Rochester Hills Council Hears From Residents on Police Funding Issue

Two millages that fund police services in Rochester Hills are Most residents would agree that funding needs to be continued.

What remains unclear, though — to residents and city leaders — is whether voters will say "yes" to a ballot question that asks them about more than just a simple, straight renewal.

A public hearing at Monday night's City Council meeting invited residents to voice their opinions on possible ballot questions that would continue the $9 million in annual funding for the city's police services, which are contracted through the .

Seven residents spoke about the issue; their main concern was whether councilmembers would be able to educate voters about the issue well enough to ensure a funding question would be approved.

In the end, councilmembers said they would discuss possible ballot language at their May 21 meeting, which would be just before the deadline for a decision to get the proposals on the August ballot.

How police are funded

Here's a look at the funding sources for Rochester Hills police services through the county sheriff's office:

• Two property tax millages that total 1.2083 (a seven-year 0.4260 millage and a 20-year 0.7823 millage) fund about 43 percent of the services. The millages expire in 2013.
• The city's general fund levies about 47 percent of the services — about 2.5 mills.
• 10 percent of the funding comes from other, smaller sources.

This $9 million equals about 3.7 mills; that's $3.70 per $1,000 in taxable value of assessed property.

How the funding can continue

A committee of city leaders and residents has been working on what to do when the millages expire. On Monday night, they presented two options for continuing the funding (the draft langauge is attached in a PDF file to this story).

• Option One: Renew the 1.2083 mills and also levy up to 2.5 mills to continue police funding — and allow the city to discontinue paying for police services out of the general fund. This wouldn't be a millage increase, just a shift in the way it is funded.
• Option Two: Omit the expired millages and amend the city's charter to allow the city to levy up to 3.7 mills to fund police services.

The two options would generate equal funding; the first option would eliminate the current transfer of money from the general fund.

In addition, the committee suggested asking residents to fund an additional .4 mills that would be dedicated to community policing programs such as neighborhood watch and school liaison officers.

Some residents suggested another option: Ask voters for a straight renewal of the 1.2083 mills and then continue to transfer the additional 2.5 mills from the general fund. Then, at a later election, the city could ask for the added .4 mills.

"Sadly in my opinion the voters in this community will not approve anything other than a straight renewal of existing police millages," resident Lee Zendel said.

Councilmember Michael Webber was a member of the technical review committeee that drafted the ballot langauge. He said a straight renewal and the continued general fund transfer would be the easy approach.

"But what if a future council does not have the focus on public safety?" Webber asked. If the voters were to approve a millage renewal and an additional dedicated millage for police services, that funding would be more secure.

Resident Linda Davis-Kirksey said she supported the millage question. "But how do we sell that to a community?" she asked.

Resident and former councilmember Melinda Hill agreed the community would need to be informed. "You need a year to educate the public," said Hill, who asked councilmembers to delay the ballot question a year.

Council President Greg Hooper said elections in August and November this year present the city with two great chances for solving the funding question.

In order to be placed on the Aug. 7 ballot, a proposal would have to be approved by May 29. To be placed on the Nov. 6 ballot, a proposal would have to be approved by Aug. 28.