Meeting Notes:

On Center Stage: The 3rd draft of the Cobalt Survey Questionnaire. 

At the first Call to the Public, several people addressed the question of Cobalt's questionable survey. 

Jim Mulcrone led the charge, laying bare the survey's many deficiencies.  He was followed by Craig WarburtonMike Ciccella, David Gordon, and Lenore Zelenock.   Several of these people said it should be called the Biltmore survey, since it was so narrowly focused.  One suggested that Biltmore should be paying for it.   Mary Devlin asked for a way to reunite our divided community

Below is a video clip of the Board discussion of the Survey Questionnaire.  Bear in mind that this was Cobalt's third draft of the survey.   The discussion lasted about 19 minutes.

In brief, no one liked it.  Although the Board walked right up to the edge of deciding to sever the relationship with Cobalt, they handed the issue back to the Planning Commission.  The cost of severing the Cobalt contract was asked but never answered.  Township Attorney Paul Burns was present but no one asked him.   Severance clauses are pretty standard in contracts.  No one wants to be stuck with a lemon. 

What also became apparent during this meeting was Cobalt's limited interest in our community.  At tonight's meeting we learned that their "budget" allowed for attending only two meetings after the contract was signed.  As far as I know, this detail hadn't been mentioned before.  Because Cobalt attended the July 1st P.C. meeting to discuss objectives, it passed on attending the July 28th meeting in favor of attending the August 5th P.C. meeting.  With that, they apparently consider their obligation fulfilled. 

Let's recap.  Whatever Cobalt hears or believes they hear in two meetings plus whatever suggestions drift in on emails or in private conversations - will form the entire basis for their evaluation of our Township.  That's quite a contrast to the approach taken in the two previous community surveys.  To work out questions for the 1996 survey, Town meetings were held and everybody was encouraged to contribute.  The process was wide open to everyone from the Kiwanis Club to the Brownie troops and Cub scouts.  It was open.  It was patient.  It was not artificially rushed.  The 1996 survey was the result of a lot of hard work and community involvement.   I don't know much about the 2010 survey but it comprised a lot of questions, 20 pages worth.

Here are the 1996 Survey and the 2010 survey (2.3MB).  Check them out.

[My opinion only:]

Cobalt is no fool.  It provided exactly what it believed Northfield Township politicians wanted, to "overcome Community opposition."   Too bad it didn't understand our community as well as it understood the politics.

 

Despite this, the draft survey questionnaire held up a terrible mirror to those who hurried it through.  The Board didn't like what it saw.

 

The Board Voted in Beckett & Raeder as our new Planning Consultant.  In the discussion, Trustee Dockett expresses dismay over the choice of Beckett & Raeder.  The P.C. selected McKenna, he said.  Trustee Chick, the Board representative to the Planning Commission, insisted that both firms were acceptable to the P.C..  Why was Beckett & Raeder chosen over McKenna?  It may have been their experience in planning for waterfront communities.  It may have been John Iacoangeli himself, talking about the process and necessity of healing communities divided by debates over development (on Youtube).

 

The Board also approved a new investment policy.  Maturities are now limited to 24 months.   Why?  To avoid the type of fiscal fiasco left to us by the previous Board of Trustees.  $280,000 lost in six months on a $3,000,000 investment!  I will flesh this out into a complete report later, but for now, here's the Board discussion:

 

In another discussion, Manager Fink explains how the Whitmore Lake Road special assessment district plans are moving forward.  Attorney Paul Burns mentions in passing that if enough people protest their assessments at the State Tax Tribunal, that financing the S.A.D. will be impossible.  He does not quantify "enough." 

 

Meeting Preview:

July 28th's Main Event: Cobalt will present its 3rd draft of the Survey Questionaire. 

Is Cobalt seeking the board's approval tonight?  Will the Planning Commission be allowed to review the questions?  This survey was supposedly their initiative.  P.C. Chairperson Chockley today said that the survey still needs tweaking and that it's on their August 5th agenda.  Trustee Janet Chick is also reported as saying this survey needs tweaked.

Preliminary observations from a Township resident and Survey Expert with years of experience in the field of Survey Research.  (his opinions only)

This has major problems. Development is presented as the  option with the only question being how intensive. I'll try and get some more thoughts together, but here are a few:

  • Item 1 mentions nothing about preserving open space or retaining the rural character of the township. Also the first check box is "Encourage more commercial development".
  • Item 2 would be more acceptable if it included something like "Additional development in the township should bear all of the costs of that development."
  • Item 4 has no option for maintaining the current 5 acre minimum or small low-density development. This is an example of development being presented as the only option.
  • Item 6 "If it supports the types of housing needed in the township"  What does this mean!?
  • Item 11 says "... homes to be on lots smaller than one acre ..." That completely ignores the fact that lots could be 1/4 acre. Again, the planning commission is trying to say that the development will be 461 homes when it could be over 1,600.
  • Item 13 is very misleading. The question sounds like it is asking if we should meet our current commitments. I think what is really being asked for is a blank check to expand sewer capacity to meet any proposed development.

 

Back to Me (I am not an expert):

  • The introduction to question 13 misleads the survey respondant into believing that the cost of improving the existing wastewater treatment plant to serve existing committments is only $2,500,000.  In fact this is only the cost to add a buffer tank to serve existing users, plus 100 or so.  Improving the plant to serve all existing - but unused - committments, mostly in the North Territorial Road district, will require a $15,000,000 - $30,000,000 Sewer Plant Expansion.
  • Question 6 looks like a variation on a classic political dirty trick, the push poll.  The problem here isn't the question: it's the answers you're allowed to choose.  Some of those answers are based on false assumptions, like this one: 
    • "If I may benefit financially, for example, by lower property taxes and fees"

This is nothing more - and nothing less, than an attempt to sell the universally discredited notion that your taxes will go down as costs of government go up.  What they're calling a survey question is actually being used to spread a falsehood.

"What is a push poll? [ from Pollster.com ] Many organizations have posted definitions (AAPOR, NCPP, CMOR, CBS News, Campaigns and Elections, Wikipedia), but the important thing to remember is that a "push poll" is not a poll at all. It's a fraud, an attempt to disseminate information under the guise of a legitimate survey. The proof is in the intent of the person doing it. If the sponsor intends to communicate a message to as many voters as possible rather than measure opinions or test messages among a sample of voters, it qualifies as a "push poll."

 

Also on the Agenda, a discussion about having the Township buy and develop the Van Curler property on the north side of Whitmore Lake.  This issue was raised at the last Board meeting.  A three minute Youtube clip of that discussion is here.

Click to watch the Meeting on Livestream

Click here to download Meeting Agenda

Click here to download Meeting Packet

Click to download the Meeting Minutes

 

BTW, I mentioned in a previous post that one of the applicants for the Planning position had some advice on dealing with the struggle between Conservation and Development.  That speaker was John Iacoangeli of Beckett & Raeder.  In the following three minute Youtube clip from his interview, he describes how the process should have happened and what should be done to heal the participants and reduce the antagonism.

 

 


 

Several applications were discussed and approved.  A trucking company is taking over the old Carter Lumber location on Territorial Road.  Al Dente Pasta will be expanding their lakeside Pasta Manufactory on Main Street.

Commissioners discussed the July 14th interviews of potential Planning Consultants.  They voted to recommend McKenna Associates to the Township Board as their first choice.  Beckett & Raeder won their recommendation as second choice.  The Board will be asked to vet the provided references and decide.  Manager Fink will be asked to negotiate a contract.

One jewel appeared out of the 140 minutes of July 14th interviews.  It arose out of a question Chairperson Chockley asked Beckett & Raeder's John Iacoangeli.  How do you deal with a community divided over development and preservation?   His answer was a real answer.  So I clipped it and put it on Youtube.  Even if you can't stand watching these boring Township videos, watch this one.  It's only four minutes out of your life.  It is a wise approach that this community needs.

 

Meeting Report

Four Candidates for Planner were interviewed.  Video of each interview was clipped and posted separately to our Northfield NewsCam site on Youtube.

Because the meeting ran late, the discussion about the possibility of having the Township buy and develop the Downtown Whitmore Lake Van Curler property was rescheduled until July 28.  Before the matter was tabled, Trustees and Commissioners edged in a few comments.  These plus a later observation by Trustee Kathy Braun are collected in the following three minute Northfield NewsCam Youtube clip:

 The Van Curler Purchase discussion

 

 

Below are the four Planning Consultant's proposals.  They're clipped from the meeting packet, which is 28 MB in size.

The Planning Consultant Interviews, in order of appearance:

 

Wade Trim (Detroit) - Not Recommended by Planning Commission 

 

 

 CIB Planners/OHM Advisors (Fenton) - Not Recommended by Planning Commission

 

 

Beckett & Raeder (Ann Arbor) - 2nd Choice of Planning Commission 

 

 

 McKenna Associates (Northville) - 1st Choice of Planning Commission

 

 

Meeting Preview

Click to watch the Meeting on Livestream

Click to download the Meeting Agenda

Click to download the Meeting Packet (28 MB)

Click to download the Meeting Minutes (when available)

Below are the four Planning Consultant's proposals.  They're clipped from the meeting packet, which is 28 MB in size.

Also on this Agenda is Sam Iaquinto's proposal to have the Township Taxpayers buy the Van Curler property on the north end of Whitmore Lake.  Relax; it's only a discussion.  

 

[On Background - Opinion]

On July 1st the Planning Commission decided to join the Board interviews of candidates to replace Carlisle/Wortman.  You can watch the ten minute discussion on Livestream beginning at about 1 hr 22 minutes after the Call to Order.   Commissioner Brad Cousino again raised the central issue.  The Planning Commission is the Planning Consultant's primary customer.  They work together in every meeting.   A good  working relationship between the Consultant and the P.C. is important.  There's no way to get a feel for that from printed proposals and feel-good sales pitches.  You can only do that in person.

Chairperson Chockley said that the MTA (Michigan Township Association) recommended devoting 45 - 60 minutes to each candidate.  Part of that time would go for the candidate's presentation (sales pitch).  In the remaining time the Board and Planning Commission members could ask questions. 

Instead of that, whoever arranged this meeting Agenda allocated only 30 minutes per candidate.

Anybody remember their first job interview?  It took me that long to get hired as a busboy when I was sixteen years old.

This firing / hiring decision seems just a bit more important than 30 minutes.  Someone is in a hurry, or the outcome has already been fixed, or they have no idea what they're doing. Or worse, they know exactly what they're doing.

 

 

 

 

 

[Meeting report]

Four Northfield Neighbors spoke up at tonight's meeting.

Real Estate Agent Dale Brewer again argued against Nowatzke Trucking's plans.

No one spoke in favor of tossing away the Master Plan.

Northfield Neighbors at the Microphone

This meeting began with discussion of Carlisle/Wortman's resignation.

Commissioner Sam Iaquinto did his best to smear the issue.  He muttered vaguely about Carlisle/Wortman's rate increase.  He didn't mention that the asked for rate increase was only 2.5%.  He didn't mention that it would have been the first rate hike since 2009.  He didn't mention that he himself voted to approve the 2009 contract rate and that he's never complained about it.  He doubled down by stating that Carlisle/Wortman resigned because they could not compete on price. 

The full irony of Iaquinto's crude attempt to frame the issue surfaced later in the meeting, when Chockley mentioned that the bids to replace C/W had come in considerably higher than C/W's revised rates.

Commissioner Dignan piled on.  He accused C/W of trying to elevate their own agenda over the wishes of those in power in this Township.  He accused the planner of abandoning his duties.  He questioned Carlisle/Wortman's motives, methods, ethics, and record of serving the Township.

Chairperson Chockley strenuously objected to both characterizations.  She said Carlisle/Wortman was looking out for the Township Citizens and was scrupulous in following the master plan.  She defended both Carlisle/Wortman and Planner Doug Lewan's motives, methods, ethics, and record.

She also pointed out that both Iaquinto and Stanalajczo approved the three year old Master Plan they now want to tear down.

Carlisle/Wortman Discussion

Next came the Planning Commission discussion with Sharlan Douglas of Douglas Communications Group.  DCG is the Royal Oak Public Relations firm that Cobalt subcontracted to create and perform the survey.  She is a Royal Oak City Commissioner.  Her list of ten objectives appears in tonight's meeting packet.  Scroll down to read or download the list.

Consideration of Land Preservation and Conservation do not appear on Douglas' list of objectives.   Farmland didn't get a mention.  Nor did natural resources, open space, or the existing master plan.  Neither did evaluating the willingness of residents to paying for the services, like the costly sewer systems necessary for dense development.  Douglas advanced a bizarre notion of trying to hide the central question, that of development vs land preservation, behind neutral terms that informed no one.  Is this how Douglas' PR firm "overcomes community opposition?"  By making the questions so vague that the answers can be spun to prove whatever someone wants to prove?

Commissioner Brad Cousino defended directly addressing the issue of development vs preservation, as did Chockley.

There was a brief consideration of adding a few questions about the school system, since we're already paying $17K for the survey.  Commissioner Ken Dignan discussed the advantages of siting development close to the schools, allowing kids to walk to school instead of being bussed.  Ken volunteered to ask the Whitmore Lake school board for input.  

Cousino asked if she couldn't add questions about desireable Township services, such as trash collection.  He said Township residents pay the highest taxes of anyone around here. One trash hauler would be easier on the road system than four.

Cousino also asked how long the survey would be, since most people ignore surveys, especially long surveys.  Four pages was Douglas' answer.  She offered to write a press announcement.  Iaquinto offered to put it in the Courant.  Chick offered to put it on the Township website.

Douglas will return with her list of survey questions at an upcoming Board meeting.  Whether this will be a joint Board/PC meeting is undecided.

So far what we've heard in public meetings are vague notions, hopes, and dreams of what the survey will be like or prove. There is a strong undercurrent of haste.  Despite liking the idea of adding questions about schools, Dignan voted to move the process forward.  Douglas insisted on approval by the end of this meeting and the P.C. went along with it.

We can all sympathize with her hustling for business, but hey, this affects our future.

Cobalt Survey Objectives discussion

Loading ...

The proposed survey objectives.

Later in the meeting the "advantage" of 2 to 2/12 acre zoning in the Ag district was raised by Trustee/Commissioner Janet Chick.  All the neighboring townships are doing it, it seems.  Discussion ensued.  (Later, at the second call to the public, Dale Brewer (a real estate guy, I think) said he knew several large local property owners who would be happy to divvy up their land that way.)  This issue is up to you to talk about.

I suspect that Trustee Chick is seeking a compromise.  2 1/2 acre zoning is about one tenth the density Biltmore has asked for. 

 

The low point of the meeting was when Stanalajczo started banging on the table (figuratively) about bylaws and regulations.  He objected to Chockley's original cancellation of the July 1st meeting.  Chockley responded saying that there was no business to transact and no applicants.  Stanalajczo said that there were many policy issues to discuss and resolve.  He said they had a rulebook full of bylaws and few were being followed and no one was performing their appointed duties.  He said that the decision to cancel a meeting should have been a commission decision.  Sam Iaquinto joined in the fun, insisting that regulations and rules were made to be followed.  It reminded me of the bad old days of the 2009-2012 board when Iaquinto joined Stanalajczo in harassing then supervisor Mozurkowich in 5 hour meetings that were painful to watch.

Other Discussions:

The interviews of the replacement planning consultant will probably be held at a future joint P.C./Board meeting.

Commissioner Iaquinto raised the issue of having the Township buy the Van Curler property and develop it "ourselves."  The Van Curler property is just about everything in the north hamlet area that isn't being used.  The large grassy area where people park during fireworks is the largest part of it, but it also includes several residential lots, including those on main street that were demolished.  Van Curler himself is dead.  If you want to know more about it, ask Trustee Wayne Dockett.

 

[Meeting background]

Carlisle/Wortman, our Township planner for more than 10 years and the most highly respected Community Planning firm in the area, has quit the Township.

Who knows what this will mean, but it isn't good.  The Board of Trustees has some questions to answer.

The backstory:  After working for the same rates since 2009, Carlisle Wortman asked for a 2.5% hourly rate increase and a $50/month retainer increase.  This request appeared in the 5/12/2015 Manager's report.  At the May 12 Board meeting, Supervisor Engstrom seized this as an opportunity to formally open the planning consultant position to new applicants.  Loyalty, quality of service, and knowledge of the issues be damned.  The idea was approved and the Requests for Proposals (RFP) were due June 26th.

[Correction: An earlier version of this story mistakenly attributed to a Planning Commissioner the idea of abandoning Carlisle/Wortman.  We apologize for the error.]

If cost had really been the issue, look at the May 26th meeting.  Howard is lining up everyone in the office and at the Wastewater Treatment Plant for another annual raise.

Below is Carlisle-Wortman's resignation letter.  Its implicit warning reminds me of President Eisenhower's final speech, informing Americans about a danger to America's way of life, addressing the Military-Industrial Complex.  Nothing on that scale is happening here.  But it certainly feels that weighty.  We face an active threat to our Northfield Township way of life. 

Since Carlisle/Wortman Planning Consultant Doug Lewan sat in on some of the closed door meetings Township Manager Fink held with whomever he met with behind closed doors, Lewan's final words are informing and a warning:

"It is clear to us that Northfield Township would like to move

in a different direction with regard to planning and zoning."

These were meetings we didn't hear about until well after the fact, if at all.

Lewan's resignation:

Loading ...

Here's something to think about while watching this meeting between Cobalt and the P.C..  At the May 26th Board meeting, Fink anticipated criticism for the way he wrote the RFPs for a Township Planner.  When Wayne Dockett asked him who might be critical, Fink called the argument over whether to trash the Master Plan a Growth/No Growth debate.  This is misrepresentation as well as a false dichotomy.  But no Board member corrected him.  This shows the deep and blinding bias on the part of Board members.

 Township Manager Howard Fink: "Growth/No Growth debate" - May 26, 2015

FYI: The July 1, 2015 PC meeting was originally cancelled by Chairperson Chockley, due to lack of business.

Later, the meeting was un-cancelled at the June 23 Board meeting.  Manager Fink insisted that the PC un-cancel the meeting to discuss survey objectives and questions with Cobalt.  (So much for the rumor that the PC controls this process.)

Holding this as a special meeting adds a thousand dollars to the survey cost.  Discussions about long term policy are not pressing or urgent.  The PC Chair normally saves Taxpayer money by piggybacking policy discussions onto meetings handling the regular flow of PC business.  Politics as usual... what one person saves, another fritters away.

Click to watch the Meeting on Livestream

Click to download the Meeting Agenda

Click to download the Meeting Packet

Click to download the Meeting Minutes (when available)

For reference, what an unbiased survey looks like, the 1996 Township Survey Report:

Loading ...

 

[Correction and apology: this was not a joint meeting.]  A joint session was discussed at the close of the June 23 Board meeting but no date was set.  That was the source of my confusion.  How could I be so wrong?  Easy.  I've watched and rewatched so many meetings on livestream that they're blurring together.  Verifying anything that occurs or is said in meetings takes another two hours so out of my life.  If I'm lucky, the info is in the official minutes or the minutes will point to an approximate location within the meeting.  But that location is relative to other Agenda items.  I listen to a lot of talk-talk to locate what I'm looking for.

To make matters more difficult, some conversations don't make it into the minutes.  Carlisle/Wortman's small rate hike was discussed twice in the May 26 meeting, but only the second discussion appears in the minutes.   That first discussion is when Supervisor Engstrom threw away the Township's relationship with Carlisle/Wortman. That discussion begins about 1hr 22 min into the livestream of the May 12, 2015 meeting.]

Adding to the problem are delays in publication of minutes on the township website.  Planning commission minutes haven't been posted since the May 6th meeting.  They can be extracted from the packets assembled for subsequent meetings but they're not on the township web site, as of today, July 2.

 

[Live Blogged] Surprise, surprise!  Cobalt's Community Survey contract has made a surprise appearance on tonight's Agenda.   Supervisor Engstrom announced this less than two minutes after opening the meeting.

Because Engstrom appended this discussion to the end of tonight's agenda, most of us won't see it.  We will excerpt the video of the discussion and post it on our YouTube channel, Northfield NewsCam.

 

[Later that evening] Here's the video.  From start to finish, it's 3 minutes 28 seconds.  30 seconds of that is Supervisor Engstrom adding Cobalt to the agenda.  Another 57 seconds splits between Trustee Dockett pleading the Board's non-responsibility for the process and Township Manager Fink saying the Board is responsible for everything.  25 seconds are Video Titles I inserted for background info.  51 seconds contain Fink explaining the involvement of Township Attorney Burns, which Fink follows by disavowing any statistics expertise.  This doesn't stop him from saying that he's comfortable with the Contract's statistical assumptions, for a contract whose sole purpose is to produce statistics.

All in all, the Township Board devoted only 41 seconds to discussing and voting for this.

[Editor's Note] We shortened and reposted the above Youtube video clip.  We also reduced the temperature of the accompanying explanation.  You can judge the situation for yourselves.

The other news from tonight's meeting regards a change in Township policy regarding FOIA requests.  Since his arrival in Northfield Township, Manager Howard Fink had been maintaining open books and free access to all Township documents.  This was for Howard a matter of personal ethos.  The FOIA requests that revealed both the parties to and the extent of the attempt to subvert our Master Plan were actually handled free of charge by Fink and his staff.

That was then; this is now.  At this meeting, Howard Fink asked the Board to approve a replacement policy.   Township Attorney Bradford Maynes provided a 32 page thicket of rules, regulations, forms, fee structures, payment schedules, and deposit requirements outlining Fink's new FOIA Policy.  From now on, you'll pay for the truth, and you'll pay by the page.

More on the FOIA story is here.