Sophie’s Choice… Ypsi style

Last night, there was a special meeting of the Ypsi City Council. I wasn’t able to attend, but your fellow reader Glen S was. Here’s his report… which is actually about a lot more that whether or not our City Council chose to prioritize one of two potential construction projects.

I attended last night’s special Ypsilanti City Council meeting where elected leaders were put in the unenviable position of having to choose between (sorry, “prioritize”) two Michigan Natural Resources Trust Fund grant applications that could potentially provide seed money to kick-start two extremely worthwhile local projects:

1.) A bridge under Michigan Ave. that would exemplify regional cooperation by providing a vital link in Washtenaw County’s Border-to-Border trail, or –

2.) A rebuild/renovation of Rutherford Pool, which provides safe, affordable recreation opportunities to untold numbers of Ypsilanti children and families.

Unlike in many such debates, it was actually kind of refreshing to see how speakers (neighbors, really, on both sides) were almost unfailingly polite and respectful — each taking great pains to recognize the worthiness of their opponents’ plans and position — while nevertheless making their individual cases for why one project or the other deserved to make the cut.

Still, I ended up leaving the meeting feeling sad and angry… as if I had just watched friends and neighbors being forced into a bizarre standoff over the mere CHANCE of being awarded a grant (albeit one that amounts to a relatively small amount of money, in the scheme of things) — amid a sense of growing urgency driven by the sense that these kinds of grant opportunities may not be available in the future.

If (as federal, state, and local budgets continue to shrink) neighbors are increasingly forced to fight over the “scraps” of what’s left — not only for amenities like recreations trails and pools, but core services like police and fire, then make no mistake — it will be because there is a DIRECT CONNECTION between the kinds of abuses described throughout yesterday’s thread and these threats to our community’s quality of life.

Q: Why are Ypsilanti neighbors who support a public pool or a recreation trail being pitted against each other — while General Electric, one of the World’s largest and most profitable corporations, enjoys a NEGATIVE 60% tax rate?

Q: Why is Ypsilanti being forced to consider trimming current and future wages and benefits for hard-working City employees — when not a single person responsible for the Wall Street “collapse” has ever been held accountable, and many of these same people continue to earn obscene salaries and bonuses?

Q: Why is Ypsilanti facing an accelerating budget disaster and threats of an appointed Emergency Financial Manager with unlimited, unchecked powers — when Michigan Republicans are proposing an unncesary $1.6 billion corporate tax giveaway?

Q: Why are we being threatened with cuts to education spending that are so drastic that continued existence of free, public education in Ypsilanti (and many other communities) is in doubt — while the U.S. is engaged in not two, but now three unnecessary wars?!

My point is this: Why is it that America seems to place a higher value on some CEO’s lavish salary and “bonus,” or another unnecessary tax giveaway to the wealthy and corporations, or for that matter — on one more ($1 million) Tomahawk Cruise Missile lobbed into the Libyan desert — than the very real needs of communities like Ypsilanti, and the people who live in them?

Better yet, why are none (or at least very few) of our so called “leaders,” doing anything about it?

Our City Council, by the way, decided to assign priority to the Rutherford Pool rebuild, despite the fact that, as far as I can tell, the pedestrian bridge project had a much better chance of actually getting funded by the Michigan Natural Resources Trust Fund. At least, that’s what I’ve been told by folks knowledgable about the grant, and aware of the kinds of projects that have been funded in the past. And, then there’s the fact that the pedestrian bridge grant application appears to be much more complete than the one for the pool, as you can see for yourselves. Of course, it might not even matter. It’s quite possible that the folks assessing the grant applications won’t even take our City Council’s preference into consideration.

Personally, as someone who uses the Rutherford pool each summer, I’d be more inclined to support their application, assuming all things were equal. But, when I look at the facts objectively, and consult with my friends that have interacted with the Michigan Natural Resources Trust Fund, I’m left wondering why our city leaders would choose to support the one less likely to receive funding. The only thing I can think of is that they were under political pressure to do so. As people love the pool, which will surely be closed if the required rebuild can’t be done, I imagine they found it difficult to say no. Personally, I hope it works out for the best, and that the pool project secures the money. I worry, however, that’s not to be the case. I think it’s very possible, given this decision, that neither will be funded. Let’s all hope that doesn’t happen.

As Glen points out, however, the real tragedy is that our community is being forced to make these decisions when, truthfully, both projects deserve funding.

On the subject of the Rutherford Pool, I’d just like to add that it’s absolutely unconscionable that a community such as ours, where almost half of our kids live in poverty, and where temperatures commonly exceed 100-degrees in the summer, could find itself without a public pool. Our elected leaders in Lansing should be ashamed.

This entry was posted in Economics, Politics, Rants, Uncategorized, Ypsilanti and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.


  1. K2
    Posted March 30, 2011 at 8:54 pm | Permalink

    Politically speaking, the pool was the only choice.

  2. Alice Krum
    Posted March 31, 2011 at 6:40 am | Permalink

    Both projects are good. The pool is essential, however. That’s the difference. And I suppose that’s why they chose it, even though it was a longshot.

  3. Edward
    Posted March 31, 2011 at 7:36 am | Permalink

    I’d like to chalk it up to political cowardice, and our City Council members not being able to stand up to their constituents and tell them that they’d voted against the public pool, but, truth is, I think they did the right thing. The pool is vital, whereas a bridge connecting the parks would be nice to have. If we have a 10% chance with the pool and a 40% chance with the bridge, I think they did the right thing.

  4. Posted March 31, 2011 at 8:03 am | Permalink

    My understanding (second hand) is that the Council’s prioritization really won’t come into play unless both projects make it past the first cut of applications and are competing against each other in later rounds. Hopefully, this means that the choice will not hinder the trail/bridge project in any way. I will say that I think both projects are important, but agree with the comments that the bridge project is a much more likely fit for the grant criteria, and so a tie is unlikely to result.

    All this is subject to process, politicking, and funding availability, of course. The Trust Fund is pretty flush with cash (it’s funded from oil & gas leases on State lands), but there’s at least one attempt in the works to divert it away from its (constitutionally established) natural space & recreation purposes to fund roads instead.

    And, with the timing involved, we shouldn’t expect either of these projects to get built this year, or maybe even next — the recommendations don’t usually get made until November or December, and then have to go through the legislative appropriations process for the next budget year. That means even if either of these do get funded, we may not see the final decision made until Sept. 30, 2012.

  5. Posted March 31, 2011 at 8:10 am | Permalink

    Actually, in timely news, apparently Governor Snyder just yesterday signed the bill appropriating funds for the selected 2010 MNRTF projects. That’s good for those projects, and we can hope anything we get allocated is as quickly funded next year.

  6. Suzie
    Posted March 31, 2011 at 9:14 am | Permalink

    From the post Murph linked to: “It’s getting to the point where the state of Michigan will own the state and the people won’t,” Agema said.

    Um. We’re talking about public land? As though public land owned, in effect, by all residents of the state and that everyone can go visit is somehow less useful to the average person than private land owned by some rich guy who plasters no trespassing signs all over it?

  7. Edward
    Posted March 31, 2011 at 9:24 am | Permalink

    The phrase “public land” smacks of Communism. I think the idea is to sell it all off to industry, where it can be exploited and put to use.

  8. wetdolphinmissile
    Posted March 31, 2011 at 11:33 am | Permalink

    Pools & Bridges, Freighthouse & Elevator, TIFs and City Income tax, public land—water street? state and national forests, underground aquifer, sand on the beaches, water in the lakes, minerals underground…the Indians didn’t believe in ownership but it is Michigan. Who owns it, who benefits?

    Posted March 31, 2011 at 12:04 pm | Permalink

    I look forward to when our Emergency Financial Manager gets here and these difficult decisions are made for us.

    Has Steve Pierce finished his training yet?

  10. Andrew Jason Clock
    Posted March 31, 2011 at 12:23 pm | Permalink

    The debate was never about which project means more to the city, emotionally, the pool wins hands down. But the city isn’t the only group with a pony in the race. Washtenaw County Parks and Recreation have put up $275k in matching funds for the bridge, and long ago promised another $145k for trail building on Water Street if, and only if, the bridge is built. I was at the meeting when the WCPR Commission voted to support the bridge. First question: why are we giving Ypsilanti more money when we already gave them money they haven’t used? Answer: if we get this bridge built, that money will come into play. Without the bridge, that trail money will never be applied. Now, council has basically said to WCPR that your support is not important to us, that we don’t value your help. If you were in the county’s shoes, would you be in a hurry to help Ypsilanti the next time? If you sat on the trust board, and you saw Ypsilanti had two projects, one with extensive preparation and regional cooperation, and another that was put together in under two weeks, would that effect your decision?

    As far as use, yes, the pool has been in use for 40 years and is a fixture of the community. But the bridge and trail network offers the prospect of connecting Ypsilanti from Spring to Forrest, no roads to cross, all fully accessible. That would probably mean quite a bit to the residents of Chitister Place, among many, many others. It would also be a part of the B2B Trail system, which thousands use each year for recreation, most of which Ypsilanti doesn’t see, because it offers only street trails. It would also be a first use for Water Street, with the county having already set aside money to pave the trails there. Don’t we need to at least need to entertain the idea that this project could help spur other downtown development?

    What really disappoints me is that council didn’t even question the pool proposal. No questions of funding. No questions of cost estimates. Very little question about future organization and operation plans and expenses. The whole thing was basically “this is an outline, we’ll get back to you on the details.” And that’s what council gave the stamp of approval to. To me, its a lot like the grant process for the Freight House: go get the grant and we promise to take care of the rest. We all know how that’s turned out.

    This isn’t to say the the Friends of the Pool aren’t an amazing group of volunteers, and can’t pull this Herculean feat off. This isn’t to say that the pool isn’t vital. What its about is the facts: Ypsilanti has been working with Washtenaw County since 2009 on the bridge project. It fits perfectly into the grant requirements, and is the preferred type of project for the trust. The grant request process started at the end of last year, seeking funds from the county and DDA, soliciting letters of support, and turning the studies and estimates generated by Washtenaw County into a proposal. And all of that work was allowed to be pushed aside and favor given to a proposal written in two weeks, with numbers we have no verification of and funding that is nothing but promises at this time. Its like we’re basing the decisions of our government on promises, dreams, and wishes.

    If the situation had been reversed, if a bridge proposal had come before council on the night it was set to give final approval to a pool proposal, what do you think would have happened? Would council have derailed the pool project?. Would the public think a great service had been done? Would the friends of the Pool be looked down own for thinking the city was crazy to let a more prepared, more qualified project with regional support be derail a project that had been finished the night before the meeting?

    The pattern becomes mind-numbing. Council taxes festivals, festivals offer to work with the city, festivals are ignored. That tax was necessitated by pulling the CDC park contract without explanation or due process. In a time when our budget is getting scary. When regional cooperation is being mandated, like it or not. When we need to look at making every dollar count, our council fails to make choices in the best interest of the city. We might feel good about making a popular decision, or using the bully pulpit to derail beneficial projects, but it’s not going to keep us out of Rick Snyder’s EFM plans. Only using common sense will do that.

    Is it fair that we are in this position? That our state government is abandoning their responsibility to us, responsibility set out in our state constitution? Certainly not. But this is the reality we are living in. And going with the feel good choice over the logical one isn’t going to get us anywhere we want to go. Until we can change things at the state level, we will have to play the game. And that’s going to mean making the sound choice over the popular one.

  11. karen
    Posted March 31, 2011 at 1:51 pm | Permalink

    So this issue is basically about the CDC?

  12. YpsiPunk
    Posted March 31, 2011 at 2:06 pm | Permalink

    @ GUZMAN – Pierce has his hand up the backside of Robb and Murdock (they both like it). Our EFM will be a Republican trained Pitbull. We can only hope they will dissolve city hall and wipe the slate clean…

  13. Mr. X
    Posted March 31, 2011 at 3:27 pm | Permalink

    Center for Disease Control, Karen?

  14. mark
    Posted March 31, 2011 at 5:01 pm | Permalink

    By building a new pool the new EFM will have another asset to sell off and privatize. I don’t think anyone will want to buy a pedestrian bridge and set up a toll booth–but how knows.

  15. Posted April 1, 2011 at 12:52 pm | Permalink

    Mark ‘ “…it’s absolutely unconscionable that a community such as ours, where almost half of our kids live in poverty, and where temperatures commonly exceed 100-degrees in the summer, could find itself without a public pool. Our elected leaders in Lansing should be ashamed.”

    Mark, our former elected leaders in Ypsilanti ought to be ashamed. The pool’s funding has gone to shore up a reserve needed to begin making those $ Million payments on the Water Street debt. If our pool fails to open, the blame for it can be put directly on those (now former) Council members and Mayor who gambled and lost $30 Million plus of our current and future tax dollars on the failed redevelopment scheme.

  16. TaterSalad
    Posted April 1, 2011 at 6:54 pm | Permalink

    University Bank of Ann Arbor is now shariah law compliant. Do not do business with them because you do not have the advantages that Muslims do.

  17. Posted April 2, 2011 at 4:44 am | Permalink

    Wow, another bigot.

  18. wetdolphinmissile
    Posted April 2, 2011 at 12:16 pm | Permalink

    D.R. is right on…

  19. CR
    Posted April 2, 2011 at 1:55 pm | Permalink

    @karen, didn’t you know, everything Andy Ypsilanti does or writes about is about the CDC.

  20. Edward
    Posted April 2, 2011 at 5:16 pm | Permalink

    It concerns me that you’re beginning to make sense, DR.

  21. Posted April 2, 2011 at 10:23 pm | Permalink

    Edward, I’ve almost always made sense. Come on in, the water on this side is fine!

  22. Posted April 3, 2011 at 6:26 am | Permalink

    They can’t be wrong all the time.

  23. Mike Bodary
    Posted April 3, 2011 at 7:34 am | Permalink

    Have to say I agree with Glen S. And yes Karen, most of the time with Andy it comes back to the CDC or not having events users kick in a little fee to improve the parks.
    Murphs right on as usual. There is a point system added up on each application regardless of where they come from. When all is done they award based on the high points and if two Ypsilanti projects are tied they consider council’s stated “most important priority” project. Pete felt that it was not best to prioritize a project that all the funding in place. I disagreed. I think a lot is already there and more will be before September when the apps. are lined up. Besides the question asked was “which is the most important?” It is how I feel and also how the most people that contacted me feel.

  24. Andrew Jason Clock
    Posted April 3, 2011 at 8:26 am | Permalink

    Yea, you know, its totally crazy of me to point out a series of moronic financial decisions by council concerning our parks. Same on me for pointing out the pattern of incompetence and foolishness. I should be ashamed for pointing out fiscal irresponsibility.

  25. Tedesco
    Posted April 3, 2011 at 8:49 am | Permalink

    “Edward, I’ve almost always made sense. Come on in, the water on this side is fine!”

    I’m not sure I would consider rooting for a Palin Presidency as sensical. Does Jesus love crosshairs? Don’t think so.

    Amazing that you predicted that Japanese earthquake, though!

  26. CR
    Posted April 3, 2011 at 1:31 pm | Permalink

    @Andy, it seems that you only disagree with people who the CDC disagrees with. Who next? the freighthouse? the heritage festival ? the mayor?

  27. Andrew Jason Clock
    Posted April 3, 2011 at 2:18 pm | Permalink

    CR, did you read anything I wrote? It has almost nothing to do with the CDC, other than to illustrate a recent history of utterly irrational decisions by council. If you’d like to defend council’s decisions, go ahead. Personaly, I prefer common sense in my local government. Call me crazy, but I dont think its hard to see a direct line from remoiviong that contract & claiming we could afford it to enacting the festival tax. Backing an unprerpared grant over a near perfect one because council can’t stand up to pressure and do their job falls in the best interest of the city right in line with those poor decisions.

    Standing for common sense wins one very few friends in Ypsilanti.

  28. Citywatch
    Posted April 3, 2011 at 7:46 pm | Permalink

    The decision about canceling the contract between the Depot Town CDC and the city came out of left field from councilmember Robb and was backed up by Murdock and supported by Richardson and Bodary. Those four created the situation whereby the city canceled their contract. Practically no discussion.

  29. charlie roger
    Posted April 4, 2011 at 12:44 am | Permalink

    Paul Schreiber is a member of the Friends of the Rutherford Pool (FORP). He is advancing the interests of the group to which he personally belongs. He never claimed impartiality and he certainly is not showing it.

    The FORP plan for Rutherford Pool appears to be invented on the spot, and very fluid, (almost slippery) as they describe the plan. Consequently, on closer scrutiny it comes off as half-baked, half-assed, duplicitous, confused and disorganized. In the beginning of their proposal they use the words “renovation” and “repair” synonymously. Both of these words have different economic implications. Finally, at the end of their proposal they use the word “replace”. As in, “replace the pool”. That’s a whole new ball game, economically speaking. A construction company appears to have provided the “scope of work” below, which is included in the FORP proposal. None of the costs are stated in the proposal, although the construction company claims to have provided the budget for the scope of work. It will probably cost $500,000 just to remove and dispose of the old pool, although FORP estimates the total pool replacement at $500,000.

    March 22, 2011
    Ruther City Pool Renovation (Phase I)
    Ypsilanti, Michigan 48197

    City of Ypsilanti Competition Pool

    Scope of Work
    1) Provide a complete Pool package. To include construction drawings submitted to all local and State
    (MDEQ) departments through final approvals of such authorities.
    2) Use the following guidelines as minimum requirement for the construction materials and equipment.
    Note that the filter system provides superior filtration along with significant water savings. Attached
    Responsible for all demolition of existing pool and filtration equipment
    Responsible for excavation, removal of spoils, backfill, and engineered compacted fill.
    Cast in place reinforced concrete structure with a minimum strength of 4000 pounds (provide 10
    year warranty). 3-1/2 to 12 feet deep with diving.
    Paddock stainless steel perimeter overflow system.
    Ceramic tile targets, lap lanes, 2” contrasting trim tile on benches, steps, and shallow to deep floor
    transition. Interior finish to be marcite with bond coat properly applied prior to finish.
    Concrete deck with depth markers.
    Shallow water offset with steps and handrails.
    All necessary structural and piping water-stops to be shown on construction documents with
    material specifications submitted.
    Paddock Stainless Steel VGB compliant main drains
    Mechanical Equipment (provide 1 year warranty)
    1. Pool filtration and therapy jet pumps with PVC strainer and spare basket.
    2. Jet pump to operate a minimum of 6 jets in the shallow offset area.
    3. Compak vacuum sand filtration system. Superior filtration with significant water savings (Leeds)
    4. Provide and install 990, 000 BTU pool heat system with inline thermometers.
    5. PPG chlorinator.
    6. Acid feed pump and double containment tank.
    7. Automatic chemical feed controller with safety flow switch.
    8. Six 500 watt LED lights with stainless steel niche.
    9. Filter and Backwash line flow meters.
    10. Stainless steel -30 to 60 PSI liquid filled gauges on the suction and discharge of each pump.
    11. PVC with 316 stainless steel stem butterfly valves on piping 3” or greater (George Fisher or
    equal). PVC tru-union ball type for piping less than 3” (George Fisher or equal).
    3) Provide electrical including permits, starters, disconnects, and all electrical relating to the pool.
    4) Provide all necessary deck, maintenance, and safety equipment to operate the pool and conform to
    MDEQ requirements.
    1. Vacuum pump and cart cleaning system
    2. 18” curved wall brush and skimmer net.
    3. 2 stainless steel handrails (.065 wall thickness).
    4. Complete DPD Taylor Test Kit (2005).
    5. Safety equipment package
    6. Jet timer and emergency stop

  30. Andrew Jason Clock
    Posted April 6, 2011 at 7:48 am | Permalink

    Since I missed it earlier, Mike Bodary, you are a liar. You are supporting the FORP because they turned the screws on you. You can’t possibly be as dumb as to think that your support of the pool over any other project has no meaning at all when it moves on. And my points only go back to the CDC when we get around to the colossally idiotic decisions council has made concerning our parks in the past two years, because, and only because, that’s where you started to make these moronic, underhanded moves that have done nothing but cost the city money. God forbid someone point out that you have left a trail of votes that are not in the best interest of city tax payers.

    Oh, and that little crack about events paying? If you recall, all of the major festivals were willing to work with council to provide capital improvement funds and council refused to work with them. Think it’s just me that is still angry? Call up a member of the Heritage Fest, Elvisfest, or Ton-up, and ask them how they feel about being rail-roaded by council on that one.

    No Mike, this isn’t about rehashing old arguments. It’s about pointing out a pattern of decision making that is harming our parks system, and you have been on the wrong side of every vote.

  31. Andrew Jason Clock
    Posted April 6, 2011 at 7:50 am | Permalink

    While we’re on the subject of stupid, last night council was to vote on resolutions thanking the YDDA and Washtenaw Parks and Recreation for devoting $300k to the pedestrian bridge project. I suppose that’s a good move, since last week you smacked them in the face by allowing an unprepared and unfunded grant to take favor over the fully prepared and funded bridge project. Ypsilanti City Council: never letting progress stand in their way.

  32. Edward
    Posted April 6, 2011 at 8:04 am | Permalink

    Putting all the fighting aside, when are we likely to hear a decision from the Michigan Natural Resources Trust Fund?

  33. Andrew Jason Clock
    Posted April 6, 2011 at 8:09 am | Permalink

    Final decisions come in December. There is an date where less qualified projects will be removed from the decision, but I don’t remember it off the top of my head.

  34. Merrill
    Posted April 6, 2011 at 10:48 am | Permalink

    First to Glenn S., you have hit on so many points that I agree with in terms of what is happening in our current political environment, local, state, and national. I am exceedingly frustrated that time and again the Republicans put in place policies and laws that support corporate interests over those of average Americans. It is a documented fact that the gap between the wealthy and the poor is widening. I just don’t understand how middle and lower income Americans continue to VOTE for Republicans whose policies will continue to cause them harm.

    @Karen and @Mike Bodary I find it interesting that you both take two sentences involving context out of Andy’s entire post and ascribe his positions to being “basically about the CDC”. It seems to me you have a lot of pent up energy there. We love Andy and we don’t always agree with him because one of his great qualities is he states his own mind. For the record, the CDC supports Andy’s work with the Water Street Trail project but this is not one of our projects. Just because Andy has found himself in the position of, yet again, pointing out decisions made by council that weren’t following a logical investigation, thought and decision making process doesn’t mean that the CDC has anything to do with it. To characterize it as such is disingenuous and illustrates that so much that happens in this town is wrapped up in old grudges and memories. The CDC has learned and moved on from its past mistakes and is making a concerted effort to continue to help this community. Unfortunately, it seems like it’s too much to ask some other members of the community to do the same.

    Ypsilanti will never be everything it can be until it’s community members bury the hatchets and make the choice to move forward together. This doesn’t mean people will always agree. What it means is that people can have discussions and arguments based upon the facts of the current situation wthout constantly having to answer to issues that have been corrected and resolved months and years ago. The reason Andy keeps bringing up the decisions made involving the parks is that they illustrate a broken decision making process that continues to evidence itself in multiple facets of the community life. The same people (for the most part) using the same processes (or lack thereof) to continue to make what might be the most politically expedient decision but not necessarily the one that makes the most sense for the health and growth of the community.

  35. April Hoto
    Posted April 6, 2011 at 12:53 pm | Permalink

    As I stated elsewhere, let’s get some fresh blood on city council. These old, white, moderately sentient pencilpushers have no clue what the Tucky needs. While we’re at it, let’s abolish the DDA, whose members seem to merely write checks to benefit each others’ lofts and restaurants. If the Tucky is failing, it certainly ain’t the fault of its young(er) citizens.

  36. CR
    Posted April 6, 2011 at 8:31 pm | Permalink

    @Merrill, it seems strange that you neither live, work or own a business in Ypsi yet you seem to know exactly how us poor taxpayers should act and what we should do. Invest some money in Ypsi, move to Ypsi or shut up.

  37. Merrill
    Posted April 6, 2011 at 10:34 pm | Permalink

    @CR It’s nice that you are so bold in your words not knowing anything and not having the spine to use your name. As it so happens I have owned a business in Ypsi for the past four years in which I invested my life’s savings and as the Chairman of the Depot Town Community Development Corporation, I have both a right and a responsibility to correct wrong impressions of our organization.

    Your words are a testament to your spineless, clueless nature.

  38. cmadler
    Posted April 13, 2011 at 1:40 pm | Permalink

    Mark ‘ “…it’s absolutely unconscionable that a community such as ours, where almost half of our kids live in poverty, and where temperatures commonly exceed 100-degrees in the summer, could find itself without a public pool. Our elected leaders in Lansing should be ashamed.”

    This is just not true. Temperatures have only exceeded 100 degrees a handful of times in the past 50 years. Ypsilanti averages about 5 90-degree-plus days per year; my count was 19 such days in 2010 (generally low-90s), which is balanced by none in 2009 and none in 2008.

  39. Glen S.
    Posted April 13, 2011 at 1:52 pm | Permalink

    @ cmadler

    So, what you’re saying is … kids in Ypsi don’t need/deserve a pool because Mark used a slight bit of exaggeration to make his point?

  40. Mr. X
    Posted April 13, 2011 at 2:36 pm | Permalink

    “His remark was not intended to be a factual statement”.

  41. Glen S.
    Posted December 7, 2011 at 9:14 pm | Permalink

    This is phenomenal news for everyone in Ypsilanti. A rare win/win … Congrats to all.

One Trackback

  1. […] [You can read the whole post here.] […]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.


BUY LOCAL... or shop at Amazon through this link Banner Initiative Art Agitation brick throwing