Week in Review: Veil of Ignorance
"Forgive me, Mr. Mackie."
Week in Review
City Council, Monday, July 7
Public Comment
To frame Ms. Hardway’s comment—the sole public comment—we must add a short preface. City Staff disputed an MDOT report that the City will have to pay $400,000 instead of the previously-advertised $200,000 for the City’s share of the Road Diet. At the previous meeting, Council voted as if the contribution was to be the latter. In addition, the agenda for this meeting included a merit raise for City Manager David Mackie, who makes over $200,000 per year and doesn’t live in the City he manages.1
Jill Hardway, on Mr. Mackie’s pay raise: “I have key concerns regarding the merit pay for Mr. Mackie as it relates to the Michigan Department of Transportation Road Diet project in Hillsdale.”2
On doing more work than most of Council: “I called MDOT today in Lansing to ask questions. . . [they] stated the non-participating cost is around $200,000 on top of $200,000 to match the 20% of the grant funding. I asked if the City Manager and specifically Alan Beeker had this information. He responded by saying, ‘I can’t imagine they didn’t know this.’”
Facetious and incisive: “I am wondering if all the members of City Council were aware that this would cost $400,000. . . and I find it very hard to believe that any one of these very intelligent, fiscally responsible Council members would have voted Yes for this if they knew the truth of the costs.”
On possibly killing the Road Diet: “I am wondering if Mr. Mackie and Mr. Beeker informed the Council of this information. If the answer is No and you voted Yes to push this project forward based on the cost of $200,000, this topic needs to be revisited. And if this is true, I do not believe that Mr. Mackie deserves any merit pay.”
Road Diet
Mr. Mackie responded later in the meeting, suggesting that he and other City Staffers believe that the new cost projection is a mistake on MDOT’s part.
Mackie: “We haven’t had time to sit down with MDOT, and Alan Beeker is on vacation out of town.”
“Jason [Blake] and Alan both thought—well, they know—that the parking lot is included in the [originally projected] million dollars.”
“If it is $400,000, that is news to us as Staff.”
Councilman Bentley, drawing the subsequent ire of Jack McClain: “First, I’d like to note again that Mr. Beeker isn’t here for the third meeting in a row.”
On Council’s ignorance: “If MDOT and expert City Staff aren’t on the same page, then. . . none of us at this table have any idea what we’re talking about either.”
FOIA Fee Forgiveness Request
Though we will not concern ourselves with the minutia of this matter, we thought it useful—nay, Decorous—to pull a quote from the Mayor Pro Tem, who in a sentence perfectly characterized this City Council’s voting habits:
Paladino: “I just wanted to see if we were, in principle, voting behind a veil of ignorance.”3
City Manager Merit Pay Raise
The City Manager received a cost of living raise, and also desired a two percent merit raise of $3400, bringing his total pay package to $225,000 per year. Motion from Councilman Morrisey to approve the merit raise; second from Councilman Flynn.4
Councilman Socha, trying to be Negative before faltering and begging for forgiveness: “Um, so with the information that we received this afternoon—last year I think it was all put out at the same time, like if I remember correctly, about the [cost of living adjustment] increase and everything. That was just a little—you know, I mean: Dave, could you just give me a few examples that you think—forgive me, Mr. Mackie—that you think warrant two percent?”
Mackie cited road repair that has been financed largely with SADs, as well as the completion of BPU projects.5
Socha: “I was just shocked by the, at the—I’m conflicted right now. I would appreciate a little bit of discussion.”
Councilman Gerg: “Everyone’s biggest complaint is the roads in this town. . . where are we at?”6
Mackie: “In about ‘16 we came up with the Fair Committee, which came up with the whole Special Assessment recommendation.” Mackie proceeded to list roads that have been repaired via SAD.
Bentley: “Manager Mackie, of that litany of roads you just named, how many have been in the last eight months?”
Mackie, interpreting eight months as twelve: “I’d say Monroe, and. . . Griswold and St. Joe and others.”
Bentley: “By my count since I’ve been here in November, we will have fixed 0.22 miles of our 48 miles of badly crumbling road.”
Bentley, seizing the moment: “I think it’s no secret that I’m not going to vote for this merit pay, but I think I should probably have a few bullet points as to why.”
On Mackie’s love of SADs: “The Barry Street SAD compromise which was on the table: Mr. Mackie, you undermined every attempt to fix that street. That does not merit merit pay.”
On Mackie’s interference with Council business: “We had a contentious issue about Officer’s Compensation—our compensation. You come to us now for merit pay after you sabotaged that committee and did not let them reconsider?”
On Mackie’s undercutting of elected officials: “Your. . . insubordination. . . to Mayor Pro Tem Paladino in the months of February, March, April does not merit merit pay.”
On Mackie’s Negative Culture: “And finally: this Culture of Negativity which you have cultivated, and accused—and had others accuse some of us—of being Negative. Well, here’s the Negativity: I will be voting No on your merit pay.”
Mayor Pro Tem Paladino: “The current salary is $211,915—$84,766 on the City side; $127,149 on the BPU side. After the 2.5 percent cost of living this year, that will bring the total to $217,213. And then with the merit pay it will bring the adjusted total to $225,902.”
Speaking all-too-reasonably to a Council of ignorami, performance artists, and snoozers: “I object to the length of the terms of the City Manager contract. The Charter says 1-5 years. . . I think that creates a danger for representative government when the term length can even in theory exceed the term length of the elected officials. . . I do believe two years is best, because that means every Council gets to vote on the Manager. I would be amenable to a four-year hard restriction so that each Council member gets one vote on the City Manager.”
Continuing: “We effectively have a parliamentary system. And in a parliamentary system the key to maintaining representative or democratic control is that each new representative gets a vote on the whole package. . . In [my and Councilman Wolfram’s] tenure, we won’t have a clean vote on the contract, period.”
Roll call vote:
Bruns: No
Flynn: Yes
Morrisey: Yes
Socha: . . . [twenty seconds of silence pass between the calling of his name and his vote] . . . Yes
Stuchell: Yes
Wolfram: Yes
Paladino: No
Bentley: No
Recall, reader, that Mr. Mackie got himself another raise a mere eight months ago. His pay package has increased by over $20,000 in less than one year. All we can do is recite a word Bentley directed at Mackie some time ago: Kudos.
Sale of City Property Downtown
The City Council sold some land to St. Anthony’s Parish.
Paladino: “They initially offered us $40,000. The City appraised it; it came back at $40,000. The Finance Committee met. . . to discuss this.”
Morrisey: “We [the Finance Committee] unanimously agree to accept this.”
Paladino, now Squirreling Away: “Do we an opinion on that, whether St. Anthony’s can put the money in the Community Foundation in exchange for this property sale since it’s going to be a tax-exempt parcel, probably in perpetuity.”
All in favor of the sale.
Public Comment
Jack McClain, highly Negative!: “Part of the harassment I see to the people of the city coming from the Council members is to Mr. Beeker. As it was said, he has not been to three meetings. Which, I don’t think he was requested to be there. If you want him there as a Council member, it’s your job to request him.”
On stupid questions: “If you don’t have the ambition to read your packet, don’t be wasting the rest of the Council’s and the City and the public’s time asking stupid questions.”7
On Town & Gown Theory: “It’s time the townies of Hillsdale got their group together. . . and got a person to run for. . . Mayor who needs to run for Mayor. These migrant, part-time City people that want on all these committees and everything—it’s a bunch of bull.”8
On Bitchin’ Bob: “The person to elect: Mr. Bob Flynn. He can be a write-in. . . Mr. Flynn needs to be the next Mayor.”9
Not his best work: “Just because people got Book Smarts don’t mean they got any Common Sense at all.”
City Manager’s Report
The Keefer closed Howell Street for construction for several weeks. They paid a price of $75 to do so.
Jason Blake, DPS Director: “Paving is potentially scheduled for late next week, to open the week of July 20th.”
Paladino: “Do they have to pay a general road closure permit fee?”
Blake: “Their application was $75.”
Bentley: “I would like more accountability. Like, not indefinitely close the street to their neighbors.”
Paladino: “At some point it should be a daily charge. . . because that’s a fairly major thoroughfare.”
Council moved to send the investigation of altering road closure permits to the Public Services Committee.
Socha, Bright & Beautiful: “I struggle with the idea of financial retribution for a business that’s trying to do so much.”
Paladino: “I don’t mean to frame it as retribution at all. It’s just there’s a cost to the residents there, and there’s an externality borne by the public.”
Mackie, fact checking: “Councilman Socha: to your comments about the City adding stuff, the City Staff does not agree with your assertion. We’ve had pretty specific requirements from day one, and they’ve tended to forget some of that. . . The extra concrete work: that was always part of it from day one. And they’ve just flat-out refused to do it.”
Socha: “Was that agreement in writing?”
Mackie: “We have minutes that reflect that.”10
Socha: “Well that’s troubling.”
Council Comment
Bentley, on the topic of next week’s Hillsdale County Review: “The Negativity Report, about Gier: Can we have that?”
Mackie: “Yes. I received permission from those two individuals to make that public if necessary.”
Bentley, on the Diet: “Whatever resolution we gave [MDOT] is not sufficient. They’re going to need more resolutions from us. . . There’s still a lot of meat on this bone.”
County Commission, Tuesday, July 8
N.b., due to editorial time constraints, other segments of the Commissioners’ meeting as well as some reflections on the history of this LifeWays bond will be covered in next week’s issue.
Public Comment
The public, as usual, opposed the bond which had received the support of three members of the Board all the way through.
George Allen: “I am speaking to urge you to vote against the bond issue on behalf of LifeWays. . . LifeWays is free to pursue a commercial loan without the backing of the County, and should not be putting the taxpayers at risk by asking that the public credit be laid on the line on their behalf.”
Joseph Hendee: “You’re locking LifeWays into the County for another twenty years. . . If you vote Yes on this, we’re coming after your seats.”
Mike Smith: “I have a very poor view of this because it’s all from internet hearsay. . . Is there a risk mitigation plan?”
Jean Heise: “It is important that this issue be put on the. . . ballot. . . It is our dollars that are risk. Not only for my generation, but for the next generations.”
Ginger Novak: “An entity which survived off of taxes drawn from Hillsdale County taxpayer funds from the federal government is anticipating a loss of those funds due to the federal voting choice that Hillsdale County voters made in November.”
Kelly Mapes: “I hope it’s been worth all the work, the lies, the deceit, the mistrust.”
Christina Bruns: “The people who signed the petition came from all areas of the County and had varying opinions both for and against LifeWays as a corporation. However, every single person was unified in the sentiment that the bond should not be issued by the County.”
Joshua Waechter: “My understanding is that Commissioner Collins has explicitly said on the record that he was not going to vote for this measure if it would prove that it would be financially damaging to the County. I think given what’s come out in the last several weeks about cuts on the federal level and state restructuring that it seems obvious that this is going to be the case.”
Matthew Bentley: “Congratulations—you have a way out. They cut all the funding. This ought to be an easy vote now. So do the right thing. Save face, and save our County.”
Parker Hjelmberg: “We ought not trust that because a bureaucracy or because an organization says that they set out to do something that they are necessarily going to achieve it. . . What I see this bond measure doing is removing our ability to hold them accountable.”
Lance Lashaway: “You’re going to vote Yes today, and I’m really looking forward to it. Because what you’ve done is you’ve managed to unite the County against you. . . So thank you for voting Yes.”
Steve Lanius: “We voted this down twice. The question remains: why did it come back a third time? What’s the underlying motive for bringing it back a third time?”
Todd Gault: “The timing is not appropriate.”
Brigette Paladino: “The federal government plans to cut 26 percent of DHHS funding next year, which will severely impact LifeWays.”
Ashley Risher: “Over the last 45 days I have been working with Citizens for Hillsdale County. . . Most of us didn’t even know each other before we started this. . . There are over 2,480 signatures from this County that want this to go to the ballot, so that we have a choice in this as well.”
“You have, Mr. Leininger, said it’s fiscally irresponsible to spend $100,000 on an election. . . But it’s not irresponsible to issue a $15.5 million bond to a company that just announced a 26 percent decrease in available funding and is looking at restructuring?”
Jacob Bruns: “I have two requests: the first that you vote against the bond. And the second, if you vote for it. . . please offer an explanation for why you’re deciding to do so. I have yet to hear that. I would like to hear, and I believe the people would like to hear.”11
Jim Graves: “I concur with everything I’ve heard here today.”
Authorize Bond Issuance for Community Mental Health Agency
Commissioner Bert: “As I read Act 34. . . we as a Board of Commissioners could not vote as a body to put it before the citizens.”
Commissioner Benzing: “Are there other statutes that would allow the County Board of Commissioners to place an issue for issuing General Obligation Tax Bonds before the voters.” Attorney: “Yes.”
Commissioner Wiley, trying to recruit the attorney for his partisan aims: “We have quite a few public here today. I talked to you Thursday as far as proceeding with this resolution. Would it be possible for you to capsulate the key points that you and I talked about?”
Attorney: “If you have a specific question that I could answer.”
Wiley, on the distinction between “authorizing” and “issuing”: “Passing this today does not necessarily automatically issue the bond. We simply are taking the next step.”
Attorney: “That’s correct.”
Ingles: “How would this body stop the bus if the bonds were authorized, but not issued today?”
Bert, desperate: “If the issue is passed, one of the Commissioners who voted in favor of that could bring that back for reconsideration.”
[Unruly chorus, unimpressed.]
Benzing, playing chess: “I would like to propose an amendment to the resolution, replacing it with “The Hillsdale County Board of Commissioners places before the electorate at the August 2026 primary election the question, ‘Should the County of Hillsdale issue its limited tax general obligation bond in an amount of $15.5 million for the purpose of constructing a Community Mental Health Facility.’”
“I think we have seen the overwhelming outpouring of opposition to this question. I think that we have seen before us in excess of 2,000 citizens of the County who have placed their names on petitions, and I think that we owe them the opportunity. . . I think that this is bigger than the five of us.”
Motion from Benzing; supported by Ingles.
Ingles: “Hillsdale County is responsible for payment on the loan. . . if there is a shortfall by LifeWays. The loan is a 30-year commitment at a time when there are too many questions.”
Collins, Benzing, Ingles in favor; Wiley; Leininger opposed. Loud applause ensued.
While we take a moment to congratulate the Commissioners who opposed this bond and the citizens who aided in those efforts, we ask the reader to render them another service: recall the members of the local establishment who have supported the bond in public writings: JarJar and Scott Hodshire; Judges Sara Lisznyai and Megan Stiverson; Chair of the Hillsdale County Republican Party Brent Leininger, and longtime Staunch Conservative Mark Wiley.
A Visit from Rep. Wortz
Rep. Wortz arrived having just barely missed out on the fun.
“In Lansing we are at a bit of a gridlock.”
“It would be prudent to tighten your belts.”
“There are some other issues that we were waiting to see at the federal level: Medicaid, Medicare funding.”
“In the House, our priorities are education and local road funding.”
External Links
“We have initiated internal discussions regarding alternative solutions that are both practical and responsible as we move forward.” David Lowe, Acting CEO of LifeWays.12
“Whether it’s a birthing unit shutting its doors or the entire hospital going under, that access isn’t just lost to the Medicaid population.” JarJar Hodshire.
“Local officials worry the federal government’s work to slash spending and reign in deficits could do more harm than good — particularly when it comes to healthcare in smaller, rural communities.” HDN.
“In combination with the recent loss of federal DHHS funding, the MDHHS restructuring could spell financial trouble for the organization, some citizens have argued.” Hillsdalian.
Under managerial logic it makes sense for the manager to not live in the city he manages, lest he become partial toward that city, which could lead to horrors unimaginable.
Whither Ms. Swan at a moment such as this? Whither Corey Murray? Their anxiety about SADs and the City’s poverty has seemingly evaporated overnight.
The answer, which must be much to Paladino’s dismay, is almost always an indisputable Yes: the veil of ignorance, a custom for the Council, not only involves one’s own castration, but the celebration of that castration. I will give up every preference, every inclination, every interest that my constituents have in order to become a purified public servant, says our majority to themselves.
This self-liquidation is known as Positivity, total deference to Staff, which is freedom of a Brighter & more Beautiful sort. (In our analogy, freedom from one’s male anatomy.) To act outside of the veil of ignorance—what Mr. Jeff King so astutely refers to as “Progressivism”—is to be accused of Negativity, i.e., of occasionally voting No.
Bitchin’ Bob had the following to say about Council pay raises in April:
“If there’s $105,000 sittin’ in the budget we’re not doin’ anything with, by God, put it towards the streets, don’t give it to us! That’s what you’ve all been bitchin’ about since I got on Council back in November.”
How is it considered meritorious to repair roads by finding new ways to coerce cash out of citizens?
Gerg has been unable to control his emotions regarding Mr. Mackie’s performance in the past: “This is an outstanding City. . . And what makes it so good is that we are a City Manager-run system, where we have a City Manager.” Using Gerg’s standards, are there any limits to how much Mr. Mackie ought to be paid? He, after all, brings us our outstandingness and our goodness.
Do any Councilmen aside from Paladino and maybe a one or two others read the packet? We say No. At least half of them have to re-learn the City’s basic policies as they come up anew each time.
We would point Mr. McClain to some of our recent writing on this very topic. Also, does Mr. McClain live in the City?
Did Mr. McClain see Flynn’s X activity before the account disappeared? Would that change his opinion?
Are minutes from a meeting binding in any way? Socha ought to have pressed this issue, though it makes sense that he would not given his vote for the raise.
So says the Councilman who routinely fails to “offer an explanation” for his own votes.
Truly an astounding statement, an admission that the former plan was neither practical nor achievable. This organization apparently planned to make you and your neighbors pay for a plan that they now admit was neither of those things.
The interested reader might peruse the comment section of the YouTube video.
Just as a point of reference, I have served 4 years as an Alderman on the Stoughton, Wisconsin City Council (pop. ~12,000), and was chair of the Finance Committee for 2 of those years, so I am not uneducated as to what it takes to responsibly run a city.
Without getting into specifics, this council, as a whole, is the most incompetent group of so-called leaders I have ever witnessed, with the possible exception of the County Commissioners.
I wish ignorance was the only veil that they were living beneath. At least ignorance can be corrected by knowledge, should they actually wish someday to pursue it.
Jack "don't internet", Honestly it's best just to listen to Jack. He is nearly always correct. I'm not in any way a fan of Mr. Beeker's work but if he was not requested by council..... and if your not going to planning commission meetings....?
That being said, what's going on at Hillsdale Township planning commission meetings needs a serious eye. Before WE have windmills menacing town like giants.
It says "county review", Hillsdale Township is ripe for satire, scorn, and scrutiny.