Ypsilanti City Council approves budget with no staff layoffs
The Ypsilanti City Council voted unanimously in favor of city budgets for fiscal years 2012-13 and 2014-15 that would allow for the city to realize a surplus instead of a deficit.
Across all funds, the budget shows $31.8 million in revenue and $31.6 million in expenditures for fiscal year 2012-13, including $13.7 million in general fund spending.
For fiscal year 2013-14, revenue will show a slight decrease to $30.7 million and expenditures will amount to $30.6 million. The city is expected to spend about $13.4 million of the general fund.
Council member Peter Murdock proposed budget amendments that created a surplus of $8,682 in 2012-13 and $382,514 in 2014-15.
Council was quick to point out that the approved budget does not have any actual layoffs.
“Given our circumstances, I think we’ve done a couple of things,” Murdock said. “We reduced a few positions, but there are no actual layoffs. Some of the positions are predicated on grants being successful.”
Instead of layoffs, the fire department will reduce its force by three in 2013 by attrition, with the elimination of a vacant position and two retirements towards the end of 2012.
However, council noted that unless grants are received—particularly the SAFER grant that the fire department applied for earlier this year— the department may be reduced by additional four positions in 2014.
“We’ve tightened up some things because the reality here is we have a lot of issues on our plate,” Murdock said. “ We left some wiggle room in 2014 for things to be adjusted and maneuvered. We haven’t locked ourselves into a total box.”
The police department will eliminate a records clerk and one police officer position in fiscal year 2013-14, a move that is expected to save $134,460.
The department also faces the possibility of two police officer positions being eliminated in 2014 unless grant funding is received.
Council member Michael Bodary said these budgets have simply put a “Band-Aid” on the situation of not having to directly lay anyone off right now— he reiterated that can change.
“When 2013-14 comes around, it can be a different situation,” Bodary said. “We’re not out of the woods yet. This budget process has been a very difficult thing and in the last three years I’ve been here I haven’t seen anything like it.”
Mayor Pro-Tem Lois Richardson said she believes this is “the worst financial situation” the city has been in.
“What we have done is certainly by no means putting a new roof on the house, but it stops a leak from damaging the inside,” Richardson said. “I think we have something we can live with for now (that will) get us to where we can deal with the more serious problems in a better way.”
Mayor Paul Schreiber echoed the sentiments that this is only a short-term fix to a potentially long-term problem down the road.
“This is a two year budget,” Schreiber said. “A five year budget just doesn’t work right now… Mr. Lange, the city manager, is aware of the challenges we face and he’s already thinking of ways that the city can restructure itself and it’s going to be hard and painful.
"But at least today we have a balanced budget for fiscal years '13 and '14.”
Ypsilanti resident Bob Levy was relieved to discover the city council decided not to immediately cut any jobs, particularly those in the fire and police departments.
"I'm glad we still have a good police and fire department ran by competent people, and this is something that should be our first priority," Levy said.
Comments
SEC Fan
Thu, Jun 7, 2012 : 12:07 p.m.
Interesting. Per the Ypsi Crime map (http://geodata.acad.emich.edu/Crime/Main.htm), there have been no crimes in Ypsi in April/May this year??? All the crimes have occurred on the EMU campus. If true, maybe 3 police officers on duty at night isn't so bad. I would like to see the actual crime statistics for Ypsi (#/Type of crime, response times, etc.). Then we could actually assess if the number of police on duty is appropriate or not.
SEC Fan
Thu, Jun 7, 2012 : 4:30 p.m.
it shows the EMU crimes. I also looked at Spotcrime.com and it showed similar info.
YpsiVeteran
Thu, Jun 7, 2012 : 2:03 p.m.
The map is obviously not updated. Not even the crimes reported in the paper are on it. Either it's not updated or it's not functioning.
Stephen Lange Ranzini
Thu, Jun 7, 2012 : 3:50 a.m.
u812: FYI, Ann Arbor actually has only 5 patrol cars on duty each shift and has a population of 114,000 versus roughly 18,000 in Ypsilanti. Of course U-M also has additional officers on duty but they don't cover the rest of the city, just campus. Ann Arbor is 27.7 square miles and Ypsilanti is 4.5 square miles and also has the EMU police force covering just the campus. I have argued elsewhere that 5 per shift is too few for Ann Arbor.
YpsiVeteran
Thu, Jun 7, 2012 : 1:59 p.m.
What does Ann Arbor PD have to do with YPD? Nothing. "5 patrol cars" says nothing about how many PEOPLE are on duty, by the way. Most of the time, every APD patrol car has two officers in it. That would give APD at least 10 officers on duty, plus whatever other special units and command staff they have. YPD has 3, sometimes 4 officers and a Sgt. The Ypsilanti community bears little resemblance to the A2 community, and the nature and rate of crimes committed are vastly different, so whatever APD has or doesn't have, or does or doesn't do, really has very little relevance when it comes to Ypsilanti.
u812
Thu, Jun 7, 2012 : 12:40 a.m.
Wow only four police officers to cover the entire city at night,the criminals hopefully haven't heard this.
Stephen Lange Ranzini
Wed, Jun 6, 2012 : 10:58 p.m.
@Gale Logan: Ann Arbor is a wealthy town rolling in money and Ypsilanti is not. Ypsilanti is facing a different trade off. If Ypsilanti raises taxes further it will fall into a downward spiral and all the police and fire won't help it. Ann Arbor has $250 million in reserves held by the city of Ann Arbor, of which $100 million is under the control of city council's whim and of that just $14 million is available to the general fund from which the police and fire fighters are paid. Please note the numbers are approximate and based on the latest city audited financial statement or "CAFR". Feel free to actually read the CAFR yourself and post the actual numbers if you want exact precision. The city of Ypsilanti can only dream about having politicians so wasteful of the funds entrusted to them!
Gale Logan
Wed, Jun 6, 2012 : 8:08 p.m.
Interesting to read Mr. Ranzini's comments. Compared to Ypsilanti Ann Arbor has a robust police and fire department. If a police or fire position were cut in A2 he would dash off 6 posts in outrage. Except for a tiny increase, the voters asked the city to take over sidewalk maintenance, the millage in A2 hasn't gone up in over a decade. It's still lower now than it was in 2000. That aside I believe the leaders in Ypsilanti are doing a good job in a tough situation.
Goober
Wed, Jun 6, 2012 : 6:39 p.m.
This conversation is getting embarrassing!
Pickforddick
Wed, Jun 6, 2012 : 6:35 p.m.
Sorry but I do not trust politicians anymore
Glen S.
Wed, Jun 6, 2012 : 2:19 p.m.
The City of Ypsilanti HAS balanced its budget without raising taxes, or activating any layoffs ... for now. However, this is only possible because Council decided to pursue a more aggressive draw-down of the City's fund balance -- essentially, our "rainy day" fund, and our only remaining insurance policy against a financial catastrophe. But make no mistake, a month after the recent tax election, Ypsilanti STILL faces a long-term, structural budget deficit that will HAVE to be addressed, eventually -- one way, or the other. (Additional taxes, or devastating cuts.) All last night's actions do is to push the actual deadline a little bit farther down the road, and assure that when the inevitable happens, it will be that much more severe.
chris
Wed, Jun 6, 2012 : 6:19 p.m.
Kind of like Bill Murray in Caddyshack - standing in the middle of the monsoon saying "I don't think the heavy stuff's gonna start for awhile yet."
greg, too
Wed, Jun 6, 2012 : 6:06 p.m.
"However, this is only possible because Council decided to pursue a more aggressive draw-down of the City's fund balance -- essentially, our "rainy day" fund, and our only remaining insurance policy against a financial catastrophe." So this is a question that no one seems to answer. What is the point of having a rainy day fund if you don't use it? I would think we currently are in a rainy day financially and yet the city council is still trying to protect and/or increase it. If Ypsi wasn't in such dire straits where it needed to draw from it, then why put forth the income tax proposal (I understood the reasoning for the millage) in the first place? What qualifies as a rainy day?
Glen S.
Wed, Jun 6, 2012 : 6:02 p.m.
Agree with you, Mike. My comment wasn't aimed so much at City Council, as at the folks on here who are "celebrating" the fact that the budget contains neither taxes, nor cuts -- as well as those who are claiming they are being lied to about the scope of the deficit.
Mike
Wed, Jun 6, 2012 : 4:57 p.m.
Using the reserves does kick the can down the road. Being a politician in most communities gets tougher and tougher every year thanks to those who will not make tough decisions and face the scorn that would be directed at them.
YpsiVeteran
Wed, Jun 6, 2012 : 2:53 p.m.
Glen, I agree with everything you said except the "inevitable" part. I don't think financial doom for the city IS inevitable. I think several possible scenarios could come to pass, and things can be done in the next couple years to slowly but surely improve the long-term financial picture for the city. Does anyone know when the new city manager starts work?
YpsiVeteran
Wed, Jun 6, 2012 : 1:19 p.m.
The police department has already been cut, in anticipation of the tax proposals not passing. How many of you crowing are aware that on any given night right now in Ypsilanti there are only 3 officers, sometimes four, and a Sgt on duty? That officers are forced into working unsustainable amounts of overtime to fill in gaps left by lack of staff? The council decided to refrain from cutting further for the next couple years, a wise course of action given the potential for change in the financial climate and the incoming new city manager, but that doesn't mean anyone was lied to, and it doesn't mean those cuts won't still be needed in the future. Hopefully they won't be, but nothing the city said during the election has been shown to be false. Those of you pretending otherwise are heavily invested in not facing facts, and viewing this situation through fixed perceptions not based on reality. The council, from the very start, said loudly, clearly and repeatedly that the projected deficits they were trying to avoid were in the coming years. Those of you accusing people of lying should be ashamed of yourselves.
YpsiVeteran
Fri, Jun 8, 2012 : 3:04 a.m.
Ken, I think public safety should be the number one priority, and I'm not a big fan of many of the decisions this council has made. It's not fair to call them liars, however, and I do support not eliminating any more public safety positions at this time. I believe council should authorize the hiring of replacements for retiring officers, as the police dept. can't afford to lose any more people. We'll see if they do it.
Ken
Thu, Jun 7, 2012 : 8:25 p.m.
@YpsiVeteran What is really shameful is a Mayor willing to sacrifice Public Safety by throwing money from the General Fund for a Transit Millage shortfall after being overcharged by the AATA while anticipating lay offs of Police and Fire. What is really shameful is the robust activity, and money being wasted with consultants taking place among the Politicians in this County for the Transit Millage, rather than seriously going after a County Wide Public Safety millage so that we do not loose any of our Safety forces!
YpsiVeteran
Wed, Jun 6, 2012 : 6:50 p.m.
Sure it is, Goober -- eventually. I suppose even one's enough...I guess it all depends on how long you're willing to wait.
Goober
Wed, Jun 6, 2012 : 6:43 p.m.
isn't 3 officers on nights, possibly 4 including a Sgt. on duty sufficient to answer any and all calls?
Pickforddick
Wed, Jun 6, 2012 : 6:33 p.m.
More scare tactics..............No more taxes
Ross
Wed, Jun 6, 2012 : 2:13 p.m.
Thank you Ypsi Vet! Very well said. And TRUE.
The Black Stallion3
Wed, Jun 6, 2012 : 10:45 a.m.
Imagine that.............and we were told nothing but doom and gloom would happen without a tax increase............absolutely amazing isn't it?
Stephen Lange Ranzini
Wed, Jun 6, 2012 : 10:27 a.m.
Thank you for balancing the city's budget without raising taxes!
Julie Baker
Wed, Jun 6, 2012 : 4:58 p.m.
This conversation is beginning to drift off-topic. Please keep your comments on this topic. Thanks.
Stephen Lange Ranzini
Wed, Jun 6, 2012 : 4:49 p.m.
@YpsiVeteran: the $16,000 a year in property taxes that I pay to the city of Ypsilanti is something I pay personally, actually. It is unrelated to University Bank. I noted above University Bank's major commitment to building Ypsilanti's future. That is of course University Bank's investment and not mine. I am CEO and President of University Bank and its sole public spokesperson. I hope this clarifies my comments.
YpsiVeteran
Wed, Jun 6, 2012 : 4:29 p.m.
Why was pseudo's comment deleted? It was in no way a personal attack or inappropriate. It simply pointed out the fact that the "investment" Mr. Ranzini claims in the community is that of his bank, and not him personally. This is a valid point and a completely legitimate perspective.
Stephen Lange Ranzini
Wed, Jun 6, 2012 : 11:39 a.m.
@lorie: University Bank has invested tens of millions of dollars in loans in Ypsilanti, supporting dozens of families and many businesses. How much do you have invested in the city to support it's growth and prosperity??
Pickforddick
Wed, Jun 6, 2012 : 11:39 a.m.
She is probably a collector not a payer
Stephen Lange Ranzini
Wed, Jun 6, 2012 : 11:36 a.m.
@lorie: I personally pay $16,000 a year to support Ypsilanti's tax base. How much do you pay??
pseudo
Wed, Jun 6, 2012 : 11:16 a.m.
ya know what, You don't live here and you don't get to vote on these folks and you don't get to thank them for something that isn't your business.