Don’t Be Confused – The Clarkston “Public Safety Millage” And The Independence Township “Police Millage” Are Two Separate Things

I’ve been asked private questions and have seen some confusion on social media about the Clarkston and Independence Township millage proposals that are on the ballot this November, so I thought this would be worth a quick post. The confusion is understandable to some extent because the City of the Village of Clarkston is a separate government that is surrounded by Independence Township, and people can have Clarkston mailing addresses but not live in the City of the Village of Clarkston. And we also all get the same Clarkston News containing the Independence Township insert and we all see the same Facebook posts in both the City of the Village of Clarkston and Independence Township groups that many people follow discussing the two proposals.

(And now I’m going to stop saying “the City of the Village of Clarkston” because it’s a stupid name and takes too long to type – I’ll just use the word “Clarkston” going forward in this post.)

I’m pretty sure there are some less-than-honest people who aren’t confused at all and are deliberately conflating the two millages (perhaps to save some money on signs?). I recently saw two gold and brown signs at Washington and Holcomb saying “Police Millage – Vote Yes!” with an Oakland County Sheriff logo on them. The signs were paid for by the “Committee to Keep the Peace” using a Clarkston mailing address. The signs look like this:

These signs pertain only to the Independence Township “police millage” and have nothing to do with the Clarkston “public safety millage.” It’s not the fault of the “Committee to Keep the Peace” organizer, who appears to have filed all the required paperwork so far allowing his group to campaign in favor of the Independence Township police millage. I’m guessing the people who placed the signs I saw in Clarkton can’t find enough people interested in supporting the insane 7-mill Clarkston “public safety millage,” so they borrowed Independence Township campaign signs. No doubt they’re hoping Clarkston residents aren’t smart enough to know the difference because surely these signs could have been placed anywhere within the 35.5 square miles of Independence Township where people will actually be voting on the Independence Township police millage. (Wonder how mayor Sue Wylie’s solicitation efforts for the Clarkston-related millage signs are going – is it possible this trickery is the best she could do?)

Despite what the people who planted these signs inside Clarkston want you to think, the Independence Township police safety millage is entirely separate from the Clarkston public safety millage. Both can pass, neither can pass, or one can pass and the other fail – because they each stand on their own and Independence Township and Clarkston voters will only be voting on the millage proposal that pertains specifically to them. So, let’s talk about them separately.

Independence Township:

Independence Township’s millage pertains to police services only. Independence Township has its own fire and emergency medical services (EMS), and the current 3.2 police millage request has nothing to do with fire and EMS.

Independence Township is making a huge push to convince people to change their minds about the same 3.2-mill police millage they voted down in August. They’re having lots of public meetings, creating lots of Facebook posts, and they even used their four-page monthly insert in the Clarkston News to beg for their residents’ money by publishing charts telling taxpayers where their tax money goes, describing all the services the township provides, telling everyone all the purported “facts,” sharing a “what you will pay” chart, and basically claiming the world will end if they don’t get their 3.2 mills for police services.

To be fair and to the best of my knowledge, Independence Township police services have always been funded by a separate millage, so this isn’t a new thing for them. They are asking for 3.2 mills to pay for Independence Township’s contract with the Oakland County Sheriff to provide Independence Township residents with police services.

Why all the attention to this issue? Independence Township voters said “no” to an identical request in August. That caused much wailing and gnashing of teeth at the township hall because, to hear them tell the tale, they supposedly have no money to make up for the shortfall. But that assumes they fund everything and everyone at the same 100% level they are funded at now, doesn’t it?

I’m not an Independence Township voter and those of you who are must make up your own minds about whether you believe what you’re being told and whether you want to pay 3.2 mills for police services. I think it’s laudable that your township government is making an effort to provide you with information regarding how your tax dollars are spent, but I also think it’s sad the only reason it happened is because taxpayers turned off one small spigot of money in the larger scheme of things. Taxpayers – remember the awesome power you wield!

For whatever it’s worth based on my experience working for the two largest municipal public bodies in the state, when the public is told a government can’t possibly make up a budget shortfall, it’s not the entire truth. The full truth is they can’t make up the shortfall unless they do the same things employers in the private sector do – delay pet projects and equipment purchases, lay off employees, combine jobs, cut hours, work smarter, cut publications and conference budgets, increase health insurance copays, cut nonrequired services, etc. Legally required services must continue, but there is likely nothing that requires these functions continue in the same way – or be staffed in the same way – as they are now. If you have fewer employees performing a mandated function, chances are no one in the public is going to notice.

The township will find a way to pay for police services no matter what happens. Maybe this experience with a small taxpayer revolt will light a fire under the township and other public bodies to find alternatives to the highly priced but less-than-stellar service provided by the Oakland County Sheriff (since I’m assuming it sucks just as bad in Independence Township as it does in Clarkston). The township will not end a budget year “in the red” because it isn’t legally allowed to under state law. Life will go on. The only way Clarkston could be affected by what Independence Township voters decide is if Independence Township decides to stop contracting with the Oakland County Sheriff because Clarkston’s contract with Independence Township for sheriff services requires the existence of that Independence Township contract for sheriff services with the Oakland County Sheriff (but that’s Clarkston’s problem, not Independence Township’s).

And word to the wise Independence Township voter – if you vote “no” this time, the service cuts you’ll likely see first are the ones that don’t save a lot of budget money but will be designed to punish you and really p*ss you off – starting with Parks and Recreation activities. Your township government will also likely lay off clerks, secretaries, and laborers before they cut jobs and salaries for executive level staff (those are always saved for the last because decisionmakers always try to protect their own for as long as possible).

Clarkston:

As you’ll see, what Clarkston is doing is entirely different than what Independence Township is doing. Clarkston wants 7 mills for a brand new “public safety millage.” And the way it is going about it is classic Clarkston government asshattery.

Clarkston used to have its very own (and very awesome) police department, but we’ve always contracted with Independence Township for fire and EMS services. When the cost to maintain our police department rose, voters were asked if we would be willing to pay an additional couple mills to support it. The vote was close with the proposal losing by only eight votes as I recall. And that’s how we lost our wonderful police department. (I voted yes. 😢)

After that, we started contracting for police services with the Oakland County Sheriff, but not directly. We contract with Independence Township who in turn contracts with the sheriff. Doing things this way helps us avoid the expense of creating and equipping a substation, which is an Oakland County Sheriff requirement. Our oh so very busy city employees are much too busy being busy doing Lord knows what to look for alternatives to police, fire, or EMS at a lower cost. The most the city manager will say is he’s “exploring” contracting directly with the sheriff – which means he’s not actually doing anything substantive but wants to tell you he is doing something during the runup to the November election when he wants you to vote “yes” on the Clarkston “public safety millage.”

Unlike Independence Township, Clarkston prefers to pay for things through the general fund. This works out well for our city government because it allows it to avoid going to the voters for approval before spending tax dollars on big ticket things we don’t want (like the way they forced us to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to upgrade city hall and the Department of Public Works through a majority city council vote to raid the water and sewer funds that ignored organized taxpayer opposition). If large expenses are funded through a separate millage, the city must ask voters to approve the initial millage and any renewals. And, as Independence Township and other local governments recently learned, sometimes voters say “no” – and that makes the local governments super mad. Clarkston government has historically preferred to do what it wants without asking.

Right now, Clarkston residents pay 37.2027 mills in taxes to Clarkston as well as to the state, county, and for other millages like the library, zoo, etc. If you want to know how much this means to you right now, multiply the money in the taxable value box of your tax bill by .00372027 (because one mill is represented mathematically as .001). Of the 37.2027 mills, 11.4107 remains in Clarkston to run Clarkston government. Our city manager likes to ignore the other 25.792 mills because if it’s not money the city can keep for its own purposes, then the money apparently doesn’t exist – even though it’s very real money to all of us and the city manager would gladly turn any of us over to Oakland County for foreclosure proceedings if we defaulted on any part of it.

The cost for police, fire, and EMS services has been rising. The city really likes its general fund money, and paying for these three services from the general fund is super annoying to the city because it leaves less for employee salary and benefit increases and pet projects we don’t get to vote on. I mention salary and benefits as a part of the bigger picture because using the available 2025 budget numbers, we estimated the cost to maintain all six of our employees (who provide minimal services to residents) takes up about half of the 11.4107 mills we send to the city. Employee costs are scattered throughout the budget making them very hard to compile and don’t include the cost of paying for time not worked for the 10-15 vacation days, 14 holidays, and 6 sick days that anyone who works 32 hours or more receives. Our city manager has been excitedly pointing to police, fire, and EMS costs to justify the “public safety millage” while completely ignoring the high employee costs he personally benefits from (look, over there – squirrel!).

There are many ways to address budget issues, but your Clarkston government decided it wants to shift the cost of paying for police, fire, and EMS out of the general fund to a special “public safety millage.” So, the better way to think of this is as a “let’s increase the general fund millage” rather than a “public safety millage,” because the city is simply using public safety costs as a vehicle to get access to more general fund money for things besides police, fire, and EMS. Once police, fire, and EMS are paid by the “public safety millage,” then the money in the general fund that used to pay for police, fire, and EMS can be spent on other things. As the city treasurer confirmed at a recent meeting, the city just wants another source of income – and this is the way it wants to do it.

There is a 15-mill Clarkston general millage cap in the city charter that the city must abide by, but the public safety millage option is a state law loophole that allows a city to ask for money over and above the general millage cap – so of course that was the way Clarkston government chose to approach the issue. Other options would require honest budget cuts and honest revenue discussions, and the city never wants that! Even worse, the city is attempting to trick people into thinking a “yes” vote will “only” result in a net increase of 1 or 1.5 mills because the city might voluntarily (but only temporarily) reduce the 11.4107 general operating mills we are paying.

But even if the city is talking about reducing the general operating millage as part of its promotion of the “public safety millage,” it’s making no promises of an operating millage reduction. As the city attorney repeatedly confirmed, the city isn’t promising jack. The council will decide what it wants to do next May when it considers the next year’s budget. If you vote “yes” on the “public safety millage,” even if there is a temporary reduction in the general fund millage, your general operating taxes can be raised by any increment at any time up to the full 11.4107 limit by a vote of the city council to cover general expenses or whatever the city council wants to spend money on with no additional input from you. And your city council admitted that your taxes will (not might) be raised the full 61% during the next four years for a total Clarkston only millage of 18.4107 mills – and that full 18.4107 millage burden could be incurred next July 1 if your city council decided to do that.

What happens if the Clarkston proposal fails in November? Nothing. The sheriff will still come when you call (even though they refuse to write traffic tickets and will undoubtedly continue not to write traffic tickets).

The city manager said the first step after a November “no” vote is for the city to waste your tax dollars on a special election next year to ask you the same question. (Wait – I thought we don’t have enough money? Make it make sense.)

The city’s second planned step will really p*ss you off. If we vote “no” again, the city is threatening to take the money from us by force through a special assessment the council will shove through over any objections (though they will politely listen to your public comments about it before they ignore you and vote to do it anyway). And no, it’s not an exaggeration to characterize this as taking the money by force. If you doubt me, try not paying it and watch your home go up for auction at a sheriff foreclosure sale.

Our arrogant, smarmy city manager recently posted a video explaining how the “force” option will work:

The second option is another one we don’t like to do but potentially is an option. That would be to establish a special assessment district, as permitted by state law, specifically for police, fire, and emergency services.

This is something the city council could do, but the city and certainly our city council members do not want to do this if they can avoid it. They’d like to have the voters weigh in on this. What do the voters want? So, we don’t like doing a special assessment district, but it is something that if we had to, we could do.

Translation: Hey, peasants. Weigh in, tell us what you want, but just so you know, there’s only one “right” answer. You only get your say if you vote “yes” – because we will force our will on you if you vote “no.”

Oh, really?

I have a message for the city manager because I know he reads everything I write, saves it as a pdf copy, and passes it around to his colleagues:

Do you all really want to go there, buddy?

You and the other jerks in city hall do not have the last word. My husband obviously knows how to jump through the necessary hoops to get a proposal on the ballot (since he did the work to put the Historic District Commission charter proposal on the ballot two years ago), and I would be more than willing to walk petitions around and get enough signatures to do that. I’m sure I would have a lot of willing signers (and helpers) because no one likes government threats. After that, we’ll get a third vote that is also hopefully “no” that will result in some meaningful discussions and realistic budget cuts, something that should have happened without trying to force a fake 7-mill “public safety millage” designed to increase general fund money down our throats. Why is it so hard for the city to do the right thing the first time?

I recently sent a letter to Clarkston voters explaining the many reasons why the city cannot be trusted to be fiscally responsible and asking for a “no” vote on this stupid proposal. A friend of mine (ironically from Independence Township) succinctly summarized that letter to voters as follows:

• • Clarkston leadership is incompetent.
  • Here are the factual ways they failed.
  • Here are the ways they are taking advantage.
  • Please don’t give the alcoholic more booze.

Excellent summary. If you’d like to read the two-page version, you can find it here.

Please vote “no” on the Clarkston 7-mill
“public safety millage” proposal in November!