Troutdale city staff: Community events a burden?

In a recent Gresham Outlook article,  Troutdale city manager Ray Young proposed that the city should charge additional fees to the non-profit organizers of community events to  recoup the $18,000 in costs and staff time for road-blocking "Bollards" during events in downtown Troutdale.

“We are recommending to council to begin charging something," Young said. "It is a burden on staff, which means the city subsidizes events on closed streets, to review plans, close streets and monitor the traffic issues."

Why does city staff feel that subsidizing community events is a burden? 

I’ve lived in Troutdale since 2001. I served on the city council for four years, and on the city’s budget committee for at least eight years. In all that time, I’ve never heard a city employee claim that subsidizing community events was “a burden on staff”.

The city of Troutdale has a long history subsidizing the costs of special events, such as Summerfest, the Christmas tree lighting, and the Troutdale cruise-in. The city’s leaders and its citizens have financially supported these events because they know they have a positive impact on the city’s local economy. More importantly, these events give a major boost to Troutdale’s community spirit and pride.

These non-profit events, which Mr. Young was quoted as saying are a “burden” to city staff, succeed in attracting visitors who spend money in Troutdale. That money creates income and supports jobs in Troutdale. The people who have those jobs in Troutdale use that income to pay taxes. Some of those taxes go to pay for Troutdale city employees. These events are a win-win for city staff, Troutdale residents, and the non-profits who receive donations resulting from these events.

The Gresham Outlook has also questioned why the city wants to burden community events with costly additional fees and red tape. In their Thursday, August 16, 2018 online edition, the Gresham Outlook wrote, in their editorial "Bollard' fee puts public events at-risk in Troutdale", 

Having said that, it's disappointing to hear that the city of Troutdale may impose a fee — for installation and removal of bollards — on groups that organize these events. Many of these groups are nonprofit organizations, most with tiny budgets, and in some cases they're raising funds for a philanthropic purpose. Imposing an additional fee would likely siphon off dollars away from charitable organizations that benefit from these events.Given that the city of Troutdale operates with a $10 million annual budget, the city could easily absorb the $18,000 cost of the bollards without breaking a sweat.”

I urge Troutdale residents to contact the Troutdale city council  and demand that “no extra fees or charges” i.e. the “bollard fee”  should be charged for  non-profit community events in Troutdale.

Another Troutdale City Council *FAIL*

Have you ever shopped for a car? Shopped for groceries, or shopped for a painting contractor or plumber? Of course you have. And how do you go about it? You look at multiple options. You look for the lowest price.

That’s what we do as individuals. That’s what you do if you run a business. If you need a product or service, you put it out for bid in the competitive marketplace, to get the best deal.  In the case of the city's waste management and recycling services it's what Troutdale told its citizens it would do.

 But that isn't what the Troutdale city council actually did.

According to the  February 20, 2015 Gresham Outlook:

"City Manager Craig Ward asked the council for direction at the Feb. 10 meeting, and was greeted with a consensus to explore other options.

“I just asked a question of the council and they said they wanted us to go out for a competitive process,” Ward said."

The Outlook article quoted city councilors at the meeting:

" They owe it to the city and themselves to explore the options available."

“We like Waste Management, but if we can get a better deal for our citizens from someone else, we’d be foolish to not look anywhere else. . ."

“Our due diligence to the city of Troutdale is to make sure we’re not overlooking something in looking at other companies,”. .. “(It’s to see) if we can save some money or to tell us that Waste Management is where we need to stay. With anything, when something is coming up for a renewal, you need to look at other companies.”

But the city council backed down. They chickened out. The  Troutdale city council failed to put the contract for Troutdale's waste/garbage provider out for bid. This is a contract that has not been  through an open bid process for over 35 years. This is inexcusable.

From the April 10, 2015 Gresham Outlook:

“For the past 35 years, the city of Troutdale has contracted with Waste Management as its sole provider of garbage services without seeking a competitive bid."

"The City Council entertained the option to put out a request for bids as the contract nears an end, but following a Tuesday, April 7, work session, the city will instead renegotiate the existing contract."

"The council’s decision to not pursue the bidding process was largely based on the associated cost."

“Troutdale would need to contract with an outside group to manage the request for proposal at a cost of $30,000."

“I’m OK with just renewing with Waste Management,” said Mayor Doug Daoust. “Now we know it’s going to cost $30,000, and there’s no guarantee we’d improve the rates.”

They folded under pressure from current provider Waste Management, who told the city they should stick with Waste Management because of its continued support of community events such as Summerfest.

I can just hear the phone conversation that took place between Waste Management’s representative for Troutdale and the HQ of Waste Management in Houston Texas:

WASTE MANAGEMENT TEXAS HEADQUARTERS: HOW DID YOU TALK TROUTDALE OUT OF PUTTING THEIR GARBAGE CONTRACT OUT FOR BID?

WASTE MGMT TROUTDALE REP: I GAVE THEM A $1000 DONATION FOR THEIR SUMMERFEST PARADE, AND FREE GARBAGE CANS ALONG THE PARADE ROUTE!

WASTE MANAGEMENT TEXAS HEADQUARTERS: HA HA HA GREAT JOB!! YOU GET A BONUS AND A PROMOTION!

I made up that conversation. It didn't take place (as far as I can tell. . .)

HERE’S A TIP FOR THE CITY COUNCIL: WHEN THERE IS COMPETITION, RATES GO DOWN!

WHEN THERE IS COMPETITION, RATES GO DOWN! 

This contract has not gone out to bid for over 35 years. No competition! 

TROUTDALE SHOULD HAVE PUT THE GARBAGE CONTRACT OUT TO BID TO GET THE LOWEST PRICE FOR YOU, THEIR CONSTITUENTS! THEY ARE NOT LOOKING OUT FOR YOU.

According to the Outlook article, the city council said they didn’t want to pay $30,000 to put waste/garbage contract out for bid, possibly saving you, the rate payer, hundreds of dollars a year on your garbage bill.

BUT THEY DIDN'T HESITATE TO PAY a consultant $70,000 to do polling/focus groups on what sales pitch would work best to get voters to approve a gas tax.

They’ll pull out all the stops to help you pay more taxes.

They won’t lift a finger to help you SAVE MORE MONEY.

I would call that a tremendous FAIL.

"We'll save Troutdale $800,000! Take our word for it!" Not so fast. . .

They'll save us $800,000! Let's take their word for it!

 Oregonian reporter Kelly House and Gresham Outlook reporter Cari Hachmann both decided to take the words of Troutdale Police Chief Scott Anderson and Multnomah County Sheriff  Dan Staton when they declared Troutdale would save $800,000 annually if Troutdale's police department merged with the Multnomah County Sheriff's Office.

"Troutdale taxpayers stand to save $800,000 in the first year if the city contracts its police services out to the Multnomah County Sheriff's Office". - Oregon Live, (The Oregonian's online presence) April 2, 2014.

"By consolidating with the sheriff, the city would save about $800,000 a year, reducing its cost for police to $3.1 million annually."- Gresham Outlook online,  April 4, 2014.

"Troutdale taxpayers stand to save $800,000. . ."

". . . the city would save about $800,000. . ."

I am wondering one thing. In their articles,  why did both reporters fail to mention what Troutdale's Finance Director said at the meeting regarding the alleged  $800,000 savings? Why did both reporters fail to quote the most important slide in the PowerPoint presentation that night?

 

There it is. Tuesday night,  the PowerPoint slide said the savings are ESTIMATES.  Troutdale's Finance Director stated the savings were ESTIMATES several times at the meeting.

These savings ESTIMATES include several LARGE DOLLAR ASSUMPTIONS. That's very different from "would save", and "stand to save".

Troutdale residents should take everything they read and hear about the proposed merger with a grain of salt and keep in mind the self interest of each of the parties involved.

Who is really looking out for you?