At the beginning of the consent‑agenda discussion on Dec. 17, resident Charles Dawson asked the board to table consent items 5a–5c and pause related actions for the 2026 Pathway Gap Closure Program. Dawson said the board approved design work on May 28, 2025 without providing required notice to affected property owners under MCL 41.288 (section cited in his remarks). He asked the township attorney to seek a declaratory judgment to clarify notification obligations.

Township staff and the board responded in public discussion: engineers and attorneys told the board they were preparing a response and that, in their initial review, the township had followed its longstanding notice process. One township attorney said they did not want to give a legal opinion in public but would address the resident’s request outside the meeting. Board members asked whether state rules or requirements had changed and were told they had not.

Despite Dawson’s request, trustees moved and approved items 5a–5c and the remainder of the consent agenda. The transcript records the board’s vote as passing unanimously. The attorney and engineering staff committed to follow up with the resident and to provide further clarification about notice procedures.

The meeting transcript records the statutory citation as “MCL 41.288 a section 2” in the resident’s remarks and notes the township’s commitment to follow up through counsel. The transcript does not record any declaratory‑judgment filing or a formal finding about noncompliance at the meeting.