Fiscal Responsibility, Rochester Hills
Hats off to all those who worked on the police millage proposal: Don Cline, Dale Hetrick, Walter Johnson, Linda Raschke, LeAnne Rogers, Nancy Soisson and Thomas Stephens. (hundreds of hours of work NO compensation from the city) but because of the current economic condition the nation is currently in, threats of a fiscal cliff etc., a straight up renewal would probably be the only millage the residents of Rochester Hills will probably support. Do the math 1.2083 mills renewal, plus and up to 2.5 additional mills, for 10 years. Total 3.7083 mills, or if you own a $200,000 house that's up to $370.00, or if you own a business like Bill Fox Chevrolet its $5,532.00 just for police per year. I personally feel the residents of Rochester Hills will see through this tax shift and vote no. I'm also personally sadden that our mayor and city council ignored many of your great ideas and came up with their own plan.
Council Members: Greg Hooper, James Rosen, Mark Tisdel, Adam Kochkenderfer, Michael Webber, Nathan Klomp vote yes for the up to 3.7083 mills tax increase
Ravi Yalamanchi voted no
Pouring Gasoline On The Fire, Rochester Hills
Monday June 18th our Rochester Hills city council voted on this idea: "Resolved that the Rochester Hills City Council hereby approves funding for an Educational Campaign in the amount not-to-exceed $25,000.00 to educate voters on the details of the police funding ballot proposal that will appear on the August 7, 2012 Primary Election ballot." Now according to state law the city can't say YES or NO... so I guess 1/2 the money spent on an education will be for a NO vote and 1/2 will be for a YES vote. That did not happen, recently (I would assume) the city has mailed this direct mail piece out to all our registered voters. Now according to state law did this literature break any rules...? NO... but it is misleading to say the least which is too bad. Most people nowadays are just looking for a little honesty in government; is this to much to ask? What you are voting on is far different than what postcard says on the front side. The front side of the postcard is only a non-binding promise by the current mayor and council. What you are voting on is an up to 3.7083 mills tax increase. What you are voting on doesn't even prevent a future mayor or city council from using general fund tax dollars to pay for police protection... read the ballot language closely "allow the City to discontinue". What you are voting on doesn't mandate the mayor or city council to reduce the general fund tax! And finally the adoption of this kind of city council resolution printed on the postcard is non-binding, and this city council or any future city council can throw out this resolution at any time.
Council Members: Greg Hooper, James Rosen, Mark Tisdel, Adam Kochkenderfer, Michael Webber, Nathan Klomp vote yes for the postcard and to spend the $25,000.00
Ravi Yalamanchi voted no
Still no new Oakland County Sheriffs, Rochester Hills
Recently my daughter was a victim in a "fender bender" no injury... hit and run auto accident. Oakland County Sheriff response time was over 1/2 hour. Would you not be ticked off if you found out your daughter in her mid twenties had to wait in the dark over 1/2 hour for a cop... the system is broken in Rochester Hills. So even after this lengthy discussion about a funding source, your local government still is not solving the problem... are town needs to continue a discussion regarding long term public safety! Recently a good friend of mine put it this way... all we are doing with this proposal is rearranging the deck-chairs on the Titanic. note: when someone gets caught shoplifting at Walmart it takes up to 3 hours of Oakland County Sheriff time to process the crime, that's 3 hours their working for Walmart and not your daughters safety! When I left council that land was zoned office research and technology. Thought I'd share that thought with you too... because as of late our current mayor and city council are gung ho on changing all the remaining vacant land in Rochester Hills into strip malls... full of shoplifters and other crime that attaches itself to that kind of development.
After this millage fails... what is plan "B" in Rochester Hills
I think it's extremely important if you take the time to shoot down someone's else's idea you should have your own solutions... just always saying NO to any new taxes is not an intelligent solution. First and foremost we need a simple millage renewal on the November ballot. Yes... this only kicks the can down the road; but would buy time to continue the discussion regarding long term public safety in Rochester Hills. First we need an open transparent discussion on our needs and NOT how much it's going to cost and what fund the money comes from! We need to listen to ourselves first... personally I don't care how many cops Troy of Rochester has; or especially what the federal government tells me I should have! --- We need a Rochester Hills solution. One of many examples we need to openly talk about: police protection is not for profit, we don't need to hire a county police force... spending its time camping out in front of our restaurants busting drivers because they had just two or three beers... (just barely at or over the legal limit)... big money for law enforcement and the courts in the "DUI business". I don't make this up, many of these restaurants are my advertising clients, and they tell me all the time the Oakland County Sheriffs department is "camping out in front their restaurants which scares off their patrons." We need that to be an open transparent discussion... what is more important our public safety or Oakland County Sheriff's bottom line. What's more important in your mind, cops parked out in front of our restaurants or patrolling our neighborhood streets at night. We need to re-examine creating our own police force that does not have a long-term legacy cost... just because we contract with the Oakland County Sheriff does not mean were not strapped in with their long-term legacy cost... As long as we contract we pay. Maybe just maybe we need to elect those who do not just always rubber stamp the Oakland County Sheriff department as the only idea. Better yet, contrary to a lot of "popular belief," we do have a lot of real intelligent full time employees up at city hall and I would love to see them look into a public safety service that may actually even cost less (in the long hall) than the Oakland County Sheriff. Recently a retired state representative told me that because the Oakland County Sheriff took over Pontiac... "there is no way to prove if we're paying them to patrol our streets or Pontiac streets." I don't know how to prove if that statement is right or wrong but it's certainly something worth thinking about. We also need an open transparent discussion regarding dispatch. Money was more important than your public safety... our current mayor dismantled a perfectly good Rochester Hills dispatch. Whether you call dispatch from a landline or your cell phone the first thing you have to tell them is what city your in... what would happen if you didn't know? When I was on city council all phone calls went to the main fire house on Livernois. Example if your husband is having a heart attack in front of Kroger there is only one Kroger in Rochester Hills... under the current system your emergency phone calls are directed to some undisclosed bunker in Waterford MI... do the math there are 10 Kroger Stores in Oakland County? Saving one's life is all about the seconds it takes not minutes. Let's all renew the current millage and look at our needs next, then decide how to fund and where to fund our needs for public safety.
Current Rochester Hills 2012 general fund expenditures
102 – City Council $177,360
171 – Mayor’s Department $1,695,830
191 – Elections Division $355,440
201 – Accounting Division $1,069,840
209 – Assessing Department $1,147,320
210 – Legal Services $307,500
215 – Clerk’s Office $984,610
233 – Human Resources $588,370
247 – Board of Review $6,100
253 – Treasury Department $552,800
276 – Cemetery Division $257,990
279 – Building Authority $1,010
315 – Crossing Guards $50,370
326 – Wireless Communications $167,270
371 – Building Department $1,439,110
372 – Ordinance Compliance $1,056,470
400 – Planning Commission $7,910
401 – Planning & Economic Development Department $733,370
410 – Zoning Board of Appeals $4,850
448 – Special Lighting $6,580
535 – Weed Control $95,190
666 – Community Development Block Grant $131,850
756 – Parks Department $2,659,540
760 – Community Events $81,530
774 – Forestry Division $508,540
804 – Historic Districts Commission $10,710
990 – General Fund: Transfer-Out $8,783,440 note: $4,571,710 of that line item funds Oakland County Sheriff protection or about 1.5 mills
............................
207 – Special Police Fund $8,963,770 (page 215 Rochester Hills budget)
Scot Beaton
655 Bolinger St. Rochester Hills 48307
Political Experience former Rochester Hills City Council member 1988 to 1997
President, Rochester Hills City Council (2 Years)
The resolution passed by City Council not to spend this money is worthless. Their own City Attorney told them (in writing on 5/2/12) that such a resolution was not enforceable, They passed it to create a smokescreen to call this NEW millage a tax shift. I fully support the police and will happily vote for the necessary taxes to keep them doing their jobs. I don't trust the City and Council with a future 2.5 mill slush fund to dip into whenever they please. Vote NO....force them to come back with an honest proposal.
If you're running for office, say so. Be "transparent". This is a stump speech. You included your past experience at the end of this diatribe. Please. I must have missed your suggestion for replacing the Sheriff's Department and "do the math", what will it cost us and will it provide the level of services we currently have? Are you implying that the City Council are conspiring on this issue (including their votes) or is it that one of the members is simply unaware? It wasn’t clear to me. Finally, here's what really got my ire. Suggesting that the Sheriffs are waiting to nab people drinking and driving is a bad thing. Is there a personal reason for choosing to use this example? Here are some facts regarding DUI's in Oakland County: Of all the counties in the state, OC had the second most auto accidents involving drunk driving. OC had the 2nd-most drinking and driving accidents. Fatalities in OC –11, the 5th highest rate in all of the Michigan Counties. That fender-bender could have easily resulted in something worse.
Why would anyone with half a brain vote for a 2.5 mill tax increase? Why let the Council raise the millage without the vote of the community in the future? This ballot proposal is not binding. It makes no sense what so ever. There never has been an a real good explanation for this latest political joke. What about Councilman Ravi's proposal to wait for the two expiring millages in a few years to help fund police? Did the rest of the Council even hear him? There must be plans for those expiring millages-roads? parks? It would be nice for once if this administration would be upfront about long term needs and plans. One of the key reasons RH has a low millage rate is because the voters have not rubber stamped every millage that has come a long and there is very little trust for the majority of this administration. What's in it for you Scot?
Ted I am a bit confused by some of your comments... my blog did offer solutions, take the long term legacy costs out of public safety -- that will reduce cost... like any service form time to time the smart thing to do is bid it out. I'm not running for anything, and I would personally feel the Patch would be an inappropriate place as a format for that kind of "free advertising". I publish my public record only to add credibility to the blog. Readers do from time to time like to hear from those who have been there. I included the vote -- in my opinion only one council member got it right. I thought I made it quite clear my one example was a complaint coming from my advertising clients. I don't have a hard time finding expenditures, I have approved or disapproved nine RH budgets and read over fifteen cover to cover. Most residents would... did you know there are about 100 pages in the RH budget before you even get to the budget. Ted thanks for your DUI facts, the misery level has been pretty high lately -- when I walk through my neighborhood my neighbors like to point out all the foreclosures and suicides.
Great blog, this is a tax increase and to propose one in our economic times is way out of line. The "New Normal" which is not being accepted by our public sector is reality for us in the private sector. Why are they asking for permission to raise our taxes in the future? Why not ask us when they need the money and demonstrate the need at that time? This is a set up; it happen when RCS did the same thing years ago in a primary vote, then raised our millage 38%. No accountability, they just raised our millage because they needed the money to fund the existing unsustainable model. Since 2008 the private sector has seen dramatic cuts in wages, benefits, jobs and pensions are a thing of the past. The public sector wasted the stimulus money on keeping the same structure in effect without any changes to make them fiscally responsible and sustainable. The stimulus money is all gone; they want to raise our taxes to pay for their non-actions. In the August Primary vote we have several tax increases proposed in these times of tough economic peril in the private sector. We need the public sector to have a "shared sacrifice" with us in the private sector with no more raises (Step Increases), shared benefits funding and pensions to the 401K style like the people who fund their jobs. They need to join reality and become fiscally responsible with our money and prove it is sustainable. They need to earn our trust first, then give us an honest proposal.
Short Story... about a year before I won my seat on city council the mayor wanted to buy about $45,000 worth of new office furniture. Baylea this is before the internet -- no email to alert the voters just phones and flyers residents would put on mailboxes. City hall was packed with angry taxpayers, a conservative estimate 100 residents show up to protest the purchase. Back then city hall was packed all the time holding our government accountable for their actions. I still attend the majority of city council meetings and no one is there... Why? Baylea, I was the very first person in this town to protest the water tank proposal. And "the money" at the time was not my main issue, I went door to door telling the residents on John R. the city was planning on building a concrete tank three stories tall, wider than Rochester Road right next store to your homes and they have never taken the time to sent you a personal notice about their plans. I still to this day sincerely thank the residents who killed this project. to be continued...
Salt Storage Facility total estimated project cost $936,000... Yep Baylea one million dollars of your money to build a box to store road salt in... where are the residents protesting the uncontrolled spending of their local government? Baylea, Let's both hope this blog continues to fill with comments that will hold their local government accountable for their actions!
The City and Council could have proposed a charter amendment to reduce the General Fund, but instead chose to pass a useless and unenforceable resolution not to spend the NEW tax limits available to them. If voters are foolish enough to trust that promise, they get what they deserve. I fully support the police, but am opposed to dishonest proposals. I challenge the Patch to discuss the FACTS of this proposal. Talk with city attorney about the 5/2 letter he wrote to council and then read the mailer the city is circulating. You will be equally offended at the blatant attempt of the city to mislead voters by strategically leaving out the key facts.
Relative to my question regarding you’re allowing for people to drink and drive, you chose to avoid that entirely. Foreclosures and suicides in your neighborhood. Huh? Please tell me that you’re not suggesting that the Sheriffs should turn their heads and allow our local citizens to drink and drive for the benefit of your advertising clients. Also, slightly curious how you know that it's 2-3 beers and not 2-3 martinis? Regardless, your indifference regarding this important issue is disreputable and speaks to your character and that to me speaks considerably, not credentials.
Rather than ‘dumbing it down’ you might consider simply writing in a way that is clear while covering your implications/accusations with facts. I understand that the Fire Department isn't strapped because it was part of the original Charter. That’s what I know. Now you probably can enlighten me and the other folk that need to be schooled by Master Scot. Your comments and innuendos are meant to stir the pot. No factual basis for some of them and you need to be called out. My point that you seem to be missing Scotty is that anyone that thinks it's OK to go into a restaurant/bar and have 2-3 cocktails and then jump into a car and drive has not thought through their comments very well or has an underlying issue that they need to deal with. I, for one, expect the Deputies to incarcerate people under the influence. Is that clear to you? You questioned in one of your earlier post whether we(citizens) know for a fact that the number of Deputies that we're paying for are actually working in our City and not, say, in Pontiac. Do you recall that innuendo? You should have done your homework (and may have got to the 6th grade) Scotty. If they did what you imply, it would be fraud. Is that simple enough for you to understand, or do you need me to dumb it down further?
Anyway, by moving the police millage out of the general fund and into the dedicated fund it leaves an unused 2.5 mills in the general fund that our city says they won't use - yah right! When it comes time for another round of pay increases, overseas trips, etc. you can just bet that 2.5 mills will be used and they can do it without asking the taxpayers. the fact is, this shell game they are playing will undoubtedly result in a TAX INCREASE.
"In summary, the council's options appear to be limited to making a non-binding expression of intent to reduce the general fund levy, if the police millage is approved, or amending the Charter to establish a dedicated police millage with a corresponding reduction to the Charter tax rate." Guess which one they chose? HINT- The non-binding one VOTE NO on the August 7th Police Millage. If approved, the City Council can INCREASE your taxes at any time by up to 2.5 Mills, WITHOUT a vote of the taxpayers.
Really sorry to have broken up your lovefest, "Mindy" by pointing out the discrepancies.and propaganda being put out here.
SO, I guess everyone's entitled to their own opinion on what's waste and what's not.
We need to reject this request and let them give us a proposal to continue the police funding at the existing levels with no tax increase. If the police funding is not enough from tax collections, then they need to take the pay and benefit cuts like we all did in the private sector way back in 2008 and continue to see reductions to this day. How about some shared sacrifice between the public sector and the taxpayers who pay their wages and benefits who are in the private sector?
To: City Council Members From: Bryan K. Barnett, Mayor Date: July 16, 2012 Subject: Governmental Representation and Consulting Services Request: City Council is requested to authorize a contract/blanket purchase order to Strategic Communication Solutions, Inc., Novi, Michigan for governmental representation and consulting services in the amount not-to-exceed $60,000.00 through August 1, 2013. Council Members: Greg Hooper, Mark Tisdel, Adam Kochkenderfer, Michael Webber, Nathan Klomp vote yes for a $60,000 Lobbyist. Ravi Yalamanchi and James Rosen voted no No one should vote YES for the police millage when the city has money to burn on a $60,000 Lobbyist.