[0:36] Are

[0:36] >> you healthy?

[0:37] >> Yeah.

[0:38] >> I had a cold and it's got great now.

[0:45] » Let's see if I get it.

[0:46] >> Is that the day?

[0:48] >> I made this

[0:52] last

[0:59] Okay.

[1:07] » Are we good?

[1:08] >> Okay. We are good with technology. Uh

[1:11] let's call to order this meeting. Uh

[1:13] Ottawa County Board of Commissioners

[1:14] meeting for Thursday, April 30th, 2026.

[1:18] Um guess Rachel is here today to call

[1:21] the uh what am I doing here? Call the

[1:24] order. Well, that's me. I do have to

[1:25] call the order. We don't do attendance

[1:27] yet, so we're good. Sorry. It's been a

[1:29] day. We're just getting started. All

[1:31] right. Uh let's uh uh open up with an

[1:33] invocation. Who's doing the invocation

[1:35] today? Have we got that?

[1:36] >> Hey,

[1:37] >> Doug is.

[1:38] Oh. All right. Thank you, Doug.

[1:39] If you would uh offer

[1:42] Lord, bless us this morning as we

[1:44] convene to address the issues pertaining

[1:46] to the well-being of Ottawa County

[1:47] residents. May your wisdom guide our

[1:50] discussions toward fair and successful

[1:51] outcomes. Grant us the courage,

[1:54] strength, and insight to make decisions

[1:55] that benefit all those we serve.

[1:58] Be present in our deliberations,

[2:00] bestowing your grace upon the choices we

[2:02] make as leaders. Help us to lead with

[2:04] integrity, ensuring that our actions

[2:06] align with goodness and righteousness,

[2:08] and grant us humility to always seek

[2:10] your will in all our endeavors. Thank

[2:12] you for being our guiding light today.

[2:14] Amen.

[2:14] >> Amen.

[2:15] >> All right. And if you would all rise for

[2:16] the pledge of allegiance.

[2:21] I aliance to the flag of the United

[2:24] States of America and to the republic

[2:27] for which it stands. One nation under

[2:30] God, indivisible, with liberty and

[2:34] justice for all.

[2:37] >> All right.

[2:38] And now, Rachel, if you'd call the role.

[2:42] >> Mr. Barry. Mr. Dorsma.

[2:44] >> Yeah. Here.

[2:45] >> Mr. Zilstra.

[2:47] >> Yes.

[2:48] >> Bon Mr. Bonama

[2:50] >> here. Mr. Moss

[2:52] >> here.

[2:52] >> Mrs. Wenszel

[2:53] >> here.

[2:54] >> Mr. Toples

[2:55] >> here.

[2:55] >> Mrs. Roadie

[2:56] >> here.

[2:56] >> Mr. Kyers

[2:58] >> here.

[2:58] >> Mr. Buger

[2:59] >> here.

[3:00] >> Mrs. Mida

[3:00] >> here.

[3:01] >> Mr. Chair, we have a quorum.

[3:03] >> Thank you. And uh for those of you

[3:04] noticing that Commissioner Barry is

[3:06] missing, he is in route right now. So,

[3:08] he'll be joining us in a little bit. Uh

[3:10] first up on uh the agenda today,

[3:12] correspondents. We've got some sheriff's

[3:14] commendation awards. I spoke with the

[3:16] sheriff about mixing the order up just a

[3:19] touch because he has a whole bunch of

[3:21] people here. And so, um, we're going to

[3:23] go with the customer service awards, uh,

[3:26] first. So, um, first up is Deputy Evan

[3:30] Potter in the room.

[3:33] You You have to come up to the middle so

[3:34] that we can embarrass you.

[3:40] All right. Actually, I'm going to come

[3:41] up there and join you. How about that? I

[3:43] think that'll be better. Let me grab

[3:44] these wards.

[4:03] So, these are our Ottawa County customer

[4:05] service awards and there were um two

[4:08] well there were more than one nominee,

[4:09] but two individuals who stood out this

[4:11] year. Uh, and I've got Deputy Potter

[4:13] from the Sheriff's Office to my left.

[4:15] While working at Holland Township,

[4:17] Deputy Potter overheard a call about a

[4:20] baby being delivered at a home. Feet

[4:22] first. Breach. With an AMR still 11

[4:26] minutes out, it's an ambulance. Without

[4:29] hesitation, Deputy Potter responded to

[4:31] the scene in Zealand City and safely

[4:33] delivered a healthy baby girl.

[4:37] Wow.

[4:40] His

[4:46] calm under pressure and clinical

[4:48] excellence in such a high-risisk

[4:49] situation made all the difference for

[4:51] that mother and child. This is just one

[4:54] example of his dedication. Whether it's

[4:55] a challenging medical emergency or

[4:58] assisting law enforcement in a difficult

[5:00] call, Deputy Potter never hesitates to

[5:02] step in, lead, and support those around

[5:04] him. He consistently goes above and

[5:06] beyond the call of duty. Beyond his duty

[5:09] hours, Deputy Potter lives the

[5:11] commitment to serve. Just this past

[5:13] Friday, there's more. Okay. Just this

[5:15] past Friday night, a community member

[5:17] shared on Facebook that he saw Deputy

[5:19] Potter handing out Halloween candy to

[5:21] kids while on a shift. Uh it's small

[5:24] moments like this showing kindness,

[5:25] building community relationships, and

[5:27] making kids smile that truly reflect who

[5:29] he is. His heart and soul are poured

[5:32] into serving others, and our community

[5:34] is better because of them. One more

[5:36] applause for Deputy Potter, please.

[5:50] » All right. And up next, uh, is Tavia

[5:53] here.

[5:55] Oh, come on up. We get to embarrass you

[5:56] now.

[5:58] >> And am I saying that right, Octavia?

[6:01] Okay. Thank you. Like Octavia. Battavia.

[6:03] All right. So, uh, from the clerk's

[6:05] office today, we are honored to

[6:07] recognize Tavia Renma from the county

[6:10] clerk's register of deeds office for her

[6:12] outstanding compassion, professionalism,

[6:14] and exceptional service. Recently, a

[6:17] distressed customer came into the office

[6:19] after being targeted by a sophisticated

[6:22] jury duty scam. She had spent nearly

[6:24] half an hour on the phone with someone

[6:26] impersonating law enforcement, was

[6:28] threatened with a $15,000 warrant, and

[6:31] was coerced into sending all the funds

[6:33] she had available, $900, through a QR

[6:37] code payment.

[6:40] Tavia immediately stepped in. She

[6:42] contacted the Circuit Court Records jury

[6:44] division to verify the customer's status

[6:46] and quickly confirmed that no jury

[6:48] summons had been issued. With great

[6:50] care, she informed the customer that she

[6:51] had been scammed. then gently guided her

[6:53] to a private space to help her regain

[6:55] composure. Seeing the customer too

[6:58] overwhelmed to advocate for herself,

[7:00] Tavia took the lead, contacting the

[7:02] sheriff's office, speaking with

[7:04] dispatch, and ensuring the situation was

[7:06] escalated to a detective. She stayed

[7:08] with the customer every step of the way,

[7:10] offering support, reassurance, and even

[7:13] a comforting hug when the customer's

[7:14] emotions became too much for her to

[7:16] bear. Davia's actions went far beyond

[7:19] the expectations of her role. Her

[7:20] empathy, calm leadership, and heartfelt

[7:22] concern made a profound difference in

[7:24] someone's life on the one of their worst

[7:26] days. This is the very definition of

[7:29] exceptional public service. Please join

[7:31] me in recognizing Tavia.

[7:46] All

[7:58] right. And now we'll turn the floor over

[8:00] to our Ottawa County Sheriff, uh, Eric

[8:02] Dbor.

[8:03] >> Thank you, Chairman Burgerer. Uh, and I

[8:06] appreciate the board and the

[8:07] administration for recognizing our

[8:09] employees during your customer service

[8:11] awards. Um, as is the policy of the

[8:13] Ottawa County Sheriff's Office, when uh

[8:15] when a member is given an award, uh, it

[8:18] is they are notified by letter for their

[8:21] personnel file, but then scheduled for

[8:22] the next convenient meeting of the

[8:24] Ottawa County Board of Commissioners so

[8:25] they can be recognized publicly, as has

[8:27] been, uh, our our habit here within the

[8:31] last two years again. Um, but the

[8:34] incident we have today had a significant

[8:37] uh number of people and so in uh

[8:41] in respect for the time of the board and

[8:43] I know you have a busy agenda, we won't

[8:45] be bringing each person up to be

[8:47] recognized, but I will call their names

[8:48] after the description of the award and

[8:51] they'll hopefully raise their hands so

[8:53] you at least know which ones could make

[8:54] it because all of them couldn't even be

[8:56] here today. Um, and if after that we'll

[8:59] be we'll allow you time to recognize

[9:01] them and then we will leave your

[9:03] boardroom.

[9:04] >> Is this an hold applause until the end?

[9:06] >> That's what that is.

[9:07] >> All right. Got it.

[9:09] >> So, it is my honor to recognize the

[9:11] Ottawa County Sheriff's Office personnel

[9:13] who exceptional actions during the

[9:15] multi-vehicle crash on I96 in Zealand

[9:17] Township reflect the very best of public

[9:20] service. On that day, more than a 100

[9:22] vehicles were involved in one of the

[9:24] most complex crash scenes in our

[9:25] county's history.

[9:27] Despite the extreme weather and chaos,

[9:30] these men and women responded with calm

[9:31] professionalism, steady leadership, and

[9:34] remarkable teamwork. They secured a

[9:36] dangerous scene, assisted the injured

[9:38] and stranded motorist motorists,

[9:41] maintained critical communications, and

[9:43] coordinated research resources across

[9:45] multiple agencies, all while ensuring

[9:47] public safety under extreme pressure.

[9:50] Their actions not only saved lives, but

[9:52] also demonstrated what it truly means to

[9:54] serve with integrity, courage, and

[9:56] compassion. The seamless collaboration

[9:58] between our road patrol, our

[10:00] supervisors, our command staff, our EOC

[10:03] personnel along with fire, towing, and

[10:06] busing, and other entities exemplify how

[10:08] training, preparedness, and character

[10:10] come together when it matters most. It

[10:12] is a great privilege to present the

[10:14] sheriff's commendation award to this

[10:15] outstanding team for their dedication

[10:17] and professionalism during a nationally

[10:19] recognized event. Their service brought

[10:21] great credit to themselves, the Ottawa

[10:23] County Sheriff's Office, and the people

[10:25] of Ottawa County. We would like to

[10:28] recognize Deputy Ryan Beering,

[10:30] Investigative Support Specialist Greg

[10:32] Carlson,

[10:34] Deputy Jessica Davidson, Deputy Josh De

[10:37] Hogue,

[10:39] EOCC Leah Deleno,

[10:42] Animal Control Deputy Chris Dit,

[10:45] Deputy Brandon Fisk, Deputy Tristan

[10:48] Gerbers, Lieutenant Darren Derek Grener,

[10:52] Director Lou Hunt, Lieutenant Nick Not,

[10:56] Deputy Zack Martini,

[10:58] Sergeant Josh McCarthy,

[11:01] Deputy Mahar Nie, Deputy Ben Norris,

[11:05] Deputy AJ Reapberg,

[11:08] EOCC Chris Sadler,

[11:11] Deputy Jim Scholma, EOCC Deputy, sorry,

[11:14] EOCC Derek Schroeder,

[11:17] Captain Jake Sparks, Sergeant Michael

[11:20] Taminga, Deputy David Thompson, Deputy

[11:23] Brian Tucker, Deputy Adam Vanis,

[11:27] Sergeant Tyler Van Ducelar and Captain

[11:29] Eric Wester

[11:55] once again. I appreciate your time.

[11:58] >> Thank you, Sheriff. And thank you to

[12:00] your team.

[12:04] » Think we'll get sheriff's department a

[12:05] moment. I think they're going to head

[12:06] out for a photograph.

[12:28] You're going to be testing them every

[12:29] single day.

[12:40] Right.

[12:48] As they continue to file out, we'll

[12:49] invite uh Bob Dere up

[12:53] for a legislative update.

[13:03] » Good morning.

[13:05] >> Morning,

[13:07] >> Bob. I feel like we Yeah.

[13:10] little broken ankle deal I'm working on.

[13:12] But, uh, thank you for my time, uh, this

[13:14] morning as always. Always good to see

[13:16] everybody. We're right in the midst of

[13:18] budget season. Uh, things seem to be

[13:19] moving a little bit quicker than last

[13:20] year. As you remember, uh, the the

[13:23] budget went overtime last year. They had

[13:25] a little bit of a continuing resolution

[13:26] situation and didn't get done until

[13:28] October. Uh this being an election year,

[13:30] the pressure is on a little bit for the

[13:32] legislature to get it done, and it feels

[13:34] like it's headed towards uh an early

[13:36] July resolution um like we've been used

[13:39] to the last several years. So, that's a

[13:40] good thing. Uh but the budget is a

[13:43] little more challenging than it has

[13:44] been. There's about a $1.8 billion uh

[13:46] projected deficit, although we'll learn

[13:48] a little bit more when the revenue

[13:49] estimating conference happens uh in

[13:51] early May. Uh the governor's proposed

[13:53] closing that deficit uh through several

[13:56] new taxes, a little bit of decreased

[13:58] spending and some money from the rainy

[14:00] day fund to fill the last part of the

[14:02] hole. The House and Senate um have

[14:04] decided not to push forward with the tax

[14:06] proposals. Uh the Senate though is

[14:08] interested in pulling about $350 million

[14:11] out of that rainy day fund to help uh

[14:13] close the budget gap. Uh the governor

[14:15] and the senate both recommended uh the

[14:17] same revenue sharing uh numbers that we

[14:19] received in the budget last year. While

[14:21] the the house is adding $9.8 million to

[14:24] the county revenue sharing line, which

[14:26] is about a 10% increase. Um it's early

[14:29] to tell where that will land, but it

[14:30] will certainly be subject to um

[14:32] negotiation moving forward. Uh one other

[14:35] good thing I guess on the on the revenue

[14:36] sharing front is the Senate is starting

[14:38] to move forward on the bills to

[14:39] implement the revenue sharing trust

[14:40] fund, something that Ottawa County has

[14:42] long supported. Um, and this would take

[14:45] a portion of tax revenue and permanently

[14:47] dedicate it to this revenue sharing

[14:48] trust fund so that revenue sharing would

[14:50] no longer be subject to negotiations

[14:53] every single year. There's a pot of

[14:54] money be divided up. In theory, it goes

[14:56] up when when the state is doing well and

[14:58] revenues are up. Revenues ever go down,

[15:00] that pot of money would also go down,

[15:02] but it wouldn't be subject to uh annual

[15:04] negotiations,

[15:06] uh, cuts, raises, and the political

[15:07] process. It creates a little bit of

[15:09] stability and some predictability there.

[15:11] So, it was good to see the Senate uh

[15:12] taking some action on that this week. Um

[15:14] but it's got a little ways to go yet

[15:16] before it gets across the finish line.

[15:18] Uh as part of the budget process, uh

[15:20] there are two projects that we are

[15:21] working on behalf of Ottawa County. Uh

[15:24] the first one, um is in process already.

[15:26] The Michigan Strategic Fund recommended

[15:28] a $17 million grant to the city of

[15:30] Coopersville to support infrastructure

[15:32] upgrades um to help Fairlife expand

[15:35] their uh facility there in Coopersville.

[15:38] um Lakeshore Advantage and others are

[15:39] kind of leading that project and we are

[15:41] doing what we can to support them. Uh

[15:43] since the strategic fund uh recommended

[15:46] that funding, it's up to now to the

[15:47] House and the Senate appropriations

[15:49] committees to approve it. Um that money

[15:52] would come out of the uh state strategic

[15:54] readiness program uh fund. That fund has

[15:57] been a little bit less uh popular in the

[15:59] last year or two. It has funded some of

[16:00] the more controversial projects like the

[16:02] Gan Battery Plant up in Big Rapids. So I

[16:04] think there's a possibility that rather

[16:06] than use that process, the legislature

[16:09] will look at just appropriating money

[16:10] directly um and Rep. Mirman and others

[16:13] have led the process on asking uh for

[16:15] that to be part of the budget. So there

[16:17] we got two different pathways there. Um

[16:19] and I remain hopeful that that uh will

[16:21] be part of the budget. Uh the other

[16:23] project we're working on is with water

[16:25] resources commissioner Joe Bush a

[16:27] $500,000 grant request to support a

[16:30] study for ways to recharge Ottawa

[16:32] County's uh groundwater aquifers. Um Joe

[16:35] came to Lancing recently testified in

[16:37] front of a House Appropriation

[16:39] Subcommittee about the need for this

[16:40] project. Um and things are looking good.

[16:43] All of our Ottawa County delegation has

[16:45] uh teamed up to push for this. Um it

[16:48] will really depend on how much money

[16:50] there is available. These are the types

[16:51] of things that are the the last the last

[16:53] types of projects funded. But um if we

[16:55] do have a decent pot of money for these

[16:57] legislatively directed spending items, I

[16:59] think there's a good chance that we'll

[17:00] get that $500,000 to do that study.

[17:04] >> Um the other thing that is starting to

[17:05] get a little bit of movement, the House

[17:06] Republicans introduced the uh the bills

[17:08] that would implement their property tax

[17:10] reform. I talked about that a little bit

[17:12] uh when I was here last quarter. Um and

[17:15] these are what we expected them to be.

[17:16] bills to eliminate the state education

[17:18] tax, the real estate transfer tax,

[17:20] eliminate the popup tax, and the

[17:22] personal property tax on utilities. Uh

[17:24] there is also a bill that would uh

[17:26] create a service tax on certain

[17:28] services, although the list of services

[17:30] is not yet uh part of it. It's subject

[17:33] to the negotiations. Um if we would

[17:36] eliminate all of those, it's about a $5

[17:37] billion uh amount of revenue that would

[17:40] need to be replaced, and that's what the

[17:41] service tax uh bill is designed to do.

[17:45] Um and so we'll we'll continue to

[17:47] monitor that. Obviously, anything

[17:49] property tax related has a potential to

[17:51] have a significant impact on the county.

[17:53] Um and we will uh work with

[17:55] administration to make sure whatever is

[17:57] happening um we're in the loop. But uh

[18:00] that's my brief update and I'm happy to

[18:01] answer any questions you have.

[18:04] >> Thank you, Bob. Um we have a full

[18:06] agenda. Does anybody have a brief

[18:08] question to ask of Bob? We can also act

[18:10] give you a call. Is that correct?

[18:12] >> Always happy to take a phone call.

[18:13] >> Here we go. All right, let's do that.

[18:15] Thank you very much, Bob.

[18:18] >> All right, up next, uh, item D on our

[18:20] agenda, the prosecuting attorney's

[18:22] office 2025 annual report. I do believe

[18:26] I saw our prosecutor in the audience and

[18:28] making her way up. Welcome.

[18:30] >> Good morning, board. Thank you for

[18:32] having me today.

[18:35] Yeah, it's my honor to present to all of

[18:37] you the 2025 annual budget for the

[18:39] prosecuting attorney. And yes, in the

[18:41] interest of time, I'll get right at it.

[18:43] Um, I hope all of you have had an

[18:45] opportunity to actually receive our

[18:47] report when I had a copy of it because I

[18:50] believe we printed a bunch of copies for

[18:52] that not knowing you didn't need them.

[18:54] Okay. All right. Well, as you all know

[18:57] probably, this was my first year as the

[18:59] elected prosecutor in 2025 to present to

[19:02] you the annual report. So, certainly is

[19:05] my honor. The mission statement. Go. Is

[19:10] this ready for me to go? Not so much.

[19:15] if that's easier. Okay. The mission

[19:19] statement of the prosecutor's office is mainly broken down into three parts.

[19:24] First of all, obviously, we want to

[19:25] preserve the quality of life of the

[19:27] citizens of Ottawa County. So, we want

[19:29] to make sure that Ottawa County remains

[19:31] one of the best places to live, work,

[19:32] and raise our children. And we do so

[19:34] through consistent enforcement of the

[19:36] criminal laws of the county and of the

[19:38] state. We also want to promote lawful

[19:41] conduct. We want to make sure that our

[19:43] enforcement of the laws is encouraging

[19:45] people to comply with those laws by

[19:47] educating them, by making people

[19:50] understand that we are going to proceed

[19:51] with fair prosecution and that there are

[19:54] consequences for criminal behavior. And

[19:56] three, that we're enhancing the safety

[19:58] and the security of Ottawa County and

[20:01] its citizens. So, we work very

[20:03] collaborative collaboratively with all

[20:05] of our law enforcement agencies,

[20:07] sheriff's department, Zealand Police,

[20:09] Grand Haven, Holland, Grand Valley, um

[20:12] all of our police agencies, MSP, etc. We

[20:15] work with them very closely to make sure

[20:17] that we are using community enforcement,

[20:20] creating that safer environment that

[20:21] we're looking for to make sure that

[20:23] we're strategically working together to

[20:25] enforce laws and to create safety.

[20:28] The responsibilities of the prosecutor

[20:31] remain very heavy and we take those very

[20:34] seriously. The prosecuting attorney is

[20:36] the chief law enforcement officer in

[20:39] Ottawa County created by the Michigan

[20:41] Constitution and responsible for common

[20:44] law statute court rule and appellet case

[20:46] law. We obviously do criminal case

[20:49] prosecution both at the criminal level

[20:51] or excuse me at the adult level and the

[20:53] juvenile level. So, we handle any type

[20:55] of criminal case that enters Ottawa

[20:57] County, no matter what your age. We have

[21:00] specialty services that we focus on at

[21:04] the Ottawa County Prosecutor's Office,

[21:06] which includes a family court division

[21:08] that is becoming growingly and

[21:10] increasingly large and timeconuming.

[21:12] Unfortunately, we have a domestic

[21:14] violence unit, a very strong and large

[21:18] victim's rights unit. You may have seen

[21:20] our May basket spread throughout the

[21:22] county. Our victims advocates have been

[21:24] working very hard to get hygiene

[21:27] products gathered together for victims

[21:29] of crime and donate those to resilience.

[21:30] So if you haven't seen those, I think

[21:32] you have one more day to donate. Um we

[21:34] have an appellet specialist. Um the

[21:36] appellet world is truly causing us a lot

[21:40] of extra work and focus. So we've

[21:43] divided um some of our units into

[21:45] creating that specialty department. And

[21:47] also we have attorneys that are

[21:49] specialized as we all are in training

[21:52] law enforcement to make sure that

[21:53] they're up to speed with our laws and

[21:56] how we're handling cases.

[21:58] Third, and very important to us is

[22:00] community leadership. I think it's more

[22:01] and more important for us to recognize

[22:03] our role in the community and the need

[22:05] for us to make sure that we're out in

[22:06] the community educating them as much as

[22:09] possible. I know today we have a couple

[22:11] of attorneys that are um allowing a

[22:13] middle school student to job shadow them

[22:15] today to just kind of give them a little

[22:17] bit of taste of what we do. But any

[22:18] opportunity we have to go into schools,

[22:20] uh senior resource facilities, anything

[22:22] we can do, we're going to be there and

[22:24] we're going to educate as but as much as

[22:25] we can. And we often will team with our

[22:27] law enforcement to kind of give the full

[22:29] story of making sure that people and

[22:31] citizens are safe. Our office locations,

[22:35] those haven't changed. We still have the

[22:37] two. So we have our office.

[22:39] Unfortunately, it's very unique and

[22:40] difficult when it comes to being a

[22:42] prosecutor to have these two very

[22:43] distinct locations. We work very hard

[22:46] constantly to try to keep that division

[22:48] as small as possible. We try to get our

[22:51] teams together as much as we can, but

[22:53] unfortunately Ottawa County is pretty

[22:55] spread out. So we've talked many times

[22:57] about rebringing in a third branch.

[22:59] We're just not going to do that. We need

[23:01] to keep our resources together, keep our

[23:03] teams together. It's one of the thing

[23:04] that truly makes us great. Um,

[23:08] we are looking forward to presenting to

[23:10] this board in our 2026 budget, moving or

[23:13] at least starting to move into

[23:15] renovations of the second floor of Grand

[23:16] Haven. I won't go there yet. Um, the

[23:20] prosecutor's office staff, we have a

[23:22] leadership team made of four individuals

[23:24] and I can tell you I am so incredibly

[23:28] grateful for this team. I certainly

[23:29] couldn't do what I do without them. So

[23:31] me as the prosecutor, my chief assistant

[23:33] is Jake Jennison. He was going to be

[23:35] here today, but he had court he had to

[23:37] handle handling one of our young child

[23:39] CC victims with our K9 advocate Q.

[23:43] Mallerie Juel, she's here. She loves

[23:45] being drawn attention to. She's our

[23:48] office manager in Holland. And Elizabeth

[23:50] Cookenmeister is at a training. She's

[23:51] our office manager in Grand Haven. Um

[23:54] those three individuals really are

[23:56] important to me in my work and make this

[23:58] county and this uh prosecuting office

[24:00] truly run. The other people that make us

[24:03] stellar in my humble opinion is the rest

[24:07] of our staff, including 16 assistant

[24:09] prosecuting attorneys with specialized

[24:12] expertise. We've really tried to focus

[24:13] on where are your strengths. What do you

[24:15] do the best in? Because we've got crime

[24:17] coming from all angles. And we want to

[24:19] know if we've got one that's really

[24:20] complicated and it involves digital

[24:21] evidence or if it involves weaponry or

[24:23] if it involves kids or it involves

[24:25] adults or or lots of numbers, who who do

[24:28] we go to on those really complicated

[24:30] cases? And we try to really focus their

[24:32] trainings in those areas. Whereas we all

[24:34] can handle them. If we've got those

[24:36] really complicated ones, we have ones

[24:37] that we can go to. very gifted, very

[24:40] gifted attorneys and very experienced.

[24:42] We're blessed. 12 legal assistants that

[24:44] across three divisions. We have legal

[24:46] assistant ones that kind of handle

[24:48] triage in our office, the front windows.

[24:50] We have twos that handle our district

[24:51] courts. And then we have threes that

[24:53] handle our circuit courts. Four IT

[24:55] specialists that handle our digital

[24:56] evidence. We've had those positions for

[24:58] several years now. And they are so

[24:59] crucial. um more and more increasing

[25:02] their duties when it comes to digital

[25:03] evidence, receiving from the police

[25:05] agencies, getting them out to defense

[25:07] attorneys and then helping the attorneys

[25:09] prepare those presentations for juries,

[25:11] which more and more we're being expected

[25:14] to do. And instead of just reviewing a

[25:16] police report, we're reviewing about

[25:18] four to eight plus hours of digital

[25:20] evidence in addition to those police

[25:22] reports. So the time that it takes to do

[25:24] our jobs is very different these days.

[25:28] We have seven victim's rights unit

[25:29] members. That's just increasingly more

[25:31] need in our community to have advocates

[25:34] that are here for victims. Um, our

[25:36] seventh is the cheapest one for the

[25:37] county. So, you all can rest assured

[25:39] that our most lazy employee is the

[25:41] cheapest employee and probably one of

[25:43] our best and that's our K9 advocate

[25:45] queue. So, we have some new faces in

[25:48] 2025. We hired and we were able to hire

[25:50] some new attorneys. Kimberly Ronin is an

[25:54] assistant prosecutor level one. She has

[25:57] vast experience when it comes to doing

[26:00] um mental health hearings and some

[26:01] probate matters. So, she did work for

[26:04] the county being assigned to some of

[26:05] those mental health commitment hearings,

[26:08] defending those individuals and making

[26:10] sure that those rights are protected.

[26:12] And now we've snagged her and she's

[26:13] working with us and she's been assigned

[26:15] to our juvenile delinquency division and

[26:17] handling some other probate matters.

[26:18] She's been a true gift. Rachel Mcenhill,

[26:21] she was a prosecutor in Moskegan for 15

[26:24] years and then she decided that she

[26:26] wanted to do more with regards to

[26:27] advocacy for children. So she worked as

[26:30] a forensic interviewer and then became a

[26:32] senior in the position with

[26:34] supervisoring at the Moskegan Children's

[26:37] Advocacy Center. And we have another

[26:39] prosecutor that we had snagged from

[26:41] Mskegegan a while back who said, "Hey, I

[26:43] know you still got that itch to be a

[26:45] prosecutor. I think Ottawa County is

[26:46] going to get you what you need." And she

[26:48] agreed. So, we were very fortunate to

[26:50] get Rachel McNill to come and help us

[26:53] out with our cases. She's been focusing

[26:55] more and more on child abuse cases. Ryan

[26:58] Seal, he's one of our assistant

[26:59] prosecutors that actually, if you happen

[27:01] to recognize his name, it's because he

[27:03] was a public defender, and I won't go

[27:06] there, but we're very lucky to have

[27:08] Brian Seal on our staff. He's he's a

[27:10] gift. Changes and challenges. Well, I

[27:13] don't know that I like the title of

[27:14] Changes and Challenges being my name,

[27:16] but there it's there. Um certainly it's

[27:19] been a challenge and a total privilege

[27:21] for me to have this office and and

[27:23] hopefully things are going well that you

[27:25] can see on your end as well. Jake

[27:27] Jennison was uh promoted to my chief

[27:29] assistant. He was previously a senior

[27:31] attorney. Had some promotions of um APAs

[27:35] that were now senior attorneys. Carol

[27:37] Wilkinson, Jay Tubergen, and Ben Medma.

[27:40] um just absolute gifted attorneys that

[27:43] have a lot of experience that are are

[27:44] branching out in some other areas and

[27:46] covering some new topics. We had Joel

[27:48] and Haz who was probably the only other

[27:50] attorney that had been there anywhere

[27:52] near as long as I had. So I think she

[27:54] was shy of mine by about two years. She

[27:56] finally retired um for her sake for her

[28:00] grandchildren back in June of 2025.

[28:03] Um we went paperless. You are welcome.

[28:05] That was a very difficult thing for a

[28:07] lot of us to do. We had been kind of

[28:10] baby stepping it, but you can only baby

[28:12] step things for so long. And we figured

[28:13] after about five, seven years of baby

[28:15] stepping stepping, we're just going to

[28:16] rip that band-aid. So, we did. Um, and I think we're pretty cool with it. I

[28:21] think things are going fine. And I

[28:22] definitely know that we've we've

[28:23] experienced a significant um financial

[28:26] savings. Also, time just duplicating

[28:29] everything over and over again was just

[28:30] becoming ridiculous. So, we we fixed

[28:32] that. Towards the end of last year, we

[28:34] implemented Carpel as our new case

[28:35] management system. I also will just wait

[28:38] and talk to you about that this year

[28:39] because that's been really a huge

[28:41] struggle for my staff and I am so

[28:44] grateful for them for just hanging in

[28:45] with us on it and um we're getting

[28:47] through it here pretty well and it will

[28:48] end up being a real big gift. So

[28:50] hopefully next year when I'm here I will

[28:52] tell you all the great things about

[28:52] Carpal right now. I'm just going to bite

[28:54] my tongue for a hot minute. Digital

[28:56] evidence just continues to be expounded.

[28:58] Ottawa County Sheriff's Office started

[29:00] their digital evidence. We had been used

[29:02] to it with Holland and a couple other

[29:03] agencies, but we were preparing and knew

[29:06] that that would change things a bit and

[29:07] it certainly did. So, we're continuing

[29:09] to enhance our digital evidence pro um

[29:11] in the courtroom and our discovery

[29:13] process. Between retirements,

[29:14] promotions, and positions offing uh

[29:16] openings, there were 11 different

[29:18] staffing changes in 2025. Most of those

[29:20] we were able to gift some really good

[29:22] talented individuals with promotions

[29:24] within our office. Criminal case load

[29:27] overview, we had almost 2,000 felonies.

[29:30] That rate increased by about 5.5% from

[29:32] last year. Little over 5,000

[29:35] misdemeanors which increased just not

[29:37] even quite 1% from last year. Um the

[29:40] juvenile case load decreased by about 5%

[29:43] just under a thousand there um this year

[29:46] for a total of approximately 8,000 cases

[29:49] which increased by about 1%. So you know

[29:53] crime is what crime is going to be and

[29:55] so when we receive those cases we make

[29:57] sure we handle them appropriately.

[29:59] significant crime trends. I know this is

[30:00] something that everybody likes to kind

[30:02] of just have a grasp on, especially from

[30:04] the board here. Notable increases are

[30:06] felony drunk drivingings. You know, we work really hard with our recovery

[30:10] courts. They do a tremendous job.

[30:12] They're not full. So, we need to make

[30:14] sure that we're reassessing who's

[30:15] getting into those courts and if maybe

[30:17] expanding that. So, I know we've had a

[30:19] lot of conversations about expanding

[30:21] that application process to see who else

[30:23] we can serve in those areas. Robberies

[30:26] up 100%. Well, that just basically means

[30:28] that if we had maybe two, we had four or

[30:30] something along those lines. So, you can

[30:31] refer to our our more detailed report to

[30:34] get that information. Misdemeanor drunk

[30:36] driving, not surprisingly, is also

[30:38] increased. Weapons offenses are up. That

[30:40] is something that we have always been

[30:42] very careful of. We're just trying to

[30:44] work on those as best as we can and our

[30:46] law enforcement does a tremendous job

[30:47] making sure that once it comes to us, we

[30:50] make sure those weapons are forfeited so

[30:51] they don't get back into the hands of

[30:52] people who don't need them. Um, domestic

[30:55] violence is up a little bit, drug

[30:56] offenses are up. So, those are the kind

[30:58] of areas that we see usually fairly

[31:00] consistently in our in our county.

[31:02] Notable decreases, property crimes, I

[31:04] know we were dealing with that so much

[31:06] with break-ins and driveways and things

[31:08] along those lines. That significantly

[31:09] went down, which is great. Criminal

[31:11] sexual conduct is slightly down.

[31:13] Obviously, that's a great trend. Arson,

[31:15] again, is one of those where we have

[31:16] maybe one or two or three a year. So,

[31:18] you're going to see that percentage one

[31:19] way or the other pretty significant.

[31:21] breaking entering extraditions where

[31:23] we're bringing in other people from

[31:24] other counties who committed crimes here

[31:26] that is also down um there's statistics

[31:29] here I want to keep your time here at

[31:31] most interest you can take a look at

[31:33] those with regards to domestic violence

[31:35] I touched a little bit about on that um

[31:38] moving on to postconviction workload

[31:40] that that's appeals so once we get

[31:43] through the trials we get our

[31:45] convictions we have served justice as

[31:48] best as we can we are seeing a huge

[31:51] increase in our appellet work. The

[31:53] prosecutor's office as many people might

[31:55] not know know is that we also have to

[31:57] handle those. So at any point in time

[31:59] there is a case there is work involved

[32:02] in a case we are going to be handling

[32:04] that. So if we handled the criminal case

[32:06] we're going to be handling the appeals

[32:08] and it is just been a huge significant

[32:11] um issue that we've been dealing with.

[32:14] So we've had some major significant

[32:16] appeals. Everyone's probably familiar

[32:18] with the Karen Bose case because we've

[32:19] come to you for a lot of money for

[32:21] experts on the different appeals on that

[32:22] and we appreciate your support through

[32:24] that. Um, we're very happy with that

[32:26] result. Um, and then there's a couple

[32:28] other noteworthy ones. These cases that

[32:30] are on here I could talk to you about

[32:32] for probably hours and all the major

[32:34] issues that are being handled right now

[32:36] in our Supreme Courts and our court of

[32:38] appeals that are going to make some

[32:40] significant changes in how we handle our

[32:43] cases. So, we've got a lot of concern

[32:46] going out there anxiously awaiting for

[32:47] some of these decisions and

[32:49] unfortunately we're not looking forward

[32:50] to some of the results that we're

[32:51] hearing rumors of. So, it gives you kind

[32:53] of an outline of of our postconviction

[32:56] process there. Abuse and neglect cases

[32:59] are up. Um, I spoke with our abuse and

[33:02] neglect attorneys before kind of coming

[33:05] here once they saw the results. They are

[33:07] definitely trying more cases. They tried

[33:09] 58 between the two of them in 2025 and that's more. But they're doing great

[33:14] work. They're they're really giving

[33:15] these cases great attention and using

[33:18] their skill and their expertise to make

[33:19] sure that everything is handled

[33:21] appropriately. Um when it comes to those

[33:23] very sensitive cases,

[33:26] homicides in 2025, you know, we

[33:28] obviously can't get into them, so we

[33:30] just kind of take some news clips and we

[33:32] just give them to you. Um there was a

[33:34] mother charged with killing her teen son

[33:36] in a Holland apartment. Katie Lee, she

[33:38] was already sentenced. Um, regarding

[33:41] Alan Lopez, it was an 18-year-old

[33:43] charged with manslaughter and the

[33:44] shooting death of a friend of his in a

[33:46] vehicle. Um, Grand Valley State

[33:50] University student was shot through the

[33:51] floor at a house party. Um, that case

[33:54] got resolved last year as well. And then

[33:58] pending trial here in 2026 is Michelle

[34:01] Matoss Cologne and that's a Jennison

[34:04] area woman who's accused in the shooting

[34:06] death of her husband.

[34:09] Um the last one is Joyce Lockett. She

[34:12] was charged with involuntary

[34:13] manslaughter and that was pled to a

[34:14] lesser charge that involved um a young a

[34:16] young baby.

[34:18] >> Victim's rights services. That's where

[34:21] everything always gets very heavy during

[34:22] that moment. So, I don't if anybody has

[34:24] any questions, you know, happy to answer

[34:26] them. Victim's rights services. Um, our

[34:28] victim's rights department is second to

[34:30] none. We have a fairly short staff

[34:32] considering we're the seventh largest

[34:34] county in Ottawa County. So, or excuse

[34:36] me, in Michigan and the amount of

[34:38] victims that they reach out to is

[34:41] phenomenal. And to be perfectly honest,

[34:43] I I don't know how they do it, but they

[34:45] also were able to um fine-tune all of

[34:48] our paperwork. we have to send out

[34:51] information to victims on every single

[34:52] case and we were just looking at it more

[34:54] and more just thinking this stuff just

[34:56] doesn't make sense. If I'm a victim and

[34:57] I'm receiving this like let's take the

[34:59] time and see what happens when we're

[35:00] receiving this information and and we

[35:02] just weren't satisfied with the quality

[35:04] of that. So they worked very hard with

[35:06] our office managers to go through and

[35:09] revamp all of that and I'm very proud of

[35:11] the result and they also brought an

[35:12] intern for that that was no cost to the

[35:14] county and she helped change our entire

[35:16] website as well. So hopefully you guys

[35:18] all have an opportunity to take a look

[35:19] at our website. Very proud of that as

[35:21] well. It's been a long time since that's

[35:24] ever been looked at. A day in the life

[35:26] of Q. He's probably the most fun thing.

[35:28] I already kind of talked with him. But

[35:29] the interesting thing is Q helps us in a

[35:32] 100 plus child victim cases and I don't

[35:34] know what we would do without him. We've

[35:36] had other canines in the past and this

[35:38] one is just working out great. One of

[35:40] the things is we have them assigned to

[35:41] an attorney rather than a victim

[35:43] advocate. So, um, Jake handles a lot of

[35:45] our child CSC cases with Rachel. And so,

[35:48] it's really good to have him there with

[35:51] his dog, um, as they're doing. And so,

[35:53] he takes Q home with him. It is his dog,

[35:56] but Q is here every day at work. Um,

[35:59] we've unfortunately been told that we

[36:00] can't give him as many treats as we used

[36:02] to. He's on a wee bit of a diet. Um, but

[36:04] other than that, he's healthy and happy

[36:06] and doing a great job. All right. Uh,

[36:09] last but not least, looking ahead, we've

[36:11] got a really exciting 2026. Um, we're

[36:14] integrating learns and Axon to our

[36:17] Carpel system. That's all boring stuff,

[36:19] but you all probably have heard these

[36:21] words, so you know what that's relevant

[36:22] to. Just integrating, getting the

[36:24] information to our office faster and

[36:26] cleaner and without as much work from

[36:29] our law enforcement agencies. building

[36:31] reconstruction. We have busted the seams

[36:34] in all of our offices and you guys have

[36:36] kindly and graciously provided an

[36:38] opportunity for us to move up to the

[36:39] second floor in Grand Haven. So, that'll

[36:41] give us a lot more space. Um, we also

[36:44] know that there's some new judges that

[36:45] might be coming that we're going to be

[36:46] having to increase our staff a bit too

[36:48] for. So, we got a lot of stuff going on

[36:50] and just continuously dealing with

[36:52] digital evidence and how we can make

[36:54] sure that we're handling that

[36:55] appropriately. I appreciate your time.

[36:58] Um, I know you got a lot going on. If

[37:00] there's any questions I can answer, I'm

[37:01] more than happy to do so. Otherwise, I

[37:03] really am grateful for all that you do

[37:04] and for having me here today.

[37:06] >> Sarah, would it be all right if we

[37:07] reached out to you with an email or a

[37:09] phone call?

[37:10] >> Anytime.

[37:11] >> All right. Thank you very much for the

[37:13] update, for all you do and your team. My

[37:15] goodness.

[37:18] All right. Up next on our agenda item E,

[37:21] excuse me, F is the equalization

[37:23] department's 2025 annual report. Nope.

[37:26] Sorry. I apologize. I went too far. E 20

[37:29] circuit and probate courts 2025 annual

[37:32] report. I believe Susan is maybe in the

[37:36] audience. There she is making her way

[37:38] for and we have a judge as well. Sir,

[37:40] welcome.

[37:40] >> We do.

[37:42] >> Thank you uh Chairperson Berger and the

[37:44] Ottawa County Board of Commissioners.

[37:46] Good morning from the third branch of

[37:48] government. Uh on behalf of my

[37:50] colleagues on the circuit and probate

[37:52] court, it's my privilege to introduce

[37:53] the 2025 annual report titled Justice

[37:56] Forward, focusing on innovation and

[37:59] excellence. Our court administrator,

[38:01] Susan Franklin, will walk you through

[38:03] the report in more detail, but I wanted

[38:05] to offer a few brief remarks from my own

[38:07] perspective at the outset. First, I want

[38:10] to express our appreciation on behalf of

[38:13] judges, referees, administrators, and

[38:15] staff for the board's consistent support

[38:17] of the administration of justice in

[38:19] Ottawa County. The quality of justice

[38:22] we're able to provide is not accidental.

[38:24] It's the direct result of a governing

[38:26] body that takes seriously its obligation

[38:28] to fund the courts. We are recognized

[38:31] statewide as a high performing court. We

[38:33] have a nationally recognized recovery

[38:35] court and legal self-help center and

[38:37] they exist because of your investment.

[38:39] They deliver real measurable benefit to

[38:42] the families of Ottawa County and we do

[38:44] not take that partnership for granted.

[38:46] I'm here because I want to highlight our

[38:48] current challenges. Case loads across

[38:50] the circuit court continue to grow and

[38:52] the complexity of individual cases is

[38:54] increasing as well. Our judges and

[38:57] referees are carrying more than

[38:58] full-time workloads. The Michigan

[39:00] Supreme Court recognized this in the

[39:02] 2025 judicial resources report issued

[39:05] last December and recommended adding an

[39:08] additional circuit judge to the 20th

[39:09] Circuit.

[39:11] We will be pursuing this recommendation

[39:13] and what that means for Ottawa County

[39:16] with the knowledge that a new judgeship

[39:18] cannot now be filled until the general

[39:20] election in 2028

[39:23] when we will be electing potentially

[39:25] three new judges, half our bench. But we

[39:29] can't wait for three new judges to deal

[39:31] with our current challenges. What we

[39:33] need to do is work smarter with the

[39:34] technology we have and the technology

[39:36] that's now available. So in 2025 we

[39:39] launched an AI assisted transcript pilot

[39:42] project uh in partnership with the state

[39:45] court administrative office. This year

[39:47] we've launched a second pilot project to

[39:49] improve case and data management and

[39:51] analysis by our judicial officers and

[39:53] research attorneys. That first pilot

[39:55] project has gone very well and the

[39:58] second one is uh is just getting started

[40:00] and we will be reporting back on those.

[40:03] Our probate court has long been a leader

[40:05] in virtual hearings, electronic filing

[40:07] and digital case management. Looking

[40:10] ahead, improvements in our use of

[40:12] technology is essential to sustaining

[40:15] the quality of and timeliness of

[40:17] judicial services for county residents.

[40:20] We're committed to moving justice

[40:22] forward thoughtfully. responsibility

[40:24] responsibly and in partnership with the

[40:27] county. I'd welcome any questions you

[40:29] have for me. Otherwise, I'm going to

[40:31] turn the floor over to our fabulous

[40:32] court administrator, Susan Franklin.

[40:35] Thank you.

[40:36] >> Thank you, your honor.

[40:39] >> Thank you very much, judge. And we

[40:41] should recognize that in 2025, Judge

[40:43] Venolsburg was actually the recipient of

[40:45] the Hilda Gage Judicial Excellence

[40:47] Award. This award was present pres

[40:49] presented to him at uh he was considered

[40:52] amongst all the current and retired

[40:54] circuit and court of appeals judges and

[40:57] he was granted that award by the

[40:59] Michigan judges association. So

[41:01] congratulations judge.

[41:04] Obviously we have more than just judge

[41:05] vanber although he does a lot. He can't

[41:07] do it all by himself. Our other judicial

[41:10] officers are shown here. We the top

[41:12] three are all in the family justice

[41:14] center as part of our family division.

[41:16] And below them, Judge Hullsing and Judge

[41:18] Midima work out of the Grand Haven

[41:20] courthouse and they handle the civil and

[41:22] criminal dockets.

[41:27] And Judge Dolman is our chief probate

[41:29] judge. He's also located in the Grand

[41:32] Haven Courthouse and he also presides

[41:35] over a recovery court which Judge

[41:37] Vanberg mentioned. that recovery court

[41:39] is completely grant-f funded. So that

[41:42] has not cost uh Ottawa County any money

[41:45] over the term. It's been I think 21

[41:49] years now. Um and we're very proud of

[41:51] it. It's been recognized statewide and

[41:53] nationally and we had 25 participants

[41:56] graduate in 2025 which we're very proud

[41:58] of.

[42:00] Uh Judge Vanlesburg mentioned a little

[42:02] bit about our transcript pilot project.

[42:04] I would like to say that it did go a

[42:06] little further than just transcripts

[42:08] because we uploaded basically all of our

[42:10] hearing recordings into the cloud and an

[42:13] AI converted that to text. But there was

[42:16] also a part of the program that allowed

[42:18] the judges to ask questions of what

[42:21] happened in the hearings. So it could

[42:23] provide a separate summary. It could

[42:25] provide a summary of what witnesses

[42:27] testified to uh what exhibits were

[42:30] offered and admitted and allowed the

[42:32] judges to actually ask it to summarize

[42:35] the order that they gave in those cases

[42:37] which we could then uh create a document

[42:40] for. So it was definitely a very

[42:42] interesting pilot project and we're

[42:44] looking to continue potentially that uh

[42:47] pilot project into the future. Our trial

[42:50] division is the portion of the court

[42:52] that hears our criminal and civil cases.

[42:56] And I should have mentioned this at the

[42:57] beginning, but I do appreciate that we

[42:59] were able to follow uh prosecutor

[43:01] Matoyek. Uh it's really an Ottawa County

[43:04] episode of Law and Order here today. And

[43:06] I'll let you uh add the sound effects to

[43:09] that yourselves. Uh

[43:12] so this as I said this is uh Judge

[43:15] Holling and Judge Mima's docket

[43:16] generally in Grand Haven and we did have

[43:20] an uptick in our case numbers this year.

[43:23] Uh not a huge uptick but one of the most

[43:25] significant parts were that there were

[43:27] 46 more felony capital criminal cases

[43:32] last year than there had been the year

[43:33] before. And those capital cases are the

[43:35] ones that are punished by up to life in

[43:37] prison. So those take a lot of time both

[43:40] for the prosecutor's office, the public

[43:41] defender's office, and for the court uh

[43:43] to manage.

[43:46] We have two legal self-help centers now,

[43:48] one in each of our major courouses. So

[43:50] one in Grand Haven and one in the family

[43:52] justice center here in West Olive. Uh

[43:54] this program allows people to represent

[43:57] themselves. So we see a lot of use for

[44:00] this in family division cases where

[44:02] perhaps someone could not afford to hire

[44:05] an attorney to represent them. They're

[44:07] able to ask questions regarding court

[44:09] processes and procedures and get forms

[44:11] that are uh make it easier for them to

[44:15] represent themselves. Uh a lot of court

[44:17] procedures are in legal ease as we say

[44:21] and this center allows for that

[44:23] translation into English that everyone

[44:26] can understand. So we're very proud of

[44:28] the work that they've done.

[44:30] our case load statistics. You can see

[44:32] there compared to last year, we've had

[44:34] some upticks. Uh we did have a slight um

[44:38] reduction in juvenile delinquency cases.

[44:40] Uh but that was made up for in other

[44:42] areas where we had upticks. I'd also

[44:46] like to highlight our attorney referees.

[44:49] Uh these three individuals do a lot of

[44:51] pre-work for our family division judges.

[44:54] They will hear uh motions for child

[44:57] support, parenting time, those type of

[45:00] cases. They also do a lot of preliminary

[45:02] hearings in juvenile delinquency. And

[45:03] that takes some of the stress off our

[45:05] judicial dockets, which is particularly

[45:08] important because as Judge Vanlberg

[45:11] referred to the judicial resources

[45:13] report, the Supreme Court determined

[45:16] that each Ottawa County judge is doing

[45:19] 122% of what a judge's full-time

[45:22] workload should be. they have a lot of

[45:24] cases in front of them. So, our attorney

[45:27] referees are also doing a lot of work

[45:29] and their number of hearings went up uh

[45:31] since last year uh to help deal with

[45:34] those docket issues.

[45:38] Our friend of the court continues to be

[45:39] one of the highest performing in the

[45:41] state and certainly one of the highest

[45:42] performing in large counties. Uh we are

[45:45] very proud to try to maximize every

[45:48] dollar we can get reimbursed from

[45:50] various grants and programs so that the

[45:53] friend of the court can operate as

[45:55] efficiently as possible for the citizens

[45:57] of Ottawa County. And we do have a

[45:59] couple of friend of the court employees

[46:01] here today that I want to recognize.

[46:02] They took time off so that they could

[46:04] attend this meeting. So if you just

[46:06] wave, we're very proud of all of our

[46:08] friend of the court employees, but those

[46:10] two are here today. And there we had a

[46:14] 50 a 5.7 increase in the number of cases

[46:16] in front of the front of the court this

[46:18] year. So we've also kind of embarked on

[46:21] this GEMS program which is gain

[46:23] employment maintain support. So this

[46:25] helps people who are having a hard time

[46:28] meeting their child support obligations

[46:30] to get either because they have a lack

[46:33] of employment or insufficient

[46:36] employment. So, we work with Michigan

[46:37] Works to try to get them better paying

[46:40] jobs, help them get GEDs, help them

[46:43] navigate any kind of vehicular issues if

[46:46] they don't have a car to get to jobs or interviews. So, uh this program is

[46:51] we're just starting out on it, but it's

[46:53] so far it's been a great aspect of our

[46:56] family division and are the far front of

[46:58] the court. So, we look forward to

[47:00] continuing that.

[47:04] Juvenile court services is one of our

[47:06] largest sections. So, uh out of our 150

[47:09] court employees, most of them are in

[47:11] juvenile court services and that is to

[47:14] provide probation

[47:16] um for juvenile delinquents. We also do

[47:19] a lot of work for neglect abuse cases

[47:21] and we have our juvenile detention

[47:23] center here in Ottawa County. Uh our

[47:26] RISE treatment program is in the

[47:28] juvenile detention center. It's trying

[47:30] to help reduce recidivism and to help

[47:34] juveniles learn better ways to cope as

[47:37] well as working with their families. Uh

[47:39] we have 39 contracts or 39 contracts

[47:42] with other counties where they will send

[47:45] their juvenile delinquents to us for

[47:47] participation in that program and they

[47:50] obviously pay for that privilege. But

[47:52] that program is well recognized

[47:54] throughout the state. We're very proud

[47:56] of it.

[47:57] We had 296 youth in our detention center

[48:01] over last year. That was obviously not

[48:03] at all all at one time because we've

[48:04] only got 40 beds. Uh but that was over

[48:07] the the last year. The average length of

[48:09] the their stay was 24 days. We don't

[48:12] want to use the juvenile detention

[48:14] center as a long-term kind of facility.

[48:17] That's really not indicated well for

[48:19] juveniles. uh we try to keep them there

[48:22] and to try to get a reset basically

[48:25] before returning them to their families.

[48:28] And finally, our smallest division is

[48:30] our probate court. They're small but

[48:32] mighty. We've only got seven employees

[48:35] other than the judge and I in probate

[48:37] court, and they've been dealing with a

[48:38] lot. Uh our case loads are very

[48:41] challenging for the probate court. These

[48:43] are mental health cases uh and cases

[48:47] involving obviously deaths of

[48:48] individuals and children needing

[48:51] guardians or adults needing guardians or

[48:53] conservators. So they do a lot of very

[48:56] important work. This is kind of really a human focused court because it's

[49:02] dealing with people who are in severe

[49:04] need. So they're working hard. Um, but

[49:07] there's unfortunately a lot of work to

[49:09] do and we may be coming to you with a uh

[49:12] request for a new employee for the

[49:14] probate court to help us out with that.

[49:17] So, that is the end of my presentation,

[49:20] but I would be remiss if I did not say

[49:23] that although we are the judicial branch

[49:25] and we do our jobs to the best of the

[49:27] ability our abilities, we cannot do that

[49:30] without the support of the county. Uh we

[49:32] obviously work very closely with the

[49:34] clerk register of deeds and the

[49:36] sheriff's office, the prosecutor and the

[49:38] public defender. Um but we also work

[49:40] very closely with HR, facilities, fiscal

[49:42] services, it and many other county

[49:45] departments. And of course, we've always

[49:47] enjoyed the support and appreciated the

[49:49] support of this board of commissioners

[49:50] and of county administration. So thank

[49:52] you very much for your support and we'd

[49:55] happy to answer any questions you may

[49:57] have.

[49:58] >> Thank you, Susan. And uh thank you Judge

[50:00] Van Hollsburg for uh joining her today.

[50:02] Um just let us know what support you

[50:04] need. We will do our best to get it to

[50:05] you. Yeah. Thank you. And we will uh

[50:08] reach out with questions by email or

[50:09] phone.

[50:10] >> All right. Thanks.

[50:11] >> Thank you.

[50:13] >> All right. And now on to item F, the

[50:15] equalization

[50:17] uh department's 2025 annual report.

[50:22] We welcome Brian Busker.

[50:27] Morning commissioners.

[50:32] I'd like to say this is moment you've

[50:35] all been waiting for. So let's get

[50:37] started.

[50:38] >> All right. I'm pleased to present the

[50:39] 2025

[50:41] uh equalization annual report. Um

[50:44] equalization is very cyclical in nature.

[50:46] So a lot of this is very similar to what

[50:48] it's been every other year. I'll try and

[50:50] highlight uh particular parts that that

[50:52] have deviated. But uh the equalization

[50:55] department uh moving to the next slide

[50:58] delay

[51:08] there we go may maybe yeah um the

[51:11] equalization department has uh I'll just

[51:13] say five primary functions four of which

[51:16] are statutory meaning this is required

[51:18] by the constitution that we do these

[51:19] functions one of which is contra cont

[51:22] contractual and that is one the

[51:23] assessing function uh that I'll be

[51:26] speaking about more later. Uh the first

[51:28] uh function of the equalization

[51:30] department is our our namesake

[51:32] equalization itself. Uh equalization

[51:35] really is a a process of studying the

[51:38] market for purposes of establishing

[51:41] assessed values. So that that's what

[51:43] equalization does. Uh we do this uh

[51:46] through two primary means. Uh number one

[51:48] is a sales study where we look at sales

[51:50] that have occurred in the market and we

[51:52] compare them to the assessed values on

[51:54] those properties and from that

[51:56] information we can project what the

[51:58] value as a whole should be adjusted to.

[52:02] So uh we're developing ratios and

[52:04] multipliers that we pass down to our

[52:07] local uh local unit assessors so that

[52:10] they can adjust the assessment roles to

[52:13] reflect 50% of market value. that that's

[52:15] our that's our primary goal. Um, we have

[52:18] a a a team of four uh clerk clerks that

[52:22] handle most of those deeds, but I I

[52:24] personally handle a lot of the actual

[52:26] sales studies themselves, but they do an

[52:28] awful lot of work preparing all of those

[52:30] sales and and verifying all of that

[52:33] information. Uh the second way that we

[52:35] study the real estate market is through

[52:36] appraisal studies where we have uh three

[52:39] staff appraisers that study commercial,

[52:41] industrial and agricultural properties

[52:44] and then we use those appraised values

[52:46] as compared to the assessed values in

[52:48] order to set what the market value is.

[52:54] Uh on the next slide actually go I think

[52:56] a couple of slides up.

[53:00] There we go. uh is just a uh couple of

[53:03] graphs showing the sales volumes that

[53:06] we've been looking at over the last

[53:07] couple years. Uh and you can see for

[53:09] about the last two or three years, our

[53:11] sales volume has actually dropped uh by

[53:14] a pretty good margin. Um and while that

[53:17] is I'm going to say probably the the

[53:20] effect of just not having sufficient

[53:21] inventory in the market to have all of

[53:24] these sales, the sales, excuse me, the

[53:26] sales dollar amounts actually continues

[53:29] to increase. uh which which maybe is is

[53:32] probably what we would expect, right? As demand increases, supply goes down,

[53:36] the price is going to go up. And that

[53:38] certainly is what we're seeing. Um but

[53:42] the other thing that I want to point out

[53:43] there is if you look on the the right

[53:45] hand graph, uh the lower line is still

[53:48] indicating that we're basing our our

[53:50] assessed values, what we're telling our assessors to assess value at is

[53:55] still based off from over 6,000 sales.

[53:58] So we have a lot of information

[53:59] supporting the values that we're putting

[54:01] forward.

[54:05] Uh the next primary function of uh the

[54:07] equalization department is aortionment.

[54:10] Uh aortionment is a process that we

[54:12] handle every well we handle it

[54:14] throughout the year but you guys will

[54:16] actually see it in the fall uh typically

[54:18] in the month of October and uh in 2025

[54:22] when the the year we're looking at um I

[54:25] presented the equalization report excuse

[54:26] me the aortionment report uh in October

[54:29] and for the first time in many many

[54:31] years we did not have to amend that

[54:33] report as the result of um a November

[54:38] ballot measure that changed the millage

[54:40] rates on the winter levies. Uh that is quite unusual. One of the things

[54:45] that I'm going to point out is one of

[54:47] the uh the bills that I think that that

[54:49] Bob Dere had mentioned. Uh one of the

[54:52] bills is to put all ballot or excuse me

[54:54] all milligereated ballot questions on

[54:56] the November ballot. Uh which which

[54:59] certainly we can we can implement.

[55:01] However, that's also going to mean that

[55:03] almost certainly we're going to have to

[55:05] amend our aortionment report every year.

[55:07] So not not we can work through it but

[55:10] just letting you know that's something

[55:11] that we we would have to do. Um yeah the the aortionment function in general

[55:17] is a lot of uh I'll say auditing and

[55:20] advising. Uh a lot of local unit clerks

[55:22] who are responsible for the actual uh

[55:25] levying of the taxes or putting the uh

[55:28] the the millage rate uh request forms

[55:30] together. These are elected positions

[55:33] that tend to have a little bit higher

[55:34] turnover. So my office provides a lot of

[55:37] guidance on making sure those millage

[55:39] rates are are correct.

[55:42] Uh the third function is is the uh

[55:45] property description and mapping

[55:46] function. Uh and that is one uh where

[55:49] our our mappers in our department. I'll

[55:52] just say largely this this function is

[55:54] maintaining the parcel layer. So if you

[55:57] go anywhere on the county website and

[55:59] you look in you can see parcels um on

[56:02] our GIS maps or something like that.

[56:04] those layers are maintained by our

[56:06] mappers. One additional function that I

[56:09] would like to highlight is that uh these

[56:11] guys are really good at reading legal

[56:14] descriptions and most people are really

[56:17] bad at it. So these guys provide a an

[56:19] excellent resource. Uh especially I'll

[56:22] say to title offices. Uh, a lot of

[56:25] attorneys seem to struggle with u, not

[56:27] all attorneys, but a lot of attorneys

[56:29] seem to struggle with um, legal

[56:31] descriptions and these guys are just an

[56:33] excellent resource and it's kind of one

[56:35] of those behindthe-scenes uh, functions

[56:37] of government that if they weren't

[56:39] there, you would know about it, right?

[56:41] And they they just do a lot of work to

[56:43] keep our legal descriptions, tax

[56:45] descriptions um, up to date and

[56:47] accurate. So, um, one of the things that

[56:50] I want to mention on the next slide,

[56:52] thank you. um is I had mentioned last

[56:54] year that 2024 had a little drop in the

[56:58] amount of splits that that our mappers

[57:01] were processing and you can see that on

[57:02] that grid there. Um one of the things

[57:05] that that I can't really explain why it

[57:08] is but I can just say that it is and

[57:10] that is whenever we have an election

[57:12] year we always see a drop in the amount

[57:14] of splits coming into the county. Um,

[57:18] why that's related, I can't necessarily

[57:20] say, but like I say, you can see it in

[57:21] the numbers. Election year seems to I'll

[57:24] just say it seems to make people nervous

[57:25] and they're just not quite as quick to split or combine or or whatever their property uh their property.

[57:37] Uh, one of the other functions that we

[57:38] provide is local unit assistance and

[57:40] this too is largely I'll say advisory

[57:43] and education in nature. Um, we provide

[57:46] a lot of problem solving. Uh, local unit

[57:49] assessors, they'll encounter, uh, I I'll

[57:52] just say challenges as they as they go

[57:54] through their job. And quite often we

[57:56] work with the, uh, local unit assessors

[57:58] to develop a plan, look at look at the law and say this is how we apply the law to make

[58:05] sure that our taxpayers are are um,

[58:08] appropriately served. Um we also provide

[58:11] a lot of education and this year we

[58:13] started providing uh board of review uh

[58:16] education. So we have local unit boards

[58:18] of review that that uh um need to

[58:22] receive education every other year and

[58:24] so we provide that education for them.

[58:26] Uh the class really went well. It was

[58:28] wellreceived and well attended. So that

[58:30] was that was a good class. In addition

[58:32] to that, uh Josh uh my deputy, uh does a

[58:35] lot of education uh for local realtors,

[58:38] just trying to explain the property tax

[58:40] process, uh specifically in in regards

[58:43] to how uncappings work and letting them

[58:45] know um letting realtors know how to let

[58:49] their their their customers know um how the taxes are going to be affected

[58:54] on those properties. So, we we try and

[58:56] get involved in that. just trying to uh

[58:58] I'll just say raise awareness to how how

[59:00] property taxes work. Um in addition to

[59:03] that, we do um we do provide education

[59:08] uh at at the state level and various

[59:09] other places as well. Um I taught a

[59:12] class last week on agricultural

[59:14] assessment administration just trying to

[59:17] you might say overall help the

[59:18] profession uh do better. So that that is

[59:21] a function that we provide as well.

[59:24] And our last function uh is the

[59:26] assessing function which is is

[59:28] contractual. It is not statutory. Uh

[59:30] this is a function that Ottawa County

[59:33] decided in 2011 to offer as a service to

[59:36] our to our local units. And to date we

[59:39] have seven local units that have taken

[59:41] us up on this. Um you can see the list

[59:44] on the on the left there. Two of those

[59:46] are fairly new. I think we just picked

[59:48] those up a couple of years ago. Uh and

[59:50] that is Georgetown and Pulton Township.

[59:53] Both of those are going extremely well.

[59:55] Uh we have some really good division

[59:57] managers that are handling those and I I

[59:59] always try and touch base with the uh

[1:00:01] the local unit supervisor or manager

[1:00:03] just to make sure they're happy with our

[1:00:05] service and and just rave reviews by uh

[1:00:08] by them. Uh in 2025, we renewed five of

[1:00:12] those contracts. Um those are a

[1:00:15] three-year contract and we renewed uh

[1:00:17] five of those seven last year. Uh the

[1:00:20] reason we only did five is because the

[1:00:22] Georgetown and Pulton, the relatively

[1:00:24] new ones, uh those we did a four-year

[1:00:26] contract. So in 2020, I believe it's

[1:00:29] 2028, all seven of them, seven of them

[1:00:32] will be up for renewal. So

[1:00:37] um as part of providing that assessing

[1:00:40] uh services, we do a lot of property

[1:00:42] inspections. Uh the state requires we do

[1:00:44] a 20% review of all properties in in

[1:00:48] those jurisdictions. And that's a lot of

[1:00:50] reviews when you do a lot of units. So,

[1:00:52] you can see the the number of of reviews

[1:00:54] that we do there. Uh we've changed uh a

[1:00:57] little bit of our process just to make

[1:00:59] sure that we're complying with a recent

[1:01:01] Supreme Court decision. Uh just to I'll

[1:01:04] say both to protect our staff and and to

[1:01:07] protect the taxpayers and make sure that

[1:01:08] they're they're uh serviced in the best

[1:01:11] way possible.

[1:01:14] Um then the next slide is the ratios and

[1:01:16] multipliers which really goes back to

[1:01:18] our equalization function. After

[1:01:20] studying the market, we put all of this

[1:01:22] information together and this grid is

[1:01:25] the result of our of our studies. This grid goes to our local unit

[1:01:30] assessors to tell them how much of an

[1:01:32] increase or in this case this year uh

[1:01:35] some of the units or some of the classes

[1:01:37] actually had decreases.

[1:01:39] um the uh industrial class, we had a

[1:01:42] couple of them that had above 50 ratios,

[1:01:46] which means they actually needed to

[1:01:48] lower their values in the industrial

[1:01:50] class this year. Uh the the grid that

[1:01:53] you're seeing there is the grid that

[1:01:55] we're used to put we developed them in

[1:01:58] 2025 for the 2026 ratios. So the values

[1:02:02] that you you guys will be voting on uh

[1:02:04] in five 10 minutes here are actually

[1:02:07] developed right from these ratios and

[1:02:09] multipliers. We pass this on to the

[1:02:11] assessors. They change the values to

[1:02:14] come in line with these with these

[1:02:16] ratios and multipliers. And if they do,

[1:02:19] we recommend to you guys that we

[1:02:20] equalize as assessed. So um

[1:02:25] one one of the things that I want to

[1:02:26] point out here is that everything sorry

[1:02:28] if we could go back one everything on

[1:02:30] that grid pertains to assessed value but

[1:02:33] we don't pay taxes based on assessed

[1:02:35] value. We pay taxes based on taxable

[1:02:37] value and in 2025 excuse me for 2025 for

[1:02:42] 2026 the taxable value increase is 20

[1:02:45] 2.1 excuse me 2.7%. So even if the

[1:02:49] values were going up, you know, 6 8 10%

[1:02:52] whatever it was, the taxable value only

[1:02:55] increases by the the 2.7%.

[1:02:58] Um in residential, which is of course

[1:03:00] what pertains to most of us here,

[1:03:02] residential in um 2026 went up 6.1%.

[1:03:08] Uh and while that is still a healthy

[1:03:10] increase, that's actually down a good

[1:03:12] amount from our last last couple years.

[1:03:14] In 2025, we had a 7.7%

[1:03:18] increase in residential and in 2024, we

[1:03:21] had a 13% increase. So, uh 6% is still a

[1:03:25] good increase. Um, but I I one of the

[1:03:29] other things I'll I'll mention, I don't

[1:03:30] know if this is good or bad, but um this

[1:03:33] also is influenced by election years,

[1:03:35] which means the reason it's down isn't

[1:03:38] because the market is slowing, but

[1:03:40] because well, or maybe the market is

[1:03:42] slowing, but it was slowing because of

[1:03:44] an election year, which means next

[1:03:46] year's values are going to be higher.

[1:03:49] So, I'm going to say kind of kind of

[1:03:51] bank on that one. Um,

[1:03:56] Uh now the the awards one. Uh one of the

[1:04:00] things that I want to point out uh we

[1:04:01] have an excellent staff and I just want

[1:04:03] to point out some of the things that our

[1:04:05] staff have been up to. Uh Chris Vaness

[1:04:08] and uh Sean Canol uh both received their

[1:04:10] certified assessing officer

[1:04:12] certification. This is a year-long

[1:04:14] program and there's a lot of work that

[1:04:16] goes into it. So I want to congratulate

[1:04:18] them on on receiving that certification.

[1:04:20] Uh Jillian Vanvel, she's one of our

[1:04:23] part-time staff. uh she attained her

[1:04:25] Michigan certified assessing technician

[1:04:27] certification. Uh that is a uh not quite

[1:04:31] as extensive of a program that's more of

[1:04:33] an entry level certification, but still want to congratulate her for

[1:04:37] getting that. Uh the other thing I want

[1:04:39] to highlight uh the deputy director Josh

[1:04:42] Morgan. Uh he received the presidential

[1:04:44] citation award from IAAO for his work on

[1:04:47] the experience credit for mass appraisal

[1:04:49] task force which I think is probably the worst possible name you could give

[1:04:54] to an award. Um but it is a really high

[1:04:57] award. So I want to recognize him for

[1:05:00] that. He put a lot of work on that

[1:05:01] committee. Um and I I'll just say just for a brief summary uh it it's

[1:05:06] working with IAO and all of the states

[1:05:09] around the nation uh to accept uh

[1:05:13] assessor certification

[1:05:15] um exed hours for appraisal lensure. So

[1:05:20] uh in the past this has been a problem

[1:05:22] and him and his task force have worked

[1:05:24] um a lot of hours on making that making

[1:05:26] that so. So congratulations to him. Uh,

[1:05:29] and then I won the or I I guess I would

[1:05:32] say recognized for my service on the uh

[1:05:34] the standards committee. I received a

[1:05:37] presidential award on that one. Again,

[1:05:39] um I serve as chair on on the MEED

[1:05:42] standards committee. I've served on that

[1:05:44] for a number of years now. Uh it really

[1:05:46] is a good committee to serve on for

[1:05:48] influencing uh property tax

[1:05:51] administration. So, I'm happy to serve

[1:05:53] on that committee. Um is in terms of

[1:05:55] challenges for our department. Um I'll

[1:05:58] say our assessing division challenges uh

[1:06:01] pretty much remains the same. Um our our

[1:06:04] dayto-day they do really good uh really

[1:06:07] good work. Uh the challenges for our

[1:06:09] department though is tax tribunal

[1:06:11] appeals. Uh they just take up a lot of

[1:06:13] our time and resources. Uh I don't have

[1:06:16] a solution. Right. The the appeals come

[1:06:18] in and and and much like um my

[1:06:21] predecessor speaking, right? those

[1:06:22] appeals just take an awful lot of time.

[1:06:25] Um so so that that certainly is a

[1:06:27] challenge for us. The the difficulty of

[1:06:30] course is that people once they reach

[1:06:32] the tax tribunal level uh tend not to

[1:06:35] appeal their value. They're appealing

[1:06:37] their tax bill. Right? So they don't

[1:06:39] come in and say my value is wrong which

[1:06:42] is what they're supposed to appeal.

[1:06:44] They're coming in saying I pay $3,000 a

[1:06:47] year in taxes but I only want to pay

[1:06:49] 2,000. How do we work backwards to get

[1:06:52] down to that $2,000 level? Right? It's

[1:06:55] just a challenge uh because we of course

[1:06:58] can't appeal that bill. We work on

[1:07:00] value. So that's that certainly is a

[1:07:02] challenge for us. On the equalization

[1:07:04] side, uh one of the challenges uh as uh

[1:07:07] Bob Dice mentioned, there are a lot of

[1:07:10] uh bills put forward right now uh both

[1:07:12] by the Republicans and the Democrats.

[1:07:14] And uh we like to I'll say stay on top

[1:07:18] of those. We don't really take positions

[1:07:21] on it. At least as equalization

[1:07:22] director, I I'm an apolitical position.

[1:07:25] So I don't really take a a position on

[1:07:27] it, but I like to speak to those issues

[1:07:29] to say what is the effects if we

[1:07:32] implement this? Right? You're intending

[1:07:34] to accomplish this, but if you do this,

[1:07:37] does it accomplish that objective? Um,

[1:07:39] and unfortunately oftent times what

[1:07:42] seems like a great idea, if you

[1:07:44] understand the property tax system, it

[1:07:46] ends up being a really bad idea. So,

[1:07:48] that's that's just kind of the some of

[1:07:49] the things that we work through.

[1:07:53] And that is where I'm going to wrap it

[1:07:55] up. Uh, thank you very much for for your

[1:07:57] time. Do you have any questions for me

[1:08:00] or or if you have questions that you

[1:08:01] want to wait till later, you're always

[1:08:03] welcome to email me.

[1:08:04] >> All right, we will do that, Brian. Thank

[1:08:05] you very much.

[1:08:06] >> Excellent. Thank you for your time.

[1:08:07] >> I will say I do believe you're going to

[1:08:09] be visiting my house as a part of that

[1:08:10] assessment.

[1:08:11] >> Probably. So,

[1:08:12] >> I think someone is. So, see you then.

[1:08:14] Coffee. Coffee will be on.

[1:08:16] >> All right. Um, I think the next two

[1:08:18] items on our agenda, and Patrick may

[1:08:20] have to assist me with this, um, just

[1:08:22] statutoily. Oh, or Ron. Oh, hi Patrick.

[1:08:28] >> Well, we just have a note here that we

[1:08:29] need to receive the equalization report,

[1:08:31] which was just given, and we also need

[1:08:32] to receive the land bank authority

[1:08:34] annual report, which are both in your

[1:08:35] packets. So, thank you, Patrick. You're

[1:08:37] good. All right, we're going to move on

[1:08:39] to uh item five here on our agenda. Uh,

[1:08:42] public comment. Uh if anyone has come

[1:08:45] prepared to make a comment today, you

[1:08:47] are most welcome to do so. Please come

[1:08:48] up to the podium. Uh comments are

[1:08:50] limited to three minutes and please

[1:08:52] identify yourself by name and voting

[1:08:55] jurisdiction.

[1:08:56] >> Can I interrupt you a minute? Yeah.

[1:08:58] >> Um just point of clarification just a

[1:09:00] reminder maybe to those coming to make

[1:09:03] public comment that if they're wanting

[1:09:04] to make a comment related to their to

[1:09:07] parks or CH that there's going to be a

[1:09:10] hearing set for just those comments.

[1:09:12] Correct. Thank you, uh, Commissioner.

[1:09:14] Yes. Um, regarding CH and regarding the

[1:09:17] parks millillage, if you'd like to wait

[1:09:19] to give your comments on those two

[1:09:21] items, there will be another opportunity

[1:09:23] during the meeting to do so. You are

[1:09:25] also welcome to comment now if you

[1:09:27] prefer. All right. Would anyone like to

[1:09:29] comment today?

[1:09:32] Welcome. Thank you. Hello. My name is

[1:09:35] Tom Nebor from Cooperville. I am a

[1:09:37] health inspector for Ottawa County

[1:09:39] Department of Public Health as well as

[1:09:41] chapter chair of ask me local 43501.

[1:09:44] I'm here to give another perspective on

[1:09:45] the wage study. Um, obviously I would

[1:09:48] like you to reconsider preventing the

[1:09:50] union employees from benefiting from the

[1:09:51] wage study immediately. You can offer

[1:09:54] the wage study increases to union

[1:09:56] employees at any time. The unions will

[1:09:58] call a vote from our members and they

[1:10:00] will decide if they approve it or not.

[1:10:01] This allows for a democratic workplace

[1:10:03] and gives the wage study extra validity

[1:10:05] if it is passed. Not providing this

[1:10:07] option is the same tactic used by Ottawa

[1:10:10] count or Ottawa impact when they ran the

[1:10:12] board previously in order to gain

[1:10:14] leverage in negotiations. That said,

[1:10:16] there are major flaws with the wage

[1:10:18] study. First and most obvious, most

[1:10:21] grade two increases

[1:10:24] more most grade increases of two or more

[1:10:26] managerial positions, admin assistance,

[1:10:28] fiscal, and treasurer. These services

[1:10:30] are clearly favored in the wage study as

[1:10:32] any insignificant grade increase was the

[1:10:35] best outcome for any county employee.

[1:10:37] I'm sure they are all welld deserved,

[1:10:39] but the distribution of these shows

[1:10:41] clear favoritism. Second, the steep wage

[1:10:44] increase or the step wage increases only

[1:10:46] apply after four years and before that

[1:10:48] employees are actually paid less. This

[1:10:50] essentially red circles new employees to

[1:10:52] benefit the long-term employees. And a

[1:10:55] union group that would accept this as

[1:10:56] part of a wage study is hurting itself.

[1:10:59] Public sector unions live and die by

[1:11:01] being able to show new hires that union

[1:11:02] membership is good for everyone. If you

[1:11:05] wish to reward longevity, that is

[1:11:07] admirable, but doing so at the expense

[1:11:09] of new hires across the entirety of the

[1:11:11] county um is not a good idea. Lastly,

[1:11:14] there is an existing issue that this

[1:11:16] wage study does not address. There is a

[1:11:18] massive wage gap between lower earners

[1:11:20] and higher earners at the health

[1:11:22] department. Simply put, and I'm not

[1:11:24] making this up, um there are no union

[1:11:27] employees in grades six or seven um of

[1:11:30] the grades on the wage or wage

[1:11:32] increases. Um this creates unnecessary

[1:11:35] friction between the lower paid and

[1:11:36] higher paid employees. This mixed with

[1:11:38] the fact that new employees are having

[1:11:40] their wages lowered instead of raised

[1:11:42] creates a vicious cycle that is a clear

[1:11:44] attack at the union's ability to recruit

[1:11:46] and bargain. This wage study asked the

[1:11:48] union to sell out the young and the new

[1:11:50] for the experienced and the secure. This

[1:11:53] is exactly what the health department

[1:11:55] well this is exactly what we at the

[1:11:56] health department union have come to

[1:11:58] expect from the county ever since Ottawa

[1:12:00] Impact took over. However, I don't

[1:12:03] necessarily believe this board is the

[1:12:05] same as the previous negotiations this

[1:12:07] year were much smoother and the than the

[1:12:08] previous one and your rhetoric has

[1:12:10] changed significantly. If this board of

[1:12:12] commissioners is truly interested in the

[1:12:14] quality of life of union employees, then

[1:12:16] this board will listen to them. And

[1:12:18] since it is illegal for the county to

[1:12:20] directly bargain with individual

[1:12:22] employees covered by the CBA, according

[1:12:24] to the National Labor Relations Board,

[1:12:27] this includes the grade increases. Allow

[1:12:29] me to give you local 435's position.

[1:12:32] Every position at the health department

[1:12:33] that is grade 5 or below should get a

[1:12:35] two grade increase. They are vastly

[1:12:37] underpaid, desperately needed. No Ottawa

[1:12:40] County Department of uh public health

[1:12:42] employee would jump any other because

[1:12:45] again there are no Union Public Health

[1:12:47] employees at grade six or seven.

[1:12:49] >> All right, Mr. Never time has expired,

[1:12:51] but thank you.

[1:12:52] >> I would like to request to finish. I got

[1:12:53] like 10 seconds more.

[1:12:55] >> Go for it.

[1:12:55] >> Thank you.

[1:12:56] >> Be quick, please.

[1:12:57] >> Um if you're thinking that this was out

[1:12:59] of line to do in public, I agree. That

[1:13:01] is why I made a special meeting request

[1:13:02] on April 16, but HR only gave us dates

[1:13:05] after this wage study. I did not need to

[1:13:08] do this. It's tulip time. We are very

[1:13:10] busy on the food team right now. We

[1:13:12] could have let um things play out and

[1:13:15] then reacted. Instead, we're trying to

[1:13:17] be proactive. I believe communication

[1:13:19] leads to understanding and I think this

[1:13:20] board having this information will

[1:13:22] better allow you to make a decision on

[1:13:24] the wage study.

[1:13:25] >> Thank you, sir.

[1:13:25] >> Thank you for your time.

[1:13:26] >> Thank you.

[1:13:27] >> All right. Would anyone else care to

[1:13:29] approach? Um and I apologize. Usually

[1:13:31] when the threeminut alarm goes off,

[1:13:33] there's a little music that goes with

[1:13:34] it. So, Mr. Neore didn't get the benefit

[1:13:36] of that. Um,

[1:13:39] right. All right. Thank you, sir. If

[1:13:41] you'd state your name and uh uh

[1:13:42] jurisdiction for voting or reason.

[1:13:44] >> Yeah. U My name is Ken Skur and I'm an

[1:13:46] investigator with the Ottawa County

[1:13:47] Friend of the Court, vice president of

[1:13:48] the Friend of the Court Employees

[1:13:50] Association, also known as our union. Um

[1:13:52] I've worked for the county since 2012. I

[1:13:54] wanted to raise two issues that I

[1:13:56] believe are in existence with the 2025

[1:13:58] wage study and how it's about to be

[1:14:00] rolled out. I apologize for bringing

[1:14:02] these issues to you at the last minute,

[1:14:04] but the union employees did not know how

[1:14:06] that was going to be implemented until

[1:14:08] it was in committee two weeks ago. In

[1:14:10] 2020, I'll also say I was last in this

[1:14:13] room. An anonymous individual that I had

[1:14:15] taken support action against nominated

[1:14:17] me to receive the quarterly customer

[1:14:19] service award. They stated that I had

[1:14:21] taken the time to communicate with them

[1:14:23] clearly, treated them with respect, and

[1:14:24] left them feeling like an equal, not

[1:14:26] just a case file or number. But the

[1:14:28] truth is that is how most of my office

[1:14:30] works and tries to treat the public

[1:14:31] every day drawing on the experience and

[1:14:33] of our collective years of service to

[1:14:35] serve the public equally and with

[1:14:37] transparency. The issue we find with

[1:14:39] proposal one is with the uh proposal of

[1:14:42] how the wage study is going to be

[1:14:43] implemented is equality. As it reads,

[1:14:46] union employees would remain on the

[1:14:48] outdated wage scale and placement system

[1:14:50] for an additional eight months or after

[1:14:52] the next collective bargaining agreement

[1:14:53] is finished. During this time, union

[1:14:55] employees will be paid less despite

[1:14:57] having the same job titles as others in

[1:14:59] non-UN positions in other departments.

[1:15:02] Worse, veteran employees who have

[1:15:04] experience and positions about to

[1:15:06] receive grade increases will not only

[1:15:08] not move to the new scale, but they will

[1:15:09] not be able to move up on their

[1:15:10] anniversary dates in 2026.

[1:15:13] This penalizes both union positions and

[1:15:15] the most experienced employees that we

[1:15:17] have. We ask the universal wage scale

[1:15:19] that were developed by Baker Tilly to be

[1:15:21] made effective on the same date for

[1:15:22] everyone. We're confident the union

[1:15:24] would vote to adopt it with a one-page

[1:15:26] letter of understanding as we've done in

[1:15:27] the past and this has not been caused to

[1:15:30] reopening to reopen negotiations early.

[1:15:32] I ask for equal treatment for all union

[1:15:34] positions and the same respect for the

[1:15:36] individuals serving in public in those

[1:15:38] positions as our non-UN counterparts are

[1:15:40] going to receive. In the name of

[1:15:42] transparency, I'd also like to point out

[1:15:44] that the full wage study has not been

[1:15:47] released. As an investigator, for

[1:15:48] example, I don't know what positions I

[1:15:50] was compared to in other counties. I

[1:15:52] don't know what their job descriptions

[1:15:53] are, and I don't know what my how my job

[1:15:55] duties were scored in this wage study.

[1:15:57] Providing access to the full study has

[1:15:59] historically allowed employees to better

[1:16:00] understand the process, their grading,

[1:16:03] and to clarify job descriptions when

[1:16:04] necessary. Failing to provide the full

[1:16:07] report creates another transparency

[1:16:08] issue that we in the court feel. We're

[1:16:10] familiar with creating accurate findings

[1:16:12] and calculations that are made known to

[1:16:13] affected that are made known to affected

[1:16:15] case participants and ask for equal

[1:16:17] treatment in this respect with the wage

[1:16:19] study that's about to affect us. In

[1:16:21] closing, I thank everyone for their

[1:16:22] participation in the study. It's been a

[1:16:24] process. It's continued through several

[1:16:26] leadership changes. We simply ask for

[1:16:28] the establishment of a universal county

[1:16:30] wage scale rather than maintaining two

[1:16:32] separate systems for the next eight

[1:16:34] months and for the opportunity to see

[1:16:36] our grades in the full report. Thank

[1:16:38] you. Thank you, Ken. It's almost as if

[1:16:40] you timed that.

[1:16:42] Bravo.

[1:16:45] » Good morning, uh, Greg Coyle, uh, Spring

[1:16:49] Lake, uh, resident and CEO of the Tri

[1:16:52] Cities Family YMCA. Uh, thank you, Mr.

[1:16:55] Chairman, and commissioners for an

[1:16:57] opportunity to speak a bit early on the

[1:16:59] CH um, millillage. I wanted to um

[1:17:04] identify the wise support and

[1:17:07] specifically I'm speaking on behalf of

[1:17:09] our board of directors um to support the

[1:17:12] millillage uh for CH as a recent uh

[1:17:16] millillage uh mental health mill

[1:17:18] provider. We have seen firsthand the

[1:17:21] impact of the mental health millage in

[1:17:24] our county and and with our residents.

[1:17:27] We are in support of the renewal at its

[1:17:30] uh current rate for the additional 10

[1:17:32] years because we think the impact to

[1:17:34] county residents is significant. As a

[1:17:37] social wck provider, the impact between

[1:17:41] um physical, social, and emotional

[1:17:44] well-being. Um being able to utilize

[1:17:48] facilities such as the Y. It has

[1:17:50] literature backed up, evidence-based

[1:17:52] backup that's off the charts. um

[1:17:56] bringing in social well-being combats

[1:17:59] loneliness amongst other illnesses that

[1:18:01] are wide rampant in our communities

[1:18:03] today. The Y is grateful to have been a

[1:18:07] provider over this past year and looks

[1:18:08] forward to being able to serve Ottawa

[1:18:10] County residents in the future. Thank

[1:18:12] you.

[1:18:13] >> Thank you, Mr. Coyle. Is there anyone

[1:18:16] else? Come on up.

[1:18:18] Oh,

[1:18:20] >> hi, my name is Jenny White and I'm a

[1:18:22] Holland resident. I serve as the

[1:18:24] executive director of Bellow Kids, a

[1:18:26] nonprofit organization here in Ottawa

[1:18:28] County focused on getting kids outside

[1:18:30] and on bikes. My husband and I also run

[1:18:33] a small business here in Ottawa County.

[1:18:35] So, we care deeply about this community,

[1:18:37] not just through our work, but also as

[1:18:39] small business owners and as parents.

[1:18:42] I'm here today to express my strong

[1:18:44] support of the Ottawa County parks and

[1:18:46] the open space mill. At Kids, we work

[1:18:49] with thousands of children each year

[1:18:51] across Ottawa County. In 2025 alone, our

[1:18:54] 60 coaches biked with more than 4,000

[1:18:57] kids through partnerships with school

[1:18:59] districts like Grand Haven Public

[1:19:00] Schools, Holland Public Schools, West

[1:19:02] Ottawa, and Zealand. But our programs

[1:19:05] don't exist in a vacuum. They depend on

[1:19:07] safe, accessible, and well-maintained

[1:19:10] public spaces. Ottawa County parks are

[1:19:13] that foundation.

[1:19:15] They are where children learn to ride

[1:19:17] bikes, where students build confidence

[1:19:19] beyond the classroom, and where families

[1:19:22] connect outside and away from screens.

[1:19:25] For many kids we serve, especially those

[1:19:27] without easy access to outdoor

[1:19:29] recreation, these parks aren't just nice

[1:19:32] to have, they are essential. We

[1:19:35] absolutely love the rides that we get to

[1:19:36] do with Ottawa County Juvenile Court

[1:19:38] kids. Just last week, I was in

[1:19:41] Bentonville, Arkansas with a group of

[1:19:42] West Michigan leaders studying the

[1:19:44] impact of trails, parks, and bike

[1:19:47] infrastructure. What we saw was

[1:19:49] powerful. Their investment was not only

[1:19:51] improved health and community

[1:19:53] connection. It also has driven economic

[1:19:56] growth, supporting small businesses,

[1:19:58] attracting visitors, and creating a

[1:20:01] vibrant place people want to live and to

[1:20:03] work. That same opportunity exists here.

[1:20:07] parks strengthen our community, support

[1:20:09] local businesses, and help make Ottawa

[1:20:11] County a place where families and

[1:20:13] organizations like ours can thrive. As

[1:20:16] you consider the millillage renewal and

[1:20:18] proposed increase, I encourage you to

[1:20:20] think about the long-term impact.

[1:20:22] Investing in parks is investing in

[1:20:25] people. It's investing in our kids, and

[1:20:28] it's investing in the future of Ottawa

[1:20:30] County. Thank you for your time and your

[1:20:32] commitment to this community.

[1:20:35] >> Thank you, Miss White.

[1:20:37] Is there anyone else? Come on up.

[1:20:46] » Hi, my name is Becca Laren. I'm live in

[1:20:50] Grand Haven and I go to the Y for

[1:20:56] >> team

[1:20:56] >> the social programm.

[1:21:01] » That's a mouthful.

[1:21:03] >> And why are you here today?

[1:21:05] I am here to get

[1:21:08] voted that I can keep going to the Y and

[1:21:12] stuff

[1:21:14] that membership. She has been able to um

[1:21:18] go to the Y. She can't afford it and she

[1:21:20] lives at Gracious Grounds and so she got

[1:21:22] a flyer and went and she has really come

[1:21:26] I'm her mother Trisha and she has really

[1:21:29] come out of her shell the independence.

[1:21:32] She's never wanted to do anything alone.

[1:21:34] And so I know that this has been very

[1:21:36] important and that you're considering

[1:21:37] this on the ballot, but it really is

[1:21:39] important. This me this membership ends

[1:21:42] in September. And if it could get on

[1:21:44] that ballot in August instead of

[1:21:46] November, she has lost 17 18 pounds. Her

[1:21:50] last doctor's appointment, what

[1:21:51] happened?

[1:21:52] >> I'm off my bud push for medicine.

[1:21:55] >> She's enjoyed a couple friends to join

[1:21:58] her as well. So, her independence, her

[1:21:59] socialization and everything has just

[1:22:01] been and then I'm sorry. Um, the biggest

[1:22:05] thing is that she has been so much more

[1:22:09] social and it's really become her second

[1:22:11] home. She spends more time there than

[1:22:13] our house or at work and then at home in

[1:22:16] her apartment. So, I just feel like if

[1:22:19] that membership ends September 30th, I

[1:22:22] believe, and it doesn't get on that

[1:22:23] ballot till November, she's going to

[1:22:25] lose three and four months of routine

[1:22:28] and endurance. And when you started

[1:22:31] swimming, what did you how many laps did

[1:22:34] you do?

[1:22:35] >> 15.

[1:22:36] >> How many are you doing now?

[1:22:39] >> 50 or 60. So if we lose three months for

[1:22:43] these individuals, they're going to lose

[1:22:45] a lot of social and a lot of endurance

[1:22:47] that they've inquired. And I just feel

[1:22:49] like if there's any way that can get on

[1:22:50] that August ballot, I think it's just

[1:22:53] going to be monumental for her and so

[1:22:55] many others. Thank you for listening.

[1:22:58] >> Thank you, Becca. And thank you, Becca's

[1:23:00] mom.

[1:23:05] » Good morning. Um I'm very happy to be

[1:23:07] here. Miss Luakowski, executive director

[1:23:10] of Mosaic Counseling and resident of

[1:23:12] Spring Lake. I apologize I'm not able to

[1:23:14] stay for the second public comment. Um,

[1:23:17] I would like to express to you my

[1:23:19] support for putting the mental health u

[1:23:21] millage renewal on the August ballot.

[1:23:24] Um, Mosaic has been um very very uh

[1:23:28] grateful for receiving funding from the

[1:23:30] mental health millillage that helps us

[1:23:33] with providing um professional

[1:23:35] counseling um for people who are

[1:23:38] uninsured in our county for a

[1:23:40] collaboration that we have with the um

[1:23:43] Tri Cities Family YMCA um also suicide

[1:23:47] prevention and support groups. So,

[1:23:50] speaking on behalf now of Mosaic, um we

[1:23:54] provide accessible, affordable

[1:23:56] counseling to anyone who lives or works

[1:23:59] or goes to school or worships in Ottawa

[1:24:01] County. And that means that um anyone

[1:24:05] who um you know can't afford counseling

[1:24:09] is therefore we are there for them. We

[1:24:12] have a panel now of almost 300

[1:24:14] therapists who are able to pro provide

[1:24:16] that support with no wait list.

[1:24:20] We also provide inschool counseling um

[1:24:23] that's free with parental consent in

[1:24:26] Spring Lake and Grand Haven and West

[1:24:28] Ottawa and Holland and now Sagatuck

[1:24:30] public schools and also West Michigan

[1:24:32] Academy of Arts and Academics also free

[1:24:36] QPR suicide prevention as I mentioned

[1:24:39] support groups and that collaboration

[1:24:41] with the YMCA has been really

[1:24:43] incredible. We've had a therapist

[1:24:45] embedded there and so they're there um

[1:24:48] for five hours a week and then also we

[1:24:50] assist with the summer camp for the uh

[1:24:53] children who have big emotions during

[1:24:56] camp and having um professional

[1:24:58] therapists who are there to assist has

[1:25:00] been really remarkable.

[1:25:02] So I'm talking all these words um but

[1:25:05] they represent people. They represent

[1:25:08] children and adults and couples and

[1:25:11] families in our county and really depend

[1:25:14] on what the mental health millage has

[1:25:16] been able to do for our county. It's a

[1:25:18] such a ripple effect and it affects so

[1:25:21] many other things. So, I appreciate your

[1:25:23] consideration. It would be wonderful um

[1:25:26] for this to be on the August ballot and

[1:25:28] thank you so much.

[1:25:30] >> Thank you, Sarah.

[1:25:34] Morning.

[1:25:38] My name is Elizabeth Brewbaker. I live

[1:25:40] in Holland Township and I'd like to

[1:25:42] comment on the proposed two new well

[1:25:44] permits for the Consumers Energy JH

[1:25:46] Campbell plant. Coal ash has been found

[1:25:49] to contain arsenic, lead, and mercury as

[1:25:52] well as other materials that are known

[1:25:53] carcinogens and biological disruptors. A

[1:25:57] quick search for coal plants that have

[1:25:59] contaminated groundwater will reveal

[1:26:00] that this is not a theoretical concern.

[1:26:04] After high levels of toxins were found

[1:26:05] in some residential wells near the

[1:26:07] Campbell plant in 2019, Consumers Energy

[1:26:11] released the following. Safety is

[1:26:13] consumer energy's top priority. Nothing

[1:26:16] is more important than protecting our

[1:26:18] neighbors, employees, customers, and the

[1:26:21] planet we all cherish. We're working

[1:26:23] hard to safely handle, store, and

[1:26:25] dispose of coal combustion residuals

[1:26:29] commonly known as coal ash.

[1:26:32] Disposing of leeate from coal ash

[1:26:35] storage ponds in wells within 2 miles of

[1:26:38] one of the largest sources of fresh

[1:26:40] water in the world doesn't seem in line

[1:26:42] with that statement. Nor does pushing

[1:26:45] that plan through without a public

[1:26:46] hearing. It's not as if Michigan doesn't

[1:26:49] know the danger of toxic levels of

[1:26:51] dangerous chemicals entering our

[1:26:53] waterways.

[1:26:55] Every person in this room knows the

[1:26:57] value of Lake Michigan, the value of

[1:27:00] fresh water, the value of recreation,

[1:27:03] the value of fishing in the lake, and

[1:27:05] the value of people from all over the

[1:27:07] world coming to the shores of West

[1:27:09] Michigan to discover the value of the

[1:27:11] lake for themselves.

[1:27:13] More studies must be done before these

[1:27:15] wells are approved. our water is worth

[1:27:18] protecting.

[1:27:19] I ask this board of commissioners to

[1:27:22] formally request a delay in any permits

[1:27:25] for these wells and that this board also

[1:27:28] requests specific studies into the

[1:27:30] safety of this means of leech disposal.

[1:27:33] Thank you.

[1:27:35] >> Thank you, Miss Brewbaker.

[1:27:38] >> Anyone else? Come on up.

[1:27:42] >> Hi, my name is Amanda Jonas. I'm in

[1:27:44] Grand Haven. Um, and I appreciate the

[1:27:46] opportunity to speak before the um, next

[1:27:49] public comment. I apologize I have to

[1:27:50] leave, but I wanted to speak in support

[1:27:52] of placing the um, community mental

[1:27:54] health mill on the August 4th ballot um,

[1:27:56] to continue funding those programs at

[1:27:59] the same rate. I don't think the

[1:28:00] importance of funding mental health

[1:28:02] programs can be overstated um, given so

[1:28:06] many of the struggles that we're seeing

[1:28:07] in children, adults, seniors with mental

[1:28:10] health. Um I have worked as a social

[1:28:12] worker, clinical social worker for the

[1:28:14] last 14 years in both community mental

[1:28:16] health in Moskegan County and also in

[1:28:18] emergency departments in um hospitals in

[1:28:20] Ottawa County. Um and I've seen that

[1:28:22] firsthand. Um as I think the director of

[1:28:24] Mosaic Counseling said, it it comes down

[1:28:26] to people. We can cite statistics of

[1:28:29] increasing um suicide rates. It's the

[1:28:31] second largest killer of um adolescence

[1:28:34] in our country, which is pretty

[1:28:35] shocking. Um, but it comes down to

[1:28:37] people and a lot of times in the

[1:28:38] emergency room, the difference between

[1:28:40] being able to create a a plan for a

[1:28:43] person to to leave the emergency room

[1:28:45] versus going to a psychiatric hospital,

[1:28:47] which is a a huge disruption in their

[1:28:49] lives, is do they have access to

[1:28:52] support, outpatient mental health

[1:28:53] treatment? Do they have access to

[1:28:55] support people and community connection?

[1:28:58] um and me community mental health

[1:28:59] services and programs like the Momentum

[1:29:02] Center in Grand Haven where I'm a

[1:29:03] volunteer are providing that connection

[1:29:05] that people need to reduce loneliness,

[1:29:08] isolation, the things that really

[1:29:09] contribute to those deadly conditions.

[1:29:11] Um so I'm in full support of placing

[1:29:13] that on the ballot and I appreciate uh

[1:29:16] the opportunity to to speak here today.

[1:29:19] >> Thank you very much.

[1:29:28] My name is Peter Bogart. Allen Township

[1:29:31] is home for me. It's district 4 where

[1:29:34] we're representative by Commissioner

[1:29:36] Bonama. And Commissioner, I want to say

[1:29:38] thank you to you for the work you do in

[1:29:41] working for the welfare of Ottawa

[1:29:42] County.

[1:29:44] I'm here, as have others before me,

[1:29:47] asking that you pass a resolution which

[1:29:50] calls on the Environmental Protection

[1:29:52] Agency to hold public hearings before

[1:29:55] making any decision and Consumers

[1:29:57] Energy's proposal to drill two deep

[1:30:00] injection wells at the JH Campbell Power

[1:30:03] Plant. I've done as much reading as I

[1:30:06] can about issues related to deep well

[1:30:08] drilling and management. I'm not a

[1:30:10] geologist or a scientist and unless I miss my guest, neither are any

[1:30:15] of you.

[1:30:17] I've been tripping over terminology like

[1:30:19] toxic plumes, modeling, hazardous, and

[1:30:24] deep rock formation.

[1:30:26] I'm willing to trust people who really

[1:30:28] are experts.

[1:30:30] My concern is that the public has so far

[1:30:33] been denied that opportunity.

[1:30:35] We have yet to hear a comprehensive

[1:30:37] defense of all the measures necessary to

[1:30:40] execute this proposal. There are other

[1:30:43] areas of energy systems management where

[1:30:46] operators wait for years to get a

[1:30:48] permit. There may be valid reasons for

[1:30:51] the formatting of this permitting

[1:30:52] process, but the perception the

[1:30:55] perception of haste cannot be avoided.

[1:30:59] The just trust me, we're experts

[1:31:01] approach for transparency.

[1:31:04] Real experts can explain their work.

[1:31:07] Real experts value the community as much

[1:31:09] as the project, and they allow time to

[1:31:12] address community concerns.

[1:31:14] Failing to do so damages public trust.

[1:31:19] I try to avoid TV news these days

[1:31:21] because I'm tired of the polls which

[1:31:23] constantly tell me that people are

[1:31:25] losing their trust in our government. I

[1:31:29] view this deep well proposal as an

[1:31:30] opportunity to rebuild some of that

[1:31:33] trust.

[1:31:34] You as a county commission are in a far

[1:31:37] better position than any one of us

[1:31:40] individually to ask the EPA for a better

[1:31:43] commitment to transparency.

[1:31:46] I'm asking that you petition the EBA

[1:31:48] asking for scheduled public hearings

[1:31:51] before rendering any decision on this

[1:31:54] application from Consumers Energy. Thank

[1:31:57] you.

[1:31:58] >> Thank you, Mr. Bogart.

[1:32:01] There anyone else?

[1:32:10] Uh, for fear of being redundant, um, I'm

[1:32:14] also here to, um, make the same plea as

[1:32:18] Mr. Bogart. I'm Peter Evers and I am a

[1:32:22] constituent in Mr. Jeritzma's district.

[1:32:25] Um, and I am asking you to consider

[1:32:29] passing a resolution calling on the EPA

[1:32:33] to hold public hearings before approving

[1:32:36] Consumer Energy's request to drill two

[1:32:39] deep injection wells at the Campbell

[1:32:41] Power Plant.

[1:32:43] Um,

[1:32:45] Consumers Energy has argued that they

[1:32:47] will dispose of what they state as

[1:32:50] non-hazardous waste. And the wells they

[1:32:53] propose to drill apparently meet the

[1:32:55] standards of EPA's class one wells,

[1:33:01] whatever that means. I that's what I

[1:33:03] read. However, I read also that there

[1:33:07] are counterarguments

[1:33:09] being made by hydrogeeological experts

[1:33:11] who are very familiar with the

[1:33:14] geological structures here in Michigan

[1:33:17] who believe that these injections could

[1:33:20] create pressure underground, possibly

[1:33:22] creating fractures in a fragile

[1:33:25] geological structures and that could

[1:33:28] create pathways for waste material to

[1:33:31] eventually enter our drinking water.

[1:33:34] Um there's other uh concerns expressed

[1:33:37] as well and that's the one I've chosen

[1:33:40] to um highlight. As our water tables are

[1:33:44] already lowering in our state and the

[1:33:46] salinity of our drinking water is on the

[1:33:48] rise, can we afford to increase the risk

[1:33:52] of losing access to drinkable water

[1:33:56] should these wells fail or leak?

[1:33:59] And what happens when another

[1:34:00] administration takes over the federal

[1:34:02] government and rescends the emer energy

[1:34:05] emergencies,

[1:34:07] promotes cheaper and cleaner renewable

[1:34:09] um energy sources when the Campbell

[1:34:12] Power Plant eventually closes? Uh who

[1:34:16] will be responsible for monitoring the

[1:34:18] safety and the maintenance of these

[1:34:20] wells?

[1:34:22] As it stands right now, Ottawa County

[1:34:24] residents are being asked to accept a

[1:34:27] decision-making process without full

[1:34:30] opportunity for public input.

[1:34:32] This is not how decisions of this

[1:34:34] magnitude should be made. People who

[1:34:38] live, work, and raise families here

[1:34:41] deserve to understand the risks, ask

[1:34:44] questions, and have their concerns

[1:34:46] formally heard before permits are

[1:34:49] granted. Public hearings are not a

[1:34:52] barrier. They are a basic safeguard.

[1:34:56] They ensure transparency,

[1:34:58] build trust, and ultimately lead to

[1:35:02] better and more informed decisions.

[1:35:05] On April 22nd, the Port Sheldon Township

[1:35:08] Board did the right thing. They

[1:35:10] requested the EPA.

[1:35:12] >> Mr. Evers, your time is up. If you have

[1:35:15] a moment to wrap it up, go for it.

[1:35:16] >> Okay. Um, I would just ask you to join

[1:35:20] what has been passed by the Port Sheldon

[1:35:22] Township Board and um, send a resolution

[1:35:26] to the EPA asking for a public hearing.

[1:35:29] Thank you.

[1:35:30] >> Thank you, sir.

[1:35:33] Is there anyone else?

[1:35:39] » Hi, my name is Kate Armstrong. I am a

[1:35:42] resident of Grand Heaven Township and an

[1:35:45] employee of Ottawa County, currently

[1:35:47] serving as an investigator with the

[1:35:49] Ottawa County Friend of the Court and

[1:35:51] president of the Friend of the Court

[1:35:52] Employees Association. I stand before

[1:35:55] you today to respectfully express my

[1:35:57] concerns regarding the proposed

[1:35:59] implementation of the wage study and ask

[1:36:02] the board to reconsider the recommended

[1:36:04] approach. At issue is the proposed delay

[1:36:07] in applying the updated wage study to

[1:36:10] union employees until the completion of

[1:36:11] collective bargaining anticipated to

[1:36:14] occur this fall and take effect in 2027.

[1:36:18] In contrast, my non-UN peers are

[1:36:21] recommended for immediate placement on

[1:36:22] the updated wage scale. Whether

[1:36:25] knowingly or unknowingly, this

[1:36:27] recommendation has created a growing

[1:36:29] divide between employees. And I continue

[1:36:31] to hear consistent concerns from my

[1:36:33] association regarding fairness,

[1:36:36] transparency,

[1:36:37] accountability, resulting in declining

[1:36:40] morale, and diminished trust in county

[1:36:42] leadership. In recent years, our

[1:36:45] association members have continued to

[1:36:47] provide customer service and perform as

[1:36:49] one of the top friend of the courts

[1:36:50] throughout Michigan despite repeated

[1:36:53] administrative administration changes

[1:36:56] and turnover of HR personnel. All while

[1:36:59] hoping for a positive, transparent, and

[1:37:01] equitable outcome of the wage study.

[1:37:04] Instead, at the April 14th finance board

[1:37:06] meeting, we were informed that the Baker

[1:37:08] Tilly study would only be negotiating

[1:37:11] data going into negotiations.

[1:37:14] Many Friend of the Court employees

[1:37:16] remain in the position of needing second

[1:37:17] jobs on the weekends and evenings

[1:37:20] despite working full-time in public

[1:37:22] service, demonstrating the continued gap

[1:37:25] between compensation and the real cost

[1:37:27] of living. I myself serve at a local

[1:37:30] restaurant every weekend, often working

[1:37:32] seven days a week to be able to afford

[1:37:34] the rising cost of daycare, groceries,

[1:37:37] and raising a family in Ottawa County.

[1:37:40] My association respectfully requests

[1:37:41] that the board of commissioners

[1:37:43] reconsider the current approach and

[1:37:45] instead implement the wage study results

[1:37:46] for all employees on a consistent

[1:37:48] timeline. We are not seeking to reopen

[1:37:51] or accelerate our contract negotiations.

[1:37:54] Instead, we request that the wage

[1:37:55] adjustments be implemented through a

[1:37:57] letter of understanding attached to our

[1:37:59] current agreement as has been

[1:38:01] historically done, allowing for the

[1:38:03] timely and equitable application of the

[1:38:06] wage study while preserving our existing

[1:38:07] agreement. Thank you for your time.

[1:38:10] >> Thank you, Miss Armstrong.

[1:38:20] Ian Zimmer, Port Sheldon Township. An

[1:38:23] update on the online petition concerning

[1:38:25] ethics involving Joe Moss narrative and

[1:38:28] the board handling of the same.

[1:38:30] Currently 504 signatures online and 187

[1:38:34] paper signed within two hours on March

[1:38:37] 28, 2026.

[1:38:40] After voting 10 to one to pursue not to

[1:38:43] pursue an ethics inquiry, John Tele

[1:38:45] stated, "We have nothing more to learn

[1:38:47] or gain. There is much more to be

[1:38:50] learned." Per the May 2, 2025

[1:38:53] memorandum, employment investigation

[1:38:56] 2024, Jordan Eper timeline prepared by

[1:38:59] Nate Wolf and submitted to Gary Rosema

[1:39:02] and Ron Frans. It is clear and

[1:39:04] self-evident the allegations lodged had

[1:39:07] not been fully vetted and investigation

[1:39:09] was still ongoing when Joe Moss

[1:39:12] instructed Nate to terminate the

[1:39:14] investigation.

[1:39:15] There exists the possibility of a false

[1:39:18] bottom. Presuming allegations made by

[1:39:21] Jordan Eperson were true, then it is

[1:39:24] only the false narrative of severance

[1:39:26] terms Joe Moss outlined to the full

[1:39:29] board in closed session. But if the

[1:39:31] allegations presented by Jordan were

[1:39:34] just as false as the severance terms

[1:39:36] outlined by Mr. Moss, a matter of one

[1:39:39] hand washing the other. During close

[1:39:42] session, Gresian Cosby

[1:39:44] gave commentary about the release of the

[1:39:47] Eper resume and the only source was HR.

[1:39:51] Sylvia stated HR was malicious in the

[1:39:54] leak. All statements building a reason

[1:39:57] to reward Jordan. Jack Jordan processed

[1:40:00] foyer request 2023-00008802143

[1:40:08] and legal appeal that released the Eper

[1:40:10] resume. Commissioners listened to public

[1:40:13] comment concerning the heavy 98%

[1:40:16] redaction. However, during close

[1:40:18] session, corporate council and

[1:40:20] commissioners alike had factual amnesia.

[1:40:25] No one challenged the HR leak narrative.

[1:40:28] If the material facts surrounding the

[1:40:30] resumeé foyer request can be overlooked,

[1:40:33] what lesser but equally important

[1:40:35] material facts were circumvented,

[1:40:38] overlooked, or simply not given the

[1:40:41] opportunity for discovery?

[1:40:43] The definition of malfecence is

[1:40:46] applicable on many levels. The material

[1:40:49] facts of which occurred and the

[1:40:51] expediency the new board treated the

[1:40:54] ethics involved as radioactive.

[1:40:58] Impersonating an attorney to promugate a

[1:41:00] $100,000 severance based on false

[1:41:03] pretenses is no significant matter.

[1:41:10] » Thank you, Mr. Zimmer. Is there anyone

[1:41:13] else?

[1:41:16] It's a busy mic today. Come on up.

[1:41:20] >> Busy day. You have a busy busy docket.

[1:41:23] Thank you for commissioners. My name is

[1:41:26] Bruce Greenley. I live in Park Township.

[1:41:29] I'm uh I'm here uh a little ahead of

[1:41:33] time from the public hearing to support

[1:41:36] the um increase in parks and open spaces

[1:41:40] millillage. Um my wife and I are um uh

[1:41:45] residents of uh of Michigan about 17

[1:41:49] years now. Uh we moved from the western

[1:41:52] United States, western Colorado. I've

[1:41:54] spent many times uh hiking and and

[1:41:59] visiting national parks and the first

[1:42:01] time I came to a a uh county park in

[1:42:04] Ottawa County, Rosie Mound, I was

[1:42:07] impressed by the infrastructure there,

[1:42:10] the steps um and all the infrastructure

[1:42:16] there and in especially other parks as

[1:42:19] well. um in the

[1:42:23] um the new park and all of all of Shores

[1:42:26] is now not a new park. It's uh several

[1:42:29] years old now, but uh same kind of

[1:42:32] thing. Uh Ottawa County Parks does not

[1:42:35] do things poorly. the trails and uh and

[1:42:41] facilities that have been supported by

[1:42:43] the public uh in the uh ser scientific

[1:42:48] survey uh about a year ago and then an

[1:42:51] update in February support um the

[1:42:55] public's

[1:42:57] um great great support for for parks as

[1:43:01] we all know things are more expensive

[1:43:04] whether it's engineering studies or your

[1:43:07] um your meal at Red Robin, everything is

[1:43:12] quite a bit more expensive than it was

[1:43:14] five years ago or so. Um those

[1:43:17] engineering studies that get the item

[1:43:20] explorers trail um parts um uh stages

[1:43:24] complete and all of those things cost

[1:43:29] cons significantly more money than they

[1:43:31] did a few years ago.

[1:43:33] um the millillage um would help with

[1:43:37] getting more than just operations done,

[1:43:40] which is what's going to happen within

[1:43:42] the next year or so. Um, our the staff

[1:43:46] at the parks department do an incredible

[1:43:49] job in getting hundreds of thousands of

[1:43:51] dollars from the Michigan uh natural

[1:43:54] resources trust fund allocated for park

[1:43:57] operations and um land purchases and

[1:44:02] upgrades. I just thank you f uh thank

[1:44:05] you for helping uh consider uh

[1:44:09] increasing the millillage for the Ottawa

[1:44:11] County Parks and open spaces. Thank you.

[1:44:14] >> Thank you, Mr. Greenley.

[1:44:23] Sheila Detloff Holland Township. When

[1:44:26] this board took office, you stated that

[1:44:28] you would be transparent to a fault and

[1:44:30] that you wanted to increase morale of

[1:44:32] county employees. But two recent events

[1:44:34] are painful examples of how much you are

[1:44:36] still like Ottawa impact in both of

[1:44:38] those respects. The first is this insane

[1:44:41] backroom deal with the treasure and

[1:44:43] water resources commissioner revealed by

[1:44:44] Doug Venison in the compensation

[1:44:46] commission meeting. Patrick Waterman

[1:44:49] says that these stipens were fully

[1:44:51] disclosed after the fact to the

[1:44:53] commission in materials received by

[1:44:56] them. But in the meeting, Lynn Jansen

[1:44:58] asked Doug Vanesson what he meant when

[1:45:00] he said increases for the two were being

[1:45:02] handled internally. So Lind seemed

[1:45:05] unaware of any such materials. Doug had

[1:45:08] to spell it out for him, adding that

[1:45:10] they were, and I quote, an internal

[1:45:12] decision that the board of commissioners

[1:45:15] approved and made. Of course, that's

[1:45:17] impossible.

[1:45:19] So, is Doug Vaness openly admitting a

[1:45:21] massive OMA violation?

[1:45:24] No one is denying that our treasurer and

[1:45:26] water resources commissioner deserve a

[1:45:28] fair wage. But you don't achieve that by

[1:45:30] undermining the statutory authority of

[1:45:33] the compensation commission or by

[1:45:35] approving secret contracts in an

[1:45:37] apparent violation of OMA.

[1:45:40] This reeks of the same Ottawa impact

[1:45:42] backroom deals that landed cushy parting

[1:45:44] gifts in the laps of Ben Wetmore and

[1:45:46] Jordan Eper.

[1:45:48] The second issue is the wage study

[1:45:50] that's on today's agenda. It's

[1:45:53] interesting that the study has now been

[1:45:54] pulled from the employee portal. I think

[1:45:57] you know how flawed it is and that's why

[1:45:59] Patrick Waterman wanted broad authority

[1:46:01] to fix it post approval. Is that what

[1:46:04] you're going to do now with all board

[1:46:06] decisions? Say, "Hey, it's close enough.

[1:46:08] We'll just vote yes and fix it later."

[1:46:11] That's crazy. Obviously,

[1:46:14] the recommendation concentrates wage

[1:46:16] increases on managers and min and

[1:46:18] administrators with the notable

[1:46:20] exception of Adeline Hamley. deja vu oi

[1:46:23] anyone.

[1:46:24] But it defaulted to the option that

[1:46:26] excludes unions completely. If you want

[1:46:29] to demoralize your breadandbut

[1:46:31] employees, that would be a great way to

[1:46:33] do it. It seems to me it's easier to

[1:46:36] give raises across the board than

[1:46:38] dealing with retroactive pay and

[1:46:39] individual unions later, but that's just

[1:46:42] me being pragmatic.

[1:46:44] And that's not even getting into the

[1:46:46] confusion and uncertainty this will

[1:46:48] cause for CH union employees for obvious

[1:46:50] reasons.

[1:46:52] You might want to look up the 2023

[1:46:54] decision by the NLRB on Starbucks

[1:46:56] attempt to exclude union employees from

[1:46:59] wage from a wage increase. If that's not

[1:47:02] enough to make you vote no on this wage

[1:47:04] study and send it back to be fixed, then

[1:47:07] at least vote no to show us that you

[1:47:09] truly care about county employees and

[1:47:11] it's not all lip service. Thank you.

[1:47:14] Miss Love.

[1:47:18] I see movement. We'll hold the mic.

[1:47:25] » Good morning. Um, I am an Ottawa County

[1:47:28] employee, Brandy Mitchum, but I took

[1:47:30] time off this morning to talk as a

[1:47:32] resident. I am a resident of Holland

[1:47:34] Charter Township. My husband and I moved

[1:47:36] here 30 years ago. Um, and as

[1:47:38] transplants from Iowa, I immediately

[1:47:40] recognized the value of our parks and

[1:47:42] open spaces. Over the years, we've spent

[1:47:44] countless hours mountain biking and

[1:47:46] hiking in Riley Trails and enjoying the

[1:47:48] unique landscapes of a tunnel park. Um,

[1:47:51] we've raised our four children here and

[1:47:53] we've spent time in our parks. Um,

[1:47:57] they've become a foundation of some of

[1:47:59] our most meaningful family experiences.

[1:48:02] Our children have taken opportunity to

[1:48:04] take walking field trips at Tunnel Park

[1:48:06] as part of elementary school and those

[1:48:08] have created great memories for our

[1:48:09] family as well. During 2020 shutdowns,

[1:48:12] our appreciation of parks deepened even

[1:48:14] further. It provided our family a safe

[1:48:16] and accessible way to get outdoors, stay

[1:48:18] active, and maintain connection. Um,

[1:48:21] time reinforced exactly how essential

[1:48:23] these public spaces are to not just our

[1:48:25] family, but also to our community. My

[1:48:28] husband has led Cub Scout and Boy Scout

[1:48:30] troops in Holland over the last 25

[1:48:32] years, regularly utilizing Ottawa County

[1:48:35] Parks trails at Riley and Pisca have

[1:48:38] developed. Um

[1:48:42] these boys um some of their skills have

[1:48:45] come from um spending time in these

[1:48:48] parks for their high adventure trips and

[1:48:50] locations like the Kirk Park Lounge

[1:48:53] Lodge, not lounge and Pigeon Creek

[1:48:55] Campground have created opportunities

[1:48:58] for them to spend time outdoors with

[1:49:01] their skill building and earning merit

[1:49:03] badges. These parks do more than serve

[1:49:05] just our individuals and our families,

[1:49:07] but they also are helping our community,

[1:49:09] building young lives. Our family

[1:49:11] continues to support the parks, and two

[1:49:13] of my Jol adult children have chosen

[1:49:15] careers rooted in the outdoors because

[1:49:18] of all the time that they have spent um

[1:49:20] as children thriving in the nature. When

[1:49:22] I reflect on decades of our value that

[1:49:25] our family has received, renewing and

[1:49:28] restoring Parks Village is the bare

[1:49:30] minimum I'm wanting to support. I

[1:49:33] strongly favor and will encourage others

[1:49:35] to vote for also the 2.2 mil increase to

[1:49:38] preserve and enhance the greenways of

[1:49:40] Ottawa County. As a resident, I deeply

[1:49:43] value the stewardship and the long-term

[1:49:45] planning required to maintain these

[1:49:46] spaces. Nearly 500page

[1:49:50] parks, recreation, and open space plan

[1:49:52] submitted to the state as part of their

[1:49:53] grant funding requirements reflects just

[1:49:56] a portion of the thoughtful long-range

[1:49:58] planning undertaken by park staff. Their

[1:50:00] detailed budgeting and preparation over

[1:50:02] the last three years that I've been part

[1:50:04] of it have demonstrated diligence,

[1:50:06] responsibility, and a clear commitment

[1:50:08] to managing these public spaces wisely.

[1:50:11] I respect and encourage um you to

[1:50:14] approve the ballot language for both the

[1:50:16] renewal and restoration of the CH and

[1:50:18] parks millage along with the proposed

[1:50:21] increase for parks in November. With

[1:50:23] well over two million visits a year, the

[1:50:25] community has clearly demonstrated

[1:50:27] um vital spaces are important to the

[1:50:30] quality of life. Thank you for your time

[1:50:32] and for your support and for your

[1:50:33] continued um dedication to serve our

[1:50:36] community. Thank you.

[1:50:37] >> Thank Thank you, Miss Mitchell.

[1:50:40] Is there anyone else?

[1:50:49] » Good morning, commissioners. Becky

[1:50:51] Patrick Allenale. I'm following up on

[1:50:53] the emails I sent to you regarding

[1:50:55] statements made at a recent meeting of

[1:50:57] the Officer's Compensation Commission.

[1:50:59] As you know, the Officer's Compensation

[1:51:01] Commission is the only body that has the

[1:51:03] statutory authority to set salaries for

[1:51:05] non-judicial elected officials in this

[1:51:07] county. According to statements your

[1:51:10] corporate council made at that meeting,

[1:51:12] you, the board of commissioners,

[1:51:14] recently made a quote internal decision

[1:51:17] to increase the salaries of two of those

[1:51:19] elected officials. This was truly a

[1:51:22] breathtaking statement. So I asked you

[1:51:24] for an explanation.

[1:51:26] Commissioners Midima, Roodie, and

[1:51:28] Zyestra responded to my emails.

[1:51:31] I learned that the three of them were

[1:51:33] unaware of this internal decision. They

[1:51:36] agreed with me that the compensation

[1:51:38] commission, not the board of

[1:51:39] commissioners, has the authority to set

[1:51:41] salaries of elected officials.

[1:51:44] This revelation about an internal

[1:51:46] decision to increase increase salaries

[1:51:48] was especially astonishing because you

[1:51:51] all were asked to do this very thing at

[1:51:53] your December 9th finance committee

[1:51:54] meeting. You declined to do so.

[1:51:57] Yesterday, I rewatched that entire

[1:51:59] discussion on video. That meeting was

[1:52:02] characterized by commissioners

[1:52:04] expressing discomfort at the idea of

[1:52:06] increasing those salaries because you

[1:52:08] were concerned about the legality of it.

[1:52:11] You voted unanimously to table the

[1:52:13] matter and ask the administrator to

[1:52:15] collect additional information and bring

[1:52:17] it back to you at a subsequent meeting.

[1:52:20] That did not happen. Instead, according

[1:52:22] to corporate counsel, the salaries are

[1:52:24] ways raised quote internally out of

[1:52:27] public view in spite of all your high

[1:52:30] sounding public statements that you

[1:52:31] weren't comfortable taking such an

[1:52:33] action.

[1:52:35] Let us be clear, the issue is not the

[1:52:38] amount of money involved. The issue is

[1:52:41] not whether elected salary elected

[1:52:43] officials should have a salary increase.

[1:52:46] The issue is purely and simply your

[1:52:48] obligation to act in the public trust.

[1:52:52] Acting in the public trust means acting

[1:52:54] within your authority. It means making

[1:52:56] decisions as a full board, not by a

[1:52:59] subset of the board. It means making

[1:53:02] decisions in public. It means refusing

[1:53:05] to circumvent your colleagues in state

[1:53:07] law when they get in the way of an

[1:53:08] outcome you want. It means respecting

[1:53:11] the residents of Ottawa County enough to

[1:53:13] do all of those things.

[1:53:15] So, what is the remedy? At a minimum,

[1:53:18] you owe the public an explanation, and

[1:53:21] today would be a good time for that.

[1:53:23] Thank you.

[1:53:25] >> All right. Thank you, Miss Patrick. Is

[1:53:27] there anybody else?

[1:53:32] » Good morning, Karen, Spring Lake. On

[1:53:35] more than one occasion over the past 16

[1:53:37] months, I've heard this board state its

[1:53:39] desire and intent to move forward. I

[1:53:43] admit I've struggled at times over these

[1:53:45] past months to understand exactly what

[1:53:46] you mean by that. So my comment today is

[1:53:49] a plea that you demonstrate by your

[1:53:51] words and actions that you understand

[1:53:54] the need to restore public trust as a

[1:53:56] critical component of moving forward in

[1:53:59] a way that acknowledges the broader

[1:54:00] community beyond your own board. Because

[1:54:04] I stand here before you today to express

[1:54:06] the dismay I felt when I watched the

[1:54:08] recent Ottawa County Compensation

[1:54:10] Commission meeting and struggled to make

[1:54:12] sense of the explanation Mr. Vaness

[1:54:14] offered the members of that commission

[1:54:17] as to how the county had dealt

[1:54:19] internally to resolve the compensation

[1:54:21] difference for the county treasurer and

[1:54:22] water commissioner that resulted from

[1:54:25] the work of the last compensation

[1:54:26] commission.

[1:54:28] And while the email pertinent to this

[1:54:30] matter which Mr. Waterman sent to this

[1:54:32] board upon the request of Chair Buger

[1:54:34] does offer helpful background and a more

[1:54:36] detailed summary of actions taken to

[1:54:39] address the compensation issue in

[1:54:41] question. It does little to restore my

[1:54:43] trust that this board is committed to

[1:54:45] good process, the kind of transparent

[1:54:47] good governance process it instills and

[1:54:49] restores public trust. And as for what

[1:54:52] moving forward might mean to our county

[1:54:54] staff, I would also like to encourage

[1:54:56] you, as others have done before me, to

[1:54:58] consider carefully the agenda item

[1:55:00] related to the need to approve the

[1:55:02] classification and compensation study as

[1:55:05] recommended. Specifically, I'm concerned

[1:55:07] about the impact of the exclusion of our

[1:55:09] union employees from this wage study.

[1:55:12] But concerns are even greater in terms

[1:55:14] of the potential impact of that decision

[1:55:16] as it relates to our CH employees who as

[1:55:19] you well know are also facing job

[1:55:21] related uncertainties due to the ongoing

[1:55:23] transition to an authority.

[1:55:26] So I ask that you carefully consider

[1:55:28] whether further review is warranted. And

[1:55:31] finally, as both Mr. Evers and Mr.

[1:55:33] Bogurt stated in their public comments

[1:55:35] here this morning. I agree that this

[1:55:37] board would do well to pass a resolution

[1:55:39] asking the EPA hold a public hearing

[1:55:42] related to the two deep injection wells

[1:55:44] for which Consumers Energy is seeking a

[1:55:46] permit. In doing so, you will

[1:55:49] demonstrate your commitment to building

[1:55:52] public trust in yet another area of

[1:55:54] public concern. Thank you for your time.

[1:55:58] >> Thank you, Miss Oittz. Is there anyone

[1:56:01] else?

[1:56:04] Is there anybody online?

[1:56:06] >> Yes, there are two.

[1:56:07] >> Two online. All right.

[1:56:09] >> Um, Kimberly Whitten Meyer,

[1:56:12] >> you can unmute and you have three

[1:56:14] minutes if you could say your

[1:56:15] jurisdiction.

[1:56:20] » My name is Kimberly Whittener. I'm the

[1:56:23] executive director.

[1:56:24] >> Whitmer, are you there?

[1:56:26] >> What are you there?

[1:56:28] >> Um, hello.

[1:56:31] All right, let's the next one.

[1:56:33] >> Daniel Bectal.

[1:56:39] » Hello. Can you hear me?

[1:56:40] >> I wonder if we're having technical

[1:56:42] difficulties that we're not

[1:56:45] might be. All right, Miss Beal and Miss

[1:56:47] Whitmire, if you are listening, give us

[1:56:49] 60 seconds. If we can resolve this, we

[1:56:51] will. Otherwise, we'll have another

[1:56:53] opportunity to speak at the end of the

[1:56:55] meeting or call into the audience from

[1:56:57] the audience.

[1:56:59] Yeah, staff is shaking their head that

[1:57:00] 60 seconds probably isn't going to do

[1:57:02] it.

[1:57:02] >> I wonder if we would take a short recess

[1:57:04] a minute.

[1:57:05] >> I We'll have them comment at the end.

[1:57:07] Yeah, thanks.

[1:57:16] Okay. All right. Staff has indicated

[1:57:18] that um we'll have to do this at the

[1:57:20] end. We'll work on that during the

[1:57:21] meeting. Uh so if Miss Whitmer and uh

[1:57:24] Mr. Beal are listening, uh please stay

[1:57:26] tuned and call in at the end of the

[1:57:27] meeting. We'll be happy to take your

[1:57:28] comments. All right. And with that, we

[1:57:31] will close the public comment section of

[1:57:33] our meeting and we will move on to one

[1:57:37] moment.

[1:57:38] >> Motion to approve the agenda.

[1:57:40] >> Yeah. Thank you, Joe. Motion to approve

[1:57:41] the agenda. We got a motion. Is there a

[1:57:43] second?

[1:57:44] >> Mr. Chair,

[1:57:44] >> motion and support. And uh Miss Mea,

[1:57:48] >> um as I sent an email to you yesterday,

[1:57:50] I'd like to uh make a motion to add a

[1:57:54] discussion item um on the water resource

[1:57:57] commissioner and the county treasurer um

[1:57:59] being paid additional compensation.

[1:58:03] >> There's a motion. Is there a second?

[1:58:06] Got support from was that Commissioner

[1:58:08] Wenszel. All right.

[1:58:11] Any further comments?

[1:58:15] Okay, let's take a vote. Uh, if you

[1:58:16] would do roll call, Miss Sanchez, that

[1:58:18] would be great.

[1:58:20] >> Mr. Moss,

[1:58:22] >> yes.

[1:58:23] >> Mr. Kyers,

[1:58:24] >> no.

[1:58:24] >> Mr. Barry,

[1:58:26] >> yes.

[1:58:27] >> Mr. Bonama,

[1:58:28] >> yes.

[1:58:29] >> Mrs. Roadie,

[1:58:30] >> yes.

[1:58:31] >> Mr. Zystra,

[1:58:32] >> yes.

[1:58:32] >> Mrs. Wel,

[1:58:33] >> yes.

[1:58:34] >> Mrs. Midama,

[1:58:34] >> yes.

[1:58:35] >> Mr. Dortzma,

[1:58:36] >> yes.

[1:58:37] >> Mr. Tuples,

[1:58:38] >> no.

[1:58:38] >> Mr. Buger,

[1:58:39] >> uh, no.

[1:58:41] >> Motion passes.

[1:58:42] >> All right. Thank you. Let's add that as

[1:58:44] item

[1:58:48] under additional business

[1:58:50] discussion on consumers deep well report

[1:58:53] by county minister let's slide that in

[1:58:55] under a

[1:58:57] call it b discussion

[1:59:00] re

[1:59:02] making this note for me compensation

[1:59:05] of elected officials is that good

[1:59:07] >> I'm sorry where's that going

[1:59:08] >> so under uh item 11 additional business

[1:59:12] Oh, okay.

[1:59:13] >> Discussion on consumers energy wells and

[1:59:16] B will be discussion regarding consumers

[1:59:18] uh compensation or excuse me consumers

[1:59:20] compensate. Uh yeah, elected officials

[1:59:23] compensation. All right. Anything else?

[1:59:28] Okay. Oh, sorry. Nope. You're good.

[1:59:31] >> Okay. All right. Uh we've got a motion

[1:59:33] on the table to approve the agenda. All

[1:59:34] in favor say I. I. I. Those opposed. All

[1:59:37] right. Motion carries.

[1:59:43] All right. Sorry, guys. Got a lot on

[1:59:45] this one here. All right. So, item

[1:59:47] number seven, the consent resolutions.

[1:59:49] Uh, the suggested motion is to approve

[1:59:51] the consent resolutions as presented.

[1:59:53] >> So, moved

[1:59:54] >> or moved in support. Any discussion?

[1:59:58] >> So, sorry. Uh, letter H. We could remove

[2:00:02] that, please. a request for a letter H

[2:00:06] to be removed to an action item

[2:00:09] that is the classification and

[2:00:10] compensation study and we will put that

[2:00:15] as item G

[2:00:18] to be the next one in sequence there

[2:00:19] under

[2:00:21] it's a three-page agenda under item

[2:00:24] under section eight so item G will

[2:00:26] become

[2:00:28] classification and compensation study

[2:00:34] If I can read my handwriting later,

[2:00:36] it'll be a miracle. I'm sure Rachel will

[2:00:39] be able to assist. All right, with that,

[2:00:41] uh, all in favor of approving the

[2:00:42] agenda, say I.

[2:00:43] >> I.

[2:00:43] Those opposed?

[2:00:45] >> We're on the

[2:00:46] >> Excuse me. Consent agenda. Apologies.

[2:00:47] Yeah, let's do that again. Uh, all in

[2:00:49] favor of approving the consent agenda as

[2:00:51] amended.

[2:00:51] >> Mr. Chair, could I request a roll call,

[2:00:53] please?

[2:00:54] >> Sure. Can

[2:00:56] >> Mrs. Roie?

[2:00:57] >> Yes.

[2:00:58] >> Mr. Teles?

[2:00:59] >> Yes.

[2:00:59] >> Mr. Mr. Zystra,

[2:01:01] >> yes.

[2:01:02] >> Mr. Bonama,

[2:01:03] >> yes.

[2:01:03] >> Mrs. Wel,

[2:01:04] >> yes.

[2:01:05] >> Mrs. Midama,

[2:01:06] >> yes.

[2:01:06] >> Mr. Moss,

[2:01:07] >> yes.

[2:01:08] >> Mr. Jordma,

[2:01:09] >> yes.

[2:01:09] >> Mr. Kyers,

[2:01:10] >> yes.

[2:01:10] >> Mr. Barry,

[2:01:11] >> yes.

[2:01:12] >> Mr. Buger,

[2:01:13] >> yes.

[2:01:13] >> Motion passes.

[2:01:15] >> All right. Thank you. Uh, item eight,

[2:01:17] agenda and action requests. First up is

[2:01:20] a public hearing regarding the CH

[2:01:22] Militch and parks and open space. The

[2:01:25] suggested motion is to open the public

[2:01:26] hearing to receive comments on the

[2:01:28] proposed CH millillage and parks and

[2:01:30] open space mill. Anyone care?

[2:01:32] >> Support.

[2:01:33] >> Motion by Jorrettzma, second by Moss.

[2:01:36] All those in favor say I.

[2:01:38] >> I.

[2:01:38] >> Those opposed. All right. So, at this

[2:01:41] time, if anyone who didn't already

[2:01:44] comment uh would like to approach the

[2:01:46] board to comment regarding the CH

[2:01:48] millillage and the um parks millillage,

[2:01:51] now is the time. Please state your name.

[2:01:54] voting jurisdiction if you know it and

[2:01:56] uh keep your comments to about three

[2:01:58] minutes. Thank you.

[2:01:59] >> Good morning. This is Bob Davis,

[2:02:01] Georgetown Township.

[2:02:03] I'm simply here to ask this board to

[2:02:05] place a mental health millage renewal on

[2:02:07] the August 4th ballot and to make the

[2:02:10] case for why Ottawa County voters have

[2:02:12] earned the chance to say yes again.

[2:02:16] 10 years ago, the voters of this county

[2:02:18] made a commitment.

[2:02:20] They said that mental health services

[2:02:22] matter, that their neighbors deserve

[2:02:26] access to care, and that this community

[2:02:29] was willing to invest in that vision.

[2:02:32] I'm here to tell you that that invest in

[2:02:34] investment has paid dividends.

[2:02:37] Over the past decade, millage funding

[2:02:39] has allowed Ottawa County Community

[2:02:41] Mental Health to expand access to

[2:02:44] services for thousands of residents,

[2:02:47] children, adults, seniors,

[2:02:50] and people with developmental

[2:02:52] disabilities

[2:02:54] who might otherwise have gone without

[2:02:56] care.

[2:02:57] It has supported crisis intervention,

[2:03:00] outpatient therapy, substance use

[2:03:03] treatment, and community-based programs

[2:03:06] that help people live stable, productive

[2:03:09] lives,

[2:03:11] and people connected to their families,

[2:03:14] their jobs, and their communities.

[2:03:18] These are not abstract ideas or

[2:03:20] outcomes. These are real people. You've

[2:03:23] heard some of them earlier today. They

[2:03:26] are our neighbors and our families who

[2:03:29] received help because Ottawa County

[2:03:31] chose to fund it. That is something

[2:03:34] worth renewing and actually to be proud

[2:03:37] of. A renewal millage is exactly what it

[2:03:40] sounds like, a continuation of something

[2:03:43] that is already working. It doesn't

[2:03:46] create a new tax burden. It asks voters

[2:03:48] whether they want to maintain the

[2:03:50] progress that they have already made.

[2:03:53] Given the track record of the past 10

[2:03:55] years, I believe the answer would be a

[2:03:57] resounding yes, but only if this board

[2:03:59] gives them the opportunity to vote.

[2:04:02] Placing this on the August 4th ballot is

[2:04:05] the efficient and responsible path. The

[2:04:07] deadline is approaching and the work of

[2:04:10] certifying ballot language needs to

[2:04:12] happen now. I want to thank the board

[2:04:14] for the support you have shown for

[2:04:16] community mental health over the years.

[2:04:19] The renewal is an opportunity to build

[2:04:21] on that legacy to signal to residents,

[2:04:25] to providers, and to the people who

[2:04:26] depend on these services that Ottawa

[2:04:28] County maintains

[2:04:30] remains committed to the work of serving

[2:04:32] our most vulnerable.

[2:04:34] And since I have a minute left, a quick

[2:04:36] shout out to the parks.

[2:04:40] Good parks

[2:04:42] help improve mental health. Thank you.

[2:04:46] >> Thank you, Mr. Davis. And just a

[2:04:48] clarification, if anybody who spoke

[2:04:50] earlier would like to speak again to add

[2:04:52] an exclamation point to your comments,

[2:04:53] you are most welcome to approach as

[2:04:55] well.

[2:04:57] Anyone else?

[2:05:02] Almost took out Barb on my way up here.

[2:05:05] Sheila Lafalen Township. Um, I am going

[2:05:08] to add my voice to the support for uh

[2:05:11] putting the CH millillage on the August

[2:05:13] ballot. Until the woman spoke earlier

[2:05:15] about her experience with the Y, it

[2:05:18] really had not occurred to me of that

[2:05:20] kind of tangible benefit to having that

[2:05:23] millillage approved earlier rather than

[2:05:25] later. Um, so I really encourage you to

[2:05:28] do that. As far as parks go, um when we

[2:05:31] moved here five years ago for my

[2:05:33] husband's job, um

[2:05:36] the parks were a huge attraction in

[2:05:38] coming here. Um not that I had a whole

[2:05:40] lot of choice of where we were moving

[2:05:41] to, but um the parks made it extremely

[2:05:44] attractive. When we lived on the east

[2:05:46] side, I had to drive 20 minutes at a

[2:05:49] minimum to a nice park that had place

[2:05:51] for kayaking and hiking. And now I can

[2:05:54] practically walk out my back door and

[2:05:56] get the same thing. Um, so I am fully in

[2:05:59] support of the parks renewal and

[2:06:01] increase. Personally, I do understand

[2:06:03] that these are very difficult times

[2:06:05] financially for a lot of people. Um, gas

[2:06:08] prices are approaching $5 a gallon as

[2:06:10] you all know. Um, so I do understand

[2:06:12] that there might be some um, hesitancy

[2:06:16] about the increase. Um, but I personally

[2:06:19] support both of them. Thank you.

[2:06:22] >> Thank you, Miss Detaf. Is there anyone

[2:06:25] else who would like to talk about parks

[2:06:27] or the chillage?

[2:06:30] » Hello everybody. Uh my name is Kelly

[2:06:33] Ruffing. I'm um from Robinson Township.

[2:06:36] So um I just want to also in I don't

[2:06:38] know it's hard to think of what to say

[2:06:39] that our CEO or Becca didn't already say

[2:06:42] but um I work at the YMCA and we've been

[2:06:45] implementing a social wreck uh program

[2:06:47] under the millillage since uh last May.

[2:06:50] So almost a year and it has been so eye

[2:06:52] opening for us. Our mission is really to

[2:06:55] reach more of the vulnerable populations

[2:06:57] that don't just come in for a swim in a

[2:06:59] gym and this has given us the

[2:07:01] opportunity to do that. It's been an

[2:07:03] absolute joy and I believe it's brought

[2:07:05] people out of the woodwork. Um people

[2:07:07] with substance use disorder,

[2:07:09] developmental disabilities, and mental

[2:07:11] health challenges. um those it the Y is

[2:07:14] so welcoming to all and I feel like it's

[2:07:17] really helping to destigmatize people

[2:07:19] that might not otherwise qualify for

[2:07:21] mental health services or access them

[2:07:23] just of their own free will have told me

[2:07:25] especially with the substance um use and

[2:07:28] the mental health members they are they

[2:07:31] are thrilled to be able to just walk

[2:07:33] into the Y and reap the benefits of

[2:07:35] improved physical health and how that's

[2:07:37] impacted their mental health and how

[2:07:39] they can um do programs with their

[2:07:41] families amilies and how it strengthened

[2:07:42] their relationships with their friends

[2:07:44] and they've made new friends and our

[2:07:46] staff have just been um really enjoying

[2:07:48] the program as well. So, I encourage you

[2:07:50] to put it on the August ballot to reduce

[2:07:52] the likelihood of any kind of

[2:07:54] interruption of services and to say

[2:07:56] thank you for allowing me to speak and

[2:07:58] leave Grand Haven and everybody else of

[2:08:00] Grand Haven and everybody else. We would

[2:08:03] like you to put the Momentum Center on

[2:08:05] the ballot for August.

[2:08:08] We do a they do a lot for us. we go

[2:08:10] places and if the but militism passed

[2:08:13] then we wouldn't be able to go. I

[2:08:16] finally decided to go to Momentum

[2:08:18] because

[2:08:21] oops

[2:08:22] um I decided to go to Momentum Center to

[2:08:25] get out of my apartment because I'm not

[2:08:28] really a social person. I like to stay

[2:08:30] home and I'm just real quiet. Thank you

[2:08:32] for everything I meant.

[2:08:34] >> Right. Thank you. Is there anyone else?

[2:08:39] >> Greenwood.

[2:08:42] >> Yeah. Hello. Glad to be here this

[2:08:43] morning. My name is Caleb H Caleb

[2:08:46] Higgins and I reside in Holland Township

[2:08:48] and therefore I'm a member of the

[2:08:51] Holland Momentum Center and I am here

[2:08:53] this morning to show my support for the

[2:08:55] renewal of the mental health millage and

[2:08:57] to support it being placed on the August

[2:08:59] ballot. One program that receives mental

[2:09:02] health millage funding is the Momentum

[2:09:04] Center. So, I'm certainly grateful for

[2:09:06] the momentum center for the fact that

[2:09:08] it's a great way for me to spend time

[2:09:11] because a lot of people like myself may

[2:09:13] be disabled and unable to work and

[2:09:15] single at the time. So, the Momentum

[2:09:17] Center really helps me and others like

[2:09:19] myself deal with the boredom and

[2:09:21] loneliness.

[2:09:22] And I'd also like to add that the M

[2:09:24] momentum center is some very interesting

[2:09:26] activities which I think are very

[2:09:28] educational and almost comparable to the

[2:09:32] extracurricular activities in the

[2:09:34] schools. It's also a very great way to

[2:09:36] socialize with a lot of people and learn

[2:09:38] a great deal of skills. Like it's taught

[2:09:40] me how to be a lot better cook.

[2:09:44] The Momentum Center also provides

[2:09:46] opportunities for us to keep up on our

[2:09:48] good health. They do some offering of

[2:09:52] activities like walking outside,

[2:09:54] especially when the weather is good or

[2:09:56] during what we call our open gym time at

[2:09:58] the church we meet in now. And I would

[2:10:03] actually believe I'd be lost without the

[2:10:05] M momentum center. So I hurtly hope that

[2:10:08] you vote to add add to the renewal to

[2:10:10] the August ballot and renew the mental

[2:10:13] health millage so that others and I can

[2:10:16] continue to grow and keep it operating.

[2:10:19] Thank you.

[2:10:21] >> Thank you Mr. Higgins.

[2:10:28] » Hi Gwen Foss um from Spring Lake

[2:10:30] Fairiesburg. Um, and I was not intending

[2:10:33] to make a comment. Um, but I just I work

[2:10:37] for University of Michigan Health and I

[2:10:39] just think it's ironic that I got an

[2:10:41] email that came in just a few minutes

[2:10:43] ago that says May is mental health month

[2:10:46] and um encourages everybody to get

[2:10:49] involved. It talked about different

[2:10:51] webinars and symposiums

[2:10:53] um about AI and mental health risks um

[2:10:56] maternal um mental health addiction

[2:11:00] services different um drug agents

[2:11:05] um breakthroughs for bipolar disorder

[2:11:09] and um supporting kids at of every age.

[2:11:12] Um, so I just thought it made sense to

[2:11:15] also put my word in for supporting

[2:11:18] community mental health.

[2:11:20] >> Thank you, Miss Boss.

[2:11:22] Is there anyone else? Come on up.

[2:11:26] >> My name is Elizabeth Brewbaker from

[2:11:27] Holland Township. I've lived in Holland

[2:11:30] Township for 30 years. When my children

[2:11:32] were young, we spent a lot of our summer

[2:11:34] at the parks and took part in some of

[2:11:38] the programming. We even started an

[2:11:40] annual tradition of taking a hike to

[2:11:42] Rosie Mound on Labor Day, which we still

[2:11:44] do. My husband and I continue to enjoy

[2:11:48] walks in Adawa County parks and we also

[2:11:50] enjoy programming, especially the

[2:11:51] birding programs. In fact, we enjoyed

[2:11:53] the yearly program to see the Eagle's

[2:11:55] Nest at the Grand Ravines just this past

[2:11:57] weekend.

[2:11:59] We also continue to enjoy exploring the

[2:12:01] steady expansion of the county parks and

[2:12:03] trails. And it's hard to believe we get

[2:12:05] to enjoy the beauty of these parks and

[2:12:07] actively enjoy making use of them all

[2:12:10] for only an average of about $66 a year

[2:12:12] per household. With the proposal to

[2:12:15] increase the millillage by2 mills or an

[2:12:17] average about $40 a year per household

[2:12:21] to fund further expansions and

[2:12:22] renovations, we still come out at a

[2:12:24] total of less than $10 a month for an

[2:12:26] incredible park system. I don't have

[2:12:28] hard data about how much this county

[2:12:30] park system adds to the value of my

[2:12:32] home, but I feel confident it's more

[2:12:34] than $110 a year. I'm fully in support

[2:12:37] of the renewal of the existing uh.33

[2:12:39] mills as well as the proposed 2 mills

[2:12:41] for parks and open space. And I urge you

[2:12:43] to vote yes to adopt the resolution

[2:12:45] approving the ballot language. I also

[2:12:47] urge you to vote in favor of the

[2:12:49] community mental health millage. Hearing

[2:12:51] these stories today reminds me of how

[2:12:54] much work goes on in the background to

[2:12:57] make sure that so many people in Ottawa

[2:13:00] County get to live the life that makes

[2:13:03] it a quality life for them. Thank you.

[2:13:06] >> Thank you, Miss Brewbaker.

[2:13:10] >> Come on up.

[2:13:15] » My name is Katie Oswald and I live in

[2:13:16] the city of Holland. I'm here as someone

[2:13:18] who really needs a place like Momentum

[2:13:20] Center. When people hear mental health

[2:13:22] millage, I think many who don't know

[2:13:23] what the funds it funds simp assume it's

[2:13:26] simply a tax increase. To me, it's a

[2:13:28] reminder of how far I come from a season

[2:13:30] when I wasn't sure how I was going to

[2:13:31] get through. When even small steps

[2:13:33] forward took everything I had before I

[2:13:35] found the Momentum Center, I was in a

[2:13:37] really dark place. I felt alone all the

[2:13:39] time, even when I was around people. I

[2:13:42] was dealing with suicidal thoughts and

[2:13:43] it felt like I was trapped in my own

[2:13:45] mind with no way out. I heard about

[2:13:47] Momentum Center after being discharged

[2:13:48] from Holland Hospital. They told me it

[2:13:50] could be a resource in the community to

[2:13:52] support my mental health. The M momentum

[2:13:55] center welcomed me into a space where I

[2:13:57] didn't have to pretend I was okay. I

[2:13:58] could come exactly as I was. It's a

[2:14:00] place where I'm not too much, not a

[2:14:02] burden, and not a problem that needs

[2:14:03] fixing. The Momentum Center gave me what

[2:14:06] I didn't realize I was aching for. A

[2:14:08] place where I could simply exist, take

[2:14:09] up space without apology. And that

[2:14:11] changed everything. When you spend your

[2:14:13] whole life feeling like you have to

[2:14:15] shrink yourself, stay quiet, or

[2:14:16] disappear. Being in a place where you're

[2:14:18] allowed to just be there fully and

[2:14:20] without apology is powerful. It's

[2:14:21] healing. It can literally keep you

[2:14:24] going. That's what the mental health

[2:14:26] means to me. It's not just progress.

[2:14:28] It's survival. It's the small moments

[2:14:29] that build up into something bigger.

[2:14:31] It's showing up one day and then finding

[2:14:33] the strength to come back again.

[2:14:37] It's going from feeling completely alone

[2:14:39] to realizing you are a part of something

[2:14:41] bigger than yourself. I need to say this

[2:14:43] clearly. The Momentum Center is not the

[2:14:45] only place doing this work. There are

[2:14:46] other social recreation programs out

[2:14:48] there and they matter just as much.

[2:14:50] Maybe more than people realize because

[2:14:52] not everyone finds connection in the

[2:14:54] same place. Not everybody needs the same

[2:14:56] kind of support, but every person

[2:14:57] deserves a place to go, a place to be in

[2:14:59] their community where they can choose.

[2:15:02] These funded programs like the Momentum

[2:15:04] Center give people a reason to get out

[2:15:06] of bed. They give people somewhere safe

[2:15:08] to land when life feels unbearable. They

[2:15:10] give people connection which for me

[2:15:12] helps reduce going into crisis. They

[2:15:14] give people hope and that's why we it's

[2:15:16] so important to get the millillage on

[2:15:18] the ballot in August. It is bigger than

[2:15:20] just the momentum center. One program,

[2:15:22] one story. People deserve a voice and

[2:15:24] whether support like this continues,

[2:15:25] grows, and reaches the people who are

[2:15:27] barely hanging on. For me, this kind of

[2:15:29] support has made all the difference. And

[2:15:31] I know I'm not the only one. Mental

[2:15:33] health is about more than progress. It's

[2:15:35] about survival. It's about dignity. It's

[2:15:36] about being reminded that your life

[2:15:38] matters. Your presence matters and your

[2:15:40] future matters. That is why I'm asking

[2:15:42] you to add the mil mental health millage

[2:15:44] to the ballot in August to give people a

[2:15:46] place and a voice where they wouldn't

[2:15:47] normally have one. Thank you.

[2:15:49] >> Thank you, Miss Oswald.

[2:15:52] Is there anyone else?

[2:15:58] » Barbara Lee, city of Miss uh city of

[2:16:00] Grand Haven and the Momentum Center. I'm

[2:16:03] here today as so many others are because

[2:16:05] we want to make something really clear.

[2:16:07] The community mental health millillage

[2:16:09] is not an abstract policy decision. It

[2:16:13] is the difference between stability and

[2:16:15] crisis for thousands of our neighbors.

[2:16:18] For the past decade, this millillage has

[2:16:20] quietly done exactly what it was

[2:16:22] designed to do. Support people before

[2:16:25] they reach a breaking point. Every day

[2:16:28] we see the impact. We see individuals

[2:16:30] who because of these services are not

[2:16:32] sitting in an emergency room, not

[2:16:35] cycling through the jail system, but

[2:16:37] instead are finding connection, purpose,

[2:16:40] and a path forward. And that matters not

[2:16:43] just morally, but financially. Because

[2:16:45] when we invest in mental health early,

[2:16:47] we reduce the strain on law enforcement,

[2:16:50] hospitals, and the broader system. But

[2:16:53] here's the part that's really important

[2:16:55] to say clearly. This only continues if

[2:16:57] the millage continues. If it's not

[2:17:00] renewed, these programs, the ones you've

[2:17:02] been hearing about throughout this

[2:17:04] meeting, will be reduced or lost. And

[2:17:07] the people who rely on them won't

[2:17:09] disappear. They will simply show up in

[2:17:12] systems that are most more costly and

[2:17:14] often less effective. So today, I'm

[2:17:17] asking you to do two things. first vote

[2:17:19] to place the millillage on the August

[2:17:21] 4th ballot so that the people of Ottawa

[2:17:23] County can decide whether to continue

[2:17:25] this investment in their neighbors. And

[2:17:28] second, I invite you to come and see

[2:17:30] this work for yourselves. Visit the

[2:17:32] programs that have been speaking here

[2:17:34] today. I joined the momentum center at

[2:17:36] our annual prom with a purpose. Come

[2:17:38] meet the people whose lives are shaped

[2:17:40] by these services because once you see

[2:17:43] it up close, it stops being theoretical.

[2:17:46] it becomes personal. Mental health is a

[2:17:50] community issue, one that's been

[2:17:52] chronically underfunded. This community

[2:17:54] saw that problem and chose to respond

[2:17:57] with a truly unique community solution.

[2:18:00] The millillage isn't just about funding

[2:18:03] services. It's about continuing

[2:18:05] something that this community chose to

[2:18:07] build together. Thank you for your time,

[2:18:11] your leadership, and your commitment to

[2:18:13] the well-being of this community.

[2:18:17] Thank you, Miss Lee.

[2:18:24] » Good morning, commissioners. My name is

[2:18:26] Vonnie Vanderswag and I am I'm from um

[2:18:30] Olive Township. I'm also a board member

[2:18:32] for community mental health. You've

[2:18:34] already heard a lot about both the

[2:18:37] services that our millillage has been

[2:18:39] able to fund and the importance of it

[2:18:42] being on the August ballot. Um, I would

[2:18:45] just like to add a little bit to this by

[2:18:48] sharing with you. I was a board member

[2:18:50] prior to our first millillage being

[2:18:53] passed and currently I'm a board member

[2:18:55] as well. I have seen firsthand what a

[2:18:58] difference it has made and so I just

[2:19:01] encourage you to put it on the ballot

[2:19:03] for August. Um, additionally,

[2:19:08] um, I am currently serving as the

[2:19:12] chairperson of our finance committee.

[2:19:14] And I just want to also assure you that

[2:19:17] we look at all of the dollars so

[2:19:20] carefully as we make determinations and

[2:19:23] recommendations about how to spend them.

[2:19:25] Just like all the funding that comes in

[2:19:27] through Medicaid and other sources, our

[2:19:29] millage money is looked at through a a

[2:19:32] very close lens.

[2:19:34] And finally, I want to thank all of you

[2:19:37] for the work that you do and for the

[2:19:39] support that you have given in the past

[2:19:41] for the community mental health services

[2:19:44] and all of our members of our community

[2:19:47] who need that service. Thank you.

[2:19:51] >> Thank you, Vonnie.

[2:19:53] I know there's at least one more.

[2:19:57] » Rosalie Austin, city of Holland. I'd

[2:20:00] like to support the mental health

[2:20:01] millage also and that mental health not

[2:20:04] only serves mental health consumers but

[2:20:06] also the intellectual developmental

[2:20:09] disability

[2:20:10] population that supports my daughter and

[2:20:14] I'm thankful and grateful for our

[2:20:16] community for putting the community in

[2:20:18] community mental health because it's

[2:20:22] priceless the millillage and what it

[2:20:24] does for our community neighbors.

[2:20:29] You can't. It's undervalued that we

[2:20:34] can't. It's the best we can do. Okay.

[2:20:38] Thanks.

[2:20:39] >> Thank you, Rosalie.

[2:20:42] Is there anyone else? Come on up.

[2:20:48] » Good morning. Uh, Kelly Rice, Crockery

[2:20:51] Township. Most of you know me as the

[2:20:53] president of the Ottawa County Parks and

[2:20:54] Recreation Commission, and I've

[2:20:56] previously spoken about the amount of

[2:20:58] work that parks has done to arrive at

[2:21:00] the proposed 0.53 mill rate for the

[2:21:03] upcoming ballot. But I'm here today to

[2:21:05] talk to you about what parks mean to me.

[2:21:08] Ottawa County Parks hold a special place

[2:21:10] in my heart. Although I've lived here

[2:21:12] for over 20 years, I've also lived all

[2:21:14] across the country, and I've seen the

[2:21:16] local park systems across the country,

[2:21:18] or lack thereof. And I can tell you that

[2:21:21] our Ottawa County parks are truly

[2:21:22] something special. In addition to the

[2:21:25] ecological benefits and services they

[2:21:27] provide, such as clean water, critical

[2:21:30] wildlife habitat, pollination services,

[2:21:33] and storm water management, or the

[2:21:35] physical benefits of hiking, biking, or

[2:21:38] running in the beautiful natural

[2:21:39] communities in open spaces. Our parks

[2:21:42] also provide sometimes more intangible

[2:21:44] benefits such as solace, just simple

[2:21:47] unplugged family time, stress reduction,

[2:21:50] and healing. I can personally vouch for

[2:21:53] these benefits as I was diagnosed with

[2:21:55] breast cancer in 2023.

[2:21:58] The energy I received from the natural

[2:22:00] world and our parks during my journey

[2:22:02] was immeasurable. Having the privilege

[2:22:04] to observe something as simple as a

[2:22:06] chorus of wood frogs in the vernal pools

[2:22:09] at Crockery Creek, a carpet of spring

[2:22:11] wild flowers at Grand Ravines, a downy

[2:22:15] woodpecker mama popping in and out of

[2:22:17] her cavity next nest tree while I could

[2:22:19] hear her babies chirping in the

[2:22:20] background on the Grand Explorers Trail,

[2:22:23] and an or maybe something like a native

[2:22:25] prairie that was flowing like waves in

[2:22:27] the wind at Upper Makatawa Natural Area.

[2:22:29] These sometimes provided me with the

[2:22:31] energy I needed just to simply get

[2:22:33] through the day. And they still do. My

[2:22:36] friend, who's also a cancer survivor and

[2:22:38] thor organizes walks for a friend group

[2:22:40] that I try to attend in our parks every

[2:22:42] single week. These natural wonders make

[2:22:45] you realize that you're an integral part

[2:22:47] of something bigger. And these benefits

[2:22:49] are something we should be looking to

[2:22:51] preserve and enhance for our children,

[2:22:53] grandchildren, and the many generations

[2:22:55] coming after us. I hope you will all

[2:22:58] support placement of the parks

[2:22:59] millillage on the ballot and allow our

[2:23:01] residents the opportunity to continue

[2:23:03] and enhance this legacy. And since I

[2:23:06] have a bit of time, I do want to give a

[2:23:07] shout out. I'm very supportive of the

[2:23:09] community mental health millage as well.

[2:23:11] So, I would like to go on record for

[2:23:12] saying that. Um, also a couple folks

[2:23:15] contacted me and said they weren't able

[2:23:17] to attend the public hearing today

[2:23:18] because there wasn't a designated time.

[2:23:20] And I just wanted to offer up, it may or

[2:23:22] may not work, but at the parks

[2:23:23] commission, we have a published time at

[2:23:25] which the public hearing starts. So we

[2:23:27] start the meeting at three. We have the

[2:23:29] public hearing at 4. So we stop the

[2:23:31] agenda where we are and just have like a

[2:23:33] hard time so people know, especially

[2:23:35] during the workday because some people

[2:23:37] weren't that able to take off an

[2:23:38] indefinite amount of time to be here

[2:23:40] today. So just wanted to offer that up.

[2:23:42] But thank you so much for your time and

[2:23:44] support.

[2:23:45] >> All right. Thank you, Kelly.

[2:23:47] There anyone else? Come on up.

[2:23:50] Seeing none. No, I'm kidding.

[2:23:54] >> Story of my life.

[2:23:57] >> Uh, good morning. I think it's still

[2:23:59] morning. Um, Gordon Gallagher, Spring

[2:24:01] Lake Township Manager. I promise I'll be

[2:24:04] brief. Uh, Spring Lake Township and

[2:24:06] Ottawa County Parks Department have a

[2:24:08] long and productive partnership. We

[2:24:11] deeply value the access our residents

[2:24:13] have to high-quality parks, trails, and

[2:24:16] natural spaces. These assets are not

[2:24:19] just amenities. They are essential to

[2:24:21] our residents quality of life and to the

[2:24:24] economic vitality of our region. Parks

[2:24:27] attract visitors, support local

[2:24:28] business, and make our communities

[2:24:30] places where people want to live and

[2:24:32] invest. As our population continues to

[2:24:35] grow, so does the demand for outdoor

[2:24:37] recreation, environmental education, and

[2:24:41] accessible natural areas. Without

[2:24:44] continued investment, we risk falling

[2:24:46] behind that demand. Investing in parks

[2:24:49] is investing in community well-being.

[2:24:52] Parks are places to learn, to gather,

[2:24:55] and to spend meaningful time with

[2:24:57] family. They are also critical to

[2:25:00] preserving the natural resources that

[2:25:02] define Ottawa County.

[2:25:04] We respectfully ask that you support the

[2:25:07] parks department by placing the

[2:25:09] millillage requests on the ballot and

[2:25:12] supporting their passage. Importantly,

[2:25:15] millage dollars in Ottawa County are

[2:25:17] leveraged with state and local grants as

[2:25:19] well as private donations.

[2:25:22] This multiplies the return on investment

[2:25:24] and maximizes the benefit to our

[2:25:26] residents and taxpayers. So again,

[2:25:30] please put these on the ballot, but also

[2:25:32] you have a lot of constituents. Please

[2:25:35] consider supporting these individually

[2:25:37] as your constituents listen to you.

[2:25:39] Thank you.

[2:25:41] >> Thank you, Gordon.

[2:25:42] >> Ty. Yeah, nicely done.

[2:25:45] >> Everybody else did a nice job, too, just

[2:25:47] to put that on the record.

[2:25:52] » Hello, commissioners. My name is Allison

[2:25:54] Shamblin of Fairiesburg. Many of you

[2:25:57] know my wonderful husband, Jason

[2:25:58] Shamblin. I'd like to share a personal

[2:26:00] story about what the parks mean to our

[2:26:02] family and why the proposed increase is

[2:26:04] really important. Over 23 years of

[2:26:07] marriage, we've moved three different

[2:26:08] times so my husband could further his

[2:26:10] career in parks. Each move met new

[2:26:13] schools, new friends, and starting over

[2:26:15] for our family. In 2015, we visited West

[2:26:18] Michigan on a family vacation and fell

[2:26:19] in love with it, especially Lake

[2:26:21] Michigan and the dunes. A few years

[2:26:24] later in 2019, we moved here for his

[2:26:26] role with Otto County Parks.

[2:26:28] Our kids were 11, nine, and eight at the

[2:26:30] time, and they didn't see it as the

[2:26:32] dream we did. They saw it as leaving

[2:26:35] everything they knew. Their question was

[2:26:37] simple and honest. Why did we have to

[2:26:39] move to Michigan for dad's job? We moved

[2:26:42] to our home a few days before school

[2:26:43] started, and the kids were just

[2:26:45] beginning to adjust. And like everyone

[2:26:47] else, March of 2020 hit, and the world

[2:26:50] shut down. Once again, the kids question

[2:26:52] came. Why did we move here? So, we did

[2:26:55] what many families did. We went outside.

[2:26:58] We explored the trails, the beaches, the

[2:27:00] water, the woods, and all the open

[2:27:02] spaces. We discovered places like Grand

[2:27:04] Ravines, upper Makataba natural area,

[2:27:07] Ottawa Sands, and Eastmanville Bayou.

[2:27:09] And slowly things began to shift. One

[2:27:12] evening, my husband took our two

[2:27:13] youngest on a mission to find Virginia

[2:27:15] blue bells. something common where we

[2:27:18] used to live but very rare here. After

[2:27:21] searching, they finally found them. An

[2:27:23] entire forest floor covered in blue.

[2:27:26] They stayed until sunset exploring,

[2:27:28] taking photos, and enjoying it all. And

[2:27:30] on the way back, our daughter looked up

[2:27:32] and said, "I get it now, Dad.

[2:27:37] I understand why we moved here. So you

[2:27:39] could work in beautiful places like

[2:27:41] this." He said, 'You're close, but we

[2:27:44] moved here so I could help make sure you

[2:27:46] could explore experience places like

[2:27:48] this. Parks aren't just land. They're

[2:27:51] where kids discover something bigger

[2:27:52] than themselves. They're where families

[2:27:55] reconnect. They're where lifelong

[2:27:57] memories are made. That is why this

[2:27:59] continued investment is all about. It's

[2:28:01] about making sure that those moments are

[2:28:03] there not just for our family, but for

[2:28:04] every family in Ottawa County for

[2:28:06] generations to come. Thank you for your

[2:28:08] time.

[2:28:10] >> Thank you, Allison.

[2:28:18] Good morning, commissioners. Uh, my name

[2:28:19] is Nick Smith. I currently serve as the

[2:28:21] coordinator of visitor and business

[2:28:22] services for Ottawa County Parks

[2:28:24] Department. I took some time off to come

[2:28:26] down today to share a different

[2:28:28] perspective about the parks with you

[2:28:29] all. Um, so I'll do that now. My name is

[2:28:32] Nick Smith. I I have worked in parks and

[2:28:34] recreation since 2007, starting as a

[2:28:37] seasonal park attendant in a Metro

[2:28:38] Detroit city park department. Since

[2:28:40] then, I've worked at the city, township,

[2:28:42] federal, metrop park, and county levels,

[2:28:44] and I hold a degree in parks

[2:28:46] administration from Central Michigan

[2:28:47] University. And my passion has always

[2:28:49] been operating and improving park

[2:28:51] facilities to help people enjoy

[2:28:53] meaningful experience outdoors and make

[2:28:55] those special lifelong memories. Through

[2:28:58] my statewide involvement with the

[2:28:59] Michigan Recreation and Park

[2:29:00] Association, as well as the Michigan

[2:29:02] Association of County Park and Recreck

[2:29:04] Officials, I've had the great

[2:29:05] opportunity to work with park

[2:29:07] professionals across Michigan.

[2:29:09] That perspective has shown me something

[2:29:11] very important. Ottawa County Parks are

[2:29:13] truly exceptional.

[2:29:15] And sometimes those of us who work in

[2:29:17] them or live around them all the time

[2:29:19] don't fully realize how special they

[2:29:21] are. For roughly 30 years, Ottawa County

[2:29:24] residents have invested in parks. And

[2:29:26] that investment has helped create a park

[2:29:28] system and over 7,000 acres, including

[2:29:31] high-quality parkland, trails,

[2:29:33] facilities, public access. It has also

[2:29:36] helped build a professional organization

[2:29:39] that has re sorry

[2:29:42] uh respected across the state. Before

[2:29:44] coming to Ottawa County, I spent eight

[2:29:46] and a half years as the parks and

[2:29:47] recreation director for Niggo County

[2:29:50] where I had a very successful career

[2:29:51] managing four campgrounds, multiple day

[2:29:53] use parks, and helped oversee the

[2:29:56] construction and development of

[2:29:57] Michigan's Dragon of Hardy Dam 47 mile

[2:30:00] multi-use trail that draws people from

[2:30:02] all over the country.

[2:30:04] Through that involvement, I saw uh

[2:30:07] firsthand how parks support tourism,

[2:30:09] local businesses, and community pride. I

[2:30:12] also saw what happens when park systems

[2:30:14] do not receive the same level of public

[2:30:16] investment. Uh, NEGO County parks does

[2:30:19] not receive um investment from the

[2:30:21] county itself or from a millillage is

[2:30:23] all self-funded. And because of that,

[2:30:26] our focus was on um amenities and things

[2:30:30] that generate revenue and not

[2:30:32] necessarily serve the public in all the

[2:30:34] areas we probably should. Um so that

[2:30:37] experience strengthened my belief that

[2:30:39] parks must be fiscally responsible but

[2:30:42] they also must be remain focused on

[2:30:44] public service. Parks should serve

[2:30:46] families, seniors, children, visitors,

[2:30:49] people with disabilities and residents

[2:30:51] of all income levels. This is one of the

[2:30:54] reasons I came to Ottawa County. I saw a

[2:30:56] community that values their parks,

[2:30:58] invests in them, and understands that

[2:31:00] parks are a part of the quality of life,

[2:31:02] and make people want to live here, visit

[2:31:04] here, and return here. Ottawa County

[2:31:06] Parks has done an excellent job using

[2:31:08] local investment to leverage grants,

[2:31:11] helping the public's dollars go further,

[2:31:13] and making major projects possible.

[2:31:15] Ottawa County has something truly

[2:31:17] special. It did not happen by accident.

[2:31:20] It happened by residents, leaders,

[2:31:22] staff, and partners. Believe parks are

[2:31:25] worth investing in. My hope is that we

[2:31:27] will continue to recognize, protect, and

[2:31:29] responsibly invest in that legacy for

[2:31:31] the future generations. Thank you.

[2:31:33] >> Thank you, Mr. Smith. Wow. That uh maybe

[2:31:37] a little different tune there.

[2:31:39] >> New music.

[2:31:40] >> All right. Is there anyone else? Uh this

[2:31:43] has been great. All right. I understand

[2:31:45] we have an online comment and we've got

[2:31:48] two and we're going to try this again.

[2:31:51] Uh if it doesn't work this time because

[2:31:53] this is the only opportunity to speak,

[2:31:55] we will take a brief recess uh to make

[2:31:58] sure that they have the opportunity. So

[2:32:00] go ahead. Who have we got?

[2:32:02] >> Kimberly.

[2:32:03] >> Hello.

[2:32:04] >> Oh,

[2:32:04] >> yep. Go ahead. If you could just

[2:32:06] jurisdiction.

[2:32:08] >> Hello. My name is Kimberly Whittenmeer

[2:32:10] and I'm the executive director of the

[2:32:12] Holland Dropin Center and we as my

[2:32:16] members and I are encouraging you to

[2:32:18] vote for the mental health millage on

[2:32:20] the August ballot. Um we are 100% mill

[2:32:24] funded. So without this millillage we

[2:32:27] would cease to exist. We are also

[2:32:30] peerrun, meaning we have been down the

[2:32:34] road that some of our members have,

[2:32:36] which allows us to better support them.

[2:32:39] Some of the things that my members would

[2:32:41] like me to share with you is that

[2:32:43] they've had the opportunity to serve on

[2:32:45] the board and have personally witnessed

[2:32:48] many success stories of others receiving

[2:32:50] services here. Without the drop-in,

[2:32:54] their recovery would not be in the place

[2:32:55] it would be today. We need each other to

[2:32:58] be there for each other because it takes

[2:33:00] a team to succeed.

[2:33:03] And I've often heard from members how it

[2:33:06] has kept them out of the hospital.

[2:33:09] Having a space to come where they truly

[2:33:11] are stigmafree and a safe place to be is

[2:33:15] crucial.

[2:33:16] We meet people where they are and we

[2:33:19] allow many opportunities for them to

[2:33:21] participate in various activities.

[2:33:25] It keeps their mind strong. It builds

[2:33:28] character which helps them overcome

[2:33:30] their illness. Many of our members like

[2:33:33] to come multiple times a week, a few

[2:33:35] every day.

[2:33:38] We are in need of better and more mental

[2:33:43] health opportunities to support our

[2:33:46] community.

[2:33:48] As many of you already know, our mental

[2:33:51] health is at an all-time high in terms

[2:33:53] of crisis, and we don't have enough

[2:33:56] resources to reach everyone for

[2:33:59] everything. And so, our space allows

[2:34:03] people to come in, have a place to come

[2:34:06] where they're welcome and accepted. Some

[2:34:09] people who have been in recovery for a

[2:34:12] while, um, have clinicians and etc. uh

[2:34:16] to help them in their journey of

[2:34:18] recovery, but the drop-in is a

[2:34:21] non-clinical place for them to come and

[2:34:23] many times it's the first person that

[2:34:27] they meet to hear their story. And we

[2:34:30] value people's voices here. We believe

[2:34:32] everyone's voice is worthy of being

[2:34:34] heard as well as their story. And

[2:34:37] sometimes it's a matter of just sitting

[2:34:39] with someone and not saying anything and

[2:34:41] other times it's just listening. Um, and

[2:34:45] so we just want to thank you for your

[2:34:48] time and your consideration in hearing

[2:34:50] from us. Um, and we just appreciate the

[2:34:54] time you have given us. Thank you.

[2:34:58] >> Thank you, Miss Whitmire.

[2:35:00] >> All right. And I believe we have someone

[2:35:02] else online.

[2:35:04] >> The other person put their hand down, so

[2:35:05] I think we're all set.

[2:35:06] >> All set. They put their hand down.

[2:35:11] All right,

[2:35:13] we got it. Okay, thank you. Uh would uh

[2:35:17] I would at this time entertain a motion

[2:35:19] to close the public hearing.

[2:35:21] >> So moved.

[2:35:23] >> Moved by Moss, supported by Kyers, will

[2:35:25] say. All those in favor say I.

[2:35:28] >> I.

[2:35:28] >> Those opposed. All right. Motion

[2:35:30] carries.

[2:35:32] Motion to take a short recess.

[2:35:35] >> Got a motion for a recess. Is there a

[2:35:38] second? We May I suggest five minutes?

[2:35:42] >> How about 10?

[2:35:43] >> 10 minutes of the negotiation. Sounds

[2:35:45] great. All those in favor of a 10-minute

[2:35:47] break, say I.

[2:35:49] >> Those opposed?

[2:35:50] >> I I.

[2:35:51] >> All right. Motion carries.

[2:35:52] >> Moving on, man.

[2:35:54] >> Moving on.

[2:35:57] >> I'd rather keep moving than take a half

[2:36:00] hour break in 45 minutes.

[2:36:03] >> But now it's off the network, so I can't

[2:36:05] reset it.

[2:45:08] All right. If Boy, could someone close

[2:45:11] the door to the back, please?

[2:45:14] >> Anyone?

[2:45:16] >> Patrick, you got that?

[2:45:19] welcome them in if they'd like to come

[2:45:20] in. But

[2:45:25] » back there,

[2:45:29] » all right, and we will call the meeting

[2:45:31] back to order. Um,

[2:45:34] the April 30th, 2026 Board of

[2:45:37] Commissioners meeting is now back in

[2:45:38] session. Uh, item B on our agenda is the

[2:45:41] CH and parks and open space ballot

[2:45:45] language. Uh, this will be a roll call

[2:45:47] vote. Uh suggested motion is to adopt

[2:45:50] the resolution approving the ballot

[2:45:51] language to place the renewal and the

[2:45:53] restoration of the 10year 0.30 mil

[2:45:58] dedicated millillage for community

[2:46:00] mental health on the August 4, 2026

[2:46:03] ballot. the renewal and restoration of

[2:46:05] the 10-year 0.33 mil dedicated

[2:46:09] millillage for the parks and open space

[2:46:12] on August 4, 2026 ballot and placing the

[2:46:16] 10-year 0.20 mil increase dedicated

[2:46:20] millillage for the parks and open space

[2:46:23] on the November 3, 2026 ballot. Would

[2:46:27] anyone care to make that motion? make

[2:46:29] that motion or

[2:46:31] >> motion by Kyers and I think I had

[2:46:33] Jorrettzma as the support

[2:46:35] we will open up for discussion. Um I

[2:46:39] think uh just protocol-wise Commissioner

[2:46:42] Kyers I don't know if you were prepared

[2:46:43] but making the motion you are welcome to

[2:46:45] start off.

[2:46:46] >> Perfect. Thank you. Yes, I'd like to uh

[2:46:49] um supported this. I think the parks did

[2:46:51] a really good job um starting off with

[2:46:54] um the 0.53 and I know there was not

[2:46:58] agreement with that. So all we did was

[2:47:00] separate them and Jason did a really

[2:47:01] good job of separating discussion with

[2:47:03] our work sessions and came at a really

[2:47:05] good solution here that we would give

[2:47:07] the voters the chance to uh have the say

[2:47:10] in in November. And I know there were

[2:47:12] some concerns about having it all in

[2:47:14] November and I'm I think we split it

[2:47:15] both ways which is a compromise also.

[2:47:17] So, I'll be in favor of this uh this motion.

[2:47:21] >> All right. Thanks, Commissioner Kyers.

[2:47:23] Anyone else? I think I saw Joe uh

[2:47:25] earlier. Go ahead, Joe.

[2:47:26] >> Yeah, thank you. I'll just start by

[2:47:27] echoing some of what Commissioner Kyers

[2:47:29] just said. Uh I know that there has been

[2:47:32] some discussion and maybe a little bit

[2:47:34] of concern about putting a 0 53 in

[2:47:36] August. So, I appreciate the the change.

[2:47:39] Um I believe that there's strong support

[2:47:42] for the two August millages that are in

[2:47:45] this motion. And I think most of the

[2:47:47] discussion that might happen today is

[2:47:49] probably about the increase. So uh what

[2:47:52] I would like to do is uh make a motion

[2:47:55] to divide this question and uh have the

[2:47:58] first vote on the two renewals and a

[2:48:02] second vote on the increase.

[2:48:04] >> Would you take a friendly amendment to

[2:48:06] having it divided three ways?

[2:48:09] >> I would be happy to divide it three

[2:48:11] ways. Um

[2:48:13] >> I would support that motion.

[2:48:15] >> Okay. Okay. So, we have a motion on the

[2:48:17] table to divide item B into three

[2:48:20] separate motions.

[2:48:22] I'm going to say one regarding the

[2:48:25] community mental health millage with

[2:48:27] the.3 ms, one vote regarding the 10-year

[2:48:31] 33 mil for parks and open space and an

[2:48:34] additional one for the 2 mil increase uh

[2:48:37] for parks and open space. I articulated

[2:48:39] that about right?

[2:48:41] >> Yes.

[2:48:41] >> All right. And we've got a second by

[2:48:43] Commissioner Mima. We'll open for

[2:48:44] discussion. Uh, Commissioner Moss.

[2:48:46] >> Yep. I believe that if we move forward

[2:48:48] with this uh now that we could im

[2:48:51] probably immediately handle the first

[2:48:53] two

[2:48:54] >> and I think that would be very good for

[2:48:57] CH. I think it'd be very good for parks.

[2:48:59] >> Okay. Anyone else?

[2:49:02] >> Uh, Commissioner Rodie. Um, on that

[2:49:04] particular motion, I would say that I I

[2:49:06] agree with it because I I think that we

[2:49:09] may have, you know, pretty universal

[2:49:12] support or large support on these two

[2:49:15] items. And by putting them all together,

[2:49:19] um, I think you're probably you might

[2:49:21] not obtain a full, you know, a unanimous

[2:49:24] vote on some of these things. And so

[2:49:26] where where we have agreement, I think

[2:49:28] it's good to be able to demonstrate that

[2:49:30] to the community. I know I will not be

[2:49:32] able to vote yes on each of these, but I

[2:49:35] don't want to have to vote no on all of

[2:49:37] them by them being combined.

[2:49:40] >> Thank you, Commissioner Toples.

[2:49:41] >> I agree. I have no problem splitting

[2:49:43] this. Um I think the public also has a

[2:49:45] right to hear the positions of each

[2:49:47] commissioner on each one of these

[2:49:49] issues.

[2:49:50] >> Anyone else? Commissioner Mima,

[2:49:52] >> I echo exactly what Commissioner Tles

[2:49:54] just said.

[2:49:56] >> All right. Anyone else? Commissioner

[2:49:58] Barry. Uh I personally

[2:50:00] >> you leaned

[2:50:00] >> I personally like the uh putting this

[2:50:04] together. I think uh the two renewals um

[2:50:07] going together I I think for the benefit

[2:50:10] of voters to see that those two issues

[2:50:13] being renewed

[2:50:15] um and pushing the increase into the

[2:50:18] November ballot. Um I think it's a

[2:50:21] little easier to understand for uh for

[2:50:24] voters. Uh I'm comfortable with the

[2:50:27] language in the um uh proposal as

[2:50:30] presented. Uh however, I would like to

[2:50:33] get as close to a um unanimous vote on

[2:50:37] these issues as we possibly can. And if

[2:50:39] we have to break this up to get there, I

[2:50:41] guess I'm willing to do that. But

[2:50:44] >> All right. Thank you, Commissioner

[2:50:45] Barry. Anyone else?

[2:50:47] >> All right. I'll throw my two cents out.

[2:50:49] Um, I would be in favor of splitting

[2:50:51] these, putting parks as one and CH as

[2:50:54] the second one, but both millages with

[2:50:55] parks. I think a lot of extra effort

[2:50:58] went into the compromise that resulted

[2:50:59] in the.3 and the point 2, and I would

[2:51:02] hate to see that compromise uh taken

[2:51:06] down by people voting against one or the

[2:51:08] other of those two options. So, on the

[2:51:10] motion on the table, I'll be voting no,

[2:51:12] but we'll see what happens after that.

[2:51:15] >> Made me think of one thing for what you

[2:51:17] just said, Commissioner. Um, Buger, I

[2:51:20] one of the reasons I want them to be

[2:51:22] divided is because I am for sure in

[2:51:25] support of a couple of them and I think

[2:51:27] there's one one that I want to have

[2:51:29] further discussion on and I do want to

[2:51:33] show support for sure where I'm at.

[2:51:35] >> Okay, thank you. All right, let's uh

[2:51:38] might as well do a roll call vote. Um,

[2:51:39] Rachel, if you'd take the role.

[2:51:43] >> And this is just to divide, correct?

[2:51:45] >> Correct. The motion to the motion on the

[2:51:46] table is to divide.

[2:51:47] >> Mr. Bonama

[2:51:48] >> into three threes.

[2:51:49] >> Three.

[2:51:51] >> Yes.

[2:51:52] >> Mr. Dortzma.

[2:51:53] >> No.

[2:51:53] >> Mr. Toples.

[2:51:54] >> Yes.

[2:51:55] >> Mrs. Nema?

[2:51:56] >> Yes.

[2:51:56] >> Mrs. Wel?

[2:51:57] >> Yes.

[2:51:58] >> Mr. Barry?

[2:51:59] >> Uh, yes.

[2:52:00] >> Mrs. Broie,

[2:52:01] >> yes.

[2:52:01] >> Mr. Moss,

[2:52:03] >> yes.

[2:52:03] >> Mr. Zystra,

[2:52:04] >> no.

[2:52:05] >> Mr. Kyers,

[2:52:06] >> yes.

[2:52:07] >> Mr. Buger,

[2:52:08] >> no.

[2:52:09] >> Motion passes.

[2:52:10] >> Okay. So, we will do these one at a

[2:52:12] time. Uh, may I suggest um boy, do we

[2:52:16] need to make another motion here, Ron,

[2:52:17] or are we how how can we clarify this as

[2:52:20] far as procedure goes?

[2:52:21] >> Well, I think you could just take them

[2:52:23] in the order that they're in the

[2:52:24] resolution.

[2:52:25] >> All right, so we'll do the first one on

[2:52:27] the table, which will be the.3 mil

[2:52:29] dedicated millillage for CH to place

[2:52:31] that on the ballot for August 4th, 2026.

[2:52:34] >> So moved.

[2:52:35] >> Support.

[2:52:36] >> All right, we've got a Do we need a

[2:52:38] motion in a second on that round? Was

[2:52:39] that We did that correct? Okay. All

[2:52:40] right. Sorry. I know I just asked the

[2:52:42] same question twice. Apologies. Uh,

[2:52:44] Commissioner Kyers, um, motioned and

[2:52:46] Commissioner Moss second it.

[2:52:47] Commissioner Kyers, one more time, sir.

[2:52:49] >> I think it's pretty obvious this morning

[2:52:50] with the discussion and what we got

[2:52:52] going here in our county and support we

[2:52:54] need for the mental health is it's it's

[2:52:56] just a a yes vote for me.

[2:52:59] >> All right. Thank you, sir. Anyone else?

[2:53:01] Commissioner Moss,

[2:53:02] >> I'll echo that and say that um there's

[2:53:04] currently a large change happening um

[2:53:06] with converting CH from a department to

[2:53:08] an authority and maintaining the current

[2:53:10] millillage also helps with the stability

[2:53:12] during that change.

[2:53:14] >> Thank you, sir. Commissioner Mina,

[2:53:16] >> um I also support the millillage. I do

[2:53:18] still have one remaining question that I

[2:53:20] don't believe was answered um during our

[2:53:23] work session. I made a request that we

[2:53:26] could uh make sure that we were being

[2:53:28] proactive so that 10 years from now,

[2:53:30] whoever's sitting here um has the option

[2:53:34] to having it on the November ballot

[2:53:36] without it affecting residents as what

[2:53:38] was demonstrated here today by um

[2:53:40] certain individ individuals sharing from

[2:53:43] the YMCA and others sharing that if it

[2:53:45] wasn't on the August ballot that there

[2:53:47] there's a service gap. And so I I do

[2:53:50] still have that remaining question if if

[2:53:52] we are looking ahead with this ballot

[2:53:55] language of being proactive looking

[2:53:57] ahead 10 years from now. And so I would

[2:53:59] like that question answered before the

[2:54:01] vote today.

[2:54:04] >> Sorry, could you clarify your question

[2:54:06] just for a moment and we'll ask legal

[2:54:08] Ron if you're about ready for it. Say

[2:54:09] that one more time, Commissioner Mima,

[2:54:11] please.

[2:54:12] >> I think

[2:54:12] >> you don't have to do the whole thing.

[2:54:13] Just the question.

[2:54:16] Can you

[2:54:16] >> My question is is will the

[2:54:21] I don't know if it's the ballot language

[2:54:24] um I I think that would be the case the

[2:54:26] ballot language um or whatever needs to

[2:54:28] take place

[2:54:30] to make sure that we're not in the same

[2:54:32] predicament 10 years from now

[2:54:35] um saying that we can't put it on the

[2:54:37] November ballot because we have a

[2:54:40] service gap. And so that's because 10

[2:54:43] years ago we put this on.

[2:54:47] >> Does that make sense? What I might be

[2:54:49] able I might be able to help you out

[2:54:51] with that and maybe Dr. Bashers can as

[2:54:53] well. But um I believe some of that can

[2:54:56] be done by pacing the expenditure of the

[2:54:59] funds that come in so that they would go

[2:55:02] up, you know, and be be spent up until

[2:55:05] the the November election. And Dr.

[2:55:09] can correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't

[2:55:10] think it's necessarily something that

[2:55:12] has to happen with this, but it can

[2:55:15] happen with planning within CH itself.

[2:55:18] >> And and I'm I'm not sure are we if you

[2:55:22] don't mind answering I I'm not sure are

[2:55:24] we going to have a much of a gap with

[2:55:26] some of those services,

[2:55:30] » right?

[2:55:36] TH board just approved extending all of

[2:55:39] the programs that were supposed to end.

[2:55:41] They were onetime funding this um on May

[2:55:44] 1st to September 30th.

[2:55:47] So there could potentially be an issue

[2:55:50] if it if there's an issue in August,

[2:55:53] which I'm not anticipating, but we can

[2:55:55] deal with some of those of your concerns

[2:55:58] contractually with the providers and so

[2:56:00] they know

[2:56:02] >> when they're like I gave adequate notice

[2:56:04] to all of them months ago saying this

[2:56:06] could happen. Let's prepare for that.

[2:56:09] And we can also have a strategy of

[2:56:12] saving millage in reserve

[2:56:15] >> to extend out to cover any issues as

[2:56:18] well. I'm fine with August for this

[2:56:20] time, but going forward, it would be

[2:56:23] great if I I understand that's 10 years

[2:56:26] out, but

[2:56:28] >> there's no reason why we can't address

[2:56:30] it now once we once we're in that period

[2:56:33] and demonstrate protections to both the citizens and the programs and for

[2:56:39] you. So, we're not in that situation.

[2:56:41] >> All right. Thank you, Dr. Commissioner

[2:56:44] Ro. I know that Commissioner Barry does

[2:56:45] have his hand up, so go ahead quickly.

[2:56:47] Sorry. And I believe that we're we're

[2:56:49] adjusting contract years on some of

[2:56:52] those. So, we could simply adjust

[2:56:54] >> correct

[2:56:54] >> that. Okay.

[2:56:55] >> Yes.

[2:56:55] >> Thank you, Commissioner Barry.

[2:56:56] >> I I guess my question was uh how does

[2:56:58] this line up with um fiscal year on

[2:57:02] funding?

[2:57:05] » I don't know who to direct that question

[2:57:06] to, Commissioner Barry. Uh maybe that is

[2:57:09] uh Oh, Doug. Uh

[2:57:13] Dr.

[2:57:16] take a shot at it.

[2:57:17] >> All right.

[2:57:19] >> So, legally the the levy occurs in

[2:57:23] December. So, a vote in no August or

[2:57:27] November doesn't affect the levy. Okay.

[2:57:31] It affects budgeting. So under the

[2:57:35] Uniform Budgeting and Accounting Act in

[2:57:39] September,

[2:57:42] the Mental Health Board cannot

[2:57:45] appropriate

[2:57:47] into October and beyond

[2:57:51] with funds it doesn't have. Now, if it's

[2:57:56] ex if it has a levy that will occur in

[2:57:59] December, it can freely appropriate

[2:58:02] uh with these contracts indefinitely

[2:58:05] into that fiscal year. If it doesn't

[2:58:09] know in by the August election that it's

[2:58:13] going to have those funds, the best it

[2:58:15] could do would be to appropriate a

[2:58:18] budget

[2:58:20] recognizing that it might be extending

[2:58:23] some of these contracts and coming up

[2:58:26] with some funding to show that if the

[2:58:29] millage doesn't occur, it yet is not

[2:58:32] going to deficit spend. So, it puts a

[2:58:36] real burden on Michael and his staff for

[2:58:40] budgeting for the next fiscal year if

[2:58:44] they don't know in August that they're

[2:58:47] going to have the millage funds

[2:58:48] available.

[2:58:49] >> I think that carries risk to the

[2:58:51] organization to do do that.

[2:58:54] >> And just to clarify, we're not proposing

[2:58:56] any language changes to the U ballot

[2:59:00] initiative in order to create that. Uh,

[2:59:02] Commissioner Roodie just wants to make

[2:59:04] sure that should a future board wish to

[2:59:06] put this on a November ballot, they

[2:59:07] would be able to do so. There's a

[2:59:09] mechanism. Is that an accurate

[2:59:10] statement?

[2:59:11] >> I agree. And that's just that is a

[2:59:13] budgeting and planning decision. We

[2:59:15] don't have play we don't have ability to

[2:59:17] play with the date of the vote or the uh purpose of the uh millillage

[2:59:24] proceeds. So uh that is what it is.

[2:59:27] >> Okay. All right. Thank you.

[2:59:29] >> Any problems with technology right now?

[2:59:31] It says preparing live stream.

[2:59:36] » We've had that up for quite a while.

[2:59:38] Unfortunately, without rebooting, I'm

[2:59:40] not sure I can make that go away.

[2:59:42] >> Is it recording?

[2:59:43] >> It is. We double checked.

[2:59:45] >> Yeah. All right. Thank you. Any other

[2:59:47] questions on the CH mill or comments? Um

[2:59:49] I think Yeah, Commissioner Rodie, go for

[2:59:51] it.

[2:59:51] >> I just have some comments. Um I just

[2:59:53] want to say that um I do support this

[2:59:56] millillage um with rigorous

[2:59:58] accountability and utilization data

[3:00:01] about what the mill is used for which I

[3:00:04] have seen um CH uh begin to require and

[3:00:08] to utilize and making um decisions on

[3:00:12] what to do with millillage funds. Um, so

[3:00:14] I think there's now high accountability

[3:00:17] and um and and some good decision-

[3:00:21] making going on there. Um, the needs in

[3:00:24] our community have changed um from when

[3:00:26] the millillage was passed 10 years ago

[3:00:28] and there are new beautiful new and

[3:00:30] effective services that it's now funding

[3:00:33] which I very strongly support. Um I've

[3:00:36] also seen it used effectively to support

[3:00:38] Iikus um for some of its prior purposes

[3:00:41] in my area. So, um I think it's very

[3:00:44] worthwhile and um I will be encouraging

[3:00:48] my community to support it.

[3:00:51] >> Thank you, Commissioner Rodie.

[3:00:52] Commissioner Deeples.

[3:00:53] >> Um I'm not going to reiterate kind of

[3:00:56] where I've been for the last year on

[3:00:57] this issue. U I'm a huge supporter of

[3:00:59] our county's CH. Uh and uh I I trust Dr.

[3:01:05] Brchur's. I felt that I've I've tested

[3:01:07] him many times over the last year uh on

[3:01:10] your fiscal responsibility and prudence.

[3:01:12] I trust your board uh the people that

[3:01:15] have been this board has put on your

[3:01:16] board. Uh so I think this is u a great

[3:01:20] thing. Uh I'm 100% support of this of

[3:01:25] this motion.

[3:01:26] >> All right. Thank you, Commissioner

[3:01:27] Debbles. Anyone else?

[3:01:30] All right. I'll just add uh that I am

[3:01:32] fully in support of this as well. I

[3:01:34] think if anything, today's speakers did

[3:01:37] a fabulous job advocating on behalf of

[3:01:39] the CH Mill and absolutely underscored

[3:01:42] the purpose and the reason for it. Our

[3:01:44] job is to put it on the ballot for

[3:01:46] voters to ultimately decide and my hope

[3:01:48] is that voters will vote in favor of

[3:01:50] this message. So with that, uh, Miss

[3:01:53] Sanchez, would you care to call the

[3:01:55] role?

[3:01:56] >> Sure. Mr. Kyers,

[3:01:57] >> yes.

[3:01:57] >> Mr. Moss,

[3:01:58] >> yes.

[3:01:59] >> Mrs. Midama,

[3:02:00] >> yes.

[3:02:00] >> Mrs. Wel,

[3:02:01] >> yes.

[3:02:02] >> Mr. Barry,

[3:02:03] >> yes. Mr. Zystra,

[3:02:04] >> yes.

[3:02:05] >> Mr. Toples,

[3:02:06] >> yes.

[3:02:06] >> Mr. Bonama,

[3:02:07] >> yes.

[3:02:08] >> Mrs. Roadie,

[3:02:09] >> yes.

[3:02:09] >> Mr. Jordma,

[3:02:10] >> yes.

[3:02:11] >> Mr. Buger,

[3:02:12] >> yes.

[3:02:12] >> Motion passes.

[3:02:13] >> All right. Thank you. And then up next,

[3:02:15] we will have I guess we'll do the

[3:02:17] suggested motion would be to

[3:02:20] place on the ballot the renewal and

[3:02:22] restoration of the 10-year 0.33 mil

[3:02:26] dedic mill dedicated millillage for the

[3:02:28] parks and open space on the August 4,

[3:02:30] 2026 ballot. So moved.

[3:02:34] >> All right. Motion by Moss, support by

[3:02:36] George, Commissioner Moss. Go for it.

[3:02:39] >> I support the motion.

[3:02:42] >> Thank you for uh the amazing work that

[3:02:44] Parks has done. And we'll keep this

[3:02:46] short.

[3:02:47] >> All right. Thank you. Uh Commissioner

[3:02:49] Dors, may you second to that. Would you

[3:02:50] care to comment or

[3:02:52] >> I would agree. I'm I'm very appreciative

[3:02:54] to Jason for uh I sat down with him and

[3:02:56] we kind of talked through their plan and

[3:02:59] I feel very confident that parks is in

[3:03:02] strong hands and has good leadership

[3:03:05] over there. So, thanks Jason and rest

[3:03:07] the parks commission.

[3:03:08] >> All right. Thank you, commissioner.

[3:03:10] Anyone else?

[3:03:11] >> Uh Commissioner Toples.

[3:03:12] >> So, I'm going to reiterate what I

[3:03:13] basically just said about the the

[3:03:15] management of CH. Um what I've seen with

[3:03:18] parks and the administration under under

[3:03:20] Jason's uh watch is a consistent

[3:03:25] proactive forthought

[3:03:28] approach to running this

[3:03:31] business, this community serviceoriented

[3:03:34] business. Um I think your board's

[3:03:36] fantastic. Um the communication also I

[3:03:40] think is excellent um not only to the

[3:03:42] community but to this board and we've

[3:03:44] seen this time and time again. Um I I

[3:03:48] think you know so often when we have

[3:03:50] governmental agencies run things we

[3:03:52] wonder are we getting our bang for the

[3:03:54] buck? Is the money being spent wisely?

[3:03:57] Those kind of questions fundamental

[3:03:59] questions. Um I have absolutely no

[3:04:01] quarrel with how you and your team have

[3:04:04] done this your work. It's fantastic. So,

[3:04:07] I will also be supporting this.

[3:04:10] >> Thank you, Commissioner Deeples. Anyone

[3:04:12] else? Commissioner Kyers.

[3:04:13] >> Yeah. Um, I can't say enough about parks

[3:04:16] and and how I approve of parks and what

[3:04:18] we do at parks. I've been on the parks

[3:04:20] longer than any commissioner has and

[3:04:22] I've seen what they've done and how

[3:04:23] they've grown and what they do to our

[3:04:25] community. This goes handinhand with CH

[3:04:28] Mill because it is part of what um

[3:04:30] controls people in their minds and their

[3:04:31] bodies. heard about that this morning,

[3:04:34] especially from Kelly, how it affects

[3:04:35] you when you have trials in your life.

[3:04:37] So, um, I'll be supporting this. Thank

[3:04:39] you.

[3:04:40] >> All right. Thank you, Commissioner.

[3:04:41] Anyone else?

[3:04:43] All right. I will just echo what has

[3:04:45] been said here that I am fully in

[3:04:47] support of placing this millillage on

[3:04:48] the ballot before the voters, and I do

[3:04:51] hope that they will vote in support of

[3:04:52] it. Our parks are an absolute treasure,

[3:04:55] and it takes uh community support to

[3:04:59] create that treasure and to maintain it.

[3:05:01] So, I hope that uh our our citizens will

[3:05:03] vote in favor of this. Uh with that,

[3:05:05] Miss Sanchez, would you call the role?

[3:05:06] >> Just for clarification on the motion

[3:05:08] itself, it has to read at the beginning

[3:05:10] to approve to adopt a resolution

[3:05:13] approving the ballot language. Correct,

[3:05:15] Mr. Bulchie.

[3:05:17] >> Correct. Correct. Okay.

[3:05:18] >> Yeah. I apologize. I did not articulate

[3:05:19] that. You're right.

[3:05:20] >> I just wanted to make sure. So, that's

[3:05:21] what I put in there. Okay. Perfect. Mrs.

[3:05:23] Oh, I'm sorry. Mr. Tles.

[3:05:25] >> Yes.

[3:05:25] >> Mr. Zystra.

[3:05:27] >> Yes.

[3:05:27] >> Mr. Kyers.

[3:05:28] >> Yes.

[3:05:29] >> Mr. Barry.

[3:05:30] >> Yes. Mr. Moss,

[3:05:31] >> yes.

[3:05:32] >> Mr. Jordma,

[3:05:33] >> yes.

[3:05:33] >> Mrs. Roadie,

[3:05:34] >> yes.

[3:05:35] >> Mrs. Midima,

[3:05:36] >> yes.

[3:05:36] >> Mr. Bonama,

[3:05:37] >> yes.

[3:05:38] >> Mrs. Wzel,

[3:05:39] >> yes.

[3:05:39] >> Mr. Buger,

[3:05:40] >> yes.

[3:05:41] >> Motion passes.

[3:05:43] >> All right. Thank you. Up next, we have a

[3:05:45] guess we'll read the suggested motion is

[3:05:47] to place on the ballot and to approve

[3:05:48] the placement on the ballot. Did I say

[3:05:50] that correctly, Rachel? Of the

[3:05:56] uh 10year 0.20 20 mil increase dedicated

[3:06:00] millillage for the parks and open space

[3:06:02] on the November 3, 2026 ballot. Is there

[3:06:05] a motion?

[3:06:07] >> A motion by Ky, support by Joritzma and

[3:06:11] uh boy, Phil getting a lot of activity

[3:06:13] today.

[3:06:14] >> Thank you.

[3:06:14] >> Right over to you, sir. Um, you know, I we talked about with our work sessions

[3:06:19] and and the parks did a lot of work and

[3:06:22] a lot of surveys and and got really good

[3:06:24] feedback from what our community wanted

[3:06:27] and and what they treasure in Ottawa

[3:06:29] County and the parks do make Ottawa

[3:06:31] County what it is. I mean, I've sat on a

[3:06:33] lot of interview committees and people

[3:06:34] that interview um they've literally

[3:06:36] moved here because of the parks. So, I

[3:06:39] think separating this gives the people

[3:06:41] the choice that our board wanted because

[3:06:44] we didn't uh we didn't want it all in

[3:06:46] one because we thought it was too much

[3:06:48] to ask um tax increase and I understand

[3:06:51] that. But to give them the decision that

[3:06:53] they want and put it forward to them, I

[3:06:55] think is a perfect compromise. So, I

[3:06:57] would definitely be supporting this.

[3:06:59] Thank you.

[3:07:00] >> Thank you, Commissioner. Uh anyone else?

[3:07:02] Uh Commissioner Rodie?

[3:07:03] >> Yes. Um, so I I absolutely love our

[3:07:07] parks and I think it's um always amazing

[3:07:11] when we can give our kids and our

[3:07:12] community the opportunity to get out

[3:07:14] into God's creation and it's certainly

[3:07:18] um helpful to all of us in many regards

[3:07:21] um for that. Um I am concerned with um

[3:07:26] continuing to add to the tax burden on

[3:07:28] our citizens. And one of one of the

[3:07:31] reasons that um that it concerns me is

[3:07:35] we're you know we're seeing a lot of

[3:07:37] movements throughout our state um a lot

[3:07:39] of indications that uh the property

[3:07:42] taxation has just become too much. And

[3:07:45] we see that through um you know there

[3:07:48] was the acts by tax initiative. Uh we

[3:07:50] were in Lancing this week and they were

[3:07:52] talking about um the popup tax relief.

[3:07:55] You know, the population is making, you

[3:08:00] know, is making it known that they are

[3:08:02] stressed by property taxes and um we

[3:08:06] wouldn't be seeing things on a statewide

[3:08:09] um basis happening to try to reform

[3:08:11] property tax if citizens didn't feel

[3:08:14] like it was becoming too much. And so

[3:08:17] I'm particularly concerned about our

[3:08:20] young people who um you know, we talk

[3:08:22] about affordable housing and people um

[3:08:25] being able to um buy homes. I'm also

[3:08:28] concerned about our our elderly and some

[3:08:31] of them can't even downsize um to a

[3:08:34] smaller home to open up their home, you

[3:08:36] know, so we can have that movement

[3:08:38] through the market um because if they

[3:08:40] did that, their property taxes will

[3:08:42] increase so much that they can't they

[3:08:44] can't afford to downsize. So, um, that's my concern on this. I love our

[3:08:50] parks, but, um, I think that we are

[3:08:54] possibly getting to the point where

[3:08:56] we're we're starting to ask too much of

[3:08:58] our people when it comes to property

[3:08:59] taxes. I'm also cognizant of the fact

[3:09:02] that we have a 044 mill for our 911 call

[3:09:06] center. That's not coming up for a vote

[3:09:08] anytime soon. But, you know, we have

[3:09:10] critical services that have to that are essential that are needed that we have to um you know, fund

[3:09:18] through through millages. Um so, so

[3:09:21] while I love our parks, um I think that sometimes we also have to

[3:09:27] prioritize where our people are at and

[3:09:29] what they can personally afford. And to

[3:09:31] me, I I feel like we're we're at our

[3:09:33] limit. So, I'm not going to be able to

[3:09:35] vote yes on this one.

[3:09:36] >> All right. Thank you, Commissioner

[3:09:37] Roodie. Uh, Commissioner Wenszel.

[3:09:39] >> Um, I agree with Sylvia. Um, our parks

[3:09:42] are beautiful. I use them. Our family

[3:09:45] uses them. All of our kids use them. We

[3:09:47] love them. Um, but I'm hearing from

[3:09:49] individuals right now about being so

[3:09:51] strapped financially. Um, and how just

[3:09:54] expensive life is. And just this

[3:09:56] morning, I received a text message with

[3:09:58] a picture of

[3:10:02] the screen when an individual purchased

[3:10:05] gas and to fill their tank for the

[3:10:08] vehicle that they needed to use for

[3:10:10] work.

[3:10:11] It was, I think, if I'm remembering

[3:10:13] correctly, like $150. It was insane. Um,

[3:10:16] and this is a young individual. I think

[3:10:19] that our parks are amazing as they are

[3:10:22] without any more increases. All right.

[3:10:25] Thank you, Commissioner. Uh,

[3:10:27] Commissioner Baron,

[3:10:28] >> just a few thoughts I've got on this.

[3:10:29] Uh, I think, um, parks have demonstrated

[3:10:32] they're good stewards with the resources

[3:10:34] they've been given. Um, I think there's

[3:10:37] probably universal, um, feeling that,

[3:10:40] uh, the parks we have are really

[3:10:42] special. Uh I think having this increase

[3:10:45] put out as a separate vote uh allows

[3:10:48] parks to make the case to voters what

[3:10:51] they would do with the money and uh then

[3:10:54] voters would be able to decide whether

[3:10:56] that that

[3:10:58] cost whether you look at that as a cost

[3:10:59] or an investment is worth it. Um

[3:11:03] the whole property tax question in

[3:11:06] general though was kind of interesting

[3:11:07] and I talked about this on WHTC last

[3:11:10] week. There is a populist movement uh

[3:11:13] regarding property taxes and uh I said

[3:11:17] on the air that property taxes are the

[3:11:21] only tax that voters get to vote on

[3:11:24] themselves. All the other taxes are

[3:11:27] handed down to them, but property taxes

[3:11:29] you get to vote on. Those are also the

[3:11:31] only tax revenue that stays within your

[3:11:35] county or school district or township.

[3:11:38] Um, it it's a direct benefit to the

[3:11:41] taxpayers, the money that comes from

[3:11:43] property taxes. I don't know why we

[3:11:45] don't roll back sales tax. I don't know

[3:11:47] why we don't reduce the gas tax. I don't

[3:11:50] there's a lot of things you could take a

[3:11:52] look at. I don't I'm not exactly sure

[3:11:54] why the focus is is so intent on

[3:11:56] property taxes, but anyway, in this

[3:11:59] case, I I think um parks have been great

[3:12:01] stewards and I think uh voters should

[3:12:04] have the opportunity to decide whether

[3:12:06] that's uh an investment they care to

[3:12:07] make.

[3:12:08] >> Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner

[3:12:09] Mima,

[3:12:11] >> um I first just really loved hearing

[3:12:14] from the um

[3:12:16] all our constituents, all the people who

[3:12:18] live here. They had so many um beautiful

[3:12:22] stories to share about parks. I echo

[3:12:24] many of those. Um my family and I use

[3:12:27] parks on a very regular basis. That was

[3:12:30] part of my last job was teaching a

[3:12:31] nature-based preschool program um

[3:12:34] working with outdoor discovery center.

[3:12:36] And so I can't say enough good about our

[3:12:38] parks. Um this has been a topic that I

[3:12:41] have spent a lot of time wrestling with.

[3:12:43] Um, and I think where I've where I've

[3:12:47] landed is I believe that we can honor

[3:12:53] the overall thoughts of many of the um

[3:12:57] people that shared their their desire to

[3:13:00] continue our great parks. If we don't

[3:13:02] vote today for um putting an increase on

[3:13:05] our

[3:13:07] um on our residents on the millillage,

[3:13:09] that does not mean that our parks are

[3:13:12] all of a sudden going to

[3:13:14] um not be of good standing. If you look

[3:13:17] at all the things in the 33 millillage

[3:13:19] rate, line by line by line, it is

[3:13:22] continuing to do the great work that has

[3:13:24] been happening here already. Um, when

[3:13:27] you look at the 0.53,

[3:13:30] I think there's some really good

[3:13:32] thoughts there. I think there's some

[3:13:34] really good hopes. Um I look at it a

[3:13:36] little bit as when I in to a much um

[3:13:40] lesser degree each year I had to put

[3:13:43] together a budget for my own classroom

[3:13:45] and I started broad and then that slowly

[3:13:49] got um brought down and some years I got

[3:13:52] to have more brought in and some years I

[3:13:55] did not. And what I'm sensing um our

[3:14:00] role is as a board of commissioner and

[3:14:01] why we why we have to vote for a

[3:14:04] millillage to even go on a ballot is

[3:14:07] because we we should have a broader

[3:14:09] purview

[3:14:11] of everything all at once. So we we are

[3:14:14] the ones that are looking at the

[3:14:15] budgets. We're looking at the things

[3:14:17] that are coming before us in a little

[3:14:20] bit from the 911 call center. we're able

[3:14:23] to look at the different um things in

[3:14:25] our community that are affected by

[3:14:27] school millages. We have a better caveat

[3:14:30] of understanding sometimes the whole

[3:14:33] scope and sometimes when it comes on a

[3:14:35] ballot just for a couple things at a

[3:14:37] time, people aren't stopping to think

[3:14:39] about I said yes to this here, I said

[3:14:43] yes to this over here. And so I do think

[3:14:45] it's we have a greater responsibility

[3:14:48] as commissioners to

[3:14:51] properly um understand what we're

[3:14:53] actually voting for. And and when I hear

[3:14:56] people say that they can't afford to

[3:14:59] live here at the moment. I I want people

[3:15:01] to come

[3:15:03] to continue to enjoy our parks. One of

[3:15:05] the things we've been known for is

[3:15:06] people move here because of our parks.

[3:15:08] But if we can't have an affordable place

[3:15:10] to live, then people are no longer

[3:15:11] moving in to enjoy our parks.

[3:15:14] Can I personally afford a an additional

[3:15:16] increase for my family? Yes. But I think

[3:15:18] there's many people here that don't feel

[3:15:21] like they're in that spot. And I think

[3:15:23] it's the responsible thing to do at the

[3:15:25] moment is to create a pause and to ask

[3:15:28] parks to pause on that their wish list

[3:15:32] um and to come back to us at a later

[3:15:36] date when things are maybe not so hard

[3:15:40] um here in Ottawa County. So, for that

[3:15:43] reason, um I I will be voting um against

[3:15:47] the increase military.

[3:15:49] >> Okay.

[3:15:49] >> Thank you, Commissioner. I've got

[3:15:51] Commissioner Zielstra and then

[3:15:52] Commissioner Tles.

[3:15:53] >> John, would you go first?

[3:15:55] >> Sure.

[3:15:55] >> I'm sure.

[3:15:57] >> So, uh I'll be making more comments

[3:15:59] about uh this. But my fundamental

[3:16:02] question for the board is, and I've been

[3:16:04] challenging this for a year and a half,

[3:16:06] is what is our role as commissioners? I

[3:16:09] think we as a board often times step out

[3:16:11] of our duty and our responsibilities and

[3:16:15] think that we the government is not here

[3:16:17] to fix everything and that's not our job

[3:16:20] to do that. Um unlike what Commissioner

[3:16:23] Medium just said where people aren't

[3:16:25] thinking about what they're voting for.

[3:16:27] I absolutely trust our public to make

[3:16:30] the best decision for themselves and I'm

[3:16:32] willing to live with it regardless of

[3:16:33] their decision. And I think they have a

[3:16:36] right to make that decision. And I don't

[3:16:37] think my vote here should to should take

[3:16:40] that right away from them. That's not my

[3:16:42] role. I'm a commissioner, a county

[3:16:45] commissioner, and my job is to watch the

[3:16:47] county budget. It is to set policy for

[3:16:50] the county that deals with safety and

[3:16:52] other issues. It is not to take away a

[3:16:55] vote that the public can make for

[3:16:56] themselves. And that's where we have to

[3:16:59] understand where our lane is. And

[3:17:02] sometimes we jump over it. And it's not

[3:17:05] our duty. I trust the public to make the

[3:17:08] decision. I respect that parks has

[3:17:10] divided this so that the public can be

[3:17:13] well informed that there's a distinction

[3:17:15] between what happens in August and what

[3:17:18] happens here in November. The public is

[3:17:20] well informed of that. The park had a

[3:17:23] survey and showed that by far the public

[3:17:26] supports the 0.53.

[3:17:28] Well, if I'm going to vote against that, means all those people that did a

[3:17:32] scientific sur survey, a statistically

[3:17:35] reliable survey, I'm just throwing out

[3:17:37] the window as if they're those people

[3:17:40] are illrelevant. That's not my job as a

[3:17:43] commissioner. Again, I trust the public.

[3:17:47] If they vote yes, I vote I support it.

[3:17:49] If they vote no, I understand. I support

[3:17:51] it. I certainly support the point, too.

[3:17:55] But more so, my role as a commissioner

[3:17:58] is not to take that that right away from

[3:18:00] the people where they can do it

[3:18:01] themselves. That's just not my role.

[3:18:04] That's how I see my role as a

[3:18:05] commissioner.

[3:18:07] >> Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner

[3:18:08] Zstra.

[3:18:08] >> Sure. So, one of the reasons I like to

[3:18:10] have John go before me because he covers

[3:18:11] a lot of the terrain for the summer

[3:18:13] anyway. So, it makes my life a lot

[3:18:15] easier. I I let you go as well, Jim. Did

[3:18:18] I not let you go as well? Because I knew

[3:18:19] you were going to cover the same terrain

[3:18:20] and you know, you know, we split this

[3:18:22] into two uh two different votes.

[3:18:25] uh for the public like John said, two

[3:18:27] different days to let the public have a

[3:18:30] very clear voice on these on these

[3:18:32] issues. I think we should allow them to

[3:18:34] have that voice, right? I think

[3:18:36] depriving them of the right to vote on

[3:18:38] this um is not doing the public service.

[3:18:42] Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner

[3:18:43] Barry, did you have a comment again or

[3:18:45] you're good? Okay. All right. Anyone

[3:18:47] else? Oh, sorry. Commissioner Bonama,

[3:18:49] you know, I think I was supposed to come

[3:18:50] back to you a little bit ago. Apologies.

[3:18:51] >> It's all right. It's all right.

[3:18:52] >> Thank you for your patience. Hey, it's been a great day. Um, no, I think

[3:18:56] uh this is a great opportunity for the

[3:18:58] public to weigh in on whether they want

[3:19:00] a tax increase or not. I think we get

[3:19:02] very few opportunities as voters to vote

[3:19:05] on that. And so, here's a chance to um I

[3:19:08] was on a journey with this. Uh this is

[3:19:10] one where originally it was all together

[3:19:11] and it was just to vote on an increase.

[3:19:13] Uh I was a hard no on that because I I

[3:19:16] hate my taxes getting raised, right? I'm with y'all. Uh but I was uh you know

[3:19:22] persuaded that there's power and options

[3:19:24] and I want to give that power to the

[3:19:26] public to say hey uh yes yes yes or no

[3:19:30] on you know maintaining I think that's

[3:19:32] being a good steward and then yes or no

[3:19:34] on increasing and that's a decision that

[3:19:36] they can decide. So uh I'll be

[3:19:38] supporting that as well.

[3:19:40] >> All right thank you uh Commissioner

[3:19:41] Moss.

[3:19:43] >> All right I try to keep it short. Uh I

[3:19:45] agree someone said in the beginning we

[3:19:47] have good stewards in our parks

[3:19:48] department. I appreciate that. Um, we

[3:19:50] have great parks. Uh, we got unanimous

[3:19:54] support for the renewal today. And

[3:19:57] lastly, government is taxing too much.

[3:20:01] Uh, I recommend to the board, to my

[3:20:04] fellow board members, that you vote no

[3:20:06] on this particular item. Uh, it is a tax

[3:20:10] increase. Right now in Lancing, we just

[3:20:13] heard from Bob this morning and we heard

[3:20:14] uh at the MAC conference that at the

[3:20:17] state level, the Democrats are looking

[3:20:19] at tax increases.

[3:20:21] At the same time, Republicans are

[3:20:23] looking at multiple ways and have new

[3:20:24] proposals to cut taxes. So, I'm opposed

[3:20:28] to this particular increase, and I'd ask

[3:20:31] that you all vote no and come back to

[3:20:34] this sometime next year.

[3:20:36] >> Thank you, Commissioner.

[3:20:38] Um yeah. Okay. All right. All right,

[3:20:41] I'll go for it. Um, I am going to uh say

[3:20:43] that I I do wish given the effort that

[3:20:45] went in and the consiliatory

[3:20:49] um grac I say let's say given the

[3:20:51] graciousness of the parks board uh and

[3:20:53] the parks director in uh accepting a

[3:20:57] split of these votes. I really did want

[3:20:58] to vote on these both together um

[3:21:00] because I thought that was a very

[3:21:01] valuable compromise. Uh from the get-go,

[3:21:04] I have supported these both being

[3:21:06] separate um to be put before the uh the

[3:21:09] public separately. uh so that they have

[3:21:11] as many options and they can choose what

[3:21:13] they want to do. It's interesting that

[3:21:14] uh uh township uh supervisor Gordon

[3:21:18] Gallagher is in the house today. Uh they

[3:21:20] had a millillage uh put before the

[3:21:23] people of Spring Lake Township about a

[3:21:25] year ago regarding their um bike path

[3:21:29] and they broke that millillage into two

[3:21:31] proposals. One was a maintaining what

[3:21:33] they have, the other one was expanding

[3:21:35] what they have. uh that was the right

[3:21:37] approach and I believe that the right

[3:21:38] approach is putting these two

[3:21:40] separately. Uh I in the case of the bike

[3:21:43] millillage in Spring Lake voters voted

[3:21:44] in favor of both of those and uh I think

[3:21:47] that was an excellent outcome all

[3:21:48] around. So I am very much in favor of

[3:21:50] putting this before the voters. Uh we

[3:21:52] are essentially on this one a pass

[3:21:55] through entity and I want to give every

[3:21:56] voter the opportunity to vote as they

[3:21:58] see fit. I do not want to take that

[3:22:00] opportunity away from them. So with

[3:22:02] that, I'll be voting in favor of this.

[3:22:04] And Rachel, would you call the role?

[3:22:06] >> Mr. Zielstra,

[3:22:08] >> uh, yes.

[3:22:08] >> Mr. Tles,

[3:22:09] >> yes.

[3:22:10] >> Mr. JSMA,

[3:22:11] >> yes.

[3:22:12] >> Mr. Kyers,

[3:22:13] >> yes.

[3:22:13] >> Mr. Barry,

[3:22:14] >> yes.

[3:22:15] >> Mrs. Nema,

[3:22:16] >> no.

[3:22:16] >> Mr. Bonama,

[3:22:18] >> yes.

[3:22:18] >> Mrs. Roodie,

[3:22:19] >> no.

[3:22:20] >> Mr. Moss,

[3:22:21] >> no.

[3:22:21] >> Mrs. Wel,

[3:22:22] >> no.

[3:22:23] >> Mr. Buger,

[3:22:24] >> yes.

[3:22:24] >> Motion passes.

[3:22:26] >> All right. Thank you. Thank you

[3:22:27] everyone. And thank you again to uh

[3:22:29] Jason and to uh Dr. Bashier for your

[3:22:32] efforts with this. Uh we know you put a

[3:22:33] lot of work into it and your teams did

[3:22:35] too. So thank you. Uh item C

[3:22:37] postexecution contract ratification. The

[3:22:40] suggested motion is to ratify all

[3:22:41] contracts on the ratification report

[3:22:43] pursuant to the county's contracting

[3:22:45] policy.

[3:22:45] >> So move support.

[3:22:47] >> Motion by Jorzma, second by Moss. Any

[3:22:49] discussion?

[3:22:51] All those in favor? Oh, sorry. Roll call

[3:22:52] vote.

[3:22:54] >> I have one question.

[3:22:55] >> Okay. Commissioner Mima. Um

[3:22:58] so contract 2970 which has to do with

[3:23:02] the marijuana

[3:23:04] um classes and substance abuse

[3:23:08] um education. It mentions in that

[3:23:11] contract about going into five schools

[3:23:13] within Ottawa County. And I would just I

[3:23:16] would really like to have some more

[3:23:17] information on that. That was a request

[3:23:18] I had at the last time that anytime we

[3:23:20] are going into schools um with public

[3:23:23] health, I would appreciate a heads up

[3:23:25] and I would like that conversation to

[3:23:27] take place before a vote on that.

[3:23:30] >> Understanding is it is after school

[3:23:32] engagement. Um this is a this is a grant

[3:23:35] for 44,000

[3:23:37] uh for marijuana medical um medical

[3:23:40] marijuana act awareness training and

[3:23:43] it's a grant that we've received since

[3:23:45] 2019. And I think prior to that, these

[3:23:47] same funds came in and were channeled to

[3:23:50] law enforcement. So now they're running

[3:23:51] through public health. But

[3:23:53] >> which schools are we looking to

[3:23:55] implement them in?

[3:23:56] >> I can't answer that.

[3:23:57] >> I think that's really important for us

[3:23:59] to have that conversation. So anytime as

[3:24:01] a county that we are going into our

[3:24:03] school systems, we have a very um small

[3:24:07] role within our purview of going into

[3:24:10] schools as count as a county and I think

[3:24:13] that is really pertinent that we

[3:24:16] understand a little bit more about this

[3:24:18] contract before we approve it. Um and I I'm sensing that maybe there's

[3:24:24] some questions that you're not aware of.

[3:24:26] I I'm going to ask to move contract 2970

[3:24:30] outside of um the contract the rest of

[3:24:33] the contracts to vote on separately.

[3:24:35] >> And we've got a motion on the table. Is

[3:24:37] there a second?

[3:24:39] >> Support.

[3:24:40] by Commissioner Roie.

[3:24:42] Discussion. I think uh Commissioner

[3:24:44] Mima, you led up to that one with a

[3:24:46] motion. So, do you have anything further

[3:24:48] to say?

[3:24:49] >> I just think it's our responsibility to

[3:24:51] better understand how we are going into

[3:24:54] our schools. I it would be great if our

[3:24:56] health department could come um before

[3:24:59] us potentially at one of the committees

[3:25:02] to present the information and I think

[3:25:05] with a little bit of um discussion my

[3:25:08] guess is the board will probably get

[3:25:09] behind it but I do think it's our I

[3:25:12] think it would just do be due diligence

[3:25:14] to better understand

[3:25:17] >> any further discussion.

[3:25:20] All right, let's do a roll call vote.

[3:25:21] Uh, Miss Sanchez.

[3:25:23] >> This is just to separate it, right?

[3:25:25] >> Correct.

[3:25:26] >> Mrs. Wel,

[3:25:27] >> yes.

[3:25:28] >> Mr. Moss,

[3:25:29] >> yes.

[3:25:30] >> Mr. Zystra,

[3:25:31] >> yes.

[3:25:32] >> Mr. Kyers,

[3:25:33] >> no.

[3:25:33] >> Mrs. Roadie,

[3:25:35] >> yes.

[3:25:35] >> Mrs. Mida,

[3:25:36] >> yes.

[3:25:37] >> Mr. Jordma,

[3:25:38] >> no.

[3:25:38] >> Mr. Teles,

[3:25:39] >> no.

[3:25:40] >> Mr. Bonama,

[3:25:41] >> no.

[3:25:41] >> Mr. Barry,

[3:25:42] >> no.

[3:25:43] >> Mr. Buger,

[3:25:44] >> no.

[3:25:47] >> Motion fails.

[3:25:48] >> All right. Thank you. We've got back to

[3:25:49] the original motion on the table, which

[3:25:50] is to ratify all contracts on the

[3:25:52] ratification report pursuant to the

[3:25:54] county's contracting policy. Anything

[3:25:56] further?

[3:25:59] >> I'll I'll just be voting no then since

[3:26:01] we I wasn't able to vote separately on

[3:26:03] this one.

[3:26:04] >> Okay. Thank you. All right, Rachel,

[3:26:05] would you call the role?

[3:26:06] >> Mr. Jordma?

[3:26:08] >> Yes.

[3:26:08] >> Mr. Barry?

[3:26:09] >> Yes.

[3:26:10] >> Mrs. Nema?

[3:26:11] >> No.

[3:26:11] >> Mr. Moss?

[3:26:12] >> Yes.

[3:26:13] >> Mrs. Roadie?

[3:26:14] >> No.

[3:26:15] >> Mr. Zielstra?

[3:26:16] >> Yes.

[3:26:17] >> Mrs. Wel? No.

[3:26:18] >> Mr. Kyers,

[3:26:19] >> yes.

[3:26:20] >> Mr. Bonama,

[3:26:21] >> yes.

[3:26:22] >> Mr. Teles,

[3:26:22] >> yes.

[3:26:23] >> Mr. Buger,

[3:26:24] >> yes.

[3:26:24] >> Motion passes.

[3:26:25] >> All right. Thank you. Uh, next item on

[3:26:27] the agenda, the investment policy. The

[3:26:29] motion is to approve the revised

[3:26:31] investment policy for a first reading.

[3:26:33] >> So moved.

[3:26:34] >> Support.

[3:26:35] >> Moved by Joritzma, second by Moss. Any

[3:26:37] discussion?

[3:26:39] >> All right. All those in favor say I.

[3:26:42] >> I. Those opposed? Motion carries. Uh

[3:26:45] item E, artificial intelligence policy.

[3:26:49] The suggested motion is to approve the

[3:26:50] new artificial intelligence policy for a

[3:26:52] first reading with the change of

[3:26:55] revisiting the policy every one year. Is

[3:26:58] there a move?

[3:26:59] >> Motion by Moss, second by George. You

[3:27:01] guys got a thing going over there. Any

[3:27:03] further discussion? All right. All those

[3:27:05] in favor say I.

[3:27:07] >> I.

[3:27:07] >> Those opposed? Motion carries. Item F,

[3:27:11] remote work policy. The suggested motion

[3:27:13] is to approve the new remote work policy

[3:27:15] for a first reading.

[3:27:17] >> So moved support.

[3:27:18] >> Motion by Jorrettzma, second by Moss.

[3:27:20] Any discussion?

[3:27:23] >> Mr. George, do you have anything or are

[3:27:24] you okay? All right. Miss Maima, sorry.

[3:27:28] >> Um, so as I made a motion at committee

[3:27:32] level, I'm going to make the same

[3:27:33] motion. Um, so I will make a motion to

[3:27:36] add a letter C under procedure.

[3:27:41] Um

[3:27:44] uh for reporting department heads will

[3:27:46] submit a report to administration for

[3:27:49] board of commissioner review each year

[3:27:52] showing number of hours worked remotely

[3:27:55] in their department

[3:27:57] >> support. We got a motion and a support.

[3:28:00] Rachel, do you have that motion

[3:28:03] documented sufficiently?

[3:28:05] >> I can go back and listen to it.

[3:28:07] >> Okay. All right.

[3:28:08] >> I can bring up the two later. Thank you

[3:28:09] for

[3:28:10] >> All right. Sounds good. Uh, Commissioner

[3:28:12] Mima, would you care to lead this one

[3:28:13] off?

[3:28:14] >> Um, yep. As as stated already at the

[3:28:16] committee level, um, I think it's really

[3:28:19] important that we have some

[3:28:22] accountability um, by hours worked um,

[3:28:26] internally versus remotely. I think it's

[3:28:28] really great for any administrator

[3:28:31] whether it was um Patrick here or if

[3:28:34] it's someone else down the line that

[3:28:36] they can easily come into their position

[3:28:38] and have a quick glance of going okay

[3:28:40] this is how many this is how many people

[3:28:42] are working remotely this is the trends

[3:28:45] that I'm seeing yearbyear it makes for a

[3:28:48] very quick checkin um by department

[3:28:50] levels I would think at the

[3:28:51] administration level I also think it

[3:28:53] provides great checks and balances um

[3:28:56] for department heads with their staff.

[3:28:58] It gives them a little bit of

[3:28:59] discernment of wondering um is is this a

[3:29:03] good use of somebody's working remotely

[3:29:07] or not? It gives them a little bit of a

[3:29:08] check going, "Yep, I can easily explain

[3:29:12] this to a board if I were ever to be

[3:29:13] asked, why did you have so many hours?"

[3:29:16] It gives them um just kind of another um

[3:29:19] way to look at that. And I would say

[3:29:22] that

[3:29:23] um in-person work shows by studies that

[3:29:27] you're going to get um better quality of

[3:29:30] work. And I think in a government as a

[3:29:35] whole um when you look at the national

[3:29:37] level and you look at our state level

[3:29:39] and when you're finding a lot of

[3:29:42] potential issues for abuse um I think

[3:29:45] it's just impertinent that we put some

[3:29:48] safeguards out there, some guard rails.

[3:29:50] um that just allows us to have um better

[3:29:53] communication with one another and with our community.

[3:29:57] >> Thank you, Commissioner. Uh anyone else?

[3:30:00] >> Uh Commissioner T.

[3:30:01] >> So again, this is going back to the same

[3:30:03] issue. What is our role as

[3:30:05] commissioners?

[3:30:09] What we're doing now is telling the

[3:30:10] administrator how to run the county uh

[3:30:13] with this kind of a a motion. Next thing

[3:30:16] we're going to want to know is how many

[3:30:17] people work? uh what's the overtime for

[3:30:20] each employee in the county? How many

[3:30:22] people take lunch at what time? How much

[3:30:24] micromanaging are we going to do as a

[3:30:26] board? This is not our Bailey Wick in my

[3:30:29] opinion as a commissioner. This is

[3:30:31] micromanaging the administrator

[3:30:32] regardless of who the administrator is.

[3:30:34] We need to my mind from my perspective,

[3:30:37] we need to stay in our lane.

[3:30:40] >> Okay. Thank you, Commissioner. Oh, wow.

[3:30:43] Okay. Uh Commissioner Barry, I saw you

[3:30:44] first and I'll come over to this end of

[3:30:46] the table. Mr. Barry,

[3:30:47] >> just the first just the first paragraph

[3:30:49] and this is the county of Ottawa's

[3:30:51] general standard is for work to be

[3:30:53] performed in the county office setting.

[3:30:55] However, there are seldom uh there are

[3:30:57] seldom occasions where remote work may

[3:30:59] be permissible. The policy provides the

[3:31:02] guidelines and procedures for both staff

[3:31:04] and management of what expected what

[3:31:07] expectations are in a remote work

[3:31:09] scenario. So we we are doing our job by

[3:31:12] pro providing policy to the

[3:31:14] administrator and then they're able to I

[3:31:18] expect them to manage that policy as the

[3:31:21] will of the board.

[3:31:23] >> Thank you Commissioner Barry. I think

[3:31:24] we'll go Commissioner Moss and then

[3:31:25] George.

[3:31:26] >> Sure.

[3:31:26] >> I'd actually like to echo what um

[3:31:28] Commissioner Barry just said. I'd like

[3:31:30] to take it just a slightly different

[3:31:31] direction though. Um this is board

[3:31:33] policy. I think it's good this is a new

[3:31:35] policy. It's good to get these things

[3:31:37] written down so that they're very clear.

[3:31:39] Just like Jim just said, um I think we

[3:31:41] can add um I'll just call it a le a

[3:31:45] level of coverage for our administrator.

[3:31:48] If this is board policy, it's very easy

[3:31:50] to generate. You just get it from HR,

[3:31:52] payroll or whatever. Um it makes it very

[3:31:56] easy uh for him to make the request and

[3:31:59] to do some of that due diligence and

[3:32:02] it's it's coming directly from the

[3:32:04] board. uh it's not coming from him. Um

[3:32:07] it doesn't seem like, you know, he's

[3:32:09] trying to micromanage the departments.

[3:32:11] This is a simple high level board

[3:32:13] policy. I think that's a better position

[3:32:14] for all of us to be in.

[3:32:16] >> Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner

[3:32:17] Dorsma.

[3:32:18] >> Yeah, I um I actually agree with this policy as well. I I think it it is

[3:32:23] in our purview as as commissioners. Um

[3:32:26] Commissioner Bonama frequently says that

[3:32:28] um what we do needs to be relatable,

[3:32:31] repeatable, and measurable. And this

[3:32:33] falls into that measurable category. Um

[3:32:35] we're not making it any judgment call on

[3:32:37] whether the number is too high or too

[3:32:39] low. We're getting information and we're

[3:32:41] asking those department heads to say,

[3:32:43] "Hey, if you can stamp your name behind

[3:32:46] that number of remote work hours, then

[3:32:49] good. And if there's a problem, we have

[3:32:51] that information." I actually think this

[3:32:52] would be a benefit to the administrator

[3:32:54] to have. And I'm just not sure that

[3:32:56] we're

[3:32:56] >> tracking this at all. I mean, there is more of a push to um return to

[3:33:02] work in person. So, I'm I'm curious. I

[3:33:05] mean, if if we hear from department

[3:33:07] heads that this is unreasonable to

[3:33:10] measure and they're having a very hard

[3:33:12] time tracking this information, we I'm

[3:33:15] willing to circle back on the

[3:33:16] discussion, but um yeah, I I support it.

[3:33:20] >> Okay, I got Commissioner Jarrettzma. Uh

[3:33:22] thank you. And uh Commissioner Tbles has

[3:33:24] indicated he'd like to speak again. I do

[3:33:26] want to give everyone else the

[3:33:27] opportunity one time before we go back

[3:33:29] to uh Commissioner Tles. So,

[3:33:30] Commissioner Roodie.

[3:33:31] >> Yeah. So, uh I agree with Commissioner

[3:33:34] George and Commissioner Medima and um I

[3:33:38] appreciate and respect and agree with

[3:33:41] the desire to provide oversight um to

[3:33:45] our bureaucracies and the county. I

[3:33:47] think it's I think it's really

[3:33:49] important. I think um we're seeing a lot

[3:33:51] of things that are not receiving

[3:33:53] appropriate oversight on a national

[3:33:55] level. And so anytime that we're we are

[3:33:58] providing, you know, good oversight, I

[3:34:00] think it provides our administrator, you

[3:34:03] know, um a really good path forward on,

[3:34:06] you know, on doing this. I don't see

[3:34:08] this as micromanaging our administrator.

[3:34:10] I think it it's just setting good

[3:34:12] policy.

[3:34:13] >> All right. Thank you, Commissioner. Is

[3:34:15] there anyone else who hasn't spoken who

[3:34:16] would like to? One moment, Mr. Waterman.

[3:34:19] All right. I think we've gone around

[3:34:21] once. Uh do you mind if uh our county

[3:34:23] administrator speaks of course ahead of

[3:34:25] you? All right.

[3:34:27] >> Thank you. U so just a general comment.

[3:34:29] We we spent a lot of time on this on

[3:34:31] this policy and and just for the

[3:34:34] background of the folks that aren't on

[3:34:35] the policy committee where this was

[3:34:36] introduced. The idea the intent with

[3:34:39] this is to really change the cultural

[3:34:40] mindset to postcoid return to work which

[3:34:43] is in in most businesses the the the

[3:34:46] best practice now. So, um, recognizing

[3:34:49] that there are departments that have

[3:34:51] remote work situations that do make

[3:34:54] sense and and, um, are beneficial to the

[3:34:56] county, equalization is a very good

[3:34:59] example of that. Um, so we wanted to

[3:35:02] write it broadly enough that it worked

[3:35:04] for the current situation, but not too

[3:35:06] restrictive where it created chaos. If

[3:35:09] you look at section uh 4A, the end of it

[3:35:13] states that uh department heads may

[3:35:15] require employees to provide reports,

[3:35:17] updates of work performed while working

[3:35:19] remotely at any time. So that is in

[3:35:21] there as a protection clause. U it it

[3:35:24] allows us to look at those situations

[3:35:26] where we may think there there might be

[3:35:28] an issue we need to address, but it it's

[3:35:31] not a requirement. I don't like to write

[3:35:34] work assignments into policy and and to

[3:35:37] introduce a new work assignment per

[3:35:38] policy um creates an administrative

[3:35:41] burden. This accomplishes our ability to

[3:35:44] do it as written without without taking

[3:35:46] that next step. So I'm comfortable with

[3:35:48] the language as written. I spent we

[3:35:50] talked about this with leadership

[3:35:51] committee or leadership team and u we we

[3:35:54] think the the language addresses the

[3:35:56] concerns and allows for the

[3:35:57] accountability should there be an issue.

[3:36:00] >> Thank you sir. And actually I didn't get

[3:36:02] a chance to speak myself before we went

[3:36:03] over to Patrick. And um my comments

[3:36:06] first round would essentially be which

[3:36:08] you just answered the question. Uh is

[3:36:10] this a request from administration to

[3:36:12] add this or not? And it is not. And so

[3:36:16] uh I'm supportive of our administration.

[3:36:18] Um and I believe that if they were

[3:36:20] making this request, I'd be happy to

[3:36:22] support it, but as they're not, I'm

[3:36:24] going to let them do their jobs. Uh

[3:36:25] Commissioner Toples.

[3:36:26] >> Yeah, maybe I got mixed up. Uh because I

[3:36:28] thought what we were talking about is

[3:36:30] Commissioner Ma's motion if it ever got

[3:36:33] to that. Maybe it wasn't seconded about

[3:36:35] whether you had to report this to the

[3:36:37] board every year. That's what I'm

[3:36:38] against. The policy itself. Absolutely.

[3:36:41] I'm in favor of that. So I just want to

[3:36:43] make sure that we're talking and

[3:36:45] whatever we're going to vote here that

[3:36:46] it's clear what we're voting on. I guess

[3:36:47] I got maybe I got confused on

[3:36:49] >> No, you're right.

[3:36:50] >> You're correct.

[3:36:50] >> Y we're uh the motion on the table is to

[3:36:53] add an item C. Can't remember what

[3:36:56] section it was. Rachel will go back for

[3:36:58] the tape on that one as needed. Um,

[3:37:00] which will require reporting of, uh,

[3:37:04] atome work hours. All right. Um, any

[3:37:07] further discussion? I think we're ready

[3:37:08] for the vote. Uh, Rachel, would you do a

[3:37:10] roll call on this one, please?

[3:37:11] >> Sure. Mr. Moss,

[3:37:13] >> yes.

[3:37:13] >> Mr. Kyers,

[3:37:14] >> no.

[3:37:15] >> Mr. Barry,

[3:37:16] >> no.

[3:37:16] >> Mr. Bonama,

[3:37:17] >> no.

[3:37:18] >> Mrs. Roodie,

[3:37:19] >> yes.

[3:37:19] >> Mr. Zystra,

[3:37:21] >> no.

[3:37:22] >> Mrs. Wel,

[3:37:22] >> yes.

[3:37:23] >> Mrs. Mida,

[3:37:24] >> yes.

[3:37:25] >> Mr. Jordzma,

[3:37:26] >> yes.

[3:37:26] >> Mr. Teles,

[3:37:27] >> no.

[3:37:28] >> Mr. Buger,

[3:37:29] >> uh, no.

[3:37:31] >> Motion fails.

[3:37:32] >> All right. So, we're back to the

[3:37:34] original motion on the table, which is

[3:37:35] to approve the new remote work policy

[3:37:37] for first reading. Any further

[3:37:39] discussion?

[3:37:40] >> Mr. Chair, just one other comment. Um, I

[3:37:42] did note uh, Commissioner Zalstra

[3:37:45] submitted some some recommended changes

[3:37:47] between committee and now those are

[3:37:49] redlined in the version. We looked at

[3:37:51] those. We think they were good changes

[3:37:52] and and those are incorporated. So you

[3:37:54] are voting on a little bit different

[3:37:56] version.

[3:37:56] >> Let me

[3:37:58] just talk about that Patrick steal your

[3:38:00] >> thought. No, no, no. I mean, let me just

[3:38:02] check the

[3:38:03] >> I I know I checked the AI and I

[3:38:05] appreciate the the red line on that one.

[3:38:08] Um,

[3:38:08] >> Commissioner Zra, you have the floor. Go

[3:38:10] for it.

[3:38:14] » I don't know. I got to throw it up.

[3:38:15] >> And you can tell me because the the

[3:38:17] suggested recommendations were for

[3:38:20] deletion of seldom.

[3:38:21] >> Pardon me. Pardon me. Yes, that you're

[3:38:23] right. That was not redlined. But we did

[3:38:26] agree with that correction to re remove

[3:38:28] the word seldom in the

[3:38:30] >> maybe we can just make that change then

[3:38:32] chair.

[3:38:33] >> Yes, that is

[3:38:34] >> I just think that it it didn't really

[3:38:36] make sense to me the two sentences

[3:38:37] against each other.

[3:38:38] >> And then in the second paragraph for any

[3:38:41] reason at all with or without notice

[3:38:44] um I thought it was a little bit

[3:38:46] capricious uh with or without notice. I

[3:38:48] mean at some point you have to give the

[3:38:50] employee notice. You can't just expect

[3:38:51] them to read minds. So

[3:38:54] um

[3:38:55] >> where is this? Give us

[3:38:57] >> Yeah.

[3:38:57] >> So second paragraph where it says remote

[3:38:59] work requires department head approval

[3:39:01] and can be revoked at the discretion of

[3:39:03] the department head. Just put a period

[3:39:06] there.

[3:39:08] >> This this one we did not I can dialogue

[3:39:11] with commission.

[3:39:12] >> Right. So if if if we're okay with the

[3:39:14] seldom them, I would like to make a

[3:39:15] motion to delete for any reason at all

[3:39:17] with or without notice just because I

[3:39:19] just think that sounds a little bit

[3:39:20] capricious for department heads to say,

[3:39:24] "Hey, you were had this arrangement

[3:39:27] and I'm taking it away without giving

[3:39:30] that employee any rationale whatsoever

[3:39:32] and without notice, which I think is

[3:39:34] kind of impossible. How can you take

[3:39:35] something away without actually telling

[3:39:37] somebody you're taking them away?" So,

[3:39:39] >> excuse me. as I explain.

[3:39:40] >> Hold on just a moment before you go

[3:39:41] there. We've got a motion on the table.

[3:39:43] Good parliamentary. How am I doing, Ron?

[3:39:44] Did I get that one?

[3:39:45] >> You got it.

[3:39:46] >> All right. Is there a second for that

[3:39:47] motion so we can discuss it or

[3:39:51] >> There's no second.

[3:39:51] >> Oh, no. Second.

[3:39:53] >> I'll I'll second it if you so that gives

[3:39:54] you a chance to second from Commissioner

[3:39:57] Teles. Patrick, take it away. is uh and I apologize for not removing the

[3:40:02] word seldom, Commissioner Zelstra, but

[3:40:04] the second change that you suggested was

[3:40:07] to essentially require that we give

[3:40:10] notice in the situations where remote

[3:40:12] work authorization is revoked. And as I

[3:40:14] said, we want to have the ability to do

[3:40:17] that because there may be circumstances

[3:40:19] that it needs to be revoked immediately

[3:40:21] without notice. In any case like that,

[3:40:24] the vast likelihood is that we're going

[3:40:26] to be having a conversation with that

[3:40:28] person if there's an issue where the at

[3:40:30] work authorization is at risk. Even

[3:40:33] though it's not specified in this

[3:40:34] policy, that would be my practice is to

[3:40:37] be aware of those situations and be

[3:40:39] having discussions with the department

[3:40:40] head and say, "What's happening in this

[3:40:43] situation? What are we doing to address

[3:40:44] it?" I don't like to put those things in

[3:40:47] policy because it it essentially tips

[3:40:50] into the to the HR realm of how are we

[3:40:53] handing disciplinary action.

[3:40:55] >> So I guess maybe I'm mis reading the

[3:40:58] word notice. I mean at some point you

[3:41:01] have to give notice that you know the

[3:41:04] policy has changed for an individual

[3:41:05] employee, right? So I I think what

[3:41:08] you're saying is that hey this is going

[3:41:11] to change and this has changed like so

[3:41:14] if you had this you know you're working

[3:41:16] from home on from Friday for example and

[3:41:19] it's Thursday

[3:41:21] they have to know that they have to be

[3:41:22] in the work on Friday so that they have

[3:41:24] to have notice

[3:41:24] >> they will be given notice. Yeah.

[3:41:26] >> Okay. So I guess maybe I'm just kind of

[3:41:28] uh

[3:41:28] >> but it it it the my how I am

[3:41:31] interpreting is that it doesn't

[3:41:32] necessarily need to be way in advance

[3:41:35] notice. We could we could have a

[3:41:36] situation where we need that person into

[3:41:38] work on a given day given a work

[3:41:40] shortage or um you know that person was

[3:41:43] found not to be using remote work

[3:41:46] properly and we revoke that right. So we

[3:41:49] need to have the authority and the

[3:41:50] discretion to make those

[3:41:51] >> I understand the without notice part

[3:41:53] because I think we're thinking about

[3:41:55] notice differently but for any reason at

[3:41:57] all I mean

[3:42:00] does an employed serve I mean if they

[3:42:02] had this

[3:42:05] if if they had you know uh remote work

[3:42:09] um is part of their work plan

[3:42:13] taking it away with no rational

[3:42:15] whatsoever just seems a little bit

[3:42:16] harsh. Hold on that for just a moment.

[3:42:18] Commissioner Moss, uh, go right ahead. I

[3:42:20] Sorry, Patrick.

[3:42:20] >> Yeah. Yeah. I I'm not going to make a

[3:42:22] motion, but I actually have one prepared

[3:42:24] after this. I'd actually like it to say

[3:42:26] for any reason or no reason for legal reasons.

[3:42:31] >> Like it to

[3:42:32] >> it should say in my mind it should say

[3:42:34] for any reason or no reason. There

[3:42:38] doesn't have to be a reason given for

[3:42:40] telling someone they need to work

[3:42:43] >> in the office. That's different than

[3:42:44] what

[3:42:44] >> and it's different than what

[3:42:45] Commissioner Zalstra is saying.

[3:42:48] >> All right.

[3:42:48] >> It's kind of actually the opposite.

[3:42:51] >> Yeah.

[3:42:52] >> So, we've got a motion on the table.

[3:42:53] Anyone else care to address it? And I

[3:42:55] can come back to you, Doug, one more

[3:42:56] time if you Nobody else is.

[3:42:58] >> All right, Commissioner, you have one

[3:43:00] more time.

[3:43:02] >> Said my piece on this.

[3:43:03] >> All right. Uh, let's take a vote if you

[3:43:05] would uh call roll. Rachel,

[3:43:06] >> where was the period that you were

[3:43:08] wanting it to?

[3:43:08] >> Right after department head.

[3:43:09] >> After department head. Thank you. All

[3:43:12] right. Um, Mrs. Mrs. Roodie,

[3:43:14] >> no.

[3:43:14] >> Mr. Tibbles,

[3:43:15] >> no.

[3:43:16] >> Mr. Zystra,

[3:43:17] >> yes.

[3:43:17] >> Mr. Bonama,

[3:43:19] >> no.

[3:43:19] >> Mrs. Wel,

[3:43:20] >> no.

[3:43:21] >> Mrs. Mida,

[3:43:22] >> no.

[3:43:23] >> Mr. Moss,

[3:43:24] >> no.

[3:43:24] >> Mr. Jordma,

[3:43:25] >> no.

[3:43:26] >> Mr. Kyers,

[3:43:27] >> no.

[3:43:27] >> Mr. Barry,

[3:43:28] >> no.

[3:43:29] >> Mr. Buger,

[3:43:30] >> uh, no.

[3:43:30] >> Motion fails.

[3:43:31] >> All right, so we're back to the original

[3:43:33] motion. Hold that, Joe. I'm just going

[3:43:35] to get this back out on the floor. So,

[3:43:36] the original motion as to approve the

[3:43:38] new remote work policy for a first

[3:43:39] reading. Would anyone care to discuss

[3:43:41] this further or make another amendment?

[3:43:43] Uh, Commissioner Moss,

[3:43:44] >> I would love to. Thank you. I'd like to

[3:43:46] add uh the words or no reason into that

[3:43:50] sentence uh so that the county doesn't

[3:43:53] get stuck having to always provide a

[3:43:56] reason and sometimes

[3:43:59] the county might not need to. So, I'd

[3:44:00] like to strengthen this policy.

[3:44:02] >> We've got a motion to add the word or no

[3:44:04] reason to said sentence. Would anyone

[3:44:07] care to second that?

[3:44:08] >> I'll second it. seconded by Bonama. Um,

[3:44:11] Mr. Moss, I believe you already let out

[3:44:12] with your comments unless you want to

[3:44:14] say anything further.

[3:44:14] >> I'm just thinking like John, as I hope I

[3:44:17] am,

[3:44:18] >> I'm smiling like crazy, Joe.

[3:44:20] >> I'm thinking you could have been sitting

[3:44:22] there. I'm I got to shut up.

[3:44:26] >> Would anyone else care to comment on

[3:44:28] this one? Commissioner Zystra,

[3:44:30] >> I'm not a lawyer. Would kind of tell me

[3:44:32] what's happening with that?

[3:44:34] Why would you make that change?

[3:44:35] >> Should we ask Commission uh Mr. Boli who

[3:44:37] is here and on the clock.

[3:44:39] >> We got a lawyer and we got

[3:44:39] >> we got a lawyer. Let's ask

[3:44:41] >> pretty smart.

[3:44:42] >> Yeah.

[3:44:42] >> Oh, go ahead, Ron.

[3:44:44] >> Um well, I guess the abil saying any

[3:44:47] reason or no reason at all is a little

[3:44:49] broader than for any reason at all. On

[3:44:52] the other hand, I doubt we have any

[3:44:54] administrators or department heads who

[3:44:56] can't come up with a reason. Uh, so it's

[3:45:00] not a huge significance in in my mind,

[3:45:03] but I certainly don't object to adding

[3:45:06] no reason.

[3:45:08] >> All right. Thank you, sir.

[3:45:10] >> Can I can I ask another question? When

[3:45:11] it comes to union contracts, um, could

[3:45:14] that cause a problem having that wording

[3:45:16] in there?

[3:45:17] >> Uh, only if uh the unions negotiate

[3:45:21] something different regarding remote

[3:45:22] policy,

[3:45:23] >> which

[3:45:24] >> and they can and we can agree to that.

[3:45:25] What do you

[3:45:26] >> which they don't. There's nothing in the

[3:45:27] contracts related to word.

[3:45:28] >> Okay, that was my question.

[3:45:30] >> Yeah, there there may be next up. Who

[3:45:32] knows? All right, let's take a vote on

[3:45:35] the amendment. Miss Sanchez, would you

[3:45:37] call the role?

[3:45:38] >> Mr. Bonama?

[3:45:40] >> Yes.

[3:45:40] >> Mr. Jordma?

[3:45:42] >> Yes.

[3:45:42] >> Mr. Teles?

[3:45:43] >> Yes.

[3:45:43] >> Mrs. Mida?

[3:45:44] >> Yes.

[3:45:45] >> Mrs. Wel?

[3:45:46] >> Yes.

[3:45:46] >> M. Mr. Barry?

[3:45:48] >> Yes.

[3:45:48] >> Mrs. Roodie?

[3:45:49] >> Yes.

[3:45:50] >> Mr. Moss?

[3:45:51] >> Yes.

[3:45:51] >> Mr. Zystra?

[3:45:52] >> No.

[3:45:53] >> Mr. Kyers?

[3:45:54] >> Yes.

[3:45:55] >> Mr. Buger? Yes.

[3:45:56] >> Motion passes.

[3:45:57] >> All right. So, the motion on the table

[3:45:59] is to approve the new remote work policy

[3:46:02] for first reading as amended.

[3:46:06] >> I think we can vote on this one. Would

[3:46:09] you do the roll call, Rachel?

[3:46:10] >> Mr. Kyers?

[3:46:11] >> Yes.

[3:46:12] >> Mr. Moss?

[3:46:13] >> Yes.

[3:46:13] >> Mrs. Medma?

[3:46:14] >> No.

[3:46:15] >> Miss Wzel?

[3:46:17] >> Yes.

[3:46:17] >> Mr. Barry?

[3:46:18] >> Yes.

[3:46:19] >> Mr. Zystra?

[3:46:20] >> Yes.

[3:46:20] >> Mr. Teles?

[3:46:21] >> Yes.

[3:46:22] >> Mr. Bonama?

[3:46:23] >> Yes.

[3:46:23] >> Mrs. Roodie?

[3:46:24] >> Yes.

[3:46:25] >> Mr. Mr. Dortzma.

[3:46:26] >> Yes.

[3:46:26] >> Mr. Buger.

[3:46:27] >> Yes.

[3:46:28] >> Motion passes.

[3:46:29] >> All right. Thank you. And then BCDE FFG.

[3:46:33] We're going through the whole alphabet

[3:46:34] today. Item G, which was item H on the

[3:46:38] consent agenda. The suggested motion is

[3:46:41] to approve the recommendation for Ottawa

[3:46:43] County to adjust positions, pay grades,

[3:46:45] and wage scale as recommended to

[3:46:48] maintain a competitive position in the

[3:46:49] marketplace, and to authorize the county

[3:46:51] administrator to make individual wage

[3:46:53] adjustments as warranted.

[3:46:55] support.

[3:46:56] >> Got a motion by Joritzma and supported

[3:46:58] by Moss as has become the custom.

[3:47:02] Commissioner Jorrettzma, would you care

[3:47:03] to lead out on this one?

[3:47:05] >> Sure. Um, I think there's been some

[3:47:07] great work done on this. Um, I really

[3:47:11] appreciated Baker Tilly coming and and

[3:47:13] giving a rundown of of their processes.

[3:47:16] Uh, and then I also want to thank

[3:47:18] Patrick and the other department heads

[3:47:19] for their diligent work on this as well.

[3:47:21] I know Patrick had a couple of changes

[3:47:23] um that he wanted to make. So I

[3:47:26] appreciate this motion, including um

[3:47:28] that flexibility to allow him to do

[3:47:30] those without having to come back to the

[3:47:32] board. Um

[3:47:34] so yeah, I look forward to uh to doing

[3:47:37] this for our employees who work very

[3:47:39] hard.

[3:47:40] >> All right. Thank you, Commissioner uh

[3:47:42] Commissioner Rodie and then Commissioner

[3:47:44] Second.

[3:47:44] >> Oh, I'm sorry. You that is our custom.

[3:47:46] Yes, it is.

[3:47:47] >> I'll keep this part brief. Um, two quick

[3:47:50] questions or just clarity. The changes,

[3:47:53] I believe we already have the some of

[3:47:54] those changes back and they looked like

[3:47:55] they were less than $10,000.

[3:47:57] >> Less than $7,000.

[3:47:58] Okay. Thank you. Just

[3:48:00] wanted to confirm. And then the other

[3:48:02] confirmation.

[3:48:03] Um could could you comment just briefly

[3:48:06] on fiscal what what their input has been

[3:48:09] on the overall increase

[3:48:13] >> in terms of

[3:48:15] >> um the way study will institute some

[3:48:18] increases across the board. It's not a

[3:48:20] huge increase. Um it it you know it's a

[3:48:24] large dollar amount compared to you know

[3:48:27] $7,000 but that's because it is a wage

[3:48:29] study that impacts the entire county and

[3:48:32] 1300 employees. Um so when we're looking

[3:48:34] at an increase is that something that

[3:48:37] fiscal has looked at and looked at the

[3:48:38] budget and looked into next year and

[3:48:40] said yes this looks like something that

[3:48:43] is going to fit in just fine with our

[3:48:44] planning.

[3:48:46] >> Is there any cause for concern? Yes, it is uh it's been evaluated. The the

[3:48:51] cost estimates um as you know are

[3:48:53] prrated for this year assuming five

[3:48:55] months of proration and also assuming

[3:48:58] the board um approves the recommended

[3:49:02] meth there's three options as you know.

[3:49:04] So the financial impact for for the

[3:49:06] current fiscal year of the remainder

[3:49:08] would be 561 a little over 561,000

[3:49:12] and then um you know going forward for

[3:49:15] the full year that that's also

[3:49:17] demonstrated in the amount and fiscal

[3:49:19] has I think answered this in terms of

[3:49:22] our ability to to cover that shortfall

[3:49:24] of vacancy savings and contingency.

[3:49:26] >> Great. Thank you.

[3:49:28] >> All right. Thank you. And just a side

[3:49:30] note for commissioners, I know I've got

[3:49:31] to go back around here, but um Sarah

[3:49:34] Town is online and available. I have not

[3:49:37] seen this little picture before on our

[3:49:38] meeting, so that's quite nice. There

[3:49:41] Sarah waved. All right. Thank you. I

[3:49:43] apologize. Who was up next? I've lost

[3:49:45] track.

[3:49:45] >> Uh I think it was Silia.

[3:49:47] >> Silia and then Doug. Yeah.

[3:49:49] >> Um sure. So, um I think that I think

[3:49:53] that we have received a number of

[3:49:56] concerns. Um we have letters um that

[3:49:58] we've received from three judges. Judge

[3:50:00] Bunts from the district court, Judge Van

[3:50:03] Alsberg from the circuit court, Judge

[3:50:05] Dolman from the probate court. Um each

[3:50:07] of whom have you know um indicated uh

[3:50:11] they have several concerns with the the

[3:50:13] results of the wage study and even you

[3:50:16] know that it's not been transparent and

[3:50:18] they haven't re received the full you

[3:50:20] know release of the wage study. Um,

[3:50:23] we've heard from a number of people here

[3:50:25] today with concerns. Um, so I would make

[3:50:29] a motion to schedule a work session for

[3:50:32] further review prior to this board

[3:50:34] making a decision to implement the wage

[3:50:36] study so that we can um give further

[3:50:38] consideration to these concerns.

[3:50:41] >> So there's a motion to

[3:50:42] >> support discussion

[3:50:44] >> motion and support to schedule a work

[3:50:46] session to further discuss the wage

[3:50:48] study. Uh, Commissioner Roodie, do you

[3:50:50] have any further comments on that or

[3:50:51] should we go to Commissioner Mida?

[3:50:53] >> Uh, no, you can move on.

[3:50:54] >> Okay. All right. Commissioner Mida,

[3:50:56] >> I'm sorry. Just as a point of order. Is

[3:50:58] that a gerantine motion?

[3:51:01] >> Apologies to table this. We have

[3:51:04] >> I can I think it would be to motion to

[3:51:06] table it until a work session can be

[3:51:08] had.

[3:51:08] >> Thank you. Yes,

[3:51:09] >> Jordan. Actually, thank you, Ron.

[3:51:11] Nodding. Ron's nodding. Thank you. All

[3:51:13] right. So, the motion is to table um

[3:51:15] item H. Well, sorry. Are you voting to

[3:51:18] table it or are you voting to move it to

[3:51:20] a work set?

[3:51:20] >> We're voting it to table it until a work

[3:51:22] session.

[3:51:23] >> Going right to a roll call vote right

[3:51:24] now.

[3:51:25] >> Otherwise, if you don't table it, then

[3:51:27] we can actually discuss it. But we have

[3:51:30] a you're not amending the motion in any

[3:51:32] way

[3:51:34] >> to to move it to a work session

[3:51:37] >> procedurally require

[3:51:38] >> I think the basically we can either have

[3:51:41] a discussion and out of that discussion

[3:51:43] there could raise a uh there could arise

[3:51:46] a desire to table it and then table it

[3:51:49] or we can have a motion to table it now.

[3:51:51] >> I'll withdraw my motion for right now so

[3:51:53] we can have a discussion.

[3:51:55] >> Okay, that works. You're going to

[3:51:57] withdraw your Well, agenda. I don't have

[3:51:59] to withdraw, but I'm sure you don't. Y

[3:52:01] >> I do have a comment.

[3:52:02] >> And you have a comment about that motion

[3:52:03] or that idea. Thank you. If we were to

[3:52:07] move to table, one thing that I think

[3:52:10] would be something I would appreciate in

[3:52:12] a work session is going through some of

[3:52:15] the concerns that were brought forward

[3:52:17] by the judges as well as a request that

[3:52:20] was made in one of the emails from the

[3:52:22] judges was a legal opinion and that has

[3:52:25] not been provided to the board at this

[3:52:26] point. And I think that is something

[3:52:28] that we I I personally would like to see

[3:52:31] a legal opinion um fleshed out a little

[3:52:34] bit. And uh another comment that was

[3:52:38] made was that this was taken away from

[3:52:40] the portal. And so there was some

[3:52:42] information that

[3:52:44] um employees and the public did not feel

[3:52:47] like they had a better um the best

[3:52:50] understanding. And so I think out of

[3:52:52] transparency that would give a little

[3:52:54] bit of um time to get that ready um for

[3:52:58] their full understanding. And I think

[3:53:01] for that matter for mine I there were a

[3:53:04] lot of emails we received from staff um

[3:53:06] apart from the judges as well that um I

[3:53:10] think there was one that was a back and

[3:53:12] forth one and I don't think all of those

[3:53:15] questions have been answered yet to my

[3:53:17] satisfaction yet from the email we

[3:53:19] received

[3:53:21] later in the day yesterday. um and for

[3:53:24] that matter the email that you sent out,

[3:53:26] Patrick, I haven't had an opportunity to

[3:53:28] really flesh that out and compare um to

[3:53:31] what's been presented to us yet.

[3:53:34] >> Okay. Thank you, Commissioner.

[3:53:35] Moss.

[3:53:36] >> So, this was up for this agenda. Um so,

[3:53:39] I completely understand having it on

[3:53:40] here and looking to either move it

[3:53:42] forward or have discussion. Um, I would

[3:53:46] be very comfortable with pushing this

[3:53:50] either to the next meeting or to a work

[3:53:51] session or whatever it might be just to

[3:53:53] give administration a little extra time.

[3:53:55] The questions that came in or some of

[3:53:57] the concerns I I believe have come in

[3:54:00] since it was on committee. So, I would

[3:54:04] support

[3:54:05] giving it a little bit more time just to

[3:54:07] work through those if there's no reason

[3:54:09] to rush it.

[3:54:11] >> Thank you, Commissioner. And I, by the

[3:54:13] way, apologies to the board. I just

[3:54:14] realized that we have one original

[3:54:16] motion still on the table and we're

[3:54:18] supposed to go around one time to

[3:54:19] everybody and a maximum of two. Uh, so

[3:54:22] Commissioner Moss has now spoken twice,

[3:54:23] but I did not give Commissioner Zlesto

[3:54:26] the floor.

[3:54:27] >> Um,

[3:54:29] sir, would you care to comment?

[3:54:31] >> Where were we on your motion?

[3:54:33] >> It's I withdrew it. So,

[3:54:36] >> we're on the original motion to approve

[3:54:38] >> for discussion. So I I I I wanted to ask

[3:54:41] because I did sympathize with the idea

[3:54:43] of taking a little step back. I mean

[3:54:48] I think the non-union union issues

[3:54:51] important. Uh I think a lot of people

[3:54:52] spoke to us public comment uh the judges

[3:54:56] letters as well as emails. Uh and I'm

[3:54:58] very sympathetic. I think that can

[3:55:00] easily be solved by choosing a different

[3:55:03] option. I think A is the recommended

[3:55:05] option and and B would solve that issue.

[3:55:08] I think for the most part um the step

[3:55:11] eight option was um

[3:55:14] uh the step eight option being taken

[3:55:16] away was

[3:55:18] uh pretty

[3:55:19] um did come to us quite often especially

[3:55:23] in the judges letters as well as emails.

[3:55:26] Um,

[3:55:28] and I guess maybe I'd like to make a

[3:55:31] motion to add back the step eight um on

[3:55:34] a grandfathered basis and that would

[3:55:37] address that issue.

[3:55:39] >> Okay. So, we've got a motion to add back

[3:55:41] step eight. Is there a second?

[3:55:43] >> I will second it for discussion.

[3:55:46] >> Right. Doug, anything further?

[3:55:48] >> Yeah. No, I I I think that we're down to

[3:55:51] 20 21 folks who are at step eight.

[3:55:54] Scott, is that right?

[3:55:56] Yeah. So, there's not a ton of folks,

[3:55:58] but I think that, you know, the idea of

[3:56:01] making them wait two or three years for

[3:56:02] a coal adjustment doesn't make sense. I

[3:56:05] mean, the original purpose of step 8 was

[3:56:08] to incentivize long-standing employees

[3:56:11] just kind of does the opposite. Um, so

[3:56:14] grandfathering those folks who have it.

[3:56:16] I understand the logic of Baker Tilly

[3:56:19] and removing it, but at the same time,

[3:56:22] you know, what that does to folks who

[3:56:24] have it. I think that, you know, there's

[3:56:26] a balance there and I think

[3:56:28] grandfathering those folks in makes

[3:56:30] sense to me. Go ahead, Scott.

[3:56:32] >> Yeah, if I may, uh, Mr. Chair, Mr. Vice

[3:56:36] Chair, and esteemed board. Um, yeah,

[3:56:39] there was 29 um, let's see, 21 30 looks

[3:56:43] like 30 at step eight. And if if we did

[3:56:47] nothing um and left at eight um none of

[3:56:51] those 30 would get any type of increase

[3:56:53] any any any increase except for the uh

[3:56:56] the colus moving forward because of the

[3:56:58] adjustment in the proposed wage scale.

[3:57:01] Uh nine of those employees at step 8 uh

[3:57:05] will get an increase uh with this

[3:57:08] proposed uh new wage scale. Uh and then

[3:57:11] 21 who were already uh red circled will

[3:57:14] remain red circled. So I just wanted to

[3:57:16] add that note.

[3:57:17] >> Thank you, sir. That you still have the

[3:57:19] floor.

[3:57:19] >> No, I I I appreciate that, Scott. And

[3:57:22] yeah, that kind of

[3:57:26] Yeah, I mean it's I I would hate to have

[3:57:30] three or four years after we we

[3:57:32] implement something to incentivize

[3:57:35] longer term employees uh to take that

[3:57:37] incentive away. And so yeah,

[3:57:39] >> all right. Thank you, Joe.

[3:57:42] >> Um, I hear Commissioner Zstro's

[3:57:43] concerns. I absolutely believe that

[3:57:46] that's not the intent of what's going on

[3:57:48] here. And

[3:57:49] >> I didn't say it was Oh, I know. I know.

[3:57:51] >> I understand that there was a logic to

[3:57:53] this, the removal, but the consequence

[3:57:56] of it.

[3:57:57] >> So, I I believe Commissioners and I

[3:57:59] agree on that. And I think it would be

[3:58:01] really helpful just to give this a

[3:58:03] little bit more time to breathe so that

[3:58:05] there's too much detail here to go

[3:58:06] through every single thing right now.

[3:58:09] There's there have been a lot of emails.

[3:58:11] There have there are concerns from

[3:58:12] individuals. It's not two or three. It's more. So, I think we should just

[3:58:17] give it some time. Just give it you know

[3:58:19] what put it up next month. Let

[3:58:20] administration work through it with HR

[3:58:22] and just, you know, it probably settled

[3:58:24] almost I think they could probably

[3:58:26] settle most of those by then.

[3:58:28] >> So, we've got a motion on the table to

[3:58:30] add section eight. Would anyone care to

[3:58:32] discuss that specifically or shall we

[3:58:34] have a vote on it?

[3:58:36] >> You wanna Sylvia regarding section

[3:58:38] eight. Sorry,

[3:58:38] >> regarding regarding um section 8, I just

[3:58:42] want to um read off some of the

[3:58:44] positions that I believe are included in

[3:58:46] this in this section because these are our these are our higher level

[3:58:52] positions within the county. So some of

[3:58:54] them are uh director of probation and

[3:58:56] community corrections, district court

[3:58:58] administrator, public defender, circuit

[3:59:00] court administrator, under sheriff,

[3:59:02] chief assistant public defender,

[3:59:04] juvenile court director, public health

[3:59:06] officer, friend of the court, mental

[3:59:08] health court practitioner, chief deputy

[3:59:10] sheriff's office, licensed clinical

[3:59:12] manager, deputy health officer, senior

[3:59:15] attorney, parks and recreation director,

[3:59:17] facilities director, equalization

[3:59:19] director, nurse practitioner, assistant

[3:59:21] public defender three, Superintendent of

[3:59:24] Detention, Assistant Prosecuting

[3:59:26] Attorney 2, Local Unit Unity Financial

[3:59:29] Leaison, and Veteran Services Director.

[3:59:32] So, uh, this particular block of people

[3:59:36] are key leadership for our county. And

[3:59:38] so, they're they're not positions, and

[3:59:41] correct me if I have those positions

[3:59:43] wrong, but

[3:59:43] >> you do. Okay.

[3:59:45] >> Okay.

[3:59:45] >> Yeah. There's some I know for a fact are

[3:59:47] not correct. They're not anymore.

[3:59:48] >> Okay. Great. Is it true though? Um, is

[3:59:51] it could you could you answer me? Is it

[3:59:53] true though that um some of those

[3:59:56] positions who have the step eight option

[4:00:00] are some of the senior leadership within

[4:00:01] the county across the departments?

[4:00:04] >> I would say that's that that's partially

[4:00:07] accurate. I would say that um when we

[4:00:10] think of someone at a top step, we often

[4:00:12] think and they've vetted out many many

[4:00:14] years of service and we like to think

[4:00:16] pure that they all started at step one

[4:00:19] and they moved their way up through the

[4:00:20] chain. Um not not necessarily the case.

[4:00:23] We have we have some that were hired in

[4:00:25] frankly u just just the circumstances

[4:00:28] hired in at a very doesn't mean they're

[4:00:30] not valued performers. I'm not

[4:00:31] suggesting that by any means, but um the the adage of you know they they've

[4:00:36] been with us so long and so forth and

[4:00:37] can't um you know not recognize that. So

[4:00:40] it isn't it isn't all uh folks that have

[4:00:43] just uh you know have you know strong

[4:00:45] you know long longtime loyalty with the

[4:00:47] comp with

[4:00:48] >> so they might not have longtime loyalty

[4:00:50] but are they largely in the lead

[4:00:52] >> valued of course in high highly valued

[4:00:55] leaders highly valued employees in

[4:00:57] general of course I just wanted to point

[4:00:58] that out because I think I heard some

[4:01:00] saying they've been with us and uh this

[4:01:02] and that so long so it's not always the

[4:01:04] case but for what it was worth.

[4:01:06] >> Commissioner Ro anything else?

[4:01:08] >> Nope. All right, Commissioner Toples and

[4:01:11] then Commissioner Barry.

[4:01:13] >> So, I've been gone the last couple of

[4:01:15] weeks and uh obviously I'm guessing

[4:01:17] there my email must be box must be full

[4:01:20] um from what I'm hearing. U including

[4:01:23] these three judges opinion, right? Can

[4:01:25] someone fill me in on maybe what the

[4:01:27] judges are suggesting that the legal

[4:01:29] opinion address? What's the issue?

[4:01:31] They're they're very long emails, very

[4:01:34] long letters,

[4:01:35] >> very thorough,

[4:01:35] >> and it would take a while to go back for

[4:01:40] that yet or no,

[4:01:40] >> I've not seen it.

[4:01:41] >> Haven't either. for comment on that if I

[4:01:44] may. Um, I've been privy to the letters

[4:01:46] myself and I know that one of the uh one

[4:01:51] of the suggestions was uh or or I think

[4:01:54] the uh uh the analysis of what's going

[4:01:57] on is that we're violating the National

[4:01:59] Labor Relations Act, the NLR. Um we're a

[4:02:02] public sector uh organization and we're

[4:02:04] not covered under the NLR. Um there's

[4:02:07] clearly uh in my estimation I am a labor

[4:02:10] relations professional. I'm not a I'm

[4:02:12] not a lawyer one with my uh uh my

[4:02:15] experience but uh been in labor

[4:02:16] relations many many many years and I can

[4:02:19] tell you that there is no legal issue

[4:02:20] here. Um the collective bargaining

[4:02:23] agreements speak to the requirements uh

[4:02:25] the working conditions of union

[4:02:27] employees. Uh the county will follow

[4:02:29] those uh collective bargaining

[4:02:31] agreements to a tea and has been doing

[4:02:32] so. So, I just want to make it clear. My

[4:02:35] opinion would be that there is no uh

[4:02:37] reason to use taxpayer dollars uh for

[4:02:40] legal expenses. Pause.

[4:02:42] >> Mr. Chair,

[4:02:44] >> sorry, just Mr. Toples has the floor.

[4:02:46] Apologies.

[4:02:46] >> No, I I uh I think that's enough for me

[4:02:49] right now. So, okay.

[4:02:50] >> I just read one of the

[4:02:52] >> All right. Before Joe goes number two on

[4:02:56] the amendment, I'm trying my best, guys.

[4:02:58] Is there anybody else who would like to

[4:02:59] comment? Number eight. Sorry. That's

[4:03:02] right. Jim, thank you. Ben, it's 1:00,

[4:03:04] guys. Sorry.

[4:03:06] >> I'm beginning to feel like this probably

[4:03:08] needs to percolate a little bit longer.

[4:03:12] Um, I have some questions on um employees covered under union

[4:03:18] contracts. I' I' I'd be very interested

[4:03:21] to know more about what's precedence in

[4:03:24] this kind of a situation where they're

[4:03:26] kind of mid in a existing contract that

[4:03:31] all sides have agreed to and then we get

[4:03:33] a wage study which is going to create an

[4:03:36] increase for some employees but

[4:03:39] not all. So I I I guess I would like to

[4:03:42] know what precedent is on that. Um

[4:03:45] >> is that a is that a question to me that

[4:03:49] if this does come around for another

[4:03:51] work session, that's something I'd like

[4:03:53] to get a little more information on if

[4:03:55] we can.

[4:03:57] And then uh

[4:03:59] the ranking of the employees um if I

[4:04:03] remember right um in the original

[4:04:05] presentation on this um it showed that

[4:04:08] Ottawa County um does very well a little

[4:04:11] better than average as far as

[4:04:13] compensation for uh the lower the lower

[4:04:16] level or the entry positions, but we're

[4:04:19] a little bit behind the curve on on the

[4:04:21] higher end of the scale. So, I don't

[4:04:23] know if these rankings of people that

[4:04:26] are in the eight range, I'm not sure how

[4:04:28] all this plays out, but I I think we

[4:04:30] should be sensitive that we want to make

[4:04:32] sure we're competitive on longer tenure

[4:04:35] or higher level positions.

[4:04:38] >> Sorry, Scott, before you go, and Jim,

[4:04:41] very much value your comments and

[4:04:43] everybody else's, but we have a motion

[4:04:45] on the table to amend section 8. We're

[4:04:47] talking about a lot of different things

[4:04:48] which is great and they're all valid.

[4:04:50] >> But I'd like to do a roll call on the

[4:04:52] amendment as proposed and if you could

[4:04:55] read that again Rachel.

[4:04:56] >> Yeah, I have a question. I I would be

[4:04:59] >> starting section eight. I just had to

[4:05:00] Okay, thank you. All right, go for it.

[4:05:02] >> It's about the t It's about the timing

[4:05:04] of the motion. So I I'm not opposed

[4:05:06] necessarily to entertain that motion,

[4:05:10] but I would rather go through a work

[4:05:12] session first. So I guess I would rather

[4:05:14] see where the board is as it relates to

[4:05:15] a work session and then once I know that

[4:05:20] then I would rather come back to this

[4:05:22] motion,

[4:05:22] >> right? And so that's why it asked the

[4:05:23] commissioner roadie if that motion to

[4:05:25] table is still on the table so to speak

[4:05:28] uh because I'm willing to with I mean

[4:05:30] the idea was if we're not going to go to

[4:05:33] a work session and we have these

[4:05:34] concerns well let's dive in and fix the

[4:05:37] concerns but if we are going to go to a

[4:05:39] work session then I then I'll withdraw

[4:05:40] them.

[4:05:40] >> Would you be willing to withdraw and the

[4:05:42] motion at this point in time be added

[4:05:44] for a work session and then seeing where

[4:05:47] that goes then may go back to yours.

[4:05:49] >> Yeah, I'll withdraw without any

[4:05:51] conditions. How about that?

[4:05:52] >> Okay, thank you.

[4:05:52] >> Wonderful.

[4:05:53] >> Okay, so we're back to the original

[4:05:54] motion which I believe Joe has spoken

[4:05:58] twice on. I'm sorry you're cut off at

[4:06:00] the moment unless somebody makes an

[4:06:01] amendment.

[4:06:03] >> I'd like to make an amendment.

[4:06:06] » I'm not really sure how Robert's rules

[4:06:08] works on that one, but Joe, go for it.

[4:06:11] Uh if if it's all right with the chair,

[4:06:13] I'd just like to remind everybody what I

[4:06:15] said in the beginning. Our administrator

[4:06:17] did a great job looking at the

[4:06:18] adjustments and it was under $7,000.

[4:06:21] Um I don't know if we need a work

[4:06:23] session. Uh but I do think we I think

[4:06:26] the administration could just use a

[4:06:27] little bit more time um to handle some

[4:06:30] of the questions. I don't think there's

[4:06:31] anything abnormal going on here. There's

[4:06:34] nothing that's I'm assuming there's

[4:06:36] probably nothing different from prior

[4:06:38] years. There's just a few questions that

[4:06:40] probably need a little more time and

[4:06:43] then I think probably we'll get strong

[4:06:46] support for this item.

[4:06:50] >> All right, Joe, do you have

[4:06:51] >> I don't have an amendment. No, sorry.

[4:06:52] >> Yeah, let's not do that again, y'all. I

[4:06:54] appreciate it, but

[4:06:55] >> make a motion to table if you'd like.

[4:06:57] >> Yes, please.

[4:06:57] >> Motion to table this then.

[4:06:59] >> Is there a second?

[4:07:00] >> Second.

[4:07:01] >> All right. Motion to table. Uh there is

[4:07:03] no discussion on a motion to table. So

[4:07:05] Rachel, would you call the role?

[4:07:08] Mr. Tuples,

[4:07:12] » can I ask a clarification question to

[4:07:15] the just motion to table?

[4:07:18] >> I'm just motioning the table for now.

[4:07:20] >> We're doing

[4:07:20] >> that's it. No session, no nothing. Just

[4:07:22] motion to table.

[4:07:23] >> What happens to it after this? Is

[4:07:24] >> can I can I clarify a question? Ron, I'm

[4:07:27] gonna turn to you

[4:07:28] >> about the motion or because it does that kind of depends on how I would the

[4:07:32] answer that question affects my

[4:07:34] >> the motion is to table in which case it

[4:07:36] would be on your agenda for your next

[4:07:39] meeting unless something else happens

[4:07:41] but if uh if the mo I don't know that

[4:07:44] you need to clarify that.

[4:07:45] >> Is that how it goes Ron or is it not on

[4:07:47] the table unless we put it back on the

[4:07:49] table?

[4:07:50] >> It is up to the table.

[4:07:51] >> It's automatically I I'm not correct me.

[4:07:53] Isn't it automatically off the table

[4:07:55] unless it's put back on another table?

[4:07:58] >> If it's put on the agenda.

[4:08:00] >> Yeah, if it's put on agenda.

[4:08:01] >> Yeah. Right. So, something has to

[4:08:02] happen.

[4:08:03] >> I was assuming. Yeah. Right. You're

[4:08:04] correct. That is correct.

[4:08:06] >> I'd put it on the agenda again.

[4:08:08] >> I was assuming that.

[4:08:09] >> Okay.

[4:08:11] >> You call the role, please.

[4:08:14] >> Mr. Tles.

[4:08:15] >> Yes.

[4:08:15] >> Mr. Zystra.

[4:08:22] Uh, no. Sorry,

[4:08:24] >> Mr. Kyers.

[4:08:25] >> No,

[4:08:26] >> Mr. Barry.

[4:08:28] >> Yes,

[4:08:28] >> Mr. Moss.

[4:08:30] >> Yes,

[4:08:30] >> Mr. Jordma.

[4:08:31] >> No,

[4:08:32] >> Mrs. Roadie.

[4:08:33] >> Yes,

[4:08:34] >> Mrs. Nema.

[4:08:35] >> Yes,

[4:08:36] >> Mr. Bonama.

[4:08:38] >> Sorry, Mr. Bonama. It cut out.

[4:08:40] >> You're good. Yes,

[4:08:42] >> Mrs. Wzel.

[4:08:43] >> Yes,

[4:08:44] >> Mr. Buger.

[4:08:45] >> No.

[4:08:46] >> Motion passes. That was the strangest

[4:08:49] scenario there that I've ever

[4:08:51] experienced. That's great, guys. Um, so

[4:08:53] at the moment, and Patrick, I'll

[4:08:54] identify in just a moment. Uh, we have

[4:08:56] tabled this. Uh, I will I do anticipate,

[4:08:59] as Ron indicated, putting this on the

[4:09:00] agenda. Um, I think our esteemed uh,

[4:09:04] county administrator may have a qu a few

[4:09:06] questions.

[4:09:07] >> Just just a comment and and you know,

[4:09:12] so I started working on this as soon as

[4:09:14] I got here. It was presented to me. So,

[4:09:17] you know, in October and and we have

[4:09:19] been working very diligently to address

[4:09:23] all of the concerns with this study.

[4:09:25] Wage studies and I've been involved with

[4:09:27] a few of them are never fun. Um you will

[4:09:31] never have any everyone coming here and

[4:09:33] saying we support this holistically. Um,

[4:09:37] the one thing I will say with the nature

[4:09:39] of all of the questions that have been

[4:09:41] raised are very much in regards to

[4:09:44] appealing what the findings were or

[4:09:46] appealing the methodology. We had we

[4:09:49] have Sarah here today. We have HR here

[4:09:52] today. We were prepared to ask answer

[4:09:54] those questions and we will do so again.

[4:09:57] Um, but we didn't have any questions

[4:09:59] that were raised that we were able to

[4:10:01] ask or answer today and we were prepared

[4:10:03] to do that. So, I am a little frustrated

[4:10:05] because this will withhold this another

[4:10:08] month. Um, employees are frustrated with

[4:10:10] that it hasn't been implemented yet.

[4:10:12] >> Yeah.

[4:10:13] >> And and without knowing what the

[4:10:14] questions are,

[4:10:16] uh, we can't answer them for you. Um, so

[4:10:20] please articulate what those concerns

[4:10:23] are. As I said in my email, we have gone

[4:10:26] over this hours and hours and hours and

[4:10:29] with Sarah, with her team, we're

[4:10:31] confident in the data. We're confident

[4:10:32] in the findings. We wouldn't be

[4:10:34] presenting it to you if we didn't feel

[4:10:36] it was a a well done wage study.

[4:10:39] >> Okay. Thank you, sir. Scott, I noticed

[4:10:41] you stand up. We'll give you the the

[4:10:42] floor for just a moment and then we got

[4:10:43] to move on.

[4:10:43] >> Quick moment. I I would support uh the

[4:10:45] county administrator Waterman's comments

[4:10:48] uh fully. Um I would add um that um

[4:10:52] because of yet another delay um what

[4:10:54] we're going to to note to know uh uh

[4:10:57] negative uh connotation to this board

[4:11:00] but there have been some delays uh

[4:11:02] internally um that is going to delay um

[4:11:05] you know our employees once again from

[4:11:07] uh you know market increases that are

[4:11:09] due to them um that those employees

[4:11:12] don't have the right to bargain um our

[4:11:14] other employees that are unionized will

[4:11:16] have their rights to bargain. Sorry.

[4:11:18] >> Thank you, sir. Uh let's move on in our

[4:11:19] agenda. Next item is number nine,

[4:11:21] committee reports. Are there any

[4:11:23] committee reports? Don't believe there

[4:11:26] are. In which case, we'd move on to item

[4:11:28] number 10, which is public comment. Uh

[4:11:31] second call to the audience if you'd

[4:11:32] like to address the board. Uh now,

[4:11:35] please approach the podium. Um provide

[4:11:38] your name and uh I guess relevance to

[4:11:40] your conversation topic. Or Jason, you

[4:11:43] can tell us if you want. Hi,

[4:11:46] >> Jason Chamblin. I'm a resident of

[4:11:49] Parisburg, also the parks director. So,

[4:11:51] just a quick update wanted to share.

[4:11:53] I'll pass out. Brian, can I hand you

[4:11:55] these? So, spring summer newsletter um

[4:11:58] is out and we're doing a new program

[4:12:02] this upcoming season. So, we're calling

[4:12:04] it our leadership perspective hike. So,

[4:12:07] um we're trying to host um guided hikes

[4:12:11] in all of our parks or a lot of our

[4:12:12] parks throughout the county. So, our

[4:12:14] first one is next Tuesday um at Gross

[4:12:17] Park. So, I've already reached out to

[4:12:19] Allison and invited her. They are they

[4:12:21] will be bright and early at 7:00 a.m. in

[4:12:23] the morning um for about an hour and a

[4:12:25] half and just learn a little bit about

[4:12:26] the parks, but then connect with staff

[4:12:29] and uh talk about where we're headed

[4:12:31] organizationally. So, just an

[4:12:33] opportunity um I'll reach out to each of

[4:12:36] you as those are approaching. So, I

[4:12:38] think that's a couple pages deep in

[4:12:40] there. Um but then also we recently just

[4:12:43] sent out a press release. So the um this

[4:12:48] our natural resources crew will be doing

[4:12:50] um several control burns. So we use

[4:12:53] prescribed fire to help manage some of

[4:12:55] our natural resources. Um and we're

[4:12:57] coordinating these this upcoming

[4:12:59] weekend. So Friday Grand River Park um

[4:13:03] Saturday Sterns Creek and then Sunday

[4:13:07] Eastmanville Bayou. So that's all, you

[4:13:09] know, we coordinate locally with the um

[4:13:12] local fire department and um we have a a

[4:13:15] certified burn boss on each of those and

[4:13:19] um we make the call then the day of

[4:13:21] depending on weather conditions. But um

[4:13:24] just a another opportunity to pass that

[4:13:27] information along. So thanks everybody.

[4:13:29] >> Thank you Jason. Is there anyone else?

[4:13:34] Okay, I think we had an individual or

[4:13:36] two online. Are they able to get in now?

[4:13:39] >> Roger. Jonas,

[4:13:43] » Roger, if you can hear us, go right

[4:13:45] ahead.

[4:13:50] » I can stall for Roger. Roger's nickname

[4:13:52] is Roger Boom Boom Jonas because he has

[4:13:55] been in charge of the Grand Haven Coast

[4:13:56] Guard fireworks for a very long time.

[4:14:01] That still long enough for Roger?

[4:14:06] All right. I do apologize. Is there

[4:14:08] anyone else? Was that it online?

[4:14:12] >> That Rogers logged in twice, so it's

[4:14:14] showing he had his hand up twice. Okay.

[4:14:17] Unfortunately, um

[4:14:19] >> we're unable to connect.

[4:14:20] >> Mr. Jonas, if you would like to email

[4:14:22] us, you are welcome to do so. All right,

[4:14:24] that will uh close the public comment

[4:14:27] portion of our agenda. Uh on to item

[4:14:29] number 11, which is additional business.

[4:14:31] Uh item A on additional business is

[4:14:33] discussion on consumers energy deep well

[4:14:35] injection public hearing.

[4:14:38] I guess I got to lead this off patron.

[4:14:40] Okay. So, this is on the agenda as a

[4:14:42] discussion item because a number of

[4:14:44] commissioners um have

[4:14:47] approached me requesting that we discuss

[4:14:50] further whether or not uh we as a board

[4:14:52] ought to take action regarding the EPA's

[4:14:56] um proposal to approve two deep water

[4:14:58] wells for consumers. Um, just as

[4:15:02] backstory, uh, we've had a number of

[4:15:03] individuals who've reached, well, I will

[4:15:05] say for myself personally, a number of

[4:15:06] individuals who have reached out, uh, as

[4:15:09] CC the board on it asking that we would

[4:15:11] encourage the EPA to hold a public

[4:15:13] hearing. Uh, Consumers Energy has also

[4:15:15] requested that the EPA hold a public

[4:15:17] hearing as well as Port Sheldon, I

[4:15:20] believe Jim, Commissioner Barry's

[4:15:22] district has requested it. So, the

[4:15:24] question for us today is, do we as a

[4:15:26] board want to take action on that? uh

[4:15:28] what that action might look like and uh

[4:15:31] or not at all. So, I will open the floor

[4:15:34] if anybody would like to speak to this.

[4:15:36] Actually, I think I may put this over to

[4:15:37] Commissioner Barry because this is

[4:15:39] coming out of his district in

[4:15:40] particular. So, Jim, if you'd lead us

[4:15:41] off. Okay. the um this is this is an item that

[4:15:48] generated a lot of lot of interest and

[4:15:51] um comment from um folks in the area um

[4:15:56] about plans for this injection well. Um

[4:16:03] I've probably spent a lot more time on

[4:16:04] this than I ever thought I would on an

[4:16:07] injection well

[4:16:09] thing. Uh but this has to do with with

[4:16:12] the byproduct of burning coal at the

[4:16:14] Campbell plant and some of this uh

[4:16:18] product that's left over. Uh what do

[4:16:20] they do with it? And um

[4:16:24] uh they're currently um

[4:16:30] as they're producing coal, they're using

[4:16:32] water to cool turbines. And then then

[4:16:34] the water gets discharged back into the

[4:16:36] channel. and what's in those settling

[4:16:39] ponds from pod ash residue. Um, under

[4:16:43] eagle supervision and permitting,

[4:16:46] they're

[4:16:48] taking diluted amounts of that material

[4:16:51] and pumping it back into the into the

[4:16:53] lake. Um, I'm not sure people fully

[4:16:57] understand that. um when the Campbell

[4:16:59] plant eventually closes, whenever that

[4:17:02] might be, they won't have the water

[4:17:04] that's passing through um to be to

[4:17:07] continue that process. And that's why

[4:17:09] they're looking at doing these deep

[4:17:11] injection wells. Um it's not my job to

[4:17:15] uh justify this or explain what

[4:17:17] Consumers is trying to do. Uh, but I

[4:17:20] think people have legitimate concerns

[4:17:22] about this and have questions uh

[4:17:25] legitimate questions to be answered for

[4:17:27] it. And I think a public hearing that

[4:17:30] the EPA would host would be u the form

[4:17:33] for that. I think for uh for us to uh

[4:17:38] show some support for a public hearing

[4:17:40] isn't telling consumers what to do. As a

[4:17:43] matter of fact, they as was as

[4:17:46] Commissioner Burgerer mentioned,

[4:17:48] Consumers has already requested um a a

[4:17:51] hearing from the EPA. Um what I would

[4:17:55] hope we we could do is show support for

[4:17:58] the resolution that Park Township Board

[4:18:00] of Trustees issued requesting a hearing

[4:18:04] from from the EPA

[4:18:06] um on this on this matter. And then um any action we take would show uh

[4:18:13] support for what Port Sheldon Township's

[4:18:15] trying to do and also uh would

[4:18:18] communicate to our constituents in our

[4:18:20] area that um we're aware of the

[4:18:22] situation or taking note of it. Um we're

[4:18:25] not telling anybody what to do. We're

[4:18:27] just uh supporting the township in their

[4:18:29] effort to get a hearing on this. I think

[4:18:32] that's probably going to happen. Uh I

[4:18:34] had heard that over 60

[4:18:37] uh people had written uh requests to the

[4:18:40] EPA wanting a a public hearing on this.

[4:18:44] Um but I think it would still be good

[4:18:46] and I think it would be proper for the

[4:18:48] board to take a position on this to show

[4:18:51] support for local unit of government and

[4:18:53] some of the concern that uh folks have

[4:18:55] on this issue.

[4:18:57] >> Thank you uh Commissioner Barry. So

[4:18:58] generally speaking we have Commissioner

[4:19:00] Barry would like the board to take

[4:19:02] action. Does anybody else have any

[4:19:04] further thoughts on that?

[4:19:06] >> Commissioner Mida,

[4:19:08] >> um, did you have a specific request that

[4:19:10] you're hoping that our board would

[4:19:12] entertain, Commissioner Barry?

[4:19:14] >> Um, normally the board would issue a

[4:19:17] resolution that would be a a resolution.

[4:19:20] Um, you could tinker with the language a

[4:19:23] little bit on that and just make it a

[4:19:24] letter of support.

[4:19:27] um which makes it a little slightly less

[4:19:29] official I think but it still would put

[4:19:32] the board on on record on this. Um,

[4:19:37] just

[4:19:39] language on this could be uh worked with

[4:19:42] a little bit, but I I was thinking the

[4:19:43] Ottawa County Board of Commissioners

[4:19:45] support the Port Sheldon Township Board

[4:19:47] of Trustees resolution requesting the

[4:19:49] Environmental Protection Agency hold

[4:19:51] public hearing regarding consumer

[4:19:53] energy's request to the EPA for the

[4:19:56] issuance of a class one non-hazardous

[4:19:58] underground injections permits for two

[4:20:00] wells to be located at the JH Campbell

[4:20:03] generating facility.

[4:20:04] members of the community have raised

[4:20:06] questions and concerns regarding the

[4:20:08] plan. It would be to the public good to

[4:20:10] have a form where those questions may be

[4:20:12] asked.

[4:20:14] >> Okay. Thank you.

[4:20:15] >> That's a motion. I would support I would

[4:20:17] support that. I think um it's just

[4:20:19] showing

[4:20:20] our our team approach with Port Sheldon

[4:20:24] and as well as the residents who are

[4:20:25] just simply asking for our support of a

[4:20:28] public hearing to take place. Consumers

[4:20:30] Energy has already voiced their thoughts

[4:20:32] on that and I think it's showing a um a

[4:20:35] united front that we just want to um

[4:20:38] open it up for discussion for our

[4:20:40] community. So

[4:20:42] >> So I think just from a point of order

[4:20:43] standpoint, I don't have a motion yet,

[4:20:45] but Mr. Barry, would you like to make a

[4:20:47] motion perhaps that the uh commission

[4:20:50] the board of commissioners authorize the

[4:20:52] chair to sign a letter

[4:20:55] to that effect as as outlined in your

[4:20:58] >> I would like to make a motion that the

[4:21:01] uh uh chairman of the Ottawa County

[4:21:03] Board of Commissioners would uh sign

[4:21:06] this letter to be forwarded to the EPA.

[4:21:08] Uh we are in the window for submitting

[4:21:11] that request up till May 4 to the EPA.

[4:21:15] >> By May 4. Okay. And a second by

[4:21:17] Commissioner Me.

[4:21:18] >> Well, would you take a friendly

[4:21:19] amendment to include um maybe the whole board's support because

[4:21:25] anybody Commissioner Buger could write

[4:21:27] his own letter with his own commissioner

[4:21:29] letter head and I think it would show a

[4:21:32] different you you think that this is

[4:21:34] different?

[4:21:35] >> Yeah. I I would not be using my letter.

[4:21:36] would be on behalf of the entire board.

[4:21:38] And sorry, Ron, you go ahead.

[4:21:40] >> Well, I think the motion is that the

[4:21:42] board uh instruct the chair to write a

[4:21:46] letter of support to Port Sheldon

[4:21:48] consistent with the background

[4:21:50] information that Mr. Barry had in his

[4:21:52] motion and as reflected in the vote that

[4:21:56] you will presumably take

[4:21:58] >> and I think it should be sent then to

[4:21:59] the EPA as well.

[4:22:00] >> Yes.

[4:22:01] >> Then then I would support that.

[4:22:03] >> All right. Okay. Got a motion and a

[4:22:05] second.

[4:22:05] >> And we're in we're in that window where

[4:22:07] EPA is taking requests for this public

[4:22:09] hearing. So that's very timely and uh

[4:22:12] proper, I think.

[4:22:13] >> All right. So, Commissioner Barry, thank

[4:22:14] you. Uh would anyone uh Commissioner

[4:22:16] Toples,

[4:22:17] >> has uh has anyone seen the letter from

[4:22:19] Consumers Energy on this asking for a

[4:22:22] public hearing?

[4:22:22] >> We've seen the email officially

[4:22:24] requesting the public hearing consumers.

[4:22:27] >> Then I would suggest if we're going to

[4:22:28] do a letter of support um then more

[4:22:31] comments about it. I would say it's not

[4:22:33] just that we support

[4:22:36] uh Park Township's Port Sheldon

[4:22:38] >> Port. Yeah.

[4:22:40] >> Yeah. Port Sheldon, but also we support

[4:22:43] consumers energy request. I think it's

[4:22:45] so we can combine it.

[4:22:47] >> All right. So, let me get some give some

[4:22:50] other thoughts on this.

[4:22:52] Um, some people in the public may not

[4:22:53] like my comments here or mis or

[4:22:56] understand it, but I think it u this

[4:22:58] isn't an easy isn't an easy slam dunk

[4:23:01] for me. Um,

[4:23:08] as many of you know, I used to be the

[4:23:09] chairman of the environmental law

[4:23:11] section of Grand Rapids. Uh, represented

[4:23:13] lots of companies, clean been involved

[4:23:15] in numerous cleanups throughout the

[4:23:17] state.

[4:23:19] I've been my clients were heavily

[4:23:21] regulated through the EPA. Um,

[4:23:24] and yes, I agree that we're not talking

[4:23:28] about a hazardous waste not the same

[4:23:30] thing as as what we're talking about

[4:23:32] here, right? There's but it's still a

[4:23:33] concern a waste that we should all in

[4:23:36] the state should always be concerned

[4:23:37] about, right? drinking water, other

[4:23:39] things, touching, direct contact, all

[4:23:42] those kind of things which are standards

[4:23:43] under the EPA's or under the DEQ

[4:23:47] regulations. But the permitting the

[4:23:49] permitting process also is a very

[4:23:52] regulated process to get to the and it's

[4:23:56] both federal and state. So to put the

[4:23:59] pro the permitting process in place

[4:24:02] required public participation, right? So

[4:24:06] the public has already been involved in

[4:24:08] step one in just the permitting through

[4:24:11] the regulatory system to some extent.

[4:24:14] Then we got now we've got um this permit

[4:24:17] that consumers is going through um it

[4:24:21] required public notice. Now it it it

[4:24:24] didn't automatically require a public

[4:24:26] hearing but that's how the public found

[4:24:29] out about it was because it's going

[4:24:30] through the permitting process. Right.

[4:24:33] My concern is

[4:24:38] overregulation

[4:24:40] of of business by government. Um

[4:24:46] business in many ways is overregulated

[4:24:50] and the public doesn't understand the

[4:24:52] cost of regulation on business

[4:24:56] uh to in many many areas. We've got the

[4:25:01] federal EPA watching this matter and we

[4:25:04] have the state DEEQ watching this

[4:25:06] matter. Two highly regulated non-elected

[4:25:11] bodies whose job it is to protect our

[4:25:14] environments and natural resources,

[4:25:16] right? That's their job.

[4:25:19] I may not always like the

[4:25:20] overregulation,

[4:25:22] but I've certainly worked within it

[4:25:24] certainly at the state level. Um, so my

[4:25:27] concern is okay, how do how far do we go

[4:25:29] as an elected body, government, agency,

[4:25:33] further adding further obligations onto

[4:25:36] the regulatory system that already

[4:25:37] exists. Um, and so that's where my fine

[4:25:41] line is, right? I will support this

[4:25:44] letter uh that you recommend. Um, but I

[4:25:49] think that we again I'm cautioning this

[4:25:51] board to stay in its lane. Um because

[4:25:56] there are always individuals throughout

[4:25:57] in our community that want to

[4:26:00] overregulate or put extra burdens. You

[4:26:03] know, the fact that the consumer's

[4:26:05] energy has been discharging into the

[4:26:08] Lake Michigan for a long time, right? A

[4:26:10] long time. That means the government's

[4:26:12] been involved a long time because you

[4:26:14] just don't do that stuff, right? Um, and

[4:26:17] so even though there's members of the

[4:26:20] public who would like more than that,

[4:26:22] the fact is it's the business has a

[4:26:24] right to rely on regulations that have

[4:26:28] been in place a long, long time. And my

[4:26:32] concern is I don't want to be that

[4:26:35] government agency adding an extra set of

[4:26:38] requirements onto business that already

[4:26:42] has the regulations to be protective of

[4:26:44] ours already. That's my concern. Again,

[4:26:47] I will support this letter in this case

[4:26:49] because the the business community,

[4:26:51] Consumers Energy in this case and the

[4:26:54] local township, right, and the people

[4:26:56] that representatives saying, "Let's hold

[4:26:58] a public hearing. How can you hurt to

[4:27:00] have a public hearing?" Couldn't agree.

[4:27:02] I agree. Right. Um, we all want to

[4:27:04] protect that resource and the fact that

[4:27:07] the public, we want to hear the from the

[4:27:09] public. Great. I I support that, but I

[4:27:11] also don't want to add burden,

[4:27:14] regulatory burden onto an already

[4:27:17] regulated system. That's where my my

[4:27:20] line is, guys. Um and I just want to

[4:27:22] caution us to remember that. Uh at least

[4:27:25] some of us,

[4:27:26] >> if I could just respond briefly.

[4:27:28] >> Um John, I I share a lot of your

[4:27:31] concerns about um we need to stay in our

[4:27:34] lane and it's not our job to tell a

[4:27:36] business how to run their business. Um

[4:27:39] just the fact the proximity to Lake

[4:27:41] Michigan becomes more that's really I

[4:27:44] think the big reason why this has

[4:27:46] generated as much public interest as it

[4:27:47] has. Um um I actually think could they

[4:27:53] probably have the best possible

[4:27:55] solution. I'm certainly no expert in

[4:27:57] this but they've got a situation where

[4:27:59] they have to do something with with this

[4:28:01] byproduct material. Um this is a a

[4:28:05] solution to it. It's not entirely

[4:28:07] unheard of. Um, but consumer it needs to

[4:28:11] be sold to the public. I don't think

[4:28:13] people understand what the current

[4:28:15] situation is and and exactly what's

[4:28:18] being proposed here. Uh, so public

[4:28:21] hearing would serve a function of an

[4:28:24] opportunity to inform public and again

[4:28:27] as as you mentioned too uh consumers has

[4:28:30] already agreed that they want to have

[4:28:32] the public hearing as well. I think they

[4:28:33] realize uh they need to do a little more

[4:28:36] communication to the public on on what

[4:28:38] they intend to do.

[4:28:40] >> All right. Thank you, Commissioner

[4:28:41] Barry. Anybody else? Commissioner Moss.

[4:28:44] >> Thank you. Yeah, I actually don't

[4:28:46] support the motion. It's for some of the

[4:28:48] reasons that Commissioner Tull's already

[4:28:49] outlined. Um I don't think this is

[4:28:52] necessary

[4:28:54] for this board to do at this time. It's

[4:28:57] my personal view. Um so I'm If there's a

[4:29:01] public hearing, great. I think they're

[4:29:03] probably already going to they've

[4:29:04] already had the feedback. The locals

[4:29:07] where this directly impacts has already

[4:29:10] expressed that. I think that they're the

[4:29:12] people closest to the issue are speaking

[4:29:14] to it and so I don't think this is

[4:29:16] necessary.

[4:29:18] >> Thank you, Commissioner. Anyone else?

[4:29:22] Oh, Commissioner Roie.

[4:29:24] >> Um, I I do support it. I I think it

[4:29:27] doesn't hurt for there to be the

[4:29:29] communication and the conversation

[4:29:30] around what's actually going on and I

[4:29:32] think it actually might um it might help

[4:29:36] resolve some of the fears in the

[4:29:38] community be my hope.

[4:29:40] >> Yeah. Yeah. So I I think it could

[4:29:42] ultimately be helpful, but I do agree

[4:29:44] with with us not going so far as to

[4:29:47] telling a business what to do. So, um,

[4:29:50] but I am supportive of the the letter,

[4:29:52] um, because I think it actually might

[4:29:53] help in the situation.

[4:29:55] >> All right. Thank you, Commissioner. I'll

[4:29:57] just I didn't see anybody else, so I'll

[4:29:58] just add that, um, uh, I will support

[4:30:01] the letter initiative as well. Uh, in

[4:30:04] particular, for me, it was very

[4:30:05] important to get consumers to let us

[4:30:07] know. And, John, to your question there,

[4:30:10] um, I did press consumers to send us

[4:30:11] confirmation, written confirmation, and

[4:30:14] they actually sent us a copy of the

[4:30:15] email where they had requested this

[4:30:17] themselves from the EPA. Uh were it not

[4:30:19] for that then I definitely would be more

[4:30:21] hesitant on this one. So uh with that uh

[4:30:24] Rachel would you call the role?

[4:30:26] >> So hearing uh Mr. Bolshi and uh Mr.

[4:30:29] Barry I have moved to have the board

[4:30:33] instruct the chairperson to draft a

[4:30:34] letter to the EPA to support Port

[4:30:36] Sheldon Township to hold a public

[4:30:38] hearing regarding consumers energy's

[4:30:40] deep well injection proposal.

[4:30:41] >> I need to say Port count portsheldon

[4:30:43] township and consumers energy. Okay.

[4:30:45] >> I was wondering if you were going to add

[4:30:47] that or not. Okay. Uh,

[4:30:49] >> good. Got it. Okay.

[4:30:50] >> Yep. Mr. Zystra,

[4:30:52] >> yes.

[4:30:53] >> Mr. Teles,

[4:30:54] >> yes.

[4:30:55] >> Mr. Jordma,

[4:30:56] >> yes.

[4:30:56] >> Mr. Kyers,

[4:30:58] >> yes.

[4:30:58] >> Mr. Barry,

[4:30:59] >> yes.

[4:31:00] >> Mrs. Midama,

[4:31:01] >> yes.

[4:31:01] >> Mr. Bonama,

[4:31:02] >> yes.

[4:31:03] >> Mrs. Broie,

[4:31:04] >> yes.

[4:31:04] >> Mr. Moss,

[4:31:05] >> no.

[4:31:06] >> Mrs. Wel,

[4:31:07] >> yes.

[4:31:08] >> Mr. Buger,

[4:31:09] >> yes.

[4:31:09] >> Motion passes.

[4:31:11] >> I will get out my signing pen, everyone.

[4:31:14] Thank you. All right. Uh, item B on

[4:31:16] additional business. Uh this was an

[4:31:18] addition and this is the discussion

[4:31:20] regarding compensation of elected

[4:31:22] officials. Um I was not my Oh, sorry.

[4:31:27] >> Chair, could I um request to be excused,

[4:31:29] please? Is that how that works?

[4:31:31] >> I have a six-month standing appointment

[4:31:33] with my wife of cancer. So,

[4:31:35] >> all right.

[4:31:35] >> This is important. So,

[4:31:36] >> yes. Thank you, Mr. Kyers. Uh thank you

[4:31:39] for your attendance. Um all right, so we

[4:31:41] have on the agenda um uh item regarding

[4:31:44] officer's compensation. Um, I will say,

[4:31:46] and I'm going to turn this over to those

[4:31:47] who made the motion, just because I did

[4:31:49] not vote in favor of adding it um, uh,

[4:31:52] to the agenda, not because it's not

[4:31:54] worth discussing, but um, I didn't feel

[4:31:56] like this was the appropriate time or

[4:31:57] place for it. So, and at that rate, I'm

[4:31:59] trying to think who made the motion to

[4:32:00] add it. Oh, sorry. Yeah, Commissioner

[4:32:02] Mima, please, by all means.

[4:32:04] >> So, I I appreciate the opportunity to

[4:32:07] discuss this. Um, I was disappointed and

[4:32:12] to be frank, um,

[4:32:15] frustrated and somewhat angry to be

[4:32:18] learning about the additional, um, wages

[4:32:23] to be given to our treasur and water

[4:32:25] resource commissioner. I found we found

[4:32:26] that out through a constituent emailing

[4:32:29] us. that circulated through all of our

[4:32:32] social media pages um accusing this

[4:32:35] board of non being non-transparent.

[4:32:38] Um

[4:32:40] I

[4:32:41] I'm very disappointed um in how we found

[4:32:45] out about it. I think that was one of

[4:32:47] the things that we really advocated for

[4:32:51] um Patrick when you came on and that you

[4:32:54] would make sure that to avoid at all

[4:32:56] costs um that we wouldn't find about

[4:32:59] things later on and this this is a

[4:33:01] pretty big one. Um when we talked about

[4:33:04] this as a board months ago, it was very

[4:33:07] much given that while it while we were

[4:33:11] disapp while no one was arguing that our

[4:33:14] treasure and water resource commissioner

[4:33:16] didn't deserve to make a fair salary

[4:33:20] that we believed that the officers

[4:33:23] compensation commission that was their

[4:33:24] role and we did not see anything in the

[4:33:29] statute that would allow um that to be

[4:33:32] handled in a different way, but if there

[4:33:34] was, we would welcome that conversation

[4:33:36] to take place as a full board. And when Doug Van Essen when I relisted when

[4:33:43] I listened to the meeting that took

[4:33:45] place um a week ago

[4:33:49] um one of the commissioners that serves

[4:33:51] on the compensation commission, Lynn

[4:33:53] Jansen, was asking some questions and

[4:33:58] Doug said that this was an internal

[4:34:00] decision that the board approved in May.

[4:34:04] I don't know which May you're talking

[4:34:06] about. We're in April right now. We

[4:34:08] certainly didn't have this conversation

[4:34:10] a year ago in May

[4:34:13] um to my knowledge. And

[4:34:18] it was also stated on the meeting that

[4:34:20] we found additional Doug said that they

[4:34:23] found that we found he used the word we.

[4:34:27] I don't know who who he's referring to.

[4:34:30] We found additional tasks that we needed

[4:34:32] done that we assigned on a temporary

[4:34:35] basis for those people to do.

[4:34:38] They thought and then also went on to

[4:34:41] say when when asked why did you do this?

[4:34:45] Well, they I'm assuming he's referring

[4:34:48] to our treasur and our water resource

[4:34:50] commissioner thought strongly that a

[4:34:52] decision had been made

[4:34:55] and

[4:34:58] I have great concern about what's

[4:35:00] happening because it I I would like to

[4:35:03] see

[4:35:05] for the work that has been done. Is it

[4:35:08] been has it been approved of? Who's approved it? Who did it get

[4:35:12] approved by?

[4:35:14] Um, why didn't it come before our board?

[4:35:18] Um, I think

[4:35:22] I'm again I'm very disappointed. I I

[4:35:24] have to wonder what other elected

[4:35:27] officials are being paid more money that

[4:35:30] we aren't aware of.

[4:35:33] Um, has that taken place before?

[4:35:36] Are there commissioners that sit on this

[4:35:38] board that are getting paid now more

[4:35:40] money because they felt like they

[4:35:42] deserve to be paid more money?

[4:35:46] >> I I think we deserve some answers as

[4:35:49] this board.

[4:35:49] >> Okay.

[4:35:50] >> Uh Patrick, before you respond, if you

[4:35:52] wouldn't mind, this a discussion item is

[4:35:54] a unique format. I don't think Robert's

[4:35:56] rules gives a whole lot of guidance on

[4:35:57] it. Or do they? Thank you. All right. Um

[4:36:01] before Patrick responds, I just want to

[4:36:03] go around the horn as far as

[4:36:04] commissioners. If you have questions of

[4:36:05] Patrick or comments, at least do that

[4:36:07] once so that we give him the opportunity

[4:36:08] to respond in full. Uh does anybody else

[4:36:11] uh care to comment on this?

[4:36:14] >> I will. Yeah, very quickly. Um I just

[4:36:17] think that there's two sides to every

[4:36:19] story and uh I think this is a great

[4:36:21] opportunity for the public to hear the

[4:36:22] other side. So that's why I supported it

[4:36:25] and I think uh the whole narrative

[4:36:27] should be out there, not just a partial

[4:36:29] narrative.

[4:36:32] Thank you, Commissioner.

[4:36:34] Roie, you took a breath.

[4:36:35] It's like a Jim Barry. Jim kind of leans

[4:36:37] in and goes and then I call him.

[4:36:39] >> I have I have partial thoughts on this,

[4:36:41] I guess. Uh just two things that stand

[4:36:44] out to me. One is um you know, the

[4:36:47] officers compensation commission made

[4:36:50] decisions on a number of things the last

[4:36:52] time. One was on commissioner salary.

[4:36:54] They also they also approved that at a

[4:36:58] higher rate outside of the the window

[4:37:01] and and so

[4:37:04] you know there's some picking and

[4:37:05] choosing here of of of who who based on

[4:37:09] those prior decisions now you know we

[4:37:12] find a way to pay and who we don't find

[4:37:14] a way to pay. So, you know, we're like

[4:37:19] we're establishing new new authority

[4:37:22] over how those decisions are made, how it's applied. We're picking and

[4:37:26] choosing which of their decisions we

[4:37:28] liked and will enforce and which ones we

[4:37:31] won't. Um, and so I I mean, Commissioner

[4:37:34] Medma's question is then valid of, you

[4:37:38] know, are there any other decisions made

[4:37:40] by the officers compensation commission

[4:37:43] the last time that are now being applied

[4:37:46] to commissioners? And um so I this is

[4:37:50] why you follow the law and why you

[4:37:52] follow proper process because because

[4:37:55] when you don't it raises it raises

[4:37:57] questions and I certainly you know I

[4:38:01] took a strong stand before u about

[4:38:04] fairness of pay and I think you would

[4:38:06] find my record to be very consistent

[4:38:08] across my time in service here of

[4:38:10] advocating for for good um competitive

[4:38:13] pay for every employee that's here. And

[4:38:17] the same is true, you know, when it

[4:38:18] comes to elected officials. I think

[4:38:20] people need to be compensated fairly.

[4:38:22] So, I'm not taking issue at all with how people should be should be paid

[4:38:28] or the decisions made by the officers

[4:38:31] compensation commission. Um, but we have

[4:38:34] to follow the law. We have to follow

[4:38:36] proper process. And, um, you know, I

[4:38:40] know they're meeting again, which is

[4:38:41] great. And so I also don't want this

[4:38:44] discussion at all to dampen their

[4:38:46] efforts to um you know to pay

[4:38:50] competitive competitively. OB obviously

[4:38:52] we're not going to all go chase down

[4:38:53] other roles in other counties and stuff

[4:38:55] but you know I I think people should be

[4:38:57] compensated fairly. So I don't want this

[4:38:59] conversation to diminish their work

[4:39:02] there. But um Patrick, one thing I'm

[4:39:06] concerned with um

[4:39:09] is is one of the comments that you wrote

[4:39:12] in the email and thank you for the email

[4:39:13] explaining some of what had happened,

[4:39:15] but particularly the one that says

[4:39:17] directed to me, you're going to work on

[4:39:19] seeing if we can get something. No

[4:39:21] pressure. And so I don't know who made

[4:39:23] that comment to you, but I I am

[4:39:26] concerned if people are pressuring you

[4:39:28] to do things. And so, um, I just want to

[4:39:32] defend you in that and in that I don't

[4:39:34] think that's right. So, um,

[4:39:38] hopefully this the situation one, we we

[4:39:40] need, um, we need clarity, we need

[4:39:43] transparency, and we need to follow the

[4:39:46] law.

[4:39:48] >> Thank you, Commissioner. Uh, anyone else

[4:39:50] before we turn the floor over to

[4:39:51] Patrick?

[4:39:53] >> All right.

[4:39:54] >> Okay, Patrick, floor is yours. So, um,

[4:39:58] appreciate your comment about being

[4:39:59] caught off guard and I do strive to to,

[4:40:02] um, always avoid those situations. The

[4:40:04] first I became aware of this is

[4:40:06] Commissioner Buger reached out and said,

[4:40:08] "I have been getting calls from the

[4:40:10] media and maybe some residents about

[4:40:13] this concern." So, I immediately started

[4:40:16] working on I dro it was a busy day and I

[4:40:18] remember talking to you. I dropped what

[4:40:19] I was doing and said, "I need to address

[4:40:22] this with the board so they're well

[4:40:23] informed." So, I I don't want to

[4:40:25] regurgitate my April 24th email, which

[4:40:30] that was really intended to inform you

[4:40:32] on all of this. I understand that this

[4:40:35] email has since been um shared with the

[4:40:38] public and the media. So, and that's

[4:40:39] fine. It it is out there now, but it was

[4:40:42] intended to inform you as a board. So in

[4:40:46] that email um I indicated that this

[4:40:49] issue of the disconnect between the pay

[4:40:53] um that the officer's compensation

[4:40:55] commission intended um but wasn't

[4:40:57] enacted due to the 45day window is

[4:41:00] something that was being discussed

[4:41:01] before I came on as administrator.

[4:41:05] um prior administrator Rosema was

[4:41:07] working on this with uh with corporation

[4:41:09] council and trying to find a solution

[4:41:12] and it was just kind of one of those

[4:41:13] transitionary projects that was on the

[4:41:15] threshold when I got here. So um after

[4:41:19] talking through this with corporation

[4:41:21] council and talking with the uh elected

[4:41:24] officials, we determined that um the

[4:41:27] best solution would be to bring this

[4:41:29] back to the board with the

[4:41:31] interpretation uh per the per the

[4:41:33] statute that we cited that they did in

[4:41:37] fact take action that day. There was a

[4:41:39] consensus that that pay uh should be

[4:41:42] adjusted upwards. We brought that to you

[4:41:45] as a recommendation to say this is

[4:41:47] right. This this was enacted. We don't

[4:41:50] have minutes to to show you because no

[4:41:52] minutes were taken. And um we believe

[4:41:56] that legally you were within your right

[4:41:57] to correct this issue. This board opted

[4:42:01] not to do that without the uh

[4:42:03] verification that that had truly been

[4:42:05] said despite the fact that we collected

[4:42:08] um affidavits and and information from

[4:42:10] the people that were on that board. So,

[4:42:13] as I put in my email, I was given what I

[4:42:16] interpreted to be very clear cues to

[4:42:17] solve this. We had a problem. Find a

[4:42:20] solution, Patrick. Um, subsequently to

[4:42:24] this, the Ottawan County Insurance

[4:42:26] Authority had been meeting and talking

[4:42:28] about two significant issues. One, they

[4:42:31] purchased a piece of property, a 45acre

[4:42:33] piece of property at Zealand Township

[4:42:35] several years ago as an investment for u

[4:42:39] the future 231 future phases. as uh the

[4:42:42] interchange may be located there. They

[4:42:45] wanted to know what are we going to do

[4:42:46] with this property? Are we going to

[4:42:48] continue to hold it or are we going to

[4:42:50] sell it at uh because we're not in the

[4:42:52] business of owning property. We need

[4:42:54] some verification. We need some

[4:42:56] analysis. We need some discussions with

[4:42:58] MDOT on what their plans are. Who's

[4:43:00] going to do that? The other issue is

[4:43:02] there's an ongoing two ongoing legal

[4:43:05] cases with regard to property tax

[4:43:08] foreclosure that are of high interest to

[4:43:10] the Ottawan County Insurance Authority.

[4:43:12] So those discussions had happened prior

[4:43:15] to me bringing this to you as a solution

[4:43:17] as an opportunity to solve this problem.

[4:43:20] Meanwhile, uh, at, you know, after the

[4:43:22] board's decision to not go forward with

[4:43:25] that, it was our understanding that we

[4:43:27] had two elected officials that were not

[4:43:29] being paid properly and we we saw that

[4:43:32] as a risk to the county that it could

[4:43:34] inherently create future legal challenge

[4:43:36] for us that we didn't want to do. That's

[4:43:38] part of our job is to keep us out of

[4:43:40] court. So, we approached the insurance

[4:43:42] authority of the idea of, hey, you have

[4:43:45] um some some work that needs to be done.

[4:43:48] I have two elected officials that are very qualified to do that work. In

[4:43:53] fact, Joe specializes in in land

[4:43:55] development and land um related issues.

[4:43:59] He has a lot of connections and we

[4:44:01] thought that might be an opportunity for

[4:44:03] Joe to step in um on the contract of the

[4:44:07] Ottawa County Insurance Authority, which

[4:44:08] is an outside entity of this board. Um

[4:44:12] same with Cheryl. Cheryl had an interest

[4:44:14] in knowing what the tax appeals or the foreclosure process outcome was

[4:44:19] going to be. It's above and beyond her

[4:44:22] job duties as a clerk and also her role

[4:44:24] on the insurance authority. So, we

[4:44:26] proposed the idea to both of them. Is

[4:44:29] this something you'd be interested in

[4:44:30] doing for a stipen to help offset that

[4:44:33] wrong that was made to you? Um, they

[4:44:37] said yes, that would be great. Great. We

[4:44:39] thought we would alleviate any legal

[4:44:41] risk if they agreed to that. We then

[4:44:43] presented that to the insurance

[4:44:45] authority workg group. The work group

[4:44:47] liked the idea of it because they were

[4:44:48] going to receive the services that they

[4:44:50] were asking for at what we think is a

[4:44:53] discounted rate compared to hiring a

[4:44:54] consultant to do that work. Problem

[4:44:57] solved. As I said in my email, I didn't

[4:45:00] report back to this board and I and I

[4:45:02] should have done that, but my intent was

[4:45:04] to report back to the board when the

[4:45:05] work was complete. The matter was tabled

[4:45:08] and as you all know something stays

[4:45:10] tabled until it's brought back or

[4:45:12] removed from the table. That was never

[4:45:14] requested by any of the board to do

[4:45:16] that.

[4:45:18] It's it's what was done was legal,

[4:45:21] ethical, it was open. There was a that

[4:45:23] was a public meeting. Um it was within

[4:45:26] the board workg groupoup's authority to

[4:45:28] sign an outside contract. They do that

[4:45:30] often and uh it alleviated the legal

[4:45:33] risk.

[4:45:34] >> Okay. Thank you, administrator. And I've

[4:45:36] noticed Doug has moved there since we're

[4:45:37] on staff time at the moment. Why don't

[4:45:39] you go right ahead? And I do think Doug,

[4:45:41] one uh thing you might want to address

[4:45:43] is that you did misspeak at the uh

[4:45:45] meeting about the board having voted on

[4:45:47] this. And I think one of the

[4:45:48] commissioners had brought that up.

[4:45:51] >> So first of all, let me explain what I

[4:45:53] was trying to do in front of the current

[4:45:56] compensation commission, which was about

[4:46:00] to get completely off the rails.

[4:46:03] My job at that meeting was to make sure

[4:46:06] they were following their purview. Their

[4:46:09] purview was not to try to figure out

[4:46:11] what the 2024 compensation commission

[4:46:15] did.

[4:46:16] They were ready in their approval of the

[4:46:20] minutes to try to figure out and answer

[4:46:23] that question. Then

[4:46:27] Mr. France wanted to delve into the

[4:46:30] issue, assuming they concluded that the

[4:46:33] 2024 commission had made its decision to

[4:46:37] equalize the pay of these three elected

[4:46:40] officials, how they could compensate

[4:46:43] those elected officials for the wrong

[4:46:45] that had been done to them over the past

[4:46:48] two years. My efforts were trying to

[4:46:52] redirect them to stay away from both of

[4:46:54] those issues and concentrate only on

[4:46:58] their the future pay of those two

[4:47:01] elected officials

[4:47:04] and not worry about what happened in the

[4:47:07] past whether there were any in

[4:47:09] inequities. And in the course of trying

[4:47:13] to redirect them, I explained that

[4:47:15] administration had taken care of that

[4:47:18] issue. It was not something they needed

[4:47:20] to worry about. All right. Now, let's go

[4:47:24] back to January of 2025.

[4:47:28] Gary and Doug are commissioned to try to

[4:47:32] clean up a variety of different messes

[4:47:35] that were lingering from the previous

[4:47:38] board and the previous administration.

[4:47:41] I don't remember. I have a vague

[4:47:43] recollection, Doug, of Commissioner

[4:47:45] Zystster, of you can Doug, I'm sorry.

[4:47:49] There's a lot of Doug around here.

[4:47:50] >> Yeah. Yeah.

[4:47:51] >> And and Gary, you're talking Gary Rosa.

[4:47:53] >> You know, one

[4:47:53] >> Rosma. But I also have a vague

[4:47:56] recollection of the water resources

[4:48:00] commissioner and you, Commissioner

[4:48:02] Zystra,

[4:48:04] coming to my office to talk about the

[4:48:07] 2024 compensation commission and whether

[4:48:10] or not the water resources commissioner

[4:48:13] was being underpaid. I may be wrong in

[4:48:16] that. You may not have been there.

[4:48:18] >> You just continue because I Yeah,

[4:48:20] >> but whatever. My response to Joe was, I

[4:48:26] take direction from Gary. If Gary

[4:48:28] assigns this task to me, I will look

[4:48:31] into it. Gary came back the next day and

[4:48:35] said, "Doug, I want you to review

[4:48:38] Joe's position that he is not being

[4:48:41] adequately compensated because in fact

[4:48:45] the board had made it the commission had

[4:48:48] made its decision in 2024 that his pay

[4:48:52] should be equalized

[4:48:54] and the board of commissioners had not

[4:48:56] rejected that.

[4:48:59] I performed as I was tasked to do an

[4:49:02] inquiry into that question. It's a messy

[4:49:05] legal issue because while Coleman was

[4:49:09] absolutely correct that a decision had

[4:49:13] to be made by the compensation

[4:49:16] commission within 45 days. It doesn't

[4:49:21] describe how that decision has to be

[4:49:25] memorialized.

[4:49:26] Right? So we had a vote

[4:49:30] unanimous by the commission or to

[4:49:34] equalize

[4:49:35] those salaries. That vote was taken

[4:49:39] outside the 45day window. Joe was saying

[4:49:44] they assured me during the 45 uh day

[4:49:48] window that they had made that decision.

[4:49:52] I pulled the compensation commissioners.

[4:49:56] A majority said indeed we had made that

[4:50:00] decision within the 45 days and we

[4:50:04] documented it with our vote because we

[4:50:06] realized we hadn't actually taken a vote

[4:50:08] on that outside that window.

[4:50:13] A mess without question. A $200,000

[4:50:19] litigation if you wanted to take that

[4:50:21] one to court. We're getting good in

[4:50:23] Ottawa County at taking unusual

[4:50:25] questions to our court system, but the

[4:50:28] mess only got more complicated

[4:50:31] because the board of commissioners

[4:50:34] did receive

[4:50:36] the report of the compensation

[4:50:39] commission, including the compensation

[4:50:43] increase for uh the commissioners,

[4:50:47] including the equalization of the

[4:50:49] elected officials rates.

[4:50:52] They then commissioned

[4:50:54] corporation council at the time Coleman

[4:50:56] to look into that. Two things came back

[4:51:00] from legal counsel.

[4:51:02] One, the vote on the compensation

[4:51:05] commission did not reflect a majority of

[4:51:10] the compensation commissioners

[4:51:13] voting in favor of it and therefore it

[4:51:16] was not an appropriate decision.

[4:51:20] Secondly, they looked at the vote

[4:51:22] unanimously and enough commissioners on

[4:51:26] the compensation commission agreeing

[4:51:28] with the equalization issue, but the

[4:51:31] vote occurred outside the 45day window.

[4:51:35] The board decided therefore not to

[4:51:39] authorize the increase

[4:51:43] in your pay or in the elected officials.

[4:51:47] Was that a rejection

[4:51:51] of what the commission had done?

[4:51:54] Arguably, you could also look at it and

[4:51:57] say they erroneously concluded that a

[4:52:00] decision hadn't been made and that's the

[4:52:02] only reason they didn't authorize the

[4:52:05] initial compensation. And my research

[4:52:08] indicated on question one. Indeed, the

[4:52:12] commission had properly made a decision

[4:52:15] and only documented it outside. So now

[4:52:19] we have a $400,000 piece of litigation

[4:52:22] trying to figure out whatever the board

[4:52:24] did, was it a rejection or not.

[4:52:27] Meanwhile, Joe is not getting paid what

[4:52:31] he believes in good faith he's being

[4:52:33] paid.

[4:52:35] Now, the suggested resolution

[4:52:39] that I got Joe and Cheryl to agree with

[4:52:44] is let's take a resolution to the board.

[4:52:49] You're going to wave your first year

[4:52:52] increase because we're going to make it

[4:52:54] effective January 1. that indeed the

[4:52:58] board did make a proper decision within

[4:53:01] the 45day window and you're going to get

[4:53:05] paid starting January 1st of 2025. Is

[4:53:10] that acceptable to you, Mr. Bush and Ms.

[4:53:14] Clark? In good faith, they said we could

[4:53:17] live with that.

[4:53:19] So, we presented it. The board tabled

[4:53:22] it. I've got a very angry Joe Bush and a

[4:53:25] very angry Cheryl Clark right now.

[4:53:31] This was the resolution.

[4:53:33] They haven't adopted it now. And we are

[4:53:37] facing in the insurance authority a

[4:53:40] potential $400,000

[4:53:43] piece of litigation trying to figure out

[4:53:46] what indeed the compensation commission

[4:53:48] did and what the board did or did not

[4:53:51] do.

[4:53:53] So, the insurance authority had these

[4:53:57] tasks that it needed done.

[4:54:00] The insurance authority wick group is

[4:54:03] well within its $50,000

[4:54:06] uh authority limit to offer them an

[4:54:09] accordance satisfaction.

[4:54:12] these additional tasks for the one-year

[4:54:15] period

[4:54:17] or not the county,

[4:54:20] the insurance authority. It won't

[4:54:24] increase your county salary at all or

[4:54:26] the benefits that go along with it. It

[4:54:29] won't assure that in the compensation

[4:54:31] commission of 2026, you're starting

[4:54:35] equal to the county clerk. Is that a

[4:54:38] compromise you're willing to accept to

[4:54:41] let this matter go away? They agreed.

[4:54:45] And so the work group sign uh prepared

[4:54:48] and had them executed and we approved

[4:54:52] what is called a memorandum. It could be called a settlement agreement.

[4:54:56] And according satisfaction, it resolved

[4:54:59] the issue in a compromised fashion.

[4:55:04] And Joe, am I wrong in any of what I'm

[4:55:08] representing to the board?

[4:55:11] >> So, it's not just your decision that was

[4:55:14] compromised. Their rights were

[4:55:17] compromised in this fashion

[4:55:22] » and you rest your case. The the one

[4:55:26] >> an explanation of what we did to fix a

[4:55:29] problem and enable this issue to go

[4:55:32] forward. Yeah. And just one

[4:55:34] clarification that I wanted to get and I

[4:55:36] said Doug is wiggling over there so he'd

[4:55:38] like to say something. Yeah. Yeah. Okay.

[4:55:40] All right. Uh I just want to make sure

[4:55:42] >> one of the things you said during the

[4:55:43] compensation commission is that the

[4:55:45] board had voted on this in May or

[4:55:47] whatever it was. I don't remember the

[4:55:48] exact words. Just want to verify that

[4:55:50] the board did not vote on this. Is that

[4:55:52] correct? It this was an act of the

[4:55:54] insurance authorities.

[4:55:55] >> I must have misspoke. I don't know which

[4:55:57] board I was talking about. it wouldn't

[4:55:58] have been the county commissioners

[4:56:00] because you never made a decision,

[4:56:02] >> okay,

[4:56:03] >> on this.

[4:56:04] >> Um, and so if I misspoke, I apologize

[4:56:08] for misspeaking. Again, we were trying

[4:56:11] to focus their attention on the future

[4:56:14] and leave the past alone. Got it. I also

[4:56:17] didn't want to go into a complete

[4:56:18] recitation that I just gave trying to

[4:56:21] explain how we are trying to eliminate

[4:56:24] the chaos that had ensued from the last

[4:56:28] compensation commission's decision.

[4:56:30] >> Okay, thank you Doug. Um Doug Zilstra

[4:56:33] and then Sylvia's got a hand. I'm not

[4:56:34] wiggling whatsoever, but uh you know,

[4:56:37] Commissioner Rohood and Commissioner

[4:56:38] Mima both had I think the central

[4:56:42] question like we understand the the

[4:56:45] email you sent us the recitation

[4:56:48] we get that I think the central question

[4:56:50] is under what authority was that action

[4:56:53] taken? Am I mischaracterizing?

[4:56:55] >> No, that's that's a really good

[4:56:58] question.

[4:56:58] >> I think that's our central question. The

[4:57:00] authority was the the compensation

[4:57:03] is coming from not Ottawa County but the

[4:57:07] insurance authority which is a separate

[4:57:09] legal entity and in the process they

[4:57:12] have resolved their claim against Ottawa

[4:57:14] County which is the essential task of

[4:57:18] the workg group is to resolve potential

[4:57:22] litigation. We also have this investment

[4:57:26] uh in that 231 property that the

[4:57:30] insurance authority needs to re make a

[4:57:32] resolution on and whether we keep it in

[4:57:35] light of MDOT's decision.

[4:57:36] >> Doug, but you didn't answer

[4:57:38] commissioners's question.

[4:57:40] >> The authority is the insurance

[4:57:42] >> who who gave you the authority to give

[4:57:44] the insurance authority that decision.

[4:57:47] >> The board of commissioners when they

[4:57:49] created the insurance authority

[4:57:51] absolutely did. No,

[4:57:53] >> we did not give you permission to set

[4:57:55] >> to come up with more dollars if if you

[4:57:58] felt like, oh, somehow we think that the

[4:58:01] officer's compensation got this wrong.

[4:58:04] >> We didn't give you permission to take

[4:58:06] the insurance authority um and to use it

[4:58:09] in this manner. In the meeting at the

[4:58:12] officer's compensation commission, you

[4:58:13] in fact said to Lynn, you can do more harm in trying to

[4:58:19] fix something if you go backwards. Isn't

[4:58:22] that in essence what you're doing

[4:58:23] yourself?

[4:58:24] >> No, we were settling a controversy and

[4:58:29] that is for 40 years. That's what the

[4:58:32] insurance authority has done. 40 years.

[4:58:34] That's its task is settling these

[4:58:38] disputes in one manner or another. That

[4:58:42] is absolutely within the purview of the

[4:58:46] insurance authority and that work group.

[4:58:48] Is there

[4:58:50] coming to you right now and asking to be

[4:58:52] because they felt like we didn't make

[4:58:54] our 60%

[4:58:56] increase at the officers compensation

[4:58:57] commission. Do you have another

[4:58:58] commissioner that has asked you for

[4:59:00] that?

[4:59:01] >> Absolutely not.

[4:59:04] >> Um

[4:59:04] >> but I don't have any commissioners

[4:59:07] coming and saying the compensation

[4:59:09] commission raised my salary and the

[4:59:13] fiscal is not honoring that. Why is that

[4:59:16] not happening? That was the situation we

[4:59:19] had with Mr. Bush.

[4:59:21] >> Um, while you were conversing there, and

[4:59:24] I go over to Sylvia in just a moment

[4:59:25] here, Ron Bolie was squinting and I'm

[4:59:28] maybe that's a wiggle from Doug and I'm

[4:59:30] not supposed to interpret it as such,

[4:59:31] but did you want to interject or you

[4:59:34] want to hold your thoughts?

[4:59:36] >> Well, I mean, basically, I've learned

[4:59:37] all of this today, but uh but I what I'm understanding is that you had a

[4:59:43] discrepancy on pay. The insurance

[4:59:46] authority had a couple of potential

[4:59:48] litigation issues for which you would or

[4:59:51] the insurance authority ordinarily would

[4:59:53] hire consultants to work on and prepare

[4:59:57] a defense or or a resolution.

[5:00:01] >> It's absolutely correct.

[5:00:02] >> So instead of going out and hiring

[5:00:05] outside consultants, you hire inside

[5:00:08] consultants which satisfied them and pre

[5:00:11] and took care of a pay discrepancy.

[5:00:14] Absolutely. And my role here was as the

[5:00:18] insurance authorities council.

[5:00:20] >> Yeah.

[5:00:20] >> Trying to resolve a festering potential

[5:00:25] litigation

[5:00:26] that the insurance authority would have

[5:00:28] to spend $400,000 to resolve.

[5:00:30] >> And there's no question the insurance

[5:00:32] authority would have the authority to go

[5:00:34] out and hire a consultant to handle a

[5:00:37] problem issue.

[5:00:38] >> Absolutely.

[5:00:39] >> You've been doing that.

[5:00:41] We have been doing that and we would

[5:00:43] have to do that on the 231 property if

[5:00:46] we didn't engage Mr. Bush to um work on

[5:00:52] that particular project.

[5:00:54] >> So the authority is just in the

[5:00:55] authority of the continued uh operation

[5:00:58] of the insurance authority. Too many

[5:01:00] authorities and Doug's here. Um but you

[5:01:03] operate you the insurance authority did

[5:01:05] what it has historically done and spent

[5:01:09] money that it had authority to spend to

[5:01:12] work on an issue.

[5:01:14] >> They're a uh 1099

[5:01:18] consultant

[5:01:19] in both instances not to the county

[5:01:23] >> because they're not employees of the

[5:01:24] insurance authority either.

[5:01:26] >> Correct. This is a 1099 for both of them

[5:01:30] from the insurance authority and it is a

[5:01:34] report that they will owe to the

[5:01:36] insurance authority not to the county.

[5:01:39] >> All right. Thank you. Thank you Ron and

[5:01:41] uh Sylvia and then Doug.

[5:01:43] >> Yeah. So I think perhaps I should sue

[5:01:46] and perhaps the officers compensation

[5:01:49] commission can remember one more vote to

[5:01:51] pay me.

[5:01:53] I'm just thinking, you know, maybe some

[5:01:55] of us should be doing that. Um,

[5:01:58] >> along those lines, I would like a copy

[5:02:00] of the affidavits that asserted

[5:02:04] uh and and supposedly confirmed um what

[5:02:08] people

[5:02:10] supposedly remembered. We I would like a

[5:02:12] copy of those affidavits that were

[5:02:14] obtained. I think the board um needs to

[5:02:16] receive a copy of those. um if a matter

[5:02:20] like this, you know, is $400,000 in

[5:02:23] litigation, I think maybe we need to

[5:02:25] take another look at our legal counsel.

[5:02:28] And then also, if um if angry officials

[5:02:32] mean we don't need to follow the law

[5:02:34] anymore, again, you know, we're in a

[5:02:37] world of hurt. So, um I think we need to

[5:02:41] take a look at how we're operating and

[5:02:43] make sure we're following statute.

[5:02:45] >> Okay. Thank you, Commissioner.

[5:02:46] Sales,

[5:02:48] >> I guess, Mr. Vanessa, I

[5:02:51] the question is simply

[5:02:55] I I think it's pretty clear that the com

[5:02:58] compensation commission sets

[5:02:59] compensation for county officials. Is

[5:03:02] that true

[5:03:04] >> for Ottawa County?

[5:03:06] >> Right.

[5:03:06] >> Or just for Ottawa County,

[5:03:08] >> right? and

[5:03:12] you came back to us in December of

[5:03:15] 2025 and asked us to sign off on a

[5:03:19] resolution. This board unanimously as

[5:03:22] finance commission this committee

[5:03:25] refused to do so.

[5:03:27] At some point between the end of the

[5:03:30] finance committee and the beginning of

[5:03:34] the insurance authority, a decision was

[5:03:36] made to compensate those individuals. Is

[5:03:40] that correct or not correct?

[5:03:42] >> No. A decision was to engage

[5:03:45] those individuals in two tasks that the

[5:03:49] insurance authority

[5:03:50] >> as a as a means of compensating them.

[5:03:52] Those were your words. as a means of uh

[5:03:58] compromising

[5:03:59] their claim.

[5:04:01] >> They have a claim yet.

[5:04:02] >> They had a claim. Absolutely.

[5:04:04] >> Did they sue us? Did Did Did Mr. Bush

[5:04:07] sue us?

[5:04:07] >> Oh, he hadn't sued it yet, but we get

[5:04:10] claims all the time. Commissioner

[5:04:12] Zystra, we get demands all the time.

[5:04:15] >> Okay.

[5:04:17] I I guess the just walk us through I

[5:04:20] guess Commissioner M and Commissioner

[5:04:23] kind of said the same thing.

[5:04:25] At what point was a decision made to

[5:04:29] in my mind abregate what the commission

[5:04:33] said like

[5:04:36] this is the salary but the insurance

[5:04:38] authority made the decision to augment

[5:04:40] their salary which is what I heard in

[5:04:43] the compensation commission heard you

[5:04:46] say

[5:04:48] um

[5:04:50] >> no their salary is set by the county

[5:04:54] Right. Not include the 13,000. It did

[5:04:56] not include the 2500.

[5:04:59] >> And it still doesn't.

[5:05:02] >> Your words in the compensation

[5:05:03] commission were theseUS are a means of

[5:05:06] compensating these individuals. When the

[5:05:09] compensation commission

[5:05:11] >> did not make that judgment,

[5:05:12] >> my words to the compensation commission

[5:05:16] were you don't have to go back and try

[5:05:19] to fix that issue

[5:05:20] >> because you've already done it. because

[5:05:22] they are satisfied

[5:05:25] with the resolution of that issue. I

[5:05:28] >> I think we all understand the recitation

[5:05:30] of facts. I think what we're still at

[5:05:32] least at least I am and I think some

[5:05:34] other commissioners are at what point

[5:05:35] was the decision made to compensate

[5:05:38] these individuals in this manner in a

[5:05:41] way that the board via the finance

[5:05:43] committee rejected.

[5:05:46] I I guess specifically did the insurance

[5:05:48] authority take a vote on that at any

[5:05:51] time?

[5:05:51] >> The work group did. Yes.

[5:05:53] >> Oh, the work group did.

[5:05:54] >> Yes. On January 12th.

[5:05:56] >> Absolutely.

[5:05:57] >> I understand. I I I know. I get it.

[5:06:02] >> I it they weren't

[5:06:04] >> and and it I just it's I think it's

[5:06:07] confusing compensation with a stipen,

[5:06:09] >> right? It's it was a one-time stipen to

[5:06:11] pacify an issue. That's right.

[5:06:13] >> And it was it was a benefit to the

[5:06:16] insurance authority to have this work

[5:06:18] done. It it it potentially augment or

[5:06:22] pacified the the litigation that was

[5:06:25] likely and it addressed the board's

[5:06:28] what I thought to be the board's

[5:06:30] directive to find another solution to

[5:06:31] fix this. I I I think and I don't want

[5:06:34] to go out of turn here, but I think the

[5:06:37] idea was in finance committee in 2025 in

[5:06:40] December that we asked you to try to

[5:06:43] find a solution that we could sign off

[5:06:45] on. We were not given that ability to

[5:06:47] sign off on the workg group took that

[5:06:50] decision away from us. Right? We didn't

[5:06:53] say administrator waterman find a

[5:06:56] solution that the work group can solve.

[5:06:58] We said find a solution that we all as a

[5:07:01] board can approve. Those are very very

[5:07:03] different things.

[5:07:04] >> One of the quotes I cited commissioner

[5:07:06] with all due respect is is there another

[5:07:08] mech mechanism where we can affect these

[5:07:10] changes that's outside of this. That was

[5:07:12] your

[5:07:13] >> that's outside of this resolution right

[5:07:14] because we all didn't like the

[5:07:15] resolution. My my if you'll keep reading

[5:07:19] my solution was to dissolve the

[5:07:21] compensation commission and then let us

[5:07:23] make that decision. We didn't have that

[5:07:26] work group that was promised to us,

[5:07:27] right? And that's fine, but and they and

[5:07:31] you know,

[5:07:33] we had this discussion for a year and a

[5:07:35] half.

[5:07:37] If we had dissolved the compensation

[5:07:39] commission, we could have solved the

[5:07:41] issue. I don't want to go back in time,

[5:07:42] but that's how I viewed the issue.

[5:07:46] I and the quotes that you put in the

[5:07:48] email all come back to present us

[5:07:52] something that we can all agree on going

[5:07:55] forward.

[5:07:56] >> The only problem with that, Doug, sorry.

[5:07:58] The only problem with that is we never

[5:08:00] made a motion to that effect. We never

[5:08:01] gave a directive. No, I'm just saying

[5:08:03] there are quotes in the email that say

[5:08:05] that and and administrator Wman saying I

[5:08:07] have these quotes and I totally get that

[5:08:08] there are quotes but all the quotes come

[5:08:11] back to we would like a solution that we

[5:08:15] as a board can sign off on.

[5:08:17] >> I appreciate that that's your

[5:08:18] interpretation. However, the motion was

[5:08:20] to table the recommended solution and to

[5:08:23] direct the uh Patrick to come up with

[5:08:26] something else. It didn't say come up

[5:08:27] with something else and bring it back to

[5:08:28] the board. I appreciate that. That was

[5:08:29] the intent of a number of board members,

[5:08:31] but that was not specifically, this is

[5:08:33] just a point of order, that was not

[5:08:34] specifically stated in the

[5:08:36] >> exact motion to come up with something

[5:08:38] else. Is that what the motion?

[5:08:39] >> I actually I think it was motion was

[5:08:40] just a table,

[5:08:41] >> right? So

[5:08:42] >> even even less even more vague.

[5:08:44] >> Yeah. So he actually wasn't directed by

[5:08:47] motion to come up with something else.

[5:08:50] That was conversation.

[5:08:51] >> It was I it should have

[5:08:53] >> I appreciate that, but the motion was

[5:08:55] not specifically to bring it back to the

[5:08:57] board. That's all I'm saying.

[5:08:58] >> Josh, if I could jump in here.

[5:09:01] >> Um,

[5:09:03] >> irrespective of of

[5:09:06] whatever Patrick might have been

[5:09:08] directed with, if the insurance

[5:09:09] authority is sitting there looking at

[5:09:11] we've got uh liability exposure here on

[5:09:14] a a compensation claim, they're not

[5:09:18] determining what that compensation

[5:09:20] should be. They're just as an insurance

[5:09:22] authority trying to determine at what

[5:09:25] price can we end the threat of

[5:09:29] litigation on the matter.

[5:09:32] Yeah. So they weren't hired as county

[5:09:34] employees.

[5:09:37] You just found the the price point that

[5:09:39] there there was no longer a threat of

[5:09:41] litigation over this.

[5:09:44] >> Absolutely correct.

[5:09:46] We could probably discuss this all

[5:09:49] afternoon long.

[5:09:50] >> Um, and I understand that there are at

[5:09:53] least three commissioners, maybe more,

[5:09:54] who are not happy with the way this

[5:09:55] went. A few that haven't spoken. Maybe

[5:09:58] they are, they aren't. I don't know. As

[5:10:00] a discussion item, I don't know what

[5:10:02] further we need to do as a board. Um,

[5:10:05] I'd be happy to offer some comments. I I just would rephrase what I sent in the

[5:10:10] email uh to to the count to the

[5:10:13] commissioners when this topic came up.

[5:10:15] Um, but that's already in the email and

[5:10:16] that's already public. So, I I don't

[5:10:19] know that I can add anything more to

[5:10:20] this. Um,

[5:10:23] >> yeah, go ahead, Jacob. Thank you. I've

[5:10:25] not spoken yet.

[5:10:26] >> I am on the insurance authority. I'm not

[5:10:29] in the work group. Uh, as part of the

[5:10:32] insurance authorities's uh

[5:10:34] responsibility, we do look at

[5:10:36] liabilities regularly.

[5:10:39] This mess

[5:10:41] was a true mess from the prior board,

[5:10:44] from the prior compensation committee

[5:10:46] that had to be addressed. We put this

[5:10:49] back to our attorneys and said, "Are

[5:10:51] these claims valid? Do we have real

[5:10:54] liability and exposure here?" They

[5:10:56] answered, "Yes, this is this is a this

[5:10:58] is a true mess.

[5:11:00] Mr. Bush and Miss Clark are not making

[5:11:03] this up. This is a mess, right? We need

[5:11:05] to figure this out. The board discussed

[5:11:08] this back in December that yeah, we want

[5:11:11] to do this the right way. We need to

[5:11:13] figure out a way to do this the right

[5:11:14] way.

[5:11:16] Once Mr. Waterman uh took his seat, he

[5:11:20] was tasked with trying to figure out a

[5:11:22] way to make this work.

[5:11:25] When I asked questions as to how this

[5:11:27] all took place over the last 48 hours,

[5:11:29] there's a there's a lot of information

[5:11:31] here to digest, but I was very satisfied

[5:11:34] that it was done in a very fair and

[5:11:36] legal way because it put the interests

[5:11:40] of Ottawa County first. This could have

[5:11:43] been a very expensive litigation to go

[5:11:44] through. We avoided that. This was a

[5:11:47] solution that two wonderful public

[5:11:50] servants were willing to go along with.

[5:11:53] appreciate that too. We need to not

[5:11:55] repeat the the messes of the past. Do

[5:11:59] things the right way. I'm very grateful

[5:12:00] that the new compensation committee is

[5:12:02] now meeting with legal counsel with uh

[5:12:05] experienced seasoned leadership is uh is

[5:12:08] public. They're using the cameras and

[5:12:10] audio. Uh all things that the last

[5:12:13] compensation committee didn't do. They

[5:12:15] didn't even take minutes. It was a true

[5:12:18] mess that needed to be cleaned up. So,

[5:12:20] I'm grateful that we found a solution

[5:12:22] that works, very inexpensive solution.

[5:12:26] The the the false flag here to try to

[5:12:29] equival

[5:12:31] make the uh the accusation that certain

[5:12:34] people are being paid, you know, without

[5:12:36] the the whole board knowing is reckless.

[5:12:40] >> No, it's not.

[5:12:41] >> It's reckless. You should not be saying

[5:12:42] that. You are making accusations about

[5:12:45] things you know nothing of. You haven't

[5:12:47] asked your questions. You know, you're you're

[5:12:51] what happened under Commissioner Moss'

[5:12:53] leadership with Eper and Wetmore. I keep

[5:12:55] hearing it's it's like that this is

[5:12:58] these this this is a false flag if I've

[5:13:02] ever seen one. I appreciate that you

[5:13:04] handled it correctly, that you came up

[5:13:06] with a solution that we could move

[5:13:08] forward with and this is in the best

[5:13:10] interest of Ottawa County. So, I found

[5:13:13] out about this just like everybody else

[5:13:15] did, asked questions and got

[5:13:18] satisfactory answers. So, I understand

[5:13:19] that there's no there's no backroom

[5:13:22] deals going on there. This kind of

[5:13:25] language needs to stop because this

[5:13:28] isn't helpful. So, that's where I stand

[5:13:31] on this. I think that we can move

[5:13:33] forward from this and I think that we

[5:13:35] have a plan with the new compensation

[5:13:37] committee to make sure that things are

[5:13:39] back on track.

[5:13:41] >> All right. Thank you. Uh, Commissioner,

[5:13:42] anyone else care to comment? Uh,

[5:13:45] Commissioner Winsel,

[5:13:46] >> you just made the point that others knew

[5:13:48] nothing of.

[5:13:50] >> No, that that is the role of the

[5:13:52] insurance authority to deal with this.

[5:13:55] We've we've dealt with so many lawsuits

[5:13:57] from Ottawa Impact's decisions.

[5:13:59] >> How much how many millions of dollars

[5:14:01] are sitting in the insurance authority

[5:14:03] at the moment?

[5:14:03] >> That is not what we're discussing,

[5:14:05] Allison. We're discussing how to fix a

[5:14:08] problem that was created by leadership

[5:14:10] you put in place. Don,

[5:14:13] >> well, I think it's important to keep in

[5:14:15] mind understanding that

[5:14:18] >> uh the insurance authority didn't change

[5:14:20] any compensation commission decision.

[5:14:23] They didn't change compensation.

[5:14:27] » They basically gave additional

[5:14:28] assignments to two elected officials.

[5:14:32] The pay those elected officials get for

[5:14:35] their statutory duties did not change.

[5:14:38] And they're taking a risk. They they got

[5:14:40] extra pay for extra duties. They did.

[5:14:43] >> It was real work meetings.

[5:14:45] >> Extra duties to get what they had been

[5:14:48] owed all along and they still don't have

[5:14:51] that in their salary. Now their salary

[5:14:53] from the county is still below and

[5:14:56] they're taking the risk that this will

[5:14:57] be worked out I assume. Do you haveus to

[5:15:00] show their work?

[5:15:03] >> I don't have anything. I'm just

[5:15:04] listening here like all of you like like

[5:15:06] you I think. Well, no, no, no. Because

[5:15:08] all you have at least you all have read

[5:15:11] stuff before me. I walked into this

[5:15:13] today. So, no, I don't have anything. Um

[5:15:16] but but the idea But the idea that

[5:15:19] county board decisions were changed, no,

[5:15:22] or compensation commission decisions

[5:15:24] were changed, that's not true. The

[5:15:27] insurance authority acted on its own

[5:15:30] with its own dollars with its own

[5:15:32] assignments and these officials had to

[5:15:35] do things beyond their statutory

[5:15:36] authorities to get these dollars from

[5:15:39] the insurance authority.

[5:15:41] >> Okay. Thank you. Comfortable with that.

[5:15:42] So I I am requesting um copies of the

[5:15:47] affidavits from the members of the

[5:15:49] officers compensation commission that are believed to have justified

[5:15:55] these decisions. And so when when this

[5:15:58] was brought to us before, we didn't

[5:16:00] believe the evidence was there. And so

[5:16:03] uh my understanding was was that you

[5:16:06] know more a was that testimony was

[5:16:08] requested of those officer compensation

[5:16:11] commission members and then we as a

[5:16:14] board didn't hear anything more after

[5:16:17] those those things were requested. So, I

[5:16:20] would like a copy of those records

[5:16:22] because it appears to me that based on

[5:16:24] whatever you received, you came to a

[5:16:27] conclusion, I'm not saying you, but you

[5:16:29] came to a conclusion that um that money

[5:16:33] was owed to these two elected officials.

[5:16:36] And so, that's information that we did

[5:16:38] not have and that we were not provided

[5:16:40] at that board meeting because because

[5:16:43] that piece was missing for us. We were

[5:16:45] not sure that that all the board members

[5:16:49] truly did um vote on that and have that

[5:16:52] understanding at that at that time and

[5:16:54] that date. So, if you received evidence

[5:16:57] that proves that, we would like to have

[5:16:59] that.

[5:16:59] >> I I'll have to look back, but I'm pretty

[5:17:01] sure that that was included in the

[5:17:03] resolution already.

[5:17:04] >> No, it was included from one board

[5:17:07] member, Larry Jackson, and we did not

[5:17:09] have affidavit from all board members.

[5:17:12] And so whatever information was

[5:17:14] collected from all board members, this

[5:17:17] board I believe needs to see.

[5:17:19] >> I'll just jump in here. I I think valid

[5:17:22] question. Sure, Silia. I I don't think

[5:17:24] it's valid given the solution has

[5:17:25] already taken place.

[5:17:27] >> Well, but the solution might not have

[5:17:29] been needed if it wasn't justified. So,

[5:17:31] the justification is needed.

[5:17:34] >> I appreciate that, but we chose not to

[5:17:36] take action. I'm gonna read my draft

[5:17:38] response to the board from earlier and

[5:17:41] then let's wrap this up. Um,

[5:17:44] >> Josh, could I do one really quick

[5:17:45] comment before you do that?

[5:17:47] >> I haven't I haven't spoken yet.

[5:17:49] >> Keep it super short.

[5:17:50] >> I'm just getting tired and it's

[5:17:51] >> I know I have a meeting I have to go to,

[5:17:53] too.

[5:17:55] >> Um, I I'll just say I do have a much

[5:17:56] better understanding of everything

[5:17:57] that's happened now. Um, and as

[5:18:00] Commissioner Bono was saying, I I think

[5:18:02] I am there's one element that I'm

[5:18:05] particularly just I'd like to raise and

[5:18:08] that's that members of the insurance

[5:18:09] authority were not aware of what the

[5:18:11] work group did. So, as we've that

[5:18:16] probably should have that should have

[5:18:17] had a little tighter

[5:18:20] connection.

[5:18:21] >> That's not I I did report that to to the

[5:18:23] insurance authority at the next meeting

[5:18:25] following that. I give a report at every

[5:18:26] meeting. did report that

[5:18:29] >> I was out of the country for that

[5:18:30] meeting. So that's correct.

[5:18:32] >> Thank you. Thank you for providing the

[5:18:34] additional information. And I have other

[5:18:35] thoughts, but

[5:18:36] >> Okay.

[5:18:37] >> And and by the way, we have commissioner

[5:18:38] comments later, which is where I thought

[5:18:40] a lot of this belonged for me

[5:18:42] personally. All right. Um here you go.

[5:18:44] Having watched the compensation

[5:18:46] committee meeting and reviewed the

[5:18:48] December finance committee meeting

[5:18:49] discussion about compensation for

[5:18:51] countywide officials, I can completely

[5:18:54] understand the confusion and

[5:18:55] frustration.

[5:18:57] At the December 9 finance committee

[5:18:59] meeting, commissioners told staff that

[5:19:01] they were not comfortable with the

[5:19:02] proposed solution to increasing

[5:19:04] compensation for Miss Clark and Mr.

[5:19:05] Bush. A motion to address the issue was

[5:19:08] tabled and staff were tasked with coming

[5:19:10] up with another solution.

[5:19:13] different interpretations on whether

[5:19:14] that was to come back to the board or

[5:19:15] not. I agree.

[5:19:19] The next time the full board met was a

[5:19:21] week later, December 18. The issue was

[5:19:24] not addressed or discussed. It was not

[5:19:26] put back on the table. Matter of fact,

[5:19:28] it shouldn't have been because it wasn't

[5:19:29] the finance committee meeting. The next

[5:19:31] time the finance committee meeting met

[5:19:33] was on January 20th. The issue was not

[5:19:36] discussed. No commissioners brought it

[5:19:37] back onto the table for further

[5:19:39] discussion.

[5:19:41] In the meantime, staff approached Miss

[5:19:43] Clark and Mr. Bush from the through the

[5:19:46] vantage point of the insurance authority

[5:19:48] with an opportunity to take on

[5:19:49] additional work on behalf of the

[5:19:51] insurance authority. Both Miss Clark and

[5:19:54] Mr. Bush agreed to do additional work

[5:19:58] and were assigned projects

[5:20:02] as stated by uh Mr. uh Waterman over

[5:20:05] there. Mr. Bush is working on an

[5:20:07] evaluation of insurance authority owned

[5:20:09] property associated with the 231 bypass.

[5:20:11] Miss Clark is working on numerous

[5:20:13] lawsuit reviews.

[5:20:17] Between December 9

[5:20:20] and this week's compensation committee

[5:20:22] meeting, which was last week at the time

[5:20:24] I wrote this, while neither the finance

[5:20:26] committee nor the board of commissioners

[5:20:28] asked for further updates from staff

[5:20:30] regarding the December 9 discussion,

[5:20:32] neither did staff nor board leadership.

[5:20:34] I'll put myself in that offer that a

[5:20:36] solution had been found and undertaken

[5:20:38] with the insurance authority.

[5:20:40] The reason that this slipped my mind at

[5:20:42] the insurance authority meeting is that

[5:20:45] was the first meeting in January

[5:20:47] and while commissioner or excuse me

[5:20:49] administrator Waterman did bring this up

[5:20:51] and mentioned that the work group had

[5:20:53] resolved the issue the primary

[5:20:56] discussion at that meeting was the

[5:20:58] lawsuit against Mr. Moss by Mr. Klein.

[5:21:02] At that lawsuit, we were informed that

[5:21:05] would we should we not settle this

[5:21:06] lawsuit, we would be looking at millions

[5:21:09] of dollars in damages.

[5:21:12] So, you'll have to forgive me if a 10

[5:21:14] to$15,000 issue slipped my mind at that

[5:21:18] time. However, I will say that we should

[5:21:21] have myself and Patrick should have

[5:21:23] reported back to the full board um at

[5:21:25] the next earliest meeting or to the

[5:21:27] finance committee as this originated in

[5:21:28] the finance committee. And for that lack

[5:21:30] of communication, I do apologize. And we

[5:21:33] will work to do a better job, won't we,

[5:21:34] Patrick?

[5:21:35] >> Yep.

[5:21:35] >> All right. Thank you. Let's move on now

[5:21:38] to the next item on the agenda, which I

[5:21:40] think

[5:21:42] >> I don't know where it went.

[5:21:45] >> Oh, report from the county

[5:21:46] administrator. Clear the slate, take a

[5:21:49] deep breath, and Patrick, take it away.

[5:21:52] >> You um I don't want to steal any of the

[5:21:54] commissioners thunder, but I did. Brian

[5:21:56] and I enjoyed the time we were able to

[5:21:58] spend with the seven commissioners who

[5:21:59] attended this week's MAC legislative

[5:22:01] conference in Lancing. Uh he and I came

[5:22:04] back with a lot of good notes and ideas

[5:22:06] on things we can look at doing here in

[5:22:07] Ottawa. The legal services director

[5:22:10] position is currently posted and while

[5:22:12] there have been several qualified

[5:22:13] applicants that have applied, we did

[5:22:15] decide to extend the application

[5:22:17] deadline to May 15th to allow additional

[5:22:19] time for an eer even deeper pool of more

[5:22:22] qualified applicants. So we do hope to

[5:22:25] begin the interview process for that

[5:22:27] towards the end of May. Work continues

[5:22:30] on the CH authority transition efforts

[5:22:33] which seem to pop up new thoughts and

[5:22:35] questions daily. Uh I have asked Deputy

[5:22:38] Administrator Deette to prepare an

[5:22:39] update on the progress for the board at

[5:22:41] the next month's meeting.

[5:22:43] Coincidentally, um I ran into the deputy

[5:22:46] from Mskegeegan and one of his

[5:22:47] commissioners um at the MAC conference

[5:22:50] who are now looking at transitioning

[5:22:51] their CH department to an authority. So

[5:22:54] they want to ask uh questions about that. Uh speaking of which, as was

[5:22:59] noted, May is mental health awareness

[5:23:01] month, which was established in 1949 to

[5:23:04] highlight the importance of mental

[5:23:06] health, educate the public, and

[5:23:07] celebrate recovery from mental illness.

[5:23:09] The observance encourages individuals

[5:23:12] and communities to recognize the vital

[5:23:14] role mental health plays in overall

[5:23:16] well-being and to foster supportive

[5:23:18] environments for those experiencing

[5:23:20] mental health challenges. Staff will be

[5:23:22] working on creative ideas on how to

[5:23:24] answer this challenge and I would invite

[5:23:26] any of the board members uh to do the

[5:23:28] same to submit any ideas on how we can

[5:23:31] raise awareness this month.

[5:23:33] Next week I will be receiving uh

[5:23:36] feedback on the proposed strategic plan

[5:23:38] that I received from leadership team and

[5:23:40] using it to populate the action steps in

[5:23:43] the draft plan. Uh we plan to present

[5:23:46] the draft plan to this board at a May

[5:23:48] work session. I think we're looking

[5:23:49] somewhere chair offsite. Is that

[5:23:52] correct?

[5:23:52] >> For the May

[5:23:53] >> uh in towards the end of May. So um

[5:23:55] we're excited to uh circle back on that

[5:23:58] conversation on the strategic priorities

[5:24:00] of this board. And lastly, based on

[5:24:02] today's vote, a newly created document

[5:24:05] from our communications department

[5:24:07] called your millillage investment will

[5:24:09] be published and made available for

[5:24:10] public distribution. The document

[5:24:13] provides educational talking points that

[5:24:15] you as board members can discuss with

[5:24:17] your constituents. And we'll also be

[5:24:19] launching on our website at my Ottawa a

[5:24:22] millillage calculator so property owners

[5:24:24] can uh see personally what that impact

[5:24:28] will be uh on their property taxes and

[5:24:31] that's based on the taxable value. So

[5:24:33] it's a true accurate uh calculation of

[5:24:36] the impact. That's all I have.

[5:24:38] >> Thank you sir. Just a round table round

[5:24:41] robin if anybody would like to comment.

[5:24:44] >> You are welcome to do so.

[5:24:46] >> Sure. Uh festival season is back. Tulip

[5:24:49] time is going to be here. Uh I'm excited

[5:24:51] about that. It's going to be a great

[5:24:53] time to celebrate our Dutch heritage. Uh

[5:24:55] let's be safe out there. Let's stay out

[5:24:57] of the traffic and uh yeah, I'm excited.

[5:25:00] There's a lot of economy that takes

[5:25:02] place for a lot of small businesses

[5:25:03] right now. And so be praying for safe

[5:25:05] roads and safe crowds.

[5:25:07] >> Thank you, Commissioner Bonama. Anyone

[5:25:09] else?

[5:25:11] >> I'll go.

[5:25:12] >> Oh, Commissioner Roing. Okay. I also

[5:25:14] enjoyed the Matt conference was good

[5:25:15] spending time with you guys and getting

[5:25:17] to know Brian better. Um and so uh that

[5:25:21] was really good. Also just spending time

[5:25:23] talking with commissioners from other

[5:25:25] counties and finding out you know

[5:25:27] different things that have been

[5:25:28] happening in their counties was very

[5:25:30] helpful as well. Um I'm really pleased

[5:25:34] to see the CH um you know and the parks

[5:25:37] millillage go on forward and um

[5:25:40] hopefully those will be great things for

[5:25:42] our county.

[5:25:43] Thank you, Commissioner. Anyone else?

[5:25:45] Commissioner Barry,

[5:25:46] >> I just want to apologize for being tardy

[5:25:49] today uh with the price of gasoline. I I

[5:25:51] rode my bicycle out here from Park

[5:25:53] Township, but

[5:25:55] somehow my calendar showed 9:30 for the

[5:25:58] meeting and then when Josh called me, I

[5:26:00] about had a stroke and set a world

[5:26:03] all-time world speed record getting out

[5:26:05] here from Park Township. But um uh but I

[5:26:08] just wanted to say I I also wanted to

[5:26:10] apologize to uh employees that were

[5:26:12] recognized today or the sheriff's

[5:26:14] accommodation awards and the customer

[5:26:16] service awards. We got some terrific

[5:26:18] employees here at the the county and I'm

[5:26:20] really glad that uh our board takes time

[5:26:22] to recognize that.

[5:26:25] >> All right. Thank you, Commissioner. Uh

[5:26:26] Commissioner MBA. Um just just again a

[5:26:29] huge thank you to staff um for the hours

[5:26:34] of work for putting into um our our

[5:26:38] deliberating on the millages. Um it

[5:26:40] doesn't go unnoticed. Um I recognize a

[5:26:44] lot of time was spent in that into that

[5:26:46] and I appreciated the dialogue that we

[5:26:48] had as a board as well.

[5:26:51] >> Commissioner, thank you. Anyone else?

[5:26:55] All right. Uh seeing none, I'll just

[5:26:57] close us out by saying thank you

[5:26:58] everyone for uh your attention during

[5:27:00] this very long meeting. We got through a

[5:27:01] lot of stuff, some of it difficult, some

[5:27:02] of it smooth. Um but this is the work we

[5:27:05] are called to do. So um it's a privilege

[5:27:07] and an honor to serve with all of you.

[5:27:09] Thank you to our staff for sticking

[5:27:11] around. And with that, we are adjourned.

[5:27:18] I've had a choice to stick around.

April 30, 2026 Ottawa County Board of Commissioners

Transcript