Washtenaw County Road Commission board to remain at three members
Washtenaw County commissioners agreed Wednesday to halt the process to expand the Road Commission's board from three to five members. But that doesn't mean the debate is over.
Commissioner Wesley Prater made a motion to end the process to expand the road commission’s governing body, which passed despite opposition from commissioners Jeff Irwin and Conan Smith. Irwin then informed the board he would bring a resolution back at the Aug. 4 meeting.
Irwin said after Wednesday's meeting the legal process to expand the Road Commission’s board required first holding a public meeting, which occurred Wednesday evening. The county commissioners then needed to vote on a resolution to approve its expansion.
County Commissioner Conan Smith is a proponent of expanding the road commission board.
Irwin contended Prater’s motion to end the process carried only symbolic or political meaning, but was not legally binding. He said a resolution on expanding the body still needed a vote.
“This gives a sense of where the board stands on the issue, but I didn’t want it to be a surprise if it came up for an official vote at the next meeting,” Irwin said. “I think it’s still ripe legally, if not politically - based on sentiment of the board it seems unlikely to be successful.”
But several commissioners who voted to end the process said they were satisfied the issue was settled, and another public hearing would be required in the event of another resolution. Board counsel agreed the motion ended the process, but Irwin said he intended to check the law.
Two Road Commission board members are from eastern Washtenaw County, while one is from Scio Township. The road commissioners’ base salaries are $10,500, with an additional roughly $10,000 paid toward travel, computer, phone and training expenses. Several board members said they couldn’t justify paying for more road commissioners when the county’s roads are in such poor condition.
Irwin said greater expertise and geographical variety could be brought to the table without increasing costs by spreading the three commissioners’ salaries over five members. He added the current board membership “doesn’t do justice to the broader representation we need on that body.”
Smith said he didn’t believe the board had an adequate discussion on the topic. Like Irwin, he argued better geographic representation and greater expertise in areas like finance, engineering and transportation would serve the road commission well as it faces financial challenges.
He questioned whether three board members were enough to handle the issues they face.
“Frankly, to just allow us to maintain the status quo when there is a disaster facing our transportation system is just irresponsible,” he said.
Prater, who is the board’s liaison to the Road Commission, acknowledged the Road Commission faces a dire financial situation, but said its board has a plan to deal with the issues.
Prater estimated the Road Commission will receive roughly $14 million from the state’s motor transportation fund this year, which is down from its peak of $16 million several years ago.
He and several other commissioners said they have seen a marked improvement in the Road Commission - especially in the area of customer service - in recent years. He expressed confidence in their ability to remain successful.
“They really have turned a lot of things around so that they do recognize their customer and that starts at the commissioner level down to the smallest compensated employee,” Prater said.
County Commissioner Kristin Judge said she initially supported the idea of expansion, but heard from her constituents that they strongly opposed spending more money on commissioners.
Commissioner Jessica Ping said expansion was a “great concept” that would address questions over Open Meetings Act requirements and provide better countywide representation, but she too was concerned over paying for more commissioners.
“Fiscally, it doesn’t make sense to add two people at the current salary they’re at,” she said. “I can’t justify adding two additional commissioners at their salary when seven bridges are closed in the county.”
Editor's note: This story has been corrected to reflect that two of the road commissioners are from the Ypsilanti area, not western Washtenaw County.
Tom Perkins is a freelance writer for AnnArbor.com. Reach the news desk at news@annarbor.com or 734-623-2530.
Comments
Ron Torrella
Mon, Jul 12, 2010 : 7:13 a.m.
@AlphaAlpha "No; that is not the question at hand, and is quite settled." Perhaps too "settled," then. "No, one good commissioner is better than five mediocre commissioners." Well, I wouldn't expect 5 mediocre commissioners to be seated. You wouldn't want to be a part of that body, right? I'm sure this county has more than enough capable, interested citizens who could do the job very well for a fraction of the cost. Or, are you suggesting that a single "good" commissioner is making the decisions for the currently seated three? That's interesting. Do elaborate.
snapshot
Fri, Jul 9, 2010 : 4:24 p.m.
I agree with Irwin and Smith, we need better, and broader representation on such an important board that controls so much money. Judge also has a good point about making these folks accontable via public election. What I find interesting is that construction folks oppose board expansion. That speaks volumes and is telling me we need more representation. I don't know what Ping is getting at with her justification of maintaining the status quo because of bridge disrepair. To me that fact is screaming for more representation. There is definitely something wrong with this commission as is.
Kristin Judge
Thu, Jul 8, 2010 : 10:40 a.m.
@John Q The compensation for a Commissioner cannot be changed during their term in office from what I have been told. We are looking into the law. If that is the case, the current commissioner in year one of a six year term would be making more than the other two for a few years. I have also asked our corporation council to look into the law regarding having the Road Commissioners elected by the entire county just as the Sheriff and Treasurer are. They should be chosen by the people they serve and not appointed by the Board of Commissioners.
John Q
Thu, Jul 8, 2010 : 10:15 a.m.
The logical thing would have been to add two commissioners and to reduce the pay so that the cost for the 5 would have been the same as is spent on the 3. Can anyone provide a reason why that couldn't have been done?
AlphaAlpha
Thu, Jul 8, 2010 : 9:05 a.m.
"Either it's a fully paid job with benefits or it's a volunteer position. Let's settle that, first." No; that is not the question at hand, and is quite settled. "But, IMHO, only three commissioners on a board that represents all of Washtenaw County is ludicrous and poor representation." No, one good commissioner is better than five mediocre commissioners.
comm.man3000
Thu, Jul 8, 2010 : 8:58 a.m.
Penny wise, pound foolish. There are so many ways, so many opportunities - both technological and through disparate cultural connections - in which a 3 person board simply can't keep pace and help create the future. This board of commissioners seems to be seeing one tree after another and not seeing the broader pic. With the existing 3-man road commission worrying about retirees and making the existing employees/organization work well, good luck on any mo' in getting those bridges fixed!
Ron Torrella
Thu, Jul 8, 2010 : 8:25 a.m.
Given the punt "salary" (really, $10K is a stipend, right?), why don't we just have an all-volunteer Road Commission? I'm not monetarily compensated as a Road Committee member in the Township where I live, nor was I compensated for the work I did on the board of directors at the condo where I live. How many hours do they spend in a given week on Road Commission work? Maybe the thinking needs to start at why we're compensating our Road Commissioners as much as we are. They apparently get an allowance for expenses related to their duties as commissioners. What more do they really need? Either it's a fully paid job with benefits or it's a volunteer position. Let's settle that, first. But, IMHO, only three commissioners on a board that represents all of Washtenaw County is ludicrous and poor representation. Ron Torrella Pittsfield Township
jcj
Thu, Jul 8, 2010 : 8:14 a.m.
@ AlphaAlpha Bravo well said! Irwin and Smith need to drive around in the county some time and see how many bridges are closed. This is a major inconvenience to people in these areas and dangerous when emergency services are needed! I have witnessed 1st hand emergency vehicles looking like the keystone cops last year trying to figure out how to get west of Steinbach on Liberty. I wonder how many of these bridges would be deemed "unsafe" if those making the decision live near one of them? They need to have strict weight restrictions on them and if some numskull in a vehicle too heavy causes damage sue his/her insurance company for the repairs.
PhatChick
Thu, Jul 8, 2010 : 7:23 a.m.
More heads are Better than three of you.
AlphaAlpha
Thu, Jul 8, 2010 : 6:12 a.m.
"[Irwin and Smith] questioned whether three board members were enough to handle the issues they face." Respectfully, sirs, if you can't do the job, please step aside.