Grosse Ile board reviews draft toll-bridge commission ordinance; directs staff to revise membership, add township manager liaison

Grosse Ile Township leaders spent the Feb. 24 study session reviewing a draft ordinance to create a Toll Bridge Commission, asking the authors to clarify membership, voting rights and administrative support and to add explicit language that the commission should liaise with the township manager.

The discussion began after township manager Derek introduced the draft prepared by municipal attorney Kristen as “just a real rough draft to start somewhere,” and asked the board for feedback. The draft places the proposed commission in chapter 67, like other township commissions, and outlines membership, responsibilities and reporting.

Board members and staff focused on three recurring issues: whether the finance director and the contracted civil engineer should be voting members, where bridge-engineering expertise will come from, and whether the commission should be required to coordinate with the township manager. Several trustees favored a five‑member voting body composed of elected trustees and three township residents, with the finance director and the civil engineer serving as non‑voting, advisory members so they can provide technical and financial guidance without becoming voting township employees on the commission.

“Having the finance director and the engineer...in an advisory capacity, to make sure that they can be part of the conversation, but they might not necessarily take place in the votes,” Derek said during the discussion.

Members expressed concern that the board still needs ready access to bridge‑specific engineering expertise. Trustee Bill suggested recruiting a bridge engineer with relevant credentials or having a bridge engineering firm available as a consultant so the commission’s technical judgments would be defensible in the future. Several board members said they expect consultants such as H&H (Haggerty and Harmon) to be available for formal engineering work regardless of whether an engineer serves on the commission.

On administrative support, trustees stressed that commissions succeed when staff provide ongoing assistance. Multiple speakers recommended adding a clear line requiring the commission to liaise with the township manager to ensure operational coordination, packets and budget input. Trustee Mark specifically proposed wording: that “the commission shall be charged with working with the township manager,” a change the board agreed to direct staff to add.

Board members also discussed procurement and spending authority for commission activity. The township’s current purchasing policies already contain emergency purchase provisions and authority for the township manager to act in urgent situations and later certify expenditures to the board; trustees asked staff to clarify a recommended spending threshold for the commission and how emergency repairs would be handled.

The board did not adopt the ordinance at the study session. Instead, Derek and Supervisor Joe agreed to incorporate the board’s feedback — including (a) adding explicit liaison language for the township manager, (b) making the finance director and contracted civil engineer advisory (non‑voting) members while keeping a five‑member voting body, and (c) drafting suggested language on spending limits and emergency procedures — and return with a revised draft for review.

Public comment reinforced the desire for citizen oversight and transparent reporting. Resident Greg Karmeson praised creating a citizens’ oversight body for the toll bridge and suggested the commission present an annual report on toll enterprise revenues and expenditures for broader transparency. Karmeson also urged early outreach and advertising for bridge‑pass distribution to avoid last‑minute demand spikes.

The board closed the study session and moved into the regular meeting to take separate votes on engineering procurements and other Department of Public Services items.