From left: AAATA strategic planner Michael Benham, Ed Vielmetti (background) and CEO Michael Ford, talked after the meeting.

The board barely achieved a quorum – with six of 10 board members attending. Anya Dale presided over the meeting in the absence of board chair Charles Griffith.

The board received some updates on the preparations for implementing that expanded service plan. And three of the board’s July 24 voting items were related at least indirectly to the additional services: a plan for acquiring 20 new buses; adjustments to the current fiscal year’s operating budget; and a tweak to the AAATA’s mission statement.

The mission statement was modified to highlight “accessible” as the kind of transit services that the AAATA aspires to provide. The change to the mission statement also reflected the addition last year of the word “area” to the name of the organization. That name change came as the result of adding the city of Ypsilanti as well as Ypsilanti Township as members of the authority. Previously, the city of Ann Arbor had been the sole member. The additional services will be paid for with a millage levied on property owners from all the member jurisdictions.

The fiscal 2014 budget ends Sept. 30. Revenues were adjusted to reflect the millage revenue. Of the additional $4,543,695 in local millage revenues, $3,850,000 is being put toward next year’s FY 2015 budget. Adjustments to this year’s budget include changes to reflect the hiring and training of 11 new bus drivers, bringing the total to 138 drivers. An operations supervisor, two new vehicle mechanics, an additional service crew member, and a human resources administrative assistant will also be added.

The additional 20 buses the AAATA is acquiring for the service expansion are spread over the next three years, with two to be acquired this year, 11 in FY 2015 and 7 in FY 2016. The buses for FY 2015 and 2016 will be paid for with the additional local millage funds, while the buses this year will tap a federal grant with matching state funds. A public hearing was held on the federal grant application that will include those two buses.

Potential future expansion of services – in addition to those to be implemented starting Aug. 24 – was also reflected in a voting item on the board’s July 24 agenda. The board approved an increase in the contract with SmithGroupJJR from $105,200 to $800,000 – to continue study of north-south commuter rail options between Howell and Ann Arbor. An earlier phase of the study for the WALLY (Washtenaw and Livingston Railway) project identified a segment of the Ann Arbor Railroad right-of-way, between Liberty and Washington streets, as a preferred location for a downtown Ann Arbor station. A portion of the work is being paid for with a $640,000 federal Transportation, Community and System Preservation (TCSP) program grant.

The final voting item on the board’s agenda was a $234,360 contract with GZA GeoEnvironmental to perform environmental cleanup work at the AAATA headquarters building at 2700 S. Industrial Highway. The cleanup, which involves contamination from a gasoline leak that was identified in 2010, is covered by insurance.

At its July 24 meeting, the board also heard its usual range of updates, reports and public commentary, much of which highlighted the idea of accessibility.

AAATA Mission Statement

The board considered an update to the organization’s mission statement – to reflect the new name of the organization and a few other concerns. The proposed modified mission statement, which reflected board discussion at its June 10 retreat, read as follows [added words in bold, deleted words in strike-through]

It is the Mission of the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority to provide accessible useful, reliable, safe, environmentally responsible, and cost-effective public transportation options for the benefit of the Greater Ann Arbor Area Community.

The mission statement had been last affirmed over five years ago at the AAATA’s Feb. 18, 2009 board meeting.

The word “useful” was critiqued by some board members at the June retreat as too modest an attribute, and they argued for “valuable” instead. Ultimately, the consensus was that this positive, goal-oriented attribute could be incorporated through adding the word “benefit.”

Inserting the word “accessible” was championed at the retreat by board member Jack Bernard. He works in the office of the University of Michigan’s general counsel and serves on the university’s council for disability concerns.

The insertion of the word “area” in the mission statement reflects the geographic expansion of the AAATA’s jurisdiction in 2013 to include the city of Ypsilanti and Ypsilanti Township – as well as the formal change of the authority’s name to include “area.” [.pdf of memo on AAATA mission statement]

Mission Statement: Public Commentary

Thomas Partridge addressed the board’s mission statement. He said it needed to be expanded – to serve the needs of the most vulnerable riders. The operating budget needs to have additional funding to greater serve the most vulnerable riders in terms of disabled persons and senior citizens in particular, he said. And the board needs to answer how, with the passage of the millage, service will be targeted to the disabled people and seniors. Partridge did not see those priorities in the existing materials and the existing applications to the FTA for formula funding. He also questioned whether existing funding could be used to continue planning for a true countywide transportation system. Such a system is certainly needed to serve those areas of the county that do not have existing bus service, senior ride service, or paratransit handicap ride service, he said.

Mission Statement: Board Discussion

Roger Kerson reported out for the performance monitoring and external relations (PMER) committee. He noted that the revised mission statement was on the board’s agenda. He pointed out that there had been some debate about the use of the word “useful.” He urged the board to take a careful read of the proposed new language, saying that the issue should not be re-debated at every meeting – the board should adopt a mission statement that it really likes.

During question time, Jack Bernard talked about the image of the “service star” in some of the marketing materials and how it matches up with the mission statement. He asked that the board continue to think about how that star is going to look after the mission statement is adjusted. He put a plug in for “accessibility” to be added into that graphic.

When the board came to the item on its agenda, Kerson was asked to read aloud the new mission statement, which he did. Larry Krieg said he rather lamented the demise of the word “useful” but was willing to live with a mission statement as it stands. He felt it would require too much revision of planned materials to change it now. In some ways, usefulness is so fundamental to the mission of any transit organization that it almost goes without saying. So Krieg could live without saying it, as long as the AAATA remembers that it needs to be useful to the community – that is why it’s there.

Jack Bernard thanked his board colleagues for including the word “accessible.” He also appreciated the fact that the word had not been relegated to the end. So often, accessibility is relegated to an afterthought at the end of the statement. Putting it at the beginning heralds that all the programs, services and buses are to be accessible to all – people who have disabilities, older passengers, kids, people with resources and people who don’t have a great deal of resources. It’s the entire community that they are trying to serve. So he commended the board for stepping up to this and including the word “accessible.”

Outcome: The board voted unanimously to adopt the new mission statement.

Mission Statement: Accessibility

During his report to the board, CEO Michael Ford noted that during public commentary at the planning and development committee meeting, there had been a request for additional information at bus stops to aid passengers. The AAATA is considering redesigning its bus stops and changing the size of the signs to provide more information on each side of each sign, he said.

During question time, Jack Bernard thanked Ford for talking about the expansion of information at the bus stops. He felt it was a very important thing. But as the organization thinks about doing that, he wanted to encourage people to be aware of a general trend across organizations: When more information is provided, the font tends to be shrunk. He encouraged the AAATA, as it thinks about the real estate of the sign, to understand that there’s a cost associated with shrinking everything down – because it ends up not having a great deal of utility.

Bernard asked that a QR code be included, as more information is added on bus stops signs. That would enable somebody to get that information and then enlarge it or get expanded information using a mobile device. Those QR codes are a very efficient way to drive people to information that they want, which can not be included on the sign. He allowed that not all riders have a smartphone, so essential information still needs to be included on the physical sign. Increasingly, however, riders are connected with mobile devices.

Ford responded to Bernard by saying that staff just had a meeting about QR codes and signage, and they discussed issues of color contrast, placement and height. So Ford welcomed Bernard’s comments.

During public commentary time at the conclusion of the meeting, Ed Vielmetti responded to Bernard’s suggestion about QR codes. A local example of where that’s being done is the University of Michigan’s transit system, he said. There are QR codes on a number of the university’s bus stop signs. You put your phone up to it, it beeps, and it gives you a link to information that is specific to that individual stop – so it is not general information about the system, or general information about the line that you’re on, but rather it’s information relevant to your exact location. That is immensely helpful, Vielmetti said, especially if you are in an unfamiliar spot wondering where the bus goes, or when the bus coming, or if it is even running right now. It’s not a trivial exercise to assemble real-time, pinpoint information for thousands of stops, he ventured, but he called it a worthwhile goal.

Also during public commentary at the end of the meeting, Thomas Partridge told the board that he had attended the AAATA’s meetings numerous times over more than a decade, pleading for greater assistance for the most vulnerable riders – including handicapped riders and senior citizens. He questioned whether the board and administration of the AAATA comprehended and absorbed the full range of difficulties that disabled people and senior riders have in using the system.

Earlier in the meeting, during his report from the performance monitoring and external relations committee, Roger Kerson noted that a new web developer has been hired on staff: Preston Stewart. Kerson felt it was a good transition to bring the web project in-house so that the AAATA is not at the mercy of a contractor. If you think about the core functions of the agency, Kerson said, the ability to communicate regularly with its customers in an efficient and up-to-date manner is not an add-on – that is a core function. He called Preston’s previous experience very impressive.

Bernard said he was thrilled to hear that a new web developer had been hired. It remains continually important for the website to be accessible. He said that strides have been made, but the website was not yet completely accessible. He hoped that the web developer would be provided any support that he needed to make the AAATA website as accessible as it can be. Bernard asked if the new web developer had any experience in accessible websites. Ford was not sure, but said the AAATA was focused on that issue.

New Buses

The board considered a change to its capital and categorical grant program – in order to acquire new buses needed to implement expanded services. The services will be funded by the new millage that voters approved earlier this year on May 6, 2014. The expanded services are scheduled to begin on Aug 24.

The plan is add a total of 20 new buses over the next three years to the AAATA’s existing fleet of 80 buses. Total cost for the vehicles is $9 million.

The initial service expansion will not require many additional buses – as expanded services focus on extended hours of operation. But over the five-year service expansion, new route configurations and higher frequency services will require the additional vehicles. By year, here’s how the bus acquisition breaks down:

• 2014: 2 buses for service expansion. Federal grant and state matching funds ($1,016,250). [Tentative: clean diesel.]
• 2015: 11 buses for service expansion. Local funds from new millage ($4,903,300). [Tentative: clean diesel.]
• 2016: 7 buses for service expansion. Local funds from new millage ($3,187,100). [Tentative: clean diesel.]

A tentative decision appears to have been made to specify the drive train on the new buses as conventional clean diesel, as opposed to the hybrid electric technology used by 52 of the current 80-bus fleet. However, no final decision has been made on the technology choice. The incremental cost per bus for the hybrid technology is nearly $200,000.

Minutes from the board’s July 8, 2014 planning and development committee show that AAATA maintenance manager Terry Black has indicated a final decision on the type of power unit for the buses needs to be made by November or December of 2014 – and certainly no later than February of 2015. The battery packs for many of the existing hybrid buses are reaching the end of their projected life, and the AAATA is also weighing the hybrid-versus-conventional diesel decision for replacement of those buses.

Among the issues to be weighed for the hybrid-versus-conventional diesel decision are fuel savings and noise reduction associated with hybrids. At the AAATA’s June 10 meeting, Black reported that for the newer clean diesel models, there is not a significant difference in the fuel economy. Some of the AAATA’s existing hybrid buses have had some transmission problems, which have resulted in a cost of $50,000 per bus. Even though that cost has been covered under warranty, the manufacturer is looking toward reducing the warranty coverage.

The board’s planning and development committee is supposed to receive a report on the hybrid-versus-diesel issue at its August meeting.

Outcome: When the board reached the voting item on its agenda, there was no additional discussion. The board unanimously approved the amendment to the capital and categorical grant program.

New Buses: Federal Grant Application

While most of the new buses needed for the expansion of service will be purchased with new millage funds, at least two buses will be purchased with federal grant money. A public hearing was held on the federal grant applications, which essentially mirrored the capital and categorical grant program already approved by the board last year, with the exception of some “livability” funds that the AAATA had been awarded a few months ago.

Chris White, AAATA manager of service development, explained that the public hearing was about the FY 2014 program of projects. The program of projects and the public hearing notice had been published in the Ann Arbor News twice. And it had been posted on the AAATA website for the last 30 days. No written comments had been received either by mail or by email at that point, White said. He then reviewed the entire program.

The projects in this program come directly from the capital and categorical grant program that was adopted by the board in December 2013 – with one exception, White said. When the AAATA was developing the capital and categorical grant program, a process was used that was open to the public. That included three meetings of the planning and development committee, and the board meeting at which the program was actually adopted. Any additional comments received that night would be included in the record for the Federal Transit Administration to review, White said.

White explained that the amounts in the program – Section 5307 ($6,457,306), and Section 5339 ($752,049) funds – are formula funds that are allocated to the Ann Arbor urbanized area. The southeast Michigan Regional Transit Authority (RTA) is now the designated recipient for those funds, but the RTA has given the AAATA the authority to program that money and to make applications directly to the Federal Transit Administration for those funds. Livability Section 5309 ($813,000) funds are discretionary, White said.

There was also an amount for 5307 carryover ($622,969), White said. Those are funds from last year that the AAATA did not program. The funds are available to the AAATA for the two years following their appropriation. So the AAATA always uses up the money, but not always in the year that the funds are appropriated.

The total program is for the use of a total of $7,521,000 in federal funds. The total amount available is $8,645,324, so about $1.1 million will be carried over into FY 2015, White said.

White then reviewed the items in the program – nine small “expansion buses.” These are buses that AAATA will purchase that the paratransit contractor now provides for A-Ride service, White explained. So these buses are not to expand A-Ride service, so much as for the AAATA to provide that service directly, he clarified.

The second item on the list of projects is three large buses for expanded service. Those buses will use the federal Livability Section funds – the discretionary funds that the AAATA received. The AAATA had been informed that it had received approval for funds during the year – just a couple of months ago. And they were not included in the capital and categorical grant program, because the AAATA didn’t think it had the funds for the buses at that time.

White noted that this item was labeled as “up to three large buses.” He explained the $813,000 was actually not enough for three full buses – it’s enough for two buses and a fraction of a bus. The AAATA must record “up to three” in order to spend the entire amount, White said. Those are buses for the AAATA’s expansion for the five-year transit improvement program. The millage funds that were approved by the voters were programmed to buy expansion buses. Most of those buses will still be purchased from the local funds, White said. The livability funds would help the AAATA purchase two and a fraction of those buses.

All the other items on the program of projects are being paid for with the Section 5307 formula funds – computer-aided reservations dispatch for A-Ride, computer hardware and software, bus components (for hybrid buses), bus stop improvements (a Super Stop on Washtenaw Avenue), capital costs of subcontracted service, preventive maintenance and operating assistance.

New Buses: Federal Grant Application – Public Hearing

Jim Mogensen told the board that he thought it would be helpful in the future to have an issue paper that explains how the formula funds work. Is it because of the amount of service that we have? It seems that what is happening, Mogensen said, is you find out how much the funds are and then you figure out how to allocate the money in these various categories. But for someone who doesn’t have that information, it’s a little unclear how that would work. The other thing that would be helpful to know is what happens if for some reason federal money doesn’t come through. How would that impact how the funds are sorted out?

Tom Partridge questioned whether the existing formulas are sufficient to serve the most vulnerable paratransit riders. He said he heard no significant amounts being dedicated to extending and expanding the service that is available to handicapped riders or senior riders and other people who are disadvantaged in the community. He called on the AAATA to take steps before sending this on to the federal government. He called on the Federal Transit Administration to give priority for expansion of transit services for senior and handicapped riders.

FY 2014 Budget Adjustments

The AAATA fiscal year runs from Oct. 1 through Sept 30. At its July 24 meeting, the board considered an amendment to the budget for FY 2014 fiscal year to increase total expenses by $41,597 – from $34,073,795 to $34,115,392.

The proposed change also reflects adjustments to incorporate proceeds from the new millage, approved by voters on May 6, 2014. Of that additional $4,543,695 in local millage revenues, $3,850,000 is being put toward next year’s FY 2015 budget. Although that net amount of the expense adjustment is small, the infusion of new millage funds was offset by several hundred thousand dollars that were not spent this fiscal year for north-south commuter rail study.

It’s not uncommon for public bodies to make adjustments to the budget toward the end of the fiscal year.

The AAATA’s proposed amended budget reflected a number of changes related to the new millage and the service expansion that it will pay for. Among those changes are the hiring and training of 11 new bus drivers, bringing the total to 138 drivers. An operations supervisor, two new vehicle mechanics, an additional service crew member, and a human resources administrative assistant will also be added. [.pdf of detail on FY 2014 budget amendment]

The fares collected under the AAATA’s agreement with the University of Michigan are under budget for the year, because the proportion of the $1-per-ride fare booked as cash has decreased. A federal grant – which is recorded as federal operating assistance – has increased.

In the report to the board treasurer, AAATA controller Phil Webb reported an $81,254 surplus. But the report also noted an unrestricted net asset reserve amount of 2.64 months. The board’s reserve policy is to maintain at least the equivalent of a 3-month operating reserve.

FY 2014 Budget Adjustment: Public Commentary

Jim Mogensen addressed the board during the board’s first opportunity for public commentary at the start of the meeting. He said he’d always been very impressed with how detailed the information is about the operating budget. The AAATA presented both the standard operating budget and the extended notes. Because people are trying to understand how this all works, he suggested that materials also include a discussion of how the money is flowing in. For example, in the category of “special fares” – which related to the University of Michigan and the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority, Washtenaw Community College and Eastern Michigan University – it would be helpful to have that broken out so that people could see how the total number is determined. He suggested that the board figure out a way to include that kind of information in the extended notes on the budget.

FY 2104 Budget Adjustment: Board Discussion

Reporting out from the performance monitoring and external relations committee, Roger Kerson noted that the proposed budget revision includes the new millage funds and the expansion of service. The total amount of the adjustment is small because the AAATA spent less in a different area – namely, the north-south rail study. There were a few hundred thousand dollars not spent on that project in this fiscal year. So even though there is more than $42,000 going to new activities, the net effect is the increase that is included in the budget. The committee had discussed with staff the fact that the board wants to track as carefully as the AAATA can exactly how the new millage funds are used for the new service – so that the AAATA can report to voters on that in an ongoing way, he said.

The committee had reviewed financial reports. Budget-wise, the organization is under budget on both revenues and expenses, so that matches up fairly well, Kerson said. The news on performance reports is that over the year, ridership is down overall as a result of the severe winter weather. People stay home and work at home or make other arrangements so that they don’t have to travel, and that impacts the quantity of service that gets delivered, he said.

AAATA board member Eli Cooper.

When the board came to the voting item on its agenda, Eli Cooper stressed that the amendment of the budget is a positive aspect of the effort, which is a culmination of the efforts that led to the successful millage. The budget amendment is needed, to incorporate resources to sustain the new services that are being offered. The AAATA needs to be able to account for the resources that have been bestowed on the organization, and they need to be vigilant to ensure that the pledges made with respect to the five-year service plan are kept. Those pledges should be kept in a way that is consistent with the mission statement – in a cost-effective manner.

The budget is a planning instrument expressing the AAATA’s plan as it moves forward, Cooper said. It’s not merely an item where the board says: Yep, the numbers all add up and we’re going to approve that. So Cooper asked that the board take a moment to reflect on the value and the meaning of the budget – as a device that reflects all the hard work and that prepares a platform for the services to be delivered in a manner that is fiscally responsible. That’s one of the challenges the AAATA as an authority does well with, Cooper said, and it needs to continue to do well with that. So Cooper was pleased to speak in support of this amendment to the operating budget – because of the work done in the last six months, the last year, and even before that.

Outcome: The board unanimously approved the budget adjustments.

North-South Rail Study (WALLY)

The board considered an $800,000 contract with SmithGroupJJR for additional study of north-south commuter rail project. [.pdf memo for July 24, 2014 WALLY resolution]

Planning and work for north-south commuter rail between Ann Arbor and Howell in Livingston County has been going on for several years in a project that has been called WALLY (Washtenaw and Livingston Railway). The AAATA appears to be transitioning to a project label that incorporates “N-S Rail” as part of the description.

About two years ago, at its Aug. 16, 2012 meeting, the AAATA board approved the award of a $105,200 contract to SmithGroupJJR for “station location and design services” in connection with the WALLY project. The board’s authorization at that time included an option to increase the contract scope at a later date. That’s what the board’s July 24 item was proposed to do – increasing the total amount of the contract from $105,200 to $800,000.

Of that $800,000, a significant portion will be covered with a federal grant received by the AAATA in 2012 under the federal Transportation, Community and System Preservation (TCSP) program. The federal grant award of $640,000 requires a $160,000 local match, which will be made by the Howell Downtown Development Authority, the Ann Arbor DDA and Washtenaw County – equaling a total of $143,000, with the remaining $17,000 to come from the AAATA.

The initial $105,200 contract with SmithGroupJJR was focused on a station location study and is now largely complete. The conclusion of that station location study was to identify a segment of the Ann Arbor Railroad right-of-way, between Liberty and Washington streets, as a preferred location for a downtown station.

The scope of the additional work under the contract considered by the AAATA board on July 24, 2014 will:

• Thoroughly examine alternatives/supplements to N-S Rail service such as express bus, bus-on-shoulder and HOV (high-occupancy vehicle) options.
• Complete the evaluation of boarding areas (stations) in terms of locations, costs and required features.
• Estimate operating and capital costs at a much finer level of detail, taking into account new service concepts, rail right-of-way work, ownership changes, and railcar acquisition that has taken place since 2008.
• Undertake a more rigorous approach to demand estimates in full compliance with FTA New Starts / Small Starts requirements.
• Incorporate “green” concepts and operating principles.
• Be accompanied by a robust public involvement effort aimed at informing stakeholders and testing public support for the service, governance and funding elements of the plan as they evolve.

The timeframe for the second phase of the study is about 18 months.

North-South Rail Study (WALLY): Board Discussion

In his report out from the planning and development committee, Larry Krieg noted that there was a federal grant of $640,000 to undertake the study. He noted that the city study would include not just the possibility of a rail corridor, but also the use of express buses, and high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes on US-23. The study would take about 18 months, he said, and the federal portion covers 80% of the cost. Several organizations – including Washtenaw County, the city of Ann Arbor, the Howell Downtown Development Authority – had contributed to the local match for that. Krieg concluded that the study had received a lot of support from around the region.

In his report out from the performance monitoring and external relations committee, Roger Kerson also commented on the north-south rail feasibility study. He felt that including express buses in the scope of the study is a very good idea – so that the AAATA would have a good sense of what the cost and time alternatives are.

Kerson said he was personally a big fan of trains and noted that the reason the board had a quorum for the meeting was because of the efficiency of DC Metro – which had gotten him from his meeting in Washington, D.C., that morning to Union Station, and then to another train to get to his plane. But that system had cost taxpayers billions and billions of dollars. And WALLY would cost millions and millions. “We can have a bus for thousands of thousands of dollars,” Kerson said, and probably have it in a matter of months, instead of years.

The AAATA had hit a home run with its service between downtown Ann Arbor and Detroit Metro Airport, he said, so the AAATA now knows how to provide that kind of service. AirRide is receiving very high marks for convenience and rider experience. So that’s in the AAATA’s inventory now of services it can deploy. Kerson wanted to see side-by-side from the feasibility report what it will take moneywise and timewise. He also wanted the study to find out people’s opinion about the different kinds of service. He felt that if people are exposed to that type of express bus service, they would really really like it, and it could be done in a cost-effective manner.

Outcome: When the board came to this item on the agenda, there was no additional discussion. The board voted unanimously to approve it.

Environmental Cleanup Work

The board considered a $234,360 contract with GZA GeoEnvironmental for environmental remediation work at the 2700 S. Industrial Highway headquarters of the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority.

The need for the work dates back four years to 2010, when an in-ground gasoline leak was discovered during an upgrade to the fuel tank monitoring system.

The $25,000 insurance deductible through Chartis, the AAATA’s insurance company, has already been paid through previous work associated with this contamination. The current work – up to the $234,360 amount of the contract – will be reimbursed by Chartis for the total project price.

The work includes the following:

1. Installation of new monitoring wells.
2. Perform baseline groundwater sampling.
3. Chemical analysis of groundwater samples.
4. Anaerobic biodegradation bench scale study.
5. Soil and dewatering excavation.
6. Collection of excavation verification of soil remediation sampling.
7. Introduction of selected bioremediation enhancement materials.
8. Backfill restoration and concrete replacement.
9. Groundwater sampling (will occur a year after remediation activities has been completed).
10. Completed summary report that will be filed with MDEQ for satisfactory closure of incident.

Environmental Cleanup Work: Board Discussion

During his report out from the performance monitoring and external relations committee, Roger Kerson noted there are procedures and equipment in place to prevent that kind of leak from happening again.

AAATA controller Phil Webb

Larry Krieg asked for clarification of the word “gas” in the report. Was it natural gas, diesel fuel, or gasoline? AAATA maintenance manager Terry Black explained that it was gasoline. There had been a connection on a tank that had probably been seeping for several years, he said. And it had previously been undetected.

Eric Mahler asked about the contingency costs. If the additional work is not necessary, he wondered if the money would be returned to the AAATA. AAATA controller Phil Webb explained that the AAATA would pay only for the work that was done. If additional work is needed, then there would be an additional negotiation about how that would be paid for. Webb also pointed out that it’s part of the insurance coverage the AAATA has. So the AAATA had worked with the insurance company on this project – which has been approved by the insurance company. The AAATA would be reimbursed through the insurance claim.

Outcome: The board voted unanimously to approve the contract for the environmental work.

Communications, Committees, CEO, Commentary

At its July 24 meeting, the board entertained various communications, including its usual reports from the performance monitoring and external relations committee, the planning and development committee, as well as from CEO Michael Ford. The board also heard commentary from the public. Here are some highlights.

Comm/Comm: Title VI Compliance

During his report to the board, CEO Michael Ford noted that the planning and development committee had heard from members of the public during public commentary at its meeting on the issue of Title VI compliance. The AAATA is close to completing the new requirements under Title VI, Ford reported. The full board had approve the Title VI policy earlier in the year, he noted, and the five-year transit improvement program will provide consistent service in the member jurisdictions, starting with the service improvements in August.

The performance monitoring and external relations committee was also working on revisions to service standards that would need to be approved by September, Ford noted. With those elements in place, Ford continued, the AAATA would be submitting all of its materials in October to the Federal Transit Administration about how the AAATA is meeting Title VI standards. The performance monitoring and external relations committee would be working throughout fiscal year 2015 on service standards, which are not required, but would be updates to Title VI material.

Jim Mogensen said that the previous week he’d attended two public meetings. The first was a University of Michigan’s regents meeting. His topic was public transit and the university. It was a topic that he talked to the regents about a couple of years ago, he said. At that time, he had said: Look, I’m probably gonna file a Title VI complaint against the AAATA – because there are structural issues the university needs to pay attention to when they merge their own transit plans with the AAATA’s. He’d suggested that because outside people would be looking in [to review Title VI compliance], one of the things the university should consider is providing transit out to its East Ann Arbor medical center. What he had not told the regents is that he had decided not to speak to the regents again until he actually filed the complaint. So he had not spoken to the regents for a couple of years.

He told the AAATA board to remain calm – because he had not actually filed a Title VI complaint yet. But he felt it was time to revisit the situation. The M-Ride agreement – between the University of Michigan and the AAATA – is being re-authorized next year and there was a year to figure it all out. So he suggested to the regents that this continues to be an issue – even with the new transit millage, because it is based on property taxes. And if you evaluate service based on municipal capacity, that will always be a challenge.

He suggested that the M-Ride agreement should be linked to the full actual fair, which is $1.50 – whereas the agreement now is for UM to pay $1 per ride. His suggested approach would recognize that what is happening was: People affiliated with the university have their fares paid by the university. The idea would be to tie it to the full fare. So, over the longer term, if fares for the general ridership went up, they would also go up for university affiliates, and would be linked to the university’s use of the transit system.

The second meeting that Mogensen had attended the previous Thursday was the WeROC (Washtenaw Regional Organizing Coalition) meeting. He brought up the Title VI issue up with WeROC – which had worked in support of the public transit millage. So Mogensen wanted to convey to the board that this was something he was working on, and that he was not working on it just by himself. He asked the board to please not short-circuit the idea before it’s given the opportunity to happen. Because sometimes, when you put ideas forth, things actually happen, Mogensen said.

Comm/Comm: Construction Detours; On-Time Performance

During his report to the board, CEO Michael Ford noted that there have been some challenges with construction and detours throughout the city. He ventured that everyone had felt the pinch of that. Some of the routes of been impacted by traffic backups, he reported, which affected the AAATA’s customer satisfaction and on-time performance. They’re doing everything they can to mitigate those issues, but it’s a difficult slog, he said.

AAATA board member Roger Kerson.

Traveling right now in Ann Arbor is a pain in the neck because of all the construction, Roger Kerson noted during his report out from the performance monitoring and external relations committee. That’s true whether you’re walking, riding a bus, or in a car. And that is impacting the AAATA’s ability to meet on-time standards. They’re doing the best they can, but when virtually every major artery and every major entrance and exit to town has construction, and the buses just can’t move.

Kerson was surprised to hear about the situation on Pontiac Trail, where the AAATA literally cannot run the buses down the street and has to stop and turn around and have a detour. Obviously that is going to impact people there quite a bit, he said, but added: “We are at the mercy of the construction project.”

During question time, Larry Krieg asked about the difficulty in achieving on-time performance. He asked if any of the methods the AAATA was using to do the best it could, were impacting budget. Ford replied that they were actually suffering in that area. They are adding buses, and according to AAATA manager of transportation Ron Copeland, the estimate of the additional cost is $4,000-$5,000 a week. There is not a lot of bandwidth available to the AAATA, Ford said, and so they’re trying to do the best they can – trying to communicate as best they can with customers, and to get them where they need to go, as efficiently as they possibly can. He allowed it is costing the organization money to do that.

Comm/Comm: Public Comment – Compliments

Ed Vielmetti addressed the board during the first opportunity for public comment. He introduced himself as an Ann Arbor resident. He told the board that he rides the bus from time to time. As he’d look through the board packet before coming to the meeting, he noticed some of the statistics that were gathered and reported with respect to complaints about drivers and service – as well as compliments about drivers and service. He was surprised to see that the number of compliments was just 41. When he rides the buses, people are generally friendly with the bus driver and say hello and they seem to be cheerful about the whole process – especially in the summertime. Since he had never registered a formal compliment, Vielmetti wasn’t sure what the process was for doing that. He wasn’t sure if he was supposed to send an email or fill out a form at the transit center. He had no clue about how he would add one to the number of compliments. He asked the staff to figure out what needed to be added to signage or to the RideGuide to let people know how they can report on how the ride went, and to encourage people to give positive comments.

Comm/Comm: BTC Public Art

During his report to the board, CEO Michael Ford noted that the planning and development committee had requested a summary of the evolution of the Blake Transit Center art project and the details on the warranty of the artist’s work. Issues of durability and the warranty had been discussed with the artist as a result of the PDC request, Ford said, and that agreement would be committed in writing. The AAATA is also documenting the award of the art project to this particular artist.

During his report out from the planning and development committee, Larry Krieg noted the committee had received an update on the artwork that was funded as a part of the new Blake Transit Center. The artist, Roberto Delgado, made a visit to Ann Arbor and had made photographs of the distinctive parts of the region so that those images can be incorporated into the artwork. The final artwork would be made of tile and would be vandal-resistant, Krieg said. Sue Gott had urged the AAATA to set aside funds for the maintenance of the art, saying that any outdoor artwork would require maintenance.

Comm/Comm: Art Fair Ridership

During his report to the board, Michael Ford noted that the Ann Arbor art fairs had taken place the previous week. Ridership for the AAATA’s art fair shuttle from Briarwood to downtown was up over 30% compared to last year, he reported. There were about 79 riders per service hour and the weather was great. He thanked everyone who was involved in the process.

Present: Eric Mahler, Eli Cooper, Roger Kerson, Anya Dale, Jack Bernard, Larry Krieg.

Absent: Susan Baskett, Sue Gott, Charles Griffith, Gillian Ream Gainsley.

Next regular meeting: Thursday, Aug. 21, 2014 at 6:30 p.m. at the Ann Arbor District Library, 343 S. Fifth Ave., Ann Arbor [confirm date]

The Chronicle could not survive without regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle. And if you’re already on board The Chronicle bus, please encourage your friends, neighbors and colleagues to help support The Chronicle, too!

Exactly one week before the vote, Ward 2 Ann Arbor city councilmembers Jane Lumm and Sally Petersen hosted a resident meeting on the topic.

This AAATA route map shows the current configuration of fixed-route buses. Label and icon for Earhart Village added by The Chronicle.

Invited were all residents of Ward 2, city residents at large, as well as representatives of the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority. The AAATA board voted in February to place the millage on the May 6 ballot.

About 50 people attended. Among others, the meeting drew Ward 2 city council candidate Nancy Kaplan, former Ward 1 council candidate Jeff Hayner, former mayor Ingrid Sheldon, Ward 3 council candidate Julie Grand, and state rep Jeff Irwin (D-53).

This is a report of that meeting.

Lumm and Petersen had previously co-hosted a half dozen similar meetings for their constituents on a variety of topics. The April 29 event had a potentially broader impact: At a candidate forum held on April 16, 2014, mayoral hopeful Petersen had stated that she was planning to wait until after the April 29 ward meeting to decide on a possible endorsement of the millage.

At that time, Petersen was still a little bit on the fence – but leaning toward supporting it. By then, the three other candidates in the Democratic mayoral primary – Sabra Briere, Christopher Taylor and Stephen Kunselman – had already indicated support for the additional tax.

The April 29 evening meeting was held at Earhart Village – a 174-unit condominium community just off the north-south Earhart Road, between Plymouth and Geddes. The Route #2 bus line runs from downtown to the northeast up Plymouth – with a relatively infrequent variant, Route #2C, that offers service down from Plymouth to the Earhart Village area. Accessing Route #3 to the south, on Geddes, would mean about a 1-mile walk up Earhart for an Earhart Village resident.

Frequency of service to the Earhart Village area was among the complaints of some attendees. Many in the room were negatively inclined toward the millage, as one woman announced she’d already voted no, using an absentee ballot. But there were some voices in the room that backed the proposal. Responding to criticism that the AAATA was not a “lean-and-mean” organization, a teacher in the audience made a comparison to cuts by the school district: “Lean-and-mean is not serving our students.”

AAATA staff Chris White, Michael Benham, and Mary Stasiak gave a presentation to the group before fielding questions. Lumm and Petersen structured the interaction by reading questions that attendees had written on index cards, but people were also free to ask direct questions. Some questions were pointedly critical in tone: “Does the millage money cover the additional wear and tear on the roads due to the additional buses?” And some were softballs: “Do Ward 2 constituents understand the benefit of bus expansion for low-income people and people with disabilities?”

At the conclusion of the meeting, Petersen quipped: “We had loaded questions, we had loaded answers. Hopefully one way or another we’ll have loaded buses sometime soon!” And Petersen announced her support for the millage two days later at a May 1 morning meeting of the Main Street Area Association.

However loaded the questions might have been, they elicited some useful information about how public transportation works. This report is organized along three broad themes reflected in the questions and comments from residents: overall efficiency of the AAATA as an organization; the nature of transportation funding; and some basics of public transportation service. The report is supplemented with charts generated from a national transit database.

AAATA Efficiency

A number of questions from the audience – either written on cards and handed to Lumm and Petersen or asked directly – dealt with a perception that the AAATA is not operationally efficient.

AAATA Efficiency: Staffing

Question: If the millage passes, how many new jobs will be created in total at the AAATA, and how many of those will be new drivers? [Background to the question is a claim by opponents of the millage that the AAATA has 52 management staff.]

CHRIS WHITE: We expect over the five-year period about 60 new drivers. And there will be a couple of mechanics because we’ll have a larger fleet of buses. There might be a supervisor or two related to mechanics or facilities – but so far it looks like we can handle this with the staff we’ve got.

Question: Cutting administrative staff could offset increased costs – why isn’t that being pursued?

CHRIS WHITE: Right. That assumes that those administrative staff are not being productive and are not doing tasks that are worthwhile. That’s a judgment for the AAATA board to look at and see what our plans are and what we need to do to carry that out. Administrative staff includes our mechanics supervisors, the transportation supervisors, the people who are dispatching buses, the people investigating accidents, human resources, finance, IT, planning, the people who sell tickets, the people at the front desk, at the Blake Transit Center – it’s a wide range. Our judgment is that the staff that is there is needed in order to provide the level of service that we provide.

MICHAEL BENHAM: There are a number of folks at the office who were amazed to learn that they were “managers.” We have 11 managers. There are 52 non-union employees. That’s a big difference. There’s some messages out there that are a little bit misleading. Take our IT staff – they’re working on the overhead signs on the buses, they work to maintain those, they maintain the fare boxes. The system is very electronic these days. So our IT staff is part of those so-called “managers,” but without them we would not know where our buses are, we would not be able to provide messages to people as the bus arrives at the stop.

[Later in the meeting, Benham stressed the importance of IT staff in some of the shorter-term research and development initiatives.]

The other thing I think we should point out in terms of research and development, some of it is looking fairly far down the road. But some of it is looking at short-range issues. One of those is transit signal priority, where buses can communicate with the traffic signals and a little extra green time or gain a little extra time on that left turn – and that will speed up our operations quite a bit. With more traffic out there, we are concerned that our operations might slow down and we want to make sure that we can keep up with it.

Also, fare box technology is another big thing. Right now, if you ride our service, you see people get on the bus and people unroll their dollar bill and it takes a while at each stop. Obviously you want to collect those dollars, but it slows down our operation to do that. There are technologies out there that are being used by other systems, where you buy your ticket on your phone and you show it to your driver or you have a smart card that you don’t have to put into the farebox, you can just bring it close to the farebox. Those technologies are here, but it takes work to figure out how to apply these technologies in the system. But that’s going to speed up service. We’re looking long-term, but we’re also looking at very near-term possibilities.

Question: Does the AAATA conduct salary surveys and keep its salary levels commensurate with the corporate world?

CHRIS WHITE: We have a salary administration program that we’ve had in place for a number of years. It compares our administrative wages by position with similar positions in southeast Michigan. We benchmark those positions that are relatively simple to compare: Manager of human resources is pretty much the same at a transit agency as it is at a lot of other places … finance manager and that kind of thing. And so those are benchmarked. We keep our salaries in line with those in southeast Michigan.

AAATA Efficiency: Expenditures on Marketing, Campaign

Question:What about all the marketing staff and consultants on marketing?

MICHAEL BENHAM: As far as marketing, we have 50% more riders per service hour than our peers. In part that is because of our marketing. That’s because we offer innovative programs. We go to schools and we talk with kids early on to see if we can introduce them to transit and make them lifelong transit riders. We go to the University of Michigan and we offer options to them for getting to their workplace without bringing their car into Ann Arbor. We go to companies and talk to them about how they can get downtown without bringing their car into the downtown, and on and on.

You know, transit is not necessarily something that people know about or think about. Some people do, but we need to work hard to get people onto the system. We have a big chunk of ridership that we call “transit dependent” – they don’t have cars and they don’t have any other choice. But the big and growing part of our system is what we call “choice riders.” Those are people who have a car, or maybe have one car at home and there are two wage earners. But they have a choice whether to take that bus to work, or to the theater, or what have you. Maybe they do it to save money – which they do – or maybe because they are environmentally conscious. So the marketing we do – we call it outreach – it is our way of talking to the community and getting people interested in the service and getting people onto the bus and making that productivity 50% higher than our peers. That’s what that’s all about.

RESIDENT A: You said that the marketing campaign is designed to go to schools to urge students to use the bus more. I’ve watched the campaign over the last two years, and much of it has nothing to do with urging people to ride the bus. “TheRide, your way, vote on Tuesday.” “TheRide gets people to jobs for a healthy economy. Vote May 6.” “TheRide is essential for independent living. Vote May 6.” It’s all feel-good stuff to make people feel good about the AAATA – and damn little of it is the kind of thing the Ann Arbor District Library has, which is: We have a program here and we have a program here – Ya’ll come.

MICHAEL BENHAM: The Ride Guide is something we publish three times a year that has all information about how to ride the bus, the different kinds of tickets that are available, how to use the Blake Transit Center – so this is a central book. This is our bread and butter.

RESIDENT A: I’ve lived here 45 years, and I’ve never seen a more expensive taxpayer-funded millage campaign than the one I’m experiencing right now.

RESIDENT B: You think there’s something wrong with the AAATA telling you that there is a millage vote going on?!

MARY STASIAK: It would be completely inappropriate for the agency not to tell people that there was a vote coming up. And it’s really important that we tell people that there is a vote so that they can have a choice and they can decide for themselves what it is and how they want to vote. And you learn about it. It’s our job to tell you that this is what would be included and what you would be paying for. If we did not do that, then I would say shame on us.

SALLY PETERSEN: The sentiment I’m hearing is that some of the informational literature – knowing that you’re not a campaign organization – it feels like it’s going right up on the edge of being campaign propaganda. You say to vote, but you don’t say how to vote.

RESIDENT C: If you say you want as many people to know about it as possible, why are you having it in May instead of voting when we’re voting for governor [in November]?

MARY STASIAK: We did that on purpose so that we would not be competing with all the other issues, so that people have a clear understanding of what they were voting on.

RESIDENT C: You’d have another three months to learn about it.

AAATA Efficiency: Overall Perception

Question: I just want to say that the city, the schools and all of us workers have had to become more lean-and-mean. And I have not seen that from this presentation. We feel like [the marketing campaign] is more grandiose spending of money. We want to see you be lean-and-mean like we’ve all had to – in our jobs and our schools, and our state government. We feel like you could be a little more lean-and-mean on things.

MICHAEL BENHAM: There’s two ways to succeed in business. One is to slash and cut – bring out the meat cleaver, slash costs to the bone to the point where it really hurts your product. The other way to do it is to do what we’ve been doing – which is to build up our customer base, build our customers so we have that 50% more than our peers. We are a lean-and-mean organization. We keep a constant eye on costs and we are always looking at ways to save a few dollars here and there. But by the same token, we pay attention to our customers, both our existing customers and the many people out there who would be our customers in the future. It’s really about how to succeed in business, and I think that’s what we’re doing.

RESIDENT D: Being a teacher, lean-and-mean is not serving our students.

AAATA Efficiency: Comparative National Stats

When Benham referred to the AAATA’s 50% greater ridership per service hour than its peer group, he was citing the result of a peer-group comparison analysis from a tool that is available through the Florida Transit Information System (FTIS) based on recommendations from the Transit Cooperative Research Program.

To determine a peer group, the tool relies on the following criteria to establish a “likeness” index between a transit agency and other transit agencies nationwide:

• urban area population
• total annual vehicle miles operated
• annual operating budget
• population density
• percent of college students
• population growth rate
• percent service purchased
• percent low-income population
• annual delay (hours) per traveler
• freeway lane miles (thousands) per capita
• percent service demand-responsive
• distance between agencies

Based on the “likeness” index, it’s possible to select the top 20 (or any number) of other transit agencies to analyze in comparison to the AAATA. Measured on the above criteria, using 2010 demographic survey information, the most similar 20 organizations to the AAATA are transit agencies in these peer communities: Peoria, IL; Lexington, KY; Moline, IL; Lansing, MI; Syracuse, NY; Savannah, GA; Champaign-Urbana, IL; Roanoke, VA; Concord, CA; Erie, PA; Kalamazoo, MI; Harrisburg, PA; Fort Wayne, IN; Rockford, IL; Shreveport, LA; Hartford, CT; Fort Collins, CO; Scranton, PA; Gainesville, FL; and South Bend, IN.

The peer group scoring based on the following year’s data resulted in a group of peers that overlapped in 19 out of 20 cases, with some minor shuffling of “likeness” scores.

Using the same tool, The Chronicle was able to replicate the AAATA’s conclusions in determining the peer group, as well as the comparative analysis for three metrics. For its fixed-route service, the AAATA’s cost per service hour is higher than its peer group average. But the AAATA’s number of riders per service hour is higher than its peer group. The number of riders per service hour is sufficiently higher that it pushes the AAATA’s cost per ride lower than its peer group.

In the charts below, the AAATA is always presented in the leftmost bar, and the other transit agencies are presented from left to right in their rank order of “likeness.” The peer group median is shown in a horizontal red line.

AAATA Operating Expense per Revenue Hour compared against FTIS Top 20 peers. Top 20 peers to AAATA are based on Florida Transit Information System (FTIS) analysis. Data from Integrated National Transit Database Analysis System (INTDAS), developed for Florida Department of Transportation by Lehman Center for Transportation Research, Florida International University, http://www.ftis.org/intdas.html, accessed Nov. 22, 2013.

AAATA Passenger Trips per Revenue Hour compared against FTIS Top 20 peers. Top 20 peers to AAATA based on Florida Transit Information System (FTIS) analysis. Data from Integrated National Transit Database Analysis System (INTDAS), developed for Florida Department of Transportation by Lehman Center for Transportation Research, Florida International University, http://www.ftis.org/intdas.html, accessed Nov. 22, 2013.

AAATA Operating Expense per Trip compared against FTIS Top 20 peers. Top 20 peers to AAATA based on Florida Transit Information System (FTIS) analysis. Data from Integrated National Transit Database Analysis System (INTDAS), developed for Florida Department of Transportation by Lehman Center for Transportation Research, Florida International University, http://www.ftis.org/intdas.html, accessed Nov. 22, 2013.

While there’s been considerable public back and forth between opponents of the millage and the AAATA about the number of managers employed at the authority, the National Transit Database includes administrative employees and total employees (as well as other categories of employees) as variables. For 2012, the database shows 26.5 FTE in administration and 181 total employees. If administrative FTEs are computed as a percent of the total and that statistic is compared to the AAATA’s peer group, the AAATA’s percentage is higher than the peer group median:

AAATA Administrative Employees as a Percentage compared against FTIS Top 20 peers. Top 20 peers to AAATA based on Florida Transit Information System (FTIS)

Historically, the number of administrative employees at the AAATA has trended higher over the last three years, as the organization has added capacity for planning and development of service expansion alternatives and public engagement. At the April 29 meeting, AAATA representatives indicated that if the millage passes, the service improvements would result in 60 additional bus driver positions, but not add administrative positions. That mix (shown in the red bar) would bring AAATA’s administrative staff ratio back in line with the percentage the AAATA has had historically:

AAATA Historical Employees as a Percentage charted with data from the Florida Transit Information System (FTIS)

The AAATA’s higher ridership also means that the number of rides provided per employee is higher than its peer group:

AAATA Trips per FTE compared against FTIS Top 20 peers. Top 20 peers to AAATA based on Florida Transit Information System (FTIS) analysis. Data from Integrated National Transit Database Analysis System (INTDAS), developed for Florida Department of Transportation by Lehman Center for Transportation Research, Florida International University, http://www.ftis.org/intdas.html, accessed Nov. 22, 2013.

Funding Sources for Public Transportation

In addition to questions about millage mechanics, several of the questions from residents touched on various funding sources and why they are not being used instead of a millage.

Funding Sources: AAATA Millage – We Already Pay

Question: The $70 that this millage would cost the owner of a $200,000 house is on top of the city millage of 2 mills that we are paying already – so you’re not just paying $70, you’re paying $270.

MICHAEL BENHAM: That’s a good point, and we have balanced the service with the revenues. While Ann Arbor is paying more for the service – because of these stacked millages – Ann Arbor is getting the overwhelming majority of the service. Ypsilanti is putting 0.7 mills on top of their roughly 1 mill and they’re getting that level of service.

Funding Sources: AAATA Millage – After Five Years?

Question: If this is a five-year plan, does this imply no request for an increased millage for the next five years?

MICHAEL BENHAM: We haven’t really looked that far, to be honest. There’s more need for service out there, there’s no question about it, but we have not made any plans to expand the system beyond five years. You have seen our 30-year plan. We need to be flexible in response to changes: A new employer coming into town, or a new large set of apartments can change a lot of our plans. As long as growth continues, I think it is safe to say there will be more services needed out there. We are aware already that our proposed services won’t serve all of the needs. But we are also aware that the public appetite for providing transit on every street is not there.

CHRIS WHITE: I think an important point of this is that we have tried to be careful in planning the funding so that the 0.7 mills is sufficient to fund the service plan in place. And at the end of that five-year period, that same millage rate would be sufficient to carry it forward. We are not going to wind up in a position at the end of five years where we say that we can’t continue the service after five years unless we get a higher millage. So we tried to be careful in planning. That has been the intention to make sure that 0.7 mills is sufficient pay the service now, and into the future after five years.

Question: If the millage passes – which is 35% more than what we’re paying now – and we’re not happy with it, can we vote it down or do we have it forever?

CHRIS WHITE: At the end of five years, this millage would come up for renewal. [Yes, it could be voted down.]

Funding Sources: RTA Millage?

By way of background, the southeast Michigan Regional Transit Authority was established in a lame duck session of the Michigan legislature in late 2012, and includes a four-county region – Macomb, Oakland, Washtenaw and Wayne – with each county making two appointments to the board, and the city of Detroit making one.

Question: What about concurrent millages? If the AAATA millage passes, and in 2016 when the regional transit authority (RTA) asks for one, is there any guarantee that there can’t be any concurrent millages that will be added on top of this?

CHRIS WHITE: It’s really hard to say what the RTA is going to do. They’ve been working really hard to get their act together. But it is going very slowly. If there’s anything from the RTA, it will be for the region and for regional service, not for local service within Washtenaw County. If there’s going to be regional service, that will be the RTA’s role and they would have to seek funding from that four-county region.

MICHAEL BENHAM: One of the things that we are concerned about is that the RTA is out there, but we don’t know when they are going to be able to take care of the needs that are out there. The needs are here today. At the earliest, it would be two years before they’re even prepared to request funding. We felt like the needs were pretty urgent.

Funding Sources: State, Federal

Question: How long are the matching funds that you are requesting supposed to last? Are you counting on those funds to remain in place in perpetuity?

CHRIS WHITE: It’s something we worry about a fair amount. It’s one of the reasons we have always had a reserve account – to try to make sure that something doesn’t happen. The state funding mechanism has been in place since 1974, and since that time the state has funded public transit pretty much the same way. Funding as a percentage of operations has been declining over a long period time – but at a very gradual rate, and we’ve been able to manage. The state provides a match for federal capital funds – and that is the first priority for funds that come from what is called the state’s Comprehensive Transportation Fund. So from the state, you have a long history but that doesn’t mean it can’t change.

RESIDENT E: So does the millage increase take that into account or not?

CHRIS WHITE: The budgeting for the millage increase includes a continuation of that state funding that has been in place for 30 years. The second part of it is federal funding – and we also count on federal funding. Similar to state funding, the basic formula for federal funding has been in place for 30 years. The difference with federal funding is that we have seen very steady increases in the level of funding. Part of that funding is based on the population of our urbanized area.

Part of it is based on the amount of service we provide and the amount of service that gets used. That funding has been increasing. We are not counting on further increases, but we are counting on the continuation of that funding source that has been in place for 30 years. So yes, that is something that we worry about in terms of what we could do in the future. But there’s also some pretty significant planning in place. Unlike most places, we don’t spend all of the federal money in the year that we receive it. The feds are nice, they give us money, and they actually let us plan how to use it. The money we get this year we can use over the next three years.

What we do is put together a five-year plan. We bank some of that money, partly for that eventuality that if something happens, we make sure that we can smooth out any change.

RESIDENT E: So you’re asking for more money than you really need?

CHRIS WHITE: No.

RESIDENT E: But if you have money in reserves, you are asking for more money than what you need for operating.

CHRIS WHITE: It is wise and prudent for any organization to have some level of reserves to make sure that they can weather unforeseen circumstances. With transit service, if something happens, we’re not going to just shut the doors. We’re going to be able to do a plan to change. But reserves are something we actually have to have.

MICHAEL BENHAM: Remember the federal shutdown. We need to be prepared if there is a temporary problem. If there is a longer-term problem, this is not entirely out of our control. We do work very closely with our congressional delegation, we work with our local delegation in Lansing, and with the other transit agencies to really push for these funding programs. It’s not that we’re sitting back waiting for something to happen. We work hard to influence those programs. Keep in mind that there are 450 other transit agencies in this country and we work together to push hard for that funding and we have been successful for 30 years.

Funding Sources: Purchase of Service Agreements (POSAs)

Question: What aren’t increases to POSAs being considered as a way to offset increasing costs?

MICHAEL BENHAM: POSAs cost what the service is worth – what it costs the AAATA. If we increase the cost of the POSA, that would not be fair: We would be getting more for the service than what it costs us. We take the number of service hours we are providing and multiply that by the fully-allocated cost for service – that’s the cost. Then we give the POSA community credit for: (1) the fares that are collected; (2) the state share (the state provides 30% of the cost); and (3) the federal share – because some of that is earned for their operation for their riders. The difference between the cost and those three revenue sources is the amount that a POSA community is required to pay to get their service.

Funding Sources: Fares

Question: Why aren’t fare increases being pursued as an option for funding increased costs?

[In response to a different question, AAATA staff explained that $3.36 is the AAATA's cost per rider on the fixed-route system. The full cash fare is $1.50. The average fare paid by passengers is about $0.80. That lower average is due to a variety of factors: transfers are free; and discount fares are provided for seniors and people with disabilities, low-income people and students.]

CHRIS WHITE: We increased the fare 50% in the last five years. There was a 25% increase in 2010 and another 25% increase in 2011. [These two increases lifted the full cash fare from $1 to $1.50.] So that’s a substantial increase. That fare increase is passed through to everybody who pays fares, including the third-party fares that we get from a lot of organizations [such as the University of Michigan and go!pass program].

Funding Source: Fares from Third Parties

Question: Why does the University of Michigan pay only $1.25 million per year for 2.5 million rides. That’s $0.50 a ride.

[The key fact is that UM's reimbursement to the AAATA is made partly in cash, and partly through federal funds. The question assumes that the cash portion is the only reimbursement.]

MICHAEL BENHAM: The university reimburses us $1 for every single ride – we get reimbursed at a rate that’s slightly higher than the average fare.

CHRIS WHITE: For 2.4 million rides, the amount that we see from the university is about $1.2 million in cash. It’s a little complex. Part of the federal formula for determining funding allocations is based on riders, passenger miles, and vehicle miles. The University of Michigan provides a public transit service [through its blue bus system.] One of the things the AAATA did 15 years ago was convince the university to start filing a report with the feds – an actual transit database report – which brings in the federal funds for the University of Michigan’s bus operation.

The agreement we have with university for their faculty, staff, and students – which allows them to board AAATA buses without paying the fare to get on – turns over to us the federal funds that are earned by the University of Michigan bus system. We got $1.35 million in federal funds last year from that, and every year it’s going up. And if the ridership goes up, they will pay more. But for every university rider, we get a dollar.

It sounds like something is wrong there because the full cash fare is $1.50. But the AAATA board of directors looks at two things. First, university employees live in this community, and they pay taxes in this community, and they are entitled to public transit services as well. That’s one thing that gets lost. The second thing is that we do sell passes to anyone at a volume discount. You can buy a monthly pass and it costs $58. When people use those monthly passes, we count how many times they use it.

It works out on average to about 90-91 cents per boarding. We charge the University of Michigan $1 per boarding. So we’re actually charging them more – about 10% more – than the least expensive fare that anybody in the public can get. We don’t give away service to people. We have partnerships and we use them. One of the advantages is that it gives us the fare revenue and also gives us the productivity to allow us to look at expanding services. We feel pretty strongly that we have an obligation to provide comprehensive transit service to allow people who live in this community who do not drive – a lot of them choose not to drive. So having a public transit system is an important thing that we feel are required to try and do. The nice thing is that we can add ridership from some of these riders of choice, and that helps us to expand service that benefits the entire community.

Funding Sources: Fares – National Stats

The farebox recovery ratio is the percentage of costs covered by passenger fares. Using the same kind of peer group comparison as above, it’s possible to analyze AAATA’s farebox recovery ratio with its national peers. The AAATA has about the same farebox recovery ratio as the average of its peer group:

AAATA Farebox Recovery compared against FTIS Top 20 peers. Top 20 peers to AAATA based on Florida Transit Information System (FTIS) analysis. Data from Integrated National Transit Database Analysis System (INTDAS), developed for Florida Department of Transportation by Lehman Center for Transportation Research, Florida International University, http://www.ftis.org/intdas.html, accessed Nov. 22, 2013.

The AAATA’s farebox recovery ratio has trended upward in recent years, attributable to fare increases implemented in 2010 and 2011 ($0.25 both years for a total increase from $1 to $1.50).

AAATA Farebox Recovery Historical Trend with data from Integrated National Transit Database Analysis System (INTDAS), developed for Florida Department of Transportation by Lehman Center for Transportation Research, Florida International University.

Farebox recovery is also influenced by ridership. All other things being equal, more riders means a higher farebox recovery ratio, because more riders generate more fares. Ridership on AAATA fixed-route buses has trended upward:

Fixed-route AAATA ridership by year. (Data from AAATA, charted by The Chronicle.)

All other things being equal, increasing ridership also pushes the cost per ride downward:

AAATA Farebox Operating Expense Per Passenger Trip with data from Integrated National Transit Database Analysis System (INTDAS), developed for Florida Department of Transportation by Lehman Center for Transportation Research, Florida International University.

Funding Sources: Restricted – BTC Construction

Question: The AAATA spent a great deal of money on a new transit center. Why? Why was that money not spent on moving people?

CHRIS WHITE: The money we spent on that was 80% federal funds and 20% state funds – that we received by making a competitive application for it. Those are federal funds that were brought into the community that would not otherwise have come, in order to improve that transit center. The old transit center was for a variety of reasons undersized and was 25 years old, so it was time for a new facility.

That new facility provides a much better waiting area for riders. But it also allows us to provide information to those riders so that they can see what buses have arrived. If you’re familiar with the arrangement we have downtown, we have a transit mall where we have six buses, and we have the east side of Fourth Avenue where we have eight buses. The farthest buses towards Liberty Street are out of sight, and it’s a little hard to see when the buses arrive. So part of the idea is to provide a new facility that allows us to provide electronic information, much as you would see at transit centers in other cities.

Funding Sources: Restricted – Planning

Question: I’ve heard that in the 2014 AAATA budget that there is a planning category that includes $2 million just for three things – WALLY [north-south commuter rail], the Connector [a high-capacity link from US-23 and Plymouth down through UM campus, downtown southward to State and I-94], and something called “urban core” planning. Now if this is true, why shouldn’t that $2 million be used for improving services rather than expanding into newfangled, improbable, grandiose schemes? You’re talking about service and the need for service for handicapped people, etc. In the budget apparently is WALLY – to subsidize people who live in Ann Arbor and work here to move to low-tax Livingston County so they can get the best of all worlds. Or the Connector, that largely benefits the university but won’t pay for it.

CHRIS WHITE: The budget figure is correct but your observation does not reflect the revenue sources that support it. The Connector is an initiative that came out of the city’s transportation plan. The AAATA is the lead agency for that, and we have a $1.2 million grant from the federal government for that specific purpose. So we made a competitive application and we got money for that. There’s another $300,000 that has to come from partners. The University of Michigan is paying half of that $300,000. The AAATA is paying $60,000 and the city and the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority are splitting the remainder. The amount the AAATA is paying is $60,000.

MICHAEL BENHAM: WALLY is a joint project with the state. The state got $650,000 to study WALLY and it is a research and development project. There’s also some local money, but it is not our money – those are contributions by other organizations within the county and from Livingston County to pay for the local match.

Transit Service

The evening led off with a presentation from AAATA staff describing the historical background of governance changes to the AAATA over the last year, and a description of the 5-year service plan the new millage is supposed to pay for. A number of questions dealt with operational aspects of specific types of service.

Transit Service: Description of Improvements: Fixed Route

Chris White gave a description of the fixed-route service improvements the millage would pay for.

CHRIS WHITE: One of the points I want to make up front is that the proposed millage is to fund additional service. We provide a pretty extensive suite of services now. Our fixed-route service, A-Ride (for people with disabilities), Good as Gold (for seniors) – those will continue regardless of what happens with the millage. The vote is to provide additional service.

There is a schedule book that we put together that we call the Ride Guide of the future that we brought to all the public meetings – specific schedules for all the routes that we are proposing, so that people could know what we’re proposing to do, so that you can give us input on and make comments on it, and we could go back and make revisions to that plan and respond to that. A number of revisions got made that way. Overall, what we’re proposing to do is about a 44% increase in our fixed-route service hours. There also increases in our A-Ride service – the service for people with disabilities and seniors.

The first element of that we would do in August 2014 – a few months from now, if the vote is successful – is to extend the end time of our service on weekdays on most of the routes. Most of the routes would go from 10:30 p.m. to 11:30 p.m. There are a couple of routes where we don’t have evening service on now that we would extend into the evening, and one of them is the route that serves this area – Route #2C that comes down Green and goes to Glacier Hills. Another one is the Route #14 route that serves Arbor Hills. Those routes would be extended to between 7:30 p.m. and 8 p.m.

The second element of the plan is later evening service on weekends. It’s one of the very specific requests we get – to have Saturday evening service. Service currently ends between 6 p.m. and 7 p.m. on most routes on Saturday. Service would be extended about an hour on all the routes in the first year if the millage passes, starting in August 2014. And then in August 2015, service would be extended essentially on all routes to between 10 p.m. and 11 p.m. on Saturdays.

That would also lead to an extension of our A-Ride and Good as Gold services. So if someone is out for a play, a concert, or on campus, they would be able to get home easily.

There’s variety of routes where we’re extending service by adding more frequent trips. A lot of people know that on Route #4, which is our Washtenaw Avenue route, our busiest ridership, we doubled the weekly frequency in January 2012 as kind of an advance implementation of this plan. That service was acutely successful and a year later we added more frequency on our Route #5, because we were having problems with capacity and on-time performance on that route.

As part of the service plan that we’re proposing, we’ve increased frequency and capacity on a number of routes in Ann Arbor. Route #2 is the route that serves the Plymouth Road area and north of Plymouth Road. We’re adding a bus midday to take care of problems we’re having with crowded buses on that route. We’re not able to accommodate the loads on that route at that time. We have service on a route that goes down to Briarwood and then out Ellsworth. That service is going to be doubled in frequency in 2017 in the plan. And we have a number of routes on the west side of Ann Arbor, where we’re redoing those routes. [White also described the reconfiguration of routes – converting some loops to out-and-back routes, which allows flexibility to extend service farther out in the future.]

Transit Service: Description of Improvements: Paratransit

Question: How are the paratransit and dial-a-ride services [A-Ride for people with disabilities and Good as Gold for seniors] being improved and how do people request this?

CHRIS WHITE: Every place we are increasing service hours, those service hour extensions apply to our door-to-door, paratransit services as well. It applies to new destinations as well. Our coverage in Ann Arbor is already such that the fixed-route improvements don’t mean a lot of new areas are served within Ann Arbor – improvements inside Ann Arbor are mostly in terms of frequency and time of day. But some locations have been added – the Pittsfield branch of the Ann Arbor District Library, the Costco on Ellsworth, the Quality 16 movie theater and the Meijer on Jackson Road. The AAATA is a little hesitant to talk about the Jackson Road locations, as an agreement would still need to be worked out with Scio Township on that. In Ypsilanti, the Ypsilanti District Library and the District Court are actually important destinations even for a lot of people from Ann Arbor.

MICHAEL BENHAM: The weekend and night service expands for paratransit service whenever we extend fixed-route service. That’s a huge expansion of service, if you don’t have to be in by 6:30 p.m. and can actually take in a movie and dinner.

CHRIS WHITE: Another thing that a lot of people don’t know about is that we have a tentative arrangement with the University Michigan so that the A-Ride service and the Good as Gold service goes to the East Ann Arbor Medical Center and Domino’s Farms. The University Michigan is actually paying for the additional cost of those trips. We have not been able to get an agreement to do fixed-route service yet.

Question: Can you talk about the LAC?

CHRIS WHITE: For a long time, we have established a group called the local advisory council (LAC) – a group of people with disabilities and seniors that is an advisory committee to our board, which meets monthly. A number of years ago we had a number of people who were agency reps on that. But we found that it’s actually much more effective to have people who are actually using the service. It’s been a very, very important group to us, because in essence there is mutual group training going on. We’re learning more about how they use the service and they are learning more about how transit operates and what some of our limitations are. So we get a group of people who have some expertise to give us really quality advice about what we can do to improve the service – door-to-door services, as well as how we can provide our fixed-route service. The LAC has been a real benefit to us over the years.

Transit Service: Why Large Buses?

Question: Why do you run such large buses, and why do you use such large buses all the time?

MICHAEL BENHAM: The peak hours do tend to be the busiest, but even off-peak tends to be pretty busy, particularly on certain routes. It’s only in the very off-peak routes that we have the less-used buses. We could switch to smaller buses during those off-peak hours, but then we would have two separate, duplicative fleets of buses to maintain. We’d need a larger bus garage. And we would have to maintain a whole different fleet and would have to buy that fleet. It is a trade-off. We do have a van ride program – that’s a fleet of small vehicles, 6-8 passengers, where the driver is actually one of the users of the bus. That is one of our answers to what we call low-density transportation, where you don’t have a lot of people traveling down a specific corridor. Demand-response service is another way we do that. And we’re also thinking about the possibility of smaller vehicles in some of the starter services on new routes where we would not expect to fill up a large bus on day one.

CHRIS WHITE: It’s particularly pertinent in this neighborhood. If you live on Earhart and Green road in this area, the bus that you can see most of the time is going to be empty: It’s near the end of the route. That bus may have been very full and probably was very full during other parts of the route. But as it gets to the end of the route, it’s emptying and emptying.

RESIDENT F: I was on the Route 2C six weeks ago, and there were five people when I got on, and there were 60 by the time I got off on campus.

Transit Service: Ward 2 Service

Question: Are there any plans to increase the frequency of buses for Route #2B on the weekends? Why are there no new bus routes in the northeast corner? What are my taxes going for? Will you consider route reorganization to improve crosstown transit time, if you are not heading in and out of downtown?

CHRIS WHITE: It’s about balancing demand and the level of services. The Saturday morning service on Route #2 is once per hour. But it increases to every half hour on Saturday afternoon. There are quite a few routes in the system that are just hourly service all day on Saturday. One of the things that we’ve seen some change in over the last few years is ridership during the off-peak hours. That’s what this service plan is supposed to address – some of that demand.

We’re seeing an increase in demand in the evenings and on Saturdays. Route #2 is not scheduled for an increase except for the fact that we’re going to do one earlier trip – that’s the only increase on Saturdays for Route #2. This area of town has changed significantly. Historically, this is a pretty low ridership area. But demand has grown significantly and we have seen a lot of increase in demand for service in this area. We provide service every 15 minutes all day on the trunk of the route, and then it divides into three alternatives that provide service less frequently in this area.

Question: Route 2 has three variants right now. Can’t that be split up and have a separate loop? I can speak from experience that part of the problem with lower rider volume is that people had taken the bus, but now they can’t depend on being able to go back out on the route they came in on in a timely manner – especially if they’re under a time constraint or they got delayed at their appointment or something. It can be an hour between buses – and for me that’s not acceptable. You can’t wait at a school or library for that period of time.

CHRIS WHITE: Yes. And part of this five-year service plan is to try to reduce those places where we just do hourly service. But there’s a limit to how much we can do. One of the things that we try to balance is that demand for service and the quality of service that we’re providing. On a fairly regular basis we look at low productivity service. There’ve been high levels of service provided in an area, and we have reduced it some if we did not generate the ridership to justify it.

The Chronicle could not survive without regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle. And if you’re already on board The Chronicle bus, please encourage your friends, neighbors and colleagues to help support The Chronicle, too!

Generally, the improvements include increased frequency during peak hours, extended service in the evenings and additional service on weekends. Some looped routes are being replaced with out-and-back type route configurations. The plan does not include operation of rail-based services. The AAATA has calculated that the improvements in service add up to 90,000 additional service hours per year, compared to the current service levels, which is a 44% increase. The AAATA refers to the plan in its communications as the 5YTIP.

To provide the additional service, the plan would include the purchase of 19 more fixed-route buses by the end of the full implementation – at the five-year mark. There are currently 80 buses in the AAATA’s fixed-route fleet. The plan would also include the purchase of five additional vehicles for providing demand-response service, which is required by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

A draft five-year plan was presented to the public in a series of 13 public meetings in the fall of 2013. Changes to the five-year plan made in response to public feedback were included in the board’s information packet for the Jan. 16 meeting. [.pdf of presentation made to the board on Jan. 16]

The plan indicates that $5,456,191 of additional local revenue would be required to fund the expanded services. For the member jurisdictions of the AAATA, that translates to a tax of 0.7 mills. A millage rate of 0.7 translates to dollar amounts as follows: Ann Arbor ($3,387,910), city of Ypsilanti ($202,730), and Ypsilanti Township ($778,207). One mill is $1 for every $1,000 of a real property’s taxable value.

Partners for Transit – a coalition coordinated by the Ecology Center – issued a press release on the afternoon of the AAATA’s Jan. 16 board meeting, calling for the board to put a millage request on the ballot. But the AAATA staff memo accompanying the board’s resolution makes clear that any funding proposal, like a millage, would come in a separate action. In 2010, a ballot question committee was formed with the name Partners for Transit, but Carolyn Grawi indicated in a phone interview with The Chronicle that the current Partners for Transit coalition would be forming its own ballot committee. Grawi is the director for advocacy and education at the Center for Independent Living.

The AAATA board would be unlikely to vote to place a millage on the ballot before analyzing the results of a survey conducted in the fall of 2013, which included an attempt to measure voter attitudes toward a new transportation millage. Those results are expected to be released sometime in the next few weeks. At the Jan. 16  meeting, board chair Charles Griffith indicated that he felt the board would be taking the next step on implementing the program very soon. That indicates a probable vote on the millage question at the AAATA’s February board meeting.

If the millage question is put before voters in May this year, instead of the fall, it could cost the AAATA $90,000 to $100,000 to cover the cost of conducting the election. That’s the figure AAATA manager of community relations Mary Stasiak has been given as a rough estimate by the Washtenaw County clerk’s office. In an email responding to a question from The Chronicle, Stasiak noted that if other proposals resulted in an independent reason for holding an election in May, that could defray the AAATA’s costs.

The two city members of the AAATA – Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti – already levy a dedicated transit millage of their own, which would stay in place if voters in the three-jurisdiction area of the AAATA approved a 0.7 mill tax. For Ann Arbor, the rate for the existing millage is 2.056 mills, which is expected to generate a little over $10 million by 2019, the fifth year of the transportation improvement plan. For the city of Ypsilanti, the rate for the existing transit millage is 0.9789, which is expected to generate about $314,000 in 2019.

The transit improvement program also calls for an additional $1,087,344 to come from purchase of service agreements (POSAs), based on increased service hours in Pittsfield, Saline, and Superior townships.

A new millage would be decided by a majority vote of all three member jurisdictions of the AAATA. The two Ypsilanti jurisdictions were added as members of the AAATA just last year. The Ann Arbor city council voted to approve changes to the AAATA’s articles of incorporation – to admit the city and the township of Ypsilanti as members – at its June 3, 2013 and Nov. 18, 2013 meetings, respectively.

The current, more localized expansion of the AAATA contrasts with a now demised effort in 2012 to incorporate all of Washtenaw County into a single countywide transportation authority. Components of the countywide effort’s five-year plan and 30-year vision formed the basis of the current more geographically-confined effort to expand service.

When the Ann Arbor city council withdrew Ann Arbor’s participation in that effort, at its Nov. 8, 2012 meeting, it encouraged the AAATA “to continue to discuss regional transportation options among Ann Arbor, Ypsilanti, Ypsilanti Township, Ann Arbor Township, Pittsfield Township, and Scio Township, leading to a better understanding and process for improving local transit options…”

Over the course of 2013, the AAATA held a series of meetings with officials from those municipalities, a group that came to be called the “urban core” communities.

One outcome of those conversations was an interest in membership in the AAATA on the part of the two Ypsilanti jurisdictions. The city of Ann Arbor (pop. ~116,000), the city of Ypsilanti (pop. ~19,500) and Ypsilanti Township (~53,000) make up a bit more than half the population of Washtenaw County (pop. ~351,000).

This brief was filed from the downtown location of the Ann Arbor District Library, where the AAATA board holds its meetings. A more detailed report will follow: [link]

Ypsilanti Township would become a member of the AAATA, if the Ann Arbor city council approves a change to the AAATA’s articles of incorporation at its Nov. 18, 2013 meeting.

The governance change would grant a request from Ypsilanti Township to be admitted as a member of the authority, joining the cities of Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti. The city of Ypsilanti requested membership in the AAATA just this summer, and that request was granted.

Some of the recent community conversation about the topic has included the idea that the governance changes were long overdue. That’s based on the fact that some transportation service to the two Ypsilanti jurisdictions – the city and the township – has been provided by the AAATA through year-to-year purchase of service agreements (POSAs) since at least the early 1980s.

As a result of action earlier this summer, the AAATA board has already expanded from seven to nine members, with one of the additional seats appointed by the city of Ypsilanti. The now-pending governance change, to add Ypsilanti Township as a member, would bring the total number of board seats to 10. [Amendment 3 of the AAATA articles of incorporation]

But the Ypsilanti jurisdictions asked for membership in the AAATA not just because they wanted a seat at the table. They also want to use that membership to help generate additional revenue in the AAATA geographic area – to pay for additional transportation services in all three jurisdictions. Those additional services are described in a five-year service improvement plan the AAATA has developed. The additional services – which include extended hours of operation, greater frequency, and some newly configured routes – were the topic of a series of 13 public meetings that were scheduled from Oct. 17 through Nov. 14.

For the city of Ann Arbor, the five-year plan would mean 33% more service, according to the AAATA. It’s the additional services, and the revenue needed to pay for them, that gave some Ann Arbor city councilmembers pause on Oct. 21, 2013, when the item first appeared on the agenda.

This article reviews some additional context, including the taxing powers of the AAATA, the issue of equity among jurisdictions, the AAATA’s performance as a transit authority, and a couple of vignettes from the series of public meetings held over the last month by the AAATA.

Ann Arbor City Council: Final Say

The Ypsilanti Township board voted on Sept. 9, 2013 to request membership in the AAATA. Two weeks later, at its Sept. 26, 2013 meeting, the AAATA board approved the amended articles of incorporation to add Ypsilanti Township as a member of the authority. And on Oct. 15, 2013 the Ypsilanti city council approved the change to the articles of incorporation.

That leaves action by the Ann Arbor city council as the final step in admitting Ypsilanti Township as a member.

One document that some Ann Arbor city councilmembers wanted to see on Oct. 21 was a memorandum of understanding between the AAATA and Ypsilanti Township that would ensure payment for transportation services. The fact that a draft document was not available at that time was one reason some councilmembers were inclined to delay approval. That document is now available. [.pdf of draft YT-AAATA MOU]

The Ann Arbor/Ypsilanti Regional Chamber of Commerce has weighed in, urging the Ann Arbor city council to approve the amendment to the articles of incorporation. [.pdf of A2Y Chamber support letter]

Who Levies What Taxes?

Through their membership in the AAATA, the Ypsilanti jurisdictions would have the same ability as the city of Ann Arbor tax themselves – so they can pay for the additional transportation services in their geographic area. Specifically, AAATA membership would allow the Ypsilanti jurisdictions to join the city of Ann Arbor in taking advantage of the authority’s ability – under Act 55 of 1963 – to ask voters to approve a new transportation tax. Any request would need majority approval of voters across the entire geographic area of the member jurisdictions.

The power to request and then levy a voter-approved tax is one the AAATA has never used before. Readers might be familiar with two different existing transportation taxes – one paid by Ann Arbor property owners (2.053 mills) and another paid by city of Ypsilanti property owners (0.987 mills). Those existing taxes are not levied by the AAATA, but rather by the respective cities. The proceeds of those taxes are passed through to the AAATA. The city of Ypsilanti does not have the option of increasing the amount of its own transportation tax – because Ypsilanti is already at the state constitutional limit for taxes levied by a city, which is 20 mills. But an AAATA tax would not count against that constitutional limit.

The five-year service improvement plan that the AAATA has developed would need an estimated 0.7 additional mills levied across the geographic area of the authority. One mill is $1 per $1,000 of taxable value. So for a $200,000 house, with taxable value of $100,000, a 0.7 mill tax would translate into $70 a year. For an Ann Arbor taxpayer who owned that $200,000 house, that would translate into about $270 a year total in transportation taxes.

One option that’s been floated to pay for transportation improvements within the city of Ann Arbor – using just the existing Ann Arbor tax – would be to ask Ann Arbor voters to approve an override of the Headlee Amendment. Headlee has reduced the amount of the levy from its voter-approved level of 2.5 mills to the current 2.053 mills. So approval of a Headlee override would result in about 0.5 mill more revenue to fund transportation services within the city of Ann Arbor.

Translating millage rates into total dollars, Ann Arbor’s city transportation tax currently generates $9,565,000 annually, according to AAATA. A 0.7 mill additional tax would generate $3,230,007 in additional revenue in the city of Ann Arbor for a total Ann Arbor local contribution of more than $12.7 million. According to AAATA, Ypsilanti’s dedicated millage generates $274,000, which is less than its POSA agreement called for last year. The 0.7 mill tax would generate around $189,785 in additional revenue in the city of Ypsilanti, for a total contribution in the city of Ypsilanti of around $464,000. Ypsilanti Township currently pays $329,294 annually for transportation services under its POSA agreement. If a 0.7 mill tax were approved, that would generate around $707,969 in the township. Based on the amount of expanded services that the township would receive, the township contribution would be defined as just that $707,969.

Equity

The current, more localized expansion of the AAATA contrasts with a now demised effort in 2012 to incorporate all of Washtenaw County into a single countywide transportation authority. When the Ann Arbor city council withdrew Ann Arbor’s participation in that effort, at its Nov. 8, 2012 meeting, it gave encouraged the AAATA to “to continue to discuss regional transportation options among Ann Arbor, Ypsilanti, Ypsilanti Township, Ann Arbor Township, Pittsfield Township, and Scio Township, leading to a better understanding and process for improving local transit options…”

Over the course of the last year, the AAATA held a series of meetings with officials from those municipalities, a group that came to be called the “urban core” communities.

One outcome of those conversations was an interest in membership in the AAATA on the part of the two Ypsilanti jurisdictions. The city of Ann Arbor (pop. ~116,000), the city of Ypsilanti (pop. ~19,500) and Ypsilanti Township (~53,000) make up a bit more than half the population of Washtenaw County (pop. ~351,000).

The differences in financial contribution by each of the jurisdictions receiving transportation service from the AAATA was a topic that dates to the countywide effort. It’s also been a topic of the urban core conversations about equity: Is the amount of service provided commensurate with the financial contribution?

Various methodologies can be applied to the challenge of allocating costs. At a meeting held at the Saline city hall on April 25, 2013, AAATA staff illustrated how equity stacked up for some of those methodologies. According to AAATA staff, that equity analysis has not been re-run since then to reflect the latest refinements in the service plan, but the basic conclusions weren’t expected to be dramatically different. The chart below is by The Chronicle, using AAATA numbers from earlier this year. The analysis assumes a uniform millage across the five jurisdictions in the chart.

Interpreting the chart. The left axis is a percentage. Zero means that the ratio of benefit to revenue is 1:1. A positive bar means that a jurisdiction gets more benefit (services with greater cost) than the jurisdiction would contribute under a uniform millage. A negative bar means a jurisdiction gets less benefit (services costing less) than the contribution of that jurisdiction in a uniform millage.

The method used to calculate the cost of POSA agreements is by service hours.

Performance

One criticism of the AAATA that has been a part of recent community conversation is the contention that administrative overhead costs are too high – and that additional operational efficiency could and should be achieved before expanding service. At the Nov. 14 community engagement meeting, held in Ypsilanti at SPARK East on Michigan Ave., part of the presentation included a slide that in part confirmed the idea that AAATA’s operating expenses are per hour higher than average – 18% higher when compared to peer transportation authorities. But that same slide included analysis showing that the AAATA’s operating expenses per passenger were 17% lower.

AAATA operating expense per service hour.

AAATA trips per service hour.

Expense per passenger trip.

AAATA’s choice of the peer communities in this analysis was based on recommendations from the Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) to use the Florida Transit Information System (FTIS) as an analysis tool for National Transit Database figures. Those peer communities are: Peoria, IL; Lexington, KY; Moline, IL; Lansing, MI; Syracuse, NY; Savannah, GA; Champaign-Urbana, IL; Roanoke, VA; Concord, CA; Erie, PA; Kalamazoo, MI; Harrisburg, PA; Fort Wayne, IN; Rockford, IL; Shreveport, LA; Hartford, CT; Fort Collins, CO; Scranton, PA; Gainesville, FL; and South Bend, IN.

Public Meetings

During the month-long delay by the Ann Arbor city council in voting on Ypsilanti Township’s membership, the AAATA has continued a series of 13 meetings – designed to introduce residents to a five-year service improvement plan – which would require additional funding.

At the Oct. 28, 2013 public meeting on service plan improvements, held at AAATA headquarters, Jack Eaton points at Route G, a proposed new route. He suggested that it continue from Stadium & Pauline on to Pioneer High School, before looping back to the north, which would complete a connection between two high schools – Skyline and Pioneer.

The series of meetings began on Oct. 17 before the council’s Oct. 21 decision to postpone. The last of those meetings took place in Ypsilanti on Nov. 14.

At the council’s Oct. 21 meeting, Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) provided one of the eight votes for postponement, so he was keen to assure Ypsilanti Township officials – who were present at the meeting – that he was still supportive of their membership in the AAATA.

He indicated at the council’s Oct. 21 session that he would be attending some of the public meetings to show his support. Responding to an emailed query, Kunselman wrote to The Chronicle that he’d attended three of the meetings – on Oct. 29 at the Michigan League, on Nov. 6 at Tappan Middle School and on Nov. 12 at the Malletts Creek branch of the Ann Arbor District Library.

The first meeting (which is available through CTN’s video on demand) was held just before the AAATA’s regular board meeting on Oct. 17. Details of the service improvements, including maps and scheduling, are available on the AAATA’s website.

The conversation at the public meetings ranged from policy concerns to extremely practical issues.

Looking northwest: Corner of South Maple and Scio Church.

On the policy side, for example, the AAATA staff heard from a taxicab driver at the first public meeting complaining that the cheap price of the AAATA’s new AirRide service to the Detroit Metro airport diminished his ability to earn a livelihood driving a cab.

As an example of the practical side, a question was raised at the Oct. 18 meeting about the ability of a bus to easily make the right-hand turn from South Maple onto Scio Church, which would be required by the new Route E. The turn is less than 90 degrees.

That pre-election question came from former bus driver Jack Eaton, who was elected to represent Ward 4 on the city council on Nov. 5. [Eaton's bus driving career included 10-years with Kalamazoo Metro Transit from 1974 through 1984. Eaton now earns his livelihood as a labor attorney.]

Responding to Eaton, AAATA manager of service development Chris White allowed that when he’d presented the new route configurations to AAATA drivers, that was the one concern they’d raised. White felt that by using part of the neighboring lane, that turn could be navigated.

Eaton will be attending his first meeting as a sitting councilmember on Nov. 18, with the Ypsilanti Township membership on the agenda.

The Chronicle could not survive without regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle. And if you’re already on board The Chronicle bus, please encourage your friends, neighbors and colleagues to help support The Chronicle, too!

Several members of the unincorporated Act 196 board attended the AATA’s Sept. 5 special board meeting. Clockwise from the near left corner of the table: Bob Mester (U196 West District – trustee, Lyndon Township); David Read (U196 North Middle District – trustee, Scio Township); Peter Murdock (U196 Ypsilanti District – councilmember, city of Ypsilanti); Roger Kerson, Charles Griffith, and Jesse Bernstein (AATA board members); Michael Ford (AATA CEO), David Nacht (AATA board);  Karen Lovejoy Roe (U196 Southeast District – clerk, Ypsilanti Township); and Bill Lavery (U196 South Middle District – resident, York Township).

According to a press release announcing the 5-year service plan’s final draft, a millage to support The Washtenaw Ride could be placed on the ballot by May 2013.

The estimated cost of the service in the plan is now 0.584 mills, an increase of 0.084 mills compared to the estimated cost in a draft plan that was released in April. Compared to the draft plan, the final version also includes several additional services, which were added based on input from district advisory committees (DACs).

The 5-year service plan includes: (1) countywide demand-responsive services and feeder services; (2) express bus services and local transit hub services; (3) local community connectors and local community circulators; (4) park-and-ride intercept lots; and (5) urban bus network enhancements. For Ann Arbor, the program includes increased bus frequencies on key corridors, increased operating hours, and more services on weekends. According to the Sept. 5 press release, Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti will get a 56% increase in service hours compared to current levels.

The possible transition from the AATA to The Washtenaw Ride will take place under the framework of a four-party agreement between the city of Ypsilanti, the city of Ann Arbor, Washtenaw County and the AATA.

The other vote taken by the AATA board at its Sept. 5 meeting stemmed from a formal protest in connection with the AATA’s award of a contract for handling advertising on its buses – to CBS Outdoor Advertising of Lexington, New York. The contract previously had been held by Transit Advertising Group Ann Arbor (TAG).

TAG president Randy Oram addressed the board during public commentary at the Sept. 5 meeting. Also during the meeting, AATA CEO Michael Ford pointed the board to his written response to the protest and asked board members to uphold his decision to award the contract to CBS. The board voted in a formal resolution to support the advertising contract award to CBS.

5-Year Transit Program

The special meeting of the board had been called specifically for the purpose of releasing the final draft of a 5-year transit program. An earlier draft had been released in April of this year.

5-Year Transit Program: Background

Publication of a 5-year transit program and a plan to fund it is one requisite to incorporation of The Washtenaw Ride under Act 196 of 1986. That’s not a requirement of the state statute, but rather a stipulation in a four-party agreement, ratified between the city of Ann Arbor, the city of Ypsilanti, Washtenaw County and AATA. [The Washtenaw County board of commissioners again had the agreement on its agenda for its Sept. 5 meeting – and voted again to approve its side of the agreement. See "Washtenaw Board to Re-Vote Accord" for a preview.]

That four-party agreement establishes the legal conditions under which assets of the AATA could be transferred to The Washtenaw Ride. A key condition is a voter-approved funding source adequate to pay for the services outlined in the plan released on Sept. 5. While the draft plan issued in April stopped short of recommending a millage as the funding source, the AATA now indicates that a millage vote could take place as soon as May 2013.

The four-party agreement also calls for the cities of Ypsilanti and Ann Arbor to direct the proceeds of their current transportation millages to the new authority. If approved by voters, the 0.584 mills from a new millage would be paid by property owners in those cities in addition to the existing transit taxes. Current transit taxes are about 1 mill for Ypsilanti and about 2 mills for Ann Arbor.

Washtenaw County’s role will be to file the articles of incorporation for the new transit authority. The articles would be filed with the state of Michigan under Act 196 of 1986. But that filing would come only after a request from the AATA and only after the AATA publishes details of the service and funding plan for the authority in newspapers of general circulation in Washtenaw County. This is the current phase of the possible transition.

At the point of incorporation, jurisdictions throughout Washtenaw County would have the ability to opt out of the new transit authority. If their governing bodies don’t opt out, those jurisdictions will be included in the new authority. Residents of jurisdictions that choose to stay in the new authority – and do not decide to opt out – would participate in a vote on any millage placed on the ballot to fund The Washtenaw Ride.

5-Year Transit Program: From 0.5 mills to 0.584

The estimated gap between revenues ($184.2 million) and expenses ($223 million) for a 5-year period of the program is $38.8 million. That gap could be covered with a tax on the participating jurisdictions of 0.584 mills. A popular vote on that tax could come as soon as May 2013.

One mill is $1 for every $1,000 of taxable value on a property. So for a house worth $200,000, with a state-equalized value of $100,000, an 0.584 mill transit tax would cost that property owner about $58 per year. For an Ann Arbor resident with a $200,000 house, adding the 0.584 mill tax to the existing city transit tax of roughly 2 mills works out to a transportation tax burden of about $258 a year.

AATA expects The Washtenaw Ride to add 3.6 million rides to the existing 6 million rides that the AATA already provides.

A previous estimate of 0.5 mill as sufficient to cover the operating gap of a new authority’s 5-year plan had been generated by a financial advisory group led by McKinley Inc. CEO Albert Berriz and Bob Guenzel, retired Washtenaw County administrator. That group had worked with the AATA’s consultant on the project, Steer Davies Gleave, to generate the estimated cost.

The current revised estimate is the result of service additions to the 5-year plan made since the draft was released earlier this year. After the Sept. 5 meeting, AATA strategic planner Michael Benham, who has led the project for the AATA, responded to a question from The Chronicle by saying that the new calculations were done by AATA staff, building on the work already done by Steer Davies Gleave. Benham indicated that he hoped the financial advisory group would also be able to convene to review the revised plan and figures.

At the AATA board’s Aug. 16, 2012 meeting, Benham had sketched out in broad strokes some of the changes that had been made since the draft service plan had been released in April. For example, the urban bus network – in Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti – has been expanded compared to the draft. In the draft plan, it was based on a 16-hour day, while now it’s based on an 18-hour day for some routes. That will involve a number of select routes operating until midnight. Some routes will also operate a little bit earlier in the morning, starting at 6 a.m. instead of 6:30 a.m.

Connectors and circulators for Milan have been added. The Northfield Express has been extended to Brighton. Also at the Aug. 16 board meeting, Benham also indicated the AATA is thinking about extending service to Lincoln Consolidated Schools in August Township, using a combination of flex service and limited extensions of the already-proposed Route #46. They’re also looking at a park-and-ride proposed in Pittsfield Township – and they’re thinking about either adding an additional park-and-ride, which would be further east, or perhaps just taking the existing one and moving it.

5-Year Transit Program: Board Response

During his oral report to the board, Michael Ford – the AATA’s CEO – noted that the document reflected a lot of hard work. The AATA had begun with a 30-year vision, which had been refined to a 5-year implementation program. A lot of work had been done with the district advisory committees over the last two years, he said, taking in comments and suggestions and making sure that the AATA had heard what people had to say.

CEO of the AATA Michael Ford takes bound copies of the 5-year plan out of a box before the Sept. 5 board meeting.

During the month of September, Ford said, the AATA is going out to the districts again to get full support and concurrence on the document. He emphasized that it’s a very detailed document – as it goes through a lot of layers of detail to provide people the best information to make an informed decision about whether to participate. He called it a very important document and reiterated that a lot of hard work has gone into it.

Ford took a moment to acknowledge some staff members individually – Sarah Pressprich-Gryniewicz, Mary Stasiak and Chris White. He singled out strategic planner Michael Benham as having done a yeoman’s job, which prompted a round of applause.

Board chair Jesses Bernstein then delivered some remarks, giving his personal perspective. That week marked the start of his 45th year in Ann Arbor and Washtenaw County, he said. During that period, he had worked for the county government, started two businesses, worked in a lot of other settings and volunteered in a lot of places. He had never seen a process and an outcome like the AATA had produced with this 5-year program.

The AATA has a 30-year vision and a 5-year program to implement it, Bernstein said. One of his favorite sayings, he continued, is “If you don’t know where you’re going, you’re never going to get there. … We know where we’re going.” He allowed that the road would not be straight and smooth, and there would be twists and turns and curves. Bernstein said he is very proud to have been on the board while the AATA had undertaken the effort. He added his personal thanks to the staff for their incredible work that they’ve done – including nights and weekends – saying it has been just an unbelievable effort. He concluded his remarks by saying, “And as the song says: We’ve only just begun.”

Charles Griffith appreciated that the document has evolved to the point that it has, noting that it’s the result of a lot of good work and thought. He appreciated the fact that it is still a “living document.” He ventured that it probably won’t ever be final because the AATA will always be adjusting and tweaking it and making it better – as it does currently with its existing system. The AATA changes its service plans, altering routes on an ongoing basis to make sure the AATA has the most efficient system that it can have. The new transit authority will continue to that. He stressed the fact that the AATA will continue to need to work on this.

David Nacht ventured that anybody who’s been paying attention in Michigan understands that there are communities in the state that have taken a “parochial view” of their role – such communities imagine that they are an island and can function without connection to their neighbors. These communities are either being taken over by the state government or are in danger of being taken over by the state government, Nacht said.

But Ann Arbor sees itself differently, Nacht said. Ann Arbor views itself as part of the surrounding environment, which includes different communities that are different from Ann Arbor, but are connected to it. It’s an environment where people live and work and participate in the economic life of Ann Arbor. Nacht continued by saying it is in Ann Arbor’s interest to reach out to its neighbors in an open way, to transparently say: Let’s be connected in a way that we think is reasonable and fair, that works for people no matter what part of the county they live in.

Nacht observed that he had been a part of this process for a long time – there were people on the board just talking about expanding service countywide, when he joined the AATA board nine years ago. Michael Ford, he said, has led a team to bring the AATA to this point. Nacht did not think the process was perfect, and he did not think that the outcome was perfect. But he called it an outstanding political and policy result for a public entity.

For a public entity, “This is as good as it gets,” Nacht said. He agreed with Bernstein, in that he’d been through a lot of projects at different levels of government and in the private sector, and he was very proud of the AATA’s work. The AATA is offering the community a choice to move forward to take care of those who need transportation services, to help the environment, and to prosper, Nacht said. Ultimately, Nacht said, if we move people around better, everyone will prosper.

Roger Kerson echoed what had been previously said. He added that it’s the easiest thing in the world to say, “Let’s work together,” but it’s in fact very hard to do. It’s a real testament to the staff work that so many different jurisdictions are cooperating and participating.

Kerson addressed some remarks to those board members from the as-yet-unincorporated board of The Washtenaw Ride who were at the table – thanking them for participating in an enterprise that was still not completely 100% defined. He thanked them for attending meetings where they don’t get to vote yet. And he thanked them generally for helping the AATA in the process.

Kerson felt that the existing board would be able to do its job better as a steward of the AATA’s resources, when the board gets bigger – and when it has more input and more ideas and more knowledge of the communities that the AATA is trying to connect with. Right now, the AATA is running buses to Ypsilanti and Chelsea, he pointed out – places where board members don’t live. The AATA will be able to provide service more effectively and efficiently when the team is expanded. He looked forward to a time when everyone at the table also had a voice and a vote.

Outcome: The board voted unanimously to release the 5-year plan. A series of district advisory committee meetings will be now be held in different areas of the county to go over the plan. Ann Arbor’s meeting will take place on Sept. 24, 2012 from 6:30-8:30 p.m. at the Mallets Creek branch of the Ann Arbor District Library. A complete meeting schedule is available on the MovingYouForward.org website.

Bus Advertising

At its Sept. 5 meeting, the board considered a resolution upholding a previous decision to award a contract for handling advertising on the sides of AATA buses to CBS Outdoor Advertising.

Bus Advertising: Background

At its Aug. 16, 2012 meeting, the AATA board authorized a three-year contract with CBS Outdoor Advertising of Lexington, New York, to handle placement of ads on its buses and bus stops. The contract had been held by Transit Advertising Group Ann Arbor (TAG) for the last seven years, but that contract had expired. So the AATA solicited bids for a new contract. The AATA selected CBS Outdoor Advertising from seven respondents to an RFP (request for proposals).

The AATA’s advertising program currently accounts for about $80,000 a year in a budget for fiscal year 2012 that calls for $29.4 million in total revenues. In the past, the advertising program has netted up to $169,000 a year.

When first implemented in 2005, the program was expected to generate $200,000 a year [.pdf of 2005 Ann Arbor News article: "Some AATA Buses to Be Used as 'Movable Billboards'"] Ann Arbor News coverage from that era documents some controversy associated with the decision to offer advertising on buses, as well as the initial implementation that allowed for complete wraps. [.pdf of 2007 Ann Arbor News article: "AATA to Review Bus Ads"]

An ad rejected by the AATA for placement on its buses prompted a lawsuit filed last year on Nov. 28, 2011. The text of the ad included the words “Boycott ‘Israel’” and featured an image of a scorpion-like creature. In the most recent court action connected with that lawsuit, TAG and its president Randy Oram were dropped as defendants in the case by mutual agreement of the parties. The court has not yet ruled on the substance of the case, but an evidentiary hearing was held on July 23.

The lawsuit was not related to the routine process of putting the advertising contract out for renewal.

Bus Advertising: Protest, Commentary

In his written protest about the award, TAG president Randy Oram detailed a number of objections, among them a contention that the proposal from CBS did not actually respond to the AATA’s request for proposals. TAG also points to the recent elimination of a CBS staff position for someone who’s named in the CBS proposal as a person who would be part of a team fulfilling terms of the contract.

For its part, the AATA maintains that it followed its RFP procedures, that it violated no laws, and that CBS was able and willing to meet the requirements of the RFP but that TAG, based on its proposal, was either unwilling or unable to meet those requirements. TAG felt that the contingencies it had included in its proposal – based on its experience as the vendor over the last seven years – had been held against it in the AATA’s evaluation of the proposal. [.pdf of TAG protest and AATA response]

Randy Oram, president of Transit Advertising Group Ann Arbor, addressed the board on Sept. 5.

Oram addressed the board during public commentary at its Sept. 5 meeting. He told the board that TAG had been proud to serve the AATA as the exclusive agent for bus advertising services since 2005. He appreciated the opportunity to partner with the AATA in that endeavor. TAG had always served the AATA and its constituents to the best of its ability and with fidelity, he said. He appreciated the efforts of the board in hearing the appeal he was making concerning the denial of the contract award to TAG and the award the contract to a different vendor.

Oram allowed that the process had required a lot of time and effort on the part of the AATA staff so far. A clear understanding of the contract requirements at the onset, he continued, will benefit the AATA and an agency in evaluating all the proposals that have been made. He felt that the board needs to understand clearly what the issues are before making a final recommendation.

In honoring its past contract in partnership with the AATA, TAG had prepared a proposal that was detailed and knowledgeable in operating a bus advertising system according to the contract, Oram said. That knowledge, he said, appeared to be the key in TAG’s failure to be recommended for the award of the contract. TAG’s proposal reflected its understanding of the contract and past operations, and that was faithfully spelled out as part of the request for proposals. TAG is not trying to create any more difficulties, he assured the board.

If the eventual awardee can comply with each and every one of the requirements in the request for proposals, with no exceptions or deviations, exactly as the RFP is written, that firm would be deserving of the contract regardless of which company it is, Oram said. It’s important for TAG that the AATA understand that TAG’s proposal was not an indication that TAG was unwilling or incapable of performing the contract. It was a proposal that reflected the application of the past performance of the contract and the forethought, recognition and planning for contingencies – which should have been seen as a strength, not a weakness, he said.

Shortly before Oram concluded his remarks – as he was pushing past the limits of the two-minute speaking time – board chair Jesse Bernstein asked Oram if he had much more to say. Oram indicated he had just two more sentences and then he would “pass out.” Board member David Nacht joked that Oram surely meant that he had a “hand out,” not that he was actually going to pass out. Nacht’s remark generated chuckles around the board and from Oram.

Oram concluded by thanking the board members and the staff for considering TAG’s appeal. He hoped that the board would consider delaying the award of the contract until all of the issues could be examined.

Bus Advertising: CEO & Board Response

Michael Ford, the AATA’s CEO, responded to Oram’s remarks at the meeting by telling board members that he had taken time to write out a detailed response. After review and consultation with the staff, Ford said he felt the AATA had responded appropriately. He asked the board for their support to uphold his decision to affirm the contract award to CBS.

He felt that the AATA’s RFP evaluation team had done its due diligence, and he felt that he had answered Oram’s questions very thoroughly. He was confident and comfortable upholding the decision. Roger Kerson sought confirmation that CBS Outdoor Advertising also had experience with handling advertising with transportation agencies. Ford indicated CBS  had such experience.

AATA CEO Michael Ford, right, approaches TAG president Randy Oram after the Sept. 5 board meeting.

David Nacht followed up by asking if Ford was confident that the AATA had followed all relevant procedures in the contract award process. Ford indicated he was confident. Nacht noted that the AATA’s legal counsel – Jerry Lax, of Pear Sperling Eggan & Daniels, P.C.  – was attending the meeting. Nacht asked if Lax thought there was anything else the board should be aware of. Lax did not think there was  – beyond what was in their information packet.

Nacht indicated that as a general matter, he thinks it’s healthy for a public agency to follow processes, and for the board not to take a role in selecting contractors who get public dollars. Instead, the board has a role of making sure that the process was followed, he said. The CEO and the legal counsel for the agency had assured the board that processes were followed. And Nacht said he had a chance to review what had just been handed to him, so he supported the resolution to uphold the decision.

Outcome: The board voted unanimously to uphold the decision to award the advertising contract to CBS Outdoor Advertising. 

Present: Charles Griffith, David Nacht, Jesse Bernstein, Roger Kerson.

Absent: Eli Cooper, Sue Gott, Anya Dale.

Next regular meeting: Thursday, Sept. 20, 2012 at 6:30 p.m. at the Ann Arbor District Library, 343 S. Fifth Ave., Ann Arbor [Check Chronicle event listing to confirm date]

The Chronicle could not survive without regular voluntary subscriptions to pay the fare for our coverage of public bodies like the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle. And if you’re already supporting us, please encourage your friends, neighbors and colleagues to help support The Chronicle, too!

The service plan and the AATA’s position on the plan were released at a special meeting of the board on Sept. 5 and through a press release embargoed until the start of that meeting at 10:30 a.m.

The estimated cost of the service in the plan is 0.584 mills, which is an increase of 0.084 mills compared to the estimated cost in a draft plan, released earlier this year in April. Compared to the draft plan, the final version also includes several additional services – which were added based on input from district advisory committees (DACs).

The five-year service plan includes: (1) countywide demand-responsive services and feeder services; (2) express bus services and local transit hub services; (3) local community connectors and local community circulators; (4) park-and-ride intercept lots; and (5) urban bus network enhancements. For Ann Arbor, the program includes increased bus frequencies on key corridors, increased operating hours, and more services on weekends. According to the Sept. 5 press release, Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti will get a 56% increase in service hours compared to current levels.

The geographic areas of the district committees would be represented on a proposed 15-member board for a new transit authority, which would be incorporated under Act 196 of 1986. That incorporation would take place under the framework of a four-party agreement, ratified between the city of Ann Arbor, the city of Ypsilanti, Washtenaw County and AATA.  [The Washtenaw County board of commissioners will have the agreement on its agenda for its Sept. 5 meeting – but that's intended only to affirm some administrative changes to the document. See "Washtenaw Board to Re-Vote Accord."]

That four-party agreement establishes the legal conditions under which assets of the AATA could be transferred to the Washtenaw Ride. A key condition is a voter-approved funding source adequate to pay for the services outlined in the plan released on Sept. 5. While the draft plan released in April of this year stopped short of recommending a millage as the funding source, the AATA now indicates that a millage vote could take place as soon as May 2013.

The four-party agreement also calls for the cities of Ypsilanti and Ann Arbor to direct the proceeds of their current transportation millages to the new authority. If approved by voters, the 0.584 mills from a new millage would be paid by property owners in those cities in addition to the existing transit taxes. Current transit taxes are about 1 mill for Ypsilanti and about 2 mills for Ann Arbor.

Washtenaw County’s role will be to file the articles of incorporation for a new transit authority – The Washtenaw Ride. The articles would be filed with the state of Michigan under Act 196 of 1986. But that filing would come only after a request from the AATA and only after the AATA publishes details of the service and funding plan for the authority in newspapers of general circulation in Washtenaw County. This is the current phase of the possible transition. At the point of incorporation, jurisdictions throughout Washtenaw County would have the ability to opt out of the new transit authority. If their governing bodies don’t opt out, those jurisdictions will be included in the new authority.

At the AATA board’s Aug. 16, 2012 meeting, AATA strategic planner Michael Benham had sketched out in broad strokes some of the changes that had been made since the draft service plan had been released earlier this year in April. For example, the urban bus network [Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti] has been expanded compared to the draft. In the draft plan, it was based on a 16-hour day and now it’s based on an 18-hour day for some routes. That will involve a number of select routes operating until midnight. Some routes will also operate a little bit earlier in the morning, starting at 6 a.m. instead of 6:30 a.m.

Connectors and circulators for Milan have been added. The Northfield Express has been extended to Brighton. At the Aug. 16 board meeting, Benham also indicated the AATA is thinking about extending service to Lincoln Consolidated Schools in August Township, using a combination of flex service and limited extensions of the already-proposed Route #46. They’re also looking at a park-and-ride proposed in Pittsfield Township – and they’re thinking about either adding an additional park-and-ride, which would be further east, or perhaps just taking the existing one and moving it.

A digital version of the service plan will be available later in the day on Sept. 5. Updated:  [.pdf of Final 5-Year Transit Program]

This brief was filed from AATA headquarters at 2700 S. Industrial Highway, where the board’s Sept. 5 meeting was held. A more detailed report will follow: [link]