About The Index

Grand Traverse Regional Readiness Index

Grand Traverse is one of Michigan’s fastest-growing regions, and that growth is set to continue. Grand Traverse County has grown 25% over the past 25 years and nearly 150% since 1970, and the four-county Traverse City metro grew more than three times as fast as Michigan over the last decade. State projections show the same pace ahead: the county is expected to grow 5.5% by 2035, against 1.5% for Michigan as a whole. Growth on this scale is a real opportunity for our economy, and making the most of it depends on being ready: local governments working together across boundaries, current plans and zoning, infrastructure capacity in place ahead of demand, the tools to support businesses, and housing supply that keeps pace. Communities that prepare now will shape where and how growth happens and protect the character that makes this region attractive to residents, workers, and investment. Traverse Connect is here to help, working alongside local units of government as a partner to strengthen their readiness and prepare for the growth ahead.

GT County · Past 25 yrs

+25%

Nearly +150% since 1970

TC MSA · Past 10 yrs

+5.6%

3x+ Michigan's +1.7%

GT County · Projected

+3.2%2030+5.5%2035

Michigan: +1.1% / +1.5%

TC MSA · Projected

+2.9%2030+4.9%2035

3x+ Michigan's pace by 2035

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau (MSA: 2014 to 2024, Vintage 2024 estimates); projections from MCDA County Population Projections through 2050, measured from 2025. TC MSA = Grand Traverse, Benzie, Kalkaska & Leelanau counties.

This tool tracks the Regional Readiness Index for Grand Traverse County and each of its 16 cities, townships, and villages, using a transparent, evidence-based rubric. It exists to give elected officials and private sector leaders clear information and to inform the joint efforts of local units of government and Traverse Connect to prioritize projects, develop technical assistance, and direct investment. Every score traces back to cited public records, with flagged items where the evidence is incomplete or a finding is a judgment call.

Maintained by Traverse Connect · Updated as new public records surface

▲ outperforming ▬ pacing ▼ underperforming

Performance based on readiness score, size, and capacity

Priorities 1 to 5

Top 5 Recommendations

Near-term moves with the highest payoff, ranked in order.

1Confirm EPIC-GT interoperability directly with participating jurisdictions, or migrate to BS&A, by defined checkpointsDecision needed · High impact

Who leads Grand Traverse County

Grand Traverse County reports incremental progress toward EPIC-GT adoption. By April 30, 2027, the county should publish a jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction interoperability and adoption timeline developed with the participating townships. By December 31, 2027, it should either confirm full adoption across all 16 jurisdictions or, if functionality is still an issue, consider moving to BS&A or a similar platform.

2Build a countywide planning, zoning, and permitting coordination table, anchored by the new Community Development DepartmentHigher effort · High impact

Who leads Grand Traverse County, with all local units

By June 30, 2027, the new Community Development Department should convene a standing, voluntary coordination table, with participating jurisdictions and a shared work plan named at that point, where jurisdictions align zoning updates, share planning and permitting staff and data, and adopt electronic permitting together. Local units should use it to extend models that already work rather than replanning their own edges in isolation, with transportation investment following the shared land-use work.

3Formalize PA 425 and joint-service agreements in Kingsley/Paradise and the Fife Lakes, with county facilitationFast · High impact

Who leads Kingsley, Paradise, and the Fife Lakes, with county facilitation

Kingsley sits entirely inside Paradise Township; a joint planning commission plus shared assessing or public works would keep the two from zoning the same edges in opposite directions. Fife Lake Village and Township already share a sewer authority and a zoning administrator, and the next step is a written interlocal agreement with clear cost sharing, with consolidation still worth revisiting after the August 2026 vote fell short. The county should ask both pairs by March 31, 2027 whether they want to pursue a PA 425 pilot, and begin a defined facilitation role within 90 days of confirmed interest.

4Coordinate the east and west corridorsHigher effort · High impact

Who leads Green Lake and Blair (west); East Bay, Acme, and Whitewater (east)

The west corridor (US-31 from Interlochen through Chums Corner in Blair Township) and the east corridor (East Bay's US-31 shoreline through Acme and along M-72 toward the Kalkaska County line) are each being planned node by node. Each needs one coordinated effort, through a shared corridor authority or service agreement, covering water and sewer feasibility, access management, and placemaking.

5Stand up a proactive business community engagement functionFast · Medium impact

Who leads Local units, with business partners

Business Climate scores reflect the tools a jurisdiction uses, but the business community has documented concerns that local commissions and staff aren't receptive to its needs. An ombudsman-style function, whether housed at Traverse Connect, the local MTA group, or elsewhere, should actively seek out business feedback and give businesses one consistent channel for both general concerns and jurisdiction-specific disputes.

Priorities 6 to 8

Tier 2: Longer-Term Structural Changes

Bigger governance and service changes with structural payoff. They take longer, so the groundwork should start now.

6Modernize and expand the DPW into a full countywide utilitySlower · Structural payoff

Who leads County BPW and member jurisdictions

The county DPW is limited and under strain. Expand it into the full countywide water and sewer authority its enabling statute already allows. Garfield, East Bay, Acme, and Traverse City have standing to push the governance review forward, and Blair, which owns its own water and sewer outright, is the clearest next member.

7Coordinate a joint PA 425 corridor tax-sharing frameworkSlower · Structural payoff

Who leads Traverse City with Garfield, East Bay, Blair, Acme, and Long Lake

Garfield, East Bay, Blair, Acme, and Long Lake should build one PA 425 conditional-transfer and revenue-sharing framework with Traverse City for corridor sites instead of separate one-off deals. The point is sharing the corridor's tax base and coordinating growth, not utility access, which all five already have.

8Pursue a countywide fire and EMS authority, sub-regional consolidation as the fallbackSlower · Structural payoff

Who leads County and local fire and EMS providers

A countywide fire and EMS authority, extending the model Metro Fire (Garfield, Acme, and East Bay) already proved, would spread staffing and equipment costs across the widest possible base and give Traverse City a coordinated alternative to building its own ambulance service. Southern and western sub-regional authorities are the fallback.

Recommendations are ranked by priority, weighing effort and impact, not by jurisdiction size · Reviewed periodically as underlying facts change

About The Index

Benchmark Criteria

Grand Traverse County

Michigan Peer County Comparison

5 Categories: Equal Weight (20% each)

How the Readiness Score Works

Recommendations

Top 5 Recommendations

Tier 2: Longer-Term Structural Changes

Michigan Examples

National Peer Benchmarking