You are viewing this article in the AnnArbor.com archives. For the latest breaking news and updates in Ann Arbor and the surrounding area, see MLive.com/ann-arbor
Posted on Thu, Jan 6, 2011 : 1:23 p.m.

Dexter pushes forward with cityhood effort; Historical Society continues to oppose it

By Lisa Allmendinger

DowntownDexter_Mi.JPG

Officials hope to turn the Village of Dexter into a city.

File photo

The Village of Dexter submitted a new map to the state Boundary Commission last month in its quest for cityhood, and village officials are hoping that it will approve the new boundaries at a hearing next month.

The village has spent about $40,000 on the process, most of it on the boundary map, said Courtney Nicholls, assistant village manager. who is handling the cityhood process.

On Dec. 15, the village submitted a new petition to the boundary commission, and if it’s found to be “sufficient,” the boundary commission will set a date and conduct a public hearing, adopt its findings, and approve the petition.

However, the new map faces opposition from the Dexter Area Historical Society because it includes Gordon Hall, the stately mansion build by Judge Samuel Dexter and bought several years ago by the historical society.

Nicholls said if the Boundary Commission decides the cityhood effort should move forward, within 45 days any citizen can obtain signatures on a petition asking for a referendum. If no referendum petition is filed, village voters will elect a nine-member charter commission to write a city charter that then will be sent to the governor for approval.

Once approved by the governor, village residents will vote on the charter and if it's approved, the village will become the City of Dexter.

The village formed a city study committee to investigate the pros and cons of cityhood in 2006, and the committee recommended that the Village Council move forward with the process.

Among its findings was that village residents would pay lower taxes than they currently do. Scio Township residents would see a reduction of 1.5 mills, or $1.50 for every $1,000 of taxable value, according to information provided by the village.

Webster Township residents would see a reduction of 3.5 mills, or $3.50 for every $1,000 of taxable value.

The report estimates total savings to taxpayers in the village of more than $250,000 per year.

The council adopted a resolution declaring its intent to pursue city status and incorporate as the City of Dexter in May 2007 and hired village engineer Orchard, Hiltz and McCliment to put together a boundary map, which was completed in January 2009.

Residents circulated petitions in support of cityhood and gathered 164 signatures, about 7 percent of the village’s eligible voters and property owners, and filed the petition with the State Boundary Commission on Nov. 6, 2009.

Gordon Hall.JPG

The Dexter Historical Society is upset about the inclusion of Gordon Hall in new proposed boundaries for Dexter in the petition for cityhood.

File photo

The Boundary Commission found that the village met a number of the requirements, including those dealing with population and density, but found issues with the boundary map, including non-contiguous boundaries, and deemed it “legally insufficient.”

The village is actually three separate areas, Nicholls said.

“The village petitioned to keep its boundaries the same as they are now,” she said. but couldn't because the sections of the village — the old village, the Westridge subdivision and The Cedars of Dexter housing development — don’t touch.

On April 12, 2010, the council voted to resubmit the petition and changed the boundaries to include Gordon Hall and the back half of the Mill Creek Sporting Goods store property so all the corners meet, Nicholls said.

The new boundaries square off the corner and make them contiguous, she said.

However, members of the Dexter Area Historical Society and Museum are adamant that Gordon Hall not be included in the new city boundary.

Paul Bishop, chairman of the Gordon Hall Management Committee, said the property is zoned for agricultural use.

“Judge Dexter built and developed Gordon Hall in Webster Township and we want to keep it that way,” Bishop said. “There’s a problem with zoning as there is no provision for agriculture in the Dexter zoning ordinance.

“They can develop continuity by annexing other property and leave us alone.”

If the Boundary Commission approves the new map, village officials hope the next step — a public hearing — could be held this spring.

Dexter’s Website has extensive information about all the steps involved as well as the history of the process to date.

Lisa Allmendinger is a reporter with AnnArbor.com. She can be reached at lisaallmendinger@annarbor.com. For more Dexter stories, visit our Dexter page.

Comments

ypsi

Sat, Jan 8, 2011 : 8:44 a.m.

Its just a bad idea.Keep it a village as it was since the beginning!

julieswhimsies

Fri, Jan 7, 2011 : 3 p.m.

As a former resident of Chelsea, after the village became a city, taxes initially dropped a bit, but then became higher than before within two years. I agree with Heardoc. There is no altruistic motive here. Village of Dexter...EMBRACE your village. The small town character is what sets us apart. Let's not become the City of the Village of Dexter.

dextermom

Fri, Jan 7, 2011 : 11:02 a.m.

The issue of taxes to the Township and taxes to the Village is particularly significant to some people now that the Village residents live in two different Townships. Webster Township taxes are significantly higher that Scio.

ToddAustin

Fri, Jan 7, 2011 : 12:35 a.m.

Heardoc, I'd like to hear what it is you know about plans to raise taxes. Do you have concrete reasons to believe that a City of Dexter would impose any more taxes than the village/township combinations in the future? What services would these alleged taxes be used to cover?

Heardoc

Thu, Jan 6, 2011 : 8:21 p.m.

This money savings rant is a Red Herring! The City of Dexter will raise taxes. That is what government bodies do in order to retain/obtain power. This so called savings will be quickly eaten up by government under the banner "Your taxes are the same as they were when this was a village".... Geez-- don't be sheep -- there is a motive here and it is not altruistic.

JimB

Thu, Jan 6, 2011 : 6:46 p.m.

Beside the money saved in taxes, what are the benefits of City status versus Village?

ToddAustin

Thu, Jan 6, 2011 : 5:53 p.m.

The savings has to do with the fact that residents of the village presently pay property taxes both to the village and to a township (Scio or Webster). Cityhood consolidates local government, removing the secondary authority of a township and eliminating the resultant overhead. As it was described to me by a staffer in a township office, the taxes they collect go essentially to support the Dexter schools. Remove that middle man and you save money.

Trae

Thu, Jan 6, 2011 : 3:08 p.m.

The taxes may end up being lower overall, since the city limits look like they have been expanded from what the current village limits are. More people would be included in having to pay the city taxes, resulting in a lower average tax amount. Why are all of these small towns and villages trying to become cities? Why not just embrace the village status?

Brian Kuehn

Thu, Jan 6, 2011 : 2:28 p.m.

While I am a resident of Ann Arbor, I am curious. It is not clear why residents of the proposed City of Dexter would see lower taxes. Under the theory that one rarely gets something for nothing, what service or cost will disappear as a result of cityhood?