According to the labor contract between the city and the International Association of Firefighters Local 693, the city is required to provide two sets of turnout gear for each firefighter – in accordance with National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) standards.

According to the staff memo, at least 20 sets of gear are due for scheduled replacement, and 14 more sets of gear are needed in order to equip seven new hires.

This brief was filed from the city council’s chambers on the second floor of city hall, located at 301 E. Huron. A more detailed report will follow: [link]

From left: Mark Kettner of the accounting firm Rehmann; Carla Sledge, Wayne County’s chief financial officer; Kelly Belknap, Washtenaw County’s finance director; and Pete Collinson, accounting manager for Washtenaw County. (Photos by the writer.)

The county’s finance staff, along with the auditor, Mark Kettner of Rehmann, highlighted several points, including a relatively dramatic increase in the general fund balance over the last few years – from $9.7 million in 2009 to $16.8 million at the end of 2012. Kettner also explained upcoming accounting changes that will require unfunded liabilities from the county’s pension and retirement healthcare plans – now totaling nearly $250 million – to be recorded in a different way, with more disclosure.

The new accounting changes – required by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) – won’t begin until 2015, but commissioner Dan Smith (R-District 2) wondered whether the county could implement the changes sooner. It might be possible, Kettner replied, but “I don’t know why you’d want to do it.” He suggested that the board hold a working session to go over the upcoming changes in more detail.

Kettner also pointed out that the changes will affect government entities in different ways. For example, it’s likely that there will be more impact on the city of Ann Arbor, because of how its many “enterprise” funds might be affected and the implications that would have on outstanding bonds. At minimum, the changes will mean more work for finance staff.

Also at the April 3 meeting, commissioners voted to add 39 new jobs in the community support and treatment service (CSTS) department, which provides mental health and substance abuse services to county residents. The work is primarily funded by the Washtenaw Community Health Organization, a partnership between the county and the University of Michigan Health System. Most of the new jobs are union positions. Dan Smith expressed concern about adding to the county’s payroll, but supported the resolution along with other commissioners in a unanimous vote.

The board also took an initial vote to dissolve The Washtenaw Ride. That Act 196 authority is a remnant of a failed attempt to create a countywide transit system last year. Efforts to expand the current reach of the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority are still underway, but don’t require the structure that was put in place under Act 196.

The topic of public transportation was raised later in the meeting as well, as Ronnie Peterson (D-District 6) asked about the county’s role in the southeast regional transit authority (RTA). The RTA was formed by the state legislature last year to coordinate regional transit in the city of Detroit and counties of Wayne, Macomb, Oakland and Washtenaw. There was not uniform support for Washtenaw County to be part of this effort, and it’s not yet clear what the impact will be on the AATA.

In other discussion, Yousef Rabhi (D-District 8) highlighted a proposal in front of the Ann Arbor city council regarding possible ordinance changes governing the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority. Depending on what the council decides, there might be implications for the county, he said, so he wanted to put it on the board’s radar. For background on this issue, see Chronicle coverage: “DDA Tax Capture Change Gets Initial OK” and “DDA Ramps Up PR after First Council Vote.”

Also briefly mentioned was a discussion that occurred at a late March county pension commission meeting, raising questions about the new labor contracts that the board approved on March 20, 2013. At issue is whether the county complied with a state law requiring supplemental actuarial analysis before pension benefit changes are adopted. The county administration subsequently conferred with outside legal counsel, and confirmed their view that no new actuarial analysis was necessary.

And although it wasn’t discussed at the April 3 board meeting, the recent labor contracts resulted in another issue related to compliance with state law: Elimination of the county’s healthcare benefits for domestic partners.

When the county’s previous labor contracts were opened for renegotiation, that triggered the need to comply with a state law passed in late 2011. PA 297 restricts public entities from offering domestic partner benefits. For the county, those benefits had been offered to “other eligible adults” who met certain criteria, like sharing the same residence. Nine county employees had been using those benefits, according to Diane Heidt, the county’s human resources and labor relations director. The benefits were eliminated as of April 1.

Heidt noted that even if the contracts hadn’t been renegotiated in March, the benefits would have eventually been eliminated when the previous contracts expired at the end of 2013. She said the administration was very disappointed about the change, and continues to explore other options that serve the employees while complying with state law.

2012 Finance, Audit Reports

The main action of the April 3 meeting related to the county’s financials, including a report from the auditor, Mark Kettner of the accounting firm Rehmann. Chronicle readers will likely recognize his name, as Kettner oversees audits for several local government entities, including the city of Ann Arbor.

Part of the financial presentation included an award to the county. As she has for the past several years, Carla Sledge – Wayne County’s chief financial officer and past president of the Government Finance Officers Association – presented the county with a certificate of achievement for excellence in financial reporting for its fiscal year ending December 2011. The award is based on the county’s timely completion of its state-mandated comprehensive annual financial report, or CAFR. This is the 22nd year that Washtenaw County has received a certificate of achievement.

Pete Collinson of the county’s finance department also gave a brief presentation with highlights from the current set of reports. The financial reports presented to the board are:

• Washtenaw County Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) for the year ended Dec. 31, 2012.
• Washtenaw County single audit of federal awards for the year ended Dec. 31, 2012.
• Washtenaw County Building Authority financial statements for the year ended Dec. 31, 2012.
• Washtenaw County Department of Public Works projects financial statements for the year ended Dec. 31, 2012.
• Washtenaw County Water Resources Commissioner financial statements for the year ended Dec. 31, 2012.
• Washtenaw County Employees Retirement System (WCERS) financial statements for the years ended Dec. 31, 2011 and Dec. 31, 2012.
• Washtenaw County Money Purchase Pension Plan (MPPP) financial statements for the years ended Dec. 31, 2011 and Dec. 31, 2012.
• Washtenaw County Voluntary Employees Beneficiary Association (VEBA) financial statements for the years ended Dec. 31, 2011 and Dec. 31, 2012.
• Washtenaw County Community Support & Treatment Services (CSTS) financial statements for the year ended Sept. 30, 2012.
• Washtenaw County Employment Training and Community Services Fund (ETCS) financial statements for the year ended Dec. 31, 2012 (conducted by the accounting firm of Stewart, Beauvais & Whipple).
• Washtenaw County Employment Training and Community Services Fund (ETCS) single audit of federal awards for the year ended Dec. 31, 2012 (conducted by the accounting firm of Stewart, Beauvais & Whipple).

Collinson described the process of fiscal review leading up to the audit. Auditors arrive in January and stay for about five weeks, then work with county staff for an additional period to finalize the financial statements. The goal is to make a presentation to the board by the first meeting in April, he said. He joked that an audit “certainly isn’t something we’d choose to do” every year. An annual audit is mandated by the Michigan Uniform Budgeting and Accounting Act (PA 2 of 1968), which requires it for local units of government with a population of 4,000 or more residents.

There are two components to the audit, Collinson explained: (1) an audit of financial statements for all of the county’s funds, including assets, liabilities, revenues and expenditures; and (2) a “single audit” of all federal grants, to see if the county complied with federal requirements attached to those grants. Last year, he noted, the county received about $28 million in federal grants, “so it’s a significant part of our operation.”

The 206-page CAFR is the main document that’s produced as a result of the audit, Collinson said. He noted that the auditor has given the county a clean opinion.

He also highlighted the different sections of the CAFR. For example, a statistical section provides a range of trend data, including employee count, expenditures, revenues and other financial information. “It’s a helpful section to look at the trends over time,” he said. [.pdf of CAFR statistical section]

Collinson said he wouldn’t spend a lot of time on the general fund report, noting that the board had received a detailed update on 2012 year-end finances at its March 20, 2013 meeting. The general fund ended 2012 with a $2.3 million surplus, and a fund balance of $16.8 million – or 16.8% of annual general fund expenditures and appropriations. He characterized that position as very good, and in line with the minimum fund balance recommended by the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA). It would be good to build on that, he added, but it was impressive to finally reach the minimum. “I didn’t think we’d get there in my years here,” he said.

From left: Commissioner Felicia Brabec (D-District 4) and county administrator Verna McDaniel.

Turning to the report on all of the county’s fund balances, Collinson noted that some funds are restricted and can only be spent for a limited range of purposes. All county fund balances totaled $102.275 million at the end of 2012. Of that, $31.989 million was unobligated. [.pdf of schedule of fund balances as of Dec. 31, 2012]

He also mentioned the CAFR’s schedule of long-term liabilities over the last five years. Primarily, those liabilities are debt – such as debt related to construction projects – and actuarial liabilities for the pension and retirement healthcare systems. [.pdf of long-term liabilities] The schedule of long-term liabilities shows that total liabilities have increased from $393.9 million at the end of 2008 to $446.6 million as of Dec. 31, 2012.

Collinson also highlighted the county’s state revenue-sharing reserve fund, which had a balance of $4 million at the end of 2012. That remaining amount will be spent in 2013, and the fund will “sunset,” he said. The state has reinstated revenue-sharing at a lower level, with the county getting about $2.8 million for the current year. That amount is expected to increase, he said.

New to the CAFR this year are changes that reflect the county’s implementation of Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) statements 63 and 65. Certain items that were previously classified as assets are now called “deferred inflows.” And certain liabilities are now called “deferred outflows of resources.” In addition, the balance sheet (statement of net assets) is now called the statement of “net position.” Collinson joked that if he read the definition of these terms, it wouldn’t clarify things. He noted that the terms “assets” and “liabilities” have worked well for centuries, but GASB has decided to change the terminology. He characterized these changes as minor, though he noted that “bigger changes are coming down the pike.” [The reference was to implementation of GASB 67 and 68, which was discussed later in the meeting.]

Collinson reported that despite the economy, the county has maintained its AA+ bond rating with Standard & Poor’s, and an Aa2 rating with Moody’s. It’s the second-highest rating possible, he noted. The county administration hopes to secure the triple-A bond rating in the future.

Collinson concluded by introducing Mark Kettner from the accounting firm Rehmann, who reviewed the 2012 audit and answered questions from commissioners.

Kettner noted that the current report was “unmodified” – a new term that’s being used instead of the previous “unqualified.” Both mean that the audit was clean, which is the highest level of assurance for financial statements. He cautioned that “the auditor did not say that everything is OK.” That is, it’s not an opinion on internal controls or the county’s financial position. It’s an opinion that the financial statements are fairly presented in accordance with criteria that meet GASB principles, he said.

Kettner also highlighted some terminology changes that result from GASB’s new “clarity” standards. Like Collinson, he characterized the changes as subtle, adding that it created some “nuisance work” compared to previous statements.

Bigger changes are coming, however. About a month ago, Kettner said he met with county administration and board leadership to talk about the current report as well as upcoming GASB standards 67 and 68. It would take hours to explain, he said, but he summarized it as a very big change dealing with pension plans and retirement healthcare. It will require an extra actuarial report, more disclosure, and recording of liabilities in a different way.

He pointed to the current pension fund statement – on page 115 of the CAFR – and noted that the current unfunded actuarial liability of $101 million will be recorded in 2015 as a liability on the county’s governmental-wide financial statements. That won’t have as great an impact as it would if it were required to be booked as a general fund liability, he said. [.pdf of CAFR statement regarding pension fund] “It’s going to be a big pop into the financial statements,” he said.

Two years later, in 2017, the same thing will occur for retiree healthcare – the county’s Voluntary Employees’ Beneficiary Association (VEBA), a 501(c)9 trust established to pre‐fund retiree healthcare benefits. Kettner said the county will be booking that liability – now at about $148 million – on the governmental-wide financial statements. [.pdf of CAFR statement regarding VEBA]

There’s lots of lead time, Kettner said, but he suggested that the board hold a working session, and perhaps include the boards of VEBA and WCERS, to talk in more detail about what this transition will entail.

Kettner praised the county for completing its audit by the end of the first quarter, saying it’s as good as any publicly traded Fortune 100 or 500 company.

2012 Finance, Audit Reports: Board Discussion

Dan Smith (R-District 2) asked if there’s anything preventing the county from implementing GASB 67 and 68 standards sooner than required. There’s nothing to prevent that, Kettner replied, but “I don’t know why you’d want to do it.”

Smith said he’d like to do it in order to get a clearer understanding of the county’s financial picture, because the county will be forced to do it eventually. Kettner likened it to going to the dentist to get a root canal, and being offered the choice of doing it tomorrow or next week – you might want to put it off.

From left: Mark Kettner with the auditing firm Rehmann talks with Curt Hedger, the county’s corporation counsel.

The information about these liabilities is already provided in the CAFR, Kettner noted. The amount might change – either up or down – because different assumptions will be used under the new GASB reporting standards. The county will need to get a new actuarial report that uses a different set of assumptions. But he indicated that those changes likely won’t be dramatic. The main difference will be a greater amount of disclosures, and a booking of the liabilities under the governmental funds.

Kettner added that the county couldn’t implement the changes until it gets the necessary information from the Municipal Employees’ Retirement System of Michigan, a statewide system. Although only a small subset of county employees are enrolled in MERS, that pension system still must be included in the county’s audit. He described it as a “triple whammy” for Washtenaw County, because the county will be required to include information for all three systems: MERS, WCERS and VEBA.

For MERS, the county will have to include information related to the entire MERS system, not just for the small piece of it that relates to county employees. So under the new standards, the county’s financial statements will need to include a listing of all MERS investments and the rate of return for those investments. Then, the county’s financial staff will have to calculate the county’s “slice” of those investments as part of their report. “So it’s going to be rather complicated, and I don’t expect that you’ll have MERS ahead of time,” Kettner said.

Kettner also questioned whether the actuaries hired by the county are prepared to handle this additional workload yet. “I hear what you’re saying,” he told Smith regarding an early implementation, “but I would really advise against doing it.”

Smith noted that if the liabilities are currently on the county’s balance sheet – what’s now called its statement of net position – then the net position would be negative. It would make the statement look significantly different, he said.

That’s true, Kettner replied, but the rating agencies – Standard & Poor’s and Moody’s – are well aware of this information, and they know that actuarial information is based on an educated guess. In addition, it won’t be as big of a hit to the county as it will to the city of Ann Arbor, Kettner said. For a city that has a higher number of enterprise funds – like water, sewer and other utilities – the pension and retirement healthcare liabilities will have to be allocated to those funds. “All of a sudden those funds are going to get significant charges, and it could push them into a fund deficit,” Kettner explained.

The minor impact could be a requirement from the state to do a deficit elimination plan. But there’s potential for greater impact: If those enterprise funds have revenue bonds that are still being paid off, there might be covenants in those bonds stating that the funds can’t operate with a deficit. If that’s the case, Kettner said, then the city would need to figure out how to address it, which might entail rate increases. “That’s not going to go over very well,” he said.

The changes will hit governmental entities differently, he said. For the county, it will hit them in the governmental funds, “and to be honest with you, some people don’t even pay attention to those. Rating agencies are more concerned about your general fund, and any significant proprietary [enterprise] funds.”

Continuing his questions, Smith then highlighted a sentence from the CAFR, included in the notes on the pension system. He read it aloud, and asked Kettner to clarify. That sentence states: “However, for purposes of calculating the annual required contribution (ARC), the System uses the aggregate cost actuarial funding method, which does not identify or separately amortize unfunded actuarial liabilities.” Kettner explained that the county is using a different approach in its calculations to determine an annual required contribution to the pension plan, compared to what’s required as a GASB disclosure.

Smith indicated that he had other questions and comments, but he understood that Kettner’s scope was limited to the report of financial statements, not to the actual financial condition of the county.

Commissioner Kent Martinez-Kratz (D-District 1).

Andy LaBarre (D-District 7) asked Pete Collinson to elaborate on his remarks about the county’s fund balance.

Collinson noted that for many years, the fund balance was around $4 million, which would barely cover more than a couple of weeks of operating costs, he said. Former county administrator Bob Guenzel had tried to add to it every year, to build the fund balance slowly. In the last couple of years, the growth in the fund balance has been much greater, he said, from about $7 million to the current $16.8 million. [According to data provided in the CAFR, the general fund balance grew from $7.4 million in 2003 to $9.7 million in 2009, then jumped dramatically to $15.3 million in 2010.] Collinson called it a good surprise to reach that amount.

Yousef Rabhi (D-District 8) called the CAFR interesting, but noted that “the weeds can get tall pretty quick.” He was glad the county has a staff that’s “able to wade through those weeds” and provide answers to questions that commissioners might have. The work that the staff does is very valuable, he said.

Later in the meeting, Dan Smith made some additional comments on the CAFR, reflecting more on the county’s financial condition. He praised the staff, saying that even though many people were involved, the documents were unified with a consistent style that made it seem as though the same person wrote it.

Smith highlighted page 178 of the CAFR, with a chart comparing the county’s principle taxpayers in 2003 through 2012. [.pdf of Washtenaw County's top taxpayers] The county has a much broader tax base now than in 2003, he noted. Nine years ago, the top 16 taxpayers made up 9.89% of the county’s tax base. Now, that percentage is down to 6.88%. In 2003, several taxpayers represented more than 1% of the tax base. In 2012, no taxpayers are paying more than 1% of the county’s tax base. “I think that bodes well for the long-term future of the county,” Smith said.

The county’s top five taxpayers in 2003 were Pfizer, Visteon, General Motors, Detroit Edison and MichCon. By 2012, three of those – Pfizer, Visteon and General Motors – were not even in the top 16. The top five taxpayers in 2012 were Detroit Edison, McKinley Associates, Toyota, MichCon and Ford.

On pages 184-185, Smith pointed to a list showing the total debt across the entire county, including school districts, libraries, municipalities and other government entities. [.pdf of direct and overlapping debt table] The debt totals about $1.3 billion. If you divide that amount by the number of county residents, it works out to just $3,773 per person, Smith noted. If it was divided by parcels or taxpayers, that number would go significantly higher, he added. [Debt-per-capita is a factor weighed by bond rating agencies.]

Smith also highlighted page 23 of the audit for the office of the water resources commissioner. The office uses a straight-line amortization schedule of 50 years for its infrastructure. He noted that some of the county drains are well beyond that age, so there’s a building infrastructure deficit. It’s already clear that there are problems with roads, he said, and some of the county’s drains will likely start to collapse and fail as well. He pointed to a situation in Superior Township last year where a drain had not been maintained and it slowly sedimentized. The 50-year amortization schedule roughly equates to the lifespan of the county’s drainage infrastructure, Smith noted.

In wrapping up the discussion of financial reports, county administrator Verna McDaniel thanked the staff for their work. She thanked Dan Smith as well “for appreciating the CAFR to the extent that he does.” She joked that because she knew he would read the CAFR closely, “I read this darn thing front-to-cover myself.”

Outcome: This was not a voting item.

Jobs for Mental Health Services

A resolution was on the April 3 agenda to create 39 new jobs and reclassify 76 others for Washtenaw County’s community support and treatment service (CSTS) department.

CSTS is a county department employing about 300 people, but it receives most of its funding from the Washtenaw Community Health Organization, a partnership between the county and the University of Michigan Health System. The WCHO is an entity that receives state and federal funding to provide services for people with serious mental illness, developmental disabilities and substance abuse disorders. WCHO contracts for services through CSTS. Although staffing has remained fairly constant in the last five years, demand for services has increased by about 40%. These jobs are being created to provide the capacity to meet that demand.

The new jobs include client service managers, support coordinators, mental health professionals, mental health nurses, management analysts, administrators and a staff psychiatrist. All of the reclassified positions are client service managers. Of the 39 new positions, 30 of them are union jobs, represented by AFSCME.

According to a staff memo, the changes will add $14,255,535 to the CSTS 2012-2013 budget, bringing the budget total to $41,822,489. Of that, WCHO is providing $38,692,815, including revenues from grant pass-throughs. Other revenues include $165,190 from the Haarer bequest and $246,846 from a contract with the Washtenaw County sheriff’s office.

Jobs for Mental Health Services: Board Discussion

Yousef Rabhi (D-District 8) said he supported the move. There’s a lot of need that often goes unmet in other communities, but the county rises up to the challenge, he said. CSTS has been seeing more customers, even though its staffing level has been relatively flat, he said.

The need for more staff is crucial, Rabhi said, because it means better service for people in the community. It will also mean a net increase in union jobs, he noted, which he said he is very supportive of. He also praised the fact that some of the people who have been doing these jobs on a temporary basis will now have permanent, full-time positions. “And as a temporary employee, I can tell you that being a temporary employee is no fun.” [Rabhi works for the city of Ann Arbor's natural area preservation (NAP) program.]

From left: County commissioners Yousef Rabhi (D-District 8) and Andy LaBarre (D-District 7). Both represent districts in Ann Arbor.

Even in the face of shrinking government, Rabhi said, this proves that government is still relevant and necessary for this kind of service, because there is no private market to provide it. “We need to be there for those folks,” he said.

Felicia Brabec (D-District 4) said she wanted to echo Rabhi’s comments. It’s an important move for mental health stability in the community, for residents as well as workers. She asked for an explanation of where the money to fund these positions is coming from.

Tim Florence, CSTS medical director, reported that WCHO is the funder for these kinds of mental health services, and CSTS is the service provider. No county general fund dollars are being used.

Ronnie Peterson (D-District 6) wondered if the additional staff would be serving a specific geographical region. He said he’s interested in “providing services where services are needed.” Florence replied that WCHO/CSTS are responsible for providing all medically necessary services for county residents on Medicaid. Recently there has been a push to engage in more outreach, he said, especially in areas where there might be opportunities to expand services. Those areas include the 48197 and 48198 zip codes, he said. [That's a reference to the Ypsilanti area, which is part of Peterson's district.] But the services are provided to anyone in the county, he added, regardless of location.

Andy LaBarre (D-District 7) asked Florence to explain the restructuring that occurred in 2002, and wondered if there would be another restructuring locally as part of a broader statewide initiative. It was his understanding that Washtenaw County is being left untouched by a statewide restructuring, “and I think that speaks to our strength in terms of this service provision,” LaBarre said.

Florence explained that the WCHO is the community mental health service provider for this county, going back to the year 2000. The county board and University of Michigan formed this freestanding entity to provide mental health and substance abuse services to people with Medicaid, as well as to the uninsured. In 2002, there was a change made by the state Dept. of Community Health, which provides funding to WCHO. The state created PIHPs – pre-paid inpatient health plans – which basically set up a managed-care structure for these services, Florence said. The WCHO became the PIHP for Washtenaw County, as well as for other surrounding counties. The WCHO contracted with CSTS, which actually provided the services.

Now, the WCHO is trying to ensure that CSTS has the tools it needs – including administrative resources – to deliver these services, Florence said. There are some functions previously provided by WCHO that will move over to CSTS, he explained. Regarding the broader statewide restructuring, the number of PIHPs has decreased, he said, but Washtenaw County has been untouched by that change. He felt the county could help inform the state about ways to integrate mental and physical healthcare, which he called a wave of the future.

Florence noted that CSTS is serving about 40% more people today than it was 5 years ago, but staffing hasn’t increased.

Dan Smith (R-District 2) expressed concern about adding to the county’s employee base. The county isn’t close to being out of the woods financially, he said, and in the not-too-distant future there will be about $250 million impacting the county’s bottom line. [The reference was to an upcoming change in how pension and retirement healthcare liabilities will be accounted for on the county's financial statements.]

The current budget is based on continued declines in tax revenues, he noted. With the additional CSTS jobs, plus the two jobs added in information technology and water resources [on a vote taken at the same April 3 meeting], the total county headcount will reach about 1,375. That will be the highest headcount since 2008, he said. The county could be faced with the “unsavory” prospect of letting people go, he said, which no one wants. He also noted that the employees with union positions could have various bumping rights. [A “bump” is a union term referring to reassignment based on seniority.]

“I’ll be supporting this,” Smith concluded, “but I am still very, very cautious and leery about increasing the county’s headcount at this time.”

Peterson pointed out that the funding is revenue-driven, coming from dollars that are outside of the general fund. Public health services have avenues for resources that haven’t been available before, he said. These are long-term dollars from outside the general fund, Peterson added, and that’s why he’s supporting it.

However, Peterson also noted that he had in previous years raised concerns about the creation of the WCHO. He said he’s an advocate of mental health services, but he believes only one entity should be responsible for the delivery of services. The costs should be directly related to delivering services, not for administrative overhead, he said. “There are two separate entities here,” he said. “I won’t get into how much these two separate entities cost, because I don’t want to put somebody on the spot.”

Florence explained that all services provided by CSTS are those delegated to it by the WCHO. To date, there were a limited number of services that hadn’t been delegated, however, including “front door” services like intake and assessments, as well as crisis care and 24/7 phone access. Those services will now be transferred to CSTS, he said. Peterson replied that he was glad to hear it.

Outcome: Commissioners unanimously gave initial approval to the creation and reclassification of CSTS jobs. Commissioners Alicia Ping, Rolland Sizemore Jr. and Conan Smith were absent. A final vote is expected on April 17.

New Jobs in IT, Water Resources

Final authorization to create two new jobs – in IT support and water resources – was on the April 3 agenda. The items had received initial approval on March 20, 2013.

The water resource specialist will work in the county’s office of the water resources commissioner, Evan Pratt. The job is authorized at a salary range between $30,515 to $40,253. According to a staff memo, the position is needed due to heavy drain construction activity and an increase in soil erosion application inspections. The job is described as a revenue-generating position, bringing in an estimated additional $41,337 in each of the first three years, and a minimum of $15,000 annually after that. The staff memo indicates that the office has identified reductions within its budget to offset the increased cost of the position.

Pratt had attended the March 20 meeting and told commissioners that the construction activity is primarily in the city of Ann Arbor, which is paying for the work. He had described the change as “budget neutral,” saying this was the most cost-effective way to proceed, by shifting some responsibilities elsewhere within his office.

The IT system support technician was authorized at a salary range between $37,464 to $52,355. According to a staff memo, the new position is needed to provide back-up for the IT help desk and other staff support. It will be funded from IT contracts and a structural reduction of $32,647 in the tech plan appropriation.

Outcome: The creation of two jobs in IT and water resources won unanimous final approval, without discussion. Three commissioners – Alicia Ping, Rolland Sizemore Jr. and Conan Smith – were absent.

Public Transit: Dissolving The Washtenaw Ride

Taking a step officially to end an effort that stalled last year, commissioners were asked to give initial approval to dissolve a countywide public transit authority known as the Washtenaw Ride.

The Act 196 authority, created in mid-2012 and spearheaded by the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority, never gained traction and was for all practical purposes ended late last year when the Ann Arbor city council voted to opt out of the transit authority at its Nov. 8, 2012 meeting. Of the 28 municipalities in Washtenaw County, the city of Ypsilanti is the only one that hasn’t opted out.

Commissioner Dan Smith (R-District 2).

The April 3 resolution was similar to one that county commissioner Dan Smith (R-District 2) had considered bringing forward in November of 2012, though he decided not to pursue dissolution at that time. [See Chronicle coverage: "End of Road for County Transit Effort?"] The April 3 resolution would rescind the board resolutions that created the transit authority, and request that the state legislature also take action to dissolve the Washtenaw Ride, in accordance with Attorney General Opinion #7003. That AG opinion stated that “the dissolution of a transportation authority organized under the Public Transportation Authority Act requires an act of the Legislature and may not be accomplished by the unilateral action of the city in which it was established.” [.pdf of AG opinion 7003]

The county’s role in creating the transit entity had been laid out in a four-party agreement with Ann Arbor, Ypsilanti and the AATA, which commissioners approved on Aug. 1, 2012 in a 6-4 vote. Subsequent revisions involving the other entities resulted in the need for a re-vote by the county board, which occurred on Sept. 5, 2012.

There are two other transit efforts now under way. Washtenaw County is part of a southeast Michigan regional transit authority (RTA) created by the state legislature late last year. The RTA was formed to coordinate regional transit in the city of Detroit and counties of Wayne, Macomb, Oakland and Washtenaw.

Separate from the RTA effort, the AATA has been meeting with representatives of the county’s “urban core” communities to discuss possible expanded public transit within a limited area around Ann Arbor. It would be a smaller effort than the previous attempt at countywide service. The AATA hosted a meeting on March 28 to go over details about where improvements or expansion might occur, and how much it might cost. [See Chronicle advance coverage: "Costs, Services Floated for Urban Core Transit."]

Outcome: The initial vote to dissolve The Washtenaw Ride was approved unanimously, without discussion. Three commissioners – Alicia Ping, Rolland Sizemore Jr. and Conan Smith – were absent. A final vote is expected on April 17.

Public Transit: Regional Transit Authority (RTA)

The issue of public transit was also raised later in meeting, during one of the opportunities for communications from commissioners. Ronnie Peterson asked about the regional transit authority (RTA): When was the board going to discuss the county’s role in that effort, or in any alternative approaches to public transit?

Yousef Rabhi replied that he had attended the recent meeting of “urban core” communities, facilitated by the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority. The group – which included representatives from Ann Arbor, Ypsilanti, Ypsilanti Township, Pittsfield Township and other municipalities – talked about how to fund and govern expanded public transit. He noted that the Act 196 authority “did not work out the way most people had hoped, so we’re looking at new ways of funding it.”

Rabhi also hoped the RTA had a role to play, and said he was working with the county’s representatives on the RTA board – Richard Murphy and Liz Gerber – to make sure the opportunities for this county are fully explored under the new RTA structure.

Peterson asked whether the county board needed to take any action, or will there be any discussion about their involvement in the RTA or in any alternative to the RTA? Rabhi replied that the county’s involvement is governed by the state law that created the RTA. At this point, Washtenaw County is part of the RTA and the county board doesn’t need to take any action. The RTA board’s first official meeting is on April 10 in Detroit, he said, although the board met informally last month. Rabhi said he attended that meeting as well, and was the only elected official there from the four-county region and Detroit. Compared to other RTA board members, the Washtenaw County representatives have a lot of background and experience in transit, he said. “They bring a different voice to the table, which I think will be valuable.”

Commissioner Ronnie Peterson (D-District 6). In the background is Andy LaBarre (D-District 7).

The effort is being staffed by SEMCOG and other partners, Rabhi said, and has about $6 million in federal funding. The RTA board is discussing how to build sustainability within the organization and move forward.

Peterson wondered what the impact was on the AATA. It’s debatable, Rabhi replied. “I think the full implications of the legislation have yet to be determined.” He said he was working with the county’s RTA representatives and state legislators “to ensure that AATA is fully protected so that we can continue to have a robust transit system here in Washtenaw County, and potentially expand that transit system to the urban core areas.” The RTA was created to connect regions, Rabhi noted – like how to get from Ann Arbor to Detroit, and from Detroit to Mount Clemens. “But getting from Ann Arbor to Ypsilanti, that’s our task,” he said.

Responding to another query from Peterson, Rabhi said the county’s only obligation to the RTA at this point is to appoint two board members, which happened in December of 2012. [The appointments were made by the county board chair at the time, Conan Smith, and did not require confirmation by the full board.] If the RTA board decides to put a tax proposal on the ballot, or to pursue a vehicle registration fee, then voters of Washtenaw County will have an opportunity to weigh in on that, Rabhi said.

Regarding a possible transit tax to support the RTA’s efforts, Dan Smith said he wanted everyone to be clear about how that would work. If the RTA board decides to put a tax proposal on the ballot, the entire RTA region votes on it as a whole. That area – covering four counties and Detroit – has a population of over 4 million, he noted, although he added that there are fewer registered voters than that. Even so, Washtenaw County is a relatively small piece of that, he said, with a population of about 348,000 residents. So Washtenaw County voters “probably won’t have a whole lot of say-so” in the outcome of a millage vote, he said.

Andy LaBarre noted that in order for the RTA board to put a tax proposal on the ballot, a super-majority of that board would need to approve it. There’s also the option for a single county veto, he said. For example, if both representatives from Washtenaw County voted against putting a tax proposal on the ballot, it wouldn’t move forward. LaBarre hoped all of this information could be clarified at a future working session.

LaBarre, who chairs the board’s working sessions, continued by telling Peterson that the topic of the RTA will be on the agenda for a working session in August or September. By that time, he hoped they would have more information about what the RTA intends to do, so that the county board can talk about more specific roles that Washtenaw County can play.

Peterson said he appreciated Rabhi’s involvement in support of regional transit, but felt it was important to have a discussion about this issue by the full board.

Public Hearing for Urban County Plan

Commissioners were asked to set a public hearing for April 17, 2013 to get input on the Washtenaw Urban County‘s five-year strategic plan through 2018 and its 2013-14 annual plan. The hearing will be held at the county board of commissioners meeting at 6:30 p.m., in the boardroom of the county administration building at 22o N. Main St. in Ann Arbor.

The Urban County is a consortium of Washtenaw County and 18 local municipalities that receive federal funding for low-income neighborhoods. Members include the cities of Ann Arbor, Ypsilanti and Saline, and 15 townships. “Urban County” is a designation of the U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), identifying a county with more than 200,000 people. With that designation, individual governments within the Urban County can become members, entitling them to an allotment of funding through a variety of HUD programs. The Urban County is supported by the staff of Washtenaw County’s office of community & economic development (OCED).

Two HUD programs – the Community Development Block Grant and HOME Investment Partnership – are the primary funding sources for Urban County projects.

Outcome: Authorization to set a public hearing on April 17 won unanimous approval, without discussion.

Communications & Commentary

During the evening there were multiple opportunities for communications from the administration and commissioners, as well as public commentary. Here are some highlights.

Communications & Commentary: Retirement System

During the time set aside for liaision reports, Dan Smith (D-District 2) gave a brief update on the late March meeting of the Washtenaw County Employees Retirement System (WCERS) commission. He noted that the stock market is doing very well, and that has had a positive impact on the balances in the WCERS account. The commission is starting to begin the discussion about doing some explicit inflation hedges, he said. There’s a concern that in a few years, inflation might start to inch up a bit, and at this point there are no explicit hedges against that.

Smith also reported that there had been a discussion about possible PA 728 pension change requirements in the recently approved labor contract.

Smith was alluding to an issue related to the precedent-setting agreements reached in mid-March with 15 of Washtenaw County government’s 17 bargaining units. The new contracts, approved by the board on March 20, aimed to protect unions before Michigan’s right-to-work law took effect on March 28, and cut legacy costs for the county. All but one of the new agreements run for more than 10 years, through Dec. 31, 2023.

The issue raised at the WCERS meeting was whether the process of securing new contracts violated Public Act 728 of 2002. In relevant part, PA 728 states [emphasis added]:

A system shall provide a supplemental actuarial analysis before adoption of pension benefit changes. The supplemental actuarial analysis shall be provided by the system’s actuary and shall include an analysis of the long-term costs associated with any proposed pension benefit change. The supplemental actuarial analysis shall be provided to the board of the particular system and to the decision-making body that will approve the proposed pension benefit change at least 7 days before the proposed pension benefit change is adopted. For purposes of this subsection, “proposed pension benefit change” means a proposal to change the amount of pension benefits received by persons entitled to pension benefits under a system.

The county’s new labor contracts state that employees hired after Jan. 1, 2014 will participate in a defined contribution retirement plan, instead of the current defined benefit plan – the Washtenaw County Employees’ Retirement System (WCERS). In defined benefit plans, retirees receive a set amount per month during their retirement. In defined contribution plans, employers pay a set amount into the retirement plan while a person is employed. The most common defined contribution plan is the 401(k). Similar changes in retiree healthcare plans will also affect new employees.

Although current employees will keep their defined benefit plan, anyone hired before Jan. 1, 2014 – including current employees – will be offered a one-time opportunity to transfer their WCERS employee account to the newly created defined contribution system. That decision must be made within a window between Jan. 1, 2014 and Feb. 28, 2014.

The county did not conduct a supplemental actuarial analysis related to these new contracts. Dan Smith, who cast the lone vote against the contracts, had cited a lack of information about the impact of the changes as one reason why he didn’t feel comfortable supporting the agreements. From The Chronicle’s report of the March 20, 2013 meeting:

A 10-year contract “severely binds future boards and dramatically eliminates the flexibility that they have to respond to situations that may face them seven or eight years down the road.” There are some benefits to that as well, [Dan] Smith noted, but he’s not able to find enough data or information that would make him comfortable with that length of time. It would be different with a two-year contract, which gives the county the chance to respond to changing conditions, he noted. With a 10-years contract and the unknowns surrounding the costs and benefits of the various provisions, “I’m just not comfortable moving forward with that at this time.”

D. Smith also cited concerns about legal questions “that continue to nip away at this.” He wished the legislature would just leave this issue alone, but instead they continue to pick at it “week after week after week.” He didn’t know how it will play out, but “I do know that if we did this contract in the traditional way … we wouldn’thave a bull’s-eye on our back for that.”

Responding to a follow-up query from The Chronicle, county administrator Verna McDaniel stated via email that the county had sought outside legal counsel on the issue. She indicated that the county’s position is: There was no need for an actuarial analysis because no changes were made to the existing pension benefits, and the law does not require an analysis for the new defined contribution system that will be offered to employees hired after Jan. 1, 2014.

Communications & Commentary: Retreat Follow-up

Ronnie Peterson (D-District 6) asked about the follow-up to a board retreat held on March 7. [See Chronicle coverage: "County Board Priorities Emerge at Board Retreat."] He noted that the board has set a course for the next 10 years on one of the budget’s largest components – labor costs. The 10-year contracts are rare in the state, he noted, but now the other budget components must be put in place for the county’s long-term stability. [For background on those labor agreements, see: "New Labor Contracts Key to County Budget"]

Yousef Rabhi (D-District 8) said he has received a report from the retreat’s facilitator, Mary O’Hare, but he hasn’t had a chance to review it yet so he hasn’t sent it to other commissioners. He plans send it out and possibly schedule a presentation on it. Rabhi added that it’s essential to have another retreat and a more focused discussion. That will likely happen in May, he said.

Andy LaBarre (D-District 7), chair of the board’s working sessions, reported that he would send out a revised schedule of upcoming sessions, and asked commissioners to let him know if there were topics they’d like to discuss.

Peterson said he hoped there would be time at the retreat for commissioners to get to know each other and learn about their priorities. Rabhi replied that he’d gotten feedback from a few commissioners, who felt that the last retreat wasn’t focused enough on the board’s priorities. So the format for a second retreat will be different, he said, with more opportunity for commissioners to share their thoughts.

Communications & Commentary: Ann Arbor DDA

Yousef Rabhi (D-District 8), one of the commissioners representing Ann Arbor, told the board that he wanted to make everyone aware of discussions happening at the Ann Arbor city council regarding funding for the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority. The council’s action could have implications for the county, he said, so he wanted to put it on their radar.

Commissioner Kent Martinez-Kratz (D-District 1), whose district covers Chelsea and other parts of the county’s west side, asked Rabhi to elaborate. What might the implications be for the county?

Rabhi said his understanding of the proposal is that the funding mechanism would change so that the DDA would capture fewer tax revenues in its district, and more dollars would come back to the county. The downside, he added, is that there would be less money for the DDA to do their work in downtown Ann Arbor. It’s just something to be aware of, Rabhi said.

For Chronicle coverage related to the proposed Ann Arbor DDA ordinance changes, see: “Planning, DDA: City Council to Set Course?” “DDA Tax Capture Change Gets Initial OK” and “DDA Ramps Up PR after First Council Vote.”

Communications & Commentary: Land Bank

Ronnie Peterson reported that he had asked county administrator Verna McDaniel to be involved directly with the new land bank committee. He’s also asked that she extend an invitation to communities that have been greatly impacted by the economic downturn, with neighborhoods that have seen home values drop – including Ypsilanti, Ypsilanti Township and Superior Township. He has asked that the meetings of the land bank committee be public, so that anyone can attend.

By way of background, at its March 20, 2013 meeting, the board voted to form a committee that will explore the feasibility of creating a land bank. The resolution named three people to the committee: Peterson, county treasurer Catherine McClary, and Mary Jo Callan, director of the county’s office of community & economic development. The committee is directed to report back to the board by Aug. 7, 2013.

A land bank is a mechanism for the county to take temporary ownership of tax- or mortgage-foreclosed land while working to put it back into productive use. “Productive use” could mean several things – such as selling it to a nonprofit like Habitat for Humanity to rehab, or demolishing a blighted structure and turning the land into a community garden.

Communications & Commentary: Waste Knot Awards

Yousef Rabhi highlighted the upcoming annual Waste Knot awards, on Thursday, April 11 from 5-7 p.m. at Weber’s Inn. The Waste Knot program encourages businesses and organizations to increase waste reduction and recycling activities.

Responding to a follow-up query from The Chronicle, Jeff Krcmarik – the county’s environmental supervisor – reported that this year the county is also partnering with the Community Partners for Clean Streams and recognizing the 2012 Environmental Excellence Award winners. The event’s guest speaker will be Josh Bloom, a building contractor who specializes in LEED-certified buildings. Locally, Bloom designed and built the new LaFontaine auto dealership in Dexter.

Communications & Commentary: Thomas Partridge

The only speaker during public commentary was Thomas Partridge, who criticized commissioners for not adopting a comprehensive, people-oriented agenda that focuses on the most vulnerable people in the county, including the disabled, senior citizens, mothers with children, and everyone who suffers from the difficult economic climate. Yet meeting after meeting, commissioners bring county managers and outside contractors, like the auditors, to make presentations, he said, while not sending resolutions to the state legislature calling attention to the waste of requiring annual audits. There are many unmet needs, he said, including needs for affordable housing, and accessible public transportation to that housing.

Present: Felicia Brabec, Andy LaBarre, Kent Martinez-Kratz, Ronnie Peterson, Yousef Rabhi, Dan Smith.

Absent: Alicia Ping, Rolland Sizemore Jr., Conan Smith.

Next regular board meeting: Wednesday, April 17, 2013 at 6:30 p.m. at the county administration building, 220 N. Main St. in Ann Arbor. The ways & means committee meets first, followed immediately by the regular board meeting. [Check Chronicle event listings to confirm date.] (Though the agenda states that the regular board meeting begins at 6:45 p.m., it usually starts much later – times vary depending on what’s on the agenda.) Public commentary is held at the beginning of each meeting, and no advance sign-up is required.

The Chronicle could not survive without regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the Washtenaw County board of commissioners. 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: Conan Smith (D-District 9) and Dan Smith (R-District 2) at the Washtenaw County board of commissioners meeting on March 20. Dan Smith cast the lone vote against new contracts with labor unions representing county employees, citing concerns over the length of the agreements. Most of the contracts run through Dec. 31, 2023. (Photos by the writer.)

About 85% of the nearly 1,300 county workers belong to a union. The board also approved similar wage and benefit changes for the county’s non-union employees.

The right-to-work law will make it illegal to require employees to support unions financially as a condition of their employment, but labor agreements in place prior to March 28 will not be affected until they expire. Most of the previous contracts with the county’s labor unions were set to expire on Dec. 31, 2013. All but one of the new deals will run for more than 10 years – through Dec. 31, 2023.

Dan Smith (R-District 2) cited the length of those contracts as a reason for casting his no vote – he was the only commissioner to vote against the union contracts, though he supported the agreement for non-union employees. The duration eliminates the flexibility to deal with different conditions that might face the county in the future, he said. There is no “re-opener” clause that would allow either side to renegotiate before 2023.

Despite his no vote, Smith praised the most significant changes that will impact employees hired after Jan. 1, 2014. Those employees will participate in a defined contribution retirement plan, instead of the current defined benefit plan – the Washtenaw County Employees’ Retirement System (WCERS). In defined benefit plans, retirees receive a set amount per month during their retirement. In defined contribution plans, employers pay a set amount into the retirement plan while a person is employed. The most common defined contribution plan is the 401(k). Similar changes in retiree healthcare plans will also affect new employees.

The shift in the county’s approach to retirement plans and retiree healthcare was a major concern for several other commissioners. While acknowledging the benefits of eliminating the county’s legacy costs, Conan Smith (D-District 9) cautioned that retirees could be put at risk without the predictable stability of a defined benefit plan. However, he also noted that the board can’t continue to put the institution at risk by “guaranteeing something that we don’t know we’re going to be able to afford in the long run.”

Those legacy costs were a factor alluded to during the March 20 discussion, linking to another major decision that is expected to come before the board: bonding to cover the county’s unfunded liabilities for employee pensions and retiree healthcare. The issue hasn’t been discussed directly at any of the board’s regular meetings, but commissioners have been informed that a proposal likely will be brought forward by administration.

Based on actuarial valuations at the end of 2011, the county had $101.27 million in unfunded liabilities for its defined benefit pension, and $148.46 million in unfunded liabilities for its retiree healthcare. Those amounts will be higher when the 2012 actuarial valuations are completed later this year. The new accounting standards of GASB 68 require that unfunded liabilities must be included in an organization’s financial statements for fiscal years beginning after June 15, 2014.

Commissioners also got a year-end 2012 financial update during the March 20 meeting – the final 2012 audit will be brought to the board in April. Total revenues exceeded total expenditures by $2.26 million. The county had planned for a surplus of $1.889 million to carry into 2013 – so the year ended with an excess of $327,607 above that targeted amount.

In other action items, the board voted to form a committee that will explore the feasibility of creating a land bank, and appointed three people to the committee: Commissioner Ronnie Peterson (D-District 6), county treasurer Catherine McClary, and Mary Jo Callan, director of the county’s office of community & economic development. The committee is directed to report back to the board by Aug. 7, 2013.

During communications from the board, Conan Smith reported that the southeast Michigan Regional Transit Authority board has now been fully appointed, and will convene on March 28 for an orientation meeting. He suggested that the two Washtenaw County representatives – Richard “Murph” Murphy and Liz Gerber – come talk to commissioners about what the county’s interests and priorities are. “The earlier we weigh in, the more systemic the impact of our comments are going to be,” he said. “If we don’t talk to them until they’ve already made decisions, then it’s going to be too late.”

Labor Agreements

The county administration and labor have been negotiating new contracts since February. At the board’s Feb. 20, 2013 meeting, commissioners had approved a resolution opposing the right-to-work legislation, with a clause that directed the county administration to renegotiate union contracts, as requested by union leaders. The resolution stated a “goal of reaching four (4) year agreements to protect and extend each bargaining unit’s union security provisions, as well as enter into a letter of understanding separate from the existing collective bargaining agreements for a period of ten (10) years.”

That was an approach taken by other institutions statewide, including the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority. [See Chronicle coverage: "AATA OKs Labor, Agency Fee Accords"] However, the county administration and union leaders ultimately felt that the strategy of a separate letter of understanding would be more vulnerable to legal challenges. They opted instead for longer-term labor agreements and no separate letter of understanding.

Since mid-February, the board has held four lengthy closed sessions to discuss labor negotiations – including a closed session near the beginning of the March 20 meeting that lasted over an hour. Labor negotiations are one of the few reasons under Michigan’s Open Meetings Act that public governing bodies are allowed to hold sessions out of public view.

Nancy Heine, president of AFSCME Local 3052, talks with Washtenaw County commissioner Rolland Sizemore Jr. Local 3052 – which represents 48 general supervisors and four supervisors in the juvenile division – agreed to a new five-year contract.

The vote to go into closed session was 8-1, with dissent by Rolland Sizemore Jr. (D-District 5), who did not state any reason for his no vote.

The administration and AFSCME Local 2733 had reached a tentative agreement on March 7, which union members ratified on March 13. Other union bargaining units subsequently ratified similar agreements. However, the ratified agreements differed slightly from the version that had been shown to commissioners at their most recent closed session on March 6, so another closed session was held on March 20 to go over those changes.

In broad strokes, the agreements provide for annual wage increases, a cap on employee healthcare contributions, and the elimination of “banked leave” days. Banked leave days have been used in recent years to help balance the budget by cutting labor costs. The days are unpaid, but don’t affect retirement calculations.

Some of the major changes relate to benefits for employees hired after Jan. 1, 2014. Those employees will participate in a defined contribution retirement plan, instead of the current defined benefit plan – the Washtenaw County Employees’ Retirement System (WCERS). In defined benefit plans, retirees receive a set amount per month during their retirement. In defined contribution plans, employers pay a set amount into the retirement plan while a person is employed. The most common defined contribution plan is the 401(k).

In some ways, the change reverts the county to its previous approach. Until about 2009, employees participated in the Money Purchase Pension Plan (MPPP), a defined contribution plan. Most county employees were shifted from the MPPP to WCERS, the county’s defined benefit plan. The MPPP was never eliminated, but is used primarily for county commissioners who choose to participate in it.

The county will also shift away from a defined benefit retiree healthcare plan for new employees, in favor of retiree health reimbursement accounts (RHRAs).

Most details in the contracts match the agreement reached with AFSCME 2733, the county’s largest bargaining unit, with 630 members. Highlights from the AFSCME 2733 agreement include:

• Restoring 3.85% to an employee’s annual salary in 2014 by eliminating banked leave days. In addition, employees will receive a 2% non-structural salary increase.
• In 2015, there will be a 1% salary increase if county property tax revenues do not rise. However, if tax revenues do increase, employees will receive a salary increase of either 2% (if revenues increase by up to 4%) or 3% (if revenues increase by 5% or more).
• Employees will receive 2% salary increases in 2016 and 2017. The 2016 increase will be structural; the increase in 2017 will be non-structural.
• The remaining years through 2023 alternate in this same three-year pattern of (1) formula increases tied to tax revenues, followed by (2) a 2% structural increase and (3) a 2% non-structural increase.
• Current employees will remain in the county’s defined benefit retirement plan, unless they choose to transfer into a defined contribution plan.
• Employees hired after Jan. 1, 2014 will participate in a defined contribution retirement plan, with each employee providing 6% pre-tax contributions that are matched by 6% from the county. Contributions will increase to 7% in 2016 and 2017, and to 7.5% in 2018 through 2023. Vesting for employer contributions will occur over several years, with workers becoming fully vested after 10 years of employment.
• For current employees, their contributions to the Washtenaw County Employees’ Retirement System (WCERS) – the defined benefit plan – will be capped at 10% in 2014 and 2015. That cap will be lowered to 9% in 2016 and 2017, 8.5% in 2018 and 2019, and 8% in 2020 through 2023.
• The county will adopt state-mandated “hard caps” on health care contributions by public employers. Current workers will pay $75 per month in medical premium-sharing.
• Workers hired after Jan. 1, 2014 will have negotiated health care benefits. Their retirement health care will be handled through retiree health reimbursement accounts (RHRAs), with staggered contributions by the county based on years of employment. The current retiree healthcare plan – the Voluntary Employees Beneficiary Association (VEBA) – is a defined benefit plan.

At the March 20 meeting when commissioners returned from their closed session, they took up the issue of the labor agreements. Dan Smith asked to pull out the non-union agreement for a separate vote. The other six contracts were handled as a group.

The bargaining units that struck new deals are:

• AFSCME (American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees) Local 2733 Units A, B, C, Juvenile Division, and Juvenile Detention – a total of 630 employees. [.pdf of AFSCME 2733 contract summary]
• AFSCME Local 3052 General Supervisors and Juvenile Division Supervisors – a total of 52 employees. [.pdf of AFSCME 3052 contract summary]
• Assistant Prosecutors Association Units I & II – a total of 24 employees. [.pdf of APA contract summary]
• Public Defenders Association Units I & II – a total of 13 employees. [.pdf of PDA contract summary]
• Michigan Nurses Association Units I & II – a total of 13 employees. [.pdf of MNA contract summary]
• T-POAM (Technical, Professional and Officeworkers Association of Michigan) Units I & II, District Court – a total of 30 employees. [.pdf of T-POAM contract summary]

A similar agreement was on the table for the county’s roughly 225 non-union employees. [.pdf of non-union agreement]

The resolution for non-union workers also provides the same benefits to the county’s five statutory elected officials: Treasurer (Catherine McClary), clerk/register of deeds (Larry Kestenbaum), water resources commissioner (Evan Pratt), county prosecuting attorney (Brian Mackie) and sheriff (Jerry Clayton). It also “aligns” the salaries for the treasurer and clerk/register of deeds to the current salary of the water resources commissioner – $101,685, effective immediately. Previously, the treasurer and clerk/register of deeds earned $98,570 and $101,528, respectively. The sheriff and prosecuting attorney each earn a salary of $119,268.

All of the new contracts contain only one element that takes effect in 2013: An additional banked leave day will be added, and must be used sometime this year. The intent is to ensure that the new contract differs from the previous one during the rest of 2013, to guard against possible legal challenges. If there were no changes in 2013, it could be argued that there were no real contract differences until 2014 – well after the right-to-work law went into effect.

Two bargaining units did not negotiate new contracts – the Police Officers Association of Michigan (POAM), which represents 254 employees, and Command Officers Association of Michigan (COAM), with 33 members. Those public safety employees are exempt from the right-to-work law.

For background on the county’s unions, see Chronicle coverage: “County Board Briefed on Labor Issues.” Most of the current contracts were authorized in September of 2011.

Labor Agreements: Broader Context

These new agreements will be a factor in the budget that’s being developed for 2014, 2015 and beyond. The county administration is hoping that the board will approve moving from a two-year budget cycle to a four-year budget planning process.

Caryette Fenner, president of AFSCME Local 2733.

The administration has projected a $24.64 million general fund deficit over a four-year period from 2014 through 2017. A much smaller general fund deficit of $3.93 million is projected for 2014, but county administrator Verna McDaniel hopes to identify $6.88 million in structural changes for that year – a combination of new revenues and cuts in expenditures – in order to eliminate the cumulative deficit going forward. When McDaniel briefed commissioners on budget preparations at their Jan. 16, 2013 meeting, she indicated a desire to find $2.62 million in reductions to employee compensation and benefits.

The county also faces a challenge due to its unfunded liabilities related to employee pensions and retirement healthcare. New Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) standards, enacted in 2012, require that public employee pension liabilities be reported on an organization’s balance sheet. Expenses related to pensions and retirement healthcare are projected to spike in the coming years.

Based on actuarial valuations at the end of 2011, the county had $101.27 million in unfunded liabilities for its defined benefit pension, and $148.46 million in unfunded liabilities for its retiree healthcare. Those amounts are expected to be higher when the 2012 actuarial valuations are completed later this year.

The administration plans to propose dealing with those unfunded liabilities by issuing bonds to cover those costs. Although the county would be taking on significantly more debt as a result – and incurring interest expense – the idea is to take advantage of low interest rates and create a “smoothing” of payments over a more extended period.

The board has not directly discussed this possibility at any of its public sessions. John Axe of Axe & Ecklund – a Grosse Pointe Farms firm that serves as the county’s bond counsel – has attended at least one closed session of the board this year, when labor negotiations were discussed.

In response to an email query from The Chronicle, Tina Gavalier – a financial analyst for the county – described how the new contracts and bonding could affect the upcoming budget:

The preliminary estimated cost savings from these deals in terms of the settled contracts and the anticipated bonding for retiree health care and defined benefit pension obligations is approximately $2.1M per year. The savings is likely to increase or compound over time. The estimated cost savings is preliminary because of the basis of calculations used the 2011 actuarial valuation reports. Savings estimates will be finalized after the 2012 actuarial valuation reports are published (anticipated to be in late May or early June).

If the authorization to bond is approved by the Board of Commissioners and bonding is successful, $2.1M of the $2.62M reduction target for employee compensation and benefits will have been met.

The $2.62M was based on the preliminary financial state of the county presented in January. The updated financial state of the county will be presented in May after the equalization report is issued in April. Therefore, reduction targets may be modified based on the updated financial state of the county presentation.

Labor Agreements: Board Discussion

Before the March 20 vote, Conan Smith (D-District 9) began the board discussion by saying the contracts represent “a very, very substantial change in the way the county does business.” He thought it was important for the public to know the details. In large part, the county is moving away from a defined benefit pension system and back into a defined contribution system, he noted. This introduces substantial volatility for county retirees, he said, and does not provide for predictable stability that a defined benefit plan would. He appreciated that county administration has been “keenly sensitive” to the impact of that change.

The fact is that in moving out of a defined benefit plan, C. Smith said, “we are able to eliminate substantive legacy costs for the organization, which will create an enormous opportunity for us to do alternative types of investing to the community’s benefit at large.” It comes at the cost of introducing risk into the retirement system for employees, but after weeks of heavy debate, he said, he felt the county had created the best defined contribution program that they could. “It’s not the thing that I want,” he added, saying he’d prefer that the county keep its pension plan.

County commissioners Conan Smith (D-District 9) and Alicia Ping (R-District 3).

C. Smith said the process of reaching this decision was “interesting, open and thorough.” For years, he said, the county’s approach to labor negotiations has been remarkable in this way. The county was one of the first local governments to institute an interest-based bargaining process, “which was revolutionary,” he said. Smith noted that when county administrator Verna McDaniel was HR director for the county, he had asked her to teach members of the Michigan Suburbs Alliance about this approach. [Smith serves as executive director for the alliance, which is based in Ferndale.] So despite the fact that he’s disappointed about moving out of the defined benefit system, Smith said he’s very supportive of the contracts because he respects the negotiating process that was used.

C. Smith said he hoped the board and administration would be attentive to retiree health care. These new contracts are moving way from a defined benefit approach to retiree healthcare, and using another kind of investment system instead. [Smith was referring to retiree health reimbursement accounts (RHRAs), for employees hired after Jan. 1, 2014.] This is probably the most important thing that the county can do financially, he noted, because they have no control over the volatility of health care costs, which have been skyrocketing. He hoped that national responses to rising health care costs will have an impact, “but we don’t know that.” So the board can’t continue to put the institution at risk by “guaranteeing something that we don’t know we’re going to be able to afford in the long run.”

The proposal to move out of guaranteed retiree health care is dramatic, C. Smith said, and will likely pose significant challenges to employees. Both administration and the board will need to be very attentive in the coming years to ensure that this new system will provide the right kind of security. He said it’s the right move fiscally for the county.

These are big changes, C. Smith concluded. He thanked other commissioners and the administration for “bearing with me through my panic modes.” He described the solution as decent. It’s “imperfect, in my opinion, but quite good – B+.”

Dan Smith (R-District 2) spoke next. As with all contracts and negotiations, you end up with things you like and things you don’t like, he said. In this case, there are some things that he liked a lot. “And then, as these things go, there are things you don’t like so much.” It’s important to look at the entire document as a whole, he said.

The thing that made D. Smith uncomfortable is that most of the contracts are long-term – more than 10 years. “That is very likely longer than the service of most of us sitting around this table,” he said. A 10-year contract “severely binds future boards and dramatically eliminates the flexibility that they have to respond to situations that may face them seven or eight years down the road.” There are some benefits to that as well, Smith noted, but he’s not able to find enough data or information that would make him comfortable with that length of time. It would be different with a two-year contract, which gives the county the chance to respond to changing conditions, he noted. With a 10-years contract and the unknowns surrounding the costs and benefits of the various provisions, “I’m just not comfortable moving forward with that at this time.”

D. Smith also cited concerns about legal questions “that continue to nip away at this.” He wished the legislature would just leave this issue alone, but instead they continue to pick at it “week after week after week.” He didn’t know how it will play out, but “I do know that if we did this contract in the traditional way … we wouldn’t have a bull’s-eye on our back for that.”

D. Smith said he wouldn’t be supporting the union contracts. He appreciated the time and effort that the administration had put in to reach these agreements so quickly. He was very pleased with some of the provisions, and looked forward to seeing how those played out. But 10 years is too long a time to risk taxpayer dollars, he said. He realized there were competing interests – taxpayers, employees, the services that the county provides to citizens – that all have different needs. He realized that the new contracts try to address those needs in various ways, but he wasn’t comfortable with it in its entirety. He concluded by thanking the administration, and saying he was sorry he couldn’t support the contracts.

Andy LaBarre (D-District 7) expressed support for the contracts. The final product included the “varied thinking on this board,” he said. Hearing some of the issues raised by Dan Smith had been “exceedingly helpful,” LaBarre said. The flip side of concerns related to the 10-year length is the stability that these contracts bring – or at least the certainty of knowing the costs and benefits, for both the county and its employees.

Commissioners Felicia Brabec (D-District 4) and Yousef Rabhi (D-District 8).

LaBarre said Conan Smith did a laudable job in acting as a “conscience” on the real-life impact of the county’s workforce. LaBarre also thanked commissioners Felicia Brabec (D-District 4) and Yousef Rabhi (D-District 8) for providing the framework to reach this final contract. [Rabhi serves as board chair; Brabec is chair of the board's ways & means committee.] “It’s an imperfect but very workable solution that I believe is in the long-term best interests of the county,” he concluded, “and most importantly, the long-term best interests of the citizens we serve.”

Rabhi also indicated strong support for the contracts. The process was an example of why unions have been an institution that has worked in this country, he said, and it’s an example of why Washtenaw County’s bargaining process is one to be modeled across the country. Labor and management had only a few weeks to make this happen, he said, and came together with the engagement of the board to work out these contracts. “It’s an amazing accomplishment, and one that we should all be proud of.” He agreed with Conan Smith that there were some features that “can make some of us uncomfortable.” Specifically, Rabhi cited the switch from defined benefit to defined contribution plans. But in the end, the contracts will have a significant impact on the county’s long-term fiscal stability.

The fact that it’s a 10-year contract sounds scary, Rabhi said. But it provides the stability that the county needs to move forward, and the tools to build a healthy and resilient workforce, he said. He applauded the process and all of those who were involved. It had been a challenge, and they all had stepped up to it. He agreed with Conan Smith about the need to be mindful of the long-term resiliency of county employees and fiscal strength in retirement. By helping to provide the tools that employees need to invest, the county can help employees make the right decisions about their retirement plan. That will be a priority for him moving forward.

Rabhi also highlighted the aspect of these contracts that builds in wage increases when property taxes increase. “So when the county is bringing in more money, we’re able to pay our employees more,” he said. It builds in an economic reality and stability, without ignoring the needs of employees to keep up with the cost of living. It will also allow the county to offer competitive salaries, so that they can hire and retain the most excellent staff in Michigan and the country. He concluded by again thanking everyone for their work.

Alicia Ping (R-District 3) noted that she agreed with Conan Smith that the contracts were imperfect, but “for different reasons.” Ultimately, for her it’s about the stability of the entire organization. Without that stability, no individual employee can be secure in their job. There was some give-and-take in the negotiations, and when no one is completely happy, it’s a sign that everybody truly wins, Ping said. The county can now do more structured planning, based on what they know their costs will be. And any employee who comes on board will know what their pay structure will be like, so they can do some planning, too.

The county is eliminating legacy costs by eliminating the defined benefit plan, Ping noted. For her, that’s huge – it’s one of the best things that could happen, along with the changes to retiree health care. “It also gives us options on what we can do with our unfunded liabilities,” she said.

This process got started “because Lansing is meddling again,” Ping said, and that leads to unintended consequences. The contract is lengthy, but she believed it will be an “awesome” benefit to the county. While there are certain aspects that she doesn’t agree with, overall it’s the best thing that could happen for the county and its planning efforts. She thanked both the administration and employees.

Commissioner Ronnie Peterson (D-District 6).

Rolland Sizemore Jr. (D-District 5) cautioned the board against using acronyms. [Some commissioners referred to defined benefit and defined contribution plans as DB and DC, for example.] Noting that the public is watching on TV, he said commissioners should use “real words” and be more down-to-earth so that people can understand what the board is saying.

Ronnie Peterson (D-District 6) told commissioners that he wouldn’t be voting on the contracts for AFSCME Local 2733 or Local 3052, citing a professional relationship he has with the union’s parent organization. [Peterson is the legislative/political director for the Michigan AFSCME area office.] He said he agreed with Conan Smith’s comments, and highlighted the “years of sacrifice” that employees have made. The new contracts are the best that the county has ever negotiated, he said. It’s a “sharing loss,” but employees again are giving up a lot to keep the organization afloat.

The employees do it because they trust the administration and board to do right by them in the years ahead, Peterson said. Employees need to get credit for their help in balancing the budget over the past few years, he said, citing furlough days, wage concessions and other “huge sacrifices.” While most employees in other organizations are now being forced to do that, Washtenaw County employees came to the table years ahead of that to keep the organization afloat and to keep jobs for their colleagues. He wanted to make sure everyone was mindful of their sacrifices, including sacrifices for future employees – some of the union membership will frown on that, he said.

The 10-year term is almost unheard of, he said. It’s not locking them into a commitment that’s too long, he added, but rather it’s locking the county into a road map for the future. If the county does well and tax revenues increase, it’s only right that the employees benefit from that, he said. “They are public service providers,” he said. “They are not public servants who serve for free. They’re entitled to their compensation.”

Kent Martinez-Kratz (D-District 1) spoke briefly, saying he supported the move to the defined contribution system. He noted that the Chelsea city council had made the same decision several years ago when he served as a councilmember. It was overdue, he said. The long-term contract will help stabilize the county, and will give the workers knowledge that their jobs will be stable. It’s a good contract, he said.

Brabec wrapped up the discussion by also expressing her support. It’s been an open and transparent process, she said, that was done with great care “under some trying and difficult circumstances.” It will allow the county to address long-term liabilities and fiscal stability, and allow for a stronger county organization and a stronger workforce to serve residents. She thanked administration and labor for their work. It’s not perfect, she concluded, “but it’s the best imperfect.”

Outcome: The vote on contracts for AFSCME Local 2733 and AFSCME Local 3052 was 7-1, with Dan Smith dissenting and Ronnie Peterson abstaining. Commissioners unanimously approved the agreement with non-union employees. The vote was 8-1 on all other union contracts, with Dan Smith casting the lone vote of dissent.

2012 Financial Update

County administrator Verna McDaniel introduced finance analyst Tina Gavalier to give commissioners a 2012 year-end report, saying “I think you’ll be pleased.” Most recently, the board had received a financial update at their Jan. 16, 2013 meeting, to lay a foundation for setting the 2013-2014 budget.

From left: Finance analyst Tina Gavalier and Washtenaw County administrator Verna McDaniel.

Gavalier reported that the 2012 audit is wrapping up, and will be presented to the board at its April 3 meeting. So she characterized her presentation as preliminary, with the possibility of final “tweakings” before the audit is completed.

She told commissioners that she’d start with the good news: The county saw a $540,000 surplus in property tax revenues compared to what had originally been projected in the 2012 budget. Of that, about $111,000 is due to the timing of property tax collections, including $104,000 from Ann Arbor Township’s 2011 Huron Clinton Metro Authority millage, which was collected in 2012.

Other revenue surpluses include $536,000 more than budgeted from the county clerk/register of deeds office, related to real estate transfer taxes and fees, as well as services from e-commerce. In the “transfers in” category, a surplus of $506,000 related to closing out some non-general funds, Gavalier said, and transferring those into the general fund. And a $167,000 surplus from state revenue-sharing was due to payments under the 2012 incentive program.

In total, general fund year-end revenue surpluses reached about $1.7 million.

Gavalier also noted some revenue shortfalls, including about $687,000 in the sheriff’s office mostly due to delayed implementation of the consolidated dispatch services with the city of Ann Arbor. The district court also recorded a revenue shortfall of $286,000 primarily due to lower-than-expected court fees and fines. New case filings have declined for five straight years, she noted.

Overall, general fund revenue shortfalls totaled about $973,000.

Factoring in both surpluses and shortfalls, 2012 ended with a total general fund revenue surplus of $797,970.

Shifting to the general fund expenditures, a surplus of $1.7 million in fund balance reserves was planned and will be carried forward to use in 2013. There was also a savings of $336,000 in personnel services because of attrition, job vacancies and planned reductions. An additional $309,000 in net operational savings came across all county departments. For example, the trial court exceeded its “lump sum” reduction by $101,000, not counting personnel reductions.

The category of appropriations/transfers out was $731,000 higher than budgeted. Gavalier cited an increase in infrastructure management, and capital investment in technology, building maintenance and renovations.

The total expenditure “surplus” was $1.464 million for 2012 – that is, expenditures were $1.464 million less than budgeted for the year.

Through the end of 2012, total projected revenues of $102.04 million exceed total projected expenditures of $99.78 million by $2.26 million. The county had planned for a total surplus of $1.889 million to carry into 2013 – so the year ended with a surplus of $327,607 above that targeted amount.

2012 Washtenaw County general fund budget variance.

Chart showing 2012 Washtenaw County general fund status.

In 2011, the year-end fund balance was about $14.5 million, compared to a year-end fund balance as of Dec. 31, 2012 of about $16.8 million – or 16.3% of general fund expenditures in the 2013 budget.

Gavalier also reviewed several of the non-general fund outcomes for 2012. There are surpluses in the child care, facilities operations and maintenance, Friend of the Court, public/environmental health, building inspection, and risk management funds. On budget are funds for the prosecuting attorney, veterans relief, and office of community & economic development. The fund supported by the county’s Act 88 millage – for economic development and agricultural programs – showed a shortfall. Gavalier said the shortfall was planned, and includes a planned use of $15,000 from the program’s fund balance.

Looking ahead, Gavalier reminded commissioners that they’ll get the 2013 equalization report in April, along with the 2012 audit. The first-quarter 2013 budget update will be delivered in May. Throughout this year, staff will be working on the 2014-2015 budget, which will be presented to the board in September.

2012 Financial Update: Board Discussion

Yousef Rabhi wanted to highlight the shortfall of $687,000 in the sheriff’s office, most of it related to the dispatch consolidation with the city of Ann Arbor. [Rabhi represents one of three Ann Arbor districts on the county board.] It’s an example of a collaborative effort, and in the future it will save taxpayers money, he said – about $500,000 annually for Ann Arbor.

From left: Commissioners Yousef Rabhi, Alicia Ping, Andy LaBarre, and Ronnie Peterson.

The county is working to make regional collaboration a reality, he said, “but it is costing us something.” He wanted people to realize that the county is stepping up to the plate and putting up resources to help that consolidation go forward, because they believe in this approach. He said he didn’t like the shortfall, but wanted to highlight the investment that’s being made for the sake of regionalism.

Rabhi also noted that the county has a fund balance surplus at year’s end, and that’s something to be proud and excited about. But this good news comes on the heels of federal sequestration, which will impact county operations, he said, including employees and services. The budget surplus won’t offset sequestration entirely, he said, but perhaps it helps the county delay that impact a little bit. If the board prioritizes its programs and focuses on outcomes, he added, there’s a way to mitigate the impact of a loss of federal funding.

Rolland Sizemore Jr. said he was glad the county was working with Ann Arbor on dispatch consolidation, “but maybe Ann Arbor can be a little nicer and not charge us rent.” He asked whether the county will charge Ann Arbor rent when the dispatch operation eventually moves to county facilities on Zeeb Road. [Currently, the combined dispatch unit is located in the downtown Ann Arbor fire station No. 1 across from city hall.] Greg Dill, the county’s infrastructure management director, replied that the answer was “to be determined.”

Sizemore also wondered why the county showed a deficit in Act 88 funds. Gavalier reiterated that the 2012 budget for Act 88 funds included a planned use of the Act 88 fund balance.

Conan Smith asked for more details about the appropriations/transfers out, which was $731,000 higher than budgeted. Gavalier replied that because of overall budget reductions, the county has held flat the appropriations for the “1/8th mill fund” – which is used for maintenance projects – and the technology plan. In 2012, there was some extra money available to allocate, so the administration decided to provide more funding for those areas, Gavalier said.

“How does that happen without the board voting on it?” Smith asked. Gavalier replied that it was an administrative decision. County administrator Verna McDaniel elaborated, saying those funds had been “cut short” over the past few years. The plan was to eventually restore funding, she said.

Smith noted that the board had budgeted $1.3 million for the 1/8th mill fund in 2012. So capital construction got a “solid chunk of money” in the budget process, he said. Was McDaniel saying that it was still underfunded?

Gavalier said the 1/8th mill fund and tech plan funding have been flat since 2008 and 2009. Normally, the allocations are based on property tax values, she said, but that hasn’t been the case in recent years. So administration determined that if it were possible to increase the allocation to those funds, “it would help soften that reduction,” she said.

Allowing that he might sound rude, Smith asked where the budgetary authority was to make that appropriation without the board’s approval.

Commissioner Kent Martinez-Kratz (D-District 1).

McDaniel replied that she knew her authority was for line items under $100,000. The decision was made to restore funding to those areas, she said, but the board can make changes if it wants. Smith clarified with McDaniel that the funds aren’t yet spent. Gavalier added that the money has simply been transferred into the fund for future capital needs, and there was no net impact on the budget.

Smith indicated that he understood – the county had more money than it anticipated, “so we had to put it in some fund.” He further clarified that Dill would be discussing how those funds would be used during a working session presentation on March 21. [Dill's recommendations, presented on March 21 as part of the county's "space plan," included demolishing the former juvenile center and redeveloping the vacant Platt Road site, as well as renovating and remodeling several other county facilities.]

Smith said he wanted to draw the board’s attention to the fact that the money in this line item hasn’t yet been spent. The board has discussed other priorities for the organization, he added, and they need to carefully weigh the appropriateness of making an investment in the county physical infrastructure against some of the programmatic cuts that have been made – such as support for nonprofits, or to offset the impact of sequestration.

Andy LaBarre, who chairs the board’s working sessions, noted that in addition to the space plan update, the March 21 working session would include a presentation by Mary Jo Callan, director of the county’s office of community & economic development, about the impact of sequestration. [.pdf of sequestration impact on county departments] [.pdf of sequestration impact on OCED programs]

Outcome: This was not a voting item.

County Land Bank

Commissioners were asked to form a committee that will explore the feasibility of creating a land bank. A resolution on the March 20 agenda also named three people to the committee: Commissioner Ronnie Peterson (D-District 6), county treasurer Catherine McClary, and Mary Jo Callan, director of the county’s office of community & economic development. The committee is directed to report back to the board by Aug. 7, 2013.

A land bank is a mechanism for the county to take temporary ownership of tax- or mortgage-foreclosed land while working to put it back into productive use. “Productive use” could mean several things – such as selling it to a nonprofit like Habitat for Humanity to rehab, or demolishing a blighted structure and turning the land into a community garden.

The board has made attempts in the past to start a land bank, and actually formed one in the summer of 2009. But after commissioners were unable to resolve issues related to governance and funding, they voted to dissolve the land bank in March of 2010. Only three current commissioners were on the board at that time: Ronnie Peterson, Rolland Sizemore Jr. and Conan Smith.

At its Sept. 1, 2010 meeting, the board voted to revive the land bank. However, the board never took the next step of funding it or getting approval from the state.

On March 20 it was current board chair Yousef Rabhi who brought forward the land bank resolution. At the board’s Feb. 20, 2013 meeting, Rabhi had announced his interest in this effort.

For additional background, see Chronicle coverage: “Banking on a Land Bank” (July 8, 2009 board meeting); and discussions during the county board meetings on March 17, 2010, July 7, 2010 and Aug. 4, 2010.

Outcome: Without discussion, commissioners voted to form the land bank exploratory committee.

New Jobs in Water Resources, IT

Two new jobs – in IT support and water resources – were on the March 20 agenda for initial approval.

A new water resource specialist will work in the county’s office of the water resources commissioner, Evan Pratt. The job is authorized at a salary range between $30,515 to $40,253. According to a staff memo, the position is needed due to heavy drain construction activity and an increase in soil erosion application inspections. The job is described as a revenue-generating position, bringing in an estimated additional $41,337 in each of the first three years, and a minimum of $15,000 annually after that. The staff memo indicates that the office has identified reductions within its budget to offset the increased cost of the position.

New Jobs in Water Resources, IT: Board Discussion

Commissioner Dan Smith (R-District 2) expressed hesitation to add to the county’s payroll, but said he understood the need in these cases.

Evan Pratt, Washtenaw County’s water resources commissioner.

Evan Pratt, the county’s water resources commissioner, attended the March 20 meeting and spoke briefly, beginning his remarks by joking: “Long-time listener, first-time caller.” [He was first elected to this position in November of 2012.] Pratt said the construction activity is primarily in the city of Ann Arbor, which is paying for the work and has made at least a three-year commitment. “Existing staff was doing the work, but getting pretty far behind,” he said. He added that he had challenged his staff to figure out a cost-effective way to handle this without hiring part-time staff. The strategy includes shifting some clerical and accounting work to existing front-office staff.

Yousef Rabhi (D-District 8) said he appreciated that Pratt would be hiring a full-time position, rather than using temporary or part-time workers.

Pratt said he wished he didn’t have to come before the board with this request while they were dealing with labor negotiations, and he didn’t want people in the public to think the county was sending a mixed message. Pratt indicated that he was sensitive to Dan Smith’s concerns, but thought this was the most cost-effective way to proceed, by shifting some responsibilities elsewhere within his office. “We see it as budget neutral,” Pratt said.

The IT system support technician was authorized at a salary range between $37,464 to $52,355. According to a staff memo, the new position is needed to provide back-up for the IT help desk and other staff support. It will be funded from IT contracts and a structural reduction of $32,647 in the tech plan appropriation.

Outcome: Both positions received unanimous approval from commissioners in an initial vote at the ways & means committee meeting. The items will be considered for a final vote on April 3.

Public Health Plan

The Washtenaw County public health plan – mandated by the state of Michigan – was on the agenda for a final vote. The board gave initial approval at its meeting on March 6, 2013. [.pdf plan of organization]

State law requires that the county submit a plan of organization every three years to the Michigan Dept. of Public Health. The 103-page document outlines the county health department’s legal responsibilities and authority; the department’s organization, vision, mission and values statement; community partnerships; services, locations and hours of operation; reporting and evaluation procedures; and procedures for approving the county’s health officer and medical director. In Washtenaw County, the health officer is Dick Fleece. Alice Penrose serves as medical director.

Approval of the health plan is part of the state’s accreditation process for public health departments, which was put in place in 2004.

There was no discussion on this item.

Outcome: Commissioners unanimously approved the county’s public health plan.

Water Quality Training Fee

A $75 fee for Washtenaw County’s training course to certify drinking water operators was on the agenda for final approval. The board had given initial approval at its meeting on March 6, 2013.

Entities with drinking water supplies or places that use certain water treatment processes – like factories or schools – are required by the state to have certified operators. Until the end of 2013, the Michigan Dept. of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) reimbursed local health departments that offered these training courses, paying $75 for each certified operator who attended. Those funds will no longer be provided. The Washtenaw County public health department plans to continue offering the courses, but now needs to charge for this service.

The new fee will take effect on April 1, 2013.

Outcome: With no discussion, commissioners gave final approval to set the training course fee at $75.

Communications & Commentary

During the evening there were multiple opportunities for communications from the administration and commissioners, as well as public commentary. Here are some highlights.

Communications & Commentary: Regional Transit Authority

Conan Smith (D-District 9) highlighted the fact that the southeast Michigan Regional Transit Authority board has now been fully appointed, and will convene on March 28 for an orientation meeting. He suggested that the two Washtenaw County representatives – Richard “Murph” Murphy and Liz Gerber – come talk to the board about what the county’s interests and priorities are. “The earlier we weigh in, the more systemic the impact of our comments are going to be,” he said. “If we don’t talk to them until they’ve already made decisions, then it’s going to be too late.”

The city of Detroit and counties of Wayne, Macomb, Oakland and Washtenaw are included in a regional transit authority created by state legislation passed on Dec. 6, 2012.

Rolland Sizemore Jr. (D-District 5) said he’s been getting emails from people in the community who are interested in opting out of the RTA. He wanted to have a working session soon to talk about the RTA, “before we get too far down the tubes, to find out what our options are.”

Smith responded, saying there are no opt-outs allowed for the RTA under state statute. He thought Sizemore might be talking about the countywide effort that “AATA and the locals were trying to put together.” As far as the RTA, legally no one can opt out, he said. Sizemore replied that he still wanted a working session on it.

By way of background, the RTA was created by the legislature in December of 2012 to coordinate regional transit in the city of Detroit and counties of Wayne, Macomb, Oakland and Washtenaw. Conan Smith has been a strong advocate for Washtenaw County’s participation in the RTA. He lobbied the legislature to include Washtenaw County in the RTA, and accelerated the appointment process so that he could make the county’s two appointments to the RTA board before his term as board chair expired at the end of 2012.

However, other local leaders are concerned about the impact of the RTA on the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority, which primarily serves Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti. At a special meeting on Dec. 10, 2012, the Ann Arbor city council unanimously passed a resolution objecting to the inclusion of Washtenaw County in the RTA. There was subsequent lobbying to urge legislators to amend the law so that Washtenaw County would be excluded from the RTA – but that hasn’t happened.

Separately, the AATA has been meeting with representatives of the county’s “urban core” communities to discuss possible expanded public transit within a limited area around Ann Arbor. This follows last year’s derailed effort to build a countywide transit system. The AATA is hosting a meeting on March 28 to go over details about where improvements or expansion might occur, and how much it might cost. [See Chronicle coverage: "Costs, Services Floated for Urban Core Transit."]

Communications & Commentary: Healthy County

Alicia Ping noted that Washtenaw County has been ranked among the healthiest counties in the state. She congratulated the staff for their work.

The annual rankings are published by the University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, looking at counties across the U.S. Dick Fleece, Washtenaw County’s public health officer, told commissioners that there are two categories: (1) health outcomes, based on morbidity and mortality; and (2) health factors, including health behaviors (tobacco use, diet and exercise, alcohol use and sexual activity), access to care and quality of care, social and environmental factors, and physical environment.

Washtenaw County ranked first in Michigan for health factors, Fleece reported, and fifth for health outcomes.

Communications & Commentary: Thomas Partridge

Only one person spoke during public commentary at the meeting. Thomas Partridge told commissioners that it was nearly the eve of Good Friday and Easter, and he wondered what Jesus would advocate if he were here today. Partridge thought Jesus would want everyone to be treated in a kind, respectful manner – despite differences of opinion. Commissioners need to work toward affordable, accessible housing and transportation, among other issues to help the most vulnerable residents of Washtenaw County.

Present: Felicia Brabec, Andy LaBarre, Kent Martinez-Kratz, Ronnie Peterson, Alicia Ping, Yousef Rabhi, Rolland Sizemore Jr., Conan Smith, Dan Smith.

Next regular board meeting: Wednesday, April 3, 2013 at 6:30 p.m. at the county administration building, 220 N. Main St. in Ann Arbor. The ways & means committee meets first, followed immediately by the regular board meeting. [Check Chronicle event listings to confirm date.] (Though the agenda states that the regular board meeting begins at 6:45 p.m., it usually starts much later – times vary depending on what’s on the agenda.) Public commentary is held at the beginning of each meeting, and no advance sign-up is required.

The Chronicle could not survive without regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the Washtenaw County board of commissioners. 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!

Caryette Fenner, president of AFSCME 2733, the county’s largest bargaining unit, at the Washtenaw County board’s March 7, 2013 budget retreat. Her union had reached a tentative agreement with administration earlier that day, which was ratified by union members on March 13 and approved by the county board on March 20.

The majority of contracts run through Dec. 31, 2023 and are the longest-term labor agreements ever authorized by the Washtenaw County government, which employs about 1,300 workers. One of the unions agreed to a shorter-term contract: The contract for AFSCME 3052 lasts five years, through Dec. 31, 2017.

Typically, such agreements last two to five years. About 85% of county workers belong to a union.

In broad strokes, the agreements provide for annual wage increases, a cap on employee healthcare contributions, and the elimination of “banked leave” days. Banked leave days have been used in recent years to help balance the budget by cutting labor costs. The days are unpaid, but don’t affect retirement calculations.

Some of the major changes relate to benefits for employees hired after Jan. 1, 2014. Those employees will participate in a defined contribution retirement plan, compared to the current defined benefit plan – the Washtenaw County Employees’ Retirement System (WCERS). In defined benefit plans, retirees receive a set amount per month during their retirement. In defined contribution plans, employers pay a set amount into the retirement plan while a person is employed. The most common of these defined contribution plans is the 401(k).

Many of the details in the contracts match the agreement reached with AFSCME 2733, the county’s largest bargaining unit, with about 650 members. Highlights from the AFSCME 2733 agreement include:

• Restoring 3.85% to an employee’s annual salary in 2014 by eliminating banked leave days. In addition, employees will receive a 2% non-structural salary increase.
• In 2015, there will be a 1% salary increase if county property tax revenues do not rise. However, if tax revenues do increase, employees will receive a salary increase of either 2% (if revenues increase by up to 4%) or 3% (if revenues increase by 5% or more).
• Employees will receive 2% salary increases in 2016 and 2017. The 2016 increase will be structural; the increase in 2017 will be non-structural.
• The remaining years through 2023 alternate in this same three-year pattern of (1) formula increases tied to tax revenues, followed by (2) a 2% structural increase and (3) a 2% non-structural increase.
• Current employees will remain in the county’s defined benefit retirement plan, unless they choose to transfer into a defined contribution plan.
• Employees hired after Jan. 1, 2014 will participate in a defined contribution retirement plan, with each employee providing 6% pre-tax contributions that are matched by 6% from the county. Contributions will increase to 7% in 2016 and 2017, and to 7.5% in 2018 through 2023. Vesting for employer contributions will occur over several years, with workers becoming fully vested after 10 years of employment.
• For current employees, contributions to the Washtenaw County Employees’ Retirement System (WCERS) – the defined benefit plan – will be capped at 10% in 2014 and 2015. That cap will be lowered to 9% in 2016 and 2017, 8.5% in 2018 and 2019, and 8% in 2020 through 2023.
• The county will adopt state-mandated “hard caps” on health care contributions by public employers. Current workers will pay $75 per month in medical premium-sharing.
• Workers hired after Jan. 1, 2014 will have negotiated health care benefits. Their retirement health care will be handled through retiree health reimbursement accounts (RHRAs), with staggered contributions by the county based on years of employment.

The March 20 vote by commissioners came after about 90 minutes in closed session near the start of the board’s ways & means committee meeting, for the purpose of discussing labor negotiations. The vote to go into closed session was 8-1, with dissent by Rolland Sizemore Jr. (D-District 5), who did not state any reason for his no vote.

It was the fourth consecutive meeting that included a lengthy closed session on this topic, as the administration has been conducting accelerated negotiations with its union to reach a new contract before March 28. That’s the date when Michigan’s right-to-work legislation – enacted late last year – takes effect. The law will make it illegal to require employees to support unions financially as a condition of their employment. Labor agreements in place prior to March 28 will not be affected by the law. Most of the previous contracts with the county’s labor unions were set to expire on Dec. 31, 2013.

At the board’s Feb. 20, 2013 meeting, commissioners had given final approval to a resolution opposing the legislation, with a clause that directed the county administration to renegotiate union contracts. The resolution stated a “goal of reaching four (4) year agreements to protect and extend each bargaining unit’s union security provisions, as well as enter into a letter of understanding separate from the existing collective bargaining agreements for a period of ten (10) years.”

That was an approach taken by other institutions statewide, including the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority. [See Chronicle coverage: "AATA OKs Labor, Agency Fee Accords"] However, the county administration and union leaders ultimately felt that the strategy of a separate letter of understanding would be more vulnerable to legal challenges. They opted instead for a longer-term labor agreement and no separate letter of understanding.

The administration and AFSCME Local 2733 reached a tentative agreement on March 7, which union members ratified on March 13. Other union bargaining units subsequently ratified similar agreements. However, the ratified agreements differed slightly from the version that had been shown to commissioners at their most recent closed session on March 6, so another closed session was held on March 20 to go over those changes.

Commissioner Ronnie Peterson (D-District 6) abstained on voting for two contracts – AFSCME Local 2733 and AFSCME Local 3052 – citing a relationship with the parent organization of these local units. The vote on those two contracts was 7-1, with Dan Smith (R-District 2) dissenting. The vote covering the other four union contracts was 8-1, also with dissent by Dan Smith.

The bargaining units that struck new deals are:

• AFSCME (American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees) Local 2733 Units A, B, C, Juvenile Division, and Juvenile Detention. [.pdf of AFSCME 2733 contract summary]
• AFSCME Local 3052 General Supervisors and Juvenile Division Supervisors. [.pdf of AFSCME 3052 contract summary]
• Assistant Prosecutors Association Units I & II. [.pdf of APA contract summary]
• Public Defenders Association Units I & II. [.pdf of PDA contract summary]
• Michigan Nurses Association Units I & II. [.pdf of MNA contract summary]
• T-POAM (Technical, Professional and Officeworkers Association of Michigan) Units I & II – District Court employees. [.pdf of T-POAM contract summary]

A similar agreement was approved for the county’s non-union employees. [.pdf of non-union agreement] The vote on that agreement was unanimous. The two bargaining units that did not negotiate new contracts – the Police Officers Association of Michigan (POAM) and Command Officers Association of Michigan (COAM) – are exempt from the right-to-work law.

Several commissioners highlighted various aspects of the new contracts, most prominently the shift to a defined contribution system as a way to eliminate legacy costs for future employees. Conan Smith (D-District 9) said he supported the contracts, but expressed disappointment at the move to a defined contribution approach and the impact it would have on employees. Dan Smith objected to the length of the contract, saying it severely constrains future boards and their flexibility to deal with whatever events might occur down the road.

These new agreements will be a factor in the budget that’s being developed for 2014 and 2015. The county administration has projected a $24.64 million general fund deficit over a four-year period from 2014 through 2017. A much smaller general fund deficit of $3.93 million is projected for 2014, but county administrator Verna McDaniel hopes to identify $6.88 million in structural changes for that year – a combination of new revenues and cuts in expenditures – in order to eliminate the cumulative deficit going forward. When McDaniel briefed commissioners on budget preparations at their Jan. 16, 2013 meeting, she indicated a desire to find $2.62 million in reductions to employee compensation and benefits.

For background on the county’s unions, see Chronicle coverage: “County Board Briefed on Labor Issues.” Most of the current contracts were authorized in September of 2011.

This report was filed from the boardroom of the county administration building at 220 N. Main St. in Ann Arbor. More detailed coverage will follow.

The Chronicle relies on regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of local government and civic affairs. 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!

Washtenaw County commissioners Ronnie Peterson (D-District 6) and Yousef Rabhi (D-District 8), who serves as board chair, talk before the board’s March 6, 2013 meeting. (Photos by the writer.)

This was the third consecutive meeting that’s included a lengthy closed session on this topic, as the administration has been conducting accelerated negotiations with its union to reach a new contract before March 27. That’s the date when Michigan’s right-to-work legislation – enacted late last year – takes effect. At the board’s Feb. 20, 2013 meeting, commissioners gave final approval to a resolution opposing the legislation, with a clause that directed the county administration to renegotiate union contracts.

Several union leaders attended the March 6 meeting. However, they did not formally address the board, and left before commissioners ended the closed session.

The board took no action after emerging from the closed session. The new long-term agreements are expected to be brought forward for a vote at the board’s March 20 meeting, and would also need to be ratified by union membership.

A new union contract is likely to have a significant impact on the county’s budget, which will be the focus of a board retreat on Thursday, March 7. Board chair Yousef Rabhi briefed commissioners on the agenda for that retreat. The discussion will focus on six key areas: (1) labor force sustainability/internal equity; (2) environmental impact and mobility in Washtenaw County; (3) economic development; (4) human services/safety net; (5) mandated service provision/resources; and (6) long-term fiscal stability.

Also impacting county operations are automatic sequestration-related federal budget cuts that were activated on March 1. Rabhi read aloud a letter from the U.S. Dept. of Housing & Urban Development, which alerted the county to an anticipated 5% reduction in HUD funding during the current fiscal year for programs supporting low-income housing and emergency assistance to the homeless, among others. The full impact of federal cuts across all county departments – including public health and the office of community & economic development – is not yet known, according to the county’s finance director.

The light agenda on March 6 included three items related to public health: (1) a move toward setting a $75 fee for the county’s training course to certify drinking water operators; (2) giving initial approval to the county public health department’s plan of organization, as mandated by the state of Michigan; and (3) making two appointments to the Washtenaw Community Health Organization (WCHO) board.

Rabhi also reported that the county’s new food policy council, on which he serves, might make a funding request soon to hire a staff member, who would help carry out the council’s work. The council was formed in 2012 to support the local food economy.

Budget Retreat

Yousef Rabhi gave commissioners a brief overview of the agenda for their budget retreat. The session is scheduled for Thursday, March 7 starting at 6 p.m. at the county administration building, 220 N. Main in Ann Arbor. It is open to the public, but will not be recorded for broadcast.

Caryette Fenner, president of AFSCME Local 2733, attended the county board’s March 6 meeting. She leads the largest union representing county employees.

Rabhi said he has invited other county elected officials to attend. The “electeds” include sheriff Jerry Clayton; county prosecuting attorney Brian Mackie; water resources commissioner Evan Pratt; treasurer Catherine McClary; clerk/register of deeds Larry Kestenbaum; and judges of the Washtenaw County Trial Court, including chief judge Donald Shelton.

The retreat will include small group breakouts focused on six broad topics that commissioners had raised during budget preparation discussions earlier this year. Those topics are: (1) labor force sustainability/internal equity; (2) environmental impact and mobility in Washtenaw County; (3) economic development; (4) human services/safety net; (5) mandated service provision/resources; and (6) long-term fiscal stability.

The group will then reconvene to debrief about the breakout work, and identify issues that require more information-gathering. They’ll also begin to set priorities for allocating resources in the 2014-2015 budget, and discuss how to engage citizens in this budget process.

The retreat is expected to last about three hours.

Fees for Water Quality Training

Commissioners were asked to give initial approval to setting a $75 fee for the county’s training course to certify drinking water operators.

Entities with drinking water supplies or places that use certain water treatment processes – like factories or schools – are required by the state to have certified operators. Until the end of 2013, the Michigan Dept. of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) reimbursed local health departments that offered these training courses, paying $75 for each certified operator who attended. Those funds will no longer be provided. The Washtenaw County public health department plans to continue offering the courses, but now needs to charge for this service.

If given final approval, the new fee would take effect on April 1, 2013. A final vote is expected on March 20.

There was no discussion on this item. Dick Fleece, the county’s health officer, attended the meeting but did not formally address the board.

Outcome: Commissioners unanimously gave initial approval to the training fee.

Public Health Plan

On the agenda was a resolution giving initial approval to the county public health department’s plan of organization, as mandated by the state of Michigan. [.pdf plan of organization]

Washtenaw County health officer Dick Fleece and Jennifer Brassow, finance administrator for the public health department.

State law requires that the county submit a plan of organization every three years to the Michigan Department of Public Health. The 103-page document outlines the county health departments legal responsibilities and authority; the department’s organization, vision, mission and values statement; community partnerships; services, locations and hours of operation; reporting and evaluation procedures; and procedures for approving the county’s health officer and medical director. In Washtenaw County, the health officer Dick Fleece, who attended the March 6 meeting. Alice Penrose serves as medical director.

Approval of the health plan is part of the state’s accreditation process for public health departments, which was put in place in 2004.

There was no discussion on this item. A final vote is expected on March 20.

Outcome: Commissioners unanimously voted to give initial approval to the public health plan of organization.

WCHO Appointments

Dennis McDougal and Jeanette Spencer were nominated to serve on the Washtenaw Community Health Organization (WCHO) board for terms ending March 31, 2016.

The Washtenaw Community Health Organization (WCHO) is a partnership between Washtenaw County and the University of Michigan Health System. Each institution appoints six members to the board. The partnership focuses on providing services to children and adults with mental or emotional health disorders, substance abuse problems or developmental disabilities.

The organization is in transition following the sudden death of Patrick Barrie, the former WCHO executive director who died in late 2012. WCHO also recently relocated its offices to the county-owned 705 Zeeb Road building in Scio Township. The group’s offices were previously located at 555 Towner in Ypsilanti.

Yousef Rabhi, the county board’s chair, reported that these were the only two applicants for these positions. There was no other discussion on this item.

Outcome: Commissioners unanimously approved the two WCHO appointments.

Communications & Commentary

During the evening there were multiple opportunities for communications from the administration and commissioners, as well as public commentary. No one spoke during the two opportunities for public commentary. Several Skyline High School students attended the meeting as part of a class assignment, and were asked by commissioners to introduce themselves. They appeared to do so only somewhat reluctantly.

Communications & Commentary: Sequestration

Yousef Rabhi read aloud a letter he’d received this week from the U.S. Dept. of Housing & Urban Development (HUD) regarding the impact of automatic sequestration-related federal budget cuts that were activated on March 1. Based on HUD’s initial analysis, the letter stated that it’s likely the formula funding for HUD programs in fiscal 2013 will be lowered by 5%, “which may affect your workforce and planning for this year, possibly beyond.” Programs that are affected include the community development block grant (CDBG), HOME, housing assistance for persons with AIDS, and emergency grants for the homeless. More details about the cuts will be forthcoming.

Rabhi said that sequestration is obviously having a direct impact on this community. He noted that earlier in the day, he participated in a “welfare simulation” with the Interfaith Council for Peace & Justice, led by the Dispute Resolution Center. He calling it an extremely eye-opening experience, reminding participants how hard it is for people just to get the money they need for food and other basic necessities. Now, as the government is cutting back even more, Rabhi said, “it’s going to get even worse.” He asked commissioners to keep that in mind as they move forward.

Responding to a query from The Chronicle during a break in the meeting, Kelly Belknap – the county’s finance director – said the overall impact of sequestration cuts isn’t yet known. Many county programs receive federal grants, either directly or as pass-through funding from the state. Department heads continue to assess the impact, but haven’t yet received detailed information about the level of cuts. The county’s public health department and the office of community & economic development are among the units that run programs supported by federal funding.

Communications & Commentary: Food Policy Council

Yousef Rabhi gave an update on the county’s food policy council, which had met earlier in the day.

By way of background, the county board had created the council at its March 21, 2012 meeting. Most of its members – including Rabhi – were appointed on June 6, 2012, when the county board also approved the council’s bylaws. [.pdf of food policy council bylaws]

From left: Washtenaw County commissioners Dan Smith (R-District 2) and Kent Martinez-Kratz (D-District 1).

The food council aims to support local “small and mid-sized farmers by fostering policies that encourage local food purchasing and production,” according to a staff memo. Among other activities, the council could also: recommend policy changes at the local, state and national levels; provide a forum for discussing food issues; encourage coordination among different sectors of the local food system; evaluate, educate, and influence policy; and launch or support programs and services that address local food needs.

Other food council members are Bill Alt (faith-based organization); Amanda Edmonds (urban agriculture); Dena Jaffee (food service); Liz Dahl MacGregor (citizen); Nicole Miller (emergency food system); Lindsey Scalera (education); Dayle Wright (health care); Patti Smith (human services); Jenna Bacolor (Washtenaw County public health); Nicole Chardoul (Waste management); Gretchen Hofing (nutrition); Tim Redmond (food manufacturer and distributor); Michaelle Rehmann (economic development); and Kenny Siler (rural agriculture).

At the county board’s March 6 meeting, Rabhi reported that the council is talking about its purpose and vision, and at some point soon will be bringing a proposal to the board for funding to hire someone to support the effort.

Commissioner Ronnie Peterson expressed some concern, indicating that he’d like to discuss this proposal before it’s brought forward as a formal resolution. He wondered what amount would be requested.

Rabhi replied that the council is applying for a grant from the Ann Arbor Area Community Foundation, and the county would be asked to provide matching funds. He said the amount wasn’t yet determined. Peterson clarified with Rabhi that at this point, the county had not allocated any money for the council.

Saying he wasn’t necessarily against it, Peterson wanted to have a broader discussion – possibly at a working session – to develop a process for funding projects that other commissioners might want to bring forward. Rabhi supported that suggestion.

The March 6 county board agenda also included written minutes from the food policy council’s action team meeting on Feb. 12, 2013. [.pdf of food council minutes]

Communications & Commentary: Road Commission

Commissioner Dan Smith highlighted the recent meeting of the Washtenaw County road commission, noting that the meeting minutes were included as part of the March 6 agenda. [.pdf of minutes for Feb. 5, 2013 road commission meeting] He pointed out that the commission had passed an order of determination for the Leland Acres subdivision in Northfield Township, which Smith represents as part of District 2. Owners have petitioned the road commission to repair following roads in the subdivision: Leland Drive, Trudy Lane, Avon Lane, Avon Court, Tipperary Circle, and Glengarry Court.

Smith said the process started about two years ago, and he knew the road commission had already put in a lot of work on this. He thanked the commission, saying that residents were looking forward to getting their roads back in good shape.

Present: Felicia Brabec, Andy LaBarre, Kent Martinez-Kratz, Ronnie Peterson, Alicia Ping, Yousef Rabhi, Rolland Sizemore Jr., Conan Smith, Dan Smith.

Next regular board meeting: Wednesday, March 20, 2013 at 6:30 p.m. at the county administration building, 220 N. Main St. in Ann Arbor. The ways & means committee meets first, followed immediately by the regular board meeting. [Check Chronicle event listings to confirm date.] (Though the agenda states that the regular board meeting begins at 6:45 p.m., it usually starts much later – times vary depending on what’s on the agenda.) Public commentary is held at the beginning of each meeting, and no advance sign-up is required.

The Chronicle could not survive without regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the Washtenaw County board of commissioners. 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!

Diane Heidt, the county’s human resources and labor relations director, talks with Greg Dill, director of infrastructure management. (Photos by the writer.)

The resolution taking a stance against the state law was approved on a 6-2 vote, with dissent from the board’s two Republican commissioners – Dan Smith (District 2) and Alicia Ping (District 3). Felicia Brabec (D-District 4) was absent. Though Smith had stated his objections on Feb. 6, when an initial vote had been taken, there was no discussion on the item at the Feb. 20 meeting.

The resolution directed the administration to negotiate new four-year contracts “to protect and extend each bargaining unit’s union security provisions.” Current contracts with most of the 17 unions representing county employees expire at the end of 2013. New contracts, if completed before the right-to-work law takes effect in March, would not be required to comply with the new law, which makes it illegal to require employees to support unions financially as a condition of their employment.

Negotiations with the unions began earlier this month.

In other action at the Feb. 20 meeting, the board appointed Dan Smith to the Washtenaw County parks & recreation commission – the third county commissioner to be appointed to that 10-member board. Ronnie Peterson (D-District 6) raised concerns about having too many commissioners serve on that entity, noting that Smith was filling a slot designated for the general public.

Yousef Rabhi, who as board chair made the nomination, responded to Peterson’s comments, saying that he and Smith had discussed this issue – because Smith had the same concerns as Peterson. Rabhi assured Peterson that the commission will continue to provide opportunities for citizens to serve, and that the slot filled by Smith would remain designated as one for the general public for future appointments. Five members of the general public currently serve on the parks & rec commission.

In communications to the board, Rabhi noted that he planned to form a task force to explore establishing a county land bank. A land bank is a mechanism for the county to take temporary ownership of tax- or mortgage-foreclosed land while working to put it back into productive use. The board had previously voted to establish a land bank at its Sept. 1, 2010 meeting, but never took the next step of funding it or getting approval from the state. Only three commissioners from that period – Ronnie Peterson, Rolland Sizemore Jr. and Conan Smith – still currently serve on the board.

Among the other items handled at the Feb. 20 meeting included: Resolutions of appreciation for two Chelsea organizations – Purple Rose Theatre and Chelsea Lanes; a final vote to authorize borrowing up to $40 million against the amount of delinquent property taxes in all Washtenaw County jurisdictions; and final approval to add the Detroit Region Aerotropolis board to the list of boards, committees and commissions that are eligible for commissioners to receive stipend payments.

The Feb. 20 meeting was attended by several students, including nursing students from the University of Michigan who were observing the proceedings as part of a psychiatric nursing course.

Right-To-Work Response

Commissioners were asked to give final approval to a resolution opposing Michigan’s new right-to-work legislation, with a clause that directs the county administration to renegotiate union contracts. Initial approval had been given on Feb. 6, with a 6-1 vote. The dissenting vote at that meeting cast by Dan Smith (R-District 2). Absent at that Feb. 6 meeting  were Ronnie Peterson (D-District 6) and Alicia Ping (R-District 3).

In addition to condemning the right-to-work law and urging the state legislature to pass SB 95 and SB 96 – bills that would repeal the law – the resolution also “directs the county administrator and the director of human resources to engage in expedited negotiations, as requested by the unions, with the goal of reaching four (4) year agreements to protect and extend each bargaining unit’s union security provisions, as well as enter into a letter of understanding separate from the existing collective bargaining agreements for a period of ten (10) years.”

This same approach was authorized by the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority’s board at its Jan. 17, 2013 meeting. [See Chronicle coverage: "AATA OKs Labor, Agency Fee Accords"]

The controversial right-to-work law was passed late last year by the Republican-controlled House and Senate, and signed by Republican Gov. Rick Snyder. The law, which takes effect in March, will make it illegal to require employees to support unions financially as a condition of their employment. It’s viewed by Democrats as a way to undercut support for labor organizations that have historically backed the Democratic Party. On the Washtenaw County board of commissioners, seven of the nine commissioners are Democrats.

Unions represent 85% of the 1,321 employees in Washtenaw County government, through 17 different bargaining units. The largest of those units is AFSCME Local 2733.

Several commissioners have been vocal advocates in opposition to the new law. Those views were aired on Jan. 3 with a lengthy discussion of the right-to-work issue. [Chronicle coverage: "County Board Weighs Right-to-Work Response"]

On Feb. 20, Dan Smith (R-District 2) asked that the resolution be pulled out of the consent agenda to be considered separately. There was no discussion on the item, but a separate roll-call vote was taken on it.

Outcome: On a 6-2 vote, the resolution related to right-to-work issues was passed. Dissenting were Dan Smith (R-District 2) and Alicia Ping (R-District 3). Felicia Brabec (D-District 4) was absent.

At its Feb. 6 meeting, when the resolution received initial approval, the board held a closed session that lasted nearly three hours, for the purpose of discussing labor negotiation strategy. On Feb. 20, at the end of their meeting commissioners again met with staff for a closed session on collective bargaining, which lasted about 90 minutes.

Appointments

Appointments to the Washtenaw County parks & recreation commission and the Area Agency on Aging 1B were on the Feb. 20 agenda.

From left: County commissioner Ronnie Peterson (D-District 6) and Bob Tetens, director of Washtenaw County parks & recreation.

Dan Smith, a Republican county commissioner representing District 2, was nominated to the county parks & recreation commission for the remainder of a three-year term, ending Dec. 31, 2014. He had previously served two years on that commission, through Dec. 31, 2012.

He had not been reappointed in the initial round of appointments to WCPARC that were made earlier this year. Other commissioners appointed to WCPARC at the county board’s Jan. 16, 2013 meeting were Conan Smith of Ann Arbor (D-District 9) and Rolland Sizemore Jr. (D-District 5).

In a separate resolution on Feb. 20, Thomas Miree was nominated to the Area Agency on Aging 1B for a two-year term ending Dec. 31, 2014. The resolution noted that Miree had been the only applicant for this position.

Miree had previously been appointed to the AAA 1B in December of 2011, for a two-year term. Pete Simms of the county clerk’s office, who handles the application process for the county board appointments, clarified for The Chronicle that the AAA 1B board had changed its bylaws last year so that terms for its citizen representatives – one from each county in the agency’s geographic region – would have terms ending at the same time, on Dec. 31, 2014. So the agency asked the Washtenaw County board to reappoint Miree for a new two-year term, Simms explained.

Simms said that the position had been reposted as a formality, but that Miree was the only applicant. According to the agency’s website, Miree serves as the AAA 1B board’s vice chair.

Chronicle readers might recognize Miree from previous reports about the city of Ann Arbor’s intent to put a dog park in West Park, across from the New Hope Baptist Church. Miree, a trustee with the church, had spoken during public commentary earlier this year at the city’s park advisory commission as well as at city council, advocating against putting a dog park in that location. The city ultimately decided to look for another spot for a dog park.

Appointments: Board Discussion

The opening on WCPARC was designated for the general public. That concerned commissioner Ronnie Peterson (D-District 6), who spoke at length about the importance of involving citizens on the parks & recreation commission. Peterson said his comments were not a criticism of Dan Smith – characterizing their relationship as a good one. While it’s important to have a liaison between the county board and WCPARC, Peterson cautioned against having too many county commissioners serve on WCPARC. He wanted to ensure that the position remained designated for the general public, even though it would be filled at this point by a county commissioner.

By way of background, this was the membership of the 10-member parks & recreation commission, prior to Dan Smith’s appointment:

• Bob Marans, president (general public)
• Patricia Scribner, vice president (general public)
• Nelson Meade, secretary (general public)
• Jan Anschuetz (general public)
• Janis Bobrin (general public)
• Rolland Sizemore, Jr. (county commissioner)
• Conan Smith (county commissioner)
• Evan Pratt (county water resources commissioner – mandated)
• Fred Veigel (county road commissioner – mandated)
• Vacant (general public)

At the Feb. 20 meeting, Yousef Rabhi, who as board chair made the nomination, responded to Peterson’s comments. Rabhi said that he and Dan Smith had discussed this issue – because Smith had the same concerns as Peterson. Rabhi assured Peterson that the commission will continue to provide opportunities for citizens to serve, and that the slot filled by Smith would remain designated as one for the general public.

Outcome: Commissioners unanimously approved appointing Dan Smith to WCPARC and Thomas Miree to the Area Agency on Aging 1B board.

Changes to Stipend List

At their Feb. 20 meeting, commissioners were asked to give final approval to change the board rules and regulations that they had adopted on Dec. 5, 2012. The amendment, initially approved on Feb. 6, 2013, was to change the list of boards, committees and commissions that are eligible for stipend payments, adding the Detroit Region Aerotropolis board to the list and removing the Southeast Michigan Regional Transit Authority (RTA). The stipend for service on the aerotropolis will be $100.

From left: Curtis Hedger, the county’s corporation counsel, and county board chair Yousef Rabhi (D-District 8).

Commissioner Rolland Sizemore Jr. (D-District 5) had been appointed to serve on the aerotropolis at the county board’s Jan. 16, 2013 meeting. Sizemore’s appointment on Jan. 16 came in the context of the annual county commissioner appointments made at the start of each year. [.pdf of 2013 appointments listing]

The original list of eligible boards, committees and commissions for which stipends are paid was approved at the county board’s Dec. 5 meeting, but the aerotropolis had not been included in that list.

At that Dec. 5 meeting, commissioners had voted to alter their compensation to receive stipend payments based on the number of meetings that a commissioner is likely to attend for a particular appointment. One or two meetings per year would pay $50, three or four meetings would pay $100, and the amounts increase based on the number of meetings. Each commissioner typically has several appointments.

In the past, commissioners had to request per diem payments for their work. Now, stipend payments will be made automatically, unless commissioners waive their stipends by giving written notice to the county clerk. According to the county clerk’s office, Dan Smith (R-District 2) is the only commissioner who has waived all of his stipends. Ronnie Peterson (D-District 6) does not receive any stipends because he was not appointed to any boards, committees or commissions.

Outcome: Without discussion, commissioners unanimously voted to approve the change in the stipend list.

Delinquent Tax Borrowing

On the agenda was a final vote to authorize borrowing up to $40 million against the amount of delinquent property taxes in all of the county’s 80 taxing jurisdictions. [.pdf of delinquent tax resolution] Commissioners gave initial approval on Feb. 6, 2013, when county treasurer Catherine McClary had been on hand to make a presentation and answer questions.

After March 1, taxing jurisdictions – including cities, townships, schools systems and libraries, among others – turn their delinquent taxes over to the county, and are reimbursed for that amount. The county treasurer then assumes responsibility for collecting these delinquent taxes. This is a standard procedure that’s conducted annually at this time of year. The borrowed funds are used for cash flow purposes, to fund operations for the first half of the year.

This year, the estimated amount of delinquent taxes is about $25 million. At the Feb. 6 board meeting, McClary told commissioners that she expects the actual amount to be lower than that. The exact amount won’t be determined until the middle or end of March. The notes will likely be issued in April or May, she said. McClary also pointed out that the resolution limits the amount that can be borrowed to $40 million, down from a limit of $45 million last year.

McClary did not attend the Feb. 20 meeting, and there was no discussion on this item.

Outcome: Commissioners unanimously approved the delinquent tax borrowing resolution.

Allen Creek Drain Project

Commissioners were asked to authorize backing bonds for a drain project along Miller Avenue in Ann Arbor – in the Allen Creek drainage district – with the county’s full faith and credit. The board had given initial approval on Feb. 6, 2013.

The backing is for up to $1.58 million in bonds for the project, which will be repaid through a special assessment against the city of Ann Arbor. The project is being handled by the office of the Washtenaw County water resources commissioner, led by Evan Pratt. It’s the first project brought forward by Pratt, who took office in January.

According to a staff memo, the funds will be used “to clean out, widen, deepen, straighten, tile, extend, or relocate along a highway, construct branches, relief drains, or connections to the Miller Avenue portion of the Allen Creek Drain to reduce downstream flooding and improve water quality to increase the public health benefit.”

Pratt had attended the Feb. 6 meeting, but was not on hand for the Feb. 20 session.

Outcome: The board unanimously approved the drain project, with no discussion.

Sewer Debt Refinancing

Final approval to refinance debt for a sewer system on the county’s west side was on the board’s Feb. 20 agenda. The refinancing, which is intended to save more than $280,000 in interest payments, got initial approval at the county board’s Feb. 6, 2013 meeting. [.pdf of Feb. 20 memo and resolution]

John Axe of Axe & Ecklund, a Grosse Pointe Farms firm, is the county’s bond counsel. He attended the Feb. 20 meeting but did not formally address the board during the public portion of its meeting.

The resolution authorizes the sale of refunding bonds that would be used to pay the remaining principal on existing bonds that were sold in 2004. That year, the county sold $5.115 million in bonds to help Lyndon and Sylvan townships pay for the sewer. Of that, $2.25 million remains to be paid.

However, the bond sale now is expected to be about $990,000 – an amount that’s lower than indicated in the original Feb. 6 resolution. According to a Feb. 20 memo from county water resources commissioner Evan Pratt and Daniel Myers, director of public works, Lyndon Township has decided to pay off all of its remaining debt and will therefore not participate in the new bond sale. In addition, Sylvan Township will pay $225,000 to reduce its part of the debt.

The resolution that commissioners considered on Feb. 20 for final approval had been changed from the Feb. 6 resolution, to reflect this updated information.

The project built sewers at Cavanaugh, Sugar Loaf, Cassidy, Crooked, and Cedar Lakes. It’s funded through special assessments on property around those lakes and payments by the Sugar Loaf Lake State Park and Cassidy Lake State Corrections Facility.

This sewer system is separate from a controversial water and wastewater treatment plant project in Sylvan Township. For more background on that project, see Chronicle coverage: “County Board OKs Sylvan Twp. Contract.”

John Axe of Axe & Ecklund, a Grosse Pointe Farms firm, is the county’s bond counsel and attended the Feb. 20 meeting. However, he did not formally address the board during the public portion of its meeting.

Outcome: The board unanimously approved the sale of refunding bonds.

Recognizing Purple Rose, Chelsea Lanes

Two Chelsea organizations – Purple Rose Theatre and Chelsea Lanes – were recognized for their support of the community at the Feb. 20 meeting. Resolutions of appreciation were brought forward by Kent Martinez-Kratz (D-District 1), whose district includes the city of Chelsea.

The Purple Rose Theatre – founded by the actor Jeff Daniels, who lives in the area – is a nonprofit professional theater located in downtown Chelsea. The resolution of appreciation cites several contributions, including the theater’s weekly Wednesday matinee held for the community, and its partnerships with local businesses and entities like the Chelsea District Library. [.pdf Purple Rose Theatre resolution]

Chelsea Lanes, a bowling alley owned by Eddie Greenleaf III and located at 1180 S. Main, was commended for its support of the SRSLY community coalition, and for hosting many community events and fundraisers. [.pdf of Chelsea Lanes resolution]

The resolutions noted that Chelsea Lanes received the Chelsea Area Chamber of Commerce’s 2012 Small Business Award, while Purple Rose Theatre received the chamber’s 2012 Large Business Leadership Award.

No one from either organization attended the Feb. 20 meeting, and there was no discussion on these items.

Outcome: The board unanimously approved the resolutions of appreciation.

3-Way Tech Agreement

Washtenaw County commissioners were asked to give final approval to amend a three-way agreement with the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority and the city of Ann Arbor.

Andy Brush, the county’s IT manager.

The three-way accord – an interagency agreement for collaborative technology and services (IACTS) – is meant to provide a way to procure and maintain common technology platforms and services centrally. Commissioners had given initial approval to the changes on Feb. 6, 2013.

The modification to the agreement allows for adding other entities into the agreement in a more streamlined way. It gives each founding member the ability to add new participants administratively, without modifying the agreement itself. The original IACTS was approved in May of 2011. [.pdf of IACTS amendment]

The Ann Arbor city council approved the amendment at its Feb. 4, 2013 meeting.

Washtenaw County already provides certain IT services to other local entities – like the city of Ypsilanti, Dexter’s fire department, and the 14B District Court – although they aren’t yet parties to the IACTS agreement. Another entity that might participate in the IACTS is the Washtenaw Intermediate School District.

Andy Brush, the county’s IT manager, attended the Feb. 20 meeting but did not formally address the board.

Outcome: Without discussion, the board unanimously approved amendments to the IACTS.

Grant Funding

Three items related to grants and programs administered by the county’s office of community & economic development (OCED) were on the Feb. 20 agenda for final approval.

The items are: (1) the Michigan Works! system plan for 2013 [.pdf of 2013 MWSP]; (2) $20,000 in federal funding (Community Services Block Grant discretionary funds) to conduct a needs assessment of the New West Willow Neighborhood Association, supplemented with $5,000 in county matching funds; and (3) $20,000 in federal funding (Community Services Block Grant discretionary funds) for tax preparation services to low-income customers, in partnership with Avalon Housing, Catholic Social Services of Washtenaw County, Housing Bureau for Seniors and Women’s Center of Southeastern Michigan.

These items had received the board’s initial approval at a meeting on Feb. 6, 2013.

Outcome: Without discussion, the board unanimously approved these OCED grant-related items.

Communications & Commentary

During the evening there were multiple opportunities for communications from the administration and commissioners, as well as public commentary.

Communications & Commentary: Land Bank

Yousef Rabhi (D-District 8) announced that he planned to put together a task force to “take a serious look” at establishing a county land bank. He said he wanted to make sure that commissioner Ronnie Peterson (D-District 6), who represents the Ypsilanti area, is involved in that effort, along with the county treasurer’s office and the office of community & economic development. He invited any other commissioner who wanted to participate to let him know. He said he hoped they could move quickly, because a land bank could have a potentially big impact on local communities, including on the eastern side of the county.

Conan Smith (D-District 9) expressed support, noting that the board and staff had worked on this issue a couple of years ago. Even though the economy is starting to recover nationally and across Michigan, he said, there are still struggles related to foreclosure – particularly on the county’s east side, in the Ypsilanti and Ypsilanti Township area. Those issues would be well addressed by a land bank. The challenges of structure and funding still exist, Smith said, adding that “we never were able to resolve that.” So it’s good to have a task force that could develop a strategy that meets the board’s interest as well as the interests of the county treasurer, he said.

After consulting with corporation counsel Curtis Hedger about the process for creating a task force, Rabhi indicated he would bring a formal recommendation to the board in the near future to form the land bank task force.

By way of background, a land bank is a mechanism for the county to take temporary ownership of tax- or mortgage-foreclosed land while working to put it back into productive use. “Productive use” could mean several things – like selling it to a nonprofit like Habitat for Humanity to rehab, or demolishing a blighted structure and turning the land into a community garden.

The board has made attempts in the past to start a land bank. The board actually formed a land bank in the summer of 2009. But after commissioners were unable to resolve issues related to governance and funding, they voted to dissolve the land bank in March of 2010. Only three current commissioners were on the board at that time: Ronnie Peterson, Rolland Sizemore Jr. and Conan Smith.

At its Sept. 1, 2010 meeting, the board voted to revive the land bank. However, the board never took the next step of funding it or getting approval from the state.

Commissioner Kent Martinez-Kratz (D-District 1) greets students from the University of Michigan School of Nursing who attended the county board’s Feb. 20 meeting.

For additional background, see Chronicle coverage: “Banking on a Land Bank” (July 8, 2009 board meeting); and discussions during the county board meetings on March 17, 2010, July 7, 2010 and Aug. 4, 2010.

Communications & Commentary: Students

Several students attended the Feb. 20 meeting, and were asked by commissioner Rolland Sizemore Jr. (D-District 5) to introduce themselves. They were students from Skyline High School fulfilling a class assignment, and nursing students from the University of Michigan who were observing the proceedings as part of a psychiatric nursing course. This detail drew laughs from commissioners, who appeared to appreciate the implication.

Communications & Commentary: Thomas Partridge

There was only one speaker during the two citizens participation slots at the Feb. 20 meeting – Thomas Partridge – who spoke during both opportunities for public commentary.

He raised concerns about the local impact of possible sequestration at the federal level. He called on the board to pass resolutions to recall elected officials who are neglecting their responsibilities to the most disadvantaged and vulnerable residents, and to labor unions. Among those who should be recalled, Partridge said, are Gov. Rick Snyder, Ann Arbor mayor John Hieftje, and certain members of the county board, whom he did not identify by name.

Partridge also urged the board to get serious about addressing job creation, affordable housing and affordable transportation needs.

Present: Andy LaBarre, Kent Martinez-Kratz, Ronnie Peterson, Alicia Ping, Yousef Rabhi, Rolland Sizemore Jr., Conan Smith, Dan Smith.

Absent: Felicia Brabec.

Next regular board meeting: Wednesday, March. 6, 2013 at 6:30 p.m. at the county administration building, 220 N. Main St. in Ann Arbor. The ways & means committee meets first, followed immediately by the regular board meeting. [Check Chronicle event listings to confirm date.] (Though the agenda states that the regular board meeting begins at 6:45 p.m., it usually starts much later – times vary depending on what’s on the agenda.) Public commentary is held at the beginning of each meeting, and no advance sign-up is required.

The Chronicle could not survive without regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the Washtenaw County board of commissioners. 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!

The AATA and TWU are reaching an agreement separate from the labor contract that covers agency shop fees and dues – which runs for 10 years, through 2023. The contract resets the full wage for newly hired drivers after three years to $21.50 per hour. The wage for current drivers with at least three years of experience is $24.50 per hour. The contract calls for a $0.50 an hour increase per year, except in the third year of the contract when the increase is $0.75 per hour.

The vote by the AATA board, authorizing CEO Michael Ford to sign the agreements with TWU, came at the board’s Jan. 17, 2013 board meeting. Dissenting on the vote was Eli Cooper, who expressed dissatisfaction that a copy of the labor agreement was not available to all board members before they were asked to vote.

This brief was filed from the downtown location of the Ann Arbor District Library at 343 S. Fifth, where the AATA board holds its meetings. A more detailed report will follow: [link]

Nancy Heine, president of AFSCME Local 3052, Caryette Fenner, president of AFSCME Local 2733, the county government’s largest union. (Photos by the writer.)

The working session included presentations by one of the county’s Lansing lobbyists; labor attorney Paul Gallagher; and Mary Kerr – president of the Ann Arbor Convention & Visitors Bureau. Kerr told commissioners that Washtenaw County brings in an estimated $12 million annually from the training conferences held here by three major unions. She said the CVB – which is funded through an accommodations tax levied by the county – will work to ensure that the unions feel welcome, but she has not had any conversations yet to gauge their reactions to the new right-to-work law.

Gallagher was less circumspect, saying he’s concerned about the potential loss of business if unions decide to move their training to a state that doesn’t have right-to-work laws.

The Michigan legislation – supported by the Republican-controlled House and Senate and Republican Gov. Rick Snyder – made it illegal to require employees to support unions financially as a condition of their employment. It’s viewed by Democrats as a way to undercut support for labor organizations that have historically backed the Democratic Party. On the Washtenaw County board of commissioners, seven of the nine commissioners are Democrats.

The legislation, which will take effect in March of 2013, received national attention and followed a failed ballot initiative by labor to protect collective bargaining rights in the state Constitution. That effort – Proposal 12-2 – was not supported by a majority of voters in the Nov. 6 election.

At the Jan. 3 working session, Conan Smith questioned Gallagher about details of state and federal labor laws, exploring the latitude that the county might have in supporting unions that represent 85% of the 1,321 employees in county government. He floated several ideas that commissioners might consider pursuing.

For example, most current union contracts expire on Dec. 31, 2013. Because the right-to-work law doesn’t take effect until March of this year, the county has until then to work with the unions and possibly extend their contracts beyond the end of 2013. If that happens before March, then the unions could continue to collect “agency fees” from employees who don’t want to join the union but who are still part of the bargaining unit that the union represents. Though the practice would be illegal for future contracts, it could remain in place for the duration of the extended agreements.

Additionally, Smith said there are items in the union contracts that might set the stage for a division of employees into three distinct groups. Two of those groups exist now: (1) unionized employees, and (2) non-union management employees. There’s the potential for a third group, Smith said: Non-union, non-management workers who have made the choice to opt-out of the union and the benefits that the union provides, be it economic, social, protective or anything else. Those benefits, in his opinion, shouldn’t accrue “to those people who don’t pay to play.”

Smith told commissioners: “I hope we are comparatively aggressive in our stance of supporting our labor partners and finding innovative ways that we can test this new world.” He hopes to make sure that the benefits of union membership are clear before people make the decision about whether to join. The point is not to coerce them to join or discourage them from joining, he said, but just to make sure they understand very clearly what opportunities they have as union members.

Smith said there are a number of places in the current union contracts where the county can make that “imminently clear.” And there are a number of places in the county’s practices where they can make that clear, too, he said. “I think if we do that through practice, undoubtedly we’ll be challenged – and I for one am quite comfortable taking that challenge forward and being the test case to determine the extent to which this law applies to our public employees.”

Smith – who is married to state Sen. Rebekah Warren – does not believe the majority of legislators would be willing to amend the right-to-work law, and that lobbying them to do so would probably be a waste of time.

Commissioners also heard from two labor leaders on Jan. 3: Caryette Fenner, president of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO (AFSCME) Local 2733, the county government’s largest union with about 700 members; and Nancy Heine, president of AFSCME Local 3052, which represents about 50 supervisors. Both Fenner and Heine expressed concerns amid an uncertain future. “What could potentially happen with this law is that it will render us useless,” Heine said. “We will have no resources to defend any of our members.”

It’s unclear how far the majority of commissioners would be willing to go in challenging the right-to-work law. At the Jan. 2 board meeting, the two Republican commissioners – Dan Smith and Alicia Ping – indicated they did not want to debate the issue. However, there was more clear support for sending a signal to the labor unions that do their training in Washtenaw County that they are welcome here. Andy LaBarre, who led his first meeting as chair of the working session, offered to draft a resolution to that effect for the board to consider.

Legislative Update

Gary E. Owen of Governmental Consultant Services Inc. (GCSI), the county’s lobbying firm, briefed commissioners about the right-to-work legislation. He began by cautioning that he’s not an attorney or an expert in labor policy, and deferred questions on policy implications to the county’s legal counsel.

Two right-to-work bills were considered by the state legislature: (1) House Bill 4003, which affected public-sector employees, and (2) Senate Bill 116, which addressed unions in the private sector. Both were introduced in 2011 “and just kind of sat there,” Owen said. For the first two years of his administration, Gov. Rick Snyder had made it pretty clear that right-to-work legislation was not part of his agenda, Owen noted. But almost immediately after the Nov. 6, 2012 election, it did become a priority for Snyder. So with only nine days left in the legislative calendar – the lame duck session – the House and Senate leadership declared it was a priority, too. The bills moved through the legislature in about seven days, and Snyder quickly signed them into law. “That’s really how it went down,” Owen said.

Legislative Update: Board Discussion

Yousef Rabhi (D-District 8) wondered how this process compared to typical legislative proceedings. He noted that the legislation creating a regional transit authority (RTA) went through a lengthy process with committee hearings and other input. Did the right-to-work bills go through the same kind of public vetting?

Owen replied that right-to-work was probably an exception to the rule, as far as the process in Lansing is concerned. It’s a very emotional, hotly contested issue, he added, and legislators likely already knew where they stood on it. That’s not an excuse, he said – that’s just the way it is. He said he’d classify the issue as “not lobby-able.” The leadership decided they wanted to do it, and even though there were 15,000 people in and around the capital protesting it, the legislation still moved ahead.

Economic Impact

Mary Kerr, president of the Ann Arbor Convention and Visitors Bureau, was asked to talk about the possible economic impact of the state legislation on Washtenaw County. Tom Lamb, the new chair of the Ann Arbor CVB who also is general manager of the Ann Arbor Ypsilanti Marriott at Eagle Crest, was also on hand.

Kerr started by providing what she described as high-level data. There are three major unions that hold training events in Washtenaw County: (1) the United Association (UA) of Plumbers and Pipefitters, who’ve been coming to the county for one week in August for 23 years; (2) the National Training Institute for electricians, put on by the National Joint Apprenticeship & Training Committee (NJATC), has been coming to Ann Arbor for the past four years during the last week in July and first week in August; and (3) the instructor training program for the ironworkers union – the International Association of Bridge, Structural, Ornamental and Reinforcing Iron Workers – that’s been holding its annual instructor training program at Washtenaw Community College in June for the past three years.

Mary Kerr, president of the Ann Arbor Convention & Visitors Bureau, and Tom Lamb, chair of the CVB board. Lamb is also general manager of the Ann Arbor Ypsilanti Marriott at Eagle Crest.

The estimated total economic impact of these three union events is about $12 million, Kerr said. She also provided a breakdown of that amount. The three unions account for 22,000 hotel rooms, or $2.2 million. They also bring in $2.3 million for local restaurants. Anecdotally, she said, Mike Kabat – the owner of Haab’s Restaurant in Ypsilanti – equates the union business to seven University of Michigan home football games. A combined $3.5 million is spent on entertainment, transportation, recreation and shopping, with the balance of that $12 million paid for facilities and services at local colleges and universities.

The United Association views it as a partnership with the community, Kerr said. The reason they chose this area – and the reason they stay – is Washtenaw Community College, she added. The union also appreciates the support of the community and of the Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti CVBs, she said. And that CVB support is possible because of the county board’s continued support of those entities, Kerr noted.

By way of background, the county is the governmental unit that’s responsible for levying an accommodations tax primarily on local hotels and motels. In 2011 the county collected $3.99 million in accommodation taxes. The majority of those funds are distributed to the county’s two convention & visitors bureaus – in Ann Arbor ($2.69 million in 2011) and Ypsilanti ($898,563).

Kerr noted that this year is the UA’s 60th anniversary of training, and they’ll be bringing additional groups to this area, including some people who will come prior to the training sessions. The UA also has a new training agreement with the union in Australia, so there will be an Australian contingency coming to Washtenaw County this year. The union will also be making additional investments at its training facility at WCC, she said.

Another example of the UA’s partnership with the community is its 5K run to raise money for the Semper Fi Fund, which supports wounded soldiers. Last year they raised about $27,000 for the charity, and they plan to make it an annual event, Kerr said.

It’s the CVB’s goal to keep these events in Washtenaw County, Kerr said, and to share with the unions that the county appreciates their business and will provide the same level of service in the future.

Economic Impact: Board Discussion

Conan Smith (D-District 9) observed that Washtenaw County was able to court the unions away from other states, and he wondered what the impact of the right-to-work law would have on the attractiveness of this area now, for these unions or others who might consider holding events here.

Kerr said she didn’t have any experience with that, so it would be difficult to answer. Smith pressed, wondering if unions have indicated in the past that they’ve been less interested in supporting right-to-work states.

Kerr noted that the NJATC had been recruited from Tennessee, which is a right-to-work state. The union’s director of training has cited the training facilities here and the general community support, she said, but she’s never had any specific conversations with union officials about right-to-work.

Smith ventured that there are likely many reasons that factor in to the unions’ decision to hold their events here, and that the university facilities likely weigh heavily in their decision-making. But he imagined that from a philosophical standpoint, the right-to-work law at least would dampen their enthusiasm for coming here. He asked Kerr to inquire about the issue directly when she talks to union representatives in the future, and to share that information with the county board.

Labor’s Perspective

Paul Gallagher, a local labor attorney, spoke about the impact on Washtenaw County government as an employer. He noted that two of the 17 unions that represent county employees – the Police Officers Association of Michigan (POAM) and the Command Officers Association of Michigan (COAM) – will be unaffected. That’s because a different law applies to public safety unions, and state legislators didn’t touch it. Those two unions account for about 300 of the 1,321 county employees.

In general, about 85% of the entire county government workforce are union members.

All 17 unions for county employees currently have a “union security” clause in their collective bargaining agreements, making the county an “agency shop,” Gallagher explained. The clause requires that employees in job classifications that are represented by unions must either become a full member or pay an “agency fee.” The agency fee is nearly identical to the amount of union dues that members pay, Gallagher said.

For the 15 county unions that are affected by the right-to-work law, the security clause can’t be included in future collective bargaining agreements – the law makes agency shops illegal. So employees won’t have to be union members or pay the agency fee, even though they would still be covered by the union-negotiated contract – as far as wages, hours and working conditions – and the union will be obligated to represent them for situations like discharge or grievances.

Gallagher noted that some of these 15 unions probably won’t be seriously affected, and cited the assistant prosecuting attorneys union – the Assistant Prosecutors Association – as an example. People in those positions are well paid, union dues are relatively low, and the union is run locally – that is, it’s not affiliated with a state or national organization.

But for workers who aren’t as well paid, like clerical staff, Gallagher ventured that many employees will likely opt out of paying the unions, because they want that money in their paycheck instead. So the net effect is that there will be union members working next to people who aren’t in the union, but getting the same level of representation.

Rolland Sizemore Jr., standing, talks with Mary Kerr, president of the Ann Arbor Convention & Visitors Bureau, and Tom Lamb, chair of the Ann Arbor CVB board.

As far as a timeline, Gallagher explained that the new right-to-work law would take effect when new contracts are negotiated. Most of the current union contracts for county employees expire on Dec. 31, 2013.

Gallagher also spoke more generally about the impact of the right-to-work law on the economy. He noted that he has represented UA Local 190 in Washtenaw County since 1988. Before moving to Washtenaw County, the UA had held its training conferences at Purdue University for 37 years, he said. But when a general contractor for Purdue hired a subcontractor that didn’t use union labor – and didn’t relent when the UA protested – a year later the union took its training elsewhere.

Gallagher said he didn’t know if the right-to-work law would attract a manufacturer here from somewhere else, and whether that type of business would offset the loss of these union events, if the unions decide to leave.

For Washtenaw County, the union business comes during the summer when there typically isn’t a lot going on, Gallagher said. The unions love the labor-friendly atmosphere here, he noted – and they love to see the construction-related cranes in the air when they drive into town. His primary concern is for the potential loss of business if unions decide to move their training to a state that doesn’t have right-to-work laws.

Labor’s Perspective: Board Discussion – State and Federal Law

Conan Smith asked Paul Gallagher about the relationship between the federal Taft–Hartley Act, which sets the tradition of having labor unions represent everyone in their bargaining unit, and Michigan’s Public Employment Relations Act. Are they separate, or is one subject to the other?

Taft-Hartley, passed in 1947, was basically an amendment to the Wagner Act of 1935, Gallagher explained. The Wagner Act, also known as the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), established the right of people to form and join unions. It was legally challenged, but ultimately came under the power of Congress to regulate interstate commerce – and that’s what gave Congress the authority to create labor laws. It was one of the first instances of using the so-called “commerce clause” of the U.S. Constitution, which was also used later for civil rights legislation, he noted.

However, public employers aren’t covered by these federal labor laws, because the workers don’t cross state lines. In Michigan, the state legislature adopted a separate Public Employment Relations Act (PERA). The state and federal laws are similar, but “run on separate tracks,” Gallagher said.

Smith noted that one of the clauses that remains in PERA is the prohibition of the employer to discriminate against an employee on the basis of their status as a union member or non-union member. What’s the general case law interpreting that? he asked.

Gallagher replied that obviously you can’t tell someone they’ll be fired if they don’t drop their union membership. Employers can’t encourage – or discourage – union membership, and are supposed to leave internal union affairs alone. There are certain things that employers aren’t even supposed to inquire about, like how many votes the union leadership got in their elections or who should be the union steward. On the other hand, he said, unions aren’t supposed to tell employers who should sit at the bargaining table, either. It’s supposed to be an arm’s-length relationship, Gallagher said.

Smith then commented on the tradition of the union providing the same benefits to every employee in their bargaining unit, saying “I don’t find basis in PERA for that. I see the tradition emanating from Taft-Hartley. Is it directly indicated in PERA?”

Gallagher explained that the Michigan Employment Relations Commission (MERC), which administers PERA, has ruled in several cases that if an issue isn’t addressed in PERA – but is addressed in the Wagner Act or Taft-Hartley – then the federal law will apply. If MERC hasn’t addressed the issue at all, court cases rely on federal law.

Smith asked who serves on MERC. Gallagher couldn’t recall all the members, but said they were usually all labor attorneys. There are three members appointed by the governor, who obviously appoints people who are friendly to his agenda, Gallagher said. [The MERC commissioners are Nino Erwin Green, a Democrat from Escanaba (term ends June 30, 2013); Edward D. Callaghan, a Republican from Royal Oak (term ends June 30, 2014); and Bob LaBrant, a Republican from Perry (term ends June 30, 2015).]

Smith noted that in labor contracts for the city of Ann Arbor, there a clause that discusses the right of the union to represent everyone in the bargaining unit. “That makes complete sense in a closed shop environment, where everyone is a member,” he said. But in an open shop environment where some people aren’t union members, is there any restriction to labor not representing those non-union workers? he asked.

The union is required under law to be the exclusive representative of everyone in that bargaining unit, Gallagher explained. Smith replied that he knows that’s a requirement written into the labor contracts, “but I don’t see that in PERA.” Gallagher said he’d find the specific reference to that in the state law and send it to commissioners.

Smith pointed to the philosophy behind the support for right-to-work laws. During the debate on this issue in Lansing, right-to-work supporters would say that if the union is good, then everyone will belong – it’s an open marketplace. “But the fact of the matter is that it’s not an open market,” Smith said. “So it makes it quite difficult for our labor unions to show to everybody the true benefit of being a part of that bargaining unit, if everyone gets the benefit that they then go fight for.”

One of the things that Smith said he’s interested in is setting up “opportunities for employees to make the choice – openly, honestly and fairly – about whether or not they want to belong to the union.” But he also wants to establish an open, honest and fair process by which employees see the benefits or lack of benefits when they’re making that choice. The most striking barrier to Washtenaw County, from a policy standpoint, seems to be the exclusive representation clause, he said.

Gallagher pointed out that exclusive representation is the law. Smith replied that this seems to be a MERC issue, as the entity that oversees PERA. “If we were to establish a policy that was then challenged, it would go to MERC,” Smith said. Gallagher indicated that Smith was correct.

As a state statute, Smith said, PERA is quite flexible to the kinds of things that he’s interested in pursuing. It’s MERC’s interpretations of the law in its previous case filings and decisions – prior to enactment of the right-to-work law – that call into question the approach he’d like to pursue. “Perhaps in a post right-to-work environment, MERC might see the fairness issue differently.”

Washtenaw County commissioners Yousef Rabhi (standing) and Alicia Ping. In the background is commissioner Felicia Brabec.

Gallagher noted that in other right-to-work states, unions are still viewed as having exclusive representation. “I’m sure MERC will follow that as it currently stands,” he said.

Smith asked for the justification of that view. Gallagher reported that it’s viewed as the nature of collective bargaining – the employees have a choice, and they express their choice by voting to have a union or not. After a majority of employees in a unit votes to have union representation, the union is the exclusive representative of employees in that unit.

In that situation, if a union negotiates a salary increase for its members, then the increase applies to non-members as well. “I don’t understand the philosophical grounding for the logic there,” Smith said. “What’s the basis for that?”

Gallagher replied that it’s simply the basis of collective bargaining – a group of people bargaining with an employer. At a certain point, if a majority of people didn’t want to belong to the union, then the union would be subject to decertification, he said. The union would be dissolved, and there would either be no union representation, or another union could step in to take its place. By way of example, Gallagher reported that recently in Washtenaw County, the clerical workers at the 14th District Court were represented by the Teamsters, but voted to decertify that union and switch their affiliation to the Technical-Police Officers Association of Michigan.

So the bargaining unit is the arbiter of who receives a benefit, Smith said. How is that bargaining unit established?

Gallagher explained that the unit is established by showing a “community of interest,” based on a common work location, supervision, rates of pay, duties and other factors. You can’t put skilled tradespeople in with custodians, because their jobs are so different. So the idea is to find the most people who share those commonalities within a workplace.

Smith noted that this union process has been in place 70-80 years in a closed-shop environment. When did the right-to-work laws begin to emerge? Have the National Labor Relations Board or labor negotiators adjusted their positions because of it?

Gallagher explained that in a closed shop, everyone is a union member. On the other end, open shops are found in right-to-work states, where you don’t have to join a union. Until recently, he said, Michigan had “agency shops,” where employees aren’t required to be union members, but they have to pay an agency fee. Most states that are open shop (right-to-work) or agency shop states made that decision decades ago, Gallagher said, and have stayed that way.

Smith was curious if Gallagher had seen any trends on the NLRB as states move from being closed or agency shops to being open shop states. Gallagher indicated that it’s too soon to see any trends. Until the recent right-to-work laws were passed in Indiana and Michigan, everything has been “set in stone for decades” regarding these issues.

Smith then directed his comments to other county commissioners: “I hope we are comparatively aggressive in our stance of supporting our labor partners and finding innovative ways that we can test this new world.” He hopes to make sure that the benefits of union membership are clear before people make the decision about whether to join. The point is not to coerce them to join or discourage them from joining, he said, but just to make sure they understand very clearly what opportunities they have, or not.

Smith said there are a number of places in the current union contracts where the county can make that “imminently clear.” And there are a number of places in the county’s practices where they can make that clear, too, he said. “I think if we do that through practice, undoubtedly we’ll be challenged – and I for one am quite comfortable taking that challenge forward and being the test case to determine the extent to which this law applies to our public employees.”

Responding to a query from Rolland Sizemore Jr., Gallagher said that Indiana had passed its right-to-work legislation in 2012. Sizemore then asked if there’s any data showing the differences between states with open shops compared to closed shops. Gallagher replied that typically wages and benefits are lower in open shop states, but it’s hard to trace that specifically to right-to-work laws.

Sizemore said that he’s from a union family, and that unions created the middle class in this country. It makes him “darn sad” that there’s a movement toward creating the haves and have-nots, and “I’m going to miss that middle section.”

In response to a question from Dan Smith, Gallagher said that you need at least two people to make up a bargaining unit, but there’s no upper limit to the size. Based on previous MERC decisions, the intent is to create the largest possible grouping that still makes sense in terms of a bargaining unit of common interest.

Felicia Brabec wondered whether there could be a bargaining unit consisting of people who did not want union representation. Gallagher said that MERC wouldn’t allow a unit to be created based on an unwillingness to pay union dues.

Labor’s Perspective: Board Discussion – Local Union Leaders

Two presidents of unions representing Washtenaw County employees attended the Jan. 3 working session.

Caryette Fenner – president of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO (AFSCME) Local 2733, the county government’s largest union – told commissioners that she’d been in contact with AFSCME Council 25 at the statewide level, who are working with national AFSCME representatives. In the meantime, she said she’s been trying to get information out to the membership of Local 2733 so they’ll know what the right-to-work law represents, how it affects the union, and to allow them to make their own decisions. “I think that’s the best that I can do at this point,” Fenner said.

Nancy Heine – president of AFSCME Local 3052, which represents about 50 supervisors – stressed that even though the law has been signed, it doesn’t take effect until March. And because most union contracts run through Dec. 31, 2013, the law doesn’t apply until after that point, when new contracts are in place. “This is an interesting period for us,” she said.

Heine also commented on how the right-to-work law will affect the unions and their work defending employees through the grievance process. Even if a large number of employees decide not to join, the unions will still be obligated to represent them, she said. There are labor attorneys at the AFSCME Council 25 state level, and a Council 25 representative – “all of those folks get paid with union dues,” she said. The local level receives only a small percentage of dues. The majority of funds go to the state, national or international levels, she said. If fewer people are paying dues, Heine noted, the unions will have fewer resources. “What could potentially happen with this law is that it will render us useless,” she said. “We will have no resources to defend any of our members.”

Heine noted that her union has four cases before an arbitration panel, but in the future, the positions on that panel will be cut back and arbitration cases could potentially stay in limbo for years. “This impact is so significant and has such long-term consequences that I can’t even think of everything that may potentially happen with this change.”

Yousef Rabhi responded, saying he wanted to share some of his thoughts. He reported that he had been in Lansing for the large right-to-work rallies last year – and it had been a very moving experience for him. It was a day when the state went the wrong direction, he said, and when people spoke with one voice against it.

His grandfather had been a UAW organizer, and Rabhi said he wouldn’t have been able to go to college were it not for his grandfather’s pension dollars to help pay tuition. So unions are very important to him on a personal level, Rabhi said. In his first term as commissioner – in 2011 and 2012 – unions played an important role in balancing the county’s budget. “They came to the table and made some huge cuts in their compensation.” He didn’t think county commissioners could overstate their thanks for that. It’s an example of how unions work well for the public and for the employees they represent, he said. It’s important for him to support the county’s unions and the work that they do.

Labor’s Perspective: Board Discussion – Possible Response?

Referring to the union training sessions held in Washtenaw County, Andy LaBarre noted that the thought of losing a large percentage of people who drive the economy “is pretty scary.” He thought Conan Smith had done a great job in outlining some of the policy considerations that the board might want to explore.

Andy LaBarre, right, confers with Pete Simms of the Washtenaw County clerk’s office. LaBarre, a county commissioner from Ann Arbor, was preparing to start the Jan. 3 special working session – his first as working session chair.

It’s worth considering some sort of response at some point, LaBarre said, adding that he didn’t want to presume it was an issue they could work out that night.

Conan Smith indicated that LaBarre had previously articulated two separate issues to him “offline.” One is the question of sending a signal to the labor unions that do their training in Washtenaw County that they are welcome here. The board might put together a resolution to that effect.

But Smith also wants to dig  more deeply into the situation with the county’s own bargaining units. He didn’t think the state legislature would take up any amendments to the right-to-work law in the coming year. So asking the legislature and the governor to amend PERA “probably would be a waste of our time,” he said. He’d support making that pitch, if others felt it would be useful. [Smith is married to one of those legislators – Democrat Sen. Rebekah Warren of District 18, which covers Ann Arbor.]

But Smith wanted to look at the options that the county has in terms of “framing the labor practices here in Washtenaw County.” Because the law doesn’t take effect until March, the county has the option of working with the unions to extend their contracts beyond the end of 2013. If that happens before March, then the county would remain an agency shop for the duration of the extended agreements.

Secondly, he said there are items in the contracts that might set the stage for a division of employees into three segments.

At this point, LaBarre interrupted Smith, saying that he had received some advice from Diane Heidt, the county’s human resources and labor relations director, that the board shouldn’t publicly discuss labor strategy.

Smith said he appreciated that advice, but it was an issue on which he disagreed with the administration. “I am a public official – I’m not management. I do vote on your contracts … but what I’m talking about now is public policy. This isn’t about strategy around negotiations. This is about how we set the framework as the policy for this organization – whether we support labor unions or not, and how we move forward as an entity.”

He said he appreciated Heidt’s sensitivity to his statements, and “I know I sometimes freak out our partners in labor as well, when I talk like this. But bear with me – we’re in new times.”

Continuing, Smith said that if the county is going to be in a right-to-work environment, the county should look carefully at three distinct groupings of employees. Two of those groups exist now: (1) unionized employees, and (2) non-union management employees. There’s the potential for a third group, Smith said: Non-union, non-management workers who have made the choice to opt-out of the union and the benefits that the union provides, be it economic, social, protective or anything else.

Those benefits, in his opinion, shouldn’t accrue “to those people who don’t pay to play.” It would be akin to the board putting a tax on the ballot that a majority of voters approve, but then giving people the option of not paying it while still receiving the services. “That is obscene, and we shouldn’t be forwarding that as a policy environment here in Washtenaw County.” In future contracts, the county should be assertive in establishing the baseline “from a values standpoint and a policy standpoint that that isn’t acceptable to us,” he said.

LaBarre indicated that he shared Smith’s view on the first issue – of sending a supportive message to be welcoming to the unions already here and those who come in for special events. He’s hopeful that the board can develop a resolution reflecting those sentiments, not just because of the economic benefit but also because of the mutually beneficial relationships that have been built. He volunteered to help craft such a resolution.

Present: Felicia Brabec, Andy LaBarre, Kent Martinez-Kratz, Alicia Ping, Yousef Rabhi, Rolland Sizemore Jr., Conan Smith, Dan Smith.

Absent: Ronnie Peterson.

Next regular board meeting: Wednesday, Jan. 16, 2013 at 6:30 p.m. at the county administration building, 220 N. Main St. in Ann Arbor. The ways & means committee meets first, followed immediately by the regular board meeting. [Check Chronicle event listings to confirm date.] (Though the agenda states that the regular board meeting begins at 6:45 p.m., it usually starts much later – times vary depending on what’s on the agenda.) Public commentary is held at the beginning of each meeting, and no advance sign-up is required.

The Chronicle could not survive without regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the Washtenaw County board of commissioners. 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!