BREAKING: Ottawa County Elections Director Justin Roebuck May Replace County Clerk Kreuger

After over three decades of service, Ottawa County Clerk Dan Kreuger recently announced he would be retiring in June. The deadline to apply for the position is tomorrow, May 15th.

West Michigan Politics can confirm Justin Roebuck, Director of Ottawa County's Election Division, has applied for the position and must undoubtedly be considered a favorite.

Roebuck has been widely praised for his management of elections in Ottawa County. He has had the position for over 5 years. A committee comprised of Ottawa County's Circuit Court judges will announce a replacement soon.

Roebuck is a seasoned political hand, having worked closely in the past with Congressman Tim Walburg, and Secretary of State Terri Lynn Land.

Of note: Dan Kreuger was originally appointed clerk in 1978 after the incumbent clerk retired. It looks like history may repeat itself.

State: JUDGE POST VIOLATED 20 LEGAL DOCTRINES

 The group responsible for monitoring Michigan's judges, the Judicial Tenure Commission, released a scathing report today on the conduct of Ottawa County's 58th District Court Judge Kenneth Post, charging him with three counts of misconduct. Post has 14 days to respond to charges of:

• Failure to follow the law
• Improper demeanor to counsel
• Trivialization of court proceedings

JUDGE POST

He will then face the Commission in a hearing. Depending on the outcome of the hearing, he could be censured, suspended without pay, or even removed.

Official report here: http://woodtv.triton.net/news/judge-post-judicial-tenure-complaint-072412.PDF

The conduct described in paragraph nos. 1 – 57 constitutes:

(a) Conduct which violates the 5th Amendment to the United States
Constitution, and Article I, Section 17 of the Michigan
Constitution.
(b) Conduct which violates the 6th Amendment to the United States
Constitution, and Article I, Section 20 of the Michigan
Constitution.

(c) Conduct which violates MCL 600.1701, addressing contempt.

(d) Misconduct in office, as defined by the Michigan Constitution of
1963, as amended, Article 6, Section 30 and MCR 9.205.

(e) Conduct clearly prejudicial to the administration of justice, as
defined by the Michigan Constitution of 1963, as amended, Article
6, Section 30 and MCR 9.205.

(f) Conduct which is prejudicial to the proper administration of
justice, in violation of MCR 9.104(1).

(g) Failure to establish, maintain, enforce, and personally observe high
standards of conduct so that the integrity and independence of the
judiciary may be preserved, contrary to the Code of Judicial
Conduct, Canon 1.

(h) Failure to be aware that the judicial system is for the benefit of the
litigant and the public, and not the judiciary.

(i) Irresponsible or improper conduct which erodes public confidence
in the judiciary, in violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct,
Canon 2A.

(j) Conduct involving impropriety and the appearance of impropriety,
in violation of the Code of

k) Failure to respect and observe the law and to act at all times in a
manner which would enhance the public’s confidence in the
integrity and impartiality of the judiciary, contrary to the Code of
Judicial Conduct, Canon 2B.

(l) Failure to be faithful to the law, contrary to the Code of Judicial
Conduct, Canon 3A (1).

(m) Failure to be patient, dignified, and courteous to lawyers with
whom the judge deals in an official capacity, contrary to the Code
of Judicial Conduct, Canon 3A (3).

(n) Unnecessary interruptions of counsel during arguments, contrary to
the Code of Judicial Conduct, Canon 3A (8).

(o) Conduct, which exposes the legal profession or the courts to
obloquy, contempt, censure, or reproach, in violation of MCR
9.104(2).

(p) Conduct, which is contrary to justice, ethics, honesty or good
morals, in violation of MCR 9.104(3).

(q) Conduct that violates the standards or rules of professional
responsibility adopted by the Supreme Court, contrary to MCR
9.104(4).

(r)Conduct that violates the 5th Amendment to the United States
Constitution, and Article I, Section 17 of the Michigan
Constitution, addressing a defendant’s privilege against selfincrimination.

(s) Conduct that violates the 6th Amendment to the United States
Constitution, and Article I, Section 20 of the Michigan
Constitution, addressing a defendant’s right to counsel in a
criminal proceeding.

(t) Conduct that violates MCL 600.1701, addressing contempt.

Zylstra: Expanding Medicaid is the Fiscally Responsible Choice for Snyder

A few weeks ago, as part of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) ruling, the Supreme Court ruled that individual states can decide whether or not to accept federal funds to expand Medicaid coverage, the joint federal/state health insurance program, without jeopardizing their current Medicaid dollars as the Reform law originally held. Currently the State of Michigan pays approximately 36% of its own Medicaid funding, a 2 to 1 match, for its existing enrollees. Under the expansion, residents up to 133% of the poverty level would be covered, beginning in 2014, with zero initial cost to the State. In 2017, these percentages would change slightly every year so that by 2020, states would pay approximately 10% of its funding for the expanded population, a 9 to 1 match.

Governor Snyder has yet to speak about his intentions regarding the expansion, but will likely need to make a decision relatively soon. It will be an important decision, one where the access to quality health care for up to half a million uninsured Michigan residents hangs in the balance.  While the sticker price cost of coverage to the state in 2020 could be around $200 million, there are many offsetting incentives that should make the decision a relatively easy one, at least based on the fiscal impact.

SNYDER

The first is the fact that the State would see major savings, beginning in 2014, in the Community Mental Health (CMH) non-Medicaid line, as significant numbers of mental health patients served by CMH would become covered by Medicaid. The yearly savings from that change would be approximately $200 million or more. The initial 100% match rate, combined with the CMH non-Medicaid savings, would mean the expansion would lead to that level of net savings to the State beginning in 2014. Even after 2017, when matching levels drop, the 10% portion that correspond to the State of Michigan will still mean a roughly $180 Million savings.

The second is the MI-Child match  At present the State receives roughly a 75% match rate for the program. The Federal legislation would increase that match rate by 23% (capped at 100%) for all states beginning in fiscal year 2015. Michigan's annual cost for the MI-Child program would decrease by roughly $12 million in FY 2015 and in subsequent years.

There is one main disincentive for not participating, namely via Disproportionate Share (DSH) Payments. These are payments set aside for hospitals to help alleviate the costs of their uncompensated care. The Affordable Care Act begins to phase out these payments in 2014 with the thinking that if most Americans have some sort of health coverage, public hospitals would presumably see a reduction in unpaid bills and wouldn’t need the supplemental payments anymore. However, if a state opts out of the Medicaid expansion and therefore does not end up extending coverage to those living below the poverty line, the math changes. The unpaid bills do not disappear, but the DSH dollars do. Barring an act of Congress, those supplemental funds will be largely phased out by 2020.  In 2011, total Michigan DSH payments totaled $265 Million and it's quite conceivable that refusal of the expansion would mean the state would lose a large portion of that.

Looking at the above, there really is a big difference for Michigan to accept or deny Medicaid expansion funding. If Governor Snyder decides to go forward with it, the state could likely save more than $200 million per year from 2014 to 2020, at the same time increase access to Medicaid for a half a million residents. If he declined, the state, through its public hospitals, will continue to spend ever $200 million on uncompensated care, but now will not be reimbursed for that care. Hopefully, Governor Snyder can continue with the independence of mind that he recently showed with the veto of the Republican-sponsored voter-ID laws, and make the right choice for the hundreds of thousands of of Michigan residents who currently lack access to quality health care.

 Douglas Zylstra is a small business owner and the Vice-Chair of the Ottawa County Democratic Party. Connect with Doug on Facebook here

Zylstra: Snyder's Vetoes Prove He's No Pete Hoekstra

Governor Snyder allows the League of Women Voters to actually carry out a large part of their mission.

by Doug Zylstra
Vice Chairman, Ottawa County Democratic Party

Being the Vice Chair of the Ottawa County Democratic Party, and not generally agreeing with all that many Republican policies, I found myself in the unusual position in August of 2010 voting for not one, but two Republicans in their primary races. The first was Spring Lake resident Field Reichardt, whom I believe would have made a great congressional nominee for the fall race against Holland Democrat Dr. Fred Johnson. The second was Rick Snyder, whom I thought to be a more moderate, less ideological and a generally more competent candidate than his main rival, Holland resident and former US Representative Pete Hoekstra.  Field, unfortunately, did not win his race-but Mr. Snyder of course, did, and convincingly. He then went on to defeat Lansing Mayor and the Democratic candidate Virg Bernero in the November general election.

Gov. Rick Snyder

Up until last Tuesday, outside of some helpful and interesting Dashboards, I hadn't really felt that I had got anything for my vote, and instead felt that Governor Snyder was basically governing the way a Governor Hoekstra would have, But Tuesday was the day that Governor Snyder finally redeemed a bit of his promise of being above politics by vetoing  a package of voter suppression laws—including SB 754 —passed by the state legislature -which would have expanded unnecessary voter ID requirements and imposed unfair requirements and restrictions on voter registration drives, all making it harder for eligible Michigan citizens to participate in our democracy.

Under Senate Bill 754, lawmakers wanted to require third-party groups like the League of Women Voters, who have been registering people to vote for decades, to get mandatory training by the Secretary of State's office or county election clerks. Under the proposed law, new training, certification, and paperwork requirements would have made it more difficult for groups such as the League to conduct registration drives, resulting in fewer opportunities for citizens to register at locations such as schools, community centers, and churches.  According to national data, Hispanic and African American voters are twice as likely as white voters to join over nine million citizens who register through voter registration drives and, therefore, more likely to be adversely affected.

From Pennsylvania to Florida to Texas, the current trend has been for legislators and governors to pass laws whose main purpose is to suppress, not empower, American voters. With an estimated 51 million eligible Americans still not registered to vote, such laws represent a major step in the wrong direction. Previously, Governor Snyder had stated that he opposed laws that disenfranchise eligible voters, and yesterday, he carried that out.

Republican response in Michigan to Governor Snyder's veto has been unusually harsh. Ari Adler, Michigan House Speaker Jase Bolger's spokesman, said in a statement that, "It is not unreasonable to expect that people handling voter registrations should receive some basic training, People who believe they are registering to vote should have confidence in the process so they know their registrations are being handled properly. Antics by unscrupulous groups such as ACORN have proven that protecting the voter registration process is vital if we hope to preserve the integrity of ballots cast by every eligible voter."

Aside from the fact that ACORN no longer exists and allegations that they and groups like them ever engaged in voter fraud have been repeatedly disproved, it really is telling that Michigan Republicans seem much more concerned that one or two people may have an incorrect registration form than that hundreds and thousands of Michigan citizens may be denied the ability to participate in our great democratic experiment.

Writing this on the day that we celebrate our independence and liberty, it really feels good that Governor Snyder has stood up for democratic participation and sent a clear message that voter suppression will not be tolerated. I hope other local elected officials, from all three of our state reps to our state senator who voted for this and the other suppression bills, will follow his example. In the words of  recent Secretary of State candidate Jocelyn Benson, ”This is a victory for every voter in this state, and a great nod to tomorrow’s holiday. Congratulations to all who worked to amplify peoples’ voices and emphasize the negative impact the vetoed portions of this package would have on our citizens and elections officials."

Zylstra

 Douglas Zylstra is a small business owner and the Vice-Chair of the Ottawa County Democratic Party. Connect with Doug on Facebook here

Holland City Council Candidate Scott Troeger's Message to WMP Readers

I am proud to call Holland my home. I have lived and traveled throughout the world and chose to settle
in the community that welcomed my great-grandparents. With the exception of college and active duty
military service I have been an active member of my community since 1975.

It is easy to claim that you believe in cooperation between governments and/or business. However, I
can point to specific instances where I have demonstrated leadership in that arena:

1. As an Officer in the Michigan National Guard, I led when we assisted Tulip Time during parades
with traffic control and medical emergencies.
2. I was a Trustee of the Holland School Board when we finalized the relationship with the City of
Holland to create the joint fueling facility that has saved the taxpayers significant funds.
3. Also during my tenure as President of the School Board, we had the groundbreaking opportunity
to work with the entire staff of the District to make significant cuts in the budget. Furthermore,
we were able to open mid-contract bargaining sessions and negotiate reductions in pay for
everyone. This phenomenal cooperation allowed the District to maintain programs and staffing
that would have otherwise been cut.
4. As a member of one of the area Public Safety Teams I led the effort to raise (to date) more than
$10,000.00 to purchase a rescue boat and equipment. All of the funding came from business
organizations and no public dollars were spent. (see story in Holland Sentinel Archives dated
Nov. 25, 2003)

As a member of Holland’s City Council I would be especially conscious of the public trust in the
expenditure of funds. I have a particular sense of pride in the fact that I was on the Board during the
last major building program for Holland Public Schools. Major portions of that project were completed
not only early, but under budget. The monies saved allowed additional improvements to facilities not in
the original plan and benefited the students, staff and our community.

The current economic realities are causing hardship to the families of Holland and beyond. I believe we
must focus on:

1. JOBS. Every tool available must be used. Those tools include:
a. Tax abatements. Business development costs money. If Holland has the ability to
attract employment we must give industry the chance to save on their investments and
create well paying jobs.
b. Organization such as Lakeshore Advantage, Hedcor and the Chamber of Commerce.
These groups need support to seek and attract business and industry to Holland.
c. Reliable and affordable energy and water. Peter Garforth was quick to point out that
Holland has the unique ability to generate electricity at the municipal level. We need to
use this to our advantage. The BPW has an exceptional track record for reliability in its
power, water and wastewater treatment systems. Even after suffering major storms,

Holland recovered its utilities quickly.
d. Transportation of goods. Holland is located in an area with abundant transportation
options. We have easy access to road networks, air cargo possibilities, Great Lakes
shipping and even rail. We need to promote all of these advantages and continue to
improve on their accessibility.

2. PUBLIC SAFETY. Holland has cut deeply into our public safety services. The current term being
used is “minimal staffing”. Public safety is not satisfactory when conducted at minimal levels.
Options are available to provide “optimum staffing” and we must explore them.

The Professional Firefighters of Holland’s Department of Public Safety has endorsed my
candidacy because of my long term commitment and beliefs.

3. OUR ENERGY FUTURE. The Sustainability Committee has recommended a course of action and
an outline for Holland’s energy future. The plan needs to be adopted… soon.

Our community needs education and the opportunity to participate in implementation of the
program that will carry us for the next forty years. We need to remember that the plan must
adapt to changing technology and new opportunities as time passes.

Everyone needs to take ownership. This ownership includes citizens, business, educational
institutions, churches and government.

4. FILLING VACANCIES OF SENIOR CITY STAFF. The current leadership of full-time city staff has too
many “interim’s”. Filling these positions is critical for our future.

Qualifications for both City Manager and BPW General Manager have to include:

a.
b.
c.
d.

Superior fiscal responsibility skills.
A commitment to long term planning.
A collaborative spirit.
The ability to introduce innovative opportunities that will continue to make Holland a
preferred destination for well-paid jobs.

(See quote: http://www.hollandsentinel.com/feature/x1764488103/Holland-city-council-
candidates-weigh-in-on-energy-new-manager-more)

I believe my demonstrated commitment and proven record are a benefit to Holland. My understanding
of current issues provides me with the ability to join Holland’s City Council and immediately participate.

Mr. Troger can be found on Facebook HERE

***Regarding the Holland Sentinel saying he supported the gay rights measure before council:

"I do not know why the Sentinel reported me as being in favor of the ordinance.  The July article you referred to is in regard to the League of Women Voters forum that was held before the primary.  If you were to watch the tape of that forum, you would see that I outlined objections to it.  In fact, you might even notice that one or more of my competitors thanked me for the issues I brought out."

Klomparens: "A New Voice for Holland City Council"

I have worked or lived in Holland, Michigan for nearly all my life. My ancestors came to Holland in 1847. As a retired educator, I have time to work for the citizens of this community.

If elected to city council, I pledge to speak up on your behalf. I have supported the following ideals from the get go: (1) at green energy policy, (2) limited tax abatements for companies and industry in the name of fairness, (3 support current levels of employment of city workers, (4) develop new language out lawing discrimination against the LGBT community, (5) control urban blight, but not at the expense of homeowner's rights, (6) use tax dollars with fiduciary responsibly, (7) I will listen to your ideas and viewpoints.

Sincerely, Wayne Klomparens -a new voice for Holland City Council

Wayne can be found on Facebook HERE

(WE HAVE ALSO OFFERED MR. KLOMPARENS OPPONENT THE CHANCE TO SHARE A MESSAGE WITH POTENTIAL VOTERS AS WELL...)

Zylstra: Update on Holland Energy Plan

Update on the Holland Energy Plan

Please see previous Posts on the Holland Energy decision here and here.

On November 2, the Holland BPW will be holding an all-day session at the DoubleTree Hotel in Holland entitled Risk Analysis Process: Session 2. It is a follow up to the first session held back on September 28 by HDR Consultants that set out the perimeters (workbook here) for the subsequent sessions that the BPW has held as as part of what it calls P21decison, a relatively elaborate process whose stated goal is to go through approximately eight major options they've laid out as possible ways in which the BPW can supply the Holland area with its future energy needs. Because the November 2 Session will seek to fix the economic inputs and values, and thus be fairly determinative, it seems a good time to review what has happened up to now in anticipation of that meeting.

On October 17, the Holland Sustainability Committee voted to approve the recommendations of the Community Energy Plan  which it had spent the previous year working on, together with Garforth International. The recommendation was to approve Scenario B, which offered a wide variety of generation options and time schedules to provide for the next 40 years of Holland's energy future. This recommendation was sent to City Council, and is awaiting action.

On a parallel course, the Holland BPW has begun its P21decision process on September 28. It has its website, and the BPW is beginning the process of putting power points and videos of the presenters online, both on its own site and on Macmedia.org. Up to now, we've seen discussion of generation options, fuel types, regulations, and assorted topics such as dredging, district heating and thermal discharge into Lake Macatawa.

The two processes, Garforth and P21decision, definitely have different emphases. But they do agree on one central question, that is, what should be the very next step for Holland and which asset should we go with to power the next 5-10 years. And they both come up with the same possible three options:

1. Solid Fuel/Circulating Fluidized Bed - A 70 MW plant located at current JDY site, costing $270 million, and fueled by a mix of Petroleum Coke, Coal and Biomass. It will be able to support current snowmelt system as well as, with additional modifications, a district heating system. The CEP puts the levelized cost of electricity from this starting in 2016 option at $74.9 per MwH with no Greenhouse gas penalty, and $98.6 per MwH with one.

2. Combined Cycle Gas Turbines - Two LM2500 Combined Cycle turbines costing $105M for 70 MwH capacity (Garforth) or $90M for 55 MwH capacity (HDR/P21). It will be fueled with Natural Gas. It will be able to support current snowmelt system as well as, with additional modifications, a district heating system. The CEP puts the levelized cost of electricity from this option, starting in 2016, at $65.5 per MwH with no Greenhouse gas penalty, and $75.7 per MwH with one.

3. Combined Heat and Power Plant - One LM2500 Combined Cycle turbine costing $60M for 30 MwH capacity (Garforth) or $40M for 20 MwH capacity (HDR/P21). It will be fueled with Natural Gas. It will be able to support current snowmelt system as well as, with additional modifications, a district heating system. The CEP puts the levelized cost of electricity from this option, starting in 2016, at $81.1 per MwH with no Greenhouse gas penalty, and $91.9 per MwH with one.

The following table shows the Option-Benefit matrix as developed by HDR, and discussed at the first RAP session:

If this is supposed to be just a preliminary idea of how the final process is going to work, that's fine. But if these are the only real categories that are going have weight in the final decision, that seems problematic. There are at least two fairly important concerns that are not dealt with at all here.

One, there's no scoring of emissions, which is important when we talk about the high cost of externalities.  A new paper in the American Economic Review attempts to  estimate the cost imposed on society by air pollution, and allocate it across industries. The costs being calculated don’t include the long-run threat of climate change; they’re focused on measurable impacts of pollution on health and productivity, with the most important effects involving how pollutants — especially small particulates — affect human health, and use standard valuations on mortality and morbidity to turn these into dollars. The following table represents their findings as it relates to the present discussion:

 A lot of that backs up what the Garforth report details. In the case of the AER report, it estimates the the Gross Economic Damage (GED) costs of Coal at an additional $28 per MwH, and Natural Gas at an additional $8 per MwH. This is very consistent with the GHG penalty the Garforth report applies to the two different fuel sources, which assigned a $24 and $10 penalty respectively.

Secondly, what the matrix also doesn't do is score financial risk. The larger list of categories does talk about fixed and variable costs, and that underscores in some sense the idea that larger projects carry more downsides than smaller ones do, as well as the idea that both Coal and Natural Gas have very uncertain price forecasts. But I don't think they are robust enough to underscore how much downside financial risk there is in large scale public works projects that are built, in some sense, on speculation of future revenues from a future clientele that is not at all certain. There is a category entitled 'Capacity Market Revenue' that deals with selling excess energy, but that is scored as a pure positive, without a corresponding acknowledgement that having an excess built capacity represents a downside risk as well.

Hopefully, these two areas get fuller attention in the next RAP session; without a fuller accounting of emissions as a serious social cost and financial risk as a large element, its hard to say that the final analysis will be at all comprehensive.

Douglas Zylstra is a small business owner, Vice-Chair of the Ottawa County Democratic Party, and a contributor to West Michigan Politics. Connect with him on Facebook HERE