Political Cartoon August 2, 2010

With the Primary election on Tuesday, the Little Mayors are back. They are making a list and checking it twice.

Opinion: HDC should support Solar project at City Hall

by Dave Strenski

We have the final design. We have the money. We have the community support. All we need is the HDC to approve the project. Please spread the word to help convince Ypsilanti’s Historic District Commission to approve this project.

The Ypsilanti Solar Project is on the Historic District Commission agenda for this Tuesday evening October 14, 2008 at 7:00pm.

Dave Strenski will be addressing the Commission to ask for approval to install 12 solar panels on the back of the City Hall building. We need as many people as possible to attend as a show of support. The Commission is divided about whether to approve the project.

We have compiled a report of all past HDC minutes and City Council minutes pertaining to this project, plus an 1887 picture of City Hall from James Mann’s 2002 book, Ypsilanti, a History in Pictures (Arcadia publishing, Chicago).

Over the past 18 months the HDC has generally expressed support for this project, while also asking many questions about aesthetics, precedence, and impact on the building structure. Most recently the HDC requested a review of the design by a licensed structural engineer. On October 8th Fitzpatrick Structural Engineering completed this review, and we now have a final design which will not damage the old brickwork, and which may actually strengthen the building’s wall.

You can see the design on the Sustainable Ypsilanti website. (3.7MB)

You can also read about the project in an article from the Ypsilanti Courier.

There will be an opportunity at the beginning of Tuesday’s meeting for public input on agenda items. Below are a few points people could mention:
Continue reading the story

Political Cartoon January 24, 2008

Editorial: Pay raise for DDA director is emblematic of problems in Ypsilanti

The Depot Town DDA just granted Downtown Development Authority director Brian Vosburg a 6% pay increase retroactive to July 1, 2007. We are not begrudging the raise, though in this economy and constantly hearing from the Mayor and city officials that they don’t have money and the continued threats by city officials to lay off police and fire, we wonder about the size of the raise and the timing.

The issue we have is how the raise was granted. In talking with DTDDA board members after their meeting today, they were surprised to learn that Vosburg had received a 3% pay increase just one month after starting his job in June 2006. Those board members polled after the meeting did not understand that their action and vote today granted Vosburg a pay increase from July 1, 2006.

That 3% raise in July 2006 was a clerical error made by the City’s Finance department. Vosburg was not eligible for the raise as he had only been working for the city one month.

The error wasn’t caught until a year later in the summer of 2007. Instead of the City taking back the excess pay, which is what most employers do, the DTDDA and DDA let the raise stand. Then, by their unanimous vote today, the DTDDA formally granted the DDA director a new 6% raise and then made it retroactive to July 1 of 2007. What they did not understand is that their vote granted Vosburg the 3% raise he was paid in error by making that pay increase retroactive to July 2006.

This 6% pay raise is troubling on two points. First, the idea that a department manager would receive an automatic 3% pay increase just one month after being hired is stunning. Immediately after the error was found, the excess pay should have been withheld from the employees check. Most large organizations will work out a repayment process over time so as to minimize the impact to the employee. The money was paid in error and it should have been returned to the City. Vosburg had neither earned or was entitled to this pay increase and it was never approved by either DDA board.

Secondly, the process of approving the pay increase is troubling. The DDA director receives pay from two funds, the Downtown Development Authority (DDA) and the Depot Town DDA. Yes it is true, Ypsilanti has two DDA districts.

The DTDDA contributes just 25% to the directors salary the rest comes from the DDA. However, with the DTDDA setting the compensation level by their vote today, they in effect force the Ypsilanti DDA to agree to the same salary arrangements even though the Ypsilanti DDA hasn’t yet met to discuss Vosburg’s evaluation and compensation.

Instead of playing one board against the other when it comes to deciding the compensation for the DDA director, the DDA and DTDDA should have formed a joint committee of both boards to review and evaluate the director’s performance over the past year. That joint committee would then bring the evaluation back to both boards for approval. This is how it was done in the past and frankly we are baffled why this process was not used this year. We are also shocked and so were several DTDDA members to learn after the meeting that they had approved a retroactive pay increase effectively going back to July 2006 and approved a 3% pay increase for the director just one month after he was hired.

This joint committee should also be looking at the total compensation package for the DDA Director. The DDA director makes no contribution to his health care or benefits package, which costs the Ypsilanti DDA an additional $22,000 a year. The Depot Town DDA does not contribute to the directors health and benefits package.

Both DDA’s should have been looking at the total compensation and benefits package for the DDA director and not just simply salary.

We urge both DDA’s to put the brakes on any further pay increases for the DDA director and encourage both boards to form a joint evaluation and compensation committee and bring those recommendations back to the full board. This process must be open and transparent to the constituents and taxpayers of the DDA and DTDDA districts.

In the mean time, neither DDA should agree to a 3% pay increase for the DDA director because of a clerical error. An accounting error was made. You don’t compound that error by granting a pay raise retroactive to just one month after the DDA Director started his new job in 2006.

Political Cartoon November 5, 2007

Next Page »