Schadenfreude
I was fascinated by the results of the Democratic primary today in Ann Arbor. In the First Ward, Sabra Briere beat John Roberts and Richard Wickboldt, Leigh Greden of course triumphed in the Third Ward, and Mike Anglin, in the surprise of the night, defeated Wendy Woods in the Fifth Ward. I thought Briere had a shot in the first since Roberts and Wickboldt were so weak, but I did not think Anglin had a snowball’s chance in hell of taking out Woods. She is multiply incumbent and a generally uncontroversial character, unlike fellow Fifth Warder Chris Easthope. However, without the major defensive moves Easthope displayed last year (big-time fundraising and running “green” leading up to the primary), Woods’ name wasn’t enough this year.
I am almost gleeful in anticipation of the schadenfreude I will no doubt be feeling over the next 2 years — Ann Arbor is going to be feeling some serious buyer’s remorse. “Wait, we just elected a retiree and a B&B operator to govern one of the largest cities in Michigan that’s home of one of the largest universities in the country? WTF were we thinking?” But of course, the clowns who elected these two aren’t the people interested in bringing economic development or making substantial affordable housing commitments in Ann Arbor. Those people who have to create jobs, recruit workers, and market the city with something more than the funky character of its 12 downtown blocks filled with Starbucks outlets are going to be living a nightmare the next two years.
The irony, of course, is that this will create even more of a reliance upon City Administrator Roger Fraser, the DDA, and the Chamber of Commerce to keep the city functioning, recruiting business, and avoiding ice bergs in the North Atlantic, which is bound to make the amber freezers even more irate. (Speaking of the DDA, pity Jennifer Hall, who could have scooped up the First Ward seat with ease, given her vast experience in city government, had she run).
My expectation is that moderates are going to strike back in the next two years, because smart people like Todd Leopold and Hall and Leah Gunn and you name it are going to realize they are going to have to do more to help improve Ann Arbor or the whole damn city is going to end up one big historic district. My hope, I should note, is that we will see a resurgence in the local Republican party.
But what do I know? I’m just a student, not one of the real Ann Arbourites who are “already here.”
Buyer’s remorse, quite possible. I arrived at my 5th ward home Monday late evening to find a piece of campaign literature on the door from the challenger. To say it was shallow insults puddles. With Wendy’s defeat, the Council also loses any voice from the University and in a city like Ann Arbor that’s a problem.
As for a resurgence of the local Republican party though, no. There can be healthy intraparty competition. A resurgence in a party where its considered ok to be a regent at a national research university while chairing the gubernatorial campaign of a guy advocating “intelligent design”? Those aren’t voices missing from the dialogue.
By dan on 08.08.07 9:28 am
“But what do I know? I’m just a student …”
After voting yesterday in the Fifth Ward, I was chatting with one of the poll worker ladies about the relative merits of moving to non-partisan elections for Council, on the theory that we’d get broader participation, broader discussion, etc., if the decision were made in the fall instead of in one of the party’s primaries.
She said she’d be for it. But then she observed that the Council elections had been moved from a spring-time cycle in the past to their current configuration–largely to accommodate students [I'm not sure exactly what the historical facts are there.] And then went on to inveigh against students voting in ‘our elections’. After all, she said, they register merely to get access to the presidential level franchise, which is all well and good, but that shouldn’t mean that they should get to vote to raise our taxes–as they don’t pay taxes. The counter that students who paid rent to a landlord did so at a level that included an amount sufficient for a landlord to pay taxes on the property was met with the bald fact: it’s the landlord who pays the taxes.
On the idea that even folks who had a stake in a community by living here for even a ’short’ while, and being involved in that community’s life and concerns for that time, certainly deserved the franchise, she was skeptical that even 20% of students could be looped into active participation in the community that would allow them to vote in an informed way. [20% was the number I floated as a fraction that might become active and informed if non-student, longer-term residents made an effort to loop students into the 'city', while acknowledging that when I was in college I definitely would have been in the other 80%.] I did not share with her the anecdote of a longtime Third Ward homeowner I was socializing with, who one day before the election conceded that she was uncertain which of the two chicks in her ward to vote for, /lay/ or LuAnne. [Leigh, the first one, is male.]
The poll worker lady was generally pleasant, sincere, and quite cheery, concluding our little chat with, “But Ann Arbor _is_ really wonderful.” There is some kind of joke to be made here about whether you see the glass as half-empty or as completely wonder-ful. I’ll settle for a glass of anything I can drink right now, because it’s freakin’ hot today.
Anyway, if she works the same precinct the next half-dozen elections, I figure I might be able to win that lady over to the idea that democracy really means everybody. It’d be nice though, if enough people were voting that there wasn’t time for her to have a 10-minute chat with me.
By HD on 08.08.07 10:06 am
I wouldn’t be so down on retirees and small businesspeople, if I were you.
First of all, Anglin’s win was no surprise, given that he hugely outworked, outraised, and outspent Woods. In a transient community like Ann Arbor, city council incumbency has little “strength”, and being noncontroversial is not necessarily an asset. You win by campaigning, as Greden, Briere, and Anglin did, and as Easthope did in last year’s primary.
If the council consists of two factions, yesterday’s result represents only a one-seat shift; this year’s pro-development majority will still be the majority next year.
Moreover, I wouldn’t write off Sabra Briere’s commitment to affordable housing, even if she makes the argument that building upscale condos is not the way to achieve it. Frankly, if the prime goal is near-term affordable housing, she’s absolutely right.
Finally, there is really no way under present political circumstances that the Republican Party will resurge in this town. The notion of idiosyncratic local versions of national political parties is quaintly archaic now, like Mom-and-Pop gas stations. National politics has sharpened the Democratic and Republican party brands, and by those standards, only a small minority in Ann Arbor are willing to identify with the Republican Party.
Of course, the absence of Republican candidates or Republican organization doesn’t mean that conservative voters are disempowered. They have simply switched over to voting in the Democratic primary, at least in the odd-year, council-only elections. Presumably they are willing to support, at least, ex-Republicans like Higgins and Rapundalo. As I wrote in AAIO comments, I expect the Ann Arbor News coverage and endorsements were crafted to guide them in a certain direction.
By Larry Kestenbaum on 08.08.07 10:28 am
Larry, I don’t think I’ve heard or read anything from Briere or Anglin that hasn’t been provincial and self-serving, let alone the significant mistakes and distortions on their campaign Web sites. Based on their own words, Anglin doesn’t understand stormwater, for one; Briere doesn’t understand the difference between population density and building height, for another.
I would be willing to cut small businessman Anglin some slack if, for example, his skepticism about downtown development didn’t fit so beautifully into his own business interests. And if he weren’t endorsed by every major figure in the NIMBY lobby.
As for Briere, I believe she is for a kind of affordable housing — the pittance that assuages liberal guilt rather than the structural change along a broad continuum that provides for working class residents as well as the impoverished. But the overreaching Lower Town historic district proposal was a pretty transparent into her values regarding housing in Ann Arbor. Arguing that, in the near term, employing the quickest and most easily understood strategy to address affordable housing (and defending that position) is like arguing that the near term solution to beating a Midwestern heat wave is to leave one’s refrigerator open all day. If the prime near term goal is a cool kitchen and dining room, it’s absolutely right. On the other hand, if the goals are broad accessibility to cool places, mitigation of the effects of the sun and lower energy consumption, you’re going to have to do something about street trees, passive cooling, and better insulation and ventilation. Why would we even suggest standing in front of the fridge?
Anyway, I don’t think of the current council as having pro-development and anti-development caucuses. I think of them as all pretty skeptical (or gunshy), with Greden, Easthope and maybe Kunselman being the most willing to address the significant development problems in the city. Don’t get me started on the NIMBY dog whistle of “sensible development” and “unique character.”
At the risk of being entirely repetitive, I’d say it’s high time for Todd Leopold to get into city politics.
By urbanoasis on 08.08.07 11:34 am
I don’t defend anything either candidate wrote or said. No question, their attitude toward density is not the same as mine or yours. But neither did any of their opponents articulate that kind of vision, probably because that’s not likely to win elections in this town.
In 1999, when I ran for city council in the 4th ward, the Ann Arbor News feared that I’d be the eighth vote in a Democratic “supermajority” (e.g. to override then-mayor Ingrid Sheldon’s veto of a living wage ordinance).
But, strategically, they didn’t write much about that. Nor did they slam me as an ex-chair of the Historic District Commission who would halt change. Rather, in print, they picked up on my density views, and portrayed as a pro-development extremist who wanted big buildings all over downtown. And sure enough, I lost by 79 votes.
Believe me, I know how you feel. I remember bitterly catastrophizing over the result of this or that city council primary in the past (not even counting my own). But Ann Arbor has a big council with short terms. It’s better to take the long view in politics as well as planning.
By Larry Kestenbaum on 08.08.07 12:48 pm
Gee whiz Dale, don’t break your freakin’ arm pattin’ yerself on the back, already! You really ain’t so mucking fuch!
I think you should seek employment in the television pundit biz. Maybe you could call it “Softball with Dale Winling”
Your real calling is in political prognostication, not urban planning. You’re just as accurate and as irritating as Chris Matthews and Sean Hannity. You really know how to throw the big words and phrases around! No wonder you wrote an 11mb thesis. Wast of bandwidth if you ask me, (but then no one did)
My advice? Learn a trade!
By mucho gusto on 08.08.07 9:08 pm
It feels good to have such devoted readers.
P.S. I had a builders license before I went to grad school, Mucho.
By urbanoasis on 08.08.07 9:51 pm
You must know some of this since it’s on the licensing exam.
A builders license is nothing more than a license to do business. By State of MI law, you need one to legally enter into a contract, not to actually build anything. Trade/Contractor licenses are the same. A State of MI license is required to get a permit, but not to do the actual work. Indeed many licensed contractors are proficient at their trade, but the license is only required for contracts and permits. Many licensed contractors do not work with the tools, but hire others to perform the actual work. A carpenter on the job is not required to hold any type of license, only their employer.
In fact, a “builders” license is not required to build a high rise building. At that level anyone can contract to build as long as the specific trades, including the structural work performed by a builder, are licensed and apply for their own permits and schedule required inspections. The design work must be done by a licensed architect or an engineer for that specific trade, but the developer/contractor is not required to be licensed, only their subcontractors.
The proficiency licenses that are actually meaningful are at the journey level. Trade unions are the only organizations that offer the traditional steps for tradespeople at apprentice, journey and master skill levels.
MI requires at least one person of journey level to be on the jobsite when electrical and plumbing work is being performed. This does not apply to builders or mechanical contractors.
How long was your apprenticeship? Did you attain journey level or Master in a trade?
I know dozens of folks with builders licenses and have met hundreds more. Some of them have never driven a nail or cut a board. They took the class at WCC or Henry Ford that guaranteed them to be able to pass the licensing exam. They have the gall to call themselves “builders”. The State of MI builders licensing is a sham that leads people to believe that the person they’re hiring actually knows something about building.
By mucho gusto on 08.09.07 10:45 am
Mucho — I worked some summers for framers and masons to get a feel for building, then got a license with my dad a few years ago. He has frequently been the general contractor for the houses he has lived in and I thought I might like to do some rehabbing but later decided on grad school. I eventually hope to get back to something along those lines after finishing, but we’ll see what happens. I didn’t do any electric or plumbing, nor did I have much interest in it. I would like to get better with trim carpentry.
By urbanoasis on 08.09.07 11:44 am