the-compact
Road Advisory Committee Thursday, July 16, 2026 · 89 min

Bloomfield Township Road Advisory Committee Meeting on July 15, 2026

Transcript

Click any timestamp to jump the video to that moment. Auto-transcribed; expect occasional errors on proper nouns.

  1. Jay is not going to be here so it might put Mike's back so we're just missing one person okay the purpose of the meeting now that this is to go over this presentation the slides see if there's any anything that we want to change or whatever I gave you that's the introduction that's not in the slides that's just the introduction I'll be giving that one page to introduce the oh yeah you're right you're right okay we got yeah I looked at the minutes from the last meeting everybody got them got them your motion to approve them moved second moved and seconded all those in favor aye okay all right we did attendance we did the minutes I think then we can get get on so what I started to say was that the first couple of slides the brief history the committee members the mission statement that's all part of it just in this introduction that's not here you did I just gave it to you so you can see it and it's just going to be my introduction but the meat of it is going to be from these slides here so after we have the minute we want to post the mission statement and then I always want to introduce the members of the committee so so that the board of trustees know who's on it and then we're going to just a really a brief history of how this one but it was when this was set up and the major milestones report that we gave last October and and then we go into the points the points of the key points only the major bullets from the presentation that we did in October just to remind them and more importantly to remind the public who's looking at this it's a second audience you know we have two audiences the board of trustees and then the public and so just to remind them of why we're doing is what we're looking at some of the things we study now the next next slide I just question is we

  2. introduction but the meat of it is going to be from these slides here so after we have the minute we want to post the mission statement and then I always want to introduce the members of the committee so so that the board of trustees know who's on it and then we're going to just a really a brief history of how this one but it was when this was set up and the major milestones report that we gave last October and and then we go into the points the points of the key points only the major bullets from the presentation that we did in October just to remind them and more importantly to remind the public who's looking at this it's a second audience you know we have two audiences the board of trustees and then the public and so just to remind them of why we're doing is what we're looking at some of the things we study now the next next slide I just question is we have the pace of report and I just want to ask throw it out we are going well we have a section in later on on this report asking for updated versions etc we'll get into that but should we have this to remind people of the the condition the condition of the roads over overall even though this is not up-to-date I think it presents the magnitude of the issue okay that we're studying so I don't know why you wouldn't all right prime them for that magnitude okay Mindy see what we don't have a current one well then it should say in big letters because you what will happen with residents if they come and we want them to come we want that we want our work which has been good important work to be believable mm-hmm and we want to establish trust right you're right and that's what I would like to do that and say this is the

  3. at some of the things we study now the next next slide I just question is we have the pace of report and I just want to ask throw it out we are going well we have a section in later on on this report asking for updated versions etc we'll get into that but should we have this to remind people of the the condition the condition of the roads over overall even though this is not up-to-date I think it presents the magnitude of the issue okay that we're studying so I don't know why you wouldn't all right prime them for that magnitude okay Mindy see what we don't have a current one well then it should say in big letters because you what will happen with residents if they come and we want them to come we want that we want our work which has been good important work to be believable mm-hmm and we want to establish trust right you're right and that's what I would like to do that and say this is the most current we have though it is not up to date and I want to make that point you're right it just also says as of 2025 on here yeah but even then there were changes there that were made that aren't reflective right what does it say well I'll emphasize that okay Fred go ahead there's a key component to this it's it's out of date we know that right well what not what the key component not to me this is like the number one thing If we as a township don't change the way we do business, we're never going to get out in front of this. The roads in our township, the residential roads in our township, for the most part, I want to say a gigantic percentage of these roads, are well beyond their life cycle. And the township is experiencing, in a lot of these neighborhoods, the township is experiencing a massive regrowth of reconstruction of the neighborhood.

  4. right you're right and that's what I would like to do that and say this is the most current we have though it is not up to date and I want to make that point you're right it just also says as of 2025 on here yeah but even then there were changes there that were made that aren't reflective right what does it say well I'll emphasize that okay Fred go ahead there's a key component to this it's it's out of date we know that right well what not what the key component not to me this is like the number one thing If we as a township don't change the way we do business, we're never going to get out in front of this. The roads in our township, the residential roads in our township, for the most part, I want to say a gigantic percentage of these roads, are well beyond their life cycle. And the township is experiencing, in a lot of these neighborhoods, the township is experiencing a massive regrowth of reconstruction of the neighborhood. And so you're taking old roads, they were in specification 50 years ago, they're no longer in specification, but you're subjecting them to the vehicular traffic, the construction vehicular traffic of modern day construction of much bigger homes than we have now. That's addressed completely later in the program. But it's part of this, it's part of this, because of the fact that it shows that why is the road, why are the roads in our township so bad? They're not just bad because they're bad, they're bad because they're old. And they outlive their life cycle, and I can certainly speak for my neighborhood, when you take roads that are outside of their life cycle, 10, 15 years outside of their life cycle, and you suddenly subject those roads to heavy construction traffic, you're overtaxing the roads that are no longer within specification. And you're accelerating the additional wear on those roads that are no longer being. Stay tuned! specification. And that's just gonna make that map more red than it is now. Okay. And if we sugarcoat that, I think we're doing a disservice. Well, I don't think we're sugarcoating it. I don't see that at all. Number one. Number two, you're

  5. And so you're taking old roads, they were in specification 50 years ago, they're no longer in specification, but you're subjecting them to the vehicular traffic, the construction vehicular traffic of modern day construction of much bigger homes than we have now. That's addressed completely later in the program. But it's part of this, it's part of this, because of the fact that it shows that why is the road, why are the roads in our township so bad? They're not just bad because they're bad, they're bad because they're old. And they outlive their life cycle, and I can certainly speak for my neighborhood, when you take roads that are outside of their life cycle, 10, 15 years outside of their life cycle, and you suddenly subject those roads to heavy construction traffic, you're overtaxing the roads that are no longer within specification. And you're accelerating the additional wear on those roads that are no longer being. Stay tuned! specification. And that's just gonna make that map more red than it is now. Okay. And if we sugarcoat that, I think we're doing a disservice. Well, I don't think we're sugarcoating it. I don't see that at all. Number one. Number two, you're talking about the reason why it's all red. Not that the fact that it's like that. But the reason it's red is a big part of it. You're putting in there, these are the reasons why, and I think we get to that. We do. So I don't see what the, it is, okay, it's as early as, as close we can get to the modern map, which is 2025. It's a year out of whack. This is really just for cosmetic things to say, this is the, this is the magnitude of the problem. I mean, you're not gonna go through there and say, well, San Rosa doesn't have one and this one does. It's a magnitude of the problem. The map doesn't look good. To your point, it's, it needs to be addressed. That's what we're trying to do. Fred's point is right. I mean, he makes a good point. Well, but I'm gonna say we, we do address that as a whole section later on. In fact, that was what your group, you came up with about, you know, maybe a part of the permitting process and a fee, a road fee to do, to correct all that. And that's part of what is causing this to be. That is right. But we do address that. This, in my opinion, is simply way to Thank you.

  6. we're sugarcoating it. I don't see that at all. Number one. Number two, you're talking about the reason why it's all red. Not that the fact that it's like that. But the reason it's red is a big part of it. You're putting in there, these are the reasons why, and I think we get to that. We do. So I don't see what the, it is, okay, it's as early as, as close we can get to the modern map, which is 2025. It's a year out of whack. This is really just for cosmetic things to say, this is the, this is the magnitude of the problem. I mean, you're not gonna go through there and say, well, San Rosa doesn't have one and this one does. It's a magnitude of the problem. The map doesn't look good. To your point, it's, it needs to be addressed. That's what we're trying to do. Fred's point is right. I mean, he makes a good point. Well, but I'm gonna say we, we do address that as a whole section later on. In fact, that was what your group, you came up with about, you know, maybe a part of the permitting process and a fee, a road fee to do, to correct all that. And that's part of what is causing this to be. That is right. But we do address that. This, in my opinion, is simply way to Thank you. This is what is. That's all. And we'll get to that. I just caution everybody that in the world I came from, if you didn't make your point within the first few minutes of a meeting, you lose the audience. And in this case, our audience is the trustees. Well, there's two audiences. There are. The public is one. But we are reporting to the trustee. That is true. And we're making a voice for the citizens. So our primary audience is the trustees. And if we don't grab their attention and make them realize that if we continue to do business the way we've done business for the last 20 or 30 years, we're never going to fix this problem. And, again, I'm saying that's part of what is handled later on from your reporting that you sent. That was what was garnered from all that. That, yes, the perception is, not the perception, but we say it in the conventional wisdom is that the construction, heavy trucks, the construction, et cetera, what you pointed out, is part of the problem. It's what's causing a lot of this. And we want to look into that. And it's a big part of the problem mainly because of the fact that the roads are old. Well, that's, you know, if the roads were 10 years old and they were still within specification,

  7. This is what is. That's all. And we'll get to that. I just caution everybody that in the world I came from, if you didn't make your point within the first few minutes of a meeting, you lose the audience. And in this case, our audience is the trustees. Well, there's two audiences. There are. The public is one. But we are reporting to the trustee. That is true. And we're making a voice for the citizens. So our primary audience is the trustees. And if we don't grab their attention and make them realize that if we continue to do business the way we've done business for the last 20 or 30 years, we're never going to fix this problem. And, again, I'm saying that's part of what is handled later on from your reporting that you sent. That was what was garnered from all that. That, yes, the perception is, not the perception, but we say it in the conventional wisdom is that the construction, heavy trucks, the construction, et cetera, what you pointed out, is part of the problem. It's what's causing a lot of this. And we want to look into that. And it's a big part of the problem mainly because of the fact that the roads are old. Well, that's, you know, if the roads were 10 years old and they were still within specification, the impact of the roads on this would be completely different. But these roads have been, first of all, I don't know what the specification of the pay. I don't know if it's a big part of the road to the road to the road to the road to the road to the road to the road. residential road was 50 years ago but I'd be willing to bet money that the specification for the building that road today is much more severe and that's part of the impact of the cost because you can't just grind down three four inches and and recap it and have a good solid road because the the specification of what lies below the surface in the Asheville it no longer meets any special one is one of the main things and we talked about this the last time from your report was that you insisted that we should have a study done to look into I forgot the word you used but something data something I forgot what it was but to look into see do those is it true that those wrote that the construction is is making the roads that much worse and and that was your recommendation was to make sure that we see that is it true and if it is let's

  8. Well, that's, you know, if the roads were 10 years old and they were still within specification, the impact of the roads on this would be completely different. But these roads have been, first of all, I don't know what the specification of the pay. I don't know if it's a big part of the road to the road to the road to the road to the road to the road to the road. residential road was 50 years ago but I'd be willing to bet money that the specification for the building that road today is much more severe and that's part of the impact of the cost because you can't just grind down three four inches and and recap it and have a good solid road because the the specification of what lies below the surface in the Asheville it no longer meets any special one is one of the main things and we talked about this the last time from your report was that you insisted that we should have a study done to look into I forgot the word you used but something data something I forgot what it was but to look into see do those is it true that those wrote that the construction is is making the roads that much worse and and that was your recommendation was to make sure that we see that is it true and if it is let's let's do something about it yeah but our last meeting I thought was was one of the most productive meetings we had because it was the best brainstorming session that I had seen in the time being on this committee and it was looking at all the impacts if you look at the the final version of what Mindy and I came up with reporting it's in its content it's significantly different than what it was in its objective it's the same in its in its recommendation the same but part of it was realizing that no we can't go to the road commission and claim you're just allowing these heavy trucks to damage our road it's really based on the fact that the roads are old to begin with okay and and that is a key component i think of what the township is up against is that we have been we've been neglecting this problem for a very long time and it's not a function of trying to figure out well who do we smack down because of this it's own the problem and you can fix the problem if you fail to own the problem statistically your chances of fixing it okay let's let's just get back to this this slide though on this slide we we said mindy right right well the pacer one oh yeah yeah um that we have to make sure that that

  9. recommendation was to make sure that we see that is it true and if it is let's let's do something about it yeah but our last meeting I thought was was one of the most productive meetings we had because it was the best brainstorming session that I had seen in the time being on this committee and it was looking at all the impacts if you look at the the final version of what Mindy and I came up with reporting it's in its content it's significantly different than what it was in its objective it's the same in its in its recommendation the same but part of it was realizing that no we can't go to the road commission and claim you're just allowing these heavy trucks to damage our road it's really based on the fact that the roads are old to begin with okay and and that is a key component i think of what the township is up against is that we have been we've been neglecting this problem for a very long time and it's not a function of trying to figure out well who do we smack down because of this it's own the problem and you can fix the problem if you fail to own the problem statistically your chances of fixing it okay let's let's just get back to this this slide though on this slide we we said mindy right right well the pacer one oh yeah yeah um that we have to make sure that that uh we let people we emphasize the fact that this is now out of date okay one two what fred what what would you put on just on this what is slide what would you change what would you add to it i would add the fact that that that that in most cases the roads especially the ones that are in red first of all i guess i narratively i would add this slide is out of date and we know we know that that we know that it's much worse than what is reported here no it's better actually it's better yes it's yes all right but i'm counting i'm counting miles yeah i'm just saying yeah well no people that So I think that we should be adding in, narratively or somewhere in this, on this slide, that the roads, our residential roads are largely old and well beyond their useful life, their design life, not their useful life, their design life. That tells you right from the beginning that it sets you up to talk about the cause of the problem later.

  10. we said mindy right right well the pacer one oh yeah yeah um that we have to make sure that that uh we let people we emphasize the fact that this is now out of date okay one two what fred what what would you put on just on this what is slide what would you change what would you add to it i would add the fact that that that that in most cases the roads especially the ones that are in red first of all i guess i narratively i would add this slide is out of date and we know we know that that we know that it's much worse than what is reported here no it's better actually it's better yes it's yes all right but i'm counting i'm counting miles yeah i'm just saying yeah well no people that So I think that we should be adding in, narratively or somewhere in this, on this slide, that the roads, our residential roads are largely old and well beyond their useful life, their design life, not their useful life, their design life. That tells you right from the beginning that it sets you up to talk about the cause of the problem later. Okay. That's my point. Great. I think that's fine. Because if you're going to get to the problem later, you've got to set yourself up to get to the problem. That's a good way to say it. Okay? So I'll just add that narratively. It doesn't have to be on the slide. Narratively, remind people that these roads are 80 years old. Some of them are. Or some buggy. Horse and buggy. I would at least say that they're well beyond their design life. And that's what I wrote. Old and beyond the design life. I'll work that out. That's a good enough technical statement that people will understand. Okay. Back to the key points from our presentation. Sorry. There was one thing. I think Steve came up and said it's Pacer spelled wrong in here. P-A-S-E-R, I think it is. I believe it should be 213 miles of paved neighborhood roads. 213? Yeah. I think we have 230 total with gravel please okay yeah this is we're not doing

  11. Okay. That's my point. Great. I think that's fine. Because if you're going to get to the problem later, you've got to set yourself up to get to the problem. That's a good way to say it. Okay? So I'll just add that narratively. It doesn't have to be on the slide. Narratively, remind people that these roads are 80 years old. Some of them are. Or some buggy. Horse and buggy. I would at least say that they're well beyond their design life. And that's what I wrote. Old and beyond the design life. I'll work that out. That's a good enough technical statement that people will understand. Okay. Back to the key points from our presentation. Sorry. There was one thing. I think Steve came up and said it's Pacer spelled wrong in here. P-A-S-E-R, I think it is. I believe it should be 213 miles of paved neighborhood roads. 213? Yeah. I think we have 230 total with gravel please okay yeah this is we're not doing with gravel or dirt but our road division does I understand okay I don't think the pacer assesses the gravel does it why does it it's 213 that will show the drop down here but I know whatever whatever so if you if you leave the total amount of roads in and you want to kept encapsulate gravel you've got 230 miles of roads and 93% of them are paved I mean I think that's another way of saying it without it without without not talking about the gravel roads well okay yeah all right so now once we go we do look at that I mentioned I'll do what we said about the pace of report how it's not any date and it's roads are old and beyond their lifetime design life now we go into recommendations I don't want to dwell here we don't want to I don't think we want to dwell so much on we've already told them

  12. I think we have 230 total with gravel please okay yeah this is we're not doing with gravel or dirt but our road division does I understand okay I don't think the pacer assesses the gravel does it why does it it's 213 that will show the drop down here but I know whatever whatever so if you if you leave the total amount of roads in and you want to kept encapsulate gravel you've got 230 miles of roads and 93% of them are paved I mean I think that's another way of saying it without it without without not talking about the gravel roads well okay yeah all right so now once we go we do look at that I mentioned I'll do what we said about the pace of report how it's not any date and it's roads are old and beyond their lifetime design life now we go into recommendations I don't want to dwell here we don't want to I don't think we want to dwell so much on we've already told them They've already got that, as you said, trustees who were actually mainly, we're addressing, they've already got it. So, the first one, increased funding through township debt allocation. I've got a question on that. Yeah, Jeff, go ahead. Mike, I think that my understanding in the general fund, $250,000 have been paid. I think the debt is an incorrect word. I just, what we're saying, which is that continue the funding, continue the funding through the general fund of $250,000. Just delete the word debt? Yes. And I would also say, you're not saying increase, you're going to say continue. Because on the next recommendation, you talk about the second $250,000 that you're going to put in this year's budget, if I understand what's going on. So, Mike, that should be continued funding through township allocation? Yeah, debt comes out. Everything else is good. Okay. So, continued funding. And we had put this, and just so you know, this year we put an extra $250 in to subcontract for pothole fixing. And that's the next slide. Yep. And we're already used over, I think, $180,000 of it in such a short period. This has been a huge pothole season. The recommending, the recommendation, I want to read that word for word so we see it, that the township continue dedicating an additional $250,000 annually to the road fund to support roadway maintenance and infrastructure improvements throughout the township.

  13. They've already got that, as you said, trustees who were actually mainly, we're addressing, they've already got it. So, the first one, increased funding through township debt allocation. I've got a question on that. Yeah, Jeff, go ahead. Mike, I think that my understanding in the general fund, $250,000 have been paid. I think the debt is an incorrect word. I just, what we're saying, which is that continue the funding, continue the funding through the general fund of $250,000. Just delete the word debt? Yes. And I would also say, you're not saying increase, you're going to say continue. Because on the next recommendation, you talk about the second $250,000 that you're going to put in this year's budget, if I understand what's going on. So, Mike, that should be continued funding through township allocation? Yeah, debt comes out. Everything else is good. Okay. So, continued funding. And we had put this, and just so you know, this year we put an extra $250 in to subcontract for pothole fixing. And that's the next slide. Yep. And we're already used over, I think, $180,000 of it in such a short period. This has been a huge pothole season. The recommending, the recommendation, I want to read that word for word so we see it, that the township continue dedicating an additional $250,000 annually to the road fund to support roadway maintenance and infrastructure improvements throughout the township. That was the recommendation come out of that. so i think the recommendation here on this one is to continue the 250 000. on the next slide i just read it i understand but what we're saying we're talking about words here the word continues right there yeah but not dedicating an additional oh i see you don't want to continue dedicating to remove the word additional okay yep okay and addition so continue continue dedicating 250 000 annually to the road fund to support okay good and additional just leave it good okay good all right okay okay next slide the next slide support for special assessment districts support continued support for special say the question here mike and made this may be incorrect i thought the second 250 you're going to put in the budget this year was going to be for sads it is to get just to go help with sads okay so then that's correct what we're saying there okay and that wouldn't be continued well well is it continue the support for okay continue or initiate yeah

  14. The recommending, the recommendation, I want to read that word for word so we see it, that the township continue dedicating an additional $250,000 annually to the road fund to support roadway maintenance and infrastructure improvements throughout the township. That was the recommendation come out of that. so i think the recommendation here on this one is to continue the 250 000. on the next slide i just read it i understand but what we're saying we're talking about words here the word continues right there yeah but not dedicating an additional oh i see you don't want to continue dedicating to remove the word additional okay yep okay and addition so continue continue dedicating 250 000 annually to the road fund to support okay good and additional just leave it good okay good all right okay okay next slide the next slide support for special assessment districts support continued support for special say the question here mike and made this may be incorrect i thought the second 250 you're going to put in the budget this year was going to be for sads it is to get just to go help with sads okay so then that's correct what we're saying there okay and that wouldn't be continued well well is it continue the support for okay continue or initiate yeah the township how does it help us well let's use um let's use mindy's yellow and gold section okay and let's say we put in yeah let's say we budgeted correctly we start with 250 000 we're going to put towards our sad so it'll come off the top okay along with the road commission yeah and we could always look at raising that number but trying to start at something simple and then we'll concentrate on where we can go which leads us to because you need a you want a regular um revenue stream that's right you can't have fluctuations because that can throw things off so what are the obstacles to increasing that number it just depends on how our budget is each year and like we've been in a very good budgets because of increased values but also because of the stock market and our investments if there was a downturn that might make things a little tighter for us okay but is there a process for increasing it or should we be saying you know 250 000 or more

  15. wouldn't be continued well well is it continue the support for okay continue or initiate yeah the township how does it help us well let's use um let's use mindy's yellow and gold section okay and let's say we put in yeah let's say we budgeted correctly we start with 250 000 we're going to put towards our sad so it'll come off the top okay along with the road commission yeah and we could always look at raising that number but trying to start at something simple and then we'll concentrate on where we can go which leads us to because you need a you want a regular um revenue stream that's right you can't have fluctuations because that can throw things off so what are the obstacles to increasing that number it just depends on how our budget is each year and like we've been in a very good budgets because of increased values but also because of the stock market and our investments if there was a downturn that might make things a little tighter for us okay but is there a process for increasing it or should we be saying you know 250 000 or more i mean because it sounds like with that statement it sounds like we're we're okay with everybody's okay with 200 i'm fine with adding more it does plant the seed that's what i'm getting at right like and because now now we're talking to the trustees but the audience that the the people the citizens are listening the voters are listening yeah okay but i want to be careful with that fred because you know um you just don't know how market conditions can change right right and and certain things that we do we are very conservative on our planning because of fluctuations that could set us back so you want to say you want to just say so you the township continues this funding or more yeah because one of the major complaints we hear is why isn't the township doing more to participate and it's us stepping up to the table and saying yes we do all right all right township continue this funding like the township continue this funding commitment or more future fiscal years to assist neighborhoods with ongoing to the

  16. okay but is there a process for increasing it or should we be saying you know 250 000 or more i mean because it sounds like with that statement it sounds like we're we're okay with everybody's okay with 200 i'm fine with adding more it does plant the seed that's what i'm getting at right like and because now now we're talking to the trustees but the audience that the the people the citizens are listening the voters are listening yeah okay but i want to be careful with that fred because you know um you just don't know how market conditions can change right right and and certain things that we do we are very conservative on our planning because of fluctuations that could set us back so you want to say you want to just say so you the township continues this funding or more yeah because one of the major complaints we hear is why isn't the township doing more to participate and it's us stepping up to the table and saying yes we do all right all right township continue this funding like the township continue this funding commitment or more future fiscal years to assist neighborhoods with ongoing to the structure yeah yeah and no improvement needs okay good all right okay next slide now with Pat consider of redirecting safety path millage funding the township currently townships current safety path millage is scheduled to just expire in fiscal 2728 the committee recommends that upon expiration the township should replace the safety path millage with a supplemental road millage directing those funds toward repair maintenance and an improvement of township roads can we add what the numbers are what the millage would mean to the roads like is it 10 million 20 million 2 million yeah I have it on my desk I forget offhand but you want me to go get it no well I mean I just think it would be it would be good to see the magnitude of how much that is good point sure If it's $1.98, then no. Yeah, it's easier to make the case that it's meaningful. Yeah, it's too vague, especially the audience. In the newsletter, it's 3.9.

  17. or more future fiscal years to assist neighborhoods with ongoing to the structure yeah yeah and no improvement needs okay good all right okay next slide now with Pat consider of redirecting safety path millage funding the township currently townships current safety path millage is scheduled to just expire in fiscal 2728 the committee recommends that upon expiration the township should replace the safety path millage with a supplemental road millage directing those funds toward repair maintenance and an improvement of township roads can we add what the numbers are what the millage would mean to the roads like is it 10 million 20 million 2 million yeah I have it on my desk I forget offhand but you want me to go get it no well I mean I just think it would be it would be good to see the magnitude of how much that is good point sure If it's $1.98, then no. Yeah, it's easier to make the case that it's meaningful. Yeah, it's too vague, especially the audience. In the newsletter, it's 3.9. 3.9? Almost 4. 3.929. And we'd have to have a new millage for that? What? Is that correct? They'd have to vote on a new millage. They'd have to approve it. It's up for a vote. It expires then. Yeah, so then you'd have to resurrect it. So instead of doing a safety path millage, you say, let's do a road millage. It's the same amount, but, you know, or something. Then a double secret election. You know why? Let's just tax people. We'd have to have an election. That's not clear in the article in the newsletter. Well, if the millage, if it expires, it would have to be re-elected. No, but I mean the safety path thing. I don't know. Yeah, yeah. Okay. I like the safety path. Maybe you found a newsletter that's at 3.9? Yeah, is this the one, right? Newsletter number? 3.929? Yeah, it could be his case. I don't know. Where'd you find that? In the newsletter. Okay. Yeah. Yep. Okay. And so the safety path millage, which started in 1998, it was most recently up.

  18. In the newsletter, it's 3.9. 3.9? Almost 4. 3.929. And we'd have to have a new millage for that? What? Is that correct? They'd have to vote on a new millage. They'd have to approve it. It's up for a vote. It expires then. Yeah, so then you'd have to resurrect it. So instead of doing a safety path millage, you say, let's do a road millage. It's the same amount, but, you know, or something. Then a double secret election. You know why? Let's just tax people. We'd have to have an election. That's not clear in the article in the newsletter. Well, if the millage, if it expires, it would have to be re-elected. No, but I mean the safety path thing. I don't know. Yeah, yeah. Okay. I like the safety path. Maybe you found a newsletter that's at 3.9? Yeah, is this the one, right? Newsletter number? 3.929? Yeah, it could be his case. I don't know. Where'd you find that? In the newsletter. Okay. Yeah. Yep. Okay. And so the safety path millage, which started in 1998, it was most recently up. dated in 2022 it had a vote of 62.8 percent support from the community the levy rate is 0.04511 and you're right it'll be about what three and a half then what does it say yeah it's a significant dollar amount yeah um and i know people don't want new millages but this is an existing one our sidewalks are that look better than our roads so either we stripe the sidewalks i would say that in the paragraph that's a powerful statement you're not talking about chump change no it's a big number current millage is scheduled to expire in fiscal year 27 28. this millage currently raises and they put the amount it's 3.9 that's what i think this millage well it's in the newsletter that's the newsletter number don't i'm just sharing we'll use mendy's number and then a quarter it's a significant dollar amount i appreciate that 3.7 million i'm just you're the at least you know what it is make a big difference all right so then the committee recommends that that upon expiration the township should replace

  19. dated in 2022 it had a vote of 62.8 percent support from the community the levy rate is 0.04511 and you're right it'll be about what three and a half then what does it say yeah it's a significant dollar amount yeah um and i know people don't want new millages but this is an existing one our sidewalks are that look better than our roads so either we stripe the sidewalks i would say that in the paragraph that's a powerful statement you're not talking about chump change no it's a big number current millage is scheduled to expire in fiscal year 27 28. this millage currently raises and they put the amount it's 3.9 that's what i think this millage well it's in the newsletter that's the newsletter number don't i'm just sharing we'll use mendy's number and then a quarter it's a significant dollar amount i appreciate that 3.7 million i'm just you're the at least you know what it is make a big difference all right so then the committee recommends that that upon expiration the township should replace the safety path millage with a supplemental road millage of the same amount of the same amount yeah okay and that would go to a vote of of the township residents a lot of support for that village of the same amount directing those funds towards the same amount repair maintenance and improvement of township roads okay all right township roads i think we focus on township residential roads yeah that's a good point yeah i think we put residential okay that's 62 percent like over 70. the more often you put that in there the better it is we've been using the word we've been using the we've been using neighborhoods let's use neighborhood yeah yes neighborhood right but we could also add like for the repair and replacement because we have a big obligation for these sads that went in like in the village to make sure we maintain them at a level that they expect you know that's that's another thing just as an aside when you've replaced those roads where the maintenance is basically zero now because they're brand new that's right potholes repair there's no right it's saving money things that have to so there's so

  20. all right so then the committee recommends that that upon expiration the township should replace the safety path millage with a supplemental road millage of the same amount of the same amount yeah okay and that would go to a vote of of the township residents a lot of support for that village of the same amount directing those funds towards the same amount repair maintenance and improvement of township roads okay all right township roads i think we focus on township residential roads yeah that's a good point yeah i think we put residential okay that's 62 percent like over 70. the more often you put that in there the better it is we've been using the word we've been using the we've been using neighborhoods let's use neighborhood yeah yes neighborhood right but we could also add like for the repair and replacement because we have a big obligation for these sads that went in like in the village to make sure we maintain them at a level that they expect you know that's that's another thing just as an aside when you've replaced those roads where the maintenance is basically zero now because they're brand new that's right potholes repair there's no right it's saving money things that have to so there's so people say well all that money you're saving there oh right i'm just saying it's an assignment absolutely okay she's asking if we could validate that sewage but is it 3.7 or 3.9 that creates an additional 3.7 mic or three um um i i let me get let me get back to you i don't want to i don't want to start throwing numbers around without it accurate in front of me sure okay we published it was 3.9 It's from Mr. McGrady's staff. Did somebody lie when they publish this? Well, I don't know. Well, it's a millage. It's published, that's the number. I hate it, but I read so much stuff. Right, but the millage raises so much. I'm just kidding. Millage and it's .04. You're saying you should put the millage in rather than a dollar bill. Okay. A dollar bill. Read the paragraph. What I put in, after that whole thing is done. No, not where it is. Because that changes year to year, how much it's raised, because the millage, the values change. I said, take that out and put it, after what was currently there, a new sentence, this millage currently raises 3 point whatever,

  21. that's right potholes repair there's no right it's saving money things that have to so there's so people say well all that money you're saving there oh right i'm just saying it's an assignment absolutely okay she's asking if we could validate that sewage but is it 3.7 or 3.9 that creates an additional 3.7 mic or three um um i i let me get let me get back to you i don't want to i don't want to start throwing numbers around without it accurate in front of me sure okay we published it was 3.9 It's from Mr. McGrady's staff. Did somebody lie when they publish this? Well, I don't know. Well, it's a millage. It's published, that's the number. I hate it, but I read so much stuff. Right, but the millage raises so much. I'm just kidding. Millage and it's .04. You're saying you should put the millage in rather than a dollar bill. Okay. A dollar bill. Read the paragraph. What I put in, after that whole thing is done. No, not where it is. Because that changes year to year, how much it's raised, because the millage, the values change. I said, take that out and put it, after what was currently there, a new sentence, this millage currently raises 3 point whatever, 9 million, is that what you said? There you go. Right there, at the end of there. Right there. Right there. This millage currently raises. There you go. Because that changes every year. Yeah. You good? Okay. Sue, I just have a question for you. Do you need more people to tell you what to do? Yeah. That's just a question. That's why she gets paid the big bucks, man. That's just a question. All right, now we're going to get the next slide. Now we get into what you were talking about earlier, the PACER analysis. The PACER analysis performed every three years by RCOC provides objective information regarding the quality of low- local roads. An updated PACER analysis would assist in identifying prioritizing and strategically planning future roadway maintenance and infrastructure improvement projects based on objective roadway condition data. The condition recommends the township requests an updated PACER analysis to evaluate current roadway conditions throughout the township and provide as a guide in the allocation of funds. Now, the only thing I would say here is do we mean to do it just one more time or should we ask, are we asking, and I don't remember how we phrased this in

  22. currently raises 3 point whatever, 9 million, is that what you said? There you go. Right there, at the end of there. Right there. Right there. This millage currently raises. There you go. Because that changes every year. Yeah. You good? Okay. Sue, I just have a question for you. Do you need more people to tell you what to do? Yeah. That's just a question. That's why she gets paid the big bucks, man. That's just a question. All right, now we're going to get the next slide. Now we get into what you were talking about earlier, the PACER analysis. The PACER analysis performed every three years by RCOC provides objective information regarding the quality of low- local roads. An updated PACER analysis would assist in identifying prioritizing and strategically planning future roadway maintenance and infrastructure improvement projects based on objective roadway condition data. The condition recommends the township requests an updated PACER analysis to evaluate current roadway conditions throughout the township and provide as a guide in the allocation of funds. Now, the only thing I would say here is do we mean to do it just one more time or should we ask, are we asking, and I don't remember how we phrased this in subcommittee, asking it to be updated more regularly or more frequently so that we get more up-to-date information every year. Now, I don't know what you think. Every three years. When the road commission was here, they told us how often they do it, right? But it wasn't every year. It was three years. It was 30 years. I think that's fine. I mean, this stuff is not going to go like this and all of a sudden everything's going to be green. The township consultant, Mark Mesler, said the PACER is a factor, but he said that's not the sole or perhaps even the driving factor because he said there were roads that they thought, when he was with the commission, that were in terrible condition, but the residents weren't saying anything. Then there are others that the residents were up in arms and privately within the road commission, they said, don't see that to be a the number one priority so so if you look pacer wise that's not the sole or even the driving factor may I make a comment okay so if at the beginning of this presentation we cite

  23. one more time or should we ask, are we asking, and I don't remember how we phrased this in subcommittee, asking it to be updated more regularly or more frequently so that we get more up-to-date information every year. Now, I don't know what you think. Every three years. When the road commission was here, they told us how often they do it, right? But it wasn't every year. It was three years. It was 30 years. I think that's fine. I mean, this stuff is not going to go like this and all of a sudden everything's going to be green. The township consultant, Mark Mesler, said the PACER is a factor, but he said that's not the sole or perhaps even the driving factor because he said there were roads that they thought, when he was with the commission, that were in terrible condition, but the residents weren't saying anything. Then there are others that the residents were up in arms and privately within the road commission, they said, don't see that to be a the number one priority so so if you look pacer wise that's not the sole or even the driving factor may I make a comment okay so if at the beginning of this presentation we cite the pacer report as a source of importance to us and we then don't continue to use it we need to be careful about how we lay it out as a source of truth at the beginning my thought would be just one person's voice can we use it we make it current and we use it as a metric to show progress if if we all agree that's the source otherwise we need a different source so that we can have the residents ask for it we could provide it and it builds trust I just thought that the point of ad putting this in was not that the gold Commission would say this is this is the most important thing or what it's just that we would have updated information more regularly than three years every three years I think that's what you're saying is that it's got to be accurate so that we could add to this it's a guided allocation of funds and also shows improvement in the condition of our neighborhood roads we're asking people to pay more and to invest what's the center where's the database and who has the database where we're looking at the condition of the roads and we're qualifying qualifying

  24. may I make a comment okay so if at the beginning of this presentation we cite the pacer report as a source of importance to us and we then don't continue to use it we need to be careful about how we lay it out as a source of truth at the beginning my thought would be just one person's voice can we use it we make it current and we use it as a metric to show progress if if we all agree that's the source otherwise we need a different source so that we can have the residents ask for it we could provide it and it builds trust I just thought that the point of ad putting this in was not that the gold Commission would say this is this is the most important thing or what it's just that we would have updated information more regularly than three years every three years I think that's what you're saying is that it's got to be accurate so that we could add to this it's a guided allocation of funds and also shows improvement in the condition of our neighborhood roads we're asking people to pay more and to invest what's the center where's the database and who has the database where we're looking at the condition of the roads and we're qualifying qualifying The SADs, the repairs that the Township is doing, and the repairs that the Road Commission are doing, because all of that goes into what that map looks like. And I think that we may not be able to get the Road Commission to update that map for us on an annual basis. They did it every three years? Yeah, but we should know what roads were worked on. We do know somewhere. But who's in charge of that database? Well, we have a list of all the current SADs and what they're paying. Can you correlate that database to that map? We probably could, yes. But saying that, though, take for instance, Knob Hill, where Steve lives. Avery did yours how many years ago, Steve? Thirteen. And you're already at a yellow. Oh, yeah, ours are horrible. Yeah. Maybe a red. They're already red. Yeah. So I see what you're getting at, Fred, but in some instances, the road is already decaying. So we have to almost wait for the PACER ratings to come out again to really get a handle. But, yes, we can track, and we do track.

  25. The SADs, the repairs that the Township is doing, and the repairs that the Road Commission are doing, because all of that goes into what that map looks like. And I think that we may not be able to get the Road Commission to update that map for us on an annual basis. They did it every three years? Yeah, but we should know what roads were worked on. We do know somewhere. But who's in charge of that database? Well, we have a list of all the current SADs and what they're paying. Can you correlate that database to that map? We probably could, yes. But saying that, though, take for instance, Knob Hill, where Steve lives. Avery did yours how many years ago, Steve? Thirteen. And you're already at a yellow. Oh, yeah, ours are horrible. Yeah. Maybe a red. They're already red. Yeah. So I see what you're getting at, Fred, but in some instances, the road is already decaying. So we have to almost wait for the PACER ratings to come out again to really get a handle. But, yes, we can track, and we do track. But we, I don't know if we could change the map. I'll talk to Noah. I don't think you can change the map, but you can annotate it. Can we edit a phrase? We can. At the end of the recognition. Let me think about that, Fred, because I think we'd have. to run parallel maps somehow let us let us think about this okay we should demonstrate should be a way to share the data with the Road Commission and put it see there so that the Road Commission can update that man if those as well they do what they said right they do and that would change and show no I think you're right maybe we'll create our own map in house yeah cuz I think it's a classic situation of one branch of government doesn't talk to the other branch of government of what they're doing well no and I think in this instance it's more about us creating our own map is what I think you're indicating yeah I'll talk to no one the guys in IT about it see we can put together it's such a strong statement we can have Amazon do it

  26. But, yes, we can track, and we do track. But we, I don't know if we could change the map. I'll talk to Noah. I don't think you can change the map, but you can annotate it. Can we edit a phrase? We can. At the end of the recognition. Let me think about that, Fred, because I think we'd have. to run parallel maps somehow let us let us think about this okay we should demonstrate should be a way to share the data with the Road Commission and put it see there so that the Road Commission can update that man if those as well they do what they said right they do and that would change and show no I think you're right maybe we'll create our own map in house yeah cuz I think it's a classic situation of one branch of government doesn't talk to the other branch of government of what they're doing well no and I think in this instance it's more about us creating our own map is what I think you're indicating yeah I'll talk to no one the guys in IT about it see we can put together it's such a strong statement we can have Amazon do it I do think that we've annotated that pacer map to show that it's it's an outdated map okay yeah and I think that I think to protect not just this committee but to protect the trustees I think we need to state that to the audience that this is a map that's already outdated and most likely could be worse than what it's showing but it's also better than what it shows yeah it could be it is okay I think we should just emphasize the fact that the map that we're presenting is not necessarily a snapshot of exactly the way things are and that's covered in the very beginning number two we should emphasize the fact in a discussion to get the RCOC to give us more in order to properly administer this program we need to have better

  27. I do think that we've annotated that pacer map to show that it's it's an outdated map okay yeah and I think that I think to protect not just this committee but to protect the trustees I think we need to state that to the audience that this is a map that's already outdated and most likely could be worse than what it's showing but it's also better than what it shows yeah it could be it is okay I think we should just emphasize the fact that the map that we're presenting is not necessarily a snapshot of exactly the way things are and that's covered in the very beginning number two we should emphasize the fact in a discussion to get the RCOC to give us more in order to properly administer this program we need to have better updated information regarding who is getting worked on and at what stage they are so you may have lilac and gray as being categories of a road that's being almost done or partly done or this level whatever whatever you want to come up with but I don't just I think it's three years maybe too long of a time when this is especially we're going to have the millage because it'll be more dynamic process okay what I would suggest then that's all I'm saying put that in I was just a first sentence that the township requests put an s at the end of request get rid of and request update yes updated pacer analysis to evaluate current rollaway conditions that's very But I think the other component, Gary, of what you said is very important is that we should be recommending that the Road Commission keep track of what's being done. Nobody's keeping track. There's no scorecard anymore. It's like, who are we? Yeah, and because there's no scorecard, and I'm sorry, but they own the roads. They have the responsibility to own the scorecard. But we don't know if they do or they don't want to find out.

  28. us more in order to properly administer this program we need to have better updated information regarding who is getting worked on and at what stage they are so you may have lilac and gray as being categories of a road that's being almost done or partly done or this level whatever whatever you want to come up with but I don't just I think it's three years maybe too long of a time when this is especially we're going to have the millage because it'll be more dynamic process okay what I would suggest then that's all I'm saying put that in I was just a first sentence that the township requests put an s at the end of request get rid of and request update yes updated pacer analysis to evaluate current rollaway conditions that's very But I think the other component, Gary, of what you said is very important is that we should be recommending that the Road Commission keep track of what's being done. Nobody's keeping track. There's no scorecard anymore. It's like, who are we? Yeah, and because there's no scorecard, and I'm sorry, but they own the roads. They have the responsibility to own the scorecard. But we don't know if they do or they don't want to find out. Well, could we, I agree with both of you, Dr. Syrian. What I would say is if we could put a recommended date within 90 days, whatever the time is, Jonah, within 90 days, we are asking, what does it say? That we're requesting an updated PACER analysis from where? No, I said the township requests updated PACER analysis. Within 90 days, and then the township. Without 90 days of what? From the date of its presentation. I'm just trying to give a deadline so people feel like, to your point, like, as if. In 90 days, or whatever time frame we've read to, there will be an updated kind of foundational PACER current report, and the township will then, I don't know if you want to say this in writing or verbally, put a process together to produce a current, what do we want to call it, road map, no pun intended, of the roads and the township. If you want to own that process, you might get credit for it, and say that's what you're going to do. I think we have a deadline. We have to have that before we ever will propose a millage. Well, that's true. That's right. But whatever the heck that number is, I'm sure Susan can be up with it. The only problem, Mindy, I just want to say that the only problem is I don't want to put them on a spot with a timeline that they must do this.

  29. But we don't know if they do or they don't want to find out. Well, could we, I agree with both of you, Dr. Syrian. What I would say is if we could put a recommended date within 90 days, whatever the time is, Jonah, within 90 days, we are asking, what does it say? That we're requesting an updated PACER analysis from where? No, I said the township requests updated PACER analysis. Within 90 days, and then the township. Without 90 days of what? From the date of its presentation. I'm just trying to give a deadline so people feel like, to your point, like, as if. In 90 days, or whatever time frame we've read to, there will be an updated kind of foundational PACER current report, and the township will then, I don't know if you want to say this in writing or verbally, put a process together to produce a current, what do we want to call it, road map, no pun intended, of the roads and the township. If you want to own that process, you might get credit for it, and say that's what you're going to do. I think we have a deadline. We have to have that before we ever will propose a millage. Well, that's true. That's right. But whatever the heck that number is, I'm sure Susan can be up with it. The only problem, Mindy, I just want to say that the only problem is I don't want to put them on a spot with a timeline that they must do this. I would rather be a little more personally, a little more vague. But we're requesting updated. We want updates. But I would think... Okay, but when people put their hand in their pocket, Jeff, and pay a millage or anything else, SAD, whatever, that's a serious, that's an action that's not vague. You have no choice, right? I get it. I get it. Okay, so let me just ask, should we put a timeline, as Mindy suggests, in this recommendation or not? Is the timeline for when we'll have the information? But you're putting a timeline on an agency that we have no control over, right? Well, Howard, but then our recommendation is furious. If we can't get the data, we're saying we want something, but we don't know when it's going to happen, so good luck. But you can vote for anything for us. Wait, wait, wait, time out. The recommendation is that the township requests... Okay, so...

  30. The only problem, Mindy, I just want to say that the only problem is I don't want to put them on a spot with a timeline that they must do this. I would rather be a little more personally, a little more vague. But we're requesting updated. We want updates. But I would think... Okay, but when people put their hand in their pocket, Jeff, and pay a millage or anything else, SAD, whatever, that's a serious, that's an action that's not vague. You have no choice, right? I get it. I get it. Okay, so let me just ask, should we put a timeline, as Mindy suggests, in this recommendation or not? Is the timeline for when we'll have the information? But you're putting a timeline on an agency that we have no control over, right? Well, Howard, but then our recommendation is furious. If we can't get the data, we're saying we want something, but we don't know when it's going to happen, so good luck. But you can vote for anything for us. Wait, wait, wait, time out. The recommendation is that the township requests... Okay, so... not saying that we're not saying we're demanding or that they have to because we control them we're requesting that they do this so do we want to request that there's a timeline involved in this or not that's all I'm asking okay sure whatever you that's it that's what you you want you would like to see it to try to have a process and to dr. Sari if we're going to ask people for a millage I mean they're going to be asked to vote I don't know how we ask people to pony up to help us with this but as we have the data but I don't know what we're doing we're drilling too much down yeah I like the way you have it here it's vague enough like you said in but I think you know 90 days or whatever the numbers I have no idea how long it takes to put yeah I think you you know you I don't think first of all I don't think that the township should own the patient report because it's not our report secondly I don't think that we can count on RCOC to not bureaucratically roadblock us from them spending the money to update it but I do believe that the township could could put pressure on RCOC by us recommending that that that the township request this

  31. not saying that we're not saying we're demanding or that they have to because we control them we're requesting that they do this so do we want to request that there's a timeline involved in this or not that's all I'm asking okay sure whatever you that's it that's what you you want you would like to see it to try to have a process and to dr. Sari if we're going to ask people for a millage I mean they're going to be asked to vote I don't know how we ask people to pony up to help us with this but as we have the data but I don't know what we're doing we're drilling too much down yeah I like the way you have it here it's vague enough like you said in but I think you know 90 days or whatever the numbers I have no idea how long it takes to put yeah I think you you know you I don't think first of all I don't think that the township should own the patient report because it's not our report secondly I don't think that we can count on RCOC to not bureaucratically roadblock us from them spending the money to update it but I do believe that the township could could put pressure on RCOC by us recommending that that that the township request this from RCOC and request a method of collaboration so that the township come and collaborate with RCOC to maintain a database of what roads are being worked on that gets you into you And once you can get the township's nose under the tent, I think you're now inside of what they're doing. I don't know what everybody else thinks of that, but I feel like it's a better strategy to request that the township not only ask for this, but that the township also look for a method of collaboration with the road commission to update this. All right, you know what, then? You could do that. You could do that, exactly what you're asking for. Well, part of it, part of it, by adding that the township requests updated PACER analysis more frequently or on a more frequent basis to evaluate current roadway conditions. When you said current roadway conditions, I mean, that's updated. Sorry? If you say current, that's like in real time, right?

  32. put pressure on RCOC by us recommending that that that the township request this from RCOC and request a method of collaboration so that the township come and collaborate with RCOC to maintain a database of what roads are being worked on that gets you into you And once you can get the township's nose under the tent, I think you're now inside of what they're doing. I don't know what everybody else thinks of that, but I feel like it's a better strategy to request that the township not only ask for this, but that the township also look for a method of collaboration with the road commission to update this. All right, you know what, then? You could do that. You could do that, exactly what you're asking for. Well, part of it, part of it, by adding that the township requests updated PACER analysis more frequently or on a more frequent basis to evaluate current roadway conditions. When you said current roadway conditions, I mean, that's updated. Sorry? If you say current, that's like in real time, right? It doesn't mean last year. I think... We have to be careful that we're telling them what to do, and then these are our recommendations. How you do it, it might be all over the map, but I think, like you said, in the commentary part, you could say all these things. And they're all valid things? Well, so, again, back to the original question that is... If we... If we... want to do that and add that it should be there's a timeline that we want to ask for it in a more more timely basis we technically say that they're at least that's a cyclist three years that we've already established that do we want to say that we would like to request pacer analysis on it all right all right either annually on a more timely basis you know yeah okay we want it annually we want to request that we're not demanding it we just request ween conditions and throughout you could put in a timely basis you know what rc isn't that like beauty like how many isn't it like how many says he's timely basis is three years I mean I see these are out there well how many said timely basis how many stands are complete how many miles in the commentary we're not talking about a

  33. If you say current, that's like in real time, right? It doesn't mean last year. I think... We have to be careful that we're telling them what to do, and then these are our recommendations. How you do it, it might be all over the map, but I think, like you said, in the commentary part, you could say all these things. And they're all valid things? Well, so, again, back to the original question that is... If we... If we... want to do that and add that it should be there's a timeline that we want to ask for it in a more more timely basis we technically say that they're at least that's a cyclist three years that we've already established that do we want to say that we would like to request pacer analysis on it all right all right either annually on a more timely basis you know yeah okay we want it annually we want to request that we're not demanding it we just request ween conditions and throughout you could put in a timely basis you know what rc isn't that like beauty like how many isn't it like how many says he's timely basis is three years I mean I see these are out there well how many said timely basis how many stands are complete how many miles in the commentary we're not talking about a three-year basis right talking about a one-year basis because if the SADs are coming I mean this is I mean if you want to get too carried away the SADs are going to come up more timely than every three years but Mike I happen to do this how many miles of SAD are done in each year on average I don't know the answer to that okay but see we've got 200 and just throwing a figure 220 miles just just for talking purposes well Mindy how many and if we do was in your yellow and gold section I have no idea so if we do 10 a year 15 a year that's 10 So do we really need a pacer every year to show a 10% improvement? Well, I would think that the RCOC updates them. As these things get changed, they update it. I'm not sure. Right. But let's just say in the village, let's use the village, and let's think last year when yellow and gold were redone. And I'm thinking, was there any other SADs that were occurring last year? I don't know if there were.

  34. stands are complete how many miles in the commentary we're not talking about a three-year basis right talking about a one-year basis because if the SADs are coming I mean this is I mean if you want to get too carried away the SADs are going to come up more timely than every three years but Mike I happen to do this how many miles of SAD are done in each year on average I don't know the answer to that okay but see we've got 200 and just throwing a figure 220 miles just just for talking purposes well Mindy how many and if we do was in your yellow and gold section I have no idea so if we do 10 a year 15 a year that's 10 So do we really need a pacer every year to show a 10% improvement? Well, I would think that the RCOC updates them. As these things get changed, they update it. I'm not sure. Right. But let's just say in the village, let's use the village, and let's think last year when yellow and gold were redone. And I'm thinking, was there any other SADs that were occurring last year? I don't know if there were. This year we have the green section, and then we have Verner Estates. Right, exactly. So that's four miles. Probably. I'm closing my eyes. Probably. Four miles out of 220, that's not, you know, you see all the spaghetti of red. That's not going to change. The spaghetti of red is still going to be there. Quite a bit. So, Steve, if you look at the map at the beginning, there's a square right in the middle that's Bloomfield Village. Yes. By the end of, I don't know, three months from now, it's all going to be green. Okay. It's going to be a green dot in the middle. Yes. People will then, like you, people will go, oh, it's right there. So people, so you know where Bloomfield Village is, right? It's right here. This is all going to be green. Yeah. So if you, you would look at that and go, wow, what happened there? Right. It will create questions and interaction. Well, that's all SAD. Well, how did we get done? You know, I mean, isn't that what we want? But that all didn't happen in one year, did it? No. Three years. Three years. Yeah. So. Three years. So that's why we're three years out of sync, that's why it's not... So I don't even know if that was probably right in 25. I don't want to beg that question. I don't think that was accurate even in 25. I'm not sure we need... If it's four or five miles out of 220 a year, I don't know that we need an annual update.

  35. This year we have the green section, and then we have Verner Estates. Right, exactly. So that's four miles. Probably. I'm closing my eyes. Probably. Four miles out of 220, that's not, you know, you see all the spaghetti of red. That's not going to change. The spaghetti of red is still going to be there. Quite a bit. So, Steve, if you look at the map at the beginning, there's a square right in the middle that's Bloomfield Village. Yes. By the end of, I don't know, three months from now, it's all going to be green. Okay. It's going to be a green dot in the middle. Yes. People will then, like you, people will go, oh, it's right there. So people, so you know where Bloomfield Village is, right? It's right here. This is all going to be green. Yeah. So if you, you would look at that and go, wow, what happened there? Right. It will create questions and interaction. Well, that's all SAD. Well, how did we get done? You know, I mean, isn't that what we want? But that all didn't happen in one year, did it? No. Three years. Three years. Yeah. So. Three years. So that's why we're three years out of sync, that's why it's not... So I don't even know if that was probably right in 25. I don't want to beg that question. I don't think that was accurate even in 25. I'm not sure we need... If it's four or five miles out of 220 a year, I don't know that we need an annual update. Because four miles out of 220, we're not going to see a massive change. But what's happening to a more yellow going red? You're focused on what's turning green, we're not focused on what's turning more red. Well, that's not the point here. The point is, I think, how many miles did we get done in the last year or two? Yeah, that's right. Mindy's point is... And who paid for it? How did it get done? I mean, these are the questions the residents are going to ask if we want them on board to help... Yeah, Mindy's point is improvement, to show improvement. If our request is, in part, to show improvement, once we get a major reset, which would bring the village into the green zone, from then on, moving forward, we're going to have incremental green added. Versus four or five out of 220, I mean, one squiggle. And to Fred's point, some of that yellow could turn south, I mean, could go back. If you have... So I'm not sure that... At the rate we're going, yellow isn't going to... At the rate we're going, yellow isn't going to...

  36. If it's four or five miles out of 220 a year, I don't know that we need an annual update. Because four miles out of 220, we're not going to see a massive change. But what's happening to a more yellow going red? You're focused on what's turning green, we're not focused on what's turning more red. Well, that's not the point here. The point is, I think, how many miles did we get done in the last year or two? Yeah, that's right. Mindy's point is... And who paid for it? How did it get done? I mean, these are the questions the residents are going to ask if we want them on board to help... Yeah, Mindy's point is improvement, to show improvement. If our request is, in part, to show improvement, once we get a major reset, which would bring the village into the green zone, from then on, moving forward, we're going to have incremental green added. Versus four or five out of 220, I mean, one squiggle. And to Fred's point, some of that yellow could turn south, I mean, could go back. If you have... So I'm not sure that... At the rate we're going, yellow isn't going to... At the rate we're going, yellow isn't going to... turn green. Red's going to turn green and yellow's going to turn red. Yeah, so I guess my point is a major reset, but I don't know after that, I don't know that to do it annually, it's a lot of work and expense that I'm not sure it's going to show a major change. Well, if we just had a platform or a foundational map that was accurate, it'd be great. Yeah, and I think... We don't have that, so it's making it a more protected conversation. So if we go back, if the millage expires in 28, if we get an update in 27, then we could use that as the reset to show, you know, to move forward with. And there's logic to that, so I think if we said we need to have an updated report by 27, which becomes our base, and which we work off of, and then we manually can update as things improve the SAD, we don't need to go back to that to do a complete study. So maybe tying into that whole thing, we just say we need an updated PACER. Just showing the new roads. Showing the conditions. So we could probably go out. How about if we do this, that the township updates the PACER analysis yearly.

  37. turn green. Red's going to turn green and yellow's going to turn red. Yeah, so I guess my point is a major reset, but I don't know after that, I don't know that to do it annually, it's a lot of work and expense that I'm not sure it's going to show a major change. Well, if we just had a platform or a foundational map that was accurate, it'd be great. Yeah, and I think... We don't have that, so it's making it a more protected conversation. So if we go back, if the millage expires in 28, if we get an update in 27, then we could use that as the reset to show, you know, to move forward with. And there's logic to that, so I think if we said we need to have an updated report by 27, which becomes our base, and which we work off of, and then we manually can update as things improve the SAD, we don't need to go back to that to do a complete study. So maybe tying into that whole thing, we just say we need an updated PACER. Just showing the new roads. Showing the conditions. So we could probably go out. How about if we do this, that the township updates the PACER analysis yearly. The township updates the PACER analysis yearly. I agree. We're not using the same technology, but we could use... Well, we can still... I think from an IT point of view... We can change... a red line to a green line in the report. But we request that the township do it to update the report. That would be great. I think that would help. So what I said was that the township, forget about the word request, the township updates yearly the PACER analysis. Annually. Annually, that's what I said. Really annually? Okay, what's the difference? Okay, okay. That would help. Okay, so that the township updates annually the PACER analysis to evaluate current roadway conditions throughout the township as a guide to allocating funds and demonstration improvements in the quality. Okay. Yes. When is it next scheduled to be done by the Road Commission? I don't think we're here. It's every three years. We think it was 24. So it would be 27. We're not sure. We're not sure is the answer. Yeah. Yeah. The other thing is the categories of roads would be you're red, you're in process of, you're avid, let's say an SAD approved road, and then you haven't done it yet.

  38. How about if we do this, that the township updates the PACER analysis yearly. The township updates the PACER analysis yearly. I agree. We're not using the same technology, but we could use... Well, we can still... I think from an IT point of view... We can change... a red line to a green line in the report. But we request that the township do it to update the report. That would be great. I think that would help. So what I said was that the township, forget about the word request, the township updates yearly the PACER analysis. Annually. Annually, that's what I said. Really annually? Okay, what's the difference? Okay, okay. That would help. Okay, so that the township updates annually the PACER analysis to evaluate current roadway conditions throughout the township as a guide to allocating funds and demonstration improvements in the quality. Okay. Yes. When is it next scheduled to be done by the Road Commission? I don't think we're here. It's every three years. We think it was 24. So it would be 27. We're not sure. We're not sure is the answer. Yeah. Yeah. The other thing is the categories of roads would be you're red, you're in process of, you're avid, let's say an SAD approved road, and then you haven't done it yet. Right. And now you're in lime green, and then you're in green. Yeah. So you can have way more control when you can do what Mike suggested that we just do it ourselves, because then you really know what the heck's going on. I think that's excellent. I agree. I think the township should have all the data, and we should be able to do this in-house. because we have no control over RCOC okay so I so what I said was and go back again that we're gonna change this the committee recommends that the township updates annually the pacer analysis to evaluate current roadway conditions about the township and then the rest of it remains the way it is that sounds good all right moving on then yes the next slide is close quote are we there no oh okay I'm sorry go ahead all right okay we are ready okay a close coordination with the road commission of Oakland County the roads are owned and

  39. The other thing is the categories of roads would be you're red, you're in process of, you're avid, let's say an SAD approved road, and then you haven't done it yet. Right. And now you're in lime green, and then you're in green. Yeah. So you can have way more control when you can do what Mike suggested that we just do it ourselves, because then you really know what the heck's going on. I think that's excellent. I agree. I think the township should have all the data, and we should be able to do this in-house. because we have no control over RCOC okay so I so what I said was and go back again that we're gonna change this the committee recommends that the township updates annually the pacer analysis to evaluate current roadway conditions about the township and then the rest of it remains the way it is that sounds good all right moving on then yes the next slide is close quote are we there no oh okay I'm sorry go ahead all right okay we are ready okay a close coordination with the road commission of Oakland County the roads are owned and controlled by RCOC the committee recommends that supervisor McCready and township staff continue working closely with senior staff at RCOC to communicate the townships roadway infrastructure needs and identify available RCOC resources and funding opportunities that may benefit the township what this really means is that we want to we want to have a good close working relationship with RCOC and that's very important and now Mike has already done a lot of that as closely and really worked with them yeah and we want to see that that kind of relationship continue that's really all of this that's what this means right okay I think that relationship is very important because As we pointed out in our last meeting and in the report that we did, is that the township, the only authority the township has over neighborhood roads is policing. There's no other authority that the township has over neighborhood roads. Most likely. You can't even tell the neighborhood what type of truck can't go on the road unless RCOC says it.

  40. coordination with the road commission of Oakland County the roads are owned and controlled by RCOC the committee recommends that supervisor McCready and township staff continue working closely with senior staff at RCOC to communicate the townships roadway infrastructure needs and identify available RCOC resources and funding opportunities that may benefit the township what this really means is that we want to we want to have a good close working relationship with RCOC and that's very important and now Mike has already done a lot of that as closely and really worked with them yeah and we want to see that that kind of relationship continue that's really all of this that's what this means right okay I think that relationship is very important because As we pointed out in our last meeting and in the report that we did, is that the township, the only authority the township has over neighborhood roads is policing. There's no other authority that the township has over neighborhood roads. Most likely. You can't even tell the neighborhood what type of truck can't go on the road unless RCOC says it. And so getting a relationship hopefully leads to the township being able to sort of get RCOC more on board and say, you know, we really don't need these tandem trucks in certain roads within the township. Well, I tell you, with Mark Mesler, we've really made some inroads in getting some things done that I never thought we would get done with some simple little things. So, and I'll just remind you that that extra state funding that was always talked about, it's coming in lower than what was forecasted. Marijuana sales, the tax isn't what they thought. It's $200 million versus the over $400 million they thought. So, yeah. We need to endorse marijuana. We need to endorse marijuana. You put a tariff on an item, people buy it somewhere else. The point here is that we've got to continue holding hands. Well, the thing is that too many people, there's an adversary, they perceive this as an... the adversarial relationship with the road RCOC, it's them versus us, we want to try and change that narrative and and make it so that we're working together and that's that's we've started to do and I think that's the point here that we need to continue to do that all right next

  41. And so getting a relationship hopefully leads to the township being able to sort of get RCOC more on board and say, you know, we really don't need these tandem trucks in certain roads within the township. Well, I tell you, with Mark Mesler, we've really made some inroads in getting some things done that I never thought we would get done with some simple little things. So, and I'll just remind you that that extra state funding that was always talked about, it's coming in lower than what was forecasted. Marijuana sales, the tax isn't what they thought. It's $200 million versus the over $400 million they thought. So, yeah. We need to endorse marijuana. We need to endorse marijuana. You put a tariff on an item, people buy it somewhere else. The point here is that we've got to continue holding hands. Well, the thing is that too many people, there's an adversary, they perceive this as an... the adversarial relationship with the road RCOC, it's them versus us, we want to try and change that narrative and and make it so that we're working together and that's that's we've started to do and I think that's the point here that we need to continue to do that all right next increase state funding for neighborhood roads this is this is a big one here increase state funding for neighborhood roads Michigan's new neighborhood road legislation which became effective October 1 RCOC is anticipated to receive 45 million dollars for neighborhood roads however unfortunately the legislation does not mandate any of the additional funding be allocated to subdivision roads that's true that's a truism that's a fact can you use the same word all the time yeah that should be neighborhood roads like if we're in the beginning we're saying neighborhood roads and in the end we're saying subdivision roads just for yep clarification I don't know just to make it easier I think you're trying to draw a distinction at this point okay because if you say neighborhood roads I like the fact that it said specifically your subdivision roads because if it's called neighborhood roads and you're saying yeah but it's not allocated for neighborhood roads that makes it confusing but if you leave the word subdivision in there then it becomes very clear it's a neighborhood road thing but it doesn't go through your subdivision well actually I think it's the exact opposite okay it says in here that it's neighborhood is the neighborhood road legislation that

  42. to do and I think that's the point here that we need to continue to do that all right next increase state funding for neighborhood roads this is this is a big one here increase state funding for neighborhood roads Michigan's new neighborhood road legislation which became effective October 1 RCOC is anticipated to receive 45 million dollars for neighborhood roads however unfortunately the legislation does not mandate any of the additional funding be allocated to subdivision roads that's true that's a truism that's a fact can you use the same word all the time yeah that should be neighborhood roads like if we're in the beginning we're saying neighborhood roads and in the end we're saying subdivision roads just for yep clarification I don't know just to make it easier I think you're trying to draw a distinction at this point okay because if you say neighborhood roads I like the fact that it said specifically your subdivision roads because if it's called neighborhood roads and you're saying yeah but it's not allocated for neighborhood roads that makes it confusing but if you leave the word subdivision in there then it becomes very clear it's a neighborhood road thing but it doesn't go through your subdivision well actually I think it's the exact opposite okay it says in here that it's neighborhood is the neighborhood road legislation that It tends to be $45 million for neighborhood roads. However, it does not mandate any additional funding be allocated to neighborhood roads. So I think I would argue that that's actually more consistent. Yeah. I'll buy that. But the reality is we're not going to see any of that. I mean, we heard, and I forget his name, Gary, the representative of RCOC. He's not under any obligation whatsoever. No, and we're going to do railroad crossings and bridges and safety and all sorts of other things. But there's going to be little to nothing, and he emphasized nothing, coming to neighborhood roads. Well, I don't recall that. He said that on the record? Yep. No. You mean even with the new funding coming in? Yep. He said they're under no obligation to put any money into neighborhood roads. But he said that we... Into neighborhood roads. That's what he said, right, standing right here. But he also said that we've got other things that are taking more priority. We're not required to put it in neighborhood roads. And other projects are taking more priority than neighborhood roads. And he said, I don't mean to be the bearer of bad news, but I don't anticipate you're going to see anything.

  43. It tends to be $45 million for neighborhood roads. However, it does not mandate any additional funding be allocated to neighborhood roads. So I think I would argue that that's actually more consistent. Yeah. I'll buy that. But the reality is we're not going to see any of that. I mean, we heard, and I forget his name, Gary, the representative of RCOC. He's not under any obligation whatsoever. No, and we're going to do railroad crossings and bridges and safety and all sorts of other things. But there's going to be little to nothing, and he emphasized nothing, coming to neighborhood roads. Well, I don't recall that. He said that on the record? Yep. No. You mean even with the new funding coming in? Yep. He said they're under no obligation to put any money into neighborhood roads. But he said that we... Into neighborhood roads. That's what he said, right, standing right here. But he also said that we've got other things that are taking more priority. We're not required to put it in neighborhood roads. And other projects are taking more priority than neighborhood roads. And he said, I don't mean to be the bearer of bad news, but I don't anticipate you're going to see anything. Well, the point is we have to put pressure on them to do that. Yeah, but that's premature. They're going to get the money. It's going to be an interactive process. They've got a three-member commission. There's a lot of interactive pressure, communications, and maybe those priorities... change so i don't think it's absolutely they've been giving us money yeah so it's not absolute like the they started giving money to the sads uh first with the yellow and gold they gave five hundred thousand dollars in design and engineering cost relief okay and then when the when the green section came up they did the same half million plus another half million into the sad on the born lane actually not born lane on the burner estates they put in sue do you remember what the number is on their sad it was per household like what would you think five or six thousand what do you think it was yeah so they they have come to the table but i think they've had to hold back now a little bit because the state funding and see all their money came from act 51 right and then the other place they get money and and um the uh dennis caller was really good at this he was buying federal dollars from northern michigan communities at 80 cents on the dollar and bringing the money back down here

  44. Well, the point is we have to put pressure on them to do that. Yeah, but that's premature. They're going to get the money. It's going to be an interactive process. They've got a three-member commission. There's a lot of interactive pressure, communications, and maybe those priorities... change so i don't think it's absolutely they've been giving us money yeah so it's not absolute like the they started giving money to the sads uh first with the yellow and gold they gave five hundred thousand dollars in design and engineering cost relief okay and then when the when the green section came up they did the same half million plus another half million into the sad on the born lane actually not born lane on the burner estates they put in sue do you remember what the number is on their sad it was per household like what would you think five or six thousand what do you think it was yeah so they they have come to the table but i think they've had to hold back now a little bit because the state funding and see all their money came from act 51 right and then the other place they get money and and um the uh dennis caller was really good at this he was buying federal dollars from northern michigan communities at 80 cents on the dollar and bringing the money back down here to try and get more money so and now they're getting this extra money but it was supposed to be as we said 45 million but we'll have to get a recalculation on that because as we discussed earlier well the point though that that uh that gary pointed out when he when he presented in front of us the point is whether it's 45 000 45 million or 25 million that the road commission is under no obligation that the road commission is under no obligation that the road commission is under no obligation that the road commission is under no obligation that the road commission is under no obligation to allocate where that money goes. And it goes into their general fund, and it covers their overhead. Well, the other comment I need to make about the yellow and gold SAD is the way the entire project was crafted was from RCFC. So if they want to contribute half a million on an egregiously expensive $13 or $14 million project that should have cost half that and say they're saving the residents money, that is not how the cash flows. What the recommendation is really saying is it's a process. And what we're recommending that we're at the table, we're there, we're presenting our needs, we're making them aware of it and trying to get, as we have to date, getting some money out of it.

  45. from northern michigan communities at 80 cents on the dollar and bringing the money back down here to try and get more money so and now they're getting this extra money but it was supposed to be as we said 45 million but we'll have to get a recalculation on that because as we discussed earlier well the point though that that uh that gary pointed out when he when he presented in front of us the point is whether it's 45 000 45 million or 25 million that the road commission is under no obligation that the road commission is under no obligation that the road commission is under no obligation that the road commission is under no obligation that the road commission is under no obligation to allocate where that money goes. And it goes into their general fund, and it covers their overhead. Well, the other comment I need to make about the yellow and gold SAD is the way the entire project was crafted was from RCFC. So if they want to contribute half a million on an egregiously expensive $13 or $14 million project that should have cost half that and say they're saving the residents money, that is not how the cash flows. What the recommendation is really saying is it's a process. And what we're recommending that we're at the table, we're there, we're presenting our needs, we're making them aware of it and trying to get, as we have to date, getting some money out of it. That's what it is. It says don't just go off into the corner and hide. Be there at the table putting your requests out, and you'll probably get something. This is an extension of the... It follows up the previous one about working with close coordination with the Road Commission. It follows that up, and it's to put pressure to work with, to get that money funded. Some of that money. Some of that money, of course. Now, the thing of it is, the way it was framed, is that let's just say there are 10 projects that the Road Commission wants to do. So this year they had so much money, or last year they had so they do two of them. Well, now they've got 45 million extra money. Now the four of them are going to get done of their priorities. Okay. Well, we need to do what this says is that we need to get to the table and say wait a minute how about and when monitor it says the monitor will read it but to monitor how they're allocating it and to put pressure on them to allocate some of it you know to the neighborhood roads that's all does the RCOC report to the county commissioner the RCOC does not report to the county executive they have their own commissioners they have their own commission of their own commission and they're appointed though by the county commission they're there they're

  46. That's what it is. It says don't just go off into the corner and hide. Be there at the table putting your requests out, and you'll probably get something. This is an extension of the... It follows up the previous one about working with close coordination with the Road Commission. It follows that up, and it's to put pressure to work with, to get that money funded. Some of that money. Some of that money, of course. Now, the thing of it is, the way it was framed, is that let's just say there are 10 projects that the Road Commission wants to do. So this year they had so much money, or last year they had so they do two of them. Well, now they've got 45 million extra money. Now the four of them are going to get done of their priorities. Okay. Well, we need to do what this says is that we need to get to the table and say wait a minute how about and when monitor it says the monitor will read it but to monitor how they're allocating it and to put pressure on them to allocate some of it you know to the neighborhood roads that's all does the RCOC report to the county commissioner the RCOC does not report to the county executive they have their own commissioners they have their own commission of their own commission and they're appointed though by the county commission they're there they're voted on they're appointed by residents like the other commissioners are and they vote at the county level but RCOC is an independent corporation from Oakland County well no I think what it is Fred is the Oakland County Commission probably through the chairman makes a recommendation for a it's a three-member board and they the head of the county commission be Dave Woodward makes a pick and then the county commission votes them into that role okay and there's three commissioners but they're still independent from the county they are independent but let's go back I remember Gary telling us what they're going to try they want to do is participate in the SADs across the county well I think it's great that they want to participate in the SADs across the county but I think going to what Mindy brought up is that somebody wants to get in turn let's go. me figure out how to how to build a seven million dollar road for thirteen million dollars i'm sorry i don't need your help well that's how do we how do we find a way to sort of that for the township how do we find a way for the township to have more leverage over over making sure that we're

  47. and they're appointed though by the county commission they're there they're voted on they're appointed by residents like the other commissioners are and they vote at the county level but RCOC is an independent corporation from Oakland County well no I think what it is Fred is the Oakland County Commission probably through the chairman makes a recommendation for a it's a three-member board and they the head of the county commission be Dave Woodward makes a pick and then the county commission votes them into that role okay and there's three commissioners but they're still independent from the county they are independent but let's go back I remember Gary telling us what they're going to try they want to do is participate in the SADs across the county well I think it's great that they want to participate in the SADs across the county but I think going to what Mindy brought up is that somebody wants to get in turn let's go. me figure out how to how to build a seven million dollar road for thirteen million dollars i'm sorry i don't need your help well that's how do we how do we find a way to sort of that for the township how do we find a way for the township to have more leverage over over making sure that we're getting the best price and the best value for these roads that are going into the sads because as a as a citizen i i expect the township to protect me absolutely not necessarily the road commission and i don't have the we will have to work towards those answers but i know the one first was we did a large refund for the red and blue section and we anticipate a a good refund for the yellow and gold because they were putting aside a large contingency fund as in more than they needed and that's why these numbers are coming back like eight to eleven thousand dollars per household credit or refund i think to answer part of your your concern is that an objective is that um our consultant mr messler is working and doing exactly what you he want what you want him to do he's looking at these things and saying this is way too much this is you know and and i think going forward that's that's a very positive step in doing exactly what you want done i think it makes the you know and i think it makes the township look better to the citizens you

  48. how do we find a way for the township to have more leverage over over making sure that we're getting the best price and the best value for these roads that are going into the sads because as a as a citizen i i expect the township to protect me absolutely not necessarily the road commission and i don't have the we will have to work towards those answers but i know the one first was we did a large refund for the red and blue section and we anticipate a a good refund for the yellow and gold because they were putting aside a large contingency fund as in more than they needed and that's why these numbers are coming back like eight to eleven thousand dollars per household credit or refund i think to answer part of your your concern is that an objective is that um our consultant mr messler is working and doing exactly what you he want what you want him to do he's looking at these things and saying this is way too much this is you know and and i think going forward that's that's a very positive step in doing exactly what you want done i think it makes the you know and i think it makes the township look better to the citizens you the township is if we recommend that the township play a more more active role in making sure that that whatever whatever funding is done in SADs that there is back the maximum value to the homeowner absolutely and Mindy has something to Jeff's point to this also says here's a communication process we're supporting and it implies we could ask for outcomes which you can ask for and then communicate with the residents which empowers the residents understand our COC right okay moving on to the next one construction I'm sorry the 14th there's something okay we tried we wordsmith this exact thing earlier and construction impact fee okay that's what it's titled it just says new construction subdivision has an impact on already combing roads is that true or not the committee recommends that data be collected okay so what I put into this

  49. the township is if we recommend that the township play a more more active role in making sure that that whatever whatever funding is done in SADs that there is back the maximum value to the homeowner absolutely and Mindy has something to Jeff's point to this also says here's a communication process we're supporting and it implies we could ask for outcomes which you can ask for and then communicate with the residents which empowers the residents understand our COC right okay moving on to the next one construction I'm sorry the 14th there's something okay we tried we wordsmith this exact thing earlier and construction impact fee okay that's what it's titled it just says new construction subdivision has an impact on already combing roads is that true or not the committee recommends that data be collected okay so what I put into this this is a sentence or something previous that current conventional wisdom hasn't that new construction in subdivision has an impact on already crumbling roads so we want data collected determined in subdivisions has a negative impact on local road conditions. That was what you said about data collecting. Yeah, and I think that- So we want to find out if that's a true statement or not. Well, I think we do, but I think we need to set ourselves up to not have a barrage of pushback from the road commission. As long as we protect ourselves by saying, instead of crumbling roads, I think going back and saying that it's having an impact on roads that are in disrepair and already well beyond their design life. I think that's a more accurate statement and a more powerful statement for people to realize. Yeah, like we talked about- Gary? Well, let's just assume for a minute that the weight is the problem of the vehicles. Would it be hallucinatory to say that any building permit issued in the township

  50. the committee recommends that data be collected okay so what I put into this this is a sentence or something previous that current conventional wisdom hasn't that new construction in subdivision has an impact on already crumbling roads so we want data collected determined in subdivisions has a negative impact on local road conditions. That was what you said about data collecting. Yeah, and I think that- So we want to find out if that's a true statement or not. Well, I think we do, but I think we need to set ourselves up to not have a barrage of pushback from the road commission. As long as we protect ourselves by saying, instead of crumbling roads, I think going back and saying that it's having an impact on roads that are in disrepair and already well beyond their design life. I think that's a more accurate statement and a more powerful statement for people to realize. Yeah, like we talked about- Gary? Well, let's just assume for a minute that the weight is the problem of the vehicles. Would it be hallucinatory to say that any building permit issued in the township carry a 2% supplement that goes into this- Well, we talked about that in the last recommendation. That's the recommendation. It would be any construction, not just new construction. It's not just construction itself. I saw a sod truck go into our thing. That's the heaviest truck I've ever seen in our subdivision. And I've seen drywall delivery. Heaviest thing I've seen. A new roof person comes in. So they all have to pull permits. So if our objective is to repair the roads that are damaged by this traffic then why wouldn't we ask everyone to participate and it's sort of like a taxation without them really knowing about it but you take a certain amount of money from these permits and then you say okay this has got to go in for repairing the roads and this and that. I'm just putting it out there because to just do it

  51. Would it be hallucinatory to say that any building permit issued in the township carry a 2% supplement that goes into this- Well, we talked about that in the last recommendation. That's the recommendation. It would be any construction, not just new construction. It's not just construction itself. I saw a sod truck go into our thing. That's the heaviest truck I've ever seen in our subdivision. And I've seen drywall delivery. Heaviest thing I've seen. A new roof person comes in. So they all have to pull permits. So if our objective is to repair the roads that are damaged by this traffic then why wouldn't we ask everyone to participate and it's sort of like a taxation without them really knowing about it but you take a certain amount of money from these permits and then you say okay this has got to go in for repairing the roads and this and that. I'm just putting it out there because to just do it to new construction is not really fair. I think it works as long as you tie it to permitting. Yeah. So if you if you if you get. I'm permitting anything. Well you're not. I don't have to get a permit if I get a load of sod delivered to my house. I don't have to get a permit if I have a load of dirt delivered to my house. But you have to get a permit for them to what they're going to do with the dirt. No I don't. No you don't. Not with the driveway. The driveway if you if you deliver drywall are you going to put that somewhere in your house? In a driveway? Yeah. If you if you drywall. If you deliver drywall. Well let me give it. Well let me give it. There are things that you can do that do not require the current permitting process. I understand that. I totally understand that. All I'm getting at is that I agree completely that if you tie it to things that are currently governed under the current permitting process, when I got a roof on my house, I think they had to get a permit to do the roof. But there are other things that you do that don't require a permit. The benefit of tying it to the permitting process is it more or less becomes a tax on the contractor

  52. and this and that. I'm just putting it out there because to just do it to new construction is not really fair. I think it works as long as you tie it to permitting. Yeah. So if you if you if you get. I'm permitting anything. Well you're not. I don't have to get a permit if I get a load of sod delivered to my house. I don't have to get a permit if I have a load of dirt delivered to my house. But you have to get a permit for them to what they're going to do with the dirt. No I don't. No you don't. Not with the driveway. The driveway if you if you deliver drywall are you going to put that somewhere in your house? In a driveway? Yeah. If you if you drywall. If you deliver drywall. Well let me give it. Well let me give it. There are things that you can do that do not require the current permitting process. I understand that. I totally understand that. All I'm getting at is that I agree completely that if you tie it to things that are currently governed under the current permitting process, when I got a roof on my house, I think they had to get a permit to do the roof. But there are other things that you do that don't require a permit. The benefit of tying it to the permitting process is it more or less becomes a tax on the contractor as opposed to a tax on the current citizen. He just passes it on. He does. He does, but most of your money is going to come from home construction. So you can tie it to as broadly as you want, but I think you have to make sure that you tie it to the permitting process because, you know, if you have a roof put on your house, it's $50,000, $60,000. One percent of that is, you know, is a minimal amount. If you tie it to a $3 million house, it's $30,000. That's exactly what we've said in the next paragraph, except we have to add one other thing, one preface to that. And I would, and we took, this is part of what we talked about earlier in that subcommittee, adding at the beginning, if the data indicates that there is a negative... impact so we're saying when collect data to determine if new construction has a negative impact that we want to see if it does well if it does a consideration of a construction impact fee a 1% fee we put a newly constructed homes I think

  53. The benefit of tying it to the permitting process is it more or less becomes a tax on the contractor as opposed to a tax on the current citizen. He just passes it on. He does. He does, but most of your money is going to come from home construction. So you can tie it to as broadly as you want, but I think you have to make sure that you tie it to the permitting process because, you know, if you have a roof put on your house, it's $50,000, $60,000. One percent of that is, you know, is a minimal amount. If you tie it to a $3 million house, it's $30,000. That's exactly what we've said in the next paragraph, except we have to add one other thing, one preface to that. And I would, and we took, this is part of what we talked about earlier in that subcommittee, adding at the beginning, if the data indicates that there is a negative... impact so we're saying when collect data to determine if new construction has a negative impact that we want to see if it does well if it does a consideration of a construction impact fee a 1% fee we put a newly constructed homes I think we're just asking we're asking for somebody to do a to do a survey that will take a year and and in that year 40 or 50 new homes will be made will be constructed and we'll just continue to lose more money now you know it's if you're asking for an objective opinion of God can we collect any data that says that that that this road construction is the construction construction traffic is having a negative effect well any vehicle that goes on the road that's that's beyond its design life is going to have a negative impact on the road it's just that a minivan is going to have a far less impact on the road than a gravel train you know I think that from our what our engineers tell us and Marcus said the trash trucks are the worst problem well it could be but I'm getting at is that that it I think the current trash trucks are the worst problem because I happen to see a truck from our old one or old contractor that we fired two years ago GFL and they have three axle trucks and the current truck contractor is two acts

  54. of a construction impact fee a 1% fee we put a newly constructed homes I think we're just asking we're asking for somebody to do a to do a survey that will take a year and and in that year 40 or 50 new homes will be made will be constructed and we'll just continue to lose more money now you know it's if you're asking for an objective opinion of God can we collect any data that says that that that this road construction is the construction construction traffic is having a negative effect well any vehicle that goes on the road that's that's beyond its design life is going to have a negative impact on the road it's just that a minivan is going to have a far less impact on the road than a gravel train you know I think that from our what our engineers tell us and Marcus said the trash trucks are the worst problem well it could be but I'm getting at is that that it I think the current trash trucks are the worst problem because I happen to see a truck from our old one or old contractor that we fired two years ago GFL and they have three axle trucks and the current truck contractor is two acts trucks so shame on us for firing a guy that was like it wasn't fired them they actually got out of the residential business oh okay man just did commercial okay what about changing the word new to permit construction permitted construction for permitted construction oh okay I think I'm fine with that I just I just because I just I just get it collected yeah to determine if please on construction go that way okay I would just encourage us to not base the timing of doing all this on spending another year collecting data but you're assuming facts not an evidence sir as in a lawyer would say you're assuming fat do they actually do they and what and how much damage do they do we all think they do but do they I think you I think you put the stick in the ground and you challenge somebody to come up against it because RCOC is not going to challenge it as long as you're not blaming them for doing it the roads being out of their design life means that whoever was involved in the design of those roads no ever no longer has any responsibility or obligation so there's nobody left to to

  55. trucks so shame on us for firing a guy that was like it wasn't fired them they actually got out of the residential business oh okay man just did commercial okay what about changing the word new to permit construction permitted construction for permitted construction oh okay I think I'm fine with that I just I just because I just I just get it collected yeah to determine if please on construction go that way okay I would just encourage us to not base the timing of doing all this on spending another year collecting data but you're assuming facts not an evidence sir as in a lawyer would say you're assuming fat do they actually do they and what and how much damage do they do we all think they do but do they I think you I think you put the stick in the ground and you challenge somebody to come up against it because RCOC is not going to challenge it as long as you're not blaming them for doing it the roads being out of their design life means that whoever was involved in the design of those roads no ever no longer has any responsibility or obligation so there's nobody left to to point at and say you're responsible for that's that what you're saying is this is beyond that design life meaning that they whether there's a big truck going through there or not they need to be replaced period absolutely okay so why blame the new construction damaging them because they're really damaged beyond repair if i'm if i'm an elected official interesting and i'm saying here's our new policy we're going tied to the permitting process there's going to be a fee of x percent then i would want if the public comes to me and says why do you do that what what's the objective basis for doing that i'd want political cover i mean but i also as a thinking person i would want data to support why i'm doing i'm taking that action so i think that's what the first step is it's a it's a valid we've got to have a objective basis at least some study some data just show now you can say well your data is wrong well then we that that's different but at least i've got something okay to support the premise and right now we have nothing your your point is well taken but in reality you said two different things

  56. ever no longer has any responsibility or obligation so there's nobody left to to point at and say you're responsible for that's that what you're saying is this is beyond that design life meaning that they whether there's a big truck going through there or not they need to be replaced period absolutely okay so why blame the new construction damaging them because they're really damaged beyond repair if i'm if i'm an elected official interesting and i'm saying here's our new policy we're going tied to the permitting process there's going to be a fee of x percent then i would want if the public comes to me and says why do you do that what what's the objective basis for doing that i'd want political cover i mean but i also as a thinking person i would want data to support why i'm doing i'm taking that action so i think that's what the first step is it's a it's a valid we've got to have a objective basis at least some study some data just show now you can say well your data is wrong well then we that that's different but at least i've got something okay to support the premise and right now we have nothing your your point is well taken but in reality you said two different things so if you change the first line to say conventional wisdom has it we're blaming all this on construction traffic and we change the first line to just be a statement of fact that in most cases the neighborhood roads are well beyond their their their design life and in bad repair period you'd have to do a survey to show that that's true that's all the red map the red map What's the design like? What's the useful life that was designed in? I don't know. Well, what's the specification on the current new roads that they're putting in? Is it 50 years? Fred, that's relevant. It's irrelevant. It may be 30. It's 30, but it's irrelevant because whatever was done last year or this year, we're talking about 30, 40 years ago. We don't know what the engineered lifespan was 30 or 40 years ago. And some of the roads are 30 and 40 and more years old. And do we think any of those roads that are red or yellow on that map could still be within their design life? I don't know.

  57. now we have nothing your your point is well taken but in reality you said two different things so if you change the first line to say conventional wisdom has it we're blaming all this on construction traffic and we change the first line to just be a statement of fact that in most cases the neighborhood roads are well beyond their their their design life and in bad repair period you'd have to do a survey to show that that's true that's all the red map the red map What's the design like? What's the useful life that was designed in? I don't know. Well, what's the specification on the current new roads that they're putting in? Is it 50 years? Fred, that's relevant. It's irrelevant. It may be 30. It's 30, but it's irrelevant because whatever was done last year or this year, we're talking about 30, 40 years ago. We don't know what the engineered lifespan was 30 or 40 years ago. And some of the roads are 30 and 40 and more years old. And do we think any of those roads that are red or yellow on that map could still be within their design life? I don't know. So we want to hire a survey in order to tell us that a 30-year-old road is beyond its design life? You know, all I'm getting at, guys, is that your point is well taken from the standpoint of setting up the objective for what we're asking them to do. But if the objective is, well, go run another survey, you're just going to take another year or so and nothing's going to change. But it's been 70 years since those roads were built. Another year, okay, you say we're losing money in a year. Well, all right, yeah, that's true. But, you know, these things take, sometimes things take time to evaluate and to be accurate and not just say, okay, this is what the fact is. No, it's not. This guy here, he's a construction guy. My trucks aren't doing any damage to your roads. Prove it. Show me that I am. I'm not going to pay one percent to you. Prove it. The premise is that traffic, heavy, heavy traffic, super traffic, super weight, is destroying the roads. Logically, I mean, it could make sense. That's going to have a bigger impact than my passenger vehicle. Right. But we need some data to support that. I agree. Do we have the before, before the construction, and then in the path of the heavy road, the traffic,

  58. So we want to hire a survey in order to tell us that a 30-year-old road is beyond its design life? You know, all I'm getting at, guys, is that your point is well taken from the standpoint of setting up the objective for what we're asking them to do. But if the objective is, well, go run another survey, you're just going to take another year or so and nothing's going to change. But it's been 70 years since those roads were built. Another year, okay, you say we're losing money in a year. Well, all right, yeah, that's true. But, you know, these things take, sometimes things take time to evaluate and to be accurate and not just say, okay, this is what the fact is. No, it's not. This guy here, he's a construction guy. My trucks aren't doing any damage to your roads. Prove it. Show me that I am. I'm not going to pay one percent to you. Prove it. The premise is that traffic, heavy, heavy traffic, super traffic, super weight, is destroying the roads. Logically, I mean, it could make sense. That's going to have a bigger impact than my passenger vehicle. Right. But we need some data to support that. I agree. Do we have the before, before the construction, and then in the path of the heavy road, the traffic, is it, has it deteriorated in a major way where the road next, you know, the next road in the same subdivision isn't deteriorated because it didn't have that kind of support. How about if we recommend that the township ask the RCOC for a history of residential roads in our township and whether or not those roads are still within their design life? I don't think we know the design life. But we're going to ask for somebody to give us an evaluation. I'm telling you, it's going to go to RCOC. But this doesn't talk about design life. This talks about the impact of heavy, heavy vehicles. And regardless of the design life, if it could be Mindy's one-year-old road, and if they get super, super heavy vehicles, that one-year-old road could cook. Well, I'm going to tell you, I've had this conversation with people at RCOC, and they will flood us with data that shows that a heavy truck within the weight specifications of the state of Michigan, on that brand new road in the subdivision, is not going to cause damage.

  59. Do we have the before, before the construction, and then in the path of the heavy road, the traffic, is it, has it deteriorated in a major way where the road next, you know, the next road in the same subdivision isn't deteriorated because it didn't have that kind of support. How about if we recommend that the township ask the RCOC for a history of residential roads in our township and whether or not those roads are still within their design life? I don't think we know the design life. But we're going to ask for somebody to give us an evaluation. I'm telling you, it's going to go to RCOC. But this doesn't talk about design life. This talks about the impact of heavy, heavy vehicles. And regardless of the design life, if it could be Mindy's one-year-old road, and if they get super, super heavy vehicles, that one-year-old road could cook. Well, I'm going to tell you, I've had this conversation with people at RCOC, and they will flood us with data that shows that a heavy truck within the weight specifications of the state of Michigan, on that brand new road in the subdivision, is not going to cause damage. Is not going to cause damage. Will not cause damage. Then this recommendation is we shouldn't do it. No, it's only the fact that you're, if we change the fact that we're saying that this is all being caused by new construction traffic. What we're saying, what we should be saying is, is that the roads are old, and anything we do to them is causing damage. You know, if you change, if you change. So that every vehicle that passes there, we should set a toll gate at the end. That's right, and the toll gate is 1% of the permitting process. That's the toll gate. So then what you're saying is that all the construction companies, or the people who have new homes built, they'll pay it eventually. They're going to pay for the, all the, they're going to pay, but the garbage trucks won't. That the, anybody passing through with a heavy truck won't. I think we lost. Yeah. So, but, but only, only those who build a new home will. Well, we're probably now. And we're assuming that that's who's, that's where all the, all the damage coming from. No, we're assuming that that's where the majority of the money comes from. Well, just because the money's there, we want to go after, because that's what.

  60. Well, I'm going to tell you, I've had this conversation with people at RCOC, and they will flood us with data that shows that a heavy truck within the weight specifications of the state of Michigan, on that brand new road in the subdivision, is not going to cause damage. Is not going to cause damage. Will not cause damage. Then this recommendation is we shouldn't do it. No, it's only the fact that you're, if we change the fact that we're saying that this is all being caused by new construction traffic. What we're saying, what we should be saying is, is that the roads are old, and anything we do to them is causing damage. You know, if you change, if you change. So that every vehicle that passes there, we should set a toll gate at the end. That's right, and the toll gate is 1% of the permitting process. That's the toll gate. So then what you're saying is that all the construction companies, or the people who have new homes built, they'll pay it eventually. They're going to pay for the, all the, they're going to pay, but the garbage trucks won't. That the, anybody passing through with a heavy truck won't. I think we lost. Yeah. So, but, but only, only those who build a new home will. Well, we're probably now. And we're assuming that that's who's, that's where all the, all the damage coming from. No, we're assuming that that's where the majority of the money comes from. Well, just because the money's there, we want to go after, because that's what. money is well why do people rob banks because that's where the money is you know but we're tying it now not to just new home construction that we're turning it now i get that to the permitting process right so but in subdivisions that's new homes period i mean it's not a bank being built there it's not it's not it's not a supermarket being built there it's a home in subdivisions um i okay in most case in most cases it is a home but i i guess i just keep coming back to that we've got to find a way in my opinion to change the way we're doing things and we've got to change the way we're doing things rapidly if we can't change the way we're doing things rapidly we're just blowing out blowing farts in the wind guys i would respectfully disagree with that analysis because just because you want to do something and you want to do it quick you can you know you that's that's that is not that's not it's not how government works no it's not how it's not how even well business doesn't work that way either business does not work that way if they do they're out of business really quick because they they they do things too quickly and they don't analyze things tell that to google well they've analyzed they analyze things pretty thoroughly tell that to google break things quickly do we have any idea what the 35 yeah what is the magnitude of

  61. money is well why do people rob banks because that's where the money is you know but we're tying it now not to just new home construction that we're turning it now i get that to the permitting process right so but in subdivisions that's new homes period i mean it's not a bank being built there it's not it's not it's not a supermarket being built there it's a home in subdivisions um i okay in most case in most cases it is a home but i i guess i just keep coming back to that we've got to find a way in my opinion to change the way we're doing things and we've got to change the way we're doing things rapidly if we can't change the way we're doing things rapidly we're just blowing out blowing farts in the wind guys i would respectfully disagree with that analysis because just because you want to do something and you want to do it quick you can you know you that's that's that is not that's not it's not how government works no it's not how it's not how even well business doesn't work that way either business does not work that way if they do they're out of business really quick because they they they do things too quickly and they don't analyze things tell that to google well they've analyzed they analyze things pretty thoroughly tell that to google break things quickly do we have any idea what the 35 yeah what is the magnitude of all the permitted construction in the township annually say that again gary the magnitude of one percent of all construction in all construction in the county is this the township is it it I think that's important that we know that number at some point not right now but because Darren went through and shared his number and I forget what his numbers were we'd have to go back and look at his presentation anyway that would be good number to know you know we go back to this I said that's how business works it's not just government a business in order to satisfy their stockholders they don't react just you know just like that they study things and they they make good cases for things you mentioned Google my son was an executive at Google and he analyzed it what part of his job was to go through these things when they said let's do this this is not just gonna do let's find out and analyze it first so yeah you may see it when you read it read in the newspaper they just did this boom they've been analyzing for a year and a half I don't so I just think to spend a year or to spend a little time in getting data and finding out if what we're suggesting a 1% fee to to new

  62. tell that to google break things quickly do we have any idea what the 35 yeah what is the magnitude of all the permitted construction in the township annually say that again gary the magnitude of one percent of all construction in all construction in the county is this the township is it it I think that's important that we know that number at some point not right now but because Darren went through and shared his number and I forget what his numbers were we'd have to go back and look at his presentation anyway that would be good number to know you know we go back to this I said that's how business works it's not just government a business in order to satisfy their stockholders they don't react just you know just like that they study things and they they make good cases for things you mentioned Google my son was an executive at Google and he analyzed it what part of his job was to go through these things when they said let's do this this is not just gonna do let's find out and analyze it first so yeah you may see it when you read it read in the newspaper they just did this boom they've been analyzing for a year and a half I don't so I just think to spend a year or to spend a little time in getting data and finding out if what we're suggesting a 1% fee to to new people want to build new homes in the township I don't think that's I don't think that's out of line I really don't and I think the way it's word remember we're saying is the Board of Trustees let them let us and put our engineers and our DPW people to work you know do the implementation absolutely it's all I think we're gonna agree disagree that's what I think yeah but we have it in here and it's it's a it's a I think it's good I yeah All right, but we do, I do, we made that one change, and there was a couple of changes. Instead of, on already crumbling roads, I think we said roads in distress, spare, and past air design life. I think that's good. I like that. Data collected determined if permitted construction in subdivision. Jeff, you said, can we go back to the crumbling roads? What? I thought at the very first sentence it says conventional wisdom. Yes, current conventional wisdom has it that new construction in subdivision has an impact on roads in disrepair and past air design life. Okay. What I'm saying is that if you just leave new construction subdivision has an impact, you are assuming facts that, you're just making an assumption.

  63. getting data and finding out if what we're suggesting a 1% fee to to new people want to build new homes in the township I don't think that's I don't think that's out of line I really don't and I think the way it's word remember we're saying is the Board of Trustees let them let us and put our engineers and our DPW people to work you know do the implementation absolutely it's all I think we're gonna agree disagree that's what I think yeah but we have it in here and it's it's a it's a I think it's good I yeah All right, but we do, I do, we made that one change, and there was a couple of changes. Instead of, on already crumbling roads, I think we said roads in distress, spare, and past air design life. I think that's good. I like that. Data collected determined if permitted construction in subdivision. Jeff, you said, can we go back to the crumbling roads? What? I thought at the very first sentence it says conventional wisdom. Yes, current conventional wisdom has it that new construction in subdivision has an impact on roads in disrepair and past air design life. Okay. What I'm saying is that if you just leave new construction subdivision has an impact, you are assuming facts that, you're just making an assumption. Okay, Jeff, could you? Yeah, can you tell me why current construction is up or where you are? It, uh, super slow. Okay, one word at a time. Yep. That sentence. Current conventional wisdom. Current conventional wisdom. Okay. Has it that new construction in subdivision. Hold on. Subdivisions have an impact on roads in disrepair and past their design life. Okay. That's good. And then going down, data, we, the committee recommends that data be collected to determine if permitted. But I'm going to wait at the price to have a Place that I took place. The Mitswondo開. construction in subdivisions just not new permitted getting a permit permitted construction in subdivisions has a negative effect impact on local road conditions everything else is neighborhood roads yeah so put neighborhoods right you're right one thing let's be consistent right the first line has to be some neighborhood in this last the first

  64. What I'm saying is that if you just leave new construction subdivision has an impact, you are assuming facts that, you're just making an assumption. Okay, Jeff, could you? Yeah, can you tell me why current construction is up or where you are? It, uh, super slow. Okay, one word at a time. Yep. That sentence. Current conventional wisdom. Current conventional wisdom. Okay. Has it that new construction in subdivision. Hold on. Subdivisions have an impact on roads in disrepair and past their design life. Okay. That's good. And then going down, data, we, the committee recommends that data be collected to determine if permitted. But I'm going to wait at the price to have a Place that I took place. The Mitswondo開. construction in subdivisions just not new permitted getting a permit permitted construction in subdivisions has a negative effect impact on local road conditions everything else is neighborhood roads yeah so put neighborhoods right you're right one thing let's be consistent right the first line has to be some neighborhood in this last the first line of the all right double secret paragraph there okay the second bullet bullet tell me when you're ready yeah yeah yes okay the next bullet a sentence if the data indicates that there is a negative impact comma a consideration of a construction impact fee and then the rest of it I just left it alone I didn't unless somebody else wants to change I just thought it was fine the way it was and the third line is yeah okay yep that's good but we shouldn't say newly constructed homes we should say them permitted permitted right permitted homes permitted it's there right that construction permitted improvements I don't know something permitted because it's more unpermitted construction yeah okay okay okay so should we I think you should say maybe a one percent additional fee because there's already a fee on permitted construction well we're talking about a road impact fee not just a permitting it's a new it's a new a new title a new a new construction impact

  65. one thing let's be consistent right the first line has to be some neighborhood in this last the first line of the all right double secret paragraph there okay the second bullet bullet tell me when you're ready yeah yeah yes okay the next bullet a sentence if the data indicates that there is a negative impact comma a consideration of a construction impact fee and then the rest of it I just left it alone I didn't unless somebody else wants to change I just thought it was fine the way it was and the third line is yeah okay yep that's good but we shouldn't say newly constructed homes we should say them permitted permitted right permitted homes permitted it's there right that construction permitted improvements I don't know something permitted because it's more unpermitted construction yeah okay okay okay so should we I think you should say maybe a one percent additional fee because there's already a fee on permitted construction well we're talking about a road impact fee not just a permitting it's a new it's a new a new title a new a new construction impact we beat this to death yeah one more slide we're done okay okay recommendations uh continued out with the county and state elected officials we talked yeah uh public affairs associates rcoc and state representatives the committee the township supervisor remain in regular contact with elected officials in oakland county the state of michigan and the federal government in order to advise the township trustees on all possible funding opportunities for local roads in our township okay along in for the neighborhood roads instead of local right okay it's a very powerful now the last slide oh i'm sorry anybody okay the last slide the long-term things now the two subjects are um changes in public act 51 which is killing us um and then we talk about the headley legislation now i want to expand on that this is just a this this slide i'd like to wordsmith more i'll send

  66. it's a new it's a new a new title a new a new construction impact we beat this to death yeah one more slide we're done okay okay recommendations uh continued out with the county and state elected officials we talked yeah uh public affairs associates rcoc and state representatives the committee the township supervisor remain in regular contact with elected officials in oakland county the state of michigan and the federal government in order to advise the township trustees on all possible funding opportunities for local roads in our township okay along in for the neighborhood roads instead of local right okay it's a very powerful now the last slide oh i'm sorry anybody okay the last slide the long-term things now the two subjects are um changes in public act 51 which is killing us um and then we talk about the headley legislation now i want to expand on that this is just a this this slide i'd like to wordsmith more i'll send and send it out soon I can work on it I'd like to change some of this this is not this is just I don't we can't consider revision the Hedley legislation it's an amendment to the Constitution you can't just do anything about it what I would what I suggested was that we look at how it's implemented how it's interpreted okay it is the Hedley amendment says a millage increase has to be voted on by the public a millage increase the way it's been implemented has been that even if no millage increase is suggested any increased money that comes in because of new construction or uncapped sales you have to lower the millage rate what I'm suggesting what I'd like to look at what I thought of and part of this and is to look at how it's implemented do we really have to have a millage increase election to keep the money keep more of the money that comes in because of new construction and uncapped homes we're not asking for millage increase it stays at 50 mills or whatever that whatever 35 mills not changing but we would like to know can we say we don't want to lower

  67. and send it out soon I can work on it I'd like to change some of this this is not this is just I don't we can't consider revision the Hedley legislation it's an amendment to the Constitution you can't just do anything about it what I would what I suggested was that we look at how it's implemented how it's interpreted okay it is the Hedley amendment says a millage increase has to be voted on by the public a millage increase the way it's been implemented has been that even if no millage increase is suggested any increased money that comes in because of new construction or uncapped sales you have to lower the millage rate what I'm suggesting what I'd like to look at what I thought of and part of this and is to look at how it's implemented do we really have to have a millage increase election to keep the money keep more of the money that comes in because of new construction and uncapped homes we're not asking for millage increase it stays at 50 mills or whatever that whatever 35 mills not changing but we would like to know can we say we don't want to lower it from 35 to 32 because we're getting more money because what happens is and I want to introduce this is that with all the new construction and with all the uncapped homes the township realizes about three and a half percent increase in funding that was what that was what our oh three and a half percent where our increase that's all we get because of the rollback because of the millage rollback we're anticipating a million dollars next year because of this increase but no we have to roll back our millage so we can only get two hundred thousand or whatever the numbers i made that up i just made it up three and a half percent of what amount on everything that comes in but what's the toy job you're oh i don't know the cost of living year over year year over year so all the new 20 million dollars in new construction income could come in we get only three and a half percent of that because we have to roll back the millage to accomplish that in the following year which is when we forecast it the the fact of the matter is and this comes from our people here the township um financial people that it's we get an increase of about 10 to 15 percent every year in our costs that the cost that's the cost of fuel the cost of asphalt for roads the cost of health care for employees the

  68. 35 mills not changing but we would like to know can we say we don't want to lower it from 35 to 32 because we're getting more money because what happens is and I want to introduce this is that with all the new construction and with all the uncapped homes the township realizes about three and a half percent increase in funding that was what that was what our oh three and a half percent where our increase that's all we get because of the rollback because of the millage rollback we're anticipating a million dollars next year because of this increase but no we have to roll back our millage so we can only get two hundred thousand or whatever the numbers i made that up i just made it up three and a half percent of what amount on everything that comes in but what's the toy job you're oh i don't know the cost of living year over year year over year so all the new 20 million dollars in new construction income could come in we get only three and a half percent of that because we have to roll back the millage to accomplish that in the following year which is when we forecast it the the fact of the matter is and this comes from our people here the township um financial people that it's we get an increase of about 10 to 15 percent every year in our costs that the cost that's the cost of fuel the cost of asphalt for roads the cost of health care for employees the cost of all these other things is going up to 10 to 15 percent and we're only getting three and a half percent from all the new construction and all the all of that um it's based on the consumer price index well how much butter and eggs does the township use you know how much lettuce does the township buy they buy fuel and we buy asphalt very expensive stuff and we have health care costs we have new trucks for new fire trucks and and additional police and fire all these other things that aren't in the Consumer Price Index. All I'm saying is that the point of this was to look into how Headley is interpreted and implemented. Jeff? Over the long term. This could take 20 years. I'm just saying it, but it's a long-term thing. Where does that interpretation take place? Is that in Mike's office? Is that in the county? The county? Every year it's filed. It's in Lansing. Is it in Lansing? No. Well, forms are filed by the township, and it goes to Lansing. And we have to show, we have, we're going to have our assessments for the following year, our assessment is going to be this much. We have new construction for this much. We have uncapped homes.

  69. that's the cost of fuel the cost of asphalt for roads the cost of health care for employees the cost of all these other things is going up to 10 to 15 percent and we're only getting three and a half percent from all the new construction and all the all of that um it's based on the consumer price index well how much butter and eggs does the township use you know how much lettuce does the township buy they buy fuel and we buy asphalt very expensive stuff and we have health care costs we have new trucks for new fire trucks and and additional police and fire all these other things that aren't in the Consumer Price Index. All I'm saying is that the point of this was to look into how Headley is interpreted and implemented. Jeff? Over the long term. This could take 20 years. I'm just saying it, but it's a long-term thing. Where does that interpretation take place? Is that in Mike's office? Is that in the county? The county? Every year it's filed. It's in Lansing. Is it in Lansing? No. Well, forms are filed by the township, and it goes to Lansing. And we have to show, we have, we're going to have our assessments for the following year, our assessment is going to be this much. We have new construction for this much. We have uncapped homes. So our new assessment value is going to be $100 million more than it is today. So now next year that millage has to come down and take that down. If the interpretation does not take place, I'll call it in this room, I mean, Bloomfield township, you know. No, I'm saying we have to ask for it to be looked at. Okay. Maybe it is at the state level. Probably it is. Yeah. The attorneys, they decide. Okay. Let's look at it. Let's see. Isn't it possible to look and see if maybe that's wrong? That's all. Okay. But that's a long, long-term goal. Because Hedley's killing us. Because it was intended to stop communities from taking in a lot of extra money that they would take me in. Cash money. And spending it on whatever they wanted. Amen. And so they interpreted that not only new millage has to be voted by the public, but new monies have to be voted by the public because you have to lower your millage rate in order to accommodate for all this new money is flooding in. Well, yeah, but we have candidates running for governor that are going to eliminate my income. You know why? That's a long-term goal. I agree with the goal. The temporary adjustment for the Headley Amendment would be the greatest thing ever accomplished.

  70. We have uncapped homes. So our new assessment value is going to be $100 million more than it is today. So now next year that millage has to come down and take that down. If the interpretation does not take place, I'll call it in this room, I mean, Bloomfield township, you know. No, I'm saying we have to ask for it to be looked at. Okay. Maybe it is at the state level. Probably it is. Yeah. The attorneys, they decide. Okay. Let's look at it. Let's see. Isn't it possible to look and see if maybe that's wrong? That's all. Okay. But that's a long, long-term goal. Because Hedley's killing us. Because it was intended to stop communities from taking in a lot of extra money that they would take me in. Cash money. And spending it on whatever they wanted. Amen. And so they interpreted that not only new millage has to be voted by the public, but new monies have to be voted by the public because you have to lower your millage rate in order to accommodate for all this new money is flooding in. Well, yeah, but we have candidates running for governor that are going to eliminate my income. You know why? That's a long-term goal. I agree with the goal. The temporary adjustment for the Headley Amendment would be the greatest thing ever accomplished. I'm just saying, let's look at it. That was one. The other thing is to evaluate and to just change it to PA-51. Again, that needs a little bit more in this slide, and I think we need to put a little bit more in there to explain why PA-51 is just killing us. We're hampered by that, by Headley, by so many things. And PA-51 is just killing us. It's not being a city. What about that one? Well, we took that out. We took that out for a reason. Jeff, before we wrap up. Yeah, we're done. May I thank Sue Bullen for her extraordinary services. Sue, she's been spectacular. Terrific. Thank you. Thank you guys for putting this together. So now, we're going to make these changes that we came up with, and I think we should do, Sue, maybe we'll, like you suggested, maybe we don't need a meeting to go over this again. I don't think so. Let's do it. Let's send out a new one to everybody and say, here it is. Because I made all the changes. Yeah. Okay, good. The only one is that last slide, then I want to go look with you on here. All right. So we're presenting in mid-September. In September. We don't need to meet again until then. Well, we should before just to go over one more time, like in early September, maybe.

  71. I'm just saying, let's look at it. That was one. The other thing is to evaluate and to just change it to PA-51. Again, that needs a little bit more in this slide, and I think we need to put a little bit more in there to explain why PA-51 is just killing us. We're hampered by that, by Headley, by so many things. And PA-51 is just killing us. It's not being a city. What about that one? Well, we took that out. We took that out for a reason. Jeff, before we wrap up. Yeah, we're done. May I thank Sue Bullen for her extraordinary services. Sue, she's been spectacular. Terrific. Thank you. Thank you guys for putting this together. So now, we're going to make these changes that we came up with, and I think we should do, Sue, maybe we'll, like you suggested, maybe we don't need a meeting to go over this again. I don't think so. Let's do it. Let's send out a new one to everybody and say, here it is. Because I made all the changes. Yeah. Okay, good. The only one is that last slide, then I want to go look with you on here. All right. So we're presenting in mid-September. In September. We don't need to meet again until then. Well, we should before just to go over one more time, like in early September, maybe. Okay. We should meet before the... Yeah. Yeah, right. That's what I meant. Yeah. Okay. We'll figure that out. Okay. Officially, there's no meeting next Wednesday. No. Yeah. You're a good leader. I move to adjourn. We are adjourned. Thank you all very, very much. This is really good discussions here.