On March 18th, 2008 there will be a town hall meeting held to discuss the future of the Millcreek Township.
Meeting Location & Time:
Skyline High School
Open House: 6:00 - 7:00
Town Hall Meeting: 7:00 - 8:30
This post has been set up to collect comments and generate discussion leading up the the town hall meeting.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
23 comments:
Below is an article submitted by SL County Councilman Mark Crockett for the Millcreek Township Newsletter, March edition 2008.
DECIDE YOUR DESTINY
Millcreek is such a wonderful community. And if you live in Millcreek Township, then you live in unincorporated Salt Lake County – at least for now. In other words, unlike being in Salt Lake City or Holladay City, the County is your “City.” And being a Township keeps your community and its tax base from being broken up and annexed into neighboring cities, as happened with the Brickyard area years ago. Soon, though, all this could change.
In the coming weeks, you will get a survey in the mail. It will ask whether you and your neighbors want to
stay in unincorporated county,
annex into a neighboring city, or
incorporate into your own City of Millcreek
The state legislature will then rely on your answers to decide whether to extend the township laws past 2010 – or not.
So, what kind of a community do you want? What future do you want for Millcreek?
We at the County will support you in whatever you decide. But we need to know what you think. Please watch for more information in other news articles and in mailers coming to you soon.
Please join in a Town Hall meeting on Tuesday, March 18 at Skyline High School’s auditorium to discuss the future of the Millcreek Township. The meeting begins at 7 p.m. with an informational open house at 6 p.m.
As always, I would be curious to know your thoughts and questions on this and other community topics. Please send me an email: mcrockett@slco.org.
Please explain to me who's crazy money grab is this.?? Do we need another layer of fog.. South Salt Lake can't even clean there streets of snow.. Now were talking of them in Mount Olympus!! Who's paying for all that additional needed to service what is already good.. How about the County Sherrif?? Do you really want to trade that for South Salt Lake Police?? Someone better start thinking instead of dreaming us into one big costly mess!! Please wake up before it is too late!!
As a lifelong resident of South Salt Lake I would welcome the diversity that merging with the Millcreek Township would bring to our City.
Our large commercial tax base would benefit Millcreek and your large residential population would benefit SSL.
This is a Win-Win proposition and I think that Millcreek City would be an appropriate name for our City since Millcreek runs right thru SSL as well as the Millcreek Township.
Anonymous, for now.
According to the Salt Lake County
web site "(South Salt Lake) City boasts one of the lowest property taxes in the state, free garbage collection, and a high level of municipal services."
Unless the "large commercial tax base" suffers from an extreme surplus a merger would only dilute the tax base and raise property taxes and reduce services in both South Lake and East Millcreek.
http://www.slco.org/cities/soSlc.html
What will Millcreek township gain from any merger or incorporating with South Salt Lake or any other intinty? Will it cut property taxes? Will it cost money to residents? Will we have the same services? Lets think this through.
I'd like to see Millcreek Township either remain unicorporated or become its own city. Annexing with another can set-up the area to be someone else's after-thought. The Millcreek area continues to evolve. The direction of this area deserves leadership with Millcreek Township as its primary interest. My concern is that any city looking to annex the area will have a "what's in it for me?" mentality rather than a "where do we grow from here?" appraoch.
Show me someone in a City that has incorporated in the past 50 years that is not in government employ who thinks it was really a good idea to incorporate. Maybe some well organized mature city like Murray would make some sense but staying unincorporated is my vote today.
Thank you for organizing the Town Meeting. I look forward to reading more on this blog about each of the options (and their variations) presented.
I moved to this community about 8 years ago, because of the community. The problem I see with annexing with a neighboring city is that we will no longer be our own little community but part of a larger city whose ideals are not in line with ours. The problem with staying unincorporated Salt Lake County is that the unincorporated areas are spread so far apart that our needs might not be met, because we have different needs than other unincorporated areas. The problem with becoming incorporated is our tax base is not that big, therefore more than likely we will face tax increases. I guess it all depends on what we want as a community. I feel that I love our community and I don't think we can achieve the same goals if we become larger.
I've actually never posted a comment online before, but I would like to know the best route to research the different options on the table. I want to be clearly informed. Is that even possible?
I believe that incorporating into a new city would give the citizens of Millcreek the best chance of having some control over thier tax dollars. However if we were to be annexed into a neighboring city we should first ask what will they do for us?
Some thoughts on the HB40 Survey:
Years ago I would have pushed to remain in the unincorporated county but my experience in serving on the East Mill Creek Community Council for 15 years has taught me several things. Some of these sentiments I have also heard from the council chairs of Canyon Rim and Olympus Cove.
1) We, as citizens of the unincorporated county do not have near an equal voice to that of the cities that surround us. That translates to less control over our tax dollars, identity as a community, and our destiny. The county council and the Mayor's office have to represent such a wide and disparate group of interests and citizens that it is impossible for them to represent us in the same way that city representatives advocate for their citizens. Cities have a distinct advantage when trolling for the pool of tax dollars available. The council heads of the township especially learned this when working with the county on the Evergreen library and rec center rebuild. It was eye-opening to see the impressive presentations from paid representatives of cities vying for funding compared to what our township volunteers were able to present.
2) The township law is subject to the whims of the legislature. The cities interests dominate the legislature. It was the legislature that put the sunset provision into HB40 in the first place. This was because cities want to incorporate the revenue generating parts of our township. The reason so many worked hard to create a township was to freeze the boarders so the unincorporated part of the county wouldn't get cherry-picked from the cities. The Brickyard Plaza is the most familiar and egregious example of cherry picking by a city. That being said, I think this survey and education process is a valuable one and I am glad that was put in even though I think the cities are hoping for people in the areas they want to annex will seek to do so.
3) We lack a long-term stable representative local government. We currently have a great mayor and staff. They have been very supportive and helpful advocates for our needs. I would vote for Mayor Corroon in a heartbeat. I think Salt Lake County Councilman Mark Crockett has also done a pretty good job of representing our interests. He has worked hard to advocate for the new library rec center rebuild in addition to getting each community council more funding so that we can better communicate to the citizens. However, in either case, it has not always been so and may not continue in the future. (Remember Mayor Workman and her huge push for "wall to wall cities?")
4) Being in the unincorporated county impedes a sense of community. A sense of community is one of the great benefits of living in one. It helps motivate people to care about where they live and the people they live next to. It encourages cooperation and respect for each other. It fosters a safer and more livable environment. It encourages input and activity from citizens. The Millcreek Township community council leaders (I was one of them at the time) met with the Mayor of Cottonwood Heights last year. He could not say enough good about their transition into a city. He said the biggest benefit he has heard the citizens express is the sense of community and identity incorporating has created.
So I've learned that if we want to have:
A. An equal voice for our tax dollars and representation within the legislature
B. Greater long-term security for our area township boundaries
C. Control of our destiny both as neighborhoods and as a larger community entity
D. A greater sense of community and all the benefits that engenders
Then I believe we need to incorporate.
The biggest objection, which is understandably most often brought up, is the fear that incorporating will raise our taxes. This is a genuine possibility. However, I was surprised to see on the HB-40 mailer that came a week or so ago to see that the unincorporated counties taxes were the second or third highest as compared to the cities. Now, I don't believe that took into consideration various services taxes that cities may charge here and there.
One possible solution to the tax concern that I find intriguing is to combine with South Salt Lake. South Salt Lake has made overtures to Millcreek Township that they would like to annex us and change the name of the city to Millcreek City. They are bordering lacking the populace to remain a city and we are lacking in revenue generating businesses. Of course this would take considerable more study. It may make more sense to incorporate first and then annex them.
If the citizens do decide to incorporate then I would suggest we contract with the county for as many of the services we now receive from them. I see no reason to reproduce police departments etc.
There is a lot more at stake to becoming incorporated to SSL than just where our taxes go. We would no longer be under the jurisdiction of the Utah County Sheriff and instead go under the "protection" of SSL. The city with the highest crime in the county. And they contract to the Sheriff department for large portions of their police business. If we get annexed into SSL there is a very good likelihood insurance (car and homeowners) would increase. Additionally, city mayors have the option to hire or fire a the police chief for any reason of they see fit, whereas the county sheriff is elected or not elected through popular vote.
SSL is financially struggling and is looking to annexing unincorporated areas to subsidize the coffers. So, if we get annexed there is a very high likelihood property taxes will go up significantly.
My vote is that we stay in the county! Why fix what is not broken?
I would have some great concerns about joining SSL. One being the crime and I think it would lower property values because SSL lacks any active zoning enforcement that we see in Sandy or even West Valley. Incorporation would allow us control over our tax dollars and our own zoning enforcment.
I also think it would help develope a greater pride in our community.
I still feel the best advantage would be better representation.
I just received the survey in the mail and frankly I was disappointed when I opened it up. As I read the questions they were so broad that I can't truthfully at this point answer them all. There are various scenarios that could change my answer. I could answer questions 7 and 8.
As an example, question #1 asks if I would like to see no changes or see the form of government change. It depends on various scenarios. If property taxes would decrease and service remain acceptable I would say change, but that depends on incorporation, annexation, etc. I seems like there could be more questions that are more specific in nature to determine the wants and needs of its citizens. If there were a vote held today on incorporation I would have to say neutral only because I don't have all the information. I thought more info was coming out. I did attend the town meeting which did give me good info, but there are various scenarios to be considered that 6 questions can't determine.
I don't have enough info on Holladay, South Salt lake, etc. to determin which would be a better city to adjoin with.
Anyway, I don't know who created the survey, but feel it was inadequate to address a very important decision that will affect us in the future.
I would recommend to anyone who has even the slightest inkling to want to be annexed by SSL, to take a drive through their city.
I think once you see for yourself, you will know why it would be such a bad idea.
I vote we stay a Township and remain unincorporated in the County. With a city comes city ordinances and tighter regulations. I want to live in the county so I can park my travel trailer, motor home, or boat in my driveway without some silly city ordinance telling me that it can't stick out in front of my house or it can't be seen by my neighbor, or even park it on the street while I pour new cement in my driveway without crazy "city ordinances" that seem to want to restrict so many things of the freedoms we enjoy living in the county. Cities have a tendancy to want to dream up how many restrictions they can come up with to choke out us country boys that enjoy more of a relaxed atmosphere.
I too see no advantage to becoming part of SSL. It is high crime and will raise our insurance costs due to relationship. I agree with other comments made about just driving through SSL and thinking about do we want to be associated with that.
First of all, let's clear up some misconceptions about SSL. They have a very large commercial tax base, one of the highest in the county, but because the legislature changed the way sales taxes are apportioned, SSL only keeps about half of the 1% local option. Adding the 65,000 residents of Millcreek would allow the city to retain a much greater portion of those taxes.
If SSL were to annex the Millcreek township, it would become a city af about 87,000, 65,000 of which would be the residents of the former Millcreek Township. What this means is that if you don't like the SSL police department, you can change it, if you want to keep the Sheriff, you can, if you want to change the zoning requlations, no problem. All the residents of the Millcreek Township would have to do is run for office, either council or Mayor, or get on the planning commission, or continue to stay active in the community and mold this new city into what we all want.
As a city of 87,000, the new City of Millcreek would have incredible power within the county and the state. Never again would we have a problem with our voices not being heard on issues like the school district split.
I for one think it is a very interesting idea that warrants further analysis.
Obviously Jonathon is a resident of SSL and understands the desperate state SSL is in. Perhaps once the Millcreek residents have decided our course for ourselves, and by chance we decide to incorporate, then perhaps WEcan look at annexing SSL into OUR city.
It is naïve to believe that those entrenched in SSL government will so easily give up the power to legislate and cede control of their own police department. I think it is so true that if one were to drive around that city you will quickly understand why it is such a bad idea.
The politicians of SSL have no concern for the residents of Millcreek and only look at us as a cash cow. Don’t be deceived.
Interesting reading
http://www.sltrib.com/ci_9409758?IADID=Search-www.sltrib.com-www.sltrib.com
Please Salt Lake City, South Salt Lake and Murray City. Please keep your stinking hands off our community. You are NOT wanted.
I am a resident of the Millcreek Township and I fervantly request that we DO NOT INCORPORATE WITH ANY OTHER ENTITIY. WE FUNCTION WELL WITHOUT ASSUMING OTHER CITIES PROBLEMS AND AND LESS THAN ACCEPTABLE SERVICES.
AT THIS POINT WE ARE RARE AMONG THE SALT LAKE COUNTY AREAS AND WE SHOULD STAY THE COURSE AND RESIST BECOMING PART OF ANY INDUSTRILIZED TOWN SUCH AS SOUTH SALT LAKE WHO WOULD IMMERSE US WITH THEIR PROBLEMS. ALWAYS AND INTO THE UNFORSEEN FUTURE KEEP MILLCREEK AS IT IS MNOW.
IF PEOPLE HAVE ANY QUAMS ABOUT THE INCORPORATION WITH THE LIKES OF SOUTH SALT LAKE LET THEM TALK WITH THE PEOPLE OF WEST VALLEY WHEN THEY INCORPORATED. AT THAT TIME THEY HAD TO REQUEST SERVICES FROM THE COUNTY SHERIFF, THE ROADS AND OTHER SERVICES BECAME MUCH LESS THAN WHAT THEY EXPECTED. TAXES WENT UP, SERVICES WENT DOWN. IT HAD BECOME A NEW LITTLE KINGDOM WITH MINONS NEW ADMINSTRATORS AND EMPLOYEES AND WITH THEM CAME NEEDS TO FULFILL THE NEW LITTLE KINGDOM FROM THE MAYOR DOWN TO THE JANITORS TO CLEAN THE FACILITIES. THINK HARD ABOUT WHAT SOUTH SALT LAKE WOULD BRING TO THE TABLE. THE ADVANTAGE IS ON THEIR SIDE, NOT MUCH OF AN ADVANTAGE FOR OUR TOWMNSHIP. UNTIL WE CAN BECOME PART OF A OF A TOWN SUCH AS MURRAY WHICH HAS ITS SERVICES AND ALL ESTABLISHED AND THE ADVANTAGE WOULD BE OURS, THEN WE SHOULD REMAIN A TOWNSHP.
Post a Comment