Lansing ethics reform

This story has been updated to correct an error.

Lansing voters will likely decide in November whether to make sweeping changes in the city’s ethics ordinance, including adding a provision for public funding of local elections.

A new ballot initiative committee called Lansing Citizens for Ethics Reform submitted a petition with 6,673 signatures to the City Clerk’s Office last week. Clerk Chris Swope has until Wednesday to determine if at least 4,000 are valid. If so, the proposal goes to the City Council, which can either adopt it or, more likely, put it on the General Election ballot. If passed, it would take effect in 2017.

The national group Represent.Us, which bills itself as “a fiercely nonpartisan movement to pass tough anti-corruption laws,” is behind the local effort. It paid an outside firm to collect the signatures. The same group backed a similar measure that passed by 67 percent last November in Tallahassee, the capital of Florida.

The initiative, which would tighten the 1994 ethics ordinance, would:

• Use city general funds to reimburse candidate contributions by city residents up to $25 each once per election cycle.

• Prohibit top officials from becoming lobbyists after leaving office.

• Require lobbyists to register

• Subject violators of the ethics ordinance to criminal prosecutions

• Require online disclosures of donations and gifts to top city and elected officials

The changes would apply to all City Council members, the mayor, the city clerk and all mayoral cabinet level administrators and their top paid deputies.

Perhaps the most contentious part of the proposal is the requirement for public financing for city election candidates. Organizers said the proposal would cost an average of $337,500 a year at the most.

In odd-year elections when only four Council seats are up, such as this year, the proposal would cap reimbursements at $450,000. In mayoral election years, when four Council seats and the clerk’s post are up, the limit would be $900,000. Walt Sorg, who is leading the effort locally, said that averages out to $337,500 a year over four years.

Randy Hannan, chief of staff for Lansing Mayor Virg Bernero, said the city’s assessment of costs during a mayoral election year could be closer to $1 million because of administrative costs.

Hannan said the proposal “appears to be a solution in search of a problem that doesn’t exist in Lansing.

“We already have a strong ethics ordinance that includes financial disclosure requirements for top city officials. State law already regulates campaign contributions and the reporting of lobbying activity. It is not clear that the city even has the legal authority to regulate these areas.”

Sorg called the effort “proactive.”

“Too often government only reacts to scandal or crisis. We feel being proactive protects future generations from the kinds of scandals that have rocked Detroit, other cities and Congress.”

Sorg is a longtime Democratic activist, former radio talk show host and unsuccessful candidate for the state House in 2012. Delhi Township Trustee John Hayhoe, a Republican, and Rich Robinson of the nonpartisan Michigan Campaign Finance Network are also organizers.

Dan Krassner, a spokesman for Represent.Us, said by email it has spent $25,000 so far in Lansing and doesn’t anticipate spending more than $50,000.

He said his organization paid California-based PCI Consultants to collect the petition signatures. It is also paying Sorg.

He said it spent $127,000 on the Tallahassee effort.

It is targeting Lansing because “the folks at Lansing Citizens for Ethics Reform said they wanted to protect their city from corruption, and they clearly had the energy and know-how to get it done.”

“Lansing voters led the way nationally more than 20 years ago by creating one of the first municipal ethics boards in the country,” Krassner added, “and now locals want the next wave of national anti-corruption reform to begin in Lansing. It was an obvious choice for us to support them.”

He said the organization has backed successful efforts in several other communities, including Princeton, N.J., and Genoa, Ill.

City Council candidates running in the August primary offered mixed reviews on the proposal.

Third Ward challenger Ryan Earl opposed the entire proposal.

“I do not believe corruption of city officials to be blatant within our city,” he said. “While I do support a city lobbyist registry as I believe it would give Lansing voters more information of what is going on in city hall, I do not believe that a two-year freeze on becoming a lobbyist after an office holder leaves office is really necessary.”

Expressing support for the lobbying restrictions were At-Large Councilwoman Carol Wood and challenger Emily Dievendorf; 1st Ward Councilwoman Jody Washington and challenger Shelley David Mieloc ; and 3rd Ward Councilwoman A’Lynne Boles and challenger Adam Hussain.

Dievendorf and Mielock said they also support the funding scheme.

The three incumbents questioned the funding proposal.

Wood said she supported “some sort of public financing” but is unsure this is the right proposal.

“We have a number of issues before as a city and right now, and being able to pick a particular program or project Council would cut for something that would take effect in 2017 I can’t do that and I don’t know anyone who could.”

Other candidates were not immediately available for comment.

Sorg declined to suggest any specific cuts to the Lansing budget to pay for campaign financing. He said he was not an expert on the city budget, and that would be the job of the City Council and the mayor.

An earlier version of this incorrectly stated how much Randy Hannan, chief of staff for Lansing Mayor Virg Bernero, said the changes may cost.

Also, earlier versions also misidentified one of the organizers. It has been corrected to say John Hayhoe.