Ann Arbor public art commissioner Wiltrud Simbuerger, showing other commission members some proposals from artists for a mural at Allmendinger Park. A local artist, Mary Thiefels, has been selected for that project. (Photos by the writer.)

The group unanimously recommended selecting Ed Carpenter of Portland, Oregon for a $150,000 art project in the lobby of the city’s Justice Center, located at the corner of East Huron and Fifth Avenue. A task force had recommended the selection of Carpenter’s proposal from three finalists. It’s a sculpture called “Radius”.

Carpenter plans to create a hanging sculpture of dichroic glass, aluminum, stainless steel and lighting, including LED spot and flood lighting. Among the reasons for recommending Radius, the task force cited the sculpture’s metaphor: That the activities in the Justice Center have a “rippling” effect throughout the community, which echos the water sculpture by Herbert Dreiseitl that’s located in the plaza outside the building.

The Justice Center, a new building next to city hall, houses the 15th District Court and the Ann Arbor police department. The commission’s recommendation will be forwarded to the city council for approval.

In other action, the art commission voted to select Ann Arbor muralist Mary Thiefels for a mural project to be located on pillars at a building in Allmendinger Park. A task force had recommended her selection from among four finalists. Her proposal entails asking neighborhood residents for artifacts to create mosaics at the top and bottom of the pillars. The task force recommended that they continue to work with Thiefels on designing the remainder of the mural in the middle sections of the pillars.

Commissioners liked the concept of “found object” mosaics, but questioned whether the $10,000 budget was sufficient. They ultimately voted to approve selecting Thiefels for the project, contingent on her submission of a revised proposal and budget, with additional input from the task force. This project is the first one in a pilot mural program started last year by former commissioner Jeff Meyers.

AAPAC also discussed possible artwork for four sites connected to the East Stadium bridges, which are being reconstructed. The two commissioners who serve on a task force for that project – Wiltrud Simbuerger and Bob Miller – indicated that the budget recommendation will likely be at least $250,000 for artwork there. The task force is currently developing a request for proposals to be issued in the coming weeks.

In the context of developing their annual art plan for fiscal 2013, which by ordinance must be delivered to the city council by April 1, commissioners decided to hold a retreat next month. In addition to shaping the annual plan, the aim of the retreat is to develop a master plan that would provide a broader conceptual framework to guide AAPAC’s decisions. Input from an online survey of the public will also be used – the survey remains open until Feb. 20, and has garnered more than 400 responses so far.

Commissioner Appointments

Marsha Chamberlin, the commission’s chair, began the Jan. 25 meeting by welcoming two new commissioners: Bob Miller and John Kotarski. Kotarski had been appointed by the city council at its Jan. 9, 2012 meeting to replace outgoing commissioner Margaret Parker. He has been a media consultant who previously worked for the Mount Clemens Schools. His three-year term expires Jan. 9, 2015.

At the city council’s Jan. 23, 2012 meeting, Bob Miller was appointed to replace Cheryl Zuellig, and Chamberlin was reappointed for a second term. The terms for Miller and Chamberlin run through December 2015. Chamberlin is president of the Ann Arbor Art Center. Miller has worked as a real estate agent and homebuilder, and has a fine arts degree from The School of the Art Institute of Chicago.

Both Miller and Kotarski have attended AAPAC meetings over the past few months as observers.

Chamberlin reported that mayor John Hieftje has identified another candidate that he intends to nominate for approval by the city council, but she didn’t want to identify that person publicly until the nomination was made. The person would replace Elaine Sims, whose term expired at the end of 2011.

Justice Center Artwork

On the Jan. 25 agenda was an item to consider approval of artwork proposed for the lobby of the city’s Justice Center, located at the corner of East Huron and Fifth Avenue.

A rendering of Ed Carpenter's proposed "Radius" sculpture in the southwest corner of Ann Arbor's Justice Center lobby. This image was revised from earlier drawings by the artist to include more glass, at the request of a selection task force. (Links to larger image)

A task force had recommended the selection of Ed Carpenter’s proposal – a sculpture called “Radius” – from three finalists for the $150,000 project. Members of the task force who recommended Carpenter are Elaine Sims, Margaret Parker, Spring Tremaine, Karl Daubmann, Maureen Devine, Laura Rubin, Ray Detter, Margie Teal, Homayoon Pirooz, and Aaron Seagraves.

It will be the second major installation funded with money from Ann Arbor’s Percent for Art program, which captures 1% of each city capital project – capped at $250,000 per project – for public art. The first major installation is located in the plaza outside of the Justice Center and in front of city hall: A bronze water sculpture by the German artist Herbert Dreiseitl, that cost more than $750,000.

Carpenter’s proposal calls for creating a hanging sculpture of dichroic glass, aluminum, stainless steel and lighting, including LED spot and flood lighting. The intent of the artwork is to reflect how the work of the courts and police radiate out into the community. The Justice Center houses the 15th District Court and the Ann Arbor police department.

The task force cited several reasons for their choice. Among them:

• The artwork uses a great deal of the space in the lobby and makes the best use of the site.
• The reflective nature of the glass used in the design will incorporate direct lighting and reflective light, which will be visible from both indoors and outdoors, during the day and at night.
• The colored glass and moving reflections will add a mediating softness and color to the architecture of the lobby.
• The art’s metaphor that work within the Justice Center has a rippling effect throughout the community; the “ripple” metaphor is consistent with the Dreiseitl sculpture.

In his proposal, Carpenter wrote:

Like ripples from a stone tossed into a pond, “Radius” emanates outward through the Justice Center lobby, a reminder of the interconnectedness of the public with the agencies serving them, and suggesting a network of cause and effect in the public realm.

“Radius” is designed to involve as much of the lobby as possible, radiating from the southeast corner, visible from inside and outside, day and night. [Editor's note: The sculpture will be located in the lobby's southwest corner.] Lighting contained in its hollow center will illuminate gleaming glass and anodized aluminum details, creating elegant views of its expansive forms.

When sun strikes, dichroic glass elements will project and reflect colored light deep into the space in luminous compositions, slowly moving through the lobby in response to the arc of the sun and the passing of clouds.

Justice Center Artwork: Commission Discussion

John Kotarski noted that the task force had cited some issues they wanted the artist to address. Had the artist responded? Aaron Seagraves, the city’s public art administrator, said Carpenter had submitted new renderings showing additional glass in the sculpture, which the task force had requested.

John Kotarski at his first meeting as a public art commissioner on Jan. 25.

Marsha Chamberlin asked whether the budget reflects those changes. [The budget of $150,000 includes a $9,000 line item for dichroic glass elements. Other major line items are for fabricated anodized aluminum elements ($35,000), installation ($20,000), lighting/electrical ($12,000), structural site work and ceiling refinishing ($12,000) and artist's wages/overhead ($25,700).] Seagraves said the artist had indicated that extra glass could be accommodated within the original budget.

Wiltrud Simbuerger wondered how quickly the work would be completed. There would be a six-month timeline, starting from the point of approval by the city council, Seagraves said.

Chamberlin noted that after the council approves the project, it typically takes an additional two months for the city attorney’s office to draw up a contract. She speculated that the six-month period would start sometime this summer, after a contract with the artist is signed. Kotarski asked whether it really takes two months for legal staff to prepare a contract. That’s been the commission’s experience, Chamberlin replied.

Chamberlin said she liked the project, and found it intriguing. Kotarski agreed, saying he especially liked the theme of the work. It puts the police and justice system at the center of the community, “as it should be,” he said. The ever-changing color and light reflects the community’s diversity, he added. It’s elegant, and light – it won’t disrupt the area at all. He also liked the fact that people can sit under it. Visitors are part of the center, and radiate out, he said – the artist ties this all together.

Connie Brown thanked the task force members for their work.

Outcome: Commissioners unanimously recommended approval of Carpenter’s Radius sculpture for the Justice Center lobby. The recommendation will be forwarded to city council for a vote.

Mural Project at Allmendinger Park

The art commission was asked to vote on selecting Ann Arbor muralist Mary Thiefels for a mural project to be located on pillars at a building in Allmendinger Park.

A task force had recommended her selection from among four finalists. Members of the task force include Wiltrud Simbuerger, Connie Pulcipher, Aaron Seagraves, Mariah Cherem and Hannah Smotrich.

This is the first project in a mural pilot program originally proposed by former AAPAC commissioner Jeff Meyers. Following Meyers’ resignation in mid-2011, Simbuerger has taken the lead on this project. At the Jan. 25 meeting, she briefly outlined the proposals for four finalists chosen by the task force. In addition to Thiefels, other finalists were (1) Robert Delgado of Los Angeles, Calif.; (2) Bethany Kalk of Moorehead, Kentucky; and (3) Jefferson Nelson of Liberty Center, Ohio.

The task force decided to recommend Thiefels not because hers was the best artistic treatment, but because of her proposal’s involvement of the community, Simbuerger said. Thiefels’ proposal entails asking neighborhood residents for artifacts to create mosaics at the top and bottom of the pillars. In a sense, it would create a “library” of the neighborhood, Simbuerger told commissioners, and the task force really liked this concept. They also liked the fact that Thiefels has a concrete plan for how to execute the community involvement aspect of her project. [.pdf of narrative portion from Thiefels' proposal]

However, task force members had some issues about the imagery that Thiefels proposed for the middle of the columns, Simbuerger said. In her proposal, Thiefels described it this way:

My timeless design for the Allmendinger park will inspire all who encounter it year round. Each of the 12 pillars represent a month of the year, 3 pillars to a season. Seasonal activities illustrate the diversity and popularity of the park.

In the spring, lilac bushes blossom, children come out of hibernation to play hide and go seek, birds nest again in the oak and hickory trees, the playground comes alive with activity and laughter. On the summer pillars kites fly and sports abound, like basketball, volleyball, tennis, baseball, and soccer. On the fall pillars you see, colors changing, tree climbing, dog walking and frisbee tossing, sunny day picnics, and morning martial arts. Winter offers cross country skiing, snowshoeing, and snow angels.

I will paint these illustrations onto a third of each pillar space. The remaining area will be made up of tile or glass mosaic and a section of collected and found materials.

I intend to use striking and strong imagery, illustrating the activities with visual confidence. The figures, birds, and trees, could be painted in Kara Walker style silhouettes (to see visuals of Kara Walker’s work, visit: http://learn.walkerart.org/karawalker). They can be heavily modeled and detailed or played down (painted more like a wood block, stencil or silhouette). Grays and earth tones can be used instead of blacks to better harmonize with the surroundings.

Right now, those images might work if you’re close to them, but not necessarily if you’re driving by or looking at them from a house across the street, Simbuerger said. So the task force recommended that they continue to work with Thiefels on designing the remainder of the mural on the middle sections of the pillars. Thiefels is willing to do that, but her new proposal isn’t yet completed, Simbuerger said.

Mural Project at Allmendinger Park: Commission Discussion

John Kotarski began by saying he really liked the proposal, especially because it involves the neighborhood and because Thiefels is a local artist. It’s important to build a sustainable community of local artists, he said. Kotarski agreed that the task force should continue to work with her on developing the project.

Image depicting Mary Thiefels' mural proposal at Allmendinger Park.

Connie Brown liked the collaboration between the task force and Thiefels – that’s a good process, she said, and will result in a richer design.

Tony Derezinski also liked the concept, and noted that members of the Allmendinger family still live in this area. He reported that his wife used to work in the Allmendinger building at First and Washington. [The historic brick building contains offices now, but was originally the Allmendinger piano and organ factory.]

Commissioners discussed other projects that Thiefels had completed, including murals in Hillsdale, Dexter and downtown Ann Arbor – a mural depicting Michigan veterans, located in the alley on West Liberty between Ashley and Main. AAPAC had selected Thiefels for a 2011 Golden Paintbrush award from the city for that mural.

Marsha Chamberlin questioned whether the $10,000 budget was sufficient, considering the time and effort that would be required. Simbuerger agreed that it wasn’t much, but noted that it’s an amount low enough so that it doesn’t require the city council’s approval. Connie Brown clarified that the mural pilot program – approved by AAPAC in November 2010 – had designated a maximum $10,000 per project with the idea that multiple projects could be completed relatively quickly.

Simbuerger noted that the funding limit puts constraints on the types of materials that might be used, essentially limiting it to paint because of the cost. Bob Miller wondered whether there was any flexibility to add to the budget for materials.

Derezinski asked whether Thiefels is experienced at making bids on projects like this. Chamberlin reported that Thiefels has a company – TreeTown Murals – and has completed several projects. Chamberlin said she trusted that Thiefels could finish the project as proposed, within the amount budgeted. But it felt like AAPAC was setting up the program to encourage artists to cut corners, she added.

Chamberlin recalled that when Susan Skarsgard did the Imagine/Align project – a linear planting of daffodils at The Arb – it had been a major undertaking. Among other things, Thiefels’ project would entail cataloguing all of the contributed items to be used in the mosaic. It would be lovely to eventually have a story on the building’s wall to document the items, Chamberlin said.

Brown noted that this is a pilot program, so AAPAC could change it if they needed to.

Miller suggested that the commission ask Thiefels to submit a revised budget, one that would realistically reflect her work. At that point, the commission could discuss whether other funding might be available. After further discussion, Malverne Winborne made a friendly amendment to accept Thiefels as the artist for this project, contingent on her working with the task force to submit a revised proposal and budget.

Outcome: Commissioners voted to select Mary Thiefels for the Allmendinger mural project, contingent on asking her submission of a revised proposal and budget, with additional input from the task force. Work on the mural is expected to begin this summer.

Artwork for East Stadium Bridges

Wiltrud Simuerger gave an update on artwork for the East Stadium bridges project. The task force, which she leads, now includes Dave Huntoon, Joss Kiely, Nancy Leff, Jim Kosteva, Bob Miller and Aaron Seagraves.

The group met and talked about possible locations for artwork, Simbuerger said, within AAPAC’s framework of making it a high visibility project for a range of users – motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians. They identified four locations: (1) on the East Stadium bridge itself; (2) on a fence in Rose White Park; (3) at the terminus of White Street, north of the bridge; and (4) on the stairs and underpass at South State Street. Artwork at any of these sites could be seen differently by various users, she said, depending on their velocity.

From left: Ann Arbor public art commissioners Bob Miller and Malverne Winborne.

The task force is developing a request for proposals (RFP) that will incorporate one or more of these locations. The proposal should also introduce an overarching theme, ensure the artwork’s high visibility, and address the diverse nature of the site, she said.

After the draft RFP is approved by the task force, it will be presented to AAPAC for consideration. Simbuerger said the task force is inclined to suggest a budget of $250,000 because it will be a high-visibility project: “That’s why we really recommend putting in some money.” Miller added that the amount suggested might be even higher.

Malverne Winborne clarified with Aaron Seagraves that $100,000 in funding was available directly from the bridge reconstruction budget, as the Percent for Art earmark. Other Percent for Art funds could be tapped, as long as the artwork relates directly to the original funding source. For example, artwork for the bridge could be funded with some of the $529,251 that’s available for public art from street millage projects.

Connie Brown said it’s difficult to allocate money for these kinds of public art projects without having a sense of how the projects fit into a broader plan. Marsha Chamberlin replied that the commission’s annual art plan is designed to provide that kind of guidance. [.pdf of current annual art plan, for fiscal year 2012]

The annual plan gives a list of projects and potential sites for public art, Brown said. It doesn’t provide an overall framework, one that answers the question of what the public art program hopes to accomplish more broadly for residents, she said.

John Kotarski agreed. Without a “conceptual narrative,” it’s hard to say whether a project is worth investing $100,000 or $400,000, he said. It’s challenging to evaluate sites by location, without a broader narrative or theme. Without that framework, he said, people might ask whether the Percent for Art program is just decorating the city.

Brown described it as the difference between being reactive or proactive. The commission needs an upper-level vision, she said.

Winborne noted that a budget for the East Stadium bridges artwork didn’t need to be set that night. Even after the task force makes a recommendation, a draft RFP would need to be reviewed by the city attorney’s office, he said. So the commission has time to discuss these issues further.

Strategic Planning

The discussion of the East Stadium bridges project – and the need for a broader conceptual framework to guide AAPAC’s decisions – led to talk of developing a master plan, in addition to the commission’s annual art plan.

Marsha Chamberlin pointed out that the commission’s approach has been from the bottom up, but they need to also look at it from the top down. They could look at what they’d generally like to achieve in the next three years, for example, then evaluate how specific projects would fit those goals.

Chamberlin initially suggested using part of AAPAC’s Feb. 22 meeting to talk about a master plan. But after further discussion, commissioners reached a consensus that a half-day retreat would be a better approach. Chamberlin proposed asking the mayor to expedite his nomination of the new commissioner, so that person could participate in the retreat. Connie Pulcipher of the city’s systems planning unit will be asked to facilitate. She has led AAPAC through similar exercises in the past, most recently in October 2011 to help commissioners prep for a Nov. 14 working session with city council.

No date has yet been announced for the upcoming retreat.

Aaron Seagraves, the city’s public art administrator, informed commissioners that he’ll be making a presentation at a March 12 city council working session to give an update on the Percent for Art program. He noted that AAPAC needs to pass its next annual plan – for FY 2013 – in March, so that it can be presented to the city council by April 1, as required by the Percent for Art ordinance.

At AAPAC’s Dec. 13, 2011 meeting, Seagraves had led a discussion regarding the next annual plan. As a follow-up to that meeting, he’d subsequently surveyed commissioners via email about their priorities for the coming year. At the Jan. 25 meeting, he presented results of that survey, which five of the eight commissioners had completed.

Based on the survey input, Seagraves identified priorities in several categories for the city’s 2013 fiscal year, which runs from July 1, 2012 through June 30, 2013:

• Streets: (1) the southeast corner of Main & William; (2) the intersection of Main & Huron; and (3) the median at Washtenaw & Stadium.
• Water & Sewer: (1) dams – Barton, Superior; (2) manhole covers; (3) interpretive signs regarding sewer “lead throughs” in parks.
• Programs: (1) crosswalk designs; (2) banners; (3) bus stops.
• Other: (1) roofs at the farmer’s market; (2) Douglas Park on Washtenaw Avenue; and (3) Miller’s Creek streambank.

Seagraves noted that in addition to priorities from commissioners, results from a public online survey could be used to guide the annual plan. The online survey, which launched earlier this month, will run through Feb. 20. So far, about 400 responses have been received, Seagraves said.

John Kotarski said he didn’t complete the survey because he’d had trouble figuring out what kind of responses were being sought. Connie Brown said she didn’t complete it either – she’d been frustrated that the questions didn’t fit into a broader framework.

Wiltrude Simbuerger suggested using this for the basis of discussion at the retreat, but not relying on the survey results exclusively to develop the annual art plan.

Commissioners present: Connie Rizzolo-Brown, Marsha Chamberlin, Tony Derezinski, John Kotarski, Bob Miller, Wiltrud Simbuerger, Malverne Winborne. Also Aaron Seagraves, the city’s public art administrator.

Absent: Cathy Gendron.

Next regular meeting: Wednesday, Feb. 22, 2012 at 4:30 p.m. at city hall, 301 E. Huron St. [confirm date]

The Chronicle relies in part on regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of publicly-funded programs like the Percent for Art, which is overseen by the Ann Arbor public art commission. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle.

During the course of 2011, mayor John Hieftje did not appoint anyone to fill the two vacancies. And since that time, a third vacancy has been added. However in this report, The Chronicle makes good on its promise to cover the commission’s only meeting this year.

Ann Arbor local officers compensation commission (Dec. 16, 2011): Salaries for Ann Arbor’s mayor and 10 city councilmembers will remain constant for the next two years at $42,436 and $15,913, respectively. That was the conclusion of the four members on the local officers compensation commission (LOCC), who met Friday morning for around a half hour.

Ann Arbor mayor and councilmember salaries from 2000 through 2013. The local officers compensation commission's recommendation, made at its Dec. 16, 2011 meeting, means that salaries will stay constant from 2009 through 2013. (Image links to higher resolution .jpg file)

Commission members cited the down economy as a main reason for not bumping the salaries higher. They discussed the fact that a flat salary, even with little inflation, translates into a pay cut – which was also a possibility they briefly mentioned.

The seven-member body currently has just four members, because no appointments have been made by the mayor to fill vacancies. Attending the meeting were Martha Darling, William Lockwood, Roger Hewitt and Eunice Burns. Hewitt chaired the commission two years ago when it last met, and he was again drafted by his commission colleagues to serve as chair this year.

The  LOCC is required to meet in odd-numbered years, so this year is a required meeting year. The LOCC makes a recommendation to the city council – a decision that automatically takes effect unless the city council votes to reject it. The council does not need to take affirmative action to approve the LOCC recommendation. 

2011 Commission Deliberations

After the roll call and approval of the agenda, the first order of business on the Dec. 16 agenda was the selection of a chair.

2011 Commission Deliberations: Selection of Chair

Until that point, Roger Hewitt, the chair held over from the commission’s 2009 session, had presided over the meeting. Hewitt was nominated again to serve as the chair, with Bill Lockwood saying, “It’s a fine nomination!” For his part, Hewitt displayed little enthusiasm for the role, asking: “Don’t the members think it might be good to rotate?” They did not, and Hewitt accepted the chore his commission colleagues assigned to him.

Responding to the suggestion that Hewitt could record his chairship on his resumé, Hewitt quipped that very few people his age are polishing up resumés. But he then allowed that in the currently down economy, there might be more people his age doing that than in the past.

The down economy factored into commissioners’ thinking when they eventually recommended that salaries for councilmembers and the mayor remain the same.

2011 Commission Deliberations: Timeframe; Information Packet

As they began to consider their task, commissioners observed that they needed to complete their work not later than Dec. 31. After establishing Dec. 19 as a possible additional meeting date – if they did not arrive at a consensus during the current meeting – Hewitt encouraged his colleagues: “Let’s see if we can complete our work.”

Assistant city attorney Mary Fales, who provides staff support for the commission, reviewed the information in the packet that she’d compiled for the commission’s review. The list of comparable cities in the packet consisted of Lansing, Livonia, Southfield, Sterling Heights, Westland, Taylor and Dearborn.

Fales advised that the salary information for all seven cities was not included, because the database from which she drew the information – from the Michigan Municipal League (MML) – was based on voluntary submission of data by league member cities. Data from Southfield, Lansing, and Taylor were missing from the list. [.pdf of charts from MML database provided to the commission]

The commission did not discuss how the comparable cities were chosen or the fact that just two of the seven comparables have council-manager forms of government like Ann Arbor’s – Southfield and Sterling Heights. [The other five have "strong mayor" forms – in which the mayor manages the city day-to-day. In a council-manager form of government, the city council hires a city administrator to oversee day-to-day operations for the city.]

Sterling Heights (with a population slightly larger than Ann Arbor, at around 124,000) is the one council-manager city for which comparable salary data was provided to the commission. Sterling Heights’ mayor earns $19,754, compared to $42,436 for Ann Arbor. Other cities on the comparables list (with strong mayor forms of government) showed correspondingly higher salaries for the position of mayor. For example, Livonia’s mayor is paid $105,000 annually, and Dearborn’s mayor is paid $131,133.

Information in the packet also included compensation for Ann Arbor District Library board of trustees ($30 per meeting), Ann Arbor Public Schools board of trustees ($130/month) and Washtenaw County board of commissioners ($15,500 annual salary and $25/meeting per diem).

The packet prepared by Fales also included community profiles for the seven cities downloaded from the Southeast Michigan Council of Governments (SEMCOG) website: Ann Arbor; Livonia; Southfield; Sterling Heights; Westland; Taylor; and Dearborn.

Fales also provided the determination from the last LOCC session for reference. The determination in 2009 was to keep salaries constant.

Commission Deliberations: Lower, Higher, Flat?

Bill Lockwood led off deliberations by saying he thought it’s highly unlikely that there could be a salary increase in the current circumstance. The only issue, he felt, is whether councilmembers and the mayor should share in the pain by taking a decrease, “like other folks are taking.” He asked if city staff were taking a reduction or whether the city is simply losing people. Responding to Lockwood’s question, Martha Darling ventured that the reduction in compensation experienced by city staff have been mostly on the benefits side.

Left to right: assistant city attorney Mary Fales, and LOCC members Martha Darling, Bill Lockwood, Roger Hewitt and Eunice Burns.

Roger Hewitt observed that the LOCC deals only with salary. Hewitt wanted to know if there’d been any increase in city employee wages in the last year or two. Fales indicated that for non-union employees, there had been no increases. She also left the room briefly to confirm with the city’s labor attorney that union employees, in all the recently settled contracts, had not received any wage increases beyond the “step increases” that have historically been a part of those contracts.

Darling pointed out that in Ann Arbor’s salary history, Fales had included a footnote indicating that the mayor and some councilmembers voluntarily “gave back” 3% of their salary one year. Lockwood observed that the 3% figure came from the 3% increase that the LOCC had recommended in 2007, which councilmembers did not reject.

By way of background, not all councilmembers who made the public announcement in early 2010 that they’d give back 3% of their salaries followed through – until The Chronicle inquired about the status of promised give-back payments. From an April 29, 2011 Chronicle column:

On Feb. 22, 2011 – more than a year after the public promises were made – The Chronicle inquired with the city’s financial office about the status of those payments. Not all had paid. But by March 7, 2011, all those who said they’d participate had finally made good on their commitment – it took The Chronicle’s inquiry to get them to follow through. According to city staff, it had been the expectation of some councilmembers that they would be invoiced with an incremental payment plan. And apparently when they didn’t receive an invoice from the city, they didn’t have the discipline to make the payments on their own.

Responding to the mention of the voluntary give-back, Hewitt noted that the council would have its own political discussion. He said he’d suggest a nominal cost-of-living increase or keeping it flat. He indicated he didn’t believe it was possible to increase salaries substantially. Lockwood noted that inflation, though relatively low recently, did the work of reducing wages, if they left salaries flat.

Returning to the issue of the lack of any increase for city employee salaries, commissioners also noted that staff reductions meant that the same amount of work was getting done with fewer people. As the mood in the room seemed to verge on entertaining a recommendation to reduce mayoral and councilmember salaries, Hewitt ventured that the LOCC could not actually make such a recommendation. Responding to Hewitt, Fales indicated that recommending a salary reduction is within the purview of the LOCC.

Lockwood said that even though Fales was recording the minutes for the meeting, he wanted her to include how wonderful the information packet was. Fales is to be complimented for that, he said.

Returning to the issue of salary, Lockwood said he couldn’t see any possibility that he’d vote for an increase. He then moved that the recommendation of the commission be to continue the current salaries for the mayor and councilmembers at $42,436 and $15,913, respectively, for the next two years.

Eunice Burns suggested using the same paragraph from the 2009 session’s determination:

The LOCC has determined that no increase in salary is appropriate for the mayor, mayor pro tem, and members of the city council. The salary determination for local elected officials is responsive to the present economic climate and is not reflective of the time, energy and leadership roles that the mayor and members of city council have and continue to participate in regional and state levels.

Picking up on the “leadership roles” phrase in the paragraph, Darling noted that leadership on transit and establishing a rail corridor had reflected real progress, which is befitting one of the few counties in Michigan that is doing arguable better than the rest of the state. Darling said the council and mayor are really doing important work within a constrained budget situation. Lockwood commented that it’s sad that “we are where we are.” Darling ventured that increasing salaries would not be possible until there’s a broader economic recovery.

Burns related the feedback that she’d received from a party she’d attended the previous night. When she floated the idea of raises to other attendees, she reported, everyone said: No! Burns added those she had asked were all good Democrats.

Lockwood said he hoped that the next time the LOCC meets, in 2013, commissioners would be looking at an economy that’s starting to blossom. Hewitt commented that comparing what mayors make in other Michigan cities, Ann Arbor can’t compensate what’s appropriate. The economic reality is, Hewitt said, “standing still means you’re taking a pay cut.” Darling noted that people aren’t taking on the job of mayor and councilmembers for the money. She said it’s fortunate that the city has people of high quality taking on the work.

Hewitt ventured that the wage per hour wouldn’t be very high. Darling came back to the suggestion from Burns that they use similar language to the 2009 determination, because it again captured the right sentiment. About our elected officials, Darling suggested that, “In our regular lives when we run into them, we should thank them.”

Outcome: The commission voted unanimously to recommend that salaries for the Ann Arbor mayor and councilmembers stay at current levels for 2012 and 2013.

After offering an opportunity for public commentary (no one other than The Chronicle attended) Hewitt accepted a motion to adjourn, the commission voted to end its meeting, and with that the commission’s work was done for another two years.

LOCC Membership: “If no one knows, no one will apply.”

Before the meeting was convened, as the commissioners were waiting for their full complement to arrive, they reflected on the fact that three vacancies exist on the seven-member body.

Mary Fales reported that there are not even three applications on file. She indicated that she’d informed the city clerk of the vacancies. But Bill Lockwood indicated that he’d been looking for vacancy listings for a different body and had not seen any vacancies listed for the LOCC.

By way of background, the city’s online Legistar system that organizes meetings of boards and commissions includes a module for the current and past membership of boards and commissions. The module is sometimes not immediately updated. The currently listed vacancies do not include the three for the LOCC.

About the lack of applications, Eunice Burns said: “If no one knows, no one will apply.”

One hurdle to recruiting members of the commission is that eligibility for service on the LOCC is constrained more than for some other citizen boards and commissions. From Ann Arbor’s ordinance:

The members [of the LOCC] shall be registered electors of the city, appointed by the mayor subject to confirmation by a majority of the members elected and serving in the legislative body. … No member or employee of the legislative, judicial or executive branch of any level of government or members of the immediate family of such member or employee shall be eligible to be a member of the commission.

In the time since The Chronicle reported on the local officers compensation commission in early 2011, the third vacancy that has accumulated on the LOCC  is the spot left by local attorney Fred McDonald, whose term expired on Nov. 21, 2011. His son, Kevin, is employed by the city as an assistant city attorney, and he thus appears to have been ineligible to serve on the LOCC. [See "Ann Arbor City Council Service: What's It Worth?"]

Current member Roger Hewitt also serves on the board of the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority. And Lockwood serves on the city’s board of canvassers. [.pdf of membership on all Ann Arbor city boards and commissions]

In January 2011, responding to a question from The Chronicle about his view of the status of the DDA and the board of canvassers as a part of the local government in the context of the LOCC eligibility requirement, city attorney Stephen Postema wrote in an email:  ”…  I would have to research the issue more closely to give a definitive answer.”

Present: Martha Darling, William Lockwood, Roger Hewitt and Eunice Burns.

Next meeting: Sometime in 2013.

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.

Brabec was one of two candidates who applied for the job, along with Christopher Nielsen. Both Democrats live in Pittsfield Township and had been interviewed by commissioners at a public meeting on Monday, Oct. 17. Brabec has a doctorate in social work and a private practice but no previous government service. She had been encouraged by Judge to pursue the board appointment.

Brabec will serve until special elections are held in early 2012 – a primary on Feb. 28, and a special election in May. The winner of that election will serve the remainder of the term, through 2012.

This brief was filed from the boardroom at the county administration building, 220 N. Main St. in Ann Arbor. A more detailed report will follow: [link]

Christopher Nielsen and Felicia Brabec were interviewed by Washtenaw County commissioners, who'll be voting to appoint one of them to the open District 7 seat on the county board. The interviews took place at a public meeting in the Pittsfield Township hall. (Photos by the writer.)

The board will vote to appoint one of the candidates at its Oct. 19 meeting, filling the position vacated after Kristin Judge resigned earlier this month.

Monday’s interviews were held at the Pittsfield Township hall – the district covers the township, and both candidates live there. It was fairly informal, with questions about why they want the job, what their passions and priorities are, and how they’d work to build trust and relationships with their constituents, county staff and other commissioners. At the end of the meeting, several commissioners praised both candidates, saying either one would serve District 7 well.

The meeting was sparsely attended. The audience included Pittsfield Township supervisor Mandy Grewal and Barb Fuller, deputy supervisor. Former township treasurer Christina Lirones also attended, and posed a question during public commentary to elicit the relationships between the candidates and Judge. Lirones noted that Judge had run on the same slate as current township elected officials, and Lirones wanted representation on the county board by someone who isn’t lockstep with the current township leadership.

Brabec responded that Judge had encouraged her to consider applying, and that their husbands work together. Several commissioners said that Judge had set up meetings with them and Brabec, but they felt that Brabec was an independent thinker and said that Judge hadn’t pushed inappropriately for Brabec’s appointment.

Nielsen is a friend of former county commissioner Jeff Irwin, and worked on Irwin’s 2010 campaign for state representative. Board chair Conan Smith said having someone who’s done the job who can vouch for the candidates is important, and he noted that’s the case with both candidates.

The appointee will serve until special elections in early 2012 – a primary on Feb. 28, and a special election in May. The date for the May election will be set by the board at Wednesday’s meeting. The winner of that election will serve the remainder of the term, through 2012.

One person – Republican Richard Conn – has already filed for the 2012 special election in District 7. However, according to deputy county clerk Matt Yankee, since the election hasn’t been officially set by the county board, Conn might have to refile if the election dates are different from those he’s indicated in his filing affidavit – Feb. 28 and May 8.

District 7 Candidate Interviews

In their applications, the two candidates had provided their resumé and an essay responding to the board’s Strategic Priorities and Budget Principles. Felicia Brabec has a doctorate in social work and a private practice. Christopher Nielsen has a law degree, was an assistant town manager in Orange, Virginia, and is a housing development officer with the Michigan State Housing Development Authority (MSHDA). For additional background, see Chronicle coverage: “Two Candidates Apply for County Board Seat.”

All commissioners except Leah Gunn attended Monday’s meeting, and asked questions of the candidates. For this report, the questions posed to candidates from each commissioner are paraphrased. Candidate responses are reported in the order in which they answered.

Candidate Interviews: Response to Board’s Priorities & Principles

Conan Smith (D-District 10): In applying for this position, you were asked to write an essay responding to the board’s Strategic Priorities and Budget Principles. Please elaborate on those thoughts.

Brabec: After thanking the board for allowing her to speak with them, Brabec said the board’s five guidances – focusing on public safety, basic needs, increased economic opportunity, integration of efforts, and long-term stability – address the county’s sustainability and most pressing needs. Those needs would be unaddressed if the county didn’t provide services, she said – the safety net is important. The guidances really resonated with her, Brabec said. It reminded her of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs: If the basic needs at the bottom of the hierarchy aren’t fulfilled, you can’t reach the higher needs, like self-actualization. Entities working together can provide needed services to residents, Brabec said, and she hoped to be part of a board that would work toward that goal. [.pdf of Brabec's essay]

Nielsen: The board had done a good job under difficult circumstances, Nielsen said. In looking at the strategic priorities and budget principles, one of his concerns is that while core services are a top priority, the county continues to fund other services that are important but that have costs associated with them. He noted that he had attended the Oct. 13 board working session and heard citizens speak against proposed funding cuts. It was eye-opening to hear how difficult the decisions will be. He recognized that each of the commissioners showed empathy. But some of the direction given in their strategic priorities document is confusing, he said. Perhaps that was intentional, he added, in that it gives the county administrator flexibility. [.pdf of Nielsen's essay]

Candidate Interviews: Establishing Trust

Barbara Bergman (D-District 8): How would you work to establish trust with the county’s department heads?

Nielsen: Having been a department head, Nielsen said it’s important to be a good communicator. He’d take an active role in meeting with people. It’s important to be very fair and honest – if you’re willing to do that, you can build trust. Your actions will demonstrate to the staff your ability to be trustworthy and honest.

Brabec: Trust is a foundation needed to get good work done, Brabec said. Her job would be to sit with all the department heads and learn as much as she could by asking questions and soaking up information. That approach facilitates an open relationship to help tackle problems.

Candidate Interviews: Why Do You Want the Job?

Wes Prater (D-District 4): What motivates each of you to become a commissioner, especially in this difficult time of budget challenges?

Brabec: Service is one of her core values, Brabec said, and is integral to who she is and to her family. For the past several years, she’s focused on individual service, on the micro level. Now that her children are a bit older, she has more time to dedicate to serving others. This position seems like it would be service at the macro level, she said. Being able to collaborate is key, she said – it’s fundamental to social work, and would be important as a commissioner too.

Nielsen: He’s always gravitated toward public service, and he enjoys government work. He’s been a Pittsfield Township resident about five years, and loves the community. This feels like the best opportunity to get involved, despite walking into a challenging situation. When he served as assistant town manager, Nielsen said, difficult budget decisions had to be made. That experience relates to this job, he said. Whatever the board decides will have a lasting impact on residents, staff and outside organizations. Nielsen said he would bring people together, and listen to all sides before making a decision. He hoped to have an opportunity to represent the community.

Candidate Interviews: Handling a Diverse District

Alicia Ping (R-District 3): Pittsfield Township is a very diverse township from east to west, with cultural and socio-economic differences, different school districts, and a more rural community toward the west. Even the traffic is different on each side. How would you work with the township government, and balance that with the needs of the county as a whole?

From left: Washtenaw County commissioner Alicia Ping, District 7 candidates Felicia Brabec and Christopher Nielsen, commissioner Conan Smith, and Brabec's husband David.

Nielsen: He sees himself as a facilitator, and would communicate openly with the township, respond promptly to citizen concerns and questions, and try to understand all the issues that come up. He said he’d try to help residents and businesses by pointing them in the right direction for resources, if they have questions or problems.

Brabec: To learn more about the different needs of residents, Brabec said she’d talk to township officials, citing supervisor Mandy Grewal and treasurer Patricia Scribner. She’d have a steep learning curve, she said, and would rely on them and others. The county has diverse needs too, Brabec noted, so she’d talk with each commissioner to find out how they make decisions and balance the needs of the entire county with their district. She’d try to find a fair way to balance the needs of Pittsfield Township with the needs of the county.

Candidate Interviews: What’s Your Pitch?

Yousef Rabhi (D-District 11): Pretend I’m a citizen and you’ve just knocked on my door. You’re running for office. What would your pitch be?

Brabec: She’d want to listen to what residents have to say – what are their concerns, what do they think the county or township is doing well? She’d bring back that information to the board. She’d also tell people that human services and public safety are important to her.

Nielsen: Nielsen said he’d begin by introducing himself, and asking them what he could do to help them gain access to county services. What issues do they think are important? How can he serve them? Because ultimately, he’s there for customer service.

Candidate Interviews: Constituent Outreach

Yousef Rabhi (D-District 11): How would you make yourself available to constituents? Kristin Judge put a high priority on that – sending out regular newsletters, for example. What do you plan on doing?

Nielsen: There are certain limitations because of his job, Nielsen said, but he’d be available on evenings and weekends. He’d look to make himself accessible through different avenues, like email or newsletters, if that works best for people.

Brabec: As a resident, Brabec said she likes to receive newsletters, so she’d probably continue that. She also likes the idea of regular times to be available to constituents, like lunches or teas. When Pittsfield Township was putting together its master plan, there were forums for public input – that’s another good idea, she said. She’d also make her phone number and email address available, and would attend as many public events as possible, like a recent open house she’d attended at the Pittsfield fire station. Being visible and approachable is important, she said.

Candidate Interviews: Passions

Rob Turner (R-District 1): As a commissioner, there are a lot of areas that you’ll have to deal with, like finance, human services and public safety. What areas are you passionate about? Also, are you interested in running for public office beyond the county board, such as the state legislature?

Brabec: Given her background, she has a natural inclination toward human services, Brabec said. She’s also interested in the criminal justice system. She had originally considered pursuing a joint degree in social work and law. She did an internship with a juvenile court system and loved working with kids and their families outside of court. She’s passionate about working with kids and families, and that’s what she does in her private practice. Regarding Turner’s second question, until a few weeks ago she hadn’t planned to seek this office, she noted, so she has no notion of doing anything beyond that at this point.

Nielsen: Noting that the county had more than 40 committees and commissions, Nielsen said he wanted to study those more to know what they covered. His own interests are diverse – he enjoys finance and economic development, parks and recreation, and public safety. He’s willing to consider anything. When Turner again asked what his passion is, Nielsen said he has a passion for art – does the county have an art committee? he quipped. With his legal background, he’d probably be more interested in public safety, Nielsen said. As for other public office, Nielsen said he has no interest in running for state office. When pressed by Turner, he said he wasn’t interested in judgeships or Congress, either. “This is a good starting place,” he said.

Candidate Interviews: Expertise

Barbara Bergman (D-District 8): I’m a social worker and have expertise in issues like mental health and substance abuse. There’ve been some major transitions at the county in these areas, and in some cases I’ve asked commissioners to trust me about the direction that’s being taken. Other commissioners have different areas of expertise. How would you respond to that?

Nielsen: When Nielsen asked for clarification, Conan Smith replied that on large boards, there’s often a division of labor – some people develop expertise, and ask others to trust them and follow their lead on certain issues. You can’t know everything, Smith said, yet you have the responsibility to your constituents. How do you balance that? Nielsen said that even if someone was an expert, he’d need at least a good explanation of the issue. Is it reasonable enough for him to understand, with the information that’s available? It’s difficult to say whether he would just take something at face value – it depends on the issue. If it involved finances or a significant policy decision, then there’d need to be more discussion, he said.

Brabec: It’s the same approach that she’d take in establishing trust with department heads, Brabec said – she’d spent time with each commissioner to get to know them, and to establish trust. At the same time, she’d read as much as she could, to learn as much as she could. So it would be a hybrid approach, she said. On some things, she’d want to ask questions. But commissioners have to deal with such a broad range of issues that it’s impossible for everyone to be an expert, she said.

Candidate Interviews: District Territory

Rolland Sizemore Jr. (D-District 5): Starting with the next term, the board will decrease from 11 districts to 9 districts. How do you think that will affect the county? Also, each district is unique. I don’t like it when other commissioners come into my district unless I know they’re there. How do you think you’ll get along with that?

Brabec: She said she hadn’t really followed the reasoning behind the change in district size, but noted that it will certainly be different. In terms of working with Sizemore, Brabec said she’d hope to build a working relationship with him, and learn about his district. To her, that’s where it starts.

Nielsen: Like Brabec, Nielsen said he’s not really sure how decreasing the number of commissioners will impact residents. It depends on whether the changes will impact customer service, and they won’t know that until it happens, he said. After clarifying what Sizemore meant by the second part of his question, Nielsen said he’d learn about Sizemore’s district by talking to Sizemore. “Good answer,” Sizemore said.

For background on the county redistricting, see Chronicle coverage: “County Board Loses Two Seats in Redistricting.”

Candidate Interviews: Top Priority

Dan Smith (R-District 2): What do you think is the No. 1 job of a county commissioner?

From left: County commissioners Rolland Sizemore Jr., Dan Smith, and Ronnie Peterson.

Nielsen: Representing your district is the No. 1 job – you’re providing customer service, in a sense, he said. That perspective is reflected in the policy and budget decisions you make, regarding services to residents. Nielsen said he’d also serve as a representative and advocate for different organizations and interests.

Brabec: A commissioner’s No. 1 job is to balance the county’s budget, she said, and to take into account all the things that are necessary to create a balanced budget.

Candidate Interviews: Responding to Advocates

Rob Turner (R-District 1): As we make budget decisions, we receive emails and calls from people who are advocating for their organization, such as the humane society or human services agencies. They don’t want the county to cut funding for their groups. How would you respond to these constituents?

Brabec: She’d first want to listen to what the constituent was saying, and she’d be open to understanding the organization’s impact. She said she’d temper that view with the knowledge that a lot has to be done with less. She’d let the person know that she understands the cuts affect real people or animals, but at the same time, she’d make clear that the board must make tough decisions, and budget cuts have to come from somewhere.

Nielsen: Responding to a community advocate would involve listening, Nielsen said, but he’s also want to do research on what the organization brings to the county. The board has a document outlining its strategic priorities and budget principles, he noted – that’s a guide. He’d work with the organization to see if it fit into the county’s strategic framework. If it did, and if there’s a persuasive argument to be made that its services have a measurable impact, then it’s worth reconsidering. Maybe some funding should be returned to the organization. Of course, he said, that would then require another difficult decision – if you give more money to one organization, you have to cut elsewhere. There’s a limited amount of public dollars. But he’d be willing to reconsider allocations, if a case can be made for it.

Candidate Interviews: Long-Term Involvement

Yousef Rabhi (D-District 11): Beyond this appointment, what’s your long-term plan for being involved with the county?

Nielsen: If he isn’t appointed, Nielsen said he might apply for a volunteer position on one of the county’s advisory committees or commissions, to try to get a better understanding of how the county operates. He hopes he can use his background and interests to benefit the county.

Brabec: The previous evening, Brabec said, she’d been reflecting on the presentation that Mary Jo Callan had made at the Oct. 13 board working session, which Brabec attended. [Callan gave an update on basic needs for low-income county residents – including the increased need for housing and food assistance.] Hearing the numbers really stuck with her, Brabec said, so she emailed Callan and asked how she could help. She’d like to help either way – if she’s appointed, or just as a resident. That’s how she’d start getting involved.

Candidate Interviews: Conflict of Interest

Barbara Bergman (D-District 8): I won’t sit on any board that might come to the county asking for money. What’s your position on that?

Brabec: People in her profession deal with ethical conflicts of interest, Brabec said. She would try to minimize those as a commissioner.

Nielsen: He said he wouldn’t choose to create a situation that would cause a conflict of interest. He wouldn’t take a position on the board of any organization that would have a direct conflict with the county.

Candidate Interviews: Public Commentary

Two people spoke during public commentary.

At the start of the meeting, Steven Stone introduced himself as a neighbor of Felicia Brabec, saying he was a good friend of her and her husband. He was there to give her moral support and to urge commissioners to consider her for the job. He’s known the family for six years, and they’ve been active in the community. He’s watched their family grow – they now have two young children – and she’s the type of person you’d want on the board, Stone said. She’s very humble, he said, adding that it was years before he learned that she held a doctorate degree. He concluded by noting that he didn’t know all of the factors that the board was considering, but “as a person, you can’t do better” than Brabec.

Later in the meeting, Christina Lirones asked a question of the candidates and the board. She said there’s a homogenous group now representing Pittsfield Township, and that former commissioner Kristin Judge had run on that same slate. They had replaced Lirones’ group in the township, she said – Lirones is a former township treasurer and clerk who lost her seat to the current elected officials. Judge had tried to recall her when she was still in office, Lirones noted.

Lirones is looking for representation on the county board by someone who isn’t lockstep with the current township leadership. She asked if either of the candidates had been selected or promoted by Judge, and if so, how had Judge solicited support for that candidate? Lirones said she was glad that both candidates are Democrats, but she was curious about their affiliations.

Candidate Interviews: Public Commentary – Candidate Response

Nielsen said he hadn’t received any direct support, but he’d received encouragement to apply. [He didn't specify who had provided that encouragement. In his application, he stated that he had worked in the 2010 campaign for Jeff Irwin, a Democrat and former county commissioner who was elected in November 2010 as state representative for District 53, representing Ann Arbor.]

Nielsen said it was his decision to apply because of his desire to provide public services. His role on the board might help bring to light some of the issues that Lirones mentioned, he said, so that they could be discussed. But it seemed that the issues were at the township level, he added, and he would be limited to his work at the county level.

Brabec said that Judge did ask her to consider serving. She talked it over with several people, including her husband, and decided that it was something she wanted to do. In the role of commissioner, it would be her job to listen to a variety of concerns or accomplishments, she said. She would take that very seriously. Brabec added that until Judge approached her about this opening, they had never really talked politics. They knew each other through their husbands, who work together, she said.

Candidate Interviews: Public Commentary – Commissioner Response

Editor’s note: Rob Turner and Rolland Sizemore Jr. had left the meeting before Lirones asked her question. Wes Prater didn’t respond to the question. Leah Gunn was absent.

Conan Smith said Judge had contacted him to tell him she planned to resign. That was all they initially talked about, he said – what it would mean to the board, and what a loss it would be. A couple of days later she called again and asked him if he would meet with her and Brabec. He agreed, and had lunch with them and some other commissioners. It was not a public meeting and at that time the board wasn’t yet accepting applications, he said. Judge had said she wasn’t pushing a particular candidate, but she wanted to make sure there wasn’t a gap in representation, Smith said. Judge hadn’t been forceful at all, he added, and she had handled the situation delicately.

Barbara Bergman also said Judge had called and asked Bergman to meet with her and Brabec. “I declined,” Bergman said, but later reached out to Brabec so that the two of them could meet without Judge. Bergman noted that she did not have a positive relationship with Judge, but Bergman had hoped Brabec might like her anyway. Bergman said she asked Brabec questions that convinced her that Brabec is “quite independent.” Bergman added,  “I don’t think she is owned by anybody.” Bergman also had reached out to Nielsen, but they had not met face-to-face before that day’s interview.

Washtenaw County commissioners interviewed Chris Nielsen, left, at Pittsfield Township hall. Felicia Brabec is off camera. Both are vying for an appointment to serve as District 7 commissioner until special elections are held in 2012.

Alicia Ping said she hadn’t received a call from anyone, and she was glad she hadn’t. This was the first time she’d met either candidate. Both candidates are extremely qualified and Pittsfield Township will be lucky to have either one, she said. She thanked them for coming, and noted that the job of county commissioner can often be thankless.

Saying that Lirones had asked a fair question, Ronnie Peterson said he’d had three phone conversations with Judge about Brabec. He’d been invited to a party but didn’t attend – he said he had viewed it more as a farewell party than an introduction for Brabec. He had met Brabec previously, but this was the first time he’d met Nielsen. [Brabec has attended several regular board meetings, and Nielsen attended a working session.]

Both of their qualifications are outstanding, Peterson said, and Pittsfield Township would benefit from either of them. He could tell that public opinion was as important to them as it is to him, and he hoped they’d remain independent if they became commissioners, and be non-biased advocates for residents of their district and the county. He said that he and Judge had gotten along extremely well – they didn’t always agree, but they had mutual respect.

Yousef Rabhi said Judge had reached out to him about Brabec, too. In his conversations with Brabec, he’d wanted to ensure that she was independent-minded and that she wasn’t Judge’s candidate. He said he’s confident that she’s independent and would follow her heart. Rabhi said he’s talked with Nielsen by phone and that Nielsen seems like a fine person too. Judge hadn’t contacted Rabhi about Nielsen nor asked him to support Nielsen.

Dan Smith said he didn’t really know either candidate. He’d met Nielsen at the board’s Oct. 13 working session, and had met Brabec at a party a couple of weeks ago that Judge had arranged. A couple of other commissioners were there too, along with county staff, he said.

Conan Smith noted that being a county commissioner is a complex job, though it might not seem to be. Having someone who’s done the job who can vouch for the candidates is important, he said. In both candidates’ cases, a former commissioner had done that, he said. Smith said he could tell that neither of them would take the job lightly, and that they both seemed to have a high enough tolerance to hang out with the commissioners.

Next Steps

Conan Smith said the item to appoint a District 7 commissioner would be at the top of the board’s agenda for their Oct. 19 meeting. After the vote, the candidate who’s selected will join the other commissioners at the board table, so Smith suggested that the candidates get up to speed by reading the agenda materials, which are available to the public on the county’s website.

The appointee will serve in that seat until special elections are held next year. A primary on Feb. 28 will be followed by a special general election in May – the board will officially set the dates for those elections at their Oct. 19 meeting.

The winner of the May special election would serve a truncated term for the current District 7, through 2012. Redistricting of the county board, which takes effect in 2013, will reduce the number of districts in the county from 11 to 9. Candidates for the new districts will compete in an Aug. 7 primary and November general election.

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

From left: Ann Arbor housing commissioners Andy LaBarre and Ronald Woods at the Oct. 12 special meeting. (Photos by the writer.)

Commissioners praised all four candidates, but Jennifer L. Hall emerged as the leading choice. Four of the five housing commissioners selected her as their first choice in a straw poll at the beginning of the meeting. Hall currently serves as housing manager for the Washtenaw County/city of Ann Arbor office of community development. In advocating for Hall, board member Leigh Greden – a former city councilmember – noted that her knowledge of the local community is a strong asset.

But after about 90 minutes of discussion, commissioners decided to move ahead with three of the four finalists: Hall, Damon Duncan and Bill Ward. Both Duncan and Ward have more extensive public housing experience than Hall, primarily with the Detroit housing commission. The other finalist, Nick Coquillard, has served as deputy director of the Ann Arbor housing commission and is now interim director.

During the meeting, much of the discussion focused on the vision, leadership and management styles of the candidates, and how those styles would fit the existing staff focus on teamwork and customer service. As a backdrop to the discussion, the housing commission has seen some dramatic leadership changes over the past two years – including dissolution of the previous board in 2010, and a previous change in executive directors.

At the beginning of the meeting, Ronald Woods, the only commissioner who did not indicate a preference for Hall, asked whether it would be possible to conduct some of their discussion in closed session. He felt it would allow for a more candid exchange of opinions. But Kevin McDonald of the city attorney’s office informed the board that this was a public hiring process, and needed to be held in public view.

The executive director of the housing commission is one of only four positions in city government that is required to have a public hiring process, McDonald told the board. The other positions are city administrator, city attorney, and executive director of the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority.

The board will take up the hiring decision again at their regular meeting on Wednesday, Oct. 19. The meeting is open to the public and starts at 6 p.m. at Baker Commons, 106 Packard (the corner of Packard and Main) – a housing commission property. It’s possible that commissioners will make a final decision then, or continue the discussion at a later date.

Housing Commission: Some Background

The Ann Arbor housing commission (AAHC) oversees the city’s public housing units, as well as the Section 8 program for Washtenaw, Monroe, and western Wayne counties. Section 8 provides vouchers that subsidize rent for low-income residents living in privately-owned properties. The commission’s public housing units are located throughout the city of Ann Arbor and include Miller Manor, Baker Commons, North Maple Estates, Hikone and Hillside Manor, among several other properties. Much of the funding for these programs comes from the federal U.S. Dept. of Housing & Urban Development (HUD).

The housing commission has gone through some dramatic leadership changes over the past few years. The most recent executive director, Marge Novak, resigned effective July 29, 2011 to take a position with an affordable housing investment firm. She had been hired for the permanent job in May 2010 after serving as interim for 10 months.

Novak’s hire came less than two months after the city council voted, at its March 15, 2010 meeting, to dissolve the housing commission board and appoint new members. Among other issues, the city administration had been dissatisfied with that board’s progress towards hiring an executive director. [For additional background, see Chronicle coverage: "Housing Commission Set to Hire Director"]

Marta Manildi is the only current board member who was part of the previously dissolved board. She is an attorney with Hooper Hathaway, the same law firm that employs Ann Arbor city councilmember Christopher Taylor. Other current housing commission board members include former city councilmember Leigh Greden; Andy LaBarre, a former aide to Congressman John Dingell and current vice president of government relations and administration at the Ann Arbor/Ypsilanti Regional Chamber of Commerce; Ronald Woods, an Eastern Michigan University professor who’s married to former Ann Arbor city councimember Wendy Woods; and Gloria Black, a representative for residents of housing commission properties.

There was little communication with the general public about the more recent leadership change at the housing commission, aside from postings on the commission’s website. The Chronicle has not observed any mention of this transition at public meetings of the Ann Arbor city council, for example. The city council’s liaison to the AAHC through this period was Tony Derezinski (Ward 2). He recently stepped down as liaison in order to serve on the city’s public art commission. Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3), who had previously served as council liaison to AAHC, publicly offered to replace Derezinski, but mayor John Hieftje instead nominated Margie Teall (Ward 4) to that position, instead of Kunselman.

The June 2011 AAHC board minutes record that Novak had tendered her resignation by that commission meeting, with AAHC deputy director Nick Coquillard appointed as interim at the July 2011 AAHC board meeting. The job opening was posted in August, and four candidates were selected to be interviewed: Coquillard; Damon Duncan, a housing consultant who previously worked at the Detroit Housing Commission; Jennifer L. Hall, housing manager for the Washtenaw County/city of Ann Arbor office of community development; and Bill Ward of the Detroit Housing Commission.

Interviews for the four candidates were held on Friday afternoon, Oct. 7, in a public meeting. The Chronicle requested resumés and other application materials for the candidates, but was informed that the information would be released only in response to a Freedom of Information Act request. That request has been filed. Update: Oct. 21, 2011 application materials were provided to The Chronicle. [.pdf of AAHC applicant materials]

Hiring Process: Open Meetings Act

At the start of Wednesday’s special meeting of the housing commission board, Ronald Woods asked whether the state’s Open Meetings Act allowed commissioners to hold any of their discussion in a closed session. In his experience, discussions in closed session result in a degree of frankness that’s not possible in public. It’s not about being secretive, he said, but rather about sensitivity toward the candidates. He also wondered whether confidentiality would be extended to the candidates’ references.

Kevin McDonald of the city attorney’s office told the board that there are only a narrow set of circumstances that would allow the commission to enter into a closed session. It might be uncomfortable, he said, but the candidate names have been disclosed and the hiring process for this position is public. It’s one of only four such positions in the city that has this kind of public hiring process, he noted. Others include the city administrator, city attorney, and executive director of the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority.

The purpose of the Open Meetings Act is to open up this kind of process to the public, McDonald said. He told commissioners they just needed to accept it and move forward, even if it’s uncomfortable.

Initial Preferences: Hall Emerges as Lead Candidate

Marta Manildi, who serves as president of the board, proposed taking a straw poll to see where commissioners fell in terms of their initial preferences. She began by saying her first choice would be Jennifer L. Hall, followed by Bill Ward.

Chronicle file photo of Jennifer L. Hall, taken at a 2010 meeting of the Washtenaw Urban County executive committee.

Andy LaBarre also picked Hall has his No. 1 choice, followed by Damon Duncan.

Leigh Greden said his initial assessment was based on breadth of experience, supervisory experience, staff input and the candidate’s local knowledge. For him, Hall came in first, followed by Ward.

Gloria Black also chose Hall as her first choice, then Duncan.

Ronald Woods was the only commissioner who did not select Hall for either of this top two candidates. His first choice was Duncan, followed by Ward.

Commissioners then elaborated on their preferences.

LaBarre described Nick Coquillard, the housing commission’s interim director, as a tremendous asset, and said that he would best serve the organization in his position as deputy director. Ward was impressive, LaBarre said, with great technical knowledge – he’d be a great problem-solver, but not the kind of person to lead the organization.

Duncan gave a terrific presentation, with a strong vision for the housing commission, LaBarre said, but it needed more specifics. Finally, Hall – his first choice – combined the best qualities of the other candidates, LaBarre said, including technical knowledge and leadership. What tipped it for him, though, was her knowledge of the local community, who the players are, and a sense that she’d be able to quickly jump-start the ability of the housing commission to secure new funding.

Woods spoke next, noting that Duncan – his No. 1 candidate – had a strong track record on redevelopment issues and finding alternative funding streams. Duncan is also extremely well-versed in HUD operations, he said, with a diversity of experience in virtually all aspects of public housing. Woods believes that Duncan would be able to develop strong relationships with critical partners, and that he has the vision to take the housing commission to the next level. He has the capacity to develop the Ann Arbor housing commission into one of the exemplary public housing systems in the state, Woods said.

Ward has many of the same qualities as Duncan, Woods said, and he’d also be a strong leader. Coquillard and Hall would be capable, he added. In Coquillard’s case, there would be some growth needed in executive leadership skills. For Hall, her learning curve about public housing issues would be steeper, Woods said.

Manildi began by saying they didn’t have a bad choice – it was comforting to know that any of the four candidates would do a good job. She agreed with the strengths that other commissioners had cited for the candidates, and said she started by looking at her reservations about them. One concern is that Ward, while extremely capable, didn’t articulate a clear long-term vision, especially as compared to Duncan and Hall.

Regarding Duncan, Manildi said her concern is more intuitive. Staff reaction toward him was mixed, as was hers. His forward-looking view seemed too general and philosophical, not grounded in concrete things that the housing commission must deal with. The other question Manildi had related to Duncan’s leadership style, and whether it would be a good fit for the organization. During his interview, she recalled, he’d made a comment that the hierarchy of the staff needs to be respected. To her, that seemed to indicate a view that differs from the organization’s team-building approach. On the other hand, she allowed, it might indicate a good management style. But these concerns caused her to rank Ward above Duncan.

As for Hall, it’s true that she doesn’t know the regulatory framework in rich detail, Manildi said. But she has enough surrounding knowledge and personal capacity that would allow her to fill in the gaps quickly. Hall also had a good manner, Manildi said, and a tremendous amount of useful knowledge.

Greden said he agreed with what everyone had said. He noted that he worked with Hall for many years – Greden is a former Ann Arbor city councilmember – and his experiences were very positive with her work. The housing commission staff and people who spoke during public commentary at the interviews also were positive toward Hall, he said. She’s extremely passionate about affordable housing. She has a vision, and in the past he’s seen her execute her visions time and again.

Greden said that Hall shares the housing commission’s model for client services, its team approach, and its style of working directly with residents of public housing. One concern is that she doesn’t have as much public housing experience. But she does have a lot of HUD experience, Greden said. He didn’t believe that the previous executive director, Marge Novak, had a lot of public housing experience, either. Yet Novak was wonderful, he said. Hall’s other attributes can overcome that lack of experience. Another positive attribute is that she’s local, Greden said. She knows people in the county and city, knows the properties, and knows staff. She’d hit the ground running, he said.

As for his second choice, Greden said he struggled between Ward or Duncan. Staff input caused him to give Ward the edge.

Ann Arbor housing commissioner Gloria Black.

Gloria Black praised all four candidates. Coquillard has dedication and drive. Ward has lots of experience with HUD and public housing. Duncan gave a spot-on presentation, and forced Black out of her comfort zone to look in a different direction – moving away from HUD toward other funding sources. But she questioned his commitment, saying it’s not clear if he’s in it for the long haul.

Hall doesn’t have a lot of HUD public housing experience, Black said, but maybe that’s a good thing. It will be important to make finding non-HUD funding a priority, she said.

Returning to Black’s point about Duncan being in it for the long haul, LaBarre recalled that during the interviews each candidate was asked a question to gauge their long-term commitment to the housing commission. Hall gave the best answer, in his view – she wants to retire from the position. That’s good for the stability of the organization, and other candidates weren’t so firm and definitive.

No doubt Hall would be a capable administrator, Woods replied. His comments are not about being negative toward her, he said. But he challenged his fellow commissioners to separate their familiarity with her, and to place all candidates on an equal plane. They need to look at her as if she’s coming from the outside, just like the other candidates.

As for Hall’s willingness to retire from the position, it might indicate stability and commitment, but you could also look at it as a statement about her eagerness to meet new challenges, he said. Woods again expressed concern about the public setting in which they were discussing these candidates, saying that some things aren’t negatives but might be perceived that way.

Woods felt that Ward and Duncan were equal in terms of staff responses – both had positive and negative comments.

Initial Preferences: Leadership, Vision

Much of the discussion at Wednesday’s meeting focused on leadership styles, and candidates’ vision for the housing commission.

Woods responded to comments from other commissioners about Duncan’s lack of specifics in his interview presentation. To Woods, Duncan seemed like he could be a transformative leader. Based on Duncan’s experience in the public housing sector, he used his presentation to elevate above specifics, Woods said. Woods understood Duncan to be saying that if the housing commission didn’t have a transformative vision for its future, it would never achieve dramatic change.

The other candidates didn’t strike Woods as having that same kind of vision and leadership. And he acknowledged that transformative leaders can get into trouble – not that Duncan would, he added. But often members of an organization aren’t interested in change initially, and it can be difficult to deal with that.

On the issue of Duncan’s description of staff hierarchy, Woods saw that as a positive – he was talking about delegating responsibility.

Black agreed in part with Woods’ assessment. She said she didn’t know any of the candidates personally, so she didn’t view Hall as an insider. What she liked about Hall was her “humanness.” While Duncan comes across as extremely powerful, knowledgeable and a visionary, Black wasn’t sure that fit with the housing commission’s customer-service focus.

Duncan’s presentation was sophisticated, but that wasn’t necessarily a positive. Hall, on the other hand, was ready to admit when she didn’t know something, Black said. That’s what an executive should be – someone who doesn’t walk in thinking they know it all, but who’s willing to grow and learn, she said.

As for Ward, Black didn’t find him genuine and she questioned his commitment to the housing commission. It seemed like he was just looking for a job closer to his home, she said. That gave her some reservations.

Manildi responded by saying that she was satisfied that all four candidates would be committed to the work. Ward had noted that he’s worked for seven years to get the Detroit housing commission out of receivership, and she could understand why he’s ready for a change. [Ward has served as director of compliance for the Detroit housing commission.]

However, this discussion was leading her to reconsider her second-choice preference, Manildi said, switching it from Ward to Duncan. She agreed that the housing commission needs someone with vision, and she liked Woods’ characterization of transformative vision. The board has chafed at the constraints of the housing commission’s dependence on HUD, she noted, but it will be years before they can move away from that funding. In the meantime, they’ll need to continue to work with that agency.

Duncan was impressive and able to clearly articulate a vision for the housing commission, Manildi said. But Hall also had a vision, though it was expressed in a quiet way. Hall was able to move back and forth between concrete details and her vision for the future, which suggested to Manildi that Hall has the ability to keep her eye on the long-term goals while engaging in the day-to-day details necessary to reach those goals.

Members of the Ann Arbor housing commission board: Marta Manildi and Leigh Greden.

Manildi wanted to hear from other commissioners about management styles for the candidates. She noted that when she first started her service on the board, the commission was at the end of a period with “terrible problems,” in no small part because of staffing issues related to low morale, poor organization and bad relationships between staff and residents – lots of management-level problems.

After Marge Novak was hired as director and Nick Coquillard as deputy director, Manildi said, there had been a huge improvement. There’s been a building-up of approach and process, she said, and a sense of cohesiveness and teamwork. Her sense was that this environment would be a natural fit for Hall, and that Hall would immediately begin to work well with staff. ”I have concerns about whether Mr. Duncan can do that,” she said.

Manildi acknowledged that she had known Hall previously – the two were in a Leadership Ann Arbor class years ago – and Manildi had a favorable impression of Hall. But she hasn’t worked with Hall, and felt that she’d have the same kind of favorable impressions of Hall even if they hadn’t met prior to the interview. Manildi also didn’t feel it was a bad thing to bring previous knowledge of a person to bear on the decision. She cited Marge Novak as an example – the board knows Novak well, and based on that, they’d likely hire her again if she applied.

LaBarre said he felt that Hall had a solid vision for the housing commission, though it might have been overshadowed by Duncan’s strong vision for bolder action and change. LaBarre said he hated to use dumb analogies, but he felt Duncan presented the chance for a home run, while Hall was more of a solid double. She’d be a strong and safe choice, he said, while Duncan was bolder and more of a chance for greater change. LaBarre said he wasn’t sure if the housing commission at this point needs something big and bold, which also presents a risk if it doesn’t succeed. He’s inclined to err on the side of strong and certain.

Black noted that she’s not familiar with baseball.

Public Commentary

Public commentary is typically held at the start and conclusion of each meeting. But midway through Wednesday’s meeting, a staff member – noting that she needed to return to work – asked if she could address the board. At that request, Marta Manildi, the board’s president, opened the meeting to public commentary.

Three people spoke during public commentary. Weneshia Brand, Section 8 housing manager, noted that she had met with each of the four candidates, and they were all very good – she was glad she didn’t have to make the hiring decision. From the staff’s perspective, it’s very difficult to support a new manager who doesn’t have public housing experience, she said. It means that the staff has to provide a lot of education and take on more responsibilities. Without specifying anyone by name, Brand said she’d lean toward a candidate with public housing experience or who has the skill to come in and quickly educate themselves. Specifically, the staff doesn’t have the experience to support a director in making grant applications, she noted – that’s a factor.

Another staff member addressed the board, saying that if staff could make their comments anonymously, they’d be more candid. She said she wouldn’t feel comfortable giving her opinion in front of her co-workers.

Suzette Leininger told commissioners that her preferences were for Hall and Duncan. Hall made her feel very comfortable, Leininger said, and if there was a problem, it seemed that Hall would be confident enough to handle it.

Public Commentary: Commissioner Response

Several commissioners responded to the public comments. Black said she gleaned from Brand’s remarks that the new executive director will need to multi-task, and that staff will need support to step outside the box in pursuing a vision for the housing commission. But they will still need to operate with HUD’s rules and regulations, she noted.

LaBarre said he’d like to get more staff input, especially since it seemed that the board wouldn’t be making a decision at the current meeting. Manildi wondered if there was a way for staff to speak confidentially to the board about the candidates, rather than the anonymous comments that had been collected so far.

Woods felt that staff had sufficient opportunity for input – they could always contact human resources if they had additional comments, he said. Greden agreed with that observation. Black wondered why the staff couldn’t simply send commissioners written commentary.

Kevin McDonald of the city attorney’s office said that if the board wanted additional staff input, he could work with the human resources staff to figure out a way to get it. He wasn’t sure at this point exactly how to do it, but they could work on it before the board’s next meeting.

Manildi said she’d leave it up to the attorneys to decide on a method, but she wanted to extend the time to get staff comments. This didn’t imply that the board will defer to staff, she noted. But staff have a distinct and, in some ways, better-informed perspective, and it was important to get their input, Manildi said.

Next Steps

Initially the board seemed inclined to narrow the candidate list to two: Duncan and Hall. But commissioners ultimately decided to include Ward among the finalists as well, based in large part on his public housing experience, in light of Brand’s public commentary.

Manildi floated the possibility of scheduling another special meeting to continue their discussion. But the consensus was to add the item to the agenda for the board’s next regular meeting, on Wednesday, Oct. 19. That meeting begins at 6 p.m. at Baker Commons, 106 Packard (the corner of Packard and Main). Baker Commons is one of the housing commission’s properties.

Sharie Sell of the city’s human resources department said she could check references on the three finalists and report back to the board. She will also work on collecting more staff input.

It’s possible – but not certain – that the board will make a final decision at that Oct. 19 meeting. The meeting is open to the public and will include opportunities for public commentary.

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

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.

Felicia Brabec, right, talks with Greg Dill at the Oct. 5 meeting of the Washtenaw County board of commissioners. She's one of two candidates for an appointment to fill the District 7 seat on the county board. (Photo by the writer.)

The deadline to apply was 5 p.m. – an hour away. Conan Smith, who chairs the board of commissioners, said that at 5:01 p.m. they would cancel a scheduled Monday meeting to interview candidates, assuming that no one else applied.

But at about 4:15 p.m., another candidate – Christopher M. Nielsen – turned in an application too. So he’ll join Felicia Brabec, who applied earlier this week, in vying for the board seat to represent Pittsfield Township.

Candidates will be interviewed  on Monday, Oct. 17 at the Pittsfield Township Hall (6201 W. Michigan Ave.) starting at 5:30 p.m. Commissioners – seven Democrats and three Republicans – are expected to make an appointment at their board meeting on Wednesday, Oct. 19.

Peter Simms, deputy county clerk, told commissioners that the staff had received several calls from people who expressed interest in the appointment, but also some confusion about what it entailed. The person appointed to the board won’t serve a full term – they’ll be representing District 7 only until special elections are held. There will be a Feb. 28, 2012 primary for that seat, followed by a May 2012 special general election. The winner of that election would serve a truncated term for the current District 7, through 2012. Redistricting of the county board, which takes effect in 2013, will reduce the number of districts in the county from 11 to 9. Candidates for the new districts will compete in an Aug. 7 primary and November general election.

District 7 Applicants: Background

Applicants for the board vacancy were required to submit a letter of interest and resumé, including a home address – they must be residents of District 7 – as well as identification of political affiliation and a current list of past political leadership/involvement. They were also required to provide a statement of 500 words or less, responding to the board’s Strategic Priorities and Budget Principles.

Both Brabec and Nielsen are Democrats.

District 7 Applicants: Felicia Brabec

Felicia Brabec attended the Oct. 5 board meeting as well as the Oct. 6 working session, and turned in her application earlier this week. According to her resumé, she is a licensed clinical psychologist and clinical social worker in private practice. She previously worked as a staff psychologist and social worker at the University of Michigan. [.pdf of Brabec's resumé] She received her undergraduate degree from Saint Mary’s College in Notre Dame, Indiana, with a master’s degree in social work from Boston College and a doctorate in clinical psychology from the Illinois School of Professional Psychology.

In her application, Brabec stated that she was active in student government throughout graduate school, college, and high school, but has had no recent political leadership or involvement. As reasons for her interest, she cited a “desire to serve the constituents of Pittsfield Township while balancing their needs with those of the residents of the county as a whole,” and a “desire to actively work with other Commissioners on the Board as well as other public and private entities to advocate for public safety as well as attending to the needs of those most vulnerable in our communities, particularly children and families.”

Brabec’s essay in response to the board’s Strategic Priorities and Principles begins with a quote from Henry David Thoreau: “Be not simply good, be good for something.” [.pdf of Brabec's essay]

She writes in support of the board’s general direction, as outlined in their priorities and principles. ”I hope to be a part of this board; a board that is willing to tackle difficult problems rather than shies away from them or pretends that they do not exist or waits for someone else to potentially help. I also appreciate that the board recognizes the need for collaboration. If these guidances are to be met effectively, collaboration will be necessary. The apparent lack of ego in service of accomplishing this important work is refreshing.”

District 7 Applicants: Christopher M. Nielsen

Christopher M. Nielsen is a housing development officer with the Michigan State Housing Development Authority (MSHDA). He’s a University of Michigan graduate and received his law degree from the University of Detroit Mercy School of Law. [.pdf of Nielsen's resumé]

His local government experience includes serving as an assistant town manager and acting town manager for Orange, Virginia. In 2001, he was an environmental intern with the Washtenaw County drain commissioner’s office.

Nielsen stated that his political experience includes assisting in the 2008 presidential campaign, and in the 2010 campaign for Jeff Irwin, a Democrat and former county commissioner who was elected in November 2010 as state representative for District 53, representing Ann Arbor.

Nielsen’s response to the board’s Strategic Priorities and Principles provides, in part, a critique:

It is evident a great deal of thought has been given to the priorities outlined in the Strategic Plan. However, more emphasis and clarity on some qualitative priorities may provide the Administration and staff with a better understanding of the Board’s intent. Clear concise statements particularly in reference to guidance objectives 1 and 4 may help to focus resources on programs and services that adhere with the strategic priorities outlined by the Board. In addition, this document identifies several priorities that assume responsibility for services that go beyond investment in core services and functions essential to maintaining long-term institutional stability. The Board should exercise care to ensure its commitment of priorities do not over extended the resources of the County should economic conditions worsen.

Appointments to County Boards & Commissions

The vacancy in District 7 wasn’t the only appointment discussed at Wednesday’s agenda briefing. Peter Simms, deputy county clerk, told commissioners that notices have been posted for 20 volunteer committees, commissions, boards and advisory groups for the county. Positions are open in these groups [.pdf descriptions of volunteer groups]:

• Accommodations Ordinance Commission
• Agricultural Lands Preservation Advisory Committee
• Area Agency on Aging Executive Board
• Brownfield Redevelopment Authority
• Building Authority
• Citizen’s Advisory Council to the Juvenile Drug Court
• Community Action Board
• Department of Human Services Board
• Emergency Medical Services Commission
• Emergency Telephone District Board
• Environmental Health Code Appeals Board/Public Health Advisory Committee
• Historic District Commission
• Huron River Watershed Council
• Local Emergency Planning Committee
• Natural Areas Technical Advisory Committee
• Parks and Recreation Commission
• Public Works Board
• Washtenaw County/City of Ann Arbor Community Corrections Advisory Board
• Washtenaw County Veterans Affairs Committee
• Workforce Development Board

The deadline for applying is Friday, Oct. 28. The board of commissioners will make appointments at their Dec. 7 meeting, to take effect Jan. 1, 2012.

Applicants for those positions are asked to submit a letter of interest and resumé, including a home address, to Peter Simms, Washtenaw County clerk, P.O. Box 8645, Ann Arbor, MI 48107. Applications can also be made via email to simmsp@ewashtenaw.org, via fax 734-222-6528, or via the county’s online application form.

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

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]

Ann Arbor city administrator Steve Powers talks with Washtenaw County administrator Verna McDaniel before the Oct. 5 meeting of the county board of commissioners. Powers, who started his job in mid-September and was formerly a Marquette County administrator, told the board he looked forward to building more collaborative efforts between the city and county. (Photos by the writer.)

The proposal debated by the board came from the Washtenaw County road commission. Rob Turner (R-District 1) recommended indefinite postponement. He objected to the idea of levying a millage without voter approval – an action that road commissioners believe is possible under a 1909 law. It’s still on the books but that hasn’t been used in decades.

Ultimately, the board voted to postpone action until their Dec. 7 meeting. The next evening – on Thursday, Oct. 6 – they held a working session on the issue.

In other business, the board gave initial approval to a contract with Sylvan Township, related to its bond repayment schedule, which the township is struggling to meet. The county will be tapping its reserves to help the township cover the bond payments, but the deal is contingent on township voters passing a 4.75 mill, 20-year tax that’s on the November 2011 ballot.

The board also took an initial vote to create a new management position and hire Greg Dill into that job – as county infrastructure management director. The job is part of a broader reorganization of county administration, which hasn’t yet been approved by the board.

Accolades were threaded throughout the meeting, as the county handed out its annual Environmental Excellence Awards to several local organizations. Praise was also served up to Lansing lobbyist Kirk Profit for his work on the county’s behalf. That praise included initial approval of a two-year contract renewal for Governmental Consultant Services Inc. – Profit is a director of the Lansing-based firm.

The board also said an official farewell to Kristin Judge, a Democrat from District 7 who resigned her seat, and was attending her last board meeting.

Introduction: Ann Arbor City Administrator

At the start of Wednesday’s meeting, county administrator Verna McDaniel introduced her counterpart at the city of Ann Arbor, Steve Powers, who started the job as city administrator on Sept. 15. Powers told commissioners that it felt good to be back at a county meeting – he’d spent most of his career in county government, including the past 15 years as county administrator in Marquette County.

Powers said that McDaniel, as county administrator, was one of the first people he had wanted to get to know when he came to town. He came from a place where cooperation was a necessity, and it’s clearly a necessity in Washtenaw County too, he said. Powers cited several examples of how cooperation is already taking place between the city of Ann Arbor and the county, including police dispatch operations, the joint office of community & economic development, and natural areas preservation. He said he looked forward to building on those efforts, to better serve citizens and manage the tax dollars entrusted to local government.

Road Repair Millage?

The item on Wednesday’s agenda that received the most discussion related to a county road repair plan – and the potential for a millage to fund it. The idea of a millage was put forward by the Washtenaw County road commission.

The board had initially discussed this issue at its Sept. 8 working session, and it was expected to be on the agenda for the Sept. 20 meeting. But it wasn’t until Sept. 23 that the road commission formally submitted its plan to the county clerk’s office outlining road improvements. The plan was then brought forward as an item of discussion on Oct. 5. However, no resolution related to the topic was proposed, and no member of the road commission attended Wednesday’s meeting.

At issue is how the board should respond to the road commission’s plan. One option would be to levy an 0.6 mill tax, which is now estimated to raise $8.7 million for a raft of road improvement projects countywide. [.pdf of projects list] [.pdf of map showing project locations] Road commissioners believe the millage could be levied under Public Act 283 of 1909. Because that act pre-dates the state’s Headlee Amendment, it could be levied by the board and would not require voter approval.

Wes Prater began the discussion by proposing that the board table the item. It’s important to communicate what’s happening with the road commission, he said, and that discussion needs to take place at a public meeting before the board takes action.

It’s ultimately the county’s responsibility to provide funding for roads, Prater said. Yet it’s been nearly two years since the board met with the road commission to talk about it. The road commission is getting the same amount of state funding as it did in 2000, Prater said. It’s struggling like everyone else, and many county roads and bridges are in bad shape. This needs to be discussed, he concluded.

Alicia Ping observed that the information given to the board was different than what some communities have received. At least one community had been told that all the millage proceeds collected from their community would be spent on projects there, but it turned out that no projects on the final list were located there, she said. [Ping did not specify which municipality she was referring to.]

There’s no question that some county roads need to be fixed, Ping said, but residents should be the ones voting on a millage.

Barbara Bergman said if she’s going to tax citizens and must choose between funding services for the homeless and children, for example, or filling potholes, then the choice was clear to her. She couldn’t support a millage for roads.

Ronnie Peterson separated out two issues: Communication with the road commission, and funding for county roads. The road commission has presented a plan, and now it’s up to the board to decide how to proceed, he said. They should have a dialogue in the public eye, he said. Finding a funding mechanism should come after a report on the condition of the roads, Peterson said.

Board chair Conan Smith said there’d been some back and forth about setting up a meeting with road commissioners, and he apologized for not following up on it. Regardless of the millage issue, the board needs to start working more closely with the road commissioners, he said.

From left: Commissioners Yousef Rabhi (D-District 11) and Rob Turner (R-District 1).

Rob Turner, who serves as the board’s liaison to the road commission, thanked Smith for apologizing. There’s been some miscommunication and misunderstanding, he said. The board needs to make time to meet with the road commissioners, and road commissioners have expressed the desire to do that. The board needs to hear about the conditions of county roads and bridges, and future funding needs.

However, Turner said, since news about the possible millage has spread, he’s heard from people of all walks of life who are very concerned that a millage might be levied without voter approval. There are also split opinions among officials of local townships, he said.

Turner said he supports road repair, but doesn’t support this approach to funding it. He then moved to postpone the road commission’s proposal indefinitely, and to encourage the road commission to work toward funding the projects with a voter-approved millage or millages.

Prater responded by saying Turner was jumping the gun – the board hadn’t yet discussed the proposal with the road commission. Postponing action until a specific date was fine, Prater added, but he didn’t support getting rid of the proposal completely.

Dan Smith agreed that indefinite postponement was premature. He said he had planned to suggest postponing it until the board’s Nov. 2 meeting.

Conan Smith asked a procedural question: Didn’t the board have to vote the proposal up or down? Curtis Hedger, the county’s corporation counsel, replied that this is the first time a county has considered this particular law in roughly 40 years, so in some ways they’re winging it. Hedger’s reading of the law is that after the road improvement plan is presented to the board, commissioners can do whatever they want – approve it, reject it, pick only certain projects out of the list and levy a lower amount to cover the costs of those projects, or find another funding source.

Hedger noted that if the board delays action much longer, the county wouldn’t be able to include the levy on the December tax bills – assuming they wanted to levy the millage this year.

Kristin Judge said she disagreed with Turner. It’s important to address this now, she said. The board is an oversight body for the road commission – the board doesn’t control the road commission’s budget, but it does appoint the road commissioners, she noted. In her last newsletter, Judge said, she conducted a poll about the millage. Even constituents who are generally anti-tax seemed supportive of it, she said. Good roads are key to economic development, but the state isn’t providing sufficient funding. “To me, it’s an infrastructure question,” she said.

She felt the county could push the envelope on this issue. Judge also expressed frustration that the road commissioners hadn’t been scheduled for a meeting with the county board so far. She said she knew the road commissioners had wanted to come, but they hadn’t been put on an agenda – that’s an issue, she said. She would not support indefinite postponement.

Bergman said roads might be the county’s responsibility, but it’s yet another unfunded mandate from the state.

Turner said he appreciated Judge’s comments and he also wants the roads maintained. But this “ancient law” isn’t the way to do it. He felt it would be wrong to bring road commissioners to a meeting if he had no intention of supporting a millage. If the road commission comes with a more viable alternative – that he might vote for – then that’s fine.

Judge countered that it’s important to have this debate in public – and her board colleagues shouldn’t assume that they know the outcome of a vote. They shouldn’t stand in the way of a public debate on an issue of such importance to residents.

Dan Smith asked about procedure – is postponing indefinitely just another way of voting no? Hedger replied that there wasn’t a main motion to vote on. The agenda item had been a discussion point, not a resolution. The county administration didn’t want to presume to know what the board would want to do, he said, “so it’s now in your lap.” The motion to postpone indefinitely would have the effect of killing it, Hedger said. If commissioners vote to do that, the issue could be reconsidered in the future if it’s brought forward by someone on the prevailing side of the vote, he said.

After some additional commentary by Peterson, who supported having a public discussion with the road commission, Prater moved to “call the question” – a procedural move that forces a vote.

Outcome on Turner’s motion to postpone indefinitely: The motion was rejected on a 3-7 vote, with support only from Turner, Barbara Bergman (D-District 8) and Conan Smith (D-District 10). Leah Gunn (D-District 9) was absent.

At that point, Rolland Sizemore Jr. suspended discussion to handle other items on the agenda, including the Environmental Excellence Awards – several people were on hand to accept those awards, and had been waiting while the board conducted other business.

Later in the meeting, when the discussion resumed, Dan Smith moved to postpone the item until the board’s Dec. 7 meeting, and that it be scheduled as the topic of a working session at some point before that date.

Yousef Rabhi, who chairs the board’s working session, said he had tentatively scheduled the road commission for the Oct. 6 working session, pending the outcome of the board’s discussion on Wednesday. His only question about the Dec. 7 date is whether it’s too late for putting a millage on the December tax bill, if that’s what the board decides to do.

Dan Smith said they needed to think through the issue, indicating that they shouldn’t rush to make a decision based on the timing of the tax bill.

Peterson said he wished Dan Smith had made that proposal an hour ago – it would have saved the board some time. And if there’s an intent to kill the proposal on Dec. 7, that should be stated, he said. It’s just a report, he said, and the board needs to deal with it.

Sizemore expressed some reluctance to hold the working session so soon. He said he wanted to get some documents under the Freedom of Information Act before meeting with the road commission.

At that, Prater called the question.

Outcome: The motion to postpone the road commission proposal until Dec. 7 passed on a 9-1 vote, with dissent from Alicia Ping (R-District 3). Leah Gunn (D-District 9) was absent.

Later in the meeting, Sizemore urged anyone who was watching the meeting to contact the road commission and give them input. He provided the web address and phone number: www.wcroads.org and 734-761-1500.

The topic was on the agenda for the Oct. 6 working session, which was attended by road commissioner Ken Schwartz and Roy Townsend, the road commission’s director of engineering.

Sylvan Township Bond Repayment Contract

At Wednesday’s meeting, commissioners were asked to give initial approval to a contract with Sylvan Township related to the township’s bond repayment schedule. The township has been struggling to make payments on $12.5 million in bonds issued in 2001 to build a water and wastewater treatment plant intended to serve future development. The township expected that connection fees would cover payments for the bond, which is backed by the county’s full faith and credit. But the development never materialized. [More extensive background on the situation is provided in a staff memo that was part of the board's packet of material for the Oct. 3 meeting.]

Sylvan Township – located west of Ann Arbor, near Chelsea – is now facing default on its bond payment in May 2012, which the county will need to cover. The township board voted to put a proposal for a 4.75 mill, 20-year tax on the November 2011 ballot for township residents, with proceeds to pay a portion of the bond payments.

The millage proceeds alone would not be sufficient to cover the entire cost of the bond payments, and the county would need to tap its own capital reserves to cover the remaining amount. After the entire bond is repaid, the millage proceeds would continue to be used to repay the county to cover the amount used from its capital reserves, as well as interest. The millage proceeds would also be used to repay the county treasurer’s office, which advanced about $1.2 million to the township in 2007 and 2008 related to this project.

The contract between the county and township is contingent on voters passing the 4.75 mill tax. If the millage fails and the township defaults, the county could file suit against the township for breach of contract in failing to meet its debt repayment obligation, according to a staff memo. The county would also need to make the bond payments, to avoid having its bond rating negatively affected.

Sylvan Township Bond Repayment Contract: Commissioner Discussion

This issue has been discussed several times over the past year, most recently in a report by commissioner Rob Turner at the board’s Sept. 7, 2011 meeting. Turner represents District 1 on the county’s west side, which includes Sylvan Township.

At Wednesday’s meeting, Yousef Rabhi asked how much the county would be paying on an annual basis. Curtis Hedger, the county’s corporation counsel, pointed Rabhi to supplemental materials provided at the meeting, which laid out the repayment schedule. Sylvan Township’s portion of the bon payments – using millage proceeds – start at $853,860 in 2012, with the county contributing $118,498. The estimates for county payments vary, reaching a high $262,414 in 2023. The bond will be repaid in 2026. For five years after that, all millage proceeds will be paid directly to the county, to repay the county’s contribution from previous years.

Hedger said the estimates for millage proceeds were calculated for the worst-case scenario – that is, for zero percent growth in property value.

Outcome: Commissioners unanimously gave initial approval to the contract with Sylvan Township, contingent on township residents passing a 20-year, 4.75 mill tax in November. A final vote on the resolution is expected at the board’s Oct. 19 meeting.

Contract Renewal for Lansing Lobbyist

Commissioners were asked to give initial approval to renew a two-year contract with Governmental Consultant Services Inc., a Lansing-based lobbying firm. The contract would run from  Nov. 1, 2011 through Oct. 31, 2013 at $54,250 per year. That’s the same rate that the county currently pays, and is already built into the proposed 2012-2013 budget. [.pdf of draft contract]

GCSI lobbyist Kirk Profit attended Wednesday’s meeting. He and his colleagues most recently gave a formal update to the board at their March 2, 2011 meeting. GCSI provides lobbying services at the state level for several local units of government, including the city of Ann Arbor.

County administrator Verna McDaniel noted that commissioners had been given a list of issues that GCSI had worked on for the county, and said that GCSI staff have been very helpful and responsive. From the staff memo recommending GCSI’s contract renewal:

GCSI has, on numerous occasions, been able to cut through the red tape and arrange for County officials to meet with various hard to reach members of State government. In addition, GCSI has on many occasions advocated the County’s position on pending legislation with key State lawmakers. GCSI also keeps the Board of Commissioners and key County Administrative personnel periodically apprised of developing legislation that could positively or adversely affect County government. This early notification permits the County to develop a strategy to either promote or oppose the proposed legislation.

Contract Renewal for Lansing Lobbyist: Commissioner Discussion

Several commissioners praised GCSI and Profit specifically. Conan Smith said Profit has done yeoman’s work over the last year, on issues ranging from state revenue-sharing to 80/20 legislation [requiring public employees to pay 20% of their health care costs, effective Jan. 1, 2012, or to cap the amount that local governments would pay as premiums for employees] to threats against Act 88, which allows the county to levy an economic development millage without voter approval. Smith hoped Profit would be able to bring even more benefits to the county in future years.

Kirk Profit, a director with Governmental Consultant Services Inc., a Lansing lobbying firm, attended the Oct. 3 county board meeting. Commissioners gave initial approval to renew GCSI's contract with the county.

Barbara Bergman recalled that when this contract first came up for consideration years ago, she questioned whether the county would get any value out of it. “That was not the smartest question I ever asked,” she said.

Kristin Judge also thanked Profit, and said she hoped someday the county would consider hiring a lobbyist at the federal level, too. She was especially grateful for his work in helping secure funding for an improvement project at Lakeside Park on Ford Lake, which included building a new boathouse.

Wes Prater quipped that with all the praise Profit was getting, he must not actually be on the payroll. Profit replied that GCSI appreciated the compensation provided by the county. Prater added that Profit has always been a hard worker, now and when Profit had been a state legislator.

Conan Smith noted that Profit also has worked on behalf of the county parks & recreation department. He asked for an update on pending state grants for parks-related projects.

Profit began by praising parks & rec staff and its director Bob Tetens, crediting them for pushing for collaborative efforts that have been funded in the past. That included the $500,000 in state funding received for the Ford Lake project, in partnership with Eastern Michigan University.

This year, Profit said, even though there’s not a lot of money coming out of the state, Washtenaw County is again well-positioned to receive funding from the state Dept. of Natural Resources trust fund. He said that state Sen. Rebekah Warren (D-District 18) – who is married to Conan Smith – and state Rep. David Rutledge (D-District 54) have been helpful, as have DNR staff. Profit noted that Gary Owen, DNR’s legislative liaison, grew up in this area.

He mentioned that the $300,000 requested from the DNR trust fund for the proposed Ann Arbor skatepark scored well, and now they’re working with the trust fund board to ensure that the full amount gets awarded. [The county parks & recreation commission approved $400,000 in matching funds for the skatepark, which is proposed for city-owned land at Veterans Memorial Park in Ann Arbor. The $300,000 state grant would be counted toward meeting that match.]

Profit also cited collaboration between the city of Ypsilanti and the county parks & rec department on a $300,000 DNR grant for Rutherford Pool, calling it a recreational opportunity in an urban setting that’s unmatched in this region. He praised the collaborative efforts of the county, and thanked commissioners for their support.

Outcome: Commissioners unanimously gave initial approval to the GCSI contract renewal. A final vote is expected at their Oct. 19 meeting.

Infrastructure Manager

On the agenda was a resolution to authorize hiring Greg Dill to the new position of county infrastructure management director, with a salary of $116,758. The resolution also approved the creation of that post, with responsibility for information systems and technology, as well as management of the county’s buildings and other facilities. Some of those duties were previously assigned to the county’s information & technology manager, a position that was eliminated following the departure of James McFarlane earlier this year.

Dill has been director of administrative operations for the sheriff’s office, but previously worked for five years in facilities management for the county. Dill attended Wednesday’s meeting but was not asked to address the board formally.

The creation of this new job and Dill’s appointment to it were originally on the agenda for the board’s Sept. 21, 2011 meeting. However, that item and a proposed reorganization of county administration were pulled from the agenda at that meeting. The reorganization would have replaced the deputy administrator position by giving additional responsibilities to four managers, including Dill, paying them annual stipends of $15,000 each in addition to their salaries. Some commissioners had concerns over the stipend, and the proposed reorganization has not yet been reintroduced.

Infrastructure Manager: Commissioner Discussion

Wes Prater asked whether the job description could be altered after board approval. County administrator Verna McDaniel said it’s quite easy to do that and it can be handled administratively, as long as they’re not changing the salary rate.

Rolland Sizemore Jr. said he had a problem with the way salaries are presented for new positions. There’s often just a range given, he said, but it would be better to have the exact amount. He asked that staff provide information over the past two years indicating the salary ranges that the board has approved for new hires, and the actual salary that’s been set for those jobs. It might be time to tighten up what the county pays, he said.

Outcome: Commissioners unanimously gave initial approval to create the position of infrastructure manager and hire Greg Dill for that job. A final vote is expected on Oct. 19.

Appointment to Natural Areas Advisory Group

On the agenda was a resolution appointing Catherine Riseng to the natural areas technical advisory committee (NATAC), which advises the county parks & recreation commission regarding its natural areas preservation program (NAPP). Her appointment was recommended by the county parks & recreation commission, to fill a seat previously held by Mike Wiley. She’ll serve the remainder of a two-year term, which expires on Dec. 31, 2012.

Riseng is an aquatic ecologist researcher at the University of Michigan’s School of Natural Resources and Environment. She also is vice chair of the city of Ann Arbor’s greenbelt advisory commission. [.pdf of Riseng's cover letter and resume] Other NATAC members include: Rane Curl, Bob Grese, David Lutton, Tony Reznicek, John Russell, and Sylvia Taylor.

NAPP is funded by a 10-year countywide millage that was first approved by voters in 2000 and renewed in 2010 at 0.2409 mills.

Outcome: Without discussion, commissioners unanimously approved the appointment of Catherine Riseng to NATAC.

Environmental Excellence Awards

At Wednesday’s meeting, commissioners passed a resolution honoring winners of the county’s 2011 Environmental Excellence awards, now in its 14th year. The awards were handed out to representatives of the winning organizations by Steve Manville of the county’s environmental health department, and Janis Bobrin, water resources commissioner.

The overall Environmental Excellence Award went to the Chrysler Group LLC for the Chrysler Proving Grounds in Chelsea, in recognition of its waste reduction and recycling program, its model stormwater and erosion control system involving native plants, and its efforts to keep toxic materials out of the waste stream.

The Washtenaw County Parks & Recreation Commission was given the Excellence in Water Quality Protection Award for its innovative stormwater management, use of native plants in landscaping, and pollution prevention. An honorable mention in this category was awarded to Horiba Instruments Inc.

The Leslie Science and Nature Center of Ann Arbor received the Excellence in Waste Reduction and Recycling Award for its extensive recycling program, purchasing of recycled products, and educating the public in waste reduction and conservation ethics. And ITC Holdings Inc. of Ann Arbor received the Excellence in Pollution Prevention Award for reducing the use of toxic substances and preventing pollution before it is produced.

After the presentation, several commissioners praised the winners. Yousef Rabhi said environmental quality is important, and it’s important to have local institutions like these at the forefront of environmental protection. He noted that during the presentation he’d received a text message from his girlfriend, Christine Muscat, an environmental compliance analyst with Con-way Freight in Ann Arbor. She was teasing Rabhi about the fact that her employer’s environmental efforts hadn’t been mentioned. Rabhi gave Conway and his girlfriend a shout-out for their work.

Conan Smith said that places that take care of the environment attract the best talent. It’s part of Washtenaw County’s culture, he said, telling the organizations that “you’re really the models of the future of our economy.”

Smith and other commissioners also thanked Bobrin and her staff for their efforts in environmental protection, praising the innovative approach they took to the work.

Ann Arbor Drain Projects

Drain projects in Ann Arbor – including two related to the East Stadium bridge reconstruction project – were given initial approval by commissioners at Wednesday’s meeting.

The county water resources commissioner’s office was asked by the city of Ann Arbor to design and build stormwater control measures for the bridges along Stadium Boulevard between Kipke and South Industrial, according to a staff memo. The Allen Creek East Stadium bridges drain project and the Malletts Creek East Stadium bridges drain project will require in total no more than $415,000 for bonds issued with the county’s full faith and credit. The bonds will be repaid through special assessments on property in the drain district for this project.

Separately, county commissioners gave initial approval to an Allen Creek drain project in Ann Arbor. The project involves installing an underground infiltration system on the west side of the Veterans Park Ice Arena and putting in a rain garden near the entrance of the ice arena on the east side of the building. Rain gardens will also be installed next to Fire Station #3 at 2130 Jackson Ave., and trees will be planted in the city right-of-way throughout neighborhoods on the city’s west side.

The Allen Creek project had been previously approved by the board at its July 2011 meeting, as one of several drain projects authorized at that time. The overall cost of the projects approved then is now expected to be $1.45 million less than originally estimated. However, the $330,000 approved for the Allen Creek project turned out to be an underestimate – that project is now expected to cost up to an additional $65,000. That $65,000 – covered by bonds issued with the county’s full faith and credit – was the amount commissioners were asked to approve at Wednesday’s meeting.

Outcome: Commissioners unanimously approved the drain projects on an initial vote. A final vote is expected on Oct. 19.

Farewell to Kristin Judge

It’s the board’s custom to award a resolution of appreciation to commissioners when they leave the board. On Wednesday, Kristin Judge, a Democrat who represents District 7, received such a resolution. It was her last regular board meeting before her resignation, which took effect on Oct. 9. She announced her decision to step down on Sept. 30, citing potential conflicts with a job she recently accepted with the Multi-State Information Sharing and Analysis Center (MS-ISAC).

After receiving a framed copy of the resolution, Judge got a standing ovation from her board colleagues and staff, and several commissioners praised her work on the board. Conan Smith (D-District 10) described her as a “force of nature,” while Rob Turner (R-District 1) cited her energy, passion, and compassion. Ronnie Peterson (D-District 6) called Judge ”an outstanding public servant – and I have not said that about many people in my career.”

From left: Commissioners Ronnie Peterson, Conan Smith, Kristin Judge, Wes Prater.

Saying there were too many people to thank individually, Judge said she’s loved every minute of her time on the board. [She was first elected in 2008, then re-elected in 2010.] One of her goals, she said, has been to make people understand that government really works, and that most people in government are good. In her new job she’ll work with local and state governments nationwide, she said, helping address online security threats.

Much of Judge’s recent work has been related to cyber-security issues. She led the formation of the Washtenaw County Cyber Citizenship Coalition, and organized the Oct. 7 Michigan Cyber Summit, a day-long event that served as the kickoff for National Cyber Security Awareness Month. Keynote speakers included Janet Napolitano, secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder. In conjunction with that event, at Wednesday’s meeting the board also passed a resolution declaring October as cyber security awareness month in Washtenaw County.

The county has announced the process for filling the vacant District 7 seat, which will be an appointment made by the board of commissioners. The deadline to apply is Wednesday, Oct. 12 at 5 p.m., and the board is expected to make a decision at its Oct. 19 meeting.

The board must make an appointment within 30 days of a resignation, for a commissioner to serve until special elections are held. There will be a Feb. 28, 2012 primary for that seat, followed by a May 2012 special general election. The winner of that election would serve a truncated term for the current District 7, through 2012. Redistricting of the county board that takes effect in 2013 will reduce the number of districts in the county from 11 to 9 – candidates for the new districts will compete in an Aug. 7 primary and November general election.

Upcoming Working Sessions

The topic of working sessions emerged at several points during Wednesday’s meeting.

After the discussion about a potential road repair millage, Rolland Sizemore Jr. told his fellow commissioners that he wanted to schedule a working session to discuss all possible millages that might be coming in the future. He said he’s heard rumors that some commissioners want to see a countywide millage to fund human services. There’s also the likelihood that a countywide transportation millage might be floated. Why not put them all on the table to get a better overall sense of what’s happening? he said.

Ronnie Peterson said he hoped that the road repair millage would be the topic of a working session, before other possible millages get discussed. Sizemore noted that a working session on the road millage was set for the following evening.

Later in the meeting, Yousef Rabhi – who as chair of the working sessions sets those agendas – reported that the Oct. 6 working session would include the possible road millage, as well as an update on bond ratings and the county’s fiscal scorecard. A special budget-related working session will be held on Thursday, Oct. 13, he said. Topics will include an update on the community’s food and housing needs, and a discussion of the proposed 2012-2013 budget for nonprofit and other outside agency funding.

Peterson questioned why commissioners needed an update on food and housing needs. They should focus on budget items, he said. Rabhi indicated that the update, which had been requested by Barbara Bergman, would be brief.

Conan Smith observed that the community’s food and housing needs provide a context for making budget decisions, particularly for funding nonprofits that provide food and housing services.

Peterson again expressed concern, saying he hoped the working sessions weren’t going to be stacked with non-budget items. If so, he wouldn’t attend. The budget for funding outside agencies is over $1 million, he noted. They had a lot to discuss, and commissioners shouldn’t be burnt out on other topics before they get the chance to address the budget. The budget is their biggest responsibility, he said. [Earlier in the meeting, the board had voted to postpone the agenda item on a discussion of the budget until their Oct. 19 meeting.]

Bergman said she certainly wanted a complete discussion about outside agency funding, but she agreed with Conan Smith – the update on food and housing would provide context.

Rabhi then highlighted topics for other upcoming working sessions, noting that topics reflect items that commissioners had previously expressed interest in. On Thursday, Oct. 20, the board will hear from Pat Horne McGee, director of Washtenaw Head Start. [The county administration has proposed relinquishing support for the program, and previously reviewed that option at a July 21, 2011 working session.] Other topics for Oct. 20 include professional services contracts and the county’s Voluntary Employee Benefits Association (VEBA) trust. A Nov. 3 working session will focus on the 2012-2013 budget.

Public Commentary: Salem Twp. Historic District

The only speaker during the four opportunities for public commentary was Terry Cwik, president of the Salem Area Historical Society. He said the topic he wanted to address – creation of an historic district for Jarvis Stone School, the Dickerson Barn and associated property – wasn’t on the agenda that night. It would likely come up at the board’s Oct. 19 meeting, but he couldn’t attend then. The school is owned by the historical society, he said, and a study committee has been working on a proposal for the board to review.

Cwik said the one-room schoolhouse on North Territorial was built in 1857 and in continuous use until 1967. The historical society now uses the school as its headquarters, he said. The site is a worthy candidate for designation as an historic district, he said, and would be the second one in Salem Township. [The current historical district is Conant Farm on Napier Road.]

Kristin Judge said she’d been to the school, and called it a gem in the community. Conan Smith expressed confidence that the historic district designation would eventually be approved, and noted that it was located just a couple of miles from where he’d grown up. He also joked that it was special because commissioners Barbara Bergman and Wes Prater had been part of the school’s first graduating class. Prater pointed out that Smith was incorrect: “It was the second,” Prater quipped.

Present: Barbara Levin Bergman, Kristin Judge, Ronnie Peterson, Alicia Ping, Wes Prater, Yousef Rabhi, Rolland Sizemore Jr., Dan Smith, Conan Smith, and Rob Turner.

Absent: Leah Gunn.

Next regular board meeting: Wednesday, Oct. 19, 2011 at 6:30 p.m. at the county administration building, 220 N. Main St. in Ann Arbor. The Ways & Means Committee meets first, followed immediately by the regular board meeting. [confirm date] (Though the agenda states that the regular board meeting begins at 6:45 p.m., it usually starts much later – times vary depending on what’s on the agenda.) Public comment sessions are held at the beginning and end of each meeting.

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