Screen shot of Washtenaw County clerk election results map for Ward 2. Purple shading corresponds to precincts won by Lumm, light blue to those won by Westphal. The two precincts won by Westphal were the lightly voted 2-1 (70 Westphal, 59 Lumm, 5 Brown) and 2-2 (7 Westphal, 3 Lumm, 3 Brown).

In Ward 4, Democrat Jack Eaton was unopposed on the ballot and won easily, with 88.9% of the tally, against declared write-in candidate William Lockwood.

The Ann Arbor Public Schools sinking fund millage won easily with a 13,321 (80.34%) to 3,259 (19.7%) margin.

The outcome makes Eaton the only new member on the 11-member council. He’ll replace Democrat Marcia Higgins. Eaton and Higgins contested the Aug. 6 Democratic primary, which Eaton won in decisive fashion – with about 65% of the vote.

The composition of the council will not change before its Nov. 7, 2013 meeting, which features a very heavy agenda. Eaton will join Ward 4 colleague Margie Teall at the table for the Nov. 18 meeting, but will be officially sworn in on Nov. 11.

Ward 2 featured the closest race, with Lumm’s 2,071 votes (55.9%) still a clear margin over Democratic challenger Kirk Westphal’s 1,549  (41.8%), and independent Conrad Brown’s 71 (1.9%). Lumm’s relative share of the votes was slightly less than the 60% she received in her 2011 win against Stephen Rapundalo, but came within eight votes of matching the number of votes she received in 2011 (2,079).

The $20,875 raised by Lumm during the pre-campaign finance period was twice what Westphal had raised. [Chronicle coverage: "Ann Arbor Campaign Finance 2013"] Possibly more significant than the total amount raised was the distribution of donation amounts. In recent years, those campaigns with a greater skew toward donations of lower amounts have been winning efforts. This year during the pre-campaign period, Lumm’s average donation was $102, compared to $133 for Westphal.

Ward 2 also had the highest voter turnout of any of the wards, with 3,751 voters participating. That’s 19.83% of registered voters. Even though Mike Anglin was unopposed on the ballot, Ward 5 had the second highest turnout, with 3,418 (15.37 %) of registered voters participating in the election.

Possibly helping that Ward 5 turnout was Chip Smith’s write-in candidacy for Ward 5, which was announced on Oct. 24, just shortly before the election. But voter turnout in Ward 5 is typically strong, compared to other wards. Anglin received 2,112 votes (67.8%), with “Write-In” receiving 1,004 votes (32%). That write-in tally is for the number of voters who filled in the write-in bubble, not broken down by candidate or validated by election officials. The two declared write-in candidates in Ward 5 were Thomas Partridge and Chip Smith.

The percentage of votes received by Ward 5 write-in candidates was similar to that received by independent Ward 1 challenger Jeff Hayner. Hayner received 549 votes (31.9%), compared to 1,147 votes (66.6%) for the incumbent Democrat Sabra Briere. Independent Jaclyn Vresics, who had announced she was withdrawing from the race – but not in time to prevent her name from appearing on the ballot – received 20 votes (1.2%).

In Ward 3, Democrat Stephen Kunselman received 1,545 votes (70.3%) compared to Sam DeVarti’s 618 (28.1%). Kunselman told The Chronicle that on Election Day, for two of the city’s five wards (Ward 3 and Ward 5) he managed to collect enough signatures to satisfy the requirement for his 2014 mayoral election effort. He collected 60 signatures in each of those wards, which gives him a margin of 10 over the minimum 50 in each ward.

As in Ward 5, in Ward 4 the write-in tally of 209 (11%) is for the number of voters who filled in the write-in bubble, but those have not yet been validated. So declared write-in candidate William Lockwood could have received a maximum of 11% of the vote. It’s possible some number of those write-ins were tallied for a joke candidate, Twenty Pound Carp.

Results here are unofficial. For unofficial results compiled by the Washtenaw County clerk’s office, including maps, see: Election Results.

The Chronicle could not survive without regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the Ann Arbor city council. 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!

Early returns of Ann Arbor city council races based on paper tapes from precinct locations are published here with the most recent updates. Results here are unofficial. For unofficial results compiled by the Washtenaw County clerk’s office, see: Election Results.

Ward 1 Ann Arbor City Council Race

With results from 4 of 8 in-person polling locations informally reported, Briere has received 592 votes (67.4%), Hayner has received 274 votes (31.2%), and Vresics has received 9 votes (1%).

Updated at 8:20 p.m.: With results from 5 of 8 in-person polling locations informally reported, Briere has received 791 votes (66.6%), Hayner has received 378 votes (31.8%), and Vresics has received 13 votes (1%).

Updated at 8:58 p.m.: With results from 6 of 8 in-person polling locations informally reported, Briere has received 930 votes (64.9%), Hayner has received 485 votes (33.8%), and Vresics has received 13 votes (0.9%).

Updated at 10:02 p.m.: With results from 8 of 8 in-person polling locations informally reported, Briere has received 965 votes (65.2%), Hayner has received 492 votes (33.2%), and Vresics has received 15 votes (1%).

Updated at 10:26 p.m.: With results from 8 of 8 in-person polling locations informally reported, as well as absent voter totals from precincts in Ward 1, Briere has received 1147 votes (66.6%), Hayner has received 549 votes (31.9%), and Vresics has received 16 votes (0.9%).

Ward 2 Ann Arbor City Council Race

With results from 4 of 8 in-person polling locations informally reported, Lumm has received 1030 votes (55%), Westphal has received 815 votes (43.5%), and Brown has received 22 votes (1.1%).

Updated at 8:16 p.m.: With results from 6 of 8 in-person polling locations informally reported, Lumm has received 1285 votes (54%), Westphal has received 1043 votes (43.8%), and Brown has received 43 votes (1.8%).

Updated at 9:05 p.m.: With results from 7 of 8 in-person polling locations informally reported, Lumm has received 1553 votes (54.4%), Westphal has received 1243 votes (43.5%), and Brown has received 50 votes (1.7%).

Updated at 9:55 p.m.: With results from 8 of 8 in-person polling locations informally reported, Lumm has received 1556 votes (54.3%), Westphal has received 1250 votes (43.6%), and Brown has received 53 votes (1.8%).

Updated at 10:24 p.m.: With results from 8 of 8 in-person polling locations informally reported, as well as absent voter totals from precincts in Ward 2, Lumm has received 2071 votes (55.9%), Westphal has received 1549 votes (41.8%), and Brown has received 63 votes (1.7%).

Ward 3 Ann Arbor City Council Race

With results from 0 of 6 in-person polling locations informally reported, as well as absent voter totals from precincts in Ward 3, Kunselman has received 291 votes (83.3%) and DeVarti has received 56 votes (16%).

Updated at 9:25 p.m.: With results from 2 of 6 in-person polling locations informally reported, as well as absent voter totals from precincts in Ward 3, Kunselman has received 430 votes (78.1%) and DeVarti has received 114 votes (20.7%).

Updated at 9:42 p.m.: With results from 6 of 6 in-person polling locations informally reported, as well as absent voter totals from precincts in Ward 3, Kunselman has received 1545 votes (70.3%) and DeVarti has received 618 votes (28.1%).

Ward 4 Ann Arbor City Council Race

Write-in counts are for the number of voters who filled in the write-in bubble, not broken down by candidate or validated. The declared write-in candidate for Ward 4 was William Lockwood.

With results from 0 of 8 in-person polling locations informally reported, as well as absent voter totals from precincts in Ward 4, Eaton has received 383 votes (95.5%) and Write-in has received 18 votes (4.4%).

Updated 9:28 p.m.: With results from 8 of 8 in-person polling locations informally reported, as well as absent voter totals from precincts in Ward 4, Eaton has received 1678 votes (88.9%) and Write-in has received 209 votes (11%).

Ward 5 Ann Arbor City Council Race

Write-in counts are for the number of voters who filled in the write-in bubble, not broken down by candidate or validated. The two declared write-in candidates in Ward 5 were Thomas Partridge and Chip Smith.

With results from 1 of 10 in-person polling locations informally reported, Anglin has received 38 votes (63.3%) and Write-in has received 22 votes (36.6%).

Updated at 9:18 p.m.: With results from 2 of 10 in-person polling locations informally reported, as well as absent voter totals from precincts in Ward 5, Anglin has received 625 votes (81.3%) and Write-in has received 143 votes (18.6%).

Updated at 9:24 p.m.: With results from 3 of 10 in-person polling locations informally reported, as well as absent voter totals from precincts in Ward 5, Anglin has received 731 votes (78.5%) and Write-in has received 200 votes (21.4%).

Updated at 9:52 p.m.: With results from 10 of 10 in-person polling locations informally reported, as well as absent voter totals from precincts in Ward 5, Anglin has received 2132 votes (67.9%) and Write-in has received 1004 votes (32%).

AAPS Sinking Fund Millage

With results from 1 of 40 in-person polling locations inside the city of Ann Arbor informally reported, 358 (86.6%) have voted YES and 55 (13.3%) have voted NO on the AAPS sinking fund millage.

Updated at 9:00 p.m.: With results from 2 of 40 in-person polling locations inside the city of Ann Arbor informally reported, as well as absent voter totals from the city of Ann Arbor, 1378 (76.4%) have voted YES and 424 (23.5%) have voted NO on the AAPS sinking fund millage.

Updated at 9:58 p.m.: With results from 13 of 40 in-person polling locations inside the city of Ann Arbor informally reported, as well as absent voter totals from the city of Ann Arbor, 3497 (80.6%) have voted YES and 839 (19.3%) have voted NO on the AAPS sinking fund millage.

Dots correspond to addresses that made contributions to Ann Arbor city council candidates for the Nov. 5, 2013 election.

Lumm’s fundraising effort during the pre-election phase exceeded her total from 2011 when she contested the general election with incumbent Democrat Stephen Rapundalo. That year she raised $18,950 from 193 donors.

The third Ward 2 candidate, Conrad Brown, filed a reporting waiver, which is allowed if a candidate does not expect to raise more than $1,000.

Ward 1 incumbent Democrat Sabra Briere raised $11,800 in a race where she’s challenged by independent Jeff Hayner, who has raised $2,680 so far.

In Ward 3, incumbent Democrat Stephen Kunselman, who survived a tough primary race with Julie Grand, did not raise any additional money during this most recent filing period. Kunselman’s independent challenger Sam DeVarti raised $945.

In Ward 5, Mike Anglin does not have an opponent on the ballot, but raised $4,299 in this most recent period. He’s spent $1,340 of that. In addition to Thomas Partridge, who declared his write-in candidacy much earlier in the year, Charles “Chip” Smith has just recently filed his paperwork to declare a write-in candidacy for the Ward 5 seat that’s up for election this year. Responding to an emailed query, Smith said he will try to keep his expenditures under the reporting-waiver limit of $1,000.

In Ward 4, Jack Eaton does not face any opponents on Nov. 5 on the ballot or as write-ins, but does have a write-in opponent in William Lockwood. Eaton won the Democratic primary against incumbent Democrat Marcia Higgins.

The Ann Arbor city council includes a total of 11 members – two from each of the city’s five wards and the mayor. All city council positions are elected for two-year terms, with one of the wards’s seats up for election every year. The position of mayor is elected in even years, so not this year.

The filings, which were due on Oct. 25, are available through the Washtenaw County clerk’s searchable campaign finance database. Charts and maps by The Chronicle are presented after the jump.

Charts

A pattern for winning city council campaigns over the last few election cycles has been a skew toward more numerous but lower dollar amount contributions. For this pre-election period, Mike Anglin in Ward 5 had the lowest average at $64 per donor, with Kirk Westphal in Ward 2 coming in at $133 – or more than double Anglin’s average.

Jeff Hayner: Contributions to 2013 Ward 1 city council campaign. Hayner has raised $2,680, averaging $96 per donor, with a median of $50 for 28 donors. He’s spent $841 so far.

Sabra Briere: Contributions to 2013 Ward 1 city council campaign. Briere raised a total of $11,800, averaging $118 per donor and a median of $100 among 100 donors. So far she’s spent $6,864 including $1,000 for Brad O’Connor as a campaign manager. O’Connor managed Carol Kuhnke’s successful 22nd circuit court judge campaign as well as Adam Zemke’s 55th District state representative campaign.

Jane Lumm: Contributions to 2013 Ward 2 city council campaign. Lumm raised $20,875, averaging $102 per donor, with a median of $100 for 204 donors. She has spent $11,664 so far.

Kirk Westphal: Contributions to 2013 Ward 2 city council campaign. Westphal raised $10,103, averaging $133 per donor with a median of $100 among 76 donors. He has spent $4,614 so far.

Mike Anglin: Contributions to 2013 Ward 2 city council campaign. Anglin has raised $4,299, averaging $64 per donor with a median of $50 among 67 donors. He has spent $1,340 so far.

Maps

The 2013 general election filings continue the trend of Ann Arbor city council candidates showing considerable citywide support, in addition to having support in their own wards.

Jeff Hayner: Yellow dots correspond to addresses making contributions to his 2013 Ward 1 campaign.

Sabra Briere: Black dots correspond to addresses making contributions to her 2013 Ward 1 campaign.

Jane Lumm: Green dots correspond to addresses making contributions to her 2013 Ward 2 campaign.

Kirk Westphal: Purple dots correspond to addresses making contributions to his 2013 Ward 2 campaign.

Mike Anglin: Red dots correspond to addresses making contributions to his 2013 Ward 5 campaign.

The Chronicle could not survive without regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the Ann Arbor city council. 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: (1) a puzzle with counting numbers, which was completed multiple times during the meeting by Ann Arbor city councilmember Chuck Warpehoski’s daughter; (2) the voting credential that had to be held aloft at the Dems meeting in order for a vote to be counted; and (3) Robert’s Rules of Order held aloft as the authority determining that a 2/3 majority of votes would need to be counted, in order for the endorsement of Kirk Westphal to be rescinded. (Photos by the writer.)

The party’s executive board had voted on Wednesday to endorse Westphal. But at Saturday’s meeting of the general membership, Jack Eaton – the Democratic nominee for Ward 4 Ann Arbor city council – brought forward a motion to rescind that endorsement of Westphal. His motion was defeated by a vote of the general membership.

Eaton had contested the August primary in Ward 4 with incumbent Democrat Marcia Higgins, and he won the race decisively. He is supporting incumbent independent Jane Lumm against Westphal in the Ward 2 election, as are Democratic councilmembers Mike Anglin (Ward 5) and Sumi Kailasapathy (Ward 1) and some other local Democrats. Lumm served on the council in the mid-1990s as a Republican. Except for Lumm, the entire 11-member council consists of Democrats. The Ward 2 race includes independent Conrad Brown in addition to Lumm and Westphal.

Anglin and Kailasapathy attended the Democratic Party meeting, as did several other councilmembers who have not endorsed Lumm: Sabra Briere (Ward 1), Sally Petersen (Ward 2), Christopher Taylor (Ward 3), and Chuck Warpehoski (Ward 5). Taylor and Warpehoski have endorsed Westphal.

In rising to express her support for Lumm, lifelong Democrat Jane Michener indicated that she felt Westphal was working toward making the world “safe for developers” instead of on behalf of residents, and that’s why she’s supporting Lumm. Westphal is chair of the city’s planning commission.

To vote on the question of Westphal’s endorsement, attendees held aloft squares with a Democratic logo  – a voting credential issued that morning. With 56 people voting against the motion to rescind – that is, to leave Westphal’s endorsement in place – and only 21 voting to rescind it, a simple majority was not achieved. So the required 2/3 majority was also not achieved.

The question of Westphal’s endorsement came in the context of a meeting that had been billed as “Endorsement Saturday” by the party. Representatives for 2014 campaigns at the state and national level were on hand to deliver remarks and to receive the Ann Arbor Democratic Party’s endorsement.

Not every candidate was on hand in person, but the general membership of the Ann Arbor Democratic Party gave its endorsement to the following: Mark Schauer (governor), Mark Totten (Michigan Attorney General), John Dingell (U.S. House District 12), Pam Byrnes (U.S. House District 7), Gary Peters (U.S. Senate), Gretchen Driskell (Michigan state house representative District 52), Jeff Irwin (Michigan state house representative District 53), and Adam Zemke (Michigan state house representative District 55).

Not every candidate who attended the meeting was seeking an endorsement. Ward 1 Democratic incumbent Sabra Briere addressed the meeting, but explicitly stated that she was not there for an endorsement. The fact that she was the Democratic Party nominee was a sufficient endorsement, she said. Briere faces a challenge on Nov. 5 from independent Jeff Hayner.

Briere’s statement helped break a pattern of first hearing remarks of a candidate, followed by an endorsement vote. Washtenaw County commissioner Andy LaBarre also told the group he wasn’t there for an endorsement. But the previous pattern had led some in attendance to expect the same sequence – remarks, followed by a vote – to unfold after Westphal spoke. However, his endorsement had been handled by the executive board a few days earlier.

The motion to rescind Westphal’s endorsement came after Nora Wright, who presided over the meeting, declined to entertain a different motion from Eaton while other business was being considered. Later, after Westphal had spoken, Wright declined again to entertain a motion – that the party not make an endorsement in the Ward 2 city council race – because there was no such motion on the meeting’s agenda.

But when Eaton then put forward a motion to rescind the executive board’s previous action of endorsement, Wright put that question to the membership.

Some back-and-forth between Eaton and David Cahill drew out the fact that a 2/3 majority would be required – as Cahill cited Robert’s Rules of Order on the issue. Cahill is one of the party’s two vice chairs for resolutions, bylaws, and policy. Cahill responded to a question from Eaton about the ability of the executive board to make endorsements, by citing the group’s bylaws that provide for the board to carry out the business of the party between general meetings of the membership. [By way of background, Cahill is married to Sabra Briere.]

The meeting had begun with a misunderstanding about who would be allowed to participate in the endorsement votes. Democratic Party chair Mike Henry first seemed to indicate that only those who were on the party’s list seven days earlier would be allowed to participate. Cahill rose to appeal Henry’s apparent ruling.

The potential disagreement proved to be moot. Graham Teall – who’d assisted in issuing the voting credentials earlier in the morning – pointed out that anyone who had asked to be added to the list that morning had been issued a credential. The party’s bylaws state that: “Residents of the Ann Arbor area who are in sympathy with the general aims and policies of the Party are considered members of the Party and are eligible to participate in Party activities and to vote at Party meetings.” [Teall is married to Ward 4 city councilmember Margie Teall.]

Supporters of both Lumm and Westphal had rallied people to attend the meeting to vote on the Ward 2 endorsement. It led to the observation by several speakers that it would be nice to have that kind of attendance on a regular basis. Democratic Party chair Mike Henry told attendees: “We would love to see you here all the time!” About 80 people attended the meeting.

After the meeting, Westphal responded to a question from The Chronicle – about whether he’d taken an affirmative step to request the endorsement of the Ann Arbor Democratic Party. Westphal said he wasn’t sure he’d taken such a step to request an endorsement of the group, beyond having implicit endorsement of being the Democratic Party nominee. But he allowed that he’d conveyed that he wouldn’t mind having that additional endorsement.

Westphal’s Endorsement

-

Kirk Westphal, the Ward 2 Democratic nominee in the Nov. 5 general election. He thanked attendees for all their support with his campaign. “It’s a big fight. It’s all about getting out the vote,” he said. “The city is at a critical point where we may be going into an era of missed opportunities and going backward instead of forward.”

Signs for both Ward 2 Ann Arbor city council candidates were placed at the entrance to the Ann Arbor Community Center on North Main Street, where the Ann Arbor Democratic Party held its Oct. 12 meeting.

From left: Ann Arbor Democratic Party chair Mike Henry and David Cahill, who’s one of the two vice chairs for resolutions, bylaws, and policy. They were discussing the issue of membership and who would be entitled to vote that morning.

Graham Teall assisted with the issuance of voting credentials.

Jane Michener described herself as a life-long Democrat, and spoke in support of Jane Lumm at the meeting.

Peter Eckstein took a photo of Jack Eaton. Eckstein and Eaton are supporting independent incumbent Jane Lumm in the Ward 2 city council race. Eaton is the Democratic candidate in Ward 4.

Nora Wright, one of the Ann Arbor Democratic Party’s three vice chairs for programs. She presided over the endorsements portion of the meeting.

David Cahill held aloft a copy of Robert’s Rules of Order.

David Cahill thumbed through a copy of Robert’s Rules of Order.

Attendees held their credentials aloft to vote.

Graham Teall counted the votes of those who were in favor of rescinding the executive board’s endorsement of Westphal.

Other Endorsements

-

Pam Byrnes is running to represent the 7th District of the U.S. House for Michigan. That’s a seat currently held by Republican Tim Walberg. “Tim Walberg is definitely beatable,” she said. “He epitomizes the gridlock that is in Washington. We are calling it the Walberg Shutdown.”

Stephanie White, political director of the Michigan Democratic Party. She spoke on behalf of gubernatorial candidate Mark Schauer who was campaigning in the northern part of the state. Wherever he goes across the state, she reported, good crowds are showing up to “meet the next governor of Michigan.” “He has incredibly progressive values,” she said. When asked if he supports gay rights, “he’ll say, ‘Hell, yeah, I support gay rights,’” she told the Ann Arbor Democrats.

Michigan state house representative Gretchen Driskell (D-District 52). She’s running for e-election in 2014. She called her first two years frustrating, because the Michigan legislature is controlled by Republicans.

Travis Gonyou, who’s U.S. representative John Dingell’s field representative for Washtenaw County. Dingell was “stuck in D.C.” he reported, with votes scheduled over the weekend. “Whether that yields us any progress, I’m still not sure,” he said.

Debbie Dingell, who’s married to U.S. Rep. John Dingell (D-District 12) also delivered some remarks to the audience. She’d just come from a breast cancer fundraiser, she said.

Alma Wheeler Smith attended the meeting to promote the candidacy of Gary Peters for U.S. Senate. Peters is running in the 2014 election for the seat being vacated by retiring Sen. Carl Levin. Smith said the answer to the question of “Who’s that guy?” is someone with progressive values, who knew how to use his experience in business to work across the aisle.

Mark Totten is running for Michigan attorney general in 2014. He holds a PhD in ethics. He asked the group: “Who is the attorney general supposed to represent?” The response from the members of the Ann Arbor Democratic Party who were assembled Saturday: “The people!” Totten called the position of attorney general “the people’s lawyer.”

From left: Michigan state house representatives Jeff Irwin (D-District 53) and Adam Zemke (D-District 55). Irwin called Gov. Rick Snyder’s policy one that lowers taxes on wealthy people and raises them on low-income people, which is “wrong for the future of Michigan.”

From left: Michigan state house representatives Jeff Irwin (D-District 53) and Adam Zemke (D-District 55). Zemke called Lansing “a horribly partisan place.”

Elected Officials Not Seeking Endorsement

-

Washtenaw County commissioner Andy LaBarre (D-District 7) told the members he was not there for an endorsement. He was there to encourage people to attend the next meeting of the Washtenaw County board of commissioners, on Wednesday, Oct. 16 at 6:30 p.m. to help support a resolution calling for the repeal Michigan’s Stand Your Ground law.

Incumbent Democrat Sabra Briere (Ward 1) faces a challenge in the November general election from Jeff Hayner. “I’m unopposed as a Democrat. What that means is that I have the Democratic nomination. I have your endorsement. I don’t need anything else, except for you to tell me if I step wrong. And for you to tell me when I step right. Because it’s important that I listen to you.”

Other Faces in the Crowd

-

From left: Ann Arbor city councilmembers Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) and Mike Anglin (Ward 5).

From left: Ann Arbor city councilmember Sally Petersen (Ward 2) talked with Ann Arbor District Library board member Nancy Kaplan.

From left: Kirk Westphal, Ward 2 Democratic nominee in the Nov. 5 general election, and Ann Arbor city councilmember Chuck Warpehoski (Ward 5).

Washtenaw County commissioner Andy LaBarre (D-District 7) talked with resident Kathy Griswold.

Linda Lombardini, who is newly wed to Sandi Smith, former Ann Arbor city councilmember.

From left on the sidelines: Ann Arbor city councilmember Sally Petersen (Ward 2), Washtenaw County commissioner Andy LaBarre (D-District 7) and Michigan state house representative Jeff Irwin (D-District 53). LaBarre is not sending Irwin in with a play called “Dems Huddle.”

Former Ann Arbor Transportation Authority board member Ted Annis.

Clockwise from left foreground: Mike Allemang, former Washtenaw County water resources commissioner Janis Bobrin (who’s married to Allemang), Ward 2 Democratic nominee Kirk Westphal, Ann Arbor Democratic Party officer David Cahill, and former state representative Alma Wheeler Smith.

From left: former Ann Arbor city councilmember Eunice Burns, current councilmember Sabra Briere (Ward 1) and a longtime Ann Arbor Democratic activist Doug Kelley.

Anne Bannister, past chair of the Ann Arbor Democratic Party.

Resident Kathy Griswold talked with Michigan state representative Adam Zemke (D-District 55).

Ann Arbor resident Peter Nagourney.

Ann Arbor city councilmember Chuck Warpehoski’s daughter Camille completed a puzzle several times during the meeting.

The Chronicle could not survive without regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of government and elections. 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!

On the ballot for Ann Arbor residents are two items: (1) city council races; and (2) continuation of the Ann Arbor Public Schools sinking fund millage.

A precise breakdown of absentee ballots by ward is difficult, because some of the combined precincts in the election cross wards. However, at least 380 of the first wave of ballots will be sent to residents of Ward 2, which will be a carefully watched race. That’s a contest between independent incumbent Jane Lumm, Democratic challenger Kirk Westphal, and independent challenger Conrad Brown.

Two years ago, in the 2011 Ward 2 race between Democrat Stephen Rapundalo and independent Jane Lumm, 731 absentee ballots were cast. Lumm received about 63% of those absentee votes, which was about three points better than she did overall in prevailing.

The last day to register to vote in the Nov. 5 election is Monday, October 7, 2013. Information on how to do that is available on the city clerk’s website. Information on how to request an absentee ballot is available on the same website.

The local League of Women Voters is again this year hosting candidate forums. They’ll be broadcast live on Community Television Network’s Channel 19, which is also streamed live over the Internet. [Channel 19 live stream] The schedule for those debates:

• Oct. 1, 2013 at 7 p.m. Ward 3: Stephen Kunselman (incumbent Democrat); Sam DeVarti (independent).
• Oct. 1, 2013 at 8 p.m. Ward 5: Mike Anglin (incumbent Democrat); Thomas Partridge (declared write-in).
• Oct. 2, 2013 at 7 p.m. Ward 1: Sabra Briere (incumbent Democrat); Jeff Hayner (independent); Jaclyn Vresics (independent). [Vresics has announced that she's withdrawn from the race, but she did so too late to prevent her name from appearing on the ballot.]
• Oct. 2, 2013 at 8 p.m. Ward 2: Jane Lumm (incumbent independent); Conrad Brown (independent); Kirk Westphal (Democrat).

Democrat Jack Eaton, who prevailed over incumbent Marcia Higgins in the August primary, is not opposed in Ward 4.

Joining Ward 1 incumbent Democrat Sabra Briere on the Nov. 5 general election ballot will be independent Jeff Hayner. Briere is unopposed in the Democratic primary and no Republican candidate filed to run – in Ward 1 or in any other of the city’s five wards. According to city clerk’s office records, Hayner took out nominating petitions on July 3, submitted them on Aug. 2, and they were certified by the city clerk’s office that same day.

Also in Ward 1, independent Jaclyn Vresics submitted signatures on Aug. 1 but the clerk’s office has been able to validate only 68 of them, which falls short of the 100 necessary to qualify for the ballot. If she submits 32 additional valid signatures by the Aug. 7 deadline, that would set up Ward 1 for a three-way race. Vresics is affiliated with the University of Michigan student Mixed Use Party.

A three-way race for Ward 2 is already assured, as independent Conrad Brown submitted 101 valid signatures on Aug. 1. He’ll join incumbent independent Jane Lumm and Democratic challenger Kirk Westphal on the Nov. 5 ballot. Lumm filed her petitions on July 23, and Westphal is unopposed in the Democratic primary. Like Vresics, Brown is affiliated with the Mixed Use Party.

In Ward 3, the winner of the Democratic primary – either incumbent Stephen Kunselman and Julie Grand – could face an independent challenge from Sam DeVarti. He filed his petitions on Aug. 2, but the city clerk has been able to certify only 97 of them.

In Ward 4, Noah Weber took out petitions in mid-May, but as of noon on Aug. 5 he has not yet filed signatures with the clerk’s office. If he does not file at least 100 valid signatures by the Aug. 7 deadline, then the winner of the Democratic primary – either incumbent Marcia Higgins or Jack Eaton – would almost certainly be unopposed on the November ballot.

In Ward 5, Thomas Partridge took out petitions to run as an independent on Aug. 2, but has not filed signatures yet. Partridge also took out petitions to run in the Democratic primary, but did not submit any signatures. Incumbent Democrat Mike Anglin is unopposed in the Aug. 6 primary for Ward 5.

Update on Aug. 6, 2013 at 4:35 p.m.:  DeVarti submitted supplemental signatures and now has 103 valid signatures. That sets up a choice for Ward 3 voters in the fall – between DeVarti and the winner of the race between Grand and Kunselman.

In Ward 1 Vresics submitted supplemental signatures today that city clerk staff are still verifying. And even though he already submitted enough signatures, Hayner also submitted supplemental signatures today to guard against the possibility that some people might have signed both his and Vresics’ petition. Signing both petitions would disqualify the signature for both candidates. 

Update on Aug. 7, 2013 at 4:10 p.m.: According to city clerk staff, Vresics did have sufficient signatures to qualify for the ballot. With the deadline now passed – without Partridge or Weber filing petitions – that finalizes the field of city council ballot candidates on Nov. 5. (Kunselman and Eaton prevailed in the Ward 3 and Ward 4 Democratic primaries, respectively.) Ward 1: Briere, Vresics, Hayner. Ward 2: Lumm, Westphal, Brown. Ward 3: Kunselman, DeVarti. Ward 4: Eaton. Ward 5: Anglin.

Kirk Westphal was in the audience at the March 4, 2013 meeting of the Ann Arbor city council, when the council considered a moratorium on site plans for areas of the downtown zoned D1. He serves as chair of the city planning commission.

If he files the petitions with at least 100 valid signatures by the May 14 deadline, he’ll be competing for the seat currently held by independent Jane Lumm. Lumm was elected most recently in November 2011, winning the general election against Stephen Rapundalo, who ran as a Democrat. Lumm, who served for a period on the council in the mid 1990s as a Republican, is expected to run again this year.

In a telephone interview with The Chronicle, Westphal stated: “I consider myself strongly pro-environment, pro-transit, pro-alternative energy, and a strong Democrat. I hope to represent my ward in that capacity.” Responding to a standard question, he said he’s running “because I sense we’re on the cusp of some unique opportunities and challenges. I’m hopeful my vision of the future resonates with the ward.”

Westphal is currently chair of the city’s planning commission. He was first appointed on Oct. 3, 2006, replacing James D’Amour. The city council confirmed Westphal’s reappointment to the planning commission on July 2, 2012 for another three-year term on the commission, ending July 1, 2015. Westphal also serves on the city’s environmental commission.

Westphal is married with two children, ages 5 and 7, and lives in the Glacier neighborhood of Ward 2. Chronicle readers might be familiar with that part of town through The Chronicle’s coverage of last year’s Memorial Day parade.

Westphal is founding principal of a documentary production firm, Westphal Associates. He holds a master’s degree in urban planning from the University of Michigan. For a Chronicle profile of Westphal, written in 2010, see “Know Your Kirk: Public Servant.”

The Ann Arbor city council is an 11-member body, including the mayor. Each of the city’s five wards is represented by two councilmembers, who serve two-year terms. In any given year, only one of the councilmembers is up for re-election. Not up for re-election this year in Ward 2 is Sally Petersen, who was first elected in November 2012.

Westphal is the second non-incumbent to indicate plans to run for city council this year. Earlier this month, Julie Grand – chair of the Ann Arbor park advisory commission – pulled petitions to run in the Ward 3 Democratic primary. If she files the petitions with at least 100 valid signatures by the May 14 deadline, she’ll be competing for the seat with incumbent Stephen Kunselman, a two-term councilmember who is running for re-election.

The Chronicle could not survive without regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of local government and civic affairs. It’s not easy to draw perfect circles for those cartoon character heads. 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!

Stephen Rapundalo and Jane Lumm were adamant in their positions, but appeared in relatively good humor. (Photos by the writer.)

Rapundalo has made the city’s past and future a central theme of his campaign, and the Oct. 26 event amply reflected that. Rapundalo spent much of the evening trying to characterize the city councils of the 1990s, on which Lumm served, as unable to work cooperatively as a group. That contrasts with his own approach and that of the current council, said Rapundalo, which is based on consensus and cooperation, even if councilmembers don’t agree on everything.

Even as Rapundalo appealed to the past in criticizing Lumm – for supporting what he called luxurious labor contracts during her tenure of service – he also criticized what he perceives her attitude to be towards the future. He calls it a “hunker down” mentality, which he says doesn’t take into account the steps the city needs to take to ensure future generations have what they need.

For her part, Lumm tells a narrative in which city government has become, since the time she served on the council, disconnected from the priorities of residents. She wants to restore community input and open conversation back to city government, which she contends is now lacking. At the Thurston forum, she responded to Rapundalo’s criticism about her prior service as a councilmember by saying she welcomed the comparison between “the bad old days” and now. She characterized herself as a fiscal watchdog, who pressed financial issues, even if there was not the same appetite for that on the rest of the council.

Certain aspects of Lumm’s record are portrayed on Rapudalo’s campaign website in a way that could fairly be described as out of context. [A closer examination of Rapundalo's portrayals based on city council minute archival material is included in The Chronicle's write-up of the League of Women Voters forum, earlier in the campaign: "2011 Election: Ward 2 City Council"] At the Thurston forum, however, Rapundalo was right about a point of contention that emerged over whether Lumm had enjoyed a Republican majority on a city council committee. The city council archives show a 3-2 Republican majority on the labor negotiating committee in 1996.

The forum was hosted by the Orchard Hills/Maplewood Homeowners Association, moderated by Peter Mooney, who’s president of that group. Rapundalo is a member of the association, and Thurston Elementary is in Rapundalo’s neighborhood. But if there was a general leaning among the assembly, it seemed to be in favor of Lumm – based on response to a few laugh lines sprinkled throughout the forum.

The format of the event contrasted with many other similar events, in that it featured no rigid time constraints on candidate responses – just a general guideline from Mooney to try to limit responses to around three to four minutes.

Mooney took questions written by audience members on cards and synthesized them into prompts for the candidates. Paraphrased questions and responses below are summarized in the order they were given. [Campaign websites: Jane Lumm , Stephen Rapundalo]

Opening Statements

Each candidate gave an opening statement.

Opening: Lumm

Lumm began by saying it was an honor to serve on the council for three terms in the 1990s. She said she didn’t expect to run again, but felt that city government has become disconnected from the community. In financially challenging times, she said, the city can’t afford everything – it’s about choices and priorities.

Many people believe the city should be targeting tax dollars on getting basic services right, but we don’t see that happening, she said. Instead, she said, the city government had built a new municipal center and diverted precious capital dollars to public art. The council had focused on ordinances addressing issues like pedestrians in crosswalks and vehicles idling too long, instead of more pressing problems. “We deserve better,” she said.

She then described Rapundalo’s campaign strategy as tossing “a bunch of false claims and nasty accusations on the wall in the hope that something might stick.” As an example, she gave Rapundalo’s contention that she’d consistently opposed recycling, the environment and human services. She said she doubted that the local Sierra Club would have endorsed her if she were anti-recycling and anti-environment. She said she also doubted that former city human services director Eileen Ryan would be saying the positive things she was saying about Lumm if Lumm were anti-human-services.

Today, Lumm said, our elected officials don’t seem to be listening to residents, which was shown by a misalignment of priorities. She continued by saying that elected officials appear to think they “know better.” Decisions are made privately, she contended, and then publicly it becomes about “selling” the decision to the public. She said that people who remembered her previous service know that she would work hard to engage all stakeholders to ensure that all options and points of view are heard – that’s just a good government principle that she would restore to city government, she said.

Opening: Rapundalo

Rapundalo thanked everyone for their confidence and support over the last six years of his service on the council. He called it an honor to serve as representative to the council. Rapundalo said that for him, the election is about who can best lead Ann Arbor forward. Ann Arbor is facing some real economic challenges, he said, but compared with other communities in the state, the outlook is not as bad. He attributed that to the fact that the city council, during his period of service, had focused diligently on priorities for the budget, services and infrastructure improvements. It has not been easy, he said, but the council has managed it pretty well. As a result, he said, the city of Ann Arbor enjoys a good fund balance, top bond ratings, clean audits, and earns praise for its quality of life.

He said he has not adopted a “hunker down mentality.” Instead, he said, he’d tried to be strategic in his due diligence in addressing issues, so that Ann Arbor can move forward. It should not just be a question of whether things are okay for today. The question is what needs do we have for tomorrow, he said, and we need to challenge ourselves with meeting those needs.

Rapundalo said he was proud of the council’s accomplishments – replacing outdated and expensive labor contracts, with savings that can be allocated to hiring back police. More and better recycling has been established, he said, parkland has been protected, aging infrastructure has been replaced, and neighborhoods have been protected from inappropriate development. Budgets had been developed that did not raise taxes.

All this had been done, Rapundalo said, because he’d worked collaboratively with his council colleagues to reach consensus on solutions, even though they did not always share the same view on everything. In short, he said, there’s important work to be done to ensure that Ann Arbor remains the economic beacon for Michigan. His strength, he said, is as someone who runs a business that is a high-tech industry leader [the industry association MichBio], has strong analytical and management skills, and demonstrates principled leadership. Rapundalo said he is exactly what the city council needs going into the future.

Huron Hills Golf Course

Question: What are your thoughts on the future of Huron Hills golf course? Should it be kept as it is, sold, or something else?

Huron Hills Golf Course: Rapundalo

Rapundalo began by saying, “That’s an easy one!” From the get-go, he said he’d supported keeping Huron Hills as a golf course. He had never supported or contemplated that it would be sold.

As chair of the golf advisory task force, he said he had worked very hard with others to try to improve golf operations. Over the last three years, revenues have increased, he noted, not just at Huron Hills but at Leslie Park golf course as well. The hope is that the trend will continue. Various adjustments and improvements have been implemented to make that happen, but it takes a concerted effort, he said. He concluded by saying his support is completely behind Huron Hills as a golf course.

Huron Hills Golf Course: Lumm

Lumm said she’s been very involved in trying to save Huron Hills over the last six years. The course has gone through countless reviews by consultants, she said. This last summer, a request for proposals (RFP) went out and Miles of Golf was the only respondent. If the proposal from Miles of Golf had been approved, it would have commercially developed half the property.

Lumm noted that she’d spoken against the RFP – because the plan recommended by the golf advisory task force was, and is, working. [Lumm addressed the city council on the topic at its June 7, 2010 meeting.] Lumm said the situation is being grossly misrepresented. She said Rapundalo is on record as saying the operating shortfall is greater than $500,000. But later, she said, Rapundalo had acknowledged that on a cash-operating basis, Huron Hills is essentially break-even. The public perception is that Huron Hills bleeds money – but it doesn’t, she said. She said she believes in public recreation – Huron Hills turned 90 years old this year.

If Huron Hills were not already owned by the city and were under consideration by the city’s greenbelt advisory commission for acquisition, she said, she felt there’d be no doubt that the city would purchase it. Greenbelt parcels are evaluated based on eight criteria. One of those criteria is its proximity to the Huron River, she said. Another one is the number of passers-by. Huron Hills would score very high on that metric, she said. Of the city’s 12 recreation facilities (swimming pools, canoe liveries, ice rinks), Huron Hills is the No. 3 revenue generator, she said.

Huron Hills serves a municipal function, Lumm continued, pointing out that young people, as well as seniors, play there. Leslie and Huron Hills, on a fully-allocated basis, Lumm said, lose $160,000 and $100,000 respectively. The Miles of Golf proposal was eventually turned down – it was a “lose, lose, lose” for Huron Hills and the city. It would have only benefited Miles of Golf, she said.

The RFP also violated the 2008 city charter referendum on selling parkland. The charter amendment requires that if the city ever decided to sell parkland, then residents get to vote on it. What was happening with the Miles of Golf proposal was an attempt to “skirt that voter referendum,” she said. All sorts of words were used instead of “sale,” she said – “long-term leases” and “development agreements.” That happened under Rapundalo’s watch, she said.

The city got a land appraisal on Huron Hills a number of years ago – that’s not something we should do with our parks, Lumm said. If you believe in protecting city parks, you don’t turn a blind eye to activity like that, she contended. Lumm noted that the city is spending millions of dollars outside the city – through the greenbelt program – to prevent development. So why would we allow development of our own city parks? she asked.

Public Art

Question: What’s your philosophy on public art spending? What changes should be made?

Public Art: Lumm

Lumm noted that $2.2 million has been set aside so far through the city’s Percent for Art program – it’s been carved out of the parks millage, the solid waste millage, the parks capital improvements millage, utility fees and the municipal center building fund. She thinks money like that should be used in a way that any reasonable person would consider related to the source. So she would not support carving out one percent of funds from those various millages for public art. She particularly would not do that when streets and bridges are deteriorating.

Lumm said supporters of the public art program talk about the economic benefits. She said she didn’t doubt the economic benefit – her objection is based on the funding source. She noted that the city of Ann Arbor has a lot of public art – it’s been donated. The city should look at those opportunities.

Another option would be to give voters discretion – they could make a contribution to public art when they paid taxes, she said. She characterized herself as an “art lover,” having served on the Ann Arbor Art Center board for six years. It’s not about being for or against public art, she said, it’s about how it’s funded. It amounts to diverting resources to things that are “nice to have” in financially challenging times.

Public Art: Rapundalo

Rapundalo said he took a very different point of view from Lumm. He said he was in support of the Percent for Art program concept for a number of reasons. He contended there are a lot of myths and misrepresentation of what the Percent for Art program is all about.

Rapundalo contended that the program is “budget neutral.” He said you could think of the public art being “a design element in whatever [capital] project” is already funded by a source – whether the funding source is the streets millage or the parks millage or whatever. That art has to be accommodated in the project, like painting or landscaping within those projects. So the art doesn’t detract from the projects that need to get done.

He called public art an economic development tool. He said he works in the high-tech industry, and people want to be in a community that is vibrant and that offers a lot in terms of cultural arts. So to retain talent in this day and age, in this kind of community, he said, it’s important that we make that kind of investment.

He went on to contend that it’s inexpensive to make that investment with the Percent for Art program. He reiterated that the public art program is “budget neutral.” He maintained that it takes nothing from the city’s general fund, so it can’t be used for fire or police protection. He wound up by saying the public art program builds the vibrancy of the community, and it’s something that people can point to and say, “This is what Ann Arbor is all about,” and take pride in it. It’s a selling point for Ann Arbor for being a magnet for the future economy.

Unfunded Pension/Health Care for City Workers

Question: Rapundalo notes the city has a strong fund balance. But the city has an unfunded combined health care and pension obligation for city employees of $225 million. Thoughts?

Pension/Health Care: Rapundalo

Rapundalo began by saying that the questioner had not looked at the numbers very carefully. The city has assets against that liability, he noted. Percentage-wise, the pension fund is about 90% funded, he said. It was 98% funded as recently as five years ago. The retiree health care fund is about 30% funded – which Rapundalo said was one of the best in the state. It’s inaccurate and misleading to say we don’t have assets against the liability, he said.

The city is actually in relatively good shape with respect to pension and health care, but Rapundalo allowed: “That’s not to say we don’t have our work cut out for us.” That’s why he had gone after the labor contracts, which he said under Lumm’s watch were luxurious. Union members had free health care and very little pension contribution. He said he’d spent the last two years trying to roll back those benefits, whether employees are union or non-union, so people pay their fair share “just like you and I have to.” In that way, future pension fund obligations would not be as great, he said.

Pension/Health Care: Lumm

Lumm said her take on the numbers is 180-degrees opposite to Rapundalo’s. When she served on the council previously, the council had adopted the first long-term financial plan for the city. Any long-term outlook takes into consideration debt and unfunded liabilities. Today, she said, both of those have grown considerably. The most recent actuarial report, she said shows the pension obligation is unfunded to the tune of $45 million. The health care obligation is unfunded by another $170 million.

While Rapundalo talks about cleaning up the mess of 15 years ago (when Lumm served on the council), Lumm said, at that time the pension fund was $60 million over-funded, while retiree health care was underfunded by $50 million. That was a net surplus of $10 million, she said. She felt the truth is in those numbers.

Lumm pointed to a 2005 blue ribbon finance report that recommended addressing the fundamental issue of the pension benefit – but the city is still offering a defined benefit plan, not a defined contribution plan. That’s not sustainable, she said.

The changes that have been made recently by the council have been good, she said, like extending the final average compensation (FAC) period and increasing employee contributions to healthcare. But for Rapundalo to say she was the person who supported fat labor contracts, she said, “That’s laughable.” She said Rapundalo could ask his Democratic colleagues, or anyone who has any institutional memory – she was “a pain in the neck” about labor issues. However, she said, there wasn’t the appetite for it.

Lumm contended she “pushed mightily” on controlling employee pension and health care costs. She said she brought forward resolutions when the council discussed the budget, and she aired those issues not weeks but months in advance to try to get buy-in. She’d started in 1994 and was a pain in the neck about this topic until her last meeting on the city council, she said.

Fuller Road Station, Transportation

Question: What are your thoughts on the proposed Fuller Road Station and high speed transit?

Transportation: Rapundalo

Rapundalo said he’s supportive of the whole concept. He called it a “generational game changer.” Whether people appreciate it or not, it’s here today because the federal government has identified high speed rail in this corridor as a priority and a need, he said. When you combine that with local needs driven by University of Michigan employment, Fuller Road Station becomes an important component of that. In years past, the city has looked at how to move people in and out, he noted, and after looking at many different locations, the conclusion was that the spot on Fuller Road at the base of the university hospital would be the ideal location.

The concept that’s been developed involves two or three phases, Rapundalo said. The first phase would be a parking facility with commuter rail platform. The second phase would include a fully built-out high speed train station. A third phase would be an interconnector hub from North Campus and Plymouth Road southward. It would integrate rail, bus, bike, pedestrians and cars.

The first two phases won’t require any city general funds, he said. Entities like the University of Michigan, Michigan Dept. of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Federal Rail Administration and Amtrak have committed to being full partners. Hundreds of millions of dollars have been allocated – the state of Michigan has purchased the trains and the tracks. The pieces are in place and in motion, he said. Other stops along that route – Battle Creek and Dearborn – are getting renovated. Ann Arbor is the busiest Amtrak stop on the Detroit-Chicago route, so it would behoove Ann Arbor be a part of the high speed and commuter rail link, he concluded.

Transportation: Lumm

Lumm allowed that she would sound like the naysayer, but what Rapundalo was describing sounds “utopic.” It’s an “intermodal transit station” – that sounds great. At some point it would be a wonderful amenity for the city, she said, but we need a reality check.

What we’re talking about today is the first phase, which is essentially a parking structure for the University of Michigan, she said. The city has made a commitment of $10 million in order to use 22% of the facility. The university is a wonderful employer, and the city should be partners, she said, but Ann Arbor taxpayers shouldn’t necessarily bear the expense of that project on their parkland.

The project comes with too many unanswered questions, Lumm said. She has yet to see a business plan. What will the ongoing operating costs be? If someone would share that information, she said, that would be great. As far as the claim that it will require no city general fund money, she said, “I’ll believe that when I see it.” She came back to the point that the site is located on city parkland. The project violates the spirit of the 2008 charter amendment. Voters said in 2008 that if the city is going to unload parkland, voters get to weigh in on that. Thinking the project will become a train station anytime soon, Lumm said, is not realistic.

Labor Negotiations

Question: What’s your philosophy on labor contracts? What’s the role of the council versus the role of the administration in labor negotiations?

Labor Negotiations: Lumm

Lumm said the question strikes a nerve, because she knows what she did, and she knows what has been said about what she did. She said she’d welcome anyone who can remember the history, to confirm she had pushed on pension and health care issues, for current and retired employees.

Lumm said she had served on the labor committee, and recently she’d reviewed some of the contracts from that time. She referred to a study that had been done looking at benchmarking health care costs with other communities. The committee relied on human resources staff, the city administrator and the city attorneys – they’d come to the labor committee as those staff members had negotiated the contracts. She said she’d looked at a contract from 1997 – before that contract was settled there were 14 negotiations. She allowed that some things that were being asked for were actually fairly luxurious, but she maintained that the city had held the line on things.

Lumm said  that back when she served, the council relied on professionals to guide it. Today, she said, the council is doing the work that professionals once did. The impression is, she said, that it’s the councilmembers who are doing the negotiating. She said she didn’t think that’s what is actually happening.

Labor Negotiations: Rapundalo

Rapundalo said that before he addressed the question that had been posed, he wanted to respond to some of Lumm’s comments. He noted that when Lumm served on the labor committee, she was on it when there were more Republicans than Democrats. So she had the opportunity to carry a recommendation out from the labor committee to the full council as to what they wanted to see come out of the negotiations. But he didn’t think there’s a record of that having happened.

Rapundalo stated that councilmembers don’t participate in labor negotiations – they provide parameters and the strategies by which the professionals do the negotiations. What has changed over the last five to six years, he said, is that the labor committee has put its foot down and said: The city is not going to conduct business like this any longer.

Rapundalo said that for many years, the police and firefighter unions, which are governed by the Act 312 arbitration law, would “call our bluff.” They’d say: “You’re not going to lay us off; we’ll string this out as long as we can.” But the council had gotten to the point where it said, “Enough is enough.” The city could not continue to cut other areas, he said, without looking at the largest expense, which is personnel. And the majority of personnel costs are in the public safety sector, he said. And with public safety union contracts that had no contributions to health care and minimal contributions in terms of pension, it was not fair.

So the council had said it’s time to connect the labor strategy with the budget strategy, Rapundalo explained. That meant that for units with employees who’d agreed to contracts that had higher contributions to health care and pension plans, budget reductions in those units would be correspondingly less. Most of the unions, “saw the writing on the wall,” Rapundalo said, and accommodated that strategy. Police and firefighters, however, had not, he said.

Rapundalo called it ironic that the settlement that the city had recently reached with the police officers rank and file – with greater contributions by employees to health care and pension – was the same set of conditions offered to them in May and June of this year, before the budget was approved. It was also the same set of conditions that had been offered a year ago. In their minds, he said, their contracts had already expired, so it was to their benefit to continue to work under those contracts that were more generous to them. But the police officers had finally come around, and he hoped now that those savings could be used to re-hire some of the officers.

Rapundalo called it a situation where the labor committee and the council at large had said that it was going to put its foot down, because it’s not sustainable. We’ve been living off those luxurious contracts for many years, Rapundalo said, and the rich buyouts that many people remember, back when firefighters were ending their careers with pensions in six figures, came under Lumm’s watch. At that, Lumm objected that she was not around at that time. Rapundalo insisted, “You supported it, you voted for it at the budget time, period, Jane. … You were there …”

Rapundalo’s contention was that Lumm had served on the council when the terms and conditions had been put in place that allowed for subsequent buyouts. Rapundalo continued by saying he’d spent his time on the council trying to roll back the labor contracts, and it had not been easy, because they were very entrenched. “Folks, you’re paying for these guys’ … food every day! They have written into their contract that you will pay for their coffee. I mean this is ludicrous in this day and age, let alone that they’re not paying for health care.”

The council said that “enough was enough” and had been adamant with the city administrator that it was not going to budge. And this time, if the unions called the city’s bluff, it would not work, Rapundalo said.

Council Minority

Question: (For Rapundalo) How is Lumm held responsible for what took place on the council when she served as a minority? (For Lumm) For residents who are happy with the current majority on the council, why shouldn’t they be?

By way of historical background on city council membership, ArborWiki’s entry on Ann Arbor city council membership from different periods is useful.

Annotated from the Nov. 18, 1996 Ann Arbor city council meeting minutes is the following membership for the labor negotiating committee:

Labor Negotiating Committee
Meets: As needed
Location: Guy C. Larcom Jr. Municipal Building (various rooms)
Contact: Neal Berlin, City Administrator, 994-2650
Sheldon [Ingrid Sheldon, Republican, mayor]
Lumm [Jane Lumm, Republican, Ward 2]
Kwan [David Kwan, Republican, Ward 2]
Hartwell [Stephen C. Hartwell, Democrat Ward 4]
Daley [Elizabeth Daley, Democrat, Ward 5]

Council Minority: Rapundalo

Rapundalo reiterated a point he’d made previously that evening, that there were instances where Lumm was in the majority “whether it be on the committee level, or otherwise.”

The remark drew some sarcastic laughs from the audience, likely because Rapundalo’s phrase “or otherwise” was understood to be a contention that Lumm had been a part of a Republican majority on the council as a whole, which she was not.

A brief exchange between Rapundalo and audience member Tom Wieder included, from Wieder, “Well, stop lying!” and protest from Rapundalo that the reference was to a committee [the five-member labor committee, on which Lumm had served as part of a 3-2 Republican majority].

Rapundalo continued by saying that good governance is about collaborating with colleagues to try to reach a consensus. He said that’s exactly what the councils he’s served on have tried to do – come together based on an understanding of what the issues are with a common goal. The councils of the 1990s, Rapundalo contended, were characterized by petty partisan politics and brinksmanship. It was the same sort of thing we see in Washington D.C., he said, and there’s too much of that in Congress. That’s a recipe for stagnation, he said. “The only way you’re going to get is if you give,” he said.

Council Minority: Lumm

Lumm began by saying she didn’t know where to start. She said when she served there were two Republicans on the council, three counting mayor Ingrid Sheldon. She said there’d never been any Republican majority on any committee or board. She insisted she was not a part of any majority.

Referring to the buyouts in 2000 and 2001, those buyouts had contributed to the increased pension liability, she said. There were subsequent buyouts as well, including the 2009 police buyout, which Rapundalo had voted for. She returned to her point that she had left the council by the time of the 2001 buyouts, even though Rapundalo said she was responsible.

At that time, Lumm said, the council had (without consultation with the actuary) made an early retirement proposal. Two hundred employees were eligible and 200 accepted, she said. Although she was not on the city council at the time, she said, she was curious about it. She was serving on a chamber of commerce public policy committee, so she called the actuary as an interested citizen, and the actuary reported that the city never contacted them.

Obviously, Lumm said, the buyout was far too lucrative – the FAC was based only on the last year’s compensation, she said. She noted that the current mayor, John Hiefjte, had voted for that. But she said she wasn’t around for it. That was a “golden parachute,” she said, and she wondered who wouldn’t take it. “Please don’t blame that on on me, I wasn’t around,” she said.

Commenting on her interactions with other councilmembers, Lumm returned to a point she’d made previously, saying she would float proposals not weeks but months in advance. When Rapundalo talks about brinksmanship, she doesn’t know what he means. “We had a little more diversity on council and we talked about things openly. What a concept! I think that’s a good thing.”

Today, what you see is everybody in agreement, Lumm said, with decisions having been made before the actual council meeting. Now, it seems like it’s more about selling and marketing the decisions. She said she wanted to open up the conversation to the wider community. In the 1990s, there were philosophical differences on the council, but it didn’t get personal. That’s good democracy, she concluded.

Underground Parking Structure

Question: The underground parking structure currently under construction on Fifth Avenue includes foundations that are capable of supporting a 12-story hotel, when the future use of the parcel has not yet been determined. Also, how do you justify building the underground garage when popular opinion is against it?

Underground Parking Structure: Lumm

Lumm said it was not possible to turn back the clock on the parking garage. It was built to support a much larger structure on top, she noted. So going forward, the conversation is more about what’s going to go on top. It’s a very valuable piece of property, she said. So the discussion about what goes on top needs public input, but not in a check-off-the-box kind of way. We’re talking about everybody’s tax dollars, she said, so we need to open things up to all conceivable stakeholders. It’s a vitally important parcel in the downtown area.

There’s one group of citizens that has come up with some guiding principles, which she supported. They want to see a public art component, green space and “it’s not all or nothing … it’s a really balanced set of guiding principles.” One of them is that it should be tax-producing, as well as an enhancement to the Ann Arbor District Library’s downtown location. Another factor is the nearby Blake Transit Center. She said she wanted to see a robust community discussion about it.

Underground Parking Structure: Rapundalo

As far as justifying construction of the underground garage itself, Rapundalo noted that the need for the capacity was identified by the DDA by sitting down and projecting forward 10 or 20 years. The city has lost a number of lots and structures, he said, so that underground garage is really trying to make up for some of the loss.

For last five or six years, the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority and the city council have been adamant in supporting the notion that there’d not only be an underground parking garage, but also a mixed-use development above that. As a result, the foundations included reinforced steel to accommodate something bigger, he said, but not specifically for a hotel. The question of what would go on top was purposely left open, he said.

Reviewing the set of proposals the city had received for the Library Lot RFP, Rapundalo said it was interesting that three had a hotel component, and of those, two had a conference center component. The job of the committee he’d chaired was to shepherd the proposals through a review process and bring a recommendation to the city council. His frustration, Rapundalo said, was that the council was not able to complete that process. [The council voted to terminate the process.]

For what it’s worth, Rapundalo said, the project that the committee had selected as its preferred option was, in its final version, not going to cost the city any money – it was going to be completely private. Rapundalo said he found it ironic that Alan Haber, who’d championed one of the responses to the city’s RFP that had called for parkland, has now come forward supporting something more akin to what the council has always said about the parcel – it should be mixed use with a large public component. “We’ve come back full circle,” Rapundalo said. He noted that the future of the lot is now in the hands of the DDA, which is looking at not just that site, but at other city-owned surface parking lots as well.

Heritage Row, City Place

Question: Explain what happened that resulted in the City Place development going forward – which will knock down seven historic houses – when the Heritage Row plan was turned down.

Heritage Row, City Place: Rapundalo

Rapundalo called the situation very frustrating. He said he was on the side supporting the Heritage Row PUD (planned unit development), which in its initial version would have torn down the seven older houses – which he contended were not “historic,” even though they were old. The first version of the project was to be a “very quaint” brownstone row house-type development, which he described as a very nice project. [At that time, the PUD was called "City Place," but subsequently the name "City Place" would be attached to a matter-of-right project, not a PUD.] After the brownstone version, the PUD then evolved into the Heritage Row project most people are familiar with, Rapundalo said. That one would have preserved the seven houses and also built something more contemporary behind the row of houses.

The majority of council supported Heritage Row, but neighbors took various steps to try to prevent its approval, Rapundalo explained. One tool was to file a petition with the city to force the council to achieve a supermajority of eight votes. The council was not able to muster that supermajority, and as a result Heritage Row failed on a 7-4 vote. So the developers came in and offered City Place, which was a project that was proposed to meet all the zoning codes, but would definitively remove the old houses. Rapundalo called it an “inferior project,” but the council was not in a position to say no, because the project met the zoning regulations. Saying no would have meant putting the city at risk of litigation and almost a certain loss in that litigation, he said.

There were several attempts to reconsider that vote on Heritage Row, Rapundalo said. However, the four councilmembers who’d voted against the project refused to budge on that. In the context of the most recent attempt in the last few weeks, the project had been sold to a new developer. And when the numbers were crunched by the new developer, long story short, he said, the numbers didn’t add up for the new developer. So the Heritage Row proposal was withdrawn.

Rapundalo said that in the next few weeks, he expected that demolition permits would be issued and the houses would come down, to make way for a project that will likely become student housing. Rapundalo called it unfortunate and it saddened him. There were many opportunities to make it right, he said. He said he can’t speak to why some councilmembers chose to prolong their opposition to a project that was at least reasonable. [For the latest City Place news, see "City Place: ZBA Appeal Filed"]

Heritage Row, City Place: Lumm

Lumm said nobody is happy with the outcome. She suggested that the situation could have been averted, if elected officials had moved forward with the review of the R4C zoning districts. A committee was formed, she said, to address questions about this zoning classification. If that had proceeded along a path where recommendations could have been made, it’s possible that the recommendations could have been in place in time to steer things in a direction that everyone was hoping for – Heritage Row.

Now, there’s speculation about whether the original developer had calculated the true cost accurately. Lumm ventured that he would know better than anyone. The new developer contends the Heritage Row development was not feasible. She said she just didn’t understand why those questions weren’t worked out and discussed. She said she hoped there’d now be an effort to get the R4C zoning review completed. The City Place project is student housing in a near-downtown neighborhood and she wondered how viable it would be, but she hoped it would be fully occupied. She said the council “played chicken” too long. She said people should have locked themselves in a room and figured it out. But she allowed it was easy for her to say – she didn’t live through it.

Sidewalk Millage

Question: If the sidewalk millage is not approved, will there need to be cuts?

[This item was presented in conjunction with a question about a possible city income tax, but are separated here, because the two are really two separate issues.]

Sidewalk Millage:  Lumm

Lumm said she was personally not supporting the sidewalk millage. Those feelings have been strengthened by knocking on doors during the campaign, she said. She’d been walking on some nice, newly-repaired sidewalks that residents had paid to have fixed under the recent five-year sidewalk replacement program. By way of full disclosure, she said, there are no sidewalks adjacent to her property.

People Lumm has talked to say they just spent a lot of money getting their sidewalk slabs replaced, and wonder about the coincidental timing of the millage proposal. She said a lot of people are not embracing that idea. Addressing the question of whether something would need to be cut, she called it an “unnecessary add,” because $540,000 had been carved out of the street millage for the public art program, when the sidewalk millage is projected to raise around that same amount – $560,000.

Lumm also called the 25% that is needed for administrative overhead excessive – “That’s insane,” she said. She’d attended a meeting of the Main Street Area Association, where members had discussed the use of the sidewalk millage inside the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority district. Commercial property owners would all be paying the the millage, she said, but based on the original city council resolution of intent for the use of the sidewalk millage, it would not be used inside the DDA district except for single-family and duplex residences.

The expectation was that the DDA would handle the sidewalk repair inside the district, using only the tax increment from the millage already captured by the DDA TIF district. [The council's resolution of intent was subsequently modified to provide the DDA with all proceeds from the millage inside the DDA district, provided that the DDA agreed to take responsibility for sidewalk repair.] The original resolution was discussed by the council, but nobody bothered to discuss it with the DDA, she said.

Sidewalk Millage: Rapundalo

Rapundalo described the sidewalk millage ballot proposal as coming about due to feedback from voters over the five years that the replacement program has been in place. Many people had to replace slabs, go through the rigamarole of hiring contractors, or teaming up with neighbors to find economies of scale, Rapundalo said. And what councilmembers had heard from people was that they really didn’t want to deal with all that.

The 1/8 mill tax roughly translates to $15 a year, Rapundalo explained. From the monetary side of things, it’s less than having to pay $120-130 per slab. One of the reasons the city has the current model of the five-year inspection program is due to the reduced administrative costs. If you chose to ignore the citation from the city and opted to have the city do the work, the per slab cost was more expensive. If the sidewalk milage doesn’t get approved, he said, the city will continue with the current model on another five-year program cycle.

City Income Tax

Question: What are your thoughts on a city income tax?

City Income Tax: Lumm

Lumm said she does not support a city income tax, noting that Rapundalo calls it “revenue restructuring.” She said she hears all the time from the mayor and other councilmembers, like a mantra, that we’re experiencing the worst recession since the Great Depression. But when times are tough, she said, this is not the time to raise taxes.

There’s a lot more that can be done in terms of government consolidations, Lumm said. So far, we’ve only nibbled at the edges of government consolidation, she said. She said the city didn’t collaborate with the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority, the Ann Arbor Public Schools, the University of Michigan, or Washtenaw County when the city built the $35 million maintenance facility [Wheeler Center]. She said when she served on the city council, she’d brought forward a resolution that called for cooperation with those other units of government, if a maintenance facility were to be built.

Until those kinds of collaborative options are explored, the city government should not be thinking about asking taxpayers for more money. An income tax, she said, is not revenue neutral and would be highly volatile. Up until two or three years ago, tax revenues had been increasing at roughly twice the rate of inflation. Suddenly things have slowed, she said, with respect to property tax growth. She called it “a panic reaction,” to appeal to a revenue restructuring plan. She felt there are many more ways the city can be more efficient in providing basic service delivery.

City Income Tax: Rapundalo

Rapundalo allowed that on the income tax, Lumm is right – he’s in favor of having a dialogue about revenue restructuring. He does not think the city can rely on cost-cutting alone. We’ve already cut and cut and cut, he said, and we’re at or near the bone.

Rapundalo said it’s foolish not to examine the revenue side of the equation. That’s particularly true in light of the reduced amount of state shared revenue that cities have received from the state, he said, and given the legislature’s contemplation of eliminating the personal property tax. By way of illustration, Rapundalo said Pfizer was previously a company that was very personal-property intensive, because of high-tech capital instruments it had. If the city lost that personal property tax revenue for all companies, it would have a huge impact and would not be easily replaced.

Before the personal property tax is eliminated, Rapundalo cautioned, it behooves us to think about whether the revenue model that’s in place is the best one: Is the burden fairly distributed among users of city services – property owners and people who just work here? A Headlee override is also an option, he pointed out. [A Headlee override would reset taxes up to their original rate before they were rolled back by the state's Headlee Amendment.] He wanted to stack the different revenue models against each other and ask what they would prefer.

He contended that Lumm misrepresents the income tax as an “additional tax.” Under the Ann Arbor city charter, Rapundalo said, it’s not possible to have both an income tax and property tax. [This is true for the general operating millage levied by the city of Ann Arbor for its general fund revenues, which is currently just over 6 mills. Other property taxes, levied for parks maintenance, solid waste, open space preservation and the like, could and would still persist, even if an income tax were enacted. Rapundalo's point is that the general operating millage property tax (6 mills) and an income tax are, in fact, either-or propositions. ]

Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority

Question: Some say the DDA has so much power, it’s ruining Ann Arbor. What’s your vision for downtown? What are three things you’d do to improve downtown?

Ann Arbor DDA: Rapundalo

Rapundalo said that the DDA had generated a lot of discussion, and a lot of points of view have been brought to bear on the question. He said there are two extreme views. One is that the DDA is not independent enough and the city council is trying to impose its will on the DDA. The other extreme view is that the city council doesn’t have enough control over the DDA. He said that one of his council colleagues has proposed the city get rid of the DDA entirely, and that the city take over the management of the city’s public parking system, which the DDA now operates.

For his part, Rapudalo described the city-DDA relationship as a balancing act. He said it’s important to remember that the DDA is enabled by state legislation, but the city is responsible for the DDA’s assets. So if the DDA were to disappear, the city could get stuck with both the liability and the assets. It’s only prudent, therefore, that the council exercise some control, he said. That control is exercised primarily through the appointments to the board, he explained. At the same time the council can’t be so overbearing that the council prevents the DDA from doing what it’s supposed to do – make decisions that are in the best interest of the downtown. The city council has tried to walk that line, he said.

Rapundalo does not support eliminating the DDA, because he said that would have dire consequences. At the same time he didn’t think the city council should be so overbearing as to “cuff the hands” of the DDA. On the DDA board there are some dedicated people, he said, who have the best interests of the downtown at heart. As a show of good faith, he said, the city had turned over the entire management of its parking system to the DDA, as well as the planning for city-owned parcels. The council is trying to walk a fine line, he said.

With respect to his vision of downtown, he noted that he works in the high-tech industry in biosciences, and works with economic development agencies, including Ann Arbor SPARK. We have to maintain the vibrancy of downtown, he said. He would like to see more density in downtown, either through commercial or residential development. He said he could imagine some kind of mid-sized corporate headquarters downtown. There are opportunities with companies currently located on the fringes, he said.

It boils down to creating more density – to increase tax revenue and to allow for a flourishing retail sector, he said. Up to now the downtown has been able to forestall the introduction of big box stores and maintain a nice mix of local and mom-and-pop type of retail, Rapundalo said. By the same token, the city has never really developed a retail attraction and retention strategy. He’d like to see the city set out some economic development priorities so that they could be coordinated and integrated with the efforts of Ann Arbor SPARK.

Ann Arbor DDA: Lumm

Lumm contended that in many respects, the DDA has lost its independence. Rapundalo has talked about the extreme views – that it should be wholly independent versus the idea it shouldn’t exist. When she served on the council, the DDA was an independent body, but it’s not today. She felt like the city council had subsumed the DDA.

She contended that former councilmembers serve on the DDA board, and she noted that the mayor of course [by statute] also serves on the board. When she served on the council, the DDA board was composed mostly of downtown property owners – their mission was solely focused on the downtown. They were not susceptible to pressure to assist the city financially. But today, the DDA is paying $500,000 per year on a 30-year loan for the new municipal center, Lumm noted. That money could be used on other downtown investments.

She described the DDA as being in a “compromised position” now. She pointed to the contract under which the DDA manages the city’s public parking system – the city receives 17% of the gross parking revenues. She took issue with the idea that the city had “given” the DDA the management of its public parking system. What came with that “gift,” she said, was the obligation of roughly $2.7 million a year provided by the 17% of gross revenues in the contract. That money is needed to fill the holes in the city’s operating budget, she said.

Lumm said that despite Rapundalo’s desire not to “cuff the hands” of the DDA, in many ways the city did that. Now a discussion is unfolding about the possibility that hours of parking enforcement will be extended and rates might be raised. [Extension of hours of enforcement has recently been taken off the table, at least for now.] This was predictable, she said. As the city kept going back to the “DDA trough” saying, “Give us more money,” Lumm noted, some members of the DDA board had indicated that parking rates would need to be raised, if the trend continued.

The DDA board is accountable to all of us, she said, and they need to be allowed to have a laser focus on the downtown. Her vision for the downtown, she said, is a vibrant downtown – who doesn’t want that? The DDA has been stretched beyond what their traditional mission was, she said. The downtown is the core of the city and we need to work collaboratively with the DDA so that it remains a strong economic driver.

Closing

Each candidate gave a closing statement.

Closing: Rapundalo

Rapundalo offered that what attendees at the forum had heard is a fundamental difference in how he and Lumm approach the role of a councilmember. What they’d heard from Lumm was a “hunker down” mentality, where we batten down the hatches and say no to everything. He did not accept that, he said. There are times to say no, no doubt. But time doesn’t stand still. It’s important to ask: What are the needs of tomorrow? What do our kids need? We need to think about those questions now, he said. It’s what defines being strategic and it’s what defines leadership.

In his tenure on the budget committee and the labor committee, he said he has challenged other councilmembers about priorities. The council sets priorities at budget retreats, which sets the tone for everything. The council has done a good job of establishing the things that are important, he said, and figuring out what accommodations have to be made in the budget to make those things happen. He said that Ann Arbor is actually doing pretty well. It has good bond ratings, he noted, which allowed the city to embark on needed infrastructure improvements, when bond rates were lowest and when construction costs were lowest. That was exactly the right time to do some of those projects, he observed.

Rapundalo said he would not sit back and accept the status quo. We should always ask if the status quo is okay. If it’s okay, then great. But if it isn’t, then we had better be working on the next steps, he said. It’s about investing in our future, prioritizing safety, and accelerating road repair and economic development to shore up our tax base.

The conversation has to include revenue restructuring, Rapundalo said. It’s not enough to cut costs, because when you try to prioritize, everybody thinks that everything is important. That’s why we have to talk about revenues, he said.

There’s important work to be done, Rapundalo said. He brings a varied skill set to the table, he said, and will continue to bring his due diligence that he’s always brought. He said he would be fair, equitable and mindful of people’s input and bring that into the decision-making at the council table.

Closing: Lumm

Lumm thanked the organizers for hosting, and Rapundalo for his service, and the forum attendees for coming out on a night when the weather was bad. She said it had been great to hear all the questions and to hear what’s on people’s minds.

She ventured that people likely had a sense of what her campaign is about: refocusing spending priorities to reconnect neighborhoods to city hall. She said she wanted to make sure tax dollars are deployed consistent with residents’ priorities. She felt the city has taken its eye off the ball – that’s why she is running.

She allowed that public art is valuable, but the city shouldn’t sacrifice basic services to pay for it. Although Rapundalo said prioritizing public safety is a priority, she said that over the last six years, during Rapundalo’s service, public safety has been cut by 24%. She said she’s no expert, but she’s talked to experts – people who served at senior levels in the Ann Arbor police department – and they are very concerned. If they’re concerned, she said, so was she.

Lumm said that when she hears that we’ve cut to the bone and around 50% of the head count is in public safety, that tells her there are other opportunities for reductions, too. Maybe the city needs fewer attorneys or accountants, she ventured. The city needs to look at cuts strategically. She called for having the community assist in building the city’s budget. She didn’t think the city government’s priorities are the community’s priorities. She welcomed the comparison between the time she served on the council and now. She said she’d worked hard to contain costs and limit taxes. She was known as a “fiscal watchdog,” she said, and would do that again. She asked people to consider when they felt safer and when the roads and streets were in better condition – now or then.

Lumm said she is running as an independent, but is honored to have both Democrats and Republicans supporting her. She hopes that going forward there’ll be other independents who run for city council, and said that maybe the city council elections can become non-partisan.

Lumm said she feels a sense of unity as she goes door to door, and with the group that has come together to support her. They share the belief that city government must reconnect with the people, she said.

The Chronicle could not survive without regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the Ann Arbor city council. 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!