Ballot language available for three proposals going before Ann Arbor voters in November
The city of Ann Arbor has posted information about the Nov. 8 general election on its website, including the language of three ballot proposals coming before city voters.
Proposal 1 asks voters to renew the city's 2-mill street and bridge reconstruction millage through 2016. Proposal 2 then asks voters to layer on an additional 0.125 mills to add sidewalk repairs into the scope of services covered by the street millage.
Five Ann Arbor City Council members also are up for re-election, though only four face competition. Sabra Briere, D-1st Ward, does not have a challenger for her seat.
- In the 2nd Ward, Democratic incumbent Stephen Rapundalo is up against Independent challenger Jane Lumm.
- In the 3rd Ward, Democratic incumbent Stephen Kunselman is up against Republican challenger David Parker.
- In the 4th Ward, Democratic incumbent Marcia Higgins is up against Republican challenger Eric Scheie.
- In the 5th Ward, Democratic incumbent Mike Anglin is up against Republican challenger Stuart Berry.
Ryan J. Stanton covers government and politics for AnnArbor.com. Reach him at ryanstanton@annarbor.com or 734-623-2529. You also can follow him on Twitter or subscribe to AnnArbor.com's e-mail newsletters.
Comments
Tony Livingston
Sun, Oct 16, 2011 : 6:28 p.m.
No, no, no on proposal 2. If the city has a pile of money for sidewalks, they are sure to spend 3 times as much on it as homeowners would. They bungled the management of the sidewalk repair program and we do not want them having our money to prove once again that they are poor managers. Money for sidewalks will be piddled away on extraneous charges that only city bureaucrats can dream up! They handled it very badly once. Do we want to give them money to handle it badly for the next decade? No!
Ashok Gopalakrishnan
Sun, Oct 16, 2011 : 4:15 p.m.
Please don't forget the TIGER II grant from USDOT for reconstruction of the Stadium bridges. This amounts to $13.1 million, and from what I can tell, has been obligated to the city. This means that a total of $42 million is available to the city to repair the streets, and the Stadium bridges. Let us see some meaningful spending before approving another millage.
Sparty
Sun, Oct 16, 2011 : 3:50 p.m.
Vote no to incumbents! And before someone snarky asks, I am a registered voter in Ann Arbor and a Democrat.
David Cahill
Sun, Oct 16, 2011 : 3:49 p.m.
AnnArbor.com, could you please correct the dreaded "pubic/public" typo in the first line of SonnyDog09's comment above?
say it plain
Sun, Oct 16, 2011 : 7:48 p.m.
I wish that the ballot language mentioned the money already sitting unused in the street repair bucket, but of course it can't, sigh... I hope these two street-repair proposals get defeated and we get to see how the city interprets that... our luck, they'll claim it must mean AA citizens think the streets are in fine shape, and they'll increase by fiat the percent-for-art to 20-percent-for-even-'better art', or something...
say it plain
Sun, Oct 16, 2011 : 7:43 p.m.
lol...is pubic on one of the FCC no-go lists?! Thusly *requring* AA.com to edit or remove posts?!
SonnyDog09
Sun, Oct 16, 2011 : 3:56 p.m.
oops. Unintentional, I assure you.
SonnyDog09
Sun, Oct 16, 2011 : 2:27 p.m.
Here is a link to the presentation that they gave at the pubic meeting I attended earlier this week. <a href="http://www.ci.ann-arbor.mi.us/government/publicservices/project_management/Documents/2011%20City%20Millages%20Presentation%20Oct%202011.pdf" rel='nofollow'>http://www.ci.ann-arbor.mi.us/government/publicservices/project_management/Documents/2011%20City%20Millages%20Presentation%20Oct%202011.pdf</a> At some point, they are supposed to post answers to the questions that we asked. When I asked how many sidewalk slabs they intended to replace with the $500k/year, I was unimpressed that they did not know. I also remain skeptical that the city can manage to replace sidewalk slabs for less than citizens would pay to have it done on their property, given city overhead costs and the requirement that the contractors pay "prevailing wage."
Tony Livingston
Sun, Oct 16, 2011 : 6:32 p.m.
I agree totally. If the city is in charge, they will spend way more than homeowners would. They have a very long history of this in the rental property inspection program. They raise the price every year and now charge $100 to inspect a 600 sq foot apartment. They find all kinds of creative ways to spend our money.
Bob Carlin
Sun, Oct 16, 2011 : 1:01 p.m.
It's really a question of trust. If you like the way the city has managed the prior street millage, and the way the city has included the public in its large spending decisions, then you'll want to vote for these new taxes. I'll be voting no. There's plenty of money in the streets fund. If this millage isn't passed, we can do another one later. I don't have confidence in the current council majority and see this vote as a way to tell them that.
DrD
Sun, Oct 16, 2011 : 12:27 p.m.
The language used for these proposals always seems worded specifically too abstract. "...to renew the city's 2-mill..." & "... to layer on an additional 0.125 mills..." I'd like to pull a trick from the political world and call it what it is: "We'd like to increase property taxes." If its proven worth it, then I'm on board, otherwise, no and try again later.
Carole
Sun, Oct 16, 2011 : 12:23 p.m.
Until the city becomes fiscally responsible, I will not vote for any renewable or new millage. And, I truly hope we see some new responsible folks come on board for the council.
xmo
Sun, Oct 16, 2011 : 12:16 p.m.
We have had "ONE PARTY" rule for a number of years in Ann Arbor yet we lack transparency, we have City Council appoint committees to cover their action on tough issues, political bickering, (Remember the last election) and we have out right theft by the pension board yet the Voters of Ann Arbor Refuse to institute a two party system? Maybe the Ann Arbor Voters are not as smart as they think they are?
Stephen Lange Ranzini
Sun, Oct 16, 2011 : 12:12 p.m.
Please vote Yes on Proposal 3 and No on Proposals 1 and 2! Why yes on 3? In the past the City Managers have used their position on the pension fund board to vote themselves amazingly generous early buyouts. Having a majority of independent citizen trustees along with the City Treasurer on the pension fund board doesn't *guarantee* a better result, but is more likely to, than the current situation where the city employees held a majority of the board seats and as trustees have voted themselves overly generous benefits we couldn't afford. The city pension fund and health care retirement funds are about $240 million in deficit, and this reform, first proposed by the city's blue ribbon commission on reforming the healthcare and retirement programs of the city, could help lower that red ink over time. Why no on 1 and 2? Proposal 2 regarding having the city charge us *twice* (!!) for sidewalk repair is a non-starter for reasons thoroughly discussed here. Although we have a huge number of miles of roads in poor or worse condition, Proposal 1 should be defeated as a message to city council to spend the money already accumulated in the road millage fund, before coming back to the voters asking for more. Last I heard there was $28 million sitting in the road millage fund *bucket*. Voters are hurting financially and there is no point having money stacked up in the city's bank account doing nothing instead of being used by the voters to make ends meet in the community. Drain this bucket and then we'll approve a new millage for road repair!
Gorc
Sun, Oct 16, 2011 : 4:53 p.m.
Thank you
Ashok Gopalakrishnan
Sun, Oct 16, 2011 : 4:07 p.m.
@Stephen, I think the question was asked of you to show that the people who post on AA.com against some of what the A2 city council does, do not live in the city, and are therefore not qualified to comment. The question was uncalled for.
Stephen Lange Ranzini
Sun, Oct 16, 2011 : 3:50 p.m.
@Gorc: Yes, I live downtown in Ward 1, work as the President & CEO of University Bank which has it's headquarters in the city in The Mansion at 2015 Washtenaw Avenue, and am a director and past president of the Ann Arbor Economic Development Corporation. I also previously served on the city's Housing Policy Board. At the County, I have been Vice Chairman of the Washtenaw County Economic Development Corporation since 2004. Just curious why you ask?
Gorc
Sun, Oct 16, 2011 : 3:11 p.m.
Mr. Ranzi are you a registered voter in the City of Ann Arbor?
thorj97
Sun, Oct 16, 2011 : 11:27 a.m.
Maintaining infrastructure should be a basic city function. I'd really like to support at least the street/bridge millage, and potentially the sidewalk millage. However, City Council has shown time and time again that their priorities with our tax money are not about providing basic city services, but funding pet projects. They have prioritized bailouts for waste-hauling companies, decorating their office building with an almost $1 million European sculpture (more to come), a metal tree in West Park (I kinda like real thing), planting more trees when the city doesn't have the budget to maintain the existing ones, etc., etc., etc., (fill in your own example of mis-spending) over basic city services. So while the millage will increase taxes, I have little faith that we will actually see improved roads/bridges/sidewalks from this tax. It will be squandered in some way. I know the city is "broke", but somehow when a pet project comes before City Council, it always gets funded. Maybe next time, basic city services (like street repair) could come first.