A2Politico: Ann Arbor Politics Grilled To Perfection

August 27, 2010

The Politics of Culture: Ann Arbor Launches the National Pilot Fish Fry Festival

Filed under: art, politics — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , — A2 Politico @ 8:00 am
VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rate this posting
Rating: 5.0/5 (4 votes cast)

I like Constance Crump’s thoughtful writing. I particularly like writers who, with a simple question, can get me all tangled up in trying to figure out the answer. I first read Crump’s blog post a few days ago. Initially, I didn’t get hooked. Who cares if Austin has music, Sundance has film, Aspen has comedy and the Bay Area has, well, I don’t know how Crump zeroed in on the single festival she chose? Then, Connie Crump Cicked the ball through the uprights when she wrote, “Ann Arbor has football as our signature event, culture-vulture yearnings to the contrary…what brings most people here on a most consistent basis is football.”

Football is our signature event? Our. Signature. Event. Football is the signature event of the University of Michigan. To say football is our signature event is, well, some very co-dependent reasoning. It’s kind of like saying: My neighbor’s a doctor, so medicine is my forte. Before you slacker profs. employed to teach 9 hours per week, 8 months per year—when you’re not on sabbatical or spring break—get your leather briefcases in a bunch, I’ll make sure to give lip service and say what Crump didn’t. Graduation, not sports, is the signature event at colleges and universities. Allegedly.

Now, I’m going to let those of you who aren’t among the inside Scrabble players in higher education in on a dirty little secret: fewer and fewer colleges students are graduating. That’s right, after spending an average of $11,000 per year on tuition, room and board, close to half of America’s 18,000,000 undergraduate college students never reach the promised land. If you really want to ferret out a possible explanation for why Americans ages 15-24 read, on average, one book per year, or seven minutes per day, look at graduation rates. Then, consider student-athletes. At some schools, non-white athletes have a better chance of getting struck by lightning than earning an undergraduate degree. Before you feel smug, because, obviously, those colleges are all nestled in states that backed coach Jefferson Davis, hold on to your maize and blue butt-warmer. At the University of Michigan, 83 percent of students graduate, and on average, 73 percent of athletes do. A look at the school’s football program should sober you right up. In that program, 58 percent of the white student-athletes graduate, but just 38 percent of the black players do, according to data from Black Issues in Higher Education.

So it is a big deal that only 38 percent of black football players at U of M graduate? Hell yes it is. According to data from the 2000 Census, someone with a bachelor’s degree earns nearly $1 million more over his or her lifetime than a high school graduate. Census Bureau data show a college graduate can expect to earn $2.1 million working full-time between ages 25 and 64, which demographers call a typical work-life period. A master’s degree-holder is projected to earn $2.5 million, while someone with a professional degree, such as a doctor or lawyer, could make even more — $4.4 million. In contrast, a high school graduate can expect to make $1.2 million during the working years. 

Could it be different? You bet. At Boise State University, 24 percent of students graduate, and 54 percent of student athletes graduate. In that school’s football program, 57 of black athletes graduate, and 47 percent of white football players do.

In the higher ed biz, that’s called the “graduation gap,” and excepting Boise State’s record, black student-athletes generally graduate less often than their white teammates. Every time the geeky editors The Chronicle of Higher Education or, (please, God, no) Black Issues in Education feel the need to kick-up some sand at the beach, they publish features about athlete graduation rates in higher education.

Those of you wearing your rose-colored glasses, and who are under the impression that many of the student-athletes who don’t graduate end up turning pro, here’s what The Christian Science Monitor has to say about that:

21% of Division I male athletes want to turn pro.

1% of college athletes go on to play at the professional level.

Football at the University of Michigan, Crump’s so-called “signature event” of Ann Arbor, is about exploitation and big money for the patricians who can afford the tickets, transportation, housing, and who make money off of the people who come to town for the football games, etc.., and not the Saturday afternoon gladiators who play the game. The next time you get invited by Dr. Coleman to one of her comfy lairs at the various stadia, where she hosts donors, politicos and other bigwigs like you, casually bring up the subject of graduation rates of the black athletes. Then run. Fast. Because the burly, yet erudite Deans of the School of Student-Athlete Tutoring will be chasing you. You see, U of M football generates piles of cash for the university and the town on the backs of oodles of black athletes, 62 percent of whom will never enjoy the lifetime earnings income boost an undergraduate degree provides. In her piece, Crump quotes Mary A. Kerr, president of the Ann Arbor Area Convention and Visitors Bureau: ”It [U of M football] brings in $80 million for eight home games a year. 60 percent (of people who attend) come from outside of Washtenaw County.”

So why doesn’t Ann Arbor have a nationally-recognized festival all its own? Partially, I think, it has to do with this mentality that the University of Michigan is us. And the fact that there are way too many politicos in office who would kill to get an invite to Coleman’s private viewing box, blaxploitation be damned. The University has never been us, and never will be. The University is the shark, circling, swimming, feeding, hunting for great land deals, like our parkland for U of M’s Fuller Road parking garage. Thus, Ann Arbor serves as a Pilot fish of a town, swimming into the shark’s mouth to clean the predator’s teeth. The Stadium bridges fiasco rests squarely on the shoulders of the current mayor and Council as they approved staff-generated Capital Improvement Plans that did not include the replacement of the crumbling bridge. When City Administrator Roger Fraser went to our university neighbor to ask if, perhaps, U of M could chip in on the Stadium Bridge replacement tab—after all tens of thousands visitors travel over the bridge on their way to football and basketball games—the answer was a resounding “No.” Pilot fish, you see, get little in return for their efforts. Pilot fish should be happy they don’t get eaten, right?

Outside Magazine did a feature recently about the 25 best cities to live in, and in Michigan the magazine editors chose Grand Rapids. The editors wrote: “Where do you end up when you want a community with incredible access to the outdoors, affordable homes, and solid jobs?” Here’s how they described GR:

Michigan’s second-largest city will surprise you. For starters, the regional economy is both more diverse and more robust than Detroit’s—and includes everything from furniture (Herman Miller and Steelcase) to health and beauty (Amway) to footwear (Wolverine Worldwide). Plus, despite the state’s overall woes and high unemployment, G.R. is, dare we say, thriving. In the past few years, it’s gained a riverfront luxury hotel, a medical school, and the world’s first LEED-certified museum. What’s more, the county recently set aside 1,500 acres for a downtown park, and Grand Rapids’ newly established ArtPrize competition—the largest art contest in the world by prize money—resulted in 1,200 works of public art on display throughout downtown.

Connie Crump recognizes that Grand Rapids hit gold with ArtPrize: 

Sadly, Hash Bash and the Naked Mile compete with Tree Town athletics and arts events for regional and national attention. Thankfully, both are endangered or extinct. Plenty of other local festivals fill the calendar but none have taken the crown as ArtPrize has done for Grand Rapids. After only one year, ArtPrize has established an indelible community identity for the city.

Compare how GR put together its ArtPrize competition with how Ann Arbor launched its Percent for the Arts Program, and chose its first project and artist. About GR Crump writes, “Total community involvement was the key to success for ArtPrize in Grand Rapids last year, says the program’s executive director, Bill Holsinger-Robinson. Having a $250,000 first prize and a total $449,000 purse doesn’t hurt, either, he adds.” At just about the same time GR was putting together its ArtPrize competition, Ann Arbor was appointing a group of insiders to the Public Art Commission, people who would have no problem with a Task Force comprised of hand-picked Municipal Center “stakeholders,” recommending the first project be awarded to a German artist. The city’s web site explains away the hiring of the German artist this way: 

Because the water-related project had to be designed in time to be incorporated into the basic infrastructure of the building, the Public Art Task Force decided to commission one artist to begin working on a design immediately. It recommended Herbert Dreiseitl.

Thus, Ann Arbor used a selection process that enraged local artists and shut out, rather than encouraged the participation of large numbers of artists and citizens. Meanwhile, Grand Rapids devised ArtPrize with a process that was described by the program’s executive director, Bill Holsinger-Robinson thusly, “A lot of what we did last year was based upon one-on-one outreach, really — and a lot of trying to stay out of the public’s way and (let them) determine how they were going to participate. Even though art was the focus of the event, the community played on the main stage. We make everything as accessible to participate in as many ways as possible.”

Grand Rapids is becoming a cutting edge community, and Ann Arbor is becoming Little Southfield, a bugie bedroom berg.

Yet, here in A2, our Pilot fish Mayor and Council act as though they could show those Grand Rapids Gramublicans a thing or two about how a cool, cutting edge city works. [Please note: Versions of this same clever strategy  are currently being used to try to privatize Huron Hills Golf Course, and to dispose of public land next to the Library downtown.]

First, John Hieftje creates and hand picks a National Festival Task Force from among Hizzoner’s political pals, donors, present political appointees or, better still, his basketball buddies.

Next, Council quickly rubber stamps all of the appointments.

Second Ward Council member, Stephen Rapundalo, when running for re-election in 2011, will refer to the rubber-stamping of mayoral appointments as an example of “efficiency in city government” which he “spearheaded.” Ann Arbor CFO Tom Crawford will be quoted by Rapundalo as swearing to Zeus that rubber stamping board and commission appointments saves someone, anyone, everyone, really, $15 million dollars. Rapunds will boast (modestly) that the $15 million in savings is, well, “a conservative estimate. It’s probably more, like a brazilian million.” Fourth Ward Council member Marcia Higgins, in her campaign for re-election, will claim to have spearheaded the same rubber stamping initiative, and to have saved the same brazilian million dollars. For good measure, she’ll claim to be safeguarding the money by keeping it in her purse. Third Ward Councilman Steve Kunselman, in his bid for re-election in 2011, will rail ad infinitum against rubber stamping and promise to end it. Someday. Soon. Really. Fifth Ward Councilman, Mike Anglin, will present a resolution to end rubber stamping—only to lack a second. First Ward Council member Sabra Briere will explain in such a way that only the reporter from the AnnArborChronicle.com can understand, why she couldn’t second Anglin’s resolution to end rubber stamping of mayoral appointments. “I was possibly, probably, rarely in favor of Anglin’s proposal,” Briere will email later to confused constituents to whom she’d spoken in support of the resolution.  

Next, the National Festival Task Force will meet monthly, and the city staff assigned to “help” the group will decide exactly what kind of festival Ann Arbor should have. This will be done without ever having to bother with a single public hearing. Yet evidence of more efficiency in government, Stephen Rapundalo/Marcia Higgins will claim on their campaign literature. CFO Crawford will tell the eager local press that public hearings cost the city exactly $15 million dollars per year, or at least he thinks they do. Could be more. Could be less. “I’m just not sure I understand the definition of the word ‘cost,’” Crawford will explain.

Then, once festival plans have been finalized, the National Festival Task Force will be replaced by the Ann Arbor National Festival Commission. (For an appointment to this commission, please see above and start practicing your jump shot or starting saving your money). A National Festival Administrator will be hired full-time, and the Administrator’s salary, benefits, private school tuition for up to three children, retirement, vacation, car and clothing allowances would be paid out of the Economic Development Fund, Water and Sewer Fund, with a dash of cash from the Fleet Fund.

Four years later, the Ann Arbor National Festival Commission will announce to a stunned public who’d forgotten there was a National Festival Commission, that the first annual Ann Arbor National Pilot Fish Fry Festival is scheduled to be held on Whitsuntide in the spacious party room at Arbor Brewing Company, with entertainment provided by the members of the Downtown Development Authority, who are renowned for their ability to tell stories, sing, dance and play jokes on taxpayers.

Connie Crump may wonder why Ann Arbor has no national festival to call its own, but in reality the answer is as plain as the fried Pilot fish on her plate.

Popularity: 15% [?]

July 28, 2010

The Politics of the Pen: Dirty Political Tricks Versus Poise & Grace

Filed under: Mayor Hieftje, campaigns, elections, political reporting, politicians, politics — Tags: , , , , , — A2 Politico @ 11:54 am
VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rate this posting
Rating: 4.9/5 (18 votes cast)

A letter to the editor to AnnArbor.com from Ann Arbor voter, Wendy Cooper

Patricia Lesko Has Shown the Poise and Grace of a Leader

“The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy.”-Martin Luther King, Jr.

Our community faces unprecedented challenges now and in the foreseeable future. How has Mr. Heiftje handled the challenges to this point? By eliminating 37 positions from the fire department; 83 positions from the police department; increasing per capita debt by almost 64 percent; increasing parking fines and more than doubling his salary. When faced with his first serious challenger in years, he responded by using political antics and ad hominem attacks on his opponent. When controversy arose over the state of the city or the fact that he is spending over $800,000 dollars on fountain art in front of the over budget city hall building – rather than save public safety jobs – instead of taking responsibility for his decisions he responded with his usual, “It’s not my fault, I feel really bad for those guys, but it’s not my fault.”

In contrast, Ms. Lesko has from the beginning of her campaign focused on ways to restore the positions in public safety lost by Mr. Hieftje’s budget cuts. Her message won the support of the police and firefighter unions early on; even though she made it clear she would not cut any sweetheart deals with them in exchange for their support. When faced with challenges regarding statements made during her campaign stops, she admitted when she was mistaken and corrected the statements. She has continued to focus on the issues that are important in this race and over time some of her statements, especially regarding the loss of positions in the fire department proved premature but true. If she was guilty of anything it was having the ability to see through the political gamesmanship being played by her opponent.

We have all witnessed over the last few weeks the heavy damage that can be leveled by the press when they react without researching the facts behind the story. Shirley Sherrod, lost her reputation, her job, and her dignity when the press picked up on a story written by a reporter with a hidden agenda. It was discovered only after the damage was done that her statements were taken out of context and the statements that didn’t support the message the reporter wished to convey were conveniently left out of the story. The parallels between Ms. Lesko’s treatment by the local press and the Sherrod story are unmistakable. The reporter covering Ms. Lesko, rather than go to city documents for verification, went to her opponent and government officials that report directly to her opponent – hardly trusted sources.

Ms. Lesko has shown that she recognizes at its most basic level the government is here to protect the community it serves and to do that it needs to work with the departments that provide those services. She has also made it painfully clear that the years ahead will force us to make tough decisions – unpopular decisions – and she has stated many times she is not afraid to make those tough decisions while working to build a consensus in the government. Hieftje, on the other hand, seems to be obsessively worried about being popular and voting with the consensus.

It’s time to let Hieftje know that the voters in Ann Arbor are smarter than he gives us credit for, and that we won’t fall for his political antics.

When you vote on August 3rd, ask yourself the following:

Do we really want our Mayor working for the largest land owner in the City? Is he able to remain objective when both he and his wife are employed by the University?

Do we want a Mayor when challenged to say, “It’s not my fault, I can’t do anything about it?”

Or, do we want our Mayor to accept responsibility for his/her actions and work on a solution?

Do we want a Mayor that spends over $850,000 dollars on fountain art in front of his over budget new office building while slashing city services and public safety jobs?

Do we want a Mayor that is prepared to spend millions to assist the University in building another parking lot while the Stadium Bridge and surrounding roads are in major disrepair?

We can’t fall for the dirty political tricks pulled by a candidate that fears for his future. Ms. Lesko has shown over and over that she will not sacrifice others to advance a personal agenda as Mr. Hieftje has done. She has faced challenges and controversy throughout the campaign and each time she has refused to back down or to do something just because it might earn her a few more votes. We owe it to her to listen to her message and not the rhetoric.

Popularity: 58% [?]

May 4, 2010

The Politics of Rescue Heroes: What in the Billy Blazes Is Going On?

Filed under: campaigns, elections, money, politicians, politics — Tags: , , , , , , , , , — A2 Politico @ 5:49 pm
VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rate this posting
Rating: 5.0/5 (7 votes cast)

On April 30th, I predicted the future. I wish I had the same luck with lotto numbers. I think the state jackpot is somewhere around $266 million dollars, and like everyone else out there, $266 million minus taxes could come in pretty handy right about now as my kids close quickly in on the ages where we need to start saving for university. So how did I predict the future with pinpoint accurately? Actually, it wasn’t too tough, and it was a clear-cut case of much of what is dysfunctional in our city government at the moment being played out on the big stage for the general public who care enough to watch on CTN, or read on AnnArbor.com.

At the May 3rd City Council meeting, several “changes” to the proposed 2010-2011 budget were announced. One major “change” was thanks to a $2 million dollar quick fix of cash from the Downtown Development Authority’s coffers. I sat in Council chambers and listened as the incumbent announced that he hoped to “greatly minimize” layoffs in police and fire. He added that the “budget…will be quite remarkable in the state of Michigan when we look at so many cities with tax increases on the ballot and so many cities that are facing very deep cuts and layoffs.” 

So, we’ll lose only 10 police and 10 firefighters instead of 20 each, and we’ll see politicos stumping for re-election claiming to have “saved” jobs. 

Malarky.

Police officer Jamie Adkins explained to City Council on Monday night exactly why playing politics with safety services is like playing with fire. Our city has lost close to half of its police officers and half of its firefighters since 2003. At any given time, there are six-twelve police officers on patrol and just 17 firefighters staffing our five stations. Just so you understand what that means, it takes 17 firefighters to suppress one fire. In a town with a major research university and 45,000 residences, what do you think the chances are that there might be two fires simultaneously? If there were two fires called in, the awful truth is that one of houses would burn while the first fire was being handled. Our firefighters respond to auto wrecks, and emergencies involving hazardous materials, as well. In 2003, before there was the misguided notion that “streamlining” fire and police would be a great way to save a buck, our emergency service departments could handle three emergencies at once.

So, right now, if my house and your house burn, and I call my fire in first, you should call the Mayor and your two City Council members to come over and help with your own bucket brigade, because that’s all you’re going to have until any mutual aid might arrive. I say might, because if the firefighters from the three small surrounding communities with which we are trying to hammer out a mutual aid agreement are busy, they can’t offer any support to Ann Arbor. In fact, only three communities (Ann Arbor Township, Ypsilanti and Ypsilanti Township) would consider participating in our City Administrator’s grand scheme of mutual aid. Several city administrators from surrounding communities turned Ann Arbor down flat: they left a meeting scheduled for two hours after just 20 minutes, and refused to subsidize our safety services at the same time our Mayor and Council were balancing the budget by eliminating police and fire.

At the May 3rd Council meeting, I sat in chambers and watched my predictions come true. Fourth Ward Council member Margie Teall (up for re-election) announced that she and her colleague Marcia Higgins had come up with a plan to save the residents in the Frisinger/Allmendinger Park neighborhood from the indignity of Saturday football parking, proposed in the 2010-2011 budget to raise less than $40K in revenue. Mayor Hieftje then announced that he hoped to “greatly minimize” police and fire layoffs. 

Then came the most touching display of pandering I’ve seen in quite some time. Councilmember Teall announced that she and the Mayor had a plan to to bring forward an amendment on May 17 to maintain funding for human services at 2010 budget levels. In essence, they were announcing a zero percent increase in the funding. What item better to be “rescued” than Human Services funding? Margie Teall even threw out a bone to the other Council members up for re-election when she said that she hoped “other Council members would support her proposed amendments to the 2010-2011 budget.” It was a touching display of political gamesmanship, and a perfect example of how much time, citizen effort and energy is wasted so City Council members can have bullet points for their political résumés.

I was truly offended, but not the least bit surprised. Every budget cycle, there are high profile items put on the chopping block in private Budget Committee meetings for certain Council members up for re-election to “rescue.” In the 2010-2011 budget, it was the Burns Parks Senior Center (Christopher Taylor), Mack Pool (Carsten Hohnke), police, fire and human service funding (Hieftje/Teall), and protecting Allmendinger Park (Teall).

There were police and firefighters present at the Council meeting to plead for funding to keep our city and its citizens safe. There were leaders of several local nonprofit agencies at the meeting Monday night, begging the council not to make cuts to human services. 

So Julie Steiner from the Interfaith Hospitality Network of Washtenaw County took an evening off of her work helping homeless families to remind City Council members that the families served by her agency need, well, help. Ironically, I had earlier in the day helped the folks at Alpha House plan their veggie garden (I built them a raised bed garden the year before as a part of a project sponsored by our synagogue). Katie Doyle from Ozone House took an evening off of her working with homeless youths and runaways to remind Mayor and Council that, well, young people served by her agency need help.

Michael Appel of Avalon Housing was there pleading for human services funding, as well. During 2010, Avalon has enjoyed a taxpayer-funded  $500,000  from the DDA for Avalon’s Near North Development, as well as a two year property tax abatement on all of its properties—a resolution presented to Council without a dollar amount so that Council members would actually know how much of the taxpayers’ money Avalon was being given in abatements. 

You know who was absent? Representatives from U of M begging for the $10 million dollars for the Fuller Road parking garage. I didn’t see a single person from the city’s IT department there to plead for that department’s increased allocation, or a single representative from the fleet department pitching the case for the extra couple of million that department was allocated in the 2010-2011 budget. There was no one there to bow and scrape for money set aside for the so-called Economic Development Fund. No. IT, the Fuller Road parking garage boondoggle, and the Economic Development Fund allocations are not going to be cut.

I have an idea: let’s get Council focused on the multi-million dollar budget items, like city employee pension and health care costs, as opposed to spending endless hours playing Rescue Heroes so they can have something to put on their campaign web sites and campaign literature. It was Thomas Edison who said that invention was 10 percent inspiration and 90 percent perspiration. Inventing crises to resolve, and budget items to “save,” wastes 100 percent of the public’s time and money.

Popularity: 49% [?]

March 11, 2010

The Politics of Playing to the Crowd: Ready For Straight Talk?

Filed under: politicians, politics — Tags: , , , , , , , , , — A2 Politico @ 12:15 pm
VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rate this posting
Rating: 5.0/5 (5 votes cast)

I had a great lunch yesterday with someone who has quite a bit of experience serving Ann Arbor as a member of several city boards and commissions. We had a rousing debate about the Downtown Development Authority, economic development, and leadership. What my lunch companion is looking for in a local politico is, well, someone who’s just willing to up and make a decision already. We disagreed about the recent cell phone ban sponsored by Second Ward Councilmembers Stephen Rapundalo and Tony Derezinski (I consider the ban a waste of taxpayer money and staff time—a politically motivated resolution that, once again, diverts focus from the serious issues that face the city). However, we both agreed that it was nice to see a decision made by Council in a timely manner. The board member brought up Argo Dam, and bemoaned the fact that there have been wasted, literally, years of citizen time trying to make a decision about the disposition of the dam. 

“Just make a decision!” my companion said. “Base the decision on one set of the facts that have been presented by the two advisory boards that studied the situation, and decide.” People might not agree with the decision, the board member reasoned, but would respect the fact that a decision was being made.

I couldn’t agree more.

Decision-making for some politicos gets clouded over by a fear of angering the electorate, and getting tossed out of office. In other words, holding onto the elected office becomes the primary goal. As a result, straight talk, up and down votes, open debate, and “just making a decision,” as the board member said, fall by the wayside. I once had a chat with a Council member, and was told that this person would not push for greater transparency in local government out of the fear that it would anger certain members of the Council majority, and the Council member would, then, be challenged in the primary. A primary challenge was to be avoided at all costs.

No one who runs for office wants to lose the election. However, as I told a group of city employees whom I spoke with, I’m not a career politician. I don’t aspire to spend life in elected office. I’ve worked at my job as a Publisher and CEO for two decades; I have an exit strategy, as the saying goes. Serving in elected office won’t be a stepping stone for me to do anything except return to my current job. That gives me a huge advantage I think. It will certainly free me up to be creative, collaborative, make decisions, and get our city government refocused on its core mission.

Former Ann Arbor Mayor Dr. Samuel Eldersveld recently died at the age of 92. He was elected as a Democrat in 1957, beating out a 12-year Republican incumbent. Dr. Eldersveld was described in his obituary as “an absolute giant” in the field of political science at the University of Michigan, where he taught for five decades. During his time as Mayor, Eldersveld biked to City Hall, then to his university job, then back to City Hall. It was, I imagine, a demanding schedule. He returned to university teaching and research after just two years in office. But what he aimed at in his two years! 

Eldersveld supported the Civil Rights movement, and created the Ann Arbor Human Relations Commission. The Commission aimed to eliminate racial discrimination is housing, banking, education and business in the city, a move that was not universally supported by any means in conservative-leaning Ann Arbor of 1957. He was considered, according to his obit, “a pioneer in ending racial discrimination in the city, and was the first Ann Arbor mayoral candidate to campaign in the city’s African American neighborhoods and churches.” I wish we could say that Dr. Eldersveld’s work ended racial discrimination in Ann Arbor, but anyone who follows the good work of my friend Pam Kisch in her job at the Fair Housing Center knows there’s still work to do. In July 2009, AnnArbor.com posted a piece about a three-year investigation and subsequent federal lawsuit filed by the Fair Housing Center against an Ann Arbor apartment complex.

In fact, as Tony Dearing of AnnArbor.com wrote in a January 2010 editorial, “We’d like to see the City Council be less worried about banning plastic bags and cell phones in cars and bicycles on sidewalks until it’s successfully addressed far more serious issues.”

To refocus government on the basics, to tackle the serious issues is going to mean making some tough decisions, but more than that it’s going to mean pulling together to get the work done. I know I’m ready. There are candidates who’ve entered the First and Fifth Ward City Council races who are ready.

Are you?

Popularity: 37% [?]

March 1, 2010

The Politics of the Pen: 1,082 New A2 Politicos Interested in the Issues

Filed under: City Hall, Mayor Hieftje, city services, money, police, political reporting, politics, taxes — Tags: , , , , , , , , , — A2 Politico @ 9:35 am
VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rate this posting
Rating: 5.0/5 (2 votes cast)

I was at the YMCA last night for the kick-off of the Strong Kids Fundraising Campaign. I raised money for the Campaign last year, as well, and was throughly impressed by the structure and organization of the Campaign. This year, like last year, Joe Upton tops the organizational chart of participants that you’ll see posted on the wall at the Y. Upton and his family own Malloy Printing, to which we moved a good portion of our book printing business several years ago in an effort to bring work home to Michigan, and pump dollars into the state’s economy. 

Scholarships for kids to participate in programs sponsored by the Y are crucial, particularly in these tough economic times. There are many, many people with the same desire to help see to it that kids who wouldn’t otherwise be able to participate in YMCA programs, due to their parents’ inability to pay, are able to do so. Demand for scholarships at the Y has risen sharply, as you can imagine. I’m looking to almost double what I raised last year, or to bring in about $1,200. It will be a small part of the $200,000-$300,000 we raise total, but that’s the whole point—everything raised matters. 

Those of you who’ve been reading this blog know that I like to set goals. I wanted to see if, together, we could get 5,000 people reading A2Politico within five months. We got pretty darn close: 4,734. Thanks to everyone who passed on the link. 

Since I consider this blog to belong to those who stop by and read it on a regular basis, I thought you might like to know that in February, A2P added the most new readers ever, 1,082, for a total of 7,024 readers. We’re closing in on our 2,200th comment. Each entry averages 14 comments. 

Last night at the YMCA event, a Y staffer came up to me and thanked me for entering the Mayor’s race and for writing A2Politico. The staffer said that, at lunch with other Y employees, they talk about the entries and, before knowing the identity of the blogger, spent time trying to figure out who A2P was. I got a compliment on the research that goes into the entries, and the “connect the dots” quality of the work.  

The topic of Friday’s A2Politico connect the dots piece showed up in AnnArbor.com on Sunday. It’s probable that AnnArbor.com government reporter Ryan Stanton and I have been thinking about some of the same issues (more than probable), money primary among them. I was delighted to read that the City Council and City Administrator are finally talking frankly about the two areas that I consider crucial to the economic health of Ann Arbor: employee costs and retiree benefits.

We’ve been told for years by elected politicos and politicos running for re-election that the city has realized “savings” from negotiating co-pays on employee health insurance premiums. In the AnnArbor.com piece we read from Mayor Hieftje:

“We are still struggling with labor contracts that were heavily one-sided that were decided back in the ’70s and ’80s. We’ve been working very hard to try to do more. Employees are contributing more to their health benefits, but not nearly what they need to be.”

Recently, the City Administrator, in a presentation to City Council, presented a chart that showed $25 million in “savings” from the 256 person reduction in our city staff. Sunday’s AnnArbor.com piece demonstrates quite clearly that contrary to “savings,” our elected officials and City Administrator have consistently let employee costs rise since 2002. At the same time, the cost of running government ballooned by $34 million dollars (35 percent) between 2006-2010. While our city bled money, we had elected officials and their endorsers claiming that taxpayers have enjoyed “remarkable” financial leadership from our local politicos that has resulted in “reduced costs” and “increased efficiency” in government. 

It is any wonder there are “struggles” between our elected officials and our labor unions? 

I can tell you from conversations I’ve had with unionized employees that our current Mayor and Council and City Administrator will continue to “struggle” to get concessions from unionized employees for one simple reason: a complete lack of trust. Shuffling money around and between the many funds in our City’s labyrinth of a budget for the past decade, inflating deficits, creating the impression that the budget “expert” was a single City Council member (who quite obviously was not, judging from the results), claiming “savings” and “increased efficiency” when there were none, resulted in intense mistrust on the part of our city’s unionized employees. Quite frankly, they feel they’ve been deliberately misled, and money has been hidden. The books are not open to them, and they are routinely refused access to financial data by city officials.

How do we go forward? The City’s elected officials have had a plan to bring the cost of city employee retiree benefits into line since 2005. The Mayor appointed a Blue Ribbon panel to look into the program (a good move), but then never implemented the panel’s suggestions. Now, we have to re-examine the panel’s recommendations (it could be that some are outdated) as quickly as is practicable, then tackle the dragon that is the single largest line item in the city’s budget: city employee pension and retiree health care benefits. I think we should move heaven and earth to keep the financial promises made to past employees, with some obvious changes, such as adjusting health care co-pays. As for future retirees, it’s quite clear that we must completely redesign the program.

Unfortunately, at City Hall the mantra is still “revenues are down.” Yes, they are. However, let’s get real. Spending on overhead is up. Way up. Out of control up 35 percent since 2006. Debt payments are up, as well, to $3.9 million per year, from $900,000 in 2005.

The way to get a handle on the bleeding is to put a moratorium on all non-essential spending, particularly before any further cuts are made to our city’s human capital. Let’s start with the million dollar line items: Is the Fuller Transportation Station essential spending, or are police officers? The money for the station is being diverted from the General Fund, which pays for public safety services. Did we need to spend $6.4 million to change to ecologically regressive single-stream recycling at the moment? Just because the money is budgeted, and the politicos behind the move, Fourth Ward Council member Margie Teall, the Mayor and Fifth Ward’s Carsten Hohnke are all up for re-election, doesn’t mean we need to spend it.

Savings accumulated from the solid waste millage could be returned to taxpayers in the form of credits.

Local politics hits us all right where we live, so to the 1,000 new readers of A2Politico.com, I extend a warm welcome. I look forward to reading your comments about how our money is being managed by those at City Hall. What do you think we should be spending our tax dollars on?

Popularity: 32% [?]

February 16, 2010

The Politics of Governing: Should City Council Draft Resolutions That Address International Political Issues?

Filed under: city council, politics, weekend poll — Tags: , , , — A2 Politico @ 5:01 pm
VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rate this posting
Rating: 5.0/5 (4 votes cast)

I was walking Flash (the family’s new Jack Russell pooch) in the woods this afternoon, and ran into a neighbor who’s quite an active local politico. During the course of our conversation about my run for office, she wanted to know where I stand on City Council drafting resolutions at the prompting of citizen groups that comment on international policy issues. We ended our conversation with a promise to get together to discuss the topic further. She’s not the first person to have asked me this question, or to have expressed an opinion about Ann Arbor City Council responding to international policy via Council resolution. Thus far, opinion among those whom I discussed the issue with has been pretty evenly split between those opposed and those in favor of the practice. 

Those opposed object to local political issues taking a back seat to international politics. City Council and Mayor, so say those on this side of the debate, have an obligation to tend to local issues, concerns and challenges. They see devoting time to international politics as a form of political grandstanding. “People in Ann Arbor,” one politico snapped, “may think the town is the center of the universe, but it’s not.” Local people who want to impact foreign policy, so say these politicos, need to write to their congressional leaders. On the other side of the aisle are Ann Arbor politicos who see city government as a way to move federal foreign policy issues one way or the other. They see City Council as a “voice of the people” who bring the issues to the forefront. 

I’ve decided to put up a poll. As always, one vote per customer. If you’re inclined to leave comments, I’d be interested to hear your thoughts on the subject in more detail. What do you think? Should Ann Arbor City Council draft resolutions that address international political issues, or should Council keep its nose our of other people’s political business and tend to its local political issues?

Popularity: 33% [?]

February 15, 2010

The Politics of Grandstanding: The Three Percent Solution Resolution

Filed under: city council, money, politics — Tags: , , , , , , , , — A2 Politico @ 3:30 pm
VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rate this posting
Rating: 5.0/5 (4 votes cast)

Between 2004 and 2009, Fourth Ward Council member Marcia Higgins, Mayor Hieftje,  Fourth Ward Council member Margie Teall, and Second Ward’s Stephen Rapundalo voted, as Chair and members, respectively, of the City Council’s Budget and Labor Committee to give City Administrator Roger Fraser the following salary increases, lump sum payments and cash-outs:

In December 2004, Fraser received a 3 percent raise of his $133,000 salary retroactive to July 2004. ($3,990)

In December 2005, he received a 3 percent raise retroactive to July 2005 and 10 extra vacation days, which can be exchanged for cash. ($4,109)

In February 2007, he received a one-time payment of $8,479, plus a life insurance policy worth twice his salary.

In November 2007, the City Council approved a lump sum payment of $4,361 and five extra vacation days.

In October 2008, the council approved giving Fraser another lump sum payment of $3,634 and the ability to cash out 150 hours of vacation, sick or personal time.

This past November 2009, Fraser’s contract was revised again to include a clause that allows him to cash out an additional 120 hours of paid time off before June 30, 2010.

Since 2004, Council members Higgins and Rapundalo have voted to raise Mr. Fraser’s salary by $8,099 dollars, and given him lump sum payments equal to $16,744 dollars. That’s a total of $24,843 in cash. They then added the option for Mr. Fraser to cash-out 275 hours (6.8 weeks) of paid vacation, sick and personal time, worth over $18,800. In total, then, Mayor Hieftje and Council members Teall, Higgins and Rapundalo voted to give our City Administrator raises, lump sum payments and cash-outs equal to $43,643. This amounts to a 35 percent increase in his initial $133,000 salary. Ironically, this is exactly the same percentage that overhead has grown in our city’s budget since 2006. In my experience, outside of Wall Street, an employee under whose management overhead costs increase by 35 percent ($34 million dollars) does not get rewarded with a pay package increase equal to 35 percent of her/his starting base salary.

Council members Rapundalo and Higgins  are now co-sponsoring a resolution that, according to a piece posted to AnnArbor.com, “…asks that the base salary of both Fraser and City Attorney Stephen Postema be reduced by 3 percent, starting July 1. It also asks that the base salaries of all other non-union employees be reduced by 3 percent.” A draft of the resolution also asks that the remaining two council members who did not voluntarily reduce their own pay by three percent this year do so—Fifth Ward’s Mike Anglin, and third Ward’s Stephen Kunselman.

On the surface, their resolution appears sensible and equitable, even responsible. However, upon closer scrutiny it is quite the opposite. It is neither a resolution worth supporting, nor a resolution that treats the city’s 765 employees equitably. The proposed three percent reduction in Mr. Fraser’s salary leaves him with a net 32 percent increase in his pay since 2004. Further the Higgins-Rapundalo resolution links their proposed three percent reduction to the proposal that all of the city’s non-unionized employees to accept a lifetime three percent pay reduction. The Higgins-Rapundalo resolution penalizes the lowest paid city employees and protects pay gains given to the highest paid city employees over the course of the past five years.

Council members Higgins and Rapundalo agreed to a voluntary three percent pay reduction. However, Council members Higgins and Rapundalo would do well to remember that they were caught via FOIAed emails published in a piece in the Ann Arbor News rigging the vote for the three percent pay raise they voted to accept in 2007. Mayor Hieftje and Council would do well to remember that their voluntary pay cut is, in essence, a one-time give back. The give back being asked of current unionized, as well as non-unionized employees is for the rest of their tenure as employees of the City of Ann Arbor. 

It’s time to stop political grandstanding that accomplishes little than further angering already demoralized city staff and union members. It’s time to get down to the hard work of rolling back the $34 million dollars in overhead increases that Council members Higgins and Rapundalo allowed to slip past them unquestioned, over the past four years. Council needs to direct the City Administrator and CFO to devise a plan to reduce staffing costs that is truly equitable and reflects a commitment to tie compensation directly to performance and the fiscal health of the City. 

The current Higgins-Rapundalo proposed resolution reflects precious little understanding of pay equity, and sends the message that our City Council cares little about the lowest paid city employees, and instead intends to protect tens of thousands of dollars in raises they’ve awarded to those highest paid city managers.

It’s good politics and terribly regressive leadership. In short, once again, it’s business as usual.

Popularity: 29% [?]

February 13, 2010

The Politics of Temper: Making Ann Arbor Stronger and More Resilient

Filed under: politics — Tags: , , , , , , , — A2 Politico @ 7:35 am
VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rate this posting
Rating: 5.0/5 (3 votes cast)

I turned 49 this year. I am the Publisher and CEO of a national higher education publishing group headquartered here in Ann Arbor. No other academic publisher in the country publishes the kinds of books or serves the audience we do. Half of the country’s 5,000 colleges and universities are our customers. About four years ago, I brought all of our book printing work back to Michigan, because I wanted to support the state economy. As luck would have it, I was able to hammer out a great contract with Joe Upton at Malloy Printing, on Jackson and Zeeb.  Malloy, is a family business owned by the Uptons. Joe Upton, VP of Sales and Marketing, served on Ann Arbor City Council in 2000, and I was pleased to work with him on the YMCA’s Strong Kids fundraising campaign last year. 

If there is one personality trait of which I am proudest, it’s my ability to be be forward-thinking. Our company has had a web page since 1992. I worked with our programmer to design our own online micro-payment system to sell individual magazine articles to readers before PayPal was a common noun, and “leverage content” became a publishing industry catch-phrase. I moved our print magazine online five years ago, well before The Christian Science Monitor and the Seattle Post-Intelligencer did so. It’s sometimes difficult to be forward-thinking. I often spend lots of time convincing my colleagues and employees that change is just a synonym for success. Someone posted in a comment to AnnArbor.com (an overall positive comment) that I seem to lack temper. I found this interesting, particularly because the word “temper” has a several meanings. I’ll list them:

1 : to dilute, qualify, or soften by the addition or influence of something else : moderate <temper justice with mercy>
2 archaic a : to exercise control over : govern, restrain b : to cause to be well disposed : mollify<tempered and reconciled them both — Richard Steele>
3 : to bring to a suitable state by mixing in or adding a usually liquid ingredient: as a : to mix (clay) with water or a modifier (as grog) and knead to a uniform texture b : to mix oil with (colors) in making paint ready for use 
4 a (1) : to soften (as hardened steel or cast iron) by reheating at a lower temperature (2) : to harden (as steel) by reheating and cooling in oil b : to anneal or toughen (glass) by a process of gradually heating and cooling
5 : to make stronger and more resilient

So which did the writer mean? I suspect it was the first, “to moderate,” as in tempering justice with mercy. I find it interesting that number 4 a & b present opposite meanings of the word. One can temper something to make it harder or softer.

Does Secretary of State Hillary Clinton lack temper? Did Democratic Texas Governor Ann Richards? How about Mother Jones? It’s an interesting question, particularly given that Ann Arbor has only had two women mayors over the past 160 years. Is temper really the question?

You tell me.

Part of my job for the past two decades has been to comment on higher education policy for a variety of national magazines and newspapers. Getting Americans to care about higher education policy on a level that is both fundamental and immediate is a challenge. Several years ago, I was a guest on Terry Gross’s NPR program Fresh Air, and the host, after the show, actually complimented my lack of temper. Evidently, higher education policy wonks can be a stultifying and tweedy lot. I was not. If anything, I’ve been willing, for the sake of my work, to write and speak in ways that can clash with what we might call “Midwest nice.” I have no problem dealing with conflict, if a situation demands it. Part of this was born through 16 years of officiating high school and recreational sports.

When I began officiating in the mid-70s, in high school, only about 10 percent of all sports officials in the country were women. More than a few times I walked onto the field or court, and was the first and only woman official the players had ever seen. Officiating sports tempered me (as in definition number 5, above). There is nothing so disconcerting as knowing that the minute you open your mouth, half of the people are going to be irked. “The ball was fair. The catch was inbounds. The home team was the last to touch the basketball. The blocker was in the net.” There is nothing so powerful as being able to live with the fact that people will be irked, because you are confident that you made the right call. There is nothing so powerful as being able to admit a mistake, because you know your job is to make the right call, not to simply be right, but to be just, fair and impartial.

I am choleric, for those who ascribe to the Four Temperaments theory, a doer. I am very ambitious, energetic and passionate, and I like nothing better than to try to instill those things in others. 

This is part of why I believe that local politics is so important, too important to be excluded from the day-to-day conversations about politics that we have. It was the great Tip O’Neill, long-time Speaker of the House, whose father told him that “All politics is local.” O’Neill had lost a city council race, and his father had explained that though O’Neill had worked hard in other sections of the city, he’d neglected his own backyard, his own neighborhood.

Ann Arbor’s own backyard has been neglected for a decade. We’re the fifth largest city in Michigan, but our growth has stagnated, our tax base is overburdened. Ann Arbor can’t possibly hope to grow, lead or build on the natural advantages we have unless we stop neglecting our own backyard, our roads, our infrastructure, and our neighborhoods, and start spending the tax dollars we have responsibly. Do I lack temper?

That’s depends on how you define the word.

Popularity: 28% [?]

January 21, 2010

How Cheaply Can A Councilmember Be Bought Off?

Filed under: campaigns, politicians, politics — Tags: , , , , , , , , , — A2 Politico @ 2:14 pm
VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rate this posting
Rating: 5.0/5 (6 votes cast)

We live in a small town. There are about 56,000 adult, non-student residents in Ann Arbor. That’s a relatively small political gene pool. I know of someone who won’t run for City Council simply because the Council member against whom he would have to run is his neighbor.

If you’re A2P, you think, “So what? May the best neighbor win.” However, we’re also midwesterners. Nice midwesterners. Well, mostly. There are some Council members, including the one referenced above, whom an investigative piece published in the Ann Arbor News last June showed to be well, not so nice. 

In a comment on another post, local blogger and former county Board politico Vivienne Armentrout suggests that it’s absurd to think a local politico can be bought off for $100. Former City Council member Leslie Morris writes over at AnnArborChronicle.com (where there was a rousing discussion of a post about First Ward Council member Sabra Briere on A2Politico) that local politicos can’t be bought off for $500. 

Morris writes: “The notion that an Ann Arbor city council member could be bought (or even alter a vote or position) for a $500 campaign contribution is ludicrous, insulting and demonstrates a complete misunderstanding of the way our local political process operates. I spent six years on city council, worked on many campaigns for local office, and attended city council meetings as a citizen for years. During that time I observed (and participated in) many serious fights over controversial development projects, budget decisions, etc. As strange as it may seem to a naive and suspicious observer, the various participants in these fights actually believe in the positions they take, and are convinced that their opponents are wrong. City council members sacrifice huge amounts of their time, and considerable amounts of money to do their jobs. I have disagreed vehemently with many of them on numerous issues. I have even disliked some of them. But the thought that even a single one of them (including the ones I disagree with or dislike) could be bought for $500 is just plain silly.”

But that Leslie Morris and Armentrout were right. The truth is that Ann Arbor politicos can be impressed with miniscule amounts of money and opportunities to rub elbows with fat cat developers, state-level politicos, and the titled royalty who inhabit the University of Michigan. In our small town, it’s more about moving up the social pecking order than actual graft.

First off, let’s define by what we mean as “bought off.” Does this mean that the politico in question votes in favor of a particular project, or votes in favor of throwing city work to a particular individual? Does it mean that the politicos give political favors to their donors? Yes. Yes. And yes. Are we talking Blago-sized portions? Nope. I’m willing to bet the ranch that no one in local elected office is selling anything for $50,000 servings of greenbacks. 

Third Ward’s Steve Kunselman ran for re-election to office on “ethics” and bringing back integrity to City Council. He has been in office since November, and the only guy singing and dancing about ethics is Third Ward Council member Christopher Taylor. I sent Kunselman an email asking where he is on his campaign promise to bring integrity back to Council. His answer?

“I ran. Chris championed. We’re meeting.” 

Does that answer mean Steve Kunselman considers ethics and integrity little more than convenient friends while campaigning? I hope not. It’s not good enough for him to say he ran on the issues and Chris Taylor is the one who will “champion” ethics. As I’ve written before, Chris Taylor has absolutely no standing to champion ethics for his colleagues on Council. Furthermore, these are the same people who simply broke every rule they wanted to before being caught by FOIAed emails. They won’t adhere to an ethics policy; it’s clear the veteran Council members believed for years, literally, they were above common sense, common courtesy, common decency, Open Meetings Act laws and their own Council rules already in place. 

Council’s self-appointed ethics expert (thanks to his experience as an entertainment and intellectual property attorney, and his experience getting fingered by the Ann Arbor News in June of 2009 for, well, behaving rather unethically during City Council meetings) demonstrated more hubris than ethical behavior. So where’s Council member Kunselman on ethics? Voters have come to expect empty promises, but it is particularly dangerous to run on ethics, get elected, and then go mute on the subject. 

Lord knows the Mayor isn’t going to bring up ethics anytime soon.  He’s too busy cashing his checks from the Univeristy of Michigan. It could be argued that the University of Michigan saves millions every year by giving the Mayor and his wife jobs that pay, in total, under $40,000 per year, almost equal to the salary paid to the Mayor by the city. The Mayor has pointed out that current Michigan State Senator Liz Brater worked for U of M when she was mayor of Ann Arbor. As my mother might have said to Hieftje, “Yeah, well, and if Liz Brater jumped off a cliff, would you jump, too?” It was just as unethical for Brater to cozy up to U of M as it is for our Mayor. At least Brater had a beard—her husband, Enoch, a tenured professor. Universities routinely hand out lecturer jobs to the spouses of tenured faculty. In the case of Mayor Hieftje, he has neither the tenured spouse nor the academic qualifications to teach graduate school at Michigan. So why is he there? Because he’s the Mayor of Ann Arbor, and it benefits the university of have our myaor in their pocket. 

Luckily for local developers, and others who come to town to build, not to mention the University of Michigan, our local politicos are cheap dates. Small-town, small-plan, small-potato politicos who are happy with burger and fries-sized “donations” from people who make hundreds of boatloads of money off development deals.

Dr. Mary Sue Coleman, with her doctorate in playing hardball with our Mayor and City Council, has said that voluntary payments to the city in lieu of the millions in property taxes her non-profit doesn’t have to pay, just ain’t never gonna happen. (Coleman, of course, didn’t use the words “ain’t” or “gonna.”) Thus, for the Mayor with a B.A., a chance to teach at the University and pretend to be a “professor,” the chance to rub elbows with Deans and other titled nobility at U of M, and $16,000 a year is enough to co-opt him. The results of this relationship between our Mayor and the University? As opposed to negotiating with the university in the best interests of citizens, he recently gave U of M parkland on which to build a parking desk near U of M hospital. He even offered up $14 million dollars to help U of M build the parking garage. Ann Arbor citizens will not, however, be allowed to park in it “at first,” according to a a news piece about the parkland giveaway.

For Marcia Higgins, a $2,500 donation from the Firefighter’s PAC, while she chairs the Committee that negotiates labor contracts, doesn’t ring any ethical fire bells for her. However, that $2,500 donation was a huge amount of money in a campaign where the average donation was $50-$100. In Higgins’s campaign that PAC donation represented 40 percent of the total money she raised. In an Ann Arbor race, a $1,000 donation from a PAC is as close to feeling like a big-time player as any of our local politicos are ever going to get. 

Interestingly, the Firefighter’s PAC stiffed Marcia Higgins this past August when she ran for re-election in a contested race, and soon thereafter found themselves threatened with layoffs, and subsequently forced to swallow a steep pay cut in exchange for a six month breather. Come June, the firefighters will find themselves once again the target of lay-offs or further reductions in salary and benefits. I’ll be watching their PAC donations closely this summer during campaigning season.

Add to this the interesting fact that Ann Arbor fits the profile developed by two researchers from Dartmouth of places where political corruption flourishes in the United States. Authors Amanda Maxwell and Richard F. Winters write in their paper “Political Corruption in America” that cities, “with well-informed and highly participant political cultures have lower rates of corruption.” In Ann Arbor’s last August primary election, fewer than 10 percent of registered voters went to the polls city-wide.

Of course, fitting a profile doesn’t mean there is political corruption. On the other hand, watching the Library Lot RFP twist & shout currently going on makes it hard to give Mayor and Council the benefit of the doubt. One of the six bidders had an 18-month head start and opportunities to pitch their “concept” in private to our Council members prior to the March 2009 vote to create the RFP to solicit proposals for the 1.2 acre Library Lot site. I wrote about the bidder’s contact with city staff and Council members here.

Perhaps what Ann Arbor suffers from most is advanced Cronyism. As I written before, the Mayor collected 35 percent  of his campaign donations the last time he ran from those whom he’d appointed to the city’s many boards and commissions. In Illinois, that’s referred to as pay-to-play, but in Ann Arbor the amounts are so ridiculously low that to label it corruption seems a misuse of the term.

As always, I’d be interested to know what other A2 politicos out there think about the subject.

Popularity: 24% [?]

January 13, 2010

The Politics of Opportunism: Defining John Hieftje As “Progressive”

Filed under: Mayor Hieftje, best of A2Politico, politics — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , — A2 Politico @ 7:40 pm
VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rate this posting
Rating: 5.0/5 (7 votes cast)

We’ve had almost a decade of  Mayor John Hieftje. Let me confess something: I voted for John Hieftje three times. The other two times I voted for Fifth Ward’s former Council member Wendy Woods when she ran for Mayor, and then, in 2008, for businessman Tom Wall. By 2008, I would have voted for Satan if he’d have run against our Mayor. So how is it that I have become increasingly disillusioned with Hieftje, a politico with whom I have shared any number of political causes, interests and enthusiasms? How can I, literally, have come to politically oppose a man whom I should be able to find reasons to support?

Like some transformations, it was a slow process. However, I have come to think of John Hieftje as the Paper Mayor. He has a long political résumé, such as the one he has posted to the City of Ann Arbor’s web site. Politicos about town, such as the Ecology Center’s Executive Director Mike Garfield, provide handy testimonials such as this one:

“John Hieftje has the strongest environmental record of any Mayor in the Midwest. He’s championed the city’s Greenbelt, the clean energy initiative, commuter rail, bicycling and our terrific parks system. These programs set Ann Arbor apart. John’s leadership has set the standard for progressive mayors everywhere.”

John Hieftje, like most career politicians, has made certain his political career  looks good on paper—campaign postcards, palm cards, tri-folds, glossy, 4-color political inserts. After all, these are the pieces of paper that go out in the mail a few days before the August primary elections where, in the past, Hieftje has won his races. A few thousand voters visit the polls and cast ballots. In the August 2008 primary election, Hieftje won with a total 7,500 votes. This means that less than 8 percent of the 96,000 registered voters in the City put our current Mayor in office (he was opposed by a student in November 2008, who mounted no campaign).

So why my reservations about Mayor Hieftje, whose political career looks so good on recycled paper? For starters, there’s his voting record, and his almost teenage-like obsession with what’s cool, popular and trendy. Thus, his political schemes have resulted in disappointing failures. He’s a champion of telling voters what they want to hear, but not a champion of the city, its employees or its residents. As a result of governing by popularity contest, he has turned into a chronic teller of half-truths. Our Mayor is a paper progressive, what one A2Politico commenter referred to as a “fauxgressive.”

Mike Garfield’s endorsement piqued my curiosity. What, exactly, makes John Hieftje progressive? What has he done to “set the standard” for progressive mayors everywhere? The devil I discovered is always in the details with John Hieftje. Let’s dissect Garfield’s endorsement of Mayor Hieftje’s accomplishments:

“He’s championed the clean energy initiative.”

He issued the Mayor’s Green Energy Challenge calling for the City Government to use 30 percent renewable energy by 2010 and the city as a whole to use 20 percent renewable energy by 2015.

According to the city’s web site, “Ann Arbor currently uses 12.4% renewable energy in its municipal operations.”

“He’s championed commuter rail.”

Mayor Hieftje certainly has championed commuter rail. For years he has been desperately trying to make commuter rail (north-sorth/east-west) a reality in Ann Arbor. There is simply no money to operate commuter rail to and from Ann Arbor, according to officials from SEMCOG. Thus, there is no commuter rail. 

“He’s championed  bicycling and our terrific parks system.”

Mayor Hieftje is fond of touting the 600 percent increase in on-road bike lanes. As I wrote in November 2009 (Cyclist Run Down: Hieftje & Hohnke Still Not Looking Both Ways), and September of 2009 (Telling Whoppers 101: Hohnke and Hieftje Show A2 How It’s Done), whenever John Hieftje starts spouting percentages, check your whole numbers, and the real story emerges. When he took office in 2000, there were 8 miles of on-road lanes. Today, there are 42 miles of lanes. Ann Arbor has a fraction of the on-road bike lane miles that Boulder has for example (300 miles).  

Hieftje called for the city to have 1,000 solar homes by 2010. 

There are none.

You can see the progression of his transformation by looking at his campaign finance disclosure forms. In 2000, the donations to Hieftje’s campaign for Mayor were numerous and small, $20-$25. There are 104 pages of people who donated. In 2008, campaign finance disclosure forms show he loaned himself $6,500 then raised $12,450 from a tight-knit little group made up of his appointees to the city’s various boards and commissions. Virtually every member of the Downtown Development Authority Board coughed up $100; DDA Board member Leah Gunn donated $586 worth of stamps to Hieftje’s campaign. There are donations from PACs, current council members, as well as council candidates he endorsed in 2008 (Carsten Hohnke gave $200). There are $500 donations from real estate developers, and donations from half a dozen realtors. Not surprisingly, he spent more than he raised and his campaign finished in debt. 

Mayor Hieftje is a slick political slacker whose official calendar shows he took six weeks of vacation in 2009, and in Fall 2009 spent his time at his office at City Hall planning and creating materials for the course he taught at U of M—a class that met, by the way, at 1 p.m. in the afternoon. 

In the good times, Hieftje’s pie-in-the-sky ideas have been fun and funky as long as nobody minded the wasted tax dollars and unkept promises. He was using Ann Arbor as a stepping stone to 53nd District House Representative Rebekah Warren’s seat until his plans were derailed this past Fall by Ned Staebler and John Dingell. Now, John Hieftje needs a job, and it’s not going to be as a realtor again. He’s going to tell us we need him in the Mayor’s office for another two years. He’s going to tell us Ann Arbor needs his “experience.” 

Of course, that’s like a man who has driven a perfectly good car into a deep ditch saying that he’s the only one who can figure out how, by jingo, the car got into the ditch in the first place. 

Over the past years, few voters have been savvy enough to look closely at the connection between Hieftje’s pie-in-the-sky promises and the actual results. It didn’t help that the Ann Arbor News government reporters never bothered to look too closely, either. The Mayor then took to speaking in percentages, and no one at the Ann Arbor News (or AnnArbor.com for that matter) wondered why. Fewer voters are savvy enough to see the cynical dishonesty behind the so-called “endorsements” Hieftje uses when campaigning. They’re from his political appointees, donors and friends, but those little bits of truth are never made clear in the Mayor’s campaign literature.

Here’s what I want: an ethical, honest Mayor. A progressive Mayor. Someone with vision, who will champion the city, its employees, and its residents. I want someone who is devoted to public service. John Hieftje, I’ve come to realize, is devoted to himself. He has devoted his career in the Mayor’s office to doing whatever was necessary to stay in the Mayor’s office. That’s because John’s leadership sets the standard for political opportunism not progressive politics.

Popularity: 24% [?]

Older Posts »
Get Adobe Flash playerPlugin by wpburn.com wordpress themes