A controversial choice to hike retired firefighters’ insurance premiums according to the Schor administration’s reading of a 2013 collective bargaining agreement, unfunded vacancies that never seem to get filled and the demolition of historic old Eastern High School hang over this year’s mayoral race. City Pulse asked all five candidates about each topic.
IAFF Local 421, the local firefighters’ union that pulled its endorsement for Mayor Andy Schor, said May 24 that premiums increased by over 600%. The new interpretation increases cost-sharing for some retirees from $0 monthly to around $500, and others from $200 to around $900. The Schor administration has argued the hike represents what retirees should have been paying all along.
Schor, who is seeking a third term, defended his choice to hike the firefighters’ premiums, arguing that “several attorneys” support his interpretation of the contract. He said he wants to find a “legal solution” to help the retired firefighters. But for now, he said, he must follow the contract as written.
IAFF Local 421 has refused to accept an offer that requires it concede the city’s interpretation is valid.
For a candidate whose campaign is built on opposition to Schor, Brett Brockschmidt’s response was surprisingly similar.
“These premiums were clearly spelled out in the contract,” he wrote. “They should be upset with their union, rather than the city, for not doing a better job of bargaining on their behalf, and for not adequately explaining the contract to membership.”
While he said he understands the struggle of living on a fixed income and empathizes with the retirees, he champions a solution through arbitration and hopes the city and the union will “negotiate an amicable compromise that more closely mirrors other city union contracts’ terms.”
David Ellis had choice words. He called the city’s choice “disgusting.”
“It might be 100% legal to do what’s being done, but this is what happens when an administration is more interested in wringing the words of law to get what they want instead of actually doing what the intent is,” he wrote. He argued that the precedent the city set for 13 years should be upheld and that “the right thing to do is follow what the bargaining agreement meant” as supported by that precedent, not what it technically said.
Jeffrey Brown and Kelsea Hector walked a finer line. Brown invoked his uncle Bob Brown, who he said was the city’s longest-serving fire commissioner, and said “promises made must be promises kept,” but stopped short of taking sides on the bargaining agreement. He said that “if there has been an error,” then “the city must thoroughly investigate and correct it transparently and fairly.”
Hector said, “No one who spent their life keeping our community safe should be left struggling to afford healthcare in retirement,” but she did not provide an immediate opinion beyond a commitment to “engaging retired firefighters and their union in good faith” and “exploring remedies that do not cause harm or hardship.”
The Eastern question was less divisive. All five candidates said they were sad to see old Eastern High School go, though they varied on whether its preservation was possible or realistic.
Ellis said it was obvious University of Michigan Health-Sparrow had no concern about salvaging items and simply wanted the building leveled, but that “the time for preservation talks was a decade ago.”
Schor said he had shared a hope for preservation with UM-Sparrow leadership, who told him “that rehabilitating or keeping the shell would cost millions that instead would be used for health care,” which he recognized an urgent need for.
Brockschmidt echoed Ellis’ sentiment about destroyed items and called the demolition “a travesty” and “a terrible waste,” suggesting it could have been used as a home for low-income seniors.
Hector did not express a direct opinion about whether Eastern’s loss was necessary, instead saying, “We shouldn’t have to choose between honoring the past and meeting present needs.” She and Ellis said they would take stock of historic sites in need of preservation. Schor said he supports reviewing buildings to preserve history. Brockschmidt said he would make preservation a priority.
Brown toed the line, saying that seeing the building demolished was “a sad moment” but that “sometimes difficult decisions are necessary to meet the city’s current and future needs.” He said he would “support adaptive reuse where possible” but did not elaborate on criteria.
The vacancy question was the most divisive. Ellis’ response was simple: fill them. He said the topic lacked nuance, that vacancies should be filled or the ante upped for applicants, and that the money should not be spent “on reallocated pet projects or slush.”
“When your parents give you lunch money, you use it for lunch,” he said.
Hector said she would conduct a vacancy audit, identifying unnecessary positions and asking why some are sitting open. She added she would create a public staffing dashboard.
Brown also said he would prioritize evaluating vacancies but did not offer a plan.
But Brockschmidt took the opportunity to double down on his opinion that the Schor administration has intentionally kept the positions vacant, using “the infamous ‘Vacancy Factor’ budget line item” to “add the $1.5M back to the budget to use on things the voters didn’t ask for, don’t need, and can’t afford.” He said filling the vacancies would be his first priority as mayor, but that it would mandate cutting the budget elsewhere.
For his part, Schor called funding qualified candidates “challenging,” adding that the city’s Human Resources Department has “improved efficiencies in recruiting and hiring” and will continue to make the process quicker. He also said new facilities and updated equipment would attract employees, and that “directors prioritize positions and front load when possible to ensure we have enough employees and factor in retirements.”
Support City Pulse - Donate Today!
Comments
No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here