By Mary Drier (Contact / Staff Bio)
September 6, 2008 - 12:00 a.m. EST

SEBEWAING ‹ There are mixed feelings about the village of Sebewaing wanting to change to a home-ruled city government.

Approximately 150 people attended Thursday’s State Boundary Commission (SBC) hearing on Sebewaing’s proposed governmental change.

The village’s proposal was just to change the property within the current village limits to a city, but by statute the SBC has to try to keep boundaries square. So, some more area was added to square off the proposed, explained SBC Chair Kenneth Verburg.

Some of the proposed additional areas include the Hickory Court Subdivision and part of some church property.

While there was some opposition to becoming a city, most of those who spoke were strongly against the additional area the SBC added.

An audience speaker noted SBC’s proposal would put the Lutheran school in the city limits, but the Immanuel Lutheran Church that was just across the parking lot would be in the township.

The village-to-city committee’s attorney, William Beach, outlined the advantages and rationale for the village wanting to become a city, and Sebewaing Township’s attorney, William Fahey, outlined why that shouldn’t happen as well as, the impact it would have on the township if it did and additional costs to village/city residents.

As a General Law Village, Sebewaing residents pay village and township taxes. As a city, residents would only have one government to follow and one taxing unit to pay.

“Village residents would see a change in their taxes. The difference would be about 5.25 mills less,” said Beach.

The village levies a total of 17.49 mills, but when county and township taxes are added, residents pay about 46.53 mills.

However, it is Fahey’s opinion that by the time all the costs of changing to a city and the responsibilities that being a city has it would total up to about 5.7 mills.

Changes that would come with being a city include being responsible for handling all elections, cost of voting equipment and election inspectors, doing property assessing, and paying attorney fees and managerial costs.

“Where is the savings in that?” questioned Fahey.

Some of the reasons the village is looking into becoming a city are: village residents pay about 45 percent of the township’s taxes; the 3.9 mills of township road tax, which is also paid by village residents, is seldom used for village streets. Plus, village residents pay about 2/3 of a joint venture like the marina, while township residents pay 1/3.

Another area of contention besides road funding is that the township doesn’t support the village’s police department even though it routinely answers calls outside of the village limits.

Township officials want to keep the status quo. They feel not only would the village’s change to city government impact township finances, as well as city residents, but could also have an impact on the quality of services.

The village-to-city side contends that emergency and library services wouldn’t be affected because an equitable arrangement should be worked out.

Other reasons given for wanting to change government structure include a better chance of receiving grant funding, as well as more state revenue sharing.

Former newspaper owner Walt Rummel, urged the two sides to solve their differences.

“I can’t see any good coming from this,” said Rummel, noting that with the state’s economy and factories closing (See related articles) in town, a division would “anger and divide more people.”

He suggested a negotiation committee be created to find a solution.

His comments about working together to make a “better community” to be proud of rather than dividing it was applauded.

Others who spoke supporting being a city without annexing land received applause.

SBC members were asked to recommend whether city or village rule was better for a community’s economy. They replied that many factors make or break a community’s vitality and economics, and government structure doesn’t necessarily play a part in that.

SBC member Ruth Ann Jamnick, who is also the Ypsilanti Township supervisor, said it was her opinion that either form of government was, and is a matter of a community working together finding ways make them stronger.

At the end of the meeting, SBC members requested additional information from the village and township to help them make their decision.

The SBC will continue to take written comments for 30 days. The deadline is Oct. 6 to mail them to the State Boundary Commission - Office of Policy and Legislative Affairs, 611 W. Ottawa St., P. O. Box 3004, Lansing, MI 48909-7504.

After that time, there is a seven-day rebuttal period before the SBC adjudicates.

If the Department of Labor and Economic Growth doesn’t approve the incorporation process, it ends; but if it is approved, there is a 45-day referendum to file petitions to put the issue to a vote of the people whether or not to allow the process to continue.

If the process is allowed to continue, the people would elect a charter commission to write a city charter, which would also have to be voted on by the people. At that time, voters can accept or reject the charter.

But, if the referendum vote denies allowing the process to continue, it ends.