Hall had been offered the housing commission job at the commission board’s Oct. 19, 2011 meeting. The commission oversees the city of Ann Arbor’s public housing units, as well as the Section 8 program for Washtenaw, Monroe, and western Wayne counties. Hall’s last day with the office of community & economic development is Nov. 23.

Among his various responsibilities at the county, Lenart has managed the brownfield redevelopment program, working in the office of economic development & energy. That department is one of three that are part of a merger approved by the county board of commissioners in August. The merger – which includes the office of community development, and the employment training and community services (ETCS) department – is already underway, but will officially take place at the beginning of 2012. The new office of community & economic development will be led by Mary Jo Callan, current director of the office of community development. The office will have responsibility for a broad range of initiatives, including low-income housing, redevelopment efforts, job training and other economic development programs.

Called ”Seeds for Change: Growing Prosperity in Ypsilanti,” the project is intended to provide job training and placement to unemployed workers interested in agricultural employment, and to offer shared commercial kitchen space and business support to local agri-business entrepreneurs, according to a staff memo. The initiative will also encourage local entities – including governments, universities, hospitals, and other partners – to buy products made from people in this program. Products will be available for purchase with food stamps, to address the nutritional needs of low-income residents and expand the market for locally-produced products.

The project will initially rely on existing county staff, including workforce development resources, as well as local Dept. of Human Services support and possible other public funding, which has not yet been specified. Additional funding from state and federal sources will be needed, according to the staff memo, and the project will seek private grants and volunteer support.

Possible partners include Zingerman’s Community of Businesses, Food Gatherers, Food Systems Economic Partnership, Growing Hope, Think Local First, two local food co-ops, St. Joseph Mercy Hospital and University of Michigan Hospital, local school systems, University of Michigan, Eastern Michigan University, Washtenaw Community College, local working farms and farmers’ markets.

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

At left: Andy LaBarre talks with county commissioners Rob Turner (R-District 1) and Barbara Bergman (D-District 8). Bergman is not planning to run for re-election in 2012, and LaBarre is expected to be a candidate in her district, which is being reconfigured as part of a countywide redistricting set earlier this year and implemented for the 2012 elections. LaBarre, a former aide to U.S. Rep. John Dingell, attended Wednesday's meeting in his role as vice president at the Ann Arbor Ypsilanti Regional Chamber of Commerce, to support the proposed economic development tax.

After an executive session early in the meeting, the board approved a contract with the Michigan Nurses Association-Unit II, representing two county employees. It’s the second of 15 union agreements being negotiated as part of the 2012 and 2013 budget cycle, with the hopes of securing about $8 million in concessions over the two-year period.

Throughout the evening, hallway conversations took place among various county administrators who were involved in labor talks that same night. And later in the meeting, the board voted to set a special meeting on Tuesday, Sept. 13 at 4 p.m. to discuss proposed labor agreements. It was expected that additional deals would be announced at that time.

One of those deals was confirmed on Monday, Sept. 12, by county administrator Verna McDaniel. She reported that the county’s largest union – AFSCME Local 2733, representing 644 employees – has ratified a new contract that will coming to the board for approval on Tuesday.

Commissioners dealt with a range of other budget-related items at last week’s meeting. They gave initial approval to budgets for the public health and CSTS (community support & treatment services) departments, which include about a dozen job cuts and a raft of new and increased fees. And two taxes – to support services for indigent veterans, and for economic development and agriculture – received initial approval from the board. Nine people spoke during public commentary and a public hearing on the economic development tax, all urging the board to support it. However, three of the 10 commissioners present voted against it. Final votes on both millages will be taken at the board’s Sept. 21 meeting.

An item that drew the most discussion among commissioners was a resolution to suspend the county’s use of Construction Unity Board (CUB) agreements, pending the outcome of litigation that’s challenging the validity of the state’s Public Act 98. The resolution passed, but with four commissioners dissenting. The dissent came from two differing perspectives, however. Two Republican commissioners – Dan Smith and Alicia Ping – objected to an amendment that affirmed the value of these agreements. Two Democratic commissioners – Kristin Judge and Conan Smith – voted against suspension because they wanted to keep the CUB agreements in place. A final vote on that issue will occur on Sept. 21.

Commissioners dispatched with several other agenda items, giving initial approval to: (1) appoint Jeffrey Jentzen as the new medical examiner; (2) authorize the issuance of $2.7 million in bonds to help pay for a $3.2 million facility operated by the Western Washtenaw Recycling Authority; and (3) amend a contract regarding the distribution of the county’s accommodation tax.

Several items were also brought up as communications from commissioners and the administration. Among them, commissioner Rob Turner gave an update on the situation in Sylvan Township, which has been struggling with $12.5 million in bonds issued to build a water and wastewater treatment plant intended to serve future development. It’s expected that the township won’t be able to make its May 2012 bond payment. Township officials are putting a millage proposal on the November 2011 ballot to raise funds to repay the county, which will be asked to cover the future bond payments. Information forums for township residents are planned for later this month and early October.

CUB Agreements

On the agenda was a resolution to suspend the county’s use of Construction Unity Board (CUB) agreements, pending the outcome of litigation that’s challenging the validity of the state’s Public Act 98.

CUB agreements are negotiated between local trade unions and contractors, and require that contractors who sign the agreement abide by terms of collective bargaining agreements for the duration of the construction project. In return, the trade unions agree that they will not strike, engage in work slow-downs, set up separate work entrances at the job site or take any other adverse action against the contractor.

However, Act 98 of 2011 – which became effective July 19, 2011 – prohibits municipalities from including in a construction contract anything that would either require or prohibit contractors from entering into agreements with collective bargaining organizations. The act also prohibits discrimination against contractors based on willingness or non-willingness to enter into such agreements.

The law is being challenged in federal court by the Michigan Building and Construction Trades Council, AFL-CIO and the Genesee, Lapeer, Shiawassee Building and Construction Trades Council, AFL-CIO. They are seeking to rule the law invalid, alleging that it is pre-empted by the supremacy clause of the U.S. Constitution and the National Labor Relations Act.

CUB Agreements: Commissioner Discussion

Conan Smith, the board’s chair, began by saying that he appreciated the county’s legal strategy, but he believed their CUB agreements as written do comport with the law signed by Gov. Rick Snyder. He’d be voting against the resolution, he said.

Kristin Judge agreed with Smith, and asked that the resolution be removed from the other resolutions on the consent agenda – which are typically voted on as a group – so that the vote on suspending CUB agreements could be taken separately.

Leah Gunn argued that the county can’t afford another lawsuit. [Her statement was likely an allusion in part to a years-long legal battle with three townships over the cost of police services. At its July 6, 2011 meeting, the board voted to approve the recommendation of a court-ordered facilitator, and the two remaining townships in the case later paid the recommended amount owed to the county. Legal fees for the county were over $1 million, and weren't part of the agreement.]

It’s in the county’s interest to suspend the CUB agreements, Gunn said, then reinstate them at some later date, when it’s “safe” to do so.

Barbara Bergman agreed with Gunn, saying that everyone has to sacrifice and the county shouldn’t deliberately become the target of a possible lawsuit. This doesn’t make her anti-union, she said, but it does make her anti-frivolous-lawsuit.

Rob Turner voiced support for the construction trades, and said he’s been following this legislation closely. Until the court makes a ruling, it’s not a good fiduciary decision to continue CUB agreements. He said he’d be against terminating the agreements, but would vote to suspend them temporarily.

Wes Prater also weighed in to support the CUB agreements in principle. A ruling in federal court will clarify the situation so that there won’t be a slew of cases in state courts to contend with, he said.

CUB Agreements: Amendments

Yousef Rabhi spoke passionately about the state law, saying that “what the governor has done is wrong – flat wrong.” Going after workers flies in the face of work that’s been done over decades to protect workers, he said. The board can take a stance about how they feel regarding the law, he added, but they have to comply with it.

In that context, Rabhi proposed two amendments:

(1) Be it further resolved that Washtenaw County continues to support the values that a CUB agreement embodies and asserts the effectiveness of such agreements in ensuring a fair and cooperative workplace.

(2) Be it further resolved that upon such time as it is permitted under State and/or Federal law or otherwise ruled legal by State and/or Federal Courts, it is understood that the County will reinstate its CUB agreement policy.

While they need to live within the laws that are enacted, Rabhi said, everyone needs to be vigilant about what’s happening in Lansing. And in 2012, he added, it’s important to vote for people who won’t do this kind of thing – because after the state laws are passed, the county can’t do anything about it.

Gunn, who had moved the original resolution, offered to accept the amendments as friendly, but Alicia Ping objected. [Under Robert's Rules of Order, friendly amendments require approval by the entire board. If any commissioners object, an amendment can't be considered friendly and needs to go through the entire formal voting process.]

Several commissioners then expressed support for the amendments. But Dan Smith said while he didn’t have a problem with the second amendment, he felt that the first amendment changed the tone of the resolution considerably. The resolution proposes a pragmatic solution to an immediate problem, he noted, and it was important to avoid the expense of a lawsuit. However, the first amendment takes a stance on the value of a CUB agreement, and he didn’t want to include that. This was not the time to debate the policy of CUB agreements, he said.

Outcome on amendments: The amendments were approved on an 8-2 vote, with dissent from Dan Smith (R-District 2) and Alicia Ping (R-District 3).

After the vote, Dan Smith said that as amended, he’d now have to vote against the resolution, though he was previously satisfied with it. Ping agreed, adding that she didn’t like CUB agreements but that she had an even bigger problem – she didn’t think the state should tell local governments how to do business. Legislators in Lansing should take care of their own business “before interfering with ours,” she said.

Judge said she was concerned about possible litigation regarding existing CUB agreements on county projects. She also wondered whether the county could simply not enter into construction contracts, which would result in no CUB agreements being necessary.

Curtis Hedger, the county’s corporation counsel, reported that according to the law, CUB agreements that pre-date the enactment of the law can remain in place. He said there are several county projects waiting to go out for bids – including some with the office of the water resources commissioner, and county parks & recreation – pending the board’s vote on CUB agreements.

Outcome on main resolution at Ways & Means Committee meeting: On a 6-4 vote, commissioners gave initial approval to suspend the county’s use of Construction Unity Board (CUB) agreements. Voting against the resolution were Kristin Judge (D-District 7), Alicia Ping (R-District 3), Dan Smith (R-District 2) and Conan Smith (D-District 10). Ronnie Peterson was absent. 

All resolutions are voted on twice by the board: first at the meeting of Ways & Means, a committee of the entire board; and finally at the regular board meeting. Ways & Means and regular board meetings are held back-to-back, but typically a resolution that’s passed at the Ways & Means meeting is considered at the regular board meeting two weeks later.

However, for some items that the administration or board wants to expedite, votes are taken the same evening at both meetings. That was the case with the resolution on the CUB agreements, which was on the agenda for both the Sept. 7 Ways & Means meeting and the regular board meeting.

Hedger noted that in order to pass the resolution on a final vote that same night, eight votes were needed at the regular board meeting.

Outcome at the regular board meeting: The resolution suspending CUB agreements passed by a 6-4 vote. Dissenting were Kristin Judge (D-District 7), Alicia Ping (R-District 3), Dan Smith (R-District 2) and Conan Smith (D-District 10). Ronnie Peterson was absent. Because it did not receive an 8-vote majority, the resolution requires another vote at the Sept. 21 board meeting.

Labor Issues

Two items during the Sept. 7 meeting related to ongoing labor negotiations for the upcoming 2012-2013 budget.

The county hopes to see about $8 million in labor concessions for the two-year budget cycle, to help address a projected $17.5 million deficit. There are 17 unions representing the county workforce, but two bargaining units – the Police Officers Association of Michigan (POAM) and the Command Officers Association of Michigan (COAM) – earlier this year reached agreements that aren’t part of the $8 million goal. The POAM and COAM deals are for a four-year period through 2014.

Labor Issues: Nurses Union

Early in the meeting, commissioners held an executive session to discuss a collective bargaining agreement with the Michigan Nurses Association – Unit II, a union representing two county employees. When they emerged, a resolution to approve the agreement was added to the agenda.

The contract is effective from Sept. 7, 2011 through Dec. 31, 2013, with no wage increases in 2012 or 2013. The agreement also includes several changes, including:

• Co-pays will increase. For example, co-pays for emergency room visits will increase from $50 to $250. An office visit co-pay will be $40.
• Union members will now pay $150 per month in a medical premium sharing for certain preferred provider organization (PPO) programs.
• As of Jan. 1, 2012, all employees under this contract will contribute 9% to their retirement plan.
• Employees will take 10 annual “banked leave” days – similar to unpaid furlough days.
• Longevity pay will be eliminated for new hires after Jan. 1, 2012. [Longevity pay is a benefit provided to union employees based on years of service with the organization (generally after 5 years of service). Employees would receive between 3%-9% of their prior year’s wages, paid out either in a lump sum payment or bi-weekly throughout the year.]

In addition, tuition reimbursement, a $1 per day reimbursement for employees who use their own vehicles for work, and the “excessive vacation payout” program will be eliminated as of Jan. 1, 2012. Step increases (automatic pay increases) will also be eliminated from Jan. 1, 2012 through Dec. 31, 2013.

The contract includes a “me too” clause that would provide parity if another union contract is negotiated for higher wages or benefits. There’s also a “reopener” contingency – if the county sees at least a 2% revenue gain by the end of 2012, the contract could be reopened to consider wage increases.

The agreement is estimated to save the county about $24,300.

It’s the second of the 15 union agreements being negotiated as part of the 2012 and 2013 budget cycle. Commissioners had previously approved an agreement with the Michigan Nurses Association – Unit I, representing 13 public health nurses and nurse coordinators in the county’s health services department. That agreement is expected to achieve an annual savings of $132,000.

Outcome: Commissioners unanimously gave both initial and final approval to the collective bargaining agreement with Michigan Nurses Association – Unit II.

Labor Issues: Special Meeting

Near the end of their Sept. 7 meeting, board chair Conan Smith introduced a resolution setting a special meeting of the board for Tuesday, Sept. 13 at 4 p.m. to discuss proposed labor agreements. The meeting will be held in the boardroom of the county administration building at 220 N. Main St. in Ann Arbor. It’s expected that the board will be asked to vote on additional collective bargaining agreements at that time.

Outcome: Without discussion, commissioners approved the special meeting for Sept. 13.

Act 88 Economic Development & Agriculture Tax

Commissioners were asked to give initial approval at Wednesday’s meeting to authorize the levy of 0.05 mills in December 2011 for support of economic development and agriculture. That represents an increase over the 0.043 mills that were previously levied for Act 88. The board also held a public hearing on the issue.

If given final approval at the board’s Sept. 21 meeting, this will be the third consecutive year that the tax has been levied. The millage – authorized under the state’s Act 88 – would cost homeowners $5 for each $100,000 of their home’s taxable value. Act 88 predates the state’s Headlee Amendment. That means the millage can be approved by the board without a voter referendum.

The anticipated $688,913 in millage proceeds will be allocated to several local entities: Ann Arbor SPARK ($230,000), SPARK East business incubator ($50,000), the county’s dept. of community & economic development ($131,149), Eastern Leaders Group ($100,000), promotion of heritage tourism ($65,264), Food System Economic Partnership (FSEP – $15,000), Washtenaw 4-H, operated by the Michigan State University Extension program ($82,500) and Washtenaw Farm Council 4-H Youth Show ($15,000).

Commissioners were given a report outlining activities that Act 88 revenue has supported to date in 2011. [.pdf of Act 88 activities report]

Act 88 Economic Development & Agriculture Tax: Commentary, Public Hearing

A total of nine people addressed the board regarding the Act 88 millage, all in support of it.

During the meeting’s first opportunity for public commentary, three people spoke on the issue. Leigh Greden, a former Ann Arbor city councilmember who now serves as Eastern Michigan University’s executive director of government and community relations, told commissioners that he couldn’t stay for the public hearing later in the meeting, but he wanted to ask them to support the Act 88 millage. He noted that he was co-chair, along with county administrator Verna McDaniel, of the Eastern Leaders Group (ELG), which gets funding from Act 88. He characterized Ann Arbor SPARK as a national model for generating jobs, and described projects supported by the ELG and the Ypsilanti Downtown Development Authority to improve the city. He concluded by noting that the community supports the millage, as evidenced by resolutions of support from the Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti city councils and DDAs, and the Ann Arbor Ypsilanti Regional Chamber of Commerce.

Paul Krutko, president and CEO of Ann Arbor SPARK, thanked the board for funding the organization for the past two years with Act 88 proceeds, and said he felt fortunate that he was able to assume his job earlier this year as head of SPARK. When he previously worked in Silicon Valley, Krutko said, people there were aware of the Ann Arbor area and of SPARK’s economic development efforts. He handed out a description of SPARK’s accomplishments, saying “I think these results speak for themselves.”

Saline mayor Gretchen Driskell began by observing that the only reason the Saline city council doesn’t have a resolution of support the millage is that they haven’t yet passed one – that’s expected to happen at the council’s meeting on Sept. 12, she said. Noting that she serves on SPARK’s executive committee, Driskell said that in addition to job creation, SPARK helps retain jobs in the county, too. The organization’s budget also is leveraged to bring in crucial funding from other sources, she said.

County board chair Conan Smith talks with Jennifer Fike, executive director of the Food System Economic Partnership (FSEP), which receives support from a millage levied by the county.

Six others spoke during a public hearing on the Act 88 millage later in the meeting. Jennifer Fike, executive director of the Food System Economic Partnership (FSEP), thanked commissioners for their previous funding of the program. Based in Washtenaw County, FSEP serves a five-county area and focuses on economic development via the local food system.

Fike described several FSEP activities that have taken place over the past year, including: (1) support for a Washtenaw County “food hub;” (2) work with the University of Michigan food purchasing to promote the use of more locally produced food in dining halls; (3) support of the Tilian Farm Development Center; and (4) expansion of the Ann Arbor Public Schools farm-to-school program. She then read a statement of support from FSEP board member Sharon Sheldon, who’s also an administrator with the Washtenaw County public health department. Fike wrapped up her commentary by inviting commissioners to the Homegrown Festival on Saturday, Sept. 10 from 6-11 p.m. at the Ann Arbor Farmers Market.

Tim Colbeck, director of the Ypsilanti Downtown Development Authority, noted that the DDA board had passed a resolution of support for the millage. He described how the city had leveraged the 2011 Act 88 funds, partnering with the Eastern Leaders Group to support renovations and facade improvements in downtown Ypsilanti. The funds were very significant for the city, he said, especially because it brought positive change to a “dis-invested” downtown area. He urged commissioners to continue to support the millage.

Andy LaBarre, vice president of government affairs & administration for the Ann Arbor Ypsilanti Regional Chamber of Commerce, spoke briefly, referring commissioners to a letter they had recently received from chamber president Diane Keller. [.pdf of letter from Keller] In the letter, Keller stated the chamber’s general support for the millage, but suggested that the county be more transparent about how appropriations are made to groups that receive funding. The letter also reiterates the chamber’s support for cooperation among governmental units and consolidation, where appropriate.

Ypsilanti city councilmember Pete Murdock said he was representing Ypsilanti mayor Paul Schreiber and other councilmembers in support of the Act 88 millage. It’s about “jobs, jobs, jobs,” he said, adding that the Act 88 funding helps create jobs. He urged commissioners to renew the millage.

Lynn Rich of the Washtenaw Farm Council described activities at the annual 4-H Youth Show. He noted that this year there had been over 600 participants and about 7,000 exhibits at the event, held during the last week in July. He asked commissioners to continue their support.

Thomas Partridge noted that he had been elected president of his high school student body and president of the 4-H club in the same year that John F. Kennedy was elected U.S. president. Partridge endorsed the Act 88 millage, with some reservations. The county and its civil servants should support economic development activities directly, rather than outsource those activities to outside organizations like Ann Arbor SPARK, he said.

Act 88 Economic Development & Agriculture Tax: Commissioner Discussion

Rob Turner, who also is owner of Turner Electric Service in Dexter, noted that he has two new customers and two existing customers that have all benefited from SPARK’s services, and had created jobs.

Rolland Sizemore Jr. asked whether there were job-shadowing opportunities at SPARK for local high school and college students. If not, there should be, he said, indicating that it’s important to mentor local youth and keep them in this area after they graduate. Krutko replied that since he was relatively new to SPARK, he wasn’t familiar with all of the organization’s programs. However, he added, they are emphasizing the retention of young talent.

Outcome: Commissioners voted 7-3 to give initial approval to levy the Act 88 millage. Dissenting were Alicia Ping (R-District 3), Wes Prater (D-District 4) and Dan Smith (R-District 2). They did not indicate during deliberations why they were voting against the millage. When Prater voted against it a year ago, he said the tax shouldn’t be levied unless it was authorized by voters. This is the first time Ping and Smith voted on the measure – they were first elected to the board in November 2010. A final vote is expected on Sept. 21.

Indigent Veterans Relief Tax

Commissioners were asked to give initial approval to levy 0.025 mills in December 2011 to pay for services for indigent veterans.

The millage would cost homeowners about $2.50 for every $100,000 of a home’s taxable value. It’s expected to raise $344,486 – about $11,000 less than in 2010, due to projected decreases of property values. The county first began levying this millage in 2008. Because the Veterans Relief Fund Act predates the state’s Headlee Amendment, it can be approved by the board without a voter referendum. Services are administered through the county’s department of veterans affairs.

One person – Thomas Partridge – spoke at a public hearing on the millage held at the board meeting. He was supportive of the tax, and saluted all members of the armed forces. There’s inadequate money to fund the growing needs of veterans, he said, especially because of foreign conflicts like the war in Iraq. However, Partridge said he’d like to see the needs of veterans addressed in the broader context of the needs of the general citizenry for affordable housing, health care, education and job training.

Outcome: Commissioners unanimously voted to give initial approval for the indigent veterans relief tax. A final vote will be taken at the board’s Sept. 21 meeting.

Public Health Budget

A net of nearly seven full-time positions will be eliminated in the 2011-2012 public health budget that was given initial approval by commissioners at their Sept. 7 meeting.

The $11,839,496 budget, which will receive a final vote at the board’s Sept. 21 meeting, includes a $3,553,575 allocation from the county’s general fund – a net decrease of $583,597 from the previous year. Unlike the county’s general fund budget, which is aligned to the calendar year, the public health budget runs from Oct. 1 through Sept. 30, in sync with the state’s fiscal year.

Though a total of nearly 12 full-time-equivalent positions (a combination of part-time and full-time jobs) will be eliminated in the proposed budget, five positions will be created or reclassified, for a net loss of nearly seven FTEs.

The budget also calls for a raft of new fees and fee increases. Effective Jan. 1, 2012, new fees will be required for a change of restaurant ownership ($250), a temporary food license late fee ($60), a time-of-sale authorization extension fee ($50), and a pollution prevention late reporting fee ($25).

A sampling of the fee increases includes a septic tank only permit (from $52 to $100), a new-build well permit (from $187 to $250), and a swimming pool inspection (from $56 to $150). Cremation permit fees will be increased from $40 to $50. [.pdf of complete 2012 fee schedule for public health]

Outcome: Without discussion, the public health department budget was given initial approval by a unanimous vote. A final vote is expected at the board’s Sept. 21 meeting.

Public Health: Medical Examiner

Dick Fleece, director of the public health department, introduced Jeffrey Jentzen and Bader Cassin to the board at Wednesday’s meeting. On the agenda was a resolution to appoint Jentzen to a four-year term as the county’s medical examiner, and Cassin as deputy medical examiner. Currently, Cassin serves as medical examiner, a role he’s held since 1996, and Jentzen is his deputy. Fleece told commissioners that the change in appointments is part of a transition at the medical examiner’s office.

From left: Dick Fleece, director of the Washtenaw County public health department, and Bader Cassin, county medical examiner. Cassin will become the deputy medical examiner, pending final approval by the county board of commissioners. He'll be replaced by Jeffrey Jentzen, who currently serves as deputy medical examiner.

The county contracts with the University of Michigan Health System (UMHS) for the medical examiner’s administration, customer service and autopsies – UMHS provides field investigators, administrative support, customer service, and autopsy assistants. Jentzen is a UM professor of pathology. Cassin is a clinical lecturer with UM’s pathology department. Both men attended Wednesday’s meeting.

Of the $3,553,575 portion of the public health department 2011-2012 budget that’s coming from the county’s general fund, $548,052 is allocated for the medical examiner’s office.

Fleece said the department has been having conversations for 2.5 years about making a transition in the medical examiner’s office. He noted that Jentzen had previously been a medical examiner in Milwaukee, dealing with high-profile cases like the serial killer Jeffrey Dahmer. Jentzen told commissioners that he realized the importance of the position, and that he hoped to uphold the standards set by Cassin, who had served as an excellent model. Cassin thanked commissioners for their support for the past 16 years.

Concerns were raised about Jentzen earlier this year during public commentary at the county board’s April 6, 2011 meeting. Douglas Smith criticized the county medical examiner‘s autopsy report on Stanley Jackson Jr., who died hours after being Tasered during an August 2010 drug raid in Superior Township. Smith told commissioners there were a number of controversial cases in Milwaukee when Jentzen was medical examiner there.

At Wednesday’s meeting, commissioner Kristin Judge praised Jentzen for his “phenomenal” resumé, and said the medical examiner’s office is another example of silent government working on behalf of citizens. Government isn’t a bad word, she said, adding that she appreciated the work of the office.

Outcome: The board unanimously voted to give initial approval to the medical examiner appointments. A final vote on the appointments is expected at the Sept. 21 meeting.

CSTS Budget

A net loss of five full-time-equivalent (FTE) positions is part of a proposed 2011-2012 budget for Washtenaw County’s community support & treatment services (CSTS) department. The CSTS budget runs from Oct. 1 through Sept. 30, in sync with the state’s fiscal year. The county operates on a calendar year cycle.

The proposed $26,838,557 budget calls for eliminating seven FTEs and putting one position on hold/vacant status, but creating three new FTE positions, for a net loss of five FTEs. In addition, 19 FTE positions will be reclassified.

Though CSTS is a county department employing about 300 people, it receives 98.8% of its funding from the Washtenaw Community Health Organization, a partnership between the county and the University of Michigan Health System. The WCHO is an entity that receives state and federal funding to provide services for people with serious mental illness, developmental disabilities and substance abuse disorders. At this point, WCHO “leases” its employees from the county, and contracts for services through CSTS. Commissioners were briefed on a reorganization of the WCHO at a July 7, 2011 working session. The changes are aimed at limiting the county’s financial liabilities.

Commissioner Yousef Rabhi asked about the reclassifications. CSTS director Donna Sabourin, who had just emerged from negotiations with bargaining units representing CSTS employees, said details were being finalized about the job descriptions for the tentative new labor agreement. She promised to have more information for commissioners soon, but clarified that promotions were not automatic, and required satisfactory job performance as well as a minimum of two years in an employee’s current position.

Outcome: Commissioners gave initial approval to the CSTS 2011-2012 budget, with a final vote expected on Sept. 21.

Western Washtenaw Recycling Authority Bonds

Commissioners were asked to give initial approval to authorize issuance of $2.7 million in bonds, backed by the county’s full faith and credit, to help pay for a $3.2 million facility operated by the Western Washtenaw Recycling Authority (WWRA).

The WWRA plans to use $500,000 from its reserves to fund part of the project. The $2.7 million in bonds would be repaid through special assessments on households in participating WWRA communities – the city of Chelsea, Dexter Township, Lima Township, Lyndon Township, and Manchester Township. Bridgewater Township is participating in the WWRA but will not help fund the new facility. The village of Manchester and Sylvan Township have withdrawn from the WWRA.

County commissioners had been briefed on the proposal at their July 7, 2011 working session. Since then, the WWRA board has approved adding a county commissioner to their board. Rob Turner – a Republican representing District 1, which covers large portions of western Washtenaw – will serve in that role.

Outcome: Without discussion, commissioners gave initial approval to the issuance of bonds for the WWRC facility. A final vote is expected on Sept. 21.

Accommodation Tax Contract Amended

The board was asked to amend a contract regarding the distribution of the county’s accommodation tax.

From left: Debbie Locke-Daniel, president of the Ypsilanti Convention & Visitors Bureau, and Mary Kerr, president of the Ann Arbor Convention & Visitors Bureau, confer prior to the start of the Sept. 7, 2011 county board meeting.

The county treasurer’s office collects a 5% excise tax from hotels, motels, and bed & breakfasts, which is then distributed to the Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti convention & visitors bureaus and used to promote tourism and convention business. The county board had raised the tax from 2% to 5% in December 2008.

In 2010, the tax brought in $3.539 million, a 16.4% increase over the previous year. Year-to-date tax revenues, as of July 31, are $2.127 million. [.pdf of county treasurer's report on accommodation tax collections through July 2011]

The current five-year contract, approved in December 2009, calls for the county to retain 10% of that tax to defray the cost of collection and enforcement, which is handled by the county treasurer’s office. (Until 2009, the county had only retained 5% for this purpose.) The remaining funds are split, with 75% going to the Ann Arbor Convention & Visitors Bureau, and 25% going to the Ypsilanti Convention & Visitors Bureau.

The contract amendment addresses the process for distributing excess funds that might accumulate from the county’s 10%, if that amount exceeds the expenses required to administer and enforce compliance with the tax. Beginning in May 2013, the county will continue to retain 10% of the tax proceeds, plus 10% of any remaining fund balance. But if additional funds accumulate in the fund balance, the excess funds are to be returned proportionally to the two convention & visitors bureaus – 75% to Ann Arbor, and 25% to Ypsilanti.

As of July 31, 2011, the county fund balance for the accommodation tax stood at $779,475.

Although presidents of both bureaus attended Wednesday’s meeting – Mary Kerr from Ann Arbor, and Debbie Locke-Daniel from Ypsilanti – they did not make a formal presentation nor were they questioned by the board. They last gave an update to commissioners at the board’s April 7, 2010 meeting.

Outcome: Without discussion, the board unanimously voted to give initial approval to the contract amendment for allocating funds from the accommodation tax. Final approval is expected at the board’s Sept. 21 meeting.

Urban County Renewal, Expansion

Commissioners were asked to give final approval to continue the county’s participation in the Washtenaw Urban County program – from July 1, 2012 to June 30, 2015 – and to expand the program to include six additional jurisdictions. Initial approval had been given at the board’s Aug. 3 meeting.

Saline mayor Gretchen Driskell talks with county board chair Conan Smith. The city of Saline is a new member of the Washtenaw Urban County, which the board voted to expand on Wednesday. Driskell was at the meeting to speak in favor of an economic development tax.

“Urban County” is a designation of the U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development, identifying a county with more than 200,000 people. With that designation, individual governments within the Urban County can become members, making them entitled to an allotment of funding through a variety of HUD programs, including the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnerships. Those two programs provide funding for projects to benefit low- and moderate-income residents, focused on housing, human services and other community development efforts.

Washtenaw County and the townships of Ann Arbor, Ypsilanti, Pittsfield, Superior, Northfield, Salem, and Bridgewater received the Urban County designation in 2002. Later, the city of Ypsilanti and Scio Township joined, and in 2009 the city of Ann Arbor – which previously received HUD funding directly – joined as well, roughly doubling the amount of money available in the Urban County’s funding pool.

New jurisdictions that are joining the Urban County for the next funding cycle are the city of Saline, the village of Manchester, and the townships of Dexter, Lima, Manchester, and Saline.

Staff support for the Urban County programs comes from the joint county/city of Ann Arbor office of community development.

Outcome: Commissioners voted unanimously to give final approval to participate in the Urban County and expand its membership.

Sept. 11 Remembrance

During one of his turns at public commentary, Thomas Partridge called for the board to memorialize the week of Sept. 11 each year, to honor the lives that were lost during the 2001 terrorist attacks.

Later in the meeting, commissioner Rob Turner thanked Partridge for his suggestion, and introduced a resolution designating Sept. 11 as a day of reflection and remembrance for the 2001 attacks. Leah Gunn noted that the city of Ann Arbor would be holding a memorial on the morning of Sept. 11 at the downtown fire station near city hall.

Outcome: Commissioners unanimously passed the resolution of remembrance for Sept. 11.

Federal Justice Grant

On the agenda was a resolution giving final approval to apply for an Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance grant. Initial authorization had been given by commissioners at their Aug. 3, 2011 meeting.

The $42,587 grant would be awarded to the Washtenaw County sheriff’s office by the U.S. Dept. of Justice’s Bureau of Justice Assistance. The funds would be used to support the sheriff’s community outreach program, according to a staff memo. Specifically, the grant would fund a part-time community engagement coordinator and two of the program’s five peer outreach workers.

No one spoke during a public hearing at the meeting to get input on how the grant will be used.

Outcome: Without discussion, commissioners voted unanimously to give final approval to apply for the Edward Byrne grant.

Insurance Providers

Commissioners were asked to give initial approval to accept proposed quotes for insurance coverage in seven areas, totaling $1,021,275 in premiums.

The Arthur J. Gallagher Insurance Agency has proposed obtaining coverage from several providers for the areas of: (1) property coverage, including boiler and machinery – Chubb Insurance Co.; (2) general liability, law enforcement liability, public officials liability, and auto liability – Genesis Insurance Co.;(3) crime – Great American Insurance Co.; (4) fiduciary liability – Chubb Insurance Co.; (5) lawyers professional liability – Underwriters at Lloyd’s London; (6) judicial liability – Underwriters at Lloyd’s London; and (7) medical professional – Hudson Insurance Co.

Outcome: There was no discussion on this item, which commissioners approved unanimously. The board will take a final vote on the item on Sept. 21.

Information Technology Ranking

This summer, Washtenaw County received 4th place in a national ranking of county information technology departments. The ranking is from the 2011 Digital Counties Survey, conducted by the Center for Digital Government and the National Association of Counties (NACo).

At left, Andy Brush of the county's IT staff presents the 2011 Digital Counties Survey plaque to Conan Smith, chair of the board of commissioners. Washtenaw County ranked 4th in the survey of county IT departments nationwide.

The award was presented on July 16 at the NACo annual conference in Portland, Oregon. Kristin Judge, a member of NACo’s justice and public safety steering committee, accepted the award on behalf of the county.

At Wednesday’s meeting, Andy Brush – interim head of the county’s IT staff – presented a plaque to the board in recognition of that achievement. Brush noted that last year, Washtenaw County ranked 9th, and that they’ve been in the top 10 for eight out of the last nine years.

In accepting the plaque on behalf of the board, Conan Smith quipped that he was looking forward to the year when the county would rank No. 3.

Misc. Commentary & Communications

During the evening there are multiple opportunities for communications from the administration and commissioners, as well as public commentary. Here are some highlights.

Misc. Comm/Comm: Sylvan Township

Rob Turner gave an update on the situation in Sylvan Township, including details on how the township plans to pay off debt to the county if the township defaults on bond payments, as it’s likely to do.

Sylvan Township has been struggling with $12.5 million in bonds issued to build a water and wastewater treatment plant intended to serve future development. The plan was to use revenue related to that development – from connection fees to the system – to cover the bond payments. However, the economy soured and development hasn’t materialized. Last year, the county board approved a bond refunding in order to restructure the debt and lower the township’s bond payments. If the township defaults, the county has the right to make a special assessment of township residents to cover those bond payments.

Turner read a statement outlining the chronology of events in the township. [.pdf of Turner's statement] He said the township will be able to make its November 2011 bond payment, but is likely to default on the payment in May 2012. After discussions with the county, the township board recently voted to put a proposal for a 4.75 mill tax on the November 2011 ballot, with proceeds to repay the cost of the bond payments that would be made by the county.

Turner noted that three forums have been scheduled to talk to residents about this proposal: On Sept. 15, Sept. 19 and Oct. 13 – each meeting begins at 7 p.m. at the Washington Street Educational Center Auditorium in Chelsea.

Turner said an agreement would be worked out for the county board to review, outlining the township’s repayment schedule. He hoped the board would support it, and that it would resolve the problem that’s been looming for so long. He apologized to commissioners that this issue had taken so much of his time, noting that he hadn’t been as thorough with some of his other board work recently.

Several commissioners praised Turner for his work. Barbara Bergman told him that no one would ever accuse him of being a slacker. Turner said the people who have really sacrificed are his family, since he’s had to attend many community meetings and hasn’t spent as much time at home. He then thanked his colleagues on the board, saying he doesn’t always agree with them, but he’s grown to respect and care deeply for them.

Misc. Comm/Comm: Road Commission

Kristin Judge highlighted a letter that had been sent to the board by Doug Fuller, chair of the Washtenaw County Road Commission – it was included as an item of communications in the board’s packet for the Sept. 7 meeting. [.pdf of Fuller's letter] The letter, she noted, requests that a representative of the road commission present a report to the board regarding the county’s road conditions.

Yousef Rabhi, who chairs the board’s working sessions, said he’d been asked by the road commission that they be added to an upcoming working session agenda. However, a review by county staff determined that the road commission’s report must be presented at the board’s annual meeting on Sept. 21. That’s been communicated to Fuller, he said, adding that a working session will also be scheduled for a future date.

Misc. Comm/Comm: Police Services

Alicia Ping reported that the county’s police services steering committee (PSSC) met recently for the first time since April. The advisory group is working out contracts with local municipalities that contract with the county for sheriff deputy patrols. Ping said they expect to have tentative contracts for review by the board within the next month or so.

By way of background, a PSSC subcommittee has been meeting this year to hammer out details of the cost and price of the deputy patrols, which has been a contentious – and litigious – issue over the past several years. Most recently, at its June 1, 2011 meeting the board passed a resolution that set the price of a police services unit (the amount that municipalities will be charged) at $150,594 in 2012, with 1% increases each year through 2015.

At Wednesday’s meeting, Rolland Sizemore Jr. complained that he’s heard two different things related to the contracts – that it will cost the county more money if they hire additional sheriff’s deputies, and that it will cost them more money if they lay off deputies. Both things can’t be true, he said, adding that he wanted someone to clarify those conflicting statements.

Misc. Comm/Comm: Opting Out?

Ping noted that among the communications provided in the board’s packet for the Sept. 7 meeting, there were notices of public hearings related to two businesses that are applying for “industrial facilities exemption certificates” in the city of Saline. The certificates would exempt the businesses – McNaughton & Gunn Inc., and Klingelberg-Oerlikon Tec Center – from paying a certain percentage of their property taxes for a period of time. [.pdf of notices]

Ping wondered what the county’s options were if the board wanted to opt-out of the exemption. She noted that the issue had been discussed earlier this year, in the context of the county’s equalization report that was presented at the April 20, 2011 meeting. From The Chronicle’s report:

Wes Prater pointed out that for tax-capture districts in local municipalities, the county has the option of opting-out – in that case, they would continue to receive full revenues. However, there’s a 60-day window to make that decision, and often they don’t get information about it in timely way, he said. As a result, he added, the long-term revenues that the county is missing “is really having an effect on the budget, I think.”

Rolland Sizemore Jr. asked that [Yousef] Rabhi – who’s chair of the board’s working sessions – add that topic for a future session.

[County equalization director Raman] Patel noted that it’s a political decision to be made, and that there’s no uniformity among jurisdictions about how to handle these tax-capture districts.

Prater said it’s been the county’s longstanding policy to do nothing – not to opt out. That’s ok, he said, if that’s what they decide to do. But it’s worth discussing.

Curtis Hedger, the county’s corporation counsel, said he’d look into it and provide information about options that the board might have.

Misc. Comm/Comm: Huron Valley Child Guidance Clinic

Barbara Bergman reported that county CSTS children’s services staff were forced to vacate a building at 2940 Ellsworth in Ypsilanti that they leased from the Huron Valley Child Guidance because of problems with the facility – the building is in bad shape and it wasn’t safe for staff to work there, she said. The county was the sole tenant, she said, and their lease was up at the end of September. She expressed thanks to Huron Valley Child Guidance, and said she hoped the sale of the land would cover what the group owed on it. She also thanked county administration for helping facilitate the move to extra space in the county’s juvenile detention center.

Misc. Comm/Comm: Regional Summit

Conan Smith announced that Washtenaw County has been invited to participate in a southeast Michigan regional summit on Sept. 30. In past years, the summit included Detroit and the counties of Wayne, Oakland and Macomb. This year, Washtenaw and St. Clair counties will be included, and the topics will focus on regional cooperation and transportation. Smith and Kristin Judge will be participating in the planning stages on Washtenaw County’s behalf.

From left: Peter Simms, deputy county clerk, and Curtis Hedger, the county's corporation counsel.

Misc. Comm/Comm: New Deputy Clerk

Peter Simms was introduced as the new deputy clerk – one of the responsibilities for that job is to take minutes and record votes at the board meeting, and the Sept. 7 meeting was the first one that Simms attended. Jason Brooks, who formerly held that job for several years but is now working in the county administrator’s office, told commissioners that Simms is a recent graduate of the University of Akron. Simms originally hails from Maine, but has moved to the Chelsea area. That news elicited a “Way to go!” from commissioner Rob Turner, whose district includes the city of Chelsea.

Misc. Comm/Comm: Events

Several events were highlighted in various communications during the evening. County administrator Verna McDaniel noted that Sept. 15 is the kickoff event for this year’s Washtenaw United Way fundraising campaign. The lunch runs from 11:30 a.m. until 1 p.m. at Eastern Michigan University’s Student Center.

Commissioner Kristin Judge mentioned three events:

• The Huron River Watershed Council’s Suds on the River fundraiser on Thursday, Sept. 15. Washtenaw County water resources commissioner Janis Bobrin is one of the event’s hosts.
• The annual golf outing to raise funds for the Washtenaw County Hazardous Materials Response Team is on Monday, Sept. 26 at the Barton Hills Golf Club.
• The Michigan Cyber Summit, which Judge has been instrumental in organizing, will be held on Friday, Oct. 7 from 8 a.m. until 3:30 p.m. at the Marriott Eagle Crest Hotel and Conference Center. Keynote speakers are expected to include Gov. Rick Snyder, U.S. Rep. John Dingell, and Secretary Janet Napolitano of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

Misc. Comm/Comm: Public Commentary

Ellen Schulmeister, CEO of the Shelter Association of Washtenaw County, thanked commissioners for the county’s past support of her organization. She said she wanted to report on the county’s return on investment by telling a story about a woman who came to the Delonis Center, a homeless shelter on Huron Street run by the association. Schulmeister described the services that the center provided to help the woman overcome her barriers to self-sufficiency, and reported that the woman now has a job and is renting her own place. Diana Neering, the shelter association’s chief development officer and director of communications, told another story about the help that they’d given to a 45-year-old mentally impaired man.

In addition to speaking at two of the three public hearings at Wednesday’s meeting, Thomas Partridge spoke during the four opportunities for public commentary. He objected to the state law allowing for medical marijuana, saying that it was turning Ann Arbor into a drug capital of the United States. He noted that many medical marijuana advocates had attended the Sept. 6 Ann Arbor city council meeting. He contended that one of them – Chuck Ream – had made threatening remarks about a woman who had called law enforcement about Ream’s medical marijuana dispensary, which was subsequently raided. It was important to ensure the safety of people who make such complaints, he said.

Partridge also advocated for the recall of Gov. Rick Snyder and other Republicans in the state legislature, saying they had started a “destructive juggernaut.” He urged commissioners to put an override of the state’s Headlee Amendment onto the next available ballot.

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

Absent: Ronnie Peterson

Special board meeting: A special board meeting to discuss labor agreements has been scheduled for Tuesday, Sept. 13, 2011 at 4 p.m. at the county administration building, 220 N. Main St. in Ann Arbor.

Next working sessions: Thursday, Sept. 15, 2011 at 6:30 p.m. at the county administration building, 220 N. Main St. in Ann Arbor. The working session will focus on the 2012-2013 budget. An additional working session is set for Thursday, Sept. 22 at 6:30 p.m.

Next regular board meeting: Wednesday, Sept. 21, 2011 at 6:30 p.m. at the county administration building, 220 N. Main St. in Ann Arbor. The Ways & Means Committee meets first, followed immediately by the regular board meeting. [confirm date] (Though the agenda states that the regular board meeting begins at 6:45 p.m., it usually starts much later – times vary depending on what’s on the agenda.) Public comment sessions are held at the beginning and end of each meeting.

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

Ann Arbor city council chambers on Aug. 15, 2011. Despite appearances, the city of Ann Arbor does not currently have a balloon payment due that will put the city up against its debt ceiling. (Photo by the writer).

The city council originally gave its approval to the selection of Village Green as the purchaser of the city-owned First and Washington lot back in 2006. To make up for the fact that the First and Washington deal has not yet been finalized, on Monday the council approved a $3 million inter-fund loan from its pooled investment fund. The money is needed to pay construction bills for the city’s new municipal center.

A year earlier, in 2005, the city received a recommendation from a blue-ribbon task force to change the composition of the board of trustees for its retirement system – to a mix on the board that is less heavily weighted towards members who are beneficiaries of the system. And on Monday, the council approved the Nov. 8 ballot language that will ask voters to change the city charter, which specifies the composition of the board.

A year before that, in 2004, the city council gave direction to city staff to develop an ordinance that would regulate idling vehicles. On Monday, the city council formally received – but took no action on – a resolution from its environmental commission recommending a draft anti-idling ordinance.

Likely dating back even earlier was an agenda item that addresses a point of ongoing friction between the city and the University of Michigan: reimbursement for the costs associated with traffic control during home football games. On Monday, the council approved a resolution that sets Aug. 25 as a deadline for completing a contract that reimburses the city for those costs. Otherwise, the city administrator is directed not to provide the signs and signals operations during home games.

In other business, the council gave final approval to the reapportionment of the five city wards, which will take effect after the Nov. 8 election. The council also set the application fee for medical marijuana business licenses at $600. The city’s medical marijuana licensing legislation, approved in June, takes effect later this month. Mayor John Hieftje also announced nominations for four of the five slots on the newly-established medical marijuana licensing board.

The mayor also announced nominations to the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority board. Joan Lowenstein and John Mouat were nominated for reappointment, while Gary Boren, recently elected as chair of the board for the coming year, was not.

At the meeting, the DDA was also highlighted during public commentary by the owner of Jerusalem Garden, a restaurant adjacent to the construction site of the Fifth Avenue underground parking structure, which the DDA is managing. The restaurant has seen revenues drop during construction. He reiterated some of the points he’s made previously when addressing the council and the DDA board, and this time called on the council to think about how to apply lessons learned from the current situation in the future.

Economic development was also part of the council meeting in the form of a resolution the council passed that urges the Washtenaw County board of commissioners to levy a tax to fund economic development. The tax is based on Act 88 of 1913 and does not require voter approval.

The proposed Fuller Road Station maintained a presence during council proceedings in the form of public commentary, as well as a reminder from the council to the mayor that he’d previously indicated a council work session would be scheduled on the project.

Inter-fund Loan for Municipal Building

The council was asked to approve the temporary loan of $3 million from its pooled investment fund (Fund 0099) to the building fund for its new municipal center (Fund 0008), which is nearing completion. The municipal center is located at Fifth and Huron.

Inter-fund Loan: Background

The loan is needed because the sale of the city-owned First and Washington property to Village Green for its City Apartments development has not yet been finalized.

As a historical point, the city council approved the selection of Village Green as the buyer of the First and Washington property at its Aug. 10, 2006 meeting. On that occasion, Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2) cast the sole dissenting vote.

The new municipal center’s financing plan included $3 million in proceeds from that sale. The loan from the city’s pooled investment fund will allow the construction bills to be paid.

The city’s pooled investment fund includes all eligible cash across all city funds – interest earned on the pooled funds is apportioned back to each fund based on the relative amount of cash from that fund in the pool.

The building fund will incur a cost of 1.93% annual interest on the money lent from the investment pool. According to the staff memo accompanying the resolution, on a short-term basis the inter-fund lending approach is more desirable than borrowing money from a lending institution, because of lower transaction costs, lower interest rates and no prepayment penalties.

The short-term financing strategy of lending the building fund $3 million from the pooled investment fund will not have an impact on the city’s general fund, if the land sale is finalized. However, the short-term financing strategy does not eliminate the risk to the general fund, if the land sale does not go through.

The city bonded for about $47 million for the municipal building project. The yearly bond payments of $1.85 million can be broken down roughly as follows: $508,000 in TIF (tax increment finance) capture pledged by the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority; $490,000 in revenue from antenna rights; $455,000 in elimination of leases for space at other locations; $175,000 in elimination of utilities for leased space; $225,000 pledged by the 15th District Court facility fund.

The council had been advised by interim city administrator and chief financial officer Tom Crawford at its Aug. 4, 2011 meeting to expect some kind of short-term financing proposal on the Aug. 15 agenda. And more than a year earlier, at a city council work session in April 2010, the council discussed the city’s contingency plan of taking out short-term financing in the event the land sale did not materialize.

With respect to the land sale, at its Aug. 4 meeting, the council extended a purchase option agreement with the developer Village Green for the First and Washington site, where the developer plans to build Ann Arbor City Apartments. It’s a 9-story, 99-foot-tall building with 156 dwelling units, which includes a 244-space parking deck on its first two stories.

The land deal was originally set at $3.3 million, but was reduced by the council at its June 6, 2011 meeting to $3.2 million. The reduction in price approved at the council’s June 6 meeting was based on a “bathtub design” for the foundation that is intended to prevent water from ever entering the parking structure, eliminating the need for pumping water out into the city’s stormwater system. However, the Aug. 4 purchase option extension came with a charge by the city to Village Green of $50,000.

The parking deck portion of Village Green’s City Apartments project is being developed in cooperation with the Ann Arbor DDA, which has pledged to make payments on around $9 million worth of bonds for the project, after the structure is completed and has been issued a permit for occupancy.

According to the staff memo accompanying the Aug. 4 resolution, Village Green still hopes to break ground on the project in the 2011 construction season.

As a historical point related to the planned use of the sale proceeds for the new municipal center construction, the council defeated a resolution on March 17, 2008 to extend the Village Green purchase option agreement for First and Washington. At the council’s following meeting, on April 7, 2008, the measure was brought back for reconsideration, and the council voted unanimously to extend the agreement. The key difference was the addition of a “resolved clause,” which stated: “Resolved, that the proceeds from this sale shall be designated to the general fund, Fund 010.”

Inter-fund Loan: Council Deliberations

Mike Anglin (Ward 5) confirmed with the city’s chief financial officer and interim city administrator Tom Crawford that the $3 million loan transfer was part of the municipal center construction cost. Anglin asked why the city would not simply look to the general fund itself to cover the cost. Crawford explained that approach would result in a lower investable fund balance in the general fund, which would be a detriment to the general fund.

The financing the city is proposing, Crawford said, is structured so as not to be a detriment to the general fund. It’s the building project fund that pays the interest, he said. Sabra Briere (Ward 1) characterized the financing essentially as establishing a line of credit. Crawford confirmed that the investment pool is reinvested and reevaluated on a daily basis.

Outcome: The city council voted unanimously to approve the inter-fund loan to the municipal center building fund from the city’s pooled investment fund.

Charter Amendment: Retirement Board Composition

The council considered a resolution to place before voters on Nov. 8 a charter amendment to alter the composition of the board of trustees for the city’s retirement system.

Retirement Board Composition: Background

The composition of the nine-member body as currently set forth in the charter is as follows: “(1) The City Administrator and the Controller to serve by virtue of their respective offices; (2) Three Trustees appointed by the Council and to serve at the pleasure of the Council; (3) Two Trustees elected by the general city members from their own number (general city members being members other than Policemen and Firemen members); and (4) Two Trustees elected by the Policemen and Firemen members from their own number.”

The proposed change would retain nine members but would distribute them differently: (1) the city controller; (2) five citizens; (3) one from the general city employees; and (4) one each from police and fire.

If the measure passes on Nov. 8, it will still need to be ratified by the city’s collective bargaining units in order to take effect.

In 2005, a “blue ribbon” commission – tasked to make recommendations about the city’s retirement board and the city’s pension plan – had called for a change in the board’s composition to be a majority of trustees who are not beneficiaries of the retirement plan and, in particular, to remove the city administrator’s position from the board.

In 2008, a member of the retirement system’s board of trustees, Robert N. Pollack, Jr., resigned from the board in part due to the city’s failure to enact recommendations of the blue ribbon panel. [.pdf of blue ribbon panel report] [.pdf of Pollack's resignation letter]

Under the terms of new city administrator Steve Powers’ contract, he will not be a beneficiary of the city’s retirement plan, but will instead have a 401(a) plan.

The city’s retirement program is supported in part by the levy of a retirement benefits millage [labeled CITY BENEFITS on tax bills], currently at a rate of 2.056 mills, which is the same rate as the city’s transit millage. A mill is equal to $1 for every $1,000 of a property’s taxable value.

Retirement Board Composition: Council Deliberations

Marcia Higgins (Ward 4) introduced the proposed ballot language asking voters to amend the city charter and described how the state attorney general’s office – after back and forth with the city – had provided approval of the ballot language at 4:55 p.m. that day.

Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2) scrutinized the proposed ballot language, which resulted in single word deletion from the language [deleted word indicated with strikethrough]:

For the purpose of adding two additional citizen trustees, removal of the City Administrator as a member of the Board, and decreasing the number of elected general member trustees, shall Section 17.2 (a) of the Charter be amended to restructure the composition of the nine-member City Employees Retirement Board of Trustees to a membership of 5 appointed citizen trustees, one elected trustee each for general City general members, fire members, and police members, along with the continued membership of the City Controller?

Based on the interaction between Rapundalo and assistant city attorney Mary Fales, the inclusion of the first instance of “general” was erroneous. It was stricken as an administrative amendment on which the council did not vote.

Tony Derezinski (Ward 2) wanted to know what the nature of the issue was that had caused the delay in the attorney general review. Higgins explained that it had to do with the terminology of “chief financial officer” versus “controller.” Higgins thanked the city attorney’s office staff for its work, which Rapundalo echoed.

Rapundalo noted that the issue had been going on for a number of years. The change to the charter should go a long way to establishing a board that has a little bit more independent oversight, he said. And by virtue of that, it would provide more transparency and reduce the perception of conflict of interest for those sitting around the retirement board table, he said. Higgins added that the city’s unions will need to ratify the language as well, even if the charter amendment passes.

Outcome: The city council voted unanimously to approve the placement of the retirement board charter amendment on the Nov. 8 ballot.

Anti-Idling Law?

Although it originally appeared in the slot designated for board/commission-initiated business, an anti-idling item was moved on the agenda to the section for written communications from the city administrator. The council formally received the communication from its environmental commission: a resolution approved by the commission in February 2011 that refers a draft anti-idling ordinance to the city council. The ordinance would aim to reduce instances of unnecessary idling by internal combustion engines of all types when not “doing work.”

The resolution approved by the city’s environmental commission makes reference to the city council’s direction to city staff to develop the ordinance, but does not mention the date when the council passed a resolution giving that direction – July 6, 2004.

Examples of unnecessary idling cited in the draft resolution are “warming up a vehicle, dropping off or picking up children at school, loading or unloading cargo, pulling over to take a cell phone call, or waiting in line at a drive-thru window.” However, the draft ordinance explicitly exempts “vehicle queues for drive-through goods and services.” [.pdf of whitepaper including draft ordinance]

Councilmembers addressed the issue during one of the communications slots on the agenda. Margie Teall (Ward 4) thanked Sabra Briere (Ward 1) for tracking down the resolution passed by the council seven years ago that gave direction to city staff to develop an ordinance. It had gone to the city attorney’s office and other city staff, including the city’s environmental coordinator Matt Naud, and back to the environmental commission.

Teall, who serves on the environmental commission, observed that the item had accidentally landed initially on the wrong part of the agenda – but said that the communications items are often overlooked. Teall noted that it’s the city environmental commission’s resolution and the city council will be looking at it in the near future. Teall said she’d welcome comments and discussion and perhaps a city council working session on it.

Teall invited Naud to the podium. He described how 50-100 cities have such an ordinance. He traced Ann Arbor’s effort on the topic to a resident of The Armory – a residential development at Fifth and Ann streets – who was concerned about school buses idling in front of the Hands-On Museum. The museum is immediately adjacent to The Armory. Naud allowed that it had taken a long time (since 2004), but reported that the city had also accumulated a lot of good data. He suggested that this was now an occasion to open up a community discussion.

Outcome: The city council did not take any action on the item – it was ultimately listed on the agenda as simply a communication from the city administrator.

University of Michigan Football Traffic Controls

Before the council for its consideration was a resolution stating that no traffic controls for University of Michigan home football games will be provided starting this season, unless the university reimburses the city for costs associated with erecting barricades and changing traffic signals to facilitate efficient movement of traffic.

University of Michigan Football Traffic Controls: Background

The cost of providing these signs and signal services is around $100,000 per year. The university already reimburses the city for police and fire services associated with home football games.

From the resolution: “Resolved that the City Administrator shall not provide Signs and Signals services to UM for Special UM Events unless: UM and the City execute a contract prior to August 26, 2011, that provides for the full reimbursement to the City of all direct and allocable costs associated with the provision of Signs and Signals services to UM for Special UM Events.”

Michigan’s home opener this year, against Western Michigan, falls on Sept. 3.

Left to right: interim city administrator Tom Crawford, Marcia Higgins (Ward 4) and Christopher Taylor (Ward 3).

The issue is a persistent point of frustration on the city council, because traffic control for football games is a dollar cost to the city, but the city has limited leverage with the university to extract payment. That’s due in part to the fact that traffic control is seen not as merely a matter of convenience, but rather of public safety.

From a March 2010 city council budget work session report: “Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) asked how much of [football traffic control] was an issue of convenience versus public safety. Chief of police Barnett Jones stated that it was all safety-related. Without the combination of cars, barricades and signals, he said, ‘it would be a major malfunction.’”

From a January 2011 city council budget retreat report: “Some councilmembers seemed to suggest that concessions from the university could be won by withholding city consent when the university wanted something from the city. The university’s desire to include Monroe Street as part of the UM Law School campus was cited as a specific example. [City administrator Roger] Fraser, though, counseled that each situation should be evaluated unto itself. He pointed to the planned Fuller Road Station as an example of the importance of that principle.”

From a March 2011 city council budget work session report: “Responding to councilmember questions, [public services area administrator Sue] McCormick said the city did not send the university invoices for the regular home football games, because the university has made it clear that it will not pay. McCormick said when she’d notified UM of the city’s intention of invoicing for the Big Chill, the response she gotten was, ‘We really don’t know how we’ll fund that.’ There was little recourse for the city to take, she said, and in the end the city would have to write it off.”

University of Michigan Football Traffic Controls: Council Deliberations

Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) introduced the resolution, acknowledging that it had been added late to the agenda. By way of explanation for the lateness, he offered the fact that the city and the university had been involved in ongoing conversations that were progressing well, but he hoped the resolution would improve things. He noted that football Saturdays are “a very big deal” for the university and the city community.

Taylor went on to say that the city cooperates with the university to ensure the efficient and safe operation of large university events. It includes police and fire services as well as traffic management services. The costs for the police and fire services are reimbursed by the university, he explained. However, up to now, the traffic management services have not been reimbursed. The city is currently having a conversation about the university’s possible reimbursement of the traffic control costs, Taylor said.

In every good conversation, Taylor continued, it’s sometimes useful for there to be clarity about the position of the parties, and the resolution was intended to provide that clarity.

Tony Derezinski (Ward 2) expressed concern about the timing. He asked for clarification about the time pressure, given that the football season was fast approaching. Taylor said the conversations had been progressing well, but there was some lack of clarity about whether the city will continue to provide traffic control services in the absence of reimbursement.

Margie Teall (Ward 4) then stated that UM can contract with some other organization to provide the service. However, interim city administrator Tom Crawford made clear that’s not actually the case, saying that police and fire services are already reimbursed and that the signs and signals work involves the city’s staff, working with city assets – it can’t really be done by some other organization.

Crawford went on to say that other communities sometimes contacted the city to learn how the city manages to provide the level of services it does provide in connection with football crowds. [Michigan Stadium, located at Main and Stadium with a capacity of 109,901, is the largest in the country.]

Mayor John Hieftje said that the proliferation of games has made it a real burden on the city staff and he felt it was appropriate to have a contract.

Sandi Smith (Ward 1) brought up another point for clarification – was this a matter of looking forward, or also about asking the university to pay for past years of traffic controls? Crawford said he was in the middle of fruitful discussions that included last year as well as upcoming years. He called it an issue that still needs to be resolved.

Outcome: The city council voted unanimously to approve the resolution that directs the city administrator not to provide traffic controls for university football games, unless the university agrees to reimburse the city’s costs.

Ward Boundary Changes

The council considered final approval to minor changes in the apportionment of its five city wards, made in response to population changes revealed by the 2010 census. The changes will not take effect until after the Nov. 8 general election. According to the city charter, city wards must have the general shape of a pie-shaped wedge, with centers of the tips lying at the center of the city. The council had given the boundary changes initial approval at its Aug. 4 meeting.

The council had postponed the issue at its July 5 meeting, but not before unanimously agreeing to alter the timing of the boundary changes, which had originally been recommended by the city attorney’s office to come between the primary elections for city council, which were held Aug. 2, and the general election to be held Nov. 8.

While the minor changes to the boundaries themselves had not been met with strong objections, the timing had been controversial. So at their July 5 meeting, councilmembers agreed to move the effective date of the boundary changes to Dec. 1, 2011.

The staff-recommended tweaks, given initial approval at the Aug. 4 meeting, showed minor differences from the changes recommended on July 5. All changes involve the way the tips of the pie-shaped wedges come together.

In the July 5 version, Ward 5 was bounded by Huron Street to the north and Madison Street to the south as it came towards the city center. In the Aug. 4 version, the Ward 5 northern boundary was dropped to Liberty Street, and to compensate the Ward 5 pie tip extended farther to the east.

In the July 5 version, the boundary between Wards 3 and 4 was aligned to Packard Street. But in the Aug. 4 version, the existing protrusion of Ward 4 across Packard, between Arch and Wells streets, was preserved. And to compensate, Ward 4 was pushed back from South University, with the result that Monroe Street, east of State Street, is a part of Ward 3. [.pdf of staff-recommended tweaks from Aug. 4] [.pdf of staff-recommended tweaks from July 5.]

Ward Boundary Changes: Public Hearing

Because the ward boundary changes reflect a change to the city’s ordinances, a public hearing was required.

Only one person spoke. Thomas Partridge called on the council to take into account the socio-economic status of residents in the reapportionment of the wards. Is there anyone on the council who represents the middle class of Ann Arbor? he asked. Are there students or disabled people who come from lower income brackets? He called on the council to give additional consideration to how each ward is represented. He suggested having an at-large representative on the council.

Ward Boundary Changes: Council Deliberations

Mayor John Hieftje asked that someone explain what was going on and why the reapportionment was happening. Sabra Briere (Ward 1) explained that the 2010 census showed that Ward 1 gained population since the previous census in 2000, relative to the other four wards. The easiest way to restore the balance was to look at the densest part of the city near the downtown.

Each boundary is changing, but only slightly, Briere said, and in the end all five wards are all close to balance. Hieftje elicited from the city clerk, Jackie Beaudry, that residents in affected areas, whose wards are changing, would by law receive a new voting card. Briere reminded everyone that the new boundaries don’t become effective until after the Nov. 8 election – on Dec. 1.

Outcome: The city council voted unanimously to give final approval to the ward boundary changes.

Medical Marijuana License Application Fees

A resolution was on the agenda to establish an application fee of $600 for licenses to operate a medical marijuana dispensary in the city. The fee covers a total of approximately nine hours of work by staff in the city clerk’s office, police department, planning department, and the attorney’s office.

Sabra Briere (Ward 1) talks with Dennis Hayes before the city council's Aug. 15 meeting started.

The licenses were established by a city ordinance given its final approval at the council’s June 20, 2011 meeting. The ordinance distinguishes between an “application fee” and a “license fee.” The license fee, according to the city’s ordinance, is to be reviewed by a licensing board, with members to be appointed by the mayor.

The ordinance becomes effective Aug. 22, which is 60 days after its date of legal publication, on June 23. Applicants who were already in business before the city council enacted its Aug. 5, 2010 moratorium have 60 days after the effective date to apply for a license.

The city’s communications to this point with prospective applicants has not been perfectly smooth. A letter sent out by Wendy Rampson, head of planning for the city, was met with objections because of the city’s insistence that “proof” be provided that a business was in operation before Aug. 5, 2010 – beyond an affidavit attesting to that effect. The city’s ordinance appears to empower the licensing board, not staff in the city attorney’s office or the planning department, with evaluating the merits of license applications.

Medical Marijuana Application Fees: Public Commentary, Hearing

Dennis Hayes addressed the council at Monday’s meeting, having appeared around a dozen times over the course of the last year as the council debated the medical marijuana ordinances. Hayes told the council it was nice to be back again. He said he appreciated how the city council had responded quickly to questions about implementation of the law. He encouraged the council to approve the fee, noting that the city would incur substantial expenses any time there’s something new. He felt the Ann Arbor law would be a productive example for the rest of the state.

During the public hearing on the fee, Thomas Partridge spoke in favor of placing restrictions on access to medical marijuana.

Medical Marijuana Application Fees: Council Deliberations

During the scant council deliberations, Sabra Briere (Ward 1) stressed that the fee the council was approving was an application fee, not a licensing fee.

Outcome: The city council voted unanimously to approve the $600 application fee for medical marijuana licenses.

Medical Marijuana: Licensing Board Nominations

Nominations to the medical marijuana licensing board were also made later at the Aug. 15 meeting: Patricia O’Rorke, James Kenyon and John McKenna Rosevear. Sabra Briere (Ward 1) was nominated as the city council representative. The five-member licensing body is to consist of one member of the city council, one physician, and three other Ann Arbor residents.

Still needed is a physician to serve on the board. The nominations will be confirmed at the council’s next meeting.

Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority

The Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority came up in two ways at the council’s Aug. 15 meeting. First, nominations for re-appointment to the DDA board were announced. And second, the owner of the Jerusalem Garden restaurant, Ali Ramlawi, again addressed the council about his frustration over the underground parking garage construction project, which the DDA is managing.

Ann Arbor DDA: Nominations

Appointments to the DDA board are made by the mayor, subject to confirmation by the city council. Mayor John Hieftje nominated John Mouat and Joan Lowenstein for reappointment, but Gary Boren, who was elected this July by his colleagues as chair of the DDA board for the coming year, was not reappointed. Nominated to replace Boren was Nader Nassif, a local attorney. Boren is also an attorney.

In an email sent late Monday to The Chronicle, after the nominations appeared late on the council’s agenda, Boren wrote that Hieftje had met with him a few weeks ago and at that meeting the mayor had told him he was not inclined to reappoint Boren. Boren acknowledged that he and the mayor had philosophical differences about the role of the DDA. About the decision not to be reappointed, Boren wrote that “I am disappointed, but not surprised – and not at all bitter.”

The four-year terms of all three DDA board members – Boren, Lowenstein and Mouat – had actually expired on July 31. The mayor’s appointment of Bob Guenzel to the DDA board last year also came late, after Jennifer S. Hall’s term had expired.

At the DDA’s annual meeting early this July, DDA board member Newcombe Clark provided a chance for the mayor to announce publicly any intention not to reappoint Boren, when Boren’s name was put forward as a candidate for chair of the board for the coming year. Clark asked if Boren’s term would be renewed. The mayor declined to respond to Clark’s question. From The Chronicle’s DDA meeting report of July 6, 2011:

Newcombe Clark asked if Boren’s term was being renewed – that is, would he be reappointed by the mayor to serve on the board? By way of background, outgoing chair Joan Lowenstein’s term on the board ends on July 31, 2011, as do the terms for Gary Boren and John Mouat. Boren has been a vocal proponent of the idea that the DDA is an independent corporate body and not an arm of the city of Ann Arbor.

Last year, Clark had pointedly abstained from voting in the officer elections over the lack of information about reappointments to the board. From Chronicle coverage of the July 7, 2010 DDA annual meeting:

Abstaining from each of the officer votes was board member Newcombe Clark.

Clark explained to The Chronicle after the meeting that there’d been no indication from the mayor whether the two board members whose appointments are expiring July 31 – Jennifer S. Hall and John Splitt – would be reappointed. Clark said he could thus not be certain of the full range of choices for board officers.

Splitt was reappointed; Hall was not. Bob Guenzel was appointed instead of Hall.

In response to Clark’s question this year, Lowenstein said they did not know that yet. Mayor John Hieftje, sitting at the board table, did not offer any statement about whether he planned to nominate Boren for the city council’s approval for reappointment.

At its first meeting in September, the DDA board will presumably elect a new chair. The board’s pattern historically has been to select its vice chair as the next chair. Elected vice chair in July was former Washtenaw County administrator Bob Guenzel, who joined the DDA board a year ago.

Outcome: The council will not vote on the confirmation of DDA appointments until its first meeting in September. Those appointments will presumably not include the kind of public hearings that Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) suggested during his communications at the council’s Aug. 4, 2011 meeting. However, allocation of the 10 public commentary reserved time slots at the beginning of every council meeting gives preference to those speakers wishing to address agenda items – and the confirmations will be on the agenda.

Ann Arbor DDA: Construction Complaints

During public commentary, Ali Ramlawi reminded councilmembers that he had also addressed them last month. He’s the owner of the Jerusalem Garden restaurant, located next to the construction site of the underground parking structure being built along Fifth Avenue. He expressed frustration about reading the response by Susan Pollay, executive director of the DDA, to his previous criticisms – a response that was published in AnnArbor.com.

Ramlawi characterized Pollay as claiming that the DDA had provided trash pickup, snow removal and lighting. He said those are ordinary city functions, which the city has “delivered flawlessly” since 1987 when the restaurant opened. With respect to the snow removal, he said he had to call several times this past winter because of the build-up of snow obstructing pedestrian walkways. He felt like he was a “cop on the beat” on the corner, because he had to call and complain about trash, lighting and snow removal.

He alluded to the expense of the DDA’s wayfinding sign project, saying that for an organization that had spent $1 million on some signs, its efforts to place signage indicating that the restaurant was still open have been “poor.” Two years into the project, he said, the DDA had not delivered any kind of signage. The problem is not confined to Jerusalem Garden, he said – people come in wondering where the library and the post office are.

He asked the city council to review the situation and use this as a learning lesson. He also called for a complete review of the DDA board appointment process – noting that appointed officials were making important decisions. He concluded by saying that to give credit to the DDA for the success of downtown Ann Arbor is like giving Al Gore credit for inventing the Internet.

By way of additional background,  construction-orange-style signs about businesses have been in place in two locations in connection with the parking garage construction project since it began. At the intersection of Fifth Avenue and Washington Street, a sign placed on the left side of the street facing the one-way traffic heading south on Fifth Avenue indicates generically that businesses are open – no businesses are named. And at the next intersection of Fifth Avenue, at Liberty, a sign facing southbound Fifth Avenue traffic is placed with the names of businesses still open. No signs for eastbound or westbound Liberty Street traffic appears to have been placed.

That signage is actually required as part of a settlement agreement in connection with a lawsuit filed against the city of Ann Arbor about the project, to which Ramlawi was a party. From the settlement agreement:

Throughout the construction process, the City agrees to provide signage that directs customers to Herb David and Jerusalem Garden. Such signage will be similar to what the City has provided in the past as part of other City construction projects.

Act 88 Economic Development Tax

Before the council for its consideration was a resolution urging the Washtenaw County board of commissioners to use Act 88 of 1913 to levy a tax to support economic development in the county.

Act 88 Economic Development Tax: Background

For the last two years, the county board has levied the tax – at a rate of 0.043 mill. (One mill is $1 for every $1,000 of a property’s taxable value.) The council resolution was brought forward by Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5), Margie Teall (Ward 4), Sandi Smith (Ward 1) and Christopher Taylor (Ward 3).

Because Act 88 predates the state’s Headlee legislation, the board does not need to put the issue before voters in order to levy the tax. The county board could, by the Act 88 statute, levy such a tax up to 0.5 mills, or more than 10 times the amount it has chosen to levy the last two years.

Last year in November, the county board approved the Act 88 tax with just a six-vote majority on the 11-member board. Kristin Judge, Mark Ouimet and Wes Prater dissented. Jessica Ping abstained, and Rolland Sizemore Jr. was absent from that Nov. 3, 2010 meeting.

For 2011, the allocation of the roughly $611,266 raised by the countywide Act 88 tax broke down as follows: $200,000 to Ann Arbor SPARK; $50,000 to SPARK East; $100,000 to the Eastern Leaders Group; $144,696 to the county’s department of economic development and energy; $15,000 to fund a Michigan State University Extension agricultural innovation counselor for Washtenaw County; $27,075 to fund horticulture programming for the Washtenaw MSUE horticulture educator; $59,229 for 4-H activities, including allocation to the Washtenaw Farm Council for operating the Washtenaw County 4-H Youth Show & 4-H agricultural programming for the 4-H extension educator; and $15,000 to support the work of the Food System Economic Partnership (FSEP).

SPARK is also supported by Ann Arbor taxpayers through a contract with the city of Ann Arbor for business development services. At its June 20, 2011 meeting, the city council authorized the city’s annual $75,000 contract with SPARK. That translates to the rough equivalent of 0.017 Ann Arbor city mills. (Each mill levied within the city of Ann Arbor translates to roughly $4.5 million.) Together with the countywide Act 88 millage, direct Ann Arbor taxpayer support of economic development translates to the equivalent of at least .06 mills (0.043 + 0.017) or roughly $270,000.

Ann Arbor SPARK is also the contractor hired by the city’s local development finance authority (LDFA) to operate a business accelerator for the city’s SmartZone, one of 11 such districts established in the early 2000s by the Michigan Economic Development Corp. (MEDC). The SmartZone is funded by a tax increment finance (TIF) mechanism, which in the current fiscal year captured around $1.4 million in taxes from a TIF district – the union of the Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti Downtown Development Authority districts, though revenue is generated only in Ann Arbor’s district. The specific taxes on which the increment since 2002 is captured are the school operating and state education taxes, which would otherwise be sent to the state and then redistributed back to local school districts.

Act 88 Economic Development Tax: Council Deliberations

Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) introduced the resolution. He noted that the question of whether to levy the tax will soon be before the county board of commissioners. [A public hearing on the millage is set for the board's Sept. 7 meeting.] Taylor portrayed the millage as costing the owner of a $250,000 house about $5.38 a year. He encouraged the council to support the resolution, in light of the utility of the money that the millage would generate countywide.

Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5) echoed Taylor’s sentiments. He also noted that the county had recently reorganized itself by merging three departments, including its economic development department. The merger will present a greater challenge to the county staff, Hohnke said, but it will be able to leverage the Act 88 millage that much more efficiently. He mentioned the idea of promoting heritage tourism.

Sabra Briere (Ward 1) asked what happens if the county board doesn’t approve the levy of the millage. What are the effects on economic development at the county level if it doesn’t pass? she asked.

Expressing some hesitancy, Hohnke said he didn’t know, but offered some thoughts. The millage brings in around $600,000 and is deployed in a number of ways in partnership with other organizations, including Ann Arbor SPARK. In some activities, Hohnke said, it’s the county that takes the lead, and he ventured that you’d see a scaling back of those activities if the millage were not levied.

Outcome: The city council voted unanimously to adopt the resolution urging the county board’s passage of the Act 88 millage.

West Park: Flooding, Tennis Courts

Councilmembers heard from a resident about flooding related to a stormwater project in West Park, and they used the occasion of a construction contract for tennis courts in the park to talk about some of those concerns.

West Park: Public Commentary on Flooding

During public commentary at the start of the meeting, Daniel Marano introduced himself as a resident who lives on the west side of town, on Maple Ridge. He reported a severe flooding problem on his street that he said seems to be tied to the engineering failure of the West Park drainage and stormwater system.

Maple Ridge, looking south.

By way of background, the city undertook major renovations to West Park using federal stimulus funds and revolving loans facilitated by the county’s water resources commissioner. [Chronicle coverage: "West Park Renovations Get Fast-Tracked"]

In February 2011, Craig Hupy – head of systems planning for the city of Ann Arbor – reported to the park advisory commission on the status of a failed swirl concentrator, which had collapsed, and seven other swirl concentrators that were in some state of failure.

Swirl concentrators are underground vessels that help remove particulates from stormwater before it flows into the stormwater system. Based on an August 2011 city staff memo, the situation is being analyzed as a problem with both the project design and the product’s manufacture. The city is expecting to recover costs from multiple parties. The memo acknowledges upstream flooding that was experienced during project construction, which took place during the summer of 2010:

During the construction of the project, flooding was experienced upstream of the work area during one of the several large storms experienced in the summer of 2010. In addition, in October of 2010, after the stormwater work had been completed, one of the swirl concentrators on the north branch collapsed, creating a sinkhole near the northwest corner of the park. … In response to the upstream flooding, the weir plates that served to divert flow into the swirl concentrator units were removed due to concerns over their effect on upstream flooding. … Currently, the weirs are still removed, leaving the below ground sewer system to function essentially as it did prior to the 2010 construction,

The street where Marano lives is upstream from West Park – Maple Ridge runs north-south, parallel to (and one block west of) Seventh Street, which is West Park’s western boundary.

Marano described a phenomenon where a collection of several feet of water appears out of nowhere, lasts for about an hour or so, followed by a “catastrophic emptying” of the entire street. It’s like two giant bathtub drains, he said, that drain the street in a matter of minutes. There’s a real possibility of danger to people, pets, and children, he said. He said he had about a foot of water in his car on Tuesday morning, which is when he realized the extent of the flooding. This type of flooding has never happened before in any neighbor’s memory, he said. The first time it happened was last year, on Aug. 10, 2010.

Marano said that when he’d reported it to the city, he was met with derision, and the claims were ignored. It’s a lot more than just standard runoff, he said. He concluded by saying it’s a safety risk.

West Park: Tennis Courts

Before the council for its approval was a $216,331 contract with ABC Paving Co. to renovate the tennis courts at West Park. It’s a contract that the city’s park advisory commission had discussed at its June 21, 2011 meeting and that had been approved by the city council at the council’s July 5, 2011 meeting. However, the resolution had contained a typographical error, and the contract had only been approved for $166,331. So it was back before the council for re-approval.

The council did not discuss the paving contract. However, Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5) and Mike Anglin (Ward 5) expressed their concern about the West Park stormwater renovations that had been raised during public commentary by Daniel Marano. [The tennis courts at West Park are situated off Huron Street, considerably above the plane of the park where the stormwater improvements were undertaken.]

Hohnke stressed that the contemporaneous flooding and construction work events were not conclusive with respect to establishing a cause-and-effect relationship. However, he allowed that the timing was suggestive of such a relationship, and he asked that the interim city administrator look into the issue. Anglin expressed his hope that a good resolution to the issue could be found and acknowledged the stress on the residents who live in the affected area.

The flooded neighborhood is in Ward 5, which Anglin and Hohnke represent.

Outcome: The council approved the contract with ABC Paving Co.

Fuller Road Station

Fuller Road Station was brought up during public commentary, as well as by councilmembers.

Fuller Road Station: Public Commentary

Nancy Shiffler spoke on behalf of the Huron Valley Group of the Sierra Club. She said that on reviewing a recent letter sent to the community by mayor John Hieftje, she was pleased that the letter attempted to address questions that have arisen about the project. She first reiterated her basic objection of using a portion of Fuller Park for the construction of a parking structure.

She noted that the letter indicates the University of Michigan will pay all upfront costs for the construction and that the city’s portion of the cost would be made up over time. [The memorandum of understanding between UM and the city on the planned Fuller Road Station specifies a 78%-22% split for the cost-sharing arrangement.]

The portion of the mayor’s letter to which Shiffler was referring reads:

Although the University of Michigan and the City of Ann Arbor will share usage of the parking structure/bus station portion, the University will pay almost all upfront costs to construct Phase 1 of the Fuller Road Station. Under the plan that is still being worked out, the City will own FRS and the City’s portion of the costs will be made up over time from funds generated by parking spaces.

Based on earlier estimates, she said, the city’s portion to be made up over time would be around $10 million. With 220 parking spaces available for the city’s use, and depending on the users to whom the spaces are allocated, Shiffler estimated that it would take 30 years to repay the $10 million – if the rate for use of those 220 spaces were charged at the maximum rate used by UM in its parking system.

Later in the letter, Shiffler noted, Hieftje states that revenues from user fees for the parking spaces would go to the park system. Will the revenue go to make up for the upfront construction costs, or rather to the park system? Shiffler pointed out this is not clear. She said it appeared the sources of funding are being cobbled together behind the scenes. She wondered what relevance the parking structure has to the rail station. She asked that the city council have all details and disclose them to the public and have public hearings before taking a vote on the project.

Fuller Road Station: Council Commentary

During council communications, after the public commentary, Sabra Briere (Ward 1) noted that the council had heard from a speaker about Fuller Road Station. She allowed that it was a moving target, but said she wanted to remind the mayor that everyone would benefit from a working session on the topic of Fuller Road Station. Hieftje said that as soon as there’s some new information, a working session could be put together.

Previously, at the council’s June 6, 2011 meeting, Fuller Road Station had received extensive public commentary, despite the lack of any item on the agenda related directly to the project.

Partly in response to that commentary and to remarks from Mike Anglin (Ward 5), at that meeting Briere had pushed for a city council working session on the project. From The Chronicle’s report of that meeting:

Sabra Briere (Ward 1) anticipated mayor John Hieftje’s reaction to Anglin’s comments [Hieftje has pushed hard for the project] by telling the mayor that she knew he had a lot of thoughts about Fuller Road Station. But she thought the council should have a working session, so that councilmembers can become more knowledgeable about the issue. Hieftje indicated that he would look into adding something to the calendar.

Then, at the council’s June 20, 2011 meeting, the council revised its calendar for the year to include a work session scheduled for July 11, apparently to accommodate the desire to discuss Fuller Road Station.

Mayor John Hieftje. That kind of hammer, or course, works on a totally different kind of nail.

However, at the council’s July 5 meeting, Hieftje responded to remarks from Mike Anglin (Ward 5) about the upcoming work session on Fuller Road Station by indicating there was no work session on the topic scheduled. He did not acknowledge his earlier explicit assurance that he would look into scheduling one.

At the Aug. 15 meeting, Anglin said he was glad Shiffler had brought up the issue of the parkland. He said he still had concerns about the status of the parkland and that he continued to receive emails about it. He said that in 2008, when voters approved a charter amendment requiring a voter referendum on the sale of any parkland, they thought they were protecting their parks. The legacy of the parks is an important part of the community, Anglin said. When a national environmental group [the Sierra Club] is speaking against it, he said, that should suggest something is amiss.

Anglin said the details are not yet clear enough to sign a contract. During tough times, he said, there are other needs that are more paramount. The project doesn’t seem to have much benefit for citizens, he said.

Sandi Smith (Ward 1) suggested that the city’s park advisory commission take a look at the practice soccer field adjacent to the proposed Fuller Road Station site and perhaps partner with the public art commission to develop something for that space that’s designed to inform people about the Huron River.

Smith said she’d love to see an exploration of some lower-maintenance use of the land that people can enjoy. She asked that the suggestion be conveyed to PAC by the council representatives to that body. Smith mentioned an upcoming RiverUp! event, which Hieftje said he appreciated. He noted that the Wolfpack group of the National Wildlife Federation, of which he is a member, had raised $30,000 for that project. [PAC had been briefed about the project at its July 2011 meeting. See Chronicle coverage: "RiverUp! Focuses on Revitalizing Huron River"]

Green Communities Grant

The council was asked to consider accepting a $50,000 Michigan Green Communities Planning grant from the Michigan Dept. of Natural Resources and Environment (DNRE).

The money will be used in part to enhance a peer learning network of Michigan local government and university staff who are working on sustainability issues. The grant funding also supports holding an annual conference in 2011 and 2012 among Michigan Green Community members. A third activity the grant will support is development of challenge grant opportunities with local governments and Michigan foundations.

Outcome: The city council voted unanimously to approve the receipt of the grant.

Small Claims Policy

On the council agenda was a resolution to approve a policy describing which city staff may represent the city in small claims court and under what circumstances. Small claims issues are limited in dollar amount to $3,000. Under Act 236 of 1961, the city may not be represented in small claims court by an attorney.

So under the policy, city employees who are not attorneys may appear on the city’s behalf, subject to the constraints of the policy, which requires that employees who appear in small claims court have “… direct and personal knowledge of the dispute” and that the city administrator and the city attorney approve in writing the appearance by an employee in small claims court on behalf of the city, for each individual case.

Outcome: The city council voted unanimously to approve the small claims policy.

Water Supply Bonds

Before the council for its consideration was the issuance $7 million worth of revenue bonds for its water supply system. The money will be used by the city to finance improvements to the city’s water distribution system, including portions of the Arbor Oaks subdivision water mains replacement project, the Catherine Street 16-inch water main, the Dover Court/Collingwood water main replacement, physical security enhancements, and Barton Dam concrete repair projects.

Assistant city attorney Abigail Elias explained at the meeting that because the ordinance does not change the city code, it does not require a second reading and public hearing.

Outcome: The city council voted unanimously to approve the issuance of the water supply bonds.

Recision of CUB Requirement

The council was asked to vote on the recision of a resolution passed at its Nov. 16, 2009 meeting, which required execution of Construction Unity Board (CUB) agreements by contractors and subcontractors with the Washtenaw County Skilled Building Trades Council as a condition of award for all city construction contracts. The resolution also required inclusion of the requirement in all construction bids issued by the city.

The resolution was rescinded because Act 98 of 2011 – which became effective July 19, 2011 – prohibits municipalities from including as a requirement in a construction contract anything that would either require or prohibit contractors from entering into agreements with collective bargaining organizations. The act also prohibits discrimination against contractors based on willingness or non-willingness to enter into such agreements.

At the council’s Aug. 4 meeting, interim city administrator Tom Crawford had alerted councilmembers that they would likely be asked to consider the measure at the Aug. 15 meeting.

The item was included as part of the council’s consent agenda – a collection of items on which the council votes “all in one go,” but councilmembers have the option of separating out any items they’d like to discuss separately. That’s what Tony Derezinski (Ward 2) did with the CUB agreement item. He had sponsored the original resolution that was being rescinded.

He noted that the new law prohibits CUB agreements  so the city’s previous action would be illegal. That’s why it’s in the city’s best interest to rescind it, he said, because it brings the city in line with state law.

Outcome: The city council voted unanimously to rescind its previous resolution on CUB agreements.

Pedestrian Easement on Liberty

The council was asked to grant an easement to the owner of 115 W. Liberty St. – Dotcom 115 LLC, which lists its resident agent as local developer Peter Allen. Cost of the easement was set at $2,500.

Local developer Peter Allen and Ann Arbor public art commission chair Marsha Chamberlin, talking before the Aug. 15 council meeting started.

Allen is planning to sell the third floor condo unit in the building and needed the easement to ensure legal access to the entryway on the south side of the building.

Allen attended the meeting – he was also the recipient of a Golden Paintbrush Award presented by Ann Arbor’s public art commission.

Outcome: The city council voted unanimously to approve the easement.

Rezoning of Annexed Property

Before the council for its consideration was a request to rezone the property at 2562 Newport to R1A (single-family residential district.) At the public hearing, Thomas Partridge called on the council to amend the rezoning to require an equal amount or more of affordable housing access in the city. It’s something that Partridge typically calls on the city council to do, any time there is a public hearing on a rezoning of land.

Mayor John Hieftje expressed some irritation with Partridge by saying that Partridge was aware that the property is being annexed into the city and that the kind of resolution he was suggesting could not be done legally.

Outcome: The council voted unanimously without discussion to approve the annexation-related rezoning.

Communications and Comment

Every city council agenda contains multiple slots for city councilmembers and the city administrator to give updates or make announcements about issues that are coming before the city council. And every meeting typically includes public commentary on subjects not necessarily on the agenda.

Comm/Comm: Remembering Gary Lillie

Tony Derezinski (Ward 2) called the council’s attention to the recent death of Gary Lillie, a Vietnam War veteran and a local realtor who was killed by an alleged drunk driver. He called it one of those tragedies that reminds us of the tender nature of life. He said that Lillie deserved a moment of recognition at the city council meeting for the life he gave and the life he lived.

Comm/Comm: Golden Paintbrush Awards

At the start of the meeting, Marsha Chamberlin presented the Ann Arbor public art commission’s Golden Paintbrush awards. Chamberlin, who chairs the public art commission, is also president of the Ann Arbor Art Center.

In August in front of Blimpy Burger, which received a Golden Paintbrush award: 'sno bears now, but Snow Bears later.

The awards had been previously announced at the most recent meeting of AAPAC in July.

This year, winners are: (1) Krazy Jim’s Blimpy Burger, for the Snow Bears sculptures that Rich Magner builds each winter in front of the business at Packard and South Division; (2) Mary Thiefels and TreeTown Murals for the mural outside the Alley Bar along West Liberty; and (3) Peter Allen & Associates, for rock sculptures on North Main Street, a project initiated by Steve Zobeck.

Comm/Comm: Sidewalks

During public commentary time, Kathy Griswold told the council that based on a Craigslist ad, a school crosswalk guard costs $30/day plus benefits, or $5,400 annually. She said that the money would be better spent on other activities. Griswold has long advocated for moving the mid-block crosswalk in front of King Elementary School to the four-way-stop intersection, which would eliminate the need for a crossing guard at that location. The barrier to moving the crosswalk is the need to construct a section of sidewalk that would link the corner where children would cross to a path leading the rest of the way to the school.

On a positive note, Griswold said, she reported that although nothing had been promised, it was possible that the city might be able to provide an alternate location for the Kiwanis Club’s warehouse sale [now located at 415 W. Washington St. instead of the current location W. Ellsworth at Airport Blvd Building #837].

Comm/Comm: Recall Snyder

Thomas Partridge spoke during public commentary time, saying it’s necessary to pursue the recall effort of Gov. Rick Snyder and the leaders of the Republican legislature, who have “turned and glowered into the faces” of people who need vital services. He also called on President Barack Obama to do something or step aside. We need to protect Ann Arbor’s disabled residents and seniors, Partridge said. We need an agenda for progress, he said – housing, transportation, healthcare and education should all be affordable.

Present: Stephen Rapundalo, Mike Anglin, Margie Teall, Sabra Briere, Sandi Smith, Tony Derezinski, Stephen Kunselman, Marcia Higgins, John Hieftje, Christopher Taylor, Carsten Hohnke.

Next council meeting: Tuesday, Sept. 6, 2011 at 7 p.m. in the second-floor council chambers at 301 E. Huron. [confirm date]

The Chronicle could not survive without regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the Ann Arbor city council. 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!

Because Act 88 predates the state’s Headlee legislation, the board does not need to put the issue before voters in order to levy the tax. The county board could, by the Act 88 statute, levy such a tax up to 0.5 mills, or more than 10 times the amount it has chosen to levy the last two years.

Last year in November, the county board approved the Act 88 tax with just a six-vote majority on the 11-member board. Kristin Judge, Mark Ouimet and Wes Prater dissented. Jessica Ping abstained, and Rolland Sizemore Jr. was absent from that Nov. 3, 2010 meeting.

For 2011, the allocation of the roughly $611,266 raised by the countywide Act 88 tax broke down as follows: $200,000 to Ann Arbor SPARK; $50,000 to SPARK East; $100,000 to the Eastern Leaders Group; $144,696 to the county’s department of economic development and energy; $15,000 to fund a Michigan State University Extension agricultural innovation counselor for Washtenaw County; $27,075 to fund horticulture programming for the Washtenaw MSUE horticulture educator; $59,229 for 4-H activities, including allocation to the Washtenaw Farm Council for operating the Washtenaw County 4-H Youth Show & 4-H agricultural programming for the 4-H extension educator; and $15,000 to support the work of the Food System Economic Partnership (FSEP).

SPARK is also supported by Ann Arbor taxpayers through a contract with the city of Ann Arbor for business development services. At its June 20, 2011 meeting the city council authorized the city’s annual $75,000 contract with SPARK. That translates to the rough equivalent of 0.017 Ann Arbor city mills. (Each mill levied within the city of Ann Arbor translates to roughly $4.5 million.) Together with the countywide Act 88 millage, direct Ann Arbor taxpayer support of economic development translates to the equivalent of at least .06 mills (0.043 + 0.017) or roughly $270,000.

Ann Arbor SPARK is also the contractor hired by the city’s local development finance authority (LDFA) to operate a business accelerator for the city’s SmartZone, one of 11 such districts established in the early 2000s by the Michigan Economic Development Corp. (MEDC). The SmartZone is funded by a tax increment finance (TIF) mechanism, which in the current fiscal year captured around $1.4 million in taxes from a TIF district – the union of the Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti Downtown Development Authority districts, though revenue is generated only in Ann Arbor’s district. The specific taxes on which the increment since 2002 is captured are the school operating and state education taxes, which would otherwise be sent to the state and then redistributed back to local school districts.

This brief was filed from the city council’s chambers on the second floor of city hall, located at 301 E. Huron. A more detailed report will follow: [link]

Washtenaw County commissioner Dan Smith (R-District 2) and county administrator Verna McDaniel. Smith is vice chair of the board's ways & means committee, and led the meeting in the absence of the committee chair, Rolland Sizemore Jr. (D-District 5). (Photos by the writer.)

The budget update showed the impact of higher-than-anticipated property tax revenues, which had first been announced in April. Because of higher revenues than originally projected, the county now expects to use only $2.9 million from its fund balance during 2011 – previously, the budget called for drawing $5.3 million from the fund balance to cover a shortfall between revenues and expenditures.

Without the $2.9 million transfer from the fund balance, however, there would be a projected $2.5 million deficit for the year, on a general fund budget of roughly $100 million. Among several shortfalls on the expenditure side, about $1.034 million in anticipated non-departmental lump sum reductions have not materialized.

Expenses for attorney fees are higher than budgeted, but the county’s corporation counsel Curtis Hedger noted that there’s at least one case that won’t be costing the county in the future. It was an allusion to the end of a 2006 lawsuit against the county over the cost of police services. Hedger later told The Chronicle that the two townships still involved in the case – Ypsilanti Township and Augusta Township – paid the county this week the nearly $750,000 recommended by a court-ordered facilitator.

There was little discussion about most of the action items that the board approved. Most notably, a final OK was given to creating a new office of community & economic development – the result of merging three county departments. The new unit, to be led by Mary Jo Callan, will employ about 31 full-time workers, compared to 40 that are now employed in the three separate departments: the office of community development (OCD); the economic development & energy department; and the employment training and community services (ETCS) department. Other jobs within the county government have been identified for all but one employee so far. The consolidation will take effect in 2012.

Commissioners also set public hearings for their Sept. 7 meeting to get input on two millages: one levied under the Veterans Relief Fund Act, and another collected under Public Act 88 to be used for economic development purposes. Because Act 88 and the veterans relief act predate the state’s Headlee Amendment, they can be approved by the board without a voter referendum.

The Act 88 millage of 0.05 mill would be an increase from the 0.043 mills currently levied. It would generate an estimated $688,913 annually. In previous years, it has been used to fund several entities, including Ann Arbor SPARK. The veterans relief millage of 1/40th of a mill does not represent an increase, and is estimated to bring in $344,486 to provide services for indigent veterans in Washtenaw County through the county’s department of veterans affairs.

Republicans Dan Smith and Alicia Ping led the back-to-back ways & means committee and regular board meetings on Wednesday – as vice chairs of those respective bodies, they were filling in for chairs Rolland Sizemore Jr. and Conan Smith. Both Democrats were out of town.

Second Quarter Budget Update

Tina Gavalier, the county’s finance analyst, gave a formal presentation on the 2011 second-quarter budget update, for the first six months of the year. County administrator Verna McDaniel and interim deputy administrator Kelly Belknap were on hand to answer questions.

Gavalier reported that expense reductions haven’t materialized as much as expected, but property tax revenues were higher than anticipated. [The news of higher-than-expected property tax revenues had been announced at the board's April 20, 2011 meeting, when the equalization report was presented. The equalization report is the basis for determining the taxable value of property in the county, which in turn indicates how much tax revenue is collected by local taxing entities.]

When commissioners originally approved the 2011 budget in late 2010, they had anticipated using $5.289 million from the county’s fund balance. But because property tax revenues were about $3.5 million higher than initially projected, less of the fund balance will be used.

The county now expects to use $2.9 million from its fund balance during 2011. Without that transfer, there would be a projected $2.5 million deficit for the year, on a general fund budget of roughly $100 million. As of June 30, the fund balance stands at $12.8 million.

Among several shortfalls on the expenditure side, about $1.034 million in anticipated non-departmental lump sum reductions have not materialized. [.pdf of county general fund budget as of June 30, 2011]

Other highlights:

• Revenue surpluses of about $368,000 are anticipated from the clerk/register of deeds office due to higher-than-expected revenues from fees and transfer taxes. Budgets for the treasurer and prosecuting attorney also are showing revenue surpluses.
• The office of the water resources commissioner is seeing a roughly $80,000 revenue shortfall, caused by lower-than-expected construction-related fees and licenses. That amount is offset by about $49,000 in higher-than-budgeted savings for employee development and reimbursements.
• The sheriff’s office is about $481,000 short of its goal in anticipated expense reductions, but that’s offset by a projected revenue surplus of $877,o00. The additional revenue comes from new contracts for court security, additional contract deputies, dispatch services, and fees, among other sources.

The finance staff will give the next budget update – for the third quarter of 2011 – in November. McDaniel anticipates presenting the county’s 2012-2013 budget to the board for its review in September.

Second Quarter Budget Update: Commissioner Discussion

Wes Prater asked why the IT maintenance contracts were “out of whack.” Gavalier explained that about $221,000 in savings that the department had expected to get this year by renegotiating some of its contracts didn’t materialize.

Prater pointed out that the corporation counsel’s budget showed that expenses were $125,000 over budget – at $250,000, expenses were double the amount anticipated. Curtis Hedger, the county’s corporation counsel, quipped: ”There’s at least one case that we won’t be expending attorney fees on in the future.” The remark elicited laughter – it was a reference to the anticipated settlement of a years-long lawsuit filed against the county in 2006 by three townships over the cost of police services contracts.

[At its July 6, 2011 meeting, the board voted to approve the recommendation of a court-ordered facilitator, who set $749,427 as the amount owed by Ypsilanti Township and August Township to the county for police services provided in 2006. The county is not seeking payment for its legal expenses related to the lawsuit, which are estimated to be more than $1 million since 2006. Responding to a follow-up query from The Chronicle, Hedger said the paperwork has been completed to dismiss the lawsuit, and the townships paid the county this week.]

Commissioners Alicia Ping (R-District 3) and Wes Prater (D-District 4) confer before the Aug. 3 board meeting.

Prater also asked about the shortfall in a lump sum reduction that the 14A District Court had been asked to make. Gavalier clarified that the original target for expense reduction was $375,000. However, the court wasn’t able to reduce its operating budget by that amount, falling about $205,000 short of that goal.

Also related to the 14A District Court, Barbara Bergman questioned whether the board should revisit a policy of setting aside funds for future expansion of the courthouse in Saline. A portion of the fees collected by the 14A District Court – about $140,000 annually – are put into a public improvement fund. A portion of those funds are used to reimburse the county for the Saline courthouse construction in the mid-2000s. Some of the funds are also set aside to be used to pay for future expansion of the court – the current building, located at 1000 N. Maple, was completed in 2009. Bergman said that given the current economic condition, those funds might be put to better use.

Dan Smith noted that there were shortfalls in the budgets funded by the indigent veterans relief and Act 88 millages. Given that the board was setting public hearings later in the meeting for renewals of both millages, he wondered if there were any plans to increase the rates. [Because Act 88 and the veterans relief act predate the state’s Headlee Amendment, they can be approved by the board without a voter referendum. The Act 88 millage is currently levied at 0.043 mills. The county levies 1/40 mill for indigent veterans relief.]

McDaniel said that no change is being requested for veterans relief, but they are asking for an increase in the Act 88 millage to 0.05 mills. It’s expected that the board will be asked to increase the rate of the veterans relief millage next year, she said.

Mid-Year Budget Adjustment

The board was asked to approve a mid-year budget adjustment that increased the general fund budget by $1.42 million. The adjustment also increased the county Community Support and Treatment Services (CSTS) department’s budget by $150,003.

The general fund adjustment reflects an increase of $3,476,225 in property tax revenue for 2011. The 2011 budget approved by commissioners in late 2010 included the use of $5,289,000 from the county’s fund balance. In light of increased property tax revenues, only $2,921,391 will be used from the fund balance for the current budget year, which ends Dec. 31. On the expenditure side, there is a $1,034,000 shortfall in anticipated lump sum expense reductions. Several other more minor adjustments were made on both the expense and revenue side. [.pdf of staff memo detailing budget adjustments]

The total 2011 general fund budget is $100,696,000.

The CSTS increase reflects an adjustment in the cost allocation plan (CAP) – an amount charged to each department for items like the county attorney and administration. According to a staff memo, the expense will be offset by additional revenue from the Washtenaw County Health Organization (WCHO), a partnership between the county and the University of Michigan Health System.

The WCHO had been one of the topics of a July 7, 2011 board working session, where WCHO executive director Patrick Barrie briefed commissioners on a proposed transfer of about a half-dozen employees from the county payroll to the WCHO, as part of a restructuring aimed at limiting the county’s financial liabilities. The WCHO is an entity that receives state and federal funding to provide services for people with serious mental illness, developmental disabilities and substance abuse disorders. At this point, WCHO “leases” its employees from the county, and contracts for services through the county’s community support and treatment services (CSTS) department, which employs about 300 people.

Commissioner Ronnie Peterson, at a June 28 agenda briefing, had advocated strongly for reordering the working session’s agenda in order to give more time to the WCHO discussion, but he did not wind up attending that meeting. On Wednesday, however, he again raised concerns about the WCHO changes. He said he’d watched a video of the July 7 working session, and would be asking more questions about the restructuring in the future.

Commissioner Barbara Bergman, who also serves on the WCHO board, urged Peterson to meet with Barrie directly to address any questions Peterson might have. Peterson responded by saying that others are free to meet in whatever ways they choose, but he prefers to hold his discussions at a public meeting.

Outcome: Commissioners unanimously approved the mid-year budget adjustment as part of their consent agenda.

Office of Community & Economic Development

A departmental consolidation long in the works got final approval on Wednesday, after only a few questions from commissioners. The move combines and reorganizes three county departments: the office of community development (OCD); the economic development & energy department; and the employment training and community services (ETCS) department. An initial vote of approval had been taken at the board’s July 6, 2011 meeting, though some commissioners had asked for more details about the proposed changes, which would take effect on Jan. 1, 2012. [.pdf of responses to commissioner questions] [.pdf of business plan for the new office]

OCD director Mary Jo Callan will lead the new office of community & economic development. The goal is to cut costs by eliminating duplicated services in the face of declining revenues, while finding ways to deliver those services more efficiently to citizens.

Commissioners were briefed on the restructuring at a May 5, 2011 working session, and also discussed it at a June 28 agenda briefing.

Office of Community & Economic Development: Commissioner Discussion

Ronnie Peterson asked whether other jobs had been found for employees whose positions were eliminated because of the consolidation.

Diane Heidt, the county’s human resources and labor relations director, reported that the change resulted in a net loss of eight county jobs. [The office of community development, which will be part of the newly merged entity, is a joint operation between the county and city of Ann Arbor. An additional city job is being eliminated. Overall, the three departments are shrinking from 40.35 full-time employees to 31.85 FTEs in the new office.]

Heidt said that jobs in other departments have been found for all but one of the affected employees. She told commissioners that she’s continuing to work to find another position for that remaining employee, whose current job won’t be eliminated until the end of the year.

Peterson asked whether the department is also planning new hires. Yes, Heidt said – a couple of positions have already been posted.

Peterson then spoke at length about his concerns regarding these changes. Loyalty should count for something, he said, expressing dismay that some county workers had seen their jobs eliminated even as the county plans to hire other employees. Workers are being asked to take cuts in wages and benefits, he noted – it affects morale to then see some employees lose their jobs while other positions are created, he said.

Peterson also talked about the importance of economic development, especially on the county’s east side. [Peterson represents District 6, covering Ypsilanti and part of Ypsilanti Township. In the past he has voiced concerns that the departmental reorganization will downplay the county's role in economic development.] Ann Arbor is doing fine, and that helps the entire county, he said. But the eastern side is struggling, and will continue to struggle for years to come. He said he trusts Mary Jo Callan to direct the new department and he’s been pleased with her advocacy. He said he’d support the resolution to create the new department, but that he’ll raise these same concerns later in the year during budget deliberations.

Responding to a question from Yousef Rabhi, Heidt said that of the eliminated positions, four had been temporary jobs funded by a federal stimulus weatherization grant, and two other positions had been vacant. She said that multiple meetings with union representatives had been held as part of this process. Administrators had originally thought that more jobs would be affected, she said, but they were able to keep most employees within the new structure.

Outcome: The board unanimously gave final approval to the departmental consolidation as part of the consent agenda.

WISD Contract for Juvenile Programs

The board was asked to authorize a contract with the Washtenaw Intermediate School District, funding educational programs at the county’s Juvenile Detention Center and the Daybreak Residential program.

The agreement provides $380,379 for the 2011-12 school year, and gives the county administrator the authority to sign second-year contracts for the 2012-13 school year. The county expects to be reimbursed by the state for all but $75,370 of the annual cost. According to a staff memo, the WISD would provide two certified teachers and a half-time school social worker for up to 30 youth, based on the program capacities and a ratio no greater than one teacher to 10 youth, as required by state and federal regulations for special education programs. [.pdf of contract with WISD]

Lisa Greco, the county’s director of children’s services, attended Wednesday’s meeting but did not address the board.

Outcome: Without discussion, the board unanimously approved authorization of the WISD contract as part of the consent agenda.

New Contract for Nurses Union

A resolution on Wednesday’s board agenda gave final approval to an agreement with the Michigan Nurses Association – Unit I. The agreement covers the period from July 1, 2011 through Dec. 31, 2013.

The collective bargaining agreement, which affects 13 public health nurses and nurse coordinators in the county’s health services department, was given initial approval on July 6. It’s the first of 15 union agreements being negotiated as part of the 2012 and 2013 budget cycle, and is expected to achieve an annual savings of $132,000.

In total, the county hopes to see about $8 million in labor concessions for the two-year budget cycle, to help address a projected $17.5 million deficit. [There are 17 unions representing the county workforce. In January 2011, the county reached agreements with two other unions – the Police Officers Association of Michigan (POAM) and the Command Officers Association of Michigan (COAM) – for a four-year period through 2014.]

According to terms of the agreement with the nurses union, union members will not have raises in 2012 or 2013. The nurses will bear a greater share of health care expenses, pension contributions and retiree health care contributions. For example, the co-pay for emergency room visits will increase from $50 to $250.

Union members will now pay deductibles, and a percentage of the cost of their medical expenses, up to an annual maximum. Prescription drug co-pays will also be increased under the new agreement. In addition, the number of annual “banked leave” days – similar to unpaid furlough days – will increase from 6 to 12.

Outcome: Without discussion, commissioners unanimously gave final approval to the collective bargaining agreement with the Michigan Nurses Association – Unit I, as part of the board’s consent agenda.

Urban County Expands

The board gave initial approval to continue the county’s participation in the Urban County program – from July 1, 2012 to June 30, 2015 – and to expand the program to include six additional jurisdictions. A final vote is expected on Sept. 7.

“Urban County” is a designation of the U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development, identifying a county with more than 200,000 people. With that designation, individual governments within the Urban County can become members, making them entitled to an allotment of funding through a variety of HUD programs, including the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnerships. Those two programs provide funding for projects to benefit low- and moderate-income residents, focused on housing, human services and other community development efforts.

Washtenaw County and the townships of Ann Arbor, Ypsilanti, Pittsfield, Superior, Northfield, Salem, and Bridgewater got the Urban County designation in 2002. Later, the city of Ypsilanti and Scio Township joined, and in 2009 the city of Ann Arbor – which previously received HUD funding directly – joined as well, roughly doubling the amount of money available in the Urban County’s funding pool. New jurisdictions that plan to join the Urban County for the next funding cycle are the city of Saline, the village of Manchester, and the townships of Dexter, Lima, Manchester, and Saline.

Outcome: Without discussion, the board unanimously voted to give initial approval to continue participation in an expanded Urban County program.

Agreement Set with Regional Energy Office

Commissioners held a public hearing and subsequently voted on an interlocal agreement with the Southeast Michigan Energy Office Community Alliance (SEMRO). The Ferndale-based nonprofit (SEMRO) provides technical services to the county in identifying and implementing federal Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant projects. [.pdf of interlocal agreement]

The energy office is a division of the Michigan Suburbs Alliance. County commissioner and board chair Conan Smith is CEO of the alliance. The board voted initially to join the energy office at its March 17, 2010 meeting. Smith abstained from that vote. He was absent from the Aug. 3 meeting.

Sam Offen, director of the Alliance’s Southeast Michigan regional energy program, attended Wednesday’s meeting but did not address the board. Offen, an Ann Arbor resident, also serves on the Ann Arbor park advisory commission and is a board member of the Leslie Science and Nature Center.

Regional Energy Office: Public Hearing

One person – Thomas Partridge – spoke during a public hearing about the interlocal agreement. He began by asking for clarification about the hearing’s topic. He said it was incumbent upon the board to publicize the hearing more broadly and to ensure that adequate background material is provided. He asked that funding for energy and energy conservation be directed to help the county’s most disadvantaged residents, and called for a resolution that asked public utilities like DTE to stop discriminatory billing practices against the disadvantaged. No one should have to go without heat or air conditioning, he said.

Outcome: Without discussion, commissioners unanimously approved the interlocal agreement with the Southeast Michigan Energy Office Community Alliance as part of their consent agenda.

Public Hearings Scheduled for Millages

The board scheduled two public hearings for its Sept. 7 meeting that related to countywide millages.

The hearings are intended to get feedback from the public on a millage levied under the Veterans Relief Fund Act, and a millage collected under Public Act 88 to be used for economic development purposes.

The veterans relief millage would not exceed 1/40th of a mill, to be levied in December 2011 for use during the calendar year 2012. It’s estimated to bring in $344,486 and would be used to provide services for indigent veterans in Washtenaw County.

The Public Act 88 millage of 0.05 mill would generate an estimated $688,913 annually and would cost homeowners $5 for every $100,000 of their homes’ taxable value. [The Act 88 millage is currently levied at 0.043 mills.]

According to a staff memo, the county could assign some of the funds “to a non-profit organization which is engaged in the purpose of advertising the advantages of and encouraging trade within the County.” In previous years, Act 88 revenues have been used to fund the economic development agency Ann Arbor SPARK and other groups.

Outcome: The board set public hearings for its Sept. 7 meeting to get input on the veterans relief and Act 88 millages.

Grant for Sheriff’s Office

Commissioners were asked to vote on a resolution authorizing the Washtenaw County sheriff’s office to apply for a Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance grant. The $42,587 grant would be awarded by the U.S. Dept. of Justice’s Bureau of Justice Assistance. The funds would be used to support the sheriff’s community outreach program, according to a staff memo. Specifically, the grant would fund a part-time community engagement coordinator and two of the program’s five peer outreach workers.

Commissioners also set a public hearing for Sept. 7 to get input on how the grant will be used. The U.S. Dept. of Justice requires a public hearing before awarding these grants, to get input about projects or programs that might be funded by the money.

Sheriff Jerry Clayton and Greg Dill, director of administrative services for the sheriff’s office, attended Wednesday’s meeting but did not address the board.

A final vote is expected at the next board meeting on Sept. 7.

Outcome: Commissioners gave initial approval to apply for the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance grant, and set a Sept. 7 public hearing for how the grant will be used. There was no discussion on this item.

Misc. Communications, Public Commentary

In addition to the public hearing mentioned earlier in this report, Thomas Partridge of Ann Arbor spoke during each of the four opportunities for public commentary. He was the only person to speak during public commentary at Wednesday’s meeting. Describing himself as a Democrat and an advocate for the disadvantaged, Partridge said the budget discussion for the next fiscal year was a moral, ethical and civil rights subject, not just a financial one. He advocated for accessible and affordable health care, transportation, housing and education for all, but especially for the disadvantaged, including senior citizens and the poor.

He said that although he was an early supporter of Barack Obama in the 2008 presidential race, he’s been very disappointed in Obama’s performance and he called for other Democratic candidates to come forward to run for president in 2012.

Partridge also expressed concern about tactics the county administration is using to get employees to accept cutbacks – he did not give details, but said he’d been talking earlier in the meeting with a county employee who’s a member of the AFSCME union. Commissioners should be working to raise revenues so that the county can employ enough workers to adequately deliver services to residents, he said.

Partridge also called for changes that would make the county administrator an elected position. [That job is currently a hire made by the board of commissioners.] The officers of the board should also be chosen by the electorate, he said. [All commissioners are elected positions, but commissioners then elect officers for the board, ways & means committee, and working sessions.] Partridge also said that the speaking turn for commissioners should be limited in the same way that time for public commentary is limited. [Speakers during public commentary are limited to three minutes during each turn at the ways & means committee meeting, and five minutes during the regular board meeting.]

Misc: Communications: Congratulations to Jason Brooks

Commissioner Yousef Rabhi thanked Jason Brooks for his impressive service. Brooks, a deputy county clerk, attends all public meetings of the board and handles many of the board’s procedural logistics, including taking minutes of the meetings.

From left: Deputy county clerk Jason Brooks, commissioner Yousef Rabhi (D-District 11), and corporation counsel Curtis Hedger. In mid-August, Brooks will be taking a new job as management analyst in the county administrator's office.

Rabhi noted that Brooks hadn’t missed a meeting since 2006. He also congratulated Brooks on recently receiving The Ann Arbor Chronicle’s Bezonki award. [Brooks and deputy county clerk Matt Yankee were joint recipients of a Bezonki, recognizing their service in the public sector. More details about award winners will be provided in the September 2011 Chronicle monthly milestone column.]

Rabhi said he looked forward to working with Brooks in the future. In mid-August, Brooks will take a new job as management analyst in the county administrator’s office, replacing Joanna Bidlack, who left that position earlier this year. County administrator Verna McDaniel said she’ll be working with county clerk Larry Kestenbaum on the transition.

Brooks received a round of applause from commissioners.

Misc. Communications: Working Sessions

Rabhi, who chairs the board’s working sessions, noted that commissioners had canceled their Aug. 4 working session, “so don’t come – nobody will be here.” However, he reminded his colleagues that they had added five working sessions focused on the 2012-2013 budget, and the next one is set for Thursday, Aug. 18. The topic will be the consolidation of dispatch operations between the county and the city of Ann Arbor.

Misc. Communications: Stuff the Bus

McDaniel highlighted the 2011 Stuff the Bus event, a United Way fundraiser that this year will run from Aug. 15-19. It will be held from 9 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. each day in the parking lot of the Target at 3749 Carpenter Road. The public is asked to donate new school supplies – backpacks, pencils, notepads, binders, crayons, glue and other items – that will be distributed to children in need throughout the county in grades K-5. Participating school districts include Ypsilanti, Willow Run, Chelsea, Manchester, Whitmore Lake and Lincoln Consolidated schools.

Closed Session

The board ended its meeting by voting to go into closed executive session for the purpose of discussing the confidential opinion of legal counsel and the settlement of pending litigation. The specific topic wasn’t revealed, but the session appeared to have been a contentious one. Leah Gunn left early and several commissioners later reported that the discussion had been heated.

Present: Barbara Levin Bergman, Leah Gunn, Ronnie Peterson, Alicia Ping, Wes Prater, Yousef Rabhi, Rob Turner, and Dan Smith.

Absent: Kristin Judge, Rolland Sizemore Jr., Conan Smith.

Next regular board meeting: Wednesday, Sept. 7, 2011 at 6:30 p.m. at the county administration building, 220 N. Main St. The Ways & Means Committee meets first, followed immediately by the regular board meeting. [confirm date] (Though the agenda states that the regular board meeting begins at 6:45 p.m., it usually starts much later – times vary depending on what’s on the agenda.) Public comment sessions are held at the beginning and end of each meeting.

Next working session: Thursday, Aug. 18, 2011 at 6:30 p.m. at the county administration building, 220 N. Main St. The working session will focus on the 2012-2013 budget.

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

OCD director Mary Jo Callan will lead the new office of community & economic development. The goal is to cut costs by eliminating duplicated services in the face of declining revenues, while finding ways to deliver those services more efficiently to citizens. The change resulted in a net loss of nine jobs. However, jobs in other departments have been found for all but one of the affected employees. Diane Heidt, the county’s human resources manager, said she’s continuing to work to find a position for that employee.

Commissioners were briefed on the restructuring at a May 5, 2011 working session, and also discussed it at a June 28 agenda briefing.

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

If the reorganization gets final approval, Mary Jo Callan, director of the office of community development, will lead the new office of community & economic development. The goal is to cut costs by eliminating duplicated services in the face of declining revenues, while finding ways to deliver those services more efficiently to citizens. Several personnel changes are part of the restructuring, which would eliminate 11 positions and create 3 jobs – for a net loss of 8 jobs. In addition, there would be 20 job reclassifications, 5 title changes and 1 position held vacant.

Commissioners were briefed on the restructuring at a May 5, 2011 working session, and also discussed it at a June 28 agenda briefing. At that briefing, county administrator Verna McDaniel told commissioners that all but one person had been given a “soft landing” within the county’s organization.

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

Washtenaw County commissioner Ronnie Peterson, right, and county administrator Verna McDaniel before the start of the chair's briefing on Tuesday, to preview agendas for the July 6 board meeting and July 7 working session. (Photo by the writer.)

Generating significant conversation was an item on the planned consolidation of three departments: The office of community development, the economic development & energy department, and the employment training and community services (ETCS) department. Commissioners wanted clarification on the status of the employee count listed out on the agenda: 11 positions eliminated, 3 jobs created, 20 reclassifications, 5 title changes and 1 position held vacant. County administrator Verna McDaniel told commissioners that while that seems like an extensive set of changes, in terms of people, all but one person had been given a “soft landing” within the county’s organization.

Another item that generated interest among commissioners was the second phase of the trial court consolidation project. Phase two will renovate the first floor of the downtown Ann Arbor courthouse to consolidate some trial court operations, as part of a restructuring that included moving the juvenile court from its Platt Road location earlier this year to the courthouse at Main & Huron. The consolidation was made possible in part due to the relocation of the 15th District Court from the downtown courthouse to the city of Ann Arbor’s new municipal center at Fifth & Huron. Commissioner conversation centered around the purview of the board’s space committee (consisting of Rolland Sizemore Jr. and Rob Turner) in connection with the future of the Platt Road building.

The board’s July 7 working session agenda led to an extended conversation about prioritization of the three items listed: (1) the split of the Washtenaw Community Health Organization (WCHO) from Washtenaw County; (2) the Western Washtenaw Recycling Authority; and (3) the Ann Arbor Skatepark. Chair of the working session, Yousef Rabhi, did not attend Tuesday’s briefing, but with the consent of the working session’s vice chair, Rob Turner, the order to the agenda items was revised to put the WCHO item last. The rationale was to allow an open-ended time for adequate discussion – commissioner Ronnie Peterson figured he might need at least an hour for discussion on that item alone.

The presentation that commissioners will hear on the skatepark is likely to be similar to the one presented by Friends of the Skatepark at the Ann Arbor city council’s June 20 meeting.

Tuesday’s “chair’s briefing” was in a format similar to administrative briefings used in the past to preview upcoming adendas. Those administrative briefings were abandoned due to concerns expressed by some commissioners about accessibility. The June 28 briefing was conducted in the county boardroom and was video-recorded. It was the second in a series of three such briefings scheduled for the summer – the next one takes place on July 26, starting at 4 p.m., to prep for the Aug. 3 board meeting.

Departmental Consolidation

On the agenda for July 6 is a resolution to consolidate three departments: (1) the office of community development; (2) economic development and energy; and (3) employment training and community services (ETCS). The board had previously received a presentation about the plan at a May 5, 2011 working session. Combined, the three departments employ nearly 60 people with a combined budget of about $16 million. The $16 million reflects a decrease, due to federal funding cuts, from around $29 million. At their May 5 working session, commissioners had been told that staff cuts will likely result from the changes – those and other details were still being worked out.

As they’re currently configured, here’s what the three departments look like:

• Economic development & energy: Four employees, led by Tony VanDerworp. Programs focus on energy efficiency and renewable energy investments, historic preservation, brownfield redevelopment, community engagement and planning, and economic development – including support for the Eastern Leaders Group, the Detroit Region Aerotropolis, and other efforts aimed at job growth.
• Office of community development: Twelve employees, led by Mary Jo Callan. OCD, which is funded by both the county and city of Ann Arbor, handles a range of programs, including energy efficiency improvements for residential housing, affordable housing development and rehab, improvements to public facilities and infrastructure, neighborhood revitalization, and community engagement and planning – particularly focused on human services. OCD is managing the coordinated funding of local human services nonprofits by the county, the city of Ann Arbor, the Urban County, Washtenaw United Way and the Ann Arbor Area Community Foundation – a process that was discussed at length at the board’s May 4 meeting. The Barrier Busters program is also managed by OCD.
• Employment training & community services (ETCS): Forty employees, led by Patricia Denig. [Long-time ETCS director Trenda Rusher retired at the end of 2009.] ETCS also offers residential energy efficiency programs, including help with weatherization, and contracts with other agencies to provide human services support, primarily related to food and nutrition. They’re involved in crisis intervention services, like Barrier Busters, and provide services to job seekers and employers.

Mary Jo Callan, OCD director, will lead the new department.

At the briefing on Tuesday, county administrator Verna McDaniel offered some clarification about the “bottom line on staffing” that is reflected in the resolution: 11 jobs eliminated, 3 jobs created, 20 reclassifications, 5 title changes and 1 position held vacant. McDaniel cautioned that those numbers could be deceiving. Based on her conversations with Diane Heidt, Washtenaw County’s human resources and labor relations director, everyone in the three departments had a place except for one, and that person has the ability to “bump” – a union term referring to reassignment based on seniority.

Wes Prater asked for confirmation, which he received from McDaniel, that when the board receives the budget, it would be presented as required by the Uniform Budgeting and Accounting Act, with budgets for the past year, the current year, next year.

Rolland Sizemore Jr. confirmed with McDaniel that the reorganization results in eliminating a net of eight jobs and creating five positions through title changes. Sizemore also wanted to know who was in the position labeled “human services division director” and why there’s a salary range of $73,846-$116,758 listed. McDaniel explained that it’s Trenda Rusher’s old position, which has been changed because it’s no longer needed – a position lower than a director position has been created instead. [Rusher was the long-time ETCS director before retiring at the end of 2009.] The salary is listed in a position to be eliminated, not added, she said.

Prater said it’s a good thing to reduce costs, and it appears the county would be doing that with this move. He got confirmation from McDaniel that all eight positions to be eliminated would be coming from jobs in the departments to be consolidated.

Trial Court Consolidation: Space Committee

On the July 6 agenda is a resolution that would authorize up to $1 million for the next phase of consolidation of services at the downtown courthouse facility, where the juvenile court is now located. Phase two entails renovation of the first floor of the courthouse. Commissioners had previously received a detailed briefing on this project from Donald Shelton, chief judge of the Washtenew County trial court, at their Jan. 19, 2011 board meeting.

Rolland Sizemore Jr., who’s a member of the board’s space committee (along with Rob Turner), noted that the board needs to look at the property on Platt Road where the juvenile court was previously located. The county needs to decide whether it wants to keep the property or not. He said he didn’t think that renovating the building was an option – the facility was beyond renovating.

Barbara Bergman offered that whatever the board decides to do, it’s important to put it back onto the tax rolls.

Ronnie Peterson questioned whether the space committee had purview to decide the future use of the Platt Road property, asking whether that decision would rest with the board or with the space committee.

Conan Smith, who chaired the briefing, told Peterson that he was hopeful that Sizemore and Turner would work together on that issue, and it would come back before the board. Peterson noted that he’d previously served on the space committee, and determining alternative uses of property was not, he felt, within the scope of the space committee’s work. He wanted some deliberation on the question by the full board of commissioners.

Sizemore assured Peterson that the space committee looks at all buildings and property, but that anything that actually happens to the county’s facilities comes back to the board for its approval. Sizemore said it’s time to look at all of the county’s buildings. He noted that the western service center on North Zeeb Road is partly empty. It’s a question as to whether some staff might relocate out to that facility. But he concluded by assuring Peterson that it would not be the case that the committee would come back to the board with: “Here’s a decision and here it is!”

On the topic of moving the juvenile court to the downtown courthouse, Turner said someone had needed to give it a push to get things going. The building on Platt Road is in such bad shape, he said, it would cost more to repair than to tear it down. He wanted to make sure that the renovation of the first and third floor of the downtown courthouse was brought before the board for its approval. The next phase for the Platt Road building would be oversight of the existing building – he ventured that it probably needs abatement of some materials. Beyond that point, it’s beyond the scope of the space committee, Turner concluded.

Peterson confirmed that the outline sketched by Turner was consistent with what Peterson understood the scope of the space committee to be.

Barbara Bergman said that as the discussion of the future use of the Platt Road property progresses and the board gets to a point where there is a committee that would have such scope, she’d be interested in seeing a list of pros and cons for its use.

Working Session Priorities: WCHO Split

On the working session agenda for July 7 are three items: (1) the split of the Washtenaw Community Health Organization from Washtenaw County; (2) the Western Washtenaw Recycling Authority; and (3) the Ann Arbor Skatepark.

The presentation that commissioners will hear on the skatepark is likely to be similar to the one presented by Friends of the Skatepark at the Ann Arbor city council’s June 20 meeting.

The Washtenaw Community Health Organization (WCHO) is a partnership between Washtenaw County and the University of Michigan Health System. Each institution appoints six members to the board. The partnership focuses on providing services to children and adults with mental or emotional health disorders, substance abuse problems or developmental disabilities.

Bylaws for the WCHO were changed recently by approval of the UM board of regents (at its April 21 meeting) and by the Washtenaw County board of commissioners (at its March 2 meeting). The changes included: (1) removing language for the UMHS to provide money for physical health services; (2) providing for the executive committee to act on behalf of the board and for actions to be reported to the full board at its next meeting; and (3) removing Washtenaw County as the fiscal agent for the WCHO.

It’s this last change on which the board is scheduled to receive a July 7 working session presentation from WCHO executive director Patrick Barrie.

Yousef Rabhi, who chairs the working sessions and sets those agendas, did not attend Tuesday’s briefing; however, vice chair of the working session Rob Turner did attend.

Ronnie Peterson noted that the board was sensitive to time constraints, but he thought the conversation on the WCHO would be a helpful discussion. He wondered how long the presentation on the WCHO would be. Having three items meant that it’s a “stacked agenda,” he said. Peterson cautioned that the WCHO item would need at least an hour of discussion. He also wanted to make sure that there would be background documentation provided in advance of the working session so that board members could follow Barrie’s presentation.

Barbara Bergman, who serves on the WCHO board, assured Peterson that the 48197 and 48198 zipcodes “are districts of importance to all of us, including you and to the WCHO.” [Those zipcodes are in the Ypsilanti area, which Peterson's board district covers.] Regardless of the outcome of the split, she said, it will not affect the fact that the county has under-served those two zipcodes. She said as a WCHO board member, she wanted to allay Peterson’s fears – those two zipcodes are primary in the WCHO’s thinking, she said.

Leah Gunn then suggested that the other two items on the working session agenda be heard first, before the WCHO item. She said she’d never heard that there’s a limit on the amount of time board members can use for their meetings – they could stay until 10 p.m. if they want to dig deeply into the WCHO issue, she said.

Wes Prater said he thought that currently UM and Washtenaw County each appointed six members to the WCHO board. He wondered what was meant to be achieved through the split. Conan Smith cautioned that the purpose of that day’s briefing was not to deliberate. Bergman summarized for Prater that the CSTS and WCHO want to serve the county with the best services possible. [CSTS is the county's Community Support & Treatment Services department, which is merging with WCHO.]

Sizemore ventured that everybody seemed to think the WCHO split was a “hot item,” but he felt that the recycling authority is also a hot item. The board could be there until 11:30 p.m., he ventured.

Peterson responded to Sizemore, saying that he had no problem staying as long as was needed. But he had wanted to be respectful of Rabhi’s expressed wishes to limit working session meetings to two hours.

Gunn reiterated her suggestion that the skatepark and the recycling items be placed first on the agenda, to leave the time for the WCHO item open-ended.

Conan Smith noted that it’s the chair’s agenda to set. Vice chair of the working session, Rob Turner, agreed to the agenda order change.

The recycling item was dealt a glancing mention, when West Prater asked whether the recycling authority would have the ability to place a millage on the ballot. County administrator Verna McDaniel told him no – it would require the $3.2 million of the county’s full faith and credit, which would be backed by assessing the participating communities.

Peterson returned to his point that when items are scheduled for a working session, he wanted commissioners to have some background material provided to them. He also wanted one or two pages of material explaining why the item was being scheduled for the working session. C. Smith responded by saying that the agendas are set by the working session chair. Peterson then pointed out that the working session chair is new, and it’s a new board – the board should not go into a working session blindly. [Rabhi was elected to the board in November 2010, and took office in January 2011. It's his first term on the board.]

In response to Peterson, Gunn reminded him that Rabhi had been elected to the leadership position of working session chair, and setting the agenda is one of the things a chair does. The board should be respectful of the chair’s decisions. She also noted that the board is always provided with background material. Gunn indicated that the board should follow the decisions of its elected leaders.

Peterson responded by saying that he was not a “follow-the-leader kind of guy.”

The board concluded with an apparent consensus that there would be adequate information provided to commissioners about the content of the working session on July 7, in advance of that session.

Before adjourning its briefing, the board went into a closed session to discuss pending litigation.

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

Before the June 20 meeting started, Sabra Briere (Ward 1) handed out amendments she'd be proposing to the medical marijuana licensing ordinance. From left: Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) and Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5). (Photos by the writer.)

The first local law stipulates where medical marijuana businesses can be located in the city – it’s an addition to Ann Arbor’s zoning code. The second law establishes a licensing board for medical marijuana dispensaries and sets up an application process for the award of a maximum of 20 licenses to dispensaries in the first year of the program.

On Monday evening, the council undertook amendments to the licensing ordinance that were few compared to massive changes that have taken place at several council meetings dating back to January 2011. On Monday, the labeling requirements for marijuana packaging were changed so that dollar amounts are no longer required.

The council teetered on the edge of postponing the legislation, when city attorney Stephen Postema encouraged councilmembers to delay voting until the Michigan Court of Appeals issued an opinion on a case (Michigan v. McQueen) for which oral arguments were heard on June 7. Despite the support for postponement from mayor John Hieftje, an initial vote to postpone achieved only two other votes. A second vote achieved a total of five votes, leaving the postponement one vote short of the six-vote majority it required.

As some councilmembers observed that the council had invested a disproportionate amount of time on the medical marijuana legislation, Hieftje contended that it had not prevented the council from handling its other work.

On Monday, that other work included a collective bargaining agreement with its police service specialists union, which was an item added just that evening to the agenda. The council also heard public commentary critical of the recent budget approved on May 31 by the council, which includes the layoff of some firefighters and police officers. The meeting was preceded by a demonstration by the city’s public safety employees, at Fifth and Huron streets just outside city hall

The council  also approved two contracts in connection with the East Stadium Bridges replacement project and three purchase orders related to tree care. And the council gave final approval to sewer and water rate increases and a revision to its landscaping ordinance.

The council revised its debt/fund balance policy, and revised its budget to reflect the blending of its economic development fund back into the general fund. Also related to economic development, councilmembers approved the annual $75,000 funding for Ann Arbor SPARK and set a public hearing for a tax abatement for Picometrix.

The council established an affordable housing lien policy and gave initial approval to technical revisions to the city’s pension ordinance. They confirmed appointments to the new design review board, but postponed a vote on setting the design review fee. The council added a work session for July 11, which is likely to include an update on the planned Fuller Road Station.

The council also heard a presentation on a skatepark planned for Veterans Memorial Park.

Medical Marijuana

At Monday’s meeting, the council considered two city ordinances that ensconce medical marijuana businesses with local regulations.

One ordinance concerned zoning – legislation that stipulates where medical marijuana dispensaries and cultivation facilities can set up business. The second ordinance concerned licensing – a law that describes how licenses will be awarded to dispensaries, and how a licensing board will be set up to evaluate applications.

Key features of the zoning ordinance include the requirement that medical marijuana dispensaries must be located in districts zoned as D (downtown), C (commercial), or M (manufacturing), or in PUD (planned unit development) districts where retail is permitted in the supplemental regulations. Medical marijuana cultivation facilities are only allowed in areas zoned as C (commercial), M (manufacturing), RE (research), or ORL (office/research/limited industrial). Medical marijuana businesses are prohibited in a 1000-foot buffer zone around schools.

Key features of the licensing ordinance include a limit of 20 total licenses for dispensaries in the first year – cultivation facilities are not licensed under the ordinance. The license applications will be processed by a five-member medical marijuana licensing board consisting of one member of the city council, one physician, and three other Ann Arbor residents. The license application requires proof of legal possession of the premises for which the license is sought. Licensed dispensaries are required to maintain records on patients for 30 days after marijuana is dispensed, and on cultivation sources for 60 days.

The council’s work on the medical marijuana legislation dates at least as far back as June 7, 2010, when councilmembers convened a closed session on the topic to discuss a city attorney’s memo dated May 28, 2010. The council convened another closed session on July 19, 2010, purportedly to discuss the same May 28, 2010 memo. The council did not publicly discuss the topic until Aug. 5, 2010, when it enacted a moratorium on the use of property in the city for medical marijuana businesses.

Dispensaries that were operating before the moratorium was enacted – and that were allowed under the moratorium to continue to operate – will have a 60-day window within which they can apply for a license after the ordinance takes effect, which is 60 days from publication. Other dispensaries cannot apply until 75 days after the ordinance becomes effective.

Medical Marijuana: Public Commentary

Every council meeting agenda includes 10 3-minute slots at the start of the meeting for which people can sign up to speak. On Monday, some of them addressed the topic of medical marijuana. This public commentary does not count as the public hearing for any issue. Public hearings do not require signing up in advance and are not limited to a specific number of speakers.

Dennis Hayes reiterated a point he’d made at the council’s previous meeting – data from Michigan’s Dept. of Community Health show that over half of registered medical marijuana patients are on Medicaid, Social Security or some other form of support. Ann Arbor should be proud of leading the way to helping them get the medicine they need for relief, he said. About the process of enacting the legislation, he said at the very least, it has been a long slog. He thanked councilmembers Sabra Briere and Sandi Smith, both of Ward 1, for their efforts.

Hayes said that Ann Arbor’s ordinance would be an example for the rest of the state of Michigan. However, he said that the requirement for the dollar amount on labeling needs to be removed. He called the record-keeping that’s been agreed upon appropriate and helpful, but added that he hoped to come back with further suggestions. He allowed that there would be litigation for some time to come, but said it’s now time to move forward.

Chuck Ream noted that if the city could tax medical marijuana, they could hire more police officers. He told the council it’s time to finish the legislation, but it’s important to finish it right. He said he’d previously asked that no monkey wrench from the legal department be thrown into the process, and said the suggestion to delay passage that evening was such a monkey wrench. He allowed that, yes, there would be a ruling that would be handed down, and there’d be another one after that and another one after that. At their last meeting, he told the councilmembers, all the major decisions were done. But he described the zoning ordinance as “still in bad shape.” The zoning ordinance should be made parallel with the licensing ordinance, he said.

A citation for the charter of the city of Ann Arbor should be included, Ream said, saying that it’s not just the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act that enables the local legislation, it’s also the city charter. He said the council should toss out the part about the defenses, exceptions and and immunities. To the phrase “valid registration card,” he asked the council to add “or its equivalent.” He also asked the council to take the dollar amount off the label – that just provides evidence to bust people, he said.

Rhory Gould said he was speaking as a representative of Arborside Health and Wellness. He thanked mayor John Hieftje and the council for developing an ordinance that would serve and protect all. He also thanked all his colleagues – including his attorney, Matt Abel – for diligence in helping to get the ordinance to pass in the right manner. He said he’d previously complained about the length of the moratorium. The current legislation is something that can be used as an example, for other communities in the state, he said. Others will look to Ann Arbor as leaders on how to do things the right way. He stated that he would like one of the available licenses to be awarded to Arborside. He stated that he would “give it his all” to give professional service to everyone. He thanked the council for effort to put the ordinance in place.

Medical Marijuana: Public Hearing

A formal public hearing related to the licensing ordinance. The public hearing on the zoning ordinance had been held previously.

Mayor John Hieftje told the audience before the public hearing started that he thought the medical marijuana ordinances would be postponed. His said his “best guess” would be that the legislation would be postponed. If it were postponed, the public hearing would be continued until it was voted on, but those who spoke that evening would not be able to speak at the continued hearing.

After the vote on medical marijuana, during a recess, Charmie Gholson chats with Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3).

Chuck Ream stated that it was disconcerting to hear that the measure might be postponed. No one knew it was being postponed, he said. He returned to similar comments he’d make during public commentary at the very start of the meeting. He asked the council to include a reference to the Ann Arbor city charter in the legislative intent section. He said that the language in the ordinance that stated the ordinance did not provide for defense against prosecution is “pretty poor language,” when 74% of Ann Arbor residents voted in 2004 to give dispensaries every power that they have. The dollar amount requirement on packaging needs to be removed, he said – that sets up evidence for people to get busted. He hoped that there would be no more foolishness, shenanigans or chicanery.

Charmie Gholson told the council she had not been there for a while, because she’d been ill. Even if someone doesn’t need help to get to the microphone, she said, that doesn’t mean that they’re not struggling with chronic and lethal illness.

She pointed to the renewed federal interest in distribution facilities that the council had expressed at its recent meetings. She said, “We’re in a national battle.” She’s been working on this issue for the last five years, she said. In June, she continued, two reports had been released – one from the Global Commission on Drug Policy and one from Law Enforcement Against Prohibition. The conclusion of those reports was that the drug war has failed with devastating consequences. It’s a U.S. attorney’s job to say, “It’s still working,” she said. She told the council that the reality is, if you start talking to victims of the drug war, you would think that the war is a failure.

Medical Marijuana: Recent Developments – Michigan v. McQueen

City attorney Stephen Postema told the council about a case that’s now before the Michigan Court of Appeals.

By way of background, the case that’s being heard on an appeal by the prosecutor – Michigan v. McQueen (Compassionate Apothecary) – was noted in The Chronicle’s coverage of the council’s Jan. 3, 2011 meeting, when the council deliberated on the licensing legislation. The case was initially heard by chief judge of the Isabella County trial court, Paul Chamberlain, who was asked to consider a request from the Isabella County prosecutor to find that Compassionate Apothecary constituted a public nuisance. In his order filed Dec. 16, 2010, Judge Chamberlain found that “Defendants only operate their business during designated business hours, and as decided above, perform their medical marihuana related conduct pursuant to the MMMA. Therefore, their business does not constitute a nuisance per se.”

In finding that Compassionate Apothecary operated in accordance with the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act, Chamberlain laid out how the Compassionate Apothecary business model, in his view, conformed with the MMMA:

This court is charged with determining whether the patient-to-patient transfers in this case are considered medical use of marihuana, as permitted by the MMMA. Further, the record reveals that only registered qualified patients or registered primary caregivers make such transfers as members of defendants’ business. Members place their marihuana in defendants’ lockers, and the members transfer or deliver the marihuana pursuant to the MMMA. Even when a registered primary caregiver transfers medical marihuana to another member, such caregiver does so under the authorization of the patient to whom he or she is registered. The Legislature did not prohibit such transfers, and such registered primary caregiver conceivably serves as a person who assists a registered qualified patient with using or administering marihuana. MCL 333.26424(i). Therefore, the ultimate issue before this court is whether the presumption listed in MCL 333.26424(d) applies and pertains to the patient-to-patient medical use of marihuana in this case. This court finds that it does.

Postema told the council that a request for an expedited appeal had been made, which had resulted in the hearing of oral arguments two weeks ago [June 7, 2011]. What is significant about the case being heard by the Court of Appeals, said Postema, is that the opinion would be binding if it were published, and it would be the first time that guidance had been provided. He said that based conversations with people who saw the oral arguments, the unanimous opinion of observers was that the ruling would come down quickly, and when it did come down, the business model used in that case would not be found legal. Postema said the sense he got from attorneys who represented dispensaries was they weren’t optimistic. They were predicting a reversal in favor of the prosecutor. He said it’s something the council should consider.

Sabra Briere (Ward 1) asked Postema to explain exactly what the issue was in the Isabella County case. Postema said that the municipality had tried to close down the business, because it was based on patient-to-patient transfer of marijuana, and explained that this is how a number of dispensaries in Ann Arbor operate. Briere followed up by asking Postema to confirm that for both the licensing and the zoning, what the council has proposed is: Everything must be done in accord with MMMA, and that means in accord with any court’s interpretation of it. Postema confirmed that is the case.

Briere asked if the court were to rule that dispensaries can’t exist, what effect would there be on the city’s ordinances? Postema said definitions in the ordinances may need to be altered. He also said that the licensing board set up by the ordinance might need to be given some guidance.

Medical Marijuana Licensing: Deliberations on Postponement

Sabra Briere (Ward 1) said they don’t know a date certain when the Court of Appeals ruling might come down, so the choices on postponement would be to postpone indefinitely or postpone every two weeks. Postema said he felt that in a month, he thought the ruling would come down. At that point, Briere said, she wanted to talk about a few amendments that she wanted to propose, then let the council consider the issue of postponement.

Before considering amendments, mayor John Hieftje wanted more information from Postema. He asked if the pending court ruling could outlaw dispensaries. In responding, Postema contended that if the court struck down the trial court’s ruling, it would end most dispensaries as they exist across the state.

Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5) said there was clearly some benefit in moving forward – the council has been “at this a while.” He wondered what the harm is if the council moves forward and a ruling comes down inconsistent with the city’s ordinance. The language would have to be amended, said Hohnke, either as an existing ordinance or as a pending ordinance – the task would be the same. Postema attempted to respond to Hohnke’s point by saying that the issue for everyone is getting guidance on the state law. It would be useful, however the ruling came down – it’s what everyone has been waiting for, Postema said. The importance that the court was attaching to the ruling was evident from the effort that had been made to expedite consideration of the appeal.

Sandi Smith (Ward 1) said that the council had been working in good faith with voters’ desire, saying the council had hammered it out, and is now ready to cross the finish line. What she was hearing in the city attorney’s remarks is that it’s a matter of how business is done at a dispensary, which is up to them to do. It’s not the council’s job to anticipate when and how the court would rule, and she felt that dispensaries will make their own decisions about their business model.

Marcia Higgins (Ward 4) was not active in the deliberations, but cast one of two votes against the medical marijuana legislation..

Hieftje said he didn’t know why the council wouldn’t take the additional time, if it might be able to make a more informed decision. Right now, he contended, if you want access to medical marijuana you can get it – the moratorium could be extended by one month, which would allow existing dispensaries to continue to operate.

Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) posed a more specific version of Briere’s question to the city attorney. Taylor noted that the pending court decision involves the manner in which marijuana is distributed: Does the pending Ann Arbor ordinance “engage” how dispensaries transfer their marijuana? Postema responded by contending that the court ruling could affect Ann Arbor’s ordinance, depending on how the ruling comes out. A dispensary has to get marijuana from somewhere, he said – a dispensary may get it from “overages” from caregivers, or it might be transferred between patients. Postema went on to say that many dispensaries in Ann Arbor use patient-to-patient transfer in their business model.

Taylor pressed Postema to speak to the issue of whether Ann Arbor’s ordinance engages that question: Does it engage how they get the marijuana? Postema allowed that right now it’s an open question. But he maintained that if the council felt that patient-to-patient transfer is not allowed under the law, then the council would not adopt this kind of ordinance. He went on to say that the attorney general for the state of Michigan, Bill Schuette, had said he felt that patient-to-patient transfer is not allowed, so Postema felt having the court ruling in place would be useful before proceeding.

[Ann Arbor's licensing ordinance defines dispensaries as follows: "'Medical marijuana dispensary' means a building or part of a building where one or more primary caregivers operate with the intent to transfer marijuana between primary caregivers and/or qualifying patients, other than a medical marijuana home occupation or a dwelling unit in which the transfer of marijuana occurs between a primary caregiver and qualifying patient who resides in the dwelling unit as permitted under subsection (7)."]

Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2), standing, touches base with interim city administrator Tom Crawford.

Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2) said he agreed with the mayor. He had never understood the rationale of proceeding with this ordinance, when it would be altered by legislation and court decisions. The time invested by the council on the issue of medical marijuana legislation was so disproportionate compared to other priorities. Rapundalo indicated he’d voted for the measure at the polls, but did not see why the council couldn’t wait it out. This is just ridiculous, he said, to keep going forward. So at that point he moved for a postponement, with a second in support of that motion coming from Marcia Higgins (Ward 4).

Briere went back to the question that Taylor had asked Postema – if anything in the ordinance, as written, deals with business practice – because that’s the issue at hand based on his description of the court case. She noted that the proposed licensing board is supposed to set the criteria for licensing and those criteria could reflect any possible court ruling. Postema allowed that was true. But he said that the practice of patient-to-patient transfer is very prevalent, so a ruling could result in the ordinance needing to clarify that. A court ruling could also give guidance to the board, said Postema.

Briere said at the most she was intending to introduce a few amendments, so requested that the council discuss the amendments, and then discuss whether to postpone. So she said she would not support a postponement “at this moment.”

Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) said he was confused about postponing based on a potential court ruling. He asked what the difference was between a potential for a court ruling on marijuana compared to a recent ruling on the living wage ordinance? Postema said a recent decision on the living wage ordinance was an unpublished opinion, so has no precedential effect. He expected that the opinion in the Michigan v. McQueen case would be published, and thus be used as a precedent.

Taylor said he agreed with Rapundalo that medical marijuana is an important issue, but not the council’s top issue. For Taylor it was a “near call,” but he was in favor of “gutting it out tonight.” And if the council needed to change the ordinance, the council could run that through the ordinary process.

Hohnke agreed with Briere’s desire to consider the amendments first, so he asked if Rapundalo would consider withdrawing the motion to postpone and then reintroduce it. Rapundalo, sitting to Hohnke’s right, shook his head no. Faced then with commenting on the issue of postponement, Hohnke said that while he appreciated the helpful input from the city attorney, he was not convinced of the benefit of postponement, so he would not support it.

Outcome on postponement: The motion to postpone failed 3-7, with Higgins, Rapundalo and Hieftje voting for it.

Medical Marijuana Licensing: Deliberations – Amendments

The council then proceeded to the amendments offered by Briere, which included the following additions [in italics] and deletions [in strikethrough], most notably the elimination of dollar amounts from the labeling requirements:

5:50.1(2)
(a)“Registry identification card” means a document issued by the department that identifies a person as a registered qualifying patient or registered primary care giver

7:506(4)
(e) The date delivery, weight, and type of marijuana and dollar amount or other consideration being exchanged in the transaction;
…
(h) The name of an authorized representative of the medical marijuana dispensary whom a registered qualifying patient can contact with any questions regarding the product and the address, e-mail address, and telephone number of the medical marijuana dispensary of an authorized representative of the medical marijuana dispensary whom a registered qualifying partent can contact with any questions regarding the product.

Outcome on amendments: The council approved all the amendments without significant comment.

Medical Marijuana Licensing: Deliberations (Again) on Postponement

With the main motion to approve the licensing again before the council, mayor John Hieftje said he wouldn’t vote against it, but also said it would be “silly” to pass it. With his frustration apparent, Sabra Briere (Ward 1) asked if he would like another motion to postpone, and the mayor said he would appreciate one. Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2), however, indicated that he himself wasn’t interested in pursuing a postponement further. So it was Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) who moved for a postponement, with support from Margie Teall (Ward 4), who seconded the motion.

There was some clarification about the timing of the postponement – it would have been to the council’s second meeting in July. Without further discussion, the council voted and split 5-5, so the motion failed.

Outcome: The postponement failed, because it did not get the required six-vote majority. Voting for the postponement were: Rapundalo, Kunselman, Teall, Higgins, Hieftje. Voting against the postponement were: Taylor, Hohnke, Anglin, Smith and Briere. Derezinski was absent.

Medical Marijuana Licensing: Deliberations on Main Motion

Mayor John Hieftje continued the deliberations on the main motion, expressing his frustration that the postponement had not been achieved. “If this comes back to us and we have to spend any more time on it, I think we’ve done ourselves and the whole city a disservice. We’ve spent a great deal of time on this – a great deal of time.”

Sandi Smith (Ward 1) told the mayor she could respect his concern, but told him, “The work is done. And we’ve gone through this over and over again.” She said that any future revisions could be informed by the licensing board.

Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2) said it should be no surprise that he would not be supporting the ordinance – he’d hoped there would at least have been a postponement. He said the medical marijuana issues had gotten out ahead of the regulatory environment. He agreed with the remarks of a speaker who had addressed the council at a previous meeting, who had said the council was trying to shove the genie back in the bottle. He didn’t think it was going to work. He said he appreciated the time and effort that Briere and Smith had put into it. But he said the effort – particularly on the part of the city attorney’s office – has been out of proportion with other priorities.

Rapundalo said he thought the current language is still insufficient in terms of regulatory parameters that are needed. Particularly in terms of neighborhoods and health, safety and welfare, he was concerned. He alluded to an example in his own extended neighborhood without specifying the nature of that example.

Dispensaries are not allowed by the Michigan Medical Marijuana Act, and Rapundalo said that allowing them in the ordinance caused him concern. He was also concerned about the city’s exposure and conflict with respect to federal laws. “We’re setting ourselves up for lots of protracted uncertainty and chaos,” he said. The council don’t know what the future will hold in terms of legislation and court decisions, so it’s ridiculous to go ahead with this local ordinance, he said.

The medical issue has become very different from what it was originally envisioned, Rapundalo continued. Many people supported the state ballot measure, but didn’t anticipate dispensaries. He also alluded to a growing illicit trade in obtaining referrals from physicians to get registry cards, which he found quite troubling. Until the state can provide more clarity, he said, there should be no sanctioning beyond what is unambiguously allowed under state law. He said the city should extend the moratorium and take the time to figure out how to put the genie in the bottle.

Sabra Briere (Ward 1) responded to Rapundalo’s remarks by saying there was not a word she would disagree with. Through the entire process it had been eye-opening. She said that many were quite happy not to address medical marijuana with a city ordinance, but the council had two ordinances in front of it. One tells where medical marijuana can be grown and under what circumstances – they’d been told it’s a necessary zoning ordinance. The other sets up a licensing board.

Some communities have been sued because they prohibited dispensaries, Briere said. The council had worked hard to craft something that protects city. There’s a built-in delay. There is a 60-day delay before documents can be filled out by any dispensary. There is another delay before any licenses can be issued, she said. If something happens between now and the time licenses can be issued, then she was happy to pull everything back or part of it back and revise it. The truth is that it’s taken more time than anyone anticipated, and she would like to move on and address other issues.

Hieftje made the point that although the council had spent hours and hours on the issue, it had not kept the council from getting its other work done. He said he was afraid it would soon be back in the council’s lap again. Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5) said he appreciated Rapundalo’s comments, noting that it was a difficult path to navigate between state and federal law. But he said the council had to the best of its ability crafted ordinances to address the ambiguities in the law and he felt that the council had a mandate to do that.

Outcomes: The council voted 8-2 in favor of the medical marijuana licensing ordinance. Dissenting were Rapundalo and Higgins. Derezinski was absent. The vote on the zoning ordinance came out the same way and was taken without significant discussion.

Medical Marijuana: Coda

Towards the end of the meeting, the council came back to the issue of the moratorium by recognizing that the moratorium currently in place extends only through the end of June. The licensing ordinance does not take effect until 60 days after legal publication, which was expected to be Thursday, June 23. After that, existing dispensaries have a 60 window within which they can apply. Others must wait until 75 days after the ordinance takes effect.

Outcome: The council voted to extend the moratorium by 120 days from June 30, 2011.

Collective Bargaining: Police Service Specialist

Added to the agenda on Monday night at the request of Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2) was a new collective bargaining agreement with its police service specialist union for a contract that goes retroactively from July 1, 2009 through June 30, 2013.

Key features of the contract are no wage increases and participation in the city’s health plan, which requires a contribution by employees to the cost of that plan. There are five members of the police service specialist union. They provide support services to police officers.

Collective Bargaining: Public Commentary

Anne Daws spoke on behalf of Citizens for a Safe Ann Arbor – representatives of the police and fire departments – to urge the mayor and council to reconsider and amend the budget approved at the end of May. [Though the city uses a two-year planning cycle, it adopts budgets just one year at a time. The budget adopted by the council last month for FY 2012, which begins July 1, 2011, is the first year of a two-year cycle.] Current staffing levels for police and fire mean that they are unable to provide the level of service that the community deserves, she said.

Outside city hall at Fifth and Huron streets, members of the city's police and fire department demonstrated against the planned layoffs in those departments. Behind the wheel of the "downsized" police cruiser is two-year-old Charlie Maguire, son of AAPD officer Patrick Maguire, who has served on the force since 2000. He told The Chronicle that every year he's served, there has been talk of layoffs.

Daws said it is unsafe both for emergency responders and for residents to reduce further the number of police officers, 911 dispatchers and firefighters. For emergency responders who live in Ann Arbor, they’re in a unique position, because they work in the city so they understand what’s going on in the community, and they pay taxes so they understand the tax burden, she said. When they go home at night, they rely on emergency responders to keep them safe.

In 2002 there were 196 police officers, Daws continued. Now there are 122 – the administration would eventually like to reduce that to 109. For this year, four police officers have been given pink slips, she said, in addition to two dispatchers and one police service specialist. Officers are now being sent to priority calls – domestic violence, suicidal subjects and fights – without a backup. They’re told a backup will be sent when one can be found. For non-priority calls, like non-injury traffic crashes, the wait can be 30-90 minutes, she said.

For the fire department, Daws continued, in 2002 there were 113 firefighters, and now there are 81. The administration wants to reduce that to 76, she said. The department is using rotating closures of stations – last week, Fire Station 3 was closed. There’s talk of Washtenaw County taking over dispatch operations, she said. That would mean that when citizens of Ann Arbor call 911, she said, their call would go in line with all the people calling from Washtenaw County, including West Willow and Ypsilanti Township.

[During time for communications from the interim city adminstrator, Tom Crawford said earlier this month there had been a press release about possibly transitioning dispatch to the county. Separate from that was the layoff of two dispatchers, Crawford said. Given the closeness in timing, he wanted to point out the distinction.]

Daws concluded by saying that they were honored and proud to serve the community, but at the same time worried to see staffing levels drop to all-time lows.

Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2), responding a few minutes later to the comments by Daws, said he’s mentioned on numerous occasions that the layoffs could be mitigated in the police and fire departments, if the bargaining units adopted the same health care plan that non-union and some other unions have taken on. It’s within the control of public safety unions, he said, to avert layoffs.

Mayor John Hieftje added that no one is asking the public safety unions to take on diminished health care, just to pay for a portion of it.

Collective Bargaining: Council Deliberations

Introducing the new contract for council approval, Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2) – chair of the council’s labor committee – said he was glad to bring it forward from the labor committee. The key elements of the contract had been arrived at a number of months ago, he said, before the legislative developments at the state level, which may lead to a requirement that municipalities pay no more than 80% of employee health care costs.

Rapundalo ticked through some highlights of the contract: a retroactive term from 2009 through June 30, 2013; no wage increase; increases in pension contribution by employees in the latter years; and adoption of the city’s health care plan, which includes a contribution from the employees. He expressed the hope that the contract would be a model for the remaining unions, who have not ratified an agreement.

Asked by Sandi Smith (Ward 1), interim city administrator Tom Crawford said the union included five police service specialists who perform a variety of specialized services to support officers. Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) asked how much money and how many jobs were saved through the contract. Crawford said he did not have those figures handy. When the city does negotiations, it has savings targets, but uses different ways to achieve those savings.

Kunselman said for a four-year agreement, where there is no wage increase, and they pay more for health care, he hoped an estimate could be provided based on just that. Crawford told Kunselman that with respect to evaluating savings, the city has not been paying wage increases. He told Kunselman he could provide an estimate.

Outcome: The council voted unanimously to agree to the contract with the police service specialists. This leaves the contract with the much larger police officers union still unsettled – it expired on June 30, 2009.

Infrastructure: East Stadium Bridges, Barton Dam

Before the council were two contracts related to the East Stadium Boulevard bridges replacement project. The first was a $3,587,456 contract with Parsons Brinckerhoff Michigan Inc. for project management and construction engineering services for the replacement. According to a staff memo, the contract would be paid for out of money from a variety of sources: street repair millage; the water supply fund; sanitary sewer fund; storm water funds; the alternative transportation fund; and the major street fund.

The second was a $609,815 contract with Northwest Consultants Inc. for construction engineering and design engineering services. The staff memo identifies funding sources as the water fund, the sewer fund, the stormwater fund and the street repair millage.

Sabra Briere (Ward 1) noted that she expected the money for the two contracts on the East Stadium bridges project to come from a mix of local street funds and federal funds. Homayoon Pirooz, head of the city’s project management department, indicated that the contract for design and construction engineering is all local money.

Approval for construction of the project would come before the council in September, and that portion would be mostly federal and state funds, Pirooz explained. At the end of the day, he said, the city would be able to capture all the state and federal grants that had been assigned to the bridge replacement project. Briere asked for confirmation that the federal TIGER II grant funds had all been secured. Pirooz said that the TIGER II money had been finalized and the money had been secured. [TIGER is an acronym for the federal program Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery.]

Mike Anglin (Ward 5) asked that the public be made aware of which federal funds had been secured. Pirooz told Anglin that $13.9 million had been awarded through the TIGER II federal program and a total of around another $3 million had been awarded by the state of Michigan.

Outcome: The council voted unanimously to approve the two contracts associated with the East Stadium bridges replacement project.

Another construction project on the agenda was a contract with Gerace Construction Co. for $812,500 worth of concrete repairs to Barton Dam. The funding was drawn from the water supply fund, but also required a $366,250 appropriation from the general fund reserve.

Outcome: The council voted unanimously without comment to approve the contract for concrete repairs to Barton Dam.

Tree Care

The council was asked to approve purchase orders with three different companies: Asplundh Tree Expert Co. ($90,000), Advanced Tree Care Services ($40,000) and Owen Tree Service ($30,000) for tree removal, stump removal and tree trimming services. The item resulted in a fairly extended interaction between councilmembers and Craig Hupy, the head of the city’s systems planning unit.

Sabra Briere (Ward 1) wanted to know when the contracts went into effect. Hupy said that the resolution had been drafted in April of this year, with the intention of taking it to the council for its first meeting in May – now it’s the second meeting in June. The city’s fiscal year ends June 30. Obviously, he said, there would be little or no expenditures in FY 2011. Briere confirmed that by authorizing the resolution, the council was not expecting work to be completed in the next nine days.

Briere then brought up the possibility that in the city’s approach to urban forestry, too much emphasis was placed on tree removal, and not enough on maintenance of healthy trees. Hupy responded by saying that tree removal is always a concern. Before a tree is removed, the city has two professionals do an assessment before a decision is made about a removal – removals aren’t taken lightly, Hupy said. It’s clear that with current funding levels, the city doesn’t have a maintenance plan for trimming trees. That’s a desirable long-term goal. He said he hoped that will eventually be a recommendation that comes from the urban forestry management plan.

Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5) returned to the question of when the expenditures would take place – it’s a $160,000 expenditure that will be approved for each of the next three years, including the current fiscal year, which has only nine days left. After some back and forth, the result was that the council voted to amend out the reference to the current fiscal year.

Hohnke asked if there is anything about the approval of the expenditure that locks in a particular approach to tree care. No, answered Hupy.

Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) said the staff report noted a couple of staff retirements. He asked Hupy what the status is of the city’s forestry department in terms of trucks and people. What are they capable of doing? Hupy told Kunselman that throughout field operations, the city is stretched thin. For example, in water and sewer, he would normally go to a four 10-hour-a-day work week to gain efficiencies. The city can’t do that this summer because there are not enough employees to get coverage. Similarly, forestry is down and park operations is down due to retirements. The city has a number of vacancies posted, but is not being terribly successful in attracting candidates, he reported.

Kunselman wondered how the city council was approving expenditures for the contracts for FY 2013, when it has not yet approved that year’s budget. Interim city administrator Tom Crawford explained that a standard city purchase order contains language to the effect that qualifies the amount, to the extent that funding has been approved by the city.

Outcome: The council unanimously approved the amended resolution.

Water, Sewer, Stormwater Rates

Before the council was final approval for increases in water, sewer and stormwater rates.

In terms of revenue generated to the city, the rate increases are expected to generate 3.36% more for drinking water ($664,993), 4% more for the sanitary sewer ($829,481), and 3.35% more for stormwater ($176,915). [.pdf of complete utility rate changes as proposed]

According to the city, the rate increases are needed to maintain debt service coverage and to maintain funding for required capital improvements.

The city’s drinking water charges are based on a “unit” of 100 cubic feet – 748 gallons. Charges for residential customers are divided into tiers, based on usage. For example, the first seven units of water for residential customers have been charged at a rate of $1.23 per unit. The new residential rate for the first seven units is $1.27.

The city’s stormwater rates are based on the amount of impervious area on a parcel and are billed quarterly. For example, the lowest tier – for impervious area less than 2,187 square feet – has been $12.84 per quarter. Under the new rate structure, that increases to $13.24.

Water usage for Ann Arbor city residents is available online under the My Property tab. [You'll need your account number to access information.]

Water, Sewer, Stormwater Rates: Public Hearing

Vince Caruso introduced himself as a coordinating member of the Allen’s Creek Watershed Group. He told the council that he would support the use of porous pavement – it can handle two inches of rain an hour, has less heat-island effect, and is 70% quieter when vehicles travel across it. He noted that the city has paved Sylvan Avenue with porous pavement. There’s now a proposal to use state revolving funds for four projects, and to use stormwater funds to pay for those projects. He said he does not support paying for the complete road construction cost from stormwater funds – but he would support the incremental cost between using standard pavement compared to porous pavement.

Caruso criticized the fact that there were no funds for watershed studies, but the city wanted to spend stormwater fees on roadwork. He cautioned that the city’s public services area administrator, Sue McCormick, should know something about the issue of using restricted utility funds on purposes for which they are not designated, alluding to a court case, the Bolt decision. The Bolt decision had involved the city of Lansing, where McCormick worked earlier in her career. Some would say it’s appropriate to spend the stormwater money on porous pavement road construction, because it’s a great improvement in stormwater management, Caruso said. But the roads would be built anyway, he said. A watershed study for the Allen’s Creek is needed, he concluded.

Thomas Partridge said he had concerns about raising the water, sewer and stormwater rates given the “flat rate schedule,” without attention to the value of a home or a homeowner’s income. That makes it an anti-democratic tax that harms the most vulnerable members of our society, he said. Partridge called on the council to amend the ordinance to ameliorate the most harmful aspects of flat rate taxing. He also took a shot at the medical marijuana legislation by suggesting that the city charge higher rates and fees to those residents who seek “to turn this great city into one big pot facility.”

Water, Sewer, Stormwater Rates: Council Deliberations

Mayor John Hieftje noted that during the council’s initial deliberations on the rate increases, the question had been raised about whether comparative data supplied by the city staff were relevant to the city of Ann Arbor’s situation. Stephen Kunsleman (Ward 3) had pointed out that most of the communities cited in the rest of southeast Michigan were served by the Detroit Water and Sewerage Department (DWSD).

Hieftje said that other comparative data had been supplied in the meantime, and that it would inform the council’s judgment. Councilmembers did not discuss the additional data, nor was it publicly available at the time of the meeting. [.pdf of rate comparison to Lansing and Grand Rapids] [.pdf of 2009 rate comparison across various communities]

Outcome: The council unanimously approved the new water, sewer and stormwater rates.

Water Laboratory Managment

Connected to the city’s water-related infrastructure was an item that established a $110,026 contract with PerkinElmer Health Sciences for a water laboratory information management system. During council deliberations, Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2) asked for some clarification, which established that the city’s laboratory is staffed by five people and provides sampling services to the water treatment plant and the wastewater treatment plant, as well as stormwater and special projects. The city provides sampling assistance to the Huron River Watershed Council, and is also running tests for the Pioneer High School stormwater detention project to determine the efficiency of that project, as well as the city’s compost site. In addition, the city provides sampling services to Ann Arbor Township, Scio Township and Barton Hills.

Outcome: The council unanimously approved the contract with PerkinElmer Health Sciences for the water lab information management system.

Landscaping Ordinance

Before the council was final approval to a revision in its landscaping ordinance. The changes are intended to: (1) improve the appearance of vehicular use areas; (2) revise buffer requirements between conflicting land uses; (3) reduce negative impacts of stormwater runoff; (4) improve pedestrian movement within a development site; and (5) preserve existing significant vegetation.

Those benefits are meant to be achieved through several text amendments to the ordinance, which include: adding definitions for “bioretention” and “native or prairie plantings”; allowing the width of landscape buffers to vary; modifying requirements for interior landscape islands; prohibiting use of invasive species for required landscaping; and increasing fines for violation.

The city’s planning commission had given the ordinance change a unanimous recommendation at its March 1, 2011 meeting. The city council gave its initial approval to the landscaping ordinance change at its June 6 meeting. All city ordinances require a first and a second reading in front of the city council, after a public hearing, before final enactment.

During council deliberations, Sandi Smith (Ward 1) noted that as a result of a conversation she’d had with some staff in the field operations area, it was her understanding that sometimes after a landscape island is first built, and a contract expires, it takes a while for someone to adopt it. We tend to see a shabbiness, she said, before it’s brought back up to standard. She wondered if this ordinance would change that. She clarified with Jerry Hancock, the city’s stormwater and floodplain program manager, that the landscape islands to which the ordinance referred were generally in strip mall contexts.

The issue Smith had identified was apparently related to the establishment of rain gardens on city property, where there is initially a contract period for maintenance of the garden – after the contract expires, there’s sometimes a lag time before the city takes it over.

Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) said Smith raised a good issue. While the private sector does a good job initially, there doesn’t seem to be a lot of teeth for enforcement following up. Trees get proposed for a development and planted, but a few years later, they’re dead. He wanted to know if the ordinance change provided additional teeth for enforcement.

Hancock said the ordinance was not proposing a change to the enforcement activities – it’s complaint-based and there is no inspection program, Hancock explained. If a site plan is proposed to be revised, there is also enforcement at that point, he said. He said the fines are being increased, which may help improve things if enforcement is required.

Kunselman noted that the increase specified is from not more than $500 per violation to not more than $2,500 per violation. He wanted to know if those violations were written by community standards or by code enforcement officers. Hancock said that typically it would be code enforcement inspectors from planning and development services who write up those type of violations.

Outcome: The council voted unanimously to approve the change to its landscaping ordinance.

Fund Balance, Debt Policies

The council was asked to consider adoption of a new fund balance policy to comply with the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement No. 54, and revision of the city’s debt policy to include two new sections – one on defeasance of debt and another on inter-fund loans.

The new GASB standard requires a finer-grained explication of the components of a fund balance. The breakdown of fund balance categories is: (1) non-spendable – not in spendable form or legally/contractually unable to be spent; (2) restricted – constraints on funds placed by creditors or through enabling legislation; (3) committed – specific constraints placed on the use of funds by the city council (for example, funds set aside by council resolution); (4) assigned – constrained by the intent of the city, but not restricted or committed (for example, those funds to which authority for assignment is given to the chief financial officer); and (5) unassigned – a fund balance that does not fit into any other classification. [.pdf of fund balance policy]

The debt policy as it relates to inter-fund loans includes a provision that addresses the ability of the city to make loans to specific funds from the investment pool. [The city invests its fund balances in a pool, not for each fund.] The policy notes that while such inter-fund loads may be prudent in certain situations, they are ultimately backed by the city’s general fund. So such inter-fund loans should only be approved if the credit worthiness is high for the fund to which a loan is made. [.pdf of debt management policy]

During brief council deliberations, Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) wanted to know if the council had policies on debt and fund balance prior to this one. The city’s interim city administrator and chief financial officer Tom Crawford explained to Kunselman that these policies have existed previously – they are listed in the budget book every year.

Kunselman asked if debt and fund balance policies are required of other units, like the Ann Arbor Housing Commission and the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority. Crawford said that developing such policies is the responsibility of those units. Crawford said he did recall suggesting the DDA adopt a fund balance policy around the time when the underground parking garage was being discussed. Kunselman asked if such a policy would require some amount to be set aside for bond reserve – he noted that the DDA does not have a bond reserve. Crawford explained that it’s the city that issues the bonds, when the DDA bonds for projects, so it’s the city that meets the requirements for any bond issuance.

Outcome: The council unanimously approved the fund balance and debt policy.

Economic Development Fund, General Fund

Before the council for its approval was the authorization to blend the city’s economic development fund – with its fund balance as of June 30, 2010 standing at $967,161 – into its general fund. The move had been planned as part of the fiscal year 2012 budget that the council adopted at its May 31, 2011 session.

The economic development fund was established on June 18, 2007 by a unanimous vote of the city council by transferring $2.18 million from the general fund to the new economic development fund. It was set up to meet the city’s commitment made to Google to pay for up to 400 parking spaces for its employees, for up to four years for an estimated total cost of approximately $2,029,017. Google’s hiring was not as rapid as it had initially projected, and that left a bit under half of the money untapped.

The Government Accounting Standards Board (GASB) No. 54 has also changed the definition of what funds qualify as special revenue funds – the city’s economic development fund was established as such a fund, but no longer qualifies under the new GASB 54 definition, and thus needs to be blended back into the general fund.

The council’s resolution also amended the current fiscal year 2011 budget in some other ways as well, so that expenditures from funds that exceeded budgeted amounts are appropriately covered. Among those expenditures covered were: the International City/County Management Association fire protection study ($54,000); higher maintenance costs for Superior Dam ($35,000); and higher snow removal costs and cleanup from the recent Plymouth Road mudslide and pavement markings ($500,000).

Sabra Briere (Ward 1) asked  how it was that returning the $967,161 balance in the economic development fund to the city’s general fund resulted in an amendment of $1,127,590.  She noted that in the memo, $750,000 is attributed to the transfer from the economic development fund. The city’s CFO and interim city manager, Tom Crawford, said that the city was re-characterizing expenditures coming from the economic development fund “as if it was from the general fund.” So the fund balance and the expenses are being transferred to the general fund. The reason for that is due to the GASB rule, which was anticipated to go into effect for FY 2012. In turns out that the GASB rule is in effect for the end of the current fiscal year.

Briere came back to her original question, which was how the total of $1,127,590 was calculated. Crawford explained that it was the total for all the item adjustments. Only $750,000 was due to the economic development fund, he said.

Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) concluded that the effect of the resolution was that the city is adding about $1 million to the general fund reserve. Crawford said  it was less than that, but essentially, yes. Mike Anglin (Ward 5) asked for a clarification of non-departmental dollar amounts. Crawford said it was all the economic development fund.

Outcome: The council voted unanimously to blend the economic development fund into the general fund.

Consent Agenda: SPARK, Lobbyist Funding

Among the several items on the Ann Arbor city council’s June 20, 2011 meeting consent agenda were two involving significant city contractors: Ann Arbor SPARK for $75,000, and Governmental Consultant Services Inc. (GCSI) for $48,000.

Items on the consent agenda are considered routine, and include contracts for less than $100,000. They’re voted as a group of items. However, councilmembers may separate out items on the consent agenda for separate consideration. Neither the item for SPARK nor for GCSI were considered separately.

The contact with the economic development agency Ann Arbor SPARK is one that has been renewed annually since the Washtenaw Development Council and Ann Arbor SPARK merged in 2006. Previously, Ann Arbor had contracted with the WDC for the business support services for which it now contracts with SPARK. On June 20, 2005, the city council authorized a one-year contract with WDC for $40,000. This year’s $75,000 contract with SPARK describes the organization’s focus as “building our innovation-focused community through continual proactive support of entrepreneurs, regional businesses, university tech transfer offices, and networking organizations.”

Ann Arbor SPARK is also the contractor hired by the city’s local development finance authority (LDFA), to operate a business accelerator for the city’s SmartZone, one of 11 such districts established in the early 2000s by the Michigan Economic Development Corp. (MEDC). The SmartZone is funded by a tax increment finance (TIF) mechanism, which in the current fiscal year captured around $1.4 million in taxes from a TIF district (the union of the Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti Downtown Development Authority districts, though revenue is generated only in Ann Arbor’s district.) The specific taxes on which the increment since 2002 is captured are the school operating and state education taxes, which would otherwise be sent to the state and then redistributed back to local school districts.

GCSI’s Kirk Profit, a former member of the state House of Representatives, typically makes an annual presentation to the council with an update on state-level legislative issues relevant to the city’s budget situation. Written updates to councilmembers on legislative activity are sent on a weekly or daily basis.

Christopher Tayor (Ward 3), an attorney with Butzel Long, was excused from voting on a consent agenda item involving a $37,000 purchase order for that firm to provide legal services to the 15th District Court. That was achieved by separating out the item from the rest of the consent agenda.

Outcome: The council unanimously approved the consent agenda, including the items on Ann Arbor SPARK and GCSI.

Picometrix Tax Abatement

The council was asked to approve a resolution setting the date for a public hearing on July 18, 2011 for a tax abatement for Picometrix LLC, located at 2925 Boardwalk in Ann Arbor. Picometrix is a supplier of high-speed optical receivers.

The 5-year abatement would apply to $2,434,882 of personal property that Picometrix is acquiring. From the application for abatement: “Due to the projected increase in production volume, the company will need to purchase assets to maximize production and support added staffing.”

The list of personal property included in the application ranges from garden-variety desks and cubicles to digital oscilloscopes and laser beam profilers. If the abatement were approved, it would reduce the company’s annual tax bill for the new equipment by about $16,500 annually. The new personal property would generate approximately $20,700 in property taxes for each year during the abatement period, according to a city staff memo accompanying the resolution.

The industrial development district in which the Picometrix tax abatement is sought was established in 2006.

At its June 6, 2011 meeting, the council held a public hearing on a proposed tax abatement for another company – Sakti3. No one spoke at that hearing, and the council did not take a vote on the abatement that evening. No council vote is currently scheduled for the Sakti3 abatement.

Outcome: The council voted without comment to set the Picometrix tax abatement hearing for July 18, 2011.

Affordable Housing Lien Policy

Before the council for its approval was a policy under which liens can be subordinated and city loans forgiven, in the interest of perserving affordable housing.

Key elements of the policy: at least one city or county lien will be maintained on the property; liens with federal affordability restrictions will be in the highest lien position possible; liens that do not have federal affordability restrictions will be discharged if needed to facilitate reinvestment of outside funding; the city administrator is authorized to approve lien subordinations and lien discharges.

The city council had discussed a specific case related to the forgiveness of loans and subordination of liens at its May 16, 2011 meeting. The context there was the appropriation of funds for the demolition of houses to prepare for construction of the Near North affordable housing project, located on the east side of North Main Street between Kingsley and Summit.

Outcome: Without comment, the council unanimously approved the affordable housing lien policy.

Pension Benefit Change

On the agenda was an item to approve some purely technical changes to its ordinance on retiree benefits for non-union employees. For example, the phrase “three years” was revised to read “36 consecutive months.”

These were not the changes to the pension ordinance that had been described in a resolution passed at the city council’s June 6 meeting. Under those planned ordinance changes for the future, for new hires after July 1, 2011, the final average contribution (FAC) for the pension system would be based on the last five years of service, instead of the last three. Further, employees would be vested after 10 years instead of five, and all new non-union hires would be provided with an access-only style health care plan, with the opportunity to buy into whatever plan active employees enjoy.

The council will need to give a second and final approval of the technical changes to the ordinance change, after a public hearing, at a future meeting.

At its June 6 meeting, the council had passed a resolution directing the preparation of the ordinance change for non-union employees, and expressing an aspiration to eventually extend the same policy to union workers. At that meeting, chief financial officer Tom Crawford stressed that the potential savings to the city would not be realized immediately, but rather five to seven years in the future.

Also at the June 6 meeting, mayor John Hieftje attempted to head off potential criticism that such a policy should have been enacted sooner, by pointing out that the city had reduced the size of its work force over the last several years and had made few new hires in recent years.

In response to a request from The Chronicle, the city provided data on new hires made by the city since July 1, 2006. Of those 121 new hires, 49 are non-union positions; they would have translated into savings had the policy been enacted five years ago.

Outcome: The council voted unanimously to give initial approval to the technical changes in the city’s pension ordinance.

Design Review Board

Before the council for approval was a fee for its new design review process, which is now part of the city’s code. Projects in Ann Arbor’s downtown area, zoned D-1 and D-2, are now subject to a mandatory process of design review, but compliance with the board’s recommendations is voluntary. The proposed application fee was to have been set at $1,000 – to cover estimated mailing costs of $500 and about five hours of city staff time.

A postponement of the vote was moved by Sandi Smith (Ward 1).

Outcome: The council voted unanimously to postpone the vote on the fee until July 5.

Also at its June 20 meeting, the council confirmed the nominations for the initial membership of the design review board: Tamara Burns, Paul Fontaine, Chester B. Hill, Mary Jukari, Bill Kinley, Richard Mitchell, and Geoffrey M. Perkins.

That board met to review its first project two days later, on June 22, 2011, at 3 p.m. The project reviewed was The Varsity at Ann Arbor, a residential project planned for 425 E. Washington St., next to the 411 Lofts building. The site is currently an office building which formerly housed the Prescription Shop. The Varsity is planned to be a 13-story apartment building with 173 units that would house 418 people. It would include 77 parking spaces. [.pdf of The Varsity at Ann Arbor project presentation]

Outcome: The council unanimously confirmed the appointments of the design review board.

Scheduling of Work Session: Fuller Road?

The council was asked to vote on a revision to its calendar for the year to include a work session scheduled for July 11. While the staff memo accompanying the resolution indicates only that the additional session is due to “numerous activities developing in the city,” a likely topic to be addressed at the July 11 session is the city’s proposed Fuller Road Station.

Fuller Road Station would be located on what is now a city-owned surface parking lot south of Fuller Road, east of East Medical Center Drive. The parcel is included as parkland in the city’s park planning documents – some residents oppose the project because it’s on land designated as parkland. The initial phase of the project is being planned by the city and the University of Michigan as a large parking structure with bus bays and a bike station, with plans eventually to build a train station on the same site.

At the council’s June 6 meeting, the Fuller Road Station had received extensive public commentary, despite the lack of any item on the agenda related directly to the project.

Partly in response to that commentary and to remarks from Mike Anglin (Ward 5), at that meeting Sabra Briere (Ward 1) pushed for a city council working session on the project. From The Chronicle’s report of that meeting: “Sabra Briere (Ward 1) anticipated mayor John Hieftje’s reaction to Anglin’s comments [Hieftje has pushed hard for the project] by telling the mayor that she knew he had a lot of thoughts about Fuller Road Station. But she thought the council should have a working session, so that councilmembers can become more knowledgable about the issue. Hieftje indicated that he would look into adding something to the calendar.”

The city’s park advisory commission received an update on Fuller Road Station at its May 17, 2011 meeting.

Outcome: The city council voted unanimously to add a work session to its calendar.

Environmental Commission Appointment

Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5) had placed Jamie Woolard’s name before the council at the council’s previous meeting to serve a three-year term. Woolard brought valuable experience in environmental law, Hohnke said. He encouraged the council to support the appointment.

[Unlike appointments for most other boards and commissions, which are nominated by the mayor, the nomination for spots on the city's environmental commission originate with the city council.]

Outcome: The council unanimously approved Woolard’s appointment.

Communications and Comment

Every city council agenda contains multiple slots for city councilmembers and the city administrator to make updates or make announcements about important issues that are coming before the city council. And every meeting typically includes public commentary on subjects not necessarily on the agenda. The agenda also sometimes includes items of interest on which there is no council comment.

Comm/Comm: Planning Commission Nomination

Eleanore Adenekan‘s name was placed before the Ann Arbor city council as the replacement for outgoing planning commissioner Jean Carlberg, who is ending her 16-year tenure on the commission.

At Carlberg’s final city planning commission meeting – a June 14 working session – no word had been received by staff or commissioners about the identity of Carlberg’s replacement.

The nomination will need to be confirmed at the council’s next meeting.

Comm/Comm: Student Relations Committee Proposal

Michael Benson introduced himself as a resident of Ward 2 and an electrical engineering PhD student at the University of Michigan. He was speaking as the president of the graduate student body. He began by telling the council about a recent encounter some university students in Iowa had with the state’s Senate education appropriations committee. Senator Shawn Hamerlinck told them: “I do not like it when students actually come here and lobby me for funds. That’s just my opinion. I want to wish you guys the best. I want you to go home and graduate. But this political theater, leave the circus to us, okay?” The quotation, read aloud, provoked smiles from councilmembers.

Then Benson reminded councilmembers that in 2005, the council had created a student relations committee – the council appoints and approves its members. The other members, however, are appointed by the Michigan Student Assembly. The student relations committee has not met for a long while, partly due to the fact that the MSA has not appointed members.

Benson proposed amending the method of appointment and expanding the membership of the committee to include some some high school students, some undergraduates, some graduate students and some students in professional schools. He suggested that the mayor appoint all the members, working with partners in the educational community, with the council giving confirmation of those nominations. The committee should meet monthly, he said, and should strive to find solutions to problems affecting the city and student community.

By way of additional background, back in 2005, when the council again contemplated a possible couch ordinance, the issue was seen as a topic appropriate to be addressed by the then newly-formed council-student relations committee. From a Nov. 12, 2005 Ann Arbor News article, “Fire Official Pushes for Couch Ban,” by Tom Gantert:

“The new student relations committee needs to talk about this,” said [councilmember Leigh] Greden, who will serve on that committee. “I want them to look at the issue and talk about ways to solve the problem. We are going to have a dialogue about it.”

Benson, who served on the council-student relations committee in 2008 and 2009 – while he was Michigan Student Assembly’s general counsel – wrote in a fall 2010 email to The Chronicle that the council-student relations committee had not met since Greden’s loss in the Democratic primary election of August 2009. In that email, Benson put responsibility for meeting on both the MSA and the city council:

This lack of meeting is a shared responsibility between the the Michigan Student Assembly and the Council … MSA did not appoint any representatives to the committee in the 2009-2010 academic year and the two Council members did not attempt to hold a meeting nor to ask that the MSA appoint its members. To my knowledge, the current MSA administration has not appointed either a City Council Liaison or the student membership of the student relations committee. As a comparison, when I was serving as MSA’s student general counsel, we appointed the student members of the committee in the spring, directly after taking office at the end of the Winter 2008 term.

The city council’s current representatives on the student relations committee are Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5) and Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3).

Benson had also reminded the council in an April 5, 2010 turn at public commentary that the student relations committee had not met in over a year at that point.

Comm/Comm: Skatepark

At the start of city council meetings, a slot called “introductions” is used by the council to invite guests to give short presentations or to hand out proclamations. At Monday’s meeting, Scott Rosencrans – former chair of the city’s park advisory commission, who is now working as a board member of the Friends of the Ann Arbor Skatepark – gave the council an update on that group’s efforts. He began by thanking the council for their support in collaborating on a government grant application.

By way of background, the council decided at its March 21, 2011 meeting to re-prioritize two grant applications the city was making to the Michigan Dept. of Natural Resources and Environment (MDNRE). The result of that re-prioritization was that a grant for the proposed skatepark at Veterans Memorial Park was ranked higher than the other grant – for improvements to the Gallup livery and park. For both grants, the city applied to MDNRE’s Michigan Natural Resources Trust Fund.

The city’s park advisory commission recommended approval of the applications at its March 2011 meeting. [Chronicle coverage: "PAC Supports Grants for Skatepark, Gallup"] The argument for changing the rank order of the prioritization was based on the opportunity to leverage $400,000 of matching funds from Washtenaw County Parks & Recreation, which will expire unless the skatepark’s construction is under contract by Jan. 1, 2012.

At the council’s June 20 meeting, Rosencrans alerted the council to Go Skateboarding Day at Wheeler Park. [It took place the following day, June 21, from 4-8 p.m.] He also told the council about merchandise sales that support the skatepark: T-shirts, coffee mugs and skateboard decks, which are available from a range of local merchants: Acme Mercantile, Launch Board Shop, Play It Again Sports, Vault of Midnight, Roos Roast and Produce Station.

Rosencrans gave a presentation emphasizing that skateboarding is a safe sport. He described in detail the work the Friends of the Ann Arbor Skatepark had done collaborating with the city’s commission on disability issues to ensure that the skatepark facility planned for Ann Arbor would be accessible to everyone.

After the presentation from Rosencrans, Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5) – in whose ward the proposed park location sits – thanked Rosencrans. Hohnke said he continued to be impressed by how professionally the Friends of the Ann Arbor Skatepark have moved the project forward. He asked Rosencrans what kind of helmets or pads might be required. Rosencrans told him that based on past experience serving on the park advisory committee, those kind of rules are produced by a rules committee working with city staff and the commission. He said if he were on such a committee, he’d recommend that helmets, wrist pads, elbow pads, and knee pads be required.

Comm/Comm: Housing, Not Skating

During public commentary at the start of the meeting, Thomas Partridge introduced himself as an advocate for the disadvantaged and called on the public to get behind the movement to give due priority to matters most paramount to those who are disabled. A priority item should not be the “risky sport” of skateboarding, he contended. Priority should instead be given to planning and constructing affordable housing, providing a countywide public transportation system and extending affordable educational services to all members of the public.

Partridge called on the council to bring about a truly equitable health care system. Partridge said we need to support the effort to recall Gov. Rick Snyder and to expand it to include the lieutenant governor, the attorney general and other elected officials.

Comm/Comm: West Park Renaming?

Steven Thorp, a former city planning commissioner, began by saying it had been good to see mayor John Hieftje and councilmembers Mike Anglin and Sabra Briere at West Park for the Father’s Day get-together. He thanked the city for organizing event. He said that city park planner Amy Kuras and the planning staff deserve many thanks. He noted that the park is around 100 years old – it was once a farm. It’s near Allen Creek, near the place where the first settler cabins were located. The park’s eastern boundary is also the downtown boundary.

Thorp told the council that he and Bob Dascola would like to offer “Central Park West” as the new name for the park. Based on an informal survey of friends and neighbors, there’s support for that idea, he said. The name offers an association with one of the most beautiful and famous urban parks in the world. He noted the park’s “Olmsteadean vistas” and forested places, broad play areas, curvilinear path system. Thorp encouraged the council to give it some thought, so that maybe that name can come about.

Comm/Comm: Library Lot

Alan Haber said he had not visited the council recently, but wanted to remind them that there’s still great enthusiasm for a place in the center of town for meeting, gathering, and for cultural events. When the RFP process for the Library Lot was terminated, he said, residents were promised a robust public process to look at the future of the city-owned lot, but have not heard anything from council or the DDA, he contended. [For recent Chronicle coverage of how the Downtown Development Authority is working to put together that process, see "DDA Preps Downtown Ann Arbor Process" and "Ann Arbor DDA Continues Planning Prep"]

Haber told the council that the public is continuing its own process to develop a vision for a gathering place. He’s been told it’s the most valuable piece of property in town and that the city should get top dollar for it. But it’s so valuable, he said, that it should not be sold at all. There’s plenty of room around downtown for density. A central park would be a complement for that. He said he’s also been told that the need to sell the land is based on $5 million of investments in foundational support for something to be built on the top of the structure. He contended there’d been no authorization to build anything.

[Later during council communications time, Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5) questioned the dollar figure for the investments, saying his recollection was that the extra foundation strength was a lower figure. The city's chief financial officer Tom Crawford indicated he did not recall off the top of his head what the figure was. Contacted after the meeting, Susan Pollay, executive director of the DDA, told The Chronicle that a dollar figure isolating the cost of the beefier footings had not been calculated.]

Comm/Comm: Recall Gov. Snyder

Thomas Partridge addressed the council at the conclusion of the meeting as an advocate for all those people who are vulnerable in the trying economy and trying political time. He called on the true Democratic members of the council to support the recall of Gov. Rick Snyder.

Present: Stephen Rapundalo, Mike Anglin, Margie Teall, Sabra Briere, Sandi Smith, Stephen Kunselman, Marcia Higgins, John Hieftje, Christopher Taylor, Carsten Hohnke.

Absent: Tony Derezinski

Next council meeting: Tuesday, July 5, 2011 at 7 p.m. in the council chambers at 301 E. Huron. [confirm date]

Purely a plug: The Chronicle relies in part on regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the Ann Arbor city council. 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!