Where do we go from here

Last week’s election had a mixed message, one that can be interpreted several ways. There was enough support for increased funding of the fire department to place a levy on the ballot and a certain level of support at the ballot box. However, there was clearly enough opposition to defeat that levy as it was structured as well.

One thing that I think is quite clear is that without working together, we will get no where. No new money, no solid plan, no communication. And probably most importantly, no level of comfort or trust from the community.

So, I am committed to working with all our stakeholders to reach a consensus regarding the operation of the fire department. But I can’t have that conversation with myself so it is just as important (not more important, not less important) that those other community stakeholders be willing to work with me. That means compromise on both parts. I am confident that compromise can occur without impairing community safety, and in the end our citizens can be assured that fire and rescue services will continue to be of the highest quality.

In that spirit, I have reached out to the City of Sylvania and I have reached out to Safe Sylvania about where we go from here. I have spoken to numerous people involved and plan to speak to more as the next few weeks pass. Fire safety in Sylvania will be maintained, and I am committed to bringing stability to our fire services.

On the bright side, our new Fire Chief Fred Welsh will have the opportunity to show the community what he sees as his vision for the fire department. He brings with him 30+ years of fire fighting experience and has a lot of new ideas and a fresh perspective. He is without the lingering distrust that may still be around after the rough road to the election. I look forward to giving the community an opportunity to see the experience, knowledge, and enthusiasm Chief Welsh has shown the trustees. Being able to give Chief Welsh the opportunity to help formulate a plan for the fire department is perhaps the only positive result from this recent election debacle.

DeeDee Liedel,
Sylvania Township Trustee

Important Election for Sylvania

The Sylvania area faces an important election next Tuesday. Three fire levy issues will be on the ballot, as well as a contested Fiscal Officer race.

How much more can you afford?

Many people have accused me of being opposed to all taxes. This is not true. However, my level of justification for additional taxes is quite high. It is not each individual tax levy that I oppose. In and of themselves, each levy that Sylvania voters will be facing November 6, be it COSI, the Metroparks, the Library, TARTA, and even all three fire levies can easily be justified by supporters citing helpful statistics.

But as a whole, our property taxes are becoming more and more of a burden, and I believe they are detrimental to continuing to build and maintain a quality residential and commercial community in Sylvania.

Taxes in the Sylvania area already exceed 2% of the value of our homes. The 7.5 mills of tax requests on our ballet this election will push that up even more. By comparison, Monclova Township is 1.53% of assessed value; Maumee - 1.79%, Perrysburg Township - 1.73%, and Evergreen School District in Amboy Township (Metamora, Ohio) - 1.51%. These are all "Excellent" rated school districts, they all have access to the amenities of northwest Ohio; they all share the same level of state taxation.

These are the communities that Sylvania competes with for quality employers and residents, yet they are not faced with the tax hike that we are. So, when looking at tax levies, whether they are new or replacement or renewals, I look not just at who is asking and what is promised to be done with the revenue, but at what is our overall tax burden.

In all, there is $618 at issue for my family, over 10% of our property taxes. Each seperate levy is asking for a 50% to 100% increase in funding. Words such as 'mere', 'only', and 'just' are used to describe each levy but I don't consider $618 to be a meager amount.

So, when you vote next Tuesday, and are faced with a "yes" or "no" vote on seven different levies, think not only of what each individual levy is promising, but ask yourself "How much more can I afford?"

What is a safe service level?

Two years ago, I told voters that I believed we could run the township more efficiently - in other words, we can continue to provide the same level of service to our community but at a lower cost.

Today, I am more confident than ever that we can run the township more efficiently. We are doing it now, in several of the departments. Our efforts so far have included a tax holiday in the police department and increased services in the road department with no tax increases.

But to run the fire department more efficiently we have to be able to implement sound policies, exercise management rights to create a more productive work environment, and utilize and leverage resources to the best benefit of the township. Simply put, we need the union to work with us, and not demand unnecessary, unproductive, and costly practices that only enhances the union's coffers and not the services provided.

Let's look at some of the accusations Safe Sylvania is making to support their accusation that we aren't safe:

• They say: Two first responders were taken out of service when we reduced staffing from 57 to 52. When you calculate in sick time, vacation time, and Kelly days, our reduction in staff amounted to about 1.25 persons per day. How could that 1.25 persons drive two vehicles at one time? We removed from service a non-life threatening transport unit, a service that is now provided via contracts managed by the Lucas County EMS.
  
• They say: Fire inspections are two years behind, and thus jeopardizing the safety of our community. Our new Fire Chief is implementing a plan to inspect all 2,400 commercial structures in our community every year with current staff. If our Fire Chief says this can be done now, why wasn't it done before? There were 2,248 inspections in 2005 and 1,655 in 2006. If (and that is a big 'if' in my opinion) we are 2 years behind, the problem did not occur in 2007 and the trustees should have been told about it. Instead, you only hear this when the firefighters are trying to convince you that Sylvania is not safe.
• They say: "The 1.5 mil levy amount will return staffing back to previous levels and allow for equipment repair and replacement, including return of the Fire Department transport service." The township has done various scenarios regarding funding levels at a 1.5 mill level. Our reviews show that 1.5 mill will pay for either additional staff or replace equipment. It won't do both. When I have asked them for their projections to support their statements of what their levies will pay for, they tell me they don't have any. They are making unrealistic promises with no way to be held accountable.
• They say: Rehiring 5 firefighters will put us closer to national staffing standards. Yes, it will put us closer - by one person per day. But according to our Fire Chief that one additional person will not enable us to respond to any more emergency medical situations or fires than we do today, it will just put one more due's paying member in the union ranks. In addition, they are comparing apples to oranges in order to scare you in to supporting more taxes by saying we have 14 firefighters on duty but need 21. In fact, we have 17-18 firefighters assigned to each shift, with a guaranteed minimum staffing of 14. Their reference to a recommended 21 does not mean a minimum of 21 on duty.

Truth is, they have no support to say that we are not safe today. Response times have remained consistent at an average of 4:17, 45 seconds to four minutes faster than other suburban fire departments in our area. Staffing levels are mandated by the union contract and can not be reduced. Our community continues to receive quality, efficient and responsive emergency medical transportation through agreements with the Lucas County Emergency Medical Services Agency.

The bottom line is that when you call 911 with a medical or fire emergency, we respond. When you call with a concern about an odor, we respond. When you call because an elderly resident has fallen and is unable to get back in to bed, we respond. When you call because you're unable to remove a ring or get a cat out of a tree, we respond. Service has not decreased. We are simply using the resources (your tax dollars) more efficiently in providing fire and EMS services to you, your family, and your visitors.

It's a union effort (in my opinion)

Supporters for a Safe Sylvania have been adamant in its contention that it is not a union effort to control the direction of the Fire Department. I disagree. Over the last year, I have taken the opportunity to observe certain actions and have come to what I believe is a logical conclusion that unions are a major force behind trying to convince the Sylvania community that we are not safe.

Let's review some basic facts about Safe Sylvania that their co-chair readily admits to:

• 40% of the petitions circulated by Supporters for a Safe Sylvania to put their 1.5 mill levies on the ballot were circulated by union members or their spouses.
• 60% of the funds raised during the most recent reporting period were contributed by union-related organizations or union members/spouses. (Compare this to the community effort supporting the May 2005 fire levies where only $1,500 of $17,000 raised for the campaign came from a union.)
• A noted local union attorney, Joseph J. Allotta, is the group's treasurer.
• Three unions, a union trade group and a union PAC have endorsed their efforts, including, thousands of dollars of financial support from Local 2243 of the IAFF, the union that represents our firefighters.
• The committee's attorney, Keith Wilkowski, interchangeably uses the phrases "my clients" and "the firefighters" in email correspondence with a local elected official.

Two and a half years ago, all of the support for the levy campaign came from the local community - businesses and residents who chose to support an unprecedented expansion of the fire department. This election we have various unions from outside Sylvania putting major money in to a campaign in order to avoid losing their grip on even one small part of the government.

Don't be fooled by their protests that this has nothing to do with the union. For decades, in governments all through out Lucas County, unions have been pandered to in order to get their support and avoid controversy. Now, Pam and I have stood up to the union, and the union community is doing every thing they can to thwart our efforts to bring responsible government to Sylvania.

Who do you want running Sylvania Township? Experienced business and government professionals, or the union? I urge you to vote "NO" on issues 5 and 20, the 1.5 mill fire levies supported by the unions.

Perry for Fiscal Officer

The township would benefit from the experience, knowledge and financial background of Ken Perry as Fiscal Officer. Ken has 30+ years of experiencing in the banking industry, and has first hand knowledge of the duties and obligations of the Fiscal Officer. I encourage you to vote for Ken Perry for Fiscal Officer.

Thank you for joining me in this township update. I encourage you to forward it on to other township residents and businesses.

Sincerely,

DeeDee Liedel
Sylvania Township Trustee

Civil Discourse Has Disappeared

Civil discourse in the debate regarding competing fire levies has pretty much disappeared. I have been accused of lying regarding statements that I have made. Let me take a moment to defend my statements:

1. I have been accused of saying that if it were not for the union mandated minimum staffing level I would have cut staffing even more.This is not true.I have said that in making the staffing level decision, we looked at the union contract for guidance.The union thought 14 firefighters was safe almost 2 years ago when they entered into the contract; why have they now changed their minds?
2. My statement that “the 1.5 Mill levy is a ‘temporary’ fix according to the citizens group”:Their website states that this levy will allow the department to operate “while long term funding options can be explored.”My proposal for a five-year levy was intended to get the township on a five year funding horizon, not as a stop-gap measure until we can “fix” a funding mechanism (property taxes) that isn’t broken.
3. My statement that the levy committee is demanding that we increase our staffing by 50 per cent: Again, their website refers to needed staffing levels of 21 people at all times, seven more than the 14 we staff on a daily basis now. It’s simple math.
   
4. I have stated that the 1.5 mill levy will not pay for new equipment or facilities. Although the ballot language of the 1.5 mill levy will allow us to use the money for capital needs, it’s not enough money for what they are saying it will pay for. According to public statements made by their co-chair Mike Brown, they believe the 1.5 mill levy will pay for 5 additional fire fighters ($490,000+), transport unit ($100,000 for equipment lease, plus other expenses), full time fire inspector ($75,000+) and equipment and buildings ($740,000 per our bond levy request). If we are at a $1.6 million deficit as our fiscal officer claims, the $2.2 million raised by this levy is barely enough to cover the personnel changes they are demanding. This levy will not pay for capital needs and personnel increases, despite what the levy group is saying.

For years, the fire department has demanded more and more and more. Prior trustees just opened up the township coffers and practically gave them a blank check. In ten years, we have seen spending almost double, while township population has increased only marginally. I’m not seeking to ‘gut’ the department, I’m simply demanding that the fire department be responsible in its spending and actually stick to a budget.

DeeDee Liedel
Sylvania Township Trustee

Sylvania Township Update

Lots of new and important information in this issue, including taxes, money, and zoning. A lot of good news and progress has been made, and I want to share that with you.

Township Taxes Reduced!

It took a little bit of work, but I did it - I have reduced your taxes. I firmly believe that we can run government more efficiently without reducing services, thus saving you, the taxpayer, money. This is a step in that direction.

In the last few months, it became apparent to me that the police department has more in cash reserves, almost double, than was expected after voters passed the 2004 2.5 mil levy. Clearly, we have enough money to operate the police department at current levels, and there was no reason in my opinion to continue to collect more than we need. We can reduce the police revenues without reducing service, laying off employees or otherwise negatively affecting the safety of our community.

I applaud the police department for their fiscal stewardship while providing excellent service. Many of our officers and staff live in the township and understand the burden that high property taxes place on our residents and businesses.

The tax holiday is not large, just $660,000 out of a $22 million overall township budget. But it is a first step, and I will continue to work to reduce your taxes and limit any increases to those absolutely necessary.

Finding Money

Well, we haven't exactly 'found' money, but we have increased revenues without increasing property taxes. Part of the process of putting the Township's finances in order is to make sure we are collecting all money that is due to us.

Back in 2000, the township entered in to an agreement with a developer for road improvements for the Giant Eagle/Lowe's development on Central Avenue. The Township agreed to make over $500,000 in road improvement for the project, to be reimbursed by the retailers over nine years. Unfortunately, the township was not collecting the money, shifting the burden of these road improvements to the township taxpayers, not the businesses that benefited.

Why had we not collected this money? I don't know. Our Fiscal Officer who likes to refer to himself as the township's fiscal watch dog never brought this issue to the attention of the trustees. It was Pam Hanley's review of past records that brought this outstanding receivable to our attention. In 2006, with the assistance of a little legal muscle, we received $172,169.70, bringing the obligation current.

There were a few other areas where we have been able to collect the full amount due the township. In total, we received over $200,000 in additional revenue in 2006 and 2007, money that could have been collected in prior years and have eased the tax burden on our residents and business, but for the lax fiscal policies of prior boards and weak assistance of the fiscal officer. This is just an example of the fiscal oversight which has been added to the township since I took office, in an effort to manage our assets to the best benefit of our residents.

We Now Have a Zoning Compliance Office

We made a very important purchase recently for our zoning department - we bought tape measures. Yes, simple tape measures, items that are used to measure distance and height and width and depth. With these tools we will now be able to operate a Zoning Compliance Office as opposed to what we have been operating, a zoning application office.

Why didn't we have tape measures in a department that is supposed to be in charge of making sure that those who are building in Sylvania Township are doing so within the guidelines of our Zoning Resolution? I have no idea, other than to say that it has taken me and the other trustees as well as our administrator this long to figure out that our Zoning Office was doing little more than taking applications and approving them, with little or no follow up.

For at least 4 years, township trustee elections have partially focused on the issue of development and growth in our community. But it didn't matter what we ran on, what we said, what we told constituents or how we voted on zoning issues, if the reality was that the zoning department was not fairly, accurately, and timely enforcing the guidelines of our Zoning Resolution.

We all made the assumption that the Zoning Department was enforcing site plan requirements as approved by the Trustees and Zoning Commission, that site visits were made to ensure sign limits and landscaping requirements were being adhered to, that reasonable enforcement was being instituted for the betterment of the community as a whole. That was a wrong assumption, and it is now being corrected.

I look forward to working with Carol and Pam to strengthen our zoning department so that it truly serves the interests of our entire community including the residents, not just the interests of developers and builders.

Competing Fire Levies

The push has started to convince the Sylvania community that they are in imminent danger, a danger that can only be remedied by raising our already high property tax rates. Recent rhetoric by members of the group Supporters for a Safe Sylvania is meant to do nothing but scare the public in to giving the township more money, money that we don't need to provide quality fire and EMS protection to our community.

The trustees have determined that a 0.5 mill operating levy is sufficient to continue funding our fire department at its current service level. However a citizens group is encouraging a 1.5 mill levy, three times the money we really need. They have also said our 0.5 mill capital levy is not enough, either.

Let's start with the 1.5 mill operating levy the citizen group has put on the ballot. It has been described by a member of the firefighters union as a band-aid on a bleeding artery. Adding $2.2 million dollars on a $6.8 million budget is only a temporary fix? They want $2.2 million now, and they want even more in 5 years. What is really needed according to them? They haven't said, just vague references to a "permanent" solution along with demands to increase our staffing 50%. In other words, hold on to your pocketbook, they want to dig a lot deeper.

Members of the group are also attacking our capital levy saying that it's not enough. Again, they want more. They want more space for more firefighters. Now mind you, our plans allow for twice the number of firefighters than we have now, allowing for future growth needs. But eighty percent of the township is built out; almost the entire city is built out. How much bigger do they want? How many more fire fighters? But they want more. More than twice the staff than we do now, if the proposed fire station plans are too small. More space, more money, higher taxes. Keep a tight grip on that pocketbook.

We currently operate an extremely effective fire and EMS service, with excellent response times. Over 80% of our fulltime firefighters are paramedics, a percentage matched by no other department in this region. Our first responders - the first vehicle out to any medical emergency call - are staffed with paramedics, providing unparalleled service to the residents and visitors of the Sylvania community. We respond to the needs of the community with timely, trained staff.

In 2005, the then-trustees tried to increase annual funding for the fire department by $5 million. I helped lead the campaign opposing such an outrageous increase in our property taxes and it was defeated by voters four to one. While we ostensibly have a citizens group trying to raise taxes now, it is supported by the same people - the firefighters union. They want $2.2 million now, more operating money in 5 years, plus more than $740,000 a year to build new buildings. Do you think we're getting close to the $5 million we so soundly turned down 2½ years ago?

Spending in the fire department has doubled - DOUBLED - in ten years. Now they want another 32% increase. We don't need it. We are not cutting services; we are not replacing our full time firefighters with part time volunteers; we are not going to an all-volunteer force. But we are demanding that the department watch its spending, that they operate in an efficient manner.

One levy supporter stated that "one of these levies will accomplish something and the other one won't." That is true. One levy, the 1.5 mill citizen levy, will continue to push up the cost of living in Sylvania and make it harder for families and retirees to remain in Sylvania because our property taxes are out of control. It will tax our residents needlessly and will make it more difficult for other property-tax based entities to get needed funding in the future. The other one, the 0.5 mill operating levy, will keep property taxes as low as possible while maintaining our excellent fire and EMS services.

Thank you for joining me in this township update. I encourage you to forward it on to other township residents and businesses.

Sincerely,

DeeDee Liedel
Sylvania Township Trustee

Sept. 18, 2007 Trustee Meeting - Tax Cut Proposed

A month ago, I initiated a process of placing Sylvania Township on a five-year funding horizon, where every five years the voters of Sylvania Township will have the opportunity to vote on the level of spending and the level of services desired. The first step of this process was to place on the November ballot a 0.5 mill, 5 year levy for fire department operations. This levy will provide sufficient funding to operate the fire department for five years.

The second step of implementing a 5-year funding horizon for township services will begin as we start discussing our annual resolution to authorize necessary tax levies and certify them to the county auditor.

I have reviewed the current financial information for each department, and while several departments appear to be financially healthy, only the police department will not be affected by the result of levies that are on the November ballot.

When the township requested a 2.5 mil police levy in 2004, taxpayers were told those funds would create a maximum $1.8 million in cash reserves. As 2007 concludes, the police department will actually have $3.3 million in cash reserves. I recognize and appreciate the hard work of members and supporters of the Police Department to pass levies, but diligent work at controlling their budgets have paid off.

The result of the healthy financial position of the police department means that we can safely forego collecting the 1984 1.5 mill levy which currently collects approximately $757,000 without reducing police services.

If we were to choose to not take this action, the police department would continue to build cash reserves. In essence, the people who live here today would be paying for police service 15-20 years in the future. My proposal today simply begins to realign our funding sources so that those who are paying for the services actually receive the services.

I believe this is a reasonable step to take, so that we can assure tax payers that we are being prudent and efficient with their tax dollars while being cognizant of the burden property taxes place on the residents and businesses of our community. It is not the place of government to collect whatever revenue it possibly can, just because they can. Government should burden the taxpayers no more than necessary to provide basic necessary services, including emergency services of police and fire.

I believe that we are currently burdening our residents more than necessary, and will continue to support a reduction of tax revenue.

Welcome to my latest edition of Talk of the Township. This issue I will update you on traffic improvements, the township's land use plan, and a new service which enhances our emergency services.

Improved Traffic Safety

Three weeks ago, I criticized Lucas County for failing to address several critical issues in Sylvania Township. One of those issues was dangerous intersections in the township. In making that statement, I was referring specifically to the intersection of Mitchaw and Brint Roads, which has historical seen numerous accident a year and is highly traveled by our teen drivers to and from sporting and school events.

I am happy to say that the Lucas County Engineer announced today plans to install stop signs on Brint Road at Mitchaw, thus making that intersection a four-way stop. This will increase the safety at that intersection, reduce accidents, and benefit the residents and visitors of our community.

Improvements are expected to take place on Monday, September 24. Several methods of notification will be used in order to identify this change in traffic signals to drivers using that roadway.

I applaud the county for finally taking this step to improve the quality of life in Sylvania Township. It would be nice if we didn't need to publicly criticize the county in an attempt to bring attention to our needs. But I am willing to do just that if it is what needs to be done to ensure the safety of our residents and visitors.

Township Land Use Plan Updated

The Board of Trustees has updated the Township's Land Use Plan for the first time in 6 years. And for the first time in over a decade, a developer has not sat as a trustee to approve or oppose a plan that could directly affect their future activities in the Township.

A land use plan for the Township is very important because we need to maintain and even improve the quality of life of existing residents but at the same time not unduly interfere with property owners' rights to realize the highest and best use of their property in the future. Sometimes this is a delicate balance, but I believe the Plan approved by the Trustees on September 4 does exactly this.

We have maintained historically residential areas on Sylvania Ave. and McCord Road, despite pressure by some to allow further commercial creep in these areas. Recommendations were made for future revisions of our Zoning Resolution that provide for better buffering between residential areas and commercial zoning. In addition, future areas of growth and redevelopment were identified so that we can be prepared with an overall view of what we want in our community; we can act proactive instead of reacting.

Let's be clear on what the purpose of the land use plan is. It is not to help property owners or developers realize the highest profit from changing the zoning on some particular parcel. It is not to diminish the value of currently existing properties in the township. The purpose of a land use plan is to help guide future development in our community so that growth is of a high quality, blends well with existing residential areas, allows for sufficient commercial areas to provide services, goods and jobs to compliment our residents, and maintains our high standard of living.

One interesting note that came out of this land use revision comes from our decision to develop a land use plan separate from the City of Sylvania. Historically, our land use plans had always been a joint venture with the city, a process that had its uses and was beneficial. But clearly, the Township and the City are in different stages of growth. The result of the joint endeavor was that certain growth issues in the township were not really being addressed because of the effort to coordinate the two different zoning codes. I won't rule out the prospect of perhaps in the future joining forces with the city to revise our land use plans, but we will certainly be more cognizant of the different needs of our community if that should take place.

You will not notice instant changes to the development you see going on in our community today. It can take a few years from the start of the process before a commercial or residential development is done. But this land use plan will improve the quality of development and protect residential areas in the future.

I want to commend and thank the Steering Committee for their hard work. Their time and effort will be a benefit to our community for years to come.

Enhanced Emergency Services

I am pleased to announce a new emergency service that is being offered to the residents, businesses, and visitors of Sylvania Township and the City of Sylvania. Starting August 20, 2007, we began offering simultaneous dispatch of ambulance services to those who find themselves in need of being transported to a medical facility but are not in a life-endangering situation.

Under the past structure of EMS services, when a medical emergency call was received by our fire dispatchers, they would send out one of the fire department's first responders - a crew of at least 2 fire fighters including at least one paramedic - to respond immediately to the scene and provide medical care. If during the initial call to 911 the dispatcher believed the call was life threatening, the Lucas County Life Squad housed at Station 1 would be dispatched at the same time.

However, if the incident was not considered to be life threatening, our first responders would be sent alone. Once on the scene, they would assess the situation and determine if medical transport would be needed, at which time an ambulance would be called to provide basic life-support transportation to a medical facility of the patient's choice. By waiting until the first responders arrive and assess the situation, an additional 10-15 minutes could go by before the patient was headed to the hospital. Now, let me reiterate, this is in non-life threatening situations.

By working with the Lucas County EMS and private ambulance companies, it is now standard operating procedure to dispatch an ambulance at the same time our first responders are sent out. This will reduce the wait before the patient can be transported to a medical facility; reduce the amount of time our first responders are out of service on a call; and increase community safety as it reduces the number of emergency vehicles operating with lights and sirens.

This enhanced emergency service is being provided to those in need in our community without making our taxpayers subsidize transport services for non-residents. If the ambulance is cancelled en route or if the patient declines transportation, the private ambulance companies will not bill for services not rendered. Finally, this will allow our firefighter/paramedics to concentrate on what they were trained to do - fight fires and provide emergency medical care, not drive an ambulance.

Thank you for joining me in this township update. I encourage you to forward it on to other township residents and businesses.

Sincerely,

DeeDee Liedel
Sylvania Township Trustee

Earlier today, at a meeting of the trustees, I voted to place two levies on the November ballot.

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 Sylvania Township.

With that in mind, I offer Resolution No. 07-202.

And with that, there will be two 0.5 mill levies on the November ballot, one for buildings/equipments and one for operations. I believe that the levy for operations is sufficient to continue our excellent fire and EMS service to the Sylvania community, putting the department on a pattern of efficiency and stability. The levy will generate $740,000 additional dollars for the fire department which will allow us to implement sound accounting principles and maintain excellent service. I can't support asking for more, because I believe more is not needed. As the township has shown in the past, give them more money and they will simply spend it. I'm not asking for more because it will only be wasted instead of being spent prudently, efficiently and wisely. It is now up to the voters. (For anyone who saw this before I corrected a typo - it was a typo, and not what I intended to say. Note to self - proof read twice.)

Volume #2, July 2007

Welcome to another installment in my quest to keep you informed on what is going on at the township. Today I will tell you about the significant financial progress we have made, discuss the issue of borrowing money, and talk about public works. Thanks for taking the time to learn more about the workings of Sylvania Township government. I invite you to share this with your friends and neighbors and encourage you to sign up for my email newsletter.

Significant Financial Progress

Look what happens when you have a fox guarding the hen house. No, you don't have wholesale slaughter of the chicks, but you do have peeps much more conscientious of what they are doing. What am I talking about?

A review of our financials as of June 30, 2007 shows that we have $5,039,870.01 more than we did as of June 30, 2006. Five million dollars more. Now, granted, half of that is due to a windfall estate tax receipt that we received in February of this year, an unexpected but welcome deposit into the township's treasury. But what about the rest? Good fiscal policy, ardent review of expenditures, conscientious pursuit of revenue (without raising taxes), and employees who are beginning to realize that the trustees (well, at least two of us), do not view the taxpayers as bottomless pits of money.

The first step in putting our financial matters in orders was hiring someone who knew what a balance sheet and budgets were, someone who not only knew how to read reports but how to develop reports that were informative and useful. Devon Klofta was hired in fall of 2006 as our Director of Accounting and Budgeting. Devon is working with all senior management to formulate and monitor department budgets, identify and explain variances, and to make sure that the township is collecting all revenue that it is due. Why was this not done before? Good question; I have no idea why the prior administration and elected officials didn't do this.

Now we have monthly reports that show us how much we have spent, how much we had expected to spend, how much more we plan to spend, trending information, and - (drum roll please) - a bank reconciliation, to show us how much cash we have in the bank. Last fall, when we had state auditors in the office performing our biennial audit, I refused to approve monthly financial information as it was provided to the trustees by the Fiscal Officer after the state auditor told me that the cash we reported on our balance sheet did not match the cash we had in the bank. I'm not sure how that happened, but I do know we have fixed that problem and now we know exactly how much cash we have, and I'm happy to say that we have $5 million more than we did last year.

Borrowing Money

I think most people would agree that when you borrow money, you should pay it back. Much of our economy is set up on that premise.

For years, the township fire department has borrowed money from the general fund of the township. Currently, the general fund is owed over $1 million by the fire department, some of it dating back to 2001. The fire department has been living above their means, yet they provide a valuable service to the city and township, so it was the decision of past elected officials to loan the fire department this money. The current board agreed to loan about $135,000 in 2007 as well.

As we approach having to make a decision on a levy request for the fire department, I have heard numerous people ask whether the proceeds from a new levy will go to repay the general fund. Specifically I have heard queries as to whether proceeds from a citizens levy initiative will go to repay those advances. Many site the mismanagement of the prior township trustees as a reason why the fire department should not repay the loans. But the community as a whole voted for those trustees, so it would be unfair at this point to disavow borrowings that were made under prior trustees.

City residents do pay a 0.5 mill levy into the township's general fund, because the city has never removed itself from the township's borders. In addition to that levy, we receive general fund revenue from numerous other sources, including gas tax, licence fees, personal property tax, estate tax, etc. Except for the 0.5 mill levy, all general fund revenue is received directly or indirectly from activities in the unincorporated township. In all, the tax revenue from city property amounts to about 6% of the general fund receipts. To say that the fire department, which serves the city, should not pay back the general fund when only 6% of the revenue is derived from city property taxes is not logical to me. If the fire department does not repay the general fund, in essence we would be making taxpayers in the unincorporated township subsidize fire and EMS services provided to the city.

So should the fire department have to repay the general fund? We required loans made to the police department be repaid. We are also asking for repayment of loans made to the water and sewer district. The general fund is repaying a loan it received from the road department. Why should we treat the fire department differently? Fire services should be paid for by those who benefit from the services, so I think it is logical and fair to plan on having the fire department repay the general fund.

Balancing Roads and Leaves

Our Department of Public Works is making good progress this year in street repaving. In total, department director Greg Huffman expects to be able to pave 7 miles this season. This is an improvement over past years when sometimes the township was only able to repave 1 mile of road. Given that we have 120+ miles of residential road, and on average roads need to be repaved every 20 years, the Township needs to repave at least 6 miles a year to stay on top of the game. Raiding the road department budget to pay for other township services is exceptionally short-sighted, and something I am opposed to.

Last year, we spent about $400,000 on street repaving, just barely hitting our average of 6 miles. But surprisingly, the leaf pickup for fall 2006 cost over $600,000. I was stunned when I saw the report that said we spent more on a non-capital service than we did on our infrastructure.

I know that leaf collection is an important service to our tree-laden community. Our residents expect it, and we will continue to provide that service. But I also think that we need to figure out more efficient ways of providing that service. I believe that many of the problems at the Township result from failing to look beyond what has always been done. We have grown from a small rural township to an urban community, and yet some of our practices have not changed, thus leading to inefficiencies.

Improving our fall leaf pickup service to provide quality service in a cost efficient manner will be looked at in the next few years. There are a variety of ideas that we are looking at, and we always welcome resident input.

That wraps up this latest installment. As always, I encourage emails to trusteedeedee@yahoo.com.

Sincerely,

DeeDee Liedel
Sylvania Township Trustee

Fire Department Update

So far I've told you I'm going to say something, then I told you what I'm going to talk about, but I haven't really said anything yet. I can hear it now: typical politician! Well, I'll kick off my substantive comments with probably one of the most pressing issues facing the township - the fire department.

The trustees are moving closer to voting on the issue of putting a capital levy on the November 2007 ballot. I can hear some people now - but you said no new taxes! I did, and I'm not yet convinced that our taxpayers can afford any more taxes. But there are positives to what is being looked at.

First, as any one who has looked at our facilities will agree, our fire stations are in bad shape and some of the equipment should have been replaced years ago. Routine maintenance has been deferred for years, in exchange for more bodies on trucks. The roof repair at Station 2 earlier this year that necessitated our firefighters to move to temporary quarters for a month has been evident for years. I know their self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA) equipment has not been tested in over 20 months (despite annual testing standards) because the 2006 budget was approved without money for testing included. I was not aware that the budget approved by the prior board did not include money for this testing because it was not brought to our attention until spring of 2007. Money is available in this year’s budget, and testing is scheduled for later this fall.

I believe it is bad management to forego maintenance of facilities and equipment in exchange for personnel because we can’t protect the lives of our fire fighters, residents, and visitors with equipment that may not be functional when it is needed. I am working hard to make sure that the fire budget has a solid balance of personnel and equipment/facilities, instead of over-emphasizing one at the cost of the other.

We have retained an architect to revise the fire station plans that were completed over 2 years ago when the township first considered a capital levy. We have scaled down the proposed buildings 30-40%, thus reducing the cost to the taxpayers. Incredible as it seems, the plans we are looking at will accommodate twice the manpower we are currently using at each of the stations to allow for potential future growth. And yet the plans from 2 years ago were larger! I have no idea what they planned to do with all of that space. Our community needs solid, efficient, productive facilities from which to operate the fire department, not monuments to government excess.

With scaling back the request for facilities and equipment from the excessive to the reasonable, I believe we are looking at a potential 20 year bond levy of around 0.75 mill. That is in comparison to the 1.1 mill permanent levy that was requested in May 2005. We are still working through final numbers, but I will continue to make sure that if we go to the voters for additional revenue, it will be under a prudent, efficient, and modest plan, not something that will fluff the egos of those involved at the expense of the taxpayers.

What did I say?

While preparing material for my return to proactive political communication, I took the opportunity to review some of my campaign material and remind myself of what I told people while I was campaigning. I think it is important for an elected official to carry through on the promises made while campaigning. When it comes to politics, almost nothing frustrates me more than having a candidate get in to office to say "I know what I said, but ..." I think that is wrong. So reviewing my campaign material has given me an opportunity to see if I have changed my mind since I've been in office. Have I held to my campaign statements? My current self-assessment is that I have not changed my position on the major issues I campaigned on, though I will admit progress has not been as quick as I had hoped on some items.

Here is a list of topics I discussed in my campaign emails:

· Fiscal restraint

· Financial Accountability

· Quality Growth

· Working with the City

· Purpose of Government

· Procrastination

In the next few months I will talk in more depth about these issues, especially as some of them tie in to the ballot issues that Sylvania voters will be facing in November.

Busy November Ballot

The election ballot for this November is promising to be a very busy ballot, indeed. In addition to the regular elections for a township trustee, the township fiscal officer, two school board members, and four members of city counsel, there is expected to be several other issues including:

· a citizen petition initiative to place a 1.5 mil fire levy on the city and township ballot,

· a merger proposal,

· the unexpired term of a city counsel seat,

· several county-wide levies,

In addition there is potential for a capital levy and an operating levy for the fire department.

As we get closer to November, I will talk about each of the election decisions that will affect our local community, including the township's role and my personal perspective.

Back to proactive communications

It's been 18 months since I took office as a Sylvania Township Trustee. While I think I did a good job of getting my message out to the voters of Sylvania during the campaign, I have to admit that I have done a poor job of that while in office. This email is the first in my effort to correct that.

I'll own up to a bit of naivety while entering the fray that is politics. I campaigned hard, got my message to the voters, and the voters supported me. But then I stopped proactively communicating with the voters, and let the media and others explain what was going on at the Township, I let others define who I was and what I was doing. As a result, my actions were not always being represented fairly and accurately.

I ran and was elected on some very important issues to our community - ever- increasing property taxes and development. The direction that I am working to take the township keeps those issues in mind, every step of the way. You may not always agree with me, but hopefully by resurrecting my email campaign, I can help you understand the basis for some of my decisions.