Govt. Section

Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority board meeting (Oct. 17, 2013): The main business of the board’s meeting was the approval of a funding agreement with the city of Ypsilanti – a new member of the AAATA, and the first jurisdiction to join the authority outside of the city of Ann Arbor.

The funding agreement between the AAATA and the city of Ypsilanti formalizes the existing arrangement under which Ypsilanti passes its dedicated transit millage through to the AAATA. The board approved it unanimously. The Ypsilanti city council will consider the agreement on Nov. 5.

In another piece of business that came at the end of the meeting, after a closed session that lasted about an hour and a half, the board voted to establish a subcommittee to meet with whichever developer might make the winning bid on the city-owned property at Fifth and William – known as the old Y lot. That’s an alternative to the AAATA attempting to bid on the property itself, which was listed at $4.2 million. Bids were due by Oct. 18. The city paid $3.5 million for the property 10 years ago and still owes that much on a balloon payment due at the end of this year.

An item that simply authorized the purchase of additional vehicles for the AAATA’s vanpool program had some complex history behind it – involving the federal government shutdown. The shutdown prevented the AAATA from completing its pursuit of a waiver from the Federal Transit Administration for the Buy America requirement. And the Buy America requirements were pointing the AAATA toward purchasing more expensive vehicles (Chevrolet Traverses) that did not fit the needs of passengers as well as the non-qualifying vans (Dodge Caravans). So the board opted to use local millage revenue, and to backfill the operational expenses that the millage money was covering – by using federal preventive maintenance dollars.

In a final routine item, the board authorized the AAATA’s chief executive officer to execute contracts with MDOT that are less than $1 million.

A common thread among public commentary and other board communications was the 5-year service improvement plan the AAATA has developed, and the schedule of public meetings to introduce that plan.

Editor’s note: For the AAATA’s Oct. 17 meeting, The Chronicle hired a CART (Communications Across Real Time) professional to provide a real-time “text” stream of the meeting that was accessible online through The Chronicle. The resulting transcript from that live text stream is available here: [link]. The Chronicle is experimenting with ways to make public meetings more accessible to a broader segment of the community, and to provide archival transcripts of those meetings. [Full Story]

An Ann Arbor city council work session held Oct. 14, 2013 provided a roundup of several transportation initiatives.

The projects all fit into the general rubric of regional transportation – relative to different scales of the concept of “region.” Eli Cooper, the city of Ann Arbor transportation program manager, led off the session with some introductory remarks that framed the session in those terms – regions defined on a national, state and more local scale.

Nationally, Amtrak provides rail service between major cities like Chicago and Detroit. And it’s to support that service that the city of Ann Arbor is currently planning for a new or reconstructed Amtrak station. A contract for a required planning study, 80% of which is funded with a federal grant, appears on the council’s Oct. 21 agenda. [Legistar file 13-1128]

On a smaller regional scale, SEMCOG (Southeast Michigan Council of Governments) is the lead organization for a possible new kind of future service on the same tracks as the Amtrak inter-city service: an Ann Arbor-Detroit commuter rail service. That would be at least two years out, partly because no operating funds for the service have yet been identified. Those funds could eventually come from the nascent southeast Michigan Regional Transit Authority (RTA), which could ask voters in a four-county region – Macomb, Oakland, Washtenaw and Wayne – to approve either a transit property tax or a vehicle registration fee dedicated to supporting transit.

On the smallest regional level, voters in member jurisdictions of the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority could be asked as soon as May 2014 to approve additional transportation funding. The AAATA currently includes the city of Ann Arbor, the city of Ypsilanti, and Ypsilanti Township – provided that the Ann Arbor city council approves the township’s membership at its Oct. 21 meeting. [Legistar file 13-1267]

As AAATA staff stressed at the Oct. 14 work session, the board of that organization has not yet made a decision to place a millage request in front of voters. If approved by voters, the additional funding – likely to be 0.7 mills – would be used to increase frequency and time of service in the local region.

Details about the service improvements are the subject of a series of public meetings, which is set to start this Thursday, Oct. 17 from 4-6 p.m. That first session takes place just before the AAATA board meeting at the Ann Arbor District Library’s downtown location. [Full Story]

Ann Arbor planning commission work session (Oct. 8, 2013): Planning commissioners discussed a consultant’s downtown zoning report at their recent work session, after hearing over 30 minutes of public commentary. The session changed venue because of an anticipated crowd, moving from city hall to the fourth-floor jury assembly room in the Justice Center.

Generally, commissioners at the session seemed to favor downzoning certain areas of the downtown. They are looking for ways to create better transitions between residential neighborhoods and property that’s zoned for denser development. They’re also interested in requiring approval from the design review board for projects that are seeking premiums. A premium allows developers to construct larger buildings, in exchange for providing certain features that the city wants to encourage, like affordable housing, pedestrian amenities and public parking. Currently, projects must be reviewed by the design review board, but no approval from the board is needed.

The zoning evaluation was set in motion earlier this year, following a city council directive to the planning commission that was prompted in part by the controversial 413 E. Huron development. Planning consultant ENP & Associates was hired to gather public input and evaluate certain aspects of downtown zoning known as A2D2, which was adopted in 2009.

Erin Perdu of ENP & Associates attended the commission’s Oct. 8 working session to present her report. After public commentary, commissioners gave feedback on Perdu’s recommendations, which she then used to revise the report. [.pdf of revised downtown zoning report]

Commissioners will take up the topic at their regular meeting on Oct. 15. That meeting will also include a formal public hearing to gather additional feedback.

The recommendations they’ll be considering are: (1) rezone the parcel located at 336 E. Ann from D1 (downtown core) to D2 (downtown interface); (2) rezone the Municipal Center parcel from PL (public land) to D2; (3) reduce the maximum height in the East Huron 1 Character District (on the north side of Huron, between Division and State) to 120 feet and add a tower diagonal maximum of 130 feet; (4) rezone the D-zoned parcels on the block bounded by Huron, Division, Ann and Fifth Avenue (where city hall is located) from East Huron 2 Character District to East Huron 1 Character District; (5) change the maximum height in the Main Street Character District to 150 feet when within 20 feet of a residentially zoned area and add a tower diagonal requirement of 50% of the maximum parcel diagonal; (6) rezone the south half of the parcel at 425 S. Main (between William and Packard) from D1 to D2.

In addition, several recommendations relate to premiums: (1) require approval of the design review board for a project to be eligible for any premium; (2) revise the residential premium to be more specific about the types of units that will be eligible for premiums; (3) revise the affordable housing premium so that the provision of affordable housing is mandatory for receiving any premiums; (4) eliminate the affordable housing 900% FAR (floor area ratio) “super premium”; and (5) include other types of premiums in addition to those currently available.

It’s possible that planning commissioners would wrap up their discussion on Oct. 15 and vote on the recommendations at that meeting, to be forwarded to the city council. But during the Oct. 8 working session, several commissioners indicated that they felt they’d need more time, and were prepared to postpone a vote until a later date. [Full Story]

At a morning meeting on Saturday, Oct. 12 held at the Ann Arbor Community Center, Ann Arbor Democratic Party members affirmed the party’s endorsement of Kirk Westphal in the Ward 2 city council race. Westphal was unopposed in the Democratic primary held in August and is the Democratic Party nominee on the Nov. 5 ballot.

The party’s executive board had voted on Wednesday to endorse Westphal. But at Saturday’s meeting of the general membership, Jack Eaton – the Democratic nominee for Ward 4 Ann Arbor city council – brought forward a motion to rescind that endorsement of Westphal. His motion was defeated by a vote of the general membership.

Eaton had contested the August primary in Ward 4 with incumbent Democrat Marcia Higgins, and he won the race decisively. He is supporting incumbent independent Jane Lumm against Westphal in the Ward 2 election, as are Democratic councilmembers Mike Anglin (Ward 5) and Sumi Kailasapathy (Ward 1) and some other local Democrats. Lumm served on the council in the mid-1990s as a Republican. Except for Lumm, the entire 11-member council consists of Democrats. The Ward 2 race includes independent Conrad Brown in addition to Lumm and Westphal.

Anglin and Kailasapathy attended the Democratic Party meeting, as did several other councilmembers who have not endorsed Lumm: Sabra Briere (Ward 1), Sally Petersen (Ward 2), Christopher Taylor (Ward 3), and Chuck Warpehoski (Ward 5). Taylor and Warpehoski have endorsed Westphal.

In rising to express her support for Lumm, lifelong Democrat Jane Michener indicated that she felt Westphal was working toward making the world “safe for developers” instead of on behalf of residents, and that’s why she’s supporting Lumm. Westphal is chair of the city’s planning commission.

To vote on the question of Westphal’s endorsement, attendees held aloft squares with a Democratic logo  – a voting credential issued that morning. With 56 people voting against the motion to rescind – that is, to leave Westphal’s endorsement in place – and only 21 voting to rescind it, a simple majority was not achieved. So the required 2/3 majority was also not achieved.

The question of Westphal’s endorsement came in the context of a meeting that had been billed as “Endorsement Saturday” by the party. Representatives for 2014 campaigns at the state and national level were on hand to deliver remarks and to receive the Ann Arbor Democratic Party’s endorsement.

Not every candidate was on hand in person, but the general membership of the Ann Arbor Democratic Party gave its endorsement to the following: Mark Schauer (governor), Mark Totten (Michigan Attorney General), John Dingell (U.S. House District 12), Pam Byrnes (U.S. House District 7), Gary Peters (U.S. Senate), Gretchen Driskell (Michigan state house representative District 52), Jeff Irwin (Michigan state house representative District 53), and Adam Zemke (Michigan state house representative District 55). [Full Story]

Washtenaw County parks & recreation commission meeting (Oct. 8, 2013):  WCPARC’s October meeting saw the commission taking final action on the acquisition of a conservation easement on 82 acres in Superior Township, northeast of Ann Arbor. The land is adjacent to 65 acres that are already part of the county’s natural areas preservation program.

The new parcel of mostly agricultural land, on the north side of Ford Road a bit east of Berry Road, is owned by Ford Road Property Company LLC. The intent is to provide a buffer between Ford Road and the land that WCPARC previously purchased, as well as Superior Township’s nearby Schroeter Park. WCPARC authorized purchase of the easement for $413,000, which will prevent the land from being developed.

In a separate vote, commissioners authorized moving ahead on the purchase of 10 acres in Bridgewater Township – located near the southern border of Washtenaw County on the south side of WCPARC’s 43-acre Riverbend Preserve. Commissioners approved the preparation of a purchase offer of $92,500 contingent on completing all necessary due diligence and WCPARC’s final approval.

Also on Oct. 8, WCPARC director Bob Tetens provided an update on the proposed recreation center near downtown Ypsilanti, a project that WCPARC began almost two years ago. The proposal is to build a multi-purpose recreation center on part of the 38-acre Water Street redevelopment area on the south side of Michigan Avenue, next to the Huron River. The project would be a partnership, with the city providing the land, the county constructing the building, and the facility to be managed by the Ann Arbor YMCA.

Ypsilanti mayor Paul Schreiber attended the Oct. 8 meeting, to emphasize the city’s strong support for this project. Discussion focused on possible changes to the design developed by a team of University of Michigan architects and students. The need to make changes arose from the city of Ypsilanti’s 2013 master planning and rezoning project, which is nearing completion.

In addition to the regular financial reports and updates, other actions at the Oct. 8 meeting included approving WCPARC’s participation in Pittsfield Township’s State Road corridor improvement authority. The CIA to improve State Road would entail capturing a percentage of taxes from several local entities, including taxes that support WCPARC. [Full Story]

Ann Arbor city council meeting (Oct. 7, 2013): The council’s meeting was bookended with the topic of mayoral appointments to boards and commissions – beginning with a confirmation vote that was not taken at all, and ending with a motion to reconsider a confirmation vote the council had taken at its previous meeting.

The confirmation vote that did not take place was on the appointment of Wayne Appleyard to the city’s energy commission. Although his nomination had been announced at the council’s Sept. 16 meeting, mayor John Hieftje did not move his name forward for a vote on Oct. 7. Appleyard’s appointment would have required a 7-vote majority under the city charter – because he’s not a city resident. With only eight councilmembers in attendance, his confirmation might not have received seven votes. A recent change to the council’s rules put the routine appointments – which the council approved unanimously – near the start of the meeting.

The confirmation vote that was moved for reconsideration at the end of the Oct. 7 meeting was that of Al McWilliams to the board of the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority. Midway through the meeting, the council had voted to direct the city attorney to write an opinion on the legal issues surrounding McWilliams’ appointment, which was made on a 6-5 vote at the council’s Sept. 16 meeting.

Under the council’s rules, McWilliams’ appointment appears to have required an 8-vote majority, because his nomination and confirmation came on the same night. That analysis relies on Hieftje’s statement at the council’s Sept. 3 meeting that on that occasion he was withdrawing McWilliams’ nomination. But because no objection to the apparent violation of the council’s rules was raised on Sept. 3, the city attorney’s opinion will likely just establish that a court challenge to the appointment could not be made.

A portion of the minutes of the council’s Sept. 16 meeting – relating to McWilliams’ appointment – was the topic of considerable back and forth, with approval of the minutes coming only after an amendment had been made to change the way some remarks made by Hieftje had been characterized.

The frustration of councilmembers on the losing side of the Sept. 16 vote was evident during deliberations – reflected in Mike Anglin’s (Ward 5) sole vote of dissent against the resolution directing the city attorney to write an opinion. Sumi Kailasapathy (Ward 1) also indicated dissatisfaction that the opinion resolution would not address the public’s interest in due process.

So a few minutes past midnight, after the council’s other business had been dispatched, Chuck Warpehoski (Ward 5) convinced his council colleagues to re-open the agenda for a motion to reconsider the vote on the appointment. Warpehoski had been on the prevailing side of the McWilliams’ confirmation vote. He then moved immediately for postponement until the Oct. 21 meeting and councilmembers supported that motion – so the council will take up the question of reconsideration at that time.

In other business, the council adopted an update to its solid waste plan, but not before amending the plan to remove mention of exploring the possibility of every-other-week trash pickup and pay-as-you-throw options in the future.

The council also considered two items related to hyper-local neighborhood infrastructure issues – cross-lot walkways and traffic calming projects.

Councilmembers gave initial approval to a change in the city’s sidewalk ordinance that would define certain walkways as “sidewalks.” The change will affect cross-lot walkways that connect streets with schools or parks, or streets with other streets. Defining these walkways as  “sidewalks” allows them to be eligible for funds from the sidewalk repair millage, but does not trigger winter maintenance responsibility for adjacent property owners.

The council also approved a budget allocation of $55,000 to fund an additional two traffic calming (speed bump) projects this year. The same resolution directed the funding of three traffic calming projects next year.

Two site plans were approved by the council – one for a Tim Hortons drive-thru on Ann Arbor-Saline road, and another for a Belle Tire on Ellsworth.

A new schedule of liquor license fees was approved by the council. In some cases fees were lowered or eliminated, and in other cases they were raised – to reflect actual city costs in processing. For example, on-premise liquor license annual renewal fees were set at $90, an increase from $50, while fees for new liquor licenses were set at $600, a reduction from $2,500.

The council also approved a grant application to the Rockefeller Foundation for designating Ann Arbor as one of 100 Resilient Cities. While the total amount of funding for the program is identified as $100 million, according to the Rockefeller Foundation, that does not mean that each of the 100 cities would receive $1 million of support if selected. [Full Story]

Washtenaw County board of commissioners meeting (Oct. 2, 2013): The county board’s major agenda item was the presentation of a proposed four-year general fund budget, for the years 2014-2017.

The $103,005,127 million budget for 2014 – which represents a slight decrease from the 2013 expenditures of $103,218,903 – includes putting a net total of 8.47 full-time-equivalent jobs on “hold vacant” status, as well as the net reduction of a 0.3 FTE position.

County administrator Verna McDaniel had previously indicated that the county would need to find $3.9 million in structural savings in 2014. On Oct. 2, she reported that $4.13 million in operating cost reductions had been identified. The proposal assumes a 1% annual increase in property tax revenues over the four-year period.

Commissioners asked a wide range of questions, and debated the merits of a four-year budget. Questions focused on the general fund reserves, changes in employment policy related to the federal Affordable Care Act, support for nonprofits, potential bonding for pension and retiree health care obligations, and proposed staff reductions.

Ultimately, the board voted to postpone initial action on the budget until its Oct. 16 meeting. A public hearing on the budget is also set for Oct. 16.

Two other items on the Oct. 2 agenda related to the Washtenaw County road commission: (1) the appointment of Barb Fuller to fill a vacant road commissioner seat; and (2) the creation of a new subcommittee to look at possible changes to the road commission. The vote on Fuller’s appointment was postponed, when Dan Smith (R-District 2) raised questions about whether the previous road commissioner, Ken Schwartz, had officially resigned. The appointment will likely be made on Oct. 16.

The subcommittee item drew some controversy following a proposal by Conan Smith (D-District 9) to amend the resolution, adding a $10,000 budget for possible research costs. Andy LaBarre (D-District 7) objected, arguing that amending in $10,000 late in the meeting “doesn’t look good and isn’t needed.” He also noted that another recently appointed committee – to develop recommendations for the county’s Platt Road property – did not receive funding. The board eventually voted to create the road commission subcommittee with the $10,000 budget and in-kind support as needed, over dissent from LaBarre and Kent Martinez-Kratz (D-District 1).

Final approvals were given to a micro loan program for small businesses, and to a new way to pay off debt incurred from bonding, typically for public works projects in local municipalities. In other action, the board gave initial approval to an increase in the tax that supports services for indigent veterans, with a final vote set for Oct. 16. Also scheduled for Oct. 16 are four public hearing on the following topics: (1) the proposed 2014-2017 budget; (2) an increase to the Act 88 tax for economic development and agriculture; (3) a proposed ordinance that would allow the county to issue municipal civil infractions for owning an unlicensed dog; and (4) a proposed brownfield plan by the Chelsea Milling Co., makers of Jiffy Mix.

During public commentary, the board heard from a representative of the Michigan Association of Counties, which represents 81 of the 83 counties in Michigan – but not Washtenaw County. The board eliminated annual MAC dues from its budget for 2012 and 2013. Some commissioners are interested in rejoining the organization.

But public commentary was dominated by supporters of Michigan’s “Stand Your Ground” law, responding to plans by Yousef Rabhi (D-District 8) to bring forward a resolution urging the state legislature to repeal that law. That resolution was not on the Oct. 2 agenda. Many of the speakers were from outside of Washtenaw County, and wore sidearms to the meeting.

The board also spent about 30 minutes debating how to handle its agenda briefings. In the current approach, briefings take place a half-hour prior to the board’s bi-monthly working sessions – and almost two weeks before the subsequent board meeting. As a result, very few agenda items are ready when the briefing occurs. Over dissent by Ronnie Peterson (D-District 6), the board voted to eliminate those briefings. Instead, agenda packets will be emailed to commissioners a week prior to their board meetings. Rabhi, the current board chair, indicated his intent to include public input into the agenda-setting process in some way.

The Oct. 2 meeting coincided with the birthday of Alicia Ping (R-District 2), and commissioners helped her celebrate by singing a somewhat subdued rendition of “Happy Birthday” just before a break in the proceedings. [Full Story]

At least two topics on the council’s Oct. 7 agenda could offer potential points of friction: (1) leftover controversy from the confirmation of Al McWilliams to the board of the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority at the council’s previous meeting on Sept. 16; and (2) adoption of an update to the city’s solid waste plan.

A resolution added to the agenda on Friday, Oct. 4 would, if approved, result in the waiver of attorney-client privilege with respect to a specific advice memo that has already been written by the city attorney’s office on the McWilliams appointment.

The memo responds to questions that were raised about the procedure used to appoint McWilliams to the DDA board. Mayor John Hieftje had asked the council to vote on McWilliams’ appointment after saying at a previous meeting that he was withdrawing the nomination. Under the council’s rules, an 8-vote majority is required for confirmation of an appointment when the nomination is made at the same meeting when the confirmation vote is taken. McWilliams was confirmed on a 6-5 vote.

It’s also possible that a motion could be put forward to reconsider McWilliams’ confirmation, in order to eliminate the procedural controversy. However, by the end of the weekend before the meeting, no such item had been added to the agenda.

The council will also be asked to adopt an update to its solid waste plan. [Waste Less: City of Ann Arbor Solid Waste Resource Plan] [Appendices to Waste Less] The update proposes a number of initiatives, including goals for increased recycling/diversion rates – both generally and for apartment buildings in particular. A pilot program would add all plate scrapings to the list of materials that can be placed in the brown carts used to collect compostable matter.

And if that pilot program is successful, the plan calls for exploring the possibility of reducing the frequency of curbside pickup – from the current weekly regime to a less frequent schedule. Also included in the draft plan is a proposal to relocate and upgrade the drop-off station at Platt and Ellsworth. The implementation of a fee for single-use bags at retail outlets is also part of the plan. [Previous Chronicle coverage: "Waste as Resource: Ann Arbor's Five-Year Plan."]

The solid waste plan update could face opposition from some councilmembers who don’t think it would be feasible or desirable to reduce the frequency of curbside trash pickup to once every two weeks.

The council will be asked to give initial consideration to a new definition of a sidewalk, covering so-called cross-lot walkways. Such walkways aren’t really on the “side” of anything. They connect a street to a park or school, or two parallel streets. The item had been up for final consideration at the council’s July 1, 2013 meeting, but it was postponed until Oct. 7.

In the meantime, the city’s approach to the cross-lot walkways has changed. Currently if an existing walkway meets the definition of a “sidewalk,” then the city bears responsibility for its repair for the duration of the sidewalk repair millage. All other things being equal, the adjacent property owner would be responsible for snow removal in the winter. The new approach, to be considered on Oct. 7, would allow the cross-lot walkways to qualify as sidewalks under the city’s ordinance, but not trigger a winter maintenance requirement for adjacent property owners. This fresh look would mean that any action taken on Oct. 7 would be considered only an initial approval of the ordinance change.

Land use is on the agenda in the form of two developments and one annexation.

Returning to the council’s agenda is the planned unit development (PUD) zoning for the Shell/Tim Hortons at the northeast corner of Ann Arbor-Saline Road and Eisenhower Parkway. The proposal for the 1.44-acre site would allow for a drive-thru restaurant within the existing convenience store, where a Tim Hortons is already located. The project includes constructing a 109-square-foot drive-thru window addition and access driveway on the north side of the building.

The council had given initial approval for changes to the project’s PUD supplemental regulations at its Sept. 3, 2013 meeting. That’s when Chuck Warpehoski (Ward 5) objected to including the drive-thru as a public benefit in the regulations: “To say that somebody now doesn’t have to spend the 10 extra calories between getting out of their car to get their salt-sugar-fat fix?! I don’t see that as a public benefit and I don’t want us to list that as some big thing that we’re modifying our zoning for in our ordinance.” On that occasion, the council modified the PUD regulations to accommodate his objection. The final approval of the PUD zoning as well as the site plan is on the council’s Oct. 7 agenda.

Councilmembers will also be asked to approve a site plan for Belle Tire on the north side of Ellsworth, adjacent to and east of a different Tim Hortons – one that’s located near the intersection with South State. The currently vacant 1-acre site will become a one-story, 9,735-square-foot auto service facility with 49 parking spaces, including 10 spaces located in service bays.

The council will also be asked to vote on a standard annexation from Ann Arbor Township to the city of Ann Arbor – a 0.39-acre site at 2640 Miller Ave.

Also on the Oct. 7 agenda is an item to approve a change to fees associated with liquor licenses. Some fees are being eliminated – those related to licenses for which the state of Michigan doesn’t require local review.

Other Oct. 7 agenda highlights include an allocation for more traffic calming studies and a resolution that would direct the city administrator to apply for a Rockefeller Foundation grant to make Ann Arbor one of 100 Resilient Cities.

More details on other meeting agenda items are available on the city’s Legistar system. Readers can also follow the live meeting proceedings on Channel 16, streamed online by Community Television Network. The Chronicle will be filing live updates from city council chambers during the meeting, published in this article “below the fold.” The meeting is scheduled to start at 7 p.m. [Full Story]

Ann Arbor planning commission meeting (Oct. 1, 2013): With three members absent, the planning commission quickly dispatched its main agenda item – an addition for the Ann Arbor Christian Reformed Church at 1717 Broadway St.

Five existing buildings at the back of the church – originally built as classrooms for a private school that moved out in 2003 – would be torn down and replaced with a 12,850-square-foot, two-story addition to be used primarily for the church’s educational activities.

Bonnie Bona urged the church to consider ways the space could be used as much as possible, not just for Sunday school and evening programs. Sabra Briere encouraged the church to explore adding permeable pavement to at least some of the parking area.

Commissioners voted unanimously to recommend approval of the site plan, which will next be considered by the city council. A special exception use was also unanimously granted, and does not require additional council approval.

In updates from the planning manager, Wendy Rampson reported that the Traverwood Apartments proposal – which was postponed at the commission’s Sept. 17, 2013 meeting – won’t be coming back to the commission for a few weeks. The developer, First Martin Corp., now wants to donate the two-acre high-quality woodland portion on the north end of the site to the city for parkland. So before the apartment project moves forward, the process of acquiring the parkland will unfold. That includes working through the park advisory commission’s land acquisition committee, she said, and then through city council.

Rampson also reminded commissioners that they’ll be getting a draft report on the downtown zoning review at their Oct. 8 working session. Then, based on feedback from that meeting, the report will be revised for commissioners to consider formally at their Oct. 15 regular meeting.

And a project on which commissioners had been briefed during their Sept. 10 work session – the city’s effort to be certified in Michigan’s “Redevelopment Ready Communities” program – will be on the city council’s Oct. 14 work session agenda.

The commission’s Oct. 1 meeting was notable for the crowd it drew, including about 30 University of Michigan students and at least one student from Skyline High. The UM students were in the masters of urban planning program. [Full Story]

Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority board meeting (Oct. 2, 2013): In its one piece of voting business, the board approved a $20,500 grant to the Arts Alliance to implement a pilot project that would wrap 14 traffic signal electrical boxes in downtown Ann Arbor with vinyl that’s imprinted with artwork.

Called PowerArt, the project is proposed as a way to beautify downtown as well as deter graffiti. The proposal was developed by the DDA – working with the Ann Arbor-based Arts Alliance and the Ann Arbor public art commission. The art commission had voted at its Sept. 25, 2013 meeting to support this first phase of the project with the same amount as the DDA – $20,500. While the first phase of the project would wrap 14 traffic signal boxes, the Arts Alliance is proposing two more phases, for a total of 42 wrapped boxes, and a total cost of $121,000.

The Arts Alliance will administer the project, taking an administrative fee of 30% for the first phase and 25% for the second two phases, if the first phase is judged to be successful. The $41,000 cost of the pilot includes the 30% administrative fee for the Arts Alliance. [.pdf of PowerArt proposal]

The relatively brief board meeting featured an introduction of new board member Al McWilliams as he participated in his first meeting after winning confirmation for service from the city council on a 6-5 vote.

The board also heard various updates from its two standing committees on topics that included the bike share program, the streetscape framework planning project, the connector study, parking structure repairs, and National Hockey League-related events on New Years Eve and New Year’s Day. [Full Story]

Local government doesn’t get more pedestrian than sidewalks.

Yet these existing and future slabs of concrete are themselves a constant topic of confusion and controversy: Who’s responsible for repairing the busted slab in front my house? Who’s supposed to shovel snow off the sidewalk in the winter?

Sidewalks also connect up to other equally important if also dull components of local governance – like stormwater management and public art.

So here’s a quick rundown of some specific sidewalk-related issues that the Ann Arbor city council will be considering.

The council’s agenda for Monday, Oct. 7, includes an item on the definition of sidewalks. If an existing walkway meets the definition of a “sidewalk,” then the city bears responsibility for its repair for the duration of the sidewalk repair millage. All other things being equal, the adjacent property owner would be responsible for snow removal in the winter.

The Oct. 7 agenda item focuses on walkways that aren’t really on the “side” of anything – walkways that connect a street to a park or school, or that connect two parallel streets. The city calls them “cross-lot” walkways. If such walkways were added into the definition of “sidewalk” – as the city council is contemplating – then the city would be responsible for repair. That’s a result welcomed by property owners. But it would put the burden for snow removal on those property owners – a less welcome result. That was the sentiment that led the council to postpone final consideration of a change to the definition of “sidewalk” three months ago, on July 1, 2013.

So on Oct. 7, the council will be asked to consider a different approach to that definitional change – one that would allow the so-called “cross-lot” paved pathways to qualify as sidewalks under the city’s ordinance, but not trigger a winter maintenance requirement for adjacent property owners.

The fresh look would mean that the council’s possible action on Oct. 7 would be considered only an initial approval of the ordinance change. Final enactment of the change would require a second vote at a subsequent council meeting. If approved, the ordinance would allow cross-lot paths to be repaired under the city’s sidewalk repair program – funded through the five-year millage approved by Ann Arbor voters in November 2011. That program is noticeable to residents in the form of pink markings that appear on sidewalk slabs – an “R” for replace and a “C” for cutting an out-of-alignment section so that it lines up flush with the next slab.

The millage can pay for repair or replacement of existing slabs of sidewalks, but not for the construction of new sidewalks. So that millage money isn’t available to build a new stretch of sidewalk along the south side of Scio Church Road (or to fill in a smaller gap on the north side) – a section of sidewalk that residents have petitioned the city to build. The petition for a sidewalk there is based on several considerations, including a desire to connect to amenities west of I-94, like the Ice Cube, Wide World of Sports and the Ann Arbor District Library’s Pittsfield branch. It’s also seen as a pedestrian safety issue, because the lack of a sidewalk on one side of the road could induce pedestrians to cross the road at places where motorists don’t expect pedestrians to cross.

The city council authorized $15,000 of general fund money for the study of alternatives along that stretch – alternatives that were presented at a meeting held on Sept. 18 at Lawton Elementary School and attended by about two dozen people. Next up for the city council, likely on Oct. 21, will be a request for a design budget, so that costs of the project can be estimated with more precision.

Among the alternatives that were considered, but not pursued in much detail, was construction of a pathway through Eisenhower Park. That’s where the Washtenaw County water resources commissioner is now recommending that a pair of detention ponds be constructed – to help mitigate overland flooding in the area. That recommendation was presented to a group of about 80 neighbors on Sept. 30 – also held at Lawton Elementary School.

And a fence that that might need to be constructed along the proposed Scio Church sidewalk – to prevent people from falling down the steep incline – received a glancing mention at a recent meeting of the Ann Arbor public art commission. A proposal to fund a public art project that would be integrated into the fence was tabled by the commission at its Sept. 25, 2013 meeting. [Full Story]

Ann Arbor public art commission meeting (Sept. 25, 2013): The main item on this month’s AAPAC agenda was a request to partner with the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority on a project called “PowerArt,” to be administered by the Arts Alliance.

The project would involve wrapping about 40 traffic signal boxes in the DDA district with vinyl printed replicas of artwork. The initial pilot phase would focus on 14 boxes at a total cost of $41,000, to be split between the city and the DDA. That cost includes a 30% administrative fee paid to the Arts Alliance, which is based in Ann Arbor. Another $80,000 would be needed for the final phases.

Deb Polich, executive director for the Arts Alliance, told commissioners that the DDA board is expected to vote on the project at its Oct. 2 meeting.

Commissioners were supportive of the project, but concerned about how to approach the funding, given constraints tied to the remaining Percent for Art funds. “I want to make sure we don’t step in something that we then get slapped for,” Marsha Chamberlin said.

Ultimately, commissioners unanimously voted to approve participating in the PowerArt project, contingent on the city’s legal review of potential funding sources.

AAPAC also authorized allocations for other projects that have been discussed for several months. They approved $10,000 for a community project called Canoe Imagine Art, and $5,000 for a Coleman Jewett memorial at the Ann Arbor farmers market. Both of these projects will rely on grants and private fundraising for the majority of their budgets.

Action on three other projects was tabled, as commissioners wanted more detailed proposals before allocating funds. Those projects were: (1) artwork for a roundabout at State & Ellsworth; (2) a community art project at Arbor Oaks Park, adjacent to Bryant Elementary School; and (3) a proposal for enhancing the fence along the south side of Scio Church Road, between Maple and Delaware.

These projects prompted some discussion about broader issues, included the process that AAPAC uses to vet proposals. Ashlee Arder, one of the newer commissioners, advocated for continuing to develop a more structured approach. “I do think we need to have a larger conversation or retreat about who we are and what we’re trying to do here,” she said.

The commission has been grappling with a transition to a new funding model for public art, after the city council voted to eliminate the previous Percent for Art mechanism this summer. That model set aside 1% of the budget for each of the city’s capital projects for public art – up to a cap of $250,000. Because that money was taken from restricted funds – such as millage funds for parks or street improvements –  a thematic link must exist between the funding source and the public art expenditure. About $840,000 in Percent for Art funds remain available for projects, but there will be no additional Percent for Art funding.

Instead, the city has adopted an approach in which city staff will work with AAPAC to determine whether a specific capital improvement should have enhanced design features “baked in” to the project – either enhanced architectural work or specific public art. The funding for any of the enhanced features would be included in the project’s budget and incorporated into the RFP (request for proposals) process for the capital project. There is also an increased focus on private fundraising and partnerships.

On Sept. 25, commissioners also received several updates from Aaron Seagraves, the city’s public art administrator. He reported that a reception is planned for Thursday, Oct. 10 at 6 p.m. to dedicate the hanging sculpture Radius, located in the Justice Center lobby next to city hall. Oregon artist Ed Carpenter is expected to attend.

And two finalists for artwork at Argo Cascades – Jann Rosen-Queralt of Maryland and Mags Harries & Lajos Heder of Cambridge, Mass. – will be coming to town on Oct. 17 to present their conceptual designs to the public. A task force will make a recommendation to AAPAC on which of the artists to select for the project.

The Sept. 25 meeting was the first one for AAPAC’s newest member, Devon Akmon. Appointed by the Ann Arbor city council on Sept. 3, 2013, Akmon is director of the Arab American National Museum in Dearborn. [Full Story]

Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority board meeting (Sept. 26, 2013): The board took two significant actions at this month’s meeting. First, board members approved AAATA’s operating budget for the 2014 fiscal year, which starts Oct. 1. The board also approved a revision to its articles of incorporation, adding Ypsilanti Township as a member and expanding the board from nine to 10 members.

If the Ann Arbor city council does not object, this would be the second expansion of the AAATA board this year. The item is expected to be on the Ann Arbor city council’s Oct. 21 agenda.

The earlier expansion was given final approval by the AAATA board at its June 20, 2013 meeting. That’s when the city of Ypsilanti was admitted as a member of the AAATA and its board was increased from seven to nine members, one of whom is appointed by the city of Ypsilanti.

Regarding the budget, on Sept. 26 the board approved a $33.97 million expenditure budget for fiscal year 2014. The budget includes revenues that almost exactly balance those expenditures, leaving an excess of $20,500. About half of the revenue to the AAATA comes from local sources (taxes, purchase of service agreements and fares) with most of the rest funded from state and federal support. The budget will fund roughly 7 million total passenger trips for the next year, according to the AAATA.

Also at its meeting, the board approved the selection of the law firm Pear Sperling Eggan & Daniels P.C. to handle AAATA’s legal work. The firm already handles legal work for the transit authority, so the board’s approval means that Pear Sperling will continue in that capacity for the next five years.

As a result of another board action at the Sept. 26 meeting, Charles Griffith will be leading the board for another year as chair. He was first chosen as chair last year by his colleagues. The pattern of chairs serving for two years is typical for the AAATA.

It was the first board meeting Jack Bernard attended as a board member since being confirmed by the Ann Arbor city council on Aug. 19, 2013. However, three other board members did not attend the AAATA meeting: Roger Kerson, Anya Dale and Gillian Ream Gainsley.

Those who did attend received several updates on various projects, including construction on the new Blake Transit Center in downtown Ann Arbor, AAATA’s new website, and activity related to the southeast Michigan regional transit authority (RTA). The next board meeting of the nascent four-county authority – which includes the city of Detroit and the counties of Washtenaw, Wayne, Oakland, and Macomb – will be held at 2 p.m. on Oct. 2 at the downtown location of the Ann Arbor District Library. [Full Story]

Ann Arbor District Library board meeting (Sept. 16, 2013): Representatives from Pittsfield Township briefed AADL trustees about a proposed State Road corridor improvement authority (CIA) that would entail capturing a percentage of taxes from several local entities, including the Ann Arbor District Library.

Planning consultant Dick Carlisle and Craig Lyon, director of utilities and municipal services for Pittsfield Township, described the new authority and the roughly $30 million in improvements it would fund between the I-94 interchange and Michigan Avenue. The intent is to create a four-lane boulevard with a median, bike lanes and pedestrian pathway.

The library’s Pittsfield branch is located in the township, and a portion of the AADL district is included in the northern part of the proposed CIA. Under the CIA’s tax increment financing plan, 50% of the increase in taxable value would be captured over a 20-year period to fund the CIA projects. The captured taxes would otherwise go to the entities that levy those taxes. Currently, AADL receives about $8,536 in taxes from taxpayers in the proposed CIA boundaries.

In responding to questions from trustees, Carlisle alluded to ongoing controversy related to the TIF capture by the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority. He said that’s why Pittsfield Township is offering to enter into specific agreements with each taxing jurisdiction “that will carefully spell out the limitations on what will actually occur here. So this way, there is no blank check. It is very specific that what we are saying here is exactly what we are going to do.”

A two-year disagreement has persisted over the way the Ann Arbor DDA  calculates its TIF capture, which includes capture of AADL taxes. For the latest Chronicle coverage on this issue, see: “Library View on DDA TIF Capture: Unchanged.”

When the Ann Arbor DDA was formed in the early 1980s, the state enabling legislation for DDAs did not allow for taxing jurisdictions to opt out of participation. However,  CIA legislation includes an opt-out provision. AADL and other taxing entities will have a 60-day period to make that decision. That period is expected to begin when the Pittsfield Township board holds a public hearing about the CIA proposal on Oct. 9.

Based on questions from AADL trustees, they may be skeptical about whether participating in the CIA would be a wise move for the library.

The CIA presentation was the library board’s main agenda item on Sept. 16. The board also reviewed data for the month of August in five categories: Collections, users, visits, usage and participation. In addition, associate director Eli Neiburger presented highlights from the AADL summer game, which wrapped up last month.

During her director’s report, Josie Parker noted that AADL recently released an archive feature on the history of the Ann Arbor Garden Club. It’s part of a broader archiving effort on local history, which includes architecture, cooking, the Ann Arbor police department and several other organizations and topics. Parker said AADL staff would be pleased to talk to anyone who’s interested in archiving the history of other local organizations online.

Parker also told trustees that she’s been invited by the Journal of Library Administration to serve on its editorial board and to write a quarterly column. The journal has historically been limited to administration in academic and specialty libraries, but the new editor and review board wanted to add a public library administrator’s voice to the publication. “I’ve been invited to be that voice, and I’ve accepted,” Parker said.

Items raised during public commentary on Sept. 16 related to a Freedom of Information Act request regarding the 2012 library bond campaign, as well as a plea to renovate the front entrance of the downtown library “from bunker chic to pedestrian friendly.” A topic mentioned at the AADL board’s Aug. 19, 2013 meeting was replacement of the front doors to the downtown library, and possibly undertaking broader renovations at the entrance. [Full Story]

Ann Arbor park advisory commission meeting (Sept. 17, 2013): With about a half dozen Camp Take Notice supporters watching, commissioners recommended approval of a broad park fee waiver for charities that distribute “goods for basic human needs” in Ann Arbor parks.

The waiver, which would require approval by the city council before taking effect, follows action by the council this summer to waive all park rental fees for the use of Liberty Plaza during a one-year trial period, also based on a PAC recommendation. The goal of that waiver is to spur more activity in that urban park, at the southwest corner of Liberty and Divisions streets.

The issue of fee waivers arose earlier this year when city staff considered charging a rental fee to the church that hosted Pizza in the Park, a weekly homelessness outreach ministry. Members of Camp Take Notice, a group that advocates for the homeless, has been urging the city to apply a broad fee waiver throughout the entire park system for entities that provide humanitarian aid. The recommendation approved on Sept. 17 is a compromise worked out with city staff and Camp Take Notice representatives.

Discussion among commissioners focused on how the waiver would be handled. Parks & recreation manager Colin Smith stressed that all park rules would still apply, and that applicants would need to go through the standard permitting process in order to receive a waiver.

During their Sept. 17 meeting, commissioners also discussed the issue of releasing raw data to the public, in the context of two recent surveys – on dog parks and downtown parks. Tim Berla and others advocated for making the survey results available in a form that could be used by the public for analysis. [The data from both of those surveys had been available in a .pdf format, and can now be downloaded from the city's website as Excel files.] Other commissioners pushed for the city to develop a policy regarding the release of data – a standardized approach that would be approved by the city council.

The Sept. 17 meeting also included PAC’s annual election of officers. Commissioners unanimously selected Ingrid Ault as chair and Graydon Krapohl as vice chair. Bob Galardi was re-elected chair of PAC’s budget and finance committee. There were no other nominations. Current PAC chair Julie Grand is term limited and will be cycling off the commission in October.
[Full Story]

Ann Arbor planning commission meeting (Sept. 17, 2013): A major new apartment project in northeast Ann Arbor was discussed but ultimately postponed by planning commissioners, pending unresolved issues that the planning staff did not have sufficient time to review.

Traverwood Apartments is a proposed complex of 16 two-story buildings and 216 one- and two-bedroom units on nearly 22 acres off of Traverwood Drive, north of Plymouth Road. It’s one of the first large residential developments in the last few years that’s come forward outside of downtown Ann Arbor. For part of the site, a rezoning would be required – from ORL (office, research and light industrial) to R4D (multi-family residential).

Developer First Martin Corp. is making the proposal. In response to a query from commissioner Bonnie Bona, Mike Martin explained that although the site would allow for denser development – taller buildings and more units – the cost of construction would have been high, and they didn’t think they’d be able to charge the amount of rent necessary to make a larger project feasible.

The site is east of the city’s Leslie Park golf course, and south of Stapp Nature Area – created on land that First Martin sold to the city in 2003. Some of the discussion on Sept. 17 centered on pedestrian connections between those parks and the apartment complex, which will include a path running along the west side of the site, next to Leslie Park.

During a public hearing on the project, resident Paul Bruss supported the concept of that kind of public trail. He described a vision he shares with others, of a trail that would start at Stapp and loop south then west around the Leslie Park golf course, going north all the way to the Dhu Varren Woods Nature Area. “If we could figure out a way to connect all that as a necklace around Leslie golf course, this would be one of the premium trails in Ann Arbor,” Bruss said.

Commissioners Bona and Ken Clein advocated for more of a pedestrian focus within the complex. Calling First Martin and the architect firm Hobbes + Black “kind of the dream team for developing in Ann Arbor,” Clein – a principal with Quinn Evans Architects – expressed disappointment at the “cookie cutter” site design.

Depending the outcome of a staff review, the apartment project might be on the planning commission’s agenda for consideration as early as Oct. 1.

The other action item on Sept. 17 was authorizing two planning commissioners – Paras Parekh and Sabra Briere, who also serves on city council – to attend the Michigan Association of Planning annual conference, held this year from Oct. 2-4 in Kalamazoo. Their expenses will be paid for out of the city’s training budget for planning staff and related commissions.

Also during the meeting, planning manager Wendy Rampson gave a brief update on the work of consultants who are developing recommendations as part of a downtown zoning review. The consultants – Erin Perdu and Megan Masson-Minock – plan to present their report at the planning commission’s Oct. 8 working session, with commissioners considering the recommendations at their Oct. 15 regular meeting. [Full Story]

Ann Arbor city council meeting (Sept. 16, 2013): Of the roughly 3.5-hour session, about an hour was devoted to two separate items that were added to the agenda the day of the Monday meeting.

One of those late agenda additions was a confirmation vote of Al McWilliams’ appointment to the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority (DDA) board. The vote tally was 6-5, which was declared sufficient for confirmation. However, the city attorney is still reviewing the possibility that the confirmation required an eight-vote majority, under the council’s rules.

The debate on that item came late in the meeting, because that’s where nominations and appointments are slotted on the agenda template, based on the council’s current rules. But that will change in the future – due to a change in the council’s rules that was also on the Sept. 16 agenda. The council adopted some revisions to the rules that were three months in the works. Those included: adding an opportunity for public commentary to work sessions; changing the order of the agenda to move nominations and appointments for boards and commissions to a slot toward the start in the meeting; and prohibiting the use of personal electronic communications devices while at the council table.

Also related to the DDA on the Sept. 16 council agenda was the final approval of revisions to the city ordinance regulating the DDA’s tax increment finance (TIF) capture. The council again put off a vote on the question, which was given initial approval five and a half months ago – on April 1. The question was put off this time until Oct. 21.

The initially-approved amendments to Chapter 7 of the city code include various changes to governance, including term limits for board members, as well as clarifications to the existing language on TIF capture. The initially-approved amendments would enforce the existing language of the ordinance in a manner that would impact the DDA’s TIF revenue in a way roughly matching the DDA’s projected revenues in its 10-year planning document.

At the council’s Sept. 16 meeting, Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) sketched out a different conceptual approach to the way the TIF capture is constrained. It’s an approach being developed by a joint committee of councilmembers and DDA board members as a “dual track” to the ordinance revisions currently under consideration.

Under the existing ordinance language, the amount of DDA TIF capture is calibrated to projections in the DDA TIF plan, which is a foundational document for the DDA. The different conceptual approach would establish a basis level for the maximum captured taxable value in the DDA district – a “cap” on TIF revenue – and then set some clearly defined annual increase, keyed to a specific percentage or some variant of a consumer price index (CPI).

A working document used by the joint committee at its Sept. 10 meeting showed two basic scenarios, one of which could roughly mimic the TIF revenue levels that would be provided under the current proposal, while the other might not provide any practical cap.

The second item added to the Sept. 16 agenda on the same day as the meeting was reconsideration of a vote on fossil fuel divestment taken by the council at its previous meeting, on Sept. 3. At that meeting, the council had voted 5-4 on a resolution calling on its employee retirement system to divest from fossil fuel companies. That tally defeated the resolution because it failed to achieve the necessary six votes on the 11-member council.

However, Margie Teall (Ward 4) voted with the prevailing side – one of the votes against it – giving her the right to bring a motion for reconsideration, which the council passed at its Sept. 16 meeting. But on the fossil fuel divestment resolution itself, after about 45 minutes of debate, the council voted to postpone the matter – until its Oct. 21 meeting.

In other business, the council approved the site plan for an expansion of a Honda testing facility, north of Ellsworth on Research Park Drive. The council also approved the rental of 8 extra trucks to supplement the city’s fleet during fall leaf collection season, at a cost of $117,200. It’s an annual expenditure.

Also on Sept. 16, the council formally accepted the final report of the North Main Huron River corridor task force.

The council also heard an update from Ann Arbor police chief John Seto on the preliminary assessment of newly implemented street closures for University of Michigan home football games. That preliminary assessment did not include any major problems, but Seto indicated that he wouldn’t draw conclusions until after a community meeting that’s being held to get additional feedback. That meeting takes place on Tuesday, Sept. 24 at 6 p.m. at Pioneer High School. [Full Story]

Washtenaw County board of commissioners meeting (Sept. 18, 2013): With a third of the nine-member board absent, commissioners dispatched their business in one of the shortest sessions in recent memory, lasting only 45 minutes. The early adjournment elicited a round of applause from staff in attendance – the previous meeting on Sept. 4 had lasted about five hours.

Even so, a wide range of resolutions were passed – mostly with no discussion. The absence of three commissioners also led to non-votes on two items originally on the agenda, out of concern that there would not be sufficient support to pass them.

During the meeting, the board postponed a final vote on a countywide micro loan program for small business. Under the county board rules, a resolution requires votes from “a majority of the members elected and serving” in order to pass – that is, five votes. Supporters of the resolution weren’t certain they could achieve that number. A resolution regarding the state’s “Stand Your Ground” law had been pulled from the agenda earlier in the day for the same reason.

Opponents of the “Stand Your Ground” resolution – which called on the state legislature to repeal the law enacted in 2006 – had been expected to appear at the meeting in force, prompting county administration to add extra security. However, after the resolution was pulled, only a handful of people attended to speak against it, as did one supporter.

In another resolution that addressed a statewide issue, commissioners voted to direct staff to explore options – including possible legal action – to help set cleanup criteria in Michigan for the carcinogen 1,4-dioxane. In part, the item relates to a 1,4 dioxane plume stemming from contaminants at the former Gelman Sciences plant, west of Ann Arbor.

Dan Smith (R-District 2) stated “present” during that vote, rather than voting for or against the resolution – because board rules do not allow for abstention. After the meeting, corporation counsel Curt Hedger told The Chronicle that he’d be looking at the board rules to determine how Smith’s vote will be recorded. Hedger pointed out that the resolution needed five votes to pass, which it garnered even without Smith’s vote.

Commissioners also gave initial approval for a new approach to paying off debt incurred from bonding – typically for public works projects in local municipalities. The proposal would allow local units of government to repay bonds early via the county’s delinquent tax revolving fund (DTRF), which is administered by the county treasurer. The intent is to reduce interest rate payments and the county’s debt burden. In a related resolution, commissioners gave initial approval to restructuring debt held by Bridgewater Township, using this new approach.

Several items that received initial approval at the board’s previous meeting on Sept. 4 were passed in a final vote on Sept. 18 with minimal discussion, including: (1) strengthening the county’s affirmative action plan, as well as other nondiscrimination in employment-related policies; (2) authorizing a range of grants administered by the county’s office of community & economic development, as well as a resolution that would give blanket approval in the future to nearly 30 annual entitlement grants received by the county; (3) adding three new full-time jobs for stewardship of the county nature preserves; (4) adding a new 10-bed treatment program for female teens in the county’s youth center that will create a net increase of 5.46 jobs; and (5) budgets for the county’s public health and community support & treatment service (CSTS) departments.

And after postponing action on Sept. 4, the board voted to create a 13-member community advisory group to look at options for the county-owned Platt Road site in Ann Arbor. The Sept. 18 resolution was much more general in its direction than the one that was debated on Sept. 4, stripping out most of the details related to a previous focus on affordable housing.

Also on Sept. 18 as an item of communication, Yousef Rabhi updated the board on plans to fill a vacancy on the county road commission, which will result from the recent appointment of current road commissioner Ken Schwartz as Superior Township supervisor. Applications for the road commissioner job are being accepted until Sept. 25, with the county board likely making an appointment at its Oct. 2 meeting. [Full Story]

At its most recent meeting on Sept. 16, 2013, the Ann Arbor city council again considered a revision to the ordinance regulating the tax increment finance (TIF) of the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority (DDA). The council had given initial approval to the Chapter 7 changes nearly six months ago, on April 1, 2013. But at the Sept 16 meeting, the council again postponed a final vote on the revisions, this time until Oct. 21.

Other taxing jurisdictions besides the city of Ann Arbor – entities that also have a portion of their levied taxes captured by the DDA – have something at stake.  Those units are Washtenaw County, Washtenaw Community College and the Ann Arbor District Library. The topic of other taxing jurisdictions’ interest in the Chapter 7 revisions has been raised at three public meetings since late August: (1) at an Aug. 26 meeting of a joint city council and DDA board committee; (2) at the Sept. 15 city council Sunday night caucus; and (3) at the Sept. 16 city council meeting.

Some councilmembers have speculated about the current view held by one of the other taxing jurisdictions in particular – the Ann Arbor District Library. AADL director Josie Parker wrote a letter to mayor John Hieftje in January 2012 outlining the library’s position on the matter at the time, something that has been widely reported. The Chronicle only recently became aware that a similar letter had been sent by Parker to the Ann Arbor DDA in August 2011.

Those letters articulate a view that’s consistent with op-eds published in The Chronicle on the topic – that the DDA owes more in repayments to the taxing jurisdictions than the DDA agreed it needed to pay back in May 2011. Further, the AADL’s position, as expressed in the two letters from Parker, is to reject the DDA’s most recent and current interpretation of the city ordinance  – which was stated only after the DDA had already made repayments of excess TIF capture in 2011. Those repayments had been made to cover several prior years, because the required repayment had been “overlooked.”

The DDA’s subsequent interpretation was that the DDA did not owe the money it had returned in 2011. DDA officials maintain that as long as the DDA had debt obligations, it would also not owe any return of excess TIF to the other taxing jurisdictions in the future. Based on calculations by The Chronicle, the DDA’s current interpretation probably deprives AADL of roughly $55,000-$60,000 annually, compared to the kind of interpretation AADL gives the ordinance. That amount could increase, or decrease, in the future.

The position articulated in Parker’s August 2011 letter includes the statement: “The Library fully intends to enforce its rights for all past and future amounts owed to the Library as a result of excess TIF capture. However, the Library would prefer to resolve these issues without court involvement.”

Responding to a question in a telephone interview with The Chronicle on Sept. 19, 2013, Parker stated: “The position of the Ann Arbor District Library is still accurately reflected in those letters.”

That statement appears to resolve any uncertainty that might exist about the AADL’s current position. At the Sept. 15 Sunday night caucus, for example, Sabra Briere (Ward 1) had ventured that Parker’s letter to Hieftje might be appropriately regarded as a “snapshot in time” and might not reflect the AADL’s current position. And Christopher Taylor (Ward 3), during the Aug. 26 joint committee meeting, appeared to discount the current relevance of the letter to Hieftje by asking what year it had been sent.

However, about the AADL’s position on the DDA TIF capture taken in 2011, Parker stated this week: “It has not changed.” [Full Story]

The Ann Arbor city council’s vote last Monday on the appointment of Al McWilliams to the board of the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority was 6-5 on the 11-member body. A 6-5 vote for the Ann Arbor council is rare, and reflects a certain amount of controversy surrounding McWilliams’ appointment.

But in this column I’d like to leave aside the controversies that led to such a narrow split. Instead, I’d like to review the history of the legislative actions that led up to the 6-5 vote at the council’s Sept. 16, 2013 meeting. That review leads me to conclude that eight votes should have been required for approval.

A quick narrative summary goes like this: McWilliams was set to be nominated, then not actually nominated, but then nominated after all, then had his nomination “withdrawn,” and then finally had his nomination voted on by the council. But in the end, the six-vote majority was declared enough to confirm his membership on the DDA board, replacing Newcombe Clark, who made an employment-related move to Chicago after serving one four-year term.

Choice of the phrase “was declared enough to confirm” is not accidental. Even though the tally of six votes was deemed sufficient by the city clerk and mayor John Hieftje for approval of the motion, I think the vote actually required eight votes to pass.

Under the council’s rules, a nomination to a board or commission can’t be confirmed or approved before the next regular meeting of the council – unless eight members of the council vote for the confirmation. So the typical pattern is that a nomination is put forward at one meeting and the vote on confirmation is taken at the next regular meeting.

Hieftje explicitly stated at the council’s Sept. 3 meeting – during deliberations – that he was withdrawing the nomination of McWilliams. The matter was not “postponed” – as Hieftje described it at the Sept. 16 meeting – because the council did not vote on the McWilliams nomination at all, much less vote in a way that postponed consideration. It certainly would have been an option for the council to have entertained a motion to postpone. But councilmembers did not wind up voting on it at all, and Hieftje stated: “Okay, so I will withdraw it [McWilliams' nomination] tonight.”

Under any rational understanding of the nomination and confirmation procedure, Hieftje needed to take some affirmative action to put the nomination before the council again, which could have been done at the Sept. 16 meeting. Early in that meeting, during communications time, Hieftje indicated to the council he’d be bringing McWilliams’ nomination forward toward the end of the meeting, when nominations and confirmations are handled. The nomination was not on the council’s agenda as of 4 p.m. that day and came as a surprise to some councilmembers.

But instead of just placing the nomination of McWilliams before the council, Hieftje also asked the council on Sept. 16 to vote on confirmation, which it did – with the 6-5 outcome.

It’s puzzling that the online Legistar file for Sept. 16 containing the McWilliams nomination states that the nomination was “placed on the table for [the council's] consideration at the Sept. 3, 2013 Regular Session.” Reviewing my own notes, The Chronicle’s reporting and the CTN video, I can’t discern anything that happened at the Sept. 3 council meeting that could reasonably be described as placing McWilliams’ nomination on the table for consideration. Certainly councilmembers were asked to vote on Sept. 3 on a nomination that had been put before them on Aug. 19. But at the Sept. 3 meeting, the nomination was withdrawn by Hieftje for consideration by the council. And the Legistar record from Sept. 3 accurately reflects that: “Appointment taken off the table on 9/3/13.”

It’s certainly contemplated by the council’s rules that a nomination and confirmation vote can take place at the same meeting. So asking for the vote on Sept. 16 did not violate the council’s rules. It’s just that the 6-5 outcome on that vote should have been judged as not confirming the appointment of Al McWilliams to the DDA board – because it needed eight votes.

The problem here is not just a technical one. What’s the rationale for a higher voting threshold when a confirmation vote comes at the same meeting as the nomination? Granted, I think part of the rationale is to ensure enough time for an adequate review and vetting of a candidate – which arguably took place in the case of McWilliams’ nomination. But part of the rationale is not peculiar to appointments to boards and commissions. At least part of that general parliamentary principle is this: A higher standard is imposed when less notification has been given to the members of the council (and to the public).

When Hieftje withdrew McWilliams’ nomination at the Sept. 3 meeting, I think councilmembers and the public could have had a reasonable expectation that they’d be notified of an upcoming vote on his confirmation at least one meeting before a confirmation vote was taken. Absent that notification, the threshold for a successful vote should rise – to eight.

In this column, I’ll lay out some of the documentation in the online Legistar files that makes clear that the Sept. 16 nomination really was considered a new, fresh nomination that should have required either an eight-vote majority or a delay on voting until the following meeting.

I also have a suggestion for a remedy that does not involve Miley Cyrus. [Full Story]

Ann Arbor planning commission meeting and work session (Sept. 10, 2013): Planning commissioners acted on a change to the city’s master plan, by approving an update to the non-motorized transportation plan.

Items in the city’s master plan must receive approval from both the planning commission and the council, so councilmembers will be asked to vote on the update as well. [.pdf of draft 2013 non-motorized transportation plan update]

The 79-page document includes sections on planning and policy, as well as recommendations for short-term and long-term projects, such as bike boulevards, crosswalks, sidewalks and larger efforts like the Allen Creek greenway and Border-to-Border Trail. An additional document – over 100 pages – outlines the update’s public participation process, including emails and comments received during public meetings.

Eli Cooper, the city’s transportation program manager, briefed commissioners on this update, and much of their discussion centered on how to prioritize and implement the items in the plan – especially the funding for sidewalk “gaps.”

Cooper pointed out that implementation relies on including these projects in the city’s capital improvement plan (CIP), which the planning commission reviews and recommends for approval each year. City planning manager Wendy Rampson suggested that the commission could reconvene its CIP committee to talk about these issues.

In its other item of business, commissioners unanimously recommended approval of a proposed expansion to the U-Haul business at 3655 S. State St., south of the I-94 interchange. It will be forwarded to the city council for consideration.

The relatively short meeting – lasting about 90 minutes – was followed by a working session focused on Michigan’s “Redevelopment Ready Communities” program, in which the city of Ann Arbor is participating. [.pdf of program overview]

Rampson described the program as a tool to help communities put in place elements that would allow redevelopment to happen. Those things include master plans that are clear about what community expectations are for new developments, and zoning needs to reflect those expectations in a very specific way. It means that when developers look at a specific property, they’ll be able to know exactly what they can do.

If the city completes the state’s evaluation successfully, Rampson said, then it would be certified as a “Redevelopment Ready” community. This is a relatively new program, but the state has indicated that communities with this certification could receive priority points on grants from the Michigan Economic Development Corp. and the Michigan State Housing Development Authority (MSHDA).

Before the staff can proceed, Rampson explained, the city council must pass a resolution stating that the city can participate. On Oct. 14, the issue will be on the agenda for a joint city council and planning commission working session, although the main topics will be the current downtown zoning review and R4C/R2A zoning revisions.

Commissioners discussed how this program might be received by the community, with Sabra Briere – who also serves on the city council – pointing out that for some people “redevelopment ready” sounds like “tear down all the old stuff.” She noted that development is a very sensitive topic right now.

The issue of development also arose during a brief update from Rampson about the ongoing downtown zoning review. The consultants who are leading this effort – Erin Perdu and Megan Masson-Minock – have put together a workbook that they’ve been presenting at public forums. [.pdf of workbook] The same information is part of an online survey that’s underway through Sept. 17. A final public forum to review all of the feedback gathered so far will be held on Thursday, Sept. 19 starting at 7 p.m. at Workantile, 118 S. Main in downtown Ann Arbor.

The goal is to review the consultants’ recommendations at an Oct. 8 planning commission working session, and then take action on those recommendations at the commission’s Oct. 15 regular meeting. At that point, the recommendations will be transmitted to the council, Rampson said. [Full Story]

The second Ann Arbor city council meeting of the month, set for Sept. 16 19, 2013, comes after three home football games have been played by the University of Michigan football team.

That’s actually pertinent to the council’s work – because Ann Arbor chief of police John Seto has a spot on the meeting agenda to provide an update about the implementation of new traffic control measures on home game days. This year for the first time, the council gave approval for street closures around the Michigan Stadium in the hours before kickoff through the end of the game.

The council’s 7-4 vote approving the street closures was taken on Aug. 8, 2013. No council action on the issue appears on the Sept. 16 meeting agenda. However, the council’s approval had included a request for a review after the first three games, which featured three different start times.

The council’s Sept. 16 meeting includes two other items on which it has previously punted a number of times: final approval of revisions to the ordinance regulating the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority’s tax increment finance (TIF) capture; and revisions to the council’s internal rules. The council’s Sept. 3 meeting was planned to be the session when the council would tackle those two issues. However, the necessary committee work had not been completed by that time.

A joint committee composed of DDA board members and councilmembers huddled up for a second time on Sept. 10, 2013. And based on that meeting, it’s somewhat unlikely that the council would use its Sept. 16 meeting to take a simple yes-no vote on the ordinance revisions currently in play, which had already been given initial approval back on April 1. Those revisions would enforce the existing language of the ordinance in a way that has an impact on the DDA’s TIF revenue roughly matching the DDA’s projected revenues in its 10-year planning document.

The consensus at the Sept. 10 joint committee meeting appeared to be that the council should give itself a fresh set of downs on the question – by changing the basic conceptual approach to limiting the DDA’s TIF. That approach would impose a cap on TIF revenues with a built-in increase each year. But it’s not clear that a substitute set of changes would be ready for the council to consider at its Sept. 16 meeting.

Starting with a fresh draft of ordinance revisions would mean that the council would again need to give the changes an initial approval, followed by a second vote at a later meeting. The fresh start could also eliminate changes to the governance of the DDA board that had been included in the original revisions initially approved by the council on April 1. Those included term limits for DDA board members.

Among the options in the council’s parliamentary playbook are: tabling, postponing indefinitely, or postponing the DDA ordinance revisions until a date certain. If the council amends the proposal with a substitute proposal, postponement to a date certain would be more likely. However, the council could also choose to vote down the current proposal and leave the committee to come back with a future recommendation.

The council’s rules committee also met on Sept. 10, 2013. Based on discussion at that meeting, the consensus appeared to be that no shortening of speaking turns for the public or for councilmembers should be undertaken, and that the procedure for reserving public commentary time at the start of the meetings should not be altered. Among the substantive changes that survived the committee’s conversation are: adding public commentary to work sessions; changing the order of the agenda to move nominations and appointments to boards and commissions to earlier in the meeting; and prohibiting the use of personal electronic communications devices while at the council table.

The council’s agenda is otherwise fairly light. It includes an expansion of the Honda testing facility on north of Ellsworth on Research Park Drive, formal acceptance of the final report from the North Main Huron River task force, and a $117,200 expenditure for the rental of rear-loading trucks to supplement the city’s fleet during the fall leaf collection season.

Update: An item to reconsider the fossil fuel resolution that failed to pass at the council’s Sept. 3 meeting was added to the agenda on the morning of Sept. 16. The original resolution called on the city’s employee retirement system to divest from fossil fuel companies – but it failed on a 5-4 vote, with two councilmembers absent. Six votes were needed to pass. The motion to reconsider is sponsored on the agenda by Margie Teall (Ward 4).

More detail on other meeting agenda items is available on the city’s Legistar system. Readers can also follow the live meeting proceedings on Channel 16, streamed online by Community Television Network. The Chronicle will be filing live updates from city council chambers during the meeting, published in this article “below the fold.” The meeting is scheduled to start at 7 p.m. [Full Story]

Washtenaw County parks & recreation commission meeting (Sept. 10, 2013): WCPARC’s September meeting had only three action items, but they were each significant.

First, the commission gave final approval for a natural areas preservation program purchase: $390,005 to buy 13 acres from members of the Harwood family, located along Michigan Avenue in Pittsfield Township. The property is primarily high quality native woodland, nearly devoid of invasive species. In addition, it is proximate to the Pittsfield Preserve, owned and operated by Pittsfield Township, so existing trails can be extended, and there is a possibility of using a single parking lot for both sites.

Parks & rec commissioners also gave permission to spend up to $100,000 at the Meri Lou Murray Rec Center to replace the HVAC system’s pneumatic controls with digital controls. The project has been delayed because of a recent court ruling related to construction unity board (CUB) agreements.

The final major agenda item was approval of proposed budgets for 2014 and 2015 and projected budgets for 2016 and 2017. Bob Tetens, director of WCPARC, presented the budgets in the context of WCPARC’s millage history and developments since the mid-1970s, as well as budget strategies underlying all the proposals. The budget contains separate sections for the natural areas preservation program (NAPP) and for parks operations & development, because they are supported by separate millages. [.pdf of WCPARC budget document]

The 2013 operations & development budget of $13.79 million in expenditures drops to $10.417 million next year. The staff is proposing a budget of $13.574 million in expenditures for 2015. The projected budgets in 2016 and 2017 are $12.672 million and $10.009 million, respectively. Over the four years from 2014-2017, the operations & development budget – which does not include NAPP – will draw from its fund balance. At the end of 2012, the operations & development fund balance was $12.95 million. By the end of 2017, the fund balance is projected to drop to $2.8 million.

Expenditures for NAPP are projected to remain flat in the 2014-2015 budgets, at around $3.7 million annually, then drop to about $3.5 million in 2016 and 2017.

Commissioners discussed renewing the parks operating millage, which expires in 2016. It’s possible that staff will recommend putting a renewal on the November 2014 ballot. Other discussion focused on efforts to make WCPARC’s operations more self-sufficient, and whether personnel expenditures could be reduced.

The budget section on capital improvements generated discussion about dog parks. In 2015, a dog park is tentatively slated for the Medford Road side of the 141-acre County Farm Park, at a projected cost of $250,000. Some commissioners expressed concerns about WCPARC’s existing Swift Run dog park, which was developed in partnership with the city of Ann Arbor at the southwest corner of Platt and Ellsworth. Complaints focused on the lack of shade and water, but Tetens explained there are constraints about what can be done on that site, stemming from the dog park’s location on a former landfill.

Commissioner Rolland Sizemore Jr. suggested that WCPARC should invest in the Swift Run dog park “or give it to Ann Arbor.” The city of Ann Arbor is currently exploring the possibility of adding another dog park that would be more centrally located. A public forum for that effort is set for Tuesday, Sept. 24 from 7-9 p.m. at the Traverwood library, 3333 Traverwood Drive. [Full Story]

Ann Arbor city council meeting (Sept. 3, 2013): Two significant items on the council’s agenda were postponed so that more committee work could be done on the issues: revisions to the ordinance (Chapter 7) regulating tax increment finance (TIF) capture by the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority; and revisions to the council’s internal rules.

Both issues also had been postponed from previous meetings. However, the committees that were supposed to have provided more specific recommendations to the full council prior to Sept. 3 did not accomplish that work.

After the Sept. 3 council meeting, both of the relevant committees subsequently met. An update on their work is included in this council meeting report.

The DDA ordinance revisions have already been given initial approval by the council and are awaiting a final vote. The amendments to Chapter 7 include various changes to governance, including term limits for board members, as well as clarifications to the existing language on TIF capture. The amendments would enforce the existing language of the ordinance in a way that has an impact on the DDA’s TIF revenue that would roughly match the DDA’s projected revenues in its 10-year planning document.

However, since that 10-year document was last updated, the amount of new construction in the DDA district has resulted in significant increases in the taxable value on which TIF is computed. About $1 million a year is at stake – which would be distributed to the other jurisdictions whose taxes the DDA captures, instead of being collected by the DDA. The joint committee of DDA board members and city council members met on Sept. 10, and the group appeared to be ready to recommend that the council table the initially-approved ordinance changes and start from scratch, likely shedding the proposed changes to governance.

The approach the committee is now taking would remove the current Chapter 7 language expressing restrictions on the DDA’s TIF revenue, and replace it with a “cap” that would have a built-in annual increase. Among the scenarios the committee is weighing would be a cap set at a high-enough level that it would likely have no impact on the amount of the DDA’s TIF revenue, compared to the amount the DDA is receiving under its own current interpretation of the ordinance, which is disputed.

While the Sept. 3 postponement of the DDA-related ordinance was dispatched quickly, later in the meeting the council engaged in a substantial debate on an appointment to the DDA board – that of Al McWilliams. With only nine councilmembers present and his confirmation dubious – because it needed six votes on the 11-member council – mayor John Hieftje withdrew the nomination.

The council’s rules committee also met on Sept. 10 and reviewed revisions that had previously been recommended. Basing its work on a debate that the entire council had on July 15, 2013, the committee decided that none of the council rules on the length of speaking turns (for the public or for councilmembers) or for reserving time to speak at the start of meetings would be changed from the current rules. Among the proposed changes that survived committee discussion included: (1) adding public commentary at work sessions, (2) re-ordering the agenda to place nominations and appointments near the start of the meeting, and (3) prohibiting use of personal electronic communications devices while at the council table.

The council will take up the DDA ordinance as well as the internal rules issue at its next meeting on Sept. 16.

Other business handled by the council on Sept. 3 included passage of a resolution calling for work on better cleanup standards for 1,4-dioxane – which came only after lengthy debate about possibly postponing it in order to strengthen the language and seek the advice of additional stakeholders.

The council also passed a resolution recommended by the city’s energy commission, to direct city staff to develop a pilot program with DTE for a “community solar” project. Another resolution recommended by the energy commission failed to win council approval, however. It would have directed the city’s employment retirement system to divest from fossil fuel companies.

In land-related business, the council approved the city’s participation in two deals related to the city’s greenbelt program. Councilmembers also gave approval to a Hampton Inn project on Jackson Road and initial approval to a drive-thru to be constructed at a Shell/Tim Hortons at Eisenhower and Ann Arbor-Saline Road.

As part of city administrator Steve Powers’ report to the council, he mentioned that a memo on the review of the city’s crosswalk ordinance would be forthcoming. That memo was subsequently released. [Full Story]

Washtenaw County board of commissioners meeting (Sept. 4, 2013): A five-hour meeting was dominated by two debates: funding for a new software system for the Washtenaw County trial court, and the future of county-owned property on Platt Road.

For the site at 2260 and 2270 Platt Road – the former juvenile center – staff have proposed a process that focuses on possibly using the site for affordable housing. A $100,000 planning grant is available to explore that option. However, several commissioners – while expressing support for affordable housing in general – wanted to look at a broader range of alternatives, including the possibility of selling the site, which some believe could be worth $2 million. After more than an hour of debate, the board voted to postpone action until its Sept. 18 meeting, directing staff to prepare an alternative resolution to consider.

Another lengthy debate focused on the funding mechanism for new trial court software, estimated to cost $2.3 million. The vendor of the current system went out of business several years ago, and replacement is critical. Donald Shelton, chief judge of the trial court, told commissioners: “If this [software] system goes down, our judicial system in the county simply stops operating.”

Some commissioners wanted a more formal mechanism to repay the county’s investment in the system, which includes nearly $1.3 million from capital reserves. The board eventually passed a resolution stating that revenues from the court’s electronic filing fees will be used to reimburse the capital reserves. E-filing fees – likely to be $6 per filing – are expected initially to generate only about $45,000 in revenues. The e-filing will start with civil cases, with phased roll-out to other cases, including criminal and probate. At some point, e-filing might become mandatory.

A range of other significant action items yielded far less discussion. The board gave initial approval to a new micro loan program for small businesses, to be managed by the Center for Empowerment and Economic Development. Also getting initial approval was a range of grants administered by the county’s office of community & economic development, as well as a resolution that would give blanket approval in the future to nearly 30 annual entitlement grants received by the county totaling an estimated $8.8 million, beginning in 2014. Currently, each of those grants requires separate annual approval by the board.

Commissioners also gave initial approval to strengthen the county’s affirmative action plan, as well as other nondiscrimination in employment-related policies. The primary change adds a prohibition of discrimination on the basis of gender identity, gender expression, and sexual orientation. Community activist Jim Toy and Jason Morgan, who serves on the board of the Jim Toy Community Center, spoke during public commentary to support the changes.

Other items receiving an initial vote from the board include: (1) adding three new full-time jobs for stewardship of the county nature preserves; (2) adding a new 10-bed treatment program for female teens in the county’s youth center that will create a net increase of 5.46 jobs; and (3) budgets for the county’s public health and community support & treatment service (CSTS) departments.

During the meeting, the board also honored the nonprofit Dawn Farm on its 40th anniversary, and recognized Bill McFarlane, the long-time Superior Township supervisor who recently announced his resignation due to health issues. Commissioners also supported renaming the county-owned Head Start building in Ypsilanti in honor of the late Charles Beatty Sr., a pioneer in early childhood education.

Topics that emerged during public commentary included a plea to urge state legislators to repeal Michigan’s version of a “stand your ground” law. Board chair Yousef Rabhi indicated his intent to bring forward such a resolution on Sept. 18 – similar to one passed by the Ann Arbor city council on Aug. 8, 2013. Rabhi also plans to introduce a resolution on Sept. 18 advocating for stronger cleanup standards of 1,4 dioxane – the contaminant in an underground plume caused by Pall-Gelman’s Scio Township operations. The Ann Arbor city council passed a resolution on Sept. 3, 2013 related to this issue.

Also on Sept. 18, a public hearing will be held to get input on a proposed increase to the Washtenaw County tax that supports services for indigent veterans and their families. The current rate is 0.0286 mills – or 1/35th of a mill. The new proposed rate of 1/30th of a mill would be levied in December 2013 to fund services in 2014. It’s expected to generate $463,160 in revenues. The public hearing was scheduled by commissioners at their Sept. 4 meeting. [Full Story]

Back in the spring of 2011, the Ann Arbor city council and the Downtown Development Authority were arguing bitterly about money.

Now two and a half years later, a solid working relationship between the two entities has evolved – unmarred by political machinations, based instead on a clearly understood shared past, and consensus interpretation of relevant statutes and local laws governing tax increment finance capture.

That has led to a joint working session between the entities scheduled for Sept. 9, 2013. The session will offer an opportunity for members of the organizations to exchange appreciation and praise for the positive turn the relationship has taken over the last 30 months.

Heh. That’s a joke, as is the headline – the only accurate part of the preceding two paragraphs is the fact that a Sept. 9 working session is scheduled.

And it’s fair to say that the working session between the two groups would probably not be taking place unless it were contractually obligated – under an agreement ratified in May of 2011. The DDA operates the city’s parking system under that contract. In addition to the convening of a joint working session every fall, the contract stipulates that 17% of the gross parking revenues are to be paid to the city.

Parking money is just one of the two revenue categories over which the city and the DDA have been bickering. The other is the DDA’s tax increment finance capture (TIF), which is regulated by Chapter 7 of the city code. With an initial approval of changes to Chapter 7 already approved by the council on April 1, 2013, a joint DDA-city council committee was tasked on July 1, 2013 with making a recommendation on Chapter 7 changes to the council.

Representing the council on the joint committee are Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3), Christopher Taylor (Ward 3), Jane Lumm (Ward 2) and Sally Petersen (Ward 2). Representing the DDA are Sandi Smith, Roger Hewitt, Bob Guenzel and Joan Lowenstein.

Despite being tasked by council on July 1 to begin meeting immediately, the committee did not meet until eight weeks later, on Aug. 26 – after the Aug. 6 city council primaries. Here’s the political calculus: If Kunselman had lost the Ward 3 Democratic primary to Julie Grand, the balance of votes on the council might have shifted to clarifying Chapter 7 in the DDA’s favor.

Grand ran a campaign that was generally supportive of the DDA. But Kunselman has led the council’s effort to clarify Chapter 7 in a way that favors the city as well as the other taxing jurisdictions whose taxes are captured by the DDA. However, Kunselman prevailed – as did Ward 4 challenger Jack Eaton, who campaigned in part on the idea of limiting the DDA’s TIF capture through clarification of Chapter 7.

Because the committee waited until after the Aug. 6 primary to meet, the DDA members had a clearer idea on Aug. 26 about who they’d be dealing with in the near future. The outcome of the Aug. 6 primary meant that Kunselman brought a certain amount of confidence to the committee meeting on Aug. 26. At one point he stated: “… I don’t really have a lot of trust out in my neighborhoods about what the DDA does downtown, ok? And that’s how I have been able to galvanize my base, so to speak, to stay here and to keep this effort alive, so that we can get this ordinance changed … Some of that money, yes, should be returned to the taxing authorities.”

Now the only question mark on the committee is the independent Lumm, who faces a challenge from Democrat Kirk Westphal in the November election. Lumm has made it clear she supports a Chapter 7 revision that respects the interests of the other taxing jurisdictions. But Lumm’s re-election is not a foregone conclusion.

That’s why the opening gambit from the DDA’s side at the Aug. 26 meeting was to delay further, even though the council is scheduled to take a final vote on the Chapter 7 revisions at its Sept. 16 meeting. A future council that included Westphal, mayor John Hieftje, Chuck Warpehoski (Ward 5), Margie Teall (Ward 4), Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) and Sabra Briere (Ward 1) might have six votes that potentially could support the current approach to TIF calculations. But among those six, I think even Westphal, Warpehoski and Briere are capable of independent and rational thought on the question of TIF capture.

The delaying tactic on Aug. 26 emerges in a fairly obvious way if you read through the meeting transcript. [.pdf of 40-page transcript]. DDA members were more inclined to want to talk about general arguments for the existence of a DDA, professing uncertainty about why they’d even been invited to the table. Kunselman, Lumm and Petersen made it clear they were there to talk about clarifying the TIF calculations, not more general themes. It wasn’t clear whose interests Taylor was upholding, but he aligned himself policy-wise – as well as socio-linguistically – more with other DDA board members than with his city council colleagues.

The Aug. 26 meeting was highlighted by a number of misstatements or incomplete statements of historical fact – some serious enough that I worry about the ability of some of those at the table that day to effectuate good public policy.

Still, I think the meeting offered a glimmer of hope – from a guy whose history with the city of Ann Arbor is approaching an anniversary. On Sept. 15, city administrator Steve Powers will have been on the job exactly two years.

Powers, I think, offers a contrast with the previous city administrator Roger Fraser. On April 16, 2010 Fraser barred me from a meeting of a “working group” of councilmembers and DDA board members. Shielded from public view, the group was sorting out the terms of a new parking agreement. Powers, on the other hand, toward the end of the Aug. 26, 2013 committee meeting, had this to say: “If the committee is done commenting, you should provide for public comment, as it’s a public meeting.”

This column includes a brief outline of some factual points worth remembering – because they were misstated or incompletely stated at the Aug. 26 meeting. But first, a point about words.  [Full Story]

The city of Ann Arbor recently won a technology achievement award from The Public Technology Institute – for the city’s integration of a piece of software called CrimeView Dashboard into police operations. The distinction was mentioned in city administrator Steve Powers’ Sept. 3, 2013 written report to the city council, which was attached to the council’s packet as a standard part of the agenda template.

CrimeView Dashboard is an Omega Group software product used internally by the Ann Arbor police department to help solve crimes. CrimeView is far more robust than Omega Group’s publicly available, web-based crimemapping.com, which provides citizens with crime maps based on data from the most recent six months.

In a phone interview with Chris Baldwin, Omega Group account manager for Ann Arbor, he told The Chronicle Omega views the company’s relationship with AAPD as a partnership. The publicly available crimemapping.com tool, Baldwin said, is relatively lightweight compared to the tools available in CrimeView, but is still useful for educating and informing the public.

As one example of the difference, crimemapping.com gives locations by street blocks, whereas the AAPD has access to the exact street address.

Through CrimeView, AAPD officers also have access to data on all calls for service, not just on the verified incidents. In a telephone interview, AAPD deputy chief Greg Bazick explained that a call for service is not automatically logged as an incident. The call initiates the report, but then it’s reviewed and validated – which means that, in the view of AAPD staff, an incident meeting the description took place. It’s those validated incidents that appear on crimemapping.com

CrimeView allows officers to set up and save standard data queries so that trends and patterns can be spotted, which can drive decisions about how to deploy resources with an eye toward solving crimes. Bazick described how CrimeView played a supporting role in a recent series of home invasions (breaking and entering). That effort involved sharing information with Pittsfield Township,, which also uses the CrimeView Dashboard.

CrimeView was used to plot reported crimes by date, time and location. Because AAPD had the suspect’s home address, known associates, and knew the suspect had no regular access to a vehicle, AAPD could identify the pattern of home invasions geographically, by day of week, and hour of the day, Bazik said. While CrimeView didn’t itself solve the crime, it saved a lot of time compared to the effort it would have taken to compile the information manually.

Bazik described the AAPD as still in the early stages of learning and using the CrimeView Dashboard tool. It’s part of the AAPD’s broader effort to take a data-driven approach to decision making.

That broader effort includes a project that takes a digital approach to officer activity reports. Having easily analyzable data about how officers are spending their time will allow the AAPD to provide a metric that’s important for measuring success in public safety as defined by the Ann Arbor city council. The description of public safety success, developed by the council at a December 2012 retreat, reads in part: “Police officers have between 25-30% of their time available for proactive policing.”

The AAPD started using electronic data sheets for officer activity logs around the beginning of the year. At the council’s July 15, 2013 meeting, AAPD chief John Seto told councilmembers that the department was doing the initial analysis of data that’s been recorded so far. Responding to an emailed query in late August, Seto wrote to The Chronicle that the analysis of timesheets would be reported to the city council sometime in the near future.

At the July 15 council meeting, Seto also briefed councilmembers on the somewhat downward trend for overall crime for the first six months of 2013, compared with the first six months of 2012. For example, based on the publicly available data from crimemapping.com for the additional month of July, The Chronicle counted 249 breaking-and-entering (forced and unforced entry) incidents from January-July 2013, compared to 295 for the same period in 2012.

Slightly more detail on the breaking-and-entering data is provided after the jump. [Full Story]

Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority board meeting (Sept. 4, 2013): The board’s first meeting since early July was attended by the minimum seven members needed for a quorum on the 12-member group. In its one main business item, the group voted to approve a $300,000 grant to Washtenaw County, to support renovations to the county-owned building at 110 N. Fourth in Ann Arbor, which is known as the Annex.

The renovation is part of the county’s overall space plan, approved by the board of commissioners at its July 10, 2013 meeting. The space plan calls for modifications to the Annex so that it can house the county’s Community Support & Treatment Services (CSTS) department. The cost of the renovations at the Annex, which would include a new lobby and “client interaction” space, would be about $1 million, according to the DDA board resolution. [.pdf of DDA resolution on the Annex] The Annex has housed the county’s office of community and economic development, office of infrastructure management, and the public defender’s office. Those offices are being moved to other leased and county-owned space.

Not described at the DDA’s board meeting was the backdrop of the grant award to the county, which evolved from a conversation between county administration and the DDA about ways the DDA could help the county address its budget deficit. A pitch from the county had been to re-open the agreement under which the county purchases monthly parking permits in the city’s public parking system, which the DDA manages. The alternative proposed by the DDA was to make a one-time $300,000 grant  – to help fund a project for which the county had already identified funding.

Also not mentioned among the several updates given during the Sept. 4 DDA board meeting was an Aug. 26 meeting of a joint DDA-council committee. That committee had been established by the Ann Arbor city council at its July 1, 2013 meeting to work out a recommendation on possible legislation to address an ongoing controversy about DDA tax increment finance revenue. Not much forward progress was made at that committee meeting.

The city council has already given initial approval of changes to the ordinance language that would clarify the amount of tax increment finance capture (TIF) revenue received by the DDA . The clarification currently under consideration does not work out in the DDA’s favor. A final vote of approval appeared on the council’s Sept. 3, 2013 agenda – the day before the DDA board met – but the council decided again to postpone a final vote.

At their Sept. 4 meeting, DDA board members also got a look at a draft five-year plan of projects that has now been generated, partly in response to pressure from the city council – dating back to April of this year – asking the DDA to explain what projects would not be undertaken if the DDA didn’t continue to receive TIF revenue based on its preferred interpretation of the city’s ordinance.

Highlights of other updates that were given at the Sept. 4 DDA board meeting included a review of the preliminary end-of-year figures for the public parking system and the rest of the DDA’s funds. Overall, the DDA’s financial picture was better than budgeted. That difference is due to the timing of various capital costs.

For the parking system, the year-end picture was consistent with the trend throughout the year. Revenue generated by the parking system was up by 11.9% ($19.09 million) compared to the previous fiscal year, while the number of hourly patrons was down by 1.96% (2,232,736).

Low attendance at the board’s meeting was partly a function of the fact that two of the seats are currently vacant. One of the seats could potentially have been filled by the city council through confirmation of Al McWilliams’ nomination at its Sept. 3, 2013 meeting. However, as the nine councilmembers present debated his confirmation, mayor John Hieftje withdrew it, at least for the time being.

McWilliams’ confirmation would have needed six votes on the 11-member council – and the outcome was dubious based on conversation among the nine attendees at the council table. Some councilmembers questioned whether McWilliams’ might have a recurring conflict of interest based on the work his advertising firm, Quack!Media, does for the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority and the allocations that the DDA makes to the AAATA’s go!pass program. That allocation amounted to $479,000 this year, and was approved at the DDA board’s March 6, 2013 meeting.

The Sept. 4 DDA board meeting was somewhat unusual in that no one from the public chose to address the board during the session at either of the two points on the agenda for public commentary. [Full Story]

Ann Arbor greenbelt advisory commission meeting (Sept. 5, 2013): This month’s GAC meeting marked the first session for two new commissioners – Jean Cares and John Ramsburgh – and the first meeting led by the group’s new chair, Catherine Riseng.

Cares had been confirmed by the city council on July 15 to replace Tom Bloomer, filling the slot designated for a farmer. She co-owns the Dexter Mill, and serves with Bloomer on the Webster Township farmland and open space board. Ramsburgh, who was confirmed on Aug. 8, is a development officer with the University of Michigan’s College of Literature, Science & the Arts. He also is the son of Ellen Ramsburgh, a long-time member of the Ann Arbor historic district commission, and its former chair. He replaces Dan Ezekiel, who was term limited.

The Sept. 5 meeting was in some ways a tutorial on the greenbelt program. It began with introductions of all the members, and included a presentation on conservation easements.

Ginny Trocchio, who provides staff support for the program, also reviewed the draft activity report and financial statements for fiscal 2013, which ended June 30. During the year, the greenbelt program completed 5 deals covering 448 acres of farmland in Webster, Salem, Superior and Lodi townships.

Total revenues for the open space and parkland preservation program – which includes the greenbelt as well as park acquisitions – were $2.626 million. Of that, $2.141 million came from proceeds of the program’s 30-year millage, which voters approved in 2003. Total expenses for the year were $3.357 million. In addition to $1.227 million for debt service, expenses include $1.757 million in greenbelt projects and $242,867 for parkland acquisition.

During her staff report, Trocchio highlighted upcoming on-the-road events, including a Sept. 21 bus tour of greenbelt properties that’s open to the public, and a driving tour of greenbelt land as part of the commission’s Oct. 3 meeting. [Full Story]

Ann Arbor R4C/R2A advisory committee meeting (Aug. 28, 2013): At its second of four meetings since being reconstituted by the city council this summer, the committee tasked with giving advice on possible changes to the R4C/R2A residential zoning districts moved closer to prioritizing final recommendations to deliver to the planning commission and city council.

Two main priorities have emerged as areas of concern: lot combinations, and a proposed “group housing” overlay district. Parking is also a concern, but several committee members noted that there isn’t time to reach consensus about parking recommendations. Only two more two-hour meetings are scheduled – on Sept. 11 and Sept. 25.

The committee’s original report had recommended imposing a maximum lot size of 6,525 square feet. This would limit the ability of a developer to combine lots in order to build larger structures. It would be a way to limit the size of developments within R4C districts.

The planning commission’s ordinance revisions committee made a different recommendation, however, which was adopted by the full commission. Rather than requiring a specific lot size limit, lot combinations would be approved on a case-by-case basis. Review standards would be developed, as well as standards for design and massing, to ensure that new development is compatible with the neighborhood. The planning commission has not yet developed details of how what standards would be used. Advisory committee members didn’t like this approach, saying that it seemed too arbitrary.

There are even fewer details at this point about a proposed group housing district, which planning commissioners envision as a future phase of R4C ordinance revisions. The planning commission recommendations call for a new zoning overlay district, located south and west of the University of Michigan’s central campus. It would be roughly an area outlined in the city’s Central Area Plan, but with final boundaries to be determined. [.pdf of Central Area Plan] The idea is to address issues that are somewhat unique to neighborhoods with a large amount of student housing.

In general, the new district would be intended to allow for flexibility by putting limits on density, but with premiums provided in exchange for community benefits such as pedestrian-friendly character and conformance with architectural design standards. For example, parking might be based on a building’s total floor-area ratio (FAR), independent of the number of units in a structure. The commission’s recommendations call for details of this new district to be fleshed out in a second phase, after other ordinance changes are made that are seen as more straightforward.

Advisory committee members were extremely skeptical of this approach, which one member characterized as “redlining.” Targeting housing for a particular type of resident – in this case, students – made many members uncomfortable. There was also uncertainty about the exact intention behind the recommendation.

Committee members have invited planning commissioner Bonnie Bona, who also serves on the commission’s ordinance revisions committee, to attend their Sept. 11 meeting. Their hope is to get clarity about the commission’s recommendations, as well as the intent behind those recommendations.

Several committee members stated that their overarching goal is to protect the character and integrity of existing neighborhoods, and to prevent older houses from being demolished. That’s the scenario that unfolded when seven houses were torn down along South Fifth Avenue to make way for the City Place apartments – a controversial development that was part of the impetus for the R4C/R2A review. [Full Story]