Corporation Political Giving, Potter Park Zoo Director, DB/DC Hybrid, PLA for Family Center

Sorry for being late with the Blog this week. We had committee Thursday night, so I wasn't able to write this at that time. Luckily, I have a rainy morning to do it this morning!

This week, we had the County Services committee which was fairly busy. We first took up a resolution expressing the county's support for the group Move to Amend. This group is a national organization that wants to overturn the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in the Citizen's United case. This case said that corporations are people and contribute to political campaigns. Move to Amend wants to amend the U.S. Constitution to say (1) money is property and not speech, so it can be regulated and (2) corporations are not people. The Lansing Coordinator of Move to Amend testified in support of the resolution. He said that there is a resolution before the Lansing City Council as well. He also said that in addition to the Lansing group, there are groups in Traverse City, Glen Arbor, and Grand Rapids in Michigan. The resolution passed unanimously.

We then discussed the Potter Park Zoo. In good news, the Zoo was accredited by the AZA (which few zoo's are) when the accreditation folks were here last month. That is great news for Ingham County and the Potter Park Zoo. One criticism in the report, though, was that the executive director has too many levels of people to report to. There were about several levels of decision making after the executive director. The resolution that we had before us addressed that situation. It would make the executive director an employee of the county and directly supervise employees (which is necessary for the accreditation). The resolution gives the executive director $48,000 as a salary with no benefits in addition to compensation from Friends of the Zoo. This passed unanimously. We also considered a resolution that would move the executive director to be an employee of the Controller. She currently reports to the zoo board which reports to the parks board which reports to the parks director which reports to the County Services Committee which reports to the Board of Commissioners. This has too many advisory committees and is too much time in order to make decisions. There were also questions about if there is too much direct reporting to the controller. She currently has about 13 departments reporting to her now. Several member of the committee were hesitant to add another one. There were also questions about creating a new zoo department. I had suggested that we should have the zoo board report to the county services like the fair board does. We will continue the discussion at the next meeting and make a decision then.

We again considered a resolution authorizing the establishment of a MERS Defined Benefit/Defined Contribution Hybrid plan for the Board of Commissioners and Elected Officials. This was referred to committee from the Board, a resolution approving modifications to the 2012 managerial and confidential personnel manual, and a resolution the Establishment of MERS a Hybrid Plans for managerial and confidential employees. We rehashed the same conversations regarding the fairness of each plan, the problems with defined benefit, the risks involved, the potential rate of return percentages, and other factors. The big hang-up on these resolutions is whether or not we should do these before we deal with the union employees in collective bargaining. Some (Grebner and Holman) argued that we should deal with the employees that we can control now and pass these resolutions. Others (DeLeon, Celentino, Schor) argued that we should wait until employee negotiations settle the DB versus DC issue before moving on to our non-represented employees. These resolutions were table in County Services, but passed Finance and will be considered on the Board floor on Tuesday. One issue that came up that was new was how to prevent people from getting a higher rate if they go to another county position? Currently, if a county commissioner receives a 1.5 DB multiplier for 15 years then takes a job somewhere else in the county and receives a 2.25 for a few months, the entire service become a 2.25 multiplier. We all agreed that is wrong. We were told that we could go to an alternative rate instead of standard rate with MERS, but were not sure if this can only be done for transfers or not. Staff is checking on this, and we will make that change if we can.

Finally, we considered a recommendation from our staff to not use a Project Labor Agreement (PLA) when the bid specs go out for the Ingham County Family Center. Our staff recommended against having a PLA because of a recent;y-passed law. Last year, the Legislature passed a law prohibiting PLA's. That law was struck down by the courts. The Legislature then came back this year and passed a law saying that PLA's cannot be used in bid specs. This law has not yet been challenged but many think that it illegal to craft a law that would re-create something already struck down by the courts (according to previous legal cases). Our staff recommended against a PLA in bid specs due to the passage of that law. They said that they would be able to encourage the winner of the project to use a PLA according to the law, but were not comfortable going against the law. Commissioners Grebner and Holman and Celentino agreed with this. They said that we should follow the law and push for a PLA after the bid packets go out. They said to continue to push for a PLA could delay the Ingham County Fammily Center project because of time delays and the need to re-write the bid documents. I made a motion to reject the staff recommendation. I believe that the move by the Legisalture would be struck down by the courts just like the previous law was. If we continue with the PLA and we are sued, I believe the judge would rule the new law unenforceable. Commissioner DeLeon agreed with me and voted with me to reject the staff recommendation and continue on with a PLA. Commissioners Holman, Grebner, and Celentino voted against my motion (again, bevause they were concerned about the delays for the project and they think that a PLA can still be done after the bid packets go out). The motion was rejected and we went along with the staff recommendation to not use a PLA in the bid packets for this project.

The other committee that I had was the Human Services committee. All of the action items were on the consent agenda (many of the changes were already made in Finance, which met the day before and was out of order because of the Jewish holiday). We did hear an excellent presentation on the county dental program. Really eye-opening regarding the need for dental services and the many needs. They are truly doing a great job!

Next week is the Board of Commissioners meeting. We are meeting on Monday night instead of Tuesday because Tuesday night is the beginning of Yom Kippur. Have a great weekend!

PLA's, farmland preservation, WIC, elder abuse, foreclosure and Land Bank forums

This week was a less contentious week for the Ingham County Board of Commissioners. We had only one controversial resolution.

As you probably remember, if you are a faithful reader of my blog, that a few years ago the Ingham County Commission passed a new policy that would require county staff to utilize Project Labor Agreements. These are certain agreements that require a general contractor or manager to negotiate with the bidders to ensure certain conditions are met when county facilities of $100,000 or more are under construction. To date, we have only had three of these. The County Board this week passed a resolution in opposition to HB 4287 and SB 165, which are state laws that would prohibit local units of government from entering into PLA's. Ironically, though, private entities would still be free to use them (such as Sparrow hospital, who has used these for years).

Commissioner Deb Nolan spoke in support of the resolution, saying that the locals should be allowed to govern how they choose. She said that the Legislature was not respecting local control and that we should be able to create our own contracting policies how we want. Commissioner Vickers disagreed, saying that the local control shouldn't infringe on personal rights. Honestly, I have no idea what he is talking about. PLA's don't infringe on personal rights. But oh well. The resolution passed 10-4-1 (one commissioner abstained due to being an advocate against the bill in the Legislature for a client).

Otherwise, we passed several non-controversial resolutions. One would approve selection criteria for ranking landowner applications to the Ingham County Farmland and Open Space Preservation Board. This would be a scoring system. We will be looking at another resolution this week on the same concept, but that will ensure that taxpayer dollars are considered first and foremost in negotiations. We also passed a resolution to create a Women, Infant, Children (WIC) satellite office at the Grand River head start site of the Capital Area Community Services. Another resolution we passed would authorize a grant subcontract between the City of Lansing and Ingham County Prescuting Attorney's Office for the training and prosecution of elder abuse.

In other news, the Ingham County Treasurer has announced a series of Community Forums designed to provide information on the tax foreclosure process, the Ingham County Land Bank and property taxes. A short program on the work of the Treasurer’s office and the Ingham County Land Bank will feature City of Lansing Maps showing foreclosure activity and Land Bank projects as well as discussion of the current status and future of Community Gardening. The goal of the forum is to provide information and solicit public feedback. Light refreshments are provided.

Forums will be held from 7-9 p.m. on the following dates:
Wednesday, April 13th at Gone Wired 2021 East Michigan Avenue, Lansing 48912
(yes, we are a bit late for this one!)
Wednesday, April 27th at the Human Services Building “B” 5303 S. Cedar, Lansing
Wednesday, May 11th at South Side Community Center 5815 Wise Road, Lansing 48911

Have a great week!

PLA, Community Agencies, Commissioners Bupp and Tsernoglou, and the Start of Election Season

The Board of Commissioners took up the resolution to create a Project Labor Agreement for the Rhino exhibit at the Zoo. If you are a faithful reader of my blog (and I hope you are!) then you already know what a PLA. We had public testimony from the Associated Builders and Contractors saying that PLA’s are for union-only shops and are unfair. Several Commissioners during debate rebutted this assertion, though, reminding that our policy is unique and makes it specifically possible for non-union contractors to bid on projects. Non-union shops would not be disadvantaged, and would only have to allow union level benefits and pay for employees working only on that project. The PLA was passed on a 13-3 vote, and the project can now begin.

We also considered the community agency funding. This was a very tough vote for everyone. As discussed in my blog last week, we have a small pot of money that we give to community agencies in Ingham County who do non-profit work. They help out those in need. Unfortunately, the money that we have available is continuously reducing. We need to pay our own employees without laying them off and reducing benefits, so it is hard to give money away to others. In the past, this money has been $300,000 or so, This year, though, it is anticipated to be about $100,000.

We had a proposal before us to instead send any money available to the Power of We for community agency building (which recently lost a federal grant). After discussing this with the Power of We director and some constituents in my district who contact me about the proposal, I decided that it would maximize the dollars more to ensure that the community agency building program kept on running. Sending few dollars to over 30 agencies would not be as effective as ensureing that the groups are doing their work most efficiently. This was a very tough decision, but I believe that it was the best one. We will try this for a year and see what happens. Next year we will review this and see if it still makes the most sense. We will also have a chance to review the program before we actually send the money (when we do our budget later in the year). The proposal passed on a 9-7 vote.

Finally, we said goodbye to Commissioner Shelby Bupp (D-East Lansing). When Commissioner Marc Thomas (D-East Lansing) resigned, Shelby was appointed to the Board. She held that seat until a special election was held. She did an excellent job and we all appreciate her work. Thanks Shelby!!!

We also will welcome new Commissioner Penelope Tsernoglou (D-East Lansing) to the Board at our next meeting. Congratulations, and welcome Penelope!

On the political front…filing deadline has passed. I have a primary opponent in the Democratic primary on August 3rd. He has been aggressively campaigning and has been very critical of my leadership for our district. I will continue to work on behalf of the citizens of my district and all of Ingham County, and will continue to talk to my constituents and get the message out about the important issues. If I am successful in the primary, then I will take on a Republican who filed in November. If you are reading this blog and are a constituent, I hope I have earned your vote for another term. Please feel free to email (aschor@yahoo.com) or call me (485-0926) any time!

That’s it for this week.

Andy

PLA, Saving County $, Community Agencies (and a little campaign info)

On Tuesday, we also considered our first contract proposal under our Project Labor Agreement (PLA) policy. In case you haven’t heard, last year the county created a policy requiring PLA’s for bigger construction projects (anything over $100,000). It was highly controversial and the County Services held many meetings on it and worked with both business and labor to create the final product. I was not on the committee at the time, but worked on this when it came up on the Board floor. The County is planning to do an expansion of the Rhino exhibit at Potter Park Zoo and it will be the first PLA project. This is being done with dedicated zoo millage funds, so don’t worry about general fund dollars being used for this instead of deputies or health department or
anything else.

The controversy came, though, in the way our staff wants to do the PLA. There were two options presented: (1) have the county directly negotiation a PLA with one or more labor organizations, or (2) condition the award of a contract to a construction manager/general contractor. All other PLA’s – Sparrow, MSU, others – have the construction manager or general contactor negotiate with the union. Our staff wanted to negotiate directly for the first project because they wanted to set the first PLA as a basis for all future ones in case there is not the ability for future contract managers or general contractors to negotiate. The problem with that, though, was that this project is big enough to have a general contractor that is able to negotiate. I argued that we should take this on a case-by-case basis because each project has to come to the Board. I pushed for “option 2” to be adopted. In the end, that is exactly what happened. If there are future projects that need to have the county staff negotiate directly, then we can consider it at that time.

In other news, the Drain Commissioner came to County Services and Finance with a plan to save money for him and earn money for the county. How? Well….the Drain Commissioner borrows money for projects from banks and pays a certain interest rate (5% or so). The County invests its short-term tax collections in banks and receives a small interest on that money (1% or so) until it is needed for spending. So, why not combine the two? Why not have the
Drain Commissioner borrow it from the County and pay 3% interest or so? Then the county gains an extra 1% or 2% on interest on the short-term dollars, while the Drain Commissioner saves 1% or 2% on interest. So, we passed a resolution that would do this one time for a limited amount of money. I asked several questions about cash flow and ensuring that this won’t jeopardize county dollars or collections. Both County Treasurer Eric Schertzing and County Drain Commissioner Pat Lindemann ensured the committee that this work just fine, and that it will save money for the Drain Commissioner while earning a little more money for the County general fund. Now that’s government efficiency in motion! Thanks to Drain Commissioner Lindemann and Treasurer Schertzing!

In Finance, we considered how we fund our community agencies. Community agencies are the various groups in the community that do good work. Examples are the Lansing Community Gardens (which provide food for the poor) or the Lansing Area Aids Network or about 30 others. In the past, the county has given a few dollars to each of these organizations to do good work in the community. We cannot be everything to everyone, but we can support these groups to help those in need. The allocation in past years has been about $300,000. Last year that was cut to $200,000. This year, that is expected to eb cut to $100,000. While I have tremendous respect for the work they do, I have concerns about giving this money to outside agencies when we are cutting our own county employees and services. $100,000 is a deputy, or money for a park, or other key services. While I would consider supporting moving community agency dollars to other areas within the county, there doesn't seem to be support for that.

Instead, Commissioner Brian McGrain proposed to send the $100,000 to the Power of We consortium. The Power of We work with these non-profit organizations and show them how to be better at what they do. The concept is...if you give a man a fish, he eats for a day; if you teach a man to fish he eats forever. Instead of funding the programs each year with a very little amount of money from the county, the Power of We can use the money to teach them how to run better.

This proposal to move the money to the Power of We instead of directly allocating it to community agencies passed the Human Services committee on a 3-2 vote. I was not there but I understand that there was significant debate on the pros and cons. The Finance Committee defeated it on a 3-3 vote. The resolution will go to the Board for consideration on Tuesday, and it should be a very interesting debate and vote.

Well...that's it.

Actually, I will tell you one other thing. This week officially starts my re-election campaign. I have a challenger in the Democratic primary this year, and he has been bashing me left and right. Although he just moved into the district, he is telling anyone that will listen what a terrible job I have been doing for my district. I am taking this very seriously and will rise to the challenge. While this blog is usually dedicated to issue work (which my challenger will undoubtedly benefit from), I will also spend some time talking about my re-election. As always, I welcome any support folks can give (contributions, door knocking, etc.). And I look forward to the vote on August 3rd!

Andy