The Ypsilanti City Council approved a resolution April 7, 2026, to send certification of a petition for a divisive ballot initiative to the governor's office and Washtenaw County clerk for review.
If approved by voters, the ballot proposal would create a charter amendment that would require any increase to the city police budget that is higher than the previous year's expenditures to be voted on by constituents in the next citywide election. The proposal was initiated by the Ypsi Ballot Initiative Group, or YpsiBIG, and the petition for it was filed with the city clerk July 19, 2024.
"It is proposed that City Charter Section 5.04 be amended to provide for a limit in the City Council's provision to budget police expenditures above the previous year's budgeted expenditures unless such an increase be approved by a majority of voters in a regular city-wide election in a ballot question pertaining to no other issue," states the ballot language presented to petition-signers.
At its April 7 meeting, members of the Ypsilanti City Council moved the resolution forward, an action that serves an administrative function and does not pass political judgment on the content of the proposed ballot question. The approved resolution directs Ypsilanti City Clerk Tracey Boudreau to forward a certificate of sufficiency for the filed petition to the Washtenaw County clerk for action and the governor for review in accordance with Michigan law. A certificate of sufficiency certifies that an initiatory petition was canvassed and approved for the required number of valid signatures of registered electors in Ypsilanti.
Previously, the resolution approving the certificate of sufficiency was tabled to allow time for council members to prepare an explanatory caption. An explanatory caption is a description to explain the proposal when it is submitted to the county and governor. It does not replace the original petition language, which is what would be presented to voters on a ballot. Council members voted and approved an amendment to omit an explanatory caption, which wasn't required to submit the ballot proposal to the governor's office. Councilors opted to submit only the original ballot language, with the option to include a caption later.
Council member Patrick McLean, Ward 2, has previously been critical of the proposed initiative. At the April 7 meeting, he expressed concern that the way the proposal is presented does not accurately reflect the actual impact to the city charter, which he said will change the entire budget process and the respective roles of the mayor, city council, citizens and the city manager. Currently, the charter places budget approval power with the City Council.
"It is holding our budget hostage," McLean said.
McLean told The Eastern Echo, "There is no good reason to put anything before the voters that creates an inherent, internal contradiction within our city charter. This would make our city charter make no sense. And it would make our city almost ungovernable."
He raised questions about the City Council's ability to complete its fiscal budget by the date Michigan law would require if completing a budget depended on the timeline of an election cycle.
"We would have to start, I believe, a 2029 budget while we're busy doing the 2026 budget," McLean said.
He said if the budget wasn't approved by the required date, it could trigger other actions, such as the appointment of an emergency manager, which he said could harm the city. City charter stipulates that a budget must be adopted by June 7 each year, and the mayor shall declare a fiscal emergency if a budget isn't adopted by then. McLean also raised concerns about how the proposed change could impact the police department and its officials.
"This is really in an effort to either throw us into fiscal chaos or eliminate the police department," McLean said.
Councilor Desiraé Simmons, Ward 3, pushed back on these concerns, describing some of the pushback as fear-mongering and misinformation around the issue. Councilor Amber Fellows, Ward 3, shared similar views, telling The Echo that this initiative will not defund the police.
"It's just: every time we want to increase the budget, it has to be approved by the vote of the people," Fellows said. "It is really a matter of a compelling argument from future council governments, like, 'Hey, we need an increase.' And if the argument is compelling, then the voters might support that, but overall, it is just some more democracy, and so I find it pretty abhorrent that people are advocating against it."
Fellows said the proposal brings decision-making to the hands of the public, and said the community should move towards addressing social issues as a collective.
"To get more into organizing social needs by collective decision-making, I think is the direction we should go towards, so that is going to look like shifting away from traditional government models, and putting more things on the ballot," Fellows said.
Before the proposal can appear on ballots, it must be reviewed by the governor, who bring back adjustments that need to be made, said City Attorney Randolph Barker.
During the public comment portion of the April 7 meeting, some residents spoke in favor of the proposal and bringing the original language to a vote on a ballot. Many mentioned recent incidents, including the police response to a man who barricaded himself in his home and a fatal shooting by Washtenaw County Sheriff's deputies, as reasons for their support.
In materials shared online, organizers at YpsiBIG argue that this initiative is necessary to rethink what safety means, and that oftentimes, residents aren't even aware when the police budget increases, stated an informational Google document from the group.
"Currently, the general public has no say in changes to the police budget. The budget has frequently been raised at the last moment by the approval of council, and while citizens can express public comment in either support or disapproval, it is ultimately not up to us," the document stated.
