Maier Suchowljansky

Mon, Apr 23, 2012 : 1:07 a.m.

Does anyone else have that oddball relative who never seems to get it quite right, who always makes bad decisions, and who always seems to be on your doorstep asking for money? On the surface, you just hate to say no because they're incapable of handling their affairs and you're afraid of what might happen if you don't give in. Deep down, you just know that your money will be squandered away and they'll be back for more before too long. Every time it happens, you wish that grandpa would step in and crack the whip and take control. But everyone says it would be too traumatic and awkward, so he never does. So you keep giving and sacrificing, hoping things will change. And it always gets worse. And it never ends. It's time to crack the whip and say no.

ypsi 1

Sun, Apr 22, 2012 : 11:31 p.m.

Can't believe the people who chose to comment and know nothing about the history! NO there is no one sill in office who did the Water Street deal. This has been stated so often I'm incredulous is keeps getting asked. Doesn't really matter though, as it is what it is. The citizens either pay back some of their recent tax reductions for the good of the city or else prepare for the consequesces: lose police fire and service employees. Don't comment if you're not living in Ypsi as you are not facing the danger.

JB

Sun, Apr 22, 2012 : 9:09 p.m.

I live in Ann Arbor and work in Ypsilanti -- not at EMU or the City of Ypsilanti, by the way. Of course paying higher taxes is not 100% appealing to me, but I support this proposal. The place where I work has made use of the Ypsilanti police and fire services several times over the years; we have greatly appreciated their prompt response times and professionalism. Similarly, I've worked with various COY staff members over the past couple of years and have been impressed by their dedication and work ethic. Without this tax, the City and its residents will suffer; I'm okay with paying a little more so that doesn't happen.

eastsidemom

Sun, Apr 22, 2012 : 11:22 a.m.

I am sick about the scare tactics being used to promote this huge tax increase for the citizens of Ypsilanti. Scaring elderly widows living alone and telling them the streetlights will be out and no police will answer their calls. Oh yes and this is because every couple of blocks we need a new government entity complete with and administration and all the expensive trimmings. Please guard your turf, we must pay 28% more for it for the next 5 years.

Stephen Lange Ranzini

Sun, Apr 22, 2012 : 5:35 a.m.

Mr. Weiss wrote: "Furthermore, the threat of an emergency city manager just a few years off won't be an economic or population stimulus either." All the projections of financial doom and talk about Emergency Financial Managers are scare tactics based on "facts" that come from the same people who frequently revise the city's five year financial projections up and down to such a degree that you ought to question their competence. Do you actually trust their figuring and five year projections? Paper takes ink, but that doesn't make it true! See: www.annarbor.com/news/ypsilanti-officials-frequently-change-5-year-budget-projections-as-vote-on-tax-proposals-near/ I suggest you ask the following question of your political leaders: if the city is in such "bad" financial shape, how come your outstanding debt is rated so highly by the bond rating agencies? An "A2" rating is an excellent investment grade rating (Moody's says: "Obligations rated A[2] are considered upper-medium grade and are subject to low credit risk.")! Sure the rating agencies aren't perfect but they are a lot more careful these days than before. This is a manufactured "crisis" in my opinion and in my opinion you are being hoodwinked. I'd like to see the financial projections that were provided to the rating agencies!!

Jay Thomas

Sun, Apr 22, 2012 : 1:14 a.m.

The University is not the problem (it's all Ypsi really has). Ypsi is that rare university town with a majority of its housing being composed of rentals. The problem is that Ypsi has always been geared toward maintaining and growing a population of the underclass. You get what you focus on. Instead of spending its scarce resources on promoting home ownership, it always finds the money to rebuild housing projects that only lasted a few decades in the first place. I know home owners that don't even have street lights despite living on a normal street! It has let slumlords THRIVE for as long as I can remember. It loves to put... let's call them "low income services"... right off campus so the students can get mugged and raped by the people living in the projects (and boy do they ever! It's a neverending crime wave). Ypsi just does things WRONG.

TommyJ

Sun, Apr 22, 2012 : 12:18 a.m.

I am glad I live in the Township and don't work in the city.

The Black Stallion3

Sat, Apr 21, 2012 : 10:38 p.m.

Do away with all city pensions.what is wrong with a 401K plan for everyone? If we the tax payers are to fund these pensions then we will vote NO, NO, NO......public employee's are no better than the private sector employee's who pay them.

Stephen Lange Ranzini

Sat, Apr 21, 2012 : 10:30 p.m.

FYI, in case you want to look and come up with your own suggestions, here is the 2011 audited financial report (CAFR) for the city of Ypsilanti: https://michigan.gov/documents/treasury/812040YpsilantiCity20111219_371737_7.pdf

Stephen Lange Ranzini

Sat, Apr 21, 2012 : 10:27 p.m.

Next since *no one* in the private sector can afford to pay employees a post retirement health care plan, the city could look into eliminating that for everyone but police and fire fighters.  Philosophically, I believe that government workers should be paid no less than nor no more than comparable private sector jobs pay.  That would probably reduce the annual cost by half, a savings of another $500,000 a year.    Over 5 years, maybe $5.5 million could be raised with these two suggestions?

Stephen Lange Ranzini

Sat, Apr 21, 2012 : 10:25 p.m.

Several posters have made a challenge, come up with an alternative plan and we'll vote down the tax.  Well here are two ideas to consider.   Ypsilanti runs three pension and retirement plans, (A) one for police and fire, (B) one for everyone else and (C) a post retirement health care plan, similar to the one that sank GM.  The city runs A and C and not surprisingly, both of those plans are in a giant deficit and cost the city a combined almost $2 million deficit.  Page 49 of the annual financial audit of the city (CAFR) states: "The annual pension cost (APC) for the year ended June 30, 2011 is $1,018,284," for Plan A and page 52 notes "Contributions made: $949,195" to Plan C.    Now the good news is Plan B, the plan the State of Michigan runs, has been well managed and has a very large surplus and page 51 notes "The City was required to make a minimal contribution of $444 to the plan for the year ended June 30, 2011."   So, here is my idea.  Terminate Plan A and/or terminate Plan B and combine Plan A and Plan B into one combined pension plan for all city employees.  Since page 51 notes that Plan B has a surplus of $6,008,058, (Unfunded Actuarial Accrued Liability (UAAL) $ (6,008,058)" and since page 50 notes that Plan A has a deficit of 10,486,606 ("Unfunded AAL (UAAL) $ 10,486,606", the combined plans might have a deficit of only $4.48 million, so the annual contribution required would drop from $1,018,284 to perhaps $400,000 a year, a savings of $600,000 a year.

Bells Defranco

Sat, Apr 21, 2012 : 9:25 p.m.

It's a simple choice for American voters too this November. Vote the marxist bum out.

Martin Church

Sat, Apr 21, 2012 : 9:15 p.m.

So your saying don't cut city services. But if the measures do pass I have to cut personal spending and savings. What do I cut. Let see I guess I could eat more high starchy foods and cheaper meats. I can stop paying for gas to heat my home and the electrical. Over the last 10 years I have seen my income cut by 40% and my taxes go up by even more. The city choose to ignore what was said during the water street debte in 1999 and went ahead and destroyed many business that were providing jobs to our economy. force business that wanted to get tax help to pay outrageous wages beyond the federal and state standards. I say let's stop rewarding bad behavior with more income. No way in the plan is there a way to restore or cancel the extra taxes if the economy turns or the property is fully developed. that means the city will return to the mistakes of the past. I SAY VOTE NO until a real plan is put together that will provide for the tax payers.

Bogie

Sat, Apr 21, 2012 : 9:03 p.m.

I agree, the city should have an income tax.......Look how well it has worked for Detroit, and Flint?

Bells Defranco

Sat, Apr 21, 2012 : 8:47 p.m.

This country is about to go through a massive reset period. When we have 16 going on 20 trillion in debt, and the current government's only answer is to double the capital gains tax, penalizing investors, it's clear that we are doomed. Ypsi is just little Obama. Same tactics, same fear mongering, same type of government club members all lookin' out for themselves. No reform, no new ideas, just the same old attempt take more money from others. People need to pay their fair share, I bet you say. I say get your hefty salaries and lavish benefits in line with the private sector's then. Thing is, you don't have to get them in line, because it's not your money, so why do you care? People are tired of the same old repetitive 2-chord refrain. People don't like having their money wasted and then getting asked for more. And here's another thing, we're in a recession, I know, so in these kind of times you have to make cutbacks. When times are good and the economy is cranking, you need to SAVE for a rainy day. SAVE, and not waste all the money. Government just doesn't get this concept. But you don't have to I guess, and that's because you can always just take more from the citizens if you failed to save during the good times.

David Cahill

Sat, Apr 21, 2012 : 7:53 p.m.

Several years ago, a proposal for an income tax for Ypsilanti was crushed by a 2-1 margin. Is there any reliable polling data on how public opinion is leaning now?

Bells Defranco

Sat, Apr 21, 2012 : 7:30 p.m.

It's unfair and unconstitutional for government to act this way. They stick together and care mostly about their own pensions and golden retirements. Mary Ann mentions "promises" from the state, and then mentions the word again, saying "revenues "promised" through passage on income tax." Just like Obama who says it constantly, but uses a different term. Obama is always going to "ensure" everything. This is where the fundamental philosophy differs between democrats and republicans. Democrats want to promise, or ensure everything, through higher taxes and bigger government, because the private sector can't be trusted according to them. Republicans understand that there are no guarantees in life, and that the best way is to give freedom to the individual to succeed and create wealth through lower taxes and less regulation. America's founders warned of this phenomenon. Liberty eventually has to make way for government gains. It happens incrementally. But evidence that it's true exists all around the world today, from Detroit to Greece. Jefferson said this: "Every government degenerates when trusted to the rulers of the people alone." The people themselves, therefore, are its only safe depositories." Grabbing more money through higher taxes takes the power away from the individual, Ypsilanti. It squashes the desire of the people that actually produce things. If Ypsi, Detroit, the USA, and the rest of the world continue to ignore this, we'll have real poverty, at all levels. Government is not GOD. Government doesn't produce anything, it just takes. I suggest the Ypsilanti city government read the constitution. Or do you think you know better?

The Black Stallion3

Sat, Apr 21, 2012 : 7:27 p.m.

Sorry Blah, Blah, Blah Anna but the tax payers can see right through this and they Will vote it down....it is the only sensible thing too.....Sorry.

Anna Elder

Sat, Apr 21, 2012 : 7:11 p.m.

Blah, blah, blah Detroit! Blah, blah, blah city council! Blah, blah, blah padded pensions! Blah, blah, blah unions! Blah, blah, blah tax flight! Blah, blah, blah Obama! Blah, blah, blah May vote! Instead of this collection of fears and ignorance, go to SAVEYPSIYES.COM and get some facts. On this page, there is some evidence to back up the case for the yes vote. Ypsilanti needs educated voters. So find out the facts and vote yes.

jim

Sat, Apr 21, 2012 : 7 p.m.

If raising taxes lowers property values, And property taxes are tied to property values, Raising property taxes will result in less property tax revenue collected in the long run. The same vicious circle that continues to haunt Detroit.

The Black Stallion3

Sat, Apr 21, 2012 : 6:48 p.m.

It is very obvious by the comments here that most of the com-mentors in favor of raising taxes are city employees or teachers. I can understand that they want to keep all their benefits and their padded pensions, who wouldn't? But, it is not fair to ask the tax payers in the private sector to keep supporting your dreams when theirs have been shattered. I believe it is time for public employee's to share in this terrible economy. Suck it up and go on with life but please do not expect us to feel sorry for you. we must vote NO on higher taxes and take what comes, be it bankruptcy or an EFM. It is the right thing to do.

Pickforddick

Sat, Apr 21, 2012 : 6:28 p.m.

Why should tax payers continue to pay for pensions, medical, bonuses, drive vehicles for some and raises not only while these public servants are working but for the rest of their lives after they retire? Can you honestly say that is fair to the tax payers who are losing most of these benefits if they are lucky enough to even have a job? I am waiting for an answer to this.

Mary Ann Barbary

Sat, Apr 21, 2012 : 6:25 p.m.

Falling revenue from the State of Michigan (in spite of its promises) means that we have to take care of ourselves. I dread the idea of an Emergency Manager taking over our city and selling off our assets, our public trusts, and cutting even more staff and services without citizen input. With more income from all who use city services, we can retain our local control. We need the revenues that are promised thru the passage of the income tax. Today's AnnArbor.com pointed out that crime and robberies are rising in AA. It's happening everywhere due to our down economy. The last thing we need is less police protection. I can't help what happened in the past. I have to learn the facts and then act to protect the services that are important to me as a city resident. I'm voting yes and I invite you to do the same.

Pickforddick

Sat, Apr 21, 2012 : 6:21 p.m.

Vote NO, NO, NO The only way to save this city is to have it go bankrupt or have an EFM come in a set it right.

Macabre Sunset

Sat, Apr 21, 2012 : 6:09 p.m.

Instead of passing a tax that will be a deal-breaker for any business considering a move to Ypsi and an incentive for many businesses to leave, maybe the city should analyze exactly why it needs this money when most cities don't. A poster above talks about the "sacrifice" of paying 20% of your own medical costs. In the real world, we pay for our own medical insurance. In the real world, we save money on our own, there's no such thing as a pension. I question the wisdom of a tax increase that, long-term, probably will reduce revenues. All that simply to fund Cadillac benefits for public employees. And just imagine where they were a few years ago, with 35% more employees. There's definitely a public trust issue here.

Bells Defranco

Sat, Apr 21, 2012 : 5:41 p.m.

Look at any city with huge financial problems, and they all have these things in common - greedy unions and socialist democrats running amuck. It's happening on a national level also, to the point that America is just about destroyed financially. Sounds too late for Ypsi. You guys have blown it already. And your answer is to raise taxes? That's your solution for how to become competitive? Raising taxes might work if Ypsi was the only city to live in, but there's this thing called competition, which all you government dems just don't get, I know. You have to COMPETE with other cities. Raising taxes takes you out of the game! Same goes for the national scene. Obama is obsessed with raising taxes, which will further diminish America's competitiveness in a global economy. Didn't your liberal college profs teach you this? What we'll eventually end up with in this country, is a dead private sector, and government employees as the only ones with jobs. You simply raise taxes when you spend too much money, unlike a private corporation which must lean up to survive. Greece used the model you advocate, and look where they are. Detroit is like the wild west, guns blazin', complete financial carnage. And they have to be dragged like babies kicking and screaming to get anything done. That's your big brother, man! and you can't even learn a lesson from it? Same liberal, tax and spend, entitlement mentality. Here's the answer: get rid of ALL UNIONS immediately. Then hire a private sector CEO and tell them to fix your city like he or she would fix a private corporation. That's free advice, and the best advice you'll ever get. But knowing city government, you'll go hire a liberal consultant for 50,000 to tell you to raise taxes. How can government be this detached from reality? Your job should not be to confiscate more of the taxpayers money, but to make due with what you have, and then CUT taxes.

Idiocracy

Sat, Apr 21, 2012 : 5:35 p.m.

If the city income tax is passed then city property owners will have an even harder time selling their properties. No one is going to purchase a house in the city when the township is so close and has lower taxes and no income tax. The fact that you will be adding all of these EMU people to the tax base ignores the fact that you are hitting property owners twice. If the plan reduced property taxes to help offset the income tax for property owners maybe it would be more acceptable. And nobody seems to mention the added cost of collecting these taxes. As for real solutions how about we do something with water street instead of letting it sit there. This is a nice piece of riverfront property right next to downtown and walking distance to depot town and we need to take advantage of that. The fact that we are spending money on a May ballot (just to try to sneak this in under voter's noses) is just another example of the fiscal irresponsibility of this city!

Lisa Bashert

Sat, Apr 21, 2012 : 5:15 p.m.

I wanted to say thank you to John Weiss for this straightforward and simple guest column. John has been part of the solution in Ypsilanti for years. He and many other citizens have worked very hard to keep our community thriving in these uncertain times. It is through efforts like his that our city will continue to be the great place to live that it is now. Ypsilanti is mean and lean fighting machine! We have made the painful cuts that are possible and now we need more revenue from those who use our city services without contributing. This plan will help us move into the future with the tools we need to build a more resilient community: run with locally elected representatives and creating solutions that make sense for our residents and taxpayers. We love our city and we won't give up.

Glen S.

Sat, Apr 21, 2012 : 4:57 p.m.

Voters deserve to have complete (and truthful) information before they decide on May 8. That's why it's such a shame that some of the posters here who are blasting the City of Ypsilanti and calling for more and deeper cuts won't take a moment to actually find out the *facts* before spreading such damaging (and seriously outdated) misinformation. For starters, the days of "gold plated" pensions and benefits for City employees ended YEARS ago. Ypsilanti City employees ALREADY pay 20% of their total health insurance costs. Salaries for administrative staff have been frozen for several years. Union employees have made substantial concessions in recent contracts. And, because the City has instituted "furlough days," most City employees have actually taken pay CUTS, in recent years. Likewise -- contrary to another piece of misinformation being spread by opponents of these proposals -- neither the Mayor nor any current (or past) City Council members receive ANY pension or benefits. These are basically "volunteer" positions that only pay a modest stipend to cover their costs -- and even these already modest payments have been cut several times in recent years. Please understand: Voting "No" on these measures won't punish past City Council members for decisions you didn't like. It will not serve as a "payback" for the Water Street. Nor is it a way to get back at "greedy" public servants. The only people who will be "punished" by a "No" vote on May 8 are thousands of hard-working Ypsilanti residents, homeowners, and business owners who will see increased crime and blight, see their community "fail," and see the values of their properties drop even more. It is very easy to get carried away by rhetoric ... but please, take a few minutes to get the facts -- and think about the consequences -- before you vote on May 8.

Pickforddick

Sat, Apr 21, 2012 : 4:17 p.m.

Vote no or end up paying big time for the public servants to live large and retire large on our dime.

The Black Stallion3

Sat, Apr 21, 2012 : 3:42 p.m.

Get ready Ypsi.........the ones who are pushing this tax increase are the ones who work for the city or benefit from contracts with it. How about all city employees forfeit their pensions and pay into a 401K? Also they will be required to pay 25% of their medical premiums and they will not be afforded free medical upon retirement? These are all expenses paid for by us tax payers and they still want us to pay more. The money we save on the fore mentioned items will be more that enough to help the city pay the bills without a tax hike. Also we will freeze all raises for 5 years to these employee's. What do you say public employee's....are you willing to sacrifice like you are asking us to do?

information please

Sat, Apr 21, 2012 : 3:14 p.m.

Has the ratio of municipal employees to citizens in Ypsilanti been compared to similarly sized, successful municipalities? 140 seems incredibly excessive, but I wonder if 91 to roughly 19,500 is where the city should be as compared to peers in Michigan.

Lloyd Payer

Sat, Apr 21, 2012 : 2:49 p.m.

TAX TAX TAX THAN NEXT THANK YOU KNOW THEY GIVE THERE SELF A BONUS THAN TAX TAX TAX THAN ITS SAME STORY THEY ARE BROKE AGAIN TAX TAX KMOW MOBODY IS LEFT THEY MOVED OUT TAX TAX TAX NOTHANK IS LEFT BUT MORE TAX TAX BYE BYE MICHIGAN

Barbara M Papp

Sat, Apr 21, 2012 : 2:46 p.m.

Is it really so simple? How many people in the area are without jobs? How many who have jobs do not earn enough to cover their most basic needs each month? How many will be even more financially pressed as the rising cost of gas raises the price of every daily necessity?

Carol L

Sat, Apr 21, 2012 : 2:13 p.m.

I'd like to thank John Weiss for putting factual information before the voters of Ypsilanti. Those opposed to the ballot issues are spreading fear and doubt without any sound facts to support their positions. If these two proposals do not pass, we will have a budget deficit of more than $13 million over the next 5 years with no way to fill that hole. The "Just Say No" people have yet to explain how that hole will be filled and how we will keep our police and fire services. I am voting YES on May 8th.

Julia Grant

Sat, Apr 21, 2012 : 2:11 p.m.

I agree with Kristyn. Ypsi is a small city with a big tax-exempt university taking up a big percentage of the taxable property. (Isn't it like 35% or something?) It's a no-brainer that having some income from EMU and others who work in Ypsi for city services is a good thing. I can't go with the persepctive that taxes are always bad. We've already cut staff to the bone, as Weiss says. So we have to get more money from somewhere and it isn't going to be the state. So, while I am not thrilled, I will vote yes.

Lisa Bashert

Sat, Apr 21, 2012 : 1:50 p.m.

Like John Weiss, I have lived in Ypsi for decades. I can't blame the citizens who served on City Council for not knowing the future when they acquired the Water Street property -- who knew that the bottom was going to fall out of the economy? I have made some huge mistakes in my time in my household management -- but I didn't declare bankruptcy and my city shouldn't either. We can and SHOULD pay that debt. With the big reduction in property taxes, we can afford to pay this small income tax -- and I welcome the addition of 6,000 more tax payers. As we face more of the same and worse (global financial crisis, climate change, and skyrocketing energy costs), I can't imagine a worse idea than relinquishing local elected government for an EFM. Our city has been resilient and fighting back against very challenging odds. I'm proud of all we've accomplished and I believe deeply that this bold plan will work. So I'll be voting YES for both proposals on May 8.

Jon Wax

Sat, Apr 21, 2012 : 1:33 p.m.

this isn't just ypsi. this is the entire country in 2013. doesn't matter which party wins, the only thing to do in 2013 is cuts. HUGE cuts. in ALL areas: education, medical, etc. Austerity measures are going to be hard for this country to handle. But on the bright side, much like Harlem and soon to follow Detroit, once the property values drop low enough and the people all move out, others will come in and buy it all up and renovate it and turn around and sell it to the highest bidder. Ypsi doesn't have enough hardcore money to cover it's costs. EMU, the businesses and the locals can't foot the bill. if you jam them up on more taxes, they will leave the sinking ship that is Ypsi... just like everyone is leaving Detroit. Peace

Chase Ingersoll

Sat, Apr 21, 2012 : 1:31 p.m.

EMU is the straw man that gets thrown under the bus by the City of Ypsilanti, every time they are shown to be fiscally incompetent. Were it not for EMU, the property values in the city of Ypsilanti would be the lowest in Washtenaw County. As it is they are near that due to the millage rates being the second highest in the state to DETROIT!!! And now, they want an income tax?! On the issue of fire services to EMU: with buildings maintained under the commercial building codes with sprinklers, the EMU campus is not a big user of fire protection services. Rather, the big users of fire protection services are the aged and low income in the rest of the city. A city manager and even better, a bankruptcy that would clear off the structure debt that would enable a drastic lowering of the millages to competitive levels would do more than anything to make living in Ypsilanti affordable to people that actually pay a mortgage or rent that is not subsidized. Where was Weiss letter to the editor when the Ypsilanti City Council was making bad decisions? Chase Ingersoll

worldchamp

Sat, Apr 21, 2012 : 1:05 p.m.

This is the specific reason municipalities should not get into the development business. Now the piper has shown up at the front door. Oh and by the way, if you are going to tax people from outside the city, I am sure the have the right to vote for that tax increase. Sounds like a slippery slope. Maybe a Financial Manager is the last best hope.

Ron Granger

Sat, Apr 21, 2012 : 12:58 p.m.

A Yes seems like an endorsement of the people who did the Water Street deal. Are those politicians still in office? I don't know how you fix Ypsi. But there needs to be some fundamental changes beyond higher taxes and some cuts.

Kristyn Spangler

Sat, Apr 21, 2012 : 12:19 p.m.

I know it's not really this simple, but it seems like having people who live and work in Ypsilanti help pay for keeping it safe (and thus a place where people want to continue living and working) makes perfect sense. I've lived in Ypsilanti or 12 years.

The Black Stallion3

Sat, Apr 21, 2012 : 12:08 p.m.

If the city can't manage their finances then maybe it is time to have Governor Snyder to appoint an Emergency Manager to get this city back to financial order.

Glen S.

Sat, Apr 21, 2012 : 11:43 a.m.

I agree. Given the budget circumstances we face, a "Yes" vote on both May 8 ballot questions is our last, best option to guarantee that Ypsilanti is able to continue delivering essential services -- including Police and Fire Protection -- at levels necessary to keep our community safe and attractive to new residents and businesses. On the other hand, a "No" vote will spell deep cuts to Police and Fire, and set us up for a downward spiral that will create a fiscal emergency -- and, ultimately, a takeover by a Snyder-appointed "Emergency Manager." While some in our community oppose this plan, NONE of them has been able to offer an acceptable alternative that will guarantee a solid future for Ypsilanti. I plan to vote "YES" on both issues on May 8, and I'm encouraging all my neighbors to do the same. I also encourage everyone who wants to learn more about these proposals to visit: www.saveypsiyes.com