County commissioners Mark Ouimet and Leah Gunn talk prior to the start of the Oct. 20 Washtenaw County board of commissioners meeting. During the meeting Gunn, a Democrat, defended Ouimet, who has come under attack by some Democrats for excessive and inappropriate per-diem claims. (Photos by the writer.)

At the center of public commentary and commissioner discussion – which at times grew heated – was the issue of whether commissioners are appropriately claiming reimbursements for mileage and per diem. The controversy first emerged at the board’s last meeting on Oct. 6, when Democrat Tom Wieder spoke during public commentary to call for an investigation into per diem spending by commissioner Mark Ouimet. That same Oct. 6 meeting included discussion of a projected two-year budget deficit for 2012 and 2013 that could exceed $20 million.

Ouimet, a Republican who’s running for state representative in District 52 against Democrat Christine Green, was defended on Wednesday during public commentary by the county’s top two GOP officials, Mark Boonstra and Wyckham Seelig, who accused the Democratic board majority of partisan politics. They said they’ve launched their own investigation into commissioner spending, specifically citing out-of-state travel by Kristin Judge. Judge has been a vocal critic of Ouimet’s spending, during the meeting noting that the board rules are clear and that Ouimet failed to abide by them at times.

Ouimet was also defended at Wednesday’s meeting by several Democrats who serve with him on the board and who said they had nothing to do with the recent criticism of him. Leah Gunn recalled that Ouimet had been her Ward 4 Ann Arbor city councilmember some 20 years ago, and that she’s always found him to be upstanding and gracious. Ken Schwartz criticized the “Lansing politics” that were being brought to the county. He noted that the board has a track record of working together without divisive partisan politics, and that they’d all been surprised by the recent controversy.

County clerk Larry Kestenbaum also weighed in, commenting on a report that his office had released earlier in the day that analyzed per-diem and mileage expenses for all commissioners, dating back to 2005. Ouimet claimed the most expenses by far during that period – $32,804. Of Ouimet’s claims, $10,564 was analyzed as ineligible, and another $6,055 was “uncertain,” indicating a gray area where reimbursement rules aren’t clear. That means that about half of Ouimet’s claims don’t fall into the clearly acceptable category. Kestenbaum spoke during public commentary, saying that he considered all the commissioners to be his friends and great public servants – the report was not intended to be an attack, he said.

Ouimet offered to put the disputed amount in escrow until all of the claims have been reviewed. [The Chronicle converted the county clerk's Excel workbook with multiple tabs, one for each commissioner, to a single .pdf file. Commissioner Ronnie Peterson has not claimed mileage and per-diem expenses, and is not included in the report.]

The issue of commissioner expenses came up earlier in the meeting in another context. Judge introduced a resolution that would have eliminated retirement pensions and health care for commissioners, saying that the change would save the county more than $25,000 annually. She noted that she had circulated the resolution to commissioners prior to the meeting, though it was not on the agenda. No one seconded the motion, and it died without further discussion.

Also related to budget issues, the board gave initial approval to levy an economic development tax of 0.043 mills. Known as the Act 88 millage, it is expected to generate roughly $611,266 annually and would cost homeowners $4.30 for every $100,000 of a home’s taxable value. Because Act 88 predates the state’s Headlee Amendment, it can be approved by the board without a voter referendum. Three commissioners – Judge, Ouimet and Wes Prater – voted against the measure, and Jessica Ping abstained, citing the fact that a recipient of the funds, Ann Arbor SPARK, is a client of hers.

Another millage – one that, unlike Act 88, will be on the ballot – would support the Ypsilanti District Library. Linda Gurka, a member of the library’s board of trustees, spoke during public commentary to drum up support for the millage increase that will be on the ballot for Ypsilanti District Library voters. Also during public commentary, Todd Clark, co-chair of this year’s United Way of Washtenaw County‘s fundraising campaign, spoke in support of a proposed coordinated funding model for local nonprofits.

Commissioner Spending

At the board’s Oct. 6 meeting, Democrat Tom Wieder spoke during public commentary to call for an investigation into per diem spending by commissioner Mark Ouimet. The issue emerged again on Wednesday, when the county’s top Republican leaders and others defended Ouimet during public commentary – a defense echoed by some, but not all, of Ouimet’s Democratic colleagues on the board.

Commissioner Spending: Public Commentary

Kathleen Timberlake of Scio Township said that in light of the recent reports regarding per-diem spending, she’d like to see full public disclosure of the county clerk’s investigation of this matter.

Commissioner Jessica Ping, a Republican, read a statement from Jolea Mull, supervisor of Bridgewater Township, which is in Ping’s district. Mull was disappointed that Ouimet’s service has been maligned, stating that he should be commended, not condemned. Ouimet had been especially helpful to the township in dealing with the police services issue – the township benefited from his advocacy, according to her statement.

Wyckham Seelig, vice chair of the Washtenaw County Republican Committee, said he wanted to put the charges that have been levied against Ouimet into a broader context. He quoted from James Madison, who wrote in The Federalist No. 10 “… that measures are too often decided, not according to the rules of justice and the rights of the minor party, but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority.” He quoted John Stewart Mill and, finally, Henry Reid – the Democratic senator from Nevada, who, when his party had been in the minority in the U.S. Senate, was concerned about the dangers of one-party rule. That’s exactly what’s taking place in Washtenaw County, Seelig said. [Nine of the 11 county commissioners are Democrats.]

He said he wasn’t talking about Wieder or Stu Dowty [chair of the Washtenaw County Democratic Committee] or Mark Brewer [chair of the Michigan Democratic Party]. “We kind of expect that from them,” Seelig said. “That’s what they do.” It was different when the attacks come from elected officials, he said. Seelig specifically charged that Kristin Judge was behind the attacks, and alleged that she bullied county clerk and fellow Democrat Larry Kestenbaum into investigating the per-diem issue – but only for expenses within the county, not for travel outside of Washtenaw, which would have showed that Democrats claimed more than Ouimet. Silence from other commissioners gives tacit consent to these actions, he said, adding that this is ordinary, normal behavior when one party dominates.

Mark Boonstra, a local attorney and chair of the Washtenaw County Republican Committee, also blasted Democrats on the board, and said he was rising to Ouimet’s defense in the face of scurrilous attacks on the eve of an election. [Ouimet is running against Democrat Christine Green for the 52nd District state House seat.] There’s no harder-working commissioner than Ouimet, Boonstra said – that’s why the board elected him vice chair. There’s also no more honest commissioner than Ouimet, he said, yet he’s been pilloried by Democrats and the press. Boonstra cited examples of Democrats on the board – Barbara Bergman, Jeff Irwin and Wes Prater – who have claimed per diem for attending multiple meetings in one day, but only Ouimet was singled out for this, Boonstra noted. He also cited higher out-of-county travel for Democrats.

All of this is all the more astonishing, he said, because it comes from someone who has presented herself as a champion of transparency and open government – referring to Kristen Judge. He charged that Judge had tried to divert travel funds from other commissioners into her own account in secrecy. [Transferring funds requires a vote by the board. A transfer request by Judge was discussed at the board's Sept. 1, 2010 meeting.] Boonstra called on commissioners to denounce these attacks and set aside partisan politics. He said the attacks had emanated from Mark Brewer, head of the Michigan Democratic Party, who had asked his communications manager to obtain records through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, and that Brewer’s minions locally had done the rest. Boonstra brandished a bundle of documents, saying they had obtained materials of their own through the FOIA, but that Democrats should remember who started the mudslinging – it hadn’t been the Republicans. He called on them to do an independent audit, and to make sure the rules are clear and apply to everyone equally.

Paul Schissler, a Lima Township resident, said he’s lived in Washtenaw County for 40 years, staying here after coming to attend the University of Michigan. He described his community involvement, which includes being a board member of the Western Washtenaw Area Value Express and a member of the Chelsea Rotary Club. Schissler said he’s never been so riled up in his life about anything political, and that Ouimet didn’t want him to be there speaking on his behalf. But when Schissler saw Ouimet’s character being attacked, he said he had to do something. Schissler said he’d read in AnnArbor.com that Ouimet got reimbursed for attending a lot of meetings and believed he was following the rules. But Schissler, who called AnnArbor.com a “blog of opinions,” said he didn’t see in the article the fact that Ouimet gives his salary and reimbursements to charity, and he didn’t read whether other commissioners did the same. Schissler called Ouimet “one of the finest people I’ve ever met in my life.” To assassinate his character is reprehensible, Schissler said, and it’s shameful to suggest that Ouimet is anything but hard-working and fair.

Washtenaw County clerk Larry Kestenbaum, left, talks with Curtis Hedger, the county's attorney, prior to the start of the Oct. 20 board of commissioners meeting.

Larry Kestenbaum, Washtenaw County clerk/register of deeds, said he hadn’t planned to speak – he didn’t have prepared remarks. He said he’d been characterized as a Democrat, and “I plead guilty to that,” he said. But he said he considered all commissioners to be friends and great public servants. The report that came from his office was never intended as any kind of attack on anyone, he said. Kestenbaum said he believed that everyone submitted expense requests in good faith, and that the standards that applied this year weren’t in place previously. He noted that Kristin Judge had pointed out the board rules have been in place for years, and that’s true – but not everyone reads the board rules, he said. Deputy clerk Jason Brooks applied the standards he’s been using this year to approve per diem expenses, Kestenbaum said. [Prior to 2010, no such approval was required.] Whether those standards are appropriate is something for commissioners to decide, he added.

Kestenbaum said he regretted that he didn’t include a cover letter with the report, to better explain what’s in it. He said he didn’t seek to do the report – it had been requested of his office – and while there may be some mistakes in it, everyone’s human. He noted that if someone makes a deduction on their taxes and it’s accepted every year by the IRS, it’s understandable that they believe the deduction is acceptable to make year after year. Finally, Kestenbaum  said that the commissioners knew he didn’t believe in per diems, and that this is an example of the kind of trouble it can cause.

In response to a follow-up email from The Chronicle, Kestenbaum clarified who had requested the report evaluating commissioners’ per diems:

Commissioner Ouimet made the original request. Then Commissioner Judge, through County Administrator Verna McDaniel, asked that the report be provided to the entire board. Then, after he was given the original report to review, Commissioner Ouimet asked for another report, covering ALL the board members. This was communicated to the county administrator as well, and she asked that Commissioner Ouimet’s report be merged in with the others rather than given separately.

Commissioner Spending: Commissioner Response

Wes Prater said Kestenbaum had explained what his office had done very well. Then directing his comments to Mark Boonstra, Prater said Boonstra was making statements without the facts. “You must not know how to read,” he said. Kristin Judge had nothing to do with the request for a report, Prater said, “and neither did I.” Prater said he might have made some mistakes in requesting reimbursements, but it wasn’t done intentionally. He said he had never accused Ouimet of anything, and that Boonstra should tell them who’d been making the accusations.

Kristin Judge spoke at length, and began by passing out a document she’d prepared that showed an itemized listing of commissioners’ spending, as a group, from 2005 through what’s been budgeted in 2010. Total spending in 2005, 2007 and 2008 topped $70,000. For 2010, under a new flex account structure, spending is capped at $39,050.

Judge said it’s the responsibility of each commissioner to read the board rules and abide by them. She then read the board rules regarding reimbursement – she’d read them during a statement at the start of the meeting as well. Here’s the section in its entirety:

B. COMPENSATORY SERVICE

In addition to the salary received by the Board of Commissioners, each member of the Board may receive a per diem payment of $25.00 and County mileage reimbursement from their residence or from their actual place of departure whichever is less from their CFA allotment for the following activities:

1. Attendance for a committee, subcommittee meeting or Working Session of the Board, when the member has been properly appointed to that committee or subcommittee, the meeting has been called in accordance with the Open Meeting Act, Public Act 267 of 1976, and the meeting has not been canceled twenty-four (24) hours prior to the scheduled time of the meeting and the Commissioner has not been notified of said cancellation within twenty-four (24) hours of the scheduled meeting.

2. Attendance at a meeting of a non-Board committee, subcommittee, commission, board, or attendance at a conference or convention as a representative of Washtenaw County when the member of the Board serves by appointment of the Board of Commissioners or the Chair of the Board.

3. For the purpose of receiving per diems, the Commissioner must be present for at least 1 hour or half of the meeting, whichever is less. Commissioners shall note their arrival and departure times on the meeting attendance per diem slip submitted to receive payments.

Any member of the Board of Commissioners may waive his/her per diem and/or mileage reimbursement by giving written notice to the County Clerk.

These are not difficult sentences to read, Judge noted, adding that she was sure that Ouimet had read them. When she was elected and started her term in 2009, Judge said she had looked at commissioner spending and questioned it. There was a line item for miscellaneous spending, for example – it totaled $12,278 in 2007, $7,075 in 2008 and $7,516 in 2009. Why hadn’t Ouimet cut that? she wondered. In 2009, when she first talked to deputy clerk Jason Brooks about what spending qualified for reimbursement, he referred her to the board rules, she said, but then told her that he’d have to approve whatever they submitted. That was like the fox guarding the henhouse, she said. There was a problem, she said, to the tune of thousands of dollars each year.

Judge said Boonstra gave her too much credit for bullying Kestenbaum – he’s not someone who could be bullied, but she appreciated the fact that Brewer thought she could. She said she’s not a minion of Mark Brewer, and has spoken to him only about four times. She said she’s never taken direction from Brewer, and never will. As for her own travel expenses, Judge said her $8,000 of travel to conferences has resulted in roughly $100,000 of tangible benefits to the county.

Finally, Judge noted that commissioners have to fill out forms to get reimbursed for mileage and to get their per diem. You have to take the time to do that, she said – it’s a choice. She asked whether it was OK to rob a bank, if you then gave the money to charity. It’s the commissioners’ responsibility to guard taxpayer money, she said, and if you follow the rules, you have nothing to hide. She concluded by saying that she’d brought commissioner spending under control.

[By way of background, starting in 2010, each commissioner has an annual flex account for expenses, capped at $3,550. A commissioner can only receive additional funds if another commissioner agrees to transfer unused funds from his/her account. [.pdf file of flex account rules] Flex accounts were voted into place in 2009, taking effect with the 2010 budget. From The Chronicle’s report of the June 3, 2009 board meeting:

The commissioners first considered a resolution to cut their own piece of the budget by 11.3%, and to create “flex accounts” that would pool previous line items for per diem, travel, and convention/conference expenses. The budget calls for $3,550 per commissioner for these flex accounts. The total budget for commissioners after the reduction is $532,885, an amount that includes salaries ($177,387), consultant fees ($55,150 for a lobbyist in Lansing), fringe benefits ($41,979) and an amount to cover administrative expenses (called the Cost Allocation Plan, at $143,462), among other things. The resolution also includes new guidelines for administering the flex accounts.

This resolution is the third iteration of an attempt to cut the commissioners’ budget, following two resolutions presented at the board’s May 20 meeting that did not receive sufficient support to pass. There was little discussion on the issue at Wednesday’s meeting.

Outcome: The motion carried, with Barbara Levin Bergman, Leah Gunn and Jeff Irwin voting against it.

At Wednesday’s meeting, several other commissioners weighed in on the issue of commissioner spending. Leah Gunn said she is a Democrat but didn’t agree with everything that the Democratic Party did. She has no control over what people say, Gunn added, and to accuse the Democratic commissioners of some nefarious plot against Ouimet was unfair. She recalled that Ouimet had served as her Ward 4 representative on the Ann Arbor city council some 20 years ago, and that she’d always found him to be upstanding and gracious. She noted that as a group, the entire board had addressed the $30 million budget deficit for 2010 and 2011. They had voted unanimously on the budget, and they had all worked to reduce commissioner spending.

Ken Schwartz characterized the situation as “Lansing politics” being brought to the county. He noted that the board has a track record of working together without divisive partisan politics, and that they’d all been surprised by the recent controversy. Though the Democrats are in the majority, they had elected Ouimet as vice chair of the board, and elected Republican Jessica Ping as chair of the board’s working session. He said it’s been great working with them both.

Rolland Sizemore Jr. said he didn’t like the kind of accusations he’d heard during public commentary, and that he agreed with Schwartz. They sometimes have little catfights and argue on the board, he said, but they work together and get things done. He said he’d been advised by the county’s legal counsel that he couldn’t stop people from speaking during public commentary. Sizemore said that if he could stop them, he guaranteed that he would.

Barbara Bergman said it had been a privilege to work with all the commissioners, and Ouimet in particular. Divisions on the board didn’t tend to go along party lines, she observed. They were more likely to be divided on issues like police services, where there were differences between commissioners who represented cities versus townships. She said the board worked together as a team.

In his response, Ouimet said it’s been a “very interesting process” to watch how people have reacted to this issue over the past two weeks. He restated what he’d said at the Oct. 6 board meeting – that he’d be happy to go over the expenses with the clerk’s office and repay anything if there was a discrepancy. He offered to put the disputed amount into an escrow account until the issue was resolved. Ouimet said that other commissioners knew him, and knew that any meetings he attended had been on behalf of his constituent base.

Judge spoke again, saying she agreed that the board had worked as a team. But she observed that she’d taken criticism in the past for her support of the flex spending account. She noted that when she had originally questioned the line-item budget for commissioners – which prior to 2010 had included line items for magazine subscriptions, books and a miscellaneous category, among other things – she’d been told she was micromanaging.

Act 88: Economic Development Tax

Earlier in the meeting, the board gave initial approval to levy an economic development tax of 0.043 mills. Known as the Act 88 millage, it is expected to generate roughly $611,266 annually and would cost homeowners $4.30 for every $100,000 of a home’s taxable value. Because Act 88 predates the state’s Headlee Amendment, it can be approved by the board without a voter referendum. The millage would be levied in December 2010 to be used in 2011.

The millage rate is slightly higher than what was passed a year ago, which raised $603,000 for use in 2010. The increased funding has been directed to the county’s department of economic development and energy, which will get $144,696 from the millage proceeds, compared to $87,000 allocated this year.

If given final approval, the millage funds will be allocated to the following groups [2010 funding is indicated in parentheses]:

• $200,000 to Ann Arbor SPARK ($200,000)
• $50,000 to SPARK East ($50,000)
• $100,000 to the Eastern Leaders Group ($100,000)
• $144,696 to the county’s department of economic development and energy ($87,000)
• $15,000 to fund a Michigan State University Extension agricultural innovation counselor for Washtenaw County ($15,000)
• $27,075 to fund horticulture programming for the Washtenaw MSUE horticulture educator ($27,000)
• $59,229 for 4-H activities, including allocation to the Washtenaw Farm Council for operating the Washtenaw County 4-H Youth Show & 4-H agricultural programming for the 4-H extension educator ($60,000)
• $15,000 to support the work of the Food System Economic Partnership (FSEP) ($15,000)

Act 88: Commissioner Discussion

Kristin Judge pointed out that she voted against the millage last year, and she’d be voting no again. It doesn’t mean that she doesn’t support these programs, she said. She praised Ann Arbor SPARK in particular, saying that the economic development agency is doing an amazing job. It’s short-sighted not to allocate funding for these programs out of the general fund, she said. [Until the budget that was passed in 2009, SPARK and other economic development programs received support out of the county's general fund budget.] It isn’t right to burden taxpayers with an extra tax for these programs, she said.

Jessica Ping said she’d be abstaining, since both Ann Arbor SPARK and SPARK East, a business incubator in Ypsilanti, are clients of hers. [Ping works for Paychex, a payroll processing firm.] If she were to vote, she said she’d vote against the millage, because it’s not the right time to be taxing residents. She cited a small business in Saline, which is in her district, that employs over 100 people – most of those employees live in Jackson, she said. The county needs to create an environment where businesses can grow, but also one in which people want to live, she said. It’s a small tax, but it adds up, Ping said, adding that if they want to increase taxes, they should put it on the ballot and let voters decide.

Mark Ouimet noted that he served on the board of Ann Arbor SPARK, and asked the county’s corporation counsel, Curtis Hedger, whether he should also abstain. Hedger clarified with Ouimet that it wasn’t a paid position, and said he didn’t see it as a conflict of interest.

Wes Prater also weighed in against the millage, saying the only taxes that should be levied are those approved by voters. He echoed Judge in saying that economic development programs should be supported with general fund dollars, and that he couldn’t support a tax that wasn’t voter-approved. “I just don’t think it’s right.”

Ken Schwartz asked the county clerk, Larry Kestenbaum, how much it would cost to hold an election on the millage. Kestenbaum said it cost about $1,200 per precinct, and there are 156 precincts in the county. If a measure were simply added to the ballot of an existing election, the incremental cost would be negligible, he said. [Kestenbaum later clarified in an email to The Chronicle that if a low-turnout standalone proposal were on the ballot, at least a dozen precincts likely would be combined, reducing the total number of polling locations to around 140.]

Schwartz also clarified that the amount of the tax works out to be 4.3 cents for every $1,000 of a home’s taxable value, or $4.30 for every $100,000.

Outcome: The board gave initial approval to the Act 88 millage, with dissent from Judge, Ouimet and Prater. Ping abstained, saying that Ann Arbor SPARK is a client of hers. The board is expected to take a final vote at its Nov. 3 meeting.

Resolution to Eliminate Commissioner Pension, Health Benefits

During the agenda time allotted for items for current or future discussion, Kristin Judge introduced a resolution to eliminate retirement pensions and health care for commissioners, effective Jan. 1, 2011. She noted that she had circulated the resolution via email prior to the meeting, though it was not on the agenda.

Commissioners, who are considered part-time county employees, are enrolled in the county’s Money Purchase Pension Plan (MPPP). They contribute 7.5% of their pre-tax wages to the plan, and get a matching 7.5% county contribution. In addition, they are eligible for lifetime health care benefits when they retire if they are at least age 60 and have served for eight years on the board, or if they are at least 50 years old and their age plus their years of service total 75.

The MPPP is a defined contribution plan, in which employers pay a set amount into the retirement plan while a person is employed. In 2008, the county shifted most employees out of the MPPP and into the Washtenaw County Employees’ Retirement System, known as WCERS, a defined benefit plan. In defined benefit plans, retirees receive a set amount per month during their retirement.

In addition to benefits, commissioners earn $15,500 annually. Officers receive higher pay: $18,500 for the board chair (Rolland Sizemore Jr.), $16,000 for the board vice chair (Mark Ouimet), $16,500 for the Ways & Means Committee chair (Conan Smith) and the working session chair (Jessica Ping).

By way of background, the issue of pension benefits was mentioned at the Jan. 6, 2010 board meeting:

Leah Gunn asked that they revisit the issue of getting the board out of the Money Purchase Pension Plan (MPPP). [Commissioners are the only county employees still participating in this defined contribution plan. Other county employees have been moved to the Washtenaw County Employees’ Retirement System, known as WCERS, a defined benefit plan.] A resolution to eliminate the county’s contribution for commissioners to the MPPP was pulled from the board’s Nov. 18, 2009 agenda, at Wes Prater’s request. Prater had asked that the item be moved to the board’s Jan. 20, 2010 meeting.

The issue was raised again at the board’s April 10, 2010 meeting, during a report to the board from Mark Kettner of the accounting firm Rehmann Robson, which conducts the annual audit of the county’s financial report:

Mark Ouimet asked about the county’s Money Purchase Pension Plan. He said that he and Gunn feel it’s time to close the plan and move the remaining $1.9 million in assets somewhere else. There are only a dozen people in the retirement plan – all of the county commissioners, and a judge. He asked Kettner to explain how it might be terminated.

Kettner said it was his understanding that commissioners couldn’t make changes to their salaries or benefits until the beginning of their next term.

Wes Prater objected, saying there needs to be some discussion about what to do with the pension plan. Nobody has convinced him that eliminating the plan is the best option. “I, for one, am not ready to go that route,” he said.

[Retirement benefits for most county employees have been shifted out of the MPPP, a defined contribution plan, to the Washtenaw County Employees’ Retirement System, known as WCERS, which is a defined benefit plan. Commissioners contribute 7.5% of their salary on a pre-tax basis to the MPPP and receive a 100% employer match. The county also contributes to a voluntary employee beneficiary association (VEBA) on behalf of each commissioner.]

Most recently, Gunn referred to her support of eliminating the MPPP in a comment thread on The Chronicle’s report of the board’s Oct. 6 meeting:

Once again, I will say that I proposed ending the MPPP (the Money Purchase Pension Plan, a defined contribution program that the Commissioners benefit from) last year, and I got violent pushback from Commissioners (whom I will not name out of courtesy). When I became a Commissioner, I asked to be excluded from this benefit, and was told that I had to take it. All Commissioners put in 7.5% and the county matches that. This year, with the county employees all in a different plan, this plan has only eleven members, the Commissioners. It is my understanding that a memo will be sent out soon to dismantle the plan and put Commissioners in a 457 deferred compensation plan, which will have no county match. Then, individual Commissioners can decide what they want to do – stay in the plan, roll it over to another tax deferred instrument such as an IRA, or pay taxes and cash out. I am hoping that all Commissioners will support the ending of this pension benefit. It costs about $10,000 a year to administer, and that is an expense we do not need to bear. I realize that $10,000 is a small amount, but we have already cut to the bone in our budget, and are in the position of looking at digits and perhaps limbs in the future. I am also willing to take a salary cut, and actually earn nothing, if my fellow Commissioners will agree to that. It is about public service, not about us.

A cover memo accompanying Judge’s resolution also mentioned the $10,000 annual fee that Prudential charges for administering the MPPP. In addition, during Wednesday’s meeting Judge noted that eliminating the pension would result in a $13,200 annual savings because the county wouldn’t be making a matching contribution. Eliminating health care benefits – medical and dental – would result in an additional $12,522 annual savings.

Judge pointed out that if they are re-elected on Nov. 2, two commissioners would be eligible to retain their pension and lifetime health care benefits if they retired by the end of the year. She did not name the two commissioners. [Responding to a follow-up email from The Chronicle, Judge clarified that only Barbara Bergman would be eligible.]

Judge said that residents in her district feel strongly that part-time commissioners shouldn’t get these benefits. They shouldn’t be expected to do the job for free, she said, but it’s time to let go of the benefits.

Outcome: No one seconded the motion, and it died without further discussion.

Ypsilanti District Library Millage

Linda Gurka, a member of the Ypsilanti District Library board of trustees, spoke during public commentary and urged commissioners and residents to support a millage increase that will be presented Ypsilanti District Library voters on the Nov. 2 ballot. Gurka was there to enlist general support for the measure – the county board of commissioners does not have purview over the question.

Because of declining property values and millage rollbacks triggered by the Headlee Amendment, the library has seen a 13% loss in revenue since 2008. They anticipate another 30% loss over the next three years, she said. Gurka described the library as a “jewel of the community,” and said that even as revenues declined, the demand for services has increased. They’re simply trying to bring revenues back up to 2007 levels, she said. A homeowner whose house is valued at $100,000 would pay $19 a year, or $1.60 per month.

More information about the millage is available on the library’s website.

Ypsilanti District Library Millage: Commissioner Response

Several commissioners praised the library, and said they supported the millage increase.

Ronnie Peterson, whose district includes Ypsilanti and parts of Ypsilanti Township, said he appreciated the leadership of the library board, which he characterized as aggressive. Its management is the best they’ve ever had. Many communities have closed their libraries or reduced services, he noted, and they needed to spread the word about the importance of libraries, not just in Ypsilanti, but throughout the county.

Leah Gunn, a former librarian, praised the library for its support of the nonprofit Washtenaw Literacy. “I may be from Ann Arbor, but boy, I love the Ypsilanti District Library too,” she said.

Ken Schwartz, whose district includes Superior Township, told Gurka that the library needs to provide a map of the district on its website and in its literature. He said the township had voted several years ago to join the library system, but that many residents still didn’t know they are a part of it.

Saying he supported the library, Rolland Sizemore Jr. also reported that the library’s geo-caching isn’t quite right – that information came from his grandson, he said,”so please check that.”

Coordinated Funding Model for Human Services

At its Oct. 7, 2010 working session, the board was briefed on a proposed coordinated funding model involving the Washtenaw United Way, Ann Arbor Area Community Foundation, Washtenaw County, the city of Ann Arbor and the Urban County. Those five entities provide about $5 million annually for local human services nonprofits. Already, the county and city of Ann Arbor coordinate their funding via the office of community development, a joint county/city department led by Mary Jo Callan.

The proposed public/private model would focus funding on six priorities that have been identified for the entire county: housing/homelessness, aging, school-aged youth, children from birth to six, health and food.

The board of commissioners is expected to vote on the proposal later this year, likely at their Nov. 3 meeting.

Coordinated Funding: Public Commentary

Todd Clark, president of United Bank & Trust’s Washtenaw operation, said he was there to strongly support the proposed coordinated funding strategy. He noted that he is co-chair of the United Way of Washtenaw County‘s fundraising campaign and serves on the board of SOS Community Services, so he sees the perspectives of both the funders and the nonprofits seeking funding. The bank is also a large funder, he said, contributing about $100,000 annually to local nonprofits, and about 5,000 hours of employee time.

Clark said the four guiding principals of the coordinated funding strategy really resonated with him: 1) focusing on the consumer of services, not on the organization that provides the services, 2) creating savings and improving the process for funders and service providers, 3) leveraging the assets and strengths of each funding organization, and 4) providing a model of cooperation and collaboration. If funders can do this, he said, it will carry through to other organizations. He noted that one example of current collaboration that’s already providing a benefit to consumers is a waiting list for the homeless that’s being managed by SOS, the Shelter Association of Washtenaw County and the Salvation Army. Clark urged commissioners to support the funding model.

Coordinated Funding: Commissioner Response

Leah Gunn, Kristin Judge and Mark Ouimet all commented that they support the coordinated funding approach. Ouimet noted that he sits on the board of United Way, and that they spend a lot of time and energy trying to figure out how to allocate funding. The coordinated model is a better way to do that.

Conan Smith said he’s close to one of the board members at SOS, and he commended Clark for dealing with that “unruly bunch.” [Smith is married to Rebekah Warren, who serves on the SOS board.]

Present: Barbara Levin Bergman, Leah Gunn, Kristin Judge, Jeff Irwin, Mark Ouimet, Ronnie Peterson, Jessica Ping, Wes Prater, Ken Schwartz, Rolland Sizemore Jr., Conan Smith

Next board meeting: The next regular meeting is Wednesday, Nov. 3, 2010 at 6:30 p.m. at the County Administration Building, 220 N. Main St. The Ways & Means Committee meets first, followed immediately by the regular board meeting. (Though the agenda states that the regular board meeting begins at 6:45 p.m., it usually starts much later – times vary depending on what’s on the agenda.) Public comment sessions are held at the beginning and end of each meeting. [confirm date]

Absentee voter applications are not printed on baseballs. This is just someone's execution of the concept that "Every article should have art!"

Now, you don’t have to go to the game in order to qualify for an absentee ballot. But just to be clear, if you do plan to make a whole day event out of your visit to Detroit to watch the game, that will absolutely qualify you for an absentee ballot. If you expect to be out of town, that’s a legally valid reason for voting absentee.

Maybe some of you would even like to make the short drive in to the ballpark after a Monday night stay at the Westin Book Cadillac – from what I understand, it’s a pleasant place to spend the night, even if you’re not a Washtenaw Communty College trustee.

What about you Chronicle readers who aren’t baseball fans? If you want to vote absentee, the current election law specifies a limited set of other reasons you can use, which include being older than 60, being in jail, or having religious beliefs that prevent attending the polls.

The topic came up a bit more than a week ago, when the Ann Arbor city Democrats hosted a forum for candidates contesting the Democratic primaries for Michigan’s 52nd and 53rd district state House seats. Jeff Irwin, who along with Ned Staebler is running for the 53rd District seat, threw out an idea for a tweak in Michigan’s election laws.

Irwin said he’d like to see “on-demand absentee” voting – citizens would be able to obtain an absentee ballot and avoid the lines at the polls for any or no reason at all. It’s not some new screwball idea – it’s been around a while and enjoys a lot of support, from Washtenaw County clerk Larry Kestenbaum, among others.

For the time being, though, the application for an absentee ballot requires that voters commit, you know, really commit – just like the guy on the mound has to commit to delivering the ball to the plate after starting in that direction – to at least one of the allowable reasons under the state statute. Through June 17, according to the first Absent Voter report sent out last week via email by the city clerk, over 1,800 Ann Arborites have already committed to one of those reasons.

The Absent Voter Report

Last week, the Ann Arbor city clerk’s office sent out an email containing its first Absent Voter report – absentee ballot applications requested through June 17. The first one, as well as subsequent reports, contains an updated list of names and addresses of all voters who have applied for an absentee ballot. That first email indicated that the city has taken delivery of its ballots, so starting this week, the absentee ballots will be mailed out to those who’ve requested them.

How do you sign up for the city clerk’s email alert service? It’s as simple as telling the city clerk you’d like to be added to the “daily AV list.”

Who would want to receive timely updates about people who’ve applied for absentee ballots as those requests roll in? Candidates on those ballots have a clear interest in knowing who has requested ballots and whether the ballots have been returned – both pieces of information are provided in the daily AV list.

As The Chronicle noted back in May, as a part of its coverage of the finalized primary field, someone who’s requested an absentee ballot is highly likely to vote, so from that point of view, candidates typically see them as a good time investment. It’s worth an extra knock on their door or an extra postcard in the mail. Similarly, if the person has already voted by absentee ballot, well, contacting them is not going to change their vote – a candidate’s time might be better invested knocking on new doors.

How Many People Vote Absentee?

Absentee ballot applications are accepted starting 75 days before the election. Calculating backwards from Aug. 3 puts the start of application acceptance on May 21. In the first daily AV list sent last week, 1,860 voters were listed. Broken down by ward, here’s what that picture looks like – the percentages indicate the percent of total ballots requested so far:

Absentee ballot requests
through June 17, 2010
for Aug. 3 primary

214 Ward 1  11.5%
569 Ward 2  30.6%
319 Ward 3  17.2%
475 Ward 4  25.5%
283 Ward 5  15.2%

Total: 1,860

-

That percentage distribution of absentee ballots roughly parallels the November 2009 general election absentee voting percentages. Separate absentee ballot count boards – one for each ward – made a breakdown of absentee votes visible in the election results [Ward 1, Ward 2, Ward 3, Ward 4, Ward 5]:

Absentee Voting
by Ward in Ann Arbor
November 2009

236 Ward 1   9.9%
678 Ward 2  28.4%
390 Ward 3  16.3%
551 Ward 4  23.1%
533 Ward 5  22.3%

Total 2,388

-

Ward 5 accounted for a greater relative percentage of the total absentee vote in the November 2009 general election than it does in the early requests for ballots for the Aug. 3, 2010 primary, but it’s still relatively early in the ballot request season – the daily AV report for Monday, June 21 added another 49 names and addresses.

How Many Is a Lot of Absent Voters?

Based on the general election of November 2009 and the early absentee ballot application numbers, it looks like the absentee voter numbers for the Aug. 3 primary will, on the very conservative side, be at least 2,000. Is that a lot?

Viewed through the lens of the last two Democratic mayoral primaries, 2,000 votes works out to be roughly the difference between a clear victory and a virtual dead heat.

In 2008, when Tom Wall challenged John Hieftje for mayor, Wall received 3,394 votes to Hieftje’s 7,447. Shift 2,000 votes to Wall and Wall would have still been short – 5,394 to 5,447 – but not by much.

Two years earlier in 2006, when Wendy Woods challenged Hieftje, she received 2,913 votes to Hieftje’s 6,703.  Shift 2,000 votes to Woods and Woods would have prevailed 4,913 to 4,703.

So it’s fair to say 2,000 votes is a lot of votes. It’s easy to understand why candidates for public office in Ann Arbor “work the absentees,” using the daily AV lists – they’re not just almost certain to vote, their numbers are great enough to have a potential impact on the election.

The Penalty of Law

The kind of on-demand absentee voting advocated by Jeff Irwin at the city Democratic Party candidate forum does not currently exist. Absent voter ballots require “application” because Michigan does not currently allow for absentee voting for no reason. An exhaustive list of justifiable reasons that can be checked on the absentee ballot application is:

• age 60 years old or older
• unable to vote without assistance at the polls
• expecting to be out of town on election day
• in jail awaiting arraignment or trial
• unable to attend the polls due to religious reasons
• appointed to work as an election inspector in a precinct outside of your precinct of residence.

The application notes that “A person making a false statement in this absent voter ballot application is guilty of a misdemeanor.” And a call to the state’s Bureau of elections confirmed that the check on the accuracy of statements – including the reason cited justifying the right to vote absentee – is the application itself. In signing the form, an applicant for a ballot is attesting: “I declare that the statements in this absent voter ballot application are true.”

Irwin isn’t alone in advocating for reform that would eliminate the need to commit to a reason for voting absentee. Archived on Washtenaw County clerk Larry Kestenbaum’s blog, Polygon, the Dancing Bear, is part of a Nov. 12, 2006 Ann Arbor News Q&A conducted by reporter Dave Gershman:

Q: What’s the trend you’re seeing in terms of absentee ballots?

A: Absentee ballots are being used more widely over time and you can see the percentage creeping up little by little, year by year. That may also have to do with the aging population as well. If you’re 60 years of age or older you’re automatically eligible to use an absentee ballot without having to state another reason.

And people certainly are aware of the fact that if you choose to vote absentee you can put down that, yes, you plan to be out of the jurisdiction on Election Day even if those plans later change. There has been a movement in the Legislature to enact basically freedom to use an absentee ballot instead of showing up in person without having to state a reason. That legislation, although supported by virtually all of the county and municipal clerks in the state and supported by the secretary of state, did not move forward in the Legislature in the last couple of years. It may in the next one.

Q: And you support that?

A: Oh, absolutely. … If people want to vote absentee they should be able to vote absentee, and the notion of swearing to a reason is really pretty superfluous.

That Q&A was published four years ago. But in response to a recent emailed query, Kestenbaum says: “All those things are still perfectly valid as far as I’m concerned.”

I think the case for on-demand voting is pretty straightforward: it would remove various barriers to participating in democracy. On-demand absentee voting would eliminate the need to make your vote on a specific day, the need to stand in a possibly long line, the need to brave possibly inclement weather, the need to arrange transportation to a polling place, among other barriers.

I don’t think on-demand absentee voting would be a grand-slam home run for democracy. I don’t think that such voting by itself would increase participation in the Ann Arbor August primaries a whole lot, beyond the roughly 14% of registered voters who decided the 2008 mayoral primary.

But improving our democratic process is not about hitting home runs – it’s about getting base hits. And on-demand absentee voting is like a solid base hit, straight up the middle.

For now, you need a reason for voting absentee. Planning an out-of-town excursion on election day – to a Tigers game – just so you can vote absentee might seem a little elaborate. But at least it means you’re planning to vote.

Absentee ballots can be requested by mail until the Saturday before the election. This year that’s July 31. The absentee ballot application form is available on the city clerk’s part of the city of Ann Arbor website. It can be sent via the full range of modern communication technologies: mailed; hand delivered to the city clerk’s office at 100 N. Fifth Ave., Ann Arbor, MI 48104; faxed  to 734-994-8296; or scanned and emailed to cityclerk@a2gov.org.

Go Tigs.

About the writer: Dave Askins is editor of The Ann Arbor Chronicle.

Sarah Palin buttons were among many on display at the Feb. 16 Lincoln Day Dinner at the Four Points Sheraton in Ann Arbor. (Photos by the writer.)

“What do you say we bring a little Massachusetts home to Michigan?” Boonstra asked, referring to the recent Republican victory in that state’s U.S. Senate race. His question prompted cheers and applause from the crowd of about 150 people attending Tuesday’s Lincoln Day Dinner, at the Four Points Sheraton in Ann Arbor.

“What a difference a year makes,” Boonstra said, noting a resurgence of energy and enthusiasm among local Republicans. It’s a year that the GOP can win back the state House of Representatives, he said, adding that Washtenaw County needs to do its part. Currently, all four state legislative seats in the county are held by Democrats. “If we can do it in Massachusetts,” Boonstra said, “I think we can even do it in Ann Arbor.”

The annual dinner drew more than 20 elected officials and candidates for the August primary. Two gubernatorial candidates – Rick Snyder of Ann Arbor and Mike Bouchard of Oakland County – dropped by for the pre-dinner reception. Others at the dinner included Archie Brown, a Washtenaw County Circuit Court judge; Kirk Tabbey, chief judge of the 14-A District Court in Ypsilanti; as well as several candidates for state attorney general, secretary of state and state legislative seats.

On the federal level, candidates included Tim Walberg, former 7th District Congressman who was defeated in 2008 by Democrat Mark Schauer and who plans to run again; and Jack Lynch and Robert Steele, two challengers for U.S. Rep. John Dingell’s seat.

Marlene Chockley and Joe Fitzsimmons, who organized the Feb. 16 Lincoln Day Dinner, confer before the program begins.

Both Republicans on the Washtenaw County Board of Commissioners – Jessica Ping and Mark Ouimet – attended the event, with Ouimet serving as emcee.

Ouimet, who’s running for the state representative seat in District 52, observed that a year ago there were many empty seats at the annual dinner. The crowd on Tuesday reflected renewed interest in the Republican Party, he said, giving credit for that to Ron Weiser, chair of the state GOP and founder of McKinley Associates in Ann Arbor. If Weiser had been able to attend, Ouimet said, he would have told the group that “it’s a different time, we’re going to do it in a different way, and have a different outcome.”

The event’s keynote speaker was Ken Braun of the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, a Midland-based free market think tank. Braun is also editor of the Michigan Capitol Confidential, the center’s bi-monthly print and online publication that covers state government.

Braun began his talk, titled “Learning from the Tea Party,” by asking how many in the crowd were looking forward to the November elections. When the applause died down, he cautioned that they shouldn’t be quite so optimistic. “These Tea Party people are not always synonymous with getting Republicans elected,” he said.

Braun, who’s done consulting for Tea Party groups across Michigan, described them as not the standard Republican or even conservative – and they’re not a cohesive group that’s organized by the Republican Party. To say that, he joked, would be “like accusing the Detroit Lions of organizing a Super Bowl parade.”

Tea Party members are angry, Braun said. And their anger at Barack Obama over adding to the problems that were there when he got into office could just as easily bite Republicans. But Republican leaders don’t yet realize that, he said.

Braun noted that the deficit was high under former president George W. Bush when the GOP held majorities in Congress, and that taxpayers were angry then, too. People see the federal budget exploding and know that someone is responsible. That makes them angry, he said – even more so when Republicans are in charge.

The situation is similar in Michigan. Former governor John Engler started out fiscally conservative. But during his tenure in office, Engler and the Republican-controlled legislature created a bigger, hungrier government – which left taxpayers, when the bottom fell out in 2001, just hungrier, Braun said.

Ken Braun, editor of the Michigan Capitol Confidential, gave the keynote speech for the Feb. 16 Lincoln Day Dinner.

What went wrong? Voters elected and re-elected these lawmakers, Braun said, then didn’t watch what they were doing, and didn’t hold them accountable for their actions. He said they shouldn’t worry about getting Republicans elected in November – they should worry about what happens after the election.

It’s up to voters to raise a ruckus when an elected official’s actions don’t line up with their words, Braun said: “Your politicians are not the leaders. You are.”

After his speech, Braun fielded several questions from the audience. Responding to a question about what the Tea Party wants – as opposed to what they don’t want – Braun drew a parallel to the 1994 mid-term elections, when anger against Bill Clinton’s reform efforts resulted in Republicans gaining control of both the House and the Senate. As Clinton shifted to a policy of accommodation, he said, that anger generally subsided. People in the Tea Party don’t want government leaders to make radical changes when things are working pretty well, Braun said.

Asked how the Republican Party can capitalize on the enthusiasm of the Tea Party, Braun said he didn’t think the Tea Party could be co-opted, calling them “enforcers.” They’re fiscally sane, everyday people who don’t particularly care about politics, he said. “They just want to be left alone.”

Later, a member of the Willow Run Tea Party Caucus stood up and told the crowd that they won’t allow the Republican Party to co-opt them. “What we want from you is to come and see us,” he said, and to listen to what they have to say. He invited candidates to attend the group’s regular meetings at the Big Sky Diner in Ypsilanti, but again said the candidates weren’t there to talk – they’d be there to listen.

Bill Bigler, of the Ann Arbor Patriots and the Washtenaw Campaign for Liberty, introduced himself and said the Tea Party was interested in three things: 1) fiscal responsibility, 2) a return to Constitutional government, and 3) a reduction in the size and scope of government.

Rick Olson, a candidate for the 55th District state representative, asked how many in the audience had attended a Tea Party event. More than a dozen people raised their hands. Olson said he’d gone to a Tea Party rally in Brighton, and was impressed by the people he met there, calling them patriotic and “kindred spirits” with Republicans. Following up on that comment, Braun likened the Tea Party members to Reagan Republicans,  and to the Republicans of the Contract with America in 1994.

In the final question of the night, Norma Sarns wondered what happens to people who are elected – people you know and respect – who then go to Washington “and it’s like they’ve gone to another land.” Braun said that they’ve “gone to a land where people buy them food.” Lobbyists and others treat elected officials very specially, and it’s natural that politicians don’t want to let go of that, he added. Everybody can be co-opted by the political system – it’s up to constituents to remind politicians of their priorities.

And again he reminded the audience: “They’re not the leaders – you’re the leaders.”