The changes affect more than a dozen sections of the AADL policy manual, which covers a wide range of issues spanning overall library philosophy to circulation policies and rules of behavior for patrons. Among the changes include a new policy to offer free library cards to non-resident students and staff at state-sanctioned schools within AADL’s district.

The board’s policy committee had already reviewed all revisions that were proposed by AADL staff and vetted by legal counsel.

Revisions were made in the following sections of the policy handbook. [Each topic in this list includes a .pdf file with the old policy, a marked-up version showing changes, and the new policy.]:

• AADL philosophy
• “Freedom to Read” policy
• Privacy statement
• Internet use policy
• MichNet acceptable use policy
• Interlibrary loan services
• Photocopying/fax services & fees
• Circulation policy
• Confidentiality policy
• Requests for access to records from general public
• Display/distribution of materials by outside groups
• Rules of behavior in public sectors
• Unattended child policy
• Equal employment opportunity & affirmative action policy

In separate action, the board voted to eliminate five policies, which have been incorporated into other policies or were outdated: (1) freedom to view; (2) providing access to computer-based resources; (3) release of minor child’s records; (4) fines for damaged or lost materials; and (5) business use of facilities.

This brief was filed from the fourth-floor boardroom of the downtown library at 343 S. Fifth Ave. A more detailed report will follow: [link]

The changes involve transfers from the library’s fund balance into the capital outlays budget, the library programming line item, and the purchased services line item:

• Increase the capital outlays budget by $30,000 to buy a delivery truck from Varsity Ford.
• Increase the library programming line item by $63,000 for costs related to the design, printing and mailing of event postcards and newsletters to all district residents. AADL director Josie Parker told the board that this is in direct response to recommendations in a 2013 communications audit by Allerton-Hill Consulting. [.pdf of Allerton-Hill report]
• Increase the purchased services line item by $25,000 to cover a satisfaction survey of library district residents, to be conducted by Lansing-based EPIC-MRA. Parker said this is also a recommendation of the communications audit, and would be done this spring. The library previously used EPIC-MRA to conduct a phone survey in March of 2012, and results were reviewed at the board’s April 16, 2012 meeting. That survey had in part asked questions to gauge public support for financing a new downtown library. The board later put a bond proposal on the November 2012 ballot to fund a new downtown building, but it was rejected, failing to receive a majority of votes.

The 2013-2014 budget was approved by the board at its May 6, 2013 meeting. [.pdf of 2013-14 budget summary] According to the most recent financial report, the library had a fund balance of $8.188 million as of Dec. 31, 2013.

The board has made previous budget adjustments during this fiscal year. On Oct. 21, 2013, trustees authorized a $40,000 adjustment to AADL’s 2013-14 budget to cover costs of repairs and testing of the downtown library roof.

This brief was filed from the fourth-floor boardroom of the downtown Ann Arbor District Library, 343 S. Fifth Ave. A more detailed report will follow: [link]

From left: Consultant Dick Carlisle and Craig Lyon, director of utilities and municipal services for Pittsfield Township, attended the Sept. 16, 2013 meeting of the Ann Arbor District Library board, which was held at the Malletts Creek branch on East Eisenhower. The men gave a presentation on a proposed State Road corridor improvement authority in the township. (Photos by the writer.)

Planning consultant Dick Carlisle and Craig Lyon, director of utilities and municipal services for Pittsfield Township, described the new authority and the roughly $30 million in improvements it would fund between the I-94 interchange and Michigan Avenue. The intent is to create a four-lane boulevard with a median, bike lanes and pedestrian pathway.

The library’s Pittsfield branch is located in the township, and a portion of the AADL district is included in the northern part of the proposed CIA. Under the CIA’s tax increment financing plan, 50% of the increase in taxable value would be captured over a 20-year period to fund the CIA projects. The captured taxes would otherwise go to the entities that levy those taxes. Currently, AADL receives about $8,536 in taxes from taxpayers in the proposed CIA boundaries.

In responding to questions from trustees, Carlisle alluded to ongoing controversy related to the TIF capture by the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority. He said that’s why Pittsfield Township is offering to enter into specific agreements with each taxing jurisdiction “that will carefully spell out the limitations on what will actually occur here. So this way, there is no blank check. It is very specific that what we are saying here is exactly what we are going to do.”

A two-year disagreement has persisted over the way the Ann Arbor DDA  calculates its TIF capture, which includes capture of AADL taxes. For the latest Chronicle coverage on this issue, see: “Library View on DDA TIF Capture: Unchanged.”

When the Ann Arbor DDA was formed in the early 1980s, the state enabling legislation for DDAs did not allow for taxing jurisdictions to opt out of participation. However,  CIA legislation includes an opt-out provision. AADL and other taxing entities will have a 60-day period to make that decision. That period is expected to begin when the Pittsfield Township board holds a public hearing about the CIA proposal on Oct. 9.

Based on questions from AADL trustees, they may be skeptical about whether participating in the CIA would be a wise move for the library.

The CIA presentation was the library board’s main agenda item on Sept. 16. The board also reviewed data for the month of August in five categories: Collections, users, visits, usage and participation. In addition, associate director Eli Neiburger presented highlights from the AADL summer game, which wrapped up last month.

During her director’s report, Josie Parker noted that AADL recently released an archive feature on the history of the Ann Arbor Garden Club. It’s part of a broader archiving effort on local history, which includes architecture, cooking, the Ann Arbor police department and several other organizations and topics. Parker said AADL staff would be pleased to talk to anyone who’s interested in archiving the history of other local organizations online.

Parker also told trustees that she’s been invited by the Journal of Library Administration to serve on its editorial board and to write a quarterly column. The journal has historically been limited to administration in academic and specialty libraries, but the new editor and review board wanted to add a public library administrator’s voice to the publication. “I’ve been invited to be that voice, and I’ve accepted,” Parker said.

Items raised during public commentary on Sept. 16 related to a Freedom of Information Act request regarding the 2012 library bond campaign, as well as a plea to renovate the front entrance of the downtown library “from bunker chic to pedestrian friendly.” A topic mentioned at the AADL board’s Aug. 19, 2013 meeting was replacement of the front doors to the downtown library, and possibly undertaking broader renovations at the entrance.

Pittsfield Township Corridor Improvement Authority

Craig Lyon, director of utilities and municipal services for Pittsfield Township, and Dick Carlisle of Carlisle Wortman Associates made a presentation to the AADL board about the township’s proposed corridor improvement authority (CIA) for State Road, south of Ann Arbor.

Carlisle Wortman Associates is the planner for this project, as well as the township’s overall planning consultant. Lyon gave a brief introduction, explaining that the project extends from the I-94 interchange with South State, down through the intersection at Ellsworth and continuing south on State Road to Michigan Avenue. He traced the project’s impetus to 2006, when the Washtenaw County road commission began studying the corridor and determined that there was heavy traffic congestion, and that the road can’t provide the level of service that’s needed. It impacts businesses and residents, Lyon noted. “Going down there at about 4:30 in the afternoon is a lot of fun,” he joked, referring to the congestion at rush hour.

A view showing the northern portion of the proposed corridor improvement authority (CIA) for State Road in Pittsfield Township, starting at the I-94 interchange. The red parcels indicate land that’s developed. Yellow parcels are undeveloped land. (Image links to .pdf file showing entire corridor boundaries.)

Carlisle expanded on details of the project, which would be phased over a 20-year period. South of Ellsworth, State Road currently is two lanes, and has been inadequate for the amount of traffic since well before 2006, he said. It’s a major conduit between Ann Arbor and communities in southern Washtenaw County, including Pittsfield Township and the city of Saline. He noted that part of Pittsfield Township is in AADL’s district. The corridor also is a major center for economic activity that benefits all the taxing jurisdictions, Carlisle said, including AADL. That economic activity could be jeopardized and stifled because of inadequate road infrastructure, he noted.

Most of the township’s major employers are located near State Road, and over 40% of land near the corridor is zoned for businesses, primarily research & development, light manufacturing and other industries that provide “quality jobs” for people in the county, Carlisle said.

The first step in this kind of project is to conduct an environmental assessment, Carlisle said, to qualify the project for federal funding. The environmental assessment identified the preferred design for State Road as a boulevard style – a four-lane road with a central median, similar to the section of Eisenhower Parkway that also intersects with State to the north. The design would also accommodate non-motorized transportation, with bike lanes and a 10-foot pathway for pedestrians. Roundabouts would be added at Morgan, Textile and Old State Street, similar to the roundabout at Ellsworth.

When completed, traffic flow and safety will be improved, Carlisle said, and the corridor will accommodate all types of users, including vehicles, pedestrians, mass transit and bicyclists. He noted that Pittsfield Township has been involved in efforts to try to expand transit options in the county. The improved corridor would also promote economic development, Carlisle said, noting that 40% of the property in that area is now vacant.

The project is estimated to cost $30 million, in 2012 dollars. The challenge for any local government, especially townships, is the fact that townships don’t have a separate funding authority to pay for roads, Carlisle said. To qualify for federal funding, the township has to raise 20% in matching funds, he noted. He said the county road commission won’t invest in road capacity projects like this.

A corridor improvement authority (CIA) is a mechanism to raise the money, Carlisle explained. It would affect the AADL because the library levies taxes on a small portion of the proposed CIA, he said, on the northern end.

The CIA allows the township to raise money through tax increment financing (TIF). The first step to do that is to create a development and tax increment financing plan, which the Pittsfield Township board voted unanimously to receive at its Sept. 11, 2013 meeting. The township board would still need to vote to adopt the plan at a later date. [.pdf of Pittsfield Township CIA development and TIF plan] At that same Sept. 11 meeting, the township board adopted the CIA’s bylaws and rules of procedure. [.pdf of Pittsfield Township CIA bylaws and rules]

The TIF plan establishes a base year – in this case 2013. Eligible taxing jurisdictions would retain all tax revenues from the base year taxable value. By law, a TIF authority could capture 100% of the increase in taxable value over that base year, or it could capture just a portion of that increase. Pittsfield Township is proposing to capture 50% of the increase in taxable value.

AADL board members listen to a presentation about the proposed Pittsfield Township corridor improvement authority (CIA), given by Dick Carlisle and Craig Lyon.

So AADL would keep the amount of taxes in the base year, Carlisle said, plus 50% of any increase in tax revenues that is tied to the increase in taxable value of property in the CIA. This TIF capture would be in effect throughout the 20-year span of the CIA, he said.

The jurisdictions that collect taxes within the CIA boundaries are: Pittsfield Township, Washtenaw County, Washtenaw County parks & recreation, Huron Clinton Metropolitan Authority (metro parks), Washtenaw Community College, Saline District Library, and Ann Arbor District Library.

Any of the jurisdictions have the ability to opt out of the CIA, Carlisle noted. That decision must occur within 60 days of the township’s public hearing on the development and TIF plan. He said the township was sensitive to the fact that other taxing jurisdictions would want as much information as possible in order to make a decision, and that’s why he and Lyon were making presentations in advance of the point at which a decision must be made.

TIF funds can only be spent in the CIA district, and only on projects that are included in the development plan, he said. Pittsfield Township’s plan is very specific and focused just on the roadway and associated improvements, he noted. “There are no hidden projects within this particular proposal,” he said.

The township will hold a public hearing on the CIA on Oct. 9. That starts the 60-day clock for taxing jurisdictions to decide whether to opt out. If the library board takes no action, that means the AADL would be participating for the CIA’s 20-year period.

The AADL would be affected in the following ways, Carlisle said:

• The base year (2013) taxable value for the AADL within the CIA district is $5.507 million.
• Currently, AADL receives about $8,536 in taxes from taxpayers in the CIA boundaries.
• For the CIA’s 20-year duration, AADL would continue to receive its base year tax revenues. For any incremental increase in taxable value, the library would retain 50% of tax revenues. Carlisle estimated that in total over the 20-year period, that would amount to $120,436 for AADL.

Carlisle concluded by reiterating the benefits expected from the CIA: improved traffic operation and increased safety, an accommodation of different modes of transportation, and an increase in economic development that results in increased tax revenues for all jurisdictions.

Pittsfield Township CIA: Board Discussion

Margaret Leary asked for confirmation that the underlying state statue enabling a CIA – as opposed to a downtown development authority (DDA) – allows for a 50% split in tax capture, as well as an opt-out provision. Yes, Carlisle replied. Leary, retired director of the Law Library at the University of Michigan Law School, then asked for the specific statute that enabled the CIA. Carlisle said he didn’t have that information on hand, but he could provide it later. [The statute is Act 280 of the Public Act of 2005.]

AADL trustee Margaret Leary.

Carlisle offered to paraphrase the statute. It states that the CIA can capture all or a portion of the tax increment from the eligible taxing jurisdictions. The statute is also very specific in stating that this is not something that can be imposed on the taxing jurisdictions, he said. “You have the ability to opt out.”

Carlisle also alluded to ongoing issues related to the Ann Arbor DDA. “We’re aware of some of the issues that have occurred elsewhere regarding tax increment financing,” he said. It’s understandable that there are concerns, so Pittsfield Township is offering to enter into specific agreements with each taxing jurisdiction “that will carefully spell out the limitations on what will actually occur here,” Carlisle said. “So this way, there is no blank check. It is very specific that what we are saying here is exactly what we are going to do.”

[By way of brief background, a two-year disagreement has persisted over the way the Ann Arbor DDA  calculates its TIF capture, which includes capture of AADL taxes. For the latest Chronicle coverage on this issue, see: "Library View on DDA TIF Capture: Unchanged."]

Carlisle told AADL trustees that details would be stated in an intergovernmental agreement between the township and each taxing jurisdiction. That agreement is in a draft form for the AADL board, administration and legal counsel to review. [Carlisle did not provide a copy of the draft agreement during the meeting, nor did he have on hand a copy of the draft development & TIF plan. Those were later sent to AADL administration and the board.] [.pdf of draft intergovernmental agreement] [.pdf of draft development & TIF plan]

As a board member, Leary said, she’d like to see such an agreement before she voted on whether to opt out.

Leary also asked for Carlisle’s comments regarding common criticisms of TIFs: (1) that TIFs take money that voters thought would go to AADL, and would allow the CIA to use that money for other purposes without the permission of taxpayers; and (2) that TIFs also take responsibility out of the hands of elected officials, like the AADL board, for determining how that money is spent.

Carlisle argued that the CIA’s TIF wouldn’t be taking responsibility out of the AADL board’s hands, because the AADL board would be entering into an agreement about how the TIF money would be spent. If that agreement isn’t followed, the board would have means to seek remedy, he said. Leary asked what the remedy would be. Anything that’s outlined in the intergovernmental agreement, Carlisle replied.

Lyon explained that the agreement will clearly state that the funds generated through the TIF can only be spent on items identified in the development & TIF plan. The AADL board would have control by making a decision upfront on how the TIF money will be spent over a 20-year period, he said.

Leary then observed that it seemed the remedy, if this agreement is violated, would be for the library to sue the township. Carlisle replied that there could be other means of remedy identified in the agreement, but he did not give any example of what such an alternative might be.

Regarding Leary’s question about taxpayer intent, Carlisle characterized it as the largest philosophical debate surrounding the TIF concept. The question is whether the taxing jurisdictions would receive the benefit of an increased tax base, if the improvement weren’t made. “I would suggest you would not,” he said. As evidence, Carlisle pointed to the Jackson Road boulevard project in Scio Township, which began in 1987. That has resulted in over a 300% increase in taxable value there, he said. He didn’t think anyone would say that the economic development there would have occurred if Jackson Road had remained a two-lane road. “We believe the same thing is going to be true on State Road,” he said.

The nature of the development on State Road will likely be different, Carlisle continued, because it will be more of an employment corridor for high tech and other businesses. But it won’t happen without an improvement to State Road, he said.

AADL trustees Ed Surovell and Nancy Kaplan.

Nancy Kaplan wondered what would happen if not enough of the taxing jurisdictions agree to participate. Carlisle replied that the township board would have to decide whether to continue. That’s one reason why he’s advising the township board not to adopt the development and TIF plan until after the 60-day opt-out period. If there’s not a critical mass of participating jurisdictions, the township board will need to decide if there are enough participants to proceed.

Some of these issues could be covered in the intergovernmental agreement, Carlisle said.

AADL director Josie Parker asked what would happen if it’s just a straight TIF proposal, with no separate intergovernmental agreement. Carlisle said that if the AADL doesn’t opt out, “then you are in.” Responding to another query from Parker, Carlisle said that the law requires a development and TIF plan, and that the plan must identify projects to be paid for with TIF revenues. If the projects are never implemented, “then the law requires that the money is returned to the taxing jurisdictions,” he said.

Leary asked for clarification about the opt-out process. Carlisle explained that the township will hold a public hearing about the CIA on Oct. 9 – the 60-day opt-out period begins at that point. The township board won’t adopt the development & TIF plan until after the opt-out period, but the plan won’t change during that time, he said.

Lyon said that the township board would likely vote to adopt the plan at their Dec. 11 meeting. Between Oct. 9 and Dec. 11, an agreement would be developed between AADL and the township. Starting in 2014, the CIA would capture the TIF revenues. The first phase of construction wouldn’t likely begin until enough funds are accumulated through the CIA, which would probably take 5-6 years, Lyon said.

Prue Rosenthal wondered what would happen if only a couple of the taxing jurisdictions participated. Carlisle replied that the project would have to be scaled back to fit the available financing.

Kaplan asked why the township was pursing the CIA approach, rather than issuing bonds for this project. Carlisle described a TIF as the most equitable way to finance a project that benefits more than just the township. With a bond, it would only be the taxpayers of Pittsfield Township who would pay, he added. He noted that Pittsfield Township will be participating too, in that 50% of its tax revenues within the CIA district will be captured for the project.

Kaplan then asked if Pittsfield Township paid for the environmental assessment. Lyon replied that federal funds helped pay for that.

Leary wondered what other options the township has for raising this money. “Nothing,” Lyon replied. Carlisle added that the township could pay for it with its own tax revenue, “at the peril of all other services.” He reiterated that bonding would require payment by the township’s taxpayers, even though the project would benefit a much broader constituency.

Leary pointed out that the effect would be to raise Pittsfield Township’s tax base. Yes, Lyon said, but it would raise the tax revenues for other taxing jurisdictions too, including AADL. He noted that one of the main differences between Pittsfield Township and the city of Ann Arbor,  or any city, is that the township doesn’t capture any Act 51 (gas tax) dollars from the state. If the township could get Act 51 money, then “the dynamics of this scenario would completely change,” Lyon said.

All of the township’s roads are under the jurisdiction of the Washtenaw County road commission, Lyon explained. And the road commission has indicated that it won’t participate in this project, because it’s a capacity-building project, not a road maintenance project.

Prue Rosenthal, AADL board president.

Parker asked if that was an arbitrary decision made by the road commission. No, Carlisle said, not if you consider the diminished funding that the road commission has received. Like all road commissions in that state, he added, “they’re generally scrambling just to try to maintain what they have.”

Parker got clarification that the road commission does, in fact, have discretion to do this kind of project. Carlisle replied that the road commission could do it, but it would take away from other road improvement projects in the county.

Kaplan wanted to know if the township was going to use the power of eminent domain to take property in order to widen the road. Carlisle said there will be “some necessity for right-of-way acquisition.” However, condemnation is the last resort, he said, although the CIA does have that authority.

When asked who specifically will be making the decisions for the CIA, Lyon replied that the CIA has its own board, which includes the township supervisor, Mandy Grewal. Other members are Claudia Kretschmer (business representative), Roger Jackson (business representative), Bill Linfield (business representative), Bill Reminder (township resident), and David Sarns (business representative), who serves as chair. Lyon is a liaison between the CIA board and the township board, which appointed the CIA board members.

Leary asked when the AADL board could get copies of the interlocal agreement and the development and TIF plan. Carlisle told her that he could provide those the following day. [.pdf of draft interlocal agreement] [.pdf of development & TIF plan]

In describing her view toward the CIA, Leary said she could understand how an entity like the county parks & recreation commission might embrace it, because the CIA’s goals mirror many of the goals in the parks & rec strategic plan, like improving non-motorized transportation and increasing pedestrian access. Therefore, the parks & rec commission has a motive to financially support the CIA, because it would otherwise spend its own money on projects that are part of the corridor improvements.

However, Leary added, “I’m struggling because [the library is] not here to provide transportation.” Leary said she understands how the improvements would benefit AADL and she understands how tax increment financing works. But she was struggling with how to justify taking $120,000 out of the library’s revenues – or whatever the amount will turn out to be. She noted that no one knows how much could be involved, because it depends on the economy and other factors. It would be less than $120,000 – or more. Participating in the CIA would take that money away from books, speakers, building improvements – “all of the things that we were authorized by the voters who elected us to do,” Leary said.

Outcome: This was not a voting item.

Financial Report

Ken Nieman – the library’s associate director of finance, HR and operations – gave a brief report on the August 2013 financial statements included in the board packet. [.pdf of financial statements]

The unrestricted cash balance was $13.75 million as of Aug. 31, 2013. That’s mainly due to the receipt of taxes collected in July. By the end of August, the library had received 65.2% ($7.465 million) of its budgeted tax receipts. [The library's fiscal year starts July 1. Summer property taxes are collected in July.] The fund balance at the end of August was $8.056 million.

Four items are currently over budget but are expected to come back in line as the year progresses, Nieman reported. The over-budget line items are: (1) employment costs related to merit increases; (2) purchased services; (3) communications, for an annual Internet-related payment; and (4) software.

There was nothing out of the ordinary, he concluded.

Financial Report: Board Discussion

Nancy Kaplan pointed out that at last month’s meeting, a member of the public [Lyn Davidge] had asked that explanations be given for any major financial items, such as claims. Kaplan asked Nieman to report on variances for two line items in the budget – materials and LCards/circulation cards. [Materials through Aug. 31 had been budgeted at $145,833 and the actual amount in that line item is $92,210. For LCards, the budgeted amount of $6,000 is unspent so far.]

Nieman said those items reflect timing issues. For materials, more money will be spent later in the year when new releases come out. Spending on LCards usually comes in “big chunks,” he said, because large amounts of library cards are ordered whenever the library is close to running out of them. Orders are typically $5,000. So the amounts can fluctuate, depending on when the need to order arises.

There was no additional discussion, nor any discussion about the August disbursements, which require board approval. [.pdf of August disbursements]

Outcome: The board voted unanimously to approve the August 2013 disbursements.

Director’s Report

AADL director Josie Parker highlighted several items from her written director’s report. [.pdf of September director's report] She noted that associate director Celeste Choate had been invited to make a presentation at the National Institutes of Health Partners in Research 6th annual Clinical and Translational Science Award conference in Bethesda, Maryland. The conference theme was “Science of Community-Engaged Research,” which is something that Choate has been working on for several years, Parker said.

Parker reported that a photo from AADL’s participation in the 2010 Top of the Park will be included in a slideshow by the American Library Association titled “60 Ways to Use Your Library Card,” as part of ALA’s National Library Card month.

Also, AADL has scanned issues of the Ann Arbor Sun, which will be included in Independent Voices, a collection of alternative newspapers, journals and magazines. Independent Voices is published by Reveal Digital, based in Saline. It’s part of a broader effort– including the licensing work that associate director Eli Neiburger described to the board at its Aug. 19, 2013 meeting – to get as much information out to the public as possible, Parker said. It demonstrates what open access can do, she noted, without violating anyone’s copyright.

Parker also reported that on Sept. 11, AADL released an archive feature on the history of the Ann Arbor Garden Club. It’s part of a broader archiving effort on local history, which includes architecture, cooking, the Ann Arbor police department and several other organizations and topics. Parker said AADL staff would be pleased to talk to anyone who’s interested in archiving a local organization’s history online.

Parker told trustees that she’s been invited by the Journal of Library Administration to serve on its editorial board and to write a quarterly column. The journal has historically been limited to administration in academic and specialty libraries, but the new editor and review board wanted to add a public library administrator’s voice to the publication. “I’ve been invited to be that voice, and I’ve accepted,” Parker said. She received a round of applause from the board.

Finally, Parker highlighted a Sept. 5 article in the Michigan Daily by Noah Cohen: “Literati story continues to unfold.” It’s about bookstores and reading, but the article includes the Ann Arbor District Library as part of the conversation, Parker said, “because it’s that important of a place, like bookstores, for readers and reading.” From the article:

Even on dates, since I never had a car, I’d just say, “Meet me in Borders; I’ll be in the young adult section.” That was what downtown meant — Borders, Shaman Drum, Michigan Book & Supply, Dawn Treader, Vault of Midnight, David’s Bookshop and the Ann Arbor Public Library. Not a coffee shop nor a park; not a pub nor an arcade. We had those, but they couldn’t be home base. They didn’t have the magic gravity.

Library Stats

At the board’s Aug. 19, 2013 meeting, trustees had received a briefing on a new format for presenting AADL statistics. On Sept. 16, Eli Neiburger – AADL’s associate director of IT and product development – continued with this approach, providing details in five categories for the month of August: Collections, users, visits, usage and participation. In addition, Neiburger reviewed highlights from the AADL summer game. The data also includes comparisons to August 2012, when available.

AADL collections data: August 2013

AADL user data: August 2013

AADL visits: August 2013

AADL usage data: August 2013

AADL participation data: August 2013

AADL Summer Game data: August 2013

AADL Summer Game data (badge awards): August 2013

Neiburger provided highlights of the statistics from each category, and fielded a wide variety of questions from trustees. In the usage category, for example, 9,592 documents (.pdf files) were downloaded from the AADL website in August 2013, representing a 10.3% increase compared to the previous year. Documents include, for example, full versions of heritage cookbooks in the Ann Arbor Cooks collection – “the things with the squirrel recipes,” Neiburger said.

Ed Surovell, who collects rare books, joked that where he grew up, people still eat squirrels. Neiburger noted that at one point, the library had received a complaint from a member of the public, who felt that the cookbooks “were not being fair to Ann Arbor’s furry friends.” Margaret Leary asked if there were groundhog recipes. Neiburger ventured that there probably were – or he imagined a squirrel recipe would probably work pretty well as a substitute.

Regarding the summer game, AADL director Josie Parker noted that library staff contributes to ideas for “badges,” which can be earned by completing specific tasks and accumulating points. She offered trustees the opportunity to come up with their own ideas for badges next year, if they’d like. “I came up with one, so you can do it too!” she said. Players could earn Parker’s badge – called Josie’s Catfish – by going to her office and finding the game code in the mouth of a stuffed toy catfish.

Outcome: This was not a voting item.

Committee Reports

The board has six committees: communications, budget and finance, facilities, policy, director’s evaluation and executive. Board president Prue Rosenthal reported that none of the committees had met since the August board meeting, so there were no reports.

Public Commentary

During public commentary at the beginning of the Sept. 16 meeting, Don Salberg told the board that he was speaking on behalf of Libby Hunter, who had asked him to read a statement because she couldn’t attend the meeting. She had sent a Freedom of Information Act request earlier in the day asking for emails and all written documents between AADL staff, the board and consultants regarding the 2012 library bond campaign, from Jan. 1, 2012 through Sept. 16, 2013. Salberg read the letter that Hunter had sent to AADL director Josie Parker to make the FOIA request.

Staff and members of the public at the Sept. 16 AADL board meeting, held at the Malletts Creek branch.

Lou Glorie also addressed the trustees. She noted that issues related to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), including projects that might impact accessibility, were discussed at the AADL board’s August meeting. At that meeting, she said, it was reported that the library is largely in compliance with ADA, and that the downtown building is accessible to users with disabilities even in areas where compliance isn’t possible. “But of course, we can do better,” she said. Since it appears that AADL will be making renovations to the downtown library’s entrance, it’s a good time to make that building more accessible.

Glorie hoped that at least one door could be widened, “and the horrible jumble of concrete fronting Fifth Avenue can be made less hazardous.” She urged the board to think about how the multiple levels of the sidewalk along Fifth Avenue would be experienced by patrons with visual impairments – for example, someone who uses a walker who is dropped off in front of the building.

Even if that area is legally compliant with ADA rules, it’s still not easy to use “and is certainly not attractive,” Glorie said. Last month, she noted, Ken Nieman – the library’s associate director of finance, HR and operations – reported that the library had an unrestricted fund balance of $7.8 million. “I’m not saying blow it all on a fancy entrance,” she said, but she hoped the board would think about improving that area of the property to help move that section of Fifth Avenue “from bunker chic to pedestrian friendly.” The sidewalk improvements would likely be paid for by the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority, she said, but the library should start the process by incorporating a sidewalk renovation into whatever repairs happen at the entrance.

Glorie also remarked on another issue raised at the August board meeting. She said the board president had needed to formally clarify statements recorded in the minutes. She said she understood that Prue Rosenthal would not want to claim authorship of those comments. It’s often difficult for people to sort through minutes and get things right, Glorie said. One way to avoid this problem is to have the board and committee meetings recorded and broadcast by Community Television Network (CTN), Glorie noted. There would then be an unambiguous record of what was said, and by whom. Openness and transparency benefit not only the public, Glorie concluded, but also governing bodies acting in good faith.

[The clarification to the minutes had been made by Margaret Leary, a former AADL board president, not Rosenthal. Leary was clarifying a section of the minutes that transcribed public commentary from Bob Rorke, who read excerpts from email exchanges that the Protect Our Libraries political action committee obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request. At the time of the email exchanges, Leary served as board president.]

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

Absent: Rebecca Head, Barbara Murphy.

Next meeting: Monday, Oct. 21, 2013 at 7 p.m. in the fourth-floor conference room of the downtown library, 343 S. Fifth Ave., Ann Arbor. [Check Chronicle event listing to confirm date]

The Chronicle relies in part on regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the Ann Arbor District Library board. Check out this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle. And if you’re already supporting us, please encourage your friends, neighbors and colleagues to help support The Chronicle, too!

From left: Ann Arbor District Library trustee Jan Barney Newman and AADL director Josie Parker. (Photos by the writer.)

The $112,150 contract with Merit Network, a nonprofit based in Ann Arbor, would put the Pittsfield branch on par with high-speed connections throughout the rest of the AADL system. The branch had been described to the board as a “bandwidth backwater,” with about 2% of the Internet connectivity speed compared to other AADL locations. The project will be paid for with money from the library’s fund balance.

In other action, the board approved final budget adjustments for the fiscal year ending June 30 – a routine procedure.

In her director’s report, Josie Parker highlighted the launch of the library’s popular summer reading game, and announced that Ann Arbor/Ypsilanti Reads is soliciting suggestions for its 2014 selection – a work of fiction. The theme is “A Very Good Read.”

During public commentary, Doug Jewett focused his remarks on the Michigan Open Meetings Act, especially as it relates to committee meetings. Bob Rorke discussed the results of a Freedom of Information Act request filed by the Protect Our Libraries political action committee, related to the AADL’s hiring of Allerton-Hill Consulting. Reading through the 634 pages of material the library had produced in response to the FOIA request had raised some concerns for Rorke, including questions about whether the library was using public monies for political purposes.

Pittsfield Fiber-Optic Project

In its main action item, the board was asked to approve a $112,150 contract with Merit Network to build and maintain a connection from AADL’s Pittsfield branch to Merit’s existing high-speed network. Merit, a nonprofit based in Ann Arbor, has focused on serving the state’s educational market since the 1960s.

The board had been briefed at its May 6, 2013 meeting by Eli Neiburger, AADL’s associate director of IT and production. He had described that location at 2359 Oak Valley Drive as a “bandwidth backwater,” with about 2% of the Internet connectivity speed compared to other AADL locations.

Merit currently provides AADL’s main connection to the Internet. The Pittsfield branch is outside of the city of Ann Arbor’s I-Net (Institutional Fiber Network) and currently uses much slower T1 and cable TV connections. Merit had proposed building a new fiber run from the Washtenaw Intermediate School District (WISD) on Wagner Road over to Pittsfield.

The resolution proposed on June 17 included a transfer of $120,000 from the library’s fund balance to its communications line item in the FY 2013-14 budget. The board had passed its FY 2013-14 budget on May 6, for the fiscal year starting July 1, 2013. The arrangement with Merit is expected to include ongoing annual costs of $2,625.

Pittsfield Fiber-Optic Project: Board Discussion

Margaret Leary began the discussion by saying she’d read a comment online from someone who said he uses the Pittsfield branch and had never experienced any problem with the Internet service there.

AADL trustees Ed Surovell and Prue Rosenthal, who serves as president of the board.

Leary recalled that Neiburger had been “quite convincing” in explaining the need for this upgrade. [He did not attend the June 17 meeting.] She speculated that not all users would likely have a problem all the time. “We’re just trying to make it so good so that nobody – no matter how heavy their use or how big the file that they’re downloading – will ever have a problem,” Leary said.

AADL director Josie Parker confirmed that not everyone would experience problems, but many people do. That branch simply doesn’t have the capacity, she said. It depends on the time of day and other factors, she added, saying it’s “much, much slower than the rest of the system.” Barbara Murphy made an analogy to a pipe – “there’s only so much you can run through it.”

Ed Surovell wondered whether the library could fund this project from the surplus remaining at the end of the current fiscal year, rather than from the fund balance. Parker clarified that the contract will be paid in the next fiscal year, not the current one. The current fiscal year ends on June 30, 2013.

Parker also explained that the difference between the $120,000 fund transfer and the $112,150 contract will be used to pay for “make ready” costs, such as digging up the existing line and getting it ready for the new connection.

Outcome: The board unanimously approved the contract with Merit Network.

FY 2012-13 Budget Adjustment

The board was asked to approve minor year-end adjustments to the budget for fiscal year 2012-13, which ends June 30. This is a standard action at the end of the fiscal year.

The adjustments entailed making the following transfers:

• $18,000 from capital outlays to the supplies line item.
• $15,000 from capital outlays to the utilities line item.
• $12,000 from repairs & maintenance to the communications line item.
• $4,000 from repairs & maintenance to the line item for other operating expenditures.
• $10,000 from the fund balance/restricted funds to the programming line item.

There was minimal discussion. Nancy Kaplan, chair of the board’s budget and finance committee, pointed out that this is a typical practice at the end of each year. She said she had checked with Ken Nieman, AADL’s associate director of finance, who had explained to her that because the library has a line-item budget, these transfers need to be made in order to comply with state law. It’s for the fiscal year that’s concluding on June 30, not the coming year, she said.

Outcome: The board unanimously approved the FY 2012-13 year-end budget adjustments.

Financial Reports

AADL director Josie Parker presented the financial reports for April and May, in the absence of Ken Nieman, AADL’s associate director of finance, HR and operations. [.pdf of April 2013 financial statement] [.pdf of May 2013 financial statement]

Parker focused her brief presentation on the most current financial statements, for the period ending May 31. As of May 31, 2013 the library’s unrestricted cash balance was $8.775 million, down from $9.91 million at the end of April. The fund balance stood at $8.363 million as of May 31. The library had received 98.5% of its budgeted tax revenues for the year, or $11.038 million. At the end of May, there was an operating surplus of $417,846.

Committee Reports

The board has six committees: communications, budget and finance, facilities, policy, director’s evaluation and executive. Two of those – communications and facilities – were created as special committees at the board’s Jan. 21, 2013 meeting.

Most of the committees had not met since the last board meeting, and there was nothing to report.

The one exception was the policy committee. Barbara Murphy noted that the policy committee had met earlier this month and talked about the role of the committee in relation to the library and policy management. The library staff is reviewing AADL’s policy manual, she said, looking for anything that needs updating. The staff will bring that to the policy committee later this year, Murphy said.

Director’s Report

AADL director Josie Parker began by noting that the library’s summer reading program kicked off. This year, the theme is dogs. The program is cast in the form of a game, with points awarded for reading/listening to books, watching movies, posting reviews on the library’s website, and other activities. She encouraged board members to play, and asked others at the meeting if any of them were on the leader board – about half the people in the room raised their hands.

Some of the badges that can be earned by playing the Ann Arbor District Library summer reading game.

From the audience, Donald Harrison asked if a game code would be given for people who attended the board meeting. [Points are awarded for attending an AADL event – including board meetings. At the event, a code is announced that allows you to redeem the points.] Parker laughed, and said the staff could create a code for the meeting. It was announced before adjournment.

For additional background on AADL’s summer game, see Chronicle coverage: “AADL Gets Its Game On.”

Parker also reported on AADL’s new short story contest for grades 3-5, which recently concluded. There were 99 entries from a wide range of schools, including the Michigan Islamic Academy, several Ann Arbor Public Schools elementary schools, Ann Arbor Learning Community, Honey Creek Community School, Heritage School in Saline, Ann Arbor Christian, and home-schooled students. An awards ceremony in early June featured Shutta Crum, a local author and former AADL librarian.

Trustee Barbara Murphy asked if the board could see some of the stories that were submitted. “They’re so young. I’d love to know what kind of stories they write,” she said. Parker quipped: “Short ones – very short ones.”

Parker also recognized Terry Soave, AADL’s manager of outreach and neighborhood services, for her work setting up an online repository for documents that can be used by all libraries for the blind and physically handicapped nationally. Parker read aloud a resolution from the Northern Conference of Libraries for the Blind and Physically Handicapped, specifically commending the Washtenaw Library for the Blind and Physically Disabled, which is managed by the AADL. Parker noted that the AADL has been responsible for the WLBPD for less than five years. Soave has led the effort and should be congratulated publicly, Parker said. The board gave Soave a round of applause.

Finally, Parker noted that Ann Arbor/Ypsilanti Reads has changed its focus a bit and is going to select a work of fiction for 2014. The previous selections have been non-fiction. The theme for 2014 is “A Very Good Read.” Parker encouraged anyone who has a suggestion to submit it to the AAYR selection committee.

Communications & Commentary

The board meetings have two opportunities for public commentary – at the beginning and end of each meeting – as well as time for various communications from the board. Here are some highlights.

Communications & Commentary: Public Commentary

Doug Jewett addressed the board about the Michigan Open Meetings Act. He read from material that had been prepared by Ellen Richardson, a former law library specialist for the Library of Michigan. The materials were directed specifically for the trustees of local library boards, he said. Jewett read excerpts from a document dated July 1999:

Most library boards are well versed in meeting these basic requirements. Trustees know what constitutes a quorum, how to allow for public comment, and how and when to post notice of regular and special meetings. Questions usually arise about some of the finer points of the act. What about closed sessions? What about committee meetings?

Closed sessions are allowed only for the limited purposes stated in Section 8 of the act. Library trustees who have served on boards in the private sector are often surprised at how limiting the exceptions are, especially in regard to personnel issues. Unless the person subject to an evaluation, a disciplinary action, or complaints, asks for a closed session, such matters must be handled in a public meeting. It often takes a great deal of discipline and tact to address these issues in a respectful yet effective way under the glare of public scrutiny. The act also outlines the procedures that must be followed before the board may go into closed session. This is not an easy area of the law. Trustees should make it a practice to consult legal counsel before a closed session is held.

Do committee meetings need to follow the requirements of the Open Meetings Act? It has long been established that library board committees and subcommittees which include a quorum of library board members must comply with the act. What if there is less than a quorum of board members on the committee? Board committees, such as a budget committee, are usually charged with a specific duty and delegated the authority to carry out that duty. Deliberations and decisions are made in the committee meetings which will lead toward the final decision-making by the full board. Recent Michigan Supreme Court decisions indicate that it is probably wise to make sure that all such committee meetings are open to the public.

Trustee Jan Barney Newman asked Jewett if Richardson’s advice applied to all committee meetings, or just the budget committee. He replied that he didn’t think it was Richardson’s intent to single out only budget committee meetings, but he couldn’t speak for her beyond what she had written. [By way of background, the AADL board's committees consist of less than a quorum of board members, and are not open to the public. In the past board members have defended that approach, saying that no decisions are made during those meetings, just recommendations that are brought to the full board.]

Members of the public at the June 17, 2013 Ann Arbor District library board meeting. From left: Donald Harrison, Shoshana Hurand, Lyn Davidge and Irene Dernberger.

Bob Rorke talked about the AADL’s decision to hire Allerton-Hill Consulting, which had been announced at the board’s March 18, 2013 meeting. The firm had been hired to conduct a communications audit for $28,000. A few weeks ago, Rorke said, the Protect Our Libraries political action committee had filed a Freedom of Information Act request for documents related to the contract. After reading through the 634 pages – which he said he did twice – Rorke was somewhat concerned and had several questions. [Documents related to the FOIA response are posted online at the Ann Arbor Area Government Document Repository.]

Rorke referred to the first two objectives listed in the Allerton-Hill proposal. The first objective is to provide high-quality research on voter attitudes on the library. Rorke noted that the reference is to voter attitudes, not patron attitudes. The second objective is to offer high-quality long-term messaging so that the AADL is successful in its public initiatives. He assumed that public initiatives referred to ballot proposals and possibly bond proposals. “Clearly, Allerton-Hill is a political consultant doing political work for a political campaign,” Rorke said – that’s their business. It raises a concern about using public monies for these purposes, he said, and whether it’s legal under Michigan law.

Rorke referred to his experience as a former Ann Arbor Public Schools board member, saying that they had well-defined constraints on spending for political purposes. They were limited to talking about facts, and not doing anything in terms of advocacy. “So my question tonight is where do we stand on this particular contract,” he said. Rorke also wondered if the contract was awarded through a competitive bid, and in particular whether any Michigan firms had been considered. [Allerton-Hill is based Columbus, Ohio.]

The board did not respond to Rorke’s questions during the meeting.

Lyn Davidge told board members that it’s an excellent idea to hold the meetings in various AADL branches, at least for the summer months. However, she hoped that in the future there were be microphones for the board members to use – it had been very difficult to hear what they were saying, “and I have passable hearing,” she said. She had never been to the Traverwood branch, Davidge said, but she’d attended other types of meetings at other branches and microphones were used. It would be helpful to use them, she said.

Don Salberg welcomed the board to his neighborhood, saying that he lived about three blocks from the Traverwood branch and thought it was nice that they were using the facility for their board meeting. Now that the bond referendum for a new downtown library had been defeated, he felt it was time to pay attention to maintenance and upgrades that had been considered for the existing downtown library prior to the November 2012 referendum. Specifically, he suggested increasing power outlets, citing the trend of patrons who are bringing laptop computers and smartphones that need to be charged. The library should also consider upgrades to the heating and cooling systems, as well as the lighting. All of these upgrades would likely cost less than 1% of the library’s reserve fund, he said, and should therefore be affordable.

Communications & Commentary: Board Communications

Board president Prue Rosenthal responded to public commentary that Don Salberg had given at the board’s May 6, 2013 meeting. She cited Salberg’s statement that when Luckenbach|Ziegelman Architects was hired by the library several years ago to develop schematics for a new downtown building, the architects had stated that very few people were coming to the library to do research because they were primarily using the Internet to do that work.

Rosenthal said she went back and reviewed the information that Luckenbach|Ziegelman Architects had provided to AADL, “and I found nothing that said anything like that.” She read from the architects’ proposal: “The incredible wealth of information available on the Internet and its World Wide Web, the speed and accuracy of search like Google, have made the Internet the platform of preference for reference materials.” It goes on to discuss the patrons who can or can not access that information, she said. Rosenthal stated that she wanted to set the record straight.

Near the end of the meeting, Nancy Kaplan, who chairs the board’s communications committee, wondered what members of the public felt about the board’s decision to hold its meeting at Traverwood. She noted that the board intends to hold meetings at other branches, and it would be nice to have some feedback. The July 15 meeting will be at the Pittsfield branch. Margaret Leary suggested that people could give their feedback via the AADL’s website.

Jan Barney Newman encouraged others to check out the digital library services at University of Michigan. [She was referring to the Digital Media Commons at the Duderstadt Center on north campus.] The experience is exhilarating, she said, “and it’s an extension of what libraries can offer.” She said Rob Pettigrew had led a tour, which included a 3-D computer lab, sound lab and video lab.

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

Absent: Rebecca Head.

Next meeting: Monday, July 15, 2013 at 7 p.m. at the Pittsfield branch, 2359 Oak Valley Dr. [Check Chronicle event listing to confirm date]

The Chronicle relies in part on regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the Ann Arbor District Library board. Check out this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle. And if you’re already supporting us, please encourage your friends, neighbors and colleagues to help support The Chronicle, too!

The board had been briefed at its May 6, 2013 meeting by Eli Neiburger, AADL’s associate director of IT and production. He had described that location at 2359 Oak Valley Drive as a “bandwidth backwater,” with about 2% of the Internet connectivity speed compared to other AADL locations.

The resolution approved on June 17 included a transfer of $120,000 from the library’s fund balance to its communications line item in the FY 2013-14 budget. The board had passed its FY 2013-14 budget on May 6, for the fiscal year starting July 1, 2013. The arrangement with Merit is expected to include ongoing annual costs of $2,625.

This brief was filed from the library’s Traverwood branch at Traverwood Drive and Huron Parkway, where the board held its June meeting. A more detailed report will follow: [link]

From left: Prue Rosenthal, the new president of the Ann Arbor District Library board, and board member Barbara Murphy. The seven-member board elected new officers at its Jan. 21, 2013 meeting. (Photos by the writer.)

The board voted unanimously to create two special committees – for facilities and communications. The efforts can be tied to a defeated bond proposal on the Nov. 6 ballot, which the AADL board had hoped would fund a new downtown library.

Both topics were touched on during public commentary, too. Two local architects – Sahba Laal and George Kachadoorian – told the board they’ve prepared a proposal for renovating and perhaps adding to the downtown library building. They hope to present their ideas at a future board meeting. Also during public commentary, Lou Glorie urged the board to consider moving its meeting dates, which typically fall on the same evening as Ann Arbor city council meetings. She also suggested that the meetings be recorded for viewing on Community Television Network (CTN) – an idea that the majority of board members rejected when Nancy Kaplan proposed it nearly two years ago.

In contrast, Kaplan’s most recent proposal – to hold three board meetings this year at library branches, rather than at the downtown location – won unanimous support from the board. The change is intended to make it easier for the public to attend, and to showcase the branches. Those branch meetings will be held at: (1) the Traverwood branch at 3333 Traverwood Drive, at the intersection with Huron Parkway (June 17); (2) the Pittsfield branch at 2359 Oak Valley Drive (July 15); and the Malletts Creek branch at 3090 E. Eisenhower Parkway, east of Stone School Road (Sept. 16).

The Jan. 21 meeting included a swearing-in ceremony – officiated by Libby Hines, chief judge of the 15th District Court – for the four AADL board incumbents who were re-elected on Nov. 6, 2012: Nancy Kaplan, Margaret Leary, Rebecca Head and Prue Rosenthal. The seven-member board also held officer elections. Prue Rosenthal was unanimously elected president. Other officers are Jan Barney Newman (vice president); Nancy Kaplan (treasurer); and Rebecca Head (secretary).

Several members of the Protect Our Libraries group attended the Jan. 21 meeting. Formed in 2012 to oppose the AADL’s bond proposal for a new downtown library, the group subsequently organized as a political action committee (PAC). Kathy Griswold, who launched Protect Our Libraries, was among those present at the board meeting – along with Bob Rorke, who previously served on the Ann Arbor Public Schools board of education with Griswold. Griswold told The Chronicle that the PAC is hiring Rorke to conduct a financial analysis of the AADL.

Swearing In, Officer Elections

The four Ann Arbor District Library board incumbents who were re-elected on Nov. 6, 2012 were sworn in for another four-year term at the board’s Jan. 21 meeting. Libby Hines, chief judge of the 15th District Court in Ann Arbor, administered the oath to Nancy Kaplan, Margaret Leary, Rebecca Head and Prue Rosenthal.

15th District Court chief judge Libby Hines, left, was given a bouquet of flowers by AADL director Josie Parker before administering the oath of office to four incumbent board members elected on Nov. 6, 2012. Seated in the foreground is AADL board member Jan Barney Newman.

Before the ceremony started, AADL director Josie Parker presented Hines with a bouquet of flowers to show appreciation for her work, noting that Hines had received significant recognition over the past year.

That recognition included the American Judges Association’s decision last year to establish the annual Judge Elizabeth Hines Award, to honor judges who have developed innovative strategies to reduce domestic violence. Hines was also the first recipient of that award. She handles a specialized domestic violence docket as well as a street outreach court – a community program that she spearheaded to address issues related to homelessness and the criminal justice system.

Hines said it was a great honor to deliver the oath to people who have been elected to protect such a valuable community resource. She observed that it was fitting for this ceremony to occur on the same day as the presidential inauguration and Martin Luther King Jr. Day.

The four incumbents stood at the front of the boardroom while Hines administered the brief oath of office.

The meeting also included the election of new board officers. Before that took place, Leary – who has served as president for the past two years – gave some remarks. She said she didn’t want to describe the huge accomplishments of AADL, because she didn’t want to take credit for those efforts. Rather, she wanted to thank the people who are responsible for AADL’s success, starting with taxpayers who approved the millage that brings in about $11 million of the library’s $12 million budget each year. She also thanked voters who have elected her to three terms, and individually thanked each of her board colleagues for their work. In her comments to Ed Surovell – the board’s longest-serving member – Leary thanked him for teaching her about the “human political animal.”

Leary thanked the nonprofit Friends of the Ann Arbor District Library and its president, Pat McDonald, as well as the group that had advocated for the Nov. 6 library bond proposal, led by Ellie Serras. Leary’s concluding remarks were directed to AADL staff, thanking several senior staff members individually and noting that Parker and her staff accomplish the library’s mission statement every day. [The AADL vision statement, mission statement and list of values is available on the library's website.]

From left: AADL board members Nancy Kaplan, Margaret Leary, Prue Rosenthal, Rebecca Head are sworn in for new four-year terms. The four incumbents were re-elected on Nov. 6.

Leary received a round of applause from her colleagues and AADL staff, and Parker presented her with a bouquet of red roses. Parker noted that Leary usually gets the last word, but not this time. She said Leary had brought grace in her approach to board leadership, and has a way of speaking to people as though they are the most important person – it was much appreciated, Parker said. On behalf of the board, Rebecca Head also thanked Leary for her service as president.

The board then held officer elections for 2013. Prue Rosenthal, who has served as vice president for two years, was unanimously elected president. Other officers are Jan Barney Newman (vice president); Nancy Kaplan (treasurer); and Rebecca Head (secretary).

There were no competing nominations, and all votes were unanimous.

Board Committees

Several agenda items related to committee work for the AADL board, including resolutions to create two special committees in 2013 – for facilities and communications.

Board Committees: Facilities

The special facilities committee is a continuation of a committee that was originally formed at the board’s April 16, 2012 meeting. At that time, the purpose of the committee was to make a recommendation to the board regarding a possible new or renovated downtown building.

AADL board member Ed Surovell.

At the board’s July 16, 2012 meeting, that committee – consisting of Prue Rosenthal, Nancy Kaplan and Ed Surovell – recommended that the board place a bond proposal on the Nov. 6 ballot to fund a new downtown library. At that same July meeting, the committee’s charge had been amended to include recommending “measures needed to maintain the existing building should a bond to replace the downtown facility fail to pass.”

The $65 million, 30-year bond proposal was rejected by voters, with 41,359 votes (55.17%) against it and support from 33,604 voters (44.83%).

On Jan. 21, Rosenthal gave a very general report on the committee work, saying that it had met and discussed issues concerning the defeat of the bond proposal and how to continue efforts regarding library facilities. The committee’s work in 2013 will focus on all the library buildings and their needs, she said.

Later in the meeting, the board considered a resolution with a new charge for the special facilities committee: “to recommend to the Board steps needed to develop and maintain clean, safe, physical facilities that creatively meet the needs of the community and staff with an emphasis on sustainability, accessibility and flexibility.”

The only discussion on this item was a comment by Leary, who noted that the committee’s charge is taken directly from the AADL’s strategic plan.

Outcome: The board voted unanimously to form the special facilities committee for 2013. In a separate vote later in the meeting, the board voted to appoint Ed Surovell, Rebecca Head and Margaret Leary to serve on that committee. Leary will serve as chair.

The topic of library facilities was also touched on during public commentary at the start of the Jan. 21 meeting. Sahba Laal introduced himself and George Kachadoorian, saying they were two local architects who have prepared a proposal for renovating and perhaps adding to the downtown library building. They did not show the board any designs during public commentary, but Laal indicated that they hoped the board would consider their proposal at a future meeting.

Board Committees: Communications

The board also considered a resolution to create a special communications committee that is charged with making recommendations about a communications audit and plan.

There was no discussion about this item prior to the board vote. After the meeting, Margaret Leary told The Chronicle that the idea to form the committee evolved following the Nov. 6 election, and is a recognition that the AADL needed to do a better job of communicating its work to the public. The work might require hiring a consultant to help formulate a communications strategy.

Issues related to communications are also part of the board’s long-term strategic plan. The three communications goals identified in that plan are:

1. Learn more about who is using the Library, who is not and why.
2. Communicate the value and return on investment to the community from its district library, and how that return might be increased.
3. Market library services to current patrons and non-users.

Outcome: The board voted unanimously to form the special communications committee for 2013. In a separate vote later in the meeting, the board appointed Nancy Kaplan, Margaret Leary and Ed Surovell to serve on the committee.

Board Committees: Appointments

During the meeting, a handout was distributed that listed proposed assignments in the board’s permanent standing committees:

• Budget and finance: Nancy Kaplan (chair), Barbara Murphy, Jan Barney Newman.
• Policy: Barbara Murphy (chair), Nancy Kaplan, Prue Rosenthal.
• Director’s evaluation: Prue Rosenthal (chair), Margaret Leary, Jan Barney Newman
• Executive: Prue Rosenthal, as board president, plus any two additional officers of the board.

In accordance with the Michigan Open Meetings Act, any meeting that includes a quorum of the board must be held in public, with specific exceptions allowed for certain topics to be covered in closed sessions. For AADL’s seven-member board, four members constitute a quorum. Because AADL’s committees have only three members each, the meetings are not required to be open to the public.

Outcome: In separate votes for each committee, the board voted unanimously to make appointments to its standing committees for 2013.

Outreach Efforts

In addition to creating a special communications committee, the board handled another agenda related to the general topic of community outreach – holding three of its 2013 board meeting in library branches, rather than the main downtown building. The issue of outreach was also addressed during public commentary.

Outreach Efforts: Public Commentary

Lyn Davidge told board members she was disappointed that the December 2012 meeting had been canceled. So many views have been expressed by the electorate regarding the library, she said, and there’s a vast public interest in the library and its downtown building. She felt that the library’s constituents deserve regular monthly updates on AADL finances and policy. It’s also important to hear regularly from the board’s special facilities committee, Davidge said.

Lou Glorie spoke to the AADL during public commentary.

Lou Glorie asked the board to consider holding its meetings on different nights, because in its typical schedule, AADL board meetings fall on the same night as Ann Arbor city council meetings. [AADL meetings are usually on the third Monday of the month, starting at 7 p.m. City council meetings are on the first and third Mondays, also starting at 7 p.m.] Glorie noted that the city council was not in session in observance of the Martin Luther King Jr. Day.  The council’s meeting was held the following day instead. She asked that the library board be more sensitive to these holidays when scheduling its meetings.

Glorie noted that many people who attend the city council meetings would also like to attend AADL board meetings, but they can’t. For the sake of increasing citizen involvement, she said, it would help to hold the meetings on a different day. Glorie also encouraged the board to broadcast its meetings on Community Television Network (CTN), as are many public meetings in the city.

By way of background, CTN is a unit of the city of Ann Arbor, and broadcasts a wide variety of public meetings – including several that are held in the same boardroom as the library board meetings, on the fourth floor of the downtown AADL building. Meetings that are currently recorded by CTN in that room include the Ann Arbor Public Schools board and the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority board. At the AADL’s May 16, 2011 meeting, board member Nancy Kaplan brought forward a resolution to videotape monthly board meetings for broadcast. It was defeated on a 2-4 vote, with support only from Kaplan and Barbara Murphy. Ed Surovell was absent from that meeting. No trustees spoke about their reasons for voting against it, although board members had discussed it with AADL staff at the board’s April 25, 2011 session.

Glorie concluded her remarks by saying that she’s a member of the Protect Our Libraries group, and she looked forward to collaborating with AADL.

Protect Our Libraries formed in 2012 to oppose the AADL’s bond proposal for a new downtown library. The group subsequently organized as a political action committee (PAC). [.pdf of the PAC's statement of organization, filed on Dec. 11, 2012] Kathy Griswold, who launched Protect Our Libraries, also attended the Jan. 21 AADL meeting, along with Bob Rorke, who previously served on the Ann Arbor Public Schools board of education with Griswold. Griswold told The Chronicle that the PAC is hiring Rorke to conduct a financial analysis of the AADL.

Outreach Efforts: Board Meetings

On the Jan. 21 agenda was a resolution to hold three of its 2103 meetings at library branches. Typically, the board’s monthly meetings are held in the downtown library at 343 S. Fifth Ave.

AADL board member Nancy Kaplan.

The resolution was brought forward by Nancy Kaplan, who said she thought it was a good idea and hoped it would draw more attention to AADL meetings. The goal is to make meetings easier to attend, she said, and to highlight AADL’s different branches.

Jan Barney Newman recalled that in the past, some board meetings had been held in branches. AADL director Josie Parker confirmed that this was true, but it did not happen on a regular basis.

This year, the proposal called for meetings to be held at: (1) the Traverwood branch at 3333 Traverwood Drive, at the intersection with Huron Parkway (June 17); (2) the Pittsfield branch at 2359 Oak Valley Drive (July 15); and the Malletts Creek branch at 3090 E. Eisenhower Parkway, east of Stone School Road (Sept. 16).

In a separate item, the board was asked to adopt the 2013 meeting schedule. [.pdf of 2013 meeting schedule]

Outcome: The board unanimously approved its 2013 meeting schedule, as well as a resolution directing that three meetings be held at library branches.

Financial Report

In a standard agenda item, Ken Nieman – AADL associate director of finance, HR and operations – gave a brief financial update to the board. Because the board had canceled its December 2012 meeting, this month’s presentation included reports for the months of November and December. [.pdf of November 2012 financial report] [.pdf of December 2012 financial report]

Nieman highlighted a $40,000 donation made to AADL by the nonprofit Friends of the Ann Arbor District Library, which operates a used bookstore in the lower level of the downtown library building.

By Dec. 31, 2012 the library had received nearly 97% of its budgeted tax revenues for the year, or $10.86 million. The library’s unrestricted cash balance was $13.2 million as of Dec. 31, with a fund balance of $8.07 million. Four line items are currently over budget: communications, materials, software, and a line item for “other operating expenses.” All are expected to come back in line with budgeted amounts by the end of the fiscal year, Nieman said.

Board members had no questions about the financial report.

Director’s Report

AADL director Josie Parker began her report by showing a video annual report for the library’s 2011-12 fiscal year. The six-minute video features clips from programs and speakers hosted by AADL, as well as describing new online services and content that’s available for circulation.

Parker also highlighted several items that were included in her written report: [.pdf of January 2013 director's report]

• As part of its annual program to bring second-grade students to the library, this fall 56 classes with 1,278 students came to the library, and 511 library cards were issued. The Friends of the AADL paid for bus transportation for this program, which is designed to introduce students to the public library.
• The Washtenaw Library for the Blind and Physically Disabled at AADL received commendations from the Regional Librarian for the state’s Bureau of Services for Blind Persons, following a site review. The WLBPD@AADL was also recognized for best practices by the National Library Service in its December 2012 newsletter.
• Cynthia Page-Bogen, a Burns Park Elementary music teacher, and local singer/songwriter Joe Reilly highlighted AADL’s Library Songsters program at the Michigan Music Conference this month. The Library Songsters is described on AADL’s website as a program that “brings folk musicians, storytellers and dancers into our public schools to teach these traditional arts to students.” It’s been spearheaded by Ira Lax of AADL’s outreach and neighborhood services staff.

Human Resources Report

DeAnn Doll, manager of finance/human resources for AADL, gave a brief presentation to the board at the Jan. 21 meeting. She described information that was also provided in a three-page handout. [.pdf of HR handout] The handout included an organizational chart, a chart showing the general compensation structure for AADL jobs, and definitions of AADL “regular” and “casual” employees – categories that are typically referred to in other organizations as full-time and part-time positions, respectively.

As of Dec. 31, 2012, the library employed a staff of 227 people.

Board members had only a few questions for Doll. Leary asked how many employees were represented by a union – Doll didn’t have that information immediately at hand. Leary also wondered how many people worked in the different types of positions. Doll went through the entire org chart, listing out the number of people in each group. The largest categories of employees are “casual” staff – defined as employees who work 16-19 hours per week – in the categories of bookshelvers/processors (55 employees), circulation/branch clerks (26), and information desk clerks (20).

In response to another query, Doll noted that the compensation structure had been completed in 2008 and that it would be updated this year.

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

Next meeting: Monday, Feb. 18, 2013 at 7 p.m. in the fourth-floor conference room of the downtown library, 343 S. Fifth Ave. [Check Chronicle event listing to confirm date]

The Chronicle relies in part on regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the Ann Arbor District Library board. Check out this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle. And if you’re already supporting us, please encourage your friends, neighbors and colleagues to help support The Chronicle, too!

This year, meetings will be held at: (1) the Traverwood branch at 3333 Traverwood Drive, at the intersection with Huron Parkway (June 17); (2) the Pittsfield branch at 2359 Oak Valley Drive (July 15); and the Malletts Creek branch at 3090 E. Eisenhower Parkway, east of Stone School Road (Sept. 16). In a separate vote, the board voted to adopt the 2013 meeting schedule.

This brief was filed from the fourth floor conference room of the downtown Ann Arbor District Library at 343 S. Fifth. A more detailed report will follow: [link]

The seven-member board also held officer elections during its Jan. 21 meeting. Prue Rosenthal was unanimously elected president. Other officers are Jan Barney Newman (vice president); Nancy Kaplan (treasurer); and Rebecca Head (secretary).

This brief was filed from the fourth floor conference room of the downtown Ann Arbor District Library at 343 S. Fifth. A more detailed report will follow: [link]

View of the downtown Ann Arbor library building at 343 S. Fifth Ave., from the corner of Fifth and William. The orange cones are tied to construction of what's tentatively called the Library Lane parking structure, being built by the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority. Library staff and board members are again discussing whether to renovate or rebuild this main library location. (Photos by the writer.)

At the board’s April meeting on Monday, AADL director Josie Parker summarized results of the phone survey, which was conducted in early March by the Lansing firm EPIC-MRA. It included 400 responses. She noted that the library’s five-year strategic plan, approved by the board in 2010, includes an initiative related to the downtown building.

The survey indicated that if a vote were taken today – on funding a $65 million renovation or new construction project with a property tax increase of 0.69 mills – 45% of survey respondents would vote yes, and another 15% would lean toward a yes vote. That compares with a total of 37% who said they would either vote no or lean toward no.

Support was even stronger among survey respondents for scaled-back options with lower tax increases. [.pdf of survey results]

“This is a beginning, but it’s a very positive beginning after a long four years,” Parker said, referring to the board’s decision in 2008 to halt redevelopment of the downtown building because of faltering economic conditions.

Later in the meeting, the board voted unanimously to appoint a three-member special facilities committee, charged with making recommendations to the full board.

The April 16 meeting also included a presentation of the draft 2012-2013 budget, for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2012. The budget is based on levying 1.55 mills – unchanged from the current levy, but below the 1.92 mills that the district is authorized to collect.

The budget anticipates tax revenues of $11.203 million for fiscal 2012-13, representing a 1% increase in tax revenues compared to the current projection of $11.091 million for fiscal 2011-12. The overall FY 2012-13 budget revenues – including tax revenue, state aid and other revenue sources – is $12.254 million, compared to the current budget of $12.191 million.

The board is expected to vote on the budget at its May 21 meeting. That meeting is also expected to include a public hearing on the budget, as well as a formal director’s evaluation and renewal of a space use agreement with the Friends of the AADL, which operates a used bookstore in the downtown library’s lower level.

Downtown Library Building

Two items at the April 16 meeting related to ongoing consideration of a possible new or renovated downtown building: (1) a report on the recent survey commissioned by AADL;  and (2) formal formation of a special facilities committee.

By way of background, several years ago the AADL board had spent months evaluating the condition of the downtown building – located at 343 S. Fifth Ave. – and working with the local firm Luckenbach Ziegelman Architects on designing a new structure. But in late 2008 the board voted to suspend redevelopment of the downtown building, citing the shaky economy. [See Chronicle coverage: "Citing Economy, Board Halts Library Project."]

The topic has been addressed at subsequent AADL board meetings: “New Downtown Library? If, When and Where,” and “Board Renews Library Building Discussion.” And in November 2011, the board took a concrete step, voting to provide $45,000 in funding for consultants to help resume the process of possibly redeveloping that downtown building. The building is located south of the city’s new underground parking structure, which is being built by the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority and is now tentatively named the Library Lane Parking Structure.

During her director’s report at this week’s board meeting, AADL director Josie Parker said she wanted to alert the board to a change made in the library’s five-year strategic plan, which the board had adopted in 2010 and which runs through 2015. She noted that the plan is intended as a guide, and has been updated based on changing conditions – for example, changes in electronic publishing or demand for special collections.

One initiative in the plan’s section on facilities relates to the downtown building, Parker said. The plan includes this goal: “Renovate or replace the downtown library with attention to the condition of the existing building; tax base; revenue stream; development of surrounding properties and demographics.”

The library had commissioned the Lansing firm EPIC-MRA to conduct a phone survey regarding attitudes toward the library’s services and facilities. The survey was conducted from March 3-5, 2012 and reflects a sample of 400 responses, with a margin of error of ±4.9%.

Parker said she was pleased that the results showed that this community continues to highly value education and learning, and the position that the AADL holds in contributing to that isn’t questioned. Even in the era of the Internet, the library is considered as relevant as ever, and many people felt it was more relevant, she said.

Ann Arbor District Library director Josie Parker

The survey also revealed that people would be willing to spend more to ensure that this community and its future generations continue to have library services, Parker said. That’s very positive, she added – and it would have been impossible to guess that outcome, given the economy.

The questions on the survey had been very explicit regarding funding for a new or renovated downtown facility, Parker said.

If a vote were taken now – on funding a $65 million renovation or new construction project with a property tax increase of 0.69 mills – 45% of survey respondents would vote yes, and another 15% would lean toward a yes vote. That compares with a total 37% who said they would either vote no or lean toward no. A mill is equal to $1 for each $1,000 of taxable value for a property. [.pdf of survey results]

The survey also asked about support if the project were scaled back, requiring an 0.51 mill increase or an 0.25 mill increase. In those cases, the project received favorable support (yes or leaning to yes) of 61% and 72%, respectively. Results from the survey also indicated an 82% positive rating of the current downtown facility (41% excellent and 42% pretty good). Those who indicated a negative perception of the downtown building cited construction (20%), parking (20%) and “needs upgrades” (15%) as the main reasons for that perception.

Parker stressed that no decision has been made about the downtown building, and that not even a timeframe for making a decision has been determined. ”This is a beginning, but it’s a very positive beginning after a long four years,” she said.

There was no discussion among board members following Parker’s remarks at the board meeting.

Earlier in the month, at a partnerships committee meeting of the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority, Parker had described to committee members the role of the downtown location as an anchor institution for that area of downtown – generating around 600,000 visits annually. Depending on the choices that are made on the future of a downtown AADL facility, she raised the possibility that the figure could substantially increase, perhaps even double.

Downtown Library Building: Special Facilities Committee

Later in the meeting, the board was asked to appoint formally a special facilities committee. The committee includes AADL board members Prue Rosenthal (chair), Ed Surovell and Nancy Kaplan. At the board’s March 19 meeting, Rosenthal reported that the group had already met informally with library staff.

The committee’s charge is to gather information and make a recommendation to the board about AADL’s facilities, including but not limited to a review of information that was collected in the past regarding the condition of the downtown building. The term of the committee is through 2012.

There was no discussion among board members on this resolution.

Outcome: The board unanimously appointed the special facilities committee.

Budget & Finance

There were two presentations at the April 16 meeting related to budget and finance: (1) a monthly financial report, and (2) a report of the draft 2012-13 budget, which the board will be asked to approve in May.

Ken Nieman,  associate director of finance, human resources and operations,  gave both reports. In summarizing the monthly financial results as of March 31, he described it as a normal month. The unrestricted cash balance was $10.49 million, with an operating surplus of $339,229 and a fund balance of $8.05 million. The library has received nearly 98% of its budgeted tax receipts for the year, he reported. [.pdf of March 2012 financial report]

The three line items that are over budget – materials, software licenses and supplies – are expected to fall back in line with budgeted amounts by the end of the fiscal year on June 30. Nieman also noted that the library has received $40,873 in state aid so far this year – about half of what it expects to get by the end of the fiscal year.

Board members had no questions or comments about the monthly financial report.

Budget & Finance: Draft 2012-13 Budget

Nieman also summarized a draft of the budget for the coming fiscal year, beginning July 1, 2012 through June 30, 2013. [.pdf of draft budget]

The budget had been reviewed by the board’s budget and finance committee, chaired by Barbara Murphy. At the board’s March 2012 meeting, another committee member, Ed Surovell, had reported that although the committee typically reviewed the budget in March, there were too many unknowns regarding revenue sources and a draft budget hadn’t yet been developed at that time. Those uncertainties related to local property taxes, personal property taxes, and penal fines.

Subsequently, more information became available, including the county’s preliminary equalization report, which is the basis for determining taxable value of property in the county and in turn indicates how much tax revenue is collected by local taxing entities.

During her committee report, Murphy praised the staff for their work. She noted that the budget is able to increase some line items – including employee salary and benefits – while still collecting an amount lower than the library is authorized to levy. AADL’s millage rate for the current fiscal year is 1.55 mills – below the 1.92 mills that the district is authorized to levy.

Based on collection of that same 1.55 mill tax, the 2012-13 budget anticipates tax revenues of $11.203 million for fiscal 2012-13, compared to the current budget projection of $11.091 million for fiscal 2011-12. That represents a 1% increase in tax revenues. The overall FY 2012-13 budget revenues – including tax revenue, state aid and other revenue sources – is $12.254 million, compared to the current budget of $12.191 million.

Nieman noted that in recent years, because of the uncertainty of state funding for public libraries, the AADL has not included that revenue in developing its budget. For the coming fiscal year, however, funding seems more certain and the budget includes a projected $80,000 in state aid.

On the expense side, employee benefits are budgeted to increase from $1.476 million this year to $1.565 million in the next fiscal year. In part, that reflects an increase in the amount that AADL must contribute to the Michigan Public School Employees Retirement System (MPSERS) – from 24.46% this year to 27.37%. The proposed budget also includes a 3% merit raise pool for employees. In recent years, there has been no increase in merit pay.

In addition to the budget for 2012-13, the library finance staff is projecting a surplus of $292,025 for the current fiscal year.

Budget & Finance: Draft 2012-13 Budget – Board Discussion

There was little discussion among board members. Prue Rosenthal asked for clarification of the revenue line item called “grants and memorials,” which is budgeted for $90,000 in FY 2012-13. The library expects to receive $122,551 from that revenue source in the current fiscal year.

Nieman explained that the main source is from the Friends of the AADL. The library typically receives more from FAADL, as well as from other gifts, but the projection is for $90,000.

Nieman concluded by saying that the budget might need to be revised based on final estimates of tax revenues. AADL director Josie Parker also noted that the budget is an estimate. She’d held a staff meeting earlier in the day focused on the budget that was attended by about 85 employees. The staff understands that this is an estimate, too, she said.

The board is expected to vote on the FY 2012-13 budget at its May 21 meeting. In a resolution related to that meeting, board members set a public hearing on the budget for that meeting.

Outcome: Board members unanimously voted to set a public hearing on the 2012-13 budget for its May 21, 2012 meeting.

Director’s Report: Friends of the AADL

In addition to her comments regarding the EPIC-MRA survey, Josie Parker briefed the board on the space use agreement with Friends of the Ann Arbor District Library (FAADL), a nonprofit that operates a used bookstore in the lower level of AADL’s downtown branch at 343 S. Fifth Ave. Proceeds of the store are given to the library.

At its May 2011 meeting, the AADL board approved a one-year extension to the space use agreement. [.pdf file of FAADL space use agreement] Parker said she plans to bring another one-year extension to the board’s May 21 meeting for approval.

Parker reported that she’d met with FAADL president Pat McDonald to talk about the agreement. McDonald is taking the agreement to the FAADL board to make sure there’s nothing they want to change, but it’s not expected that there will be any revisions, Parker said. This process has become a normal annual routine, she added.

FAADL is doing well, Parker said – door count numbers and revenues are up, as is membership. That’s good for them and good for the library, she said.

During his finance report, Ken Nieman – associate director of finance, human resources and operations – told the board that the library expects to get about $90,000 annually from FAADL.

Director’s Evaluation

Board president Margaret Leary reported that the director’s evaluation committee, which she chairs, had met to discuss the annual evaluation of AADL director Josie Parker. Committee members – Leary, Prue Rosenthal and Jan Barney Newman – had reviewed Parker’s self-evaluation and had discussed it with her.

In executive session at the April 16 meeting, the board as a whole had discussed the evaluation with Parker, Leary said. Leary added that she’ll bring a formal public letter regarding the evaluation to the May 21 meeting.

Public Library Associates

In March, Celeste Choate  – associate director of services, collections and access – and DeAnn Doll, manager of human resources, spoke on a panel at the Public Library Association conference in Philadelphia. The panel focused on the development of the next generation of librarians, and highlighted AADL’s public library associate (PLA) program.

At the April 16 meeting, Choate gave a brief presentation to the board about the PLA program. PLAs are paid part-time positions filled by graduate students who are working on degrees in library science or related fields. The program began about 10 years ago as a partnership with the University of Michigan’s School of Information, focused on providing jobs, training and mentoring to minority students. It has evolved into a broader program and now includes relationships with Wayne State University and several online institutions.

AADL hires eight PLAs each year, working in different areas of the library, including the youth/adult services department, IT and production, and outreach. They typically work for 9 to 18 months, although one position is reserved for a student supported with a full scholarship at UM, who works as a PLA for two years.

Choate said the program provides opportunities for the students to learn the profession, but it also benefits AADL and therefore the public that AADL serves.

PLAs have gone on to jobs in the Library of Congress and other libraries nationwide. AADL has also hired some former PLAs as full-time staff after they’ve graduated, Choate said.

AADL director Josie Parker noted that the PLAs often get more experience than in a traditional job. Some of them manage small budgets, or develop programming. She noted that some have served on selection review committees, which are formed when the choice of material at the library is questioned or criticized. That’s something many people never have the opportunity to do in their career, she said.

The AADL pays for PLAs out of its operational budget, Parker said – there’s no grant money to support the program. [Responding to a later email query from The Chronicle, Parker reported that $90,000 is budgeted annually for the PLAs. She noted that these are positions that the library would need to fill even if the program didn't exist.]

In response to a question from Nancy Kaplan, Choate explained that some PLAs get academic credit for their work, but it’s not automatic.

Kaplan also asked about the difference between PLAs and interns. Parker noted that unlike PLAs, interns don’t work directly with the public – interns wouldn’t staff a reference desk or lead a children’s storytime program, for example. Also, internships are not paid positions. PLAs are paid and take advantage of the professional development opportunities available to regular staff, Choate said.

Jan Barney Newman asked how many libraries have this kind of program. Not many, Choate said. It’s even rarer for a library to support it without being reliant on grant funding, Parker added.

Margaret Leary commented on the benefits of working with students who can bring new ideas and creativity to the library, while learning from experienced staff. She also noted that it’s an example of AADL taking advantage of UM’s outstanding School of Information.

Given that AADL gets contacted by other libraries across the country that are interested in the program, Kaplan encouraged Choate to write an article about it for a professional journal.

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

Absent: Rebecca Head.

Next meeting: Monday, May 21, 2012 at 7 p.m. in the library’s fourth floor meeting room, 343 S. Fifth Ave. [confirm date]

The Chronicle relies in part on regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the Ann Arbor District Library board. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle. And if you’re already supporting us, please encourage your friends, neighbors and colleagues to help support The Chronicle, too!

Eberwhite Elementary School, Ward 5 Precinct 6 on Nov. 2, 2010, election day. Note that the sky is blue, not on fire. (Photo by the writer.)

Margin of victory was also the main interest offered in local races, but with expectations for the identity of the victorious party reversed from the gubernatorial contest. Ann Arbor voters returned Democratic incumbents to five city council seats and the mayorship. For Steve Bean, who mounted an independent campaign for mayor, and for city council challengers Republican John Floyd (Ward 5), independent Newcombe Clark (Ward 5) and Libertarian Emily Salvette (Ward 2), the final raw tally did not offer many bright spots.

Bean managed about 18% of the vote in the mayor’s race. Floyd and Clark drew 22% and 9%, respectively, in the Ward 5 city council race, and Salvette received 21% in the Ward 2 council contest. Unless they are robots, it’s hard to imagine that any of their egos escaped completely unscathed. And despite the fact that Newcombe Clark’s door hangers depict a very cheerful robot with an NC insignia, I do not believe that Clark himself is a robot. So at some level, given their sheer humanity, the results must feel at least a little bit like a personal rejection by the electorate.

On the flip side, it’s hard to imagine that an incumbent like mayor John Hieftje, or Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5) or Tony Derezinski (Ward 2) – perhaps even more so Sandi Smith (Ward 1), Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) and Margie Teall (Ward 4), who were all elected unopposed – could interpret the results as anything less than an overwhelming endorsement of their job performance.

Challengers and incumbents alike would be wrong in those interpretations, I think.

But as far as local races go, far more interesting to me than performing a postmortem on the council and mayor’s campaigns would be to take a look at the race for the library board, where there was little campaigning by the candidates. The outcome was not completely clear until the votes from outside the city and all absentee ballots from the city of Ann Arbor had been counted. That came at around 4 a.m. – almost eight hours after CNN had already called the governor’s race.

Vivienne Armentrout would have been a winning choice of city of Ann Arbor voters who voted in person at the polls. But once absentee ballots and votes from outside the city were included, she narrowly missed joining the board. Instead, incumbents Barbara Murphy, Edward Surovell, and Jan Barney Newman retained their seats.

Why The Local Democratic Landslide?

If challengers are wrong to interpret the local Democratic landslide as a personal rejection, and incumbents are wrong to interpret it as an endorsement of their job performance, what is a reasonable way to look at it? One alternative within easy arm’s reach might be to blame it on straight-ticket voters.

Why the Democratic Landslide: Straight Ticket?

Taking Ward 5 as an example, 38.4% of ballots were voted straight-ticket Democratic, while 7.25%  were voted straight-ticket Republican. That’s a total of 45.6% of all ballots that were voted straight ticket, leaving 54.4% of voters who voted for each race individually.

It’s worth noting that individual race votes will override a straight-ticket selection. By way of example, in Ward 5 a voter could have voted straight-ticket Republican, but chosen to vote for Carsten Hohnke, the Democrat. In that case, the specific Ward 5 selection for Hohnke would have overridden the Republican straight-ticket vote. It’s reasonable to assume, however, that there are not prodigious numbers of voters who make their choices in this way.

If the 54.4% of non-straight-ticket voters had been distributed randomly among the three candidates, then the expected percentage of non-straight-ticket voters for each candidate would have been 18%.

Let’s assume the same straight-ticket behavior that was recorded at the polls, but with a random distribution of non-straight-ticket votes. And let’s further assume that a straight-ticket vote actually resulted in a tally for the Ward 5 candidate from the straight-ticket party. That would give an expectation of the following vote totals: 56.4% for Hohnke, 25.3% for Floyd, and 18% for Clark. Variance from that expected outcome based on random voting can be taken as some indication about attitudes of voters who made a specific selection in the Ward 5 race:

WARD 5 EXPECTED OUTCOME
ON RANDOM VOTE
W/ STRAIGHT TICKET

CANDIDATE  RND STRGHT  EXPT  ACTUAL  VAR
Hohnke     18%  38.4%  56.4%  69%   +12.6
Floyd      18%   7.3%  25.3%  22%   - 3.3
Clark      18%   0.0%  18.0%   9%   - 9.0

-
So even peeling away the straight-ticket voters in this way, Hohnke did 12.6 points better than you’d expect from a random distribution of non-straight-ticket voting. Floyd did slightly worse than you’d expect if non-straight-ticket voting were random – by 3.3 points – and Clark did about half as well as he could have expected.

So the incumbent victory can’t be blamed on the straight-ticket vote – voters who made a specific selection still preferred Hohnke – by a lot. A similar exercise for the mayor’s and the other city council races yields similar conclusions.

Why the Democratic Landslide: Are You Listening?

In these races, I don’t think voters were rejecting challengers personally, or rejecting their ideas. Instead, voters did not perceive that the challengers would represent their interests any better than the incumbents. That perception was based mostly, I think, on the failure of any challenger to run a campaign that would convince voters they’d get better representation than what they’ve already got.

Bean’s campaign for mayor included one kind of message that could have succeeded: I’m here to listen and facilitate discussion. But that message needs to come at the very beginning of a campaign, and then evolve at some point to a message that goes something more like this: I have listened, and here’s what I’ve been hearing people say … and here’s how I can effectively represent that point of view.

I don’t think it’s actually necessary that you go knock on doors of people’s houses as a part of the “listening phase.” In fact, I’m astonished that candidates will actually knock on doors – you couldn’t pay me enough to do it. Selling newspaper subscriptions door-to-door when I was young left a certain mark. So it’s easy to understand why two years ago, when Carsten Hohnke contested the Democratic primary for Ward 5 – his first run for office – he tagged along with a seasoned political veteran, Chris Easthope, who was running for district court judge at the time.

But if not literal door knocking, then there needs to be some alternative, towards the beginning of the campaign, that translates into an engaged listening phase. Maybe it’s hanging door hangers on every door – no knocking required – with a handwritten note that invites people to a series of listening sessions you’ve set up. You’ll also encounter people while you’re out and about hanging stuff on doors. Inevitably, someone will ask you what you’re doing with that batch of door hangers in your hand, and then you’ve already turned the tables in your favor – they have interupted you, instead of the other way around.

Why do I think this early listening phase is a key? Because that’s what I hear local politicians who actually win elections talking about later in their campaigns. They’ll say things like, “When I’m out in the neighborhoods knocking on doors, what I’m hearing is …” The listening phase is important not just in its own right, but also so that you can talk about it later.

I did not discern any real listening phase in Bean’s campaign. He made himself available – but that’s not the same thing as investing the time and energy to seek out and elicit ideas from the people whose vote you want.

Floyd’s campaign included one message that I think could have been presented slightly differently, to convey that he was interested in listening to voters. Part of Floyd’s message was that he would ask probing questions. Fair enough. Close readers of The Chronicle’s meeting reports might reasonably conclude that Hohnke does a relatively poor job at this basic council function. So it was not crazy for Floyd to focus on a weakness of the incumbent.

Floyd’s message however, was presented in the form of a series of his own questions: Have you ever wondered …?  For example, Have you ever wondered who will pay to park 4-5 stories underground in the new underground parking garage? The easy smart-aleck answer is: No, I’ve never wondered that – because I can’t wait to park down there in that mine shaft myself. So Floyd would have needed to ask the quick followup: Okay, then, what have you wondered about? Something similar to Floyd’s message could have been presented early in the campaign, with voters’ concerns front and center: What are your questions … I can get them answered.

Part of Clark’s message actually tackled the listening issue head on. He proposed a mechanism for “open source government” where constituents would use an online interface to vote on the issues they wanted him to work on for just the two-year term he would have served. That might have been more effective, I think, if the interface had been set up very early in the campaign, and during later stages of the campaign, he had been able to talk about what voters’ priorities seemed to be, based on his open source government.

Why the Democratic Landslide: The Sky is Not Falling

I think it’s a mistake to try to sell Ann Arbor voters on the idea that our city’s condition is somehow dire, and that city councilmembers and the mayor are completely derelict in fulfilling their responsibilities as public officials. Even if it is dire, and even if the council is derelict in their duties, that’s probably not the basis of a winning campaign. Why don’t I think so?

Lawton Elementary School, Ward 4, Precinct 9 the morning of election day. Note: The sky is not on fire – it's just a sunrise.

Over the summer, several challengers in local Democratic primary races attempted to appeal to the East Stadium Boulevard bridges as a campaign issue. And it’s plausible to think that pointing at a giant gaping hole in a piece of major infrastructure could convince voters that maybe things have gone horribly, horribly wrong. It didn’t work. I don’t think it was a matter of the specific narrative that the challengers told about the bridges. It’s simply that a big hole in a bridge is not dramatic enough to convince Ann Arbor voters that things aren’t still pretty much okay.

Maybe that says something interesting about Ann Arbor voters, but hey, that’s us. So candidates for local office, take note: We Ann Arbor voters will not be persuaded we are in a crisis, as long as the sky is not on fire, and as along as when we flush our toilets, the shit still disappears. So if you think the sky is merely falling and not actually aflame, go ahead and run for office, but not on that message – keep it to yourself … unless that’s what you hear people telling you everywhere you go.

For incumbents who believe that an overwhelming victory in a local race means a personal endorsement by the electorate of your job performance, I would suggest that most voters still have no idea who you are or what you’ve done – they just know that the sky is not on fire. And that’s good enough. If there’s someone out there who can persuade the electorate that they will be better at listening to us than you are, they’ll be elected, whatever party they represent.

Absentee Voters

For one of the library board races, the voting patterns of absentee voters actually made a difference. But tabulation of absentee ballots for the city of Ann Arbor was not complete until the early morning hours of Nov. 3.

The group of election inspectors who were counting the absentee ballots cast by city of Ann Arbor voters were sequestered in the basement of the county administration building at Main and Ann streets for the whole day that polls were open and they worked through the day. So why did the absentee voter ballots take until 4 a.m. to get counted?

Result tapes from the absent voter counting boards in the lower level of the county administration building.

Several factors contributed to the delay. First, it’s worth noting that the ballots were not processed as one giant batch. That’s because not all paper ballots in the city of Ann Arbor looked the same on Tuesday. Some city residents live in state House District 53, while others live in District 52. Some city residents live in county District 8, while others live in 9, 10 or 11.

So for each ward, the precincts were collapsed into as few absentee voter count boards as possible, based on the form of the ballot. That resulted in 19 different batches of ballots to be processed.

The ballots themselves were physically long. Sending them through the mail required two folds, which meant that each ballot had four creases in the paper. Based on conversations with some of the election workers who performed the absentee ballot counts, the voting machines scanned the creased ballots without great difficulty. Where the creases caused problems was when the ballots dropped into the catchment bin after scanning. Instead of floating gracefully to the bottom, the creased paper tended to snag against the sides or fold back in on itself. A fair amount of time was apparently spent trying to get the ballots to drop cleanly to the bottom of the bin. I watched election workers smoothing out the ballots – one at a time – before they were inserted into the scanner.

Another issue that arose on at least one occasion was a mismatch between the number of paper ballots in a count board – as determined by a hand count – and the number that should have been in the batch, based on the list of names that had been checked off as the ballots had been returned through the mail. The count was off by one. It was a batch of over 1,000 ballots that needed to be recounted by hand – and the hand recount still did not resolve the mismatch. Much discussion ensued about how to handle it. Scott Munzel, a local attorney who was part of the team that processed that count board, wound up writing a memo to the board of canvassers, who would certify the election results the following day, clarifying exactly what had happened. To be clear no special legal skills are required in order to work the elections – Munzel is just coincidentally an attorney.

City clerk Jackie Beaudry and election inspector Jeff Micale, who had directed the day’s activities for counting absentee ballots, were still wrapping things up after the counts were finished and The Chronicle was departing the scene at 4 a.m.

Library Board Numbers

The early returns for the four-year term library board of trustees race showed Vivienne Armentrout narrowly ahead of incumbent Edward Surovell, who were both led by the other two incumbents, Barbara Murphy Jan Barney Newman, in a very tight race. The four were competing for three four-year terms on the board.

The other library board race was fairly clear-cut from earliest results, with Nancy Kaplan eventually winning a two-year term on the Ann Arbor District Library board. Kaplan took just over 55% of the votes in that three-way race against Lyn Powrie Davidge and incumbent Carola Stearns, who was appointed to that seat in 2008 following the resignation of Jean King.

Armentrout wound up finishing fourth in the four-way race, with 16,975 votes or 22.3% of total votes cast. Murphy got 20,404 votes, or 26.8%; Newman had 19,834 votes, or 26.07%; and Surovell got 18,415 votes, or 24.2%.

The earliest returns The Chronicle received were from the city of Ann Arbor polls where people had voted in person. Later, non-city precincts started to be reported to the county clerk’s office, and a lot later, the absentee ballots came in.

Looking at the final numbers, it’s clear that Armentrout did better among the in-person voters (22.65%) than absentee voters (20.91%). She also did better among city residents (23.19%) than non-city residents (20.39%). And among  in-person city of Ann Arbor voters Armentrout did well enough to finish third, outpointing Surovell by 23.75% to 23.13%. [Sheet 2 of this shared Google spreadsheet contains the library board elections results breakdown. It's identical to this downloadable MS Excel version.]

That still doesn’t put Armentrout on the library board, but it’s fun to know.

It makes up for the fun that CNN ruined on election night by calling the governor’s race so quickly.