A) CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Hess called the meeting to order at 6:00 PM at City Hall Meeting Room - 2nd floor.
Members present: Hess, Staley, Cross, Hodgson, Gully, Kusina
Dobulis and Flanders
Members Excused Whitney
Staff Present: Harsch, Manore, Jim Young
B) INQUIRY INTO POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
None
C) APPROVAL OF AGENDA
The Agenda was approved as amended. The Chair requested that
H) NEW BUSINESS 2. Discussion regarding conflicts of interest
be heard after the public hearing.
D) APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. The Minutes of March 14, 2004 were approved as corrected.
E) CORRESPONDENCE
None
F) PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Public Hearing to consider an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance Section 5.172(1-5) Site Condominiums
Chairman Hess introduced this item and opened the matter for discussion. He indicated that this draft has not been amended since the last time the Commission reviewed it.
It was pointed out that this amendment allows for smaller lot sizes and public open spaces. Mr. Hess stated it is imperative that the Planning Commission review applications for site condominiums.
Ms. Gully addressed section 5.172(1)(e), stating the word etc. should be explained.
Mr. Harsch explained that etc could include emergency services, streets and utilities. It was also suggested that language should be added as follows: such as ... but not limited to.
Motion by Hodgson Supported by Cross
To send the amendment to Section 5.172(1-5)Site Condominiums to City Council for their review.
Ayes: Hess, Staley, Cross, Hodgson, Gully, Kusina, Dobulis
and Flanders
Nays: None
Motion Carried
H) NEW BUSINESS 2. Discussion regarding conflicts of interest
Mrs. Cross stated the Commission requested that Mr. Young, City Attorney be present to discuss conflict of interest. Mrs. Cross presented the Commission with a copy of East Jordans ordinance. (see attached)
Mr. Dobulis stated that when he was in business as a licensed mechanic he could not do business with the City. In addition, this would also eliminate his son and employees. It would affect his income to the point where he would have to resign from the Planning Commission. This town is too small. How much do we want to sacrifice?
Mr. Hodgson agreed.
Mrs. Cross pointed out that the Planning Commission needs something in writing to address conflicts of interest.
Mr. Young stated one approach would be to include the East Jordan language. Other municipalities who want qualified people to serve their communities follow State law.
There is a state statute that has an exception for communities of less than 25,000 people. Under this exception the statute allows a public servant to have a contract with the City. However, there has to be advanced notice of at least seven (7) days. At that time this contract would be discussed at an open meeting.
In communities of less than 25,000, the governing body can authorize additional services by a public servant. This is only a decision that is made by City Council.
He pointed out that if you get too strict, qualified people would be not be able to serve. The public must never get the impression that someone is getting a job because they are a public official.
It is the Commissions decision as to whether they would like to adopt strict rules or follow the State guidelines.
The current City policy, dated 1993 states: No member of a City Council Commission, Board, Agency or authority shall vote on a matter when any of the following exists;
1. The financial interest of the member or a members immediate family may be affected by the matter upon which a vote will be taken. The term immediate family means a members spouse, child, spouse of a child, or a parent.
2. The matter involves a business which employs the member or in which the member has a financial interest or is a partner, member, director, officer or a stockholder where the stockholder owns more than one (1%) percent of the outstanding stock.
Mr. Young stated that he would prepare something that would meet the needs of the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission could then make a recommendation to the City Council.
Mrs. Cross stated that re-bids should also be addressed.
Mr. Staley stated that this discussion arose from a specific section of the ordinance. The intent of the Charter states that an ordinance has to have a full vote of the City Council, with full disclosure beforehand. We have a Charter an we must operate under that Charter.
Mr. Hess asked if a Planning Commission member, with a conflict, can discuss a project that comes before them and not vote. Mr. Hodgson asked if the Commissioner would have to totally leave the room or could they participate in the discussion from the audience.
Mr. Hess stated that an elected official is an elected official 24/7. If you are a Planning Commissioner, you are only a member when the Commission is meeting. If you have a conflict and sit in the audience, then you are a private citizen.
Mrs. Cross stated the MSU class stated you are to leave the room.
Mr. Dobulis and Mr. Kusina agreed that if a Commissioner steps down, they have the right to speak on the matter as a private citizen. Mr. Staley stated they would have an obligation to speak up. Mr. Young stated the Commissioner would have to step down, but would probably not have to leave the room. He stated that he will research this issue and present his recommendations.
Mr. Flanders pointed out that there are two issues: Conflict of interest and the appearance of a conflict of interest.
Motion by Cross Supported by Dobulis
To request that Jim Young, City Attorney, research a conflict of interest policy for the Planning Commission.
Mr. Staley pointed out that the important thing is that a public servant inform the public ahead of time if there is a conflict of interest. He agreed that if the Commissioner steps down, he should be able to speak on the matter, since he may have valuable information.
Ayes: Hess, Staley, Cross, Hodgson, Gully, Kusina, Dobulis
and Flanders
Nays: None
Motion Carried
Mrs. Doan, Resident, asked if the Planning Commission has a time limit for the public to speak. Mr. Hess stated he usually will allow 3-4 for each person to speak and then go on. He also allows the first party to have additional input.
G) OLD BUSINESS
1. Continued discussion of Assisted Living amendment
Mrs. Doan stated that assisted living should not be allowed in the R-1 and R-2 zoning districts.
Mr. Hess pointed out that this is the same draft the Commission reviewed in 2003-2004.
Mr. Dobulis stated that the draft contains the following phrase, which should be revised: and provided further, that special use approval shall be the Charlevoix City Council, after review and recommendations by the Planning Commission, rather than the Planning Commission as authorized by Article VIII. This sentence should read: and provided further, that special use approval shall be, after review, by the Planning Commission.
Mrs. Cross stated that she heard that Sunnybanks is proposing to change the site plan from what was approved in the consent judgment.
Mr. Hess asked if there is language that could be added to the Preamble that would cover any future developments that would very similar in nature.
Mr. Harsch pointed out that the preamble section of an ordinance is not regulatory. These terms will be added to section 5.5 and 5.7 of the definition section of the ordinance. He pointed out that most of these types of facilities are licensed by the State. Each license is usually very specific as to the term they use in addressing the facility in question.
2. Continued discussion Comprehensive Plan revisions
3. City and Village Zoning Act Review (Sec. 125.584b-125.584c)
Mr. Hess stated that the next staff packet will contain the next 3-4 pages of the Zoning Act Review.
H) NEW BUSINESS
1. Discussion regarding amending the By-Laws
2. Discussion of Rules of Procedure for Public Meetings
I) FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
Special Planning Commission meeting scheduled for April 25, 2005 for Mary Ann Hodak.
J) ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the Chairman adjourned the meeting at 7:35 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Dianne Manore, Recording Secretary