Has been updated: 33 few minutes ago release date: 33 few minutes ago
:quality(70)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/adn/CGIHE5PZZNGHPG6DKQAED4CZHE.jpg)
In a column published in ADN a few weeks ago, Elise Patkotak expressed general support for the idea of having more and better public restrooms in Anchorage, but in fact the April 2 He said the $5 million bond on the ballot was only tentative support. She said she feels there hasn’t been much public discussion, and she raised a number of fairly specific questions about how exactly the bond money would be used.
The answer never came.
The city ordinance that put the bond on the ballot, AO 2023-114, had three sponsors, and I believe the final vote on the twice-amended ordinance was 9-3. Councilors who vote in favor of the ordinance may be expected to answer several questions. But once a bond proposal is approved by a vote, lawmakers appear to be prohibited from using any resources to advocate for the bond proposal’s passage. So who will now speak for the unsaved?
I will volunteer until someone comes along who is more knowledgeable and can explain clearly. (And they better act soon. As I write this, the election is only six weeks away.)
Fortunately, there is already a significant amount of information available online from ADN and municipal websites alone. There is an ADN article dated October 24, 2023 that explains the proposed ordinance and the thinking behind it. There is another ADN article dated January 6, 2024 that details a public information session held the previous day on this topic. There is also a memo on the city’s website explaining the background of AO 2023-114.
Looking at these materials, there is one thing I know for sure. It’s more complicated than you think. The bond itself does not appear to obligate the municipality to purchase a specific number of public toilets or make any specific commitments to the contractor. When the measure was first introduced, a $12 million bond was required to cover 20 to 30 toilets. A vendor considering a product called Portland Loo quoted a price of about $150,000 per unit, not including installation costs, depending on the exact model. (Of course, the price per unit would probably be higher than it is now because there would be fewer units to buy.) As you can see from the way the bond itself is structured, operating and maintenance costs would be significant. Under the proposal, the total increase in property taxes would be $1.80 per $100,000 of assessed value, but only $1.01 of that would go toward purchasing the units.
The city of Anchorage is already paying for portable toilets (about $450,000 in 2023, according to Council President Chris Constant), but it needs a better plan. Because the cost of these products to municipalities will rise rapidly and will not stand up. Very suitable for public use.
Portland Loo is used in 34 cities. It has its own Wikipedia page. City documents link to a 41-page report conducted in 2019 based on research by the city that purchased Portland Ruth. If for some reason you don’t want to think about Portland, you can also call it by the names of 33 other cities. For example, Missoula Rue or Galveston Rue. And, as noted above, this bond does not mandate that municipalities use Portland restrooms. His 2021 article in MIT Technology Review compared the Portland Loo to a model developed and used in Montreal. Competition: C’est bon!
Where to put these toilets is a natural question. But that’s what people are already thinking. Portland’s restrooms have specific recommendations for placement, and according to his ADN article on January 6, potential sites have already been identified and evaluated (with another set aside for this purpose). (use funds). If voters approve the bond on April 2, “the city will have on-the-ground data,” said member Meg Zaratel.
Finally, consider one of the answers I’ve heard from many people, including Patkotak. “$500,000 is more than my house is worth!” That’s a natural reaction. But let’s be serious. As explained above, the actual cost per unit may end up being lower, and that number includes operations and maintenance. No offense, but your home probably won’t be up to the task. Even if your house could magically be relocated to the perfect location for a public restroom, just imagine how that would play out. There are a lot of things that can go very wrong with a typical home. These public restrooms the city is considering are designed to serve this specific purpose far better than a typical residential building. It’s apples and oranges. But with all these practical issues in mind, if you think you can come up with a better design than the Portland Loo, go for it. Let’s take a look. Please check the specifications of available products. Send your ideas to local governments.
That’s the conclusion. Don’t just wash your hands and look away. So, yes, I wash my hands, but only after I finish my errands. To me, Proposition 8 is great. And before you downvote, please do your research.
doug miller I have lived in Anchorage for over 20 years and use the restroom frequently.
The views expressed here are those of the author and are not necessarily endorsed by the Anchorage Daily News, which welcomes a wide range of viewpoints.To submit your work for consideration, please send an email Commentary(at)adn.com. Submissions of less than 200 words should be sent to: [email protected] or Click here to submit from any web browser.Read all guidelines for letters and comments here.