From left: Greenbelt advisory commission members Tom Bloomer and Mike Garfield. (Photos by the writer.)

The properties include 32 acres in Northfield Township along US-23, 30 acres in Scio Township near Wagner and Scio Church roads, and 111 acres in Lodi Township along Pleasant Lake Road. By year’s end, the new additions brought the total of property protected by the city’s greenbelt program to 3,430 acres since its inception in 2007.

Most of Wednesday’s meeting was spent in closed session to discuss possible future land acquisitions, but the main action item involved land that’s not part of the city’s greenbelt program. Commissioners unanimously passed a resolution urging Webster Township to strictly enforce all of its conservation easements – the resolution will be forwarded to township officials as they weigh a request from the Dexter Area Historical Society to amend an easement that would loosen restrictions on parking.

The society wants permission to allow spectator parking for Civil War re-enactments on a site where the historic Gordon Hall is located. Land preservation activists are concerned that parking would damage the land, and that amending the easement would set a bad precedent, calling into question the trustworthiness of regional land preservation efforts. The resolution was brought forward by Tom Bloomer, a GAC member who also serves on Webster Township’s land preservation board.

Staff Update: December Closings

During Wednesday’s meeting, Ginny Trocchio – who serves as support staff for the greenbelt program – reported on three closings for land preservation deals in the greenbelt that occurred in December.

The city provided due diligence and stewardship costs for a conservation easement now held by the Legacy Land Conservancy, for a 32-acre property in Northfield Township. The landowner, Charles Botero, had donated the easement, she said. At its Nov. 10, 2011 meeting, the Ann Arbor city council had approved funding for up to $15,000 on the project. The land is located along the east side of US-23, north of East Northfield Church Road.

The city had also closed on a purchase of development rights (PDR) for 30 acres owned by Duane Thomas and his wife Judith Lobato in Scio Township. The city paid $140,367 for the deal, which city council approved at their Oct. 17, 2011 meeting. The owner contributed 50% of the cost for the PDR, Trocchio reported. The property is located near the northwest corner Scio Church and Wagner roads.

The final closing was for the purchase of development rights on 111 acres in Lodi Township, owned by Bill Lindemann and his sister Karen Weidmayer. The property is located along Pleasant Lake Road, about a half-mile from the former Girbach farm, which is also protected through the greenbelt program. At its July 18, 2011 meeting, the city council had authorized $699,992 for the deal, with $1,000 contributed by Lodi Township and 49% of the cost reimbursed by a grant from the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Farm and Ranchland Protection Program, or FRPP.

Trocchio also reported that just before the holidays, she’d received word that the deadline for applying to the next cycle of FRPP grants is on March 9. She’s been working with landowners who might be interested in applying.

Webster Township Land Preservation

On the agenda was a resolution brought forward by GAC member Tom Bloomer regarding conservation easements in Webster Township. He had initially raised the issue at GAC’s December 2011 meeting, when he reported on a situation involving the Dexter Area Historical Society.

About 10 years ago, the society had purchased land from the University of Michigan that included the historic Gordon Hall. The society later sold the development rights to Scio and Webster townships, through conservation easements to those townships. A conservation easement restricts certain types of activity from taking place on the land, and is often used to protect land from development.

Last summer, the society asked Webster Township officials for permission to hold a Civil War re-enactment on the site. The event didn’t conflict with terms of the conservation easement, but the society also wanted permission for spectator parking – and that did conflict with the easement. The township eventually agreed to a one-year exception to allow parking for several hundred vehicles, with the understanding that an exception wouldn’t be granted again.

Now, the historic society wants to amend the conservation easement so that parking for this kind of event would be allowed. The township’s farmland and open space preservation board has recommended denying that request, but the decision will ultimately be made by the Webster Township board of trustees. The preservation board has asked for support from other land preservation entities (like Ann Arbor’s GAC) before the township trustees vote.

Catherine Riseng, vice chair of the Ann Arbor greenbelt advisory commission, chaired the Jan. 5, 2012 meeting. GAC chair Dan Ezekiel was absent.

At Wednesday’s meeting, Bloomer told other commissioners that based on their discussion at the December meeting, he had crafted a resolution that he hoped expressed GAC’s concerns without encroaching on the township’s decision-making. He had aimed to make township officials aware of where the greenbelt commission stood regarding easements in general. [.pdf of resolution]

The resolution notes that Ann Arbor has contributed over $4.7 million in partnership with Webster Township to preserve over 810 acres of farmland and open space in the township. The city, through its greenbelt program, has also spent more than $4.5 million for additional land preservation in Webster Township on its own.

The resolution also referenced the national Land Trust Alliance, noting that the alliance has established generally accepted practices and rules of conduct for land preservation, and that it discourages amendments to conservation easements that compromise the agreed-upon conservation values. The resolution does not specifically reference the situation regarding the historical society’s easement.

The resolution’s only resolved clause states:

Now, Therefore Be It resolved that the Ann Arbor Greenbelt Advisory Commission urges the Township of Webster to strictly enforce all of its conservation easements, and all of the conservation values protected therein.

There was only brief discussion about the resolution. Shannon Brines said it seemed to be a reasonable statement, in that it supported Land Trust Alliance practices and discouraged amendments to conservation easements.

Bloomer noted that it would be good to let all townships within the greenbelt boundaries know about the stance expressed in this resolution. It was directed at Webster Township because there’s a controversy there, he said, but he had tried to make it generic so that it could apply to other areas as well.

Catherine Riseng responded to Bloomer by saying she thought the resolution served that purpose well, and could be adopted to other situations.

Outcome: Commissioners unanimously passed the resolution regarding Webster Township’s land preservation program.

Closed Session

Commissioners spent almost an hour of their meeting in closed session to discuss possible land acquisitions. When they emerged from closed session, they voted unanimously to recommend that the city council apply for grants from the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Farm and Ranchland Protection Program (FRPP) for four properties located in the greenbelt’s boundaries.

Before appearing on the city council’s agenda, details of these greenbelt acquisitions are not made public – parcels are identified only by their application number. The parcels recommended for FRPP grants are 2005-01, 2011-12, 2011-13 and 2012-01.

Outcome: Commissioners unanimously approved a recommendation to apply for FRPP grants for four parcels in the greenbelt.

Present: Tom Bloomer, Mike Garfield, Catherine Riseng, Liz Rother, Laura Rubin. Also: Ginny Trocchio.

Absent: Peter Allen, Dan Ezekiel, Carsten Hohnke.

Next regular meeting: Thursday, Feb. 2 at 4:30 p.m. in the second-floor council chambers at city hall, 301 E. Huron St., Ann Arbor. [confirm date]

The Chronicle survives in part through regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of publicly-funded entities like the city’s greenbelt program. If you’re already supporting The Chronicle, please encourage your friends, neighbors and coworkers to do the same. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle.

From left: Dan Ezekiel, chair of the Ann Arbor greenbelt advisory commission, talks with commissioner Tom Bloomer. (Photos by the writer.)

The land in question, outside the greenbelt boundaries, is owned by The Dexter Area Historical Society. The society is seeking a change to the conservation easement for a parcel that includes the historic Gordon Hall – a change that would allow parking for several hundred vehicles on the land for spectators of Civil War re-enactments that the society intends to hold. Webster Township trustees will ultimately vote on the request, but the township’s land preservation board – which includes Tom Bloomer, who also serves on GAC – has recommended denying it.

Bloomer told GAC commissioners that altering the agreement in this way would set a bad precedent, and call into question the trustworthiness of regional land preservation efforts. Bloomer asked for GAC to weigh in with support for the land preservation board’s position, prior to the trustees’ vote. GAC will likely take up the issue again at its Jan. 5 meeting.

Other action at GAC’s Dec. 14 meeting included passing a resolution of appreciation for Tom Freeman, deputy director of Washtenaw County parks & recreation, who is retiring at the end of the year. GAC chair Dan Ezekiel said Freeman has been “absolutely indispensable” to land preservation efforts in the county, including deals in which Ann Arbor’s greenbelt program has participated.

Ezekiel also presented a letter to the editor that he drafted, in response to misinformation expressed by commenters on AnnArbor.com articles regarding the greenbelt boundary expansion. He plans to send the letter sometime next week, pending feedback from other commissioners. [.pdf of draft letter to the editor]

During Wednesday’s meeting, commissioners also welcomed the newest commissioner, Shannon Brines, to his first meeting of GAC. Brines, who’s active in the local food movement, was appointed by the city council at its Nov. 21 meeting.

Gordon Hall Conservation Easement Request

In addition to serving on Ann Arbor’s GAC, Tom Bloomer serves on the Webster Township farmland and open space preservation board. At Wednesday’s GAC meeting, he reported on a situation that’s arisen in Webster Township, which has implications for Ann Arbor’s greenbelt program.

Webster Township’s land preservation program was created in 2005. One of its first actions was to preserve land that includes the historic Gordon Hall, he said. The Dexter Area Historical Society had purchased the land and Gordon Hall from the University of Michigan about 10 years ago, and subsequently sold the development rights to Scio and Webster townships, through conservation easements to those townships.

Last summer, Bloomer said, the society approached Webster Township with a proposal to hold a Civil War re-enactment on the site. The event didn’t conflict with terms of the conservation easement, he said, but the society also wanted permission for spectator parking – and that did conflict with the easement. The township eventually agreed to a one-year exception to allow parking for several hundred vehicles, with the understanding that an exception wouldn’t be granted again, Bloomer said. It was fortunate that there was no rain during the event, so minimum damage was caused to the land.

However, the historic society now wants to amend the conservation easement so that parking for this kind of event would be allowed, Bloomer told GAC. The township’s farmland and open space preservation board has recommended denying that request, he said. The decision will ultimately be made by the Webster Township board of trustees, but the preservation board is looking for support from other land preservation entities – like GAC – before the township trustees vote.

The decision will impact more than just this piece of land, Bloomer said. It will affect Webster Township’s reputation as a conservator of land, and whether it can be trusted by its partners, including Ann Arbor, to adequately protect land in perpetuity.

Ginny Trocchio said she did some research on the situation, looking at the standards and practices set by the national Land Trust Alliance. The alliance states that conservation easements should be amended only to strengthen the agreements, or if the net effect of the change is neutral. To allow additional activities to take place on the land that would impact conservation values is definitely not a standard practice, she said.

The other concern relates to enforcing conservation easements, Trocchio said. The public tends to view all land preservation programs as a group, she said, so this kind of change would impact the public perception of all regional land preservation efforts, not just Webster Township’s.

Bloomer noted that parking 400 cars on the land doesn’t contribute to conservation values in any way. It sets a bad precedent to make an adjustment for this kind of thing, he said – that’s the position of the township’s land preservation board. He said he didn’t have a specific resolution to propose for GAC to vote on, but he hoped commissioners could reflect on it and perhaps take action at their January meeting.

Dan Ezekiel felt GAC should act quickly, but Laura Rubin indicated that she’d like more information. What do Ann Arbor’s current conservation easements say about parking in general? Her concern was that the greenbelt was intended to support agricultural activities and farms, and that some ventures – like a farm stand – might require parking. She didn’t want to take action that would prevent this kind of activity.

Trocchio said she could review the greenbelt easements and report back to GAC. Ezekiel noted that most easements allow for 2% of land to have impervious surfaces, which would be enough for a small amount of parking – sufficient for the kind of activity that Rubin mentioned.

Every easement is unique to each property, Bloomer said. If the historical society had wanted to write into the easement the use of parking for this kind of event, it could have proposed that when the easement was being negotiated, he said. As it is, the easement only allows for agricultural machinery on the property.

Ezekiel noted that this controversy has been percolating for some time. Barry Lonik, a land preservation consultant who works with Webster Township, has been quite concerned, he said. Lonik took the conservation easement to the attorney who does work with the Legacy Land Conservancy for review. The attorney confirmed that the current easement does not allow for parking of this kind.

Rubin said she completely supported enforcing the conservation easement. She just wanted to understand the ramifications, and to ensure that local farms in general would be viable within the constraints of the easements.

Ezekiel reported that he and fellow GAC commissioner Liz Rother had attended last month’s Webster Township board of trustees meeting, where this issue was discussed. It appears there are other options, he said, including the possibility of parking at another site with shuttles to the Gordon Hall land.

Ezekiel noted that Gordon Hall is located outside of the Ann Arbor greenbelt boundaries, so there is no direct stake in this decision. However, Ann Arbor greenbelt program has partnered with Webster Township on several other properties that are within the boundaries, and he’s proud that together they have protected a huge block of contiguous farmland in that township.

Millions of taxpayer dollars have been invested in conservation easements throughout the greenbelt, Ezekiel said, and enforcement of those easements is key. The easements are just pieces of paper – the city doesn’t own the land. Landowners took money in exchange for abiding by terms of the easements, he said, and amending the easement in this way would set a terrible precedent. It’s fine if the amendment would strengthen the easement, or simply clarify the terms, he allowed. But to amend it for another use opens the door to all sorts of requests. “I think we should look very askance at this proposed deviation from this easement,” he said. He suggested that GAC pass a resolution of support for the Webster Township land preservation board’s position, supporting the township in standing firm on all of its conservation easements.

Bloomer said he’d be happy to bring the specific language of the easement to GAC next month, for their review. When Ezekiel asked whether that timeline would work, Bloomer said it would – GAC’s January meeting occurs prior to the township board’s next meeting.

Some people look at a conservation easement as just a contract, Bloomer said, and contracts are often amended if both parties agree. But the issue here relates to setting a precedent, he said, and the risk of “opening a bottomless pit of conflict in the future.”

Bloomer said he would craft a resolution of support for GAC to discuss and vote on at their January meeting.

Letter to the Editor

Dan Ezekiel introduced this agenda item by noting that recent efforts to tweak the greenbelt’s boundaries have raised the program’s profile with the public.

By way of background, at its Sept. 14, 2011 meeting, GAC had recommended that the council approve changes to Chapter 42 of the Ann Arbor city code, expanding the greenbelt boundaries to add a mile to the southwest in Lodi Township, and one mile to the northeast in Salem Township. [.jpg of map by The Chronicle showing original boundaries, a 2007 expansion, and the current expansion.] The changes also allow a parcel of land adjacent to the greenbelt boundary to be eligible for protection, if it is also adjacent to a parcel under the same ownership within the greenbelt boundary. The council gave final approval to the changes at its Dec. 5, 2011 meeting.

Shannon Brines, the newest member of Ann Arbor's greenbelt advisory commission.

During the council’s deliberations, Ezekiel said, it seemed that some councilmembers misunderstood elements of the greenbelt program. And many of the comments on articles posted on AnnArbor.com contained misinformation, he said. So as he was sitting through other business at the council meeting, Ezekiel said he decided to draft a letter to the editor setting things straight. [.pdf of draft letter to the editor]

He indicated that he was conflicted about it. Sometimes, it’s best to ignore what people say because if you respond, he said, it dignifies the criticism. On the other hand, if you don’t respond to criticism, some people will think it’s true. Ezekiel said he discussed it with GAC’s executive committee, where the consensus was that he should send the letter as chair of GAC, but first bring it to commissioners for review before sending it. He plans to send it to AnnArbor.com sometime next week, pending feedback from other commissioners.

Tom Bloomer noted that some people seem philosophically opposed to the greenbelt program, while others are merely misinformed. For example, some people seemed to think that the protection of land only lasts 30 years – the duration of the open space and land preservation millage. Noting that land preserved under the greenbelt program is protected in perpetuity, he asked Ginny Trocchio to make sure that information about the program was front-and-center on the greenbelt program’s website.

Trocchio noted that a goal for 2012 is to improve communication with the community about the greenbelt program, which could address these issues.

Ezekiel also commented that recent discussions at city council meetings about the city’s public art program had included the issue of administrative support. [Public art commissioners have contended that the city's Percent for Art program has lacked adequate staff support to carry out the program's goals.] He said it made him appreciative of the work of The Conservation Fund staff.

Recognition for Tom Freeman

Dan Ezekiel noted that commissioners had recently learned that Tom Freeman, deputy director of Washtenaw County parks & recreation, is retiring at the end of the year. Freeman has been “absolutely indispensable” to land preservation efforts in the county, Ezekiel said, adding that when the history of local land preservation is written, Freeman will be one of the names that will shine.

Freeman had last attended a GAC meeting in March, when he gave an update on the county’s natural areas preservation program (NAPP) and its efforts related to farmland protection. In 2010, the county board of commissioners had approved changes to the county’s Natural Areas Ordinance No. 128, which governs NAPP. Those changes enabled the county to buy development rights for farmland – a land preservation strategy also pursued by Ann Arbor’s greenbelt program.

At Wednesday’s GAC meeting, Liz Rother read a resolution of appreciation for Freeman. It stated that NAPP has partnered with Ann Arbor’s greenbelt program on three land preservation projects since 2005: the Fox Science Preserve, Meyer Nature Preserve and Scio Woods Preserve. Freeman has been a champion for county land preservation, and went “above and beyond to make difficult transactions come to fruition.” The resolution recognized Freeman “for his outstanding commitment to land preservation, service to Washtenaw County Parks and Recreation and partnership with the City’s Greenbelt Program.”

Outcome: The resolution of appreciation for Tom Freeman passed unanimously.

After the vote, Ezekiel recalled that Freeman had been instrumental in pulling together the complicated land deal for the Fox Science Preserve. Freeman had always been upbeat and encouraging throughout the process, he said, assuring everyone that they’d be able to overcome all hurdles. Freeman’s championing of that project had been hugely significant, Ezekiel said.

Land Acquisition Projects

During her staff report, Ginny Trocchio of The Conservation Fund – which the city contracts to manage the greenbelt program – said she’s been working with local landowners in anticipation of applying for grants from the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Farm and Ranchland Protection Program, or FRPP. The deadline will likely be in February 2012.

Dan Ezekiel asked whether any of the applications will be for land located within the recently-expanded greenbelt boundaries. Several were, Trocchio replied.

Ezekiel noted that the city council had acted positively on GAC’s recommendation to expand the greenbelt’s boundaries in Lodi and Salem townships, and that he really appreciated the council’s support. Directing his comments to Carsten Hohnke, a GAC commissioner who also serves on city council, Ezekiel noted that the changes were a bit of a “heavy lift” to get approved, but “it’s a little change that I think is going to make a huge difference,” he said.

Land Acquisition Projects: Closed Session

At the end of their meeting, commissioners voted to enter into a closed session to discuss possible land acquisition. When they emerged 45 minutes later, commissioners voted on a resolution recommending that the city apply for an FRPP grant for parcel number 2011-11. [Before appearing on the city council’s agenda, details of these greenbelt acquisitions are not made public – parcels are identified only by their application number.]

Outcome: Commissioner unanimously approved a recommendation to apply for an FRPP grant for parcel 2011-11.

Meeting Date Changes

The topic of monthly meeting times has emerged at several previous GAC meetings. The current date and time – on the second Wednesday of each month at 4:30 p.m. – are difficult for some commissioners to make. By Wednesday’s meeting, schedules had been coordinated and a new regular monthly meeting date was proposed: The first Thursday of the month, at 4:30 p.m.

Outcome: Commissioners voted unanimously to change GAC’s monthly meetings to the first Thursday of each month, starting at 4:30 p.m.

Present: Tom Bloomer, Shannon Brines, Dan Ezekiel, Carsten Hohnke, Liz Rother, Laura Rubin. Also: Ginny Trocchio.

Absent: Peter Allen, Mike Garfield, Catherine Riseng.

Next regular meeting: Thursday, Jan. 5, 2012 at 4:30 p.m. in the second-floor council chambers at city hall, 301 E. Huron St., Ann Arbor. [confirm date]

The Chronicle survives in part through regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of publicly-funded initiatives like the city’s greenbelt program. If you’re already supporting The Chronicle, please encourage your friends, neighbors and coworkers to do the same. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle.

The property was identified only by application number – #2005-27. The location of the properties and their owners aren’t revealed until resolutions are voted on by the Ann Arbor city council. However, the property discussed by GAC at its Nov. 30 meeting was likely part of an initiative mentioned briefly at GAC’s Nov. 9 meeting, which was attended by Jack Smiley, former executive director of the Southeast Michigan Land Conservancy. He had indicated that the conservancy hoped to partner with Ann Arbor’s greenbelt program and Washtenaw County’s natural areas preservation program on preserving property in the Superior Greenway – land between Ann Arbor and Detroit that’s protected from development.

The resolution passed on Wednesday recommended that the city contribute up to $168,300 for acquisition costs on a conservation easement. In addition, the recommendation calls for the city to be named as secondary grantee on the easement, and to recover 50% of the sale price – or at least the amount contributed by the city – if the land is ever sold to a private individual. No other details were made public.

During the open session, commissioner Laura Rubin asked Ginny Trocchio – a Conservation Fund staff member who’s under contract with the city to provide support for the greenbelt program – to let commissioners know if the property owner agrees to the “extra terms.” Trocchio indicated that if there’s a counter-offer, GAC would have time to discuss it at their next regular meeting, on Dec. 14.

Trocchio also told commissioners that the city council will likely discuss the deal during a closed session at the council’s Dec. 5 meeting, then vote on the proposal on Dec. 19.

Responding to a follow-up query from The Chronicle, Trocchio said that Wednesday’s special meeting was necessary in order to complete the deal before the end of the year.

There was no discussion during this special meeting about another greenbelt issue that’s being considered by the city council. At its Nov. 21 meeting, councilmembers initially approved expanding the greenbelt’s boundaries – a move that had been previously recommended by GAC. The council is expected to take a final vote on that measure on Dec. 5.

Six commissioners attended the Nov. 30 meeting: Peter Allen, Tom Bloomer, Mike Garfield, Catherine Riseng, Liz Rother, and Laura Rubin. Absent were Dan Ezekiel and Carsten Hohnke.

Skyline High students get their attendance sheets signed by Dan Ezekiel, chair of the greenbelt advisory commission. Some students recognized Ezekiel from his other job – a science teacher at Forsythe Middle School.

Those who did stay witnessed a brief meeting that included a recess to wait until a sixth commissioner arrived – GAC requires six members to hold a closed session, which they needed in order to discuss possible land acquisition.

Briefly participating in that closed session was Jack Smiley, former executive director of the Southeast Michigan Land Conservancy. The conservancy hopes to partner with Ann Arbor’s greenbelt program on property in the Superior Greenway – land between Ann Arbor and Detroit that’s protected from development.

In other business, commissioners briefly discussed ways to communicate better about the greenbelt program with the public, building on what they viewed as a successful bus tour of protected greenbelt land in October. One possibility is a forum this winter at the Ann Arbor District Library, where the public could meet with landowners whose property is part of the greenbelt.

The one action item at Wednesday’s meeting was a vote to pre-authorize staff of The Conservation Fund, which manages the greenbelt program under contract with the city, to conduct appraisals for potential land acquisitions through Dec. 31.

Typically, GAC votes to authorize appraisals on specific parcels, as part of the application process that landowners make for being part of the greenbelt. But the city council is expected to vote on a possible expansion of greenbelt boundaries in December, after GAC’s meeting that month. GAC voted to recommend the expansion at its September 2011 meeting. It’s expected that some landowners within the expanded boundaries might want to apply for the greenbelt, and a February deadline to seek matching federal dollars makes the timeline for getting appraisals shorter than usual. Pre-authorization gives staff flexibility to move forward with the process.

Commissioners are also awaiting finalization of Shannon Brines’ appointment to GAC. The city council was expected to vote on his appointment at its Nov. 10 meeting. But the council postponed the vote to Nov. 21 – due to a procedural issue, not any substantive concern about his appointment.

Partnership with Southeast Michigan Land Conservancy

Jack Smiley, founder and former executive director of the Southeast Michigan Land Conservancy, attended Wednesday’s meeting and spoke to commissioners informally. He also addressed the group during public commentary, saying that he’s now a volunteer with the conservancy’s land protection committee. SMLC is excited about partnering with Ann Arbor’s greenbelt program and Washtenaw County’s natural areas preservation program, he said, to build what’s known as the Superior Greenway.

Already, more than 1,800 acres have been protected between Ann Arbor and Detroit, Smiley said. There are some unique opportunities in the Ann Arbor greenbelt areas, he added, and he hopes the partnership will protect additional land in the future.

Greenbelt advisory commission chair Dan Ezekiel, left, talks with Jack Smiley, former executive director of the Southeast Michigan Land Conservancy, before GAC's Nov. 10 meeting. They are looking at a map showing the location of land that might be preserved in partnership with the city and SMLC.

Before the meeting, Smiley had shown a map to GAC chair Dan Ezekiel and Ginny Trocchio, a Conservation Fund staff member who helps administer the greenbelt program. The map indicated a potential location for land preservation. Toward the end of its meeting, the commission entered into closed session to discuss possible land acquisition, and Smiley was invited in for part of the session. When queried by The Chronicle about the location of the land, Smiley indicated that it was not information he wanted to make public at this point.

In response to Smiley’s public commentary, Ezekiel noted that Ann Arbor had previously partnered with SMLC and Washtenaw County on the Meyer Preserve – two parcels on the southwest and northeast corners of Vreeland and Prospect Roads in Superior Township, near SMLC’s LeFurge Woods Nature Preserve. Ezekiel said the parcel that might be preserved in the future through a partnership with SMLC would be located in an area within the greenbelt’s expanded 2007 boundaries.

Ann Arbor’s greenbelt program is funded by the Open Space and Parkland Preservation millage, which voters approved in 2003. Since then, the council has expanded the boundaries once, in August 2007, by bumping out the original boundary by a mile. [.pdf map of existing greenbelt district]

At its September 2011 meeting, GAC recommended expanding the boundaries again. The expansion would include “bump outs” in Lodi and Salem townships. It would also allow the city to acquire development rights on property adjacent to (but outside of) the greenbelt boundary, if it’s under the same ownership as an inside-the-boundary property that’s being considered for the program. These recommendations have not yet been approved by the city council – the council is now expected to vote on the issue in December. Previously, that vote had been expected at the second meeting in November.

Update: New Commissioner Appointment

Laura Rubin, a commissioner who’s also executive director of the Huron River Watershed Council, asked about the status of appointing Shannon Brines as a new GAC member. Ginny Trocchio reported that his nomination was on the agenda for city council’s Nov. 10 meeting. The council resolution is sponsored by Carsten Hohnke, a city councilmember who also serves on GAC. Hohnke did not attend Wednesday’s GAC meeting. [The council voted to postpone the appointment until Nov. 21. The resolution on the agenda would have made the effective date Nov. 21, and the council wanted to time their vote to the effective date.]

At its October 2011 meeting, GAC voted unanimously to recommend Brines for the appointment to fill the one open position, an at-large seat. For most city commissions, members are nominated by the mayor and confirmed by the council. However, greenbelt commissioners are both nominated and confirmed by the city council.

Brines is an Ann Arbor resident and owner of Brines Farm in Dexter, which is located outside of the city’s greenbelt boundary. He is active in the local food movement, as a board member for Slow Food Huron Valley, and a steering committee member for the annual HomeGrown Festival, Local Food Summit, and the Tilian Farm Development Center, a farming business incubator project in Ann Arbor Township. He is a lecturer at the University of Michigan and manager of the environmental spatial analysis (ESA) lab at UM’s School of Natural Resources and Environment. Since 2007 he has served on the city’s public market advisory commission, which handles issues related to the farmers market. His current term on that commission ends in 2014.

Authorizing Appraisals

The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Farm and Ranchland Protection Program, or FRPP, has set a February 2012 deadline to apply for the next round of grants, Trocchio told commissioners. The greenbelt program frequently seeks FRPP matching funds to offset costs of its land preservation efforts. In fiscal 2011, the greenbelt program received nearly $2.8 million in FRPP funding.

Trocchio noted that there are some landowners in the potentially expanded greenbelt boundaries who are interested in applying to the greenbelt program. But since the city council won’t be voting on the boundaries until December, that leaves a tight timeframe to get all the necessary work done to apply for the FRPP grants, she said. Typically, GAC votes to authorize property appraisals of specific potential greenbelt acquisitions. But a council vote on the expanded boundaries won’t occur until after GAC’s December meeting, Trocchio noted.

Trocchio said she talked with GAC’s executive committee – chair Dan Ezekiel and vice chair Catherine Riseng – about how to handle this situation. One approach would be for GAC to direct staff to make appraisals needed for FRPP grants, if the properties fit the greenbelt program’s strategic goals. “The sooner we can get those started, the better off we are,” she said.

Ezekiel clarified that it would essentially pre-authorize staff to start the appraisals. Trocchio noted that GAC could put an end date on the authorization, after which it would revert to the regular approval process. Liz Rother made a motion to grant the authorization, with an end date of Dec. 31.

In response to a query from Laura Rubin, Trocchio said that if an appraisal was started that GAC members later disagreed with, they could stop the process immediately at that point. Rubin asked how many applications Trocchio expected would need appraisals. ”If we get three or four, that would be really exciting,” Trocchio said. She estimated that appraisals cost between $2,300 to $2,500 each.

Outcome: The commission unanimously authorized staff to move forward with appraisals as needed without GAC approval, through Dec. 31.

Staff Report: Communications

During her staff report, Ginny Trocchio of The Conservation Fund said that the Oct. 22 greenbelt bus tour had been a success, with about 30 people attending. She said there was great feedback from people who took the tour, which visited several farms that are protected by the greenbelt program and provided an opportunity to talk with landowners who are participating in the program.

Trocchio said the commission has talked in the past about possible ways to communicate more with the public about the program. One idea is to hold an event at the downtown Ann Arbor District Library building this winter, where landowners could discuss the greenbelt.

Saying that the bus tour sounded encouraging, Mike Garfield urged other commissions to think about additional ways they could publicize the greenbelt program. He noted that over the past several years, the program hasn’t received much notice. With students in the audience, Wednesday’s meeting was probably the largest crowd they’ve had in years, he said.

Garfield remembered how much attention the greenbelt program received when it was originally proposed and right after it was started, and he wondered how the city could reach out to the community again. Garfield suggested putting the topic on a future agenda, as an item for discussion.

Trocchio suggested that another possibility is to have a booth at the city’s annual Green Fair, typically held in June. Dan Ezekiel voiced support for a session at the library, noting that they could bring in maps and photographs, essentially creating a virtual tour of the greenbelt.

New Meeting Date

GAC’s current meeting time has posed a problem for some commissioners, and for the past few months they’ve discussed possible new dates for their monthly meetings, which now fall on the second Wednesday of each month at 4:30 p.m. For Dan Ezekiel and Catherine Rising – the commission’s chair and vice chair – the current time requires them to leave faculty meetings related to their jobs.

After further discussion, the consensus among those who were present was that the first Thursday in the month, also at 4:30 p.m., was a preferable time. Two commissioners – Peter Allen and Carsten Hohnke – weren’t present at Wednesday’s meeting, and no formal vote on the change was taken. The new dates, if approved at GAC’s December meeting, would take effect in 2012.

Ezekiel noted that because the volume of GAC’s work is decreasing, it’s likely that meetings in future years will be relatively shorter.

Closed Session

Commissioners spent the last 45 minutes of their meeting in closed session to discuss possible land acquisitions. Jack Smiley of the Southeast Michigan Land Conservancy was invited into the session briefly, staying about five minutes. The commission did not take any additional action when they emerged from closed session.

Present: Tom Bloomer, Dan Ezekiel, Mike Garfield, Catherine Riseng, Liz Rother, Laura Rubin. Also: Ginny Trocchio.

Absent: Peter Allen, Carsten Hohnke.

Next regular meeting: Wednesday, Dec. 14 at 4:30 p.m. in the second-floor council chambers at city hall, 301 E. Huron St., Ann Arbor. [confirm date]

The Chronicle survives in part through regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of publicly-funded entities like the city’s greenbelt program. If you’re already supporting The Chronicle, please encourage your friends, neighbors and coworkers to do the same. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle.

From left: Greenbelt advisory commissioners Catherine Riseng and Liz Rother. (Photo by the writer.)

The greenbelt advisory commission (GAC) voted unanimously to recommend Brines for the appointment, which would fill the one open position, an at-large seat. Brines owns Brines Farm in Dexter but lives in Ann Arbor’s Fifth Ward – which GAC member Carsten Hohnke represents on city council. Hohnke, who did not attend Wednesday’s meeting, will likely be the councilmember to put forward Brines’ nomination to council.

Brines also works for the University of Michigan School of Natural Resources and Environment (SNRE), as does GAC vice chair Catherine Riseng. At Wednesday’s meeting, Riseng told commissioners that she’s been appointed to an advisory committee for the county’s natural areas preservation program, and hopes to serve as a liaison between the two groups.

In other action, the commission voted to write a letter of support for continued funding of a federal program for farmland preservation. As Congress hammers out the 2012 farm bill, funds for the program could be at risk. The city received nearly $2.8 million in federal dollars for greenbelt properties during the last fiscal year.

At Wednesday’s meeting the commission also discussed forming a committee to develop a communications plan for the greenbelt program. The intent is to get the word out about the program’s achievements in a consistent, coordinated way.

One of the program’s ongoing efforts at communication is coming up later this month. On Saturday, Oct. 22, a two-hour bus tour will highlight some of the farmland and other properties that are being preserved by the greenbelt program. The tour runs from 11 a.m.-1 p.m. and starts from the Ann Arbor farmers market. Boxed lunches are included in the $15 fee.

Recommendation to Appoint Brines

Two former commissioners – Jennifer Santi Hall and Gil Omenn – were term-limited earlier this year and left the advisory group at the end of June. Liz Rother was appointed by the city council in June to replace Hall, but Omenn’s at-large position remains unfilled.

Shannon Brines has previously expressed interest in the appointment, and had attended GAC’s August meeting. On Wednesday, the commission discussed recommending him formally for appointment by the city council. For most city commissions, members are nominated by the mayor and confirmed by the council. However, greenbelt commissioners are both nominated and confirmed by the city council.

Brines is an Ann Arbor resident and owner of Brines Farm in Dexter – located outside of the city’s greenbelt boundary. He is active in the local food movement, as a board member for Slow Food Huron Valley, and a steering committee member for the annual HomeGrown Festival and Local Food Summit. In a cover letter applying for the GAC appointment, Brines said he’s also assisting with a farming business incubator project in Ann Arbor Township called the Tilian Farm Development Center. Brines serves on its steering committee.

Brines is also a lecturer at the University of Michigan and manager of the environmental spatial analysis (ESA) lab at UM’s School of Natural Resources and Environment. Since 2007 he has served on the city’s public market advisory commission, which handles issues related to the farmers market. His current term on that commission ends in 2014.

During a brief discussion of Brines’ appointment, Peter Allen praised UM’s recent efforts to use more locally-produced food at its campus dining halls, and noted that Brines is part of the local food network. Dan Ezekiel added that there were several promising announcements recently about UM’s sustainability efforts. [UM president Mary Sue Coleman announced a range of new sustainability goals for the Ann Arbor campus last month.] It puts the university more in step with the city, he said, noting that’s not always the case.

Mike Garfield asked if the commission typically makes recommendations for appointments. No, Ezekiel said, but in this case, Carsten Hohnke specifically asked for it.

Hohnke – a city councilmember representing Ward 5, where Brines lives – also serves on GAC. It’s likely that Hohnke will put forward the nomination for Brines at an upcoming council meeting. Hohnke did not attend Wednesday’s GAC meeting.

Ginny Trocchio, support staff for the greenbelt program, noted that more seats will be opening next year on the commission, so it’s good to continue to look for possible candidates.

Outcome: Commissioners voted unanimously to recommend that city council appoint Shannon Brines to the greenbelt advisory commission.

Greenbelt Communications Committee

At the commission’s Sept. 14 meeting, Ginny Trocchio had presented an annual report on the greenbelt program for fiscal 2011, which ended June 30. In discussing the report, Carsten Hohnke had asked about the program’s communications strategy, and indicated that he’d like to identify goals for communicating to the public about the greenbelt program and its successes.

On Wednesday, Trocchio reported that she discussed with GAC’s executive committee – chair Dan Ezekiel and vice chair Catherine Rising – the idea of creating a communications committee to develop a plan for those goals. Committee members could work with the city’s communications staff to design branding for the greenbelt, and a logo. Another possibility is to create an impact report about the greenbelt, to distribute to residents. She passed out some examples of brochures and reports that other land preservation groups have developed.

Ezekiel said that this first effort would be important, because it could serve as a template that would just be tweaked in future years. The program is moving from an acquisition mode to a maintenance and publicity mode, he said, so communications will be increasingly important.

Liz Rother, GAC’s newest commissioner, volunteered to on the committee. Other commissioners indicated that they’d think about it.

Support for Federal Funding

The greenbelt program has been successful in tapping matching funds from the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Farm and Ranchland Protection Program, or FRPP. In fiscal 2011, the greenbelt program, which is funded through a 30-year millage, also received nearly $2.8 million in FRPP funding. Those funds are used to offset costs of the purchase of development rights (PDR) – the primary mechanism that the greenbelt program uses to preserve farmland and open space. To date, the greenbelt has protected more than 3,200 acres.

At Wednesday’s meeting, Ginny Trocchio reported that as part of negotiations in Congress over the 2012 federal farm bill, FRPP funding might be at risk. The Michigan Dept. of Agriculture is asking land preservation programs in the state to submit statements of support for the FRPP. Trocchio said she’s working with local landowners to get letters from individuals who are part of the greenbelt, but she hoped that GAC could also submit a letter.

FRPP funds have helped the greenbelt program achieve its goals, Trocchio said, by leveraging local dollars for federal funds. Without that federal support, Ann Arbor wouldn’t have been able to preserve as much land as it has, she said.

If commissioners agreed, Trocchio said she’d draft a letter for review by GAC’s chair or vice chair before submitting it.

Mike Garfield asked if there seemed to be an immediate threat to FRPP funding. Trocchio replied that everything is on the table. Dan Ezekiel felt the threat was imminent. The so-called “super committee” of Congress that’s working on a proposal to address the budget deficit hasn’t released much information about potential cuts, he noted. “I think when they strike, they’re going to strike fast,” he said.

Outcome: Commissioners unanimously voted to approve writing a letter of support for the FRPP program.

Misc. Communications

There were several updates from commissioners and staff during Wednesday’s meeting.

Misc. Communications: Greenbelt Boundary Changes

Dan Ezekiel reported that he and Ginny Trocchio had attended a recent Lodi Township board meeting, where township trustees approved a resolution encouraging Ann Arbor city council to expand the greenbelt boundaries. The city council is expected to vote on those changes at its second meeting in November.

GAC had voted to recommend the changes at its Sept. 14 meeting. If approved by the council, the greenbelt boundaries would expand in Lodi and Salem townships. The recommendation also calls for allowing the city to acquire development rights on property adjacent to (but outside of) the greenbelt boundary, if it’s under the same ownership as an inside-the-boundary property that’s being considered for the program.

Ezekiel indicated that Salem Township’s board will also be weighing in with a recommendation to approve the boundary changes.

Trocchio noted that the the changes would require votes by council at two consecutive meetings, but there would still be time to solicit applications from landowners in the newly added areas before February 2012. That’s the deadline to apply for matching funds from the federal Farm and Ranchland Protection Program, which helps offset the cost of the city’s greenbelt acquisitions.

Misc. Communications: Riseng on NATAC

Catherine Rising informed her colleagues that she’s been appointed to Washtenaw County’s natural areas technical advisory committee (NATAC). The county board of commissioners approved her appointment at their Oct. 5 meeting.

NATAC advises the county parks & recreation commission regarding its natural areas preservation program. Like the city’s greenbelt program, NAPP is funded by a millage and works to preserve natural areas and farmland throughout the county.

Riseng – an aquatic ecologist researcher at the University of Michigan’s School of Natural Resources and Environment – said she hopes to serve as a liaison between the two advisory groups.

Misc. Communications: Meeting Times

As they had at last month’s meeting, commissioners again discussed possible new dates for their monthly meetings, which now fall on the second Wednesday of each month at 4:30 p.m. For Dan Ezekiel and Catherine Rising – the commission’s chair and vice chair – the current time requires them to leave faculty meetings related to their jobs.

After additional discussion of possible alternative dates, Ezekiel suggested deferring the decision. He noted that two current commissioners – Carsten Hohnke and Laura Rubin – weren’t there to weigh in. Nor was the potential new commissioner, Shannon Brines.

Closed Session

Commissioners spent the last 40 minutes of their meeting in closed session to discuss possible land acquisitions. They did not take any additional action when they emerged from closed session.

Present: Peter Allen, Tom Bloomer, Dan Ezekiel, Mike Garfield, Catherine Riseng, Liz Rother. Also: Ginny Trocchio.

Absent: Carsten Hohnke, Laura Rubin.

Next regular meeting: Wednesday, Nov. 9 at 4:30 p.m. in the second-floor council chambers at city hall, 301 E. Huron St., Ann Arbor. [confirm date]

The Chronicle survives in part through regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of publicly-funded entities like the city’s greenbelt program. If you’re already supporting The Chronicle, please encourage your friends, neighbors and coworkers to do the same. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle.

Brines is an Ann Arbor resident and owner of Brines Farm in Dexter. He is a lecturer and manager of the environmental spatial analysis (ESA) lab at the University of Michigan School of Natural Resources and Environment. Since 2007 Brines also has served on the city’s public market advisory commission, which handles issues related to the farmers market. His current term on that commission ends in 2014.

Two vacancies opened on GAC earlier this year. Liz Rother was appointed by the city council in June to replace term-limited Jennifer Santi Hall. The remaining vacancy is an at-large slot, held by former GAC member Gil Omenn. For most city commissions, members are nominated by the mayor and confirmed by the council. However, greenbelt commissioners are both nominated and confirmed by the city council.

It’s likely that his nomination will be put forward by city councilmember Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5), who also serves on GAC. Hohnke did not attend Wednesday’s meeting.

This brief was filed from the council chambers at city hall, where the greenbelt advisory commission meets. A more detailed report will follow: [link]

Ginny Trocchio of The Conservation Fund, which has a contract with the city to manage the greenbelt program. She's showing the greenbelt advisory commission a map of proposed boundary changes. (Photos by the writer.)

The recommendation also calls for allowing the city to acquire development rights on property adjacent to (but outside of) the greenbelt boundary, if it’s under the same ownership as an inside-the-boundary property that’s being considered for the program.

The recommended “bump-outs” in Lodi and Salem townships – in the southwest and northeast corners of the greenbelt, respectively – reflect increased support for the program from those townships. The Salem Township board, for example, recently voted to earmark $200,000 annually for land preservation.

A separate resolution was voted down, with support only from the commission’s chair, Dan Ezekiel. It would have recommended that the council consider properties adjacent to the greenbelt for acquisition, and create a one-mile buffer surrounding the current boundary. Properties within that buffer would have been considered for acquisition with greenbelt funds, but with stricter selection criteria.

Several commissioners were reluctant to increase the boundaries with a mile-wide buffer zone, citing concerns that land in that area is too far from Ann Arbor, and noting that opportunities for land preservation are still available within the existing greenbelt boundaries.

In other business, the commission got a review of the greenbelt program’s finances and activities for the 2011 fiscal year. A 30-year open space and parkland preservation millage, which voters approved in 2003, funds both the greenbelt program as well as land acquisition for parks. During the year, the greenbelt program spent $8.3 million on 12 deals – by far the most transactions since the greenbelt’s inception.

Those 12 deals protect 1,472 acres of farmland from future development. In total, more than 3,200 acres are now part of the greenbelt. To put that into perspective, Ezekiel noted that those 3,200 acres are roughly equivalent to 80 parks the size of Veterans Memorial Park in Ann Arbor.

Three more greenbelt acquisitions were recommended by commissioners at the end of their meeting. The properties were identified only by application number  – the location of the properties and their owners aren’t revealed until the resolutions are voted on by the city council.

Greenbelt Boundary Changes

The greenbelt advisory commission has been looking at possible expansion of boundaries for about a year. At their Nov. 10, 2010 meeting, commissioners voted to form a subcommittee – chaired by Dan Ezekiel – to explore the issue. At the time, a main reason to consider expansion was a opportunity to protect important parcels of land that fall just outside of the existing greenbelt boundary. [.pdf map of existing greenbelt district]

By way of background, in August 2007 the Ann Arbor city council expanded the greenbelt’s boundaries for the first time since the open space and parkland preservation millage was approved by voters in 2003. A summary of the ordinance for that expansion reads as follows:

Ordinance No. 26-07 amends Section 3:62(13) of Chapter 42, Open Space and Parkland Preservation of the City Code enlarging the boundaries of the Greenbelt District one mile to the west in both Webster and Scio Townships, one mile to the south in Pittsfield Township and one mile to the east in Superior Township and incorporates a new map of the boundaries, as revised, as part of Chapter 42.

At Wednesday’s meeting, Ezekiel – who now chairs the commission – introduced the topic by saying it had been kicked around for a while, and he hoped they could reach some closure. He reviewed some history of the program, including the 2007 boundary change. He noted that two people instrumental in drawing the original greenbelt boundaries – Mike Garfield, who still serves on the commission, and former city councilmember Bob Johnson – had also been part of that 2007 boundary committee.

In considering these new boundary changes, Ezekiel said, the focus should be on what would make the best possible greenbelt, and how the city can give taxpayers the kind of program they thought they were voting for back in 2003.

Map of the Ann Arbor greenbelt. The solid green line indicates the current boundary. The dotted green lines in the lower left (Lodi Township) and upper right (Salem Township) indicate proposed "bump outs." The black line indicates a one-mile buffer zone, which was rejected by the greenbelt advisory commission. (Links to larger image.)

Ginny Trocchio, a Conservation Fund staff member who helps administer the greenbelt program, brought out a large map that showed the existing boundary and proposed changes. The committee suggested that the advisory commission consider two separate resolutions.

The first resolution would expand the boundaries in Salem Township and Lodi Township to “square” off the greenbelt boundaries. The Salem Township boundary would be extended 1 mile to the east so the eastern greenbelt boundary would align with Superior Township to the south. The Lodi Township boundary would be extended 1 mile to the west and 1 mile to the south so the boundaries would align with the borders of Scio Township to the north and Pittsfield Township to the east.

That same resolution recommended allowing the program to acquire property that’s outside the greenbelt but adjacent to the boundary, if it is under the same ownership as an inside-the-boundary property that’s being considered for the program. This change addresses the situation of a property owner holding land on both sides of a road – one parcel within the greenbelt boundary, the other outside of it.

The formal resolution, read aloud by Catherine Riseng, states:

To recommend to City Council to expand the Greenbelt boundaries in Lodi Township and Salem Township to be consistent with the adjacent townships’ Greenbelt boundaries. In addition, to recommend to City Council to amend the Chapter 42 Ordinance to allow properties adjacent to the Greenbelt boundary, that are under the same ownership as property located immediately adjacent within the Greenbelt boundary to be considered for acquisition.

Riseng noted that now, unlike in the past, officials in Lodi and Salem townships are supportive of the greenbelt. Salem Township has committed $200,000 annually from the township’s landfill revenue for the next five years for land preservation. There are some wonderful properties in those townships, she noted, and the land is still reasonably close to the city.

Ezekiel described the second part of the resolution, which addresses the issue of adjacency, as “a technical patch on a problem that we found.” A situation had arisen in which a landowner wanted his entire farm protected, but two parcels were separated by a road – one side was within the greenbelt, the other wasn’t. So the city was constrained from acquiring development rights on the entire farm, even though the landowner was willing.

Peter Allen asked why there were two resolutions. Ezekiel said the resolutions were presented in a hierarchy of “no-brainerness” – the first one proposed changes that the committee felt were easier to swallow.

Carsten Hohnke said the logic behind the initial resolution was strong. While some people might say there’s still plenty of land to be preserved within the existing boundary, he could see the point about a hierarchy – the logic of this first resolution is easy to understand.

Ezekiel noted that because of boundary changes in 2007, the greenbelt was able to acquire development rights to the Nixon farm in Webster Township, which had been targeted for development as a mobile home park. It’s one of the most significant acquisitions the program has made, he said. Another example is the Meyer Preserve in Superior Township, which before 2007 had fallen outside of the greenbelt boundary.

Hohnke countered that it will always be true that opportunities will exist outside the boundary, regardless of where they draw the line. That said, he acknowledged that the Nixon farm anchored one of the greenbelt’s largest successes – establishing a 1,000-acre block of protected land in Webster Township.

Riseng said that Hohnke was right, but she noted that the current proposed changes are also being driven by the opportunity for additional financial support from partnering with the townships. That’s in addition to the fact that there are some beautiful properties in Lodi and Salem townships that fall outside of the existing boundary, she added.

Ezekiel reported that earlier this month, several commissioners – himself, Riseng, Liz Rother and Tom Bloomer – had taken a drive with Trocchio to the bump-out in Lodi Township, and walked through some of the properties there that might be considered for the greenbelt. They were only about five miles from the Meijer store on Ann Arbor-Saline Road, he noted – it’s still close to the city, even though it felt like they were far out in the country. He said his rule of thumb is that the property should be within an easy hour bike ride of the city. Voters wanted to preserve land that was relatively close to Ann Arbor, he said.

Outcome: Commissioners voted unanimously to approve the first resolution, bumping out the greenbelt boundaries in Lodi and Salem townships, and addressing the issue of adjacent properties. It will be forwarded to the city council for consideration.

Riseng then read the second resolution, noting that there would likely be some concerns about it:

To recommend to City Council to amend the Chapter 42 Ordinance to allow properties adjacent to the Greenbelt boundary to be considered for acquisition, and to recommend to City Council to amend Chapter 42 Ordinance to create a 1 mile buffer surrounding the Greenbelt boundary to allow properties that meet stricter criteria located within the buffer to be considered for acquisition.

Riseng said that there were properties within the proposed buffer that the Huron River Watershed Council had identified as high-priority bioreserves for the Huron River.

Peter Allen asked what might qualify as “stricter criteria.” Riseng replied that the committee didn’t believe they should be the ones to set the criteria, but that examples might include a requirement for higher financial contributions from the landowner, or a stipulation that buffer properties that have a higher value in some way, like a bioreserve.

Allen noted that on the plus side, this kind of expansion could allow the program to acquire land that was less expensive, because it was located farther from Ann Arbor. On the other hand, it could dilute attention to the core greenbelt area.

Bloomer said he didn’t think the distance they were talking about would make much difference in land value. ”We’re still well within the development pressure area,” he said. When asked by Allen if the farmland was better quality in the proposed buffer zone, Bloomer replied that he didn’t know if it was better – there was just more of it.

Dan Ezekiel, chair of the greenbelt advisory commission. He is also a science teacher at Forsythe Middle School.

Trocchio said she hadn’t observed a substantial price difference in the proposed buffer area. A bigger factor is whether the land is located within the Ann Arbor Public Schools district – that tends to increase value.

Hohnke said that for the changes proposed in this second resolution, he didn’t think the benefits outweighed the costs. There was a lot of clarity in the first proposal, he said. There are partners in Lodi and Salem townships who are willing to participate, and it fixes the parcel-cut-in-half problem.

But this second set of changes would set up a second tier of scoring criteria, Hohnke said, and that becomes harder to communicate. It starts diluting the program’s efforts, he added, especially now that there are additional areas in Lodi and Salem that have rich opportunities. He said he was not inclined to support this resolution.

Bloomer said he agreed with Hohnke’s assessment.

Allen asked whether it would be possible to return to this proposal in the future, if they didn’t recommend it now. It’s possible, Ezekiel said, but he wasn’t sure how enthusiastic the city council would be if the commission “came back to the well” for a third time.

Riseng asked Trocchio whether there’s a lot of opportunity for land preservation within the existing greenbelt boundaries. “Absolutely,” Trocchio replied, especially with the inclusion of Lodi and Salem townships.

Outcome: On a 1-5 vote, the resolution – recommending a buffer zone and allowing the program to consider properties adjacent to the greenbelt for acquisition – failed, with support only from Dan Ezekiel. Mike Garfield and Laura Rubin were absent.

At the end of the meeting during his communications to commissioners, Ezekiel reported that a message had been received from Lodi Township’s treasurer, indicating that the township board had talked about the boundary change at their meeting earlier this month. The consensus was that township officials are not opposed the the change, he said. The township had “jumped the gun” a bit, Ezekiel said, noting the changes still need to be approved by the city council. But he reported that he had responded to the message by saying he hoped the township would actually support the greenbelt program, not simply “not oppose” it.

Ezekiel said he planned to contact officials in Lodi and Salem, to report on the commission’s recommendation. He hopes to secure letters of support from the townships by the time the resolution is on the council’s agenda.

Greenbelt Program Finances

A member of the city’s finance staff typically comes to the commission’s meeting once a year to give an annual financial report on the greenbelt program. On Wednesday, Kelli Martin, financial manager for the city’s community services unit, reviewed the program’s unaudited financials for FY 2011, from July 1, 2010 through June 30, 2011. The 30-year open space and parkland preservation millage, which voters approved in 2003, funds both the greenbelt program as well as land acquisition for parks. Martin’s presentation covered the overall millage-funded budget, while highlighting parts that related to the greenbelt. [.pdf file of complete finance report]

Revenues from the millage were $2.164 million in fiscal 2011, down slightly from $2.262 million the previous year. [Two-thirds of the millage proceeds fund the greenbelt program, with the remaining third allotted to parks. The parks funding is overseen by the city's park advisory commission.]

In addition, the greenbelt program brought in nearly $2.8 million in federal grants during the year – the highest amount it has ever received. Those grants are from the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Farm and Ranchland Protection Program, or FRPP. Investment income was $233,614 for the year, down from $492,576 in FY 2010.

In total, $5.185 million in revenues came in for the combined greenbelt and parks acquisitions programs in FY 2011.

On the expense side, items included $1.2 million in debt service on the $20 million bond that the city issued in FY 2006. Those bond proceeds have now been spent, Martin noted.

The major expenses for the greenbelt program – $8.3 million during the year – related to land preservation projects. Martin noted that over the life of the greenbelt program to date, $24.288 million has been spent directly on land preservation projects.

In FY 2011, $120,338 was paid to The Conservation Fund, which manages the greenbelt and park acquisition programs. Total administrative costs – including items like information technology (IT) and bond insurance – were $161,195. Administrative expenses accounted for 1.5% of the $10.672 million in total expenditures.

The fund balance stands at $10.3 million, down from $15.79 million a year ago. Of that, the greenbelt program’s share is $6.06 million, Martin said. An endowment to fund future maintenance and enforcement of greenbelt deals stands at $442,274.

Greenbelt Program Finances: Commissioner Comments, Questions

Peter Allen asked for more detail about the investment income. Martin reported that the lower amount in FY 2011 reflects a lower fund balance – there was less money to invest, she said. She offered to ask Matt Horning, the city’s treasurer, to attend a future meeting with more detail about the city’s investment strategy, if commissioners were interested.

Allen also asked for background on the FRPP grants. Ginny Trocchio, a Conservation Fund staff member who oversees the greenbelt program, reported that the grants helped fund the purchase of development rights for several properties. Those include the Braun, Gould, Whitney, Honke and Maulbetsch properties. It was by far the greenbelt program’s busiest year, she said.

Commissioner Tom Bloomer, who also owns Bur Oaks Farm in Webster Township.

Commenting on the visual presentation, Allen suggested showing the data in chart format, so that it would be easier for people to see the trend lines. Specifically, he suggested charting the major revenue and expense trends, which he noted would show clearly how much activity is handled with relatively low administrative costs.

Carsten Hohnke, who also represents Ward 5 on city council, said one operations metric that might be useful to the public would be to identify the cost per protected acre. That information would reflect that the greenbelt program is taking advantage of the relatively lower property values to buy development rights, he noted.

Tom Bloomer asked for an explanation of how the endowment amount is calculated for each property. Trocchio said there’s a formula that’s used to project future expenses that might be incurred. Those might include legal expenses and costs for monitoring compliance with the land deals.

Hohnke noted that the city hasn’t had to incur any legal expenses so far, but there has been several years of monitoring. He wondered if there’d been any useful data that could be used to refine or validate the estimated monitoring costs. Trocchio indicated that the staff could revisit those calculations.

Dan Ezekiel observed that literature about land conservancies stresses the importance of setting aside funds for monitoring compliance and protecting conservation easements. Setting up an endowment for that purpose is one of the most important things a land preservation program can do, he said, and it’s a point of pride that Ann Arbor’s greenbelt program has done that since its inception.

Greenbelt Annual Report

Ginny Trocchio presented an activity report for fiscal year 2011, which ended June 30. [.pdf of draft activity report for FY 2011]

The greenbelt program completed 12 transactions during the year, protecting 1,472 acres of farmland, Trocchio reported. Deals included nearly 680 acres of farmland along Whitmore Lake Road, which serves as a gateway into Ann Arbor.

Examples of FY 2011 greenbelt deals include:

• $1 million for the 146-acre Whitney farm in Webster Township, plus a $23,867 endowment.
• $2.5 million for the 286-acre Braun farm in Ann Arbor Township, plus a $25,000 endowment.
• $438,936 for the 51-acre Gould property, also in Ann Arbor Township, plus a $24,000 endowment.
• $683,459 for the 96-acre Honke property in Northfield Township, plus a $23,867 endowment.
• $734,067 for the 128-acre Maulbetsch property in Northfield Township, plus a $23,867 endowment.

Since the greenbelt program began, 3,214 acres have been preserved, Trocchio said.

Trocchio also reviewed the program’s goals for the past year, noting that most were exceeded:

• Goal: Apply for grant funds on two properties. Result: One grant was applied for, but a second application was withdrawn by the property owner.
• Goal: Close on four properties. Result: The city closed on 12 properties.
• Goal: Complete a 1,000-acre block of preserved land in Webster Township. Result: 1,200 acres are now protected there by the greenbelt program.
• Goal: Complete the first greenbelt bus tour. Result: A bus tour was held in July 2010. Additional tours will be organized for the current fiscal year.
• Goal: Obtain at least 20% matching funds on all transactions. Result: This was achieved. The overall average was 52% matching funds for completed transactions.

Three goals are identified for the current fiscal year: (1) Apply for grant funds on two properties; (2) close on three properties; and (3) obtain at least 20% matching funds on all transactions.

In noting the lower goal of closing on three properties, Trocchio said she didn’t think they could keep up with the pace of this year’s acquisitions.

Greenbelt Annual Report: Commissioner Discussion

Carsten Hohnke asked Trocchio to review the program’s communications strategy. He said he didn’t see any goals about this for the current year, and wondered what the staff planned to do, other than the bus tour and general media coverage.

Trocchio said she could certainly add communications goals to the list. She noted that she and Dan Ezekiel, the commission’s chair, had an information booth in the Homegrown Festival earlier this month. She also had a display about Ann Arbor’s greenbelt program at a conference hosted by the Heart of the Lakes Center for Land Conservation Policy earlier this year. More of that kind of outreach is planned, she said.

Commissioner Catherine Riseng, an aquatic ecologist and researcher at the University of Michigan School of Natural Resources and Environment.

In reviewing the year’s overall activities, Ezekiel said it was a banner year for the program, and the excellence of the staff has really shined through. Ann Arbor taxpayers have protected 3,200 acres, he noted. To put it in perspective, he said, it’s the equivalent of 80 parks the size of Veterans Memorial Park in Ann Arbor, or about 5 square miles. “And we’re nowhere near finished,” he said.

It’s a credit to Ann Arbor voters and taxpayers that they’re willing to tax themselves in order to preserve land near the periphery of the city, he said. No one anticipated the crash in land values and the lull in development because of the economy, and the program has been able to take advantage of that.

Ezekiel observed that the greenbelt program is under the radar – if the program does its job, nothing changes, because the land is preserved as it is. The program’s charge is to protect some of the best land in the area forever. If and when development pressure returns, that’s when people will notice what’s been done, he said. Many years from now, he added, people will be happy with what the city has been able to do during this time.

Peter Allen observed that they haven’t created a greenbelt as much as they’ve protected the foodshed. He wondered how many farms were represented in the 3,200 protected acres. Ezekiel said that of the 27 total properties, 24 of them are farms and three are open space. Allen then queried Tom Bloomer – who also owns Bur Oaks Farm in Webster Township, which is part of the greenbelt program – to comment on the economic value of goods produced on these farms.

Bloomer was hesitant to speculate, saying the answer would be complicated. He did venture that in general, the economic value of farming is consistently underestimated.

Outcome: The commission voted unanimously to accept the activity report for fiscal 2011.

Greenbelt Acquisitions

At the end of their meeting, commissioners entered into a closed session to discuss potential land acquisitions.

Land acquisition is one of the few exceptions under the Open Meetings Act that allow for discussion out of public view. When they emerged after about 40 minutes in closed session, commissioners voted on three resolutions.

Properties are identified only by application number at this stage. The location of the properties and their owners aren’t revealed until the resolutions are voted on by the city council.

• Recommending approval of the purchase of development rights for the parcel in application 2011-04, if at least 20% matching funds are received.
• Recommending approval of the purchase of development rights for the parcel in application 2011-01, if at least 20% matching funds are received.
• Recommending that the city partner with the nonprofit Legacy Land Conservancy on the purchase of development rights for the parcel in application 2005-24, and contribute up to $15,000 dollars toward that purchase.

Outcome: In separate votes, commissioners unanimously approved resolutions for all three greenbelt acquisitions. The recommendations will be considered by the city council for approval.

Misc. Communications

There were several opportunities for updates from commissioners and staff.

Misc. Communications: New Meeting Time?

Dan Ezekiel told commissioners that he hoped they could alter their meeting time in order to accommodate a potential new commissioner. [Shannon Brines, who attended last month's greenbelt advisory commission, is expected to be nominated for the position vacated this summer by Gil Omenn, who was term limited. For most city commissions, members are nominated by the mayor and confirmed by the council. However, greenbelt commissioners are both nominated and confirmed by the city council.]

Commissioners will complete a survey about possible meeting times. Any changes wouldn’t take effect until 2012. Currently, the commission meets on the second Wednesday of each month at 4:30 p.m. Other commissioners indicated that the current meeting time is difficult for them, too.

Misc. Communications: Executive Committee

Ezekiel expressed interest in expanding the commission’s executive committee. Now, it consists of the chair (Ezekiel), vice chair (Catherine Riseng), city council representative (Carsten Hohnke) and staff (Ginny Trocchio). Ezekiel noted that in the coming years there will be considerable turnover on the commission, as members are term limited.

Bringing another member into the executive committee would help future leadership get up to speed, Ezekiel said, and help keep the group’s institutional memory strong. He said it was an open invitation to commissioners, and that they should contact Trocchio if they’re interested.

Misc. Communications: Bus Tour

Trocchio reported that she’d like to schedule another greenbelt bus tour sometime this fall. She’s looking at Saturdays when there’s not a University of Michigan home football game: Oct. 8, 15 or Nov. 5. The tour would last about two hours and include stops to see land that’s been protected by the greenbelt program.

Present: Peter Allen, Tom Bloomer, Dan Ezekiel, Carsten Hohnke, Catherine Riseng, Liz Rother. Also: Ginny Trocchio.

Absent: Mike Garfield, Laura Rubin.

Next regular meeting: Wednesday, Oct. 12 at 4:30 p.m. in the second-floor council chambers at city hall, 301 E. Huron St., Ann Arbor. [confirm date]

The Chronicle survives in part through regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of publicly-funded entities like the city’s greenbelt program. If you’re already supporting The Chronicle, please encourage your friends, neighbors and coworkers to do the same. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle.

The recommendations will be forwarded to city council for consideration. [.pdf map of existing greenbelt district] The greenbelt program is funded by the Open Space and Parkland Preservation millage, which voters passed in 2003. Since then, the council has expanded the boundaries once, in August 2007, by bumping out the boundary by a mile.

A related resolution failed during Wednesday’s meeting on a 1-5 vote. It would have recommended that council consider properties adjacent to the greenbelt for acquisition. The resolution also recommended creating a one-mile buffer surrounding the current boundary. Properties within that buffer could be considered for acquisition with greenbelt funds, but would require stricter selection criteria. Only Dan Ezekiel, chair of the commission, voted for that resolution.

A subcommittee has been considering possible expansion of the greenbelt boundary for about a year. See Chronicle coverage: “Time to Expand Greenbelt Boundary?” and “Proposal Would Expand Greenbelt Boundaries.”

This brief was filed from city council chambers in the second floor of city hall, 301 E. Huron, where the greenbelt advisory commission meets. A more detailed report will follow: [link]

Pittsfield Township planner Paul Montagno helps Anissa Bowden of the Ann Arbor city clerk's staff set up his presentation for the greenbelt advisory commission at its Aug. 10, 2011 meeting. (Photos by the writer.)

Township planner Paul Montagno briefed commissioners on Pittsfield Township’s updated master plan, which the township board approved late last month. Specifically, he focused on the section concerning open space, natural features and agricultural land use. He described efforts to balance denser development along corridors like State Road and Michigan Avenue while protecting more rural land, especially in the central and southern parts of the township.

Pittsfield Township has partnered with Ann Arbor’s greenbelt program on just one property – the Hilton farm, near the township’s large Pittsfield Preserve nature area. However, Montagno indicated that township officials are open to future land preservation deals with the greenbelt.

Also during the Aug. 10 meeting, Ginny Trocchio of The Conservation Fund, which manages Ann Arbor’s greenbelt program, reported that the previous day, the Salem Township board had approved an ordinance that created a purchase of development rights (PDR) program, and allocated $200,000 annually for land preservation. GAC is considering possible expansion of the greenbelt boundaries, including an expansion in Salem Township. The boundary proposal was discussed at the commission’s July meeting, and will be on the agenda again in September.

The commission took one formal vote on Wednesday, after emerging from a closed session to discuss land acquisition. Commissioners unanimously approved a resolution recommending that city council move forward with application 2010-09 if at least 50% matching funds are secured. Properties are identified only by application number at this stage, and the resolution did not indicate what type of land acquisition this would entail. Typically, greenbelt monies are spent on the purchase of development rights (PDR).

There is currently one vacancy on GAC. Shannon Brines, owner of Brines Farm and a member of the city’s public market advisory commission, attended Wednesday’s meeting and expressed interest in applying for the seat. Nominations to GAC are made and approved by the city council.

Pittsfield Township Land Preservation

Paul Montagno, a planner for Pittsfield Township, gave a brief presentation about land preservation efforts in the township, primarily as reflected in its recently updated 2010 master plan. Township supervisor Mandy Grewal had been scheduled to attend, but could not because of an unexpected conflict, he said.

The township’s final plan was adopted by the township board at its July 27, 2011 meeting. Among several components is a category for open space, natural features and agriculture. [.pdf of master plan section on open space, natural features and agriculture]

The township has its feet in many worlds, Montagno said. It’s near urban areas like Ann Arbor to the north, Saline to the southwest, and Ypsilanti to the east. But in many areas, Pittsfield Township is a rural community, and shares borders with other rural townships. There are a variety of land uses in the township – areas of density along corridors like State Road, Carpenter Road and Michigan Avenue, as well as rural areas that should be preserved. “Ultimately, what we’re looking at is a balance,” he said.

A "heat map" of development in Pittsfield Township – red and orange areas indicate denser commercial and residential development. Areas in the center and southern parts of the township include more open space, natural features and agricultural land. (Links to larger image)

The goal is to alleviate pressure on rural areas by focusing development along existing commercial and residential corridors – areas that already have water/sewer access and transportation, or that would be logical extensions of those existing corridors. The inverse of that is to look at agricultural and natural areas – primarily in the center and southern parts of the township – and find ways to preserve that land.

For each of the master plan’s key concepts, the plan identifies specific goals and then more detailed objectives to achieve those goals, Montagna said. Now that the plan has been officially adopted, he added, “the real work begins.”

Montagna reviewed the goals for the key concept of open space, natural features and agriculture:

• Encourage the protection of agricultural lands that are most productive and suited to agricultural operations, and implement policies that provide additional protection.
• Create connections between natural areas and protect significant viewsheds.
• Promote natural resources protection on a local and regional level in a planned and strategic manner.
• Ensure that development decisions support, protect and enhance the natural environments and ecosystems in the township.

As part of the plan’s implementation, updating the township’s zoning ordinances is a major project. The township will be looking for ways to support and promote agriculture, Montagno said. That might include things like allowing for a greater number of farm stands or activities like corn mazes. While not directly agricultural land use, he said, these uses would help make farming more economically viable.

Montagno concluded his presentation by noting that the final version of the master plan would be posted on the township’s website later in the week.

Pittsfield Township: Commissioner Discussion

Peter Allen asked if the Ann Arbor greenbelt program had partnered with Pittsfield on any land preservation efforts. Just one, Montagno said – the Hilton farm, about 90 acres at the corner of Morgan and Platt roads, near the township’s large Pittsfield Preserve. Ginny Trocchio of The Conservation Fund, which manages the greenbelt program, confirmed that there are no other potential deals in the pipeline.

Mike Garfield asked whether the township envisioned having funds for a purchase of development rights (PDR) program in the future. Montagno said the township would look at possible tools, like the PDR, to pursue land preservation. They had no specific plans now, he said, but those are among the implementation goals of the township’s master plan.

Garfield followed up by asking whether the township would consider making a financial contribution to a deal, if a project were presented. Montagno indicated that budgets are tight, but said he didn’t want to say no. As a policy, the township would work with programs like the greenbelt or Legacy Land Conservancy on land preservation projects, he said.

Saying he’d heard rumors that some people in the township want to see currently protected property open for development, Garfield also wanted to know if there was any truth to that. Montagno said he wasn’t aware of that, although during the process of updating the master plan, he said township officials felt pressure to change some areas that were zoned for lower density uses – some people wanted areas rezoned for more commercial uses.

Garfield praised the township for its land preservation work over the last 10-20 years, especially in the center of the township. The township has created a remarkable buffer between the rural areas and the cities of Ann Arbor, Saline and Ypsilanti, he said. The greenbelt commissioners had been happy to partner on the Hilton property, Garfield said, and if there are other opportunities, GAC would like to participate.

Montagno responded by saying that a major part of the master plan had been an emphasis on connectivity. While Garfield had characterized it as a buffer, the township doesn’t want to create barriers, Montagno said. So township officials are also looking for ways to connect residents to the preserved land – things like low-intensity roads through some of the preserves and gravel parking lots with bioswales for stormwater management. Providing a certain amount of access will enhance the popularity of land preservation, he said.

Tom Bloomer, a GAC member and Webster Township farmer, noted that one of the objectives listed under the goal of protecting agricultural lands is to balance the rights of farmers and adjacent residential property owners. What did that mean? Bloomer asked.

Montagno said the township wants to make sure that property uses next to agricultural lands are appropriate. There can be tensions between residential developments and farms, he said. A farm’s dust, odors and hours of operation might conflict with residents of a housing development, for example, and whenever possible there should be a natural buffer between the two types of land uses.

With no further questions from commissioners, Montagno wrapped up by saying the township definitely wanted to partner with Ann Arbor’s greenbelt program in the future.

Misc. Communications

Ginny Trocchio told commissioners that Shannon Brines, an Ann Arbor resident and owner of Brines Farm in Dexter, had come to the meeting after expressing interest in a vacancy that’s available on the commission.

Shannon Brines, owner of Brines Farm, is interested in the vacancy on the greenbelt advisory commission, and attended its Aug. 10 meeting.

Brines came to the podium and spoke briefly, telling commissioners that he kept up with their work by reading minutes as well as Ann Arbor Chronicle meeting reports. The commission’s work is important, he said: “You have followers.”

Brines said he started working at the University of Michigan in 1998 – he is manager of the environmental spatial analysis (ESA) lab at the School of Natural Resources and Environment. He does a lot of work with GIS mapping, helping researchers and students on land use and other issues. Brines also is a lecturer at UM, and said there might be some occasions when his courses conflicted with GAC meetings.

Brines started his farm in 2004. It’s located outside the greenbelt boundary, he noted, and also would fall outside of the proposed expansion of its boundaries. Though he sells produce year-round at the Ann Arbor Farmers Market, Brines said he’s best known for his hoop house produce, selling greens from November through May.

This was not mentioned at the meeting, but since 2007 Brines also has served on the city’s public market advisory commission, which handles issues related to the farmers market. His current term on that commission ends in 2014.

Peter Allen encouraged Brines to apply for a position on GAC, saying his point of view and background would be a valuable addition.

Two vacancies opened on GAC earlier this year. Liz Rother was appointed by the city council in June to replace term-limited Jennifer Santi Hall. The remaining vacancy is an at-large slot, held by former GAC member Gil Omenn. For most city commissions, members are nominated by the mayor and confirmed by the council. However, greenbelt commissioners are both nominated and confirmed by the city council.

Misc. Communications: Salem Township

Trocchio reported that on Tuesday, the Salem Township board had approved an ordinance that created a purchase of development rights (PDR) program, and allocated $200,000 annually for land preservation. She said she looked forward to partnering with the township in the future.

GAC is considering possible expansion of the greenbelt boundaries, including an expansion in Salem Township. The proposal was discussed at the commission’s July meeting, and will be on the agenda again in September. Any changes recommended by GAC would need approval by the Ann Arbor city council before taking effect. Since the Open Space and Parkland Preservation millage was approved by voters in 2003, the council has expanded the boundaries once, in August 2007, by bumping out the boundary by a mile.

Closed Session: Land Acquisition

Commissioners voted to enter into closed session to discuss land acquisitions, and emerged after about 40 minutes. Land acquisition is one of the few exceptions under the Open Meetings Act that allow for discussion out of public view. Commissioners then voted on a resolution to recommend that the city council move forward with application 2010-09 if at least 50% matching funds are secured. The resolution did not indicate what type of land acquisition this would entail. Typically, greenbelt monies are spent on the purchase of development rights (PDR).

Properties are identified only by application number at this stage. The location of the properties and their owners aren’t revealed until the resolutions are voted on by the city council.

Outcome: Commissioners unanimously approved the land acquisition recommendation.

Present: Peter Allen, Tom Bloomer, Mike Garfield, Catherine Riseng, Liz Rother, Laura Rubin. Also: Ginny Trocchio.

Absent: Dan Ezekiel, Carsten Hohnke.

Next regular meeting: Wednesday, Sept. 14 at 4:30 p.m. in the second-floor council chambers at city hall, 301 E. Huron St., Ann Arbor. [confirm date]

The Chronicle survives in part through regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of publicly-funded entities like the city’s greenbelt program. If you’re already supporting The Chronicle, please encourage your friends, neighbors and coworkers to do the same. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle.

Liz Rother attended her first meeting as an Ann Arbor greenbelt advisory commissioner on July 13. Her appointment was approved by the city council in June – she replaced Jennifer S. Hall, whose term had expired and who was term limited.

A subcommittee of GAC has been evaluating a potential greenbelt boundary change since November 2010. Options included expanding in Salem Township and Lodi Township to “square” off the boundaries, and allowing properties adjacent to the greenbelt to be eligible for the program. Another option would be to create a one-mile “buffer” around the existing boundaries, and include properties within that buffer if they met stricter criteria. Whatever recommendation GAC eventually makes would require Ann Arbor city council approval.

Also at July’s meeting, commissioners got an update on Scio Township’s land preservation efforts from Barry Lonik (a consultant who works with the township) and Bruce Manny (a member of the township’s land preservation commission). Lonik noted that the township’s 10-year, half-mill land preservation millage expires in 2014. The land preservation commission would like to get a renewal on the November 2012 ballot, to coincide with higher voter turnout for the presidential election.

It was the first meeting for GAC’s newest commissioner, Liz Rother, who was appointed by the city council in June to replace term-limited Jennifer Santi Hall. Another position, held by former GAC member Gil Omenn, remains vacant. Dan Ezekiel – who was elected GAC’s chair at the meeting – urged anyone who’s interested in serving on the commission to contact their city councilmember.

During his communications to fellow commissioners, Ezekiel noted the recent death of “Grandpa” Don Botsford, calling him a real pioneer and champion of land preservation in this area. Botsford was man who lived in poverty rather than sell his land to developers, Ezekiel said. He eventually sold part of his property’s development rights to Scio Township, in partnership with Ann Arbor’s greenbelt program – it’s now known as the Botsford Recreational Preserve, near M-14 and Miller Road. Botsford introduced thousands of people to the natural environment, Ezekiel said, so it was fitting to note his contribution and his passing.

Scio Township Land Preservation

Barry Lonik and Bruce Manny of the Scio Township land preservation commission had been invited to give GAC members an update on land preservation efforts in the township. They were asked specifically to update GAC about how Scio Township is prioritizing its acquisitions to preserve land. Lonik – of Treemore Ecology and Land Services – is a consultant for Scio Township, working on land preservation issues.

The prioritizing process took about a year and was just recently completed, Lonik said. The commission had reviewed applications they’d previously received but hadn’t acted on. Since Scio Township voters had approved a land preservation millage in 2004, the township had completed nine projects, he said, but there are about two dozen others that the commission hasn’t acted on. These applications hadn’t received high scores on the scoring system that the township uses to rate potential acquisitions. For some of them, Scio Township had approached potential funding partners, he said, but no one had been interested, and the applications languished.

In taking a closer look, Lonik said he realized that the applications weren’t the greatest properties. It seemed the land preservation program wasn’t attracting higher priority properties in the township. So at that point, the commission started a process of prioritizing. Lonik referenced a May 2010 memo he’d written to the township land preservation commission, recommending critical factors to consider in the three land categories allowed by the land preservation ordinance: farmland, open space, and potential park properties. From the memo:

Farmland critical factors

• proximity to protected land: properties in the vicinity of protected agricultural properties, including areas in adjacent townships.
• viable agricultural operation: properties where a functional agricultural business is located or is integral to a business.
• blocks of farmland: located along the northern, southern and western boundaries, including areas in adjacent townships.
• scenic: visible from publicly accessible areas (roads primarily).
• soils: highest quality soils for agricultural production.
• size: properties large enough to utilize modern farm equipment.

Open space critical factors

• Huron River Watershed Council bioreserve area: high or medium priority.
• water quality protection: containing a seasonal or perennial stream, or wetlands that provide stream buffers and/or serve as headwater areas.
• corridors and blocks: properties that could add to existing blocks or provide links for wildlife and/or people.
• public access: properties that could be purchased and made available to the public.
• scenic: visible from publicly accessible areas (roads primarily).
• parcel size: properties of a sufficient size that important features could be protected.
• development potential: properties on which structures could be built, which would diminish open space values.

Park critical factors

• size: a regional park large enough to accommodate developed recreational activities.
• location: a more central location to provide easy access to the greatest number of residents.
• visibility: to provide a feeling of safety and for easy way-finding.
• topographic features: a sizable number of acres must be fairly flat to develop sports fields.
• surrounding land use: proximity to higher density residential was a positive, while either entirely rural surroundings or scattered large lot residential was not.
• features diversity: having features such as forest fragments, streams and ponds as well as large open space for active recreation.
• access: properties along major corridors were given a higher rating than property along gravel raods and along minor, less traveled roadways.

Lonik said he’s tromped around Scio Township for about 15 years, and has a good sense for where higher priority properties are located. He developed the list of critical factors – outlined in the May 2010 memo – by using his own knowledge of the area, the ordinance requirements, and the scoring system that’s been used by the township land preservation commission.

Barry Lonik, a consultant for Scio Township, talks about land preservation priorities for the township.

He said he then listed each property that had any natural resource value in the township, and assigned each property a high, medium or low priority in each category of land (open space, farmland or parkland). Lonik said he didn’t want to publicize the list of landlowners at this point, even though the township isn’t actively trying to acquire these properties.

The township also hired Carlisle/Wortman Associates, an Ann Arbor-based planning firm, to develop a series of maps, which show where the priority properties are located in relation to: (1) bioreserve areas in the township; and (2) the township’s master plan designations. Another map shows the high priority properties in relation to areas that are already protected – either by the township’s programs or others. One map shows only the high priority properties in each category, and another map indicates the location of all priority properties – high, medium and low.

Some applications are already in hand for properties that have been identified as high priority, Lonik said. In addition, the township has sent letters and applications to landowners of all high, medium and low priority properties, asking them to apply to the land preservation program. Finally, Lonik said he’ll be personally contacting the owners of all land designated as high priority, to encourage them to apply. Often, people are reluctant to apply to a program blindly, without first establishing a relationship and getting more information, Lonik said.

He thanked GAC members for the partnerships the greenbelt program has already done with Scio Township, and said he looked forward to many more. Lonik noted that the township’s 10-year, half-mill land preservation millage expires in 2014. The land preservation commission would like to get a renewal on the November 2012 ballot, to coincide with higher voter turnout for the presidential election. It’s likely a renewal will pass, Lonik said, given the history of support for land preservation by township residents. The original millage passed with 76% of the vote, and the more recent countywide millage for the Washtenaw County natural areas preservation program was supported by 63% of voters in Scio Township.

Scio Township Land Preservation: Commissioner Discussion

In response to a question from Catherine Riseng, Lonik said that of all the high priority properties, only four are for possible parks – most are open space parcels. The township doesn’t own any park properties, Lonik noted, but that’s of interest in the future, assuming that township officials can find land with the right qualities – located with easy access to the township’s population centers, with a mix of open land for fields as well as natural areas. Not many properties meet those criteria, Lonik noted. Of the roughly 100 priority properties he’s identified through this process, about two-thirds of them are open space, as opposed to farmland or potential parkland.

In response to a query from Dan Ezekiel, Lonik told commissioners that about 8,400 acres of farmland have been preserved countywide in the past 15 years or so. That amount includes land protected by a variety of programs, including township preservation millages, Ann Arbor’s greenbelt program, Washtenaw County parks & recreation, the county’s natural areas preservation program, state easements and land conservancies. By next year, that number will likely push past 10,000 acres, Lonik said. It’s really extraordinary, he said, considering that the first deal occurred just recently, in 1997, when the Southeast Michigan Land Conservancy protected property at the corner of Prospect and Geddes roads. He noted that Manny’s farm on Parker Road in Scio Township was among the first farms to be preserved.

Ezekiel observed that the greenbelt program had participated in protecting 3,200 acres. He then asked whether Lonik knew if Saginaw Forest – a property in Scio Township that’s owned by the University of Michigan – is protected through a conservation easement. It’s not, Lonik said, nor have township officials approached the university about that possibility. In Michigan, state law requires that public entities like UM dispose of their assets at market value, he said – UM couldn’t just donate the property. However, it’s possible that the township or city could buy a conservation easement, if they wanted to, he said.

Ezekiel thanked Lonik for coming, and said it would be great if other townships within the greenbelt did this kind of work. GAC was open to suggestions for partnering on properties in Scio Township, he said, adding that the city was very proud of the properties it had already partnered on with the township: the Fox Science Preserve, Scio Woods Preserve, and the Botsford Recreational Preserve.

Ezekiel also wished Lonik a happy 50th birthday.

Greenbelt Boundaries

At GAC’s November 2010 meeting, commissioners formed a subcommittee to explore possible changes to the existing boundary of the greenbelt district. The intent would be to give the program greater flexibility in protecting desirable properties that fall just outside the current boundaries. [.pdf map of existing greenbelt district] Any changes recommended by GAC would need approval by the Ann Arbor city council before taking effect. Since the Open Space and Parkland Preservation millage passed in 2003, the council has expanded the boundaries once, in August 2007, by bumping out the boundary by a mile.

In introducing the topic at GAC’s July 13 meeting, Ginny Trocchio of The Conservation Fund – which has a contract with the city to manage the greenbelt program – explained the rationale for the subcommittee’s recommendations. She said the subcommittee looked at maps of larger properties inside and outside of the greenbelt, reviewing what’s already been protected and identifying other potential greenbelt property that’s in the Huron River watershed and that contains other natural features.

Trocchio reviewed the subcommittee’s two recommended options:

Option 1:

1. Expand the boundaries in Salem Township and Lodi Township to “square” off the boundaries. The Salem Township boundary would be extended 1 mile to the east so the eastern Greenbelt boundary would be consistent with Superior Township. The Lodi Township boundary would be extended 1 mile to the west and 1 mile to the south so the boundaries would be consistent with Scio Township and Pittsfield Township.

2) Additionally, to allow one of the following: a) Greenbelt’s participation on any property that is adjacent to the Greenbelt boundary, or b) Greenbelt’s participation on any property that is adjacent to the Greenbelt boundary, or extends a contiguous block of contiguous protected land, that is within the Greenbelt boundary.

Option 2:

1) Expand the boundaries in Lodi Township and Salem Township as described above.

2) Create a 1-mile buffer area surrounding the Greenbelt boundary to allow the Greenbelt’s participation, for exceptional properties or if stricter criteria are met. The specific criteria are still to be determined, but examples included: a) if there is a local partner willing to take the lead; b) if it extends a block of protected properties that originates in the Greenbelt boundary; c) significant for protection of Huron River Watershed; d) higher percentage of matching funds; e) or limiting the percentage of funds expended in “buffer” area.

Lodi Township has expressed more of a willingness to work with the greenbelt program in recent years, Trocchio said, even though that township doesn’t have a dedicated millage for land preservation. There are also some great, large farmland parcels in Lodi, she noted. Salem Township is also considering more financial contributions to land preservation, possibly by earmarking $200,000 annually from the township’s landfill revenue for that purpose, she said.

Greenbelt Expansion: Commissioner Discussion

Peter Allen began by saying he didn’t see any downside to Option 2 – were there any? Trocchio said the one possible objection would be that an expanded boundary would push protected land farther away from the city.

Map of Ann Arbor greenbelt with potential expanded boundaries. The solid green line indicates the current boundary. The dotted green lines in the lower left (Lodi Township) and upper right (Salem Township) indicate proposed "bump outs." The black line indicates a potential one-mile buffer zone. (Links to larger image.)

Dan Ezekiel, who chaired the boundary subcommittee, noted that distance from the city was a matter of degree. Everything within the expanded boundary would still be within an easy hour bike ride from downtown Ann Arbor – that’s his rule of thumb. He also noted the greenbelt program had vastly more partnership opportunities now than when the program started with the original boundaries. For example, Washtenaw County’s natural areas preservation program (NAPP) was modified last year to allow the county to spend up to 25% of its millage on the purchase of development rights for farmland. [See Chronicle coverage of a presentation on the county's efforts at GAC's March 2011 meeting.]

Laura Rubin asked whether there’s been a decrease in applications to the program from landowners within the existing greenbelt boundaries. No, Trocchio said – the program completed an unprecedented number of deals last year.

In that case, Rubin said, one of the cons to expanding the boundaries might be that there are still opportunities for protecting land closer to the city, closer to Ann Arbor taxpayers who are paying for the program.

Mike Garfield said that one issue is interpreting the intent of Ann Arbor voters who approved the millage. The original boundaries were set more by art than science, he noted. Garfield said he didn’t have a strong opinion about it, but that it made sense to take advantage of opportunities – when valuable properties become available, it’s beneficial to be able to act, as long as the properties aren’t too far from the city. He pointed out that the last time GAC considered expansion, he resisted expanding the boundaries in Lodi Township, because township officials hadn’t been receptive to the program. That’s now changed, he said. It looks like there are a lot of properties worth protecting in the expanded areas. While the program needs boundaries, it hurts not to be able to protect land that’s close, but not within the borders.

Allen suggested supporting Option 2. Tom Bloomer then weighed in, saying he wasn’t necessarily opposed to the expansion, but he wanted more time to think about it. He was particularly interested in flexibility for properties adjacent to the greenbelt, owned by the same person. Bloomer, a Webster Township farmer, was less certain about a general geographic expansion of the boundaries – he said he didn’t want to just keep expanding, because it runs the risk of diluting the program’s efforts.

Ezekiel pointed to one example of a property owner holding land on both sides of a road – one parcel was within the greenbelt boundary, the other was not. The greenbelt program was able to secure matching federal funds for the portion within the greenbelt, but not for the adjacent land that fell outside the boundary.

Carsten Hohnke, a commissioner who also represents Ward 5 on Ann Arbor city council, supported Bloomer’s desire to postpone action. He cited concerns he’s heard expressed by people who feel there’s still land that can be preserved within the existing boundaries, closer to the city. Though it isn’t explicit in the ordinance, he said, there was a good community discussion before the 2003 vote about where the boundaries would be, and that needs to be taken into account. He thought the notion of loosening language to allow for protecting properties contiguous to the greenbelt made sense, in that it would eliminate the “across the street” issue.

Ezekiel clarified that whatever recommendation is made by GAC would be forwarded to the Ann Arbor city council for approval. He noted that when the original greenbelt boundaries were set, GAC almost immediately found the boundaries too constraining. He wished that Lodi and Salem townships had been included in the 2007 expansion, but the thinking at that time was to expand into areas where townships were willing to partner.

Allen asked Trocchio to estimate how much land within the existing greenbelt boundary has already been protected – 50%? 80%? Trocchio guessed it was probably closer to 20%. Garfield noted that the intent was never to get conservation easements on 100% of farmland and open space. The original idea was to stop sprawl, he said, to help farmers stay on their land and make their operations viable. If there are large blocks of protected farmland, he said, the thought was that it would have a ripple effect that would prevent development.

Bloomer observed that identifying a percentage is a moving target, because the program is voluntary. Land is only “available” for protection if the landowner is interested in being part of the greenbelt program. In the greenbelt’s early days, almost no land was available, he said, because people weren’t familiar with the program. It would be hard to measure a percentage, even now.

Trocchio offered to organize a field trip for commissioners, taking them out to see the proposed expansion and the land that might be available if the boundaries are changed. Ezekiel supported that idea, and said he sensed that commissioners were reluctant to proceed at this meeting. Hohnke then made a motion to postpone, which was seconded by Allen.

Outcome: Commissioners voted unanimously to postpone a vote on the greenbelt boundary expansion until GAC’s next meeting. A meeting is scheduled for Aug. 10, but might be cancelled if a quorum can’t be achieved.

Election of Officers, Seeking Another Member

Dan Ezekiel, who has served as GAC’s vice chair for the past year, chaired the July meeting and was nominated as chair. Catherine Riseng was nominated vice chair, after Laura Rubin confirmed that Riseng was willing to do it. Riseng said that although she had concerns about the time commitment, she’d be willing to give it a try – unless any of the other commissioners were “gung-ho” to do it. (Apparently they were not.)

Outcome: Dan Ezekiel and Catherine Riseng were unanimously elected chair and vice chair, respectively.

Ezekiel welcomed Liz Rother to GAC, replacing Jennifer Santi Hall, whose term expired on June 30 and who was prevented by the ordinance that established the greenbelt program from seeking additional terms. Both she and Gil Omenn, who also stepped down from GAC as of June 30, had been term limited. Ezekiel noted that Rother was an accomplished gardener and beekeeper, and had been attending GAC meetings for several months before her appointment was approved by city council at their June 20 meeting.

Three seats on GAC are open to the general public, Ezekiel said – he and Rother now fill two of those seats. But a third general public seat – previously held by Omenn – remains open. The commission’s work is nowhere near completion, he said, and it’s important work. The term runs for three years, and members can serve two consecutive terms. Anyone who’s interested in volunteering can contact their Ann Arbor city councilmember. Unlike most other city commissions, in which members are nominated by the mayor and confirmed by council, greenbelt commissioners are both nominated and confirmed by the city council.

Communications: Remembering Don Botsford

During the July 13 meeting, Dan Ezekiel noted the recent death of “Grandpa” Don Botsford, calling him a real pioneer and champion of land preservation in this area.

By way of additional background, Botsford, 82, died on June 27. He was known for generations for the Ann Arbor Gymkana, which closed in 1986, and for his enthusiasm for spaceball – a game combining elements of basketball and volleyball, played on a trampoline. The Chronicle visited Botsford two years ago: “Back to the Future with Spaceball.” The article quotes Washtenaw County prosecuting attorney Brian Mackie, who played competitive spaceball under Botsford’s tutelage in the 1960s.

Botsford was man who lived in poverty rather than sell his land to developers, Ezekiel said. He eventually sold development rights to part of his property in Scio Township – it’s now known as the Botsford Recreational Preserve, near M-14 and Miller Road. Botsford introduced thousands of people to the natural environment, Ezekiel said, so it was fitting to note his contribution and his passing.

Communications: More Notes from the Chair

Ezekiel also noted that GAC’s June 16 open house at the Braun farm went well – certificates were presented to several landowners who had participated in the greenbelt program. The Braun farm in Ann Arbor Township is one of the greenbelt’s more recent protected properties.

Ginny Trocchio of The Conservation Fund, which manages Ann Arbor's greenbelt program, talks with Dan Ezekiel, who was elected chair of the greenbelt advisory commission at the July 13 meeting.

Ezekiel commended the work of Lisa Gottlieb and Jeff McCabe, who recently completed their “20 hoops in 20 days” effort to build hoop houses at local farms – including some located within the greenbelt. Ezekiel reminded commissioners that the couple, who also run the Friday breakfast salon Selma Cafe, had made a presentation about the hoop house project at GAC’s November 2010 meeting. It was a tremendous achievement, Ezekiel said.

Later in the meeting, Ezekiel noted that Bob Sutherland, owner of Cherry Republic – which recently opened a downtown Ann Arbor story at the corner of Main and Liberty – wants to contribute $2,500 toward land preservation in the greenbelt. The city welcomes these kinds of contributions from private businesses, he said.

Communications: Staff Report

Ginny Trocchio reported that the greenbelt program had received $312,620 from the federal Farm and Ranchland Protection Program (FRPP) to help pay for the purchase of development rights on the 110-acre Lindemann-Weidmayer farm in Lodi Township. That deal will be going to the city council soon, she said. [The council approved the deal at its July 18, 2011 meeting.]

Trocchio also told commissioners that Gov. Rick Snyder has signed the farmland preservation bill (Public Act 79). The law provides incentives to farmers to pay back defaulted Public Act 116 agreements. Farmers who enroll in Michigan’s Farmland and Open Space Protection Program (PA 116) get tax incentives. However, if they quit the program they must repay the state – if not, the state puts a lien against their property, Trocchio explained. Until now, there hasn’t been a way for the state to collect those funds. Payments would be added to the state’s Agriculture Preservation Fund, which is used to make grants to local communities for the purchase of farmland conservation easements.

Proposed Greenbelt Acquisitions

Near the end of the meeting, commissioners went into a closed session to discuss land acquisitions. They emerged after about 45 minutes and voted on two resolutions:

1. a resolution recommending that the city council approve spending up to $121,365 in partnership with Webster Township for the purchase of development rights (PDR) on a property that’s in close proximity to other greenbelt parcels.
2. a resolution recommending that the city council approve spending up to $49,500 in partnership with Ann Arbor Township for the purchase of development rights (PDR) on a property in that township.

The properties were identified only by application number – 2011-03 and 2011-02, respectively. The location of the properties and their owners aren’t revealed until the resolutions are voted on by the city council.

Outcome: Commissioners unanimously approved the two land acquisition recommendations.

Present: Peter Allen, Tom Bloomer, Dan Ezekiel, Mike Garfield, Carsten Hohnke, Catherine Riseng, Liz Rother, Laura Rubin. Also: Ginny Trocchio.

Next regular meeting: Wednesday, Aug. 10 at 4:30 p.m. in the second-floor council chambers at city hall, 301 E. Huron St., Ann Arbor. [confirm date]

The Chronicle survives in part through regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of publicly-funded entities like the city’s greenbelt program. If you’re already supporting The Chronicle, please encourage your friends, neighbors and coworkers to do the same. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle.