Comments on: AATA Looks to Ride Over Bumps

By: Matt Hampel

Matt Hampel — Wed, 28 Nov 2012 14:32:32 +0000

I have little substantive to add to this conversation — but I do want to use it as my “public comment” and note that I love the AirRide. It’s now my primary way to get to DTW, and it’s been a fantastic value. I only wish it could take me further (eg to work in downtown Detroit), but even I can admit that’s somewhat out of the AATA’s remit.

By: Jack Eaton

Jack Eaton — Wed, 21 Nov 2012 19:37:08 +0000

The article notes that “The overall tone of the AATA board’s Nov. 15 meeting reflected the optimistic parts of the Ann Arbor city council’s Nov. 8 resolution …”

The AATA Board pursued the countywide plan for almost 4 years without noticing that most communities were not interested in collecting a transit tax from their residents. I certainly hope the AATA Board noticed that the optimistic parts were added to the resolution and hurriedly passed before the composition of Council changed.

The AATA Board needs to face the fact that the TMP failed when the countywide transit plan was rejected. It is time to focus on transit service for the under-served residents within the existing AATA area. The image of standing room only buses on Route 5 while the AATA spent years and millions planning service for those who do not pay any transit tax is pretty offensive.

By: Tom Whitaker

Tom Whitaker — Tue, 20 Nov 2012 21:26:47 +0000

If there are truly surpluses from the AirRide service that can be applied toward better Ann Arbor service, that’s great. But surely there are more expenses than simply paying the contractual fee to the AirRide service provider. I seem to recall an advertising campaign and isn’t AATA also paying for discounted parking for riders in the downtown structures? What about administrative costs?

I’m just curious, because it seems the decision to spend the “extra” money was based solely on covering the fees to the operator without any discussion of other costs.

By: Alan Goldsmith

Alan Goldsmith — Tue, 20 Nov 2012 19:22:44 +0000

“He wants to show that first and foremost, it’s Ann Arbor taxpayers who allow the AATA to exist. “We shouldn’t delay servicing [Ann Arbor taxpayers'] needs because we’re trying to figure out what other projects which go outside Ann Arbor we might keep or not keep.””

Wow, what a concept.

By: Vivienne Armentrout

Vivienne Armentrout — Tue, 20 Nov 2012 18:38:15 +0000

Dave, you omitted an important moment in Paul Schreiber’s comment following mine. He strode to the podium and announced, “I’m Paul Schreiber and I’m the Mayor of Ann Arbor.” There were gasps, then laughter (good-natured and spontaneous). He then retreated a few steps and tried again, substituting “Ypsilanti” as the city he represents.

I asked him afterward if that was intentional and he said it was a genuine mistake. I think this slip actually reflected a point that he had in mind (and expressed somewhat), namely that Ypsilanti is part of the greater Ann Arbor area, but more than mere regional contiguity, is part of the essence of Ann Arbor and is its working partner. I actually agree with this. But boundaries are significant when it comes to taxes and sovereignty of the populations who live within them. (And of course, the two cities are not quite contiguous. I know someone was going to point that out.)

This situation needs a really creative approach. Unfortunately, I don’t think the vehicle AATA is likely to propose will be it.