|
|
WEST MICHIGAN REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION
BOARD MEETING MINUTES
January 21, 2011
9:30 a.m.
1. Call to Order. D. Disselkoen, WMRPC Vice-Chair, called the meeting to order at 9:45 a.m.
2. New WMRPC Representatives / Roll Call
Commission members and guests introduced themselves. D. Bee mentioned Commission representatives who have left the WMPRC: Chris Larson (Ottawa County), Mark Gifford (City of Big Rapids), Rosalynn Bliss (City of Grand Rapids), Linda Howard (Mecosta County), and Merri Moore, Charlie Watson, and Christine Burns (City of Cedar Springs).
Roll Call:
Linda Howell – Allegan County
Terry Burns – Allegan County
Lynn Anderson – City of Big Rapids
Mark Sweppenheiser – City of Big Rapids
Joseph Harper – City of Big Rapids
Ruth Kelly – City of Grand Rapids
Suzanne Schulz – City of Grand Rapids
Brenda Cowling-Cronk – City of Ionia
Paul Bullock, Treasurer – Mecosta County
John Johansen – Montcalm County
Tom Lindeman – Montcalm County
Donald Disselkoen, Vice-Chair – Ottawa County
Tim Cochran – City of Wyoming
Sam Bolt – City of Wyoming
Roger Belknap – City of Cedar Springs
Joseph McCord – Easton Township
Sandy Wolniakowski – Village of Pewamo
Gregg Yeomans – At large
Howard Hansen – At large
Bill Routley – Mecosta County (alternate)
Staff:
David Bee – Director
Elizabeth Van Doorne – Planner
Nancy Murphy – Administrative Assistant
Guests:
Eric Van Dop – Brickley DeLong
Landon Bartley – City of Grand Rapids Planning Department
3. Public Comments
None.
4. Approval of Minutes
A MOTION WAS MADE BY J. Johansen to approve the minutes for the December 10, 2010, Commission meeting as presented. SUPPORTED BY T. Burns. MOTION APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.
5. General Business
a. Commission Member Orientation Materials
The 2011 version of the Commission Member’s Orientation Materials was distributed to members in attendance. D. Bee briefly reviewed the contents of the packet, which includes a list of Commission and CEDS Committee members, staff contact information, meeting dates, FY11 budget, a review of last year’s goals and 2011 goals, facts about the Region and its programs, the bylaws that guide the Commission, personnel and other policies, and WMRPC history.
b. Administrative Matters
Financial Statement
D. Bee distributed the Financial Statement, which covers the Fiscal Year 2011 through December 2010, and briefly reviewed the statement. He said that there’s money coming in, and money going out, and that we have money in the bank. All is going well, with everything similar to past years, with not a lot of change.
A MOTION WAS MADE BY H. Hansen to accept and place on file the Financial Statement for the period of October 1, 2010 through December 31, 2010. SUPPORTED BY S. Bolt. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
FY 2010 Audit Report
Eric Van Dop, from the accounting firm of Brickley DeLong, presented an overview of the WMRPC’s audit for fiscal year 2010 (ending September 30, 2010). He said that the opinion letter states that the WMRPC’s financial position conforms to generally accepted accounting principles. The opinion is an unqualified, or “clean”, opinion, which is the highest possible determination.
Mr. Van Dop reviewed financial statements from the audit report, including Revenues and Expenditures, changes to Fund Balance, and the Balance Sheet. The presented information showed comparisons with 2009. He said that we are mostly a “grant clearinghouse”, where the goal is to break even, which we usually do. FY 2010 was down a bit due to the dues cap placed on members and to the loss of Ionia County’s membership.
He referred to the two auditor’s letters which supplement the audit report. The first letter is standard text that the auditor is required to put into writing. The second letter is a recommendations letter. Although the auditor’s purpose is not to judge a client’s internal controls, they still make comments based on their observations during the audit process. Their past suggestions have received immediate implementation, so there is only one remaining issue. That issue is the same as in past years, and is a situation common to agencies with small staffs: we do not have a person on board with accounting expertise who has the ability of in-depth understanding of financial reports. However, he said that Dave and Nancy do have the ability to look at the numbers and say they look right. Mr. Van Dop concluded by saying that there have been more requirements for audits during the past few years.
c. Strategic Planning
D. Bee said that at the November 2010 Executive Committee meeting, he had presented a paper with information about possibly forming a membership committee. That type of committee would explore options related to Ionia County’s decision not to renew their membership and discuss ways to keep our members happy. The Executive Committee thought that membership should be discussed within the context of broader issues, and decided to start the process in January. D. Bee said that although we have limited time at this meeting, we could still get started and decide what we need to do to move forward, and use this opportunity to share thoughts and ideas.
Membership
H. Hansen asked if Ionia County’s action was related more to their fiscal constraints or to political issues. D. Bee said that Ionia County’s dues were about $3,000. He was not successful in his efforts to convince their Commission of the value of membership. The County felt that EDA grants benefit individual communities rather than the county. They also cut some other budgets, like MSU Extension. Also, Kent County has not been a member since the beginning of the Metro Council, although there have always been individual members within Kent County. There have been ongoing efforts to network with Kent County Commissioners.
We now have a dues ceiling of $5,000 for each member, but that has been an informal agreement, and could be changed in the future. With the current dues structure, if Kent County were to become a member, that would lower our revenues. One issue to consider is whether we should have different levels of dues to encourage the county as a whole to be a member. Our dues are based on a per capita rate. Our dues rates are the lowest of any region in Michigan. We have the second largest population and the smallest staff and operations.
Our bylaws restrict voting membership to members with a population of 10,000 or more. Within the county of Ionia, last year we had multiple representatives for each community that was a member. But this year, only the City of Ionia – which has a population greater than 10,000 – has two representatives on the Commission. All the other smaller communities have just one representative.
S. Schulz said that the Metro Council has also been experiencing membership and budget issues. For members of any organization, the important consideration is what benefits they receive from membership. One service we could offer is to provide information about “best practices”. There are issues that are common to communities and it would be valuable to have a central source of information, as well as a forum for discussions and opportunities for information exchange. We could provide a bigger perspective, which would make us more valuable. We need to focus on what value we can provide and communicate that to current and potential members.
H. Hansen said that his employer (a local development company) is totally about marketing. The Region is very low key and could benefit from more marketing efforts. Maybe we could use the services and abilities of our representatives to help to market us. We need a glossy brochure and an upgraded website.
L. Howell said that our grant and loan opportunities book could be a valuable resource. People want answers to questions like: What is an EDA grant? How can I apply? What are the deadlines, where are the forms, what links can I use? The Region and its website could become known as a central source of information available to communities. The Michigan Municipal League (MML)’s website has a library of ordinances that is only open to members, and we could do something similar.
S. Schulz said that we control the message. D. Bee said we could have a more ready list of benefits. H. Hansen said that the Monroe North business association has a marketing focus and expertise. We should start to spin our story and let communities know what’s available.
T. Burns asked if there is a state mandate for regions. D. Bee said that EDA is very supportive of regions, which are the most common conduit for EDA grant applications. Communities can write their own CEDS report, but EDA does not support that option. S. Schulz mentioned the West Michigan Strategic Alliance and asked who does what, them and the Region. D. Bee said that we are the federally designated EDA district. There is not much duplication between us and the Strategic Alliance. We each have our own areas of specialization. S. Schulz said that an important question in the future will be how we intersect, and which functions are performed by each agency.
D. Disselkoen asked how we work with MDOT. D. Bee responded that our relationship with MDOT has more of a focus on rural areas. For instance, we work with corridor groups like M-40/M-89 in Allegan County and M-66 in Montcalm and Ionia Counties. We have an annual planning grant from MDOT for $37,000. The Metro Council covers Kent County and part of Ottawa County. We are not an MPO (Metropolitan Planning Organization) – which is the primary agent for transportation planning – and there are three MPO’s within our regional boundaries. Also, we have MDOT’s Asset Management program. D. Disselkoen asked if we sign off on all Asset Management reports and D. Bee said that we do an annual report that summarizes the reports of agencies within our region. D. Disselkoen asked to whom the MACC (Macatawa Area Coordinating Council) submits their report of their work. D. Bee said that they report to the State, who then gives that information to us.
WMRPC Representatives
D. Bee said that all these points tie back to members – if they’re happy and can see value in membership. Currently the WMRPC has three groups: the Commission, the CEDS Committee, and the Executive Committee. The Commission meets five times a year and the two committees both meet four times a year. We could trim back a little on smaller members. For two years we rotated meeting locations throughout the region and covered all of the counties (although not every individual community member, like Cedar Springs). We did a survey to determine representatives’ preferences regarding meeting days and locations. The survey data showed that people prefer to meet at some location within the Grand Rapids area, either at the WMRPC offices or someplace else, and that they also prefer meetings on Fridays.
S. Schulz talked about urban and rural issues – they have different interests, so maybe we should separate them. Maybe we should divide our group so there is a larger community group and a smaller / rural group. That way people within each group would have more in common with each other, with similar issues, so they could discuss the same problems and find solutions. D. Bee said that United Growth for Kent County was divided into urban and rural groups. S. Schulz talked about the City of Grand Rapids connecting with other urban areas like Kalamazoo and Traverse City to discuss common issues. Maybe the WMRPC could separate into groups that focus on rural and urban interests a few times a year.
T. Burns said that Allegan County borders on five counties, which presents a lot of opportunity for cooperative projects (like a regional jail). There are areas with no infrastructure, but a lot of available land for development. There is a need for planning and a vision for the future. He said he liked Suzanne’s ideas and thinking related to that.
D. Bee said that the Kalamazoo region is a one-man operation, so counties like Barry might come to us. Allegan is pulled in different directions – Kalamazoo, Holland, Grand Rapids. S. Bolt said that people drive through Allegan County but don’t think about it. T. Burns disagreed and thought there are a lot of worthwhile destinations within the county.
L. Howell said that more committees would enable addressing diverse priorities and needs. We could bring together groups with similar issues, like transportation or agriculture. They would not need to be standing committees, but could be formed on an as-needed basis. The website could include list serve discussion groups and online meetings. S. Schulz said that the value of the Region could include multi-jurisdictional discussions and how to facilitate that. D. Bee suggested surveying members to determine areas of interest and S. Schulz said there are different ways to group interest areas – urban/rural, transportation corridors, etc. R. Kelly said that when a topic has a shared interest, there could be smaller meetings.
Dues/Funding
D. Bee said that the current bylaws are vague on the topic of dues. He talked about the trends over the years: Dues were 3˘ per capita in 1999. In 2001, the Board raised it to 4˘ with an automatic increase of 3 percent every year, which continued until 2007, when we stopped the annual percentage increase. In 2009, the Board set a dues cap of $5,000 per member. That dues cap dropped the annual dues from $39,000 to $27,000, which is a significant decrease in our relatively small budget. 2011 is the third year we have had that dues cap. Plus, since last year, we have had the loss of dues from Ionia County. So now our annual dues received is about $25,000 from current members, which is the same level as ten years ago. We still have the same programs and same staff size.
A question to consider is whether we want to stay a small organization or take on new projects, along with increased funding. One thing that might happen in the future is that the State might depend more on regions as they reduce their own staff levels. The primary use of our dues is for matching funds for grants.
G. Yeomans asked how other regions with higher dues justify it. In response, D. Bee provided information about other regions’ dues and functions:
Region 2 – They have a 27˘ dues rate. They have no EDA funding. They perform most of the land use and recreation plans within their region (which does not make them popular with consultants). In contrast, we usually do plans when there is no one else to do them.
Region 4 – They have a $1 million budget.
Region 6 (Tri-County) – They are the MPO, so they do more transportation planning. They also do water-related planning.
Region 14 – They are involved with homeland security for half of the state. They are also the MPO.
Region 8 – We have a $230,000 budget.
The region in Sault Ste. Marie receives $35,000 from dues.
G. Yeomans stated that in order to be able to raise dues, we would have to “polish the apple” first. D. Bee said many regions provide a wider range of services.
D. Disselkoen mentioned the roundtable at Commission meetings, when representatives report on current projects in their area. He suggested that people could submit their information in writing before the meeting when they will not be attending, so those in attendance can benefit from their report. D. Bee said that Mark Knudsen frequently provides a written report.
Capacity and Member Services
D. Disselkoen and S. Schulz discussed the medical marijuana issue. Since the recent State legislation, many communities are dealing with issues related to implementation. It would be very helpful if they could participate in a dialogue and information exchange in order to better understand the landscape. They could benefit from hearing about what other areas are doing and what their experiences have been. T. Burns said that he is a drug and alcohol counselor and he sees first hand the problems with the new law. T. Cochran said Wyoming was a leader and banned it, and now the City is being sued. He would recommend that communities be conservative and try to stop the spread of dispensaries.
Interaction with Other Organizations
What organizations do other regions deal with and not deal with? D. Disselkoen asked if we coordinate with the Metro Council and D. Bee said that right now we don’t, but we could do more. We are a member of MEDA (Michigan Economic Developers Association), but we are not active in that group. MAR is not a large organization. Last year the regions worked with MSU’s Land Policy Institute on a strategic plan for Michigan’s future.
S. Schulz referred to the work with MSU that focused on regions and asked if it led to legislation proposals presented to the Legislature. She said that the inventory book should be widely distributed. She wondered if we are connected to the right organizations.
G. Yeomans said we need a hit list of 20 groups. D. Bee said we could get the MML report from Suzanne. We could find out which of our Commission members belong to which other groups and then they could give reports on their group(s) at Commission meetings. G. Yeomans said that we could publicize our link to all those groups. D. Bee will survey all representatives to determine all of the organizations that they also serve.
Interaction with State of Michigan and Federal Agencies
We have programs with both MDOT and EDA. We also have good relationships with the MDEQ (Department of Environmental Quality) and the MDNR (Department of Natural Resources), even though we do not receive any funding from them. But our links to those state agencies provide value to our members. The federal agencies we work with also include USDA Rural Development and the Census and, in the past, FEMA when we worked on hazard mitigation plans.
D. Bee said there are also smaller issues related to the organization. An example would be our office space. Our lease will be up next year and we have to decide if we want to move. A move would be expensive and time-consuming, but there are increasing problems with our current building and landlord.
H. Hansen said that every Commission representative is on the membership committee. We should charge them with the task of marketing the region by referring to Region 8 whenever appropriate. If a person is a member of the Commission, he/she should want to support and promote the Region.
d. Round Table / Regional Issues
Joe Harper – City of Big Rapids. He said that as a private sector representative, he considers ways to integrate the public and private sectors. There are still private sector issues that don’t get addressed; we have a limited number of meetings. Democracy falls apart because there are too many issues and meetings. In theory, there can be public and private interaction, with each person getting an overview of all the issues. The Region could be a one-stop shopping destination, a forum available to the private sector. But there are distractions, and focus on each person’s own area, so day-to-day happenings in businesses don’t get addressed and get an adequate hearing.
Public sector employees are still getting raises, which means more taxes for everyone and creates a burden on the private sector, where most people have not been getting raises. There could and should be targeted issues that bring the private sector into the conversation. It’s not just important to attract jobs to Michigan. There are other issues like declining property values that are not getting adequate attention; how will that shake out in the next few years? It “takes a village” to solve problems. We can’t just wait for the government to fix things. Region 8 is a good starting point.
Howard Hansen. There is a “flashing red light” with private development. It is no longer a matter of “if we build it, they will come”. Instead, now companies have to have the tenants committed first. His company (Parkland Properties) invested $1 million in a hotel and conference center in Muskegon, along with a restaurant. They will see how the facility does once the weather gets warmer. The first step in efforts to improve the economy has to be more jobs. Without jobs, there is no financial security, and no demand for property development.
Bill Routley – Mecosta County. He talked about the potential merger between the Mecosta County Medical Center and Spectrum Health. They are trying to get objective feedback. Some believe that they would be giving away the gem of the county, while others think a merger would enhance that gem and make it even better.
Gregg Yeomans. There are two Frisbee golf courses in Ionia County.
John Johansen – Montcalm County. He talked about trail development and the move to create a trail authority. Work on the new county fairgrounds is progressing. There will be four phases in all; they have completed phase one and expect to finish phase two by the end of the year. The fairgrounds are a tool for economic development in the area, with many benefits to the community, which is busily scheduling events at the facility.
Tom Lindeman – Montcalm County. They are working on forming a county tourist group. This year the County is looking at budgets. There are six different unions representing county employees.
Joe McCord – Easton Township. There is a lot of interest in Frisbee golf. There is a good structure of trails through the township. They have a free travelogue every Thursday morning that is very popular. They should promote the rails-to-trails facility. They could have a one day special event where they would get seniors on golf carts to ride the trails to see what the trails are all about.
Suzanne Schulz – City of Grand Rapids. The City is working on trails too. Last month they acquired rails property at the Canal Street Park, which will connect to the White Pine Trail. The rail acquisition is significant. There will be a $300,000 study on the Michigan Street health corridor, which has had a billion dollars in investment. The study will determine how best to accommodate the growth along the corridor. An important issue is how best to handle traffic; their options are limited by the inability to widen the street. The study will also look at the institutional anchors of medical and education – how can they be used as a seed to create new development?
Ruth Kelly – City of Grand Rapids. She referred to the downtown framework plan. There is economic development in pockets around the city. An example would be the Madison Square area.
Brenda Cowling-Cronk – City of Ionia. Ionia is also working on their downtown.
Linda Howell – Allegan County. There is a lot of interest and participation in Frisbee golf. With a lot of open space in the county, there is considerable potential. The parks can accommodate both mountain bikes and Frisbee golf. The participants of both activities are usually willing to play together nicely in the sandbox. Frisbee golf has become hugely popular.
Roger Belknap – City of Cedar Springs. He said that he is a new representative and is looking forward to learning and serving. He has been involved in active recreation and natural resources development. He appreciates the optimism he hears in the meeting. There is a need to build great places which can attract residents. He also likes the inclusion of the private sector perspective. He will be attending a national brownfield redevelopment conference in Philadelphia and will report back to the Commission and share what he learns there.
Don Disselkoen – Ottawa County. There are a few Frisbee courses in Ottawa County. They also have a bike trail. But the new bridge across the Grand River won’t include a non-motorized pathway unless they can find the necessary $5 million to fund the costs.
e. Election of Officers
D. Bee said that every year the Nominating Committee beats the bushes to find out who is interested in serving as Commission officers. He mentioned that the Mecosta County Economic Development Corporation has a more active role and that they consider other issues as well.
This year’s Committee included Gregg Yeomans (Committee Chair), John Johansen, and Lillian VanderVeen. G. Yeomans reported that this year, the positions were uncontested, with the 2010 slate offering to serve again in 2011.
Chair – Charles Mulholland, At-large
Vice-Chair – Donald Disselkoen, Ottawa County
Treasurer – Paul Bullock, Mecosta County
f. Staff Updates
D. Bee distributed his Staff Update (copy attached). The Update includes information in the categories of Economic Development, Transportation Planning, Member Projects/Initiatives, and Other. D. Bee very briefly reviewed the bulleted items.
6. Unscheduled Business
The next Commission meeting will be March 18, 2011.
7. Adjournment
A MOTION WAS MADE By G. Yeomans to adjourn. SUPPORTED BY T. Burns. MOTION APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY. The meeting was adjourned at 11:50 p.m.
Back to Board Minutes Page