Let’s all step back for a second

The Milan City Council has opened a debate on how the current Milan Area Fire Department should be managed. This is a public policy debate. There are many questions, and there are many different scenarios that must be considered before any decision should be made.

 

There will always be fire service here in this community. Always. No one on the city council is suggesting leaving any of the townships out, and those who tell you different are misinformed or have misunderstood our goal.

 

I believe it is possible to provide fire service to the same exact area that is currently served by the MAFD; but under the sole ownership of the City of Milan as the only discernible difference.

 

The city's insurance carrier has assured us, that if the city has its own fire department, our ISO rating will either stay the same, or most likely, most likely go UP.

 

Yes—if the city of Milan has its own fire department, Milan city residents are likely to experience a reduction in their home insurance rates. This is because one of the most important factors in this determination is distance from the fire station, (among other values.)

 

It seems possible to do this, while at the same time operating at the same high standards the current MAFD provides, yet at a lower cost to the Milan taxpayers and most likely, townships as well.

 

It seems possible to do this. It SEEMS possible. Holding this discussion at council work sessions, and thoroughly researching every aspect of this issue is the only way to know for sure if it IS possible.

 

Under the current model, each township is also struggling to afford this service. From the beginning of this discussion it was never my intent to give the impression that we have no interest in providing fire protection to the townships that we share fire service with now.

 

We know for sure, that one or more of the co-owning townships have also initiated exploring withdrawing from the MAFD—knowing this, we must ensure we have a back-up plan for our fire service and not be left unprepared. This is an important point to remember when entering into this public policy debate. This is possibly the most important point to keep in mind.

 

I believe it MAY be possible to continue the same service at a cost savings to all involved. Right now we are in the beginning phase of exploring this idea.

 

I urge everyone to ask questions before making blind accusations or jumping to any rash conclusions about the future of our fire service.

 

I realize the citizens of Milan, and the nearby townships, want the best quality fire safety they can have.  However, these same citizens want to keep their taxes under control.  I believe this is possible-- we can reduce the taxpayer burden without raising fire insurance rates or interfering with fire safety.

 

While I completely understand that this is a highly emotional issue, I urge everyone to please take a step back with me and look at the bigger picture as we openly discuss this issue.

 

 

Let’s talk about it…

I believe our paid on-call firefighters fire chief, both past and present (including all retirees) have done, a fantastic and noble job providing us with fire protection for all these years.


Even so, we can build on what is already a high quality service. I'm talking about things like, much faster response time, more efficient use of current personnel and equipment, locally controlled with our own residents' needs the focus of how the department is managed and run.


The model we have in mind would be a public safety department, with the same paid on-call fire fighters that are on the current MAFD roster. They do a great job, there is no reason they can't continue doing a great job for the City of Milan.  This would provide faster response time on medical calls. Why? Because we would use our police officers for medical calls since they are always on patrol 24/7. (Our police officers would undergo public safety training and would now become our first responders. Moreover, because they are always out on patrol anyway, when an emergency call comes in, they are already on the road and that would decrease the time between the 911 call being made and the responders arriving on the scene.


 
As usual, HVA would be dispatched for a life threatening medical call, while in the meantime our first response team would already be on-scene. HVA charges the individual they service, not the municipality. This is why this type of call would be cheaper and more efficient for the city. Paid on-call firefighters should be dispatched when there is a fire or life threatening situation, or when our professional first-responders evaluate the scene and determine that fire is needed.


Paid on-call firefighters are dispatched whenever there is a fire or life threatening situation, such as I just mentioned.


I'm currently working on a report that will tell us on average how many actual fire calls the City of Milan has per year. I can assure you that most of the Fire calls INSIDE THE CITY are medical calls and not fire calls. From January to mid-March, according to the most recent quarterly MAFD run report, the City of Milan dispatched the MAFD 39 times. Of those 39 times, only one call was a fire call. The other thirty-eight calls were medical or "good intention" calls. Generally speaking, the City of Milan has very few actual fires and there have been times when the City of Milan has had ZERO fire calls in a 3 month period. Because of this frequency we would be remiss not to explore a better, more efficient way to provide emergency and fire protection to our residents.


I know many people are asking how we would pay for this and fund the training required to move forward.


Please understand those questions are why we are discussing this in the open as a council and with our residents. These questions are also the reason why I am organizing a citizen advisory board. This board will comprise of City of Milan residents, some with years of firefighting experience both professionally and on the MAFD and even some of our own Milan police officers who are already certified fire fighters, a fire chief and a few regular citizens. If this new department is to be successful, our citizenry must have some ownership in the creation of it.


As mayor, I did not just wake up a few days ago and decide, "Hey—I think we will withdraw from the MAFD and start our own department!" without doing some homework and research with my professional staff first.


I want to assure all the residents that if the council were to approve withdrawing from the MAFD, we are required to give one year's notice of intent to leave the MAFD first. This means that we would have a year to establish a new department, funding, and terms for the withdrawal. Bottom line: things like this take time—I am not (and the council members are not) interested in making fast and hasty decisions.


While the council is discussing this possibility-- it does not mean this is automatically going to happen. This is not a new idea---past administrations at the City of Milan have mulled this idea among themselves. I am simply proposing we mull over this idea in public.


I welcome everyone to attend our Milan city council work sessions and meetings. Feel free to ask us questions or to voice your concerns and more importantly share your ideas.


 
This is the time for healthy dialog. Join the conversation.

A New Milan Fire Department....MAYBE...if the city council supports the idea

Some residents of Milan may be surprised to learn that the City of Milan may withdraw from the Milan Area Fire Department.
 
 

Most citizens do not actually understand the MAFD.  In fact, it is "owned" by four governmental units, London Township, Milan Township, York Township, and the City of Milan.  Each of the "owners" send two representatives which comprise the MAFD Executive Board.  We sometimes call it the "Fire Board."

 

The representatives to the fire board must be elected officials.  For the City, that means the Mayor (me) and one city council member (Joe Chapin.)  For the townships, it means the township supervisor and one board member.  Once every two months, the eight people get together and decide how to run the MAFD.

 

Normally, it seems like a good idea to have cooperation between and among the governmental units.  However, for many years, taxpayers in the City of Milan have been spending too much on fire protection.  Yes, fire protection is extremely important.  At the same time, wise economic use of taxpayer funds is also valuable. Even more important than dollars though, is quality of service. Back in the 1980s when the MAFD was created, the size of our city was much smaller, and the service provided by the MAFD was adequate to our size. But our city has grown since then, and the needs of our community have grown too.

 

Over the years, the MAFD has gained a reputation for having too much bureaucracy and for being uneconomic. Financial decisions have been made based on what seems to feel good at the moment rather than taking a good look at what it costs for the type of service we receive.  Right now, the MAFD spends nearly $50,000 on salaries for a variety of officials such as the fire chief, assistant fire chief, and various lieutenants. The City of Milan would not spend taxpayer money on excessive numbers of officials.  Perhaps the police chief could serve as fire chief, at a cost of ZERO for the fire chief's salary.  There is no need for a series of assistant officers to lead the fire department. 

 

This is not just about dollars and cents though. This will also mean that our residents will receive a much higher quality of service. More information on this will be forthcoming in future blogs soon!

  

In all fairness, this issue has not been discussed formally at a city council work session. So far, all discussion and work on this concept has been between myself, city administrator Ben Swayze and councilman Joe Chapin, who is the other council representative on the MAFD. I intend to bring this item up for discussion at the Monday night council meeting, (March 22, 2010) to get council feedback.

 

If we were to officially withdraw from the MAFD, the Milan City Council would have to approve it through a vote in order to do so.

 

I do not have "all the answers" and the City Council has not officially approved this plan. Of one thing I am certain.  Change is going to provide us with economic efficiency.  It will save us substantial amounts of tax dollars and it will not affect our fire safety—except for the better.

Government Transparency: what this means to you

This word, “transparency” has almost become a buzz word.

(BTW, I hate buzz words!)

Transparency in our local Milan city government refers to specific laws under the Freedom of Information Act and the Open Meetings Act. 

The Michigan Freedom of Information Act, a.k.a. FOIA is a series of laws designed to guarantee that the public, (you) have access to public records of government bodies at all levels. Here in the City of Milan this means that you have the right to obtain copies of our city government documents and records for your own review.

For example, citizens have a right to review all public documents and records that affect public policy. Examples would include copies of the city budget and audit. All of us have a right to see where and how our tax dollars are being spent. Other examples would include our bills payable and payroll. A good way to know what is “FOIA-worthy” (hey I coined a new buzz word) would be any public records that are paid for with public money, (tax dollars) for some public purpose.

Anyone can request the Milan City Council meeting minutes and agendas through FOIA.

How to use FOIA:

This is very simple. All requests for information must be in writing. Milan City Hall has a quick and easy form for you to fill out to obtain any documents that are covered under the Freedom of Information Act.

Sometimes there is a charge for a FOIA request, if you ask for an amount of material that will be costly to make copies of or labor intensive to find—but the laws are very specific about how much a FOIA request can cost, and the cost is limited so that the request for information is NOT cost prohibitive.

The Michigan Open Meetings Act, a.k.a. OMA requires that governmental meetings be conducted in public, (with certain exceptions.) OMA governs the procedures that the public must be notified of government meetings in advance. For example, before we can have a Milan City Council meeting, we have to “post” the meeting in a public way at least 48 hours before the meeting is held. We put notices in local newspapers and we post notices on the front door of Milan City Hall. We also announce when meetings are held on Cable Channel 22.

In the interest of transparency, our city council meetings are also broadcast on Channel 22, and copies of the meetings are available for check out on DVD at the Milan Public Library. You can also purchase these DVDs from the City of Milan.

We also broadcast our city council work sessions, which are also open to the public so that residents have the opportunity to see the work we do that goes into the decisions we make when we vote at the council meeting.

Posting when and where the meetings will be held gives the public the option of attending the meeting if they want. This also keeps the city council (or any governmental body) from being able to conduct its business in secret.

Here are some great links for more information on FOIA and OMA:

http://sunshinereview.org/index.php/Michigan_Freedom_of_Information_Act

http://www.michigan.gov/ag/0,1607,7-164-17337_18160-51242--,00.html

http://www.spj.org/

*If clicking on the link does not take you to the page, then try copying and pasting into your search engine window*

Budget Season begins...

Well it’s that time again---budget season. The bane of every elected official’s existence in these troubled economic times.

For me, as the mayor, it is probably the most important duty I am tasked with according to our city charter.

For us city council members, this time of year represents the official setting of our agenda. What I mean by that is simply, everything the city government wishes to accomplish costs something. If we simply set our goals then don’t create a budget that reflects those goals then our goals are really nothing but empty wishes.

Last year we had to balance a budget with about 10 percent less revenue than the previous year---that represented more than $400,000 less money than the year before.

This year we have the same challenge---we have to balance our budget and accomplish our goals with a budget based on another 10 percent drop in revenue. Over the period of the past two years that amount comes to about $1 million less than three years ago.

Why is this happening?

I’m going to reference my “perfect storm” blog from earlier this year to explain it.

We are dealing with a financial crisis created by our tanked housing market, the long term affects of Proposal A, and the recession which all have converged into one tornado-like vacuum causing our overall economy to shrink rather than grow.

This means that the state government is dealing with the same challenges, so they are also making cuts which dramatically affect our city government. The significant change for us is the state of Michigan continues to cut our portion of revenue sharing.

What is State Revenue Sharing?
The State of Michigan Department of Treasury defines it as a program that distributes sales tax collected by the State of Michigan to local governments as unrestricted revenues. The distribution of funds is authorized by the State Revenue Sharing Act, Public Act 140 of 1971, as amended (MCL 141.901).
I’ll try to give you the TV GUIDE version of what that is. Whenever anybody buys something we pay sales tax on it. Every city and township in the state of Michigan is entitled to a share of the total sales tax collected. We have a statutory amount and a constitutional amount. For many years now the state doled out less and less of that revenue to the cities and townships.
City Administrator Ben Swayze and I have decided not to include state revenue sharing when creating our budget this year.
The other reason we are expecting another 10 percent drop in our revenue is because of declining home and property tax values.

As we all know, our market value is a fluid factor which will increase or decrease depending on the overall economic and market weather conditions.
We are also compiling our budget based on a lower millage. I know that might sound like crazy talk, when you consider that we have to make our budget do everything it did last year with even less money.
But there is a method to the “madness.” We removed the water and sewer fund from the general budget and made our water and sewer utility what is called, an “enterprise” fund.
That means that, while, YES we raised your water rates, you are now paying what it costs us to provide you that service. No tax dollars are going to subsidize the water and sewer anymore—therefore that entire multimillion dollar line item has been removed from our budget. We collect the money from your water and sewer bills, and it goes directly to the water and sewer enterprise fund.
To help offset the higher rates, we have lowered the millage by the same amount that we were previously subsidizing the water and sewer fund.
In short: we are lowering your taxes from 15.50 mills to 14.40 mills.
At the last city council worksession, we had a goal setting brainstorming session. From that meeting, our city administrator is compiling a list for us to prioritize at our next council meeting. From that meeting Ben and I will glean what is important and what is less important in our budget process and from there we will create a budget that reflects the direction we as a city council, together want to take the city for the next fiscal year.

It’s really not very exciting---it is probably the most strenuous and stressful part of this job, but it is also the most important. Over the next few months you will see a lot of budget talk at our council meetings. Hopefully this blog has given you a better understanding of what we’re doing with your tax dollars.

September just won't be the same

Without the Relay for Life at our Wilson Park

I will never forget my first Relay for Life event. It was 1998 at Wilson Park, right here in Milan. I was on a team, but I was also covering the event for the Milan News-Leader. There were, it seemed to me hundreds of people there, united to fight for one cause—to raise money to support cancer research. And while there were hundreds of people gathered in one place, we all shared a sad common bond: everyone there has been touched by cancer in some way, either through a friend or a family member or some were survivors themselves, while others were currently fighting the battle. This bond made us all friends and supporters of each other.

Over the years the Relay for Life started to feel like a Milan tradition. People looked forward to it, and every August or so the purple and white signs started popping up all over town, along with all sorts of team fundraising events.

This year will be the first year that the Relay won’t be held at our Wilson Park, and I have to say it: it really makes me sad.

I’m disappointed that this year we won’t see our park filled with tents, campers and various shelters held together with clothespins and string.

It saddens me that we won’t see the glow of luminaries lining the walking path this September.

I completely understand all the reasons why they decided to move the event out of town, and why they changed the date to June, but I can’t help it: not having the Relay in Milan will really leave a void here for us in September.

The event brought hundreds of people to Milan, many for the very first time, and they always left with a great impression. Because at the Relay, strangers could see the very best of what makes Milan such a wonderful and unique place to live.

Folks are able to enjoy beautiful Wilson Park in a unique way---it is the only event where people are allowed to camp in the park.

We also got to enjoy our local talent, including the amazing Milan Tae Kwon Do, Dance Explosion, Milan Dance and myriads of others.

For me that first Relay, 1998, (at least I’m fairly certain it was 1998,) was when I made two of my dearest friends, Lori Friese and Helen Polaski. The three of us each lost a parent within a month of each other the previous August. For Lori, the Relay event was a way to remember her dad, and for Helen it was a way to celebrate the life of her mom, who also lost a battle with cancer. Even though my dad passed away from heart disease, it seemed like the shared experience with Lori and Helen made the Relay a poignant experience for me too.

On a more dollars and cents level, I’m saddened by this change as well. I am convinced that the Relay for Life brought folks to our downtown where they could enjoy our bakery, coffee shop, pizza and other shops. And many of our local business people were very active Relay supporters as well, coming up with all sorts of inventive ways to raise money for cancer research.

I’m hoping that this is just a one time thing, and we can convince them to come back to Milan next year.

Don’t get me wrong, I understand why they made the decision to move to KC Campground, they wanted to hold the event in the summer so more students could be involved, and the weather is warmer, and unfortunately Wilson Park was booked solid for the month of June. I understand why, but I still hope they come back to Wilson Park next year.

September just won’t seem the same without the Relay for Life at Wilson Park.

My pledge to the Milan city residents

The same rules that apply to me and you, also apply to our city employees.

No special treatment or consideration will be given to individuals just because of close friendships with council members.

As mayor, it is my job to ensure transparency and fairness, especially when investigating a city personnel matter.

Those in position of authority, our police officers, must uphold to the highest code of behavior, to ensure the respect and integrity of the uniform they wear.

In the most recent personnel issue involving Sgt. Tim Casey, I requested the State Police conduct an external investigation to ensure transparency, objectivity and fairness.

There is no black eye on the community as a result of an open, objective investigation by an outside authority. In fact it is just the opposite. There can be no sweeping the matter under the rug if the employee is culpable. There can be no pursuing of a witch hunt if the employee is actually innocent.

Public trust in the police department is paramount. We must not compromise the honesty of our police department just because of individual friendships to one or more elected officials.

Any employee, who breaks the rules through his or her own act of free will, must accept whatever consequences of that act.

I understand the feelings of the elected officials who are close friends with Sgt. Casey, but no one is above the law. The same rules that apply to you and me must apply to those in the “inner circle.”

When any employee is charged with breaking the law, this is an act of free will, and he or she must accept the consequences.

Any and all employee investigations should be concluded before city officials publicly discuss them. Talking about an ongoing investigation of an individual is a violation of that person’s privacy and more importantly his right to fair due process. Well meaning statements from supportive council members, could violate the civil rights of Sgt. Casey and compromise his right to fair due process.

There is not one set of rules for those with the “right” friends, and another set of rules for the rest of us.

Kym Muckler

Mayor--City of Milan

Email comments directly to:

k y m m @ c i . m i l a n . m i . u s