Beaver Island Michigan

I am in immediate need of a small two-bedroom rental home, year-round. My current home is being sold. I am a retiree hoping to remain on the island for the rest of my life and, therefore, dearly hope to find a stable/permanent situation. Please call Nancy Levant at 448-2336.

Brand new Soundworld Solutions Bluetooth Wireless hearing aids (2), unused/untried, in original packaging. Charged by USB/no batteries with which to struggle. Carrying case, charger. $500.00 firm. Call 448-2336.

Kitchen/bathroom detailing, windows, walls, baseboards and floors, interior painting, and general housekeeping; let me know how I can help. Many BI references. Call Stella at 231-492-5595 or 448-2336.

Kitchen/bathroom detailing, windows, walls, baseboards and floors, interior painting, and general housekeeping; let me know how I can help. Many BI references. Call Stella at 231-492-5595 or 448-2336.

Many, many thanks, Ken.

Ken, How can I contact you regarding 2 tickets for dental appointments? My phone number is 448-2336. Many thanks. Nancy Levant

I have many tree trunks that someone cut into 24" sections in my yard (unsplit) plus several downed trees -- all free for the taking. 448-2336.

Regarding "To that end we will seek out persons who can provide factual information as well as advocates that support consolidation and those who oppose it to serve on a panel that will make initial presentations."

I would personally be happier with a non-facilitated event.

Executive Director of the Michigan Townships Association, Larry Merrill, wrote an article in 2012 titled â??Michigan law spells out how consolidation might goâ?￾. This article has legal/educational information. In part the article states:

â??As far as the passage of the consolidation proposal, Merrill said that each township must pass the proposal because one or more townships cannot overrule anotherâ??s wishesâ?¦In other words, if the majority of voters in just one township turns it down, the measure fails.

Merrill noted that the new township would not have to be a charter township based on the new population and that there would not be a need for a reassessment of all properties. He said the cost of consolidation could include attorney fees, he said, but more likely it would take someone who is a municipal finance expert to make the transition.

He said if voters approve the consolidation, â??itâ??s a done deal,â?￾ adding, â??no one knows the answer to any of these [questions.]â?￾ Without answers, he said, it is â??not exactly an informed decisionâ?￾ by voters.

â??Thereâ??s not a mechanism for people to know with any [certainty] what theyâ??re voting for...[Voters will] buy a pig in a poke.â?￾â?￾

It is worth reading and is very short. See link below:

http://www.houghtonlakeresorter.com/new ... ht_go.html

This helps. Many thanks.

Donna,

These are exactly the kind of questions we all need to be asking. EXCELLENT! Your questions are huge, and I personally never thought about this angle. Many thanks.

John,

Because it is on the ballot is why those against the consolidation MUST prepare rebuttal arguments. Both sides DO bear the burden of proof, because this is now a contest for winning votes. Unless there is a process for removing this vote from the ballot, this is a contest for votes.

John,

You are right that the proposition bears the burden of proof to demonstrate why a consolidation vote was placed on the ballot as a best-interest issue. However, and assuming the opposition will take issue with at least some of the facts when presented, the opposition also bears the burden of proof to demonstrate a fact-based rebuttal.

By the very nature of the vote itself, to consolidate or not to consolidate is a debate, and a debate cannot be won by not wanting the debate. It can only be won by voters perceiving or being convinced that one argument or the other is best. It should also be considered that voters, as a rule, vote what they perceive to be in their best interest vs. an interest in â??the greater good.â?￾ Everyone knows they are co-dependent for survival on the island, but each islander is also solely responsible for their individual/familyâ??s survival, which is his/her immediate and pressing responsibility.

For me, and not knowing the primary players, my biggest concern regards lowering the number of elected representatives on the island. Perhaps having only five representatives is fine right now, but what about in the future? What if people are voted into office who have other ideas or plans for Beaver Island? My other concern and what concerns me in every level of government is that the wealthiest people always become â??leadersâ?￾ over the less well to do -- a historic pattern and one that cultivates/perpetuates classism. I am not saying this exists on the island, but fewer representatives could be risky, in my opinion, and particularly so in the unknown future. As such, an argument that island cohesion would automatically result from consolidation is somewhat of a fallacy, because we cannot know the goals or intentions of future boards of trustees which could also cause division(s). Is the cohesion argument based on actual evidence, or is it simply a hope for cohesion? In my opinion and to date, this argument has not been made. Another consideration, however, is â??nothing ventured, nothing gained.â?￾ Change can and should be productive, but should the change become problematic, can it be undone?

It should also be understood that the state determines and regulates the rules for how such initiatives are brought before the people; not township trustees/boards. In fact, the only way to decide if people want to consolidate or not is to get it on a ballot, and Angel Welke clearly solicited input from residents prior to petitioning the people for signatures (in both townships) indicating their desire to vote on a potential consolidation.

That said, both sides are seemingly dug in to their respective opinions while admitting to awaiting the facts. I agree that open-mindedness is probably a more reasonable stance until those facts are provided. At the same time, demanding generic â??factsâ?￾ is a somewhat inadequate response. Each voter should compile a list of specific facts they want answered. If, as stated, 70+ percent of island services are already consolidated, what specific questions do you want answered to feel your vote would then be an educated/best vote?

Asking very specific questions also holds both sides accountable for making their cases, which ultimately are your cases both for and against. However, as with all things that affect the future, things can and will change, so permanent answers are never possible, particularly with unknowns such as future development opportunities, economic changes, war(s), county consolidations, new federal and state laws, etc.

I take issue with the term â??leadâ?￾. It is the obligation/duty of the people to lead those they elected to represent them; representatives are paid to represent the will of the people. If people favor consolidated townships, they have an obligation to lead their representatives to initiate that action. If people do not want consolidated townships, they have an obligation to direct their representatives to act against consolidation. Representatives are not supposed to lead the people (refer to DC).

Consolidation is on the ballot, and it was placed on the ballot in the only manner available to raise the issue because consolidation is, in fact, a ballot/voter-determined process. The process is State-regulated, not Beaver Island-regulated. Petitioning for signatures was the legal means, and opinions were solicited prior to the petition, so letâ??s move on to the specific facts each voter needs to cast a facts-based vote.

"Why the waste and confusion of unevenly splitting the funds to all that we share?"

This is really hard to argue.