Parks millage - for or against?

[toobad]

Keith...thanks.

[waterboy]

As Keith noted,

"Might this millage be a round about way for obtaining the monies to finally build Ansted Park, sure, that's possible, but it also assures us the funds to maintain the parks we do have. "

I guess we will have to wait to see what the ballot actually says;  however, I also suspect that this is their way to grab money to help build Ansted Park.  And then we will need additional funds to maintain it, and perhaps they will also build a duck pond to name after one of our deserving community politicians.  Who knows what they might do under an "improvement" wording proposal that is not defined? 

Frankly, I don't appreciate any group that requests funds under one premise and then uses the funding for something else.  If they want funds for maintenance;  then request funds for maintenance.  If they want funds to build the new park;  then request funds to do that.  Don't mask a building plan for a new park behind the threat of our parks going to hell if a maintenance funding ballot isn't approved. 

I don't know what their intent is.  However, we do not have to approve a park maintance ballot that includes a new park building improvement ear mark.  They could simply be straight forward, and ask for maintenance funding for the existing facilities.   Hopefully, there will be a better definition forthcoming of what is planned and how the funds will be used.




 

[unionmade]

Looks like we will get some answers concerning the ballot language for the park issue. I see that the township posted their agenda for the March 16th board meeting.  There is a resolution listed on the agenda: Approving Parks Maintenance & Operations Ballot Proposal.  There is also a scheduled presentation by Ralph Lange called “Bedford Township Roads—At a Crossroads”.

Here is the link for the agenda:

http://www.bedfordmi.org/minutes/boardminutes/Agenda%20March%2016%202010.pdf

[mike1959]

 you hit it on the head water boy, round about? how about saying ...the truth

[BettyBedford]

I work with several organization donating my time and also with some close friends. We work with families in trouble with food, mortgages and general everyday living. This link will help and offers great advise for those who are struggling

http://www.blogsmonroe.com/budget/2010/03/the-mobile-food-pantry-in-monroe-mi/

It has information about downsizing in a bad economy  and other helpful information about money problems as well.

Here is a link about our county.. and what our unemployment is: Bedford is bad as well

http://www.blogsmonroe.com/budget/statistics-on-low-income-families-and-homelessness-in-monroe-county-mich/

getting back to this thread...vote your own conscience, but we need to prioritize of needs for at least now. I looked at the next meeting agenda and it has nothing to say but, gimme, gimme gimme. We need to secure our local budget first, then the roads and then the parks. I believe our roads with offer a better bang for the buck than the parks.

My 2 cents.

[mike1959]

 The roads are bad, id like to see a plan to fix them up and id like to see a plan that doesn't add more on the home owners  tax bill's. its not our fault the roads are so bad Ive paid my tax's for years and Ive watched the roads go bad for years and years. I thought that the increase in gas tax's and user fees were to help fix roads, so why went they fixed? i feel that the county's in MI have found a way around the proposal that limits the tax on our homes increases by bringing back voter issues again and again till they get the vote they want. we should not have to vote on something 4 times in ten years or less. And how does a park go to heck?? cut the grass pick up the garbage plant some nice trees. and also ask people to help out some. I for one would cut some grass and plant a tree.  we could start a Bedford group to help keep up the parks? we could put up signs at the parks asking people to sign up for a park clean up program? put an add in the paper? we could all give a hand. And I'm sure allot of us would and our kids would be showed a new way to do things not pay county workers but a comunity of people keeping up our own parks...  my 2 cents lol

[Director29]

Governement entities are experts at rallying groups of people who have a passion for an issue and having them get new taxes passed. In the early 50's, Toledo/Lucas County had a general property tax and a small income tax. When they they could no longer afford the zoo, it got it's own levy. Then seniors, parks, metal health, all received their own funding. I'm not saying that the issues don't need to be addressed, but did the general taxes go down? Obviously not. Citizens continue to support wages and benefits that are now far better than the private sector. The problem is worse at the Federal level than at the state and local level, but we need to start someplace.
The big 3 had a program that allowed employees on sub pay to do volunteer work. Why not require abled bodied people on unemployment to volunteer and perform some of the park and road maintenance that is not getting done? Maybe because the unions won't let it happen? The only way we are going to get to get the econony goging is to manufacturer items not through new services.

[bedford wife]

29...such good points.  I do think that if you receive aid, in any shape, there needs to be a volunteer requirement attached to it.  It gives people a sense of pride.  It's too bad, this country is so entitled that such an action would be deemed, "beneath the dignity" of the people receiving the aid.  I guess my parents scutting out toilets so their 8 kids could be educated was fine......I'm just saying.....BTW...federal retirement isn't all that great....some of the jobs have a great retirement but you have to be at the  GS14 or above level to get that.

[mike1959]

 good points 29

[Peter Griffin]

Frankly, I don't appreciate any group that requests funds under one premise and then uses the funding for something else.  If they want funds for maintenance;  then request funds for maintenance.  If they want funds to build the new park;  then request funds to do that.  Don't mask a building plan for a new park behind the threat of our parks going to hell if a maintenance funding ballot isn't approved. 

I don't know what their intent is.  However, we do not have to approve a park maintance ballot that includes a new park building improvement ear mark.  They could simply be straight forward, and ask for maintenance funding for the existing facilities.   Hopefully, there will be a better definition forthcoming of what is planned and how the funds will be used.

Waterboy, that's the best I've heard it put.  I couldn't agree more.

And how does a park go to heck?? cut the grass pick up the garbage plant some nice trees. and also ask people to help out some. I for one would cut some grass and plant a tree.  we could start a Bedford group to help keep up the parks? we could put up signs at the parks asking people to sign up for a park clean up program? put an add in the paper? we could all give a hand. And I'm sure allot of us would and our kids would be showed a new way to do things not pay county workers but a comunity of people keeping up our own parks...  my 2 cents lol

I agree, Mike.  SIGN ME UP.  Keeping the playground equipment maintained would require some sort of professional service because of the liability I'm sure, but general cleanliness can be maintained by us, the residents, and should reduce the cost of "upkeep" significantly.

I don't agree with people who receive aid "in any shape" working at the parks or the roads.....perhaps those receiving unemployment?  I would rather see people receiving aid spending their time trying to find work to get off the aid--not working at the park for free.  Those who enjoy the parks will volunteer their time regardless of receiving aid or not.  Those are the people I want to work side by side with.  Keeping our parks beautiful FOR FREE is something you have to WANT to do....you can't force somebody to do it....it just leads to bad results.  Besides, who is going to supervise the people that don't really want to be there and who is going to follow behind them and do the job right?
 

[New Guy]

I just finished watching last night’s Township Board meeting on the Bedford Yes site.  Pretty interesting meeting, with a lot of info given out.  I think that we have our answer about the parks millage request now.  After listening to Walt Wilburn at the meeting last night concerning the parks millage it got me to thinking about how are they paying for the park maintenance and operation now?  I went to the financial statements that are posted on the Bedford Yes site.  If I read them correctly, it looks like the parks maintenance and operation are currently funded by the township’s general fund (about $144,000 for each of the past 2 years). 

Right now the parks look like they have been taken care of pretty well as they are currently being funded.  So I guess the question is “Why do we need a new park millage if they are currently being taken care of by the Township?”  What happens if the new millage passes?  Will the $144,000 currently being used to fund the parks continue to be put in the parks fund or will the Township remove the $144,000 and use it for some other project (Maybe the $144,000 would be used to develop the new Ansted Park?).  Another question is “What happens if the park vote fails?” Will the township continue to fund the parks maintenance and operation out of the general fund as it has done in the past?  Unless, I am thinking wrong it doesn’t look like we need any additional park funding to maintain our parks just like they currently are being taken care of.  Check the figures out for yourself and see if I am missing something here.

Here is the link to the page where the financial statements for the park fund for 2008-2009 & 2009-2010 are located:

http://www.bedfordyes.com/BedfordTownshipFinancialTaxInfoPage.htm#NewsArticlesDocuments

[Director29]

New Guy, I agree. a millage for improvements in one thing one for maintenance is a horse of a different color.

As for mandating work for people on asistance, when I sold disability insurance, I was told that people who adjusted their life style for an extended period of time, got used to it and they had a real time returning to work. Think about the generations of welfare receiptiants on the rolls.

[bedford wife]

29..u hit the nail on the head.  I'm from Baltimore and that mentality is generational.  A lot of the girls I went to school with elected to score their 1st Apt by having a child thus making the eligible for their own apartment courtesy of the taxpayer.  That plus AFDC was enough.  I'm not talking about those who hit a hard spot and need help temporarily rather those who make it a lifestyle. 

[unionmade]

Congrats to “New Guy” for his post on this topic.  I think that he has figured out what is really going on with the new millage that is proposed by the Park Board.  I also went over the financial statements for the last 2 years and it doesn’t look like to me that we need any new money for the parks.  The township is already putting in about $143,360 from the general fund to maintain and operate the parks (and the park board gets another $19,000 for other sources).  I agree with New Guy, the parks look like they have been taken care of pretty good with the money that the Township has budgeted from the General Fund.  So can someone from the Township please explain to the taxpayers why we need the new parks millage if it is already being adequately funded for maintenance and operation?  Unless they can explain this to me it looks like I will be voting “No” on this one.

I just finished watching last night’s Township Board meeting on the Bedford Yes site.  Pretty interesting meeting, with a lot of info given out.  I think that we have our answer about the parks millage request now.  After listening to Walt Wilburn at the meeting last night concerning the parks millage it got me to thinking about how are they paying for the park maintenance and operation now?  I went to the financial statements that are posted on the Bedford Yes site.  If I read them correctly, it looks like the parks maintenance and operation are currently funded by the township’s general fund (about $144,000 for each of the past 2 years). 

Right now the parks look like they have been taken care of pretty well as they are currently being funded.  So I guess the question is “Why do we need a new park millage if they are currently being taken care of by the Township?”  What happens if the new millage passes?  Will the $144,000 currently being used to fund the parks continue to be put in the parks fund or will the Township remove the $144,000 and use it for some other project (Maybe the $144,000 would be used to develop the new Ansted Park?).  Another question is “What happens if the park vote fails?” Will the township continue to fund the parks maintenance and operation out of the general fund as it has done in the past?  Unless, I am thinking wrong it doesn’t look like we need any additional park funding to maintain our parks just like they currently are being taken care of.  Check the figures out for yourself and see if I am missing something here.

Here is the link to the page where the financial statements for the park fund for 2008-2009 & 2009-2010 are located:

http://www.bedfordyes.com/BedfordTownshipFinancialTaxInfoPage.htm#NewsArticlesDocuments

[Lamont Cranston]

I just finished watching last night’s Township Board meeting on the Bedford Yes site.  Pretty interesting meeting, with a lot of info given out.  I think that we have our answer about the parks millage request now.  After listening to Walt Wilburn at the meeting last night concerning the parks millage it got me to thinking about how are they paying for the park maintenance and operation now?  I went to the financial statements that are posted on the Bedford Yes site.  If I read them correctly, it looks like the parks maintenance and operation are currently funded by the township’s general fund (about $144,000 for each of the past 2 years). 

Right now the parks look like they have been taken care of pretty well as they are currently being funded.  So I guess the question is “Why do we need a new park millage if they are currently being taken care of by the Township?”  What happens if the new millage passes?  Will the $144,000 currently being used to fund the parks continue to be put in the parks fund or will the Township remove the $144,000 and use it for some other project (Maybe the $144,000 would be used to develop the new Ansted Park?).  Another question is “What happens if the park vote fails?” Will the township continue to fund the parks maintenance and operation out of the general fund as it has done in the past?  Unless, I am thinking wrong it doesn’t look like we need any additional park funding to maintain our parks just like they currently are being taken care of.  Check the figures out for yourself and see if I am missing something here.

Here is the link to the page where the financial statements for the park fund for 2008-2009 & 2009-2010 are located:

http://www.bedfordyes.com/BedfordTownshipFinancialTaxInfoPage.htm#NewsArticlesDocuments

Now that's doing your homework.

You inspired my new signature.