Like many residents, I believe public transportation is an important service for our community. Seniors, veterans, individuals with disabilities and others depend upon it for medical appointments, groceries, work and maintaining their independence. If the facts show that these essential services would truly be lost without additional taxpayer support, my vote would be yes. That is why I believe voters deserve clear, complete and timely information before making an eight-year commitment.

The signs placed throughout Delta County sending messages like “if transit ends, lives will end” and “no millages – No DATA” are highly visible. Many people understandably interpret these statements to mean our most vulnerable neighbors will lose every single transportation option, or that the agency will vanish entirely if this countywide proposal fails. If that is truly the case, the public deserves to hear those specific facts directly from DATA administration. At the same time, if current city and township services will actually continue under existing frameworks while other community transportation resources remain available, voters deserve to understand that side of the ledger as well.

The question is not whether these residents matter — they absolutely do. The question is how we best meet those needs in a way that is effective, sustainable, and fair to taxpayers throughout the entire county. What services remain if the proposal fails? What specific services would be added if it passes? Distinguishing between maintaining essential services and expanding them would help the public make an informed choice.

Public transit agencies already provide operational and ridership information to state and federal agencies. Sharing local data in a clear format would help citizens understand current usage, unmet needs, and how the proposed changes affect different communities across the county. Bringing additional state and federal dollars back into Delta County is a positive goal, but that alone should not determine whether every property owner takes on an additional tax burden.

Before asking taxpayers for more support, we should also consider whether stronger coordination among existing resources could help. Veterans’ transportation programs, Medicaid services, senior organizations, volunteer efforts, and private providers already play important roles. Working together may help us find solutions that strengthen essential services while minimizing additional costs.

Another question that deserves discussion is timing. The Menominee-Delta-Schoolcraft Transit Efficiency and Regionalization Study, being conducted through CUPPAD, is examining regional transportation needs and efficiencies. The findings from that independent study are expected later this year. Waiting for those recommendations is not opposition to public transportation; it is simply a desire to make decisions with the benefit of comprehensive data.

If essential services are truly at risk, the public deserves to know exactly what those services are and why additional funding is necessary to preserve them. If the proposal is primarily about expanding service, voters deserve to understand who will benefit and whether it represents the best use of taxpayer resources. Open communication and complete information will help every voter make a decision based on facts rather than fear or assumptions.