Joseph Baker

Key discussions and actions during the meeting included the adoption of the agenda with amendments concerning the resignation of D. Rochow and the appointment of two Election Commissioners. The Board unanimously approved the job description for the Building Official. Subsequent motions approved the job description for the Building Inspector, Ordinance Administrator, and Zoning & Code Enforcement. The Board also approved the hiring of C. Kreger for this combined role, contingent upon licensure, and formally accepted the resignation of D. Rochow effective January 13, 2026. Finally, A. Kloha and E. Arnold were appointed as Election Commissioners.

The meeting agenda was adopted with modifications, including moving the Building Department Official item and removing a parking lot request. The Board approved the payment of bills totaling $57,465.90. Ordinance 67-T, rezoning a 4.785-acre parcel from Agricultural (AG) to General Business District (C), underwent its second reading and adoption. Firefighters were recognized for a successful resuscitation effort following a cardiac arrest incident. The Board approved the hiring of an interim building official and addressed a property request from an adjacent property owner, granting permission to purchase a parcel with a restrictive covenant ensuring it remains tied to the primary residence. Authorization was given to sign a letter to the Governor regarding reimbursement for Special Elections costs. The resignation of a Chief Baker was accepted, and a leave of absence for another Chief was approved. The Board also approved a revised yearly pay scale, accepted the resignation of the Deputy Clerk, authorized the Deputy Clerk job description and appointment process, approved a hall refund request, and added the new pay schedule to the Personnel Policy as an appendix.

The meeting included a public input session. A public hearing was held regarding the amending of the special assessment roll, during which no public comment was offered, leading to the approval of spreading the tax roll for the special assessment on trash pickup service. The board also approved the 2025 General Fund budget adjustments, though this decision was met with dissenting votes. Furthermore, the board approved the DWS Annual REU review concerning the M1, M2, MK, and MW billing districts.

The meeting addressed multiple variances for property 09-100-037-300-1 at 5472 Casemier Road concerning the construction of a new garage. Key discussions included variances for the garage's height (17 ft peak, 12 ft sidewall) and setbacks, as the structure's height exceeded that of the existing, older house. The board also considered a variance request related to the house's existing, non-conforming south sideyard setback (8.5 ft required 10 ft total sideyard setback). The approval for the garage construction was conditioned upon the main house becoming livable (expected by spring) and receiving a certificate of occupancy concurrently with the garage. The board also discussed utility updates, noting the removal of the old garage and a metal shed, and awaiting Consumers Energy approval for new dual meters for the house and garage. A three-foot variance for the south property line setback on the existing house was approved due to the house being non-compliant since its construction over 70 years ago.

The Special Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting addressed several variance requests and procedural items. Key discussions included a request from Pamela Blanchett for front yard and rear yard setback variances for a proposed shed; the Board ultimately denied both variances, citing that no hardship was found and alternative placements existed. Consideration for Bill Waterman's request for front yard and side yard setback variances for an accessory building was tabled pending submission of revised drawings and addressing the condition of the existing home. A side yard setback variance request from Daniel Short to allow for the attachment of a breezeway and garage was approved after the Board determined that a 5-foot variance from the 20-foot minimum setback was justified by hardship related to adjacent property ownership and structure placement. Members also requested the preparation of an appendix for their Ordinance books for the next meeting.