Goldenberg, professor of public 
policy and political science, 
founded Turn Up Turnout, a 
non-partisan 
student 
group 
which aims to increase voter 
registration and turnout among 
young people. Upon discovering 
the NSLVE data, Goldenberg 
said she felt motivated to 
develop a voting initiative.
“We’re surprised both at 
how low everybody is, and 
we’re surprised Michigan isn’t 
leading rather than trailing,” 
Goldenberg 
said. 
“So 
we 
thought this really wasn’t the 
Michigan that we know and are 
proud of, and we really wanted 
to do something about that.”
Goldenberg recruited some 
of her former students to form 
TUT, and they soon pitched 
the Big Ten Voting Challenge 
to University President Mark 
Schlissel. The Big Ten Voting 
Challenge, a competition among 
all the Big Ten universities to 
see which school can produce 
the highest percentage and 
greatest improvement in voter 
turnout in the Nov. 6 election, 
began 
in 
September 
2017. 
Among the hurdles to student 
voting, registration was one of 
the first to be addressed.
“One big reason is that 

students move a lot and their 
voter 
registration 
doesn’t 
stay 
current, 
and 
they 
sometimes forget to update 
their addresses,” Goldenberg 
said. “Another reason is all the 
voting rules we have to abide 
by are state rules, and they 
vary by state, and some states 
have passed rules that make it 
much easier for young people 
to vote than other states. For 
example, quite a few states now 
have online registration, but 
Michigan doesn’t.”
The state of Michigan also 
does not offer early voting, 
which can alleviate scheduling 
difficulties for students trying 
to make time to travel to the 
polls. Erin Byrnes, democratic 
engagement 
lead 
at 
the 
Ginsberg Center, said the early 
voter registration deadline can 
also pose challenges to student 
turnout.
“We 
do 
have 
a 
voter 
registration 
deadline 
in 
Michigan that’s 30 days out, 
so the time is limited,” Byrnes 
said. “Once you’re back on 
campus, if you’re looking to 
register in Michigan, you’ve got 
roughly five weeks to make that 
happen.”
In order to increase student 
voter registration, TUT and 
the Big Ten Voting Challenge, 
as well as several other student 
groups, 
advertised 
voter 

registration information online 
and offered voter registration 
tables on campus. Now that the 
Michigan 
voter 
registration 
date has passed, the Big Ten 
Voting Challenge will focus 
on educating students about 
their choices on the ballot and 
voting logistics. Though the 
voter 
registration 
deadline 
in 
Michigan 
closed, 
voter 
registration for many out-of-
state students is still open.
“Pushing people to get out 
and vote, making sure people 
know when election day is 
and when the polls are open, 
making sure folks know they 
can bring their U of M ID with 
them, that’s a valid form of ID, 
all of those things are really 
important,” Byrnes said. “Polls 
are open until 8 p.m., if you’re 
in line at 8, you can vote and 
they can’t tell you to leave.”
Byrnes said organizers will 
now focus on providing students 
with information on decisions 
they will have to make at the 
polls, 
including 
a 
proposal 
that would dramatically alter 
Michigan’s voter registration 
deadline.
“We’ll still doing in person, 
peer-to-peer tabling,” Byrnes 
said. 

A, was put on the ballot after a 
citizen-led petition gathered more 
than 5,000 signatures to place it 
on the November ballot.
Ann Arbor Mayor Christopher 
Taylor 
urged 
residents 
in 
a 
letter posted to Twitter on Sunday 
to vote “no” because of a loss of tax 
revenue and affordable housing.
“If City Proposal A passes, we 
will lose hundreds of units of new, 
permanent affordable housing; 
miss out on millions of dollars of 
tax revenue to support basic city 
services; and be forced to either 
raise taxes or re-allocate millions 
of parks dollars to build and 
operate a failed park in the middle 
of our downtown,” Taylor wrote. 
“The passage of City Proposal A 
will sentence the Library Lot to 
remain what it is today: desolate 
and uninviting.”
Councilmember 
Anne 
Bannister, D-Ward 1, said she 
believes the city has enough 
tax 
revenue 
without 
new 
developments and thinks Taylor is 
stressing the issue tax revenue loss 
to fit his agenda.
“The city does have a lot of 
tax revenue,” Bannister said. “It 
seems a bit disingenuous that 
when it’s something that the 
mayor supports, he asks for money 
for it. But, when it’s something he 
doesn’t support, he brings up this 
idea that we don’t have the money. 
These things are invaluable to 
the economic vitality and it’s 
an economic engine to have an 
upbeat, positive, inviting ‘Center 
of the City.’”
Taylor criticized the proposal 
for a lacking a payment plan for 
the development of the urban park 
and commons.
“It proposes to obligate the 
city without any kind of proposal 
on how to pay for it to reserve 
the land for an urban park and 
commons,” Taylor said. “A park 
at that location will be a failure 
… Urban parks in order to be 
successful have to have organic 
activity.”
Bannister is one of three 
councilmembers viewed as an 
opposition member of Taylor’s 
eight-councilmember 
majority 
and urges voters to say “yes,” to 
Proposal A.
“We’re 
representatives 
of 
democracy,” Bannister said. “As I 
hike around the ward and the city 
and also for my own campaign 
… I’m continuing to amplify the 
voices of the residents as best I 
can and am firmly supporting 
this urban park and ‘Center of the 
City’.”
According to Taylor, passage 
of Proposal A would also cost 
money the city can use to pay 
off the repurchase of the “Y lot.” 
On May 1, the council voted to 
repurchase the property at 350 S. 
Fifth Ave. for $4.2 million from 
real 
estate 
developer 
Dennis 
Dahlmann. The repurchase came 
after Dahlmann failed to develop 
the property into commercial 
developments 
and 
affordable 
housing.

Taylor also explained the 43 
units that would be developed 
at 150 percent of fair market 
rent were designed to be workforce 
housing units instead of affordable 
housing units.
“150 percent of fair market rent 
is going to be below market rent 
because fair market rent is a figure 
derived by HUD (Department of 
Housing and Urban Development) 
in order to key a number of 
things, one of which is Section 
8 vouchers,” Taylor said. “These 
are going to be apartments in a 
location where rents can be quite 
high, there’s going to be 43 units 
available in this building for 
people that otherwise couldn’t 
afford it.”
In an open letter addressed to 
Taylor, Ann Arbor resident Mary 
Hathaway 
criticized 
Taylor’s 
critique 
of 
losing 
affordable 
housing 
by 
addressing 
the 
financing of the project.
“We all want more, truly 
affordable housing,” Hathaway 
wrote in her letter. “You and 
others on Council set a goal of 
creating over 3,000 new units of 
affordable housing by 2035. The 
question is, what’s the best way to 
achieve that goal? Your answer is 
to sell public land to Core Spaces, 
a Chicago developer specializing 
in luxury student apartments, and 
allocate $5 million to the housing 
trust fund. Does $5 million really 
buy 200 to 500 new units of 
affordable housing? ... Most people 
have no idea how you will leverage 
$5 million to create 500 units. Do 
you?” 
Hathaway said the council 
should look at the Library Lot as an 
opportunity to build relationships 
and neighborhoods.
“By retaining public land at the 
center of the city, we can take a 
more holistic approach to planning 
for development on the Library 
Block,” Hathaway wrote. “Rather 
than looking at a parcel in isolation 
and 
insisting 
on 
maximum 
development of a 17-story tower 
(or one even taller than that), we 
should look for an integrative 
approach 
that 
strengthens 
the relationships between the 
neighboring 
structures 
and 
welcomes pedestrian movement.”
Taylor also mentioned the 
contract requires Core Spaces to 
have a 12,000-square foot public 
plaza that could be used for events.
Taylor 
believes 
passing 
Proposal A will raise similar issues 
associated with Liberty Plaza such 
as drug use and violence.
“Liberty Plaza does not meet 
our aspirations and if Proposal A 
passes, I’m very much concerned 
that a park at that location would 
replicate the failures of Liberty 
Plaza,” Taylor said.
Bannister 
and 
fellow 
Councilmember 
Sumi 
Kaliasapathy, 
D-Ward 
1, sued Taylor and City Clerk 
Jackie Beaudry in June over the 
development contract for allegedly 
signing a contract without the 
council’s approval.
Both Taylor and Bannister 
declined to comment on the 
status of the lawsuit because it is 
currently in litigation.

The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
News
Friday, October 12, 2018 — 3A

Read more at 
MichiganDaily.com

ALEXANDRIA POMPEI/Daily
Frances Champagne from the University of Texas, Austin, speaks on research for genetic inheritance at a 
lecture hosted by the University Psychology Department in East Hall Thursday afternoon. 

GE NETIC INHE RITANCE

VOTER
From Page 1A

LIBRARY
From Page 1A

their proposed ordinance for 
consideration 
during 
a 
work 
session in September.
Three 
councilmembers 
introduced the citizen task force’s 
ordinance. Councilmember Sumi 
Kailasapathy, D-Ward 1, one of 
the sponsors of the ordinance, 
said it was the most democratic 
ordinance she had seen in her six 
years on the council, though she 
did say she didn’t feel the proposal 
was perfect.
The proposal was defeated 
by the council in a 5-4 vote. The 
council voted to advance Taylor’s 
competing ordinance in an 8-1 
vote, with only Kailasapathy 
voting against it, saying it was a 
“watered down” version of the 
citizen task force’s version.
“Somebody 
feels 
like 
something is better than nothing, 
but sometimes that something 
actually 
undermines 
the 
credibility and the trust that the 
community needs to have in this 
commission,” Kailasapathy said. 
“That’s my rationale.”
Since the vote, Taylor said his 
ordinance retained most of the 
important aspects of the citizen’s 
proposal while ensuring that it 
adhered to the city charter and 
AAPD’s 
collective 
bargaining 
agreements.
“It is very important to me 
that we have an effective, trusted 
and 
legally 
defensible 
police 
commission,” Taylor said. “We 
received the task force’s proposed 
ordinance. What I did is I went 
through that ordinance with the 
city attorney’s office and strove 
to take as many of the policy 
recommendations as would meet 
that standard and strove to put 
them into law.”
The defeats of the citizen’s 
proposal angered the task force’s 
supporters, who began chanting, 

“Who do you protect? Who do 
you serve?” as councilmembers 
walked out of the meeting.
In 
response 
to 
the 
legal 
questions concerning the police 
oversight 
commission 
at 
the 
meeting, task force co-chair Rich 
Friedman challenged the council 
to have more patience before 
discarding the citizens’ proposal.
“With some of the parts where 
people are very dissatisfied, I 
think we just have to say, ‘Well, 
let’s see how it works,’” Friedman 
said. “Let’s see if the city does 
what it says it’s going to do. Let’s 
see if the police department does 
what it says it’s going to do.”
In 
both 
ordinances, 
the 
commission 
would 
have 
11 
voting 
members, 
including 
a youth member, with two 
councilmembers acting as non-
voting liaisons. Members would 
be appointed by the City Council 
liaisons and approved by City 
Council. 
Active 
duty 
police 
officers 
and 
city 
employees 
are ineligible to sit on the 
commission, with the task force’s 
ordinance extending the ban to 
include any former employees of 
or “regular contractors” with the 
city or “any police department.”
The commission in each case 
would be able to initiate its 
own review of AAPD practices 
and conduct, as well as retain 
independent 
counsel 
subject 
to approval by City Council. 
Additionally, 
people 
filing 
complaints could choose to 
remain anonymous.
However, in the task force’s 
ordinance, 
the 
commission 
could withhold complaints from 
AAPD, which could potentially 
conflict with the department’s 
union contract.
Nancy Niemela, who works 
at the City Attorney’s Office, 
said the police department’s 
collective bargaining agreement 
requires that employees are 
notified of complaints against 
them within two weeks of when 

the city receives the complaint.
“It provides certain timelines 
for that investigation, it provides 
certain disciplines that can be 
imposed on the officers and 
then it goes on and provides 
the 
grievance 
process 
after 
that, with respect to how the 
grievance proceeds and then 
goes to arbitration,” Niemela 
said.
Taylor’s ordinance avoids this 
issue by giving residents the 
option to “transmit information” 
to 
the 
commission 
through 
community liaisons instead of 
filing a direct complaint.
The 
mayor’s 
proposed 
ordinance and the ordinance 
created 
by 
the 
citizen 
task 
force 
both 
explicitly 
state 
the 
police 
oversight 
commission 
is 
expected 
to 
operate independently of City 
Council and other arms of city 
government. However, a memo 
from City Attorney Stephen 
Postema cast doubt on just how 
much autonomy the council 
could award the police oversight 
commission.
Postema 
argued 
any 
commission 
created 
by 
the 
council “is part of the City” from 
a legal perspective, meaning the 
commission would not be an 
independent legal entity.
“Any ‘independence’ by the 
Commission would be, as with 
any board or commission, limited 
to operating the commission 
within the parameters of any 
resolution or ordinance setting up 
the Commission,” Postema wrote.
As a result, the police oversight 
commission would be subject 
to the same legal constraints as 
the rest of city government. That 
includes the city charter, existing 
laws and collective bargaining 
agreements 
with 
AAPD 
employees.
According to Postema, the 
subpoena power given to the 
commission by the task force’s 
proposal is problematic because 

the city charter does not explicitly 
give the council this power.
“Because the City Council may 
not have this power, it would not 
have the authority to delegate 
such power to a Commission,” 
Postema wrote.
Taylor’s ordinance does not 
include subpoena power. It also 
differs from the task force’s 
ordinance in that it states that 
an investigation undertaken by 
the commission must begin after 
AAPD completes an internal 
investigation.
Kailasapathy took issue with 
the prohibition on concurrent 
investigations during discussions 
at the City Council meeting, and 
supported allowing simultaneous 
inquiries.
“I don’t think it’s the intention 
of the commission to be getting in 
the way,” Kailasapathy said. “It’s 
almost two parallel tracks.”
Niemela said there was nothing 
barring concurrent investigations 
in the AAPD collective bargaining 
agreements because “it’s never 
been an issue before.”
Despite the criticisms of the 
task force supporters, Taylor said 
he was hopeful his ordinance 
would be able to foster trust in 
the community between residents 
and law enforcement. The council 
will take up the issue of funding 
for the police commission in 
Taylor’s ordinance at the City 
Council meeting on Monday.
“I believe that we all share 
the same goal,” Taylor said. “I 
believe that we all want a policing 
commission 
that 
provides 
meaningful 
commissioner 
oversight of the police department, 
and that the commission that 
will result from the ordinance 
up for consideration on Monday 
will have that result. I believe 
that we all share the same goal 
of making sure that Ann Arbor 
police and the citizens that they 
serve have a common trust and 
understanding.”

ORDINANCES
From Page 1A

the digital system. Students will 
be able to brighten the screen, 
make the text bigger and utilize a 
variety of other resources.
LSA 
sophomore 
Jack 
Wroldsen, who is considering Law 
School, believes these changes 
were inevitable and may require a 
bit more practice, but overall will 
be a great aid to students.
“I really like (the switch to 
digital) — I think the LSAC is 
moving in the right direction by 
putting it online and increasing 
the testing availability,” Wroldsen 
said. “Advanced degree tests 
like the GMAT have been online 
for decades, so I think moving 
into a digital format is the LSAC 
keeping up with the times. It may 
take a bit more practicing and it 
adds some sort of unpredictability 
as it’s hard to know exactly what 
it’ll look like. But I’m sure it’ll be 
a well-structured program that 

makes the testing process actually 
easier.”
Jeff 
Thomas, 
executive 
director of pre-law programs 
for Kaplan Test Prep, believes 
this is a practical change, saying 
newer generations of students 
will virtually age with the 
advancement of technology.
“This really gives two big 
advantages for the Law School 
Admission 
Council,” 
Thomas 
said. “First, it allows for a very 
consistent test-taking experience 
for students. Up until now, the 
test 
was 
paper-and-pencil-
based. 
Students 
would 
walk 
into the testing room and would 
encounter some sort of variability 
within the testing experience, 
such as proctors keeping time 
in different ways. Now there is 
a sense of consistency. Second, 
this will really allow the LSAC to 
speed up the scoring process and 
then get the scores in students’ 
hands faster.”
When the test transitions in 
July, about half of the students 

will take the computerized LSAT 
and the other half will take the 
standard pencil-and-paper test. 
Students won’t get to choose 
their type of test — it will be 
randomly assigned. Because of 
this, the LSAT is offering a one-
time opportunity: Students will 
have the chance to see their score 
before they decide whether they 
want to send it to each of their 
prospective schools. Those who 
decide to cancel are allowed the 
option to retake the test until 
April 2020 with no additional 
costs. The upcoming July test is 
the only test for which this will be 
an option.
Law student Jeff Nwagbo is 
in favor of the transition, but he 
believes students might just have 
to adjust their study habits.
“I don’t think it’s a huge deal 
either way,” Nwagbo said. “I 
think I’d rather take it on paper 
but that’s probably because of 
the way I studied for it. Some 
of my strategies for taking the 
test involved diagramming logic 

games or marking up the reading 
comprehension passages so I’m 
not sure how they’re going to 
handle that if the test is digital. 
I don’t think the online thing 
makes much of a difference in 
terms of difficulty.”
There are four paper-and-
pencil administrations of the 
LSAT left: November, January, 
March and June. Kaplan is 
encouraging all students that 
are considering studying for, 
preparing and taking the LSAT 
next year to take at least one of 
those 
final 
paper-and-pencil 
exams.
“Students shouldn’t be scared 
of the digital format, but it does 
introduce a level of complexity 
and 
unfamiliarity 
and 
there 
are, frankly, not going to be a 
tremendous amount of practice 
tools 
digitally 
available 
for 
students immediately at launch,” 

LSAT
From Page 1A

Read more at 
MichiganDaily.com

