Who Gets the last 2 Liquor Licenses and at What Cost?

Hi All,
On Monday, July 12, 2015 @ 7 pm  the following will be an AGENDA ITEM at the Board of Trustees meeting. 

The problem with this "agenda item" is there will be some "discussion" ( pre-determined for the most part)  and this agenda item will have a VOTE... that will change how and to whom ... a liquor license is awarded.... well... keep reading...  Show up at the meeting if you are a business owner or a potential owner/investor needing one of these liquor licenses.

It appears that this new criteria is just for the two available:   CLASS C and TAVERN QUOTA LIQUOR LICENSES.
Thinking out loud:  what IF our population increases and more licenses become available?  Do they need to meet these new criteria?
More thinking.  What if an existing establishment closes and the existing license either goes back to the Township or is sold... must the new owner of that license meet these new criteria in this resolution?

FYI:

Class C: On Premise license to serve Beer, Wine, and Liquor. Issued by the local governmental unit according to population
Tavern: On Premise license to serve Beer & Wine Issued by local governmental unit according to population

    

It always amazes me how the Township RESOLUTIONS  are pre-written and not a result of the Township Board and Citizens discussion at a public meeting.
Somehow, study sessions took place with no public notice... or groups of people met below the number required to have open meetings and hashed all this out.  Obviously, the township had to pay lawyers to write this up...and I wonder if they also participated in the decision making?  Will the Township tell the taxpayers when and how this issue came up... and who participated in writing the Resolution? 

The three minutes at the podium for comment/discussion  by the citizens mean nothing.  Often the Trustees seem to be checking their phones or laughing among themselves versus actually paying attention to what may be said. Then, Supervisor Savoie chooses what he wishes to respond to... and not other comments.  He always has the last comment and no citizen follow up is permitted. 

Good grief... just recently, an elderly man with an oxygen tank was speaking out of turn for the second time... and Supervisor Savoie had the elderly man escorted out of the meeting by an ARMED policeman. If the Township would follow Roberts Rules of Order, maybe some issues could actually be heard properly. 
 
My second area of concern deals with WHY is this resolution NEEDED NOW?  

Let's speculate.
Supervisor Leo Savoie basically appointed himself to be part of the 3 person committee ( Joint Development Council)  planning the property shared with the City of Pontiac on Telegraph Road...   AKA the failed Bloomfield Park property. That acreage is reported to be going out of bankruptcy and a proposal to develop by Redico and others was on the table at the April 16, 2015 meeting (go to the link in this paragraph and click on Council Packets).  Unfortunately, any May or June meeting held does not have any minutes posted.  What does Savoie know from those meetings?  Are there businesses willing to come to this area IF..... they get a liquor license?  Is there a question as to how can Savoie keep the TWO remaining liquor licenses available for those potential establishments?
Coming up:  NEXT MEETING of the Joint Development Council:  

Let's speculate some more.
There is property in the northeast section of the township that is now vacant and in need of investors.
South Boulevard/ Opdyke/ Squirrel roads...  A really nice establishment with a liquor license would most likely be welcomed by the taxpayers in that area.  But could a new restaurant AFFORD the new criteria?  It is not as high a traffic location as Telegraph Road.  The question is..  should this Township Board make decisions that improve ALL SECTIONS of the Township?   Will this resolution eliminate some areas for redevelopment?  How many liquor establishments do we need on Telegraph Rd?

Well, let's read the township's predetermined....  RESOLUTION.  See Below.

The Resolution will adopt ADDITIONAL CRITERIA ....above and beyond what all the existing liquor license holders in the township needed when they got their permit.  The existing businesses are exempt from meeting the new additional criteria.

1.  Money is one new criteria.

2.  Seating capacity is another new criteria.  Must have 60 or more seats.

3.  Job creation is also required by the applicant.

4.  Capital investment for new or redeveloped property... a mere $1.5 million.

5.  Capital investment for existing business... why a "preferred minimum" of $250,000 already spent over the past 5 years combined with job increases.

6.  Gambling will not be allowed or permitted. 

Thinking out loud.....What if the facility is to be used by a charity that wants to hold special "gambling" events?  Will that be denied?   Will existing liquor license holders be able to hold "gambling" events for charities?

7.  Keep reading the "Resolution" below for MORE CRITERIA.  I would love to know who sat around thinking all this up. 

8.  FYI...I wanted to read the Ordinance referenced in the resolution.. but when I did a SEARCH of the township website.. this is what appeared:
 "no pages contain the words:  zoning ordinance 569"   I'm sure it is SOMEWHERE... but it would be nice if the document was included in the board packet.  Maybe here:https://www.municode.com/library/mi/bloomfield_charter_township,_%28oakland_co.%29/codes/code_of_ordinances

In my opinion, if you are CHANGING an ordinance... it would nice to see the ORIGINAL... and exactly HOW it will be worded in the future. 

9.  Have questions or need answers from the Township?  Sorry... they voted themselves a 4 day work week... they don't work on Friday.  You'll have to wait until Monday.... or speak up and help get the Township get back to a 5 day work week... like the rest of us...

Secrets or Lack of Transparency at Bl. Twp.?

Hi All,
This morning I received the Bloomfield Township E-News ... sent minutes after midnight... informing me in a side column blurb, that the Township offices are CLOSED TODAY.... THURSDAY, July 2 for the 4th of July holiday.  There was and is no notice on the home page of the Township website giving any forewarning.    http://www.bloomfieldtwp.org/

WHAT??   Friday, July 3,  is the Federal Holiday day off,  but since the Township doesn't work 5 days a week,  they decide they are ENTITLED to a Thursday vacation day??

It is PAST TIME for the taxpayers to INSIST that the township government operates on a 5 DAY WORK WEEK.

Here is what Greg Kowalski, wrote:

Bloomfield Township offices will be closed Thursday, July 2, in honor of the Fourth of July holiday. The Senior Center will be closed Friday, July 3, and Saturday, July 4.
In addition, the Bloomfield Township Public Library will be closed Saturday, July 4. The library will reopen at noon on Sunday, July 5.

Greg Kowalski's Bloomfield Township E-News never really tells us about the Township government news. Once again, he wrote about the Woodward Cruise happening in August.  He wrote about the Bloomfield Hills school construction and about a Charity organization.  He is not at The Eccentric newspaper anymore.

Why is closing government offices on a Thursday....a secret?  Or is it just plain lack of transparency? Please read my OTHER "secrets or lack of transparency" issues below.

MY:   "Hi All, MARCIA's News" about our Twp. government....maybe not news...but rumors and opinions  :)

1.  Nepotism:  is the "family and friends" hiring system at the township, as I call it.  Leo Savoie says it is not a problem.  The problem is that jobs are not posted for the public in many ways.  Despite calls for job postings to be more transparent,  often family and friends are getting the jobs.   Rumor has it that the Fire Chief now has his son as an employee.  Did Supervisor Savoie approve that hiring?  If so, why didn't he say anything at the special study session  (Thurs., May 28, 2015 @ 8 am) when the nepotism question was raised?  Is it to keep the public from knowing what is really going on at the Township?

How open and truthful was the township when speaking to Lisa Brody when she was gathering ,information for her article on nepotism?  See:  http://www.downtownpublications.com/Articles-features-c-2015-06-25-220857.112113-Government-nepotism.html

Children/spouses/ relatives/friends of employees may get the summer positions or full time/part time positions somewhere in the township. Even how Greg Kowalski got his job should be called in question as to where, when and how the job he was hired to do was posted. 

The nepotism policy of the township should be changed and more importantly, the JOB POSTING and hiring policy should be reformed.

2.  Who is Lewis G. Bender, PhD and why is he interviewing trustees and others?
See his webpage:  http://lewbender.com
Seems one of his specialties is Workplace Conflict. 

Did Supervisor Savoie contact him and hire him to do something at the Township?  Did Savoie do this with the APPROVAL of the Board?  If so, at what PUBLIC meeting was this discussed?  Is this just another step in Savoie's attempt to change the job description and pay for the job of Treasurer or Clerk before the coming 2016 election cycle?

On April 13, 2015 this was a very controversial agenda item:


What is the mission for Dr. Bender?  Rumor has it that Dr. Bender  also met with Department Heads?  Why?  Who is left out of some meetings and why?   

What about the PUBLIC?  We should know what is going on behind closed doors.  Having small meetings with a hired person, asking questions presumably about how the township government is working and how the elected and hired personnel work together.... is a problem...especially when we, and perhaps some of them being interviewed, don't know the PURPOSE of the hiring of this man.

3.  Contract RAISES... were given to ALL employees 4x since 2011, without any apparent negotiation committee in place or used.  The special six year contract that was signed in 2011 prior to former Supervisor David Payne's "retirement" (aka as quit in the middle of his elected term) had wage openers in 2013 and 2015.  In both cases, ALL employees, not just the ones with the contract, were given 2% raises for 2013 and another 2% for 2014  and then again 2% raise for 2015 and 2% more for 2016.  That included raises for the elected officials... Supervisor, Treasurer, Clerk.  Is that how TOWNSHIP government works?  They suggest their own raise and vote on it?

When I asked Supervisor Savoie about where that money in the budget is coming from for the 2% raises times 4, he indicated that property values are increasing and that the employees had wage freezes in prior years.  WELL, yes, there was a reported wage freeze, but step and longevity increases and promotional raises, etc. continued per the contract.

Also, please do NOT FORGET, that in February 2010, the township asked the taxpayers for a 1.3 ten year millage to KEEP THE STATUS QUO.  The economy was hurting for everyone.  But this ten year millage was intended to be TEMPORARY.  The township collects $4 million plus from this "temporary millage" every year.. for ten years. This was to make up for lost revenue.  Now, the money is being used to increase wages and other benefits and more hiring of employees.

4.  New Contract Language   Have any talks or ideas or suggestions been tossed about at the township?  Maybe.   Rumor has it that the number of years worked at the township may be LOWERED  to be able to collect pensions and health benefits.  Is that a negotiable item/ or will it just be an "update" in an employee handbook?    Rumor has it that the retiree health benefits are/were  "adjusted" so living in upstate Michigan or other places, participants would be able to remain  "in network"   so extra fees and costs would not be paid by the retiree.  Guess who pays?  

The EXISTING employee contracts should be part of public record that does NOT need to be FOIA.  WE, the taxpayers, should know not only WHO is hired, but under what conditions and at what price.  We should also know who in those contracts are "perked" with vehicles...car maintenance...car insurance..gasoline..etc. 

Did you know that the township pays the retiree health benefits each year/ as billed?   That is rather misleading.  There are over 200 current retirees.  We can lay off employees to save money, but we can't lay off retirees.  That money has to keep being spent each and every year...until every retiree and/or their beneficiaries are dead.  Is this a negotiable item in the next contract?  When will the township explain the potential REAL liability of retiree health insurance over the future decades? 

5.  Much more to tell... to think about...  to reveal...  wish more people in the township would pay attention to what is going on.   Read my archived blogs going back to 2011.  Many of the issues remain today.

6.  PLEASE CONSIDER placing YOUR NAME on the 2016 ballot.  Please be qualified to perform the job you are considering.   Be prepared to have that decision made PRIOR to May 1, 2016  in order to get your name on the August primary ballot.

Marcia