080811 MEDWAY replacement levy heading to fall ballot

080811 MEDWAY replacement levy heading to fall ballot
080811 MEDWAY replacement levy heading to fall ballot
080811 MEDWAY replacement levy heading to fall ballot
080811 MEDWAY replacement levy heading to fall ballot
080811 MEDWAY replacement levy heading to fall ballot
080811 MEDWAY replacement levy heading to fall ballot
080811 MEDWAY replacement levy heading to fall ballot
                        
Summary: A .25 mil replacement levy for the MEDWAY Drug Enforcement Agency is on its way to the fall ballot. When Wayne County voters head to the polls for the November 8 general election they will be asked to decide the fate of a .25 replacement levy for the agency charged with keeping illegal drugs off the streets. During their July 27 meeting, the Wayne County Commissioners voted two to one to submit the question of a levy for MEDWAY to the county’s voters. According to Ted Bogner, who is leading the levy passage effort, 2011 will mark the first time MEDWAY has brought a request to the voters since its existing .25 levy passed 27 years ago. “When the levy passed in 1984 the average homeowner paid $5.25 per year for protection from the affects of illegal drugs. That amount has currently dropped to $3.81 a year,” said Bogner adding “with the passing of a replacement levy, the average $100,000 homeowner will only pay $7.66 a year” which equates to $0.02 a day. County Auditor Jarra Underwood noted that because the total value of all the property in Wayne County has risen since MEDWAY’s levy passed in 1984, the actual amount assessed to individual homeowners has gradually dropped to an effective millage of .12 mills. According to Underwood the passage of the replacement levy would bring the voted and effective millage rates in sync, generating approximately $527,100 a year in property tax revenue. According to MEDWAY Director David Smith one of the primary reasons the agency is seeking the levy is the gradual loss of federal grant dollars the agency has traditionally used to supplement its budget. “I’m just trying to maintain the safety of my staff but still do our job,” Smith added. In voicing his support for the levy Bogner noted that “over the years MEDWAY has proven over and over its ability to do things no other law enforcement agency in Wayne County can because only MEDWAY has the ability, manpower, equipment and time to conduct these long-term, complex investigations.” Judy Kropf of the Orrville Turning Point Coalition added her support noting that while it’s the entire community’s responsibility to raise young people free from the drugs and alcohol it’s agencies like MEDWAY that “keep negative influences and substances out of the community and off the streets.” Commissioner Scott Wiggam, who cast a dissenting vote on the resolution, noted that while he supports the agency and its work the time may be right to look to a new model in light of the withdrawal of Holmes County and Wadsworth from the coalition. According to Wiggam’s figures should the levy pass, Wayne County taxpayers will shoulder 85 percent of the burden with only 75 percent of the population. “If the MEDWAY levy passes Wayne County citizens will be subsidizing Brunswick and Millersburg with a significant amount of local tax dollars,” said Wiggam noting the “replacement levy will disproportionately burden Wayne County taxpayers.” “My question is, is it time we start looking at these numbers to see if Wayne County needs to be its own jurisdiction or whether we need to start asking whether we want to be part of more of a regional effort,” said Wiggam. “I think it’s time that we discuss a new model not a new tax,” Wiggam said after the meeting. “I’m not a supporter of tax increases but we have a growing drug problem in Wayne County,” said Commissioner Jim Carmichael adding that the decision to pass the levy should be made by the citizens. Commissioner Ann Obrecht agreed adding “I am going to support putting this on the ballot (so) all the people will have a chance to vote on whether they want this increase or not.”


Loading next article...

End of content

No more pages to load