SPI
image
Palace Chrysler-Jeep

Letter to the editor


Cityhood too costly



shadow
shadow
October 20, 2010 - Dear Editor,

I am writing in response to "write-in" candidate Michael Sabol's position on cityhood. When we moved to Clarkston it was not yet a city. We were told that by voting for cityhood we would maintain lower taxes. The township was growing, requiring more taxation to add services – we as a "city" would not have to contribute to the added taxes needed to serve that growing population.

However, over the last 15 years or so we have seen the reverse. While the township grows, their tax base also grows. Ours is not. We still receive the same services, but at a much higher price. We cannot grow in population so our taxes must increase as wages and costs increase. Personally I cannot believe that I voted for the rhetoric we were given back then.

As far as identity is concerned, there isn't a resident in this township, that I know, who doesn't take pride in being from Clarkston. We have always been residents of the "village". It doesn't define us.

Our downtown is not defined by 700 residents but by those who spend their time and money there. We would not survive by excluding the township from our downtown nor should we deny the township the pride they take in being a part of our village.

As far as I can see, the only benefit to being in the "village" is receiving snowplowing on a timely basis. We lost our police, one of the reasons we originally decided to become a "city." Unfortunately, this candidate has not lived here long enough to speak to the situation about dissolving the city. It is getting too costly to maintain this name. How do we benefit in being a third party in contracts for services? This "pride" is too costly for me. I will not write his name in for council.

Stephenie L. Huber

Clarkston

print
Print
email
Email Link
share
Share
The Oxford Leader
SPI Subscriptions
Site Search