Cease and Desist Clearing the Land

This is looking from the corner of the Elk Township Hall to the south-east

Land has obviously been cleared of woods, and the trees have already been hauled away

You can see posts marking the corners of a proposed building site

At the latest board meeting, a motion was made and seconded and voted in the affirmative by a majority of the board, to cease and desist in building a new township hall until documents may be reviewed and looked at by a lawyer. The complete board did not have time to review contracts and plans before land was being cleared.

Controversy & Clash

May 10, 2011 meeting continued the controversy over a large, stand-alone building to be built without any bids, even after a discussion ensued concerning bids for lawn maintenance at the same facility but with a much lesser overall amount in question.  This month's controversy included questions asked between board members:

"Do we have a contract?"
"You did not ask for bids?"
"Who did you ask to review the project?"
"I see Steve Riggs was given $1,000, what was that for?"
"Did you ask for a signed waiver of lien?"
"Did an attorney review this contract? (implied understanding that the board has not seen this contract)"
"Is there a copy of the contract?"


Most questions were either not answered, or not answered satisfactorily. Most answers were "NO", or "I will not get anything else out for this meeting." If this township board has a contract, most board members have not seen it, and definitely have not signed it. The Supervisor maintained throughout the meeting that there was a legitimate contract on site within the town hall, but nothing was produced for review. Instead onlookers heard things like, "This smacks of hypocrisy...let's move on," and "I'm going to sit here and listen to you, and let me know when you're finished."

The end result of this board controversy was a motion made by Carol Draper, Treasurer, and seconded by John Fairbanks, Trustee:
"I would like to make a motion that any work on a new building be stopped until such time as we can review the contracts and make sure that a lawyer reviews them as well."
This motion passed with Frances Arquette, John Fairbanks, and Carol Draper voting in affirmative, and Marilyn VanVleet, and Linda VanDolsen voting against.

At the end of public comment, Linda VanDolsen was heard speaking over everyone else, "Sign the recall, recall me, whatever." 

And that is how the meeting ended...stay tuned...this clash is not over!

Recall Is Definitely Going Forward...

It took less than one week to obtain more than enough signatures to recall all three board members who voted to build a $150,000 building without any input from the taxpayers.  According to the Michigan Township Association Red Book, which is the lawyer's interpretation of township law, "Recall is initiated by a petition signed by registered and qualified electors within the township...The petition must be circulated by a qualified and registered elector who must attach a certificate of circulation to the petition. An official sought to be recalled continues to perform the duties of the office, until the result of the recall election is certified by the board of county canvassers in the county where the petition is filed...The election shall be held on the next regular election date that is not less than 70 days after the date the petition was filed."
The soonest recall may be voted on will be August, so this board still needs to hear from you concerning building a free-standing, pole-barn-construction, building adjacent to the current town hall. DO YOU THINK THIS BOARD SHOULD USE $150,000 OF TOWNSHIP MONIES TO BUILD THIS BUILDING?
Next Board meeting will be May 10th at the township hall at 7pm...hope to see you there!

Sad, but True...Recall is in the air

Recall is a tough and unfortunate process to let elected officials know they are NOT serving the public's good, or with the public's best interest at the forefront.  This should be a last resort at any governmental level.
Since the annual meeting for Elk Township, a recall petition has been approved by a board of three down at the county courthouse. This step may not stop a new free standing building being built, but it certainly will let the elected officials know that they have stepped over the line of public displeasure.
The wording on the petitions only vary according to the name on the particular petition, names include Linda VanDolsen, Supervisor; Marilyn VanVleet, Clerk; and Frances Arquette, Trustee:

“Has demonstrated a lack of financial accountability and judgment when she committed Elk Township to spend $150,000.00 of cash reserve for a new town hall.  She did not give due consideration to a less expensive proposal which would have extended the existing hall with new construction.  The less expensive proposal would have added needed space and restored the integrity of the old building at considerable savings.”

If you are interested in signing a petition, or would like to know more information about this step, you may call 266.8489

Bye-Bye Building...

According to old documents John Fairbanks has on hand, this building was built in the winter of 1914 by John B. Wallace after a bid was accepted for $1014.00 total

The new roof was put on in 2004, and a new furnace was purchased this winter, 2010-11

Well, with the approval of three people to build a new stand-alone meeting hall/office building for $155,000, the current town hall will undoubtedly go to rack and ruin...just another lonely building rotting its good memories...

Well Said From Johnel Buckingham...

To Elk Township Citizens:

 

After the 2011-2012 Annual Budget Meeting and the Annual Meeting, the Elk Township Board held a “Special Meeting for Proposed Building Project” today, March 26, 2011.  The results of that meeting follows:

 

     1)    The Board presented three separate building plans representing possible choices of construction.

 

     2)    The citizens present were allowed to ask questions or comment about each building.  (Most questions and interest was with John Fairbanks’ presentation.)

 

     3)    A “vote” of hands was called for by Supervisor VanDolsen to learn which building the citizens present thought to be the best for Elk Township residents.

 

            3 votes were cast for the smallest of the buildings presented

            4 votes were cast for the largest of the buildings presented

            9 votes were cast for the building/addition presented by John Fairbanks that would be attached to the existing Township Hall

 

Immediately following the citizens’ vote:

 

     4)    A motion was made by Trustee, Frances Arquette to build the largest of the building plans presented (the one that got 4 votes of the citizens)

This motion was seconded by Secretary, Marilyn VanVleet

No discussion was asked for by Supervisor, VanDolsen

A role call vote was taken as follows:

           Supervisor VanDolsen – yes

           Trustee Arquette – yes

           Secretary VanVleet – yes

           Trustee Fairbanks – no

           Treasurer Draper – no

 

The motion passed 3-2.

 

    5)    The “Special Meeting” was immediately adjourned.

 

A TOTAL DISREGARD OF THE PUBLIC!

In politics' usual display of power, Elk township board members:
Linda VanDolsen, supervisor
Marilyn VanVleet, clerk
Frances Arquette, trustee
listened to the public's concerns, and even took a vote of confidence for three proposed building ideas. Then these three elected officials voted to build a larger stand-alone building which was the public's least-favored of all the ideas.
Such disregard for voters leaves me speechless!...

Myths, Misconceptions, or Misrepresentations

Myth #1: The current building cannot be added onto without bringing everything up to code- The building inspector, Tony Gagliardo, has repeatedly instructed Elk township residents that only what is changed will have to be brought up to date--why are we taking one person's word for truth? Tony may be reached at 745.2722

Myth #2: The current building cannot support the load on the floors- Three local contractors assessed the building inside and upside and outside and downside. They did not come to a consensus as to the structural viability of the building, but two employees from a reputable architectural firm did spend 7 hours inspecting the building (including pictures from the crawl space) and found it to be worthy of an addition, and mentioned that it had 35-50 years of useful life left in it--again why are we taking one person's word for truth? Dean DeKryger of DK Design may be reached at 779.4002

Myth #3: The current building's occupancy rate is less than 30 people with all the weight in the building now-where is this figure coming from? In speaking with a retired fire marshal from Kalamazoo, and DK Design's office, seating for meetings (chairs only) would need 7 square foot/person. This leads me to believe with a footprint of 33x22 foot(current township hall), even with the filing cabinets and desks and tables taken into account, we should be able to fit 50 chairs in any meeting--why are we taking one person's word for truth?

Myth #4: The fire regulations do not allow for more chairs set up-WHAT? Exactly where is this info coming from? See above Myth #5 for a fire marshal's perspective--and why are we taking one person's word for truth?

Myth #5: The proposed project is considered to be a mixed use project by Lake County, and therefore, is not a Class C commercial building project-not supported by the Lake County Building Dept or the aforementioned architectural firm. This building proposal may be a mixed use proposal, but it is still a commercial building subject to commercial codes and regulations.--why are we taking one person's word for truth?

Myth #6: One or two members of a township board can decide to spend $155,000 without a vote of the taxpayers-by law a majority of a township board must vote during a scheduled meeting after a motion or resolution has been made. This must be a matter of public record and documented as such. It is true, however, that the board of a township may vote by majority to spend $155,000 on anything they deem worthy, and unless the voters use their power of referendum or (heaven forbid) recall, there is not much that can be done after the fact.

Annual Township Meeting coming up...

The annual Elk Township Meeting will be held on March 26th, Saturday, at 10:00 am with a special meeting held immediately following. The supposed purpose of this special meeting would be an open forum of which citizens have requested:

• At that meeting, present three separate building plans
• Include approximate costs of each plan
• Citizens present at the special meeting would then vote on which plan they would like to see the township build.

It remains a fact, however, that a standing township board is not bound by a citizen's vote in a town hall meeting. The board would be bound by a vote during a regular election such as the board allowed in November of 2008. At that time, the citizens were able to vote on borrowing the sum not to exceed $200,000 and use current funds of $125,000 to add on to the current township hall. This vote went down in defeat. A letter from the auditor after the 2008 audit showed the township having "an unreserved fund balance of $251,797," and the auditor recommended that the township could use $125,000 of the fund balance with a years worth of operating capital remaining. The current township officials would like to use $155,584 of tax payers monies to add on to the current township hall even though we only have "an unreserved fund balance of $281,178,"according to the audit for 2010. This means we would have less than a years worth of operating capital, and the money would be gone for good. Over the past two years, according to existing audit records, we have accumulated $29,381, or $14,690 per year. This is taxpayers' monies which should allow for taxpayers to have a say in where is goes. However, according to our representative form of government, any elected official acting on your behalf may spend such balance of money as they deem fit. Your only say-so is at meetings where motions are being made and seconded and passed, or at the voting booth. I encourage every citizen to make their voices heard at the annual township meeting this Saturday at 10am.

Business, Building, and Bull...

Wow, how time does fly along with the ugly, white stuff. It's been awhile since an update, and I've not heard any crying, so you must be staying informed all by yourself. Anyway, as far as business, the current board has met Dec, Jan, and Feb with not much noteworthy to report.
Remember that on November 18, 2010, this board voted 3-2 to hold a public forum concerning the proposed building project. This will come up later, so keep reading.

Sauble Township super has asked surrounding townships to help with the costs of the recycling program that Sauble and surrounding township residents have been utilizing for garbage control. This is a free service for the area residents.

Doug Mann and Lou Fitz have been appointed to the Fire Board as representatives of Elk Township, they are replacing outgoing Corey VanFleet and Carol Draper (Fire Board only).

Bob Nalbach passed away in December, and will be missed as an electrician and neighbor.

Blossom Fairbanks has been appointed to the Cemetery Board.

Board of Review appointments are as follows: Don Arquette, Philip VanVleet, and Yvonne Kibbe with Kay MacDonald being an alternate. If anyone else is interested in being an alternate for Board of Review, let Linda VanDolsen know.

Bob Englebrecht, Elk Township Assessor, has reviewed area commercial properties and classifications and found the following:
Properties classified as exempt:
7th Day Adventist Church, Community Service Center
Properties classified as industrial:
Fischer #3 (gravel) Haliday Sand & Gravel
Properties classified commercial:
ABC Redi Mix
Most other businesses are classified residential as they are operated from homes, although a few businesses will need a physical visit in the spring to accurately assess classification.
Any questions pertaining to this may be directed to Bob Englebrecht at 231.883.4141

2011-2012 Salary Resolutions include a raise for trustees to $95 per meeting, and a raise for deputies to $12/hr, not to exceed $500 annually.

Under New Business at the Feb Board meeting, the Agenda states:
Building Project Public Hearing Reconsideration...
According to the Feb meeting minutes draft, there was a
"Motion was made by Frances Arquette to rescind the previous motion to hold a public hearing pertaining to the building project, seconded by Marilyn VanVleet," and passed 4-1...
then a second motion was made,
"Motion to carry under old business the building project and carry a question period of no more than 10 minutes was made by Frances Arquette, seconded by Linda VanDolsen," and passed 5-0.

So, just to recap this proposed building bull:
In Nov, Arquette seconded a motion made by John Fairbanks to have a public forum meeting when any citizen could have their questions answered concerning expenditures to build a proposed township hall.
Then in Feb, Arquette rescinds the motion she seconded and passes a new motion to limit citizens to a collective 10 minutes of questions (and hopefully answers) before the board votes to use $155,584 of taxpayer's monies.
And you will have no vote on the matter of this expenditure. Might want to make your voice heard at the next board meeting on March 8, 2011 (hopefully you will be included in the 10 minutes).