Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

CyberX

Wyoming Cost Recovery Program

Wyoming Cost Recovery Program   23 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you favor Wyoming's cost recovery program?

    • Yes
      7
    • No
      13
    • No opinion
      3

Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

10 posts in this topic

http://www.mlive.com/southwestadvance/index.ssf/2007/12/wyoming_puts_end_to_cost_recov.html

I've been viewing this forum for the past two months and am very impressed with the number of opinions from so many people in the Grand Rapids area. Please provide as much feedback on Wyoming's Cost Recovery program as you can; because believe it or not, people at City Hall actually care about what you have to say...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Thanks for the poll and feedback CyberX! I'm going to move this poll to the GR Coffee House section as it is not development related, and will probably get more responses there.

Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Voted in favor of the program. I am a Wyoming resident. The police says that accidents have gone down by 12% since the program was started. Of course, who knows how much of that was due to the program. The quote from that one commissioner who argued against continuing the program due to less than expected revenue is missing the point, I think. If the program is successful, the revenue should be declining as time goes on. You want there to be less accidents, leading to less money to have to recover. At the very least, some analysis should be done to determine the relationship between the number of accients and the program. Until I see a conclusion that the program was little to no factor in that trend, I'm giving the program the benefit of the doubt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^Maybe the program works. Maybe not. But no matter. I think its unfair that Wyoming residents are not nailed with this fee while outsiders are. From the way I see it, this whole fee bit is a loud and clear message to stay out of Wyoming. Now if the fee was charged to residents as well as non residences then I would not have so much of a problem with the fee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I personally know one of the city counslers. So I do have some info. The other thing is that one of the city commissioners also come into my work often. As such what happened was the commission (not sure which one just I know there is 12 people on the commission) In anycase they had to vote on it as well. Well two motions were setup. First was to go with the board but delay 6 months to allow the contract with the firm to expire. Well nobody liked that one. The second was to just kill it then and there. Well that failed 4 to 8. I would tell ya the commission but my gut feeling is that its the planning. In anycase my contact did not understand why they feel they need to collect when the cost to do so is more expensive than the fee. But given some of out estemed city folks, i am not suprised.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was in favor of this even though I don't live in Wyoming. It charged at-fault parties so I dont see why it would be a "stay away" sign unless you plan on causing accidents in the city. Why not charge the at-fault people?

If what francishu is true and that accidents declined in the city 12% I would agree that the true goal of the plan of reducing accidents is working. It should not be a revenue decision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I was in favor of this even though I don't live in Wyoming. It charged at-fault parties so I dont see why it would be a "stay away" sign unless you plan on causing accidents in the city. Why not charge the at-fault people?

If what francishu is true and that accidents declined in the city 12% I would agree that the true goal of the plan of reducing accidents is working. It should not be a revenue decision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not gonna lie... we avoid Wyoming because of this program. Its easy to say the 'at-fault' party is the one charged, but that is determined by an officer that did not see what really happened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Not gonna lie... we avoid Wyoming because of this program. Its easy to say the 'at-fault' party is the one charged, but that is determined by an officer that did not see what really happened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I was in favor of this even though I don't live in Wyoming. It charged at-fault parties so I dont see why it would be a "stay away" sign unless you plan on causing accidents in the city. Why not charge the at-fault people?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.