Sumpter Township to place police millage on November ballot
Sumpter Township officials have unanimously approved placing the Police Protection 5 mill levy on the Nov. 3 General Election ballot.
The question, considered by officials as crucial to funding the police department, was not approved by voters during the Aug. 4 primary election. Negative votes on the question totaled 1,284 or 56.7 percent of votes cast while 982 or 43.3 percent of voters were in favor of the millage.
This was the first police millage increase request in the township in 15 years and officials said the failure was due to a lack of information and misinformation.
The new millage set at 5 mills would be in effect for 4 years and be dedicated to police protection in the township. Current millages, totaling 3 mills, expired last year. The average homeowner in the township would have seen an increase of approximately $250 annually with the approval of the ballot proposal, which is a 2 mill increase.
That increase, noted Trustee Matt Oddy, may have discouraged township voters who are currently facing a substantial county drain assessment and the SMART bus tax.
Oddy said the township needs a “more robust plan” to provide voters with correct information concerning the need for the millage.
“If people could hear what these officers do on a day-to-day basis. People don’t realize how crucial these officers are and what they do day-to-day. They are on every fire department emergency call because HVA won’t go in until the scene is secure.”
Oddy said he felt most residents are unaware of the serious situations the police officers face and the number of calls the department handles in an effort to provide the safe environment in the township.
Trustee Tim Rush said he felt both misinformation and a lack of information surrounding the issue contributed to the failure of the ballot question.
“Before the election a woman asked me, ‘What are you going to do with the extra money,’, Rush said.
“There is no extra money, right now we subsidize the police department from the general fund and royalites,” he said.
Rush added that he felt the restrictions on the ballot language also contributed to the lack of support with voters.
“We are very limited in the way we have to word the question,” he said. “Many people thought this was a 5 mill increase, which just isn’t the case.”
Treasurer Bart Patterson agreed noting that the officials have had several meetings attempting to compose ballot language voters could understand within the regulations imposed by election laws.
Patterson explained that most residents are not aware that the police department is underfunded and that the general fund budget supplements funding the police.
Patterson said the trustees had been in three special meetings attempting to design language and a plan for the November ballot question.
“People just didn’t have enough information,” Rush said.
