Because endless growth isn’t all it’s cracked up to be.

Because there’s a disconnect between those who pay the cost (resident property owners) and those who benefit (business owners, resident or not, and non-resident workers).

Because the larger economy is about to take a long recess and we’re going to be on our own for a while.

As I watch this whole thing play out, I’m amazed at how complex interjurisdictional efforts like this are. Four or five years ago I heard a local elected official lay out a vision for getting countywide transit on the ballot by November 2010. Appropriately, the AATA has followed a more deliberate and participatory process with their 30-year vision and 5-year plan.

Just today I overheard an employee at the Peoples Food Coop talk about the challenges he faces getting home from work because of poor weekend and evening bus service. I see a real need to build on our good M-F, 9-5 Ann Arbor service. So, while I’m champing at the bit to see this through, I support the decision to double-check the protocol and take the time needed to do it right.

The articles of incorporation lay out the initial board composition and how board members are to be selected:

The governing bodies of the Cities of Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti and the Charter Township of Pittsfield shall appoint their respective directors in accordance with their adopted policies and procedures for appointment to boards and commissions and retain the right to remove and replace such directors in accordance with the same procedures. The other districts select directors through Act 7 Interlocal Agreements, which contain procedures for appointment and removal. … The directors shall revisit the Board make-up if … all communities within one of the Act 7 districts withdraw from the Authority.

Re: “Has Ann Arbor received that packet?

From previous Chronicle reporting:

Responding to a phone query, Washtenaw County clerk staff told The Chronicle that certified letters had already been sent on Sept. 27 to the clerks of all jurisdictions in the county of an intent to file the articles of incorporation on Oct. 3. Letters were also sent to all elected officials in the county. Information included in that communication was the last day to opt out of inclusion – Nov. 2 – as well as sample resolutions that could be used by a jurisdiction’s governing body to decide the opt-out question. [.pdf of sample letter] [.pdf of sample resolutions] Included in the information packet was a set of FAQs about transit and a set of FAQs about Act 196 incorporation. [.pdf of FAQ about transit] [.pdf of FAQ about the Act 196 filing]

As clerk of a jurisdiction in the county, the Ann Arbor city clerk received the mailing from the AATA, along with councilmembers – and I’ve observed the received mailing in the hand of an actual councilmember.

Re: “And if so, is there a chance that the form has already been returned with the ‘yes, we’re in’ box checked?”

With respect to whether the city of Ann Arbor is actually in or out, the response form just doesn’t matter. The response form has no legal implications – and was clearly intended to be used as a communicational courtesy, not as the legal mechanism for opting in or out. And to be clear, there is no “opting in.” On filing everybody was in. No action required. You could imagine a jurisdiction passing a resolution expressing its desire not to opt out – but that would be political window-dressing.

The packet sent to townships includes a form to be returned to the AATA. Has Ann Arbor received that packet? And if so, is there a chance that the form has already been returned with the “yes, we’re in” box checked?

And we all know what happens when we ASSUME…

Yet again, it’s ready, fire, aim. Why did no one ask the city attorney for an opinion on this two or three years ago?