Posted on Sun, Nov 15, 2009 : 6 a.m.
Albert Berriz's opposition to millage was self-serving
By Letters to the Editor
It is interesting to note that in Albert Berriz's many anti-school millage campaign pronouncements and in his Nov. 8 exultation of his triumph, he failed to mention that he and his company (McKinley) are huge property owners in Washtenaw County. Thus any school millage would add to the property taxes he pays and, therefore, cut into his profits.
I suspect that his efforts to kill the school millage is strongly motivated, if not solely motivated, by his desire to protect his profits, even if it means cutting the public education programs of this county. Roger G. Stutesman Ann Arbor
Comments
allergictobs
Sat, Dec 12, 2009 : 11:59 a.m.
Don Bee Challenged "Gentle People" to reserve judgement on Mr. Al Berriz and his donation, quoting; "I would suggest we wait for the various reports to come in and David Jesse to report on how much money each group spent. I think we will find that both the "Pro" and "Anti" groups probably spent about the same amount of money. I will withhold my comments until then. I would suggest you do so as well." Well the results are in. The anti millage folks donated $101,000 with $100,000 coming from a single donor, Al Berriz and McKinley Properties. The pro millage supporters donated $57,000 with the largest single donor being at $3,000. It is very clear the election was bought! What say you now Don, Thoughts and perspective are appreciated.
Basic Bob
Tue, Nov 17, 2009 : 9:06 a.m.
I don't think it helps anyone to identify a scapegoat for the failure of this proposal. One's motivations and suspicions are irrelevant to the outcome. Voters were saturated with mailings and yard signs from both sides. After entertaining *both* arguments, voters based their decision on the merits of the millage and their personal living condition.
DonBee
Mon, Nov 16, 2009 : 12:30 p.m.
Gentlepeople - I would suggest we wait for the various reports to come in and David Jesse to report on how much money each group spent. I think we will find that both the "Pro" and "Anti" groups probably spent about the same amount of money. I will withhold my comments until then. I would suggest you do so as well. Everyone who invested on both sides of this issue had self interest from the "Pro" side that was supported by School boards, unions and employees to the "Anti" side that was supported by tax payers. Lets wait for the final reports to come in before we sling arrows.
RayA2
Mon, Nov 16, 2009 : 12:23 p.m.
Mr. Berriz makes regular and generous donations to the Repubican party. This makes sense for him. The only group the Republican party truly represents is Mr. Berriz'z economic group. All other issues they claim to represent are only used to gather votes. Think about, for example, while the Republicans have been in power, how much headway did they make in outlawing abortion? The real fools are those who aren't in Mr. Berriz'z economic group, but still swallow the lies his party uses to attain power.
cook1888
Mon, Nov 16, 2009 : 8:28 a.m.
I have heard the name Berriz, but was not contacted by his group and no nothing about him. All the people that voted against the millage were self-serving. The economic situation in this state and high taxes are killing businesses and hurting individuals. I don't think most people are against schools or teachers, but if you are struggling to make ends meet, how can you vote for higher taxes? I don't recall anyone who was in support of this millage acknowledging the fact that a lot of people in this state are in financial trouble and what seems like a small increase in taxes to some is devastating for others. All I think the people who voted against this expect is for the schools to tighten their belts like everyone else. If you are somehow thriving is this economy step up and donate to the schools.
toomuchtodo
Sun, Nov 15, 2009 : 8:58 p.m.
Regardless of the amount of money that Mr. Berriz spent, or whether his intentions were of noble or selfish pursuit, I am an idealist who doesn't think money alone can "buy" people's votes when their hearts and minds aren't in agreement. If this were not true, Mr. Devos would be governor, and vouchers would have been approved during the last ballot intiative, as there was plenty of funding behind those campaigns. http://www.rethinkingschools.org/special_reports/voucher_report/v_bank.shtml
TruBlue
Sun, Nov 15, 2009 : 2:13 p.m.
Why all these letters bashing Mr. Berriz? I never even heard of him or his campaign until AFTER the vote. In any case he is entitled to work for his cause whatever his reasons.
clara
Sun, Nov 15, 2009 : 8:35 a.m.
Unfortunately, you miss a fundamental part of economics. If the property taxes go up on apartment buildings, then the owner would need to raise the rental fees. This would hurt all the tenants who I doubt have their income rising to cover the additional rent they would have to pay.