Sterling Heights convened an open forum to ask residents what kinds of properties the city should pursue with funds from the voter-approved Play and Preservation Pathway (PPP) millage and how purchased land should be used.

The meeting began with a presentation on the program’s goals, the city’s tree canopy and land-use context, and an overview of how many vacant properties exist in Sterling Heights (the presentation referenced these data but specific figures were not provided at the forum). Staff then organized four breakout sessions focused on: desired post-purchase uses; types of properties to acquire; criteria for prioritizing purchases; and individual commitments or requests from residents.

“ We’re really looking to get feedback on...what type of properties do residents want us to pursue? ” said Speaker 1, who opened the forum and laid out the questions staff wanted public input on. Speaker 1 listed options ranging from small neighborhood pocket parks to large-acre parcels and restoration projects such as clearing flooded properties and converting them to green space.

A key thread in the discussion was how the city should prioritize acquisitions. Speaker 1 asked attendees to consider proximity to existing city-owned land, tree canopy coverage, and the presence of wetlands or wetland-restoration opportunities when ranking sites. The presentation invited preferences on post-purchase uses — keeping sites as open space, planting native vegetation, adding rain gardens or bioswales, or developing parkland.

“ When you ask for public money, you also should ask for a public opinion, ” said Speaker 2, noting that voters approved the millage and that public input is essential to setting priorities and weighing trade-offs.

A participant who identified as Speaker 3 called the presentation substantive and praised the meeting format for balancing structure and creative input: “ The presentation covered a lot. I also enjoyed having input on how the land was used, how the money was spent. ”

Forum organizers emphasized that sustainability is a shared responsibility and asked residents what commitments they would make and what support they would need from the city to steward newly acquired properties. No formal motions, votes, dollar amounts, or implementation timelines were announced during the session.

The forum captured a range of resident preferences and questions that staff said would inform next steps; the timeline for formal acquisitions, allocations, or council-level decisions was not specified at the meeting.