You’re walking down Main Street on your way to dinner. Ahead, you see a panhandler. He’s well-dressed, well-educated, and ready with a snappy, buzz-word filled presentation to give to you in order to hit you up for a little cash. You recognize the panhandler, because in May 2009 you gave the panhandler $1.08 million dollars, and in June 2009, you gave the panhandler $56,000 dollars more. Since 2006, you’ve given the same panhandler over $3 million dollars. Public money—tax dollars. The panhandler is supposed to give back to the community through a process under the auspices of which the panhandler creates jobs for other panhandlers.
However, training up new panhandlers is expensive, complicated and involves lots of staffing and buzzwords.
The panhandler stops you, and launches into his presentation (you can download it here). “Resolution to Amend the Fiscal Year 2010 SmartZone LDFA Budget for Increased Business Accelerator Services.”
“As you may know,” our panhandler reads from his presentation, “this process of grooming panhandlers and creating jobs involves: events. There’s networking, talent support, entrepreneurial education related to starting one’s own panhandling business, and marketing. Identifying and grooming panhandlers involves lots of paper shuffling.”
In fact that’s why our panhandler is asking for the hand-out. He needs to hire someone to:
- “handle general inquiry” from prospective panhandlers (in real life we call this answering the phone and responding to emails)
- “to conduct ‘due diligence’” so that he can identify the best panhandlers to offer his services to (in real life, we refer to this activity as weeding out the nut jobs and loonies). Generally, con artists can be spotted pretty readily, but our panhandler prefers to do it over the course of multiple lunch meetings, cocktail gatherings and interviews involving lots of staff.
- “customer/partner introductions” so that aspiring panhandlers can meet potential panhandling partners (in real life, this is called picking up the phone and calling people).
So, do you give the panhandler the money? Of course you don’t. For pity’s sake, the public schools just got a huge kick in the proverbial teeth when they came a beggin’ for a handout. Then again, though the tax money belongs to you, you aren’t going to be making the decision on whether to give a handout to this particular panhandler. That will be the decision of the intrepid over-spenders and chronic under-performers on City Council.
So who’s the panhandler? Second Ward Council member Stephen Rapundalo and the Board of the LDFA (The LDFA is the City Council-appointed Board that oversees Ann Arbor SPARK.), both in loco parentis for Ann Arbor SPARK. You remember Ann Arbor SPARK, right? It’s the public-private boondoggle supported by Mayor and Council with your tax dollars that has created no new jobs that would not otherwise have been created, according to the Chair of the LDFA, Richard King. And SPARK has done it all for you since July 2006 for a mere $3+ million dollars. Who could want less for more? It’s a Bernie Madoff Special—no actual job creation in return for millions in public money. How long will it take the public to realize that they’re being robbed?
Tonight, Council member Rapundalo will come before City Council to ask for an additional $205,000 for the LDFA to give to Ann Arbor SPARK “for the purpose of assisting with the creation and acceleration of innovation‐based businesses.” If this relationship between your money, the LDFA and Ann Arbor SPARK seems overly complicated, it is. Most public-private financing scams involving tax dollars and politicos looking to pad their CVs, involve multiple governing boards and lots of overhead. Ann Arbor SPARK needs money, Daddy. So, the LDFA Board asks Council member Rapundalo to sponsor a resolution for more money for the LDFA, so the LDFA can give the money to SPARK. You following me? If not, that’s exactly the way the fine panhandlers at SPARK, City Council and the LDFA want it.
So why does Ann Arbor SPARK need more money?
The panhandlers at SPARK are having a problem referred to in business buzzword-ology as an “accelerated burn rate.” Let me translate: SPARK officials blew through their money and want some more from the taxpayers. They’re saying they blew through their money because lots of entrepreneurs are begging for their services and oodles of new businesses are being “incubated.” Cool. Here are some ideas for the innovators who work at Ann Arbor SPARK. Don’t have enough money to pay your staff? Have a bake sale, or do one of those car wash fundraisers. Get a loan from a bank. Cut the pay and benefits of your current employees. Start a waiting list for your services until your cash flow situation improves. I have a million ideas that don’t involve bilking the taxpayers through the use of Council Sugar Daddies.
Fifth Ward Council member Carsten Hohnke is SPARK Sugar Daddy number one. Hohnke was recently appointed to the SPARK Executive Committee. Second Ward Council member Stephen Rapundalo is SPARK Sugar Daddy number two. Rapundalo sits on the LDFA Board; that group siphons tax money away from our schools through a TIF scheme. The LDFA then “contracts” with SPARK to “provide services.” As of April 2009, 38 percent of SPARKS’ $2.8 million dollar budget was provided by the LDFA (i.e. public tax dollars).
Here is ROI (return on investment) information from the presentation prepared for this evening’s Council meeting by the SPARK staff. It’s frightening in its grammatical vagary.
Return on Investment:
From 2007 to date, the Ann Arbor SPARK Business Accelerator (BA) has provided business acceleration services to nearly 100 start‐up companies. There were 180 entrepreneurs engaged in starting these new companies. Since their engagement with SPARK they have created more than 60 more jobs.
There’s just only little problem: In April of 2009 Richard King shared a little secret with City Council members. The Chair of the LDFA Board confessed that all of the jobs SPARK officials had rushed to take credit for “creating” since 2006 would have been created in the absence of taxpayer funding. Thus, in April of 2009, City Council members learned there was absolutely no reason to allocate any further taxpayer money to fund the LDFA and Ann Arbor SPARK. Regardless of learning from King that the taxpayers were receiving absolutely zero return on their investment in the LDFA and Ann Arbor SPARK, in May of 2009, Council members voted in support of a budget that continued to fund the twin boondoggle. Worse, in June of 2009, 30 days after axing the funds for Project Grow, Rapundalo and Fourth Ward Council member Marcia Higgins came to Council and asked for an additional $56,000 of funding for the LDFA. The money was allocated.
Now, Stephen Rapundalo is back asking for another handout from the taxpayers in exchange for, well, nothing.
It’s time Ann Arbor SPARK stopped picking the pockets of Ann Arbor taxpayers, and it’s way past time City Council members stopped pimping for their political cronies at SPARK and the LDFA. It’s time to revoke the LDFA’s TIF, and let SPARK fly free. It’s Third Ward Council member Steve Kunselman’s first meeting back on Council tonight. Will he lead a charge to stop Rapundalo’s highway robbery of taxpayers, or will Kunselman serve his other master? The current Chair of SPARK is Stephen Forrest, Vice President for Research at the University of Michigan, where Steve Kunselman works.
A2PNote: This resolution was passed unanimously at the November 16th meeting.
Feel like you’d like to let Mayor and Council know your opinion about Council member Rapundalo’s panhandling, funding the LDFA and Ann Arbor SPARK? Email them: JHieftje@a2gov.org;ssmith@a2gov.org; Sbriere@a2gov.org; SRapundalo@a2gov.org; TDerezinski@a2gov.org; CTaylor@a2gov.org; SKunselman@a2gov.org; MHiggins@a2gov.org; MTeall@a2gov.org; CHohnke@a2gov.org; MAnglin@a2gov.org,
Popularity: 20% [?]
feed://www.a2politico.com/?feed=rss2