YEP! while 10% of the Metro Detroit suburbs are mostly black.
Segregation would still be rampant. There would still be in-fighting and things would become more clan-like.Quote:
Benefits would include:
--stemming the endless stream of unneeded residential/commercial development along the rural fringe, while focusing on strengthening what we already have.
--consolidation of governmental services, thereby reducing taxes needed to pay for 100s of mayors, police chiefs, etc.
--economies of scale when it comes to contracts for city services, again reducing the tax burden of most residents.
--less regional in-fighting and more cooperation on bringing new developments and jobs to the region.
--better national image as far as social/economic statistics are concerned. For example, Detroit would no longer be the "most dangerous city". In fact, it would actually have one of the lowest crime rates in the country, when compared to other cities.
I never said anything about segregation. Segregation is going to persist regardless of a unigov. Again, this has nothing to do with "fixing" Detroit or race relations. It has to do with creating a single voice for the region, lowering taxes for most residents, and streamlining government services to make things more efficient. Under a unigov the inner-city neighborhoods aren't going to magically be cured of all their social ills.
Also, studies would obviously be done showing how much a unigov would actually save the region in tax dollars, as well as the likely benefits and drawbacks to a unigov system.
Lastly, the whole idea that people who live in Rochester Hills would instantly think their neighborhood would become a crime infested ghetto with poor schools and terrible city services is silly. The word Detroit has two connotations: a negative one associated with the actual city [[crime, abandonmnent, corruption, etc.), and a generally positive one associated with the region [[sports teams, zoo, airport, corporations, etc.) A consolidated unigov would ultimately trend more toward the positive association.
Here's something many people don't realize: The city of Houston covers nearly 600 sq. mi. If the city of Detroit somehow annexed its inner-ring suburbs so that it also covered nearly 600 sq. mi., it would have about the same murder rate as the city of Houston. Such things as crime rates, etc. are one of the biggest factors in how people from around the world picture Detroit.
Perception is everything. With its current boundaries, Detroit is one of the supposed "Most Dangerous Cities" but if nothing else except the city boundaries changed, Detroit would instantly fall to the middle of the pack. The same would be true for other social and economic statistics.
There would still be extremely high crime and poverty rates in the inner-city, but those numbers would be highly diluted by the relatively low crime and poverty rates in the rest of the Tri-County area. Ultimately, as Detroit would fall from the "bad" lists and start showing up on the "good" lists, the general perception of the region as a whole would improve.
One thing is for sure. Detroit and the suburbs will NEVER be annexed because the the state boundry commissions orders:
Section 123.1001
STATE BOUNDARY COMMISSION [[EXCERPT)
Act 191 of 1968
123.1001 Definitions.
Sec. 1.
As used in this act:
[[a) “Adjusted boundaries” means the total area that would be encompassed by a municipality if a municipal boundary adjustment is approved as proposed in a petition or resolution.
[[b) “Commission” means the state boundary commission.
[[c) “Secretary” means the executive secretary of the commission.
[[d) “Municipality” means an incorporated city or village.
[[e) “Municipal boundary adjustment” means incorporation of a new city or village, consolidation of 2 or more cities, villages or townships as a new city, and the annexation of territory to a city where the commission has jurisdiction over annexation proceedings.
History: 1968, Act 191, Eff. Nov. 15, 1968 ;-- Am. 1972, Act 362, Imd. Eff. Jan. 9, 1973
Compiler's Notes: For transfer of powers and duties of the state boundary commission from the department of commerce to the director of the department of consumer and industry services, see E.R.O. No. 1996-2, compiled at MCL 445.2001 of the Michigan Compiled Laws.
Section 123.1001
linkable
printable
STATE BOUNDARY COMMISSION [[EXCERPT)
Act 191 of 1968
123.1001 Definitions.
Sec. 1.
As used in this act:
[[a) “Adjusted boundaries” means the total area that would be encompassed by a municipality if a municipal boundary adjustment is approved as proposed in a petition or resolution.
[[b) “Commission” means the state boundary commission.
[[c) “Secretary” means the executive secretary of the commission.
[[d) “Municipality” means an incorporated city or village.
[[e) “Municipal boundary adjustment” means incorporation of a new city or village, consolidation of 2 or more cities, villages or townships as a new city, and the annexation of territory to a city where the commission has jurisdiction over annexation proceedings.
History: 1968, Act 191, Eff. Nov. 15, 1968 ;-- Am. 1972, Act 362, Imd. Eff. Jan. 9, 1973
Compiler's Notes: For transfer of powers and duties of the state boundary commission from the department of commerce to the director of the department of consumer and industry services, see E.R.O. No. 1996-2, compiled at MCL 445.2001 of the Michigan Compiled Laws.
Section 123.1002
linkable
printable
STATE BOUNDARY COMMISSION [[EXCERPT)
Act 191 of 1968
123.1002 State boundary commission; creation; appointment, qualifications, terms, and removal of members; vacancy; compensation; expenses; chairman.
Sec. 2.
The state boundary commission is created consisting of 3 members appointed by the governor with the advice and consent of the senate. The term of office of members shall be 3 years and until their successors are appointed and qualified. A member of the commission may be removed in the manner provided by law for removal of a public officer. A vacancy shall be filled for the unexpired term in the same manner as the original appointment. Members appointed by the governor shall be known as state members and shall qualify by taking and filing the constitutional oath of office. The per diem compensation of the commission and the schedule for reimbursement of expenses shall be established annually by the legislature. The governor shall designate a state member as chairman of the commission.
History: 1968, Act 191, Eff. Nov. 15, 1968 ;-- Am. 1975, Act 72, Imd. Eff. May 20, 1975
Compiler's Notes: For transfer of State Boundary Commission from the Department of Treasury to the Department of Commerce, see E.R.O. No. 1980-1, compiled at MCL 16.732 of the Michigan Compiled Laws.
Section 123.1003
linkable
printable
STATE BOUNDARY COMMISSION [[EXCERPT)
Act 191 of 1968
123.1003 State boundary commission; employees and consultants.
Sec. 3.
The commission may appoint such employees and retain such consultants as may be necessary, but who shall not be members of the commission, within limits of appropriations made for this purpose.
History: 1968, Act 191, Eff. Nov. 15, 1968
WAIT THERE'S MORE!
CONTINUED...
Section 123.1004
linkable
printable
STATE BOUNDARY COMMISSION [[EXCERPT)
Act 191 of 1968
123.1004 State boundary commission; offices and facilities; rules, regulations, and procedures; meetings; records; oaths.
Sec. 4.
The commission shall be furnished with suitable office space and facilities in Lansing by the department of administration. The state members shall make rules and regulations and prescribe procedures necessary or desirable in carrying out the intent and purpose of this act, including forms of petitions for municipal boundary adjustments, and the documents, maps and supporting statements deemed to be necessary, establish rules for public hearings, for the submission of supplementary documents and statements, and governing the holding of elections where necessary. The state members shall meet when there are matters pending for their consideration and keep a record of all proceedings. The rules and regulations of the commission shall be promulgated in accordance with the provisions of Act No. 88 of the Public Acts of 1943, as amended, being sections 24.71 to 24.80 of the Compiled Laws of 1948, and subject to the provisions of Act No. 197 of the Public Acts of 1952, as amended, being sections 24.101 to 24.110 of the Compiled Laws of 1948. The state members of the commission may administer oaths to persons appearing before the commission.
History: 1968, Act 191, Eff. Nov. 15, 1968
Admin Rule: R 123.1 et seq. of the Michigan Administrative Code.
Section 123.1004a
linkable
printable
STATE BOUNDARY COMMISSION [[EXCERPT)
Act 191 of 1968
123.1004a State boundary commission; conducting business at public meeting; notice; availability of writings to public.
Sec. 4a.
[[1) The business which a commission created pursuant to this act may perform shall be conducted at a public meeting of the commission held in compliance with Act No. 267 of the Public Acts of 1976, being sections 15.261 to 15.275 of the Michigan Compiled Laws. Public notice of the time, date, and place of the meeting shall be given in the manner required by Act No. 267 of the Public Acts of 1976.
[[2) A writing prepared, owned, used, in the possession of, or retained by a commission created pursuant to this act in the performance of an official function shall be made available to the public in compliance with Act No. 442 of the Public Acts of 1976, being sections 15.231 to 15.246 of the Michigan Compiled Laws.
History: Add. 1978, Act 599, Imd. Eff. Jan. 4, 1979
Section 123.1005
linkable
printable
STATE BOUNDARY COMMISSION [[EXCERPT)
Act 191 of 1968
123.1005 Municipal boundary adjustments; appointment of county members and alternates to serve on commission; residency requirement; vacancy; term; per diem and expenses; oath.
Sec. 5.
The presiding probate judge in each county shall appoint 2 persons and 2 alternates for those persons residing in that county to serve on the commission when the commission considers municipal boundary adjustments for territory lying within his or her county. One appointee and his or her alternate shall reside in a township, and 1 appointee and his or her alternate shall reside in a city. If there is no city in a county at the time of the filing of a petition for a municipal boundary adjustment, the presiding probate judge shall appoint 2 county members and alternates from the county at large. Within 30 days after notice from the commission that a municipal boundary adjustment is pending in the county and the office of 1 or more of the county members is vacant, the presiding probate judge shall make original appointments and any appointment to fill a vacancy. A county member shall serve for 3 years and until his or her successor is appointed and qualified. Notwithstanding the appointment and qualification of a successor, a county member shall continue to serve until the conclusion of all boundary adjustment matters which were filed during his or her term or the filing of which gave rise to his or her appointment. If a municipal boundary adjustment involves territory lying in more than 1 county, the county members of the county in which the greater part of the territory to be included within the adjusted boundaries lies shall serve on and be voting members of the commission. A county member shall receive per diem and expenses as authorized and paid by the county board of commissioners when serving on the commission on matters involving territory within his or her county. A county member shall qualify by taking and filing the constitutional oath of office.
History: 1968, Act 191, Eff. Nov. 15, 1968 ;-- Am. 1972, Act 362, Imd. Eff. Jan. 9, 1973 ;-- Am. 1988, Act 39, Imd. Eff. Mar. 7, 1988
WAIT THERE'S MORE!
CONTINUED...
STATE BOUNDARY COMMISSION [[EXCERPT)
Act 191 of 1968
123.1006 Order of processing petitions and resolutions.
Sec. 6.
Except as otherwise provided in this act, the commission shall process all petitions and resolutions in the order in which they are filed and shall finally dispose of a petition or resolution before taking up any other petitions or resolutions which deal with all or any part of the same territory. With respect to petitions for annexation proceedings filed with the board of supervisors or the secretary of state and petitions or resolutions for boundary adjustment proceedings filed with the commission, covering all or any part of the same territory, the petition or resolution first filed shall be processed before and take precedence over a petition or resolution subsequently filed.
History: 1968, Act 191, Eff. Nov. 15, 1968 ;-- Am. 1972, Act 362, Imd. Eff. Jan. 9, 1973
Section 123.1007
linkable
printable
STATE BOUNDARY COMMISSION [[EXCERPT)
Act 191 of 1968
123.1007 Incorporation of village or city; initiation; petitions; signatures and filing; powers and duties of commission; census; other means of incorporation; incorporation of general law village or home rule village without change of boundaries.
Sec. 7.
[[1) Except as otherwise provided in this act, the incorporation of a village shall be initiated as prescribed in and shall be subject to Act No. 278 of the Public Acts of 1909, as amended, being sections 78.1 to 78.28 of the Michigan Compiled Laws, and the incorporation of a city shall be initiated as prescribed in and shall be subject to Act No. 279 of the Public Acts of 1909, as amended, being sections 117.1 to 117.38 of the Michigan Compiled Laws.
[[2) Except as provided in section 10a, petitions proposing the incorporation of a city shall be signed by a number of persons who are qualified electors and freeholders residing within the affected territory equal to at least 5% of the population of the territory affected by the proposed new incorporation, or 100, whichever number is greater.
WAIT THERE'S MORE!
CONTINUED...
[[3) Except as provided in subsection [[6) and section 10a, petitions for incorporation shall be filed with the commission. The commission shall exercise the powers and carry out the duties of the board of supervisors, the village council, or the secretary of state in relation to incorporations.
[[4) A census of the territory affected by an incorporation or consolidation as provided in section 2 of Act No. 278 of the Public Acts of 1909, as amended, being section 78.2 of the Michigan Compiled Laws, or by section 6 of Act No. 279 of the Public Acts of 1909, as amended, being section 117.6 of the Michigan Compiled Laws, shall not be taken unless a proper petition for the incorporation or consolidation has been filed with the commission and the census has been specifically ordered by the commission.
[[5) Except as provided in subsection [[6) and section 10a, while this act is in effect no other means of incorporation of a city or village shall be effective.
[[6) The incorporation of a general law village as a home rule village without a change of boundaries shall be initiated as prescribed in and subject to Act No. 278 of the Public Acts of 1909, as amended.
History: 1968, Act 191, Eff. Nov. 15, 1968 ;-- Am. 1972, Act 362, Imd. Eff. Jan. 9, 1973 ;-- Am. 1981, Act 67, Imd. Eff. June 23, 1981 ;-- Am. 1982, Act 457, Imd. Eff. Dec. 30, 1982
Section 123.1007a
linkable
printable
STATE BOUNDARY COMMISSION [[EXCERPT)
Act 191 of 1968
123.1007a Violation of MCL 168.1 to 168.992 applicable to petitions; penalties.
Sec. 7a.
A petition under section 10[[3) or 12a[[3), including the circulation and signing of the petition, is subject to section 488 of the Michigan election law, 1954 PA 116, MCL 168.488. A person who violates a provision of the Michigan election law, 1954 PA 116, MCL 168.1 to 168.992, applicable to a petition described in this section is subject to the penalties prescribed for that violation in the Michigan election law, 1954 PA 116, MCL 168.1 to 168.992.
History: Add. 1998, Act 191, Eff. Mar. 23, 1999
WAIT THERE'S MORE!
CONTINUED...
Section 123.1008
linkable
printable
STATE BOUNDARY COMMISSION [[EXCERPT)
Act 191 of 1968
123.1008 Review of proposed incorporations; certifying nonconformance of petition; return of petition; public hearing; commencement of time period; notice of hearing; sufficiency or legality of petition.
Sec. 8.
[[1) The commission shall review proposed incorporations considering the criteria established by section 9.
[[2) If the commission finds that a petition does not conform to this act, to Act No. 278 of the Public Acts of 1909, as amended, or Act No. 279 of the Public Acts of 1909, as amended, to the extent that the requirements are not superseded by this act, or to the rules of the commission, it shall certify the nonconformance, stating the reasons for the nonconformance, and return the petition to the person from whom it was received with the certificate.
[[3) At least 60 days but not more than 220 days after the filing with the commission of a sufficient petition proposing incorporation, the commission shall hold a public hearing at a convenient place in the area proposed to be incorporated. At the public hearing the reasonableness of the proposed incorporation based on the criteria established in this act shall be considered. If section 6 prohibits the commission's acting on a petition because 1 or more petitions or resolutions have priority the time period provided in this section shall commence on the date upon which the prohibition ceases.
[[4) The commission shall give notice of the hearing in the manner required by section 4a[[1) and by publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the area at least 7 days before the date of the hearing, and by certified mail to the clerks of municipalities and townships affected, at least 30 days before the date of the hearing. After the commission has entered its order for a public hearing on an incorporation proposal, neither the sufficiency nor legality of the petition shall be questioned in a proceeding.
History: 1968, Act 191, Eff. Nov. 15, 1968 ;-- Am. 1972, Act 362, Imd. Eff. Jan. 9, 1973 ;-- Am. 1978, Act 599, Imd. Eff. Jan. 4, 1979
Compiler's Notes: For provisions of Act 278 of 1909 and Act 279 of 1909, referred to in this section, see MCL 78.1 et seq. and MCL 117.1 et seq.
Admin Rule: R 123.1 et seq. of the Michigan Administrative Code.
Section 123.1009
linkable
printable
STATE BOUNDARY COMMISSION [[EXCERPT)
Act 191 of 1968
123.1009 Review of proposed incorporation; criteria.
Sec. 9.
Criteria to be considered by the commission in arriving at a determination shall be:
[[a) Population; population density; land area and land uses; assessed valuation; topography, natural boundaries and drainage basins; the past and probable future urban growth, including population increase and business, commercial and industrial development in the area. Comparative data for the incorporating municipality, and the remaining portion of the unit from which the area will be detached shall be considered.
[[b) Need for organized community services; the present cost and adequacy of governmental services in the area to be incorporated; the probable future needs for services; the practicability of supplying such services in the area to be incorporated; the probable effect of the proposed incorporation and of alternative courses of action on the cost and adequacy of services in the area to be incorporated and on the remaining portion of the unit from which the area will be detached; the probable increase in taxes in the area to be incorporated in relation to the benefits expected to accrue from incorporation; and the financial ability of the incorporating municipality to maintain urban type services in the area.
[[c) The general effect upon the entire community of the proposed action; and the relationship of the proposed action to any established city, village, township, county or regional land use plan.
History: 1968, Act 191, Eff. Nov. 15, 1968
WAIT THERE'S MORE!
CONTINUED...
Section 123.1010
linkable
printable
STATE BOUNDARY COMMISSION [[EXCERPT)
Act 191 of 1968
123.1010 Denial or approval of proposed incorporation; revision of boundaries; referendum on question of incorporation.
Sec. 10.
[[1) After the public hearing on a proposed incorporation and review thereof by the commission, the commission may deny the proposed incorporation, approve the petition, or revise the boundaries of the area proposed for incorporation and approve the proposal as revised.
[[2) If an incorporation proposal is denied by the commission, its order is final immediately and the secretary shall transmit a certified copy of the order to the petitioner and the clerk of each city, village, and township affected.
[[3) If an incorporation proposal is approved with or without a revision of the boundaries, the commission's order is final 45 days after the date of the order unless within that 45 days a petition for a referendum is filed with the commission that contains the signatures of at least 5% of the registered electors residing in the area to be incorporated as approved by the commission. If a petition is not filed and the commission's order becomes final, the secretary shall send a certified copy of the order to the petitioner, to the clerk of each county, city, village, or township affected, and to the secretary of state. Charter commission elections and proceedings under the home rule village act, 1909 PA 278, MCL 78.1 to 78.28, or the home rule city act, 1909 PA 279, MCL 117.1 to 117.38, shall follow.
[[4) If a referendum petition is filed, the commission, after determining the validity of the petition, shall order a referendum on the question of incorporation to be held in the area approved for incorporation and shall specify a date later than the referendum on which the commission's order shall become final if the proposal is approved at the referendum.
[[5) If a majority of the electorate voting on the question in the territory approved for incorporation voting collectively approves the incorporation, the commission's order shall become final on the date specified therein, the secretary shall send a certified copy of the order to the petitioner, to the clerk of each county, city, village, or township affected, and to the secretary of state. Charter commission elections and proceedings under the home rule village act, 1909 PA 278, MCL 78.1 to 78.28, or the home rule city act, 1909 PA 279, MCL 117.1 to 117.38, and except as provided in subsection [[6), shall follow. Otherwise the incorporation shall not take effect and no further proceedings on the petition shall take place.
[[6) If on submission of a second charter, a favorable vote by a majority of the electors residing in the area proposed for incorporation is not obtained, the incorporation proceedings shall end and the charter commission shall have no further authority to act or to submit another charter to the electors. If a charter has not been adopted within a period of 3 years following the date the commission's order becomes final, or if within the 3-year period the charter commission does not reconvene within 90 days after the election at which the first proposed charter was defeated, the incorporation proceedings are ended.
History: 1968, Act 191, Eff. Nov. 15, 1968 ;-- Am. 1972, Act 362, Imd. Eff. Jan. 9, 1973 ;-- Am. 2008, Act 419, Imd. Eff. Jan. 6, 2009
Compiler's Notes: For provisions of Act 278 of 1909 and Act 279 of 1909, referred to in this section, see MCL 78.1 et seq. and MCL 117.1 et seq.
Section 123.1010a
linkable
printable
STATE BOUNDARY COMMISSION [[EXCERPT)
Act 191 of 1968
123.1010a Incorporation of village as city; population and other incorporation requirements; initiation; submittal to electors; election of charter commissioners; effective date of incorporation; stay of proposed change of boundaries after incorporation approved by electors; division of assets and liabilities.
Sec. 10a.
[[1) In compliance with section 20 of article 7 of the state constitution of 1963, if all the territory of an organized township is included within the boundaries of a village or villages, the village or villages, without boundary changes, may be incorporated as a city or cities as provided in this section. The incorporation shall include all the territory within the boundaries of a village notwithstanding that the village includes territory within another organized township a part of which township lies without the boundaries of the village.
[[2) Except as otherwise provided in this section, incorporation under this section is not governed by the population and other incorporation requirements of Act No. 279 of the Public Acts of 1909, as amended, being sections 117.1 to 117.38 of the Michigan Compiled Laws.
[[3) Incorporation under this section is initiated by a resolution of the village council which resolution shall call for a referendum on the incorporation. The proposed incorporation shall be submitted to the qualified electors of the village at the next regular village election occurring not less than 40 days after adoption of the resolution. If the next regular village election will not occur within 90 days, the resolution may fix a date preceding the next regular village election for a special election on the proposed incorporation.
[[4) The resolution proposing incorporation may also call for an election of charter commissioners as provided in Act No. 279 of the Public Acts of 1909, as amended.
[[5) Incorporation under this section is effective when a charter is adopted and filed as provided in Act No. 279 of the Public Acts of 1909, as amended.
[[6) After an incorporation under this section is approved by a majority of the electors voting on the question, a proposed change of boundaries by incorporation, consolidation, or annexation shall be stayed until proceedings under this section are finished.
[[7) Assets and liabilities of the township, townships, or parts of townships affected by the incorporation of a city shall be divided on the effective date of incorporation as provided in section 14 of Act No. 279 of the Public Acts of 1909, as amended, being section 117.14 of the Michigan Compiled Laws.
History: Add. 1982, Act 457, Imd. Eff. Dec. 30, 1982
WAIT THERE'S MORE!
CONTINUED...
STATE BOUNDARY COMMISSION [[EXCERPT)
Act 191 of 1968
123.1011 Succession to property and liabilities; division of properties; sharing of revenues; tax assessment and collection.
Sec. 11.
Succession to property and liabilities, division of properties, sharing in revenue from various taxes and state funds distributable among local units and assessment and collection of taxes in newly incorporated municipalities shall be governed by the existing provisions of law.
History: 1968, Act 191, Eff. Nov. 15, 1968
Section 123.1011a
linkable
printable
STATE BOUNDARY COMMISSION [[EXCERPT)
Act 191 of 1968
123.1011a Jurisdiction over annexation petitions or resolutions.
Sec. 11a.
The commission shall have jurisdiction over petitions or resolutions for annexation as provided in section 9 of Act No. 279 of the Public Acts of 1909, as amended.
History: Add. 1972, Act 362, Imd. Eff. Jan. 9, 1973
Compiler's Notes: For provisions of section 9 of Act 279 of 1909, referred to in this section, see MCL 117.9.
Section 123.1011b
linkable
printable
STATE BOUNDARY COMMISSION [[EXCERPT)
Act 191 of 1968
123.1011b Resolution calling for referendum on question of annexation; conditions; filing; order; referendum and election resolution not passed; approval of annexation; applicability of section; section as alternative to referendum and election process provided for in MCL 117.9[[5).
Sec. 11b.
[[1) If the commission, after determining the validity of a petition or resolution for annexation, has ordered a public hearing pursuant to section 9 of Act No. 279 of the Public Acts of 1909, as amended, being section 117.9 of the Michigan Compiled Laws, and if on the date the petition or resolution was filed more than 100 persons resided in the area proposed for annexation, the legislative body of each city and township affected by the proposed annexation may pass a resolution calling for a referendum on the question of annexation. If a copy of each resolution passed by the legislative body of each affected city and township is filed with the commission and the commission approves the annexation, the commission, in its order approving the annexation, shall order that a referendum on the question of annexation be held in each affected city and township. If a resolution calling for a referendum on the question of annexation is not passed by each affected city and township and filed with the commission, the referendum and election shall be subject to section 9[[5) of Act No. 279 of the Public Acts of 1909, as amended. However, if a referendum in each affected city and township is ordered pursuant to this section and if the majority of the electorate voting on the question in each city and township in which a referendum was held, voting separately, approve the annexation, the annexation shall be effective on a date set by order of the commission, otherwise the annexation shall not take effect.
[[2) This section shall apply to all petitions or resolutions for annexation filed with the commission after May 1, 1982.
[[3) This section is an alternative to the referendum and election process provided for in section 9[[5) of Act No. 279 of the Public Acts of 1909, as amended, and does not supersede section 9[[5) of Act No. 279 of the Public Acts of 1909, as amended.
History: Add. 1982, Act 192, Imd. Eff. June 24, 1982
WAIT THERE'S MORE!
CONTINUED..
Section 123.1012
linkable
printable
STATE BOUNDARY COMMISSION [[EXCERPT)
Act 191 of 1968
123.1012 Petition for consolidation; filing; inclusion of township; contents of petition; rejection of petition.
Sec. 12.
[[1) Proceedings for consolidation may be initiated by the filing of a petition with the commission signed by a number of registered electors who are residents of 1 or more of the affected municipalities at least equal to 5% of the total population of the affected municipalities:
Provided, however, That no new city may be created by the consolidation process unless at least 1 of the municipalities to be consolidated is an incorporated city.
[[2) Any township having a common boundary that is contiguous with a city or village proposed for consolidation may be included in the consolidation if no village is incorporated within the territorial boundaries of the township or, if 1 or more villages are incorporated within the territorial boundaries of the township, then such village or villages shall be included within the consolidation. When any township is included in a consolidation, the term “municipality” as used in sections 12 to 17 shall include the township and the procedures set forth in such sections shall be altered as may be necessary to provide for the township.
[[3) The petition shall name the municipalities proposed to be consolidated and shall request the commission to take the proceedings necessary for consolidation under this act. The commission shall reject a petition for consolidation if a proposition to consolidate the identical municipalities has been voted on within the 2 years immediately preceding the filing of the later petition. This shall not prevent the consolidation of 2 or more municipalities, which were included in a proposed consolidation voted on in the preceding 2 years, with or without additional territory, if the prior proposition included 1 or more municipalities which are not included in the later proposition.
[[4) If the commission finds that a petition does not conform to the provisions of this act, Act No. 278 of the Public Acts of 1909, as amended, or of Act No. 279 of the Public Acts of 1909, as amended, to the extent that provisions thereof are not superseded by this act, or to the rules promulgated by the commission, the commission shall return the petition to the person from whom it was received together with a certified copy of its reasons for rejecting the petition. If the commission finds that the petition is proper it shall proceed in the manner specified for the processing of petitions which propose incorporation.
History: 1968, Act 191, Eff. Nov. 15, 1968 ;-- Am. 1972, Act 362, Imd. Eff. Jan. 9, 1973
Compiler's Notes: For provisions of Act 278 of 1909 and Act 279 of 1909, referred to in this section, see MCL 78.1 et seq. and MCL 117.1 et seq.
Admin Rule: R 123.1 et seq. of the Michigan Administrative Code.
Section 123.1012a
linkable
printable
STATE BOUNDARY COMMISSION [[EXCERPT)
Act 191 of 1968
123.1012a Denial or approval of consolidation; revision of boundaries; referendum on question of consolidation; notice.
Sec. 12a.
[[1) After the public hearing on a proposed consolidation and review by the commission, the commission may deny the proposed consolidation, revise the boundaries of the territory to be consolidated and approve the proposal, or approve the consolidation without any change.
[[2) If a consolidation proposal is denied by the commission its order is final immediately and the secretary shall transmit a certified copy thereof to the petitioner and the clerk of each city, village or township affected.
[[3) If a consolidation proposal is approved with or without a revision of the boundaries the commission's order becomes final 45 days after the date of the order unless within that 45 days a petition for a referendum is filed with the commission which contains the signatures of at least 5% of the registered electors residing in the area to be consolidated as approved by the commission. If a petition is not filed and the commission's order becomes final the secretary shall send a certified copy of the order to the petitioner and the clerk of each county, city, village or township affected and to the secretary of state. If the petition is filed, the commission after determining the validity of the petition shall submit the proposition to a vote of the electors of the affected municipalities and shall specify a date later than the referendum on which the commission's order becomes final.
[[4) In order to be adopted, the proposition to consolidate shall receive an affirmative majority vote in each municipality affected voting separately. If a majority of the votes cast in each municipality affected are in favor of the proposed consolidation the commission's order becomes final and proceedings may be conducted in accordance with sections 13 to 17. Otherwise the proceedings on the consolidation proposal shall terminate.
[[5) The secretary shall notify the clerk of each municipality affected by the consolidation of the date for the election and the question to be submitted. Each clerk shall arrange for an election on the question of the proposed consolidation and for the election of the charter commissioners to be elected from his municipality and he shall follow the procedure prescribed in the state election law except as otherwise provided in this act.
History: Add. 1972, Act 362, Imd. Eff. Jan. 9, 1973
WAIT THERE'S MORE!
Jesus, Danny. Who wants to read all this junk? :p
CONTINUED...
Section 123.1012b
linkable
printable
STATE BOUNDARY COMMISSION [[EXCERPT)
Act 191 of 1968
123.1012b Jurisdiction of commission over reannexation of detached territory.
Sec. 12b.
The commission shall have jurisdiction over reannexation of territory detached under section 9b of Act No. 279 of the Public Acts of 1909, being section 117.9b of the Michigan Compiled Laws, only to the extent provided in section 9b of Act No. 279 of the Public Acts of 1909.
History: Add. 1982, Act 457, Imd. Eff. Dec. 30, 1982
Section 123.1013
linkable
printable
STATE BOUNDARY COMMISSION [[EXCERPT)
Act 191 of 1968
123.1013 Proposed consolidation including portion of township; “municipality” defined; order; election and number of charter commissioners; appointment of charter commissioners; resolution; eligibility; applicability of subsection [[2).
Sec. 13.
[[1) If a proposed consolidation includes a portion of a township, the term “municipality” as defined in sections 1 and 12 when used in this section and sections 14, 15, and 17 means only that portion included within the proposed consolidated city. Except as provided in subsection [[2), when its order approving a proposed consolidation becomes final, the commission shall call an election of 9 charter commissioners who shall be registered electors of the municipalities proposed for consolidation, each having a residence of at least 2 years in the municipality from which he or she is to be elected immediately before the election. The commission shall determine the number of charter commissioners to be elected from each municipality proposed for consolidation, which number shall be as nearly proportionate as possible to the municipality's population. Each municipality proposed for consolidation is entitled to a minimum of 1 charter commissioner, regardless of population. If charter commissioners are elected at the same election at which the proposition to consolidate is submitted, the election of the charter commissioners is void if the proposition to consolidate is not adopted. If charter commissioners are not elected at the election at which the proposition to consolidate is submitted they shall be elected at a separate election to be held within 60 days after a favorable vote on the proposition to consolidate, which election date shall be set by the commission. A municipal officer or employee, elected or appointed, shall not be eligible for election to the charter commission.
[[2) The municipalities proposed for consolidation may, by resolution of their respective governing bodies, choose to appoint their charter commissioners pursuant to this subsection. If the municipalities proposed for consolidation choose to appoint their charter commissioners pursuant to this subsection, the commission, when its order approving a proposed consolidation becomes final, shall instruct the governing bodies of the municipalities proposed for consolidation to appoint not less than 8 and not more than 10 charter commissioners. The governing body of each municipality proposed for consolidation shall appoint an equal number of charter commissioners. The appointees for charter commissioner shall be residents of the municipalities from which they are to be appointed for not less than 2 years immediately preceding the appointment and shall also be registered electors in the municipalities from which they are to be appointed. The charter commissioners shall be appointed within 180 days after the commission's order approving a proposed consolidation becomes final as determined pursuant to section 12a[[3). A municipal officer or employee, elected or appointed, shall not be eligible for appointment to the charter commission. This subsection shall apply to all municipalities whose proposals for consolidation are approved by the commission after January 1, 1982.
History: 1968, Act 191, Eff. Nov. 15, 1968 ;-- Am. 1972, Act 362, Imd. Eff. Jan. 9, 1973 ;-- Am. 1982, Act 192, Imd. Eff. June 24, 1982
Section 123.1014
linkable
printable
STATE BOUNDARY COMMISSION [[EXCERPT)
Act 191 of 1968
123.1014 Election on consolidation; form of ballot; expenses; canvass; returns; commissioners.
Sec. 14.
The ballot to be used in an election on consolidation shall be substantially in the following form:
“For consolidation of the cities [[and villages) of ............... and ............... [[naming each city or village) [ ] yes [ ] no”
Each municipality proposed for consolidation shall bear its own election expenses, the results shall be canvassed by the canvassing board of each municipality, and the returns thereof made to the commission. The nominations, qualifications of commissioners, form of ballot, election and all other things to be done in the election of commissioners, shall be as provided in section 15 of Act No. 279 of the Public Acts of 1909, as amended. The nomination and election in each municipality shall be separate, and the members of the charter commission from each municipality shall be the sole judge of the membership and qualifications of the commissioners elected from such municipality. If only 1 commissioner is to be elected from a municipality and his qualifications are challenged, not less than a majority of the other charter commissioners elected and serving shall be the sole judges of the qualifications of such commissioner.
WAIT THERE'S MORE!
CONTINUED...
Section 123.1015
linkable
printable
STATE BOUNDARY COMMISSION [[EXCERPT)
Act 191 of 1968
123.1015 Meeting of charter commission; notice; procedure for adopting charter; power, duties, and procedure of commission; submission of charter to electors.
Sec. 15.
The charter commission shall meet for organization at the time and place to be designated by the secretary, who shall notify each member elected in writing thereof. The procedure for adopting a charter and the powers, duties and procedure of the charter commission shall be as prescribed in Act No. 278 of the Public Acts of 1909, as amended, or of Act No. 279 of the Public Acts of 1909, as amended, except as otherwise prescribed in this act. When the charter commission has been elected, it shall proceed to formulate and prepare a charter, and agree upon a name or a choice of names for the consolidated city, which charter, when prepared, shall be submitted to the electors of the municipalities proposed for consolidation, for rejection or adoption. If the charter is adopted by a majority of the electors of each municipality proposed for consolidation, voting separately, the consolidation in the charter shall be operative at such time as shall be stated in the charter.
History: 1968, Act 191, Eff. Nov. 15, 1968 ;-- Am. 1972, Act 362, Imd. Eff. Jan. 9, 1973
Compiler's Notes: For provisions of Act 278 of 1909 and Act 279 of 1909, referred to in this section, see MCL 78.1 et seq. and MCL 117.1 et seq.
Section 123.1016
linkable
printable
STATE BOUNDARY COMMISSION [[EXCERPT)
Act 191 of 1968
123.1016 Charter of consolidated city; preparation, contents; effect of adoption of provisions in charter.
Sec. 16.
In the preparation of a charter of a consolidated city, any power, limitation or provision granted to any of the cities or villages affected by the consolidation in any charter previously adopted by such city or village or granted or passed by the legislature for the government of such city or village and contained in the charter of the city or village at the time of the vote to consolidate may be included in the charter of the consolidated city, and when so included, such power, limitation, or the effect of any such provision shall continue with the same force and effect as when adopted by the city or village or granted or passed by the legislature in the first instance.
History: 1968, Act 191, Eff. Nov. 15, 1968
Section 123.1017
linkable
printable
STATE BOUNDARY COMMISSION [[EXCERPT)
Act 191 of 1968
123.1017 Corporate status of municipalities; submission of revised charter to electors; effect of unfavorable vote; termination of proceedings.
Sec. 17.
[[1) The corporate status of the cities and villages proposed for consolidation shall not be changed or in any way affected until the charter takes effect.
[[2) If the charter first submitted for adoption is not approved on the first vote taken by the electors, the charter commission may reconvene and prepare a new charter or prepare modifications or amendments to the first charter as they consider necessary, and shall submit the revised charter to the electors in the same manner and on a date to be fixed as in the first instance.
[[3) If on submission of the second charter a favorable vote by a majority of the electors voting separately in the municipalities proposed for consolidation is not obtained, the consolidation proceedings shall end and the charter commission shall have no further authority to act or to submit another charter to the electors.
[[4) If a charter has not been adopted within 3 years following the date the commission's order became final, or if within the 3-year period the charter commission does not reconvene within 90 days after the election at which the first proposed charter was defeated, the consolidation proceedings shall end.
History: 1968, Act 191, Eff. Nov. 15, 1968 ;-- Am. 1972, Act 362, Imd. Eff. Jan. 9, 1973 ;-- Am. 2008, Act 419, Imd. Eff. Jan. 6, 2009
WAIT THERE'S MORE!
CONTINUED...
Section 123.1018
linkable
printable
STATE BOUNDARY COMMISSION [[EXCERPT)
Act 191 of 1968
123.1018 Judicial review.
Sec. 18.
Every final decision by the commission shall be subject to judicial review in a manner prescribed in Act No. 197 of the Public Acts of 1952, as amended, being sections 24.101 to 24.110 of the Compiled Laws of 1948.
History: 1968, Act 191, Eff. Nov. 15, 1968
Section 123.1019
linkable
printable
STATE BOUNDARY COMMISSION [[EXCERPT)
Act 191 of 1968
123.1019 State boundary commission within department of treasury; establishment.
Sec. 19.
The commission is established within the department of treasury.
History: 1968, Act 191, Eff. Nov. 15, 1968
Compiler's Notes: For transfer of State Boundary Commission from the Department of Treasury to the Department of Commerce, see E.R.O. No. 1980-1, compiled at MCL 16.732 of the Michigan Compiled Laws.
Section 123.1020
linkable
printable
STATE BOUNDARY COMMISSION [[EXCERPT)
Act 191 of 1968
123.1020 Repeals.
Sec. 20.
Act No. 390 of the Public Acts of 1913, being sections 123.21 and 123.22 of the Compiled Laws of 1948, is repealed.
History: 1968, Act 191, Eff. Nov. 15, 1968
History: 1968, Act 191, Eff. Nov. 15, 1968 ;-- Am. 1972, Act 362, Imd. Eff. Jan. 9, 1973
Compiler's Notes: For provisions of section 15 of Act 279 of 1909, referred to in this section, see MCL 117.15.
© 2009 Legislative Council, State of Michigan
WORD FROM THE STREET PROPHET!
Read the Michigan annexation laws very carefully and weep!
In Memoriam: Neda Soltani
You could save us all a lot of reading, and yourself a lot of copy-and-pasting, if you just posted the clauses specifically prohibiting the combination of municipalities.
If we as Americans are not entitled to choose how we are to be governed, then what is the purpose of being American?
The American constitution laws are there to balance the power in order to prevent overruling of state, local and federal governments to have too much power over the other. There would be no other clauses, otherwise this nation might end up either a chaotic dictatorship or sudden poltical change of government regime that could have an 'upside down' totalitarian disorder. That is what happen to the Soviet Union, Thailand, Vietnam, Laos, Japan, North Korea, Cuba, England and lot's of various Middle Eastern Carribean, South American and African Nations. Anyone who took law school must read these kind of laws. There's plenty more that come from.
WORD FROM THE STREET PROPHET
God bless of forefathers who put these laws in the free country.
"The more laws, the more corrupt the government." --Tacitus
"Without laws, there would be chaos." -- Socrates
Those two statements aren't nec. incompatible. ;)
I'm not suggesting the law not be followed; it just looks to me that as long as the appropriate petitions, commissions, hearings, charters, etc. are complied with, that there is nothing that prevents consolidation. Are you saying that these laws prevent the consolidation of any 2 cities? Could you please cite your reference precisely?
It looks to me like a petition has to be filed by 5% of the people, the boundary commission puts it up for a vote, and if each city has a majority vote in favor of consolidation, it's a done deal. How do you interpret it?
It's just cumbersome enough to be politically unfeasible. That's my take on it.
Well, the State law is what it is, but of course laws are changeable things. But having said that, let me ask this: what one elected leader might sponsor a bill whose ultimate effect would be to combine cities in the Detroit area into a greater metro Detroit? It certainly can't be done without some of the politicians backing it. OK, sure, theoretically it can be, but for all practical purposes it can't.
You'd have a hard enough time getting some of the smaller suburban communities to combine with each other. One could argue, for instance, that Berkley, Huntington Woods, Madison Heights and Royal Oak might combine into one city, which [[one could argue) would be a more efficient way of running things than is done today. Yet, you would have a very hard time getting that done, and that avoids some of the issues discussed in this thread. If that's going to be hard, imagine throwing Detroit into the mix!
Interesting enough thread, but face it, we are discussing impossibilities here. Not physical impossibilities, but political impossibilities, and those are impossible enough.
All this, of course, just IMVHO.
There would have to be some reason for the suburbs to want to be part of Detroit. The suburbs would see it as the loss of their own city services, increased taxes, and think there would probably more crime. It certainly would be a public relations disaster for any suburb to join Detroit. We would have to "tart up" Detroit up and make them want us, "C'mon Big Boy, you know you want to touch my Eight Mile."
Retroit,
Please re-read the SBC requirements above very carfully before you understand the Michigan annextion laws. The laws may be long, but when I read them carefully it seems to me that there are no loophole for a proposed annexation of Detroit and suburbs. In order for Detroit and suburbs to be amalgamated the State Boundry Commission have to change the laws without distribing the rights and charters of other cities, villages and townships. If you all eager to annex Detroit and suburbs, file a petition to appeal the State Boundry Commissions laws of city, village, charter township and township annexation. Get your friends involved, too. State, federal and local constitutions can be change by the government of the people and for the people. It's in the constitution.
Your statement is correct Rick Bell. RACE, POLITICS, SCHOOLS, POLICE AND FIRE PROTECTION will be the greatest problem if Detroit and suburbs were to be amalgamated. Race relations then poltics, city services and changes of the laws to the state boundry commission must to handled before we ever see a L.A. like Detroit with little or no suburbs and township borders.
I agree with your statement, professorscott. However do you read the SBC requirements, for I see them as State Law. Can the SBC law be a course law? If it is then it can be change through poltical action. But the shield of racial 'invisble segregation' between Detroit and suburbs must be broken first before we could see an amalgamation process. Not to mention about the huge tax base.
Do you all remember years ago about those rediculous Detroit Dept. of Waterworks water rates? For example Garden City have to pay 20% for using Detroit water while Redford TWP have to pay 17% for their rates. While Livonia have to pay up to 11% to use Detroit's water system. Maybe of the suburbs petition the legislatures in Michigan to change the SBC annexation laws and build race relations in the black ghettoes in Detroit then amalgamation could happen.
Indianapolis is the only one of those cities that did anything even remotely like this proposal. Houston and Columbus just happened to be able to annex lots of land, and they have their own suburbs, counties, etc.
Other examples include Jacksonville and Nashville. All three cities have relatively healthy economies and generally effective government services. However, every example is different. Only a thorough investigation into this proposal would truly determine how much money taxpayers would save and how much redtape would be eliminated. They can look at Indianapolis, Nashville, and Jacksonville to determine that it indeed works, and use them as guidelines, but only a study would truly determine how effective a unigov would be for the Tri-County area.
Also, laws can be changed at will by the legislature and more rarely directly by the people. It's silly to say it can't be done because it's against the law, when the whole point is to change the law to allow it to happen...
Okay, I just typed a fairly detailed response and lost it since I was logged out. But I think you bring up good points.
If Detroit were to amalgamate with all of the communities that it shares a land border with, its population would be 1.64 million people. That would make it the fifth largest city in the U.S. behind Houston. And it would achieve this in 300 square miles, versus Houston's 600 square miles. It would also be 800,000 residents larger than Phoenix, which itself has a land area of nearly 600 square miles.
A more plausible scenario would be for Detroit to amalgamate with all of its bordering neighbors in Wayne County. That would push Detroit's population up to 1.25 million, and its land area would only increase to 211 square miles. This would dillute Detroit's density, but it would still be one of the most densely populated of the 10 largest U.S. cities.
It would also likely be more mutually beneficial for the Wayne County communities to join Detroit, than for the Macomb or Oakland communities. For some reason, the communities in Wayne County that border Detroit are extremely fragmented. There are only 8 counties in both Macomb and Oakland County that border Detroit, but there are upwards of 13 in Wayne County itself, and most have land areas of less than 4 square miles. If these communities joined the city, it could greatly reduce the cost of providing services since the cost would be spread over a much larger population. None of the Wayne County communities that border Detroit have more than 100,000 residents, but after amalgamation they would lock into a municipality of 1.25 million residents.
Metro gov is neither an annexation nor a takeover even though opponents on both sides of the issue will use those terms. When Indy combined the county and the city it was a sleepy town locals called" Indiananoplace". Today the vast majority of citizens there not only support the metro gov but look at it as the begining of the turnaround. Been to Indy? It's a nice place that works. The same seems to be the case with Toronto according to Dave from Windsor. There is less money. A radical departure from our present course needs to be put forth. We cant be like 12th century crusaders building castles in the Holy Land. We need to embrace the world as region not as a city that doesn't work surrounded by entities that don't want people know they're related.This will save money. It will stop the economic cannibalism within our region. We will be a city of 3.9 million people. We will be the center of a region of almost 6 million people. We will be forced to address our problems as a region rather than run from it as we always have. Don't beat it to pulp on why it wont work but look at it a possible first stage in our salvation.
Very interesting that if Detroit at the same size as Houston would most likely put it at #4 most populated city, even though Houston has that place now and Detroit is at #11.
Also very intersting is the crime data would be skewed if Detroit borders grew. We would no longer be considered the most dangerous cities.
A recent online article [[Forbes I think, but I could be wrong) had the top 25 most dangerous neighborhoods, and chicago had 5 or 10 of them. Detroit only had 1. Yet Chicago is generally seen as a much safter city.
The truth is that you can't generalize an entire region, and each city within a metro area is different each neighborhood within a city is different, and each block within a neighborhood is different. It is easy to see this in Detroit where one block will be completely intact of historic buildings, while the next one will be almost completely destroyed, while the one after that has be redeveloped with new construction.
Annexing suburban communities that border Detroit is a good idea. It will increase the tax base, lessen the city vs. suburb divide and lead to more regional unity, as well as take us from #11 largest city to number 4 or 5... which is much more accurate [[so many of the top 10 are called southern "cities" but are actually s mega-suburbs) and Detroit has a density two or three times that of those cities.
If Detroit [[at same density) was the size of Dallas, it would be aprox 2,455,000 [[4th Largest)
If Detroit [[at same density) was the size of Houston, it would aprox 3,838,000 [[2rd Largest) about exact same population as LA [[but lower density)
I have an idea! Let's really lower our crime stats and turn all of Michigan into Detroit! I think this is a great way to fight crime. If it does not work, we will absorb Ohio too. We've had a bone to pick with them since the Toledo war, so hey, they'll never know what hit them.
And I say we leave the upper pennisula out of it for now. We will keep it in reserve in case we need to "fight" crime in the future. It's always good to think ahead.
******************************************
In the above, I am just joking. You guys are making some good points concerning a metropolitan wide government. Very interesting arguments. Very thoughtful. [[Maybe unlike my jokes above.)
Growing up in Indianapolis, I have to say that unigov there excluded the schools, police and fire departments in the merger. Growth stopped in the outer townships of the city for about 20 years as many people wanted to move outside of the boundaries of unigov so their children would not have to have one-way busing from the old city. Now, almost 40 year later, some of the townships are just now merging their police and/or fire departments with the city, due to budget issues. The school districts are all still independent from the old city. I guess if we did the same thing, all of us would get to vote for the mayor, Detroit would run such things as water, bus service, and public health [[unless given back to the counties) and we would pay some higher taxes to the city.....
new state law.
All acquisitions, mergers incorporation and laws associated with the boundary laws of 1968 act are hereby superceded when mergers of entities of greater than 500,000 are involved. The laws that govern these entities are ........
Is that a bill or a law? you gots the MCL #?
It was a statement that a new law can supercede or replace an old law if it is so written. I assume as long as it does not conflict with the state constitution it can be changed. The political will is the area lacking.
It will never happen, forced integration led to self-segregation, and escape from jurisdictional boundaries. No one who was born and raised in the old Detroit, and was forced to raise his own kids in the new suburbs, is going to want to see those boundaries redrawn, ever. It's over, thanks for playing.
There have been a lot of very interesting posts... and a few really smartass sarcastic ones. On this thead Danny is making some of the latter look downright foolish..... :D
Priceless! :rolleyes:
At 600 sq. mi., the population is only about 3 million. At 1,000 sq. mi. the population is around 3.7 million.
My comments of Detroit amalgamation with the suburbs has made it clear to the point. It would take lots of petitions to change the SBC requirements and repeal the 1947 Michigan Charter Township Act. It would take breaking the racial and political barriers to make this 'Super Detroit City' happen. For far as I know, Detroit will stay Detroit, The suburbs will stay the suburbs. The best we can do to make Detroit better for ethnicities to clean up our neighborhoods, reform the police, fire, departments, reform city politics and develop regionalization of capital goods.
Technically, you are correct that there is no loophole, but this is because no loophole is needed as consolidation of cities is explicitly allowed!
Proceedings for consolidation may be initiated by the filing of a petition with the commission signed by a number of registered electors who are residents of 1 or more of the affected municipalities at least equal to 5% of the total population of the affected municipalities {123.1012[[1)}
After the public hearing on a proposed consolidation and review by the commission, the commission may deny the proposed consolidation, revise the boundaries of the territory to be consolidated and approve the proposal, or approve the consolidation without any change. {123.1012a[[1)}
If there is opposition to the consolidation, 5% of the voters can have it put up for vote:
If a consolidation proposal is approved with or without a revision of the boundaries the commission's order becomes final 45 days after the date of the order unless within that 45 days a petition for a referendum is filed with the commission which contains the signatures of at least 5% of the registered electors residing in the area to be consolidated as approved by the commission. If a petition is not filed and the commission's order becomes final the secretary shall send a certified copy of the order to the petitioner and the clerk of each county, city, village or township affected and to the secretary of state. If the petition is filed, the commission after determining the validity of the petition shall submit the proposition to a vote of the electors of the affected municipalities and shall specify a date later than the referendum on which the commission's order becomes final. {123.1012a[[3)}
In order to be adopted, the proposition to consolidate shall receive an affirmative majority vote in each municipality affected voting separately. If a majority of the votes cast in each municipality affected are in favor of the proposed consolidation the commission's order becomes final and proceedings may be conducted in accordance with sections 13 to 17. Otherwise the proceedings on the consolidation proposal shall terminate. {123.1012a[[4)}
I think that it would be a mistake to limit the consolidation [[I am going to use that term instead of annexation, because that is what we are talking about) to just the adjacent ring of suburbs around Detroit. Consolidation should cover the whole metropolitan area. This will put more pressure on each city to join, so as not to be surrounded and excluded.
The racial opposition is being exaggerated. Most of the suburbs have seen a large influx of blacks from Detroit. If any suburbanites are truly racist, it should be obvious by now that municipal boundaries have not kept the blacks out, so why have them?
The political opposition is being exaggerated. Politicians love power, so why would they not be eager to be leader of the whole metropolis instead of just a city or county?
The school opposition is being exaggerated. School districts will not change [[unless they choose to).
The police and fire opposition is being exaggerated. They are already cooperating. Suburban police departments have already established relations with Detroit since many of the suburban crimes are committed by Detroiters.
The water/sewage situation is a perfect example of why many suburbanites should be in favor of consolidation; it would give them more control. Better mass transit would also be an easier sell if they had more control over money spent. The key is convincing suburbanites that consolidation will put the control in their hands as they will be the majority. Detroit is incapable of maintaining their city and this has proved detrimental to the metropolitan region. Detroit doesn't need to be taken over by far-away Lansing, it needs to be taken over by the people who know the situation best - suburbanites.
That's an interesting way to put it, have the suburbs take over Detroit.
<Cynicism>
And since there is so much negativity associate with "Detroit", let's call the whole shebang Farmington Hills.
</Cynicism>
But that calls for the amalgamation for Detroit and suburbs in which it would not happen. Now this messages brings up back to square one. Everyone should follow the rules and regulation of thr State Boundry Comission and Michigan Township Charter Act of 1947 or have the power to change it. Talking about having the amalgamation of Detroit and suburbs will not change or appeal the laws. It takes community action through signing petitions. We Americans govern the land, not just the politicians. If you all want a better community or a supercity, change the laws. We Americans change slave abolishments, African Americans and Womens voting rights, prohibition of alcoholic beverages, civil rights and we can change annextion laws.
As for right now, Detroit and the suburbs remains divided and most people who are living in those cities, townships and villages like it that way.
WORD FROM STREET PROPHET
For Neda Soltani
If the amalgamation occurs, the entity area could officially be called "Greater Detroit", similar to Greater London, however it would be colloquially known as Detroit.
Would the STREET PROPHET please prophesy on which part of the "State Boundry Comission and Michigan Township Charter Act of 1947"[sic] he thinks specifically prohibits the consolidation of cities?
WORD FROM PLAIN OLD ORDINARY FORUM POSTER
Sort of like you! :D
Oh, most holy Street Prophet, wouldst thou, from the great abundance of thy deontological wisdom and for the sake of Neda Soltani, graciously read the following excerpt from the laws that thou hast posted and endow thy humble servants with thy exegesis:
Proceedings for consolidation may be initiated by the filing of a petition with the commission signed by a number of registered electors who are residents of 1 or more of the affected municipalities at least equal to 5% of the total population of the affected municipalities {123.1012[[1)}
After the public hearing on a proposed consolidation and review by the commission, the commission may deny the proposed consolidation, revise the boundaries of the territory to be consolidated and approve the proposal, or approve the consolidation without any change. {123.1012a[[1)}
If a consolidation proposal is approved with or without a revision of the boundaries the commission's order becomes final 45 days after the date of the order unless within that 45 days a petition for a referendum is filed with the commission which contains the signatures of at least 5% of the registered electors residing in the area to be consolidated as approved by the commission. If a petition is not filed and the commission's order becomes final the secretary shall send a certified copy of the order to the petitioner and the clerk of each county, city, village or township affected and to the secretary of state. If the petition is filed, the commission after determining the validity of the petition shall submit the proposition to a vote of the electors of the affected municipalities and shall specify a date later than the referendum on which the commission's order becomes final. {123.1012a[[3)}
In order to be adopted, the proposition to consolidate shall receive an affirmative majority vote in each municipality affected voting separately. If a majority of the votes cast in each municipality affected are in favor of the proposed consolidation the commission's order becomes final and proceedings may be conducted in accordance with sections 13 to 17. Otherwise the proceedings on the consolidation proposal shall terminate. {123.1012a[[4)}
“Municipality” means an incorporated city or village. {123.1001[[d)}
Danny's a bit clueless when it comes to these laws. There's nothing in state law that prohibits multiple cities and townships from consolidating into a single city. The State Boundary Commission act specifically permits it and the requirements of the Charter Township Act have no bearing on any consolidation. That's the legal side. As the Professor has stated, this is never going to happen so it's all debating society discussion on the details.
The idea of a Farmington/Farmington Hills merger died for most of the reasons outlined in the article. The Farmington residents were afraid of losing their political clout in a larger city and losing the services that they paid higher taxes to get. People get fixated on services like leaf pick-up even if it means that the quality of the police and fire services is less than what they would get in a consolidated city. The same attitude has come up over the years when Northville and Northville Township have talked merger. You have to get badly in the hole, like the towns in the UP did, where you are forced to merge or die before people will sign onto the concept.
I don't think any city would ever agree to be annexed by Detroit. But what about a section of Detroit becoming it's own new city? Wouldn't Detroit be better off if it were cut up into new smaller cities?
http://detroitgayhistory.blogspot.com/
"Wouldn't Detroit be better off if it were cut up into new smaller cities?"
How so? Most of Detroit's problems are due to low property values, a tax base that can't support the level of public services needed and too few people spread across too much land. Breaking Detroit into smaller chunks won't address any of those problems. Creating a bunch of new, smaller cities would leave you with a bunch of Highland Parks and Hamtramcks, struggling at best, complete failures at worst.
Well, I agree some areas would just continue to be crap. But, some other nicer areas of Detroit could become even nicer. Imagine a city of Palmer Park which included Sherwood Forest, etc. I think smaller more localized control would help improve these little "districts"
http://detroitgayhistory.blogspot.com/
Actually he's referring to Hamtramck as the "struggling at best", while Highland Park is the "complete failure".
"Actually he's referring to Hamtramck as the "struggling at best", while Highland Park is the "complete failure".
Correct. I would hope Hamtramck residents would see their city as at least a step above Highland Park!
"But, some other nicer areas of Detroit could become even nicer. Imagine a city of Palmer Park which included Sherwood Forest, etc. I think smaller more localized control would help improve these little "districts"
With what money? Providing the range of services that would need to be provided isn't going to be done for free. Places like Palmer Park are in better shape that many areas of Detroit. But when it comes to tax base, they're not going to be able to support the levels of service that would move them into the class of similarly sized suburban enclaves.
Actually they probably would. The area that includes Palmer Woods, Sherwood Forest, Green Acres, Bagley, University District, and the Golf Club is one of the wealthiest areas in Metro Detroit. There's more than enough money in that area to support an independent enclave.
Novine,
YES, but you are not looking further into the clause. There is nothing in the Michigan State Constitution that city can annex a city, but it can propose of merging its city services. A city annexation to a city must have conventional bill to become law, Therefore a city annexation for a city is ILLEGAL! I did some urban studies research to find out whether Michigan city can annexation a city I only found this Now we are getting back to square one:
Introduction
The Charter Township Act, Public Act 359 of 1947, is an example of progressive legislation
affecting Michigan townships. The Michigan Legislature recognized that there are
townships which provide additional services and need additional laws to provide for
better administration of township affairs. Since its passage in 1947, there have been
several amendments to the act to meet the changing needs of townships.
A general law township having a minimum population of 2,000 inhabitants is authorized
to adopt the Charter Township Act and incorporate as a charter township. A township is
not authorized to develop its own charter; the Charter Township Act is the charter of the
township. The act’s provisions are uniform for all Michigan townships, and they cannot
be altered by a particular township.
Charter townships and general law townships are similar in organizational structure and
powers except for specific differences provided for in the Charter Township Act. In
particular, the act grants charter townships additional flexibility in their organizational
structure, boundary protection against annexation and enhances the unit's general tax
authority.
Should your township incorporate as a charter township? The decision belongs to your
township alone. To help you make an informed decision, the following information spells
out some differences and similarities between a charter township and a general law
township.
Organizational Structure
In a charter township, all legislative authority and powers are vested in a seven-member
township board comprised of a supervisor, clerk, treasurer and four trustees. A quorum
of four members must be present at a meeting to conduct business.
Organization changes in the act affect the offices of the supervisor and trustee. There
are no substantive changes in the duties of the township clerk and treasurer if a township
incorporates under the act.
The Supervisor and Superintendent
In general law and charter townships, the supervisor is an officer of the township board
and has an equal voice and vote in township board proceedings. In a general law
township, the township board retains most of the administrative authority. The Charter
Township Act grants a charter township supervisor more authority over the day-to-day
WAIT, THERE'S MORE!
CONTINUED....
operations of the township.
The township board of a charter township is authorized to hire a superintendent. [[MCL
42.11) If the township board appoints a superintendent, the board may delegate any or
all of the following statutory duties to that official:
❑ Oversee enforcement of township ordinances and laws;
❑ Manage public improvement projects; oversee construction, repair, maintenance,
lighting and cleaning of township property, including streets, sidewalks, bridges,
and sewers;
General Law or Charter Township? / MTA, February 2005 Page 1 of 13
❑ Manage construction, repair, maintenance of sidewalks, streets, bridges,
sewers, pavements of all public buildings and other township property;
❑ Oversee operation of township utilities and maintenance of township property,
tools and appliances;
❑ Oversee terms and conditions of township contracts;
❑ Attend township board meetings and take part in discussions, but without the
right to vote;
❑ Serve as ex-officio member of all township board committees;
❑ Prepare and administer the annual budget under township board direction and
apprise the township board of the township’s financial status;
❑ Make recommendations to the township board as necessary;
❑ Administer all township departments;
❑ Serve as the purchasing agent for the township or delegate this responsibility to
some other officer or employee;
❑ Conduct authorized sales of township personal property;
❑ Serve as personnel director or delegate this duty to some other officer or
employee, and
❑ Perform any other duties delegated to him/her which are not assigned to some
other official. [[MCL 42.10)
If these duties are not delegated to the superintendent, they become the responsibility
of the township supervisor. In effect, this provides additional authority to a charter
township supervisor beyond that accorded a supervisor of a general law township.
If a board appoints a superintendent, he or she serves at the pleasure of the township
board. State law provides that the township board determines the superintendent’s
salary, and the appointee must become a township resident within 90 days of assuming
the position, unless the board waives the requirement by resolution adopted by 2/3 of
the members of the board. The act also provides that the appointee must be selected
on the basis of training and ability without regard to political or religious preferences.
[[MCL 42.11)
If a township has not appointed a township superintendent under MCL 42.10, the township
board may employ a township manager to perform duties lawfully delegated to the
manager by the township board. The duties may include those that are delegated by
law to another township official if written consent has been granted by that official.
MCL42.10a)
State law does not specify the duties of a township manager. MTA’s position is that a township manager can be delegated the same duties as a superintendent.
Page 2 of 13 General Law or Charter Township? / MTA, February 2005
WAIT, THERE'S MORE
CONTINUED.....
Trustees
A charter township board must have four trustees. If a township becomes chartered with
only two trustees, the additional two trustees must be elected at the first general election
held following incorporation.
The duties of a charter township trustee are identical to those of a general law township
trustee. He or she possesses an equal voice and vote in township affairs. The trustee is
responsible for attending township board meetings and takes part in all decisions.
Trustees are the “pure” legislators on the board and should have an understanding of all
aspects of township board affairs.
Other Officials
What about hiring other township officials? There is no difference in the ability of a
general law township or a charter township to hire the necessary personnel to properly
and efficiently operate the township. The act enables a township board, by resolution, to
establish additional offices to administer township affairs, such as a public works administrator
or personnel director, or combine any administrative offices, so long as it does
not conflict with state law. The newly created offices cannot replace, abolish or diminish
the statutory duties of the clerk’s or treasurer’s office. [[MCL 42.9)
Annexation Protection
The Charter Township Act grants enhanced protection from annexation to townships
that provide police and fire protection, water and sewer services, and other services. In
the 1970s, many general law townships incorporated as charter townships because of
the annexation protection offered by the act.
If a township became chartered prior to June 15, 1978, the township is generally
protected from annexation.
A charter township that incorporated on or after June 15, 1978, is generally protected
from annexation to any adjacent city or village if it meets certain statutory criteria:
❑ State equalized valuation of at least $25 million;
❑ Minimum population density of 150 persons per square mile;
❑ Provides fire and police protection, solid waste disposal, and water and/or sewer
services by contract or some other method;
❑ Has a comprehensive zoning ordinance or master plan. [[MCL 42.34)
WAIT,THERE'S MORE.
CONTINUED....
Michigan Supreme Court decisions indicate a township must provide more than
minimum service to obtain greater protection from annexation.
However, the exemption from annexation is not complete immunity. Although the
authority of the State Boundary Commission over charter township land is lessened by
the act, the commission may order a portion[[s) of the township to be annexed to
straighten boundaries and avoid instances in which portions of a township are completely
surrounded by the annexing city. Township territory can also be annexed if the
action is initiated by the citizens themselves.
General Law or Charter Township? / MTA, February 2005 Page 3 of 13
Financial Matters
Fiscal Year
A charter township may adopt one of two fiscal years: January 1 to December 31 or
April 1 to March 31. This differs from general law townships, which can choose either
April 1 to March 31 or July 1 to June 30. An annual audit is required.
Budget
Each township official prepares a department budget and delivers it to the supervisor or
superintendent on or before 150 days prior to the fiscal year commencement. The
supervisor or superintendent must submit a complete itemized budget to the township
board no later than 120 days prior to the beginning of the fiscal year. [[MCL 42.24)
Prior to the new fiscal year, the township board must pass a resolution adopting the
budget for the new fiscal year, make an appropriation of the money needed for township
purposes, and provide for a levy of taxes upon real and personal property. If a township
operates on a calendar-year budget cycle, a public hearing on the proposed budget
must be held no later than December 15, and the budget must be adopted no later than
December 31. [[MCL 42.27)
The supervisor or superintendent must prepare quarterly reports that disclose
estimated and actual expenditures and revenues to date. [[MCL 42.29)
Within 60 days after a township becomes chartered, the board must pass a resolution
adopting an interim budget until the next fiscal year. [[MCL 42.27)
Taxing Authority
The Charter Township Act offers enhanced taxing authority. However, the act does not
require a township to levy any or all of the additional mills available to it under the act.
If a township became chartered by township board resolution before 1978 or by direct
voter approval after 1978, the township board may choose to automatically levy up to
five mills without voter approval. The township may with voter approval levy up to
five additional mills [[for a total of 10 mills).
Townships that incorporated after 1978 by board resolution have the same authorization
rate they enjoyed as a general law township and can levy up to 10 mills only with voter approval.
Page 4 of 13 General Law or Charter Township? / MTA, February 2005
WAIT, THERE'S MORE
CONTINUED...
Compensation
Setting Salaries
How are compensation levels set in a charter township? Salary levels can be set in one
of two ways: 1) by township board resolution subject to citizen referendum or 2) by a
compensation commission established by ordinance. [[MCL 42.6a)
If a general law or charter township does not conduct an annual meeting and does not
have a compensation commission, the township board shall, by resolution, set the
salaries of township board members. The board’s resolution to increase a salary is
subject to referendum if a citizen petition is filed with the township clerk. [[MCL 41.95[[3))
If a compensation commission is established, the township board cannot set the salaries
for any township official.
Trustees
The act provides that “A trustee may receive, in addition to other emoluments provided
by law for his service to the township, a sum per meeting of the township board meetings
actually attended by him, as established by the township board to be paid upon
authorization of the board.” [[MCL 42.6) MTA interprets this provision to allow a trustee
to be paid on a per meeting basis for attending township board meetings in addition to
an annual salary. The act specifically prohibits a supervisor, clerk and treasurer from
receiving additional compensation for attending township board meetings.
Decreases in Salary
The Charter Township Act provides that the salary of an elected township official cannot
be decreased during the official’s term of office unless the responsibilities and requirements
of that office are diminished and the official consents in writing to the salary reduction.
If the township hires a superintendent [[or manager under MCL 42.10a) the board can
not reduce the supervisor’s salary designated for performing non-assessing supervisor
duties unless the supervisor consents in writing to the salary reduction. [[MCL 42.6a)
The act specifically addresses reducing the salary of a supervisor who is compensated
for performing assessing duties but fails to perform those duties. A township board can
reduce the supervisor’s portion of the salary designated for assessing duties without the
official’s consent in writing. [[MCL 42.6a)
WAIT, THERE'S MORE.
CONTINUED...
Township Board Meetings
A general law township board is required to meet once every three months and at
additional times as necessary. The township board of a charter township is required to
meet at least once a month. Each member of a charter township is required to vote, if
present, on any issues presented to the board, unless the official is excused by the
unanimous consent of board members who are present. [[MCL 42.7)
There is one exception to this requirement. Under Public Act 15 of 1992, a charter
township board member may abstain from voting without the other board members’
consent when voting to fill a vacancy on the charter township board and the board
member abstaining states that he or she desires to be appointed to fill that vacancy. [[MCL 42.7)
General Law or Charter Township? / MTA, February 2005 Page 5 of 13
Board Authority
Acquiring and Disposing of Township Property
A charter township board is authorized to purchase, sell or long-term lease real or personal
property without authorization from the inhabitants. Under Public Act 16 of 1992, a
general law township board, by resolution, has the same authority.
Police and Fire Departments
General law townships and charter townships may have a police and fire department. In a
charter township, the officers are appointed by the supervisor or superintendent, if that
duty has been delegated, with the approval of the township board. [[MCL 42.13) In a
general law township, the township board appoints police and fire officers.
Ordinance Authority
Charter townships are authorized to adopt ordinances to protect the health, safety and
general welfare of township inhabitants and property. Ordinances in effect when a
general law township incorporates as a charter township remain in effect unless they
are repealed or amended. [[MCL 42.19)
A charter township can operate in essentially the same manner as a general law township
without any additional costs, with the exception of adopting ordinances. State law
requires additional publication of an ordinance before and after it is adopted. A charter
township is authorized to adopt any state law as an ordinance by reference. In general
law townships, only certain ordinances, such as the Uniform Traffic Code, may be
adopted by reference.
Public Improvements
Public improvements are managed in the same manner in both charter townships and
general law townships. Both general law and charter townships can create special
assessment districts and issue special assessment bonds to finance authorized improvements
[[MCL 42.31).
WAIT, THERE'S MORE.
CONTINUED...
Citizen Expectations
Another significant difference for charter townships, not found in any law book, is that
citizens may have increased expectations for services when a township incorporates as
a charter township. Because a charter township is often viewed as an “urbanized” form
of township government, citizens may expect additional and improved services beyond
that which the township currently provides.
Annual Meeting of the Electors
Charter townships are not required to conduct an annual meeting of the electors unless a majority of the township board determines to do so by resolution.
Page 6 of 13 General Law or Charter Township? / MTA, February 2005
How to Become a Charter Township
In order to incorporate under the Charter Township Act, a township must meet certain
population requirements and follow the procedures set forth in the act.
After each federal, state or special census, the Secretary of State’s office will notify the
township clerk of each township that meets the minimum population requirement of
2,000, excluding the population of any incorporated village, that it may incorporate as a
charter township.
The process to incorporate as a charter township can be initiated in one of two ways:
1) by township board resolution or 2) by citizen petition.
After the Secretary of State’s office has notified a township that it has met the population
requirement, the township board may adopt, by majority vote, a resolution opposed
to incorporation; a resolution of intent to incorporate, or a resolution to place the question
of incorporation on the ballot at the next regular or special election. [[MCL 42.3a)
Whether or not the township passes a resolution of intent to incorporate as a charter
township, the township clerk must publish the notice of right to referendum in a generally
circulated newspaper in the township within 15 days of notification from the Secretary
of State’s office. A second notice must be published seven days after the first notice.
If a citizen petition is filed within 60 days requesting a referendum on the question, the
township clerk is required to take appropriate steps to place the question on the ballot.
The second method for initiating incorporation under the act is citizen petition. If a
township has a minimum population of 2,000, a citizen petition can be filed with the
clerk requesting that the necessary steps be taken to place the question on the ballot.
The proposal to incorporate must be submitted on or before August 30 if the question is
to be put on the ballot at a general election or at least 60 days in advance of a special
election. [[MCL 42.3) However, note that the Michigan Election Law states that, for
elections in which state officers are to be elected, ballot proposals must be certified to
the local or county clerk at least 70 days before the election. Townships must use the
Election Law filing deadline of 70 days for elections at which state officers are to be
elected. [[MCL 168.646a)
An election, if conducted, must be in compliance with the general election laws. The
ballot language is as follows:
WAIT, THERE'S MORE.
CONTINUED...
“Shall the Township of ________________________ incorporate as a charter township,
which shall be a municipal corporation subject to the provisions of Public Act 359 of
1947, as amended, which act shall constitute the charter of such municipal corporation?
Yes [[ ) No [[ )"
If the voters approve the ballot proposal, the township clerk files a copy of the initiating
petition or township board resolution and other specified documents with the county
clerk’s and the Secretary of State or appointed, serve the balance of their term until their elected successors qualify for
and assume the office.
Can a charter township disincorporate?
Yes, the act provides the method for disincorporation as a charter township. An election
to disincorporate cannot be held until four years after the charter township first incorporated
or more often than every four years. [[MCL 42.2) General Law or Charter Township? / MTA, February 2005 Page 7 of 13ate's Office of the Great Seal. Township officials, elected
Conclusion
Should your township become a charter township? It is a value judgment which can
only be determined by your township. It is a complicated issue. We recommend that
township board officials and citizens familiarize themselves with the facets and
implications of the Charter Township Act to make an informed decision.
Under the Campaign Finance Act [[MCL 169.201, et seq), township board cannot use
general fund monies to campaign for or against becoming a charter township. It is
permissible to provide information, such as a newsletter article, that is unbiased and
provides both pros and cons of becoming a charter township. [[MCL 169.257)
The Michigan Townships Association is available to offer advice and sample forms
which a township may adapt to meet its particular needs. In addition, your township
should contact legal counsel experienced in township law to assist you throughout the process.
Page 8 of 13 General Law or Charter Township? / MTA, February 2005
WAIT, THERE'S MORE.
CONTINUED...
Duties of the Township Clerk
When Township is Notified of Eligibility to Incorporate:
1. Publish Notice of Eligibility to Incorporate
MCL 42.3a[[3) sets forth duties of the township clerk following receipt of notification from the
Secretary of State as:
1) Prepare a notice for publication in a newspaper of local circulation.
2) The notice must be published within 15 days following receipt of notification from the
Secretary of State.
3) A second notice, reiterating the material presented in the first notice, must be
published seven [[7) days following publication of the first notice.
NOTICE OF ELIGIBILITY TO INCORPORATE AS
A CHARTER TOWNSHIP AND RIGHT TO REFERENDUM
Official certification has been received from the Michigan Secretary of State that the
township of ___________________________ has a population of 2,000 or more and
the township board has the right to exercise one of three options concerning status
as a charter township under the provisions of Public Act 359 of 1947, as amended:
1. Adopt by majority vote a resolution opposed to incorporation as a charter
township.
2. Adopt by majority vote a resolution of intent to approve incorporation as a charter
township.
3. Adopt by majority vote a resolution to place before the electorate at the next
regular or special township election the question of incorporation as a charter
township.
If Option 2 is adopted by the township board, the citizens of the township have the right
to file a “Right to Referendum Petition.” This petition must be filed within the 60 days
which must lapse between passage of a resolution of intent to incorporate and final
passage of the resolution to incorporate as a charter township.
The petition will follow, in general form, the nominating petition form as prescribed in
the Michigan Election Law [[MCL 168.488), and in the heading will indicate “Disagreement
of Intent to Incorporate as a Charter Township.” The petition must be signed by
not less than 10% of the registered voters of the township based on the vote cast for
all candidates for supervisor at the last election at which a supervisor was elected.
If the petition is successful, the question of incorporation will be placed on the ballot at the next general or special township election.
WAIT, THERE'S MORE.
CONTINUED....
General Law or Charter Township? / MTA, February 2005 Page 9 of 13
Resolution of Intent to Become a Charter Township
_______________ Township
__________ County, Michigan
WHEREAS, the Township Clerk has been notified by the Secretary of State of the State of
Michigan that __________ Township has a population of 2,000 or more inhabitants, excluding
the population of any incorporated village, notice of which notification was duly published in the
as required by law, and
WHEREAS, under the provisions of 1976 PA 90, the Township is accordingly eligible to be
incorporated as a charter township by resolution of the Township Board of its intent to so
incorporate and a subsequent resolution of said Township Board at least 60 days after the
adoption of the first resolution to be incorporate, and
WHEREAS, if no petition for referendum on the question of such incorporation is received by the
Township Clerk signed by not less than 10 percent of the number of electors of the township
voting for Township Supervisor at the last election, said township shall be incorporated as a
charter township on the date of said second resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED that the
Township Board does hereby declare its intent, by resolution to be adopted not less than 60 days
from the date hereof, to incorporate ___________ Township as a charter township unless the
aforesaid petition of this agreement to so incorporate is filed with the Township Clerk prior to the
passage of such final resolution.
Motion was made by ________________, seconded by ____________, to adopt the foregoing
resolution.
Upon roll call vote, the following voted “Aye”:
The following voted “Nay”:
The chairman declared the motion carried and the resolution duly adopted.
_______________________
Township Clerk
CERTIFICATE
The undersigned, being the duly elected and acting Clerk of the Township of _______ hereby
certifies that the foregoing resolution was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the Township
Board at which a quorum was present on the ___ day of _______, 20__, and that the members
voted thereon as hereinbefore set forth.
________________________
Township Clerk
WAIT, THERE'S MORE.
CONTINUED....
Page 10 of 13 General Law or Charter Township? / MTA, February 2005
Resolution Incorporating as the
Charter Township of ___________________________.
At a regular meeting of the ________ Township Board, _______ County, Michigan, held on the ___ day
of ______ , 20__, at the ________ _ _ _______ Township Hall, ______________, Michigan, in said
township.
Members Present: Members Absent:
The following preamble and resolution were offered by __________ and supported by ____________.
WHEREAS, the __________ Township Board on the ___ day of ______, 20__, by motion duly made,
second and passed, adopted the resolution of Intent to Incorporate ________ Township, _______ County,
Michigan, as the Charter Township of ________________, _________ County, Michigan, under Public
Act 359 of 1947, as amended; and
WHEREAS, notice of adoption of said resolution was published in the _______, a newspaper of general
circulation in __________ Township, on ______, 20__, and again on ________, 20__, and considerable
publicity has been given this matter; and
WHEREAS, more than sixty [[60) days has elapsed since adoption of said resolution and no Petition of
Disagreement to the Intent of Incorporate as Charter Township has been filed as in said act provided;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Township of __________, ________ County, Michigan,
being qualified, having completed all necessary action preliminary thereto hereby does INCORPORATE
AS THE CHARTER TOWNSHIP OF _____________, __________ COUNTY, MICHIGAN, a municipal
corporation pursuant to PA 359 of 1947, as amended, which act shall constitute the charter of this charter
township.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the CHARTER TOWNSHIP OF _________, _________ COUNTY,
MICHIGAN, shall, as provided by law, succeed to and be vested with all of the property, real and personal,
money, rights, credits and causes of action belonging to ___________ Township as it formerly existed,
and all debts and liabilities of _________ Township and all taxes and assessments levied and uncollected
as of the date of this Resolution of Incorporation shall stand until discharged or collected.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Clerk is hereby directed to file certified copies of this resolution
with the Secretary of State for the State of Michigan, and with the Clerk for _________ County.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this resolution shall take effect as of this date.
AYES: _____ NAYS:_____ ABSENT:_____
RESOLUTION DECLARED ADOPTED THIS ___ day of ________, 20__.
_______________________
Township Clerk
CERTIFICATE
I hereby certify that the foregoing constitutes a true and correct copy of a resolution adopted by the
Township Board of the Charter Township of _________, ________ County, Michigan, at a Regular Meeting
held on __________, 20__.
____________ ________________________________
Township Clerk______________________
General Law or Charter Township? / MTA, February 2005 Page 11 of 13
WAIT, THERE'S MORE.
CONTINUED....
2. When a Petition for Referendum is Submitted
MCL 42.3a[[3) sets forth duties of the township clerk if petitions for referendum are submitted
as follows:
1. Upon accepting for filing a petition seeking referendum on the charter township
question, the township clerk shall check the petition signatures against the registered electors’
signatures.
2. If the petition contains the proper number of valid signatures, the clerk will make all
provisions for submitting the question of incorporation as a charter township to the registered
electors of the township.
3. The question shall be placed on the ballot at the next regular or special township
election which allows the clerk the necessary time to provide for an orderly conduct of the
election.
4. If a special election is contemplated for the purpose of submitting the question, the
proposed date will be presented to the county scheduling committee for approval.
5. The wording on the ballot shall read as follows:
“Shall the township of ________________incorporate as a charter township which shall
be a municipal corporation subject to the provisions of Act No. 359 of the Public Acts of 1947,
as amended, which act shall constitute the charter of such municipal corporation?
Yes ______ No______ "
Page 12 of 13 General Law or Charter Township? / MTA, February 2005
3. File Documents with the
Office of the Great Seal and Registration Section,
Michigan Department of State
1. If the township board adopts a resolution opposed to incorporation as a charter township,
a copy of the resolution should be filed for informational purposes.
2. If the township board adopts a resolution of intent to approve incorporation as a charter
township, and no petitions of disagreement are filed, the following documents would be filed:
[a] Affidavit of publication of required notices;
[b] Resolution of Intent;
[c] Certificate of township clerk that no petitions were filed within the 60 day period;
[d] Resolution approving incorporation.
3. If the township board adopts a resolution of intent to approve incorporation as a charter
township, there are petitions of disagreement filed, an election is held, and the proposition is
approved, the following documents would be filed:
[a] Affidavit of publication of required notices;
[b] Resolution of Intent;
[c] Certificate of township clerk that petitions were filed within the 60 day period and date
set for election;
[d] Copy of ballot;
[e] Board of Canvassers certificate showing total votes cast and number of votes cast for
and against incorporation as a charter township;
4. If the township board adopts a resolution to place the question of incorporation as a charter
township before the electorate, an election is held, and the proposition is approved, the
following documents would be filed:
[a] Affidavit of publication of required notices;
[b] Resolution of township board,
[c] Copy of ballot;
WAIT, THERE'S MORE.
CONTINUED...
[d] Board of Canvassers certificate showing total votes cast and number of votes cast for and against incorporation as a charter township.
5. If the proposition to incorporate as a charter township is defeated at an election held under
3 or 4 above, the township clerk may file only a copy of the Board of Canvassers certificate showing the proposition did not pass.
Office of the Great Seal
110 W. Michigan Ave.
Suite 100
Lansing, MI 48918-1750
[[517) 373-2531 [[Main Office)
[[517) 373-3706 [[Facsimile)
General Law or Charter Township? / MTA, February 2005 Page 13 of 13
WORD FROM THE STREET PROPHET
If you all want an amaglamation of Detroit and suburbs, make a petition and change the SBC's Charter Township Laws. Novine, try not to cross examine your comments against my evidence. You're arguments about the Detroit and suburbs merging would lead you back square one. Anybody else wants to challege my rebuttal go right ahead I have proof from the SBC laws.
In Memoriam, Neda Soltani
Danny,
If you can copy and paste, you can create a link. Knock it off with the endless copying of text.
The Home Rule Cities Act specifically allows cities to annex one another if there is voter approval in both cities. Ann Arbor annexed East Ann Arbor in the 1950s using that provision. Consolidation isn't annexation and the consolidation of multiple communities in the UP a few years back shows that it can be done legally. The Charter Township Act has no bearing on the question of consolidation.
It didn't see the word 'annexation' clause in the Home Rule Act under the Public Act of 1909. It states that townships and village can became a city when a new city form government is established and approved by the voters. The reason that East Ann Arbor merged with the City of Ann Arbor because they folks want more city services and that's legal and was approved by the votes. That includes other U.P. cities. Please re-read the laws again:
The Home Rule City Act was enacted by the Michigan Legislature as Public Act 279 of 1909. This statute provides the framework by which a new city may become incorporated and provide for its own government by adopting a city charter. It also provides for the method by which an existing city may amend or revise its city charter.
History
Local units of government in the United States are created by the various states. Such local governments may go by various names in the several states. It is entirely possible for a state to totally abolish any or all local units of government. In the case of Michigan, the state government is specifically restricted under the state's constitution as to how it may interact with local governments and may not alter the boundaries of a local government without a vote by the affected residents.
The Home Rule City Act resulted from the provisions of the 1908 state constitution, which called for home rule authority to be conferred upon the various local governments in the state. The 1963 state constitution retained these same home rule provisions.
Both constitutions recognized the fundamental integrity of counties, townships, cities, and villages in Michigan. Local governments could no longer be created, abolished, or consolidated without the consent of the electors who reside within the affected territory. Prior to this time, local governments had been created by a special act of the legislature which did not require any consent from those living within the affected territory.
Under Michigan’s Revised Statutes of 1848, there were several classes of cities, the primary distinction among which was population. In nearly every case, however, it was the legislature that had provided a city charter for each city that mandated how each city was to be governed and how its officers were to be chosen. Under the Home Rule City Act, each city was given the ability to make changes to its city charter on its own. The charters that had been previously granted by the legislature continued in force until such time as an affected city took this action. All cities in Michigan are now classified under one class, namely, Home Rule Cities, regardless of the source or origin of the various provisions of their respective city charters.
Revising or amending a city charter
Under the Home Rule City Act, a city can amend its city charter by a vote of the electors residing within the city. An amendment can be proposed either by the governing body of the city, typically called the city council, or by an initiative petition signed by a certain number of registered voters.
A revision of a city charter is a more comprehensive process which replaces the existing charter with a new one. The decision to revise a city charter must be approved by the voters of the city and can be proposed by the city council or by an initiative petition. A special commission is elected to conduct the work of writing a new charter and submitting it to the voters for approval. The commission is not bound to keep any provisions of the current city charter.
Most commonly, city charters are revised in Michigan to change the model of city government that is followed. To change from one system, such as a council-manager system, strong mayor-council model, or city commission form, to another requires a charter revision.
Provisions of the act
The Home Rule City Act specifies certain requirements that every city must contain within its city charter. At the same time, the Act provides for numerous optional charter provisions. In general, any power that is not specifically prohibited by another law for a city to exercise may be included in a city’s charter.
Nice try! Novine any more comments that you can rebuttal?
I don't know about that. I need to see stats to back that up and the census tract data is dated.Quote:
The area that includes Palmer Woods, Sherwood Forest, Green Acres, Bagley, University District, and the Golf Club is one of the wealthiest areas in Metro Detroit
Palmer Woods People Data
Median Household Income:
Palmer Woods - $110,745
Detroit - $29,526
National - $44,512
[[Michigan - $44,627)
University District People Data
Median Household Income:
University District - $80,461
Detroit - $29,526
National - $44,512
[[Michigan - $44,627)
Green Acres People Data
Median Household Income:
Green Acres - $60,798
Detroit - $29,526
National - $44,512
[[Michigan - $44,627)
http://www.zillow.com/local-info/MI-...ople/r_270047/
[[I pulled the Median income for Michigan from Wikipedia.)
Income doesn't equal property values. That would be the guide for how much local government they could afford.
Danny, endless copying doesn't equal comprehension on your part.
"THE HOME RULE CITY ACT [[EXCERPT)
Act 279 of 1909
117.9 Incorporation, consolidation, or change of boundaries; governing law; affected district; petition or resolution for annexation; voting; duties of commission.
Sec. 9.
[[1) In the event of a conflict between the provisions of this act and 1968 PA 191, MCL 123.1001 to 123.1020, regarding an incorporation or consolidation, the provisions of 1968 PA 191, MCL 123.1001 to 123.1020, shall govern."
Translation - Any conflict involving the laws covering incorporation or consolidation is governed by MCL 123.1001 - 1020, which governs the actions of the State Boundary Commission. Both laws allow for the consolidation of multiple cities, villages and townships into a new city.
Except from section 9.
"Except as otherwise provided, this section shall not be construed to give any city the authority to attach territory from any other city unless the question relative to the territory has been voted upon by the voters of the entire cities affected "
Translation - State law allows one city to annex another if approved by voters in both cities.
"STATE BOUNDARY COMMISSION [[EXCERPT)
Act 191 of 1968
123.1001 Definitions.
[[e) “Municipal boundary adjustment” means incorporation of a new city or village, consolidation of 2 or more cities, villages or townships as a new city, and the annexation of territory to a city where the commission has jurisdiction over annexation proceedings."
Translation - The State Boundary Commission has the authority to approve the consolidation of multiple cities, villages and townships into a new city.
Anything else that you need explained?
I'm not an advocate for more municipal fragmentation in Metro Detroit, but you have to agree that property values in that area would quickly benefit if those neighborhoods seceded from Detroit. Those houses become much more marketable to prospective buyers when potential residents aren't forced to have a Detroit address. Because as it stands now, that area is only marketable to monied buyers who either don't mind having a Detroit address, or monied buyers who don't understand the local stigma attached to having a Detroit address. I'm not saying that it is right, but that is how it is.
Furthermore, if the area were to become its own town or village, it would have a median household income roughly on par with West Bloomfield, and thus be put on a few of the national "most wealthy community" lists. Real estate agents would have little trouble marketing the area.
And the residents in these areas already pay for private snow removal, security and other services on top of their tax bills. So it doesn't seem like that much of a stretch for them to fund their own municipal services with the tax money that they would no longer be sending to Detroit.
The property values are so depressed because the tax bills are so high. There's no reason to believe that as property tax rates fall the value of the homes would increase. When someone realizes they can get a mansion at half the price of other suburban cities and not have the ridiculous taxes and poor city services associated with the city, more people will be willing to locate to this area. As demand increases, property values increase. As the area focuses on improving schools and city services the property values increase even more, and eventually you start getting to the point of being the Grosse Pointes, a wealthy enclave that just happens to be adjacent to the city.
I'm not advocating this at all, my stance has always been a metropolitan unigov. I'm just saying that an independent "Palmer Woods" would no doubt become a successful suburban city within a decade of secession.
In any case here's some data from the 2000 Census for the area bounded by 8 Mile, Woodward, McNichols, and Wyoming:
Population: 30,850
Area: 4.68 sq. mi.
Density: 6,586 ppl / sq. mi.
Median Household Income: ~$44,000
Median Household Income [[excluding Palmer Park Apts): ~$51,000
Race:
Black - 93.2%
White - 4.9%
Other - 1.9%
Chances are that if it did become an independent enclave and city income taxes were eliminated and property taxes cut by 20 or 30 mils, the area would become more attractive to people who earn a bit more money. That would be especially true as schools and city services improved and the Livernois Ave corridor became a true "downtown"
Talking about beating a dead horse [[topic).
This just about takes the cake.:rolleyes:
YES, A city can annex a city by means of voter approval for better police, fire and city services. [[ from section 9) And YES, the SBC can have the right to alagamate city, by city, township by township and village by village, However, since most cities, villages and townships in the Metro Detroit Area had been chartered and incorporated locked for annexation immunity. An alagamation of Detroit and suburbs WILL NOT happen unless we change the racial, political and tax base for urban regionalizational purposes.
WORD FROM THE STREET PROPHET
Now we're still back to square one
In Memoriam: Neda Soltani
But the point is that you said it was illegal. There's a big difference between legality and will...
Still wouldn't change the fact that businesses do not want to relocate or set up shop here. Making the COD any larger wouldnt help diversify the local economy.
If you can consolidate city services you have a large monetary savings which in turn leads to lower tax bills. Lower taxes make an area more attractive to companies. Companies bring jobs. Jobs bring people. People bring money. Money makes companies happy, and the cycle starts all over.
It also helps the region in attracting business when you have a single voice speaking for the entire region. Instead of 100 weak, tiny voices bickering with each other, you have a single, powerful voice speaking for one of nations largest cities. Also, a city like Highland Park really can't offer companies huge tax incentives to build in that city. But a metropolitan unigov would be able to offer such incentives.
Why can't Detroit annex neighbouring cities to regain its population?
To answer the initial question, because it is a stupid idea.
Here's a better idea, davewindsor [[what a name, snork snork). Detroit annexes Toronto. Our blacks are far tougher than those Jamaican pussies, and those holier-than-thou TO whites couldn't say squat. Can you dig it? I knew you could.
CUTTING UP DETROIT,
Bad ideal! If the SBC approve this proposal a new separate city, village or charter township government had be established. It's legal under the Public Act of 1947 and 1980 and 'a new city, village or township' must pay off the piece of the deficit that is left over from the city budget deficit. There is no pardon from any budget shortfall. For example when the Hasidic Jewish community who lived the northern part of Royal Oak Township on 10 Mile Rd. and Greenfield Rd. in late 1990s They want to be annexed to Oak Park. The people voted yes and the City of Oak Park had to pay piece of the R.O.T's budget deficits.
Way to add to the conversation detmich!
Come on, your question was "legitimate" [[legal) but was either ignorant [[give the beaver the benefit of the doubt, snork snork), or it was intentionally provocative [[more like it). Unlike Canada's Jamaican immigrants, Detroit's blacks are the real deal, and are real Americans, and have real American roots and social traction. And you, beaver-boy, have not the slightest idea regarding the pose you wish to strike. You're stupid, face it.