001confirm that you will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of this state and that you will faithfully discharge the duties of the position of the planning commission in for the Township of Addison, County of Oakland, State of Michigan according to the best of your ability. >> I do. >> Mark, do you also take this oath for the zoning board of appeals? >> I do. >> Thank you. So now if everybody could sign their name here and I will come around and pick them up. The card is for yours is for you to keep. >> Carol, we're going to give you your oath, too. I would bring her hand. >> She had her hand up. I I was witness. >> I was there. >> She walked in and he did this. >>
002Never quite did that before, but that was As long as you got good. >> Oh, thank you. >> For you to keep want to sign it. >> You need to sign. >> Oh, they have. >> Yes, that is. >> It's like a Monopoly that you can get out of jail free card. >> Sweet. >> Two bucks. >> It is >> probably 350 now. >> You want me to do that? Sorry. >> Just trying to be nice. >> Suckers. >> How much time before we call? >> Just a couple minutes. I'm not Jennifer is excused, so I'm not expecting her. Um, another four minutes. >> Can I ask everybody a question off the record? I guess it was more of a insight thing. Um I I grew up in um the plain states, right? So open
003spaces to me is probably a little bit different than what it is here. So what what does open spaces mean to everybody? I know I know we talked about farms to me it means far like this until we're open and then it's really not on the agenda but it is a good question. >> So you said think it's a question worthy of official discussion. This is just me asking my neighbors their opinion. >> So I would number one let's look to see if it's defined in the zoning ordinance. it might be and that's where we would go and if it's not we could um Joan say hey put that on the agenda and when the planner's here have him give you a good description of it but since it's not on the agenda we shouldn't
004talk about it and then of course you guys should be talking about it because then it'll be a violation >> yeah open meetings acts >> is Justin not here tonight >> no I think address >> yeah I'm going address that >> once the meeting's But you guys can talk about what's going on in your life or >> the sports >> on the farm or >> the the tigers and the lions. a lion's gloss. That was horrible. So you guys can talk about that kind of stuff. You don't have to be quiet. >> It was a beautiful day today. >> It was. >> It's been a beautiful week. The weather is like perfect work working weather. >> I'm going to say remember to get your flavor fest tickets from the library. >> Just coming up quick.
005Look, that shut down the whole pretty nice supporting. >> Yeah, I know. >> For many years, I am seated. >> Yes. Thank you. >> Because you know it's been passed to me. >> Oh, congratulations. So this will be our third and then last year with James and then they reached out again this year. >> I almost >> when is it? >> Very close to not being in town. Cool in here. >> Uh well, at 6 p.m. I'd like to call this meeting of the Addison Township Planning Commission together uh in order. We are located at the Addison Township Hall uh on 1440 Rochester Road in Leonard. And if I could have everyone please rise and join me in the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and
006to the republic for which it call, one nation under God, indivisible, liberty and justice for all. We're not expecting Secretary Lundy to be here tonight. So, I will be handling any roll calls for roll call votes. Uh right now, uh a quick roll call for president at the meeting. We have uh as I said, Secretary Lundy is as an excused absence. Uh Vice Chair Beans >> here, >> Cliff Cameron here, >> Derek Musgrave here, >> Jenny Eller here, >> Mark Smith here, >> and Chair King here. Uh there is a single communication uh on the subject of short-term rentals and it is signed and is dated on July 20th and it is signed by about 30 um residents of Lakeville Lake and is available in the clerk's office for review. Um on to business. Uh
007the agenda I would ask that we strike uh item two golf accessory solar energy systems as that is not quite ready for uh planning commission review 2G yeah sorry accessory solar energy systems and uh we will uh however as far as I'm concerned the rest of the agenda is in order. If I could have a motion to approve the agenda as amended. >> Motion. >> A second. >> Second. >> Um, any discussion? >> Okay. Roll call vote. Uh, Secretary Lundy is excused. Vice Chair Beans. >> You uh uh just roll call vote on the approval agenda? >> Yes. >> Uh uh Cliff Cameron? >> Yes. >> Derek Musgrave? >> Yes. Jenny Yeller. Yes. >> Mark Smith. Chair Kaine. Yes. The agend the agenda is approved as amended. >> Um, next item of business is the
008approval of the July 8th, 2025 meeting minutes. Um, I reviewed them and didn't have any comments. Uh, does anybody have any items any issues with the meeting minutes from July 8th that they would like to raise? They're pretty short and sweet to the point. Uh recommend motion to >> Okay. So, we have a motion to approve the minutes as presented. A second. >> All in favor say I. >> I. >> And motion passes. We're now on to um items sub items under two, the ordinance reviews. Um the packet itself is fairly extensive. However, we have looked at a number of these before. Uh also the uh township attorney has looked at these. And this is where I'll bring up the point about the planner. The planner's business CIB has been purchased by another firm um
009whose business model is encompasses larger municipalities than ours. So, I'd bid them a fair fond farewell and the township is in the process of uh finding a replacement firm and I imagine that will happen >> relatively quickly. Um and I was kind of hoping that we'd have uh the um the township attorney here tonight just in case he wanted to bring up any particular items in the uh the ordinance reviews. uh but we can go through these one by one and make a decision about whether we want to have them uh placed in in the dock for a public hearing or we want to review them again. Uh just be aware that because of the upcoming November election and there is an election in November for Addison Township that there's going to be a a
010school board bond or school bonds on the uh at least two of the precincts or at least two of the school districts that affect Addison Township as I understand it. uh because of that and the the extensive preparation and ex and necessary for execution of elections um it's possible we would if we even any of these that we do say let's go ahead and get them advertised and on the uh on the dock for uh public um comment that may not happen for a couple of months but we can certainly make that call on them on a one by one basis. Yes, >> the the lawyer has already gone over all this >> to A through E. >> Okay. >> E not F. >> All right. And uh so on the first starting with 2A
011uh the pocket park um that's we've seen a couple of times before. Uh it got shortened up a fair amount when the township attorney went through it. Uh I personally I feel it captures what we were trying to capture in the in the park both the types of parks, the uses of the parks and the restrictions on the private parks. Is there any discussion on that as it stands? >> Since I'm wasn't here for that, uh just a quick uh catch me up on the private parks. Uh my only concern as a uh I guess on behalf of the taxpayers is I'm sure legal address this but uh what's the liability of those if someone to get hurt is on the township itself >> the privates. Yeah.riv private. >> Yeah, that's what I was saying.
012It seemed like it it those would be four like sub it said like subdivisions and like HOA areas and stuff. So, I guess who who is since it's privately owned and operated and maintained there, but it's in a public use. >> What kind of legal battle? >> I think so. Homeowners association and that's private. It's not public homeowners in the development. kind of like a you kind of like a no through fair road type thing. Yeah. >> Right. >> Okay. >> Yep. And the the private parks would be essentially us uh willing to say that a private residence could use this for a particular purpose and perhaps for example have people come in and do bird watching on a on a a body of water. um sort of thing >> that kind of ties over
013into something we'll talk about later with the wetlands. So >> yeah, >> I just have a grammatical question that I don't answer for sure. The very last sentence on the bottom of the page, the immediate area is not a there is not a forc The very last >> special area and the event is not a note or the immediate area and the event is not a I say I'd say not a forprofit event personally and if you Yeah. And you do you are dealing with a list in that of three items >> in that uh in that last sentence. So you could theoretically throw in commas after the ands, especially if you're a f fan the Oxford comm. Yeah. >> But I agree that uh for clarity's sake, if you stick the the word a
014in there, it's not a forprofit event would probably be the better since it is a simple uh clarity correction. Uh people will we should we anybody have a motion that we put this on the the public um uh on the list for uh >> public hearing? >> Yes. I as is except for the last sentence with the addition of the a not for I said the rest of this as is. >> Okay. Any uh support? >> Support. >> Any discussion? >> Okay, roll call vote. Um Mark Smith, >> yes. >> Jenny Eller, >> yes. >> Derek Musgrave, >> yes. >> Cliff Cameron, >> yes. >> Secretary Lund is excused. Vice Chair Bean, I think, >> yes. Chair Kane, yes. Yeah. Um, at least in my package on 2B, I had multiple copies of slightly different
015variants. I think the first one was sort of the final draft. In fact, it says so at the top. The second one was uh uh simply highlighted highlighted to show where changes had occurred. And then the third one was the original draft or reference to go back to. Um I would call your attention to the second page item B5. If you might be curious as to why um that had a little attention, at least on mine had a little yellow mark. Yeah. And that was because he just wanted to confirm with the uh the fire department >> uh that that wasn't so far back on a single use property of a private road that they might have difficulty uh in particular with like hose link for example and they confirmed no it would not be
016too far so >> so that is the reason that one of my questions who who 800 ft what was the background >> I don't know about the background for it but originally it was before the concern about the hose and they say well we got thousand foot hoses >> yeah say they have they have two operations for that kind of thing. >> Are there any properties in the township that would be a concern that are that deep for private access? >> I know we practice. Hey, I I bet you could go back on some of these roads and find that easily. Um, Hosner is one of them, which is broken into segments because it used to be a corduroy road. And if you ever go back there and look at some of those places, you
017can't even see the house. They're just just a driveway wandering up the hill and then it's gone. And and furthermore, I don't know where they' be getting water from in a lot of instances either. But again, this is this is a rather restrictive requirement uh because it's it's in in the instance where it's a single parcel of a building site and there's a essentially it's a a driveway that's 800 ft long. But I I wouldn't surprise me there's a few. But then this would be a um a restriction on future construction, not on not try not trying to go back in uh places that are grandfathered. Any other uh comments or items of concern? I'm looking at the top of page and it reads the width of a proposed private road or access. I just
018want to know what that means. I'm not sure I understand what it's trying to typically requires 200. This is saying 200 plus. So we need 2 It explains this. I'm not sure it makes sense. >> It does because you can change >> a lot of changes with a few words. So the board author saw that, you know, it's been a while. One of these was from 1972. So, we were very careful not to change the intent of the ordinance because the board authorized us to do 5B only, but he did feel that some of the words needed to be corrected. So some of these are just more or less versus the only fully changed area totally. So does the 260 foot requirement apply as you said other than the property owner using that accessur. >>
019So that's why Um any any other uh concerns? >> Okay. Or say the township land committee. My question is Thank you very much for your careful reading of that. Uh any other concerns? Does the board feel comfortable with pushing this one on to a public hearing? >> Yep. >> Okay. >> Any discussion? >> One piece of discussion since we had a question about the fire department operations. Should we invite uh extend an invitation to the fire department to ex explain that at the public hearing? I mean, we could, but I think it as long as we're ready to to site that we had done the the um appropriate referencing, I think we'll be fine. >> Yeah, I believe it was uh Vice Chair Beans did support. Any other discussion? Okay, we'll move on to a
020roll call vote. Again, this is a roll call vote on uh moving article 419, private roads, onto a public hearing. Um, >> we move it and second it. >> Uh, yeah. Yes. Yeah. >> I couldn't hear. So, >> yeah, I think you were the second. >> You were the second for this one. >> There goes the mine. >> Um, Jenny Eller, >> yes. >> Mark Smith, >> yes. Cliff Cameron, >> yes. >> Derek Musgrave, >> yes. >> Vice Chair Beans, >> here. >> Secretary Lundy is is excused absence. And Chair King is also a yes. >> We'll skip ahead to 2C now. I can find the right first page. Here we go. Make sure I didn't skip something. Okay. Um, the next several items are corrections. Um, if you will skip ahead and to page
021four on your article 14 C1, you will see uh language that now makes this article 14 compliant. what what we what we did with um uh multi-use septic systems um in in previous hearings to uh not authorizing any more of them. Um so essentially you're saying you got to be uh a lot of these requirements are going to be restricted to uh zoning areas in which uh full urban services for sanitary sewer water service and such are provided in a like manner. in C2. Got two C1s here. >> So, so uh article 14 C1 commercial district local. Uh then we have article C2 commercial district general you'll see again uh a few pages in on page five a similar rewarding that was recommended by the township attorney to make sure that we are in compliance
022with our our previous uh decisions on uh multi-unit septic systems. Both of those C1 and C2 were the only changes to those particular articles. Um, as such, I'd like to recommend um that we I'm willing to entertain a motion to move them forward for a public hearing. question. >> Sure. >> Is the word urban synonymous with public discuss Yeah. Instead of either one of those, why not municipal services? >> I don't know. Very good question. >> But the thing Yeah. >> Yeah. Two subcategories of urban. Yeah. I was going to say I think it's worth exploring. >> There's a question in my mind. That's why I asked you. >> The pass was twoprong that covers So this is saying it's giving a description what services are If you have that considering system lawyer But it
023does go on to say >> that's what single service system for >> principal property. So no Yeah, >> the same language. >> Consistency is key. Article 4 was very much focused on simply prohibiting private multi-use systems. of a roll call vote. Um, Cliff Cameron, >> yes. >> Derek Musgrave, >> yes. >> Jenny Eller, >> yes. >> Vice Chair Beans, >> yes. >> Mark Smith, >> yes. Secretary Lundy excused. Chair King. Yes. Moving on to um item 2E R2 residential district and multiple corrections and MMD corrections. Your corrections are found on pages one and four. Essentially what this says is that you can make a residential district an R2 district with but it has to meet certain requirements first. And um and this again is in keeping with um our our previous article 4 changes, section
0244 changes and again citing the availability of public utilities on page one and similar uh reference back to article 4 and paragraph 10. And in my mind, these these like the previous ones serve pre perhaps primarily to refer the reader to go back and make sure they understand article 4 and uh are are not going down a pathway of paying a u you know developer or a designer uh a lot of money and not realizing there's a problem up front that would have to be uh that may be insurmountable. Why do they exactly? So it is intertwined. And then this is 12 and also taken right. So I I can see what you're saying, but it is coming from a different as well. services. We can still hear. There's probably a whole lot of changes
025that have made a whole lot of >> well ago that's changing the commercials. matches. But I can ask about >> uh what about um at the very top of the overarching ordinance and the terms and definitions. Just throw a a definition that covers both and that way it fixes them across the board. >> If you were to do the definition >> Yeah. Yeah. at the very Yeah. >> That way you don't have to change it in every single one. You can just change it in one. It fixes them both or all >> we put that work in. I don't want to hear what the uh why the attorney is saying it this way. You could there could be some very specific legal way and it could be as simple as your other ordinances use both
026terms. It could be as simple as that. So >> before we decide we want to pull something back and and start writing additional definitions into sections, let's let's talk let let uh the clerk talk with the attorney. Yeah. And again, in my mind, the most important thing is we're referencing article 4. And that's where the real bite's going to happen on uh someone who's not aware that we've we did that at some point in the past. So, we're at least pointing a future township resident who's investigating doing something their with the property in the right direction. But they weren't reading the >> Okay, we'll call vote. Uh, Vice Chair Beans, >> yes. >> Cliff Cameron, >> yes. >> Greg Musgrave, >> yes. Johnny Eller, Mark Smith, >> yes. >> Secretary London is excused. Chair Kane,
027yes. Uh 2E. It's my understanding that the uh what brought this about was again a comparison of our schedule of regulations and or or many of our um items um and the requirements that the were generated when we uh did the uh the change to the uh article article 4. Am I am I am I confused here? Uh, Clerk Fannon, is that correct? >> That's pretty correct. Um, I do think the first time we went through article 24. Our first time out though, as you can see, it didn't even have a word to it. So, we totally missed that one. So, again, this one's just correcting what we missed the first time out. And then the other two were notice referring to which sends them back to number four as well. So yeah, >> are
028you talking about this? >> No, no echo. >> We're on twoe >> 2E article 24 schedule of regulations. Yeah, we well R2 and and MD were part of 2D and then the changes were the wording was identical. It's just two different uh um zoning uh districts. Yeah, >> those existing solution. We're public service. I would hesitate to jerk that one around too much because we do have this one instance in the township where we got multiple uh residences tying into a single system that's not a public system. >> Article 12 page one of item the second part of 2D where we're talking about article 12 multiple dwelling residential district >> and we're disc uh >> on the highlighted area right inert orders. So that can just be included if everybody agrees that locations. covered by
029judgement. I don't think anything we do. >> Nor do we want anything that we do to be considered to be trying to modify that. >> There's other >> Yeah. I mean it does the previous sentence does say public utilities. You guys tell me enough to serve the public. I'm there should be plenty of time between now and whenever we can get it scheduled for a public hearing >> to resolve the ambiguity between um urban public uh and how often does it belong? In my mind, it's it's Not a major issue, but it's certainly one that we can bring up to the attention of the the guy that makes a living word smithing stuff, the lawyer. >> Is that a motion? >> Um, >> I don't think we need I mean, I don't think we need
030a motion. We're just asking for minor clarification. Uh but in general, we're happy with I with how these are modified. Chair, you had a concern about uh the frequency of using the word public, right? Meaning >> I mean not really. I mean for I'll give you an example. Um, article 12, multiple dwelling uh residential district. If you take a look at the third to last and the second to last sentence, the third to last sentence, these multiple family zoning districts will provide locations for garden apartments, town houses, duplex, triplex, quadruplex, town houses, patio houses, and depending upon the availability of public utilities. So we're citing public the utilities and then in the next sentence these locations that tie in existing sewer systems later reconsideration for this zoning district designation. My interpretation of that is that
031that second to last sentence is is referencing back to the public utilities in the third to last sentence. >> Yeah. The third to last sentence, I believe, now that you pointed that out, is kind of the same consistency that we saw in the previous articles. It just wasn't highlighted. Therefore, uh it's made it look like we were the change was the same, but it wasn't the same changes to be consistent. But it's a separate change on this one compared to the previous ones. Um, does the board want to reconsider setting this forward for public hearing? >> I'm not I've seen a lot of uh show of hands. Yeah. Okay. So, so other than may you know put this on the list of uh very small items to address with the township of attorneys u judging
032by the board's response we are comfortable with um having the both the R2 and the MD correction from items 2D on the on the agenda move forward to public hearing as such a hearing can be scheduled. Um, returning to item 2E, article 24, schedule regulations. Again, that was a perhaps the most minor of the changes uh that are being presented tonight. Um, and it was again just simple reference to um make sure we're consistent across multiple um items. And as as uh the clerk noted, it was actually the initiating reason for even looking at any of these. Um >> we move this forward as is. >> I support. Okay, we have a motion. We have support. Any further discussion? Uh roll call vote. Mark Smith. >> Yes. >> Jenny Eller, >> yes. Derek Musgrave, >>
033yes. >> Cliff Cameron, >> yes. >> Vice Chair Beans, >> yes. >> Secretary Looney is excused. Chair King, yes. >> Um item 2F, wetlands protection. Um there's this is the first time this has been presented in front of the board. It's in the shape that it's been since I don't know >> 1979. Yeah, it might have been 1979. I don't know it, but um it's quite a read. I went through it a couple of times. Um don't have to have a full throat to discussion at this point. Just want to make sure it was in front of everybody. I will bring up a couple of the items um that I would like you to I would ask that you think about um before we revisit this um to which paragraph three and then later on
034uh in the uh in the section references something called the Addison Township Planning Commission Wetlands Committee. >> Yes. which apparently was a thing once and then with turnover uh fell apart and without any requests from citizenship to do something that would have us refer back to this to invoke it or have the ZBA refer to it and and can go back to it. Um there's never been a need uh since however long ago the the people that were on the on the uh wetlands committee uh departed the planning commission. Now, given that I I am personally of the opinion, but I'm not going to ask for um a consensus from the planning commission tonight, but I'm personally of the opinion that we don't need a separate committee that this is a rarely enough invoked thing
035that it should probably go in front of the whole uh planning commission if the planning commission has to pay a play a role in an approval of something that where where there might be a wetlands issue involved. Um but just that's just one of the things that cropped up in my mind. Um something else that's kind of related to that, you know, that there are there are things that the state lets us do and there are things the state does not let us do when it comes to wetlands. Um there are some things that we that are beyond our approval process. If you read some of the language in the current language of section 4.44 44 there's an implication that we are giving an approval also before it goes to the state and I would
036much rather just from the way I I tend to operate make sure we review it before it goes to the state so we don't get embarrassed by something that the state's out going to say that's that's wrong or we may want to may highlight a couple of items of particular a wetlands protection issue to make sure that the state doesn't miss them when the project goes forward to them. Um, but I'm not I don't I think I don't want to be in a position where I'm the planning commission is refusing to get permission and it goes to state looking like we're dragging our we're trying to um make decisions for them or and replace them. Just a thought again, not something that we need to resolve tonight, just when you're reading through this, just something
037to bear in mind. Um, how we want to run some of that language. And there was another one on land division. Oh god, I never to go back and figure that out. What's the difference between this wetland? >> Oh, the species. Yeah. What's the >> Well, the wetlands committee would be a subset of the membership of the Addison Township Planning Commission. >> Yeah. Internal versus external. >> Yeah. and you're buying yourself a you know you would not be a quorum but you are buying yourself a whole another meeting and then you have to come back and report back to the planning commission and the planning commission has got to discuss it and and uh certainly if it was a situation where this was happening all the time well it might make sense to have a
038separate uh committee >> come up more >> it might septic fields and the lakes and >> well let's say on page three and uh alpha 3 that kind of like makes 60% of the residents in this township owner of a wetland. And if you start telling them how to live their life, they're going to be like, uh, we need to change to the rules, >> which >> if it's regulated by the state, let them regulate it and stay out of it and >> we just administer it. >> Administrate. Yeah, >> that was going to be my question is uh whatever is above and beyond the state, can we just simplify this whole thing down to adopt by reference like most other like agencies do then expound where we want to expound which should be very
039minimal acres also regulates anything to just reference it wants to do this and update it and make sure that we're in compiance wetlands >> and and we won't do that tonight. And to sort of uh uh emphasize what Pauline said and something that the vice chair beans had asked about the very beginning, um the lawyer's gone through A through E, but he's not gone through F yet. So other than using this as an opportunity to introduce it to the members of the of the planning commission um and a couple of thoughts on my part, that was the only reason that I I kept it on the agenda. >> Do we have a copy of the map? It also references in here that we have a map which I looked on the website and only saw
040a couple maps >> that we need to address. So it does say that we have a designated wetland which you Yeah. >> Yeah. It's online readily available. >> Correct. latest and so we don't have to go in the reference. >> But the only concern about that would be uh since they only regulate five acres or more, we're doing more. Uh we would have a much bigger map than what the state would have, wouldn't we? Or no? Um, typically and I would have to double check that one too, but the state wetlands that we have now shows all the wetlands in Edison Township and it reflects which ones are regulating so that we know it is a really good map for us to probably should be similar or they're going to reflect those that are regulated
041and those that aren't. I will to check into that. >> And if you know off the top of your head, you don't have to put too much brain cells in. What's the background on why we're doing >> two to five acres above the state? >> I think this is going back a long time too because the township does so many wetlands and we do not have the infrastructure. It's important that we arev environmentally concerned. So we want to make development that happens is not going to contaminate so >> the wershed stuff right >> the township stepped in to say we want to regulate the smaller ones which the law allows us to do >> yeah okay as long as it's for that protecting the the drinkable water um because the the way this is written
042it seem to be more about wildlife wrecks parks and stuff like that recreation >> but how we all of this, but he does want he's going to do as some of those items will go to identify the the goal is to update this as part of a uh a larger process of stepping through all of our zoning stuff to make sure it's comp it's current current and consistent with what we want. So, uh, if it's appropriate, I make a motion that uh, for that specific thing, uh, just leave it recommend the lawyer leave it open enough to where, uh, we we can not have a standing committee, but can call a committee as needed to where, like you said, if the frequency is small, we can just downsize it just to us here the week,
043the month before we have something. But if it gets to be something big, more frequent, then we can create a standing committee. >> How about just turning the responsibility over to the planning committee completely and avoiding any other agency. >> Yeah. I mean, I I I can see a situation where we might assign two people to investigate a particular issue, some detail. I don't think it's necessary to since it's since it's it's not a quorum producing issue. It doesn't uh run a foul of the open meetings act. Um so having two or three people report back on an investigation to the whole planning commission is fine. It's it's the it's more the division the um decision making responsibility the way it's currently written. the decision-making responsibility in some sections are placed on the committee, not
044on the planning commission. And um the the fact that for example, our bylaws don't have a wetlands planning committee on them. Um, I would rather avoid increasing the organizational infrastructure by establishing a wetlands planning committee and having to go back to the bylaws and make sure it's in there, too. I would much rather handle things on the fly. And if it does get busy enough where we want to have a couple people in, you know, you two go investigate this wetland issue and you two go investigate that wet wetland issue, we can do that without having to have it down here in that manner as long as we leave the formal decision- making process to the whole planning commission. But that that's my thought on it. I'm sure we're going to get a um an
045intelligent and well-reasoned um uh rewrite out of this by the township attorney and we can just something to bear in mind when we we get to see that for the first time. Um, no action on this one is required. As I said, uh, there's if if we could uh there's no other urgent discussion items on it, I recommend that we move on to to item three. since uh item 2G was eliminated upon the amendment of the uh agenda. Um and it's simply there to uh note that we are now in compliance bylaws by having uh planning commission representation of the township board and the person of Jenny Eller. Um my reason I bring that up is because the last time we discussed it uh we did we were not in compliance with our bylaws but
046now we are. Um and of course welcome to Cliff Cameron as a member of the board. It is now uh 6:56 p.m. I would like to go ahead and open the floor for public forum. This is the opportunity for the uh anyone in the public to uh address the planning commission. We are here to listen, not to dialogue. >> Never know. >> Can I step out there and ask? >> Yeah, actually L. Can we do that? >> Oh, normally during commissioner's report is a great opportunity to have any additional discussion that has to happen. Uh, it's 6:57. I go ahead and close the uh the public forum. I'll move on the next item which is commissioners reports. Anything out of the is the zoning board at a had a meeting? >> Okay. >> And any
047anything of any great worth coming out of the township board? >> Always great. Does anybody else have any um uh reports uh that they want to bring up in front of the planning commission while we're still in formal session? Okay. Uh next item on the agenda is adjournment. >> I move we support. All in favor say I. I. I. >> We're adjourned. Uh 658