May 16th meeting:
Two major topics: 1. presentation by MTA about the services offered and 2. voting vs the board extending the special assessment they had been levying for police service.
The MTA presenters discussed their funding, rates for riders, countywide services plus connections (regional services) to other county centers. Price is $2.50 each way I believe or $1.50 reduced rate for qualifying riders. Who uses the services was discussed, as was funding (renewal millage, federal funds, senior care millage for county, etc.) MTA employs about 500 people and has 342 vehicles.
I believe the presenters went wrong when they asked for township support for the upcoming millage renewal. The first board member's comments can be summarized as "Your Ride encourages urban sprall, we have too many services, too many cab companies put out of business because of MTA".
The next board member had a list of millage/taxes he must pay already and said the MTA service -- THESE ARE HIS EXACT WORDS -- is "enabling people to stay where they shouldn't be".
WOW--basically the service is too cheap, competition is nonexistant because the price is low, people who use it shouldn't (There was a discussion of why a doctor probably shouldn't use the service since he has money--yes really that was discussed.) And here I thought the price was good for those who don't have a lot of money; for people who don't have transportation for a day, week, longer; for those who might need a way to appointments or a job; for those who have to get someone somewhere and doing it alone is too hard; for those who work and can't take a family member to work or to the doctor; for anyone who wants to use it since he/she pays taxes to fund it, for those. . . .you fill it in.
OR were the ideas expressed by 2 white males who have never experienced unemployment, taking care of a family member, foreclosure, underemployment, car break downs, lack of money,medical problems, etc. Simple immaturity? Simple racism? Simply a lack of empathy?
OR were the 2 simply implying that those city folk need to stay where they are, and that we white folk have the intelligence and ability to take care of ourselves way out in the suburbs?
Now for the special assessment for police patrols:
The supervisor suggested a millage request for covering the shortfall of $
for police coverage in Atlas Township. Three other board members were against
that because #1 it is getting close to the ballot submission deadline #2 if only
20% of the voters usually vote between presidental elections and 80% usually
vote during presidental, it would be better to have a larger number of people
expressing their opinion (male board member) and #3 (another male member) bad
idea to have that millage request in an off year election. (This I believe
means he would guess that it would be voted down.)
WELL JUST KNOW that the special assessment was basically a board decision to
impose the millage WITHOUT A VOTE anyway. Sure, a special meeting had to be
called when it was first imposed but IT WAS NOT VOTED ON BY THE PUBLIC. How can
a chance, A RIGHT, to vote be worse than only 20% showing up at the polls in
November and voting yes or no?
A decision to have a special June meeting was made--if anyone shows up to voice
an opinion for or against the need for the millage, the board can decide for
a ballot issue or another unilateral decision to tax the public without a public
vote. (Check out state government law which allows boards to do this -- I'll
do it for you even. Something to look forward to.)
