Minutes - Planning Commission|





JULY 11, 2022

6:30 P.M.

Orr opened the meeting at 6:30 p.m. with the Pledge of Allegiance.


Orr, Barrett, Hoffman, Henry, Howard and Tuttle.


ABSENT: Miller.


Neil Erickson, Building Inspector, George Jackson, Treasurer and Greg Stremer, Township Attorney.



    Barrett motioned to approve the agenda as presented supported by Henry.

    Motion Carried.


    1. Medical Marijuana Act


    Barrett: Discussion regarding Annual Inspections.


    Greg Stremer, Township Attorney: If you recommend having an Annual Inspection, then it needs to be done within a certain time frame. Complaint basis or inspection. Operate within ordinance.


    Barrett: What is the standard that the Planning Commission should use to start the revocation process? Being in theory, if there was no inspections but we had individuals that came and complained to us because the administration or the staff, I know I have they know they have a growing operation. I know because they came here and you gave them a Special Exemption Use for Home Occupation so they are approved. Is that enough for the Planning Commission to make a decision?


    Stremer: Yes, that is what they are going to have to do. We look to what uses and conditions you put on it.




    Barrett: Discussion regarding flow of enforcement for non-compliance.


    Stremer: The Revocation Process would be to put a notice in the newspaper, individual plead case and conditions of usage. If it passes, they would need an Annual Inspection. Commercial operators operating as non-commercial. Complaint versus inspections. Put into a report for findings. Revocation annually. Review Site Plan and water usage. Notice of opportunity to be heard before permit is revoked. Municipal, Civil Infraction, District Court, corrective and fine.

    Need a record of evidence.


    Barrett: Can the Planning Commission special approval linked to a specific rental name the lease agreement as an allowed use? Lease approval with tenant. Reasonable to the common man.


    Erickson: Deserves inspections, water testing. Harmful to neighbors. Two to three years water testing. Private nuisance one to two people. Public nuisance harmful to public. Annual fee schedule, policy and enforcement. Planning Commission does not.


    Hoffman: Question regarding contaminated water.


    Erickson: Proof of well contamination. EPA involvement.


    Jackson: Backflow preventers should be required and charged back to applicant

    based on the Property Management Code regulation.


    Sherry Simpson: We are having problems with the water pressure dropping significantly.


    Stremer: Water distribution needs be addressed in the Site Plan: where are you drawing the water from?


Stremer: Start with the St. Clair County Health Department. We are pre-emptive against farming. USDA doesn’t allow farming for Marijuana. Incomplete application, right to deny or postpone with the benefit of the double. Board does not have to make a decision.




Nelson: Is the reason we are having issues with where the inspections are is it because we put it in the Home Occupation, which is in the Zoning Ordinance as far as where General Law or Zoning Inspections is where it falls under?


Stremer: The biggest difference with Zoning is that if there is a prior existing non-conforming use. They existed before hand and it is in a Zoning Ordinance. They get to raise that to say, I was here before you passed the ordinance. If it is a Regulatory Ordinance, it doesn’t matter. Once you regulate it, everybody has to comply with that.


Nelson: As far as the fees, according to the state, the people that are growing, can we charge them for yearly inspections?


Stremer: Yes we can. We can set it up to $5,000.00.


Nelson: Is there limitations of dispensaries as far as feet from schools, day care, etc.?


Stremer: Commercial Zoning draws litigation distance. Not constitutionally allowed.


Nancy Crowe: Yearly Inspections keep people more honest.


Stremer: Yes it does.


Orr: Thank you Mr. Stremer for coming to the meeting tonight.


Barrett: Are we still having the Public Hearing on the July 26th at 6:30 p.m.?


Carwyn: Yes.


Stremer: If you need me to come to the Public Hearing, I’m glad to.


Barrett: Ms. Carwyn, do you know what the timeline is now when it involves the county. Is the policy still the Township Board waits for the Metro decision before they act on it?




Nelson: Is the Public Hearing based on what ordinance? Will the public get to see that ordinance before the Public Hearing?


Erickson: It will be on our website.




Tuttle: I think that we should do yearly inspections.


    Orr: Do we want Mr. Stremer to attend the next meeting?


Barrett: Accessory Buildings, page four Definition (A. a) dwelling, page six, number two, approved facility, “dwelling” or in attached Access Structure.

Page three, number four, incidental for residential use. Excludes accessary dwellings. Signage, other than permitted use. Number seven, no signage.




Stremer: I will clean up the language in it.





    Henry motioned to adjourn the meeting at 7:54 p.m. supported by Tuttle.

Motion Carried.


Meeting adjourned at 7:54 p.m.


Submitted by William Orr, Chairman



Comments are closed.

Close Search Window