9 people vying for 2 seats in Vermilion Twp.

This week, the Register is publishing news stories about contested races in various Erie County-based townships: • Monday: Groton Township • Tuesday: Margaretta Township • Wednesday: Milan Township • Today: Vermilion Township Note: Coverage on the other contested township race, in Perkins, previously received attention, including with a debate this past week. Editor's note: Joseph Jones is a Register correspondent representing vermiliondaily.com. VERMILION TWP. — In Vermilion Township, nine people seek two open township trustee seats. The top two vote-getters in this race each receive four-year terms, starting in January. Two incumbents, Kurt Johnson and Don Rowe, seek re-election. The seven challengers — Charles Hall, Tom Krukemeyer, Katie Lalonde, Nancy Sauer, Keith Sexton, Joseph Trinter and Malcolm Williams —all want to win a seat as well. Other than Sexton, the other eight candidates all answered a pair of pressing questions many community members seek clarity ahead heading into the Nov. 4 election: Q: Beyond the trustee's race, another issue Vermilion Township voters will see on the fall ballot involves raising taxes to support fire operations. Do you support the levy? • Hall: I want to start by expressing my full support and appreciation for our township fire department. That said, before voting, I think residents deserve a clear understanding of how the additional funds will be used, what specific needs the department is facing and whether other funding options have been explored. Transparency and accountability are essential when asking taxpayers to contribute more, even for a vital service like fire protection. • Johnson: The levy is on the ballot. We support the decision-making being in the hands of the voters. It is a fair assumption that we all agree our fire department provides vital and lifesaving services that our township cannot do without. That it needed to be brought to the voters who are facing higher taxes and shrinking finances was important. If the levy passes, our fire department can maintain equipment, staffing and quick response times residents rely on. If it fails, costs will fall directly on residents, which is always more expensive in the long run. • Krukemeyer: I 100% support our first responders and fire/EMS. The levy that has been proposed, in my opinion, is not written correctly. Once elected trustee, I would work with the fire department to craft a better-written levy by learning more about township needs. I would propose a smaller levy that includes sharing resources from surrounding communities. (Paying) $175 per $100,000 for a homeowner is too much to ask for at once. • Lalonde: I support the fire levy being placed on the ballot in November. I feel it's great to give the residents a voice on this issue. • Rowe: Current trustees, like myself, can't campaign for or against the levy, but we can explain what happens either way. If it passes, the township can maintain and improve its current level of fire and EMS protection. If it fails, residents could face longer response times and higher personal and insurance costs in an emergency event. We believe the levy question is best left to the residents and how they decide to cast their votes. • Sauer: I have my concerns about the fire levy. Like many residents on a fixed income, I'm concerned about whether I can afford the increase in my taxes. However, I do think it's necessary for our fire department. We have an aging population that cannot wait in a medical emergency. • Trinter: Yes, I support the fire levy. I trust that the fire department determined that this is truly the funding level needed to continue service going forward. Providing our own EMS service is just as important, if not more so, in the future. I'm afraid that the almost tripling of the levy at once is going to be a large ask, and we might have to go back to the drawing board if it fails. • Williams: I do not support it at this time. We just had the largest property tax increase ever, and now everyone is asking for more money. Where did this increase go? Q: Development is coming rapidly to Vermilion Township with several new subdivisions and projects already underway. How would you approach managing this growth, particularly in terms of infrastructure, traffic and the use of township resources? • Hall: The township must take a proactive and accountable approach. New developments should not be approved without comprehensive stormwater management plans verified by independent engineers. Developers should contribute to road widening and traffic control improvements to ensure sustainable growth. • Johnson: Growth is happening even when we do nothing. We must be prepared to manage it responsibly before it arrives. Roads, drainage and township services need to be ready to meet increasing demand before any new homes are built. Developers should cover their share of the costs that includes all infrastructure needs. • Krukemeyer: Vermilion Township must ensure new developers pay for infrastructure improvements, conduct traffic surveys and implement safe traffic patterns. We should follow examples, like Strongsville and Columbia Station, where developers funded necessary infrastructure as part of responsible growth. • Lalonde: When it comes to growth within the township, we need to be diligent. We should work closely with all entities including the county, zoning board and state to ensure our voice is heard and concerns addressed. • Rowe: You can't just give tax breaks away to large-scale developers. You must negotiate, stand your ground and fight for the residents and the needs of our community. The current trustee team is already solving problems and working together for the township's future needs. • Sauer: Development is needed for our township to be prosperous. Trustees have a responsibility to decide which projects fit the community to keep our small-town charm and bring in the best tax revenue. (Ohio) 60 north of (Ohio) 2 will be too congested. We must study and plan accordingly. • Trinter: Growth must be managed where it fits. There are limited areas of the township where large developments can even be considered. Infrastructure improvements should fall on the developer, not taxpayers. Once permits are handled, the township should be out of the picture unless the building department returns. • Williams: We need to ensure existing infrastructure can handle growth and expand accordingly. The township must work with the counties and state to develop a long-term plan to upgrade aging infrastructure for the future.