WEST MICHIGAN REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION

BOARD MEETING MINUTES

 

 

March 17, 2006

9:30 a.m.

 

 

1.  Call to Order.  C. Mulholland, Board Chair, called the meeting to order at 9:30 a.m.

 

Roll Call:

Pat Capek – City of Cedar Springs

Gregg Yeomans – Ionia County

Joe Marhofer – Ionia County

John Todd – Mecosta County

Charles Luteran – Mecosta County

Marcia Walker – Montcalm County

John Johansen – Montcalm County

Paul Thibodeau – Osceola County

Edward Berghorst, Treasurer – Ottawa County

Spencer Bertram – City of Wyoming              

Tim Cochran, Vice-Chair – City of Wyoming    

L. Charles Mulholland, Chair – At large          

Regina Davis – At large                               

Staff:

David Bee – Director

Steven Stepek – Planner

Nancy Murphy – Administrative Assistant

Guests:

Steve Warren – Kent County Road Commission

John Drury – Michigan Department of Transportation

Andrea Brush – Michigan Department of Transportation

Karen Brewster – Mecosta Osceola Transit Authority (MOTA)

 

2.  Approval of Minutes

A MOTION WAS MADE BY J. Todd to approve the minutes for the January 20, 2006, Board meeting as presented.  SUPPORTED BY J. Marhofer.  MOTION APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.

 

3.  Public Comments

None.

 

4.  Guest Speaker – Steve Warren, Kent County Road Commission

The function of the Kent County Road Commission (KCRC) is to maintain the system of roads in the county.  The two primary characteristics of their planning are:

        1)  Long range:  they work within a 10-year horizon.

        2)  Strategic:  how will they fund needed improvements?

Mr. Warren distributed copies of the draft “Kent County Road Commission Long-Range Strategic Investment Plan for Primary Roads”.  The Plan includes a map that shows where road improvements are planned – and where they are not planned.  The Plan is intended for use by local communities and local businesses so they will be aware of what will happen and when.  There are no new roads included in the plan, as well as no major reconstruction and widening.  The primary focus during the past five to six years has been preventive maintenance, and that focus will continue for the next ten years.  That cycle of reconstruction is called “asset management”.

The map shows all public roads in the county.  The 10-year plan is for work exclusively on “primary” roads, which are major roads outside of incorporated local jurisdictions, within townships.  There are 670 miles of primary roads in the county.  All primary roads in the county are paved and the Road Commission pays the entire cost of maintenance improvements for this system.  Only one-third of primary roads are “all season” roads, so there are weight restrictions on most of the roads.

The KCRC 10-year vision includes the following:

        1)  maintain 62% (406 miles) of the roads in “good” condition

        2)  preserve 28% (181 miles) in “fair” condition

        3)  reconstruct roads in “poor” condition

KCRC’s strategic planning process considers these questions:

        What is our plan for the future?
        Are we satisfied with the current distribution of improvements?

        What is the trend?

        Where do we want to be in the future?

        What is the “strategy”, i.e., where will the funds come from?

        What are the trade-offs with alternative investment strategies?

The KCRC has a five-year improvement program, 2005–2009; they update the five-year plan every year.  Each year they set aside money for road preservation.

Mr. Warren talked about the “asset management” approach to planning which is used to help decision makers determine which projects to fund.  The first priority is preservation of the existing road system and dollars are allocated there first.

“Vision” questions what do we want to achieve?  The “strategy” tells how we will achieve it.  Vision is composed of performance measures.  The KCRC Vision for county primary roads is to:

When they try to add road capacity, that attracts development, which results in more demand on capacity.  During the 1980’s, the focus was on expansion, with major road widening and reconstruction projects; that focus meant that funds were taken away from preservation of the existing system.  By the year 2000, they had decided to focus on preservation.  From 1995 to 2000, one-half of the funds were spent on expansion.  In the future, there will be increasing preservation to improve the overall system.  From 2005 to 2016, one-half will be spent on preservation.  They will spend $68 million over the next ten years for preservation of existing roads.

Mr. Warren talked about the growth trend for Kent County through the year 2016 and said there would still be a need for expansion, to widen and reconstruct roads.  That work costs about $2.5 to $3.0 million per mile.  Roads to be expanded include Kalamazoo, Division, and 10 Mile.

Total needs for the next ten years will cost $236.4 million.  During that same period, $166.6 million in funds will be available for the work.  So there is a need to prioritize needs and corridors.  The plan for dollars distribution for the next ten years is as follows:

$  68.2  preservation

    41.2 widening

    30.9 reconstruction

      9.5 bridges

    16.8 intersections

$ 166.6 total investment

 

People who use the roads determine what the speed limits will be.  Drivers determine what reasonable and safe speeds are.  The KCRC uses 85th percentile traffic studies that observe the speeds drivers are using to set speed limits.

The Michigan Manual for Uniform Traffic Control dictates the criteria for the installation of traffic signals.

There has been a steady decline in revenue from the gas tax.  People are driving less due to the higher cost of gas.  There has also been an increase in fuel economy.  There are two sources of funding for the Michigan Transportation Fund (MTF):  the gas tax and registration fees.  There is discussion in Washington, D.C., regarding changing the paradigm related to how transportation projects are funded.  One option would be automated toll collection based on bar codes:  people would be charged based on how they used the system, not on the number of miles driven (like the gas tax) or what kind of car they drive (like registration fees).

 

5.  MDOT Project in Mecosta and Osceola Counties

John Drury and Andrea Brush from MDOT and Karen Brewster with MOTA attended the meeting to present information about the proposed MDOT project in Mecosta and Osceola Counties.  D. Bee read excerpts from the project proposal, and said that several weeks ago Ms. Brush had called him to see if there was any interest in working on a transportation study in Mecosta and Osceola Counties.  There is existing public transit but it will be discontinued.  A past millage attempt was defeated but there may be another millage vote this year.  The biggest part of the project would be a community survey.  The WMRPC will develop the survey; Western American Mailers will distribute the survey; and the WMRPC will tabulate and analyze the survey.

Mr. Drury said the project would be mostly funded with Federal Transit Administration (federal) money.  The local match can be soft money, in-kind service.  The State has historically had money for the match but this year there are no funds due to budgetary constraints.  Ms. Brush had asked him if the Region could help with the project.  The study is intended to determine the need for transit.  The results are needed as soon as possible, before the election in either August or November this year.

C. Luteran said that Ray Steinke and John Todd would be on the committee for the transit study project.

The Region will be working on the project during the next few months.

J. Todd said that it would be better to have the millage vote in November because there is another millage request scheduled for the August election.

A nine-person committee will design the transit survey and review the results.

 

6.  Administrative Matters

Financial Statement

D. Bee reviewed the Board Financial Statement for the period of December 1, 2005 through January 31, 2006.  He said that the Office Machines category is over budget due to the purchase of GIS software for the MDOT non-motorized transportation project.  The software cost $1200, all of which will be reimbursed by MDOT.  We will change the budgeted amount for that category when we amend the budget in June.  The Status of Grant Programs is on track.  The Investments show that cash flow is not a problem.

A MOTION WAS MADE BY E. Berghorst to accept and place on file the Financial Statement for the period of December 1, 2005 through January 31, 2006.  SUPPORTED BY S. Bertram.  MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

 

EDA Rules related to Board and CEDS Committee

EDA changed its rules last year.  Changes affect communities in that the project grant rate changed from an EDA share of 60–70% to 50%.  Changes that affect the Region are that we need more private sector involvement for the Board and CEDS Committee.  For example, Joe Marhofer is a County Commissioner and a farmer/private businessman – do we split his representation by interest? 

We are working through the process with EDA; they don’t have any good answers yet.  The intent is to expand the table to include more private sector representatives around the table.  One option would be for members to each appoint one person from the private sector.  Or we could recruit people directly from businesses.  We would have to change the WMRPC bylaws because now they provide for two representatives designated by each community plus three at large board members.  We could expand the number of representatives from each community to include people from the private sector.  We could also specify which businesses should be represented.

Another issue is whether or not EDA will continue in its present format.  Maybe we would make changes to accommodate EDA’s new requirements and they could change or disappear all together.  And do we really want to change the way we operate in response to one of our funding agencies?  Our funding ratio has increasingly become more transportation based and less economic development.  Another question is if we did have the private sector at the table, what would we need to do to maintain their interest?

S. Bertram asked what is EDA’s intent?  D. Bee said that they want to increase economic development and reduce the need for EDA spending.  C. Mulholland said that the real question is how liberal will their interpretation be?  T. Cochran said that maybe there could be some tie-in with the Strategic Alliance since they have a broad representation.

 

7.  Round Table / Regional Issues

T. Cochran – City of Wyoming.  The City will partner with the Road Commission on the reconstruction of Wilson Avenue, from Rivertown Crossings Mall to M-6.  The cost will be $5 million for two miles.

 

E. Berghorst – Ottawa County.  The City of Hudsonville will disband their police department and turn over their functions to the County; the change will save them $200,000 per year.  Two years ago the City of Coopersville did the same thing and it worked out fine.  Meijers has a new store in Jamestown Township.  Ottawa County is considering a change to the county seat location (currently in Grand Haven) and some county offices.  They might raise the tax 3/10 of a mil.

 

C. Luteran – Mecosta County.  The transportation authority will not happen unless something is done.  They’re glad that we’re doing the study.

One issue they talked about at their Commission meeting is house trailers that don’t meet standards.  Another issue is courthouse security.  They crossed legal hurdles and are installing video equipment; this is just the first phase of planned changes.  Staff people want the added security but they’re not always comfortable with the implementation:  parking farther away, frequent locking of doors, working behind tempered glass.  The County is planning to perform a dog census.

 

J. Todd – Mecosta County.  In the northwest corner of the County they have oil drilling problems.  They are moving heavy equipment.  There are now three producing wells, with five wells planned.  The Road Commission is concerned.  In Mecosta and Osceola Counties, judges are joined.  They have one of the heaviest case loads in the state.  They will be getting another judge.  Each county will have a new circuit court judge.  That will help to alleviate jail overcrowding due to people who are waiting for arraignment.

 

S. Bertram – City of Wyoming.  They will have the final reading on their proposed ordinance for Sunday alcohol sales (liquor by-the-glass in restaurants and bars).

 

R. Davis – Fair Housing Center of Greater Grand Rapids.  They are working on their annual Luncheon and Workshop Series to be held April 20.  This year’s theme is “Changing the Landscape: Welcoming Everyone to our Backyard”.  Topics for the three workshops are: 

        NIMBYism: the Implications of Prejudice in our Backyard

        Community, Industry and Advocates: Partners in Fair Housing

        Building Multi-Cultural Competence

The luncheon speaker will be Michael Allen, with the Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law, who will speak on “Making Room at the Inn: Housing for the Least among Us”.

 

G. Yeomans – Ionia County.  Economic development is happening in the form of “big boxes”.  Menards wants to locate a store in Orange Township, where there isn’t a water system.  G. Yeomans said the City is trying to be bigger than it is and is having problems with the townships.  One township was thinking of enacting a junk ordinance but changed their plan in response to public opposition.

J. Johansen – Montcalm County.  They are re-bidding the recycling contract.  The last time they did it, they only received a bid from one supplier.  This time, there were six bids, including one from Goodwill (providing employment for the hard to employ).  The County Plan was approved and is out to communities for their review.  They are working on the jail expansion project, with an opportunity for 12 or 24 additional cells.  There is a two-year payback from housing out-of-county prisoners; it would be better with a five-year payback.  The County is working with Dave Bee on the transportation plan.  They are working on a five-year economic development plan with the MEDC.

 

M. Walker – Montcalm County.  Today was the big good-bye for Electrolux in Greenville.  The company and the community are meeting today.  The site might be eligible for brownfield designation but they had to wait until after the last line was done before it could be tested; the site has had contamination citations during the past few years.  Related to the NIMBYism topic at the Fair Housing Center conference, there is an empty church in Greenville for which there was an interest in using it for a shelter for homeless men, and the community was very opposed.

 

P. Capek – City of Cedar Springs.  The City had a public meeting for the Muskegon Street reconstruction.  Most citizen input was related to funding; a State grant covers most of the cost, with some dollars from the City’s street funds.  There will be a new road from Northland Drive to the high school, with major disruption for drivers during construction work.  They hired a grant writer to apply for a grant to extend Pine Street a few blocks.  They also have a grant for a ten feet wide pathway/walkway from Muskegon Street to the new middle school.  The City is facing the issue of outdoor wood burning furnaces – do they need a new ordinance?  Two people in the City have installed these furnaces.  A group from the City Council will attend the Michigan Municipal League’s Legislative Conference.  Their Chamber of Commerce has a new Director.  They had thought the Chamber might disband so are pleased they have a new Director; she is very enthusiastic and events-focused.

 

J. Marhofer – Ionia County.  The County did a dog census; they worked with the Drain Commissioner and used GPS, and included every household.  Along M-66 south of the City of Ionia “big box” stores are coming it.  There are issues to resolve but it will all work out.  Orange and Berlin Townships are working with them.  Related to Mr. Warren’s discussion, Ionia did an 85th percentile traffic study where the speed limit was 35 mph and residents thought it should be 25 – but the study showed it should be 45.

 

8. Staff Updates

D. Bee distributed copies of his Staff Update, and briefly reviewed the bulleted items.  His comments included the following:

The next CEDS Committee meeting is March 29th.  One of the speakers will be Greg Northrup with the West Michigan Strategic Alliance.  The Alliance is changing their mission.  They received a $15 million wire grant from the Department of Labor.  Another speaker will be Kara Wood with the Community Assistance Team at the Michigan State Housing Development Authority (formerly with the MEDC).

EDA approved our 2006 planning grant.  The Regions met with EDA February 14 and will meet with them again next month.

We need to receive CEDS projects from communities very soon.

He distributed copies of the Estimated Population of Michigan Counties, 2000–2005 (copy attached).

 

9.  Other Business

C. Mulholland talked about the Small Town and Rural Development Conference April 25–27 at Crystal Mountain.  The Conference is presented by Rural Partners of Michigan and will include some excellent speakers.  They are trying to get rural communities to prosper.

The next Board Meeting is scheduled for June 16th.  The agenda will include approval of the annual CEDS document.

 

10.  Adjournment

A MOTION WAS MADE BY J. Todd to adjourn.  SUPPORTED BY E. Berghorst.  MOTION APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.  The meeting was adjourned at 11:25 a.m. 

 

 

Back to Board Minutes Page