Okay, a Millage Vote is Coming

Just to get you started thinking, here are some of the statements you'll be hearing, beginning at the CITCOM meeting which follows the Monday after the Wednesday I'm writing this:

• The rush to get a May vote is because that will bring in the higher summer taxes than will a vote in August. November will almost guarantee a defeat because the national election will attract a large number of uninformed people who have not followed the local dialogue.
• But, does May provide enough time for officials to make the case for a millage to the voters?
• Housing values will "never" get back to pre-Recession levels.
• Short of repeal of Headlee or Proposal A, even an increased millage won't bring in enough revenue to fund all the services we've lost.
• Our Police and Fire will try to reproduce what happened in Ferndale: Fire granted concessions. Cops played it to the end.
• Let's have Town Meetings (Hoover did) to ask the citizens which services they are willing to reduce or eliminate.
• Oh, please, how can anyone who has been paying attention not have heard everything we residents have to say?
• As happened when Hoover asked whether he should ask for 3 mils or 1.75 mils, CITCOM will punt.
• The planning session made it clear that asking 15 or 20 guys and gals to come up with specific recommendations is futile.
• So the city manager has to take the lead, but he's heard it all already, and he has resources which neither commissioners nor department heads have ready access to.
• People will not approve any millage if the Public Safety guys haven't granted concessions.
• People will approve a millage dedicated to Public Safety.
• How can the new commissioners responsibly vote on this?
• There is consensus in city hall that there is no choice.
• How much millage will will be requested? No lower than 3, no higher than 7.

It's serious stuff, yes, but we're in for several months of fun as well as irritation.

Another CITCOM 'A'
Serious disagreements politely and respectively addressed
Julie Rudd, Director of Finance, was the hero of the evening. On the last item on the agenda, from 11:05 to adjournment at 11:34, Rudd defended her request to replace a parttime payroll clerk with a fulltime accountant against half an hour of challenging questioning. She was successful, but the vote was 5-2.

This long and productive meeting included several serious debates, but with the exception of one snippy aside from a commissioner to the city manager, the tone throughout the evening was polite and respectful, as CITCOM addressed demolitions, dancing, enforcing motel ordinances, where parking tickets are paid, and the sale of surplus equipment. The split votes were:

• To, conditionally, postpone demolition of 620-646 West Eleven Mile Road for 90 days, 6-1, David Poulton voting No.
• To approve a liquor license and plan of operation for Burgrz Royal Oak, 6-1, Peggy Goodwin voting No.
• To approve a dancing permit for Fifth Avenue, 5-2, with Pat Capello and Poulton voting No.
• To approve the hiring of a fulltime accountant in the Finance Department, 5-2, Capello and Poulton voting No.

There were absences during two or three votes: no way to determine whether because of a phone call or a call of nature or a decision not to go on record about the agenda item.

I have reactivated the tabulation of split votes for this 46th City Commission on the same page where the tabulations for previous commissions appear. See Split Votes

The three new commissioners -- Kyle DuBuc, Mike Fournier, and Peggy Goodwin -- participated substantively in this second CITCOM meeting of 2012 -- with questions, seconding motions, debate. Not a sign of posturing.

Wisely, the commission postponed action on the request to promote a private sector sewer warranty program from which the city would earn income.

The eight speakers during Public Comment were focused: Most of them were in favor of granting Fifth Avenue that dancing permit.

Frank Versagi is the editor of Versagi Voice.