Sylvania Township Trustees Suspend Police Officer

Under the provisions of Ohio Revised Code §505.491, the Sylvania Township Board of Trustees took action to suspend a police officer for three days, without pay. This was a decision which was made after all proper steps were taken, including the filing of charges on October 7, 2008 against Officer Ron Dicus followed by a hearing held during our regular township trustee meeting October 21, 2008. While having a disciplinary hearing during a public meeting may seem inappropriate, it is in fact required under the Ohio Revised Code unless waived by the police officer.

This discipline process was started because an officer refused to follow a direct and lawful order. After 11 days elapsed and the officer remained in violation of the order, he was notified that he was insubordinate and the discipline process was started. The officer was given the opportunity to waive the public hearing in front of the trustees by having the Chief of Police hear the discipline charges but the officer chose not to.

Insubordination, the failure to follow a direct order, is a serious offense in a police department. The safety of our residents, visitors and employees depend upon police officers following orders. Our officers need to know without a doubt that their fellow officer will follow lawful orders given to them. We cannot have individual officers determining which orders they choose to follow and which orders they will ignore.

If an officer disagrees with an order, for example if they believe it is in violation of the union contract, proper procedure would be to follow the order and then file a grievance and allow the grievance procedure to work in determining if it was a lawful order under the contract. But this did not happen in this case, the officer chose instead to ignore the order until discipline procedures were started.

Given the totality of the situation, I believe the township trustees had to act unanimously in disciplining Officer Dicus for insubordination when he failed to follow a direct order. We cannot have the uncertainty that would be created if our police officers do not know which order a fellow officer will follow; their very lives could depend on having confidence that orders will be followed.

Now I come to the part which will trigger questions: the order Officer Dicus was given and failed to follow was to trim his mustache. The obvious question is "should he really be suspended just because he didn't trim his mustache?" While that may be an obvious question, it is not the issue. Bottom line is that the officer failed to follow an order. Period. As was laid out at the hearing, the Sylvania Township Police Department has a policy on personal appearance and grooming, including the appropriate grooming of mustaches. Officer Dicus received and acknowledged the policy yet he chose to ignore the direct order. He never raised concerns or objections to the policy prior to his discipline.

As mentioned earlier, the officer could have waived his right to a hearing before the trustees, as other police officers at the township have done when discipline was necessary in other cases. But I believe this was a calculated decision by the union to not waive the trustee hearing, and set up a situation which had the potential to make the trustees either 1) cave in light of the potential bad publicity of disciplining a police officer over a mustache or 2) look bad for being so petty as to discipline a police officer over a mustache.

Ohio law requires that trustees hold a hearing in order to discipline a police officer with time off. If the trustees do not follow through on such hearings and subsequent discipline (i.e., we cave), we would potentially be in the position of never being able to discipline a police officer. If we fail to support our Chief of Police in implementing and enforcing policies that we have directed and supported him in developing in order to improve and enhance our police department, we would be creating chaos and encouraging an atmosphere which would jeopardize the safety and protection of our residents, visitors and employees. That is not something that I am willing to do.

Some might say it was wrong to discipline a police officer over a mustache. But this was not just a mustache - this was willful disregard of a direct lawful order. I will not encourage an atmosphere in our police department where our Chief is powerless and the union is running the department. Officer Dicus was given a lawful order and he chose not to follow it. That is insubordination and the trustees acted appropriately.

Sylvania Township Update

Sorry, gang, this is a long update. There is a lot to talk about including the merger, taxes, the police department, and other issues.

Merger Commission Not Supported by Trustees

On October 1, 2008, the township trustees held a public forum so that we could hear from you, our constituents, what they felt about the proposed merger commission. We gave ample opportunity for everyone there to speak, listening to both those who were in favor of continued study and those who were opposed to any further talk of merging the township and city.

Some in favor of the merger encouraged the trustees not to politicize this issue, asked us not to become involved, and told us we should not try to influence the discussion. I found this extremely disturbing because several city councilmen have either become directly involved or have stated that the city has a vested interest in this process. Why should elected officials from the city be involved but not the township? Numerous township residents asked the township trustees to become involved, to oppose the merger, and to even provide funding for an opposition group. Both city and township residents are our constituents, so where should my focus lie? Hands off or vocally opposed?

On one hand, I respect those who believe this is a valuable process and potentially beneficially to our community. Some have put hours of time in to OneSylvania, and I appreciate the time they are willing to commit to Sylvania. However, I can't help but be firm in my opinion that this is not the right thing for the township to do for a variety of reasons. And after our public forum, I am convinced that I not only have a right to speak out about this issue, but residents are expecting me to speak out on this issue.

Today, the Sylvania Township Board of Trustees took unanimous action not to support the merger commission. We based this decision on two issues.

First, the merger commission as it will be voted on by the residents is not balanced. Under Ohio Revised Code §709.45(A), the merger commission is required to have 5 members from the city and 5 members from the unincorporated township. Unfortunately, one of the township commissioners was annexed in to the city and is no longer a valid elector for the township - but remains on the township ballot. The township requested that the issue be removed from the ballot, but the protest was denied. How, who or when this commissioner would be replaced is unclear despite our efforts to seek advice from the Secretary of State and Attorney General.

Second, we heard loud and clear the view of the vast majority of residents who attended our public hearing. What we heard was:

1. There was a lack of interest in any further exploration of merging the city and the township;
   
2. Residents expressed their favor for and love of the qualities of life unique to township living;
3. Residents expressed their skepticism of promises to reduce residents' local tax burden;
   
4. Rejection of a tax structure where some township residents and businesses would bear a heavier tax burden in order to finance a tax cut for other residents, including city residents; and
   
5. Residents expressed satisfaction with the responsive and cost-effective nature of township government.

There are more reasons beyond the above why I oppose the merger, but there are some other topics that I want to update you on today, so I will be sure to discuss those other reasons at a later date but certainly before the election.

Tax Holiday Expanded but Still Not Enough

The good news first: we have expanded the tax holiday that I lobbied for last year. We chose not to collect approximately $700,000 in property taxes for the police department this year, 2008. As we begin the budgeting process for 2009, we voted not to collect $1,050,000 in property taxes for the police department, expanding the tax holiday to township residents.

Despite reducing revenue by over $1 million, initial projections indicate that the 2004 police levy will last another 3 years. If we had not declared a tax holiday, the police levies would last an additional 10-15 years, making taxpayers today pay for services that will not be rendered for almost 15 years. That is not logical and is why I supported the decision to roll back taxes on our residents.

While this increased tax holiday is great, I don't believe it is enough. For the last three years I have been asking that we develop and implement an investment policy, a cash reserves policy, long-term plans for the general fund, and capital improvement plans for all departments. While we have not focued on these long-term financial issues, our cash balance continues to increase - we are spending less money then we collect. While at first glance this is great, the reality is that we are taking money from the pockets of our residents and businesses and we don't know if we need it or how it will be spent.

I asked that my fellow trustees consider choosing not to collect the 0.5 mill inside levy which collects about $700,000, funds a small portion of our general fund and is assessed against all township and city property owners. I made this request because I object to the township continuing to collect money with no real plans on how to spend it. I firmly believe that if government has money, they will figure out a way to spend it; that doesn't mean we need it.

There was not support for the general fund tax holiday from my fellow trustees. Part of the reason for that is the timing - we have to certify amounts to the auditor's office before we really start the budgeting process, so I'll admit that it's hard to know at this point whether or not we really need that $700,000. But I still hate the thought that we continue to collect all monies available to us while our cash balance improves.

I did secure from my fellow trustees commitments - on the record - to make sure we work to get the policies in place, the plans developed, the processes in order so that next year when we can give serious consideration to the general fund tax holiday. I will hold them to that commitment.

7510 Wind River Drive - UPDATE

Just a quick update on the status of the house on Wind River Drive. On behalf of the trustees, I attended the hearing on September 25 on the appeal of our decision to have the structure removed because it was not secured, not safe and structurally defective. The owner's attorney provided testimony from one expert witness as did we. The judge took the case under advisement and will be making a decision, hopefully relatively soon. As this is still pending litigation, I will refrain from further comment and will update you as soon as we have a ruling.

Police Union Negotiations

It's been a bit of a rough year, as our police department unions have been working without a contract since October 1, 2007. Despite this internal unrest, our police personnel have continued to serve the residents, businesses and guests of Sylvania Township to their highest ability and I appreciate and respect their dedication to our community.

During the past year, we have been diligently negotiating with all three police unions, but the process has been long as there were numerous issues that we had to address in order to increase the efficiency and cost effectiveness of the police department, while maintaining the quality service that our community expects.

Certainly, working without a contract is not necessarily conducive to productive labor-management relationships. It was not a situation that I was pleased with, but clearly we have to have a union contract structure that allows us to make the management decisions necessary to operate the police department in the best interests of the public.

But the final outcome of the union negotiations resulted in 3.0-3.5% raises for each of the next two years (plus one year retroactive); in addition, there was a $1500 signing bonus. In exchange, we have the right to implement a more cost effective health insurance plan (an 80-20 plan as compared to our current 100%/fully-insured plan) with employee contributions of 10% (up from about 2.5%) and more management flexibility in manning levels and shift supervision. We were denied our requests to set up more flexible shifts and to change the disciplinary process to a structure that would be more respectful of individual personnel.

I don't view contract negotiations as a win-win type of things; we all lose something. But hopefully now that the process is over, we can get past the unfortunate consequence of being on opposite sides of the bargaining table and focus all of our energies on providing efficient and effective safety services.

Township Under Audit

It is time for our bi-annual audit - every two years we undergo an audit which is intended to make sure that our financial reports accurately represent the financial position of the township. The last time we were audited covered the 2004 and 2005 calendar years; state auditors are now looking at 2006 and 2007.

Our last audit was a bit problematic. Going back to 2000, auditors had instructed township staff to make certain adjustments to properly reflect which funds received money but these adjustments had not been made. So 6 years worth of adjustments had to be made at one time which created some additional problems.

In the past year since our last audit was concluded, I have had numerous conversations with our staff regarding making sure this year we would get a clean audit report. I was assured that the prior problems had been corrected and things were fine. Unfortunately, now I am hearing that the same problems that had to be corrected in prior years are still happening.

Clearly, this does not make me happy. I am not of the mind to micro-manage our staff, as I consider them professionals capable of performing their assigned duties with efficiency and experience. But somewhere along the line, issues have not been addressed and we are not functioning as we should be 100% of the time.

The addition to our staff of Jim Beck as our Director of Accounting and Budgeting will allow the township to address this problem, along with helping us down the road of making long-term plans, setting investment and accounting policies, and making sure we are able to monitor daily and weekly expenditures to keep expenditures in line with budgets.

While I struggled a little with the expense of having a full-time Director of Accounting and Budgeting, the reality is that we have a budget in excess of $22 million, a cash balance exceeding $15 million, and we're embarking on a $10 million capital plan including needing to become rated for bonding purposes. Those factors dictate we put adequate resources toward preserving, monitoring and planning the township's cash resources.

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

Merger Petition Protested by Township Trustees

For decades, our community has played with the topic of merging the city and township. Unfortunately, this issue is greatly polarizing among our residents - some believe it is an issue that should be explored; others are adamantly opposed to any idea of merging the two governments. Today, Sylvania Township was forced to take action to protect the integrity of the legal process of merger, and thus stepped squarely in to the middle of this issue.

Over the past year, volunteers have circulated petitions in the township and city collecting signatures in order to place the issue of forming a merger commission on the November ballot. These volunteers spent countless hours working on an issue that they are passionate about, and I respect them for that. The petition includes five specifically named township electors and five specifically named city electors. These electors are often referred to as merger commissioners and, if a commission is formed, are charged with drawing up the statement of conditions for merger (i.e., how we would become one entity). The merger petition was filed with the Board of Elections and was certified to the ballot in August.

Unfortunately, separate action by a small group of township residents including one of the township merger commissioners has put in jeopardy the effort to allow residents to vote on the merger commission this November. On September 3, 2008, the City of Sylvania accepted a request to annex property at the corner of King and Brint known as Country Commons Walk, an annexation effort that was started in November 2007 by the residents of that subdivision.

When the city accepted the annexation request, it annexed in to the city the residence of one of the township's merger commissioners who had signed the annexation petition in November 2007. For at least eight months while One Sylvania was gathering signatures, they were aware that one of their township commissioners had requested to be annexed in to the city. Despite encouragement early on to replace this commissioner with another township resident, a step that would admittedly have made them start over with the petition drive, One Sylvania chose not to do so and continued to collect signatures.

Now that the annexation has been approved by the city, only four of the 10 merger commissioners slated to be voted on are township residents, which does not meet the minimum requirements of Ohio Revised Code ("ORC") § 709.45. Thus the integrity of the merger process has been compromised.

I know that some are going to criticize the township for spending taxpayer money on for this protest. But I believe that as township trustees we have an obligation to our constituents - township and city residents - to raise questions if the legal process for such an important community issue has not been followed and in fact may place township residents at a disadvantage if merger discussions proceed. Statements by merger proponents that "they believe" we can appoint a replacement for this commission but that the law is ambiguous is not reassuring that we will be facing a balanced merger commission if the issue passes in November.

But 2,500 voters signed the merger petitions, so doesn't that mean we are ignoring the will of voters by taking this action? What really undermines the will of the voter is misrepresenting that the township had equal representation among the named merger commissioners when One Sylvania knew one of the commissioners was likely to be annexed in to the city prior to the November election and in fact work edwith members of Sylvania City Council to ensure that the annexation would take place after the merger petitions were filed.

It is not the Township Trustees who are prohibiting the residents from making an informed decision with regard to a merger. It was One Sylvania that I believe failed to meet the legal requirements of the law and has placed the township trustees in the position of having to protect the integrity of the merger process as well as the representation of the voters of the unincorporated township. We should not allow the law to be subverted by a rush to the polls despite clearly failing to meet the requirements of the Ohio Revised Code.

Sincerely,

DeeDee Liedel

Sylvania Township Trustee

Thanks for joining me on my latest update ...

Important Upcoming Dates for Township Residents

ANNUAL HOUSEHOLD LARGE ITEM PICK UP

The Annual Household Large Item Pick Up for Township residents will begin on Monday, September 8, 2008.

Crews will provide one (1) pass through the community. To avoid being missed, the Public Works Manager requires all items placed at the curb or edge of the road by SUNDAY, SEPTEMBER 7. This service is available to Township residents only and all are invited to take advantage of this program.

COLLECTIBLE ITEMS: washers, dryers, stoves, dishwashers, furniture, bundled books and magazines, empty 55 gallon drums, toys, bikes, empty containers, carpeting, mattresses and bed springs, and small loose material that is placed in some type of container other than plastic bags. Brush will be picked up, please place in an organized pile along the roadway, but not in the road.

ITEMS WHICH WILL NOT BE PICKED UP: Refrigerators, freezers, air conditioners, liquid of any kind, earth, auto parts, batteries, fuel oil tanks, tires, vehicles, construction or building materials, leaves, grass, garden refuse, garbage bags, iron or steel pipe, tree stumps, boats, manufactured waste, garage doors, and newspapers.

BRUSH PICK UP

Sylvania Township Road Department offers a semi-annual Brush Pickup for Township residents, in April and September. The next scheduled Brush pickup is Monday, September 8, 2008, BRUSH ONLY, no grass clipping, leaves or other solid waste. Do not place brush piles in the roadway or gutter area. This is considered unlawful and creates a liability to the property owner. If additional help is required, call a landscape / waste hauling company.

We also provide a “Free Drop Off” facility, Clean Wood Recycling, 6505 West Bancroft Street, between I-475 and McCord Road, for all Township residents, zip code information is required. Hours of operation change throughout the year.

LEAF PICKUP SCHEDULE UPDATE

The Township starts Leaf Pick Up in mid October and continues through mid December, performed on a patrol basis. One cycle through the Township requires 3 weeks, then crews start over again performing additional cycles. Depending on weather conditions, our goal is to perform at least three (3) pickup cycles. Leaves should be placed at the curb side or along the edge of the street and free of brush and garden waste. PLEASE DO NOT PLACE LEAVES IN THE STREET OR IN PLASTIC BAGS!

Inclement weather and temporary equipment failure creates difficulty to predict the location of crews at any specific time.

Just compensation

A recent Toledo Blade article took umbrage with the raises that we gave some of our administrative staff recently, particular our administrator, Mr. Thomas. While I wince at having an employee's salary subject to such open analysis because a person's income is generally a personal and private topic not subject to public scrutiny, the reality is that all of our employees are fully aware that this information is public record and is turned over to anyone who asks. That being said, I have no problem discussing my part in the decision to award these raises.

First, let's get some facts straight that the Blade did not: prior to July 1, 2008, Mr. Thomas received $105,000 annual salary plus $450 per month in a car allowance, for a total W-2 compensation package of $110,400. During our recent annual review for Mr. Thomas, we rolled his car allowance in to his salary and increased the total package to $125,000. Thus, he received a 13% raise, not 19% that the Blade reported.

The Blade takes great pains to point out several townships that pay less than we do, as well as noting that a couple of large townships do not have an administrator. One of those townships without an administrator, Marion Township in Marion County, actually has only 20% of its population (fewer than 10,000 people) in the unincorporated part of the township; the rest is located within the city of Marion which has its own separate government just as the City of Sylvania does. The other, Beavercreek Township, has only 3,000 out of a total population of 41,000 in the unincorporated portion of the township. These are hardly valid comparisons to Sylvania which has over 25,000 residents outside the City of Sylvania, but they certainly where useful in making it look like we are paying our administrator too much.

But beyond those two example, according to the Center for Public Management and Regional Affairs at Miami University (link: http://data.cpmra.muohio.edu/salary/2007Data/07data.htm), the following are administrator salaries from some of the larger townships in Ohio for 2006 and 2007:

• Colerain - $118,955 (Largest Township)
• West Chester - $121,900 (3rd Largest Township)
• Washington - $108,530 (4th Largest Township)
• Anderson - $117,157 (9th Largest Township)
• Union - $125,000 (11th Largest Township)
• Deerfield - $109,507 (32nd Largest Township)
• Harrison - $115,000 (33rd Largest Township)

Not included in the above numbers may be additional perks such as a car allowance, additional retirement allocations, or factors such as experience and education of the administrator. Also, I am not familiar with what services these townships provide; not all townships have their own police, fire, etc., while others have recreation, parks and the like.

Mr. Thomas has brought to the township a new level of professionalism, management, and oversight, providing valuable guidance and strategic direction to the trustees. No longer are our labor contracts negotiated without the assistance of an attorney; no longer do we simply sign off on any building permit or development proposal that is brought in to our zoning department; no longer do we simply add 3% to last year's budget and ignore the budget until next year; no longer do we ignore the budget impact of labor negotiations.

Clearly our decision to increase Mr. Thomas's compensation is well within reasonable ranges of that profession. And for that sum we receive in exchange qualified, professional, and experienced management. By and large we have very little turn over at the township, partially due to the fact that we pay competitive wages in all departments, for both union and non-union labor. Certainly, we could replace any township employee as no one is irreplaceable, and that includes Mr. Thomas. But it would be extremely short sighted if we were to lose Mr. Thomas due to inadequate benefits to turn around and either have to accept a less-qualified replacement or pay the higher going market rates for a qualified candidate while losing valuable time and progress as the learning curve has to be tackled by a new administrator.

Should we become one city?

As you may have heard in local media, petitions have been filed and accepted by the Lucas County Board of Elections in order to put a proposed merger commission on the November ballot. What exactly does this mean?

Proponents of the merger commission are quick to tell me that 'this is not a merger, this is not a tax'. In other words, what we will be voting on in November will be whether or not the community wishes to further discuss the idea of a merger between Sylvania Township and the City of Sylvania; we are not voting on an actual merger or income tax. If the merger commission is approved by a majority in both the township and the city, the commission will then be in charge making a proposal of how the two governments could merge including how the government would be funded. The time line for this process is quite long, and could take several years if this merger commission is approved.

While this may just be a discussion of if and how we would want to merge, the argument that we would not be voting on a tax is a bit specious. First, all of the studies that have been done that 'support' a merger include the incorporation of an income tax. In fact, it is the income tax which they point to which will allow the new potential city to reduce our property taxes. In addition it is within Ohio law itself that says any municipality may impose an income tax of up to 1% without voter approval. So even if the proposed structure doesn't include an income tax, the new city can impose one at its option without going to the voters as is typical of any tax increase.

Many have asked what am I, as a township trustee, going to do to oppose the merger. First, be clear that this is a citizen movement - neither the township nor the city have taken an active or official role in this process, though individual elected officials may have been involved. It is for the citizens to decide at this point.

For me personally, I am not convinced that becoming part of a city is the right thing for Sylvania Township. There are advantages to living in a township that will disappear if we become a city. At the same time, there are limitations to the township form of government that cities do not struggle with. So far, I think the benefits of living in a township outweigh the negatives.

But according to a recent email from Pam Haynam on the subject of merger: "It is a unique opportunity for Sylvania to decide its future." I certainly hope that if the township declines the merger commission, the vote will indeed be interpreted as a decision about the township's future and not simply disregarded as indecision or lack of understanding.

7510 Wind River Drive - UPDATE (AGAIN)

Sylvania Township has been served with an appeal by the owners of the property at 7510 Wind River Drive against our order to have the structure removed. The appeal has been assigned to Judge Linda Jennings of the Lucas County Common Pleas Court. At this point, I am not sure what the next step for the Township is. This is a process which we have never undertaken before, so we are proceeding as quickly as possible but within our legal authority.

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

July 2008 - Township Update

The township has been busy in the last month, and I have a lot of news in this month's issue of Talk of the Township.

7510 Wind River Drive - UPDATE

As previously announced, today the Sylvania Township Trustees held a hearing regarding the property located at 7510 Wind River Drive in Sylvania Township. This was a quasi-judicial hearing based upon section 505.86 of the Ohio Revised Code, which authorizes the Trustees to order removal of any building located within the unincorporated territory of the Township which has been declared insecure, unsafe or structurally defective by any fire department, county building department or declared unfit for human habitation by the county board of health.

Today at that hearing, we heard testimony from John Walters, Chief Building Inspector for Lucas County, Nathan Fries, Registered Sanitarian for the Toledo/Lucas County Health Department, Deputy Chief Tom Eisel of the Sylvania Township Fire Department and Jim McGowan, a local builder/developer who had no pecuniary interest in this property. We also heard testimony from area residents as well as several people who stated they had an interest in this property and were performing work at the premises.

Repeatedly, the testimony that we heard was that this property was not safe, it was not secure, and it was structurally defective, all a result of the fire which occurred in November 2006, and the fact that the house remained open to the elements since the fire. Damage included water-soaked wood, standing water in the basement, and mold and mildew due to being open to the elements. Testimony regarding the ability to renovate the property included the statement that anything above the foundation was unsalvageable.

Given the testimony presented to me and the other trustees by experts in their field related to the housing and building industry, the trustees unanimously passed a resolution calling for the removal of the structure located at 7510 Wind River Drive in Sylvania Township. The resolution was declared an emergency, dispensing with the second reading, and takes effect immediately in order to preserve the public peace, health, safety and welfare of Sylvania Township.

We have authorized our Planning and Zoning Manager, Mr. Tim DeWitt, beginning thirty (30) days after service of the Resolution upon the owner and all lienholders of the property, to remove and secure the building and all appurtenances located on the property.

This has not been a quick process, and I want to thank all of the residents who have expressed concern regarding this property yet have been patient in allowing the township to work through the processes necessary to deal with troubled properties in our community.

Junk Cars - Townships Granted More Authority

A new portion of the Ohio Revised Code, section 505.871, became effective earlier this year which grants townships additional power in which to deal with junk motor vehicles. Prior to this new law, townships were really restricted on what we could do to address junk cars left in driveways and yards. Only junk cars that were deemed a 'nuisance' could be removed from the property.

With the new law, we can legally remove a junk vehicle from a property after proper notice. "Junk motor vehicle" is specifically defined as a "vehicle that is three model years or older, is apparently inoperable and is extensively damaged, including, but not limited to, any of the following: missing wheels, tired, engines or transmissions." There is no dollar limit or value. Court involvement is not required prior to removing a junk motor vehicle.

This is a great new tool that can (and will) be used to help us help our community maintain a quality of life and high property values by addressing junk vehicle issues in a more effective and efficient manner. I welcome this added authority and we are working to implement the necessary legislation so that we can utilize this authority and improve the quality of life in Sylvania Township.

Downed Wires and Volunteers

At our last regular trustee meeting, Fire Chief Fred Welsh presented his June monthly report regarding fire department operations. We use monthly reports to keep the trustees updated on a regular basis on department operations, although our department heads are always available for our questions and to discuss resident concerns.

There were two items of interest in the recent monthly report. First, we were informed that we had 18 - EIGHTEEN - applicants to become members of our volunteer firefighter ranks. Applicants range from those with little/no fire fighting or EMS experience to EMTs and even a doctor. This is a wonderful testament to the willingness of our community to step up and become involved in some capacity.

In the last several years, the viability of our volunteer program was questioned because of shrinking membership and failure of volunteers to respond when called. But I was convinced that the program simply needed a fresh perspective and the commitment of the administration and the fire department to thrive. And that is exactly what has happened. We haven't even fully implemented our plans due to budget restraints in 2008, but the response from our community so far is promising and I look forward to the benefits and support that a fully functioning and supported volunteer force can provide to Sylvania.

The second issue to be raised in the June monthly report was a service-related issue and at first glance may raise eyebrows and concern, which is why I want to address it directly. Chief Welsh reported that during the serious storm system that moved through our community on the evening of June 9, eleven calls to our 911 call center were not responded to.

As I said, at first this may raise some serious concerns about our ability to respond to calls. However, further review of the data shows that we did what we should do during serious weather-related conditions: we prioritized our resources, assessed calls for service and responded accordingly. Ten of the eleven calls for service were for reports of downed wired. Downed wires are the responsibility of Toledo Edison, not the Sylvania Township Fire Department. Yes, it would be nice if we could respond to calls for downed wires and provide 'blocking' so that residents and visitors do not mistakenly travel on or near the downed wire, and during otherwise normal operations we do provide this service. But during excessive call volumes like we experienced during this storm, we simply do not have the manpower to respond to every call for service. And we can't afford to staff 24-hours-a-day, 365-days-a-year at a level that would let us respond to all of these calls for the once or twice a year that we experience severe weather.

In reviewing this situation, the Fire Department has noted some weaknesses and has begun the process of addressing those weaknesses in a logical, efficient and cost-effective way so that during the next severe storm our response is improved. The 18 potential volunteers I mentioned previously is another way that we can help address this situation.

Bottom line is that we still maintain the best Fire/EMS department in the area, with excellent response times and highly qualified staff dedicated to keeping our community safe. During severe weather and similar manpower-taxing situations, we may not be able to respond to every downed-wire call, but we do respond to incidents where life, limb and property are imminently at risk.

Mosquitoes Abound

With the heavy rains of the past month, our area is experiencing a heavier-than-normal influx of mosquitoes. While this is just a fact of life for living in what used to be called the Great Black Swamp, it is still annoying; it interferes with the ability to enjoy our decks, sports facilities, and other activities where we are outside.

The township has received numerous inquiries as to why we are not spraying for mosquitoes or when we will be in certain areas. Unfortunately, we do not spray for mosquitoes. This is handled by the Toledo Area Sanitary District (TASD), which is a separate entity created by judicial order back in 1945. According to their website "The Toledo Area Sanitary District controls adult mosquitoes by daytime "misting" and by evening "fogging" operations. Schools, business and homeowners may have their properties misted by requesting this service at 419-726-7891. These properties must have an access so that a pickup truck may drive around the periphery of farmyards, wooded areas and buildings."

The township is not equipped to spray for mosquitoes and doing so would only duplicate the work of the TASD, which is paid for by a special property tax assessment. If you have concerns about mosquitoes or questions about spraying, please contact the TASD at 419-726-7891.

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

June 2008 Township Update

Welcome to this month's issue of Talk of the Township. There are several items in this issue which are very timely and relate to making sure we maintain a quality community.

The Delimma of Storm Debris

Sylvania Township has been receiving numerous phone calls and emails regarding storm debris pickup from residents expecting us to pick-up storm debris that has been placed in the roadway by residents. At the same time, we have also been fielding phone calls from residents who are complaining about neighbors who are placing yard debris in the roadway, obstructing parking spaces, making it difficult to see on-coming and cross traffic, and unsightly refuse piles. Who should we respond to, those expecting additional services or those who believe their neighbors are not tending their own lawns appropriately?

So let me start off with our policy on brush pickup. We provide brush pickup services twice a year, once in April and once in September. There is no policy to pick up storm-related debris after severe storms go through the area. On a case-by-case basis, trustees (former and current) have directed the public works department to perform brush pickup in certain areas and after certain severe weather. But there was no consistency with regard to when it was done, who received the services, or what other projects may suffer in order to provide this un-stated service.

Where does that leave us with regard to the current brush piles located in some roadways? At our last regular meeting, the trustees discussed the issue and agreed that we could not pull our crews off of some very necessary and important infrastructure jobs for the 4-5 weeks it would take to complete a township-wide brush pick-up. These infrastructure projects include long-delayed maintenance of Schlicker Ditch to prevent flooding, asphalt patching, roadside mowing, street sweeping, catch basin and storm drain repairs and resurfacing projects.

In 2008 we received $599,000 in grants and loans from the Ohio Public Works Commission for local road resurfacing and reconstruction projects. We are required to complete certain services and projects in order to receive these monies. If we do not complete these projects, in violation of our agreements, we default on the current loans and grants, and hinder our ability to receive additional loans and grants in the future.

These projects maintain our infrastructure which contributes to a quality community. If we divert resources to brush pickup, we are in essence emphasizing aesthetic priorities over the need to keep our infrastructure maintained. In the long run, failing infrastructure will be more detrimental to our community than unsightly debris in roadways after storms.

This fall's brush pickup will start September 8. If you wish to dispose of yard waste prior to that, I would encourage you to contact your private refuse company or use the free drop-off facility maintained by the Lucas County Solid Waste District at 6505 West Bancroft St.

If you have placed debris in the street in front of your house, I suggest you remove it; it is illegal to obstruct the roadway as it interferes with road safety and street sweeping. Help keep our community clean.

7510 Wind River Drive

"Public notice has been posted pursuant to Ohio Revised Code §505.86 that the Sylvania Township Board of Trustees intends to conduct a hearing on Thursday, July 24, 2008 at 3:00 p.m. at the Sylvania Township Hall located at 4927 Holland-Sylvania Road, Lucas County, Ohio to determine if the structure located at 7510 Wind River Drive, Sylvania, Ohio is unsecured, unsafe or structurally defective and if so, whether the structure should be removed, repaired or otherwise secured."

Many residents have inquired about this property since it was the subject of a sever fire in October 2006. The township has worked diligently within our legal powers to address the concerns of our community working with county agencies and other stakeholders. This process has led us to the meeting mentioned above.

Due to the legal rights of interested parties, and the legal obligation of the Board of Trustees, I cannot comment beyond letting residents know that this hearing has been scheduled.

Fire Department Overtime

Earlier this year, after the fire levy was passed, a document was put together by several members of the Fire Department regarding the cost of overtime and the potential benefit of hiring more firefighters in an effort to reduce overtime. This report seemed to indicate that overtime would almost be eliminated if three firefighters were to be hired into the department.

Unfortunately, further review of the information indicated problems with the assumptions, calculations and methodology used. At our June 17 trustee meeting, Fire Chief Welsh acknowledged that the data used to make calculations was inaccurate and the methodology was flawed.

Reality is that numerous factors contribute to overtime, including training schedules, family and medical leave, military leave, minimum manning, shift holdovers, large incidents, etc. While hiring an additional fire fighter may lower some categories of overtime, it will actually increase other categories of overtime.

I am constantly reviewing financial information to make sure we are operating as efficiently as possible while maintaining the high level of services our community is used to. This includes analyzing the affects of recalling firefighters from laid-off status. At this point, due to retirements, etc., we have been able to recall two of the three laid-off firefighters. We are maintaining 52 firefighters on staff until we begin to receive the proceeds of the 1.25 mill levy next February, at which time we can begin to implement the staffing proposals of the levy.

Rocket Ventures and the LCIC

Recently, the township was approached about investing in Rocket Ventures, a venture capital group, via our membership in the Lucas County Improvement Corporation (LCIC). County Commissioner Pete Gerken encouraged the member entities of the LCIC to invest with the prospect of great returns. I have looked into the possibility of Sylvania Township 'investing' in Rocket Ventures via the LCIC and what I have found out concerns me greatly when it comes to the role of the LCIC and its member entities.

Point blank, townships are not allowed to make an investment in a venture capital fund. We are restricted to 'safe' investments, so that the taxpayers' money is not put at risk. Further review of the rules regarding townships and Community Improvement Corpoations (CICs) indicate that townships are allowed to make financial contributions to CICs to help defray administrative expenses, but we are not allowed to give additional monies.

Basically, the suggestion that the township's use the LCIC to side-step our restrictions on 'safe' investments is not allowed under the Ohio Revised Code (ORC). This attempt to invest in a venture capital fund by way of the LCIC is illegal and something that I will not support.

I have also talked to several people regarding the county's ability to make such an investment. Per my conversations, the county is under similar restrictions regarding their investments and therefore a direct investment in Rocket Ventures would not be allowed under the ORC. Sidestepping those laws by using the LCIC is, in my opinion, highly suspect as well.

It is my opinion that the LCIC should not be used to by-pass the laws established for the safekeeping of taxpayer funds. If our member entities cannot directly make this investment, we should not allow the LCIC to be used as a middleman. I am opposed to the LCIC making an investment in Rocket Ventures on behalf of member entities. If member entities have the ability to make the investment (or believe they have the ability to make the investment) they should do so directly and not drag the LCIC into this issue.

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

Sylvania Township Update

Where do I pick back up? In an effort to move beyond the rhetoric last fall I took a break from posting while the fire levy compromise was in the works. It was all too easy to get out of the habit of posting, so here I am 6 months later trying to figure out where to start.

First Things First - A Successful Fire Levy

The fire levy passed. That's good news. It puts to rest the uncertainty on the direction of the department and the level of service. The trustees have a clear plan, as put forth by the Fire Chief's levy proposal, on additions to our staff, construction of new buildings and new equipment and apparatus purchases.

We are moving forward on implementing those plans, which include:

1. Building three new fire stations to replace stations 1, 2 and 3. Geographically they will be in the same location, but we are reviewing potential site locations in order to increase safety and response times.
2. Remodeling station 4 to accommodate the department headquarters including training facilities.
3. Increase shift staffing to 55 firefighters which is the desired staffing level needed (according to Chief Welsh) to staff 14 firefighters on duty at all times.
4. Add a new day shift which will provide 2 additional full-time firefighters from 7 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday thru Friday. Peak usage of our fire and EMS services tends to be during the weekday, thus these two firefighters will help to meet peek demands on our fire department as well as minimize overtime due to training.
5. Enhance our part paid/volunteer program. Volunteer firefighters have been a vital part of the Sylvania Township Fire Department for 35+ years, but in the last few years the program has waned. The program as Chief Welsh has outlined will do two things. First, it will provide for volunteers to be scheduled to work evening and weekend shifts to supplement our full-time crew. Second, it will provide a larger pool of people to respond in the occasional instances of large and involved fire or emergency medical incident.

I supported the chief's proposal because it introduced into our department an economically sustainable staffing structure that will help to keep our excellent level of first responder services at a price our community can afford to pay.

To be clear, the levy that was approved will not begin to be collected until February 2009. Given that, and a very tight 2008 budget, we are limited on how quickly we can implement the entire levy proposal. But we are certainly moving in that direction and look forward to successfully fulfilling the promises of the levy in 2009.

Police Citizen Patrol

With the success of the Citizens' Police Academy, the police department has been able to launch a new endeavor designed to enhance the quality of life in Sylvania Township. As explained on the police department's website:

"The Citizen Patrol is an extension of the [Sylvania Township Citizens Police Academy Alumni Association] that expands their ability to serve the Sylvania Township Community. The Citizen Patrol works in partnership with the Sylvania Township Police Department and supplements the efforts of its sworn officers in keeping the community a safe and enjoyable place to live, work, and visit.

Volunteers patrol designated areas in a marked Sylvania Township Citizen Patrol Vehicle and wear the Citizen Patrol Uniform, both bearing their distinctive burgundy and yellow logo. Citizen Patrol volunteers conduct high visibility, crime prevention patrols and act as observers and reporters of criminal and/or suspicious activity. Citizen Patrol Volunteers do not carry firearms and are not sworn police officers.

All members of the Citizen Patrol have received specialized training and undergone extensive criminal history checks. Members of the Citizen Patrol must follow all rules, regulations, and standards of conduct set forth by the Sylvania Township Police Department. "

This is a great addition to our community. I applaud the police academy alumni, Chief Metzger and Officer Sarah Toth for their initiative and dedication to our community. If you would like to learn more about the Police Academy and their work including the citizens patrol, please visit the police department's website at: Volunteer Citizen Patrol

Zoning Challenges

Certainly the affects of the mortgage crisis and slowing economy has shown their affect on residential properties in our community. Last year, the trustees approved spending on lawn maintenance for more residential properties than is typical, many of which were in foreclosure. (This is not a way to get you grass cut for free; such expenditures are recouped via tax assessments including administrative and legal costs.)

Our Zoning Resolution does require property owners to maintain their property in reasonable condition, including mowing the lawn, removing trash, etc. Unfortunately our ability to remedy problem situations is limited and often involves extended periods of time. Our new zoning administrator, Mr. Tim Dewitt, is monitoring problem properties, keeping in contact with owners, real estate agents, and mortgage companies as appropriate to try to encourage voluntary compliance.

When action is necessary, the trustees can and do approve lawn maintenance expenditures. Unfortunately, this process is not quick and action is not taken until the property has deteriorated beyond what many neighborhoods and subdivisions consider acceptable. And the lawn services provided are not necessarily aesthetically pleasing, rather it is functional and efficient use of township resources.

If you are aware of property that you believe is being neglected, whether due to foreclosure or other reasons, please contact our Zoning Department at 419-885-5276. I can't promise immediate improvements to the property, but we will do what we can to work with property owners and other interested parties to make improvements so that Sylvania Township can maintain its quality neighborhoods.

Finally, Let's Talk Money

At the end of 2007, cash resources of the Township increased by $5,737,488.46 from the end of 2006. This includes an increase of over $3.2 million in the general fund; almost $700,000 increase in the police fund; and almost $250,000 in the fire fund (this carryover balance will help maintain service levels in the fire department for 2008 until the department begins to receive the new levy revenue).

The only major fund that had a decrease in fund balance from 2006 to 2007 was the Road & Bridge Fund. The decrease was $17,000. The road department works on a different budgeting horizon, often saving up cash resources for several years in planning a large road project, so it is not unusual for the cash balance to vary greatly from year to year. Bottom line is that despite this small decrease in cash balance, the road department is in good financial position.

What does this mean, to have increased cash resources by almost $6 million to $14,282,862.35? Some believe this means we are being careful with taxpayers dollars, simply by having not spent all the money we received. (Having excess cash is good, but it is not necessarily evidence that wasteful spending does not happen.) Others believe that all of this money means we should be spending more in the fire department. (Just because we have money doesn't mean we should spend it. All township services should be efficient and effective, so that we are not wasting money. ) And still others believe that this means we should be cutting taxes and letting our residents and businesses keep more of their money.

The right answer is probably a combination of all of these. It's a delicate balance and obviously there is a wide range of opinions s to whether that balance has been met. But I continue work hard to do what I can to keep a good balance of keeping cash reserves, spending wisely, and keeping taxing as low as possible so that we stay "A Place to Grow".

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

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