Page 2 — Thursday, October 7, 2021 — The Hastings Banner
Chamber launching broadband connectivity survey
Millions of Americans across the country
lack access to reliable, high-speed internet
connections. According to the U.S. Census
Bureau as of January, at least 3.8 million
households with school-aged children report-
ed infrequent or no access to the internet from
their homes.
Officials with the Barry County Chamber
and Economic Development Alliance are
committed to expanding access to broadband
service for homes and businesses throughout
local communities.
“Reliable and accessible broadband access
is critically important in our ever-connected
world,” Jennifer Heinzman, president/CEO at
Barry County Chamber and Economic
Development Alliance, said in a Sept. 27
press release. “Our goal is to expand accessfor broadband service to all homes and busi-
nesses in Barry County.”
In order to identify and prioritize the
needs, the chamber and EDA staff have
announced a partnership with Chicago-based
consulting firm Antero Group to develop a
comprehensive assessment for strategic
expansion of broadband throughout the coun-
ty for overall improved internet access.In support of this coordinated effort, offi-
cials have launched a set of surveys individu-
ally designed for households and businesses
and are asking the public to take a few min-
utes to complete the surveys.
The results of these surveys will be used to
determine the demand for internet service and
support efforts to address gaps in services
throughout Barry County. Responses are beingcollected through Oct. 30. Responses are lim-
ited to one survey per home or business.
The home survey can be found at https://
bit.ly/BCMIhomebroadband.
Businesses can access the survey by visit-
ing https://bit.ly/BCMIbizbroadband.
All data collected will remain strictly con-
fidential and will solely be used to identify
critical eligible broadband expansion areas.Mercy no longer
seeking subsidy for
ambulance services
Benjamin Simon
Staff Writer
Mercy Ambulance Service Hastings
Division will continue providing emergent
and non-emergent transportation for the
BIRCH Rural Fire Association and City of
Hastings at no cost, Mercy Director/
Treasurer Rodney Palmer announced at last
Wednesday’s joint meeting.
The news came as a surprise to represen-
tatives from the City of Hastings and
BIRCH, which includes Baltimore, Irving,
Rutland, Carlton and Hastings townships.
For nearly 45 years, Mercy did not
charge for its services. But in early
August, the ambulance service expressed
the need for additional funding to contin-
ue operating. With their contract set to
expire in June 2022, Mercy presented a
new five-year agreement to BIRCH and
the City of Hastings that would have
started at $118,602, followed by a 3 per-
cent increase after the second year. The
contract would have ended at $129,600 in
2026-27.
“Cost of operation, medical and mental
health incidents have changed and the cur-
rent business model is not financially, or
logistically possible,” Palmer wrote in a
statement. “Looking down the road for the
next several years a reasonable amount of
subsidy is necessary to offset the rise of
such costs.”
After the state budget was signed by Gov.
Gretchen Whitmer Sept. 29, the need for
additional funding has disappeared, Palmer
said. With the help of the federal govern-
ment, EMS services across the state will
receive $50 million. Most notably for
Mercy, the budget earmarked $12.9 million
for Medicaid reimbursements.When an ambulance is called, the user
can pay though personal insurance,
Medicare, Medicaid or out of pocket. If
Mercy charged $1,000 for an ambulance
run, Palmer said, Medicare paid about $
to $600, with Mercy covering the rest of the
cost
Medicaid, on the other, only paid about
$200. At least 30 percent of callers in the
BIRCH and City of Hastings area use
Medicaid, Palmer said. As a result, Mercy
was having to pay more money on a large
portion of their trips.
With the passage of the new budget,
Mercy will receive the same payout from
Medicare and Medicaid, meaning the ambu-
lance service no longer needs the previously
requested subsidy.
“We think that this is a tremendous thing
because now we can continue to be
free-standing and continue to offer ser-
vices,” Palmer said during the meeting.
In the coming months, Palmer plans to
distribute an updated contract. There are
still some uncertainties – such as how long
the Medicaid reimbursement funds will last,
given that the budget changes every year.
But for the City of Hastings and BIRCH,
the news is cause for celebration. Hastings
Mayor David Tossava said the city did not
have money budgeted for Mercy.
“I think it’s great because we were going
to have to come up with a bunch of money,”
he said in an interview with the Banner.
During the meeting, Hastings Charter
Township Supervisor Jim Brown also
expressed excitement.
“We were all prepared to pay our fair
share,” he said. “There was no problem
there. But now we can really take that
money and do something else with it.”Planning commission considering
additional housing units in Hastings
Benjamin Simon
Staff Writer
People want to move to the city of Hastings.
But there’s a problem. The city doesn’t have
enough housing to accommodate more people.
“Housing is critical job one for the future
planning of the City of Hastings,” Community
Development Director Dan King said in an
interview after Monday night’s planning com-
mission meeting.
That’s why, for the past seven or eight
months, the planning commission has designat-
ed a housing committee to explore the possibil-
ity of expanding access to housing in the city.
During the meeting, members of the com-
mittee – which included King, City Manager
Sarah Moyer-Cale, Chairman Dave Hatfield,
Mayor David Tossava, Mayor Pro Tem John
Resseguie and McKenna Planning Consultant
Rebecca Harvey, presented their findings.
They took no action, but instead, hosted a
discussion and solicited feedback from people
on the commission who were not a part of the
committee.
The problem of housing is not unique to
Hastings, Harvey said. Across the state, com-
munities are facing housing shortages due to the
high cost of building new homes. As a result,
they are trying to find other ways to increase the
number of places where people can live.
The committee’s research focused on add-
ing two specific types of housing in the city:
accessory dwelling units and two-family
dwelling units.
“They’re the same in the sense that you’re
using two existing housing ideas to create
more housing,” Harvey said during the meet-
ing. “So, it’s really coming at it from that
perspective, rather than going out and just
expecting new development in open areas. It’s
increasing housing opportunities in existing
neighborhoods.”
But, in almost every other way, Harvey
said, the two types of housing are different.
Accessory dwelling units would allow land-
owners with a single-family home to rent outaccessory property, such as garages, carriages,
attics or basements. Language in the commit-
tee report defines ADUs as “a secondary hous-
ing unit that occupies the same structure or lot
as the principal single-family dwelling.” It
must use the same features of the principal
home, including utilities and a driveway.
Landowners could only have one ADU per
lot. They would also need to prove that a lot is
large enough to accommodate another occu-
pant. If a lot is deemed nonconforming with
the design guidelines, property owners would
have the opportunity to apply for a special
land use permit to fit within the guidelines.
“Your lot has to be big enough for a home,
and it’s got to have the home operating law-
fully on there for you to have this extra oppor-
tunity for another home,” Harvey said.
The city allowed ADUs until about 15
years ago, when they were deemed unlawful,
King said. The hope is to “reactivate” the
housing type.
Two-family dwelling units, on the other
hand, look noticeably different than ADUs,
Harvey said. There are no size limitations, and
they don’t share the same utilities. While the
ADUs are supposed to be a part of the princi-
pal unit, two-family dwellings are not.
“A two-family dwelling does not presume
that there’s any connection between the two,”
Harvey said in an interview. “It might be
owned by one person and they’re simply rent-
ing out both, or it might be that each unit is
owned by someone separately. They usually...
look like two different units are in the same
building.”
Unlike ADUs, two-family dwelling units are
currently permitted in the city in multi-family
districts and on state highways. Initially, the
housing committee discussed the possibility of
opening entire neighborhoods to two-family
units, but, in the end, decided against it.
They landed on an overlay district, which
would give the planning commission control
over where two-family dwelling units would
be allowed on a case-by-case basis.Landowners interested in developing duplexes
on their property would have to apply for
rezoning and receive approval from the plan-
ning commission and city council.
If approved, an overlay district would be
placed specifically on their property to allow
for the construction of a two-family unit.
Without the overlay district, someone would
not be permitted to build a two-family unit.
“It gives [the planning commission] some
flexibility,” King said, “to then look at the
design, look how it fits in the neighborhood
and say, ‘Yeah, we’re going to grant the rezon-
ing,’ which allows you, because of that overlay
district, to construct or convert a single-family
residence into a two-family dwelling.”
King said the committee doesn’t intend to
alter the existing nature of neighborhoods with
the addition of ADUs and two-family dwell-
ings units.
“[The committee doesn’t] want that appear-
ance to change from a single-family unit,”
King said of ADUs. “They liked the design
standards of that accessory use to look and
flow with the architecture and design of the
single-family house. Even though it’s a sepa-
rate dwelling unit, the casual observer
wouldn’t notice the difference.”
At the end of the night, the planning com-
mission scheduled a workshop with city coun-
cil for 6 p.m. Nov. 1 to receive feedback on the
proposed text amendments. If council agrees to
the changes, King said the planning commis-
sion would hold a public hearing before approv-
ing it to city council. In a best-case scenario,
the process could wrap up by late December.
King emphasized that the introduction of
new housing types will not fix the shortage in
Hastings. Rather, it is just one part of the
process.
“It’s a step,” he said. “It’s a step in address-
ing the housing needs in Hastings. It’s not the
only step, likely there would be other ones
down the road. ... [This one] was easier to
address and quicker to address to give other
options. But it’s just Step 1.”Besides the creation of a commission seat
in Hastings, the next biggest change is how
the district lines are being redrawn in the
northwestern quadrant of the county, the area
with the most significant growth in the last
census, said Commissioner Catherine Getty,
R-Thornapple Township.
“My district, which is District 2 ... is cur-
rently the west side of M-37 and north of
M-179 – the north half of Yankee Springs
[Township] and the west half of Thornapple
Township and all of the village of
Middleville,” Getty said at a Middleville
Village Council meeting Tuesday. “The pro-
posed redistricting drops my district line to
about the south quarter of Thornapple
Township, all of the village of Middleville,
then north of M-179 [in Yankee Springs
Township], and even a little bit east into
Rutland Township ... [Commissioner] Jon
Smelker would cover the lion’s share of
Thornapple Township.”
Smelker’s District 4 would cover most of
Thornapple Township, Irving Township and
the village of Freeport.
Commissioner Vivian Conner’s District 6
would take in the portion of Yankee Springs
south of M-179, all of Orangeville Township
and all but the southeast corner of Prairieville
Township.
District 5, represented by Geiger, would
include the villages of Nashville and Woodland,
all of Castleton and Woodland townships, the
eastern portion of Carlton Township and the
northern half of Maple Grove Township.
District 1, currently represented by
Commissioner Howard Gibson, would include
all of Hastings Charter Township outside the
city, the north half of Rutland Township and
the west half of Carlton Township.
“They have to keep those districts balanced
in terms of population and some kind of log-
ical, geographical makeup,” Getty said.
District 7, currently represented by
Commissioner Bruce Campbell, would
include all of Assyria, Baltimore and
Johnstown townships and the southern half of
Maple Grove. District 3, currently represent-
ed by Commissioner Dave Jackson, would
including all of Barry and Hope townships,
the southeast portion of Prairieville Township
and the southern half of Rutland Township.
County Clerk Pam Palmer, who chaired the
commission, said the proposal for this
eight-district plan has been submitted to the
state. The public has 30 days to appeal it.
The members of the commission are Palmer,
county Treasurer Susan VandeCar, and Phillip
Joseph representing the Republican Party and
Mark Bonsignore representing the Democrats.
NEW DISTRICT,
continued from page 1