Annapolis Capital Punishment

Many, many, many of you have called or sent email on the sidewalk fee. Believe me, I’m as frustrated as you, but the buck stops here.

Several of us on the Council are discussing ways to fix the ordinance and we will be holding a Council Workshop on the matter before the next Council meeting on 14 July. In the mean time, I’m sending out this email blast in an attempt to more fully explain the issue and to give you an idea of my thinking.


Below is a massage the Council has received from Finance.

Below is the current policy of the Finance Office:

Currently we are holding checks we are receiving for a couple of days in case the City Council wishes to rescind the charge. We have already processed numerous payments and the process of refunds is onerous and costly, so City Council action is necessary sooner rather than later.

If the customer complains that they should not have a bill, or that they were billed incorrectly, we have no authority at this time to make any changes. They are asked to put their complaint in writing, provide their name and account number, and we will address the complaints as time permits. No payment is required with the written complaint. We will accept letters mailed, dropped off, faxed, or emailed to sidewalkfee@annapolis.gov


Tim Elliott
Finance Director
City of Annapolis
410-263-7952


Here are the principles I am operating under:


Statement of Assumptions


· Sidewalks are a public good (i.e., everyone benefits from them in some way),

· Repair of sidewalks is a public safety issue,

· Sidewalks are largely in the public right-of-way,

· Sidewalk maintenance is akin to road maintenance, which the City already provides,

· The City bears some legal liability for sidewalks under both current or past code and definitely an obligation to protect sidewalk users,

· Property owners are either unaware of their responsibility or have chosen not to properly maintain their sidewalks,

· Some property owners cannot afford to repair their sidewalks.


If you accept these assumptions, then, in my view the City has two choices, we can accept full responsibility for sidewalks or we can improve the old process.



A. City Assumes Full Responsibility


· Assume responsibility for the repair of sidewalks, and, thus full liability for injury or damage due to sidewalks in disrepair.

· Develop and promulgate a criteria for sidewalk repair:

o Sidewalk is an eminent danger to the public,

o Sidewalk needs repair but is not yet a danger to the public,

o Sidewalk is in acceptable condition and poses not threat to the public.

· Inspect the sidewalks and build an inventory of sidewalks ranked by the repair criteria. Inspection to by done jointly by DENP and Public Works staff on an expedited basis.

· Begin sidewalk repair work ASAP either by contract or by City staff as they are available or both.

· Pay for sidewalk repair out of the road repair fund from within the general fund.

· Earmark a portion of the property tax for sidewalk repair and for installation of new sidewalks.

· Estimate the amount of total installation and repair costs and develop an algorithm to apportion costs among property owner types.

· Bill property owners through the property tax according to the algorithm.

· Bill property owners for new sidewalks according to the cost sharing arrangement.

· Make an estimate of the City’s potential liability for injuries and damage due to sidewalks in disrepair and insure against such liability.


B. City Strongly Enforces The Old Sidewalk Code



· Sidewalk repair is the responsibility of the property owner.

· Develop and promulgate a criteria for sidewalk repair:

o Sidewalk is an eminent danger to the public,

o Sidewalk needs repair but is not yet a danger to the public,

o Sidewalk is in acceptable condition and poses not threat to the public.

· Inspect the sidewalks and build an inventory of sidewalks ranked by the repair criteria. Inspection to by done jointly by DENP and Public Works staff on an expedited basis.

· Issue a citation to property owners with sidewalks in need of repair.

· Property owners will pay for repairs themselves. For those you cannot or will not make the repairs, the City will make repairs and place a lien on the property. For those who of modest means, the City could set up a payment plan to fit individual budget needs.

· Make an estimate of the City’s potential liability for injuries and damage due to sidewalks in disrepair and insure against such liability.


I have put these two proposals before my colleagues on the Council, but have heard from only Sam, who favors proposal A and Julie who favors proposal B.


However, none of this gets to some of the underlying issues many of you have raised. The City staff did a less than exemplary job of getting out an explanation of the sidewalk fee. I apologize for that and will strive to make sure that it doesn't happen again.


Worse, staff did a very poor job of billing for the fee. We have many folk in the position of being billed at the business rate for slips. There is a question in my mind as to how condominiums, residences or slips, should be billed -- as individual units or as a business structure or some other arrangement. This leads to the same type of question regarding apartments. There is also the issue of property owners who live on private streets and do not receive City services. All of this was left to Finance and I think they made choices based on administrative simplicity, which may be all they could do, but doesn't make the bill recipients happy because of obvious flaws in the process.


I believe that those who don’t have sidewalks still benefit from sidewalks in good repair elsewhere, just as they benefit from roads in good repair, even when they never or rarely use them. Also, the new legislation provides for funds to pay for the construction of new sidewalks in a cost sharing arrangement with the property owner. Any new sidewalks will have the public safety benefit of providing a place out of the street for pedestrians.


I like having a dedicated fee that can only be used for sidewalk construction and repair. Like other enterprise funds, these fees can’t wonder of to other spending areas. However the administrative nightmare of the fees suggest to me that this funding would better come as a part of the property and business taxes. We can still earmark the funds and track their use through the system.


This is a new service, if provided by the City, must have a revenue source. I favor the idea of spreading the cost over a large base so that everyone pays a little bit to cover the large cost that would be born by a few. In that regard it is like an insurance fund. I wish we could find a way to spread this cost to our 4.5 million annual visitors as they certain use and benefit from our public sidewalks. I also agree that, as this is a public safety matter, it should take precedence over other types of spending and that we should look within current budget to find funding rather than raise taxes of fees for this service.


I have not seen it, but the Finance Department tells me that they have an estimate of the cost to make the needed sidewalk repairs and a guestimate of the number of requests for, and the cost of, installing new sidewalks. This is information that the Council should have been given – certainly we should have asked for it. The Council assumed that Public Works has criteria for determining which sidewalks need repair an inventory of those sidewalks. I am no longer making that assumption and call for an explicit enumeration for both criteria and inventory in my steps above.


Where does this leave us on the issue of repeal? I still believe that sidewalks in disrepair pose a public safety issue that must be addressed. I’m leaning towards the City taking over the sidewalks because then we will know who is supposed to do the job and can monitor that it gets done. I can live with the other proposal, but I have a hard time with the notion of the City putting liens on the homes of those without the means to pay for repairs.


I realize that this has been a long response to the questions you have each raised, but this is a complicated matter, much more complicated than we gave it credit for being when we so glibly pass the Ordinance last fall. Now we must take some time to rethink the issue and come up with a better set of solutions.


I certainly welcome your comments on what I have set forth. Though I would like to do it sooner, the council will be taking up this issue at its 14 July regular meeting.


Ross Arnett

Alderman, Ward 8
410 295-9743


CP Notes: What are your thoughts? Call your alderman or alderwoman!