Michigan Press Association fights Ann Arbor charter amendments with 'robo-calls'
The Michigan Press Association has spent more than $46,000 in radio, television and automated phone advertisements over the last 10 days, urging Ann Arbor residents to defeat a ballot proposal that would change how the city publicizes legal notices.
One of the MPA’s measures is “robo-calls,” the automated home phone calls that have become a fixture in larger statewide and national campaigns. City officials say they’ve gotten complaints from residents, many of whom have received least four different calls in the last 10 days.
Documents filed late Tuesday with the Washtenaw County Clerk’s Office show the Lansing-based MPA gave the Committee to Protect the Ann Arbor Public’s Right to Know $44,942 for a commercial blitz on local radio and Comcast cable stations up until the election.
At issue are two amendments to the City Charter residents are being asked to approve on Nov. 3. One would give the Ann Arbor City Council authority to determine how to publish legal notifications, including online postings in lieu of print publications.
The ads have been running during local commercial time slots on Comcast stations, and frequently on WWWW-FM, WQKI-FM, WTKA-AM, and WAAM radio.
The MPA also paid $1,250 to a Virginia firm to saturate voters with “robo-calls.” One, featuring a man’s voice, says:Â
- "There's a good chance that soon you won't even know if it's time to raise our millage rate. They're trying to change our city charter so that important notices, like proposed millage rate increases that cause our property taxes to go up, no longer have to be published in the newspaper where you're likely to see them. Instead, they have to post them only on the city's Web site. Tinkering with the city charter is a bad idea that makes it harder for us to find out critical news affecting our homes, neighborhoods, schools and jobs, but makes it easier to post fraudulent information online. Vote no on Ann Arbor proposals A and B. Sacrificing our right to know is just too high a cost."
The second amendment is specifically tailored to zoning ordinances, which by law must be published in a newspaper within 10 days of enactment. If passed, the charter would be amended to allow publication in any other media permitted by law, including the city’s Web site at www.a2gov.org.
City officials say the changes are necessary to modernize the charter, save money and keep the city in compliance with transparency laws in the aftermath of the Ann Arbor News’ closure in July.
But MPA spokeswoman Lisa McGraw said the group’s membership believes the changes will impact the public’s right and expectation to know how local government operates.
“Public notices should have achievability, be accessible and be used by an independent third party that can be documented historically,” McGraw said. “It’s part of the public’s right to know.”
City Council Member Leigh Greden called that argument catchy for campaign purposes, but said it doesn’t take into account Ann Arbor’s unique situation.
Greden, the outgoing Democrat representing Ward 3, said he supports the changes and believes publishing notices online would enhance the mission of public notification.
“We’re one of the most tech-savvy cities in the state, and the Web is far more accessible to far more people than any print publication serving Ann Arbor,” he said. “This is not about public service or government transparency. For the opposition, it’s about money and nothing else.”
State law defines a newspaper of general circulation as any publication with paid subscribers that has been in existence for at least a year.
AnnArbor.com, which publishes print editions twice a week and is owned by The News’ parent company, won’t qualify to publish legal notices until next July under the current city charter.
Both Ann Arbor and Washtenaw County have turned to the weekly Washtenaw County Legal News since the end of July.
McGraw said other communities could follow Ann Arbor’s lead and self-publish notices if the measures pass.
Also joining the MPA in the fight is the Michigan Environmental Council, which issued a letter opposing the charter changes Tuesday but has yet to contribute to the committee.
“As defenders of Michigan’s public health and natural resources, we have a strong interest in government transparency and access for all residents,” wrote MEC President Chris Kolb, a former Ann Arbor city council member and state representative. “Notification of significant public policy activities in print journals of record - supplemented by online notifications - is the most transparent and reliable way to meet those goals.”
The committee also reported an $800 contribution from Ann Arbor resident Steven Norton, who indicated he was a self-employed consultant; and $500 from Ann Arbor-based Iris Drycleaners, Inc.
Greden and other city officials said they’ve received dozens of complaints from residents about the robo-calls, which he believes are misleading.
One call hypothetically threatens zoning ordinance changes that could allow chemical plant construction in the city without public knowledge.
“The notion that anything of that magnitude happening at City Council without public knowledge is ridiculous,” Greden said. “Clearly they’re using bizarre scare tactics that indicate just how out of touch they are with Ann Arbor.”
Greden also said he’s concerned political groups outside Ann Arbor are trying to interfere with city policy decisions.
The opposition committee formed Oct. 15 and missed the initial financial disclosure deadline last week, records show.
Documents list a non-partisan affiliation, but the committee treasurer, Mason resident Mary Doster, is a Republican Party activist who was recently named treasurer of Republican State Sen. Tom George’s gubernatorial campaign.
Doster said Tuesday she’s just a bookkeeper for the committee and deferred all questions to Jeff Timmer, a founding partner of the Sterling Corp., a Lansing-based consulting firm that specializes in political and public affairs.
Timmer, who was executive director of the Michigan Republican Party from 2005 until earlier this year, confirmed Sterling Corp. is working on behalf of the committee but deferred further comment to McGraw Tuesday.
McGraw insists the effort to defeat the ballot proposals is non-partisan.
Ann Arbor resident and long-time attorney Elmer White said he plans to support the charter changes without hesitation.
“The requirement that legal notices be published in print media goes back to the early 19th Century. What Ann Arbor city government is trying to do is to drag us into the 21st Century,” he said. “The train has left the station.”
The city has information about the proposals posted on its Web site at www.a2gov.org/elections.
• Read the city's fact sheet
Art Aisner is a freelance writer for AnnArbor.com. Reach the news desk at news@annarbor.com or call 734-623-2530.
Comments
Steve Norton, MIPFS
Thu, Jan 28, 2010 : 9:41 a.m.
I've just run across this article in a search, and want to set the record straight. The contribution reported from me, and from another local business, were contributions to the Citizens Millage Committee for the Washtenaw Schools Millage campaign. That document, which was a late contribution report from the CMC, was posted with the files of this Committee opposing the city charter changes in error by the County Clerk's office. They have since rectified that error. A careful review of that document at the time would have shown that the name of the ballot question committee listed was, indeed, the "Citizens Millage Committee." This document can now be found with the CMC's online filings, in its proper place. It would be nice if AnnArbor.com would annotate the story to reflect these corrections, since the story is still online and will be read and indexed for the foreseeable future.
Duane Collicott
Wed, Nov 4, 2009 : 1 p.m.
"But for Proposal B, it is probably best to stick with newspapers for another couple of years." Janelle, we don't have a newspaper any more. We can't stick with a newspaper that didn't stick with us.
Rici
Wed, Nov 4, 2009 : 10:39 a.m.
For those of you asking along the same lines as happysenior: "Who decided that the Washtenaw County Legal News was adequate disclosure? That decision sounds like the city council and the mayor are trying to hide information from the public." It's *STATE LAW* which decided the WLN was adequate disclosure. The newspaper has to have been in circulation for AT LEAST 1 YEAR. The print edition of annarbor.com has only been in circulation since August, so it doesn't qualify. The only paper in this area with a high enough circulation and long enough history is the Washtenaw Legal News. (Does the Observer qualify? Or is the problem there that it's monthly? It certainly wouldn't work for timely notification!)
brad
Tue, Nov 3, 2009 : 2:14 p.m.
I will vote no for three reasons. This is a long-term solution to a short-term problem. By July 2010, AA.com will be in print for a year, so the city can resume publishing with the "newspaper serving our community". The mysterious and mercurial properties of the web are not proper for formal public announcements. Could the city simply change it's website and claim the notice was posted? With a physical 3rd-party record, that prospect is less likely to succeed. Last, cost/benefit. The city might save a few thousand a year. That's not enough to outweigh the risks stated above.
DagnyJ
Mon, Nov 2, 2009 : 6:28 p.m.
Thank you Tony. Wow, that's a lot of money to publish ads that no one really reads. If you include planning and zoning, there's probably enough there to pay an entry-level city employee salary...
Tony Dearing
Fri, Oct 30, 2009 : 3:57 p.m.
Anvil and Paul, we had to do a little research to find the answers to your questions. Local governments do pay to place legal notices in newspapers. Here is what Ann Arbor City Clerk Jacqueline Beaudry told us about the costs: "Last year the City Clerk's Office spent approximately $35,000 in advertising. This figure does not include cost incurred by other departments for notices, such as Planning and Development. We were able to cut approximately $10,000 from our budget when the Council eliminated the rule requiring the publication of the agenda each week. I don't have exact figures for the costs of publishing ordinances or public hearing notices beyond our total advertising budget. Also, keep in mind that even if the charter amendment passes, many notices, including zoning notices, would still be published in a paper per State law.'' Also, the circulation of the Washtenaw Legal News is about 1,500. The daily circulation of The Ann Arbor News about about 40,000 and the circulation of our Thursday newspaper is also about 40,000.
Dave66
Fri, Oct 30, 2009 : 9:48 a.m.
I think Rena hit the nail on the head. This isn't about public access to city business, it's about the MPA looking out for its bottom line. Maybe there's some principle buried under there somewhere, but the MPA is just concerned about the impact to their revenue.
Rena Basch
Fri, Oct 30, 2009 : 8:29 a.m.
There are over 40-some (mostly antiquated) Michigan laws that require municipalities to publish notices in "newspapers of general circulation." Publishing these notices is NOT FREE as someone thought. As the Clerk of a small township we've spent THOUSANDS of taxpayer dollars per year publishing the required legal notices. I can't even guess how much taxpayer dollars the Ann Arbor City Clerk's office must spend to publish these notices. How many people do you think are reading them? Did you get your news from the "public notices" section of the classifieds in the old Ann Arbor News? Of course the Michigan Press Association is trying to block this change which would severely impact their taxpayer revenue stream.
Craig Lounsbury
Thu, Oct 29, 2009 : 6:51 p.m.
The fact that the Ann Arbor News closed shop should not be an excuse to change the city charter to allow the city council even less transparency than their trusty laptops already provide.
Paul A.
Thu, Oct 29, 2009 : 3:31 p.m.
Just wondering how many of your readers actually know of or have read the Washtenaw Legal News? How many readers do they have compared to the old Ann Arbor News or annarbor.com?
ResidentAnvil
Thu, Oct 29, 2009 : 3:01 p.m.
I am curious how much money the city says they will save by not posting in the "newspaper"? I always thought the public announcements that were printed were free to the governments. How much more difficult could it be to email the announcement to the "newspaper", while posting it to the city website?
Ruth
Thu, Oct 29, 2009 : 2:07 p.m.
I plan to vote to pass these charter amendments. As I read the description, the City Council will decide where proposed changes will be published. So the notices will not be limited to the Internet. We should not be tied to an unavailable daily paper.
Juliet Pressel
Thu, Oct 29, 2009 : 10:49 a.m.
There are two separate problems here: one is the proposed change, and the other is the obnoxious and intrusive method used here to oppose it. No one should imagine that print publications are obsolete, whether in Ann Arbor or anywhere else. Leigh Greden and his omnipresent laptop do not set the standards for the rest of the world. The fact that internet access is easy does not make it universally available or convenient, and there will always be citizens whose political participation will be impaired because on-line access may be less available or convenient to them than print. So, I agree with the MPA on that matter. What I DON'T agree with is the use of robocalls. Not only are they so inherently offensive that I refuse to listen to them, but in this case, they undermine the very cause the MPA is intending to support. Which is, using print. In fact, if the City of Ann Arbor were to take a leaf from the opposition's book and include notifying citizens by robocall in their proposal, the MPA would be hoist by their own petard.
C. Alfaro
Thu, Oct 29, 2009 : 10:45 a.m.
Maybe we need a Town Crier or may post changes on a board at City Hall. Robo calls are so invaisive and annoying I will not answer my home phone. What happened to my do not call list?
Bill
Thu, Oct 29, 2009 : 10:32 a.m.
Advertise on radio all you like but stay off my phone. I may vote for it now after all these robocalls. Five? Seven? I've lost count. One is too many.
Susan Cybulski
Thu, Oct 29, 2009 : 10:09 a.m.
It's very simple: Public notices should be published both online and in print.
B. Corman
Thu, Oct 29, 2009 : 8:24 a.m.
People need to understand that the problem is that we don't have a local newspaper? This has nothing to do with the government trying to sneak something by the public or hiding information. The choice is to print in an obscure newspaper, the Washtenaw County Legal News, that most of the public will never read or will be forced to pay a subscription fee or a Detroit news paper which has a limited readership in our area and that costs much more than what the city paid using the ann arbor news. I can't believe that people would want that? It is contradictory to the spirit and meaning of the original intent. Just publishing somewhere, regardless if anyone sees it, it is not public notification. No one is going to look in these obscure places for a notice. A system set up so that residents have a place to go find information is public notification. For this unique situation, printing notifications online is justified and should be approved. In our unique situation with no local newspaper, arguing the principle "print is better for public notification" is arguing for the people to be less informed while filling the pockets of the newspaper owners.
Anne R.
Thu, Oct 29, 2009 : 7:31 a.m.
I am concerned about our possibly losing a print message about City Council actions. Council can use the web, as well. The widest possible distribution of Council information is important to keep citizens informed. The robo calls are obnoxious, however. It's a shame to think people may vote "Yes" just to spite the robocallers.
Dave66
Thu, Oct 29, 2009 : 7:28 a.m.
I'm very pleased with AnnArbor.com for publishing this article, because now I FINALLY know who's been robo-bombing my answering machine. I sometimes get multiple calls per day. I hope someone from MPA monitors these comments so they can know that I will make it a point to vote for the exact opposite thing that they want. Anyone who is so invasive, irritating, sneaky and sleazy can't possibly have my best interest at heart. Prior to the robocalls, I had no opinion whatsoever and was going to abstain on this issue. I really don't care one way or the other. But now I will cast my vote to defeat whatever it is that that MPA wants.
A Voice of Reason
Thu, Oct 29, 2009 : 6:21 a.m.
SENIOR CITIZENS--Passing this amendment will not be good for you and your voters. A lot of senior citizens rely on the hardcopy of the newspaper for their information vs. the internet. GET YOUR FRIENDS OUT TO VOTE "NO"!!!! SENIOR CITIZENS STAND UP FOR YOUR RIGHTS!!!!
HappySenior
Thu, Oct 29, 2009 : 6:15 a.m.
So, instead of the government being proactive and informing the people they are supposed to represent, the people are supposed to check the city website on a daily basis to see if there is anything the government wanted to let them know. And how easy will it be to find this new information on the city website. And who was there to ask questions of the city and be sure all the facts are reported. There may be some generation gap between people who read newspapers and people who get their news somewhere else. Some of the comments here are offensive to say the least. The people who tell the story against the proposals are somehow immoral in the eyes of the people who support the proposal. Can the people against the proposals call the supporters immoral because they believe that older citizens, people without internet access or understanding, and the homeless are not entitled know what the city government is planning, doing, or discussing? Who decided that the Washtenaw County Legal News was adequate disclosure? That decision sounds like the city council and the mayor are trying to hide information from the public. I am curious how many of the people who are so against political call at home are the same people who make cell phone calls in public, while they walk, and while they drive. I am voting no on both proposals. We need to shed more light on what the city government is doing and planning. We need more information, easily accessible, and verified by a third party. To those people who think robocalling is violating the public trust, I say abstaining from citizenship is violating the public responsibility.
WRTurner
Wed, Oct 28, 2009 : 10:40 p.m.
I don't know enough about this situation to comment with authority, but I would generally always be suspicious when politicians want to make changes that makes their goings on argueably less transparent. This arguement about how easy the internet is to use is moot, it's government's responsibility to announce to all what they are doing by most reasonable means. Not all people are going to use the internet, especially older people who aren't comfortable with it/don't want to be comfortable with it. Also, people seek general info in news publications thus announcements are more likely to be seen, versus actively logging onto a government website to seek out info. One is much more likely to reach more people than the other. Once again, the theme here is transparency. Make them stand up in the town square and spell it out. They are slippery as eels folks. Personally, I'm not going to cut any level of government slack. Hold their feet to the fire, make them answer questions, make the answers known to all. If we stuck to that, we wouldn't be where we are now.
ypsituckey1
Wed, Oct 28, 2009 : 10:12 p.m.
Why is Steve Norton, co-chair of the Citizens for Responsible School Spending contributing to this effort? Wish he would apply to the same standard to transparency in educational spending!!!!
grimdaddy1
Wed, Oct 28, 2009 : 7:44 p.m.
Macabre-Older people have just as much internet access as the rest of us. There's no reason they can't get online. Computers aren't hard to use. As for the homeless - many can and do use the public library, where there is free access to the internet. Homeless doesn't mean helpless. homeless can't use library computers without a library card and to get a card you must have a home. you cannot just walk inot a library and surf the net without them first making sure they belong to the library. and many older people may have computers but not the know how to find websites and more importantly navigate them if they find them. why can't they do both the paper and website?
aareader
Wed, Oct 28, 2009 : 7:21 p.m.
The paper version of AA.com currently comes out just 2 times a week. How many read it now? It would appear fewer people will know about "official" announcements from the "paper" than other sources. "This bus has sailed" Let the city officials make the picks for sending out information. Who knows they may still include info in local papers.... if there are any left. BTW I like newspapers but this media blitz points to desperation. REQUIRED local "official" announcements will not save them.
Linda Diane Feldt
Wed, Oct 28, 2009 : 6:59 p.m.
I have received 9 robocalls, on my cell phone. Not a single one identified who was paying for the calls. To ask for open access to information and at the same time hide your own financial interest is unethical. For that reason as well as the obnoxious scare tactics in the scripts, the organization behind this - the Michigan Press Association - does not have my support, and no ethical group should ally with them. This campaign is a far greater abuse of communication and trust than the actual proposals. Unsolicited anonymous misleading calls are more than just annoying.
Anonymous Commentor
Wed, Oct 28, 2009 : 6:44 p.m.
I have received three "robocalls" so far. Based on my irritation with that alone, I will vote for this ballot proposal.
Craig Lounsbury
Wed, Oct 28, 2009 : 6:06 p.m.
"Anyone who uses robocalling is violating the public trust. Our telephones are not advertising vehicles." Anyone who conducts the business of "we the people" in secrete using laptops to exchange e-mails and thus circumvent open government violates the public trust in the most despicable way possible. This is what our elected officials have done to the citizens of Ann Arbor. They treat us like surfs,the "unwashed masses" in their fiefdom. The city council has proved unworthy of our trust. To hand them any new powers is lunacy. While I find the robo calls only slightly annoying they are not a danger to my freedom like the city council is.
Chanchito
Wed, Oct 28, 2009 : 3:36 p.m.
The phone calls are definitely using scare tactics. We have received about 6 of these. They are wasting their money and our time.
Macabre Sunset
Wed, Oct 28, 2009 : 3:28 p.m.
Isn't that a lot like insisting the US Mail continue to use horse-and-carriage to make deliveries, when everyone else is using automobiles? Older people have just as much internet access as the rest of us. There's no reason they can't get online. Computers aren't hard to use. As for the homeless - many can and do use the public library, where there is free access to the internet. Homeless doesn't mean helpless. Now this is an organization that is funded by commercial interests using telemarketing to spread a commercial message. It should be an illegal use of the telephone. But because politicians voted themselves an exception to the laws everyone else has to follow, this group can take advantage of the loophole as well. A moral organization wouldn't make these robocalls. Which means I will go out of my way to vote against them.
Janelle Baranowski
Wed, Oct 28, 2009 : 3:27 p.m.
What is bothersome about the language is the phrase: - "or by any other means or methods determined by City Council appropriate to properly inform the general public in matters of municipal concern" - Proposal A is about ordinances that have already been announced and have been enacted. I have no problem with posting them on the city website. - But for Proposal B, it is probably best to stick with newspapers for another couple of years. - www.some-other-viewpoint.blogspot.com
ypsituckey1
Wed, Oct 28, 2009 : 3:15 p.m.
I read the newspaper and thank goodness for this association and their robo calls. Older people do not have access to the internet nor to our homeless people.
Macabre Sunset
Wed, Oct 28, 2009 : 3:11 p.m.
Anyone who uses robocalling is violating the public trust. Our telephones are not advertising vehicles. Personally, I think the laws are abused in this manner and I would vote for the charter change. No one reads newspapers any more. Requirements should be increased in terms of notification of service for lawsuits.