A ward system, for those who don’t know, is where the city is divided up into parts, and each part is represented in government by an elected individual. If there are parts A, B, C, and D then people from Ward A can only vote for a candidate who lives in ward A, and so fourth. This is exactly what activist and former mayoral candidate Gloria Haller is proposing, thus far it has gotten public support from former school board member Joe Rheker and sitting board member Larry Humphrey, while getting opposition from Mayor Barb Dempsey.

Much of this is the fault of the people themselves. If you don’t vote, then you are held prisoner by those that do (of course, not voting because you have no candidate you want to vote for is completely different). And there are even less people who are willing to step up to the plate and run for political office.

This issue borderlines cronyism, where a section of the city breeds all the people who will run it. How bad is it? There is only one elected official in Mount Clemens who lives north of Cass Avenue: School Board President Earl Rickman.

This map shows where the Mayor, the City Commission, and the School Board members live.

The southern 2 neighborhoods control the whole city of Mount Clemens

This map is taken directly from the new Master Plan of Mount Clemens. This is the neighborhood map, and from what I can tell by itself, is very accurate. Neighborhoods 7 and 10 (which also correspond with current voting precincts 2 and 9) run the entire show.

Driving through these areas, it’s not hard to see where this is different from the rest of the city. These are the nicest neighborhoods in town, and the people that live there are likely to be the most successful, college educated and have a little extra cash in the bank. Others who live in these neighborhoods include long time Mount Clemens High School Principal Nelson Jackson, Charter Commission President Jake Femmineneo, and former Congressional Democratic Whip David Bonior.

Due to the nature of these ares, it’s not surprising that these people are more likely to vote and more likely to run for office themselves. Voter data all across the country will give similar stories: higher income and better education almost always lead to higher voter turnout.

Due to the small voter turnout in Commission and School Board elections, there is absolutely no need to run a city-wide campaign if you are seeking office. If you win precincts 2 and 9 (on election day and the absentee), you’ve just won the election. I know this first hand, I won 14 of 17 precincts last year when I ran for school board and still lost the election, having lost precincts 2 and 9 and tied in precinct 1. This means that when you run a campaign, knocking on doors all over the city means nothing.

We have a culture where only 2 neighborhoods elect the officials. With all these politicians in the same area, it’s no wonder that they breed more politicians from the same neighborhoods. And when your friends and neighbors are all running for something, you get to know them pretty well, even if you already didn’t.

When election time rolls around, someone from neighborhood 7 will see a name on the ballot he recognizes. Maybe it’s his friend or long-time neighbor. Maybe he’s knocked on your door to talk to you about the campaign or you’ve gotten something in the mail from his committee. Over the years you might have seen this candidate washing their car or doing their own landscaping, maybe even playing ball with the kids and the family dog on the front lawn.Maybe your kids are friends with theirs, and they walked to school together, or even dated! Either way, it’s a community within a community. And this is someone you know either through reputation or just because you’ve seen them out and about and know they’re a “good person”.

That same person in neighborhood 7 might also see another name on the ballot. Someone who knocked on their door once or twice during the campaign. You’ve never met them beforehand, and you don’t know what kind of person they are. They seem very nice and very well intentioned, but aside from a quick conversation and a little reading, you know nothing about this candidate’s character, how he conducts his life, or anything else other than what he wants you to know.

When election day comes, guess who is going to get the vote?

Meanwhile, why would someone from neighborhood 9 even consider voting on election day? They may see a handful of names on the ballot, where none of which have knocked on their door or given them any information. If they are an informed voter they may have read their profile in the C&G paper or Macomb Daily and seen their website if they have one, but that’s it. And odds are, they are someone from the other side of town, who lives in a very different part of Mount Clemens than you do. So different in fact, that if you were shown pictures of the different neighborhoods side by side, you would never know that it’s the same city. It’s easy for people to not vote when they don’t feel represented, and that’s exactly what happens.

For someone who wants to make a difference, running an election is difficult if you don’t live in the right neighborhood. The people that statistically always vote will be harder to win over when they don’t already know you. Especially when one of their neighbors in on the ballot. And when you see all of your neighbors putting up yard signs for the local guy, you start to think “well these guys are all like me, and this is who they like, so this candidate must be my kind of guy”.

The machine just generates more cogs. The candidates ignore the rest of the city, as they don’t have to answer to them. It matters not what they do as long as they appease their neighbors.

By putting the city into a ward system, we eliminate this. This will allow people from different neighborhoods to elect someone who they know, who they may have known for a long time. This will allow the candidate to take their message right to the people, instead of trying to impress folks from the “rich side of town” into voting for them over one of their neighbors. This will entice more people to run for commission as the campaigns will be easier to manage with a smaller geographical area and less expensive to run with a smaller voter base to work with.

At meetings, this will bring new, fresh perspectives to the table. Mount Clemens, despite being small, is not small the way that Armada, Romeo, or Oxford is small. We are one of the most diverse cities in Macomb County, with different ethnic groups, races, ages, incomes, lifestyles and viewpoints. Because of this, we are underrepresented across the board. And as the old saying goes, “No Taxation without Representation”.

This will also make sure that there is no cronyism in board appointments or replacements: people will be elected by their neighbors come special election or anything else. For example, take a look at the map again. Towards the bottom there are 2 shapes that overlap, one of those is a newly appointed school board member and the other is a siting elected board member. I am not making accusations against the qualifications of newly appointed school board member Laura Kropp. But I will say that it surprises me not one bit that despite being the voter’s 2nd choice to sit on the board last May, I was passed up for appointment that was given to a sitting board member. And while I have no evidence to support this theory, it wouldn’t surprise me one bit of she was “asked” by her neighbor to apply for the appointment, so the board could use the opportunity to pass me over.

Opponents of the Ward plan say that it will force the new commissioners to only serve their neighborhoods, as opposed to the city at large. This point is downright laughable. If the current commissioners are doing their best to work for Mount Clemens as a whole then the system needs obvious reform. Because right now, it isn’t working.

Let me say that again: the current system is NOT working. Businesses are closing up left and right, neighborhoods are in decline, and people are moving out. The current elected officials have failed us.

The more realistic story is that they are not serving the community at large, but their own little community within a community: Seminole Hills and the Wilson School Area. Precincts 2 and 9. Neighborhoods 7 and 10. Whatever you want to call it, it’s the southwest end of town and it runs the show.

Because of this, there is no accountability. All you have to do to win is be from that area and show your neighbors that you’re like they are. No matter what way you want to look at it, the city is suffering, the people are underrepresented, and the people have little say in anything that happens. Their cries at board meetings can be ignored, because the commissioners know that if the angry person behind the mic gets everyone he knows to vote against you, you still have a strong base.

The one thing about the Haller Ward Plan that I do not like is the raising of pay for the elected officials. People are driven to public service for things other than the pay, and the better campaign platforms that can be developed as well as the chance of knowing that they can win an election will be more than enough to get more people to seek public office. The other small thing would be that the school board should be included in this as well.

With that being said, it’s time for a change. A Ward system would give better accountability, different viewpoints at the table, and allow government to be what it was meant to be: of the people, by the people, and for the people. Instead of a few elite neighborhoods that have power over the rest of the city with no accountability overall for their actions.

Let’s take this step to save our city and bring responsible government to Mount Clemens.

Well, he wasn’t the least bit pleased about the idea of putting lessons online for people to see. He didn’t think it fair that “some kid in Oklahoma” could view the lessons and “learn for free”. Realistically, if schools like Yale, Carnegie Mellon, MIT, etc. all do this and see no threat, than Oakland University has absolutely no argument and no reason to be threatened. Lets take a look at why.

There’s nothing wrong with videotaping lectures and putting them online, and the lectures are property of the school not the professor, that’s how the real world works. My mom, who works for St. John Health System has to forfeit any and all rights over her intellectual property. If she invents something at home, St. John has the rights to it, regardless of what it is, unless she convinces them to sign an official release document releasing the rights to it.

Such things have been the way of the world for some time. When Steve Jobs and Steve Woz started Apple Computer, Woz worked for HP and as such, the Apple I belonged to HP. Woz showed it to them and they thought it was a joke and a toy, so they released the rights to it. While that was a massive mistake on HP’s part, they could have just as easily kept the Apple I and marketed it. Nonetheless, this is what happens.

Many colleges and universities offer course material online, and it doesn’t damage the school or the Professor’s integrity, on the contrary, it adds to it. A kid doesn’t get a degree for free via this method, but they do get to see what is being taught and it adds a lot of credibility to the school if people can go online and find, say, Oakland University experts for whatever they need. It builds a reputation and it’s just a fact that it does not decrease enrollment or anything else.

It doesn’t matter what they see, hear, or learn, without an actual degree it makes little difference other than for personal enrichment or research. Otherwise, we could put down “I spent 3 months in the library researching this, I know all about it” and that would be sufficient enough to land a job. But alas, in many cases it doesn’t matter if we have hands on experience, without the degree nothing matters in the eyes of Human Resources Departments around the world.

Take for example Massachusetts Institute of Technology. They offer what is called openCourseware.

Many other schools offer similar things online, and sure, anybody can just go online and look at lectures, course material, assignments, etc. To reiterate my point, I can’t put down “I looked at a bunch of courses online through MIT” on a resume and expect it to count. Not to mention, the “attendance” policy at Oakland is a joke. Anybody can just walk in there, sit down, and learn with the rest of the class. I know, I’ve done it before. If anyone can just stroll on in to class, what does it matter if material is online?

When I was prepping for grad school, I knew little, if anything about Urban Planning specifics. So what did I do? I went here and gave myself a crash course in undergraduate urban planning. I went though the lessons, not doing it all of course, but reading through the material, looking at maps, and ordering books to read through. One week into classes I can tell you that it has already paid off. There’s a good mix of people in my courses who are professional planners, and others who brand new to this, so thanks to the people at MIT and the fact that I can see their course material online, I’m prepared and, in many ways, ahead of the game as far as my classes go. I can answer questions and have intelligent discussion right away, while other students are obviously still adjusting, and I can keep up discussion with people who already do this for a living.

Online access to lectures and courses is also a great service to current students. Lets say you go to Oakland and are taking an early American History course. You wonder if the professor has some kind of bias or if there is another angle that isn’t being covered. It would be a great convenience to be able to pull up lectures from another school anywhere in the country to see what their angle is, get a different point of view, and enrich your learning experience. You can become better rounded and gain a deeper understanding of your subject with ease and convenience.

Published lessons also keep teachers honest and on point. People, especially parents who shell out hard earned cash for their kids to be educated, often wonder what really is being taught in college classrooms. This can give them direct insight into what is going on in these classrooms. Last week, I had my first course with a professor who wanted to spend a great deal of time picking a fight with someone who wasn’t on board with the Canadian health care system. Not only did this have nothing to do with the course, lesson, or material, but the girl whom he was engaging was Canadian and he was not. Nonetheless, I can’t help but wonder if such a phenomenal amount of time would have been wasted had the class been recorded and put online (for now I’ll just chalk this up to being day one nonsense and we’ll see if it continues).

Such insight can also serve students when they go to choose a school or are looking to transfer schools. Let’s be honest, the “campus tours” and meetings with Professors and department heads are all the tip of the ice burg as far as what things will really be like. Maybe you’ve thought that chemical engineering was for you, if you watch a few lectures before you jump right in you can decide if you like it or not before you’re out time and money on a class you end up not liking. Maybe you don’t like the way that things are done at your school, wouldn’t it be disheartening and painfully frustrating to transfer across the state because someone else told you things are different, only to find out for yourself that it’s an even worse situation for you?

Online, open course platforms offer the chance for students to make the best, well-informed decisions about their education before they move far away, spend a ton of money, and end up in a world of frustration. Knowledge is power, even more important is having the power to control your knowledge.

Let us not forget as well that we are discussing Public Universities. As such, they conduct public research, take federal and state money, and are expected to make numerous contributions to our lives. Open course platforms do such things as a low cost and high volume solution. By doing this, we accomplish:

• More transparency as to where federal and state dollars go.
• Better and more informed choices in education
• More resources for students
• More resources for the general public
• A higher standard to meet and greater quality education

Literally nothing is lost except for the small cost it takes to set something up and the bandwith to keep it running, which is marginal at most. It’s win for everybody. More credibility for the professors, a higher profile for the University, and better education for the students.

So before we get all zealous about what we pay for our education as students, or what rights these tenured professors feel they deserve, let’s look at the big picture and see what good it does for everyone.

To see other schools that do this sort of thing, check out 101 Killer Open Courseware Projects and see for yourself.