Members of the committee heard an air- and water-quality update in which local monitoring gaps and a pending air‑quality permit were identified as near-term issues for public health.

Air‑quality volunteers and advocates told the committee that the city has only one permanent monitor in the fairgrounds area and questioned the placement and the state’s use of a 24‑hour averaging period, which they said can mask shorter spikes in pollution. They also flagged a pending permit application to the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy (EGLE) from a local manufacturer, GPI, that will be available for public comment once EGLE’s review moves to that stage.

Why it matters: committee members and advocates said limited spatial coverage and long averaging periods can leave residents unaware of short-term unhealthy exposures. The committee discussed next steps including drafting a short plan to recommend more targeted monitoring and to track the GPI permit through EGLE’s public‑notice process.

The update was delivered by a member of the local 269 air‑quality team, who said the team submitted comments during the review of a Michigan study and is concerned about where monitors were placed. The presenter said the city’s monitoring footprint currently relies heavily on a single monitor "at the nearest fairground," and argued that "by averaging a 24 hour period, it is not adequate, it's not adequate. It it doesn't protect our citizens and our residents." The presenter added that shorter averaging windows (one to eight hours) show pollutant concentrations that can reach unhealthy levels even when a 24‑hour average remains within federal limits.

Committee members asked whether the group could draft a first step plan they could send as a recommendation to the city. One member offered to help with that work; the presenter said the 269 team would follow up to bring a draft to the committee next month. The presenter also noted an upcoming public event focused on indoor and home air quality on June 25 and pointed attendees to the MI Enviro portal for permit tracking and company enforcement histories.

Separately, a committee member alerted the group that GPI has applied to EGLE to stop one production line and increase output on another, which triggered an EGLE permit review. That member said the permit application had been flagged via EGLE’s notification system and that the committee should watch for a public‑comment window.

The discussion produced no formal motion. Committee members agreed to ask volunteers to draft a short monitoring/response plan to bring back at the next meeting and to circulate the EGLE permit link when it becomes available.

The committee’s air‑quality volunteer also offered to share the 269 team’s written comments and monitoring data with members.