Is there going to be a regional mass transit tax on the ballot again in two years?

Is the North Oakland Transportation Authority (NOTA) going to continue serving only specific groups of people or is there the potential for it to expand and give rides to the general population?

Should it be a simple majority or a super majority of the NOTA board needed to alter the entity’s purpose?

These are the types of questions and concerns that led the NOTA board last week to table, for a period of two years, a proposed set of articles of incorporation that would have turned the entity into a taxing authority. It was a 5-4 decision.

Voting to table the issue were Bruce Pearson, Mike McDonald, Lori Fisher, Sue Bossardet and Ken VanPortfliet.

Voting against the motion were Chris Barnett, Margaret Payne, Cathy Alvis and Brenda Wilson.

NOTA was originally created under a July 2010 interlocal agreement between the townships of Oxford, Addison and Orion along with the villages of Oxford, Leonard and Lake Orion.

Under the proposed articles of incorporation, NOTA would have become a public authority under the Public Transportation Act (Public Act 196 of 1986).

This would have given NOTA the power to levy a tax for public transportation purposes on all properties within the six municipalities, which together would have formed the authority’s district.

Such taxes would have required approval by a majority of the votes cast within the district as a whole, not in the individual communities as was the case when the current NOTA millage was originally approved.

Oxford and Orion voters approved NOTA’s 0.25-mill property tax in August 2014. However, Addison voters failed it in both the August and November 2014 elections, then narrowly passed it in May 2015.

It’s because of that situation that Barnett, township supervisor of Orion, supported NOTA becoming an Act 196 authority.

“I think it’s a good thing,” he said. “I think that it ensures some stability for NOTA going forward.”

But McDonald, village president of Leonard, expressed his concern that some of the language in the proposed articles was “a little bit too broad.”

Under the proposed articles, NOTA would have continued to provide transportation services to senior citizens (age 60 and older), disabled individuals and low-income people. It’s currently limited to serving these groups.

However, the proposed language would have given NOTA the ability to expand its ridership to “any and all other persons the members of the authority deem appropriate.”

McDonald doesn’t want to see NOTA end up establishing “fixed (bus) routes” to serve the “general public.” He believes NOTA should not go beyond serving its existing ridership.

He suggested changing that language and “narrowing the scope of it” so it’s clear that NOTA is “not going to be funding transportation for anybody and everybody.”

“That’s my core issue,” McDonald said.

But Wilson, who represents Training and Treatment Innovations, one of NOTA’s funding sources, didn’t want to see NOTA lose out on potential grant opportunities because its purpose is too narrowly defined.

She said she understands McDonald’s fear that “it’s a loophole that can be exploited,” however, to her, it’s the board’s job to “make sure that we don’t go in any direction that we don’t want.”

The proposed language is “valuable” because it gives officials the “leeway” to alter or not alter NOTA’s purpose through a vote of the board “versus having to rewrite our articles,” which is a much more cumbersome process, Wilson said.

Although Barnett made it clear he doesn’t envision NOTA ever setting up fixed routes for the general public and he believes the “number one priority . . . will always be seniors,” he also doesn’t want to place limitations on the authority that could hinder it.

He used an Orion Township experience as a cautionary tale. He explained how the township used Community Development Block Grant money to purchase exercise equipment for its community center. But the money came with a restriction – the equipment could only be for residents age 62 and older.

As a result, Barnett said, “No one used it.”

As a protection against this “broad” language, McDonald suggested that instead of a simple majority, a super majority vote of the NOTA board be required to expand the authority’s purpose.

He explained he’s “not comfortable” with a simple majority because something as big as changing NOTA’s mission should require the “overwhelming support” of the board.

“It shouldn’t just be able to squeak by,” McDonald said.

Pearson, township supervisor of Addison, is concerned about his township and Leonard being outvoted at both the ballot box and on the NOTA board.

Addison and Leonard’s populations are much smaller compared to Oxford and Orion, so their voters’ wishes could be easily overruled at the polls under an Act 196 authority, plus the two communities only have a total of three votes on the 12-member NOTA board.

“I just don’t feel comfortable at this time putting (Addison residents) into a transportation authority (where) we have really no say in (terms of) the votes,” Pearson said. “We would be outvoted at every single (board) meeting because we don’t have the votes no matter what.”

Like McDonald, Pearson is concerned about NOTA possibly expanding beyond its current purpose. He said the senior citizens in his community worked hard to finally get the NOTA millage passed after two consecutive failures and “they don’t want our service to be diminished by adding other things to it.”

The idea for a trolley service connecting Oxford and Orion, proposed last year by NOTA Director Lynn Gustafson, was cited as an example. This proposed fixed route connecting shoppers and diners to stores and restaurants in the two communities would have been available to everyone.

But Pearson said his residents “didn’t vote for that” and they didn’t want their tax money used to pay for it.

Ultimately, the trolley idea was scrapped due to the inability to secure pledges from local businesses to fund it.

At its November 2016 meeting, the NOTA board unanimously passed a motion, made by Pearson and seconded by McDonald, stating that the trolley must be funded by outside sources and “not be subsidized by NOTA.”

Even though he was a proponent of the trolley idea and tried to drum up support for it, Barnett said, “I agree, it should die. It’s not right for right now.”

Also of great concern to some NOTA officials is the idea that the Regional Transit Authority (RTA) of Southeast Michigan could return with another millage proposal on the November 2018 ballot.

The RTA’s last proposal – a 20-year, 1.2-mill regional mass transit tax – failed in the November 2016 election. It was opposed by Oxford and Addison’s township boards as well as the Oxford and Leonard village councils. All four boards passed resolutions against it because officials felt it would have led to northern Oakland County residents receiving little or nothing service-wise in exchange for their tax dollars.

Local officials are concerned about the potential impact another regional mass transit proposal could have on NOTA’s future funding and ability to get its millage renewed by local voters.

That’s why Pearson recommended postponing a vote on the proposed articles.

“We have a little bit of time to decide and see if (the) RTA does come back in two years,” he said. “I’m thinking they’re going to be back in a year and nine months.”

Last year, NOTA provided a total of 33,869 rides. Of those, 16,419 were for Orion residents; 15,774 for Oxford residents; and 1,676 for Addison residents.