Two millage proposals considered by the Leelanau County Board of Commissioners this week received mixed reviews from commissioners and could be approved - or not - by county voters in the Aug. 5 Primary.

In a 4-3 vote, the county board acting as its executive committee on Tuesday recommended adoption of ballot language that calls for a 0.375-mil property tax levy for two years to support the county’s 9-1-1 emergency dispatch center.

Regarding the second millage proposal – a request to renew a 0.275-mill property tax levy to support senior citizens services – the board decided to delay a decision to approve ballot language until next month pending receipt of additional information from county Commission on Aging director Rosie Steffens.

A one-mill, two-year property tax levy that voters narrowly approved in August 2006 to support the 9-1-1 Center and other county operations was reduced to 0.6-mills this year. A portion of that millage supports the 9-1-1 Center’s annual budget of $900,000 – but the millage will expire this year.

The county board in February rejected a proposal to add a $3.64 surcharge to the monthly bill of each cellular phone and land line in Leelanau County to support 9-1-1 because commissioners felt the arrangement would be unfair to families with more than one phone line or cellular phone, and there was no way to determine how much revenue would actually be provided through the surcharge. In addition, the surcharge was based on short-term legislation that commissioners and state legislators alike acknowledged was “flawed.”

But commissioners have pointed out that a property tax levy is also unfair to large landowners who may pay far more in property taxes for the same 9-1-1 service that the owners of small properties pay.

District No. 5 commissioner David “Chauncy” Shiflett said he viewed the new 9-1-1 millage as a “stop-gap measure” until the state Legislature figures out a better way to fund 9-1-1 operations statewide and Leelanau County more fully explores cost-saving options such as closer collaboration with other 9-1-1 dispatch centers in the region. Shiflett was among the narrow majority of commissioners who recommended adoption of ballot language calling for the millage. Also voting “yes” were District No. 6 commissioner and county board chairman Robert Hawley, District No. 4 commissioner Mary Tonneberger, and District No. 2 commissioner Mark Walter.

Several commissioners suggested that state legislators be urged to draft legislation that would allow collection of a “per-household fee” to support 9-1-1, similar to legislation that enabled collection of such a fee for county recycling services. In addition, Hawley said he would try to set up a meeting with county board chairmen in Benzie and Grand Traverse County to see if there was any interest from those counties in beginning formal discussions about collaborating on 9-1-1 operations.

Opposed to approving the 9-1-1 ballot language were District No. 7 commissioner Melinda Lautner, District No. 1 commissioner Jean Watkoski, and District No. 3 commissioner Will Bunek.

Bunek said he believed the county had “ignored” the 9-1-1 funding system the state had recently proposed through the temporary telephone surcharge; and that a millage would be an unfair burden on too many taxpayers.

According to tentative estimates, the 0.375 mill levy would raise almost $850,000 of the $900,000 required to run the county’s 9-1-1 dispatch center as it is currently configured.

Also at Tuesday’s meeting, Steffens presented draft ballot language that would renew a 0.275 mill property tax levy that voters approved in 2002 to support senior citizens services. Under the Headlee Amendment to the state Constitution, that levy has been “rolled back” to 0.2421-mills but is bringing in more revenue than it did years ago because of increases in property values.

In the meantime, the Commission on Aging has expanded its services – but has also amassed a $375,000 fund balance, according to county treasurer Vicki Kilway.

“That means we’re collecting too much and should consider a lower millage rate,” said Shiflett.

“We could put this 0.275 millage proposal on the ballot in August but it could very well fail,” said Lautner. “If voters are presented with a more realistic figure, though, it just might pass,” she added.

Several commissioners said this week they had heard from constituents concerned that too much tax money was going into Commission on Aging coffers, with very few “clients” actually being served and little need apparent for some services. Of particular concern, commissioners said, are “vouchers” offered to anyone over 60 years of age for subsidized meals and other services such as snow shoveling and window washing – with little regard for whether certain seniors actually have any financial hardship.

“We need to see better data,” Shiflett told Steffens.

Tonneberger, who also serves on the Commission on Aging board, moved to table her previous motion to approve the ballot language pending receipt of additional information from Steffens at next months’ meeting. The motion to table carried in a 6-1 vote with Bunek opposed.