Diverse field of At-Large Council candidates speak out on issues

LANSING -- City Council could experience a fall overhaul. 

Up to half of the council's current members could be replaced, based on the number of seats available and interested candidates. 

There are two available at-large seats and one each in the 2nd and 4th wards. Council members serve four-year terms. The posts are part time and pay $24,240. (Members elected by the council to serve as president and vice president will make slightly more.) 

RELATED:

Where mayoral candidates stand on key issues

The State Journal asked eight questions of Lansing's 12 at-large council candidates.

Answers were limited to 100 words. Eleven of the 12 at-large council candidates responded. Messages left with candidate Rosalinda Hernandez weren't returned.

The primary is Aug. 8; the general election is Nov. 7. Races are non-partisan, but the primaries will reduce the field to two candidates for each position.

The at-large candidates who responded to the questionnaire: 

• Kathie Dunbar (incumbent)
• Peter Spadafore
• Christopher Jackson
• Justin DeBoer
• Guillermo Z. Lopez
• Michael Ruddock
• Yanice Jackson
• Evelyn Pech-Vazquez
• Alexander Rusek
• Kyle Bowman
• Thomas J. Harris Jr. 

The questions and their responses: 

1. What would be your top three priorities if elected?

Spadafore: Roads and infrastructure, local economy and good governance. Lansing residents deserve more than a Band-Aid approach; they need good roads and sidewalks. We must develop a long-term plan to fix our infrastructure that prioritizes all roads, not just a few visible streets. Lansing must focus on our neighborhoods and improving the quality of life beyond the few blocks around the Capitol. It's time we mean it when we say we value our neighborhoods. Today's council climate is too focused on infighting instead of building a stronger Lansing. I've demonstrated a strong ability to build consensus and execute a shared vision. 

Christopher Jackson: Substantial infrastructure investment, increasing revenues for the city and insuring the basic needs of citizens are met. 

DeBoer: My main priorities are health care, city revenue and Board of Water & Light issues. 

Lopez: In no particular order: neighborhood empowerment, development and quality of life; closer relations and cooperation with the Lansing School District; city economic wellness. 

Ruddock: I think it is paramount to work on strengthening the core our neighborhoods across the city. My top priorities would be working with fellow council members to produce a long-term, public plan to address decaying roads and sidewalks, working on ensuring stronger protections for neighborhood parks and greenspaces, and historical assets, and locking in stronger assurances and negotiating power for neighborhoods when it comes to development. 

Yanice Jackson: Roads and infrastructure. Education. Dealing with vacant real estate, as a result, would help with attracting new businesses, decreasing local unemployment rate and retaining talent. 

Pech-Vazquez: Attracting business to Lansing by working with the mayor and local colleges and universities. We need businesses which offer jobs for graduates in fields keeping up with the times like technology and engineering. I want to attract businesses to develop in existing buildings that are left abandoned. Safety is another priority. Infrastructure (roads and sidewalks) needs to be fixed in a timely manner that doesn't pose a risk to drivers and pedestrians. Buildings which are underused or abandoned only attract trouble and therefore is another safety concern. Supporting schools and creating community involvement to support our schools is another priority.

Rusek: My top three priorities as a City Council member will be: (1) Fixing and improving our infrastructure, including roads, sidewalks, water, electric, high-speed internet, and other systems; (2) Promoting smart business growth to provide more jobs in our established and emerging business sectors; and (3) Planning for the future of the city by establishing a balanced budget that addresses the future financial needs of the city, such as unfunded pensions and health care plans. 

Bowman: I have spent 22 years rising up the ranks to first lieutenant in the Michigan State Police, working to keep citizens safe and bringing people together to solve complex problems. If elected to the Lansing City Council, I will put my experience to work for Lansing residents, working to fix our crumbling roads, create good jobs for local workers and keep Lansing children, seniors and families safe. 

Dunbar: Jobs, smart growth, and jobs. It's like the chicken and the egg - good paying jobs help grow our economy, and growing our economy helps create more jobs. All of this increases the revenue base in the city, so we can address other priorities like crumbling infrastructure and unfunded liabilities. With regard to smart growth, I'd like to see more outer core development with diverse housing options. One of my goals on the job front is increasing the number of Lansing students moving into skilled trade apprenticeships. We need more technical training opportunities for young folks who aren't college bound. 

Harris: Education, health and infrastructure. 

2. What should the city do to fix its pension and health care shortfall?

Christopher Jackson: We need to increase revenues to address this issue, not fail to fulfill our promises to retirees. One way of doing so is to increase revenues collected from non-Lansing residents who work in the city of Lansing. In order to do this under current state law, we are going to have to increase the income tax on residents as well. This increase on residents can be offset on decreasing property tax rates, while still allowing for overall revenue increases for Lansing. This increased revenue can be used to address these shortfalls, delivering on the promises we made to our retirees. 

DeBoer: The city should raise the cigarette tax and increase drunk driving fines to fix the shortfalls. And possibly a small tax on medical marijuana sales, too . 

Lopez: Lansing has a dilemma with legacy costs. I would advocate for a thorough review of retirement funds to verify that our fund managers are getting the most for our "buck." Also, to the extent possible, rightsizing by selling excess properties. Additionally, we need to grow our property values. The city needs to do a better job of assessing current properties and to find a way to bring more families into the city as well as to grow our businesses. The mayor and City Council should work closely with the Lansing Health Team or another like entity to explore all options.

Ruddock: There is no magic fix to erasing our unfunded liabilities. With that being said, we're not going to go bankrupt because of the costs. What we can, and should, do is continue paying into our debt and assure all those that are owed that we pay our debts in Lansing. I think our elected officials should also be working with the members of the state Legislature to restore the amount of revenue sharing that they're legally obliged to be sharing back with Lansing. 

Yanice Jackson: My approach to protection of pensions and health care benefits would first be to learn the entire scenario. I would sit down with each department within the city to review the challenges that are being faced between businesses and neighborhoods while balancing that with the city’s needs. It is never easy with the budget shortfall but we want to make sure to fund the city’s needs. We would want to continue to fund the needs of police and fire. We have to look at cutting the City Council and the mayor’s budget before moving forward with any additional cuts.

Pech-Vazquez: The Michigan pension plan analysis report released this May gave a clear view on the shortfall figures as well as "funding approach alternatives." I think seeing what other mid-sized cities have done is an important step. 

Rusek: As a City Council member, one of my top priorities will be to immediately begin addressing the unfunded liabilities the city faces in the near and long-term future. We must examine our budget line by line to ensure that public funds are being spent wisely so that Lansing does not find itself faced with bankruptcy or under state emergency management. I will examine every option available to plan for our pension and health care liabilities, while remaining aware of the other short and long-term needs of the city. 

Bowman: We must streamline the budget process to focus on core priorities. The mayor and council must work together to identify areas of savings while developing long-term plans that will increase city treasury resources. We also need to ensure labor and management are working together to solve their shared challenges, and a large part of that is re-establishing trust and a collective spirit. 

Harris: Take a deep look at the liabilities the city has, and see how we can get rid of the liabilities.

Dunbar: We should make every effort to honor commitments made to our retirees, which means we need to be disciplined and apply a portion of any surplus toward unfunded liabilities. Having unfunded liabilities isn't unique to Lansing. Government finance experts across the state are struggling to help cities address multi-million dollar shortfalls. The most important thing local elected officials can do is educate ourselves in municipal finance. We can't fix anything if we don't understand pension/OPEB obligations or GASB 45. If you're wondering what all that means ... that's my point. 

Spadafore: We need to bring everyone to the table to address the pension and health care shortfalls. Lansing is not alone in this issue. What we can do differently is develop a long-term plan to continue to pay down our debts and honor our commitments. There will be no easy solution or obvious answer, which is why we should look to stakeholders like our retirees, employees, the Financial Health Team and others to craft a solution that all parties can support. 

3. What is your stance on commercial and residential regulations for medical marijuana?

DeBoer: My stance on the medical marijuana industry is that we should embrace it 100% because the industry will bring more tax revenue for the city, bring more jobs and careers, and it will help lower the unemployment rate in Lansing! 

Lopez: On the medical marijuana issue, Lansing needs to honor the will of the people of Michigan in a way that benefits both those who need this medical marijuana and the community at large. As to commercial and residential regulations, we need to work on developing fair and equitable standards to satisfy these needs. I am aware that the state will come out with licensing regulations later this year. I would support working with our elected and state officials to craft the Lansing licensing requirements. One thing is for sure, Lansing has far too many dispensaries at this time. 

Ruddock: I think we should be regulating the quality of dispensaries in Lansing, not the the number. We want to create safe environments for community members, dispensary staff and patients while also allowing this legitimate economic sector to grow. We need to keep our eye on potential recreational legalization in 2018 while creating strongly regulated and safe environments for kids, patients and neighborhoods. 

Yanice Jackson: I believe there should be accountability when it comes to being able to open a medical marijuana dispensary. I don't believe that anyone should be able to open this type of business unless there are guidelines to hold them accountable for consumer safety. I do not believe patients who need medical marijuana should be criminalized for using a product that helps with their medical condition. We may want to explore keeping the shops in particular areas. I support regulations that protect the citizens of Lansing. I am watching closely how the mayor and City Council are proceeding with this issue. 

Pech-Vazquez: Regulations are necessary to insure safety. I don't believe it is necessary to have these businesses in residential areas. Monitoring is harder in residential areas and homebuyers may be deterred from investing in areas where providers are visibly plentiful. 

Harris: We have to play the waiting game with our legislators. Once they have pulled their heads out their asses, we as a city can implement our plans in accordance with state regulations. Also look at other cities and see what worked for them. Use their regulations as a guide to help our city plans.

Rusek: The spread of medical marijuana dispensaries has overtaken our primary business corridors and neighborhoods. The number and density of dispensaries must be smartly regulated in the best interests of residents, businesses, patients and the medical marijuana industry. I believe that the city should wait until the Michigan Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs enacts the statewide rules governing the production, testing and distribution of medical marijuana before spending more time on revision after revision of a proposed city ordinance. The residents of Lansing deserve fair, safe and consistent laws regarding medical marijuana. 

Bowman: This issue needs serious work at the federal, state and city level. Federal law precludes marijuana businesses from using banks. Marijuana advocates have high expectations for tax revenue, yet without a clear way to track transactions to collect revenue. We need tough but fair regulations locally, and federal changes to marijuana law to permit marijuana business to use banks. 

Dunbar: I support reasonable regulations that protect public health and wellness. In a residential setting, that includes appropriate electrical infrastructure to support the load without creating a fire hazard. Complaints about odor can be addressed through the city's nuisance ordinance. With regard to commercial establishments, I support licensing and regulations that ensure safe access to safe medication. This includes product testing, labeling with source codes, security plans, etc. Given there is support for a cap on the number of dispensaries, I cannot support financial criteria (minimum liquid assets, surety bonds) that favor large corporations and may disqualify smaller, local operators. 

Spadafore: The law has passed; it's time to craft Lansing's response. We must develop a regulatory and enforcement action plan that guarantees best practices and patient and public safety. I remain open to input, but we must work to address the concerns of the critics and advocates alike. Unfettered expansion of any industry can be problematic, so we need to get Lansing's regulatory framework right. 

Christopher Jackson: I believe that we need to see what the state legislature and our state's populace are going to do in the next year before creating any new regulations, including changes to zoning ordinances. With the very real prospect of recreational marijuana use being legalized in Michigan, now is not the time to waste our limited time and resources on an issue that could soon be moot. 

4. How would you improve relationships among the city's elected officials?

Lopez: I have served on the Lansing School Board of Education going on 17 years. I have experience working with a diverse group of people with very specific goals. Being able to come together with some and mediating with others has worked well to bring the best decisions for our school district. As a council member, I would work to establish a common understanding of goals for our city. I would establish regular meetings with other elected officials, such as state representatives, county commissioners, school board members and others to keep communication lines open for mutual support and cooperation. 

Ruddock: I've been a community organizer in the area for a long time now. Mixed with my educational background in policy, I see myself as uniquely qualified to bridge ideological divides and create consensus solutions to our pressing problems. We need energy, focus and leadership in City Hall now more than ever, and my eclectic background can provide that bridge between council members.  

Harris: Pull everyone together and remind them what we are here for. Tell them to put their big boys and big girls pants on. Cut the BS out and do what we are here for - to take care of the people of the city of Lansing.

Yanice Jackson: I would do my best to encourage collaboration and open communication. Furthermore, I would stress the importance of keeping the needs of the community first and doing our best to put personal agendas aside. I would encourage officials to have respect as well as a clear understanding of plans of governance. In addition, I would stress the importance of everyone getting to know each other and build a strong foundation for working relationships. 

Pech-Vazquez: Because these parties represent Lansing's citizens and their voice, City Council must communicate and work together with other elected officials. It is equally important to work with professional staff whose knowledge base can help us carry out policy decisions. 

Rusek: The city can no longer tolerate fractures and a lack of cooperation between the executive and legislative branches. I have met with and know many of our current elected officials and the candidates running for office this year and feel I have a good relationship with them. One of my first tasks as a City Council member will be to meet with all elected officials in the city to restore a framework of cooperation for the future of Lansing. I will bring my team building experience as a trial and transactional attorney to my role as a City Council member. 

Bowman: Lansing's elected officials must focus on residents' priorities, like fixing roads and improving public safety, instead of engaging in pointless bickering and grandstanding. Relationships are built on trust and integrity, and I would work in a transparent way - in the same manner I have for 22 years with the state police - and put citizens' concerns first. Elected officials must spend more time listening. 

Dunbar: A few years back, during a team building exercise, one of my colleagues said she wasn't elected to make friends ... she was elected to represent her constituents. She's right. We are elected to represent the interests of 114,000 people. They don't think alike, and neither should we. When we strongly disagree with each other, constituents on all sides of an issue know someone is up there fighting for them. Like him or not, Bernie Sanders was right when he said, "if you want everything to be quiet and orderly ... without vigorous debate, that's not what democracy is about." 

Spadafore: I've dedicated my life to public service because I want to help make Lansing the best city it can be, and while one person can make an impact, it takes working together to truly make a difference. Serving on the Lansing School Board for the past six years has allowed me to work with many of Lansing's elected officials and build strong, positive relations that facilitate effective collaboration. I believe that success is reached by listening, learning from and respecting every voice at the table, which is exactly what I will do as a member of Lansing's City Council. 

Christopher Jackson: Fundamentally, each of our current elected officials chose to run for one of two reasons: to make a difference in the community or to gain power. For those who ran to make a difference, including current candidates, we must look at our common goal and use it as motivation to strive for better relationships among not only ourselves, but also our communities. Emphasizing how, together, we can make Lansing a safer, more vibrant community will help improve our relationships as well as push Lansing in a positive direction. 

DeBoer: I will improve the relationships by hosting forums and have question and answer sessions so we will know what to work on the current problems in the city. 

5. How can the city improve its infrastructure given the funding limitations? 

Harris: Focus on the most damaged and the busiest. Take the funds and divide up equally to fix our roads.

Ruddock: I would be a huge proponent of working toward passing a millage to provide us with funds to begin road and sidewalk repairs, but before strapping another tax on the backs of working people across the city we need to focus on creating a long-term and public plan that addresses when, where and how we are going to prioritize our greatest infrastructure repair needs. 

Yanice Jackson: The people of Lansing want new roads, and this is a major issue for the community. A millage is an excellent avenue to explore. I also believe we should explore other ideas that would contribute to improving our roads and infrastructure. 

Pech-Vazquez: We need to look at the long-term when discussing funding. When we find a way to fund current projects, will we have anything left for future maintenance? The material used for current roads does not last, but it certainly absorbs a lot of money. Carefully planning and looking for alternatives is equally important as looking for funding. 

Rusek: The city needs to prioritize infrastructure projects in the 2018-2019 budget as fixing our roads and sidewalks must be a top priority for the mayor and council. As a City Council member, I will work to attract and retain new residents and businesses to the city to increase our tax base without raising taxes. As the city grows, the additional funds generated from income and property taxes must be specifically designated for infrastructure improvement. Further, I will work with neighborhood associations, business, residents and experts to prioritize fixing our worst roads and sidewalks throughout the city. 

Bowman: Infrastructure is far and away the top priority for Lansing residents, so it should also be a top priority when drafting city budgets. We must also make the case to state lawmakers and the governor's office as to why cities like Lansing need an increase in state revenue sharing. 

Dunbar: Growing our economy and creating good paying jobs will generate more revenue for sidewalk and road repair. I'd like to see companies applying for development incentives start contributing some of their construction resources toward public infrastructure (the public benefit). This fall, folks may choose to take matters into their own hands by voting for a sidewalk/road millage. I work with many residents who have mobility challenges, and they want the opportunity to pay a little more to fix the most hazardous sidewalks they navigate every day. 

Spadafore: We will only do this by actually developing a long-term plan that identifies our priorities. Right now, budgeting seems to be on a year-to-year basis rather than done with a strategic eye on the future. If we work together to make infrastructure a spending priority, as resources become more limited, that important work won't fall to the cutting room floor. 

Christopher Jackson: As mentioned above, we must look at raising revenues by increasing the amount of revenue collected from non-resident, Lansing workers. Many of these individuals work in Lansing five days a week, utilizing our infrastructure and increasing its wear and tear. Looking at these non-resident workers to help cover these expenses makes sense when looking at the impact the continued disrepair we find our infrastructure. 

DeBoer: The city can improve its infrastructure and funding limitations by raising some fines and fees on certain traffic tickets, by raising the cigarette tax, and possibly use a portion of the medical marijuana tax that the city can impose to combat the funding problems. 

Lopez: We need to look at current priorities to determine if they are in line with current needs. So, with the same budget we could allocate more funds for infrastructure. In addition, we need to look for additional funding from the state as well as the federal government. And, as mentioned before, we need to bolster our property values through housing improvement programs as well as continuing to bring more businesses to the city. There is not a magic bullet, so we need to constantly be on the lookout for resources to help our infrastructure. 

6. What's your take on tax breaks/incentives for businesses or developers? 

Yanice Jackson: I believe there should be an incentive for developers that build in the city of Lansing, especially in instances where vacant real estate is being utilized. Tax breaks are a good incentive as long as they are properly measured and do not put a strain on the city budget. New development will help attract new people to our city. In addition, it will address the issue of unemployment if local residents are employed during construction and after the venues are built and open for business. 

Pech-Vazquez: We need accountability and transparency. Tax breaks are reasonable when developers are held accountable. I'd like to see more tax breaks for developers who rehabilitate existing buildings and do more to prevent developers from leaving buildings abandoned.  

Rusek: Tax incentives can spur development on property that would otherwise remain vacant and dilapidated. As a City Council member, I will work with leaders in the business community to bring new businesses and industries into Lansing. However, while I support tax incentives that will spur growth in the city, each tax incentive must be closely examined to ensure that Lansing will ultimately benefit. If the city does not benefit, then developers must be held accountable. 

Bowman: Tax credits have been used successfully in the past, but they're overused and given to almost every project that comes along. Too often the city gives away tax incentives without getting much in return. I support tax incentives that provide real public benefits, such as improving roads and sidewalks. 

Dunbar: Development incentives allow urban core cities to compete with rural/suburban communities for new investment, jobs and tax revenue. I support incentives that improve our city's long-term economic position and provide tangible public benefits, such as cleaning up contaminated sites, reducing neighborhood blight, re-purposing abandoned/functionally obsolete buildings, providing quality affordable housing to low-income families and seniors, restoring community green spaces and repairing public infrastructure. 

Harris: Business and developers don't need a tax break. They are going to make money in the long run anyway. Pretty sure they have enough money. How else are they in development business?

Spadafore: Tax incentives can be a powerful took to spur development, but they must be used sparingly and only in the best interest of Lansing residents. Many communities have been able to impose public art requirements, blight mitigation measures and other types of return on investment for tax incentives. Why not Lansing? 

Christopher Jackson: While these tax breaks/incentives were developed with well-intended purposes in mind, these incentives have been abused by developers and have led to increased costs to the city with little return on investment. We must greatly reduce these incentives and instead re-purpose these funds into job training programs and infrastructure growth, both of which have shown substantially better return on investment for the local community than tax breaks. 

DeBoer: Take on tax breaks and incentives is that only businesses that deserve them should get then; they should earn it. Some people take advantage of these breaks they they don't really need them. 

Lopez: We should use all tools available to move the city forward. What has been missing is keeping the developers in check when tax credits or abatements have been given. They need to be held accountable to ensure that they keep their commitments made in exchange for tax abatements or any other tax credit. 

Ruddock: Tax breaks can be an excellent tool to bring business, jobs and good wages into the city. I'm worried that our current City Council has developed a "rubber stamp" mentality when it comes to tax incentives. With a great portion of our revenue coming from property taxes, I'd like to see more deliberation coming from council when deciding when and how to subsidize projects. I'd also like to create legislation that gives neighborhoods ultimate negotiation power when it comes to neighborhood development projects in order to assure that our business community and neighborhoods have a thriving relationship. 

7. Do you support efforts to increase shared services across the region? 

Pech-Vazquez: Yes, I think collaborting with others may allow our city to offer more to residents. 

Rusek: I support sharing services with our neighbors when it makes fiscal sense to do so and when services will remain at the same level of quality or have their quality increased. Lansing should be the regional leader in cooperative programs as mid-Michigan's largest and most promising city. As a City Council member, I will work with our neighbors and other regional partners to leverage Lansing's strengths in both the public and private sectors. 

Bowman: When it makes sense, yes. For example, we must improve our transportation infrastructure through regional collaborations. CATA has significant gaps in convenience of use. The airport is under-promoted and under-utilized, as I-96. From my own experience as assistant post commander in Lansing, I learned that a lot of people travel between Detroit and Grand Rapids without considering the Lansing area as a place to meet or live. 

Dunbar: Yes. We sink or swim as a region, and we should always be searching for opportunities to share costs and increase efficiencies by collaborating with other units of government (state, counties, cities, townships, colleges, school districts). I proudly supported regionalizing the 911 call center, the zoo and the river trail system. I also support purchase agreements that create economies of scale and lower costs for fleet vehicles and other equipment for participating unities of government. 

Spadafore: Yes. Working together with other municipalities to increase shared services allows Lansing to continue improving our community. Collaborating across the region creates an opportunity to develop innovative solutions that maximize efficiency and the effectiveness of government resources. If elected, I will work to build productive partnerships with local officials in Lansing and the surrounding areas to ensure the entire region prospers, so that everyone has increased access to the services they need and can experience the quality of life they deserve. 

Christopher Jackson: Yes. Regional collaboration is vital for future sustainable growth of our cities in Michigan. The need for collaboration has continued to grow as the state has continued to fail in revenue sharing with our cities. Regional collaboration and shared services can help decrease the cost of service delivery for our cities as well as increase the quality of services provided. While I am not in a position to currently say yes to any efforts to increase shared services, I believe it is vital that we continue to look at these possibilities. 

DeBoer: I don't have an answer to this question yet; I am still researching this issue. 

Harris: I do, just as long as everyone is willing to work together for the greater good. No one gets too greedy! 

Lopez: Yes.

Ruddock: In general, yes. Regional partnerships can be critical in providing more efficient services to all people in Lansing. I'd simply like to ensure that Lansing is getting out what we're putting in to these cooperative measures.  

Yanice Jackson: I do support the effort to increase shared services across the region. 

8. Are you current on all city, county and state taxes? 

Dunbar: Yes. 

Lopez: Yes.

Ruddock: Yes. 

Harris: Yes, I am! 

Yanice Jackson: I am current on all my city, county and state taxes. 

Pech-Vazquez: Yes.

Christopher Jackson: Yes. 

Bowman: Yes. 

Rusek: I am current on all my city, county, state and federal taxes. 

Spadafore: Yes. 

DeBoer: Far as I know, I am current on city and state. 

Eric Lacy is a reporter for the Lansing State Journal. Contact him at 517-377-1206 or elacy@lsj.com. Follow him on Twitter @EricLacy.