Civic News Ticker

Voters will likely be asked to renew a 10-year countywide parks and recreation operations millage in November, now that the Washtenaw County board of commissioners have given initial approval to put the request on the Nov. 4 ballot. That action came at the board’s May 21, 2014 meeting. A final vote is expected on June 4.

The operations millage was first authorized by voters in November 1976 at 0.25 mills for a 10-year period and has been renewed three times. Because of the state’s Headlee amendment, the rate that’s actually levied has been rolled back and is now 0.2353 mills. The current millage expires in December 2016.

If renewed again, it would generate an estimated $3.2 million annually. That’s about half of the parks & rec annual operating expenses of $6.7 million. Other revenue sources are admission/gate/membership fees charged seasonally at facilities including the Meri Lou Murray recreation center, the water/spray parks, and the Pierce Lake golf course. Funding is also received from state and federal grants as well as private donations. [.pdf of staff memo]

The county parks system receives most of its funding from two countywide millages. In addition to the operations millage, another millage pays for capital improvements and park development. It was also originally levied at 0.25 mills, but has been rolled back to 0.2367 mills.

In addition, a third millage – levied at 0.25 mills but rolled back to 0.2409 mills – funds natural areas preservation, bringing in about $3 million annually. It was first approved by voters in 2000, and renewed for another 10 years in 2010.

The county’s parks & recreation department is overseen by a separate entity – the parks & recreation commission – whose members are appointed by the county board. The county board has the authority to put a parks millage proposal on the ballot, but does not authorize expenditure of the funds. That responsibility rests with the parks & recreation commission. The group meets monthly at the parks & recreation office at County Farm Park, and its meetings are open to the public.

This brief was filed from the boardroom at the county administration building, 220 N. Main St. in Ann Arbor. A more detailed report will follow: [link]

Action on a site plan for new condominiums on West Liberty was postponed by the Ann Arbor planning commission at its May 20, 2014 meeting. The postponement was based on a recommendation from the planning staff, to allow time for a public water system issue to be addressed.

The proposal from developer Alex de Parry is to demolish an existing car wash at 318 W. Liberty and build an 11,910-square-foot structure with seven residential condominiums – five two-bedroom and two three-bedroom units. Each condo would have its own two-car tandem garage for a total of 14 parking spaces, although no parking is required.

The lot, on the north side of Liberty, is east of the historic Peter Brehme house at 326 W. Liberty and located in the Old West Side historic district. The historic district commission issued a certificate of appropriateness for the project on March 13, 2014.

The project would require two footing drain disconnects, according to a staff memo. In addition, the existing six-inch water main in West Liberty Street would need to be upsized to a 12-inch water main. The six-inch main wouldn’t have the capacity to handle the additional development, particularly the building’s fire-suppression system. That was the reason for postponement. [.pdf of staff memo]

De Parry told commissioners that the development team had just been informed about this issue last week, and they are now analyzing the budget impact and alternatives that they might pursue.

The project is expected to cost $2.7 million.

This brief was filed from the second-floor council chambers at city hall, 301 E. Huron. A more detailed report will follow: [link]

The site plan and development agreement for a new downtown hotel at the northeast corner of North Ashley and West Huron is moving to the city council for consideration, following a recommendation of approval from Ann Arbor planning commissioners at their May 20, 2014 meeting.

The proposal, brought forward by First Martin Corp., calls for a six-floor, 88,570-square-foot building with a ground-floor restaurant and an extended-stay hotel on the upper five levels. The site currently includes a Greyhound bus depot and a one-story building that houses the Ann Arbor Convention & Visitors Bureau. Both of those buildings will be demolished. The bus depot facade will remain in place as part of the hotel’s design. [.pdf of staff report]

The main hotel entrance is proposed for the building’s west side, facing North Ashley, while the restaurant’s main entrance is proposed to face West Huron, on the building’s south side. The site is zoned D1, which allows for the highest density development in the downtown. According to the staff memo, five off-street parking spaces are required. First Martin has secured a letter of commitment from Zipcar, a car-sharing service, for two vehicles. Parking spaces for those cars are proposed at the northeast corner of the site. For purposes of the city’s parking requirement, the two Zipcars would count as eight off-street parking spaces, and would satisfy the requirement.

The two existing curbcuts will be closed, and access to the two parking spaces, loading dock and trash/recycling would be from the mid-block alley to the north.

Nine bicycle parking spaces are required for the project, and would include two bike hoops in the North Ashley right-of-way and two in the West Huron right-of-way, for a total of eight bike spaces. Three more hoops are proposed for the Ann Ashley parking structure, with First Martin paying for labor and materials. The city of Ann Arbor and Downtown Development Authority would assume responsibility for maintenance of those hoops. The installation of hoops in the city’s right-of-way will require city council approval, and was recommended by the planning commission.

Construction is estimated to cost $13 million.

During a public hearing on the project, three people spoke representing owners of residential and commercial condominiums at One North Main, on an adjacent site east of the hotel project. Concerns included blocking views, noise from rooftop mechanicals, and problems with egress from One North Main’s underground parking.

This brief was filed from the second-floor council chambers at city hall, 301 E. Huron. A more detailed report will follow: [link]

An expansion of the Bank of Ann Arbor headquarters in downtown Ann Arbor took another step, as Ann Arbor planning commissioners recommended the project for approval at their May 20, 2014 meeting. It will next be considered by the city council.

Commissioners recommended approval of a site plan that involves reorienting the main entrance – moving it from the center of its South Fifth Avenue side to the southeast corner of South Fifth and East Washington. A 9,179-square-foot third-floor addition would be constructed over the rear of the building’s east side. In total, the building would be 32,651 square feet after construction. The project is estimated to cost $4.2 million. [.pdf of staff memo]

The site is zoned D1, which allows for the highest level of density in the downtown area.

D1 zoning requires a special exception use for drive-thrus, which the planning commission granted to Bank of Ann Arbor on May 20 in a separate vote. Because the project is going through a site plan approval process, the requirement for a special exception use was triggered. Special exception uses do not require additional council approval. The bank has an existing drive-thru teller window on its north side. No changes are planned to that configuration, however.

Commissioners amended the special exception use to limit the drive-thru to a financial institution. That amendment, put forward by Sabra Briere, was approved on a 6-2 vote, over dissent from Wendy Woods and Eleanore Adenekan. Briere also proposed an amendment that would restrict the hours that the drive-thru could be open. The concern was that vehicles pulling out from the drive-thru onto Fifth Avenue could cause a threat to pedestrians and bicyclists in the evening. But after discussion – including some comments from Hans Maier, a senior executive for the bank – Briere withdrew that amendment.

The special exception use, as amended, received unanimous approval.

Modifications to drive-thru regulations are in the works, but not yet enacted. The planning commission approved new drive-thru regulations earlier this year. Amendments to Ann Arbor’s zoning ordinance related to drive-thrus received initial approval at the council’s May 5, 2014 meeting, and will be on the council’s June 2 agenda for final approval.

This brief was filed from the second-floor council chambers at city hall, 301 E. Huron. A more detailed report will follow: [link]

A new five-year partnership with the nonprofit Community Action Network has been recommended for approval by the Ann Arbor park advisory commission at its May 20, 2014 meeting.

The agreement would be for CAN to continue operating the city’s Bryant and Northside Community Centers, which the nonprofit has been managing since 2008. The proposed amount is not to exceed $130,000 annually – an increase of $25,000 from the current agreement. The higher amount is included in the FY 2015 general fund budget for parks and recreation that the city council approved on May 19. According to a staff memo, the higher amount will address increases in fixed costs and “assist in retaining quality staff that is at the core of the services that CAN provides.” [.pdf of staff memo]

The staff memo also noted that a request for proposals (RFP) was not issued for this work, because CAN has been the sole respondent to the previous two RFPs and the city is satisfied with its work.

During the May 20 meeting, CAN received praise for their work from several commissioners and Colin Smith, the city’s parks and recreation manager. CAN executive director Joan Doughty and deputy director Derrick Miller were on hand to answer questions. Part of the discussion focused on CAN’s exemption from the city’s living wage requirement, which the city council granted in 2012 for a three-year period through Nov. 8, 2015. Doughty noted that the exemption was sought in part because CAN was paying a living wage to part-time employees who were high school or university students, which limited the nonprofit from paying higher wages to full-time workers. She also pointed out that the city parks and recreation unit isn’t required to pay the living wage to its seasonal workers.

The recommendation will be forwarded to the city council for consideration.

This brief was filed from the second-floor council chambers at city hall, 301 E. Huron. A more detailed report will follow.

Ann Arbor park advisory commissioners have recommended awarding a contract with Renosys Corp. to install PVC pool liners at Buhr and Fuller pools. The action took place during PAC’s May 20, 2014 meeting.

The value of the contract is $205,055 plus a 10% construction contingency of $20,506. That brings the project’s total budget to $225,561. Renosys was the lowest of two bidders. Natare Corp. submitted a bid of $211,965.

The work will be done in the fall, so the summer swimming season won’t be disrupted. Funding is available from the approved FY2014 park maintenance and capital improvement millage revenues. [.pdf of staff memo]

This brief was filed from the second-floor council chambers at city hall, 301 E. Huron. A more detailed report will follow.

Judge Lawrence Zatkoff has ruled in an election lawsuit filed by Bob Dascola against the city of Ann Arbor that the city cannot bar Dascola from the Ward 3 city council Democratic primary ballot based on city charter eligibility requirements that were ruled null and void in the early 1970s.

From the opinion: “Plaintiff has provided compelling evidence that Defendants have used void provisions of the Charter in an attempt to preclude him from running for City Council. Further, remedies available at law would not compensate Plaintiff for his inability to run for City Council. Finally, as established above, the balance of hardships between the parties – and the public interest at large – warrant this Court enjoining Defendants from enforcing a void law when the City has failed to re-enact that law.” [Dascola v. City of A2: Opinion] [Dascola v. City of A2: Judgment]

Dascola has already submitted sufficient valid signatures to be eligible to appear on the Aug. 5, 2014 Democratic primary ballot, along with Julie Grand and Samuel McMullen.

We will follow up this report with more detailed coverage.

The Ann Arbor District Library board has authorized the library director to negotiate with O’Neal Construction Inc. for work related to the downtown library entrance. The action came at the board’s May 19, 2014 meeting.

O’Neal would be contracted to provide construction management services. This is the next step in a process that began several months ago.

At the board’s April 21, 2014 meeting, the board had authorized the library director, Josie Parker, to hire a construction manager for the project. Board members also allocated $18,580 from the fund balance to pay InForm Studio for construction documents. InForm Studio, the architecture firm that previously designed AADL’s Traverwood branch, gave an update on the process at that same meeting.

The existing teal porcelain panels that wrap around the front facade, part of architect Alden Dow’s original design from the mid-1950s, will be replaced with a “concrete skin” panel. The entrance will continue to be oriented to South Fifth Avenue, with new doors into the building. Leading from the front of the building into the vestibule will be two balanced double doors, which will be easier to open than the existing entry, and a single automatic door. A matching set of these doors will lead from the vestibule to the interior of the building. A heated sidewalk is proposed along the exterior edge of the steps.

The new design also will address accessibility concerns that have been raised by the public.

The overall project is now expected to cost more than $250,000.

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

A resolution to extend the Ann Arbor District Library’s space-use agreement with the nonprofit Friends of the Ann Arbor District Library for one year was unanimously approved at the AADL board’s May 19, 2014 meeting. The current agreement expires on May 21.

Friends of AADL operates a used bookstore in the lower level of AADL’s downtown branch at 343 S. Fifth Ave. Proceeds of the store – about $90,000 annually – are given to the library.

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

Two service contracts – for janitorial work and HVAC maintenance – were approved by the Ann Arbor District Library board at its May 19, 2014 meeting. Both contracts are for three-year periods.

R.N.A. Janitorial was awarded a contract through fiscal 2016-17 for a total of $476,748. The current contract expires on June 30, 2014 – the end of the current fiscal year. Three bids were received for this work, including one from Pioneer Janitorial. The library currently contracts with both Pioneer and R.N.A. for janitorial services. The bid from Pioneer was significantly higher, at $584,618 for the three-year period. Library staff believed that the lowest bidder – CITI Building Services, at $437,115 – did not understand the full scope of the work.

For HVAC equipment maintenance and repair, the AADL board approved a contract with Shambaugh & Son for $259,240 over a three-year period. Shambaugh was the lowest of three bidders. They also hold the current contract with AADL for this work. The new contract would begin on July 1, 2014.

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

The Ann Arbor city council has passed a resolution opposing the oil exploration and drilling proposed by West Bay Exploration under MDEQ permit application #AI40053. The action took place at the council’s May 19, 2014 meeting.

The drilling would not take place inside the city limits, as the city is empowered by the state to prohibit drilling, which it does through the city code. However, the location in Scio Township is within two miles from the city limits and less than a mile from the Huron River, which is the source of the majority of the city’s drinking water. And the state zoning enabling act – as revised in 2006 – deprives townships and counties of the ability to regulate drilling.

Opposition to the drilling is grounded in concerns about the impact on the drinking water supply of the city, especially in the context of a 1,4 dioxane plume in the area of the proposed drilling activity.

In addition to expressing opposition to the proposed drilling in the shorter term and in the future, the text of the resolution requests that the Michigan Dept. of Environmental Quality require an environmental impact assessment, including impacts to surrounding natural resources and public health, before making a decision.

Further, the resolution calls on state legislators to revise the state’s zoning enabling act to provide townships and counties with the power to regulate drilling activity.

This brief was filed from the city council’s chambers on the second floor of city hall, located at 301 E. Huron.

Three sidewalk projects were the topic of different agenda items at the Ann Arbor city council’s May 19, 2014 meeting: Barton Road, Scio Church and Newport Road.

A public hearing on the Newport Road sidewalk special assessment, which started on May 5, continued at the council’s May 19 meeting. For the sidewalk segment on Newport Road, the council had approved at its April 21, 2014 meeting a resolution directing the city assessor to prepare a special assessment roll of properties to be assessed.

The total amount to be special assessed for the Newport Road project is $49,746. But residents of the Newport Creek Site Condominium – who would not ordinarily be assessed, as their property isn’t adjacent to the sidewalk – have volunteered to contribute $10,228 to the project to help offset their neighbors’ assessments. Details of that arrangement are being finalized.

Several residents spoke at the May 5 public hearing, opposing the special assessment. However, on May 19, Eric Preisner, representing the Riverwood subdivision homeowners association, told the council that as a group, they’re in support of the proposal. The affirmative vote was 75% in favor, he said.

Resolutions on the May 19 agenda about a Scio Church Road sidewalk project had been postponed from council’s April 21, 2014 meeting. On May 19 the council approved both resolutions – to set the assessment roll and set a public hearing (to be held June 16) for the special assessment.

For the Scio Church sidewalk project, the total cost is expected to be $365,100. Of that, about $164,000 will be paid from a federal surface transportation grant. The remaining $201,100 will be paid out of the city’s general fund and by the special assessment of just $1,626. It was the size of the total amount of special assessment that led to the earlier postponement. Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) argued at the April 21 meeting that the amount to be assessed was not worth the staff time to follow all the bureaucratic procedures involved in implementing the special assessment. He also called for 80% of any sidewalk project to be funded through non-special assessed funds.

Also approved at the May 19 meeting were resolutions on the Barton Drive special assessment sidewalk project – to set the assessment roll and a public hearing (to be held on June 16). The sidewalk to be special assessed was part of action taken at the council’s April 21 meeting: The council approved $177,100 of city funds for the construction of the Scio Church Road sidewalk and for an additional sidewalk on Barton Drive.

The cost of the Barton Drive sidewalk has been calculated to be $80,606. Of that, about $36,000 will be paid from federal surface transportation funds. Of the remaining $44,606, the city’s general fund would pay $42,626, leaving just $1,980 to be paid through the special assessment.

By way of additional background, approval of the design contract for the Barton Drive and Scio Church Road stretches of new sidewalk had been approved by the city council at its March 3, 2014 meeting.

And at its July 15, 2013 meeting, the council had approved $15,000 for preliminary design of a sidewalk along Barton Drive. Even earlier – at its Nov. 19, 2012 meeting – the council approved $15,000 for preliminary study of a sidewalk to be constructed along Scio Church, west of Seventh Street. On Nov. 7, 2013, the council approved another $35,000 for Scio Church sidewalk design work. The design contract for the Barton Drive and Scio Church stretches of new sidewalk drew on the previously authorized funding.

The preliminary planning budget of $15,000 for the Newport Road sidewalk gap was approved over a year ago by the council at its Jan. 23, 2013 meeting.

This brief was filed from the city council’s chambers on the second floor of city hall, located at 301 E. Huron.

Fees for community and public service areas have been given approval by the Ann Arbor city council at its May 19, 2014 meeting.

For community services, increases affected stall fees at the Ann Arbor public market (farmers market). The basic annual fee for renting a stall was $300. It was increased to $450 – a 50% increase.

The farmers market stall fee increase is projected to generate $26,000 in additional revenue. However, this additional revenue has not been assumed in the proposed FY 2015 budget.

According to the staff memo accompanying the agenda item, “market fees were last increased in 2009 and have not kept pace with the overall increase of annual operating costs during this same time period.” A comparative analysis of Ann Arbor’s fees also showed that Ann Arbor’s fees are well below those of comparable markets.

In the public services area, new fees for a variety of services were also approved – for such items as site plan review, soil and sedimentation control. According to the staff memo accompanying the agenda item, the increases consider labor, material and supplies, equipment, and overhead cost and are aimed at full cost recovery. The increases are generally in the range of 1% to 5%.

This brief was filed from the city council’s chambers on the second floor of city hall, located at 301 E. Huron.

Higher utility rates – for water, sewer and stormwater – have been given initial approval by the Ann Arbor city council. Action on the annual setting of the rates came at the council’s May 19, 2014 meeting. A final approval of the rates will come at the council’s June 2 meeting.

Water rates will increase across all tiers of consumption. For the first 7 “units” of water, the charge is will increase from $1.35 to $1.40. For the next 21 units, the charge is proposed to increase from $2.85 to $2.96 per unit. And for the 17 units after that, the increase is proposed to be from $4.88 to $5.08. A unit is 100 cubic feet, which is 748 gallons.

Sewer rates will increase from $3.65 to $3.85 per unit. And stormwater fees would increase for all tiers of impervious service. For the middle tier – for more than 2,187 square feet but less than or equal to 4,175 square feet – on a quarterly basis, the increase would be from $24.85 to $26.32.

According to the staff memo accompanying this agenda item, the recommended rate changes in water, sewer, and stormwater would increase revenues to the water, sewer, and stormwater funds by $765,119, $1,171,931 and $410,235 respectively. The reason given for the rate increases is to cover maintenance and debt payments, and to maintain funding for capital improvement requirements. The city calculates the impact to be an additional $6.25 per quarter or $24.98 per year for an average consumer, which is a net increase of 4.2%.

Water consumption for a typical single family is assumed at 19 units per quarter.

This brief was filed from the city council’s chambers on the second floor of city hall, located at 301 E. Huron.

Funding allocations to nonprofits have been approved by the city of Ann Arbor for the 2015 fiscal year. The roughly $1.2 million in general fund money was allocated as part of a coordinated funding approach for human services, in partnership with several other local funders.

The city is one of the original five partners in the coordinated funding approach. Other partners include Washtenaw County, United Way of Washtenaw County, Washtenaw Urban County, and the Ann Arbor Area Community Foundation. It began as a pilot program in 2010.

City council action came at its May 19, 2014 meeting.

This year, 105 applications were submitted by 50 local organizations totaling $8,732,389 in requested funding, according to a staff memo. A review committee recommended that 57 programs receive a total of $4,321,494 in available funding. Of that amount, the city is providing $1,244,629.

FY 15       Funding Source                                        
$1,244,629  City of Ann Arbor General Fund                    
$1,760,708  United Way of Washtenaw County                    
$1,015,000  Washtenaw County's General Fund                   
$  274,907  Washtenaw Urban County CDBG funds                 
$   26,250  Ann Arbor Area Community Foundation senior funds 
========== 
$4,321,494  TOTAL

-

The coordinated funding process has three parts: planning/coordination, program operations, and capacity-building. The approach targets six priority areas, and identifies lead agencies for each area: (1) housing and homelessness – Washtenaw Housing Alliance; (2) aging – Blueprint for Aging; (3) school-aged youth – Washtenaw Alliance for Children and Youth; (4) children birth to six – Success by Six; (5) health – Washtenaw Health Plan; and (6) hunger relief – Food Gatherers.

In 2012, TCC Group – a consulting firm based in Philadelphia – was hired to evaluate the process. As a result of that review, several changes were recommended and later authorized by the city council at its Nov. 7, 2013 and by the Washtenaw County board on Nov. 6, 2013. One of those changes is that funding would not necessarily be allocated to the six priority areas based on the proportion of funding allocated in the past. Instead, allocations among the six priority areas would be based on identified community-level outcomes, the strategies that align with them, and how each are prioritized. An additional change would broaden the pre-screening process so that smaller nonprofits could be accommodated.

Funding for this cycle will start on July 1, 2014. In addition, the RNR Foundation – a family foundation that funded TCC Group’s evaluation of the coordinated funding approach – will now be an additional funder in this process.

The RNR Foundation funding will go toward the planning/coordination and capacity building components of the effort, so their funding is not listed among the items in the program operating component.

Here’s a breakdown of how the program operating component of the city of Ann Arbor’s share will be allocated:

   
   FY 2015  Agency
   $20,000  Barrier Busters 
   $30,000  Peace Neighborhood Center
   $35,069  Ozone House Inc.
   $54,168  Domestic Violence Project Inc. dba SafeHouse Center
   $56,396  UM Regents (Community Dental Center, Housing Bureau for Seniors)
   $85,500  Avalon Housing 
   $90,786  Child Care Network
  $102,156  Food Gatherers
  $115,558  The Salvation Army of Washtenaw County
  $122,095  Washtenaw Community Health Organization
  $160,761  Shelter Association of Washtenaw County
  $164,660  Community Action Network
  $207,480  Legal Services of South Central Michigan
$1,244,629  Grand Total

-

That compares with the current fiscal year as follows:

 
  FY 2014   Agency
   $4,561   HIV/AIDS Resource Center     
  $12,772   Washtenaw Association for Community Advocacy     
  $14,282   Planned Parenthood Mid and South Michigan     
  $17,139   Jewish Family Services of Washtenaw County
  $19,835   Barrier Busters     
  $23,719   UM Regents - Ann Arbor Meals on Wheels     
  $27,369   The Women's Center of Southeastern Michigan     
  $63,419   Home of New Vision
  $91,645   Interfaith Hospitality Network of Washtenaw County     
  $94,490   Catholic Social Services of Washtenaw     
  $95,171   Food Gatherers     
 $104,944   Community Action Network
 $109,851   Perry Nursery School of Ann Arbor     
 $142,851   Avalon Housing Inc.     
 $177,052   Services of South Central Michigan
 $245,529   Shelter Association of Washtenaw County
$1,244,629  Grand Total

-

The coordinated funding approach sometimes results in the same programs being funded – but by different funders. This year, the city of Ann Arbor is funding a program for Peace Neighborhood Center; last year Washtenaw County provided funding ($19,995) for Peace Neighborhood Center. And last year, the city of Ann Arbor funded a University of Michigan meals-on-wheels program; this year, United Way is funding that program.

Recipients of funds in one year are not guaranteed funding the following year. An example of that is the Women’s Center of Southeastern Michigan, which received $27,369 from the city of Ann Arbor last year for a mental health program, but is not receiving funds as part of the coordinated funding program this year.

This brief was filed from the city council’s chambers on the second floor of city hall, located at 301 E. Huron.

New policies for making contributions to the pension and retiree health care plan have been adopted by the Ann Arbor city council. The new polices are intended to ensure that the plans are eventually fully funded.

The policy would set the funding at the higher of two different figures: (1) the Actuarial Required Contribution (ARC) rate; or (2) the existing level of contributions adjusted for the change in general fund revenues. That would have an impact of establishing a minimum increase in funding of 2% per year.

Action came at the council’s May 19, 2014 meeting.

The operative language in the policy is:

If the General Fund revenues are projected to increase less than 2%, the city’s contribution shall increase 2%; thereby establishing a minimum increase of 2% per year.

The pension plan is currently 80.24% funded. The VEBA plan is 38.5% funded.

This brief was filed from the city council’s chambers on the second floor of city hall, located at 301 E. Huron.

The Ann Arbor city council has approved an allocation to address the needs that resulted from the severe winter weather.

The resolution, approved by the council at its May 19, 2014 meeting, allocates money from the fund balance reserves from three sources: $1.7 million from the major street fund, $638,000 from the local street fund, and $666,000 from the water fund. Those amounts include $461,171 from the state of Michigan.

According to the staff memo accompanying the resolution, compared to last year there was a 36% increase in water main breaks and a 950% increase of broken water services. Compared to the previous two years winters, the 2013-14 winter had 272% more snow and a 450% increase in required plowing. That meant additional use of materials like ice-control salt, sand, cold-patch, pipe, repair clamps and fittings – in addition to higher-than-anticipated work hours and overtime, and increased equipment costs.

The work will include frozen service line repairs, pavement marking, and road surface repair. The work is not anticipated to be completed until well after June 30, 2014 – the end of the current fiscal year.

At a May 12 city council work session, public services area administrator Craig Hupy presented the council with some data on the age of the city’s piping system, saying that for the water pipes, those that were constructed in 1950s, 1960s and 1970s are more problematic than those built before and after that period. Still, he indicated that the city’s breakage rate was considered low for a system that is as old as Ann Arbor’s.

This brief was filed from the city council’s chambers on the second floor of city hall, located at 301 E. Huron.

Two contracts related to a north Ann Arbor street reconstruction project were given approval by the city council at its May 19, 2014 meeting. The Pontiac Trail project is now expected to begin in June of 2014 and be completed by fall of 2014.

The council approved $2,605,190 contract with Evergreen Civil LLC for construction of the project. A $46,879 contract with Professional Services Industries Inc. was also approved for testing of materials used in the project.

According to the staff memo accompanying the resolution, the project includes reconstruction of Pontiac Trail beginning north of Skydale Drive to south of the bridge over M-14/US-23. The project also includes extending water mains and sewer pipes, as well as construction of new sidewalk along the east side of Pontiac Trail, and installation of bike lanes. The memo also indicates the project will include stormwater infiltration trenches, edge drains, and the addition of a small section of curb and gutter.

Responding to a query from The Chronicle, city project manager Nick Hutchinson indicated that the council would be presented at its June 16 meeting with the next in a series of resolutions on special assessment to help fund the sidewalk portion of the Pontiac Trail project. The council had voted at its Jan. 21, 2014 meeting to direct the city administrator to prepare plans, specifications and a cost estimate for the Pontiac Trail sidewalk project. The special assessment process requires the setting of an assessment roll and the holding of a public hearing before a special assessment can be imposed.

This brief was filed from the city council’s chambers on the second floor of city hall, located at 301 E. Huron.

At its May 19 meeting, the city council approved an application to the federal Agricultural Land Easement (ALE) program to protect 260 acres of farmland located in Superior Township. The ALE program now includes what was previously known as the Farm and Ranchland Protection Program (FRPP).

The farm parcels consist of property on either side of Vreeland Road, which is currently in agriculture production. Additional properties under the same ownership, adjacent to the farmland parcels, are also being considered for inclusion in the city’s greenbelt program, and the Vreeland Road properties are near other properties already protected as part of the greenbelt – the Meyer Preserve, the Jack R. Smiley Preserve and the Schultz conservation easement. Cherry Hill Nature Preserve is located just north of the property. [.jpg of greenbelt properties as of May 2014]

Here’s a dynamic map of properties outside the city already protected under the city’s greenbelt program. A 30-year open space and parkland preservation millage, which voters approved in 2003, funds both the greenbelt program as well as land acquisition for city parks. The border indicates the area where greenbelt funds can be spent to protect properties.

This brief was filed from the city council’s chambers on the second floor of city hall located at 301 E. Huron.

The Ann Arbor city council has approved a resolution that authorizes adding the city of Ann Arbor to a list of municipalities supporting an amicus brief in connection with the Deboer et al v Richard Snyder, et al case, which  now is now being heard before the the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals.

Federal judge Bernard Friedman ruled  earlier this year, on March 21, 2014,  that Article I, Section 25 of the Michigan Constitution – which limits the benefits of marriage to unions between one man and one woman – did not advance any legitimate state interest. So the ruling had the effect of making same-sex marriages legal in Michigan.  The Ann Arbor city council’s action at its May 19, 2014 meeting was to authorize the inclusion of the city of Ann Arbor as a list of municipalities supporting the side of legal same-sex marriages.

The council’s May 19 resolution follows action approved earlier this year at the council’s April 7, 2014 meeting – to ask that Gov. Rick Snyder and Attorney General Bill Schuette not appeal the ruling of judge Bernard Friedman on the Deboer et al v Richard Snyder, et al case

But the day following the decision, on March 22, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit issued a temporary stay on Friedman’s ruling, as Michigan’s Gov. Rick Snyder and Attorney General Bill Schuette appealed Friedman’s decision.

Before the stay on Friedman’s ruling took effect, Washtenaw County clerk Larry Kestenbaum opened his office for business on Saturday, March 22, and issued 74 marriage licenses for same-sex couples in Washtenaw County. The county board had already set the stage for those couples to receive what practically amounts to a fee waiver for the expedited processing of a license, which ordinarily takes three days. The “fee” approved by the board at its Feb. 19, 2014 meeting reduced the usual fee from $50 to 1 cent.

The resolution passed by the board on Feb. 19 allows the county clerk, consulting with the county administrator, to establish a “fee holiday” on the day preceding a period during which the office’s vital records division would be closed for four or more days, or when an unusual number of marriage license applicants are expected to appear. During a “fee holiday,” the charge for immediately processing a marriage license is 1 cent.

This brief was filed from the city council’s chambers on the second floor of city hall located at 301 E. Huron.

The Ann Arbor city council has approved the receipt of a grant of $113,154 from the Michigan Supreme Court State Court Administrative Office (SCAO) to fund the planning for a mental health court program. Action came at the council’s May 19, 2014 meeting.

According to the staff memo accompanying the item, mental health courts are problem-solving courts “that focus on therapeutic treatment for offenders with mental illnesses whose crimes are a result of their mental illness.”

The memo continues:

Eligible defendants are diverted into judicially supervised, community-based treatment to address the underlying problems. The program uses a team approach to address the participant’s needs for mental health and/or substance abuse treatment while also linking the participant with ancillary services such as education, housing, job skills or other individualized assistance. The goal is to assist participants in bettering their lives while also benefiting the community by reducing jail time, recidivism rates, and court docket congestion.

The 15th District Court already operates several specialized courts – a sobriety court, a homeless court, veterans court and domestic violence court. The mental health court would be operated in addition to those other specialized courts.

For background on the 15th District Court’s specialized “problem-solving” courts from last year’s Chronicle reporting, see: “Round 1 FY 2014: 15th District Court.”

This brief was filed from the city council’s chambers on the second floor of city hall located at 301 E. Huron.

The Ann Arbor District Library board has authorized its fiscal 2014-15 budget with a millage rate of 1.55 mills – unchanged from the current rate. The action took place at the board’s May 19, 2014 meeting. [.pdf of budget summary from AADL board meeting packet]

The $12.568 million budget assumes a 2.4% increase in tax revenues, based on an increase in property values. The library is authorized to levy up to 1.92 mills, but in recent years the board has set the millage rate at lower levels. The library’s fiscal year runs from July 1 through June 30.

The budget reflects a 3% increase in the merit raise pool for full-time employees. Salaries, wages and benefits account for the largest portion of the budget expenditures – a projected $8.048 million in fiscal 2014-15. The budget also includes a 3% increase in the library’s contribution to employee health care costs. Other major line items include materials ($1.75 million); utilities ($448,000); programming ($320,000); and repair/maintenance ($312,000).

The legal expense line item is increasing from a budgeted $50,000 this year to $96,000 in FY 2014-15. That reflects the start of union contract negotiations.

The budget and millage rate were approved in separate votes. A third vote designated the budget as a line-item budget with a policy for disbursements. All votes were unanimous.

The board also held a public hearing on the budget, but no one spoke.

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

A resolution added to the city council’s May 19, 2014 agenda the same afternoon of the meeting would oppose the oil exploration and drilling proposed by West Bay Exploration under MDEQ permit application #AI40053. The drilling would not take place inside the city limits, as the city is empowered by the state to prohibit drilling, which it does through the city code.

However, the location in Scio Township is within two miles from the city limits and less than a mile from the Huron River, which is the source of the majority of the city’s drinking water. And the state zoning enabling act – as revised in 2006 – deprives townships and counties of the ability to regulate drilling.

Opposition to the drilling is grounded in concerns about the impact on the drinking water supply of the city, especially in the context of a 1,4 dioxane plume in the area of the proposed drilling activity.

In addition to expressing opposition to the proposed drilling in the shorter term and in the future, the text of the resolution requests that the Michigan Dept. of Environmental Quality require an environmental impact assessment, including impacts to surrounding natural resources and public health, before making a decision.

Further, the resolution calls on state legislators to revise the state’s zoning enabling act to provide townships and counties with the power to regulate drilling activity.

The council resolution is sponsored by Chuck Warpehoski (Ward 5).

The main item on the Ann Arbor city council’s May 19, 2014 agenda is the adoption of the budget for the 2015 fiscal year, which starts on July 1, 2014.

Under the city charter, the council needs to adopt the budget, with any amendments, on a seven-vote majority. If the council is not able to achieve a seven-vote majority on an amended budget, then under the city charter, the city administrator’s proposed FY 2015 budget will be adopted by default.

To alert the public to potential budget amendments that could be debated on Monday night, here’s a tentative list of possible proposals, with provisional councilmember sponsors in parens:

• Police staffing. One proposal would increase the number of sworn police officers by five officers instead of an increase of three proposed by the city administrator. Funding would come in part from a reduction in the 15th District Court budget. (Jane Lumm, Jack Eaton, Sumi Kailasapathy) An alternative proposal would increase the number of sworn officers by two officers instead of three, with the savings allocated to human services for the purpose of drug treatment and prevention. (Chuck Warpehoski)
• Forestry staffing.  The proposal would add a city forester position. The funding for the initial year would come from eliminating a proposed corridor study planned for Ellsworth Road. (Eaton)
• Compost/leaf program. One proposal would restore loose leaf collection in the fall and holiday tree pickup in the winter. This would require roughly $406,000 in capital investment and $319,500 in recurring expenses from the millage-supported solid waste fund. (Lumm, Eaton, Kailasapathy) A different proposal would extend the curbside compostables pickup from seasonal to year-round so that food waste could be kept out of the garbage stream year-round, at an increased annual cost of $300,000. (Sabra Briere)
• LDFA, Ann Arbor SPARK. One proposal would eliminate some increases in the budget of the local development finance authority (LDFA) – of $30,000 in incubator operating expense, $20,000 in direct staffing expense, and a $75,000 increase to Ann Arbor SPARK’s marketing plan. Those funds would instead be reserved for “future infrastructure improvements.” (Kailasapathy, Eaton) A separate proposal would eliminate the city general fund allocation of $75,000 to Ann Arbor SPARK and put that money toward human services instead. (Kailasapathy, Eaton)
• Animal control. The proposal would eliminate funding for an inventory of commercial signs in favor of animal control for the Human Society of Huron Valley and for deer herd management costs. (Sally Petersen, Kailasapathy, Eaton)
• Art administration, traffic calming efforts. The proposal is to reduce the amount allocated in the recommended budget for transitional costs associated with the public art program from $80,000 to $40,000. The $40,000 in savings would be used for traffic calming projects in neighborhoods, including but not limited to speed bumps. (Eaton, Kailasapathy)
• 415 W. Washington demolition. One proposal would use about half of the $300,000 in the general fund budget that’s designated for demolition of the city-owned 415 W. Washington property to fund the pedestrian safety and access task force. (Briere, Warpehoski) A separate proposal would simply eliminate general fund support for demolition of the city-owned buildings at 415 W. Washington. (Kailasapathy, Lumm, Eaton)
• Community-facing climate action programs. Money for “community-facing” climate action programs would come in part from $50,000 allocated for the Ellsworth Road corridor study. (Christopher Taylor, Margie Teall, John Hieftje, Warpehoski)
• Warming center. This proposal would allocate $100,000 from the affordable housing trust fund to provide assistance for a warming center. (Lumm, Briere)
• Streets. A proposal about alternative transportation would, for this year, bump the Act 51 allocation for alternative transportation from 2.5% to 5% – which translates to $180,000. The amendment would ask the city administrator to provide information that would help the council determine the appropriate percentage to allocate to alternative transportation. (Briere) A separate resolution would not alter the budget but would ask the city administrator to “study alternatives to increase street funding and present to Council by Sept. 30, 2014 a report outlining options, their financial impact, and the pros and cons of each.” (Lumm, Eaton, Kailasapathy)

In addition to these budget amendments, it’s possible that a resolution will be put forward by Jane Lumm (Ward 2) directing the city administrator to develop a revised retirement plan design for new hires that “includes a defined contribution element and results in lower costs to the city.” The new plan design would be presented to the council by Dec. 31, 2014, with the intent that the revised plan would be applied to all employees hired after Dec. 31, 2015.

The Chronicle will provide some additional background and detail on these budget amendments in a future article.

In addition to these proposals, it’s also possible that councilmembers could bring forward other amendments during the May 19 meeting. And based on past practice, not every amendment that’s been prepared will necessarily be put forward at the meeting.

In a notice to the parties in the Bob Dascola lawsuit, federal judge Lawrence Zatkoff has indicated that the two sides have agreed to have him rule on the case without hearing oral arguments. From the notice: “… the parties have indicated a desire to forgo a hearing and allow the Court to resolve the pending motions based on the arguments presented in the parties’ briefs. As such, no hearing will be held at this time.” [.pdf of notice on oral arguments]

Dascola is seeking to join Julie Grand and Samuel McMullen as a candidate on the ballot for the Aug. 5, 2014 Democratic primary – to represent Ward 3 on the Ann Arbor city council. The city has informed him that he does not meet the city charter’s one-year durational requirements for residency and voter registration. Dascola’s lawsuit is based on two federal cases from the early 1970s that found the charter requirements to be unconstitutional. The city is seeking to enforce the charter requirements based on subsequent case law in other jurisdictions.

For the most recent Chronicle coverage on the substance of the case, see: “Amended Complaint: More Dascola Filings.”

The case is being heard on an expedited schedule, so that ballots can be printed in early June.

As the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority’s new Blake Transit Center nears completion, the AAATA board has bumped the roughly $8.1 million construction budget upwards by $125,000 to cover costs associated with “extraordinary winter weather and unforeseen site conditions discovered during excavation,” which delayed completion of the project by six months. Of the additional amount, $55,000 is a contingency.

The money to cover the additional cost will be drawn from federal funds. According to the AAATA, the increase will not impact existing services.

The increase to the BTC construction budget was approved in AAATA board action taken at its May 15, 2014 meeting.

According to a staff memo in the board meeting information packet, the original project budget was $8,129,988, which included a contingency of 4.5% that’s considered to be a “lean” contingency amount.

The remaining work on the center consists of completing the snow-melt system, pouring concrete for driveways, finishing the canopy, structural steel, painting and finishing installation of the security cameras.

The lobby and the building were opened to the public on March 17. The concrete work is expected to be complete around June 10. A grand opening is tentatively scheduled for June 18.

When the board approved the project budget at its Oct. 18, 2012 meeting, the AAATA staff had reduced costs from $8.5 million down to around $8 million by removing a ticket vending machine ($125,000), real-time kiosk signage ($180,000) and LEED Gold certification ($80,000). The LEED certification was added back at the board meeting.

This brief was filed from the downtown location of the Ann Arbor District Library at 343 S. Fifth Ave., where the AAATA board holds its meetings.

An Ann Arbor city council work session set for 7 p.m. tonight – May 12, 2014 – includes three items on its agenda: (1) an update on a traffic enforcement initiative “26 Weeks to Safer Streets”; (2) a review of transportation and infrastructure issues that will cover topics from funding for road repair, resurfacing, water and sewer lines, and pedestrian safety; and (3) the FY 2015 budget.

This work session takes place one week before the council is scheduled to deliberate on its FY 2015 budget and adopt it – at its May 19 regular meeting. The work session proceedings can be followed live on Channel 16, streamed online by Community Television Network starting at 7 p.m.

Updated at 4 p.m. Now available: Staff responses to councilmember questions about FY 2015 budget.

More briefs have now been submitted in the Dascola election lawsuit late last week and over the weekend – after the final supplemental briefs were submitted earlier last week.

On May 6, 2014, the final court-ordered supplemental briefs were submitted by both sides in the lawsuit, filed by Bob Dascola against the city of Ann Arbor. Dascola contends he’s an eligible candidate and wants the court to order that he be placed on the ballot in the Ward 3 city council Democratic primary. He would join Julie Grand and Samuel McMullen in that election, which will be held on Aug. 5, 2014.

But as the electorate awaits a ruling from federal judge Lawrence Zatkoff, the two sides have continued to lather up. Late last week, Tom Wieder – the attorney for Dascola – filed a motion asking permission from the court to file an amended complaint. The motion for leave to file the amendment describes the nature of the amendments as clarifying the precise source of rights that Dascola is seeking to enforce in his lawsuit [the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment and his rights under 42 U.S.C. §1983], and to clarify the basis of the claim for attorney fees, if Dascola wins. The motion contends that the changes to the complaint are minimal and raise no new legal or factual issues. On its face, the motion appears intended to ensure that Wieder can be paid, if Dascola were to prevail.

However, in responding to the motion for leave to file an amended complaint, Ann Arbor city attorney Stephen Postema offers a cutting characterization. He calls it ”procedurally odd” and accuses Wieder of failing to exercise due diligence in filing the motion. In addition, Postema responds to arguments made in Wieder’s supplemental brief, on the substance of the lawsuit. The substantial issue raised by the lawsuit involves the status of laws – like the city’s charter durational residency and voter registration requirements – when those laws have been found to be unconstitutional, null and void by a federal court.

Wieder responded in kind to the city’s brief, writing that the city does the following:

1) Misrepresent the nature of the proposed Amendment; 2) Misrepresent authority on the issue of futility and its applicability to this case; 3) Continue its fabricated argument that Plaintiff claims Charter Section 12.2 was “repealed” by the Feld and HRP decisions; 4) Produce and present to the Court what is, essentially, a Response Brief to Plaintiff’s Supplemental Brief, although none was called for by the Court’s Order; and 5) Present a fanciful “parade of horribles” that will befall the Court, the candidates, “possible donors and supporters,” the public and the Defendants if the Amendment is allowed.

By way of background, Ann Arbor’s city charter includes two durational requirements for city councilmembers – that they be registered voters in the city for a year before election, and that they be residents of the ward they seek to represent for a year before election.

Dascola contends that he meets the residency requirement. He allows that he does not meet the voter registration requirement. But Dascola’s core legal claim is that the two charter provisions were struck down as unconstitutional, null and void in federal court cases dating from the 1970s. The city contends that it can enforce the two city charter requirements based on case law that evolved subsequent to the 1970s cases.

The court ordered an expedited schedule so that the issue might be resolved before early June, when ballots must be printed. Briefs, responses, and replies had already been filed in April on motions for summary judgment and dismissal.

Here’s the complete set of briefs in the Dascola case, including the filings from last week.

• 03.28.14 [.pdf Dascola v. City of A2: Complaint]
• 03.29.14 [.pdf Dascola v. City of A2: Motion for Summary Judgment]
• 04.14.14 [.pdf Dascola v. City of A2: Motion to Dismiss]
  
• 04.14.14 [.pdf Dascola v. City of A2: Response to Motion for SJ]
• 04.18.14 [.pdf Dascola v. City of A2: Reply in Support of Motion for SJ]
• 04.18.14 [.pdf Dascola v. City of A2: Response to Motion to Dismiss]
• 04.23.14 [.pdf Dascola v. City of A2: Reply to Response to Motion to Dismiss]
• 05.06.14 [.pdf Dascola v. City of A2: Plaintiff's Supplemental Brief]
• 05.06.14 [.pdf Dascola v. City of A2: Defendant's Supplemental Brief]
• 05.08.14 [.pdf Dascola v. City of A2: Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint]
• 05.09.14 [.pdf Dascola v. City of A2: Response to Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint]
• 05.11.14 [.pdf Dascola v. City of A2: Reply to Response to Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint]

Following a lengthy discussion at their May 7, 2014 meeting, Washtenaw County commissioners voted to set a public hearing about a possible countywide road millage. The hearing will be held at their meeting in two weeks – on May 21 – so that the public can give input on a proposal to levy up to 1 mill for roads.

The tax would  be levied under Act 283 of 1909. The vote to set the public hearing was 5-3, over dissent from Ronnie Peterson (D-District 6), Felicia Brabec (D-District 4) and Yousef Rabhi (D-District 8). Rolland Sizemore Jr. (D-District 5) was out of the room when the vote was taken.

No final decision about whether to levy the millage is expected at the May 21 meeting, although an initial vote might be taken then.

Commissioners all appeared to support finding a way to secure more road funding, but some voiced concern about process and timing – especially since a levy under Act 283 would be done without voter approval.

Act 283 requires the road commission to submit a plan of recommended road repairs and the cost to undertake the projects. The law allows the county board to levy a millage to cover those costs, without voter approval. [.pdf of relevant section from Act 283, including summary by Lew Kidder of Scio Township.] Because the law is more than a century old and pre-dates the state’s Headlee amendment, there’s some uncertainty about the ability of county governments to use it.

Commissioners have previously held several discussions about the possibility of additional funding sources for road repair, most recently at a lengthy working session on April 17, 2014. In addition to a possible Act 283 levy, another option that’s been discussed is to put a countywide road millage on the Nov. 5, 2014 ballot for voter approval. A draft resolution circulated at the working session called for a four-year, 0.5 mill tax – from 2014-2017 – that would raise $7.15 million in its first year.

The May 7 discussion began when Dan Smith (R-District 2) brought forward a resolution that would authorize levying a 1 mill tax – under Act 283 – in December 2014. It would generate $14.34 million “to repair 2013–14 winter damage to the roads, streets and paths in Washtenaw County.” [.pdf of draft resolution] The board ultimately voted to postpone the resolution until May 21 over dissent from Alicia Ping.

Smith’s resolution would earmark 50% of the gross revenues to be used in the municipality in which the revenue was generated. Beyond that, 10% would be used for non-motorized transportation needs – like bike lanes and pedestrian paths – with the remainder to be allocated “based on use, need, and impact to the traveling public.”

The resolution also addresses concerns about the potential legal issues related to Act 283. From the draft resolution:

FURTHERMORE, BE IT RESOLVED that Washtenaw County Corporation Counsel is directed to provide an exhaustive formal written opinion, by September 30, 2014, which clearly and convincingly details the exact mechanism under which Act 283 of 1909 taxes may be levied in excess of Article IX, Section 6 constitutional limits without a vote of the people; and that the Washtenaw County Board of Commissioners waives any attorney/client privilege concerning this opinion.

FURTHERMORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Washtenaw County Board of Commissioners asks the county’s legislative delegation, State Senators Randy Richardville and Rebekah Warren and State Representatives Gretchen Driskell, Jeff Irwin, David Rutledge and Adam Zemke, to request an Attorney General opinion regarding the ability for counties to levy a tax under Act 283 of 1909 in excess of Article IX, Section 6 constitutional limits without a vote of the people.

During the wide-ranging discussion on May 7, Peterson expressed concern that the public hadn’t yet been informed about the Act 283 proposal. At the request of board chair Yousef Rabhi, Roy Townsend – managing director of the county road commission – had prepared a list of road projects that could be funded by an Act 283 millage, which was distributed at the May 7 meeting. Townsend and two of the three road commissioners – Barb Fuller and Bill McFarlane – attended the May 7 meeting, and Townsend fielded questions from the board. [.xls spreadsheet of proposed road projects based on 0.4 mill tax] [.xls spreadsheet of possible amounts raised by jurisdiction] [.pdf map showing location of proposed projects]

Corporation counsel Curtis Hedger cautioned that Act 283 lays out a specific process, which calls for a presentation of proposed road projects at a meeting in late September or October, prior to the December levy. Responding to those concerns, Dan Smith noted that options might include passing a resolution this month or in June to indicate the board’s intent to levy the tax, then possibly using money from the general fund’s fund balance to pay for road work this summer. The fund balance would be reimbursed when the tax revenues are collected in December.

The board discussion on this issue will continue at the May 21 meeting. Before then, a May 8 working session agenda includes the topic of possible expansion of the road commission board.

In other road-related items on the May 7 agenda, the board voted to accept the recommendations of a subcommittee that was appointed last year to explore options enabled by state legislators. The subcommittee had recommended not to make the road commission part of county operations, and not to make the job of road commissioner an elected position. The vote to accept the recommendations was 7-1, over dissent from Conan Smith (D-District 9). Rolland Sizemore Jr. (D-District 5) was not in the room when the vote was taken.

State legislation enacted in 2012 allowed for: (1) a county board of commissioners to exercise the powers and duties of a road commission; and (2) the functions of a road commission to be transferred to the county board. A sunset clause means that the laws expire on Jan. 1, 2015. That deadline prompted the county board to examine these options.

Related to that issue, Dan Smith drafted a letter to be sent to the state House Transportation & Infrastructure Committee, urging passage of House Bills 5117 and 5118, which would remove the sunset clause from the legislation. [.pdf of letter]

From the letter:

Washtenaw County’s roads are a critical public asset; stewarding this infrastructure is the responsibility of an independent entity, with negligible input or funding from the elected Board of Commissioners. Eliminating the sunset would provide the board with more options for managing roads, including the possibility of additional locally-generated revenue. We urge passage of HB 5117 and HB 5118.

Yousef Rabhi and Alicia Ping asked that their names not be included as signatories. After consulting with Hedger during the meeting, Rabhi told commissioners that if anyone else wanted their names removed from the letter, they should let Smith know. It was not a voting item.

This brief was filed from the boardroom of the county administration building at 220 N. Main St. in Ann Arbor. A more detailed report will follow: [link]

At their May 7, 2014 meeting, Washtenaw County commissioners passed a resolution calling for an increase in Michigan’s minimum wage to $10.10 per hour, over dissent from Alicia Ping (R-District 3). Not voting yes was also Dan Smith (R-District 2) who stated “Present” for his vote and Rolland Sizemore Jr. (D-District 5) was not in the room when the vote was taken.

At the board’s April 2, 2014 meeting, board chair Yousef Rabhi (D-District 8) had indicated his intent to bring forward this resolution. Earlier in the day, President Barack Obama had given a speech at the University of Michigan that focused on the need to raise the federal minimum wage to $10.10. The resolution debated on May 7 includes a quote from Obama’s speech: “We believe our economy grows best not from the top down, but from the middle out, and from the bottom up paychecks and wages that allow you to support a family…Nobody who works full-time should be raising their family in poverty.” [.pdf of resolution]

The two resolved clauses state:

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Washtenaw County Board of Commissioners hereby voices support for the efforts of President Obama to increase the Federal Minimum Wage to $10.10 per hour.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Washtenaw County Board of Commissioners supports the current efforts of legislators and citizen groups to increase Michigan’s minimum wage to $10.10 per hour.

There was no discussion on this item prior to the vote.

This brief was filed from the boardroom of the county administration building at 220 N. Main St. in Ann Arbor. A more detailed report will follow: [link]