Good morning. The House Appropriations Committee will come to order. Will the clerk please take attendance? Chair Boland? Here. Representative Smaddick? Here. Green? Here. Arnaud? Here. Kelly? Here. Markkanen? Here. Mueller? Here. Slaw? Present. Van Werkom? Here. Beeson? Here. Horton? Here. Roth? Here. Cabot? Here. Cena? Here. Steele? Here. Robinson? Present. Farhat? Here. O'Neil? Present. Rogers? Here. Stacklaw? Private. Glanville? Yes. Edwards? Here. Mortis? Here. McKinney? Here. Morgan? Here. Price?
Here. Snyder? Here. Longjohn? Here. Madam chair, you have 20 members 29 members present. You do have a quorum. Thank you. Rep Farhat moves to approve the minutes of the April 16 meeting. There being no objections, the meetings are minutes are approved. And rep Morton moves to approve the meeting minutes of April 30. There being no objection, the minutes are approved. So, again, good morning, everybody. Today, the committee will hear testimony on, three property conveyances. House Bill four zero one one sponsored by representative Hoadley, four zero two three sponsored by representative Whitwer,
and forty one thirty five by representative Leitner. We're gonna start with representative Hoadley, and, this is house bill four zero one one, a bill that will convey property in Aranac County. Representative Hoadley, if you and yourself and if you have any other guests, please come forward. So joining you is Kyle Kaminski from the Department of Corrections. Great. When you're ready. Good morning. And, thank you, Chair Bolin and esteemed members of the Appropriations Committee for, taking testimony and and on House Bill 4,011, which would transfer state owned land in Aranac County from the Department of Corrections to
the Department of Technology Management and Budget for the purpose of putting the property up for public sale. Unfortunately, we were not able to get this bill across the finish line, last term. It it did get a hearing. It passed through that committee unanimously. But as we probably remember, lame duck got a little contentious. The Standish maximum There's no objection to that comment. There'll be no follow-up questions on that remark. The Standish Maximum Correctional Facility was a maximum security prison, with five eighty eight bed housing units and another unit comprising 164 beds.
It also has a recreational building with a full gymnasium. The facility was opened in 1990 and was occupied for nineteen years until October 2009 when it was announced the facility would be closed. The facility now sits empty and deserted. My legislation will help ensure our region is able to repurpose the vacant Standish Prison. Michigan is facing a mental health epidemic. Sheriff's citizens and local officials are all aware of the problem. This facility provides a resource for the community, that is severely lacking in in this regard. And,
again, makes that makes that available. I I will comment that Department of Corrections, through the time that the the prison was empty, is they've done a a pretty good job of of minimum maintenance on that with roofing, keeping minimal amounts of heat there. And, of course, mowing the lawn and and and keeping it up up to up to date. This facility, had a series of recent break ins. Can you imagine that? People breaking into a prison. But we've had that just again, it's it's sat there. And and people's curiosities run a little wild,
and they wanna see see what's in there. This is a practical plan that legally transfers the property ownership and ensures clear titles, and protects the buyer's rights. I have with me Kyle Kaminski from MDOC, with me today, and he can, answer any questions on any of the details of, you know, how this conveyance works and, where we're at with DTMB. So if there's, if you have any statements, Kyle, you could you could make them now. Yep. Kyle Kaminski with the MDOC. Just very quickly, the sponsor did a great job explaining the bill, and kind of the history. The sponsor had reached out to the DOC,
last spring slash summer, with a desire to go see the property with many local folks. So we arranged that. And coming out of that, we had some really productive discussions and decided that declaring the property surplus and moving forward with conveyance was, certainly in the best interest of the local community. And so that's something that the department fully supports. Thank you. We have some questions for you. Representative Coon? Thank you, Chair. Rip Holdley, you mentioned mental health. Has there been any interest in this property that you're aware of? Actually, there has. I've been working on this for probably at least three years.
And in the background, trying to create that interest in in that sector, and that was what prompted the tour that, Kyle was gracious enough to allow myself and probably 30 local and surrounding county, shareholders in the mental health space, hospital space, as well as law enforcement. Just trying to bring everybody to the table, to try to formulate a plan. But the reality is is, you know, this goes up for sale. You know, there's no guarantees of what it would become. That would be my vision to see,
it address those those needs for the state of Michigan. And I've worked in the background to try to steer it that way. But, anything that happens with this prison that puts it back in the private sector, of course, puts it back on the property tax rolls for the local community. A facility of this size would clearly create some jobs as well. Thank you, rep. Thank you, chair. Thank you. Rep. Martis. Did you have a question? I don't know. Rep. Morgan. I have the tool or two. Happy to be, mistaken for up artist anytime. I I just wanna express, strong support for this.
I grew up right near the correctional facility there, and and spent a lot of time as a kid, at the, Aranette County Fairgrounds, playing football for a short bed. I know. Big surprise here. I look like a very serious football player, but, fifth grade was different. Okay. The, and and I just wanna say the the impact that that can have on the community, I think, is really positive. Standish is is a great small town, but has had this giant piece of state owned land, just sitting vacant for a long time. So I appreciate my my colleague bringing this forward and,
look forward to supporting this. I think it's really important. My question is just, maybe if you have any sense of of what the community is thinking about this property at this point or if you're just sort of this is the first step to creating other options for its use? Yeah. Thank you for the question and and the support representative. Yeah. This is merely the first first step moving forward, trying to create that interest, you know, in an ever shrinking market of that too, right? And I've also talked with University of Michigan about having a medical center in rural
Michigan that would be a good place to do residencies. Right? I I think the best way to bring, young professionals to our urban areas is to expose them to to life in real real Michigan. Rep Steele. Thank you. Just real quick, if you could explain the process of the transfer of real estate. So just I'm curious. You put it up for sale or you transferred over, and then do you sell it for a dollar figure? And then do you put it on the market? And then do you get a licensed realtor to make sure that it's priced accordingly to what the market can bear?
And does the money go back into the fund of, the prison to be able to, use the funds accordingly? So with the permission of the chair, I'm wondering if we can invite up Neil D'Souza, my colleague from DTMB, because he would actually be more directly involved in that process. Welcome, Neil. Thank you. Good morning. I'll be quick. So there's a process where the agency declares the property surplus, connects with DTMB, and then we run it through a full real estate process. That includes an appraisal after the legislation passes in order to determine the price. Do you put it up, for sale for a fair market price to for so,
like, with a realtor that would so the best price would prevail? Yeah. The state is obligated to take the best offer. And then does the money go back into? Yeah. The money goes back into the general fund, not into the specific, any specific fund. Thank you. Rip Manock? Thank you, madam chair. What is the annual cost for the state of Michigan to maintain this property currently estimated? It's, relatively low. So the Saginaw Correctional Facility serves as the parent facility for, Standish. So there are maintenance crews from Saginaw that are otherwise normally assigned to Saginaw that
go over to Standish. They mow the lawn a couple times a year, just to keep up with that. And then if there's any need for an emergent repair, they would go over and do it. But there's no full time staff, attached to Standish at this point. It's just borrowed staff from Saginaw. Capital improvements, roof, maintenance, that kind of thing? And we any idea what the estimated cost is on an annual basis to keep There is not an ongoing annual cost, but we do periodically have to make some investments. We did make roof investments there, a few years ago just to make sure that the building stayed dry. I don't have that exact dollar amount. I'm happy to get it for you. But we don't have, like,
a annual budget that we put into Standish. Again, it's just kind of minimally maintained so that, it's in a condition where it could be sellable, and, that's our approach with the property. Do we have an idea of how much money the state has spent since 02/2009 since it's been closed? I can certainly, pull together what, you know, those roof projects would be. Quite quite honestly, the state did not spend a lot of money on the property, since it closed. It was kinda held in a mothballed condition, which is our standard approach. Thank you, Kyle. Yep. Thank you. Neil, I have a question for you in regards to, surplus property. So this is considered to be a surplus property for a lot of years.
We have a lot of empty office buildings in Lansing with, the remote work policies. So, what is the process for determining independent of somebody coming forward to convey property to get rid of identified as surplus property, I mean, sooner than later? Yeah. That's a great question. So we work with, the departments. Generally, it's a department driven decision. So in this instance, last year, MDOC reached out to us. They sent a letter that says, we no longer have operational use for this property. We'd like to declare it surplus. Once that begins, it kicks off a process in our real estate team where we assess the property
and start to look at options. That includes contacting other agencies and understanding, would you have an operational use for that. We walk that through the entire process, which includes pursuing legislation, in order to sell the property. Okay. So DTMB has no regular you wait for a department to come forward to declare it as surplus? Sorry. Can you repeat the question? That the DTMB waits for the individual department to come forth and say, hey. We no longer have our use. You're not doing a regular review of state properties? We do, or we do conduct a regular review of properties with states with each each agency.
However, a sale of a property, I think, is sort of a larger conversation. We have conversations in the state facilities administration on what individual agencies are using, in their space. This is, I think, a larger conversation when they say we want to sell an entire building or we no longer have interest in that. I'm happy to follow-up with more information. Mind regular your regular review? We have an annual process. It's in conversation with agencies, where they review with our subject matter experts, design engineers on how they're using their space. So could you please generate for the committee?
Or maybe you have one, we have three properties here. Two of them have to deal with the Department of Corrections, a list of vacant properties that potentially could be considered. Even partially vacant, I think, would be worth looking at. Yes. I can do that. Rep. Markkanen. Thank you, Madam Chair. I was just wondering what the acreage is on this property. How many acres? It's 39 acres. 39? Thank you very much. Representative O'Neil. Poneal, you don't have a question? No. No, ma'am. Alright. Thank you. Alright. Rep Beeson. Thank you for being here in this,
presentation. This is for the director, Kyle. How many properties do we have in your department that are sitting here vacant that are even though that you say there's minimum, cost, every lot, vacant building, vacant business has a cost. How many do you have like this? When it comes to actual prisons, there's there are not many because, most of them, even if they're not being operated as a prison, still serve an operational purpose. So the the sites that, are vacant would be Stanish, which is up for, or impacted by this bill. We also have the Detroit Reentry Center in Detroit Detention Center in the city of
Detroit, which are actually up on the house floor today, rep Farhat bill to convey both of those. Other than that, we closed the Michigan Reformatory in Ionia. So that prison is no longer active, but that is still tied into our Ionia complex. Our Ionia power plant is on that site along with our training and warehouse. So we still use that property even though it's not an active prison. In Kinslow in the Upper Peninsula, we have a facility that we used to call Kinross. The prison part of that property is no longer in use, but that's still our regional hub for Northern Michigan and the UP. So our training academy, and a lot of our regional work happens there. The other prison that's been closed that has not been surplus is the Florence Crane
Correctional Facility that's located in Coldwater, that's largely demolished at this point. It sits directly adjacent to the, Lakeland Correctional Facility, which is an active facility. So we are holding that property because redevelopment, from our perspective, would be problematic because it it shares a significant fence line with a active prison. So, we will, we'll certainly work with our colleagues at DTMB. We'll we'll pull together a full list of all of our closed properties, but most have actually been conveyed over the last several years. We're not sitting on a significant property portfolio at this point. And do you have any vacant acres that are not something sitting on like maybe
potential? We do. We have some vacant land in Jackson. In fact, fact, there'll be a bill up for a portion of that later today. We have some vacant land in Marquette. Mostly, that ends up getting leased off to local farmers, and they use it just as either farmland or grazing land. So we do have some agreements in a couple of communities for smaller parcels that are leased. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Rep. Glanville. Thank you, madam chair. I know sometimes our little telephone game gets a little mixed up. But, I I was curious if there are any restrictions, related to this type type of land conveyance,
in terms of what might be developed there. The bill is structured for a fair market value sale. There's no restrictions if someone pays fair market value. There's an option for local sales, which would have a restriction on, government purposes, specifically, like, corrections, park, public health care, things like that. So if I were doing some kind of, advanced manufacturing or, energy efficiency work, I could purchase that property? That would then fall under the jurisdiction of the local government, on whatever their zoning allowance would be for that.
So it would have to work through local government like any other land purchase for a particular use. Oh, I so that's a local rights issue kind of thing? Yes. Okay. Yes. It's how it's owned. And while I've got the mic, one correction. I know you've got a lot of properties. This parcel itself is actually 78 acres, roughly 78 acres. Hi. Okay. Thank you very much for being here and answering our questions. And, we are going to move ahead. Next up will be representative, Jocelyn Bundy from representative Witwer's office and Neil D'Souza again from DTMB,
on representative Witwer's bill 4,023, another property conveyance in Eaton County. Welcome. If you could please give us an overview of the request. Good morning, madam chair, and thank you, members of the House Appropriations Committee. My name is Josie Bundy, and I am the legislative director for state rep Angela Whitver. I'm thankful for the opportunity state administrative board on behalf of the state to convey by quick claim deed state owned property located in Eaton County that is currently under the jurisdiction of DTMD to a business within our district. The property is a 0.29
acre parcel of land in Windsor Township that is fully surrounded by the state of Michigan and is adjacent to the constituent business. The business unknowingly built onto this 0.29 acre of land. So currently, DTMB has issued a rental agreement to govern the relationship between the state and the business. However, the parcel has been declared surplus by DTMB, and through this legislation, the department hopes to convey the property to the business for fair market value. This would prevent DTMB from having to take regulatory action against the business and also makes it easier should the business decide to sell the property,
leaving no further issues for the state of Michigan. I'd like to thank you again for, your consideration of this legislation, and I have Neil with me from DTNB if you have any questions about the process or the property itself. Thank you. Thank you. So my understanding in your testimony is that this appears to be an encroachment of this building on state property, and you're trying to correct the property records? Yeah. That's exactly what happened. So there's a couple warehouses in the area. The neighboring business built encroached onto the property. This is our attempt to not take regulatory action and require the business to tear
down their building and instead, convey a small piece so they can continue to operate. Okay. Thank you. Committee members, are there any questions? Rep Steele. Just going back to the appraisal process, is, was this appraised? And, and then do you have an outside appraisal, or do you have internal appraisals? And can you share with what the cost was for the transfer, and have you already done the survey and split? Couple of questions in there. So, this is a uniquely shaped strip of property that is surrounded by state owned and this neighboring business's land. We're not expecting an incredibly high appraisal.
We don't conduct the appraisal until after the legislation is in law. We conduct with a an outside private appraiser to, pinpoint the actual price. Split it? Have you split the property yet for off from the state land? Yes. Yep. Okay. Seeing no other questions, thank you very much for your testimony today. Appreciate that. And, seeing no further questions, we're gonna conclude our hearing with representative Leitner to discuss her bill regarding a conveyance in Jackson County. Joining rep Leitner will be Mike Overton, Jackson County administrator Ed Saplala from Verity.
Did I say that right? And, also Neil, having kept his seat there from DTMB. Rep Leitner, if you'd like to give us an overview. Thank you, madam chair and members of the committee. Short and sweet. I'm gonna bullet point this. This property is a landfill. So the county owns part of it right now, and the state owns the other part of it. This basically would take the burden off the state, allow the county to maintain, the environmental cleanup that they always have to do every year. Right now, it's about $150,000 on behalf of the county to maintain this property and take care of the leachate
in there in the in the ground. So, what this bill does is conveys the count or state portion over to the county. The county anticipates building a wastewater treatment facility on-site. That way, long term, it'll actually save money and mitigate any transportation costs. Thank you. Do any of your guests have anything else to add? I would just add that, we're not just any wastewater treatment plant. It's a reverse osmosis, state of the art, and it's gonna be powered by solar power. We put that on top of the landfill,
some of the solar array. So I have a question about the wastewater treatment plant. And that is, who's going to pay for that? And do you have the money to pay for it? We do. We borrowed $2,100,000 about two years ago, which lends to the urgency to kind of move us forward because one more year of that loan out there without us expending the money, we start to run into questions about are we doing arbitrage and things like that. So we're looking forward to move forward on that. And how it's paid for, generally, we spend just over $100,000
a year in transportation costs. We transport about 10,000 gallons per week, depends on the rain, of leachate, very nasty water, to Inkster. So this will forego that and our plant there will process that water on-site. Okay. And then the ongoing cost for the operations of the wastewater treatment plant, what is the revenue stream to pay for that? Actually, it's the same it is right now, the County General Fund. Okay. Thank you. Do you have anything to add, sir? No, ma'am. Okay. Rep. Arnau. Thank you, miss madam chair. I just wanted to confirm.
You said that the, county will is responsible for the cleanup after if since it's a landfill, if there's any kind of cleanup, the county will assume that responsibility. Yeah. They do it right now. The problem is because it's all one it's basically all one big parcel. It's like 300 acres altogether. The county owns part of it. The state owns part of it. But we're the problem is is it's all fenced in already. So it's all one big fenced in restricted area, but the county already maintains the leachate from the landfill already.
And basically, what this does is it eliminates the need to have a contract every so many years with the state and the understanding that we can go on to the state land to actually take care of the environmental cleanup. Okay. Seeing no other questions, Kyle Kaminski, you put in a card. You're good? Okay. Alright. Hearing no, other having no other questions and seeing no further business to come before the committee, Representative Mueller moves to excuse the absent members, which I actually don't think we have any absent members, so that's nice. So, again, thank you, everybody. And seeing no business to come before the additional business come before the committee,
the meeting is adjourned.