RE: Consider having Annual Standing, Quarterly Joint CC & BLP Meetings

City and BLP staff, please include a copy of this memo in each respective body’s next meeting packet.  Thanks.  Brent Clark

Request to both City Council and the BLP

As a matter of policy, and in the interest of ongoing (and rebuilding) cooperation, I respectfully request both city council and the BLP board to each consider adopting in their annual meeting schedules standing, quarterly joint sessions.

To Friends of Grand Haven

This post is on our blog.  We welcome your comments.  https://friendsofgrandhaven.com.

Rationale for Standing, Quarterly Joint Sessions

Both bodies are elected by the same voter base, but they serve (in some ways) different constituents with the BLP’s expanded ratepayer base.  Both bodies develop strategic plans, but they are not coordinated for synergy.  Both bodies set annual goals and objectives, but they are not aligned by design.  The bodies don’t have built-in communication processes, coordination processes, synergy processes, planning processes, etc.  Yes, members of each body usually attend the other’s meetings and report back to their own body.  Yes, some (or much) of this coordination may be going on at the operations level.  But it’s not seen or heard by the public at the elected, governing level.  Optics are important.  It’s important for the public to see their two elected bodies function and interact in the same forum by design, not by crisis.  Too often, the public imagines these two bodies operate as separate silos, independent of each other – at times even at odds with each other.  Turning the page and starting a new chapter for both city council and the BLP board should include such standing, quarterly joint sessions.

Joint Session held on Sept 09, 2024

The joint meeting of city council and the BLP board showed our two elected bodies can work productively together for the good of the community.  It was mostly tame.  A 6:00 pm meeting at city hall, not high noon at the OK Corral.

Credit is deserved by many:

The Hons. Monetza and Westbrook kept the groups focused on the joint agenda and insisted on proper meeting decorum.  Messrs. Latsch, Shelley, and Gajdos showed they have been, and can continue to work together on the Harbor Island cleanup work.  Both council and board members respected and, for the most part, listened to each other.

The agenda centered around low hanging fruit.  The easy stuff.  Finding a process for the city and BLP to share the more straightforward HI cleanup costs; and to think through how to determine cost allocation for the more difficult ones that will face both bodies further down the road.  BLP and city staff offered to craft a working framework for review, and the two bodies agreed.  A wise decision and a good step forward.

The joint meeting was not all smooth sailing, however.  Also on the agenda was our city downtown snowmelt system.  Specifically, the cost allocation (approx. $1 mil) of new turbines purchased and installed by the BLP to keep producing steam for the snowmelt system previously provided as a cheap heat exchange byproduct by the JB Simms plant before it was shut down.  The BLP is asking city council to revisit their prior agreement to split the $1 mil cost; city $750k / BLP $250k.  Prior agreements, challenged reimbursement billings to Ferrysburg ratepayers, and event histories were expressed.  Along with the discussion bubbled up emotions, grudges, and baggage.  Council and BLP members should be credited for bringing these discussions out into the open at a joint session.  And for using blunt but respectful words.  It beats launching email missiles across each other’s bow.  Mistakes happen.  Judgment errors happen.  Dirty laundry happens.  The meeting chairs were right to reign the discussion back to the agenda at hand.  However, at a future session it’s only fair to the body members and the public to let these issues be aired, in a civil manner.  Let everybody get it out of their system.  But then the body members need to move on, bury the hatchets, and work together in a spirit of doing what is best for the public.  Maybe a way to address those various grievances is for each body to craft the issues in short narratives that are shared with each other as part of their joint session packets so agenda item discussions can focus on pre-thought paper issues, not feelings and people.  It lowers the temperature and helps prevent bruising relationships we need to be healthy for doing the public’s business.

Also, an undercurrent is BLP’s (at least some board members) resentment of city council taking away the BLP’s separate legal counsel.  Previously, the city had its own legal counsel.  The BLP had its own legal counsel.  Now they both look to only one, the city’s legal counsel.  Also, Harbor Island’s cleanup was shifted to the city and its consultant, HDR.  Early on, the BLP led the cleanup effort with its own consultant, Golder.  The BLP (at least some board members) expressed concern it has since been shut out and kept in the dark on information and status.

On the issue of Harbor Island cleanup status and information, the solution is easy.  The law requires all documents and status be in one place.  Harbor Island has a website regarding all aspects of the cleanup.  https://www.renewharborisland.org. If it’s not current, then update it.  If it is current, then study it.  Everything is there (or should be) for all to see.

The separate legal counsel issue is not as straightforward, but also has a solution.  In the end, any head-butting between the city and BLP will come down to the cleanup money for Harbor Island.  Who pays for what, and how much.  Nothing else should cause conflicts of interest between the two bodies.  And, lawyers are the last people in the world you would ever want to decide how to spend your money.  City and BLP staff are already working on cost allocation for the easy cleanup.  And they are working on a framework to address the harder ones down the road.  Give them a chance to prove they can sort it out.  The BLP has (I assume) liability insurance for chemical spills and Hazmat.  I assume the city does too.  If push ever comes to shove and the two bodies can’t see eye-to-eye, there will be plenty of insurance lawyers in the room to fight it out.  Why get ahead of ourselves on an issue that might never be an issue?  If the two bodies ever find an impasse, then let the BLP hire “special counsel” for the particular issue that needs to be resolved.  Whether this is an open wound or picking at a scab, let everyone say their piece, make their point, move on, and let it heal.

Progress was made at the Sept 09, 2024, joint session of city council and the BLP board.  It was a long time coming.  Don’t let it be a one and done.  Don’t meet only in times of crisis.  Low stress meetings help build working relationships, not tear them asunder.  Open issues remain and more will present themselves.  Please, both city council and the BLP board each consider adopting in their annual meeting schedules standing, quarterly joint sessions.  The public will be more informed, and the community better served by them.  Thank you.  Brent Clark