The Positive Voices

On Tuesday, May 4th the citizens of Grand Rapids went to the polls and by a slim margin approved taxing themselves increasing the city income tax rate in the name of public safety. No mandate, no you’re doing a wonderful job as fiscal stewards, no ringing endorsement of the way our elected and appointed officials are running our City. I believe the voters simply came to the conclusion Grand Rapids was no longer safe and we needed to increase our police and fire staffing levels. Just one week later not only was the infamous street light utility tax a discussion topic at City Hall, but Manager Greg Sundstrom was threatening to shut down the six city pools and halt park maintenance. Good thing the voters weren’t aware of the parks department scheme, I mean proposal, or the results could have been different. How tone deaf to the concerns of our citizens are the people running Grand Rapids? To be fair the City Manager always had the street light tax on the table, because the Mayor and Commissioners never told him it was unacceptable, but closing pools is something most people didn’t expect, especially when they were casting their votes to help the city out. I’m proud of the voters that approved the income tax increase. Their actions were unselfish and clear evidence of their willingness to sacrifice even in the midst of economic turmoil to help make our city a better place. But I also have deep respect for the voters turning out in opposition to the proposal. I know they too love our city and in large numbers sent a clear signal to City Hall also. Live within your means! Together their message is powerful and grounded in common sense. Sacrifice and live within your means. Listen up Mr. Manager and Commissioners, the people are making sense and showing you the way! Though maybe it’s a novel idea to our leaders? Mayor Heartwell needs to really listen to the public before limiting himself and the Commission to only what he calls “repugnant” choices. A careful and transparent examination of the budget, a rational reordering of priorities, imaginative critical thinking and truly embracing our voters’ message of sacrifice and fiscal responsibility would give our leaders a number of reasonable alternatives to the obnoxious choices with which they now struggle. If the Commissioners really don’t want to slap our taxpayers in the face and steal summer from our children there are other options. It only takes will and leadership to set Grand Rapids on the right track. Oh, but it also means the Commission must lead and the Manager implement their budget and priorities! First an outline of the street light tax, though the Orwellian description of it is as a street lighting “fee,” our clever citizens understand its real purpose! It is quite the bureaucratic masterpiece. Bismarck would be proud! I can see consultants around the country salivating at selling this tax, I mean revenue enhancing tool, to desperate city councils throughout the land. Of course consultants are just city bureaucrats supplementing their fat pensions, but I digress. I will save you the suffering of reading the actual ordinance language though it is available for masochists on the City website and I do applaud them for their transparency, but not for the legally obtuse language. However I’ll provide you with the straight talk translation. If you own property in Grand Rapids with an adjacent street light you will be charged money. How much will depend on street footage and the type of neighborhood you live in, but the greater your frontage the higher your costs. It won’t be good for residents, businesses, nonprofits, apartment complexes, or houses of worship. I guess it won’t be good for anyone except the tax collector again displaying the bureaucratic brilliance of the plan! To be fair it is expected to raise over $3 million annually for a city desperate for money, but to me the entire idea is misguided and unfair to taxpayers, especially when there are other alternatives. Maybe if we taxed those little light bulbs that appear over the heads of city bureaucrats when they get these bright ideas we would make a fortune, well on second thought probably not. Touching on the absurdity of cutting parks department funds and closing pools, the Manager and Commissioners need to stop and really think about what helps us maintain a quality of life in this city. Many parents bought homes close to pools and parks with the intention of using them. So did many residents without children counting on them for recreational opportunities or relishing the pure joy of green space. You certainly don’t have to live near them to enjoy them. They’re the part of the soul of our neighborhoods. Years ago parks were the jewels of Grand Rapids and an integral part of our community and were treated and financed as such. We learned to swim and play sports in them. During the winter we skated, not downtown, but at most parks throughout the city. Wherever we lived we could walk to one. Park caretakers were goodwill ambassadors and our guardians, many became neighborhood institutions. Ask anyone raised in Grand Rapids during the ’40s, ’50s, ’60s and even the ’70s and I bet they can match a park with the name of its caretaker. Yet now a homegrown Manager is prepared to carry through on the dismantling of this once great system. We can’t tolerate that any more than we could tolerate the cutting of our police officers and fire fighters. A city must be safe first of all to make it livable, but a city without a vibrant parks system is not a livable city. Think of what the Manager is proposing for our pools. I’ve seen it before, closed pools filled with rain water turned into million dollar bird baths. Also bear in mind these closed pools will have to be “opened” at least for a few days this summer to make sure things are running correctly even if our children will be barred from using them. Now that I’ve highlighted our problems where are all the solutions? I thought you would never ask! First let’s address the Mayor and Chamber of Commerce’s mantra of blaming the workers and calling for cutting wages and benefits as the solution to everything. Baloney! This city is in trouble because of how it is run, rather than how its employees are compensated. Understand I am willing to have a frank discussion regarding wages and benefits and support concessions when needed, but all this talk about pensions is going after low hanging fruit instead of using strategic thinking to address the costly and structural inefficiencies that are the real financial problems busting our budget. Again I am not afraid to have a frank discussion over what is better — a defined benefit or a defined contribution plan. In fact we will have one in this paper, but it will be a fact based discussion of the truth and some may find it surprising. When you hear the city pension plan being attacked and held up as outrageous who do they cite, our top paid managers. That is where the problem is and if we removed the unnecessary ones and watched how much we pay them things would change. The public doesn’t know how much is paid to match a number of managers’ pension contributions. Sometimes the City match is in double figures — far greater than what rank and file workers receive but that is an article for another day. Back to possible solutions to the city budget woes. Embrace sacrifice and living within your means. You know the drill — freeze all travel for Mayor, Manager, and Commissioners unless they are coming back with a check with at least six figures. Every penny counts is one of the things the electorate are demanding. Sell the Mayor’s car and take away Greg’s $700 a month car allowance. If you have to tax lights suck it up and sacrifice yourself, citizens have done enough. Let me applaud the elected officials’ pay cut — which I admire them for and is a case of leadership by example. They must understand it is only a start. In a true spirit of truth and transparency place up on the city’s website in an understandable and clear fashion the contracts of all the appointed officials along with the money spent by the Mayor, Commissioners, and all top management over the last two years and currently with an explanation where, why, and how money is spent. As always I recommend voting on and examining publicly every position and expense the city has and eliminating the non-essential ones. Middle management and upper management must be thinned and people let go not demoted or renamed. No one is being fooled. Really if this Commission could prioritize needs over wants in our budget and order the Manager to implement sound fiscal policy a lot of the problem could be relieved. Now finally a way to raise significant money, put bids out to lease and run our parking system except for the cash cow City/County operation below the government complex that feeds our general fund. You know this was suggested before and there were significant entities ready to bid, unlike the travesty of the so called “Mystery Project” that wasted thousands of tax payer dollars and ended up with no bidders, just embarrassment. The proposal was fought by the Parking Commission and city management and the City Commission lacked the will to proceed and because of their failure and inaction we have raised taxes. But what was a good idea then is a great one today when the city is in the worst shape ever financially. To not fully explore a venture like this and instead choose increased taxes and devastating service cuts would be unconscionable and a failure by the Commission of their fiduciary responsibility to our citizens. Here is the policy question. Must the City run the parking system and why? The answer is the City must try and provide safe, affordable, and accessible parking for its citizens. It also has a legitimate concern about where development takes place and has used its control of parking system property to manage and assist development. I have no quarrel with and support these elements of our parking policy, but none of that requires the City itself run the system or not lease out the property and dissolve most of the department. Last time it was brought up bureaucrats told us we would lose millions that we collect in revenue, but failed to mention all of that goes to run the system not to cover the general fund deficit. Putting out bids we could write a proposal allowing a private entity to lease and operate most of our system, but bind them contractually to have the parking prices set by the City Commission. We could also insist if they built something on the properties they would have to maintain the same number of parking spots. For ramps we owe money on they would have to assume or pay off the debt and the surplus in the parking system would be turned over to us. Even a take back clause and a penalty could be included. It might be possible to clear $25 million or more of profit from such a lease arrangement, plus the surplus, and the annual income from income tax and maybe even a payment in lieu of taxes from the leased property. With sound budgeting of needs we could fund priorities like police and fire staffing, parks, pools, planning, neighborhood services, and infrastructure. We could go back to the future and rebuild our parks making them neighborhood assets once again. What I have outlined are not “repugnant” options but viable alternatives. If Commissioners Gutowski and Shaffer don’t want to tax our citizens any further here is their chance to put our City on sound financial footing. If Commissioners Bliss and Lumpkins want pools open they can join the push for a sane fiscal policy with creative opportunities. If the Mayor wants real sustainability this is his chance and if Greg Sundstrom doesn’t want to be known as the City Manager that presided over the financial destruction of Grand Rapids he’ll jump on board too! At least the topic should be thoroughly explored. Urge our elected officials to park the Street Light Tax and turn the lights on to examine leasing our parking system and resizing our management structure. Otherwise we are back to repugnant choices where we all lose.

Please don’t rip the paper up and dismiss the headline without at least considering the argument. If I still have you, stick with me to the end while I at least make the case. Our safety depends on it. The City of Grand Rapids is no longer safe. Because of devastating budget cuts implemented over the past several years, police officer and fire fighter positions have been eliminated and we no longer have staffing levels to adequately protect our city. In a nutshell, it is the reason I’m compelled to support and work for the passage of the May 4th ballot proposal modestly increasing the income tax rate for Grand Rapids residents and individuals working in our City. It isn’t because public safety employees aren’t doing their jobs. Our outstanding and dedicated police officers and fire fighters are second to none and the quality of their performance in the face of an unmanageable work load is the only reason tragedy has been avoided and we don’t recognize the dire situation we are currently facing. Check the numbers. A police force of 408 in 1996 has been drastically reduced by 27% leaving us 296 today. Daily staffing levels of 57 fire fighters, the minimum number required to safely protect our city, have been replaced by woefully inadequate daily levels of 50 and much lower, because of the eradication of far too many fire fighter positions. Do the math and you’ll see it doesn’t add up to a safe city. Tax increases in the middle of a crippling recession are a hard sell. Citizens are having trouble trusting elected officials at every level of government, for good reasons. Truth is a rare commodity. Responsibilities are avoided. Facts obscured, or out right hidden. Tough decisions are kicked down the road. Bad judgment and poor stewardship have placed us in a horrible position and people resent it. Any kind of tax increase anywhere is met with skepticism and anger, regarded as another government bail out. Well I resent it too, but anger is never productive when it interferes with sound reasoning. Examine this ballot on its merits. Taxes are the prices we pay for the efficient delivery of government services and to maintain our quality of life. There are such things as just taxes and necessary ones. Common sense tells us nothing is free. Public safety is the most basic need we have and without it little else matters. Call 911 and you want action. Faced with crime you need police officers fast. Persons undergoing a life threatening illness or accident demand a quick response from our fire fighters. Numbers and staffing levels impact response times. People won’t live, work, or raise their families in neighborhoods where they don’t feel safe. Businesses won’t locate in unsafe areas. Stores close, for sale signs go up, and people flee to the suburbs igniting a downward spiral of decay and despair. Grand Rapids has too many great neighborhoods and a fantastic population of wonderful people. We can’t let that happen here! I have enough confidence in the citizens of Grand Rapids to believe they will support a critically needed tax proposal if they have a chance to carefully examine the facts and make an informed decision. This is not a property tax millage. Those tend to be regressive and unfairly target property owners, some on fixed incomes already struggling to make ends meet. Instead what’s proposed is a small, temporary income tax increase with the burden shared by workers and businesses. It is by law targeted to public safety and expires in five years. Our income tax rate would rise from 1.3% to 1.5% for residents and from 0.65% to 0.75% for non-residents. Someone earning $50,000 a year would see their tax bill increase by $100, less than two dollars a week. Match that against future sky rocketing insurance pre miums for businesses and home owners when insurance companies rightfully decide Grand Rapids doesn’t meet industry standards for safety. From a logical point of view this modest increase is the better choice. Additionally, the temporary increase is expected to raise $7 million dollars annually and will be used to re hire our vitally needed police officers and fire fighters once again making Grand Rapids safe! We can and should have an open and frank discussion as to how we reached the situation we are in and who should be held responsi ble. That is a conversation we can have this year during the budget process as the City Com mission outlines their priorities and next year when elected officials can be held accountable at the polls. But that is a battle for the future, right now we have a city to save. If you’ve stuck with me to the end I hope your interest has at least been stirred enough to seriously consider this urgent proposal on its merits rather than emotion. On the other hand if you disagree, my column can be used in your birdcage and my picture as a dartboard or if you wish a cure for the hiccups. Any way you cut it, you’ll get your money’s worth.

At last month’s second public G.R.A.S.S. meeting (Grand Rapids Advocates for Sensible Spending), GRASS leaders Rina Sala Baker and Mary Milanowski made a concerted argument that City workers’ pay scales and, especially, their medical and pension benefits, were the most obvious places to make cuts, as opposed to hiking City income taxes. Understandably irate off-duty firefighters, police officers and City workers packed the meeting and tried to make the case that they had been agreeing to give-backs and wage-cuts for years, and wondered when the taxpayers and citizens they have been serving and protecting were going to do their part. Watching the news coverage of the meeting on TV, eighty-four year-old Leatrice Mollien wasn’t buying the GRASS argument. This is tax prep season and she had her papers handy. “Want to see how generous a City firefighter’s pension is?” she asked, holding out her earnings statement. “After they subtract what I have to pay for supplemental health insurance, they send me thirteen bucks a month.” Not even quite that, her stub read “$12.59.” George Mollien joined the Grand Rapids Fire Department in 1945, right after returning from service in WWII. When he met and married Leatrice they had both been divorced and both had school-age children at home, one of his five children and two of her four. “I couldn’t afford to quit my job,” said Leatrice, “but at least it was part-time and I could be home to take care of the kids on some kind of a regular schedule. George and other firemen work crazy hours – 24 hours on, 24 hours off, sometimes 2 or 3 days off in a row, but a lot more than 40 hours a week. Can you imagine trying to manage children by yourself on that schedule?” Another common problem confronts both police and firefighters. The City doesn’t pay Social Security taxes for police and fire department employees so George, like a lot of firemen, had a second job so he could qualify for at least some level of Social Security. He worked part-time, on call, as a guard on Brinks armored trucks, sometimes on very long hauls. “I remember him at least once making a run to the U.P. and back.” George retired after 35 years with the fire department. He passed away in 1988, and Leatrice decided it was finally time to retire. “After 44 years at the same job, I was ready. I’m very lucky that I don’t have to survive on just George’s pension and social security benefits. He only qualified for about $400 a month from Social Security. I have co-pays on all my prescriptions and doctors’ appointments, and dental isn’t covered. I had almost two thousand dollars in out-of-pocket medical expenses last year that weren’t covered by Medicare or my supplemental insurance. I don’t have mortgage or rent costs, but I still have to pay property taxes and utilities. On just my widow’s share of George’s retirement benefits there wouldn’t be any money left for food.” City workers’ pension benefits, unlike Social Security benefits, don’t have automatic cost of living allowances to adjust for inflation As George’s widow, Leatrice gets half of the pension benefit. When George first retired his pension check was about double the amount Leatrice gets and supplemental health insurance costs were much lower. But were George still alive the health insurance costs would be double and TWO people would be trying to survive with just the tiny remainder as a pension benefit. Retired Fire Fighter Mike DeBack is proud of his service to the City and doesn’t begrudge the missed holidays and family events. Or even the injuries that eventually led to his retiring on a disability pension. Public service runs in the genes of his family: “My Grandfather was a fire fighter and so was Dad though he eventually joined the Grand Rapids Police Department. I was encouraged by my Grandfather to join the department he retired from in the 1960s. His pension when he retired was $278.85 a month and it never changed for the rest of his life. He had no cost of living increase ever and Grand Rapids police officers and firefighters don’t get social security. People don’t realize that.” “When I joined the Department back in 1970,” he recalled recently, “we had 312 men with staffing levels of over 60 to 70 fire fighters working every day. On most calls there were 5 men on every truck and engine. In those days we never went out with less than four. They wouldn’t allow it.” DeBack grimaces when he discusses the current understaffed Department: “I don’t feel very safe in my own neighborhood even though I live very close to Station Number 14 on Plainfield. Some days staffing levels are so low response times can be slower and portions of stations shut down or even go out of service. We need better numbers of officers for the police department too. We need to get back to funding the basic needs of our city - police, fire, roads, and other essential services. That is what people want and will pay for because it’s what we need.” DeBack is Vice President of the Grand Rapids Fire Fighters Retirees Association, which meets twice a year and advocates for retired fire fighters and spouses. DeBack is less concerned about his own situation but deeply concerned about the plight of other retirees: “Some of these people are barely getting by. Some spend most of what they receive from their pension every month paying the city for their health care supplemental. I don’t know how they make it. Some pay everything they have for health care. People don’t know. The city doesn’t pay for health insurance for retirees. They never have. These people are on fixed incomes, usually don’t get Social Security and have to pay for their own Medicare supplemental insurance. Fire fighters have their pride and don’t like to ask for help. Some are surviving by going to food pantries and the like. It isn’t right. Again, I don’t think the public knows.” Over the years, DeBack worked his way up to the rank of Lieutenant. Then, while fighting a fire in 1988, he fell off a roof fracturing his hip in 150 places and incurring many other critical injuries. He spent three months in the hospital and three months recovering at home, with a lot of support from his coworkers. “Fire Fighters take care of our own,” he says. With the support of his department, he returned to work for another seven years, becoming a trainer and a HAZ-MAT specialist. The scars and after effects are still with him today, including the disability that led to his retirement DeBack, now a 60 year-old widower, isn’t surprised by G.R.A.S.S.’s call for more wage and benefit cuts. “The workers always take the brunt. We’re the scapegoats. There’s been mismanagement and waste over the years by the City Commissions and City Managers, but because people don’t know everything we get the blame. City workers, government workers don’t get the respect they deserve for what they do. We’ve always been treated like second-class citizens and taken for granted…except when we’re needed. You know we always served the public well and will continue to serve them well, no matter what.“ Rewinding again to the March G.R.A.S.S. meeting, after some early protestations and brief outbursts, the dozens of City workers in the audience are listening sullenly as G.R.A.S.S. authorities expound on how City-employee benefit packages are out-of-step with employee benefit packages “in the private sector”. The City workers are just as shy as any other civilian would be to stand up in front of a crowd and make a case for how much they are worth. It’s very awkward for most regular folks to do in the best of times. But now is the worst of times in recent memory. Beyond Social Security exceptions, there are other significant differences from the private sector. Most private sector workers, even armed security guards, are ordered to avoid all risks – not enter burning buildings, pursue suspects down blind alleys or attempt to pull drunk drivers off the road. And most high-risk jobs outside of government command well above average hazardous-duty pay scales. “We don’t know if our husband or wife is coming home at night. You can just sit over there and count your blessings,” an obviously offended Dolly Jessee tells the G.R.A.S.S. organizers. Her husband, Dennis, was a Green Beret for twenty years, served in action in Grenada, and now patrols the streets of Grand Rapids. “I worried when Dennis was in the Special Forces and I just prayed for his safety.” She reveals later. “I still do but Dennis loves his job and I support him. He wanted to serve his country and I’m proud of him and supported him. He gave twenty years for his country and still wanted to give more so he went into police work.” After a stint with the Oakland County Sheriff’s Department, the native South East Michigan couple and their two children moved to West Michigan when Dennis became a Grand Rapids Police Officer. “What bothers me,” says Dolly, “is you say, ‘Ok I’m going to accept this job,.’ -then all of a sudden everything is cut. They then have to do their job, which is to protect people, but they also have to protect their family and we don’t come first. I mean, if Dennis has a late call, well… we are not going to be going out to dinner because the late call is more important. Many days our plans are ruined. These people go home and have their dinner at 5 o’clock. We don’t have our dinner at 5 o’clock. We have our dinner when Dennis comes home. You know family vacations, you don’t have any family vacations if your husband can’t get the time off. It’s like sorry guys we’re not going on vacation Dad can’t get the time off. Holidays and family events they are away many times. People don’t understand we do give. And that’s fine, after all these years I’m fine with that, but you know that women from GRASS, she said we are not willing to give up anything. Well we already give a lot. We give till it hurts. She should walk in our shoes some day.” “Every thing the guys got they are paying for. They gave up wages for benefits. We pay 10% of the medical. I just think that the people don’t know. They think we pay no medical. That we have no co-pays. That we are given everything and that police officers and fire fighters aren’t willing to give anything back. But that isn’t true. I just had an operation. We paid $500 -maybe that’s not a lot to others but we paid it. We pay a co-pay for prescriptions, doctors visits, everything. If we’re sick we wait and if we have to go to the Doctor then we go, but we are careful with how we use it.” “This is such a high stress job. The guys come home and they need time to decompress. Now to think some of the people in Grand Rapids are gunning for them. When those people need help who are they going to call?” “I’m sorry the City is struggling, but for 15 years they didn’t pay anything into the police or fire pensions -but the workers did.” adds Dolly, referring to one of the City’s main budget problems – mounting deficits in their pension funds. City workers made their contributions to the pension funds year after year while the City and the taxpayers paid no contributions at all – relying entirely on the stock market boom continuing indefinitely to make up their share of the burden. City leaders were advised that they should still pay their contributions in booming economic times so they would have some kind of built-up cushion during economic downturns. They didn’t and now that day has arrived. Ultimately, who should pay for all this? The taxpayers whose elected leaders helped get us into this mess? Or should the already-sacrificing City workers, once again, take it on the chin?