In the Wake of Approving the Public Safety Millage,
Questions Persist About the Rubbish Fund

 
By Robert E. Martin

        On May 2
nd Saginaw City voters, faced with threats of laying off 26 police officers and 20 firefighters, approved a 5-year, 6-mill property tax increase to maintain & improve police and fire protection that will generate $3.6 million in the first year alone.
     
Resistance to the tax increase was never predicated upon a desire not to have safer streets and adequate police & fire protection, but rather was born from a mistrust of city officials to properly account for public funds, given financial scandals that have torn at the fabric of the city for decades.
  
The latest looming question relating to the necessity for the Public Service millage surfaced during a round table panel discussion with city & county leaders in the March30-April 12th edition of The Review.
 
Currently the City of Saginaw collects $3.8 million for rubbish services, which they have contracted out to the Mid Michigan Waste Authority at a cost of $1.9 million, which would presumably leave another $1.9 million remaining in the fund.
       
Similar to the Public Service Fund, the Rubbish budget is a dedicated fund, meaning that expenditures must be strictly limited to the purposes of rubbish collection; however, if these monies were not utilized, City Council could conceivably vote to rebate the money to taxpayers in the form of reduced fees and reduced millages assessed for purposes of rubbish collection.  
 
Indeed, over a two-year period, the $3.6 million raised by this latest public service tax hike could be transferred without costing city taxpayers any additional financial burden if these excess monies in the rubbish fund were returned to the people footing the bill.
    
Less than one week prior to the May 2nd special election, I met with Saginaw City Manager Darnell Early and Director of Public Services, Thomas Darnell, and received a detailed accounting of the Rubbish Fund budget for 2006.
       
The Expense Budget is as follows:

Administration:  $602,830; Rubbish collection: $1,395,096; Environmental Improvement: $369, 114; Landfill: $557,393; Brush Collection: $129,987; Recycling: $309,000; Composting: $647,419. 
Total Budget: $4,019,839.

 
According to Darnell, in the 'collection' budget  $1,004,234 is budgeted to pay WM for rubbish collection, and $302,137 is budgeted for yard waste collection also done by WM. $547,792 is budgeted to pay WM for landfilling of rubbish for a total of $1,854,235. Additionally, $75,000 is budgeted under the recycling line item to pay for administrative costs of MMWA, bringing the total up to $1,929,253 that the City pays for services under contract to MMWA, which mirrors the information supplied to me by the authority.
 
As for the remainder of funds in the 'recycling' budget, apparently this includes $233,000 that was budgeted for one half of a year's residential recyclable collection, which will not be spent and remains in the fund.
      
Additionally, the Composting budget shows a 40% increase from the previous year. According to Darnell, this is for "increased overtime, temporary employee costs, and vehicle costs"
   
"Some savings will be necessary to balance the rubbish budget due to the negative $382,155 adjustment made recently to account for receivables that have been carried on the books for years, but are now considered uncollectible."
   
When asked about this, Darnell explained that many of these 'bad receivables' are from citizens billed their $50.00 annual assessment for solid waste service that did not pay their bills.
 
       
The two biggest question marks in the City's Rubbish Fund budget center around the $602,830 per year 'administration' expense and the $369,114 'environmental impact' line item, together amounting to $971,944 of collected revenue.
  
According to Darnell, the 'environmental impact' costs go to pay "one full time inspector and several part-time people that handle the 6,000 complaints which the city receives each year pertaining to code violations of neighbors allowing their yards to fall into disrepair, or other environmental nuisances or hazards."
       
As for the 'Rubbish Administration' budget, a breakdown is as follows: Personal Services: $66,581; Benefits: $134,438; Supplies: $1,500; Internal Service Charges: $331,761; Other Services: $68,550. Total: $602,830.
 
'Personal services include $36,256 for full time salaries; $18,082 for part time salaries; and $9,948 to co
ver 'paid time off' accrued for an anticipated retirement.
      'Benefits' include $16,593 for health insurance; $94,275 for retiree health insurance; $16,875 for MERS pension; and $3,793 to Social Security.
 
'Internal service charges' include $11,967 for 'information management' and $281,848 for 'indirect costs', which are charges to the rubbish fund for services performed by general fund activities, such as collection of taxes & fees and processing payroll checks. $37,166 from this line item apparently goes to 'public works building rent'.
     
'Other services' include $53,314 for insurance, $12,500 for postage, and $2,236 for telephone/cell/pagers.
 
When asked about these figures, Monica Duebbert of the Mid Michigan Waste Authority noted that the city was "dead on correct about the monies they are billed and remit to us; however, we have no idea about how all these other figures break out."
       
"I can tell you that the $602,830 figure noted for 'Administration' is the same figure that was supplied to us back when the City of Saginaw still had five trucks and eleven drivers and was handling rubbish collection on its own."