Karen Lovejoy Roe, Ypsilanti Township clerk, attended the AATA board’s Aug. 16 meeting as representative of the Southeast District on an as-yet unincorporated board of a countywide transportation authority. During the meeting she expressed enthusiastic support for expanded transit. (Photos by the writer.)

As part of that goal of establishing the new authority, the AATA board gave final approval to a four-party agreement – between the city of Ann Arbor, the city of Ypsilanti, Washtenaw County and the AATA. The agreement would establish a framework for the transition of the AATA to a transit authority incorporated under Act 196 of 1986 – to be called The Washtenaw Ride. That authority would have a 15-member board.

An unincorporated version of the Washtenaw Ride’s board (the U196) has been meeting since late 2011. The three guests at the table for the Aug. 16 AATA board meeting are representatives of three districts in the possible new authority: Karen Lovejoy Roe (Southeast District), Bob Mester (West District) and David Phillips (Northeast District).

Those three were not there to vote, and did not participate in deliberations, though they could have. However, Lovejoy Roe – who serves as Ypsilanti Township clerk, an elected position – gave one of the most enthusiastic statements of support for the countywide initiative that’s been heard at the AATA board table over the last two years. “I’m just really excited about where we’re headed as a community, as a county at large. I know that there’s been a lot of hiccups, but I think that that’s normal … I’m committed, and I think that those who’ve asked me to be here working willingly and openly to do what’s best for all county residents [are, too] …”

One element of the 30-year vision that the AATA has developed for countywide transportation is a north-south commuter rail connection between Ann Arbor and Howell, in Livingston County. And the planning effort was given continued support at the Aug. 16 meeting when the board awarded a $105,200 contract to SmithGroupJJR for station location and design services in connection with the WALLY (Washtenaw and Livingston Railway) project.

That overall planning effort was given a boost by a somewhat unexpected $640,000 federal grant to the AATA and Michigan Dept. of Transportation. The grant was awarded on Aug. 6, 2012 under the Transportation, Community and System Preservation (TCSP) program. AATA had applied for the grant last November, but did not have high expectations, given the competitive nature of the grants.

In other business, the board decided to accept a non-applicable penalty – which has no actual impact – and not comply with Michigan’s Public Act 192 for its unionized employees. The act mandates limits on how much public employers can contribute to their employee health care costs. The decision was essentially based on deference to a federal law that applies to agencies receiving federal funding – like the AATA. That federal law requires benefits like health care to be collectively bargained, not stipulated. Under the state law, failure by the AATA to comply would just mean that it would be denied state funds to which it is not even entitled.

In the meeting’s other business item, the AATA approved a three-year contract with CBS Outdoor Advertising of Lexington, New York, to handle placement of ads on its buses and bus stops. That’s a change from the previous contract, which was held by Transit Advertising Group (TAG) of Farmington Hills, Mich.

Four-Party Agreement, Countywide

In front of the board again for its approval was the four-party agreement outlining a framework for a possible countywide transportation authority, and its articles of incorporation. The other three parties to the agreement are the cities of Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti, and Washtenaw County.

The most recent iteration of approvals came as a result of an amendment to the articles of incorporation made by the Washtenaw County board of commissioners at its Aug. 1, 2012 meeting. The county board’s amendment changed the minimum threshold of votes required on the proposed new 15-member transit authority board, in order for the board to change the authority’s articles of incorporation. That threshold was increased from a 2/3 majority (10 votes) to a 4/5 majority (12 votes).

Washtenaw County’s role will now be to file the articles of incorporation for a new transit authority – The Washtenaw Ride. The articles would be filed with the state of Michigan under Act 196 of 1986. But that filing would come only after a request from the AATA and only after the AATA publishes details of the service and funding plan for the authority in newspapers of general circulation in Washtenaw County. At that point, jurisdictions throughout Washtenaw County would have the ability to opt out of the new transit authority.

Even after the funding plan is published and the new authority is incorporated, the four-party agreement stipulates that any transfer of assets from the AATA to The Washtenaw Ride would take place only after a voter-approved funding mechanism is established. And only after a voter-approved funding mechanism is established would proceeds from the transportation millages currently levied by the cities of Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti be pledged to The Washtenaw Ride.

A financial task force recruited by the AATA – to assess the amount of funding that would be necessary to offer the kind of service that AATA is proposing – concluded that it would require roughly the equivalent of 0.5 mills countywide. [.pdf of final version of transit documents] It will not be on the ballot for Nov. 6, as the deadline will expire by the end of August and not nearly enough time exists to complete remaining steps before then.

Four-Party Agreement, Countywide: Comment from Lovejoy Roe

Karen Lovejoy Roe, Ypsilanti Township clerk, will represent the Southeast District in the proposed new transit authority. That district consists of Ypsilanti Township and Augusta Township. Of the three members of the as-yet unincorporated (U196) transit board who attended the Aug. 16 meeting, she was the only one who spoke at the table.

Her remarks prompted Thomas Partridge, a frequent critic of the AATA, to rise from his seat and applaud.

She opened by saying, “I’m just really excited about where we’re headed as a community, as a county at large. I know that there’s been a lot of hiccups, but I think that that’s normal … A lot of questions have been raised about trust and I just want everybody to know I’m committed, and I think that those who’ve asked me to be here working willingly and openly to do what’s best for all county residents [are, too] …”

She stressed three key points related to the importance of better transportation in the county: jobs, seniors and young people.

What drew her attention, she said, is the impact that countywide transportation could have on economic development. Even though the national climate is difficult, she allowed, “we can control our destiny here, so we focus on that.” She said was sitting at a dinner table with a top executive of one of the largest private employers in the county, Thompson Reuters, who told her that they make their decisions about where to locate their businesses based on where public transportation is located. A huge lightbulb went off in her head, she said. That had led her to conclude: “I don’t even know why this is up to debate. The debate should be about the details of what we’re going to do, but not about whether we’re going to do it.”

As the process has gone along, she told the board, one of the things that she’d pushed for was data. She always knew that Ypsilanti Township had a huge population and travels to Ann Arbor to work – but how many? And she’d been given those numbers, she said – about 5,000-6,000. When you add in the city of Ypsilanti and Superior Township, it’s even more, she said. “Our folks need jobs,” she said, and Ann Arbor is where the jobs are. She expressed support for that idea, saying what’s good for Ann Arbor is good for the rest of the county. Ypsilanti Township and Augusta Township residents need jobs, she said, and they don’t care where those jobs are located.

Turning her attention to senior issues, Lovejoy Roe told the board that during the primary election campaign, she and Ypsilanti Township supervisor Brenda Stumbo had, between the two of them, knocked on every door in the township. As a result of that, she said, they know now that their intuition was exactly right: “Our seniors need transportation.” There are so many people that she knew four years ago who used to drive, and are not driving now, she said. They would ask, “Karen, Brenda, what can we do?” It’s true not just for Ypsilanti Township, she said, but for all of Washtenaw County – the population is aging. Seniors deserve to be able to stay in their homes, Lovejoy Roe said – especially facing an inability to sell their homes without taking a huge loss. There is not enough assisted living housing that they can move into, she said. By helping seniors stay in their homes by providing on-demand door-to-door services, it’s providing “assisted living” by helping them stay in their homes, she said.

Lovejoy Roe rounded out her remarks by talking about the importance of public transportation for young people. Washtenaw County has to be a place where young people want to live and stay, she said. She wants her five children to stay here and she’s looking forward to having grandchildren. And they need public transportation, she said. She’s learned so much through her own children and talking to other young residents, she said. For them, it’s a cultural positive. When she grew up, whoever had the fastest, hottest car was the coolest around. But now your status gets measured by whether you’re able to live and work without an automobile. That’s who young people are today, she said.

She’s really excited about the future, she said, and she knows there’s still a long way to go to get to where we need to be. But for her, the arguments for doing it are: jobs, our seniors, and our young people.

Lovejoy Roe allowed there are a lot of questions, and watching the Washtenaw County board of commissioner meetings, she knows that people are concerned that they’re going to get sucked in and “screwed over” – saying she’s probably not as politically tactful as they are. She believes in her heart that it’s going to work. She pointed out that if the millage is requested and voters approve it, then it will eventually need to be renewed – so every single community will need to benefit. They’re not going to be voting for a millage in perpetuity. So there’s a real incentive to everybody working together to move the process forward, she said.

Four-Party Agreement, Countywide: Public Comment

All of the public commentary could be connected in some way to the four-party agreement and the possibility it provides for broader governance and service area.

Carolyn Grawi from the Ann Arbor Center for Independent Living addressed the board during public commentary at the end of the meeting. She congratulated the board as well as the community, saying that we will now move forward with a chance to have countywide transportation. The disability community can’t wait for this opportunity to exist, she said. She echoed the comments of Karen Lovejoy Roe. It really will help add value to the community, Grawi said.

Larry Krieg introduced himself as an Ypsilanti Township resident, and began by thanking his township clerk [Karen Lovejoy Roe] for such rousing support. He said he wanted to bring three things together that are significant.

The first was an article in online Bridge Magazine about the number of millages that were passed in Michigan at the Aug. 7, 2012 primary. Out of 805 millages on the ballot, a total of 90% passed, he reported. Of the road millages that were on the ballot, 89% had passed. In spite of the rhetoric against taxes, people are passing millages at a remarkable rate, he observed. Second, he said the Center for Automotive Research in Ann Arbor last week released the estimate that in the next 20 years, cars will average $50,000 apiece. The third point is that as he is researching fuel costs and where the money goes, almost all the money leaves Michigan, he said, and over half of it leaves the United States. And up to 8% goes to governments that are hostile to the United States. So when people object to increasing taxes, they don’t realize that just by filling up their gas tank they are paying money to governments that are hostile to the United States. So he encouraged the board to be a bit more aggressive.

At the first opportunity for public comment, at the start of the meeting, Thomas Partridge introduced himself as a resident of the city of Ann Arbor, and advocate for everyone in Ann Arbor and all of the cities and villages and townships of Washtenaw County and the state of Michigan. He called on the board to mount an assertive, stepped-up campaign to bring about a quality countywide transportation system. It had been his proposal, he contended, made to the Washtenaw County board of commissioners more than six years ago at a board meeting, to bring about the foundation of a Washtenaw County department of transportation under the Washtenaw County government. Instead, the board has bided its time and avoided tackling this very important and vital issue, he contended.

Partridge also called on the AATA board to be more assertive about getting the proposal on the ballot as soon as possible. [It will not be on the Nov. 6 ballot.] He called on the representatives of the new transit authority board to become more vocal and more assertive to bring about this much-needed countywide transportation system.

At the second opportunity for public commentary at the end of the meeting, Partridge expressed appreciation for those who’d voted for him in the Democratic primary election – as he’d run for state representative of the 53rd District. [He received 11.5% of the vote, compared to 88% for incumbent Jeff Irwin.] He ventured that they’d voted for him based on his leadership on the issue of bringing about a badly-needed countywide transportation system. He called on everyone to unite the county in order to achieve progress.

Four-Party Agreement, Countywide: Board Deliberations

Board chair Jesse Bernstein briefly described the Washtenaw County board’s amendment, made on Aug. 1, 2012. The amendment changed the minimum threshold of votes required on the proposed new 15-member transit authority board, if the board wants to change the authority’s articles of incorporation. That threshold was increased from a 2/3 majority (10 votes) to a 4/5 majority (12 votes).

Outcome: The board voted without further discussion. That means that the all four parties to the agreement have given final approval. After the Washtenaw County board had given its approval on Aug. 1, the Ann Arbor city council re-approved the agreement on Aug. 9, 2012, and the Ypsilanti city council gave its re-approval on Aug. 14.

Four-Party Agreement, Countywide: Next Steps

In his verbal report to the board, CEO Michael Ford outlined the next steps. They include making sure that all the stakeholders know all service benefits that each district will receive. When the AATA board believes it has done all it can to inform the public of the benefits of the five-year transit program, the board can then request that the county initiate the incorporation process – filing articles of incorporation for the new authority with the state. And at that point, he continued, the local governments of the county will have 30 days to opt out, if they choose to do so.

Left to right: AATA CEO Michael Ford welcomes David Phillips to the meeting. Philips, Superior Township clerk, represents the Northeast District on the U196 board.

But several steps will precede the decision to request incorporation. The week of Aug. 20, the AATA will be mailing out a letter to all local clerks to explain the incorporation process, Ford explained. AATA will be planning and following up with all those communities. The AATA will also be sending out a newsletter to all community leaders and the public. And on Aug. 23, Ford said, the AATA will meet with the unincorporated board members to prepare for the public release of the five-year transit program.

Throughout the month of September, the AATA will be meeting with the district advisory committees (DACs) to seek local recommendations on the proposed program. They’ll also meet with local leaders and government boards to explain the program and answer all questions to build support. The AATA board and the district representatives will play an important role in ensuring that the local leadership and the public understand what the plan provides, he said. When the AATA believes it has a consensus on the scope of the service plan, the current board will then request that the county start the incorporation process. Ford said: “We believe the plan, guided by the 30-year master plan and vision, clearly benefits all local government units and citizens in the county.”

Ford stated that the AATA will continue its relationship with each local government, whether or not they decide to participate in the new transit authority.

Four-Party Agreement, Countywide: Five-Year Service Plan

A condition for a request to incorporate the new transit authority is to publish a five-year service plan. A draft of the plan was released in April.

At the board’s Aug. 16 meeting, Michael Benham – strategic planner with the AATA – gave an update on the five-year service plan. The plan is in the process of being introduced to the public, he said. There have been a number of new suggestions for additional services, he said.

Since the previous draft, which was released in April, he said, a Milan connector has been included. That will run on Carpenter Road from Milan to a Meier store at Ellsworth and Carpenter. Also, a Milan circulator has been added. That’s contingent on involvement with the southern part of Milan, which extends into Monroe County. The Milan connector is actually a rerouting of something that was previously in the plan that went from Milan through Saline to Ann Arbor. He explained that “connector services” are “semi-express services” that connect communities in rural areas.

Other changes include an extension of the previously included Northfield Express to Brighton. The urban bus network [Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti] has been expanded. Previously, it was based on a 16-hour day and now it’s based on an 18-hour day for some routes. That will involve a number of select routes operating until midnight. Some routes will also operate a little bit earlier in the morning, starting at 6 a.m. instead of 6:30 a.m. There were also a number of miscellaneous routing and scheduling changes to the urban bus network – too numerous to get into, he said.

They are also thinking about extending service to Lincoln Consolidated Schools in August Township, using a combination of flex service and limited extensions of the already-proposed Route #46. They’re also looking at the park-and-ride proposed in Pittsfield Township – and they’re thinking about either adding an additional park-and-ride, which would be further east, or perhaps just taking the existing one and moving it.

The schedule for the next round of District Advisory Committee meetings is available on the AATA’s Moving You Forward website.

North-South Rail (WALLY)

A somewhat unexpected $640,000 federal grant to the AATA and Michigan Dept. of Transportation was part of the background for a resolution the board was asked to consider – which continues planning and study for the WALLY (Washtenaw and Livingston Railway) project. The grant was announced on Aug. 6, 2012 and was awarded under the federal Transportation, Community and System Preservation (TCSP) program. AATA had applied for the grant last November, but did not have high expectations, given the competitive nature of the grants.

The AATA had also allocated other funds for continued planning on WALLY at its June 21, 2012 meeting.

On Aug. 16, the AATA board was asked to award a $105,200 contract to SmithGroupJJR for “station location and design services” in connection with the WALLY project. The board’s authorization includes an option to increase the contract scope at a later date.

A possible downtown location for an Ann Arbor rail station, between Washington and Liberty streets. The railway is highlighted in yellow. The city-owned First and William lot has been designated by the city council as part of a future greenway. The city-owned 415 W. Washington parcel is the focus of possible development as a greenway and arts center.

Based on a staff memo included in the AATA’s performance monitoring and external relations committee minutes, the initial phase of the project will focus on station location studies for five communities: Ann Arbor, Whitmore Lake, Hamburg Township, Genoa Township and Howell. In Ann Arbor, attention will be focused on the Barton Road location and how a station can be designed that overcomes the constraints imposed by a large drainage culvert.

Future phases would also include detailed designs of each site selected in the initial phase, with additional station sites in Ann Arbor – a downtown location (probably between Liberty and Washington streets, according to the memo) and one near the University of Michigan football stadium at Main and Stadium Boulevard.

The track from the Barton Road location southward is owned by the Ann Arbor Railroad, which has historically been uninterested in passenger rail use on it tracks. But in the fall of 2011, AARR indicated at least a willingness to entertain a “business proposition” on such use. Some kind of arrangement would be necessary in order to contemplate stations south of Barton Road – like downtown or the football stadium.

North-South Rail (WALLY): Board Deliberations

Charles Griffith said he was excited that the AATA can continue to evaluate the potential of this commuter rail line. It’s nice to propose something like this, Griffith said, but then you have to really figure out the details – where exactly would you put the stations and what would they look like, and how would they connect up to other services. So the AATA is very fortunate to have support from the federal government to help figure that out.

Eli Cooper stated that this step is really important – because it is work that the AATA is doing on behalf of many others. He spoke of the local contributions that come from other communities in Washtenaw and Livingston counties that had enabled the AATA to think about a smaller station design process.

By way of background, the financial support outside the AATA for WALLY includes: Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority ($50,000); Washtenaw County ($50,000); and the city of Howell DDA ($37,000).

“Lo and behold, as we were bringing this forward, comes to us support from above!” Cooper said. It’s very interesting to see that not only has the Federal Transit Administration provided AATA the grant – but the FTA has done it through the Michigan Dept. of Transportation. In the early stages of the WALLY rail service planning, Cooper said, it was all about the local involvement. And what can be seen in this agenda item, he said, is the importance to all levels of government and to all the communities to do a proper job of planning for future rail service. A new rail system, even on an existing railroad, requires a lot of effort, Cooper cautioned.

MDOT has invested in the rail infrastructure to make sure the existing rails can sustain passenger service, Cooper said, but we don’t have rail stations yet. So this begins the process of putting ideas and plans together to allow those stations to emerge – as the system becomes ready for carrying employees and families back and forth, up and down this corridor.

Cooper reported on a session sponsored by the Ann Arbor/Ypsilanti Regional Chamber of Commerce with Joseph C. Szabo, administrator of the Federal Railroad Administration. [The press was barred from the event.] Cooper relayed some numbers provided by Szabo. For the generation age 16-35, the amount of vehicle miles traveled is down 23%. Their reliance on transit and rail is up 40%. That’s a generational shift, Cooper concluded.

These investments are really allowing this generation to prepare for the next one, Cooper said.

Bernstein noted that he and AATA strategic planner Michael Benham had also attended the meeting at the Ann Arbor/Ypsilanti chamber. Bernstein said he was glad to see the commitment that the FRA has to commuter rail and also to long-distance rail. He was especially glad that the AATA had received the extra $640,000.

Bernstein is deeply concerned about the terminus of the north-south line, and he believes it needs to come into downtown Ann Arbor. He hopes this study will give more time and wherewithal to make that happen.

Outcome: The board voted unanimously to approve the WALLY station design and location study.

Health Care Contribution Policy

The board was asked to authorize a resolution that sets a policy that the AATA will not meet the conditions of Michigan’s Act 152 – which limits the amount that public employers can contribute to their employee health care. The resolution stipulates that the AATA will accept the penalty specified in Section 9 of Act 152, which actually has no practical effect on the AATA. But the resolution also allows the AATA to comply with its obligations under federal law with respect to collective bargaining rights.

Act 152 limits the amount that a public employer like the AATA can make to its employees’ medical benefits plans – $5,500 for single-person coverage, $11,000 for two-person coverage, and $15,000 for family coverage. And the law provides another option, where the employer limits its contribution to 80% of the medical benefit.

The penalty specified in Section 9 of the law involves funds to which the AATA is not entitled in any case:

15.569 Noncompliance by public employer; penalty.
Sec. 9.
If a public employer fails to comply with this act, the public employer shall permit the state treasurer to reduce by 10% each economic vitality incentive program payment received under 2011 PA 63 and the department of education shall assess the public employer a penalty equal to 10% of each payment of any funds for which the public employer qualifies under the state school aid act of 1979, 1979 PA 94, MCL 388.1601 to 388.1772, during the period that the public employer fails to comply with this act. … [.pdf of full text of Act 152]

The rationale for the resolution was this: In order for the AATA to comply with Title 49 of United States Code 5333, as an agency that receives federal assistance, unionized health care benefits must be subject to collective bargaining – not the state’s mandated fixed-dollar or percentage caps. AATA bus drivers are members of the Transport Workers Union Local 171.

The AATA had already begun to grapple with this issue, when it voted at its June 21, 2012 meeting to comply with Michigan’s Act 152 for its non-union management staff. That was followed with a discussion of possibly rescinding that vote at the board’s July 16, 2012 meeting. Although the possibility of scheduling a special meeting was discussed – to deal with non-union employee health care – no meeting was scheduled.

Health Care Contribution Policy: Board Deliberations

The board deliberations were significant, because they highlighted differing views on the appropriate language to describe the action the board was taking. The resolution itself stated [emphasis added]:

IT IS RESOLVED, that the AATA Board of Directors invokes Section 9 of Act 152 so as to protect the collective bargaining rights of its union employees under its Section 13(c) agreement with the TWU, and …

When he described the resolution in his report from the board’s performance monitoring and external relations committee, Charles Griffith reminded his colleagues that they’d already addressed the issue for non-union management staff. What the board is being asked to do now, he said, and what is being recommended, is that the resolution be passed, giving an assurance that the AATA will address the impacts to union health care benefits only through the collective bargaining process. This is triggering what he called “a waiver” in Section 9 of Act 152.

When the board came to the item on the agenda, board chair Jesse Bernstein ventured that there are conflicting requirements in state and federal law regarding health care costs and collective bargaining. The bottom line, he contended, is that the AATA can claim an “exemption” under Section 9, and the consequences don’t impact the AATA, because the AATA does not receive the money that would be impacted if it did not comply with Act 152. So Bernstein indicated that the AATA is invoking the section that says the AATA is not going to participate in the state law – and that covers the AATA for the federal law.

AATA board member Eli Cooper, who also serves as the city of Ann Arbor’s transportation program manager.

Eli Cooper took a different view of the appropriate description of the board’s action. Having read the opinion of the AATA’s legal counsel, he said, and having read the statute, he felt that words like “waiver” and “exemption” don’t fully describe what is at play. He indicated that he felt a better description would be “not applicable.” The penalties that are referenced in Section 9 of the statute do not apply to an authority such as the AATA – and as such, the AATA is not being granted a waiver or an exemption, he pointed out. It’s just that the statute, as fashioned, doesn’t have a penalty clause that applies to the AATA.

Cooper felt that it’s the right thing to do – to stay in step with the federal authorities and to continue to work constructively and positively with the union representation. He called it a point of clarification that there’s not a waiver or an exemption. The penalty is simply not applicable to the authority.

Outcome: The board unanimously approved the resolution that defers to federal requirements over state law with respect to health care contributions.

Bus Advertising

The board was asked to authorize a three-year contract with CBS Outdoor Advertising of Lexington, New York, to handle placement of ads on its buses and bus stops. That’s a change from the AATA’s previous contract with Transit Advertising Group (TAG) of Farmington Hills, Mich.

The contract had been held by TAG for the last seven years, but expired. The AATA selected CBS Outdoor Advertising from seven respondents to an RFP (request for proposals). The contract required board approval because the amount of revenue generated from the deal is expected to exceed $100,000 for the three-year period of the contract.

In the most recent court action connected to a lawsuit filed against the AATA over an advertisement rejected for its buses – which included the text “Boycott ‘Israel’” – TAG and its president Randy Oram were dropped as defendants in the case by mutual agreement of the parties. The court has not ruled since an evidentiary hearing was held on July 23.

During board deliberations, Eli Cooper talked about the way the authority is operated. He felt it was important to note that bus advertising is a revenue source. The authority and the staff use all means to generate revenue to help provide the high level of service that it does to the community. It might be seen as a simple award of a contract, he said, but it’s part of a manner of doing business that is entrepreneurial and is in partnership with the private sector. So he fully supported the resolution. Board chair Jesse Bernstein noted that every bus presents a different configuration – it’s not just slapping something up on the side of a bus. It requires a great deal of skill on the part of the vendor, he said.

Outcome: The board voted unanimously to award the advertising contract to CBS Outdoor Advertising.

Communications, Committees, CEO, Commentary

At its Aug. 16 meeting, the board entertained various communications, including its usual reports from the performance monitoring and external relations committee, the planning and development committee, as well as from CEO Michael Ford. Here are some highlights.

Comm/Comm: Blake Transit Center

In his verbal report to the board, CEO Michael Ford noted that the new downtown Ann Arbor Blake Transit Center would go before the Ann Arbor city council on Monday, Aug. 20.

By way of background, the new BTC will be built on the opposite site of the lot from the current center. So it will front on Fifth Avenue instead of Fourth Avenue. Buses will enter from Fourth and exit onto Fifth, which is the opposite traffic flow from the current configuration. The plans were reviewed by the city planning commission on July 17, 2012. As a public entity, the AATA is not required to get planning commission or city council approval. But the planning commission voted to affirm that the site plan conformed to city code with two exceptions. The city council had the BTC on its Aug. 20 agenda only as a written communication from the city administrator, and did not discuss the BTC at all. But AATA staff were in the audience until the meeting ended – after midnight – in case they were called upon to answer questions.

At the AATA board meeting on Aug. 16, Ford indicated that the BTC would be before the AATA board in October and e hoped to start breaking ground at that time.

Comm/Comm: New Website

CEO Michael Ford told the board that new AATA website will be brought online in mid- to late September. He felt that people would be very impressed with the outcome of that.

Comm/Comm: Ridership

Also as part of his verbal report, CEO Michael Ford said that ridership on Route #4 since January, compared to this time last year, is up over 28% as a result of the more frequent service being offered. NightRide service is up over 55%. ExpressRide – which included commuter service to Canton and Chelsea – is up 54%. Reverse commutes [leaving Ann Arbor in the morning for those two cities] are also now available, Ford said. The first week of AirRide service [between downtown Ann Arbor and Detroit Metro Airport] had around 400 passengers. Now the service is averaging consistently between 800 and 1,000 passengers per week. Ford also reported that AATA now has 20 vanpools on the road.

AATA board member Charles Griffith, reporting from the performance monitoring and external relations committee, said that Routes #3 and #5, because of the increased ridership, have struggled a bit with staying on time and with overcrowding. So AATA is continuing to look at ways to address that. It’s not in the budget to increase the frequency of the service as the AATA had done for Route #4, he said – at least not at this time. Route #3 runs between Ann Arbor and Washtenaw Community College. Route #5 runs along Packard between Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti.

Comm/Comm: Financial Update

Reporting from the performance monitoring and external relations committee, Charles Griffith noted that both expenses and revenues are under budget.

Expenses are lower due to the later start for the AirRide service and filling some positions later than had been projected in the budget.

An issue of concern, Griffith said, is the possibility of state operating assistance decreasing for fiscal year 2013, due to a change in the formula the state has been using to distribute money to transit agencies around the state. It could result in a loss of $800,000 in next year’s budget. Griffith said that “we have folks working on that,” and the AATA is working with some of the other transit agencies in the state, and will be attempting to address that going forward.

Present: Charles Griffith, Jesse Bernstein, Eli Cooper, Anya Dale.

Absent: David Nacht, Sue Gott, Roger Kerson.

Next regular meeting: Thursday, Sept. 20, 2012 at 6:30 p.m. at the Ann Arbor District Library, 343 S. Fifth Ave., Ann Arbor [Check Chronicle event listings to confirm date]

The Chronicle could not survive without regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public affairs. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle. And if you’re already supporting us, please encourage your friends, neighbors and colleagues to help support The Chronicle, too!

AATA board members met in a workroom at AATA headquarters for their July 16 special meeting. Clockwise around the table starting at the far left: Anya Dale, David Nacht (obscured behind Dale), Jesse Bernstein, CEO Michael Ford, Sue Gott and Eli Cooper. (Photos by the writer.)

However, the longest and most vigorous discussion took place on an item not actually on the published agenda: compliance by the AATA with Michigan’s Public Act 152, signed into law in September 2011, which limits employer health care contributions to a fixed dollar amount. At their July 16 meeting, board members took no further action on the issue, letting the vote taken at their previous meeting on June 21, 2012 stand – for now. An additional special meeting might be called sometime in the next week.

The board’s discussion of new information, obtained from the Michigan attorney general’s office, as well as additional analysis of Act 152, suggested a kind of vindication for the position of two dissenters – Charles Griffith and Roger Kerson – in the board’s June 21 action.

That action had been to limit the AATA’s contributions to no more than 80% of the non-union employee health care cost. Adopting the 80% limit is another way for a public entity to comply with Act 152. And the board had voted on June 21 to do that for its non-union employees – because open enrollment was fast approaching for those employees.

As part of that compliance decision, AATA put together a new health care option, which would allow its non-union employees to choose a health care option that would cost them the same as before – but increase their co-pays. And by the time of the July 16 meeting, employees were participating in the open enrollment process, using the boardroom for that activity.

So the board met in a smaller workroom to handle its business for the July 16 special meeting.

That business included a $60,000 increase in the contract with Steer Davies Gleave, the international consulting firm the AATA hired to assist with the development of its transit master plan. The work has included identifying new service options and financial analysis for AATA’s initiative to expand its governance and service area countywide. With this and other previous increases, the value of the contract now totals $780,622, from a deal first signed in April 2010 for just under $400,000. Some of the additional $60,000 will essentially be passed through to a local consulting firm, Carlisle Wortman Associates.

In other business, the board struck a task-order style deal for marketing and advertising with Quack! Media and Pace & Partners Inc. – a three-year arrangement that could be extended for another two years. The $500,000 total authorized by the board works out to $100,000 a year.

The board also authorized an increase in the contract it has with Blue Cab to provide its NightRide service, which operates after the hours when fixed-route service stops running. The increase is from $28 to $32 per service hour for a contract that extends through 2013. Of the $4 increase, $3 is attributed to the AATA’s relatively new living wage policy.

In a final piece of business, the board authorized a $104,000 contract with RBV Contracting to relocate a fire hydrant as part of AATA’s bus garage expansion project.

Compliance with Michigan’s Public Act 152

The board discussed at length an action it had taken at its previous meeting on June 21, 2012 in order to comply with Michigan’s Public Act 152, which was signed into law last year. The board did not take any action on the issue at its July 16 meeting, but left open the possibility of calling a special meeting before July 23, when the “drop dead” date falls for health care open enrollment for AATA’s non-union employees. The health care plan year begins Aug. 1.

Public Act 152: Background

Public Act 152 limits the amount that a public employer like the AATA can make to its employees’ medical benefits plans – $5,500 for single-person coverage, $11,000 for two-person coverage, and $15,000 for family coverage. However, the act provides another option, under which a public employer can choose through a vote of its governing body (in this case, the AATA board) to not apply the hard dollar cap. Instead, the employer can limit its contribution to 80% of the medical benefit, leaving the employee to cover the remaining 20%. It’s this 80/20 option that the AATA board had exercised in its June 21 vote.

The board’s special meeting on July 16 was held in AATA headquarters at 2700 S. Industrial Highway, instead of the usual location at the downtown Ann Arbor District Library. But it was not held in the dedicated boardroom – because that space was being used for open enrollment in the health care plan.

As part of its compliance with the 80/20 provision, AATA had put together health plan options for non-union employees that would essentially make their health care costs roughly the same as current costs – if they choose to opt for higher co-pays.

Two board members dissented on the June 21 vote: Charles Griffith and Roger Kerson. Neither was able to attend the July 16 meeting. David Nacht, who had not attended the June 21 meeting, was present on July 16.

That led to deliberations that covered much of the same ground as the June 21 discussion. However, a couple of new points are worth highlighting, which were made plainer to the AATA by a letter the Michigan attorney general’s office sent to the U.S. Dept. of Labor. The letter pointed to two specific ways that transit agencies could comply with Act 152, without limiting contributions to employee health care. [.pdf of May 29, 2012 letter] First, a transit agency could vote under Section 8 of Act 152 to exempt itself from compliance. Based on the AATA board member deliberations on June 21, their understanding was that they could not, as appointed officials, exercise that option.

The Michigan attorney general’s letter also points to Section 9 as a way to comply. Section 9 of Act 152 provides an explicit penalty for non-compliance, suggesting that the law in some sense does not apply to transit agencies – because the penalties involve taking back 10% of state funds that such agencies don’t receive anyway. Those funds include the state’s current version of state-shared revenue, as well as school aid funds – which the AATA does not receive. From Act 152:

15.569 Noncompliance by public employer; penalty.
Sec. 9.
If a public employer fails to comply with this act, the public employer shall permit the state treasurer to reduce by 10% each economic vitality incentive program payment received under 2011 PA 63 and the department of education shall assess the public employer a penalty equal to 10% of each payment of any funds for which the public employer qualifies under the state school aid act of 1979, 1979 PA 94, MCL 388.1601 to 388.1772, during the period that the public employer fails to comply with this act. [.pdf of full text of Act 152]

Why was the Michigan attorney general’s office communicating with the U.S. Department of Labor? It’s because Title 49 of United States Code 4333 5333 on labor standards set out conditions for receipt of financial assistance from a range of federal programs – and among those conditions are protection of employment conditions that derive from collective bargaining rights. Based on the Michigan attorney general’s letter, the U.S. Dept. of Labor has found the use of Section 8 or Section 9 by Michigan transit agencies an acceptable way to continue to meet its USC 5333 obligations. From USC 5333(b):

(b) Employee Protective Arrangements.—
(1) As a condition of financial assistance under sections 5307–5312, 5316, 5318, 5323 (a)(1), 5323 (b), 5323 (d), 5328, 5337, and 5338 (b) of this title, the interests of employees affected by the assistance shall be protected under arrangements the Secretary of Labor concludes are fair and equitable. …
(2) Arrangements under this subsection shall include provisions that may be necessary for—
(A) the preservation of rights, privileges, and benefits (including continuation of pension rights and benefits) under existing collective bargaining agreements or otherwise;
(B) the continuation of collective bargaining rights;
(C) the protection of individual employees against a worsening of their positions related to employment;
(D) assurances of employment to employees of acquired public transportation systems;
(E) assurances of priority of reemployment of employees whose employment is ended or who are laid off; and
(F) paid training or retraining programs.

Public Act 152: Board Deliberations

Board chair Jesse Bernstein began by posing a question about the employee health insurance benefits, which David Nacht translated roughly as follows: If the board doesn’t rescind its June 21 motion today, and takes action later to rescind, would that “screw up” what’s happening right now in open enrollment? In response to Nacht, Ed Robertson, AATA’s human resources manager, told him: “I’m afraid I don’t know the answer to that question.”

Board member David Nacht deliberates at the July 16, 2012 meeting.

Robertson clarified that the new health plan, about which AATA’s non-union employees are currently making choices, starts Aug. 1. [AATA's union employees are not immediately affected, as their contract goes through the end of the year; however, they participate in the same health care plan as non-union employees.]

Robertson indicated that his uncertainty was based on the fact that he’s not sure what information has already been transmitted to the AATA’s health insurance carrier. He stressed he was not saying the plan couldn’t be revised. Bernstein confirmed with Robertson that employees are making their decisions on health care coverage, based on the motion the board passed on June 21. Bernstein ventured that the board needs to find a way to “back out of it.”

Nacht, who is an attorney but does not provide legal counsel to the AATA, responded by saying the first thing the AATA must do is make sure it follows the law. As he understood the draft resolution that the board had been presented that day, there’s at least an oral opinion from the U.S. Dept. of Labor that Michigan’s Act 152 violates federal law with regard to the AATA’s labor union. However, Nacht continued, the AATA might still have a legal obligation under the state law to follow it with respect to the AATA’s non-union employees. Nacht said he understood that there’s an attorney general opinion, which has some relevance – because Michigan attorney general opinions are treated as legally binding in the absence of a court opinion.

But the bottom line is, said Nacht, that “we need our lawyer to tell us what to do.” The board risks breaking a law, if the board says it doesn’t have to follow a state law. So he concluded that the board should get legal advice, before passing a resolution saying that the AATA isn’t going to follow a state law.

Michael Ford, the AATA’s chief executive officer, commented that other transit agencies in Michigan are doing this “right now as we speak.” Robertson confirmed Ford’s statement, saying that’s what the AATA had been told by the U.S. Dept. of Labor. Bernstein indicated that he felt the board needs to find out how to back out of the board’s previous vote for non-union administrative staff, so that on Aug. 1 they can continue with the health plan they have now, if they choose to do that.

Nacht responded to Bernstein by saying if the state passed a law saying the AATA should follow it, he was not sure why the AATA should back out of it. Bernstein indicated his understanding was that there were certain criteria – based on the receipt of certain kinds of money from the state. The AATA does not receive that kind of money from the state, he said. If the law doesn’t cover the AATA, he continued, he didn’t know why the AATA would put its non-union employees through this procedure.

Ford asked Chris White, AATA’s manager of service development, to explain further, building on Bernstein’s comments. White said that Act 152 contains an opt-out provision for cities [Section 8] – which allows a governing body to take a 2/3 vote to opt out of following the law. [It's not clear why AATA believes Section 8 could not also apply to a transit agency.] For non-cities, White continued, there is a separate clause [Section 9], which he summarized as saying that are no penalties for not following the law. The legislature had given “an out” for both cities and non-cities in Act 152, White concluded.

Nacht ventured that the board has both a legal issue and a policy issue. The policy issue, he said, is complicated. He said it’s not something that he’d be prepared to say how he feels, because he hasn’t seen a memo analyzing it. It’d be possible to say, for example, Nacht said, that we have to comply with this law, but we’re concerned about regressive impacts on employees, and want to have some budgetary compensation for employees – but at the same time we want our organization to do what most public entities are doing.

Otherwise put, the AATA’s position might be that it doesn’t want employees to take a hit, because the agency is concerned about its people, Nacht said. But in the spirit of the legislature’s action, as much as the AATA cares about its people, the board also has a fiduciary responsibility to taxpayer dollars. The board needs to discuss its obligations under both law and policy, before it does anything, Nacht said: “We need to have a conversation about that.”

Bernstein ventured that the board did have a conversation about that at its last meeting [which Nacht did not attend]. Bernstein told Nacht that the consensus was that the board did not want to negatively impact “any employee” based on Act 152. He felt the sentiment on the board was fairly clear.

Eli Cooper picked up on Bernstein’s phrase “any employee” and noted that he felt the consensus was more about “employees as a class,” and the board had looked to the staff to recommend something that was equitable to the employees as a group. He agreed with Nacht that it’s a legal and a policy issue. Cooper conveyed some dissatisfaction with the fact that the draft resolution had been presented “as we walk into a meeting without an opportunity to review any background.” The issue was not “ripe for decision making,” he ventured.

He did appreciate the urgency of the matter, Cooper said. If the board can collect more information in the next day or two, there are still more calendar days when an emergency meeting of the board could be called – if the legal opinions and the policy analysis is such that the board is compelled to take action.

Ford responded to Cooper’s comment about the late introduction of the issue, saying he took responsibility for it. The AATA had just received the information, and he felt it was important for the board to be aware of it. He noted that the board had given staff direction at its last meeting to follow up on the issue. Ford said there’d not yet been an opportunity to follow up with legal counsel.

Nacht then apologized for not attending the last meeting, but noted that he’d read the minutes. From the minutes, he didn’t get the sense of the kind of consensus on the board that Bernstein had articulated. What he’d see in the minutes, Nacht said, was a divided vote. And he guessed that the additional information has been resolved “in favor of the dissenters.” Bernstein stressed to Nacht that “none of us were thrilled with this from a legal or a policy position.” The board was looking for a way – if the AATA had to comply with the law – to be fair to employees. It’s coming up at a bad time, he said, because of the tight deadline.

Bernstein asked for clarification from Karen Wheeler, Ford’s executive assistant, about what the rules are on voting if people are not present. [Bernstein was anticipating the possibility of convening a special meeting, and having some people participate by telephone or by sending a proxy.] Wheeler’s answer: “You cannot do it.” Bernstein confirmed that a person had to be present to vote, and could not vote by phone or with a proxy.

Nacht asked why the board could not deal with it as a financial matter. For now, he suggested, the AATA complies with the law until its lawyer gives a different opinion. If the board’s lawyer writes a letter saying the AATA doesn’t have to follow the law, then the board is in a whole different position about voting. He felt differently about voting under that kind of situation. But Nacht stressed that the decision has a financial impact for employees and their families. So through the budget process, the AATA can compensate and adjust if there’s a board consensus that there should be neutral impact to employees financially.

Bernstein returned to Cooper’s comment on individual employees, stressing that the potential impact to an employee is difficult to predict, because it’s dependent on each employee’s medical experience during the year. Ed Robertson had left the room during the deliberations to get some additional information, but returned to tell the board that the “drop-dead date” on open enrollment was a week from that day [July 23] for management staff.

Bernstein ventured that they should give staff a chance to gather more data and to get a legal opinion. Sue Gott stressed that she wanted a legal opinion in writing – so she could read it ahead of time. Nacht also ventured that he’d like to have a legal opinion on supplemental employee compensation based on health care receipts. Bernstein indicated no enthusiasm for that approach, saying it would be a “total nightmare,” citing concerns about breaching confidentiality. Responding to Nacht’s suggestion that confidentiality concerns could be addressed by using third-party administrators, Bernstein feared that costs would keep getting added.

Ford tried to extract some specific direction from the board. He ventured that he was supposed to get a legal opinion and then convene a special meeting. He’d need board members’ schedules for that, he noted. Nacht clarified for Ford that he’d like a legal opinion on three subjects: (1) How does compliance with Act 152 affect the AATA as it relates to USC 5333(b) for union employees? (2) How does compliance with Act 152 affect the AATA as it relates to USC 5333(b) for non-union employees? and (3) To the extent the AATA is following the law, what are some legal options about the AATA’s ability to adjust employee compensation? The deliberations concluded with Bernstein querying Ford: “Michael, are you clear?” “Got it,” was Ford’s reply.

Outcome: The board took no action on the issue, but held out the possibility for a special meeting to be convened in order to vote on the question.

Transit Master Plan Consultant Contract

The board considered adding $60,000 to the contract with Steer Davies Gleave, a consulting firm originally hired on April 21, 2010 to help develop a transportation master plan (TMP). The TMP is the basis for the AATA’s initiative possibly to convert the AATA to an Act 196 transit authority, with the intent to expand geographically the agency’s governance and service coverage area countywide. The consulting firm is assisting the AATA in that effort.

The original contract with Steer Davies Gleave was for $399,805. Over the last two years, the contract amount has been increased by board authorization on three occasions (on Nov. 18, 2010, July 19, 2011 and Feb. 16, 2012), which brought the total contract to $720,622. The July 16, 2012 authorization brought that total to $780,622.

Among other things, this most recent contract increase was to cover the following items: documentation of financial analysis; methodology for an equity analysis of the new service program; design and monitoring of the long-term countywide district-based community input; and administration of a community input planning tool. Of the additional amount in the contract, a portion will essentially be passed through to a local consultant, Carlisle Wortman Associates of Ann Arbor.

The previous increases to the contract covered an expanded public process, support to a financial task force, and the generation of a draft five-year service program. [.pdf of detail on Steer Davies Gleave contract changes]

Board member David Nacht said his understanding was that to some extent the additional funds would go to a local company [Carlisle Wortman Associates], which CEO Michael Ford confirmed. Nacht ask: “Is this going to be it, ya think, with this contract?” Ford indicated that the AATA is trying to “internalize” all the work that SDG has been doing until now. It’s his hope that this would be the final revision to the contract, he indicated.

Anya Dale, who serves as chair of the planning and development committee that had recommended the additional funds, noted that the resolution states it’s the “final contract amendment.” Ford indicated that if there were some compelling reason, it could be brought back, but the AATA is trying to bring the work in-house and “own it.”

Board chair Jesse Bernstein ventured that if the AATA needed some help from an international consultant like SDG, they could be hired for new contract, but this would finalize the transit master plan process. Nacht asked his colleagues to imagine that there’s some kind of an election in the spring [for example, on the question of a countywide transit millage to support expanded service]. No matter the outcome of that election, Nacht supposed, there would still not be any continuation of the SDG contract.

AATA strategic planner Michael Benham confirmed Nacht’s understanding. The intent is to bring the work in-house so that any changes to the plan or the service that might result from a popular vote could be implemented by the AATA staff. He expected that any necessary changes that might come from the results of an election would be, for example, to add a service here or take away a service there.

Sue Gott asked Benham to elaborate generally on the value SDG is bringing in terms of additional expertise, and productivity for added deliverables. She wondered if the issue was a matter of additional expertise or time and availability of AATA staff.

Benham clarified that the need for outside help had been the combination of the sheer volume of the issues that had to be handled, and with the fact that the AATA didn’t have staff on board who could do some of the analysis necessary. Now that the basic plan has been created, he said, AATA staff is in a position to do adjustments and revisions. Creation of the plan by AATA staff would have been difficult, he said. Gott asked if it’s fair to say that the majority of what SDG is bringing is added expertise. Ford indicated that it’s the expertise that SDG brings, as well as their international experience.

Responding to the mention of SDG’s international experience as critical – as it relates to some of the work that the additional funding will pay for, David Nacht asked, “Really? I mean, to attend the DAC [countywide district advisory committee] meetings and organize the DAC meetings?” Benham indicated that a lot of what this final contract revision is covering could be thought of as “training.” SDG has a lot of expertise, he said, and the AATA is asking SDG to hand it over to the AATA now.

Nacht told Benham that what he really heard Benham saying, and what sells Nacht on it, is not that SDG has international expertise. Rather, it’s that AATA has invested a lot of money with SDG to figure out the complexity of the service that will generate the actual routes for the buses in a countywide system. So as the AATA works with communities in the county and tries to transfer that knowledge – so people really understand it – the AATA needs to understand all of that, too, Nacht said. So it’s really in-house training for the AATA, so that AATA can run a countywide system, Nacht concluded.

Outcome: The board voted unanimously to approve the $60,000 contract increase with Steer Davies Gleave.

NightRide Contract

The board considered an increase in its contract with Blue Cab, which is the vendor that operates the AATA’s NightRide service. The increase is from $28 to $32 per service hour for a contract that extends through 2013. The current three-year contract was set to expire in November 2012.

The NightRide is a shared cab service with a basic fare of $5, which is available weekdays from 11 p.m. to 6 a.m. and weekends from 7 p.m. to 7 a.m. Those are hours when the AATA’s regular fixed-route service does not operate.

Of the $4 per service hour cost increase in Blue Cab’s contract, $3 is analyzed by the AATA as based on compliance with the AATA’s relatively new living wage policy. The other $1 is analyzed as a general cost increase.

The geographic coverage area of AATA’s NightRide was expanded eastward to Golfside Road in March 2011 and further to downtown Ypsilanti in January 2012 – as part of a broader effort to improve work transportation between Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti. Ridership has increased about 40% from last year – with about 25 points of that increase due to broader geographic coverage and the other 15 points due to demand in Ann Arbor.

Ridership on the AATA’s NightRide service showed a clear increase starting in January 2012. 

During her report from the planning and development committee, Anya Dale characterized the increased net cost to the AATA of the hourly operating increase as coming to around $46,000.

During deliberations, board member David Nacht asked if there’d been any complaints about Blue Cab by patrons. Board chair Jesse Bernstein noted that he’d been thanked several times by restaurant employees for the geographic expansion of service.

Chris White, manager of AATA service development, indicated that the number of complaints about Blue Cab has been low historically. However, he allowed that in recent months, complaints had shown an increase. White attributed the increased complaints to the fact that a lot of new people are using the NightRide. White also said that Blue Cab has been good at addressing complaints when they’ve occurred.

Outcome: The board voted unanimously to approve the Blue Cab contract extension.

Marketing, Public Relations Contract

The board was asked to authorize purchasing up to $500,000 of marketing and public relations services from Quack! Media and Pace & Partners Inc. over the next five years.

The marketing and public relations work will cover “public relations, education, community outreach and other communication services in support of AATA’s initiatives and general operations.” The two firms were selected after the issuance of a request for proposals that generated 13 responses from the 35 firms to whom the request was sent. Quack! Media is an Ann Arbor firm, while Pace & Partners is based in Lansing.

Board member David Nacht led off deliberations by asking why the AATA had switched vendors. Mary Stasiak, AATA director of community relations, explained that it had been a competitive procurement process. The decision was based on relative experience and qualifications, she continued. There was some specific experience, approach and management style the AATA was looking for, she said, to help move the strategic marketing and information plan forward. It requires a more sophisticated effort and project management, she said. The two companies the AATA had settled on use the same project management software, and they also have transit-related experience, she said.

Nacht confirmed with Stasiak that the AATA had a consultant study the AATA’s marketing efforts and that the request for proposals (RFP) had been designed in part based on findings of that study. But the company that performed the study is one of the companies that is being awarded the contract, Nacht said. He wondered: “So they came up with a recommendation that we should change in a way where they had a competitive advantage?” No, Stasiak said, because all respondents to the RFP were provided with the same information – the same marketing and strategic plan.

Nacht wanted to know if the situation had been scrutinized to make sure that the deck wasn’t stacked – that the consultant didn’t say, “What AATA really needs is a company that provides X” when the company “knows fully well that they have X better than their competition.” That’s always a danger, Nacht said. Stasiak came back to her point that all the bidders had the same information.

AATA board member Eli Cooper deliberates at the July 16, 2012 special meeting. To his right is board member Sue Gott. To her right is CEO Michael Ford.

Board chair Jesse Bernstein noted that the RFP was generated by AATA staff. Eli Cooper noted that the proposals had been reviewed by AATA staff and had been winnowed down from 13 to 5 and ultimately decided based on AATA’s needs, not whether the firm could “do X better.”

Subsequent board discussion clarified that the total limit on the contract is $500,000 over possibly five years – three years plus two one-year extensions. Stasiak indicated that the previous contract with the previous vendor had resulted in expenditures of $427,000 over three years. Nacht got clarification that the contract is subject to 30-day termination. Bernstein and Sue Gott indicated that they were interested in monitoring the performance of the two firms. Bernstein said there should be substantial reporting back to the performance monitoring and external relations (PMER) committee. Cooper drew out the fact that the contract is an “on-call” or “task-order” type contract. Nacht ventured that the AATA has the option not to give the two companies any tasks.

Outcome: The board voted unanimously to approve the media and marketing contract with Quack! Media and Pace & Partners Inc. over the next five years.

Fire Hydrant Contractor

The board considered a $104,000 contract with RBV Contracting to relocate a fire hydrant as part of the AATA’s bus garage expansion project. The city of Ann Arbor is requiring the relocation of the hydrant – located on the south end of the AATA’s property at 2700 S. Industrial Highway.

In the new location, the hydrant will connect to the neighboring property, which is owned by the University of Michigan. The change will create a continuous loop connection of the fire hydrant system in the area.

Commenting on the resolution, Eli Cooper – who sits on the planning and development committee that had recommended the action – noted that moving the hydrant is a city requirement for occupying the new space. David Nacht wondered why the board even need to vote on the action. Board chair Jesse Bernstein told him it was because it’s a lot of money. [With the contingency, the project went over the $100,000 threshold that requires board approval.]

Outcome: The board voted unanimously to approve the contract to relocate the fire hydrant.

Communications, Committees, CEO, Commentary

At its July 16 meeting, the board entertained various communications, including its usual reports from the performance monitoring and external relations committee, the planning and development committee, as well as from CEO Michael Ford. The board also heard commentary from the public. Here are some highlights.

Comm/Comm: Countywide Expansion

In his update to the board, CEO Michael Ford alerted the board to the fact that the Washtenaw County board of commissioners would be giving final consideration to the four-party agreement (between the city of Ann Arbor, the city of Ypsilanti, the AATA and Washtenaw County) and the articles of incorporation of a new transit authority at the county board’s Aug. 1 meeting. The county board gave initial approval to the two documents at its July 11, 2012 ways & means committee meeting, after lengthy deliberations.

Comm/Comm: New Blake Transit Center

Ford noted that the new downtown Blake Transit Center would be reviewed by the city planning commission at its meeting the following day, on July 17. [Outcome of that review was an affirmation by the planning commission that the project meets city requirements for private development, with two exceptions involving landscaping and driveway width. The key change in the site, compared to the current configuration, will be moving the transit center building from the Fourth Avenue side of the midblock driveway to the Fifth Avenue side. The buses will also enter the driveway from the Fourth Avenue side and exit onto Fifth Avenue – which is the reverse of the current traffic flow. ]

Ford told the board that he hopes to be able to bring the Blake Transit Center proposal to the  Aug. 20 Ann Arbor city council meeting.

Comm/Comm: Triennial Review

In his update to the board, Ford noted that the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) had come in to review the way that the AATA handles its federal grants, which the FTA does every three years. Ford told the board that the AATA had done a very good job. A typical transit agency will have about seven deficiencies, Ford said, but FTA had found only one at the AATA – and that one was corrected “on the spot.” The FTA had told the AATA was the review was “top notch,” so Ford  commended the AATA staff on that.

Comm/Comm: Revisions to Five-Year Service Plan

Jim Mogensen reminded board members that a while back he’d addressed them about the parallels between the current countywide plan and the plans from the mid-1970s. A barrier to implementing that vision at that time was the confluence of money and politics, he noted. Now that conversation has opened again with all its complexity.

He observed that there are 15 different amendments to the service plan that are being looked at – so Mogensen ventured that it might be good to have a central place with all of that documented so that people can track what’s going on. Board chair Jesse Bernstein responded to Mogensen by saying, “We’re with you and that’s [strategic planner] Michael Benham’s job.”

Comm/Comm: General Complaints

Thomas Partridge addressed the board as an advocate for those who need transportation services the most. He complained that Blue Cab had not undergone sufficient evaluation and scrutiny. He expressed continued concerns about problems with service on the A-Ride service, for which the AATA contracts with SelectRide. He claimed there are violations so serious that they’re violations of criminal and civil laws. He questioned the continued “proclivity” of the board to go to outside contractors and pay their expensive rates without the board first exploring AATA’s ability to provide services in-house.

When he reached the end of his two-minute time, Partridge told board chair Jesse Bernstein he would appreciate additional time – otherwise Bernstein would be giving the appearance that the board didn’t want to hear constructive criticism. Bernstein explained to Partridge that there’s a rule that everyone gets two minutes. Partridge replied that before 1920 there was a law that said women couldn’t vote.

Present: David Nacht, Jesse Bernstein, Eli Cooper, Sue Gott, Anya Dale.

Absent: Charles Griffith, Roger Kerson.

Next regular meeting: Thursday, Aug. 16, 2012 at 6:30 p.m. in the fourth floor conference room at the Ann Arbor District Library, 343 S. Fifth Ave., Ann Arbor. [Check Chronicle event listings to confirm date]

The Chronicle could not survive without regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle. And if you’re already supporting us, please encourage your friends, neighbors and colleagues to help support The Chronicle, too!