P B 236662
DETROIT'S MUNICIPAL SOLD WASTE MANAGE MK
S Y S T E M : A CASE STUDY
Applied Management Sciences
Silver Spring, Maryland
1 9 7 ?
'#'
DISTRIBUTED BY;
National Technical Information Service
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA
SHEET
1. Report No.
EPA/530/SW-8lc
PB 236 662
Title and Subtitle
Detroit's Municipal Solid Waste Management System :
A Case Study
5* Report Date
1973!
. Authot(s)
I. Performing Organization Rept.
Performing Organization Name and Address
Applied Management Sciences
962 Wayne Avenue
Silver Spring, Maryland 20910
10. Project/Task/Work Unit No.
11. Contract/Grant No.
68-03-0041
12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Solid Waste Management Programs
Washington, D. C. 201+60
IX Type of Report & Period
Covered
final
14.
IS. Supplementary Notes
16. Abstracts
This study examines solid waste collection and disposal in Detroit, Michigan.
The background of the system, including location, geography, demography,
climate, form of governifcentjr and-the solid waste management agencies^iis
described, and thfc char*ete:ri'$tiieM of th«' systems, including the serviqes,
equipment, and finances^are
17. Key Words and Document Analysis. I/O. Descriptors
Waste disposal, urban areas
17b. Identifiers /Open-Ended Terms
I7e. COSATI Field/Group
18. Availability Statement
19.. Security Class (This
Report)
UNCLASSLFIEI
[AyiFIJPp
Class (Thi
20.. Security Class (This
Page
UNCLASSIFIED
21: No. of Pages
22. Price
PORM NTIS-35 (REV. 8*72)
U3COMM-DC 14»54-P7t
-------
NOTICE
THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN REPRODUCED FROM THE
BEST COPY FURNISHED US BY THE SPONSORING
AGENCY. ALTHOUGH IT IS RECOGNIZED THAT CER-
TAIN PORTIONS ARE ILLEGIBLE, IT IS BEING RE-
LEASED IN THE INTEREST OF MAKING AVAILABLE
AS MUCH INFORMATION AS POSSIBLE.
-------
DETROIT'S MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
A Case Sfcucty
This final report (SW-8lo) describes work performed
•for the Federal solid waste martc^ement programs under contract 'tio. '68-03-0041
to APPLIED MANAGEMENT SCIENCES, INC.
and is reproduced a* received from the contractor
U.S. EN VFttONMENTAL" 'PRQTECTI ON AGENCY
1974
-------
This report has beerr reviewed by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency and approved for publication. Approval
does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the
views and policies of the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, nor does mention of commercial products constitute
endorsement or recommendation for use by the U.S. Government.
An environmental protection publication (SW-8lc)
in the solid waste management aeries
ii
-------
FOREWORD
Solid waste management systems are an integral part of' the;
environment of nearly every citizen in the United States. Yet
Until recent years, these systems have not received the attention,
other visible residential services have enjoyed. This historical
neglect-has resulted in systems Which'may not1 be- cost-effective*,
especially with respect to the rising cost trends encountered/in
solid waste management activities. These trends arise7from two
principal factors:
* Environmentally sound disposal methodology is being
enforced or strongly encouraged; as a result,, dispiosa-1
sites and needed equipment are now expensive to procure'
and operate.
* The cdllection function is highly labor intensive..
Thus, the costs of unskilled labor, which have; been
rising to meet socioeconomic demands, have had'
enormous impacts on local agency budgets-.
This rise in cost pressure has forced all: levels, of
governmental organizations to consider more closely the management
and costs of sV>11d waste management activities.
Because efforts to upgrade solid waste management- practices-
are in their Infancy, there 1s still an obv-ious lack of data
bases for evaluative and comparative analyses. This case1 study.
is one in a series of case studies of solid waste management
systems which has been conducted under the sponsorship of the
Office of Solid Waste Management Programs, U. S. Environmental
Protection Agency. Kenneth Shuster and Cindy McLaren served as
EPA project officers on the case study reported herein. The
purpose of these case studies is to fill 1n this data gap with
actual case histories of how cities are handling their solid
waste problems.
Concerned agencies at all government levels, as well.as
private firms, will be able to assess information of the .following
types:
* The management and operating characteristics of
public sector solid waste management systems.
* The institutional forces which give rise to these
characteristics.
-------
* Those techniques that have been or are being applied
to enhance the measures of productivity, aesthetics,
level of service, and environmental control.
These agencies and firms can then use these comparisons
to upgrade their systems according to the norms achieved 1n other
cities of similar size, geographical location, and operational
and institutional characteristics.
--ARSEN J. DARNAY
ion. Sotcd Wa&tt Management
Office of Solid Waste Management Programs
1v
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter Page
1 INTRODUCTION 1
2 SYST.EM DESCRIPTION ABSTRACT ,. 4
3 FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS ..... 9
4 BACKGROUND OF THE SYSTEM 13
4.1 Location, Demography, Economic Base
and Climate 14
4.2 Form of Government 15
4.3 Solid Waste Management System History .. . . 17
4.4 Agencies Affecting the Solid Waste
Management System . . 20
5 SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM CHARACTERISTICS. . 27
5.1 Collection Responsibilities of the
Sanitation Division 28
5.2 Quality of Service ............ 45
5.3 Labor Management Relations . . ... . . . 46
5.4 Disposal Methods - Present and Planned. . . 50
5.5 Equipment Description 52
5.6 Financial Aspects of the Detroit Solid
Waste Management System 58
APPENDIX A: Michigan Public Employment
Relations Act 67
APPENDIX B: Guidelines for Training Equipment
Operators 72
APPENDIX C:
City Code and Amendments Pertaining
to Refuse Collection and Disposal
76
-------
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
Figure
1 Data Sources and Information Types
Page
3
LIST OF TABLES
5
6
7
8
Page
Collection Abstract 6
Disposal Abstract 8
Sanitation Division Budgeted Manpower
1973-74 (Wage Personnel) 29
Sanitation Division Manpower Report Wage
Personnel 30
Manpower and Equipment Allocation ... 33
Route Management Packer Truck
Distribution 35
Efficiency and Productivity Data ... 36
Vacant Lot Program - Estimated
Workload and Costs 41
Annual Activity Summary for Environmental
Enforcement Group 43
10
Fringe Benefits for Union Members .
48
V1
-------
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
(Continued)
Table Page
11 Collection Vehicle Operating Costs ........ 54
12 Packer Trucks Awaiting Repair . ... 56
13 City of Detroit, General Fund Statements of
Revenue 60
14 Revenues Raised by Sanitation Division Objectives
'Detroit, Michigan, 1968 to 197:2 ... . 61
i :> •, •.pundi i.ure Summary "or Sanitation D' sion by
Activity, Detroit, Michigan, 1.969 to 1973 .... 63
16 Costs for Refuse Collection by Object Code;
Detroit, Michigan, 1969 to 1973 b5
-------
1
INTRODUCTION
The solid waste management system of Detroit, Michigan is
one in which change occurs slowly, but there have been
changes in both operating procedures and in policy. No
event, either external or internal to the system, has resulted
in major change in activity or services. The experienced man-
agement and the historically strong union have both been satis-
fied to keep the system operating without major disruption,
either to the clientele or to the Sanitation Division work
force.
The Sanitation Division is involved in a number of distinct
solid waste activities: included are refuse collection, refuse
disposal, street cleaning, lot clearing and weed control, and
environmental enforcement. The division collects no in-
dustrial solid waste and only a small portion of commercial
solid waste generated in Detroit. It does not operate any of
the sanitary landfills that are used for the ultimate disposal
of its refuse. Its disposal activities involve the use of city
and contractor operated transfer stations.
Although the system is presently operating with reasonable
success, a number of constraints that limit management's effec-
tiveness could cause current problems to multiply and, perhaps,
to reach crisis proportions within a few years. These con-
straints, detailed below, have already caused the system to be
-------
relatively costly with a relatively low level of productivity.
Detroit Public Works officials are keenly aware of these pro-
blem areas, but have been unable to adequately .resolve them due to
these very limiting constraints.
Although the collection function threatens to become a
major problem area in the immediate future, perhaps more sig-
nificant for the long term is the potential for crisis that
exists in the disposal area. The city is not effectively in-
volved in this function and depends on the private sector to
,;provide the required landfill capacity. Other agencies, most
notably the Southeastern Michigan Council of Governments, have
contended that private sector landfills will shortly be un-
available, and to avoid a disposal crisis, public agencies
must develop plans for alternative disposal methods. The city
views the present disposal methods as feasible for a number of
years to come.
Figure 1 presents the titles of the people either inter-
viewed during the site visit or contacted in subsequent telephone
calls. The types of information obtained are also indicated.
Tape recordings of all conversations were made after obtaining
the permission of the interviewee and no people rejected this
request .
The structure »l "fThis report consists of five chapters and
Y^£»e.£,
u- munber—t^ ttpp^^e^Htate appendices. Chapter 2 syriopsizes the
system for those readers who are interested only in theAparam-
eters of the city and the collection and disposal operations.
Chapter 3 presents our findings and identifies potential
problem areas. Chapter 4 is a description of the city in terms
A
of those parameters which affect solid waste management opera-
tions. Also included in this chapter are descriptions of the
different public and private sector agencies on all levels found
-------
to impact the system. Finally, Chapter 5 is an in-depth
description of the solid waste management system as a whole.
All aspects of the system are presented and, wherever appropri-
ate, tabular data is included.
Titles
Date
Information Type
Commissioner and Staff, Department
of Public Works
Superintendent and Sxaff,
Sanitation Division
Research and Systems Development
Manager, Southeastern Michigan
Council of Governments
Superint2ndent and Staff,
Motor Transportation Division
Business; Agent, Teamsters, State
County, and Municipal Workers
Local 214
Business Agent, American Federa-
tion of State, County, and
Municipal Employees, Local 26
Sept. 25
Sept. 28
Sept. 26
Sept. 27
Sept. 27
Sept. 27
General System Characteristics,
Problem Areas, History
Solid Waste Activities, Level and
Quality of Service, Problem Areas,
Manpower and Equipment-Allocations
Regional perspective of solid waste
disposal
Vehicle maintenance policies, public
areas
Labor Management Relations
Labor Management Relations
FIGURE 1: DATA SOURCES AND INFORMATION TYPES
-------
SYSTEM DESCRIPTION ABSTRACT
City>
Detroit;, Michigan
Co.nt acts' Clarence Russell
Galen Grogan
Bernard Panush
Wesley Solomon
P. L. Brown
Alvin Johnson
Conley Abrams
Clyde Dowell
James Garvie
Lloyd Piechan
Mr. Hudson
Al Kwiecinski
Donald Lamb
John Philips
Dates of
Visit: September 25-27,
Commissioner of Public Works
Deputy Commissioner of Public Works
Accounting Manager,
Central Accounting Division,
Department of Public Works
Personnel Director,
Department of Public Works
Superintendent, Sanitation Division
General Foreman/Route Management,
Sanitation Division
Administrative Assistant,
Sanitation Division
Senior Government Analyst,
Sanitation Division
Superintendent,
Motor Transportation Division
General Foreman,
Motor Transportation Division
Business Agent, American Federation
of State, County and Municipal
Employees, Local 26
Business Agent, Teamsters State,
County, and Municipal Workers,
Local 214
Research and Systems Development
Manager, Southeastern Michigan
Council of Governments (SEMCOG)
Assistant Supervisor, Environmental
Enforcement, Sanitation Division
1973
4
-------
Population Demography:
Date
1970
1960
1950
Total
1,512,893
1,670,144
1,849,568
White
838,877
1,182,970
Other
672,605
487,174
Area: • 137.89 square miles
Density: 10,962 people per square mile
Mileage: 2840.89 street miles
1485.96 alley miles
Collection:
Table 1
Miscellaneous: The Sanitation Division provides refuse
collection service for all residential dwellings in the city.
It also collects from a number of commercial establishments
(about 6,200) as part of its regular collection service. No
distinction by the source of generation is made for record-
keeping purposes. The city collects no industrial solid waste.
Bulky items are collected at the same time by the same trucks
as the normal mixed refuse. There are seven distinct service
districts, currently utilizing 1,103 men for the collection
activities. All street cleaning, lot clearing and weed control,
and snow and ice removal activities are also handled by the
Sanitation Division. Lot clearing is a major activity, due
to the extensive number of both city-owned and private vacant
lots in the city (over 18,000 lots). Absenteeism and motor ve^
hide maintenance are major problem areas, along with high laboi
costs.
-------
TABLE '1: COLLECTION .ABSTRACT
•*-- — ^^____^ Collection
_ ,1 ... 7^ --— ~^-Function
Collection ^^^~^-— -^_
Variables ^ ! — ~__^
Number of Crews
Crew Size *
Frequency of Service
|
Point of Collection
Method of Collection
•Stops
Service Limitations
)'
;I-n.centive System
Fund Source
Tonnage (Annual) '
» U,n.ionjs -
Annual Cost
•Comments
Mixed
Refuse
280
3
1 /week
Curb or
Alley
Packers
497 , 126
Unlimited
Col lection,
.Includes
Bulky
Wastes
Stree-t
Cleaning
8
14
4-6/year
N.A.
-Sweeper
-Flushexs
N.A.
None
"Lot
Cleaning
'5
10
As Req ' d
EEC Order
N.'A.
-
N.A.
-None
'Bulky
•Items
Variable
3
On Request
Curb or •
Alley
Flat Bed
N.A.
None
'Hand
•Sweeping
8
-
4-6/year
N.A.
N.A.
'N.-.-A.
'None
j
Night
Commercial
5
3
6/week
Curb or
Alley,
Packers
270
None
Task Incentive - Standard Productivity Routes
General 'Fund and $. 3-5 /-bushel for commercial collection ;
•687., 285
'57,750 '
36 ,960 !
60,0'OD |
NvA. •
8 , 505
3!eamster.s, -Local .214 .(Drivers) - AF'SCME, Local :26 '(Laborers )
24, 522. ,444 :
.2/654,694 :
VI., 329, 360 :
462 , 665 I
N.A. ;
282,483
Major .problem areas Delated to collection activities 'are
equipment downtime, absenteeism, fend multiple use blf 'crews . ..•
and equipment . :
-------
Disposal: Table 2
Miscellaneous: The Sanitation Division does not operate any
landfill sites, and utilizes one incinerator on a limited basis
to dispose of special and hazardous wastes. All city-collected
refuse is transported to one of the five transfer stations located
within the city. At the two city-owned transfer stations, one of
which is an obsolete open relay station, private haulers under city
contract.remove the refuse to the landfill sites. At the three
privately-owned transfer stations, the city contracts to provide
a minimum number of refuse tons per day; this refuse is also trans-
ported to landfill sites. All landfill sites are privately-owned
and operated and are some distance from the city, e.g. 34 miles,
located in outlying counties. A new private transfer station is
due to begin operations by November 1, 1973, allowing the city to
close down its one technologically obsolete "open relay station."
-------
TABLE 2: DISPOSAL
^">v»^ Disposal
^-->. Site
Disposal^^^^
Data ^^^^^
Type
i Capacity
Real Loading
Expected Lifetime
Operating or use
costs to city'
Start-up costs
Location
.
1
Transfer
Station
(City)
950 tonn/day
650 tons/day
Indefinite
$231.254/yr
-
Southfield
2
Transfer
Station
(Private)
2,000 tons/day
isob-isoo
tons/day
Indefinite
$5.90/ton
-
Metropolitan
Transfer.. Ctr.
3
Transfer
Station
(Private)
300 tons/day
256 tone /day
Indefinite
$3.88/ton
-
Reltzloff
Transfer Stat.
4
Transfer
Station
(Private)
300 tons/day
225 tons/day
Indefinite
$5.95/ton
- ' '
B&R .
Transfer Stat.
5
Open Relay
Station
(City)
4,000 yds/day
3,000 yds/day
Close 11/1/73
$S33,480/yr
-
East Central
6
Incinerator
300 tons/day
150 tons/day
Indefinite
$22.218
- .
St. Jean
7
Brush
Burners
400 yds/day
400 yds/day
Indefinite
$60,474
.-
St. Jean
Southfield
00
-------
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
The solid waste management system operated by the City of
Detroit is designed to provide for the collection of all resi-
dential refuse generated in the city. It also collects from
a number of commercial establishments, mostly in the downtown
area, but most commercial collection is done by private collectors.
The city does not collect any industrial solid waste. The city
does not operate any disposal sites, except for one incinerator
(part-time) to dispose of pathological materials. The city
utilizes both city and private transfer stations, from which refuse
is hauled by contractors to private landfill sites outside the
city for ultimate disposal.
As presently operated, the system exhibits many of the
characteristics and problems typical of many large northern cities.
The management staff of the Department of Public Works and the
Sanitation Division is composed of competent personnel with long
experience in the Detroit solid waste system. Most have worked
their way up through the ranks to positions of leadership. Al-
though they are intimately aware of the background and operation
of the system, there have been few staff members brought in from
other systems who would have experience with different approaches
to solid waste management. As a result, a very traditional mana- .
gerial approach is taken; it is unlikely that radical change will
occur under present circumstances.
9
-------
In addition, there are numerous constraints on the! system
which effectively limit the degree of possible change. Perhaps
most significant is the effect of strorig uhioriizaVibln:!. * Two
unions, the Teamsters and the American' FetieratioVf of State,
County?', an'ef Municipal Employees, arV veryp effective5 in"rep^resien-
tingi their membership, and have negotia-tecl very favorable" agree-
ments regarding wages, fringe benefits, and working* cbriditibns.
The unions have piayed a key role in several policy decisions
by ma-nagement. For example, the present productivity measures
for.' collection routes resulted from the union's dissatisfaction
witte the previous task incentive routes. Also; the issue:of
overtime was resolved to reflect the" union's'pbsition.' The"very
existence of two separate unions not only makes Jthe';'unioh'posit-
ion-stronger but, because of the rigid job ciassifications:, aiso
limits^ the- flexibility of management"to meet unusuai'problems.
The age of wotk force is another constraint ofi*the'system.
The •average age is 51 years, which limits the deployment of
personnel, raises wage costs, and 2 :years agb infllienced vehicle
purchase decisions. The city considered the use of: one-mSn trucks
for-the system, but it was decided';tha-t a. "ybunger wdrk force
would be required to operate such a collection system.
Perhaps the most significant present constraint on the
system is the vehicle maintenance problem. This problem is
outside the management scope of the Sanitation Division, since
it is the responsibility of the Motor Transportation Division,
and'direetly affects their ability to function effectively. Due
to the critical shortage of vehicle maintenance manpower, a large
proportion of the Sanitation Division fleet, including the newer
25 yard packers, is unavailable because of delays in repairs.
10
-------
As a result the older and smaller vehicles (16 and 20 yard packers)
must be used or routes simply are not completed. This situation,
if left uncorrected, could develop to a crisis level within the
near future. During the site visit the Common Council had a
special session with the Department of Public Works and Motor
Transportation Division Management in an attempt to define and re-
solve this problem area.
The vehicle maintenance problem is aggravated by the worker's
failure to correctly load bulky items into the trucks. Although
the packer trucks are equipped to handle bulky items along with
the regular mixed solid waste, the collection workers often fail
to follow necessary precautionary measures, causing the compactors
to break down.
The seasonality of some of the activities of the Sanitation
Division necessitates a fluctuating manpower level. The division
is usually budgeted for more than enough manpower to meet the
seasonality problem. However, the number of days lost due to
vacation, sick time, or absences has been running at extremely
high rates, so that the actual number of men availabe for assign-
ments has averaged about 100 less than the daily minimum re-
quired level. This is another serious constraint on management's
ability to operate.
The results of these factors lead, not surprisingly, to a
system with relatively high costs ($45.68 per ton for mixed refuse
collection) and relatively low productivity (355 stops per crew day)
If costs continue to increase as they have over the past five years
(more than 45 percent) and productivity remains unchanged, it is
likely that refuse collection will become an issue of great public
concern.
On the disposal side, the city has chosen to utilize transfer
stations and to let the private sector provide landfills required
11
-------
for ultimate disposal. This approach eliminates the problems- assoc-
iated with the acquisition and operation of landfill sites' that
most cities have experienced, although at some increase4 ih^cost.
Th-is solution depends on the ability of the priviaite' sector'to
find adequate- landfill capacity. Tor date, there ha% been- rib
problem', however, a study developed by SEMCOG predicts- that latitl-
f ill: sites will shortly become unavailable and/tar very^ expensive';
and recommends a plan for the' disposal of refuse of a^r.'egibn'al
basis, using resource recovery incinerators; governed'-b$ a; regional
disposal a-uthority.
12
-------
BACKGROUND OF THE SYSTEM
Detroit is located in the southeastern corner of the State
of Michigan, on the west bank of the Detroit River, directly
opposite the city of Windsor, Canada. The Detroit Standard
Metropolitan Statistical Area (SMSA) includes Wayne, Oakland,,
and Macomb counties and is the nation's fifth most populous
metropolitan area, with 4,354,200 inhabitants as of July 1, 1972.
This population represents a gain of some 145,079 from the 1970
census count. During the decade of the 1960's, the SMSA grew
by 11.6 percent but the city's population declined by 9.4 percent.
The pioneers of the automobile industry established Detroit
as the automotive center of the nation in the early 1900's, and
precipitated a large increase in population, causing Detroit to
surpass one million by the end of World War 1. The auto industry
attracted a large labor force, which led to the formation of the
United Automobile Worker's union in Detroit in 1953. The racial
«
composition was also affected, as large numbers of blacks from
southern states were attracted to the plentiful jobs available
in the auto industry.
In the 1950's, the city embarked on a rejuvenation effort
of the downtown area, constructing numerous office building,
e.g., the Henry and Edsel Ford Auditorium and the Cobo Hall
and Convention Arena. In 1967 the city experienced the largest
civil disturbance in modern U.S. history, both in terms of the
number of deaths and amount of property damage. Following the
disturbance, New Detroit, Inc. was formed to revitalize civic
13
-------
life,. In-i November 1971, the Ford Motor Company; announced a- $500 ;
million development project, the largest in the1 city history, for
the riverfront area.
^•'* 1 • Location, Demography, Economic Base and.- C'limatte •
Detroit- is located at; an altitude* of^ 619'-feet: above^ sfea;: level;
o,n; the west bank of the Detroit River:; The city> propecr proper^ covers
nearly 140 square miles-,. including Belle* Isle,, the- largest' island
inrth'e Detroit River opposite the downtown area:
Although the metropolitan area (SMSA) has co-ti-tihued..'; to" grow
a,t; a-steady pace, up. 11.6 percent from I960' to; 1970:, . thevcity; it1
self; has lost population, declining from 1.85:millionviini 1950: tb>
l;.67 million in 1960, to 1.51 million in 1970v This) 18'Jpereent
population decrease over the past twenty years: isjreflected in the
rather large number of unoccupied houses, 25^000;^and the large
number of; vacant lots, nearly 18.,000i. The Sanitation Division's
operation is affected by. these facts, since- illegal.;dumpihg.v areas
and,the resultant unsanitary conditions are readily>observable and
require constant service.
The racial composition of the city has changed^in ways
similar to many large northern cities> i.e. , a;large influx of
blacks in the central city areas. During,the decade of the;1960's,
the non-white population increased-: from 487 ,174-persons to 672 ,605,
a jump from 29.1 percent to 44-; 5 percent of the totalipopulation;
For', the metropolitan area (SMSA) excluding Detroit i,blacks com-
prise 10.6 percent of the population.
Although Detroit is often considered solely a::'manu'faeturing
center, over 61 percent of the labor force is engaged in non-
manufacturing industries, such as wholesale and retail trade, finance,
service industries, and construction. Motor vehicles and- equipment
manufacturing account, for 12 percent of the labor force. Twenty-:
five percent of the automobiles produced in' the U;S. come1 from'
Detroit area.
14
-------
The median income for Detroit is $11,015, while the cost of
living is slightly below the U.S. average.
Detroit has a relatively moderate climate for a northern
city, a result of the moderating influence of the Great Lakes
area. The daily average temperature is 27° F in January, 74° F
in July. The average annual precipitation is about 31" per
year, with an average relative humidity reading of 58. The
t
first freeze occurs on or about October 21, while the last
freeze comes on or about April 23. Snowfall during the winter
months is generally moderate, requiring salting operations more
often than plowing.
4.2: Form of Government
The City of Detroit has a Mayor-Council form of government.
As chief executive of the city, the mayor is ultimately responsible
for the administration of all city services. He has veto power
over the council approved ordinances or resolutions, but may be
overridden by the council. The mayor has appointive and removal
powers for the heads of most city departments, including the
Commissioner of Public Works. He also may propose legislation
to the council for their approval. The mayoral elections are
held at four-year intervals, the nextDelection to occur in
November, 1973. <
The Common Council is composed of nine members, all elected
at large for four-year terms on a non-partisan basis. All legis-
lative power for the city is vested in the council. The member
receiving the highest number of votes becomes president of the
council. The council meets daily as a committee of the whole,
and each Tuesday in regular session. Included in the council's
powers is the determination of annual appropriations for each
15
-------
department and the establishment of sinking funds for the pay-
ment of bonds. The council members are expressly forbidden
to interfere either directly or indirectly with the operations
of any administrative department.
The city clerk and city treasurer are separate elective
offices, independent from the office of the mayor. The city
clerk functions include the keeping of all city records, ordi-
nances, resolutions, etc., to give notice regarding elections
and registrations, to supervise such elections in his position
as chairman of the Election Commission, and to handle all com-
plaints and requests for information and direct such- to the
appropriate department. The city treasurer, who also acts as
ex-officio treasurer of the Detroit School District, receives all
taxes and assessments for the city and school district, and
records all receipts and expenditures. He is also custodian
of all monies, bonds, mortgages, leases and other evidence of
value belonging to the city. He is also a member of the Sinking
Fund Commission and the Board of Estimates of the city.
The Board of Assessors is composed of four members, appointed
by the mayor, whose principal duties include the assessment of
all property subject to city taxes. This task must be completed
by February 1 for the preceding calendar year. All real and
tangible personal property is included,, and assessments are
:
currently computed at 50 percent of true cash value. Since the
property tax is one of the primary sources of general fund rev-
enues, the task of the Board of Assessors is extremely- critical
to efficient city operations. The Common Council Board of Review
hears individual appeals on assessments to insure the Board of
Assessors has acted properly in each case.
All audit responsibilities are assumed by the Auditor Gen-
eral, appointed by the Common Council for a ten-year term. He
16
-------
must complete an audit of the financial transactions of all city
departments at least once each fiscal year, and file a report
with the Common Council detailing the financial position of the
city.
4.3: Solid Waste Management System History
The solid waste collection operations in Detroit have under-
gone moderate change in recent years, changes more concerned with
processes rather than with policies. The policies and objectives
of the system have remained remarkably constant. The changes
which have occurred were designed to make the system more effi-
cient within the constraints, both political and economic, that
are placed upon the system. The organizational structure has not
been altered radically except for the recent decrease in the
number of persons employed. Services provided to city resi-
dents are also similar to these provided in past years.
Prior to 1966, Detroit, similar to many midwestern cities,
collected rubbish and garbage separately. Four garbage stations
were used to accept the garbage; each residence was collected
weekly. Rubbish collection was handled by seven service dis-
tricts, and collection was bi-weekly. In 1966, the city went to
a combined collection system, eliminating the need for separate
garbage stations. By 1968, the last of these stations were phased
ou t.
17
-------
The use of concrete receptacles for refuse containers was
common in many areas of Detroit prior to 1969. Through the use
of Interim Assistance Program funds, the city launched an effort
to remove these receptacles, since they were a hindrarice to
efficient collection practice. By 1971, the concrete receptacles
had been eliminated. Presently, residents may use either plastic
bags or cans, or metal cans.
A Common Council ordinance, passed in 1969, prohibited any
burning of refuse by residents. Such burning was very wide-
spread, especially during the Fall, to dispose of leaves. The
increased volume of refuse caused by the leaves necessitates
the use of additional crews for collection operations during this
season.
In recent years, a number of factors led to a series of
discussions between the Sanitation Division management and the
workers, represented by the two unions, regarding work pro-
ductivity and efficiency. In the early 1960's, ten cubic yard
open trucks were used, and collection workers were paid for an
eight-hour day; no incentive system was in effect. In the mid-
1960 's the Common Council approved an ordinance paying the
collection workers on a task incentive system, whereby the
workers were required to complete a specified route e'ach day,
and then could leave. As the city acquired its fleet- of packer
trucks, moving increasingly to larger sized trucks, it became
evident that each crew should collect greater quantities of
solid waste, thereby allowing for a reduction in manpower.
18
-------
In addition, the city was concurrently in the process of
closing down three of its four incinerators, a process it com-
pleted by August 1971: the fourth incinerator was maintained to
handle pathological waste materials and now operates at only one-
half its design capacity. The combined effects led to a re-
duction in manpower of 150 employees in November, 1971, the
first such reduction in Sanitation Division history.
However, during this time, there were continuing problems
in keeping a sufficient number of collection vehicles operational
due to the shortage of manpower in the Vehicle Maintenance Di-
vision. The vehicle problem was further aggravated by the fact
that in two years, 1968 and 1971, the city did not purchase any
new packer trucks. Thus, the Sanitation Division was forced to
operate with increasingly older vehicles which required addi-
tional maintenance. The lack of sufficient packer trucks caused
some routes to fail one or two weeks behind schedule, necessi-
tating extensive overtime since the accumulated refuse could
not be collected within eight hours.
The unions, partly to protest the lay-off of their fellow
workers, resisted the efforts of management to require overtime.
This dispute led to a court test, in which the union position
was supported in the lower court. The case is presently being
appealed by the city.
As a result, the work system had to be changed. A plan of
two loads per day for each 25 yard packer truck was recommended.
Initially, differing pay scales were proposed, based on the
size of the packer truck, i.e., 16-20-25 cubic yards, but this
approach was opposed by the union. Finally, a productivity
system was adopted, and is currently in use. A "standard 45
cubic yard route" was devised for each packer truck, meaning
that each crew would be collecting approximately the same quantity
19
-------
of refuse, regardless of the capacity of the truck. Obviously,
the small 16 cubic yard trucks would require three loads to
complete its route, while the 25 cubic yard truck; would4*need
only two loads, but'no great time differential was anticipated^
In fact;, nearly, all crews work the same number-of, hours per day.
The difference in truck capacity will probably disappear as the
city acquires more 25 cubic yard packers. It has an additional
43 ordered for November, 1973, to. add to. the current number of:
179, 25-cubic yard trucks. '
For the disposal function, the city has moved,increasingly
to the use of transfer stations, with subsequent contractor trans-
port to private landfill sites outside the city. The city it<-
self has not operated any landfills since 1964, and closed its
incinerators in 1968 to all except pathological materials^ be-
cause of air pollution problems. The city is currently operat-
ing one transfer station, and utilizing the facilities, of four
private transfer station owners. A city-owned open relay station
will soon be closed, upon completion of an additional private, trans-
fer station.
4-. 4: Agencies Affecting the Solid Waste Management System .
There have been several agencies that have affected the
operations of. the Sanitation Division in recent years. This in-
fluence may become even stronger in the future, depending upon
the manner, that prospective problems are resolved. Most of the
agencies impacting the system have been regional or local or-
ganizations; very little effect has been felt from..Federal or.
state agencies.
•
4.4.1: State of Michigan
At the state level, three acts have affected the .'Detroit
solid waste collection and disposal operation. The Garbage
20
-------
Refuse and Disposal Act as amended
March 30, 1972, requires that disposal sites and transfer stations
be licensed by the state and that each municipality, or its
representative agency or county, by July 1, 1973, prepare solid
waste plans for the period through 1990. The date of submission
has been extended. The city's approach must be part of the
SEMCOG (Southeast Michigan Council of Governments) approach.
The •Michigan Public Employment-Relations Act (see Appendix A)
as amended, recognizes the right of public employees to form labor
organizations and to engage in collective bargaining with their
public employers. Exclusive bargaining unit rights and unfair
labor practices are defined. As a result of this act, the city
passed an ordinance establishing its Labor Relations Bureau and
specifying proceedings for labor negotiations and contracts.
Following a pattern similar to other states, the governor
issued executive orders to bring together Michigan's environ-
mental control agencies under one department. The orders issued
by the governor are to realign state agencies regulating air
and water pollution under the Department of Natural Resources (DNR)
with a proposed name change to Department of Environment and
Natural Resources to reflect the expanded environmental responsi-
bilities of a revamped DNR. A variety of other environmentally
related state agencies controlling areas such as land use planning,
water supply, solid waste and municipal waste, and water shed
planning are also part of the planned reorganization.
Facing a possible veto by the legislature, which has dis-
approval authority on such executive orders,, a compromise has been
worked out between the Governor's office and critics of the re-
alignment. In March, the governor issued a second order under
which the DNR will set the overall policies and objectives for
protecting the state's environment, including land-use while the
21
-------
quasi-judicial functions of issuing orders and permits, holding
hearings, and enforcing the pollution control laws are to remain
with the Water Resources Commission and the Air Pollution Control
Commission.
Critics of the original order said the DNR, a wildlife con-
servation oriented commission, lacked the scientific and technical
expertise heeded to direct the air and water pollution abatment
programs.' Other critics argued that the re'brganizatiort would seri-
ously disrupt Michigan's plans for meeting Federal deadlines for
clieaH Sir and water.
The expanded DNR will also add two deputies uhde'r the current
head. One will manage natural resources such as state forests,
land, and fish and wildlife. The second deputy will oversee the
environmental control programs. It remains to be seen as to how
this reorganization will affect local solid waste planning efforts.
4.4.2: Southeast Michigan Council of Gbviernments (SEMCOG)
The SEMCOG has been active in the disposal area. As a re-
sult of the Amendments to Public Law 87, each
municipality over 10,000 in population is required to submit a plan
for approval, detailing its methods of disposal for the near and
long term. Taking a regional approach, SEMCOG was given this task,
and immediately named a Solid Waste Committee, composed of officials
active in solid waste management from the six county areas, including
the Commissioner of Public Works for the city of Detroit. The
committee retained a consulting firm, Metcalf and Eddy, Inc., to
undertake a study of the disposal capabilities and requirements up to
1985. Using an earlier report prepared in 1964 by SEMCOG's prede-
cessor, the Detroit Metropolitan Area Regional Plarihirig Commission,
the study group decided to survey all residential, commercial, and
industrial waste generation in the area. From these data, it was
22
-------
estimated that 14.7 pounds per person per day was presently being
generated from all sources, and, of course, was projected to increase
linearly. These estimates far exceeded the capabilities of present
disposal methods, which rely almost entirely on sanitary landfills.
The consultant report recommended near-term solutions that
chiefly involved the acquisition of additional landfill sites to
meet the immediate pressures. For the long term, resource re-
covery and incineration methodologies, using transfer stations
as the immediate disposal point, were recommended as the most
effective disposal approaches. The energy, in the form of heat,
would then be saleable to industry. The Southeast Michigan Solid
Waste Authority, an independent agency, was recommended to manage
the activities relating to waste disposal for the region. This
18 month study was completed in March, 1973, and submitted to the
Solid Waste Committee for review and approval.
However, several factors led to the Committee's failure to
take any definitive action based on the report. The Solid Waste
Committee, composed primarily of local operating officials in solid
waste management, was reluctant to approve any plan that would
impinge upon their jurisdiction. The proposed regional solid waste
authority proved difficult for the committee members to accept, since
local officials viewed this as a threat to local control over these
services. Also, since the City of Detroit is the largest waste
generator, members of the committee from the surrounding areas
were hesitant to accept the city's disposal burden, believing that
by so doing, they would decrease their capacity to dispose of
their own solid waste. It is interesting to note that many of
these counties are now receiving the city's solid waste at privately
operated landfill sites. The private sites are apparently able to
operate without the political debates that surround public acqui-
sition and operation of landfill sites.
23"
-------
As a result, the study has not been acted upon and remains
inoperative. The Solid Waste Committee has been reconstituted by
SEMCOG, and renamed the Solid Waste Task Force Committee. Members
of this committee are now, for the most part, policy making offici-
als from government and industry, and not the operating officials
that comprised the previous committee. It is hopeful that this
higher-level committee can take a relatively objective .view of the
situation, .and have less concern for preserving vested interests of
individual localities. The report submitted by Metcalf and Eddy
will be used as the principal resource, and its major recommendations
are likely to be accepted by the task force with some modification.
According to SEMCOG officials, it is hopeful that two basic changes
will win approval for the plan. First, the resource recovery as-
pects of the plan will be emphasized to insure that, in this time
of energy shortage, local officials will be made aware of the po-
tential advantages of this approach. Second, the^powers of the
proposed regional solid waste authority will be limited solely to
planning activities. Operational authority will still be retained
by local units of government, while enforcement authority would be
vested in state agencies such as the State Board of Health . By so
doing, it is hoped that local fears concerning an all-powerful
regional authority will be ameliorated.
It seems likely that little impetus will be provided for the
adoption of this plan by local governments until the present system
breaks down, i.e., landfill sites suddently become extremely costly
or unavailable. SEMCOG officials predict that such problems will
begin to appear within two years. At that time they believe there
will be strong support for the implementation of this regional app-
roach for disposal operations. Other officials, such as the Detroit
Department of Public Works staff, believe the situation is less
critical and feel that landfill sites are relatively plentiful as
long as they are owned and operated by the private sector.
24
-------
4.4.3. Unions
Two unions represent the Sanitation Division work force.
Local 214 of the Teamsters State, County and Municipal Workers
represents the truck drivers and other vehicle operators. The
Michigan District Council 77 of the American Federation of State,
County, and Municipal Employees, represents the sanitation laborers,
About 600 sanitation employees belong to the Teamsters local, and
about 1,000 belong to the AFSCME local.
The present union structure was formed when a number of
smaller unions merged in 1966 to set up the two existing unions.
Although the two unions have not taken the same positions on all
issues, both have been effective in assuring relatively high wages
and fringe benefits for its members. The fringe benefit package
is particularly attractive.
When the city moved from the 16 yard to the 20 yard packer
trucks, the Teamsters local requested and received a $.15 per
hour increase because of the larger size and greater complexity
of the truck involved. Upon moving to 25 yard trucks, the AFSCME
local requested and received a $.15 per hour increase because of
the increased work load for the collection workers. This will be
followed by another $.15 per hours raise for the Teamsters members
in order to maintain the wage differential. The ability of the
unions to collectively exercise their powers, thus influencing
and constraining management action, is most evident from this
scenario.
The major difference between the attitudes of the members
of the two unions \s found with respect to overtime. The Team-
sters members generally are willing to put in overtime, while the
sanitation laborers of AFSCME are generally opposed. Thus, driver
and crew often have differing perspectives over work assignments,
particularly the completion of a route and overtime requirements.
25
-------
In 1970, a second shift was initiated, with pay Set at
overtime rates. In 1971, management attempted to-reduce pay for
secon'd shift operation to regular time, with no 'overtime incre-
ment. A-court suit ensued, the Teamsters were successful, and
thfe city was obliged to pay a $100;GOO rebate '• for overtime.
AFSGME local officials consistently have felt that the
injury rate was high because of the rush required to complete
a route 'and the practice of loading bulky items in the packer
trucks. Injury problems will probably be a major issue for the
new contract negotiations scheduled to open in December, 1973.
.Guidelines for equipment operator training have been developed
but are not viewed as sufficient (see Appendix B) .
Both unions view absenteeism as a serious problem and
recommend that accumulated sick days be paid in cash. Otherwise,
workers regard these days as bonus vacation days, cbhtributing
to absenteeism rates.
26
-------
SOLID WASTE SYSTEM CHARACTERISTICS
The Sanitation Division has responsibility for the collection
of all residential solid waste generated in the city and for the
street cleaning operations of the city. Appendix c presents the
City Code and amendments for refuse collection and disposal. The
City also collects from a small number of commercial establishments,
charging a fee to defray expenses. It does not collect from the
industrial sector, such waste being collected by private haulers.
The division's collection activities include garbage, rubbish,
yard refuse, ashes, and bulky wastes. Collection of construction
and demolition waste, special wastes, animal and agricultural wastes,
and dead animals is performed as required. The city does not collect
abandoned vehicles or sewage treatment residues.
The Sanitation Division utilizes transfer stations as part
of its collection and disposal operation, transferring refuse from
packer trucks to large haulers for utlimate disposal in sanitary
landfills outside the city. The city does not operate any landfills
itself, but relies on privately owned and operated sites. Both city
and privately owned transfer stations are utilized. In addition,
once incinerator is kept open, operating at one-half capacity, to
dispose of pathological materials.
The division does not distinguish among the types of refuse
collected, but combines all categories in its regular mixed refuse
27
-------
collection. Thus, the quantities of garbage, rubbish, yard
refuse, ashes and bulky wastes, cannot be identified, Further-
more, both residential and commercial sectors are' coinbiried
in the regular mix'ed refuse collection, although there icsv also a
separate night commercial collection for" th*i' downtown busirie;sse£V
In addition to handling other collection functions as required, ip't
cleaning and weed control activities are performed by special
crews during the summer and fall months. Street cleaning,
including street flushing, mechanical sweeping, and' ha'hd sweeping,
is handled by separate crews. Snow arid ice removal services are
also provided by the Sanitation Division, drawing from employees
normally assigned to either mixed refuse or street cleaning
activities.
T6 perform these tasks, the division has'a*budgeted"staff of
1., 710 people for direct wage persbnhel, including blidgjeted" allowances
for vacat-ion, sick, and absent leaves (see"Table 3): deducting
these allowances, a minimum of 1,464 men are required daily.
However, the average number available for assignment' is currently
1,336, which represents the effective work force for the division
(see Table 4). Of these, nearly all (1,235 men) are"assigned
to the mixed refuse and street cleaning activities. The re-
maining 101 men are assigned to disposal activities, shops, route
management, and the Community Development Commission operation.
5.1: Collection Responsibilities of the Sanitation Division
Five separate aspects of the collection responsibility may
be identified for the Sanitation Division.
28
-------
TABLE 3
SANITATION DIVISION
BUDGETED MANPOWER 1973-74
(WAGE PERSONNEL)
ACTIVE MANPOWER
Refuse Collection
Yard Operations
Weed Cutting
(Private Lots, etc.)
Street Cleaning
White Wings
Weed Cutting
(Berms, etc.)
Total District Manpower
Disposal
Shops
Route Management
Vacant Lot Program
(CDC)
Snow Alert
Total Active Manpower
VACATION
SICK LEAVE
Salaried Personnel
ABSENTEES
TOTAL MANPOWER REQUIRED
ATTRITION
(2.6/wk. x 1/2)
18 Weeks
7/1-11/4
1093
64
10
146
12
7
1332
37
36
15
44
1464
84
77
1625
61
1686
24
1710
21 weeks
11/5-3/31
1093
64
19
12
TT88
37
36
15
12
1288
153
77
1518
61
1579
27
1606
13 weeks
4/1-6/30
1093
56
146
12
7
1314
37
36
15
?
1402
52
77
1531
61
1592
17
1609
Daily
Average
1093
60
4
95
12
4
1268
37
36
15
!
1356
102
77
1535
61
1596
29
-------
TABLE 4
SANITATION DIVISION MANPOWER REPORT
WAGE PERSONNEL I/
WEEK ENDED 12 August. 1973
TITLES
BUDGETED
ASSIGNED
VEHICLE OPERATOR 11
VEHICLE OPERATOR i
TRUCK DRIVER
SUB- TOTAL
DRIVER /LABORER
SANITATION LABORER
OTHER
.TOTAL ASSIGNED
TOTAL
PERSONNEL
1713
I 67
t5
336
UW
23O
980
U9
1707
TOTAL
1573
58
37
32lK
1*19
207'
93!+
"'— • • t
- '11
1573-
VACATION - SICK LEAVE - ABSENT '
TOTAL ALLOTED .
ACTUAL
VACATION
SICK LEAVE ,
ABSENT
ACTUAL VSA
AVAILABLE FOR
ASSIGNMENTS
REQUIRED DAILY
EXCESS OR (SHORTAGE
225
167
126
73
371
1336
ll*67
(131)
220
ll>5
115
76
336
1235
1335
(100)
CE
178
8
7
32
»*7
27
106
1
ifli:
21*
.15
12 ,
5
32
.3.1*9
150
Xi).
DISTRICTS
CW SE
215
13
8
3«*
55
37 ;
122
2
2l£
29
31
15
2
:U8
StS-,-- i SS£
ruS8 ;
181 ;
(13)
199
8
1
^7
56
• 18
115
1
190
28 i
17
15 '.
.8
1*0
;"JtT"^ ~ •— •••
150 :
168
(IB)
NE 1
•269
7
6
60
73
31
166
\
Z7h
38
'26
23
17
66
.1 1
208
228
(20)
N.W |
2U3
8
6
36
50
^
ll*6
1
2U2
3^
20 '
19 :
.8
U7
^ _.._.._. .1 _. . .._'
195
.208
(13)
S.WJ
188
6
1
1*1
1*3
2l*
109
1
182
27
' -3JS .
8
f:7
1*1
"i«*i
158
W
w '
28U
8
8
?U
90
25
170
1
2&
,1+0
20 '-
23 •
19
62 ••
221*
2l*2
(Ib)
DISPC6ALJ SHOPS,
Uo
k
2
1
7
..
33 ;
21
1*1
3 ;
lu ;
k
" .— ' '
18
?-3'" •
37 ;
•(i1*;)
36
—
—
l*
1*
—>
15
*6
35
—
*
.;2 ;
•»•*
-6
,29
36
(7)
ROUTE
MMiAczj-zirr
17
1
2
7
10.
11
. u
1
26
2
—
•••
**** a
26
15
11
C.D.C.
•1*4
1*
!.
•*
—
8
12
1U
..
^
- 5
2
11
23
1&
(ST
—/Do.es not include supervisory personnel
-------
5.1.1: Mixed Refuse Collection
Duties and Level of Service
Mixed refuse is collected five days per week, Monday through
Friday, in Detroit. Bulky wastes that will fit into a packer
truck, including refrigerators and other large white goods, are
collected as part of the residential mixed refuse collection
activity. Very large objects are noted by crews or supervisors
to be picked up by special bulky waste pick-up crews.
Some 80 percent of mixed refuse is collected in alleys .
and the remaining 20 percent is collected at curbside. Carry-
out service is provided for a small number of commercial estab-
lishments. Storage containers may be either metal or plastic
cans of up to 30 gallons in volume or plastic bags. However,
plastic bags may not be used for putrescible materials. No
limit is specified on the hunger of containers. Specifically
prohibited by council ordinance are 55 gallon metal drums.
All combined mixed refuse residential units are served once
per week. A total of 280 crews, each serving an average of
355 units per day, handle this task. The city has seven
distinct sanitation districts, with separate manpower, equip-
ment and yard facilities for each. Due to problems in vehicle
maintenance and the reluctance of some collection crews to work
overtime, the city has, on occasion, fallen behind schedule in
its mixed refuse collection. The initiation of the 25 yard route
concept, as discussed earlier, has helped to alleviate the man-
power problem. However, vehicle repairs still are delayed, due
to lack of skilled mechanics, resulting in an insufficient number
of vehicles. Scheduled purchase of 43 new 25 yard packers may
help this problem.
31
-------
Manpower and Equipment Allocation
For each of the 280 mixed refuse collection route's, a crew
of three men is assigned and is made up of a driver and two
sanitation laborers. The driver does not 'assist with the
collection. Some employees have a dual 'classification of tifuck
driver/sanitation laborer, so that they may be assigned as
required, depending on the total composition o'f the available work
force on any particular day. The average amount of time taken
to" complete a route is approximately 6 hours, which includes at
least two trips to the transfer stations, which are estimated to
be an average of 5 miles away from a route. Table 5 presents the
manpower and equipment allocation for the Detroit Solid waste
management system.
Combined mixed refuse collection ia performed using a mix
of 16, 20, and 25 yard packers. As noted in Table 6, the
Sanitation Division has 156 sixteen yard packers, 1S6 twenty yard
packers, and 179 twenty-five yard packers. The smaller 16 yard"
packers will eventually be phased out as the city acquires
additional 25 yard packers. It is significant that no vehicles
•were purchased in 1968 or 1971, times when the Sanitation Division
was considering major changes in its manpower and equipment policies,
i.e., the 1-man truck approach. This approach was rejected, but
the failure to purchase packer trucks in these years necessitated
a lengthening of the useful life span of existing equipment from
7 vears to 8 years.
The 7 sanitation districts are of unequal size and plans are
being made to reduce the number to 6 districts as a rfieans of equal-
izing manpower and equipment distribution.
EffJciency and Productivity
As seen in Table 7, the city collects approximately 687,285
tons of mixed refuse annually. This breaks down to about 53 pound's
32
-------
TABLE 5: MANPOWER AND EQUIPMENT ALLOCATION
Function
PERSONNEL
Sanitation Laborer
Truck Driver/
Sanitation Laborer
Truck Driver
Street Sweeper Operator/
Vehicle Operator
Supervisors
Management
TOTAL
EQUIPMENT
Packers
Open Bed
Street Sweepers
Street Flushers
Tractor Mowers
Shovel Loaders
Dempster Dumpster
Dog Wagons
o taKe
Open Body
Passenger. Cai;
Pick-ups
TOTAL
Mixed
Refuse
709^
163i>
23ll/
'•
iiosi/
466
7
3
20
504
Street
Cleaning
isi/
—
•• /
23-'
751/
iiei/
—
63
37
16
1
128
Lot Cleaning/
Weed Control
&£/& (44)-/
- —
6-/&(44)-/
. -
18
11
.
29
Bulky
Items
—
' —
5
Hand
Sweeping
.
!<£/
—
—
—
_ —
lo&A
— _
—
— —
— —
~ —
—
—
• —
Admini-
strative
—
72
8
80
A C^
HO
45
Total
743
163
254
75
72
8
1315
466
70
37
16
18
•><>
4
5
3
2
A^
21
711
10
u>
-------
TABLE 5: (Corit'd.)
Notes arid Coriurients
—'Total effective work force, based upon the avferage' number
available for assignmeiit:s each day (1,235 in wagje category),
distributed b^y relative number budgeted for each J'ob category.
rt / . , „ . -
—'Yearly average of effective work force assigned to lot clean-
ing and weed cutting> drawn from sanitation laborers budgeted
under mixed refuse and Street cleaning.
—'Yearly average of effective work force assigned to hand
s"wileping, drawn from sanitation laborers budgeted" under street
cleaning.
—'Revenue sharing funds allowed for employment of 44 men in
special lot cleaning program from April to September, 1973.
34
-------
TABLE 6: ROUTE MANAGEMENT PACKER TRUCK DISTRIBUTION
District
Central West
South West
North West
West
Central East
South East
North East
TOTALS
Total
16 yard
Trucks
20
23
31
21
17
15
29
156
1.6 yard
1965 1966
3
1 6
15
1 12
2
7
2 11
4 56
Truck
1967
o
7
7
8
3
8
7
42
8
1969
15
9
9
-
12
-
9
54
Total
20 yard
Trucks
18
19
21
23
17
16
16
130
20 yard
Trucks
1969
2
4
1
7
3
3
-
20
1970
16
15
20
16
14
13
16
110
Total
25 yard
Trucks
10
20
35
42
8
25
39
179
25 yard Trucks
1970 1972
10
2
6
2 1
7
24
30
2 80
1973
-»
18
29
39
1
1
9
97
Total
48
62
87
86
42
56
84
465
CO
-------
TABLE 7: EFFICIENCY AND PRODUCTIVITY DATA
~^~- -— — • _ Collection Function
Parameter ^ ^-.^____^^^
Community
Description
— " — -
Waste
Amounts
Collection Syatcm
Description
(inc. Level of Service)
«
t>
u
«
&
Collection
Cost/Effi-
ciency Figs..
*
Disposal
2- •
• O 0'
f-U
Misc.
Cost
Ratios .
Population Served
No. of Rosid. or Comm. Units
Str eel :.Vi lies
Alley .Miles
A:-ca (sq. mi. )
Pop. density (pco/sq.mi. )
Annual Amounts Collected (Tons)
Lbs. /unit/*k
Lbs. /person/day
Point of Collection
Frcq. of Collection
Type of Storage Container
Avg. Dist. to Disp. Site •
AVI;. Miles Drivcn/truck/day
Avg. Hours worked/day
Direct men
Crews
Crew Size ' .-.•-••
Trucks
Avg. wages and fringe for laborers
Ayg. wages and fringe for drivers
Stops /Crew/ Day
Tons/Crew/Day
Coll. Cost/resid. unit/yr.
.' Coil. Cost/oerson/yr.
Coll. Cost/ton/yr.
Total Coll. Coat/yr. y
Type it No. of Disp. Sites,
Total Diap.-Gostfyr. 8/
Total Cost/yr.
Coll. ' Expense as % of tot. Exp,
Coll. Inbor expense ns % of tot. Coll.
Coll. equip, cxoense as % of tot. Coll.
' Proc. l» Disp. cxncnsc as % ot tot. cxp.
Proc. It Uisp. labor expense as % of
tot. dlap.
Mixed Refuse
and Small
Bulky Items
Street
Cleaninff
Lot Cleaning
Weed Control
Bulky Itema
Band
Sweeping
Night
Commercial
1.511.482
• • • - ! 497.126 I/ . 1 Z70
: . -._..-... ..... 2,841 '
1.486
' 140
10.796 .
687,285 2/
53.1
2.47
alley or
curb
I/week
bags or .cans
met . or 'pla's .
5 miles
varies by day
6
1.103
280
3 • -- '
499
57,750 2/
4.5
.21
curb
resld,-5/yr
downtownr6^jrX..
N.A.
4i miles ' '
16 miles
6.5
•- lie • •••••••
- 8 ' - '
14 5/~
118
36,960 2/
2.9
.13
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
50 3/
--— 5 — "
~ 10
"?3':
60,000 2/
4.6
.21
alley or
curb
as
requested
N.A.
N.A.
"N.A.
1 ""N.A.
as necessary
N.A.
3
5'
curb
M.A.
N.A.
N.A.
H.A>.
• W.A'.
N.A.
N=. Av.
it. 65rlM
«
5 348.007
81.3
" VIO.S'H^""
7.1: ID/.
16.3
15.1 U/
Ul
-------
TABLE 7: (Cont'd, )
I/Based on 1970 Census of Housing, number of occupied units
2/Estiraated as follows:
Mixed refuse -about 80 percent of total solid waste collected
Street cleaning -25 sweepers/day x 20 yards/sweeper/day x 165
days x .7 tons/yard
Lot cleaning -32 trucks/day x 70 yards/truck/day x 165
days x .1 tons/yard
Bulky items -about 7 percent of total solid waste collected
Night commercial-abbut 1 percent of total solid waste collected
^/Includes 44 men acquired through $500,000 Revenue Sharing monies,
from Community Development Corporation (CDC) for lot cleaning
program, April through November, 1973. Program will be continued
with local funds if necessary.
£/Approximately 10 men are budgeted for this activity with additional
men from mixed refuse collection force who are unable to perform
regular route activities because of age or poor health.
5/Includes men for mechanical sweeping and flushing, hand sweeping,
and sign posting. Approximately 4 sweepers, 2 flushers, 4 hand
sweepers, and 4 sign posters make up the average crew.
iB/Estimated as follows:
Mixed refuse -248 working days/year
Street cleaning -165 working days/year
Lot cleaning -165 working days/year
Night commercia1-312 working days/year
7yCollection costs for mixed refuse, lot cleaning, bulky items,
and night commercial, are prorated by the amounts collected from
each sector for the total cost of refuse collection ($28,284,250
in 1972-73). Street cleaning costs are directly estimated from
cost statements This method is different
from the approach used in other case study efforts which base
cost allocation by manpower fractions. For Detroit, this approach
cannot be used effectively because of the policy of assigning man-
power to different functions on an "as needed" basis.
37
-------
TABLE 7: (Cont'd.)
S/Disposal costs for each sector are obtained by prorating the
amount collected from each sector for the total disposal costs
($6,516,407).
9/Percentage obtained for mixed refuse collection and .street
cleaning from cost statements. For other activities, percentage
assumed to be the same as for mixed refuse collection.
K>/ See 9 / above.
1.1./Per cent age obtained from cost .statements. Assumed to ;be the
same for all collection sectors.
3s
-------
per unit per week or just under 2.5 pounds per person per day.
Using the three man crews, the Sanitation Division is able to
average 9.9 tons per crew day. The cost of collection averages
about $35.66 per ton, relatively higher than many systems, but
comparable to other large mid-western or northern cities. However,
it is important to note that all indirect costs are included in
that figure, not merely the budgeted direct expenditures. The
cost per dwelling unit averages $49.33, somewhat higher than
other large cities, but it also includes all indirect costs. Also,
since some commercial refuse is included in these figures, it is
likely that both the quantity and dollar figures are slightly in-
flated over what would be calculated as a cost for strictly resi-
dential collection. The average number of stops per crew per day
is low for a system collecting from curbs and alleys.
5.1.2: Street Cleaning
Duties and Levels of Service
Street sweeping and flushing is performed in Detroit between
the months of April and November. Some 160 routes are defined;
each day from 15 to 30 routes are swept. Therefore, each route is
swept from 4 to 6 times per season. The downtown loop area
receives special attention, being swept 6 nights per week
between 10:30 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. In addition to the mechanical
sweepers and flushers, white wing crews also perform hand
sweeping tasks. During the summer months, street cleaning
crews also perform weed cutting tasks along major roadways.
A total of 23,200 curb miles are swept each season.
Manpower and Equipment Allocation
As shown in Table 7, an average effective work force of
116 men is currently being used for street cleaning operations.
39
-------
An additional 10 men are used in hand sweeping tasks. Employees
with a dual classification of street sweeper operator/vehicle
operator are assigned according to the requirements for each day.
Two employees are assigned to post signs on the streets to be
swept one day in advance. One crew consists of -about 14
employees operating approximately 4 mechanical brooms.
The division currently has 37 street sweepers and 16 street
flushers to handle the mechanical sweeping and flushing routes.
In addition, it has the use of some 63 open bed trucks to collect
street dirt.
^Efficiency and Productivity
An average of 43.8 tons of sweepings are collected
each day by each crew, amounting to an -annual total of about
57,750 tons. Crews drive an average of 14 miles per-day,
working 6.5 to 7 hours . The costs per ton of street waste
collected averages $45.97 or $5.34 per dwelling unit per year.
The cost of street cleaning, including all indirect costs, totaled
over $2.6 million in 1972-73.
5.1.3: Lot Cleaning/Weed Control
Duties and Level of Service
During the summer months, the city undertakes an extensive
campaign to clean and remove weeds from the city's vacant lots.
As shown in Table 8, there exist nearly 18,000 vacant lots, of which
about 3,000 are city-owned. The problem of debris accumulating on
these lots is a serious one. Some are used as illegal dumping
sites. When this service is provided by the Sanitation Division
for private lots, the landowners are billed for the costs
incurred.
40
-------
TABLE 8
VACANT LOT PROGRAM - ESTIMATED WORKLOAD AND COSTS
Vacant Lots - This Year
3,000 City surplus
1,745 Urban renewal
8,612 Private
4.582 HUD ?•.-...
17,939 Total residential lots . '
Vacant Lots - Next Year's Proiections
3,800 City surplus
2,100 Urban renewal
6,582 HUD
JB, 600 Private
21,082 Total residential lots
Vacant Lots Needing City Services
3,800 City surplus
2, 100 Urban renewal
4,300 Private (est. 1/2 total)
10,200 Total
Est. 1/3 of 104200 need debris removal = 3,400 lots
* ^ • •
Est, average debris removal cost per lot - $250.
3,400 x $250 = $850,000 Total debris removal cost
Weed Cutting (3 cuttings per lot, 2 cuttings for those
with debrir. removal)
Est. weed cutting cost = $35 per lot per cutting
3,400 x 2 cuttings x $35 = $273,000
6,800 x 3 cuttings x $35 = 714, OOP
Total $987,000
Debris removal $ 850,000
Weed cutting 987.000
Total cost $ 1,837,000
-------
Manpower and Equipment Allocation
During the summer, an average of 10 laborers are assigned
each day .to lot cleaning. These men are drawn from the regular
pool of sanitation laborers, who also work in ;mixed refuse collec-
tion, .street cleaning, etc. A $500,000 portion of Revenue Sharing
monies was recently allocated to employ 44 men from April to Septem-
ber 1973 to assist with the lot cleaning program. An Additional 20
men were employed in the weed control program. From November to
April, the activity is discontinued, and the work force is assigned
to other tasks, e.g., snow and ice removal.
Most Jobs are done on a work order from the Enyironm.e;ntal
Enforcement group of the Sanitation Division. This group issues
orders to individual property owners requiring them tQ clean Up
the property within 10 days. If they fail to comply, the
Sanitation Division is instructed to clean thje lot, billing the
property owner for the costs. If an individual district has
enough lots that need cleaning, an individual crew will be set
up, consisting of 8 to 9 men, 2 front end loaders, 2 dirt trucks,
and a mowing machine. Table 9 depicts a summary of the annual
activities of the Environmental Enforcement Division for Fiscal
Year 1973.
This collection function requires the use of approximately
18 tractor mowers and 11 shovel loaders.
Efficiency and Productivity
The Sanitation Division normally cleans from 600 to 700
lots per year, but with the additional revenue sharing monies
made available, over 3,700 lots were cleaned in 1973. Funds
for this program have been spent, but the Community Development
Corporation, which coordinated the program, has made a proposal
that this extra effort be continued with local funds, estimated
to cost just under $2 million per year. No data on the quanti-^
ties of refuse removed from the lot clearing activity were avail-
able.
42
-------
TABLE 9: ANNUAL ACTIVITY SUMMARY FOR
ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT GROUP
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT
(Litter-Weed Control ANNUAL REPORT - Fiscal Period Beginning
July 1, 1972 thru June 30, 1973)
Complaint Office
Complaint Field
Field Pick-ups
Reinspections
No Entry to Premises
Consultative
Education Field Visits
Weed Complaints
Weed Field Pick-ups
Weed Reinspections
Weed Court Notices Served
Court Notices Served
TOTAL STOPS
Field Orders issued
Void Notices - Litter
Contact Notices Issued
Certified Letters
Weed Notices Issued
Void - Weeds
Abaited Notices
No Cause for Action
Work Orders Issued
Court Notices Filed
Records Investigation
Special Detail
Weed Abatements
Weed Record Investigations
COURT SUMMARY
Total Number Court Cases
Warrants
Number Fined
Adjourned
Suspended Sentence
Dismissed W/O Prejudice
Jailed/Probation
Bonded
Amount inFines
15,489
335
57,228
76,895
15,937
1,064
2,004
769
2
4,609
14
2.834
177,180
63,883 (Violation
499
6,810
236
78
69
46,470
4,723
633
2,396
7,330
953
1,210
1,049
2,804
1,683
664
246
144
113
1
0
$11,568.00
Notices)
-------
Duties and Level of Service
Sanitation Division provides special coliection service
to the downtown commercial establishteents.. It serves 5 routes,
with an average 'off 54 iinits-jtir 'ftftHh $9i.& •fc^ii.^'Sfd .
connnercial units. Collection is provided 6 nigbts per week. ..
Collection requirements are the sane afi for the regular mixed :;
' ' '
Manpower and Equipment Allocation . •',.;•
Night conHnercial customers are served by 5 efewS, made up ' :
of 3 workers each. Vehicles from the regular fleet of packer
trucks are used for this service. The letierth of a route varies
by;the anticipated weight, average completion time IB 5.5 to 8
hoursj;and 2 trips are made to the transfer stations. . . •.'
Efficiency and Productivity ..' '- •• •'.•./>.. '.-' .' I,,: . . .
. ' the night commercial crews coilect ah average of 5.5 tons
per Mght, significantly lower than the 9.9 tons per day collected
by the regular mixed refuse cre^s. No indication of the reasons
for this 111ferfehce iSfere
5.1 -.'* : • merit %hd See
. This activity is performed as required usitt^
and equipment resources available to the Sanitation Division.
rins-, Wa t %hvbi;v% 5^-^sMi*^'.^:.iiii^;ii^^ '
-------
hours during a major storm, Qbyious.ly, during these times mixed
refuse collection is interrupted,
Existing vehicles are converted, i.e., plows are attached to
the packer trucks, and sanding and salting machines are placed
on open trucks. About 60 open trucks and 120 packers would
normally be used. One labor relations problem related to this
area is that, while men are paid overtime if they work more than
an eight hour day, they are not paid for standby time if they
are called in before a storm hits and have to v/alt. The unions
are sensitive to this issue.
Efficiency and Productivity
No measures of efficiency or productivity are currently
available for this activity.
5.2: Quality of Service
The quality of service provided by the Sanitation Division
appears to be generally satisfactory. No major problems have
arisen that have caused a breakdown in the system, or an abnormal
number of complaints from residents. The most significant problem
in recent years has been the failure to complete routes causing
a back-log and the accumulation of refuse. This has beep
partially solved by the introduction of the productivity measures
for each route. However, during the summer of 1972, when the
Sanitation workers were attempting to modify the working require-
ments regarding: overtime, citizen complaints were extremely high.
Most complaints were concerned with missed service, since the re-
luctance to work overtime led to the failure to complete routes.
Although the system appears to be relatively costly, it is
more likely a result of high wages rather than inherent ineffic-
iencies. Since refuse collection is generally a highly labor in-
tensive activity, the costs of labor largely determine the overall
costs of the system.
45
-------
The new routing system, using the 45 yard route concept,
has largely solved the problem of overtime, although occasional
needs for overtime still arise and are still resisted by
th6 sanitation laborers. The old task incentive System, formerly
used, has been abandoned, which may cause ah increase in man-
power and, obviously, costs for the system;
5.3: Labor Management Relations
The work force of the Sanitation Division is represented
by two distinct unions. Th'e' Teatasters Statej County, a:nd Muhici-
•jpai Workers, Local No. 214, represents all truck drivers and all-
ied classes of workers. Included under this bargairii'ng unit are
sanitation employees classified as truck drivers, vehicle opera-
tors I, II, and III, Street Surveyor Operatori and Bulldozer
Operator. All sanitation laborers are represented by the American
Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Michigan
District Council 77 Local 26.
The Teamsters Local 214 is presently working under ah agree-
ment scheduled to expire November 30, 1975, while the AFSCME Local
26 agreement expires June 30, 1974. Bargaining sessions are now
under way with the AFSCME unit.
The unions have negotiated an "agency shop", which is per-
miVted by the State Public Employment Delations Act, in their
current contracts. In an agency shop, covered employees who are
not members of the unions must pay a service charge equal to the
monthly union dues to the union, this, of course, lias the effect
of encouraging ^11 employees to become union members. The city
does provide dues check-off for the respective uftiofos.
-------
Established grievance procedures are used to settle contract
disputes. The city's Labor Relations Board acts as the mediating
agency for all disputes that are unresolved by lower levels of
negotiation. Arbitration may be utilized as a last resort to
resolve a grievance, but only if both parties agree, Under terms
spelled out in the Michigan Public Employment Relations Act of
1965 (see Appendix A), public employees are forbidden to strike.
And both agreements specifically state that the unions may not
engage in strikes (or management in lock-out). However,
such provisions are viewed by both labor and management as being
without force. As has happened elsewhere, public employees
.do hold strikes. A brief 2-day walk-out occurred in 1971
by the sanitation workers over the failure to reach agreement
on wage rates. No other strike actions have occurred in recent
years.
Present labor agreements have very strong fringe benefit
provisions. In addition to regular vacation, sick and holiday
leaves, employees also receive extensive hospitalization -
medical coverage, workmen's compensation, layoff benefit plan,
group insurance programs, longevity pay, death benefits, an
eye care program, and income protection. It is estimated that
fringe benefits involve about 37 percent of the total labor
costs for the entire Sanitation Division, including both salaried
and direct wage personnel. The non-payable costs for pension,
hospitalization, social security, and other fringe benefits
account for over 27 percent alone and budgeted leave accounts
for the remaining 10 percent. Table 10 presents the fringe
benefits for the Teamster and AFSCME members. Direct wages for
both refuse collection and street cleaning wage personnel
average in excess, of $10,500 annually. Direct wages for a
sanitation laborer are $4.82 per hour, for a truck driver about
$4.84 per hour.
47
-------
TABLE 10: FRINGE BENEFITS FOR UNION MEMBERS
Benefit
: Senior ity •
Vacations
AFSCUE
Teamsters;
Seniority list based on length of service
after initial probationary period. '.
First Year
Ten days per year
Two to Five Years
Fifteen days per year
Five to Fifteen Years
One additional day for each year to maximum
of 30 uuys per year
; . (Plus five days for those with more than 50
days of accumulated sick leave) . ;
; sick l,eave
Holidays
Funeral leave
Hospital ixat ion and
' iledlcal Coverage
Croup Life Insurance
Income Protection Plan
Longevity Pay
Death Benefits
Jury Duty
Leave of Absence
Three to five days ..
Eight regular holidays
Two swing holidays
One day for U. L. King's Birthday
Three to five days
Employer pays 100* of
: Blue Cross ward rate.,
but city will pay only
$12.00 per year for
City Kye Care Insurance
Program
City contribution de-
termed by Employee
Benefit Eoard
Yearly Pay Insurance
<$ 5000 $ 3000
5000-7500 5000
7500-10,000 7500
10,000 10,000
(Up to $1500 for each
dependent)
Employer pays. 100% of
Blue Cross ward rate, :
eye and dental care, for
employee, and dependents
City pays 43£/$1000/mo.
Employee pays remainder
Yearly Pay. Insurance
<$ 5000 $ 3050
5000-7500 6250
7500-10,000 9375
10.000 12,500
(Up to $1500 for each
dependent)
To be instituted by City .
Step 1 - > 11 years: $150/year
Step 2 - > 16 years: $300/year
Step 3 - > 21 years: $4SO/year
City pays $14.56 per year toward mandatory
benefit of $4,900. Employee pays $13.00
annually. Duty dealth benefit of $2,500 paid
by city.
Paid difference between Jury pay and salary
At descretion of City
lor physical/mental
Illness, maternity,
training or Peace
Corps Service
48
-------
Absenteeism continues to be a major problem for the
Sanitation Division management. Current reports indicate that for
the Sanitation Division's direct wage personnel, the daily ayerage
number of man-days lost to vacation, sick, or absent totals 371,
some 146 days greater than the budgeted total of 225 man-days.
This has caused the Division to operate continuously below the
minimum level of required men, .necessitating more overtime
than would otherwise be required. Absenteeism may be due to
two causes: first, each employee receives 17 sick days per year
which are convertible to bonus vacation days if they are not
used; second, the problem of combined refuse and bulky item
collection contributes to both injuries and sick days. Unions
feel that the city should pay for the unused sick days to help
alleviate their misuse.
Tenure data indicates that a low turnover rate is present
in the work force. Attrition averages only 2.6 employees
per week for the division, but does aggrevate the shortage
'of manpower caused by absenteeism.—'
The unions are trying to get the city to institute a
training program to alleviate some of the accident problems.
The heavy loads (trying to pack a 25 yard truck in two hours)
and the problem of jockeying the 25 yard trucks in alleys add
to the accident problem.
The Teamsters have developed a highly detailed system of
classifying types of truck drivers based on the skill levels
required to operate equipment. This set of operator skill
definitions, by class of equipment, has been made part'of the
contract and creates a large hierarchy of driver classifications
—'Detailed tenure, absenteeism and injury data were not avail-
able at the time of site visit. Data were being prepared by
Detroit at the time this report was prepared.
-------
Another Teamster achievement is the establishment of pay
rates based on the average prevailing rate for comparable non-
public sector jobs. Specific local firms are named in the
contract and their pay rates are used as a basis for calculating
city pay rates. A formula is used to calculate the final rate
based on the specified set of private sector employees.
Currently, the drivers receive 95 percent of the "formula" rate
and will seek to have this increased to 100 percent for fiscal
year 1975.
5>4: Disposal Methods - Present and Planned
The City of Detroit relies principally on transfer stations
for its method of disposal. As mentioned earlier, the closing
of three of the city's incinerators in 1971 has led to the
establishment of transfer stations, both public and private, for
the transfer of refuse to be ultimately disposed of by contrac-
tors in private landfills outside the city. The remaining
incinerator operates at only one half capacity-, and is used for the
disposal of pathological wastes.
The city operates one transfer station, the Southfield
site, which handles from 650 to 950 tons per day. The city
contracts with a private hauler to remove the refuse from the
transfer station to the landfill. The present hauling contract
with Backman, Inc., expires June 30, 1974. The hauler is re-
^Lmbursed at the rate of $4.74 per ton, and has access to three
landfill sites. The Southfield site employes 9 men from the
Sanitation Division.
The city also operates an "open relay station", the East
Central Relay, which receives from 2,000 to 4,000 cubic yards
of solid waste per day. The refuse is transferred from an open
concrete dumping slab into truck trailers for disposal at land-
fill sites. The contract with the hauler, Backman, Inc., calls
for a specified rate per mile; no volume or tonnage rates are in-
volved. Because of the inefficient and technically obsolete way
50
-------
in which the refuse is handled at this facility, this station
is costly to operate and will be closed down with the opening of
a new private transfer station in November, 1973.
The city-operated St. Jean's incinerator handles about 150
tons of special wastes per day, requiring approximately 15
Sanitation Division employees. No efforts at resource recovery
are attempted at this location. In addition, the city operates
a brush burner at St. Jean's and Southfield for the disposal of
brush and related wastes. About 400 cubic yards per day are handled,
requiring 4 employees for each of the two shifts.
The remaining disposal sites are transfer stations operated
by the private sector. The largest, Metropolitan Transfer
Center, is contracted to handle 1,500 to 2,000 tons per day from
the city. The average city tonnage has generally been about
1,800 tons per day. The operator, J. Fons Company, Inc., operates
the facility 5 days per week, and receives $5.50 per ton from the
city for receiving, hauling, and disposing of the refuse. The con-
tract was initiated in June, 1973, for three years, with option to
renew for a fourth and fifth year, at an increased rate. Since
the transfer station opened, it has experienced no trouble
handling any amount of refuse delivered by the city. Operation is
efficient, and waiting time for weighing and load discharge is
minimal. The site is very clean and well-run.
The Reitzloff Transfer Station is considerably smaller
and operates under a contract to handle from 150 to 300 tons per
day. The current rate is $5.88 per ton. Similarly, the B and R
Transfer Station is under contract to receive from 150 to 300 tons
per day, at a rate of $5.95 per ton. In each of the contracts with
the private operators, the city may exercise a penalty if the sta-
tion is unable to handle the maximum designated capacity. Table 2
in Chapter 2 summarizes the transfer station cost and volume data.
51
-------
As noted, the city does not operate any landfill sites.
Private transfer station operators and private haulers are re-
quired to make all arrangements for the ultimate disposal of re-
fuse in the landfill sites. Some private operators also own and
operate their landfill sites. Nearly all sites are located in
the outlying areas of Wayne County or in adjacent counties, at
some distance from the transfer stations. Since the sites are
privately owned, there has not been the negative public reaction
that might have resulted if the city had attempted to directly
acquire and operate these sites. Surrounding counties have been
vocal in their opposition to accepting Detroit's solid waste even
though many are doing just that under the current system.
The Sanitation Division has no responsibility for the waste
once it is discharged at the transfer stations. This, of course,
has been an issue of some concern to other organizations, most
notably SEMCQG, since it holds the view that public agencies must
become directly involved in the planning and selection of disposal
methods. The landfill method is fast losing local acceptance.
according to SEMCQG, and alternatives must be explored (see
discussion in Chapter 4.)
5.5 Equipment Description
The Sanitation Division has an extensive fleet of a wide
variety of vehicles used to perform the collection activities in
Detroit. As shown in Table 5, (Section 5.1.1) the majority of
vehicles are packer trucks with 16, 20, or 25 yard capacities.
The division also has 78 six-ton or larger dump trucks, 36 street
sweepers, 29 tractors, and 19 street flushers, in addition to
special vehicles and passenger cars allotted to the division.
52
-------
The Public Works Department owns all of the vehicles listed;
all maintenance and repair work is done by the Motor Transportation
Division, also a part of the Department of Public Works. Table 11
presents the six month operating costs for all Sanitation Division
vehicles; Type 22 vehicles are packers, which exhibit an average
annual operating and maintenance cost of $8,388. The Motor Trans-
portation Division services all city vehicles except Fire Depart-
ment vehicles. The present listing will shortly be.augmented with
the purchase of 43 additional 25 yard packers.
5.5.1: Financing and Cost
All new and replacement equipment is funded from a line item
expenditure in the current General Fund account. No sinking fund
or depreciation account is utilized for these purchases. Packers
are currently being retired after 8 years. Expenditures for motor
vehicle equipment purchases currently average about 5 percent of
the total budgeted Sanitation Division expenditures. However,
since the division is currently trying to make up for the two
years it failed to purchase vehicles, it is likely that vehicle
purchases will become an increasingly significant part of the
total expenditures.
5.5.2: vehicle Maintenance Policies
The Motor Transportation Division, which has an exception-
ally able management staff, has a regular schedule of preventive
maintenance policies for the Sanitation Division packers. The 25
yard packers receive inspection and lubrication every 1,000 miles
or 30 days. The inspection covers 20 specific points, e.g., oil
pans, power steering, power take-off and transmissions, drivetrains,
etc. For the 20 yard and 16 yard packers, lubrication and oil
change is performed every 30 days or 1,000.miles. However, the man-
power shortage truncates the full 20 point inspection that is
53
-------
TABLE 11: COLLECTION VEHICLE OPERATING COSTS
Type
00
01
02
05
OG
07
OS
09
11
15
22
23
24
26
27
28
2.9
35
36
37
.43
45
•: 46
47
48
49
NO.
2
2
29
17
3
3
1
3
1
6
78
487
1
29
19
36
3
7
2
5
1
15
4.
10
7
4
1
781
'-
MPG
18.0
12.1
9.0
9.9
9.2
11.0
11.3
9.5
5.4
3.1
2.6
1.9
• -
1.9
.2
8.1
4.1
6.7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
»»•— -^— —
Opr
CPM
5.44
3.21
3.40
2.99
3.01
5.54
3.91
5,49
9.00
12.44
11.06
15.04
. -
15.66
36.06
4.76
7.60
6.03
15.91
0
o;
0
19.95
0
0
0
_ . •- ••
Maint.
CPM
.33
2.93
3.59
4.12
2.98
.96
3.52
5.10
19.79
23.61
24.03
22.04
-
25.03
64.09
8.25
15.55
1.46
24.35
0
0
0
55.68'
0
0
0
"
Total
CPM
6.26
8.57
10.31
10.76
8.98
7.74
10.60
15.19
49.77
57.25
57.04
63.89
-
67.03
86.13
22.72
35.08
9.50
41.89
o
0
0
16.19
0
0
0
••i 'i"
'
Miles
18,083
322,561
140,106
26,726
47,645
6,051
35,177
7,386
25,416
481,113
3,580,379
6,246
-
58,179
9,795
28,015
44 , 456
11,695
3 , 330
•
- • •
-
7,472
-
-
_
4,859,871
Gallons
Gas
24
1,000
26 . '302
15,557
2,693
5,155
551
3,098
777
4,683
150,473
1,376', 885
3 , 228
9,486
30 , 283
46,358
3,444
10,642
1 , 742
-
»•
7,837
-
-
9
27
12
1,700,581
Qts.
Oil
96
16
728
421
65
18
27
121
61
381
6,458
56,110
95
875
1,375
3,048
191
858
54
. -
-
860
-
103
' 284
297
3.4
72,716
•"•
Overhead
2,700
87
7,803
4,647
972
1,389
75
1,115
339
5,330
101,970
786,027
1,674
18,777
15,326
155,346
2,718
5,305
235
54
•
18 , 494
390
3,030
6,156
8,932
__ 4.51
1,149,342
"" Qpr~.
Cost
355
985
10,383
4,774
801
1.435
338
1.376
406
2,288
59 . 868
356.040
940
6,198
9.111
13,328
1 , 336
3,379
706
530
154
37,977
475
1,491
987
1,093
228
522,982 1
Maiht .
Cost
1 , 992
60
9,476
5,031
1,103
1,423
55
1,239
377
5,032
113,605
860,497
1,377
15,861
14,563
162,998
2,313
6,515
171
811
-
16,851:
466
4 , 161
5,090
7,409
328
,239,208
Total
Cost
5.047
1,132
27,662
14,452
2,876
4,247
472
3,730
1,122
12,650
275,443
2,042,564
3,991
40,836
39,000
331,672
6,367
15,599
1,112
1,395
154
39,322
1,331
8,682
12,333
17,434
1.007
2,911,532
-------
provided for the 25 yard packers. Maintenance occurs only at times
when vehicles break down.
One of the major problems in the solid waste management
system is the difficulty in keeping an adequate number of packers
operational. Several causes were identified, the most significant
o
being the shortage of skilled maintenance workers to repair the
vehicles. Although the number of vehicles serviced by the Motor
Transportation Division has risen nearly 25 percent in the past
decade, the number of mechanics has actually declined. Added to
this is the increased complexity of the vehicles (pollution control
valve systems, etc.) which requires more extensive and intricate
maintenance work. Although the Motor Transportation Division has
recently been called before the Common Council to discuss the de-
lays in repairs and has presented its case in terms of the short-
age of manpower, no resolution of the problem seems to be forth-
coming .
Another factor in the vehicle maintenance problem has been
the practice of loading large bulky items in the packer trucks
along with the regular mixed refuse. Although the Heil packers
can handle bulky waste if loaded properly, it appears that col-
lectors are often careless in loading and compacting these items,
causing the compacting mechanism to fail. This adds to the main-
tenenace problem. The Motor Transportation staff also reports that
they will shortly run out of sufficient floor space to handle the
repair volume and that more modern tools are necessary.
It may be noted that on a per unit basis the maintenance
and operating costs are not unusual in magnitude. However, it
seems that even though maintenance needs are high, which would be
reflected in high maintenance costs, the work is simply being
delayed. Table 12 illustrates the number of trucks awaiting
repair at the time of the site visit. Thirty-nine of the 179,
twenty-five cubic yard trucks (21 percent) and 167 of the total
of 466 packers (37 percent) were in a "down" status.
55
-------
TABLE 12: PACKER TRUCKS AWAITING REPAIR
PACKER SIZE
16 yd3
20 yd3
25 yd3
Total Per District
DISTRICT
East
Central
10
13
3
26
South
East
5
4
2
11
North
East
13
5
6
24
West
Central
7
14
4
25
South
West
9
8
2
27
North
West
14
5
11
30
West
13
10
11
34
Total
71
57
39
167
l/l
-------
The Motor Transportation Division has streamlined proced-
ures over the past few years, in order to minimize the effect of
the manpower shortage, but is still unable to perform the required
maintenance without delays. With such extensive vehicle down
time, the Sanitation Division has been forced to use older vehicles,
or has been delayed in completing regular routes.
5.5.3: Vehicle Replacement Policies
As' noted, packer trucks are currently on an 8 year replace-
ment program. Previously, packers were retired after 7 years, but
the failure to purchase vehicles in 1968 and 1971 necessitated
the extension of the useful life. The purchase of new 25 yard
packers may allow the division to return to & useful life of 7
years.
The decision to purchase vehicles is made by the Motor Trans-
portation Division staff, in conjunction with the Sanitation Divi-
sion management. Specifications and delivery terms are prepared
for competitive bidding. Bids are requested from leading manu-
facturers; the lowest responsible bid is accepted. In 1971, one
of the years that purchase of vehicles was delayed, a low bid
was submitted by a company with whose vehicles the city had exp-
erienced problems in handling the bulky wastes. Since the
Sanitation Division felt they could not refject the bid out-
right yet did not wish to purchase additional vehicles from this
firm, vehicle purchases were delayed. At this time, the feasi-
bility of the 1-man truck operation was being explored.
When vehicles are no longer useful to the Sanitation
Division, they are either traded for new vehicles or re-allocated
to another department, such as the Parks Department, for their
programs.
57
-------
13.6: Financial Aspects of the Detroit Solid Waste Management
System
The municipal solid waste management system of Detroit cur-
rently relies on the General Fund as its sole funding source.
Although the solid waste management system does collect some
revenues directly for services rendered, these monies are con-
tributed to the General Fuad and are not earmarked for solid
«
waste operations. In the past, the system has made use of addi-
tional funding sources from Federal and State governments, and
bonds have been utilized for the acquisition of capital assets.
However, capital equipment, such as motor vehicles, are purchased
on a current funds basis; they would appear as a line item in the
current year's budget.
The development of the budget is coordinated by the Budget
Office for the city, but each department is responsible for the
preparation of its own budget request. Using standard forms and
instructions supplied by the Budget Office, the Department of
Public Works estimates its program needs for the coming fiscal
year. Included in the formulation of the budget is the previous
year's data, costs for each operational unit, projected percent-
age changes, expansion of services, etc. Although the capital
budget will include a 5 year projection, the operating budget is
prepared only for the coming fiscal year. The budget, as cur-
rently developed, essentially is a very traditional line-item
budget: it does not include the program budget concepts based
on grouping major expenditure categories by function and activity.
It lists all expenditures by department or divisional breakdowns.
This tends to understate the true costs of the sanitation services,
since indirect expenditures and services contributed by other
departments are not stated in the budget document. However, in
cost statements prepared every 4 weeks, these items are included,
so that the actual costs are computed, at least for cost accounting
58
-------
and management purposes, if not for budgetary consideration. The
Department of Public Works does accumulate extensive data on a
regular basis, reflecting current cost of operations at a very
detailed level.
5.6.1: Sources of Revenue
The General Fund finances all the operations of the Sani-
tation Division in Detroit, excluding Federal and State monies
that have been available in the past. For the General Fund,
Detroit utilizes several tax sources, as shown in Table 13 for
1972. General property taxes made up about 35 percent of the
revenues for the General Fund. Other major sources include a
city income tax, a utility users tax, shared taxes and grants,
and other revenues. The category "shared taxes and grants" is
composed of Federal and State grants and other assistance. "Other
revenues" is made up of miscellaneous city revenue sources, prin-
cipally from hospital and clinic services, departmental sales and
charges for current services, and traffic and other ordinance fines
Revenues raised from the operation of the Sanitation Divi-
sion for the past 5 years are shown in Table 14. Of note is the
revenue raised from commercial refuse, about $1.17 million in 1972.
These revenues are derived from the user charges the city levies
for refuse collection from commercial establishments. The rate
is currently $.35 per bushel, with a 20 bushel exemption. The
number of commercial stops is presently about 6,200, down sig-
nificantly from a level of 10,000 accounts of five years ago due
to increased competition from private sector collectors.
The Sanitation Division views this service not as a large
revenue raising source, but rather as a service to small com-
mercial establishments who would otherwise need to obtain more
costly private pick-up service. However, the division has raised
59
-------
TABLE 13
(SENEIUL FUND
ffiOTS OF REVENUE
Jurao 36,
CSaosltlcotlon
General Property Taxes and Interest:
Current Year
Prior Years
Interest
Total General Property Taxes and Interest
CUy Income Taxes
Utility Users EstclBQ Tax
Year Ended June '
SB72-
276,150
§',2
-------
TABLE 14: REVENUES RAISED BY SANITATION DIVISION OBJECTIVES
DETROIT, MICHIGAN, 1968 to 1972
Reimbursed Highway
Maintenance - State
Reimbursed Construction
and Maintenance
Commercial Refuse
Disposal
Miscellaneous
Total
1972
269,928
86,680
1,169,307
18,029
1,543,944
1971
349,114
98 , 392
1,345,400
12,111
1,805,017
1970
341,525
55,677
1,938,073
4,161
2,339,436
1969
194,020
19 , 302
1,535,417
2,083
1,750,822
1968
235,347
24,729
1,306,836
2,389
1,569,301
-------
the rates for commercial pick-up several times in recent years,
and another proposed rate increase is now pending before the
Common Council. Ho dowbt, these rate iacreases are a factor in
the decrease in the mMBiber of coasasercial stops served by the city.
Federal reveaue sources used in part to finance Sanitation
Division Services include: the Interim Assistance Program-
Revenue Sharing; the Baergency Employment Program; and, the
Environmental Improvement Program. The present lot- clearing
program, coordinated with the Community Development Commission,
providing 44 mea aad TOS " f inanced'^ith Revenue" Sharing Funds of
$500,000.
5.6.2: Expenditures.
The Sanitation Division expenditures are monitored by means
of monthly cost stat©E@ate which list both line item direct
expenditures and indirect costs, and the mohthy and year-to-
date expenditures for the current year and the preceding year
(see Appendix H). Daily requests for expenditures are monitored
for both appropriateness and availability of funds. Expenditures
to all departments are allotted quarterly.
In Table 15, a summary of total Sanitation Division
Expenditures for the previous 5 years is presented by Detroit.
Appendix N presents th© dcstailed line item budgeted for Fiscal
Year 1973-74. Listed are all costs involved in Sanitation Divi-
sion activities, inclwdiag indirect and direct costs budgeted to
other divisions, such a$ the Motor Transportation Division costs.
As can be seen, the solid waste collection activity com-
prises nearly 70 percent of the total costs. Solid waste dis-
posal activities account for 16 percent, while street cleaning
is just over 6 percent. Collection expenditures have shown the
largest increase over the past 5 years, rising 45 percent dur-
that period. Overall, Sanitation Division costs have risen
nearly 39 percent in five years, unadjusted for inflation.
62
-------
TABLE 15
EXPENDITURE SUMMARY FOR SANITATION DIVISION
BY ACTIVITY, DETROIT, MICHIGAN
1969 to 1973
1973^ 1972 1971 1970 1969
Refuse Collection $28,284,250 $25,457,580 $22,855,365 $22,496,492 $19,681,841
Refuse Disposal 6,516,407 6,340,711 5,831,041 6,885,592 6,185,061
Street Cleaning 2,654,694 1,894,520 2,149,554 2,321,410 1,877,860
Services & Materials to Others 176,068 94.569 247,403 126,480 47,253
Environmental Enforcement 1,636,891 984,777 -
Snow and Ice Removal 1,145,920 1,115,430 2,056,440 2,236,587 1,015,150
Commercial Refuse Inspection 369,245 257,268
TOTAL $40,413,230 $35,887,587 $33,139,440 $34,435,806 $29,070,075
—'Projected for 52 weeks, based on actual costs for 44 weeks.
-------
As seen in Table 16, wages and salaries account for most of
the solid waste collection Costs. Nearly two-thirds of the to-
tal costs fall in this category. When fringe benefits, which
account for nearly 24 percent of total costs are added, direct
labor costs amount to over 90 percent of total collection ex-
penditures. Detroit's solid waste management system is highly-
labor intensive arid equipment depreciation is not considered
as an operating cost. While total collection costs'have in-
creased by 45 percent in 5 years, wages and salaries have in-
creased by 37 percent, 4ad fringe benefits have increased by
109 percent. The effects of the very substantial fringe bene-
fit package that has been won through strong unionization is
quite evident in these figures.
64
-------
TABLE 16
COSTS FOR REFUSE COLLECTION BY OBJECT CODE;
DETROIT, MICHIGAN
1969 to 1973
Ul
Wages and Salaries
Fringe Benefits
Materials, Supplies
Equipment
Other
1973 1972 1971 1970 1969
$18,828,875 $16,867,716 $15,354,090 $14,676,777 $13,735,437
6,773,035 6,106,469 4,504,453 4,757,755 3,239,513
167,969 153,763 137,246 114,614 113,884
2,013,004 1,717,008 2,306,027 2,395,006 2,312,252
501,367 612,624 553,549 552,340 280,755
$28,284,250 $25,457,580 $22,855,365 $22,496,492 $19,681,841
-------
APPENDICES.
66
-------
APPENDIX A
MICHIGAN PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS ACT
67
-------
336 of Jhe Public Acts of 1947 es emended.
Aa act to prohibit strikes by certain public employees; to provide
review from disciplinary action rrith respect thereto; to provide fop the
mediation of grievances and the holding of elections; to declare and
protect the rights and privileges of public employees; and to prescribe
means of enforcement and penaltiea for the violation of the provisions
of thio aet.
The People of She State of Michigan enact:
17.459(1) Strike defined.
See. 1. Ao used in this aet tSu> woixll "otrifce" ohall mean the eoneeFtwi
failure to report for duty, the wilful absence from one'o position, the
ntopp.ipe of work, or the abstinence in whole or in part from the full,
faithful and proper performance of the dutieo of employment, fop i\\s
purpose of inducing, influencing or coercing a change in the conditions?,
OF compensation, or the pigfita, pHTiJegcg OP obligntionn of eaiplovnspnt.
Kothing contained in thio act ohall bs construed to limit, impair or
affect the rfghfc of any pofolte employes to the exppesgiora op communica-
tion of e view, grievance, cosapiaint OP opinion oa nny matter related to
the conditions or compensation of public employment or their bsttep-
ment, so long ns the name is not designed to and does not interfere with
the full, faithful and proper performance of the duties of employment.
17.455(2) Strikes by publie employees prohibited.
See. 2. Ko person holding a position by appointment OP employment
Sn the government of the atate of. Michigan, op in the government of any
"1 or more of the political subdivision!) thereof, or in the publie ochooi
serrice, OP in any public or special district, or in the service of nny
authority, commission, OP board, or in any other branch of the public
service, hereinafter called a "public employee," shall strike.
17.455(3) Authorizing strike, etc., unlawful.
Sec. 3. No person exercising any authority, supervision OP direction
over any public employee shall have the power to authorize, approve OP
consent to a strike by public employees, and ouch person shall not au-
thorize, approve or consent to such strike, nor shall any ouch person
discharge or cause any public employee to be discharged or Qeparated
from his OP her employment because of participation in the submission
of a grievance in accordance \
-------
VD
employees in the exercise of thrir rights guaranteed in section 9; (b) to
initiate, create, dominate, contribute to or interfere with the formation
or administration of any labor organization: Provided, That a public
employer shall not be prohibited from permitting employees to confer
•with it during working hours without loss of time or pay; (c) to dis-
criminate in regard to hire, terms or other conditions of employment in
order to encournge or discourage membership in a labor organization;
(d) to discriminate against a public employee because he has given testi-
mony or instituted proceedings under this net; or (e) to refuse to bargain
collectively with the representatives of its public employees, subject to
the provisions of section 11.
17.455(11) Exclusive bargaining representatives; rights of individual
employees.
Sec. 11. Representatives designated or selected for purposes of col-
lective bargaining by the majority of the public employees in a unit ap-
propriate for such purposes, shall be the exclusive representatives of all
the public employees in such unit for the purposes of collective bargain-
ing in respect to rates of pay, wages, hours of employment or other con-
ditions of employment, and shall be so recognized by tho public employer:
Provided, That any individual employee at .any time may present
grievances to his employer and have the grievances adjusted, without in- •
tervention of the bargaining representative, if the adjustment is not
inconsistent with the terms of a collective bargaining contract or agree-
ment then in effect, providexl that the bargaining representative has been
given opportunity to be present at such adjustment.
17.455(12) Petition; investigation; hearing; election; stipulation for
consent election; procedure.
Sec. 12. Whenever a petition shall have been filed, in accordance
with such regulations as may be prescribed by the board:
(a) By a public employee or group of public employees, or an indi-
vidual or labor organization acting in their behalf, alleging that 30%
or more of the public employees within a unit claimed to be appropriate
for such purpose wish to be represented for collective bargaining and that
their public employer declines to recognize their representative as the
representative defined in section 11, or assert that the individual or labor
organization, which has been certified or is being currently recognized
by their public employer as the bargaining representative, is no longer a
representative as defined in section 11; or
(b) By a public employer or his representative alleging that 1 or
:more individuals or labor organizations have presented to him a claim
to be recognized as the representative defined in section 11;
the board shall investigate the petition aud, if it has reasonable cause
to believe that a question of representation exists, shall provide nn ap-
propriate hearing after due notice. If the board finds upon the record
of the hearing that such a question of representation exists, it shall
direct an election by secret ballot and shall certify the results thereof.
Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit the waiving of
hearings by stipulation for the purpose of a consent election in conformity
with the rules and regulations of the board.
24
17.455(13) Bargaining unit; status of fire fighting personnel.
Sec. 13. The board shall decide in each case, in order to insure public
employees the full benefit of their right to self-organization, to collective
bargaining and otherwise to effectuate the policies of this act, the unit
appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining as provided in sec-
tion 9e of Act No. 176 of the Public Acts of 1939: Provided, That In any
fire department, or any department in whole or part engaged in, or having
the responsibility of, fire fighting, no person subordinate to a fire com-
mission, fire commissioner, safety director, or other similar administra-
tive agency or administrator, shall be deemed to be a supervisor.
17.455 (14) Elections; time for holding; determining eligibility; runoff;
effect of collective bargaining agreement; contract bar.
Sec. 14. An election shall not be directed in any bargaining unit or
any subdivision within which, in the preceding 12-month period, a valid
election has been held. The board shall determine who is eligible to vote
in the election and shall establish rules governing the election. In au
election involving more than 2 choices, where none of the choices on the
ballot receives a majority vote, a runoff election shall be conducted be-
tween the 2 choices receiving the 2 largest numbers of valid votes cast
in the election. No election shall be directed in any bargaining unit or
subdivision thereof where there is in force and effect a valid collective
bargaining agreement which was not prematurely extended and which
is of fixed duration: Provided, however, no collective bargaining agree-
ment shall bar an election upon the petition of persons not parties thereto
where more than 3 years have elapsed since the agreement's execution or
last timely renewal, whichever waa later.
17.455(15) Collective bargaining duty of employer; what constitutes
bargaining.
Sec. 15. A public employer shall bargain collectively with the repre-
sentatives of its employees as defined in section 11 and is authorized to
make and enter into collective bargaining agreements with such repre-
sentatives. For the purposes of this section, to bargain collectively is the
performance of the mutual obligation of the employer and the repre-
sentative of the employees to meet at reasonable times and confer in good
faith with respect to wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of
employment, or the negotiation of an agreement, or any question arising
thereunder, and the execution of a written contract, ordinance or resolu-
tion incorporating any agreement reached if requested by either party,
but such obligation does not compel either party to agree to a proposal
or require the making of a concession.
17.455 (16) Unfair labor practices; remedies and procedure.
Sec. 1G. Violations of the provisions of section 10 shall be deemed
to be unfair labor practices remediable by the labor mediation board in
the following manner:
(a) Whenever it is charged that any person has engaged in or is
engaging in any such unfair labor practice, the board, or any agent
designated by the board for such purposes, may issue and cause to be
served upon the person a complaint stating the charges in that respect,
and containing a notice of hearing before the board or a member thereof,
or before a designated agent, at a place therein fixed, not less than 8
25
-------
-j
o
days after the serving of the complaint. No complaint shall issue based
upon any unfair labor practice occurring more than 6 months prior to
• the filing of the charge with the board and the service of a copy thereof
upon the person against whota the charge is made, unless the person
aggrieved thereby was prevented from filing the charge by reason of serv-
ice in the armed forces, in whi>:h event the 6-month period shall be com-
puted from the day of his discharge. Any complaint may be amended by
the member or agent conducting the hearing or the board, at any time
prior to the issuance of an order based thereon. The person upon whom
the complaint is served may file an answer to the original'or amended
complaint and appear in person or otherwise and give testimony at the
place and time fixed in the complaint. In the discretion of the member
OP agent conducting the hearing or the board, any other person may be
allowed to intervene in the proceeding and to present testimony. Any
proceeding shall be condti'-Vd in accordance with the provisions of srction
6 of Act No. 197 of the I'ublic Acts of 1952, ao amended, being section
24.103 of the Compiled Lawo of 1948.
(b) The testimony taken by the member, agent OF the board sM! bs
reduced to writing and filed with the board. Thereafter the board upon
notice may take further testimony or hear argument. II oytoa the pre-
ponderance of the testimony taken the board is of the opinion that any
person named in the complaint has engaged in or is engaging in the an- '
fair labor practice, then it shall state its findings of fact and shall issue
and cause to be served on the person an order requiring him to cease and
desist from the unfair labop practice, and to take such affirmative action
including reinstatement of employees with or without back pay, as will
effectuate the policies of this act. The order may further require the per-
son to make reports from time to time showing the extent to which he
has complied with the order. If upon the preponderance of the testimony
taken the board is not of the opinion that the person named in the com-
plaint ban engaged in or is engaging in the unfair labor practice, then
the board shall stale its finding* of fact and shall issue an order dismiss-
ing the complaint. No order of the board shall require the reinstatement
of any individual as an employe who has been suspended or discharged,
or the payment to him of any'l.ack pay, if the individual was rraspended
or discharged for cause. If the evidence is presented before a member
of the board, or before examiners thereof, the member, or examiners shall
issue and cause to be served on the parties to the proceeding a proposed
report, together with a recommended order, which shall be filed with the
board, and if no exceptions an; filed within 20 days after service thereof
upon the parties, or within such further period as the board may author-
ize, the recommended order shall become the order of the board and be-
come effective as prescribed in the order.
(e) Until the record in a case has been filed in a court, the board at
any time, upon reasonable notice and in such manner as it deems proper,
may modify or set aside, in whole or in part, any finding or order made
or issued by it.
(d) The board' saay petition the coart of appeals for the enforcement
of the order and for appropriate temporary relief or restraining order,
and shall file in the court the record in the proceedings. Upon the filing
of the petition, the court shall cause notice thereof to bo served upon
the person, and thereupon shall have jurisdiction of the proceeding and
26
ahffiH grant such temporary or permanent relief or restraining order aa
it deems just and proper, enforcing, modifying, enforcing as so modified,
or setting aside in whole or in part the order of the board. No objection ,
that has not been urged before the board, its member or agent, shall be
considered by the court, unless the failure or neglect to urge the objection
is excused because of extraordinary circumstances. The findings of
the board with respect to questions of fact if supported by competent,
material and substantial evidence on the record considered as a whole
shall be conclusive. If either party applies to the court for leave to present
additional evidence and shows to the satisfaction of the court that the
additional evidence is material and that there were reasonable grounds
for the failure to present it to the hearing before the board, ito member
OP agent, the court may order the additional evidence to be taken before
the board, its member OF agent, and to bs made a part of the record. The
board may modify its findings as to the facto, or make new findings, by
rea&on of additional evidence c® taken and filed, and it shall file the
modifying OP new fiadingo, abieta giadingo with respect to queotiono o£
fact if supported by competent, material and oubstantial evidence oa tho
Kscord cooBidwed oo a whole shall b« conclusive, and shall file ito recom-
mendations, if any, top the lacdifiea&ioa OF setting aside of ito original
order. Upon the filing of the recopdl with it the jurisdiction of the court
ohaSS bs exclusive and ito judgment and decree shall ba final, escept that
the tame shall be nubject to review by the supreme court in accordance
•nitfe the gesaeroi ©»urt rules.
(e) . Any person aggrieved! by a fiaal order o£ fcbe board! granting OP
denying in whole OP in papt the relief eooght saay obtain a review of
ouch order in the court of appeals by filing in the court a complaint
preying that the order oi the board be modified or Get aside, with copy of
She complaint filed on the board, and thereupon the aggrieved party shall
file ia the court the record in the proceeding, certified by the board.
Upon the filing of the complaint, the court ahall proceed in the came
manner as in the cacs of an applications by the board nndei? oobseetion
(d), and shall grant to the board such temporary relief or restraining
order as it deems jest and propar, enforcing, modifying, enforcing as
co modified, or setting aside in whole OP in part the order of the board.
The findings of the board with reopect to questions o£ fact if supported
by competent, material and substantial evidence on the record considered
aa a whole shall be conclusive.
(f) The commencement o£ proceedings onder oubcBctiono (d) or (e)
shall not, unless specifically ordered by the court, operate ao a atay of the
board's order.
(g) Complaints filed under thia act shall bs heard expeditiouBly by
the court to which presented, and fop good cnnos shown shall take pre-
cedence over all other civil matters except earlier matters of the oama
character.
(h) The board shall have power, upon issuance of a complaint ao
provided in subsection (a) charging that any person has engaged in OP
is engaging in an unfair labor practice, to petition any circuit court
within any circuit where the unfair labor practice in qweafcioa io alleged
to have occurred or where such person resides or exercises op may exercise
its governmental authority, for appropriate temporary relief or reatraia-
ing order, in accordance with the general court rules, and the court ahalS
27
-------
have jurisdiction to grant to the board such temporary relief or re-
•training order as it deems just and proper.
(i) For the purpose of all hearings and investigation*, which in the
opinion of the board nre necessary and proper for the exercise of the
powers vested in it under this section, the provisions of section 11 of
Act No. 176 of the Public Acts of 1930, being section 423.11 of the Com-
piled Laws of 1948, shall be applicable, except that subpoenas may issue
as provided in section 11 without regard to whether mediation shall have
been undertaken.
(j) The labor relations and mediation functions of this act shall be
separately administered by the board.
28
-------
APPENDIX B
GUIDELINES FOR TRAINING EQUIPMENT OPERATORS:
72
-------
ObTXUlT CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION
GUIDELINES FOR
TRAINING EQUIPMENT OPERATORS
(Sec Article 21 of Labor Contract with Teamsters Local 21H dated 12-U-67)
Each department having employees in the Equipment Operator classes covered
•
by the labor contract with the Teamsters Local 211, will observe the following
guidelines for the training of operators:
1. The senior employee who is, in accordance with the labor agreement,
Boat eligible for training and promotion to the next higher level position
for Which an opening is anticipated, may be assigned for initial training
for a period not exceeding the number of days specified as follows:
Vehicle Operator 15
Street Sweeping Machine Operator 20
Bulldozer Operator 20
Construction Equipment Operator 90
Sr. Construction Equipment Operator 120
line Helper Driver 30
Sr. Line Helper Driver 10
Asphalt Roller Operator 120
*
If the employee is being trained for a position more than one level above
his present position, the maximum period of training will be increased
accordingly.
2« Training assignments during this period shall consist of observing and
working with an experienced and qualified operator, receiving instruction
from another person who is qualified to give instructions on the particular
type of equipment involved, and practice operation. The practice operation
will include both manipulation of the controls and the moving, or processing
of materials under typical working conditions for the type of equipment
involved. During the practice period, the trainee will be closely supervised
and given additional instruction as needed. Instruction on equipment
operation may be given by any of the following: experienced operators,
supervisors, safety officers, instructors or other persons, provided that
they are qualified to instruct and have been authorized and assigned to do so.
73
-------
©ADELINES FOR
3. A Binimura of one day ©f growp Isst^sction on safety and proper eare of
equipment Is reconunended as part of the training for each level of
operating positions0 Additional elassroe® training for review purposes
or tihen new equipment is introduced is .also recommended. The Training
Division will help dapartsssratal supervisors plan and arrange instruction
as needed. Ha ©parat©? win suffsr any loss of pay or .benefits .as a
t •
result of attending th0 traifliag sessions0
*• The .Biinimuia period of traiaiag ©ra°ths=j©b OB any equipment with the
trainee working with ass$ and©? tha direct supervision of -a qualified
operator 'will b© one fusil working day if the trainee has had np prior
training or
-------
GUIDELINES FOR
TRAINING EQUIPMENT OPERATORS
8, If after a provisional or probationary promotion an employee is unable
to perform in a satisfactory manner and needs additional training, he
nay be returned to his former status for the period"of additional training
or to his former assignment until it is feasible to complete his training.
9« When new equipment is introduced and if training in its operation is
provided by the manufacturer, a reasonable effort will be made to have the
training given directly to the employee or employees who will be operating
the equipment,
10* When an employee is placed in training for an equipment operator position,
the department will immediately notify the Civil Service Commission in
writing stating the title of the class for which he is being trained,
What training, if any, he has already completed, the kinds of equipment
* •
on which he will be trained, the starting date of training, and the
projected completion date. The letter will also include a request for
an advisory examination to be given at the end of the designated period
of training.
*'"'"'' ' Submitted: li-ii-68 ' :' '' '•"•> ''' :' •'*••''" '•' ••""•" ,'v f •-••••*' V- .,:v-.V-.'^--
75
-------
APPENDIX C
CITY C6&B AHD AMENDMENTS
PElfAINXKG TO &B&OSB COU.BCTXON AUD DISPOSAL
-------
Aj;!:. HKI-VSI-: ANI» WKKUS
CHAPTER 25.
i i
Garbage, Refuse and Weeds.'
Article I. ('. As to vehicles hauling dirt,
straw und other refuse, sec §§ GO-3-1 to 00-3-8. As to receptacles for waste matlcr.in
house trailer camps, see § b'2-2-19.
Supp. # 15, 9-01)
77
-------
8 25-1-1 I»KTIWIY U'H t •«!»!•: § 2.1-1-1
, !S U5-l-:!l. I'siililr waste may lit' collected fiv«' of charge by city.
5j '^r>-\. '.',!>. Ciillci-tinn conditional on obsemim-e of article; freviucncy of collections.
5. Litter.
§ 25-1 •:<(>. Depositing litter in pultlic places.
!j 25- 1-117. Use of public receptacles; scattering of wuatepapcr, etc., on public or
private property.
$ 25-1-38. Duty of property owners to keep premises and adjoining public property
free from litter.
$ 25-1-M. Dumping of fill dirt, etc.
§ 25-1-40. Use of sand, ashes, etc., on ice and snow.
$ 25-1-41. Responsibility for litter in multiple dwellings.
3 25-1-42. Bumping of litter in public waters.
| 25-1-48. Removal of litter and assessment of costs therefor.
AfdUde IB. IPrivofie Gofffease C^Sfectors.
5 25-2-1. Definitions.
^ 25-2-2. Unauthorized collection, transportation, etc. *
§ 25-2-3. License — Required.
§ 25-2-4. Same — Application.
| 25-2-8. Same — SnvcotifjatioB of applicant.
$ 26-2-6. Same — Issuance; fee; expiration date; traneferabillty.
| 25-2-7. Same — Grounds for refusal to issue or revocation.
§ 25-2-3. Some — Vehicle licoase plates.
5 25-2-9. Specifications 2or rohicles.
§ 25-2-10. Information ffo^uSral on vehicles.
H. Public Ducaps.
26-8-1. Supervision by
-------
;K. UI-:ITSK AMI \VKI:I»S s 2:1.1-3
Ai>i'i»"/. Thai which the mft-ivir.g oll'm-r drsignaU-d as acceptable.
havim; been liy demons!ration or tost proven workable and safe fur its
intended list-.
Cnnninrr.'dl n'uxti-. The miscellaneous waste material such as garbage.
rubbish and ashes resulting from operation of business enterprises, and
institutions. Such term includes const ruction waste, but excludes trade
waste.
CiHiKtnu-tinn wartc. Waste from building construction, alteration, de-
molition or repair and dirt from excavations.
DoHU'xtic irnate. The waste material resulting from tht> usual routine of
housekeeping except from multiple dwellings of more than four units.
Such term includes garbage, rubbish and ashes.
Enforchiji officer. Any commissioner specified in section 25-1 -?> or his
duly authorized representative. ,
Uarbarie. All waste animal, fish, fowl, fruit or vegetable matter inci-
dent to the use, preparation and storage of food. Such term includes spoiled
food, but excludes food in containers of nonburnable nature.
Litter. Any garbage, rubbish, waste material or other substance placed
or allowed to remain on the ground or in any other manner constituting a
nuisance.
Municipal waste. Certain discarded products incident to housekeeping
and commercial enterprises, as further defined in this section. Municipal
waste shall be classified as domestic waste or as commercial waste.
Rubbish. The miscellaneous solid waste material resulting from house-
keeping and ordinary mercantile enterprises. Such term includes, among
other items, packing boxes, cartons, excelsior, paper, ashes, cinders, tin
cans, bottles, glassware, earthenware, rubber, rags, wood bedding, straw,
leather, automobile tires, auto parts, bedsprings, grass, leaves, furniture,
barrels, etc.
Trade, waste. The waste material resulting from industrial operations.
Trade waste is not classified as municipal waste.
Other terms. The definition of other terms shall be identical with defi-
nitions in the Building ('ode and Zoning Ordinance of the city. (Ord. No.
660-F, Art. II, §§ 201 to 207; Ord. No. 442-G, § 1; Ord. No. 573-G, § 1.)
Sec. 25-1-2. Purpose and intent of article.
It is the intent of the common council that this article be liberally con-
strued for the purpose of providing a sanitary and satisfactory method of
preparation, collection and disposal of municipal wastes and the mainte-
nance of public and private property in a clean, orderly and sanitary con-
dition for the peace, health and safety of the community. (Ord. No. 660-F,
Art. I, § 101.)
Sec. 25-1-3. Authority of commissioners of certain departments to adopt
rules und regulations; enforcement of article.
The enforcement of this article shall be the duty of the commissioner
of public works, the commissioner of health, the commissioner of police
and the commissioner of buildings and safety engineering, who are hereby
Supp. # 1!), r>-7l
7y
-------
S '.'."i-l-l IHCTKOIT «TH CODK 8 i.1-1-7
jointly aiithnn/.rd to adopt reasonable regulations to carry out the intent
of this article. (Ord. No. W.O-F. Art. I, § 102.)
Sc«. 25- 1 "J. D>«|posU of dsaKigt'romm HuHjstances in psjlblk- places prohihiU-d;
wIT ra«dnc5iroGM, drugs, ®kv':
No person shall deposit, leave or allow to remain in any public stm:t.
alley or public place or any private place or premises any glass, metal.
stone, earthenware, tacks, nails, cinders, medicine, poisons or other sub-
stance of a nature likely to cause injury to children, travelers or pedes-
trians or to injure any horse or other animal or which might damage any
vehicle. No person shall dispose of any medicine, drug. or remedy contajn-
ing a drug of any .kind whatsoever, whether it is in a liquid, tablet, capsule,
pill or otter form, fey throwing or placing the same in a trash container or
other container or OJJMJB any street, highway, boulevard, alley or public-
place or on aiay grHwafeo property in the city. Medicines or poisons from
domestic souireea, EisspJtolR, clinics, convalescent homes, nursing homes
and similar oourcea shall ba diapoasd of by flushing into a water closet
or other fixture off otfoetrcyte disposal of in a manner acceptable to the
commismonss- of health, (©rd. No. 660-F, Art. VII, § 703.)
Sec. 25-1-5. TiraEQjwlaSlto ©ff pwtac?Q, raWbisih, etc., tlhrrotagh streets.
Every vehicle uoBveysBig garbage, rubbish or other substance shall be
loaded and operated in a manner which will prevent a litter nuisance.
The load shall be covered with a tarpaulin or other material when neces-
sary to prevent contents from blowing off, spilling or otherwise creating
litter. (Ord. No. <8©0-F, Art. VI, § 602.)
SI>1 ;
Ord. No. 319-G, S 1.)
•''As to gratuitous distribution of nn-dicino, etc., in pulilii- places, sw S 2S-I-I of
Ihis Code.
Rupp. # in. 5-71
GO
-------
I 25-i-h (;AIUIAC;K. IIKKI SK ANO WKKDS § 2-%-1-12
Sec, 2.r»-|-K. Domestic garbage l» he dniined and wrapped; storage of
same in uncovered revepturlett prohibited; burning of same.
All garbage intended for cnllwtinn shall he drained of all free liquid.
The garbage shall be wrapped in several thicknesses of paper. No garbage
or food waste of any description shall be placed or stored in an uncovered
receptacle, nor shall garbage be burned in any receptacle or unapproved
incinerator. (Ord. No. 660-F, Art. Ill, § 302.)
Sec. 25-1-9. Garbage from commercial establishments to he drained;
storage in uncovered receptacles prohibited; burning of
tame.
Garbage Intended for collection from establishments for group eating,
such as clubs, restaurants and institutions, and establishments such as
markets, commission houses, grocery stores, fruit and vegetable stands,
bakeries, canneries, butcher shops and similar establishments need not be
wrapped. Properly stored commercial garbage shall be collected by the
department of public works under such rules and regulations as the com-
missioner of public works shall from time to time establish. Undrained
garbage of liquid or semiliquid nature will not be collected, whether in
containers or not. No garbage or food waste of any description shall be
placed or stored in an uncovered receptacle, nor shall garbage be burned
in any receptacle or unapproved incinerator. (Ord. No. 660-F, Art. Ill,
§ 308.)
Sec. 25-1-10. Collection of domestic and commercial rubbish; burning of
rabbish.
Properly stored domestic rubbish shall be collected by the department
of public works. Commercial rubbish collected by the department of public
works shall be subject to the requirements of sections 25-1-29 through
25-1-33. The burning of rubbish in open fires is prohibited, except under a
permit issued by the department of buildings and safety engineering.
(Ord. No. 660-F, Art. HI, § 304.)
Sec. 25-1-11. Small dead animals to be collected by city; responsibility of
owner for disposal of dead animals weighing over one
hundred pounds.
All small dead animals, if kept separate from garbage and rubbish, will
be collected without charge upon notice to the department of public works;
provided that a charge will be made by the department of public works for
all such animals collected from animal hospitals, kennels, and the like.
Owners shall be responsible for the removal and disposal of large dead
animals weighing over one hundred pounds. (Ord. No. 660-F, Art. Ill,
§ 805.)
Sec. 25-1-12. Manure.
Animal and fowl manure and other noxious wastes from commercial
establishments shall be considered as commercial rubbish, and. after due
notice, the department of public works shall be responsible for its collection
and disposal on the terms and conditions provided by this article for com-
mercial waste. Manure from domestic nets shall be properly wrapped and
placed in rubbish receptacles. (Ord. No. 660-F, Art. Ill, § 306.)
81
-------
-ta QDOTTO8T WY CO1H-: . 0 2S-1-I7
25- 11 -13.
Rubbiah that is larger thain can bs contained in the receptacles shall
be securely tied in compact bundles, not to exceed ows hundred pounds in
weight, and placed an a location convenient for collection. Large .bulky
items, such us refrigerators, stoves, bods, crates, etc., will require notifica-
tion of and arran&eBineinit with the department of public works for a special
pickup or an estimate of efaarges. (Ord. No. G60-F, Art. Ill, § S07.)
Sec 254«I4. CraUftitags ©ff torasfci, sEarafolbsiry, eie.
Cutting s of b?uslh, shrubbery and tree branches shall be collected ; pro-
vided, they do not ©sceed three feet in length, ten inches in diameter or -a
total of oae huttdFed piuaffids m weight arad are free from wire or other
metal. It shall ba the ctaty of the owner, tenant, occupant or person in
control .of "the pramJses to arrange for the disposal of trees, tree -stumps
and all otter cuttmgs so commercial rubbish personally or .by agreement
with the landscape earatKistor or other workman engaged to cut the -same.
(Ord. No.
-------
9 25-l-X (iAUUACK. UUKCSK AND \VKKDS § 25-1-12
Sec. 25-1-S. Domestic parhage lo he drained and wrapped; storage of
same in uncovered receptacles prohibited; burning of same.
AH garbage intended for collection ahull be drained of all free liquid.
The garbage shall be wrapped in several thicknesses of paper. No garbage
or food waste of any description shall be placed or stored in an uncovered
receptacle, nor shall garbage be burned in any receptacle or unapproved
incinerator. (Ord. No. 660-F, Art. Ill, § 302.)
Sec. 25-1-9. Garbage from commercial establishments to he drained;
storage in uncovered receptacles prohibited; burning of
nine.
Garbage intended for collection from establishments for group eating,
such as clubs, restaurants and institutions, and establishments such as
markets, commission houses, grocery stores, fruit and vegetable stands,
bakeries, canneries, butcher shops and similar establishments need not be
wrapped. Properly stored commercial garbage shall be collected by the
department of public works under such rules and regulations as the com-
missioner of public works shall from time to time establish. Undrained
garbage of liquid or semiliquid nature will not be collected, whether in
containers or not. No garbage or food waste of any description shall be
placed or stored in an uncovered receptacle, nor shall garbage be burned
in any receptacle or unapproved incinerator. (Ord. No. 660-F, Art. III.
§808.)
Sec. 25-1-10. Collection of domestic and commercial rubbish; burning of
rubbish.
Properly stored domestic rubbish shall be collected by the department
of public works. Commercial rubbish collected by the department of public
works shall be subject to the requirements of sections 25-1-29 through
25-1-33. The burning of rubbish in open fires is prohibited, except under a
permit issued by the department of buildings and safety engineering.
(Ord. No. 660-F, Art. Ill, § 304.)
Sec. 25-1-11. Small dead animals to he collected by city; responsibility of
owner for disposal of dead animals weighing over one
.' hundred pounds.
All small dead animals, if kept separate from garbage and rubbish, will
be collected without charge upon notice to the department of public works;
provided that a charge will be made by the department of public works for
all such animals collected from animal hospitals, kennels, and the like.
Owners shall be responsible for the removal and disposal of large dead
animals weighing over one hundred pounds. (Ord. No. 6GO-F, Art. Ill,
8 805.)
Sec. 25-1=12. Manure.
Animal and fowl manure and other noxious wastes from commercial
establishments shall be considered as commercial rubbish, and, after due
notice, the department of public works shall be responsible for its collection
and disposal on the terms and conditions provided by this article for com-
mercial waste. Manure from domestic pets shall be properly wrapped and
placed in rubbish receptacles. (Ord. No. 660-F, Art. Ill, § 300.)
83
-------
» 2.vi-2i IWTKOIT niv row: & -j.-.-i-ii
rrptai-Us shall lir rrgpiiiisiblr for obtaining tin- approval of rach si/.t- and
model liel'uH' it is made available for salt1 and installation within tin1 i-ity.
Kau-h sm-h stationary reeuplade hereafter installed shall have a capacity
«-f not loss than two hundred fifty gallon* and not more than five hundred
gallons, unless special permission is granted by the enforcing officer for a
receptacle of other six.o.
(b) Identification, und lahclinu. Stationary receptacles shall lie legibly
and permanently labeled with the following information:
(1) The name of the manufacturer.
(2) Th« capacity of the receptacles in gallons.
(8) "No Burning" os° equivalent.
(4) Appropriate symbols on both the front and the rear to designate
use for either garbage off rubbish, as suggested by the enforcing officer,
in letters at least three inehes high. ,
(c) Accessibility, The owner or installer of every stationary receptacle
shall install the receptacle so that both doors are accessible for use. Any
space existing between amiy aide of such receptacle and any adjacent re-
ceptacle, building ©? ofcat? object shall bs at least twelve inches in least
dimension, ualess f&o sfClse 5s small enough to ha effectively sealed.
(d) Steps. Any ffvScef&icla with tihs top reception door located over
forty-two inches sfeav® ^h® adjacesit ground after installation shall have
approved ateps off pSatfoimia. Stepa shall ba maintained in good repair and
in h safe condition at all feStoes.
(e) Restrictions on ne«. All receptacles for the storage of garbage, rub-
bish and ashes shall be of a portable type, as defined in section 25-1-20.
Where a caretaker in designated, as required in section 25-1-41, the enforc-
ing officer may approve an application and permit for the use of large
movable receptacles at the following building occupancies:
(1) For storage of rubbish or garbage in dwellings containing five
families or more.
(2) For storage of garbage from an individual commercial establish-
ment whose monthly bill for garbage collection from the city establishes
the need for nine or more portable legal garbage cans of twenty-six gallons
capacity between collections.
(S) For storage of rubbish from an individual commercial establish-
ment whose monthly bills for waste collection from the city establishes
the need for a total of nine or more legal portable cans of twenty-six gal-
lons capacity between collections.
(f) Permit* required—New instillations. Where large movable recep-
tacles are aauthonasd, tlhey shall not ba installed until a permit has been
obtained from the department of public works. A permit shall be issued
only after payment of a fee not to exceed five dollars. Sufficient receptacles
shall be provided to hold a three weeks' accumulation of garbage and
rubbish and they shall be maintained on a concrete slab as approved by the
department of public works.
(g) Same.—Byistinfi receptacle*. An existing installation of one in-
more stationary receptacles may be continued in use if each has between
one hundred gallons and five hundred gallons capacity, is maintained in
good repair and is on a rat wall or slab, as required by the enforcing officer.
Supp. # 1!», fi-71
-------
§ 2.1-1-22 <. \ifil.\iiK. KKI-'t'SK AM» WKKUS g 25.1.2:1
This shall apply only to promises that nuu-l all "limited uso" rro.uiivmrnts
spi'cil'u'd in sul>soct ion (v.) of this section. An application for ;i pmnil for
an existing receptacle may l>e approved by th»» enforcing olHi-er aftrr he
hua determined that the location is conveniently accessible for us»- and
collection service. Any receptacle relocated to another multiple dwelling
or commercial establishment shall be subject to all requirements for a new
receptacle. (Ord. No. 660-F, Art. IV, § 405; Ord. No. 569-C. £ 1.)
Sec. 25-1-22. Ixrcation of receptacles.
Receptacles shall be conveniently accessible for collection service and
for all users. All receptacles for garbage and rubbish shall be located on
private property, except on collection days. All trash burners shall be kept
on private property, except while being used and attended. In alley collec-
tion areas, the receptacles shall be located as near as possible to the alley
line but not in any alley, street or other public property; except, that
where it has been deemed impractical by the enforcing officer to provide
access to the receptacles on private property, revocable permission may be
granted for the storage of receptacles on public property. The commis-
sioner of public works shall have the authority to designate the location
from which receptacles shall be serviced. A notice of any change in loca-
tion where receptacles are to be placed for service shall be given to all
persona concerned before the change is put into effect. (Ord. No. 660-F,
Art. IV, § 406; Ord. No. 319-G, § 1.)
Sec. 25-1-23. Space on private property required for receptacles.
To insure sufficient space for the storage of garbage and rubbish re-
ceptacles, there shall be provided and maintained on private property an
open or unoccupied space not less than fifty square feet in area, directly
adjoining the street or alley where service is rendered, which is accessible
through & passageway not less than three feet wide from the exit of any
building to such street or alley. In the case of a commercial building where
compliance with this requirement is impracticable, an approved rubbish
room may be provided in lieu of outside space. No person shall obstruct
access to receptacles. (Ord. No. 660-F, Art. IV, § 406.1.)
Sec. 25-1-24. Garbage and rubbish chutes.
After February 8, 1962, garbage and rubbish chutes shall not be
installed unless a permit is obtained from the department of buildings and
safety engineering. Existing garbage and rubbish chutes shall not be
used Unless In combination with an incinerator acceptable to the depart-
ment of buildings and safety engineering. Any other garbage and rubbish
chute shall be effectively sealed to prevent its use or shall be removed from
the premises. (Ord. No. 660-F, Art. IV, § 407.)
Sec. 25-1-25. Rubbish rooms.
The location, capacity and use of any new or existing room for storage
of municipal waste for collection by the department of public works shall
be subject to approval, and such room shall be used only for storage of
Supp. # It), !>-71
-------
g 2r,.|.:»« JBKTKOIT CITY COI»K 8 ar.-i-si)
portable m-optadrs and not for bulk storagr of wash'. Rubbish room* or
refuse bins shall be vonstrwted only in arconlanco with minimm-nts i»f
the lluildinjr Codo. (Ord, No.-GGO-K. Art. !V. § 408.)
Sec. 25-11-28. BJciwsH «f gart&Mge. rubbish, etc., 5m receptacles belonging
or in defective, etc., receptacles :pro-
No person shall deposit garbage, rubbish or other materials in recep-
tacles belonging to other persons or premises, nor in any defective or
illegal receptacles. (Ord. No. 660-F, Art. VII, § 701.)
stmd Charges Therefor.
-Sec. 25=1-27. ColSssitoiras, etc., restricted.
It shall be unlawful for any person, other than employees of the |de-
partment of public works, lic©!ftsed garbage and rubbish collectors or
'other authorised perrons, to disturb, collect or in any other manner inter-
fere with garbage and rabbish placed in the streets, alleys and. public
places for collection by fcfee city authorities, or to interfere in -any. inanner
with any. garbage essd KS&jMsh receptacles. The commissioner ..specified in
section 25-1-3, shall ham fch® right to specify the time and methods of
storage, collection and disposal by an authorized collector. (Ord.. N.p. 660-F,
Art. "VI, g 601.)
Sec. 25-1-28. Donaosftk waofte.
Domestic waste shall ba collected without charge; except that w.aste
material scattered on the ground or placed in other than proper, receptacles
us specified in sections 25-1-16 to 25-1-26 may be classed as commercial
waste and may be charged for at special rates to be determined .by the
commissioner of public works and approved by the common council. (Ord.
No. 660-F. Art. V, § 501.)
Sec. 254-29. Corannnaeirdall wast®.
^
The department of public works shall collect garbage and rubbish from a
commercial establishment, and other commercial waste subject to payment
therefor as provided in this article. Nothing contained in this article rshall
be construed to prohibit the party responsible for creating commercial
waste from entering into a contract with an authorized private collector
or otherwise disposing of such waste, .provided it is storeoVand disposed^
in such a matoer as to create no nuisance. (Ord. No. 660-1- , Art. v, a &u<: ,
,Ord. No. 442-G, § 1 ; Ord. No. 571-G, § 1.)
Sec. 25-1-30. Charges— CoHecliom £ commercial waste.
The commissioner of public works, with the approval of the common
council, shall from time to time determine rates for the service of .collection
of commercial wastes. These rates shall provide for an exemption of not to
exceed twenty 'bushels of commercial rubbish or two hundred jgalUms of
Supp. # 1!», 5-.7J
86
-------
25-1-31 <;AKIIA(;K. MKKi:sK ANii WKKIlS « 25-S-3!
commercial garbage in any calendar month from any one establishment.
provided this establishment has entered into an .movement to pay for
amounts collected in excess of such exemption. (Ord. No. «M>O-r'. AIM. V,
S 503.)
Sec. 25-1-31. Siime — Disposal of garbage and rubbish.
The commissioner of public works, with the approval of the i-ommon
council, shall from time to time establish rates which shall be charged for
the disposal of all commercial garbage, commercial rubbish or other wastes
delivered to a city-operated incinerator or other disposal location approved
by the commissioner. (Ord. No. 660-F, Art. V, $ 504.)
Sec. 25-1-32. Contracts for removal of commercial or construction waste
—Authority of commissioner of public works; payments.
The commissioner of public works may enter into a contract with a
party responsible for creating commercial waste or construction waste.
This contract shall provide for payment in accordance with the approved
rates for all wastes collected or received by the department of public works.
Payment shall be made on the basis of periodic billing, and shall be due
in full within thirty days from first date of each bill ; provided, that pay-
ment may be made by surrender of collection tickets purchased from the
department of public works. (Ord. No. 660-F, Art. V, S 505.)
Sec. 25-1-33. Same— Breach of contract; discontinuance of service not
t» authorize accumulations of refuse.
Should any party, having entered into a contract as provided in section
25-1-32, fail to pay for service rendered by the city within thirty days
after the date of bill, the department of public works shall be relieved of all
obligation to continue to render service to such party. In the event of dis-
continuance of service, the party responsible for creating the waste shall
immediately take effective action as needed to dispose of the wastes in a
legal manner without creation of a nuisance. Existence of litter for twenty-
four hours or more, as a result of failure to take such action, shall be prima
facie evidence of violation of this article. Discontinuance of service by the
department of public works shall not constitute a valid defense in any
action brought against such establishment or party for violation of any
provisions of this article or for nonpayment of indebtedness. (Ord. No.
660-F, Art. V, § 506.)
Sec. 25-1-34. Usable waste may be collected free of charge by city.
Clean cinders, broken masonry, slag, gravel, sand, stone, combustible
rubbish or other waste materials, which may be wanted for use by the
department of public works, may be collected or received at no charge
to the producer; but such materials, if of commercial origin and not wanted
for use at that time by the department of public works, shall be classified
as commercial rubbish and may be removed or' received at prevailing rates.
(Ord. No. 660-F, Art. V, § 507.)
Supp. # 10. 5-71
87
•Si
*S8r' !
-------
8 2.'i-l-:».*i DKTIKOIT CITY COUK S 2.V1-.17
S«c. 25-1-.'{."». Colltntiun !' all municipal waste is made conditional to the obser-
vance of all provisions of this article. Collection is subject to weather and
other conditions beyond the control of the department of public works. For
commercial, construction or trade wastes, the department of public works
shall have the right to determine whether collections shall be made. Col-
lection frequency shall be determined by the department of public works.
(Ord. No. 660-F, Art. V, § 508.)
Division 5. Utter.4
Sec. 25-1-36. Depositing litter in public places.
<
No person shall deposit or cause to be deposited any litter on any street,
sidewalk, alley, public or private property, except on approved private or
public dumps, or except in accordance with section 25-1-39. (Ord. No. 660-
F, Art. VII, § 701.)
Sec. 25-1-37. Use of public receptacles; scattering of wnstepaper, etc.,
on public or private property.
Public receptacles are for use of pedestrians only, and shall not be used
by vendors or by occupants of adjacent premises. Newspapers, handbills
and wastepaper or other litter shall not be scattered or thrown upon
public or private property, but shall be deposited in private or public re-
ceptacles. (Ord. No. 660-F, Art. VII, § 702.)
4 As to depositing of rubbish, filth, etc., in public narks, see § 42-1-14 uf this Code.
As to throwing stones, etc., into pools, etc., in parks, see § 42-1-15. As to duty of street
vendors to pick up wrappers, papers, etc., see § 43-1-18. As to throwing refuse, garbage,
etc., on streets and other public places, see § 58-1-13. As to dropping of oil on asphalt
pavements, see § 58-1-22. As to dirt, etc., on sidewalks, see § 58-3-4.
Supp. # 19, ,5-71
88
-------
8 25-!-:is <; \itit\<;i:. UKI-TSK AMI \VKKHS g 2:.-'-?-
Sec. 'J.")-|-:iS. Duly of property owners to keep premises ami adjoining
public property free from lilter.
It shall be thi- duty of the owner or person in control of any premises,
vat-ant or orriipied, to keep his premises, sidewalks and adl adjoiuintr public
property between the center of street and center of alloy free of litter at
all times. All litter removed shall he placed in proper receptacles or re-
moved to sin approved disposal location. (Ord. No. 6GO-K, Art. VII, § 704.)
# 15, ll-ti'.i
89
-------
g 25-1-39 (5AKIWMJK, KKS-'USK ANSI WEKDS I 25-2-1
Sec. 25-1 -39.
Earth or other materials shall not be placed on or removed from any
premises unless the written permission of the owner of such land is ob-
tained and exhibited on request of the enforcing officer by the operator of
the vehicle used for loading, transporting or dumping such material. Such
permission shall be subject to zoning regulations and to the requirement
that no nuisance shall be created. (Ord. No. 660-F, Art. VII, § 705.)
See. 25-4-40. Ues ©(? saraci, ashes, QfLe., ©a ice and snow.5
When ice or snow has accumulated on sidewalks and it is impossible
to remove the same by usual methods, sawdust, salt, sand, ashes or cinders
shall be sprinkled in sufficient quantities to make such sidewalks safe for
use. The scattered materials must be cleaned pff and disposed of as pro-
vided in this article immediately upon removal of the hazard. (Ord. No.
660-F, Art. ¥11, § W.)
Sec. 2S-1-4L KespmalMlty ff©r litter in multiple dwellings.
In eveyy multiple dwelling occupied by five families and over in which
the owner does not reside, there shall be a responsible person designated
as such by the otraer. This person and the owner shall be severally and
jointly responsible for maintaining the entire premises including the yards
and one half of tfoe alley, street and any easement adjoining such dwelling
free of all litter. (Ord. No. 660-F, Art. VII, § 707.)
See. 25-1-42. Bwtpteg ©2 litter im public waters.6
No person shall deposit or cause to be deposited any litter in the waters
of the Detroit River, the Rouge Eiver or any of their tributaries or con-
nected waterways in the city, whether from the shore or from any vessel
or other craft in passage or moored. (Ord. No. 660-F, Art. VII, § 708.)
IL Private Garbage Collectors.
See. 2S-&4. BsfirfttoEas.
For the purposes of this article, the following terms shall have the mean- •
ings respectively ascribed to them by this section:
Garbage. All waste, animal, fish, fowl, fruit or vegetable matter incident
to the us®, preparation and storage of food. Such term includes spoiled
food, but excludes food in containers of nonburnable material.
Rubbish. The miscellaneous solid waste material resulting from house-
keeping and ordinary mercantile enterprises and includes, among other
items, packing boxes, cartons, excelsior, paper, ashes, cinders, tin cans,
bottles, glassware, earthenware, rubber, rags, wood, bedding, straw, leather,
automobile tires, auto parts, bedsprings, grass, leaves, furniture, barrels.
etc. (Ord. No, 768-F, §§ 1.1, 1.2.)
• Ao to anow and ica removal from side-walks, Bee § 58-3-1 of this Code.
8 Aa to throwing of waste matter, etc., ioto -waters of public parks, see § 42-2-3 of
this Code.
Supp. 9-64
-90,
•$:
-------
I 25-2-2 UETIIOIT CITY CODE 8 t5-2-7
Sec. 25-2-2. Unauthorized collection, transportation, etc.
It shall be unlawful for any person, except an employee of the city or a
person who is duly licensed, to collect, disturb or transport any garbage or J
rubbish placed in the streets, alleys or public places of the city. (Ord. No. ,
768-F, § 1.)
Sec. 25-2-3. License—Required. :
Every person desiring to engage in the collection and transportation of {
garbage or rubbish through the streets and alleys of the city shall obtain ^
a license from the mayor as provided in this article. (Ord. No. 768-F, § 2.) »
Sec. 25-2-4. Same—Application. j
A written application for a license required by this article shall be .1
obtained from the commissioner of public works. The application shall state \
the number, make and type of transport vehicle, the places of collection \
and the schedule of auch collections for garbage or rubbish. The places of I
collection and the schedule of such collections are hereby made confidential, |
and any person disclosing such information, except for official purposes,
shall be subject to the penalties of section 1-1-7. (Ord. No. 768-F, § 3.)
Sec. 25-2-5. Same—Investigation of applicant.
The commissioner of public works shall investigate each applicant for a
license under this article as to the type of vehicle to be used, and forward
the application to the commissioner of police, who shall investigate the
applicant's background, or if a corporation, the officers thereof, for con-
viction of any criminal statute or violation of any provision of this Code or
other city ordinance. (Ord. No. 768-F, § 4.)
Sec. 25-2-6. Same—Issuance; fee; expiration date; transferability.
Upon receipt of the written reports of the commissioner of public works
and the commissioner of police, the mayor may issue a license upon the
receipt of twelve dollars and fifty cents for each vehicle to be used for the
above purposes stated in this article. Such licenses shall expire on the first
day of August of each year. Such licenses shall not be transferable; pro-
vided, that subject to the approval of the commissioner of public works, a
transfer of a license of an approved vehicle may be effected to an approved
transferee. (Ord. No. 768-F, § 5.)
Sec. 25-2-7. Same—Grounds for refusal to issue or revocation.
The mayor may make such further investigations as he deems neces-
sary and may revoke or refuse to issue any license under this article when
he finds that the licensee or applicant has been guilty of any of the following:
(a) Has been convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude.
(b) Has operated contrary to the laws of the state or this Code or other
ordinances of the city.
(c) Has made deliberate, false or misleading solicitations or representa-
tions.
(d) Has followed a pattern of coercion, extortion or intimidation in the
procuring or conducting of his business.
Suj>p. 9-C4
•91-"-
-------
:>:,.,., <;Aim.\«.i>. IIKI-TSK AN«> WKI-:I»S § 25-M
Sec. 25-1-1. Definitions.
For the purpose of this article, the following words and phrases shall
have the meanings respectively ascribed to them by this section:
Approved That equipment, method or procedure which the department
designates as acceptable, having been by demonstration or test proven
workable and safe for its intended purpose.
Commissioner. The commissioner of the department of buildings and
safety engineering of the city.
Departm-ent. The department of buildings and safety engineering of the
city.
Erected. Such term shall mean not only ne"w buildings, but also any
addition to a structure or any conversion of use or occupancy of a structure
which results either in new or increased production of food wastes; except,
the remodeling of kitchens in one or two-family dwellings or the replace-
ments of residential kitchen sinks shall not be included.
Food wastes. Vegetable or animal matter or a combination thereof, pro-
duced or developed as the result of preparation, processing, marketing,
cooking, serving, distributing, sale, spoilage, decay, deterioration, storage
or in any other manner, of food which renders such unfit, undesirable or
unacceptable for sale, distribution or for human consumption.
On-the-site disposal The disposal within the premises by approved
methods or system of any food waste produced or developed therein. (Orel.
No. 81-F, §2.)
Sec. 25-4-2. Intent and purpose of article.
The comprehensive plan of this article is for the purpose of promoting
the health, safety and general welfare of the community by establishing
requirements for on-the-site disposal of waste foods, facilitating the en-
forcement of sanitation and the elimination of breeding places for vermin,
and removing the opportunity for the creation and maintenance of public
nuisances which generally inhere in areas where such activity is not prop-
erly regulated. (Ord. No. 81-F, § 1.)
Sec. 25-4-3. Disposal equipment required in certain structures.
Structures erected in the city after January 1, 1956, designed ar-
ranged or intended to be used for purposes which cause, result in, produce
or develop food wastes, and all structures converted or altered for such
purposes, shall provide approved food waste disposal equipment for such
purposes within the premises thereof. It shall be unlawful for any person
to use, permit or cause to be used any such structure that does not conform
to the provisions of this section. (Ord. No. 81-F, § 3.)
See. 25-4-4. Eqaipment to ©umply with other applicable regulations of
city.
The installation, operation and maintenance of any equipment -or
method to be used for on-the-site disposal of food wastes, shall comply
Supp. 0-157
92
-------
8 2rs-!-5 iM-iifoiT in y coin; g 2.%.:,.a
with the applicable provisions and requisitions of the building, housing,
plumbing, dwtriral, smoke abatement, air pollution, safely enjrineerinjr,
health, sanitation and fire, regulations of the- city. (Onl. No. Hl-F, $ 4.1.)
Sec. 25-4-5. Commissioner to keep list of approved equipment.
The commissioner shall have on file in the department si list of ap-
proved food waste disposal equipment. (Ord. No. 81-F, § 5.)
Sec. 25-4-6. Enforcement of article.
The department of buildings and safety engineering, through its officers,
inspectors or employees, shall enforce the provisions of this article. (Ord.
No. 81-F, § 4.)
Article V. Weed Control/ .
Sec. 25-5-1. "Poisonous or injurious weeds" defined; same declared com-
mon nuisance.
For the purpose of this article, "poisonous or injurious weeds" shall
include those species and varieties designated as noxious by Michigan
Statutes Annotated, sections 9.631(1) to 9.631(12) (Compiled Laws 1948,
sections 247.61 to 247.72). In addition, the following species and varieties
of plants are hereby designated as injurious weeds and declared to be a
common nuisance: Ragweed (any species of Ambrosia), poison ivy (Rhus
radicans), poison sumac (Toxicodendron vernix), poison oak (Toxiconden-
dron quercifolium), marijuana (Cannabis staira) and Belladonna (Ama-
ryllis belladonna). The board of health is hereby empowered to designate
and declare, by a written rule or regulation, additional species and varieties
of plants as injurious within the meaning of this article, on the basis of
implication of such species or varieties as actually or potentially injurious
to the public health. All such weeds are also declared to be a common
nuisance. (C. 0.1954, ch. 172, § 2.) .
Sec. 25-5-2. Growth of certain weeds and brush prohibited.
It shall be unlawful for any owner, occupant, agent or other person
having control or management of any land, either public or private, either
occupied or vacant, within the city, to allow the presence thereon or on any
portion thereof of:
(1) Poisonous or injurious weeds.
(2) Other weeds of any species or variety exceeding one foot in height.
(3) Wild growing brush or underbrush exceeding one foot in height.
(C. 0.1954, ch. 172, § 1; Ord. No. 127-F, § 1.)
Sec. 25-5-3. Abatement of weeds and brush in violation of article.
In any case in which the owner, occupant, agent or other person having
control or management of any land allows the presence thereon or on any
portion thereof of any weeds or brush in violation of the provisions of sec-
tion 25-5-2, the enforcing official shall notify by certified or registered
< For state law prohibiting scattering, etc., of noxious weeds, seeds, etc., set-
M.S.A., § 28.181.
Supp. 9-67
;••• ^ '-93.
-------
J;I:, KI:KHSI: AND \M-:I:I»S g 2.-,.;».«
mail, with rot urn receipt mitiosiod, lh<> owner, occupant, ag*:ut or person
having control of the land on which noxious woods arc gro\ving tn abate1
the violation within ten working days.
Upon the failure, neglect or refusal of any such owner, occupant, agent
or other person to abate the stated violations within the stated time, the
enforcing official may assign such employees lo enter upon the land and
to destroy such weeds or growth by spraying, cutting or by other accept-
able methods. And, provided further, that the city shall have a lien upon
such lands for such expense, such lien to be enforced in the manner pre-
scribed in the city Charter for the enforcement of tax liens. The commis-
sioner shall not have the power to expend in work or material more than
twenty-five dollars on any one lot. Any expense in such abatement, if not
paid to the city Within sixty days from the date a statement thereof was
forwarded to the party, shall be reported to the board of assessors, who
shall assess the amount against the land in question; provided, that if the
expense for any one parcel or land is not more than five dollars, it shall
be charged to appropriate funds of the city; and provided further, that
any failure to give such written notice shall not constitute a defense tn
oily action to enforce the provisions of section 25-5-2. (C. O. 1954, ch. 172.
§ 3; Ord. No. 127-F, § 1; Ord. No. 279-G, § 1.)
Sec. 25-5*4. Enforcing officers granted acccess to premises; obstruction of
officers prohibited; liability of officers in action of trespass.
The enforcing officer and his authorized representatives shall be granted
free access to and from any land for the purpose of investigation to deter-
mine whether violations of this article exist, and for the work necessary
to accomplish the abatement of any violation of this article found to exist.
No person shall obstruct or prevent such work. Such authorized representa-
tives, after performing their duties in a prudent manner, shall not be liable
for suit in any action of trespass therefor, and shall be defended in any
action arising therefrom by the corporation counsel until the final disposi-
tion of the proceedings. (C. 0.1954, ch. 172, § 4.)
Sec. 25-5-5. City reserves right to reject claims for damages.
In the event of destruction or damage of vegetation not declared un-
lawful by this article during the course of normal operations directed at
destruction of vegetation declared unlawful by this article growing on the
same tract, part or parcel of land, the city reserves the right to reject
all claims resulting from such damage. (C. 0. 1954, ch. 172, § 5; Ord. No.
127-F, § 1.)
Sec. 25-5-6. Enforcement of article.
The department of public works, through its officers, department heads,
inspectors and employees, shall enforce the provisions of this article. (C. O.
1954, ch. 172, § 7; Ord. No. 127-F, § 1; Ord. No. 279-G, § 1.)
U09J.9
Supp. !>-«7
94
------- |