Ann Arbor voters will be asked in November to approve tax increase for sidewalk repairs
Ann Arbor officials will ask voters in November to approve an increase in the city's street reconstruction millage — raising the levy from 2 to 2.125 mills.
The extra $563,000 from that increase, city officials say, would be dedicated to a new sidewalk repair program that shifts responsibility away from homeowners and back to the city.
The Ann Arbor City Council voted unanimously Thursday night to place two related proposals on the November ballot. The first asks voters to renew the city's existing 2-mill tax for street and bridge reconstruction work from 2012 through 2016.
The second asks for approval of an additional 0.125 mills for sidewalk repairs. Adoption of the second proposal will be contingent on the successful passage of the first proposal.
The city will take on the responsibility of paying for sidewalk repairs from now on if voters approve a tax increase in November.
Photo courtesy of city of Ann Arbor
Renewal of the existing 2-mill tax would bring in an estimated $9.1 million in the first year. It amounts to $214 in taxes annually for a property with an average market value of $214,000.
Homayoon Pirooz, head of the city's project management unit, said the additional 0.125-mill levy translates to about $13.37 in new taxes for a property with an average market value.
The council decided Thursday night that the proposed sidewalk repair program would cover sidewalks adjacent to all properties on the city's tax roll except for those within the Downtown Development Authority district that are not single- and two-family units.
Along with state and federal funds, the city's street millage has been the principal funding source for resurfacing and reconstruction of the city's streets and bridges for three decades.
In 1988, 1991, 1996, 2001 and 2006, Ann Arbor voters approved the collection of 2 mills annually for the resurfacing and reconstruction of streets. Those millages replaced a prior street millage of 1.5 mills, prior bond issues and general funds for local streets.
If the sidewalk millage passes, Pirooz said, city staff would oversee the new program. The intent would be to continue with a five-year evaluation and repair program where 20 percent of sidewalks would be evaluated in each calendar year, with repairs to follow, he said.
Ryan J. Stanton covers government and politics for AnnArbor.com. Reach him at ryanstanton@annarbor.com or 734-623-2529. You also can follow him on Twitter or subscribe to AnnArbor.com's e-mail newsletters.
Comments
Morris
Mon, Aug 29, 2011 : 7:30 p.m.
What about those of us in Bromley who have been forced twice in very recent years to pay hundreds of dollars out of our own pockets to make some questionable along with warranted sidewalk repairs? Equity would indicate that we should either be reimbursed or at the least exempted from the assessment if it is approved.
joe baublis
Sun, Aug 7, 2011 : 1:28 p.m.
This illustrates why the voters need more choices and should re-consider the single party system that restricts new ideas. In other words, even if a person has great ideas for resolving public issues, the idea is rejected unless that person is allied with the democrat party. For example, this year 3 people - Eric Scheie, David Parker, and Stuwart Berry - are running for positions in city council and yet the Ann Arbor League of Women Voters has rejected each of them from the public forum debate and Annarbor.com doesn't even report their names but claims they have no chance to win. Their personal merits were not even considered. When I was confronted by the city administration to comply with their orders to replace sidewalk, I demanded a due process hearing under city code chapter 47. It was my claim that city sidewalks are public property and that public improvements require a public vote and the costs of public improvements cannot be assigned to individuals- regardless of where they live - on the theory that every tax payer must share equally in the cost of public improvements. The hearing officials appeared to be 2 repairmen and claimed that their authority to force nearby homeowners to pay for sidewalk replacement arose from the ADA (Americans with Disability Act) and 28CFR36 (Code of Federal Regulations), their city zoning code that requires homeowners to "maintain" their sidewalk, and a zoning ordinance amendment that was approved by the all-democrat city council that required homeowners to be "liable" to the city for accidents on city sidewalks. But the City is wrong. Sidewalk maintenance means shoveling snow, and 28CFR36 was meant to apply to office buildings and train and bus stations. And despite what the democrats on city council approved, assignment of liability in a negligence case entitles the defendant to a jury trial , a constitutional right. It's time for Ann Arbor to consider new ideas because the democrat party methods ha
Basic Bob
Sat, Aug 6, 2011 : 1:49 p.m.
Is it odd how many people posting here own rental property in the city, and were all forced by the city to fix their sidewalks?
amlive
Sat, Aug 6, 2011 : 2:34 a.m.
Yes, it irks me a bit to know that I paid to have mine done a few years ago, and will now be paying for neighbors who neglected to do theirs. At the time the city threatened that if homeowners did not repair the marked areas by a certain date, then the city would have their contractors do it (which would likely come at higher cost) and bill it to the property owners. Of course several homes on both sides of mine and across the street didn't do anything, and neither did the city, and now they may be able to get it done out of city funds. Yes, this bugs me a bit. Still, in the end I think it will be a good idea, and should happen sooner or later. Maybe I'll feel like I got shafted this time around, but so be it. There was so much complaining when the city told homeowners they had to pay for it themselves, that I can see why they want to make this change. I probably would have supported it before I paid for my own repairs, and I guess I have to admit that opposing it now would be largely just out of spite. I'm not happy about the fact that I already paid for my own out of my own pocket when apparently I could have just waited, but I think I'll probably vote for it anyway.
buildergirl
Mon, Aug 29, 2011 : 6:54 p.m.
To my knowledge, and this is from my neighborhood, those who didn't fix them as they were suppose to are being fixed by the city and billed at a premium rate much higher than what many of us paid. Hopefully the new tax will address the future problems. My concern is the city park's poorly maintained sidewalk next to my house. My slab is fine but the blacktop running up to it is a mess and that isn't fixed.
Jim Clarkson
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 7:08 p.m.
"The first asks voters to renew the city's existing 2-mill tax for street and bridge reconstruction work from 2012 through 2016." Yet the Stadium bridge is still broken, now they want more money so they can not fix the sidewalks. Will the city reimburse the homeowners that already shelled out money to fix their sidewalks under the current guidlines? But hey, the mayor thinks we need more art, so things are going well.
Mike K
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 6:03 p.m.
The mayor needs money for public art. Wow.
Carole
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 5:57 p.m.
Absolutely no new taxes -- the city have squandered the funds that they have already received. Close down DDA and the city fathers probably could afford to pay for repairs around the city.
Haran Rashes
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 5:24 p.m.
On another note, is anyone else a little suspicious that Council would vote to put this on the ballot AFTER the primary election. The incumbents who were being challenged clearly dodged the "he or she voted to raise taxes" argument from their now defeated primary opponents through their convenient timing of this vote.
Haran Rashes
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 5:22 p.m.
Not only did many of us have to shell out thousands to repair our own sidewalks, but what about those of us without sidewalks or those of us in condo complexes or communities with private streets and sidewalks. This proposed tax burden will be imposed on us, but with very little if any benefit. For those who say we will benefit by walking on sidewalks, sidewalks remain the property of the property owner who probably just paid to fix them in the past few years. Will such a millage remove the liability from slip and falls or other hazards on the sidewalks from the property owner to the city as well? I doubt it.
2WheelsGood
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 7:11 p.m.
Good question. I own a condo, and I own a house on a dirt road with no sidewalks. I'm about to get screwed on both.
grye
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 4:38 p.m.
All the sidewalks should have been repaired over the past several years. The city systematically went through each neighborhood identifying slabs that needed repair. Now that the process of going through the city should be starting over, it makes sense to have everyone pay into a repair fund to cover the cost for all city owned sidewalks. You many complain now but when you need to have repairs made to slabs that will need replacing in the future, you won't have to shell out $350 per slab. This makes sense and rids that old system of its inequality for corner homes. If this doesn't pass, guess I'll put up a toll booth for those wishing to use the sidewalk in front of my house. The tolls could be saved for future repairs.
Kk Ichikawa
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 4:25 p.m.
...next up, a move to increase the Parks millage by 2 mills (Parks bucket, and more likely than any other millage increase to be approved by City voters) which would free up 2 mills of General Fund money (different bucket) for more philanthropy and pet projects. Oh wait, that hasn't been announced by the City yet?? Nevermind, just a rumor then!
bctoo
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 3:46 p.m.
Good luck trying to solve a community's problems with the many cuts approach. I see this as the city taking responsibility for sidewalks when in fact it should be responsible for sidewalks. As a citizen currently responsible for my sidewalks I'll vote a resounding yes. It regularizes my contribution to the problem and avoids financial surprises from the city inspector, and, I hope it will result in more sidewalk repairs.
LA
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 2:43 p.m.
We had to replace 16 slabs! And I am now unemployed. Will I be reimbursed??
Craig Lounsbury
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 2:41 p.m.
Right now I would probably vote yes, even though I replaced 3 slabs 2-3 years ago. I didn't replace 5 other slabs. I also walk my dogs on a route where I see dozens of slabs replaced when I did mine that are cracking due to the city owned tree right in front of them. A couple of those 2-3 year old slabs have lifted along the crack enough that they would qualify for replacement under the criteria used. The failure is due to the root system of a city owned tree.
Craig Lounsbury
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 5:17 p.m.
"So you figure the sidewalks are going to be any better once the city maintains them?" Nope, I'm just willing to buying sidewalk insurance for 13 bucks a year. There was nothing wrong with the 3 slabs they made me change as far as I'm concerned. And they made me change them because their tree roots lifted or cracked them. Their tree will do it again I'm sure. So the insurance is cheap for me.
2WheelsGood
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 4:31 p.m.
Then by your logic wouldn't it make sense for the city to own your driveway too? Then they can fix it and shovel it too. Oh, and as for the privately owned roads... I would support that. Perhaps you haven't driven around AA lately, but the roads are absolutely dreadful. So you figure the sidewalks are going to be any better once the city maintains them?
Craig Lounsbury
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 3:47 p.m.
No I don't think I'll move to a condo, I'll just vote on the proposal. I don't have a problem with democracy in action. If you show up to vote we'll just cancel each other out. Now to the flaw in your argument. I own my lawn (me and the bank) its my responsibility to mow it because I own it. But I don't own the sidewalk the city owns the sidewalk. So you see I don't want somebody else to take care of my responsibility I want them to stop jamming their responsibility on to my shoulders. To use your argument lets eliminate the tax and everyone be responsible for the road in front of their house too.
2WheelsGood
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 3:13 p.m.
While we're at it, why don't we just up the taxes a bit more and have them mow everybody's lawn. Maybe a bit more and have them take care of shoveling the driveways. Sounds like YOU should move to a condo if you want someone else to take care of YOUR responsibilities.
Laura J
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 2:40 p.m.
This is a joke, right??
racerx
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 2:36 p.m.
What happens to the homeowner who has already paid for their sidewalks repair? And now a tax? I won't ask how this is even fair. The tax is more than the average cost of the repair? Will this tax that is collected be sorely used for sidewalk repair? In this town, of course not! Sue McCormick came up with this original idea, and her mantra is to tax as much as she can, and collect as much as she should through increased water rates. This is the same person who wanted to (probably still does) wanted to tax downtown business for street lights. When this didn't fly her next suggestion was for residents. Guess if the city can't pass a income tax, they have now found other ways. What if a homeowner doesn't want a sidewalk in front of their home. Does this exclude them from the tax? Or, how about those homes that doesn't have sidewalks. Good grief Ann Arbor. What has become of her.
aa1940
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 2:23 p.m.
What about the numerous homes that have no sidewalk ? Shouldn't they have to contribute ?
a2susan
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 4:21 p.m.
I hope they are taxed at the same rate. There are 4 houses across the street from me that don't have sidewalks, and every single resident of those homes uses the one in front of my house, which cost us about $500. the last time some of the sections were replaced.
Robot Charles
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 2 p.m.
The more taxes placed upon Ann Arbor home owners the more people will move to other surrounding communities. I'm voting no on this millage no matter how small it is.
Bill
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 1:59 p.m.
The vote is not just the .125 increase, it is to renew the existing 2.0 mills. Voting no will eliminate this tax. Let the City Council start by revising the ordiances and eliminate the public art fund. Once the City Council is willing to make decisions based on the voice of the people who put them into office, then and only then, should any new or extensions to taxes be considered. Citizens need to unite and make their voices hear at each and every council meeting as well as in the polls. The city council must stop wasting tax payer money and stop developing excuses why the monies are not able to be spent in other categories.
Roy Munson
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 1:34 p.m.
It is the liberal way. "Spread the wealth around" after all the responsible people already took care of their sidewalks on their own. How long will it take for you people to learn and stop voting these people into office?
David Paris
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 3:21 p.m.
Oh please! So only Liberal communities tax their citizenry to pay for sidewalks because their voters are just leeches on their neighbors, while only responsible Neocon communities don't collect taxes for sidewalk maintenance because they have responsible citizens that maintain them out of their good responsible graces. Now I get it.
carush
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 1:12 p.m.
I suppose I'm going to get a tax rebate for the $1100 dollars I spent last June for the sidewalk sections outside of my house? (One of which was smashed into pieces when the City removed a tree)? Didn't think so. Go ahead and fix the sidewalks -- and slap a property tax lien assessments onto the property owners -- or let them fix their own. It is a GROSS INJUSTIC to levy these costs on some homeowners (based on the arbitrary way the City decided which sectors to focus on and when) and THEN change course and tax those same homeowners AGAIN to provide the same thing free to everyone else at the taxpayers' expense. Disparate treatment violates due process of law. Let's fix the streets, huh? There is a rift growing down the middle of Geddes/Fuller that has been getting wider 2" every year. Half the street is following gravity down towards the river. And I've been driving the left-turn lane of eastbound Glacier Way east of Green for 3 years because my car can't handle the actual traffic lane which has so many tiny scoops of asphalt patches on top of patches that it is actually worse than a washboard gravel road. Maybe this should be more of a priority than sidewalk socialism or a new fancy-schmancy transit center?
Trevor Staples
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 1:08 p.m.
As many of you know, I proudly hang my liberal banner out for all to see. However, I'll be voting against the added sidewalk millage. It's not that I don't agree with paying taxes. The problem is that individual homeowners were forced to repair their sidewalks at their own expense, meanwhile "someone" is responsible for the sidewalks near the railroad trestles that are in complete disrepair, but they are given a pass. Do these businesses somehow have leverage so that they don't have to pay for their repairs, and now they'll benefit from public money? Funny, I tweeted about it (with pictures) just yesterday: <a href="http://twitter.com/#" rel='nofollow'>http://twitter.com/#</a>!/trevorstaples/statuses/99181250505474048
David Paris
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 12:55 p.m.
"Homayoon Pirooz, head of the city's project management unit, said the additional 0.125-mill levy translates to about $13.37 in new taxes for a property with an average market value." I know this sounds ridiculous, but I'll pat $13.37 per year, instead of $250 every five years. Not only that, but I'd never heard of home owners being responsible for their own sidewalks until I moved to Ann Arbor... screw that! Not only that (part 2) I have a neighbor who lives on the corner and had to replace eleven squares two years ago, put that in your calculator!
drewk
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 12:45 p.m.
Since all of the sidewalks have been repaired (supposedly), why the new urgent need to increase taxes.? Why not wait five or ten years for when they will need repairs again?
Veracity
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 12:38 p.m.
The sidewalk repair program has been in place for years. What remains to be fixed? Where is the list of sidewalks needing replacement that will justify the $0.125 millage increase let alone the basic $2.0 millage? I am also concerned that the fund can be raided and moneys used for unrelated projects favored by City Council. Will language attached to the millage prevent this from happening?
Diagenes
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 12:29 p.m.
I love the timing of this announcement. Now that the same old crowd gets re-elected they drop this on us. Responsible home owners played by the rules and fixed their sidewalks. Instead of punishing the people who failed to follow the rules, city council says thats ok lets just raise taxes and we will fix them for you. And to you, the law abiding citizen, thanks for your shared sacrifice. Voted Dem last Tuesday? How's that working for you?
PSJ
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 12:27 p.m.
Did I miss the part about the tax credit for those of us that have already shelled out hundreds to replace the sidewalks in front of our homes?
Lets Get Real
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 1:35 p.m.
You are absolutely right - my bill was $1200. That would be a nice credit against my property tax bill - which did not go down even though my property value decreased by nearly 1/3. Effecient operation is not the hallmark of government. Recent interactions have proved the caliber and professionalism of the people who work in the city and county offices. In a town with highly educated people who think they are so sophisticated and cosmopolitan, so visionary and entrepreneurial, I've seen some of the most disgusting, rude, unprofessional behavior you can imagine. DO NOT GIVE CONTROL OF THE QUALITY OF YOUR PROPERTY'S CARE TO THE GOVERNMENT
63Townie
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 12:27 p.m.
No, no, no and no. A tax increase for something some residents already paid for? Are they going to refund those who already paid for repairs? What's coming out of city hall is ridiculous at best. The mayor and every council member who supports nonsense like this should be voted out.
Arboriginal
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 12:07 p.m.
Gee, I wonder if that tree in the photo had anything to do with the uneven sidewalk. When our "mayor" admits the sidewalks get wrecked by tree roots from trees that the city planted, he and his cronies get a no vote from me! Every time.
keepitbalanced
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 12:03 p.m.
To break this down into dollars and cents; this proposal would end up costing the homeowner much, much more in the long run. We went through this 2 years ago in our neighborhood. We had to replace 3 slabs at a cost of $125.00 each. That neighborhood will not come due for another manadatory sidewalk repair for 10 years or more! I would end up paying over 2,000 in increased taxes for what would cost me less than $400.00 (on average).
lynel
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 1:02 p.m.
Where are you getting the $2000 over the next ten years?
Gill
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 12:01 p.m.
I wouldn't ask for private rental inspections. They would be paid per inspection rather than just getting a paycheck, so it would be in the private inspectors interest to fail you as many times as possible. Also, don't forget that the $100 covers someone scheduling a time for us, sending us a letter, the inspector driving out, doing an inspection, going back, writing a report, and getting the certification. More than just one person involved in all of this I would imagine.
mw
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 7:04 p.m.
City inspectors have the same incentives -- more failures -> more work -> more job security. And if you had a choice of private inspectors, they would also have an incentive to play fair (because nobody would use the inspection company that failed everybody several times just to generate business). The city inspectors are a monopoly -- they face no competition.
MjC
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 11:56 a.m.
It will pass. Less than 10% of the citizens will vote it in, just wait and see. Time for all homeowners to make sure their property assessments are correct; especially now that we're headed into a double-dip recession and home values dropped so significantly.
Jon Saalberg
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 11:56 a.m.
I predict this millage will lose by at least 3 to 1. Really, Council? You think the many, many people who have already shelled out $$ to pay for our sidewalk slabs are now going to pay for the rest who have not? NO.
mtlaurel
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 11:49 a.m.
NO: Let's deal with my street. A crew comes to fill in cracks with the black asphalt mixture-the street looks horrible..more cracks keep happening anyway. I've mentionned to them the awkward drop at the curb where an ice dam occurrs every year-and with very little snow removal, cars slip and the mail truck gets stuck in the winter. It is dangerous...Recently they have been installing speed bumps on the other end of the street with huge white arrows-what for? There are not many children residing here, no one has complained about speeders.How much are these speed bumps costing, that no one asked for...There is no sidewalk in my neighborhood.....I will vote NO.. the street is a mess here and they choose ?SPEED BUMPS? Had enuf.
Tony Livingston
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 11:32 a.m.
While the thought of someone else taking care of sidewalks is appealing, the memories of how poorly this program has been handled by the city send up a huge red flag. Owning several places in Ann Arbor, I have plenty of experience with the city and their sidewalk and rental inspection programs. They just don't seem to be able to train people, supervise people, or do anything for a price that is anywhere close to what the private sector charges. If the city handles it, the costs will be double or triple what homeowners pay now. The city charges $100 for a rental property inspection that takes 15 minutes. I can't even imagine what it will cost if they actually do something like replace a sidewalk slab!
cette
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 11:15 a.m.
That's a no vote from me...after they made so many homeowners pay for the improvements? At 200+ year, what a scam. I think not.
sbbuilder
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 11:11 a.m.
What about all of us homeowners who have already shelled out hundreds of dollars to fix our own sidewalks? Eh? Now we're being asked to pay for others' as well? I don't think so. The folks in my neighborhood who have gone through this debacle already are rightfully incenced with the callous regard of council. Three guesses on how I'll vote....
Hunterjim
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 5:54 p.m.
Dito! Have 4 houses with sidewalks we paid for already....City will probably use the money to build more super bike paths to no where.... No No NO!!!!!
2WheelsGood
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 2:45 p.m.
To what end, Craig? So I guess we should just pool all our money together for everything. Worked well for the Soviet Union, eh?
Craig Lounsbury
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 2:33 p.m.
"And what about people like me who own two places, neither of which have sidewalks? Why do I have to pay for people who do?" maybe for the same reason we all chip in for schools, roads, airports, buses, university's, bridges.....
2WheelsGood
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 1:55 p.m.
And what about people like me who own two places, neither of which have sidewalks? Why do I have to pay for people who do?
David Paris
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 12:45 p.m.
It would only make sense, should the vote pass, for the city to prorate the tax so that a homeowner would not start paying the tax until the five years after they replaced their own sidewalk.
HappySenior
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 11:02 a.m.
So, first the city removed sidewalks from their to-do list and put the expense on the property owner. Then they did a survey at tax expense to find slabs out of kilter or crumbling. Then they told the property owners they were required to replace the slabs. Now they want to add sidewalks back to the city's to-do list but add a millage to pay for it. This is another short-change slight-of-hand scam. Nothing stops the city from reshuffling money from its original stated purpose to one of their "special interest" projects. Vote no on the millage renewal. Vote no on all new taxes. Vote out the current council members on the ballot. Start recruiting better candidates for local offices.
Stephen Lange Ranzini
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 10:59 a.m.
This special millage would create a dedicated fund and a new separate account. In other words, they want to build a new "bucket"! Why are we creating new buckets instead of asking the voters for help with draining the ones we've already got? This is exactly how we ended up with $250 million in cash in the city's hands, but not enough money for police, firefighters and other basic services. The strategy is all wrong.
snoopdog
Sat, Aug 6, 2011 : 4:23 a.m.
Because your leaders are a bunch of dingbats Stephen and you know it ! Gathering all the media from A2.com over the past two years should tell you this ? Good Day
Goober
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 10:42 a.m.
A unanimous vote last night to ask for more money. When are we going to get smart, as Ann Arbor residents and replace all of city council?
tdw
Fri, Aug 5, 2011 : 10:28 a.m.
Sorry,I just started laughing A2 wants a tax increase, what a surprise ! Do you think that they could take the parts from a few old fire engines and mix them with some sidewalk concrete and make art ?