Cascade Charter Township presents draft 2026 budget with $15 million CIP placeholder; board seeks clearer public disclosure

Cascade Charter Township staff on Tuesday presented a draft 2026 budget that projects about $7.6 million in total revenues and roughly $7.45 million in expenditures and includes a $15 million placeholder in the capital improvement plan connected to a Downtown Development Authority project.

The budget presentation focused on revenue drivers, personnel and benefits costs, and proposed changes to internal cost allocation. Staff described taxable-value growth and new construction as major revenue contributors and noted the township could add a 1% tax-administration fee on tax bills; staff estimated that fee could generate about $808,000 if levied. The township is awaiting final taxable-value figures from the assessor in April, staff said, and cautioned that state receipts—referred to in the presentation as the Local Community Stabilization receipts—may not align with local valuations.

Why this matters: The $15 million entry in the capital improvement plan (CIP) drew the most substantive board discussion because it represents the largest single placeholder in the draft budget and is tied to a DDA-led project. Several board members said they want the budget document to show clearer public-facing language about the placeholder—for example, an asterisk or explanatory note indicating the line is a planning placeholder and that final costs, funding sources and any bonding decisions will come later.

Among other items, staff described: - A proposed centralization of information-technology services into a single IT department to replace payments now split across the general fund, fire fund and building-inspection fund; staff said that would improve cost visibility and make it easier to hire or scale IT staffing and to allocate IT costs consistently across funds. - Personnel and benefit assumptions that use conservative health-insurance projections and a near-flat headcount approach; staff noted legacy defined-benefit pension obligations managed through MERS and discussed annual payment pressures tied to actuarial assumptions. - Changes in the cost-allocation plan that move more administrative costs into a direct charge for service rather than transfers, which increases some "other services and charges" lines while reducing transfer-out lines in the draft compared with prior years.

Board members asked for specific clarifications and next steps. Several trustees said they prefer that large, multi‑million-dollar placeholders be visible in the annual budget so residents can see them and ask questions during the budget-review period; one board member said, "I would rather be much more transparent with the public," and proposed showing a limited or asterisked amount in the document while preserving the board's ability to refine and approve final project budgets later. Staff said the CIP entry is a planning placeholder and that detailed project designs, cost estimates and any required bond or contract approvals would return to the board before work begins.

Staff also flagged revenue-category shifts: licenses and permits are projected to decline in part because of lower franchise/cable fees, state and federal grants (including Local Community Stabilization receipts) are expected to be flat or lower in some lines, and charges for services (including cemetery care and water/sewer hookup fees) are variable depending on development activity. Staff noted accounting rules requiring investments to be marked to market, which introduces volatility in forecasted investment income.

No formal vote was taken on the draft budget during the meeting. Staff said they will update numbers and bring back refined figures, including clearer budget documentation for the CIP entry and more detailed cost allocations for IT and assessing-related contracts.

The board directed staff to return with updated figures and clearer public-facing language on the CIP placeholder before any bonding or final spending decisions are made.