A2Politico: Ann Arbor Politics Grilled To Perfection

August 30, 2010

The Politics of Michigan: Old McDowell Had a Farm. M.O.N.E.Y.

Filed under: Huffington Post, U.S. politics, political reporting, state politics — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , — A2 Politico @ 8:00 am
VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rate this posting
Rating: 5.0/5 (4 votes cast)

I was asked recently to blog about Michigan’s national political scene for the Huffington Post.

For those who don’t read it, HuffPo was founded by Arianna Huffington and is a liberal/progressive news website and aggregated blog. The site gets about 1,000,000 comments per month. I came home from vacation to an email invitation to cover Michigan’s national mid-term elections for the HuffPo. Evidently, some folks there read A2Politico and like the blog’s political content and my writing. So, I’ll be penning weekly entries about one of the dozen most important races for the United States Congress—Michigan’s 1st Congressional District race for the hot seat being vacated by Congressman Bart Stupak.

I thought it might be fun to share my Huffington Post entries with my readers here at A2Politico. I’ll have an opportunity to travel up to the Upper Peninsula during September and October to cover the race and attend campaign events for Democratic candidate and Michigan House Representative Gary McDowell. 

Interestingly, as you’ll read in my first entry, there is a connection between McDowell and one of our local political families. NRCC leaders are eyeing Stupak’s seat, and are poised to paint McDowell as a “career politician,” and a rubber-stamp stooge for out-going Governor Jenny G. This race, I’m guessing, is going to get very nasty come September. The race is also going to make history as there is a Tea Party candidate poised to jump in who will be funded to the tune of at least $1 million dollars. (Hint: Keep that amount in mind as you read my entry.)

I’m thrilled to have a chance to blog for the Huffington Post, where millions of readers go regularly for their dose of political commentary and coverage. I’ll be blogging about politics for HuffPo along with Rahm Emanuel, Bill Maher, Norman Mailer, Nancy Pelosi and Al Franken.

Wish me luck.   

 

 

 

A visit to Michigan Representative Gary McDowell’s campaign web site, and a casual observer comes away with the impression that Democrat McDowell is a folksy fellow who supports K-12 education, and is concerned with trade, healthcare and the right to keep and bear arms. State Representative McDowell, who was first elected to the Michigan 107th District House seat in 2004, wants to represent Michigan’s 1st Congressional District in the U.S. House of Representatives—a seat vacated by U.S. Representative Bart Stupak.

On his campaign web site, McDowell stresses his background as a farmer. Visitors to the site read this: “For most of my life, I have started my summer by going out to our family’s fields and cutting hay — just as so many families here in the Upper Peninsula and Northern Michigan have done for generations.” This Gary McDowell is a native of Michigan’s Upper Peninsula, a hay farmer who owns a 1,000 acre spread with his brothers, a member of the Lion’s Club in his hometown of Rudyard, Michigan, a hamlet with just 1,300 residents.

The campaign web site, however, paints a deceptively Norman Rockwell-like picture of Old McDowell. 

His state race campaign finance records paint a portrait of a politico who’s less Norman Rockwell and more Stormin’ Norman Schwarzkopf. The records also provide tantalizing clues to as why, perhaps, Gary McDowell may have been tapped by the National Democratic Party to try to keep Stupak’s seat in the Dem family. In 2008, McDowell raised $93,916 dollars to run against a Republican challenger who scraped together just $2,575. That year, it was McDowell’s top donors that should give pause. They included the Washington, DC-based International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Kathy Angerer Leadership Fund, Michigan Health and Hospital Association, UPS, Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan, Michigan Association of Health Plans, Blue Cross of Michigan and the Michigan Medical Society. In 2008, McDowell collected 196 donations, 40 of which came from Lansing-based PACs and political committees, and totaled close to half of the $93,916 he raised.

In his 2006 state House re-election bid, Gary McDowell raised $256,288 and beat back a Republican challenger who’d raised $317,402. That year, McDowell enjoyed several $5,000 hugs from the political funds of new Lansing pals Andy Dillon, Alma Wheeler-Smith, Kathy Angerer, and Andy Meisner. To put this into perspective, in 2006 Representative Alma Wheeler-Smith gave McDowell the same amount from her Take Back PAC, that she gave to daughter-in-law, Rebekah Warren for her 2006 run for the 53rd House seat. After just two terms in office, Farmer McDowell revealed himself to be a fundraising savant, a politico who could land big donations from PACs, lawyers, lobbyists and other Lansing heavy hitters. McDowell did all this in a year in which the average candidate for the Michigan House raised $37,530.

As of July 14, 2010, according to campaign finance information filed with the Federal Election Committee, McDowell had raised $146,835 dollars and spent just over $15,000. Of that, over half had been donated by PACs. His Republican opponent, in contrast, has raised $449,090, 68.2 percent of which had been donated by individuals. Interestingly, both candidates had just about the same amount of cash on hand as of July 14th, $130,000. The FEC donor records also hint that the national Democratic Party considers McDowell’s race important. On June 30, 2010, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) in Washington, DC funneled four donations totaling $14,500 to McDowell’s campaign war chest.

The reason for the DCCC’s interest in McDowell’s candidacy, and the donations from the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee are obvious. In an August 8, 2010 post to  CQPolitics, Roll Call contributor Stuart Rosenberg writes, “For Democrats, Rep. Bart Stupak’s retirement couldn’t have come at a worse time.” Rosenberg goes on to write, “Competitive open seats usually follow the direction of the overall cycle, so with House Republicans poised for large gains, it should be no surprise that most of the open seats that flip will be headed their way. The districts at the top of the list are more likely to flip, with at least the first half-dozen looking like no-brainers.”

McDowell’s race, however, was not among Rosenberg’s “no-brainers.”

If past state races are any indication, over the next 6-8 weeks we can expect McDowell to more than double and possibly triple the amount he has raised thus far, and we can expect him to tap political pals from the Michigan House, more PACs and other political committees. Furthermore, if his 2006 Michigan House race is any indication, the fact that McDowell’s Republican opponent has, thus far, significantly out-paced him in fundraising is no guarantee that Stupak’s seat will be among those that Republicans will flip on November 3rd.

Though Representative Gary McDowell may start his summers making hay when the sun shines, his fundraising track record demonstrates that Old McDowell is no political hayseed.

Popularity: 13% [?]

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% [?]

July 23, 2010

The Politics of the Budget: Water Fountain Versus Firefighters

Filed under: political reporting — Tags: , , — A2 Politico @ 6:36 pm
VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rate this posting
Rating: 5.0/5 (2 votes cast)

It took the national media to expose the lunacy of the situation and put the incumbent’s spending priorities in their proper perspective. I’ve been asking this question since I launched my campaign in February: Do we refocus city government on the basics or fund luxuries and pet projects, such as the Fuller Road parking garage, then slash citizen services? My answer is always that we need to refocus city government on the basics: responsible spending, services, infrastructure and neighborhoods.

The Drudge Report picked up on a theme of my campaign: The need to fund core services before luxuries. Evidently, MSNBC called Council member Steve Kunselman and Fox News has been trying to interview the incumbent after Matt Drudge posted this link on his news page on July 22nd:

City lays off firefighters, but buys $850,000 ‘water sculpture’…http://www.michigancapitolconfidential.com/13219

Popularity: 42% [?]

February 14, 2010

The Politics of Assumptions: Maybe Money Does Grow On Trees

Filed under: city services, developers, money, police — Tags: , , , , , , , — A2 Politico @ 6:11 pm
VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rate this posting
Rating: 4.8/5 (4 votes cast)

I was never a fan of the new Police/Court facility. I thought it unwise to spend $47 million dollars in the midst of an economic meltdown rather than to renovate the old facility, and find new leased facilities for the 15th District Court (who, it was claimed, had to move from their space leased from the County). I toured the police facilities in 2008, and was appalled at the condition of the space in which the police were expected to work. Why hadn’t their space been renovated years ago? Why couldn’t city officials just find another rented space for the judges? For that matter, why couldn’t they re-up the lease on the current space occupied by the 15th District Court?

There is ongoing debate about whether County officials were willing to allow the 15th District Court to remain in its rented digs. There are Council members who swear that there was an opportunity to extend the $750,000 per year lease. There are others who swear that the lease simply could not be extended and that to have done so would have been a waste of money.

All of that is moot now. 

The bottom line is that we are building a new 103,000 square foot Police-Court facility.

Now we’ll take a commercial break for a short review: 

June 2008: Council approves bonds to build 103,000 square foot Police-Court facility. Public is assured by Mayor, staff, and Council members that the construction project will not impact city budget or services. Project is presented as fully funded.

May 2009: City Administrator, City CFO and City Council Budget and Labor Committee (Greden, Teall, Higgins, Hieftje, Rapundalo) present 2009 budget to Council for its approval. Budget projects a structural deficit, and 1-3 percent declines in revenues “for the foreseeable future.”

July 2009: As a necessity to balance the budget, 25 police officers retire early at a cost of $6 million dollars to taxpayers.

February 2010: CFO Tom Crawford tells AnnArbor.com that, “The premise of this thing [the Police-Court building] was we needed to build this within the resources we had. Now we’ve got less resources coming to the city than we had then, but we didn’t know that.”

In a February 14, 2010 piece about the Police-Court building project by AnnArbor.com’s Ryan Stanton, the City Administrator is quoted thusly:

“Fraser acknowledged the project budget is dependent on $3 million from the sale of city property at First and Washington – a deal that has stalled because the developer, Village Green, has had trouble coming up with financing. Fraser said the city continues to operate under the assumption that the sale eventually will happen.”

Then, we have the City’s CFO who, in June of 2008, allegedly had no idea the economy was tanking. In his February 2010 piece, Stanton quotes CFO Tom Crawford as explaining that, “The premise of this thing was we needed to build this within the resources we had. Now we’ve got less resources coming to the city than we had then, but we didn’t know that.”

To the extent that his explanation can be understood, I find it incredible that he would fall back on “We didn’t know that.” The 2009 budget had a statement on page 2 of the Administrator’s Budget Message that says, “Despite efforts to contain and reduce expenses, the city is still facing a structural deficit. For the foreseeable future, we will continue to experience 1-3% revenue shortfalls.” That Budget Message is dated July 2, 2008. Of course our City’s CFO and Administrator knew the city would have less money coming in. The two of them projected decreased revenues in the budget they worked to prepare months before Council voted to issue the bonds to build the Police-Court facility. 

In February of 2009, according to a piece posted to the AnnArborChronicle.com, during a City Council meeting, Fifth Ward Council member Carsten Hohnke asked CFO Crawford this question: “Will the funding of the building come from a reduction in services? Crawford’s Answer: Over the last five years, the city has become more efficient and the building’s funding comes from savings through efficiency, and through debt services with existing cash flow.”

Audited financial statements from the City’s web site show that between 2006 and 2009, the cost of running city government increased by 35 percent, or $34 million dollars. The city had not become “more efficient,” as Crawford claimed, and the Police-Court building’s funding was coming from savings accumulated from service cuts and hikes in fees rather than efficiency. Between 2004-2009, for example, funding for culture and recreation fell from $10 million per year to $5 million per year. The cost to provide solid waste services rose 40 percent.

The construction project remains, in essence, $3 million dollars short until that First and Washington parcel sells. That’s about 6.5 percent of the $47.4 million dollar total price tag. So what’s the plan to replace the $3 million should the sale not ”eventually happen?” ”Value engineering” is a slick term for cutting construction expenses on the fly. Is there a plan to replace the $3 million that really has no impact on the city budget or services? If there’s not, there should be.

In addition, there are some hard questions that need to be asked about how financial information about this project was presented to Council and taxpayers. Why? First of all, Mayor and Council are legally obligated by the City Charter to hold the City Administrator accountable in the performance of his job. In addition, the next time we undertake a large capital project, and city staff make assurances to Council and taxpayers that the project won’t impact services, those assurances need to be absolutely true and backed up by accurate financial data. Lastly, to have the city’s CFO claim in the Press in 2010 that, in essence, he didn’t know the City would be bringing in less revenue is simply shocking. He presented a budget in July of 2009 that projected reduced revenues. His 2010 comment brings up some disturbing questions about the quality of the financial data prepared and presented by the CFO to Council and the public.

What our city staff need to focus on is a $3.3 million dollar “value engineering” plan that has a drop dead date by which the plan will be implemented. To simply plow ahead and spend money that we don’t have under the “assumption” that a parcel of land appraised for $3 million dollars 18 months ago will sell, is yet another emergency “budget shortfall” waiting to happen. Furthermore, it’s folly to imagine that the parcel is still worth $3 million dollars.

While we can’t get back the $47 million dollars budgeted for this project. We can “value engineer” the project down by $3.3 million dollars, so that if the First and Washington parcel doesn’t sell, or doesn’t sell for $3 million dollars, our city services won’t be impacted by any shortfall. We can also take away from this experience the clear understanding that city staff must be held to much higher standards, and be expected to present financial data that are absolutely accurate. Otherwise, Council members and taxpayers can’t make informed decisions about how best to spend the money we have, or the money we borrow.

Popularity: 31% [?]

February 8, 2010

The Politics of Priorities: Firefighters, Police or Capital Improvements?

Filed under: money — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , — A2 Politico @ 10:13 pm
VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rate this posting
Rating: 5.0/5 (11 votes cast)

On Sunday February 7, 2010, citizens read in AnnArbor.com that our City’s General Fund is projected to come up $5.2 million dollars short due to falling property tax revenue. The bulk of the cuts proposed to close the fiscal gap will impact public safety. City officials informed taxpayers that, “On the chopping block are 20 positions in the Fire Department and 17 in the Police Department.”

Cutting emergency and other citizen services is an absolutely unacceptable and unnecessary solution to closing this projected gap in the budget. We should also remember that since 2003 City Administrator Roger Fraser has repeatedly predicted there will be losses in the General Fund, and when the actual numbers have come in, the city’s General Fund has registered surpluses. The only exception was 2009, when Fraser projected a $10.4 million dollar General Fund deficit related to the early retirement of 27 police officers, and the cost of the police/courts building. That projected loss was inflated by $2 million dollars. Such consistent inflation of losses brings into question the budgeting processes used, as well as the fiscal assumptions relied upon by the City Administrator when making budget predictions. This is a serious issue that needs to be resolved. Projecting loses

I have over 20 years of experience in finance as the CEO of a national higher education publishing group headquartered in Ann Arbor. I’ve studied the City’s budget, its audited financial statements, as well the Budget Impact document released to City Council members on Friday February 5th. There’s an obvious alternative to cutting services in order to close that budget gap.

Cut Capital Improvement Projects NOT Police and Firefighters

The City’s Economic Development Fund is slated to contribute over $5 million dollars for the Fuller Intermodal Trasportation Station (FITS). Thus far, the only source of revenue for the Economic Development Fund has been a $2.1 million dollar transfer from the General Fund. The City’s General Fund pays for our emergency services. FITS was described in the Ann Arbor Observer by the city’s Transportation Director, Eli Cooper, and by the Mayor, as a gamble. I’m not a gambling woman when the safety of our citizens and the jobs of our police and firefighters are on the line. At the moment, FITS is a proposed 1,000 car parking garage for U of M, bus stop, and parking for a few bikes. Our city doesn’t have the cash on hand to partner with the University on the FITS project. It’s irresponsible to lay off police and firefighters so that millions can be diverted from the General Fund to the Economic Development Fund to pay for a parking garage for U of M employees and visitors. The remaining money in the Economic Development Fund should be transferred back to the General Fund. 

When the current administration approved the police/court facility bonds in 2008, Ann Arborites were assured the projected expenditure wouldn’t impact the delivery of services. Today, thanks to the city’s inability to sell a parcel of land included in the project’s financing package, the project faces a $3 million dollar shortfall. In 2009, Ann Arbor lost 27 police officers through $6.7 million dollar early retirement offer—some of our most experienced police officers. It’s time to economize significantly, wherever possible, on the design, finishes and furnishings of the police/court facility, and to look for additional savings on that project. In addition, the downtown library underground garage project should be suspended. It represents an absolutely unnecessary capital expenditure.

In the recently released 2008-2013 Capital Improvements Plan, the plan calls for cuts to improvements in parks, street repair and the sanitary sewer system, and a $5 million dollar increase to alternative transportation, the FITS project. It’s called robbing Peter  to built the FITS for the University of Michigan.

We have 187 miles of roads that are classified as in poor condition. The Stadium bridges are, literally, falling down. Because the repairs of the bridges were put off, our city lost $750,000 in federal funding, and now must use its road repair money on the bridge. 

Here’s how we can clean up this mistake.

I’m in favor of halting the Library Lot underground parking garage project. According to officials from the SEC, those Library Lot bonds may be repurposed. We could, then, use half  of the Library Lot bonds to reconstruct the Stadium bridges. We could then invest the remaining bond money in Treasury bills for the mandatory five year waiting period before the bonds could be repaid early. There will be a penalty for early repayment ($4-$8 million dollars). The Downtown Development Authority has $14 million dollars, collectively, in its Parking and DDA Funds. The penalty not covered by the interest earned over the five years the bond money was invested in T-bills, would be made up by taking the money from the DDA’s funds. Taxpayers would save, approximately, $50 million dollars over 30 years.

The Stadium bridges would be reconstructed. Our street millage money would, then, be freed up to repair our crumbling streets.

Popularity: 39% [?]

Get Adobe Flash playerPlugin by wpburn.com wordpress themes