League of Women Voters’ Candidate Forums Provide Few Questions and Fewer Surprises

by P.D. Lesko

On July 10, 2012 from 7:00-7:45 Wards 1 and 2 Dem City Council candidates participated in the Ann Arbor League of Women Voters candidate forums. Between 8:00-8:45 Wards 4 and 5 Dem City Council candidates participated. Did you tune in? Yeah. Ok. Next question.

Why, in one of the smartest cities in the country, are local politics treated like watching paint dry on a warm summer afternoon? The Ann Arbor League of Women Voters (LWV) is a nonpartisan group that seeks to educate the public about politics, voting and local elections. The ladies involved in the candidate forums, God bless ’em, are doing their best to put on a good show. The League’s efforts are rebroadcast on the city’s Community Television Network (CTN), like reruns of “The Golden Girls”—only without the dead-on, dead pan humor. This year’s candidate forums for City Council provided viewers with an opportunity to watch some very educated candidates answer some very predictable and convoluted questions. It probably took longer to ask several of the questions than the candidates had time to answer (1 minute). There was one change-up pitch. Candidates were asked about their support of non-partisan elections: yes or no and why. It’s an interesting question, in theory, but really, who cares what City Council candidates think about nonpartisan elections? None of the candidates are running on the issue of non-partisan elections, and I suspect none of them will ever bring it up again, if elected.

The questions were virtually identical between the two Democratic candidate forums. So, Ward 5 candidates Chuck Warpehoski and Vivienne Armentrout, as well as Ward 2 candidates Tony Derezinski and Sally Hart Petersen were asked to opine on the Ward 1 Lowertown redevelopment, a six acre parcel of blighted land in Ward 1 that has been mouldering away on the corner of Broadway and Maiden Lane for years. Predictably, their answers were vague, based on speculation and fantasies that included mixed use development, transit (Derezinski), economic development (Petersen) and the Goddess of Open Space (Warpehoski). The privately owned land is a field of weeds and has been a field of weeds for the entire time Derezinski has been on City Council. Margie Teall earnestly expressed her disappointment that there had been an “opening” as she put it, with elected officials posing for photo opps, and then “nothing happened”—when funding for yet another speculative development project approved by Teall and City Council fell through. Even the Ward 1 candidates offered up answers to the question of what to do with the blighted acreage which were uninspiring, vague and included the same mixed-use, open space platitudes. Most of the 8 Council candidate were clueless about what an elected official or elected body can do when faced with chronic blight, a growing problem in Ann Arbor.

Only Ward 4 Council candidate Jack Eaton suggested the obvious: creation of a blight ordinance—which he said he would work to do.

Prior to the candidate forums, the League of Women Voters asked the community via AnnArbor.com for questions. It was shocking, then, when moderators used virtually the same questions for candidates vying to represent four of the city’s five City Council wards.

The only time the LWV “everyone answers the same question” system worked against a candidate was when Ward 4 Council candidate Margie Teall suggested regional transit as an opportunity for Ann Arbor folks to use the expanded bus system to attend events in towns surrounding Ann Arbor, “in Dexter, Chelsea, Saline.” Ward 5 candidate Vivienne Armentrout, a former 4-term Washtenaw County Commish, made clear that Teall’s answer was wrong. “The current plan is set up for commuters,” Armentrout said, “to come into Ann Arbor, not the other way around.”

The question of whether riverfront parkland on Fuller Road should be used as a construction site for a proposed train station evoked the same answer from incumbents Teall and Derezinski. Both denied City Council had anything to do with the selection of the parkland parcel. Rather, they claimed that state and federal transit officials would decide where to put any new station.

This claim is contradicted by emails and other documents released in response to 2011 Freedom of Information Act request filed by A2Politico. In September 2011, A2Politico revealed that city officials had conducted a study that targeted popular river side parks near the University of Michigan Medical Center for transit development. In 2007, when Teall was on City Council, Barton Pond, Bird Hills Nature Area, Barton Nature Area, Bandemer Park, Furstenberg Nature Area, Gallup Park, Huron Hills Golf Course, and Forest Park Nature Area all were evaluated. The 2007 environmental study concludes the Fuller Road park parcel was the best spot for a transit station.

A subsequent 2009 “feasibility study”, conducted when both Teall and Derezinski were on City Council, addressed the question of whether the Fuller Road park parcel could accommodate a parking garage. That  report states, “Preliminary investigations confirm that a variety of deck configurations, accommodating from 875 to 1,500 parking spaces can be accommodated on the eastern end of the site (Fig. 2). However, the relocation of a portion of an existing sanitary line (to the perimeter of the parking deck/transit center footprint), or other protection strategy, will be required.” Both Teall and Derezinski voted in favor of relocating the existing sanitary line in 2012 under the guise of being a pressing fix to the sanitary storm water system. Taxpayers footed the $1.2 million dollar bill for the relocation of a sanitary sewer line to the middle of an empty field across from Fuller Pool.

Ward 1 candidate Eric Sturgis began his answer to whether Fuller Road park land should be used as a construction site for a train station by claiming that the Fuller Road park parcel “is not park land. It has been a parking lot since 1993.” Ward 2 candidate Tony Derezinski, who answered the same question directly after Sturgis, began by correcting Sturgis’s error and discussing what should be done with the “public land” while also repeating the reminder that the parcel has been a parking lot since 1993. Ward 5 candidate Chuck Warpehoski affirmed his belief that before anything could be build on the Fuller Road park, “voters should decide.” Likewise, Ward 5 candidate Vivienne Armentrout, Ward 4 candidate Jack Eaton and Ward 1 candidate Sumi Kailasapathy also said that voters should be consulted before the Fuller Road river side park parcel, valued at between $6-$10 million dollars, be used as a construction site for a train station. Margie Teall spoke about her support of transit. She has voted multiple times in favor of repurposing the river side park, first for parking and now for parking and transit.

Derezinski’s opponent, Sally Hart Petersen, said she was in favor of refurbishing the current Amtrak Station and using existing parking both in front of the station, on Depot Street, as well as across the tracks in a lot on property owned by DTE. Her reply prompted the only rebuttal of the forum. Derezinski’s arm shot up. In his one minute rebuttal, he explained that the present Amtrak Station “is called a double-wide” by train officials. He refuted Petersen’s support of expanding the current station as an “unworkable solution.” The DTE parking is a parcel Ann Arbor politcos would like to convert to parkland, should DTE donate the land to the city, as officials have discussed. Ward 1 candidate Sumi Kailasapathy pointed out the irony of trying to “turn parkland into parking and parking into parkland.”

Ward 4 candidate Jack Eaton, a lawyer, said he would support a proposed Charter amendment coming before Council, co-sponsored by Ward 2 Council member Jane Lumm and Ward 5 Council member Mike Anglin, to bring the sale and leasing of parkland to the voters for their approval. Eaton’s opponent, Council member Margie Teall said, “I would read the proposal with interest.” Teall voted against every one of the May 2012 budget resolutions proposed by Lumm and routinely ignores Lumm’s emails about Council business.

Another question posed to candidates focused on what should be done with the city-owned parcel atop the newly built underground parking garage next to the Ann Arbor Public Library on Fifth Avenue. Ward 1 candidate Eric Sturgis chastised everyone and no one in particular when he said, “The ordinance includes open space. People should read the ordinance.” His opponent, Sumi Kailasaphy, talked about several of the ideas she’d heard from Ward 1 residents concerning what to do with the parcel. She said rather than present voters with “two choices, between a hotel and a conference center,” there should be an open and transparent discussion including citizens. Ward 2 candidate Derezinski claimed the library lot parcel “is the most valuable in the city.” He also reminded those watching that the underground parking garage had been built to “support a significant structure.” He was referring to the $5 million in additional costs included in the project, despite the fact that Council members, including John Hieftje in an email released in response to a FOIA request, told the public there were no plans to build atop the garage before, “perhaps a decade.”

The Ward 5 candidates were, like those in Wards 1 and 4, also on opposite sides of the regional transit policy fence, and on the same side in several other instances (need for open space atop the library lot, support of watershed management and the Greenway project, as well as the need for voters to be consulted about the disposition of land owned by the public). Armentrout and Warpehoski were at odds about regional transit plans afoot, including using AATA millage money for regional transit. Warpehoski considers support the use of millage money paid by Ann Arbor taxpayers to fund transit for out-county areas the duty of Democrats and progressives. Armentrout, a bit of a transportation policy wonk and a member of AATA’s District Advisory Committee, expressed reservations about the proposed regional transit plans based on data she has collected and her study of the plan’s particulars.

Closing statements from the 8 candidates were relatively similar and the usual earnest pleas for support on August 7th, with one exception. Ward 1 candidate Eric Sturgis got red-faced and blurted, “I’ve been attacked in this race.” He was referring to A2Politico’s coverage of his misrepresentation of his status as a student at Eastern Michigan University, as well as an election fraud complaint filed against him by an Ann Arbor resident. In 2010, Sturgis appeared on the ballot as a Precinct Delegate in both Oakland and Washtenaw counties. County clerk officials in both counties described Sturgis’s 2010 dual-ballot appearance as a “very serious” breach of Michigan’s election laws. Comments in response to AnnArbor.com coverage of Sturgis’s outburst are almost uniformly negative. One comment about Sturgis quotes disgraced former President Richard M. Nixon: “I am not a crook. Lol.” Later comments were similarly biting: “Sturgis: Just another rubber stamp for heiftje. That’s all that needs to be said.” The last of the two dozen comments sums up the tone of the others well: “Well, well, lets support the true blue american. Eric Sturgis. So what if he brole the law..filing papers in two different counties at the same time , and was not truthful about being a student at EMU. its the good old boys way of doing business…Ask Mr deresinki and the city attorney and youll get a whopping yes..” Sturgis found no sympathy among the readers at AnnArbor.com, and in fact was treated to rather surly comments about his veracity, maturity and bogus claims of persecution.

Reader response to the coverage on AnnArbor.com of the LWV forums in which incumbents Derezinski and Teall participated is virtually 100 percent anti-incumbent, calling for both Teall and Derezinski to be booted from office. Derezinski is dubbed “the worst” representative Ward 2 has ever had. These reader responses are very similar in tone to the responses to AnnArbor.com’s coverage of former Second Ward Council member Stephen Rapundalo’s November 2011 race. The first comment about Margie Teall’s bid for re-election is full of clever bile:

“Margie Teall says she’s running for reelection to her 4th Ward seat on the Ann Arbor City Council to make sure the city stays on the path it’s been on for the last decade.”

Cue the background music from the Jaws soundtrack.

Modestly, Ms. Teall doesn’t take credit for actually suggesting we move to a TWO Per Cent For Art Tax on city building projects. Don’t be shy Ms. Teall–you deserve ALL the credit for the brilliant idea.

Another comment is even more pointed.

It’s nice to see that Margie is able to rattle off a large list of accomplishments so readily. She neglected to mention her many absences from City Council meetings, and her well-known reputation in our neighborhood for lack of communication with her 4th ward constituents. I personally left several messages on her home phone last summer and emailed her several times – no response from her electronically or by phone. We need a representative on council that is involved, and communicates…Mr. Eaton, I hope this is the year that you defeat Ms. Teall.

While the LWV added 15 minutes to an initial 30 minute forum, and the additional time made for more opportunities to see candidates speak, the quality of the questions undermined the potential usefulness of the event to voters. In 2013, A2Politico hopes the LWV will not only give each Ward 30 minutes, but formulate questions based on the candidates’ platforms and keep the queries succinct. The rebuttal minute, while interesting, wasn’t used by any of the candidates except Tony Derezinski. That says more about the candidates’ fear of being perceived as overly aggressive or rude. It’s a shame. Ann Arbor has the collective intelligence to produce candidates who could debate local politics with the elegance of Lincoln versus Douglas, but mainstream media political coverage that rewards Barney the Dinosaur vs. Puff the Magic Dragon political discourse.

It’s one of the major reasons why local politics and candidate forums are mostly the stuff of fairy tales and sleep-time including, alas, the most recent LWV forum for Council candidates.