Saugatuck + Douglas...We're Better Together!
  • Latest News
  • Endorsements
    • Holland Sentinel
    • State Boundary Commission
    • West Michigan Policy Forum
    • Steve Laughner, Owner, The Pines Motor Lodge
    • Paul Marineau, Former Douglas Mayor Pro Tem
    • Judge Richard A. Shaw
    • Henry Van Singel, Saugatuck Councilman
    • John Porzondek, Saugatuck Councilman
    • Saugatuck Officials Endorse Consolidation Study!
  • 48 Rumors
    • 1. "If it ain't broke."
    • 2. Zoning
    • 3. "Outsiders"
    • 4. Cost-Effectiveness
    • 5. City Services
    • 6. Post Office-1
    • 7. Cost
    • 8. Community Identity
    • 9. Property Taxes
    • 10. Plante Moran
    • 11. Rushing things?
    • 12. "We're different."
    • 13. Cost Savings
    • 14. Financial Studies
    • 15. "Cram down our throats"
    • 16. Singapore Dunes
    • 17. Iron River-1
    • 18. Saugatuck Debt
    • 19. Iron River-2
    • 20. Government Efficiency
    • 21. Government Studies
    • 22. Inflated Savings?
    • 23. Joint Planning Commission
    • 24. Opposition
    • 25. "Government Buy-In"
    • 26. Right-Sizing
    • 27. "What's Best"
    • 28. Bigger Government-1
    • 29. City Hall
    • 30. Voter Support
    • 31. Limited Support
    • 32. Emails Uncovered
    • 33. Public Response
    • 34. Saving Our Harbor
    • 35. Consolidated Services
    • 36. New City Charter
    • 37. Press Release
    • 38. Post Office-2
    • 39. Bigger Government-2
    • 40. Commissioner Priebe
    • 41. Increased staff?
    • 42. Business Support
    • 43. Un-Done
    • 44. Zip Code
    • 45. Not necessary
    • 46. State leaders support
    • 47. Experts
    • 48. Driver's Licenses
  • CGC Info
    • Origins
    • Members
    • Resources
    • Our Slogan
    • Our Ads
  • Cost-Savings Studies
    • "Eleven-City" Comparison Study, June 6, 2012, Plante Moran
    • "Zero-Based Org Chart" Study, June 11, 2012, Plante Moran
    • City Financial Data
    • What could be done with the savings?
  • Editorials
    • "Want smaller government?"-2/24/13
    • "Eight suggestions for Douglas"-1/14/13
    • "Three cheers for Douglas!"-1/8/13
    • "There's no reason for confusion"-12/18/12
    • "To tell the truth"-11/28/12
    • "Who'll go first?"-11/21/12
    • "Don't let the people vote!"-6/21/12
    • "What are they afraid of?" -5/25/12
  • Editorial Cartoons
  • Property-Tax Facts
    • Property-Tax Savings Potential
    • Saugatuck Road Debt
  • Fun Videos
  • Information Links
    • Clippings>
      • More Clippings
      • National + Regional Press
    • Downloadable Reports
    • Boundary Commission Proceedings>
      • CGC Responds to SBC October 10, 2012 Ruling
      • CGC Statement to the SBC-October 10, 2012
      • CGC Remarks to the SBC, June 20, 2012: The case for consolidation
      • CGC Rebuttal Remarks
      • Important Statement from the CGC Chairman
  • Contact Us
(Editor's note:  The tone of this editorial is direct, but it is not meant to be disrespectful.  The allegations contained herein are supported by the facts.)

May 25, 2012
Editorial

What are they afraid of?


You can almost smell the fear.

First, the city managers of both Douglas and Saugatuck provide all sorts of "cooperative" assistance and behind-the-scenes support to a citizens group that's opposing government consolidation.

(Wait... are government officials supposed to attempt to influence civic debate by subterfuge?)

Then, in what appears a coordinated fashion, these same folks all complain that there wasn't proper advance notice of the state Boundary Commission's May 16th citizen hearing in Saugatuck on the Consolidated Government Committee's consolidation petition.  They demand the date be pushed back.

(Okay... the date gets pushed back to June 20th.)

And now, three weeks after the new hearing date was announced, both Douglas and Saugatuck city councils--in all likelihood at the urging of the two city managers--suddenly write letters to the Boundary Commission saying the new date is 11 days outside the specified 220-day time period for the petition.  

And guess what.  Our erstwhile public servants now want the Boundary Commission to dismiss the consolidation petition.

To what desperate extremes will some of these paid-by-the-taxpayer government bureaucrats go to keep government consolidation from ever reaching the voters?  

Well, the Douglas city manager was desperate enough to actually tell a citizen attorney who sought to arrange a cooperative meeting between the CGC and its opposing group aiming to agree on a joint approach to government cost-savings analysis, "Unless the CGC is willing to withdraw their petition from the SBC (State Boundary Commission), I have absolutely no desire to meet with them."

(Wait... should citizens be asked to give up their First Amendment rights, in exchange for a meeting with their city manager?)

Desperate is, as desperate does.

By now, it should be as clear as the radar dome atop Mount Baldhead that way too many of our local government folks are dead-set against allowing voters to express their wishes on government consolidation.  These bureaucrats don't want consolidated government, and they don't mind pushing the ethical limits to deny the voters their rightful say.  Maybe they're worried about losing their jobs (or their new pay raises).  Maybe they feel their personal power is threatened.  Maybe they just haven't read the First Amendment lately.

Regardless, this behavior by our local officials is unseemly at best, and conceivably downright illegal at worst.  (Ironically enough, it actually amounts to yet another pretty good argument for consolidation.)

The fact is, we all deserve better.



The Consolidated Government Committee
May 25, 2012

(Editor's note:  This editorial was also published as an open letter to the community in the June 1, 2012 issue of The Observer.)