Major changes to residential trash collection being considered as Ann Arbor faces budget deficit
Ann Arbor officials are considering major changes in residential trash collection services in response to a projected solid waste deficit of more than $500,000 by 2017.
Outsourcing residential trash pickup to a private hauler, picking up trash every other week and providing residential curbside collection on one side of the street only are among the options discussed Monday night during a special work session of the Ann Arbor City Council.
Council members heard a report from Tom McMurtrie, Ann Arbor's solid waste coordinator, in which he said increasing deficits are expected in the city's solid waste fund in the coming years. He noted the projections do not include capital funding for a multimillion-dollar replacement of the city's drop-off recycling station (See related story).
"The solid waste millage revenue has recently decreased," McMurtrie said. "It is now at the same level roughly that it was in fiscal year 2007."
Mayor John Hieftje downplayed the significance of the funding shortfall, saying cutting $500,000 from a $14 million solid waste budget by 2017 isn't a big problem.
File photo
Mayor John Hieftje downplayed the significance of the funding shortfall, saying cutting $500,000 from a $14 million solid waste budget by 2017 isn't a big problem.
He also said it has been demonstrated in the past that the city is more cost effective than the private sector in providing residential trash pickup.
According to McMurtrie, annual solid waste expenses total a little more than $14 million while revenue is a little less than $14 million. The gap is projected to grow, and city officials predict a $131,812 shortfall in 2013 that could quadruple in size to $551,085 by 2017.
Revenue from the city's solid waste millage went down slightly last year. A bar graph presented Monday night shows annual revenue from the 2.47-mill levy has hovered around $11 million since 2007. Forecasts show it growing to about $12 million by 2017.
But the city is still grappling with continued increases in costs — mostly personnel — and the volatility of revenue from the recyclable materials market. McMurtrie said the market is "very strong right now" and the city is seeing increases in revenue from recyclables.
McMurtrie said the switch to single-stream recycling last year has proven wise, with revenue from recyclables collected — which increased 20 percent — up $550,000, while the city has reduced recycling collection costs by between $155,000 and $262,000.
The city's options for further reducing costs, McMurtrie said, include cutting back more services in solid waste, modifying methods of collection or further outsourcing solid waste operations. Removing some services like residential trash pickup from the solid waste millage and funding them differently also is an option the city should consider, he said.
"The commercial waste franchise is a good example," McMurtrie said. "We used to provide a commercial trash collection as part of the solid waste millage for business. That is now a fee-based program that's separate from the millage."
McMurtrie said maybe the time has come to remove residential trash pickup from the solid waste millage and make that a fee-based program, too. He said that could shift as much as $2.9 million in annual costs away from the solid waste millage.
"If we did move in that direction and move toward a fee-based program that was privately operated or franchise like we've done on the commercial franchise, the city's role would be to oversee the franchise and provide management," McMurtrie said.
Stephen Rapundalo, D-2nd Ward, was one of multiple council members who raised concerns about that idea.
"In most people's minds, the solid waste millage is residential refuse collection," Rapundalo said. "So if you take that out, what's left?"
McMurtrie said he understood Rapundalo's concern and said he's had that same talk with many business owners who wonder why they pay taxes for solid waste services and then have to pay additional fees for commercial trash pickup for their businesses.
"The discussion that we then have is that the city is moving toward greener practices," he said, adding the city is expanding recycling as well as food and yard waste collection.
Rapundalo said he wasn't convinced.
"I guess I'm not following that," he said. "Because if the presumption is that the composting is going up, recycling is going up, and thus the solid waste is going down, then I wouldn't be expecting to see projected deficits associated with the solid waste. The rationale you just provided nowhere explains those projected increases in costs."
An earlier copy of McMurtrie's presentation posted to the city's website included more details that were not discussed Monday night, including a breakdown of what services would be left after removing residential trash pickup from the solid waste millage.
It shows a 1.87-mill levy — down from 2.47 mills — would continue to fund administration ($2.8 million), compost collection and processing ($861,347), recycle collection and processing ($3.8 million), landfill maintenance ($435,917), debt and fringe benefits ($729,527), customer service ($272,610), park trash can pickups ($104,772) and other smaller expense items such as downtown litter can pickups and community standards costs.
Council Member Stephen Kunselman, D-3rd Ward, noted solid waste expenses actually ticked down from 2009 to 2010. He said maybe what was helping costs go down then could be examined and the city could continue to reduce costs that way.
Stephen Kunselman
Kunselman added if composting and recycling are driving up expenditures so much that the city is considering franchising residential trash pickup, maybe it needs to cut those costs instead.
"It seems pretty dramatic — considering we're only looking at a $500,000 deficit in 2017 — to talk about millions of dollars of savings by going to a franchise system," Kunselman said. "I'd rather see us knock that $500,000 off with greater efficiencies and maybe cutting back on compost pickups or the drop-off station and other things like that."
As far as options for reducing services, McMurtrie said the city could save an estimated $900,000 to $1.8 million a year by providing alternating week collection of trash, recyclables and compost. Another option would be to reduce compost service in the summer months, which McMurtrie estimated could save $40,000 to $80,000 a year.
McMurtrie also estimated the city could save $400,000 to $900,000 a year by providing residential curbside collection on one side of the street only.
"So one method might be to have compost and recycling carts on one side of the street and trash carts on the other," he said, adding it would make curbside collection more efficient as trucks no longer would have to pass down every street twice.
"They'd still be picking up the same number of carts, but it would significantly cut the number of miles that each truck would need to travel on their route," McMurtrie said.
Hieftje and Kunselman said they liked the idea.
"I think it is worth pursuing the same-side-of-the-street collection, and it doesn't seem that difficult to me to find a neighborhood for a pilot program," Hieftje said, adding there also could be a pilot program for every-other-week residential trash pickup.
Council Member Sabra Briere, D-1st Ward, appeared intrigued by the idea of having the city pick up trash every other week instead of once a week.
"Many of us have noticed that since the single-stream recycling began, we're putting our trash out a lot less frequently," Briere said. "We are amassing a lot less trash. That we could go to every other week seems kind of obvious to me as a cost savings."
Sue McCormick, the city's public services administrator, said that idea is on the table. But one of the concerns is that it could cause odor problems in some areas in the summer, so to avoid that the city may have to adjust the schedule only seasonally, she said.
Council Member Marcia Higgins, D-4th Ward, said she wasn't so sure an every-other-week residential trash pickup program would work throughout the city, though. She also said she's not interested in any changes that add additional fees for residents.
McMurtrie noted the city has taken steps to reduce trash collection costs, including recently eliminating one route.
He said several other solid waste program modifications have been put into place to save money — cuts he considers the "low-hanging fruit."
That includes last year's switch to curbside leaf collection instead of bulk pickup on the streets, a move with annual savings of about $103,000.
The city is saving another $28,000 from discontinuing Christmas tree collections, McMurtrie said, and it also has discontinued curbside pickup of bulky items.
The city expects to save another $350,000 a year from its most recent move to outsource management of the city's compost operations to New York-based WeCare Organics.
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
KJMClark
Wed, Jul 13, 2011 : 12:44 p.m.
What I don't see in the presentation is *why* costs are going up. The only reason I can think of for costs to be going up are fuel costs. It seems like the expenses should be falling otherwise. It looks like the problem is that these costs are rising, and the first thing to work on is solving that problem. I suspect millage revenue is falling because we were in a housing bubble and revenue shouldn't have risen that fast to begin with. The extra millage money should have been saved in a capital fund for drop-off station repairs/replacement. It astounds me how many people didn't see that bubble and didn't make allowances for it. I also don't see any estimates of what it would cost to shore up the portion of the drop-off station that is sinking. Where are the contractor estimates for repairing/maintaining the facility? Moving or closing should be the last alternative, not the first. I don't immediately plan to move out of my house because it needs maintenance.
Wolf's Bane
Wed, Jul 13, 2011 : 11:45 a.m.
Raise taxes. Raise Taxes. Raise taxes...! C'mon, we have no choice!
eyesofjustice
Wed, Jul 13, 2011 : 3:20 a.m.
Stephen Postema highest paid City Attorney in the United States......
Heardoc
Wed, Jul 13, 2011 : 2:56 a.m.
@WWBoDo Not to worry -- Obama thinks it was Bush's fault and Heftge agrees.....
Jon Saalberg
Wed, Jul 13, 2011 : 1:23 a.m.
I don't know about solid waste issues, but as long as the city keeps people from erecting split rail fences, all will be well with Ann Arbor.
ribs1
Wed, Jul 13, 2011 : 1:21 a.m.
I am SO glad I moved out to Lodi Township. Our taxes are low. We pay for our own garbage pickup. I absolutely love Monroe's service. The take whatever I put at the curb and they are always friendly when I see them. When I lived in Ann Arbor, they put stickers on my garbage can every other week instead of picking up the trash. Sometimes they gave me a sticker that said too heavy, sometimes I had too many sticks mixed in with my leaves. I was really tired of stickers on my garbage cans.
WWBoDo
Wed, Jul 13, 2011 : 1:01 a.m.
Looks like the only thing missing from this controversy are some Republicans to blame!
Heardoc
Wed, Jul 13, 2011 : 12:40 a.m.
One of the reasons I chose to live outside Ann Arbor was due to the taxes. A nicer home, larger yard and the ability to have a campfire in your backyard -- these are all the reasons I chose not to live in Ann Arbor. My taxes are lower and my home is much nicer Than a comparable home in Ann Arbor. i live just outside the city -- so i am able to enjoy the city but not have to pay for all the social spending that has occurred in Ann Arbor. Taxes are going to go up and the services will go down all on an effort to pay oversized pensions and salaries to unionized public employees. The ity is run by leftists and you have nothing but huge financial headaches ahead of you -- where did all the money go that was collected for the water and sewer system? If you look closely you will see that the city leaders spent this money-- not on water and sewer -- but on pet projects. This is just one of many examples of mis spending by the democrats of Ann Arbor. I hope the taxes double in the city -- maybe then people will come to their senses and get rid of the leftists that have put our good town in jeopardy.
Sharon Aubin
Wed, Jul 13, 2011 : 12:07 a.m.
You could always have us put 50 gallon drums in the backyards for us to burn our trash like it was done 50 years ago.
golfer
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 10:52 p.m.
budget better.
Thaddeus
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 10:51 p.m.
Ann Arbor should have gone to alternating weeks for trash pick-up many years ago. I am at a loss how, even in large families how/ why someone would need regular weekly trash pick-up? When one makes good purchasing and usage decisions to begin with, recycles, composts, reuses, there isn't much of anything left to take to the curb.... For those who disagree, making such a modest cut in pick-ups would be a good incentive to reevaluate what/ how one consumes.... Not only would this be a good move for the City, but would be a great learning exercise for those who live to landfill. Especially when essential services are being slashed, trash hauling costs are long-overdue for reevaluation. I personally put-out a bowling ball-size bag of trash every five months or so.
joe.blow
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 10:42 p.m.
I love you liberals. I've seen multiple of you state that because you pay so much in taxes, garbage should be taken care of. Guess what, you're spending your money on worthless city administrators to spend money on liberal programs that do nothing but spend money. Good luck you socialists!
Tesla
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 10:59 p.m.
I think you got the Liberals vs. Conservative ideology thing mixed up there. Better check the guidebook again for what you're supposed to say. And it's socialist now to want the garbage picked up? You should call it "Trash Re-Distribution." Has a nice spooky ring to it.
Sharon d
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 9:46 p.m.
Has the city council been smoking wacky tabacky! My gosh, get your heads straight! You made us buy these cans, stop leaf pickup, and now with less money for snow clean up you want our cans on one side of the street. So you want my retired husband with a pinched nerve to clean out a spot for garbage. We did not buy the bigger can, thank goodness. But I can see this scene now, you decide to go to every other week pickup, garbage plying up, smelly and maggots. Does the council live in houses or condo? Can we bring our bags over to your complex? Wait... Why not put a large receptacle on each street. Can I join the council now that I came up with a stupid idea. Are you wanting us to move from here? Believe me my husband has lived and worked in this town for 60 years. But I am doing all I can to make him move. Is that your plan too, have us all get discussed and leave.
KMHall
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 9:28 p.m.
Neighbors and scout troops could help the elderly put their totes on the proper side of the street. People can occasionally combine their trash and recyclables. These are not huge efforts. People who choose to consume live trees for decoration can also band together to figure out a disposal solution.
Laura
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 9:08 p.m.
What are you putting in your trash cans that fills them up every single week? I realize that the city is not taking a position of environmental stewardship, but wouldn't most of us like to live in a world with a little less trash and a little less dump truck pollution?
MyOpinion
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 10:30 p.m.
I only fill a 13 gallon bag of garbage a week, but in the summer, I tend to put it out for collection on a weekly basis. That bag/cart can smell pretty bad after a week, even though it contains few food scraps. I do occasionally put my garbage in a neighbor's cart, but if they've struggled to wheel it across the street in the winter, they won't appreciate my poaching. Right now, they probably don't care.
Joe Kidd
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 7:49 p.m.
A new acronym for you!!! NOMSOTS Not On My Side Of The Street!!!
Joe Kidd
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 7:43 p.m.
Easy solution. Burning barrels. They work great. You burn everything that will burn. Works real well. Everybody did it in my neighborhood when I was a kid. You can buy them at Hackney Hardware in Dexter. It's fun during the winter you can roast marshmallows over the fire. Or bag up your trash and put it in a city receptacle when you go downtown or to a park. That is what they are for, trash.
Macabre Sunset
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 7:30 p.m.
The major continues to fiddle while city services burn, one by one. Have to admit, this is a new one, though. Let's get people to pay for a millage, then tell them the millage doesn't cover the actual service - only the people the city needs to hire to perform the service.
breadman
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 7:24 p.m.
Everyother week is the City of Ann Arbor Personal crazy and/or nuts? Residents on my street are so lazy that there cans do get empty everyother week. The smell in the summer heat, animals that get in the cans when the lids are not shut, Trast blowing up and down the street. Give me a break. And I am a senior I will call in for the pick om my side of the street. Also when we must place our toters at least three feet apart, I only have about four feet of curb in front of me on a circle......
Jack
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 7:12 p.m.
Once again, Mr. Rapundalo is the voice of reason. Apparently, Mr. McMurtrie's spin rang false with him, too. Indeed, what is the solid waste millage for? As a child, trash collection was every other day. That gave way to twice a week, then once a week. We do not generate much trash. However, our neighbors do. They have infants and gobs of disposable diapers. Their trash cart is stuffed to the gills. So they are supposed to wait two weeks for collection? Or perhaps they should get two, maybe three, carts. Sounds like a plan for maggot growth to me. It's already difficult to get rid of their interior odor. Imagine the stench when the garbage sits for two weeks in the summer. The carts have become a part of our landscape. Under this plan, they would become moreso because more would be needed - and of course the resident would have to pay for those, too. Timely trash removal is necessary for a decent community. While I appreciate the frills that some are trying to establish, first things first. Our roads suck. We look rundown. Let's not add trash to the problem.
Joe Kidd
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 7:45 p.m.
Every other day? Wow. You must have lived in a trashy neighborhood. Of course no offense intended, I am talking about real trash.
jj
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 7:05 p.m.
Perhaps we need to start with the trash at City Hall....
InsideTheHall
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 6:34 p.m.
How's that Green Belt thingy coming along? Just askin.
mike gatti
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 6:22 p.m.
As long as they keep the rolling sculpture show downtown they can cut whatever they want. Police? Cut 'em. Firefighters? Gone. Trash collection? Once a month is ample. It is more than we deserve. Just keep on blocking the streets for the Green Fair and the rolling sculpture and whatever you need to do to keep things groovey and casual. Some day I hope to explain to my grandchildren how I used to live in a place that had trash pick up EVERY week. I hope I can do it the Rockwellian justice it deserves.
mike gatti
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 11:47 p.m.
I meant Rockwell as in Norman Rockwell. Everything is peachy keen in our little burg. Don't need cops, or fire, etc. We got us a nice downtown with lots of fun things going on.
Mr Blue
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 6:29 p.m.
Rolling Sculpture and Green Fair get no taxpayer money and I think you mean Orwellian as in George Orwell and his book 1984
Chase Ingersoll
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 5:39 p.m.
The city does not mow private lawns. What the owner cannot do for themselves they hire a licensed landscaper to do. Allow the consumers in the market to hire the COMPETING licensed waste/recycling companies and get rid of the taxes for services that are inefficiently managed by bureaucrats rather than the markets. Next up: when police and fire protection companies compete - the consumer wins (credit to Lending Tree)
Mr Blue
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 7:03 p.m.
I wonder what Lending Tree thinks of this endorsement. And we'll all need a loan to buy that fire and police protection
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 6:51 p.m.
The failed RepubliKan candidate for state senate wrote: "Next up: when police and fire protection companies compete - the consumer wins (credit to Lending Tree)" And then, after that, the Army, Navy, and Air Force! Gotta love the RepubliKan il-logic. Good Night and Good Luck
Mr Blue
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 6:35 p.m.
Pleas let us know when you run for office again. I'll be sure to remind everyone how you feel about privatizing city services so only rich people can afford them
Mr Blue
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 6:34 p.m.
Privatized police and fire serves was once tried in this country. It was an abject failure. Only the rich could afford fire and police protection. Homes would be on fire and burn to the ground, then catch the neighbors home and on down the line. If you take it further if all schools are privatized only the rich will be educated enough to get good jobs. So, I suppose you're rich enough to afford private police, fire and education. Good for you.
MyOpinion
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 5:50 p.m.
When you don't mow your lawn it is pretty obvious - weeds, etc. and someone comes and tags your house as a public nuisance. But, if each homeowner gets to contract for garbage pick-up, what is to stop folks from stuffing their garbage in some available dumpster/large trash can? A city the size of Ann Arbor needs a coordinated trash pick-up; if it is privatized, the solid waste department needs to go, not just the garbage truck drivers.
Sparty
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 5:23 p.m.
How about those that live on busy streets --- are we supposed to drag heavy trash, compost and recycle bins across those dangerous streets each week? Apparently none of you have seen the many, many overfull and smelly trash bins allowing trash to be blown down the streets, if you had you wouldn't recommend every other week pick up of these trash bins! And the compost bins are never enough to store the necessary seasonal yard waste each week. On the other hand, bi-weekly pickup of recycling may be a possibility given the huge new bins required by the city. Surely there are other efficiencies or administrative savings to find rather than immediately those that cause citizens huge costs, inconveniences, and other draconian impacts.
InsideTheHall
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 6:35 p.m.
Yes, the Chairman said so! Comply comrade.
Jack
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 4:56 p.m.
I understand cuts are part of creating budgets but you better think long and hard about this one! Roads that are not cleared in the winter. Seniors and handicapped people who are not able to push heavy trash across the street. I am a healthy 40 year old with the exception of a bad spine- I can't even bring those ridiculous bins to the end of my driveway without being put at risk for another spinal surgery. Think long and hard!!
Ryan J. Stanton
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 4:32 p.m.
McMurtrie said he's not recommending a situation where residents have to individually contract with licensed haulers, which is how trash pickup is done in some communities. "This is done in Scio Township and the City of Lansing where it's basically a free-for-all," he said. "We don't recommend that because of the increased truck traffic, impact to the street system, lack of economies of scale, lack of coordinate routes and increased carbon footprint. We think a coordinated franchise approach makes a lot more sense." In response to another question from Kunselman, who pondered reducing compost collections, McMurtrie said: "The state law is that compost cannot end up in the landfill, so it doesn't require that we pick up compost curbside, so you bring up a good point."
treetowncartel
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 4:30 p.m.
Seems like Ann arbor is becoming more and more like Detroit with each election cycle.
goosenews
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 7:54 p.m.
Again....all Democrats on the city council.
63Townie
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 3:58 p.m.
"...picking up trash every other week..." Is the city going to provide ambulance service to the people who faint because of the stench of two-week old garbage festering in the August heat? If that idea flies, next thing you know city council will spend $1.5M to study home methane collector units to harness the gas given off by our rotting garbage and compostables.
justcary
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 3:45 p.m.
@lorie: Sounds like you got a ticket for taking poor care of your yard or sidewalk. Your beef is not with the the Community Standards Bureau (which is but a single officer downtown), it's with the neighbor(s) who made a complaint against you. The gentleman who does cite folks for neglected sidewalks and other violations of the city code responds exclusively to complaints; he never goes out on a mission to find violators and write tickets. And when he does respond, he prefers to issue a warning rather than a citation, giving the inconsiderate resident an additional week to annoy the neighbors before complying.
EyeHeartA2
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 3:35 p.m.
So, how much do people in the township pay in a "solid waste millage". I know they pay a private contractor to haul. I suspect their solid waste tax is ZERO. I would be OK with pay to haul, but then ELIMINATE the tax. Tax + Fees = just plain stupid ---which is what I have come to expect from that clown show we call city government.
InsideTheHall
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 6:38 p.m.
Trust the man behind the curtain and watch out for the rolling flames!
John B.
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 6:12 p.m.
I live in a twp. where I pay about $180/yr. to a private contractor for trash collection. Recycling (optional) is a buck-a-bag. My total twp. taxes are about $200/yr. None of that goes towards trash services, as far as I know....
treetowncartel
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 4:03 p.m.
I live in a township where the solid waste and recycling fee is collected through the water and sewer bill. One point worth noting, is that I do not use a garbage disposal that often, since I have to pay for the water and electricity when it runs. Instead, I'll put that stuff in the trash which I pay a flat fee on.
Goober
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 3:15 p.m.
Vivienne: In these times, the only thing that resonates is cost containment, cost control and cost reduction. City council and others city leaders have to quit spending like drunken sailors. These are the times when the basics are all we need. If times improve and our buckets are filled with excess revenues, the fine citizens of this city can best decide how to handle the surplus. While the waste and excess spending continues by our city leadership, I will use all of my energy to help defeat any requests for more than what is already approved now. For those that believe this is really not a big deal, feel free to pay more than your current tax bill as a donation.
Mr Blue
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 6:40 p.m.
Administrators and politicians brush this criticism aside telling us that everyone does it and that's how all businesses operate these days. We see the result of these business practices in todays economic mess.
Tom Whitaker
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 5:55 p.m.
It may be a cliche, but the City is truly privatizing profits and socializing costs.
Tom Whitaker
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 5:53 p.m.
@Goober: The "admin fees" taken by the City are not necessarily "excess" funds at all. This was a scheme cooked up by City administrators to repurpose millage funds and other revenue streams toward other uses. First, they change certain budget areas like solid waste into "enterprise funds." Second, they charge these City "enterprise" departments or budget areas large fees to administer them (like IT, City Attorney, Mayor's office, Adminstrator's office, etc.). Then they use the language of private business and start expecting these areas to produce a "profit." If the area is not generating a "profit," (see the compost facility) it is immediately targeted for sale, privatization, or some other action, not unlike a large corporation spinning off a less-profitable division. Nevermind that many of these budget areas cover popular things like parks and solid waste that include services citizens need, desire and support--so much so that they've approved dedicated millages to tax themselves for these services. Nevermind that citizens expect government to provide these services because in theory, it puts public interest ahead of profits and stock price. The City has been walking a fine line with this approach--especially as it pertains to millage funds and fees. Millage funds are not to be reappropriated without voter approval, yet this backdoor admin fee approach skirts this law. Fees charged by municipalities are supposed to cover the cost of the service--not be reappropriated to pay for art, excessive central overhead, or pet projects of elected officials. Otherwise, they are not fees at all, but a tax collected under false pretenses. Worst of all, the City continues to pour millions in fee revenue and millage money into capital improvements for the sole benefit of private contractors. See the MRF (materials recovery facility), compost facility, new garbage trucks, etc. It may be a cliche, but the City
Mr Blue
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 3:56 p.m.
Exactly, Tom. This is the corporate method of money laundering and it has no place in municipal administration. This is what happens when we hire corporate style managers to run our cities. This is the corporatization of municipal government that started when Reagan and Republicans began the chant that government should be run like a business. What kind of business? Maybe a Wall Street bank?
Goober
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 3:42 p.m.
Tom: If what you allude to is what Vivienne meant, then I am in favor of pulling these excess funds which would lower our tax liability. Again, if this is what she meant, she and other city council members can start the ball rolling by telling us where these excess funds exist. They can then make these recommendations to all tax payers so we can see how our taxes will be impacted lower. I guess I am not aware that any specific millage revenue can be used for anything except directly related to the specific millage project.
Tom Whitaker
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 3:24 p.m.
Agree with Goober AND Vivienne. What Vivienne was subtlety referring to as "resonating" was the pulling of millage, fee and other revenues from various departments, disguised as "administrative costs" and laundering them through the general fund where they were assigned to pet projects like the Fuller Road Parking Structure, city hall expansion, etc. Percent for Art cuts out the middleman and takes the money directly from all capital projects, regardless of department or funding source.
snoper
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 2:55 p.m.
How nice. We live in "opposites" town. Want your street repaired? Pass a millage. Want your trash picked up? Pass a millage. Want genereral fund revenue dollars to be given to favored non-profits? Get six votes on Council. Want to squander a million dollars on "public art", raid someone else's millage. Want Public Safety? Too bad, can't afford it. We [A2 voters] keep letting it happen, we deserve what we got.
Ross
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 2:35 p.m.
I agree with the mayor that this is not really a big deal. $500k deficit on a 14mil program ? And that is years out still, where projections may be murky at best. If the near term deficit is only a handful of thousands, who cares. So, uh, why don't we just pay the shortfall from the general fund and stop worrying about this?
InsideTheHall
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 6:39 p.m.
Yes comrade, the Chairman will show us the way.
Tom Whitaker
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 3:16 p.m.
Because the general fund has already been tapped dry for the "Justice Center" (City Hall expansion) cost overruns and loan payments, the Wheeler Center, and Fuller Road Parking Structure design work, among other non-essential items.
bunnyabbot
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 2:31 p.m.
I have this overwhelming feeling if we were to look behind the curtain there would be monkeys at the controls.
goosenews
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 7:54 p.m.
I believe they are all Democrats on the city council.
Mr Blue
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 2:17 p.m.
Now that Roger Fraser has left, his chickens are coming home to roost. Like the conditions that the previous President and his administration left for our nation, we in Ann Arbor now have to pay for Fraser's cost shifting and bucket juggling.
Mr Blue
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 6:44 p.m.
I'm glad you didn't didn't dispute what I wrote. It's just the way he and Republicans do business these days. Make a big mess, pay off your buddies as you walk away and leave it for everyone else to clean up. It's exactly how Bush ran his private businesses into the ground before he was elected. In fact it's how he's run his whole life. Make a big mess and let Poppy and his cronies clean it up.
Mike
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 4:31 p.m.
I was wondering how George Bush was going to be part of this
Stephen Landes
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 2:02 p.m.
I have less faith in Mr. McMurtrie with every solid waste article. First he warns that we have to subsidize the recycling company because the volume estimates were so bad they are losing money. Now he tells us that the single collection recycling decision was a good one and that we are saving money. Really? To top it all off he wants us to drag those carts across the street and figure out where our neighbor wants us to put the cart that week (do they need to put out cones if they are having guests coming to their own house to protect the parking space) and somehow manage to do this with the winter condition of neighborhood streets. It seems to me that what we need to do is outsource solid waste management and keep the non-management work force.
Bpf
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 1:41 p.m.
Calm down, people. It's really not that big of a deal. Alternating weeks for trash, compost or recycling isn't a big deal. Our trash bin is full every other week, if that. Look at how much you consume and then ask yourself if it's really you that needs to cut back. I couldn't care less that you have to take time out of your precious Saturday to drop off your Christmas tree. Should I care about the time and expense it took to go and buy it? I can understand if the additional 15ft you have to push your trash cart is a burden because of age or condition, but if it's because you're generally lazy I have zero sympathy for you. I find it laughable how at the same time tea-partying nit wits are shouting about cutting the deficit with no real plans if how to do it they'll complain about alternating pick-up or one side of the street pick up because then they might have to look at their own over-consumption and wasteful ways or, god-forbid, make them walk another 15ft. I like all of the suggestions besides privatization. Maybe they'll save enough to bring back monthly leaf pick-up.
deb
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 8:14 p.m.
Joe, although taxes have decreased, city revenue has increased, just not by as much as the city projected . . . Yea i know, how could someone in the city administration miss a projection
Joe Kidd
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 8:02 p.m.
I am not sure how applicable this is but let me toss a curve ball into this discussion. I just read an article written by a person on homes values being under what is owed. The author noted her property taxes decreased. If this is happening in A2, property taxes being lowered while the size of the city and its burden to deliver services remain constant, funding for traditionally provided services across the board suffers.
bunnyabbot
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 2:48 p.m.
I don't know a sane person who would rather cut trash, police or fire services as well as plowing but add (expensive) public art and shuffleboard courts or redo graded curbs in order to regrade them with those mat things. You mention leaf pickup, well maybe they could bring that back if they weren't spending money on the big dig downtown, buying property like the old Y, getting stuck with it or being forced into contracts with the DDA over parking revenue.
David Paris
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 2:45 p.m.
Bpf, you seem to be missing the point here. Laziness is not the issue, and I don't think it is your place to say how precious our Saturdays are. Most people are sick of all the take-aways; loss of leaf pick-up, christmas tree pick-up, decrease in snow plowing, etc, (not to mention a certain sculpture destined for city hall) while still paying the highest taxes in the county. Also, there is no correlation, as far as I know, between the Tea Party and Ann Arborites. If you're against privatization, then I think you're in good company, and most of us would like to see fall leaf pick-up return.
A2CommonCityFolk
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 1:39 p.m.
Come on people. The city is treating its citizens like children. When a 10 year old acts up, you do not punish him or her by taking away their driving rights. NO. You take away something that will be missed or hurt, like video games, TV, and these days their cell phones. The City is trying to make a point. It wants more money. So you take away things that will impact the citizens directly, so they will take notice. Cut fire and police. Cut services like trash pick-up. Make it inconvenient for those that live here. How else will we get the message that the City needs more money? Cutting pet projects or getting rid of redundant staffing, secretaries or clerks will not work. Do you really think they could drive home the point if they halted an art project? Come on, a child will not notice if you take away a colored crayon he or she does like or use, but take away his or her favorite color, they will notice. You will notice the next time your car is damage from a pothole. Did anyone notice the $2.8 million administration cost? The discussion never mentions anything about that cost and how they might reduce it. I like McMurtrie idea of moving to fee-based program and shifting $2.9 million in cost away from solid waste millage. He did not mention cutting the millage to reflect this change. What are they going to do with the extra $2.9 million? Fund another fountain? Hire a few more community standard personal to roam the streets to make sure you are properly removing your trash from your house? Or don't put a rail fence up? Etc. (Oh and do not forget to hire a few more supervisors to watch over the newly hired community standard personal. That is what the City needs!)
Mike
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 4:30 p.m.
Absolute truth. Things you don't miss will never be cut because you won't pay extra for them...........
omniskeptic
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 1:32 p.m.
So here's what's acceptable to the electorate, based on skimming the comments: 1) No privatization. 2) No reduction in services. 3) $500K? Suck it up. 4) Direct McMurtrie not to bring this kind of nonsense back to Council again. Fair summary?
MyOpinion
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 1:28 p.m.
@JulieAnnArb has a great campaign slogan to end her comment: We pay city taxes, we want city services! We pay city taxes, we want city services! We pay city taxes, we want city services! We pay city taxes, we want city services! We pay city taxes, we want city services! Pretty basic idea.
Joe Kidd
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 8:07 p.m.
Have A2 property taxes decreased like in most communities? If so, then the funding for what you have been getting is not there.
Craig Lounsbury
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 4:48 p.m.
And the final score MyOpinion 5 Mike 3. MO scores 5 lines on 40 words and no errors. Mike scores 3 lines on 30 words and no errors.
Mike
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 4:29 p.m.
You pay city taxes; they get cadillac benefits and retirement You pay city taxes; they get cadillac benefits and retirement You pay city taxes; they get cadillac benefits and retirement Pretty basic
Vivienne Armentrout
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 1:27 p.m.
The presentation that you reference (that was apparently not shown at the meeting) suggested that by removiing part of the solid waste millage, the council could ask the public to redirect that millage to other (non-solid waste) uses. This idea of "repurposing" the solid waste millage was first floated by Roger Fraser at the January budget retreat. There is a leap here where the public would be asked to take a major loss of service and also award the council and administration an additional income stream to use any way they choose. Does this resonate? By the way, that table also awarded over 30% of the remaining millage (about $2.7 million) to "administration". Mr. McMurtrie's job would be intact.
Huron74
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 1:22 p.m.
Load up all your trash and throw it in your council member's backyard until they implement some kind of sane trash policy that we all can afford. That is what democracy looks like. Or should anyhow. (See Alinsky's rule #11)
treetowncartel
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 3:59 p.m.
Actually, you could just drop it off at City Hall, they could re-purpose the fountain.
Jimbo
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 1:22 p.m.
I spoke at City Council 13 years ago when they put a bid out to collect recyclables. 3 private companies bid for the 3 year contract. They're costs were between $2.1-$3.2 million. The city recycle team bid $5.3 million. Guess who got the job? Combine this with giving a 48 year old retiring fire chief a pension of $130,000 per year and we wonder where all the money goes.
Joe Kidd
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 8:09 p.m.
I recall that recycling bid award and thought something funny was up too. Looked like a form of nepotism to me, protect your baby.
MyOpinion
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 1:12 p.m.
The city is tone deaf. The cost accounting for what the solid waste fund would be spent on if garbage pick-up were privatized is enlightening. Administration would still get its piece of the pie - $2.8 million. Same logic applied to the idea to privatize Huron Hills Golf Course. There would still be a big hunk of change going to "overhead." Seems like t he city needs to lop a few branches at the top of the tree. The folks doing the work shouldn't be privatized out of their jobs without concurrent cuts to the paper pushers, projection guessers, etc. Kunselman is not my representative, but he speaks for me: "We do expect to pick up our solid waste — residential — so I'm not interested in franchising to a private sector and then continuing to be charged a solid waste millage and a fee," Kunselman told McMurtrie. "And so you can take that back with you to the office."
Mr Blue
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 6:47 p.m.
I was wondering when the Soviet Union and the Communists would get dragged into this.
Mike
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 4:22 p.m.
The government in general is tone deaf. 69% of people want the government to decrease spending and they respond that we just don't understand. Did anyone ever think the Soviet Union would collapse financially? Just asking..........
Mr Blue
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 1:26 p.m.
There is plenty of "accountability" for low level city employees and NONE for highly paid administrators and managers who do little except to shuffle buckets of money around and tell us what a great job their doing . When all the low level jobs are privatized to lower pay with no benefit private employers and the public suffers from less service, the only people collecting a paycheck at city hall will be the fat cats who obfuscate. lie and look out for their own jobs.
Bulldog
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 1:03 p.m.
I would support having my trash picked up on an every other week basis. I think this is a better idea than all trash cans on one side of the street. Especially if they chose my side of the street! What if neighbors don't bring in their containers in a timely manner or place them out super early?
KMHall
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 9:40 p.m.
You or I could wheel an empty container back to the neighbor's house. Who knows, they might do you a favor in return.
Joe Kidd
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 8:14 p.m.
Good point. Out here where I live, my dumpster, supplied by my pick up company is so large I nearly never fill it. Sometimes I wish I could pay one half for every other week pick up. Seems to me if they went to every other week, your fees for garbage pickup should be lowered. Not as much wear and tear on the trucks and the city will not need as many employees.
JuliaAnnArb
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 12:56 p.m.
The one-side-of the street plan seems viable, but only in the summer. Last winter it was a nightmare to find an acceptable place for the (enormous) carts without having to drag them across the never-plowed street and into the neighbor's snowbank. Alternate-week pickup? Might work for us once the youngest is potty-trained, but only in the winter. In the summer the odor would be a problem. Considering that the single-stream system seems to be in jeopardy, it seems foolish to make any reductions in garbage collection based on current levels of refuse. If they limit, charge for, or end curbside recycling there's going to be a heck of a lot more garbage to pick up. We pay city taxes, we want city services!
huh7891
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 10:33 p.m.
And the cities response...I'm sorry we spent your money on artwork.
Mike
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 4:21 p.m.
You pay taxes to pay government employees; you want services for taxes then hire it out...........
MyOpinion
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 1:24 p.m.
What a great campaign slogan: We pay city taxes, we want city services! We pay city taxes, we want city services! We pay city taxes, we want city services! We pay city taxes, we want city services! We pay city taxes, we want city services! We pay city taxes, we want city services!
63Townie
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 12:52 p.m.
The lack of common sense and fiscal responsibility exhibited by the current crop of leaders is astonishing. If city government is not capable of providing basic services to the people like police, fire, water, sewer and garbage pick-up, why on earth do we bother? Where does the money go? Oh wait, it goes to study unnecessary projects ad nauseam, fight FOIAs to the death, and provide work for unnecessary administrative overhead. The only way to change the current paradigm is through constant pressure upon local government to act responsibly. Left to their own devices, who knows what might happen.
kindred spirit
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 12:50 p.m.
This privatization mantra has gotten out of hand. When I hear the word "privatization," I read that as code for, "Take care of it yourself; you are on your own." Our nation has been fighting this, "What is the purpose of government?" issue since the inception of the country, and those folks who feel, "Hey, I'm wealthy, I'll pay for my own, and everyone else can fend for themselves," when in essence, it is more cost-effective for one source to take care of the service, are going to send many more of us to "off-the-grid" camps near the freeway on I-94. This heartless path of not taking care of our society is going to bite us. And note that the state-wide forced changes to the school system is all done to force the privatization of education. Again, "I'll pay for my own--the rest of you fend for yourselves." It's going to get ugly in the next 50 years.
Joe Kidd
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 8:19 p.m.
Wait, wait, wait.....Sandy Springs, Ga. Here watch this: <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f8qFvo2qJOU" rel='nofollow'>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f8qFvo2qJOU</a> I am not saying this is the answer to everything, but it is worth taking a look and a ponder.
John B.
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 5:51 p.m.
...trash collection.
Mike
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 4:18 p.m.
Name one thing the government does more efficiently than the private sector. I'm still waiting............
Mr Blue
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 2:10 p.m.
And as the CEO's and shareholders of those private companies demand higher profits, taxpayers will foot the bill not only for less service but the higher profits as well.
Dcam
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 1:52 p.m.
Privatization is a code word, of course, but it's not what you say it is. It's a code word for socialism as described by Karl Marx and Milton Friedman - private corporations funded through tax collections to pay for a service provided, eliminating accountability to citizens and governments alike. The government is the billing agent for private companies that provide services formally provided by government employees, and the collection is through taxes and mandated by laws. Privatization is textbook socialism, period.
Urban Sombrero
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 12:43 p.m.
Couldn't we just sell that fugly $750,000 fountain and use the cash for this? eBay, anyone?
bunnyabbot
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 2:50 p.m.
it would only be worth the scrap metal price!
sbbuilder
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 12:40 p.m.
"...But the city is still grappling with continued increases in costs — mostly personnel —..." Cut services, cut personell, cut here, cut there, but oh my gosh, don't cut the pay or benefits of the workers. Some day down the road we'll have twenty City employees left, and we'll be still trying to figure out how to pay for them.
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 6:48 p.m.
God forbid raising taxes, esp. given the collapse in property values = collapsed revenue. Good Night and Good Luck
Mr Blue
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 12:37 p.m.
For those of you who constantly complain about the UM not paying its fair share, you must consider an income tax to capture some of that UM money. It's the only way.
KJMClark
Wed, Jul 13, 2011 : 12:16 p.m.
Seems like the past three University Presidents have *said* the city should institute an income tax. It *is* the only way. And no, the income tax would tax non-residents for using our roads and tying up our police and fire when they're in the city but not on University property. If the University decides to get rid of their police (they haven't had them that long), city police would take that over again.
Joe Kidd
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 8:22 p.m.
Sure tax the UM employees. Then pick up every service the UM does on its property like trash pick up. That is what they will be paying for right? All the services provided to everyone else.
deb
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 5:10 p.m.
The U cant leave. Get it through your head. Are they going to sell their buildings, the stadium?? A PILOT? maybe but probably not. The city should put the screws to the U in certain circumstances. We should at least try to negotiate with them instead of bending over backwords, like the fuller road station
Mike
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 4:16 p.m.
They employ many of our well paid, well fed neighbors; be careful what you complain about
Bill
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 1:26 p.m.
Don't worry about U of M, if U of M were to ever leave Ann Arbor, then Ann Arbor would over a relatively short period of time cease to exist. U of M is what brings people and their money to Ann Arbor, It certainly is not the city itself. Businesses will leave, residents will leave and then the City Council will have no one but themselves to discuss.
Lets Get Real
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 12:23 p.m.
I am stunned by the thoughtless disrespect for citizens by it's "leaders.". Visionless people who make decisions for the city & county, driving both residents & business out of town. Trash Solution #1: buy little bins for everyone to recycle, people dutifully separate their plastic, glass, paper, etc, and all will be right with the world. NO? Change! Solution #2: force them to BUY big, ugly bins: two or more of the compost bins if you have trees. Then there is the recycle bin & the trash bin: bigger than me, difficult to maneuver, and - if full - heavier than an aging woman can handle - especially in the winter when the rutted, unplowed roads prohibit moving them. And, make sure you follow the rules or the dreaded orange sticker that scolds of improper behavior appears. The intent: to "embarrass you in front of your neighbors" so you will comply - so says the city employee placing it there because the bin is "too full." Compassionate leadership that respects the dignity of its citizens is a thing of the past. In today's Ann Arbor, only narcissistic, self-important, self-indulgent, thoughtless, inconsiderate "public servants" who take more of the resources little people have & put it to their own pet project shrines to self. No wonder people are frustrated with Ann Arbor's disillusionment about itself: being on "best" lists. While I'm trying to scrape together nearly $6000 to pay my taxes and stay in my home, both the city & the county dedicate my money to be spent on fountains by absent German artists, order 12 page reports on non-conforming historical fence, employ rude sidewalk police who admonish homeowners 4 years after inspection but neglect replacing "unsafe" slabs for which they are responsible, who bring frivolous, fantasy lawsuits for ridiculously inflated, made-up amounts against business owners, & who give the CVB a 150% increase in budget while essential servic
Mr Blue
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 12:40 p.m.
Once more, the 12 page report by a city employee is a myth that Ryan J Stanton put out there when the failed to tell us that the "city" part of the report was THREE PAGES. The rest of it was info from the homeowner who knowingly broke the law, TWICE!
Awakened
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 12:20 p.m.
The City budgeted and borrowed based upon projections of increased property values. When property values slumped the City's budget went "underwater" just like a lot of people's mortgages. So the City must either increase revenue or cut spending to make ends meet. The problem is that the leadership of the City has refused to cut back on non-essentials. (Many of which are listed by other bloggers above.) In the real Ann Arbor people feeling the pinch may cut back on dining out, reduce their cable service, or put off that new car for a couple of years. In Council Ann Arbor they still buy sculptures, pay for studies, and hire administrators. We have one police supervisor for every three employees. They laid off or eliminated six + police positions without reducing one supervisor. On the contrary, Chief Jones was authorized $35,000 to have a promotional process in case they need to promote.
Joe Kidd
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 8:24 p.m.
Have always wondered why we can't get a simple look at everything funded by the city in order to see how much goes to social agenda items.
David Cahill
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 12:07 p.m.
These cost estimates are being brought to us by the same folks who were wildly wrong on single-stream recycling. Why should we believe anything they say? I agree with Councilmember Rapundalo. The solid waste millage means residental refuse collection. It looks like this is another familiar exercise in union-busting by the City staff.
Mr Blue
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 12:43 p.m.
And we thought that the union busting former administrator, the guy who shuffled the "buckets" that led to this situation, who get s a pretty nice pension and health care after 9 years, went to work for Snyder as his EMF henchman.
Theo212
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 12:01 p.m.
Ever since Our King was unjustly let go, things like this have cascaded. With Our King the facts is, No new taxes!
David Paris
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 12:01 p.m.
If they privatize, Then I want my tax money back! It's asinine to think that they can tax us for a service, then outsource to a private company. Bottom line is, housing values need to come up, but how are they going to do that when the city keeps taking services away, or worse, as the above plan suggests?
Joe Kidd
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 8:27 p.m.
If housing values are down, then property taxes are down and city revenues are down and services can't be provided as when housing values were high. Have not seen many complaints about lowered property taxes.
Mike
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 4:09 p.m.
You can't have your cake and eat it too. Remember what a famous democrat said, "ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country" and apply it to Ann Arbor. Feel better?
Craig Lounsbury
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 11:54 a.m.
I personally could accept the one side of the street idea. But I am reasonably healthy and I live on a very quiet street traffic wise. As it stands now i take my elderly neighbors trash out so she is covered either way. I would be fine with every other week for my recycling and compost. In the winter I could deal with every other week trash too. But in summer as said in the article I think oder would be an issue. All that is separate from the issue of just how inefficient government is or isn't.
Joe Kidd
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 8:28 p.m.
Thanks for helping your neighbor Craig. You are a good guy.
Craig Lounsbury
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 12:54 p.m.
There are a couple of us on the street who watch out for her. One guy has a snow blower and does her driveway in winter and he or I do her sidewalks.
Lets Get Real
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 12:29 p.m.
Wish you lived in my neighborhood. Does that elderly neighbor know how lucky she is? Most of the young people who move in my neighborhood are more interested in their next vacation, their big expensive car, their noisy party with a band, and their bratty kid than they are in their falling down fence on their property line.
Wolf's Bane
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 11:48 a.m.
Weekly trash and recyclables pick up is fundamental to a good quality of life in Ann Arbor. This smacks of the same lunacy as the whole sidewalk repair debacle from a few years earlier; HS interns with silver spray paint mark-up our sidewalks, we have to hire private contractors (at 110 dollars per slap) to repair our sidewalks, a year later city shows up and tears up all corners and puts in handicapped accessible ramps, and we're out an average of 500 dollars of sidewalk repairs. Then, to top it all off, we are requested to to send in receipts that the work had been done! The very same work that was destroyed by the city to begin with?! NUTS.
John B.
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 5:43 p.m.
I'm not so sure about weekly pickup of recyclables being necessary (trash, yes...). We recycle quite extensively, and I only deal with it about every four weeks or so, when our bins get full. We live outside the city, so we pay for our private trash pickup, and deal with our recycling ourselves. We also have a buck-a-bag option with our trash hauler for picking up the recyclables, but I don't use that very often, as I suspect those items end up in the landfill, not recycled (the hauler throws them in the same truck as the trash...).
Mike
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 4:07 p.m.
Pay your fair share for utopia and quit complaining..........
Lets Get Real
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 12:36 p.m.
I see you too were a victim of the sidewalk police. $1200 of "necessary repairs" was my punishment. After 2 years, they still haven't replaced the "unsafe" slab they insisted was mine - because the interns with the silver spray paint can don't recognize property lines. But I guess it is OK for them to have "unsafe" slabs, just not me - the naughty citizen.
Alan Goldsmith
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 11:35 a.m.
So I'm thinking the "Justice Center" million dollar urinal water fountain is looking a bit silly right about now Mr. Mayor.
baker437
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 11:31 a.m.
Ann Arbor city government priorities: 1) Cut police and fire 2) Cut trash 5) Let roads crumble 4) Put up art projects 5) By cutting services that government should provide we can get the people of Ann Arbor to pass new taxes and then spend it on more art projects It is time for real leadership!
Mike
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 4:06 p.m.
Don't forget add more rules and regulations, enforce more unfunded state and federal mandates..................
LAEL
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 11:30 a.m.
With the increase in recycling, every other week trash pickup is a reasonable strategy to try. And it might get people thinking about another, often neglected, part of the recycling mantra: REDUCE.
Mike
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 4:05 p.m.
We need more mantras.............
Lets Get Real
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 12:48 p.m.
The only kind of REDUCE mantra I want to see is the out of control spending for unnecessary, irrelevant, non-essential projects for the sake of "art." Let them find donors to fund those projects. Take a page from the University's playbook. There are plenty of narcissistic wealthy people in Ann Arbor who would love to leave a legacy with a naming opportunity. If the mayor wants a fountain in City Hall, let him pay for it. We could call it the Hieftje's Hillarious Hometown Fount
Nancy White
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 11:29 a.m.
one hyas to wonder exactly what our taxes do pay for in our fair city???? Police, fire, now trash collection are being reduced while hundreds of nonsense feel good services are not touched....who is calling the shots here and why do we allow it?
InsideTheHall
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 6:48 p.m.
Be a good little comrade and never question the Chairman.
Mike
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 4:04 p.m.
Pays for wages and benefits you'll never get! Be quiet and keep paying..............
Lets Get Real
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 12:51 p.m.
And, what will be attractive about living in our fair city when all is said and done? Individually paying for all those eliminated services will make it prohibitive to live here - since you can bet your bottom dollar the taxes we pay for those services won't go away.
a2grateful
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 11:13 a.m.
For every service that is proposed to be cut, cut the position of the employee recommending the cut. Looking for real cuts? Start by restructuring the pension board, and focus on non-union pensions. The trash collection discussion is just a smokescreen for major fiscal problems downtown. "Distract them with minutia while we fund the big stuff."
a2grateful
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 10:35 p.m.
Follow the private sector example: End future city-funded non-union pensions. At-will employees would then fund their own pensions, like most employees in the private sector. These pensions are low hanging fruit. Eliminate them. If employees don't like the change, they can quit. Next, work to restructure/eliminate future union pensions, excluding police and fire. There will be more work and time involved, due to collective bargaining. Finally, fire and police pensions are mandated by and governed by Michigan State Constitution. Not much can be done at the city level.
Jack
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 6:36 p.m.
And the focus on non-union pensions would be for what reason?
Machine
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 11:11 a.m.
When the City started charging business owners a trash removal fee in addition to the taxes they already pay, nobody paid much attention. When the City tries to do the same thing to homeowners, maybe people will sit up and take notice. Trash removal is one of those core government functions that should be covered by taxes alone and nobody should be charged an additional fee. After this, what next? A fee to borrow a book from the library? Tolls to use the streets?
John B.
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 5:35 p.m.
I like the road toll idea - that would be funny to watch being implemented!
Steve Hendel
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 11:03 a.m.
This whole discussion just goes to show where some of our elected officials place their priorities; when it comes to projects like the Fuller Road transit station (the "train to nowhere"), bicycle paths/sidewalks that are largely unused, plug-ugly (but green) City Hall additions made at the same time staffing is being slashed-well, funding is somehow available. Trash collection? Ah well, let's just keep taxing for it but cut the service and make people pay private firms.
KJMClark
Wed, Jul 13, 2011 : 12:06 p.m.
You're the second one to mention it, so let's clear something up about bike lanes and sidewalks. These are usually completely funded by the road reconstruction millage, State Act 51 revenue, and state/federal matching grants. I agree with a lot of people that some of the "buckets" are only imaginary, but the road reconstruction money is a dedicated millage and it would be illegal to use it for something else. The State Act 51 money may only be used for transportation purposes, and in Ann Arbor 5% of that is dedicated to non-motorized transportation, as specified in Act 51. It would be illegal to use that money for non-transportation purposes. And the matching grants are also for transportation purposes only. Repeat after me - it would be illegal to use that money for other purposes.
Chip Reed
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 10:59 a.m.
Couldn't we privatize city hall? (Oops, I mean the Orwellian-named "Justice" Center).
Mr Blue
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 1:17 p.m.
Privatize the courts operation and charge attorneys when they enter the building
Lets Get Real
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 12:57 p.m.
I love it!!! Any business consultant worth his/her salt would take one look at that operation and recommend - like they would for a growing business - that they need to get rid of the "work in the business" amateurs and hire professional leadership. Could we? Should we?
rs
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 10:49 a.m.
Yeah, well things like this will happen when your city has a big, tax exempt University in it that buys just about every piece of property that goes up for sale and takes those properties off the City tax roll. UM has collected a bunch of homes near campus over the years. Oh yeah, they also bought the city's largest taxable property with the Pfizer purchase. Its either the city raises everybody's taxes to make up the difference created by UM taking all these properties off the tax roll or cut services. Granted, the city could budget a lot better (multimillion dollar Washtenaw bike path, water fountain/sculpture, 12 page report on a split rail fence in the historic district, etc).
deb
Thu, Jul 14, 2011 : 6:47 p.m.
actually no. The city still has to take care of the same amount of streets, still provide fire service, etc. think before you speak
Joe Kidd
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 8:32 p.m.
If the U of M buys property, doesn't that mean the city no longer has to provide services to that area? The U takes care of police, sidewalk and street plowing. With a large building like Phizer, you get a full building with people who will buy gas, food, and supplies from local retailers. Think of it as the city is getting smaller and should be cheaper to maintain.
Mr Blue
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 12:59 p.m.
Then let's admit what the truth is instead of continuing to spread lies. The city part of the report was THREE pages.
Brad
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 12:42 p.m.
You still "railing" about that fence? Let it go, Mr. Blue!
Mr Blue
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 12:34 p.m.
You might want to ask Ryan J Stanton why he failed to tell us in the original article on "the fence" that the city employees part of that 12 page report was THREE pages. The rest of it was info provided by the property owner, Mr Breskman who illegally put up the fence then broke the law again by ignoring the stop work order. Then Stanton slipped a disclaimer into the comments section. SLOPPY JOURNALISM. RYAN- FESS UP!
Awakened
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 12:10 p.m.
The City owns more land than the U of M. The City has purchased more land in the last ten years than the U of M. Everything the City buys goes untaxed as well.
jcj
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 10:49 a.m.
"Ann Arbor officials are considering major changes in residential trash collection services in response to a projected solid waste deficit of more than $500,000 by 2017." We have seen 1st hand what the cities projections are worth.
Goober
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 10:47 a.m.
I have said it before and will say it again. Our city council and the people that they have hired for key positions do not know how to run cost effective and cost efficient operations. This goes directly to the lack of true visionary leadership. As soon as, we wake up to this fact and put in place capable leaders who know how to work together, manage to revenue streams and spend money wisely, then we will see a change in this troublesome pattern. Unless we do this as citizens of Ann Arbor, then we are stuck with this type of city management. In private industry, many of these positions would have been eliminated or replaced with a capable person. It must start with us changing our council members and city leadership. We cannot let city council replace any key position unless we agree that the position needs to be filled and the candidate being hired is the right candidate.
Mike
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 4:01 p.m.
You really believe that government can't do things more efficiently than the private sector? You just want everyone to work for slave wages and bad benefits. I was telling my kids to get a governemnt job and now you're gonna ruin it for them......
Lets Get Real
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 12:59 p.m.
Amen! Oops - I guess in Ann Arbor, that's not PC
HappySenior
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 12:22 p.m.
From the article: Removing some services like residential trash pickup from the solid waste millage and funding them differently also is an option the city should consider, he said. "The commercial waste franchise is a good example," McMurtrie said. "We used to provide a commercial trash collection as part of the solid waste millage for business. That is now a fee-based program that's separate from the millage." This is part of the smokescreen of city government over the years. They ask for a millage and receive it. Then the games begin. They pull services out of the plan and expect residents to pay for it again. I don't understand why this is legal. I don't understand why we continue to allow it. There is a primary on August 2 for city council. You may not like the choices, but it would be a good message to send if we vote out all the incumbents.
Stephen Lange Ranzini
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 10:46 a.m.
The $28,000 saved by the city on eliminating Christmas Tree pickup is a good example of a false economy. The city government "saved" some money but the costs of the citizens went way up! I spent 45 minutes tying the tree to my car roof and driving it across town to the drop off lot and back home. Multiply those costs across everyone in Ann Arbor (45,693 households), and you quickly realize that it didn't cost us all under $1.00 per person to drop off our trees. At $0.55 in costs per mile travelled (the current IRS rate for the cost of a vehicle), the mileage alone round-trip was about $3 for me, and what about my time? Our time is valuable to us. It is just disrespectful to the citizens to pull stunts like this when the city is sitting on over $250 million in cash trapped in all those separate buckets. Drain the buckets!
KJMClark
Wed, Jul 13, 2011 : 11:56 a.m.
I agree with Johnnya2 - don't assume everyone else is choosing the most expensive, wasteful option just because you are. We haven't bought a cut tree in years. We used to buy live, potted trees and plant them afterward. Then we bought an artificial tree about ten years ago and have been using it ever since. If you want a cut tree, you hauled it to your house, so you can haul it to get rid of it. I don't agree that I should help pay for you to haul it away.
deb
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 8:04 p.m.
This is similar to what I wrote in December of last year about leaf pick-up; if you like it or not, remember the city told us they were eliminating the service and replacing it this way to SAVE MONEY. However, as it was already mentioned, we have hired additional staff and rented additonal trucks to pick up the leaves. I would like to know if any money was saved at all. Also the economic impact is not just limited to the pick up process. The time and money spent on bag should also be factored in. It took me somewhere between 3-7x longer this year to finish my leaves, and i spent about $15 dollars on the bags. At my most recent job, the company I worked for billed out at $125/per hour for my time. I averaged about $30 per hour take home, and was able to work as much as I wanted. Even at just $8/hour this program cost me $40 at minimum. Add the costs of other citizens time, the rental pickup truck, and extra crews up, then take that number minus what citizens time, expenses and the cities cost for picking up the leaves last year and maybe we have a realistic number of what the economic impact of this policy was. I would guess that when taking all/most factors into account this program is much more expensive this year then last year. Additionally, to the people that say, "all other cities do it, so stop whining." I retort that they do not pay the same taxes I do. I expect more for paying more taxes, not the same things as people in other cities who pay less taxes. I agree with you Stephen, I am just showcasing that the city refuses to look at the true economic impact of cutting services. Additionally, your argument may want to point out the extra carbon emissions that were emitted by the Christmas tree programs. It is more efficient to have a truck pick up the all the trees in an area then have each household drive themselves or burn the tree. After all, we are constantly told how the city is looking forward to becoming greener
Joe Kidd
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 7:39 p.m.
Geez, while I read this post, I could hear violin music playing in the background. I am with Johnny here. You decided to buy the tree, which required the chopping of a living carbon dioxide lowering tree but you don't mind your costs for that. But you complain only about the fact the city won't take it and how much that cost you? You forgot to add the value of the tissue paper you must have used to sop up your tears. Or the increased cost of your health care expenses due to the increase in your stress level for having to do all that work. I suppose we should factor in the amount of CO2 your dead tree will not extract from the atmosphere anymore and calculate how many more dollars the federal govt will now have to invest in "green" technology to make up the difference.
InsideTheHall
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 6:47 p.m.
WOW! This is all a bit frightening. Selling tags yields a whole new bureaucratic structure. I say torch em in the backyard and roast some marshmallows. Oh heck here comes the marshmallow tax!
Mike
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 3:59 p.m.
Pass a law banning Christmas trees or put a tax on them to pay for collections. Mao would be proud of me.............
EyeHeartA2
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 3:31 p.m.
My match was free. Man, did that thing go up in flames, smoked a lot too. Made for a nice spring bonfire and I thought of it as burning mayor Leftie in effigy.
Stephen Landes
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 1:55 p.m.
While I don't really like the idea of buying disposal tags for trees it is a concept that could work easily: ask tree sellers at lots to have the tags for sale with their trees, so you buy a tree and disposal tag at the same time. No trip to city hall required. I cut the branches off my tree and put them in the composting bin then cut up the trunk for kindling wood for the fireplace.
Lets Get Real
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 1:08 p.m.
Now there's an entrepreneur. Identify a need - people need to get rid of their Christmas trees. Provide a solution - pick them up for a fee. Market the benefits to the citizen who needs, wants and can afford the service - solution to your problem, convenient service, at your doorstep, with a friendly smile. And, they guy probably ground up the trees and sold it as mulch! Yeah for the entrepreneur!
Lets Get Real
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 1 p.m.
Drain the buckets!
johnnya2
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 12:59 p.m.
Stephen, YOU made the choice to buy a real Xmas tree. You want the other residents of Ann Arbor to fund your choice? How much did it cost you to go to the tree lot or farm, chop down the tree, pay for the tree etc etc. ? Getting rid of your tree should be on you. Why should a person like me, who does not celebrate xmas and does not have a tree pay for you to make your decision. Out of those 45,693 household, how many had real trees? How many had artificial trees and how many had no tree like me?
Mr Blue
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 12:46 p.m.
Better yet, stop buying trees that end up in landfills and compost.
Charlie Brown's Ghost
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 12:43 p.m.
Next time cut it up and use it for ground cover around the garden areas of your home.
Buster W.
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 12:06 p.m.
Bob W., Take a closer look at the tag idea...A resident would need to drive down to City Hall, find a parking space, stand in a long line, get a parking ticket (due to the long line) and drive back home. Seems like a lot of expense in time and money in that, too.
Bob W
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 11:52 a.m.
I agree with the math and thoughts about false economy. Felt this way the first time it was mentioned. However, since not everyone uses real trees, why tax everyone. How about the city figuring (estimating first time) the costs associated with the tree pick-up program and developing a tag system. Buy the tag, affix it to the tree an put it at the curb. I would be surprised if this weren't more cost effective than thousands loading, driving their individual trees. Maybe some private contractor might be interested.
andys
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 11:42 a.m.
I like your thinking. I had mine hauled away by some guy with a pickup truck that was riding around and knocking on doors of houses that had trees sitting at the curb. He charged me $5 dollars, which faced with your option Mr. Ranzini seemed like a bargin. But that goes to your point, if we all paid about $5 dollars, the city saves $28,000 and it costs the residents about $200,000!!! Thank you Mr. Mayor and city adminisrators. Could we citizens of AA wake up here and see how we are getting the middle finger from our city govt?
average joe
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 10:46 a.m.
"McMurtrie said the switch to single-stream recycling last year has proven wise,......" I didn't think that was the case last week when he recommended a rate increase because of "less than projected" numbers.
USRepublic
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 10:37 a.m.
Ann Arbor's trash is Hieftje's bread and butter!!! His business is picking up. Another case of AA residents getting what they deserve.
5c0++ H4d13y
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 10:32 a.m.
My trash bin is about half full every week.
smokeblwr
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 10:31 a.m.
I wouldn't mind the every other week pickup if they gave us all the biggest size dumpster for free.
5c0++ H4d13y
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 10:34 a.m.
That avatar pic' is a new classic. Well done.
Cathie
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 10:30 a.m.
Every other week and one side of the street collections are not viable alternatives for residents, especially considering the taxes we pay.
Mike
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 3:57 p.m.
Not on my side of the street or in my backyard......
MrBeasley
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 10:26 a.m.
Are you kidding me? Trash pick-up on only one side of the road??? That's going to go over well in the winter. The city rarely plows it's roads, so it will be great to watch the elderly try to get their trash carts through the snow and across the street for pick-up. Get real city council, trash pick-up is a basic city service that needs to be provided.
KJMClark
Wed, Jul 13, 2011 : 11:41 a.m.
Right before garbage pickup is the one day they always plow. Seriously, how did you miss that. They say it every winter. If you have an elderly neighbor, maybe you could help them? Aren't you already helping them shovel the sidewalk?
Mike
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 3:53 p.m.
I want to take my garbage and put it on my neighbors lawn that way if the racoons get into it my yard won't be messed up.
pseudo
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 10:26 a.m.
pick up the garbage as long as you have enough money for historic preservation coordinator and community standards ticket writers. seriously, you are cutting cops, fire and trash and not cutting extraneous staff.
InsideTheHall
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 6:42 p.m.
And how about that monument on Huron. It's big enough to house the Politburo.
Mike
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 3:57 p.m.
I have witnessede citizens coming into city hall with lists of their neighbors addresses and violations. Felt kind of creepy and communist............
justcary
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 3:44 p.m.
Sounds like you got a ticket for taking poor care of your yard or sidewalk. Your beef is not with the the Community Standards Bureau (which is but a single officer downtown), it's with the neighbor(s) who made a complaint against you. The gentleman who does cite folks for neglected sidewalks and other violations of the city code responds exclusively to complaints; he never goes out on a mission to find violators and write tickets. And when he does respond, he prefers to issue a warning rather than a citation, giving the inconsiderate resident an additional week to annoy the neighbors before complying.
InsideTheHall
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 10:25 a.m.
Chairman Hieftje hath spoken. No privatization allowed those outsiders don't vote here.
Peter Jameson
Wed, Jul 13, 2011 : 2:18 a.m.
Bear...when has more competition in a market ever led to a worse cost/benefit ratio? I'd say its worth a shot, depending on how they do it.
Bear
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 10:06 p.m.
Privatization is a can of worms you don't want to open. It will end up meaning higher costs & lower standards. Along with that a less competent workforce that is paid less and cares less. Best service is from the public sector in refuse collection. Although the city will realize a savings, the homeowner will not.
Mike
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 3:55 p.m.
Give the guy a break, the unions would have him for lunch if he made such a proposal........
Bcar
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 10:21 a.m.
I've got an ever better idea! Lets only pick up trash every THREE weeks and then we can paint pretty foo-foo flowers on the sidewalks!! Or better yet, once a month and we can hang Christmas ornaments from the street lights and get rid of more police and firefighters!! Oh wait, can I say "Christmas?" I don't want to offend anyone.... LOL.
Mike
Tue, Jul 12, 2011 : 3:54 p.m.
I can't believe you used the "C" word in this town. I'm calling the PC police