Sanburn switches vote on second reading, preventing $10 monthly charge

This article is brought to you by Community First Bank of Indiana.

Do a little banking with us, and you’re bound to do more. That’s because we tend to treat people like… well… people. Get to know us more at CFBindiana.com.

Click here for more information.

The City of Kokomo is looking for money, but it won’t get it from trash collection. The administration of Mayor Tyler Moore attempted to convince the Kokomo Common Council to enact a $10 monthly fee for waste collection and disposal, but it went down to defeat Nov. 18.

The proposed fee was wildly unpopular amongst the citizens who attended the proposed ordinance’s first reading in late October. The council heard arguments against the fee both from the public and among its own number at that time. Yet it passed on a slim 5-4 margin.

The second reading of the ordinance differed a bit, as the council sought to amend the measure to provide some relief to those impacted the hardest by the fee. Councilman Tom Miklik, who carried the legislation for the administration, explained the amendment’s intent.

“After last meeting, we had a patron come up and speak with us, and based on that input, we had the attorney amend this,’ said Miklik. “This counts for low-income, single-family households, any owner, occupant, or lessee responsible for trash collection fee of an eligible residential dwelling unit which is occupied by a low-income, single-family household that demonstrates that they have limited income of not more than 150 percent of the federally established poverty guidelines. (They) shall pay a trash collection fee of $5 per month.”

The amendment would have allowed the Kokomo Board of Works and Public Safety to waive half of the fee for those who qualified and filled out the appropriate paperwork. This waiver would have had to have been renewed annually.

Even the amendment couldn't pass cleanly, with Councilman Tony Stewart voting against the measure. Of course, that vote quickly became a moot point as the amended ordinance came up for a second and final reading.

Given that the council held a public hearing on the matter in October, council president Ray Collins informed those in attendance that no further comment would be accepted.

"We have received numerous emails and phone calls, and we held our public hearing for this last week," said Collins. "So, during this meeting, I will not be taking any public comment for this ordinance. I want to thank everybody for their input and reaching out to all the council members with all their concerns as well."

Collins did offer a time for comment for each of the council members, and three of them chose to speak.

Councilman Dave Capshaw (R-1st) took issue with the process rather than the need for the fee.

"I have no doubt that there is a need to increase the funding for the city, because there's many aspects that haven't really been shared with everyone," said Capshaw. "Trash collection is being subsidized by other departments, and I know there are many departments that need new equipment. The money's not there.

"We need two new fire stations. We need two new fire trucks. When they break down, there's no money to repair them. If the trucks aren't in service, your insurance rates are going to skyrocket. There's no doubt that the money need is there. It's just bad timing."

Councilman Bob Stephenson (D-2nd) also objected to the timing of the ordinance, as he did when it received a first reading in October.

"I have the same objections to it I had last time," said Stephenson. "We just went through the budget process. We just passed the budget three days before I started getting phone calls about this."

Councilman Jeff Plough (R-5th) echoed his colleagues and stood on the poor timing of the measure.

With no other comment, the vote was called, and one voice made it clear the ordinance was dead. Councilwoman Crystal Sanburn voted against the fee, sending it to a 5-4 defeat.

Sanburn had given some indication that she wasn't sold on the fee when it was heard in October. She stated then that her "yes" vote was made to give the administration more time to provide her, the council, and the public additional information. Whether that information followed is unclear, but it was obvious Sanburn was unconvinced.

With the ordinance's defeat it is unclear if or when it could be presented again. In the case of petitions to the city's planning commission and board of zoning appeals, a defeated measure must wait six months before its reintroduction.

In other action, the council unanimously approved the establishment of a convenience fee not to exceed $3 on all credit and debit card transactions made with the city. City attorney T.J. Rethlake researched the Dodd Frank Act of 2010 after a citizen contended that the fee possibly violated federal law.

His conclusion was that the Durbin amendment to that act applied only to banks and financial institutions establishing a service fee for electronic transactions. As the city serves the role of “merchant” for the purposes of fee collection, it is only passing along a fee it already incurs.

The convenience fee will take effect in January 2025.