Last month Grand Rapids Mayor George Heartwell totaled his car in accident downtown. As a consequence, he announced that he wants the City of Grand Rapids to buy him a Ford Escape Hybrid (of course, Big Sister would want a hybrid) for his personal use. City Commissioner Rick Tormala has already responded that he will vote against the request for the obvious reason that the city government is in a budget crunch.
It should be noted that it has been the custom of the city government to provide the mayor with a city-owned vehicle for personal use. So, Heartwell's request is not without precedent. However, that does not mean the taxpayers have an obligation to meet that request. First of all, city residents are doing with less from their city government because of the shortfall in tax revenues from the state while not cutting enough fat from the budget. If the residents can do with less, so can Heartwell. Apparently, he understood this when he first took office and made a show of declining the customary personal vehicle perk.
Second, Heartwell's change of mind about that perk is a part and parcel of his conception of the office of mayor as a personal fiefdom. Recall that he fought for a big pay raise. He signed the "Mystery Development" confidentiality agreement as mayor to obtain special personal access to information about the project. When Michigan voters passed Prop 2, Heartwell declared he would use his office to advance his personal political beliefs about race without regard to the lawful decision of his fellow citizens. When he wanted to ban smoking, he said as mayor he can demand that we do as he does. When a developer was disgruntled with Heartwell's arbitrary stand against his project, Heartwell proclaimed that as mayor he would fight "tooth and nail" to stop him. And so on, one incident after another reveals that Heartwell understands the office of mayor as his property for aggrandizement. Now as mayor he wants a car from the taxpayers. Not because that would serve the interests of the public, but because he personally needs one.
Third, whether or not it makes good policy to provide a car to Heartwell, it should not happen until the city government cleans up the income tax evasion related to the personal use of city-owned vehicles. If an employer provides an employee with a vehicle, personal use of that vehicle is deemed taxable compensation that the employer must report to both the employee and the IRS on a Form 1099-MISC. The employee then must include the amount of that compensation on his federal income tax return. If the employee uses the vehicle for both his personal use and business use, normally he keeps a mileage log recording his business use so that will not be included as compensation on the Form 1099. When we FOIA'ed the City of Grand Rapids to get copies of the Form 1099's and mileage logs for then-Mayor John Logie's use of the Buick Rendezvous the city provided him as a perk, the City Attorney's office reported that no such records existed. That means Logie was receiving compensation from you the taxpayers that was not reported to the IRS.
Apparently the city government's practice of not reporting as compensation to city employees their personal use of city-owned vehicles continues and is widespread. Basically, it is payment under the table to city employees, and the taxpayers are getting it stuck to them from both ends. They foot the bill for the vehicles they are providing city employees while not receiving any tax revenues from them for personal use of those vehicles. If Heartwell wants to demand a car from the taxpayers, then he should demand that the city government stop this corrupt practice now.
I've never been involved in a FOIA request, so I don't know the level of semantics involved.
However, it's possible to report someone's personal use of a vehicle on a W-2; therefore, your request taken literally (e.g. a 1099) could be refused and they could still be properly reflecting the compensation.
Again, I'm not sure if they would get this 'technical' with your request or not.
Posted by: Ryan | Mar 22, 2007 at 11:05 AM
Hi, Ryan.
Good insight, which is why we made the request for all documents that reported such compensation to the IRS. The city denied our request for the reason that there were no such records.
Regards,
Bill
Posted by: The Executive Director | Mar 22, 2007 at 11:53 AM
Bill and L.A.W.,
What a refreshing (and great!) idea - the public actually holding ALL city officials and employees accountable for what they do and spend. Also, regarding your FOIA request for those PUBLIC records of former Mayor Logie, it certainly seems like there are a LOT of PUBLIC records that don't seem to exist these days at both the City and County Government Offices.
For example, certified, complete autopsy reports seem to be falling into the "don't exist" category as well, even though autopsy reports are required by state law to be filed at the County Medical Examiner's Office. Hmmnnn...There must be something in the water down there on Monroe.
Posted by: Phyllis Jennings | Mar 22, 2007 at 11:55 AM
There has to be a W-2.
-Ryan
Posted by: Ryan | Mar 22, 2007 at 11:58 AM
This late in the game I think he should just wait to see if he is re-elected before he starts making demands on the tax payers. He is getting a car from the City to use - he should be happy with that. He refused a new car from the very beginning, now is not the time to buy him one - afterall, how much did the City lose on Logie's car when they had to sell it? A hybrid - come on - I'd be very curious to see if he drives enough in this "part time job" to make it worth the cost of the car.
Posted by: beentheredonethat | Mar 22, 2007 at 12:01 PM
Hi, Ryan.
No doubt there was a W-2, but we requested a W-2 that reported compensation for personal use of a city-owned vehicle. The City Attorney's office said that didn't exist. You'll understand better when we post the FOIA request we made.
Regards, Bill
Posted by: The Executive Director | Mar 22, 2007 at 12:12 PM
Hi, Phyllis.
Thanks for the thumb's up. Denying that records exists does put an end to most FOIA requests, so I'm sure many public bodies, for instance the medical examiner's office, try to interpret a request as narrowly and tendentiously as possible to claim that there are no records. In the case of Logie's tax documents, I'm sure that the records do not exist, because their absence is evidence of unreported income.
Regards, Bill
Posted by: The Executive Director | Mar 22, 2007 at 12:21 PM
Hi, Nancy.
Good point. Of course, if Heartwell thought of himself as something other than the epitome of enlightenment sacrificing his time to deliver the benighted denizens of River City from ignorance, intolerance, and bigotry, it might occur to him to put the public interest ahead of his personal interest.
Regards, Bill
Posted by: The Executive Director | Mar 22, 2007 at 12:23 PM
There would only be one W-2, why not just request the one W-2 without parsing it with language concerning the personal use of a vehicle.
If the W-2 is done properly, the personal use would be evident.
It just seems they may be spliting hairs over your request; or maybe a W-2 falls outside the FOIA request. That I don't know.
Can you just request the W-2?
Posted by: Ryan | Mar 22, 2007 at 12:26 PM
Hi, Ryan.
We have just posted the text of the FOIA request in a new article. We try to keep our requests focused and ask for documents only if they are relevant to what we are researching. So we asked for disclosure of the W-2 (or any other form) if it reported compensation for personal use of a city-owned vehicle. Therefore, we would either receive that document, or the City Attorney's office would certify that such a document does not exist. Either way we have our answer from an official source.
In fact, by having the City Attorney's office certify that no W-2 exists recording that compensation, we have more than if we had just asked for the W-2 regardless of what it reported. We have an official statement that there is no record that reported such compensation, even though such a record is required by law. That is why "parsing" the language of a request, as you put it, serves a worthwhile purpose.
Regards, Bill
Posted by: The Executive Director | Mar 22, 2007 at 12:54 PM
WAS THE MAYORS ACCIDENT ON COMPANY TIME? DID HE HAVE INSURANCE? WAS IT HIS FAULT? EITHER WAY, HOW IN THE WORLD CAN THIS SELF RIGHTIOUS DRIP THINKS THAT WE AS TAX PAYERS SHOULD FLIP THE THE BILL FOR HIS TRANSPORTATION NEEDS. HE GETS REIMBURSED FOR MILEAGE IF HE KEEPS TRACK OF IT! HERE IS A CLASSIC EXAMPLE OF PUBLIC OFFICIALS THINKING THAT THEY DESERVE A FREE RIDE. I PERSONALLY THINK THAT THEY SHOULD FOLLOW THE LEAD OF SMALL BUSINESS AND RUN GOVERNMENT SIMILARLY.
BEST REGARDS,
BRIAN
Posted by: BRIAN BIERLEIN | Mar 23, 2007 at 12:14 PM
Anyone else think that it looks like the Mayor has a Swastika on his arm in that picture?
How appropriate.
Posted by: Ames | Mar 23, 2007 at 02:04 PM
Welcome to L.A.W., Brian. I don't recall if Heartwell was on city business when he got into the accident, but it wasn't his fault. As you indicate, it really doesn't matter, because there are other issues at play that make giving Heartwell a new car a bad idea. In fact, he already has a city-owned vehicle at his disposable and has been using it since the accident. It's just not brand spanking new.
Regards,
Bill Tingley
Executive Director, L.A.W.
Posted by: The Executive Director | Mar 25, 2007 at 11:06 AM
Hi, Amie.
Yes, it does look like a Nazi armband, but I assure you it isn't. However, because of the similarity we do use the photo in articles about Heartwell's self-aggrandizement to poke fun at him.
Regards, Bill
Posted by: The Executive Director | Mar 25, 2007 at 11:09 AM
Bill,
I think it's hilarious, and it shows what kind of a monster he truly is at heart. I see no harm in it at all, and if you have more, I know I'd love to see them!
Posted by: Ames | Mar 25, 2007 at 04:53 PM
ugh
I really hope that a real leader runs for office this next election
Do we need to make Mayor a full time job to attract someone? Would DeVos run for that?
Have all the qualified interested parties evacuated the state of Michigan already? That's a possibility.
But this guy's tenure as mayor is becoming more and more of a train wreck. Watching it is like watching a political "faces of death." Sick entertainment.
Pass the popcorn.
Posted by: Lounge Daddy | Mar 26, 2007 at 10:41 PM
Yeah, hilarious. And not at all inappropriate or excruciatingly cliche. I look forward to more Nazi comparisons, seeing as they do so much to further intelligent discussion.
Posted by: Brandon | Mar 26, 2007 at 11:12 PM
Hello, Amie, Dan, & Brandon.
Amie: Other than Hizzoner in a Santa cap, we don't have any other goofy pictures of Heartwell.
Dan: Speaking now as a conservative, as bad as Heartwell is, we don't need a member of the Amway clan as mayor.
Brandon: Most certainly the Nazi comparison is as you say "excruciatingly cliche", but then it is self-identified progressives like Heartwell who tend to indulge in that cliche, which makes his obliviousness to what the armband looks like humorous.
Regards, Bill
Posted by: The Executive Director | Mar 27, 2007 at 08:55 AM
Bill,
I reckon that's a -- if not fair, at least interesting way to look at it (I'd be surprised to find out that Hizzoner ever made Nazi comparisons with anything, but one never knows, I suppose).
Posted by: Brandon | Mar 27, 2007 at 10:34 AM
Hi, Brandon.
I doubt if Heartwell has been so foolish as to make such comparisons in public. Nor have we. It's just a funny picture of our PC-obsessed mayor that we post to let our readers figure out for themselves what seems odd about it.
Regards, Bill
Posted by: The Executive Director | Mar 27, 2007 at 12:24 PM
P.S. to Brandon:
I don't fault you at all for taking a dim view of Nazi comparisons. I do too. Those who equate a faction in normal democratic politics to the Nazis / Stalinists / Taliban lack moral seriousness when they do and diminish the horror of those who suffered at the hands of totalitarian tyrants.
Regards, Bill
Posted by: The Executive Director | Mar 27, 2007 at 12:37 PM
Bill,
That sums up my sentiments exactly, and you said it better than I could have.
Posted by: Brandon | Mar 27, 2007 at 06:39 PM
Bill,
Hitler started out small as well.
Who's to say that Heartwell isn't the next Hitler?
We don't rightfully know, and he certainly is invovled in his share of schemes, questionable acitivity, and heinous behavior.....
Posted by: Ames | Mar 28, 2007 at 03:40 PM
Hi, Amie.
I must imagine you posted this tongue-in-cheek, because we can obviously rely upon our common knowledge of human nature to know that while Heartwell's politics are foolish and his demeanor is self-righteous, the man is not evil.
Regards, Bill
Posted by: The Executive Director | Mar 28, 2007 at 04:47 PM
No Bill,
He's not evil, just not bright and not looking out for the people who put him in office.
He is definitely there for his own personal agenda's, and it's irritating as hell.
Posted by: Ames | Mar 30, 2007 at 08:08 AM