FOIA – Springfield TWP Rushed the Process
Recently, the Springfield Township Environmental Protectors (STEP) released FOIA documents they received on October 22 in response to a request submitted by Sean Miller. STEP was charged $682.13 for the records, which include 196 documents totaling 877 pages, with 168 pages, approximately 19 percent, identified as duplicates. Those interested in reviewing the full set of materials can download all 877 pages from STEP’s FOIA page.
The FOIA request seeks public records related to communications about proposed mining activities in Springfield Township between November 20, 2024 and September 16, 2025. The request covers emails, letters, memoranda, text messages, instant messages, voicemails, meeting notes, reports, presentations, contracts, agreements, and any attachments to those records. It also seeks internal Township communications concerning Burroughs Materials Corporation of Michigan, Edw. C. Levy Co., the Michigan Aggregates Association, and any related mining projects, permits, or applications. The request does not include documents already publicly available, such as posted meeting agendas or minutes.
Of the materials released to date, the documents appear to consist almost exclusively of emails, with no meeting notes, internal summaries, memoranda, or other forms of communication included in the production.
I have thoroughly reviewed all 877 pages of the released documents and have identified several emails that stand out in the overall record.
- DATE: January 14, 2025
- FROM: Ric Davis (TWP Supervisor)
- TO: Reuben Maxbauer (LEVY), Gtomlin@RCOC.org, Jerry David, Christine Rogers
“Gentlemen,
Thank you for today’s productive discussion. l’d like to schedule a meeting to finalize and launch a plan for the gravel and grading of our roads. My primary goal is to negotiate a reduction in our current gravel costs from another source, enabling us to extend coverage to more roads this year. With collective effort, I am confident we can coordinate a cost-effective bulk purchase and delivery of gravel through the Levy Company, aligning it with the RCOC’s scheduled application. This initiative has the potential to make a significant positive impact on our community, and I am eager to see it come together.
Please share your availability for a meeting at in the next week or two at your earliest convenience
Respectfully,
Ric Davis”
- DATE: January 16, 2025
- FROM: Reuben Maxbauer (LEVY)
- TO: Ric Davis (TWP Supervisor), Gtomlin@RCOC.org, Jerry David, Christine Rogers
“Ric, Thank you for initiating. I will be interested to learn what materials and in what quantities Springfield requires. I am hopeful there will be a match between our production capabilities and the Township’s needs. My availability is as follows: Monday, January 20th 3:00pm, Tuesday, January 21st 10:00am-1:00pm Friday, January 24th 12:00pm-1:30pm, Monday, January 27th 10:00am, Wednesday, January 29th 2:30pm, Thursday, January 30th 9:00am, Looking forward to getting together, Reuben”
- DATE: January 24, 2025
- FROM: Ric Davis (TWP Supervisor)
- TO: Reuben Maxbauer (LEVY)
“Here is a copy of the RCOC letter. Thank you Rueben for a productive meeting
Ric”
- DATE: January 29, 2025
- FROM: Reuben Maxbauer (LEVY)
- TO: Ric Davis (TWP Supervisor)
“Supervisor Davis,
Thank you for pulling together last week’s meeting. The Levy team is working to determine what we can do from a gravel supply perspective. As soon as we have this figured out, I will follow up with you. In the meantime, attached, please find the spec sheets I showed you during our meeting. These sheets will help you understand the difference between the various products.
Thank you,
Reuben”
- DATE: February 3, 2025
- FROM: Reuben Maxbauer (LEVY)
- TO: Ric Davis (TWP Supervisor)
“Supervisor Davis, I hope you had a great weekend. My team and I reviewed the Township’s requests, and I now have some ideas to share. Please let me know a good time for a call or visit to discuss. Thanks, Reuben.”
- DATE: March 6, 2025
- FROM: Ric Davis (TWP Supervisor)
- TO: Reuben Maxbauer (LEVY)
“FYI” [Email Forwarded: Mining Ordinances from Greg Need]
- DATE: April 29, 2025
- FROM: Reuben Maxbauer (LEVY)
- TO: Ric Davis (TWP Supervisor)
“Supervisor Davis, We did it! We got it to you today. The written portion is currently available, the first set of drawings will be added later this afternoon, but I didn’t want to delay any further. You can find our submittal at the following link: [link]
There’s a fair amount here, so I want to do my best to explain. We can go over everything in greater detail when I visit tomorrow at 3:00pm.1. Thank you for sharing your deadline with us so we could push our team to meet it. As we discussed, we will need to supplement our mining application if/as this moves forward. We did our very best getting this together to meet your timeline but couldn’t pull it all together while meeting your deadline.
2. As you will recall, you asked for assistance with both road gravel as well as a high capacity well (500+ gpm). During those conversations I shared that we were eager to support as best we could, but needed to be able to mine/produce materials to pay for these costs. That tradeoff is reflected in this application.
3. I told you we would use the least objectionable equipment possible, which is why our application reflects both portable and modular equipment for material processing.
4. We have discussed challenges the sand and gravel mining industry has faced with mine permits in other communities. I want to highlight those challenges once again to you to ensure you know (I know you do!) the chaos that could ensue. As we’ve discussed, if too much pushback is encountered, we will happily pull our application and then reapply after we’ve pulled everything together more properly in a year or two years’ time. We will continue to look to you for guidance.
5. Most communities request a $2,000-$3,000/disturbed acre bond for reclamation.
6. Finally, parcel numbers, per your request, are as follows: 07-19-401-007, 07-30-201-003, 07-19-300-011, 07-30-100-006
I will call you later this afternoon and really look forward to diving into this in greater detail with you tomorrow at 3:00pm.
Best, Reuben
- DATE: May 1, 2025
- FROM: Julia Upfal (Giffels Webster)
- TO: Sean Miller (TWP Clerk), Ric Davis (TWP Supervisor), Christine Rogers
“We really need their exhibit B (site plan) by tomorrow. Typically, the deadline for PC is one month before the meeting so that we have adequate time to complete a review and get it into the PC packet and our deadline to have a report to you is next Friday. This is already tight for a review that is so unconventional, but we will obviously expedite as needed.
In the future, the ordinance does require a pre-app meeting with the planner and engineer before the initial review for all SLUs; I know we want to keep this moving and definitely wont hold anything up, but this meeting is really important to keep projects on track, so in the future we should make sure not to skip this. Julia”
- DATE: May 29, 2025
- FROM: Reuben Maxbauer (LEVY)
- TO: Ric Davis (TWP Supervisor)
“Supervisor Davis, Attached, please find both an FAQ and Timeline. Please let me know if anything is unclear. I appreciate your assistance sharing this with the community. Thank you! Reuben”
- DATE: June 3, 2025
- FROM: Julia Upfal (Giffels Webster)
- TO: Reuben Maxbauer (LEVY), Bob Doyle, Chrstine Rogers, Stephanie Osborn, Jason Mayer, Nancy McClain, Ric Davis (TWP Supervisor), Sean Miller (TWP Clerk)
“Hi Reuben, The ordinance states, ” The applicant shall submit a report prepared by a geologist and/or other experts with appropriate credentials to demonstrate compliance with MCL 125.3205, as amended, that the natural resources to be extracted shall be considered valuable, and the applicant can receive revenue and reasonably expect to profit from the proposed mineral mining operation. The applicant shall also provide documentation to demonstrate that there is a need for the natural resources to be mined by either the applicant or in the market served by the applicant.” Exhibit C in the application here is the response to this requirement. The geologist who provided this report was not identified, but it should have been completed by a qualified expert. Exhibit C states that data collected from soil borings and observation wells resulted in a determination that the geologic resources found on the site are a viable source of materials to produce construction grade quality aggregate. We would like to conduct an independent review of these studies, but were not provided the data. In addition, this exhibit talks about the Holly Road site, but without evidence or specificity regarding the remaining capacity of this site. In addition, it should address the capacity of neighboring mines in Oakland County. Please call me if you would like to discuss. I think that further studies to demonstrate the resource need will be crucial. Julia”
A review of the released emails suggests that the mining application process moved forward under significant time pressure. An April 29 email from Levy indicates the company was “pushed” to meet a Township deadline and acknowledges that it “couldn’t pull it all together” while meeting that timeline, noting that portions of the application would need to be supplemented later. In that same email, Levy references prior discussions with the Township about assistance with road gravel and a high-capacity well (500+ gallons per minute), stating that while the company was eager to help, it would need to mine and produce materials in order to cover those costs, and that “that tradeoff is reflected in this application.”
A May 1 email from the Township’s planning consultant further reflects urgency, stating that materials were needed “by tomorrow” in order to meet Planning Commission deadlines. The consultant noted that the deadline to provide a report to the Township was “next Friday,” leaving only eight days to complete the review and prepare that report, and described the timeline as already tight and “unconventional.” The email also reminded officials that the ordinance requires a pre-application meeting with the planner and engineer before initial review of Special Land Uses, adding that “in the future we should make sure not to skip this.”
Taken together, these emails indicate that the application advanced on a compressed timeline, with acknowledged deadline pressure, incomplete materials at the time of submission, and at least one procedural step referenced as not being completed in the typical sequence.
2 thoughts on “FOIA – Springfield TWP Rushed the Process”
Am I misunderstanding something? It appears to me that ric Davis is the impetus behind Levy’s application. At any point, in any meeting, did he Make this clear to any citizen of springfield township? It doesn’t appear to me that Levy would have been applying anytime soon on their own. Oh, boy.
I agree Theresa.This “rush” to get the application in seems to have been “rushed” by Ric Davis. It almost sounds like a “hurry up or we will lose this opportunity” request.
It also appears, that Mr. Davis’s request for free gravel and the high capacity well are two things to look at closely. Get the info to us because ??? What’s the hurry to get free gravel? Seems to be an odd request, unless there’s more to it. And why do we need a high capactiy well? Perhaps for a Data Center, another thing that no one wants in their community.