Council Members in Open Revolt: Challenge Mayor & Insist Transit Proposal Is Seriously Flawed
by P.D. Lesko
Third Ward Council member Stephen Kunselman has been a pain in John Hieftje’s butter dish ever since Kunselman knocked off Leigh Greden in the 2009 stunner of a primary election. While Kunselman won by a 6 vote margin, Greden lost big overall in a three-way race that saw the 3-term incumbent manage to capture only about 35 percent of the vote. Kunselman ran on a promise to implement a code of ethics for Council. He did so in response to what the Ann Arbor News and certainly Third Ward voters perceived as serious ethical lapses on Greden’s part. Greden was not alone in his misuse of email during open Council meetings. He was joined by several other Council members, primarily those who were recruited to run and who’d been endorsed by John Hieftje: First Ward Council Member Sandi Smith, Second Ward Councilmembers Tony Derezinski and Stephen Rapundalo, Fourth Ward Council members Margie Teall and Marcia Higgins, and Fifth Ward Council member Carsten Hohnke.
Kunselman has not kept his promise to push for a code of ethics. He has, however, become increasingly vocal in calling for transparency in Council deliberations, increased care in evaluating staff proposals, and most recently, in his public support of city-wide transit funded with Ann Arbor taxpayer dollars. Hieftje is pushing a county-wide and regional transit plan paid for with Ann Arbor taxpayer dollars. Kunselman recently called Hieftje’s ideas “a little beyond reality” at an Ypsilanti City Council meeting on January 11, 2012. Kunselman includes in the category of transit ideas that are unrealistic, “commuter rail to Brighton and Dearborn.”
It is not the first time elected officials have concluded that Hieftje’s transit plans are “a little beyond reality,” however. Hieftje has failed repeatedly to convince Livingston and Oakland county elected officials to agree to partner with Ann Arbor on regional transit plans that include commuter rail between Howell and Ann Arbor (WALLY). Without cooperation of officials in other counties, there is not enough money to operate a commuter rail system. The federal government has, similarly, found Hieftje’s transit plans “a little beyond reality.” Tiger II grant funds were not awarded to the WALLY commuter train project in part because ridership studies concluded there are not sufficient numbers of people to make the WALLY project financially feasible, according to an official from the U.S. Department of Transportation, which is in chage of TIGER grant funding.
Hieftje, however, is never one to be deterred by reality.
He was recently the sole sponsor of a resolution which would lead to the dissolution of the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority. In its place there would be a country transit board. Hieftje told City Council the change would improve bus service. However, in his most recent mass email message Fifth Ward Council member Mike Anglin reveals a quiet use of Ann Arbor transit millage money for the same WALLY train that federal and state officials concluded was a money-loser waiting to happen.
Anglin writes:
On March 17, 2008 I addressed the Ann Arbor city Council. Speaking about the proposed Police Courts Building and stated .. “We will be in bad shape as a city…two years from now…people will say why is that building there and look at what we are facing.” That is exactly what happened. We have a new building, but the police and fire protection services for the citizens have been substantially cut.
I am concerned we are now making a similar mistake by approving an agreement involving millions of dollars before we have details of the services to be provided or how they will be funded. Shouldn’t the city wait until enough detail is provided to demonstrate that the county wide service can be provided without a reduction in service to Ann Arbor citizens? Even now the agreement is still being revised. Shouldn’t Council and the citizens have several weeks to review and discuss the final amended version before they are asked to comment and the agreement is approved or rejected?
The AATA is already conducting studies and hiring consultants in anticipation of expanding into a county Transit Authority. The AATA has issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for a “Railroad Station Feasibility Study and Engineering Support for NEPA Process”. The study is to be conducted for the area between Ann Arbor and Howell. These studies benefit Washtenaw and Livingston counties far more than they do Ann Arbor. Shouldn’t they be funded by the county rather than by our transit millage? Partially as a result of these studies the AATA has a budget deficit of approximately $1million for 2012.
The very public and very pointed political pressure exerted by Anglin, Kunselman and Second Ward Council member Jane Lumm is having an impact.
Anglin writes: “Citizen emails and presentations at Council have had an effect. The Public Transportation Agreement – As Amended now calls for voter approval of the funding of the County Transit Authority in both the county and the city of Ann Arbor. Thank you for your efforts. The present version of the agreement is on the city website and there is a link posted on my blog….”
As a result, perhaps, of Kunselman’s visit to the Ypsilanti City Council, that group voted to postpone any decision to participate in the “regional” transit plan cooked up by Hieftje.
Shortly after Anglin’s first email concerning the Mayor’s transit scheme hit inboxes all over town, Michael Garfield, in his capacity as head of the Ecology Center, sent out an email in support of Hieftje’s transit scheme. On the surface it appears logical that the Ann Arbor Ecology Center should back public transit. However, the Green Industrial Complex, as locals in the know refer to the Ecology Center and Recycle Ann Arbor, is neck deep in political patronage.
Garfield’s organization, Recycle Ann Arbor (controlled by the Ecology Center) was recently awarded a multi-million dollar 10-year no bid contract by Hieftje and City Council. No bid contracts are expressly forbidden by city policy. However, Recycle Ann Arbor has been awarded no bid contracts twice. Shortly before the most recent no-bid contract was awarded, Garfield endorsed Hieftje in his re-election bid in 2010. A few weeks before Garfield sent out this email in support of Hieftje’s transit plan, Hieftje voted in support of a modification to Recycle Ann Arbor’s $25 million dollar contract with the city, upping the amount by over $1.07 million dollars. Over the past decade, Hieftje has helped steer over $32 million dollars in public money to Garfield’s organization.
The title of Garfield’s email is: “Let Council Know We Support the Transportation Plan.” In it he writes: “The next step is for the city to agree to a transparent, open and fair process that would lead toward a framework for creating a transit authority serving all of Washtenaw County.” However, Hieftje’s resolution is not something that leads “toward a framework for creating a transit authority.” It is a resolution which asks Council to enter into a binding 4-party contract.
Garfield also writes, “The long-term goal is to coordinate all of Ann Arbor’s existing transit resources with improved connections and transportation options across the county.” Again, the head of the Ecology Center neglects to tell the whole truth, as is revealed in AATA’s RPF for a “Railroad Station Feasibility Study and Engineering Support for NEPA Process”—a study is to be conducted for the area between Ann Arbor and Howell.
Kunselman, Lumm and Anglin are actively working to shine a light on what looks increasingly like a transit boondoggle aimed at “repurposing” Ann Arbor tax dollars pushed by Hieftje and his “cabal,” as former Downtown Development Authority board member and local politico Rene Greff referred to the Council Majority in an interview with A2Politico.
Kunselman also spoke in favor of city-wide transit before the Wahtenaw County Board of Commissioners, who are being asked to approve Hieftje’s plan as well. Second Ward Council member Jane Lumm has made clear that she supports city-wide transit funded with Ann Arbor taxpayer dollars, and her questioning of why that $8-$10 million in millage money per year should be given over to county officials, who have no transit millage, provoked an angry outburst from Hieftje at the Council meeting at which his resolution was introduced.
The January 23, 2012 City Council meeting should be a show worth the price of admission. There will be a public hearing at which those who support city-wide transit funded with Ann Arbor taxpayer dollars, and those who want to funnel Ann Arbor tax dollars to a county transit board who could, in theory, spend the money on everything but buses for Ann Arbor residents, will have at it.
First Ward Council member Sabra Briere is hoping the whole mess gets postponed until sometime in February. The AATA committee that’s working on coming up with a funding plan hasn’t finished its work yet, and there are those who wonder why Hieftje and his supporters want City Council to sign onto a $600,000,000 transit plan that has no identified funding source (other than Ann Arbor’s millage money). Then again, Ann Arbor City Council members, including Hieftje, routinely practice “aim, ready, fire” leadership, as Anglin points out in his most recent mass email:
On March 17, 2008 I addressed the Ann Arbor city Council. Speaking about the proposed Police Courts Building and stated .. “We will be in bad shape as a city…two years from now…people will say why is that building there and look at what we are facing.” That is exactly what happened. We have a new building, but the police and fire protection services for the citizens have been substantially cut.
There’s nothing like hindsight to embolden local politicos.
