[0:00] Going to start with the pledge of
>> allegiance
[0:05] to the flag of the United States of
America and to the republic for it
[0:10] stands one nation under God indivisible
with liberty and justice for all.
[0:18] » May I please ask for a roll call?
>> Supervisor Riley
[0:21] » present.
>> Clerk Enzaldi
[0:22] » present. Treasure Epicanin
>> present.
[0:24] » Trusty Erada Thompson
>> present.
[0:25] » Trusty Jeffford
>> present.
[0:26] » Trusty Brabe. Trusty Kurami
>> present. Madam supervisor, you have six
[0:30] members present.
>> Thank you. We do have quorum. I ask for
[0:33] a motion for an approval of our agenda.
>> Madam Chair, I move to approve the
[0:37] agenda for September 9th, 2026.
>> Second.
[0:41] » Okay. Any discussion?
>> Okay. All in favor?
[0:44] » I opposed. All right. The agenda is
approved for this evening. I'm going to
[0:49] go ahead and open it up for public
comment. Any person may come forward at
[0:52] this time to address the board. Anyone
who wishes to speak is requested but not
[0:55] required to state his or her name for
the an address for the record. um you'll
[0:59] have five minutes to speak and then the
board um may choose to respond
[1:03] afterwards. If you do, we're asking that
if you do have something for the public
[1:07] hearing in regards to the data center
that you wait for the um the public
[1:10] hearing that will be next after this.
[1:16] » Good evening.
>> How do I do this? Just stand here and
[1:19] talk. Okay.
>> Good evening.
[1:22] » And um my name is Norma Smith Cost. I'm
I'm a dinosaur, but I'm not dead. Okay.
[1:28] And one of the things I want to please
ask you to remember is that there's a
[1:32] lot of senior citizens that live in the
Harwood subdivision that do not have
[1:35] computers and do not have smartphones.
Now, that ain't me. I got a computer,
[1:41] but they did not know about this meeting
because they're uninformed. So, I would
[1:46] like to please ask you
when you put out this wonderful thing,
[1:52] include something that's real important
like this meeting.
[1:56] please, because we can read, but we and
I can't tell you how sad it is that some
[2:02] of the people in my subdivision don't
know what's going on because they don't
[2:06] live in the digital world. And and I
kind of don't either, but could you
[2:11] please consider the people that, you
know, are like me that still read
[2:16] newspapers? And unfortunately, the Ann
Arbor News has just said, "Oh, we are
[2:20] not putting any printed versions out
anymore starting in December." So I
[2:24] said, "Okay, fine. I'm not buying your
No more because I'm not going to sit in
[2:28] front of a laptop and read the thing.
So, the Ann Arbor News has pushed senior
[2:34] citizens to the curb. Please don't
please don't push the seniors to the
[2:39] curb. We We like newspapers and we'd
like to get this wonderful Pittsfield
[2:45] notification of what's going on in this
wonderful township.
[2:49] Please help us inform the seniors who
are, you know, like a little more dense
[2:54] than me. Okay? and um let us all
participate because we all pay taxes and
[3:01] we care about each other. Ann Arbor News
doesn't care about us, but you must
[3:07] because I do. And I was 43 years
full-time employed at the university,
[3:12] not the University of Michigan, but as I
did work there 15 years. Midnights. Oh
[3:16] my god. But anyway, I'm a medical
technologist. I care about everybody. I
[3:22] want everybody to have the best health
possible, but they got to be informed.
[3:28] You can't be informed if you're not in
the digital world all the time. So,
[3:32] please, please consider helping the
seniors
[3:35] who don't have access to digital because
it's their choice.
[3:39] Please help the senior citizens being
involved in this community. Thank you
[3:44] for your kindness and thank you for
everything you do. And I always vote.
[3:48] Have never missed an election in my
whole life. Thank you for your kindness.
[3:52] » Thank you.
[3:59] » Good evening.
>> Good evening. Uh my name is Althia
[4:02] Battles and I am running for Washington
County Probate Judge and I just wanted
[4:07] to um approach the council
um to introduce myself and to introduce
[4:14] myself to the citizens of Pittsville
Township if that's okay. So my name is
[4:18] Althia Battles. I am currently associate
general counsel and a clinical social
[4:22] worker at the University of Michigan and
I have been uh in this role for I've
[4:27] worked at the University of Michigan for
over 35 years mostly as a clinical
[4:31] social worker then as an attorney and I
am now uh seeking the office of probate
[4:35] judge. I've been doing probate work and
and assisting with probate matters on
[4:40] behalf of Michigan Medicine for some of
our most vulnerable citizens now for
[4:43] over 10 years and I would love to
continue to do that work. The probate
[4:48] court is going to handle guardianships,
conservatorships, deceived estates, uh
[4:52] living wills and trusts, and some mental
health cases. Usually, these cases
[4:56] involve the most vulnerable in our
community, those who um suffer from some
[5:00] kind of either neurokcognitive disorder
or some kind of a um like maybe a head
[5:05] injury or who have developmental
disabilities that require the assistance
[5:09] of a guardian. There are what I'd like
for people to know is that there are a
[5:13] couple of new laws that have just been
passed that were passed in July that are
[5:16] going to really impact this seat and the
people of uh of county should know about
[5:21] those. They will involve uh whether or
not a guardian can sell a person's
[5:26] property and whether or not a guardian
can remove a person from their residence
[5:30] and relocate them. Those are things that
are now going to have to go before the
[5:34] probate judge. So that's going to create
more work and it requires more knowledge
[5:38] and experience to be able to do that and
that is what I have. I have uh 10 years
[5:43] of probate law experience and I have
been recognized as a national expert by
[5:51] um institutions and agencies like the
department of justice, the um most a lot
[5:56] of uh national academic centers like
Duke and um the New England Journal of
[6:02] Medicine when they need to have a
manuscript review that has to do with
[6:06] probate law. They call me and asked me
to do that. And so I think that that's
[6:10] the kind of person that we would want
representing our our our citizens and
[6:14] residents in county. And so I would love
to have the support of the people of
[6:19] Pittsville Township as well as county.
And thank you for your time.
[6:25] » Thank you.
>> Thank you for your service.
[6:38] Christina Luronus 151 East Textile Road
and um I'm glad to see our probate court
[6:43] candidate here. There's there's more
than one, but um it's it's such a
[6:48] crucial role. My daughter is
intellectually disabled and um you know
[6:53] the elderly often come in contact with
the probate court. So it's it is a
[6:57] crucial position. Um, I want I just
wanted to say that I'm glad that we're
[7:02] doing a data center ordinance. I think
this is what first reading tonight. Um,
[7:06] and I know that there's a public hearing
later, but good good that we're doing
[7:11] that. And I think that it went through a
lot of uh vetting through the different
[7:16] attorneys that worked on this. And I'm
glad we uh engaged outside counsel on
[7:20] top of our typical council for this. So,
that was important. Um, I want to say
[7:24] that I'm 100% opposed to the TIFF, the
tax increment finance, the corridor,
[7:30] it's also known as the corridor
improvement authority. I think it's a
[7:33] huge mistake. I think it should not be
done. It's taking scraping money off of
[7:39] our general fund, our parks, our public
safety millages, and putting it into a
[7:43] sequestered account to be used at a much
later date so that we don't have access
[7:48] to those funds should we need them. I
think it's just an enormous error to do
[7:53] this. It was done, it was attempted in
the previous administration and then as
[7:59] it collected very little money, it was
uh just refunded to the various taxing
[8:04] authorities that participated except for
Pittsfield which picked up the tab for
[8:08] all the legal, the publications, all of
the costs that went into it, the
[8:12] different plans, the consultants were
all paid on this. So, it's just a a bad
[8:18] way to go to take our own money and to
peel it off of special voted millages
[8:24] that otherwise could never be touched
for anything other than what the voters
[8:30] expected them to be used for. Those are
those are special millages that cannot
[8:35] be used for any other purpose. And with
a tiff or a corridor improvement
[8:38] authority, we're able to touch those and
draw them down for a different purpose.
[8:45] It's there's no question that state road
needs work. I don't think anybody doubts
[8:49] that. So do plat Washington a you know I
don't think there's a road in this
[8:54] township that doesn't need additional
work. But I think that there's a
[8:57] different way to approach financing.
When the Walmart was built, we
[9:01] negotiated 500, no, I'm sorry, $5
million worth of improvements that they
[9:07] paid for out of pocket. When developers
want to come here, they need to pay.
[9:12] This is an extremely desirable community
for developers to locate in. We should
[9:17] not be footing the bill for improvements
that they are requiring. And in fact,
[9:21] many of the developers on State Road
have paid to both put in center turn
[9:26] lane, additional lanes each time a
development goes in. They have been
[9:30] improving state road. Um it's true that
there's uh backups at the freeway
[9:36] entrances at 94, but that's Ann Arbor.
There's I think some confusion about
[9:41] where Ann Arbor's jurisdiction ends and
Pittsfield's begins. Pittsfield should
[9:45] not be doing this. This is a mistake.
I'm sorry that it's being proposed and
[9:50] I'm sorry that it's probably going to
happen tonight. I think it's a mistake
[9:53] and I'll continue to let the public know
about it. Um, I think the tax rate that
[9:59] you're proposing is far too high. The
total millage rate is 8.53.
[10:04] When I served in office from 2000 to
2008, it was always below six mills. We
[10:10] had lowered it to 5.95 mills early on
and cons continued that all the way
[10:15] through our administration 5.95 mills.
And this is the total tax rate including
[10:20] the two special voted millages.
And it we lowered it again to 5.45. four
[10:26] or five mills. I could see that there
might have been a need for some
[10:30] incremental increase, but this over the
years almost each and every year we're
[10:34] hitting we're getting hit with higher
and higher and higher millage rates in
[10:37] this township to the point where it's up
to 8.53
[10:41] this time around. 8.53 miller
[10:47] taxable value are really going to get
hurt by this. There is a point where
[10:51] you're hurting people by the amount that
you're taxing them. you are hurting
[10:55] them. You need to cut back. You need to
figure out a way to cut back and live
[10:59] within a more reasonable budget. Um, I
understand that a lot of it's got to do
[11:05] with the special voted public safety
mill. We needed a new building. Then we
[11:09] better be looking at an end date for
when that's going to drop back down
[11:12] again once that building's paid off. Um,
and then for the the lady that spoke
[11:17] earlier, perhaps we could publish in the
Sun Times, that's the one paper paper
[11:22] that's still around here that A lot of
the municipalities publish their legal
[11:26] notices in the Sun Times and I know that
they distribute in Seline. Perhaps they
[11:30] could be encouraged to distribute in
Fitzville Township as well. Thank you.
[11:35] » Thank you.
>> Is there anyone else who'd like to speak
[11:39] during the public comment?
[11:43] Um is there any response they would like
to make?
[11:48] But definitely um noted about u making
sure that we reach our seniors and
[11:52] mailing things out. Um so
seeing none then we will
[11:58] » well I I would just like to make you
know
[12:02] as as the lady was speaking about how
some people are not technologically
[12:08] advanced and some people do not have um
access to uh what's going on. I don't
[12:16] know that um If anybody's ever suggested
like maybe we maintain a list if you are
[12:22] if you are don't have technology and you
want a physical paper copy. I don't
[12:28] know. It's just something to think about
for future like if you want to be on
[12:32] this list where you get paper but it I
would have to say on be half of the
[12:37] board it is kind of hard to know what to
publish or what to let the public know
[12:41] and what interest they're going to have.
We do a lot of things at this township.
[12:47] I feel like of course every single thing
that we do is very very important and if
[12:51] I could I would send everybody a daily
reminder of all the good work that we're
[12:56] doing. Um the data center is you know
there has been a lot of issues
[13:01] concerning the data center and so I know
it is important to a lot of people um
[13:08] you know and sometimes people do have to
depend on their good neighbors of course
[13:12] to keep them well informed. So just just
a few thoughts.
[13:17] » Yeah. And we do have a senior center
that actually does do a lot of mailings
[13:20] and things. So that's an option too is
to become part of the senior center and
[13:25] they going there they help you sign up
for things and help you do things. So
[13:28] that's also an option. I just want to be
clear too that there's no data center.
[13:31] It's an ordinance. Um and I know that
you didn't mean that but I just want to
[13:35] make sure that doesn't not approach by a
data center. There's no data center um
[13:39] that came to us. This is all
preventative. Um, so I want to make sure
[13:43] I'm I'm clear on that part.
Okay. Um, and then we will go over the
[13:48] budget um, in detail as we go to the
working session later. So that will
[13:51] address a lot of the issues that um, was
spoken about as well.
[13:55] » All right. Um, I would like to actually
make a friendly amendment uh to the
[14:02] » We actually have to have a motion.
>> I have a motion to approve the agenda to
[14:06] to approve the minutes. Madam Chair, I
move to approve the minutes of the
[14:09] regular meeting held on August 12th,
2026.
[14:13] » Second.
>> Okay. And now we make a a friendly
[14:15] amendment. Um if we could strike out in
section 9.4 of the minutes where it says
[14:21] uh remove reimburse some of the
purchases and replace it with see if we
[14:26] can reimburse ourselves or use money
elsewhere.
[14:31] » I accept the friendly amendment. And uh
does he mean second the friendly
[14:35] amendment?
Okay. Any other changes or additions,
[14:39] questions? All in favor?
>> I opposed. All right. The minutes are
[14:44] approved as amended.
[14:49] » Oh. Oh, yeah. Here it is.
>> Sorry.
[14:52] Thank you.
>> Thank you.
[14:53] » All right. Um, moving on, we will go
ahead and on to the, um, public hearing.
[15:00] We'll start with the public hearing for
ZOA number 26 uh 236
[15:06] data center ordinance. Um I'm going to
go ahead and call it to order at 6:45.
[15:12] And first I'm going to ask our uh towers
planner Ben Carile to come up and just
[15:17] give a little information uh overview um
about the ordinance and why we're doing
[15:22] it for both the first public hearing and
second public hearing. And want to make
[15:25] sure everybody knows this is a first
public hearing. There will also be a
[15:29] second public hearing. So your your
concerns and your um uh suggestions of
[15:34] the evening are are not too late. We
have time to incorporate and then bring
[15:38] them back as well. So um I will pass it
pass it over to our planner, Ben
[15:42] Carlilele.
>> Thank you. Uh good evening to the
[15:44] township board. Good evening to the
residents. Um,
[15:48] I normally don't do this when I come and
present to you a little more off the
[15:51] cuff, but I'm going to actually kind of
read from a prepared statement that that
[15:54] we had put together as part of the
planning commission discussion. Um, so I
[15:59] apologize uh, Commissioner Jaff. This is
probably the third or fourth time you've
[16:02] heard this, but I think it's important
just to give a background to where we've
[16:06] been and to where we are tonight. Um,
but I'm here to address uh the ordinance
[16:12] regulations regarding um high resource
demand facilities, which also includes
[16:16] the issues of data centers and data
processing centers. Um, I just want to
[16:20] remind the the township board uh as well
as the public that's listening that we
[16:24] have not received an application for a
data center. Um, nor have we received a
[16:29] phone call or an inquiry for a data
center. Um, as my role as a township
[16:33] planner, I'm usually the first in line
for when requests like that come in. And
[16:37] I can relate to you that we not received
one inquiry with regards to having data
[16:41] center. Um, but what we're doing is
trying to get ahead of the issue.
[16:44] Obviously, this is this is a hot button
issue. We've seen it affected many of
[16:47] our other uh adjacent communities. Um,
but we're trying to get ahead of the
[16:50] issue in case one does get applied here
in Pittsfield that we are well
[16:53] protected. Um, as um, Miss Loronis did
note, this was a very much of a group
[17:00] effort. There were a number of staff
with various expertise that were
[17:04] participated in the drafting of this
ordinance. was not uh a oneperson show.
[17:08] Um in addition, this did get reviewed by
three different municipal attorneys uh
[17:13] with their input as well and they think
this is as legally defensible an
[17:17] ordinance that we can put together uh to
protect to best protect the township. Um
[17:21] obviously data centers are an emerging
land use. They have very significant
[17:25] impacts to communities. They involve
large buildings, continuous operation,
[17:30] major electrical demands, including
water and cooling needs, backup
[17:34] generator, noise, security
infrastructure, and long-term questions
[17:37] about site restoration. Um, one of the
requests that we received not only in
[17:42] Pittsville, but a lot of the other
companies we work in is why can't we
[17:44] just simply ban them uh outright, just
simply not allow them? Um while that's
[17:49] an understandable reaction to the
current climate of what uh the data
[17:53] centers are being received um zoning
authority has legal limits. We simply
[17:57] just cannot ban a use that is a
permitted legal use. Um
[18:04] and we can't reg we can't write
regulations that are so strict to
[18:07] basically ban them outright. So we have
to craft an ordinance that is legally
[18:11] defensible but yet best protects the
township from any sort of issue that may
[18:16] come come about.
Um, we did that. We think we did that.
[18:21] We think we wrote an ordinance that is
as legally defensible but also as strict
[18:26] as possible to regulate the various
issues that may arise. I do also want to
[18:31] note that um this is a emerging topic.
Uh it's one that's changing literally
[18:36] daily right now with how it's going. The
other thing I want to note, and the
[18:40] township attorney would would I think
back me up um if we if we if she was
[18:44] here, is that there's no case loss yet
set for this use either. So, it may
[18:49] change how we regulate once case laws
established. So, this is a great first
[18:54] draft that's coming out, a great first
uh ordinance that the town should adopt.
[18:58] That doesn't mean that we can't continue
to look at this issue and revise it and
[19:02] amend it as other issues and topics
emerge because it will emerge just based
[19:07] on how things are going right now.
Um
[19:13] we have approached the ordinance that um
simply that data centers are not allowed
[19:17] but we're going to regulate the
appropriate location the type of data
[19:22] center that we would allow um the review
process under which it would go under uh
[19:27] and standards that would protect the
public health safety and welfare for the
[19:30] community. Um I understand there are
some additional provisions that the
[19:34] board may want to consider the public
may want to consider. Uh we are
[19:37] certainly open to that. Um, but we do
feel right now as written, it really is
[19:40] as tight as it can be right now from a
legal dispensability standpoint. But
[19:44] again, we're open to additional comments
that may come through. Um, the draft
[19:49] ordinance does have a a purpose
statement. It's to establish a
[19:52] regulatory framework for the sighting,
design, operation, decommissioning of
[19:57] data centers while also potentially
balancing economic benefits with the
[20:01] protection of public health, safety, and
welfare. Um the ordinance does
[20:05] specifically identify concerns and try
to mitigate those concerns of
[20:08] infrastructure capac um capacity, new
impacts, electricity and water use,
[20:13] architecture and screening,
compatibility with the master plan, and
[20:17] who is responsible for decommissioning
should a data center come offline in the
[20:21] future. Um the ordinance begins by
defining the use including what a high
[20:25] resource demand facility is, what a data
center is, what a data processing
[20:28] center. It also includes um battery
battery energy storage systems which are
[20:34] often a component of a data center and
so it protects us from those types of
[20:37] uses either. Uh it ensures that the most
intense facilities are only located in
[20:42] the industrial districts um as a special
use that would allow the planning
[20:47] commission to have a up to have a review
of that. Um in addition because these
[20:52] are unique uses there is a provision
that actually requires it to get
[20:55] approval also by the township board. So
that is a little bit unique provision
[20:59] for this use that we don't have for any
other uses in the ordinance. So it
[21:02] ultimately this board would be the
ultimate decision maker if one was
[21:06] proposed in the township. Um it does
include a heightened review process I
[21:10] noted. Um, it also requires a uh
community engagement plan which does
[21:14] require uh neighborhood meetings um as
well as uh documentation of what the
[21:19] public input received as part of that
and that would be that would be
[21:22] submitted as part of the application and
that would be reviewed by the
[21:24] appropriate bodies yourself and the
planning commission. Um, the draft does
[21:28] include strong dimensional and sighting
standards including minimum lot size,
[21:32] height controls, lot coverage limits,
increased setbacks, green belts, and
[21:37] separation from residential and other
sensitive uses. Um, includes strong
[21:41] design standards, so they're not just
massive buildings. There is some design
[21:45] requirements. And it talks about the
screening of equipment uh the reduction
[21:49] of lighting impact increased landscaping
uh green and creative storm water
[21:53] techniques as well as construction
traffic and how the operation would
[21:57] actually be built. Um the operational
impacts of a data center are extremely
[22:02] important to regulate as much as we can
we can do possibly. There is federal and
[22:06] state law which we can't necessarily
supersede but we can bring up our limit
[22:09] as close to that as possible the local
level. So, we have performance standards
[22:12] in there for noise, vibration, generator
testing, air quality, cooling towers,
[22:18] thermal emissions, energy efficiency,
renewable energy, water use, and
[22:21] wastewater as well. Again, I'm not an
expert in any of those particular
[22:25] fields, but we had expertise in those
fields that brought those
[22:28] recommendations to the ordinance that
brought that all together. So, it was
[22:31] really a team effort. Um, in addition,
we addressed the issue of public safety,
[22:36] um, working with the public the township
public safety department. So we have
[22:39] issues with regards to security,
emergency access, fire protection. Fire
[22:43] protection is obviously a big issue with
these moving forward. Um has material
[22:47] planning, emergency response
coordination. Um as well as specifically
[22:52] if batteries included because that just
raises the level of the requirement for
[22:55] fire protection.
In addition, the ordinance does also
[22:58] allow the township um if one is
submitted to use outside consultants to
[23:02] review the project. Um there are
expertise uh that will be required to
[23:07] review the compatibility of the project
all the environmental issues we talked
[23:10] about operational issues. Uh so the
ordinance has a provision that that that
[23:14] that allows the township to hire outside
experts and that outside experts would
[23:18] be paid for by the applicant themselves.
So it would not it would be costneutral
[23:22] to the township uh with regards to
consultants use
[23:26] but overall the ordinance is really
intended to provide a clear and
[23:29] defensible framework. Um it does not
exclude data centers because it's
[23:33] legally we legally cannot do that. But
it does ensure that if they are proposed
[23:37] um they're reviewed carefully and held
to the highest standard that the
[23:40] township can to review those and protect
again the infrastructure uh nearby
[23:45] properties, residential re natural
resources and again the public health,
[23:49] safety and welfare. So in summary um the
the ordinance does three things. First
[23:53] it does recognize that the township
simply cannot outright ban a data center
[23:57] use. Um however it does direct the
facilities if proposed to what we find
[24:02] the most appropriate zoning districts
and subjects them to a heightened review
[24:05] standard. And third it creates a very
high level of detailed standards with
[24:09] regard to the sighting design
infrastructure environmental public
[24:13] engagement safety and decommissioning
and risk management uh risk mitigation
[24:18] I'm sorry. So again um the goal is that
if an application is submitted the
[24:22] township has a clear defensible and
enforceable standards to enforce and
[24:26] evaluate the proposed project. Um, with
that being said, I'm I'm happy to answer
[24:29] any questions um either now or after you
hear from the public hearing and I'll be
[24:34] here for the rest of the meeting to
answer anything that may come up.
[24:36] » Thank you.
>> Thank you.
[24:40] » Is everybody come and speak on public
hearing
[24:46] up?
[24:49] Is there any comment um from our
Oh yes, you come up.
[24:59] Yep. Oh, sorry. You have five minutes.
You're welcome to to speak on the um
[25:04] subject of the data center ordinance.
Yes.
[25:07] » Um this is the first I've heard about
the data center ordinance that you just
[25:11] described. It was pretty difficult to
keep up with everything sharing. Plus,
[25:15] you're backwards to us, so it was hard
to hear. Um being one of the seniors,
[25:22] uh is there a written um
like if this like how long have we been
[25:29] working on getting this proposal
together for example and and then is
[25:34] there something in writing that people
>> there's the yeah the draft ordinance is
[25:38] in is in the packet um so we can
certainly get you the packet and then of
[25:42] course
>> when we first walked in
[25:44] » um it's in the actual entire packet
Bryce can help you out he's coming up
[25:47] here um and then we also been working on
this for gosh we had put the moratorum
[25:52] in place back in November of 25 so We've
been working on it for quite a quite a
[25:57] time and it has gone through the
planning commission first and then
[26:01] vetted out there with public comment and
now has come here.
[26:06] » Okay. So um and now you're presenting
it. So you hear about it then you guys
[26:11] discuss it and then you decide what if
you want to propose alterations
[26:16] to the proposal if somebody came up to
us and said we want to build a data
[26:22] center here. Is that what
>> Yeah, I'm sorry. So how we and I know
[26:25] you know this when we do um public
comments you say everything I say and
[26:28] then we do it afterwards. So it's not a
>> conver those are my initial questions
[26:32] and nice to see you all again. Thank you
very much.
[26:34] » Thank you.
>> Is this for me?
[26:37] » Thank you.
[26:43] » Yes. Anybody else want to come up and
speak on the public hearing? Please come
[26:47] up.
[26:51] » My name is Raymond Vasser. Um I'm at 862
Kelpie Drive. And a couple of comments.
[26:58] I think some of my questions were
already answered in terms of uh no one
[27:02] has kind of approached
the township or a data center. Um and I
[27:08] would like to thank the planning
commission. The it sounds like they do
[27:14] all the eyes and crossed all the tees. I
I thank them for that. It's such it's so
[27:19] detailed. Um, and it's very prospective
and people are they were working very
[27:24] very hard to imagine what the problems
could be. And I I do see it I agree it
[27:31] appears to be more of a restrictive
document which I was happy to see. um in
[27:37] a recent article in the scientific
American they commented on New York's
[27:43] moratorum for one year and what they
were saying in that article was the
[27:49] reason for that was that there wasn't
any data actual data so that and and the
[27:54] data centers are not producing data no
pun intended
[28:00] they're not producing any um information
about how they're using it how much
[28:06] energy they're using, what's happening
to the water, what how much water
[28:10] they're using, and they seem to be
really closed down about sharing any of
[28:14] that information. And based on that, the
state of New York said, "No, we we have
[28:20] to wait and find out." So, I guess my
proposal would be, and again, with
[28:25] thanks to the planning commission, of
course, I've read every single word in
[28:30] the document, um, I like that it has a
very restrictive sound, but We don't
[28:36] know it's up against what and what
happens and what really goes on. And so
[28:42] what I would suggest is that the mor
moratorium be extended until we do start
[28:47] getting some information about how the
the data centers are impacting the
[28:52] community impact impacting the
environment the ecology. Um we don't
[28:58] know. I I couldn't find anything. I'm
not an expert. I'm casual,
[29:04] you know, web browser guy. Um, but I
couldn't find any information. And and
[29:09] they it's astounding how they are kind
of locking down the information. You
[29:14] can't get any information. So, nobody's
going to come to you and say, "Well,
[29:17] here on these 10 data centers, this is
how they used water. This is what they
[29:23] did. This is how it turned out. These
are the true impacts on the community."
[29:27] And all I know from my personal
experience is that um Michigan Avenue is
[29:32] not usable now for me. You know, when I
would take trips out to Hidden Lake
[29:37] Gardens and I I don't want to drive down
there to get caught behind one of these
[29:42] gravel haulers or you know going 60
miles an hour in downtown Seline and
[29:47] it's uh that impact is just incredible.
So again in conclusion I would say I
[29:53] would recommend extending the moratorum
until we are able to get more
[29:58] information that's very clear and again
my great thanks to the planning
[30:03] commission and it sounds like they
thought of every contingency but they
[30:07] don't know any reality.
>> Thank you.
[30:11] » Thank you.
>> Thank you.
[30:13] » Is there anybody else who'd like to
speak on the public hearing?
[30:19] I would like to um if I can um respond
to the information about the the
[30:23] moratorum. Um so you take it you said um
we at a suggestion of one of our
[30:30] residents actually put the moratorium in
place for a six-month period. Um and I
[30:34] think that was brilliant. That's the
beauty of having our residents being so
[30:37] engaged because I didn't think of that.
It was brought to us and we went ahead
[30:41] and put it in there. We extended it for
another six months so it would be a full
[30:44] year. The problem is is that um some
states can do it longer because the
[30:49] actual state has a law um that kind of
follows that up. unfortunately would not
[30:54] be legally defensible because they do um
there's actually a term um demonstrated
[31:00] need is what the state of Michigan has
said and because the state has said
[31:05] there's a demonstrated need and we had
basically what talking to all three of
[31:09] the attorneys that we have talked to and
and outside attorneys more than that if
[31:13] we did it for more than a year it would
not be legally defensible. So, um, but
[31:17] to your point, yeah, that would have
been the easy way to do it, but, um,
[31:21] yeah, and I think, u, Mr. Carile has,
um, more comments and more knowledge
[31:25] than I do on that.
>> No, no, I just your point's 100%
[31:29] correct. Um, we we did talk about that
whether we should we can extend it or
[31:32] not, and we we realize that we really
couldn't do it. The state of New York,
[31:35] it's a state it's a state action. So, it
supersedes local authority. The state of
[31:39] Michigan is, as far as we know, is not
in the position right now where they're
[31:42] going to adopt a moratorum. So, really,
it's on the local level. And about a
[31:45] year is as long as you could moratorum.
Um that being said though um
[31:51] Yaka is community utility authority um
has adopted a moratorum that runs at
[31:58] least through April of 2027
>> for the water supply. Yeah.
[32:01] » For the water supply and so um if there
is a data center proposed in Pittsfield
[32:05] that's in the Yucka district uh it would
be upheld to that moratorum until at
[32:10] least April of 2027. So that's just an
additional consideration that's also
[32:15] going on at the same time that I want
the board to be aware of as well.
[32:18] » Thanks.
>> And I and I do appreciate the other
[32:20] jurisdictions around us that had to deal
with this um on the fly. Uh you know I I
[32:25] I feel for them. We had the heads up of
what's going on around us were able to
[32:29] put in the moratorum to give us time to
pause and really really think about it.
[32:33] So um I feel fortunate about that. And
again I'm saying it here in public. We
[32:38] were we were not approached nor have we
um reached out interest. So
[32:43] if anybody like to make any other
comments during the public hearing
[32:54] » information or data regarding uh data
centers and I you know technology it
[33:01] moves really fast and um who knows what
it's going to be like in 10 years there
[33:06] may be no data centers and data centers
could be out in space for all we know.
[33:10] So I appreciate that. You know, it would
be nice to have some data to back up
[33:16] like, yeah, it's not it's not going to
take that much water. Yeah, it doesn't
[33:21] need that much electricity, but we don't
know. And I and I don't think there is a
[33:26] way right now because it's in its
infancy stage um to know how this how
[33:32] this is all going to play out. But uh
luckily the supervisor and the planning
[33:36] commission and the the planner, they've
all been working really I think um to
[33:42] make it so that you know it is rest it
is a little more restrictive um which I
[33:49] like and until up until we have some
data that we could say oh yeah you know
[33:57] what we thought it was going to be a big
deal to have a high capacity data center
[34:01] and really it turned out to be nothing
but we have these restrictions in place
[34:05] and I do think we needed to do something
about it now because if we don't there's
[34:10] a chance somebody could come in and say,
"Yeah, you know what? I'm going to put a
[34:15] data center here and I'm going to take
it to court. I'm going to sue the
[34:18] township. It's going to cost everybody a
lot of money." So, I appreciate um the
[34:22] steps that uh this supervisor has laid
out and um and I agree with this
[34:29] ordinance actually. And to your point, a
living and breathing document for sure.
[34:33] As we learn more, we'll be watching it
>> and as things evolve and state
[34:38] leadership changes and see what happens.
>> Okay.
[34:43] » A couple comments here as well.
>> You know,
[34:47] looking at widening the aperture and
looking back on this a bit, there's a
[34:50] reason that we had to consider this
ordinance. It's because our state
[34:53] legislature passed a tax abatement, a
sizable tax abatement that got rid of
[34:59] all the sales and use tax. So the Selen
data center that we're talking about is
[35:02] over $40 billion of investment made. And
how big is that tax investment? We'll do
[35:07] 6% on that $40 billion worth of hardware
in there. It's a $2.4 billion abatement
[35:13] initially. And then those types of data
centers have to renew their hardware
[35:17] typically every three to four years. So
you look at $2.4
[35:21] billion dollar every three to four years
for the total duration of the benefit or
[35:26] the abatement which is 30 years
currently. So these are sizable sizable
[35:30] abatements. This is why Michigan has
been targeted for so many data centers
[35:34] in congressional district 6 which we are
which is congressional uh congresswoman
[35:38] Dingo's district. There are four active
shovel like shovels are in the ground in
[35:43] data centers in this community alone.
There's 16 active in the state of
[35:47] Michigan. So I will also want to echo
the gratefulness I have to uh our
[35:52] planning commission you know Carlile and
group all we can do is be as restrictive
[35:57] as we can. We have done the mortorium
for this time but when we ask what else
[36:01] can we do as a body what else can you
all do we can talk to our people at the
[36:05] state if there are other controls we
want to have there are things are being
[36:09] proposed right now there's a senate bill
that was just proposed gosh two months
[36:13] ago now that's a community benefits uh
bill and what that means is anytime
[36:18] there's a data center that come through
like a planning commission or things of
[36:20] that nature for a local municipality we
would have to they would have to agree
[36:25] with the municipality for community
benefits
[36:28] before they can be approved. So that
means we would actually have a seat at
[36:32] the table for negotiation for things
before they're entering in our
[36:35] community. So I just want to add that
that I I'm supportive of the uh
[36:40] ordinance as it's written. I think
there's a ton of work. We've been
[36:42] working on this for a year, but there's
still more work to be done, not just in
[36:46] this ordinance that controls what this
looks like now, but there are greater
[36:50] controls that we can advocate at the
state layer. So, I'm happy to talk with
[36:54] anybody here about how like who your
representation is, how we can do that,
[36:58] and then we can also talk as a board
about how we can lend our voice to that
[37:01] conversation. So, I just want to greater
contextualize this is why this is this
[37:06] ordinance is needed. There's a lot of
big money that's coming into our
[37:09] community because they don't have to pay
taxes on the equipment at for now and
[37:13] for 30 years. And that that's not a
small change when you're talking about
[37:18] projects of this scale. So that's why
we, you know, are being targeted and
[37:21] that's why we're doing everything we
reasonably can to put in the controls in
[37:25] place.
>> Thank you, Supervisor.
[37:30] » Okay, I'm going to go ahead and give it
a last call. And if not, then I'll go
[37:35] ahead and close this
public hearing um at what time it is?
[37:42] 7:07
and go ahead and open up the next public
[37:47] hearing 5.2.
ZOA26237
[37:51] moratorum language and again we'll do
the same thing um at opening it at 707
[37:57] and then inviting uh our planner Ben
Carlile to come up and talk a little
[38:01] about what this um particular public
hearing is encompassing.
[38:05] » Yeah, thank you. I'll be I'll be much
more brief on this topic hopefully than
[38:08] the previous one. U when we were looking
at the data center ordinance uh when we
[38:13] brought in outside counsel uh they
reviewed it and they started asking us
[38:17] about the moratorum that the township
adopted. Um we had to look at some of
[38:22] our moratorum provisions and there's
nothing in the zoning ordinance that
[38:28] talks about the procedures and the
standards under which you would which
[38:31] the township would adopt a land use
essentially a land use moratorum. Um the
[38:37] township has been adopting moratoriums
for years. Uh we've never been
[38:41] challenged on it. Uh but that doesn't
mean we couldn't be challenged. And
[38:44] there have been some communities lately
that have been challenged on the
[38:47] issuance of moratorum because it wasn't
outlined in an ordinance that allowed
[38:51] them to actually take that action. So
this is what this language does. that
[38:55] simply just
grants the authority we already have but
[38:58] grants it in the or in the zoning
ordinance for to establish land use
[39:01] moratoriums and gives the procedures for
how to do it and gives kind of standards
[39:05] under which you review moratorum. So it
just cleans up what we what the township
[39:10] has done in the past but makes a little
more legal and defensible by actually
[39:13] putting it in the zoning ordinance
itself. Um it's not a huge it's not it's
[39:16] not a procedural change anything we've
done in the past. It just codifies what
[39:19] what we've been doing. So thank you.
>> Thank you. you're kind of button it up a
[39:23] little bit is what it comes down to. But
I will go ahead and ask if anybody else
[39:26] would like to uh comment on that
particular part of it.
[39:32] Okay. If not, then I will go ahead and
close that public hearing um at 7:09.
[39:39] Okay. Thank you very much. All right. Um
there are no communications. So I will
[39:44] then go ahead and ask for a motion for
our consent agenda. Madam Chair, I move
[39:48] to consent agenda
7.1 to 7.13.
[39:53] » Second.
>> Okay. Any discussion?
[39:56] All in favor?
>> I opposed.
[39:59] » All right. Consent agenda is approved.
Uh moving on to department reports and
[40:04] updates. May I please have a motion to
receive and file point 7 8.1. Man, I
[40:08] move to receive and file the M's annual
actuarial oil valuation report as of
[40:14] December 31st, 2025.
>> Second.
[40:18] » Are there any questions on this one?
It's pretty. Okay. Um, all in favor?
[40:24] » I opposed.
>> All right. Received and filed. May I
[40:27] please have a motion for 9.1?
>> Madam Chair, I move to receive the draft
[40:32] of fiscal year 2027 Pittsfield Township
budget. Second.
[40:38] » Okay. Any discussion on this one? We
will be discussing this in much further
[40:42] detail. I don't know if um we'll invite
our um director of finance up or we
[40:46] wanted to talk about this in general
during the working session, get more
[40:49] deep into it. Yeah. And that makes more
sense to me, but
[40:55] » All right. All in favor? I opposed.
>> All right. Received.
[40:59] » May I please have a motion for 9.2?
>> M. Madam Treasur, I move to adopt a
[41:04] resolution to amend the fiscal year 2026
general fund, public safety fund,
[41:08] building fund, and federal fores budget
budgets resolution number 26 to 24
[41:15] » support.
>> Okay. And discussion on this one. Again,
[41:18] we do have our director of finance if
there's um questions regarding this. I
[41:21] know it was a pretty detailed memo, but
um if you like explanation, we do have
[41:26] someone here to do that.
Okay. Um may have a roll call for this
[41:31] one. Supervisor Riley.
>> Yes.
[41:33] » Clerk Enzaldi,
>> yes.
[41:35] » Treasure Epicanin,
>> yes.
[41:36] » Trusty Erda Thompson,
>> yes.
[41:38] » Trusty Jaffford,
>> yes.
[41:39] » Trusty Braybeck,
>> yes.
[41:41] » Trusty Kami,
>> yes.
[41:42] » Madam Supervisor, you have seven years.
>> All right. Thank you. Adopted. Uh, may I
[41:46] please have a motion for 9.3.
>> Madam treasurer, I move to authorize the
[41:51] supervisor to respond to foyer appeal
within 10 days of its official receipt
[41:56] in accordance with the recommendation of
the township attorney.
[41:59] » Support. Okay. Any discussion? This is
something that when we have an appeal to
[42:03] a foya um it is the law says we have to
come to the board the approval and then
[42:08] yeah we'll look at the attorney on that.
All right. All in favor?
[42:11] » I opposed.
>> All right. Authorization is granted. May
[42:15] I please have a motion for 9.4.
>> Madam chair move to receive and file the
[42:21] quarterly cash balance report second
quarter 2026.
[42:27] » This over to you our treasurer.
Well, I'll be brief. Um, uh, rather than
[42:32] walk through the whole report, I'll just
highlight a few accomplishments for the
[42:36] second quarter. Uh, during April, we
completed the settlement and
[42:39] distribution of the 2025 winter tax
revenues to all tax units, closing out
[42:45] the winner tax cycle.
We supported the township's equalization
[42:50] process and monitored certification of
the 2026 state equalization ensuring all
[42:55] our taxable values were properly
established for the year. Uh also we
[43:00] administered the June 1st res exemption
deadline and prepared the summer tax
[43:05] which we in process of collecting now
>> and busy.
[43:09] » Yeah, it's been it's a busy month. Uh so
uh which which is ready for building
[43:14] cycle. Um all in all the township has
maintained a strong financial position
[43:19] with about 55.2 million in cash and
investments and our portfolio recorded
[43:23] approximately 210,000
investment earnings during that quarter.
[43:28] Uh so while we are continuing to
prioritize our safety liquidity and
[43:32] compliance
as we move into the third quarter our
[43:36] focus shifts to the summer tax bill
cycle and collection cycle
[43:42] investment management.
[43:46] Any questions or discussion?
[43:51] » All in favor?
>> I opposed. All right. Received and
[43:55] filed. May I please ask for a motion for
9.5?
[44:01] » Supervisor. I move through the the
Relian fire apparatus proposal number
[44:07] 1402 for the purchase of one pier saver
custom chassis bumper frontline fire
[44:14] engine for the fire department in the
amount to exceed 1 million31,67
[44:21] subject to township attorney
>> second. Okay, this one actually I'm
[44:24] gonna ask our um our fire chief and our
director of public safety, whoever wants
[44:28] to come up and and and speak to it um
and give a little background on this
[44:31] because this is something that's kind of
um I need a little more explanation for
[44:36] it.
>> Thank thankfully unique.
[44:38] » Yeah, it's a little more unique, right?
Yeah.
[44:40] » So, uh the this is for the purchase of a
fire engine and so there are a lot of
[44:45] different fire apparatus, but the
backbone of a fire response, the the
[44:48] frontline vehicle that responds for a
fire emergency is the engine from all
[44:52] three stations. So, NFPA standards call
for a 15-year
[44:57] limit in the amount of time that a truck
should be a frontline truck, then that
[45:01] truck can be moved to the back. Um, it
be just a backup in case one of the
[45:05] frontline trucks needs service. Uh, this
truck's been with us since 2010. It's
[45:10] got over 135,000 miles on it. It's got a
lot of hours on it. It's been a good
[45:13] vehicle, but at some point, the repairs
and and the cost of maintaining it and
[45:18] keeping it going start to become
prohibitive. and it is now at an age
[45:22] where we really shouldn't have it on a
frontline capacity anymore. So, there's
[45:26] a process to purchase these vehicles.
Um, and we've been exploring that
[45:30] through Pierce and their um and their
financial through PNC. Uh, but working
[45:38] with the finance director and the next
couple items you'll see we see an
[45:41] advantage in doing an RFP. So, this is
for approval to sign the agreement to
[45:46] make the purchase, but there will be
some additional steps. Any questions on
[45:51] » I believe that we know I don't know if
the board knows we did not move forward
[45:54] with the aerial truck. So this is in in
lie of right now at least why and it's
[46:00] more of a long range planning because we
know that these vehicles aren't
[46:03] something you just buy on the whim. So
we need to really make sure that we are
[46:07] um thinking long range. This is part of
that.
[46:09] » We shouldn't wait till the last second
and say oh we need to buy that new
[46:13] million dollar truck. We do need to make
a plan for this and really work it
[46:16] through. But this vehicle is is at the
point where time and we're really we are
[46:21] working to make sure that we have a
forecasted plan to to replace vehicles
[46:25] at the appropriate time
>> management there. Okay. Any questions or
[46:30] comments?
>> All right. Um all in favor? I opposed.
[46:35] All right. That's approved. May I please
have a motion for 9.6?
[46:38] » Madam supervisor, I move to adopt a
resolution authorizing an installment
[46:42] purchase agreement for frontline fire
engine resolution number 262.
[46:48] » Second. basically. Yeah. In tandem with
the other. Yeah.
[46:52] » Correct. Correct. This is to work toward
the RFP.
[46:56] » Okay. Um, roll call on this one.
>> Clerk Enzaldi.
[47:00] » Yes.
>> Treasure Epicanin.
[47:02] » Yes.
>> Trusty Erda Thompson?
[47:04] » Yes.
>> Trusty Jaffer?
[47:05] » Yes.
>> Trusty Braybeck?
[47:06] » Yes.
>> Trusty Kurami?
[47:08] » Yes.
>> Supervisor Riley?
[47:10] » Yes.
>> Madam Chair, you have seven years.
[47:12] » All right. Thank you. That is approved.
And may I please have a motion for 9.7?
[47:17] Madam supervisor, I move to authorize
the supervisor and clerk to sign an
[47:22] engagement letter within code to provide
municipal advisor services at a cost not
[47:27] to ex exceed 8,875,000
[47:32] in connection with fire engine
installment purchase agreement process
[47:36] subject to town.
>> Second.
[47:39] » Okay. Uh any discussion on this one?
This is in in conjunction with the
[47:43] actual thing uh the the process that
we're doing to make I'll explain it.
[47:48] Sorry.
>> Correct. So again again these there are
[47:50] multiple steps to including the
resolution but there are multiple steps
[47:53] and there are some fees involved um to
make sure that we're crossing all the
[47:56] tees and dotting all the eyes and that
the final agreement does it falls within
[48:00] the legal standard but then also is to
our advantage. So these steps while they
[48:05] do cost something will be financially
you know responsible for the township to
[48:09] do this as opposed to kind of easy
button with
[48:12] » making sure we're getting the best rates
and yeah. So yeah, that that should be a
[48:16] getting the best rate and the time frame
and everything will more than
[48:19] compensate.
>> Definitely willing to take extra steps
[48:21] to make sure that happens.
>> Okay. All in favor?
[48:25] » I opposed.
>> All right. That's authorized. May I
[48:28] please have a motion for 9.8?
>> Madam supervisor, I move to authorize
[48:33] the supervisor and clerk to sign a
subcontract Philip signing for signage
[48:39] lighting lighting installation as part
of the public safety facility
[48:42] improvement project. A total not to
exceed $7,999
[48:48] subject.
[48:52] » Okay. And this is just a
>> little more basic. Yep. Just signage for
[48:55] the front of the building.
>> Yeah. And this is just part of the
[48:57] project next door. And in the packet,
I'm sure you saw the picture. It looks
[49:00] pretty nice. So,
>> all right. All in favor?
[49:04] » I opposed.
>> All right. It's authorized. May I please
[49:07] have a motion for 9.9?
>> Madame supervisor, I move to authorize
[49:12] the supervisor and clerk to signed an
agreement with digital protection
[49:16] systems for the purchase and
installation of a birectional antenna
[49:20] and cell booster antenna for the public
safety facility improvement project at a
[49:24] cost not to exceed $79,425.50
[49:29] subject to township
>> second.
[49:32] » So we did discuss this a little bit in
our last meeting that this was another
[49:36] um item that while we could have done
this under the blue scope contract, it
[49:41] would have cost more but All things
considered and and full disclosure, we
[49:46] we should have done this we should have
done this a little bit earlier and we've
[49:49] been operating currently with you know
like a
[49:53] I don't want to call it makeshift. It's
a legit radio system within the building
[49:57] but cellular service within the building
is very poor due to the steel roof. It's
[50:00] really the construction of the building
and once it was fully complete and
[50:03] enclosed we discovered that we really
did need a booster for both cellular and
[50:08] emergency radio comms. So this is this
is the standard do that in a building
[50:13] like this.
[50:17] » Okay. Any discussion or questions for
Director Gray?
[50:20] » All right. All in favor? I opposed.
>> All right. Moving on to 9.10. May please
[50:27] have a motion.
>> Madame supervisor, I move to authorize
[50:30] the supervisor
to sign an agreement with Lex for the
[50:35] use of policy daily software for police
and fire department. not to exceed
[50:42] $49,33078
[50:46] subject to township.
>> Second,
[50:49] any discussion or explanation why you're
here?
[50:52] » Right. Sure. Absolutely. So, Lexapole is
uh known nationwide and I believe it's
[50:56] more than just nationwide, but Lexapole
has been around for a very long time. I
[50:59] think they started out as a policy
really just a policy um driven business
[51:04] where they would help agencies put
together a proper uh policy for both
[51:08] police and fire proper policy book and
make sure that it's up to date. And now
[51:11] they have really excelled in that to a
point where they're giving regular
[51:15] updates to your agency if there's a new
law passes and things like that. They're
[51:18] making suggestions to keep us uh
operating under best practices. And this
[51:22] is both for the police department and
the fire department. Fire chief and I
[51:25] have both put in a lot of work recently
to try to keep our policies updated. And
[51:28] this is really the next best step to
make sure that we are doing things uh
[51:32] constitutionally sound and legal um and
and doing them timely, not just finding
[51:37] out months later and then having to make
changes. There's also a training portion
[51:41] of this for the police department. The
fire department is already using Lexiple
[51:45] for staff training and police uh lensure
is they're calling it still a pilot, but
[51:51] we were really moving toward um annual
training requirements which have been
[51:56] needed in multiple uh topics and that is
really it's gone live for the last two
[52:01] years but it's really going to be um
mandated shortly and Lexapole will
[52:06] provide a lot of those CP C training
courses through this uh process so it's
[52:12] really it's a benefit for for the police
department too fire department's been
[52:15] very happy with it
[52:19] » so the annual cost for this it's I guess
it's an application right
[52:25] » it's it's like a subscription or a
membership
[52:27] » subscription
So um the annual price though I mean
[52:30] this will include some uh implementation
fees correct. So
[52:35] » my understanding so 10,000 of it or so
is um getting the system set up.
[52:41] » That's correct.
>> Your going forward cost annually is
[52:45] going to be what 39,000.
>> It will be less. Yes. implementation
[52:49] cost uh for this for police and fire to
basically have all of their policies
[52:53] brought up to date and in the system and
then the police department to get the
[52:56] training portion of of this package is
$10,652.
[53:01] That is a onetime fee. So moving
forward, you're correct. This would be
[53:05] roughly $10,000 less. And this isn't I
of course it's a um it's something
[53:10] that's used widely, but this isn't like
an introductory fee. This isn't you know
[53:14] we got you in there and now we're going
to raise the rate. I'm sure that there
[53:17] are increases annually like anything
else, but uh they do this on a uh a per
[53:23] officer or per firefighter scale. So
until they change that scale for
[53:27] everybody across the board, that would
be our fee.
[53:30] » Okay. Thank you.
>> Any other questions or discussion on
[53:35] this one?
[53:39] » Uh let's see. All in favor?
>> I opposed.
[53:44] » All right. I think we're done for now
and then we'll see you for the budget.
[53:47] » Correct.
>> All right.
[53:48] » Thank you.
>> May I please have a motion for 9.11?
[53:54] » Madame supervisor, I move to adopt a
resolution to establish the author
[53:57] authority and design designating the
boundaries for the state street corridor
[54:01] improvement authority resolution number
26.
[54:05] » Second.
>> Uh we do have administrator Lion here to
[54:09] enter any questions. Once again, this is
just um moving along uh the boundaries
[54:14] that I don't think have changed from the
last time. So, there's no additional
[54:17] costs and in doing that except for the
signs and that sort of thing. No lawyer
[54:21] costs and things. But, um also this is
um not necessarily saying that we are
[54:28] doing this. We still have to go to the
county. There's still many other steps,
[54:30] but this is putting the boundaries in
place. One of the steps that has to
[54:33] happen within the process.
>> Question.
[54:36] » Yeah, I do have a question about the
packet stuff. Um Director
[54:43] » administrator
>> administrator line um the the chart that
[54:47] you had in the um in the packet. I just
want to make sure that I I understood it
[54:52] because um the labeling on the headers
was um PCT capture 25% and then CIA
[55:02] capture 75%.
So I wasn't clear like are those labels
[55:07] correct? Is the 25%
what we are keeping and not the capture
[55:12] for the CIA. It's just the collection of
taxes.
[55:16] » Correct.
[55:25] to
be shared between the CIA
[55:33] CIA would keep 75%
taxis.
[55:40] » So it it it's going to depend on the the
growth amount. So if it's $100, say
[55:49] » the town, if we collect $100 just for
the township, for example, this is basic
[55:56] for sure.
>> Um the township is going to keep $25 and
[56:00] then and that only represents the growth
section. Is that correct?
[56:04] » Correct.
>> Okay. And then $75 will go into the
[56:10] » the TIF or the the CIA.
>> Correct.
[56:13] » That's from the and and the county if
they choose to do it. Yeah.
[56:17] » So, and then this is going to be
dependent on whether the county and the
[56:22] county parks um
come come into our district or our CIA
[56:29] » if they choose to
join the CIA.
[56:36] » Yes.
>> Sorry.
[56:38] » And I think that if they do that that
makes this worthwhile and if they don't
[56:41] then I think that's another
conversation.
[56:43] » Yeah. So, so let me ask you this. So,
this uh resolution just establishes the
[56:50] boundary that they're going to look at
and then at the next or the next item is
[56:55] going to be establishing the board.
>> Correct. This establishes the authority
[57:02] and the boundaries within that
authority. Okay.
[57:05] » And that's it.
>> Okay. And
[57:09] um Okay. So, I don't have any more
questions, but I would like to say that,
[57:16] you know, just as my personal comment is
I I'm
[57:21] going to vote no tonight probably
because I feel like for me it feels like
[57:27] it has a lot of holes in it. Um, I'm not
sure based on the calculations,
[57:35] you know, how much each part of the
project is going to cost, where that
[57:38] money is going to come from, and
like our projections are based on this
[57:45] 2.5 incremental increase in our property
values, but with the economy the way it
[57:52] is and the market, we could have a
downturn. So, we don't know what those
[57:59] pieces are going to look like and we
don't have any projections on those
[58:02] pieces either which is somewhat you know
I find questionable and I feel like I'm
[58:09] approving something that I really don't
have enough information on. I also
[58:16] feel like
another big problem that I have with
[58:21] this whole thing is you know we're we
have this expectation that there's going
[58:25] to be an 80%
um grant fund, you know, that's going to
[58:30] support this whole 58 or 60 million
dollar project and
[58:38] way and it will pay for a lot of this
project, but it's hard to say like
[58:45] that's not guaranteed. We already lost
out on a grant because we were it was
[58:51] approved, but we didn't get it for our
public safety department. So I find that
[58:56] you know problematic
and
[59:00] you know defining this project based on
our grant and the grant that we could
[59:08] potentially receive.
You know I I feel like there's not
[59:13] there's not enough numbers and I
understand we can establish this
[59:17] authority that we can establish the CIA.
um this part is only talking about hey
[59:22] we're just establishing we're just
setting the boundaries and we're going
[59:26] to come up with this plan but I think
before we even do that I think we have
[59:31] to have a better understanding of the
actual plan like how much is the
[59:37] cross-section going to cost where do we
think that the funds are going to come
[59:41] from what you know have we projected
some stress on those figures that we're
[59:48] using to
you know support this project because
[59:53] without those things you know if this
were a smaller project I don't think
[59:57] that it would be such a problem for me
but you know we are talking about a lot
[1:00:02] of money not only a lot of money to put
into it but a lot of money that we need
[1:00:08] to get from other people and a lot of
resources to maintain and you know
[1:00:12] establish the authority meetings
consultants attorneys and all this other
[1:00:18] stuff that going to go along with, you
know, establishing this corridor and
[1:00:23] improving it. I'm not saying that State
Street doesn't need to be improved, but
[1:00:30] I think what I'm saying is that, you
know, we're building this project around
[1:00:37] this grant funding where we could
probably
[1:00:41] do it cheaper or smarter or, you know,
do we need sidewalks? Do we need
[1:00:49] you know, these certain things that the
grant is requiring us to have in order
[1:00:54] to get the funds for all those things
I I think are problematic. I do think we
[1:01:00] should explore a little bit more of the
SADs.
[1:01:04] Um,
and for all those reasons, I'm probably
[1:01:08] going to vote I will vote no for this.
And also, I think um one other thing
[1:01:13] that I was thinking about today,
you know,
[1:01:18] State Street needs improvements, but
there are a lot of other places in the
[1:01:23] township that are going to need
improvements. And here we're carving out
[1:01:28] these funds that will only be able to go
down this corridor
[1:01:35] and we're earmarking it for 20 years. I
mean, at this point, I don't even know
[1:01:39] when the project will start.
You know, is it going to start in the
[1:01:44] 20th year? Is it going to start in the
15th year? Is it going to start 10th
[1:01:47] year or the third year? How are we gonna
how are we going to fund it up front? I
[1:01:53] for me there's a lot of questions. So I
don't genuinely
[1:01:59] agree with this because I feel like
we we should had more options. So thank
[1:02:06] you.
>> I have to address some of those things.
[1:02:08] » Okay. So um this is a this is a big
project and that's that's part of the
[1:02:12] thing and I think when you do any sort
of budget or planning you are even our
[1:02:16] own budget leader will be assuming some
some the 2.5 will be assuming things
[1:02:20] there's things that have to be assumed
along the way. Um when it comes to a
[1:02:25] giant quarter like that and again this
is something that if we didn't get a
[1:02:29] grant we could decide then what we want
to do with it. Um but if we do get a
[1:02:34] giant
giant 40ome million dollar grant to redo
[1:02:40] the road, we will miss out on it without
having the um the funds to go with it.
[1:02:45] Um and that's something that we can
decide clearly. Um it's also when you
[1:02:49] think about a special assessment
district and that is pulling funds from
[1:02:53] that actual corridor. So it's those
businesses within that corridor in that
[1:02:57] increment. So it's not like we're
pulling from all over the place. Um in
[1:03:01] in that respect, we also have the this
is a a regional corridor. So when you do
[1:03:07] a Tiff, you are pulling from the county
and other areas that actually have some
[1:03:13] some say in this. Um, a special
assessment district. I don't know how
[1:03:17] much those businesses along that
corridor are benefiting from the extra
[1:03:21] traffic there. You know, maybe if you
think a a carpenter road corridor or
[1:03:25] something that they are actually
benefiting from that road being
[1:03:28] improvement and having more foot traffic
in their location. um the businesses for
[1:03:32] the most part down state road um you
know their employees use that road to
[1:03:37] cope to and fro they're not going to get
more benefit from that. So I would
[1:03:40] disagree on the special assessment
district part of it. Um and and I've
[1:03:45] said before if the county did not want
to be part of this and we're not getting
[1:03:48] that extra money which is a a pretty
large amount I would say that no I don't
[1:03:51] think we should do this either. Then we
just you know look at it and and pull as
[1:03:55] we would. Um, obviously this is just us
saving money um for this this project in
[1:04:03] this important corridor. Um, yes, you
could say that Plat Road and and other
[1:04:08] roads need it. Um, but we don't have the
kind of industrial the amount of money
[1:04:12] that we bring in and that corridor and
businesses to offset taxes for the rest
[1:04:17] of our residents is huge. And if we
cannot if we lose people on that
[1:04:22] corridor um and we don't keep up on it,
we don't have the um it takes a lot to
[1:04:27] attract it. You know, I'm you work with
Spark and they and they talk about how
[1:04:30] important it is to have a whole package
when you're attracting it. We you know,
[1:04:34] we lose a lot of businesses to other
areas and the amount of um offsetting
[1:04:40] that that does. And when we do work with
businesses that come in the area, we are
[1:04:44] and I know our director um of community
development can say we're constantly
[1:04:49] trying to figure out, okay, if you're
coming in here, are you going to improve
[1:04:51] this brewery? We are we're not going to
not do that. That will continue. And
[1:04:56] yes, there's obviously going to be some
costs involved in having these meetings
[1:05:00] and making sure that we're doing
everything legally. Um this was started
[1:05:04] a while ago, so we do have the base work
already there. And as we change and
[1:05:09] modify it, yes, there will be some costs
along the way. However, the cost that we
[1:05:14] will incur will make up for that. And
this is an important corridor. Um, and
[1:05:18] the assumptions that have to be made
along the way. You can we could give you
[1:05:22] numbers of what the actual um road could
cost today. But this is going to be
[1:05:28] timing and when things are done and then
obviously with materials and things,
[1:05:32] it's not going to be the same. all we
can do is go based on what we have to
[1:05:35] know um the percentage to give an idea
of what's going to be needed. So those
[1:05:39] are my um thoughts on it. I don't know
if anybody else wants to kind of chime
[1:05:43] in or their thoughts.
>> Yeah, I would like to
[1:05:45] » Yes, please. Thanks.
>> So I think the point that can't be
[1:05:50] overlooked here is this is a cut
through. It's not just uh improving the
[1:05:55] life of the businesses and the people
that use that in our community. this a
[1:05:59] major cut through uh and there are
things that are external to our control
[1:06:03] that make this situation worse. And now
while it may be a regional benefit to
[1:06:08] have uh and actually I shouldn't say
benefit, it's outside of our control and
[1:06:12] regardless how we feel about it, there
are major projects that were made just
[1:06:16] north on State Street. The Arbor South
project is going to come now. It is
[1:06:21] going to have over a thousand new
housing units that are going to be
[1:06:24] there. Those residents are in our
taxable jurisdiction. They are going to
[1:06:29] be using this as a cut through to get to
US23 to Michigan Avenue, things of that
[1:06:34] nature. Our vehicle to have access to
county and statewide funds. Is this and
[1:06:40] and what just to be clear and I want to
ask this as a question. What we're
[1:06:43] voting on tonight is not the approval of
the project. It's not the definition of
[1:06:48] the funds within it. It's actually
looking at this is establishing the
[1:06:52] boundary. So if we do do a CIA or a tiff
capture, this is the taxable
[1:06:57] jurisdiction. So then we can do
projections based on this definition,
[1:07:01] the boundaries. And then the second
thing that we're considering tonight is
[1:07:05] just the board of that we still have a
lot of work to do. And candidly before I
[1:07:10] would be an affirmative vote in this. I
need to see the data too. I need to see
[1:07:14] the finances at a deeper detail. that
this is a necessary step to say okay
[1:07:19] with this taxable jurisdiction or these
boundaries this is the projection
[1:07:22] revenue that base offset etc and this is
a in my opinion this feels like a
[1:07:27] necessary step to even get to that next
step of the data and if we do not do
[1:07:32] something like this I wish there was a a
different mechanism for this but then we
[1:07:37] don't have access to county dollars we
don't have access to the state dollars
[1:07:40] so this is an X this in my opinion is a
way for us to put in 10 cents on the
[1:07:46] to get this pro thing that's already a
problem today and those thousand uh new
[1:07:52] housing units plus the extra growth that
we have in this region will just
[1:07:56] exacerbate this issue over the next
three to five years. So if we don't take
[1:07:59] necessary steps to start improving this
now we are going to start introducing I
[1:08:03] believe public health and public safety
concerns along that corridor as well.
[1:08:07] you know, if there's a a public safety
call that's around any type of uh time
[1:08:12] between call at 7:30 and 9 a.m. and
NASCO through State Street corridor,
[1:08:18] there's going to be delayed response.
The same is going to be true around uh
[1:08:22] the rush hour at the end of the day. And
these are things that aren't just the
[1:08:26] responsibility of those businesses and
those condos and things that are right
[1:08:30] along the State Street Corridor project.
This is a major regional corridor cut
[1:08:33] through that's material different than
plat and other areas because of the
[1:08:39] regional connect of tissue that stays
between those areas. So again I just
[1:08:44] want to close by saying the way I
understand this in the order of
[1:08:47] operations is we're not voting on the
whole CIA the tip. This is really if we
[1:08:51] do this this is the boundary. This is
what we're about to consider here. And
[1:08:55] the second step is okay another legal
step is for us to even explore the next
[1:08:59] step of this conversation. We need the
board.
[1:09:02] » Correct. And at that point, we will hit
the next toll gates as we get more data.
[1:09:05] Then we can make the affirmative or not
decision to move forward with this
[1:09:10] project. These are necessary steps to
even explore this as an option. Correct.
[1:09:14] Okay. Thank you.
>> That's a very good point and we're
[1:09:17] basically planning kind of putting
together a plan for if we do and if the
[1:09:21] numbers aren't ended the date and it
comes back and it's not um doable then
[1:09:26] it's not. But we at least we've taken
the steps to be able to have the option.
[1:09:30] I just want to add one small you guys
have covered most of everything. uh from
[1:09:35] from what I found I don't think there's
any other product any other format to
[1:09:40] finance a future um
large project such as this sad as far as
[1:09:47] I know are very specific and only cover
doesn't
[1:09:55] in as much as you know
the issue is a difficult one to
[1:10:02] to swallow sometimes is the reality that
the only ways like this are funded
[1:10:07] through this process and the only way
you qualify for those major grants are
[1:10:12] through this process. So before we can
even answer all the questions we have to
[1:10:17] we have to walk through the steps
[1:10:24] » more discussion or questions.
[1:10:29] Okay.
U may ask for a roll call.
[1:10:34] » Treasurer Epicanin,
>> yes.
[1:10:36] » Trusty Erada Thompson,
>> yes.
[1:10:38] » Trusty Jaffer,
>> yes.
[1:10:40] » Trusty Brbeck,
>> yes.
[1:10:42] » Trusty Kurami,
>> yes.
[1:10:43] » Supervisor Riley,
>> yes.
[1:10:45] » Clerk Galdi,
>> no.
[1:10:47] » Madam Chair, you have six and one name.
>> All right. Thank you. Um, resolution is
[1:10:52] adopted. If we could um get a motion for
9.12. Madam Chair, I move to adopt a
[1:10:59] resolution to appoint the corridor
Improvement Authority Board.
[1:11:04] » Second.
>> Any discussion? I think we kind of
[1:11:06] covered that in the last conversation,
but if anybody has any issues with the
[1:11:11] actual board that's presented
um roll call
[1:11:16] Thompson,
>> yes.
[1:11:17] » Trusty Jaffer,
>> yes.
[1:11:19] » Trusty Braybeck,
>> yes.
[1:11:20] » Trusty Kurami,
>> yes.
[1:11:22] » Supervisor Riley,
>> yes.
[1:11:24] » Clerk Analdi,
>> yes.
[1:11:25] » Treasure Epicanin,
>> yes. Madam supervisor, you have seven.
[1:11:29] » Thank you. Resolution is adopted. May I
please have a motion for 9.13?
[1:11:35] » Madam Chair, I move to adopt a
resolution of support for Chad Tough
[1:11:38] Foundation Run Tough Chad TU 1K and FK
or 5K on Saturday September 27th 2026.
[1:11:49] Resolution 26-23
support.
[1:11:53] » Okay. Any discussion? This is um I think
everybody's familiar with this um
[1:11:57] popular run and um support of of Chad
TU. Um it's just one of the federalities
[1:12:02] of closing a road. All right, if I could
get a roll call.
[1:12:07] » Trusty Jaffer?
>> Yes.
[1:12:09] » Trusty Braybeck?
>> Yes.
[1:12:10] » Trusty Kurami?
>> Yes.
[1:12:12] » Supervisor Riley?
>> Yes.
[1:12:13] » Clerk Enzaldi?
>> Yes.
[1:12:15] » Treasure Epicanin?
>> Yes.
[1:12:16] » Trusty Erda Thompson?
>> Yes.
[1:12:18] » Madam Chair, you have 78.
>> All right. Resolution adopted. And if
[1:12:21] you can make it out for the runs, please
do. Uh may I have a motion for 9.14?
[1:12:26] » Madam Chair, I move to authorize the
supervisor and clerk to enter into an
[1:12:29] agreement and associated distribution
service uh writer and consolation new
[1:12:35] energy gas division LLC for the
township's natural gas account. Subject
[1:12:41] to the township attorney approval
support.
[1:12:44] » Okay. Um if I could actually ask um
Director West to come up and explain a
[1:12:48] little about this. actually is a good
cost savings and a good find on um on
[1:12:53] our department's part.
>> Good evening. Hello.
[1:12:57] » Um I tried to make the memo as detailed
as I could because I know that this
[1:13:01] doesn't make a lot of sense and
sometimes when things feel too good to
[1:13:03] be true um you know they don't work out.
But we have vetted this out pretty
[1:13:08] extensively, including contacting other
municipalities who've been participating
[1:13:11] in this. Um, effectively because they
don't want um utility companies to be
[1:13:18] monopolies, the Michigan Public Service
Commission stepped in and required to
[1:13:22] have an alternative gas provider. Um,
they uh named Constellation Energy as
[1:13:28] one of those gas providers. And what
they do is effectively cut
[1:13:31] administrative overhead costs out of it.
So our um natural gas provider, uh,
[1:13:38] maintenance, um, all of those things are
still provided through DTE Energy, but
[1:13:42] our billing is done through
Constellation Energy. Um, they basically
[1:13:46] submeter out off of that. Um, and it
gives a pretty significant savings. Um,
[1:13:51] this is something that other
municipalities in our local area,
[1:13:54] including Ann Arbor, Ipsellani Township,
um, Canton Township and others, um, are
[1:14:00] seeing real savings of. Uh, this is not
just a pie in the sky number. Um, Uh
[1:14:05] many of them have been doing this for
years and years and years to the point
[1:14:08] where they didn't even remember that
they were part of this program any
[1:14:10] longer. So when we got the referral
note, they were like, "I don't know what
[1:14:13] you're talking about." And we had to go
back through and and get that
[1:14:15] understanding. But um the the estimate
um of our gas savings, so they did take
[1:14:21] a look at all of our accounts. Um we did
run this through our finance department
[1:14:25] as well just to make sure that we were
all short up. Um but currently we're
[1:14:29] paying about 63,000
and change for our natural gas. Um, and
[1:14:35] we would be paying about 39722 for
natural gas. Um, so an annual savings of
[1:14:40] approximately $24,000.
Um, the other thing that they did which
[1:14:45] was fantastic, but um, we fixed some
billing errors along the way that they
[1:14:50] helped us realize as well. So, um,
they've been really open and
[1:14:54] understanding and answered a million
questions for us in this process. If you
[1:14:57] have any specific questions, I'm happy
to try to answer them. I just want to
[1:15:00] kind of comment that when director West
brought this to me and she's like it
[1:15:03] seems too good to be true and we yeah
and she vetted it out with other
[1:15:06] jurisdictions and everything else
because we we've been tasked to know to
[1:15:11] kind of tighten our belt and this is
helping tighten the belt.
[1:15:13] » I should add we get a lot of requests
from thirdparty providers to do these
[1:15:17] types of submetering things and we've
constantly researched and vetted and
[1:15:21] said no this is not correct. My staff
takes this very seriously. Um, this one
[1:15:25] in particular is only applicable to
Wayne and Washington County. That's it.
[1:15:30] Municipalities and Wayne and Washington
County. Um, and so it's very specific to
[1:15:35] the provisions of the MPSC. Um, and like
I said, that's one of the reasons why we
[1:15:40] we vetted it for so long. We've been
looking at this for probably over a
[1:15:43] year. Um, and then we've talked to other
municipalities as well to make sure that
[1:15:47] it made complete sense.
>> Any comments or questions on this one?
[1:15:53] » Comment. Thank you for looking into this
and saving taxpayers $24,000 a year.
[1:15:58] » Is it only 24,000?
>> That's all we have in our gas metering
[1:16:02] cost.
>> So, this is part of our sustainability
[1:16:04] mission. I'll put credit out to our
community engagement team as part of our
[1:16:08] community development department. Um,
we're constantly looking for reasons to
[1:16:12] help save and cut back. Um, shout out to
the conference I was at today with the
[1:16:17] Michigan Sustainability Conference um
and the Michigan Green Communities
[1:16:20] Challenge. helps us think about these
things and look at these things in
[1:16:23] detail to try to cut back on all of our
energy savings, to reduce our climate
[1:16:27] impact, etc. Um, but this is part of
that sustainability mission.
[1:16:32] » So, we're going to keep plugging away
when things are too good to be true.
[1:16:34] We're we're there.
>> Yeah. All right. Um,
[1:16:39] all in favor?
>> Opposed? All right. Thank you.
[1:16:43] Authorized. Uh, may I please have a
motion for 9:15?
[1:16:48] Madam Chair, I move to authorize the
supervisor and clerk to sign the first
[1:16:51] amendment to the land lease agreement
with Celco Partnership doing business as
[1:16:57] Verizon Wireless extending the lease
term and modifying the associated lease
[1:17:03] provisions subject to the township
attorney approval.
[1:17:06] » Second.
>> Okay. Yeah. And this is something that
[1:17:08] is a continuation of things that we've
done in the past. This in the next one,
[1:17:12] too.
There's any questions on this
[1:17:15] discussion?
All right. All in favor?
[1:17:18] » I opposed.
>> All right, that's authorized. May I
[1:17:20] please have a motion for 9.16?
>> Madam Chair, I move to authorize the
[1:17:24] supervisor and clerk to sign the uniform
video service local franchise agreement
[1:17:28] with Direct TV LLC continuing its
authorization to provide video services
[1:17:34] within Pittsfield Charter Township
subject to the township attorney
[1:17:38] approval.
>> Second.
[1:17:39] » Okay. Any discussion?
>> All in favor?
[1:17:43] » I opposed. All right. as authorized. May
I please have a motion for 9.17?
[1:17:50] » Madam Chair, I move to approve first
reading ZOA26-236
[1:17:55] to add section 40-11.51
to the zoning ordinance.
[1:18:01] » Second.
>> Okay. And obviously this is just a
[1:18:03] followup to the public hearing we had
earlier. Um please note that again
[1:18:06] there'll be a second reading um and
staff will be recommending changes to
[1:18:09] the noise limits um to implement
clarification on the me measurements. Um
[1:18:14] that will more restrictive. Um so won't
be we could be decreasing and making
[1:18:17] sure that we're more nothing will be
increased as a um a result of it but
[1:18:22] there'll be some uh change at least that
change to the next reading.
[1:18:27] Okay. Um any discussion or comments
based on public feedback
[1:18:32] on uh all in favor?
>> I let's let's do a roll call.
[1:18:36] » Roll call. Okay. Sorry. I don't approve.
Yes. Okay. Sorry. Roll call. Thank you.
[1:18:40] » Trusty Braybeck.
>> Yes.
[1:18:43] » Trusty Kurami. Yes.
>> Supervisor Riley.
[1:18:46] » Yes.
>> Clerk Henzaldi.
[1:18:47] » Yes.
>> Treasure Epicanin.
[1:18:48] » Yes.
>> Trusty Erda Thompson?
[1:18:50] » Yes.
>> Trusty Jaffer?
[1:18:51] » Yes.
>> Madam Chair, you have seven.
[1:18:53] » Okay. Thank you. Approved um for the
first reading and may have a motion for
[1:18:57] 9.18.
>> Madam Chair, I move to approve first
[1:19:00] reading ZOA number 26-237
to add section 40-31
[1:19:09] to the zoning ordinance.
>> Second. And just button it up.
[1:19:14] All right, roll call, please. Trusty
Kurami,
[1:19:17] » yes.
>> Supervisor Riley,
[1:19:19] » yes.
>> Clerk Analdi,
[1:19:20] » yes.
>> Treasure Epicanin,
[1:19:21] » yes.
>> Trusty Erda Thompson,
[1:19:23] » yes.
>> Trusty Chaffer,
[1:19:24] » yes.
>> Trusty Braybeck,
[1:19:26] » yes.
>> Madam Chair, you have seven. Thank you.
[1:19:28] Almost made a full turnaround on the
roll calls. I don't think we've done
[1:19:31] that in a long while since I've been up
here. I don't think we have done it. All
[1:19:34] right. Um, unfinished business. We don't
have any um any leaison reports or
[1:19:39] trustee reports.
>> Yep.
[1:19:44] I'd like to share the summary of action
from September 4, 2026 plan commission
[1:19:49] meeting. The plan commission voted to
approve wetland permit and final site
[1:19:55] plan for CSPA
22-23 field park.
[1:20:02] Then the planning commissioned to state
the 2025 final site plans extension for
[1:20:08] CSPA 19-20
[1:20:13] located 471 Carpenter Road until such
time the planning commission makes a
[1:20:18] decision regarding the 2026 final site
plan extension.
[1:20:24] The next meeting, planning commission
meeting will be on September 17.
[1:20:32] » Thank you.
>> I think that the second one there um
[1:20:35] they're looking to u it's a property
across from Amazon. When Amazon came in
[1:20:40] um some of the the um roadways made a
change, so they have to do another site
[1:20:46] plan and they need another extension on
that. Um and they've already done two.
[1:20:50] So it's it's out of the ordinary.
>> Asking for extension.
[1:20:53] It might be an exception because of it
being across from Amazon, but that's not
[1:20:58] necessarily how we would do things.
There usually isn't a third exception.
[1:21:02] Correct.
>> Okay.
[1:21:04] Information to have. All right. Any
other reports or Yes.
[1:21:09] historical district commission. Um
we have two positions that are
[1:21:14] available. One we get a resation from
our architect which means have an
[1:21:18] architect on the board and also
unfortunately we lost Janice passed away
[1:21:24] earlier in August. We just found that
out. So, her positions up. So, that's a
[1:21:32] » and like to say that in um October,
we're going to work with the the
[1:21:36] district commission and the society and
um perhaps do a proclamation for um Al
[1:21:40] Pa and then maybe a moment of silence,
you know, for Janice Harwood um and
[1:21:44] recognize that um none of us really
Yeah. were aware, but and we are working
[1:21:49] on those um architect is a hard one. So,
if anyone does know our architect,
[1:21:53] please let us know who lives in
Pittsfield clearly. Thank you. Thank
[1:21:57] you. All right. Uh, we'll open it up for
public comment, too. Any person may come
[1:22:02] forward at this time to address the
board. Anyone who wishes to speak is
[1:22:05] requested, but not required to state his
or her their name um and address for the
[1:22:09] record.
[1:22:13] All right. Seeing none, um I'm going to
head and goinghead adjourn at
[1:22:23] 7:52, but then we're going to take a
five minute break and then go right into
[1:22:26] working session. So, five minutes and
we're meeting right back here.
[1:22:30] » Madam Chair, I move to
>> Oh,
[1:22:33] sorry.
>> All in favor?
[1:22:34] » I All right. Thank you.
>> Sorry.
[1:22:41] I don't know if I want to touch yet.
>> I know. I know.