The 3rd category: In a consolidation quandary

[pbona]

Hello Fellow Islanders,
The proposed township consolidation vote is an important decision for our communities. It is also, in my mind, a complicated and confusing issue. As a property owner in both townships, I would like to have my questions about the pros and cons addressed in a non threatening, competent, patient and concise manner. It would also be constructive to have impartial financial experts advice and opinion on the bottomline and long term effects on each township. I have both received the mailing and reviewed the proposed budget on the forum. Thanks to both parties for their hard work and opinions. I have no vested interest in either outcome, but would like to be able to make an informed choice. To that end, I am still at a loss to have the following concerns clarified:

1) I am not seeing a huge net savings. What am I missing? In which areas would the most saving of taxpayer dollars be realized. Please be precise. i.e. salaries? road maintenance? etc. Or, would the potential savings be more in terms of simplicity, time and efficiency? An equally worthy and positive goal. What is the total savings of the 8 bullet points under the “Conclusion: Taxes are lowered” section in the proposed consolidation budget? Simple, substantiated dollar amounts would help.

2) Am I reading consolidation as a merging of the tax revenues? If so, then is it also a merging of township debts? What are the impacts of this on each township in terms of gains and losses? Is it legal to transfer earmarked fund surpluses? Does it balance out overall?

3) Officially, how would the matter of incumbent officers be handled? Would an all new slate of township officers be needed? Would this necessitate another election? Salary negotiations? What about the continuity of existing programs, grants, purchasing contracts etc.? Would properties need to be reassessed?

4) I know we are not the only municipality to consolidate. Is there a state/county website that details the procedures and outcomes?

5) Would a unified township be better positioned to receive county/state federal funds, in terms of total population, or would two townships get twice as much assistance?

I am sure there will be more questions as the considerations are explained, but time is short and it seems in a fait accompli, greatness has been thrust upon us. We must make the best of this and to do that, I for one must be better informed. Consolidation could unite, further and focus our goals and interests as a cohesive governmental unit. Just trying to decide can be irreparably divisive and polarizing if all the facts and facets are not present for impartial deliberation. Thank you in advance for your time and assistance with this significant process.

Patrick Bonadeo

[islandliving]

Lot of great questions Pat. Good luck to you on getting answers. Probably not going to get any. You will be going to the polls blind as others will if you are a voter. You are right about it being thrust upon us.

John McCafferty

p.s. if you are a voter vote NO on township consolidation

[Gillespie]

That's enough of you deciding Tracey, who will or will not receive answers. Why not stop with the negativity, perhaps you might learn something yourself. Everyone knows you are posting for a closed group, most know who it is.

[Gillespie]

Pat,

To say any one person has all the answers would be difficult. I can only tell you that this has been something I wanted to see all my life and my father his because of the wastefulness of duplicated government and all the same co owned assets, whats the point? I believe we can save as much as 200 grand with one board if you figure all the costs of overhead and buildings to heat and insure and salaries, new roofs, lawn care etc. etc. etc. I'm sure you understand the cost of owning multiple dwellings!

Comments on your questions:

1) I am not seeing a huge net savings. What am I missing? In which areas would the most saving of taxpayer dollars be realized. Please be precise. i.e. salaries? road maintenance? etc. Or, would the potential savings be more in terms of simplicity, time and efficiency? An equally worthy and positive goal. What is the total savings of the 8 bullet points under the “Conclusion: Taxes are lowered” section in the proposed consolidation budget? Simple, substantiated dollar amounts would help. As I said before, these figures were conservatively put together but in my statement above I pointed out some of the obvious. To put specific dollar values down is to look at the big picture and the obvious, we CAN'T not save money!

2) Am I reading consolidation as a merging of the tax revenues? If so, then is it also a merging of township debts? What are the impacts of this on each township in terms of gains and losses? Is it legal to transfer earmarked fund surpluses? Does it balance out overall? In the text portion of the filing and in comments since the merger is allowed by law depending on the voters. No the island is not reassessed but the state tax commission and the assessors office would surely have to balance the books. I was told that at least one of the assessors said it was not a big deal.

3) Officially, how would the matter of incumbent officers be handled? Would an all new slate of township officers be needed? Would this necessitate another election? Salary negotiations? What about the continuity of existing programs, grants, purchasing contracts etc.? Would properties need to be reassessed? This election triggers a mid term (as they are called) primary and general election along with state and federal elections so they are being held anyway, the local cost would be negligible. This was one of the reasons the petitioners had to get this election scheduled or it would have had to go on for two more years and more waste. Whomever shall have an interest in the new board would file petitions to run in the primary, the top vote getters would go on to the fall election and those succeeding would start managing the township at that point.

4) I know we are not the only municipality to consolidate. Is there a state/county website that details the procedures and outcomes? I have found no website. I don't know what historical information is when they eliminated Galilee Township which basically started at Nomad and went South from there but that occurred some years ago.

5) Would a unified township be better positioned to receive county/state federal funds, in terms of total population, or would two townships get twice as much assistance? In a recent conversation with one of the longer standing county commissioners in Charlevoix he stated, "I don't know why you people haven't done this many years ago, you were certainly swing a bigger bat if you did."

Footnote: I worked on getting the townships to join together in the early 80's and it always falls down to the same old issues, the paychecks! You wouldn't think so but that is what is driving the opposition. We all use and live the island in an undivided way except when it comes to governance! When i did look into it I found that Redford Township near Detroit was and probably still is an unincorporated township. That said, if that township has 720 residents that township qualified for quite a pie of state revenue sharing. I think we lose out on a LOT of revenue because our numbers are so low divided. Together we "swing a bigger bat", we need to do something. We are taxing non homesteaders out of their jingle! I had a recent comment from someone who complained they were being taxed 1,000. a month for a house they use 90-100 days a year! Sure they choose to do it and yes, non homestead is higher but we are not trying to lighten the load! Status quo is not working for everyone!
I hope this helps in some way, Rich

[Andy's Grooming Barn]

Richie,

I do get what you are saying and understand this is something you personally want but I need to go by figures and not my heart on this one. All of Pat's answers are on your opinion and not facts, I think facts and figures would be helpful here and if you do not have the facts and figures then there is no way for you to know it will save us so if you could readdress these with more than just you say so that would be great!

Also I am only addressing this to you and not the committee because you are the one that answered Pat and thus far the committee hasn't answered any of the questions.

[islandliving]

quote:
That's enough of you deciding Tracey, who will or will not receive answers. Why not stop with the negativity, perhaps you might learn something yourself. Everyone knows you are posting for a closed group, most know who it is.


Clearly John signed his posts, Mr Gillespie...what closed group are you referring to? Your posts make no sense, John signs his comments, I sign mine. Why don't I just send my comments to you, and you can post them anonymously...in quotation marks?

Tracey

[DwightEarly]

Rich,

Thank you for answering Pat's questions (Post #4). Slowly, I'm wading through the chaff to help make an informed decision. Thanks to Pat, too, for his post (Post #1). Both of you were mature in asking your questions and providing answers.

C U 'round the campus.

--Dwight Early

[pbona]

Ritchie and Bill,
Thank you both for your endeavors in response to my questions. Obviously, as I stated before, this is a complex and convoluted decision. I wouldn't expect any one person to have definitive answers. I would hope for a variety of viewpoints and unique observations. Experts, experienced CPA's or lawyers would be nice too. As I did not want to muddy the waters, I didn’t touch on the larger issues that Kitty so passionately described in her post. Yes, this decision encompasses both heart and head. I do believe that we must embrace the future, but we must ensure that it is done in a fiscally responsible fashion. However, I don’t think we should throw the future baby out with the muddy financial bathwater. Can this consolidation be shown to be of longterm benefit to our entire community over a one or two year adjustment period? If so, is an interim solution possible, say a temporary comptroller with oversight that would allow the two township entities to be phased out gradually while their officers terms expire and a cooperative, comprehensive consolidation plan and budget is established? At this prohibitively short juncture, I’m not sure what is possible or how the framers of the petition envisioned achieving their goal. I will be spending the time before the vote gathering more information and look forward to talking with all parties.
Thanks again for the level headed replies. Keep them coming!
Pat Bonadeo

[Jimmy McCafferty]

Excellent points Pat. Sincerely appreciate a logical and unbiased perspective to this issue. I pray that opponents and proponents of consolidation take your points to heart.

[pbona]

YAQ,YAQ,YAQ (Yet Another Question)
As I yet again look over the statements, opinions and posted pages, it strikes me that clarity in niggling small things is lacking. Fear of the unknown begets hesitation and resistance. For example, concerning the consolidation committee, similar to the comptroller idea above. Excerpted from https://lefevream.wixsite.com/beaverislandtownship/faq (my questions inserted in parentheses)

“Three things would happen:

The new township would take effect November 20, 2018, under Michigan law.
A temporary coordinating committee would be established to prepare the transition to the new township. Under state law, the committee is required to be made up of at least the supervisor, clerk, and treasurer of each affected township. (Who else and how many, who chooses? Are these people willing to take on these extra responsibilities? Even if they opposed the consolidation? When is the committee established?)

Voters would select the new township’s officials at the August primary and November general elections.

Q. What would the temporary coordinating committee do?

State law assigns several transition tasks to the coordinating committee:

Prepare and adopt an interim budget for the consolidated township for the four months from November 20, 2018 until March 31, 2019, when the consolidated township board’s first annual budget would take effect.
Before July 1, 2018 establish salaries for the officers of the consolidated township board from November 20, 2018 until the fiscal year that begins no sooner than a year later, April 1, 2020. After that, the township board would set township officer salaries in the traditional way.
(What is the traditional way?)
Recommend individuals for appointment by the consolidated township board to the commissions and boards of the consolidated township.
(How much weight do these recommendations carry? Is the new township board bound by them?)
Make recommendations concerning the coordination, consolidation, repeal, and reenactment of ordinances, resolutions, rules, and regulations of the former townships.
(Recommendations to whom? How many of these ordinances etc. are there to consider?)

(Back to me)
The adoption of these state mandates, requires trust and cooperation between the current township officials and trust from their constituents that they will do the right thing. It also necessitates hard work and attention to detail. I would like to hear from our current officials that they are vested in this process and can make it work. In the event that the proposal passes, we as a combined, unified township should be prepared to help them to the best of our abilities. I think our community has the ability, if each step and process is clearly defined, has community input built in and has the common goal of improving and streamlining governance for our entire Island. A framework for input from both resident and non-residents taxpayers, a calendar for scheduled meetings, timelines, agendas and priorities must all be created, coordinated and disseminated. Clarity, transparency and dedication would become our watch words.

As someone who participated in years of attempted school district reform, endless meetings, committees and compromises, I can attest that it will take enormous focus to accomplish this in the mandated timeline. Are we ready?
Patrick Bonadeo

[islandliving]

Everything everyone is asking should have been presented before the proposal went on the ballot. That is why most people are upset. No we are not ready. Not even close.

[islandliving]

Most people would not even be upset if the cart was not put in front of the horse. I can speak for whomever i choose.

[Gillespie]

Pat, surely all of these things have to be completed. I don't think anyone suggests that this would be simple but do we just keep kicking the can down the road? All of the legal criteria have been addressed and will have to be dealt with step by step on the way to seating a Beaver Island Township Board. All of 100 years of doing things the way they are have produced little results. You've been around here on and off as many as 50 of those, you can't but agree. Eliminating duplicated costs cannot do us anything but good! You have my number call me!

[kathleen mcnamara]

This is in response to Pat Bonadeo's question about whether township debts would be merged - at this time St James Township has no outstanding bonds or other general fund or road fund debt. The municipal sewer system bond was paid off in 2017. The sewer fund has internal debt which is being paid through ongoing sewer use fees by those homeowners and businesses who are connected to the sewer system. This internal debt will be paid off by 2020; the debt includes $13,000.00 per year to the Street and Road fund and approximately $7,000.00 per year to Charlevoix State Bank. The municipal dock fund has internal debt which is being paid by revenue generated through dock slip fees will also be paid off by 2020; this debt is $10,000.00 per year to the general fund and is related to historic dock-fund payroll taxes which were paid out of the general fund. Both of these repayment schedules were adopted by board resolution.

[Andy's Grooming Barn]

Kitty,
I am a little confused you said the sewer has an internal debt but then state that it makes a pmt of $7,000 to Charlevoix State bank. So is there a loan from the bank and if so how much is the loan for and if not please explain the $7,000. Thanks.