Merger Study Is Not A New Topic BY JACK MACMILLAN In 1998, the Sylvania Township Trustees asked a consultant in the field to determine what options they have, considering the limitations imposed on them by Ohio law. They may have been concerned about the fact that the city had been annexing the best sites in the township. They may have been concerned about their ability to serve township resident with only the revenue from property taxes. € Townships cannot protect their borders. They are subject to annexation demands by any city next door. The 10/04/2005 minutes of the trustee¹s meeting reported that the city had annexed almost 400 acres of township land since 1996, with more since then. Annexation of land has been going on for a long time and there is more to come. € Townships cannot control their destiny. Conversations with officials who have served the township tell us that townships cannot set speed limits for township roads. They cannot install red light cameras for safety purposes. They need state approval to sell cemetery-related items, and the list goes on. They can only do what state laws allow. It is not unusual, then, that each person interviewed with experience as a township official has recommended that the merger effort be tried. The consultant¹s 1998 analysis listed options for an urban township which include:    Adopt the status quo ­ stay as they are. There are no immediate crises; no urgent requirements to change.     Incorporate ­ become a city with all the powers other cities have and none of the limitations townships have.    Annex themselves to a neighboring city ­ either by petition of landowners or by popular vote.    Merge with a neighboring city. In 1998, the status quo alternative did not appeal to the trustees. That is why they asked for the study. The incorporation option was given attention because it would allow township residents to control their destiny as city residents do. They could govern themselves as cities do. However, it was pointed out that Ohio law did not allow a new city to ³completely surround an existing municipality² and guessed that any court would agree that the city would be ³surrounded² even though the Michigan line is one side of the city. Annexation options were not favored. There are so many parcels of land in the township that a petition by landowners route is impractical. Another reason this option was not favored is that there is no provision for negotiation between city and township. Annexation would require township residents to assume not just the benefits of the city, but the burdens as well without having he chance to vote for or to challenge them. It was recommended that the township seriously look at the merger process because it is fair to residents of the city and of the township. It requires that elected representatives of each entity to sit together and negotiate the best possible terms for all. The decision to merge is one all residents must vote on after merger conditions have bee negotiated. In upcoming columns, this topic of a merger study will continued to be discussed providing readers with information about the process and the study. We encourage all residents to be fully informed before they vote.