Mark Maynard - what to cut in ypsi’s budget: johnson vs. murdock round two

07/20/08

08:29:00 pm, by mark - Ypsilanti, Politics

what to cut in ypsi’s budget: johnson vs. murdock round two

The conversation we began with our two Ward 3 candidates for Ypsi City Council the other day on the subject of Water Street has evolved, in the comments section, into a discussion on waste in the current City budget. I thought that it probably deserved it’s own thread. Here, in hopes that it’ll get everyone caught up, are some of the highlights thus far in chronological order.

Assuming both Rod and Pete are still with us, I was thinking that it would be interesting to have their thoughts on this. With that in mind, here’s my second question to the candidates: Is there waste in the City’s budget? If so, what is it? Please be specific.

OK, now here are the highlights that I promised.

WONDERING (to Mayor Paul Schreiber): Why are police and fire always the first items you suggest will be cut? Why don’t you consider cutting less essential services that wouldn’t have such an immediate impact on residential lives?

PAUL SCHREIBER: …I didn’t mean to imply that police and fire should be cut first. I listed the services that the city provides in the order of spending. Police protection accounts for about $5 million and fire protection accounts for about $3 million out of a $14 million budget.

City council went through a very long and deliberative process to determine the budget priorities and cuts. The budget process started with city council goal-setting sessions on 12/8/2007, 12/15/2007, 1/12/2008, and 1/26/2008. The city council goals and objectives were passed by city council on February 5, 2008 (see pages 5 through 11). These directions to the city manager created the FYE2009/2010 budget that was passed on June 3, 2008 (pages 5 through 7).

WONDERING: You say you didn’t mean to imply that police and fire should be cut first. So I looked at the links to see what city council goals and objectives actually are. The action strategy to reduce costs is itemized in your link. Number one - cut police services. Number two - cut fire services. Council vote was six yes, zero no, 1 absent. Feb. 5, 2008. I don’t think you really want to cut the budget. Your actions show that you really want to increase taxes another 10% so that you aren’t “forced” to cut police and fire. But what’s not on the table is cutting the waste out of the budget. Too bad for the taxpayers.

DIRTGRAIN: “But what’s not on the table is cutting the waste out of the budget.”

With such accusations should come specifics. Please show us the waste, as I’m not quite sure to what you are referring.

Why does the Mayor want to maintain the waste in the budget? Corruption? Inside deals? What? That might also help us understand your accusation.

WONDERING: City hall is a bureaucracy and everybody wants to keep their piece of the pie. Employees want their salary to increase faster than the rate of inflation, departments spend every dime that is budgeted so that they can claim they need more next year, etc. A good city council/mayor looks at each line item and determines what is essential and what can be reduced to maintain essential services and limit the effects of budget cuts so that they have as small as impact as possible.

The current council wants more money than they currently have. Hence, they advocated for an income tax. Since that failed, they have determined to make the necessary budget cuts in the most necessary and visible services: police and fire. If the cuts have a negative impact on city residents, people will complain, and they will say “I told you so". Then, they will schedule another millage or income tax vote. If the residents are suffering from the decrease in services, they will be more likely to vote an increase in the taxes. The goal is to increase revenue rather than reduce the cost of doing city business.

I’ve not made any suggestion of corruption or inside deals. But I do think the city council/mayor/city manager show a lack of concern for the financial struggles of many residents, especially those with young children. Most family incomes do not rise as fast as city taxes and fees. Other costs, such as gas and food bills, are also rising at a faster rate than family incomes.

What is very apparent to anyone who looks at the overall budget, is that the City spends more money to provide services than other municipalities of similar size and population. How is it that other communities can provide services at far lower costs? How are they able to control costs to a far greater degree than Ypsi? What are they doing that Ypsi could emulate? Why doesn’t the city’s action plan set clear goals to seek alternative, less costly ways to operate city government?

Instead, residents are told there is no waste, the budget is bare to the bones, and Water Street payments are no problem because it’s only an additional 10% of the entire city budget. Let’s cut police and fire and see how quickly the residents change their minds about higher taxes. It was reported that their intention is to make the cuts as visible as possible.

Ol’ E CROSS: Wondering. Sorry to get involved, but that was just silly. Dirtgrain asked for specifics, you offer more ambiguous assertions? What would you cut? Specifically.

STEVE PIERCE: …You say that all that is left to cut is police and fire. I am not advocating any cuts, but I think it bears noting: Police and Fire service costs about $7.5 million a year. The overall budget for the City is right around $16 million. So there is $8.5 million in annual spending not related to police and fire…

DIRTGRAIN (with what I perceive to be a bit of sarcasm): …So, $8.5 million in waste. It helps when we get more specific. Let’s cut that $8.5 million then..

BRACKACHE: Why on earth CAN’T somebody just post such a list? Everyone’s been asking for it. Just go down the list of expenditures, write down some preliminary ideas of what to cut (doesn’t have to be exhaustive yet), grow a pair, and post the damn thing…

I’d welcome anyone’s thoughts on this, but I’m particularly interested to know what Pete and Rod think about it… Is there waste in the City’s budget? And, if so, what is it? Please be specific.

126 comments

Comments, Pingbacks:

Comment from: Wondering [Visitor]

It's not possible to be specific without having more information about the city budget shared with the public. Even though 185 pages are posted on the web, the real details are withheld from the taxpayers. Earlier posts on other threads discussed this and the Mayor failed to respond with more specifics. What is the cost of recycling in the city? What do the DDA's do with the millions that they divert from the general fund? What is the specific breakdown of policing costs in the city that leads the mayor to state that contracting sheriff patrols would be more expensive. Why can't city residents get specific answers to specific questions about the budget? How can taxpayers suggest specifics when the specific information is handled as if you need a security clearance to gain access?

Permalink 07/20/08 @ 22:42

Comment from: Ol' E Cross [Visitor]

Wondering. Before I respond more, I think it'd be helpful to ask, is there anyone on city council you more or less trust?

Permalink 07/21/08 @ 00:17

Comment from: elviscostello [Visitor]

Once again, I advocate for fire (that of which I have knowledge). You are now down to 5 on duty, minimum. Try pulling up to a structure fire and making a rescue or fire attack safely with 3 people going inside. Doesn't meet any standard I know of...Even IF there is no waste in the budget, you can not continue to cut fire services...

Permalink 07/21/08 @ 06:55

Comment from: nearby [Visitor]

If true, the lack of disclosure of regular expenses in the budget is both disappointing and counterproductive.

However I see no candidates saying "we will show you the numbers". (No council members, either).

I don't see any reason to believe that any of the potential replacements will do anything any differently. They sure are not talking any differently (no details, no line-item goals, nothing).

But hey, this blog got the police to do their job a little more effectively and pay attention to the bus depot (IMO) so perhaps it can get some real dialogue out of the council, too- present and potential members both.

Else, we will just have to FOIA it out of them and a couple years from now we'll be having this same discussion with some numbers in it.

And I'm ready to work on filing that paperwork if things don't change a lot.

Permalink 07/21/08 @ 07:09

Comment from: Pete Murdock [Visitor]

· http://VoteMurdock.com

Mark -

This is the third time you have spelled my name wrong. I'm really feeling dissed. Still waiting for you to respond to my repeated invitations to sit down and discuss issues, the City, the blogosphere or whatever - going into the third month with no response.

Pete

Permalink 07/21/08 @ 10:37

Comment from: Phil Genz [Visitor]

So, will you not be answering the question, Pete?

Permalink 07/21/08 @ 12:07

Comment from: Shadowy Mister Shadow [Visitor]

Pete, wasn't it you that I saw talking with Mark on Saturday at the art fair? It looked like you and the guy had on a red "Vote Murdock" tshirt. You were for a long time. Maybe you didn't realize it was Mark.

Permalink 07/21/08 @ 13:29

Comment from: Brackache [Visitor]

It's better to do it online so people aren't so easily cowed by a more forceful personality, there are plenty of witnesses, and you're more likely to have SOMEBODY in the audience who knows that any untrue statements are not true and call bs on it. Also so no one can get away with saying one thing to one audience and another thing to another. And there's a record of it when it's posted on a blog.

Permalink 07/21/08 @ 14:02

Comment from: Pete Murdock [Visitor]

· http://VoteMurdock.com

Geez! Gimme a break Mr. Genz. This just got posted less than 24 hours ago.

All the long knives are out. What do we cut? What do we cut? List the waste. Cut the waste. Much of what I hear about waste is in the eye of the beholder. Mr. Eller thinks that everything the City does, but police and fire is waste. Some of the more libertarian out there even go beyond that to say we can just arm ourselves and even eliminate the police. But that's not me.

The City Council just adopted a two year budget plan without cuts and even the restoration of full funding of the bus service. If elected the budget that I will have any meaningful input into is the two year cycle of FY 2010-12. My goals, if elected, is do my best to pursue and adopt policies that would prevent us from having to reduce services by increasing the tax base and reducing the costs of services.

They would include:

1.An aggressive approach to marketing Water Street with an open framework of possibilities to create tax base and jobs that would pay or partially pay the Water Street debt thus preventing further cuts due to this debt.(As I have described in a earlier post.)

2. Aggressive marketing for adaptive reuse of the old Ford Plant and other under
utilized industrial sites (Motor Wheel, Exemplar among others) in partnership with the owners and local and statewide economic development agencies.

3. Transformation of the downtown into a more walkable community as well as destination point centered on arts and entertainment per the Blue Prints plan.

4. Active involvement in getting the Amtrak to stop in Ypsilanti

5. More City involvement, if necessary, to get the Freight House opened

6. Creative partnerships with organizations to pursue projects such as the Deconstruction Demonstration Project I proposed with Recycle Ann Arbor.

7. Neighborhood summits to discuss the situation with DPW and park maintenance
issues that began a month ago. For example, there are four neighborhood groups and Adams School that abut and use Prospect Park. A meeting should be called with representatives of all those groups and the DPW to outline what the status of park maintenance is and what the actual impact is and how can we help This should have been done before the changes took place, not after.

8. Real progress on creating a regional public transportation system.

9. Pursue partnerships with EMU, the County and surrounding Townships that would provide better services and/or reduce costs.

10. Reduce the staggering increases in pension, medical and energy costs.

11. Position the City to take advantage of the future "green" initiatives and funding

I'm not looking to bring a meat ax to the City Budget, if there is real waste or what I feel is an unwise expenditure I will oppose it, I am interested in doing those things that will increase tax base and streamline services.

Shadowy Mr. Shadow and Brachache - Yes it was I talking to MM at the Shadow Art Fair. Still trying to get the sit down - as much to get Mark's take on things as to answer any questions from him. Believe me, I can't imagine Mark letting me get away with telling him one thing and you another. Somehow I think it would be all over the blogosphere in a nanosecond.

Permalink 07/21/08 @ 15:23

Comment from: Wondering? [Visitor]

OEC,

If I had to choose among current council members, I would be more likely to trust Mr. Robb than any other. While he is in lockstep with the others more often than hoped for, he does think about the issues and speaks his mind quite well at times. Unfortunately, he is not my representative. I don't know him personally, have never spoken to him, and I apologize in advance if he is offended by my endorsement in any way. So OEC, I'm waiting for your advice.

Permalink 07/21/08 @ 15:33

Comment from: Glen S. [Visitor]

Pete,

Regarding #2, I'm sure the folks at GW Kent (http://gwkent.com/) would be very surprised to learn that their company's home - the former Exemplar site - is an "under utilized industrial site."

Regarding #10 - "Reducing the staggering increases in pension, medical and energy costs" seems to be a worthy goal. However, since neither our national nor state leaders seem able to do this, how - specifically - would you go about doing this, on a local level?

Permalink 07/21/08 @ 16:13

Comment from: Steve Pierce [Visitor]

· http://www.YpsiNews.com

Glen,

The city has said on several occasions that the jobs that were promised for Exemplar never came to be and it was the City that said the property was under utilized. The utilization and tax revenue of Exemplar has been a nearly annual discussion at the City planning and visioning meetings for at least the last 5 years. At least as long as I have been going to the meetings. It was even discussed after GW Kent moved in so it is on the minds of the folks at City Hall.

Didn't the city have experts come to the City several years ago with with ways to save energy including a program to replace light bulbs over a 5 year period that would cut by 25% (and they were saying it could be as much as a third) of our annual consumption for street and outdoor lighting.

- Steve

Permalink 07/21/08 @ 16:28

Comment from: BrianR [Visitor]

Exemplar was a minority-supplier for the auto industry. They manufactured bolts and screws. With a manufacturer, they had a lot of expensive equipment that we collected personal property taxes on. While it's great that GW Kent bought the building, it's basically a warehouse now. While we do collect personal property tax from them, it's on racks and shelves rather than on expensive thread-rolling equipment. Their summer tax bill last summer was a little over $1600. If you want a similar comparison, Marsh Plating paid $56,202.41 last summer.

Ypsilanti used to be the "City that works." People either forget or don't realize that industry is the most efficient way to create tax revenue because it consumes fewer resources than it provides.

As far as reducing health care and pension costs go, Council approved a batch of union contracts this year that began to close that gap and created significant savings. It's important that we continue to make further strides when these contracts are up for renewal next summer.

I realize this thread is for Pete and Rod, but Council so often takes it on the chin, I think it's important that we try and take credit for the good we do once in a while.

Permalink 07/21/08 @ 16:36

Comment from: Glen S. [Visitor]

Steve, I'm guessing that Pete simply mis-spoke, perhaps not knowing that there has been a new business actively occupying one of the City's largest (and most visible) industrial sites for at least the past few years. Especially so - because I can't imagine that any City Council candidate would publicly criticize an active local business's facility as being "under utilized."

Regarding the proposal to replace outdoor lighting - I remember this presentation as well, and can't remember exactly why it wasn't adopted - although I suspect the City determined it not to be cost-effective at the time. In any case, since (as you point out) this concept was raised several years ago - it hardly qualifies as a new or original idea.

Permalink 07/21/08 @ 16:58

Comment from: Brackache [Visitor]

Thanks, Mr. Murdock. While others might need more specifics on exactly how you plan to do those things and how much money you want to put towards making them happen, I am satisfied to know your basic philosophy of governance and appreciate your honesty.

Permalink 07/21/08 @ 17:02

Comment from: BrianR [Visitor]

Now I feel stupid and I'm sure Glen S. will too.

Pete was probably referring to the old Exemplar site on Lowell Street. That's definitely under utilized.

Permalink 07/21/08 @ 17:30

Comment from: Pete Murdock [Visitor]

· http://VoteMurdock.com

Glen -

My reference to Exemplar was to the old location on Lowell St. But the newer Huron St Exemplar facility could also be classified as undertilized compared to what it's potential could be. I am aware of the new tenant. No knock on Kent, I'm sure it is a great company and it did occupy a vacant building which is a plus. But it is essentially a warehouse operation that employs 15 persons (news account)and pays less than $ 1,000 to the City in Personel Property Taxes. Compared to other uses that is underutilization for an indstrial site. Some places we tore down in Water Street probably paid more PP taxes than that. Motor Wheel also has some kind of operation in it, but certainly it is not up what it could be. That's all I meant.

It looks like I'm a little late with this. Others have chimed in while I was writing this. Don't you folks have better things to do?

Permalink 07/21/08 @ 17:51

Comment from: Steve Pierce [Visitor]

· http://www.YpsiNews.com

Glen,

The mistake many people make is to only look to new ideas to solve problems.

It is the old ideas, what really should be called the good ideas, that are dismissed out of hand simply because they are not new. Yet it is these good ideas, the ones we all know, that many times will have the greatest positive impact on our community.

What it takes is a leader with a proven track record of seeing these good ideas, old and new, and acting on them.

Nothing said here will likely change anyone's mind. This is like the great debate society where people profess they are open to hearing all sides in a discussion, but in reality they have already made up their mind and would really rather people didn't try to muddy things up with facts.

That said, carry on.

Cheers!

- Steve

Permalink 07/21/08 @ 17:52

Comment from: Dirtgrain [Visitor]

I would like to hear from Michael Bodary and John Gawlas as to their plans--and on this topic of waste and cuts. My mind might change.

Permalink 07/21/08 @ 18:24

Comment from: Brackache [Visitor]

Nothing said here will likely change anyone's mind. This is like the great debate society where people profess they are open to hearing all sides in a discussion, but in reality they have already made up their mind and would really rather people didn't try to muddy things up with facts.

Not me. I've changed my mind on who I'm voting for three times in 2 weeks. Two of the candidates haven't even come over to my house and dropped off literature yet. Work it, people. You gotta earn that little fiefdom.

Permalink 07/21/08 @ 19:47

Comment from: mark [Member]

Pete,

First off, I'm sorry about misspelling your name. I know it's not a great excuse, but I have dyslexia. I'm obsessive about spellchecking stuff, but misspelled names don't get caught. As for wanting to talk with me, I'm not sure if you remember, but we talked for about 20 minutes at the Shadow Art Fair on Saturday. And, as you'll recall, we did have plans to meet a few weeks ago, but, unfortunately, I had to cancel due to my having to attend the funeral of a murdered friend. You make it sound as though I'm adverse to the idea of talking with you. And that's not the case. For what it's worth though - and this goes for all political folks in Ypsi - I'd much rather correspond through the site, and by way of email. After having been misquoted on few occasions, I've reluctantly accepted the fact that it's good to have documentation of what I say. And, in general, I think the community could use a few less private meetings, and a few more public forums. With all that said, however, I'd be happy to talk with you. If you're up for it, I'd even suggest that we do it in front of some folks at the Brewery. We could even invite Rob. (That was a purposeful misspelling of the other candidate's name, in hopes that it evens things out a bit.)

Permalink 07/21/08 @ 19:56

Comment from: mark [Member]

And, Pete, for what it's worth, I really like your ideas. Water Street, a rail stop, and an open Freighthouse are right at the top of my list as well... As for waste, though, is it safe to say, since you didn't mention anything, that you don't believe there's waste in the current budget?

And, Rod, I'm sure I speak for everyone when I say that we'd like to hear from you on this as well.

Permalink 07/21/08 @ 20:28

Comment from: John on Forest [Visitor]

· http://home.comcast.net/~marraeshuler

Not speaking for or against any candidate, I personally don't think much or any "waste" exists in the current budget. I'd characterize some of the line items as less important than others but not wasteful, per se. If I was running I'd compile a list of priorities for those line items.

I do think that the ~$100k budget category for City Council could be reduced substantially, perhaps as much as 80%. But that's just my opinion.

Permalink 07/21/08 @ 22:41

Comment from: egpenet [Visitor]

Hmmm ... I was thinking ...

A plan to cut waste?

Is there a plan to INCREASE city revenues without raising taxes? Like ... increasing the number of new businesses in the city to help share the burdens? Silly, eh?

Or ... like nominal increases for licenses, fees, permits, penalties, and traffic violations, maybe 5%-10%? Dumb idea, huh?

Well ... How about naming fees for area parks ... or would Mr. Frog's estate be upset if Mr. Frog ceased to have an island named after him? Are there still Water Works in Water Works Park? (No.)

No wonder some are confused. There has to be a better name ... for a price. Stupid idea ... I know.

I still think that a creative effort to fill apartments and populate the empty homes in the city would help increase city revenues, which would also likely increase the number of children in our schools, which would increase the school budget. Is there a way to use some proportion of anticipated revenue from those targeted increases to leverage a marketing effort to encourage home sales and rental unit occupancies?

What I like about these goals is that they are measurable ... we can count the homes and rental units and track our successes as they either fill or do not fill.

G'night.

Permalink 07/21/08 @ 23:22

Comment from: Ol' E Cross [Visitor]

Wondering. I appreciate your dilemma, but we may agree that any answer from someone we fully don't trust isn't ever all that satisfying. We can always suspect something hidden lurking in the background. I disagree with BrianR on a lot of issues, but still trust him to be upfront on many things. Even if you're not in his ward, it might be worth a query.

That said, I offer another perspective, although there's no reason you should trust mine. I found myself working for a gov agency for a few years. Things I took away were:

-a guarded mis/trust of politicians and activists with their agendas
-a trust and respect for professional public servants who were basically engineer types just doing what made the most sense
-an appreciation of how immensely complex public policy/spending issues are.

In short, ask the questions to someone who you will trust the answers from. Otherwise, there's not much point.

In other news:

Pete: Nice points. I would like to here from Rod again, as well.
JoF: Yes. I said it a while back, but it's hard for me to watch a council cut the jobs of hard working folks without cutting their own paychecks. I'd be interested to know if any candidate or current member is willing to cut council pay.
Brackache: Triple flip flopper.
Steve: How about that video?

Finally, Steve, how about that video?

Permalink 07/21/08 @ 23:33

Comment from: Ol' E Cross [Visitor]

Oh. And kudos to Brian Robb and the rest of council when they get it right rather than on the chin.

To Wondering, I'd suggest that on those rare moments when Brian and all the others lock step, it might actually be because they are doing something that makes common sense.

Permalink 07/21/08 @ 23:41

Comment from: Brackache [Visitor]

Hey man, I'm an American voter, I'm not running for Jesus.

I only switched to Eller once I realized he's the only one without a beard.

A trifolded piece of literature or a personal canvassing visit might change my mind, though... I don't bite.

Permalink 07/22/08 @ 00:09

Comment from: freeman [Visitor]

Hey man, I'm an American voter, I'm not running for Jesus.

I'd say that belongs on a tee-shirt or something.

Oh, and I don't know who this Eller guy is, but not having a beard seems to be strategic suicide to me. Doesn't he care about securing the anarchist votes?!?

Permalink 07/22/08 @ 02:00

Comment from: Pete Murdock [Visitor]

· http://VoteMurdock.com

Brachache -

If you are in Ward Three, I have most likely been at your door. Probably not home at the time. Contact me at VoteMurdock@gmail.com or call me at home 485-7799 to arrange a personal visit or delivery of an autographed copy of piece of literature.

Permalink 07/22/08 @ 04:03

Comment from: Paul Schreiber [Visitor]

Wondering,

Please consider dropping by the fourth floor at city hall on Thursday (7/24/2008) at 4:45 p.m. to discuss your questions with me. I look forward to talking with you.

Paul Schreiber
mayor@cityofypsilanti.com
734-277-5446

Permalink 07/22/08 @ 05:40

Comment from: Brackache [Visitor]

Spelt my name wrong, Pete! But as you're the one candidate who's dropped literature off at my house already, I forgive you.

Permalink 07/22/08 @ 11:12

Comment from: Brackache [Visitor]

So is it official now that no one thinks there's any waste in the city budget?

And what's this video OEC is asking about?

Permalink 07/22/08 @ 11:34

Comment from: Steve Pierce [Visitor]

· http://www.YpsiNews.com

Brackache wrote:
>> So is it official now that no one thinks there's
>> any waste in the city budget?

Oh I don't know, paying $400 a month to rent the fence at Water Street for the past 5 years seems a little excessive. That is over $20,000 out of the general fund. The City could have bought the same fence twice over. Worse, when the city returns it, they will have to pay for any damage and repairs the company has to make so it is just like buying the fence a third time.

Oh wait, I shouldn't say these things,. The next thing you know, the mayor will be sending out emails to everyone on council about a blog posting, then there will be an email being sent to the City Manager for research by the finance department, an investigation by the City attorney and a write-up in the Council Information Letter (CIL).

I really gotta quit posting to blogs, we can't afford the city time and money spent each time I do.

Cheers!

- Steve

Permalink 07/22/08 @ 13:41

Comment from: nammeroo [Visitor]

Comment from: egpenet: "Is there a plan to INCREASE city revenues without raising taxes? Like ... increasing the number of new businesses in the city to help share the burdens? Silly, eh? Or ... like nominal increases for licenses, fees, permits, penalties, and traffic violations, maybe 5%-10%? Dumb idea, huh? Well ... How about naming fees for area parks ... or would Mr. Frog's estate be upset if Mr. Frog ceased to have an island named after him? Are there still Water Works in Water Works Park? (No.)"

First, some very important components of the YCUA wter system are most certainly still located in (under) Waterworks Park.

Second, by law the City's fee schedule for various permits and approvals should be set up to reimburse the cost of providing the desired service - however, these fees should NOT be used as a profit center for the City. Other communities in Washtenaw County (including Ann Arbor and Pittsfield Twp.) have paid large fines for charging too much for permits, etc. in the past.

Third, the vast majority of the civil infraction fines go directly to the courts - only a small percentage make it into the City treasury.

These are the reasons why focusing on ways to make City Hall more efficient is so important.

I like the idea of naming rights, though. How much could we make for naming rights to the cannon in Prospect Park?

I have another revenue-raising idea: City leaders have said for years now that they've cut and cut and cut City Hall staff. The building must be nearly empty by now. Why not consolidate the few remaining City Hall employees into part of the building, and rent out the rest. Small office spaces (especially if the City offered use of its voice mail system and copier) are attractive, and the whole operation would provide both new rent revenue AND a great new economic development opportunity.

Heck, we could probably clear out at least one whole floor for this project! - maybe more....

Permalink 07/22/08 @ 13:42

Comment from: Dirtgrain [Visitor]

City council meeting, I think.

Permalink 07/22/08 @ 13:43

Comment from: Pete Murdock [Visitor]

· http://VoteMurdock.com

As I said before, waste is in the eyes of the beholder. One person's bridge to nowhere is another's key to economic development.

Any way let's do a little exercise.

John on Forest says he thinks the Council Budget can be reduced by 80% - so let's go take a look and see what you folks think can go and what can stay.

No fair eliminating the entire budget because you think the whole gang are worthless SOBs

Here is the Council Budget

703-001 Salaries and Wages Elected $ 40,695

Stipends for Mayor(+/-$ 9,000), Mayor Pro-Tem
(+/- $ 6,000) and Five Council Members($ 5,151 each)

Has not been raised since new Charter adopted in 1994

714-00 Fringe Benefits $ 3,113

Employer's Share of Social Security

728-00 Office Supplies $ 500

Stationary and Envelopes, business cards, etc

818.00 Contractual Services $ 34,800

Governmental Consultant Services Lobbyist Firm -
reduced from $43,345

864-00 Conferences and Workshops $ 7,500

I'm told this is rarely spent, the last year of
actual data only $355 was spent

900-00 Printing and Publishing $ 2,000

Public notices for ordinances and other Council
meetings and other printing

958-00 Memberships and Dues $ 20,182

Michigan Municipal League, Suburban Alliance, Smart,
etc.

So get the knives out and have at it.

Permalink 07/22/08 @ 13:49

Comment from: publius [Visitor]

Just wondering, Wondering, have ever been to one of the numerous budget meetings that the Mayor scheduled around the city over the past year? Or is it easier to accuse people of hiding things after they beg you for your imput? Just Wondering.

Permalink 07/22/08 @ 18:29

Comment from: nearby [Visitor]

RE: the comments from someone who knows about Fire:

If we drop below some minimum # of responders, do we lose access to matching funds or other consequences of not meeting minimum safety requirements?

Permalink 07/22/08 @ 19:07

Comment from: elviscostello [Visitor]

Your ISO rating could drop, and home insurance rates would rise...also, you put the firefighters in a position to decide whether to go into a fire (violating standards, and possibly MIOSHA rules resulting in fines), or wait until enough help arrives, letting the fire double in size every 60 seconds...

Permalink 07/22/08 @ 22:22

Comment from: Mark H. [Visitor]

Pete,

Thanks for your posting with facts on the actual budget of Council. I think the biggest item there is the $43K spent on a lobbying firm. What does the city get for that fee, and who runs the lobbying firm the city of Ypsi spends this money on?

Any answers on this with anyone with a factually based opinion would be much appreciated by me.

Permalink 07/23/08 @ 01:45

Comment from: not one of the cool kids [Visitor]

ha
I had to read Mr. Mayor's comment to "Mr/Ms. Wondering" twice...
the first time I could have sworn I read ..."meet me BEHIND city hall on Thursday (7/24/2008) at 4:45 p.m. to discuss your questions with me."
I really laughed out loud...I sat looking at the screen imagining Mr/Ms Wondering waiting behind city hall and being struck from behind on the head by The water street files wheeled by April McGrath, while Frank McDaniels hits Mr/Ms. Wondering behind the knee with a clipboard. Then the mayor steps from behind a city vehicle and says..."Now, I heard you had some questions for me..."

Permalink 07/23/08 @ 12:15

Comment from: trusty getto [Visitor]

· http://www.trustygetto.com

If the number of responders drop, and our ISO rating is in jeopardy, I volunteer for any ad hoc bucket brigade that may be needed. Just shoot me an email on my BlackBerry, and I'll zip over there, even if I don't have time to finish my latte.

Didn't that falsehood get used up last time around?

Permalink 07/23/08 @ 16:14

Comment from: Rod Johnson [Visitor]

"Is there waste in the City's budget? And, if so, what is it? Please be specific."

Sure there is but the devil is in the details. I don't have access to the inner workings of the city so it is difficult to get specific. I kinda agree with Pete on this. Concepts and goals will have to suffice till one of us is on board and has first hand knowledge. My idea is to treat budget waste like crime - be ever vigilant and report all instances. This should start with the mayor, go the Council, the City manager, Departments heads and all city workers. This should be an active campaign for every one involved in city work, volunteers included. Many ideas can come about if one were only to ask.

Past that I say Water St. remains number one. It’s has to start producing and soon. Pete and I have already presented plans in round one, so folks can refer back to that thread. I feel my 6-point plan addresses what priorities to protect and a framework of building our revenues. They are listed on my web site - www.johnsonforward3.com - but I’ll also list them here:

1. There will be NO City Income Tax. Ypsilanti voters have spoken on this issue and I am absolutely opposed to any attempt to try to raise it again. The City must work with the resources we have. Period.

2. Public Safety must be a priority. Although our resources are limited, we must not back down on our efforts to control crime, which has so many negative impacts on our community. My experience on COPAC has taught me the many ways in which neighborhood residents and the police can work together to make our streets safer, and I intend to bring that experience to City Council.

3. Our Quality of Life must be protected: Neighborhood nuisances like noise, speeding, gang graffiti, and drug sales must be stopped. One “bad” house should not be allowed to ruin a neighborhood! As vice president of the Historic East Side Neighborhood Association, I have learned a lot about the neighborhood issues and concerns facing Ward 3 families. I also know that active, involved residents are the key to healthy neighborhoods, and will work to encourage more citizen involvement.

4. Our Economic Development efforts must be strengthened. As chairman of the City Planning Commission for the last three years I have helped many businesses locate in the City, including, in Ward 3: Standard Printing on Cross St., the Corner Brewery on Norris St., the new Walgreen’s on Michigan Avenue, and American Photo Studios — which will soon move into the former Ave Maria property on Forest Avenue. Each of these businesses is now paying property taxes and providing jobs for our neighbors. I am eager to keep this progress going, and I am currently leading the work of the Planning Commission to simplify zoning and streamline the planning process to make the Water Street site more attractive to a wider variety of potential developers.

5. Regional and Public-Private Partnerships must be encouraged. We can stretch our resources by working together with our neighboring townships, as our wonderful Ypsilanti District Library demonstrates, and by working with private groups such as those who are helping keep Rutherford Pool open and working to raise money to reopen our Freighthouse in Depot Town. I will work hard to make the City of Ypsilanti a good-faith partner in these efforts.

6. We must keep Ypsilanti’s Positive Momentum going. Despite our challenges, there are many things we can all be proud of: Our unique downtown, Depot Town, and attractive historic district; our beautiful Huron River and many parks; popular festivals and special events; thriving local and independent businesses; a growing community of creative artists and musicians; our many exciting, citizen-led efforts to foster greater sustainability and a “greener” community; strong neighborhoods and active, committed citizens; and, Ypsilanti’s tremendous diversity, and our proud history of tolerance, inclusion and hospitality. All of these things make Ypsilanti a place like nowhere else, and provide us with an opportunity for a bright future … together we can make it happen!

Also, now that Eastern’s new president is in place, the City should ramp up its involvement and efforts in the Eastern Leaders Group, elg.ewashtenaw.org. Its first project, Spark East, should only be the beginning. ELG can be a springboard to getting EMU and the surrounding townships into a more united force that can promote and help the City.

Permalink 07/23/08 @ 22:18

Comment from: Wondering [Visitor]

Not one of the cool kids,

Yeah, I had some visions along those lines myself. He could answer the questions on line, but I would need to show up in person for him to verbally assault me. Then again, maybe I should be more concerned about all the people on this blog I may have pissed off. "No more taxes" is not the mantra of most progressives I've met.

But in reality, I can't afford to take time off work and have no desire to badger the mayor in person. So I'm extending an invitation to anyone on this blog who is also wondering. Feel free to step in as "Wondering" and take my appointment at 4:45P tomorrow. See if you can get answers to specifics on the budget: What is the cost of recycling in the city? What do the DDA's do with the millions that they divert from the general fund? etc... All I ask is if you do get answers, kindly share them with all of us on this blog. But be forewarned and prepared - I've also heard that April is one tough cookie and if she has Ed and Paul backing her up it could get ugly.

Permalink 07/23/08 @ 23:06

Comment from: Ol' E Cross [Visitor]

Hey friends. So, since I continue to treat this blog like a cocktail party, I figure I'll tell the regulars who I'm voting for and why. My vote may not be the best testimonial for who I'm voting for, as much as against, but it's what you get.

I've had, I believe, more minutes in actual face-to-face conversation with candidate Pete Murdock than Rod Johnson. I like talking with Pete, and hope, win or lose, he'll still stop by. But, I'm ready for my Rod Johnson lawn sign. This ain't personal. If I was electing a friend to council, I'd vote for Brackache. But regular readers will know that I wouldn't vote for dear friend Brackache to drain commissioner. I think the feeling's mutual.

I realize this is more "against" voting than "for," but here's my reasons:

One: Keep Ypsi Rolling. I very much appreciate the motives of folks involved with this campaign. I deeply want to keep transit service in Ypsi. It's a major reason we moved here. But, the language of the old proposed amendment was, by my assessment, terribly ill-conceived. I was willing to forgive some passionate bloggers for developing it, but the fact the Pete is taking credit for it makes me seriously question his ability to craft policy.

Two: The tax thing. It's a done deal, yes. And voters rejected it, soundly. That's fine. We can move on, but I can still lick the wounds. I still can't get over the tactics of the SCIT folks who wouldn't respond on this blog to fair questions. And, it comes from folks who claim to want more openness. As Pete takes credit for SCIT, I still question the "no answer is the best answer policy" that seemed to be the SCIT strategy. I also question the "Sue the city" method to keep something off the ballot.

Three: Guilt by association. Steve may be a great guy and stand for good stuff, but I've had recurring issues with Steve's tactics since my first e-mail with him (before I had any idea who he was) on the old downzoning issue. If you've noticed, Steve's continued avoidance of answering why he won't post city council minutes is just the latest. The extent that which Pete is reported to be in Steve's camp triggers my knee to jerk.

Four: I wasn't going to mention this, but since the Ann Arbor News broke the silence today, I got one of those secret packets of old news and court documents about Pete setting himself up, reportedly, for a city department head job while on city council. Whatever the backstory, the fact that he would sue the city for a job deemed unethical by the courts makes me question either his ethics or understanding of public policy and law. It doesn't seem like something the fellow who stops by my house would do, but the records just don't inspire confidence.

So, that's it. I still haven't voted so I suppose there's time for folk to persuade me otherwise, although my cement is drying.

But, I figure I at least owe it to Pete to explain why a green sign may soon sprout in my front yard. And, if nothing else, this is an opportunity for him to respond to the hesitation of myself and others might have in the voting booth.

I like a lot of what Pete's said and sincerely enjoy talking with him. I'm just being candid on what gives me pause. I'm sure others knees jerk differently but hopefully, in the end, we all jerk towards a better Ypsi, whomever sits on the council bench.

Best of luck to both candidates.

Permalink 07/23/08 @ 23:14

Comment from: Dirtgrain [Visitor]

In my neighborhood, somebody put up an anti CIT sign. Then they put a piece of paper with Michael Bodary's name on it over part of the sign. It now reads, "Michael Bodary City Income Tax."--not the message they were trying to send, surely.

OEC, did you see what the Ann Arbor News said about Minzy (I couldn't find a link--it was in the editorial section of the paper on Monday or Tuesday, I think)? They pretty much called him incompetent, endorsing Jerry Clayton. Not that one should follow the Ann Arbor News's recommendations, but it is the only information I've seen about the election for sheriff. Sorry to stray off topic.

Permalink 07/24/08 @ 07:02

Comment from: nammeroo [Visitor]

Ol' E,

I hope your soon-to-be green Rod Johnson yard sign works as well for you on August 5th as the green pro-income-tax yard sign did last November.

As for me, I'm heartened to hear that Mayor Murdock's competition is reduced to delivering "secret packets" of old news about Pete - it says that the City Hall crowd has nothing more substantive to offer. Keep stealing those yard signs and delivering secret packets folks - I'm sure that there will be plenty of beer to commiserate over at the "what happened (again)?" gripe session after the polls close.

Permalink 07/24/08 @ 17:30

Comment from: Brackache [Visitor]

Oh snap.

Permalink 07/24/08 @ 18:19

Comment from: rodneyn [Visitor]

Dirtgrain: "OEC, did you see what the Ann Arbor News said about Minzy.... They pretty much called him incompetent, endorsing Jerry Clayton. Not that one should follow the Ann Arbor News's recommendations, but it is the only information I've seen about the election for sheriff."

Dirtgrain, last week's Ypsilanti Courier had an excellent set of articles on the race for Washtenaw Co. Sheriff - including detailed profiles on both Sheriff Minzey and Mr. Clayton. Before I read the articles I was leaning towards voting for Minzey, but after reading about both candidates I must admit I'm undecided. Mr. Clayton is a strong candidate too.

If you're getting your Ypsilanti news and opinion only from the Ann Arbor News, you are missing out. Say what you will about the loss of our downtown Courier office, but no one can deny that the Ypsilanti Courier Editor Austen Smith and his crew are putting out a really good local weekly newspaper these days. If you haven't read the Courier in a while, I would encourage you to pick one up. The quality of the writing tends to far exceed what the News is putting out about Ypsilanti.

Permalink 07/24/08 @ 21:19

Comment from: Ol' E Cross [Visitor]

Dirtgrain, yup saw it. It was a reminder of everything I'd read in A2 News (I know, rodneyn) that made me not like Minzey. Clayton seems qualified, and I'm going for him. The tie breaker was the plane towing the "vote Minzey" banner in the parade. I'm a little scared of any Sheriff who can afford an airforce...

nammeroo. Pete was good enough to stop by my place this morning to answer the issues I raised, above. We didn't get to talk very long as family members were rapping on the window reminding me they had their shoes on and we had to go. I know other Rod Johnson supporters may disagree, but I don't think the world will end if Pete wins. Like I said, those are my reasons, for better or worse. I'm sure others will jerk otherwise.

On the "secret packets," I was actually glad to get one. It just had old news articles and a court decision. Since I'm not an old, old timer here, I'm glad for whatever back story I can get on the town. (If anyone has Rod Johnson's high school yearbook pictures, I'd like to see those, as well.) To me, it wasn't swift boating, i.e., made up shit. It was A2 News and Ypsi Courier articles that I wasn't around to read.

Voting ain't be easy. We can never really know what kind of public official any candidate will be. Hell, I'm not even sure what kind of official I would really be. We go with what we got. I've gotta go with RJ on this one.

Oh. And, reason number five, the real reason ... green is my favorite color, and the sign matches my lawn (parts, anyway).

Permalink 07/24/08 @ 23:51

Comment from: John Delcamp [Visitor]

Of late, AA News endorsements seem to be a death knell for Ypsi candidates and referendums. Are they again out of touch, or still smarting over the pro-income tax endorsement which was followed by a stiff scolding after it lost? Have yet to figure out how the CIT was bad for AA but good for Ypsi.
Murdock brings a long list of accomplishments and expertise to the table. The other guy, well, a fine fellow no doubt, but would only rubber stamp everything, just as his predecessor did.

JD

Permalink 07/25/08 @ 00:38

Comment from: elviscostello [Visitor]

Cam, Not a falsehood. Check with ISO if you don't believe me. Also, the bucket brigade line was funny, but when a structure is on fire in the city, what do you want those guys to do? If they don't run right in, will they be sued? If they run right in and violate MIOSHA, will you pay the fine for the city? It's not a joke to me, bud... You can go to the ISO website and look at the guidelines...

Permalink 07/26/08 @ 21:36

Comment from: Mark H. [Visitor]

OEC -
thanks for your posts on these candidates. I appreciate them, they are thoughtful.

I'm for Pete in this election - experience and the ability to ask hard questions. A record of fiscal integrity.

Rod is a very nice man, and I voted for him two years ago. But Rod is, in my view, naive: on the zoning commission he asked no tough questions on Water Street (and yeah, that's a fault he shares with many, but it is not a positive record for him). And on the ill advised and very controversial plan by EMU officials (who are all now gone, by the way) who wanted to close College Place and build a pedestrian mall there, Rod naively allowed the previously apolitical forum, COPAC, to sponsor one EMU offiicial, Jim Vick, who gave a totally one sided account of the plan. Mr. Vick depicted it to COPAC as a matter without controversy, and so COPAC, under Rod's leadership, urged neigbhorhood associations to vote to endorse the closing of a public street. All this was about a year and a half ago. A month or more latter, COPAC allowed opponents of the closing of College Place to speak. By that time, some neigborhood associations had voted for the project.

This is relevant, in my view, to this election because he shows a lack of independence on Rod's part and shows also his allowing the COPAC forum to be used by one side of a sharply controversial issue. Rod told me then and more recently he had had no idea that closing Colllege Place was controversial. I'm sure he did not know that. But gosh, if you look at Ward 3 and where people drive, you'd realize College Place is for lots of us a many route to the west side of town....Our former mayor Cheryl Farmer and the city manager and the current mayor too, by his inaction, were advocates of closing College Place: Rod as head of COPAC just went along with the crowd.

Wisely, COPAC has since that time affirmed that it has no role in non safety, non police matters. And the state of Michigan said "no way" to the insane grant application of EMU and the city to use public funds to decrease the ease of transporation in the city.

Sorry for the long lecture. But think of this next time you drive on College Pothole Place. Pete Murdock was among the many people who opposed this plan 7 or 8 years ago, when it was brought to Council.

Permalink 07/26/08 @ 22:06

Comment from: Mark H. [Visitor]

"many route" above should be 'main route'.

please pardon my rushed, error prone typing.

Permalink 07/26/08 @ 22:09

Comment from: trusty getto [Visitor]

· http://www.trustygetto.com

Elvis: The only real risk is from our current Council majority, who appears to be walking in lockstep with Mayor Schreiber on cuts to public safety. If you will recall, it was Mayor Schreiber who showed up at a meeting to announce that the AATA subsidy would be fully funded, even if it meant cutting public safety, despite the fairly obvious fact that we were well-postured at that point to negotiate a discount on the subsidy, and that the one thing that EVERYONE agrees should not be cut is public safety.

So, while I understand that you may have some concerns, Council would have be unbelievably stupid to actually go in that direction, and they would do so at their political peril. Hopefully, with this election, we will see a concerted move away from the status quo and toward a more prudent stewardship of the resources we have available to us.

Permalink 07/27/08 @ 08:52

Comment from: John on Forest [Visitor]

· http://home.comcast.net/~marraeshuler

Mr. Getto,

Didn't you argue with me a month ago, saying that no cuts had been made to police or fire??? Didn't you in fact argue that two half time police positions had been ADDED???

What is it? Cuts or Adds?

Permalink 07/27/08 @ 20:13

Comment from: John on Forest [Visitor]

· http://home.comcast.net/~marraeshuler

OEC,

While I agree with your reasons for not voting for Pete, I have to point out to you that there are lots of good reasons to vote for Rod.

Rod Johnson is a careful and deliberate thinker. I've always known him to make prudent and sound decisions. Rod Johnson is in fact a very strong candidate for city council. He has the experience to move the city forward on economic development, public safety, and city budget.

Rod is adamantly opposed to bringing back a vote on income tax. Instead, he will diligently scour the city's budget to make it work within the existing revenues. Where waste exists, Rod will be able to find it. Where efficiencies can be found, he will find them. For example, he will work hard to find ways to cooperate with neighboring governments in ways that are mutually beneficial to all concerned.

Rod is strongly committed to a strong and effective police force. Rod's experience on CoPAC makes him the uniquely qualified candidate to know what needs to be done to make Ypsilanti a safe city to live in. Rod is passionate about reducing crime and improving the quality of life in Ypsilanti.

Rod is THE candidate to push the city forward economically. Rod's experience on the Planning Commission gives him the knowledge and tools to make a difference to make Ypsilanti a business friendly city. With Rod's guidance on council, we can make Water Street the most attractive it can be to developers. Rod's track record on bringing new businesses to Ypsilanti will only grow. He will work hard to make all of Ypsilanti a vibrant business community with new jobs.

Rod has the positive vision that Ypsilanti needs.

Permalink 07/27/08 @ 20:29

Comment from: Glen S. [Visitor]

Trusty: AATA officials have been very clear about the fact that, because of state and federal cuts, and rapidly-rising fuel costs, they are unable to continue providing service at current levels, based on our reduced level of payment.

So, how exactly do you figure we "were well-postured at that point to negotiate a discount on the subsidy?"

This idea that if we had only dug in our heels, AATA (and, indirectly, other local governments) would have happily continued to "carry" us -- without any kind of comprehensive regional transit-funding strategy -- is nothing short of a pipe-dream.

As I've said here many times, if we in Ypsilanti want to have services -- police, fire, transit, etc. -- we've got to figure out how we're (individually or collectively) going to pay for them.

While you and others are eagerly awaiting a change in the "status quo," the fact is that (regardless of who ends up being elected to City Council) Ypsilanti will continue to face shrinking revenues. While taking a "get tough" stance toward AATA may play well voters right now, it is ultimately counter-productive to building the kind of political consensus that will be necessary to build a longer-term strategy for regional funding of public transit.

Permalink 07/27/08 @ 21:50

Comment from: trusty getto [Visitor]

· http://www.trustygetto.com

JoF: I tried to explain it twice, as did others, but you didn't get it. One definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. I decline your invitation to do it over again. Good luck at figuring it out, though.

Glen: I likewise refuse to dignify your ridiculously disingenuous comment with a reply. If you really are interested in my view, then see my post on the issue here.

Permalink 07/27/08 @ 22:21

Comment from: rodneyn [Visitor]

Rod Johnson is a nice guy who has made several very publicly unsound and imprudent decisions that have impacted Ypsilanti for the worse:

1. Rod is a born-again anti-income-tax guy because when he supported it and vigorously campaigned to pass it last year his view got trounced. That does reflect well on his ability to learn from his mistakes, but we don't need more people in Ypsilanti City government who have to learn on the job. We need someone with experience to represent Ward 3.

2. While on the Planning Commission, Rod pushed forward an agenda that included a flawed and horribly executed Water Street redevelopment scheme, and a punative downzoning proposal for Midtown that took nearly three years of rancorous public meetings and an overwhelming protest petition from Midtown residents to finally turn his mind to even consider the merits of the neighborhood association's proposed alternative.

3. There has been much talk about Rod's economic development credentials, but as Planning Commission Chair he allowed our (now former) City Planner to toy with a national retailer looking to come into our city for months, until the retailer's representatives finally said in frustration (and after a two-hour public meeting on their site plan) that if the city wanted so badly for them not to build, just say so and they would look elsewhere. Only then did Rod step up to rein things in and begin guiding a divided and nitpicking Commission to a positive decision.

4. Rod also presides over a Planning Commission that has not prepared a comprehensive master plan update for the city in a decade, despite a state law requiring a review of the city's long-range plans every five years. This outdated plan was the primary source of the problems the south side faced in fighting off a mini-storage facility proposed to be built at the southern gateway to the city. Neighborhood leaders and elected officials found themselves fighting against the City's adopted but outdated future land use plan! Worse yet, the city's Zoning Ordinance is also outdated, cumbersome, and not business-friendly. Keeping the City's Zoning Ordinance and Master Plan up-to-date is the Planning Commission's most important task, and Rod Johnson has failed to accomplish that after eight years as an appointed city official. How much longer does he need to be successful?... ...and can we afford to wait any longer?

We just can't afford Rod Johnson's vision anymore. Please vote for Pete Murdock for the Ward 3 City Council seat on August 5th.