by Jack Eaton

MY NAME IS Jack Eaton. I am the Democratic Party candidate for City Council in the Fourth Ward. I am unchallenged on the November 5 ballot. Like many local Democrats, I support Ward 2 Council member Jane Lumm’s re-election.

I respect the fact that reasonable people can disagree on who would best represent the interests of voters on Council. I think that we have  witnessed a slow but significant transformation of our Council since 2009.

As you may recall, in 2008 and 2009, residents filed Freedom of Information Act requests and obtained emails between Council members. Those emails revealed that Council members were exchanging emails during meetings and that many Council votes were orchestrated in advance. There was a majority serving at that time that voted in lockstep, except where members needed to vote otherwise to appear as if they were being responsive to their Ward’s residents.

Beginning with Mr.. Kunselman’s defeat of Leigh Greden in 2009, the tight group that voted in lockstep has slowly been replaced by individuals who exercise independent judgment.

While it is common to hear some residents criticize these new independent voices as being against everything, the only common traits they share is the exercise of independent judgment and the desire to represent the interests of town residents. The new independent voices are not anti-Mayor, they are anti-lockstep.

As the number of independent voices on Council grew, the Council in 2012, for the first time ever, started its budget deliberations by identifying priorities. For a number of years we have had extremely tight budgets, but have not allocated those scarce dollars by priority. We have terrible roads; we have a long neglected waste water system that dumps raw sewage into the river; we have a overwhelmed storm water system that causes neighborhoods to flood when it rains hard. We have been told for a number of years that we simply cannot afford as many police officers and fire fighters as our police and fire chiefs believe are necessary.

Where could we find extra money? In 2011, city officials and members of the Downtown Development Authority found that the City’s DDA ordinance limited the rate at which the DDA’s revenues could increase. There has never been a proposal to reduce the amount of taxes the DDA can capture from Ann Arbor, Washtenaw County, the library system and Washtenaw Community College. It is a dispute over how fast that revenue can grow under the ordinance that describes the intent to limit such growth. In 2011, the city officials consulted its attorneys and the DDA consulted its attorney and the parties agreed about how much the DDA could capture. The very next year, the DDA refused to comply with those previously agreed on limits.

Some Council members are considering amendments to the City’s DDA ordinance that would make clear the manner in which the revenue growth limits would be applied. The taxes not captured would be returned to the City, County, Library and Community College. Remember that the City has not been able to adequately staff its safety services because it lacks the money. That money would be available if the DDA revenue growth was limited in compliance with the DDA ordinance.

The 413 E. Huron problem was both foreseeable and actually foreseen. When the prior Council deliberated over the A2D2 zoning changes, neighbors to the north of the downtown warned that D-1 zoning of that property could result in a 14 story building. The Planning Commission, including member Westphal, and the former Council approved the zoning changes in spite of the neighborhood warning.

Jane Lumm was not on Council at that time, but when she was elected she listened to the concerns of the neighbors and found legally supportable reasons to oppose that project. Consistently, Mr. Westphal has failed to listen to the concerns of residents when making decisions on Planning Commission. For me, the idea that problems such as 413 E. Huron will be addressed through changing the zoning framework if we elect Council members such as Mr. Westphal are contrary to his service on Planning Commission. These problems arise because of the framework Mr. Westphal and his cohorts designed.

The issue of obstructing all things related to trains is equally unfounded. Ann Arbor residents pay $9 million per year in transit taxes to the AAATA. Our transit issues should be funded by those taxes. We are now facing the probability of having to pay increased vehicle registration fees or an additional millage to fund the new Regional Transit Authority (“RTA” – Wayne, Oakland, Macomb, and Washtenaw Counties). We will likely face a tax to fund the connector study plan, even if the University of Michigan pays a significant percent of the costs of that service. Next spring, the AAATA will seek an additional 0.7 mills ($3 million just from Ann Arbor) to fund its programs, but not the RTA or connector service.

The question must be asked – when we cannot afford police and fire staff, should we be using the City’s general funds to pay for train stations (we’ve already spent $2 million), and plans for commuter rail service for communities who are not contributing to those costs? Opposing the use of scarce City general funds for trains and train services is not the same as opposing those services. It is a question of who should pay those costs.

I don’t always agree with Jane Lumm or Stephen Kunselman. They don’t always agree with each other. But, admirably, they always exercise their best judgment after listening to the concerns of voters. They have not automatically opposed the Mayor, instead, they merely have refused to fall in line and offer unquestioning support for the agenda of the former majority on Council. For this exercise of independence, they are called conservative or a number of other names. This should not be about name calling. It should be about who will listen to residents and try to help those residents. We saw that demonstrated when Jane Lumm championed the cause of those opposed to 413 E. Huron.

I hope you will support her and encourage everyone you know in Ward 2 to vote for her re-election.