Feb 8, 2013

If Perkins is so strapped for cash, why the new township hall?

I'm confused! Perkins Township had plenty of money to start to build a new township hall a couple years back and now they are claiming to be nearly broke. What am I missing here? Where's the dough? — Greg on Perkins Avenue

Perkins Township trustees failed to truly understand how tight the state's budget would be in 2013 when they proceeded with plans to build the new township complex in 2010. At the time they felt the best use of $3.3 million in their bank account was to invest in a new township hall, housing various departments including police. The building is paid off and has no debt, but it nearly wiped out the township's savings. Trustees contended the new township hall was a necessary venture and it will serve residents for the next 50 years — but, they acknowledge they had to make sacrifices because of the building. They had to eliminate seven employment positions at a recent meeting. Understand, Perkins lost almost $1 million from its $9.5 million budget because of reductions in local government funds from the state and property tax devaluations. That's what put the hurt on them the most. Without that unanticipated loss of income, the township would be in much better financial shape. The township plans to put a levy on the ballot in May to ask for additional tax funding from residents.

The Mailbag is a daily feature on SanduskyRegister.com. Every weekday at noon, we will post one question-and-answer from a resident. To ask a question, send a letter to The Mailbag at 314 W. Market St., or e-mail mailbag@sanduskyregister.com. Please include your first name and a location in the e-mail, e.g. “John from Decatur Street."



B.O.H.I.C.A. Bend Over, Here It Comes Again!!!


At first i thought you said COHIBA, Its a hell of a cigar if you ask me.

T. A. Schwanger

It's our money and we want it now. As everyone knows, the money Cities, Townships, etc. receive back from the State and Fed. Government was our money to start.

Rather than cutting State and Federal funding for fat at the their level, they leave Cities and Townships to fend for themselves cutting local funding and leaving local govenrment with one option::beg for more money via tax increases from those already cash and tax strapped.

I'm curious whether the Ohio Municipal League has organized an effort to bring all Ohio cities, etc. together to fight against cuts in Local Government Funding.

BW1's picture

Nothing wrong with that, in fact it's preferable, as long as state and federal taxes are cut to reflect the spending cuts (and they effectively are because local taxes are deductible.) I'd rather pay taxes directly to jurisdictions where those collecting and spending it might find themselves in line with me at the supermarket and get an earful than have the money pass through aloof bureaucrats in Columbus and Washington who feel no accountability as they decide for what purposes we will be allowed to have our own money back.


Private business has had to make cuts. I guess it's time for government to do the same.

Good 2 B Me

Make the tourists pay a little more.


We're just 1 step closer to being slaves. Which is Barrys plan.


Couple of things.
Half of the 3.3 million in the bank account came from sale of the old building. If they didn't move they would have had to stay there - so only $1.6 million was used from savings. Second, the only way they can make cuts is to cut services. So be prepared to use the money we don't pay in taxes to buy extra protection on our houses (and who is it that ADT is going to call to come check out the alarm?), and to buy a snowblower to plow my steets. And, don't plan on selling your home, its value will have gone down by a good percentage - people don't want to live in a township that has reduced services. It all sounds very brave and "let's show them", but we will pay for it one way or another.

Swamp Fox

All local goverment are more than willing to yell home rule when it fits their agenda, but when it comes to money I want, I want is all they know either from the state or local taxpayers. Learn to live within your current financial budget like the taxpayers must do.....


Coming to rely on state or federal funding (which it's clear too many municipalities do) is no different than you or me counting on getting the same (or a bigger) holiday bonus check every year. If things aren't going well with the business, our check is smaller or non-existent. Well, guess what, Perkins Township? Things aren't going well, and your failure to live within your USUAL means is the single legitimate cause of your troubles!

BW1's picture

Plus, I want my local officials dancing to the tune of the local voters, rather than that of the mandarins in Washington who control the pork barrel.


Where does someone that is living on a fixed income cut, so they can pay the added tax that Perkins Township and Perkins Schools want us to pay?

My thoughts

Go back to work.


Please lower my home value so my taxes go down. Thank you.


The township will be living within their means if the levy doesn't pass. The question is will everyone be satisfied with the reduced services. Simply an either or proposition.

Dont Worry Be Happy

If the levy doesn't pass there will not be a police dept at all in 2014.


Reduced services are fine with me. Lower my taxes!


How about sharing services with other communities, removing duplication of all these little departments that are eating us alive???


It reminds me of the guy who took big steps to save his $50 shoes and ripped his $100 pants. We vote down the levy and save a couple of hundred dollars in taxes and pay thousands to replace the services and devaluation of our homes.


Please devalue my home. I want lower taxes.

T. A. Schwanger

A must read on State and Federal wasteful spending. No wonder local government funds from the State and Feds are being cut.



Build it and they will come


The township trustees decided a building was more important than services.

So if you want the same services you will have to pay more money. In essences, they want you to pay for the new building.

This is the same slight of hand proposal the school board is presenting to the taxpaying public.

You will pay for the building but just in a sneaky way.


The smart move would have been, if the township knew, in any way, the potential of the previous township hall, on Milan Road (U. S. 250), was a prime market real estate property, upon sale they should have had a clause stating the new owners will wait until after the township builds their new facility. Construction of the new township hall should have been paid for and built before they moved out. This was done in Indianapolis in order to obtain a new fire station, and never distrubted service. They could save even more by combinding services. Stop being redundant!


You base your assumption that there wouldn't be any need for repairs or improvements in the old bldg. Reality is a much different story.