Most commissioners currently are paid a salary of $15,500. The new amount of $15,750 is calculated by indexing it to one-half the median “step” of the lowest grade salary among county employees. The resolution authorizing the increase also directs future boards to adjust commissioner salaries based on this same calculation.

Officers of the board earn more than other commissioners. The board chair, Conan Smith, is currently paid $18,500. The board vice chair, Alicia Ping, earns $16,000, while chairs of the board’s ways & means committee (Rolland Sizemore Jr.) and working session (Yousef Rabhi) are each paid $16,500. Starting next year, all board chairs will receive $3,000 over their base salary. In a friendly amendment added to the resolution on Dec. 5 by Yousef Rabhi, the board vice chair will receive an extra $1,000 over the base salary.

Currently, commissioners also have a $3,550 flex account to use for per diem and mileage reimbursements, training or other authorized expenses. For example, a per diem of $25 per authorized meeting is allowed, as is mileage driven to those meetings – at a current rate of $0.555 per mile. Some commissioners don’t use their flex accounts, however, and most don’t use the entire amount. The payments are administered through the county clerk’s office.

The resolution given final approval on Dec. 5 changes that approach. Starting in 2013,  commissioners will 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 increased based on the number of meetings. At the high end, more than 24 meetings would pay $1,000. Commissioners will be able to waive their stipends by giving written notice to the county clerk.

Changes to compensation for an upcoming term must be set by the board before that term starts. So for the two-year term beginning in January 2013, any changes in compensation must be made before the end of 2012.

Ronnie Peterson (D-District 6) stressed that because the number of commissioners on the board is decreasing from 11 to 9, the overall budget for commissioners is decreasing – despite the raises for individual commissioners.

This brief was filed from the boardroom of the county administration building at 220 N. Main in Ann Arbor. A more detailed report will follow: [link]

Washtenaw County commissioners Barbara Bergman and Yousef Rabhi at the Nov. 7 county board meeting. Rabhi usually wears his hair tied back, but he let it down at the beginning of the meeting to announce a plan to raise money for local shelters – he’s collecting pledges for each inch he cuts off. (Photos by the writer.)

Taking another step toward addressing a year-long controversy over how much to pay for animal control services, the board authorized contracting with the Humane Society of Huron Valley for $500,000 annually. The action enables the administration to negotiate a contract with HSHV for up to four years, with the option of adjusting the amount based on changes to the taxable value of property in the county. Voting against the resolution were Dan Smith, Wes Prater and Rolland Sizemore Jr. Ronnie Peterson was absent.

The county would not likely pay that entire amount. There are preliminary commitments from five municipalities with their own animal control ordinances, to help the offset the cost of the HSHV contract. Those entities are the cities of Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti, Ypsilanti Township, Pittsfield Township, and Superior Township.

Several commissioners expressed concern that the county is essentially in the same position as it was when this process began. Wes Prater objected to the fact that the county’s procurement policy wasn’t being followed, because a request for proposals (RFP) wasn’t issued.  Ultimately, a sufficient number of commissioners agreed to back the resolution, giving it final approval. The contract itself will not require authorization by the board.

In another move related to animal control services, the board gave final approval to a civil infractions ordinance, giving the county more flexibility to designate violations of other county ordinances as a civil infraction, rather than a criminal misdemeanor. [.pdf of proposed ordinance] In the context of animal control, enforcement of the county’s dog licensing ordinance is low because the current penalty – a criminal misdemeanor of 90 days in jail or a $500 fine – is relatively harsh. The idea is that enforcement would improve if a lesser civil infraction could be used.

Commissioners also debated options for changing their own compensation, ultimately giving initial approval to boost their base salaries from $15,500 to $15,750 annually and replacing per diem payments with stipends, effective Jan. 1, 2013. An amendment by Yousef Rabhi also increased the pay for chairs of the ways & means committee and the working session – bringing them to the same level as the board chair, at $3,000 more annually than the base salary of other commissioners. Voting against the changes as amended were Dan Smith and Rolland Sizemore Jr. A final vote is expected at the board’s Dec. 5 meeting, when a final vote on the overall 2013 budget will also occur.

In non-budget items, Dan Smith brought forward a resolution to rescind the board’s previous support for a regional transit authority (RTA) that’s being proposed in Lansing. The RTA would include the city of Detroit and the counties of Washtenaw, Wayne, Oakland and Macomb. Conan Smith has been an advocate for that effort, both as chair of the county board and in his role as executive director of the Michigan Suburbs Alliance. During deliberations on the item, some commissioners criticized Conan Smith for acting on behalf of the board and not keeping them fully informed. Wes Prater felt Conan Smith’s actions reflected disrespect for other commissioners – but Smith said he meant no disrespect.

A sense of disrespect was also felt by a resident who attended the Nov. 7 meeting to advocate for the county’s help in establishing a daytime warming center for the homeless. Alexandra Hoffman chastised the board because no commissioner responded to commentary about a warming center, and instead the remarks by advocates for the center had been followed by “disturbingly lighthearted talk about haircuts.”

Hoffman was referring to an announcement earlier in the meeting by Yousef Rabhi, whose hair is longer than any other commissioner, male or female. He hopes to get donations of $500 for every inch he cuts, to raise money for three local nonprofits: Shelter Association of Washtenaw County, Interfaith Hospitality Network, and SafeHouse Center. Rabhi told Hoffman that he was simply trying to raise awareness and money for the same issues that the warming center advocates supported.

The meeting fell the day after the Nov. 6 general election, which had resulted in the defeat of two of the nine commissioners who were running for re-election: Republican Rob Turner and Democrat Wes Prater. In District 1, Turner was outpolled by Democrat Kent Martinez-Kratz, decreasing the number of Republicans on the future nine-member board from three to two. Republican Alicia Ping won the District 3 seat over Prater – as the two incumbents faced each other due to redistricting that took effect with this election cycle. The last meeting for Turner and Prater – as well as for Democrats Leah Gunn and Barbara Bergman, who did not seek re-election – will be on Dec. 5.

It’s likely that the new board, which takes office in January, will eventually deal with a controversial topic that was raised during an appointments caucus on Nov. 7: Possible consolidation of the Washtenaw County road commission with county operations. During the caucus, held immediately prior to the regular meeting, Conan Smith suggested not yet reappointing the one road commissioner, Doug Fuller, whose term is expiring – though Fuller will continue to serve. Smith wanted to give the new county board some flexibility in discussing the future of the road commission. Some of the other issues emerging during the appointments caucus related to the role of the county’s historic district commission, economic development corporation, and the criminal justice community collaborative.

Commissioner Compensation

For Washtenaw County commissioners, changes to compensation for an upcoming term must be set by the board before that term starts. So for the two-year term beginning in January 2013, any changes in compensation must be made before the end of 2012. After the Nov. 6 election, the board had only two meetings to act regarding compensation: on Nov. 7 and Dec. 5.

At an Oct. 18 working session, board chair Conan Smith had indicated his intent to bring forward a proposal on commissioner compensation. Then on Nov. 5, two days before their meeting, Smith had emailed commissioners a draft proposal that he described as “a straw-man policy to poke at.” [.pdf of proposal emailed from Smith to the board]

At the Nov. 7 meeting, he introduced the resolution by noting that there had been many conversations among commissioners about compensation, and that his proposal was based on input from those conversations.

Most commissioners currently are paid a salary of $15,500. Smith said that in discussing the issue with county administrator Verna McDaniel, she had initially suggested setting the salary at half the median salary for county employees. But several commissioners had indicated to him that this calculation resulted in a salary that was higher than they could agree to, he said.

Washtenaw County commissioners Felicia Brabec and Conan Smith.

So the proposed amount of $15,750 was calculated by indexing it to one-half the median “step” of the lowest grade salary among county employees. According to a memo accompanying the resolution, Step 4 of Grade 12 (AFSCME Local 2733) is $31,507.75 – half of that amount is $15,753.88.  Smith’s resolution directed future boards to adjust commissioner salaries based on this same calculation.

Officers of the board currently earn more than other commissioners. The board chair, Conan Smith, is currently paid $18,500. The board vice chair, Alicia Ping, earns $16,000, while chairs of the board’s ways & means committee (Rolland Sizemore Jr.) and working session (Yousef Rabhi) are each paid $16,500.

Smith’s proposal recommended eliminating pay for vice chairs. He noted that only nine commissioners will serve on the next board, due to redistricting, compared to the current 11 members. Giving extra pay to chairs and vice chairs would mean that six of the nine commissioners – a supermajority – would be receiving extra compensation. So Smith proposed that vice chairs receive the same base salary as other commissioners, unlike the current compensation arrangement.

For chairs, Smith proposed keeping the same “bump up” – an extra $3,000 for the board chair, and an extra $1,000 each for the chairs of the ways & means committee and the working session.

Currently, commissioners also have a $3,550 flex account to use for per diem and mileage reimbursements, training or other authorized expenses. For example, a per diem of $25 per authorized meeting is allowed, as is mileage driven to those meetings – at a rate of $0.555 per mile. Some commissioners don’t use their flex accounts, however, and most don’t use the entire amount. The payments are administered through the county clerk’s office.

Smith proposed replacing the current per diem system – which requires that commissioners submit a request for payment – and instead paying commissioners an automatic stipend as part of their compensation. The total stipend amounts would be capped at the flex account level of $3,550 per commissioner.

The stipends would be calculated based on the number of committees or boards to which a commissioner is appointed, as well as the number of meetings that each of those groups is expected to hold. 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. At the high end, more than 24 meetings would pay $1,000. Appointments of commissioners to boards and committees will be made at the beginning of 2013.

On Smith’s proposal, commissioners would be able to waive their stipends by giving written notice to the county clerk. According to a two-page document provided by Smith, stipends would be pro-rated, aggregated and paid out biweekly as part of a commissioner’s paycheck. [.pdf of draft stipend guidelines]

In explaining his rationale for the change to stipend payments, Smith said it’s important to make sure that serving on the board is accessible to everyone. People who are paid hourly shouldn’t have to choose between their job and their passion for serving the county, he said. The change also takes away the paperwork involved, he said, and attempts to be fair without adding complexity to the system.

Per diems came under fire during the 2010 election season, and resulted in repayment – by most commissioners who were on the board at that time – of a portion of their per diem requests that were determined to be ineligible under board rules. Smith was one of the last commissioners to make a repayment, doing so only in early 2012 and agreeing to repay only some of the money he had been deemed ineligible to claim, in an arrangement that appears to have taken place outside the independent review process. [See Chronicle coverage: "Compensation Change for County Board?"]

The proposed changes do not affect mileage payments – commissioners can continue to request reimbursement for mileage to authorized meetings. Nor does it affect fringe benefits. Fringe benefits include $1,163 that the county pays into a retirement account for each commissioner, as well as payment of 50% of health care insurance if the commissioner chooses to obtain health care through the county as a part-time employee.

Commissioner Compensation: Board Debate

Wes Prater asked whether these changes in per diem would apply to payments for members of the general public who serve on county committees and commissions. Conan Smith said the policy for those positions would be set by the next board at the beginning of 2013 – so there would be no changes to those per diem payments at this time.

Prater objected to the fact that there was no accountability built into the system for attendance. He also noted that depending on how many appointments a commissioner had, the stipend approach could account for a significant increase in overall compensation.

Smith replied that only one appointment – to the county road commission – would require more than 20 meetings per year. His thinking, Smith said, was that the road commission work is more intense than other appointments and that the other people at those meetings – the three road commissioners, who are appointed by the county board – each receive $10,000 in annual compensation.

Dan Smith thanked Conan Smith for his work in putting together this proposal. D. Smith said he’d given it a lot of thought, and had talked with a few other commissioners about the issue. The approach of using stipends recognizes that there’s work involved on these appointments that doesn’t entail just going to meetings, he said. He supported that approach, but not the salary increase.

Commissioner Compensation: Board Debate – Proposed Amendment (Salary Unchanged)

Saying that he felt it was the wrong time for a salary increase, Dan Smith proposed an amendment that would keep base salaries at the current level of $15,500. He liked the idea of pegging the salary to a specific level tied to other county employees’ compensation – he felt that was appropriate. But that should be left to future boards to implement. Regarding the argument that salaries hadn’t increased with inflation (a rationale for the increase that had been noted by Conan Smith in his cover memo for the resolution), Dan Smith said that previous boards could have addressed it, but didn’t. When the current commissioners took office, they were aware of the compensation level. As for the rationale that commissioners will be shouldering more work because the board will be smaller due to redistricting, Smith noted that other county employees also are being asked to do more work for about the same amount they’ve previously been paid.

In two years, the economic situation might be different and the next board could reconsider an increase, Dan Smith said. He moved to amend the resolution to keep salary levels unchanged.

Outcome: There was no second to this amendment, so it did not move forward for a vote.

Commissioner Compensation: Board Debate – Proposed Amendment (Stipends at $200)

Dan Smith then argued that the proposed schedule of stipend payments – with different pay based on the number of meetings that each board, committee or commission was expected to meet – was simply “putting per diems in stipends’ clothing.”

Here’s the stipend schedule:

Proposed stipend schedule of payments for Washtenaw County board of commissioners.

Rather than use this approach, Smith proposed making a flat $200 stipend per appointment.

Conan Smith said he’d been grappling with how to deal with the different workloads of certain appointments. The stipend schedule was an attempt to reflect those differing workloads. He suggested that they try this approach for one term, to see if it ameliorates the discrepancy between appointments with only one meeting per year, and those that require 24.

Outcome: The proposed amendment failed, with support only from Dan Smith.

Commissioner Compensation: Board Debate – Proposed Amendment (No Stipends for Quorum)

Dan Smith cited a section of the proposed general policies that referred to meetings that are attended by a quorum of the board:

a. The Board of Commissioners shall identify the boards, committees and commissions eligible for compensatory service in its Rules and Regulations.
i. The Board of Commissioners may include on the list of eligible bodies any committee, subcommittee meeting or Working Session of the Board, provided that its meetings have been noticed in accordance with the Open Meeting Act, Public Act 267 of 1976.

He moved to strike (i), noting that these meetings should be part of the board’s regular work that’s covered by salaries, and should not be eligible for extra compensation.

Outcome: The amendment passed, with dissent from Alicia Ping. This means that regular board meetings, ways & means committee meetings, and working sessions will not be included in calculations for board stipends.

Commissioner Compensation: Board Debate – Proposed Amendment (Extra for Chairs)

The original proposal called for the chair of the board to earn $3,000 more than the base salary, and for the chairs of the ways & means committee and working session to earn $1,000 more. [A friendly amendment offered by Dan Smith changed the description of those latter two positions to "chairs of permanent standing committees."]

Alicia Ping objected to having different levels of increased pay for the chairs, saying that all chairs should get equal increases. The chair of the board is just a ceremonial figurehead, she said, and not more important than other commissioners. Rolland Sizemore Jr. said he’s served as chair for all three groups, and reported that it’s far easier to be chair of the working session. If you’re a good board chair, he said, “you’re working all the time.”

Commissioner Rolland Sizemore Jr.

Conan Smith reported that when he was previously chair of ways & means, he attended budget planning meetings every other week, as well as meetings to plan for those budget sessions. None of those were eligible for per diems, he said. Now, as board chair, there are many “ministerial” duties – such as signing contracts – that eat up time, he said.

Yousef Rabhi proposed an amendment giving all chairs a $3,000 increase.

His amendment was supported by Conan Smith, who said the board will “work our chairs to death next year.” Smith cited a range of issues that the board will be dealing with: planning and policy decisions for the 2014-2015 budget, implementation of the new animal control arrangement, and the possibility of incorporating the road commission into the county operations. He also noted that a smaller nine-member board will mean a greater workload for everyone.

Rolland Sizemore Jr. objected to the change, noted that they’d been talking about the need to save money, but are now increasing expenses.

Rabhi said his intent was to reflect the leadership roles of the different chairs. He believed they should work as a team, and that their pay should be equal because of that. [There was no proposal or discussion about equalizing the pay by decreasing the chair's extra compensation to $1,000.]

The initial vote on this amendment was taken as a voice vote, but the outcome was unclear. A roll call vote was taken instead.

Outcome: The amendment passed on a 7-3 vote, over dissent by Dan Smith, Rolland Sizemore Jr. and Rob Turner. Ronnie Peterson was absent. This means that all officers of the board will be paid $3,000 above the base salary.

Commissioner Compensation: Board Debate – Vote on Main Resolution

There was little additional discussion on the main resolution.

Outcome: Changes to compensation, as amended, were given initial approval on an 8-2 vote, over dissent by Dan Smith and Rolland Sizemore Jr. Ronnie Peterson was absent. The final vote will come on Dec. 5.

Humane Society Contract

A Nov. 7 agenda item called for the county board to authorize contracting with the Humane Society of Huron Valley for $500,000 annually. It would enable the administration to contract with HSHV for up to four years, with the option of adjusting the contract.

According to a staff memo accompanying the resolution, county administrator Verna McDaniel has received preliminary commitments from five municipalities that have their own animal control ordinances, and that have agreed to help the offset the cost of the HSHV contract. Those entities are the cities of Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti, Ypsilanti Township, Pittsfield Township, and Superior Township. The memo states that those local governments have agreed to execute contracts with the county to provide funding for animal control services. The Nov. 7 resolution also authorized McDaniel to finalize contracts with each of these local entities. [For additional background, see Chronicle coverage: “Task Force: Negotiate with Humane Society.”]

Conan Smith, the board’s chair, introduced the resolution by praising Rob Turner for his leadership on this issue, helping “with what could have been really treacherous waters.” Turner served on both the board’s policy task force and a separate group led by sheriff Jerry Clayton that helped determine the cost of HSHV services.

Humane Society Contract: Board Debate

Leah Gunn led off the discussion by calling it a “gnarly” problem, adding that she’d reluctantly support this resolution. She said she was “vexed,” contending that HSHV had never presented the county with a cost-per-dog amount, and never told the county how many dogs the county is responsible for. The county is not responsible for animals brought to HSHV that have owners. “We should not be responsible for people’s pets,” she said. Gunn concluded by saying she’d support the resolution out of respect for commissioner Rob Turner and county administrator Verna McDaniel, who had worked hard on it. But she also hoped to get more specific information from HSHV in the future.

Washtenaw County commissioner Rob Turner (District 1).

Turner replied, saying he apologized if the cost breakdown wasn’t adequately shared, but he said that HSHV had provided the information. It works out to about $38 per day for stray dogs, he said, with an average 10-day hold. Just for stray dogs, HSHV calculated its annual cost for county services at about $542,000. In addition, the cost for handling animal cruelty cases is about $350,000, Turner said. So the total cost of county services provided by HSHV is about $890,000. He said the resolution is intended to get the county as close as possible to covering HSHV’s actual costs.

Responding to a question from Barbara Bergman, Turner reported that the costs don’t include a calculation of HSHV’s in-kind volunteer services. If that amount were included, it would increase the cost to $50-$60 per day, he said.

Bergman said she’d support the resolution reluctantly, but “I’m not happy about it.” Basic needs like food and shelter come first for her, she said, so she’d be diverting her charitable contributions to organizations that provide food for those in need.

Humane Society Contract: Board Debate – Procurement Policy

Wes Prater argued that the county’s procurement policy requires the county to issue a request for proposals (RFP). That policy isn’t being followed, he said, so the board is doing business in a way that violates county policy. Is this the kind of organization they’re going to run in a lame-duck session? he asked.

Prater observed that the county has been “diddling around” with this issue for two years. When commissioners adopted the general fund budget in 2011, they allocated $250,000 for animal control services in 2012 and 2013. Yet here they are, back at the previous $500,000 annual level, he said. Prater maintained that they were violating county policy and they shouldn’t be handling the situation in this way.

Prater noted that the resolution being considered by the board didn’t include a scope of services for the HSHV contract, or even a list of state-mandated services that the county is required to provide, to indicate whether the county is in compliance. Commissioners took an oath of office to uphold the law, he said, “and we’re absolutely not doing it.”

Corporation counsel Curtis Hedger responded to Prater’s concerns. HSHV is the only qualified, licensed entity within Washtenaw County that can provide these services, he said. The procurement policy has a provision for awarding sole-source contracts, at the discretion of the administrator. The board could still require a competitive bid, he said, but it’s important to take into account the cost of going outside the county for those services.

Prater replied that the county has contracts frequently with out-of-county vendors. Hedger noted that in this case, using such an entity would mean that Washtenaw County residents would be required to travel farther in order to pick up their pets. Prater indicated that if people wanted their pets, they could go and get them – regardless of the location.

Humane Society Contract: Board Debate – Amendment (Contract Adjustments)

Dan Smith was concerned about the first resolved clause – specifically, the phrase “with the potential to adjust for inflation.”

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Washtenaw County Board of Commissioners authorizes the County Administrator to work with the Office of Corporation Counsel to finalize and execute a contract for up to four years with the Humane Society of Huron Valley for $500,000 per year, with the potential to adjust for inflation.

Smith noted that the state’s Proposition A puts a cap on increases of taxable value at no more than 5% per year. [The state ballot initiative, passed by voters in 1994, put in place a cap of 5% or the rate of inflation, whichever is lower.] If inflation increases at a higher rate than 5%, then HSHV would be paid a higher increase than the county was getting in property tax revenues. He suggested amending the clause to substitute the phrase “with the potential to adjust based on property tax revenue changes.”

There was some confusion about the meaning and intent of Smith’s suggested amendment. Alicia Ping wondered how it would work, and how it would relate to inflation changes as measured by the CPI (consumer price index).

County administrator Verna McDaniel suggested changing the language of the resolution to put a 3% cap in place for potential contract increases.

Conan Smith observed that inflation affects the HSHV’s cost of providing services, while Dan Smith’s amendment ties any contract changes to the county’s ability to pay – a wiser approach, Conan Smith said. It recognizes the opportunity for increases, but limits it to an amount that’s within the county’s ability to pay.

Curtis Hedger, the county’s corporation counsel, pointed out that the word “potential” in the original clause was intended to provide the county with flexibility in negotiations. There was no requirement to adjust the contract amount.

Ping at one point indicated she’d like to amend Dan Smith’s amendment to include a 3% cap on any potential increases, as McDaniel had suggested. Conan Smith said he’d oppose that move because it would put an additional constraint on potential increases – a limit lower than the state’s 5% cap. He liked pegging any change to the county’s revenues in a straightforward way.

Barbara Bergman expressed concern about the potential of handing HSHV several million dollars, describing it as a “windfall” that none of the commissioners would want to consider. Conan Smith said that although the board wouldn’t need to approve the contract that McDaniel negotiates, commissioners would still be able to see it. The resolution they were voting on that night sets a framework for negotiations, he said. It doesn’t guarantee that the contract amount will be higher or lower in the future.

Saying that the discussion had become ridiculous, Ping withdrew her proposed 3% cap amendment. The vote then centered on a slightly revised version of Dan Smith’s original amendment (new language in italics):

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Washtenaw County Board of Commissioners authorizes the County Administrator to work with the Office of Corporation Counsel to finalize and execute a contract for up to four years with the Humane Society of Huron Valley for $500,000 per year, with the potential to adjust for inflation on the basis of the rate of taxable value change.

Outcome: The amendment passed on a 6-4 vote, with dissent from Leah Gunn, Alicia Ping, Wes Prater and Rolland Sizemore Jr.

Humane Society Contract: Board Debate – Amendment (New Revenue)

Several commissioners expressed concern about the final resolved clause. It stated:

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Washtenaw County Board of Commissioners declares that new animal control related revenue or increased contractual revenue from those local governmental entities, which maintain their own animal control ordinances which may be identified during the four-year contract period between the County and Humane Society of Huron Valley, shall be directed to the Humane Society for Huron Valley.

Yousef Rabhi felt that this opened the door too much, and that it was not proper to direct all new revenue to HSHV. If there is additional revenue, the board should decide how it’s allocated, he said. Rabhi noted that he had asked for this clause to be removed from the draft, and wondered why it had been left in.

County administrator Verna McDaniel said there was keen interest on the part of HSHV to defray more of their costs, which she said they estimate to be closer to $800,000 annually for services provided to the county. This clause about new revenue was seen as a way to make the new contract more appealing to the HSHV board, she said.

Rabhi proposed adding an additional sentence: “Any other animal control-related revenue will be used to provide animal control services as directed by the board of commissioners.”

Conan Smith said the board had discussed how the county would likely incur costs related to enforcement of the animal control ordinance, so it would be appropriate to offset those costs with additional revenue.

Wes Prater objected again to the way the process was being handled, saying it didn’t make any sense to him – the county was giving HSHV absolute control of the purse strings. “I just can’t believe this is happening!”

Outcome: The amendment passed on a 9-1 vote, with dissent from Wes Prater.

Humane Society Contract: Board Debate – Concluding Remarks

Rolland Sizemore Jr. said he wouldn’t support this resolution. He felt that the administrator should bring back the contract with HSHV for approval – saying items like this should be approved by the board. He also had a “real problem” with HSHV, saying they hadn’t offered to help or provide any suggestions to address new ways of handling animal control services. The county will be negotiating with its unions and asking for cuts, he said, yet commissioners are prepared to give HSHV whatever it wants “without any questions.”

Commissioners Yousef Rabhi and Rolland Sizemore Jr.

Sizemore also objected to the county “picking up the slack” of other communities that had their own animal control ordinances.

Rob Turner responded, noting that at the meetings held over the past few months by the policy task force and the sheriff’s working group, HSHV members had brought up many suggestions and ideas. HSHV has been very pro-active, he said. Although many of the other communities with animal control ordinances already have their budgets in place for 2013, Turner said, if the county can work out a longer-term contract with HSHV, it’s possible that negotiations can occur with those communities and that they’ll provide more revenues in the future.

Sizemore noted that if those communities don’t pay the county, there’s no recourse. Turner believed the county could withhold providing animal control services for those communities, if they didn’t pay. That’s a big incentive, Turner said. Sizemore countered by saying that the county would have to take responsibility for some of those services anyway, because of its state mandate.

Dan Smith said he was deeply bothered by this whole process. He characterized it as returning to “square one” – that is, the $500,000 level that the county had paid in 2011. There have been meetings on top of meetings, he said, with apparently no progress and insufficient information provided. He described the $38-per-day amount as “obscenely high,” equating it to payments for a $225,000 mortgage. For two dogs at $76 a day, it could provide them a pretty nice hotel room, he joked.

The proposal doesn’t seem like a solution, Smith said. It seems like the board is just putting the problem away for four years. Animal control services are one of the few mandated services for which the county uses a third-party contractor, and it creates a whole host of questions about who interprets the mandate, he said. Saying that he wished they had made more progress, Smith said he’d be voting no on the resolution.

Alicia Ping disagreed with Smith. The intent was never to get services at a lower level, she said. Rather, the process was intended to arrive at a determination about the cost of providing those services. Whether Smith agreed with the amount was irrelevant, she said. “The cost is what the cost is.” Ping didn’t feel the process had been a waste of anyone’s time, and she felt that the board had all the information they needed.

Ping then called the question, a procedural move intended to end debate and force a vote. The vote on calling the question was unanimous.

Outcome: The main resolution as amended passed on a 7-3 vote. Voting against the resolution were Dan Smith, Wes Prater and Rolland Sizemore Jr. Ronnie Peterson was absent.

Civil Infractions Ordinance

An agenda item later in the meeting – also related to animal control services – asked commissioners to give final approval to a civil infractions ordinance. The ordinance would give the county more flexibility to designate violations of other county ordinances as a civil infraction, rather than a criminal misdemeanor. [.pdf of proposed ordinance] The board had taken an initial vote on the resolution at its Oct. 17, 2012 meeting.

In the context of animal control, enforcement of the county’s dog licensing ordinance is low because the current penalty – a criminal misdemeanor of 90 days in jail or a $500 fine – is relatively harsh. The idea is that enforcement would improve if a lesser civil infraction could be used. The proposed fines would be $50 for a first offense, $100 for a second offense, and $500 for a third or any subsequent offense. An increase in dog licenses would provide additional revenue to be used for animal control services.

Civil Infractions Ordinance – Public Hearing

Thomas Partridge was the only person to speak during a public hearing on the proposed ordinance. He objected to “unnamed civil infractions and unnamed enforcers” that he believed would target people who are unable to protect themselves or unable to keep up their homes like country clubs with manicured lawns. He advocated that the board vote down the entire ordinance.

Outcome: There was no discussion on this item and it was approved unanimously as part of the board’s consent agenda.

2013 Budget Reaffirmation

At their Nov. 7 meeting, commissioners were asked to give initial approval to a 2013 general fund budget of $102.84 million, with a net increase of one full-time position. [.pdf of proposed 2013 budget]

The county works on a two-year budget planning cycle. In late 2011, commissioners set the budget for 2012 and 2013. However, state law mandates that the board must approve the budget annually. So this year, the vote on a budget is an “reaffirmation” for 2013, including several proposed adjustments. The original 2013 budget proposed a year ago was for general fund revenues and expenses of $97.066 million – $5.774 million less than the current proposal.

Property taxes typically account for about 63% of revenues, and the general fund budget is based on an operating millage rate of 4.5493 mills. Because property values have not decreased as much as originally anticipated, the county expects about $2.4 million more in property tax revenues for 2013 than it had previously accounted for in the 2013 budget. The budget assumes that property tax revenues will be 2% lower than in 2012. The 2013 budget includes a planned use of $3.287 million from the fund balance. Of that, about $2 million is estimated to be carried over from a budget surplus in 2012.

The largest expenditures relate to personnel, which accounts for 66% of general fund expenses. The proposed 2013 budget shows a $4.7 million increase in that category, compared to the original 2013 budget that commissioners approved in 2011. According to a staff memo, those additional costs relate to increases in fringe benefits, medical costs, and a higher number retirees than expected. There were 118 retirements in 2011, which added to pension costs.

2013 Budget Affirmation: Board Discussion – Borrowing from Fund Balances

Commissioners asked several questions for clarification. Dan Smith also raised concerns over one of the new policies that accompanied the budget resolution. It allows the county to replenish the general fund balance by “borrowing” from other county fund balances:

37. Due to the change in the timing of the collection of property tax revenue, which is now seven months into operations of a fiscal year, there is the likelihood that the General Fund (1010) cash balance may be depleted to a negative balance prior to the collection of the July tax levy. In the event the General Fund (1010) does experience a negative cash balance funds held within the Capital Reserve Fund (4060), Capital Equipment Fund (4010), and the 1/8 Mill Capital Improvement Fund (4010) may be utilized to be borrowed from as these funds are supported by allocated general revenues. In the event these funds have insufficient cash balances to address the negative balance within the General Fund other funds within the pooled cash account may be borrowed from. All funds borrowed will be repaid immediately upon collection of the July property tax levy.

Kelly Belknap, the county’s finance director, explained that the policy makes transparent the process of providing a financial buffer, as the county awaits receipt of tax revenues that aren’t available until July. From May until July, the general fund cash balance gets “really lean,” she said. This policy allows the county to borrow from its other fund balances to replenish the general fund until those July tax revenues are available. Then, the money is returned to the other fund balances.

Administrative analyst Elaine Holleran gives a handout to county commissioner Dan Smith during the Nov. 7 meeting.

Dan Smith noted that by using these other fund balances, there was no need to pay interest when borrowing occurred. But he wondered why this policy was needed now, though it apparently hadn’t been needed in the past?

Belknap replied that the county’s reserve of state-shared revenues, which previously had been as high as $26 million, had helped provide the kind of buffer that was needed. But as those funds have been spent – the reserves will be depleted in 2013 – that buffer is gone.

Smith thought the situation provided an argument for building up the general fund balance. That way, there wouldn’t be the need for borrowing. He said the proposed policy set an extremely dangerous precedent, creating a habit that the county shouldn’t start. Smith noted that when the county received higher-than-expected property tax revenues in 2012, those revenues were spent, not saved. He also wasn’t happy about the $5.7 million increase in the 2013 general fund budget. The county is still in dire financial straits, he said. “We need to bank that money, not spend it.”

Alicia Ping wondered whether there were any regulations over this kind of internal borrowing. She was especially concerned about the timing, and didn’t want the county to start dipping into those borrowed funds any sooner than was absolutely necessary. Belknap said the board could set any parameters it wanted – it was all county money. The goal is to not borrow until as close to July as possible, she said. Belknap also noted that the county hasn’t needed to draw as much from the fund balance as it has budgeted for in 2012, and she hoped that trend would continue in 2013.

Both Belknap and county administrator Verna McDaniel acknowledged the need to build the fund balance. McDaniel said it was about $4-5 million away from being stable – a level that could secure a better bond rating for the county.

At the end of 2012, the general fund balance is expected to be $16.544 million. The 2013 budget calls for using $3.287 million from the fund balance, with a projected balance of $13.257 million at the end of 2013. A year ago, the county had anticipated needing to draw more than that from the fund balance in 2013 – $3.805 million.

2013 Budget Affirmation: Board Discussion – Long-Term Liabilities

Wes Prater was concerned about the county’s long-term liabilities, which he pegged at $430 million. In 2007, he noted, that amount had been about $379 million – it had grown nearly $50 million in five years. Kelly Belknap pointed out that the amount Prater referred to included not just retirement obligations but all long-term liabilities, including debt from bonds for public works and other capital projects.

Prater said the county needed to take these liabilities seriously, and that they couldn’t afford to accumulate those amounts at the same rate each year.

Outcome: Initial approval for the 2013 budget was given on a 9-1 7-3 vote, with dissent from Wes Prater, Dan Smith and Rolland Sizemore Jr. Ronnie Peterson was absent. A final vote and public hearing will occur at the board’s Dec. 5 meeting.

Public Transportation

At the county board’s Oct. 17, 2012 meeting, commissioner Wes Prater had asked for an update about proposed state legislation regarding creation of a regional transit authority (RTA) for southeast Michigan – the city of Detroit and the counties of Washtenaw, Wayne, Oakland and Macomb. Conan Smith has been an advocate for that effort, both as chair of the county board and in his role as executive director of the Michigan Suburbs Alliance.

About a year ago, at its Sept. 21, 2011 meeting, the board unanimously passed a resolution of support for the RTA. From then until the Oct. 17 meeting, little discussion of the RTA has taken place at commission meetings, and several commissioners seemed unaware of the county’s level of involvement in that effort.

At the county board’s Nov. 7 meeting, Dan Smith brought forward a resolution to rescind the board’s previous support. [.pdf of resolution to rescind support of the RTA]

The resolution also stated that the board opposes any other legislation that would involve Washtenaw County in an RTA:

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Washtenaw County Board of Commissioners opposes legislation which would include Washtenaw County in a Regional Transportation Authority, which does not protect:

• The ability of county entities to manage designated transportation funding.
• The right of county entities to independently mange a transit system.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Washtenaw County Board of Commissioners supports the concept of a Regional Transportation Authority to enhance interconnectivity among the communities of the southeast Michigan region, but feels that Washtenaw County and the voters thereof should determine when to join the Authority.

Smith’s original draft – which was distributed to commissioners – had included references to specific pending state legislation. After a sidebar discussion with Conan Smith, Dan Smith revised the language to eliminate the citations to HB 5309 and SB 909.

Public Transportation: Board Debate

During deliberations, Conan Smith and Yousef Rabhi both thanked Dan Smith for “softening” the resolution, though both said they couldn’t support it, despite that change.

Rabhi said he was very supportive of the RTA legislation, and he knew that everyone in Lansing believed more amendments were needed. That process is underway, he said. Rabhi noted that when he and Barbara Bergman had been appointed to an advocacy group called R-PATH (Regional Partners Advocating Transit Here), they attended meetings at which a range of concerns had been aired. Yet the overwhelming sense was support for the general concept of the RTA, he said. Regional transit has been tried many times but has failed in the past because everyone wanted to hold on to their turf, he said.

Conan Smith spoke at length about the challenges and need for the RTA. It’s been a complicated process that they’ve been working on for more than a year, he said. The interests of Washtenaw County have been difficult to elevate because of the relative size in population and the weight that it carries. But as home to major universities, the county has an extraordinary role to play, he said. The vision of the future – of Detroit as a vibrant urban area – is compromised by the current reality. It’s a mighty mountain to climb, he said, and there’s a long way to go.

Commissioners Alicia Ping and Wes Prater.

Conan Smith also summarized several issues and concerns that had been raised by the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority in regards to a possible RTA, including the impact of federal pass-through funds to the AATA, the ability to set fares and schedules, and the issue of providing sufficient funding for local transit services.

Saying he felt he’d be compromising his past conversations with the governor and others if he didn’t support the RTA, Conan Smith said he’d reluctantly oppose Dan Smith’s resolution, though he agreed with its values.

Rolland Sizemore Jr. said he wasn’t happy that Conan Smith had gone to Lansing and the Mackinac Policy Conference without informing the board. Yet noting that he serves on the board of the Detroit Region Aerotropolis, Sizemore wondered if the county board would be shooting itself in the foot by not supporting an RTA. He wasn’t sure how he would vote, but he did want the board to be updated regularly about these efforts. County residents should be informed, too, he said.

Wes Prater supported the RTA, but said it should be the county board that’s involved, not just the chair. It bothers him when someone speaks on behalf of the board “when they really don’t have the authority to do so.” Other commissioners don’t know what kind of commitments Conan Smith made, he said. “I think you disrespect us – I really do.”

Prater said the situation is becoming like the contract with the Humane Society of Huron Valley, which was discussed earlier in the meeting. It seems like the RTA would provide very little service in Washtenaw County, he said – just a stop in Ypsilanti and at Ann Arbor’s Blake Transit Center. He didn’t see that as being beneficial, and he wondered how much it would cost and how it would be paid for. “We should have learned from what happened with AATA,” Prater said, alluding to the effort to expand transit under an Act 196 authority.

[The following evening, at its Nov. 8, 2012 meeting, the Ann Arbor city council voted to opt out of the Act 196 authority. The action effectively ends that particular approach to expanded public transit, although the council's resolution did call for continued discussion of regional transportation options. For additional background, see Chronicle coverage: "End of Road for County Transit Effort?"]

Conan Smith apologized to Prater, saying he did not lack respect for his colleagues. At times, all commissioners are called on to speak on behalf of the county, he said. There was never any intent on his part to sneak anything past the board.

Rob Turner called the question, to end debate and force a vote on Dan Smith’s resolution. The vote to call the question passed over dissent by Conan Smith and Felicia Brabec.

Outcome: The resolution rescinding support of the RTA passed on a 6-4 vote, with dissent from Conan Smith, Yousef Rabhi, Felicia Brabec and Rolland Sizemore Jr. Ronnie Peterson was absent.

The board had originally scheduled an update on the RTA for its Nov. 8 working session – from Gary Owen with Governmental Consultant Services Inc., the Lansing-based firm that serves as the county’s lobbyist on state issues. However, following the board’s action on Nov. 7, that update was cancelled.

Appointments

The board made a raft of appointments to various boards, committees and commissions at its Nov. 7 meeting. Although there was no discussion other than a reading of the appointees’ names during that meeting, commissioners had discussed the choices for about an hour during an appointments caucus held immediately prior to the evening’s regular meeting. [.pdf of appointments application grid]

Appointments – Public Commentary

Benjamin Muth addressed the board during public commentary, saying he was there to advocate for his application to the Huron River Watershed Council. He wanted commissioners to see him and understand his intent. He’s a graduate of the Vermont Law School, which he described as the nation’s top environmental law school. He said he was born and raised in Michigan, and wanted to return to practice law here – specifically, a focus on water law to protect the Great Lakes. According to the cover letter and resumé provided to the board, Muth was born in Ann Arbor and attended Pioneer High School.

He told commissioners that he understood that the decision about appointments might already have been made. If so, he hoped they would consider him for future appointments. In addition to HRWC, he listed several other areas of interest, including the natural areas technical advisory committee, the agricultural lands preservation advisory committee, and the brownfield redevelopment authority.

Muth concluded his remarks by stating, “If you give me the opportunity, I’d like to go to work for you.”

Commissioner Alicia Ping told Muth that the appointments had been determined, but that they were excited he had attended the meeting. She said she was sure that when there’s an opening, he’d be getting a call.

Appointments – Pre-Meeting Caucus

All but one of the 11 commissioners attended an hour-long appointments caucus that began at 5:30 p.m. on Nov. 7, prior to the start of the 6:30 p.m. ways & means committee meeting. Ronnie Peterson was absent.

Commissioners were given a packet of materials that included cover letters and resumés for most applicants, as well as a grid that provided: (1) brief summaries of each board, committee or commission; (2) an indication of the number and types of appointments that were needed (some appointments require certain qualifications); and (3) a list of people who had applied.

Yousef Rabhi suggested that there are too many of these groups, and that a review is needed to see if some of them can be eliminated. If necessary, the responsibility for some groups could be shifted to others, he said.

Here are some highlights from that caucus discussion:

• Community Action Board: There were two open positions and two current members seeking reappointment: Mike DuRussell and Shoshana DeMaria. Conan Smith noted that in the past, the CAB had developed an “entitlement mentality” – that is, board members expected that in exchange for serving on the board, their groups would be awarded funding. That culture is changing, he said, but it’s been difficult. Other commissioners noted that the CAB members had also been accustomed to being paid for travel and meals at nice restaurants with their spouses. Leah Gunn described DuRussell, the current CAB chair, as not being “part of the problem” – she suggested that he be reappointed, and he was. However, DeMaria was not reappointed, and that position remains unfilled.
• Criminal Justice Community Collaborative: There were six vacancies but only three applicants, including two – Ann Arbor Township supervisor Mike Moran and Ann Arbor resident Mike Fried – who applied for reappointment. Barbara Bergman described CJCC as “basically pretty useless,” with nothing to do. Conan Smith reported that sheriff Jerry Clayton felt it should be dissolved. Smith noted that judges don’t attend the meetings: “It’s hard to collaborate with justice when justice isn’t there.” Wes Prater suggested looking at the resolution that created CJCC to see if its original purpose might be served by another group.
• Economic Development Corporation: There was one opening for a member of the general public. The current representative, Pam Horiszny, did not seek reappointment. She is CFO at the Ann Arbor YMCA, and a trustee of the Washtenaw Community College. There were five new applicants. However, Conan Smith said he’s interested in restructuring the EDC so that it could be a convening forum for members of other entities, like local downtown development authorities (DDAs), local development finance authorities (LDFAs) and other groups doing economic development work. The idea would be to help coordinate those activities countywide. In light of that, no appointments were recommended. [In March of 2012, The Chronicle covered on of the EDC's rare meetings: "County EDC: Money to Loan, But No Deals."]
• Historic District Commission: Conan Smith said he hoped to shift the HDC’s focus to be a driver of economic development. In the past, this group hasn’t leveraged its capacity in that regard, he said – by exploring tax credits for historic preservation, for example. Leah Gunn noted that the group tends to get bogged down in “minutia.” Smith wanted to appoint people who would see the value of their role in economic development. Though there were some concerns expressed about reappointing local attorney Jean King – as her health problems sometimes prevent participation. There were no other applicants to fill the required slot for an attorney, so she was reappointed. Other appointments were new to the HDC: Leslie Ledbetter, James Mann, Courtney Miller, and Tony Ramirez.
• Road Commission: Conan Smith suggested not making an appointment, but letting the current road commissioner whose term is expiring continue to serve. That road commissioner is Doug Fuller.  [The two other road commissioners are Fred Veigel and Ken Schwartz, a former county commissioner.] Smith wanted to wait until the board of commissioners could have a conversation next year about possible consolidation of the road commission with overall county operations. Currently, the road commission operates independently, although its governing board of three road commissioners is appointed by the county board. [Past attempts by the board to make changes at the road commission – to expand the number of commissioners, for example – have been contentious.]

Appointments – Board Vote

Outcome: Appointments were approved unanimously, without discussion.

Finance Policy

Two items were introduced during the meeting that related to finance policy.

The board was asked to authorize a policy on the use of lines of credit issued by vendors. According to a staff memo, using lines of credit reduces the need to issue employee credit cards, but there is not a current policy in place to ensure effective internal controls. [.pdf of resolution and policy]

During the Nov. 7 meeting, Kelly Belknap – the county’s finance director – told commissioners that the proposed policy simply formalizes what’s already in practice.

The board was also asked to approve an update to the county’s procurement policy. [.pdf of updated procurement policy, with changes highlighted] According to a staff memo, the changes do the following: (1) remove the procurement card process from the policy; (2) reflect the processes/internal controls regarding the use of a county credit card; and (3) direct departments to use environmentally appropriate products when appropriate. The memo notes that because banks offer the same limits and software for procurement cards and credit cards, there is no need for the county to use both types of cards.

Outcome: The two resolutions to the county’s finance policy were approved unanimously as part of the board’s consent agenda. Both initial and final approvals were given at the Nov. 7 meeting.

Coordinated Funding

A one-year extension for a pilot program using a “coordinated funding” model to support local human services was on the Nov. 7 agenda for final consideration. An initial vote had been taken on Oct. 17, 2012.

The county is one of five partners in the coordinated funding approach. Other partners are the city of Ann Arbor, United Way of Washtenaw County, Washtenaw Urban County, and the Ann Arbor Area Community Foundation. The Ann Arbor city council approved the one-year extension at its Oct. 15, 2012 meeting.

The process has three parts: planning/coordination, program operations, and capacity-building. The approach targets six priority areas, and identifies lead agencies for each area: (1) housing and homelessness – Washtenaw Housing Alliance; (2) aging – Blueprint for Aging; (3) school-aged youth – Washtenaw Alliance for Children and Youth; (4) children birth to six – Success by Six; (5) health – Washtenaw Health Plan; and (6) hunger relief – Food Gatherers.

The total process puts $4.935 million into local human services nonprofits. The extension of the coordinated funding approach for a third year means that nonprofits receiving funding currently would not need to reapply for support. The extension by one year would allow for the evaluation process for the pilot period to finish, likely by early 2013. It would also allow a better opportunity to provide the outcome data on the program so far.

Coordinated Funding – Public Commentary

As she has on several occasions at meetings of the county board and other local governing bodies, Lily Au spoke against the coordinated funding approach.

Outcome: Without discussion, the board gave final approval to a one-year extension for the coordinated funding program.

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: Haircut for Charity

At the start of the meeting, Yousef Rabhi signaled that something was different by letting his nearly-waist-length hair down – he typically wears it tied back.

Rabhi announced that he hadn’t cut his hair in a long time, and he thought he’d get a haircut and turn it into a fundraiser, too. He hopes to raise $500 for every inch he cuts, to raise money for three local nonprofits: Shelter Association of Washtenaw County, Interfaith Hospitality Network, and SafeHouse Center. Supporting these shelters is especially important as winter approaches, he said.

Rabhi said he plans to give his hair to Locks of Love or a similar organization. The highest donors might also be able to vote on his new hairstyle. His goal is to make it a fun activity and engage the community while raising as much money as possible for these groups. He hopes to post a website for the effort by Thanksgiving, and run the fundraiser through year’s end.

Several commissioners pledged support. Conan Smith said he’d give $500 for the first inch, plus $50 for each quarter-inch of facial hair that Rabhi removed.

Dan Smith wondered if Rabhi intended to match the hairstyles of sheriff Jerry Clayton, corporate counsel Curtis Hedger or Greg Dill, infrastructure management director – all three men have shaved heads. Rabhi indicated he wasn’t sure he’d go that far. Wes Prater said he’d pledge $500 for the inch of hair that’s closest to Rabhi’s scalp.

Communications & Commentary: Warming Center

Four people addressed the board during public commentary about the need for a daytime warming center for the area’s homeless. Orian Zakai told commissioners that now, there are only two places for people to go during the day: (1) the Ann Arbor District Library, where you have to be careful not to fall asleep or you’ll get kicked out; and (2) a limited number of chairs at the Delonis Center, where you can stay during the day if you’re fortunate enough to be housed there, she said. Zakai described the Imagine Warming Centers effort, and said the group is now holding activities once a week at the Delonis Center. That’s successful, she said, but they need a permanent space.

Several supporters in the audience applauded after remarks by Zakai and two others who spoke in support of a warming center.

During the second opportunity for public commentary later in the meeting, Alexandra Hoffman said she hadn’t planned to speak. But there had been no commissioner response to the previous commentary about a warming center, she said, and instead their remarks had been followed by “disturbingly lighthearted talk about haircuts.” It’s important to talk about the successes in dealing with homelessness, she said, but it’s equally important to talk about failures. It’s atrocious that there’s no longer a daytime drop-in center at Delonis. The temperatures are already falling below freezing. The supporters of the Imagine Warming Centers are doing the best they can, but they need support, Hoffman said. She urged commissioners to please open the door, and not to be afraid of their own failings. Things can get better, she concluded, and commissioners can play a major role in that.

Yousef Rabhi – the commissioner who had introduced the “lighthearted talk about haircuts” – thanked those who had spoken and said it wasn’t his intent to make light of that situation. He had hoped to raise awareness and money for the issue that the speakers had addressed. Washtenaw County is great, but they can always do more, he said. Rabhi appreciated that the group was challenging the board on that. He noted that even though the county was under financial constraints because of the economy, they did not cut funding for nonprofits that provide human services. He said the county needs more citizen advocates, like those who had spoken to the board, to help understand the needs of the community.

Rolland Sizemore Jr. promised to try to find space that might be available in commercial buildings that aren’t currently occupied.

Communications & Commentary: Thomas Partridge

In addition to the remarks reported previously in this article, Thomas Partridge spoke during one of the two general public commentary slots of the evening. He advocated for the county’s most vulnerable residents, urging the board to take action on addressing homelessness, affordable housing, public transit and other issues.

Present: Barbara Bergman, Felicia Brabec, Leah Gunn, Alicia Ping, Wes Prater, Yousef Rabhi, Rolland Sizemore Jr., Conan Smith, Dan Smith, Rob Turner.

Absent: Ronnie Peterson.

Next regular board meeting: Wednesday, Dec. 5, 2012 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!

On Nov. 5, two days before their meeting, board chair Conan Smith had emailed commissioners a draft proposal that he described as “a straw-man policy to poke at.” [.pdf of proposal emailed from Smith to the board] The basics of his proposal remained in place, though some amendments were made during the Nov. 7 meeting.

Most commissioners currently are paid a salary of $15,500. The new amount of $15,750 is calculated by indexing it to one-half the median “step” of the lowest grade salary among county employees. Smith’s resolution directs future boards to adjust commissioner salaries based on this same calculation. During deliberations on Nov. 7, Dan Smith proposed an amendment that would keep salaries at their current levels, but it was not seconded.

Officers of the board earn more than other commissioners. The board chair, Conan Smith, is currently paid $18,500. The board vice chair, Alicia Ping, earns $16,000, while chairs of the board’s ways & means committee (Rolland Sizemore Jr.) and working session (Yousef Rabhi) are each paid $16,500.

Yousef Rabhi proposed an amendment to increase the pay for chairs of the ways & means committee and the working session – bringing them to the same level as the board chair, at $3,000 more annually than the base salary of other commissioners. His amendment passed on a 7-3 vote, with dissent from Dan Smith, Rolland Sizemore Jr. and Rob Turner. So, unlike the current compensation arrangement, vice chairs will receive the same base salary as other commissioners.

Currently, commissioners also have a $3,550 flex account to use for per diem and mileage reimbursements, training or other authorized expenses. For example, a per diem of $25 per authorized meeting is allowed, as is mileage driven to those meetings – at a current rate of $0.555 per mile. Some commissioners don’t use their flex accounts, however, and most don’t use the entire amount. The payments are administered through the county clerk’s office.

At an Oct. 18 working session, Conan Smith had indicated his intent to bring forward a proposal on commissioner compensation. [See Chronicle coverage: "Compensation Change for County Board?"] He described replacing the current per diem system – which requires that commissioners submit a request for payment – and instead paying commissioners an automatic stipend as part of their compensation. Per diems came under fire during the 2010 election season, and resulted in repayment – by most commissioners who were on the board at that time – of a portion of their per diem requests that were determined to be ineligible under board rules.

Conan Smith’s resolution proposed making 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 increased based on the number of meetings. At the high end, more than 24 meetings would pay $1,000. Commissioners would be able to waive their stipends by giving written notice to the county clerk.

During the Nov. 7 deliberations, Dan Smith proposed eliminating these staggered amounts and replacing them with a flat $200 annual stipend per appointment. That amendment failed – as  he was the only one voting in favor of it.

Changes to compensation for an upcoming term must be set by the board before that term starts. So for the two-year term beginning in January 2013, any changes in compensation must be made before the end of 2012. The board has only one more scheduled regular meeting this year to take the final vote – on Dec. 5.

This brief was filed from the boardroom of the county administration building at 220 N. Main in Ann Arbor. A more detailed report will follow: [link]

Conan Smith, chair of the Washtenaw County board of commissioners, at the Oct. 17, 2012 board meeting. At an Oct. 18 working session, Smith indicated that he might bring forward a proposal to the board’s Nov. 7 meeting for changing commissioner compensation.

The topic was brought up at an Oct. 18 working session, which was attended by county clerk Larry Kestenbaum at the invitation of board chair Conan Smith. Kestenbaum’s office is responsible for administering the requests for per diem and mileage payments that commissioners make for attending certain meetings.

During that working session, Smith indicated there had been a number of recent conversations about commissioner compensation, and that he might bring to the Nov. 7 board meeting a proposal about possible changes.

No public discussion of this issue has taken place by the board of commissioners since the spring, when Dan Smith brought forward a proposal in March to cut commissioner compensation and benefits for 2013 and 2014 – by 5.7%. His intent was for the board to vote on a change before the May 15 filing deadline for county board candidates, so that candidates would have a clear understanding of their compensation before entering the race. His proposal gained no traction among other commissioners at the time.

Based on comments by Conan Smith at the Oct. 18 working session, he’s exploring the idea of replacing the current per diem system – which requires that commissioners submit a request for payment – and instead paying commissioners an automatic stipend as part of their compensation. Per diems came under fire during the 2010 election season, and resulted in repayment – by most commissioners who were on the board at that time – of a portion of their per diem requests that were determined to be ineligible under board rules.

The determination had come from an independent review conducted at the direction of the county administrator. In gathering background on this topic, The Chronicle learned that Conan Smith and Kestenbaum later struck an agreement under which Smith agreed to repay some of the money he had been deemed ineligible to claim, in an arrangement that appears to have taken place outside the independent review process.

When asked by Conan Smith at the Oct. 18 working session for his opinion on the issue of stipends, Kestenbaum was supportive of the change to stipends, describing the current system as a lot of bookkeeping for a small amount of money. He also observed that the approach of having stipends would eliminate the kind of political vulnerability that commissioners have experienced.

Board Compensation: Background

The process for setting compensation for county commissioners is governed in part by state law – Act 261 of 1966, Section 46.415. Changes for an upcoming term must be set by the board prior to the start of that term. So for the two-year term beginning in January 2013, any changes in compensation must be made before the end of 2012. The board has two more scheduled regular meetings this year – on Nov. 7 and Dec. 5.

The line item for the board of commissioners is a relatively small percentage of the county’s general fund budget of nearly $98 million. In the county’s 2012 general fund budget, the line item for commissioners is $505,664. That includes $176,005 for salaries, $55,000 for fringe benefits, and $39,050 for “flex accounts.” Fringe benefits include $1,163 that the county pays into a retirement account for each commissioner, as well as payment of 50% of health care insurance if the commissioner chooses to obtain health care through the county as a part-time employee.

Other major expenses for the commissioners’ budget include $55,150 for consultants and other contracts, and $32,597 in dues for state and national county associations. The $505,664 line item for the board also includes $104,602 for a “cost allocation plan” (CAP). The CAP is a charge that’s levied on each county unit, designed to cover general costs like administration, technology, building use, and insurance, among other things. It’s intended to reflect the county’s true cost of doing business.

Seven of the 11 commissioners are paid a salary of $15,500. Officers of the board earn more. The board chair, Conan Smith, is paid $18,500. The board vice chair, Alicia Ping, earns $16,000, while chairs of the board’s ways & means committee (Rolland Sizemore Jr.) and working session (Yousef Rabhi) are each paid $16,500.

All commissioners also have a $3,550 flex account to use for per diem and mileage reimbursements, training or other authorized expenses. For example, a per diem of $25 per authorized meeting is allowed, as is mileage driven to those meetings – at a current rate of $0.555 per mile. Some commissioners don’t use their flex accounts, however, and most don’t use the entire amount. The payments are administered through the county clerk’s office. [.pdf file of flex account rules]

A spreadsheet of 2012 payment requests from flex accounts through early October shows that only five of the 11 commissioners have tapped those accounts: Barbara Bergman ($925 in per diem, $351.88 in mileage); Felicia Brabec ($675 in per diem, $209.79 in mileage); Wes Prater ($800 in per diem, $529.47 in mileage); Yousef Rabhi ($150 in per diem, $67.94 in mileage); and Rolland Sizemore Jr. ($375 in per diem, $275.28 in mileage). [.xls spreadsheet of 2012 per diem and mileage requests] [Google spreadsheet of same data]

The administration of per diem and other compensation is governed by the board’s rules and regulations. [.pdf of county board rules & regulations]

Board Compensation: Background – Per Diem Controversy

Commissioner compensation became an election issue in 2010, when local attorney Tom Wieder charged that then-commissioner Mark Ouimet and others were inappropriately reimbursed for per diem and mileage, and that they should repay the county. Wieder raised this issue at an Oct. 6, 2010 board meeting, during Ouimet’s ultimately successful campaign for state representative in District 52. Ouimet, a Republican, was running against Democrat Christine Green. Wieder was one of Green’s supporters.

A review of the payments was conducted for all commissioners, including an initial report by county clerk Larry Kestenbaum presented to the board on Oct. 20, 2010. It was found that several commissioners – including Ouimet – had been reimbursed for amounts to which they weren’t entitled, based on board rules. An independent audit was later conducted at the direction of the county administrator, and resulted in identifying overpayments for 10 of the 11 commissioners. [Ronnie Peterson did not make any requests for per diem or mileage payments.] The overpayments ranged from a high of 14,385.88 by Ouimet to a low of $25 by Kristin Judge and Leah Gunn.

Most of the commissioners repaid those amounts relatively soon after the audit was completed. But Wieder returned to the board during public commentary on March 2, 2011 to note that some commissioners still hadn’t repaid the county: Democrats Barbara Bergman ($1,875.33) and Conan Smith ($591.39), and former commissioners Jessica Ping ($5,002.68) and Ken Schwartz ($1,054.60). [Ping, a Republican, did not run for re-election in 2010, and Schwartz, a Democrat, was defeated by Republican Dan Smith in the November 2010 general election.]

Bergman subsequently made a repayment, as did Smith. Smith’s repayment came only after he took an adamant initial position against repaying, which he maintained at least through June 30, 2011, as he announced that he would be seeking re-election in 2012. He wrote a lengthy post on his Facebook page describing his reasons for not repaying the money deemed ineligible by the independent reviewers. An excerpt:

… paying the consultants’ assessment would essentially be an admission of guilt. Those of you who know me know that I am never hesitant to admit when I’ve made a mistake and I’m quick to rectify it if I can. In this case, the mistakes were made by others.

At that time, Smith refused requests by The Chronicle to be interviewed on the topic, and deleted one such request from his Facebook page. However, Smith wound up repaying money, though he paid a lower amount than the independent reviewer had deemed ineligible –  $175 compared to the $591.39 he was originally deemed to have owed.

A letter dated Jan. 11, 2012 and signed by Smith and Kestenbaum, also a Democrat, stated that some of the payments that were previously deemed ineligible were reviewed again and found to be eligible. [.pdf of letter] The letter also included this statement:

It should be noted that all of the meetings deemed ineligible occurred during the Commissioner’s first year of service. The current per diem processing system is designed to prevent simple clerical mistakes. It seems that had this system been in place in 2005 then the Clerk’s office would have worked with the new commissioner to determine which meetings he was eligible for and the commissioner would not owe the County any money.

Once Commissioner Conan Smith pays the per diems deemed ineligible then it will be the opinion of the Clerk that this matter is settled. Meetings were only declared eligible if it was proven that Commissioner Conan Smith was in attendance per his role as a County Commissioner. This is the same standard that is applied to per diems currently.

Board Compensation: Background – Previous Attempts to Cut

The issue of per diem payments – as well as the county’s overall budget crisis – were factors in previous efforts to make cuts to commissioner compensation. At the board’s Nov. 17, 2010 meeting, Leah Gunn had floated a resolution to abolish all per diem, mileage and travel payments, but it failed to secure enough votes to pass.

At the board’s last meeting in 2010, a resolution that would have cut flex accounts for commissioners from $3,550 annually to $1,500 wasn’t even brought forward for a vote, though Conan Smith had circulated a draft of the resolution via email. He said he decided not to introduce it because after talking to individual commissioners before the meeting, it was clear that he couldn’t marshal enough votes to get it passed.

More recently, earlier this year Dan Smith made another attempt to address commissioner compensation. He brought forward a proposal in March to cut compensation and benefits for 2013 and 2014 by 5.7%. His intent was for the board to vote on a change prior to the May 15 filing deadline for county board candidates, so that candidates would have a clear understanding of their compensation before entering the race. [.pdf of Smith's proposal]

Smith’s proposal called for an increased base salary of $16,250 per commissioner, but the county’s pension contribution would be eliminated. Each commissioner would also receive $2,813 in optional benefits, including a county pension match of $813 (5% of their salary), $1,000 for education and training, and $1,000 for stipends to replace mileage and per diem payments. Overall, the proposal would have cut total compensation by 5.7% per commissioner – from the current $20,213 to a proposed $19,063.

Smith stated at the March meeting that he hoped to get feedback from commissioners and make a formal resolution in April. There was no additional discussion at the March meeting from others on the board, however, and Smith did not bring forward a formal resolution.

Possible Changes to Compensation

Within the past few weeks, several options for compensation changes have been floated among commissioners – though none have been presented at a public meeting. [.xls spreadsheet of compensation options] [Google spreadsheet of same information]

In response to a request from The Chronicle, Kelly Belknap, the county’s finance director, emailed a spreadsheet of the 2012 budget for commissioners and the proposed 2013 budget, which will require approval by the board. The proposed  total budget for commissioners shows a 2.5% decrease from $505,664 this year to $492,623 in 2013. [.xls spreadsheet of proposed budget for board of commissioners] [Google Spreadsheet of same information] The vote on the budget for commissioners would come in the context of approval of the overall 2013 general fund budget.

The number of commissioners will decrease as of Jan. 1 – from 11 to 9, due to redistricting – but the total amount budgeted for salaries in 2013 shows a slight increase from $176,005 in 2012 to $176,684 in 2013. Belknap pointed to a separate line item labeled “personnel adjustment” of negative $21,499 as part of the accounting for fewer commissioners, adding that the administration didn’t want to make any final assumptions about personnel funding until after the Nov. 6 election.

At this point, the amount allocated for flex accounts is unchanged at $39,050, according to the spreadsheet. If divided evenly, that means each individual commissioner would have a higher flex account available of about $4,338 compared to the current $3,550.

Fringe benefits are set to increase from $55,000 to $60,000. In part that reflects increases in health insurance, according to Belknap. Because they are considered part-time employees, commissioners can get health insurance through the county, with the county paying 50% of that cost. Belknap noted that not all funds are used from the board’s budget – for example, if commissioners don’t use their flex account funds or health insurance benefits. Any unused funds at the end of the year are transferred back as revenues for the general fund.

All of these budgeted amounts for 2013 are still tentative, and could change depending on budget amendments that might be brought forward by commissioners on Nov. 7.

Based on a discussion at the board’s Oct. 18 working session, commissioners also might vote to replace their per diems with stipends. That means commissioners would automatically receive a stipend payment for meetings that they are currently authorized to receive a per diem for – if and when they request a per diem payment. With stipends, they wouldn’t need to submit a claim for payment, although they would likely be able to waive the entire stipend amount for the year, if they chose to do so.

Conan Smith had invited county clerk Larry Kestenbaum to attend the Oct. 18 working session to discuss the issue. Saying that Kestenbaum is intimately familiar with the strengths and weaknesses of the per diem compensation – because the clerk’s office administers the per diem and mileage payments – Smith asked for Kestenbaum’s opinion of replacing per diems with stipends.

Kestenbaum was generally supportive of the change. The current system requires a lot of bookkeeping for a small amount of money, he said, and he’d be in favor of any way to reduce or eliminate this “rigmarole” of paperwork. The board would need to clearly establish which committee appointments would qualify for a stipend payment, he said. But overall, the approach would eliminate the political vulnerability for commissioners, he noted, including their vulnerability to public opinion of payments that can be scrutinized. There would be no more dispute about it. ”The simpler we can make it, the better,” Kestenbaum said.

Dan Smith wondered about the feasibility of expanding the approach to appointed boards, commissions and committees that also receive per diem payments, like the Washtenaw County parks and recreation commission. That might be something to consider in the future, he said. Kestenbaum replied that the idea hadn’t occurred to him, but if there were a simple way to do that, it might be a step forward.

On the issue of instituting stipends versus per diems, Wes Prater wondered how they’d handle the potential situation of someone not attending meetings. They’d still receive the stipend – which wouldn’t be the case if they were being paid a per diem. “I think that comes into play also,” Prater said.

Yousef Rabhi, who chairs the board’s working sessions, said there needs to be a broader discussion about this issue, but at another time. The working session’s agenda did not actually include this topic – the board was being briefed on local educational issues, including the proposed consolidation of Ypsilanti and Willow Run school districts.

Conan Smith wrapped up the discussion by inviting Kestenbaum to attend the board’s Nov. 7 meeting to give additional input. Kestenbaum indicated he’d be happy to do that.

Present: Felicia Brabec, Wes Prater, Yousef Rabhi, Rolland Sizemore Jr., Conan Smith, Dan Smith, Rob Turner.

Absent: Barbara Bergman, Leah Gunn, Ronnie Peterson, Alicia Ping.

Next regular board meeting: Wednesday, Nov. 7, 2012 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 board’s rules and regulations, adopted at the beginning of each year, were modified in three ways. Most significantly, the second of two opportunities for public commentary was eliminated at both the board meeting and the ways & means committee meeting. The times slated for commissioner response to public commentary at the end of those two meetings was also eliminated. Previously, public commentary and commissioner response were provided near the start and end of each board meeting and each ways & means committee meeting. Now there will be only one opportunity for public commentary at the start of each meeting, followed by commissioner response.

In addition, the five minutes alloted per speaker during general public commentary at the board meeting has been reduced to three minutes each. The time alloted for commentary at public hearings (held on a specific topic) has also been cut from five to three minutes per speaker. Three minutes is already the current time alloted for public commentary at the board’s ways & means committee, where the bulk of the board’s business is conducted.

The original rules-change proposal called for eliminating the second public commentary at the board’s working sessions as well. Yousef Rabhi, who was re-elected chair of the working session at the Jan. 4 meeting, proposed an amendment to keep both public commentary slots in place at the working sessions. His amendment also kept the five minutes alloted per speaker for public commentary at the working sessions. Rabhi’s amendment was approved unanimously.

The third change in the board’s rules & regulations relates to the eligibility of county employees for claiming per diem and mileage. Under previous rules adopted in 2011, no county employee could claim a per diem or mileage reimbursement for service on a county board, committee or commission. The current rules adopted on Jan. 4, 2012 now apply that rule only to regular, benefitted county employees. This allows part-time county employees who receive no county benefits to receive a per diem and mileage payment. The rule does not apply to county commissioners – their per diem and mileage are handled under separate flex accounts, which were not changed.

There was only one vote taken on the overall changes to the board’s rules & regulations. It passed on a 10-1 vote, with dissent from Rolland Sizemore Jr. However, Felicia Brabec and Ronnie Peterson wanted the record to reflect that they were voting against eliminating public commentary. Peterson also voted against reducing the time allotment to three minutes.

This brief was filed from the boardroom of the county administration building, 220 N. Main St. in Ann Arbor. A more detailed report will follow: [link]

Kirk Profit of GCSI – a Lansing governmental consulting firm – talks with commissioner Leah Gunn during a break at the March 2, 2011 Washtenaw County board of commissioners meeting. (Photos by the writer.)

At his presentation to the board a year ago, Profit foreshadowed that a change in leadership at all levels in Lansing would affect the county. On Wednesday, he outlined more details of that impact, specifically related to the state budget recently proposed by Gov. Rick Snyder, the Ann Arbor Republican who was elected to office last November.

Responding to GCSI’s presentation, commissioners expressed concerns on a range of topics, including legislation giving broader emergency financial management powers to the state, potential changes to collective bargaining, and K-12 education funding. Leah Gunn made the most direct plea, asking Profit to convey a message to legislators: “Just send us money!”

Aside from the state budget update, commissioners dispatched the rest of their agenda with little discussion. Included in their actions was approval of a resolution allowing the United Way of Washtenaw County to secure a necessary state gambling permit for the nonprofit’s March 9 Power of the Purse fundraising event. The permit is needed so that United Way can auction off gift baskets.

The board also approved changes to its annual calendar that eliminated all future administrative briefings from the board’s meeting schedule. The decision to eliminate the administrative briefings – informal meetings that have been held the week prior to the board’s regular meetings, to review the upcoming agenda – was made at their final briefing on Feb. 26. There was no discussion of the issue on Wednesday.

During public commentary, Tom Wieder returned to address the board about per diem payments for commissioners, an issue he originally raised five months ago. He said he couldn’t quite believe that some commissioners still hadn’t repaid the amounts that an independent audit had determined they owed.

The audit showed that nearly all commissioners needed to reimburse the county for some per diems or mileage that they had inappropriately claimed. The amounts ranged from $25 to $14,385 – an amount repaid by former commissioner Mark Ouimet, who was elected to the state House last fall. All but board chair Conan Smith and Barbara Bergman, and former commissioners Jessica Ping and Ken Schwartz have repaid the amounts they owed as determined by the audit.

Lansing Update

For about 90 minutes during Wednesday’s meeting, lobbyist Kirk Profit of Governmental Consultant Services Inc. – along with his colleagues Ken Cole and Adrian Hemond – briefed commissioners about current budget talks and proposed legislation in Lansing, and answered questions about how state actions might affect the county. Profit had served as a state representative for 10 years, from 1988 through 1998, representing District 54 on the county’s east side.

Profit began with the state budget proposal, which Gov. Rick Snyder had recently unveiled. [.pdf file of Snyder's budget for 2012 and 2013] It’s balanced with no new revenues, he noted, and several major areas – including corrections, Medicare reimbursement rates and community colleges – are protected from cuts. However, there are some big losers under this proposal, he noted, including K-12 education, higher education and local governments.

Another major area of attention is the tax code, Profit said, which doesn’t work by any measure. Snyder’s proposal calls for a 6% flat business tax, to be levied only on C corporations. Other businesses – including LLCs, sole proprietorships and partnerships – would pay only personal income tax. The change would eliminate $1.8 billion in business tax revenue, to be offset by several different measures. Income from pensions, which are currently exempt from the state’s income tax, would be taxed at the proposed 4.25% rate, raising about $900 million. The earned income tax credit would be eliminated, bringing in another $350 million. There could also be significant adjustments to the homestead property tax credit.

Moving on to the topic of collective bargaining, Profit said that’s on the mind of every legislator in the Republican majority, and probably on the minds of the minority as well. Legislation might be introduced to eliminate collective bargaining completely, he said. Act 312 – which calls for binding arbitration of labor contract disputes between public safety employees of police and fire departments – is unlikely to be repealed, Profit said, but will likely go through a major overhaul.

Public employee compensation – including healthcare and pension benefits – is obviously a huge issue for state policymakers, Profit said. State officials will also be watching closely to see how local governments are handling the same issue.

Structural reforms are also being debated in Lansing, primarily as it relates to emergency financial management, Profit said. Snyder is expected to lay out details of the structural reforms he’ll seek in a speech slated for March 21. In general, the governor is encouraging officials at all levels to find ways to collaborate and consolidate – approaches that are considered best management practices, Profit said.

Profit pointed out that there are three members of the legislature’s Republican majority whose districts include parts of Washtenaw County: Rep. Mark Ouimet in District 52, Rep. Rick Olson in District 55, and Sen. Randy Richardville of District 17. They’ll be in positions to respond to Washtenaw County’s interests, Profit said.

In addition, Democrat Sen. Rebekah Warren of District 18, which covers Ann Arbor and a large portion of the rest of the county, is well-positioned on senate committees, he said. [Her committee assignments include health policy; natural resources, environment and Great Lakes; finance; regulatory reform; and the reforms, restructuring, and reinventing committee.] Profit noted that other local Democrats – Rep. Jeff Irwin of District 53, a former county commissioner, and Rep. David Rutledge of District 54 – are also quickly immersing themselves in their work.

Yet obviously, it’s the majority party – currently the Republicans – who are in a position to call more of the shots, Profit said. Olson, he noted, was appointed to lead a work group of the House transportation committee, which will address how to deal with declining Dept. of Transportation funding levels. The state’s gasoline tax is the primary source of revenues for transportation, and as demand for gasoline declines, so do those revenues.

Ouimet chairs the House committee on local, intergovernmental, and regional affairs, which Profit said had already dealt with the emergency financial management legislation. That committee will also likely see much of the legislation dealing with structural reforms, he said.

One thing noticeably absent from all the dialogue in Lansing is what to do about revenue streams for local governments, Profit said. When the legislature eliminates statutory state revenue sharing, he said, the issue of local tax revenue needs to be addressed. GCSI will encourage Ouimet and other legislators to take up this issue, he said.

Ken Cole then briefed commissioners on budget issues related to public health. Starting at the macro level, he said the current proposal calls for allocating $2.7 billion in general fund dollars for the state’s Dept. of Community Health in fiscal 2012 – an increase from its current $2.4 billion budget. That $2.7 billion would account for 40% of the state’s $7 billion general fund budget, he said. Increased costs from that department stem in part from growth in the number of Medicaid cases, to about 1.8 million, with 3.2% growth expected next year. It’s a sign that the “Great Recession” is wreaking havoc in the state, he said. Between 2001 to 2010, Washtenaw County had the seventh-highest growth rate in Medicaid caseloads statewide – nearly doubling during that period to almost 40,000 cases.

Proposed cuts to the state’s community mental health budget would translate to a loss of $200,000 for the Washtenaw Community Health Organization (WCHO), Cole said. Snyder has also proposed a 5% cut to public health spending, though it’s unclear if those will be across-the-board cuts to all local public health departments, he said. And proposed cuts to graduate medical education could reach $67 million – locally, that would affect the University of Michigan, Cole said. UM would face a 40% funding cut for physician training programs next year, if the proposed budget stands.

Adrian Hemond spoke next, focusing on the budget for human services. Snyder’s proposal – calling for a 48-month lifetime limit in benefits from the Family Independence Program, which gives financial aid to low-income families with children or pregnant women – would result in 12,500 people coming off that aid as of Oct. 1, 2011. Some of those people will likely turn to their local governments for help, Hemond said.

The budget proposal would reduce the child care subsidy rate paid to unlicensed aides and relatives caring for low-income children from $1.60 an hour to $1.35 an hour, Hemond said. And a proposed closure of one of the state’s juvenile justice facilities – the Shawono Center in Grayling – would leave only two such operations in the state – including the W.J. Maxey Boys Training School in Whitmore Lake. In addition, there’s a proposed reduction of 20 beds at the Maxey facility.

Snyder’s proposal calls for keeping funding essentially flat for state reimbursements to county jails and community corrections programs, Hemond said.

Profit wrapped up the presentation, saying that in fairness to state policymakers, “the challenge before them is incredible.” In part, that’s because the state is bringing in dramatically less revenue than when he served in the legislature during the 1980s and ’90s. Profit encouraged commissioners to let state legislators know what the county is already doing to curtail employee costs – both in terms of the number of employees, as well as changes to their compensation packages. “You need to tell that story,” he said, so policymakers will understand what local governments are already doing to deal with the economic crisis.

Profit concluded with some positive news, pointing out that legislation allowing the Detroit Region Aerotropolis to move forward had passed at the end of 2010 – Washtenaw County is a partner in that economic development project. He also noted that the area had successfully brought in state funding for special projects, including money to repair the East Stadium bridges – a project of the city of Ann Arbor – and funds for bike paths in the county, secured by the Washtenaw County Parks & Recreation Commission. He congratulated Bob Tetens, the county’s parks and recreation director, for making that happen.

After GCSI’s formal presentation, commissioners had several comments and questions. For this report, their remarks are organized by topic.

Lansing Update: Commissioner Comments – Pensions

Leah Gunn began by observing that she and her husband wouldn’t mind having their pension taxed. “It’s only fair,” she said. However, it would be good to indicate some kind of “circuit breaker” that would exempt lower-income seniors, she said.

Wes Prater said he disagreed about taxing pensions. According to county health department estimates, about 35,000 residents in Washtenaw County lack health insurance, he said. Prater was especially concerned about long-time retirees on a fixed income – taxing their pensions would be a hardship, he said, and it’s unfortunate that the state government would give tax breaks to others while balancing the budget on the backs of the poorest people.

“Personally, I can handle it,” he said. “But there’s a lot of people out there that can’t.”

Profit said that a lot of legislators seem to agree with that view. Especially in the state senate, the plan to tax pensions doesn’t appear to have support.

Lansing Update: Commissioner Comments – Revenues

Noting that most of the focus is on tax cuts, Gunn wondered if there’s any discussion about raising revenues. Not really, Profit replied – the talk now is about making the budget revenue-neutral. Perhaps they should be making the case that a revenue-neutral approach shouldn’t be sacrosanct, he said.

Gunn also noted that the governor has proposed rewarding municipalities that collaborate with others. The county has been doing that for a decade, she observed, and she’d hate to see them penalized for having done that work previously.

Profit pointed out that former county commissioner Mark Ouimet – now a Republican state representative who chairs the House committee on local, intergovernmental, and regional affairs – is very aware and sensitive to that issue. There should be some accounting and recognition of previous collaborative efforts, Profit said, adding that he believes Ouimet will be front and center in making sure that happens.

Gunn concluded her remarks to Profit by giving him a message for legislators: “Just send us money!”

Lansing Update: Commissioner Comments – Collective Bargaining

Yousef Rabhi noted that instead of kicking the can down the road, the state now seems to be picking up the can and throwing it at the poor and elderly, and at local communities. It seems like they all should be picking up the can together and recycling it, he said.

Rabhi praised Snyder for saying that the labor dispute in Wisconsin shouldn’t be repeated in Michigan, but noted that there’s rumblings in the legislature about getting rid of collective bargaining. How do those two conflicting views between the administration and the legislature mesh? he asked.

Profit indicated that he doesn’t think the views do mesh. There are certainly some legislators who want to eliminate collective bargaining, he said. That’s probably not the majority view, he added, but they’ll be vocal.

Given the current national climate, Rabhi said he appreciated a Republican governor taking a more moderate stance and showing that kind of leadership. It was very respectful, he said, and supportive of the view that workers aren’t the enemies.

Lansing Update: Commissioner Comments – Emergency Financial Management

Kristin Judge expressed concern over legislation regarding emergency financial management (EFM). “I am scared by this, to put it bluntly,” she said. Some versions of the proposed legislation had called for appointing a consulting firm to take charge of a municipality in financial duress, taking away the powers of elected local officials, and giving the consultant authority to sell property and change the terms of contracts, among other things. Judge said this doesn’t reflect the democratic process or the country we live in. She noted that many cities under financial distress have large minority populations – and she couldn’t imagine these measures being acceptable in places like Oakland County, for example. She wondered whether anyone in Lansing was standing up and saying that this legislation is ridiculous.

Ken Cole responded, saying that many local officials from across the state have been trekking to Lansing to challenge the legislation, and changes are being made. The provision that would allow a consulting firm to take over had been stricken, for example.

Cole explained that the legislation is a package of five bills: HB 4214 through HB 4218. The bills started out in the House committee on local, intergovernmental, and regional affairs, which is chaired by former county commissioner Mark Ouimet. After moving out of the House, the legislation is now being considered by the Senate: SB 157 and SB 158. In the process, changes are being made, Cole said. An original provision, for example, would have nullified elections and prevented officials from running for office for 10 years. That time period was later changed to six years, and ultimately the entire provision was taken out – meaning that legislation currently being considered would allow elected officials to remain in office and run for re-election.

The provision giving the emergency financial manager the power to sell local assets has been modified, and now calls for final approval by the state treasurer, Cole said. But the provision allowing the manager to nullify existing collective bargaining agreements so far remains in place, he said.

Washtenaw County commissioners Kristin Judge and Conan Smith at the March 2, 2011 board of commissioners meeting.

Judge replied that with all due respect to the governor, saying that he doesn’t want to eliminate collective bargaining while at the same time supporting this legislation seemed disingenuous. Cole assured Judge that she was not alone in her view.

Rabhi asked how the current emergency financial management powers compare to those that are proposed.

The intent of the bills, Cole said, is to neuter the powers of local elected officials. The idea is to impress upon local governments the importance of making tough decisions, he said. The state is sending a message that if local governments don’t get tough with labor, the state will pass legislation giving that authority to the emergency financial manager. But there are also provisions to take these steps in increments, Cole said. Currently, there is a set of triggers that puts in motion a preliminary review, then an official review, then the potential for negotiating a consent agreement with the financially stressed entity. Similar steps are outlined in the proposed legislation, too. It provides the chance for the local unit to devise a plan that explains how they’ll resolve the fiscal emergency.

Cole said he hadn’t yet done a side-by-side comparison between the existing EFM and the proposed legislation. It’s expected that the House and Senate will try to hammer out differences between their respective versions of the legislation sometime next week.

Conan Smith described the EFM legislation as complex and necessary – hundreds of governments are on the brink of insolvency now. There are definitely bones to pick with it, he said, but many provisions are similar to what exists under current law, like the ability to renegotiate labor agreements. Smith pointed out that the person who’ll be overseeing the EFM is “our own Roger Fraser,” the Ann Arbor city administrator who’ll be leaving that job in April to become deputy state treasurer for local government services. He has extensive experience at the local level, Smith said. Above him is state treasurer Andy Dillon – Smith noted that Dillon is a Democrat and former House speaker.

The legislation that’s ultimately enacted will probably contain some things that he’ll abhor, Smith said, but he believes it will be implemented fairly. It’s a time of economic crisis for all local governments, he said, and some are closer to the precipice than Washtenaw County is. [The county is grappling with a projected two-year, $20.9 million deficit for 2012 and 2013.] The previous state administration didn’t deal with it, he noted, and in fact made things worse in some cases – by passing unfunded mandates, for example.

Adrian Hemond noted that one of the provisions would allow the emergency financial manager to shift retirement packages from defined benefit plans to defined contribution plans, which is now considered best practice. [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).]

Wes Prater commented that as baby boomers grow older and retire, they’re beginning to realize that there aren’t sufficient funds in their 401(k) plans to sustain them through retirement – in a short time, those funds are depleted. People don’t seem to be getting adequate advice to allow them to self-manage their defined contribution plans, he said. As time goes on, he predicted there will be more issues related to this type of plan, and that this type of plan won’t be able to meet the basic needs of retirees. He said he didn’t believe shifting retirement plans was a good move.

County administrator Verna McDaniel indicated that the board will receive more information about the county’s retirement plans at an upcoming working session. [The county's largest retirement plan is the Washtenaw County Employees’ Retirement System (WERS) – a defined benefit plan with 1,001 members, 24 deferred members, and 727 retirees or beneficiaries.]

Lansing Update: Commissioner Comments – Schools

Conan Smith noted that the state has used federal stimulus money to cover budget gaps in recent years. Local school systems have done the same, he said. Part of the reason that schools have needed stimulus dollars relates to the budget timeline in Lansing – the state budget, which includes K-12 funding, isn’t passed until October, after the school year has started. [The state's fiscal year begins Oct. 1. Many school districts, including Ann Arbor's, have fiscal years that begin July 1.] Smith wondered if there was any talk about changing that timeline at the state level.

Profit replied that he thinks the governor and legislators are working hard to finish the budget in May – he said people are less optimistic that they can finish tax code reform by then.

Smith said he’s interested in keeping pressure on Lansing to change the funding timeline, especially for schools – that would go a long way toward stabilizing things at all levels. It’s important to push people to think strategically, he said.

Later in the discussion, Rob Turner – a former trustee for the Chelsea School District – thanked Smith for mentioning K-12 funding, which Turner said is near to his heart. Promises that were made when Proposal A was passed in 1994 didn’t occur, he said. [Proposal A shifted K-12 school funding away from local districts and created a system whereby local tax dollars are funneled to the state, which in turn redistributes the funding statewide. Among other things, it puts a cap on how fast a property's taxable value can increase. That cap is 5% or the rate of inflation, whichever is lower. For a detailed view of how Michigan's public schools are financed, see Chronicle coverage: "Does It Take a Millage?"]

Given the way schools are funded, Turner said, it’s difficult for districts to be good fiduciaries. Is there any discussion in Lansing about finding a better way to handle K-12 funding, to give districts better ways to forecast the budget one or two years ahead? Turner also said districts are dealing with rising teacher pension costs – is there any talk at the state level about helping districts with that?

The short answer is no, Profit said. The problem is that there are simply insufficient dollars for K-12. Profit – who was a state representative when Proposal A was enacted – said the law was initially meant as a first step to school finance reform, not the final answer. But over time, and as term limits resulted in the exodus of veteran legislators, that initial intent was lost, and Proposal A became viewed as the final answer.

The measure did narrow the funding equity gap between districts in high- and low-income areas, Profit said, but adjustments in the school funding process still need to be made. Between Proposal A and the Headlee Amendment – which limits property tax revenues that a taxing jurisdiction can collect by rolling back the millage rate so that property tax revenues don’t outpace inflation – revenues at the local level have diminished dramatically, Profit said. However, he added, addressing this issue doesn’t seem to be on anyone’s agenda.

In response to a question from Wes Prater, Profit said that the question has been raised as to whether it’s constitutional to take money previously set aside for K-12 schools – in the state’s School Aid Fund – and use it for higher education, as has been proposed. “Yes, the envelope’s going to be pushed,” Profit said.

Lansing Update: Commissioner Comments – Personal Property Tax

In response to a question from Rob Turner, Profit said that the state’s personal property tax system is a huge concern, but the governor doesn’t want to overhaul it while dealing with the budget and business tax reform – though some legislators would like the issues to be handled at the same time. Profit said that county administrator Verna McDaniel and deputy administrator Bill Reynolds had been in Lansing the previous day meeting with legislators, and had done a good job in describing the impact that the current system has on local governments.

The challenge will be in figuring out how to replace the current personal property tax system, Profit said. Legislation has been introduced to eliminate it, and separate legislation was introduced that would simply reduce it. If a flat-rate business tax is adopted, the pressure will increase to change the personal property tax. The current business tax includes a 35% industrial personal property tax credit.

It’s not yet clear how all this will shake out, Profit said.

Lansing Update: Commissioner Comments – Urban vs. Rural

Dan Smith asked about the impact of the proposed state budget on rural areas, noting that many commissioners represent rural parts of Washtenaw County.

Profit said for communities that don’t receive statutory revenue sharing, their constitutional portion of revenue sharing will be increasing about 4%. It’s also possible that those rural communities would be allowed to compete for the proposed $200 million that will be available to replace the statutory revenue sharing portion. In that respect, rural areas are treated better than the urban cores in this budget, he said. The rural communities still need to look for opportunities to consolidate services and cooperate with other local governments, he said – that’s a priority for Snyder’s administration.

Hemond pointed out that the upcoming census data will have an impact on the amount of constitutional revenue sharing funds that a community receives. Though the overall “pot” for the constitutional share will increase about 4%, if a township’s population decreases, for example, then their revenue-sharing funds could also drop. [The state formula for calculating revenue-sharing funds also includes factors beyond population, depending in part on the services it provides.]

Earlier in the meeting, Conan Smith had asked about how restructuring at state agencies like the Michigan Economic Development Corp. (MEDC) and the Michigan State Housing Development Authority (MSHDA) might affect state investments that are already in place for urban areas like Ann Arbor.

Profit said he assumed Smith was talking about things like the proposed elimination of brownfield tax credits. [Several local projects have been granted brownfield status by the state, which makes them eligible for tax credits related to environmental cleanup, or allows them to apply for Michigan Business Tax credits or use tax increment financing to recoup some of a project's cost.]

The flip side of the proposed 6% flat business tax is that many of the state’s other economic incentives, such as tax credits, would be eliminated. Profit said state treasurer Andy Dillon has assured him that projects with incentives already approved would keep those incentives, even if the tax code changes.

Profit added that Washtenaw County is well-positioned – he said he can’t recall any other time in his life when this area had so many people in state leadership positions, including the governor, MEDC chief Mike Finney, and now Roger Fraser as deputy treasurer. Profit expects Finney will want to give more authority and responsibility to local economic groups like Ann Arbor SPARK, which Finney previously led.

Public Commentary: Per Diems

During public commentary, Tom Wieder returned to address the board about per diem payments – he had first raised the issue five months ago, at the board’s Oct. 6, 2010 meeting, when he called for an investigation into per diem spending by then-commissioner Mark Ouimet.

Saying he was surprised to be back, Wieder told commissioners that he can’t quite believe the per diem issue hasn’t been taken care of yet. He said he knows all three of the commissioners who haven’t yet paid: Barbara Bergman, Wes Prater and Conan Smith. [Bergman did not attend Wednesday's meeting; Prater later clarified that he had recently paid the amount in question.]

Tom Wieder, left, is interviewed by WEMU's Andrew Cluley following the March 2, 2011 Washtenaw County board of commissioners meeting.

Wieder noted that he was accused of making a partisan attack when he first came to the board with this issue. [His initial focus was on Republican Mark Ouimet, who at the time was a county commissioner running for state representative in District 52 against Democrat Christine Green, whom Wieder supported. Ouimet won that election in November 2010.] While it might have been initially prompted by the campaign, Wieder said, it remains a substantive issue.

An investigation has been paid for by the county, he said, but some commissioners still aren’t meeting their responsibility. Wieder told Prater that he should at least pay the amounts that are clearly owed, and could hold off on the rest until the matter was adjudicated. As for Bergman, Wieder said he’s known her for years and was appalled to read her quote [in an AnnArbor.com article] indicating that the issue was between her and the county. It’s the taxpayers’ money, he said, which makes it the public’s business.

Directing his remarks to Conan Smith, Wieder said it was amazing to hear Smith’s excuse – that he was too busy to take care of it, and that other things took priority. “Maybe you need a less demanding job if you can’t find a minute to write a check,” Wieder said.

Wieder concluded by urging commissioners to pay what they owe and restore some integrity to the board.

Responding to an a follow-up request from The Chronicle on Thursday, the county’s finance office provided the latest status of repayments. Two current commissioners (Barbara Bergman and Conan Smith) and two former commissioners (Jessica Ping and Ken Schwartz) have not yet paid the amounts that the audit report determined they owe:

UNPAID
Barbara Bergman       1,875.33
Jessica Ping          5,002.68
Ken Schwartz          1,054.60
Conan Smith             591.39

PAID
Leah Gunn                25.00
Jeff Irwin              100.00
Kristin Judge            25.00
Mark Ouimet          14,385.88
Wes Prater            1,834.91
Rolland Sizemore Jr.     65.52

-

Per Diems: Commissioner Response

Prater said he wanted the public to know that he always intended to pay what he owed, but there were questions about some of the findings of the auditor. He submitted a check on Monday, Prater said, but would address the remaining issues at his own pace. He said he wasn’t enjoying the public scrutiny, and found it embarrassing. None of the commissioners intentionally took money that wasn’t theirs, he said.

Later in the meeting, Kristin Judge suggested that the board’s updated monthly budget could be included in its meeting packet as public information. It might be a way to address some feelings of distrust that have arisen over the past year, she said, adding that it was just an idea for people to think about – not a formal proposal.

United Way Request

Commissioners passed a resolution recognizing that the United Way of Washtenaw County is a legitimate local nonprofit, and authorizing the county clerk to complete a form from the state’s charitable gaming division. The resolution is required from a local government entity by the state’s Bingo Act in order for the United Way to hold a charitable fundraiser that includes gambling.

There had been some discussion of the resolution at the board’s Feb. 26 administrative briefing, with some questions about why it was needed. At Wednesday’s meeting, Kristin Judge said that in looking at the application to the state, it didn’t seem as though there were any limit to the amount of money that could be raised from a charitable gambling event. Saying she wasn’t a proponent of using gambling to raise money for human services, she asked for more information about the event.

County administrator Verna McDaniel clarified that United Way needed permission in order to raffle off gift baskets at its March 9 Power of the Purse fundraising event. [Sandy Rupp, executive director of the United Way of Washtenaw County, attended part of Wednesday's meeting, but did not speak during public commentary.]

Outcome: The resolution recognizing the United Way of Washtenaw County as a nonprofit operating in this county passed unanimously.

Board Calendar Changes

The board approved a revised annual calendar that eliminates all future administrative briefings from the board’s meeting schedule. The decision to eliminate the administrative briefings – informal meetings which have been held the week prior to the board’s regular meetings, to review the upcoming agenda – was made at their final briefing on Feb. 26. It followed a lengthy, animated debate at the board’s Feb. 16 meeting. Some commissioners, most notably Ronnie Peterson, have objected to the briefings, saying they are too far out of the public eye – even though they conform to the Open Meetings Act.

Outcome: Without discussion, the board approved a meeting calendar change that eliminates future administrative briefings.

Other Actions: Job Training Grants, New Job for Vets Office

The board passed several resolutions as part of its agenda, with little discussion.

Other Actions: Veterans Relief Job

The board gave final approval to create a new full-time position – a veterans relief program specialist – as part of a minor restructuring in the county’s veterans affairs department that includes downgrading an administrative assistant position to office coordinator. The moves are expected to result in about $20,000 in structural savings for the department. The board gave initial approval to the change at their Feb. 16 meeting.

The new position is estimated to cost $75,000 and will be funded from the Veterans Relief Fund, which gets proceeds from a dedicated millage and has a fund balance of $250,000. The job will entail coordinating the county’s veterans relief efforts and doing public outreach activities.

Other Actions: Job Training Funds

The board gave initial approval to accept federal funding for job-related programs that are administered by the county’s Employment Training & Community Services (ETCS) department:

• $141,409 from the federal Food Assistance Employment and Training Program, to provide employment services to adults who receive federal food assistance.
• $1,161,692 in federal funding from the Jobs, Education, and Training (JET) Plan, to provide job training services.
• $148,532 in federal funding from the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Statewide Activity Program, to provide job training services.

Other Actions: Appointments

The board approved several appointments during the March 2 meeting.

• William Wagner, Northfield Township director of public safety, was appointed to the county’s 800 MHz project oversight committee, for a term expiring Dec. 31, 2012.
• The following people were appointed to the county’s community action board (CAB), for terms expiring Dec. 31, 2011: Faye Askew-King, Deloisteen Brown, Howard Edelson, Myles J. Romero, Adam Zemke, Eric Copeland, Derrick Jackson, Cynthia Maritato, Brenda McKinney, Joseph Dulin, and Annie Robinson.
• Howard Edelson, Conan Smith and Charles Penner were appointed to the county’s workforce development board (WDB) for terms expiring Dec. 31, 2011. In addition, Elliot Forsyth, Diane Keller, Mary Kerr, Jon Newpol, Don Wolf, Steve Girardin and Cynthia Maritato were appointed for terms expiring Dec. 31, 2013.

The CAB and WDB both oversee programs administered by the county’s Employment Training & Community Services (ETCS) department. The boards are currently revising their bylaws – the terms of most appointments are set for the end of this year, to give the boards some flexibility for future appointments as they make their bylaws revisions.

The mention of changes to the bylaws prompted some questions from commissioner Ronnie Peterson. He wanted to know how it was being handled – this was the first time he’d heard about the changes, he said. Patricia Denig, ETCS interim director, explained that both boards have committees that are working with staff on the changes. She expects they’ll be finished in six to eight weeks.

Peterson said he wanted to hold a working session on the changes. Further, he wanted to make sure it was clear the board of commissioners would need to authorize any changes to the bylaws.

Other Actions: Bylaws

Without discussion, the board approved revisions to bylaws for two county groups: The Washtenaw Community Health Organization [.pdf of revisions to WCHO bylaws] and the Criminal Justice Collaborative Council [.pdf file of CJCC bylaws]

The WCHO is a collaboration between the county and the University of Michigan that focuses on providing services to children and adults with mental or emotional health disorders, substance abuse problems or developmental disabilities. The CJCC is a group of 17 county officials – both elected and staff – who work in the criminal justice system, plus two appointed members of the public. Its mission is to develop strategies to alleviate jail overcrowding, and to make recommendations to the county board of commissioners about how to implement and fund those strategies.

Misc. Communications

Several commissioners had reports and communications at various times throughout Wednesday’s meeting.

Kristin Judge, who arrived a few minutes late to Wednesday’s meeting, explained that she’d been at a ceremony honoring Lloyd Powell, Washtenaw County’s public defender. Powell was given the annual Bernard J. O’Connor Award for his significant contributions to social justice through peaceful conflict resolution. The award is given by the Ann Arbor-based Dispute Resolution Center.

Later in the meeting, Judge reported that she and Yousef Rabhi were among the 300 or so people who attended the March 1 Local Food Summit. She commended county staff who participated, including Jenna Bacolor of the county’s public health department, and Jennifer Fike, executive director of the Food System Economic Partnership. A lot of great ideas were floated during the event, she said, including plans to develop a local food policy council. Judge encouraged anyone who’s interested in getting involved to contact the county’s public health department.

In another food-related communication, Judge highlighted a program called Double Up Food Bucks, which provides coupons for fresh food to people who get food assistance benefits. She hoped that in the spring, people from the program – which is administered by the Fair Food Network, an Ann Arbor-based nonprofit – can come to the board and provide more details.

Wes Prater told commissioners that the financial subcommittee of the Police Services Steering Committee (PSSC) has been meeting, with some new members on board, including Leah Gunn. The group is working on a recommendation for setting the price to be charged by the county for a police services unit – the sheriff deputies that some local municipalities pay for to patrol their jurisdictions. Several issues need to be worked through, he said, but eventually there will be a good report to bring back to the board for a vote. [For additional background on this issue, see Chronicle coverage: "What's Next for Washtenaw Police Services?"]

Gunn said she’d like to see a report from the county administrator about the cost and scope of work on an internal audit that the county is planning to conduct. In addition to the monetary cost, Gunn wanted to see how much staff time is spent, noting that she believes it would be considerable. She suggested perhaps doing only one department initially, rather than the entire county operations.

Eunice Burns, left, talks with county administrator Verna McDaniel during a break at the March 2 board of commissioners meeting. Burns, a longtime Democratic Party activist, was attending the meeting with her grandson as part of an assignment for his Skyline High class.

Ronnie Peterson asked one of the students in the audience to introduce himself. Jamie McGowan came forward and told commissioners he was a student at Skyline High School, attending the meeting for a class assignment.

Peterson then asked who was attending the meeting with him. His grandmother, McGowan replied. And what’s her name? Peterson prompted. “Eunice Burns,” McGowan said. Peterson allowed that several of the commissioners might know her – Burns has been active in the Democratic Party for decades. Among other roles, she previously served on the Ann Arbor city council and as a board member for the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority.

Misc. Communications: Public Commentary

Other than Tom Wieder, whose remarks are reported earlier in this article, the only speaker during the four opportunities for public commentary was Thomas Partridge, who spoke three times. His remarks all contained similar themes, calling on the commissioners and residents of Washtenaw County to stand up against discriminatory and unnecessary budget cuts at the state and federal levels. Michigan needs to reverse its attitude, he said, and start taxing the state’s wealthy businesses and individuals, which would wipe out the deficit and create funds for social programs.

There’s been a resurgence of progressive Democratic movements in other states and throughout the world, Partridge said, from Wisconsin to Libya. People are putting their lives on the line, he said, and Michigan residents should do the same in protesting the destructive right-wing thinking of Gov. Rick Snyder and Republican administrations in other states. Partridge criticized Conan Smith for accepting some of the proposals of Republicans in the state, including some supported by state Rep. Mark Ouimet, a former county commissioner. These people live in a “country club fantasy land,” he said.

Present: Leah Gunn, Kristin Judge , Ronnie Peterson, Wes Prater, Yousef Rabhi, Conan Smith, Dan Smith, Rob Turner.

Absent: Barbara Levin Bergman, Alicia Ping, Rolland Sizemore Jr.

Next meeting: The board’s next regular meeting is on Wednesday, March 16, 2011 at 6:30 p.m. at the county administration building, 220 N. Main St. The Ways & Means Committee meets first, followed immediately by the regular board meeting. [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 comment sessions are held at the beginning and end of each meeting.

Before Wednesday's board meeting, Donald Shelton, chief judge of the Washtenaw County trial court, talks with Yousef Rabhi, a Democrat who represents Ann Arbor's District 11 on the county board of commissioners. Shelton later donned his judicial robes to officially swear in commissioners. (Photos by the writer.)

The boardroom was packed with friends and family, many of them turning out especially for the four newly elected commissioners: Rob Turner (R-District 1), Dan Smith (R-District 2), Alicia Ping (R-District 3) and Yousef Rabhi (D-District 11). A reception for commissioners was held prior to the board meeting and was attended by several other elected officials – including sheriff Jerry Clayton, prosecutor Brian Mackie and water resources commissioner Janis Bobrin – as well as county staff.

Newly elected state senator Rebekah Warren was also on hand to watch as her husband, commissioner Conan Smith (D-District 10), was elected to chair the board, as anticipated. Officers for the board, the ways & means committee and the board’s working session were all elected unanimously, without discussion. There was considerable debate, however, over aspects of the new board rules, though they were ultimately adopted with only one minor amendment.

Commissioners Sworn In, New Officers Elected

The first board meeting of the year is initially chaired by the county clerk, until commissioners are sworn in and they elect the board chair. Clerk Larry Kestenbaum began by introducing Donald Shelton, chief judge of the Washtenaw County trial court, who was there to swear in the commissioners.

At left, Curtis Hedger, the county's corporation counsel, talks with county clerk Larry Kestenbaum prior to the start of Wednesday's board meeting. The county clerk, which is also an elected position, chairs the first board meeting of each year until commissioners are officially sworn in, and they elect the board chair.

Shelton, wearing his judicial robes, joked that though the clerk might say otherwise, “there’s still time to change your mind.” No one did, and the brief swearing-in ceremony commenced.

Kestenbaum then asked deputy clerk Jason Brooks to call the roll, but also requested that each commissioner respond to the roll call by introducing themselves and the district they represent. Several commissioners took the opportunity to introduce members of their family and friends as well – Yousef Rahbi Rabhi asked his girlfriend and others to wave from the audience, for example. Rob Turner added the flourish of stating that he represented “the No. 1 District in Washtenaw County” – or District 1.

The election of officers occurred later in the meeting, with the board first electing Conan Smith as chair, without competing nominations or discussion. Smith, a Democrat who represents District 10 in Ann Arbor, has served on the board since 2005 and for the past two years has chaired the board’s ways & means committee. All board members serve on that committee, which meets immediately prior to the bi-weekly board meetings.

Smith also serves as board liaison to the county’s budget advisory team, and first reported at a public meeting last October on the county’s projected 2012-13 budget deficit of roughly $20 million. Dealing with the budget is expected to be the board’s primary task in 2011. That process includes making adjustments to this year’s budget – the board made a first stab at that in December, when they approved revisions to the 2011 budget. The county works on a two-year budget cycle, and by year’s end will also set the budget for 2012 and 2013.

The board also elected Alicia Ping as board vice chair. Later in the meeting, other officers were elected: Rolland Sizemore Jr., chair of the board’s ways & means committee; Dan Smith, vice chair of ways & means; Yousef Rabhi, chair of the board’s working session; and Rob Turner, vice chair of the working session. All positions were elected on unanimous votes, with no competing nominations or discussion.

Though Democrats make up the majority of the board – holding eight of the 11 seats – the practice in recent years has been to include the Republican minority in leadership roles. This year, the board’s three Republicans – Ping, Dan Smith and Turner – were all elected to vice chair positions.

New Board Rules Debated, Adopted

At its first meeting of each year, the board adopts a set of rules and regulations to govern its actions. This year, the document contained revisions put forth by Conan Smith. Some of the changes came in response to concerns raised last fall about whether commissioners were inappropriately claiming per diem payments. An independent audit of past per diem claims, commissioned by the county administrator, has not yet been released publicly.

The primary changes to board rules and regulations are as follows:

• A list of committees, boards and commissions that are eligible for per diem payments was deleted. The rules had previously listed nearly 30 committees for which commissioners could request a $25 per diem payment, if they attended a meeting. More general language was included, which (1) exempted county employees from per diem and mileage, and (2) stated that all “duly appointed representatives of the county” could request per diem payments. In an email explaining the changes to his fellow commissioners, Smith said that eliminating the committee list “addresses the concern that we may have missed some committees … or that we may amend the committee structure in the future.”
• The new rules eliminate the ability of commissioners to transfer any unspent money from their flex accounts to other commissioners’ accounts. Each commissioner has an expense account capped at roughly $3,500.
• A new section clarifies that individual commissioners do not have the authority to direct the work of county employees. That section reads as follows:

G. Per M.C.L. 46.11 the board of county commissioners is authorized to act as the policy-making body of a county, adopt ordinances and rules necessary for the conduct of county business, establish committees of the board necessary for the efficient conduct of business, adopt the annual county budget, and exercise all other powers in the area of legislation authorized by law. As such, legislative authority for the county is vested in the board of commissioners as a collective body; no individual commissioner may speak for the board.

H. Per M.C.L. 46.11, M.C.L. 46.13B and county policy, the supervision, direction and control of all departments of a county, except those headed by elected officials, is vested in the county administrator, who has the duty to coordinate the various activities of the county and unify the management of its affairs. Therefore, subject only to policies adopted or directions given by official actions of the board of commissioners, the county administrator shall be responsible for the general supervision, direction, administration and coordination of all the affairs of the county except those conducted by the other elected officials of the county.

Individual members of the board of commissioners do not have the authority to direct the work of county employees; only the board as a collective body speaks for the county and provides policy direction to the county administrator and employees.

[.pdf of proposed rules and regulations]

New Board Rules: Commissioner Deliberations

Wes Prater began the discussion by asking two questions about the new section related to directing the work of county employees: (1) How does the board enforce this rule? and (2) What’s the remedy if the rule is violated? Those issues need to be considered, he said.

Barbara Bergman said that for her, it seemed to be “incredibly simple” – if the board approves a project, then county staff will be deployed. But if an individual commissioner tells staff to do something independently, the county administrator or deputy administrator can recall the staff from that project.

Kristen Judge expressed her faith in the ability of county administrator Verna McDaniel and deputy administrator Bill Reynolds to know when their employees are being misused or overutilized. The board doesn’t need a policy to address this issue, she said.

Commissioners Ronnie Peterson, left, and Rob Turner.

Ronnie Peterson weighed in, observing that only the board chair has the right to chastise commissioners – they don’t report to the county administrator, and the administrator shouldn’t be a tattletale on the board. He cautioned anyone against calling him and telling him not to talk to a county employee. The public expects commissioners to respond to their requests, he said. There might be a process that could be put in place to address these issues, but this new rule doesn’t seem to do that, he said.

Conan Smith responded to these comments, making a distinction between talking to employees and directing their work. The rule does not prohibit communication – commissioners can certainly request information, he said. But the rule does clarify that commissioners can’t tell staff what work to do, he said. Smith gave an example from his own experience, where he felt he had overstepped his authority in the past in directing the county staff to work on an energy grant – he characterized his actions as “heavy-handed,” especially since they were in conflict with the wishes of some other commissioners. [Smith is executive director of the Michigan Suburbs Alliance, a nonprofit which also operates the Southeast Michigan Regional Energy Office.]

It’s also about self-discipline, Smith said. He noted that the board had just gone through the “nightmare” of the per diem and travel controversy because the rules weren’t clearly articulated – that’s a problem, he said. By clarifying the rules, they’re asking each commissioner to abide by a community standard that they all set.

In stating his support for the new rule, Rob Turner said it seemed to him that asking employees a question or notifying them of a situation was different than directing work. As far as enforcement, how are the other rules enforced? he asked. He didn’t see enforcement of the new rule as any different from how the board enforced the existing rules – it is a board responsibility, not one for the county administrator. Noting that he was new to the board, he asked if he was wrong in his understanding.

“I share your interpretation,” Smith said.

Rolland Sizemore Jr. wanted to know if he needed to come to the board for approval before working on a project with county staff. Smith drew the distinction between projects that are already in an employee’s work plan, and those that are new. He gave another example from his own experience, saying that he and Kristin Judge are passionate about pursuing grants, and worked with staff to develop a grant-writing program. That project should have been brought to the board for approval, he said, or vetted with the county administrator first.

Sizemore said he thought they were putting the county administrator “in a bad spot,” if the administrator is the one expected to enforce the rule. If Sizemore were told he can’t do a youth summit, for example, “I’ve got a problem with that,” he said. [Sizemore has championed several county programs for youth, most notably the Washtenaw Area Teens for Tomorrow.] While he agreed that some controls are needed, Sizemore said he wasn’t sure this rule was the best approach. Each district is unique, he said, and people elected him to represent their needs and work on their behalf. If the rule passes, Sizemore added, “good luck if you tell me I can’t do something.”

Leah Gunn praised the programs that Sizemore has initiated, saying they benefitted the county and had the full support of the board. In fact, she recalled that he had asked the board for their support before he started them, she said. That won’t change, she added.

Gunn described the new rule as more of a guidance than a regulation, and said it’s something they should already be doing. It won’t stop them from asking the staff for information, but they shouldn’t put a burden on staff to do things that are outside the scope of a work plan. That’s especially true as they face tough financial times, she said. Now isn’t the time for new initiatives – they need to hunker down and do the best they can with their existing programs, she said.

Judge then made a motion to strike the last paragraph:

Individual members of the board of commissioners do not have the authority to direct the work of county employees; only the board as a collective body speaks for the county and provides policy direction to the county administrator and employees.

It simply restates the information that’s already covered in state statutes, she noted. Further, she has full faith in the ability of the county administrator to tell commissioners when they’re overstepping their authority – she hoped the staff didn’t have the attitude that you can’t say no to a commissioner. Commissioners shouldn’t be treated differently, she said, and certainly aren’t above reproach. It doesn’t give the staff enough credit to believe they can’t handle this, she said.

Washtenaw County commissioners, from left: Alicia Ping, Wes Prater, Kristin Judge, Conan Smith. At right is deputy clerk Jason Brooks.

Bergman disagreed, saying that it was, in fact, difficult to say no to a commissioner. “We’re 11 pretty scary people,” she said, because they control jobs. She said she’d be voting against the amendment.

Prater noted that no existing county policy addresses this issue. The way it’s written, however, isn’t enforceable, he said. They needed to “clean it up” before approving it.

In response to a question from Peterson, Smith clarified that it was him who had proposed the changes to the rules. The last paragraph was added to clarify the existing law, so that all commissioners are operating under the same set of assumptions. [See the rule referencing M.C.L. 46.11 above.] Members of the board have been violating this law for years, he said. By incorporating it into their rules, they’d be acknowledging that it’s part of their standards of conduct.

Peterson again stated his objection to the rule, saying it was hard to support without the element of accountability.

Yousef Rabhi agreed that a lot of Peterson’s concerns were valid, and said that putting responsibility for enforcing the rules in the chair’s hands seemed like a good approach. But so far, state laws haven’t been sufficient, he noted, so it was worth keeping in the paragraph that clarified the role of commissioners with relation to county employees. It reminds commissioners that they need to get the board’s blessing before embarking on projects with the staff. He said he wouldn’t support Judge’s amendment to strike that section.

Alicia Ping voiced her support for the rule, saying that it also clarified the role for staff. Turner restated his support, noting that not understanding the law had gotten the board into problems in the past.

Outcome: The amendment to strike the final paragraph of the proposed rules failed, with support only from Judge, Peterson and Prater.

After the vote, Peterson said he’d support the overall rules, but cautioned that it wasn’t clear how they’d be enforced. He stated that he didn’t work for the government – he worked for the citizens of Washtenaw County, and he’d do what he needed to do to represent them.

Prater said he’d been a bit confused at the beginning of the discussion regarding what kind of “work” the rules referred to – he was even more confused now, he said. It didn’t seem like an effective rule, he said, but he’d support it. However, he still wanted to know who would enforce it, and what the remedy would be for breaking it.

At Smith’s request, Bergman proposed a friendly amendment to add a section addressing this issue:

I. Concerns with violations of this rule shall be addressed by the chair of the board of commissioners.

In the past, an amendment has been considered “friendly” if it is accepted by the person who made the original motion and the person who seconded that motion – a vote of the full board would not be taken. However, at Wednesday’s meeting Curtis Hedger, the county’s corporation counsel, said he’d been reading up on this procedure and had determined that friendly amendments needed to be handled in a different way, to conform with Robert’s Rules of Order.

When the main motion is made and recognized by the chair, it then belongs to the entire board, Hedger said. If an amendment is considered friendly, the chair should ask if anyone on the board objects – if no one objects, no vote is required. But if even one commissioner objects, then the amendment must be handled like any other amendment – with a motion to amend, a second to that motion, debate and a vote.

No one objected to the proposed amendment.

Outcome: The amendment stating the chair’s role in enforcing board rules passed on a voice vote.

A roll call vote on the rules as amended was then taken.

Outcome: Commissioners voted unanimously to adopt the new board rules and regulations, as amended.

After the vote, Turner asked for clarification about what they had just voted on – he said he thought they’d voted on the friendly amendment, not the overall rules. Conan Smith clarified that the friendly amendment was handled by a voice vote, while the rules were subsequently approved on a roll call vote. He then apologized, saying he’d moved through the process too quickly and should have better accommodated the new commissioners by taking a slower pace.

Misc. Communications

The meeting provided several opportunities for communications from commissioners and the county administrator on a variety of topics.

Appointments Caucus

An appointments caucus will be held immediately following the Jan. 12 administrative briefing, which begins at 5 p.m. The caucus will focus on commissioner assignments to the more than 50 boards, committees, commissions and agencies that call for a county commissioner to serve. The board chair, Conan Smith, will officially make the appointments, which the board is expected to confirm at their Jan. 19 meeting.

Both the caucus and the administrative briefing are open to the public and held in the county administration offices at 220 N. Main St.

State of the County Report

County administrator Verna McDaniel told the board that she’d be giving a state of the county report at the Jan. 19 meeting, including a financial update. The board got its last official update – for the third quarter of 2010 – at its Nov. 3, 2010 meeting. They approved revisions to the 2011 budget at their Dec. 1, 2010 meeting, but additional budget adjustments later this year are expected.

Request for Working Session, Executive Session

Rolland Sizemore Jr. asked to set up a board working session on the Washtenaw County Road Commission. Earlier in the meeting, Wes Prater had reported that there were leadership changes on the commission, and that Doug Fuller was now chair. [The three road commissioners are appointed by the county board, but are an autonomous entity. Other road commissioners are Ken Schwartz and Fred Veigel.] Prater had also suggested inviting the road commission officials to a working session, to give the board an update on their operations.

Sizemore also asked that the board hold an executive session soon regarding the lawsuit against the county over sheriff deputy patrols. The three townships of Augusta, Salem and Ypsilanti sued the county in 2006 over the issue of contract deputy prices. The county has prevailed in the case and settled with Salem Township this summer, but is still trying to recoup more than $2 million from Ypsilanti Township and Augusta Township. [For recent Chronicle coverage on the deputy contract issue, see "What's Next for Washtenaw Police Services?"]

Finally, Sizemore requested that the board discuss, at an upcoming meeting, the relocation of the juvenile court to the downtown courthouse.

Kudos for Head Start

Kristin Judge reported that the Washtenaw Head Start program recently received the results of its review by officials of the federal program, and had received high marks, outpacing national averages in most categories. The local program is over-enrolled again, she noted. [.pdf of federal review findings and .pdf of observation report As an area of strength, the report highlighted the local Head Start's site-monitoring system, calling it an innovative process. The review found only one area of noncompliance – of Head Start's 35 employees, a required criminal record check was not conducted for one teacher assistant prior to employment.]

Public Commentary

Two people spoke during public commentary time at Wednesday’s meeting.

Public Commentary: Tasers

Douglas Smith, who has spoken regularly during public commentary at the University of Michigan board of regents meetings, told commissioners that he was there to appeal the county’s denial to his Freedom of Information Act request. He said he’s taken an interest in the use of Tasers by local law enforcement. In particular, he cited two deaths last year, in Livonia and Superior Township, and others in 2009. He said he is concerned about whether Tasers are being used appropriately. [In August 2010, Michael Sheldon Ford died from injuries caused by a fall after being Tasered by Livonia police. Also in August, Stanley Jackson Jr. of Belleville died hours after being Tasered during a drug raid in Superior Township.]

Smith, who noted that he is a former University of Michigan professor of pathology, said he had made a FOIA request for an autopsy report of Jackson, but had been denied. The reason he was given is that an investigation is underway by the state police – the information won’t be released until the investigation is completed, he said.

FOIA standards require a balance between the harm that might be caused from releasing information, and the public benefit that’s provided by access, Smith said. There’s a strong public interest in knowing whether Tasers are linked to the cause of death, he said. That’s especially true, he added, since he expects the state legislature will be considering a law that would allow private citizens to own Tasers. At the least, Smith hoped that the cause of death and major anatomical findings could be released. He concluded by distributing a copy of his appeal letter to commissioners.

In the time set aside for commissioner response to public commentary, Kristen Judge assured Smith that the county takes FOIA issues very seriously, and that there would be a followup to his request.

Barbara Bergman reported that the board of the Washtenaw County Health Organization (WCHO), on which she serves, had received a briefing earlier that day about efforts to train Washtenaw sheriff deputies to use Tasers as a last resort. The goal is to reduce the use of that equipment, she said – though she stressed that this was not an official policy.

Public Commentary: Setting a More Ambitious Agenda

Thomas Partridge spoke during both opportunities for public commentary. As he has done frequently at public meetings in the past, he called for local, state and federal officials to prioritize an agenda that would create affordable, accessible housing, health care, transportation and education for all. Partridge also argued that the public should have a voice in the election of board officers, as well as the election of leaders in the state and federal legislature. Finally, he called for campaign finance reform.

Public Commentary: Commissioner Comment

Yousef Rabhi thanked those who spoke during public commentary, and urged people who might be watching on Community Television Network to come to future meetings and let commissioners know what’s on their minds. “Come on over,” he said. “We’re not that mean.”

Present: Barbara Levin Bergman, Leah Gunn, Kristin Judge, Ronnie Peterson, Alicia Ping, Wes Prater, Yousef Rabhi, Rolland Sizemore Jr., Conan Smith, Dan Smith, Rob Turner.

Next regular board meeting: Wednesday, Jan. 19, 2011 at 6:30 p.m. at the county administration building, 220 N. Main St. The Ways & Means Committee meets first, followed immediately by the regular board meeting. [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 comment sessions are held at the beginning and end of each meeting. The board’s administrative briefing, to preview the Jan. 19 agenda, will be held on Wednesday, Jan. 12 at 5 p.m. in the offices of the county administration building, 220 N. Main St. That meeting will be immediately followed by an appointments caucus.

Outgoing commissioner Mark Ouimet, left, is greeting by fellow commissioner Ronnie Peterson before the start of the Dec. 1 board meeting. Board chair Rolland Sizemore Jr. is seated to the right. (Photos by the writer.)

Also during the meeting, the issue of appropriate compensation emerged again. Local attorney Tom Wieder, who had initially raised the issue in October, spoke during public commentary about the need for commissioner Mark Ouimet and others who were inappropriately reimbursed for per diem and mileage to repay the county. An independent accountant’s report on the matter, one that was commissioned by county administrator Verna McDaniel, has been completed but not yet publicly released. Commissioners will be meeting individually with accountants regarding the report next week, and it will then be released to the public.

A resolution that would have cut spending accounts for commissioners from $3,550 annually to $1,500 wasn’t brought forward for a vote – Conan Smith had circulated a draft of the resolution via email earlier in the day. But he said he decided not to introduce it, because after talking to individual commissioners before the meeting, it was clear that he couldn’t marshal enough votes to get it passed.

The board did take action on several budget-related items, with little discussion. Commissioners gave final approval to revisions in the 2011 budget, which among other things directs county administrator Verna McDaniel to make proposals for cutting $1,034,988 out of the original budget of $98,493,155. The board also voted to accept the county’s apportionment report, which gives details of the 2010 taxable valuations for property in the county, by municipality. The report also includes the amount of millages levied and the dollar amounts collected in taxes. December tax bills have already been mailed out to property owners, based on these calculations.

Also during Wednesday’s meeting, the board approved two appointments, nominated by board chair Rolland Sizemore Jr. Commissioner Conan Smith was appointed to the board of the land bank authority, and outgoing commissioner Ken Schwartz was appointed to the board of the Washtenaw County Road Commission.

Commissioner Compensation

The issue of how commissioners are paid per diem, mileage and other expenses has been discussed in several ways over the past few months, and the topic emerged again during the Dec. 1 meeting.

Commissioner Compensation: Public Commentary

Tom Wieder, a local attorney and Democratic Party supporter, spoke during two opportunities for public commentary. He reminded commissioners that he’d previously spoken to them about two months ago, prior to the Nov. 2 election.

Tom Wieder, a local attorney, talks with commissioner Kristin Judge prior to the start of the Dec. 1 board of commissioners meeting.

At the board’s Oct. 6 meeting, Wieder produced documents obtained from the county under the Freedom of Information Act and accused commissioner Mark Ouimet of claiming per diem payments to which he wasn’t entitled. Wieder said that Ouimet’s spending far exceeded other commissioners, and that Ouimet should repay more than $30,000 in inappropriate per diem and mileage reimbursements.

Wieder’s accusations led to a review by the county clerk’s office of all commissioner reimbursements, and to a separate external accounting report on the issue commissioned by county administrator Verna McDaniel.

At the board’s Dec. 1 meeting, Wieder said his understanding is that roughly 80% of the reimbursements deemed to be inappropriate were made by Ouimet and Jessica Ping. [Ouimet and Ping are the only Republicans on the 11-member board.] Wieder said he hoped that nothing like this would happen again, and he urged commissioners to support a call by Leah Gunn to abolish all per diem, mileage and travel payments. [Gunn had floated that resolution at the board's Nov. 17 meeting, but it failed to secure enough votes to pass.]

Wieder pointed out that Ouimet had previously offered to repay anything that was inappropriately reimbursed, and that Ouimet had offered to put the disputed money in escrow until the issue was resolved. Wieder questioned whether that had happened. He said he’d emailed McDaniel raising other issues, but “the main thing is: What are you going to do now?” What are they going to do to recoup taxpayer money? he asked, stating that in excess of $25,000 needed to be repaid.

Wieder noted that time is running out in seeking reimbursement – he said it’s likely that a six-year statute of limitations applies, if it becomes necessary to litigate. They need to act soon, he said.

Commissioner Compensation: Commissioner Response

In response to a comment by Wieder, Leah Gunn said that the independent accountant’s report on per diem spending had been commissioned by McDaniel – not at the urging of Ouimet.

Jeff Irwin said that Wieder was right in returning to the board and asking them what the county’s response will be. He said they’d be looking at some hard numbers from the report that McDaniel had commissioned, which would allow them to settle the issue. [Commissioners will be meeting individually with accountants regarding the report next week – it will then be released to the public.]

Irwin noted that at the Nov. 17 meeting, they’d had another debate on the question of per diems – referring to the discussion on Gunn’s resolution to eliminate per diem, mileage and travel spending. They’ve learned that some people, in good faith, had misinterpreted the board rules, Irwin said, and that resulted in a situation that has cost the county in staff time looking into the recordkeeping. He said he hoped they could put the issue behind them as soon as possible.

Commissioner Compensation: A No-Show Resolution

Earlier in the day on Dec. 1, prior to the board meeting, commissioner Conan Smith had emailed current commissioners, the four incoming commissioners and other elected county officials about a resolution he said he was planning to bring forward at their meeting that evening.

The resolution would have cut the amount of commissioners’ individual “flex” accounts from $3,550 to $1,500 per commissioner, annually. It also would have exempted mileage reimbursements for approved county business from the flex accounts, and excluded Ways & Means Committee meetings, working sessions and administrative briefings from being eligible for per diems. [.pdf file of Smith's resolution]

In his email, Smith wrote that although it accounted for “a small part of the overall budget, the determination of our compensation sends important signals to the organization and the public both in regards to our commitment to ensure that any citizen can afford to serve in this role as well as our sensitivity to the county budget situation.”

In addition, Smith wrote:

I want to acknowledge that in the last cycle, the BOC [board of commissioners] enacted significant cuts to commissioner compensation. In the proposal that created the Flex Accounts, commissioner remuneration was reduced by more than 16%, and the overall BOC budget dropped by 11%. Considering that commissioner salaries have remained flat for well over a decade, these cuts to personnel far exceeded anything we implemented for the staff – union and non-union alike. The departmental reduction set the stage for a very productive and sincere budget process that allowed us to achieve nearly miraculous outcomes thanks to the goodwill that move generated. There should be no question in anyone’s mind that the BOC has led by example in these hard budget times.

I also want to express my appreciation for the insight you have provided on what it takes to do this job effectively and how our higher minds need to be set on ensure that no citizen is dissuaded from running for this office because of their employment situation. We function better as a board with the broad representation that our compensation package supports. This has never been a question of personal gain at our board; rather looking to the future of the institution we have consistently kept a fair – not lucrative, but fair – compensation in mind. That should remain a moral priority for us.

All this said, the organization is again facing a revenue situation that will call for nearly draconian cuts to general fund services and, with proposed reductions in state and federal aid, puts human services for our most vulnerable residents in jeopardy. If we are going to meet this challenge in the same way we did a year ago, it is incumbent on the board to act on commissioner compensation again. This is not necessarily a question of fairness or equity but one of leadership.

I agree with many of you who want to ensure that the base compensation package ensures access: this is a just outcome against which to judge our remuneration. To that end, I recommend 1) leaving the salary and benefits package alone 2) exempting mileage reimbursements for approved county business from the Flex Accounts and 3) reducing the Flex Account allocation to $1,500. I am also proposing that Ways & Means Committee Meetings, Working Sessions and Administrative Briefings be excluded from per diems.

This is the equivalent to a 9% reduction in direct compensation. The $1,500 Flex Account should be sufficient to allow for per diems for other meetings throughout a year or could be used to offset travel costs for educational opportunities. Again, the Flex Account approach allows each commissioner to determine the most appropriate use of funds necessary to do the job well.

I hope you will give this proposal judicious consideration this evening.

However, Smith did not introduce the resolution during the Dec. 1 meeting. After the meeting, he told The Chronicle that he hadn’t been able to garner sufficient votes for it to pass.

Budget Issues

As he has at previous meetings, Smith – who chairs the board’s Ways & Means Committee, and who is expected to be elected board chair in January – gave an update on preparations to address the 2012-2013 budget. He serves as a board liaison to the budget team, led by county administrator Verna McDaniel, which is developing the process that will be used to set the budget.

Smith noted that they’ll likely be facing at least a $20 million deficit over that two-year period, and said they’ll need to be creative and strong to fill the hole. “While last year was difficult, next year we’ll be cutting to the bone,” he said.

Public outreach and community engagement will be critical, Smith said, both to the general public as well as to county employees and to other elected officials, including the sheriff, prosecutor, clerk, water resources commissioner and the judiciary. The budget team is trying to come up with a range of different ways to engage these constituencies, he said, such as brown bag lunches, online surveys, YouTube videos and town hall meetings. He said they’ve also discussed adding a “rumor buster” section to the county’s budget website, which would explain the data and rationale behind their decision-making.

Smith said that in January, McDaniel will give a “state of the county” report, which will outline the county’s current status as well as goals and expectations for the coming year. He said that during budget team meetings, she had highlighted the need to discuss not just ways to cut the budget, but also to set a vision for the county’s future.

Budget Issues: 2011 Budget Affirmation

Later in the meeting, Wes Prater noted that the 2011 budget affirmation they were voting on – and which later received final approval – was simply an expenditure plan. It was likely to change, he noted, either for better or worse. He said he hoped the board would receive a quarterly update from administration. McDaniel indicated that updates would be provided as requested.

The board had held a public hearing on the 2011 budget changes at its Nov. 17 meeting, which drew three speakers. Commissioners had given initial approval of the changes on Nov. 3. [.pdf of 2011 revised county general fund budget]

Outcome: The resolution that authorized changes to the 2011 budget was approved unanimously.

Budget Issues: Apportionment Report

Every April, the county’s equalization department produces an annual report describing Washtenaw County’s total equalized (assessed) value of property. The report – part of the state-mandated equalization process – gives an indication of how much revenue the county will receive from property taxes in the coming year. [See Chronicle coverage: "Washtenaw Assessed Property Values Drop"]

Raman Patel, Washtenaw County’s equalization director.

In November, the equalization and property description department presents an apportionment report, which gives details of the taxable valuations for property in the county, by municipality. The report also includes the amount of millages levied and the dollar amounts collected in taxes. [.pdf file of 2010 apportionment report]

Raman Patel, the county’s equalization director, told the board on Wednesday that this year, all the taxing entities in Washtenaw County will be levying in total about $639 million in property taxes. The county alone will levy about $83 million this year. The largest amount – about $190 million – is levied by the county’s K-12 public schools.

Like the equalization report, the board is required by state law to vote on adopting the apportionment report. Commissioner Conan Smith joked that “just for kicks,” one year they should reject it – this was not the year.

Outcome: The board voted unanimously to adopt the 2010 apportionment report.

Budget Issues: Sheriff Deputy Patrols

The board took a final vote on a resolution setting the cost of a police services unit (PSU) at $176,108. The amount had been recommended by the police services steering committee (PSSC), a group appointed by the county board that has been working for more than a year to determine the true cost of putting a sheriff’s deputy on patrol. Commissioners had received a presentation on that issue at their Nov. 4 working session, when sheriff Jerry Clayton reviewed the PSSC proposal – most of the board’s public discussion occurred at that session.

A PSU is the term used for a sheriff’s deputy who is hired on a contract basis to serve local townships and other municipalities. The amount includes direct costs like salary and fringe benefits, as well as indirect costs and overhead. [.pdf of cost details for police services unit] For additional background, see also Chronicle coverage of the board’s Nov. 17 meeting.

A meeting of the PSSC had originally been scheduled for Dec. 1, prior to the county board meeting. It was rescheduled for Dec. 15, with the intent of waiting until the board had acted on the cost proposal, so that the PSSC could then consider its next steps. The Dec. 15 committee meeting will begin at 4 p.m. at the county’s western service center, 705 N. Zeeb Road.

Outcome: The board gave final approval to a resolution that sets the cost of a police services unit (PSU) at $176,108. The board still needs to decide how much the county will charge contracting municipalities per PSU – an amount that will likely be lower, offset by a county general fund contribution.

Budget Issues: Internal Audit

With no discussion, commissioners unanimously gave final approval for the county administration to issue a request for proposals (RFP) to solicit bids from firms to perform an internal audit on the county’s finances. The audit would begin by reviewing existing internal controls, followed by a risk assessment to identify which departments to examine first.

According to the county’s bid website, the deadline for responding to the RFP is 2 p.m. on Jan. 10, 2011. [.pdf file of internal audit RFP]

Appointments

The board approved two appointments at Wednesday’s meeting, both nominated by board chair Rolland Sizemore Jr.

Conan Smith was nominated to serve on the board of the county land bank authority. The land bank – a mechanism used to help the county deal with foreclosed and blighted properties – has a somewhat convoluted history. The board first authorized it in 2009, but decided to dissolve the land bank earlier this year after they failed to reach consensus on issues of governance and funding.

After further debate spanning several months, the board revived the land bank in September, when they also passed a resolution calling for two commissioners to serve on the land bank’s board. That change requires state approval, which has not yet been authorized. When state approval is given, Sizemore plans to nominate Wes Prater to serve on the land bank authority board, filling the second set allotted to commissioners.

Outcome: Conan Smith’s appointment to the land bank authority board was unanimously approved.

Sizemore also nominated Ken Schwartz to serve as a Washtenaw County road commissioner, replacing David Rutledge, who was recently elected state representative for District 54. [Schwartz lost his re-election bid to continue serving on the county board for District 2 – Republican Dan Smith won that race, and will join the board in January.]

At the board’s Nov. 17 meeting, Sizemore had expressed frustration with the management of the road commission, which is responsible for the upkeep and construction of more than 1,600 miles of roads and 111 bridges throughout Washtenaw County. Three road commissioners are appointed by the county board to six-year terms with a base salary of $10,500, and are supposed to provide oversight to the road commission management – Steve Puuri is the current managing director there. The other two road commissioners are Doug Fuller, who was appointed for his first term in 2008, and Fred Veigel, who was first appointed in 1991 and was most recently re-appointed in 2008, after some debate by the county board.

Seven people applied for the seat being vacated by Rutledge – Schwartz did not officially apply. At the Nov. 17 board meeting, commissioner Kristin Judge, who was lobbying to add a special meeting on Dec. 8 to discuss budget priorities, suggested that interviews for candidates be held then too. That idea didn’t get traction from the rest of the board – no additional meeting was scheduled.

There was never any previous public discussion about the possibility of Schwartz being named, though Sizemore confirmed his intention last month in a phone interview with The Chronicle. From Chronicle coverage:

Sizemore said that Schwartz – whose district covers northeast Washtenaw, including the townships of Superior, Salem and Northfield – is familiar with the county, having previously served on the board of Superior Township and as an attorney for Augusta Township, in addition to his work as a county commissioner. Schwartz also understands what the board of commissioners wants from the road commission, Sizemore said, adding that the tough economy requires a different kind of management in the road commission. … “I know I’ll take heat for it,” Sizemore said, “but it’s the right thing to do.”

Beyond Sizemore’s remarks in making the nomination, there was no discussion of Schwartz’s appointment at the Dec. 1 meeting.

Outcome: Ken Schwartz was appointed to the Washtenaw County road commission board by a unanimous vote. Schwartz abstained from the vote. His term begins Jan. 1, 2011.

Ann Arbor Skatepark

During public commentary time, Trevor Staples and Scott Rosencrans – both with the Friends of the Ann Arbor Skatepark – came to the podium.

Staples thanked the board for their support over the past couple of years, and gave special thanks to the Washtenaw County parks & recreation commission, on which two commissioners – Conan Smith and Rolland Sizemore Jr. – serve. [In March, the commission approved $400,000 in matching funds for construction of the skatepark, which will be located at Veterans Memorial Park in Ann Arbor.]

Trevor Staples, right, talks with Bob Tetens prior to the start of the Dec. 1 county board of commissioners meeting. Staples is with Friends of the Ann Arbor Skatepark. Tetens is director of Washtenaw County Parks & Recreation.

Staples also noted that the skatepark is participating in the Pepsi Refresh Project, competing for a $250,000 prize – winners are the projects that receive the most votes online or via text message in December. They’ve launched a vigorous campaign to encourage supporters to vote each day during the month.

In the time set aside for commissioner response to public commentary, several commissioners praised the efforts of Staples and other skatepark organizers – some indicated that they’d already voted in the Pepsi Refresh competition.

Barbara Bergman said she’d received an email from a local doctor who objected to supporting the skatepark and who felt there are other more worthy causes to endorse. Bergman said she disagreed – recreation is important, and she supported the skatepark. She noted that the doctor had said skateboarding is dangerous, and she indicated that she assumed the skatepark would be handled responsibly regarding safety issues.

Sizemore recalled that when he was younger, they had to build their own places to skateboard. He said he’s talked to youth from around the county, and they tell him two things: 1) they don’t like wearing protective gear, though he said he recommends it, and 2) they’re excited about the skatepark, and that the county is supporting a project of this magnitude.

Recognition: HARC, Ping, Outgoing Commissioners

Much of the Dec. 1 meeting was devoted to honors and recognitions, for members of the community as well as outgoing commissioners.

Recognition: Da-I Ping

Da-I Ping attended Wednesday’s meeting under the impression that he was there for the final meeting of his daughter, commissioner Jessica Ping. When commissioner Ken Schwartz presented a resolution honoring Da-I Ping’s military service, Schwartz quipped: “This might be the first time you were successfully ambushed.”

Da-I Ping, left, was honored at the Dec. 1 meeting of the county board of commissioners for his military service. His daughter Alicia Ping, right, was elected to the board on Nov. 2 to represent District 3. Her sister Jessica Ping currently serves in that seat, and did not seek re-election.

Ping served as a sergeant in the U.S. Marine Corps from 1965-69, during the Vietnam war. He has been awarded several military honors for his service, including the National Defense Service Medal, the Vietnam Service Medal with 2 Bronze Battle Stars, the Combat Action Ribbon, and the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm.

Bill Reynolds, the county’s deputy administrator, and Michael Smith of the county’s veterans affairs department also have served in the military and wore their dress uniforms during Wednesday’s meeting, in honor of Ping’s service.

Ping, who received a standing ovation from commissioners and others at the meeting, told the crowd that although the war in Vietnam was controversial, he never questioned his service. “I was very proud to serve my country and I would gladly do it again, any time.”

Recognition: HIV/AIDS Resource Center

As part of World AIDS Week, the staff and board of the HIV/AIDS Resource Center (HARC) were honored during Wednesday’s meeting.

Lisa Hameed, left, a staff member of the HIV/AIDS Resource Center (HARC), gives an AIDS awareness pin to commissioner Kristin Judge, right, prior to the Dec. 1 Washtenaw County board of commissioners meeting. Patricia Love, HARC's director of client services, looks on.

A resolution read by commissioner Kristin Judge thanked the staff and board for their work, noting that in 2009, HARC assisted over 201 residents living with HIV/AIDS, tested 512 residents for HIV and contacted 4,583 residents with outreach programming. Judge noted that more than 600 people in Washtenaw County have HIV/AIDS.

Four people from HARC attended the meeting. Patrica Love, the nonprofit’s director of client services, thanked commissioners, saying that HARC couldn’t do the great work it does without the support of its dedicated board, employees and volunteers. She said she was sorry they had to be there after all these years, but unfortunately HIV/AIDS is still “alive and kicking.” HARC board member David Martel also thanked commissioners for their support.

Recognition: Outgoing Commissioners

With clear affection and some tears, commissioners who will remain in office for another two-year term said a formal farewell to the four outgoing commissioners: Republicans Mark Ouimet and Jessica Ping, and Democrats Jeff Irwin and Ken Schwartz. All four were presented with framed resolutions of appreciation, as well as commemorative plaques given by county administrator Verna McDaniel.

Ouimet (District 1) and Irwin (District 11) were elected to the state House of Representatives in Districts 52 and 53, respectively, and will be replaced on the board by the winners of the Nov. 2 election – Republican Rob Turner and Democrat Yousef Rabhi. Ping (District 3) did not seek re-election – that seat was won by her sister, Republican Alicia Ping, in an uncontested race. Schwartz, a Democrat, was defeated in the District 2 race by Republican Dan Smith.

The four outgoing commissioners thanked their families and their colleagues on the board. Ouimet noted that the amount of time spent going to meetings is time not spent with family, and he thanked his wife Donna Ouimet, who was in the audience, for her support.

Some commissioners spoke about how well the group worked together, despite their differences. In her remarks, Ping said it meant a lot that Leah Gunn was the one who presented her with the resolution of appreciation, because when Ping was elected in 2006, Gunn “did not like me at first!” The remark elicited laughter from commissioners.

Schwartz reported that he just finished reading a book by physicist Stephen Hawking, who explores the notion of the existence of multiple universes. “I’m sure in one of those universes, I won the election,” Schwartz said.

Gunn also presented the resolution of appreciation to Irwin, and recalled that when he first joined the board in 1999, “he was the kid.” Gunn said for his first meeting, she embarrassed him by decorating his seat in the boardroom with maize and blue ribbons – Irwin was still a University of Michigan student at the time. And now here he is, she said, “leaving us for Lansing.”

Recognition: Outgoing Chair

Rolland Sizemore Jr., who’ll be ending his two years as board chair, told his colleagues he enjoyed the experience, even though he noted that some people say it’s like trying to herd cats into a bag. He said he was proud to be a part of the board, and to work with the county’s administration.

Conan Smith praised Sizemore’s leadership and collaborative style, noting that there’d been a contentious beginning, but that Sizemore had pulled the board together in ways that Smith hadn’t anticipated. Sizemore had seen the board through some major transitions, Smith said, including a major budget crisis and the hiring of a new county administrator.

Board officers are elected at the beginning of each year, though by custom they typically serve two years in each position.

Misc. Public Commentary

Thomas Partridge spoke during three of the evening’s four opportunities for public commentary. He said he wanted to raise issues that weren’t on the meeting’s “very brief” agenda – issues like a significant and timely expansion of affordable housing, comprehensive public transit that links the entire county and southeast Michigan, and accessible health care, especially for seniors and the disabled. He said it was gratifying to see commissioners in such a good mood, making presentations of recognition. It would have been more gratifying, he said, if homeless people had been invited to attend, and given recognition and respect for their daily struggles.

Misc. Public Commentary: Commissioner Response

Kristin Judge thanked Partridge for continuing to bring up issues that many commissioners also felt strongly about. She noted that they were involved with the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority’s current efforts to develop a countywide transit master plan, and that the county’s public outreach team (PORT) works with the homeless population every day. They are collecting blankets, gloves, tents and other supplies to distribute to the homeless, she said.

Rolland Sizemore Jr. also thanked Partridge, saying that he gave Partridge credit for showing up and doing his part. He said he missed Partridge when he didn’t attend their meetings. “I hope you continue to come,” Sizemore said.

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

Next board meeting: Wednesday, Jan. 5, 2011 at 6:30 p.m. at the County Administration Building, 220 N. Main St. The Ways & Means Committee meets first, followed immediately by the regular board meeting. [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 comment sessions are held at the beginning and end of each meeting.

Members of the Washtenaw County street soccer team, which competed in Washington D.C. this summer at the Street Soccer USA Cup. David Altherr, far left, also was picked to play for the U.S. team at the 8th annual Homeless World Cup in Rio, Brazil in September. They were on hand to promote a Dec. 10-11 fundraiser. (Photos by the writer.)

At some points during the debate there was a fair amount of confusion. A vote to eliminate per diem payments initially passed, but commissioner Ronnie Peterson then indicated that he’d intended to vote the opposite way. Because he’d voted on the prevailing side, parliamentary rules allowed him to bring the issue back for another vote – he switched his vote to no, and the resolution failed to pass. Ultimately, none of the proposed cuts won enough support to enact.

A resolution to set the cost of a police services unit (PSU) received little discussion – aside from some public commentary from Ann Arbor Township supervisor Mike Moran, and a response by commissioner Jeff Irwin. A PSU is the term used for a sheriff’s deputy who is hired on a contract basis to serve local townships and other municipalities. The board gave initial approval to set the cost at $176,108 and is expected to take a final vote on the issue at their Dec. 1 meeting. They’ll wait until next year to tackle the more contentious question of how much the county will charge contracting municipalities per PSU – an amount that will likely be lower, offset by a county general fund contribution.

In other budget-related matters, a public hearing on revisions to the 2011 budget drew only three speakers – including two representatives from local nonprofits who urged commissioners to consider the impact of any cuts they might contemplate for human services. The board also authorized soliciting bids for an internal audit, and discussed holding a special meeting in December to start setting priorities for upcoming budget discussions.

As he had during the Nov. 8 administrative briefing, board chair Rolland Sizemore Jr. expressed frustration with the management of the Washtenaw County Road Commission, and said he wants the board to address that issue. There’s a vacancy on the road commission board, a group that’s appointed by the county board and that has oversight for the road commission operations. Other county commissioners said they’d like to hold public interviews for the job – seven people have applied.

Also on Wednesday, members of the county’s Street Soccer team, the SSPORT, came to the meeting to ask commissioners to participate in the 24-hour Soccerthon, a fundraiser to be held at WideWorld Sports Center starting on Friday, Dec. 10 at 6 p.m. The team is part of the county’s homeless project outreach team (PORT), which provides mental health and other support services to the local homeless population. The players had participated in the third annual Street Soccer USA Cup this summer in Washington D.C., and one of the players, David Altherr, had been picked to play for the U.S. team at the 8th annual Homeless World Cup in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil in September.

During Wednesday’s meeting the board also passed a resolution declaring Nov. 14-20, 2010 as National Hunger and Homelessness Awareness Week. Former county administrator Bob Guenzel, chair of the nonprofit Washtenaw Housing Alliance, was on hand and told the board to expect a re-energized effort related to the county’s Blueprint to End Homelessness. He announced that the WHA has hired a new executive director to lead that effort – Julie Steiner, who has served as executive director of the Interfaith Hospitality Network of Washtenaw County at Alpha House.

Police Services Cost

The police services steering committee (PSSC), appointed by the county board, has been working for more than a year to determine the true cost of putting a sheriff’s deputy on patrol. Commissioners had received a presentation on that issue at their Nov. 4 working session, when sheriff Jerry Clayton reviewed the PSSC proposal, which recommended setting the cost of a police services unit (PSU) at $176,108. A PSU is the term used for a sheriff’s deputy who is hired on a contract basis to serve local townships and other municipalities. The amount includes direct costs like salary and fringe benefits, as well as indirect costs and overhead. [.pdf of chart with details of itemized costs Additional backup documentation: cost analysis formulas; overview of fringe benefit rates; overview of cost allocation plan (CAP)]

A discussion at that Nov. 4 working session revealed a divergence of perspectives – a split that emerged again during a discussion at the board’s Nov. 8 administrative briefing. During the working session, Clayton had told commissioners it’s important to agree on the cost of delivering police services, before moving on to the question of price – or what the county will charge for that service, presumably a lower amount. He also outlined several policy issues that the board needs to address, including what metrics they’ll use to determine future adjustments in cost and price. Current contracts for the 74 deputies paid for by local municipalities expire at the end of 2011.

Police Services Cost: Public Commentary

At the Nov. 17 meeting, Ann Arbor Township supervisor Mike Moran spoke during public commentary, echoing some of the comments he’d made at the Nov. 4 working session. He said he wanted to reiterate that the PSSC subcommittee – the group that had done most of the research in determining the cost recommendation – had worked very hard to keep out political differences and other disagreements that had historically been part of these discussions. He believed they’d done a very fair job of that. Moran said he wanted to respond to some comments that commissioners Jeff Irwin and Barbara Bergman had made at the working session.

Moran objected to what he characterized as Irwin’s desire to include the county’s 12 general fund deputies – deputies who are paid for out of the general fund, not from contracts with other jurisdictions – into the cost calculation. Likewise, Moran didn’t think the county’s cost allocation plan (CAP) should be added in, either. The CAP is an amount charged to each department for things like the county attorney and administration. Not a single dollar of that would change if you had 20 contract deputies or none, he said. Moran said there was the sense among committee members that the CAP had been allocated unfairly, in regards to the sheriff’s department, but that was an issue they’d decided to leave until another day.

Police Services Cost: Commissioner Response

Irwin responded to Moran’s comments, saying he agreed that the committee had done good work, and that it was a good jumping off point for discussions. Regarding CAP for the sheriff’s department, he said his recollection was that the county paid most of those costs, not the contracting jurisdictions. He said he didn’t think the 12 general fund deputies should be included in the cost formula either, but that it should be indicated as part of the county’s overhead for the sheriff’s department.

Finally, Irwin noted that one of the points he’d made most strenuously at the working session was something that Moran didn’t address: The cost of the county’s detective bureau. The work of the detectives is related to the contract deputies, he said – using an incremental cost model, the more contract deputies you have, the more detectives you’ll need to handle the cases generated by those deputies. He said it’s an indirect cost that should be reflected in the recommendation, but isn’t.

Police Services Cost: Commissioner Deliberations

There was little discussion on this item. Commissioner Leah Gunn suggested a friendly amendment, adding in a reference to the total cost of $176,108 per police services unit (PSU). The original resolution mentioned the cost of $168,584 per deputy, plus $7,524 in overhead.

Outcome: The board gave initial approval to a resolution that sets the cost of a police services unit (PSU) at $176,108. The board is expected to take a final vote on the cost issue at its Dec. 1 meeting. The board still needs to decide how much the county will charge contracting municipalities per PSU – an amount that will likely be lower, offset by a county general fund contribution.

Commissioner Per Diem, Travel & Mileage

During the Nov. 17 meeting, Leah Gunn introduced a resolution to eliminate per diem, travel and mileage reimbursement for commissioners. She began by noting that that she had unsuccessfully introduced a similar resolution in 2009. This time, she also included a provision to pay for newly elected commissioners to take a “Commissioner 101″ course. She indicated that she had talked to residents around the county, and had found widespread support for these cuts.

Wes Prater immediately moved to table the resolution, a motion seconded by Rolland Sizemore Jr. That motion was defeated by a 5-6 vote – voting against it were Gunn, Jeff Irwin, Mark Ouimet, Ken Schwartz, Barbara Bergman and Conan Smith.

The subsequent debate on this resolution lasted more than an hour, with additional attempts to table it, and moments of confusion that resulted at one point in a vote reversal by commissioner Ronnie Peterson.

Jessica Ping began discussion by pointing out that she wanted to table it because she isn’t going to be on the board next year – she didn’t seek re-election, but her sister, Alicia Ping, won an uncontested race for that position, representing District 3. It is important that the new commissioners weigh in, she said. Ping also noted that unlike some of the urban districts, her district included nine municipalities – it’s the biggest district, geographically. She observed that six commissioners represented districts that only had one municipality in it. [There are four commissioners representing different areas of Ann Arbor, for example.] Some commissioners can ride their bikes to meetings in their district, she said, adding, “I can’t ride my bike to Manchester!” Ping also felt it was important for commissioners to keep up to speed on issues by attending conferences, but added that they should report back to the board about what they learned.

Prater said he couldn’t support Gunn’s resolution, saying it was, in part, too late. The board had already addressed this issue when they voted to create flex accounts, which cap each commissioner’s spending at $3,550 per year. It allows commissioners to decide how they want to spend it, either on per diem, travel or other authorized items. Prater also pointed out that the last time commissioners had seen an increase in their salaries was January of 2001. If you calculated cost-of-living increases, by not taking raises over that period, the board has saved the county over $300,000, he said.

Prater also noted that if they approved this resolution, they’d be changing the rules for the incoming commissioners, who ran for office assuming they’d get per diem, travel and mileage. And he supported Ping’s observation about travel – as liaison to the road commission, he said, he attended around 45 meetings for that each year. A round trip from his home to the road commission was 30 miles, he said. “I’m just pointing that out.”

Ken Schwartz also said he wouldn’t support the resolution, saying that it didn’t take into consideration the different types of districts in the county, and the different needs of commissioners.

Kristin Judge argued, as she has in the past, that commissioners shouldn’t have to suffer a financial loss to do their job. It wasn’t good to create a situation in which only independently wealthy people could run for office. They need to make it possible for anyone to run for office, she said, whether it’s a newly graduated student – a reference to Yousef Rabhi, a Democrat in his early 20s who was recently elected to represent District 11, and who attended Wednesday’s meeting in the audience – or someone who is independently wealthy.

Commissioner Per Diem, Travel & Mileage: Mileage

There was then a discussion, leading to some confusion, regarding Barbara Bergman’s desire to retain mileage reimbursements. To do that, a motion was eventually made to amend out the reference to mileage. The amendment effectively left in place the mileage reimbursement.

Jessica Ping, right, talks with her sister Alicia Ping before the start of the Nov. 17 county board of commissioners meeting. Jessica Ping represents District 3, a seat that Alicia Ping won in an uncontested Nov. 2 election.

In deliberations on the amendment, Ping said that until this election cycle, there wasn’t clarity about what commissioners could be reimbursed for. During the last budget cycle, she said she’d been asked by the county administrator to make presentations about the budget to municipalities in her district. She was asked to represent the county, yet those types of meetings weren’t on the official list of meetings that commissioners can be reimbursed for attending, she noted. It’s really important to review the list of what meetings are allowable, she said, and not to take away mileage reimbursement. Every commissioner who represented a large geographic district “got nailed” by the media and the public on this issue, Ping said. [She was alluding to allegations that emerged prior to the Nov. 2 election, charging that Mark Ouimet and other commissioners had been inappropriately reimbursed for ineligible expenses. See Chronicle coverage: "County Commissioner Expenses Debated"]

Ping concluded by saying that she has nothing to lose, since she didn’t seek reelection. But it was an important issue for commissioners to consider.

Judge and Bergman both agreed, saying that representing the county in the way that Ping described should be reimbursed.

At this point, Irwin pointed out that nothing they’d just discussed related to the resolution they were considering. From Ping’s perspective, the amendment would actually be an improvement, he noted, since it would leave mileage reimbursement in place. He observed that changing the rules for what meetings qualify for reimbursement is a separate issue. He voiced support for the amendment.

Schwartz said it was his understanding that under current rules, you couldn’t request a per diem for attending a meeting that wasn’t part of the approved list, but that you could get reimbursed for mileage. Smith said that was an incorrect understanding – mileage should only be reimbursed for qualified meetings.

Outcome: Commissioners voted unanimously to amend out the item on mileage from the resolution.

Commissioner Per Diem, Travel & Mileage: Per Diem

Sizemore said if someone sought to serve on the county board because of the compensation, then “you’re messing yourself up from the beginning.” He said he appreciated the amount of work that Gunn, Smith and Judge had put into this topic. The work that commissioners do goes beyond the number of meetings they attend, he observed. It includes all the phone calls you get, or the times when you go out to dinner with your wife and someone comes and sits down at your table for 20 minutes to talk about a county issue.

As a point of information, Gunn reminded commissioners that issues of compensation are made before the new board takes office. So if they want to eliminate per diems, they must do it now, not in January. She reiterated the major budget challenges they’d be facing, noting that they’ll be asking employees and others to make big sacrifices. “This is a symbol of us biting the bullet and saying we’re going to do our part as well,” she said.

Irwin asked that they consider the resolution’s remaining three parts separately: 1) eliminating per diems for attending meetings, 2) eliminating travel compensation, including registration and hotel costs for conferences, and 3) paying for the “Commissioner 101″ course that new commissioners attend.

Gunn moved to vote on the item that would eliminate per diems.

Prater repeated his previous comments about the fact that commissioners hadn’t received a raise since 2001. [In addition to their $3,550 flex accounts, commissioners earn $15,500 annually, plus fringe benefits. Officers receive higher pay: $18,500 for the board chair (Rolland Sizemore Jr.), $16,000 for the board vice chair (Mark Ouimet), $16,500 for the Ways & Means Committee chair (Conan Smith) and the working session chair (Jessica Ping).]

Prater said he’d reviewed his calendar for the years when he served as board chair, in 2005 and 2006. He had attended about 140 meetings in both of those years, with very little compensation. He said the board has done its part in cutting costs, but the per diem is justified. “That’s my position, and I’m not ashamed to say it,” he concluded.

Smith said he opposed per diems. Already, commissioners are well-compensated for the hours that they put in, he said. As for serving on other boards and committees, “I feel that’s what I’m paid to do,” he said.

Peterson said he shared Prater’s concerns. He wondered whether anyone would want to serve on other committees and boards, if they eliminated per diem payments. Perhaps they should consider eliminating having commissioners serve as liaisons to other boards, committees and commissions, he said.

Commissioners then voted on the motion to eliminate per diem. The motion passed on a 6-5 vote, with support from Ouimet, Peterson, Smith, Bergman, Gunn, and Irwin.

It then emerged that Peterson had intended to vote against the motion. Because he cast a vote on the prevailing side, he could bring back the motion for reconsideration – which he did, after some discussion clarifying his position.

Outcome: The motion to eliminate per diem failed upon reconsideration. Voting against it were Peterson, Judge, Prater, Sizemore, Schwartz, and Ping.

Commissioner Per Diem, Travel & Mileage: Travel

Peterson clarified that the flex accounts cap expenses at $3,550 per commissioner. He pointed out that the board faces a large deficit in 2012 and 2013, and that they as a board should set the tone. He said he’d be interested in looking at eliminating travel for the entire county staff – he’d support having a travel moratorium for everyone. If they’re going to talk about cuts, “let’s be real,” he said, and put everything on the table. Peterson said that sometimes he felt like he was the only one who spoke for the people in the county who were struggling. If the other commissioners cared about those people, they’d be talking about the overall budget.

From left: Washtenaw County commissioners Rolland Sizemore Jr., Jeff Irwin, Barbara Bergman, Leah Gunn, Ronnie Peterson.

Gunn replied that she took great umbrage at the suggestion that the rest of the board doesn’t care about the struggles of county residents. Her resolution was about setting the tone, she added, and about sending the message to the public and employees that commissioners were willing to share the sacrifice. “But obviously, we’re not,” she said.

Prater said he had asked the administration to review conferences and travel expenses for employees, and that it would be handled in the internal audit.

Peterson then moved to table the item on travel, and Judge seconded the motion. The motion to table failed, with support only from Peterson, Judge and Smith.

Prater asked Curtis Hedger, the county’s attorney, whether this was a policy they could change at any time throughout the year. Hedger said that only mileage can be changed, since it’s considered reimbursement, not compensation. Items regarding compensation must be set before the start of the next term, in January. Prater then argued that they should vote the resolution down, and work on a policy when the new commissioners come on board.

Smith pointed out that if they voted it down now, then even if they set a policy on it next year, it wouldn’t take effect until the start of the next term, in 2013. Responding to a query from Peterson, Smith said that if it were voted down that evening, someone from the prevailing side could bring it back at their Dec. 1 meeting. But since they only have one meeting scheduled in December, it would need to be considered at both the Ways & Means committee as well as the regular board meeting. [Typically, items are given an initial vote at the Ways & Means committee meeting, which immediately precedes the regular board meeting. If approved, they are then considered at the regular board meeting two weeks later.]

Schwartz observed that another possibility would be for someone to bring back a new resolution on the same topic – Hedger confirmed that this would be possible.

At this point, Gunn called the question – a parliamentary move that forces a vote. Only three commissioners – Gunn, Bergman and Ouimet – voted in support of eliminating travel expenses, and that motion failed.

Outcome: The motion to eliminate travel expenses failed, with support only from Gunn, Bergman and Ouimet.

Commissioner Per Diem, Travel & Mileage: “Commissioner 101″ Course

Gunn’s resolution included a provision to pay for newly elected commissioners to take a “Commissioner 101″ course, which is offered through the local Michigan State University extension program. Judge pointed out that the county typically pays for these courses. Irwin said that in that case, the motion should be ruled out of order, since it addresses something the county already does. He also noted that it related directly to the previous clauses, which had been voted down.

Gunn agreed, and withdrew the motion.

Overall outcome: Commissioners voted unanimously to amend out consideration of mileage from the resolution. A later vote on the item to eliminate per diem payments initially passed, but Peterson indicated he had intended to vote the opposite way. The item was brought back for reconsideration – Peterson changed his vote, resulting in its failure to pass. Voting against it were Peterson, Sizemore, Ping, Prater, Judge and Schwartz. A vote on the item to eliminate travel expenses also failed – getting support only from Gunn, Bergman and Ouimet. Gunn withdrew the provision to pay for newly elected commissioners to take a “Commissioner 101″ course, when it emerged that this was already standard practice.

County Budget Issues

In addition to the resolution regarding commissioner per diem, travel and mileage, several other budget-related items were handled during Wednesday’s meeting.

County Budget Issues: Public Hearing on 2011 Budget

At the board’s Nov. 3 meeting, commissioners took an initial vote on a resolution making adjustments to the 2011 general fund budget. Among other things, the resolution directs county administrator Verna McDaniel to make proposals for cutting $1,034,988 out of the original budget of $98,493,155. During that meeting, commissioners discussed some of the proposed changes, and voted to set a Nov. 17  public hearing on the 2011 budget revisions. The board is expected to take its final vote on the 2011 budget changes at their Dec. 1 meeting.

Three people spoke at the budget hearing on Wednesday, including two people representing local nonprofits, who urged commissioners not to cut county funding to human services agencies.

Angie Moore, agency administrator for the Women’s Center of Southeastern Michigan, described the range of services offered by the center, providing a safety net for people who are experiencing emotional or financial crisis. Those services include personal and financial counseling, job coaching, divorce support, legal clinics and more. Moore said the center serves about 600 people each year, regardless of insurance or income, and provides referrals to about 3,000 others who call for help. In this economic downturn, those needs are increasing, she said, and more services are required. The center employs 3.75 full-time staff, with no health benefits, Moore said. They understand the county’s budget crunch – the center itself takes hit after hit, she said, while demand just increases. Moore urged commissioners, when making their budget decisions, to take into account the small nonprofits that serve residents who don’t attend these board meetings.

Joan Doughty, executive director of the Community Action Network (CAN), said that Moore’s comments had captured what many nonprofits are experiencing. CAN is a small nonprofit that’s looking at expansion, she said. It works with families in low-income, under-served neighborhoods – a new subsidiary, CAN Southeast, specifically addresses the needs of southeast Ann Arbor. Two years ago, CAN took over operation of the Bryant Community Center, and they quickly discovered that flooding was a serious issue in that area, and had been for decades. [See Chronicle coverage: "Water Main Project Set for Bryant Area"] The reason that no one on city council knew about it is that the people in that community didn’t have a voice, she said. Most nonprofits that work with at-risk populations represent people without a voice, she added – these are people who can’t come and sit through a county board meeting in order to speak about their issues. Doughty told commissioners that every cut they make in their budget will hurt much more than ever before. She thanked them for considering that.

Thomas Partridge, a regular speaker during public commentary, criticized Republican governor-elect Rick Snyder, saying it was wrong to tell the populace that the solution to Michigan’s economic crisis is to eliminate the business tax. He urged the Democratic leadership on the county board and in the state to heed a call to unity.

County Budget Issues: Other Public Commentary

Mike Fried, who made an unsuccessful bid for the District 11 county board seat in the August 2010 Democratic primary, spoke during public commentary with some suggestions for dealing with a 2011 budget deficit. Among his suggestions were giving incentives to departments that can cut costs – incentives like giving them priority for IT or other services, or setting aside funds for mini-grants that they can bid on. Fried also urged commissioners to think about other sources of revenue, and suggested the possibility of supporting a centralized grant-writing position, or tapping resources at the University of Michigan. Directing his comments to the two commissioners who were elected on Nov. 2 to the state legislature – Republican Mark Ouimet and Democrat Jeff Irwin – Fried suggested that the state provide a mechanism on its tax forms that would allow residents to donate money to their local government. Finally, he noted that openness is key, because they’ll need the trust of the people as they make these difficult budget decisions.

County Budget Issues: Setting Priorities

On every agenda is a slot for commissioners to identify items for current and future discussion. Kristin Judge said that she and Ronnie Peterson were hoping to set a special meeting for Dec. 8, to start setting priorities as they head into budget discussions for the 2012 and 2013 fiscal years. Barbara Bergman thought that priority-setting was important, but wanted to wait until the four newly elected commissioners were sworn into office in January, so that they could take part. She said it was inappropriate to do it before then.

Judge responded by saying that the new commissioners could attend the Dec. 8 meeting – she agreed that it was important for them to be included.

Peterson then gave a lengthy statement, expressing frustration that they had spent over an hour debating an issue that amounted to around $30,000 annually – the commissioners’ per diem, travel and mileage expenses. That is roughly the equivalent of an entry-level clerk’s job, he pointed out, while they were facing a budget deficit in 2012-13 of $20 million. People’s livelihoods are at stake, he said, whether it involves receiving services from the county or being employed by the county. He urged his colleagues to start addressing the budget shortfall as early as possible.

County Budget Issues: Internal Audit

During Wednesday’s meeting, commissioners voted unanimously to authorize the finance department to issue a request for proposals (RFP), soliciting bids from firms to perform an internal audit on the county’s finances. Kristin Judge thanked county administrator Verna McDaniel and deputy administrator Bill Reynolds for their work on the project, saying she hoped it would move forward quickly. The audit would begin by reviewing existing internal controls, followed by a risk assessment to identify which departments to examine first.

Jeff Irwin asked how much the audit would cost. McDaniel said they wouldn’t know until responses to the RFP came back.

Money Purchase Pension Plans

Without discussion, the board voted to give final approval to transfer pension funds that have accumulated for commissioners in a Money Purchase Pension Plan (MPPP), moving the funds to a 457 deferred compensation program of their choice before the end of 2010. Commissioners are currently the only county employees who are enrolled in the MPPP – the county pays Prudential $10,000 annually to administer the plan. In addition, the county contributes 7.5% of each commissioner’s salary to the MPPP, or a total of $13,200 annually.

Outcome: The board unanimously approved transferring commissioners’ pension funds from the Money Purchase Pension Plan into a 457 deferred compensation program of their choice.

Appointments: Road Commission

As an item for current or future discussion, Rolland Sizemore Jr. stated that he was unhappy with the management of the Washtenaw County Road Commission, and he wanted the board to address it. [This was a topic he'd also raised at the board's Nov. 8 administrative briefing.] The staff isn’t responsive, and they don’t return phone calls from residents, he said. Perhaps it’s time to look at different management, he said.

Wes Prater observed that there are a number of boards and commissions that need to have members appointed, including the road commission board. When was the county board going to address that? he asked. In the past they had conducted public interviews for the road commission board, and he hoped that they would do the same this time.

Sizemore said he’d asked deputy administrator Bill Reynolds to review all of the roughly 60 county appointed boards, commissions and committees, to see if any of them could be eliminated or combined. He wanted to wait until that process is completed – likely in early 2011 – before making appointments.

Kristin Judge suggested conducting interviews for the road commission board as part of a Dec. 8 special meeting. Ronnie Peterson said he didn’t understand the need to wait – if there were appointments they could make now, they should do it, he said.

By way of background, there are three members of the road commission board, who are appointed by the county board of commissioners. The road commission has its own budget – funded by the state – and operates independently from the county. A public hearing on the road commission’s 2011 budget is set for Dec. 9.

One of the three current road commissioners – David Rutledge – was elected to the state House of Representatives on Nov. 2, for District 54. The other current commissioners are Doug Fuller and Fred Veigel. That leaves one vacancy on the board. Seven people have applied:

• Mary Beth Day of Grass Lake, chair of the Washtenaw County Conservation District.
• James Drolett of Pinckney, a planning and zoning administrator for the city of Chelsea, and former Dexter Township supervisor.
• Scott Hummel of Dexter, an elementary school physical education teacher in Dearborn and golf course supervisor for the Leslie Park Golf Course in Ann Arbor.
• Roger Kappler of Sharon Township, former CEO of Hines Industries and former Sharon Township trustee.
• Jeffrey Alan Lewis of Pittsfield Township, chief of the Milan police department and a former 20-year veteran of the Ypsilanti police force.
• Jackson Morris of Pittsfield, a retired Ann Arbor Public Schools teacher and administrator who also served for a decade as Pittsfield Township supervisor.
• Kenny Siler of Manchester, owner of Pleasant View Farms and president of the Washtenaw County Farm Bureau.

In addition, Sizemore has plans to nominate current county commissioner Ken Schwartz, a Democrat representing District 2 who was defeated in the Nov. 2 election by Republican Dan Smith. This possibility has not been floated publicly during any of the recent discussions at county board meetings, but in a phone interview with The Chronicle, Sizemore said he felt that Schwartz was the best person for the job.

Sizemore said that Schwartz – whose district covers northeast Washtenaw, including the townships of Superior, Salem and Northfield – is familiar with the county, having previously served on the board of Superior Township and as an attorney for Augusta Township, in addition to his work as a county commissioner. Schwartz also understands what the board of commissioners wants from the road commission, Sizemore said, adding that the tough economy requires a different kind of management in the road commission. [Steve Puuri is the current managing director of the road commission.] “I know I’ll take heat for it,” Sizemore said, “but it’s the right thing to do.”

There is precedent for this kind of move. The county board appointed Wes Prater to the road commission when Prater lost the election for his county commissioner seat in 2006. He resigned from the road commission during his 2008 campaign for the county board – he won that election, and has served as the board’s liaison to the road commission since then.

Road commissioners, who earn a base salary of $10,500, are appointed to six-year terms. Earlier this year, commissioner Jeff Irwin unsuccessfully lobbied to expand the number of road commissioners from three to five. That expansion might be another strategy pursued by county board members next year.

PORT Street Soccer

Several members of the county’s Street Soccer team, the SSPORT, attended Wednesday’s meeting. The group is part of the county’s homeless project outreach team (PORT), which provides mental health and other support services to the local homeless population. The players had participated in the third annual Street Soccer USA Cup this summer in Washington D.C., where they received the Fair Play Award. One of the players, David Altherr, had been picked to play for the U.S. team at the 8th annual Homeless World Cup in Rio, Brazil in September.

Sara Silvennoinen, the team’s coach and a county PORT staff member, encouraged commissioners to participate in the 24-hour Soccerthon to be held at WideWorld Sports Center starting on Friday, Dec. 10 at 6 p.m. All proceeds will benefit the SSPORT team, she said. [To register, groups must have a minimum of 12 people to play for 1 hour. Minimum donations are $200 per group or $10 per person for groups of 20 or more. To register, contact Linda Bacigalupi at bacigalupil@ewashtenaw.org or Sara Silvennoinen at silvennoinens@ewashtenaw.org.]

The soccer team got a round of applause, and several commissioners praised both the team and PORT. Leah Gunn said she didn’t play, although her granddaughters are “fantastic” soccer players. She said she’d just write a check to support the team. “You make us proud,” she said. Conan Smith said he’d try to attend: “It may be embarrassing for all involved, but I’ll show up.”

Washtenaw Housing Alliance: Homeless Awareness Week

Former county administrator Bob Guenzel, who retired in May, was on hand to receive a resolution declaring Nov. 14-20, 2010 as National Hunger and Homelessness Awareness Week, presented to him by current county administrator Verna McDaniel.

Former county administrator Bob Guenzel, right, talks with Patrick Barrie, executive director of the Washtenaw Community Health Organization, prior to the start of the Nov. 17 meeting of the county board of commissioners.

Guenzel is chair of the nonprofit Washtenaw Housing Alliance, a consortium of more than two dozen groups working to end homelessness. In comments to the board, he announced that WHA has hired Julie Steiner as its new executive director, effective Dec. 1. He told commissioners to expect a re-energized effort related to the county’s Blueprint to End Homelessness. Steiner has served as executive director of the Interfaith Hospitality Network of Washtenaw County at Alpha House, a family homeless shelter. Also taking part in the presentation was Ellen Schulmeister, CEO of the Shelter Association of Washtenaw County, who has been serving as interim head of the WHA.

Steiner told the board that it was an exciting time, and she’d keep them informed about the WHA’s progress.

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

Next board meeting: The next regular meeting is Wednesday, Dec. 1, 2010 at 6:30 p.m. at the County Administration Building, 220 N. Main St. The Ways & Means Committee meets first, followed immediately by the regular board meeting. (Though the agenda states that the regular board meeting begins at 6:45 p.m., it usually starts much later – times vary depending on what’s on the agenda.) Public comment sessions are held at the beginning and end of each meeting. [confirm date]

The briefing, held the week prior to the regular board meeting, is designed to review the upcoming agenda, and is typically attended by a majority of the 11 commissioners. This week, in addition to items already slated for the agenda, two commissioners proposed additional resolutions to be considered at the Nov. 17 meeting: 1) a resolution regarding a cost recommendation recently made by the county’s police services steering committee, and 2) a resolution to eliminate commissioner per diems and reimbursements for travel, conferences and other meetings.

Six commissioners attended the briefing, and debate on each of those proposed resolutions was vigorous during the hour-long meeting. However, commissioners seemed in agreement on another item brought up for discussion on Monday: discontent with the Washtenaw County Road Commission.

Cost of Police Services

At the board’s Nov. 4 working session, sheriff Jerry Clayton presented a recommendation from the county’s police services steering committee (PSSC), which set the cost of a police services unit at $176,108. The goal, he told commissioners, is first to agree on the cost of delivering police services, before moving on to the question of price – that is, what the county will charge for that service.

There are 74 county deputies paid through contracts with local municipalities, including Ypsilanti Township, Ann Arbor Township and Superior Township, among others. The current price is $144,802 per police services unit (PSU) – a term that includes direct costs like salary and fringe benefits, as well as indirect costs and overhead. Current contracts call for a 4% increase next year, bringing the price to $150,594.

During Monday’s administrative briefing, commissioners discussed a draft resolution that would accept the PSSC recommendation on setting the cost per PSU at $176,108. Rolland Sizemore Jr., the board’s chair, reported that commissioner Conan Smith had suggested treating the recommendation as an item of information, which would not require a vote. [Smith, who chairs the board's Ways & Means Committee, did not attend Monday's briefing. All resolutions are first voted on at Ways & Means, before being given a final vote at the board's regular meeting.]

Wes Prater noted that he’s part of the PSSC subcommittee that’s been wrangling with this issue for about 18 months. This is about the third time that these numbers have been scrutinized, he said, and the effort has included members of the county’s finance department as well. He indicated that the cost figure has been thoroughly vetted.

Barbara Bergman and Leah Gunn vigorously opposed accepting the recommendation at this point. Bergman said there are many outstanding questions: How are charges for the county’s detective bureau being handled? What about cost-of-living increases, or building in raises for sheriff’s deputies? How often will this cost figure be reviewed? In addition, the resolution doesn’t address policy issues that the board must consider, she said.

Gunn said she didn’t agree with all the items that were not included in the cost calculation, and she noted that Jeff Irwin didn’t agree with them, either. It should be part of the budget discussion, she said. The doesn’t need to act immediately, especially since new contracts for police services aren’t needed until 2012. Last week was the first time she’d seen the cost recommendation, she said, and the figure doesn’t reflect the entire cost of providing police services. The detective bureau isn’t factored in, for example, nor are the 12 deputies that the county pays for out of its general fund.

Gunn, whose represents District 9 in Ann Arbor, said that her constituents have expressed concern because they’re paying twice – once for the Ann Arbor police force, and again for the county sheriff’s department. These issues need to be addressed, she said, and she wouldn’t support accepting the recommendation. “This is too fast.”

Judge countered that the PSSC has been working for a year and a half on this issue, at regular meetings that any of the commissioners could have attended. They could have asked questions or raised concerns at any time, she said. She noted that the resolution won’t affect the budget – it’s recommending a cost, not the price to be charged. It’s the price that will have a direct impact on budget calculations.

Judge noted that the PSSC – a group appointed by the board and consisting of leaders from contracting jurisdictions, law enforcement and the county board – made the recommendation unanimously, with the support of the sheriff and the county’s finance staff.

Sizemore said he’d attended some of the PSSC meetings, and that the members did an excellent job of evaluating the issue. He praised sheriff Jerry Clayton and Greg Dill, director of administrative operations at the sheriff’s department, for their leadership. If all the board is doing is adopting the cost, Sizemore said, he had no problem with that.

Bergman again disagreed, saying that policy questions needed to be addressed first. “Without that, I will vocally say no.”

Sizemore responded by saying that they could adjust the figure in the future. He asked Bill Reynolds, the county’s deputy administrator, to work with commissioners on the wording of the resolution “to make all the commissioners happy.”

“All commissioners happy?” Reynolds replied, causing nearly everyone in the room to laugh.

“It only takes six,” Judge said, referring to the number of votes needed to pass the resolution.

Both Judge and Prater then pointed out that there were detailed formulas backing up the final cost recommendation. [.pdf of chart with details of itemized costs Additional backup documentation: cost analysis formulas; overview of fringe benefit rates; overview of cost allocation plan (CAP)]

Gunn again cited the issue of the detective bureau, which isn’t included in the cost calculation. In total, there are $10 million in costs not included in this recommendation, she said, and that amounts to 12% of the county’s general fund budget. The county is “in a pickle” regarding the budget, she said, and these are non-mandated services.

Bergman said that the courts have backed up the assessment that police services are non-mandated. The sheriff “doesn’t even need a telephone or a horse,” she quipped. “I may not win on this, but nobody’s going to shut my mouth about it.”

Judge pointed out that by approving the resolution on cost, the board isn’t tying itself to a specific amount, but rather they’re agreeing to the formula that’s used to calculate the cost. Bergman and Gunn replied that they didn’t support the formula.

Sizemore wrapped up the discussion by asking whether it would be helpful for the commissioners to meet in small groups with the Clayton and Dill, prior to the Nov. 17 meeting. There was agreement on that suggestion.

Eliminating Commissioner Per Diems, Expenses

Commissioners then discussed another resolution – introduced by Leah Gunn – that would eliminate commissioner per diems and reimbursements for travel, conferences and other meetings. Some commissioners took issue with the proposal, saying that reimbursement to some extent is necessary.

By way of background, commissioners earn $15,500 annually, plus fringe benefits. Officers receive higher pay: $18,500 for the board chair (Rolland Sizemore Jr.), $16,000 for the board vice chair (Mark Ouimet), $16,500 for the Ways & Means Committee chair (Conan Smith) and the working session chair (Jessica Ping). In addition, each commissioner has a “flex account” capped at $3,550, to cover previous line items for per diem, travel, and convention/conference expenses. A commissioner can only receive additional funds if another commissioner agrees to transfer unused funds from his/her account. [.pdf file of flex account rules]

In total, the budget line item for all county commissioner expenses in 2010, including salaries and other compensation and expenses, is $512,473. The county’s total 2010 general fund budget is $98.43 million.

At Monday’s meeting, Wes Prater observed that the last time commissioners had seen an increase in their salaries was January of 2001, and that it’s unlikely they’ll give themselves a raise anytime soon. If you calculated cost-of-living increases, by not taking raises over that period, the board has saved the county about $350,000, he said.

He said if they were going to remove per diems and other expenses, then he wanted to look at fringe benefits, too.

Gunn argued that travel to meetings and other expenses currently reimbursed from the flex accounts are part of their public service, and shouldn’t be paid for by the county.

Prater countered that the per diem issue had been addressed a year ago, when the flex accounts were created and capped spending at $3,550 per commissioner. He said the Ann Arbor News editorial on the issue was way off base, in that it didn’t factor in that these spending controls had been put in place earlier this year. [Prater was referring to a Nov. 7, 2010 AnnArbor.com editorial criticizing "loose" controls over per diem spending. It had been a campaign issue for Republican Mark Ouimet, a commissioner who was accused of being reimbursed for items that were not eligible for reimbursement under board rules. Ouimet, who was elected on Nov. 2 as a representative to the state House for District 52, did not attend Monday's briefing.]

Gunn said she disagreed with Prater, but that he was free to vote against her resolution.

Kristin Judge noted that the proposed changes would mean the four newly elected commissioners would have to pay $150 for their “Commissioner 101″ training, which could be a hardship. She said they should look at getting rid of things like lifetime health insurance for commissioners.

Discontent over Road Commission

Commissioners typically holds a caucus in the fall to consider appointments to the county’s commissions, boards and committees. The appointments are officially made by the chair, and voted on by the entire board. This year, board chair Rolland Sizemore Jr. has pushed back the appointments caucus, asking deputy administrator Bill Reynolds to review the existing group of appointed bodies and to identify those that might be eliminated or consolidated.

At Monday’s briefing, Jason Brooks – the county’s deputy clerk, who manages the appointments process for the board – brought copies of resumes from candidates who have applied for positions on these county bodies. Though the 321-page packet was distributed to commissioners for review, Sizemore said that Reynolds hadn’t yet completed his work. That would likely be done by the next administrative briefing, on Nov. 23 – Sizemore proposed holding the appointments caucus then.

One vacancy they’ll consider is on the Washtenaw County Road Commission, which oversees road and bridge construction in the county. Oversight for the WCRC is handled by three road commissioners, who are appointed by the county board to six-year terms. One of them – David Rutledge – was recently elected as representative to the state House for District 54. His position will need to be filled.

Sizemore said he’s become increasingly frustrated by the road commission, and wants to revisit the possibility of expanding the commission from three members to five. The road commission’s staff isn’t responsive, he said, and their decisions don’t reflect the will of the people.

This proposal has been championed in the past by Jeff Irwin, who previously has failed to gain support from a majority of board members. From Chronicle coverage of the board’s Aug. 4, 2010 meeting:

At the board’s July 7 meeting, commissioners held a public hearing on the possibility of expanding the Washtenaw County Road Commission board from three members to five – the county board appoints those positions. After the hearing and some discussion, commissioner Wes Prater made a motion to terminate the process of expanding the road commission. The motion passed, with dissent from Conan Smith and Jeff Irwin, who argued that it wasn’t something the board could stop in that way.

At the July meeting, Irwin said he planned to bring a resolution on the expansion to the board’s Aug. 4 meeting. However, no such resolution was on the agenda, and the issue wasn’t discussed at Wednesday’s meeting.

In a follow-up phone interview this week with The Chronicle, Irwin said he still might bring a resolution about the expansion to a board meeting later this year. Prater’s resolution had been symbolic, he said. There’s a specific legal process for the expansion, which includes a vote on the issue. Politically, he said, based on the board’s discussion in July and the outcome of Prater’s resolution, it seems unlikely that a vote on the expansion would be successful. However, Irwin said plans to talk with his board colleagues about it in the coming weeks, to see if he can gain support.

To date, Irwin has not resurrected this issue. He did not attend Monday’s briefing.

Responding to Sizemore’s proposal during the briefing, both Barbara Bergman and Leah Gunn pointed out that these issues are not new. Bergman and Gunn both have previously supported Irwin’s efforts to expand the road commission.

Wes Prater, a former road commissioner who now serves as the county board’s liaison to that group, said that he and Rutledge had pushed the staff to get certified as an ISO 9000 and ISO 9001 organization. The process aims to put in place best practices for managing a business or organization.

The framework is there, Prater said, but the staff isn’t yet using the recommended procedures. The goal to create a culture of continuous improvement regarding customer satisfaction, he said, adding that “implementation is a bit difficult.” He praised the clerk who takes calls from residents, but said that after that, the requests get “swallowed up” and never get a response.

Prater said that he no longer calls the staff when he needs help for his district. Instead, he’ll call one of the three road commissioners, and they follow up on the issue.

Sizemore said he’s tired of his phone ringing from constituents who have problems with the road commission. He said the staff never return his calls, and that he shouldn’t have to call a road commissioner to get things done. He gave the example of a project on Ford Boulevard, between Ecorse Road and Holmes Road in Ypsilanti Township. The road commission plans to alter the boulevard from four lanes to three lanes of traffic.

Sizemore said that local businesses in that area collected hundreds of signatures for a petition opposing the change, but the road commission didn’t listen. Prater said that the road commission’s staff made the recommendation, but he contends they provided no data to support that decision.

On Nov. 5, the road commission’s decision mentioned by Sizemore was reported this way on the Michigan Complete Streets Coalition website, based on a posting by Bob Krzewinski to the Washtenaw Bicycling and Walking Coalition’s Google Group:

This week the Washtenaw County Road Commission approved road diets (turning a four lane road into two traffic lanes, a center turn lane and bike lanes) for Golfside Road in Pittsfield Township and Ford Boulevard in Ypsilanti Township.

At the meeting opponents of the Ford Boulevard road diet argued that such a configuration would put them out of business, and that the number of crashes on Ford Boulevard were not all that many. Road Commission staff, however, pointed out that Ford Boulevard’s crash rate is much higher than it should be and that study after study has shown that road diets reduce crash rates.

Supporters of the road diets included League of Michigan Bicyclists, Washtenaw Bicycling and Walking Coalition, Bike Ypsi and Friends of the Border To Border Trail, all Michigan Complete Streets Coalition partners.

At the board’s administrative briefing on Wednesday, there was no concrete proposal for a timeline to address possible expansion of the number of road commissioners. In addition to Rutledge, current road commissioners are Doug Fuller, who was appointed in 2008, and Fred Veigel, who has served as road commissioner since 1991.