One levy, a 0.5 mill 20 year bond levy, will address some of the sever deficiencies of our fire stations, rebuilding 3 stations at their current locations and remodeling the fourth. This request is less than half of the request made in May 2005. We contemplate building stations that can meet our needs for the next 30-40 years, able to house twice the staff we currently have, yet still 40% smaller than what was considered over 2 years ago.
Can we operate without new buildings? Yes, but the costs of maintenance, utilities and major repairs will place an ever increasing burden on our operating budget. The stations have been ignored for years, with regular maintenance and repairs being deferred. I believe this request is reasonable and efficient, not extravagant or excessive. Yet if the voters again reject a capital request, I will respect their decision and work with what the voters are willing to give the township.
The second levy which was placed on the November ballot was a 0.5 mill, 5 year operating levy. This was a levy that I supported, but to help you put it in to perspective, i.e., to explain why I did support this levy, the following is the statement that I made at this morning's meeting:
I have been thinking long and hard, trying to put a structure on the future steps of the township. Although we have been working with a new budgeting process for the last 10 months, there are still things that happen, suggestions that are made, that prompt me to think of a new way to look at things. Sometimes it would be nice if the taxing and budgeting process was more fluid, but there comes a time when we have to make a decision and move on from there.
Something Carol said at the last meeting, while looking at her spreadsheet prompted me to think about the overall funding of the township. As I have stated before, the township’s cash position is improving every month. The cost saving measures we have put in to place are working, the diligence we have shown to pursue uncollected revenue is helping, and overall, the township is on good financial footing.
But, we still have the fire department being under funded based on sound accounting principals. While smoke and mirrors could be used to correct the cash shortfalls in the fire department, it is not fair to the residents and taxpayers to hide the true cost of providing fire services. I am willing to compromise on my position of not putting a levy on the ballot in order to finally put the fire department on proper accounting principals.
I will be offering a Resolution in a moment that will attempt to place on the November ballot a 0.5 mill, 5 year levy for fire operations. I have long thought that placing a term-limited levy on the ballot is not logical, as the need for money never goes away unless services are cut. But by placing a 5 year levy on the ballot, residents will again have the choice in five year to determine what level of service they wish. Instead of promising not to come back for so long if a continuous levy passes, I am forcing the township to come back in 5 years if this proposal passes.
With my proposed fire operation levy in mind, but at a later date, I will be assessing the funding levels of other departments in the township, to determine the true level of need for each department in the township. I am encouraging the other trustees to do the same. While I am proposing that we increase funding to the fire department, I also anticipate that we can decrease funding of other departments, resulting in little or no net tax increase to our residents. I have already begun to review other department budgets, and believe this is realistic and achievable; else I would not be compromising to support a 0.5 mill fire levy.
My intent will be to bring all departments into a five-year funding horizon, so that in five years, if additional levies are needed to run any department in the township, those requests are made at the same time the fire levy will need to be renewed or replaced. My goal: to place all levies necessary to continue to operate the township on one ballot, every five years, so there is no “taking turns” between departments when funding is needed, there is no attempt to manipulate the voters in disguising how much our government costs, there is only an honest request for what the township needs to continue to provide excellent services to our residents and businesses.
To help in this five-year funding cycle, our administrator has begun the process of establishing objectives and goals in our budgeting process. By extending our visioning horizon, it can be integrated into our funding horizon, and provide a long-range plan as opposed to looking at budgets on a year-by-year basis.
People do have a right to be involved, but they also have a right to know exactly what it is going to cost to provide township services and they also have the right to be listened to when they say no. It is unfair to attempt levy after levy after levy, when the voters say no. I am hoping that the process that I am initiating today will provide continuity and consistency with township funding.
I firmly believe that if the township wisely, efficiently and prudently expends the funds entrusted to it by the voters, that future tax levies will be supported and passed. As the past has shown, wasteful spending will leave our residents angry, suspicious, and rejecting of new requests. By placing all departments on a five year funding horizon, we are committing to our residents that funds will only be asked for every five years, that the money we receive will be used cautiously, effectively, and within the reasonable bounds of providing services to our community. Knowing that voters will reject any request prior to the five year goal will encourage careful spending in all departments.
I know that what I am proposing is counter to the culture systemic within many governments of asking for whatever we can get. But I think it is fair-minded and appropriate, providing a more transparent and open government for the residents of
With that in mind, I offer Resolution No. 07-202.
