We will get the community development committee started.

Our first item this morning is a resolution approving a fireworks discharge permit for RKM Fireworks Company for special effects at the AcroShare Amphitheater in connection with Acrossure Amphitheater Contractor Appreciation Music Festival for special effects on May 9th, 2026.

So move.

Support.

Supported.

Morning.

Morning.

Can you hear me?

Okay.

Didn't know if it was on.

Um, yeah, there's two sites.

One's gonna be at the uh amputator itself, and then a aerial display over at Grand Valley across the river.

We have permission from Grand Valley to use their space in proximity to their building.

So right now everything's a go tentatively.

I gotta finish with the paperwork.

Wonderful.

Hear no questions.

I'll call the question.

All in favor?

Aye.

None opposed.

Motion carries.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Item number two this morning is a resolution confirming special assessment 8774 Crescent Alley improvements.

Through a motion.

So move.

Support.

And supported.

Good morning.

Good morning.

Um this uh is for confirmation of the Crescent Street Alley special assessment.

Um the City Commission order on October 18, 2022, uh ordered the assessor's office to prepare the special assessment roll number 8774.

This was for charges to improvements of the Crescent Street Alley.

The work related to the improvements was completed in 2025, and the total cost was 119,628 dollars.

Property owners were sent notices on January 5th, 2026 and notified of the charge and the appeal process.

The special assessment role was open for public inspection for the required two weeks, um, starting on January 19th and ending on January 30, 2026.

The role was available for inspection in the assessor's office as well as being posted on the city's website.

The city commission sat as board of review to hear appeals on February 10th.

Um at that time, we've had a tot received a total of three appeals.

Uh the city assessor and the city in conjunction with the attorney's office reviewed the appeals upon review of the appeals.

It was confirmed that the city acted with full transparency and followed all of the appropriate procedures dictated by city ordinances.

Therefore, we request that you confirm the Crescent Street Alley assess special assessment role as is in the amount of 11,736 and authorize the city treasurer to bill for the special assessment.

Thank you for that background.

Can you share more about the purpose or the argument behind the three appeals that were submitted?

Um these most of these appeals were people who bought after the work was completed, so they did not feel they should pay.

But that is a dispute between buyer and seller.

More in that call, uh, we we did hear one appeal in person related from someone who bought after.

Um I'm not recalling all the details.

I remember that there were some issues with communication from the city.

If do you recall?

Yep.

Um they were they were a new seller and they had indicated that they were not notified of the special assessment.

That really is between the buyer and seller, so the seller would disclose that to the buyer at the time of sale.

Um the city did follow proper procedure and notifying the owners of record.

Um, and the attorneys agreed that we had properly filed procedure, so there is not merit to approve the was that information readily available online because I recall that couple one of the couple of it's available if they were to call the treasurers.

Let me let me finish.

Oh, sorry.

Um, so I recall that when they uh the one of the couples came for us to hear their appeal, they mentioned that they did do some due diligence on their own, looking online, looking at city records, and didn't find any anything that said that they will be part of this and would owe it.

So can you speak to that?

Yes.

So with these type of projects, there's not an actual special assessment until the work is completed.

So when they checked, there was not a special assessment.

It's not available online.

Those parcels are flagged, and it is typical process for title companies to call and talk to a representative in the treasurer's office.

We were able to find through the treasurer's office that there was conversations regarding the specific property.

Um at when at what point?

Uh there was two sales in this, so the seller was knew about this directly during the sale process.

Okay.

Any other questions from my colleagues?

All right, seeing none.

Um all in favor.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries.

Thank you.

Item number three this morning is a resolution authorizing a memorandum of agreement with the Michigan State Historic Preservation Officer and the Wyoming Housing Commission for the Union Suites on Coit 2 project.

Is there a motion?

So move.

Support.

Supported.

Good morning, Mr.

Tucker.

Good morning.

This uh this item deals with a memorandum of agreement between the city, the Michigan State Historic Preservation Office, as well as the Wyoming Housing Commission.

Uh the city's responsibility to provide environmental review under Section 106 of the Federal National Historic Preservation Act of 1966.

Uh says that HUD funding HUD supported projects are uh are subject to are subject to this review in the city's right is to is to be the agent uh to make that review.

In this case, uh the Section 8 project-based vouchers that the Wyoming Housing Commission granted for this project would trigger that review.

Um, and in consultation with uh SHIPO, uh what we found is that the project uh in Bell in the Belknap neighborhood uh that is going to create 52 affordable units um is going to have an adverse effect, or there's a a judgment rendered that there's an adverse effect and the owner of the project uh will have to uh engage in certain historic preservation activities.

Um this memorandum of agreement details what those historic preservation activities are.

Um, should the owner not uh comply with those activities uh now or in the future, uh the Wyoming Housing Commission has the right to withdraw its project-based voucher support.

Thank you for that background.

Um 52 affordable rental units.

What is affordable mean in this case?

Um they're gonna be 80 percent AMI and below.

Thank you.

And then can you say a little bit more about the adverse effect?

Is that then related to the um memorandum that you mentioned in the historical requirements and review?

Yeah, so this particular project uh will the the address is 628 to 646 coit.

There are seven buildings there currently um that will be that will be raised as a result of this project, and those seven buildings um because the Bellknap area uh uh presumably meets the criteria for the national uh registry of historic places.

Um there is activity to preserve the historic uh the historic spirit of what was there before the new 52 unit building uh gets built.

And the activities that they have to engage in uh include retaining historic preservation consultant to record the existing conditions of the building, they have to create a permanent record of the affected properties, so those seven properties uh that will be raised, and then uh they have to display a historical photographic map of the impacted buildings in the new project.

Thank you.

Any questions?

Um how many uh section eight vouchers uh did Wyoming designate for this?

It's a good question.

I can get back to you on the specific number of vouchers.

Um, but yeah, uh I'll I can tell you the specific number.

Do you know the cost um that doing all this historic preservation will cost for the developer?

Uh for the developer.

I I do not have an estimate of that either, but I can get that to you in that response.

Okay, thank you.

Yes.

I'll call the question.

All in favor.

Aye.

Unapposed, thank you.

We are on to item number four this morning: a resolution adopting a clean water state revolving fund final project planning document for a wastewater system improvement project and designating an authorized project representative.

So moved.

Moved and supported.

Good morning.

Good morning, commissioners.

So this um this application for the Clean Water State Revolving Fund is to support the Godfrey um combined sewer separation project.

Um, so we've talked about this in the past.

Our combined sewer overflows to the river have been um disconnected for quite some time.

We still have some combined sewers that'll send stormwater to the water resource recovery facility.

So this project um when it's complete will be one of the last substantial separations and results in 184 acres of stormwater being discharged appropriately to the river instead of our water resource recovery facility.

Um the total estimated cost is 28 million, so hence um our uh ESD team has been working hard to identify alternate funding sources for this substantial project.

Wonderful.

I see in the memo that the plan is to um seek a CWSRF loan.

Okay.

Wonderful.

Any questions on this, colleagues?

Saying none, all in favor?

Aye.

None opposed.

Thank you.

Item number five is a resolution awarding a contract with groundhog excavating and landscaping LLC for replacement of lead surface lines at various locations in the amount of $1,876,312 with the total project cost not to exceed $2,889,800.

So move.

Support.

So this supports the um water department's continuing efforts to remove our lead water service lines.

Um we've shared previously that they're about 35% complete with the work.

Um they saw a drinking water state revolving fund loan, and with that, um, this project anticipates about $2.5 million in debt forgiveness in support of that effort.

Wonderful.

Seeing no questions, all in favor?

Aye.

None opposed.

Motion carries.

Item number six.

Resolution awarding a contract with Montgomery excavating LLC for rotomilling resurfacing of streets at various locations in the amount of three million five hundred and ninety-four thousand four hundred and three dollars, with a total amount not to exceed four million seven hundred and forty-four thousand three hundred dollars.

Is there a motion?

So move.

Support.

Supported, Mr.

Irving.

Yes, this is part of our vital streets initiatives to improve our roads.

This falls into the preventative maintenance and rehabilitation work.

Um, and with this, we also repair sidewalks, we bring things up to ADA compliance, and we of course resurface the street.

Um, and this project has 14.9% of micro LBE participation.

Great to hear that.

See no questions, all in favor?

Aye, none opposed, motion carries.

We are on to item number seven, a resolution awarding a contract with Wyoming Excavators Inc.

for res reconstruction of Leffingwell Avenue and Bradford Street in the amount of four million four hundred and thirty-eight thousand a hundred and fifty-three dollars and twenty-five cents with total amount not to exceed five million four hundred and ninety-one thousand eight hundred and eighty dollars.

Is our motion?

So move support.

Is there a thing?

Yes, so this is an exciting project where Corwell Health has been our partner and is paying for most of the improvements.

Um they are contributing um roughly 5.3 million towards this reconstruction of the street.

So this is Leffingwell just south of Leonard Street, um, and then we go south to the curve where it turns into Bradford and goes to the east belt line.

Um Corwell um years ago under a previous name had purchased a substantial amount of land, and with that rezoning with the planning department agreed that as they built out their campus, they would reconstruct the road, um, and they've reached that point.

So this is currently unimproved, meaning that they're adding stormwater, street lighting, they're also adding a shared path along this area, um, and then there's a full road reconstruction.

Um, there was no storm sewer previously, so storm sewer is being added, and they're also closing a water main gap to help improve reliability.

Seeing no questions, all in favor?

Aye.

Motion carries.

Item number eight is a resolution accepting a utility easement at the intersection of Ripens Drive Northwest and Mullins Avenue Northwest in connection with the partial vacation of Ripens Drive Northwest for one dollar.

So move.

Support.

Moved and supported serving.

This vacation is in the city of Walker.

Um we have City of Grand Rapids utilities in this space, so they're preserving an easement for our access maintenance and future replacement.

You're all in favor?

Aye.

Motion carries.

Item number nine is a resolution accepting two utility utility easements at 725 Wealthy Street Southwest and 336 Strait Avenue Southwest in connection with extension of energy lighting and communication.

Did I skip something?

No, I don't think so.

I have I think something may have gotten pulled from uh item earlier yes.

Okay.

Okay.

Okay.

No worries.

Just want to make sure we're all on the same page.

Okay.

Item number nine uh is a resolution accepting two utility easements at 725 Wealthy Street Southwest and 336 Straight Avenue Southwest in connection with extension of energy lighting and communications primary circuit in Wealthy Street and Front Avenue for $890 and $1,485.

Our motion support.

Just supported.

This project is in support of the Butterworth Solar Project where we're um installing a diff additional um primary circuit connections.

And given the um number of utilities within the right-of-way, we needed to seek a utility easement to make space for this new addition.

Great.

All in favor?

Aye.

Motion carries.

Item number 10 is a resolution approving a release of easement at 1232nd Street Northwest.

Sopport.

Ms.

Irving, anything you want to add on this one?

No, just we haven't built utilities, so there's no need to maintain the easement.

Okay.

All in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries.

Item number 11 is a resolution to schedule a public hearing on April 28th, 2026 for the 1225 Plymouth Flat Plymouth Flats redevelopment project located at 1225 Plymouth Avenue Northeast.

Support.

Moved and supported.

I think I'm on this side of the dais now.

Yes, this is a project right behind the fire station at Leonard in Plymouth.

I'll see if you can picture that.

It's a almost a two-acre site, and there is a former credit union uh on the site that was vacated in 24 will be demolished uh for the construction of three residential buildings with a total of 48 units, where 20% of those units will be dedicated to 90% AMI uh families.

The total development costs are approximately 10 and a half million, and the eligible activities, which mainly comprise of potential rent loss, which is housing uh dedicated TIFF is uh about 1.75 million.

The only other thing that I wanted to mention is the um overall participation for aspirational subtract subcontractor goals uh in relation to micro-local women owned and minority owned enterprises is 30 percent, which is great.

Wonderful.

Also great to get more housing built in the city.

Any questions, colleagues?

All right, seeing none, I'll call the question.

All in favor?

Aye.

Motion carries.

We are on item number 12.

Resolution setting Tuesday, April 28th, 2026 at 7 p.m.

As a date, the city commission will convene a public hearing to sit as board of review to hear appeals on special assessment nuisance role eight eight zero two.

Motion.

So move support.

Welcome back, Miss Post.

Um, this one is uh regarding the nuisance role for the spring.

On January 27th this year, the commission issued an order for the assessor to create this special assessment roll number 8802.

This is an unpaid charges for services or code violations issued between July of 2025 and December of 2025.

Um these charges stem from miscellaneous services such as housing violations, yard violations, rental certifications, and blight monitoring.

Uh property owners affected by these charges were mailed notices already on March 16th.

Uh these included the amount of charges as well as how to appeal.

The city's charter requires a public hearing to allow property owners affected by the special assessment the right to appeal.

Um this proceeding is to set the date for that public hearing as April 28th.

All right, thank you.

I'll call the question.

All in favor.

Just oh, quick question.

Um go ahead and what happens.

Put your mic a little bit.

Okay, hear me.

Can y'all hear me?

There we go.

Mike chick.

Um what happens when we continue to have multiple properties on this assessment rule owned by the same people?

It they just we just keep keep putting it goes, so if they remain unpaid, it goes on their tax bill.

If they don't pay it, then it can become a lien and go forward.

How long does it take for that?

Because I've I've I've looked at these like multiple times.

I've seen names of people that I may have known that and and I've reached out to them and and told them, hey, did you know that you had this?

And some of them didn't know because the mail was going to the house that they didn't occupy, and the person that was there, right?

Never passed that on.

But I mean, there's some that have been on here in my four years that I've seen multiple times.

Yeah.

I don't have an answer.

There I repeat continuous things, and that would be with community development, how they handle those violations, and I think they have a social worker that works over there sometimes.

Okay.

Thank you.

I am curious in that just the same vein from a place of curiosity.

Um, because I'm thinking of all the staff time that it takes to go after to send the, you know, to send the notices to try again.

And um, do we recoup any of those costs um to Commissioner Knight's point over time?

Uh I there is like an admin fee that's applied.

Okay.

And then I'm not sure in the fee schedule from the original fees if that is includes cost of labor, but it's in the included in the original fees for not addressing these issues.

Okay.

Thank you.

Yeah, it's this is a sticky one.

Yeah, um, to Commissioner Knight's point.

Uh sometimes folks are aware and sometimes they uh are not.

And um well, and I think some of it that part, but then also when we think about if if you see a multiple number of properties owned by this person, they're probably houses, right?

Um that people own that they may be renting out to other people, and then I think about all of the other uh consequences that people may be dealing with, right?

If you're not taking care of this, are you taking care of that property that people are living in?

And so how how all these things kind of circle one another.

You know, this has come up a few times.

This might be another good opportunity to have us a short briefing at a future meeting to talk a little bit more about uh nuisance and co-violations and the whole process.

Um I think you know, today we're we're setting a public hearing.

Um so I'll we'll follow up with you after that on what that education piece could look like.

Uh, I do see Miss Bohatch coming closer.

Is there anything you want to add?

And Miss Post, I don't want to cut you off, so please if there's anything else you have no like that really those questions come from the initiating end, and we get it assessor's office handles it after everything has gone through that.

Also, while Ms.

Bohatch is making her way to the mic, uh we have uh asked code enforcement and we'll fold in some of these questions as well to prepare a briefing so they're prepared with a briefing.

We're just trying to find time on the commission's agenda to make sure that lands.

Certainly it's um intended for the public safety committee in May, so but we can look at that date.

Um I guess just very quickly.

So it actually takes a very long time to get to the point where it becomes where where it goes to the county in terms of their their process if they don't pay, becomes a lien on the property, then goes to the county, and then after that it takes sometimes years before anything happens with that.

And um, in terms of names being on there continuously, or for often it's different properties or multiple properties.

We don't really have control of that.

That's you know, property management type issues.

Um, we do have, I would say that we have very difficult cases, and I think we you are aware of our what we call SCAT, um our special case action team that really looks at properties that we have difficulty getting into compliance, and they do a lot of work between the community development staff, the city attorneys, and our community liaison officers in the police department trying to come up with strategies to get those homes into compliance.

So there's a lot of work that goes into that.

We do have now a full-time uh social worker.

Uh we've always used students and in the past and used filled that role that way.

Um, but now we have a have a person full-time, and she does a lot of work in terms of connecting people to uh resources to try to get those repairs.

Um, and I I will mention too that not everything on this on these nuisance rolls are um co-compliance, no.

Um the majority is, but there's other fees that are being collected that are on there as well.

And there is an opportunity, so when they have this hearing for folks to come in and say they don't believe that they should pay this, and there's a process where um the that we'll sit with the attorneys and uh go through each case and they'll review the actual case file and they'll make a determination of whether they think it should the appeal should stand or not.

Wonderful.

With that, I'm going to call the question on setting a um public hearing to review and hear appeals on the special assessment.

All in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

Then oppose motion carries, and that concludes our community development committee at 9 39.

Thank you.