In District 52, incumbent Republican Mark Ouimet was defeated by Democrat Gretchen Driskell, who currently serves as mayor of Saline, by a vote of 26,646 (52.86%) for Driskell to 23,609 (46.83%) for Ouimet. The district covers western, northern and parts of southern Washtenaw County.

Winning re-election was Democrat incumbent David Rutledge of District 54, representing the eastern portion of Washtenaw County, including Ypsilanti and Ypsilanti Township. He defeated Republican Bill Emmerich by a vote of 29,869 (76.77%) to 8,716 (22.4%).

In District 55, Democrat Adam Zemke won a three-way race with 26,195 votes (64.33%) over Republican Owen Diaz (13,029 votes – 32.0%) and Green Party candidate David McMahon (1,415 votes – 3.48%). District 55 covers parts of northern Ann Arbor, the townships of Ann Arbor, Augusta, Pittsfield and York, and a northern part of the city of Milan.

From left: Democrats Thomas Partridge, Jeff Irwin, and Adam Zemke. Partridge is challenging Irwin, the incumbent, in the Democratic primary for District 53 in the Michigan House of Representatives, covering most of Ann Arbor. Zemke is running against Andrea Brown-Harrison for the new District 55, which includes the northern portion of Ann Arbor and several other communities in Washtenaw County. Brown-Harrison did not attend the July 9 candidate forum. (Photos by the writer.)

In District 53, covering most of Ann Arbor, incumbent Jeff Irwin faces Thomas Partridge in the Aug. 7 primary. Irwin, a former Washtenaw County commissioner, was first elected to the House in 2010 and is seeking a second two-year term. Partridge, a frequent speaker during public commentary at various local government meetings, most recently ran an unsuccessful campaign for state Senate (District 18) in 2010. Both candidates are residents of Ann Arbor. In the Nov. 6 general election, the winner of the Democratic primary will compete against Republican John Spisak, who is unopposed in the Republican primary.

In the new District 55 – created during the state’s reapportionment process after the 2010 Census – Democrats Adam Zemke of Ann Arbor and Andrea Brown-Harrison of Ypsilanti are competing in the Aug. 7 primary. The winner will face Republican Owen Diaz, the former mayor of Milan, in November. Diaz is unopposed in the Republican primary. The district covers parts of northern Ann Arbor, the townships of Ann Arbor, Augusta, Pittsfield and York, and a northern part of the city of Milan.

Brown-Harrison did not attend the July 9 candidate forum, which was moderated by the League of Women Voters of the Ann Arbor Area. League member Judy Mich reported that Brown-Harrison did not respond to repeated requests made by phone, email and regular mail to attend the forum. Zemke answered the same set of questions that were posed to Irwin and Partridge.

The forum was held at the studios of Community Television Network, and will be available online via CTN’s video-on-demand service. The format included opening statements, seven questions, and closing statements. Though the format did not promote interaction between candidates, each candidate was given an optional one-minute rebuttal to use once during the forum.

League moderators noted that July 9 was the last day to register for the Tuesday, Aug. 7 primary. The last day to register to vote for the Tuesday, Nov. 6 general election is Oct. 9. Information on voter registration can be found on the Washtenaw County clerk’s elections division website. To see a sample ballot for your precinct, visit the Secretary of State’s website.

Opening Statements

Each candidate was given one minute for an opening statement.

Opening Statements: Thomas Partridge (District 53)

Partridge said he was at this forum, as he’s been at numerous public meetings over the past decade, to stand up for the most vulnerable residents of the 53rd District, Washtenaw County and the state. He was there to pose a question: Why hasn’t more been accomplished since the 2010 election that brought the current incumbents – both Republicans and Democrats – to the state legislature. Why hasn’t more been accomplished under the administration of Gov. Richard Snyder, who came into office making all kinds of promises?

Opening Statements: Jeff Irwin (District 53)

Irwin thanked the league for hosting the forum, and thanked the voters of Ann Arbor for sending him to Lansing two years ago. It’s been a couple of difficult years, he said, with big cuts to public education. There was a major shift in tax policy, shifting from businesses to individuals. It’s been an honor to be in Lansing and represent the interests of this community, he said. His goal for the next two years is to refocus the state’s priorities, to put education back on a pedestal and increase educational funding. He’s also interested in environmental protection, looking at the areas of clean energy and energy efficiency to improve the environment and provide jobs. Irwin also said he wants to continue his work on equal rights. Michigan should be a welcoming place for folks of any lifestyle or background, he said.

Opening Statements: Adam Zemke (District 55)

Zemke said the 55th District is his home, and has been his family’s home for five generations. He grew up in Washtenaw County, and attended Ann Arbor public schools – Haisley Elementary, Forsythe Middle School and Pioneer High School. He has undergraduate and master’s degrees in mechanical engineering. Zemke said he worked for former 55th District state Rep. Kathy Angerer in Lansing. He’s running because he’s sick of seeing the state’s brain drain, and watching the current legislature not do anything about it.

Purpose and Qualifications

Why have you chosen to run for state representative, and what makes you the better qualified candidate?

Partridge (District 53): He’s running because he’s dedicated to serving the most vulnerable residents of the district and state, Partridge said. In today’s economy, with a slow-to-recover recession, the middle class and senior citizens, the disabled, and homeless people who’ve recently been evicted by the Michigan Dept. of Transportation from Camp Take Notice in Scio Township – all these people need representation.

Irwin (District 53): He loves Michigan – it’s a beautiful state, Irwin said. He grew up in northern Michigan, and said he can’t say enough about the Great Lakes, which the state has an obligation to protect. He’s also running to give back to the state, he said. He’s had tremendous opportunities through the public education he received, including the University of Michigan. “I want to be a positive force for change in Michigan.” As far as experience, he said he spent several years lobbying the state legislature on clean air and clean water policy for the League of Conservation Voters. He spent just over a decade on the Washtenaw County board of commissioners, he said, working on issues that addressed the most vulnerable residents, in areas of affordable housing, mental health care and public health. Having the opportunity to watch the impact of state funding at the local level has given him a lot of tools for his work in Lansing, Irwin said. When funding decisions are made in Lansing, he understands how it affects the local level.

Thomas Partridge, a Democratic candidate for District 53 in the Michigan House of Representatives. Partridge stood to deliver each of his responses during the July 9 forum.

Partridge (District 53) (using his one-time, one-minute opportunity for rebuttal): He said he attended the same Washtenaw County board of commissioners meetings over the last decade when Irwin was a commissioner. Partridge described himself as the lead-off speaker during public commentary at numerous meetings for the county board, Ann Arbor city council, township boards, and Ann Arbor Transportation Authority board. He said he was the person leading the effort to protect and serve the most vulnerable residents of the county, to end homelessness and provide affordable housing. “That was not achieved under Jeff Irwin’s leadership on the Washtenaw County board of commissioners or in the Michigan legislature,” he said.

Zemke (District 55): He said he’s running for the state legislature because he wants to take Washtenaw County values up to Lansing and work with the Democratic delegation from the county – Jeff Irwin and David Rutledge. [Rutledge was first elected in 2010 to District 54, which covers eastern Washtenaw County. He is unopposed in the Democratic primary, and faces Republican Bill Emmerich in November.] Local experience is important, Zemke said. He noted that he’s sat on several boards for the county, the city of Ann Arbor, and Dexter Township. He grew up in Ann Arbor – where his family lived on Spring Street. He again cited his work for former state Rep. Kathy Angerer, saying she supported good policy that he hasn’t seen much of in the last two years.

Public Pension & Benefits

Efforts to balance the state budget often look to reducing retirement benefits for public employees. Should retirement benefits for state legislators be the same as for other state employees? What should be the term required for legislators in order to get that benefit? Other public employees, like teachers and police officers, are getting lower retirement benefits and are threatened with further cuts. How far should this go?

Irwin (District 53): Over the past two years, state legislators have voted to completely eliminate retirement health care benefits for legislators, he noted. As far as other retirement benefits, legislators can participate in a 401(k)-style plan, but it’s no different than other public employees – and in fact, he said, the retirement plan for legislators can fairly be described as worse than for other public employees. More important are the changes that legislators have been discussing for public employees across the board, he said. A month ago, they debated Senate Bill 1040, which would drastically change the retirement and retirement health care benefits for teachers. If this bill becomes law, any new teachers hired in Michigan would not have any retirement health care benefit, he said. In the past, there’s been a social contract with public sector employees – they’re generally paid a little less, but their long-term benefits and security are greater. Now, not only are they being paid less, but their long-term security is worse as well, he said.

Partridge (District 53): The attention given to retirement benefits for state legislators is a red herring, Partridge said. The truth is that Gov. Snyder came into office with a multimillion-dollar fortune and has made a frontal attack on public employees, including legislators. Partridge contended that it’s turned the attention away from Snyder’s failure and the failure of Republicans and of too many Democrats in the legislature – including Irwin – to address the issues of ending homelessness, building affordable housing, affordable and accessible transportation, education, and health care for the most vulnerable residents. He said he’s stood up meeting after meeting and called for the recall of Snyder.

Zemke (District 55): State legislators should be treated like all other public employees, Zemke said. He agreed with the description that Irwin had given of the current situation for public employees. Public employees shouldn’t be vilified, he said, and he’s seen that happening over the past two years. He comes from a family with teachers and they’re upset by it – they work hard, yet people look at them as not being hard workers and as getting paid too much. He said he knows for a fact that teachers don’t make much money. He’s very supportive of public employees.

Great Lakes & Water Quality

The Great Lakes are perhaps the state’s greatest natural asset. Who watches water quality and quantity, and pushes for continued improvement? Does Michigan do this on its own, or is there federal support and partnerships?

Partridge (District 53): The Great Lakes are certainly a renowned resource for Michigan, Partridge said, but the real important factor in all environmental concerns are the residents, especially the most vulnerable residents and families. All are suffering the consequences of lax policies under the current administration and legislature, in neglecting to improve the environment in the Great Lakes, in air and water quality, in protecting inland lakes – even in the 53rd District, he said.

Democrat Jeff Irwin, incumbent for District 53 in the Michigan House of Representatives, is running for a second two-year term.

Irwin (District 53): There are partnerships with the federal government in several areas, including in efforts to get rid of Asian carp – though not enough is being done in that regard, Irwin said. But most of the environmental protection and enforcement is meted out at the state level. Michigan has taken control of its water quality issues, and that’s managed by the Michigan Dept. of Environmental Quality. One reason why Michigan is struggling to protect water quality is that the MDEQ has been on a 10- or 20-year slide in terms of funding, Irwin said. The number of inspectors and enforcement officers the department has – to determine if requirements for a particular permit are being met, for example – is very low, he said. The state has very poor enforcement. Another emerging issue is with fracking, Irwin said. It’s not just water pollution that’s a concern, but also water quantity. He said he’s introduced legislation that would require all oil and gas drillers to disclose how much water they’re using, and to get a permit for that use.

Zemke (District 55): As with most things, there are definitely partnerships available, Zemke said. The Great Lakes aren’t just “perhaps” the state’s greatest natural resource, he said – he’d argue that they are the greatest natural resource. The state needs to ensure that the Great Lakes are protected. That includes water extraction and invasive species in particular. One area that he doesn’t think the state and federal governments are working on hard enough is getting the Asian carp out of Lake Michigan. The Great Lakes should be kept clean and protected from drilling, Zemke added, and they need to make sure that invasive species don’t continue to be a problem.

Term Limits

Currently, state elected officials in Michigan are term-limited. Do you favor abolishing term limits, changing the limits, or continuing the policy of two terms only for state legislators?

Partridge (District 53): Term limits should be increased, but not abolished entirely, he said. The downside of eliminating term limits is that political machines develop in districts around the state. Those become “safe” districts and homes for lifelong careers for certain legislators, he said – both Republicans and Democrats. He’d like to see term limits kept in place but increased for both the Michigan House and Senate. And “we need to term-limit Gov. Richard Snyder right out of office as of the next election,” Partridge said.

Irwin (District 53): Irwin said he voted against term limits – it’s anti-democratic. However, he said he’s not investing a lot of his time or political capital working on this issue. He’d rather spend time working on education or environmental policy. However, it’s important to understand the political environment in which term limits were foisted upon the state, he said. The Michigan Chamber of Commerce had lobbied for it at a time when Democrats had a stranglehold on the state House, he said. Term limits and the public’s general irritation with public officials were used to break loose that stranglehold. And it worked, he said – now Republicans have control of both the House and Senate.

Zemke (District 55): He’s opposed to term limits, and at a minimum supports extending them. It’s been a revolving door in Lansing over the past several years, he said. A lot of new faces come in who aren’t educated on the issues. They’re constantly running for re-election and by the time they get educated on the issues, they are term-limited out of office. “That doesn’t do any of us citizens of the state of Michigan any good at all,” Zemke said. But he agreed with Irwin that this isn’t a major priority now – there are more important issues to be tackled, such as education, the environment, and Michigan’s economy.

Failing Infrastructure

The state’s infrastructure is getting old. Is there a strategic plan for replacing dilapidated roads, bridges and other infrastructure? What’s needed to guarantee implementation of the plan? Who ensures that competitive bidding occurs, and how does the state eliminate fraud and favoritism? Who monitors the final product?

Irwin (District 53): He began by noting that the question covered a lot of different topics to answer in one minute, but he’d do his best. Michigan does have a plan for its road infrastructure, he said. The Transportation Asset Management Council goes around the state, assessing the quality of pavement and bridges. There’s an inventory of all that information and a plan for spending the limited funds available to meet the need. But there are billions of dollars of unmet needs over the next decade, Irwin noted. When he served on the Washtenaw County board of commissioners, he was a representative on the executive committee at SEMCOG (the Southeast Michigan Council of Governments). “I can tell you there are tremendous unmet needs for bridges and roads across our community,” he said. But the one unmet need throughout all of Michigan is public transit, he said. It’s a particularly acute need in southeast Michigan. This community is fortunate to have the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority, he said, which does a very good job for a community this size. But if Michigan wants to take the next step and become the state it wants and needs to be, Irwin said, “we need to solve transit in southeast Michigan.” There needs to be a way to get people from Point A to Point B that’s convenient, safe and accessible.

Partridge (District 53): Failing infrastructure is certainly a problem, Partridge said. The current governor has given all his attention to building a new bridge to Canada, he added, and is not telling the public how many jobs will go across the bridge if it is built – from Michigan factories and businesses, to lower-paying jobs in Canada. That needs to be addressed. The state needs a new revenue base for funding infrastructure, he said. A constitutional amendment is needed to provide a progressive income tax to pay for needed improvements. He said he supports countywide public transportation and region-wide public transportation.

Democrat Adam Zemke is running for the new District 55 in the state House of Representatives, which includes portions of the cities of Ann Arbor and Milan, and the townships of Ann Arbor, Augusta, Pittsfield and York. His opponent in the primary, Andrea Brown-Harrison of Ypsilanti, did not attend the July 9 forum.

Irwin (using his one-time, one-minute rebuttal): Irwin said it wasn’t a rebuttal, but he wanted the extra time because it’s an important issue to him and one he’s worked on a lot. Transit is really the missing piece that’s key to making southeast Michigan the kind of attractive community we want it to be. He said he agreed with Partridge about the need for a progressive income tax. The very first resolution Irwin introduced in the House was to create a constitutional amendment for a graduated income tax in Michigan. Thirty-seven other states have that kind of progressive taxation policy, he said. It would level the playing field for Michigan. He also mentioned that in Washtenaw County, there’s been a long-range planning process that the AATA has been leading to create a broader public transit system. He encouraged everyone to participate in that. If this area waits until the federal government or the state government solves the transit problems locally, “I think we might be waiting too long. We don’t want to hold our breath. Let’s seize our own destiny. Let’s make sure the AATA is the best agency it can be.”

Zemke (District 55): He noted that in his opening statement, he had mentioned the state’s brain drain – the need to keep younger people in Michigan. Young people love urban environments, he said. Mass transit is a critical component to getting people into the urban areas of southeast Michigan, especially Detroit, which he hoped would continue to be revitalized. Mass transit is also critical in Washtenaw County, he said. There are a number of roads and bridges that are crumbling, and those are “killing us from an economic development perspective.” It’s important to invest in the redevelopment of that infrastructure. That’s being done in Ann Arbor [likely an allusion to the rebuilding of the East Stadium bridges], but it needs to expand at the state level too, he said.

Education Funding

Besides reducing money into the state’s School Aid Fund, more is being tapped for for-profit charter schools and online education. Do you see a movement toward privatization of K-12 education? What action would you support?

Partridge (District 53): Under the state’s current conservative leadership, he said, vital money is being taken away from public education and health care for children, adults and senior citizens. “We need to keep a strong public education system and resist the effort to privatize and charter-tize our public schools.” Public schools need to be turned into places of education, starting with pre-school but extending to at least the first two years of university education, he said.

A member of the League of Women Voters of the Ann Arbor Area prepares to keep time at the July 9 candidate forum for Districts 53 and 55 of the Michigan House of Representatives.

Irwin (District 53): One of the most troubling things during the last two years in Lansing has been the aggressive move to privatize education, Irwin said. “It’s been heartbreaking, frankly.” The legislature has vastly increased charter schools, including a major increase in cyber-charters – virtual online schools. Irwin said the Republican leadership rebuffed all attempts by himself and other Democrats to amend those bills and require the new charter schools to be of high quality, or to require that new charter schools only go into areas where the public schools were already failing. Those attempts were rebuffed because there’s a full-court press to privatize education in Michigan, he said. It’s not just the charter schools – it’s also an attempt to privatize within the public schools, he said.

When Republicans set the budget last year, they put in a provision that said in order for a school system to receive the full allotment of state money, it had to follow what the Republicans called best practices – and that meant privatizing or attempting to privatize all non-instructional services. So custodians, bus drivers, clerical staff are all being aggressively privatized across Michigan, he said, and that’s one reason why the pension system is so under-funded.

Zemke (District 55): With the current legislature, Zemke said he definitely sees a move toward privatization of K-12 education. He doesn’t support that. He’s a big believer in public education. Curriculum needs to be strengthened, and class sizes should be drastically reduced. The state needs to ensure that students are given then best opportunities in K-12. Michigan also needs to refocus on early childhood development – studies show that if you lose students by the time they’re in sixth grade, “you’ve lost them forever,” he said. Going beyond K-12, Zemke said that college tuition is a real problem – it’s far too expensive. It’s become unaffordable, and for public universities, that’s a major problem. The full range of education – from K-12 through college – is a collective package, and should be approached that way, he concluded.

Support for Detroit

No city is an island. In many ways, Detroit is a symbol of the state of Michigan. What’s being done in Lansing to improve the image and to aid the people of Detroit? Also, please enlighten us about the bridge controversy. Whose ad is lying? [The last part of this question refers to Gov. Rick Snyder's efforts to build a second bridge between Detroit and Windsor, Ontario. The existing Ambassador Bridge is owned by Manuel "Matty" Moroun's Detroit International Bridge Company. Moroun opposes building a second bridge.]

Partridge (District 53): Ann Arbor, the University of Michigan, Concordia University, Eastern Michigan University – all of the institutions of higher learning in Washtenaw County are linked with Detroit, he said. Education, ending homelessness, providing affordable housing, access to public transportation, affordable health care – these are the civil rights issues of the 21st century. In meeting after meeting when Irwin was on the county board of commissioners and since Irwin has been in Lansing, Partridge has been the voice standing up for those causes, he said, and he’ll continue to do that.

Irwin (District 53): The most important thing for Detroit, to make it the kind of livable city that people want to move to and contribute to, is improving the schools, Irwin said. Nothing is going to happen in Detroit until the public schools are the kind of schools where you’d want to send your kids, he said. That’s the bottom line. But there are some other things that can be done that are also important. Transit is an important missing link – connecting people and places. Also, legislation was recently passed for the Detroit Public Lighting Authority, to help get more streetlights back on in the city, he said. The state could also help Detroit clear title on abandoned properties. So there are things that can be done at the state level to help the city, he said, but education is the most important. Regarding the bridge, Irwin said the state needs a second span. There are tremendous opportunities for the Michigan economy and the Canadian economy, and building a second bridge is a good idea. Obviously, he added, the person who owns the current bridge doesn’t want that to happen.

Zemke (District 55): The bridge is an excellent economic development opportunity for Michigan, Zemke said. It’s key to help push the economy forward. Regarding Detroit, Zemke said he agreed 100% with Irwin that education is critical for attracting families to any city, and Detroit is no different. Public safety is another critical component – the state needs to work with Detroit to make sure people feel safe walking down the street, no matter if it’s in daylight or darkness. The state also needs to continue to work with private investors to revitalize the downtown Detroit area, he said, and grow the city’s populace.

Closing Statements

Each candidate had two minutes for a closing statement.

Closing Statement: Thomas Partridge (District 53)

Partridge said he’s dedicated to improving the living conditions and opportunities for residents of the 53rd District, Washtenaw County, the southeast Michigan region and entire state. That impetus under Gov. Snyder, the Republicans and even too many Democrats – including Irwin – just isn’t there, he said. Instead, there is an impetus to make backroom deals for reapportionment of the new state legislative districts, which happened during Irwin’s term, he said.

There is still the specter of backroom deals “and even corruption” that could have saved the residents of the 53rd District millions of dollars, he contended. That would have happened if the city of Ann Arbor and the Washtenaw County board of commissioners, while Irwin led the board, had come together to build a common building to hold meetings in, for offices and community events, and for the 14th and 15th District Courts. But it did not happen. Partridge said that lies were told to the public during Irwin’s leadership on the county board – lies stating that representatives from these groups [the city and county] would not speak to each other – and that resulted in a loss of opportunities and millions of dollars. He concluded by saying that the county and region needs public transportation to bring about economic revival.

Closing Statement: Jeff Irwin (District 53)

Irwin thanked the league again for holding the forum, and thanked voters for sending him to Lansing to represent them for the last two years. He said he loves his job and works very hard at it. He hopes to have the opportunity again. The issues he’ll focus on are education, environmental protection and equal rights.

Irwin said he was surprised that one question wasn’t asked during the forum – about voting. About a week ago, Gov. Snyder vetoed the “voter suppression bills,” Irwin said, which had been passed by the state legislature. Those bills would have made it more difficult to register to vote, which is something that’s anathema to the mission of the League of Women Voters, he said, and he was proud of the league’s work to oppose those bills. The next step is to expand voting opportunities in Michigan, he said, and that’s why he introduced a bill that would provide for “no reason” absentee voting. He said he was proud to stand with the LWV on that. It’s been a priority of the organization for years, and it was one of the early bills he introduced when he got to Lansing. The work that the LWV does in promoting voting is important, he said, because the citizens need to be involved at every level of government. Sometimes people don’t have a good appreciation for what’s done in Lansing, and “it’s our job to redouble our efforts,” he said, to educate people about what legislators do and why it’s important.

Education funding needs to be the state’s No. 1 priority, Irwin continued. He’d like to approach the budget by first setting aside whatever it takes to provide quality education in Michigan. He noted that no one has ever done an assessment about how much it costs to provide quality education to our children. The tendency is to appropriate whatever is left over, but “we should be taking care of that first,” he said. Irwin also said there are a lot of opportunities for bipartisan compromise regarding environmental protection and economic development.

Closing Statement: Adam Zemke (District 55)

Zemke thanked the league and the people who were watching the forum on CTN. He explained that District 55 is new, and includes the northern portion of the city of Ann Arbor as well four townships – Ann Arbor, York, August and Pittsfield – and the northern portion of the city of Milan. He’s proud to be a long-time resident of this area.

His legislative priorities would be to focus on the economy and education. Education is the No. 1 form of economic development. Protecting and preserving the environment, and ensuring equality for all are very important as well, he said. In terms of voting, he highlighted the need to find ways for students who are attending college to register to vote in the area where they attend school, not in their permanent address in their home district. It’s important to expand younger people’s participation in the democratic process, he said, and making that change is a critical way to do it.

He noted that a lot of people call him the young candidate, and say that he looks about 13 years old. However, he said he wanted to note that he’s the candidate of choice for a lot of working folks. He then cited several groups and individuals who have endorsed him: the UAW, IBEW, the carpenters’ and nurses’ unions, Congressman John Dingell, former Congressman Mark Schauer, state Reps. Jeff Irwin and David Rutledge, several members of the Ann Arbor city council and Washtenaw County board of commissioners, members of the Pittsfield Township board and leadership team, and Ann Arbor Township supervisor Mark Moran.

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

Jeff Irwin, representative for District 53 of the Michigan state House of Representatives, met with constituents at Espresso Royale in downtown Ann Arbor last Saturday. (Photos by the writer.)

In each of the first two months of his term, Irwin has held meetings for constituents in local Ann Arbor coffee houses – Cafe Verde and Espresso Royale. On Saturday, Feb. 26, The Chronicle caught up with Irwin after his talk with constituents and spoke with him for about an hour. The conversation included a discussion of Gov. Rick Snyder’s proposed budget overview. [.pdf of budget overview]

In presenting the interview below, The Chronicle’s conversation with Irwin has been reorganized and edited in some places to achieve greater coherence and focus.

Last Saturday, Rep. Jeff Irwin (D-53rd District) entertained questions and concerns from constituents on a variety of topics, including local interest in the future use of the top of the underground parking structure, which is under construction on the city-owned Library Lot between Fifth and Division streets.

Three blocks east from Irwin’s conversation with constituents, a constant parade of concrete mixers on Division Street headed south across Liberty to the east edge of the Library Lot construction site. They dumped their loads into a pump, and through the course of the day, workers poured around 6,300 cubic yards of concrete. Coincidentally, in his subsequent conversation with The Chronicle, Irwin introduced images involving concrete and construction – he was drawing an analogy between teacher contracts and construction contracts.

We’ve chronicled this conversation in a Q&A format, divided into seven sections: (1) a budget bright spot in Medicaid; (2) education as an area of concern; (3) a lack of sufficient, specific goals associated with the budget; (4) labor relations in general; (5) labor relations in Washtenaw County; (6) Irwin’s relationship with former fellow county commissioner Mark Ouimet, a Republican who’s also now a state rep; and (7) a partisan imbalance in committee appointments.

Budget Bright Spot: Medicaid

AAC: In terms of sound, Espresso Royale is really poor for eavesdropping. I was just trying to hang out on the periphery [of your conversation with constituents], and I was basically just able to identify general topics.

But I did hear you say there is one bright spot in the governor’s budget. Which is?

Irwin: Oh, you didn’t hear what I said about that? Basically it’s related to Medicaid. There was a question that came up about Medicaid funding and what the direction was on that. And everything that I have seen in the governor’s budget so far is that he is not looking at hitting Medicaid – which is really good for a number of reasons.

It’s good obviously for the health care community. It’s good for the folks who are receiving the benefit, and it’s also good because every dollar we spend on Medicaid … usually Washington D.C. is sending you two or three dollars to match that. Conversely, every dollar that we cut out of Medicaid, means instead of losing one worker, we are losing three workers. …

Budget: Why Reduce Education Allocations?

Irwin: [The proposed budget] actually has more than a 15% cut [in higher education].

AAC: I thought it was 15%.

Irwin: I have heard an even bigger number recently, but the number I understand is actually 22%. The way they get to the 15% is that it’s a 15% flat cut to everybody, period. Then there is another 7% cut to add up to the total of a 22% cut. The other 7% cut is being put into a best practices thing – sort of like with the local government business. So if you do certain things at the university, you get access to that 7%.

AAC: And when you say the “local government business,” you are talking about taking the statutory state shared revenue, eliminating it, and replacing it with …

Irwin: … a competitive something that no one knows what the details are, yet. Right. And they’re doing the same thing in the university setting with that other 7%. So there is really a 22% cut. Now, the other day I heard a 26% number, but I don’t know where that comes from yet. But truth be told, I’m still trying to make sure that I understand these numbers and what they really mean, because …

AAC: … so it’s too soon to be trying to figure out, “All right, let’s not cut higher education and instead do something else”?

Irwin: Not necessarily. At the big level of talking about the concepts and not getting into the level of detail about this precise dollar, there has been some thinking put into that. … If you are going to bring in $1.5 billion in revenue – $1 billion in new taxes on pensions and another $330 million in new taxes on the working poor – then there is plenty of money to not cut education.

The reason why the governor’s budget has to cut so deeply in education, even with all that new tax increase, is because he also wants to give a huge tax increase to the corporate community.

So what I would say …  my initial counterproposal is: How will that we fix the Michigan Business Tax in a revenue-neutral way? How do we make it a simpler tax – that’s a good idea. But let’s do it in a way that is revenue neutral. That way we don’t have to pay for it with a $1.5 billion tax cut for the corporate community, and we can use that money to invest in what is really going to drive economic development and jobs in Michigan, which is education. … [Gov. Snyder] campaigned on the idea that we want to create a climate for economic growth, we want Michigan to be a more prosperous place …

AAC: … Michigan is  open for business …

Irwin: … right. We want to create this fertile environment for people to be prosperous, right? And then his first major proposal is to cut the heart out of what is the single most important element of prosperity and economic growth, which is a good education system!

Nobody wants to move to a place, and nobody wants to bring their company to a place, where they are not going to be able to attract talented workers, and where they are not going to have their kids be able to go to good schools and that sort of thing, right?

Now, that’s not true of every industry. There are some industries where a lower tax rate is the only thing. And there are some industries for whom recruiting top talent is the most important thing. Interestingly, I would say that we as a state, our strategy should be to go after as many of those business development and economic opportunities at the end of the scale where top talent is their priority. Because those are the best jobs, and the longest-lasting jobs, and jobs that really relate to the knowledge-based economy and all that kind of stuff, right?

Whereas some of these folks, who care only about what your tax rate is, those are the lowest paying jobs, with the least economic spinoff, without the health benefits – it’s like mining or something where they just want to be able to suck that rock out of the ground at the lowest possible rate, pay the lowest possible royalties, and the lowest possible taxes, and then head back to wherever Rio Tinto’s [a mining company] headquarters is.

AAC: At the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority’s economic development committee meeting last week on Wednesday, Jennifer Owens from Ann Arbor SPARK gave a presentation to the committee, giving them an overview of what SPARK does. And one of the things they do is they make recruiting visits to convince companies to expand their operations to Ann Arbor.

[Note: In 2010 four such trips were made, which resulted in four companies deciding to expand operations to the Ann Arbor area, which translates into 170 jobs, according to Owens. In addition to the four expansions due to recruitment trips, SPARK also counts an additional 10 expansions to the Ann Arbor area as a part of its recruitment program. ]

And someone asked her, “What is the thing that is the tipping point? What cinches the deal for Ann Arbor, when we manage to cinch a deal?” Her answer was: availability of talent.

But Ann Arbor is way different than the rest of Michigan. … I’m just trying to suggest that perhaps what is self-evidently a good public [education] policy for the Ann Arbor region may not be the best public policy for the entire state.

Irwin: I totally disagree, and here’s why. Because it’s not just about higher ed and universities, it’s also about K-12. People want to live somewhere where they know their kids are going to go to good schools. The decline of Detroit is all wrapped up in racial acrimony and other issues, industrial disinvestment and all that stuff – there’s a lot of things going on in the decline of the city of Detroit. But one of the big things is as you try to attract young professionals back into the city, it’s really hard, because if they want to ever have kids, they don’t want to send their kids to a school district that has the worst statistics in terms of achievement.

I don’t know if you’re familiar with the gentleman named Myron Orfield, who was a Minneapolis state senator …  he did some groundbreaking research about 20 years ago. He wrote this book called “Metro Politics” about the Minneapolis-St. Paul region, and he tried to make the argument – very successfully, I think –that schools drive economic development. I think that’s true for K-12, and K-12 is all over the state.

And the other thing is, we’re talking about macroeconomics right now, right? And the goal of the state on one level should be to try to create this macroeconomic climate for growth in Michigan and help everybody be more prosperous, maximize our gross state product – I mean, that is a macroeconomic statement.

But there’s also the microeconomic side of it, right? The state is supposed to be working for the people of the state of Michigan, all of the people of the state of Michigan, and if we provide the people of the state of Michigan individually with education that gives them the training and the skills and knowledge to be successful individually in their lives – both in the job environment and in the home environment, and in every other environment in which they may seek to operate – that’s a benefit to those people individually. … So that’s my argument.

Better Budget Metrics

Irwin: What I think [Snyder] should have done as governor would be to say: “I’ve analyzed the situation in the state of Michigan, and here are our goals, here’s what we’re trying to accomplish, here’s what we think success looks like for the state of Michigan. So as we measure all these metrics that I like to talk about, here’s what’s that is all supposed to add up to.”

He didn’t do that. And I think that if he had done that, he would have been forced to reckon with the value of education in driving prosperity and the value of things like arts and culture.

ACC: When you say “goals,” what are some examples of the kind of goals you mean?

Irwin: … We want to graduate X-percent of our people from high school, we’d like to graduate this percent from college and we would like them when they graduate from high school to have this level of proficiency in these basic areas.

AAC: Hasn’t he done that with this budget proposal? Every section has metrics and scores, right?

[Irwin pulls out the budget proposal document. Leafing through it, AAC and Irwin identify the kind of pages mentioned by AAC. Irwin clarifies that 1,2,3 in the lefthand column are not scores, but rather keys to the types of measures: 1 = effectiveness measure; 2 = efficiency measure; 3 = quality measure. The trend arrows indicate a measure that is stable (horizontal, double-ended arrow), going the opposite of the desired direction (downward arrow), or improving (upward arrow).]

Example of metrics included in Gov. Snyder's 2012-13 budget proposal overview. (Image links to .pdf page of Dept. of Corrections metric detail.)

So for each of these items … for the things that are headed in the right direction, I think that implicit in this proposal is that we want to keep those things headed in the same direction. For anything that has performance stable, the goal is to make it better, and for those areas where performance is going down, the goal is to reverse that trend, like this – average cost per prisoner per year, $34,600 …

… so didn’t he already do what you are saying he should have done?

Irwin: What’s missing here is the number of people who are incarcerated. What’s missing here is the number of violent crimes going down. I feel that [Gov. Snyder] picked just a few things for these gigantic issue areas. There could be 200 metrics on this page, easily.

Of course he’s got to pick less than that, because that’s just insane, so he cherry-picked ones that he thinks are going to be easy to demonstrate progress with, rather than picking the important ones. Are these really the most important metrics for prison operations? I don’t think so. Cost is going to be one of the top ones … that’s one of the core ones. But … we’re talking about .07 escapes per 1,000 prisoners? This is not one of the top-line metrics for state government, in my opinion.

[reading aloud] “Prisoners past their earliest release dates who are on waiting lists for assaultive or sex offender therapy programs.” I guess that’s a fine metric, but is that the only quality measure that we’re going to look at?

Maybe they picked this one, because it’s a negative trend and they think they can turn it around by focusing on sex offender therapy programs, which is a tiny part of the budget. We should be talking about reducing recidivism. Reducing recidivism – I mean, that is the game in corrections. The reason why our corrections costs are insane, blowing the budget, is because we have two big problems – it’s not that there’s more crime, it’s not that there’s more violent crime, it’s not that there’s more people entering the criminal justice system. It’s that people stay in the system longer – average length of stay is way up – and the recidivism rate is way up.

So we have the same people revolving through and through for longer and longer. That is the core problem, and it’s not even recognized on his metrics – that’s what I’m talking about. And I think the same thing is true in a number of other areas.

… The metrics that, to me, are the most important in terms of effectiveness in education should be about student achievement, student graduation, class sizes, quality of teachers – if there’s a good way to measure that. Those are the kinds of things we need to measure.

And when you look at his proposal, I don’t see any result – given the money that’s being appropriated to K-12 – other than larger class sizes, and less attention being given to individual students. It’s been proven in study after study that the most important input to student achievement that the government has influence over is the quality of the teachers.

And the Republicans are in open warfare on teachers, across the board.

So this budget proposal is just one manifestation of that. I think that’s backwards. I think the state should be trying to work with teachers, lock arms with them and say, “How can we work together on making our kids be more educated and more successful people as they grow up?”

From Teachers to Labor in General …

AAC: When you say “open warfare on teachers,” what do you mean specifically?

Irwin: There are a number of things. One is gigantic cuts to education, which is going to mean more teachers will lose their jobs.

Two, the emergency financial manager bill, which has the effect of allowing the state to take over a school district, cancel all the union contracts, carte blanche.

Item number three is they’re trying to obviate the collective bargaining agreements, by legislatively requiring public employees in certain areas, including schools, to make certain contributions to their health care or their pension.

For instance, here’s a scenario for you. You and I are teachers. We have negotiated with the Ann Arbor Public Schools district for a certain rate, total compensation that includes benefits, wages, and all the fringes, work conditions, etc. And say it’s on a five-year contract. And then one year into the contract, the state legislature comes along and says, “Sorry, Dave and Jeff, we’ve determined outside of the collective bargaining agreement – that you just hammered out with your local school district – that you’re going to make an additional 20% contribution to your health care costs, because we think your health care costs are too high.”

That’s not a conversation that should be taking place in that way. It’s pulling the rug out from underneath collective bargaining agreements.

The analog to that would be to say if the state had a construction contract with Clark Construction to build a new building and they were submitting receipts to us, right? They build this building for us, and they finish, and they’ve got $1 million in outstanding receipts. And we say, “We don’t really think that concrete was worth $1 million. We think that concrete was worth $800,000, so that’s what we’re paying you, because we just passed a law after you built the building.”

AAC: That would save us a lot of money. [laugh]

Irwin: Wouldn’t it! But no one would ever think of doing that. Because breaking a contract in a private industry kind of relationship, that’s unthinkable.

AAC: … but as I understand the proposal, it’s to go into a collective bargaining contract and say, Okay from this point forward now, you’ll be paying more.

Irwin: Okay, the rest of your contract is void, we’ve replaced it, so a better analogy is …

AAC: … you go in and you say to Clark Construction, “Oh, the concrete you’ve already poured for $100 per yard, you will get paid for that. But for future yards of concrete that you pour, you get $80 a yard.” And Clark could say, “You know what? Screw that. I don’t want to be in this business anymore, or I’ll go pour my concrete someplace else in some other state.”

Irwin: We’ve already promised to pay them the same rate for the rest of the concrete, and we change the deal in the middle of the work?

AAC: Right. So that’s a better analogy than the one you sketched out. It’s one I think I can imagine people at least maybe arguing about, whereas the one you sketched out, you really just can’t argue about.

Irwin: Well, your analogy is better, so let’s use yours. We have a contract with Clark and it’s to pay them $100 per yard of concrete … I still think that there’s a strong analogy there. If we have a contract for $1 million to pour concrete, and they pour half the concrete, and then for the second half we say, “We’re only going to pay you $400,000 for that. You can stop in the middle if you want??”

AAC: Well, that’s not the way contract law works, as I understand it.

Irwin: No, of course not. But that’s what the Republicans are doing.

… and to Labor Relations in Washtenaw County

AAC: Okay, maybe that’s a knuckleheaded way of approaching it. But in the final analysis, the unions do need to make concessions, not just for the health of their unions, but for the health of the communities where they work.

Irwin: And they agree. And they do. Time and time again. That happened at [Washtenaw County when I was a commissioner]. And part of the reason that happened was that we had a respectful management-labor relationship and we said, “Look, the money situation has changed, so we need you to come to the table and renegotiate.” And you know what the unions do? They come to the table and they renegotiate. But when you tell them …

AAC: … in the county, perhaps they do. But in the city of Ann Arbor, I don’t know if you’re familiar with what they’re doing.

What the city is calling it – and I think it’s a fair label to put on their strategy – is to “align the budget strategy with the labor strategy.” They’ve said, “Here’s what we need. We need our open contracts to settle with no wage increases and with an additional contribution to the benefit plan, the same benefit plan that our non-union workers are on – and the same plan that some of our other unions have actually adopted. So we’re not asking you firefighters and police to adopt anything that others haven’t already accepted at the city. … So on that scenario, we still have a 2.5% reduction target.” So every department, their first task is to identify 2.5% in reductions. For departments that have workers not on the new city plan – which has increased contributions from workers to their health care – those departments are given an extra task, possibly up to a 4.0% reduction target. So police and fire … their reduction target is effectively 4.0%.

So that’s where it sits. And if I had to guess, those contracts would not be settled and signed before the city completes its budget process this year, and it’ll be settled by Act 312 arbitration.

Irwin: Probably.

AAC: What’s the difference between the city and the county? Did [recently retired county administrator] Bob Guenzel have a magic wand? And if so, did he hand it off to Verna McDaniel [the current county administrator]?

Irwin: Time will tell on that second question. Did he have a magic wand? No, but I mean, you probably know that before he was county administrator, he was corporation counsel and the lead person on labor negotiations. And before that he was a private attorney who was hired to do labor negotiations for various entities. So Bob came into the role of administrator keenly aware of the benefits of a positive labor-management relationship. And he worked very hard at that for 15 years in maintaining it.

Now will Verna be able to have the relationship with the union leaders? I think there’s a high likelihood of that. That was one of the biggest pluses that she brought to the table – that she had been human resources director, before she was deputy administrator, and she had a lot of experience with the labor-management piece and the human resources piece of the organization. And Washtenaw County, I think, has always had – at least the whole time I was there – a strong ethic of we’re-all-in-this-together, management and labor all work together to serve the people, and transparency and mutual respect.

When you maintain that transparency and mutual respect, when it’s real and not just stated, it makes a difference. Then when you go to a union and you say, “Our revenues are way down, we’re in a tough spot. There’s only so many answers – here’s what we think are the answers. Do you have any other potential answers you’d like to add to the list of answers? Because we’re eventually going to have to pick one of these, and neither of us really love any of these. So let’s work together.” … And after several months of doing that, sometimes you actually get to an amicable solution.

How Do You Have a Conversation?

AAC: So back to the budget, you’ve got 109 other [representatives in the state House] that you’ve got to have a conversation with, if you can. One of those is somebody you served on the Washtenaw County board of commissioners with. How many years were you and Mark Ouimet on the same board?

Irwin: Six.

AAC: So six out of the 12 years you were on the board?

Irwin: I was there for 11, actually. I came in on an odd year, in ’99. And Mark came along, I believe, in 2004.

AAC: So you have six years of experience working with him.

Irwin: And he’s right next door to me, too.

AAC: When you say “next door,” you mean …?

Irwin: Our offices in the House office building. They start out one, two, three all the way up to 110. So…

AAC: … so it goes 52 [Ouimet's district number], 53 [Irwin's district number] …

Irwin: … so we are right next to each other, yeah.

AAC: So if you need to talk to a Republican, there is one right next door, who will actually answer the door when you knock.

Irwin: Yes, he’s willing to have a conversation with me, usually.

AAC: Usually? [laugh]

Irwin: Well, yeah, I mean, sometimes people are busy!

AAC: So Mark is obviously not like an inside man for you in the Republican Party, but  he is somebody who is a Republican. And if there are bridges to be built or foundations to be built on, he would be a logical choice, yes?

Irwin: Yes, of course. Mark is a friend and he is willing to talk with me about these issues and that is valuable. That relationship has value to me.

AAC: Have you seen any ways in which that relationship has benefited citizens of Michigan already?

Irwin: That relationship? I’m not entirely sure, because it’s hard to evaluate, particularly this early. But there have definitely been some issues that we have talked about, where I have expressed some concerns about maybe the process, where I’ve expressed concerns about the details of certain bills that have been going through.

Did that alter his thinking about them? I’m not entirely sure – it’s hard for me to know exactly. But it certainly may have. And I think that one of the things that Mark brings to the table regardless of how he votes on issues and everything is sort of a culture of civility and decency to the loyal opposition. I don’t know for a fact, but I think that internal to his caucus, he’s probably saying, “Well, you know, we want to vanquish our enemies, but we do not need to burn down their villages and take their women.”

AAC: So on the Washtenaw County board of commissioners, he was the loyal opposition. [When Ouimet and Irwin served, Ouimet was one of two Republicans on the 11-member board.]

Irwin: I think that is maybe part of it too, that he knows what it’s like to be in the minority. And he knows that sometimes when you’re in the minority, but you have valid points to make, and when the majority actually listens to you and maybe takes some of those valid points, then maybe it’s good for the world, it’s good for public policy. Mark told me that when I was chair of the [Washtenaw County] board, he felt welcomed into the conversation and I certainly worked hard to welcome him into the conversation. Because I think that’s what a good leader does.

Do we still have that relationship? Yeah. Is the shoe on the other foot now? Yeah. Could the goodwill and a good relationship that I have built up with him be somehow helpful on a public policy concern? I certainly hope so. Has it already? I’m not sure that it has. But we have talked about some things.

AAC: Have any of those things been about the budget?

Irwin: No, we haven’t talked about the budget. That budget bomb dropped a week ago now. You know, the numbers themselves didn’t come out until midweek this week … I have not talked to Mark about it at all. I may have talked to him about it in passing, you know, “Holy Cow, the governor is really taking it out on education isn’t he?!” Maybe like the kind of passing shot like that, but no real conversation about that yet.

Stacking the Appropriations Committee

AAC: What is the breakdown of Democrats and Republicans on the Appropriations Committee?

Irwin: This is one of the dirty little secrets hasn’t really been talked about statewide…

AAC: … you can talk about it right now.

Irwin: That’s what I’m going to do! When the Republican Speaker [James "Jase" Bolger] assumed the power to populate the committees structure in this latest session …

AAC: … but, to be clear, this is an ordinary power, right? He’s not grabbing power, when he came into this role – it’s the power that anybody as Speaker has …

Irwin: … precisely. This is the normal role of the Speaker, to choose how many Democrats and Republicans are on each committee. And what the Speaker did was he pushed the envelope – further than I have ever seen it, at least, and further than the last Democratic speaker – pushed it in terms of what the balance of Democrats versus Republicans is going to be on all these committees.

So even though there are 47 Democrats and 63 Republicans in the House of Representatives – meaning that the ratio is not even 1.5:1 – the ratio of Republicans to Democrats on the committees across the board is much greater than that – they are often 2:1. So he pushed the partisan makeup of the committees, both in appropriations and elsewhere, to be even more heavily Republican than the actual body itself is.

AAC: But he could appoint only Republicans if he wanted to.

Irwin: I think he could. But I think that would look so bad that they wouldn’t do that. There may be something in the House rules that says you have to have at least one member – I mean, I have read the rules but I don’t remember all the details.

AAC: What is the breakdown [of Democrats to Republicans] for appropriations?

Irwin: The breakdown for the appropriations committee – I don’t know the total breakdown, we would have to look that up. I don’t know off the top of my head. [Note: For the 27-member appropriations committee, the breakdown is 17 Republicans to 10 Democrats. By way of another example,  the agriculture committee consists of 10 Republicans and six Democrats. .pdf of all standing committee assignments]

But on some of the subcommittees, the ones that are smaller, there will be only one Democrat, and usually three Republicans on some of the subcommittees. Now on some of the bigger subcommittees – like school aid, for instance – I think there’s probably like five Republicans and two Democrats, or like six and three, maybe.

But for the most part, Speaker Bolger pushed the envelope on partisanship with respect to committee assignments, and did almost a 2:1 partisan majority for Republicans on the policy committees and the appropriations committee – when really it should’ve been close to 1.5:1. It’s a huge difference, really.

And the other thing that they are saying very publicly: “If you Democrats want to make amendments, you’ve got to do it in committee. We’re not interested in hearing amendments on the floor – that’s too late. Introduce or amend in committees, that’s the way this process is supposed to work – where we have even a greater part of the majority and we can squelch your amendments even more easily!”

AAC: So the budget is essentially chopped apart at the subcommittee level in appropriations, which in a lot of ways makes it bite-sized chunks…

Irwin: … if your mouth really big…. They are still huge. The school aid budget is $14 billion or something like that.

AAC: But it’s a way of dividing things so that people can focus on, say, one or two or three issues as opposed to 12.

Irwin: Precisely.

Chase Ingersoll, Republican candidate for District 53 Michigan state representative, at the Sept. 28 League of Women Voters forum. Jeff Irwin, the Democratic candidate, did not attend. (Photo by the writer.)

At the Sept. 28 League of Women Voters forum, however, Ingersoll was the only candidate to appear, and after waiting 10 minutes past the scheduled start time, organizers decided to carry on without Irwin.

“We hope nothing untoward has happened,” said Sue Smith, League president. She noted that in Irwin’s absence, they’d be following the “empty chair” format, meaning that the timing for each question would be the same, and the forum would simply be half as long. It lasted 15 minutes.

Questions were selected by a committee from a pool of questions submitted by community members. The forum, held at the studios of Community Television Network, was moderated by Judy Mich. The event was recorded and is available online through CTN’s video-on-demand service.

Irwin later emailed The Chronicle saying he had apologized to the League – he had thought the forum was on the following night. Irwin’s views on some statewide issues can be found in a Chronicle report of a June 2010 candidate forum during the Democratic primary between Irwin and Ned Staebler.

Opening Statement

Chase Ingersoll had one minute for an opening statement. He suggested that viewers read his candidate profile on AnnArbor.com, then said “let’s go right into questions.”

Michigan’s Water Resources

Question: Do you see Michigan’s water resources threatened in any way? What legislation and/or enforcement is needed to protect Michigan’s water?

Ingersoll said he thought it was a really broad question that was best answered in philosophical terms. The federal government should have absolutely no say about the water in Michigan. How the state’s resources are used should be determined by people in Michigan. That being said, he added, from that principle follows that people in Washtenaw County should determine how water in Washtenaw County is used.

Partisan Deadlock

Question: Outside of one party having total control, give three specific ways that you’d try to surmount the legislative deadlock that has immobilized the state.

If you think of the principle “He who governs least, governs best,” then perhaps we’re better off if the legislature isn’t up in Lansing passing laws, Ingersoll said. Philosophically, he said he looked at it this way: The country started out with a pretty good code – the federal constitution, and a state constitution. But over time, a lot of people with their petty or particular interests have built bad code, or outdated code, on the original code. Coming from a family of computer programmers, he said, you’re not better off investing a lot of time and energy into new code – that just creates additional problems. We may be at that point, he said.

Regardless of party affiliation, you have to look at each specific piece of legislation that’s being considered in its own right, rather than the party origin, Ingersoll said. The biggest problem right now is that people simply aren’t reading the bills, he said.

State Budget

Question: Budget deficits are plugged by increasing revenues or decreasing expenditures. What sources of increased income would you would support, or what expenses would you eliminate?

Regarding increased income, if you’re talking about taxes, Ingersoll said, all you’ll do is have businesses head over to Ohio or Indiana. For example, if a small transportation business in Michigan decides to title and register its vehicles in Ohio, it saves thousands of dollars compared to doing that in Michigan. Why is that? he asked. Has Ohio found a way to be more efficient in its costs and fees than Michigan? He said he really didn’t have an answer, other than philosophically, everyone’s going to have to “take a haircut.”

Educational Funding Priorities

Question: Like many states, Michigan is facing a shortfall of funding for education, resulting in teacher layoffs, increased class sizes, a shortage of materials, deteriorating buildings and so on. Where does K-12 education rank in your funding priorities? How much would you devote to post-secondary educational support? Are there further economies possible, or must the state change its taxation formula?

Ingersoll said he disagreed with the premise that not enough money is being spent on education. He sees a “bubble” in the price of education in the same way there was a bubble in the housing market. There’s plenty of education out there, just as there was plenty of housing out there, he said. But what we have is a financing scheme for education that has resulted in prices going up.

He said he remembered what it cost to go to a private or public college in the past, and those costs have gone up exponentially – not because of inflation, or the cost of personnel, or the cost of the physical structure of a university, or even because of the cost of the K-12 physical plant. Especially in the university environment, Ingersoll said, costs went up when they increased lending. If you look to what happened in the real estate market, he said, that explains what’s happening in the post-secondary education market.

Constitutional Convention

Question: Voters will be asked on Nov. 2 to decide whether or not to have a constitutional convention. Do you favor a state constitutional convention?

Ingersoll said he doesn’t think the average voter in Michigan understands the law, or would put in enough time to understand the process or the laws or the outcome of a constitutional convention. They would be qualified to elect representatives to actually go to a constitutional convention, and have something that would actually work. On the one hand, he said, you’d love the thought of democracy and people getting together at the convention. But he said he thinks the Michigan voting populace is completely unqualified to actually do that.

Michigan Infrastructure

Question: Michigan’s roads, bridges and drains all need reconstruction. Has the federal stimulus money all been spent in the state? Do you have a priority list for future projects? We might put off projects to reduce our children’s debt burden, but what kind of state will we bequeath to them? What are your priorities in fixing up the state?

The question is too long to answer in one minute, Ingersoll said. The stimulus was a boondoggle, and we’re not getting the correct technology, materials or work effort in repairing the roads. Take Washtenaw Avenue, for example. “I’ve been in Michigan four years, and every year they’re working on Washtenaw,” he said. “It’s either poor materials or poor workmanship. That wouldn’t be tolerated in other places.”

Closing Statement

Ingersoll was given two minutes to make a closing statement. Philosophically,  he said, it doesn’t make any sense for Michigan to be sending money to the federal government, and then to have the state ask the federal government how we can spend it. Likewise, it’s not appropriate for Washtenaw County or the local townships or governmental units to be sending money to Lansing, then putting our hand out and asking Lansing to send it back to us with a list of rules on how it can be spent. Anybody who has bought into that paradigm or way of thinking, “I just don’t get them,” he said.

“Are we in Washtenaw County too stupid to figure out how we should spend our own money and what we should spend it on?” Ingersoll asked. “Or are we somehow benefiting in sending it up to a legislature that brings in many of the crooks and thieves from Detroit, who are elected by crooks and thieves in Detroit, and then they dabble around and help articulate the rules that we in Washtenaw County then have to live by.”

“I think we need to take care of our own here at home,” Ingersoll concluded. “And I think we’d be better off if basically Lansing ceased to exist and if the federal government ceased to exist. We’re big enough to handle it ourselves.”

Warren outpolled rivals Pam Byrnes and Thomas Partridge with 55.58%  – or 13,113 votes – in the race for state Senate District 18. Byrnes came in with 40.43% (9,539 votes), with Partridge at 3.85% (908 votes). The district covers the cities of Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti and the townships of Ann Arbor, Augusta, Dexter, Freedom, Lima, Lyndon, Northfield, Salem, Scio, Sharon, Superior, Sylvan, Webster and Ypsilanti. It’s currently represented by Liz Brater, who is term-limited.

Irwin’s race was even closer – he won his race against Ned Staebler with just 51% of the votes cast and, if elected in November, will be representing District 53 in the state House. Irwin brought in 5,051 votes compared to Staebler’s 4,845. The district, currently represented by Warren, takes in Ann Arbor and parts of Ann Arbor, Pittsfield and Scio townships.

In the governor’s race, Rick Snyder of Ann Arbor – who carried the field statewide for the Republican nomination – did well in Washtenaw County, getting 49% of the votes in the GOP primary. Democrat Virg Bernero beat Andy Dillon with 65% of the votes in Washtenaw County – he won the statewide nomination as well.

In November, Warren will face the winner of the state Senate Republican primary, John Hochstetler, who beat rival Gary Wellings with 59% of the votes (7,973). For the state House race in District 53, Irwin will go up against Republican Chase Ingersoll, who was unopposed in the primary.

The breakdown by precinct for the state House race:

Precinct         Irwin         Staebler
Ann Arbor 1-1      12            11
Ann Arbor 1-2       9	          1
Ann Arbor 1-3      26            10
Ann Arbor 1-4     114            72
Ann Arbor 1-5     197           110
Ann Arbor 1-6      73            60
Ann Arbor 1-7       8            13
Ann Arbor 1-8     156            99
Ann Arbor 1-10    217           142
Ann Arbor 2-2       2             1
Ann Arbor 2-3      48            34
Ann Arbor 2-4     142           215
Ann Arbor 3-1      20             4
Ann Arbor 3-2      59            28
Ann Arbor 3-3     267           366
Ann Arbor 3-4     176           174
Ann Arbor 3-5      70            68
Ann Arbor 3-6     112            86
Ann Arbor 3-7     168           185
Ann Arbor 3-8     219           136
Ann Arbor 3-9      97           149
Ann Arbor 4-1       8             4
Ann Arbor 4-2      24            19
Ann Arbor 4-3      73           145
Ann Arbor 4-4     182           211
Ann Arbor 4-5      81           126
Ann Arbor 4-6     152           176
Ann Arbor 4-7     171           258
Ann Arbor 4-8      63            79
Ann Arbor 4-9     162           201
Ann Arbor 5-1      38            29
Ann Arbor 5-2     225           205
Ann Arbor 5-3     122           108
Ann Arbor 5-4     319           195
Ann Arbor 5-5     155           129
Ann Arbor 5-6     169           183
Ann Arbor 5-7      55            44
Ann Arbor 5-8      90           113
Ann Arbor 5-9     228           182
Ann Arbor 5-10    161           156
Ann Arbor 5-11    365           301
Ann Arbor Twp 1     3             2
Ann Arbor Twp 2    10             1

Total           5,051         4,845

-

The breakdown by precinct for the state Senate race:

Precinct               Byrnes Partridge Warren

A2 City, Ward 1, Pct 1     11     0      12
A2 City, Ward 1, Pct 2      3     0       6
A2 City, Ward 1, Pct 3      7     1      30
A2 City, Ward 1, Pct 4     57     8     124
A2 City, Ward 1, Pct 5     71     3     239
A2 City, Ward 1, Pct 6     21     3     115
A2 City, Ward 1, Pct 7      8     1      15
A2 City, Ward 1, Pct 8    140     8     246
A2 City, Ward 1, Pct 9    203     5     120
A2 City, Ward 1, Pct 10   110     9     266
A2 City, Ward 2, Pct 1     50     1      35
A2 City, Ward 2, Pct 2      2     1       2
A2 City, Ward 2, Pct 3     24     1      52
A2 City, Ward 2, Pct 4    110     8     234
A2 City, Ward 2, Pct 5    180     5     132
A2 City, Ward 2, Pct 6    202     7     137
A2 City, Ward 2, Pct 7    210     4     109
A2 City, Ward 2, Pct 8    180     2      85
A2 City, Ward 2, Pct 9    166     5     115
A2 City, Ward 3, Pct 1      1     0      23
A2 City, Ward 3, Pct 2     29     0      64
A2 City, Ward 3, Pct 3    161     9     456
A2 City, Ward 3, Pct 4     93     3     258
A2 City, Ward 3, Pct 5     42    10      90
A2 City, Ward 3, Pct 6     55     7     143
A2 City, Ward 3, Pct 7     79     5     274
A2 City, Ward 3, Pct 8     81     6     262
A2 City, Ward 3, Pct 9     70    20     161
A2 City, Ward 4, Pct 1      1     0       7
A2 City, Ward 4, Pct 2      9     0      35
A2 City, Ward 4, Pct 3     61     3     159
A2 City, Ward 4, Pct 4    108     9     278
A2 City, Ward 4, Pct 5     50     8     157
A2 City, Ward 4, Pct 6    104    10     229
A2 City, Ward 4, Pct 7    142    13     282
A2 City, Ward 4, Pct 8     62    11      82
A2 City, Ward 4, Pct 9    126    13     227
A2 City, Ward 5, Pct 1     16     1      53
A2 City, Ward 5, Pct 2    100     5     344
A2 City, Ward 5, Pct 3     60     8     175
A2 City, Ward 5, Pct 4    102     6     420
A2 City, Ward 5, Pct 5     84     9     210
A2 City, Ward 5, Pct 6     79    11     271
A2 City, Ward 5, Pct 7     35     2      69
A2 City, Ward 5, Pct 8     61     5     146
A2 City, Ward 5, Pct 9     83    11     330
A2 City, Ward 5, Pct 10    90     7     222
A2 City, Ward 5, Pct 11   134    17     526
Ann Arbor Twp, Pct 1       87     2      55
Ann Arbor Twp, Pct 2      114     3     101
Augusta Twp, Pct 1         88    14     102
Augusta Twp, Pct 2         37    14      76
Augusta Twp, Pct 3         86    38     107
City of Chelsea, Pct 1    195     3      60
City of Chelsea, Pct 2    129     7      21
Dexter Twp, Pct 1         100     4      41
Dexter Twp, Pct 2         110     1      39
Dexter Twp, Pct 3          63     1      30
Freedom Twp, Pct 1         82     2      28
Lima Twp, Pct 1           109     3      37
Lyndon Twp, Pct 1         151    10      44
Northfield Twp, Pct 1     102     3      48
Northfield Twp, Pct 2      91     9      37
Northfield Twp, Pct 3      41     5      25
Pitts Chrt Twp, Pct 5       1     0       2
Pitts Chrt Twp, Pct 7       2     0       0
Salem Twp, Pct 1           17     9      54
Salem Twp, Pct 2           26    17      67
Salem Twp, Pct 3           26     5      31
Scio Twp, Pct 1           114     2      57
Scio Twp, Pct 2            64     2      26
Scio Twp, Pct 3            98     1      77
Scio Twp, Pct 4           126     1      72
Scio Twp, Pct 5            72     5      35
Scio Twp, Pct 6            63     3      38
Scio Twp, Pct 7           122     3      72
Scio Twp, Pct 8           125     0     119
Scio Twp, Pct 9           101     5      92
Sharon Twp, Pct 1          93     5      16
Superior Twp, Pct 1        87     4      61
Superior Twp, Pct 2       126    19     137
Superior Twp, Pct 3        99    14      67
Superior Twp, Pct 4        69    18      57
Superior Twp, Pct 5        90     9     107
Sylvan Twp, Pct 1         156     7      29
Webster Twp, Pct 1        118     3      55
Webster Twp, Pct 2         61     1      23
Webster Twp, Pct 3         58     6      29
Ypsi City, Ward 1, Pct 1   73    24     107
Ypsi City, Ward 1, Pct 2   81    15     128
Ypsi City, Ward 1, Pct 3   46    10      48
Ypsi City, Ward 2, Pct 1   98     6     153
Ypsi City, Ward 2, Pct 2   85    11     174
Ypsi City, Ward 2, Pct 3   66     4     182
Ypsi City, Ward 2, Pct 4   11     2      11
Ypsi City, Ward 3, Pct 1   16     1      20
Ypsi City, Ward 3, Pct 2   79     6     159
Ypsi City, Ward 3, Pct 3  113    24     174
Ypsi Twp, Pct 1            45     7      57
Ypsi Twp, Pct 2            57    17     101
Ypsi Twp, Pct 3            45    12      62
Ypsi Twp, Pct 4            60     8      95
Ypsi Twp, Pct 5            38     6      33
Ypsi Twp, Pct 6            19     4      24
Ypsi Twp, Pct 7            36    11      49
Ypsi Twp, Pct 8            31     8      56
Ypsi Twp, Pct 9            73     7      93
Ypsi Twp, Pct 10           37     5      48
Ypsi Twp, Pct 11           58    18      44
Ypsi Twp, Pct 12           33    11      29
Ypsi Twp, Pct 13           56     7      76
Ypsi Twp, Pct 14           78    17      97
Ypsi Twp, Pct 15           26     3      30
Ypsi Twp, Pct 16           18     2      16
Ypsi Twp, Pct 17           98    10     157
Ypsi Twp, Pct 18           34     2      69
Ypsi Twp, Pct 19           60    10      94
Ypsi Twp, Pct 20           60     9      73
Ypsi Twp, AVCB 1          291    60     245
Ypsi Twp, AVCB 2          246    32     208
                        9,539   908  13,113