At left is Tom Crawford, the city's CFO. To the right is Roger Fraser, city administrator. (Photos by the writer.)

The community services area comprises the Ann Arbor Housing Commission, planning and development, human services, and parks/recreation. The council had chosen to focus on that area first, because of the community service area administrator’s imminent departure – Jayne Miller’s last day working for the city is Feb. 12, 2010.

But Miller’s new post as director of the Huron Clinton Metro Authority (HCMA) factored into some of the conversation on Monday, ranging from HCMA’s canoe rental fee structure, to the (remote) possibility that HCMA might take over some of the city of Ann Arbor’s parks. It was those larger scope issues the council was meant to address on Monday.

So at Monday’s meeting, city administrator Roger Fraser labeled the occasion as a time to talk about the “big ideas” the council had been presented at their December 2009 budget retreat. And councilmembers did eventually come around to start grinding through the list of ideas.

Rather than organize our account of the meeting based on that list, we’ve identified some themes that might provide an alternate framing of some of the budget challenges. We’ve formulated them as questions: (i) What are the basic philosophies? (ii) Should anything be held harmless? (iii) What do we do with our land? (iv) Is increasing revenue an option?

Basic Philosophy

Speaking from the podium, instead of from his usual spot at the head of the table next to the mayor, Roger Fraser reminded councilmembers of the materials they’d been provided.

[The city is accumulating all of these materials on the Our Town section of its website. From the scanned PDF of the budget impact sheet summary, The Chronicle has created a live spreadsheet.]

Fraser then addressed a variety of issues and responded to questions raised by councilmembers through the course of the meeting, which we categorize as basic philosophy issues.

Philosophy: Does Everyone Share the Pain?

Fraser said that he’d been asked what the impact would be of a 3% wage reduction across all city employees. He told councilmembers that the savings to the general fund would be $1.275 million. Savings in other funds would total $970,000. He cautioned that 75% of the city’s workers belong to unions and many of those are subject to Act 312 arbitration. He was therefore not terribly optimistic about progress with those units.

[The city's recent history with Act 312 arbitration is not good – at its May 4, 2009 meeting, the city council approved the 2006-2009 Ann Arbor Police Officers Association (AAPOA) collective bargaining agreement – the result of a binding arbitration settlement that cost the city $1.6 million.]

Fraser said that the city continued to work on a plan for possible implementation of a wage reduction among city workers not represented by a bargaining unit.

Philosophy: A History of Incremental Staff Reductions

Included in the materials provided to councilmembers is a graph showing the cost savings that had accumulated since 2001 as a result of eliminating 239 positions within the city over time.

Mayor John Hieftje noted that the total impact of savings due to the incremental elimination of full-time positions over the last 10 years was $25 million. He asked that the city’s CFO, Tom Crawford, provide the math used to generate that figure.

Sandi Smith (Ward 1) asked about the contrast between one-time savings versus longer-term savings indicated in the budget impact sheets. Referring to his staff’s general focus on long-term savings, Fraser said, “My generic answer is: That’s what we do.”

Fraser observed that without creative collaboration, it would not have been possible to reduce the number of city employees by 25% over the course of eight years with little impact on services. The ongoing mission, he said, was to figure out different ways of doing things and doing them cheaper. He noted that the filling of any position anywhere in the city now requires his personal authorization.

Philosophy: Becoming More Efficient

Sandi Smith (Ward 1) inquired of Fraser what kind of systematic approach was taken to look at cost savings across service units. Fraser told her that this was an effort undertaken on a recurring basis.

As an example, Fraser cited the city’s customer service unit – in the past it dealt primarily just with water and sewer bills, but now has aggregated all of the city’s customer service functions, dealing with all calls from finance to parking tickets. He said that it was part of the weekly meeting that he had with all the area administrators – Sue McCormick, Jayne Miller and Barnett Jones – to always consider the issue of systematic ways to improve efficiency.

As another example, Fraser pointed to the fact that the fire department now works with public services on training for getting people out of holes – city staff now digs holes used for the training. Fraser allowed that it seemed like a completely obvious thing to do, yet in the past it hadn’t been done that way – instead, the fire department had contracted out to have holes dug. The fire department, Fraser said, is also now a part of a more collaborative site plan review process for new developments. He concluded by saying that identifying systematic efficiencies is really an “ongoing exercise.”

Philosophy: Chipping Away versus Complete Cutting

Sabra Briere (Ward 1) asked Fraser if his philosophy going into this budget process was to continue doing what we’re doing, but do it less expensively. Fraser’s answer: No.

He allowed that the city would continue to focus on improved efficiency but that there were two main categories of issues: (i) things that they can do without, and (ii) things they have no choice about. As an example of something he felt they had no choice but to eliminate were training budgets.

Briere then asked Fraser what he thought should be the city council’s guiding philosophy in approaching the budget. Fraser said that city council should focus on the big ideas. The relevant questions, he said, were: (i) Should we continue to do things the same way? and (ii) Which things can we do less of?

There are areas that cannot sustain a 7.5% cut, Fraser said, without having a negative impact on the quality of service. Some things, Fraser said, they will have to stop doing, period. “Tonight,” Fraser said, “I’m asking you to begin a conversation about which of the things we do should we not continue to do. We’re at a danger point, a tipping point. Incremental change is no longer healthy.”

He continued, saying, “My general rule is: we should do things the best way possible. If we can’t do that, we shouldn’t do it at all.”

Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5) noted that the budget impact sheets with which the city council had been provided built to the total dollar amounts, but it is less clear what the subjective impact on a service would be due to the savings indicated in the sheets. Hohnke asked where, in the city staff’s opinion, the service areas were that would fall below the line of providing the service well, if an additional 7.5% were cut.

Fraser replied that he did not have a complete evaluation present that evening. The data was raw right now for a reason – it was to get a first-blush reaction from the city council, he said. Which ideas have traction and which don’t have traction?

Purely as a hypothetical example, Fraser said, if $200,000 were taken out of the parks program, that is money that can be put towards other priorities. If the city council says that the community cannot tolerate a safety services reduction, then by taking $200,000 out of the parks program, they would be giving him some ability to address a concern for safety services.

Philosophy: Long-Range Planning

Mike Anglin (Ward 5) said he thought part of the difficulty was having only a two-year budget planning cycle. He said that longer-term planning was needed and pointed to the Stadium Boulevard bridges as an example of something that might have been addressed with better long-term planning.

Fraser told Anglin that he didn’t agree with that perspective on the city bridges, noting that the project had been in the city’s capital improvement plan (CIP) since the last decade. The city had planned in advance for that, but it was a matter of reductions in federal and state support for those kinds of capital projects, he said. That lowered support had been driven in part by the Bush administration, which had continued a philosophy of reduced government that had started in the Reagan era. Fraser also pointed to the state fuel tax as problematic, because it is calculated on a cents-per-gallon basis, not a percentage. We’re selling less fuel, he said, which means there’s less Act 51 money.

Mayor John Hieftje, responding to the idea of better long-range forecasting and planning, asked who would have predicted five years ago that the state would have the kind of current economic conditions that it does. Fraser then appealed to the 2006 forecast, which saw the city reaching an equilibrium between its expenses and property tax revenues, with no additional reductions required. Now, however, projections were that property tax revenues will not reach their 2007 levels again until the year 2015. The decisions that are made today, Fraser said, the city will have to live with for another five years at least.

Holding Harmless

The budget impact sheets include preliminary reports from service units, breaking down what effect various decisions would have on the budget. Included in those sheets are breakdowns of the savings that would come from laying off an additional six firefighters beyond the 14 positions already slated for elimination as a part of the FY 2011 budget plan: $653,080. [The city adopts budgets one year at a time, but plans in a two-year cycle.] The recent agreement between the city and the firefighters union prevented the early layoff of those 14 positions.

Roger Fraser shows the council a pie chart giving the breakdown of safety services expenditures versus other categories.

Also included in the budget impact sheets are the savings that would result from eliminating 17 positions in the police department – three of which are vacant: $1,608,317.

As the conversation turned to safety services, Fraser held up a pie chart, showing the breakdown of safety services as a part of the city’s budget: police, fire, and the district court make up about 61% of the budget. If police and fire services were held harmless, Fraser said, the impact on the rest of the budget would require an 18% reduction.

The theme of what, if anything, should be held harmless in the budgeting process ties together the topics in this section.

Holding Harmless: Fire

Mayor John Hieftje began by saying that he wanted to set up parameters. They needed to staff the fire department adequately to ensure that three people were on the scene as quickly as possible, so that they met the safety criteria for entering a burning building– that was his position, he said. They should take that and work backwards to determine adequate staffing levels.

A bit later it was clarified that, in fact, four people are required on scene in order to enter a burning structure – two to enter the building, and two to remain outside. However, acting fire chief Greg Hollingsworth made the point that “it takes more than four people to fight a fire, so that’s not the biggest concern.”

Fraser indicated that when a new fire chief is hired, he or she might bring some interesting ideas about how to provide adequate fire services. With respect to the hiring of a new fire chief, Fraser said that two finalists had been identified and that a hire would be imminent.

[Among the interesting ideas could be the idea of cross training police officers as firefighters – which would make them public safety officers of some stripe, along the model used in Kalamazoo. However, the International Association of Firefighters has generated several white papers outlining problems with the public safety officer approach.]

City administrator Roger Fraser, left, with acting fire chief Greg Hollingsworth.

Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5) expressed interest in seeing what kind of metrics for response time were used and how that stacked up against other communities. He asked for information about number of firefighters per square mile or the number of fire stations per thousand residents or whatever the relevant metrics might be. Sabra Briere (Ward 1) said she was interested in seeing how the joint dispatch system was working as that got off the ground.

Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) asked for clarification of the statement in the budget impact sheet concerning high-rise fires. Hollingsworth explained that present staff levels did not address fires in high-rises. The budget impact sheets indicate that the proposed reduction of an additional six firefighters would drop levels below national models to effectively staff for and safely fight an average-sized home fire.

Mike Anglin (Ward 5) asked Hollingsworth to explain what the impact on insurance rates would be from the kind of reductions the city was contemplating. Hollingsworth said the impact would most likely be seen on commercial property. The ratings depended not just on the quality of the fire department but also on other factors, like the water system, he explained. But he allowed that, yes, there was a potential for the reductions to have an effect on insurance rates. Marcia Higgins (Ward 4) wanted to know what the impact would be on response times in her ward on football Saturdays if a fire station were closed. “How will you get to us?” She asked for best estimates.

Holding Harmless: Parks Millage and Parks General Fund

A couple of related “big ideas” involve the parks maintenance and capital improvements millage and its relation to the city’s general fund. First a bit of background on that millage.

Before November 2006, the city levied two separate millages at 0.5 mill each – one for parks maintenance and the other for capital improvements. Within the combined millage, taxes are collected at a rate of 1.0 mill, but money is allocated to maintenance or capital improvements on a more flexible basis than the previous 50-50 split that was legally enforced by the specialized purpose of each millage.

However, there’s not complete flexibility to allocate money to maintenance or capital improvements within the unified millage. Percentage allocation is guided by a city council resolution passed in October 2006. The resolution specifies a range of 60% to 80% for maintenance, with the remainder going to capital improvements.

But there are some “hold harmless” clauses in the resolution as well. The resolution also calls for any reduction in the overall general fund to be reflected no more severely in parks programs supported by the general fund than in other general fund activities. For example, if the general fund were to suffer a 7.5% reduction, then parks programs supported by the general fund would suffer no greater a reduction than 7.5%.

Subsequent to the passage of the millage, in preparation of the FY 2007 budget, the city initially calculated the baseline for general fund parks activity without the Leslie Science and Nature Center – which had been spun off by the city as an independent nonprofit. The reasoning was that the item itself was no longer in the general fund, so it was not a matter of the general fund being reduced. However, in response to public criticism, funding was put back into parks programs to bring funding to the level it would have been with the Leslie Science and Nature Center as a part of the calculation.

Another “hold harmless” clause in the resolution on the administration of the parks maintenance and capital improvements millage affects the city’s natural area preservation program (NAP).

3. The Natural Area Preservation Program budget be established at a minimum of $700,000 for first year of the millage budget and that it receive a minimum 3% annual increase for each of the subsequent five years of the millage to enhance the stewardship of increased acreage of natural park areas;

It’s likely that the clause was intended to ensure that funding for NAP kept pace with funding increases to other areas, as millage revenues increased due to increased property values. But the effect of the clause now, as millage revenues decline, is to hold NAP harmless – and even to increase NAP’s budget.

The distribution of funds to various park-related tasks – which is specified in Attachment A accompanying the resolution – includes the stipulation that mowing and snow removal for parks be funded exclusively out of the general fund. The millage fund, then, is “held harmless” against mowing and snow removal costs.

Related to the idea of reducing general fund support for park maintenance is an increase use of volunteers for that activity.

On Monday night, Marcia Higgins (Ward 4) stated that a mechanism was needed in order to expand the volunteer program. Mayor John Hieftje pointed to the Adopt-a-Park program as that mechanism. Higgins, though, said she was thinking more of a ongoing, every day eyes-on-the-park mechanism. Roger Fraser noted that they would need to do marketing, education, and recruitment, and that meant staff resources.

In response to a suggestion from Sandi Smith (Ward 1), Jayne Miller said that the idea of having an organization like Project Grow put in gardens and be responsible for maintenance of the surrounding area in some parks would likely be met with strong opposition. In trying to do that over the last few years, there had been extreme negative feedback from neighbors next to parks, she reported, noting “I was shocked by that.” Neither Smith nor Miller were able to offer an explanation for the negative reaction. However, Margie Teall (Ward 4) suggested that one of the objections is that people use parks and they want to be able to continue to use them the way they are.

Holding Harmless: Partial Reallocation of the Greenbelt Millage

The open space land acquisition millage, authorized by voters in November 2003 to be levied from 2004 through 2034 at a rate of 0.5 mill, is also commonly known as the greenbelt millage. Its expenditures are guided by the city’s greenbelt advisory commission.

Rather than wait for millage proceeds to accumulate, the city issued a bond in order to have a substantial amount of cash on hand for potentially large or numerous land acquisitions. In August 2005, a bond was issued for roughly $20 million, with debt service on those bonds – around $1.2 million annually – to be paid by the greenbelt millage proceeds. The millage currently generates around $2 million in revenue.

Of the bonded amount, around $8 million has been obligated through purchase of development rights or land acquisition deals, leaving around $12 million in an unobligated fund balance. Also available per year is around $800,000 from millage proceeds not required for coverage of the debt service on the bond. [This does not factor in the investment income from the fund balance.]

The “big idea,” then, is to ask if any of that $800,000 per year should be reallocated to the maintenance of parks inside the city. Such a reallocation would require voter approval.

The connection between the greenbelt millage and possible use of those funds towards maintenance of city parks isn’t based just on thematic similarity. A recent greenbelt millage acquisition of a rental house on Chapin Street will result in an incremental addition to West Park when the house is demolished. And a greenbelt acquisition of a parcel on Sunset Road – on the city council’s agenda for Feb. 16 – will add to Bluffs Park.

Hieftje led off the discussion on Monday night by noting that there was a need to pay off the bonds that had already been sold. Hieftje said that the greenbelt program would benefit the community in the long-term and that it would be a mistake not to take the opportunity, especially in the current market with land values depressed. Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5) stated that he shared the mayor’s view. He added that the dollars being used are also being leveraged. Jayne Miller confirmed that the average match received for greenbelt initiatives was 35-50%.

Marcia Higgins (Ward 4) noted that the millage was passed on 2003 – she said she supported it then and she still supports it. However, she said she would not be opposed to asking voters to look at it. She pointed out that the current 0.47 mill rate could then be reset to bring it back up to its original 0.5 mill rate. [The rate has been rolled back because of the Headlee Amendment.] She concluded, “I think it should stay in the mix.”

Concerning the greenbelt millage, Sabra Briere (Ward 1) noted that concerns have been raised about the number of parks in the city. She asked for a clarification: What percentage of greenbelt money could be spent within city limits – was it 30%?

Miller clarified that there was no requirement about where the greenbelt money could be spent. It could range from zero to 100% spent in the city. With respect to greenbelt dollars that had been spent inside the city, therefore taking land off the tax rolls, Briere said she would like to think that it had been non-developable land.

Briere asked about the continuing maintenance issue for such properties. Miller clarified that for land acquired outside the city, there is money set aside for monitoring property, as part of the acquisition of development rights. When parkland is added to the city by the greenbelt millage, she allowed, maintenance costs did increase. Briere noted that those costs are paid out of the parks maintenance millage. Miller allowed that being able to maintain what the city owns now is a challenge. When parkland is added, she said, people typically want at least some trails and other amenities installed.

Hohnke clarified that for greenbelt money spent on land outside of the city, there is no maintenance cost. That’s because the deal is typically a purchase of development rights, not an outright purchase of property.

Real Estate

While the greenbelt millage is all about acquiring development rights and land, councilmembers on Monday night also talked about what to do with land already owned by the city.

Huron Clinton Metro Authority

Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) took the opportunity to ask Jayne Miller a question related to her future position as director of the Huron Clinton Metro Authority (HCMA). Had there been any discussions about the HCMA taking over some city parks? Miller said that one of the challenges is philosophical. The HCMA is more interested in dealing with large parcels of land at 3,000 to 4,000 acres apiece, she said. Most of the city parks are much smaller than that.

First & Washington

Sandi Smith (Ward 1) asked what the proceeds from the still-pending sale of the First & Washington parcel – to be developed by Village Green as the City Apartments project – would be used for. Fraser’s answer: As a down payment on the municipal center currently under construction next door to the Larcom Building.

Old YMCA Lot

Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) raised the question of the old YMCA lot: Why doesn’t the city put it up for sale? Fraser’s initial reply was that it’s currently generating revenue. Fraser clarified that the agreement recently struck between the city and the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority sends either the net revenue from the surface parking lot on that location or else $100,000 per year – whichever is greater – to the city’s general fund.

Kunselman pointed out that the city is making interest-only payments on the parcel – then ticked through the costs associated with the lot: its purchase, demolition of the building, rent for displaced residents, interest-only payments since its purchase in 2003, insurance deductible for a pending lawsuit, cost of the construction of a parking lot. Kunselman calculated that the city had invested some $5-$6 million in the parcel and that it was perhaps time to “cut our losses.”

Kunselman continued by saying that he thought it was time to give up the idea that “we, as politicians, can create affordable housing.” He suggested that the existing fund balance in the housing trust fund be transferred to the Ann Arbor Housing Commission.

Mayor John Hieftje allowed that Kunselman was making a good point, but that it was really a matter of timing – the parking provided by the old YMCA lot is currently needed, especially since the surface parking at the city-owned Library Lot was now unavailable while an underground parking garage is under construction. Once the parking structure is finished, said Hieftje, the YMCA parcel would be more valuable.

Fraser concurred that the old YMCA lot would become more marketable when the underground parking garage is completed. Kunselman expressed some skepticism that the parcel would bring in all that much more in the future, noting that the old Ann Arbor News building was currently for sale for around $9 million.

It’s not the first time a councilmember has weighed in for unloading the lot. From Chronicle coverage of the Dec. 1, 2008 council meeting:

The item on the agenda was to approve a continued financing of the property on the corner of Fifth and William through interest-only payments. The Bank of Ann Arbor, which will provide the financing, was one of two out of seven institutions that responded to the request for bids. The other one was Chase Equipment Leasing, whose bid of a 6.14% interest rate did not compare favorably with the 3.89% offered by the Bank of Ann Arbor.

In deliberations, councilmember Sandi Smith said that she would support the continued financing of the property, because they had no other choice, but that she urged her colleagues to begin thinking of master planning the area so that the city could divest itself of the property as soon as possible. Smith noted that given the $5,000 cost of supporting a homeless person, the interest-only payments could be used to support 27 people. The math goes like this: ($3,500,000)*(.0389)/5,000.

Main & William

Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2) suggested that the old YMCA lot merited a community discussion. An additional land parcel downtown that Rapundalo thought warranted some focus was the parking lot at Main & William, next to Palios restaurant. He noted that there were just 21 parking spaces at the lot, but it was possibly ripe for investment. He wanted to know if  it was on the list somewhere. Fraser told him it was on a list, but not near the top.

Sale of Parkland

Sandi Smith (Ward 1) cautioned that they should not be patching operations holes with capital dollars. Sabra Briere (Ward 1) noted that there was the same issue with the idea of selling parkland – patching operations with capital dollars.

Fraser responded to Briere’s point by clarifying that it was the maintenance expenses and limited use of specific parks that had resulted in their inclusion on the list provided to council. Fraser said he was not asking council to consider the capital value of parkland, but rather the ongoing maintenance cost that the parcels represented. Marcia Higgins (Ward 4) and mayor John Hiefje asked for additional information about maintenance costs for the parks that had been identified as those it made the most sense to sell, if the city were to sell any of its parks.

More Revenue?

While it’s related to how the city uses its land, and while the possible sale of the land upon which Huron Hills Golf Course sits has a controversial history, we still slot Monday’s discussion of golf courses into the section on revenue generation. One of the “big ideas” considered by the council is the idea of a public-private partnership for operation of Huron Hills Golf Course.

Revenue: Do You Golf?

Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2) said he wanted to learn more about cost savings that could be achieved through private partnerships connected to public golf courses. He asked if the next step would be to issue an request for proposals (RFP) for Huron Hills Golf Course. Jayne Miller said she would recommend issuing an RFP – even though a private golf initiative would not be operational in time to have an impact on FY 2011, the council would get information needed to plan for FY 2012, she said. Margie Teall (Ward 4) stated that she wanted to see that happen.

Mike Anglin (Ward 5) chats with Colin Smith before the Feb. 8 meeting. Smith is manager of the city's parks and recreation programs.

Sabre Briere (Ward 1) wanted to know why Leslie Park Golf Course was not also being considered for a public-private partnership. Miller noted that Leslie represented a fairly decent chance of becoming self-sustaining and that allowing a private enterprise to take it over would essentially take money out of the city’s pocket.

Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) then introduced an analogy that flummoxed his colleagues sitting on the other side of the table: “We have the wolf by the ears with golf,” he said. Marcia Higgins (Ward 4) later asked him to clarify what he meant by that. Taylor then referenced the Jeffersonian analogy to slavery in America, which compared the U.S. relationship to slavery as having a wolf by the ears.

On the question of entering a private-public partnership on the Leslie Park Golf Course, Miller explained that a consultant [Golf Convergence] – who had been hired to look at the courses in conjunction with the creation of the city’s golf task force – found that there was little interest by anyone in either of the two golf courses. Now that the Leslie course has started to show some improvement in its finances [and now enjoys a liquor license], there had been some interest in it. Rapundalo, however, said that entering a public-private partnership on Leslie would be like “giving away our crown jewel.”

The result of the discussion – which Hieftje and Fraser took care to not label as a “decision,” but rather as giving direction to the city administrator – was that city staff will start preparing an RFP for a public-private partnership on the Huron Hills Golf Course.

Revenue: Compost as Merchant Operation

The subject of converting the city’s composting facilities to a merchant operation – that is, operated by a business – arose out of one of the “big ideas” on the list, which was to analyze the possible benefits of discontinuing the city’s leaf collection program in favor of requiring citizens to “containerize” leaves – through bagging or placing them in carts.

Responding to a question from Margie Teall (Ward 4), Sue McCormick, public services area administrator, said that while the leaf collection program was not a general fund program, costs in the solid waste fund needed to be addressed as well. [The reduction in property values affects millage revenues across the board.]

McCormick reported that they’d looked at the economic side of the equation, and that the estimated net savings using conservative estimates (not factoring in behavior changes that would reduce the number of leaves set out by residents) was $100,000. In conversation with Marcia Higgins (Ward 4), McCormick stated that the situation would be helped by additional deployment of compost carts, which can be emptied through an automatic arm.

Mayor John Hieftje noted that in his neighborhood [Burns Park] people put a few leaves each week and that this had eliminated the need to sweep the leaves into the street. McCormick cautioned against compacting too many leaves into the containers, as it sometimes made emptying them difficult. [The automated arms tilt the carts upside down – whereupon the contents are liberated from the confines of the cart through a physical attractive force, a so-called "gravity."] McCormick pointed to the benefit of bagging as (i) providing more control, and (ii) limiting the amount of disruption in the community.

Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) quizzed McCormick on the proposed conversion of the compost operation to a merchant operation. Given the reduction in volume that would be anticipated as a result of required bagging of leaves, how would that make money? It had to be due to expanded operations to process non-resident yard waste, he concluded. McCormick deferred answering the question, saying that she’d like to take that on as a topic unto itself and provide a full analysis. [The city issued an RFP for the contract last year.]

Revenue: City Income Tax

On the question of possible sale of parkland, Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) stated that he would rather go to voters with something direct on revenue – an apparent reference to the idea of putting a referendum on a possible city income tax before voters. [The city of Ann Arbor's charter specifies that it can levy a property tax for general operating expenses or a city income tax, but not both.]

At a recent meeting of the city council’s budget committee, city administrator Roger Fraser had recommended to the council that they at least invest in the gathering of information about voter attitudes related to an income tax – in the same way that the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority recently did with respect to a possible countywide transportation millage. [The AATA's survey of 1,100 Washtenaw County voters cost $40,918, according to AATA spokeswoman Mary Stasiak.]

Revenue: Recreation Fees

On the subject of charging an additional rental fee for a third person in a canoe at the city’s canoe liveries, Margie Teall (Ward 4) asked if that was standard practice in other communities. Jayne Miller confirmed that it was an industry standard – Huron Clinton Metro Authority charges per person, for example.

Teall then ask about other users of the water besides canoes – on the analogy that the water was like a playing field. Miller noted that part of the difficulty in assessing a fee was that there were multiple places to enter and exit the water, as it was a public waterway. Teall allowed that yes, walking across a park should not result in a fee being assessed, but she was talking about organized use that might prevent other people from using the water. Miller then said, “The thing that comes to mind is rowing.”

Miller then put the question in the larger context of the Argo Dam. Its maintenance funding is currently in the city’s water fund, but needs to be moved out of that fund. [Roger Fraser has previously indicated that this is something that will be undertaken in the current budget cycle.]

Fees at recreational facilities, of course, generate revenue for those facilities. Miller referred the council to a spreadsheet that listed out each recreational facility with expenses, revenues and visitors. Asked what facilities should be closed, Miller said she had no simple answer.

She noted that it’s not a matter of how much the facility costs to operate. Once revenues are added in, the cost savings that the city gets from closing the facility are much less than the number in the cost column. An important question to ask in evaluating a recreational facility, she said, was this: Is this service being offered elsewhere? So the question was whether it was possible to close a facility but not eliminate the service.

At the conclusion of the meeting, city administrator Roger Fraser said, "I think it's appropriate to thank Jayne (Miller). She's done an extraordinary job." Councilmembers gave Miller, who's leaving the city to head the Huron Clinton Metro Authority, a round of applause.

If the city had three pools, for example, and one of them were to be closed, the service would still be available elsewhere. But, she cautioned, that could have a negative impact on the other two pools, due to capacity limitations. Based purely on the numbers, she said, the two facilities she would recommend closing were the two that she had in fact already recommended closing: Mack Pool, and the Ann Arbor Senior Center.

With respect to the senior center and the available-services-elsewhere metric, Miller said that there were, in fact, other places that people could get those services. However, she said, it was clear that it was not simply a matter of services, but rather the fact that people who visited the senior center use that as their social network.

That’s the dilemma, she said. Miller also said that the two task forces dedicated to looking at those two facilities had identified cost savings and revenue enhancements that also needed to be considered in any decision.

Tony Derezinski (Ward 2) asked about increasing fees for facility use and whether there was an elasticity of demand. Miller clarified that through the 1990s, fees had been consistently raised, but in the early 2000s they had been reduced because the city realized that they were losing customers. Miller also clarified that some of the revenue potential had to do with constraints resulting from the location of facilities in neighborhoods. Buhr Ice Rink, for example, has restricted hours of operation due to the noise from pucks and people crashing into the boards. Margie Teall (Ward 4) said she would like to see some information on the impact of raising rates.

State Rep. Pam Byrnes, left, and Karen Sidney talk before the start of the city council's meeting, which included a presentation at the start of the meeting from Byrnes. (Photos by the writer.)

And, in a move that some councilmembers described as leadership, mayor John Hieftje announced that he was writing a check for $1,273 as a contribution back to the city, because that’s the equivalent of 3% of his annual salary – the same percentage conceded by the firefighters union. It’s also the same percentage Hieftje has suggested that all employees citywide accept as a wage reduction. Some councilmembers indicated they’d be making similar gestures, which they allowed were only symbolic.

The city council also approved a budget increase for the 911 call center modification, a project to facilitate co-location of the city and county 911 centers – it’s expected to be a cost-savings measure.

Council also directed the city administrator, Roger Fraser, to plan an event to honor volunteer members of various boards, commissions and committees that do much of the work required to make the city run.

In other business, the council approved without discussion a University of Michigan project for the soccer complex on South Main Street.

State Rep. Pam Byrnes (D-District 52) gave a presentation to the council at the start of the meeting outlining exactly how bleak the economic outlook is in Michigan.

Many of the items on council’s agenda were postponed: revisions to bicycling and pedestrian ordinances (including bicycle registration); revisions to parking fines; and the capital improvements plan.

And two of the items were pulled from the agenda at the start of the meeting: a revision to the ordinance on signs and outdoor advertising to allow portable signs; and a resolution to approve the transfer of a liquor license to BW&R GoBlue LLC, located at 640 Packard Street.

Firefighter Contract

At the city council’s Dec. 5 budget retreat, city administrator Roger Fraser had indicated to councilmembers that he intended to implement an item in the fiscal 2011 budget plan six months earlier than specified in that plan:  layoff 14 firefighters.

When the city council did not take any action at their Dec. 7 meeting to gave Fraser other direction, layoff notices were sent – to have been effective on Jan. 4, 2010. At their Jan. 4 meeting, the city council was informed that the city and the International Association of Firefighters Local 693 reached an agreement that would forestall layoffs until at least June 30, 2010, which the union would vote the following week. The union approved the agreement.

The item on the council’s Tuesday agenda was an approval by the council of that agreement. Highlights from the council packet description:

• One-year contract: July 1, 2009 to June 30, 2010.
• Effective Jan. 3, 2010: a 3.0% wage decrease.
• Effective Feb. 1, 2010: an increase in Pension Contribution from 5% to 6%.
• Effective upon Council Approval: a payment of $250 into each member’s HRA account for FY 2010.
• Guarantee of no layoffs through June 30, 2010.

Hieftje noted that the deal did not get the city all the way to covering the budget gap they needed to cover.

Outcome: The council unanimously approved the deal preventing layoffs of firefighters until June 30, 2010.

A related item on the agenda addressed the ordinance change – to the retirement system –  needed in order to implement some elements of the agreement with the firefighters. Marcia Higgins (Ward 4) questioned why the item had been put out of place on the agenda – as an ordinance change, it should not have been included in the section on staff’s new business. City administrator Roger Fraser explained that the rationale for its agenda placement had been that it was contingent on approval of the firefighter agreement, thus immediately followed it on the agenda.

Outcome: The council unanimously approved the change to the retirement system.

Three Percent for Symbolism

Related via the 3% theme to the firefighters’ concession was an announcement from mayor John Hieftje. In his communications, he said that while he’d previously announced a challenge to all city staff, including councilmembers, to accept a 3% wage cut, it was not a simple matter for councilmembers to implement a cut for themselves.

Council Pay Raises: Legislative Background

By way of background, the city charter actually still specifies that councilmembers are not paid:

SECTION 12.6.
(a) Each member of the Council, except the Mayor, shall serve without pay. The compensation of the Mayor shall be fixed by the Council. When authorized by the Council, necessary expenses may be allowed to its members when actually incurred on behalf of the City.

However, in 1972, the following amendment was made to the state’s Home Rule City Act:

117.5c Local officers compensation commission; …

Sec. 5c. In place of a charter provision existing on December 31, 1972 establishing the salaries or the procedure for determining salaries of elected officials, the governing body may establish, by ordinance, the procedure described in this section, in which case the restriction contained in a charter provision with respect to changing salaries during term shall be inapplicable.

In Ann Arbor’s case, the relevant ordinance is contained in Chapter 22 of the city code. Pertinent to the possibility of reducing the Ann Arbor city council’s compensation is the timing of the local officers compensation commission’s (LOCC) meeting, as specified in Chapter 22 [emphasis added]:

(3)   The commission shall meet for not more than 15 session days in every odd numbered year and shall make its determination within 45 calendar days of its first meeting. A majority of the members of the commission constitute a quorum for conducting the business of the commission. The commission shall take no action or make determinations without a concurrence of a majority of the members appointed and serving on the commission. The commission shall elect a chairman from among its members. “Session days” means any calendar day on which the commission meets and a quorum is present. The members of the commission shall receive no compensation, but shall be entitled to their actual and necessary expenses incurred in the performance of their duties.

Council Pay Raises: Recent Local History

The city’s LOCC commission met on May 12, 2009 and made a determination to maintain compensation of councilmembers and the mayor at $15,913 and $42,436, respectively.

Because this year is an even-numbered year, an adjustment to compensation would have to wait until January 2011.

The previous determination of the LOCC, made in 2007, had recommended a 3% raise for the mayor’s position from $40,000 to $41,200 in 2008  and another 3% to $42,436 in 2009. In 2007, the LOCC had also recommended a 3% raise for councilmembers from $15,000 to $15,450 in 2008 and another 3% to $15,913 in 2009.

At their Dec. 17, 2007 meeting, the city council considered a resolution that would have rejected the recommended pay increases. It was separated out into three separate resolutions, one on the mayor, another on the mayor pro tem (which we here leave aside), and a third on councilmembers. The resolution was introduced by Sabra Briere (Ward 1) and Christopher Easthope, who then represented Ward 5, along with Mike Anglin.

The constitution of council at that time was: Ronald Suarez (Ward 1), Sabra Briere (Ward 1), Joan Lowenstein (Ward 2), Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2), Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3), Leigh Greden (Ward 3), Margie Teall (Ward 4), Marcia Higgins (Ward 4), Christopher Easthope (Ward 5), Mike Anglin (Ward 5) and John Hieftje (mayor).

The resolution ultimately passed failed on a voice vote. Commentary in a Dec. 23, 2007 editorial published in the Ann Arbor News read as follows:

Quite a kabuki dance ensued as the resolution was discussed and ultimately defeated – meaning that the pay raises will go into effect. Easthope and new Council Members Sabra Briere, D-1st Ward, and Mike Anglin, D-5th Ward, voted to reject the raises for the council – though Anglin supported giving Mayor John Hieftje a raise. (A challenge by Leigh Greden, D-3rd Ward, was pure debate-club theater. Greden proposed that those rejecting the raises give the money to charity – Easthope, Briere and Anglin all agreed to do it.)

[Editor's note: The editorial was drafted by Ann Arbor Chronicle publisher, Mary Morgan, who then served as the News' opinion editor.]

Then, in the summer of 2009, a request made by Ann Arbor News columnist Judy McGovern under the Freedom of Information Act yielded emails exchanged between councilmembers during the Dec. 17, 2007 meeting. Those emails revealed the talk at the table to have been actual theater. From McGovern’s July 21, 2009 article:

7:32 p.m. – Leigh Greden to Marcia Higgins: “SK (Stephen Kunselman) is with us on the pay raise.”
7:34 p.m. – Higgins to Greden: “Welll (sic) that’s 5 of us. Anyone else?”
7:37 p.m. – Greden to Higgins: “Higgins, (Margie) Teall, (Stephen) Rapundalo, (Joan) Lowenstein, Greden, Kunselman. I think (Mayor John) Hieftje is with us too. He wants it to pass. I told him I would publicly challenge anyone who votes no (against accepting the additional compensation) to return the pay raise or donate it to a charity. I told him I would publicly follow-up on that challenge in 6 months, so he better vote yes.”
7:38 p.m. – Higgins to Greden: “Joan changed her mind?”
7:39 p.m. – Greden to Higgins: “She said ‘I just don’t want to be the only one.’ I told her we have a majority, so she said she’d vote with us.”
As the question reached the floor, Greden e-mailed Easthope.
8:28 p.m. – Subject “wait”
“I’m going to see what people say about the pay raise. I will challenge in a minute.”
8:29 p.m. – Easthope to Greden: “Make sure, that’s our deal for keeping my mouth shut. I told John I wouldn’t ask for a roll call vote.”
8:29 p.m. – Greden to Easthope: “Deal. I need to let the others speak first.”

Council Pay Cuts: Symbolic Check Writing

Against that historical background, Hieftje said that he’d be writing a check for $1,273 and handing it over to the city administrator as a contribution to the city of Ann Arbor.

Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5) said he supported the idea that everybody should contribute, and said that he’d be joining the mayor in writing a check.

Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5) and Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2) chat during a recess of the council's meeting.

Tony Derezinski (Ward 2) also said he’d write a check for his 3%, noting that in tough times, symbols were important.

Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2) slowed the momentum for check writing when he said he’d “be willing to give it some thought and consideration,” but noted that there were differences between the firefighters and city councilmembers at the level of benefits received.

Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) told the mayor, “I appreciate your leadership on this,” noting that the council was asking a great deal from everyone.

Margie Teall (Ward 4) thanked the mayor for leading the effort, emphasizing that it was largely symbolic. She noted that she could not write a check for an entire year, but would do it quarterly.

Marcia Higgins (Ward 4) allowed that she did not have a problem with symbolism. But she noted that the local officers compensation commission had met and determined that there would be no pay increases. She also noted that the fire department agreement affected one union contract only, and raised the question of what the other unions were doing. She wondered what the situation looked like for non-union workers.

Sabra Briere (Ward 1) remarked, “It hardly seems rational not to join in this love-fest,” but then alluded to the historical background of how there’d been a great deal of manipulation of the discussion about council pay raises back in 2007, and that she’d held to her commitment made back then to give the 2007 raise – which she’d voted against – to charity.

Sandi Smith (Ward 1) allowed that she had no problem following the spirit of the gesture, but that the amount per person of around $450 was not going to “shake loose the $5 million” shortfall they were facing. She then admonished her fellow councilmembers: “I hope you’re all as strong when it comes to tougher decisions.”

Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) and Mike Anglin (Ward 5) did not speak to the issue.

Later in his communications, city administrator Roger Fraser, alluding to other city employees, noted that “some of our folks have been contributing already.”

Resolution Giving Recognition to Citizen Volunteers

Before the council was a resolution, brought forward by Sandi Smith (Ward 1), directing the city administrator to create an annual event that would honor and recognize the numerous volunteers who serve on boards, commissions and committees that help the city run.

City administrator Roger Fraser and Sandi Smith (Ward 1) as they discuss an event to honor citizen volunteers.

City administrator Roger Fraser remarked that such an event had been instituted in Blaine, Minn., where he’d previously been city manager, and that it had been well-received.

He reported that his recent success in dropping some weight had allowed him to fit into a commemorative T-shirt from that event in the early 2000s.

Outcome: The council unanimously approved the creation of an event to honor citizen volunteers.

Co-Located 911 Dispatch

Before the council was a resolution to approve an increase in the project budget for the co-location of the city and county’s 911 dispatch center.

Previous coverage from the council’s Dec. 9, 2009 meeting:

The city of Ann Arbor has agreed to co-locate its 911 dispatch with the county’s operation – that will take place at the city’s existing location in fire station #1, across from city hall. The cost of the remodeling will be $48,183, but will be reimbursed from the 800 MHz public safety communications millage fund.

At Monday’s meeting, chief of police Barnett Jones called the co-location a “dream come true.” The expectation is that co-location will eventually lead to consolidation of the operations.

The cooperative effort with the county on 911 dispatch, Jones said, was part of an effort to regionalize services, which already included SWAT, K-9, and training. [See also: "County Reorganizes 911 Dispatch"]

The resolution before the council on Monday was to approve the purchase of a 911 phone switch for $258,983.

During the brief deliberations by the council, Sabra Briere (Ward 1) elicited from deputy police chief Greg Bazick that the consolidation has been talked about for almost as long has he’s worked on the force – 19 years. The cost savings would lie in the ability to eliminate duplicative technology costs.

City administrator Roger Fraser pointed out that for now, the arrangement would allow the city and county to work side-by-side, which was more economical, because by state law if they made it one operation, they would have to pay the more expensive of the two labor contracts.

Outcome: The council unanimously approved the purchase of the 911 phone switch.

Capital Improvements Plan (CIP)

Although the capital improvements plan (CIP) was ultimately postponed, five people spoke to the issue during the public hearing on it.

Public Commentary on CIP

Thomas Partridge characterized one item on the plan as “selfish” on the part of the mayor – the Fuller Road Station, which in a second phase of construction could include amenities for bicyclists like showers and a mechanics shop. [Mayor John Hieftje sometimes rides his bicycle for transportation, and often mentions that he does so.] In the CIP, Phase I for the design and construction of Fuller Road Station, which is classified as “urgent,”  calls for $5.36 million to be contributed from the city’s economic development fund, with an additional $18 million coming from the University of Michigan.

Fuller Road Station was also addressed by Rita Mitchell, who echoed the sentiments of James D’Amour, who spoke to the council at its Jan. 4, 2010 meeting. D’Amour had objected to the arrangement between the city of Ann Arbor and UM for the land on which the Fuller Road Station will be built. D’Amour had characterized the arrangement as amounting to a permanent lease or a sale, which, as such, needed to be approved by voters. By way of background, on the Nov. 4, 2008 ballot had been an amendment to the Ann Arbor city charter, which was approved by voters by a 4-to-1 margin:

SECTION 14.3.
… (b) The City shall not sell without the approval, by a majority vote of the electors of the City voting on the question at a regular or special election, any City park, or land in the City acquired for park, cemetery, or any part thereof.

In addition to the city charter amendment is a clause of the state’s Home Rule City Act that also requires a referendum in order to sell land classified as a park. Specifically, among the powers explicitly not granted in the act:

… to sell a park, cemetery, or any part of a park or cemetery, except where the park is not required under an official master plan of the city;

Supporters of the city charter amendment argued that such an amendment was necessary in order to rule out possible abuse of the exception specified in the Home Rule City Act. That is, to circumvent the state statute, one could first revise the official master plan of the city to designate some other use for a park, then sell the parcel based on the exception.

During the public hearing on the CIP, Mitchell told councilmembers that the arrangement with UM violated the intent of the charter amendment that citizens have a say in how parkland is used.

Mitchell also criticized another item in the CIP: the expansion of the materials recovery facility to accommodate a change to single-stream recycling. While single-stream recycling seemed simpler, Mitchell allowed, there was additional complexity on the back end – both in the additional sorting that would need to take place, and in the incentive system that would be implemented to encourage people to recycle more. The program fed into the idea of more use, not reduce, said Mitchell. She suggested that the goal should be to reduce the total amount in the waste stream.

Kathy Boris also questioned the conversion to single-stream recycling. Ann Arbor already had a working two-stream system, she said, and residents were educated about it. The point of recycling, she stressed, was to be able to sell the material so that it could be re-used, not to collect as much as possible. She expressed concern that the quality of the material collected under a single stream system would suffer.

[In his communications, Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2) said he'd read a report questioning some of the claims made for single-stream recycling on economic grounds and that he wanted to get a response from city staff. Roger Fraser said that solid waste coordinator Tom McMurtrie had responded to the report point-by-point, and that Rapundalo would get a copy.]

Focusing less on specific items in the CIP and more on general concepts was Karen Sidney, who asked: What’s your plan to keep up what you have? She urged the council to think in terms of questions like when will Vet’s Park skating rink need a new roof? [During his communications to council, Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2) noted that this was, in fact, a part of the city's thinking, and cited his own experience in the late '90s as chair of the park advisory commission in support of that contention. Planning for facilities improvements has been going on for years, he said.]

Cresson Slotten, senior project manager with the city, sifts through the capital improvements plan (CIP) looking for a piece of data that Sandi Smith (Ward 1) had requested.

Sidney also criticized the way that items in the CIP were characterized as a wish list, and the way the plan was defended with the assurance that the authorization for expenditures of the funds was not being voted on when the plan was approved – it’s just a plan. But when it came time to vote, she warned, councilmembers would point to the plan and say, “It’s been there for years!”

[During his communications, city administrator Roger Fraser said that the CIP reflected the staff's "best guesses" and that it was, in fact, just a plan, but that a plan needs to be funded. That, he said, required that the items be in the plan long before the budget decision.]

Brad Mikus picked up on a theme that Thomas Partridge had introduced when Partridge described the CIP as a largely “unknown issue.” He noted that as he’d read through the plan there were several dramatic increases or decreases in funding levels for various projects, reasons for which were not immediately obvious – WALLY and Fuller Road Station, to name two. He challenged councilmembers to answer some specific questions about the CIP, among them: How many of the specific line items are in your ward?

Council Deliberations on CIP

Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) led off by alerting his colleagues to the fact that he’d be asking for a postponement, as he had just received a copy of the plan – he didn’t move the postponement, however, in order to give his colleagues an opportunity to raise any questions. Sandi Smith (Ward 1) asked Cresson Slotten, senior project manager with the city, to find a specific item in the plan. No other councilmembers had any comments on the plan, so the deliberations came to a halt as Slotten searched through a paper copy of the plan.

At that point, Kunselman moved to postpone the vote on the plan.

Outcome: The council voted unanimously to postpone the vote on the CIP.

Bicycles and Pedestrians

Back for their second reading before the council were two ordinances – one regarding bicycles and pedestrians and another on bicycle registration. The material effect of the ordinance revisions to the bicycle code is to repeal the city’s existing ordinances, with the idea that the Michigan Vehicle Code would apply where relevant. The ordinances to be repealed have counterparts in the MVC. For example:

[City] 10:172. Brakes.
Every bicycle shall be equipped with at least 1 effective brake.
(Ord. No. 46-61, 8-14-61; Ord. No. 26-74, 8-19-74)

[State] 257.662 Bicycles or electric personal assistive mobility device; equipment; violation as civil infraction.
(2) A bicycle shall be equipped with a brake which will enable the operator to make the braked wheels skid on dry, level, clean pavement.

[The Chronicle's set of the respective city-state pairings is available as a text file: statecitybicycle.txt.]

Bicycles: Public Comment

Three people spoke during the public hearing on the bicycle ordinance revision. Erica Briggs spoke on behalf of the Washtenaw Biking and Walking Coalition – she’s also currently a member of the city’s planning commission and previously served as director of the getDowntown program. Briggs said that WBWC fully supported the revisions to the ordinances and suggested that the fee reduction from $8 to $3 for registration be even further reduced. She also said that they’d like to see progress made towards an ordinance that would require drivers to stop when a pedestrian approached a crosswalk, not just after entering.

Brad Mikus asked that councilmembers consider the question of enforcement – bicycles are required to have headlights, for example, as well as make an audible sound when passing a pedestrian. He also asked that councilmembers take a look at the definition of a bike path, which had been somewhat simplified.

Thomas Partridge told the council that the public had not been informed as to whether the ordinance would help disabled people or seniors. He also related an encounter on a sidewalk with a bicycle-mounted Ann Arbor policeman, who’d approached from behind with no lights.

Bicycles: Council Deliberations

During deliberations, Marcia Higgins (Ward 2) wanted to know why the references to the MVC were still not included. She’d requested them at the previous council meeting, when the ordinance revision had been approved on its first reading. Eli Cooper, the city’s transportation program manager, pointed out that the MVC was referenced in the ordinance revision. It reads:

10:160. Driver regulation applicable.

Every person riding a bicycle upon a street or highway shall be granted all of the rights and shall be subject to all of the duties applicable to the driver of a vehicle under the Michigan Vehicle Code, 1949 PA 300, MCL 257.1 to 257.923 and as subsequently amended, which is incorporated by reference in Chapter 126 of this Code, except as to those provisions which by their nature can have no application. A complete copy of the code is available to the public for inspection in the Office of the Ann Arbor City Clerk.

Cooper said that a copy of the specific text of the MVC could be made available at the city clerk’s office.

Higgins, however, insisted that this was not user-friendly and stated that her previous direction had not been taken seriously. She wanted the text of the MVC to be included in the city’s code, and if there was some reason why it could not be included, she wanted to know why not.

Tony Derezinski (Ward 2) asked for clarification as to whether Higgins wanted the code itself to repeat the text of the MVC, or if instead that she meant it to be included in editorial fashion after publication. City attorney Stephen Postema said that typically it would be added in editorial fashion, but that he could not think of a reason offhand why it couldn’t be included in the code itself.

Higgins said that inclusion of the language in the code would force the council to make updates on a more regular basis.

With a motion for postponement on the floor, Sandi Smith (Ward 1) asked that in the intervening time period, a more detailed description of the educational campaign be made available to councilmembers. The campaign had previously been discussed by council. Cooper said he believed that it had been made available – in the form of a response to a “caucus question” he’d sent to the council. City administrator Roger Fraser weighed in, saying that staff would review the matter and make sure that the council had the information.

Outcome: The bicycle and pedestrian ordinance revisions were postponed.

When the council came to the ordinance revision addressing registration procedures for bicycles, Carsten Hohnke noted that there’d been some conversation around exactly how the registration process would be structured. He moved to postpone that item as well.

Outcome: The bicycle registration ordinance revision was postponed.

An agenda item connected to bicycle registration would have changed the fee from $8 lifetime to $3 for five years and provided an educational packet to a registrant. Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) led off deliberations by saying he was against the revision, saying that $8 was too expensive, especially in these economic times. Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5) then clarified that the $8 fee was proposed to be replaced with a $3 fee, but took Kunselman’s point, suggesting that the fee be reduced even further.

Hohnke then suggested that it would be prudent to postpone the matter.

Margie Teall (Ward 4) asked how much it actually cost the city to do the registration. Cooper answered that to produce the educational materials was just under $3 and there was a nominal amount of staff time to maintain the records.

Hohnke asked how much the cost would drop if the bicycle map were not included. Cooper explained that the map cost around $1.90 – it was made of an “indestructible medium,” and could be used in the rain. Cooper pointed out that the map also included some safety information.

Outcome: Consideration of the bicycle registration fee and educational packet was postponed.

Parking Fines

At their previous meeting, on Jan. 4, 2010, the council had approved a resolution to take fines for specific violations – handicap, odd/even districts and snow emergencies – and put them on the same schedule as other violations.

At that meeting Sandi Smith (Ward 1) had queried city treasurer Matthew Horning: Is this the revision to the fee schedule? Horning clarified that it was not. That would come before the council at the next meeting (Jan. 18), he had said then. Smith had asked that it be delayed until after the Downtown Development Authority had submitted the parking report that council had requested of the DDA, via a resolution, at its Dec.  21, 2009 meeting.[Chronicle coverage: "Most Aspects of Parking Deal Approved"]

What was before the council on Jan. 18, then, was the revision to the actual fine amounts. The new fine schedule includes an increase from $15 to $20 for the basic expired meter fine. [Chronicle coverage of Nov. 9, 2009 working session: "Parking Fines to Increase in Ann Arbor?"]

Consistent with her remarks at the previous meeting, Smith then moved for a postponement until April, after which the DDA will have submitted its report to the council.

Outcome: The parking fine fee schedule was postponed.

State Rep. Pam Byrnes

State Rep. Pam Byrnes (D-District 52) gave a presentation to the council outlining the current economic conditions in Michigan. Some of the council conversation focused on term limits. The topic emerged from mayor John Hieftje’s remark to Byrnes that if the state was going to reduce funding to municipalities, then it needed to provide additional taxing authority to those municipalities. The need to enact longer-term solutions like the kind of structural change the mayor was talking about, said Byrnes, might need to be preceded by elimination of term limits.

Other Public Commentary

A total of five people spoke during the time allotted for public commentary – either during reserved time at the start of the meeting or at the end, when no advance sign-up is necessary.

Library Lot RFP: Financial Return

Karen Sidney addressed one of the three objectives specified in the city’s request for proposals (RFP) to develop the Library Lot – the objective specifying that there be a financial return to the city. Using taxes to subsidize a development was not a financial return, she said. She also encouraged the council to think about the increased cost of population density – even as tax revenues increased, she cautioned, there was a parallel increase in the cost of services required by additional people.

How Should Ann Arbor Change?

John Floyd made his remarks at the end of the meeting during the slot for general public commentary. He began by expressing his appreciation for the attempts to coordinate the city and county – alluding to the co-location of the 911 dispatch center.

John Floyd spoke during public commentary at the end of the council meeting.

He then introduced a topic he’s raised with Ward 5 councilmember Carsten Hohnke before at city council, based on Hohnke’s remarks that Ann Arbor could look to cities like Portland, Seattle and Boulder as examples for inspiration. When Hohnke did not appear to be paying attention to him, Floyd said, “I’ll wait until you have moment to pay attention.” The pause, which could fairly be described as awkward – Floyd standing at the podium and Hohnke looking intently downward – was broken by Floyd saying, “Any time you’re ready,” and then continued for some seconds.

Hohnke looked up, and Floyd asked Hohnke to enumerate three or four ways that Ann Arbor should change to be like the cities he’d mentioned – should Ann Arbor, for example, grow its population to be like them?

Martin Luther King, Jr.

Thomas Partridge told the council that he was contemplating running for either the state house seat in the 52nd District or else the 18th Senate District. He noted that he’d met Martin Luther King, Jr. a year before his death when he spoke on the campus of Michigan State University, where King held held forth, speaking for 45 minutes without notes. Partridge said we must challenge the old premises and – alluding to Pam Byrnes’ discussion of term limits as a reason why structural changes are hard – suggested the problem was not term limits, but rather attitudes and behavior of elected officials.

Palestine

Blaine Coleman and Mozhgan Savabiesfahani both spoke to the issue of Palestine.

Coleman began by saying that Israel had massacred Gaza one year ago and left 1,400 Palestineans dead. A supporter of the Israeli defense forces, Coleman said, had been appointed to the Ann Arbor human rights commission: Neal Elyakin. [The city council approved Elyakin's appointment to the commission on Dec. 7, 2009.] On Elyakin’s blog, Coleman reported, Elyakin had written that “the term ‘Palestinean’ is a masterful twisting of history” and before the military action in Gaza, he had written “Let Israel do what Israel does.” Coleman asked if that was the public face that Ann Arbor wanted to present. Coleman carried a sign that read “Boycott Israel” and concluded his remarks with that sentiment.

When mayor John Hieftje introduced Savabiesfahani he stumbled on her name and observed that it seemed to be misspelled on the council agenda. [It was misspelled.] She remarked that she’d spoken often enough at the city council that she felt like he should know how to pronounce her name. Hieftje – who often listens as people run roughshod over the pronunciation of his own name – shot back: “Can you say mine?” She then delivered the name “Hieftje” correctly, saying, “I do my homework.” In the substance of her remarks, Savabiesfahani criticized the U.S. for the ongoing wars against Iraq and Afghanistan. She noted that in discussions of ways to trim the budget, “not a single penny has been denied Israel” by the U.S. She said that in the same way that the U.S. EPA and FDA had become obsolete, Hieftje’s appointment of Elyakin to the human rights commission was making that body obsolete. She concluded her remarks with “Boycott Israel.”

Homelessness

Lilly Au described conditions at a tent city of homeless people in Ann Arbor – ice on sleeping bags that comes from the water vapor freezing. She lamented the fact that there is no day warming center, noting that the downtown library had become a de facto day warming station. But the library, she said, had rules against sleeping that could result in expulsion from the facility. She said that many homeless people are under treatment for mental illnesses and that the medication they take makes them drowsy.

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: Monday, Feb. 1, 2010 at 7 p.m. in council chambers, 2nd floor of the Guy C. Larcom, Jr. Municipal Building, 100 N. Fifth Ave. [confirm date]

Members of International Association of Firefighters Local 693 waited past midnight until their president finally was able to take his turn at public commentary during unreserved time at the end of the meeting. (Photo by the writer.)

Two rows of firefighters from the International Association of Firefighters Local 693 – layoff notices have already been sent to some of them – sat in the audience through the whole meeting, which lasted until midnight.

Like the firefighters, sitting at least in the background of nearly every item on the agenda, were the looming budget issues that the city council faces.

When they came to the foreground, the concerns about the budget managed to connect topics as seemingly disparate as Verizon antennae and parking revenues.

Even a garden-variety contract with a consultant for the greenbelt provoked some brief discussion related to the budget shortfall.

The impetus behind the council’s committee reorganization was again … the budget. What was previously one budget and labor committee was split into two committees: (i) the budget committee, and (ii) the labor committee, which is now combined with the council administration committee. That reorganization was pitched as a way to allow representation from each ward on the five-member budget committee.

Councilmembers and the city administrator also made robust use of the communications section of the agenda to provide status updates on their recent work – much of it related to efforts to identify new revenue streams and ways to cut expenses as part of the effort to meet budget goals.

In other business, the purchase of carts for single-stream recycling was authorized, plus an energy grant totaling over $1 million was accepted.

Council Committee Assignments

Without a great deal of discussion, the council adopted new committee assignments, which were needed in light of Leigh Greden’s replacement as Ward 3 representative by Stephen Kunselman, who defeated Greden in the August Democratic primary. Kunselman was unopposed in the November election.

Committee assignments had been postponed from the council’s previous meeting. The original assignments, which had been put forward by Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2), had most notably replaced Mike Anglin (Ward 5) on the budget and labor committee with Christopher Taylor (Ward 3).

After Greden’s defeat in the August primary and the results of that election had been confirmed through a recount, Greden stepped down from the budget and labor committee before the conclusion of his term, as did Margie Teall (Ward 4). Though Teall did not face an election this past year and will continue on council through the year,  Mayor John Hieftje indicated that Teall was stepping down from budget and labor due to other time commitments. [Chronicle coverage: "City Council Begins Transition"]

So from Sept. 8 up to now, the council’s budget and labor committee has consisted of Mayor John Hieftje, Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2), Marcia Higgins (Ward 4), plus the replacements for Teall and Greden – Sabra Briere (Ward 1) and Mike Anglin (Ward 5).

A partial explanation of Rapundalo’s recommendation to replace Anglin with Taylor, as he put forward on Dec. 7, might be found in an email Rapundalo wrote to Greden, Teall, and Higgins last November. In that email Rapundalo wrote about Anglin’s possible continued service on the liquor committee, which Rapundalo chairs: “I’d like to have a rational person with me if Anglin continues.”

The revised committee assignments adopted on Monday took the budget and labor committee and split it into a budget committee and a labor committee. In addition, the labor committee has also been melded with the council’s administration committee.

In the brief commentary by Hieftje, he noted that each of the city’s five wards was now represented on the budget committee. [The newly formed council administration and labor committee, however, now has representation of two of the city's wards.]

The structure adopted by council for those committees is as follows:

Budget Committee

• Mike Anglin (Ward 5)
• Marcia Higgins (Ward 4)
• Christopher Taylor (Ward 3)
• Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2)
• Sabra Briere (Ward 1)

Council Administration and Labor Committee

• John Hieftje (mayor)
• Tony Derezinski (Ward 2)
• Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2)
• Marcia Higgins  (Ward 4)
• Margie Teall (Ward 4)

[.pdf file of all 2010 Ann Arbor city council committee appointments]

Verizon Antennae, Greenbelt Consultants

Two items on the agenda that would otherwise have likely moved through without discussion were identified by Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) for further deliberations.

Verizon Wireless at Plymouth Road

An item on the consent agenda that allowed Verizon Wireless to set up antennae on the Plymouth Road water tower site was pulled out for separate consideration at the request of Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3). [Consent agenda items are considered by the council as a set, without discussing each one, or reading each title.]

Kunselman noted that the agreement between the city and Verizon called for Verizon to pay an annual fee of around $35,000 to erect its antennae at the site. The amount increases at a rate of 4% a year. After getting confirmation that the money would go to the general fund, he asked whether the money could help with the closure of the budget hole that Sandi Smith (Ward 1) had been working to bridge.

The specific issue Smith has been working on concerns $380,000 the city calculated it could generate for the current fiscal year through installation of parking meters in residential areas outside downtown. [See Chronicle coverage of Part I of this same meeting: "Most Aspects of Parking Deal Approved"]

In responding to Kunselman, city administrator Roger Fraser explained that there was no effort on the city staff’s part to relate that additional revenue from the Verizon deal to any one budget item – the council could do that if it wished, he said.

Smith then ventured an on-the-fly amendment to the resolution that would have earmarked the revenue to “offset” any shortfall in the parking meter revenue. Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2) objected to the amendment, partly on the philosophical grounds that it was not good public policy to “nickel and dime on the fly without examining the whole budget structure.”

Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) took issue with the relative vagueness of the term “offset,” saying that it was possible to think conceptually of the additional funds as offsetting a specific shortfall, but that it was not clear what the amendment was meant to actually do.

Any remaining enthusiasm on Kunselman and Smith’s part, for further exploration of the amendment earmarking the additional revenue from Verizon, was diminished when Fraser pointed out the effective date of the Verizon agreement: July 1, 2010. The shortfall Smith is trying to address is for the current fiscal year, which ends June 30, 2010.

Outcome: Smith withdrew her amendment and the council unanimously approved the Verizon deal.

Greenbelt Consultant

The greenbelt advisory commission uses the services of a consultant, The Conservation Fund, to help make decisions about the use of money collected through the city’s greenbelt millage. In response to a request for proposals sent to 10 land conservation firms, The Conservation Fund was the only one to respond – it is the current consultant for the city on greenbelt management.

In 2007 council approved a three-year contract for the Conservation Fund at $209,879 for the first year, $222,175 in year two and $233,460 for year three.

The agenda item considered on Monday night called for a one-year contract for $119,565 and for possible renewals at $113,661 for a second year and $106,797 for the second year.

Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) announced that he’d be voting against the contract. Saying it was a time to cut back, he said that city staff could evaluate land acquisition and that instead of paying The Conservation Fund, the money could flow into the city departments with the staff doing the analysis – the planning department or the chief financial officer’s department.

In responding to Kunselman, Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2) and Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5) – who serves on the greenbelt advisory commission – both stressed two points: (i) greenbelt millage money could not be used for other general fund purposes, and (ii) city staff did not have the specific skill set for land preservation and acquisition.

What Kunselman appeared to be proposing – and which he confirmed for The Chronicle after the meeting – was not that greenbelt millage monies could be saved and re-purposed for general fund uses. Rather, he was suggesting that if city staff performed analysis on behalf of the greenbelt, then that city staff effort could be invoiced against the millage money.

Outcome: The council approved the contract with The Conservation Fund, with dissent from Kunselman.

Firefighters

We begin with some background before summarizing remarks made during public commentary.

Background on Firefighter Layoffs

The city of Ann Arbor does budget planning in two-year cycles, but formally adopts a budget one year at a time. The current fiscal year, FY 2010, is the first year of a two-year cycle. So the plan for FY 2011 has not yet been formally adopted. Formal adoption of the FY 2011 budget will happen in May 2010.

The FY 2011 plan, presented to the city council in January 2009, included the layoff of 14 firefighters. But when the FY 2010 budget was adopted, city administrator Roger Fraser warned that possible additional mid-year cuts might be required – such as accelerating the layoff of firefighters by six months. At the Dec. 5 city council budget retreat, Fraser told council that the firefighter layoffs would be implemented the following week, unless he received different direction from the council. The council did not give any alternate instructions, and the 30-day notice of layoff was sent on Dec. 9, 2009.

Based on the closed session that the city council undertook at its Dec. 21 meeting, there may exist some outside chance that layoffs might yet be forestalled.

Public Commentary from Firefighters: What Do They Do?

Matt Schroeder, president of the firefighters Local 693 union, had signed up for a reserved slot for public commentary at the start of the meeting, but was bumped out of the first 10 slots, and thus had to wait until the end of the meeting.

[The council makes 10 3-minute slots available at the start of the meeting that must be reserved with the city clerk in advance. It's a first-come, first-served basis, with the provision that remarks on agenda items are given priority over those who wish to address a topic not on the council's agenda. Speakers have a second opportunity to speak at the conclusion of the meeting, where no reservation is required and the topic is unconstrained.]

Schroeder was followed at the podium by firefighter Craig Ferris.

Schroeder said that the Local 693 had attempted to negotiate in good faith and that they recognized the budget constraints that the city faced. He said that the union had offered a one-time cost reduction that should have been sufficient to forestall layoffs, but that the city contended they had not identified enough savings.

Schroeder and several other firefighters attended the Dec. 5 city council budget retreat. Schroeder said that he’d been disappointed to hear talk at that retreat to the effect of “don’t let the union get the upper hand.”

Ferris dealt mainly with the question of what the firefighters’ responsibility was – at the Dec. 5 budget retreat, they’d heard councilmembers ask city staff how many “actual fire calls” they went on and the answer had been around 250. In his remarks to the council, Ferris focused on the material that he’d compiled into a report that laid out the several thousand other calls besides fire suppression that the firefighters handled [.txt file of "What We Do"]. Among those were over 3,300 medical emergency calls, plus over 1,000 calls in the category of either a “false alarm” or “good intent.”

City Employees: Benefits, Meeting

City staff as a group came up twice during the council’s meeting.

Tweak to Benefits

The council approved a change to the city’s pension ordinance affecting non-union employees. What is currently a 5% post-tax contribution to the pension fund was changed to a pre-tax contribution. It will not change the amount of money contributed to the pension fund, but will reduce the amount of income tax now paid by employees.

The change was brought forward by the city’s head of human resources, Robyn Wilkerson, who’s now been with the city a little over a year.

All-Employee Meeting

City administrator Roger Fraser announced during his communications to the city council that on Jan. 12, 2010 there would be a two-hour all-employee meeting to discuss the budget environment that the city is facing.

Environment: Recycling and Energy

Two items related to the environment appeared on the agenda.

Single Stream Recycling Carts

Though it received no discussion, the council authorized purchase of 33,000 recycling carts for $1,428,620. Tom McMurtrie, the city’s solid waste coordinator, was on hand in case of any questions, but there were none. The council had heard details of the plan at a work session, and authorized the modification to the materials recovery center for single-stream processing at a previous meeting. [Chronicle coverage: "Council OKs Recycling, Transit, Shelter" and "Work Session: Trains, Trash, Taxes"]

Energy Grant: Special Financing District

The council voted to accept an Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) from the U.S. Department of Energy for $1,243,400. Andrew Brix, the city’s energy coordinator, explained to council that the money will be used by the city in a variety of ways: (i) Phase II of the LED streetlight replacement, which would replace all streetlights outside of downtown with LED lights, (ii) some small renewable energy demonstration sites for photovoltaic panels, solar hot water, and windmills, and (iii) a community program to assist homeowners in making energy improvements. [Chronicle coverage: "Special District Might Fund Energy Program"]

This third use would require passage of some enabling legislation by the state legislature – a bill is in the works in Lansing.

Other Public Commentary

-

Pedestrian Crosswalk Issues

Kathy Griswold addressed the council at the conclusion of its meeting during general public commentary.

King Elementary School crossing's current location next to the driveway entrance to the school. (Photo by the writer.)

She reiterated her frustration about getting some action on the mid-block pedestrian crossing near King Elementary School. [Griswold has previously conveyed her concerns to the council through the fall of 2009 on several occasions – at Sunday caucus meetings and regular council meetings.]

Griswold reminded council that the request to move the crosswalk – from mid-block to the intersection where cars are already required to stop – had been requested by the PTO president and supported by the school principal and signed off on by city staff.

Griswold reported that the city had responded to a request she’d made under the Freedom of Information Act with a message from city administrator, Roger Fraser, to a city engineer. In that message, Griswold said, Fraser asks the engineer to talk to him before scheduling a meeting with all the various stakeholders.

The proposed crosswalk location is at the intersection with the stop sign. The school is behind the photographer. The asphalt path at the left is on the school-side of the street. It's between the end of the asphalt path and the intersection that a sidewalk would need to be constructed. (Photo by the writer.)

[By way of background, putting the crosswalk at the intersection would put children on the school-side of the street at a location where there is no sidewalk leading the rest of the way to the school. So the construction of a sidewalk for that stretch – about 100 feet by The Chronicle's guesstimate, based on visual inspection – is part and parcel of moving the crosswalk.]

Griswold contended that it boiled down to the fact that one of the stakeholders – the property owner on the adjoining property where the sidewalk would need to be constructed – did not want to shovel the snow off the sidewalk. [In Ann Arbor, property owners are responsible for keeping sidewalks free of snow and ice, as well as replacing cracked slabs.]

Griswold’s remarks to the council comes during a period of recent heightened publicity about specific pedestrian safety issues in the city [Chronicle coverage of "7th & Washington" and  [YouTube video].

Palestine

Henry Herskovitz spoke to the council during general public commentary time at the end of the meeting. He began by thanking the council for allowing him to speak and wished them a merry Christmas. He reminded them that last year during Hanukkah, Israel had launched a military operation “Cast Lead” that had resulted in the deaths of more than 1,400 Palestinians.

The name of the operation, Herskovitz said, stemmed in part from an allusion to the dreidel, which is a spinning top used in a game traditionally played during Hanukkah. A dreidel is traditionally made of cast lead. [The dreidel is a four-sided top and can land with any of the four faces facing up – the Hebrew letter on each face dictates what happens in the game.]

The timing of Israel’s military action and its name had led some to call it the Hanukkah Massacre, Herskovitz said. He then read aloud some of the subheadings from a report on the action compiled by Richard Goldstone for the United Nations – they included “indiscriminate attacks by Israeli soldiers,” and “certain weapons,” which Herskovitz described in greater detail as white phosphorus, flechettes, and DIME (dense inert metal explosives) weapons.

He concluded by suggesting that at Christmas we should reflect on why our government supports the Israeli government.

Updates from Councilmembers and Administration

-sfdfdf

Task Forces: Mack Pool and Senior Center

Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5) gave an update from the Dec. 10 meeting of the Mack pool task force, which was formed to explore possibilities of reducing expenses and increasing revenues to a level where the pool could remain open. It’s slated for closure as part of the FY 2011 budget plan. [Chronicle coverage of the meeting Hohnke described: "More Options for Mack Pool." The task force for the Ann Arbor Senior Center, which is also slated to close, met recently too: Chronicle coverage: "Task Force Tries to Save Senior Center"]

Parks Parking

Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) gave his colleagues a heads up that the park advisory commission, on which he serves as a representative from the city council, would be sending along a resolution to the council on football Saturday parking. Their recommendation, which might generate around $30,000 per year to contribute to the budget, would allow football Saturday parking in two city parks: Allmendinger and Frisinger. [Chronicle coverage: "Parking in the Parks, Art on the River"]

Library Lot Proposals

Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2) gave an update on the review of development proposals for the top of the underground parking garage on Fifth Avenue. Key points were that two of the proposals had been dropped, with in-person interviews for the remaining four scheduled for Jan. 18. An RFQ would be issued around the first of the year to identify a consultant to help with the analysis. [Chronicle coverage: "Two Library Lot Proposals Eliminated"]

Mike Anglin (Ward 5) weighed in, saying that he thought that dropping the two proposals from consideration now was a disservice, because the public had been led to believe that they would have adequate opportunity, as owners of the land, to comment on the proposals. He described how the space might be configured to allow graduations to take place or to allow the mayor to address thousands of people. He questioned whether a hotel was even viable, given current hotel occupancy rates.

Rapundalo responded to what he called misperceptions about the process. He noted that one of the key criteria was the financial benefit to the city of Ann Arbor, and that the two dropped proposals would likely cost the city in maintenance and possibly also in construction.

A second misperception, Rapundalo said, was the assumption that a hotel of some kind would be built on the lot.  He rejected that assumption, saying it was quite possible that none of the current proposals would be accepted.

A third point, Rapundalo said, was the idea that the public would have no opportunity to comment on the proposals. On Jan. 18, when the in-person interviews were scheduled, there was would be a robust public participation component, both in the formal question-and-answer session as well as at an open house, he said.

During public commentary, Alan Haber, who had helped conceive and submit one of the two dropped proposals for the Library Lot, said that he wanted to correct the minutes of the Downtown Development Authority’s Nov. 4 meeting, which he characterized as highly inaccurate. He said that he had risen to speak about the partnership model for the operation of the space, and he had not advocated for a small building as the DDA meeting minutes had stated. He said he’d supported a large community center as a gathering place. He said that the review committee, which had dropped the two proposals for open space, did not hear that the benefits of such space are immeasurable and priceless. He called upon the council to use their imaginations to see the larger public benefit.

Transportation: WATS, Washtenaw Avenue

Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5) reported that the Washtenaw Area Transportation Study, which is responsible for transportation planning in the county, was celebrating its 35th anniversary. For 29 of those years, the organization had been led served by Terri Blackmore, he said. [Blackmore began her work with WATS in 1979, first as research coordinator, then as deputy director, before being named executive director in 2001.] Hohnke serves as the city council liaison to WATS.

Tony Derezinski (Ward 2) reported that as part of the Ann Arbor Region Success Initiative, progress was being made on re-thinking what Washtenaw Avenue might look like. Topics being addressed by the working group include setbacks, parking, non-motorized infrastructure, transportation nodes and coordination of traffic signals.   The corridor crossed through four communities, he said: Ann Arbor, Ann Arbor Township, Pittsfield Township, and Ypsilanti. Leading the effort, he said, was Anya Dale, who’s a planner with Washtenaw County.

City Hall Elevators

When The Chronicle arrived at the Larcom building for the council meeting, we waited for a few minutes at the elevator before concluding that it was not in working order. As we reached that conclusion, city administrator Roger Fraser entered the building. He explained that this was a perhaps once-weekly occurrence.

During his communications to the council, Fraser reported that to address the problem, the one non-working elevator had been shut down – the two work in synch, and when one is on, but out of order, the other one will stop moving, too. He could not commit to the elevator working when people left the meeting, but said that it would be “more likely.”

Budget Meetings: Staff Meeting, Council Workshop

City administrator Roger Fraser announced during his communications to the city council that on Jan. 12, 2010 there would be a two-hour all-employee meeting to discuss the budget environment that the city is facing.

He told the council that there would be a budget workshop for them beginning at 6 p.m. on Jan. 25. The meeting is open to the public.

Stadium Bridges, Trees, Water Mains

City administrator Roger Fraser said that he’d met Friday with state Rep. Rebekah Warren, U.S. Congressman John Dingell and representatives of the Michigan Department of Transportation on the question of funding for the replacement of the East Stadium bridges. The local alternative, if none of the usual sources of funding materialize, said Fraser, was money from the street repair millage – it would take about two years’ worth of that millage, he said. They’d received conflicting information about the timing of any announcement about the city’s TIGER (Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery) grant application.

Fraser reported that the city had had a goal of planting 1,000 trees in the current fiscal year and that by halfway through the year, they’d planted 700 trees.

He also said that a water main leak had occurred in the area of Washtenaw Avenue, Huron River Drive Street, and Palmer. He said there currently did not appear to be a danger of flooding that would stop traffic and that the city was addressing the situation.

Argo Dam

Fraser reported that data had come back from piezometers that had been installed on the headrace embankment near Argo Dam and that the readings indicated there was no immediate threat of collapse. Mayor John Hieftje chimed in to say that it validated the position of the city that perhaps the toe drains did not need to be worked on – the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality has admonished the city to address maintenance problems with the toe drains for several years. [Chronicle coverage: "City-MDEQ Agree: Argo Headrace Shut"]

Snow Removal: Pittsfield Village

Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) reported that the city had struck a deal to subcontract out snow removal with the Pittsfield Village Condominium Association. In that area, Taylor said, the city had a hard time doing snow removal well – due to the winding streets and the lack of lawn extensions.

Taylor said that Melissa Brown of the association, former Ward 3 councilmember Leigh Greden and Sue McCormick, who’s the city’s public services area administrator, had worked to come up with the arrangement.  The association would be able to use a snow removal provider that could use smaller vehicles to navigate the tighter quarters, and street snow removal could be coordinated with sidewalk snow clearing.

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

Absent: Sabra Briere, Marcia Higgins.

Next council meeting: Monday, Jan. 4, 2009 at 7 p.m. in council chambers, 2nd floor of the Guy C. Larcom, Jr. Municipal Building, 100 N. Fifth Ave. [confirm date]

Mayor John Hieftje also gave some additional detail on a proposal he’d mentioned at the council’s budget retreat on Saturday: an across-the-board wage cut of 3% for all city employees, which would include councilmembers.

Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5) presents his case for having a plan for the Huron River. (Photos by the writer)

Though the topics of firefighters and wage cuts were mentioned during the council’s communications section of the meeting, what pushed the meeting to nearly midnight were deliberations on two resolutions: (i) a three-year reduction of the Percent for Art program to effectively a “Half-Percent for Art” program, and (ii) acceptance of the Huron River and Impoundment Management Plan (HRIMP).

Both resolutions passed, though the HRIMP resolution was heavily amended. The material effect of the amendment was that it was not technically “accepted” by the council, but rather remanded to the city’s park advisory commission and the environmental commission.

In a similar parliamentary move, but with no discussion, the council also returned the area, height and placement (AHP) project to the planning commission.

The council postponed its appointment of new council committees, as well as a resolution to purchase parking meters to be installed on Wall Street. That was the second time the parking meter resolution had been postponed.

In other business, the council approved a move to new accounting software, two greenbelt acquisitions, and funds for remodeling the city’s 911 dispatch center so that it can accommodate co-location with the county’s dispatch center.

Council also authorized a change order to the Buhr ice rink project that illustrated the crunch currently being experienced by the city’s planning and development staff.

Two resolutions were passed in support of affordable housing: one to exempt eligible nonprofit housing providers from property taxes for up to two years, and another expressing support for the efforts of the Inter-Cooperative Council to secure federal funding.

The council also authorized the city attorney to take the action he’d recommended in a closed session held to discuss the pending lawsuit the city faces over the underground parking garage that is starting construction at the Library Lot.

Balanced against some of the bleaker and contentious items on the agenda was a mayoral proclamation honoring Pioneer track coach Don Sleeman, who has some interesting connections to personalities at the city of Ann Arbor.

In Part I of this council report, we handle the HRIMP resolution, the Percent for Art resolution, and budget issues (a possible 3% across-the-board wage cut and firefighter layoffs.)

HRIMP Resolution

In the course of council deliberations on the HRIMP resolution, much of the history of the HRIMP committee’s work and its context emerged, which we present here in summary form.

The HRIMP committee was established by the city’s environmental commission in March of 2006 to develop a plan for protecting and maintaining the portion of the Huron River that flows through the city of Ann Arbor. Beginning in early 2009, a series of public engagements were held as the committee entered the final stages of its work. [Chronicle coverage: "Not So Gently Down the Stream"]

The Huron River and Impoundment Management Plan produced by the committee contains 30 recommendations labeled “consensus recommendations,” with two others on which there was no consensus. The two non-consensus resolutions contradicted each other, with one calling for the removal of Argo Dam and the other calling for its preservation. Much of the public engagement focused exclusively on the dam-in/dam-out question. Part of the context for that question was a problem with toe drains, identified by the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, in the earthen embankment adjacent to the concrete and steel dam, which separates the headrace.

In May of 2009 the city’s environmental commission voted in support of dam removal, while the city’s park advisory commission voted for its preservation. [Chronicle coverage: "City Council To Weigh Mixed Advice on Dam"]

The city council held a work session in July at which they received the Huron River and Impoundment Management Plan.

Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) flips through a copy of the HRIMP report.

In October, the council considered, but ultimately tabled, a resolution that called for the city to repair the toe drains in the earthen embankment adjoining the dam. [Chronicle coverage: "Still No Dam Decision"]

Repairing the toe drains would have addressed the dispute between the city and the MDEQ over the drains. A temporary understanding between the city and the MDEQ was reached in late October, which resulted in the closure of the headrace next to the dam. [Chronicle coverage: "City, MDEQ Agree: Argo Headrace Shut"]

At the Nov. 5 city council meeting, the council approved $38,000 in attorney fees to support the contested case the city was pursuing against the MDEQ.

The resolution to accept the committee’s plan was first considered at the council’s Nov. 16 meeting, but postponed until Dec. 7. At the council’s Sunday caucus on Dec. 6, the focus of discussion was on the difference between “approving” the plan and “accepting” it, with the option of “receiving” it also thrown into the mix. [Chronicle coverage: "Huron River Plan, Percent for Art Program also Discussed"]

During council’s Dec. 7 meeting, the resolution would be amended by Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5), who’d co-sponsored the resolution with Margie Teall (Ward 4). The original “Resolved” clauses were as follows:

RESOLVED, That the Ann Arbor City Council accepts the Huron River and Impoundment Management Plan and the 30 consensus recommendations in the Plan;

RESOLVED, The Ann Arbor City Council supports the establishment of a River Stewardship Committee (RSC) to provide oversight to the implementation of the Plan;

RESOLVED, That the RSC should be created with representatives from the Environmental Commission, Energy Commission, and Park Advisory Commission and others appointed by City Council with expertise in river science (e.g., ecology, hydrology) and river recreation (e.g., canoeing, rowing, angling, and other user groups);

RESOLVED, That the RSC is to be supported by staff from Systems Planning, Natural Area Preservation, Field Operations, and Parks and Recreation Services;

RESOLVED, That the Ann Arbor City Council shall appoint the members of the RSC, including one Council representative, within the next 60 days;

RESOLVED, The Ann Arbor City Council directs the RSC to provide an implementation plan with funding needs and proposed funding strategies, including language for a river millage, within 6 months;

RESOLVED, The Ann Arbor City Council recommends that operation and maintenance of the recreational dams (Argo and Geddes) not be funded from the Drinking Water Enterprise Fund; and

RESOLVED, The Ann Arbor City Council recommends that funds currently used for the operation and maintenance of the recreational dams from the Drinking Water Enterprise Fund be reallocated to implement the Source Water Protection Plan to protect Ann Arbor’s Drinking Water.

In the course of the meeting, when Hohnke’s amendment removed mention of the funding shift, mayor John Hieftje stressed that the intent to shift dam maintenance funding out of the water fund to parks and recreation was part of the budgeting plan for FY 2011. The reasons why it’s a potential legal problem to fund dam maintenance out of the drinking water fund were explored to some extent at the council’s caucus the night before.

Several speakers during public commentary reserved time at the start of the meeting commented on the resolution.

Public Commentary on HRIMP

A common theme among those who spoke against the resolution was that the consensus recommendations did not actually reflect a consensus of the 18-member HRIMP committee.

A member of the HRIMP committee, Michael Taft, told the council he had represented the “rowing community” on the committee, which was not, he stressed, a single entity. He reported that he felt like the outcome of the committee’s work was “predetermined” and that not all information was allowed to be used. Based on some of the scientific data that had emerged subsequent to the completion of the committee’s report, he believed that today there would not be consensus on all of the 30 “consensus” recommendations.

Another member of the HRIMP committee, David Barrett, contended there was not a consensus on the committee for a shift in the dam maintenance funding source from the drinking water fund to user groups. That was a something that had been put through by the committee’s chair, David Stead, at the very last meeting of the committee in April, Barrett said.

Jeff DeBoer, who actually led off public commentary on the HRIMP resolution, also focused on the possible funding shift to rowers as a user group. He is president of the Pioneer Rowing Club. It was the suggestion of David Stead, the chair of the HRIMP committee at the last meeting of the committee, who had made the suggestion, he said. He offered the council a videotape he’d made of the meeting. At an annual cost of $60,000 for dam maintenance, he said, that amounted to a per capita cost of around $0.50 a year, which was reasonable.

It was an email from the Huron River Watershed Council advocating for shifting dam maintenance costs – from the drinking water fund to user groups – that Tony Iannone said prompted him to come speak. He questioned how that related to the HRWC’s mission of protecting the river and suggested that the city’s $10,000 contribution to the HRWC be cut. He asked why the embankment had not been properly maintained, and contended it was unfair to target user groups with fees.

Some speakers were more supportive of accepting the HRIMP report. Elizabeth Riggs noted that the recommendations had been accepted by the city’s park advisory commission. She asked the council to accept the plan, which would direct the protection of the river. It would allow the next steps of the implementation to begin. She also posed some questions. Given that the drinking water fund was not an appropriate source of funds for maintenance on a recreational dam, she asked: Who should pay? She asked how and when the dam-in/dam-out question would be answered. She also questioned why the city was spending $38,000 on legal fees to contest the MDEQ order.

Justin Heslinga, who introduced himself as an ecologist for the Huron-Clinton Metroparks, said that he lived a two-minute walk away from Argo Dam and was a strong advocate for dam removal. He pointed to the gains in parkland that would result, as well as the cooling effect that would result, which would improve the habitat of smallmouth bass.

John Rubin identified himself as a rower, but argued that the Argo Dam should be removed. He said that dams were inherently bad for rivers, and that the removal of Argo Dam specifically was supported by six different environmental groups. He also contended that in the longer run of 5-15 years, it would be $2-3 million cheaper to remove the dam. He pointed to the 28 acres of additional parkland that would be gained. He said that according to a Michigan Rowing Association study from 1983, Argo Pond was only seventh best out of nine locations.

Council Deliberations on HRIMP

-

Meta-Discourse on HRIMP

The council’s deliberations reflected some of the same themes as the public commentary. In particular, Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) picked up on the point that there had been perhaps less consensus on the HRIMP committee than the phrasing “consensus recommendations” reflected.

He also suggested that the chair of the HRIMP committee, David Stead, may have had some bias  – Stead serves on the city’s environmental commission, and introduced the resolution passed by that body recommending removal of the dam. Kunselman questioned how the person who was supposed to be leading the effort to build consensus on the HRIMP committee could then propose a resolution to remove Argo Dam.

Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) and Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3).

In separate speaking turns, Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) took up the issue of the “consensus” nomenclature and the overall tenor of discourse – both of which, he allowed, were meta-issues that did not necessarily speak to the substance of the resolution.

On the use of “consensus,” Taylor urged that it be seen more as a “label” in the report that might not necessarily have its full meaning attached to it, so that it was not an obstacle to the council’s acting on the report in some way.

As for the suggestion of bias on the part of the HRIMP committee chair, Taylor declared that he felt like some folks’ integrity had been impugned based on very little evidence. To contend “bias,” he said suggested duplicity and conniving, but he’d seen no evidence of that. To bring a resolution as an environmental commissioner, he said was “entirely right for our commissioners to do.”

Earlier in the deliberations, Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5) had said it was “absolutely inappropriate to suggest the chair [of the HRIMP committee] had a bias.” And he cautioned that councilmembers should be careful about impugning members of the community who have put time and effort into service for the city.

Taylor lamented the fact that over the course of long community discussion, both sides had accused the other of being driven by a special interest and that this did not advance the conversation.

Sabra Briere (Ward 1) echoed Taylor’s sentiments, saying that the dam-in/dam-out question did not need to be answered quickly, but it did need to be answered civilly.

Mayor John Hieftje followed up Taylor’s remarks by saying that the Huron River Watershed Council was responsible for delivering the cleanest urban river in Michigan, and that speaking ill of the HRWC doesn’t advance a speaker’s cause. He added that he would vote to keep the dam, if the vote were to be taken that night. [This was a hypothetical – the dam-in/dam-out question was not on the agenda.]

Parliamentary Issues with HRIMP

Similar to the Sunday night caucus discussion, council deliberations were dominated by what it meant to “accept” the plan. On Monday, Kunselman said he was content to “receive” the plan, but not to “accept” it. Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2) also indicated that what he’d been prepared to do was to acknowledge the receipt of the plan. Briere pointed out that the council had already received the plan – they had it in their “hot little hands,” she said.

Among their options was “adopting” it, Briere said, which was not what they wanted to do, because that implied implementation, together with the costs of that implementation. They also had the option of simply “rejecting” it, she said, which was also not what they wanted to do.

In addition to “accepting” the plan, the original set of resolved clauses essentially asked the park advisory commission and the environmental commission to proceed on a specific set of the recommendations in the plan – which Hohnke stressed did not speak to user fees nor to the dam-in/dam-out question.

However, there was concern that the “acceptance” of the plan, together with the specific direction to PAC and EC to engage in specific activities, implied a willingness to invest money – which was not available, given the current budget crisis.

From the floor, then, Hohnke proposed an amendment to the resolution that wiped out all the original resolved clauses, replacing it with a single clause giving the two commissions a more general task, and inserted a whereas clause to make clear that the “receipt” of the plan had already happened.

So what was left was a general remanding to the two commissions, with no “acceptance” of the report.

That amendment would be subjected to further alteration, so we present the version of the amendment that eventually was incorporated into the resolution that passed:

Whereas, On July 6, 2009, the Ann Arbor City Council received from the Environmental Commission the Huron River and Impoundment Management Plan and the 30 consensus recommendation contained therein; and

RESOLVED, That the Ann Arbor City Council directs the Park Advisory Commission and Environmental Commission to evaluate the 30 consensus recommendations, and to present options for implementation to City Council for those that can be acted upon at little or no cost; and

RESOLVED, That the Park Advisory Commission and the Environmental Commission complete their recommendations and report back to Council within one year.

Merits of Remanding: How the Amendment Was Altered

Hohnke’s initial amendment, which had a date certain for completion of the two commissions’ work of March 31, 2010, was first altered through a “friendly” amendment from Briere to have no reference to a date at all.

That had been prompted by concern expressed by Mike Anglin (Ward 5) and Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2) about the workload of the park advisory commission. One aspect of that workload is their budgetary responsibility – given the tough budget year, Rapundalo and Anglin wanted the PAC focused on that issue in the coming months. The PAC is also currently revising the Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) plan, which Rapundalo said he knew was a time-intensive project, having chaired the endeavor back in 1998.

The resolution without its date certain, however, lost the support of mayor John Hieftje, who said that the Huron River was too important to leave out there “in the ether.” It also failed to win the support of Anglin or Rapundalo. Kunselman was the fourth vote against the amendment. He criticized the vagueness of the term “little or no cost” and called into question why the HRWC’s stewardship was not adequate to address the need for a river plan – Hohnke had compared the importance of a river plan to a non-motorized plan, or a downtown plan or a parks plan. Kunselman pointed out that the city paid dues to the HRWC for that purpose.

Kunselman also questioned whether sending it back to those commissions had a reasonable chance of building consensus, when they had not been able to achieve that consensus thus far.

With four votes against it, that left six votes in favor, which meant that the amendment passed.

Hieftje then asked that an additional resolved clause be added to provide a one-year time frame. That request was  accommodated by a unanimous vote. The resolution as amended was then voted and approved.

Outcome: The city council voted unanimously to remand the 30 consensus recommendations to the park advisory commission and the environmental commission, asking those groups to develop options for implementation.

Percent for Art

The city of Ann Arbor has a Percent for Art program, which reserves 1% of the cost of any capital improvement project for public art up to a maximum of $250,000 per project.

Much of the council deliberations focused on how the program actually worked and what constraints existed on it. Deliberations also led to some insight into how the city attorney sees his duties vis-a-vis the city charter.

In the context of looming budget cuts because of a down economy, Sandi Smith (Ward 1), who co-sponsored the resolution on the Percent for Art program with mayor John Hieftje, said that everything had to be looked at. “These are extraordinary times,” she said.

The text of the resolution read:

… provided that for the period January 1, 2010, through December 31, 2012, the percentage shall be reduced to and be one half percent (½%). Where a capital improvement project is only partly funded by the city, the amount of funds allocated for public art shall be one percent (1%) of that portion of the project that is city-funded, up to a maximum of $250,000 per project; provided that for the period January 1, 2010, through December 31, 2012, the percentage shall be reduced to and be one half percent (½%).

In making the case for the resolution, Smith pointed out that the program would continue, which she wanted. It would also resume at its full 1% level after three years, with no council action required.

This isn’t the first time a reduction in the percentage in the program has been floated. In February 2009, at a Sunday night caucus, Marcia Higgins (Ward 4) had mooted the idea of modifying the Percent for Art ordinance. From Chronicle coverage of that caucus ["Discontent Emerges at Caucus"]:

One Percent for Art? Really??

Higgins also called into question the need for construction projects to allocate a full 1% for public art, noting that around $1 million had already accumulated in the fund in the year since the program was adopted. She wondered if perhaps a half percent would be a more appropriate level.

Councilmember Christopher Taylor noted light-heartedly that “A Half-Percent For Art!” just doesn’t have quite the same ring. But on a more serious note he suggested that monies are being accumulated faster than they’re being allocated because a mechanism for distribution is still getting up and running.

In deliberations, every councilmember who spoke acknowledged the importance of art in the culture and economy of the Ann Arbor community.

Tony Derezinski (Ward 2) said that this was the first of many tough issues the council would face: “If you won’t vote for a cut, which ones will you vote for?” he asked. This one was not one he wanted to vote for – not at this time. He also said he felt like three years was a long time.

Margie Teall (Ward 4) said she appreciated that the resolution did not demolish the whole program.

Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) said that so long as the city’s revenue fails to meet its full aspirations, they’ll face difficult choices.  He said that based on the cross section of the community he’d heard from on the issue, it was apparent that the community values art but acknowledges that these are difficult times. The resolution, he said, was consistent with the cry for the balance of those ideas.

Sabra Briere (Ward 1) pointed out that the amount that the city would save was an intangible amount – the council had discussed at their budget retreat the idea of delaying certain capital improvements. If the capital improvements didn’t happen, then no money would be allocated to the Percent for Art program. Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2) also focused on the uncertain nature of the dollar amount to be saved, saying that he preferred to focus budget savings efforts on amounts that were fixed.

In response to the “uncertainty of amount” argument, Smith offered as a reference point that in the FY 2011 capital improvements plan (CIP), there were $519,000 eligible – so that the savings were around $260,000.

Hieftje asked for clarification from Sue McCormick, the public services area administrator, about how much money the general fund had contributed to the public art program. She clarified that the $12,500 figure she’d given at an earlier meeting had been the result of erroneous inclusion of some Act 51 funds for a non-motorized capital project. So over the first three years of the Percent for Art program, no money from the general fund had gone towards the program, she reported.

Hieftje had wanted to dispel the myth that money spent on art could instead be spent on salaries in the fire department.

Following up on Hieftje’s question about the general fund, Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5) asked if there were any funds that can’t contribute to the art program. McCormick distinguished between two types of restrictions: those built into the Percent for Art ordinance about the kinds of capital improvement projects, and those stemming from the source of funds. For example, the ordinance itself, she said, rules out “projects” that consist of a property purchase. And a project that uses Act 51 funds as a source are not eligible – the act provides money for operations and maintenance of streets.

Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) asked McCormick who on staff determined the legality of a capital improvement project’s contribution to the art program. Her answer: the city attorney’s office. She explained that in crafting the ordinance, the city attorney had been asked for an opinion. Kunselman followed up by asking, “Why wouldn’t the public know the attorney’s opinion?” [The Ann Arbor city charter has a provision that requires the city attorney to file any opinions with the city clerk's office.]

McCormick referred Kunselman’s question to Stephen Postema, the city attorney. He contended that what he’d sent to council was an “advice memo.” Kunselman pressed the issue by noting that McCormick, as a department head, could request advice that would need to be filed as an opinion.

The city charter reads in relevant part [emphasis added]:

The Attorney shall:
(1) Advise the heads of administrative units in matters relating to their official duties, when so requested, and shall file with the Clerk a copy of all the Attorney’s written opinions;

Based on the charter provision, “an advice memo” could be analyzed as synonymous with “an opinion.”

Also related to funding sources was an amendment to the resolution proposed by Briere that would have stipulated that “projects shall not be restricted by funding source in determining the type or subject matter of the art.” The need for art from the street reconstruction millage to involve projects like pressed pavement, she said, had led her to propose the amendment.

The amendment garnered only Briere’s vote, and failed.

Rapundalo laid out a case for art as a key factor in economic development – attracting and retaining talent. In support of that, he cited his professional work –  as president of  MichBio ["Mission: Drive biosciences industry growth in Michigan"].

Mike Anglin asked for an example of a project that had been completed with Percent for Art funds. McCormick explained that none had been completed yet. The first one is associated with the new municipal center under construction. [The expected Dec. 7 council vote on that project was again delayed – until Dec. 21. Chronicle coverage: "City Council Vote on Dreiseitl Delayed"]

Outcome: The council approved the resolution on its first reading to reduce public art funding from the 1% reservation of capital improvement projects to 0.5% for a three-year period, from 2010-2012. Dissent came from Rapundalo and Derezinski. The resolution must be approved on its second reading before council as well, and will include a public hearing.

Budget

-

A 3% Across-the-Board Wage Cut?

The initial public mention of a possible across-the-board wage cut had come from mayor John Hieftje at the council’s budget retreat conducted on Saturday, Dec. 5.

At Monday’s meeting, councilmembers and the city administrator alike expressed satisfaction with the format of the retreat. Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2) said that it was “the best one we’ve had – because of the council discussion amongst itself.” He noted that it serves as the beginning of the budget season.

Hieftje then put Ann Arbor’s budget difficulties in the context of other cities in the state. Grand Rapids faces 150 layoffs, he reported. Lansing is laying off 14 police officers. And in Troy, he said, one-third of the work force could be laid off if a special millage does not pass.

He introduced again the 3% across-the-board wage cut that he’d mentioned at the budget retreat and also discussed the previous evening at caucus. The idea, he said was for all city councilmembers to accept a 3% pay cut and for all city workers to do the same. For workers whose salaries are paid out of the general fund, he said, that would save $850,000 per year. If all workers citywide were added in, it would amount to a savings of $1.5 million.

The 3% corresponds to concessions made this year by unions representing most of Washtenaw County government employees, but in that case it reflected forgoing a contracted 3% wage increase, not making a cut. [Chronicle coverage: "AFSCME union concessions help, but other issues remain"] In the case of the city’s unions, it would mean a cut.

[Otherwise put, in the case of the county, a worker making $100,000 – with a scheduled raise to $103,000 – was left at the $100,000 level. That's a different proposal from asking a worker making $100,000 to accept $97,000 instead.]

Hieftje said he wanted to take the proposal to the unions. He noted that 48% of the general fund is accounted for by safety services – police and fire.

Firefighter Layoffs

At the budget retreat, city administrator Roger Fraser indicated to councilmembers that unless they directed him otherwise, layoff notices to 14 firefighters – part of mid-year cuts necessary to achieve a balanced FY 2010 budget – would be sent this week.

Fraser was asked to address an issue that had been raised by a city resident at the Sunday caucus: How does the three-person truck crew figure into the safety protocol that requires four people on scene before someone can enter a burning structure?

Fraser began by saying that there are any number of variables that go into any response to a fire call. But national standards, he said, require at least two firefighters to enter the building together, with two remaining outside – a total of four. Fraser said that with layoffs, there could be longer times to get four people to the scene. He said that greater detail would be forthcoming about how the deployment would work.

Hieftje said he was particularly interested in hearing how the extra person – in addition to the three on a truck crew – would get to the scene.

Council took no action on the firefighter layoffs.

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

Absent: Marcia Higgins

Next council meeting: Monday, Dec. 21, 2009 at 7 p.m. in council chambers, 2nd floor of the Guy C. Larcom, Jr. Municipal Building, 100 N. Fifth Ave. [confirm date]

Ann Arbor city administrator Roger Fraser talks with city councilmembers about upcoming budget decisions. That possibility includes layoff notices to 14 firefighters to be sent as soon as the week of Dec. 7. Members of the International Association of Firefighters Local 693 stand in the background. (Photos by the writer.)

Unless he receives other direction from the Ann Arbor city council at its Dec. 7 meeting, city administrator Roger Fraser told councilmembers at their Saturday budget retreat that he’ll begin implementing a plan to trim around $3 million out of the current fiscal year budget.

The moves are necessary to balance the FY 2010 budget, which ends June 30, 2010.

Some of that trimming is a matter of accounting for one-time savings – $500,000 had been budgeted for the Pfizer tax refund, but was settled last year so won’t be on the books for FY 2010. Other trimming is a matter of accepting current situations and committing to them going forward, for recurring savings – for example, vacancies from excess reductions of police through the early-out retirement incentive would not be filled.

But some of the trimming would entail cutting positions currently filled – 14 firefighter positions, which account for around $400,000 of the $3 million to be saved in FY 2010. The move to eliminate firefighter jobs had been part of the FY 2011 plan, but would be implemented six months earlier – now.

For FY 2011, the picture gets even worse, with the city facing a $5.4 million shortfall. And looking ahead one year after that, city council will be faced with constructing a budget for FY 2012 that is 30% smaller than the one they approved for FY 2009.

Background on the Budget Retreat

The Ann Arbor city council holds a budget retreat each year to provide some basic direction to the city administrator on the budget, which is presented to the council in the spring. The council then has an opportunity to amend and adopt that budget for a fiscal year that begins in July. If the council takes no action on the administrator’s budget, then – per the city charter – the administrator’s budget becomes the adopted budget.

Goal of the Retreat: Dialog

Last year, the council’s budget retreat was not held until January. [Chronicle coverage: "Ann Arbor City Council Sets Priorities"] At a budget and labor committee meeting this fall, councilmembers on that committee made it a priority to make sure the budget retreat was held earlier than last year, when scheduling problems had pushed the event into January.

Like last year, the retreat was held at the city’s Wheeler Service Center on Stone School Road. All city councilmembers attended, except for Marcia Higgins (Ward 4).

Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2), who serves on the council’s budget and labor committee, sketched out the goals for this year’s retreat. It would be short on review of basic background material, he said, so there would be more time to engage in a dialog amongst themselves.

The dialog, it turned out, could be fairly characterized as a candid, at times blunt conversation among councilmembers and staff. Rapundalo set part of the tone for bluntness in his introductory comments, when he described how the time of making piecemeal reductions had petered out and that they were now faced with the need to “amputate part of the institution.”

And later during the retreat, when councilmembers Sabra Briere (Ward 1), Sandi Smith (Ward 1) and Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) expressed concerns about eliminating firefighter positions, Fraser admonished the council that there was no way to get to the 30% reduction they’d need by FY 2012 “without some steel in your backbones.”

Review of Basic Background

The background that formed the basis of the discussion at the budget retreat had been foreshadowed at the council’s May 11, 2009 working session on the FY 2010 budget, which they approved later that month. At the working session, the specter of possible additional mid-fiscal-year cuts to the FY 2010 budget was raised. At the time it was thought that those mid-year cuts could likely be driven by a possible dramatic drop to state revenue sharing monies. [State revenue sharing is the way the state allocates a portion of the state sales tax to municipalities across the state. Chronicle coverage: "City Budget: Some Cuts Sooner Than 2011?"]

The sales tax revenue shared by the state did drop, starting in October 2009. By decision of the state legislature, the statutory revenue sharing to Ann Arbor was cut by about $850,000. And a decrease in sales tax revenues meant a $310,000 drop in constitutional revenue sharing. Altogether, that results in $1.16 million less for Ann Arbor’s FY 2010 budget. [Chronicle coverage: "State budget update"]

Four months ago, at the Aug. 6, 2009 city council meeting – based on a range of estimates for the drop in state shared revenue, plus other projected revenue declines – the city’s CFO, Tom Crawford, had already sketched out a FY 2010 budget shortfall. The FY 2010 gap forecast in August amounted to around $3.3 million and would necessitate some mid-year cuts. [Chronicle coverage: "Ann Arbor's CFO gives bleak financial report"]

Current Forecasts for FY 2010 and FY 2011

The specific up-to-date forecast provided by Crawford for the current budget year, as well as next year, is as follows [numbers inside parentheses are negative]:

                       FY 2010            FY 2011
                      (Millions)        (Millions)
November 2009
State shared revenue    (1.4)             (1.2)
Investment income       (0.9)             (0.9)
Traffic citations       (0.9)             (0.6)
and caseload
New development         (0.2)             (0.2)
review fees
Net revenues from       (0.2)             (0.1)
new parking meters
Property taxes           0.3                -
Bond user fees            -               (0.7)
Unresolved lease          -               (1.7)
with DDA 

Forecast worse than     (3.3)             (5.4)
planned
% of expenditures        -4%               -8%
FTE equivalent          (39)               (64)

-

The one “bright” spot in the forecast was that property taxes were actually $0.3 million more than originally budgeted.

A reduction in investment income is a function of the near zero interest rates now available.

Sandi Smith (Ward 1) got clarification from the chief of police, Barnett Jones, that the decrease in traffic citations was due to 24 fewer officers writing tickets – as a part of the FY 2010 budget, an early-out retirement incentive was offered. Officers write an average of 15 tickets per month, Jones said. He would not, he cautioned, tell remaining officers to write more tickets to make up for it.

Roger Fraser, Ann Arbor's city administrator, shows councilmembers the graph reflecting reductions in city staff positions that have been implemented since 2001.

The unresolved lease with the Downtown Development Authority (DDA) in FY 2011 for $1.7 million reflects the fact that no renegotiation of the current parking agreement with the DDA has been attempted.

Under the current agreement with the city to manage the parking system, the DDA is obligated to pay the city $1 million a year for 10 years, starting in 2005, with the city’s option to request a payment of $2 million in any given year – as long as the total amount over 10 years does not exceed $10 million. For the first five years of the contract, the city has requested $2 million, which means that starting in FY 2011, the DDA has no obligation under that contract to pay the city anything more. [Additional background: "DDA Invites City to Discuss Parking Fines"]

Eliminating the DDA was mentioned among possible ideas listed out in the retreat packet, in the spirit of what Fraser described as a “far-reaching attempt to provoke your thinking.”

Revenues: City Income Tax?

On a couple of occasions, Christoper Taylor (Ward 3) pointed out that the entire discussion had focused on the expense side of the equation, with no mention of the revenue side. Fraser clarified that this reflected his belief that there was little enthusiasm on council for exploring the idea of a city income tax. Fraser said, however, that he believed the council owed it to voters to ask them the question before they made the FY 2011 cuts.

The two options that Fraser said should be examined were (i) a Headlee override, which would eliminate the rollback of property millage rates mandated by the Headlee Amendment, and (ii) a city income tax. Either option would require voter approval. One upside to the Headlee override, Fraser pointed out, was that the city would be able to act immediately on the additional revenue. The downside: It would raise only an additional $6.5 million, when the city ultimately faced an $8-9 million problem.

As for the city income tax, it would take longer for the city to be able to act on any additional revenues – there’d be no revenues from that until June 2012, and initial compliance would likely be only in the 70% range, compared to the 90% or better rate that could eventually be achieved.

In terms of estimating the likelihood that a city income tax would pass, Fraser suggested that the city should invest in a study of voter attitudes, much like the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority had undertaken to gauge voter receptivity to a possible countywide transportation millage. [Results of the AATA study are to be presented at a special meeting of the AATA board on Tuesday, Dec. 8.] Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2) stressed that per the city charter, the city income tax could not be an “add-on” as in some other cities. The Ann Arbor city charter specifies that the city may levy a general operating millage or a city income tax, but not both.

CFO Tom Crawford emphasized that the idea of a city income tax was more significant than a change in revenue levels. It would completely restructure the way the city is financed. Prompted by Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) to clarify, Crawford said that in addition to new kinds of staff – auditors, collectors, form processors – there would be impacts to basic policy. One of the financial policies that would need to change if the city were financed through an income tax, said Crawford, was that reserve fund levels would need to be kept about twice as high as they are under a property tax funding mechanism. That’s because the precision of forecasting revenue levels is not as great with an income tax as with a property tax.

Fraser and Crawford also pointed out that an income tax did not represent a revenue panacea, with the extra amount of money compared to a property tax falling in the range of $8-10 million. [Chronicle coverage of the city income tax study released last summer: "Ann Arbor City Income Tax Study"]

Fraser also noted that an income tax meant there would be a different set of stakeholders in the city government who might have questions about how their tax money was being spent – the set of property owners overlaps with, but is a separate set of people from, city income taxpayers.

Current Revenue Projections with a Property Tax

Projections for future revenues for budgeting purposes assumes the city will continue to be funded through property taxes, not through an income tax.

Ann Arbor general fund revenue projections. The optimistic scenario in blue puts revenues at $81.6 million in 2015 after a peak of $84.2 in 2008. The red, worst case forecast puts revenues at $70.2 million in 2015.

Fraser stressed that the revenue projections being used by the city for future budgets do not change the need to cut over the next five years.

Even under that most optimistic scenario, in 2015 revenues would only be $81.6 million, after an $84.2 million peak in 2008.

The worst case projection – one that assumes the complete collapse of the auto industry – would put the 2015 revenues at $70.1 million.

Rethinking Services

Service area administrators gave the council a preliminary rundown of the keys issues facing the city, from the city staff perspective. Those issues ranged from infrastructure issues like Argo Dam and the Stadium Boulevard bridges to the reorganization of the Housing Commission and the impact of the overall economic downturn on the planning department.

The council then divided into three smaller groups in separate rooms, and three groups of staff rotated through each room for a more detailed discussion. Staff group I: Sue McCormick, public services area administrator. Staff group II: Jayne Miller, community services area administrator and Barnett Jones, safety services area administrator; Staff group III: Roger Fraser, city administrator; Tom Crawford, chief financial officer; and Stephen Postema, city attorney.

The Chronicle observed the council group consisting of Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2), Christopher Taylor (Ward 3), and Margie Teall (Ward 4). That group anticipated the discussion that was to happen in the afternoon, and focused on the list of ideas staff had put together for rethinking the basic kind of services that the city should provide and the way that the city should provide them.

Below is some annotation of the list of ideas that was meant to spur the council to start thinking in a fundamentally different way about city services. Fraser stressed that the items on the list were not recommendations, but rather a way for staff to get feedback on which ideas were worth pursuing.

Of the ideas, three seemed to receive almost no traction: outsourcing legal services, contracting with the county for police and emergency services, and the elimination of the DDA. While there seemed to be no great enthusiasm for any of the ideas, councilmembers were in general receptive to receiving additional, specific information.

In annotating the list, we combine the small group interaction we observed with the afternoon discussion of the list by the whole council.

Require leaves to be bagged by residents

Leaf collection and snow removal were identified by councilmembers as two areas generating a large volume of constituent complaints. Snow removal generated some animated discussion between Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2) and public services administrator Sue McCormick. It emerged as a result of a discussion of Act 51 (gas tax) money.

Sue McCormick (left), public services area administrator, and Jayne Miller (right), community services administrator.

McCormick explained that leaf collection was previously paid for out of Act 51 (gas tax) money, but staff recognized that it was more appropriately paid out of the solid waste fund. Act 51 pays for street sweeping, snow removal, crack sealing, and traffic studies, McCormick said. Rapundalo asked if there was any flexibility for allocating more of the money for snow removal – perhaps eliminating the 5% earmark of Act 51 money for non-motorized transportation infrastructure.

Rapundalo, citing his northern Ontario roots, described snow removal in Ann Arbor as “abysmal.” McCormick countered with her own bio, growing up in the Upper Peninsula, and explained that small pickup trucks were not used to plow snow on city streets, because they would be subjected to mechanical stress they’re not designed for. She suggested that in approaching field operations staff, who manage snow removal, a useful approach for Rapundalo would be to query: “Why do I observe this?”

The leaf collection program has residents rake leaves into the road shortly before scheduled collection via front-end loaders and dump trucks. Because of the unpredictability of the leaf drop in any year, McCormick said, “I think we perform it poorly. We cannot do it well.” She put the annual cost of the program at around $400,000. That number, however, did not reflect the actual cost of the program, because the street sweeping associated with it sometimes was delayed until the following year – which meant that the street sweeping was not associated with leaf collection from an accounting perspective.

Eliminating the leaf collection program would have consequences for the collection of compost material, a service which the city provides using a combination of paper bags and carts – elimination of the program would not translate into a savings of $400,000. Mayor John Hieftje remarked that the compost carts can hold a prodigious amount of leaves, especially if they’re compacted by standing on them.

McCormick indicated that probably in January, staff would be bringing forward a recommendation to convert the city’s composting facility to a merchant operation, similar in spirit to the city’s material recovery facility.

Stop general fund support for golf

The park advisory commission got a recent update on the progress being made to put the city’s two golf courses, Leslie and Huron Hills, on stable financial footing. [Chronicle coverage: "Parks Update: Golf, Birds, River Art"]

At Saturday’s retreat, Miller said that compared to a general fund allocated subsidy of $589,000, the golf courses had used $460,000 – so the trend was in the right direction, but the subsidy required was still substantial. Of the two courses, Leslie is showing more improvement, enhanced by receiving a liquor license from the city in 2008.

When the focus then came to rest on Huron Hills Golf Course as the less profitable of the two courses, Stephen Rapundalo lamented: “Here we go again!” It was possibly an allusion to the contentious general election Rapundalo only narrowly won against write-in challenger Ed Amonsen in 2007, when a central issue had been the question of whether the city intended to sell Huron Hills.

Miller said that closing Huron Hills for golf would not mean that it would stop losing money. Even keeping up the property at some basic level of maintenance (not as a golf course) would require a considerable ongoing expenditure, she said.

Hieftje summarized by saying, “I think we’ll have golf.”

Institute street lighting special assessment districts

As recently as 2007, the idea of a street lighting special assessment district has been proposed. On that occasion, the Ann Arbor DDA paid the city about $630,000 to delay and reduce a street light tax that would have been assessed on downtown property owners. That tax would have generated around $170,000 annually.

The idea now under consideration would generate $1.5-2 million annually from property owners citywide paying an additional tax to fund street lights. Sue McCormick, public services area administrator, said that one way to configure the special assessment district would be to provide some basic level of lighting standard, with additional levels of service funded through the assessment.

A complicating factor is that some of the street lights are owned by DTE and others are owned by the city of Ann Arbor. The possibility of buying out DTE was briefly discussed. Another challenge is that the energy efficiencies gained from street lights are not as highly valued by DTE as one might expect, because the energy savings from street lights come mostly during an off-peak load time (at night), when DTE has excess capacity anyway.

Reduce or re-purpose general fund support for AATA

The city of Ann Arbor currently levies a 2.5 mill tax – adjusted by the Headlee Amendment to a rate of just over 2 mill – which the city charter specifies for the purpose of “providing funds for operating and equipping a public transportation system for the City.” That money is allocated to the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority.

As CFO Tom Crawford pointed out, the charter obligation is to spend the taxes collected under the transportation tax on transportation, not necessarily the AATA.

In connection with current discussions by the AATA of proposing a countywide transportation millage, the question becomes: What happens to the existing public transportation tax? One extreme would be to leave it in place and to continue allocation of that money to the AATA. The other extreme would be to eliminate the city transportation tax entirely, which would put Ann Arbor property owners’ contribution to the possible countywide transportation system on the same footing with other county residents. [Chronicle coverage: "AATA Adopts Vision: Countywide Service"]

Or it’s possible to contemplate a reduction in the city’s transportation tax, with the reduced percentage remaining on the tax bill, but reallocated elsewhere in the fund. Any of those options would require a ballot question put before the voters.

Reduce solid waste millage

On this proposal, the city would get out of the business of garbage collection, but stay in the business of recycling. The city would contract with a waste hauler, which would then be paid directly by residents under some kind of franchising arrangement that would allow them to “pay as they go.” That would allow a reduction in the solid waste millage, which could be passed along to residents. Or voters could be asked to continue to pay the same percentage, but direct to other areas the part not needed to fund garbage collection.

When considering whether residents would choose to continue paying the same amount even though their service had been reduced, and then pay again separately for waste hauling, Stephen Rapundalo asked, “Why would they do that?”

Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) cautioned that this kind of “pay as you go” system could have the unintended consequence of encouraging the dumping of trash wherever people could find a place – something he said he’d seen as administrator of  Sumpter Township in the early 2000s.

Defer uncommitted capital improvements

Councilmembers wanted to see a list of the improvements to be deferred. In connection with discussion of the Stadium Boulevard bridge replacement, scheduled to begin construction after the 2010 University of Michigan football season, Sue McCormick was also asked to provide a list of the street reconstruction projects that would be delayed, if the bridge replacement has to be paid out of the local street reconstruction millage.

Eliminate human services funding

The roughly $1.1 million in human services funding is currently allocated to area nonprofits based on a scoring metric. [Chronicle coverage: "Ann Arbor Allocates Human Services Funding"] In response to councilmember queries, it emerged that few cities fund any kind of human services. Sabra Briere (Ward 1) noted that Ypsilanti had eliminated human services funding a decade ago.

Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2) wondered how much good some of the smaller allocations actually did, and questioned: “Are we having an impact?” Responding to Rapundalo, Briere – who works for the nonprofit The Corner Health Center – was emphatic: “I want to tell you, you are!”

In discussions of cutting back human services funding, Mayor John Hieftje warned that it would mean the elimination of some nonprofits. He said it would be important to bring together the city, the United Way, the Ann Arbor Area Community Foundation and other organizations to figure out a coordinated strategy for determining which ones survive.

Briere added that the role of nonprofits needs to be acknowledged: “We need to say out loud: This is not the government’s role alone. We do this in partnership with nonprofits.” On the subject of human services funding, Briere said it was impossible to call it a core service: “That’s why the amounts are so tiny.”

Look at various aspects of parks

While the council was unenthusiastic about any of the possible ways to save money in the parks system, they generally wanted staff to provide more concrete numbers on various scenarios. Information on the greenbelt millage was also requested: How much of the money is already obligated? Any change in that 30-year millage would need voter approval.

• Close recreation facilities: The financial benefit to closing recreational facilities, community services area administrator Jayne Miller pointed out, was not anywhere near the full cost of operating the facilities. Buhr Park, for example, requires $300,000 to operate. But it also generates $250,000 in revenue. To reach significant savings, several facilities would need to be closed. In addition, said chief of police Barnett Jones, decreasing recreational opportunities for young people would lead to increased property crimes. The same rationale applies to the potential closing of neighborhood centers (Bryant and Northside) – there was no interest in closing those centers. After the neighborhood centers, the biggest money losers (setting golf aside) are Mack Pool and the Senior Center. [Chronicle coverage of the task forces working on those two facilities: "Task Force Floats Ways to Save Mack Pool" and "Seniors Weigh in on Fate of Center"]
• Eliminate general fund support for parks system: Currently, mowing for parks is paid for out of the general fund. There is community pressure, Miller said, to treat the mowing of parks as a core service, hence it’s paid out of the general fund.
• Discontinue maintaining some parks: The key question identified by councilmembers was: Which parks and how much would it save?
• Sell some parks: It was noted by councilmembers that there would likely be little support on council for the sale of any parkland and that by a charter amendment passed in 2008, the question would need to be put to the voters. But the question of which parks might be candidates for sale was left on the table.
• Rescind parks budget reduction resolution: The city resolution, passed in 2006 in conjunction with the combined parks capital improvements and parks millage, keeps parks funding on par with other general fund allocations. So whatever percentage decrease there is in the general fund budget, there would maximally be a corresponding allocation of money to the parks and recreation system. If the general fund budget drops 3%, the amount of money the city allocates to parks can’t go down by more than 3%.
• Contract with Washtenaw County for parks services: Miller said that in the past, the reception from the county had been cool, but it might be worth trying again. She said that the Ann Arbor Public Schools had always been reluctant in the past to discuss the arrangement between the city and the schools on Mack Pool, but there’d been new-found cooperation – the same might be true of the county, she suggested.

Contract with Washtenaw County for emergency management, police services

Chief of safety services Barnett Jones said that when he worked for the Oakland County sheriff’s department, it was actually his job to put on his brown uniform with all of his regalia, and to sell safety services to the townships.

Barnett Jones, chief of police and head of safety services for the city of Ann Arbor.

He could do that, he said, because the sheriff’s department was the best provider of safety services in Oakland County. The best provider of safety services in Washtenaw County, he said, already worked for the city – the Ann Arbor police department.

Among councilmembers there was no discernible interest in exploring the possibility further.

This is an issue independent of the various regionalization efforts at cooperation among various jurisdictions that Jones ticked through as “in action”: SWAT, K-9, hostage negotiation, dispatch, and training.

Outsource city legal services

Tony Derezinski (Ward 2), an attorney, said that the trend was actually in the opposite direction, not just for municipalities, but for corporations – organizations are bringing their legal work in house, because it is more cost effective and there is a greater ability to control the work. Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2) also expressed a lack of enthusiasm for further exploration of the idea, saying it was a “non-starter.” However, city attorney Stephen Postema offered to provide any information and analysis that might be requested. It seems unlikely that the outsourcing of more of the city’s legal work will be explored further.

The idea of outsourcing information technology services was also briefly floated, but did not achieve much traction – largely because the city’s IT department is organizing itself in concert with the county in an effort at regionalization.

Eliminate the DDA

The city’s CFO, Tom Crawford, pointed out that the TIF (tax increment financing) revenue captured by the city’s Downtown Development Authority in its defined district comes from several different taxing authorities: the schools, the Ann Arbor District Library, the county and the city of Ann Arbor. So in thinking about how much revenue might be available to the city’s general fund, the starting point would be just the amount of city taxes captured by the DDA. Factored into the equation as well, he said, was the debt currently owed by the DDA. [More background in previous Chronicle coverage: "Who's on the Committee?"] Still, Crawford concluded that there could be a net annual gain for the city’s general fund of $700,000.

Mayor John Hieftje suggested that one alternative to dismantling the DDA would be to have the city council function as the DDA board, saying that in his view the DDA existed to work in concert with the city. [It's not clear if this is possible, based on the enabling legislation that allows for creation of the DDA.]

Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2) declared that he was not interested in exploring the elimination of the DDA, given the strong opposition he anticipated there’d be.

[It's worth noting that another TIF-funded entity, the Local Development Finance Authority, is not a candidate for providing additional city general fund revenue, because the taxes captured by the LDFA come exclusively from the schools, not from the city.]

Change the way fire protection services are delivered

As head of safety services, Barnett Jones spoke about the impact of laying off 14 of the city’s 94 budgeted firefighter positions. He characterized the consequence as requiring a major restructuring of how fire protection service would be delivered, and it would require some outside-of-the-box thinking. He discussed “rolling brownouts,” which would close some stations on a rotating basis. Jones said that if the city went ahead with the layoff of 14 positions, he thought one or two stations would likely be closed.

The most likely scenario would be that stations in the outer reaches of the city would remain open, based on the principle that “it’s easier to come in than to go out.” Tony Derezinski (Ward 2) was keen to understand the potential impact of station closures on commitments Ann Arbor has with surrounding communities. Jones acknowledged that Station #4 was part of a functional fire service district with the city of Ypsilanti.

Ward 3 councilmember Christopher Taylor, right, and Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2) discuss fire protection for the University of Michigan after hearing from safety services chief Barnett Jones on the subject.

Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) raised the issue of the state’s fire protection grant, which is meant to provide funding to municipalities charged with the responsibility of fire protection for state institutions located within their boundaries – like the University of Michigan. City administrator Roger Fraser said that the state’s formula for appropriate funding came out to $1.8 million, but that the state provided only $900,000.  That actually represented an increase from $300,000, which the state had paid historically.

But the extra funding, Fraser warned, had come from fines that had been established to punish severe traffic offenses, which were in the $500-$1,000 range. And there was a bill pending in the state legislature that would cut those fines, because they were deemed to be excessively harsh.

Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2) wondered if the University of Michigan had been approached directly in light of its recent acquisition of 174 acres from Pfizer. The physical area, Rapundalo allowed, did not represent new fire protection responsibility, but the university would not be paying property taxes on the parcel as Pfizer had.

Jones cautioned that the university should not be approached too aggressively on that front, because the university had the ability to provide its own fire protection, parallel to the way it has provided its own department of public safety. Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) asked why this would be perceived as a negative. Jones suggested that the city wanted to be the entity that provided the fire service in the area – but it wanted to be funded to do it.

Short Term: Firefighters and Integrated Funding

The short-term challenge, however, is not in rethinking the ways that city services are delivered. There’s a $3 million shortfall in the current FY 2010 budget that requires action, said city administrator Roger Fraser. What Fraser is proposing to begin enacting the week of Dec. 7 is as follows:

Immediate Changes for Mid-FY 2010 

Recurring Savings
$  125,000 eliminate contingencies
    38,707 elimination of temporary-contracted
           crews/non-park tree removals
   259,001 transfer stump removal, tree planting
           from general fund to stormwater (requires council action)
    45,360 eliminate hand trimming with mowing
    98,000 change mowing cycle for parks from 14 to 19 days
   811,475 do not fill extra police vacancies from
           the early-out program
   206,000 adjustment to total compensation  

 1,583,543 total recurring  

Non-recurring savings
$  135,000 lower-than-budgeted losses for golf courses
     5,000 decrease in temporary staff time
   500,000 tax refunds budgeted for Pfizer but settled
           in prior year
    90,000 eliminate vacancy in budget office
    23,875 decrease in conference, training and travel
    10,000 don't fill anticipated facilities vacancy
           slated for April 2010
    28,000 new estimates for energy savings on utilities
           for rec facilities
   396,803 fire personnel reductions - planned
           reductions advanced to Jan. 2010
    10,000 reduce contribution to the Ann Arbor Affordable
           Housing Trust Fund by 10%
   250,000 eliminate Joint Integrated Funding  

 1,448,678 total non-recurring 

$3,032,221 total recurring & non-recurring savings

-

Of these items, the most concern among councilmembers was expressed about eliminating Joint Integrated Funding and laying off firefighters six months earlier than had originally been planned.

Joint Integrated Funding

What is Joint Integrated Funding? From a city press release in May 2008:

The Joint Integrated Funding project, which is coordinated by the City of Ann Arbor, Washtenaw County, Ann Arbor Area Community Foundation and United Way, in cooperation with the Washtenaw Housing Alliance, raises funds for an integrated approach to providing housing support services for low-income residents.

Jayne Miller said that given a choice between Joint Integrated Funding and other human services funding, Mary Jo Callan, who directs the city-county office of community development, recommended making the cut in Joint Integrated Funding. It had been a two-year pilot program. Sandi Smith (Ward 1) expressed concern that cutting the Joint Integrated Funding might simply shift the problem eventually to safety services. Sabra Briere (Ward 1) noted that human services funding was also still on the table to be cut.

Briere also noted that the city council had just recently approved emergency funding for additional sheltering capacity for the homeless in advance of the coming winter. [Chronicle coverage: "Council OKs Transit, Recycling, Shelter"]

Firefighter layoffs

Several members of the International Association of Firefighters Local 693 attended at least part of the budget retreat, including Matt Schroeder, who’s president of the local. Schroeder recently gave a presentation to the University of Michigan regents, in which he warned that pending layoffs would mean less fire protection for the UM campus. [Chronicle coverage: "Regents Get Update on Town-Gown Relations"]

Matt Schroeder, president of the International Association of Firefighters Local 693, left, and Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3).

Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) declared that one of his priorities was preserving firefighter jobs and his priority for funding those jobs for another six months was to use the city’s economic development fund, which had been established in order to provide parking permits for Google employees – Google had made provision of the free parking passes a condition on their choice to locate offices of their AdWords division in downtown Ann Arbor.

Tom Crawford, the city’s CFO, quickly cautioned that funding operations from a savings fund would represent a “significant departure” from the city’s financial practice. Kunselman responded, saying that the staff had made clear to the council that there should be “no sacred cows.” Crawford replied that it was not a sacred cow that was at stake, but rather a standard financial practice.

The one situation when it might be possible “to get away with” funding operations out of savings, Crawford said, was if the city knew it was “at the bottom” and that the economy was on its way to recovery. Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2) declared that he preferred to use the economic development funds for what they were intended. Margie Teall (Ward 4) said she was also against using the fund for firefighter positions, saying it sent a bad message.

Kunselman said that the bad message being sent from the point of view of economic development was that the city would not be able to provide fire protection to downtown businesses – at which point city administrator Roger Fraser shot back: “That totally misrepresents the situation, Stephen!”

Mayor John Hieftje weighed in, saying one option that had been presented to the firefighters was an across-the-board wage cut in order to save some jobs – it was an idea that had not been embraced, he reported. Fraser confirmed Hieftje’s remarks.

Fraser then offered the council some perspective on his position at the bargaining table with the firefighter’s union. He said that the council’s unwillingness to face the need to change, and their willingness to continue to bail out the unions, lent credence to the union’s belief that they’d continue to be bailed out.

Kunselman questioned why the city’s relationship with its unions did not seem as healthy as the county’s. [Chronicle coverage of county union concessions: "AFSCME union concessions help, but other issues remain"] Fraser said that the county had not gotten any concessions from its Act 312 unions.

Michigan’s Act 312 outlines requirements for compulsory arbitration of labor disputes for police and fire departments. In a recent arbitration case involving the Ann Arbor Police Officers Association, the arbiter ruled in favor of the union, and the city council needed to appropriate an additional $673,000 to cover the settlement cost.

At the budget retreat, the city’s head of human resources, Robyn Wilkerson, said that while the benefits provided to the unions were perceived as generous, it was important to recognize that the deciding opinion in these matters was the arbiter.

Sandi Smith (Ward 1) requested some information on standards for staffing levels, saying that she still had great discomfort making a decision without a fire chief in the room to provide assurances that fire protection staffing standards and response times would be met. She said she recognized that there was likely little support on the council for delaying the layoffs, but wanted to leave her objection on the record.

Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5) noted that there was actually enough in the general fund reserve to plug every hole in this year’s budget, but that he was not in favor of “kicking the can down the road.”

Based on the budget retreat conversation, councilmembers will seek some clarification at their meeting on Dec. 7 about what fire protection service will look like with 14 firefighter layoffs, but they are unlikely to stop the layoff notices from being sent out in the week following the meeting.

Sabra Briere summed up the retreat when near the end she declared: “We are going to have a serious austerity budget.”

Matt Schroeder, president of the Ann Arbor firefighters Local 693, spoke to UM regents at their Sept. 17 board meeting about how possible firefighter layoffs could affect campus safety. (Photo by the writer.)

University of Michigan Board of Regents (Sept. 17, 2009): UM regents heard two presentations at their Thursday board meeting that closely linked the university and the community of Ann Arbor. Jim Kosteva, UM director of community relations, gave an update on the ways that the university is involved with the city, including payments as well as partnerships. And Matt Schroeder, president of the Ann Arbor firefighters Local 693, spoke during public comment on the possibility of additional layoffs among city firefighters and the potential impact it would have on the university.

Regents also heard several other reports and updates: from the director of the Life Sciences Institute; an architect working on the new basketball practice facility at Crisler Arena; and two alumni who hope to get the university more involved in an effort called Patriot Week.

And during her report on the board’s personnel, compensation and governance committee, regent Andrea Fischer Newman said that UM president Mary Sue Coleman had requested – and the committee agreed – not to raise Coleman’s salary this year.

We’ll begin with the issues most directly related to the Ann Arbor community: Kosteva’s report, and Schroeder’s public commentary.

Community Engagement

Cynthia Wilbanks, UM’s vice president for government relations, introduced Kosteva’s presentation by saying that in any relationship there are ups and downs, and that UM works to achieve more ups.

Kosteva cataloged several ways that the university interacted with the community, starting with UM’s relationship with the city government. UM and city staff meet monthly, he said, to discuss construction projects and other issues that might require planning and coordination. The university contributes about $125,000 annual to street repaving, he said, and is currently providing rent-free space for the Ann Arbor Police Department’s detective bureau, during construction of the city’s new municipal center.

UM partners with several government-related entities, Kosteva said, including the Downtown Development Authority and the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority. He cited specific examples, such as the proposed Fuller Intermodal Transportation Station, the Forest Avenue parking structure (a joint DDA/UM project) and the M-Ride agreement, in which UM pays AATA to allow university students, faculty and staff to ride AATA buses without paying a fare when they board.

The university also pays the city about $8 million each year for water, sewer and stormwater fees, which Kosteva said represented about 20% of the city’s total water and sewer operating revenues. Connection fees that the university paid the city related to construction projects have increased four-fold over the past five years, and represent over 50% of the city’s total connection fees for that period. Examples include about $550,000 for the Kellogg Eye Center, $500,000 for the Biomedical Science Research Building, and $350,000 for the Cardiovascular Center.

Though the university is exempt from paying property taxes, they pay roughly $23 million annually in leases for space they occupy in privately owned off-campus buildings, Kosteva said. The university currently accounts for about 15% of the area’s occupied commercial lease market, he said.

For bus service, the university paid AATA over $1.073 million in fiscal 2009, Kosteva said. There were 2.2 million UM riders on the bus system during that year. Those ridership numbers, coupled with the university’s own bus system, leveraged $895,000 in federal funding for regional transit in fiscal 2009, he said.

In addition, other UM payments include the rental of parking lots and classrooms from the Ann Arbor Public Schools, and payments for Ann Arbor police services during home football games and other events, Kosteva said. He also listed partnerships between the university and local groups, including:

• the UM School of Education’s Spanish-language program with the Ann Arbor Public Schools;
• the Regional Alliance for Healthy Schools, also in partnership with AAPS;
• regional transportation efforts, including possible commuter rail;
• economic development through Ann Arbor Spark, to which UM contributes $350,000 annually;
• university spin-off companies and business incubator space;
• collaboration with the Ann Arbor Area Convention and Visitors Bureau to market and attract visitors to the city;
• support for the Washtenaw Health Plan and the Washtenaw Community Health Organization, a joint UM/Washtenaw County partnership;
• funding and in-kind assistance for a variety of cultural events, including the Ann Arbor Summer Festival and the Ann Arbor Art Fairs, and for local nonprofits like the Hope Clinic, Meals on Wheels and the Housing Bureau for Seniors, among others.

Kosteva concluded by citing several projects that are being discussed between UM and the city, including the possible closure of Monroe Street, the Fuller Intermodal Transportation Station, and the issue of easements and staging for the East Stadium Bridges replacement project.

It was the Stadium Bridges project that elicited the only question from a regent following Kosteva’s presentation. Andrew Richner asked what the time frame was for completion of that effort, an estimated $22 million project to reconstruct the current structurally impaired bridges that span South State Street and the Ann Arbor Railroad. [See previous Chronicle coverage for an update on that project.] Kosteva said he believes the city is planning to start construction next fall. “The sooner, the better,” Richner said.

Ann Arbor Firefighters

Speaking during public comment time at the end of the meeting, Matt Schroeder, president of the International Association of Firefighters Local 693, said that his union was concerned about the possibility of 14 layoffs and the possible closure of two stations, due to city budget cuts. They are currently in negotiations with the city, he said, and he was coming to the regents meeting to inform them of the situation. Statements from city administrator Roger Fraser about possible layoffs “send an alarming message to us regarding citizen safety and the safety of our crews,” he said, noting that layoffs would have a direct impact on their ability to provide basic services. There are currently 92 Ann Arbor firefighters.

Schroeder passed out a document that included information on national standards for fire ground staffing, as well as comparisons between communities in the Big Ten and throughout Michigan. Those comparisons looked at general population size, student populations, number of firefighters and equipment. Ann Arbor has the lowest number of career firefighters per 1,000 population of any community in the Big Ten, he said. All but Iowa City have more than 1.1 firefighters per 1,000 people – Ann Arbor has 0.804, a figure that would drop to 0.682 if 14 firefighters were eliminated.

He reminded regents that the university has many large buildings, and relies on Ann Arbor firefighters to respond. [The university does not maintain its own fire department and does not make regular payments to the city for fire service. It does provide rent and operating costs for a north campus fire station, on Beal Avenue near Plymouth Road, which is staffed by Ann Arbor firefighters. The university occasionally makes other contributions, such as $300,000 it paid in fiscal 2004 for a city fire engine.]

Regents expressed support for the issues that Schroeder raised. Regent Larry Deitch said that he was concerned, adding that no other group of people are more selfless and brave than firefighters. Deitch asked what the regents could do to help. Schroeder said that they just wanted to convey the current situation, and that they feel they can’t absorb additional layoffs.

Regent Denise Ilitch said that her sister had been involved in a fire at a Chicago hotel, and a firefighter had saved her life. Rest assured, she told Schroeder, that university officials will do whatever they can to make sure that people in Ann Arbor and students at UM are safe.

President’s Salary: No Raise This Year

Regent Andrea Fischer Newman reported that the board’s personnel, compensation and governance committee had evaluated UM president Mary Sue Coleman and were in unanimous agreement that she was a great president. Newman said she hoped that the Sept. 17 USA Today article, an obituary for NCAA president Myles Brand which mentioned Coleman as a possible successor, was “nothing more than sheer speculation.” Newman cited several accomplishments under Coleman’s tenure during the past year, including completion of a $3.2 billion fundraising campaign and the purchase of the former Pfizer research complex in Ann Arbor.

In recognition of the state’s economic climate, Coleman requested the board not give her a raise this year, Newman said, adding that they complied with that request. [Coleman receives $783,850 in total compensation, including a base salary of $553,500. Last year she received a 4% raise.] Coleman pointed out that none of her executive officers or deans had taken pay raises this year.

Regarding the NCAA job, Coleman said she hadn’t yet seen the article, adding “I’ve got the best job in the world. I just love it.” When someone pointed out that Walt Harrison, a former UM vice president for university relations, was also mentioned as a candidate for the job, Coleman said she thought he’d be great for that position.

Crisler Arena: Practice Facility

Don Dethlefs, CEO of the Denver-based architecture firm Sink Combs Dethlefs, showed regents the schematic designs – which they subsequently approved – for a $23.2 million basketball training facility at Crisler Arena. The two-story, 57,000-square-foot structure will include offices for men’s and women’s coaching staffs, locker rooms, two practice courts, film-viewing and hydrotherapy rooms, conditioning space and other amenities.

The design includes a “Hall of Fame” entry lobby on Crisler’s south side and a “champions” room overlooking the practice courts. These areas are envisioned for use in fundraising and other events. The lobby will be designed with a lot of glass walls and dramatic lighting, creating more of a “front door” to Crisler, Dethlefs said.

A tunnel will connect the facility to seating and the playing court at Crisler. Though the current project won’t include a roof plaza, Dethlefs said that the building will be designed to support such an addition in the future, and the athletic department hopes to eventually raise money to build it. The current project is expected to be finished in the fall of 2011. When the training facility is completed, the Crisler parking area will have about 100 fewer spaces.

Regent Andrea Fischer Newman asked for a report at some future date, giving a summary of all the construction projects that the athletic department has undertaken since Bill Martin took over as athletic director in 2000. Tim Slottow, UM’s chief financial officer, noted that a $3 million renovation to the UM football locker room in 2003 was the first investment after the department’s “difficult, dark days,” referring to the years when the department ran a deficit under the previous athletic director Tom Goss.

Other Construction Projects

The regents approved several other capital projects, with no discussion. They include:

• A $9 million electronic building access system. The university will install electronic card readers on the exterior doors of over 100 buildings on campus, which are currently locked and unlocked manually. The system will provide increased security, said Tim Slottow, UM’s chief financial officer, giving them the ability to remotely lock down buildings during emergencies, for example.
• Authorization to issue bids and award construction contracts on a $6 million soccer stadium – regents approved schematic designs for the project in June 2009.
• A $1.5 million infusion center at the East Ann Arbor Health and Geriatric Center.
• A $4 million project to upgrade the University Hospital emergency power system.

Life Sciences Institute

Early in the meeting, Alan Saltiel, director of the Life Sciences Institute, gave an update on the organization that was founded six years ago. When she introduced Saltiel, UM president Mary Sue Coleman said that he’d been inundated with calls since he announced his most recent research findings: A gene found in mice appears to control obesity. “Everyone wants to join the human clinical trials,” Coleman joked. Saltiel said his main job in life had become managing expectations.

The LSI started with the goal of recruiting a diverse group of top scientists who could work across disciplines to make new discoveries in the life sciences, Saltiel said. They now have 29 faculty with labs at the LSI building, with disciplines ranging from biology and bioinformatics to genetics and chemistry. In total, some 450 researchers work at LSI, including 150 students from across 14 different departments. They’ve secured over $150 million in research funding since the institute’s inception.

Collaboration is their mantra, Saltiel said. He cited his own research into the “obesity gene” – which long-term has potential to treat diabetes – as stemming from collaboration with several other researchers at the institute.

After Saltiel’s presentation, regent Martin Taylor asked whether the institute was the right size. Saltiel said that the building is full, but that it’s difficult to say whether it should be larger. Now, everyone knows each other, which makes it easier to collaborate. Coleman said that it’s a legitimate question to ask – the LSI model might extend to the North Campus Research Complex (NCRC), the new name for the 174-acre former Pfizer site that UM acquired earlier this year.

Research Funding

In his report to regents, Stephen Forrest, UM’s vice president for research, noted that the university had crossed a major threshold by logging a record $1.016 billion in federal research funding during fiscal 2009, which ended June 30. That’s up 9.4% from the previous year, he said, and includes only a very small amount – about $130,000 – of federal stimulus funding. Stimulus dollars will show up in the report for the current fiscal year, he said. So far, university researchers have been awarded $103.2 million in stimulus grants.

He joked that it took the university 192 years to reach the $1 billion mark, but he has set the goal of reaching $2 billion in eight years. “We’re well on our way,” he said.

Public Commentary

Patriot Week: Two speakers came to encourage UM to become engaged in Patriot Week, which ran from Sept. 11 through Sept. 17, Constitution Day. UM alum Michael Warren, an Oakland County circuit court judge and former member of the state board of education, said that he and his 10-year-old daughter, Leah Warren, came up with the idea for Patriot Week as a way to celebrate the country’s history and founding principles. Each day is dedicated to a different principle – such as the rule of law or equality – as well as a specific historical figure, founding document and symbol, as represented by a flag. He encouraged the university to embrace the event. [On a related sartorial note, Warren was wearing a bow tie with a stars-and-stripes motif.]

Accompanying Warren was David Weissman, who said he holds medical and undergraduate degrees from UM. He noted that Americans – even elected officials – score embarrassingly low on tests of civic knowledge and American history, and that it’s increasingly difficult to compete for attention to teach this information. Patriot Week is a focused approach to address this problem. He said they’d like to see UM host symposiums, student debates and celebratory events to mark the week, and to get students involved in partnerships with local high schools and elementary schools.

In response to a question from regent Andrew Richner, provost Terry Sullivan said that since 2005, the university has already been involved in events related to Constitution Week, which runs from Sept. 17-23. Specifically, she cited a panel discussion being held later that day at the law school, focused on court cases that have challenged the Constitution.

Department of Public Safety: Two people spoke on the same issue related to the DPS. Douglas Smith, a UM alumnus, spoke about the treatment of Dr. Andrei Borisov, whom Smith described as a whistleblower who was beaten by campus police then arrested for assaulting police officers. Smith said Borisov had been a research assistant professor in the university’s pediatrics department when a tenured faculty member took control of – and credit for – some of his work. Smith described a chain of events that he said led to several UM administrators conspiring to fire Borisov and prevent him from getting other jobs at the university. At one point, DPS officers escorted Borisov to his office to retrieve his personal property, Smith said, and ended up arguing with him about the contents of a briefcase, ultimately pushing him against a wall and charging him with trespassing. Smith said that Borisov discussed this incident with Stephen Hipkiss, chair of the DPS Oversight Committee, but that Hipkiss discouraged Borisov from filing a complaint against the officers. This matter should be investigated, Smith said.

Hipkiss also spoke during the time for public comment, and defended both the DPS and the oversight committee that he chairs. He described the committee’s role, and said that it was an advisory group, not a tribunal – they hear grievances, then make recommendations to the university’s chief financial officer, who has responsibility for the department. Hipkiss said that DPS has complied with all of the committee’s requests for information during the 11 years he has served on the committee. He disputed Smith’s claim that there’s not adequate oversight.

The media desk during the UM board of regents meetings. The bottle contains sanitizer for hands, not news reports. (Photo by the writer.)

A range of other recommendations include closing Mack pool for the summer, eliminating funding for the civic band and Project Grow, and increasing the water utility’s safety services fee by 4%.

The timeline for the budget’s adoption will include an April 14 town hall meeting at 7 p.m. at the CTN studios on South Industrial. That will be followed by public hearings on May 4, with council adopting a budget with any amendments on May 18. If council fails to act on the budget or to amend it by its second meeting in May, then per the city charter, the budget as submitted by the city administrator is automatically adopted.

The park advisory commission will hold a public hearing next Tuesday, April 21, on the recommendations related to parks, before voting on its recommendation.

The plan (not the budget per se) for FY 2011 will be adopted at the same time the FY 2010 budget is adopted. In that second year of the two-year plan, 14 firefighters, or the equivalent of one truck company, would make up the majority of the 22 eliminated positions. For this next year, 27 of the 34  positions proposed for elimination would come from law enforcement.

Fraser said that the intent was to avoid a scenario where demotions from lieutenant to sergeant and sergeant to patrol officer would take place, a situation where the newest, most enthusiastic recruits would be shed from the department. [The newest recruits are also the least highly compensated.] Instead, he said, the plan was to spend $4.8 million from the general fund reserve on an early-out retirement program. The reserve fund expenditure would bring the reserve down to 12%, putting it at the lower end of the recommended 12-15% range. Fraser said that 16-18 command officers might participate in the program, and that earlier in the day, the plan had received the support of the Ann Arbor Police Officer’s Association.

The materials provided to councilmembers on the mix of law enforcement positions to be eliminated were: 8 community standards, 6 command, 10 patrol, 1 dispatch, 2 clerical. However, Tom Crawford, chief financial officer for the city, said that the exact mix of those positions would depend on participation in the early-out program.

Fraser said that the reductions were possible because Barnett Jones, chief of safety services, had undertaken a restructuring of the police department to reduce the size of sergeant and lieutenant ranks to focus resources on patrol, with specialty patrols for housing and downtown areas covered by regular patrol officers. The reduction in community standards officers (who write parking tickets, among other things), would be facilitated by patrol officers supporting ticket enforcement.

Not discussed at the council working session was the potential dovetailing of reduced ticket enforcement resources on the city’s side, with the possible purchase of parking meter enforcement rights in the downtown area by the DDA – an idea that was floated at the last DDA board meeting by Rene Greff. Greff chairs the DDA board’s ad hoc committee formed to begin conversations about the parking agreement between the city and the DDA.

Councilmembers sought clarity on some of the more visible proposals for cuts, which would come in 2011, like the closing of the senior center and of Mack pool for the summer. Leigh Greden (Ward 3) and Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2) were concerned about whether adequate planning had been done to provide for transitioning to other areas for people who use those services. Jayne Miller, director of community services, said that for the senior center such transitioning would be provided – including on an individual basis. For the pool, there needed to be communication with the Ann Arbor Public Schools system, said Miller, to offer the possibility that the pool might stay open with the schools shouldering a commensurate part of the cost.

Fraser followed up Miller’s point on the school system, saying that in the coming week he hoped to finally reach a written agreement on how to jointly operate recreational ball fields with the schools. He indicated that the city had been working hard over the last five years to achieve an equitable and mutually beneficial arrangement, not just for the ball fields. Fraser said that overtures to the schools by the city in other areas had not yet yielded results.

In response to a query by Marcia Higgins (Ward 4), Fraser discussed another area of cost-saving that has not yet yielded dramatic results: regional cooperation. Higgins asked about the overall strategy of collaboration with other government entities in light of some of the proposed cuts for 2011, which she described as “rather unpalatable.” Fraser drew an analogy of government entities to neighbors who live next door, who just choose to live differently – even when it makes sense to collaborate. Two examples of progress offered by Fraser in that category were the city-county data center consolidation and agreements with surrounding townships and the city of Ypsilanti for firefighting response along the corridor between Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti.

Sandi Smith wanted to know what happened to the discussion of increasing revenues that council had had during its budget retreat in January. Otherwise put, where does the city stand with respect to the request for a city income tax study? Fraser said that the state of Michigan was providing income levels for the city of Ann Arbor, and that employers were providing data for  employees who work in Ann Arbor, but who live outside the city limits. By the end of April, Fraser said, the work should be completed by Plante & Moran, the firm tapped to do the study.

Based on some of the specific items identified for cuts, even relatively small savings opportunities were identified in the proposed budget. For example, city clerk Jackie Beaudry, whose office would permanently lose a now-vacant .60 full-time position, identified the publication of council’s agenda in the local newspaper as a move that could save $15,000 a year. Beaudry said after the work session that council would need to change its rules in order to realize the savings. In relevant part, the council rules read:

The approved agenda for all meetings of Council, including Work Sessions, shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City no later than the Sunday prior to each meeting, except those meetings called less than six days prior to a meeting.

The slides from the presentation at the work session are available here in .pdf format. A binder with the detail of the proposed budget will be available on the second floor of the Larcom Building and at the public library. For members of the public who would like own a copy, the cost for reproduction (which includes charts in color) is $26.36.

The April 14 town hall meeting on the budget, which will be held at CTN studios at 2805 S. Industrial, starts at 7 p.m.

Below we’ve reproduced the budget numbers, followed by some highlights identified by city staff in each year.

Recommended Expenditure Budget
Fiscal Year Budget
                                Adopted     Recommended       Projected
                                   2009            2010            2011
General Fund Expenditures
Police                     $ 27,195,233    $ 26,057,095    $ 27,188,966
Fire                         13,928,987      14,176,119      13,516,759
AATA                          9,741,489       9,636,345       9,135,256
Parks Forestry & Operations   4,225,101       4,132,898       4,063,921
Parks & Recreation            3,844,838       3,718,788       3,511,483
Finance                       4,143,302       3,956,114       4,016,264
Courts                        4,507,684       4,226,107       4,357,693
Planning & Development        2,104,163       2,611,699       2,592,084
Community Development         2,076,980       2,428,699       1,950,666
Public Services               2,179,171       2,105,899       2,017,628
Fleet & Facilities            1,287,695       1,316,428       1,599,240
Attorney                      2,082,710       2,041,949       1,988,580
City Clerk                      924,882         885,960       1,039,966
City Administrator              639,695         634,034         607,334
Mayor & Council                 343,502         348,917         350,740
Transfers/Other              10,332,730       6,887,892       5,664,680
  Total GF Expenditures**  $ 89,214,660    $ 84,816,026    $ 83,250,520

General Fund Revenues
Taxes                      $ 52,076,573    $ 51,492,881    $ 48,993,217
State-shared Revenue         10,756,613      10,827,062      10,827,062
Charges for Services          5,866,021       7,333,170       7,704,717
Fines & Forfeitures           6,182,365       5,131,420       4,861,882
Other                        14,333,088      10,413,505      10,481,630
  Total GF Revenues        $ 89,214,660    $ 85,198,038    $ 82,868,508

Net Surplus/(Deficit)      $          0    $    382,012    $   (382,012) 

Undesignated Fund Balance  $ 13,515,463    $ 13,897,475    $ 13,515,463 

     ** Adopted Budget subsequently amended to $90,791,514

_

FY 2010 Ann Arbor City Budget Highlights

General Fund 2010

POLICE

• Reduction in size of sergeant and lieutenant ranks to focus resources on patrol
• Specialty patrols (ie. housing, downtown, etc.) would be covered by regular patrol
• Community standards reduced with existing patrol supporting ticket enforcement
• Add a 3rd School Resource Officer / Reduce 1 Canine / Reduce vehicle fleet by 14
• FTE positions reduced by 27 (8 community standards, 6 command, 10 patrol, 1 dispatch, 2 clerical)

FIRE

• Reduce non-FTE expenditures and overtime

COMMUNITY SERVICES

• Mack pool will close down for the summer (only)
• Eliminate funding for Civic Band ($7k), Project Grow ($7k), & 1 GIS employee
• Reduce hours at Vets Park Fitness Center ($9k) & expand teen camp pilot
• Leslie Science Center becomes fully financially independent of the city ($31k)
• Rental Housing Inspection Fees – 3% increase

OTHER

• Eliminate publication of council agenda in newspaper ($15k)
• Reduce projected cost of employee compensation and benefits
• Energy savings / Reduced maintenance for LEDs ($29k)
• Service drive parking meter revenue, net of set-up costs ($380k)
• 4% Safety Services Fee from water utility ($787k)
• Loading zone permit fees & S. Industrial football parking revenue ($12k)
• Reduce 4.6 FTEs – 1 in Treasury (vacant), 2 in Courts (vacant), 1 in HR, and 0.6 in Clerks (vacant)

Non-general Fund 2010

Act 51 Funds/Weight & Gas Tax (Funds Right-of-Way Maintenance Activities)

• Anticipated revenue decrease [3% major roads, 5% local roads] ($345k)
• Extend street sweeping cycle from 5 to 8 weeks ($148k)
• Traffic calming reduction [50% or 1 program per yr.] ($28k)
• Extend gravel road grading cycle from 6 to 8 weeks ($40k)
• Reduction in overtime costs for snow removal ($65k)

Utility Funds (Water, Sanitary Sewer, Storm Water)

• 3.6% increase in water revenue requirements
• 1.6% increase in storm water revenue requirement
• 3.1% increase in sanitary sewer revenue requirements
• 4% Safety Service Fee to General Fund
• Planting of 600 trees for storm water benefit ($300k)

Other (Constraints of Diminished Tax Revenue)

• Reduction in Parks Maintenance & Capital Improvements Millage revenue by $65k
• Reduction in Greenbelt Millage revenue by $26k
• Reduction in Solid Waste Millage revenue by $135k

FY 2011 Ann Arbor City Budget Highlights

General Fund 2011

FIRE

• Reduce 14 FTEs in Fire ($1.1 mil.) – equivalent to 1 truck company

COMMUNITY SERVICES

• Reduce Human Services allocations by $260k
• Eliminate Historic District contract ($24k)
• Close or turn over Mack pool to AAPS ($59k)
• Eliminate 30 hours per week of seasonal assistant facility supervisor ($12k)
• Close senior center ($141k)
• Reduce 2.5 FTEs (1 in Parks & Rec., 1 Support Specialist in Planning Development, & 0.5 Planner)
• Rental Housing Inspection Fees – 3% increase

OTHER

• Eliminate contracted services for Park Ops. ($31k)
• Include 8 months of utility charges for Court/PD building ($184k)
• Reduce projected cost of employee compensation and benefits
• Increase revenue or reduce 1 FTE in FASA (financial services)
• Revenue: Service Dr. Parking Meter/Net of Maintenance Costs ($460k)
• Revenue: Energy Savings/Maintenance from LED Installations ($12,323)
• Expenditures: Energy Savings/Maintenance from LED Installations ($69,600)

Non-General Fund FY 2011

Utility Funds/Water, Sanitary Sewer, Storm Water

Revenue:

• 3.49% increase in Water Revenue Requirements (Operation & Maintenance Budgets held constant to accommodate capital requirements)
• 1.75% increase in Storm Water Revenue Requirement (Bonding for Capital Improvements)
• 3% increase in Sanitary Sewer Revenue Requirements (Operation & Maintenance Budgets held constant to accommodate capital requirements)

Expenditures:

• 4% Safety Service Fee ($813,750)

Other

• Reduce 3 FTEs in Construction Code Fund – 2 development services inspectors (1 vacant) & 1 support specialist
• Reduction in Parks Maintenance & Capital Improvements Millage revenue by $270k
• Reduction in Greenbelt Millage revenue by $117k
• Reduction in Solid Waste millage revenue by $607k