| I find this to be very distasteful and unfair for the ministries churches and organizations in this community provide for the general welfare to our residents. Because I am not completely familiar with all organizations efforts, I will only speak to St Johns UCC's food ministry and the benefits it provides to many who are in need.
We established a Feed the Hungry program years ago to provide a hot breakfast and a sack lunch every Saturday for those in need. This was done in response to the reduction in the number of hot meals that the Salvation Army was able to provide. We have anywhere from 10 to 30 or 35 people who utilize this program every Saturday. There is a certain segment of our population that have come to rely on this program and we feel blessed to provide. From my understanding, this legislation was meant to target, for the lack of a better word, schools who provide a large number of meals and require the inspections and oversight necessary for such an institution. The unintended consequence was to essentially tax Churches for their ministries to feed those who are in need.
Last week, Reverend Herbruck and I attended the Health and Human Services Meeting to voice our concerns over this newly established 'tax' upon our Churches and the ramifications of such a 'tax'. I described our program, I asked that they act responsibly and enact a fee schedule that would be fair and not prohibit us from continuing the work we are doing. Personally, I find it hard to stand in front of an Annual Meeting of our Congregation to discuss our yearly budget, which is funded entirely by donations, and state that while we want to continue to feed the hungry, the first $500.00 budgeted to this effort, must be paid to the County. Reverend Herbruck spoke eloquently that while his Church makes and sells pasties, the proceeds of those sales help fund their ministries, which included last year the ability to send youth of their Church to Detroit to help a sister Church in their need to provide summer programs, another very worthwhile program.
Today at the Committee of the Whole, I was joined by my Pastor, John Downing, Pastor Jim Eaton of the First Congregational Church and several members of the Burns Grange Hall. We all spoke to this issue, very well, very courteous and very logical in our assessment of this issue.
First off, it is very clear that George Pichette, Director of the Health Department who impose these fees, is intent on these fees standing - so his additional funding to his Department is secured. Second, Jack Johnson, Jaime Pavlica and Dan Stewart have all spoken with Representative Ball and he is working on legislation to correct this unintended consequence of this recently passed bill.
This motion/action was tabled at a previous meeting and was due to come onto the floor again today. Jack Johnson attempted to amend the motion to 'roll back' the fees to their previous levels (which I may add included temporary licenses for sales of food for non-profits) until the amendment proposed by Rep Ball was decided in Lansing. Randy Colbry felt this was not proper because the legal opinion he subscribes to does not allow for it. Pavlica just couldn't get past that they might be 'breaking the law' in some way, the same went for Stewart. I might add, this amendment to the legislation allows for the waiving of the fees, but I anticipate that if the amendment is approved, we will be back fighting to continue these food programs without this 'tax', because the greed for the additional funds will outweigh the need to feed hungry people.
Now here comes my own personal observations and comments about today's meeting, and I mean my own.
Randy Colbry feels this isn't legal. Well, given his track record of trying to prosecute the current Drain Commissioner for bogus charges and arrest the former Drain Commissioner on the same trumped up charges doesn't bode well for his assessment of legality of an elected official. And, given the current debacle that is our Shiawassee County Sheriff and his apparent proclivity to physical violence toward his employees, the County Prosecutor stands silent. Not much confidence.
Pastors Downing and Eaton both spoke very well to the fact that this is a First Amendment issue when assessing a tax on the Church's Charitable Programs and violating the separation of Church and State.
Pavlica and Stewart's assertions that they feel personally bad about this, they can do no different than what the 'law' allows is hogwash. They can provide for a fee structure which would be equitable if they just took into consideration the number of meals provided and the number of occurrences of the meal events. Stewart even went to the extent of calling himself a philanthropist, I would encourage him to look up the word in it's conventional use. A philanthropist gives large sums of money to effect a specific social change or policy. While he gives of his time, as a great many in our community do, I hardly believe he falls under the same title as a CS Mott or Warren Buffet. Those who give of their time like you and I are called - volunteers.
The issue was postponed to a future meeting, May 6 and I hope that many more attend.
Other events from today - there was an opportunity to appoint to the Community Mental Health Board a veteran who is an active member in VSO's (Veteran Service Organizations), the Disabled American Veterans and 24 year veteran of the Air Force and Michigan Air National Guard. Jack put forth this man's name as an amendment to the motion that came out of his Committee based on the reality that with the wars we are currently involved in, plus the already established need for mental health services our vets require, the influx of clients who are veterans is anticipated to rise dramatically. Having a voice like this man would be invaluable. The Chair of CMH intended for names to be submitted to the Board of Commissioners without recommendation - however, at the nomination Committee of the CMH Board, when only two members showed up - one member was intent on and would not move from re-appointing the current members to another term. Jack was the other member. To be able to move this forward, Jack agreed that they would move the re-appointments with the alternative to be considered of the veteran who had stepped forward asking to serve, yet again as his duty had called. His amendment failed because of lack of support. Every Commissioner, besides Jack because his support was apparent, professed to supporting the veterans, but didn't feel they could appoint this veteran. There were excuses ranging from 'other' issues besides those Jack had put forth, to worrying about the fact that a couple of these re-appointments were for a couple of people who had only served a few months and how fair would that be, to they had already been trained, etc. Still, they all professed their support of veterans, even proclaiming by Stewart that he is a 'patriot'. Well, aren't we all.
In my opinion, and only my own, we have a culture on this Board of saying one thing and doing another. They like pretty words, but their actions are almost polar opposite of their actions. We have all heard the assertions that - I want it to be stronger, but I want unity; This isn't anything against veterans, but we go by recommendations; We can't break the law; We can't make an elected official do anything unless they break the law, etc.
My outline: There was an opportunity to appoint a desperately needed veteran to an important position to provide a voice - a majority of the commissioners failed. There was an opportunity to tell George Pichette to go back to his drawing board and find a fair, equitable way to assess these fees, but they lack the character, as this may end up being an option to waive, not a necessity. Oh, and I love this - they are going to formally ask the Sheriff to attend the meeting of Public Courts and Safety to discuss the jail population, because he dismissed, in practical terms, the, I guess, casual request to attend the last meeting - so I guess taking the same tactics expecting different responses, yeah that will work. These are actions right on the heels of hiding important information regarding workplace violence - I guess no violation of law or civil rights there.
I am very proud of my husband's actions, sense of right and wrong, and hope that he has for his County. I am embarrassed by what I saw today by the rest of them.
Pastor Jim Eaton in the second round of public comments made a very good statement. Commissioner Sparkes opined that the residents of Shiawassee County should be proud of the Commissioners because they are working with Rep Ball's office to try and rectify this situation. Of course, they won't make a stand on their own. Pastor Eaton simply stated, I am NOT proud of you. |
