| Versagi Voice | |
|
Coffee Conversation |
|
Conversation with
With rapid fire talk and enthusiasm, whether discussing transportation or Royal Oak’s current massage spat, Marie Donigan joined me for a conversation which I opened by asking her to begin by imagining she was speaking to a political science class across the street from Jimi’s Restaurant, at Oakland Community College. What broad brush picture would she paint about our times? Donigan, currently State Representative for Royal Oak and Madison Heights, is a former Royal Oak City Commissioner.
This being a casual conversation and not a structured interview, we then touched on many topics. In no particular order, here are some of Donigan’s thoughts.
When I raised my reservations about the Downtown Development Authority, Marie came back quickly with, “I’m pro DDA. The beating up on DDA at City Commission meetings these days is just as misguided as when the same arguments were offered 20 years ago.” She reluctantly acknowledged that – as has happened in other cities – it might be helpful to review the DDA’s scope of operations, “The primary concern, though, should be management, not money.” Our DDA exchange of opinion led Donigan to offer, “Despite organizational obstacles, Royal Oak – which in Lansing I insist is the ‘Center of the Universe’ – should seriously look for areas in which to consolidate, to regionalize.”
“Showing off” is the term she prefers, rather than my “posturing,” to describe the behavior of those elected officials who play to the audience or, these days, to the camera. “The audience for local officials is of course residents; for Lansing legislators the audience is more likely to be lobbyists.” The nearest Marie came to showing anger was when she recalled how some of her CITCOM colleagues would publicly berate area business owners or city employees, including department heads. Apparently this public embarrassment of individuals is not unknown in Lansing, especially in committee hearings.
When the conversation turned to how tightly or loosely CITCOM meetings should proceed, Donigan recalled her pique at the practice of “For purposes of discussion, I’ll make a motion.” She agrees that most times a lot of the discussion has already gone on, so both the content and the tone of the matter have been established. Then, she says, “If you don’t want the issue to move forward, don’t’ make the motion or don’t second it.” (Of course, there are those entities which prohibit any discussion before a motion is approved. At the other end, informal parliamentary procedure permits group discussion to determine “the sense of the meeting” before a motion is made.)
Donigan bemoans what she sees as a failure to take advantage of training for elected and appointed officials by such as the Michigan Municipal League. She remembers that except for Pete Webster, she was the only commissioner who took such training. “You can seek specific information about such topics as parliamentary procedure or collective bargaining or the Open Meetings Act and share information with other elected officials. It’s a great organization that works on behalf of cities in Lansing and on the local level.” (Coincidentally, in a conversation that evening with Clyde Esbri, who ran for commissioner and serves on the Plan Commission, he mentioned that he paid his own fee and expenses to take related training.) Such focused training is also available for Zoning Board of Appeals members. One can earn enough credits to become certified.
During those portions of our conversation when Marie discussed her work in Lansing, I heard:
While Donigan was a city commissioner, I frequently praised her for not speaking just to get on camera but only when she had something to say. During our conversation at Jimi’s, she agreed with the majority of present and past elected officials who have told me that partisan politics plays a minimal role when CITCOM addresses local issues. She acknowledges that informal gatherings took place, sometimes in local watering holes, after a CITCOM meeting. “For the most part, it was social chatter including what had just gone on at the meeting, but seldom did the discussion get close to being a violation of the Open Meetings Act.” Marie says that she stopped participating after sitting in on only a handful of such after-hours socializing. “Simply a personal choice.”
Since Donigan became a State Rep, I have occasionally chided her for “going Democratic,” for publicly promoting concepts which I oppose, like mass transportation; for being too eager to “invest in” (read: raise taxes for) projects which she deems are needed. . “Public Transportation is not a Democratic issue,” Donigan maintains. “It is an important economic issue that crosses party lines. Some of the biggest advocates for a modern and efficient transit sys tem are lifelong Republicans who I work with very well.”
During the conversation, I told Marie I can understand why anti-taxers were seeking her recall (they failed). Not once through our conversation did she suggest, nor did I bring up, cutting any state program or reducing any taxes. Nor did either of us mention the presidential campaign. Later, she reminded me that we ran out of time, that she will be happy to talk about what she labels the “fascinating” development of “many structural reforms and budget cuts that have been implemented and the ones that are to come.”
Through it all, agree or not, that rapid-fire enthusiasm I mentioned at the opening of this piece remained as she described her vision for serving the common good. – April 2008
|
“Your
timing is good,” Marie began. “I’m going door-to-door,
partly for constituent-contact and partly because I’m
running for re-election. People are anxious – about gas
prices, health care, the Mideast, unemployment,
Michigan’s own recession.” Thinking about whether this
is all just temporary and can we expect a turnaround in
January or whether we’re in for a long tough time,
Donigan mused, “Was it caused by these last eight years
(the Bush period), or is it some world-wide wave of
events?”