Mayor: Tremendous Financial Challenges Ahead
Mayor John B. O'Reilly, Jr.
With the city looking at a $20 million gap between revenues and expenditures, Dearborn city officials will be asking for a tax hike this year.
At his State of the City address Wednesday, the Dearborn Press & Guide reports that Dearborn Mayor John B. O’Reilly said he would “recommend the City Council approve a 1.38 mill increase as they formulate the budget, which must be balanced and adopted by June 30. Currently the city has an operating millage of 13.62. If the increase is adopted it would be the highest rate allowed under the City Charter.
“For a house with a taxable value of $70,000 — about the average for Dearborn — the bottom line would be about $100 more in annual taxes. The increased cash flow would be a needed step in the right direction, said O’Reilly.
“If that measure proves insufficient, O’Reilly said the city could issue a ballot proposal asking for an additional 3.5 mill increase, up to 18.5 mills. The maximum allowed under state law is 20 mills. Either increase still would equate to a total tax bill less than what most property owners paid in 2006, though. And if it does come down to a ballot proposal said the proposal would come with a five-year sunset clause.”
The mayor also said that while the city has reduced general employee staffing by nearly 30 percent over the last decade, there are plans to cut 40 more positions in July. As far as cutting police and fire staffing levels, the City Charter-mandated police and fire minimum staffing levels makes that much more difficult.
“No one likes to hear it, and I prefer not to say it, but we have to face it,” O’Reilly said. “The voter-approved City Charter provisions of our police and fire departments severely reduce our flexibility to manage costs.”
The Press & Guide reports that the mayor underscored the staffing mandate predicament by saying that public safety costs in Dearborn are about $51 million a year, while the city’s operating tax — the lion’s share of city revenue — only pulls in about $48 million annually.
“We need to understand that mandating the number of officers and firefighters doesn’t automatically correspond to our desired level of security,” O’Reilly said.
For the full State of the City story written by J. Patrick Pepper in the Dearborn Press & Guide, click HERE.
February 25th, 2011 at 7:51 am
Sure Jack O just like they approved paid parking by voting. Right
February 25th, 2011 at 10:22 am
Ouir taxes are ridiculously high now–Look deeper. Take away some of the perks of elected officials–cars, phones,Etc.
February 25th, 2011 at 10:57 am
Did Mr. O’Reilly mention the 12% payraise for Dearborn police and 8% payraise for Dearborn firefighters that he granted in 2010?
Is there any possibility some of those raises could be given back in exchange for softening the blow for Dearborn taxpayers?
Or, is there a possibility of a city income tax for city employees who are non-residents?
Lots of Michigan cities have such policies.
In other words, can we not preserve our police and fire resources at the mandated levels without digging yet again into the pockets of those of us still paying our property taxes in Dearborn?
Oh, and what about Hakim Fakhoury, our preferred develper who owes Dearborn $$$ and also has properties in foreclosure?
What a pathetic plan for a mayor who actually completed law school.
February 25th, 2011 at 11:51 am
Big O youu are proving once again what a blow-hard you are. You and your Council can’t properly manage the City funds, so u want the residents to make up for your ineptitude. Do what Allen Pk. had to do, cut everywhere (i.e. POLICE AND FIRE SERVICES), do what u have to do or are u completely spineless, with that Council of yes people u currently have.
February 25th, 2011 at 2:36 pm
I would prefer to pay a little extra than have any services or teachers cut.
February 25th, 2011 at 3:03 pm
I would like to know why he isn’t ‘sharing’ with us the programs he is intending to cut. Guess he doesn’t want to make the same mistake as he made last year by telling the elementary kids that he intended to close some of the pools. Why not put his ideas on the table now and maybe somone can come up with some other solutions. Not everyone likes the Governors proposed cuts but he had the guts to put them out there for everyone to see.
February 25th, 2011 at 3:09 pm
None of us like to hear that services will be cut and our costs will go up. Unfortunately, it is becoming a way of life no matter what community you live in.
Many cities have made major financial mistakes. Dearborn has paid parking that hardly any one uses and the “master plan” took away away viable business like Prices. Allen Park backed the movie studio that never materialized and now is talking about laying off the entire Fire Department.
Past mistakes need to be put aside and we must all tighten our belts and stopped pointing fingers even if it is justified. The bleeding has to be stopped.
I really believe that it is the only way that we can get ahead.
February 25th, 2011 at 4:27 pm
For a Mayor you are very misguided, and a very weak leader. Giving raises of the nature u gave the police is just being obnoxious. U were aware of what r expenditures were going to b, and still gave the raises (are u afraid of them, because of their votes?). Show some balls and make the right decisions, because right now u are a laughing stock around town.
February 25th, 2011 at 4:49 pm
It was a real chore wading through the nebulous “what ifs” and might happens.” Lay your cards on the table Jack. For once spell out in clear language what you plan on taking away from the citizens. Face the music. We are all adults. Spoon feed your vile sugar to your cronies. We are tougher and wiser than you and the insipid City Council could ever admit to. My suggestions: close the Health Department. Close that money pit Centennial Library. The gorilla in the room Camp Dearborn. The police and fire lobbies are strangling the city. I’ll pick up their donut and chili fixings if it will reduce their overtime.
February 25th, 2011 at 6:49 pm
The mayor surely realizes that Dearborn is dancing on a razor’s edge for the next several years until property values rise or a different kind of funding mechanism is devised for municipalities in Lansing. If he cuts too many services and perks that have made Dearborn the envy of so many surrounding suburbs for decades, those that can will flee the city to now affordable outer ring suburbs like Canton or Novi leaving Dearborn a 21st century Highland Park.A difficult challenge, but if the mayor is truly looking 20 years down the road, he can’t strip Dearborn of all its assets. We’ve been down so long around here, I think we’ve forgotten that good times will return.
February 25th, 2011 at 9:57 pm
So, will Dearborn be paying for police and fire services for surrounding communities that cut theirs?
February 26th, 2011 at 12:17 pm
Rob you must be one of the big guys relatives, or cronie department heads,because he isn’t giving us residents anything to be proud to say we are Dearbornites. Our previous Mayors had the balls to come up with innovative plans, unlike you, as you want to raise our taxes, and not give us additional services (that is the easy way). The Police are laughing at the raise they got, and the Fire Dept. keeps telling people they own you — give us residents a bread and treat everyone the same, now that would be innovative for you.
February 26th, 2011 at 1:32 pm
Just Asking Says:
You are totally misinformed as to Police and Fire getting raises. Here is what a wrote in response to a similar comment made in March 2010. I have seen the contract and know what it reads. They got a 1% raise in 2010, please see the FACTS as listed below:
Homegrown says:
March 18th, 2010 at 2:27 pm
As a retired Dearborn police officer, I must correct some information previously reported. “Turk 182″ stated on 3-16-10: “How about you do a comparison article and show how the DPD got a 12 percent raise and the DFD got a 9 percent raise and now when all other contracts are up the Mayor now says there must be cuts and possible layoffs. Are you going to put an article in the paper showing these facts?”
I cannot speak for Dearborn fire fighters, however I know that Dearborn Police Officers went several years without a contract that was finally settled last year. They received the following increases that amount to a 10% increase over 6 years, ending 06-30-2012:
As of 07-01-2006 2%, 07-01-2007 2%, 07-01-2008 zero increase, 07-01-2009 2%, 07-01-2010 1%, and 07-01-2011 3 %. This brings the top pay for a p[olice officer to $67,030 per year after July 2011.
In the past year the Police Officers Association of Michigan (www.POAM.com) reported at least (16) other negotiated contracts that were finalized in the past year for some police departments they represent. Please check for yourself and see that Dearborn Police are not out of line with other negotiated contracts, in fact, their pay increases are actually lower than most. Please bear in mind that DPD went several years without a contract before it was settled last year for 6 years up through July 2011. “Turk 182″ makes it sound like DPD got a huge increase (12% ?) in a short period of time, which is not the case. They started contract negotiations in 2006 before all the serious economic problems hit Dearborn, Michigan and the rest of the country. I am sure that like many other municipalities, Dearborn will be looking into some give backs by their police and fire departments, and will probably look into the changing current charter amendments, which state a certain number of fire and police officers have to be maintained, regardless of the economy and ability to pay.
Everyone is doing more with less resources, and police departments are in the same boat. What most do not realize is that working with fewer police and fire personnel not only is dangerous for the communities they serve, but doubly so for those police officers and firefighters who are now in a position of doing their jobs without adequate personnel and resources. I personally do not know many people that can do the job of a police officer, especially now-a-days. Their every action is scrutinized by the media, the public, and the very department they work for, well above the expectations of the majority of jobs.
Do I get a good pension? Yes, I do. I worked hard for many years and placed myself in dangerous situations that “normal” people would never dream of. Most of those years were for inadequate pay and shift work that took me away from my family and other opportunities afforded others.
I am sure that everyone, including police and fire personnel everywhere are aware of the economic problems we all face. Don’t be quick to label everyone as “fat cats” living on wages and pensions envied by all. I am proud of the fact that few people could have done my job, and I stood up to the plate and proudly worked for the safety of the citizens of Dearborn. We do receive pretty good pensions, however it is not enough for me to live on for the rest of my life, and I have to continue to work like everyone else. Most police departments have converted to Defined Contribution benefits (401/403b, etc.), as opposed to previous Defined Benefit pensions. Dearborn went back to a Defined Benefit pension system a couple of years ago (MERS system). This was done because there was no provisions for any kind of duty disability, and many recruits left Dearborn PD because other departments had a better pension. Dearborn PD could not get the best new officers and it still remains a problem to this day.
February 26th, 2011 at 5:47 pm
Everyman –
Exactly how is the Centennial Library money pit any more than the other libraries? All buildings require upkeep, staffing, computers and stuff to check out. All allow any member of the public to walk in and use them. Centennial also houses all of the support structure for the rest of the libraries. Things like the processing of incoming stuff to check out, administration and computer management is housed there. Explain how those are going to be handled without the main library?
Are you making this observation because you think there are more outsiders who visit Centennial than the branches? How do you know this? Do you have some kind of non-Dearbornite detector? And if you closed the main loibrary where do you think these outsiders would go? They would invade your cozy branch libraries.
And before you pitch a fit, let me assure you I DO NOT want to see ANY of the libraries close. Really, I have many friends who work for the library. But we’ve got to face facts. The library system lost one third of their full-time staff last year. If the mayor requires more cuts, there are just not enough staff to keep all of those buildings open.
Oh, I’m sure that you folks that frequent this blog have some very brilliant ideas about how the libraries (and every other city department) could work more to your liking.
February 26th, 2011 at 5:50 pm
(annoying touchpads) However, it’s very easy to throw ideas around when you will never have them tested and most likely proven weak.
We have to make choices. Less services or more taxes. There really isn’t any more fat to cut.
February 26th, 2011 at 10:52 pm
There is nothing more important than a City maintaining their services. Look to our east and see what is left. The problem isn’t police, fire, or anything other than money. The problem is revenue loss.
There are three major revenue drains on Dearborn.
1. The sewer project
2. Decreased revenue sharing from the state
3. Decreased property values
Trust me. I am not a huge proponent of the Mayor. That being said, Dearborn is safe and safe for a reason. We have great police and fire. Even if the property taxes are “raised,” we are still paying less taxes than we were paying five years ago. Our taxes have dropped drastically in recent years. Of course, the City cannot provide the same services with less money coming in.
February 26th, 2011 at 11:29 pm
Get rid of the Dearborn Public Health Department!!
How long will Dearborn continue to run a public health office? Very, very few cities even have one anymore. Personal responsibility and personal pay for what you need should come first. Why do my taxes pay for others to have free city sponsored health care? I pay my own health care at a great personal cost, so should ALL others, no free lunch anymore. If you cannot afford something, don’t make me pay for your situations.
One a similar note, since when should the Government be helping people get cell phones? When has a cell phone become a right?
February 27th, 2011 at 10:56 am
It is pretty sad to think that there are people on this blog and in the City of Dearborn complaining about giving a 1% raise to city employees who risk their lives to keep us safe. Yet, we have people in this city who will fight to the death to save one of our MANY POOLS and LIBRARIES from closing.
Where are the priorities? If you don’t feel safe in your own home then you have nothing!
Andy: How can you say that our police and firefighters are laughing at the raise they got? Your words are insulting to every working policeofficer and firefighter in this city.
Everyman: It couldn’t hurt if you are ever sitting in a restaurant with a police officer and you offered to pick up his or hers tab and say THANK YOU! And while you’re at it make sure to remind them to always wear their bullet proof vest.
February 27th, 2011 at 12:28 pm
Thank you, Homegrown, for setting me straight. Surprisingly, my information came from members of the police and fire departments (unsolicited…they are longtime friends who were rightfully thrilled with the so-called unexpected “raises”).
My point is that we all hear about “shared sacrifices”; yet from my side of the fence (lifelong Dearborn resident/taxpayer/police& fire minimum staffing supporter), all I hear is that I need to dig deeper into my pocket to pay for services that are provided by people who don’t even live in Dearborn, yet draw their generous paychecks here.
As of 2001, less than 35% of Dearborn police were residents here. I’m sure the firefighters also have fewer residents. That means, those of us who live here are absorbing all of the financial blows, not just for public safety, but for every service/department funded by local taxes.
Where is the shared sacrifice?
February 27th, 2011 at 12:33 pm
As much as I love Dearborn, and even though I think it is one great city, for decades for various reasons desirable residents have been moving out and choosing other cities to live in. They might have moved due to our proximity to Detroit and wanting to move farther away from Detroit due to crime being higher in Dearborn than cities further away from Detroit, despite our fine police department. Other reasons might also include a loss of residents when DPS students were performing so poorly under former Superintendent Artis’ leadership, or lack of leadership; older housing stock, with much of it being too small for people wanting larger houses and a few other reasons.
However, one thing Dearborn has had for decades is an array of services and amenities that no other city I know of can even come close to matching, which in my humble opinion has made Dearborn stand out from any other city in Michigan or America. No other city I know of has their own 626 acre camp out of the city, 4 public libraries, 43 parks in only 24.5 square miles, a Ford Performing and Cultural Arts Center, 3 golf courses in the city and another at Camp Dearborn, 8 outdoor public pools and on and on and on.
During my last research on police department staffing, I surveyed Dearborn, Dearborn Heights and Taylor. To the best of my recollection, Dearborn has 1 police officer per every 444 residents, Dearborn Heights 1 police officer per every 666 residents and Taylor 1 police officer per every 888 residents. Since we are surrounded in many areas by Detroit, I am glad we have this many officers and hope that our leaders do not cut police officer positions, as our DPD does an outstanding job keeping Dearborn safe.
Now we are facing a projected $20 million budget deficit for fiscal year 2010 and 2011. $40 million is a huge deficit to cover and sadly, it may require our leaders to cut a lot of services, amenities and jobs. I’ve read the Task Force recommendations numerous times and it doesn’t look good for Dearborn in the near future.
What they will cut or downsize I don’t know, but what concerns me is that it may further motivate more desirable residents to move to cities other than Dearborn and it may also make desirable current residents move out.
But I do know that our home’s property taxes have gone down the past 3 or more years by about $1,000 and while my family is not rich, it if takes increasing the property tax millage to maintain most services and amenities, then I have no issue with it. But then again, the economy and job market is so bad, this may not be a popular idea with so many residents struggling.
This is a tough call for our leaders, whether you like and/or respect them or not and no matter what they decide, there will be plenty of residents upset with them.
February 27th, 2011 at 1:11 pm
The City Charter States:
“Section 10.16. Police department.
The City shall employ no less than 2.1 fulltime paid sworn police officers for each 1,000 person residing in the City of Dearborn, as indicated by the most recent United States Census.”
The most recent census is going to be well below the 2000 census. Assuming the 2000 census accounted for roughly 100,000 residents, that means the police department should currently be maintained, by law, at 210 officers. Assuming the 2010 census is going to come in at around 80,000 residents give or take a few thousand (based on projections I’ve read), that means the police department, by current law, must be budgeted and maintained at 168 officers. That’s a reduction of FORTY TWO police officers. The mayor should be THANKING the police and residents for voting for this minimum staffing change to the charter instead of blaming the police officers and voters for putting him in an untenable position. He can now either lay-off or reduce the police department through attrition by 42 police officers and say “We’re complying with minimum staffing levels”. In effect he gets a free pass for reducing the police department by TWENTY PERCENT! And he doesn’t have to be the mayor who takes the heat for lay offs or police staffing reductions because he’s complying with what the police officers AND the citizens wanted! They voted for it!
There was a large amount of civil service hiring across the country following WWII and again in the 60’s and 70’s. My dad was one of them. A good number, maybe even a majority of this generation of employees from the 60’s and 70’s retired by the mid 80’s to mid 90’s. The generation who was hired to replace them are going to start retiring soon. The city will be able to easily reduce the police department through attrition, without layoffs, over a very short period of time.
If residents get over the need to have the police respond within 5 minutes to every minor incident, the police department can be reduced even further if the voters agree, which I’m sure they will, to waive the charter requirement for 168 police officers. There is no need for a police response to many of the problems I’ve seen the police respond to in my neighborhood. There was an officer out this summer because a tree limb fell on my neighbor’s car. My neighbor called the police and they showed up in under 5 minutes. This is ridiculous. We have no need for that kind of police response. There should be no police involvement for that kind of incident when an insurance adjuster could handle it just as well. My wife was walking our dog through Levagood Park and someone called the police on her. Again, they responded within 5 minutes. There is no need to pay for a department to provide THAT level of service. None. A robbery? Fights or other disturbances? Of course. Falling trees and leashed Poodles in the park? Hell no. But we can’t even shut down a pool without starting a revolution so I’m not sure people will be able to get used to waiting an hour for the city to come inspect a pile of leaves that was raked into the street too early.
In short, the Mayor should not be blaming the minimum staffing requirement for an inability to reduce the size of the police department at this time. He can get it down to under 170 officers and THEN cry about “We can’t save any money because the Charter says so!” I have no idea how many officers the city currently employs, but if we’re anywhere close to complying with the Charter, it’s a lot more than 168.
The asinine comment about “excessive” raises for the police has already been addressed. They were NOT given any windfalls and the people who talk about a 12% raise are being intentionally misleading. We can still attract good candidates for Police Officer without reducing pay and benefits to the point where our police service rates us as an Inkster or Highland Park.
We can do all this without anyone falling on their swords and blaming the police for unrealistic manpower requirements. It is the police and voter who made it possible to get down to 168 officers with no charter changes and no hand-wringing. Stop blaming the police and do your job. Same goes for the Fire Department.
Charter says:
“Section 10.17. Fire department.
There shall be a separate fire department, the director of which shall be the Fire Chief, who shall be appointed by the Mayor and shall be educated, skilled and qualified by experience in fire science and the administration of a fire department. The Fire Chief shall be the executive officer of the fire department and shall be responsible for the administration of the department. The Fire Chief shall organize and carry out the duties and functions of the department. The City shall employ no less than 1.24 full-time paid professional firefighters for each 1,000 persons residing in the City of Dearborn as indicated by the most recent United States Census.”
We should be able to very quickly reduce the Fire Department budget from 124 firefighters to 99 firefighters with very little jumping up and down. I’m nobody special in the world of civil service or labor negotiations. If an hourly blue collar dummy like me can figure this out by reading the charter, how come our degreed and pedigreed elected officials and blue ribbon commission members can’t figure it out and do something with it in short order?
February 27th, 2011 at 1:12 pm
Are you kidding me .. The mayor is taking a 10% reduction in pay, that would bring his pay to $120,000. Why is it not 20% …. who could not live well on $107,000???
February 27th, 2011 at 1:43 pm
The Health Department is a duplication of services provided by Wayne County. Why do we continue to run our own? We voted on selling Dearborn Towers. When are we going to get that going or is the Mayor waiting for the market to drop a little more. The city would be much better off if they stayed out of the real estate market. We lost our shirts on the Montgomery Wards building. Are we charging full market rent for the Chamber of Commerce using Bryant Library or deal the Mayor cut another deal? Instead of going after Hakim for back taxes the City continues to grant him extension after extensions. Employees screw up like Norwood and they get moved to another Department instead of being fired. Bad moves like this helped get us in this mess. Remember this at election time. We need to clean house. We need some real leaders on Council. We need a Mayor who cares.
February 27th, 2011 at 9:58 pm
Homegrown: Thank you so much for setting the record straight and thank you for your service.
February 27th, 2011 at 10:59 pm
Butwhatdoiknow: Evidently, you seem to know how to circle the wagons. You sound like a library administrator or a blind friend or lemming of such. Look around. Your precious Centennial library is an antiquated monstrosity that houses outdated reference and a mediocre collection. Walk the aisles. Check the copyrights. Cut fat? Give a valid reason for needing a Library director, deputy director and an administrative librarian just at Centennial. I’m surprised that there isn’t an assistant to the assistant deputy coffee maker and donut gatherer. The employee exodus from the Dearborn library system was an intelligent escape by probably the best and most talented employees that made our system people-centered. They saw the ham-handed way administration was groveling to O’Reilly’s enlightened plan for fiscal rescue and they bolted proudly.
February 28th, 2011 at 10:02 am
They Mayor says “Dearborn will be different”. Dearborn has been different for years. When I think back to when I was a child, we had parks, pools, libraries, shopping, a civic center that didn’t drain the recreation budget, camp dearborn etc…. These things are what made Dearborn…Dearborn. Over the last few years they have ADDED services that we never had before. Why not “get back to basics” and yes Dearborn will be different….MAKE IT WHAT IT USED TO BE. I’ve lived here my whole life. We didn’t have leaf pick up (what other city does this?) Plus raking the leaves into the street creates parking problems. We didn’t have paid parking, public service days, park rangers with expensive vehicles. I saw a pretty fancy animal control vehicle a few months ago too, is this necessary? I mean they are just going to put a stray dog in the back of it. Why a brand new fancy vehicle? We bought new street cleaners etc… Those would be painless cuts for most of us.
I don’t understand why they expect people to fit all their vehicles in driveways that were built when families only had one car. They pay someone a fat salary to come around and write us tickets for parking in front of our own home. And they have this EVERY WEEK now? Why? We can’t afford any public services any more I think this annoyance could be eliminated. We should just have them once a month or a few times a year so we can get all the vehicles moved and give the streets a good cleaning. That is one huge waste of money we could do without.
I tell ya what. If they end public service days then I would support the tax increase. But I don’t want to give another penny of our already drained finances for them to pay people to write me a ticket for parking in front of my own home which I already pay taxes for.
February 28th, 2011 at 10:07 am
We need to keep services that affect our property values.
KEEP: police, firefighters, pools, snow removal.
The city of Dearborn is known for being a city that clears snow (drive to Dearborn Heights on snowy days and see what a mess they have!). We are also known for our local pools.
GET RID OF: Dearborn Towers & Camp Dearborn. (Yes, I have wonderful memories at Camp Dearborn too, but somethings gotta give). Those two things DO NOT affect local property values. A home buyer isn’t going to pass on a Dearborn home purchase because the city no longer owns Camp Dearborn.
Allen Park insurance rates will go up without firefighters. It’s a huge risk, and a bad move.
I’ll pay more taxes to keep the trash out.
February 28th, 2011 at 10:23 am
Citizen input is good. But, we elect the mayor and council, AND PAY THEM, to make tough decisions and not place responsibility on committees. We needed to act a long time ago when problems were starting to surface. I, as a home owner, do not spend more than I can afford. Obviously, the elected officials have been doing this(going into deficit) for years because it is NOT THEIR PERSONAL MONEY. Camp Dearborn; Clearwater; parking garages; sewer project; swimming pools; leaf pickup are areas that involve mismanagement or unnecessary spendinng. Things we could once afford, but now have to go. If I can recall, the Civic Center was close to twice overbudget. It is time to change and find people who can eliminate waste and have a balanced budget on what moneys they are given. But I guess the simple solution is to raise taxes to get more revenue…There is no such thing as a free lunch, unless you are a politician. Just VENTING
February 28th, 2011 at 12:45 pm
To: Take a look, et all
Dearborn PD currently has 188 officers and has never been able to get anywhere near the 2.1 officers per 100,000 population since the charter amendment was enacted. The number of officers should be 205 at this time.r Currently, the City is waiting for the census results for Cities and Townships that comes out this March, in order to see where we stand for the numbers are required for Police and Fire personnel. If you look at Dearborn Pubic Schools enrollment as an earlier indicator, there may not be much of a change in Dearborn population. However, you are propably correct that Dearborn lost population in the last census, however I really don’t think we lost 17,000 – 20,000 population as you indicated. Our previous census was under 100,000. I guess we will just have to wait and see what the reults will be when the numbers are released.
On another note, police and fire across the state have not been required to live in the City where they work for the past twenty years. This has also been addressed in previous blogs here in the past year. I do however feel that City Directors, Police Chief and Fire Chief should be strongly encouraged to live in the City, although they cannot be compelled to do so because of state law, regardless what the City Charter says. This has also been previously discussed. The Dearborn Police Chief does not live in Dearborn.
February 28th, 2011 at 10:50 pm
I believe that this city is hopelessly treading water. My family has lived in this city for over 100 years and my son is a 5# generation Dearbornite. It really pains me to say this. The current city leadership and those in the pipeline are better than most other cities but for all intents and purposes they are not up to the job. As stated by others aging housing stock, proximity to Detroit, rising legacy costs and dependence upon a dead and dying manufacturing industry doom this city. As a first time homebuyer who bought a small west side bungalow which at the time was reasonably priced at $125,000 is now worth $45,000. Having never refinanced and always paid my note on time i am $60,000 underwater. There are foreclosures all over my neighborhood and they are being bought by absentee landlords. I already lost a good neighbor to foreclosure and she was replaced by renters who can’t speak English and either have an ambulance or social worker at their house every
other day. The cities and school systems resources are being consumed by itinerate renters with all liabilities borne by us taxpayers and all benefits to out of city speculators. What purpose does it serve to stay here and pay higher taxes for less services. I already had to enroll my son in private school because the class sizes were 34 in a third grade classroom. The last privilege I use, the local pool is a political football hanging by a thread. When I visit my parents in the aviation subdivision it is a constant cat and mouse game between cops and robbers on the Detroit border. I guess we do have a great ice rink facility at the disc, and timely city services but for how long. I hate putting negatively charged energy in the atmosphere but reality is rearing it’s ugly head. So I guess I am torn. I just don’t want to end up in forty years latter the lone holdout with a manicured lawn hiding from baggy pants teenage dopers, and dodging random gunfire. I need a reason to stay.
February 28th, 2011 at 11:18 pm
I was thinking about the call for police and fire to live in the city. Why, because they are public employees? Then all teachers, city employees, anyone who is paid in any way with tax dollors should live here. Ridiculous. But the police chief, fire chief, and directors should live here as Homegrown stated. Regarding Camp Dearborn, from what I understand Camp Dearborn is the only recreation department that MADE money for the city last year. Selling it at this time would be at a loss since it MUST be sold as recreational property in Milford. I understand why people think it might be the white elephant but I think you will be pleasantly surprised to find out that it is not the drain you think it is. I agree with ‘wassumattu’. We don’t need these public service days and these rangers driving around giving us tickets! It is maddening! Between juggling these darn garbage cans and moving cars around our small driveway, every garbage day morning is stressful. And for what? Half the time the sweepers don’t come by. Everyone get your rear end out of your house and sweep your own street. We do it anyway…we do the neighbors on either side of us. If we all chip in and do some of this for ourselves, we could save a lot of money. Get rid of that darn leaf pick up once and for all. Give these kids something to do in the fall to make a few bucks. It’s good for them. Back to basics is right.
March 1st, 2011 at 10:33 am
Lots of advice here, so I’ll be the first to volunteer. I will rake AND BAG my leaves. I will go to my own doctor and avoid using the Health Dept. I can’t shoot or put out fires so please give the money to the police & fire.
March 1st, 2011 at 5:37 pm
I would like to add something to the discussion that I think has been overlooked, which is the importance of a healthy downtown business district. Don’t get me wrong, the people who live, pay taxes, and spend their discretionary income are the backbone of any city, but without a solid business district they will find someplace else to spend that money. In addition, a healthy business district with a combination of retail and bars/restaurants downtown will attract new people here who may decide the like the feel of it and spend more time and money here. The business district is the foundation on which a city’s economy is built.
If I were setting out to design a city, I might start with a large business in town to provide a tax base and bring people in every day, i.e. Ford Motor Company, a tourist attraction, i.e. Greenfield Village, natural resources, i.e. the Rouge River, a university or community college to draw young people into the city, i.e. U of M Dearborn and HFCC, well maintained city parks, and last, but perhaps most important, a major thoroughfare running through the heart of the city, which we have in Michigan Avenue. I think that Michigan ave. is our most under-utilized asset. In addition to high traffic volume,there are neighborhoods for business to draw from on both sides of the street through most of the city, most of which have above average per capita income. Yet, as I drive down Michigan I am taken not only by the empty storefronts but also the state of disrepair many of these buildings, occupied or not, are in. In short, it’s a mess.
The obvious question is what do we do about it? I think to start, we need to enforce current city codes pertaining to businesses and buildings, such as signage, building facades, and general aesthetics. There are open businesses right next to vacant buildings in disrepair, many with the previous occupiers signs still in the windows. This is not conducive to attracting new business, nor does it help attract people to patronize the businesses that are open because the area is not pleasing to the eye. I am no expert on the administration of city services or the enforcement of codes, but it seems that enforcing these codes would not add much or any financial burden to the city.
If we were going to spend some money on something in this vein, maybe we could think about hiring somebody whose sole job would be to bring retailers into the city and help current retailers to grow. I know the city doesn’t have a lot of extra money to spend on creating a new position like this, but I believe the city has hired consultants in the past for this purpose, and I would rather see this position created than see more money spent on a temporary consultant whose success has no direct impact on their job status.
A healthy business district may take some of the pressure off of homeowners who ultimately have to make up for the lack of a bigger tax base in the city. Tax revenue gathered from a healthy business district may also help pay for some of the city services we currently enjoy. It may also help draw people to Dearborn both to work and to spend their time and money here. At the end of the day, the idea is to expand business and grow the tax base, instead of just raising taxes on homeowners, cutting services, police and fire protection, etc. I know there are some businessmen on the council that must understand this line of thinking. I would encourage them to think about trying to grow our way out of this problem.
March 2nd, 2011 at 8:50 pm
what we need to get back to is government service. why not pay peace corp persons 100k per year also. I THOUGHT PEOPLE SERVED ON CITY COUNCIL, AND MAYOR AS AN HONORABLE THING TO DO BUT NOT AS A CAREER WITH EXTENSIVE PENSION AND HEALTH CARE BENEFITS FOR LIFE. HOW BOUT’ DEARBORN’S LEADERS SAY WE WILL BE THE FIRST TO SAY IN DEARBORN MICHIGAN NO ELECTED OFFICIAL WILL EVER RECEIVE A PENSION OR HEALTH CARE BENEFITS FOR A JOB THEY WANTED TO BE ELECTED TO!!!!!!!!! NEXT LETS HAVE DEARBORN MICHIGAN BE NOTED AS THE FIRST OR ONE OF THE FIRST TO BE TOTALLY TRANSPARENT ON WAGES AND BENEFITS. PUBLISH ON THE CITY WEBSITE EVERYBODY’S PAY AND BENFITS, HOW MUCH THEY ARE SCHEDULED TO RECEIVE IN PENSIONS AND HOW MANY YEARS THEY NEEDED TO ATTAIN IT.
LASTLY WHEN WE RAISE OUR MILAGE’S AND MAYBE SLAP A CHERRY ON TOP NAMELY A CITY INCOME TAX I AM SURE THAT WILL PROPEL OUR PROPERTY VALUES TO NEW HEIGHTS (IF YOUR STANDING ON YOUR HEAD) I MEAN LOWS, THEN THAT WILL FEED ON ITSELF REQUIRING JUST .5 PERCENT MORE. WHERE DOES IT END.
WHAT IS THE LAST THING THAT OUT LEADERS DID RIGHT, THE COMMUNITY ARTS CENTER, PARKING DECK, SINKING WASTEWATER CAISSONS,
I BELIEVE JUST SAYING NO TO THEM.
NEXT WE WILL HEAR FORM THE LYING SCHOOL BOARD AND SUPERINTENDENT WE NEED MORE MONEY. ALL OF OR TEST SCORES ARE SUB PAR BUT MORE MONEY WILL BRING THE SCORES UP ANOTHER 2% TO 25% OF OUR KIDS CAN READ AT LEVEL. AND THE SUPER MAKES OVER 220K PER YEAR WITH BENNY’S BUT HE NEEDS MORE MONEY ALSO.
WE NEED TO HIRE A RETIRED COLONEL OR GENERAL AND INSTILL ORDER AND DISCIPLINE TO OUR SCHOOLS ALSO.
DEARBORN IS A TWO TIME LOSER BAD SCHOOLS AND ADMINISTRATION AND REALLY BAD MAYOR AND COUNCIL NOW THAT IS A FORMULA FOR HIGH PROPERTY VALUES. WOULD YOU BUY A HOUSE HERE RIGHT NOW??????
March 3rd, 2011 at 3:38 pm
Basically “public service” was never meant to be a lifetime sucking at the public through. With that said, no one complained about Mayor Hubbard being in office for almost forever. A way to maybe “fix” the problem is a one term limit on holding any elected public office in the city. I know we will hear that “no one will have enough experience” to run the city properly if that happens. Well look at where we are at with the over abundance of experience we have now. Just think, if you are elected to office, you can spend your whole term working for the good of the citizens and the city. You would never have to worry about raising campaign money and making alliances to get re elected. Just a thought that I am sure will be quickly rejected because “I don’t know the realities of running the city”
March 3rd, 2011 at 10:21 pm
Yeah term limits are great. Look how well they worked in Lansing. Elections are term limits.
March 4th, 2011 at 4:10 pm
Started a new political discussion Facebook page called Politics in Dearborn where we plan on tackling local issues like these, and getting feedback from the community. I have personally invited several city council members (current, past and prospective) to join us and lend some real meat to the discussion.
Civility should be improved due to the absence of anonymity, a good thing in my opinion in an era of harsh disagreement. Head over there and contribute, no matter what your political affiliation or opinion of this council and administration!
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Politics-in-Dearborn/206627386019878
March 6th, 2011 at 12:12 am
I think Dearborn was hit with the perfect storm,it wound up being the perfect storm of incompetence. It was the worst timing for our previous mayor to pass away just when the economy crash was beginning,because of that perfect storm this City is suffering through its largest lack of leadership in the history of Dearborn. What compounded the problem is that while the current Mayor lacks leadership,he also appointed,hired and promoted many people in key positions that lack true leadership qualities. In the most critical economical time in Dearborns history,from top to bottom we have the biggest lack of leadership in history,clearly a recipe for disaster.
I am worried there wont be anything left here by the time the next election arrives.
March 7th, 2011 at 7:56 am
Dearborn is standing at the dock and the boat left a long time ago.
March 7th, 2011 at 9:41 am
Theeideaman : I enjoy and respect your memory of past and current failings of this “envied” city. Yet, I don’t think you are clear on how the Dearborn dynamic is played out. First of all, Mayor, Administration and Council have the expertise, knowledge and chutzpah to mold you into a proper city advocate. If and when popular dissent raises its ugly head, a city-sponsored “citizen panel” or committee is invented to quash or at least assail the citizens that said authorities know what is best for us. Case in point: Dave Bowman, who no doubt has no connection whatsoever to Administration, seeks unbiasedly to sieve out only positive opinions and comments for the ills of the city. I think to throw us all off the point is to resurrect O”Reilly’s plan for a convention center. It’s due.
March 8th, 2011 at 2:13 pm
I’m confused Everyman… I indeed have no connection to anyone in Administration. I doubt they even know who I am. But I am not planning on “sieving out” only positive opinions and comments. Check it out and you’ll see firsthand.
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Politics-in-Dearborn/206627386019878
March 9th, 2011 at 7:37 pm
I had a hard time with his/her comments to Dave. I would have to say that this must be someone who is not familiar with you or any of your sites. I for one have never had you remove or not post anything that I have written.
March 11th, 2011 at 5:44 am
another long speech by the mayor with no substance. i guess we just have to wait and see as usual. I would really like to know why the stabbing at 11 a.m. in the morning on Chestnut Street last week went unmentioned on this site and the Dearborn Press & Guide. During the search for the two people who stabbed a man in his driveway, the neighborhood was crawling with police. They added a helicopter to the search and of course police dogs. I called the Police Dept. to see what was going on in my neighborhood and they were not allowed to say. Don’t you think the city would have sent out a Nixle message? But again, that’s bad PR for the city. God forbid, the media and the city administration admit there is any crime in our “Clean and Safe Neighborhoods.” Once the administration closeds our pools, downsizes our parks and rec programs, we are nothing more than an extension of Detroit.
Oh, there was a Nixle message – two days after the stabbing. LOL
March 15th, 2011 at 10:57 am
Here’s my opinion on the leaf pick-up. Do away with it!
I swept my leaves to the curb ONCE in my 15 years of homeownership in Dearborn. Usually at that time of year there’s a nice rainfall or two which turns those leaf piles into nothing but a sludge/mud mess that the trucks smear all over the neighborhood. My great, senior neighbors still continued with the leaf pick-up “service” and every year I had to fill at least 3-4 large garbage bags of sludge from my curb which dragged from their house and the 15 others down the street. That mud mess really made my otherwise beautiful home look like….MUD!
Ever been behind one of those UNCOVERED leaf pick-up trucks? I was and it was just blowing the “picked-up” leaves right back on to Outer Drive.