Mayor Wheeler on Rents, CDRS, and Community Growth

Democrat Albert Wheeler was elected the first black Mayor of Ann Arbor last April by the slim margin of only 112 votes over incumbent Jim Stephenson, a highly conservative Republican banker and attorney.

For over a month the Republicans challenged Wheeler 's winning margin and the new system of Preferential Voting which resulted in his victory in a three way race against Stephenson and Human Rights Party candidate Carol Ernst. The Republicans did not allow Wheeler to take office until a court ordered Mayor Jim to step down.

With Wheeler's certification as the winner, the minority GOP lost its two-year majority on City Council, which it gained in 1973 due to vote-splitting between HRP and Democrats before the advent of Preferential Voting.

Those two years of GOP rule sent the city reeling backwards, eliminating most of the progress which had been achieved from 1972-73, when council was ruled, as it is again today, by a liberal/radical majority composed of Democrats and HRP members.

That year of a progressive majority resulted in the city's $5 fine for marijuana, funding for human service programs like day and health care, anti-discrimination ordinances and other pieces of useful legislation.

Now that the Democratic/HRP coalition, albeit a sometimes shaky one, is back at the helm, the Republicans are of course working to set the stage for a return to power next April. Due to the present Council makeup of 5 Republicans, 5 Democrats and one HRP member, Kathy Kozachenko, the Republicans have only to win the 4th ward next April, along with their traditional 3rd and 5th ward strongholds, to regain their majority.

Naturally, their strategy to this end consists mainly of attacking the present coalition, and in particular Mayor Wheeler. All kinds of superficially-based mudslinging has been coming at Wheeler from the Republicans, parroted to the public by the GOP-controlled editorial policies of the Ann Arbor News. Wheeler rarely gets a chance to reach the public intact as he really comes across in person.

The struggle for the fourth ward next April will be critical for the city's future. Students in particular will play a major role in the outcome of that situation. The proposal now before city council to allow constitutionally protected door to door voter registration could go a long way towards insuring the youth and student support needed to keep power from falling back into the hands of GOP bankers and businessmen of the least sensitive variety.

The SUN is presenting this interview with Wheeler as part of a continuing series to let people find out about this man in his own words, free from the distortions of the News. Al Wheeler has been branded as an outrageous radical for most of his life for simply demanding human rights and equality for black people as a civil rights activist for over a quarter century. His approach to the Mayor's office has brought it a freshness and openness which has to be appreciated in the context of what has preceded it.

SUN: How have you found your first few months in office?

MAYOR: It's been invigorating, but in order to really accomplish some of our goals I think the way this government is organized needs to be changed. My greatest disappointment is that there are so many routine housekeeping chores, and with the city administration really in charge of government they keep inundating you with these chores that keep you from getting to the real issues. You know I've got to sign contracts, for example, but I have to read them, I won't just sign them, as did some of my predecessors. I've found some very gross errors.

First of all, I think the mayor's job ought to be full time, or at least recognized as such, because it is. I also think the mayor and council members should be paid so they can devote their full time to this work. Right now I get $3,000 for more than full time work, and the council members get nothing at all.

Secondly, I think elected officials have to be in charge, but the way things are at city hall they aren't, unless they exert really strong pressure. Unless they do, then by default the bureaucrats run the city.

SUN: Can you give us some examples.

MAYOR: Let's take the budget. He who sets the budget runs the government, and the way the city charter is set up the City Administrator (Sy Murray in this case), prepares and sets the budget. Unless there are 8 council votes to overrule it, his budget stands. Now with the political breakdown as it is in this town, you won't ever have 8 votes on one side The administration controlling the budget controls the policy of the city, and I've found that a very formidable challenge. Simple vote majorities on council ought to be able to direct the way the city goes—you shouldn't need 8 votes to override the administrator—that gives him too much power. Whether he's good or bad isn't the point, he shouldn't have that kind of power. And anybody who doesn't understand how budget determines what happens in the city ought to be home sleeping.

Right now the administration has 18 or 19 department heads, they have assistants, so they have like 40 or 50 people planning for what administration sees should happen. But the elected officials aren't full time, don't get paid, and don't have any staff whatsoever. So for us to study contracts and keep track of routine chores keeps us from getting to the 4 or 5 major changes we want to make in government. I have to put time into reading about sewer shortages instead of starting something like a Human Services Department. See, the city charter went into effect in 1956, and at that time the Republicans controlled this town lock, stock and barrel—

SUN: They didn't need to have the mayor be paid, or council members—their banks could support them while in office. . .

MAYOR: We need charter revision in this town so elected officials are in control. It needs to be put on the ballot.

"The Human Services Department as I envision it would encompass human rights, public information, and community services such as health, legal and day care."

SUN: You've been accused, especially by the Republican-backed Ann Arbor News but also the Michigan Free Press of "ignoring" a "citizen's committee" which recommended how to make use of the city's Community Development Revenue Sharing money from the federal government. Could you explain why you want to over-ride some of the proposals of this "citizen's" committee?

MAYOR: First of all, that was a Republican committee, headed by Clyde William Colburn, handpicked by Republican Mayor Jim Stephenson. It represented their point of view, and ours is different. Second, the problem with their recommendations is that they want to give half the CDRS money over to normal city services that should instead come out of the general tax revenues. (Ed. Note: The CDRS program was enacted by Congress to replace money originally going to various anti-poverty programs, and was earmarked for programs directed at low and middle income people). They wanted 100 thousand bucks for a new fire truck, 250 thousand to resurface streets, something like 40,000 bucks for tree pruning. These should be normal city functions. CDRS is not meant to be a substitute for the city. Also, the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development, which administers the program, sent me a letter recently, and said no to three of the programs proposed by the Colburn committee as being outside the purpose of CDRS. They said they had tremendous difficulty in approving part of the city's program, that some of it was improperly earmarked, and then they suggest that next year we start the CDRS process earlier so we could be more specific than we were this time.

We intend to revamp the proposal and give more money to social and human service programs, like legal aid, child care, etc. We're going to concentrate on areas of the city which need physical improvement that have been neglected in the past. We want to tie in the CDRS money with CETA (Comprehensive Employment Training Act) funds and have a more comprehensive & coordinated program. The Colburn Committee wanted to spread the whole CDRS money over too wide an area- we want instead to concentrate on certain areas and have a real program. It's like giving everybody ten bucks the way they have it set up, and you can't do a damn thing with ten bucks in a year.

SUN: When will the reorienting take place in terms of votes on council?

MAYOR: In about a month. And it isn't that easy, either, again because of the way the budget is controlled. Now I'm telling you this for the first time publicly, that we have 2 1/2 million bucks in CDRS, we have a million or so that comes in as general revenue sharing, which usually gets put in the general fund for the administrator to deal with, and we have more than a million in CETA money. In the past decisions on the spending of these funds have been left largely to the administration. My intention is to insure that elected public officials will have the determining voice in the specific allocation and use of this money.

SUN: When you ran for office you talked about a department that would be in charge of overviewing human services, social service programs and their funding. What are your plans for implementing that concept?

MAYOR: The Human Services or Resources Department as I invision it would encompass the functions of the human rights department, public information and community services such as health, legal and day care. Under legal there'd be consumer action. It's a program that we are going to try and pull together soon that serves the people. We're gonna try to have a 5 year plan on it, like they do for capital improvements like road-building and the like. I've given a rough outline to the administrators and my council colleagues. We're talking about a unit of government, with an administrator and several assistant coördinators.

SUN: Would this be a department of City Hall?

MAYOR: Given the way things are right now I'm tempted not to put it in City Hall, which goes back to the question of who controls the budget. I don't intend to sit here for another year and a half and allow things to go on as if Jim Stephenson hadn't been thrown out. If it ends up part of City Hall then you can conclude that I have some understanding with the city administration on how the program is going to work. Otherwise we might set it up as an authority or commission, which takes six votes.

SUN: How would it be funded?

MAYOR: It would be like what I talked about a minute ago, drawn from community and general revenue sharing, plus some CETA funds. We may have to take the CDRS thing in stages, and spend half of it now and hold the other half until we get this thing rolling. But it's gonna be different. I wasn't running out there and making a lot of loud noises about having a different kind of leadership in this city without meaning it.

SUN: As promised during the campaign, you've appointed a commission to study the possible implementation of a fair rental practices act. Some people are upset that you didn't just come out and offer an act that was ready to go. Others have complained that the committee you appointed is so balanced between pro-rent control and landlord management interests that they won't be able to come up with anything adequate. How would you respond?

MAYOR: I have chosen the course of action of the committee because one, I want any decision to be based on a complete assembling of all factual data, so that a good majority of the public, who defeated rent control two years in a row, will accept it, and also so that whatever law we do adopt will stand up in the courts. I personally believe that there are rent abuses in this town, in terms of what people are charged, and the services people have gotten. There are serious abuses, there's also a shortage of housing. The problem is most severe around the university area, but it also goes outside that circle. There are people who live outside the campus area, lower-level employees making 8 or 9 thousand bucks a year, and dammit when you make that much in this town and have two or three kids you're in trouble.

Now let's talk about that committee. There are four people on it who represent landlord or property-management people. I counter-balanced these with 6 tenant-type people. The other eight are kinda citizens like you and me who are willing to look at the facts and say we gotta do something. And by the way, the President of McKinley Associates has offered the committee his books, to show what his rents are, his costs, and his profits. These will be certified books, and you know the people on the committee aren't dumb, so if they get a dummy set of books, that'll come out, too. The previous rent control study commission set up by former Mayor Bob Harris concluded it didn't have enough hard data with which to make a decision. This committee will have all it needs. The committee will also have some funds, to travel and otherwise

continued on page 19, Student Guide

Wheeler continued from page 4

"All these super chains from outside the city don't care about its character. What's happened to Maynard Street is a good example."

study the situation, and come up with a proposal based on facts which can be well received by the public and in the courts.

I want to see that we have reasonable rents, that landlords don't take advantage of the shortage, that we have some way of monitoring and controlling what happens between that big landlord and the single person renting an apartment, to make sure that no one is making any 20 or 40 per cent profits on their apartment box. l'm hoping for a recommendation from the group by March, with a preliminary report in two months.

SUN: Why do you think McKinley, the biggest property management firm in the city and one charged with many abuses, is being so cooperative?

MAYOR: Well, the landlords have spent $90,000 over the past two years fighting the rent control charter amendment proposals. $90,000, from housing profits. They know the proposal is going to come up every year, costing them money, unless some of the problems are solved. I think the landlords should be assured of a reasonable rate of profit, because right now that's the system we have. But they can 't screw anybody in the process. . .

SUN: You've no doubt walked down Maynard Street, now known as Burger Row, and I wonder if you have any reaction to what's happened to that street?

MAYOR: I remember when Maynard Street had a couple of small restaurants, a couple houses, a theatre, the Arcade—it had a whole different atmosphere, it had character. Well, you get all of these super chains from outside the city grabbing money, they don't really care about the character. We lose trees because of elm disease, we lose houses because of money disease. We allow our community to be changed. Maynard Street is just a very sharp example of what happened in this town under the policies of the previous majority. But one thing the young people around campus should take pride in, is they made MacDonald's do something nicer and less offensive than anyplace else in the world. And you can't just talk about Maynard Street. Look at the entrances to the city. Washtenaw Avenue coming off US-23 used to be very beautiful-it had houses, and trees, and when you drove down it you knew you were coming into Ann Arbor, because it had that image. Now it's all auto places, supermarkets, and fast-food restaurants. US-23 to Main Street is also a jungle. It's a helluva way to invite people into the city. Now I don't want to live in the past, but I also don't want to see the present and future so very distorted.

SUN: Can Council stop these strip developments in the future?

MAYOR: Council can stop them as long as they have the guts to try. We have several requests in front of us right now.