Baseball field #4 at Veterans Memorial Park will be among fields at three parks that will be renovated, if the Ann Arbor city council approves a recommendation of the park advisory commission. (Photos by the writer.)

PAC unanimously recommended awarding a nearly $1 million contract to RMD Holdings of Chesterfield, Michigan, for renovation of ballfields at Veterans Memorial Park, West Park and Southeast Area Park. If approved by the city council, work would begin after the 2012 summer season. Ann Arbor Rec & Ed – a unit of the Ann Arbor Public Schools – plans to cancel its fall season in light of the project. Teams playing in Rec & Ed programs are the primary users of these fields.

Commissioners also got an update on the status of West Park renovations – specifically, how problems with an underground stormwater system are being addressed. City engineer Nick Hutchinson described plans for repairing the system, saying that legal issues are still being worked out, but the project will likely be completed by July of 2012. A public forum will be held on Feb. 13 at Slauson Middle School to update residents. At a similar meeting held in mid-January, residents raised concerns over whether the situation in West Park has caused flooding in nearby basements.

Also at PAC’s Jan. 24 meeting, commissioner Gwen Nystuen urged the group to consider taking action on the Allen Creek greenway, in light of remarks made by mayor John Hieftje at the city council’s Jan. 23 meeting regarding the city-owned 415 W. Washington property. Colin Smith, the city’s manager of parks and recreation, reported that there’s been discussion about possibly applying for a state grant to help fund the greenway, but the timeline for applying this year is tight. He also suggested that an initial step would be to develop a master plan for the greenway, as recommended in the city’s parks, recreation and open space plan.

Near the beginning of the meeting, commissioner Sam Offen introduced the new executive director for the Leslie Science & Nature Center, Susan Westhoff, who spoke briefly to commissioners. Offen is a board member of the center, a nonprofit that’s located on city property.

Ballfield Renovations

The main action item on the Jan. 24 agenda was a resolution recommending a nearly $1 million contract to renovate softball and baseball fields at three city parks.

If approved by the city council, the $982,333 contract would be awarded to RMD Holdings of Chesterfield, Michigan. That amount includes a $893,030 base bid plus a 10% contingency of $89,303. It was the lowest of four bids received for the project, which will focus on the fenced ballparks at Veterans Memorial Park, West Park and Southeast Area Park. Originally, the city had intended to include fields at Allmendinger Park as well, but bids came in higher than expected, and that work was eliminated from the project.

The renovations have been in the works for more than two years. At PAC’s September 2010 meeting, commissioner David Barrett gave a report on the condition of the city’s ballparks after personally surveying them. [.pdf file of Barrett's ballpark report] According to a staff memo accompanying the Jan. 24 resolution, no major restoration work has been done on the fields in more than 10 years.

Staff from Ann Arbor Rec & Ed, a unit of the public school system, will work with city staff on this project – Rec & Ed programs are the primary users of these fields. Construction will likely begin in mid-August of 2012, with fields ready for use again in early spring of 2013. Rec & Ed plans to cancel its fall season to accommodate the project.

Funding will be drawn from three sources: (1) $250,000 from the approved FY 2012 parks maintenance and capital improvements millage budget; (2) $64,000 from an unobligated remaining fund balance in the expired park repair and restoration millage; and (3) $668,333 from the unobligated fund balance of the existing parks maintenance and capital improvements millage.

Deputy parks manager Jeff Straw and Matt Warba, the city’s supervisor of field operations, briefed PAC on the proposal. Straw noted that in collecting feedback for the 2010 update to the parks, recreation and open space (PROS) plan, the city heard loud and clear that people wanted better maintenance of the fields. The fields – used for baseball, softball and kickball – drew more than 5,000 players during the summer and fall seasons in 2011, Straw said.

Warba noted that when the city had a larger parks staff, renovations of the fields occurred every 10 years. Now, that’s no longer possible to do in-house, he said. Describing the current conditions of the fields, Warba said they are poorly graded, with poor drainage that results in water pooling in the infield, which limits play. The material used for the infield makes it dusty in the summer, and doesn’t allow water to drain quickly when it rains.

For the outfields, the playing surfaces are uneven, Warba said, the turf is in poor condition, and the warning tracks are filled with weeds. Fencing is deteriorating and damaged, and many of the backstops don’t have overhangs.

Upgrades will include regrading the infields, removing the infield lip, replacing the existing infield material with red clay, and installing drainage around the infield’s perimeter. Fencing will be replaced, automated irrigation systems will be installed, field turf will be restored, and concrete will be used for floors of the dugouts and bleacher pads.

Warba told commissioners that Stantec had drawn up designs for the project, and that the lowest “responsible” bid came from RMD Holdings, a company with prior experience doing this work.

Ballfield Renovations: Commission Discussion

Karen Levin asked whether other fields in the city’s parks system can be used to play on during the renovations. Warba said there are 24 other neighborhood fields available. The next phase of this project will be upgrading those as well, he said. Straw added that Rec & Ed decided to cancel its fall season in part because lighting would be a challenge – most of the other ballfields don’t have lights.

Colin Smith, the city’s manager of parks and recreation, noted that no matter how the renovations are handled, it will be inconvenient. Rec & Ed staff felt this would be the best approach, he said. Rec & Ed director Sara Aeschbach told commissioners that players had been surveyed about their preferences, and the strong preference was to preserve the summer season. Using the neighborhood ballparks is too difficult in the fall, because it gets dark earlier. She said players are excited that the fields will be improved.

Gwen Nystuen asked about the material that would be used under the team benches. Will it be a pervious surface? Water drainage is important, she noted. Warba replied that the area will be designed with an angle to allow water to flow off the surface. Pervious materials weren’t considered, he said, though there’s still time to make changes.

Colin Smith, Ann Arbor's parks and recreation manager.

Smith noted that the majority of players wear cleats, which would create problems for any pervious surface. He also pointed out that significant stormwater improvements will be made in that section of Veterans Memorial Park, as part of the Dexter-Ann Arbor street repair project.

Nystuen said that in general, whenever they can install pervious surfaces, it will make a difference in helping address stormwater runoff.

Christopher Taylor asked whether the ballpark renovations would coordinate in any way with the possible skatepark construction at Vets. Smith replied that it’s unlikely the skatepark construction will begin by August – it’s more likely that work on the project will start in the spring of 2013. In response to another query from Taylor, Smith indicated that construction equipment used to build the skatepark isn’t expected to damage the work done on the ballfields.

Mike Anglin said he assumed that the parks staff had coordinated this project with the road work being done along Dexter-Ann Arbor. Yes, Smith said. The stretch of Dexter-Ann Arbor along Veterans Memorial Park, east of Maple, will likely be closed from April through November. That’s another good reason for the fall season to be canceled, Smith said, adding that a lot of coordination will be needed.

Julie Grand observed that rates for using the fields at Fuller and Olson parks increased after those fields were renovated. Would rates also be increased at the ballfields after renovations?

Aeschbach said that Rec & Ed charges fees to cover the cost of prepping the fields for play, and those costs won’t change. It’s up to the city, she said, to set the actual rental rates for the fields. Many user groups no longer play on city fields because of the damaged conditions, she said, so demand isn’t high. Perhaps after the fields are renovated, the city can check to see if those groups will return and pay a higher rate.

Smith noted that this project is in line with the philosophy of taking care of and restoring what the city already owns. The ballfields are eyesores, he said, and not good for playing. In addition, Veterans Memorial Park is located at one of the major entry points into town – the corner of Maple and Dexter-Ann Arbor roads. The area needs attention, he said, and the city is undertaking a major effort to do that, in part to respond to feedback from users.

Outcome: Commissioner voted unanimously to recommend approval of the $982,333 contract with RMD Holdings for ballfield renovations at Veterans Memorial Park, West Park and Southeast Area Park. The recommendation will be forwarded to city council for consideration.

West Park Update

Commissioners had received an update on problems at West Park nearly a year ago, when Craig Hupy – head of systems planning for the city – spoke at PAC’s February 2011 meeting. At that time, Hupy had described the situation with the stormwater infrastructure there as a “catastrophic failure.”

PAC got a more detailed briefing at its Jan. 24 meeting. Parks planner Amy Kuras introduced Nick Hutchinson, a civil engineer and one of the project managers in the city’s public services unit, who was on hand to give an update on the status of swirl concentrators at West Park. It was a shortened version of a similar presentation he’d given at a public forum on the topic earlier in January. Kuras reported that forum had been well-attended.

Nick Hutchinson, an engineer and project manager with the city of Ann Arbor, updated PAC on the status of infrastructure renovations at West Park.

Hutchinson began by giving a brief history of stormwater management in West Park. Originally, north and south branches of Allen Creek flowed over the surface through the land that’s now West Park. In the early 20th century, Washtenaw County built drains through the park to collect stormwater, and directed the flow of Allen Creek into underground pipes. There’s also a sanitary sewer main that runs underground through the park. Hutchinson showed a map that indicated the location of the floodway and floodplain running through the park, as well as the location of the sewer main and county drains.

Over the years, conditions worsened. Deteriorating recreational facilities and uncontrolled flooding in the park led to certain areas being underused.

In 2010, the city renovated West Park, including its bandshell, basketball courts and pathways. The project also included upgrades for stormwater management, Hutchinson said. [The total project, supported in part by federal stimulus funds, cost about $4 million.]

The stormwater portion of the project included installation of some water treatment units – swirl concentrators – on the west side of the park, in the north and south branches of the Allen Creek drain. The purpose was to divert some of the water from the stormwater system, treat it, and remove pollutants before reintroducing it into the system to flow eventually into the Huron River.

Another part of the stormwater management was to remove a nominal amount of water from the stormwater pipes by disconnecting the inlets from North Seventh Street and sending some of the water back to the surface, as it had flowed historically. Water was diverted to a series of bioswales that led to wetlands and ponds as it flowed east through the park.

When construction was being completed around November 2010, Hutchinson reported, a sinkhole appeared on the west side of the park near the drain’s north branch, where the swirl concentrators were located. “These are maybe some of the things that didn’t go quite right on the project,” he said, “that we are still trying to address now.”

The contractor investigated and discovered that the lid on a swirl concentrator had caved in. Cameras were sent down into the other units and it was discovered that all four units on the north branch were in some stage of failure.

This photo, part of the meeting packet for the Jan. 24 park advisory commission, shows the installation of a swirl concentrator at West Park in the summer of 2010.

Hutchinson explained how the swirl concentrators are supposed to work. Water is diverted from the main stormwater pipe through a device called a diversion manhole, containing a 3.5-foot “weir wall” that prevents the water from flowing directly into the main stormwater system. Instead, the diverted water flows into a large cylinder, where it swirls around in a vortex. The solids in the water are forced to the center of the unit, where the velocity of the swirling is slower and the solids settle down to the bottom. The water exits into a pipe on the other side of the unit and is reintroduced into the stormwater system.

During normal conditions or a light rain, most of the water is diverted. But in heavy rainfall, only a portion of the water is diverted – the rest flows over the weir wall and continues directly through the stormwater system, without passing through the swirl concentrators.

A total of eight swirl concentrators were installed – four on the north branch, and four on the south branch. Each unit cost about $66,000, including construction. They were initially installed in June of 2010.

In August of 2010, the four units in the south branch were taken offline because of concerns that the weir wall wasn’t operating correctly, Hutchinson said. The wall wasn’t allowing higher flows to pass through the system during heavy rains. Then in November of 2010, after the swirl concentrator collapsed on the north branch, all four of those units were also taken offline. The weir wall was removed from the diversion manhole, and a bulkhead was installed to block the pipe that led to the swirl concentrators. Since then, water has flowed directly through the stormwater pipes – none of it is diverted to the swirl concentrators. The stormwater system is functioning as it did prior to 2010, Hutchinson said.

In late 2010, the city hired Orchard Hiltz & McCliment (OHM) to look into the situation. OHM began by doing a forensic investigation of the swirl concentrator failures, and determined that the lids of those units were too thin, causing the collapse. ”It was essentially a manufacturing flaw,” Hutchinson said.

OHM also reviewed the prior design of the diversion manholes and weir walls, and conducted some site-specific stormwater modeling to get an understanding of how stormwater behaves in the system. They used that information to present some ideas for improving the system, Hutchinson said. [In November 2010, city council authorized an additional $119,000 for OHM to complete these tasks. That brought total payment to OHM for the West Park project to $324,000. An August 2011 city staff memo indicated that the city expects to recover any additional costs due to the failures, either from the manufacturer or the firm that made the initial design, Beckett & Raeder Inc.]

With a failure of this magnitude there are legal issues, Hutchinson said, including disputes regarding who’s at fault – the contractor (Site Development Inc.) or the manufacturer (AquaShield Inc. and L.F. Manufacturing). He said he couldn’t discuss those issues, except to say that the parties seem to be getting very close to reaching a resolution. The legal issues shouldn’t hold up completion of the project, he said.

Next steps include refining the design of the diversion manholes and weir walls. In addition, residents have raised concerns about manhole covers being popped off during heavy rains, because of pressure from excess water in the system. So OHM is looking at redesigning the system to provide some relief options so that pressure will be eased during storms.

Another public meeting will be held on Feb. 13 at Slauson Middle School. At that meeting, city staff will review OHM’s draft design, and discuss the technical issues that led to the design, Hutchinson said.

In May and June of 2012, the manufacturer will make repairs on the units. Following that, the city will hire a contractor to make the changes that OHM proposes to the diversion manholes and weir walls. City staff hope to have that work completed by July of 2012, Hutchinson said.

West Park Update: Commission Discussion

John Lawter asked whether there are concerns that the shutdown of the swirl concentrators is affecting water detention capability, making it difficult to control floodwater. No, Hutchinson said – the purpose of the swirl concentrators isn’t water detention, but rather to improve the water quality as it flows through.

Are there problems in terms of how much water the units can handle? Lawter asked. If too much water is sent through the units, Hutchinson replied, the water will simply bypass the units and flow over the weir wall, going directly into the stormwater system. Capacity is not a concern. The redesign of the weirs and diversion manholes will ensure that the right amount of water gets in, he said.

Lawter raised the issue of basements flooding in that area, and wondered whether that problem is related to the situation at West Park. An improperly designed weir structure could cause back-ups upstream, Hutchinson said. Any design that’s installed in the future will be studied to ensure that it doesn’t cause any upstream disturbances, he added.

Sam Offen noted that this concern was raised by residents at the January public meeting on West Park. Offen agreed that the issue either needed to be resolved through the new design, or that information should be provided to residents to explain the situation.

Offen also asked how construction would affect the active areas of the park. The work will happen on the park’s west side, Hutchinson said. Access to the ballfield, bandshell and paths will be undisturbed. Kuras added that there are three entrances to the park off of Seventh Street. The north and south entrances will be closed, but the middle entrance will remain open.

Mike Anglin asked whether there was any data related to water flow through the system that was collected prior to the installation of the swirl concentrators. OHM collected flow data in the spring and summer of 2011, Hutchinson said, by putting monitoring devices in the stormwater pipes.

Anglin asked whether the city was making an effort to talk with residents whose basements have flooded. Hutchinson replied that the current project doesn’t entail working with residents. The project is specific to West Park infrastructure.

Kuras added that at the recent public forum on the West Park situation, some people brought up the issue of basement flooding. City staff knows that they need to address the broader issues related to the entire Allen Creek area upstream from West Park, she said.

Hutchinson noted that some neighborhoods – like Maple Ridge – experienced flooding in 2011. At that time, the pipes had been returned to their pre-2010 condition, he said, so the flooding they experienced wasn’t related to changes at West Park, he said.

Report on Fuller & Olson Athletic Fields

Commissioners received an update on conditions of the city’s Fuller Park and Olson Park athletic fields, which were renovated in 2009-2010. The first post-renovation scheduling of play occurred in 2011, from March through November.

From left: Jeff Straw, Ann Arbor deputy parks and recreation manager; Matt Warba, supervisor of field operations; and Jessica Black, parks and recreation customer service manager.

Jessica Black, parks and recreation customer service manager, described how the six Fuller Park fields were used during the spring, summer and fall playing seasons. [.pdf of Fuller fields layouts in 2011] She noted that the two fields at Olson Park are always used as full fields, but that some Fuller Park fields are split into half fields. There are also seasons when the fields are taken out of play and allowed to “rest.”

Black provided a breakdown of the types of users, noting that “soccer is definitely our No. 1 use.” Teams playing soccer accounted for 65% of the use of fields, 15% were lacrosse teams, and the remaining 20% was split between flag football and ultimate frisbee.

A total of 15 teams used the fields throughout 2011, including eight teams that returned from previous years and seven new teams. There were youth and adult teams, and University of Michigan club sports.

City staff had determined that 35 games per field per season was the maximum number of games that should be allowed, in order to maintain the condition of the fields, Black reported. For the three seasons in 2011, Olson and Fuller fields were used at about 79% capacity, she said. At the six Fuller fields, 679 games were played out of a possible 875. At Olson’s two fields, 175 games were played out of 210 possible games.

Jeff Straw, the city’s deputy manager of parks and recreation, briefed commissioners on revenues from the fields. Rates were set at $60 per hour for most of the full fields at Fuller and for the two Olson fields. Half-field rates at Fuller were $40 per hour. For field #6 at Fuller, the rental fee was $32 an hour for a full field, and $20 an hour for a half field. [Previously, rates ranged from $16 an hour to a high of $31.50 an hour, depending on a variety of factors, including residency (Ann Arbor residents were charged lower rates) and time of day (rates for prime time, between 4-8 p.m., were higher). PAC recommended rate increases at its January 2010 meeting.]

Based on the maximum number of games allowed, the six Fuller fields could have brought in a maximum of $70,280. But because the fields were not used at full capacity, Fuller fields recorded $54,608 in revenues during 2011. Of that, $5,400 was later refunded due to weather cancellations, Straw said.

For Olson’s two fields, $21,000 in revenue was collected, but $1,500 was refunded because of cancellations. Those two fields had the potential to bring in $25,200 in revenues, if played to capacity.

Factoring in refunds, the eight fields at Fuller and Olson had a total of $68,708 in revenues during 2011.

Total estimated expenses were $82,688. Major line items were administration and scheduling costs ($25,000), mowing ($18,368) and fertilizing/aerification/overseeding ($18,800).

Commenting on the financials, Matt Warba – the city’s supervisor of field operations – said he didn’t think it was anyone’s intent to make the fields self-sufficient. But it’s getting close, he added, and that’s encouraging.

Warba also noted that April and May of 2011 were especially rainy months – the city had to cancel play on 25 days out of a 45-day period because of rain. Warba also noted that the irrigation system at Olson failed during the summer, resulting in turf loss. That system has been repaired.

Report on Fuller & Olson Athletic Fields: Commission Discussion

Karen Levin asked how 2012 expenses are expected to compare to 2011. Warba replied that costs generally are expected to remain static.

Sam Offen wondered how revenues compared to previous years. Colin Smith, manager of parks and recreation, said it would be difficult to compare since the rates were lower in the past, prior to the renovations. He hadn’t asked his staff to bring those figures.

Gwen Nystuen asked how long it would be before the city would need to invest in another major renovation of the fields. Warba replied that it would be possible to maintain the fields without major renovations. They’re taking a cautious approach, he said, by resting fields periodically so that they can be kept in good condition. The city staff has to balance demand for the fields against maintenance.

Julie Grand, chair of the Ann Arbor park advisory commission.

Nystuen noted that because the fields are fenced in, that keeps people off when it’s raining. That was the intent, Warba said. Olson fields aren’t fenced, however, and in some cases players have jumped the fences at Fuller, he said. One field had to be taken out of play for a month because of the damage caused when people played on a field that was supposed to be closed. Warba said the city will likely hire a temporary worker next season to patrol the fields – it would be cheaper than having to repair damage to a field if players jump the fence.

John Lawter asked whether the city is meeting the need for this kind of play, or could they do more? Smith noted that the fields are at 79% capacity, so there’s space available. However, there’s more demand than capacity for prime time slots – between 4-8 p.m. Black reported that the staff has set the maximum number of games at 35 per field per season. If the city were to add more games in order to accommodate more teams, that might not ultimately meet the teams’ needs, because the condition of the fields would deteriorate. “It’s a balancing act,” Black said.

Smith said the city wants to avoid having to make another major investment in renovating the fields. If demand is high, it’s possible to look at adding fields in other parks, he added, or possibly to acquire more land for that purpose.

Julie Grand asked if the city is doing outreach to groups that might have a lower impact on the fields – sports that don’t involve as much running and kicking as soccer, for example. Black said that at this point, there hasn’t been that kind of outreach.

Gwen Nystuen called the overall report encouraging.

Communications: Allen Creek Greenway, Leslie Science Center

Every meeting includes opportunities for public commentary and communications from commissioners and staff. No one spoke during either of the slots for public commentary at the Jan. 24 meeting.

Communications: Allen Creek Greenway

Gwen Nystuen brought up the issue of the Allen Creek Greenway. She noted that mayor John Hieftje had mentioned there might be action taken soon on the city-owned 415 W. Washington property, which has been identified as a potential part of a greenway. He’d made these comments at the Jan. 23 city council meeting. She wondered if there was any additional information about that.

[Hieftje had indicated that talks were continuing with the group that had been formed to look at the city-owned 415 W. Washington lot. The council passed a resolution giving direction for the effort at its Feb. 1, 2010 meeting, nearly two years ago. The resolution calls for the arts and greenway communities to lead fundraising and development of a vision for the parcel’s use. The site, across from the YMCA, is currently providing revenue to the city as a surface parking lot. It was previously the city’s maintenance yard. At the Jan. 23, 2012 council meeting, Hieftje said the group continues to meet – the biggest challenge remains the building. He said a report on the status of the project would be given at the end of February.]

Christopher Taylor, an ex-officio member of PAC who also serves on city council, said he didn’t have any further information at all. Nystuen then reminded commissioners that the greenway is one of PAC’s priorities. The City Apartments project at First and Washington, by the developer Village Green, is moving ahead, she said. That residential development will include parking spaces, she added, which will free up the need for spaces at the city-owned First and William surface lot that’s located in a floodway. That lot could become part of a greenway, she observed.

Park commissioner Gwen Nystuen and city councilmember Mike Anglin, an ex-officio member of the commission.

The time has come for PAC to actively pursue the greenway, Nystuen said, adding that the city council passed a resolution recently in support of a greenway.

Colin Smith, the city’s parks and recreation manager, noted that a council resolution was passed on Aug. 4, 2011 expressing general support for the idea of a greenway. There have been conversations, he said, about applying for a grant from the Michigan Dept. of Natural Resources Trust Fund, to turn the 415 W. Washington site into a park. The city staff is looking into that. The process would be similar to the way that the trust fund application for the skatepark had been handled, Smith explained. Staff would first come to PAC for a recommendation to apply. That recommendation would be forwarded to city council, which would need to approve the application.

Smith noted that one issue for the 415 W. Washington property is that it’s located in a historic district – the Old West Side. So in addition to PAC, the city would need a recommendation from the historic district commission too, he said.

Finally, Smith reminded commissioners that the parks, recreation and open space (PROS) plan, which PAC approved, recommends that the first action should be development of a master plan to guide the creation of a greenway. That point bears consideration, he said.

Nystuen responded by asking what PAC could do to move this process along. This year her term on the commission ends, she said, and the greenway has been a priority for her for both of her terms on PAC. That’s why she feels some urgency about this issue, she added.

What PAC decides as a body is up to commissioners, Smith replied. They can give direction to develop a greenway master plan, or tell staff to move ahead on the grant application before a master plan is developed. Nystuen asked how other commissioners felt – should they put forward a resolution?

Mike Anglin, a city councilmember who’s a non-voting ex-officio member of PAC, noted that the city’s environmental commission – on which he also serves has previously served – sometimes deals with issues related to parks. Perhaps a subcommittee of the two commissions could be formed to discuss the greenway, he said. There’s federal funding available for water management, he said, which might be one aspect of the greenway. Anglin also noted that the arts community has been interested in that site – they should be included in the dialogue, too.

There are several interested parties, Smith said – parks, the county drain commissioner, the University of Michigan, the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority, the railroad owners, the Arts Alliance and others. That’s why having a master plan would be useful.

Julie Grand asked about a timeline for the grant application. It’s due April 2, Smith said. That means it would be necessary to secure a PAC recommendation in February, and city council approval in March. It’s also unclear how the historic district commission would fit into this process.

No doubt there’s strong interest in the community, Smith said. But it’s uncertain how to manage the project at this point. He noted that a task force had been formed in 2007 to evaluate development of a greenway that might incorporate the 415 W. Washington site as well as city property at 721 N. Main and First & William. The group couldn’t come to a consensus for the best use of 415 W. Washington, he said, so no decision was made. It seems like a public dialogue is needed to figure out the best option, he said.

Nystuen said she wanted to point out that the near-downtown area on the city’s west side has a shortage of green space. New residential developments will be bringing hundreds of young people downtown, so there will be an increased interest in recreational areas, she said. It makes sense to move forward with a greenway adjacent to downtown. Nystuen said it sounded like the best approach would be to put together a resolution for PAC’s February meeting.

Smith said he’s still waiting on direction regarding whether to apply for the grant. If he gets that direction, then of course the staff would bring a resolution to PAC, he said. Separately, PAC can do what it wants regarding the greenway – that’s not for him to say, Smith told commissioners.

Communications: Leslie Science & Nature Center

At the beginning of the Jan. 24 meeting, commissioner Sam Offen introduced the new executive director for the Leslie Science & Nature Center, Susan Westhoff. [Offen is a board member of the center.]

Sam Offen, an Ann Arbor park advisory commissioner, and Susan Westhoff, executive director of the Leslie Science & Nature Center. Offen also serves on the center's board.

Offen said that Westhoff started about a month ago and is already doing an excellent job. He noted there had been a recent public meeting at the center to discuss a master plan for pedestrian access there. [The center was previously part of the city's parks system, but was spun off as a separate nonprofit in 2007. The city continues to own the center’s property and buildings.]

Westhoff spoke briefly to commissioners, noting that the center and the city had a long history. She said she’s been working in nonprofit administration for about 15 years. She grew up in Canton and graduated from the University of Michigan. Her first nonprofit experience was at the University Musical Society, and she said she’s glad to be back in Ann Arbor.

Westhoff said she’d be happy to share the plans for the pedestrian pathway improvements that are being developed. Among other things, it will make paths to the center’s raptor enclosures ADA compliant. She also noted that the center has many great public programs, and highlighted the Feb. 12 “Hoo’s Your Valentine?” event that features the center’s barn owl.

Julie Grand, PAC’s chair, thanked Westhoff for coming and said she looked forward to collaborating.

Present: Doug Chapman, Julie Grand, Karen Levin, Gwen Nystuen, John Lawter, Sam Offen, councilmember Mike Anglin (ex-officio), councilmember Christopher Taylor (ex-officio). Also Colin Smith, city parks manager.

Absent: David Barrett, Tim Berla, Tim Doyle.

Next meeting: PAC’s meeting on Tuesday, Feb. 21, 2012 begins at 4 p.m. in the city hall second-floor council chambers, 301 E. Huron St., Ann Arbor. [confirm date]

The Chronicle survives in part through regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the Ann Arbor park advisory commission. If you’re already supporting The Chronicle, please encourage your friends, neighbors and coworkers to do the same. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Inter-fund Loan for Municipal Building

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

Inter-fund Loan: Background

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Inter-fund Loan: Council Deliberations

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

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

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

Charter Amendment: Retirement Board Composition

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

Retirement Board Composition: Background

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Retirement Board Composition: Council Deliberations

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Anti-Idling Law?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

University of Michigan Football Traffic Controls

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

University of Michigan Football Traffic Controls: Background

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

University of Michigan Football Traffic Controls: Council Deliberations

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Ward Boundary Changes

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

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

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

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

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

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

Ward Boundary Changes: Public Hearing

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

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

Ward Boundary Changes: Council Deliberations

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

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

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

Medical Marijuana License Application Fees

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

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

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

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

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

Medical Marijuana Application Fees: Public Commentary, Hearing

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

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

Medical Marijuana Application Fees: Council Deliberations

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

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

Medical Marijuana: Licensing Board Nominations

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

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

Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority

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

Ann Arbor DDA: Nominations

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Ann Arbor DDA: Construction Complaints

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Act 88 Economic Development Tax

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

Act 88 Economic Development Tax: Background

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

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

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

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

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

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

Act 88 Economic Development Tax: Council Deliberations

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

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

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

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

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

West Park: Flooding, Tennis Courts

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

West Park: Public Commentary on Flooding

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

Maple Ridge, looking south.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

West Park: Tennis Courts

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

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

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

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

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

Fuller Road Station

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

Fuller Road Station: Public Commentary

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

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

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

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

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

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

Fuller Road Station: Council Commentary

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Green Communities Grant

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

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

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

Small Claims Policy

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

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

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

Water Supply Bonds

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

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

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

Recision of CUB Requirement

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

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

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

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

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

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

Pedestrian Easement on Liberty

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

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

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

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

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

Rezoning of Annexed Property

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

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

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

Communications and Comment

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

Comm/Comm: Remembering Gary Lillie

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

Comm/Comm: Golden Paintbrush Awards

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

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

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

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

Comm/Comm: Sidewalks

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

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

Comm/Comm: Recall Snyder

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

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

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

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

Russ Schwartz in the role of Iago in the Penny Seats Theatre Company's current comedic production in West Park of "Goodnight, Desdemona (Good Morning, Juliet)." Not a line from the play: "Tis I who'll mop the water up, before it flows to Allen Creek." (Photos by the writer.)

The swirl concentrators, which help remove suspended solids from water entering the city’s stormwater system, were a part of major renovations to the park’s landscaping and draining systems. Federal stimulus funds helped pay for much of the work.

A recent city staff memo indicates that the city expects to recover any additional costs due to the failures – either from the manufacturer or the design firm. Replacement of the swirl concentrator units is not expected to be complete until early in the 2012 construction season, with the park restored to full public use at that time.

Meanwhile, the park enjoyed a grand re-opening earlier this summer, and is accessible for all functional purposes, including performances in the bandshell.

Two theater groups are sharing the stage this summer: Blackbird Theatre and the Penny Seats Theatre Company.

This weekend wraps up the Penny Seats production of “Goodnight, Desdemona (Good Morning, Juliet).” Performances still remain on Saturday and Sunday (Aug. 13-14). The Chronicle shares a few images from the comedy after the jump.

Left to right: Desdemona (Melynee Weber), Constance (Lauren London), and Juliet (Sarah Leahy).

Sword mail. Desdemona (Melynee Weber) delivers a message to Constance (Lauren London).

Romeo (Matt Cameron) and Juliet (Sarah Leahy) lavish affection on their pet turtle, Hector.

Romeo and Juliet are horrified that their struggle over Hector the turtle has torn him asunder. (That is a prop. No West Park fauna was harmed during production of the play.)

One of two metal tree sculptures near the band shell in West Park, funded by Ann Arbor's Percent for Art program. The tree sculpture stands about 10 feet tall, and is located on tiered seating that's built into the hill across from the band shell. (Photos by the writer.)

At issue was the fact that the 2011 annual public art plan, which includes the mural pilot program, was never officially approved by Ann Arbor city council. Though the plan was approved last year by AAPAC and forwarded to city staff, it was never placed on council’s agenda.

Some commissioners questioned whether approval of the plan is needed, noting that the West Park public art project – which was also in the 2011 plan – moved ahead and was actually completed last fall. Ultimately, it appears the mural program can move forward with plans to hold public meetings regarding proposed sites in Allmendinger Park and along Huron Parkway, but no contracts can be signed with artists until the council approves the newest annual plan – for fiscal year 2012, which begins July 1. AAPAC approved that plan at the April 27 meeting.

In other business, the West Park art project was brought up again as a separate item of discussion – commissioners learned that the project had incurred $5,438 more in expenses than had been budgeted, because of unanticipated administrative costs.

The commission also got updates on: (1) the Herbert Dreiseitl water sculpture, which is expected to be installed in front of the municipal center in August; and (2) public art being planned for the proposed Fuller Road Station.

Commissioners also discussed promoting the annual Golden Paintbrush awards – nominations are being sought to recognize local contributions to public art. Nomination forms can be downloaded from AAPAC’s website, and are due May 30.

In its final action of the meeting, AAPAC elected Marsha Chamberlin as chair, though she did not attend the meeting. She has served as acting chair for several months, and had agreed to step into the permanent role.

Mural Program: What’s the Plan?

During an update on the mural pilot program, which AAPAC approved at its Nov. 9, 2010 meeting, Jeff Meyers noted that the commission had held a special meeting and approved the budget and two sites recommended by the mural task force. [See previous Chronicle coverage: "Art Commission Votes Again on Mural Sites," "Public Art Group Picks Two Mural Sites" and "Public Art Mural Program in the Works"]

Meyers reported that he had made a presentation about the project at the April 26 meeting of the city’s park advisory commission, because the proposed sites – on a building in Allmendinger Park and on a retaining wall along Huron Parkway, near Huron Hills golf course – were either in or adjacent to city parks. Public meetings on May 18 and May 25 are planned to get community input, he said, and then the task force will move to the request for qualifications (RFQ) stage to start the artist selection process. [No additional details about the times or locations of those meetings are yet available. Update: A meeting for the mural proposed at Allmendinger Park’s shelter structure will be held on Wednesday, May 18 from 6-7:30 p.m. at the Allmendinger Park shelter. A meeting for the northern retaining wall on the east side of Huron Parkway will be held Wednesday, May 25 from 6-7:30 p.m. at Huron Hills Golf Course, 3465 E. Huron River Drive.]

Meyers asked about who would take responsibility for the RFQ. When told the task force would need to handle it, Meyers said it seemed untenable that if you championed a project, you’d need to write the RFQ. Cathy Gendron offered the West Park RFQ as a template.

Cheryl Zuellig noted that when the city hires a public art administrator, the task force would coordinate with that person on the RFQ. [The city is in the process of hiring a public art administrator. That part-time job has been vacant since mid-2010.] The administrator would put together the RFQ with input and feedback from the task force. It would ultimately be approved by AAPAC before being issued.

At this point Venita Harrison – a management assistant who works for Sue McCormick, the city’s public services administrator, and who currently serves as support staff to AAPAC – mentioned that there might be a problem with the mural program. The city council had never officially approved the 2011 public art plan, she said – until that happened, her understanding was that the project couldn’t move forward.

She said the process of getting city council approval likely fell through the cracks during the transition last year, after former public art administrator Katherine Talcott stepped down from that role. More recently, a councilmember had read media reports about the mural program and raised questions about who had authorized it, Harrison said. They tried to find a record of when the city council had approved the 2011 annual plan – which included the mural program – but the plan didn’t turn up in records of council proceedings.

Harrison noted that McCormick had sent an email to her and to Marsha Chamberlin, acting AAPAC chair, earlier that day to explain the situation. [.pdf of McCormick's email]

Several commissioners then questioned whether city council approval of the plan was needed in order for a program like this to move forward. Cheryl Zuellig noted that the plan serves as a guideline, but doesn’t prevent them from taking on other projects. Meyers pointed to the West Park public art project, which was also in the 2011 plan and had already been completed.

Elaine Sims observed that the mural projects also fell below the $25,000 threshold required for approval by the council.

Harrison said the only thing that might change is the timeline for the mural program, which might have to be pushed back until after the council approves AAPAC’s 2012 annual plan in June or July.

Meyers replied that he didn’t feel they needed to delay, and that he’d move ahead with the public meetings for the mural sites unless he received a directive from the city not to do that. If it turns out that AAPAC can’t move ahead on projects until the council approves AAPAC’s next annual plan, they might as well not meet again until that happens, he said. Zuellig agreed.

Malverne Winborne, one of the newer commissioners, suggested that they develop a flow chart to outline these processes, including the annual plan and a separate annual report that’s also required under the Percent for Art ordinance. “I’m totally confused now,” he said.

Meyers noted that it seems like at every turn, there’s new information that prevents projects from moving forward. Noting that they volunteer their time as commissioners, he indicated that at some point, it wouldn’t be worth the time if they can’t get anything accomplished.

The relevant section of the city ordinance establishing the Percent for Art program, approved by the city council in 2007, states:

1:837 – Oversight body.
(1) The oversight body shall be the Ann Arbor Public Art Commission as established by section 1:238 of chapter 8.
(2) The oversight body shall:
(A) Promulgate guidelines, subject to the approval of city council, to implement the provisions of this chapter, including procedures for soliciting and selecting public art and for determining suitable locations for public art;
(B) By April 1 of each year, submit to city council a plan detailing potential projects and desirable goals to be pursued in the next fiscal year;

[.pdf file of Public Art ordinance]

Zuellig said it seemed like the role of the board chair to get further direction from McCormick on this issue. Meyers again wondered how the mural projects differed from the West Park project, which had been allowed to move forward.

AAPAC commissioner Margaret Parker: "It's public art – it's not fast art."

Margaret Parker, who had served as AAPAC chair until December 2010, noted that the public art in West Park had been a small part of a much larger effort – a major renovation of the park. In the case of the murals, it was a totally new program, she said, and the city council hadn’t been informed of it. She said she wanted to plead for patience, and an understanding that things don’t always happen as they’d like. “It’s public art – it’s not fast art,” she said.

Zuellig observed that the mural program has been discussed at public meetings for months. The Fuller Road Station project is in the same situation, she said. She offered to communicate with Chamberlin – the acting AAPAC chair who did not attend the meeting – and ask her to seek clarification from McCormick.

Gendron noted that if the mural task force has to wait until June or July to put out an RFQ, that will essentially postpone the whole project an entire year.

Meyers agreed, adding: “This is the hardest $20,000 we’ve ever spent.” [AAPAC has budgeted $10,000 for each mural site.]

The following day, Chamberlin sent an email to commissioners and The Chronicle, saying that she had spoken to McCormick and they had agreed on the following:

If the mural project was included in the 2011 plan, that plan was never presented to council and therefore not approved. That process should have occurred last June/July, BUT it is water over the dam.

We have a plan that you all approved last night, and it will go to council very soon. Council could approve or postpone the approval of the plan. Sue feels the latest it will be approved is June 6, but let’s let the process take its course.

In the meantime, all activity in support of the mural project can move forward – we just cannot get contracts until after the plan is approved.

2012 Annual Art Plan

In introducing the topic of the annual plan after discussion of the mural program, Cheryl Zuellig described it as the “now-more-important-than-ever 2012 public art plan.” [.pdf of draft FY2012 annual plan at start of AAPAC's April 27 meeting]

The plan was developed at an AAPAC retreat in March, facilitated by Connie Pulcipher of the city’s systems planning staff. What emerged from that discussion was a list of 11 projects, which were supported by those who attended the retreat, Zuellig said. Jeff Meyers clarified that they couldn’t have voted on the plan at that March retreat because it wasn’t a regular meeting of the commission.

The group then did a fair amount of wordsmithing on the items. They kept all but one from the original draft. In general terms, the projects in the plan are:

1. Exterior art at the justice center/city hall
2. Interior art at the justice center/city hall
3. Re-installation of the Kamrowski mural in the justice center/city hall
4. Public art project at the Fuller Road Station
5. Mural pilot program
6. River Art Trail, including the Gallup Canoe Livery and Argo Headrace
7. Mural on the Manchester Road elevated water tank
8. Public art at Stadium Bridges
9. Sun Dragon repairs/replacement at Fuller Pool
10. Public art at bus stops, in collaboration with AATA

Wiltrud Simbuerger, AAPAC's newest commissioner.

Commissioners voted unanimously to eliminate an 11th project from the list – to explore project opportunities at County Farm Park, focusing on an educational/interpretative project. Several commissioners said they couldn’t remember discussing this project at the retreat.

Commissioners also designated a “champion” for each project – someone who’ll guide it through the planning process.

Outcome: Commissioners voted unanimously to approve the 2012 annual public art plan. It will now be submitted to the city council for approval.

Budget Report: West Park

Unanticipated expenses for the West Park public art project led to a discussion on Wednesday about how the budgeting process works.

Two metal tree sculptures installed last fall in West Park – the first project completed under the city’s Percent for Art program – incurred $5,438 more in expenses than had been budgeted, according to a budget report discussed at AAPAC’s meeting. [.pdf file of Percent for Art budget as of April 1, 2011] AAPAC was asked to approve the transfer of funds from the parks millage Percent for Art budget line to the West Park project budget line.

The project had a budget of $10,000. A budget report provided at the Nov. 9, 2010 meeting – after the sculpture by artist Traven Pelletier had been installed – indicated that expenditures for the project were $14,890 at that time.

Connie Brown, chair of AAPAC’s projects committee, told commissioners on Wednesday that the extra charges had been a surprise. They were related to hours logged by Katherine Talcott, the city’s former public art administrator who now works as a project manager for the city. Brown said AAPAC had been under the impression that project management for the public art would be handled by Amy Kuras, a city parks planner who was project manager for the recent renovations at West Park.

Several commissioners expressed concern that they hadn’t been informed by city staff to expect these expenses. Cheryl Zuellig said there needs to be an understanding of what will be charged to the project when the budget is set. Otherwise, there’s no accountability and “that’s not a great situation.”

Jeff Meyers agreed, saying there need to be clear budget parameters for each project. For the mural program that he’s leading, Meyers said he was told by Sue McCormick to build in 50% of the budget for project management expenses. But it’s still not clear who’ll be doing the work, he said. For example, when they hire a new public art administrator, does that person’s salary cover project management – or is that an additional expense? [The Percent for Art budget includes a separate line item for administrative expenses.]

View of a metal tree sculpture in West Park.

Meyers said they need to clearly define the art administrator’s duties, to ensure that Percent for Art projects aren’t charged for tasks that should be done by the administrator – otherwise, he said, it seems like double-dipping.

Malverne Winborne suggested asking city staff to report to AAPAC if anything pushes expenses over the amount budgeted for a project. He asked how administrative costs have been handled in other projects, like the work by Herbert Dreiseitl. Zuellig told him it’s been handled differently for each project – that’s why there’s confusion.

Margaret Parker made a motion to transfer the funds from the parks millage Percent for Art budget to the West Park budget. Meyers asked whether the funds had to come from the parks budget. Strategically, he said, perhaps they should consider whether it’s possible to take the funds from a larger pot.

[The Percent for Art program captures 1% from the budget of all city capital projects, to be set aside for public art. As stipulated by the ordinance that governs the Percent for Art program, art projects must relate to the capital projects from which funding is drawn – for example, public art funded by parks must have a parks theme, or be located in a park.]

While the Percent for Art parks millage fund has a remaining balance of $17,479, some of the other funds have a considerably higher balance. The balance for the street millage Percent for Art fund is $409,844, for example.

Connie Brown noted that some of those balances don’t reflect funding that has already been earmarked for other projects. Meyers replied that it’s difficult to plan without knowing what those earmarks are.

Elaine Sims wondered what would happen if they simply didn’t approve the transfer. She said she wasn’t advocating for that, but was curious. Brown noted that the money had already been spent, so the funds needed to be transferred.

Outcome: AAPAC voted unanimously to transfer $5,438 from the parks millage Percent for Art budget to the West Park budget.

Project Updates – Dreiseitl, Fuller Road Station

Commissioners got updates on two major projects during the April 27 meeting: the water sculpture at the city’s new municipal center, and public art at the proposed Fuller Road Station.

Project Updates: Dreiseitl

AAPAC received a written report about the water sculpture they commissioned in 2009 by German artist Herbert Dreiseitl, to be installed in front of the new municipal center at Fifth and Huron.

Herbert Dreiseitl, right, with one of the polystyrene forms that will be used to make sand molds for the sculpture's bronze castings. The sculpture will be installed in front of Ann Arbor's municipal center later this year. To the left is Rick Russel of Future Fence, the company that's fabricating the sculpture. This photo was included in a written report on the project by Ken Clein of Quinn Evans Architects.

The report was submitted by Ken Clein of Quinn Evans Architects, the building’s project manager. [.pdf of full report]

In his report, Clein described how polystyrene forms to make sand molds for the sculpture’s bronze castings have been completed. They were made at Harvard University’s Graduate School of Design Fabrication Lab, where Dreiseitl is working as a Loeb Fellow. Other work being done includes final engineering for the sculpture support structure, and preparing a construction bulletin for modifications to plaza lighting and electrical systems.

Clein’s report stated that the sculpture was on track to be in stalled in August. Last year the city council approved a budget of $737,820 for the piece.

Dreiseitl’s sculpture will be on the exterior of the municipal center – the term used to describe the city hall building and the adjacent justice center, which recently opened and houses the Ann Arbor police department and 15th District Court.

At AAPAC’s April 27 meeting, Margaret Parker reported that the city attorney’s office is reviewing language in a request for qualifications (RFQ) that the municipal center public art task force plans to issue for artwork in the lobby of the justice center.

Project Updates: Fuller Road Station

AAPAC commissioners Connie Brown and Cathy Gendron serve on a task force for public art at the proposed Fuller Road Station, a joint city of Ann Arbor/University of Michigan parking structure and bus depot that officials hope will eventually become a train station as well. Although the project has not yet received final approved by the city council, staff from the city and university are moving ahead with the design, including plans for public art. As a capital project, Fuller Road Station includes $250,000 set aside for public art.

Brown provided a written report from the last meeting of the task force. [.pdf of Fuller Road Station public art task force report] The report includes a proposed timeline, which Brown noted will likely be pushed back – they’re waiting for the city attorney’s office to vet the language of a request for qualifications (RFQ) that will be issued for the public art component.

The timeline in the report is as follows:

• May 16, 2011: Call for artists/RFQ issued.
• June 6, 2011: Artists’ RFQ responses due.
• June 30, 2011: RFQ response reviews completed/Notification out to small pool of 3-5 artists. Artists to be paid stipend for proposals.
• July 13, 2011: Informational meeting for small selected pool of 3-5 artists. Artists asked to submit proposals. Artist proposals to include: (1) visual description; (2) demonstration of knowledge of materials and technical competency; (3) cost estimate.
• Aug. 17, 2011: Proposals due/Interviews and artists’ concept presentations.
• Sept. 14, 2011: Artist selected by task force.
• Sept. 28, 2011: Selected artist and proposal presented to AAPAC for vote.
• Oct. 17 or Nov. 7, 2011: AAPAC-approved candidate forwarded to city council for approval.
• December 2011: Negotiate contract.

Gendron showed commissioners a series of slides indicating the potential location for public art at the parking structure. It’s proposed for the north side of the structure, facing Fuller Road, and could include artwork in a landscaped area in front of the building, on glass panels lining the lower level, or in a space above the entrance.

A slide shown at the April 27 meeting of the Ann Arbor public art commission indicates the potential location of public art at the proposed Fuller Road Station. (Links to larger image.)

In light of AAPAC’s earlier discussion regarding administrative costs, Jeff Meyers asked about the budget for this project. Brown said they were backing out administrative costs to arrive at an amount available for the artist – because of that, the actual amount for art would be lower than $250,000, she said. The task force had discussed whether to find additional funding for the artist, she said, possibly from other funding sources in the Percent for Art program.

Cheryl Zuellig clarified that there would potentially be three sites for public art. Brown said those sites would be available, but that the artist could potentially select just one or two of them.

Zuellig said AAPAC learned a lesson from the municipal center project, and that even if an artist proposes three pieces, the artist might not realistically be able to deliver that within the available budget. [Herbert Dreiseitl had originally proposed three thematically-related pieces for art at the municipal center – one exterior, and two interior – but went significantly over budget. Ultimately, AAPAC rejected his two interior pieces, which he had modified to cut costs.] Zuellig felt that they should limit the location to one site.

Meyers said he worried about limiting the artist too early in the process. Brown said there were still a lot of uncertainties regarding the project.

PR Committee: Golden Paintbrush, AAPAC Website

During her report from the public relations committee, Cathy Gendron touched on two major projects: the annual Golden Paintbrush awards, and an overhaul of AAPAC’s website.

Golden Paintbrush Awards

Gendron told commissioners that a press release would be going out the next day to seek nominations for the annual Golden Paintbrush awards, which recognize local contributions to public art. Nomination forms are available on AAPAC’s website, and the deadline for submission has been pushed back to May 30. [.pdf file of Golden Paintbrush nomination form] Gendron reported that they have three nominations so far.

Gendron reported that in preparing a flier to publicize the call for nominations, Janet Milhem – a PR committee member – proposed including a QR code to direct people to AAPAC’s website for more information. Before being distributed, the flier needs to be approved by city staff, Gendron said.

Margaret Parker expressed concern, noting that the nominations being put out were later than usual. She asked for an explanation of a QR code – a marking similar to a bar code, which can be read by smart phones – and said she thought AAPAC should see the fliers for approval too. Since AAPAC is responsible for everything that goes out under its name, she said, they should see it so that no one is surprised. Several commissioners disagreed, with some saying they didn’t want to micromanage the committee’s work. In arguing for the work to be delegated to the committee, Connie Brown noted that this wasn’t a policy decision, nor was money being spent out of Percent for Art funds.

AAPAC Website Redesign

Gendron also gave commissioners a preview of a redesign of AAPAC’s home page, which is part of the city of Ann Arbor’s website. The new page isn’t live yet, but is “very close to launch,” she said. It’s been a work in progress for more than a year.

AAPAC commissioner Cathy Gendron, who's been leading an effort to redesign the group's website. She previewed the redesign at AAPAC's April 27 meeting.

Gendron noted that they were somewhat constrained because they are limited to using the city’s template, and must keep all the information on one page. Within that page, visitors to the site will be able to use navigation bars to go directly to information lower on the page, she said.

The page will include information about the city’s Percent for Art program, AAPAC, current and completed projects, and a link to photos on Flickr. You’ll also be able to download .pdf files of the Percent for Art ordinance, nomination forms, artist submission forms, AAPAC’s annual plan, and other reports, she said. There will also be a link to AAPAC’s Facebook page.

Wiltrud Simbuerger asked whether they’d be able to update the content. They can change parts of it on a limited basis, Gendron said, by giving direction to city staff.

Gendron received a round of applause from commissioners for her work.

Projects Committee: Managing Projects

Malverne Winborne, who serves on the projects committee chaired by Connie Brown, presented the latest versions of forms they’ve developed for project tracking, artist selection and artist requests-for-qualifications (RFQ) protocol. He had previously introduced drafts of these forms at AAPAC’s March 1, 2011 meeting.

After reviewing the forms, commissioners expressed general enthusiasm for bringing consistency to the process of tracking AAPAC’s various projects, providing status updates and improving communication. He received a round of applause.

Board Chair Elected

In their last action of the evening, commissioners elected Marsha Chamberlin as chair. She has been acting chair for several months, but did not attend the April 27 meeting. Cheryl Zuellig, who chaired the meeting and nominated Chamberlin, said they had talked and Chamberlin agreed to take on the role. Chamberlin is president of the Ann Arbor Art Center.

The group also discussed who might serve as vice chair, but no one was willing to commit to the job at this point.

Former chair Margaret Parker, who still serves on the commission, stepped down from the job in December 2010. Parker had attempted to relinquish the job for more than a year, but no one wanted to fill that role. The vice chair position has been vacant since December 2009.

Outcome: Marsha Chamberlin was unanimously elected chair of AAPAC.

Commissioners present: Connie Brown, Cathy Gendron, Jeff Meyers, Margaret Parker, Wiltrud Simbuerger, Elaine Sims, Malverne Winborne, Cheryl Zuellig.

Absent: Marsha Chamberlin.

Next regular meeting: Wednesday, May 25 at 4:30 p.m., in the basement conference room at city hall, 301 E. Huron St. [confirm date]

Before the meeting, park advisory commissioner John Lawter receives the final draft of the PROS plan from park planner Amy Kuras. Looking on is commissioner Gwen Nystuen. (Photos by the writer.)

Before approving the plan, the commission heard public commentary on the issue, as well as an update from park planner Amy Kuras about how some concerns had been addressed in revisions to earlier drafts. Later in the evening, the city’s planning commission also signed off on the plan. The PROS plan is set to come before the city council on March 7.

Heard during public commentary was criticism of the PROS plan for language it contains describing public-private partnerships for park services. One example of a potential partnership arose later in the meeting, when parks and recreation deputy manager Jeff Straw outlined a request for proposals, currently in draft form, that would explore interest from vendors in providing food concessions at park facilities.

The commission also approved a recommendation to raise fees slightly at the city’s golf courses for some items. Consideration of the fee increase came prior to the year’s regular budget decisions, so that the city council can consider and give final approval to the fee increases before the city’s golf courses open for play in the spring.

Also at the meeting, parks and recreation manager Colin Smith reviewed the parks budget presentation that had been made at a Jan. 31, 2011 city council work session. Smith also gave commissioners an update on two items concerning Argo Dam. He described how intake lines for a well that’s used for measuring water levels in the pond – so that the dam gates can regulate that level – had become clogged, and had ultimately required hiring a diver to unclog one of them.

The second Argo-related item was an update on the planned bypass channel which was recommended by the city’s park advisory commission and approved by the city council last year. Insurance issues are still being worked out with the contractor, Smith said, and construction will not start as early has had been hoped. Construction is not expected to be complete before the end of the construction season – in November.

Commissioners also agreed that before the city council approves the operating agreement between the city and the University of Michigan for the planned Fuller Road Station, they would like an opportunity to review that agreement.

At the meeting, commissioners also heard about a setback in a construction project that’s already nearing completion – renovations to the drainage system in West Park. Eight swirl concentrators were installed as a part of the project – four near the north Seventh Street entrance and four near the south entrance on Seventh. Craig Hupy, head of systems planning for the city, reported that four out of the eight swirl concentrators were in some state of failure, and that one of the four had experienced a catastrophic failure. The other four are also suspected to have problems.

West Park Swirl Concentrators: Catastrophic Failure

During the 2010 construction season, the city undertook major renovations to the drain system in West Park. Craig Hupy, head of systems planning for the city, seemed glum as he gave an update to park commissioners about a setback in the work. Most of the work in the park is complete, he said. The work around the park amenities, like the play area and the bandshell, is complete. The plantings for the wetland basins are not yet done, because spring is a better time to set them out.

View looking northeast from Seventh Street at the edge of West Park: site of the failed swirl concentrator. The backhoe had departed by the time this photograph was taken.

He began the discouraging part of the report by describing how there is currently a big yellow backhoe at the northwest end of the park on Seventh Street. The presence of the backhoe, he said, was due to a “catastrophic failure” in the new stormwater infrastructure that had been installed. During the construction work in the park, Hupy said, changes were made to the drain system. Eight swirl concentrator units – which help remove solids in the stormwater stream – had been installed as part of the drain system improvements, he explained. Four units were installed near the north Seventh Street entrance of the park and four units were installed near the south entrance on Seventh.

He told commissioners that one of the units on the north end had failed catastrophically and that the three other units on the north end were in some state of failure. They also suspect that the four units on the south end may be suffering similar failures. It’s not clear what caused the failure, Hupy said – the city has used such units at various other locations around the city. There are lawyers and engineers involved, he said, so there’s not yet any public statement that’s available.

Hupy also described how during heavy rains last year, the side of Seventh Street opposite the park had experienced a backup of water. It’s not completely clear, he said, whether the water backup was due to the construction configuration, or if it was due to changes in the park drainage system. The intent of the project, Hupy said, was of course to improve the drainage, not make it worse.

The use of the park amenities like the bandshell or the play area, he said, should not be affected by the work that will be required to put the swirl concentrators back in working order. They’d need to be dug up and rehabbed or replaced. Hupy indicated that the city hoped to be able to use the same source of funds that had paid for the project – a combination of federal stimulus and revolving loan – to effect the repairs.

Commissioner Tim Berla asked what exactly “failure” meant. Hupy told him the unit simply collapsed – nobody was hurt, though. Sam Offen wanted to know how long the repair would take – weeks or months? Hupy estimated that it would take until the end of the construction season – November.

Commission chair Julie Grand wanted to know what the implications for flooding are, with the swirl concentrators out of commission. Hupy explained that the walls directing water into the concentrators have been removed. The stormwater flow into the grates in Seventh Street was converted to overland flow through the park as a part of the project, he continued, so that should give an improvement in the stormwater management.

PROS Plan

The Parks and Recreation Open Space (PROS) plan, which provides an inventory, needs assessment and action plan for the city’s parks system, is updated every five years. The updated document is required by the state in order for the city to be eligible to apply for certain grants. The process – led by park planner Amy Kuras – began in late 2009. The city’s park advisory commission was scheduled to vote on the plan at its Jan. 18, 2011 meeting, but that vote was postponed, because the time for public input had been set to last through Jan. 24.

PROS Plan: Public Comment

Dorothy Nordness led off public commentary by citing three areas of disappointment with the draft PROS plan. First, she cited a lack of commitment to a downtown greenway in the plan. It’s important to think well into the future, she said, not just about how to get through the next year or two. She said she grew up in Minneapolis, where planners had thought ahead and the city had developed a park system that led people to love it at first sight. She challenged Ann Arbor to do the same. Her second criticism was that Ann Arbor settles for parks without a special designation as “parkland” with accompanying protective language preventing sale or lease of the land. The general “public land” designation used by the city is not sufficient to prevent the altered use of parkland. She gave as an example the Fuller Road Station site, which she called “under siege.”

As her time elapsed, Nordness addressed the language in the plan dealing with public-private partnerships, saying that any such partnerships needed to have periodic evaluation. [.pdf of remarks by Nordness]

PROS Plan: Staff, Commissioner Comment – Public-Private

Park planner Amy Kuras summarized for commissioners a series of revisions she’d made to the plan since they’d seen it at their January meeting. Highlights included:

• Section I: open space inventory now includes non-city open space; language about the city’s transportation plans and its open space millage has been added.
• Section II: language has been added to include relationships between the parks system and independent nonprofits like Leslie Science and Nature Center.
• Section III: information about the FY 2011 budget has been moved to an appendix; information on budget trends has been added.
• Section IV: references to the “drain commissioner” have been updated to “water resources commissioner;” the font size for maps had been increased; the fact that Narrow Gauge is a nature area has been made clear; the relationship between Dicken Woods and the schools has been made clear.
• Section V: language has been added about how park acquisition standards are developed; the section on downtown parks has been expanded; information on the city’s parkland charter amendment has been added; a map showing just the greenbelt boundary area has been replaced with one showing the specific properties protected by investments from the greenbelt millage.
• Section VI: projects that are now known will be completed are described that way (like the Argo Dam bypass channel); a section on public-private partnerships has been added, which includes language about evaluating the risks of such partnerships.
• Section VIII: a section about the greenway has been added, but no map has been included, because it’s not yet a part of any of the city’s master plans.

When Kuras finished ticking through the revisions, commissioner Tim Doyle wanted to know what the next step is. Kuras explained that later that day the planning commission would vote on the plan. Then it would be forwarded to the city council for their consideration on March 7. In connection with grant applications, the state’s deadline for final approval of the PROS plan, Kuras said, is actually March 1. She’s received an extension from the state, and later that evening she’d be FedEx-ing the plan to the state office, with a note saying that it is stilling pending approval by the city council.

The city will still be inside a different deadline for expiration of the current plan, which is April 1, Kuras explained.

Commissioner Gwen Nystuen wanted to know if there were any grants the city wanted to apply for that could be affected by not having the PROS plan approved. Yes, said Kuras, giving the Gallup Park canoe livery and a skatepark proposal as examples.

Mike Anglin, one of two city council ex-officio members of PAC, expressed concern about the exploration of public-private partnerships mentioned in the plan. Any RFP that would include divestment by the city in its parks should include input from PAC, he said. Anglin alluded to the RFP for the privatization of Huron Hills golf operations as an example of inadequate input from the public and PAC.

Kuras clarified that the added language she’d mentioned about public-private partnerships simply reflected the feedback from the planning commission for the section of the PROS plan that summarizes their input as a focus group. That section reads:

4) Staff should explore all opportunities to generate revenue, including public/private partnerships. A balanced view must include all possible risks inherent with acceptance of private funding.

Colin Smith stressed that inclusion of the concept of public-private partnerships is not new to the revised version of the PROS plan that PAC was being asked to consider. It’s been included in previous versions, and it’s also been emphasized that the risks must be balanced with the benefits.

Mike Anglin, an Ann Arbor city councilmember representing Ward 5 who also serves as an ex-officio member of the park advisory commission.

Smith addressed Anglin’s specific complaint about the RFP for Huron Hills golf operations by pointing out that the proposal had been discussed by the city’s golf task force and also by PAC itself. It had been a very public process, Smith said, and feedback from the public had been incorporated into the RFP.

The idea, said Smith, is that the city needs to look at opportunities for public-private partnerships, which is not to say that the city must take every one of those opportunities.

Commission chair Julie Grand also took exception to Anglin’s description of the Huron Hills RFP process, saying that she’d been present on the golf task force representing PAC for the RFP discussions, and had represented PAC at the interview with Miles of Golf, a local business that had responded to the RFP. She concluded that the Huron Hills RFP illustrated well that the city had weighed the risks and the benefits – the city ultimately rejected the Miles of Golf proposal.

Smith then gave various examples of public-private partnerships in the park and recreation system. Bryant Community Center and Leslie Science and Nature Center are operated by independent nonprofits, he said. The city’s recent promotion with Stonyfield Farm yogurt is another example, he said, as well as Zingerman’s products sold at Gallup canoe livery.

Gwen Nystuen said she thought Anglin’s point was important. She’d heard comments that the inclusion of public-private partnerships in the PROS plan made it sound like there was pressure to make money from the parks. Proposals like parking cars at Allmendinger and Frisinger parks on football Saturdays and the Huron Hills RFP were different from smaller, less permanent issues like concessions in the parks. She was concerned that permanent changes be treated differently from more minor decisions. Nystuen felt that PAC should have been more involved in the Huron Hills RFP than they were.

Smith responded to Nystuen by saying that the reality of the city’s situation is that it’s in a hard spot. They need to ask the question about whether to have a public-private partnership – even though they might answer, “No.” They need to look under every rock, he concluded.

Commissioner Tim Berla gave the city’s farmers market as another example of a public-private partnership. He noted that there had been a lot of upheaval in the community about the Huron Hills proposal, but in the end, nothing happened. It’s always important to weigh whether a proposal is good for the community or rather is simply good for some business. That could be done, he felt, without trying to impose a lot of rules for how public-private partnerships had to operate. The important thing is to make sure everything in the decision-making process is transparent, he said. He said the Huron Hills proposal showed that they’re doing a good job of that.

The discussion on the PROS plan concluded with a clarification from Smith, in response to some questions from Nystuen, about some budget information included in the plan. Administrative costs are not included in the costs of operating individual facilities, he explained.

Outcome: The park advisory commission voted unanimously to recommend adoption of the PROS plan.

Golf Course Fees

Before the commission was a recommendation to raise certain fees at the city’s golf courses. Power golf cart rentals for 9 holes at Leslie Park and Huron Hills would increase from $7 to $8; for 18 holes, the rental fee would increase from $13 to $14. City staff estimate the increases would generate $25,000 in additional revenue per season.

Weekend fees for 9 and 18 holes at Leslie Park golf course would increase by $2 and $1, respectively, and the twilight fee would increase to $16, up from $15. These increases would generate an estimated additional $12,500 in revenue per season. In addition, the commission approved raising the senior citizen qualification age to 59 for the 2011 season. That’s part of a consultant’s proposal to incrementally increase the qualification age from 55 to 62 by adding one year to the minimum age annually.

By way of introducing the proposed fee increases, Colin Smith told commissioners that the idea was to make sure that fees are still in line with other courses in the area. The fee increase for 18 holes of golf on the weekend would put Leslie at $30, Smith said, which is what the Pierce Lake course charges. The proposed increases had received unanimous support from the city’s golf task force two months ago, but they had not come easily to that conclusion.

Smith explained that the fee increase was coming to PAC in advance of the regular budget, because they wanted to get the fee increase in front of city council for final approval before the courses open in the spring.

Commissioner David Barrett got clarification that the budget impact was expected to be an extra $25,000 annuallyl from cart rentals and an extra $12,500 annually from the increase in fees for play. Commissioner Karen Levin wanted to know how often the fees were set. Smith explained that they’re reviewed every year to make sure they are in line with the competition.

Commissioner Tim Doyle wanted to know if there was a difference in price between city residents and non-city residents. Smith told Doyle that there was no difference. A recommendation from Golf Convergence had been to eliminate the different fees. Especially for Leslie, Smith said, differentiating between residents and non-residents on price was perceived negatively. It didn’t seem to make sense to pay more because you drive farther to get there.

Doyle wondered if there might be an impact on season pass sales if the price per round went up. Smith allowed that the fee increases could be a very minor additional economic incentive to purchase a season pass, but he did not think it would amount to more than a couple of extra passes sold.

Commissioner Sam Offen asked if there was any kind of combined season pass for various area municipal golf courses. Smith said there was not a season pass available, but that there was discussion of trying to coordinate marketing efforts.

Smith also clarified that once fees are set, staff has the flexibility to be creative about creating “specials.” He gave as an example a special deal where golfers could play 18 holes of golf for $18 if they started before 8 a.m. The tee timesheet between 7-8 a.m. is now full, he reported.

Mike Anglin wanted to know what the expected number of rounds would be at Huron Hills for the upcoming season. Smith put the numbers in perspective: In 2007, Huron Hills had seen 13,000 rounds played. Last year that number had risen to 22,000 rounds. This coming year, he’s hoping for 25,000 rounds, he said.

Commission chair Julie Grand asked for some explanation for the use of full-time year-round staff for the golf courses. Smith explained that the analysis of the previous season and planning for the upcoming season is done during the time the courses are closed. Smith said it’s not just the golf task force that has been instrumental in improving the number of rounds played over the last three years at the city’s golf courses. He attributed a lot of the success to the efforts of the city’s full-time golf course staff.

Smith also pointed out that the golf courses are not unique in having year-round staff, despite being open only part of the year. Canoe liveries follow that staffing strategy as well, he said. It’s during the off-season that programs are upgraded, and trends are studied. During the season, there’s only time to implement what has been developed during the off-season.

Commissioner Gwen Nystuen was curious to know if the off-season planning by the golf staff included use of Huron Hills for winter activities like cross-country skiing. Smith said he’s asked staff to contact local businesses that sell cross-country skis and snowshoes to begin a conversation about some kind of partnership, but indicated that he was not optimistic that it would generate revenue.

Outcome: PAC voted unanimously to recommend raising some of the fees associated with the city’s golf courses.

Budget Review

On the commission’s agenda was an update from parks and recreation manager Colin Smith on the parks and recreation planned FY 2012 budget. He reported from the city council’s budget work session on Jan. 31, 2011, which focused on the community services area, of which parks and recreation is a part. [.pdf of parks and recreation budget impact sheet]

Budget Review: Public Comment – Golf Courses

A large part of the discussion at the city council’s budget work session focused on options for the Huron Hills golf course. [.pdf of staff memos on golf course options and a $287,000 general fund supplement to the parks] At the park advisory commission meeting on Tuesday, commissioners heard public comment from two speakers who addressed the topic of Huron Hills golf course.

Nancy Kaplan told the commissioners that she was pleased with the apparent consensus reached by the city council at their Jan. 31. 2011 budget work session that Huron Hills would continue to be used as a park and that it also seemed agreed that the best economic use of the land is its current use – as a golf course. She expressed some concern about the fact that the city employs full-time, year-round employees for Huron Hills when the golf course is only open for part of the year. She suggested exploring additional opportunities for recreation at Huron Hills during the winter – ice-skating, cross-country skiing and snowshoeing. She stressed that she was pleased that Huron Hills remains parkland.

Ann Schriber told the commissioners that she was pleased that the Miles of Golf proposal had been turned down. She described how there are more than 100 people involved in the effort to make sure that Huron Hills is kept as parkland, yet “nobody has ever asked us” for their input on ways to ensure its future as parkland. She said the city had spent $50,000 on a consultant and that her group, Ann Arbor for Parkland Preservation, had spent $10,000. With $60,000, she said, surely they could come up with something.

Budget Review: Staff, Commissioner Discussion

Smith laid out for the commission the main points of the city council work session presentation:

• Ways that parks and recreation would be meeting its roughly 2.5% reduction target. [Energy savings in FY 2012 and increased revenues due to the construction of the Argo Dam bypass channel, in FY 2013]
• A question about whether to continue a $287,000 supplement to the parks and recreation budget, which began in FY 2008 amid controversy over the interpretation of an October 2006 city council resolution about the administration of the parks capital improvements and maintenance millage.
• Options for the future of Huron Hills golf course.

[For detailed coverage of the work session itself, see Chronicle coverage: "Ann Arbor 2012 Budget: Parks, Plans, People"]

With respect to the $287,000 parks supplement, Tim Berla recalled how the city’s chief financial officer had addressed PAC in 2007 in preparation for the FY 2008 budget planning and had explained how the parks budget does not increase at as high a rate as, for example the police department, which has a greater percentage of its costs due to personnel. He also recalled how part of the explanation for the apparent disparity in parks funding that year, compared to other parts of the budget, was related to the idea that a department can’t count savings for activities that had been discontinued.

In broad strokes, the controversy that resulted in the $287,000 parks supplement involved the language of the October 2006 resolution, which indicated that parks would be treated the same as other parts of the budget with respect to any increases or decreases.

Before the meeting started, Colin Smith, manager of parks and recreation for the city Ann Arbor, distributes written material to commissioners.

Smith told Berla that an accounting of how the parks budget had been treated the same as other parts of the budget since 2007 was now prepared in draft form. Berla had requested a report on that at PAC’s Nov. 16, 2010 meeting.

Commissioner David Barrett recalled that he’d been there during the 2007 “kerfuffle” and that the concern had been that the newly-passed millage was being swallowed up by reductions of general fund support to the parks. He gave credit to then-councilmember Bob Johnson for working it out. There’d been a feeling that the public voted and was then being hornswoggled, Barrett said.

Smith said that the city’s accounting at the time had been correct, but that perceptions had been otherwise and so the $287,000 had been supplemented to make the parks whole.

Summarizing the apparent council consensus that Huron Hills would remain a golf course for the next two years at least, Smith said that the cost to the city to use the property as a golf course was in line with, if not less than, any non-golf uses.

Argo Dam Update: Bypass, Funding, Water Levels

Parks and recreation manager Colin Smith gave commissioners updates on two different Argo Dam-related issues. The first was news that the hoped-for construction start for the Argo Dam bypass channel would not be realized. The city was meeting with the contractor and is still working out insurance issues, he said. It will take until the end of the 2011 construction season to complete the work, he said.

In response to a question from John Lawter, Smith said that the issue of the parks responsibility for funding dam maintenance would be addressed during the budget process. [At issue is whether the funding for dam maintenance at Argo is appropriately taken from the city's drinking water utility fund, even though Argo is considered a recreational dam. The city council debated the issue most recently at its Nov. 15, 2010 meeting, when the council approved the construction of the bypass channel at Argo, which will eliminate the need for canoeists to portage around the dam.]

Smith also reported that near Argo, intake lines for a well that’s used for measuring water levels in the pond – so that the dam gates can regulate that level – had recently become clogged, and had ultimately required hiring a diver to unclog one of them. When the water level in the well is low, the dam gates close in order to raise the level. When the water level in the well is high, the dam gates open to lower the level. If the intake pipes – which are between 1.5-2.0 inches in diameter – become clogged, the water level of the pond cannot be properly regulated.

The city’s first attempt to clear the lines was to use compressed air to blow out the lines. Ultimately a diver had to be hired to dive into the water, Smith said, to clear one of the lines. Work on the other line, which is a backup, will wait until warmer weather. All the dams have such regulators, he said, and they do become clogged from time to time. Clearing out the lines is a routine event, though he allowed that hiring a diver in the middle of winter made it “non-routine routine.”

Park Concessions RFP

Jeff Straw, deputy manager of parks and recreation, briefed commissioners on a draft of a request for proposals (RFP) he’s working on for concessions in the city’s park’s facilities. In light of the concerns about public-private partnerships that had been expressed earlier in the meeting, Smith playfully asked commissioners to “be kind” to Straw.

By way of backround, Straw told the commission that a few years ago the city had discontinued most of the concessions in the parks. They’d instead provided vending machines. That had allowed staff to focus on programs and services. Concessions weren’t completely eliminated, he explained, giving the golf courses, canoe liveries and Veteran’s Memorial Park ice rink (but not the pool) as examples.

The staff has heard feedback from park users that it would be nice to have concessions available. So the RFP would be to provide concessions. Straw said that except for the Veterans Memorial Park pool, the locations where the city is soliciting concessions proposals have dedicated space and facilities for concessions – it would be a win-win, he said. There would be no expense to the city. He hopes to be able to issue the RFP in the spring, and if there are responses that are agreeable, the city might be able to implement concessions operated by a private vendor starting with the new fiscal year, which is July 1, 2011, if not sooner.

Straw emphasized that the idea is not to commercialize the parks – it’s to provide a service that park users want. For a swimmer who wants to spend the afternoon at the pool, to get food they’d have to leave and come back. The RFP would include Buhr Park ice rink and pool, Veterans Memorial Park ice rink and pool, Fuller Park pool and athletic fields, and the Southeast Area Park.

They would entertain proposals involving “mobile carts,” too, he said. [In subsequent commissioner deliberations, they clarified that this did not mean that a vendor would be wandering up to park users soliciting purchases, but rather it means something akin to a food cart on the street – it'd be hauled to a location, and then at the end of the day would be put away.]

The city is not looking to discontinue the vending machines, because concessions might not be staffed for the entire time a facility is open, Straw explained. The RFP will include an expectation that some kind of sponsorship donation be made for exclusive use of the facilities and that donation would be put towards the city parks scholarship program.

Sam Offen said he thought issuing the RFP for concessions is a great idea. In response to a question from Offen, Smith said that he thought the city stopped selling concessions at its parks sometime around 2003 or 2004. He said when it was done by the city, it simply wasn’t done very well.

Offen wanted to know if someone responding to the RFP had to bid on all the locations – yes, said Straw. But if they don’t have success with that approach, they might have to try something else. Offen was also curious to know what the financial arrangement with a vendor would be like. Straw said that under the RFP, the vendors would make some kind of proposal – a percentage of gross, percentage of net, flat rental or sponsorship.

In response to another question from Offen, Straw said that the RFP does not provide any preference for Ann Arbor businesses right now.

Gwen Nystuen called offering concessions a good idea – it’s a nice thing that people enjoy, she said. She wouldn’t want to limit it just to vendors who would handle all locations. She said she liked the idea of a local business handling it.

Christopher Taylor, one of two city council ex-officio representatives to PAC, kidded Straw about what he meant by “no expense to the city.” Straw allowed that there would be some cost of utilities like gas, electricity and water. But there would be no inventory, supplies or staff costs, he said. Taylor confirmed further with Straw that utilities could not be charged to vendors because they’re not separately metered. There would be some amount of oversight and compliance, but basically whatever revenue the city realized would be “all margin.”

Tim Doyle wanted to know if the impact of clean-up costs had been factored into projections. He figured there would be some additional cost to cleaning up after park users who used the concessions. He said his first thought was to require that soda only be sold in cans with a deposit to ensure that someone had an incentive to go around and pick them up – but it had quickly occurred to him that there were many other kinds of trash that the strategy would not cover. He suggested that the RFP include a provision that any contract awarded to a vendor have a clause requiring a “re-look” after a certain period of time.

John Lawter suggested that recycling be thought about in connection with the clean-up issue. Doug Chapman drew out from Straw the fact that vendors would need to pass a health code inspection.

Doyle suggested that vendors would need to be sensitive to price – people might be turned off if costs were prohibitive. They’d hear complaints if a vendor were charging $7.50 for a hot dog, he said. Straw assured Doyle that the city wanted to make sure there are affordable options. Straw also said that they wanted to make sure there are healthy options, as well.

Julie Grand expressed some concern about the idea of mobile concessions, saying that it’s a challenge as a parent when options are presented in a manner where they are “in your face.” Straw clarified that once the concession is set up on a given day, it would not move around.

Straw concluded by saying he thought the RFP would be issued sometime in the month of March.

Fuller Road Station

During the slot for commissioner-proposed business, Gwen Nystuen expressed concern about how Fuller Road Station would be moving ahead. She reviewed many of the issues associated with the project, chief among them, the fact that the location – which is currently a 250-space surface parking lot – is city parkland. The city-university project would include around 1,000 total parking spaces as well as bus bays in its first phase and is later expected to include a train station.

Despite what the name plate says, this is park advisory commissioner Gwen Nystuen.

A point of  agreement among commissioners was the importance of the resolution that they’d passed at their June 15, 2010 meeting about the Fuller Road Station project. [Chronicle coverage: "Park Commission Asks for Transparency"]

Colin Smith told commissioners that currently the city attorney’s office is still working on the Fuller Road Station operating agreement between the city and the University of Michigan. He said he did not think, as Mike Anglin suggested, that it was on the agenda for the city council’s second meeting in March.

Commissioners made clear they want to make sure they have a chance to review the operating agreement before the city council votes on it. David Barrett drew an analogy to pouring cement on a deal – it shouldn’t begin to harden before PAC can have an impact on it.

Nancy Kaplan returned to the podium at the conclusion of the meeting during the second opportunity for public comment, and said she’d attended all the public meetings on the Fuller Road Station, and that the public who’d attended had almost universally objected to the station. She told commissioners that a group of UM graduate students is also opposed to building the station.

Present: David Barrett, Doug Chapman, Tim Berla, Tim Doyle, Julie Grand, Karen Levin, Sam Offen, Gwen Nystuen, John Lawter, councilmember Mike Anglin (ex-officio) , councilmember Christopher Taylor (ex-officio). Also Colin Smith, city parks manager.

Next meeting: PAC’s meeting on Tuesday, March 15, 2011 begins at 4 p.m. in the Washtenaw County administration building boardroom, 220 N. Main St. [confirm date]

Margaret Parker, the long-time chair of the Ann Arbor public art commission, stepped down from her leadership role at Tuesday's meeting. The commission haven't yet elected a new chair. (Photos by the writer.)

After some discussion, commissioners decided to postpone the election of officers – no one is eager to take on that responsibility. Instead, they plan to rotate the chairmanship on a monthly basis, until they can come up with a way to resolve the situation.

Tuesday’s meeting also included some debate over how to handle debate and discussion during AAPAC meetings, with Parker’s call for more formality meeting resistance from other commissioners. Parker observed that the city councilmembers don’t debate at their public meetings – they make statements. She felt that AAPAC should use that as a model, to make its meetings more orderly and efficient. A compromise was eventually reached, eliminating some of the stricter rules that Parker proposed.

Commissioners also got updates on several projects, including Fuller Road Station. Though city council hasn’t given final approval to Fuller Road Station – a joint city/University of Michigan parking structure and transit center – work is moving ahead, including the formation of a task force for public art.

For the municipal center – also known as the police/courts building, at Huron and Fifth – AAPAC approved the installation of nine-panel, 27-foot-wide mosaic murals by artist Gerome Kamrowski in the building’s atrium area. The murals were previously located on the outside of city hall, at its main entrance. There was no update available on the municipal center’s largest public art project – the outdoor water sculpture by Herbert Dreiseitl.

Looking ahead, Parker announced that starting next year, AAPAC’s monthly meetings will be held on the first Tuesday of the month, not the second. The request is to accommodate the schedule of AAPAC’s newest commissioner, Malverne Winborne, who did not attend Tuesday’s meeting.

Leadership Change: A Work in Progress

At the beginning of the meeting, AAPAC chair Margaret Parker announced that this would be her last time to serve in that position. By way of background, Parker has been pushing for someone else to take on the chairmanship for over a year. No other commissioner has volunteered to do the job.

Parker told commissioners that they’d hold elections at the end of the meeting. Several commissioners expressed surprise – Connie Brown asked whether this meant that they’d elect someone, even if that person didn’t want the job. Parker assured her that Elaine Sims – who hadn’t yet arrived – had put together a slate.

At the end of the meeting, when the topic came up again, Sims said she didn’t realize that Parker expected her to make nominations. Sims suggested that Cheryl Zuellig – who chairs AAPAC’s planning committee – would be a good candidate, but Zuellig demurred, saying she hadn’t been aware that they’d be voting that night.

Marsha Chamberlin noted that the commission was in a quandary. They hadn’t been informed in a timely way about the vote, she said, and Sims clearly didn’t have a slate to nominate as chair and vice chair. [Jan Onder previously served as vice chair, but when her term ended at the end of 2009 she left the commission and no one was elected vice chair in her place.]

Chamberlin said they needed more time to discuss it. “I’ve been discussing it all year,” Parker replied.

Zuellig reminded commissioners that she had circulated an email earlier this year to gauge interest in serving as an officer. Some people didn’t respond, and those who did respond had indicated that they weren’t in a position to take on that responsibility, she said. Since then, there hasn’t been any formal discussion about how to resolve the problem, she added.

Zuellig had asked Sue McCormick, the city’s public services administrator, whether the mayor had the authority to simply appoint a chair, but McCormick wasn’t sure and needed to check. As an interim measure, Zuellig suggested that the commissioners rotate the duties of chair on a monthly basis, so that someone would be designated to run the meetings.

Parker urged her colleagues to elect both a chair and vice chair. Though the duties of the chair aren’t as burdensome as they used to be, she said, the work shouldn’t fall on one person’s shoulders. Zuellig reminded commissioners that they had reviewed a proposal earlier this year that would have designated three officers: a vice chair, chair and past chair. This three-tier organizational structure had been presented at the July meeting, but the commission never acted on it.

Sims moved to rotate the position of chair monthly, in alphabetical order by commissioner’s last name. Chamberlin noted that while it was possible to do that, she asked: “How are we going to resolve this? Just think about it for another month and come back? I don’t know what the solution is.”

Though they did not discuss it, AAPAC’s bylaws lay out the process for electing officers:

Article VI Officers

Section 1. The officers of AAPAC shall be a Chair and Vice-Chair. The officers shall be elected by secret ballot each year from among the voting members of AAPAC. The officers shall be elected for a one-year term by a majority of the voting members currently serving on AAPAC. No member shall serve more than three (3) consecutive one-year terms in one office. The term of the officers shall run from the date of AAPAC’s regular meeting in January to the date of AAPAC’s regular meeting in January of the following year.

Section 2. The Chair shall preside at all meetings and shall decide points of order and procedure subject to the provisions of these bylaws and with the guidance of Robert’s Rules of Order, as revised. The Chair shall have the privilege of discussing and voting on all matters before AAPAC. The Vice-Chair shall assume the duties of the Chair in the Chair’s absence.

Section 3. When an office becomes vacant before the expiration of the current term, the vacancy shall be filled in the same manner as full-term offices and the new officer shall serve the remainder of the term. Should an officer resign or be removed from AAPAC, or otherwise become unable to fulfill his/her official duties before the expiration of his/her term, a replacement officer shall be elected at the next regularly scheduled meeting and shall serve for the remainder of the term. The replacement officer shall be elected in the same manner as for full-term officers. The Vice-Chair may be elected as replacement Chair, in which case a replacement Vice-Chair shall be elected at the same time.

Section 4. No individual may hold more than one (1) office at a time.

There was some discussion about the role of the chair in light of the public art administrator that will be hired – the search process for that part-time job is underway. Parker again emphasized that the duties of the chair were manageable, and could be flexible.

Zuellig noted that it didn’t appear there would be a resolution to the question that evening, and said she supported rotating the chair each month until they can find a solution.

Chamberlin then volunteered to chair the January meeting. Commissioners agreed to review the previously proposed three-tier organizational structure and discuss it in January.

AAPAC Discussion Rules

The meeting started with Parker reminding commissioners that at an organizational meeting this summer, they had discussed ways of running the meetings more efficiently by taking a more formal approach, using Robert’s Rules of Order. Specifically, she proposed adopting Rule 8 of the Ann Arbor city council rules regarding conduct of discussion and debate:

1. No member shall speak until recognized for that purpose by the Chair.
2. The member shall confine comments to the question at hand and avoid personality.
3. A member shall not speak more than two times on a given question, five minutes the first time three minutes the second time, except with the concurring vote of 3/4 of the members present.
4. A motion to call the previous question (call for cloture) immediately ends all discussion and shall be out of order until all members have had an opportunity to speak twice to the question on the floor, and shall require a concurring vote of 3/4 of the members present.
5. A motion to lay on the table shall be out of order until all members have had an opportunity to speak once to the question on the floor.

Marsha Chamberlin said she felt these rules were more formal than they needed to be. Cathy Gendron agreed that the rules seemed too formal and restrictive. Several commissioners cited concerns with the limit of two speaking turns, and of imposing time limits.

Parker noted that AAPAC meetings often turned into debates, and can become raucous. She said she noticed that at city council meetings, councilmembers simply made their statements – it wasn’t a debate. She expressed preference for this approach, saying that discussions can happen at the committee level.

Commissioners ultimately reached consensus to adopt the first three rules, modifying the third rule to eliminate a time limit for speaking turns, and giving some flexbility to the number of speaking turns.

Outcome: Commissioners unanimously adopted a modified version of the city council’s rules of conduct for discussion and debate.

Project Updates: Fuller Road Station, Municipal Center

Commissioners received updates on two major projects during the Dec. 14 meeting: Fuller Road Station, and the nearly completed municipal center, also known as the police/courts building.

Project Updates: Fuller Road Station

Fuller Road Station is a proposed parking structure, transit center and possible train station located on Fuller Road, near the University of Michigan medical complex. It’s a joint project between UM and the city, to be located on city-owned property. The project includes $250,000 earmarked for public art through the Percent for Art program.

For several months, the projects committee has reported that their attempts to contact city staff for Fuller Road Station have been unsuccessful – phone calls and emails hadn’t been returned. On Tuesday, Connie Brown said that she and Cathy Gendron had finally met with the Fuller Road Station project manager, Dave Dykman, as well as with his UM counterpart, Doug Koepsell. Katherine Talcott, who’s coordinating the public art piece for this project, participated via conference call.

AAPAC commissioner Marsha Chamberlin looks over a design for the public art installation at Fuller Road Station.

Designs are in the construction phase, Brown reported – she passed out copies of schematics for the sections of the building that would incorporate public art. The architects have already identified locations for the artwork, she said, and have also determined what kind of art they’d like. Originally, they had indicated the art would be large fritted glass panels with images imprinted on them of bikes, buses and trains. Now, the plan is to have the images inserted between two panels of laminated glass, Brown said.

The task force to select artists for the project hasn’t yet been finalized, she said. When asked by Margaret Parker about a timeline for the whole project, Brown said they’d likely select an artist or artists in the spring, with designs ready by the summer.

Gendron noted, however, that the city council hasn’t given final approval to Fuller Road Station. [A city council work session originally set for Dec. 13 was cancelled.] She said that was one reason why they weren’t moving ahead more quickly with the public art component.

Project Updates: Municipal Center

Parker said she didn’t have any update on the progress of the Herbert Dreiseitl water sculpture, located outside of the municipal center on Huron Street. But she did give a report on additional artwork that a task force is recommending for that new building.

The task force, which Parker chairs, got a walk-through of the municipal center in November. She reported that task force members later voted unanimously to recommend installing the nine-panel, 27-foot-wide mosaic murals by artist Gerome Kamrowski in the atrium area of the building, on the west wall. [Task force members attending the Nov. 8 meeting were Parker, Ray Detter, Laura Rubin, Elaine Sims, Margie Teall and Spring Tremaine.]

The mural is a perfect fit for that location, Parker said, and would be more visible from that site, compared to its previous location on an exterior outside of city hall. AAPAC needed to vote that evening in order for construction workers to have time to reinforce the walls to hold the mosaic’s weight, she said.

Outcome: AAPAC voted unanimously to approve installation of the Kamrowski murals in the municipal center’s atrium. The as-yet-undetermined cost of installation and of reinforcing the wall will come out of the building fund, according to Parker.

Parker also reported that the task force had discussed potential artwork for the court lobby of the municipal center. In the lobby’s southwest corner – near the intersection of Huron and Fifth – there’s a ceiling area about 8 feet by 20 feet that’s wired for electricity and that can bear a lot of weight, she said. The task force felt that some kind of artwork suspended from the ceiling there would be appropriate.

The task force recommended that the city put out a request for qualifications (RFQ) for Michigan artists. They further recommended that up to six finalists be selected from respondents – those finalists would then be asked to submit a proposal. A stipend of $500 to $1,000 each would be provided to cover the cost of the proposal.

Parker said the task force had several questions about how to proceed:

• Would the task force also serve as the jury for this piece, or should a separate jury be formed?
• What fund will pay for the administrative and project management fees, and for installation and lighting costs?
• What should the budget be?

In total, AAPAC had budgeted $250,000 for public art at the municipal center, above the amount budgeted separately for the outdoor sculpture by Dreiseitl, which cost nearly $750,000. The funding is allocated from the city’s Percent for Art program.

At Tuesday’s meeting, the commission reached consensus that the task force should follow up on answering these questions and make a recommendation to AAPAC on how to proceed.

Public Relations: West Park

AAPAC’s first project funded through the Percent for Art program – an outdoor installation of stylized metal trees at West Park – has been completed. [See Nov. 12 Chronicle coverage: "Mural Project OK'd, West Park Art Installed"]

During her report on the public relations committee, Cathy Gendron said that the city had issued a press release about the project, but she described the PR effort as “not the smoothest I could imagine.” The story got out before the formal press release, she said, in part because the press release needed multiple reviews by city staff, and needed to be sent to city council before being issued. Also, the artist, Traven Pelletier, issued his own press release about the project before the city’s release was sent out. He had received permission from the city to do this, she said.

Elaine Sims suggested including an item in future contracts with artists about how publicity would be handled.

Jim Curtis said it was nice that the community is interested in the work. His sense is that the overall perception of the sculpture is favorable.

Annual Report FY2010

During her report from the chair, Margaret Parker noted that AAPAC’s 2010 annual report has been posted on the commission’s website. It will be presented to the city council at their Dec. 20 meeting.

Commissioners present: Connie Brown, Marsha Chamberlin, Jim Curtis, Cathy Gendron, Margaret Parker, Elaine Sims, Cheryl Zuellig. Others: Venita Harrison, city management assistant.

Absent: Jeff Meyers, Malverne Winborne.

Next regular meeting: Tuesday, Jan. 4 at 4:30 p.m., 7th floor conference room of the City Center Building, 220 E. Huron St. [confirm date]

One of two metal tree sculptures at West Park, bookending the top tier of new wall seats for the park's bandshell. The work by artist Traven Pelletier is the first completed project funded by the city's Percent for Art program. (Photos by the writer.)

Commissioners also discussed how to publicize AAPAC’s first completed project funded by the Percent for Art program: two metal tree sculptures by artist Traven Pelletier, installed at the renovated West Park. A formal recognition of the project is expected to occur in connection with the park’s official re-opening, sometime in the spring of 2011.

There was also discussion about how to pay for repairs of the Sun Dragon, a sculpture at Fuller Pool by AAPAC chair Margaret Parker that was damaged several months ago by maintenance workers. At the suggestion of Sue McCormick, the city’s public services administrator, AAPAC could consider the project as an “asset renewal” – meaning they could treat it as a new project, which would make it eligible for funding under the city’s Percent for Art program. [The Percent for Art program captures 1% from the budget of all city capital projects, to be set aside for public art.] One commissioner jokingly referred to the asset renewal approach as “creative financing.”

AAPAC chair Margaret Parker reported that the final $553,320 funding request for the Herbert Dreiseitl water sculpture outside of the new municipal center would be voted on by Ann Arbor city council at their Nov. 15 meeting. A task force is working on recommendations for additional artwork inside the new building, with a $250,000 budget. The commission discussed how that might include a venue for displaying temporary installations, like the oversized puppets created for FestiFools, an annual street festival held in April.

The commission discussed how to handle donations of art to the city, in response to a recent gift to the mayor and city council from the Ann Arbor Summer Festival of a large photograph of the event by local photographer Myra Klarman. AAPAC also got updates on the hiring process for a new public art administrator, as well as proposed changes to its website.

This was the first meeting attended by AAPAC’s newest commissioner, Malverne Winborne, who was confirmed by city council in October. Winborne is director of Eastern Michigan University’s Charter Schools Office.

Mural Pilot Program

At Tuesday’s meeting, Jeff Meyers presented a final draft of a mural program that he had first outlined at AAPAC’s Sept. 14 meeting. Elements of the program include:

• A goal of creating two murals per year on city-owned sites, with the sites to be selected by a task force.
• A budget of between $2,500 to $10,000 per mural.
• An additional 50% contingency will be budgeted to cover the administrative costs for each project, including compensation for a project manager.
• The expected lifespan for the murals, under normal wear and tear, is set at five years.
• Artists or groups of artists who apply for a mural project must be residents of Michigan.
• Selection criteria includes artistic merit, community impact and feasibility. Selection is subject to AAPAC approval. [.pdf of site selection criteria and .pdf of evaluation criteria]

AAPAC commissioner Jeff Meyers describes details of a pilot mural project during the commission's Nov. 9 meeting.

Funding sources for each mural would either be linked directly to its physical location, or be linked thematically with the funding source. For example, a mural located in a park could be funded from the parks millage Percent for Art funds. If a mural is funded through the street millage, it would need to have a transportation theme.

During discussion of the proposal, commissioners suggested several relatively minor revisions, including a suggestion from Cheryl Zuellig to call it explicitly a pilot program.

Meyers asked for feedback on setting a recommended lifespan for the murals. Similar programs in other cities set the lifespan at between five to seven years, he said. The point is to indicate a period after which AAPAC would no longer be responsible for maintenance or restoration. It’s not that the mural would be removed, he stressed, but rather that the city’s obligation to it would have a limited duration. He said he didn’t want them to get locked into the idea that the murals would be permanent.

There was a fair amount of discussion about what would happen at the five- or seven-year mark. Meyers stressed that it wasn’t an action point. Zuellig likened it to a statue of limitations. If there’s not a specific period indicated, then the city could be responsible for maintaining the work indefinitely.

Commissioners reached consensus on five years. Jim Curtis wanted to insert language indicating what would happen if the mural were vandalized during that five-year period. Meyers said it would be handled like any other public art project, with maintenance provided by either the city unit where the mural is located, or from the funding source to which it’s linked.

Elaine Sims and Margaret Parker expressed concern that the timeline proposed for the initial murals was too ambitious. Meyers’ plan calls for a site selection task force to be formed by mid-December of this year – the group would include an AAPAC commissioner, a city staff representative, a community artist, and a community representative. Meyers suggested himself as chair and Mariah Cherem as the community representative, with other members to be determined.

When sites are identified, the task force would expand to include representatives from the neighborhoods where those sites are located. The goal is to have sites identified by January 2011, requests for qualifications issued in February and due in early March, artist selections made by the end of March, AAPAC approval in April, designs completed by mid-May and installation by mid-July.

Zuellig agreed that it was an ambitious timeline, but said that was the point of having target goals, which could be pushed back if necessary. Meyers replied: “I’m determined to make it happen by then.”

Commissioners also discussed the issue of graffiti on murals, which some felt would be a problem. Curtis said he would have bet that the mural of war veterans, located in an alley off of Liberty Street, would have been the target of graffiti, but that it remained untouched. Meyers observed that taggers don’t typically hit other artwork. When Parker pointed to the mural in the alley next to Michigan Theater, which is nearly completely covered by graffiti, Cathy Gendron said there were other factors at play there, describing it as a “war.”

At the end of the discussion, Parker said she wanted to add a requirement that guidelines for preparing murals be included in the program description. Meyers objected, saying that would be the responsibility of each muralist. Parker said the quality of the walls on which a mural would be painted was an element of the artwork. She made a motion to add that guideline requirement to the program, but it died for lack of a second.

Outcome: AAPAC unanimously approved a pilot mural program. Meyers will serve as chair of the task force for this effort.

Project Updates: Dreiseitl, Municipal Center, West Park, Sun Dragon

Commissioners discussed progress on several projects during Tuesday’s meeting, including the municipal center outdoor water sculpture by Herbert Dreiseitl, new sculptures at West Park and the Sun Dragon at Fuller Park. There was no update on efforts to form a task force for public art at Fuller Road Station – there’s been no response from city staff on queries from commissioners about that project.

Project Updates: Council to Vote on Dreiseitl Budget

Margaret Parker, AAPAC’s chair, reported that the council would be voting to allocate funds to complete the Herbert Dreiseitl sculpture at their Nov. 15 meeting. She said she plans to attend the meeting, in case any questions arise.

The council is being asked to approve $553,320 for Quinn Evans Architects, the Ann Arbor firm that’s overseeing this project. The funds, from the Percent for Art program, will be used to hire Future Fence/Future Fab Co., a Warren-based business, to handle the sculpture’s fabrication. The $553,320 will also cover the cost of installation. The city council previously approved $111,400 to Quinn Evans for this project, as well as $77,000 in design fees for Dreiseitl.

The original budget for the Dreiseitl work was $750,000 and was to include three pieces of art – a large outdoor water sculpture, and two interior wall installations. However, Dreiseitl turned in a proposal that exceeded that budget, and AAPAC commissioners had design concerns with his two interior pieces. The two interior installations were ultimately rejected. The water sculpture will be located in a plaza in front of the new police/courts building – also known as the municipal center – at the northeast corner Huron and Fifth. The sculpture is expected to be completed by the summer of 2011.

Project Updates: More Art for Municipal Center

An additional $250,000 is budgeted for up to two other pieces of artwork inside the municipal center. At Tuesday’s AAPAC meeting, Elaine Sims gave a report from the task force that will make a recommendation for those pieces, as well as for possible placement of a large multi-panel mosaic by Gerome Kamrowski, which previously was located near at the entrance to city hall and is now in storage.

Sims reported that the task force reached consensus on priorities for the municipal center: 1) placing the Kamrowski mosaic in the municipal center’s atrium, 2) placing a mobile or some other artwork in the main lobby, that could be viewed through the windows by passers-by on Huron Street, and 3) placing artwork outside, in the courtyard off of Ann Street. Sims said it would be great if the artwork in the main lobby could have a social justice theme, to reflect the building’s purpose.

Parker, who also serves on the task force, said that they’d been told by Ken Clein of Quinn Evans that if they intended to hang the Kamrowski piece, they’d need to let Clein know as soon as possible – the wall would need extra support to hang it there, given the mosaic’s weight.

Cheryl Zuellig asked whether the public would be able to access those areas. The atrium is open 24/7, Sims said, and will be the building’s main traffic area. It would also be visible from outside the building, as would the lobby installation. Jim Curtis expressed concern about vandalism on the Kamrowski piece, given that it would be located in an area open to the public. He wondered if security cameras would be installed. Sims pointed out that it had previously been located outside the entrance to city hall, and had not been vandalized there.

Project Updates: FestiFools Proposal

Jeff Meyers asked if anyone had responded to a letter that AAPAC had received from Mark Tucker, founder and creative director of FestiFools, an annual parade down Main Street featuring oversized puppets. FestiFools had previously been rejected for funding from the Percent for Art program. From The Chronicle’s coverage of AAPAC’s Jan. 12, 2010 meeting:

The commission discussed several topics that related to constraints on how Percent for Art funds can be spent.

The city attorney’s office had clarified, Margaret Parker said, that AAPAC could not use funding for temporary art projects, such as FestiFools, an annual parade of towering puppets that takes place every April on Main Street. FestiFools’ organizers had originally asked AAPAC for a five-year commitment of $25,000 each year. At AAPAC’s Oct. 13, 2009 meeting, commissioners rejected that proposal but voted to approve one-time funding of $5,000.

Parker asked that Jean Borger draft a letter to notify FestiFools of the decision. Several commissioners wanted to make sure to communicate that they supported the project in spirit, despite the funding constraints.

Most recently, Tucker proposed creating a display of the puppets at the municipal center. Here’s the text of his letter, which was also sent to mayor John Hieftje:

FestiFools is interested in finding out if you are accepting proposals for art in the interior spaces in the new City Hall. If so, we would be interested in writing and/or presenting a proposal that we think merits your attention.

In brief, this would be a relatively inexpensive proposal allowing for a selection of large-scale sculptures, or “puppets” created by community members, under local artist supervision/design, to hang in one of the spectacular atrium spaces located in the new building. The large-scale 3-dimensional pieces could be chosen by popular vote, or jury, each year from our annual FestiFools public art performance. (These creations could then replace the previous year’s winning pieces, on an annual basis).

One time funding to oversee the first set of puppets created for display, celebrating the opening of the new City Hall (and the 5th anniversary of FestiFools in 2011) and the minimal labor involved in hanging the puppets each year would be the only costs involved.

Please let me know if this is of any interest to your organization and we would be glad to make a formal proposal.

Thanks,

Mark Tucker, Founder/Creative Director

Sims said the task force had not discussed the proposal in detail. Meyers suggested that even though the installation was temporary, the Percent for Art program might be able to fund the creation of a permanent venue for such installations. Being able to support a community effort like FestiFools is worthwhile, he said. Commissioners discussed the possibility of creating a venue that could be used for a variety of installations, not just FestiFools. Sims said she’d take that suggestion back to the task force for further discussion.

Project Updates: Gift from the Summer Festival

Commissioners also discussed how to handle a recent gift to the city: A large print of a photo montage by local photographer Myra Klarman, taken at the Ann Arbor Summer Festival. Festival organizers had gifted the work to city council and the mayor, in a formal presentation at council’s Oct. 4 meeting. The council is one of the funders for the festival – in 2010, the city contributed $25,000 to the event.

(From left to right): Robb Woulfe, director of the Ann Arbor Summer Festival; mayor John Hieftje; and Jayne Miller and Jim Kosteva, members of the Summer Festival board, present a gift to the city at the Oct. 4, 2010 meeting of city council: a large photograph taken at the 2010 festival by local photographer Myra Klarman.

Commissioners expressed admiration for the work, and their discussion included whether the print needed to be framed, and where it might be installed. Sims also mentioned the possibility of getting additional photos from the series, which were exhibited this summer at the Power Center. [In response to a follow-up email from The Chronicle, Amy Nesbitt, the festival's general manager, clarified that the festival isn't currently pursuing a permanent collection donation to the city at this time. Pieces from the series will be exhibited elsewhere in the community – for example, an exhibit is set to run at Cafe Zola from Dec. 1 through February 2011.]

Margaret Parker wondered whether handling donations of art was something that AAPAC wanted to take on. “It’s just like having a museum,” she said. “Are we ready for that?”

Jim Curtis said it should be handled on a case-by-case basis, while Cheryl Zuellig wondered how they’d manage it if hundreds of people wanted to donate art to city hall. They needed to be careful about why they were accepting it, she said, and to know what they would do with it. She noted that the time and energy spent reviewing gifts would take away from other projects.

[AAPAC already has a process in place to evaluate proposed gifts of art. Earlier this year, the commission rejected a proposed gift of a large bronze horse sculpture by artist Garo Kazan. A peer review committee had evaluated the work, and had raised concerns about aesthetics, maintenance and liability.]

When Curtis expressed the view that the city was unlikely to be inundated with donations, Parker pointed out that when they’d taken an inventory of the city’s public art, they found pieces tucked away in closets, with no record of who had gifted it.

Sims said that the photo by Klarman was a special case, especially since it celebrated something special about Ann Arbor.

Project Updates: West Park Tree Sculptures Installed

As a member of the projects committee, Jim Curtis gave an update on the tree sculptures at West Park – AAPAC’s first completed public art installation. The artwork by Traven Pelletier of Lotus Gardenscapes includes two stylized metal trees, painted orange-red, that bookend the top tier of new seat walls that face the park’s bandshell.

“Given the budget, I think it came out quite well,” Curtis said. The budget had been set at $10,000. According to a budget summary distributed at Tuesday’s meeting, total expenditures for the project were $14,890.

Jeff Meyers asked what the artist thought. It emerged that Pelletier had expressed some discontent over the amount of work he needed to do, based on the project budget. Pelletier had felt it was underpriced, Curtis said. During later stages of the project, Curtis reported, Pelletier’s enthusiasm had returned.

Meyers then asked whether Pelletier had done an exit interview – he had not. This led to a discussion about the benefits of doing exit interviews or surveying artists after their projects are completed, to get feedback about the process. Elaine Sims agreed to put the item on the agenda for the next planning committee meeting.

Margaret Parker asked whether a maintenance schedule for the artwork had been developed. That needs to be part of the city’s art inventory, she said. Though Curtis was uncertain about this, Tuesday’s meeting agenda included notes on the project, indicating that a maintenance report was in the works.

Later in the meeting, during her report from the public relations committee, Cathy Gendron noted that Pelletier had crafted his own press release, and had been working on revisions with the city’s communications staff. When Gendron reported she had posted a notice about the sculptures on AAPAC’s Facebook page, Parker urged her to get the news into the “physical press,” adding that the artist shouldn’t have to issue his own press release. The important thing, she said, is that everyone gets the credit they deserve for the project, including AAPAC.

Gendron indicated that the city apparently isn’t ready to issue a release – the official dedication of the sculptures, which will be part of the grand re-opening of West Park, will happen sometime next spring. The park has been closed for several months as part of a major renovation project there.

Project Updates: Financing for Sun Dragon Repair

Prior to the start of Tuesday’s meeting, Sue McCormick – the city’s public services administrator – had stopped by the meeting room on the seventh floor of the City Center building and told Margaret Parker that she’d figured out a way for AAPAC to handle the cost of repairing the Sun Dragon sculpture. The sculpture was designed by Parker, AAPAC’s chair, and is located at Fuller Pool. It had been damaged this spring by workers during repair of a beam that supported the piece.

AAPAC chair Margaret Parker.

In general, the service units that oversee the site where public art is located pay for maintenance and repair. This applies to both public art that was acquired prior to the Percent for Art program – like the Sun Dragon – as well as work funded by the Percent for Art. In addition, AAPAC can choose to allocate funding for repair or maintenance of Percent for Art work, but not for older public art.

In the case of the Sun Dragon, the parks and recreation unit would be responsible for paying for repair – an estimated $7,000 – or decommissioning it.

When the issue of repair had been discussed at AAPAC’s August meeting, Parker had recused herself from the discussion and left the room. However, at Tuesday’s meeting she relayed the information from McCormick to the other commissioners. McCormick had suggested that the Sun Dragon be considered as an “asset renewal” – that is, it could come to AAPAC as a new project. That way, AAPAC could fund it under the Percent for Art program, treating it just like any other proposal. McCormick had said it could be paid for out of the parks or water funds. According to a budget summary distributed to commissioners, there is $16,408 available for public art from the parks millage, and $115,164 from the water fund.

One commissioner jokingly referred to it as “creative financing,” and another quipped that they shouldn’t ask too many questions about it. Cheryl Zuellig clarified that as a new project, they would start by creating an intake form for it – it would then be handled by the projects committee. Jeff Meyers expressed concern about opening the door for other projects like this.

There was some discussion about what exactly the Percent for Art program could pay for – could it also cover the cost of the structural beam at Fuller Pool, even though that beam would need to be in place regardless of the public art installed on it? Parker said she would check with McCormick about that.

Misc. Updates: Website, Facebook, Arts Administrator

Cathy Gendron reported on work by the public relations committee, saying that they’d met with Nancy Stone of the city’s communications staff and are exploring ways to make AAPAC’s page on the city’s website more dynamic. They’re also looking at ways to display the city’s public art inventory, she said.

In addition, the committee is looking for ways to solicit input via their Facebook page, which includes updates on public art projects.

Gendron also reported that Sue McCormick, the city’s public services administrator, is interested in having AAPAC develop a mapping system to identify public art, using the city’s GIS system. Cresson Slotten, a project manager with the city, will work with AAPAC on this effort. Jeff Meyers, who’s also on the PR committee, mentioned that they’d talked about developing a barcode app for public art pieces. The idea would be to affix a barcode near the artwork that could be scanned by your smartphone, and allow you listen to a digital recording about the piece, for example.

Valerie Wahna, an artist who attended AAPAC’s meeting as a member of the public, suggested that AAPAC look at the company stickybits, which offers this kind of barcode application.

Margaret Parker returned to the topic of AAPAC’s website. She said she’d been to the website for the city’s energy office, and noted that they have a very interactive page, including ways to sign up for email alerts. She suggested using that site as a template. Parker also told her colleagues that she’d recently been interviewed by a reporter for the Ann Arbor Observer, who had told her that it had been difficult to find information about AAPAC on the commission’s city website – there were no photos of the Dreiseitl project, she said, or of AAPAC’s current annual plan.

Gendron said she was well aware of the site’s shortcomings, and that they are working on it.

Cheryl Zuellig gave a report from the planning committee, including an update on the hiring process for a new public art administrator. That part-time position was previously held by Katherine Talcott, who now works for the city as a project manager, which includes work on the Dreiseitl project.

Zueillig said that Sue McCormick had revised the job description – the main difference, she said, is that the administrator can’t be a project manager. It’s still a part-time position, that reports to McCormick as a city employee. After some discussion, Zuellig said she’d forward McCormick’s revised job description to commissioners for their feedback. McCormick will then write up a job posting for the city’s website, and AAPAC can post it on other arts sites as well, like the Arts Alliance. They’ll also need to set up an interview committee.

Malverne Winborne, AAPAC's newest commissioner.

New AAPAC Commissioner

Attending his first AAPAC meeting on Tuesday, the group’s newest commissioner, Malverne Winborne, told commissioners that he was there to listen – he was not an active participant during discussions. However, at the start of the meeting he introduced himself, saying that he worked at Eastern University and shared an office suite with Leigh Greden. [Greden, a former Ann Arbor city councilmember who was voted out of office in 2009, is now executive director of EMU's governmental and community relations. In a follow-up phone conversation with The Chronicle, Winborne said that his appointment stemmed from a suggestion by Ann Arbor city councilmember Tony Derezinski.]

Winborne said he lives in Ann Arbor and that his children had attended Bryant, Pattengill, Tappan and Pioneer schools. He’s originally from Baltimore, but moved here years ago to attend the University of Michigan, where he met his wife. His oldest brother is an artist, he said, joking that his brother had instilled art appreciation in him by beating him up – an “art thug,” he quipped. [His brother, Kylis Winborne, is a painter, sculptor and photographer who lives in Baltimore.]

In welcoming Winborne to AAPAC, Jim Curtis said he was glad to have another man on the commission. Curtis also reported that he had turned in his letter of resignation to the mayor on Monday. He had indicated his intent to resign earlier this year, to spend more time on his own projects and as a board member for the startup Ann Arbor Main Street Business Improvement Zone (BIZ). Curtis is owner of Curtis Commercial, a local real estate firm.

Commissioners present: Jim Curtis, Cathy Gendron, Jeff Meyers, Margaret Parker, Elaine Sims, Malverne Winborne, Cheryl Zuellig. Others: Venita Harrison, city management assistant.

Absent: Connie Brown, Marsha Chamberlin.

Next regular meeting: Tuesday, Dec. 14 at 4:30 p.m., 7th floor conference room of the City Center Building, 220 E. Huron St. [confirm date]

New curving seat walls for the West Park bandshell have already been built, and await the public art installation – two metal tree sculptures to be installed on the ends.

The West Park project is expected to be installed later this month, as part of a major overhaul of the park that’s still in progress. The artwork by Traven Pelletier of Lotus Gardenscapes includes two metal trees that will bookend one of the seat walls facing the park’s bandshell. According to a budget summary distributed at Tuesday’s meeting, the project cost $12,375.

As for Dreiseitl’s piece, the bids from fabricators who’ll actually build the sculpture came in over budget, so to cut costs it will now be made of bronze rather than weathering steel. Quinn Evans Architects, the Ann Arbor firm that’s overseeing the project on contract with the city, also has suggested creating a $12,180 contingency – above the $737,820 budget that city council has approved – to cover potential, additional unbudgeted costs.

At Tuesday’s meeting, commissioner Cathy Gendron announced plans to revamp AAPAC’s page on the city’s website, and said that the public relations committee decided not to renew the URL for its external website – annarborpublicart.org – which had been maintained by a volunteer. That site is now defunct. Commissioner Elaine Sims noted that the University of Michigan recently launched a website for its public art efforts, and wondered if AAPAC’s page could contain similar elements. “It’s a wonderful site, but we just can’t do that,” Gendron said, adding that they’re constrained by the template used by the city. They can be more flexible on AAPAC’s Facebook page, she added.

There was some discussion about recruiting new commissioners, and it was noted that mayor John Hieftje recently made a nomination to fill an AAPAC vacancy – not all commissioners had been aware of this action. Though he wasn’t mentioned by name during Tuesday’s meeting, that nominee is Malverne Winborne, director of Eastern Michigan University’s Charter Schools Office, with a background in organizational development. The city council is expected to vote on his appointment at their Oct. 18 meeting. AAPAC will have an additional vacancy when Jim Curtis resigns – he announced his intent to step down in July and has stopped attending meetings, but hasn’t yet officially resigned.

Dreiseitl Sculpture, Other Municipal Center Art

Connie Brown reviewed a written report on the Dreiseitl project that had been submitted by Katherine Talcott, the city’s former public art administrator who’s now working on special public art projects for the city, including Dreiseitl’s project. The report notes that bids for fabrication of the water sculpture, to be located in front of the new municipal center – also known as the police/courts building – came in over budget. To cut costs, the material has been changed from weathering steel to bronze.

Quinn Evans Architects, the Ann Arbor firm that’s overseeing the project on contract with the city, is recommending the city retain Future Fence/Future Fab Co., a Warren-based business, to handle the sculpture’s fabrication. That company intends to subcontract with three other Michigan businesses as part of the project: Leprecon Inc. of Hamburg, Center for Creative Studies in Detroit, and Fine Arts Sculpture Center in Clarkston.

The total cost for design, fabrication and installation of the piece is $553,320 – part of the project’s overall $737,820 budget. Quinn Evans also has suggested creating a $12,180 contingency – above the $737,820 budget that the city council has approved – to cover potential, additional unbudgeted costs. The city council will need to approve these expenditures, as well as the selection of Future Fence/Future Fab.

Venita Harrison – a management assistant who works for Sue McCormick, the city’s public services administrator – said they are working on a resolution for the city council about this project. Her understanding is that AAPAC did not need to vote on it, she told them.

Brown asked whether Dreiseitl had signed off on the change in materials, and Harrison indicated that he had. The German artist is currently a Loeb Fellow at Harvard University’s Graduate School of Design.

Elaine Sims mentioned that every time she runs into Ray Detter at Treasure Mart or the farmers market, he asks about the status of public art projects at the municipal center. Detter is on a task force that makes recommendations on public art at the center, though the group has been dormant since 2009. Sims said Detter wondered when the task force would be reconvened. “They’re anxious to know,” she said.

Cathy Gendron said she remembered talking about this issue at AAPAC’s August meeting, but it wasn’t clear who would convey that information to the task force. Margaret Parker, who chairs both AAPAC and the municipal center task force, didn’t attend Tuesday’s meeting.

None of the commissioners present knew all the members of the task force, and there was some discussion about the need to archive that information in an accessible location online. [Members of the task force include: Ray Detter of the Downtown Area Citizens Advisory Council; Bob Grese, director of Matthaei Botanical Gardens and Nichols Arboretum; AAPAC chair Margaret Parker; Laura Rubin, executive director of the Huron River Watershed Council; Ann Arbor city councilmember Margie Teall; and Spring Tremaine, a lieutenant with the Ann Arbor Police Department. Sue McCormick, the city’s director of public services, is also a task force member.]

Marsha Chamberlin asked what the status is for the large mosaic by Gerome Kamrowski, which previously was located near the entrance to city hall and is now in storage. She noted that it’s one of the more valuable pieces that the city owns. Connie Brown said she didn’t feel it needed to be installed at the municipal center, but that it should certainly be reinstalled somewhere – although she hoped the task force could find a place for it at the municipal center.

Harrison then referenced the August meeting minutes, which commissioners had approved earlier in the meeting. She noted that AAPAC had addressed the Kamrowski issue at the August meeting, as part of its directive to the task force regarding additional public art at the center. [Neither Brown or Chamberlin attended that meeting.]

From The Chronicle report of the Aug. 10 meeting:

The commissioners then moved on to the topic of other public art for the municipal center. Parker said that the funding amount doesn’t have to be definite. “It’s not like we’re writing down our shopping list at home,” she said. “I don’t think it behooves us to come with a hard and firm number. It seems like we want the best art for the building.”

Zuellig said there’s an understanding that with a budget, they might end up spending more or less. For her, the question was whether they wanted to spend more money at the municipal center, or on other projects elsewhere.

There was discussion of the 9-panel mosaic by Gerome Kamrowski, which previously was located near at the entrance to city hall and is now in storage. Parker said the task force hadn’t been able to identify a spot for it. They felt the atrium area was too large, and would dwarf the work.

Noting that Parker was a member of the task force, Zuellig asked her what kind of direction would be helpful from AAPAC. Parker responded by saying that they’d started out thinking they’d spend about $1 million in total on art for the municipal center. Since Dreiseitl’s water sculpture was about $700,000, she said, it seemed reasonable to allocate $300,000 to other artwork there.

Gendron said they’d also talked about scaling back because of the economy. Zuellig noted that they had already spent close to $1 million, if they included the design, consulting and administrative fees. With just four commissioners at the meeting, she said, it was tricky making a decision. She added that she was undecided about whether or not to seek additional art for that location.

Sims liked the idea of a hanging piece in the police/courts lobby, possibly made of art glass, plus perhaps one or two other pieces elsewhere in the complex. But she was concerned about the cost. “We’ve spent a lot,” she said.

When Parker noted that there was money available, Zuellig said that’s not the point. Just because it’s there doesn’t mean they have to spend it, she said.

Doyle asked about the budget – was it $1 million for the municipal center? “It’s complicated,” Parker replied.

Commissioners then explained that $250,000 for the Percent for Art program came out of the budget for the municipal center project, and had to be spent there. Beyond that, Percent for Art funds had accrued from other capital projects – projects for water and sewer, for example. Those funds could be pooled and used as well, as long as the public art had a thematic link to the funds. That’s why, for example, the stormwater Percent for Art funds could be used to pay for Dreiseitl’s water sculpture.

After some further discussion, commissioners arrived at a consensus to allocate $250,000 for two additional art pieces and the possible installation of Kamrowski’s mural.

Outcome: Commissioners unanimously approved giving direction to the municipal center’s public art task force to consider two additional pieces of art, plus the possible placement of a large 9-panel mosaic by Gerome Kamrowski. They set a budget of $250,000.

At Tuesday’s meeting, Sims offered to contact Parker, and to ask Parker to convey AAPAC’s directive to the task force.

Projects: Fuller Road, West Park, Hanover Square

Connie Brown of the projects committee updated her fellow commissioners on three projects that are in various stages: Fuller Road Station, West Park and Hanover Square.

Fuller Road Station

There seems to be a lack of communication regarding AAPAC’s involvement in Fuller Road Station, Brown said. The city of Ann Arbor/University of Michigan project is a five-level, 977-space parking structure on city-owned property that’s part of Fuller Park, on the south side of Fuller Road and east of East Medical Center Drive. Officials hope eventually that a train station for commuter rail will be added to the site.

AAPAC’s first in-depth discussion on the project occurred at their July 2010 meeting. Since then, Brown said they’ve made several queries of Dave Dykman, the project manager for Fuller Road Station, but haven’t gotten a response. They’re trying to be proactive and would like to move ahead with setting up the public art task force for the project, she said, but so far, there’s been no action.

Cheryl Zuellig asked whether the project had been funded – if not, perhaps that’s why Dykman isn’t responding. Brown said she didn’t know the status of the funding, but AAPAC has been told that there’s an earmark for public art. She noted that some design decisions about the public art component have already been made by the architects – the idea is to create large fritted glass panels – and that for the past few months “we’ve been attempting to insert ourselves into the process.”

By way of background, the site plan for the Fuller Road Station project received approval from the Ann Arbor planning commission at its Sept. 21, 2010 meeting. Funding for the parking structure will be split between the city and UM, with the university paying for 78% of the estimated $32 million cost. The city is pursuing federal funding for the project, but has not yet specified how it would otherwise fund its portion of the cost.

Council is expected to consider the Fuller Road Station project at one of its upcoming meetings, likely in November.

West Park

The public art piece for West Park is near completion, Brown reported. The West Park task force met with artist Traven Pelletier last week, when he presented color samples – he’s planning to paint the metal tree sculptures in subtle shades of copper and red. The sculptures will be placed at the east and west ends of one of the seat walls that’s built into the hill facing the park’s bandshell. Installation will likely occur later this month.

They’d like to do some sort of unveiling, Brown said, but the park won’t be open to the public until after the artwork is installed. It’s more likely they’ll plan some sort of event in the spring, as part of the park’s grand opening.

Hanover Square

The Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority plans to include a public art installation at Hanover Square, at the northwest corner of Packard and Division. It would be paid for as part of the DDA’s Fifth and Division street improvement project. For more than a year, the DDA and AAPAC have been slowly trying to figure out a process for working together – at AAPAC’s Sept. 14 meeting, Brown had described a draft of guidelines that AAPAC could use for assisting in DDA-funded public art projects.

On Tuesday, Brown reported that Sue McCormick had signed off on the draft guidelines. The next step will be to identify someone to be a liaison with the DDA. Jim Curtis, who also serves on the projects committee, had been playing that role, but Brown was unsure whether he planned to remain active on the committee after resigning from AAPAC. Curtis announced his intent to resign in July, citing the need to devote more time as a board member for the startup Ann Arbor Main Street Business Improvement Zone (BIZ).

Filling AAPAC Vacancies

There was some discussion about recruiting new commissioners, and it was noted that mayor John Hieftje made a nomination to fill an AAPAC vacancy at city council’s Oct. 4 meeting – not all commissioners had been aware of this action. The nominee wasn’t mentioned by name during Tuesday’s meeting – he is Malverne Winborne, director of Eastern Michigan University’s Charter Schools Office, with a background in organizational development. City council is expected to vote on his appointment at their Oct. 18 meeting.

AAPAC will have an additional vacancy when Jim Curtis resigns – he announced his intent to step down in July, but hasn’t yet officially resigned.

Commissioners had hoped to recommend someone with close ties to the University of Michigan. Lee Doyle, a member of the UM President’s Advisory Committee for Public Art who also oversees the UM Film Office, was interested in joining AAPAC. But Hieftje, who makes nominations to the commission, conveyed that he wanted to appoint someone who resides in Ann Arbor, and Doyle lives outside the city.

This situation led commissioners to discuss their role in the recruitment and nomination process. From The Chronicle’s report of AAPAC’s Sept. 14 meeting:

[Jeff] Meyers pointed out that the appointments are made at the pleasure of the mayor, and said it opened up another conversation: What is AAPAC’s role in making recommendations for appointments?

Zuellig said they had two choices: Stay out of the process, or get feedback from Hieftje before making recommendations. Several commissioners commented on the awkwardness of having conversations in public regarding specific individuals, only to have them later rejected by the mayor – one commissioner used the term “blackballed.”

Zuellig noted that getting new commissioners on board is more of a priority for AAPAC than it is for the mayor. That’s why they’ve been proactive, she said. She noted that the city’s online Legistar system theoretically indicates which boards and commissions have vacancies, but that it’s not up-to-date – the listing for AAPAC doesn’t indicate that there are vacancies. [Also outdated is Legistar's list of current AAPAC members, which still includes commissioners whose terms expired at the end of 2008 and 2009.]

After further discussion, commissioners reached a consensus to pursue a more informal process, publicizing AAPAC vacancies more broadly, via their Facebook page and websites for AAPAC and the Arts Alliance. Individual commissioners could contact the mayor to ask him to consider specific individuals, but AAPAC itself would make no formal recommendations.

Public Relations

Commissioner Cathy Gendron gave a report from the public relations committee, with an update on plans to revamp AAPAC’s page on the city’s website. She said they’ve decided not to renew the URL for AAPAC’s external website – annarborpublicart.org – which had been maintained by a volunteer. They thought it would be confusing to have two websites, she said, and the external site is now defunct.

Commissioner Elaine Sims noted that the University of Michigan had recently launched a website for its public art efforts, and wondered if AAPAC’s page could contain similar elements. “It’s a wonderful site, but we just can’t do that,” Gendron replied, adding that they’re constrained by the template used by the city. She added that they’ll be able to do more with AAPAC’s Facebook page, which allows them to be more flexible in what they can post.

Gendron said that she and Marsha Chamberlin are starting to craft an annual PR plan for the commission. They’re also planning to develop a manual on how to promote installations, like the upcoming West Park project.

Report of the Acting Chair

Cheryl Zuellig, chair of AAPAC’s planning committee, also chaired Tuesday’s meeting in the absence of AAPAC chair Margaret Parker, who has been focused for the last two months on her entry in the Grand Rapids’ ArtPrize competition.

Zuellig gave a report about a recent meeting that she and Elaine Sims had with Sue McCormick, the city’s public services administrator. They’d talked about the hiring of a new public art administrator to replace Katherine Talcott, who has stepped out of that role to take on special public art projects on an ad hoc basis for the city. Zuellig characterized the discussion with McCormick as useful, and said that McCormick was going to write a job description for the position that would clarify its role and scope. The job wouldn’t change, Zuellig said, but the role would be more clearly defined. For example, it won’t be a project management role.

McCormick will rely on AAPAC to distribute the job posting, Zuellig said. Marsha Chamberlin volunteered to take on that task, and suggested posting it on various venues, including the Arts Alliance website, ArtServe,  offices of college career services, and Americans for the Arts, among others.

Zuellig said they hope to hire someone by the beginning of next year. It’s a part-time position.

In their meeting with McCormick, they also discussed the issue of working with the DDA, Sims said. McCormick clarified that working with the DDA would be like working with any other entity – the DDA had no special status regarding the Percent for Art program. Previously, there was some confusion about whether the relationship differed because the DDA managed city-owned parking structures.

Zuellig noted that this was part of a broader discussion regarding the role of AAPAC – what the commission was obligated to do under the Percent for Art ordinance, and what they could choose to do beyond that. The Percent for Art program captures 1% from the budget of all city capital projects, to be set aside for public art. AAPAC serves as an advisory body to the city council, making recommendations on specific projects funded through the program. [link to the Ann Arbor city code – click on Chapter 24: Public Art, which lays out the responsibilities of AAPAC.]

AAPAC isn’t obligated to handle the DDA’s public art projects, Zuellig said, though they might choose to do so. It fits into previous discussions that commissioners have had about not taking on more than they can handle, she said. Knowing what their obligations are can help them prioritize.

Commissioners present: Connie Brown, Marsha Chamberlin, Cathy Gendron, Elaine Sims, Cheryl Zuellig. Others: Venita Harrison, city management assistant.

Absent: Jim Curtis, Jeff Meyers, Margaret Parker.

Next regular meeting: Tuesday, Nov. 9 at 4:30 p.m., 7th floor conference room of the City Center Building, 220 E. Huron St. [confirm date]

About 30 people attended the Aug. 17 Ann Arbor Park Advisory Commission meeting. Prior to the start, city councilmember Mike Anglin (far right) talks with Nancy Kaplan. Standing at the left is William Newcomb, a member of the city's golf task force, talking with PAC chair Julie Grand. In the foreground are Sandra Arlinghaus and William Arlinghaus. (Photos by the writer.)

The issue drew two city councilmembers to the meeting – Sabra Briere (Ward 1) and Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2) – as well as former and current council candidates Sumi Kailasapathy, Jack Eaton and John Floyd. Councilmember Mike Anglin, who serves as an ex-officio member of PAC, also attended. Former planning commissioner Sandra Arlinghaus and her son William Arlinghaus both spoke to PAC, urging them to widen the scope of the RFP so that it might include more creative possibilities, like a location for cremains.

A couple of people also spoke in opposition of the Fuller Road Station project, citing similarities with the Huron Hills situation. In both cases, they said, the city is attempting to use parkland for other purposes. The Fuller Road Station is a proposed parking structure and bus depot, which might someday include a train station.

During deliberations, most commissioners voiced support for the RFP, noting that the golf course – though doing better – is still losing money. [The accounting method used to determine how the golf course is performing financially was a point of contention by some speakers during public commentary.] Several commissioners pointed out that the city is under no obligation to accept any of the proposals that might be submitted. And Colin Smith, manager of parks and recreation, emphasized that the city would retain ownership of the land – there are no plans to sell Huron Hills, he said. He also noted that the RFP calls for proposals to be golf-related.

The plan is to issue the RFP on Sept. 3, with responses due at the end of October. A selection committee will review the proposals and make a recommendation to PAC, probably in December. City council would make the final decision on whether to proceed with any of the proposals.

Huron Hills Golf Course RFP

The city owns two golf courses, Huron Hills Golf Course and Leslie Park Golf Course, covering more than 275 acres. In 2007 the city hired James Keegan, managing principal of Golf Convergence, to evaluate the performance – financial and otherwise – of the courses, and make recommendations for change. This was done in the wake of declining revenues and play at the courses, and debate over whether the land should be put to different use. In his report, Keegan projected that the courses would continue to lose money for at least six years. In May of 2008, city council approved a plan to reinvest in the courses, using funds from the park maintenance and improvement tax.

During staff and city council budget discussions in late 2009 and early 2010, the possibility of pursuing a public/private partnership for Huron Hills was discussed. Though the council never explicitly made a decision on the issue, they made an implicit determination at a budget work session, indicating that staff should develop an RFP to solicit proposals. A draft of that RFP was the topic of discussion at Tuesday’s PAC meeting. [.pdf file of Huron Hills Golf Course draft RFP]

PAC last received a detailed update on the performance of the golf courses at their November 2009 meeting, given by Doug Kelly, the city’s director of golf. But the issue has emerged more recently during public commentary – at the city council’s June 7, 2010 meeting, as well as at PAC’s June 15, 2010 meeting. Several people at those meetings spoke against the plan to issue an RFP. One of those speakers also attended Tuesday’s meeting.

Huron Hills RFP: Public Commentary

Janet Cassebaum told commissioners that they had a big responsibility – they are stewards of Ann Arbor parkland. The city is issuing an RFP that will result in commercial development between Huron River Drive and the Huron River, she said. “We are not fooled by the language in the RFP – this is commercial development.” The golf course’s “front seven” is the gateway to the city – a city that prides itself on open space and parkland. Residents call Ann Arbor “Tree Town,” she noted. But instead of open space and beautiful trees, people will see an ugly fence, lots of netting, lights at night and a large parking lot. “Do what you are charged to do – reject the RFP,” she concluded, “and preserve the parkland.”

Ted Annis asked commissioners to declare the RFP “dead on arrival.” It was ill-conceived and should never have been drafted. It amounts to a constructive sale of city parkland, he said – and it doesn’t matter what other terms they use to describe it, like “lease” or “use agreement.” It’s a constructive sale for 20 years, worded in a way that’s intended to circumvent the city’s charter amendment, which prohibits the sale of parkland unless approved by voters.

Annis then pointed to the city’s greenbelt program. Voters approved a millage used to buy development rights for properties surrounding Ann Arbor. Yet inside Ann Arbor, the city is prepared to sell development rights to its parkland, Annis said. “This should offend you the way it offends me. It’s really very disturbing.” Finally, Annis – describing himself as a businessman who’s good at cost accounting – noted that the city makes an economic argument for its approach to Huron Hills. But the cost accounting used for the golf operation is inconsistent with the financial view that the city takes of all other parks, he said. If the golf operations were treated like other parks, you’d find that they actually make a modest net contribution to the city’s general fund, he said – the economic argument if false. He urged PAC to keep the integrity of the commission and stand up for greenspace.

Ann Schriber began by saying she didn’t understand why the city council wants so badly to dismantle Huron Hills – one of the most beautiful open spaces in the city. The city hired an expensive consultant to look at its golf courses and came up with a proposal to sell part of Huron Hills for development, she said. There was a great huge hue and cry over the possibility of selling Huron Hills, and the city backed off, she said, but not for long. Now, this RFP is looking for a public/private partnership to make the golf course pay for itself. If that means a driving range, then it will result in lights, fences, nets and buildings, she said – and there goes the beautiful open land, which can’t be taken back.

Schriber said she’s not a golfer and doesn’t live next to the course, but she drives by it nearly every day and takes great pride in it. She always points it out when she gives tours to potential newcomers to the city. When Ann Arbor was named by Money magazine as one of the top small cities in the country, they mentioned specifically the golf courses, she said.

Like Annis, Schriber mentioned the greenbelt millage that voters approved, providing millions of dollars to protect open space and greenspace. She held up a 2005 clipping of a front page article in the Ann Arbor News, which reported that the city had spent $5 million to protect four farms for the greenbelt. Now the city wants to sell what it already owns, and which benefits all the citizens of Ann Arbor. “This makes no sense to me,” she said. Schriber said that a current councilmember’s wife made a statement to former councilmember Mike Reid when this issue of selling part of Huron Hills came up before, calling it a “short-sighted, lame-brained plan.” The same woman wrote to mayor John Hieftje, Schriber said, asking him to save Huron Hills for everyone who enjoys it, from golfers to walkers to sledders to those who drive down Huron Parkway.

Nancy Kaplan read a letter written by Paul Bancel, who she said couldn’t attend the meeting. He’d sent a longer version to city councilmembers, she said. The statement was directed to councilmembers Mike Anglin and Christopher Taylor, who serve as ex-officio members of PAC. [Taylor was absent from Tuesday's meeting.] If the proposal goes forward to build a commercial driving range on some of the most prime open space in Ann Arbor, “a great tragedy will occur.” Taxpayers are paying a tax to support the greenbelt outside the city, yet city officials propose to eliminate some of the most beautiful and visible greenspace within the city limits. It goes against the PROS plan (the city’s Parks, Recreation and Open Space plan) and all the efforts to beautify entrances to Ann Arbor.

The main reason given for commercializing Huron Hills is an accounting entry in the general fund, Kaplan continued. Golf operations, cash-on-cash, will contribute to the city overhead in 2011 and this contribution will continue to grow. Huron Hills is the people’s golf course, and Leslie Park is the championship course – they complement each other and depend on each other. Administrative and overhead costs in 2011 will almost equal the general fund subsidy. These costs will continue, regardless of the fate of the golf course, she said. Why have expenses been allowed to double in less than five years? Bancel served for the past two years on the golf advisory task force, and at every meeting the emphasis was on revenue. Revenues and rounds have increased substantially, but it is now time for a discussion on costs. Building a driving range is not the way to cut costs. Closing beautiful, historic Huron Hills, which has been a golf course for over 90 years, is an irreversible act and it should not happen.

James D’Amour said he wasn’t a resident of the Ann Arbor Hills neighborhood, but he feels like one. Huron Hills is probably  the most beautiful golf course in Washtenaw County, he said – “and that’s saying a lot.” He said he was driving past Huron Hills recently and gnashed his teeth recalling something that PAC commissioner Tim Berla had said a couple months ago. Berla had “rather callously” said if you don’t like the charter amendment, change it, D’Amour said – in reference to Fuller Road Station, and the city charter requiring voter approval of the sale of parkland.

It’s pretty clear what the voters wanted, D’Amour said – any transfer of public parkland should come with a public vote. On this basis alone, PAC should reject any consideration of this RFP. It seems as though the city is at war with its parks system and its assets, D’Amour said. He added that he’s a strong supporter of the greenbelt but said it sends a puzzling message when the city is acquiring property in the greenbelt but selling property – “or whatever the heck we’re doing with our parklands” – in the city. It’s not right or necessary, and PAC should dismiss the RFP out of hand.

Noting that she isn’t a neighbor to the golf course either, Ethel Potts said the parks belong to all of us. She assumed that commissioners knew a lot about the RFP – that at the very least, they’d been asked to help write it. The public counts on PAC to protect the parks, she said. What benefits will this RFP bring to the public or the parks? If the city removed its administrative charges, the golf course would be even more successful. The RFP might be tempting because a proposal could bring in more money to the parks system through the lease or rental of Huron Hills– as is planned with Fuller Road Station, she said.

But Potts warned that the parks support from the city’s general fund would be reduced proportionally. She also cautioned PAC to look very carefully at the businesses that respond to the RFP – what’s their history, and how are they doing in the current economy? Potts concluded by saying that if PAC hadn’t been asked to help write the RFP, then it was a disgraceful disregard of an advisory commission.

Bill Cassebaum posed some questions about the RFP, which he said PAC could address during their discussion. On page 26 of the RFP, the business arrangement is defined as a contract to accomplish a specific purpose. Yet to him, it walks and quacks like a lease. Does this circumvent Section 14A of the city charter, which requires concurrence by at least eight members of city council? he asked. On page 12, it refers to income from driving range rentals. Does this mean that development of a commercial driving range will be acceptable?

On page 22, the RFP states that the city has the right to use the premises for conferences, meetings and so forth. Does this mean that development of a conference center is acceptable? On page 14, under assumptions, the RFP states that the contractor guarantees not to abandon or otherwise breach the contract. Cassebaum said he didn’t see any backup to the guarantee, like posting a bond. If it’s covered elsewhere in the RFP, he said he couldn’t find it. He also said he didn’t see any prohibition against assignment of the contract, or subcontracting, to third parties. On page 23, the contractor certifies that it has no personal or financial interest in the project, other than the fee it is to receive under the agreement. Will the city be financially obligated to the contractor?

William Arlinghaus said he owns a home in Ann Arbor and lives in Grand Rapids, and went to high school and college in Ann Arbor. He’s now president of Greenscape Michigan, a cemetery corporation. Cemeteries are one of the best ways to preserve greenspace in an urbanized environment, he said, and so are golf courses – the two uses can be blended fairly well. The purpose of the RFP is to generate more revenue for the city, he said, adding that he was capable of giving them a proposal that night that would preserve the golf course’s natural features, allow it to operate as an 18-hole golf course, and double its revenues without destroying any natural features.

If they must move forward with the RFP, he urged them narrow it and have it be considered only as an 18-hole course. At the same time, they should widen the scope of what’s permissible, he said, opening it up to those with experience managing large tracts of land – not just golf course or driving range managers. He said the city can solve its revenue problem with a better private/public partnership that doesn’t require an RFP, and that doesn’t give away, lease or sell the land. There are many other options available. They need to preserve the natural features that make Ann Arbor a great place. The RFP urged responders to think creatively, he noted, adding that there are lots of creative opportunities that can be explored.

Saying she supported what the previous speaker said, Sandra Arlinghaus told commissioners that she is president of Archive Memorials Online, a trust-funded nonprofit based in Ann Arbor. One possibility is the memorialization of cremains, which might be put on a golf course perimeter. Archive Memorials Online has been doing Internet memorialization since 2002 – at the time, they were the only trust-funded nonprofit doing that work in the world, she said.

As president, Arlinghaus said she was there to be helpful in any way that she could. She said she’s well known around town as being a highly creative person, and she’s willing to bring that creativity to bear on the Huron Hills issue. She ticked through a list of ways in which she’s been involved in community service, including previously serving on the city’s planning commission and environmental commission, among other groups. She’s currently chair of the technology committee for the American Contract Bridge League. The technology connection is important, she said, because that’s how memories survive. There are many creative ways to do that, she said.

Myra Larson noted that at city council’s June 7, 2010 meeting, she spoke during public commentary about the Huron Hills golf course, as did Jane Lumm and Leslie Morris. They asked council not to issue the RFP, she said – the council didn’t pay attention to them, so now she was at PAC’s meeting to address the same issue, hopefully with a more positive result. She referred to page 5, section 5 of the RFP:

Environmental and Ground Conditions. Any design or development should incorporate best practice in stormwater management, and if possible highlight other environmentally-friendly design elements. There are no other specific restrictions which impact potential design or site renovations although alternative usage should be aligned with strategies contained in the Parks and Recreation Open Space (PROS) plan. All Respondents should be prepared to address how both ground conditions and operations would be impacted during the implementation phase of their proposal.

The statement is an embarrassment, she said, in a community where education is the main industry, and where the Huron River is a main source of water. She said to keep in mind that the words used in the RFP are “should” and “if possible” – she indicated that this meant there’s nothing firmly required. And references to “land north of Huron Parkway” really refers to the Huron River, she said. Be forthright about what the impact will be on the river – it’s a very important part of this community. Any alteration of the golf course will have a negative impact on the river, she said, which needs all the tender loving care we can give it. Like several other speakers, Larson also mentioned the greenbelt millage. She asked how they could reconcile giving away parkland when the voters voted to tax themselves to acquire parkland.

Betty Richart said she was raised in South Jersey and her father always aspired to raising his family on a golf course, because he thought it would develop character and honesty. He built a course in 1929, and managed to hang on to it during the Great Depression. When she moved to Ann Arbor 45 years ago, Richart said all she wanted to do was to live near a golf course – and she found a home near Huron Hills.

Right away Richart got involved in junior golf there. Over the years she’s taught children golf and she’s taught in Sunday school, and they learn as much about life from the game of golf as they do in Sunday school, she said. Richart said she worked with the U.S. Golf Association for 30 years, and the group gave her $18,000 to bring kids from outside the city to learn to play golf. This is about more than just the little city of Ann Arbor, she said. The USGA is eager to keep parkland for golf because it’s a game that everyone can play, if they can walk.

Describing Huron Hills as a treasure, Arthur Holtz said that installing a driving range would be out of character for what the city is trying to do with its parks. It doesn’t matter if you play golf or just love the vista by the river. He appreciated that commissioners were courteous enough to listen to him and others, and he hoped they would take into consideration more than just dollars and cents. It’s the wrong place for a driving range, which would diminish the area. He hoped they would keep it as a golf course because he thinks Huron Hills can succeed as a golf course.

Wendy Carman raised her objection to issuing the RFP, saying that Huron Hills is in wonderful shape. Play is up, and the addition of golf carts is bringing in more revenues. The course serves the needs of many levels of players, she noted. To issue the RFP breaks faith with the public who voted in favor of the city charter amendment – they believed they had voted for something that would keep the parks public, she said. The golf course would probably be able to support itself financially, she said, if it weren’t saddled with administrative costs that aren’t directly tied to the course itself. Carman said she didn’t know what PAC’s abilities are with regard to stopping the RFP, but she hoped they’d consider turning it down.

Huron Hills RFP: Background

Colin Smith, the city’s manager of parks and recreation, began by saying it would be good to take a few steps back and talk about how this process started. At a December 2009 budget retreat, city council and senior staff talked about a range of “big ideas” to deal with the city’s financial situation. Many of those ideas dealt with parks, Smith said, and one related to a possible public/private partnership at Huron Hills.

From The Chronicle’s report of that retreat:

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

When the focus then came to rest on Huron Hills Golf Course as the less profitable of the two courses, [Ward 2 councilmember] Stephen Rapundalo lamented: “Here we go again!” It was possibly an allusion to the contentious general election Rapundalo only narrowly won against write-in challenger Ed Amonsen in 2007, when a central issue had been the question of whether the city intended to sell Huron Hills.

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

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

At Tuesday’s PAC meeting, Smith said that after the budget retreat, city council next got a more detailed look at possible parks proposals at a Jan. 25, 2010 working session. At that time, he said, the council gave staff a directive to develop an RFP for Huron Hills. [Though the issue was discussed at that Jan. 25 meeting, there was no directive issued then. The topic came up again at a Feb. 8 council working session:

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

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

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

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

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

Huron Hills RFP: Staff Report

Smith pointed out that the RFP hadn’t been issued yet – it was still a draft. Last week it was reviewed by the city’s golf task force, and some changes were made based on that feedback. In some ways, it’s similar to the Argo Dam RFP that was recently issued, Smith said. [See Chronicle coverage: "Two Dam Options for Argo"] It’s not typical that RFPs get public input, he said, but obviously in cases where there’s a lot of public interest, it’s important to do.

Smith reviewed a timeline for the RFP process:

• Sept. 3: RFP issued
• Oct. 29: RFP response deadline
• Nov. 1: Evaluation of responses begins
• Nov. 15: Interviews begin
• Dec. 8: Golf task force review
• Dec. 21: PAC recommendation
• TBD: Selection submitted for approval by city council
• TBD: Contract begins

A selection committee will do the initial evaluation of responses, Smith said. That committee will consist of city staff, and representatives from the golf task force, PAC and city council.

Smith then went over some highlights of the RFP. The purpose is to seek creative proposals, he said. Similar to the Argo Dam RFP, he said, it’s left wide open to see what, if any, proposals come back. It might be a proposal to run the entire 18 holes as it is, or someone might propose a modified land use. But they’d have to do that within the scope of remaining golf-related, incorporating these principals:

• A commitment to growing the game of golf.
• Conduciveness to entry level golfers.
• Accessibility and affordability of recreational golf opportunities, especially for children and seniors.
• To better serve the Ann Arbor golf community.

In the section on objectives, Smith noted that the RFP calls for the respondent to provide a strategic vision for the project, to show how they’d achieve a financial return for the city, and to demonstrate financial stability and experience in similar situations. If someone proposes changing the layout of Huron Hills, the city will want assurances of their financial stability, for example. The respondents also have to address management and oversight, environmental and ground conditions, and provide a development plan.

Smith noted that if a proposal called for changes on the grounds – building or removing things – it would be subject to review by the planning commission, and they’d have to follow city ordinances, like the natural features ordinance. Instead of delving into great detail, he said, the RFP mentions more generally the areas that the proposals need to deal with.

Each proposal will be evaluated with points assigned to different categories: professional qualifications (15 points); proposed work plan – benefits to users (30 points); proposed work plan – financial benefit to the city (40 points); and interview/presentation (15 points).

Smith said it was important to point out that the RFP explicitly states that the city will continue to own the Huron Hills property, and that it will continue to operate as part of the parks system as a fully public recreational facility. The respondent would be an independent contractor, operating under a negotiated agreement with the city. It speaks to the fact that in theory, the selected respondent could be a private operator of golf courses, or it could be a more creative proposal.

The RFP includes mention of a 20-year agreement, but it doesn’t have to be 20 years, Smith said. If American Golf, for example, said they’d like to manage the course, Smith said he doubted they’d want more than a three- or four-year agreement.

Smith also highlighted the section on the proposal’s scope of service, which outlines the tasks that a proposal would need to address. Tasks include an assessment of the current golf course, a proposal of services and a description of how those services would be provided, a staffing plan and a marketing plan. In evaluating proposals, Smith said, it will be important to know that if someone is providing a service for less cost, how do they plan to do that? At that lower cost, is the value good?

There are three pages of “assumptions” that respondents must consider in their proposal. Smith pointed out that the first assumption is that the city will remain owner of the property. Another important one to note, he said, is that if Huron Hills remains a golf course, the city can retain control over the cost of services. It’s still public property, and there for the benefit of the public.

Finally, Smith highlighted another one of the RFP’s assumptions:

The Contractor shall be required to relieve the City of all operating and capital expenses associated with HHGC unless specifically agreed to by the City. Respondents are advised that any request for City-funded capital improvement on-site will be considered only if the project constitutes a public purpose and meets all statutory financing and City debt service conditions.

If a proposal is accepted, it would allow the city administrator to negotiate a contract with the respondent, Smith said. The reality is that the RFP can’t include an example of a contract, he said, because the details will depend very much on the type of proposal that might be accepted.

Smith said that the staff developed this RFP under the council directive as part of a budget process. At this point, they’re looking for feedback prior to it being issued, he said.

Huron Hills: Commissioner Deliberations

Julie Grand, who chairs PAC, began by thanking Smith and his staff for their hard work in developing the RFP.

Gwen Nystuen wanted to know what the process would be to provide feedback. Would they need to make a resolution? Smith said they could give input at the meeting, or email suggestions to Grand by the end of the week, and she would forward those to him.

Nystuen wondered what kind of feedback the golf task force had given. Grand, who also serves on that task force, said they strengthened the language related to the environment, adding mention of the PROS plan. They added the key principle of “to better serve the Ann Arbor golf community,” and gave more weight to the presentation in the scoring criteria.

At this point, it was overall received positively, Grand said, because it’s so open-ended. It’s important to remember that they could reject all proposals, she said, “which is still a distinct possibility.”

Directing his question to councilmember Mike Anglin (Ward 5), one of two ex-officio councilmembers on PAC, Tim Berla asked what the purpose was of putting forward the RFP. Is it because the golf course manager doesn’t like the course any more, or that private industry could do a better job? Why are we doing this?

Anglin said there was never a vote taken on this by council – it was simply a discussion during a work session, and suddenly an RFP was produced. He said he was concerned – is it their task to raise $250,000? Is the city looking to privatize parts of running the park, because it’s getting too expensive? If that’s the purpose, then that should be clear, he said. He said he attended the meetings with the community two years ago, when these issues were first discussed. The golf courses are a standalone enterprise fund, he said, and like most recreational activities, it’s expensive to run. The city hired a consultant to look at the situation, and out of that came several recommendations.

As for Berla’s question – why are we doing this? – Anglin said that council never had an open discussion about that. That comment elicited rueful laughter from some members of the public in attendance. Anglin then noted that councilmember Stephen Rapundalo was there, and could speak to the question if he wanted. [Huron Hills is located in Ward 2, which Rapundalo represents.]

Rapundalo came to the podium, and said that the directive was give to develop an RFP – one of many directives that were given during budget deliberations. There’s no need for a direct vote to give the staff direction on something like that, he said, which was exploratory in nature. It was clear there was an interest to see if they could improve golf operations and the golf experience. From the outset, they’ve been concerned about the long-term sustainability of Huron Hills as a golf course. The staff was given a directive to explore that, and the best way to do that is to seek input through a formal RFP, he said.

Smith added that every recreation facility and operation in the city is being looked at to see if they can be operated more efficiently and effectively. They have to do that, he said. Asking the question of “Are there possibilities?” doesn’t mean it’s a done deal, he noted. But the staff would be remiss if they didn’t ask.

Berla recalled that when the report from the golf consultant was delivered in late 2007, Berla had suggested they talk about closing Huron Hills because it was losing so much money. His personal opinion is that the city should subsidize good activities – which golf certainly is. But they should subsidize those that aren’t provided by others, so that there’s a public interest in providing the service. Then they should think about how much it’s worth to do that. At the time, it seemed to him that the city was subsidizing golf at about $15 per round – “I found that really upsetting,” Berla said.

The purpose of the RFP process is pro-golf, he said – to avoid losing so much money, which is putting a strain on the city budget. He said he’d never want to sell Huron Hills, but he’d previously suggested putting soccer fields or other activities on parts of it. It would still be a beautiful park, but it wouldn’t cost so much to run as a golf course.

Berla then asked who’d make the final decision, assuming there were proposals submitted. Was it the city council? Yes, Smith said. Then what opportunities would there be for public input between now and then, Berla asked. Smith said that when the proposals are submitted and reviewed, they might decide to conduct the interviews on Community Television Network (CTN), much like the interviews for proposals on the development of the Library Lot were televised. Then it would go to the golf task force, he said, which is a public meeting, followed by PAC and city council. Meetings for both of those two entities have opportunity for public comment.

Berla wanted to know if there’s a limit on whether buildings could be constructed. Could someone build a restaurant or auditorium? Smith said those examples don’t tie in with the scope of the RFP, but potentially you could build something that’s related to golf, like a classroom. If so, the project would have to go through the planning commission.

Berla asked whether there was any way that the city could get stuck with the bill for a project at the golf course. Smith said there’s a section in the RFP that talks about how the contractor couldn’t walk away from the project. But if a contract were negotiated, that would likely be addressed in more detail.

Sam Offen said that if the city builds something on city-owned land, it must comply with building codes, but not zoning. What if a private entity built on city land? Smith said that in the case of the Huron Hills RFP, if a proposal called for building on the land, it would be no different than if parks and recreation decided to build something.

Offen asked what a CUB agreement was. [It's one of the forms to be completed in the RFP.] CUB stands for Construction Unity Board – the CUB agreement would require a respondent to use union labor, or to abide by the existing collective bargaining agreements of the appropriate labor unions.

Offen then asked how the city was defining golf. Was it just the traditional game, or could it be something like disc golf? Smith said that right now, the scope of the agreement was for recreational golf opportunities. He didn’t think that disc golf fell into that scope, but it’s something they could look at. There are all sorts of ideas that could come up, he said.

Offen also asked about the interviews. Sixty minutes per proposal seemed like a long time, he said. Smith responded that an hour goes by pretty quickly. He said he’d hope respondents would be able to speak for that long with enthusiasm, passion and strategic foresight.

One part of the RFP asks for respondents to do an assessment of Huron Hills. How thorough would that be, Offen asked – similar to what the golf consultant had done? No, Smith replied. There’s no need for respondents to reinvent the wheel, but they do need to demonstrate that they know about the current operations, as well as the golf course’s history. Last year, there were over 20,000 rounds there, which is a vast increase over two years ago, Smith said. It fills a need, and the proposal needs to reflect that understanding.

Offen noted that two people work at Huron Hills. What does the city anticipate in terms of staffing? Would they be hired – and if not, what happens to their employment with the city? Smith said that people who work at Huron Hills have specialized skills, and he’d want to see how that might be incorporated into a business plan.

Offen said he thought the RFP was a good step, though he knew it was controversial. It gives the city an idea of what kind of creative ideas are out there, with no obligation to do anything. It’s been a very time-consuming process for staff to develop the RFP, Offen said, and he trusts that council is well aware of that. Offen observed that if any ideas are valid, they can negotiate something to the benefit of the city. If not, they won’t. Smith said that even if they don’t end up choosing a proposal, it will allow the city to see how they’re performing, relative to others in the golf business.

Tim Doyle said in his career he’s been responding to government RFPs for 35 years. He described the RFP as very exploratory – you could end up with very diverse proposals, from a putt-putt golf course to a learning center. As a contractor, he said, the thing that’s disturbing about a general RFP is that you have to spend a lot of time writing the proposal, and being careful, because it’s a binding document. He suggested that instead of an RFP, the city could issue a request for information (RFI). The disadvantage is that it would likely yield more proposals, he said. But as it stands, the RFP doesn’t allow for things like a cemetery as adjunct to a golf course. The city might not get any proposals, he said, because no one will be willing to bind themselves to this.

Smith said that the thought behind going with an RFP rather than an RFI is that they did want to be specific that Huron Hills would remain a golf course, or an area for golf. They’re not interested in looking at the possibility of a cemetery. “That’s not the direction we’ve taken yet,” he said.

Doyle said what he heard about the cemetery was interesting to him. They weren’t talking about headstones, but rather about a designated spot for the remains of cremation. Other than having to walk around it, golfers wouldn’t be bothered at all. Doyle also said that the city could write an RFI that was restrictive, and say explicitly that you want certain uses. But for an RFP, you’re asking for a much greater level of detail, asking contractors to tell you exactly what they’re going to do, how much it’s going to cost, and to spend a fair amount of energy doing that. It might cause people not to respond, Doyle said, because they’ll think it’s money and time they’ll just be throwing away.

Smith said the city needs that amount of work to be done, so that they can see what sort of financial return a proposal might have for the city. It does require a level of commitment, he said, and they’ll just have to see what they get.

John Lawter said that there’s a perception, deserved or not, that the golf course is struggling because of the heavy administrative costs that the city charges. If Huron Hills is managed by a contractor, what happens to those overhead charges? Smith replied that until he had a proposal to review, it was too difficult to say.

Offen had another question: Are there other city facilities that are run by an outside contractor? The only one that came to mind was the community centers, he said. Smith clarified that the Bryant and Northside community centers are run by the nonprofit Community Action Network, under a contract with the city. They were hired because the city felt they were better equipped than city staff to provide the services, and it ended up costing the city less. A different example is the Leslie Science and Nature Center, which used to be part of the city’s parks system. It’s now a separate nonprofit, but the city still owns the land and buildings there, and assists with staff and capital improvements.

A public/private partnership isn’t inconsistent with other things the city has done, Smith said. Ann Arbor has an exclusive agreement with Pepsi, for example, as a vendor for the parks system. So it’s not unheard of, Smith said, and he expects to see more of those agreements in the future. And it’s not just about the money – the quality of service needs to be as good as what the city can provide, or better, he said.

Julie Grand asked about retirement costs – would that have to be negotiated? Smith said it was difficult to speak at that level of detail without seeing a specific proposal, but if the golf courses remained as an enterprise fund. And if a worker spent most of his career there, then the fund would bear most of the retirement costs.

Gwen Nystuen noted that Fuller Park and Huron Hills are prime parkland for the city – if the city didn’t own the property, they’d be trying to figure out how to buy the land. Yet they’re now converting them into a quasi-commercial situation. She wanted to know what legal protections are provided to land that’s designated as parkland, as opposed to just public land. What can the public expect? The public has bought these lands, she said, and they have voted to have a say if they’re ever to be sold or if the use changes. Nystuen wanted to know from the city’s legal staff: What is the status of dedicated parkland? (In the audience, Ted Annis raised his hands, giving Nystuen two thumbs up.) Smith said he’d pass along that request.

Doug Chapman said it was his understanding that the reason this RFP came about was because Huron Hills was losing money and it might have to close. This was something they were trying as an alternative – an alternative to closing the golf course. One concern he had was that the term “alternative golf use” was too vague. What does that mean? He suggested it be more clearly defined.

Berla said he wanted to respond to something that Nystuen had said. Everyone knows that parkland can’t be sold – that’s clear. He said he loves to see the public come to PAC meetings, especially since there were constructive comments. But what he counts as the “public will” are the things that the public voted on, like the sale of parkland. The main thing the public votes for are city council positions, and those councilmembers are taking positions on these and other issues. “I hope the public is holding them accountable,” he said. These are the people who are elected – this is democracy.

Berla said he finds it upsetting that they’re talking about what the proper uses of parkland are – it says in the RFP that the use is for golf. That’s exactly what’s in the PROS plan too. He said he finds it strange that they’re talking about this. Regarding commercial uses, what about the farmers market? he asked. It’s really important and a great part of the community, but it’s a public/private partnership. He supports that, saying it benefits the community. What he’d oppose is if he thought there was cronyism – deals that weren’t benefiting the public, but were only benefiting the private entity. In the case of the Huron Hills RFP, it seems like it’s benefiting the public, he said, and it’s a good thing.

Grand clarified that the golf courses are receiving money from the general fund for six years. There’s no guarantee that they’ll continue to receive general fund support beyond that. They can argue about accounting and the municipal service charges, she said, but the point is that based on the accounting that’s used now, Huron Hills is operating at a significant deficit that the parks system couldn’t cover without sacrificing other facilities. Maybe it’s not what people want to hear, she said, but that’s the financial reality. The result of the RFP might be that the city is doing the best it can, and that no one else wants to touch it. Then they’ll have to deal with how to overcome the deficit.

They are trying to keep the process as transparent as possible, Grand said, and she’s open to making arrangements for more public input, if it’s necessary.

Karen Levin said she wanted to acknowledge the work that’s gone into developing the RFP. The intent is to see if there’s a way to manage Huron Hills more efficiently, she said, and if there is, they want people’s ideas. She said she supports that.

Offen asked if PAC could see a revised version of the RFP, after their feedback had been included. Smith said he would send out a revised draft.

Huron Hills RFP: Public Commentary, Round 2

Several people took a second turn at public commentary at the end of the PAC meeting, responding to the commissioners’ discussion.

Nancy Kaplan said she went to the meeting of the golf advisory task force during which the RFP was discussed, and noted that as a member of the public, you can’t participate or ask questions – you’re just an observer. At that meeting it was stated that cash-on-cash, Huron Hills is ahead, she said, and that this fact is not well known. Looking at how the finances are kept is important. Golf is the only recreation facility that’s in an enterprise fund and that must make money, Kaplan stated.

She also pointed out that Huron Hills and Leslie Park are very different courses with very different audiences, and that needs to be kept in mind. It seems that piece by piece, we’re giving away our parkland, she said. It seems there is no protection. When voters supported the idea that there could be no sale of parkland without a public vote, they didn’t realize that everything except a sale would be ok, she said. It’s very disingenuous to say that there’s protection for the parks. Finally, she said, if you work from a flawed premise, no matter how deeply you dig, you won’t come up with a reasonable answer. It’s a flawed premise to say that the way to save Huron Hills is to put out an RFP, which will destroy the vista there. There has to be something that we can count on to protect parkland, she said. She concluded by thanking commissioners for all they were doing.

Betty Richart reminded commissioners that golf is an 18-hole game. Anything that whacks off parts of the course will prevent people from being able to play tournaments there.

Ted Annis responded to comments that Tim Berla made about the city subsidizing golfers. That’s not quite the case, he said. If you apply enterprise accounting to other facilities, like the senior center, they’d have to close. If you apply general fund accounting to the golf operations, then revenues cover their direct out-of-pocket expenses, he said. Add in the half-million-dollar administrative service charge, however, and it looks like they’re losing money. “You’re being misled, completely misled, by this notion that you’re subsidizing the rounds of golf played,” he said. “You’re not.”

Annis also said that they seemed intent on issuing something, though he wished they wouldn’t. If they’re going to, he said, then the request for information (RFI) makes some kind of sense. Finally, he noted that Colin Smith said council gave direction to issue an RFP. But then councilman Mike Anglin said that there was no direction, it was just a discussion. He asked for some clarification on that.

William Arlinghaus said that any proposal he’d make wouldn’t change the golf course in any way – it would probably remain managed by the city. He also asked a question about golf passes, which can now be purchased and used at both Huron Hills and Leslie Park. Would people still be able to do that, if Huron Hills becomes a public/private partnership?

Fuller Road Station

Fuller Road Station wasn’t on PAC’s agenda this month, but commissioner Gwen Nystuen asked for an update. Colin Smith, manager of parks and recreation, indicated that he’d provide an update during his manager’s report. However, he did not mention the project in his report.

At PAC’s meeting in July, commissioners were briefed on the project by Eli Cooper, the city’s transportation program manager. More recently, site plans were filed with the city’s planning department in early August. [See Chronicle coverage: "Site Plan Filed for Fuller Road Station"]

Fuller Road Station: Public Commentary

Two people spoke about Fuller Road Station during public commentary.

George Gaston said his issues were basically the same as the concerns over Huron Hills – it’s just a different park and a different project. He voiced opposition to Fuller Road Station, saying the same arguments against the RFP for Huron Hills can be applied to Fuller Road Station too. He mentioned that he’d given commissioners a copy of an email he’d sent to the mayor and city council. [.pdf of email] Gaston said he hoped PAC could take a stronger stand on these issues. These projects should go to a public vote, he said, and it seems odd that the city is buying development rights outside the city while granting development rights within the city. “Please pay attention,” he said.

Rita Mitchell said she was there to talk about Fuller Road Station, but her comments were applicable to Huron Hills as well. She thanked commissioners for their attention to Fuller Road Station, and said she knows they represent those who are interested in city parks. Residents have supported Fuller Park with their tax dollars since the early 1960s, she said. It’s a core part of Ann Arbor, near the Huron River. She said she appreciated their concerns about the parks budget and the openness of the public process that they address. However, the resolution that PAC sent to council lacks acknowledgment of the citizens’ interest in parks, indicated by the vote that changed the city charter to require voter input on the sale of parkland.

A memorandum of understanding for the use of parkland for 75 years or more is essentially a sale, Mitchell said. Building a parking structure that will last that long will set a precedent that will apply to all parks. The PAC resolution to council didn’t address the precedent issue, she said. Mitchell asked PAC to change their resolution, and make it a recommendation that actually protects parks. Don’t nibble away at the parks with temporary parking lots or leases. “Really think about what the long-term implications are,” she said.

During the second opportunity for public comment, Mitchell said she’d been looking forward to the update on Fuller Road Station – that’s why she’d stayed for the entire meeting – and she wondered what had happened to that.

West Park, PROS Plan Updates

Earlier in the meeting, parks planner Amy Kuras gave an update on West Park, which has been closed this spring and summer for massive renovations. “There are still big piles of dirt in the park,” she said, “but we’re moving them around.” [For background on the project, see Chronicle coverage: "West Park Renovations Get Fast-Tracked"]

The project is about two weeks behind schedule, Kuras said, but should be completed by the end of October. They discovered poor soils that needed to be removed, which set back their schedule a bit. In addition, recent heavy rains have washed out some of the work, she said.

Major changes to the stormwater system are underway, including installation of large swirl concentrators on the west side of the park. Stormwater that flows through these underground concrete devices is swirled in a cylindrical chamber, filtering out a large amount of sediment, oil, grease and other contaminants. The project also includes construction of bioswales – shallow excavated areas filled with native vegetation – that roughly follow the course of the Allen Creek tributary, which flows through the park in underground pipes.

Other changes include seating for the bandshell and a public art project there, the addition of a boardwalk, new stairs coming down the hill from Huron Street, moving the basketball court out of the floodway, and upgrading the condition of the baseball field.

Commissioner Sam Offen asked if the project was still on budget – roughly $3.5 million, funded in large part with federal stimulus dollars. Kuras reported that they’re within the budget’s 10% contingency at this point, and she doesn’t think they’ll exceed that amount. The city is asking the contractor to look at flood insurance coverage, to see if that might cover some of the costs related to recent heavy rains.

Colin Smith, the city’s parks and rec manager, noted that the changes aren’t intended to eliminate water from the park – it will just be managed better, he said.

Kuras also gave a brief update on revisions to the state-mandated Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) plan, which is done every five years. A draft is finished and being reviewed by city staff, and will then get feedback from the PROS steering committee. After that, the draft will be posted online for public input, Kuras said, probably in September or October. The plan will be presented to PAC and the planning commission later this year, before final approval is sought from city council. [For background on the PROS process, see Chronicle coverage: "Ann Arbor Planning with the PROS"]

Updates from the Parks & Rec Manager

Colin Smith gave updates on several projects, as part of his manager’s report.

The Argo Dam RFP was issued, and about 12 people attended a pre-bid meeting on Monday, Aug. 16. They toured the site and there were some interesting questions, he said. [For details on the Argo RFP, see Chronicle coverage: "Two Dam Options for Argo"] In the coming weeks, workers will be removing about 75-100 dead or dying trees on the dam’s embankment, as part of the vegetation management plan, Smith said. They might need to close the trail on certain days, depending on the work, he said.

He gave updates on efforts to raise revenues and cut costs at the Ann Arbor Senior Center and Mack Pool, which were both at risk of closing during the last budget cycle. [For details, see Chronicle coverage: "Shoring Up the Ann Arbor Senior Center"]

The final numbers for the FY2010 fiscal year, which ended June 30, will be presented at PAC’s September meeting, Smith said. Overall, parks did very well, he said. Several facilities – including Vets pool, the senior center, and the golf courses – exceeded the revenue that had been budgeted for the year.

Smith also described a new partnership the city has with Stonyfield Farm. The organic yogurt company will be in the city’s parks through Oct. 1, passing out free samples, and will donate $15,000 to either the senior center, Mack Pool or the parks and rec scholarship fund. Residents can “vote” for one of those options by depositing Stonyfield lids in containers at groceries throughout the area. More information about Stonyfield’s efforts in Ann Arbor is on the firm’s website. Smith described it as a nice partnership, giving exposure to some of the city’s parks and rec programs.

Present: Tim Berla, Doug Chapman, Tim Doyle, Julie Grand, John Lawter, Karen Levin, Sam Offen, Gwen Nystuen, councilmember Mike Anglin (ex-officio). Also Colin Smith, city parks manager.

Absent: David Barrett, councilmember Christopher Taylor (ex-officio)

Next meeting: PAC’s meeting on Tuesday, Sept. 21 begins at 4 p.m. at the studios of Community Television Network, 2805 S. Industrial Highway. [confirm date]