THE WAY FORWARD

To Move Michigan Forward, we must first create a vision that a majority of stakeholders can agree on. This vision will help everyone focus on the core issues and when they stray toward politics, we can bring them back to the issue. This is the process by which we can start stakeholder engagement.

At each step of the way, we will identify quick wins or mutual gains for each stakeholder, to build trust and let them know we are all in this fight together. And at each step, we share information to help each of us make informed decisions. If it is not something we can agree on, then we should move to the next issue and focus on those issues that we can agree on.

The use of ADR processes by the courts and federal government has been widely celebrated as a more efficient and cost effective method of conflict resolution. Mediation is a voluntary, confidential process in which a trained, impartial mediator helps people examine their mutual problems, identify and consider options and carefully consider possible resolutions. A mediator has the experience to bring disputing parties together and help them draw out a successful resolution while preventing an impasse during the negotiations, or otherwise prevent the discussions from breaking down. Unlike a judge or arbitrator, a mediator does not make the decisions nor do they offer solutions. They help separate the politics from the process, help the parties find a common ground, build trust and identify potential solutions to agree on. 

Public policy dispute resolution focuses on the resolution of issues affecting the public, such as: Transportation; land use, special education, election districts and healthcare.  With public policy disputes, the issues tend to be a bit more polarizing, emotional and there are often a number of stakeholders from the community, including non-profits and business groups, and governments at a local, state and federal level.

Whether it is a public policy dispute or a dispute between neighbors, the goal of public any dispute resolution is to save money, preserve relationships and take control over the decisions. When it involves a public policy dispute, it is helpful and most effective if it creates the opportunity for all voices to be heard. It is a process being used in the planning process of multiple projects, including economic development projects in Austin, Texas and Salt Lake City Utah. 

In any mediation, the first step in the mediation process is to get both parties to agree to use a mediator. That is actually the first agreement both parties make together and we are on the way to developing trust and building a relationship.

While many states have dispute resolution clauses in key legislation or dispute resolution centers at universities, the State of Michigan does not. The ADR Section to the State Bar of Michigan, continues to talk with universities about creating a "Center for Public Policy Dispute Resolution Services," and continues to talk with legislators.  However, since no university has yet to step forward in creating such a center, in part due to funding, The ADR Section is trying to show by example, the benefits of ADR.

Today’s political reality is that politics is by nature partisan and partisan politics has now overtaken the capitol. In addition, people and business are demanding a greater role in the policy making process so more voices are competing to make public policy that benefits or protects them. 

After Tuesday’s election, it is time our elected leaders push politics aside and focus on the big picture of helping Michigan Move Forward.

Are we listening to Democrats?

Not with the messages handed-out by Democrats in Michigan. With so much going on in this state, from crumbling infrastructure under a harsh winter to a new vibe in Detroit and tremendous growth in Grand Rapids, you would think there is a rare opportunity for Democrats to share with voters what they stand for instead of whom they stand against. 

Unfortunately, I received two emails last week from Democrats that told me they want to play politics as usual. 

Each message was a solicitation:

Subject:  Dems $6 for 6 seats

I know we have asked for a lot lately, but only because the stakes are so very high for our state. Please chip in $6 for 6 seats in November. The deadline is tonight at Midnight and 231 donors have given so far, so your $6 donation could be the one that puts us over the top to our goal of 250 donors. Tim - Sent from my iPhone.

Then minutes later, I received a similar message:

“This will be the last update you get from us for a while because our deadline is tonight at Midnight. We know that you have not given yet, but we are just 28 donations from our goal so your donation could make the difference. Please chip in $6 or whatever you can to help us hit our goal by the Midnight deadline. Thanks, Sam”

With each message, the Democrats missed a rare opportunity to engage a prospective donor and voter in why they should support them. Each time they failed to create an emotional connection and failed to educate them on what issues they stand for or stand for advancing.

With the above messages, as someone who may make a contribution, I want to know:

• Why are those six seats important?
• Where are those six seats?
• Who is running? 

I need something more before making that investment, even for $6. I also don’t like the negative messaging. The timing of these messages did not fit the news cycle, just a political calendar. At the time, the Legislature was voting on spending bills that focused on infrastructure, the U.S. District Court (Eastern District) was preparing to hear a landmark case on equal and civil rights dealing with the rights of same-sex couples and the UAW was just recovering from difficult challenges in the South – Issues, that Democrats do have a leg to stand on. Issues that they could engage me better on as to what they plan on doing about it and why I should care.

Yet, this week the Chair of the House Ways and Means Committee announced a major tax proposal while the state is also considering major changes to state tax laws. The President also released his Budget with funding to help those living in poverty, to help restore and protect the Great Lakes and to help enhance our aging roads and bridges. Yet, this week, the Democrats were silent and I did not receive a solicitation.

I recall a time that I sat in the Lansing office of a former chair of the Michigan Democratic Party and asked if I can help create a vision for Michigan Democrats and a strategic plan for each caucus to take back to their district that would work to create a movement or engage others in why they should support Democrats. At the time, the Chairman pointed out his window, towards the state capitol with the House and Senate controlled by Republicans, and said, “You see that building, our message is against, whatever they are for.”

If Democrats are to make gains in 2014, they need a vision.  Their message needs to be strategic, coordinated and engaging.  Today, there is no such thing as politics as usual. People are no longer voting based on a D or an R behind ones name. To help those running for office, Democrats and Republicans alike, need to figure out, what they stand for and then arm their caucus with the tools and resources to broadcast and share that message in a way that will resonate with the voter.  It is time to end the politics and focus on the policy as a way to engage voters. 

Leveraging Michigan's Assets

Now is not the time for the State of Michigan to reinvent the wheel. After all, we already did that, including: The automobile, the assembly line, the elevator, traffic light, football helmet, seeds in a pouch, pharmaceuticals and so much more. However, today, we need to find something in our state to leverage for new job creation. What to leverage is underneath our nose -- our Universities. Michigan's universities can help us turn the business climate around by spinning off new companies and create a ready to work workforce to transition into a new industry. They did it in North Carolina, Boston, San Jose and elsewhere. We need Michigan’s universities and its presidents to step forward to help grow Michigan’s economy. We need the help of our universities to leverage Michigan’s assets.

A private dock on Mackinac Island, Mich.

Corruption in the Nation's Mitten

Believe it or not, in 2012, Michigan was ranked the seventh-worst state for corruption, earning an "F" in the annual State Integrity Investigation study. The 2012 study, was a collaborative project of the Center for Public Integrity, Global Integrity and Public Radio International.

To come up with its ranking system, the study used 330 indicators of state accountability broken down in 14 categories.

Michigan received "Fs" in 10 of them:

• executive accountability,
• judicial accountability,
• state civil service management,
• state pension fund management,
• state insurance commissions,
• political financing,
• legislative accountability,
• lobbying disclosure,
• ethics enforcement agencies and
• redistricting.

Since the report was prepared, the Michigan Legislature has worked or is working on a number of these issues, FOIA reform, campaign finance and general oversight.

However, in being critical of the State of Michigan, Chris Andrews, the study's author, said, (in Michigan) "reform efforts are frequently launched, sometimes debated, always shelved. Meanwhile, special interests continue to make greater use of loopholes that allow them to influence the system without leaving fingerprints on the money spent doing it."

Michigan's score of a "58" was identical to what it earned from the same study in 2011, when it again ranked seventh.

New Jersey was the best-ranked state, followed by Connecticut, Washington, California and Nebraska. Georgia was ranked the most corrupt state, followed by South Dakota, Wyoming, Virginia and Maine.  Michigan did receive an "A" in one category, internal auditing. The state also earned "B-'s" in state budget processes and procurement. In public access to information, Michigan scored a "D."

The study acknowledged there are positives. "Michigan's state government is not known for scandal. It gets many things right," Andrews writes. "It is not plagued by pay-to-play allegations in procurement, or by nepotism or cronyism in the civil service system. Its Freedom of Information Act usually, if not always, works to give journalists and others the information they request at a reasonable cost."

However, the study is overwhelmingly critical of Michigan, particularly over Michigan's campaign finance system and our lobbying laws. The legislature still has some time to improve our system and I know the State Bar of Michigan and Secretary of State are also working on some reform, but perhaps there is more work for a new legislature to tackle in 2014.