Publication select ▼
FERNDALE — With Ferndale’s Headlee override operating millage set to expire at the end of the year, the city is looking to present residents with a proposal for a new millage.
Ferndale’s effort last November to get a Headlee operating millage restoration proposal passed, with a vote to reset the millage back to 20 mills with a 4.28-mills increase, failed with residents.
Over the past couple of months, the city has held town hall meetings with residents to get their feedback on what they want in a millage proposal.
The operating millage for 2025 will be 11.4144 mills. The addition of the 2015 10-year Headlee override millage of 4.2808 mills brings the 2025 combined general operating millage to 15.6952 mills.
Several options have been presented as ideas during these meetings, according to interim City Manager James Krizan. One idea was to renew the millage at what was adopted in 2015, the last time the Headlee override was passed. That millage was 5.4552 mills when renewed, before subsequent Headlee rollbacks lowered it to 4.2808 mills. Another idea was to increase the millage by 2 mills to bring the total millage rate to around 17-18 mills to fully fund the facilities capital plan.
“At the town hall, we talked about some of the adjustments we’ve made moving forward, which include not looking at doing the full Martin Road rec facility, but utilizing grant funding that we currently have for a smaller restroom concession building,” he said. “We’ve put off other major building construction, and then looking towards potential new millage options.”
“We just talked about potentially letting it expire, which nobody was in favor of it,” Krizan continued. “There’s a general consensus among people we’ve talked with that we do have to have some sort of a Headlee override, but as we’re shaping up, I don’t see us looking to really do a big increase, but ultimately it will be the council decision of what they want to do.”
The city is aiming to have a proposal before the City Council to vote on by the Jan. 27 meeting. This would allow the millage to be on the May election ballot for residents to decide.
Krizan stated that no decision has been made as to what proposal will go to council.
Resident Mike Thompson, who spoke of his disapproval of the November millage proposal, suggested an increase of around 1.5 to 2 mills, though hearing from others, he’s not sure if that will garner support from residents to pass on the ballot.
“I’ve made a commitment to everyone I can speak to on sort of that side that I will work hard to try to sell something that’s reasonable and it isn’t really disruptive. So, that makes me wonder if 17 mills would even pass, but I think it would be much closer to something that’s acceptable than, I think, where the current council and city management is at right now,” he said. “I have to trust them in some ways, because they do have the information, they’re exposed to it and I can only kind of glean from the data that they provide, but I’ve seen some of it and I would question some of it.”
Quinn Zeagler is a resident who supported the November ballot proposal and was the chair of the citizen-led Finance Review Committee. Zeagler said the last ballot question combined operating millage money with money to build facilities and didn’t expire.
“That’s what we heard from voters, that they want it to expire occasionally, even though that kind of kicks the can down the road and we don’t know what will happen in the future. It’s hard to budget around all those sorts of things,” said Zeagler.
“What I’ve heard kind of aligns with what I said when I was on the Finance Review Committee,” she continued. “My original desire had been for around a 2-mill increase, and at the time I had said this might be a little bit more palatable for voters as opposed to the 4-mill increase on the ballot. And so, in those town halls, I heard approval from both sides, from folks that had originally said no, from folks who had originally been in support, that maybe an increase of around 2 mills from our current operating millage would be acceptable. So, about half of what was requested back in November.”
As for the facilities aspect of what was proposed in November, Zeagler said the city can put bonds on the ballot for public safety and recreation building construction, which would allow the public to choose the priorities for the community.
“We do nothing and we have to cut $4 million of our services, or we need to do something,” she said. “And the fact of the matter is that state law defunds cities like Ferndale over time. That’s just the way that the Headlee Amendment and Proposal A work, and so without a Headlee override, the cuts to services will be severe and Ferndale won’t be the same.”
