ANN ARBOR, MI -- Half a year later since being accused of violating campaign finance law, an Ann Arbor group has taken steps to resolve the situation while paying $2,300 in fees.
At issue was whether the nonprofit Library Green Conservancy went too far in its advocacy against Proposals A and B for a new downtown library in last August's election.
The group opposed undoing the central park designation it fought to secure for the city's Library Lane property in 2018, now the site of a planned mixed-use high-rise with a new library inside.
Andrew Robbins, a University of Michigan researcher, filed a complaint with the state last August alleging the nonprofit failed to form a ballot question committee, which would have required publicly reporting campaign expenses and contributors as the group put tens of thousands of dollars into messaging to voters.
"You can vote against Proposals A & B and still get a new library!" one of the mailers stated, along with the message, "The park we voted for is under attack!"
Messages on the back included, "Proposals A & B are NOT needed for a new library," "Proposals A & B are misleading," "Increased density is not the answer to every question" and "Develop for the people, not for developers."
James Biehl, a regulatory attorney for the Michigan Department of State and Bureau of Elections, notified the Library Green Conservancy in a Nov. 18 letter the department had finished investigating the complaint.
"In your response, you claimed the Library Green Conservancy is a 501(C)(3) non-profit organization that was formed by Ann Arbor residents in 2012 and not in response to the proposals,"
the letter stated, citing an argument its communications regarding Props A and B were strictly factual and should be considered issue advocacy.
Robbins provided a rebuttal contending the conservancy urged voting against the proposals, express advocacy subject to the Michigan Campaign Finance Act.
The department concluded the evidence was sufficient to determine there may be a violation of the act, Biehl told the conservancy in the November letter.
"The Library Green Conservancy used 'vote against' and 'vote no' on printed materials opposing the Ann Arbor ballot proposals which constituted express advocacy,"
he wrote.
Biehl argued that required either forming a ballot question committee or filing an independent expenditure report, and if the matter couldn't be resolved informally, it could be referred to the attorney general's office for criminal prosecution or civil fines. He gave the conservancy until April 6 to discuss a resolution.
In a followup later dated Jan. 30, Biehl thanked the conservancy for resolving the matter, saying the department received the nonprofit's statement of organization for a ballot question committee called Respect Ann Arbor Parks and campaign finance statements, along with receipt from Washtenaw County for $2,300 in late filing fees paid Jan. 16.
The reports are now available for public review on the county website and the state considers the matter closed, Biehl said.
The reports list Lutz Avenue resident Frank Wilhelme as the treasurer for Respect Ann Arbor Parks and show the committee raised roughly $60,000 for last year's campaign. That includes $59,873 in cash from the Library Green Conservancy and $910 worth of in-kind donations from two residents who contributed buttons, yard signs and graphic design services.
The reports don't list who contributed to the Library Green Conservancy and critics have called it a dark money group.
"People can call it dark money if they want to, but members of the community contributed to the Library Green Conservancy and we used those funds to support what we thought was defensible for approaching this election,"
President Rita Mitchell said.
Mitchell voluntarily disclosed in a statement last July her group had spent about $59,000 as of then on its campaign against Props A and B, including $7,000 for ads in the Ann Arbor Observer, with the rest spent on mailers.
Local attorney Tom Wieder and others were behind a separate ballot question committee called Vote No on Proposals A and B, which reported other expenses and contributions last July, including yard signs against the proposals.
The Library Green Conservancy has accepted the Bureau of Elections' decision about the campaign finance complaint and has complied, Mitchell said.
Her group didn't choose to get involved in an election -- "it came upon us," she said, arguing her group had a mission to support the will of the voters from 2018 when a majority supported the Center of the City park and commons proposal.
She's disappointed her group's efforts to see through the voter-approved park idea wasn't supported by City Council, she said, and she's sorry there won't be the type of park downtown she thinks will be sorely needed as the city grows denser.
Ann Arbor District Library Director Eli Neiburger said last year AADL would begin a design process for a new library after the election. That has yet to start, though the general idea is there would be a new library on the lower levels of a high-rise with housing and other uses, spanning both the current library site and the city's adjacent Library Lane property.
One of the potential features Neiburger is excited about is a large second floor spanning both sites, providing a larger space for AADL’s expos and festivals, he said last year. He also said he would love to see a rooftop park of sorts bridge over Library Lane, with access to it on the third floor, providing an outdoor play area where parents don’t need to worry about their children running out into heavy traffic that surrounds the library.
AADL will need multiple floors within the new high-rise development, including the ground floor, he said.
If there is an elevated park space, Mitchell said she hopes it’s as welcoming as what her group had in mind for a space that would be publicly available 24/7.
"But I do feel that something that's on an elevation that's different from ground level is a different kind of space than what we had envisioned,"
she said.
Mitchell said her group is discussing disbanding, but it has not reached a decision.