- Change the description on the tax bill from “CITY PARK ACQ.” to “GREENBELT ACQ.” The current description is confusing and some might argue misleading as well.

- According to the ballot language the goal was “to provide funds for preservation and protection of parkland, open space, natural habitats and City sourcewaters by the acquisition and management of land and land rights both within and outside the City of Ann Arbor”

What has been the spending breakdown for each category listed on the ballot? – parkland, open space, natural habitats and City sourcewaters? Are they equally weighted? If not what is the rationale for favoring one over the other? Perhaps a color coded map of the properties for each category would help.

I agree with Re:[3]that the outreach program should be a priority.

Larry Baird

My experience is that a vanishingly small percentage of A2 citizens have even the vaguest idea the Greenbelt exists or what GAC does.

Common misconceptions are that the city owns the farms from which it has purchased the development rights (they remain private property) and that there is no new construction allowed within the Greenbelt boundary.

Here’s the ballot language, extracted from the resolution recorded in the minutes of the Aug. 18, 2003 city council meeting when the council voted to place the request on the ballot:

RESOLVED, That the proposed Charter amendment shall appear on the ballot in the following form, together with the following statement of purpose:
ANN ARBOR CITY CHARTER AMENDMENT PROPOSAL
Shall Section 8.23 of the City Charter be amended to authorize a one-half mill tax for 30 years, to replace the existing Land Acquisition Millage of .5 mill that expires in 2004, which will raise in the first year of the levy the estimated revenue of $1,917,500, to provide funds for preservation and protection of parkland, open space, natural habitats and City sourcewaters by the acquisition and management of land and land rights both within and outside the City of Ann Arbor?
Yes „ No