ACME TOWNSHIP, GRAND TRAVERSE COUNTY, MICHIGAN

BOARD OF TRUSTEES RESOLUTION #R-2011-
SUPPORTING THE MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (MDOT)
COMPLETE STREETS INITIATIVE AS OUTLINED IN PUBLIC ACT 134,
AND PUBLIC ACT 135, OF 2010.

June 7, 2011

At a regular meeting of the ACME TOWNSHIP BOARD OF TRUSTEES held on June 7, 2011, the
ACME TOWNSHIP BOARD OF TRUSTEES, on a Motion made by
and seconded by , passed the following Resolution by
a vote of in favor and opposed:

WHEREAS, increasing walking and bicycling offers improved health benefits for the population and
more livable communities; and

WHEREAS, a Complete Street is safe, comfortable, and convenient for travel by automobile, foot,
bicycle, and transit regardless of age or ability, and

WHEREAS, the Michigan Legislature has passed Complete Streets legislation that requires the
Michigan Department of Transportation and local governments to consider all users in transportation
related projects; and

WHEREAS, Complete Streets support economic growth and community stability by providing
accessible and efficient connections between home, school, work, recreation, and retail destinations
by improving pedestrian and vehicular environments throughout communities; and

WHEREAS, Complete Streets enhance safe walking and bicycling options for school-age children,
in recognition of the national Safe Routes to School program; and

WHEREAS, the Township of Acme recognizes the importance of street infrastructure and
modifications such as sidewalks, crosswalks, shared use paths, bicycle lanes, signage, and accessible
curb ramps, that enable safe, convenient, and comfortable travel for all users; and

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Township of Acme, Grand Traverse County,

Michigan that:

FIRST: to the extent feasible, the Township of Acme will incorporate Complete Streets design
considerations and practices as a routine part of infrastructure planning and implementation; and

SECOND: the Township of Acme supports the continued development of the Township’s Master
Plan, and Parks and Recreation Plan that supports the ease of use, safety, and accessibility for all
users within the Township of Acme.

I, Dorothy Dunville, Acme Township Clerk, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and original
copy of a resolution adopted by the Acme Township Board of Trustees at a Regular Meeting thereof
held on, 2011.

Dorothy Dunville, Acme Township Clerk

Sharon Vreeland
From: Virginia Tegel [virginiategel@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 12:16 PM
To: Sharon Vreeland; Robert Carstens; Jay Zollinger
Subject: Re: Complete Streets Resolution

Hello Sharon and Jay,

After reviewing these documents and discussing with Bob, I would like to suggest the following
course of action for agenda item on May 23 pc meeting:

Include the following documents for reference:

1. Acme Township draft resolution

2. Atlas Township resolution
3. Michigan Complete Streets coalition policy center - features map and lists Michigan
complete streets examples
http://michigancompletestreets.wordpress.com/resource/policy-center/
4. National Complete Streets Coalition - Elements of an Ideal Complete Streets Policy

http://www.completestreets.org/webdocs/policy/cs-
policyelements.pdf
Discuss further revisions of Acme Township draft to consider
passing on to Board: I would like to suggest that the Atlas township
resolution and other documents listed above be used as resources
when in the next revision of the Master Plan to include provisions
for complete streets as required by law.
I have requested an electronic copy of the presentation made by
Kurt Schindler on complete streets. Selecting a few key slides to
show would be very helpful to convey critical information to
implementation of Complete Streets in Acme Township. I will let
you know if I receive it!
Thank you and please contact me with further questions.
Virginia
392-2502

1
5/13/2011 21c3 | Michigan's Complete Streets Act…
Contact MML :: Site Map :: Site Index :: My League RSS Feeds :: Listservs :: mml mobile

powered by google
Search mml.org Search

Home League Services Advocacy Training/Events Resources Insurance Legal Links Classifieds Market with MML Media Room About MML

21c3 Information Publications Sample Documents Aw ards Municipal Litigation Center Blogs Listserv s Multimedia Links

About Resources Multimedia Solutions Technical Services Partners/Speakers

Featured on mml.org
<< Nation's Capital Hosts Two Spring Conferences for Community Energy Leaders N e ws le tte r
| Re-sizing Michigan Communities - Free webinar series >>
Get notified when a new post is
published.
Michigan's Complete Streets Actions Bring
Ent er y our e- ma i l
National Acclaim
May 3, 2011 10:45 by Luke Forrest
Notify me
Since the Michigan Legislature, with the League's support, adopted
Complete Streets legislation in 2010, there has been a flurry of activity in
communities across the state to take advantage of this approach to Calendar
transportation and economic development. Nearly 40 local governments
have adopted policies and that number keeps growing. Now Michigan's
<< May 2011 >>
Complete Streets efforts have started receiving national recognition. The Mo Tu We Th F r Sa Su
League of Michigan Bicyclists was recognized as "Winning Campaign of 25 26 27 28 29 30 1
the Year" by the Alliance for Biking and Walking for its Complete Streets
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
leadership. Last week, the National Complete Streets Coalition released
a report analyzing and ranking Complete Streets policies in state and 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
local governments across the country. Michigan's state policy ranks in the 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
top five nationally. Three Michigan cities, Dexter, Ferndale and Taylor, 23 24 25 26 27 28 29
rank in the top 10 for their ordinances. Congratulations to those
communities and to all of our partners in the Michigan Complete Streets
30 31 1 2 3 4 5
Coalition.
View posts in large calendar
For more information about Complete Streets and sample ordinance Ca te gor y list
language, visit the League's Complete Streets resource page.
Cultural Economic
Luke Forrest is Project Coordinator for the Center for 21st Century Development (51)
Communities. Contact him at lforrest@mml.org or 734-669-6323. Diversity (13)
League Networking
Downtowns (100)
Follow the League on Twitter
Education (25)
Energy (27) Follow the League on Facebook
Entrepreneurship (50)
Green Initiatives (72) Follow the League on Flickr
Be the first to rate this post Legislative Link (169)
Tags: complete str eets Technology (23)
Categor ies: Downtowns | tr ansit | Walkability Transit (25) Quickfind/M ost Viewed
Actions: E-mail | Kick it! | Per malink | Comments (0) | Comment RSS
Walkability (49)

Elected Officials Academy

Enter search term or AP Search
Municipal Yellow Pages
Include comments in search
MML Foundation
R e c e ntP osts

P rogre ss T owa rd s R e storing Multimedia on mml.org

De troit' s De p ot
The Business Alliance
mml.org/…/Michigans-Complete-Street… 1/2
5/13/2011 2011 May/June Review
Contact MML :: Site Map :: Site Index :: My League RSS Feeds :: Listservs :: mml mobile

powered by google
Search mml.org Search

Home League Services Advocacy Training/Events Resources Insurance Legal Links Classifieds Market with MML Media Room About MML

Mission Membership Board of Trustees Foundation Business Alliance Staff Office Locations Contact the League

The Review Featured on mml.org

Jump to... Share Email Print

Feature Articles
Complete Streets Myths Debunked by Giffels Webster
Departm ent Articles By Scott T. Clein, P.E., LEED AP

Past Issues Pedestrian-friendly … walkable … You’ve

most likely heard, and used, these terms
when describing the future vision of your
community. You’ve also likely heard about
Complete Streets and assumed it was the
same thing.

Technically you’re right…and wrong. While

Complete Streets initiatives do improve the
walkability of roadways, the concept includes
so much more. Before your community takes
a dive into the Complete Streets waters, you
need to understand whether or not you’ll
need a life vest.

In 2010, Michigan joined a growing list of states that enacted legislation related to
Complete Streets. Two bills passed that added the phrase to the legislative vernacular and
requires the Michigan Department of Transportation to create a Complete Streets policy
that serves as a model for communities. League Networking

But what is the concept really all about? Below are common definitions that should be Follow the League on Twitter
considered during Complete Streets planning and discussions.
Follow the League on Facebook
COMPLETE STREETS is a movement that designs and operates roadway corridors
promoting safe access for all users. Roadways, therefore, should accommodate vehicles,
transit, bicyclists, and pedestrians of all ages and abilities. Follow the League on Flickr

UNIVERSAL ACCESSIBILITY emerged as an offshoot of barrier-free design. It’s the idea

that good design must take into account the age and ability of all users from the beginning,
even if it means exceeding minimum standards to allow for a better use of space. Quickfind/M ost Viewed

Elected Officials Academy

Municipal Yellow Pages

MML Foundation

GREEN STREETS encourages Multimedia on mml.org

sustainability in the design and
construction of roadways by using the The Business Alliance
latest best management practices, such
as rain gardens for improving stormwater Wage & Salary
quality.
League Affiliates
LIVING STREETS states pedestrians must
be properly included in transportation
designs. It goes beyond simply adding
sidewalks to include active use of the
corridor, such as outdoor dining and
sales, and neighborhood festivals.

With a clearer understanding of Complete Streets improvements, here are five common
myths that may get in the way of planning and implementation.

Myth 1: It’s expensive.

Designs in line with Complete Streets philosophies don’t have to cost a lot, especially
when included in annual capital improvement projects. Most communities have existing
funding for road maintenance and related upgrades. When resurfacing a roadway, for
example, implement bike lanes for little to no added cost.

This piece-by-piece approach may seem out of place when attempting to promote
connectivity, but it mimics road maintenance approaches and allows the largest benefits
from shrinking budgets.

Myth 2: On-street bike lanes are unsafe.

On the contrary, studies show that on-street bike lanes, when properly marked and signed,
are safer for bicyclists and pedestrians than sidewalks.

mml.org/…/p16-complete-streets.html 1/3
5/13/2011 2011 May/June Review
The Transportation Research Board
published a study by William Moritz at the
University of Washington referencing the
Relative Danger Index, which measures
bicycle-accident frequency to distance
traveled. A higher number represents a
greater danger. Sidewalks have an RDI of
5.30 while streets with dedicated bike
lanes have an RDI of 0.50.

Clearly, it’s a misperception that bicyclists

are at greater risk on roadway bike lanes.
This on-street myth is also perpetuated by
the notions that drivers won’t change their driving habits in the presence of a bicyclist and
that roadways are only built for vehicles.

Myth 3: It’s only for urban communities.

Urban areas will undoubtedly benefit the most from Complete Streets improvements
because of dense pedestrian activity. However, let’s imagine a rural suburban community
that has, during the last 30 years, shifted from primarily agricultural land uses to single-
family residential developments.

Typically, these developments are islands surrounded by farmland with intermittent access
to an open-shoulder country road. They are not truly connected with other neighborhoods
and do not allow residents to safely walk or bicycle outside of their subdivision.

Now imagine the same two-lane country road with a paved bike lane along the shoulder.
Then add a large shared-use pathway beside the right-of-way line for pedestrians and
less-accomplished bicyclists. The result is safely linked subdivisions and a community
that is making a dynamic statement about its values.

Myth 4: It negatively impacts traffic flow.

Well…yes, it might. Accommodations for pedestrians and bicyclists may increase driver
delay or reduce vehicle speeds. But this is not always a bad thing.

Pedestrian spaces and dedicated bike lanes can create an inviting atmosphere. In
addition to promoting a healthier lifestyle, this can help foster the spirit that cool
communities seem to have. This so-called “it” factor entices people to live in a
neighborhood or city center and directly translates into positive community economic
development and financial sustainability.

While there can be repercussions, such as altered traffic patterns that negatively impact
surrounding streets, transportation engineers must look at their network holistically and
reconsider pavement geometry to encourage safe driving.

Myth 5: “We ARE a walkable community, so this won’t change our plans.”
Some communities have embraced the Complete Streets concept. Still, disagreements
between planning and engineering staffs continue largely because of these myths. Simply
being walkable does not make a Complete Street. What about ADA compliance and other
street amenities? Significant opportunities spring from combining the power of the
planning, engineering, and economic development areas of local government.

Consider an engineering department that actively promotes the construction of smaller

roadways to incorporate bike lanes, wide sidewalks, and universal design principles. What
if the planning department aligns these improvements with zoning ordinances to
encourage mixed-use developments with outdoor dining and pedestrian-scale amenities?
Now, the economic development director has added firepower to actively recruit
businesses and developments. Uniting these groups can unleash the powerful potential
to positively impact a community.

This last point is the overarching benefit that must be understood about Complete Streets.
When properly infused into a community, a Complete Streets mentality can help unite
economic development, land planning, and transportation engineering for bettering the
overall quality of life. All community leaders would benefit from understanding the
definitions and implications, but also keeping in mind the myths discussed. With the
proper perspective and conviction, Complete Streets can make every Michigan community
a better place to live.

Giffels-Webster
Giffels-Webster Engineers, Inc. is a civil engineering, surveying, planning, and landscape
architecture firm with a 55-year history of serving municipalities and governmental
agencies throughout Michigan.

For more on Giffels-Webster, visit www.giffelswebster.com

Scott T. Clein, P.E., LEED AP is an associate at Giffels-Web ster.

You may reach him at 313-962-4442 or sclein@giffelsweb ster.com.

MML Home :: League Services :: Advocacy :: Training/Events :: Resources :: Insurance :: Legal :: Classifieds :: Links :: About MML :: Privacy :: Webmaster
Michigan Municipal League :: 1675 Green Road, Ann Arbor MI, 48105 :: 734.662.3246 l 800.653.2483

mml.org/…/p16-complete-streets.html 2/3
 Tool Matrix
PartiallyAddressesComplete
Tool AlreadyAddresses DoesNotAddressComplete
Streets,orSomeElements,
(checkwhichonesapplytoyourcommunity) CompleteStreets Streets
butCouldBeStrengthened
RESOLUTIONSANDPOLICYSTATEMENTS

… IntergovernmentalAgreements 3
… CityCharter
3
… StreetandSidewalkpolicy 3
ORDINANCES

… GeneralCode

… Zoningordinance
3
… Streetdesignstandards

PLANS

… Comprehensiveplan

TransitorNonǦmotorizedplans
…
3
… DDAplan

… CapitalImprovementPlan

ONGOINGPRACTICES

… StreetandSidewalkmaintenanceprocedure

… DevelopmentDesignGuidelines

… ProjectReviewProcedures 3
 Assess Local Commitment

Where do you want to be?

The degree of local commitment (1 to 5) Typical Status:

will determine the policy choice… 9 In progress

9 Complete
 May 2011

Township Law E-Letter

Introduction to Michigan’s 
“Complete Streets” Legislation 
4151 Okemos Road Local and state governments across the country are joining a “Complete
Okemos MI 48864 Streets” movement to make their communities more livable. Two laws
517.381.0100 amended last year brought the “Complete Streets” movement to Michigan.
http://www.fsblawyers.com Here is what you need to know about the new laws.

What are “Complete Streets?”  action on the part of local road agencies and land
‐use  planners.  As  originally  drafted,  the  bills 
Complete  streets  are  usable  by  all:  the  young, 
would have required local road agencies to adopt 
the old, the motorist, cyclist, walker, wheelchair 
Complete  Streets  policies  within  two  years;  re‐
user,  bus  rider,  or  shopper  and  shopkeeper.  A 
quired sidewalks in all construction and preserva‐
Complete  Street  Policy  therefore  directs  trans‐
tion  projects,  unless  the  cost  would  be  exces‐
portation  planners  and  engineers  to  design 
sively  disproportionate;  required  local  land‐use 
streets for all these users.  
plans  to  consider  or  incorporate  a  “complete 
Complete  Streets  can  encourage  economic  streets interconnected transportation system,” as  
growth  and  stability  by  providing  safe,  accessi‐
ble,  and  efficient  connections  between  home, 
public transportation, work, and shopping desti‐
nations; improving safety; promoting healthy liv‐
ing  by  encouraging  more  walking  and  biking  in 
persons of all ages, backgrounds, and fitness lev‐
els; and reducing stress on automobile transpor‐
tation networks. 
Complete  Streets  commonly  include:  sidewalks, 
bike lanes, wide shoulders, multitude of crossing 
opportunities,  refuge medians,  bus  shelters  and 
crossings,  special  bus  lanes,  raised  crosswalks, 
curb ramps, audible or tactile pedestrian signals, 
longer crossing times, and sidewalk bulb‐outs. In 
this  way,  the  Complete Street  concept  goes  be‐
yond  aesthetics,  bike  trails,  and  walkability,  be‐
cause it requires consideration of things like ADA 
compliance and other potential street amenities.  
The Law that Wasn’t Adopted 
Legislation initially proposed in May 2010 would 
have required a significant amount of immediate 

 
Township Law E-Letter Fahey Schultz Burzych Rhodes PLC
well  as  issues  like  traffic  congestion  and  noise,  Enabling  Act  will  eventually  affect  your  Town‐
traffic  impacts  of  large  developments,  traffic  ship, because the legislation: 
safety,  commercial  driveways,  traffic  calming  • Modifies  the  definition  of  “streets”  to  spe‐
techniques  or  devices  (such  as  speed  bumps),  cifically include all legal users. 
etc. But those proposals were left on the “cutting 
room  floor,”  and  somewhat  more  modest  laws  • Expands the elements that may be included 
were eventually passed last year.  in a master plan to encompass all transpor‐
tation  systems  that  move  people  and 
Public Act 135 of 2010  goods. 
As  finally  adopted,  Act  135  amended  Act  51  to  • Specifies that transportation improvements 
require  local  road  agencies  to  adopt  “Complete  identified  in  a  plan  are  appropriate  to  the 
Streets" policies in their land use "master‐plans."  context of the community and considers all 
The law defines “Complete Streets” as those that  legal users of the public right of way. 
“promote safe and efficient movement of people 
• Identifies  the  means  for  implementing 
and goods whether by car, truck, transit, assistive 
device, foot, or bicycle.”   transportation elements of the master plan 
in  cooperation  with  the  county  road  com‐
The  new  law  also  created  a  government  mission or MDOT. 
“complete  streets”  advisory  council  including 
representatives  of  various  pro‐sidewalk  interest  The  amendments  to  Act  51  also  change  state 
groups.  The  Complete  Streets  Advisory  Council  law governing expenditures of state transporta‐
held  its  first  meeting  on  April  27,  2011  and  will  tion  funding,  which  largely  affect  MDOT  and 
meet  quarterly  in  the  future.    More  information  road agencies, including the following notewor‐
about the Council is available at MDOT’s website:  thy provisions: 
http://www.michigan.gov/mdot/0,1607,7‐151‐ • Requires  counties,  cities,  villages,  and 
9623_31969_57564‐‐‐,00.html. The new law also  MDOT  to  consult  with  one  another  when 
requires  certain  consultations  between  state,  planning non‐motorized projects affecting a 
county  and  local  governments  regarding  their  transportation  facility  that  belongs  to  the 
respective  "complete  streets"  policies.  The  law  other. 
specifically  requires  “consultation,”  but  not 
• Requires  non‐motorized  improvements  to 
“agreements,” between units of government .  
meet accepted practices or established best 
Public Act 134 of 2010  practices. 
Act 134 amended the Michigan Planning Enabling  • Requires  road  agencies  to  notify  one  an‐
Act to require local land‐use plans to “provide for  other  when  their  five‐year  non‐motorized 
safe and efficient movement of people and goods  programs are finalized. 
by  motor  vehicles,  bicycles,  pedestrians,  and  • Requires the State Transportation Commis‐
other legal users" (rather than just automobiles)  sion  (STC),  within  two  years,  to  adopt  a 
and other provisions relating to the interconnec‐ Complete  Streets  policy  for  MDOT,  and  to 
tivity  of  various  elements  of  the  transportation  develop  model  Complete  Streets  policies 
system.  for use by local agencies. 
What Is Required of Townships?   • Requires state and local agencies to consult 
The easy answer to this question is nothing—yet.  and  agree  on  how  to  address  Complete 
But  the  amendments  to  the  Michigan  Planning  Streets before submitting the Five‐Year Pro‐
gram  to  the  STC  (exempts  anything  in  an 
Page 2
Township Law E-Letter Fahey Schultz Burzych Rhodes PLC
approved  multi‐year  capital  plan  approved  • Public  health  care  costs  that  could  benefit 
before July 1, 2011).  from a neighborhood that is more walkable 
and livable? 
• Allows  MDOT  to  provide  technical  assistance 
and coordination to local agencies in the de‐ • Rates of walking and biking to schools? 
velopment  and  implementation  of  their  poli‐ What  can  you  gain?  Collect  and  understand 
cies.  personal  stories  of  problems  with  traditional 
• Requires  MDOT  to  share  expertise  in  non‐ “incomplete  streets”  and  positive  experiences 
motorized  and  multi‐modal  planning  in  the  with well‐designed “complete streets” 
development  of  projects  within  municipal  Not  just  for  automobiles  anymore!  How  will 
boundaries.  you shift the focus of road design from moving 
• Allows  agencies  to  enter  into  agreements  cars  quickly  to  providing  safe  mobility  for  all 
with one another to provide maintenance for  users? 
projects  constructed  to  implement  a  Com‐ • Example  1:  Are  there  underutilized  multi‐
plete Streets policy.   lane  roads  that  could  be  converted  to  a 
Drafting  a  Complete  Streets  Policy  or  complete  street  by  removing  one  lane  and 
Amending Master Plans  using the extra space for bike lanes or side‐
walks? 
Townships now have the option of drafting their 
own  Complete  Streets  Policy,  but  certainly  must  • Example  2:  Reevaluate  standard  lane 
consider the legislative goals when amending any  widths.  Narrower  lanes  can  help  reduce 
master  plans  as  they  become  due  for  renewal.   speeding,  save  money,  and  provide  space 
There  are  a  number  of  things  to  consider  when  for sidewalks where none was available be‐
you  begin  to  grapple  with  incorporating  Com‐ fore. 
plete Streets goals into your own local needs and  Open  Invitation  to  Good  Ideas:  Include a vari‐
objectives.  ety  of  personnel  in  policy/plan  amendment 
One  size  does  not  fit  all!  Use  the  various  Com‐ project: elected officials, planning officials, pub‐
plete  Street  policies  available  as  a  guide—not  lic  works  personnel,  public  health  staff,  com‐
rules. There is no one way to complete a street,  munity  leaders,  and  the  public.  Perhaps  start 
because  each  street,  intersection,  and  neighbor‐ with a small task force and seek broader input 
hood  has  its  own  needs.  Local  government  poli‐ at different stages. 
cies  or  plans  need  not  mirror  one  another.  That  Starting  the  Clock:    When and how will policy/
means  common  sense  and  safety  should  guide  plan  affect  local  projects?  For  example,  will  it 
road plans and street design. For example, mod‐ immediately  affect  planning  and  all  construc‐
ernized  crosswalks  are  unnecessary  where  it  is  tion  taking  place  in  one  year  or  more?    What 
unlikely your citizens will cross a road, such as in  sorts  of  projects  must  comply  with  the  policy? 
an industrial zone or a remote area.    New  construction  only,  or  all  repair  and  main‐
Why  here?  Review  why  your  township  should  tenance projects? 
embrace a Complete Streets Policy—what statis‐ Money, money, money:  How will you obtain or 
tics or information spurs you to do so?  direct funding? 
• Safety?  • Special funding sources to assist in retrofit‐
• Local obesity and chronic disease rates?  ting  projects  or  undertaking  maintenance 
projects? 
Page 3
 Township Law E-Letter Fahey Schultz Burzych Rhodes PLC
• Incentives to those who undertake the complete  How  are  we  doing?  How  will  you  evaluate  your 
streets strategy before a policy is in place?  community’s  progress—reports  to  elected  officials 
and the public? And how, if at all, will that affect the 
• Funds designated for projects that are already in 
policy/plan? 
the pipeline that may require revisions? 
• Funding  for  complete  streets  through  the  usual  For More Information  
manner  for  street  construction  and  transporta‐ http://www.completestreets.org/  (in‐depth  intro‐
tion  matters?  This  requires  redirecting  funding  duction to the Complete  Streets concept and links 
concerns  from  the  question  of  “how  much  is  it  to research and training tools).  
going  to  cost,”  to  “how  we  better  allocate  the 
http://www.micompletestreets.org/  (fact  sheets, 
funds we already have?” 
documents, links to draft policies).  
Working  together:  How  will  your  community  coop‐
http://mihealthtools.org/mihc/CompleteStreets.asp 
erate with neighboring communities and road agen‐
cies  to  promote  the  ends  of  Michigan’s  Complete  (sample policies and toolkits).        — Lizzie Mills  
Streets legislation?    

                                             The Author 
Helen E. R. (“Lizzie”) Mills is a lawyer with Fahey Schultz Burzych Rhodes PLC, spe‐
cializing  in  representing  townships  and  other    municipal  governments.  She  distinguished 
herself  at  the  Thomas  M.  Cooley  Law  School,  graduating  second  in  her  law  school  class, 
magna cum laude. While in law school, Lizzie earned 11 Certificates of Merit—the highest 
honor  for  academic  performance.  In  2010,  she  was  awarded  one  of  the  inaugural  "book 
award"  scholarships    by  the  Real  Property  Law  Section  of  the  State  Bar  for  excellence  in 
advanced  property  law  courses.  Lizzie  handles  general  municipal  law,  labor  and  employ‐
ment,  real  property,  and  Freedom  of  Information  issues.  She    can  be  reached  at 
517.381.3209 (direct line) or  hmills@fsblawyers.com 
 
Fahey  Schultz  Burzych  Rhodes  PLC,  Your  Township  Attorneys,  is  a  Michigan  law  firm  specializing  in  the 
representation of Michigan townships.  Our lawyers have more than 130 years of combined experience in 
township law, and have represented more than 130 townships across the state of Michigan. This publica‐
tion is intended for our clients and friends.  This communication highlights specific areas of law, and is not 
legal advice.  The reader should consult an attorney to determine how the information applies to any spe‐
cific situation.  
 
 

4151 Okemos Road  
Okemos MI 48864 
517.381.0100 main tel 
517.381.5151 main fax 
www.fsblawyers.com 

Copyright © 2011 Fahey Schultz Burzych Rhodes PLC