The Dexter Leader
A Heritage Newspaper
Weekly Publication
Township trustee stands his ground
PUBLISHED: April 12, 2007
The 104 property owners that were threatened with annexation because of old agreements between Dexter and Scio Township have been told that the Village will "postpone indefinitely", any thoughts about annexing their property.
Advertisement
These citizens would be a lot more secure if the Village Council would simply pass a motion not to annex their lots.
There are two Dexter Village annexations on the table, the old one and the new one. The Dexter Council majority could see that opponents of the two annexations were coming together.
The energy of this political union would have been a problem for the "Seta/Carson" council majority in the 2008 elections. Better to put one group on hold and pick them off one at a time. Once the current Dexter Village Council gets the powers provided by being a city, nothing will be able to stop them.
The current Dexter Village Council wants to be a city so they can accomplish high density annexations.
If Dexter Village was a city the State Boundary Commission would have jurisdiction over boundary disputes. After a huge (maybe $50,000) expense of taxpayer dollars a Michigan city can nearly always prevail and take land from a township, if the city can provide more services.
Dexter Village, however, doesn't currently have the "ability to provide water and sewer service to the land" that Mr. Carson claims.
This infrastructure would have to be built. Even if the developer paid the initial cost, the maintenance would fall to all taxpayers. Tax-payers of a "City of Dexter" will pay more. Our Scio attorney mentioned that "It is going to take another 5 mills to become a city." Does anyone honestly think that taxes would go down if Dexter became a city? This "city" thing must be "nipped in the bud."
Mr. Carson's well crafted column (March 29 issue of Dexter Leader) does not slip into the "twilight zone" until near the end, where he says that the Scio Township Land Pre-servation Commission (LPC) fund should essentially give its budget to him for a few years to serve as his "annexation facilitation fund."
Well, I could solve financial problems if Mr. Carson sent me a monthly check, but that doesn't make it happen. Mr. Carson's attempt to turn a delicate preservation project into a political football may antagonize Scio's LPC and the landowner so much that it kills the whole thing.
The LPC has a number of potential projects near Dexter Village. If the Dexter Council wants the Sloan Farm and Kingsley property annexation with such single minded obsession how much money are they willing to give to the preservation project?
Requests for expenditures from Scio Township land preservation funds are evaluated by the Scio Township LPC, with final decisions made by the Township Board.
I still think that negotiations conducted honestly could bring a "win-win" deal, but duplicitous negotiations hinder progress. Dexter negotiators have no incentive to move toward a compromise.
Mr. Carson made it clear that his side will not budge from 575 housing units.
He calls this "slow, managed growth", in an area where the Scio Township Master Plan calls for a maximum of 178 homes.
The Dexter Village side just needs to string these negotiations along until Dexter voters are successfully lulled into voting for cityhood. Then they can pounce with power. First, they will grab the new Sloan Farm and Kingsley property "hostile annexation" from Scio and later, "mop up" the old "Bates Farms" annexations.
The 2008 election is huge for Dexter. Hopefully, Dexter voters will get to choose between city sprawl and Dexter Village heritage.Chuck Ream is a Scio Township trustee.
Not all stories are guaranteed to appear
online. The Web edition contains a reasonable
sampling of the print edition stories.
For the most complete news coverage, we invite you to
subscribe
to the print edition of the paper.
Expanded
Web
Coverage
TOP JOBS
