Ypsilanti mayoral candidates: Democrats Peter Murdock and Amanda Edmonds.

Murdock, who currently serves on the Ypsilanti city council and was mayor of that city in the 1980s, talked about how Ypsilanti is still struggling with the “economic realities” of the Great Recession. The city needs more financial stability, and to help achieve that goal he supports efforts at collaboration – like Ypsilanti’s membership in the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority. He also talked about the need to quickly deal with eliminating debt on the city-owned Water Street property, which he called the “elephant in the room.”

Responding to questions from the audience, Murdock pointed to efforts to improve public safety through collaboration between the city, Eastern Michigan University, and the Washtenaw County sheriff’s office. “We’ll have more to say about that shortly, in terms of what we’re developing,” he said.

Edmonds is founder and executive director of the nonprofit Growing Hope, and serves as chair of the Ypsilanti Downtown Development Authority board. She described her vision for the city as one where residents and businesses thrive, not just survive. The mayor is the city’s chief ambassador, she said, setting the tone and bringing energy that attracts, retains and excites people to live, work, visit and play in Ypsilanti.

Her role as mayor would also entail building positive relationships with Ypsilanti’s neighbors, she said: “We have to put past differences behind us, and stop blaming, and find the common good.” Edmonds also talked about the importance of building a leadership “pipeline” through nominations to city boards and commissions, giving citizens an opportunity to serve and lead.

Responding to audience questions, Edmonds stressed the importance of public safety, but said the city needs to think more broadly about that issue – it’s not just about adding more police officers. Community involvement, community policing, and strong neighborhood associations are also important, addressing problems in a pro-active way. “We need to really think upstream about a lot of things, including public safety, to think about where those problems are, and how we bring the community together to solve them.”

This report includes written summaries of the Ypsilanti candidates’ responses, as well as audio clips from The Chronicle’s live broadcast of the event. The third candidate for Ypsilanti mayor, Democrat Tyrone Bridges, was not able to attend.

There are no Republicans running for mayor in Ypsilanti. The deadline for independent candidates to file petitions for the Nov. 4 election is July 17.

The June 26 forum also included the four mayoral candidates from Ann Arbor: Sabra Briere (Ward 1), Sally Petersen (Ward 2), Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3), and Christopher Taylor (Ward 3). Their remarks are covered in a separate article.

The June 26 event was held at the Ann Arbor Regent Hotel and moderated by chamber president Diane Keller, with audience questions moderated by Andy LaBarre, the chamber’s vice president of government affairs and administration. LaBarre also serves in elected office as a Washtenaw County commissioner. The event was followed by a mixer for chamber members and other candidates for local, state and federal offices.

Opening Statement: Peter Murdock

Murdock began by saying that he represents Ward 3 in the city of Ypsilanti, in his second consecutive term. In the past, he’s also served as mayor of Ypsilanti, he noted.

Peter Murdock.

In the last five years, the city has spent a lot of time dealing with the economic realities of the Great Recession and the bursting of the housing bubble, which impacted Ypsilanti immensely, he said. The city government has shrunk in an attempt to balance its budget and provide the services that residents need. “We will continue to try to do that.”

As he looks to the future, Murdock said the same issues are still out there. The city needs some financial stability. Some problems are not unique to Ypsilanti, but some are. They have some legacy costs that they continue to try to deal with – they’ve addressed those in recent contract negotiations, but more needs to be done, he said. Services need to be consolidated. There needs to be some regionalization of services to provide those services in a better manner. They’ve done a lot of that over the last several years.

One good example is the expansion of the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority, which now includes Ypsilanti, Murdock said. Another example is the city’s new relationship regarding police services with Eastern Michigan University, the Washtenaw County sheriff’s office, and Ypsilanti Township. The city needs to build on that.

The elephant in the room, Murdock said, is the debt on the city-owned Water Street property. The city manager calls it the “albatross” that the city needs to deal with, he noted. “We need to deal with that fairly quickly in terms of marketing property for eliminating that debt.”

The other issue that Ypsilanti has, which probably isn’t unique to that city, he said, is public safety. The city isn’t going to attract businesses or residents if people have the perception – real or not – that the community is unsafe. They need to build on the restructuring of the police department, under its new chief and almost an entire new command structure, and a staffing level that’s finally built back up better than it was – although not necessarily what it should be, he said. They need to build the city’s community policing, and bring back a downtown officer on the beat.

Another issue is transportation. That’s always been key to Ypsilanti’s economic development, Murdock said – whether it’s the Sauk Trail, the Huron River, the railroad, Chicago road, or Willow Run airport. It’s always been transportation that’s allowed the Ypsilanti business community to thrive. That’s still important, but they’ve gone beyond that, he said. They need a broader transportation system that serves a wider community, and that’s efficient and effective. That’s why it was important to expand the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority.

The commuter rail proposal between Jackson, Ann Arbor and Detroit will be another important element in Ypsilanti’s development, Murdock said, and create a corridor between those communities. It will help the housing market and economic development in Ypsilanti. Transportation isn’t just about cars anymore, he noted – it includes bikes and walking too. The city has developed a non-motorized plan, and a new city master plan is keying in on making the community more walkable, because that attracts more people.

Sustainability is also important, Murdock said. All of the things that the city does should have a focus on making the community more sustainable. The city has adopted a sustainability plan and is starting to implement it as finances become available and opportunities occur. They’ve partnered with the Michigan Suburbs Alliance on better energy-efficiency for buildings. Energy audits have been conducted on all the public buildings, and this summer the final set of streetlights will be converted to LEDs. He noted that the city also established an energy revolving loan fund for energy-efficiency work.

Q&A with Murdock

Two questions were posed to Murdock, on public safety and education.

Question (asked by a Washtenaw Community College student): Many of my classmates will be transferring to Eastern Michigan University. They’re concerned about security issues on campus. Is there any strategy to communicate with those students, to tell them that the city is going to improve safety?

Murdock: The city has been working with EMU, the sheriff’s office and Ypsilanti Township, trying to deal with these issues, he said. “We’ll have more to say about that shortly, in terms of what we’re developing,” he said. EMU and the city of Ypsilanti have both hired more police officers. The apartment buildings next to campus have also been improving security, he said. The university is working to notify people in the community about various efforts that are underway.

Question: In a lot of communities across the country, many mayors are actively involved in trying to support education and school districts. What ideas do you have in terms of being an active participant or trying to create a partnership between the mayor’s office and the school district. As you well know, the Ypsilanti public school district recently consolidated with the Willow Run district, and at one point there was a partnership effort between the local school district and the mayor’s office. Do you see that as a viable option or major interest of yours, to try to support education by creating such a partnership?

Murdock: The public school system is a key element and is important to any community – Ypsilanti is no different, he said. There’ve been issues in the school district, the consolidation is here and there are a lot of good things happening that need to be supported. He didn’t know what form a partnership might take, “but we certainly have to be supportive of [the schools]. We have to partners in the education system for the residents of our community.”

[.mp3 of Peter Murdock's remarks and answers]

Opening Statement: Amanda Edmonds

Amanda Edmonds said she’s excited about Ypsilanti’s future. The city faces some serious economic challenges, but her vision for Ypsilanti moving forward isn’t just about surviving – it’s about the city thriving in the future.

Amanda Edmonds.

Ypsilanti has an incredible energy, Edmonds said. Walking down Michigan Avenue or walking along Cross Street reveals entrepreneurs who are excited to start new businesses, as well as anchor businesses ready to expand their reach. Whether it’s Michigan cider from Red Rock, a painting by an Ypsilanti artist at The Eyrie, fresh tacos from Dos Hermanos, shoes from Puffer Reds, Haab’s legendary fried chicken, or a weekly haircut, “it’s our diversity of small businesses that not only lay this economic foundation for our community, but weave the cultural fabric that makes it a place that I love to live and work.”

The question is what comes next, she said – how can they shape a vision for the community that’s both realistic and optimistic?

Her approach involves attracting people, investment, energy and ideas into the community. Growing the local economy means attracting and retaining investment, talent and residents. As chair of the Ypsilanti Downtown Development Authority, she’s been working to bring business and community voices to the table to create a concrete vision of a more livable, walkable and inviting community, she said. She’s helped streamline the DDA governance so that it can function both efficiently and respectfully, to focus on the good work of improving the community.

As mayor, Edmonds said she’d focus on economic development through local ownership, making Ypsilanti a model sustainable city, embracing and celebrating the diversity that makes the city strong. It means supporting the existing local businesses, making sure that they can stay and grow in the community. It also means being pro-active, seeking out and recruiting businesses that are good employers and strong community citizens, she said, that are invested as much in the community’s success as in their own success.

As founder and executive director of Growing Hope, Edmonds said she knows what it means to make payroll, to set policy, to operate with limited resources – and all the other pieces it takes to run a business. As mayor, she’d bring that experience to the council chambers.

The city can never forget that one in four citizens live below the poverty line, Edmonds said. “We only thrive as a community when every one of our citizens thrive.” She’s worked in every neighborhood in the community, and there are real disparities. Those disparities must be addressed. That means supporting employers that pay living wages, finding jobs for teens in the summer, ensuring that everyone has quality housing, safe neighborhoods, and good food. “These are all essential to our community thriving.”

Edmonds described three roles that the mayor plays for Ypsilanti. The mayor is the city’s chief ambassador, representing residents both in the community, with the city’s neighbors, and within the region. “My strength is in being that positive ambassador for Ypsi,” she said. It’s a role she already plays as executive director of Growing Hope, and when serving on regional, state and national boards and councils, and as she travels across the country as a speaker and trainer. This kind of ambassador sets the tone and brings energy that attracts, retains and excites people to live, work, visit and play in Ypsilanti.

Secondly, a mayor facilitates partnerships and positive relationships with Ypsilanti’s neighbors, because “we really only win when we all win,” she said. Her approach to working with Ypsilanti Township, EMU, the public school system, Washtenaw Community College, county government, Ann Arbor and others is to really invest in each other’s success. “We have to put past differences behind us, and stop blaming, and find the common good. All I say, every day, is all we can do is move forward. No more blaming.”

Finally, a great honor and responsibility of the mayor is building leadership, she said. The mayor nominates appointments to city boards and commissions, and through this gives an opportunity for citizens to serve and lead. “I take that really seriously, and I’m committed to ensuring that voices at the table represent our entire community.” She’d work to build those pipelines of leadership, particularly so that those who haven’t been asked or given the opportunity to serve or have a place at the table are invited to do so.

Edmonds said she’s excited about the possibility that the electorate will allow her to serve the community in this new way. “I look forward to both the challenge and the honor.”

Q&A with Edmonds

Edmonds fielded three questions, focused on a city income tax, public safety, and reasons why young professionals are reluctant to move to Ypsilanti.

Question: Like many municipalities across the country, Ypsilanti is facing rather significant financial difficulties. The current mayor and city council have done a lot to try to balance the budget. Several years ago, former mayor Cheryl Farmer appointed a commission to study city finances. The primary recommendation was a city income tax. Are you an advocate of supporting an income tax as a means to generate additional revenues to support Ypsilanti?

Edmonds: This issue has gone before the voters, she noted. The voters said no, “so while it is an option in the world, it’s not a viable option and is not what our community has said.” It’s not something she’d work to move forward.

Question: A year or so ago, the Southeast Michigan Council of Governments (SEMCOG) did a report on the city of Ypsilanti and its financial situation. If you’re familiar with that, what do you think is the biggest valid concern that was raised?

By way of background, the report was commissioned by city manager Ralph Lange and completed in December 2012. It was included as part of the Ypsilanti city council’s special meeting packet for Jan. 3, 2013. [.pdf of SEMCOG report]

Edmonds: She’d heard about the report, but wasn’t familiar with it and hasn’t read it. She asked if the question could be reframed in a way so that she could address the question.

Follow-up: Public safety was one of the main issues in the report. In the wake of that, there was a big discussion about creating a hybrid police and fire force, but that didn’t move forward. One of the suggestions was to try to utilize the 30 or so officers on EMU’s force. What type of collaboration might be possible for that – to get more police on the street while reducing overtime?

Edmonds: The city council, Rep. David Rutledge, the county sheriff and others have been working on collaboration between the city, EMU and the sheriff’s office. She’s excited about that and wants to move it forward. “We need to always prioritize police and public safety in our budget.” But it’s important to think about another level as well, she said. If public safety is only coming to light when there’s a headline in the news about tragic and terrible events, or when someone is making a call for police response, “then we’re thinking about it way too late.”

The city needs to think about public safety beyond the number of police officers. Community involvement, community policing, and strong neighborhood associations are important. Also important are how communities are designed, and how the city’s priorities in replacing infrastructure are hindering or helping public safety. “We need to really think upstream about a lot of things, including public safety, to think about where those problems are, and how we bring the community together to solve them.”

Question: At the beginning of this year, I started running a small company in Ypsilanti, with 50 employees and $15 million in revenues. But I can’t convince my wife to move to Ypsilanti with our three kids. What do you think are the things holding her back that stops professionals from wanting to live in Ypsilanti?

Edmonds: A couple of things hold people back, and it’s in part about reputation. Some of those things – the challenges that are in the media or in people’s minds or people’s past perceptions – are real, and many of them are false. “We feel like when we can bring people into the community and hang out and spend time, people have a whole different understanding.” That’s part of a mayor’s role to set that tone and be an ambassador.

Former Ypsilanti Public Schools superintendent James Hawkins attended the June 26 candidate forum.

That’s also why she talks about regionalism and partnerships, and why she says that “we all win when we all win,” Edmonds said. “Ypsilanti could be, in the city limits, the safest community in this state. And if Ypsilanti Township has crime challenges, the headline still reads ‘Ypsilanti.’” So the city needs to think beyond its borders, because if the surrounding townships still have challenges, then the city’s reputation will also suffer.

Edmonds also said the public schools are a real barrier for many people who have school-age children or who plan to start families. Although the mayor doesn’t have any direct control over the schools, the role of the mayor as an ambassador is to spread the word about good things going on in the schools. It’s a rocky time, post-consolidation, she said, but as she campaigns door-to-door she’s telling people about New Tech High School and project-based learning and the Montessori kindergarten option. “I’m finding that many people don’t know that, so whether or not we have kids in the schools, it is all of our jobs to support the schools.”

She cited the work of church leaders, who are walking the halls of the high school and being extra feet on the street. Edmonds said she’s a proud graduate of a public school that had many of the same challenges as Ypsilanti, “and I wouldn’t have changed my education for anything.” People need to send their kids to the public schools and take a chance, and to invest in the schools as community members, she said.

[.mp3 of Amanda Edmonds' remarks and answers]

The Chronicle could not survive without regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of local government. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle. And if you’re already supporting us, please encourage your friends, neighbors and colleagues to help support The Chronicle, too!

From left: Ann Arbor mayoral candidate Sabra Briere, Ypsilanti mayoral candidate Amanda Edmonds, and Debbie Dingell, who is running for Congress in District 12, a seat currently held by her husband, John Dingell. All three candidates are Democrats and attended the June 26 A2Y Regional Chamber event at the Ann Arbor Regent Hotel on Carpenter Road.

The four Ann Arbor Democratic candidates for mayor attended: Sabra Briere (Ward 1), Sally Petersen (Ward 2), Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3), and Christopher Taylor (Ward 3). They all currently serve on the city council. Both the mayor and city councilmembers serve two-year terms.

There are three Ypsilanti mayoral candidates: Tyrone Bridges, Amanda Edmonds, and Peter Murdock. All are Democrats, but only Murdock currently serves on the city council. Bridges did not attend the June 26 event.

No Republicans are running for mayor in either city for the Aug. 5 primary. More candidates than usual have entered the race at least in part because the incumbent mayors – Democrats John Hieftje of Ann Arbor and Paul Schreiber of Ypsilanti – are not seeking re-election.

This report focuses on the Ann Arbor mayoral race. Each candidate was given five minutes to make a statement and spent another five minutes answering questions from the audience. Questions covered a variety of topics, including regionalism, public transportation, road repair, the possibility of a city income tax, downtown parks, and the regulation of drivers for hire. Taylor was asked specifically about his job as an attorney, and whether he’d continue working in that capacity as mayor. He indicated that he would.

This report includes written summaries of the Ann Arbor candidates’ responses, as well as audio clips from The Chronicle’s live broadcast of the event. (Remarks by the two Ypsilanti mayoral candidates will be reported in a separate article.) Several other forums are planned in the coming weeks, leading up to the Aug. 5 primary.

The June 26 event was held at the Ann Arbor Regent Hotel and moderated by chamber president Diane Keller, with audience questions moderated by Andy LaBarre, the chamber’s vice president of government affairs and administration – who also serves in elected office as a Washtenaw County commissioner. It was followed by a mixer for chamber members and other candidates for local, state and federal offices.

Opening Statement: Sally Petersen

Sally Petersen introduced herself as a current city councilmember representing Ward 2. When Mary Sue Coleman took the job as president at the University of Michigan 10 years ago, she said she didn’t come to the university to maintain the status quo, Petersen noted. Coleman wanted the university to continue to find ways to excel. Petersen said this statement epitomizes her own campaign. She’s running for mayor to bring new leadership, skills, knowledge and abilities that the city needs now, in order to find new ways to excel.

Sally Petersen.

As mayor, Petersen hopes to transform three things for the city – the economy, the city’s relationship with UM, and the quality of civic engagement.

Regarding the transformation of Ann Arbor’s economy, Petersen noted that she’s the only candidate with an MBA. Her years of leadership in the private sector – including work in senior-level positions at CFI Group, ABN AMRO Mortgage Group and HealthMedia – have prepared her well to lead an economic strategy that leverages future growth into revenue that will pay for the city’s priorities, she said. Those priorities include better roads, more police, and safer mobility for motorists, pedestrians, cyclists and runners. “We cannot expect to restore our infrastructure without an economic strategy.”

When Petersen was elected to city council two years ago, she quickly realized that while economic development is a budget priority, the city has no economic development staff and only a $75,000 contract with Ann Arbor SPARK to support economic development. “I was astounded at the city’s lack of leadership in this regard.” So she proposed an economic development collaborative task force, which included SPARK and the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority.

The task force took inventory of several economic development activities, Petersen said, and realized there were major gaps. While the DDA focuses on downtown Ann Arbor and SPARK’s focus is countywide, no entity is solely focused on economic development throughout the city, outside of the downtown. For example, she noted, the city recognizes the need to encourage redevelopment of areas like the North Main corridor and South State Street, which are major gateways to the downtown.

The task force recommended continuing its work after a new mayor is elected, with additional stakeholders including UM, Washtenaw County, and potentially the chamber of commerce. [.pdf of economic collaborative task force report] This expanded task force would have the power to transform Ann Arbor’s economy as it evaluates the policies and tools available to leverage new revenue to pay for the city’s priorities. New approaches might include public, private and civic partnerships, Petersen said.

As leaders in the business community, Petersen hoped that chamber members would recognize the opportunity to demonstrate corporate responsibility by thinking critically about ways to work with all stakeholders, to improve the local economy for all citizens, customers, employees, the community and the environment.

Regarding UM, the university is an engine for Ann Arbor’s economic success and a natural strategic partner, Petersen said, “but they do not fill our potholes.” Ann Arbor is electing a new mayor at the same time the university is getting a new president, she noted. “It’s time for a new attitude toward town-gown relationships.” A more equitable relationship through collaboration in areas of mutual interest would benefit both campus and the community. Those areas include transportation, job creation and quality of life, she said.

Petersen also stressed the “need to repair relationships and get beyond the polarization that currently saddles our city governance.” The polarization is characterized as those who want a vibrant downtown against those who want better services for neighborhoods. It’s a barrier to achieving both of those desirable goals, she said – a vibrant downtown that belongs to everyone, and better prosperity for the neighborhoods. “I am the mayoral candidate in the best position to unify these goals, because I’m not exclusively associated with either faction.”

She said her voting record shows that she votes for what’s best for Ann Arbor as a whole. Her leadership in the private, public and nonprofit sectors brings new knowledge, new skills and critical thinking, and new resources to bring people together to achieve a common vision, Petersen said. She closed by answering a question that she’s been asked frequently over the last several months: Why does she want to run for mayor? “I want to be mayor because I want to lead the city away from the status quo, and achieve new ways for the city to excel in the long term.” It’s an ambitious agenda, she added, but she’s confident that through better collaboration, Ann Arbor can be transformed in these important ways.

As she’s knocked on doors and spoken to other community leaders, she’s heard that people want a mayor who’s open and inclusive, who stands for the homeless and the housed, regardless of ability or political party. They want a mayor who’s unencumbered by bias, who is fair-minded and trustworthy, she said. “I will be that mayor.”

Q&A with Sally Petersen

Three questions asked of Sally Petersen touched on issues of regionalism and transportation.

Question: What are some better ways that the city can promote collaboration between itself and other municipalities?

Petersen: The notion of regionalization is becoming more popular. Ann Arbor is the center of Washtenaw County, in terms of being the county seat. Finding ways to collaborate beyond our business borders into the next town is obviously something that benefits everyone, she said. Petersen likes the idea of having the economic development task force to include members of the local chamber of commerce – to include representatives from Ypsilanti and hopefully Pittsfield Township. “What benefits outside of Ann Arbor also benefits downtown Ann Arbor,” she said.

Sally Petersen, left, talks with Ann Arbor SPARK CEO Paul Krutko and fellow Ward 2 councilmember Jane Lumm.

Petersen noted that Ann Arbor SPARK is agnostic about where companies locate, as long as it’s within Washtenaw County. But she’d like companies to be taxpayers in Ann Arbor. Petersen said that Paul Krutko, SPARK’s CEO, tells her that even if companies are located outside of Ann Arbor, the employees still shop, dine and use resources in the city. Petersen recognizes that development outside of the city benefits Ann Arbor as well.

In particular, she’s watching with “cautious optimism” the redevelopment of Detroit. People talk about improved train service from Chicago to Ann Arbor, but she’d like to see more connectivity to Detroit as well. “I think we can benefit along that I-94 corridor – not just within Ann Arbor, but from the outskirts as well.”

Question: Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti voters overwhelmingly said that public transit is important. How should the city council and the next mayor help the southeast Michigan Regional Transit Authority (RTA), especially since it seemed like the city was reluctant to join?

By way of background, on May 6, 2014, voters in Ann Arbor, Ypsilanti and Ypsilanti Township passed an 0.7 mill tax to increase public transit service of the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority. The millage, which was put on the ballot by the AAATA board, passed with 70.6% approval.

Separately, Washtenaw County is part of the RTA. The four-county area of the RTA includes the counties of Washtenaw, Wayne, Macomb and Oakland as well as the city of Detroit. It was established by the Michigan legislature in December 2012. That same month – at a Dec. 10, 2012 special meeting – the Ann Arbor city council voted unanimously to ask that the RTA legislation be amended to exclude Washtenaw County. The Washtenaw County board of commissioners had passed a similar resolution, but neither body had any authority over that decision, and the county was included in the RTA. The chair of the county board of commissioners is allowed to appoint each county’s two members to the RTA board. Currently, the RTA board members for Washtenaw County are University of Michigan professor Liz Gerber and former state legislator Alma Wheeler, who is also the mother of county commissioner Conan Smith.

In addition, the AAATA’s CEO, Michael Ford, was recently offered the job as CEO of the RTA. Ford has not yet confirmed whether he has decided to accept that offer, however.

Petersen: The city was initially reluctant to join the RTA, Petersen said. This community will see the benefits of the RTA in five or 10 years, and right now, the city is focused on the recently passed AAATA millage. She said she was grateful that the millage had passed, to focus on improved transit along the urban core, “which is something I was very much in favor of.” Beyond that, a light rail or commuter rail between Ann Arbor and Detroit should be taken one step at a time. The city should encourage good analysis to be done, she said, and certainly shouldn’t be a barrier to its development.

Question: Roads in other states – from the mid-Atlantic up to New Hampshire – are so much better than in Michigan. With no hope from Lansing at this point, how is the city going to address this? It looks like the possibility of a local road millage has been shelved at the county level. What are we going to do about this?

Petersen: Roads are one of the key pieces of infrastructure that the city needs to improve. The city has a revenue problem, and without an economic strategy, “I don’t know how we’re going to solve that revenue problem.” The city can use general fund dollars to fix the roads, but the staff and council need to figure out where those dollars will come from. UM economists are forecasting that 12,500 new jobs will be coming to the county. Property values are going up 6.5% in Ann Arbor. “I’m encouraged that there’s economic prosperity out there, but we need a mayor who’s going to intentionally lead the effort to develop a strategy to transform that growth into more revenue for the city.”

She said she doesn’t have a quick or easy answer as to where those revenues will come from, but the city needs to start thinking about it strategically, and that hasn’t happened yet. “We’ve sort of relied on UM to be our economic engine, but they don’t fill our potholes.” The city needs to work with all of its stakeholders to make the most of this improving economy and turn that into more dollars that the city can then spend on infrastructure, like roads.

[.mp3 of Sally Petersen's remarks and answers]

Opening Statement: Sabra Briere

Since she began serving on city council in 2007, many of the things she’s focused on have been the small, iterative changes that make big differences in people’s lives. Those issues include traffic calming, getting snow plowed, filling sidewalk gaps and getting sidewalks repaired in an equitable and reasonable fashion. “Those are quality of life issues that help move us toward a future that really improves the life of everyone living in Ann Arbor today and the lives of all the people who come visit tomorrow – and for that matter, the lives of the people who will be living there in the future.”

Sabra Briere.

Briere said she plans long-term. It doesn’t make sense to talk just about a two-year plan or a five-year plan, because just doing a street project can take five years of planning. It doesn’t make sense to talk about how much difference one person is going to make in a two-year term, because it can take two years to get an ordinance passed – from the time that you think about it, until it’s approved by city council and implemented. That doesn’t even factor in evaluating it to see if it’s been done correctly, she noted.

Briere believes in long-term goals, with iterative changes to achieve those goals. So as the city works toward safe streets, for her that means not just paving them but also coming up with a plan to repair the potholes before they happen. It means not just improving sidewalks, but also thinking about how people use those sidewalks – where they’re going and why they’re going there, and what are the destinations that the city wants them to reach, or destinations that they want to reach but can’t.

If there’s a park that people can’t reach because there’s no sidewalk, that’s a problem in the city’s planning. If there’s no sidewalk to reach a school, that’s a planning problem. Her goal is to plan properly and make the changes that are needed.

All of this leads to stronger neighborhoods and a more resilient community. A strong neighborhood is one where people talk to each other. For example, someone can borrow a chainsaw from a neighbor to deal with a branch that fell on their sidewalk. Strong neighborhoods are also places where people know who to call to get city services, she said, “and they know that they’re going to get a response from city hall. Neighborhoods and neighborhood leaders are city hall’s partners.” It’s the responsibility of the city’s employees and elected officials to respond to those requests.

As Ann Arbor changes – and Ann Arbor will change, she said – it’s important to talk about retaining things that make Ann Arbor special, “the things that made us stay here.” But it’s also important to become a community that can meet the challenges of the future. Those challenges include changes in technology and changes in the economy, from improving the transit system to dealing with where cars should park. As the city talks about increased jobs, it’s also important to talk about increased traffic and increased wear-and-tear on the city’s infrastructure. All of that requires better long-term planning, Briere said.

“If there’s one thing besides my ability to work with everyone on council and my record of true independent thinking and of not being part of any clique or group, one thing that I bring to this race that is unique to me is my ability to see a future, and to look at the ways and steps it will take for us to get there,” Briere concluded.

Q&A with Briere

The two questions to Sabra Briere covered a city income tax and downtown parks.

Question: Regarding tax revenues, the city has occasionally talked about the idea of a city income tax. What are your thoughts on that? Would it be beneficial to the city, or detrimental – in terms of regionalism and for the city itself.

The question was posed by local attorney Scott Munzel, who serves on the chamber’s public policy committee. Before answering the question, Briere laughed: “Oh, really, Scott – are you going to bring that up?”

Steve Kwasny, a volunteer for Sabra Briere’s mayoral campaign, is interviewed by WEMU’s Andrew Cluley.

Briere: For people who didn’t know how income taxes work, she said, if the city were to ask voters to approve an income tax, the revenue from that tax would be offset by a decrease in the base property tax rate. The goal is to keep the impact to the property owners neutral. But there are always barriers to an income tax, she said, and there are reasons why the city hasn’t pursued it.

One reason is that the city hasn’t figured out a way to impact the people who make the most and live away from the city, Briere said, in a fashion that doesn’t discourage them from working in the city. There’s no way to guarantee that businesses won’t move five feet outside the city’s borders. In addition, “we haven’t figured out a way to ensure that the people who get paid the least, suffer the least. If they’re commuting to the city, what is the economic impact on their lives if we try to institute a portion of a percent of a mill.”

These issues haven’t been discussed in a way that leads to the decision to put an income tax proposal on the ballot, Briere said. If councilmembers aren’t convinced that an income tax would benefit the city’s bottom line and the citizens who live here, “then it becomes harder for us to sell.”

The reason that this idea keeps coming up is that people want to make certain that “if the university won’t pay its fair share, as it were, of the cost of doing business in Ann Arbor, then the people who work at the university should be forced to pay. And that is a barrier that none of us have quite been able to overcome. It hasn’t gone on the ballot. Anything can happen in the future.”

Question: The city has about 158 parks and 15 parks facilities. Can you talk about why there’s a need for another park, specifically in the downtown area?

Briere: People in Ann Arbor are fortunate that the city embraces the idea of as much natural area and recreational area and community gathering area as possible. One of the challenges that any downtown faces – anywhere in the country – is that there needs to be respite from construction and hardscape, she said. While it’s not always possible to guarantee, as Ann Arbor creates a dense downtown, the city will confront the need of people who live and work and visit downtown to have a break from the buildings and hardscape. That’s the purpose of a downtown gathering space or park.

The truth is that there are several places downtown, which are all small pocket parks, Briere continued. But there’s no coherent plan yet for how to use space on the Library Lane lot. The top of that underground parking garage was intended to hold a park, but not a building, in certain areas, she said. The city needs to address the needs of the community, how that park is designed, and what it does – and that can’t be done in isolation, she added. Ann Arbor embraces its open space, and when people come to visit Ann Arbor or decide to live here, part of the reason is because of its parks. “I wouldn’t give up a single one, but we’ll always have a challenge of paying for the ones we have.”

[.mp3 of Sabra Briere's remarks and answers]

Opening Statement: Stephen Kunselman

Stephen Kunselman began by thanking the audience for considering his candidacy, saying he was honored that they were interested in his policy positions and his record as an elected official.

Stephen Kunselman.

As a three-term councilmember representing Ward 3, he said he’s held a position of dignity, respect and honor, and he’d continue to do so as mayor. He’s been a strong and effective voice for all Ann Arbor residents, using common sense and fiscal responsibility as the basis for governing. “I believe in fairness and equity in the distribution of the city’s limited financial and staff resources, and have been a consistent advocate for investment in our infrastructure, funding of our parks system, and the rebuilding of our public safety department.”

Kunselman described how he grew up in Ann Arbor, and attended Ann Arbor public schools beginning with kindergarten at Pittsfield Elementary. He also attended King Elementary, Wines Elementary, Forsythe Middle School, Community High and graduated from Pioneer High in 1981. He got a bachelor of science degree in natural sciences with a major in forestry from the University of Michigan, and went on to obtain a masters degree in urban planning and landscape architecture, also from UM.

His career has been primarily in the public sector. He was an intern with the city of Ann Arbor’s forestry department, and a driver for Recycle Ann Arbor. He worked in local government for over 10 years, serving as an environmental planner in a nearby township and eventually as the township administrator. His responsibilities during that time included duties in environmental planning, solid waste operations, water distribution systems, development review, public works projects, recreation programs and planning, senior programs, and public safety.

Currently, Kunselman is employed at UM as an energy conservation liaison. He’s been in that position for the past 10 years. He’s married to Letitia Kunselman, a public school teacher, “and together we have helped raise our now young adult children – Shane, Sabrina, Sophia and Hannah.”

As a councilmember, he said he helped lead the successful community-based effort to prevent the dissolution of the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority for an “ill-conceived” countywide transit authority. Today, there’s an expanded Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority “just as I’d advocated for from the very beginning,” he said. “That is what I call common-sense governance – because anybody with common sense could have easily predicted that the western, wealthy Washtenaw County communities were never going to participate in a countywide transit taxing authority.”

Kunselman said he also helped defeat the “very questionable” transfer of restricted utility and millage funds to the public art fund. “I was the greatest critic of the Percent for Art program, and today we can confidently state that it’s been dismantled. You and I want our utility dollars to repair water mains and maintain fire hydrants – not to construct a fountain in front of city hall.”

But what he’s most proud of in his six years on city council was championing reform of the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority, “which entailed perseverance, courage and compromise to legislate the most significant amendments to the city’s DDA ordinance, which passed overwhelmingly.” The DDA tax capture is now restricted to a reasonable rate of increase, he said, providing all taxing authorities with their fair share of revenues. In addition, he continued, the DDA budget now requires funds to be allocated to affordable housing, and there are term limits for board members.

Due to his advocacy, Kunselman said, the former city-owned Y lot was sold, ending a “10-year speculative development venture.” Also, the Valiant proposal to put the full faith and credit of the city behind a “questionable” hotel/conference center venture for the Library Lot site was halted, he said, “and I was the first elected official, in 2006, to say ‘Support the skatepark’ and in 2009 to say ‘Save Argo Pond’ – and today, we have both.”

If elected mayor, Kunselman said he’d continue to work cooperatively and graciously with his council colleagues, “with an emphasis on open and vigorous debate of all issues facing our great city.” He’s proud and humbled to have the trust, support and endorsement of current city councilmembers Sumi Kailasapathy (Ward 1), Jane Lumm (Ward 2), Jack Eaton (Ward 4) and Mike Anglin (Ward 5). “As your mayor, I’m confident that city council will prioritize public health, safety and welfare, as we all expect.”

Q&A with Kunselman

There were two questions for Kunselman, focused on transportation and roads.

Question: There are a lot of ride-sharing apps and transportation companies that are coming into Ann Arbor, and it’s not clear whether they’re following the rules that the city put in place. What would you do as mayor to try to curtail those somewhat dangerous companies that are out there transporting people?

The question was asked by Sean Duval, founder and CEO of Golden Limousine International and chair of the chamber’s executive board. Duval was referring to the entry into the Ann Arbor market of Uber and Lyft. Those two companies, which coordinate drivers and passengers through software applications, have been sent cease-and-desist letters by the Ann Arbor city attorney’s office – for aiding and abetting the violation of a state statute regulating limousines.

Kunselman: It doesn’t require being mayor to take action, he said – it requires being on city council. He serves on the city’s taxicab board, and at a meeting of the board that morning, they reviewed a rough draft of amendments to the city’s taxicab ordinance regarding taxicabs and non-metered vehicles for hire. The basic premise for public safety purposes is to know who the drivers are, he said.

Stephen Kunselman at the A2Y Regional Chamber mixer.

Currently, two regulations address vehicles for hire – the state limousine act, and the local taxicab ordinance, he explained. The state limousine act doesn’t regulate drivers – it regulates vehicles, and requires insurance. The city’s possible taxicab ordinance amendments would regulate drivers. For Uber and Lyft, the city has no idea who those drivers are, he said. So if the city can at least require that the drivers register with the city, “we’ll know who the drivers are.”

If the city also has a way of identifying these drivers as registered, that would be great, Kunselman said. That way, if the police see a driver who doesn’t have a registration, the police officer would have authority to use that as a primary offense to pull over the vehicle. “So if they see that pink moustache on a car [Lyft's logo] without a registered driver in it, then that’s going to get pulled over.” Right now, police can’t pull over a vehicle just based on a suspicion that it’s a driver for hire. “So we are addressing it.”

Question: The city is spending money to repair roads. Where does that funding come from, and when will the roads be repaired?

Kunselman: When the city council approved its budget for fiscal 2015, which begins on July 1, Kunselman said he was one of the few councilmembers who didn’t put forward any amendments – because the budget was pretty tight and everything he’d wanted was already in it. Staffing for the police and fire departments was increased, and the city allocated $1 million from the general fund reserves for street tree maintenance. That’s the only way that the city can catch up on a huge backlog of tree maintenance issues, he noted. He thought in the next budget cycle, the city might look at whether they can take money out of the general fund reserve – knowing that they’re spending very prudently.

Given the downsizing of local government in recent years, Kunselman said, the city can’t spend money on “all kinds of things for all people.” There seems to be an expectation, he added, that the city can continue to provide services outside the realm of public health, safety and welfare – such as pursuing transportation initiatives that are outside the city’s jurisdiction. While it might be great that the city is thinking forward, he said, they still have to take care of their needs today. “That’s been one of the problems I have with what I will term the progressive elitist agenda – always wanting more of something else, but never taking care of what they have.”

That’s been seen in the last few years in local government, he said, “pursuing public art, and letting our roads fall apart.” As mayor, he’d push back on that kind of agenda and start a new agenda focused on public health, safety and welfare. “I’ve been the most consistent councilmember, the most consistent politician focusing on those things because of my work history, and because of the community that I grew up in. I remember when our roads were in great shape, because I was a skateboarder and didn’t have to worry about any potholes.”

[.mp3 of Stephen Kunselman's remarks and answers]

Opening Statement: Christopher Taylor

Christopher Taylor began by saying he was running for the city of Ann Arbor – then realized he’d misspoken, and joked that he knows the chief executive embodies the city, “but I think that’s getting a little grand.”

Christopher Taylor.

Taylor has been on city council for about six years, but he came to Ann Arbor in 1985. Like many, he came here for college and has a degree from the University of Michigan music school. “And like many folks with a degree from the music school, I’m now a lawyer,” he quipped. He works at Ann Arbor law firm of Hooper Hathaway on Main Street, where his practice focuses mostly on corporate commercial clients. He represents local businesses, individuals and nonprofits.

Both of his kids are in public schools – at Tappan Middle School and Pioneer High. In the community, he’s been involved in several theatrical production and choirs, as well as nonprofits. He’s been on the board of 826 Michigan, which does work in Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti, and he’s on the board for FestiFools.

He thinks Ann Arbor is going in the right direction. The city isn’t perfect, but it’s doing all right. “We can improve, but we’re on the right track.” If elected mayor, he’d like to work on two major things. The first is basic services – neighborhood safety, streets, sidewalks, snow removal, “all of the pipes underneath the ground.” These are things that the city has to work on day in and day out, and that are fundamental to the city, he said.

Taylor was proud to say that he’s a progressive, and Ann Arbor is a progressive place. So without attention to other things, “I think we would cheapen ourselves in this city.” And with respect to the business community, the city wouldn’t be as effective a place and wouldn’t attract people to come here if the only thing that the city focused on were the basics. As mayor, he’d like to work on a few discrete areas.

The city needs to do all it can with respect to affordability and affordable housing. Taylor said he’s also sat on the parks advisory commission for six years, and Ann Arbor’s parks are crucial to its quality of life. They need to be kept well-maintained and beautiful at all times. Ann Arbor also is an environmental leader. The city can’t stop climate change, “but we ought to do our part.” The city should work with residents and businesses to help them do their part as well. It’s a real opportunity to move the city’s climate action plan goals forward, he said.

The city also needs to focus on transportation, both public transit and non-motorized and pedestrian safety. These are fundamental to quality of life for residents in Ann Arbor, Taylor said, and fundamental to employees and customers for local businesses. Finally, it’s important for Ann Arbor to have a vibrant, active downtown that still maintains its essential character, he said. “Finding this balance between the growth that has to happen downtown, and a maintenance of the character – this is a tension that we all have to keep working on.” Finding that balance is part of the city’s charge going forward, “and part of my pleasure if I were to be elected as mayor.”

Fundamentally, Taylor said, he has the temperament, experience and judgment to serve as mayor, and he’d be delighted to have the individual and collective support of chamber members.

Q&A with Taylor

There was a lull before the first question was asked, so Taylor quipped, “I’m 6-6, for those of you who want to know.”

Question: There are only 24 hours in a day, and lawyers probably work more than eight hours a day. How would you balance your job as mayor, if you’re elected, and your real job? If you represent a corporation that presents a conflict of interest with your work as mayor, how would you handle that?

Taylor: Fundamentally, Ann Arbor deserves a mayor who works every day to maintain and improve the quality of life for everyone. “If I am elected mayor, I will absolutely do that.” He has a small commercial practice downtown. He doesn’t go to court, so “my schedule is my own.” His clients don’t care if he types their contracts before his kids wake up, or during the business day, or after his kids are in bed. He’s 100% confident that he could do everything necessary as mayor, and still maintain his practice.

Julie Grand, a Democratic candidate for Ann Arbor city council in Ward 3, talks with mayoral candidate Sally Petersen. Grand is running to fill the seat that’s currently held by Christopher Taylor, who’s also running for mayor. Other candidates in the Ward 3 Democratic primary are Bob Dascola and Samuel McMullen.

Taylor also thinks it’s a benefit to have a mayor who is engaged in the local community as a lawyer, working with businesses and people. “I think it gives that person a special understanding of the challenges and opportunities that are before folks.” Someone who still has to pay their mortgage, to pay for kids’ college, to pay their own student loans – this gives him an additional perspective on the challenges that confront Ann Arborites, Taylor said.

Regarding potential conflict of interest, Taylor said he represents clients now who have business that comes before the city council. What he does is make an announcement at the council table that he represents a petitioner, and he asks his council colleagues permission to sit out of that vote. In that way, he doesn’t participate in the conversation, deliberations or vote with respect to that issue, he said.

Question: Ann Arbor is a beacon in the state and the Midwest in terms of job creation, and how well local businesses are doing. How would you be an ambassador and tell the Ann Arbor story, and get other communities rolling?

Taylor: Ann Arbor is a community that values entrepreneurship. It’s open, diverse and welcoming to all faiths, origins and orientations. It’s focused on creating its own quality of life, and is open to education – it’s the seat of a global university. “We are a community that cares for ourselves – not in a selfish way, but that we care about ourselves and we strive to treat ourselves well.” Ann Arbor has a wonderful quality of life. Ann Arbor values sustainability and the environment, and progress. “Telling the story is an easy one,” he said.

As businesses come to Ann Arbor, they are keen to see where their employees would like to live. “You could talk all day about why Ann Arbor is awesome, and I’d be delighted to do so.”

Question: As a follow-up, when you look around Washtenaw County, not all communities are doing as well as Ann Arbor. The city has a brand that works and a model that works. How do we get the other communities in Washtenaw County to do as well? The business community wants people throughout Washtenaw County to come to Ann Arbor, and they do that when there’s good transit, and when other communities are doing well.

Taylor: “I would not presume to tell other folks what they should be doing and why they should be doing it.” Other communities “know their own lights best, and I wouldn’t want to play a role in advocating one way or the other on how they do their particular business.” Regional cooperation is vital, he added, and the success of Ann Arbor’s neighbors builds the success of Ann Arbor. So to the extent that other jurisdictions felt that Ann Arbor had the opportunity to be a successful partner, to help lift both communities, he’d be behind it 100%.

Transportation is an obvious example, Taylor said, as is the Washtenaw Avenue corridor. These are areas “where I think that we can and we ought to work together openly and zealously and with some cheer.”

[.mp3 of Christopher Taylor's remarks and answers]

Other Candidates

In addition to mayoral candidates, the chamber’s June 26 event drew several other candidates for local, state and federal office. Here are some photos of a few of the other candidates who attended.

Gretchen Driskell, a Democrat from Saline, is running for re-election in District 52 of the Michigan House of Representatives. She was first elected in 2012.

Jane Lumm, a Ward 2 Ann Arbor city council member who was elected as an independent, greets Republican Dan Smith, a Washtenaw County commissioner who represents District 2, which includes a small portion of northern Ann Arbor. Smith is running for re-election. Lumm is in the middle of her two-year term, which runs through November 2015.

David Rutledge, a Democrat from Superior Township, is running for re-election for District 54 in the Michigan House of Representatives. He was first elected to that seat in 2010.

Kirk Westphal is running in the Ann Arbor city council Ward 2 Democratic primary against Nancy Kaplan.

The Chronicle could not survive without regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of local government. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle. And if you’re already supporting us, please encourage your friends, neighbors and colleagues to help support The Chronicle, too!

A detail from cover art for the book “If Mayors Ruled the World: Dysfunctional Nations, Rising Cities” by Benjamin R. Barber. It was displayed on the shelves of Literati Bookstore in downtown Ann Arbor, where another mayoral candidate forum was held on June 25.

All four Ann Arbor mayoral candidates currently serve on the Ann Arbor city council: Sabra Briere (Ward 1), Sally Petersen (Ward 2), Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) and Christopher Taylor (Ward 3).

The Ypsilanti mayoral candidates are Tyrone Bridges, Amanda Edmonds and Peter Murdock. Murdock currently serves on the Ypsilanti city council.

There are no Republicans running for mayor in either city for the Aug. 5, 2014 primary. In both cities, the incumbent mayors – John Hieftje of Ann Arbor and Paul Schreiber of Ypsilanti – are not seeking re-election.

The June 26 chamber event will include audience questions as well as an opportunity for candidates to talk about their vision for Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti. After the forum, a mixer will be held for chamber members and candidates for local, state and federal offices.

The Chronicle’s live audio broadcast is planned to start around 4:20 p.m. to allow for sorting through technical issues that might arise.

Audio Player: Listen live using the Mixlr player embedded below. After the event, we will provide an .mp3 recording of the broadcast.

Text Box 1: The text box below the audio player provides live notes to listeners – for example, the current topic that candidates are addressing, who is currently talking, or other listener aids. It’s programmed to force the scroll continuously to the bottom of the text notes file – to facilitate hands-free listening.

Text Box 2: The second text box uses the same source file as the first text box. The only difference is the absence of forced scrolling to the bottom.

If your text box displays an error message that reads, “We’re trying to connect to the server,” we apologize. We’re not sure what causes that for some browser/hardware combinations.

Audio files from the event [Tyrone Bridges was unable to attend]:

[.mp3 of welcoming remarks]

[.mp3 of Sally Petersen's remarks and answers]

[.mp3 of Peter Murdock's remarks and answers]

[.mp3 of Sabra Briere's remarks and answers]

[.mp3 of Stephen Kunselman's remarks and answers]

[.mp3 of Amanda Edmonds' remarks and answers]

[.mp3 of Christopher Taylor's remarks and answers]

The Chronicle could not survive without regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of local government. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle. And if you’re already supporting us, please encourage your friends, neighbors and colleagues to help support The Chronicle, too!

Cover of the A2Y Chamber member directory. The Ann Arbor Chronicle is among the members listed.

In the interim, the city council has undoubtedly received communications lobbying for and against these changes. Among those communications was a letter sent on April 12 – with signatures from representatives of eight different entities that have significant specific interests in downtown Ann Arbor: “We write to oppose the proposed ordinance amendment … [P]aramount is the proposed change to the current ordinance procedure for calculating potential rebates of higher than anticipated TIF revenues back to taxing units …”

One of the eight signatories is unique – for two reasons.

First, the Ann Arbor/Ypsilanti Regional Chamber is the only one of which The Ann Arbor Chronicle is a member.

Second, the chamber is unique among the eight because it’s the one that has the legal and public policy resources to arrive at a position based on the legal and public policy merits of the issue. But in this case, the chamber has chosen a view that seems only half-informed by legal and public policy analysis.

With access to legal talent like Doug McClure, a recent candidate for 22nd Circuit Court judge who is chair of the chamber’s public policy committee, I’d expect this regional chamber to support the kind of clear, solid, forward-looking legal foundation that the proposed ordinance amendments would provide for us as a regional community. That’s especially true given that so many people – for and against the ordinance changes – agree that the current ordinance language lacks clarity.

And the idea that the chamber would support whatever interpretation the DDA chooses to give the ordinance – in the DDA’s sole judgment, with millions of regional tax dollars at stake – is bizarre from a public policy point of view. It’s especially bizarre given that this purportedly regional chamber has access to regional public policy talent like Andy LaBarre. He’s the chamber’s vice president of government relations who’s a former staffer for Congressman John Dingell. LaBarre is also an elected representative serving on a regional governing body that has tax dollars at stake in this debate – the Washtenaw County board of commissioners.

But the chamber chose to glance past the legal and public policy issues, opting instead to allow personal, petty mayoral politics to cloud its collective thinking.

What’s even more incredible is that the chamber has chosen wording for its letter – which it then recruited the other entities to sign – that would actually point an alert reader to the relevant legal and public policy issues. If the chamber itself had taken the words in its own letter more seriously, perhaps that would have guided the organization to take a position in favor of the ordinance changes.

In this column, I’ll lay out an analysis of the wording that the chamber has chosen – “… which the DDA calculates using its judgment within the standards set by the ordinance” – and explain why those words point the way to supporting the ordinance changes.

Brief Background

Among the revisions the council is poised to make to Chapter 7 – the part of the city code that establishes the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority – are some related to board membership. Term limits would be placed on DDA board members. And elected officials of taxing jurisdictions that have their taxes captured by the DDA could serve on the DDA board only by mutual written agreement. [.pdf of ordinance revisions given initial approval on April 1, 2013]

Those are amendments that count arguably as “just politics”– and could be scrapped, as far as I’m concerned. If we don’t like mayor John Hieftje’s appointments to the DDA board, then we should elect somebody else as mayor, or ask our city council representatives to vote against the confirmation of Hieftje’s nominations.

But most significant of the revisions would be those that clarify how the DDA’s TIF tax capture is calculated. The “increment” in a tax increment finance (TIF) district refers to the difference between the initial value of a property and the value of a property after development. The Ann Arbor DDA captures the taxes – just on that initial increment – of some other taxing authorities in the district. Those are the city of Ann Arbor, Washtenaw County, Washtenaw Community College and the Ann Arbor District Library. For FY 2013 – the current fiscal year – the DDA will capture roughly $3.9 million in taxes.

The Chronicle has reported on this issue in gory detail on multiple occasions, and I won’t repeat that history and analysis here. For those readers who need additional background, here’s a sampling of more recent Chronicle reports: “Deliberations on DDA Pave Way for Final Vote,” “DDA Ramps Up PR After First Council Vote,” and “Column: Math Is Hard, But This Ain’t Math.”

However, it’s worth highlighting at least one bit of what appears to be revisionist history. Questions about how the DDA’s TIF capture is calculated first arose in the spring of 2011. The context was the year-long, extremely difficult negotiations between the DDA and the city over terms of a new contract under which the DDA would manage the city’s parking system. The Chapter 7 issue emerged just as the DDA board was set to vote on the parking system contract at its May 2, 2011 meeting.

When the issue was first identified by the city’s financial staff, the DDA board postponed voting on the new contract. The period of the postponement was used to analyze whether the DDA’s Chapter 7 obligations could be met – at the same time the DDA was ratifying a new parking system contract, which required the DDA to pay the city of Ann Arbor 17% of gross parking revenues.

At the time, the consistent narrative on all sides was this: We didn’t realize the Chapter 7 paragraphs even existed. So when representatives of the DDA now contend that “We’ve been doing it this way for 30 years – why change now?” that’s not consistent with their 2011 narrative.

Initially during that 2011 timeframe, the DDA agreed that money was owed to other taxing authorities, not just for that year, but for previous years as well. And the DDA paid a combined roughly $473,000 to the Ann Arbor District Library, Washtenaw Community College and Washtenaw County in 2011. The city of Ann Arbor chose to waive its $712,000 share of the calculated excess.

Subsequently, the DDA reversed its legal position, and contended that no money should have been returned at all. That decision came at a July 27, 2011 DDA board meeting, and has been the position held by the DDA since that time.

Its Judgment

Now back to the A2Y Chamber’s letter. The one-page document is relatively brief – just three paragraphs. The key phrase comes in the first paragraph [emphasis added]:

We write to oppose the proposed ordinance amendment before the Ann Arbor City Council pertaining to the City’s Downtown Development Authority (DDA). There are many important issues brought forth within this ordinance, but paramount is the proposed change to the current Ordinance procedure for calculating potential rebates of higher than anticipated Tax Increment Financing (TIF) revenues back to taxing units, which the DDA calculates using its judgment within the standards set by the Ordinance.

If you stress the word “its” in the phrase “its judgment,” that induces the natural question: Who else’s judgment, besides the DDA’s, should be used to calculate the return of TIF monies?

Its Judgment: City Attorney? City Treasurer?

Besides the DDA, it might be reasonable to turn to the Ann Arbor city attorney for guidance on the TIF capture question. The city attorney has a special role to play, because the TIF rebate calculations are ensconced in a city ordinance – and one of the city attorney’s responsibilities under the city charter is to “prosecute ordinance violations.” Does the city attorney’s office have a view on the subject?

Based on an email sent nearly two years ago, on May 2, 2011 by city treasurer Matt Horning to DDA deputy director Joe Morehouse, the city attorney office’s initial review of the existing Chapter 7 ordinance language was at least consistent with the kind of clarification the city council’s April 15 approval would give.

Unless you believe that Horning was acting as an agent of city councilmember Stephen Kunselman – sponsor of the ordinance amendments and master of inflammatory political rhetoric surrounding mayor John Hieftje – then there’s no anti-mayor politics at the core of this issue. It’s just law and math.

Horning’s email expresses his view that the relevant paragraphs of the ordinance are to be understood as a limit on the DDA’s TIF capture revenue, and he reports that a preliminary consultation had been received from the city attorney’s office:

It is a bit ambiguous, but I think the intent is that the DDA should not get any more tax revenue than was anticipated by the plan. From 1982 to 2002, the original plan had very high estimates of capture, and so this clause was far from being triggered. In the new plan, the estimates were reduced significantly. From 2003 until now, the capture has exceeded the plan. … We have had preliminary consultation with the attorney’s office, but have yet to obtain an opinion as to whether our interpretation is correct. [.pdf of Horning's May 2, 2011 email]

This issue would present a logical opportunity for city attorney Stephen Postema to contribute an opinion – given that it’s a million-dollar issue. But for reasons that remain opaque to many in the community, Postema has resisted writing any opinions during his roughly 10-year career as city attorney. Under the city charter, the city attorney’s written opinions are to be filed with the city clerk’s office for easy reference by third parties. None have been filed.

So it’s fair to conclude that Horning was never provided with a formal opinion from the city attorney’s office. He may have received an “advice memo” on the topic – but the city typically shields such memos from disclosure, citing attorney-client privilege.

Still it’s relevant that Horning consulted with the city attorney’s office, and apparently got at least a preliminary indication back in 2011 that the paragraph in question can be reasonably understood as a limit on the DDA’s TIF revenue – a cap on the TIF revenue it receives. Otherwise put, the paragraph explains conditions under which a refund to other taxing authorities should be paid, independent of other considerations.

And under questioning from city councilmember Sumi Kailasapathy (Ward 1) at the council’s April 1, 2013 meeting, assistant city attorney Mary Fales appeared to support that view as well. From The Chronicle’s meeting report:

Kailasapathy indicated she felt there was some confusion, because what [Stephen] Kunselman was talking about is fund balance – which is a balance sheet item. But the TIF refund described in Chapter 7 actually has to do with the revenue income level, she explained. So if you take in revenue at a certain level, and if there is excess, then you have to refund some of it. She asked [assistant city attorney Mary] Fales if Fales agreed that this was a point of confusion. She asked Fales to confirm that the refund is actually based on revenue, not on the balance sheet. “I think that’s true,” Fales said.

That’s different from the DDA’s current legal position, which seems to be that the paragraph is a calculation related only to surplus funds that the DDA might have after satisfying obligations to make payments toward bonds. Further, the DDA’s position is that ordinance language allows the DDA to plan for bond obligations to be taken on by the DDA, independent of the cap on TIF revenues expressed in the ordinance.

Its Judgment: Other Taxing Jurisdictions?

Who else, besides the Ann Arbor DDA, might have a judgment to offer in this dispute? I think one logical set of interested parties, whose judgment should count for something, would be the jurisdictions whose taxes are captured by the DDA.

We know a dispute exists over the interpretation of the ordinance with respect to tax capture. So it’s reasonable to ask what the view is of those taxing authorities, whose tax revenues are captured and used by the DDA. After the DDA board meeting on April 3, 2013, I talked with DDA board treasurer Roger Hewitt, who defended the DDA’s unilateral decision in 2011 on the interpretation of the ordinance. His defense depended in part on his claim that DDA board members were hearing objections only from the Ann Arbor District Library.

However, that’s not the whole story. During that period in 2011, The Chronicle had reported concerns expressed by Josie Parker, director of the Ann Arbor District Library, but also by Larry Whitworth, who at the time served as president of Washtenaw Community College.

How about the Ann Arbor city council and the Washtenaw County board of commissioners? Hewitt contended on April 3 that the DDA board was hearing in 2011 that those bodies agreed with the DDA’s interpretation. I’ll give Hewitt this: It’s easy to imagine that Leah Gunn – who has served on the DDA board since 1991 and was a county commissioner in 2011 – would agree with her own interpretation. It’s also easy to imagine that then-councilmember Sandi Smith and mayor John Hieftje – who are also long-time DDA board members – would agree with their own interpretation.

But despite individual opinions, neither of those two bodies – the Ann Arbor city council, or the Washtenaw County board of commissioners – weighed in with a resolution stating their agreement with the DDA’a position. And I think whatever private assurance the DDA board and staff might have received about the view of other public bodies, that’s not an adequate foundation on which to base a multimillion-dollar decision.

To test the strength of the claim that the current Washtenaw County board agrees with the DDA’s interpretation of the TIF capture, I asked commissioner Andy LaBarre to take off his A2Y Chamber hat and put on his Washtenaw County board of commissioners cap. Does he even have a position on the DDA ordinance revisions that the city council is considering on April 15? Via email, LaBarre’s answer as a commissioner was this:

No, as a county commissioner I don’t have a position because I don’t know with enough certainty if the TIF calculation is correct. I would guess the calculation is on, but I don’t have a high enough confidence in that to take a formal position. Or more to the point, I don’t personally have the same level of certainty the [Chamber's] letter does.

In connection with the other taxing jurisdictions, there’s a myth surrounding their status in this dispute – a myth that for many people justifies their belief that the DDA alone should reasonably decide this issue. The myth was recited recently by city council veteran Marcia Higgins at a Sunday night caucus: that the other taxing jurisdictions had an opportunity in 1982, and again in 2003, to opt out of having their taxes captured by the Ann Arbor DDA.

Higgins isn’t the only veteran public official who believes this. I keep encountering all sorts of people who take as an article of faith that of course the other taxing jurisdictions had an opportunity to opt out of having their taxes captured. One of those people is a member of the A2Y Chamber’s public policy committee.

I understand how the idea that the other jurisdictions had an opt-out opportunity helps people get comfortable with the idea that it should now only be up to the DDA to decide the calculation. But the historical facts don’t lend that comfort.

Fact: The opt-out provision in the state statute was added in 1994, after the Ann Arbor DDA was established. Here’s the amendment that was added:

(3) Not more than 60 days after a public hearing held after February 15, 1994, the governing body of a taxing jurisdiction levying ad valorem property taxes that would otherwise be subject to capture may exempt its taxes from capture by adopting a resolution to that effect and filing a copy with the clerk of the municipality proposing to create the authority. The resolution takes effect when filed with that clerk and remains effective until a copy of a resolution rescinding that resolution is filed with that clerk.

And the 2003 renewal plan was crafted so that it did not trigger the opt-out provision – because it did not alter the boundary of the DDA’s TIF capture district.

Think about the end date of the 2003 renewal plan – the year 2033. Dating from 1982, when the DDA was established, that will mark a half-century of tax capture from other jurisdictions’ tax levy, absent any legislative ability of those jurisdictions to object.

In that context, I think it’s reasonable to expect the Ann Arbor DDA to show a little more respect for the judgment of the other taxing authorities, when it comes to settling this dispute.

But the real question is this: Is it even a matter of judgment, or is it a matter of law and math?

Its Judgment

Back to the chamber’s letter: “… which the DDA calculates using its judgment within the standards set by the ordinance …”

If you stress the word “judgment” in the phrase “its judgment,” that induces the natural question: What else might the DDA use instead of judgment? Given that the “standards set by the ordinance” are part of the ordinance, I think it’s reasonable to expect that the DDA would simply apply the law.

How does judgment even enter into the equation?

Its Judgment: Calculations

I’ve added paragraph numbers below to help keep things straight, but in the city code the paragraphs aren’t numbered. The main paragraph in question is this one [emphasis added]:

¶1 If the captured assessed valuation derived from new construction, and increase in value of property newly constructed or existing property improved subsequent thereto, grows at a rate faster than that anticipated in the tax increment plan, at least 50% of such additional amounts shall be divided among the taxing units in relation to their proportion of the current tax levies. If the captured assessed valuation derived from new construction grows at a rate of over twice that anticipated in the plan, all of such excess amounts over twice that anticipated shall be divided among the taxing units. Only after approval of the governmental units may these restrictions be removed.

On the question of how the calculations are to be done, it’s clear from the city treasurer’s May 2, 2011 email that he was using a cumulative method of evaluating the rate of growth – which is the method that the current ordinance amendments would explicitly clarify.

Here’s how I reach that conclusion. Based on the calculations I did back in 2011 using the cumulative method, I came up with more than $2 million that the DDA should have rebated to the other taxing jurisdictions. That’s roughly what city treasurer Matt Horning indicated in his March 2, 2011 email to DDA deputy director Joe Morehouse: “As you can see, the result would be a $2 million issue for the DDA, $1.2 million of which would be owed to the City.”

Instead, the DDA calculated a rebate using a method that requires consideration of just the immediately preceding year – instead of evaluating the anticipated rate of growth since the start of the TIF plan. Using that approach, the DDA came up with a roughly $1.1 million combined total that was owed to the other taxing jurisdictions. That is, based on the totals Horning reported, he was not evaluating the rate of growth just by looking at the immediately preceding year, but rather using the same kind of cumulative method that I did. And that’s the same kind of method that the ordinance revisions seek to clarify.

Just as an exercise, let’s imagine a completely different scenario – a hypothetical one where the actual growth in tax valuation in the DDA district was far less than anticipated in the plan. That’s the scenario in Chart A below.

Chart A: Hypothetical TIF valuation. Blue bars are the estimates for growth in the DDA TIF plan. The red line is the hypothetical actual valuation in the DDA district.

In Chart A, I think it’s clear to any fair-minded, reasonable person that no rebates would owed by the DDA for this time period – because for every year, the tax valuation was less than what was anticipated in the TIF plan. That is, the red line is lower than the blue bars.

But wait. On the DDA’s interpretation of the ordinance, which would use a year-to-year approach, in YEAR X+8, a rebate would be owed. To see this, have a look at Chart B, which is just like Chart A, with the addition of a purple line:

Chart B: Chart A: Hypothetical TIF valuation. Blue bars are the estimates for growth in the DDA TIF plan. The red line is the hypothetical actual valuation in the DDA district. For YEAR X+8, under the year-to-year method, you compare the slope of the purple line with the slope of the red line.

Using the year-to-year method, in YEAR X+8 you must check the slope of the purple line (anticipated rate of growth from previous year) against the slope of the red line (actual rate of growth). When you check the slopes of those two lines in Chart B, it’s clear that the “actual rate” exceeds the “anticipated rate” of growth – which means that on that scenario, which intuitively calls for no rebate, you’d still wind up rebating TIF capture to the other taxing authorities. Conclusion: the year-to-year method is absurd.

Moving from the hypothetical to the actual world, in Chart C below, the actual valuation (the green line) exceeds the growth anticipated in the TIF plan. So intuitively, a rebate is owed, defined by half the distance between the green line and the blue bars. Only if you were looking for an arbitrary and counter-intuitive way to calculate excess would you say: Look at YEAR X+8! The green line sloped downward that year, so that means that actual growth was not as much as anticipated!

Chart C: The green line shows actual valuation. The blue bars depict the TIF plan projections for the increase in valuation, based on pessimistic, realistic, or optimistic projections. Year X is 2004. Data for the final two years was estimated. For other years, the figures are actual.

There’s no politics in that chart. It’s abundantly clear that the cumulative method is the only reasonable application of the existing ordinance language.

Its Judgment: Loopholes

Just for readability, here’s the key paragraph again, with emphasis added in italics. Again, I’ve added paragraph numbers to help keep things straight, but in the city code the paragraphs aren’t numbered.

¶1 If the captured assessed valuation derived from new construction, and increase in value of property newly constructed or existing property improved subsequent thereto, grows at a rate faster than that anticipated in the tax increment plan, at least 50% of such additional amounts shall be divided among the taxing units in relation to their proportion of the current tax levies. If the captured assessed valuation derived from new construction grows at a rate of over twice that anticipated in the plan, all of such excess amounts over twice that anticipated shall be divided among the taxing units. Only after approval of the governmental units may these restrictions be removed.

The DDA’a current legal position relies crucially on the ordering of three un-numbered paragraphs in the ordinance and equally crucially on a choice of antecedent for the phrase “as set forth above” in this paragraph. [Again, I've added numbering to keep things straight, but the paragraphs are un-numbered in the city ordinance.]

¶3 Tax funds that are paid to the downtown development authority due to the captured assessed value shall first be used to pay the required amounts into the bond and interest redemption funds and the required reserves thereto. Thereafter, the funds shall be distributed as set forth above or shall be divided among the taxing units in relation to their proportion of the current tax levies.

By way of background, the use of “above” to refer to a specific portion of a piece of legislation is frowned upon by the state of Michigan’s Legislative Services Bureau in its official style guide. A complete list of vague and ambiguous terms to be avoided, according the LSB style manual, includes: above, hereinabove, aforementioned, hereinafter, aforesaid, hereinbefore, foregoing, heretofore, hereafter, preceding, herein. But that style guide dates from 2003, and Ann Arbor’s DDA ordinance was originally enacted in 1982, so we’re stuck with “as set forth above.”

On the DDA’s interpretation, “as set forth above” crucially refers to ¶1. That puts payment of the “refund” – according to calculations explained in ¶1 – chronologically second after payment of bond obligations, even though it’s listed first. Based on this chronological sequence, the DDA’s position is essentially that the language in ¶3 can be used as a loophole – to circumvent the requirement in ¶1 that excess TIF revenue be returned to the other taxing authorities. On the DDA’s interpretation, if the check the DDA writes to pay bonds is so large that the DDA can’t write a check to pay refunds to other taxing authorities, then the DDA doesn’t have to pay refunds to the other taxing authorities.

But more sensibly, the language in ¶1 is a condition that is supposed to affect how the DDA plans for the amount of bonding obligations it is able take on. That is to say, the most sensible way to understand the ordinance, taken as a whole, is that the DDA is supposed to take on bonding obligations only to the extent that these obligations would still allow the DDA to pay refunds to other taxing jurisdictions as spelled out in ¶1. That’s the only sensible interpretation to give the ordinance, even if the DDA is correct in assigning ¶1 as the antecedent of “as set forth above.”

But I don’t think it’s even reasonable to interpret the antecedent of “as set forth above” as ¶1. According to the DDA’s interpretation, the phrase “as set forth above” and “divided among the taxing units” would be redundant – because ¶1 would be nothing more than a special condition on how the money is to be divided. So the DDA could maintain its peculiar interpretation of the ordinance, even if the phrase “as set forth above” were completely omitted.

More plausibly, the antecedent of “as set forth above” would not make the phrase redundant, but refers simply to a section even farther “above” – about the purpose of the DDA. That purpose is “… to act in the best interests of the city to halt property value deterioration, increase property tax valuation where possible in the business district of the city, eliminate the causes of that deterioration, and to promote economic growth…”

Or a different likely antecedent of “as set forth above” would be the content of the “development plan” described in the section on the powers of the authority.

Either of those antecedents yields a paraphrase of ¶3 that does not allow for the “loophole” interpretation used by the DDA and would not result in redundancy. That sensible paraphrase would go something like this:

Tax funds that are paid to the downtown development authority due to the captured assessed value, after the “excess” to greater-than-anticipated growth is divided among the other taxing jurisdictions, shall first be used to pay the required amounts into the bond and interest redemption funds and the required reserves thereto. Thereafter, the funds shall be spent by the downtown development authority in the service of the development plan and according the authority’s purpose, or shall be divided among the taxing units in relation to their proportion of the current tax levies.

A further difficulty for the DDA’s legal position is that it did pay back more than $400,000 to other taxing jurisdictions in 2011. So if the DDA’s current legal position is correct, then it violated the ordinance in 2011 – because ¶3 doesn’t provide an option. The ordinance does not state that the money “may first be used to pay” but rather that the money “shall first be used to pay.”

If the DDA is serious about its current legal position, then it has a fiduciary and legal responsibility to reclaim the money it “erroneously” paid back in 2011. The fact that the DDA has not done so reveals that the DDA does not actually believe its own current legal position.

Conclusion: Kunselman

I totally understand why some councilmembers might feel uncomfortable voting for the clarification of the ordinance language – even if they can acknowledge how the amendments merely give clarity to the most sensible interpretation that already exists in the ordinance language.

And I totally understand why some councilmembers might feel uncomfortable voting for the ordinance amendments – even if they agree that the clarified interpretation would still result in an adequate amount of TIF revenue to the DDA. That’s because the clarified method of calculation still results in more TIF revenue to the DDA than the DDA itself is currently projecting on a 10-year horizon.

Why am I so understanding? As one city councilmember described it to me, they’re reluctant to vote for the amendments because they’re concerned this might appear to be condoning Stephen Kunselman’s “bad behavior.” As I understand it, the “bad behavior” includes Kunselman’s reported desire to provide “consequences” for those DDA board members who have in the past supported Kunselman’s opponents in city council races.

That will make it an easy political vote for some councilmembers on April 15: Vote against Kunselman based on his overtly political and “ill-mannered” style. So I completely understand why some councilmembers will take that easy political path and vote against the amendments. I hope for better from my local elected representatives, but would still predict that some will take the easy political path.

What I don’t understand is why the A2Y Chamber, with sufficient legal and public policy resources to reach the same non-political conclusion that the city treasurer did, decided to ignore the merits of the legal and public policy issues.

As a chamber member, I think The Chronicle deserved way better than we got from that organization’s April 12 letter opposing the ordinance amendments.

The Chronicle survives in part through regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of local government and civic affairs. If you’re already supporting The Chronicle, please encourage your friends, neighbors and coworkers to do the same. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle.