ANNUAL TOWNSHIP MEETING (March 14, 2006)
Note: The meeting was held at the Phillippo Scout Reservation. Ninety seven persons signed the attendance roster.
Clerk Colleen Thompson called the meeting to order at 8:10 p.m. Pledge of Allegiance was recited.
The Clerk called for nominations for moderator. Mark Dubbels nominated Joe Vandenheuvel; the motion was seconded by David Garner. Being no other nominations or discussion, a unanimous vote was cast for Joe Vandenheuvel to be moderator.
The Clerk asked everyone in attendance to sign the Annual Meeting Roster that was being passed around, stating the list would be utilized later in the votes concerning the town hall.
The moderator read the agenda and gave overview of rules to be used during the meeting.
The Clerk read the minutes of the 2005 Annual Township Meeting. D. Garner made a motion, seconded by M. Dubbels to approve the minutes as read. Motion carried.
The Clerk read the 2005 Treasurer’s Report stating fund types and account information. Total balances by fund are: General Fund - $86,046.74; Road and Bridge Fund - $61,119.05 in current fund and investments of $126,128.50 for a total fund balance of $187,247.55; Fire Fund - $19,175.50; Building Fund - $1,591.50 in current fund and $162,449.21 in investments for a total fund balance or $164,040.71. Total of all funds is $456,510.50.
Steve Emery questioned why fund based accounting.
Colleen stated we are using CTAS a software package sanctioned and required by the State for State generated reporting. D. Garner reiterated the same and made a motion to approve the Treasurer’s Report as read, seconded by M. Dubbels. Motion carried.
The moderator called for the agenda item #6 – Randolph Fire Department Invited Speaker. Being none, the moderator called for the proposed budget.
Colleen stated the 2006 proposed budget prepared by the Treasurer and Town Board Supervisors.
Road & Bridge $85,000
Dave Garner presented the proposed levy. He stated the Board determined the need for an increase of $20,000 to the Fire Fund due to anticipated increases in cost for fire protection by both the Randolph and Cannon Falls Fire Departments. He stated fire protection involves everyone here. Dave stated he had recently attended the Randolph Fire Department Meeting and reported they increased our cost by 5% (approx. $800.00) this year and will increase the cost 5% for each of the next three years. Cannon Falls Fire Association has told us to expect our bill to increase by 2/3rds from a current cost of approximately $9,000 to $27,000 per year. Due to the increase in fuel costs the Board determined the need for an additional $2,000 for the Road and Bridge Fund. The Board came to a unanimous decision to propose a $22,000 increase to the levy. D. Garner stated no increase has been made for the last nine years.
J. Vandenheuvel asked for further discussion stating an increase to the levy does not mean taxes aren’t necessarily going to go up.
Charles Rademacher made a motion to entertain the Boards proposal to increase the levy by $22,000. M. Dubbels seconded the motion. Motion carried.
J. Vandenheuvel called for the presentation of town hall plans stating the old hall is condemned being full of mold making it an unhealthy building. He stated persons had complained of being sick after being in the building with the Clerk being one of them. He stated meetings are currently being held at the scout camp and the township is paying $65.00 per meeting.
Dave Garner stated he was making the presentation for Supervisor Bob Benson who was unable to attend tonight’s meeting. The proposed building is to be 40’x 48’, having a 34’x 40’ meeting area, a 14’x 22’ office and a unisex bathroom. To be built slab on grade with in-floor heating. The building will be handicap accessible. Garner stated the estimated costs are 110 – 112 thousand dollars for the building and 18 thousand for sewer and water. He stated the Board is looking at a site at the corner of 40th and 310th Street currently owned by Bob Benson. The map on the back wall pinpoints the area. Garner stated the road and parking lot would be funded thru our road and bridge fund. The total estimated cost is $157.000. We have $160,000 in the building fund. The reasons given for moving the location are that there is not enough room in Stanton for sewer and water and there is no room to provide parking. The old hall is full of mold and the outside of the building contains asbestos. The estimated cost of removing the building would be significant due to the asbestos. (Note: Indigo Environmental has stated more testing for asbestos is needed before demolition or moving of the building can be done.) Dave ended by stating “we can’t meet here forever, we need a permanent place for records”.
William Bogenrief asked if the Board had used due diligence to find real estate suitable for building.
Garner stated the building is not a dwelling but will be a public building, a town hall can
be built in an agricultural zone.
Charles Rademacher asked about the cost to cocoon the old building.
Doug Duncan encouraged cocooning the building, stating you can not walk inside of it, it is unsafe, unhealthy, you can not store records inside.
Steve Emery stated burning or burying, the building will be a problem for the township either way.
D. Garner stated the building, having asbestos needed to be wrapped and we would need to pay to dispose of it.
J. Vandenheuvel stated “we need a meeting place”.
D. Garner stated the Board is considering three acres for room to grow with the hope to later build a maintenance shed.
Jeff Hardy stated we need to address the old building now.
D. Garner stated we can’t do anything now - the building currently has records and voting equipment stored inside.
Scott Gustafson asked to explore taking the shed on the current site down, to clean up the site and to build down in Stanton.
D. Garner stated an estimated cost of 150K to tear down the old building and also spoke to the issue of the equipment inside. He also stated there is not enough room by the salt shed.
D. Gustafson spoke about how the township came to have the building and stated his opposition to Joe calling it a “chicken coop”.
D. Garner stated the hall has served us for many years.
Jack Lucking suggested for the record the township, for storage could rent a storage shed.
Joe Lopez stated as a commercial site, the township will need to go thru all government regulations.
The question was asked of where the bid came from. Dave stated it is not a bid but an estimate of costs.
J. Vandenheuvel asked for volunteers, anyone that could help us get the project done as
economically as possible.
D. Garner and Clerk Thompson passed out questionnaires for constituents to vote with a yes or no to three questions asked. Again, the Clerk stated to vote, your name needed to be on the attendance roster so that the judges could determine your eligibility to vote and also to determine the percentage of votes (yes or no) to persons in attendance.
Steve Emery stated he didn’t think three acres was sufficient and asked if B. Benson would consider five acres.
R. Schluter asked if other land owners were contacted to sell or donate land.
D. Garner stated no ad was placed and the Board was trying to locate property near Hwy. 19 and/or Hwy. 56.
D. Garner made a motion, seconded by M. Dubbels to select the Cannon Falls Beacon as the official town newspaper. Motion carried.
D. Garner made a motion, seconded by S. Emery to make the official posting place “in front of the current town hall being used”. Motion carried.
J. Moorhouse made a motion, seconded by M. Dubbels to hold the Annual Township Meeting on the second Tuesday, March 13, 2007 at 8:10 p.m. at “whatever we are using for a meeting place at the time”. Motion carried.
In old business, J. Vandenheuvel stated last year’s minutes stated the Clerk had talked with the County and they had asked her not to reveal their conversation. Joe asked the Clerk if she could reveal the conversation at this time.
Colleen stated they asked her not to state that they planned to bring Mr. Nelson to court. This then was delayed because of the ‘tiger’ issues in the County.
S. Emery stated the Township had brought Mr. Nelson to court and the judge gave the Township a ruling to clean up the property and asked what has changed.
J. Vandenheuvel stated that when Mr. Emery and Mike Daniels were on the Board action was being taken at the time, attorneys were involved and the property was ordered to be
cleaned up. Mr. Bauer did clean up somewhat and it looked like progress was being made. Then the township brought the problem to the county level and in turn the County tells the Township it is their problem. He stated that frankly, not everybody is in favor of getting it cleaned up and that is the base of the problem.
Joyce Moorhouse stated the Planning Commission has been involved in discussions
about this and they gave it to the Board and the matter has been turned over to County.
Judge Pelkey came to announce that not everyone who had voted had signed the ‘sign-in sheet’.
Joe asked if everyone had filled out a questionnaire without signing the ‘sign-in sheet’ and announced that everyone said they had.
Judge Pelkey disagreed stating persons had handed in the questionnaire and were not on the ‘sign-in sheet’.
Discussion ensued that a petition was being circulated and constituents stated they were confused as to what they were signing and signed the petition by mistake stating they never got the ‘attendance one’.
Dave Garner stated it is the sheet that has Stanton Township Attendance on it, not any petition that is going around.
Joe again stated just an attendance sheet, if the name on the questionnaire can not be matched up to a name on the attendance sheet, the vote will be thrown out.
S. Emery stated he didn’t know how the township could just turn the Nelson problem over to the County.
Jeff Hardy asked who is accountable for cleaning up the property.
Joe stated as long as Mr. Nelson is in possession, he is accountable for it but if the property was ever abandoned the burden could fall on the tax payers.
Joe stated one more announcement, asking, has everybody signed the sign-in sheet, they still have names on ‘ballots’ that aren’t on the sign-in sheet. Again stating if you are not signed in, your vote won’t count.
Dave Garner stated “do not be confused by the petition going around on the clip boards, they are different”.
Rosie Schluter, for Kate Johanningsmeier, spoke for Pet Adoption of Cannon Valley. Last year they provided services for a total of 191 animals, 176 cats and 15 dogs. There were 20 known animals from Stanton Township cared for.
J. Moorhouse made a motion that Stanton Township donate the same as last year, that being $300.00. Heather Sharp seconded the motion. Motion carried.
Bud Gustafson, representing the Randolph Historical Society stated the Society was founded six years ago and three years ago they purchased the Randolph Methodist
Church. They replaced the roof last year costing $12,000. They made the main floor handicap accessible. Four fund raisers are held per year. He encouraged new members.
Bud stated they have an impressive railroad display. Bud asked for a donation of $400.00.
Joe stated we donated $400.00 last year.
M. Dubbels stated we voted to donate $500.00 last year and the Board lowered that. He stated they are preserving the history of Stanton Township and he made a motion to make a one time donation of $500.00 this year to the Randolph Historical Society with an invite to next year’s meeting. Gary Schmidgall seconded the motion. Motion carried.
Joe stated the donuts were compliments of Jack Lucking and his wife and that Rosie furnished the coffee and went on to thank them.
Jack Lucking introduced himself and stated there is a lot of talk in the neighborhood about development, out on CR 24 and talk about other developments coming in and that if these developments go through Cannon Falls wants to annex the property. Stating there is talk about the tax base Stanton Township would gain if the developments go through but there won’t be a tax gain if Cannon Falls annexes the property. He asked each Board member to address the residents who own land here and asked what they think about development, making lot sizes smaller, about preserving farms and preserving our area. He stated it is important for residents to know how board members feel and which way they would vote. He stated that hopefully as elected officials and appointed officials they would go by what the community wants. He spoke about the survey done by Dean Johnson and stated that 70 to 75 percent of the people who live in Stanton Township want to preserve it the way it is.
Joyce Moorhouse introduced herself and stated she had just been appointed to replace Heather Sharp on the township board stating it was an honor to serve. She stated Stanton Township is a wonderful place to live and feels we have grown because other people feel the same way. She stated she is new on the Board and until an issue is brought before her and she hears all of the facts that people are presenting she can not tell how she would vote either way. She stated she feels that in Goodhue County Ag. Land should be preserved for agriculture and non tillable acres should be used for housing. She stated that she has heard many times, people say “we don’t want any more growth” but taxes go up and sometimes you can’t always make it on a farm with increased taxes. And that “old” farmers such as her husband and herself need to sell a little land to keep up with the increased taxes with just not enough money to go around. She continued by saying she feels that when you own land you should have the right to make some living off from it and to be able to live comfortably. If you want zero growth make sure you don’t have any more children and your children don’t have children and your grandchildren don’t have
any more children because they have to live someplace. It is our place in life to provide for the young people and to provide a place for them to live and grow in a good place.
Joyce stated some growth is necessary, how much growth we should have, she stated she didn’t know saying times are changing, when you live in Goodhue County things are
much different then what is happening on our northern side when you see all the growth that is coming across the lake. She stated we have issues ahead of us and that she would need to think about growth and how it affects us because she has agreed in her oath to think of the citizens so therefore she would be very thoughtful of growth.
Dave Garner introduced himself. He stated Jack wants me to get up here and give my views on any development or project. I’ll find out when I see any plans for a development or project. There has been a lot of talk about development, and about Heathers project. There have been other people talking about what they want to do with their land, about wanting to develop or divide their land. There has been no concrete application or anything else brought before the Planning Commission or the Board. It is hard to judge something on concept and all we have had so far is concept, concept from Heather, concept from some other people, concept from somebody who wants to build a house, what their concepts are. Concepts are great; people can explore them all they want. Until they come up with a firm proposal and put in an application to do something, then we look at the Ordinance and see how it would fit in the community and within the Ordinance to see if they need a variance or a conditional use then have a public hearing and take input from people at the public hearing to determine how we are going to vote.
Jack wants me to stand up here and tell you how I’m going to vote. I can’t tell you how I’m going to vote until I see something come in on an application. We look at every application on its own merits. The Planning Commission does a great job at looking at it and then the Board looks at every application on its own merits. I don’t try to prejudge anything. As a Board, we are apt to do what we feel is the best for the township and the community, not necessarily for an individual, definitely not for myself. And if somebody can figure out how I can develop my one acre of land and make millions please tell me because I haven’t been able to figure that out yet. Again Dave stated he would not make a decision until seeing a proposal in front of him and see how it fits and stated because of this he can not answer Jack’s question. Dave went on to address the issue about annexation. Stating the townships have the cards stacked against them when it comes to annexation. The way State annexation laws are currently written the cities have all the cards in the deck; they can take 60 acres at a time basically unopposed. We do have several options we can try to pursue and try to keep it from happening. If you are following the news there is a new thing down in Claremont in Ripley Township. Claremont is trying to annex a farm a mile and a half outside of town in a process they call a balloon and string in which they take on strip of land annex it out to the farm, annex the farm and then the town can get all the taxes off the feedlot, therefore by-passing Ripley’s Township’s feedlot Ordinance. As a pure standpoint, I don’t want to see Cannon Falls move out into Stanton Township any further than they are right now. I say that as my personal view. Knowing what the laws are right now there’s not too much we can do if they come out and annex 60 acres per the current law. The current law is under review in the State legislature. I encourage you to contact them and support the Minnesota Township Association who is lobbying hard to get that law changed to get us on a level playing field. Right now we have no voice and to me that is not right, so I encourage you to get hold of your State legislature and State Senator and let them know you want your township to have a voice. If anything we should be on equal footing with the cities and not just sitting back and having to take it. The estimated cost and I read this from the township newsletter, is about a 100 thousand dollar legal bill to take a city to court and we can not afford that, and so it is a form of blackmail to bankrupt us. We can fight it and can oppose it but we also must follow the law.
Clerk Thompson stated she wanted to clarify Jack’s comment about 70 to 75 percent of the township wanting the community to stay rural. She stated that in fact she has approximately 719 persons listed on the voting roster and the figures he used add up to 1/10 of registered voters.
Jack stated he misspoke and the numbers given were 70 to 75 percent of the people in attendance at the November 1, 2006 meeting were for keeping Stanton Township rural.
Joe stated our districts representative is Pat Garofalo. He had recently talked to him about annexation, and he currently is sitting on the committee addressing the disparity of taking land from the township and giving to the city. He wants to make the playing field a little more even where townships have a little more say. He has a web site and he will answer your e-mail.
Joe spoke about the procedure used for development and building stating there is a lot of speculation about developments. He mentioned having received a lot of phone calls about Heather’s project. He stated nobody has approached the Planning Commission with a presentation yet. He stated that as a member of the Planning Commission but speaking for himself that if a request doesn’t fit according to our Land Use or Ordinance, his vote is no, but when a request comes in and it is an allowable, acceptable use according to our Ordinance his vote is yes. He stated he has voted on variances that come through and has voted in favor of variances that show a hardship. He stated that until the Planning Commission sees a formal request come through they don’t know any more than ‘you do’. He went on to state that what disturbs him the most about the ‘whole thing’ is that people are making a forgone conclusion that in some way, shape or form this will all be developed either as a proposal of such or a vinyl shanty town, that something is going to happen. He stated there is no forgone conclusion that any developments are going to happen in Stanton Township and there is no forgone conclusion that something is not going to happen.
Wendell Maltby stated his sentiments about the comprehensive plan and asked what the status was on the new Land Use Policy stating he knew there had been a special meeting called on February 21, 2006. He stated he wanted to contact Mr. Johnson as to how the Maltby Preserve fits into the land use plan and was told he could not contact him, there was only one person allowed to contact him and that was the Clerk.
Joe stated that Mr. Dean Johnson was hired to make recommendations to the township
helping them bring the township Zoning Ordinance and Land Use in compliance with the County Ordinance. Stating we can be more restrictive as a township but by law we cannot be less restrictive and we were less restrictive in some areas.
D. Garner stated the special meeting was called one hour before our regular meeting per Mr. Johnson’s request because he had other commitments he had to attend. What was presented to the Board at that meeting was a draft copy. Dave stated the Board and Planning Commission will review the draft, possibly modify it, change it and come up with a final draft of the plan. The final draft once it is approved by the Board and the lawyers will then be posted on the web site and made available to everybody. He stated the Land Use Plan is a complimentary plan to our Ordinance and as Joe stated the Township can not be less restrictive than the County and right now we are and this causes problems for everyone in here because we will approve a building permit and then at the County it’s not allowed, they need a variance or something. He stated this is a disservice to our citizens. We are in the process of bringing our Ordinance to be as restrictive or more restrictive then the County’s. This has been a long process. The Planning Commission has spent a lot of time going through it. We are at the stage right now where hopefully in the next several months we will finish going through the Land Use Plan. The Land Use Plan is a supporting document to the Ordinance. The Ordinance is a lot more detailed and takes prescedence. It basically states the zoning of the township. Once we have a final plan we will then have one or two more public hearing to present it to the people and at that time we will get peoples input as to how they feel about the document.
Scott Gustafson questioned the need for a new land use stating didn’t we already have one.
Joe explained that the County continually updates their Ordinance, we can not be less restrictive and therefore we need to update our land use plan, using the current plan as a guide.
Joe announced that when Joyce Moorhouse was appointed to the Board, this opened up a position on the Planning Commission. He also stated that the Board had recently put three year term limits on the appointments and this would mean his term and Paul Schluter’s terms are up for appointment also. He expressed his desire to be reappointed and stated he thought Paul was also interested in being reappointed. He stated that if you are interested on sitting on the Planning Commission to let a supervisor know of your interest.
John Krantz stated he has voiced and also submitted in writing his desire to be appointed to the Planning Commission.
In regards to the petition: Mr. Krantz stated the reason for the petition was that Mr. Dean
Johnson has been drawing up a comp. plan and before it is even done the Board is asking him how to amend it, how to change it, how to go to Goodhue County and the reason behind it is to be as restrictive as County but they are already in the process of trying to change it. The petition is to show what the people of Stanton Township actually think and what they want. He stated he was presenting copies to the Board members tonight and to make a motion tonight to present to Mr. Dean Johnson, to put in the comp. plan, just the wording of the petition and the amount of names on it so that the people are aware of what there was. He than stated he was looking for a motion on this.
Dave Garner stated “Point of Order” stating Mr. Krantz can not call for motions.
Dave and Joe discussed the proper procedure to follow.
Joe stated you heard from John, he put a motion on the floor from the podium, this you cannot do and Joe asked if there was a motion from the floor.
Mr. Krantz, from the floor made a motion to have the wording of the petition including the amount of names placed in the comp. plan and presented to Mr. Dean Johnson. The motion was seconded by Jack Lucking.
Jack Schlichting interrupted at this time and asked a “point of order” asking if a non resident can make or second motions stating a resident or allowable voter may only act on motions.
Vince Cockriel then seconded the motion.
Residents asked that the petition be read.
Mr. Krantz than read the following: On November 1st, 2005 the largest meeting of this type ever held in Stanton Township determined that the number one concern of the residents was to protect the “rural atmosphere” of the township, and the largest threat to our township is development and annexation. We the undersigned demand that the county and township strictly enforce current land-use and zoning ordinances, and deny any and all variance requests and conditional uses not in compliance with zoning and land use. Furthermore we demand the Stanton town board and the Stanton Planning Commission deny any request for “orderly annexation” and make it perfectly clear that any request for annexation will be “adversarial”. (Clerk’s note: The following sentence was stated on the petition, but not read or stated by Mr. Krantz. This petition is in response to Heather Sharp’s development plans for Stanton Township).
Diane Pagel wanted to know if the petition was stating no variances were to be allowed at all in the township.
Mr. Krantz responded it was for no variances in conflict with the comprehensive plan.
Joe stated all variances are weighed upon their own merit regardless of past practice,
regardless they have to be addressed as a proven hardship and everyone is looked at upon its own merit. I am looking at this and interpreting that a variance would not be granted for a development or something like that.
Mr. Krantz stated this is because the Board is trying to change the proposed comprehensive plan, trying to have five acre lots all the way down to one half acre lots and asked Mr. Garner to respond.
Mr. Garner stated you are taking a discussion that we can have with our planner to look at all options. You are picking out what you want to hear. Sure, I’ll mention ˝ acre lots and I’ll find out what the response is. You’re trying to write a comprehensive plan here to your liking. You haven’t even seen the plan yet.
Mr. Krantz again stated you are trying to change it before it happens.
Mr. Garner stated that is what you do with a draft. We bring it in, look at it decide what we want to keep and what we don’t want to keep. Stating that is what a draft is for, what you want to do is handcuff us before we start.
Mr. Krantz disagreed stating you aren’t going down to two or thee acre; you’re going down to one half acre lots.
Mr. Garner stated there is no proposal to go to one half acre lots.
Joyce Moorhouse stated as she understands it, stating that her husband had been on the Board for nine years and she had followed the township comp. plan and Ordinance closely during that time and she did not believe any numbers belonged in the comprehensive plan, stating the numbers are in the Ordinance.
Joe stated as I understand, we are not trying to overhaul a proposed Ordinance, you just want to address something that you want included in it.
Mr. Krantz stated that was correct, that all he wanted was just to address the fact that these are some of the people’s concerns that he wants included so that the County could see that not everybody wants it.
Joe stated Mr. Krantz had the right to ask to do that but anything that is to be addressed in the proposed Ordinance and Comp Plan would be addressed before a Public Hearing and that the Board has the final decision in the matter.
Mr. Krantz stated that was O.K., that if the percentages of the people don’t want it, that’s fine, if they do want it, that’s fine. At least they have a say in it, it’s fifty/fifty.
John Dibble asked how many people signed the petition.
Joe stated he didn’t know. It was established by Joe that there was confusion over the
numbers the Clerk verified in Dean Johnson’s questionnaire and the numbers on this petition.
Mr. Krantz stated he didn’t have exact numbers but thought the number was in the two hundred range.
Wendell Maltby asked if Mr. Krantz was asking the petition be made part of the plan or was he recommending presenting it to Mr. Johnson to consider including in the comp. plan or are you saying it is to be automatically considered in the plan.
Mr. Krantz stated he would like it presented to Mr. Johnson for his consideration to be included in the comp. plan.
Mr. Jeff Hatfield questioned Mr. Krantz about his differing statements and asked what it was they were demanding.
Mr. Krantz stated they weren’t demanding anything, that they wanted the comp. plan to show what the people are thinking.
Mr. Thesing stated he understood the request that was made was to have the petition and numbers included in the comp. plan, stating this many signatures felt this way and not as an addendum or attachment, just the fact that the petition was signed by this many people.
Joyce stated that anybody who wants to get up a petition has the right to present the petition to the Board and have the petition address the comp plan but what statutes say may be a question.
Joe stated the petition would be up for review by the Planning Commission and the Board as to what is presented at the Public Hearing. He stated it could be voted on tonight either as a recommendation or a mandate to the town board and wanted the people to understand that the board makes the final decisions.
Mr. Krantz wanted an answer to why only one person is allowed to be able to contact Mr. Johnson
Mr. Garner stated this is drawn up in our contract with Mr. Johnson. Mr. Johnson is a busy person and does planning for many other communities. Mr. Johnson asked for this arrangement and the contact person is the Clerk. That is why Wendell couldn’t talk to him.
Steve Emery stated that every time you talk to a lawyer or a planner the bill is going up.
Mr. Rademacher, stated that the way he understands that petition is that there are no variances. If you want to put up a building over one foot over the limit, there are no variances.
Joe stated many variances have been approved by the Board’s in the past but that no variances have ever been made concerning developments and along those lines.
Wendell asked for the motion to be reread.
Joe stated the motion made by John Krantz and seconded by Vince Cockriel is that the petition and the language be considered by the Town Board and by the consultant Dean Johnson, for inclusion into the comprehensive plan. Joe asked for any further discussion, hearing none he called for a vote. Motion carried.
Election results were given. For Supervisor: Dave Garner - 64, John Krantz – 3, Mark Dubbels – 2, Vince Cockreil – 2, John Miller – 2. The following all received one vote each. Allard Moorhouse, Randall Hoppe, Betts Top, Marc Slininger, and Jim Pagel.
For Clerk: Elizabeth Top – 55, Colleen Thompson – 9, Mark Dubbels – 2. Each of the following received one vote each. Doug Felton, Rosie Schluter, Sherrie Vandenheuvel, Patti Blue, Julie Wilcox and Lynda Boganrief.
Joe thanked Dave, Scout Master of Phillippo Scout Reservation for allowing the township to hold their many meetings at their facility stating we have been meeting here since June of last year. Joe stated they have always been accommodating and thanked Dave for the boy scouts cooperation.
Results were given on the town hall questions.
Joyce thanked Colleen Thompson for her seven years of service. Stating Colleen was first appointed in 1999 and then ran for three more two year terms.
Joe was thanked for being moderator.
Ronieda Henderson stated she would not have known about the meeting if it hadn’t been in the shopper and thanked Jack Lucking for placing the ad.
Gary Schmidgall made a motion to adjourn. Joe seconded the motion. Motion carried.