In the May 28 story, “Private vs....

In the May 28 story, “Private vs. public argued in Newport Beach,”

City Manager Homer Bludau said trash could not be outsourced, because

“Our residents love the guys who pick up their trash, and it would be

very unpopular for me to propose that we contract out that service.”

With tree trimming, the city reduced costs by 50%. The trash

haulers who service my area are great guys, but if significant cost

savings could be achieved, and quality maintained, that option should

be considered. Trash collection is a repeatable service, with service

levels provided based on a contract.

Decisions of this type should be made on the basis of full

analysis, considering the qualitative and financial implications,

rather than gut feel about residents’ views of a change in staff. How

about conducting a survey of residents to ask them what service

levels and cost structure they would prefer?

Apparently trash-collection fees are covered in the 1% general

property tax levy, so, per the city, residents get “free” trash

collection. This is not the case. The cost for trash collection is

based on salaries, equipment and other costs incurred by the provider

to provide the requested service levels. This “fully burdened cost”

should be considered independently of the pricing, and current method

of collecting fees, i.e. through the 1% property tax levy.

Newport Beach residents understand the value of business decisions

made with full understanding of the facts. We deserve to have

decisions about city services made in that way.

LAURA CURRAN

Newport Beach

It’s easy to go along with the adage that private business is

always more efficient than government. However, it is an assumption

that may not always be true. Each consideration of outsourcing needs

to be looked at very carefully to know if the bottom line is really

what it seems to be.

As an example, Greenlight spokesman Phil Arst says that the

tree-trimming cost dropped from $89 to $39 per tree when a private

company took over the work from the city. That may not be what it

seems to be when everything is considered for total cost. Someone

needs to do a complete evaluation of this and report to the taxpayers

of Newport Beach. Just in this one case, these are the things that

need to be considered: What is the total amount charged to the city

in extra fees each year for the work that the company does that is

not included in the regular tree trimming. It would be easy to low

ball the bid on trimming and then make it up with additional fees.

Does the company trim palm trees more often than shade trees because

they are quicker and therefore more profitable? Does the company pay

as much attention to the health of the tree when trimming, or has our

loss rate gone up after outsourcing? What is the turn-around time

when a resident requests a tree be trimmed compared to when city

employees did it?

I am not making any accusations -- I don’t know what the results

of such an evaluation would be. I’m saying that all of these things

need to be looked at and accounted for when making a judgment on the

value of outsourcing to the taxpayers of Newport Beach. It’s possible

that we got a lot for $89 per tree, when everything is placed on the

table, and in the worst scenario, bottom line, we may actually be

paying more than that now. I’d like to know for sure.

FRANK COLVER

Newport Beach

Should Newport Beach consider outsourcing? Absolutely not.

I’m sure most of us have experienced the marked decrease in

customer service from companies that have outsourced some of their

work and functions. We don’t need this in Newport Beach. Outsourcing

would likely save a small amount of city budget (probably much less

than $72 per resident per year, according to Assistant City Manager

Dave Kiff’s numbers in the Daily Pilot), but are the residents of

Newport Beach willing to sacrifice the efficient, helpful and

friendly responses from the city employees when you have a problem? I

think not.

We have all chosen to live in this wonderful city, and I’m sure

that most of us recognize that it would be less costly to live

elsewhere, but we haven’t chosen to move. Why? Because we like the

city the way it is. I moved here from a large city where most of the

employees had a couldn’t-care-less attitude. Getting any question

answered or getting a problem solved was typically a nightmare of

runarounds and partial or incorrect answers or directions.

I have had several occasions since I relocated to Newport Beach to

contact city employees, and I cannot recall even one experience where

my problem or question was not quickly and fully satisfied. (This

even included building a new home, which is something you would

expect to have many, difficult problems.) The time saved and the

headaches avoided have been well worth the little extra we might be

paying here in Newport Beach for these helpful city employees.

Those residents who support more outsourcing need to remember the

old saying that you get what you pay for. Here in Newport Beach we

pay a little more and get a lot more.

TOM WEBBER

Balboa Island