A2Politico: Ann Arbor Politics Grilled To Perfection

August 10, 2010

The Politics of Denmark: Something’s Rotten, or the USPS Just Really Likes Rebekah Warren

Filed under: campaigns — Tags: , , , — A2 Politico @ 10:55 am
VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rate this posting
Rating: 4.9/5 (10 votes cast)

From Hamlet, Act I, scene 4.

Horatio: He waxes desperate with imagination.

Marcellus: Let’s follow. ‘Tis not fit thus to obey him.

Horatio: Have after. To what issue will this come?

Marcellus: Something is rotten in the state of Denmark.

So, the Great Lakes Education Project (GLEP) postcards arrived like clockwork, close to the end of the Democratic primary race between Pam Byrnes and Rebekah Warren. For those not fortunate enough to have seen the GLEP postcard, it was a masterful hit piece. It slammed Rebekah Warren for missing 54 votes, including votes on really important issues, such as what to serve for lunch in the Legislative Dining Room on Tuesdays, and other more minor issues, such as lawmaker pay, and education. The GLEP postcard touted Pam Byrnes as a “progressive.” Can you hear the screaming? Well, we all know that there can only be one “progressive” running in any given Democratic race in Ann Arbor. There are some local candidates who, I believe, have trademarked the term. When opponents dare use it (or have it used for them) to describe themselves or, worse still, to describe their actual voting records, you can literally smell the umbraticum.

Here’s a question to ask yourself: Did Pam Byrnes get taken out by the Michigan Republican Party so Rebekah Warren could end up in Lansing? Why the question?

Simple publishing insider baseball: Even the Good Lord couldn’t create the Earth faster than Rebekah Warren got her postcard out slamming Pam Byrnes in response to GLEP slamming Warren’s voting record and (insert nails on chalkboard here) referring to Pammy B. as a “progressive.”

My fellow politicos, ask yourselves how Rebekah Warren had a piece disavowing the GLEP postcard designed, printed and mailed in just three days. Why, it’s almost as if Rebekah Warren knew the GLEP card had gone out and was ready to counter it. Either that, or the USPS just likes Rebekah a bunch more than they like anyone else and delivered her anti-GLEP attack postcard to households all over Ann Arbor in two days (let’s give a day for printing, shall we?) without the bother of first class postage. Here’s another niggling detail. In her counter to the GLEP-a-palooza, Rebekah Warren called out the DeVos Family Singers, but not Ron Weiser, Chair of the Michigan Republican Party. Along with the DeVos family, Ron Weiser was one of the major donors who funded GLEP, and the GLEP postcard endorsing Pam Byrnes. Why’d Weiser escape Warren’s public shellacking of the cranky conservatives behind GLEP and its independent endorsement of her opponent?

I have to say that I thought Byrnes was playing along with the GLEP folks when, just a couple of days after the GLEP card hit, I got a mailer from Byrnes with a section devoted to (raise eyebrows here) Warren having missed 50 votes, and a tacky “Vote NO on Warren message.” Then, the very next day, three days after the GLEP card went out, I got Warren’s anti-GLEP, hair-pulling postcard aimed right at Pam Byrnes’s modern bouffant. Unless you happen to be in the publishing business, like I am, you would never realize that only first class mail gets delivered lickety-split, like in two days. Permit mail takes longer, sometimes a couple of weeks. Warren’s postcard decrying the GLEP attack was mailed using a permit. So, either it had been mailed before the GLEP postcard went out (in which case that little minx Rebekah Warren knew the GLEP card was in the works), or she got first-class postal service on a postcard mailed with a permit. Creating the earth in five days would be more likely. 

Those with other theories should feel free to read the actual postcards, read up on permit mail delivery, standard printing turn-around times, and then comment, without using the words “progressive” or “conservative.” I’d make you do it blindfolded, but only a few local politicos are that talented. 

So why would the Michigan Republican Party want to take out Pam Byrnes? The obvious answer is that the brain trust within the Michigan Republican Party came to the conclusion that Rebekah Warren will be easier to do business with than Pam Byrnes, or easier to manipulate. Thus, Warren’s omission of Ron Weiser from her list of Republican “conservatives” behind the postcard becomes more interesting than ever.

Finally, Warren got a helping hand from AnnArbor.com with the wonderful headline: “Rebekah Warren says Pam Byrnes’ campaign tactics in Senate race have ‘crossed the line’.”

Crossed what line? The limbo line?

That same day AnnArbor posted that gem of a smooch for Warren’s campaign, I got a campaign mailer from Rebekah Warren slamming Pam Byrnes, a piece attacking her opponent.  While her own attack piece was being designed, mailed and delivered (again in record time), Warren told AnnArbor.com:

“I have always abhorred this aspect of our politics,” Warren wrote. “Its disparaging effect on our government and our ability to realize the vision of the founders of our country is too severe. You will never see me supporting such attacks. Never. And if any of my supporters engage in such behavior, I will do everything in my power to stop it, including publicly decrying their efforts.” 

So who’s GLEPpping whom, politicos? We’ll have to wait to see who paid for the robo-calls that tied Pam Byrnes to the “conservatives,” or was it “preservatives?” Calcium proponiate against Pam Byrnes. 

 

Popularity: 26% [?]

August 6, 2010

The Politics of Irony: Dim Bulbs

Filed under: campaigns — Tags: , , , , , , — A2 Politico @ 6:18 pm
VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rate this posting
Rating: 4.9/5 (9 votes cast)

At every voting place in Ann Arbor, there was a 100 foot line drawn and marked plainly with yellow signs. Inside that area, those working the polls for their candidates were not allowed to campaign. Rules, however, are often for the little people:

I recently received the following email from a Ward Three voter:

Dear A2P,

Third Ward Council member Christopher Taylor and his wife, Eva “The Diva” Rosenwald were at Tappan Middle School standing right at the front door of the school, campaigning for John Hieftje. What’s with the standing inside the 100 foot line and scaring up votes? 

Sincerely,

A Third Ward Voter

 

Dear TWV aka Dim Bulb,

You must have missed the Ann Arbor News coverage of the email Taylor sent to his friends on Council awhile back in which he referred to you Third Ward voters as “dim bulbs.” He obviously thought you weren’t bright enough to notice he was standing within the 100 foot area in which campaigning was prohibited. However, be of good cheer, soon, very, very soon, your Council member Christopher Taylor will finish his magnum opus, the Council Ethics Policy he’s been uh….uh….uh….formulating with the utmost large verbage and uh….uh….uh….big-eyed sincerity for months and months and months. The more cynical types out there could conclude that figuring out what’s honest and ethical has been an impossible challenge for him, based on the amount of time Taylor has been at work on the Ethics Policy. I’ve heard he actually refuses to show his work thus far on the Council Ethics Policy to other Council members. Does he think they’re going to copy his work? I’d only worry about copying the work of others and passing it off as his own with one particular Council member. Then again, to be fair, Third Ward Council member Steve Kunselman has had a year to make good on his campaign promises regarding Council ethics, as well. Well, TWV, maybe Taylor’s ethics policy will address breaking the rules during working at polling places. Maybe it will address making campaign promises then welching on them. (Don’t hold your breath, though. I’m expecting the CliffsNotes version of Council Ethics from Mr. Taylor.)

Christopher Taylor’s wife, of course, would be exempt from Council rules. This would mean that she’d possibly continue to stand within the 100 foot line at Tappan Middle School on, near, after or on any day but election day. Divas are notorious for outlandish, yet amusing, behavior. Then again, why complain? They held the door open for a dim bulb like you, right?

Popularity: 25% [?]

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 30, 2010

The Politics of Clairvoyance: Predicting the Future (I’m On A Roll)

Filed under: campaigns — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , — A2 Politico @ 1:29 am
VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rate this posting
Rating: 5.0/5 (8 votes cast)

On May 24th I wrote about the shape any negative campaign might take in this Mayor’s race of mine. I wrote:

….This is a dangerous position to take in a town where Green-compers have amassed the political power of the Vatican Curia, and it will mean that the chances are very good someone, somewhere, will whisper that I’m (gasp) against environmentalism and (gasp) against recycling. 

….Heresy, once again. I imagine, sooner or later, someone, somewhere, will whisper that I am (gasp) anti-transportation.

On May 25th, I read the web page of one of the City Council members running for re-election and there, Zounds!, was the following:

Unfortunately, Teall’s opponent wants to take Ann Arbor backwards.  He opposes expanding the City’s recycling system.  Teall’s opponent also opposes a regional mass-transit system that will be funded by the Federal and State governments and which will reduce traffic congestion.  That’s why Margie Teall is endorsed by our community’s environmental leaders. 

This week, I’m playing the lottery. I swear. If I win, we’ll pay off the orthodontist early.

Fourth Ward Margie Teall is accusing her opponent of being just what I predicted—anti-environment and anti-transportation. To top it all off, she even crowned herself the Chosen One of the community’s “environmental leaders.” Interestingly, there’s not a single endorsement on Teall’s web page by our “community’s environmental leaders,” whomever they may be. Then again, maybe the names and blurbs are forthcoming, and we’ll all know exactly who leads the environmental community in Ann Arbor. It’s a mystery to me; there are loads of well-intentioned and hard-working folks working on a variety of environmental issues around town. 

I’m actually amused by the silly attempt to paint her opponent as (gasp) anti-recycling and (gasp) anti-transportation. 

Furthermore, I’m somewhat intrigued, and I also have to admit I admire Margie Teall’s own clairvoyance. After all, to declare to voters that a regional mass-transit system will be funded is further out on the psychic hotline than most politicos are prepared to go. Even State Representative Pam Byrnes, who Chairs the Transportation Committee in Lansing, and is herself on the campaign trail, hasn’t promised a regional mass-transit system in every pot. Byrnes, of course, would be in a position to know about potential state funding to Ann Arbor for a regional mass-transit system. As for our federal government promising to fund a regional mass-transit system, the last word from the Obama administration was that Michigan wouldn’t be getting any piece of the “train money” pie. Then again, Ms. Teall didn’t mention exactly which Federal and State governments she was referring to. Perhaps Ann Arbor can expect a fat check in pesos from Oaxaca state and the Mexican federal government to fund a regional mass-transit system. 

On May 4, 2010, I posted a piece titled “The Politics of Rescue Heroes: What in the Billy Blazes Is Going On?” In that post, I wrote that,

…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, Mack Pool , police, fire and human service funding, and protecting Allmendinger Park.

Then, right there, like magic, on Margie Teall’s web site, she:

  • Sponsored budget amendments preventing police layoffs and stopping the closure of a fire station
  • Chairs the task force and drafted legislation preventing closure of Ann Arbor’s Senior Center
  • Spearheaded initiatives to protect Ann Arbor’s neighborhood parks

    • I’m not quite sure how Ms. Teall stopped the closure of a fire station, since there were no stations slated for closure in the Administrator’s 2010-2011 budget presented to Council in April 2010, and she voted to close Station number 2, located on Stadium and Packard, in 2003.

    Margie Teall, however, is not alone in taking credit for everything and responsibility for nothing.

    On First Ward Council member Sandi Smith’s web site, she takes credit for “Alternative Energy.” For the entire world, I wonder, or just Michigan? She also takes credit for the “defense of near downtown neighborhoods from the intrusion of parking meters.” Since I happen to live in one of those neighborhoods she claims to have defended, I can tell you that while defending us with one hand, with the other she sponsored and supported resolutions to hike the cost of metered parking (in 2009) from $.80 cents per hour (the hourly rate in 2008) to $1.20 per hour by 2011, and extend enforcement of metered parking until 9 p.m.

    About the latter proposal, AnnArbor.com editorialized in January of 2010 that:

    ….[A] proposal that would extend downtown parking meter enforcement well into the evening hours….as offered by 1st Ward Democrat Sandi Smith, would have downtown patrons feeding nickels, dimes and quarters (and, in the case of the newer meters, credit and debit cards) up through 10 p.m. to avoid getting a parking ticket…..In the best of economic times, we might look at this proposal differently. But, as we all are so painfully aware, these are not good economic times. Many downtown shops and restaurants are barely hanging on. 

    The good advice fell on deaf ears. Many downtown shops and restaurants are still barely hanging on.

    Smith and Teall’s web sites demonstrate quite clearly why it’s time for people on Council who aren’t so desperate to be elected that they will claim, well, political “accomplishments” that are plainly battered and deep fried hot air. Teall claims endorsements from mystery environmentalists who, evidently, lead us all down the path to green living and want her to serve another term. She claims to be singing and dancing cheek-to-cheek with a Washington under secretary and Representative Dingell to get funding for bridges that have been crumbling for half a dozen years. Getting funding to fix the Stadium Bridges is her “priority” for her next term. As one who many who months ago stopped driving over or under the Stadium Bridges, I have to wonder what her priorities were in her previous three terms. Obviously the Stadium Bridge repair was not among them, whatever they were.

    As for Sandi Smith, claiming to have achieved “alternative energy”  is patently absurd, as is trying to portray herself as a defender of the masses from the evil that is the parking meter. Thanks to her, all of us will be paying more money to park, and forced to feed the meters for more hours in the day. 

    Both incumbents created messes that are going to have to be quickly cleaned up.

    Smith’s extension of parking meter enforcement hours must be reversed before the ill-conceived scheme does irreversible damage to our downtown vitality, local shops and restaurants.

    As for the Stadium bridge fiasco, Council member Teall wants to explain the mess away using a one-time photo opportunity in the middle of State Street with a nice fellow from Washington, D.C., who came to Ann Arbor to please a U.S. Representative, and a promise to make funding the project her “focus.” Council member Teall’s web site is an example of political business as usual, negative campaigning and more spin than a Victrola. Council member Smith’s page is filled with grandiose achievements, such as her taking credit for “alternative energy,” and even more incredibly for the getDowntown and go!Pass programs. The getDowntown and go!Pass programs were established in 1999 and 2000, respectively, and Sandi Smith was appointed to the DDA (which funds the programs) in 2004.

    Last Friday, AnnArbor.com reporter Ryan Stanton shadowed me as I went door-to-door in Ward Five with firefighter Craig Ferris and campaign volunteer Libby Hunter. During the course of the two hour stretch Stanton spent with us, we visited with residents, placed yard signs, and had another great day talking to people ready (many of them) for a change in city government. Ryan phoned me later in the afternoon to tell me that he’d caught me in what he thought were several mistakes related to information I’d gathered from the city’s audited financial statements, among other sources.

    One, in particular, was indeed an error on my part. I’d miscalculated that over the past 40 months, the city of Ann Arbor had collected close to $1 billion dollars in taxes, fees and other revenues from residents and the state. It wasn’t 40 months, but rather over the past 52 months. The point, of course, is to be accurate, and it was a mistake on my part. However, when I mentioned the incident to several other voters this weekend, they all reacted similarly. Isn’t the bigger picture, they posited, that Ann Arbor residents get the services they deserve for the $669,000,000 million in taxes and fees that were collected over the past 40 months? 

    When Ryan asked me to comment on the fact that I’d made a mistake, I said that mistakes happen, I made one, and I was planning to go forward.

    I intend to do that on a positive note. No spin. No passing the buck. No excuses. 

    I told Ryan while we walked and talked that I’m not running against the incumbent. I’m running past him. I know that Fourth Ward Democratic candidate Jack Eaton, Fifth Ward Democratic candidate Lou Glorie, Fifth Ward Republican candidate John Floyd, and First Ward Democratic candidate Sumi Kailasapathy are committed to doing the same thing in their respective races. In the June issue of the Ann Arbor Observer, you’ll read my concerns about the proposed move to single-stream recycling. The incumbent’s reaction to my concerns, as well as those of the researchers at the non-profit, non-partisan Container Recycling Institute, was that I seem to be “against everything he’s for.” Fifth Ward Council member Carsten Hohnke was recently quoted in the press as saying he’s “tired” of “criticism,”  in response to challenger Lou Glorie’s suggestions that there is an alternative to taking DDA money to plug holes in the city’s budget created, in part, by cost over-runs on the Police-Court facility tacked onto the 2010-2011 budget.

    Whining, defensiveness, and generalizations are a waste of everyone’s time.

    Here’s a final prediction: You’ll continue to hear those of us working to unseat incumbents this August stay focused on the issues. The voters deserve no less than that.

    Popularity: 77% [?]

    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% [?]

    February 4, 2010

    The Politics of Financial Football: Throwing The Hail Mary Pass in the First Quarter

    Filed under: campaigns, money — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , — A2 Politico @ 11:55 am
    VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
    Rate this posting
    Rating: 5.0/5 (6 votes cast)

    On February 2, 2010, the day I declared to run for mayor, AnnArbor.com posted this piece: “Roger Fraser tells Ann Arbor City Council to set aside politics to make budget decisions.” The City Administrator is quoted in the piece as saying to Mayor and Council: 

    “I understand that these are politically difficult things to talk about,” Fraser said. “I understand that we have elections every year. I understand that six of you are up for election this year. But I also understand that we’ve got some major issues that need to be resolved in terms of our budget, and something’s got to give.”

    Well, yes. Something’s got to give. Rather, someone’s got to give: the taxpayer. Roger Fraser is pushing to have Council members put a city income tax on the ballot. At the January 19, 2010 Budget Committee meeting, Fraser suggested to the members of the Committee, First Ward’s Sabra Briere, Fifth Ward’s Mike Anglin, Second Ward’s Stephen Rapundalo, Fourth Ward’s Marcia Higgins and Third Ward’s Christopher Taylor, that they had an obligation to float the question of a city income tax. 

    The Mayor, in attendance, thus making the meeting a quorum, and subject to Open Meetings Act requirements, had this interesting tidbit to add. Whether the question was floated on the August primary ballot or on the November general election ballot would have little impact on how soon any city income tax could be implemented. Well, yes. That’s true. However, we know that in Ann Arbor, mayor and council races are decided in August, in the primary, not in the November general election. 

    Former Third Ward council member Leigh Greden, who ran opposed, and Second Ward’s Stephen Rapundalo who ran unopposed, tempted the tax gods by coming out in favor of a city income tax during the 2009 primary season. This video comes from AnnArbor.com, and was shot before the August 4, 2009 primary. Note that Roger Fraser says there are 75,000 people who commute into Ann Arbor daily. On January 31, 2010, the Mayor was quoted in AnnArbor.com as saying, “…Ann Arbor has an estimated 70,000 daily commuters.” These numbers come from the July 2009 Plante Moran Income Tx Feasibility Study. In that study, on page 26, the authors document that there are 20,000 commuters who come to work at U of M. The study then concludes there are 54,000 additional people who commute into the City. There is, however, no source for where that number comes from. Furthermore, the study concludes between 2011 and 2015, Ann Arbor will add 4,000 jobs for people to commute to. Between 2006 and 2009, Ann Arbor added a total of 600 jobs. 

     

    Roger Fraser estimates that a city income tax could “could raise $7.6 million a year in additional revenue for the city,” according to AnnArbor.com. Of course, there was a July 2009 study to support the idea of putting a city income tax to a vote. In that study by Plante & Moran, the authors write, “Using growth rate assumptions made by City personnel, we projected revenue that would be generated from the current property tax system over the next five years….The analysis has been developed using the best available information concerning financial and demographic trends and conditions. As mentioned above, each model was developed using certain key assumptions and should not be evaluated without a thorough understanding of those assumptions. The assumptions and the accompanying rationale are documented in later sections of this report….”

    Here’s where we all need to sit up and pay very close attention: “All assumptions are the responsibility of the City of Ann Arbors’ management based on their best judgment at the time of the study. It is possible that the forecasted results may not be achieved because events and circumstances frequently do not occur as expected.”

    In other words, Roger Fraser’s revenue estimate is not even an estimate. It’s a prognostication in the grand tradition of prognosticators. Plante and Moran predict that the assumptions of growth made by city staff, and on which the study is based, “frequently do not occur as predicted.”

    If that doesn’t give you a cold grue, it should. The Plante and Moran study begins with a caveat that explains, quite clearly, that a city income tax is not the panacea for the budget woes of Ann Arbor. In fact, the move to a city income tax could end up providing Ann Arbor less revenue than the current property tax model. And there we’d be, still, facing the alternatives the City Administrator often presents to the people of Ann Arbor through City Council: freeze to death or burn to death. Sell parkland, raise taxes, cut services, or increase water and sewer fees.

    Mayor Hieftje took himself off of the Budget Committee. Margie Teall stepped down, as well. However, their decision to try to distance themselves from the disaster that it the city’s fiscal situation is a day late and several million dollars short.

    It’s quite clear that for the past several years, the Budget Committee on which they sat, and Council, simply followed the direction of the City Administrator and CFO without question and without performing the due diligence required. For instance, the City Charter mandates monthly statements be delivered to the Budget Committee that summarize the City’s financial position. They were never requested or delivered. Yet, the Mayor and his hand-picked Budget Committee crafted policy, recommended program and service cuts, and made recommendations for the expenditure of over $1.5 billion in tax dollars and fees over the past five years without ever knowing exactly how much money the City had in any given month.

    Thanks to the urging of Third Ward’s Steve Kunselman, city staff will be producing monthly reports. According to the AnnArborchronicle.com, this is what long-time Budget Committee Chair, Fourth Ward’s Marcia Higgins, had to say when it was suggested that the monthly reports be delivered directly to all Council members. 

    “In discussing how the monthly report should be disseminated, Roger Fraser suggested that it be sent directly to all councilmembers. However, Marcia Higgins (Ward 4) weighed in in favor of first having the budget committee review it before disseminating it to other councilmembers. She reasoned that the rest of the council might not understand what they were looking at, and that budget committee members would then be in a position to help others on council.”

    Is it any wonder Roger Fraser is pushing, shoving and trying to drop-kick a city income tax? At this same meeting, he suggested that City Council survey voter attitudes – such as the survey conducted by AATA concerning that group’s fantasy of a county-wide millage. The City Administrator called allocating money for such a survey “due diligence.” 

    Due diligence? I call it a waste of time and taxpayer money. Those are marketing surveys designed to find out how to best phrase the ballot question so that the voters will support the measure.

    There are three steps that must be taken before we can ever entertain the notion of a city income tax: 

    1.  As I wrote in an earlier entry (“The Politics of Cooking the Books: Ann Arbor as a French Restaurant”), total city revenues are up significantly since 2006. So are total expenses. It’s time to examine every possible opportunity for savings. Overhead is the place to begin. The cost of running City Hall has risen 35 percent since 2006. That is a rate of increase that far outpaces both inflation and the cost of living combined. Over-spending must be checked immediately. There is no moratorium, for instance, on meals out and travel for city staff, while at the same time those same staff bring scenarios to Council and the public to raise revenue by selling parkland and cutting services. 

    2.  All City Council members must be given extensive training in reading and understanding financial statements. It’s no sin to be incapable of understanding a cash flow analysis, and such training would benefit not only the Council members, but the public they serve, as well. It is a sin to vote on the allocation of funds without having first examined and understood the financial situation of the City. All Council members have to know the right questions to ask in order to have the ability to oversee city staff in their use of the tax dollars given them. 

    3.  It’s time for a Mayor who will send Ann Arbor City Administrator Roger Fraser, and CFO Tom Crawford back to sharpen their pencils and to prepare two scenarios: under the auspices of the first, they cut 10 percent of the city’s expenses. Under the second, they cut 20 percent of the city’s expenses.

    There’s only one rule: not a single city service may be impacted adversely by the cuts.

    Popularity: 30% [?]

    February 1, 2010

    Weekend Poll: Mayor Hieftje “Considers” A Run…For the Mayor’s Office. Again. Will He Get Your Vote?

    Filed under: Mayor Hieftje, campaigns, weekend poll — Tags: , , , , , , — A2 Politico @ 8:04 am
    VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
    Rate this posting
    Rating: 4.8/5 (5 votes cast)

    I’m reposting this poll in light of the Mayor’s recent celebrated performance in front of the Ann Arbor Rowing Community on January 28th. Can I just say, “I told you so?” He’s out of his little Burns Park bubble and running for re-election. He’s glad-handing all over town. What follows is a piece I wrote in October 2009. Below that is a poll posted in October. At the moment, A2 politicos who’ve voted are looking to see the end of Mayor Hieftje’s reign, so cast your own vote. Maybe for you, he’s the only person for job.

    In September, free-lancer Judy McGovern caught up with Mayor Hieftje in the course of her coverage of the state legislative candidates. In a piece posted to AnnArborChronicle.com on September 12th, McGovern writes:

    Ann Arbor Mayor John Hieftje says he’s been asked whether he was interested in either the Senate race or the chance to run for the House seat being vacated by Warren.

    Although he said in 2008 that the mayoral race could be his last, Hieftje seems less ready to leave the job today. “Things are very difficult for local government in Michigan and I feel a responsibility,” he says.

    Pursuing the Senate seat would presumably present a challenge for the five-term mayor, who would run up against out-county voters and their views of Ann Arbor liberalism.

    Hieftje told McGovern he would decide by the end of October.

    In early-October, Ned Staebler threw his hat into the ring for the 53rd (tip o’ the keyboard to David Cahill) District House seat, and held a pricey fundraiser right in the Mayor’s backyard. Many of those whom the Mayor would have had to count on to support any bid he would make for the seat turned up on the guest list for Staebler’s fundraiser. I wrote about Staebler’s posturing in Ives Woods event here. 

    So, John Hieftje being, well, John Hieftje, the Mayor never announced anything about a run for state office in October. Then again, he didn’t specify by which October he would decide. It’s entirely possible that in October of 2010, Ann Arbor’s Mayor will issue a press release to alert everyone that he’s decided against running for the 53rd District House seat.

    As it turns out, Mayor Hieftje did issue a press release of sorts. He mentioned to a local politico on whom he could rely to leak the convo to at least 30,000 other people that Hizzoner is definitely not running for the 53rd District seat but “is considering” another run for the Mayor’s office. To say that John Hieftje “is considering” another run for the Mayor’s office is somewhat like hearing that Representative John Dingell “is considering” another run for the United States House of Representatives. Does either of them really have any other job?

    Thus Mayor Hieftje provides A2Politico with some fodder for the Weekend Poll. When he does run again, will you vote for him again (presuming you did the last time), or has Mayor John Hieftje worn out his welcome?

    Popularity: 48% [?]

    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 19, 2010

    A2 Politicos Running For State Offices Disappear After Declaring. Is It Something In the Water?

    Filed under: campaigns — Tags: , , , , , , , , — A2 Politico @ 10:42 am
    VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
    Rate this posting
    Rating: 5.0/5 (6 votes cast)

    County Commissioner Jeff Irwin (53rd District House candidate). Representative Rebekah Warren (State Senate candidate). Representative Alma Wheeler-Smith (Democratic candidate for Governor). Ned Staebler (53rd District House candidate). All four have launched their campaigns replete with write-ups in the press. I wrote about Wheeler Smith’s candidacy here. I posted about Staebler in October. Rebekah Warren’s kick-off got a write-up on A2Politico in response to Warren’s uncanny ability to choose the worst date possible for her Ann Arbor cheese, crackers and stump speech party. 

    These four have, since launching their campaigns, stalled out or rather not really started their engines, ladies and gentleman, and gotten their campaigns into the demolition derby. Warren, just coincidentally while campaining, sent out a mailer on the taxpayer dime to “constituents” concerning her accomplishments in office. Interestingly, the  mailer ended up in the mailboxes of “constituents” in Pam Byrnes’s 52nd district. It was shameless self-promotion, and to have mailed out the piece, ostensibly under the auspices of her office, was particularly smarmy. Warren has sent out multiple fundraising letters, and is having some trouble rustling up the cash she did the last time she ran. In 2008, Warren raised $63,000. Her current opponent, Representative Pam Byrnes, raised $114,000 for her 2008 52nd District House campaign. 

    If fundraising letters and a constituent mailer are all Warren’s got, her opponent Pam Byrnes is going to eat her for lunch.

    If you’ve read the local newspapers recently, you’ve seen op-eds “written” by candidate Pam Byrnes. In January, Byrnes launched her campaign for Liz Brater’s Senate seat, in Ypsilanti, at the Freighthouse, and not in the comfy and clubby confines of the party room at the Arbor Brewing Company, in Ann Arbor. Don’t get me wrong, ABC (as the pub is known among local politicos who frequent the spot) is a great place for a party, but it’s also a “been-there-done-that” kind of campaign launch.

    Pam Byrnes isn’t running a “been-there-done-that” campaign. If I were running against Representative Pam Byrnes, I wouldn’t waste time sleeping, because Byrnes isn’t the kind of person or candidate who’s going to sit around while her nail polish dries to get her campaign off the ground. 

    For starters, Byrnes has a  web site up. Google her opponent Rebekah Warren and you get the web site she put up when she campaigned for the State House. Search for Staebler’s web site, and you get, I swear to Machiavelli, a placeholder page where his web page will be some day. His campaign launched in October 2009. He’s going around town tapping everyone for donations, and his campaign puts up a placeholder page? Ned Staebler wants to go to Lansing for two years to represent us. That he can’t get a web page up in three months augurs poorly for the notion he’ll arrive in Lansing ready to get down to business. (A2P Notes: The day after this entry, Ned Staebler launched his web site.) Ned Staebler’s sitting around waiting for his nails to dry. He’s doing it at local coffee shops on Saturdays, when he meets with whomever happens to show up. 

    Who campaigns by waiting for the public to come to them? To be fair, Staebler is also on Twitter. He Tweets from political events he attends. Somewhat disconcertingly, A2Politico has more Twitter followers than the guy running for the State House. I don’t know whether to feel popular or not, because neither A2P or candidate Staebler has 200 Twitter followers yet. 

    Fortunately for Staebler, his opponent Jeff Irwin is still dozing at the wheel. Irwin has a Facebook page, but little actual information out about his campaign issues, positions, etc…. Perhaps Staebler, Irwin and Warren consider winter the season of campaigning discontent. However, here’s my question: why declare your candidacy, and then disappear? It makes you look as though you’re lackadaisical, and gives the impression that you’ll go to Lansing and do the same thing. 

    As for State Representative Alma Wheeler Smith, Democratic candidate for governor, as much as I wish Ann Arbor Republican candidate Rick Snyder would give us all a break from his moderate Republican views, this guy is killing her. Smith’s campaign recently redesigned her web site (more interactive and more content). Smith is on Twitter, as well, and has 135 followers (sigh). She has just under 300 Facebook followers. Rick Snyder has 2,200 Facebook “friends.”

    Both Snyder and Smith have chosen the “____________(insert candidate name) for Michigan” appellation, which I find somewhat disconcerting. Can both the Democrat and the Republican be “for” Michigan? Why, I wonder, aren’t either of them for the peeps in the state rather than the state itself? I digress.

    So what is it with the Ann Arbor politicos Irwin, Staebler and Warren? Is there something in the water that compels A2 politicos to declare early, go on fundraising benders, then disappear? No one wants to go door-to-door in February, but putting up a web site isn’t rocket science, unless, of course, you declared before you had your platform defined. In that case, I can’t even begin to fathom why someone would do that. Such a move is just asking to be seen as wishy-washy and indecisive.

    I imagine in April and May we’ll see a flurry of activity and I look forward to it. Until then, I’m drinking bottled water, lest A2P vanish suddenly.

    Popularity: 21% [?]

    December 18, 2009

    The Politics of the One-Two Bitch Slap: Obama’s Economic Advisor Dr. Lawrence Summers Raps Ned Staebler’s Knuckles and Calls MEDC “Crony Capitalism”…Then Rick Snyder Piles On

    Filed under: campaigns, money, politicians — Tags: , , , , , , , , — A2 Politico @ 7:00 am
    VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
    Rate this posting
    Rating: 5.0/5 (4 votes cast)

    As I mentioned in a Tweet, I’ve been behind in my reading. I read more periodicals than should be legal, but there you have it. Among those periodicals is The New Yorker. I was reading an October 21st article about President Obama’s economic advisor Dr. Lawrence Summers, when the piece suddenly veered toward Michigan and right into downtown Ann Arbor. The piece described a visit Summers made to Michigan and a meeting with Governor Granholm and her top economic advisor, Ned Staebler. Yep, that Ned Staebler, the one who is currently having holiday parties, cocktail parties, birthday parties, baby naming parties, bar mitvah parties and First Communion parties where attendees come together to deposit their cash and check-filled envelopes in party boy Ned Staebler’s wishing well. If Staebler happens to be shopping at Hiller’s when you’re in the store, move quickly to the nearest exit, as your shopping excursion could turn into a “party,” and you will be expected to pay $200 to be in the same building with the 53rd District House representative wanna-be. 

    A2Politico, always one to pick up on the current trends, is having a party soon. Sometime after I figure out how to deposit your checks. I digress. 

    In The New Yorker piece, the author watches as Staebler describes to Dr. Summers an economic development loan program Michigan had just created to help old-line firms make the transition to new-economy industries, like solar-panel production and microchips, and the meeting turned into a plea to the Obama Administration to adopt the program as a federal plan.

    “Ned Staebler, one of Granholm’s top economic advisers, explained excitedly that the new assistance program for struggling companies had already approved its first loan even though he hadn’t advertised the program…..”

    Pay close attention to the last part of that sentence: “even though he hadn’t advertised the program…..” because Lawrence Summers was listening.

    The New Yorker author writes, [Summers], turned to Ned Staebler. Granholm seemed to hold her breath as Summers prepared to deliver his verdict on the new loan program. ’You said you hadn’t really marketed your program at all, and you’ve been able to get a number of people who have been able to take advantage of it without marketing,’ Summers told Staebler. ‘One reaction was ‘Isn’t that terrific? There’s this demand without marketing it.’  But, he added, another way to look at it was that Staebler had started a program of loans in which only ‘the people who are well connected and fortunate enough to know about them are able to take advantage of them.’ Summers said that the Michigan program reminded him of a term used to criticize Asian countries during the financial crisis of the nineties: ‘crony capitalism.’”

    I smiled broadly when I read that. Who ever thought little old A2Politico would ever have anything in common with one of the 21st century’s brainiest economists? Turns out we can both recognize crony capitalism when we see it. I’ve been writing about the Den of Crony Capitalism gubernatorial candidate Rick Snyder birthed here in Ann Arbor: Ann Arbor SPARK. Snyder has been criss-crossing the state telling folks that he wants to bring the SPARK model of economic development to Lansing. Maybe he can spread the Bubonic Plague while he’s at it. Turns out Rick Snyder isn’t the only crony capitalist with an Ann Arbor SPARK connection who wants to spread the crony capitalism model far and wide.

    Republican Washtenaw County Commissioner Mark Ouimet, a member of the Executive Committee of Ann Arbor SPARK, and a wanna-be for Representative Pam Byrnes’s 52nd District House seat, was recently quoted in the Manchester paper as saying that, “Here in Washtenaw County, our local chambers of commerce and the Ann Arbor SPARK do an amazing job of bringing together job providers, policy makers and local interest groups to insure that all are working together to promote our region and the opportunities that exist for business here. I’ve been honored to hold leadership positions at the chambers and SPARK and can attest to the important need for strong partnership from our legislators in Lansing. I intend to foster that partnership.”

    I read that and a cold grue ran through me. Typhoid Mark. 

    So what do you think I read today? Rick Snyder issued a press release that was a big old bitch slap of the Michigan Economic Development Corporation (MEDC), where Ned Staebler works as a VP, and gives away billions of our tax dollars as “incentives” for a living. Snyder is quoted in the press release as alleging that, “The MEDC has been mismanaged by the current administration….The use of tax incentives should include performance objectives, reportable results, and be transparent to citizens. The state currently gives out $6.3 billion more in tax credits, deductions and incentives than it takes in yearly in tax revenue – more than $30 billion a year in handouts that are supposed to be stimulating our economy. There is little transparency or accountability in what return the state is getting on those investments.”

    Before you fist bump Snyder for finally realizing that tax incentives need to be coupled with absolute transparency and iron clad accountability, remember that he instituted none of these nifty reforms while the President of Ann Arbor SPARK, the Washtenaw County economic development entity created in 2005 by the MEDC with Snyder as head crony capitalist. In fact, representatives from Ann Arbor SPARK said just a few days ago that they are not in the business of verifying the results of the economic development money they distribute. A SPARK official claimed to track the actual number of jobs created by the companies funded with our tax dollars would require hiring another employee, and Ann Arbor SPARK had no interest in doing that. The state of Michigan, the SPARK official said, was responsible for tracking those results. Turns out the “state” isn’t doing a very good job of tracking much of anything where the billions of tax credits given out are concerned.

    Snyder, the Born Again Economic Tough Love Candidate, says in his press release, “Economic development incentives should be used sparingly and measured against the actual number of targeted jobs created to make the data more reliable and less subjective. The results should be posted online for everyone to see.”

    I’d love to say something cheery like, “You GO, Girl!” 

    However, there’s a political kicker. Snyder tells Michigan voters he’s the man to get the MEDC whipped into shape because, “…Rick has led the MEDC and Michigan toward a healthy business climate before; he can do it again. He’s done it on a local level with Ann Arbor SPARK. Because he’s not a career politician, he has no special interests to pay back. He has one goal: creating jobs and reinventing the state of Michigan.”

    No special interests to pay back? What about all his SPARK cronies? The cronies he helped as CEO of SPARK are as numerous as the stars in the sky. When we see Snyder’s campaign finance disclosure forms, I suspect we’ll see that many of those cronies returned his favors. Sndyer claims he can make the MEDC more transparent because he made Ann Arbor SPARK more transparent. He claims he can measure the real number of jobs created through MEDC incentives because he set up a system to do that at Ann Arbor SPARK.

    Snyder’s December 17th press release proves that he has either lost touch with reality, has no memory of what went on when he was President of Ann Arbor SPARK, or is as duplicitous a politician as I’ve seen in a good long while.

    One of President Obama’s top economist advisors, Lawrence Summers, described the Governor of Michigan’s top economic advisor’s, Ned Staebler, and the MEDC’s “unadvertised” loan program that funnels loans to their friends, as “crony capitalism.” For gubernatorial candidate Rick Snyder to bitch slap the MEDC’s administration for neglecting to track results, and for not instituting mechanisms to improve transparency is little more than a political girl fight complete with hair-pulling and lots of trash-talk. 

    Just a year ago, when Snyder was a small-town crony capitalist in Ann Arbor, he and his SPARK crew were nailed by auditors for over billing, conflicts of interest and accounting irregularities. Snyder signed off on annual reports that claim the creation of thousands of jobs when just a few hundred actual jobs had been created between 2006-2008. Snyder’s legacy of secrecy, exaggerated claims of job creation (SPARK’s 2008 990 tax form claims SPARK created over 2,000 jobs) is carried on by current SPARK staff. 

    Rick Snyder still sits on the Executive Committee of Ann Arbor SPARK.

    That the MEDC needs some serious whipping into shape to eliminate cronyism and the boondoggle’s waste of billions of tax dollars is a given. Rick Snyder may want us to believe he’s the man for the job. However, he showed us all clearly that he’s not up to the task thanks to his performance as the crony capitalist-in-chief at Ann Arbor SPARK and his continued “leadership”  as a member of SPARK’s Executive Committee.

    Popularity: 29% [?]

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