Audio tape recording of the Feb. 17, 2009 Ann Arbor city council meeting – even though the Community Television Network video has gone missing, it's still possible to review what was said at the meeting. The Ann Arbor city clerk's office makes audio recordings of council meetings to ensure the accuracy of minutes. (Photo illustration by The Chronicle.)

For its proceedings, the Ann Arbor city council does not have a video replay rule.

But if it did, here’s the kind of play that might be reviewable: Did a city council-appointed board receive advice from the city’s financial quarterback in a way that, under ordinary rules of plain American English discourse, constitutes a recommendation that should be carried forward in a future board policy?

At issue is whether two seasons ago, back in February 2009, city of Ann Arbor CFO Tom Crawford recommended to the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority that the DDA have a policy to maintain a minimum fund balance as a reserve, and specifically, whether a minimum reserve amount was specified.

The question was important over the last two years in the course of negotiations between the DDA and the city about the contract under which the DDA manages Ann Arbor’s public parking system.

The remarks made by Crawford – which everyone seems to recall (albeit differently) – took place in plain view on the public field of play, at the Feb. 17, 2009 city council meeting.

What made the public conversation remarkable in the waning stages of contract negotiations, was that it was based on what the different players (including Crawford) recalled Crawford saying. Why not just take an approach familiar to the Big Ten college football conference, and review the tape to find out exactly what Crawford said?

That’s the approach The Chronicle took – even though we’d previously reported Crawford’s remarks from the Feb. 17, 2009 council meeting in paraphrase form, and our paraphrase was consistent with the recollection of DDA board members.

In April 2011, we learned that the video recording of the meeting, which originally aired on Community Television Network (CTN), no longer exists. [For a broader look at CTN, see "CTN: What's Our Vision for Local Television?"]

However, we were able eventually to follow up with a request made to the city under the Freedom of Information Act and obtain an audio recording of the meeting made by the city clerk’s office.

If I were asked as a head official to review the play, then in the parlance of the Big Ten, I think there’s indisputable audio evidence that in his remarks, Crawford passed a recommendation along to the DDA to implement at least a 15% minimum fund balance reserve policy.

I am not, of course, a head official.

Nevertheless, it’s worth laying out exactly what Crawford did say at that 2009 meeting just for the historical record. First, a bit of pre-game coverage in the form of some additional context.

Context for Caring About Fund Balances

The most recent context for the DDA’s concerns over its fund balances involved negotiations with the city of Ann Arbor about the contract under which the DDA manages the city’s public parking system. In May 2011, after two years of negotiating, the city and the DDA struck an 11-year deal, with an 11-year renewal option, under which the city would receive a 17% cut of gross revenues from the public parking system.

The DDA’s position during contract negotiations was essentially this: We would love to accommodate the city’s desire to receive as high a percentage of gross public parking revenue as possible; however, we can’t manage it, because our fund balance would fall too far below the level recommended by the city’s own chief financial officer.

DDA board members were relying on their recollection that CFO Tom Crawford had recommended, in February 2009, that the DDA enact a financial policy under which the DDA would maintain at least 15% of operating expenses (or perhaps more) in its fund balance as a reserve amount. The context of Crawford’s remarks on the evening of Feb. 17, 2009 was a city council decision on the issuance of bonds to build the Fifth Avenue underground parking structure.

The original site plan for the project, which the DDA is managing, included extending the deck under Fifth Avenue down to William Street. The idea was that an underground connection to any future development on the former YMCA lot – at the northwest corner of Fifth and William – would be a benefit. But at their Feb. 17, 2009 meeting, city councilmembers followed Crawford’s advice and voted to eliminate the extension of the garage down to Fifth Avenue.

Just as a side note, it’s possible to imagine that the city council might eventually decide, after construction of the underground garage is complete, that it’s still worth creating an underground connection from the garage to the west side of Fifth Avenue. That decision would not need to be based on speculation about future development on the former Y lot, which is now owned by the city. Rather, such a decision could instead be driven by the fact that the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority is planning to move its Blake Transit Center from the Fourth Avenue side to the Fifth Avenue side of the lot. It could make sense to eventually connect a newly situated BTC to the underground parking structure.

If that happens, I hope councilmember Carsten Hohnke – who currently represents Ward 5, where Jerusalem Garden restaurant owner Ali Ramlawi lives – delivers that news to Ramlawi: The business, located near the corner of Liberty and Fifth, would enjoy several more months of disruption as Fifth Avenue is broken up again.

Verbatim Quotation from Feb. 17, 2009

It would be fitting for Hohnke to deliver that news, because it was Hohnke who provided the prompt for Crawford’s remarks that led to the downsizing of the project.

Carsten Hohnke: … Mr. Crawford to speak to us, in particular I’d like to ask, from your extensive review of the 10-year plan for the DDA, if we look at the site plan as currently proposed, extending down to underneath Fifth Ave. to William Street, what is your assessment of the financial impact on the DDA, together with the other projects that are in its pipeline?

Mayor John Hieftje: Everyone may not be aware that Mr. Crawford is the city’s chief financial officer.

Tom Crawford: Thanks. I spent some time with the DDA and reviewed their financial projections and you know one of the things I noticed was that they don’t have a target or minimum reserve policy.  So, as I looked at it, I use a minimum reserve of 15 to 20 percent, and as I looked at this project and everything else on their plate, I don’t, in my view, the project as proposed is not affordable, with the plans that they have. So I think that there are alternatives that are more affordable, but as proposed, I did not find it to be affordable. [.mp3 file of 90-minute chunk of the Feb. 17, 2009 city council meeting. The audio cassette tape was converted to digital format by Russell Video.]

Was That a Completed Forward Pass?

Based on the exact words uttered by Crawford and the context in which they were uttered, I think it’s both reasonable and correct for the members of the DDA staff and the board to have received Crawford’s comments as (1) a recommendation that they should have a minimum reserve fund balance policy, and that (2) the level of that minimum reserve should be 15-20%.

It’s true that Crawford did not say, “Tonight here before you in front of everyone on live TV, I am hereby recommending that the DDA establish a minimum reserve policy at a level of 15% of operating expenses.”

However, when the city’s chief financial officer highlights the absence of a minimum reserve policy at a public meeting, I think it’s impossible for the DDA not to take that as a recommendation to establish such a policy. Further, when the chief financial officer specifically calls out a 15-20% minimum reserve level as the metric used for concluding that a planned expenditure was “unaffordable,” then it’s also difficult for the DDA to establish some minimum reserve level lower than 15%.

Based on the actual text of Crawford’s remarks, I think it’s clear enough that the DDA’s understanding here was correct. In a mathematics textbook, this is the point where the author would write, “The proof is left to the reader.”

But if this were football, not math, then we would need to add the extra point. So consider a different scenario, which I contend is perfectly analogous: A wide-receiver asks the strength and conditioning coach to evaluate his training plan.

Suppose the coach says: “One of the things I noticed in reviewing your training plan was that you don’t have minimum target heart rates for any of these training activities. To get a target heart rate, I take an athlete’s resting heart rate and add 15-20% to it, and based on your current resting heart rate, I don’t think you have the cardiovascular fitness to complete all these training miles. If you reduced the miles you’re running by eliminating this extra loop down Fifth Avenue, your training plan would be more achievable.”

I think it’s difficult for the football player not to understand those remarks as a recommendation to establish a minimum target heart rate for training exercise – by adding 15-20% to his resting heart rate and monitoring his own performance in that way.

Recollections Versus Replay

What was frustrating to me as I watched the conversation between the city and the DDA unfold earlier this year was not so much the fact of the “completed forward pass,” which I already knew to be true based on The Chronicle’s reporting.

What I found frustrating was the lack of willingness on the part of any public official to insist that the conversation be based on fact, and not on someone’s recollection.

I first noticed this reliance on recollection during a meeting between the city council and the DDA’s mutually beneficial committees, when public services area administrator Sue McCormick reported that Crawford’s recollection of his remarks was different from the DDA’s.

At the council’s April 19 meeting, when pressed by councilmember Sandi Smith (Ward 1), who’s also a DDA board member, Crawford himself stated his recollection was different:

Smith also asked Crawford to reconcile his statements made around the time the city council was authorizing bonds for the DDA to build the South Fifth Avenue underground parking garage (now under construction) – statements to the effect that a fund balance of 12-15% or perhaps 15-18% would be appropriate. She asked him point blank what the difference was between then and now: What has changed?

Crawford began by saying that he didn’t recall giving the DDA a minimum fund balance that they needed to have.

Note that Smith’s recollection here is also not perfect. Mayor John Hieftje contributed to the murkiness of the conversation at a special DDA board meeting held on May 20, 2011, which The Chronicle reported this way: “[Hieftje] contended that Crawford remembered his remarks about fund balances a little differently from what [Sandi] Smith had portrayed.”

Then at the council’s June 20 meeting, Crawford – in an exchange with Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) – said that he did recall a conversation with the DDA in which he suggested that some kind of minimum fund balance policy should be adopted: “Crawford said he did recall suggesting the DDA adopt a fund balance policy around the time when the underground parking garage was being discussed.” In that exchange with Kunselman, Crawford did not address the issue of whether he’d recommended a level to set the minimum fund balance.

It’s fine to have a different or an incomplete recollection. But there’s no need for our elected and appointed leaders to rely on recollection when a replay is available. Certainly the folks who play football in Michigan Stadium understand as much.

In closing, here’s a transcription from a speech given in Michigan Stadium a couple of years ago, not about football [emphasis added]:

But if we choose to actively seek out information that challenges our assumptions and our beliefs, perhaps we can begin to understand where the people who disagree with us are coming from. Now this requires us to agree on a certain set of facts to debate from. That’s why we need a vibrant and thriving news business that is separate from opinion makers and the talking heads. [applause ~5 seconds] That’s why we need an educated citizenry that values hard evidence and not just assertion. [applause ~5 seconds] As Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan famously once said, “Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.” [audience laughter]

Yes, President Barack Obama got a laugh from the commencement crowd that year. But when we can’t consistently get this right, even on a local level, it’s really not all that funny.

About the writer: Dave Askins is editor and co-founder of The Ann Arbor Chronicle. The Chronicle could not survive without regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of local government and civic affairs. 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!

Chronicle file photo from September 2010 of the control room adjoining the CTN television studio, located on South Industrial Highway. On the screens are images from a local League of Women Voters city council candidate forum.

The Chronicle subsequently obtained an audio cassette recording of the Feb. 17 meeting made by the city clerk.

In relevant part, we report the contents of that city council cassette tape in a separate article. For this article, we take a view of CTN as an organization that’s broader than a missing DVD. But we still begin with a city council meeting.

In May 2009, former cable communications commissioner Paul Bancel addressed the city council during the time allotted for public commentary. He suggested that when councilmembers looked at the city budget, they’d see a $1.5 million allocation to community television. “It’s up to you to make it relevant,” he said.

Is it relevant? For 38 years, Community Television Network has served Ann Arbor. “There will always be cable providers or video providers,” said CTN manager Ralph Salmeron in a recent Chronicle interview.

But how does CTN fit within that media and communications landscape?

CTN’s Beginnings

In October 1973, Ann Arbor began broadcasting community television. After fighting for the creation of “public access television,” a group of local activists began running one public access channel – Channel 6. It would not be called “community television” until years later. They initially set up shop at 403 S. Fifth Ave., but by 1974 had moved to the Old Union Hall, located at 208 W. Liberty. The operation was known as Ann Arbor Public Access.

In February 1978, five years after public access television began broadcasting, the city of Ann Arbor took over the control of Ann Arbor Public Access. The city’s relationship with public access television, and the monetary support that followed through franchise fees, was not finalized until the start of 1980. By then, the name had been formally changed to the Community Television Network (CTN).

By the time current manager of CTN Ralph Salmeron took that position with the organization in 1989, CTN had expanded to include three channels – one each devoted to public, educational, and municipal programing. CTN continued to receive federal funding and franchise fees.

In reflecting on the network’s initial years, Salmeron observed in conversation with The Chronicle, “The roots of the organization are as a public access center … [A] center that makes training and resources available to citizens of Ann Arbor.”

The necessary connection between public benefit and cable companies’ use of the public resources is reflected in Ann Arbor’s city ordinance on cable communications and franchise fees (Chapter 32 of the city code). From the city code [emphasis added]:

Chapter 32, 2:100
The city council finds that the further development of cable communications may result in great benefits for the people of the city. Cable technology is rapidly changing, and cable plays an essential role as part of the city’s basic infrastructure. Cable television systems permanently occupy and extensively make use of scarce and valuable public rights-of-way, in a manner different from the way in which the general public uses them. The city council finds that public convenience, safety, and general welfare can best be served by establishing regulatory powers vested in the city to protect the public and to ensure that any franchise granted is operated in the public interest.

Part of operating a cable franchise in the public interest means providing “access channels”:

Chapter 32, 2:101
(1) “Access channel” means any channel on a cable system set aside by a grantee for public, educational, or governmental (“PEG”) use.

Of the different purposes for access channels, it’s public use that was CTN’s initial focus. “That’s our legacy,” says Salmeron, “and that’s where initially probably 75% of our resources went.” Now, CTN’s resources are divided across four cable channels:

• Channel 16 – GovTV (government meetings)
• Channel 17 – A2TV (public access)
• Channel 18 – EduTV (educational, informational)
• Channel 19 – CitiTV (original local programming)

The public access channel, A2TV, gets roughly one-quarter of CTN’s resources, Salmeron estimates – there’s a roughly even distribution across the four channels. Compared to the 75% of resources devoted to public access in the early days, it’s clear that CTN’s priorities have evolved in the last 30 years.

The Financial Picture

In reflecting on the value of CTN to Ann Arbor, one way to frame the question is in terms of dollars and cents. How much does Ann Arbor invest in CTN? The short answer this year is about $1.8 million – it’s increased in the two years since Paul Bancel addressed the city council.

Where does that $1.8 million come from? Cable franchise fees constitute CTN’s only significant source of funding. Cable operators (in Ann Arbor, it’s Comcast) pay to the city 5% of their yearly gross revenue from operations within Ann Arbor. And by city ordinance, the franchise fee goes directly into funding the activities for which CTN is responsible.

Chapter 32, 2:111
(7) The franchise fee revenues received by the city shall be directed to the cost of franchise administration, operation of PEG access television, and communications and media operations of the City.

That has more or less insulated CTN from discussion during the city council’s yearly budget talks, even during budget retreats in recent years when councilmembers have been encouraged by city staff to put everything on the table. CTN’s funding will be stable unless cable franchise fees were to be eliminated by the state legislature, or the city ordinance were changed to direct franchise fee revenues in some other way.

The percentage breakdown of the roughly $1.8 million in expenses varies from year to year. But staff compensation, like most city departments, consistently makes up the biggest single category of the CTN budget. Of the $1,843,116 in the current 2012 fiscal year CTN budget, $1,020,426 is for employee compensation. [.pdf of FY 2012 budget book for city administrator service area ] [.pdf of detailed CTN expenses]

The CTN budget funds the city communications manager, half the salary of the city’s communications unit manager, the CTN manager, two CTN assistant managers, three producers, two programmers and two training/facility coordinators for a total of 11.5 positions.

Given the technology- and hardware-based nature of operating a cable television network, equipment costs might be expected to be a large part of the budget. But compared to employee costs, equipment costs for CTN are not nearly as great.

In two out of the last three years, CTN has spent around $100,000 on equipment – in the other year, equipment expenses dipped to around $40,000. But the 2012 budget includes $326,616 for equipment, with almost $200,000 projected for FY 2013. The increase is due to additional capital outlays required to convert equipment to digital format.

The city of Ann Arbor leases space for the CTN offices on South Industrial Highway. It’s a 10-year lease, which began in 2008, with an annual cost of around $100,000.

CTN’s Current Programming

What kind of programming will $1.8 million support?

Part of Ralph Salmeron’s vision of the network is this: “What we try to bring to Ann Arbor is very much a local flavor. If we’re covering a story for our news magazine, it has to have some depiction of the community and some importance to the community.”

The news magazine Salmeron means is For Your Information (FYI), which airs on CitiTV, Channel 19. This past February, CTN aired the 500th edition of the show. A recent edition of FYI included segments on a theatre production in West Park, Ypsilanti’s Heritage Festival, and breastfeeding awareness month. Other Channel 19 programs include Ward Talk (interviews with city council members) and Conversations (interviews by Jim Blow with public figures). Recent programs aired on CTN’s Channel 19 are available online.

In seeking that local flavor on other channels, CTN fulfills two very separate functions.

The first coincides with the network’s history as a public access center. Channel 17, the public access channel, provides a venue for citizens. As Salmeron notes, “[A]ny citizen can step up and comment … [L]iterally, our programs are a soap box to get themselves heard.” One example of that is the CTN-produced Access Soapbox on Channel 17, a program that allows Ann Arbor residents to get in front of a camera and say their piece by expressing an opinion, announcing events, or raising any issues they think should be of concern for other Ann Arbor residents.

An example of a regular program airing on Channel 17 that is not produced by CTN staff is Other Perspectives, a public affairs interview show hosted by Ann Arbor resident Nancy Kaplan.

While it receives just one-quarter of CTN’s resources, a commitment to public access remains an integral part of CTN’s mission. That’s reflected in part by a recent effort to create a kind of online clearinghouse for video material related to Ann Arbor with a CTN Miro Community. In addition to hosting Channel 17′s public access material online, the Miro Community provides a way for Ann Arborites to add videos they’ve already uploaded to other online platforms – like YouTube, Vimeo, Blip.TV or Google Video – to CTN’s clearinghouse. Searches of those platforms for videos described with the term “Ann Arbor” currently return more than 10,000 results.

A second function of CTN’s other channels is described by Salmeron as “providing that window of transparency for government.”

Salmeron notes the growth of CTN’s meeting coverage on Channel 16 – a channel that began by airing only eight or so monthly meetings has grown to cover regularly 15 or 16 monthly meetings, Salmeron says. That works out to upwards of 210-220 live meetings a year, he estimates.

Over the last two years, the boards of the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority and the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority have begun videotaping their meetings and making the recordings available through CTN’s online video on demand service. Earlier this year, the board of the Ann Arbor District Library considered, but ultimately rejected a proposal to videotape its meetings.

The Future of CTN

What if sometime in the future, a resident wants to review one of those government meetings that was previously broadcast live? And more generally, what is CTN’s future role in Ann Arbor?

The Chronicle followed up with Paul Bancel, who had addressed the city council back in May 2009 challenging the council to make CTN relevant. Bancel is a former member of the cable communications commission.

By way of background, the commission is an advisory board to CTN that Salmeron says “helps us work through policy issues and budgeting.” One of the key recommendations from a study of CTN, undertaken by then-University of Michigan student Matt Hampel, was to eliminate the commission in favor of an information technology advisory board.

Bancel offered two recommendations concerning CTN’s changing role in the future.

His first suggestion is to revise the city’s ordinance on cable franchise fees so that the franchise fee revenue would be directed to the city’s general fund.

Bancel argues that because this would make budgeting for CTN the same as other general fund activities, “the relevancy of CTN will soon become apparent.” Currently, Bancel says, CTN “gets an ‘Advance to Go’ card and collect your $200 at budget time.”

While acknowledging that cable franchise fees could be directed to purposes other than local cable programming, Salmeron argues that CTN’s mission includes fulfilling a community role that is noticeably absent in broadcast stations of major cities such as Detroit.

Another suggestion from Bancel to ensure the relevancy of CTN is to measure the viewership of every program. To guarantee a sense of accountability, Bancel says, “we recommended that CTN monitor and track the quality of the broadcasts.”

CTN has, to some extent, adopted that kind of approach. CTN does not have viewership data for its four broadcast channels, though it is possible to record the statistics for its online video-on-demand service. Here’s a sample of the viewership for May 2011 government meetings online:

 10 Ann Arbor Transportation Authority Board
  4 Cable Communications Commission
232 City Council
  2 Disabilities Issues
 13 Energy Commission
  2 Environmental Commission
  5 Greenbelt Advisory Commission
  2 Historic District Commission
  9 Human Rights Commission
 11 Park Advisory Commission
  9 Planning Commission
  5 Zoning Board of Appeals

304 MAY 2011 TOTAL VIEWS

-
[Note: Salmeron clarified that CTN is unable to identify the breakdown of IP addresses for each viewing, which means that theoretically the data could be skewed if, for example, one person decided to watch the zoning board of appeals meeting five times. But as Salmeron noted, “[T]hese are municipal meetings, and I would be surprised if there were more than a handful of people (excluding reporters) who watched the same meeting more than once.”]

Bancel also noted in conversation with The Chronicle that during his time on the cable communications commission, CTN did not have specific, measurable goals: “Goals were general, like improve communication with the university.”

In the FY 2012 city of Ann Arbor budget book, the kind of goals and metrics that are now indicated for the city’s communications unit (which includes CTN) are outlined as follows:

Service Unit Goals
A. Increase by 15 percent information distributed to internal and external audiences about Ann Arbor municipal news, innovative programs, awards and services from July 1, 2011 to June 30, 2012.
B. Develop and assist in the implementation of new technology resources to engage citizens and employees and enhance understanding of city services and initiatives from July 1, 2011 to June 30, 2012.

Service Unit Measures Status
A. Track the number of information pieces distributed monthly and highlight up to three hot topics via the Communication Office Matrix (information pieces include print/online newsletter, news releases, events, public information meetings, Gov Delivery notifications, CTN programs, social media tools, website page updates/development) by June 30, 2012.
B. Track status of technology resource project implementations each month. These new resources include integration of new media, such as Podcasts and live web streaming of city meetings to promote City information and CTN services, applications to monitor effectiveness of communication messages/vehicles (Google Analytics, GovDelivery subscribers and click throughs, A2C report, Survey Monkey, VOD views) by June 30, 2012.
C1. Track the number of new training participants, clients, and PEG programs (detailed information to include specific training classes, participants, and clients) via the CTN monthly report as a result of new trainer position/programs by June 30, 2012.

The 210-220 yearly government meetings aired live on CTN represent an archiving challenge, even in the digital age. CTN’s current online archiving policies encourages medium, but not long-term, preservation of government meeting material. City council meetings are archived online for two years, and all other meetings are stored for six months.

Salmeron says that a single factor dictates CTN’s online archiving policy: server space. He says, “It will all come down to the amount of space and what we can afford to build.”

CTN buys its server space for online streaming and video on-demand from Leightronix, a company based in Holt, Mich. CTN has two PEG Central accounts, a service offered by Leightronix, that costs $5,677 per year. Each account has 500 hours of storage, so CTN has 1,000 hours total of online storage available. If CTN wanted to increase its storage capacity, it could do so in 500 hour increments by adding additional PEG Central accounts.

CTN is still working on its archiving system. Only in 2009 did CTN start to convert its videotapes to DVD and begin to capture meetings on DVD. When The Chronicle was interested in reviewing the Feb. 17, 2009 Ann Arbor city council meeting, we first noted that the previously available online recording was no longer accessible – it had been a casualty of storage space limits. When we followed up with a request for the corresponding DVD, CTN staff reported that the disk was not in the slot in the binder where it was kept.

Salmeron says of the incident, “What we have determined is that that was a meeting where there were technical difficulties, so there’s no way to retrieve a recording that doesn’t exist.” He is also quick to note, “Our recordings are not the official record for documents. For council or for any of the other commissions or boards, the documented record is the clerk’s notes.”

However, the official written minutes made by the city clerk are “action minutes,” which record the outcome of all votes, but do not depict discussion among councilmembers, even in summary form. And the audio recordings made by the clerk’s office on cassette tape are not freely accessible to the public. No other organization besides CTN systematically makes visual recordings of government meetings. So CTN’s video is in some sense irreplaceable if it goes missing.

When asked where CTN’s online services and archiving policies are headed 10 years from now, Salmeron says, “We have to keep changing with the media that changes …  Unfortunately, we don’t have the type of budget to stay on the cutting edge with the national broadcasters … We’re just trying to keep up with the media as best we can.”

About the writer: Hayley Byrnes is an intern with The Ann Arbor Chronicle. The Chronicle could not survive without regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of local government and civic affairs. 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!

Nancy Kaplan, the newest Ann Arbor District Library board member, is introducing a proposal to videotape library board meetings for public broadcast. The board is expected to consider a resolution on that issue at its May 16 meeting. (Photos by the writer.)

The deal – which is getting national attention from library professionals – gives patrons unlimited access to a downloadable catalog of about 12,000 tracks in a wide range of genres. Though it doesn’t include songs by popular artists on major record labels, AADL director Josie Parker told the board that the selection should appeal to a community like Ann Arbor, which values alternative music.

The library is looking for other ways to increase its digital offerings of audiobooks, films, music, and free or open eBooks. Possibilities include tapping collections like Project Gutenberg, which has about 50,000 titles, and working with local authors, musicians and filmmakers who might be interested in making their work accessible to library patrons.

Also at Monday’s meeting, board member Nancy Kaplan advocated for televising the board’s monthly meetings, and said she’d like to bring a formal proposal to the board for a vote on May 16. Other groups like the Ann Arbor Public Schools board and the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority currently hold their meetings in the same location as the AADL board – the fourth floor conference room of the AADL’s downtown building on South Fifth Avenue. AAPS and AATA meetings are televised by Community Television Network. Parker agreed that there are benefits to televising the meetings, but cited issues of quality and control as reasons why they haven’t decided to do that yet.

In other business, board members got a preview of the 2011-12 budget, for the fiscal year starting July 1, 2011. They plan to keep the millage level unchanged – AADL levies 1.55 mills, not its maximum allowable 1.92 mills. There will be no layoffs, but no pay increases. The board will take a formal vote to approve the final budget at their May 16 meeting, which will also include a public hearing on the issue.

And in a discussion about the nonprofit Friends of the Ann Arbor District Library, Parker asked the board to consider putting a direct link to that organization’s website on the front page of the AADL website. The move would be “a pretty public vote of confidence for them, and recognition for everything they’ve done,” she said. The AADL had distanced itself from the Friends several years ago in the wake of financial oversight issues that have since been resolved. The group operates a used bookstore in the lower level of AADL’s downtown branch, with proceeds – $100,000 this year alone – benefiting the library.

Videotaping AADL Board Meetings

As an item for discussion, Nancy Kaplan – the board’s newest member, who was first elected in November 2010 – brought forward a proposal to videotape the monthly AADL library board meetings. She cited a list of benefits, such as enhancing the library’s outreach efforts and providing another way for the public to get information about AADL, its staff and programs. As an example, she mentioned the report by director Josie Parker at last month’s board meeting regarding Parker’s work with the Digital Public Library of America, and the presentation on eBooks that was made at the April board meeting.

Viewers would also learn, along with the board, about the challenges and changes happening at the library, Kaplan said, especially as it shifts to providing more digital services. Those changes might include delivery of services, the physical structure of the library, and the changing financial environment, she said. Kaplan asked the board to consider televising their meetings, saying that she believed it would cost only $50 per month, if even that much.

[By way of background, Community Television Network (CTN) – a unit of the city of Ann Arbor – records and televises a wide variety of public meetings, including several that are held in the same boardroom as the library board meetings – on the fourth floor of the downtown AADL building. Meetings that are currently recorded by CTN in that room include the Ann Arbor Public Schools board, the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority board, and the Ann Arbor Public Market Commission.]

Parker told the board that she couldn’t argue about the benefits. But she asked Tim Grimes, the district’s community relations and marketing manager, to describe how the library allocates its resources, and why they’ve made the decision in the past not to videotape board meetings.

Grimes said his staff includes two part-time employees who videotape and provide technical support for AADL events. He said they did have an initial conversation with CTN, but were told that because the library board meetings fall on the same night as Ann Arbor city council meetings, the library board meetings could not be aired live – they’d have to be taped for broadcast at a later date.

He also said if the board did decide to videotape meetings, his staff would do it – because all of the video on the AADL’s website is done in-house.

In giving an overview of the work his department does, Grimes said they film about 6-8 library events each month to post on the AADL’s website. Talks by authors like journalist Cokie Roberts in 2008 and TV producer Chuck Barris in 2007 had been especially popular, he said. Grimes also highlighted talks held at AADL in partnership with groups like the University of Michigan Depression Center and University Musical Society, and which are available in the AADL’s video-on-demand collection. In addition to videotaping events, his staff also does podcasts and provides technical assistance for AADL events, Grimes said.

Grimes noted that they produce an annual report video, which he said includes much of the information that Kaplan described, and features interviews with staff and patrons.

Another thing to consider is that on some board meeting nights, the library has to schedule author events at the same time, Grimes said. He cited as an example the board’s next meeting on May 16, when Sebastian Junger – author of “A Perfect Storm” – will be speaking at the same time in the library’s multi-purpose room at an event they’ll be videotaping. It’s the only night that Junger was available, Grimes said, so they didn’t have any choice about scheduling.

Grimes concluded by noting that he’s worked at the library for 22 years, and has been in his current job for 18 years. Not once, he said, has a member of the public asked to have library board meetings filmed. “I have lots of requests for other things, including Chuck Barris, but never for this.”

Margaret Leary, the board’s chair, posed a hypothetical question: If the library were to produce a video about a topic that might be touched on at a board meeting – like Parker’s presentation last month on the Digital Public Library of America – would it be more in-depth than a 5-10 minute talk? Certainly, Grimes replied, saying that their films are very polished in terms of quality of picture, sound and content.

Leary then asked Parker if she had any additional comments regarding their strategic thinking on this issue. Parker said they hadn’t really considered making films about their own initiatives. They certainly could, she said, but it’s more likely they’d look for partnerships – for example, the University of Michigan’s Google books project might be a way to discuss issues related to digitization and libraries.

More generally, Parker said it wasn’t an issue of cost. Rather, with CTN, the library would have no control over quality or scheduling, she said – and the video wouldn’t be the AADL’s. It would belong to CTN.

Kaplan said it seemed to be the culture of this community to televise public meetings. She noted that more entities – like the Downtown Development Authority and AATA – are moving in that direction. She said she isn’t looking for something perfect, but that with so many changes coming for AADL, it’s important to bring the community along with them. Even though Parker’s presentation last month had been brief, she said, it was also enlightening and informative. Kaplan also thought it would be possible to request that CTN broadcast the meetings at certain times.

At any rate, Kaplan added, these are logistics that can be worked out. What they really need to decide is the concept – do they want to record their meetings for broadcast? If there are concerns, she said, perhaps they could do it on a trial basis.

Kaplan plans to bring a formal resolution on the issue to the board’s May 16 meeting.

Digital Media at the AADL

A discussion at the board’s March 21 meeting – which focused on how digital books are transforming the publishing industry and, in turn, public libraries – prompted AADL director Josie Parker to offer to give the board an overview of the library’s digital offerings at their April meeting. On Monday, Celeste Choate – associate director of services, collections and access – gave a detailed presentation on the range of digital services that AADL provides its patrons.

Digital Media: Overdrive

Choate began by describing some of the services that the library offers for eBooks and audio books – including one that’s been a frustration for both library officials as well as patrons.

Overdrive is a business that provides electronic books to public libraries – AADL accesses this service through its membership in the Midwest Collaborative for Library Services. Because Overdrive is an outside vendor, AADL doesn’t have control over its offerings, Choate told the board. The service also only allows for one user download at a time per item, so there are long waiting lists to check out the most popular material. A common complaint is that people want to get the books more quickly, she said. And once the period of use has expired, the material is automatically erased from your computer.

There are technical constraints as well, Choate said. Overdrive is only compatible with certain equipment, and requires users to first install software on their computer. Later in the meeting she walked the board through the steps required to use Overdrive – a fairly complicated process.

Celeste Choate, AADL's associate director of services, collections and access.

Recently, 700 animated Disney storybooks were added to the Overdrive collection – those allow for simultaneous use, but can only be downloaded to computers, not electronic readers. Overdrive offers about 5,000 eBooks and 4,000 audiobooks, which are compatible with Nook and Sony electronic readers. Users of Kindle will be able to access the service at some point soon, Choate said, although she added that when more patrons start to use the service because they can read the material on their Kindles, wait lists will likely grow even more.

Over the past 12 months, there have been about 16,000 checkouts of Overdrive material.

Parker later noted that AADL hasn’t publicized Overdrive because it’s not a great service. Even when it’s available via Kindle, that won’t change the problems that patrons face when using it, she said.

Digital Media: eBooks for the Blind, Physically Disabled

Working with the National Library Service, AADL offers over 21,000 books and 48 magazine titles via the Braille and Audio Reading Download service, or BARD. This service allows for unlimited, simultaneous downloads, Choate said, and unlike Overdrive material, users can keep permanently whatever they download.

To provide faster access for patrons, AADL has downloaded all 21,000 books and can distribute them quickly on flashdrives, whenever there’s a request. This is a service that’s just been launched, Choate said, and is being coordinated by Terry Soave, AADL’s outreach and neighborhood services manager.

AADL also offers access to a program called BookShare, which provides more than 90,000 books, textbooks, periodicals and other material.

All of these services require that the users be a patron of the Washtenaw Library for the Blind and Physically Disabled, which is managed by AADL.

Digital Media: Tumblebooks

Tumblebooks is designed for visually impaired children, and allows users to download animated storybooks, audio games and other games to their computers. The service offers unlimited access, and last year there were 75,000 book views by library patrons, Choate said. Based on what AADL pays for the service, it costs the library less than a penny per book view, she said.

Digital Media: Magnatune

One of the most promising new digital offerings is available through Magnatune, a digital music publisher. AADL recently negotiated a deal with the firm for about 12,000 songs – or the equivalent of about 1,200 albums, Choate said. The service offers unlimited, simultaneous downloads with no waiting. The Magnatune page on AADL’s website describes it this way, in what appears to be an oblique reference to Overdrive: “You shouldn’t have to jump through 17 flaming hoops in order to access digital content, so we’ve tried to make the process as simple as possible.”

Since launching about three weeks ago, over 11,000 tracks have been downloaded, Choate said.

Parker noted that these are independent artists – you won’t find music by the current hot performers – but there’s a wide variety of genres, from world music and blues to hip hop, classical and alt rock. She said the music is appealing in a community like Ann Arbor, where alternative music is valued.

The AADL doesn’t pay per download – rather, the library paid a $10,000 flat fee in a licensing agreement that runs through June 30, 2012. So the more times the service is used, the lower the cost is per use. It’s a very cost-effective service for the library to provide, Choate said.

Digital Media: Future Plans

The library is looking for ways to increase its digital offerings, Choate said – audiobooks, films, music, and free or open eBooks. One example, she said, is to look at what’s available from Project Gutenberg, which has been compiling a collection of free eBooks and has about 50,000 titles. [The books are free because their copyright has expired.] AADL also hopes to talk with local authors, musicians and filmmakers who might be interested in making their work accessible to library patrons.

AADL has the infrastructure in place to provide these digital services, Choate said. They’re pursuing deals like the one with Magnatune, with fixed costs, unlimited downloads and annual licenses. The library is interested in getting the most use out of its collections, she said, while containing costs – they don’t want to pay per download.

Responding to a board member’s query, Parker said there’s never enough exposure for what the library offers, but that when they launch something like the deal with Magnatune, there’s no shortage of information about it. Social media networks are playing a huge role in spreading the word about AADL’s deal with Magnatune, and earlier in the day, Parker said, they got a call from Library Journal, which is interested in doing an article about the agreement.

People who are only interested in mainstream music – like the kind licensed by Sony – might not be interested in what’s available via Magnatune, Parker said. But it’s not worth it for the library to strike a deal with Sony – it would cost them almost as much as retail.

Margaret Leary, chair of the board, expressed frustration at the relatively limited material available to the general public. Leary is director of the University of Michigan Law Library, and described how easy it is for her – as an academic librarian – to quickly access any of thousands of electronic books in their system, all at no cost to her as a user. She described how she was researching earthworms as an invasive species, and with only a simple search found two books on the subject – the full texts were available to her online, she said. Leary indicated that resources should be equally available for the general public.

Financial Reports: March Update, 2011-12 Budget

The board heard two financial reports on Monday from Ken Nieman, associate director of finance, human resources and operations. He first gave an update on March 2011 financials. The district’s unrestricted cash balance at the end of March was $10.124 million, down from $11 million in February. Its fund balance stood at $7.924 million as of March 31. The district has received 96% of this fiscal year’s tax receipts, or $10.923 million.

Three line items – employee benefits, legal expenses and library programming costs – are over budget, Nieman reported. As he’s noted at previous meetings, the extra expenses for employee benefits – related to increased health care costs – are not likely to come back in line with the budget by year’s end. Year to date, that line item is $50,543 over budget.

The district spent $21,126 in legal expenses during March, compared to a budgeted amount of $6,250. Those costs related to four issues: Research on tax increment financing (TIF) for both the Washtenaw Avenue corridor project and the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority, labor negotiations, and preparation of an amicus brief in a Herrick District Library lawsuit against the Library of Michigan. Year to date, legal expenses are $11,609 over budget.

Library programs, which was $6,107 over budget for March, is expected to come back in line with its budgeted amount by year’s end.

Nieman also pointed out that AADL received $30,264 in state aid during March. Because of uncertainties related to the state’s economy, the district had not included any state aid in its current fiscal year budget – that’s been the district’s practice for several years. The payment is the first installment – typically, the state makes two payments of 50% each, he said. Board member Prue Rosenthal asked whether receiving this first payment means they’ll likely get another $30,000 from the state. Nieman said he thinks so: “We’re as certain as we can be about that.” [.pdf file of March 2011 finance report]

Financial Reports: 2011-12 Budget

Later in the meeting, Nieman returned to the podium to give a briefing on the proposed 2011-12 budget, which the board will vote on at its May 16 meeting. Barbara Murphy, chair of the board’s finance committee, said the committee discussed the budget with staff earlier this month. “It’s another tight budget,” she said. [.pdf file of 2011-12 AADL draft budget]

Nieman began by noting that the budget had been built on the assumption that tax revenues would drop by 3%. However, on April 21, the county’s equalization department released its report on taxable values for jurisdictions in Washtenaw County. [See Chronicle coverage: "Washtenaw County's Taxable Value Falls"] At that point, they learned that AADL’s tax revenues would drop by only 1.7%. “That’s good news,” Nieman said. “We’d always like it to go up, but it’s better than we were predicting.”

In a follow-up phone conversation with The Chronicle, Nieman said the budget presented on May 16 will be revised to reflect those higher-than-expected revenues. Revenues for FY2011-12 are now expected to total $12.034 million, rather than the $11.887 million indicated in the draft budget. The bulk of revenues in the budget – $11.092 million – are from tax receipts.

On Monday, Nieman told the board there will be no layoffs, no pay cuts, and the library’s hours and service levels will remain unaffected – patrons won’t notice any changes. The draft budget shows a $186,000 deficit, he said, but given the change in anticipated tax revenues, that deficit is now closer to $40,o00.

Nieman later told The Chronicle that AADL hopes to shift its union employees over to a similar health insurance plan that non-union workers were shifted to last October, to cut costs. About 50 of the roughly 250 AADL workers are represented by unions. Several line item expenses are lower in the FY2011-12 budget, including custodial, purchased services, utilities, and grants and memorial expenses. The budget includes an $18,000 increase in the line item for repair and maintenance, to $283,000.

For some employees, the AADL will see an increase in the amount it must contribute to the Michigan Public School Employees Retirement System (MPSERS) – from 20.66% this year to 24.47%. Nieman noted that only 18 AADL employees are part of this state-mandated retirement program – they are people who were hired when the library was part of the Ann Arbor Public Schools system, before AADL was spun off as an independent entity in 1996. [For a primer on MPSERS funding, see Chronicle coverage of a February 2010 Ann Arbor Public Schools study session.]

On Monday, Nieman told the board that the administration will be working to present a balanced budget to the finance committee at its next meeting, and to the full board in May. He also pointed out that they’ll achieve the budget at the 1.55 mills that the district currently levies – they won’t be raising taxes.

Margaret Leary, the board chair, noted that they weren’t voting on the budget that evening, and that it would be modified before being brought to the board at their May meeting for approval. She clarified that although it’s possible for the AADL to levy up to 1.92 mills, they’ve chosen not to do that. “We have a track record of sticking to our budget and not overextending,” she said. “In this economy, there are not very many public organizations that are able to do that.”

Leary said that Nieman and AADL director Josie Parker deserve accolades – they set a great example for financial management and the provision of services.

Parker reminded the board that their May meeting will also include a public hearing on the budget.

Director’s Report

In addition to her written report, AADL director Josie Parker briefed the board on two other items. [.pdf file of AADL April director's report]

Josie Parker, Ann Arbor District Library director, at the board's April 25, 2011 meeting.

Parker reported that she had attended the oral arguments at the state court of appeals last week in the lawsuit brought by Herrick District Library lawsuit against the Library of Michigan.

[By way of background, new standards imposed by the Library of Michigan have changed how public libraries qualify for state aid. Those standards – originally proposed as rules – are the subject of a lawsuit against the state library, filed by the Herrick District Library in Holland. The AADL has filed an amicus curiae – or “friend of the court” – brief in support of the Herrick library’s position, which charges that the state library has no authority to set these rules, and is taking away local control from district libraries. Parker has discussed this lawsuit on previous occasions, including the board's March 21 meeting.]

Parker told the board that the three-judge panel had impressed her with their knowledge of the legal issues at stake, and that they were thorough in their questioning. It’s likely to take several months before they hand down a ruling, however. “For now, it’s a waiting game,” she said. In the meantime, she added, hopefully state aid will be dispersed.

Parker also reported that earlier that day, she’d been in Lansing for a meeting of the Michigan Library Association‘s legislative committee, on which she serves, to meet with the MLA’s lobbyist. In terms of state support for libraries, “it’s amazingly good news,” she said, relative to what they had anticipated. The state House proposed budget calls for cutting library funding from $7.25 million to $3.6 million, which she said is barely enough to fund the Library of Michigan and the Michigan eLibrary, known as MeL, for the year. There is no line item for MeL in the House version.

The Senate version holds library funding harmless – at the same levels as the current fiscal year – and includes a separate line item for MeL.

Parker said the House version at least doesn’t eliminate library funding entirely, and that the final budget will likely include funding somewhere between the House and Senate proposals. That’s “far more than we expected,” Parker said. She noted that legislators from the Ann Arbor area have been very responsive to these issues.

Director’s Evaluation

Margaret Leary, the board’s chair, is also chair of the director’s evaluation committee. She reported that all board members had participated in giving feedback about Josie Parker’s performance, and that they had discussed it in executive session earlier that evening. They’ll finish the formal evaluation document in the next month, and she’ll present a public letter regarding the evaluation at the May 16 board meeting. “It’s all good,” Leary said.

Friends of the AADL

Prue Rosenthal gave an update on the Friends of the Ann Arbor District Library (FAADL), a nonprofit that operates a used book shop in the lower level of the downtown AADL building to raise money for the library. They recently gave AADL a check for $20,000 – bringing this year’s total contributions to $100,000.

FAADL is planning a membership drive to coincide with the AADL’s summer reading program, Rosenthal said – she noted that the library is kicking off the summer reading program this year at the Ann Arbor Summer Festival.

Another thing that FAADL is discussing is whether to have a booth at the nonprofit part of the Ann Arbor Art Fairs. Parker had encouraged it, Rosenthal said, because this year it will be difficult to get access to the library from the art fairs. Fifth Avenue is closed between the library and East Liberty, where part of the art fairs are held, so it would be a good year to raise awareness about the bookstore, she said. They’ll need volunteers and $60 for the booth, Rosenthal reported, but it looks like they’ll go ahead with it.

March was down in sales – but overall for the year, the FAADL store is ahead of last year, Rosenthal said. They’ve raised $3,600 selling books online, via Ann Arbor-based Books by Chance and AbeBooks. “They are cooking on all burners,” she said.

Parker told the board that the space agreement between AADL and FAADL is up for renewal in May. At Leary’s request, Parker said she contacted FAADL president Pat McDonald to ask if there are any issues they need to address. McDonald indicated the agreement is fine as it stands, so Parker said she’ll likely ask the board to approve an extension to the agreement at their May 16 meeting.

As another item for the board to consider, Parker noted that several years ago, the library removed the FAADL from the library’s website when the nonprofit was struggling with some financial oversight issues. Now, the FAADL conducts annual audits and they’re clean, Parker said. She attends their meetings and is comfortable suggesting that the library place a link on their homepage to the FAADL website. Right now, the FAADL is only included on the library’s webpage that lists a variety of ways to contribute to AADL. Putting a link on the AADL front page would be “a pretty public vote of confidence for them, and recognition for everything they’ve done,” Parker said.

Rosenthal also noted that the FAADL is looking for board members, particularly people who have graphic design, marketing and public relations experience.

Auditors Approved

Added to the agenda at the beginning of Monday’s meeting was a resolution to approve the accounting firm Rehmann to conduct the AADL’s audit for fiscal years ending June 30, 2011 through June 30, 2014. [Rehmann – formerly Rehmann Robson – conducts audits for several local municipalities, including Washtenaw County. A representative from the accounting firm presented results of the county's audit at the April 20, 2011 county board of commissioners meeting.]

Barbara Murphy, chair of the finance committee, reported that Ken Nieman – associate director of finance, human resources and operations – had issued a request for proposals (RFP) and received four responses. Of those, two were chosen to interview: Rehmann, and Abraham & Gaffney. Murphy said that based on those interviews, it was clear that Rehmann best suited AADL’s needs.

Outcome: The board unanimously approved the selection of Rehmann to conduct the AADL’s audits through 2014.

Present: Rebecca Head, Nancy Kaplan, Margaret Leary, Barbara Murphy, Jan Barney Newman, Prue Rosenthal, Ed Surovell. Also AADL director Josie Parker.

Next meeting: Monday, May 16, 2011 at 7 p.m. in the library’s fourth floor meeting room, 343 S. Fifth Ave. [confirm date]

Ted Annis distributes copies of his treasurer's report during public commentary at the start of Wednesday's AATA board meeting. (Photos by the writer.)

A representative from Indian Trails addressed the board during public commentary at the start of the meeting, in part to convey disappointment, but primarily to thank board members for the opportunity to work on that private-public partnership.

Public commentary also included remarks from Ted Annis, the board’s treasurer, who signed up for a public comment slot, and used it to deliver his treasurer’s report. The report had not been given a slot on the agenda by the board’s governance committee – after reviewing it, the committee decided it did not fit the parameters of the treasurer’s report specified in the board’s bylaws.

The wrangling over the treasurer’s report thus continued from last month’s board meeting, when fellow board members expressed the view that Annis’ monthly reports, which he has submitted since taking over the treasurership last fall, do not include the material specified in their bylaws. Instead, they said, the reports are effectively the expression of an individual board member’s dissent on board policy.

The board voted to establish a bylaws committee to be chaired by David Nacht to examine the matter in more detail.

Board members also voted to change their meeting venue and day, starting in two months. In May, the board will begin meeting at the downtown Ann Arbor District Library on the third Thursday evening of the month at 6:30 p.m. The library board room location, also used by the Ann Arbor Public Schools and AADL for their board meetings, offers more space for attendees, as well as video recording facilities.

Chelsea-Ann Arbor Service

Before the board was a resolution – recommended by the performance monitoring and external relations committee – that the Chelsea-Ann Arbor commuter bus service be continued through May 2011, but switched to AATA buses from Indian Trails motor coaches.  The resolution specified that the fare would be reduced to $99/month from $125/month. The fare reduction, in concert with an intensive marketing campaign, is a move that is hoped to improve ridership numbers.

Although the service has not achieved the expected ridership, board members authorized its continuation as a useful means of gathering information, especially as the board moved forward with its contemplation of countywide service.

Chelsea-Ann Arbor: Public Comment

Jeff Deason, sales representative for Indian Trails, the motor coach operator that’s been operating the twice daily service between the city of Ann Arbor and Chelsea, appeared before the board to thank them for the opportunity to provide the service as long as they did – since May 2008. He told them that in those two years, Indian Trails had been a proud partner with the AATA, and noted that the ridership had been pleased with the quality of the equipment and the service provided by their drivers.

Deason described how Indian Trails had understood that the AATA was contemplating the move to in-house operation of the service due to concerns about reducing costs, and that Indian Hills Trails had presented an alternative plan, which had ultimately not been recommended. While Indian Trails was disappointed, he said, he thanked the board and expressed appreciation for the opportunity. He said they would continue to provide the service on the Canton-Ann Arbor express route, and that they were optimistic about other opportunities in the future.

In his turn during public commentary at the start of the meeting, Jim Mogensen pointed out that commuter service fares were being reduced from $125 per month to $99 a month even while fares for fixed-route service were set to increase. [The $0.50 increase, which was spread over two years, was approved last year. That resulted in a rise from $1 to $1.25 last year, with the second phase of the increase due in May 2010 to raise the basic fare to $1.50 per ride. See Chronicle coverage: "Bus Fares Will Increase"]

Asked Mogensen, “Where does the money [to offset the cost not covered by fares] come from? Is there a Chelsea purchase-of-service agreement?” [AATA provides service to communities outside of Ann Arbor  through purchase-of-service agreements. Ann Arbor taxpayers fund AATA through a property millage.]

Mogensen cautioned that the cushioning of a motor coach like Indian Trails had been providing was much different from riding on a regular AATA bus.

Mogensen returned to the topic of express bus service during public commentary time at the conclusion of the meeting.

He noted that part of the challenge in marketing the Canton-Ann Arbor service [which targets University of Michigan workers] is that to get to work in Ann Arbor from Canton, you get in your car, you drive down Ford Road, you park your car at the new Plymouth Road park-and-ride lot, you take bus to work – it’s free. [AATA buses do not require payment of a fare by UM workers on boarding – their fares are paid through the M-Ride agreement between UM and AATA. The M-Ride agreement is currently being re-negotiated.] It’s understandable why it’s hard to market that, Mogensen, said.

Mogensen also returned to the specific question of where the money to support the commuter service comes from. If it derives from the Ann Arbor property millage, he said, there are regulations that apply with respect to the use of the funds, which could be used in other ways.

Chelsea-Ann Arbor: Board Deliberations

David Nacht led off with a blunt question: “How much money are we going to throw into this?” Chris White, AATA’s manager of service development, put that number at $110,000. The total breaks down into thirds: 1/3 would be covered by fares, 1/3 through a state grant, and 1/3 by the AATA. [It is the 1/3 from the AATA that Mogensen focused on during his public commentary.]

Based on the numbers, Nacht tentatively floated the conclusion that ridership needed to almost double in order for the service to operate without support from AATA. Sue McCormick, an AATA board member who is also the city of Ann Arbor’s public services area administrator, asked Michael Ford, the CEO of AATA, if the staff thought that a doubling of ridership was achievable.

Ford said, “We’re going to try.”

Nacht wondered if it was possible to offer a commission for people to sell tickets. “I would urge us to use capitalist incentives,” he quipped.

Ted Annis noted that given the current ridership numbers, the Chelsea-Ann Arbor service required support if it was to continue. “On its immediate merits, it doesn’t stand up.” However, Annis argued for continuing the service, because it gives the organization useful information going forward. Part of that going forward is the AATA’s contemplation of expanding its service countywide, which Charles Griffith cited as a reason to retain the Chelsea-Ann Arbor express service at least another year.

During the board’s question time for the CEO, before it deliberated on the Chelsea-Ann Arbor resolution, Nacht had also expressed his unwillingness to see the service discontinued, with the AATA countywide initiative in the works.

During question time, Nacht also elicited from Chris White a clarification of the University of Michigan’s fare subsidy for its employees – UM pays $62.50, or 50% out of the $125 fare. With the reduction in fare, said White, UM will continue to pay $62.50, so UM riders will receive the full benefit of the reduced price.

Question time was also the occasion when Sue McCormick asked for some clarification about whether riders wanted the deluxe coaches versus standard buses. White explained that the kind of coach did not appear to be a “make or break” issue for riders. However, the availability of wireless Internet access on the bus did appear to be “make or break” for some riders.

Griffith said that Indian Trails had developed a proposal for their coach service at a reduced rate but without wifi capability. The desire to provide wireless access to the Internet was thus a crucial aspect of the decision.

During deliberations on the resolution, Griffith noted that the motor coach version of the service was tried at first, because the “luxury version” was thought to be necessary to attract ridership. Based on surveys of riders, he said, that did not appear to be essential.

Outcome: The board unanimously approved the continuation of the Chelsea-Ann Arbor express bus service through May 2011, reducing the fare, and using AATA buses instead of Indian Trails.

Board Venue Change

At its Feb. 17, 2010 meeting, the board discussed but did not vote on the idea of changing its meeting day and place, in order to improve accessibility and transparency to the public in the context of its contemplation of countywide expansion.

During her report to the board, Rebecca Burke, who chairs the AATA’s local advisory council (LAC), told them that the council had drafted a letter to CEO Michael Ford outlining a variety of issues they saw as challenges with the library location. [The LAC  provides a forum for seniors and those with disabilities to provide input to the AATA.]

Jim Mogensen, during his public commentary, noted that the library closes at 9 p.m. and arrangements should be made to make sure AATA board meetings could, if necessary, go past 9 p.m. He noted that Ann Arbor Public School board meetings met in the same location and often ran past 9 p.m. [At its most recent meeting, on March 24, the AAPS board meeting lasted well past midnight.]

Ford said the staff would look at all possibilities for making the transition as smooth as possible.

During deliberations on the resolution, Sue McCormick got clarification that the concerns raised by Burke had been taken into account. [They fall into two categories: possible issues with the library building; and the accessibility to the library building in the context of ongoing construction of the underground parking garage directly adjacent to the building.]

Nacht wanted to know if the meetings would be on TV. Jesse Bernstein, chair of the performance monitoring and external relations committee that worked on the issue, explained that coverage on Community Television Network (CTN), the local cable access television station, would not be live. However, within a couple of days after the meeting, the video will be available through online video-on-demand, in the same way that other meetings are, when CTN records them.

In addition, continued Bernstein, the meetings would be aired on CTN’s cable TV channels during a couple of slots during the week, still to be scheduled.

Sue McCormick declared that the new system would represent a substantial improvement.

At the board’s Dec. 16, 2009 meeting, during a discussion on the issue of videotaping meetings, David Nacht recalled the recent history of the board’s position on the question:

In board discussion of video recording their meetings, board member David Nacht said that he was personally in favor of video recording meetings, but noted that the board had recently voted down a proposal to video record meetings, and that lacking new information, out of respect for previous board decisions he was disinclined to support it. Responding to Nacht, Annis said that the “new information” could be that the AATA had a new CEO and was exploring an extension of its service to more areas of the county.

On Wednesday, Nacht said that he’d been a supporter of video recording meetings for six years in the interest of transparency and there had been zero interest in going that direction for 5 and a half years. Now that the board would be voting to make it happen, Nacht said he was “thrilled.”

Outcome: The board unanimously approved the resolution to change its meeting time and location to the third Thursday of the month at 6:30 p.m. at the downtown location of the Ann Arbor District Library, 343 S. Fifth Ave. The board currently meets at AATA headquarters, 2700 S. Industrial Ave., on the second-to-last Wednesday of the month.

Treasurer’s Report

Ted Annis has served on the AATA board since having his nomination confirmed by the Ann Arbor city council in February 2005. His current term ends in May of this year, but he could be re-appointed. He has told mayor John Hieftje that he would serve another term, if asked. The mayor makes nominations for appointments, which must be approved by city council.

Treasurer’s Report: Annis as Treasurer

Since election by his board colleagues as treasurer in 2009, Annis has submitted one-page treasurer’s reports:

• Treasurer’s report: Oct. 29, 2009
• Treasurer’s report: Dec. 8, 2009
• Treasurer’s report: Jan. 11, 2010

At the board’s February 2010 meeting, Annis raised his objection to the omission from the board’s agenda of the item that called for the presentation of his report. From discussion at the February meeting, it emerged that other board members were concerned that Annis was using the treasurer’s report as a vehicle for expressing a dissenting view on board policy, rather than presenting commentary on dollars-and-cents information:

That being said, cautioned Nacht, there is a reason for the treasurer’s report in the bylaws – it’s supposed to be more than just a dollars-and-cents accounting, and the treasurer should have the ability to report directly to the board. It all depended, Nacht said, on what the report includes: Is it more philosophical or is it more dollars and cents? To the extent that the content of the treasurer’s report amounted to a dissenting opinion on board policy, Nacht said, it shouldn’t come in the form of a treasurer’s report.

Treasurer’s Report: Annis as a Member of the Public

At Wednesday’s meeting, then, with the treasurer’s report item not included on the agenda, Annis signed up for public comment on the sign-in clipboard, after two other speakers.

When the first two speakers had said their piece, board chair Paul Ajegba noted that Annis was signed in. Ajegba expressed uncertainty about whether it was possible for a board member to address the board during public commentary as a member of the public. David Nacht said he thought it was a “definitional issue,” meaning that a person was a member of the board or of the staff, or of the public, but not more than one of those.

Queried by board members about the content of the bylaws, executive assistant Karen Wheeler [who keeps the minutes of the board meetings] said she didn’t think there was anything in the bylaws that disallowed it.

Annis suggested that because it would be a brief presentation, the board could debate the question of whether he should be allowed to address the body during public commentary – while he gave the report.

Ajegba offered somewhat resignedly that Annis would be “breaking new ground.”

Treasurer’s Report: The Content of the Report

Annis then read briefly from the introductory material explaining that the report was being delivered during public comment time, noting that:

[...] Board members have complained that the last three Treasurer’s Reports have ranged beyond the reporting upon the monthly financial statements and that they do not wish to be exposed to the Treasurer’s presentations. The offending reports have included an analysis of countywide millage funding, a request for transparency, a request for appropriate Board meeting accommodations, a suggestion of a budgeted operating amount to guide the outside consultant designing the countywide bus system, a computation of savings available from cost-efficient operations, and the hiring of a CFO (Chief Financial Officer).

The February report – delivered on Wednesday – contained the recommendation that the AATA’s cost per bus service hour, which is currently around $104, be placed into the CEO’s goal’s and objectives:

1. $95/bus service hour by year-end 2010

2. $85/bus service hour by June 2011

3. $75/bus service hour by year-end 2011

The report also contends that capital funds available from the federal government are typically transferred into operating revenue to produce a balanced budget on an annual basis. Over the last five years, the report contends, the net effect of the practice is that $10.773 milion has been removed from the capital funds account to cover “excessive operating expenses.”

As capital funds, the report says, those dollars would have been otherwise available for use on a new transit station or a rail station. [The city of Ann Arbor's share of the Fuller Road Station – a joint project to build a parking structure and bus station – is around $5 million, but no financing plan has yet been identified except that the mayor has indicated no general fund money would be used.]

Near the conclusion of the board meeting, Ajegba asked the senior staff to look at Annis’ report with particular attention to the $10.773 million in capital funds transfers and to compare that with other transit authorities.

Treasurer’s Report: Formation of a Bylaws Committee

At the conclusion of Annis’ public commentary remarks, Ajegba asked CEO Michael Ford to get an opinion from the AATA’s legal counsel, Jerry Lax, on the question of board members addressing the board as members of the public.

Later in the meeting, Ajegba explained that the governance committee had looked at the report and determined that it was not consistent with the description of the treasurer’s report in the bylaws. That description is as follows:

The Treasurer shall submit to the Board, and comment on monthly budget-expenditure reports prepared by management.

Ajegba also indicated that Lax had concluded Annis’ report was not consistent with the treasurer’s report, as specified in the bylaws.

Ajegba asked David Nacht to serve as chair of a bylaws committee to take a look at the issue. Nacht indicated that Ajegba had phoned earlier to ask him to serve in such a capacity and that he’d agreed. He quipped: “I am not going to change my mind at this moment,” which provoked laughs all around. He then joked, “I would like the bylaws to be written in Romanian.”

CEO’s Goals and Objectives

CEO Michael Ford was hired last year and started work in the summer of 2009. Since that time the board has asked Ford to work with its committees to come up with a mutually agreeable set of goals and objectives on which his evaluation would be based. That process has been iterative, and the board had before it a set of goals and objectives that had evolved from that process.

Sue McCormick led off discussion by describing them as “well-written and understandable.” However, she asked where the financial objectives were expressed in them. Ford pointed to a section in the second page that was meant to address that issue:

Using the findings of the audit, CEO will support and encourage continuous improvement teams and the principles of six sigma and lean processes to eliminate waste and inefficiencies thereby controlling costs while enhancing performance.

McCormick allowed that she appreciated the language but pressed: “What’s the metric?”

David Nacht concurred with McCormick’s concern, saying the language seemed “watered-down and mushy.” He said that Ford’s first year was not supposed to be “just a learning year.”

McCormick identified two basic issues that were problematic: (i) the formalized performance goals and objectives for the CEO were not aligned with the budget process [AATA's fiscal year starts in October; Ford's evaluation period started in July], and (ii) there’s not anything as simple in the goals and objectives as “perform within budget,” let alone something like improve efficiency by 1%.

The goals and objectives, said McCormick, need something that gives financial direction.

Nacht concurred, saying that financial direction was especially important, given how easy it is to use preventive maintenance dollars for temporary budget fixes.

Jesse Bernstein said he was not opposed to putting in some kind of metric, understanding that there was a short time-frame from now until the point when Ford would be evaluated on it.

McCormick then turned to Ford and asked if there were any issues as far as being within budget for this year. Ford indicated there were challenges and said that Nacht was right about the issue of preventive maintenance dollars being used to cover other parts of the budget.

Reflecting on the idea that they would vote on something in March and use it for evaluation three months later, Nacht said he supposed that as far as due process, they had flunked. “That’s ridiculous, it seems to me,” he said. Nacht wondered if it wouldn’t be a good idea to think of it as setting up the evaluation for next year, rather than doing it as a “pretend thing.”

Annis indicated agreement with what others had said and added that he didn’t see a target completion date. Ford responded by saying there was an accompanying work plan that reflected dates. Annis allowed that it might be simply a presentational issue.

Griffith didn’t concur with Nacht’s assessment that the board had flunked, saying “Let’s back off from calling it a failure.” He suggested that what they needed to do was to figure out how to get the evaluation of goals and objectives on a schedule and a routine that works as two-way communication.  He suggested that quarterly check-ins would be desirable.

Ajegba acknowledged the long process that had started before December 2009 in developing the goals and objectives. He noted that there were still some specific measurable outcomes in the goals and objectives that Ford could be evaluated on. He did not feel it made sense to put in metrics like a reduction in cost per service hour to $95/hour, which were not achievable in three months time, when the evaluation would take place. [That was a metric suggested in Annis' treasurer's report.]

Come July, Ajegba suggested, they could add specific metrics. For now, it was still a useful tool for evaluating a 1-year contract.

McCormick indicated she would support the goals and objectives for this year, but not for next year – they were too “activity oriented” as opposed to “outcome oriented,” she said.

Outcome: The board approved the set of goals and objectives for the CEO, with abstention by Annis.

Other Financial Matters

Also on the agenda were two other financial items. One related to the receipt of the audited financial statement for the year ending on Sept. 30, 2009. The other authorized the use of funds to hire additional personnel.

Audited Statements

Ted Annis summarized the audit report by saying the best part was that there was no substantial disagreement with management. Among the recommendations in the audit report were a surprise audit of on-demand service vendors to make sure billable hours are correct, tightening up of controls on payroll and who’s signing for what, and checking the vendor files to make sure that W-9 forms are in place.

Outcome: The board unanimously accepted the audited financial statements for the year ending Sept. 30, 2009.

Personnel Funding

A resolution before the board authorized the CEO to make some professional hires:

BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chief Executive Officer is authorized to utilize funds currently available within the FY2010 budget toward meeting AATA’s needs for sufficient professional personnel, [...]

Sue McCormick said she was supportive of the resolution’s intent but was concerned that it was open-ended – there were no funding limits and there was no indication of how many FTEs were to be added. Annis asked if McCormick was suggesting a friendly amendment on the fly – yes, replied McCormick.

After brief discussion, the board approved an amendment to specify “up to three FTEs.”

Outcome: The board unanimously approved the authorization to hire additional professional staff.

Other Public Commentary

In addition to the public commentary reported above, three others also spoke.

Sandra Holley said she wanted to draw the board’s attention to the new Plymouth Road park-and-ride lot and the impact it had on routes. To get from the north side of town to Domino’s Farms on a public route – which should be a 15-minute trip – took two hours. First you have to go down Pontiac Trail to downtown Ann Arbor, transfer at the Blake Transit Center, ride to the UM hospital, then take the shuttle. She also noted that A-Ride, the AATA paratransit service, does not consider Domino’s Farms to be inside Ann Arbor, so the fare was $9 each way, not the $2.50 fare inside the city .

In support of Holley’s depiction, Carolyn Grawi, of the Center for Independent Living, said it took a good hour spread over three routes to get from CIL to Domino’s. Grawi also alerted the board to the Transit Partnership Conference to be held April 1-2, 2010 at Mt. Pleasant, Mich. At the conference, attendees will work together to develop strategies to improve public transportation. Grawi called particular attention to the fact that one of the sessions will include participation from rural transit managers, which is germane to the AATA’s contemplation of a countywide expansion of its service.

Nancy Kaplan asked the board a question: How will the planned Fuller Road Station change bus service to that area? Board chair Paul Ajegba responded that he did not know if the logistics of that had been worked out. CEO Michael Ford indicated that there’s more work to be done on it, including modeling work. Jesse Bernstein said the advantage of a large enough bus terminus at that location was that it could handle a full busload of people. That meant it could perhaps bypass the downtown Blake Transit Center in bringing people to work at UM hospitals from Ypsilanti.

Kaplan followed up Bernstein’s comment by asking why it was not possible now to run a bus straight from Ypsilanti to the Fuller Road area. Bernstein explained that currently there is simply no location where passengers could get off the bus without blocking traffic. David Nacht wrapped up the public comment for the evening by appealing to board chair Ajegba to bring things to a close, saying that public commentary was not intended as a Q&A session.

Present: Charles Griffith, David Nacht, Ted Annis, Jesse Bernstein, Paul Ajegba, Sue McCormick

Absent: Rich Robben

Next regular meeting: Wednesday, April 21, 2010 at 6:30 p.m. at AATA headquarters, 2700 S. Industrial Ave., Ann Arbor [confirm date]

Screen capture of item by item indexed video links embedded in council agenda.

Monday night’s meeting of the Ann Arbor city council was a test of stamina, with a public hearing and council deliberations on the A2D2 zoning ordinances pushing the meeting’s end time well past midnight.

The Chronicle’s meeting report will be presented in a separate article. [Spoiler: The A2D2 zoning ordinance was eventually passed – with an unaltered maximum building height limit of 150 feet in the D1 areas of South University.] In this piece, we highlight how readers who are interested in a blow-by-blow account of those deliberations will now more easily find the exact spot in the online video where those deliberations take place. [Video for the Nov. 16 meeting has not yet been uploaded.]

We then use the indexed video links to aid in our presentation of an uncorrected error in the Nov. 5 meeting minutes, which were accepted by the council last night – an error that in this case could amount to a violation of the Open Meetings Act. On a related issue, we use the embedded indexed video links to highlight an additional possible Open Meetings Act violation in the official noticing of a special meeting that immediately preceded the regular meeting of the city council on Nov. 5.

Embedded Video Links

Starting with the Nov. 5 meeting of city council, Community Television Network (CTN) and the city clerk’s office began indexing the video of each city council meeting that is recorded during live broadcast on CTN’s Channel 16. The indexing allows for the embedding of links for each online agenda item, corresponding to just the footage related to that item.

It’s made possible by a collaboration – at the city of Ann Arbor’s request – between the software vendors for the city’s online agenda system (Daystar Computer Systems Inc, which supplies Legistar) and CTN’s online video (Leightronix).

Clicking on the link marked “Video” located next to an agenda item causes a video player to pop over the Legistar agenda interface, which can then be played as many times as a viewer would like.

Use of the Video: Regular Meeting Nov. 5

At its regular meeting on Nov. 5. 2009, the Ann Arbor city council went into closed session towards the end of that meeting to consider the performance evaluations of the city attorney, Stephen Postema, and city administrator Roger Fraser. The Chronicle initially misreported the reason for the closed session as relating to pending litigation and attorney-client privileged communication and/or land acquisition.

The Chronicle’s error is to some degree explained, but not excused, by the fact that the purpose for the closed session stated on the evening’s published agenda was to discuss matters related to pending litigation and attorney-client privileged communication and/or land acquisition, not a performance review. [Either purpose could justify a closed session under the Open Meetings Act.]

The inaccuracy concerning the purpose of the closed session persisted in the official minutes of the Nov. 5, 2009 meeting, which were accepted by the council at its Nov. 16, 2009 meeting.

A link to the council agenda allows readers to navigate to the closed session item to see how the motion was made to go into closed session (direct linking to just the video snippets appears not to be possible): [Legistar Agenda Nov. 5 Ann Arbor regular city council meeting]

The video shows that the purpose for the closed session was not misrepresented at the council table – city attorney Stephen Postema can be seen and heard offering clarification that the session was only devoted to the performance reviews, not anything else. [Mike Anglin's (Ward 5) motion at the beginning of the meeting to revise the agenda to include a closed session covering both the performance reviews and pending litigation, attorney-client privileged communication and/or land acquisition is accurately reflected in the official minutes.]

The Open Meetings Act requires that an explanation of the purpose of a closed session be recorded in the minutes of a meeting. As they currently stand, then, the official minutes of the Nov. 5, 2009 council meeting could be argued not to meet that OMA requirement with respect to the closed session held to discuss performance evaluations.

Use of the Video: Special Meeting on Nov. 5

The Chronicle certainly heard the remarks of the city attorney made at the regular meeting on Nov. 5 clarifying the purpose of the regular meeting’s closed session. We understood those remarks – erroneously – to refer to the purpose of the closed session during a special meeting that had been held at 6 p.m. just before the council’s regular meeting.

A half hour before the special meeting took place, The Chronicle verified that the physical paper notice of the meeting, which was posted in the glass case in the lobby of city hall, was accurate with respect to the closed session’s purpose.

But online, the special meeting was initially given public notice with an agenda that did not reflect a closed session for the purpose of evaluating performance. Instead, the agenda reflected a closed session to discuss pending litigation and attorney-client privileged communication and/or land acquisition. The digital artifact of that initial notice can be found in the .pdf file containing the “published agenda” of the special meeting, which persisted online up until the time of the special meeting.

On entering council chambers to attend the special meeting, The Chronicle alerted the city attorney, Stephen Postema, of the disparity between the actual purpose of the closed session and the agenda published online.

When the meeting began, Postema thus indicated to the mayor that the agenda needed to be “corrected.” That interaction can be viewed by first navigating to the Legistar agenda for the special meeting and using the embedded video link: [Legistar agenda Nov. 5 Ann Arbor special city council meeting].

Subsequently, the online “published agenda” was corrected: [revised Nov. 5 special meeting agenda]. The date stamp on that file indicates Nov. 5, 6:17:14 p.m. – after the special meeting started.

The Open Meetings Act requires that notice of special meetings – which must be made at least 18 hours before the meeting – include the general nature of the business to be discussed at the special meeting. The online notice of the special meeting of Nov. 5 did not accurately reflect the purpose of the closed session, thus could be argued not to meet the OMA requirement on notice for special meetings.

In the context of the current budget discussions and the closing of the Ann Arbor News, Paul Bancel went to the podium and asked city council to think about ways to make CTN relevant. One concrete suggestion he had was to make sure some public bodies who do not currently meet in front of CTN cameras have their meetings recorded: Downtown Development Authority board (they’re working on it), the library board, and the public art commission. The board of the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority could be added to the list.

But part of making community television relevant entails an understanding by the community of what it offers. If council has a role to play in making CTN relevant, then so does the community.

For readers who’d like an analysis, a CTN case study by University of Michigan student – and occasional Chronicle commenter – Matt Hampel is compelling reading. For readers who haven’t watched anything on CTN in a while, or who’ve never watched an episode of an Ann Arbor City Council meeting, we’d suggest that tonight’s a good night for viewing.

On Channel 16, May 11, at 7 p.m. CTN will broadcast the city council’s work session on the city budget. Their vote on the budget will take place the following week, May 18.

Last week, live broadcast of public meetings was interrupted due to a cable cut related to the new municipal building construction.  However, Greg McDonald, assistant manager for the city government productions at CTN, spoke to The Chronicle early this afternoon (Monday, May 11), and reported that the connection had been restored. Though there is no signal to the monitor inside the council chambers, the feed out to CTN studios on South Industrial is again working.

After watching the meeting live or later online using CTN’s video on demand feature, perhaps Chronicle readers will be in a better position to think of ways to make CTN more relevant.

Here at The Chronicle, we’re contemplating a slightly different way to approach our meeting coverage to make it somewhat more timely. Tonight at the work session, instead of taking notes on a local laptop hard drive, we’ll try Twittering them live on A2ChronicleMeet. One possible result is that the meeting’s Twitter feed, when cleaned up – but with time-stamp entries left intact – could provide useful time codes for finding content in CTN’s recorded broadcast. It could be a way for viewers of the online stream to orient themselves and find specific places in the video when action at council occurred  – that feature is not currently provided with CTN’s video on demand feature, which allows viewing of the meetings over the web.

That feature might be provided soon by CTN itself. According to McDonald, efforts are underway to integrate the meeting minutes information into the video stream. The technician in charge of the meeting already inserts the subtitles of agenda item numbers into the stream. Making it easier for users to navigate the online video would be a good step forward.

This year, the league is asking Chronicle readers to help come up with questions for the board candidates.

On Monday, April 20 at 7 p.m., league members will interview incumbents Glenn Nelson and Irene Patalan, who are running for two four-year terms. Because their race is uncontested, the format for that CTN broadcast will be a Q&A, according to Jeanine Delay of the League of Women Voters.

On Thursday, April 23 at 7 p.m., the league will host a debate between Adam J. Hollier and Ravi Nigam. They are running for a two-year term, to fill the seat currently held by board president Karen Cross, who is not seeking reelection.

Each of the broadcasts will last 30 minutes. More information about the board and its responsibilities can be found here.

If you have suggestions for questions to board candidates, 1) leave a comment here, or 2) go to the league’s website and click on “Contact us” – there you’ll find a link to email league members. The deadline for submitting questions is Wednesday, April 15.

In Ann Arbor, there are no other races for public office or ballots proposals for the May 5 election. Information for other municipalities is on the Washtenaw County clerk’s website.

As a reminder, April 6 is the last day to register for the May 5 election. Ann Arbor voters can get more information about registering to vote from  the Ann Arbor city clerk’s site.

Here’s an outline of the broadcast content, which can be viewed on CTN at multiple times before the election, or via the video on CTN’s website.

• Opening Statements
• Question: Thinking of neighborhoods, what are the unique qualities of your ward? Does it have good parks, a sense of community with the schools, are there issues that need to be addressed within your ward?
• Question: The greenway has generated a lot of interest among citizens and the city owns three pieces of property that fall within the proposed greenway. What use do you think should be made of those three properties that the city owns and do you think that the greenway is a feasible project?
• Question: Given the recent neighborhood objections to a project known as 601 S. Forest, should the city reinstate a cap on building heights?
• Question: In these challenging financial times, all cities are facing challenging budget decisions. If you were elected, what would be your fiscal priorities for the city?
• Question: As people are increasingly looking to public transportation, are there things the city can do to make the AATA more attractive to potential riders, and do you support additional forms of public transportation?
• Closing Statements

Because there’s plenty of time before the election for readers of The Chronicle to view the candidates’ answers, we’re not summarizing the content of their responses. If you look around this online newspaper site, you’ll see it’s all about watches. So, c’mon – it’s only a half hour of your time – go ahead and watch. Comments are open.

CTN staffer Rob Cross worked the audio during Monday's League of Women Voters debates.

For local election junkies, one of the most reliable ways to get your candidate fix is from the League of Women Voters debates, held before every local election and televised on Community Television Network. This year, The Chronicle took a behind-the-scenes look at the debates, spending Monday evening at CTN’s studios on South Industrial to see exactly what happens off camera. Though the league’s motto is “Because Democracy Isn’t A Spectator Sport,” for The Chronicle that night, it kinda was. (The complete debate schedule, including frequent rebroadcasts, is here. You can find a list of all local candidates for the November election on Washtenaw County’s website.)

Four groups of candidates debated on Monday, each race airing at the top of the hour starting at 6 p.m. But CTN staff and league volunteers were there well before that, setting up in the studio and touching base about their roles for the evening.

Jeanine DeLay holds up cards used to call time during the League of Women Voters debates.

The job of moderating was split between Judy Mich, who handled the first two debates, and Sue Smith, who asked questions during the final two. Jeanine DeLay and Barbara Clarke kept track of time – one with a stopwatch and the other with bright posterboard cards held up off camera to tell candidates how much time was left. Sometimes it was challenging to get the attention of candidates who stared intently into the camera. It called for strategic sign-waving – leaning over to get the sign into the candidate’s field of vision without getting into camera range.

League volunteers weren’t the only ones at hand. Two Community High freshmen – Shada Ahmadmehravi and Melanie Langa – greeted candidates and guests at the CTN entrance and led them back to the studio. Their forum teacher (what we used to call homeroom) told them about the debates, and they thought it might be interesting, though they’re not old enough to vote. They sat in studio for the first debate, but watched the rest from a TV in another room, where they could offer color commentary without having to whisper.

The 6 p.m. debate was for candidates in the 52nd District state House race. Incumbent Democrat Pam Byrnes couldn’t make it, and write-in candidate Tom Partridge hadn’t shown up by the time they were ready to start. That left Republican Eric Lielbriedis, a Saline resident who was the first to arrive, and Libertarian John Boyle of Ann Arbor.

John Boyle watches while Eric Lielbriedis chooses a slip of paper from the hat that Judy Mich holds, which determined the order of opening statements.

The pre-broadcast ritual includes filling water cups, putting microphones on the candidates, doing a sound check and picking which candidate speaks first. This latter task is done by having the candidates pick slips of paper from a rather ratty looking straw hat, which tended to shed onto the table’s black felt covering. Why a hat? Well, apparently it was the closest thing they could find to a suffragette’s chapeau, though there was some good-natured dispute about whether it hit the mark.

In fact, good-natured also describes the pre-debate banter between league volunteers and candidates, some of whom seemed a little nervous under the bright studio lights. There weren’t many people in the audience, but it’s unnerving to know that when the red camera light goes on, whatever you say will be broadcast for all (or, at least, all CTN debate viewers) to see.

Matt Erard and Rebekah Warren, candidates for the 53rd District state House of Representatives, after their debate. The Republican candidate, Christina Brewton, didn't show.

All chatter stops about a minute before air time. Then the music swells, the camera operator points her hand to indicate the show is live and Zoe Behnke, the league’s president, starts her intro. She repeats this for all four debates: A welcome to viewers, a brief description of the nonpartisan league, and a mention of the ballot proposals that voters will see in November. Then she hands off the proceedings to the moderator, who lays out the debate rules, which begin with each candidate making a one-minute opening statement, followed by questions formulated by league committee members.

For both the 52nd District debate and the 53rd District which followed, questions focused on statewide issues: Economic growth, views on alternative energy initiatives, prison reform, the Michigan Business Tax, redistricting, funding for education, environmental protection and others. Each candidate gets 90 seconds to respond to the same question – there are no opportunities to rebut an opponent.

Dana Denha, a CTN camera operator, kept her focus on the debate moderator. A second cameraman shot the candidates. Denha says it's hard to hear the debate – she's listening to the director giving her instructions via her headset.

Tom Partridge showed up a few minutes after the start of the 6 p.m. debate, was shown to his seat on stage, unobtrusively given a mic and worked into the questioning lineup. The debate wrapped up with each candidate giving a two-minute closing statement, some final comments by Zoe Behnke and just enough patriotic music to make you feel like you’re witnessing democracy in action.

Candidates tended to arrive a few minutes early and duck out right after they’re done, though Partridge stayed to chat a bit with 53rd District Democrat incumbent Rebekah Warren before her debate with Matt Erard, the candidate for both the Green and Socialist parties. The Republican candidate, Christina Brewton, had confirmed but was a no-show. There was some speculation about whether she was actively campaigning.

The third debate – with Democrat Jerry Clayton and Republican Dwayne Taylor, candidates for Washtenaw County Sheriff – started at 8 p.m. It was one of three new races that the league added to its expanded debate lineup this year – other new debates are for 15th District Court judge and Washtenaw Community College trustees.

Seeking refuge from the icy studio (kept chilled to accommodate those who were sitting under the hot lights), The Chronicle retreated to the adjoining control room for the final two hours.

Turns out it’s a much different experience from that vantage point. For one thing, you can watch the debate on 12 screens of varying sizes. You notice the visuals more acutely – what color tie a candidate is wearing, for example. And you can talk – or listen to two very funny guys, CTN staffers Rob Cross and Greg McDonald. Cross handled audio while McDonald was director – calling cues to the camera operators to tell them which camera was live, adding graphics to the screen that identified each speaker.

Greg McDonald, director for the debates, keeps an eye on camera shots from the CTN control room. On screen is Jerry Clayton, Democrat candidate for Washtenaw County sheriff, and Zoe Behnke, president of the Ann Arbor League of Women Voters.

These guys had questions of their own, like why do people say “recidivists” instead of “repeat offenders,” or why do jobs like drain commissioner require party affiliations. Unlikely those will be added to the question line-up for the candidates.

The final debate of the evening began at 9 p.m. between candidates for 15th District Court judge: Chris Easthope and Eric Gutenberg. The Chronicle and CTN staff were joined in the control room by Leigh Greden, who came to cheer on fellow city councilmember Easthope – though “cheering” would be one of the things forbidden by league rules: “Do not talk, whisper, move the furniture or make other disruptive noises.” Also, “Do not applaud, even though you are tempted.”

Polite applause is allowed at the end of the debate, however. It’s applause for the democratic process, too – in all its straw-hat-shedding, pink-sign waving, speechifying splendor. It was a fine way to spend four hours.

One final note: We haven’t described the content of these debates because we’d like to encourage you to watch them yourselves when they’re rebroadcast or from the stream on  CTN’s website. And tune in tonight when candidates for three other races – Ann Arbor mayor, Ward 5 city council and Washtenaw Community College trustees – face off, starting at 7 p.m.

Sue Smith holds out the selection hat for Chris Easthope, who gets his mic adjusted by CTN staffer Tim Nagae while Eric Gutenberg reviews his notes. No makeup was applied to any of the candidates during the evening.

Community High freshmen Shada Ahmadmehravi and Melanie Langa worked as volunteers on Monday night.