4

4 GROUNDCOVER NEWS LETTER TO THE EDITOR Ranked Choice Voting Dear Ms. Price, Please publish this as a letter to you, for sharing with your paper’s readers. The October 4, 2024 issue of Groundcover News ran an article on page 7, which article was submitted by me, and ran under the title, “Ranked Choice Voting — enhancing democracy.” You and your readers may be interested in the following updates on the state of affairs regarding the current efforts to get Ranked Choice Voting available to voters in Michigan, in the elections for candidates for Federal and State-wide offices: 1. On June 27, 2025, the Board of Canvassers for the State of Michigan approved the wording of a proposal to be put on the petitions to be presented to the public, to sign to get the issue of Ranked Choice Voting on the ballot to be used in the November 2026 election to amend the State Constitution. 2. Persons supporting the organization behind getting RCV in effect in Michigan, which organization is called “Rank MI Vote,” packed the public viewing area of the room where the June 27 meeting was held; more were seated in an “overflow” room. 3. Scuttlebutt has it that: a) penchant office holders and powerbrokers of both the Republican Party and the Democratic Party, together with top 0.1% U.S. wealth-holders, are broadly united by their opposition to RCV; it threatens their power, and the peculiar interests they serve; and b) large amounts of “dark” money is flowing into Michigan, to fight the RCV movement. 4. In the interest of brevity, I will not here quote the draft of the proposal (limited to 100 words) which was approved by the Board of Canvassers. The draft can be had online. One site having it has the URL: www.fox2detroit.com/news/boardapproves-ranked-choice-voting-summary-residents-will-see petitions. The proposal is at the bottom of the site-page. 5. My article of October 4, 2024 was generally favorable to RCV, but I also expressed some concerns. I remain a little curious as to how well RCV will operate if enacted by the voters, but despite my residual reservations concerning RCV, I am largely convinced that if RCV is enacted, there will be a marked improvement in the general atmosphere in which campaign season plays out, that voters will be much more satisfied with the choices they had to make, the public will be much happier with the election results, and governance will be greatly improved. I will be supporting RCV in November 2026. If RCV as proposed is enacted and then found to need “tweaking,” Michiganders are well able to do it. I do not foresee any August 5, vote no on Prop B Last November the City reserved $1,000,000 from an unanticipated surplus for anticipated losses from Trump's restrictions on federal funds. At the time I proposed they use $40,000 of the $2.5 million surplus for their promised Request for Proposals for next steps on the commons development, which they declined to consider. Then, this April, they undertook to spend what the City Clerk estimated might be a cost of $250,000 for a special August election, a special unnecessary August election. Nothing is furthered by posing the Library expansion and housing project now, with no details, rather than in a year and a half when they might be able to present a beautiful picture of their state-of-the-art desire, which now they leave only to the imagination and promises of good intentions. I asked what is to be gained by an August off-year vote now, contrary to past City policy since 2017 of "never again" for August off-year elections? No answer. I asked again to the Library Board Chairperson, the Library Director and the City Council Member who voted for this as-soon-as-possible election. Again no answer ... because there is no good reason. In my view, this is a calculated political stratagem to blindside the voters who hardly know what has been going on in the Center of the City, after six and a half years of stalling the voter-directed commons development, and new six-month highrise of a spectacular 20 floor double lot new downtown library with housing on top, miraculously paid for itself with no new taxes. Pictures of the Commons proposal, which is to be suppressed, were never viewed by the Council of the Commons or the City Council, though they did get a good presentation in the local MLive paper. Pictures of the new Library-mixed use housing proposal do not exist. I argue that the vote itself is illegal because the City is spending time and money contrary to the City Charter to sell land for mixed use development that is designated in perpetuity as a central park and civic center commons, voted into the City Charter by 26,752 citizen voters, more than the City gets its lawyers to say; that's OK because proposal B repeals the proposed commons out of the Charter and A and B are cleverly linked together. And what if B doesn't pass? Then, all the money and time spent on the election was illegal. Does the City Administrator have liability for the quarter million dollar cost, or the Mayor or each Council Member out of their salaries, authorizing use of taxpayer money in violation of the City Charter? I proposed, so far without success, that a People's Lawyer volunteer to take this illegality to the Circuit Court to get an injunction to stop this Election in violation of the City Charter. The election is on. I wrote a little leaflet; please vote No on A and B on August 5. I hope people have enough opportunity to think about it, and vote to continue the commons commitment for an urban park and civic center, and vote no on B, to not-repeal the Center of the City 1.4 section of the City Charter. I do not want the Center of the City dominated by a maximum tall double lot building, either, whatever it is called. If "No on B" wins, and the City Charter is upheld, then A is moot, or any such sale. I still want a central park and civic center commons; I hope all those who did before, still do want the commons and will call your friends. Personal connections are our If this strength. Enlist your lists. overview can help educate, please use it ... and suggest improvements to greater clarity. Vote No on B. Alan Haber, Ann Arbor Voter major problems if RCV is enacted, and am ready to follow an old adage: RCV should not be compared to some elusive, theoretical ideal; it should be compared to the status-quo. With that approach, I find the status-quo to be seriously inadequate. 6. Rank MI Vote is now approaching the early stages of signature collection. The grassroots movement is gathering momentum; the reader who longs for an improved democracy is urged to pitch in and contribute to their efforts. Rank MI Vote has a website that can be accessed by an easy search on “Rank MI Vote.” It has a wealth of information about RCV and the effort afoot. I also receive regular emails from Rank MI Vote which keep me abreast of current events in the RCV movement. Best wishes, David KE Dodge Thank you Mike Jones Dear Groundcover, I’d like to take a moment to thank Mike Jones for his article called “Art on a Journey!” Not only did it highlight the artistic resources Ypsi/Ann Arbor provides, it highlighted the need to continue making artistic opportunities accessible for all people in our community. I was specifically appreciative of the paragraph that said, “Imagine on this journey you find yourself unhoused. Imagine trying to create when displaced, and constantly on the move. Imagine having all these artistic visions in your head but not being able to manifest them because you are too occupied with basic survival…” I am a teacher and artist in Ann Arbor. If there is any resource for me to get involved with local individuals working to make artistic experiences more accessible, could you please let me know? I also think I bought an issue of Groundcover from Mike this morning in front of the YMCA, so thanks to him for throwing in this additional issue from last week that allowed me to read about this topic that’s close to my heart. Take care, Kaiti McGinn JULY 25, 2025

5 Publizr Home