Consolidated Government Committee
Remarks at the State Boundary Commission Hearing
Saugatuck High School, June 20, 2012
Good afternoon Chairman Schornack, and members of the Commission. Thank you for coming here today.
My name is Travis Randolph. I am a longtime resident of Saugatuck Township, and with my wife, Sandra, the owner of a business in the City of Saugatuck. I am also chairman of the grassroots citizens group called the Consolidated Government Committee, which, as you know, delivered the original petition on consolidation, to this Commission.
I’d like to spend just a few minutes today talking about how all this got started, the route we’ve traveled, and our consolidation recommendation for your consideration.
Some history.
Back in 1989, area citizens here crafted the first Tri-Community Plan, which was endorsed by both cities and the Township. One of its most notable recommendations was that consolidating our governments made sense.
In the twenty-three years since those foresighted citizens issued that recommendation, we have indeed experienced consolidation. We now have one fire department and one library for the two cities and the Township, one police department for the two cities, and one regional interurban bus service. These consolidated entities have performed splendidly, both from a service and a financial standpoint. So we know consolidation works.
With all of that, however, we are still operating Douglas and Saugatuck as two separate municipal governments. Two governments—with all their redundant overhead--for just 2,157 citizens, who all live around the same harbor.
Regrettably, in those twenty-three years, voters have never been permitted to express their wishes about consolidation. In other areas in the state, municipal governments themselves shouldered the responsibility for looking into re-inventing themselves as consolidated cities. But not here.
As of 2010, even with two governments (or maybe because we had two governments), we still had no economic development plan, we had no community healthcare-services plan, we had no coordinated plan to maintain our shared infrastructure. Most telling of all, we had no articulated vision for our shared future. And all this, at a time when state revenue-sharing was falling, taxes were rising, and we were in the midst of a recession like nothing any of us had ever seen before.
The desire to see our citizens reclaim their constitutional right to choose the form of their municipal government energized our group. We studied consolidation, prepared the necessary detailed maps and related paperwork, created and circulated a consolidation petition, and filed it with the SBC in November of 2011. All this, the necessary first steps to bringing consolidation to a voter referendum.
In April of this year, based on questions asked by the Commission, as well as developments within Saugatuck Township, our committee revised its recommendation to you. We now support the consolidation of only the municipal governments of Saugatuck and Douglas, with Saugatuck Township no longer included.
For the remainder of our committee’s remarks, Frank Lamb, our treasurer, and Bobbie Gaunt, another of our members, will now address you.
My name is Travis Randolph. I am a longtime resident of Saugatuck Township, and with my wife, Sandra, the owner of a business in the City of Saugatuck. I am also chairman of the grassroots citizens group called the Consolidated Government Committee, which, as you know, delivered the original petition on consolidation, to this Commission.
I’d like to spend just a few minutes today talking about how all this got started, the route we’ve traveled, and our consolidation recommendation for your consideration.
Some history.
Back in 1989, area citizens here crafted the first Tri-Community Plan, which was endorsed by both cities and the Township. One of its most notable recommendations was that consolidating our governments made sense.
In the twenty-three years since those foresighted citizens issued that recommendation, we have indeed experienced consolidation. We now have one fire department and one library for the two cities and the Township, one police department for the two cities, and one regional interurban bus service. These consolidated entities have performed splendidly, both from a service and a financial standpoint. So we know consolidation works.
With all of that, however, we are still operating Douglas and Saugatuck as two separate municipal governments. Two governments—with all their redundant overhead--for just 2,157 citizens, who all live around the same harbor.
Regrettably, in those twenty-three years, voters have never been permitted to express their wishes about consolidation. In other areas in the state, municipal governments themselves shouldered the responsibility for looking into re-inventing themselves as consolidated cities. But not here.
As of 2010, even with two governments (or maybe because we had two governments), we still had no economic development plan, we had no community healthcare-services plan, we had no coordinated plan to maintain our shared infrastructure. Most telling of all, we had no articulated vision for our shared future. And all this, at a time when state revenue-sharing was falling, taxes were rising, and we were in the midst of a recession like nothing any of us had ever seen before.
The desire to see our citizens reclaim their constitutional right to choose the form of their municipal government energized our group. We studied consolidation, prepared the necessary detailed maps and related paperwork, created and circulated a consolidation petition, and filed it with the SBC in November of 2011. All this, the necessary first steps to bringing consolidation to a voter referendum.
In April of this year, based on questions asked by the Commission, as well as developments within Saugatuck Township, our committee revised its recommendation to you. We now support the consolidation of only the municipal governments of Saugatuck and Douglas, with Saugatuck Township no longer included.
For the remainder of our committee’s remarks, Frank Lamb, our treasurer, and Bobbie Gaunt, another of our members, will now address you.
Good afternoon. My name is Frank Lamb and I am Treasurer of the Consolidated Government Committee. I am also a lifetime resident of this community; I graduated from Saugatuck High School and Michigan State University. I have always viewed the Douglas/Saugatuck area as one community, the downtown areas each having their own character, which will remain and prosper through consolidation.
I’d like to briefly take you through some of the most important financial considerations related to consolidating the governments of Saugatuck and Douglas.
One of the key considerations in any consolidation effort is the opportunity to save taxpayers money by eliminating wasteful duplication. Obviously, this can be a contentious notion, so our committee sought to generate the most conservative estimates of any such savings. And to do this, we turned to the highly respected Michigan-based accounting and business-consulting firm, Plante Moran. As you may know, Plante Moran counts quite a number of municipalities and school districts throughout the state among its clients.
Rather than relying on one approach to cost-savings, Plante Moran performed two completely separate analyses. In the first, they identified eleven cities in Lower Michigan, on or near the shoreline of one of the Great Lakes, with populations similar to a combined Douglas and Saugatuck. They compared the average three-year municipal-overhead expenses for the eleven cities, with ours here. The conclusion: A combined Douglas and Saugatuck would save taxpayers a minimum of $500,000 a year. And that’s without including any efficiencies from combining service departments like public works, for example.
The second Plante Moran analysis took a zero-based approach to creating a hypothetical organizational chart for a combined city. This was based on the current organizational charts for the municipal overhead functions in the two cities. Things like the city council, city manager, city attorney, assessor and so on. Like the other study, no municipal-service savings were included, so the projected savings would be comparable, and represent a legitimate minimum number.
Plante Moran’s annual cost-savings projection from this second study was just over $543,000.
Two different studies, both completed in just the last month, both projecting savings for a combined Douglas and Saugatuck of a half-million dollars. Minimum. Every year.
But do savings like these ever actually occur in the real world?
To answer that, we looked at the only voluntary municipal consolidation in the history of the state. It took place twelve years ago when Iron River, Stambaugh, and Mineral Hills consolidated. The “new” City of Iron River recently published their experience with cost-savings versus their old un-consolidated system. They put their savings at $1.3 million a year. So, with the millions they’ve saved over the years, it’s no wonder they proudly call themselves “Michigan’s First Consolidated City.”
Finally, one of the challenges any consolidation effort must meet is the cost required to actually make the consolidation happen. Attorney’s fees, mapping, the costs involved in writing a new city charter, and such are not cheap. In this regard, our committee was heartened by the published experience of the Township of Onekama and the Village of Onekama, which are right now engaged in consolidation. To help defray the very kinds of startup costs I mentioned, the Onekama folks applied for a grant from the State of Michigan’s Economic Vitality Incentive Program, or “EVIP.” The amount granted Onekama?
$355,000.
So, from a cost-savings perspective, not only does consolidation make good sense, should a Saugatuck and Douglas consolidation effort be endorsed by our voters in a referendum, the two existing city governments would be able to move quickly to obtain EVIP funds to help us get there.
Bobbie…
I’d like to briefly take you through some of the most important financial considerations related to consolidating the governments of Saugatuck and Douglas.
One of the key considerations in any consolidation effort is the opportunity to save taxpayers money by eliminating wasteful duplication. Obviously, this can be a contentious notion, so our committee sought to generate the most conservative estimates of any such savings. And to do this, we turned to the highly respected Michigan-based accounting and business-consulting firm, Plante Moran. As you may know, Plante Moran counts quite a number of municipalities and school districts throughout the state among its clients.
Rather than relying on one approach to cost-savings, Plante Moran performed two completely separate analyses. In the first, they identified eleven cities in Lower Michigan, on or near the shoreline of one of the Great Lakes, with populations similar to a combined Douglas and Saugatuck. They compared the average three-year municipal-overhead expenses for the eleven cities, with ours here. The conclusion: A combined Douglas and Saugatuck would save taxpayers a minimum of $500,000 a year. And that’s without including any efficiencies from combining service departments like public works, for example.
The second Plante Moran analysis took a zero-based approach to creating a hypothetical organizational chart for a combined city. This was based on the current organizational charts for the municipal overhead functions in the two cities. Things like the city council, city manager, city attorney, assessor and so on. Like the other study, no municipal-service savings were included, so the projected savings would be comparable, and represent a legitimate minimum number.
Plante Moran’s annual cost-savings projection from this second study was just over $543,000.
Two different studies, both completed in just the last month, both projecting savings for a combined Douglas and Saugatuck of a half-million dollars. Minimum. Every year.
But do savings like these ever actually occur in the real world?
To answer that, we looked at the only voluntary municipal consolidation in the history of the state. It took place twelve years ago when Iron River, Stambaugh, and Mineral Hills consolidated. The “new” City of Iron River recently published their experience with cost-savings versus their old un-consolidated system. They put their savings at $1.3 million a year. So, with the millions they’ve saved over the years, it’s no wonder they proudly call themselves “Michigan’s First Consolidated City.”
Finally, one of the challenges any consolidation effort must meet is the cost required to actually make the consolidation happen. Attorney’s fees, mapping, the costs involved in writing a new city charter, and such are not cheap. In this regard, our committee was heartened by the published experience of the Township of Onekama and the Village of Onekama, which are right now engaged in consolidation. To help defray the very kinds of startup costs I mentioned, the Onekama folks applied for a grant from the State of Michigan’s Economic Vitality Incentive Program, or “EVIP.” The amount granted Onekama?
$355,000.
So, from a cost-savings perspective, not only does consolidation make good sense, should a Saugatuck and Douglas consolidation effort be endorsed by our voters in a referendum, the two existing city governments would be able to move quickly to obtain EVIP funds to help us get there.
Bobbie…
Thanks, Frank.
While we were all encouraged to see the numbers Frank just shared, consolidation is not simply about cost savings.
In fact, money is not the primary reason our committee believes Saugatuck and Douglas should consolidate their governments.
So if it’s not money, what is the primary reason?
In three words: Our shared future.
“Shared,” because we are one community, not two.
We all have friends “across the harbor.”
We share that harbor, and so much more. Our kids go to the same schools. We eat in restaurants on both sides of the bridge. Some of us work on one side of the bridge, and live on the other.
We shop in each other’s stores, tie-up at each other’s docks. We watch the same fireworks, and the same sunsets.
But, does all this mean we are identical people?
Of course not.
Just as in Douglas, the “center-of-town people” and the “shore people” are not identical. Or in Saugatuck, the “downtown people” and the “hill people” are not the same, we are all part of what may be the most wonderfully diverse population of our size in the entire country.
Here, diversity isn’t a buzz word. Nor is diversity a “challenge.”
For Saugatuck and Douglas, diversity is one of our core strengths. One of the strengths we share.
Right along with our respect for our historic past,
… our passion for the arts,
… our work ethic,
… our trademark hospitality,
… our spirit of volunteerism,
… our dedication to the quality of our schools,
… our remarkable creativity,
… and even our seemingly innate knowledge of how to throw the best community parties.
Consolidation will multiply all these strengths.
Instead of frittering away our resources and our energies in two directions, consolidation will give our shared future a singular focus.
The focus necessary to maintain and build our attractiveness as a tourist destination competing with many others.
The focus critical to attract entrepreneurs, retirees, and young families to join our ranks. And create the jobs and the climate to keep them here.
The focus needed to ensure our stores, shops, restaurants, and galleries flourish.
The single focus to make us… successful: One thriving community facing the challenges of tomorrow.
Simply put, consolidation means we will move forward in one direction, not two.
Many of us instinctively know how true this is. In fact, when Mitchell & Associates surveyed Douglas and Saugatuck residents back in 2010, 74% favored combining our two governments into one.
And five years after consolidation up in Iron River, virtually every citizen surveyed there believed consolidation had worked out for the best.
Finally, speaking of “one,” let me leave you with one last thought.
This afternoon, we are assembled in a gymnasium. On this very basketball floor, our future citizens-- kids from both sides of the harbor-- compete as a team.
They aren’t Saugatuck players; they aren’t Douglas players.
They are one team with one focus: winning.
If the kids can do it, so can we.
After all, the fact is, we really are better together.
Thank you.
In fact, money is not the primary reason our committee believes Saugatuck and Douglas should consolidate their governments.
So if it’s not money, what is the primary reason?
In three words: Our shared future.
“Shared,” because we are one community, not two.
We all have friends “across the harbor.”
We share that harbor, and so much more. Our kids go to the same schools. We eat in restaurants on both sides of the bridge. Some of us work on one side of the bridge, and live on the other.
We shop in each other’s stores, tie-up at each other’s docks. We watch the same fireworks, and the same sunsets.
But, does all this mean we are identical people?
Of course not.
Just as in Douglas, the “center-of-town people” and the “shore people” are not identical. Or in Saugatuck, the “downtown people” and the “hill people” are not the same, we are all part of what may be the most wonderfully diverse population of our size in the entire country.
Here, diversity isn’t a buzz word. Nor is diversity a “challenge.”
For Saugatuck and Douglas, diversity is one of our core strengths. One of the strengths we share.
Right along with our respect for our historic past,
… our passion for the arts,
… our work ethic,
… our trademark hospitality,
… our spirit of volunteerism,
… our dedication to the quality of our schools,
… our remarkable creativity,
… and even our seemingly innate knowledge of how to throw the best community parties.
Consolidation will multiply all these strengths.
Instead of frittering away our resources and our energies in two directions, consolidation will give our shared future a singular focus.
The focus necessary to maintain and build our attractiveness as a tourist destination competing with many others.
The focus critical to attract entrepreneurs, retirees, and young families to join our ranks. And create the jobs and the climate to keep them here.
The focus needed to ensure our stores, shops, restaurants, and galleries flourish.
The single focus to make us… successful: One thriving community facing the challenges of tomorrow.
Simply put, consolidation means we will move forward in one direction, not two.
Many of us instinctively know how true this is. In fact, when Mitchell & Associates surveyed Douglas and Saugatuck residents back in 2010, 74% favored combining our two governments into one.
And five years after consolidation up in Iron River, virtually every citizen surveyed there believed consolidation had worked out for the best.
Finally, speaking of “one,” let me leave you with one last thought.
This afternoon, we are assembled in a gymnasium. On this very basketball floor, our future citizens-- kids from both sides of the harbor-- compete as a team.
They aren’t Saugatuck players; they aren’t Douglas players.
They are one team with one focus: winning.
If the kids can do it, so can we.
After all, the fact is, we really are better together.
Thank you.
