Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Annexation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Saint Charles council denies request to detach two North Main Street properties
Summary
The council voted to deny a petition to detach two properties at 1260 and 1100 North Main Street, following a legal briefing that warned detachment would shrink the village tax base, complicate utility provision and require county/state boundary procedures under MCL 74.6.
The Village of Saint Charles council on a recorded roll call voted to deny a petition that would have removed two parcels — 1260 North Main Street and 1100 North Main Street — from village boundaries.
Village attorney Adam Florie told the council the General Law Village Act provides a mechanism to change municipal boundaries (citing MCL 74.6) but said the village would likely see no benefit from releasing the parcels and could suffer a loss of tax base and utility complications. "From a legal perspective, I would recommend that we deny the request," Florie said.
Council members asked whether the village would still be expected to provide water, sewer and other services to properties no longer in the village. Florie replied that providing utilities to properties outside municipal boundaries would require intergovernmental agreements or urban cooperation agreements and that, absent such arrangements, the village would not routinely provide those services.
Trustees also raised the risk of setting a precedent: detaching one parcel, especially if landlocked or surrounded by village property, could encourage additional requests that cumulatively reduce the village’s taxing authority and strain utility and service provision.
When the council moved to adopt the resolution denying the petition, Trustee Paul Jenderski voted "no." Trustees Christine Newman, Michael Nesbitt, Kathy Harris, Darcy McSwain and Jennifer Rosser Nesbitt voted "yes," and the resolution carried.
What happens next: Florie said the village would represent itself and oppose any appeal to the county board of commissioners. He characterized the likely outcome of an appeal as requiring the applicant to establish "good cause" and said he had not seen persuasive grounds in this petition. The resolution formalizes the village’s decision to retain the two parcels within its boundaries.
