A skeleton – wearing an Ann Arbor District Library T-shirt – was part of the non-traditional collections on display at the Feb. 3, 2014 AADL board retreat. (Photos by the writer.)

Discussion during the retreat, held at AADL’s downtown location on South Fifth Avenue, often touched on issues specific to that area. Dealing with the chronically homeless is one of the biggest challenges there, AADL director Josie Parker told the board, because during the hours that it’s open, the library is the shelter of last resort for many people.

“We are not a social service agency, yet we act as a de facto one,” Parker said. “We have a lot to contribute to this conversation because of our experience over the last 15 years.” The board discussed the need to define the library’s advocacy role in general for issues that trustees think are important, though Parker noted that the first responsibility for both the AADL administration and the board is to advocate for the library.

Other challenges faced by AADL include urban development, changes in the education system, issues related to providing Internet access, and “blurred lines” – instances where AADL is providing services to people who don’t live within the district’s boundaries. Also related to work outside the library’s boundaries, Parker reported that she’s talking with other directors of district libraries in Washtenaw County about the possibility of doing a study on the economic development impact of libraries.

The retreat began with a review of AADL’s non-traditional collections, and items from those collections were on display in the meeting room. The library has circulated art prints for more than 30 years, but has been expanding into other areas more recently, including science kits, musical instruments, home tools and craft equipment.

Parker told the board that the public library’s mission – to distribute materials that support the reading, education and even entertainment of the public – isn’t limited to bound volumes. The items for AADL’s non-traditional collections aren’t generally available to rent elsewhere, and are usually expensive to buy, she noted. “What are the limits of sharing? That’s what we’re pushing on.”

The final portion of the retreat was facilitated by local consultant Sandra Greenstone, who has played a similar role at previous retreats. Trustees generated a list of questions that they’d like to answer to help inform their work on the next strategic plan. Many of the issues related to the downtown library, but there was no discussion about putting another ballot proposal before voters. In November 2012, voters defeated a bond proposal that would have funded a new downtown library.

How all of this fits into the next strategic plan is a work in progress. The board will be handling the next steps at the committee level, with an update expected at the board’s Feb. 17 meeting.

Setting the Stage

Prue Rosenthal, the board’s president, began the retreat by saying that oftentimes people are asked for feedback at retreats like this. Although the board was going to get information from staff about what the library is doing and plans to do, Rosenthal hoped that the board would also focus “on what might be.” As an example, she cited the possibility of having games that the adult community could be invited to play – she mentioned Luminosity as the kind of game she had in mind. “What I’m hoping we’ll do is think forward,” she said.

Librarian Mariah Cherem, far left, with AADL trustees Jan Barney Newman, Rebecca Head and Margaret Leary.

AADL director Josie Parker told the board that the staff had set up items around the room that are currently in circulation, as well as things that the library plans to circulate soon. Staff were on hand to talk with board members about these items.

Eli Neiburger, AADL’s associate director of IT and production, gave an overview of the different collections on display, including “Book Clubs To Go” for adults, thematically-related kids books in “Stories To Go” kits, and “Science Tools” that range from dinosaur kits to telescopes and light meters. About three years ago, the AADL added a “Music Tools” collection, which has proven popular, he said. “Science To Go” kits were created with science tools, and “Home Tools” is a collection that started with energy meters, as part of a program in partnership with the city of Ann Arbor. Other items are now being added.

“Art Tools” is another collection that’s relatively new, and includes items like a drum card – a device used to take fleece off a sheep and start turning it into yarn. “We now have pretty close to the full set of tools you’d need to go straight from sheep to sweater,” Neiburger said.

These non-traditional collections have grown over the years. In 2011, excluding art prints, there were 18 non-traditional items in circulation, mostly energy meters. Those items were checked out 149 times. In 2012-2013, AADL made a major investment in these collections, increasing the number of items to 236 by the end of fiscal 2013. AADL projects there will be about 300 items and about 3,800 checkouts by the end of this fiscal year – on June 30, 2014. That’s over 10 checkouts per item over the year, Neiburger noted, calling it a very high number for any kind of collection. “Clearly we’ve found something that really is connecting with an audience.”

The library has about 600,000 items all of its collections, including books. So the non-traditional collections are relatively small by comparison, Neiburger said. But they are high-value, active use collections.

Not all of the items in the boardroom that night are in active circulation yet, Neiburger noted, and some are just in beta circulation to get input from a small number of users. One such device reads the codes off of cars – for example, when your “check engine” light comes on, you can hook the tool to your car, find out the diagnostic code, and look up what you need online to fix the problem.

In addition to items that can be reserved, AADL also has a category called “Up For Grabs” – items that can’t be put on hold, and are available on the shelf for walk-ins.

Parker told the board that the public library’s mission – to distribute materials that support the reading, education and entertainment of the public – isn’t limited to bound volumes. The items for AADL’s non-traditional collections are chosen carefully so that they don’t compete with local businesses. The items aren’t generally available to rent, and are usually expensive to buy, she noted. “What are the limits of sharing? That’s what we’re pushing on.”

Margaret Leary wondered whether there’s any evidence that expanding what the library lends attracts different people to the library. The telescopes have brought in a new audience, Parker said, including young males – a group that typically loses interest in the library. But Parker also noted that this kind of lending isn’t new: AADL has been lending framed artwork for over 30 years.

Board members spent about 30 minutes talking with staff about these collections.

Public Library Trends

When the group reconvened, Josie Parker told the board the she and Eli Neiburger would be following up on information they’d presented at a Sept. 30, 2009 board retreat held at the law firm Dykema. Discussions at that retreat were used to help develop the 2010-2015 strategic plan. [All but one of the current board members – Nancy Kaplan – also served on the board at that time.]

To put things in perspective, Neiburger noted that when he gave his presentation in 2009, “I speculated that Apple would be releasing a tablet called the iPad in the next year.”

AADL staff and trustees at the Feb. 3 board retreat.

It’s a very challenging time for the “content industry,” Neiburger said. From the first quarter of 2012 through the first quarter of 2013, sales of eBooks declined by 5%. Although adult eBook sales actually grew during that period, it was offset by a sharp decline in eBook sales for kids and teens. He noted that “Hunger Games” was released in 2012, adding that when the financial health of an entire format is influenced by the release of a single title or series, that doesn’t bode well for the long-term survivability of that format.

On the print side, all book sales were also down about 5%, and paperback books sales were down about 11%. Hardcover sales, however, were up 12%. That trend counters the notion that everything is moving to digital, Neiburger said. “So the story’s not quite what it sometimes seems to be, especially for people who are avid book readers.”

In terms of a long-term trend, Neiburger said the sales trend for eBooks don’t look like an adoption curve. That is, the trend doesn’t indicate that everyone is switching to the eBook format. Sales of tablets like the iPad are growing, he noted, but those devices are being used more for streaming services – like movies – than for eBooks. He pointed out that Netflix “is off like a shot,” with a business model that charges a fixed monthly price for unlimited usage. Cable TV is still popular, but there’s a “big bomb” awaiting that service, Neiburger said: unbundling. “If people are ever able to actually choose what channels they want to subscribe to, the cable industry is going to be in a lot of trouble very quickly,” he said.

The most telling things about these trends are the popularity of the fixed price/unlimited usage model, he said, and how cable TV does extremely poorly with younger consumers.

Neiburger described another streaming service – Spotify, which provides online music – and noted that paid subscribers hear music without ads. But Spotify has more unpaid subscribers than paid ones, and those unpaid subscribers have to listen to ads. “What this shows is how much more willing people are to consume a free service, even if it’s got ads on it,” he said. The thought of reading an ad-sponsored book “is kind of a horrifying idea,” he added. But that’s the dominant method by which most content is monetized, including radio, newspapers/magazines, and cable TV.

Neiburger noted that the birth of impartiality for newspapers occurred when newspaper owners decided to drop the price to a penny and started selling their readership to advertisers. At that point, there couldn’t be one newspaper for each point of view, he said. It resulted in newspapers trying to encompass a range of views, and reach a larger market.

The fixed price/unlimited usage model is now coming to eBooks in the form of a new service called Oyster, which launched in the fall of 2013. For $9.95 a month, people can read an unlimited amount of books. It doesn’t include all books, Neiburger said, but several major publishers are participating.

Neiburger said AADL is seeing an impact from this kind of model, specifically from services like Netflix and Spotify. An opportunity for the library is to have items that are harder to find, and that won’t be part of the services offered by these larger companies, he said.

Neiburger also reported results from a survey recently released by the Pew Research Center, which showed that a growing number of Americans are reading eBooks. But only 4% said that they only read eBooks – it’s a niche, not a transition, he said.

Regarding data about AADL usage, Neiburger showed that the library system’s door counts have grown from about 1.2 million in 2004, compared to the current door count of between 1.6 million to 1.7 million annually. During that period, the library opened three new branches – Malletts Creek in 2004, Pittsfield in 2006, and Traverwood in 2008. Each of those openings lifted the door count for the entire system, Neiburger noted. Another lifting force was the “recession bump” between 2008-2010, he said. That’s now beginning to flatten, but the door count is still higher now than it was in 2008.

For checkouts and renewals, there were 2.5 million in 2004 compared to about 9 million in 2013 – although it’s been basically flat since 2011. The library received more than 112,000 reference questions in 2004, which dropped to about 62,000 questions in 2013. There’s been a slight uptick recently driven by Old News requests – primarily for obituaries. Event attendance has almost doubled over the past 10 years, from about 45,000 in 2004 to 86,000 in 2013.

The library launched its current website in 2005, starting at about 5 million page views per year and growing to about 85 million page views in 2013.

External Pressures/Opportunities

Josie Parker then presented an overview of some of the outside pressures and challenges that the AADL faces, and Eli Neiburger outlined how those challenges might provide opportunities for AADL.

External Pressures/Opportunities: Education

Parker noted that school libraries haven’t been funded well or consistently for many years. As a public library, “we are now filling gaps in ways that we might not have expected to,” she said. If there isn’t a media center at their school, children will go elsewhere – like the public library. But while the public library is providing uses that it didn’t before, that’s not being followed by additional funding, she noted.

Trustee Ed Surovell talks with AADL director Josie Parker.

There are many opportunities to continue developing programs and services for schools, Neiburger said. For example, AADL has a new kids page – called Jump! – that links to homework help, event listings, and other resources.

Non-traditional collections are another example. A music teacher had checked out two musical tools for her class, which meant that her students had to share. So AADL created a kit with 30 of the devices, Neiburger said, so that each student in a classroom would have one to use. The kits can also be used by a Boy Scout or Girl Scout troop, or any other group.

Another example is the model that AADL uses for digital downloads, which allows users – including teachers – to keep the item after it’s downloaded. For now, this mostly applies to the music collection, but AADL is in the middle of major negotiations for other collections, he said.

The AADL has put infrastructure in place to deliver a variety of content, Neiburger noted, and the library is establishing licensing agreements directly with the rightsholders – not with vendors and publishers.

The AADL will continue to reach out in developing new services, Neiburger said. One challenge related to K-12 efforts, he added, is that it’s hard for teachers to find time to partner with the library, “because it’s hard to show how it connects to test scores.”

Parker noted that it’s not clear to AADL how any of this will evolve. However, she’s sure that AADL wants no part of some of the services that are being sold to libraries now, like Freegal. Such services charge tens of thousands of dollars in set-up costs, as well as a click-per-use fee. Those services also put a limit on what users can access, Parker noted. AADL is taking a different approach, she said, even though the outcome is uncertain. [Some of these issues were covered in more detail at previous board meetings. For example, see Chronicle coverage: "Ann Arbor Library Signs Digital Music Deal" and "AADL Board Briefed on Public Library Trends."]

Regarding classes offered by AADL for adults, Neiburger reported that demand is way down, and in many cases, the same people were taking classes over and over. People don’t necessarily want to be trained to use new software or learn how to apply for a job, he noted – they’re just trying to complete a task. So there’s an opportunity for AADL staff to offer one-on-one help, he said, and to develop a service around that approach.

AADL also is looking for opportunities for classes that have a unique topic. As an example, All Hands Active held a 3-D printing workshop at AADL. They were teaching something that required you to be in the presence of the device that you were learning about, Neiburger said, and “that’s a big opportunity.” There’s also a need for places to do “noisy group work,” he said, and there aren’t many spots in the community that provide that kind of space. AADL needs to think about reconfiguring its space to accommodate these kinds of things, he said, without disturbing other patrons. “A 3-D printer has a distinct odor to it. 3-D printing geeks also have a distinct odor to them,” he joked.

Neiburger also noted that the library is taking its collections outside of its own facilities. AADL held a stargazing party at Leslie Science & Nature Center to launch its telescope collection, for example. AADL also participates in the Neutral Zone’s Washington Street Fair, the Mini Maker Faire, FoolMoon, Top of the Park and other events. It’s an opportunity to reach new audiences who don’t necessarily know what the library offers, he said.

External Pressures: Internet Access

Parker reported that increasingly, other public institutions are moving services online, then telling citizens to access that service or information by using computers at the public library. That includes information about taxes, health care, Secretary of State services, and unemployment services. “In many cases in this country, the public library is the last access point for most folks,” she said.

AADL trustee Rebecca Head.

The Ann Arbor community is a bit different, she noted, but it’s still happening. Parker also pointed out that when these other institutions direct citizens to the public library, “please don’t think that they talked to us about that first. Most of the time, they did not.” She noted that some of these public institutions have shifted services online because they don’t have the staff to support public access, so “they’re taking the path of least resistance.”

Rebecca Head noted that it’s difficult for the downtown library to install more computers, given the building’s infrastructure. Parker clarified that it’s possible to put in more computers at the downtown library. “It’s just a very high cost to do that,” she said.

Parker noted that computing is a common need that runs through all types of services that the library provides, from K-12 education to job searching to tax preparation.

There’s an equity issue here, Head observed. “Libraries have always stood for providing access to people who might not otherwise have access.” It puts an extra burden on the library, she added.

Prue Rosenthal wondered what percentage of people in AADL’s district don’t have access to computers and the Internet. Parker didn’t have that information at hand, but noted that the percentage went up during the recession. That’s why the library’s “recession bump” occurred, as people turned to AADL for that service.

Neiburger noted that even if someone does have a computer and Internet access at home, they can’t always use it for everything if the equipment and software aren’t up to date.

As another example, Parker reported that the library has held classes on PowerSchool, the homework-tracking software used by Ann Arbor Public Schools, because some parents need help in using it.

Parker also raised another issue associated with ubiquitous public access to computers. Sometimes, people will use the computer for purposes that aren’t allowed, she said. Although the library has rules of behavior and monitors computer usage, she said, the staff can’t completely guarantee that a patron won’t look at something online that offends someone else. She cited precautions that are in place. Computers designated for adults have a filter option, she noted, and in the youth department, no one over the age of 14 can be online unless they’re with a child. There is no Internet access in children’s areas at the branches. So the library has done many things to mitigate risk, she said, but “it’s impossible to totally eliminate the possibility.”

The fear that someone will inappropriately use a public library computer for pornography is not enough to offset the positive benefits of providing Internet access for job searches, research and other purposes, Parker told the board.

External Pressures: Urban Development

Parker showed the board an aerial view of the downtown library at the northeast corner of Fifth and William. She pointed out the surrounding properties – including the adjacent city-owned underground parking structure known as Library Lane, the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority’s Blake Transit Center across the street, and the surface lot at the opposite corner of Fifth and William that’s being bought from the city by hotelier Dennis Dahlmann.

Parker cited several questions that relate to AADL’s downtown building: What will surround the downtown library and who supports it? What’s happening that the library can’t control? Where does AADL have a voice? These are questions that she doesn’t have answers to, Parker said, noting that urban development is a big pressure.

External Pressures: Chronically Homeless

This community has seen a change since Parker started working at AADL, she said. A decade or more ago, the staff could identify about 20 homeless people who regularly came to the library, compared to hundreds of homeless today. For the chronically homeless, the library is their last resort, Parker said. “People who have other options, take them. The ones who don’t, come here.”

Screenshot from a Jan. 24, 2014 Channel 7 news report, interviewing a homeless man in front of the downtown Ann Arbor library.

She pointed to a Jan. 24 Channel 7 News report, which included an interview with a homeless man standing in front of the downtown library. The library was a backdrop for the report, she noted, and the homeless man discussed the library as a place where he could be warm.

“We are not part of the community conversation about the solution [to homelessness],” Parker told the board. “We are not a social service agency, yet we act as a de facto one. My point here is that while we aren’t a social service agency, we have a lot to contribute to this conversation because of our experience over the last 15 years. Yet we’re not in that conversation.”

Prue Rosenthal asked how Parker would ideally want to participate in that community conversation. Parker replied that the library staff has tried to insert themselves where they thought it was appropriate. She said she admired all the people who work with the homeless, because the chronically homeless are dealing with a range of other issues too.

But because the library isn’t a social service agency, she added, “we are not seen as equals in this conversation. So we’re a backdrop.” If the library is the last resort for shelter, then the community needs to consider what that means to ask its public library to provide that shelter. “This isn’t a hit on anyone,” Parker added. “But this is real. It costs a lot of money in security and safety and training.”

“It’s something that we just have to start being more vocal about,” she said.

Parker noted that it’s not about the fact that a person is homeless. The library will always be a refuge, Parker said. It’s about people who can’t behave, and who have needs that the library can’t meet.

“This one is our biggest challenge,” she concluded.

External Pressures: Blurred Lines/Clarity of Mission

Parker pointed out that the library provides support for other community organizations by providing a computer server that’s outside of AADL’s firewall. Examples include ArborWiki, Huron Valley Community Network, Washtenaw Literacy and the Ann Arbor Book Festival. That’s a form of blurring lines, she said, because many people involved in these groups or who use the services and programs of these groups don’t live in the AADL district.

From left: Trustees Prue Rosenthal and Rebecca Head look at some of the non-traditional items in the AADL’s collections.

Another example is the Washtenaw Library for the Blind and Physically Disabled, which the AADL manages. Anyone who lives in Washtenaw County and who is eligible for the National Library Service can receive an AADL card, even if they live outside of AADL’s district.

Barbara Murphy noted that anybody anywhere can use the AADL website too – they don’t have to live within the AADL district to gain access to it.

For K-12 education, school librarians can place a link on the school’s media center computers to access AADL databases. That service is provided because schools generally can’t afford those databases, Parker said. A couple of companies have objected to expanding the use of their databases in that way, she noted. When that happens, AADL removes those databases from being accessed via the school computers.

Based on her conversations over the past few months with the new dean of libraries at the University of Michigan, James Hilton, and the new Ann Arbor Public Schools superintendent, Jeanice Kerr Swift, Parker said she expects AADL will be looking at more instances of blurring lines in the future.

Responding to a query from Nancy Kaplan, Parker said that talking with Swift had been a big uplift as a library director, because Swift understands the value of having a media center at a school.

Parker also noted that the board is being asked to vote on a policy change – likely at its Feb. 17 meeting – to allow the library to issue cards to students who go to school within the AADL district, but who don’t live here. “That’s the next step for us in blurring those lines – carefully but deliberately,” Parker said.

Margaret Leary wondered if Parker saw any future collaboration happening with the UM library. “I do,” Parker replied. “But I don’t know exactly what it will look like.”

Historically, libraries have resisted these types of ventures for fear of being overwhelmed, Parker said, “and it rarely happens.” For example, when Parker became AADL director, she wanted to eliminate the limits on renewals and holds. There was a lot of fear among staff that this would cause the shelves to be emptied, she said. The limits were lifted and although some adjustments had to be made, it wasn’t a big deal.

Parker noted that unlike many larger cities, AADL isn’t a city library – it’s not part of the city government. So the tax revenues are tied directly to what the library collects from district property owners. That makes it more difficult in some ways, Parker said. She gave the example of Nashville, which has a major problem with illiteracy and high school graduation rates. The school system and library system are departments of the city government, so the city manager can direct those departments to work together, and can provide more funding “because the money is all in the same pot,” Parker explained.

She wasn’t advocating not to be a district library, noting that if AADL hadn’t been independent, it would be a shadow of its current operation. AADL is strong and recognizable in the community, Parker said, and other institutions are looking at how the library can step in to help. That’s a good thing, she added, but “it’s not an automatic easy step to take.”

Murphy suggested that as AADL increases its communications with residents, they should make it clear that the library is separate from city government and other organizations, and doesn’t receive funding from the city government. Parker agreed, noting that it’s a message that has to be made repeatedly.

Parker also reported that she’s talking with other directors of district libraries in Washtenaw County about how to start a process to do an economic development impact study of libraries. It will take collaboration and a pooling of resources to do, she said.

Strategic Plan

Josie Parker reminded trustees that at their Aug. 19, 2013 meeting, they had received an update on activities related to goals in the five-year strategic plan, from 2010-2015. [.pdf of strategic plan, with updates highlighted in yellow] The five-year plan was initially adopted at the board’s March 15, 2010 meeting. It includes goals and objectives for the library in the categories of services, products, finances, communications, organizational development and facilities.

Parker asked if the board had any questions about the current strategic plan.

Responding to a query from Nancy Kaplan, Parker noted that the AADL doesn’t do traditional donor development, nor does it have a foundation. Donor development hasn’t been a priority, but it’s something that the board could discuss if they choose to, she said. One issue is that AADL has a stable source of revenue from the millage it levies, while “many of our nonprofit colleagues in town do not,” Parker noted. So the library is sensitive to that.

However, when someone approaches the library and wants to donate, Parker added, of course she meets with them. For example, a family is donating about $18,000 to the library for an endowment fund in honor of a family member who recently died, and the library staff is working with the family to make that happen.

The library’s legal and financial advisors have indicated that $15,000 is the minimum amount that AADL should accept for an endowment, Parker said.

Kaplan posed the hypothetical scenario of someone donating a half-million dollars in exchange for AADL naming a room after that person. Would that be possible? That would be a board decision, Parker replied. She noted that the fireplace area at the Malletts Creek branch is named after a donor. The tree bases inside the Traverwood branch also are named in honor of people whose families donated money.

Ed Surovell reported that when one of the branches was being designed, a potential donor had indicated interest in contributing about $1 million in order to have naming rights to the building. There was disagreement on the board’s part as to whether that was enough money to name a building, he said. It became a moot point because the donation didn’t materialize, Surovell noted, but it’s a legitimate question.

Next Steps: Information Gathering

The final portion of the retreat was facilitated by local consultant Sandra Greenstone, who has played a similar role at previous retreats. She reminded the board that a decade ago, the discussion had centered on a lack of community space in Ann Arbor. Staff concerns had included the fear of losing print books completely, and questions about why the library had added videos to its collection.

Sandra Greenstone, a local consultant who acted as facilitator at the AADL’s Feb. 3, 2014 retreat.

She reviewed information that had been gathered to support decision-making of the strategic plan 10 years ago, including demographics, technology trends, and what was happening in the political and financial spheres. Staff teams had worked to develop reports in each area, which were presented to the board. The library administration also talked with community stakeholders, surveyed patrons, and held large meetings with staff to evaluate strengths and weaknesses of the AADL. There was also a large community-wide meeting to help the board move forward with the strategic plan.

Five years ago, the focus in strategic planning had included technology trends as well as what might happen to the downtown library. [The board ultimately put a bond proposal on the November 2012 ballot to pay for a new downtown library, but that effort was defeated at the polls.]

Now, Greenstone asked how the board wanted to structure its discussion about the future of AADL. She recommended starting with trustees identifying the questions that they had, and the information they needed to gather in order to shape their next strategic plan. What process did they want to use to move forward?

She reviewed AADL’s mission statement, and asked whether it still applied:

The existence of the Ann Arbor District Library assures public ownership of print collections, digital resources, and gathering spaces for the citizens of the library district. We are committed to sustaining the value of public library services for the greater Ann Arbor community through the use of traditional and innovative technologies.

Some new information is already being collected. At its Jan. 20, 2014 meeting, the library board authorized adjusting its budget to include $25,000 for a satisfaction survey of 500-600 library district residents, to be conducted by Lansing-based EPIC-MRA. Last year, the library also commissioned a communications audit by Allerton-Hill Consulting. [.pdf of Allerton-Hill report]  The board has also been receiving statistical information at board meetings over the past few months about library operations, and library managers have been making presentations to the board about various strategic initiatives. Parker said these efforts will help inform development of the next strategic plan, which will begin on July 1, 2015.

Greenstone asked trustees to generate questions regarding what they need to know in order to develop the next strategic plan. Here’s a summary of their responses:

• Who is the library not serving or able to serve – in terms of demographics, or of materials that aren’t available now at the library?
• What kind of context will the library be operating in within the next five years – regarding the broader context of Washtenaw County and southeast Michigan?
• Demographics, including a breakdown of age, education levels, economics, family size, housing. What’s the profile of the library’s users?
• How are the schools changing – in terms of demographics and funding – and how does that impact AADL?
• Does AADL need to do some kind of strategic planning focused on its resources – not collections, but finances, staff and facilities?
• What kind of continuing education does the board need to help inform its decisions? Are there different, better ways that the staff can use the board as a resource?
• Does AADL need more branches, in the context of the overall system and the growing population in townships served by AADL? What’s the role and location of branches? Specifically, Nancy Kaplan noted that the branch in Westgate Plaza doesn’t offer programs, because it’s so small. What kinds of programs and services do people want at the branches, as opposed to downtown?
• How will AADL help address the homeless problem in Ann Arbor, and how it impacts the library?
• What’s the role of the library within the community? How does the library board and administration advocate for what it wants in the community? “We still want to be that ‘third place’ – we still want to be that community center,” Prue Rosenthal said. “We didn’t get the new building to do that, but we still want to be that.” There seemed to be consensus among trustees that the downtown library should be some sort of community “commons.”
• What do the downtown businesses, residents and others who use downtown want from the library? Margaret Leary noted that the type of library building might matter to these groups, for example. “It’s part of the fabric of the downtown,” she said. “An entity that brings 600,000 or 700,000 people downtown matters to people who have businesses downtown. If that entity brought 1.2 million people instead of 600,000, that would matter too.”
• Who uses the downtown library, and how do they use it differently than the branches are used?
• How will the downtown library be affected by dramatic changes around it? The former Y lot across from the library is being purchased from the city by Dennis Dahlmann, though it’s not clear what his plans are for that site. A new Blake Transit Center is being built nearby, and in the future there might be something built on top of the city-owned underground parking structure that’s adjacent to the library. Does the library board and administration have a role in giving input for those sites?

Regarding changes around the downtown library and whether AADL has a role in influencing what happens, Greenstone recalled a previous discussion she had with some of the board members, during which Ed Surovell had said, “We should lead the way.”

At the retreat, Surovell noted that there’s a “very fluid set of players” who are making decisions that impact the downtown, including the city council, DDA board, AAATA, Dahlmann and others. Regarding the sale of the former Y site, Surovell said, “I would have hoped that council would have been more proscriptive” about how that site should be developed.

In general, the city can do whatever it wants, Surovell said. “It may be extremely important for the library to voice its opinions, but we have virtually no muscle. We are not an arm of the city. And we have at times been in conflict with the city – not because we don’t like them, but because our goals are different.” There are people who hope the library would go in a different direction, he added, which “is not surprising – it’s a democracy.”

But as a bottom line, “I think the truth is you don’t know anything right now,” Surovell said, “and whatever might be known to others is not known to you. … Should we speak up? I’d be delighted to say yes. But how?”

Rosenthal said she didn’t think this was something they needed to discuss that night, but it’s something the board needs to explore.

Parker told the board that she felt her responsibility and the board’s responsibility is to advocate for the public library first. “Whatever falls out after that, fine. But that’s the first thing.”

Next Steps: Committee Work

Board members indicated they’d be interested in having more discussions like this, as preparation for developing the strategic plan. Parker noted that as board president, it’s up to Rosenthal to set the agenda for regular meetings or working sessions.

When Greenstone asked about whether there might be a public working session, Parker replied that all board meetings or working sessions are public. Greenstone expressed some confusion about an earlier meeting, and Parker clarified that the meeting Greenstone was referring to had been a committee meeting, and therefore wasn’t open to the public. [AADL board committees consist of no more than three trustees. Because that does not constitute a quorum of the seven-member board, the committee meetings are not subject to the state's Open Meetings Act.]

Greenstone then stated that perhaps at some point the board could consider forming a new committee that would work on developing some of these ideas.

Margaret Leary noted that the information gathering they’d identified falls into two categories. Some of it is simply data that can be researched, like demographic information. Some of it involves asking other people for input and opinions.

Trustees reached consensus that a subset of the board – possibly the existing executive committee or communications committee – should meet to figure out what the process should be, and propose recommendations to the board.

Rosenthal said she’d talk with Parker and the board’s vice president, Barbara Murphy, to figure out what the next steps should be. The board is expected to get an update at its next meeting on Feb. 17.

Present: Rebecca Head, Nancy Kaplan, Margaret Leary, Barbara Murphy, Jan Barney Newman, Prue Rosenthal, Ed Surovell. Also AADL director Josie Parker.

Next regular meeting: Monday, Feb. 17, 2014 at 7 p.m. in the fourth-floor conference room of the downtown library, 343 S. Fifth Ave., Ann Arbor. [Check Chronicle event listing to confirm date]

The Chronicle relies in part on regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the Ann Arbor District Library board. Check out 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!

Prue Rosenthal was re-elected to a second one-year term as board president. Also re-elected to a second one-year term was Rebecca Head, as board secretary. Barbara Murphy was elected as vice president, and Jan Barney Newman was elected as treasurer. Newman had served as vice president in 2013.

The board also voted to establish two special committees for 2014: a communications committee, and a facilities committee. The communications committee’s charge is “to consider the implementation of recommendations in the communications audit, and related issues.” The reference is to a 2013 communications audit by Allerton-Hill Consulting. [.pdf of Allerton-Hill report] Members of the communications committee, who were appointed during the Jan. 20 meeting, are Rebecca Head (chair), Margaret Leary and Prue Rosenthal.

The charge for the facilities committee is “to recommend to the Board steps needed to develop and maintain clean, safe, physical facilities that creatively meet the needs of the community and staff with an emphasis on sustainability, accessibility and flexibility.” Its members, also appointed on Jan. 20, are Margaret Leary (chair), Jan Barney Newman, and Ed Surovell.

Special committees for communications and facilities also had been established a year ago, at the board’s Jan. 21, 2013 meeting. The duration of those committees was through 2013. They’d been formed in response to a defeated bond proposal on the November 2012 ballot, which the AADL board had hoped would fund a new downtown library.

On Jan. 20, appointments were also made to two board standing committees. Members of the finance committee are Jan Barney Newman (chair), Barbara Murphy, and Nancy Kaplan. The policy committee members are Murphy (chair), Kaplan and Rosenthal.

Also on Jan. 20, the board approved its meeting dates and locations for 2014. Typically, the board meets on the third Monday of each month at the main downtown library. Three meetings this year will be held at AADL branch locations: June 16 at Traverwood, July 21 at Pittsfield, and Aug. 18 at Malletts Creek. [.pdf of full meeting schedule]

In addition, the board followed a recommendation by library administration and scheduled a retreat for Feb. 3. The board will meet from 4-7 p.m. in the fourth-floor boardroom of the downtown library, where board meetings are typically held. The retreat in part will begin discussions for updating the library’s strategic plan. The current strategic plan runs from 2010 to 2015.

This brief was filed from the fourth-floor boardroom of the downtown Ann Arbor District Library, 343 S. Fifth Ave. A more detailed report will follow: [link]

Washtenaw County commissioner Dan Smith (R-District 2) talks with residents who attended the county board’s May 1 meeting to highlight the deteriorating condition of North Territorial Road, which runs through Smith’s district. (Photos by the writer.)

The May 16 retreat is set for the county’s Learning Resource Center at 4135 Washtenaw Ave. – near the county jail complex – starting at 6 p.m. The meeting is open to the public and will be videotaped.

Peterson also questioned the content of the retreat. “If it’s a hug fest,” he said, “I don’t have to be there.” Board chair Yousef Rabhi told commissioners that the goal will be to set priorities for the upcoming budget. “It’s going to be work,” Rabhi said. “There aren’t going to be any hugs, unless somebody wants to give me a hug.”

Also at the May 1 meeting, the board gave final approval to authorize the development of a four-year budget planning cycle, a change from the current two-year cycle that’s been in place since 1994. The vote was 7-2 vote, with dissent from Peterson and Rolland Sizemore Jr. Peterson argued that developing a budget is the main job for commissioners. “So we owe the taxpayers a rebate. I hope we cut our salaries in half … because there’s really a lot less work to do.” Though the planning cycle would be longer, the board is still required by state law to approve its budget annually – so that process wouldn’t change.

The board will get a better sense of the county’s financial status at its May 15 meeting, when county administrator Verna McDaniel will give a first-quarter update and a “state-of-the-county” presentation. One major factor is a pending decision for the board on whether to issue a $345 million bond to cover the county’s pension and retiree healthcare obligations. The board discussed that topic at a May 2 working session. [See Chronicle coverage: "County Board Debates $350M Bond Proposal."]

One item not on the May 1 agenda was raised during public commentary: The deteriorating condition of North Territorial Road, specifically a section running through Northfield and Salem townships. Residents have collected about 600 signatures on a petition urging the road commission to repair that stretch, and asked the county board to help address the problem “before somebody gets hurt or comes in here shouting or raving.”

County commissioner Dan Smith, who represents the district that includes Northfield and Salem townships, pointed out that there are possible funding mechanisms available to the county, including the possibility of levying a tax under Act 283 of 1909. A 1 mill levy in Washtenaw County would bring in about $13.8 million, based on 2012 property values, he said. He also noted that there’s a similar law on the books that appears to allow townships in Michigan to levy up to 3 mills for roads. That could bring in another $24.9 million throughout the county, he said. In total, about $38 million could be raised in Washtenaw County to fix the roads.

In other action during the May 1 meeting, commissioners gave initial approval to the Washtenaw Urban County‘s five-year strategic plan through 2018 and its 2013-14 annual plan.

The board also declared May 12-18, 2013 as Police and Correction Officers Week, and May 15 as Peace Officers Memorial Day. Dieter Heren, police services commander with the Washtenaw County sheriff’s office, was on hand to accept the resolution on behalf of sheriff Jerry Clayton and all law enforcement agencies in the county. He reminded the board that on May 15 at 10 a.m. there will be a memorial service in the Washtenaw 100 Park in Ypsilanti to “honor the law enforcement officers who have fallen here in Washtenaw County while serving the community,” he said. The park is located at the corner of Michigan Avenue and Ballard Street.

North Territorial Road

Several residents addressed the board to express concern about the deteriorating condition of North Territorial Road. The portions of most concern on the east-west road – located north of Ann Arbor – run through the townships of Northfield and Salem, east of US-23.

Bob Hlavacek told commissioners that he wanted to highlight the condition of North Territorial Road. People have been complaining about it for four or five years. They’ve talked to the county road commission and several county commissioners, he said, but the answer is that the county has no funds for repairing the road. “It’s no longer a waiting situation,” he said. “There’s patch upon patch, and there’s potholes that show up between the patches.” An untold amount of expense has been caused from vehicle damage, including damage to tires, rims and alignments.

People drive over the center line, dodging back and forth to avoid some of the roughest spots, Hlavacek said. The Northfield Township police aren’t happy about it. It would be very easy to lose control of a vehicle. Hlavacek said he and others have circulated a petition online and in person, and have about 600 signatures from people who are concerned about the road. The petition highlights the need to fix North Territorial between Spencer Road and Ridge Road.

Some of the people who signed the petition also made comments. Hlavacek said he wasn’t sure about the validity of the comments, but he wanted to pass them along. Specifically, some people think the lack of road repair is retribution for protests against a road commission proposal to put a facility at North Territorial and Earhart.

Bill Harley told commissioners that he and others have tried to understand the funding priorities of the county and state. There were people who had wanted to rally around this issue a couple of years ago, he said, but some people had argued that because the economy was bad and everyone was suffering, it was better to wait. North Territorial is a multi-community road, he noted, going west of the US-23 corridor and east to Plymouth and beyond. “It is not even close to being a road,” he said. It’s so bad that it’s causing road rage. Harley said he travels North Territorial multiple times a day, and had to replace the front end of his Ford truck for $1,300.

Harley told commissioners that he and others were at the county board meeting to beg for help. He noted that a roundabout was being built at 7-Mile and Pontiac Trail, which is needed “like a hole in the head.” And as bad off as Wayne County is, last year that county paved North Territorial up to the border with Washtenaw. “But Washtenaw has done absolutely nothing,” Harley said. “It looks like the priority for North Territorial Road is misunderstood.” He noted that advocates for the road repair have gathered 600 signatures without even canvassing neighborhoods, and he wanted to know what they should do with those signatures. He asked if there was anything that the county board could do, or anything else he and other residents can do “before somebody gets hurt or comes in here shouting or raving.”

Harley added that “we’ll do anything that’s positive.” Hlavacek asked whether it would be possible to get on the board’s agenda for a more formal discussion.

Arlene DeForest spoke on the same topic. She said she was from Salem Township and was representing the Washtenaw County Farm Bureau. North Territorial is one of the few roads that goes straight east and west, she noted, and when there’s a problem on the expressway, North Territorial is the alternative route. “We’re going to have some deaths pretty soon” because of the road condition, she said. DeForest likened the condition to a track at the General Motors proving grounds, where bad terrain is used to test vehicles. The road is narrow with no shoulder. She urged commissioners to drive the road and see for themselves.

North Territorial Road: Commissioner Response

Conan Smith thanked the speakers for raising this issue, saying he was certain the road’s condition didn’t reflect retribution by the road commission. He joked that it’s probably retribution for electing Dan Smith to the board. [Smith, a Republican, represents District 2, which includes Northfield and Salem townships. He and Conan Smith are not related.] C. Smith noted that the county board doesn’t have jurisdiction over the roads – that’s in the hands of the road commission. The road commission has a prioritization process for capital improvements, and he suggested that the residents talk to engineers at the road commission who could explain that process.

The prioritization process includes scoring the condition of local roads. The worst road in the county is at 9, C. Smith said. North Territorial is scored at 8, “so it’s already pretty high on their list of priorities for repair.” One of the problems is the expense, he noted. The road commission already has plans to spend about $9.5 million on North Territorial improvements, but most of that money isn’t secured yet, he noted. “I know that they’re keenly aware of the problem, and they’re seeking the additional state and federal funds that they need to do a reconstruct on that road.” This year, the road commission does plan to do about $300,000 worth of repairs on North Territorial, he added.

From left: County commissioners Conan Smith (D-District 9) and Rolland Sizemore Jr. (D-District 5).

C. Smith said the county board can let the road commission know that citizens are concerned.

Rolland Sizemore Jr., the county board’s liaison to the road commission, said he agreed that North Territorial is in bad shape. There’s a road in his district that’s in bad shape too. It’s all about the money, Sizemore said. He noted that one option would be for the township to levy a special assessment on property owners to raise money for the repairs. Sizemore told the residents that he’d be glad to work with them, but they weren’t the only ones with road problems in the county.

Dan Smith thanked the residents for making the trip to speak to the board. He’d heard these comments before, and reminded commissioners that he had raised this issue at the board’s March 7, 2013 budget retreat. Some new options have been provided by the state legislature, he noted, in terms of management and funding. “We haven’t really explored either of those options in detail yet,” he added.

D. Smith also pointed to an option that the board discussed but didn’t pursue a couple of years ago – an Act 283 levy for road funding. [See Chronicle coverage: "County Board Poised to Reject Road Millage."] He noted that the board could choose to bring that forward again.

The road commission has made public a map that shows sections of roads in the county that would get attention if state funding is made available, D. Smith said – including three problematic sections of North Territorial, east of US-23. But no one knows if or when that funding might be available. Reconstructing a road that’s beyond repair is very expensive, compared to spending funds on maintenance, he said, so the road commission is trying to make sure roads that are in fair condition don’t deteriorate even more. “Unfortunately, it means a segment like North Territorial, which needs major repair, doesn’t get any attention.”

Andy LaBarre encouraged the residents also to contact their state representative and state senator. There are many proposals in Lansing, but nothing has been decided, he said. Input like this would be helpful. [Northfield and Salem townships are part of District 52 in the state house, represented by Rep. Gretchen Driskell. In the state senate, the area is part of District 18, represented by Sen. Rebekah Warren, who is married to Washtenaw County commissioner Conan Smith.]

Ronnie Peterson noted that the residents had asked specifically about how to proceed. Peterson asked the county administration to contact the road commission and request that a specific discussion take place about North Territorial. Residents are relying on county commissioners to be advocates for them on this issue, he said, so there should be a meeting on it. The county commissioners are elected by the people, and have the responsibility of appointing the road commissioners, Peterson noted.

Dan Smith suggested the Whitmore Lake High School theater as a suitable venue for a public meeting in that part of the county.

County administrator Verna McDaniel said she’d follow up with the board’s liaison to the road commission, Rolland Sizemore Jr. Sizemore stated that he’d call the road commission “first thing in the morning.”

Conan Smith noted that in Gov. Rick Snyder’s proposed funding for roads statewide, the amount for Washtenaw County includes funding for North Territorial that would cover about half of the cost for the project. That funding has not yet been approved, however. “So the more you can reach out to Lansing folks as part of your advocacy effort, the better,” he said.

Later in the meeting, Dan Smith brought up the issue of Act 283 again, saying “I don’t think this horse is anywhere near dead.” He read from Act 283 of 1909: “It shall be the duty of the board of supervisors to raise a sufficient tax to keep any county roads or bridges already built in reasonable repair and in a condition reasonably safe and fit for public travel.” He said he didn’t want to interpret what each of those words mean, but the general meaning seems pretty clear to him – that the county might have a mandate and might have the funds to execute that mandate.

From left: Commissioners Dan Smith (R-District 2) and Kent Martinez-Kratz (D-District 1).

Over the past two years, D. Smith said, he’s asked residents specifically about this possible tax levy. One of the common responses he’s heard is that if the county does the job right, people still won’t like the tax but they “won’t hate it as much.” People are frustrated when they see road repairs that clearly won’t last long, he said. “People see that as throwing good money after bad.”

A 1 mill levy in Washtenaw County would bring in about $13.8 million, based on 2012 property values, D. Smith said. He also noted that there’s a similar law on the books that appears to allow townships in Michigan to levy up to 3 mills for roads. That would bring in another $24.9 million throughout the county, he said. In total, about $38 million could be raised in Washtenaw County to fix the roads. Making a rough estimate of what these taxes could bring statewide, he said the amount that could total about $800 million.

Sizemore responded, saying he didn’t agree that there should be a countywide millage for road repair. He said he felt the same way about last year’s effort by the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority to create a countywide public transit system. He’s willing to work with the road commission and residents to address the roads, but he’s not willing to support a millage. He indicated that one factor was the uncertainty of other possible millages, like one that might be proposed for the new southeast Michigan regional transit authority.

Outcome: This was not a voting item.

County Budget

Two items on the board’s May 1 agenda related to the next county budget, for the period beginning Jan. 1, 2014: (1) setting a board retreat for May 16; and (2) taking a final vote to authorize the development of a four-year budget.

County Budget: Updates & Retreat

Felicia Brabec, chair of the board’s ways & means committee, reported that she would be giving regular updates on the budget development at each meeting. She said that she and board chair Yousef Rabhi attend the bi-weekly budget task force meetings, as well as other budget-related meetings. The finance staff has scheduled its first round of meetings with all county departments, with second rounds as needed, Brabec reported. And county administrator Verna McDaniel will be presenting a first-quarter financial update to the board on May 15, as well as a “state-of-the-county” report.

Felicia Brabec (D-District 4) is chair of the board’s ways & means committee, on which all commissioners serve.

Brabec noted that the board would be voting later that night on developing a four-year budget, and that on May 2 the board would be briefed on a bond proposal to fund the county’s pension and retiree healthcare liabilities. [See Chronicle coverage: "County Board Debates $350M Bond Proposal."]

Rather than the normal working session on May 16, the board would be holding another budget retreat. This one will be located at the county Learning Resource Center (LRC), 4135 Washtenaw Ave. – near the county jail complex.

Ronnie Peterson expressed concern about the location. He felt that all meetings – especially related to the budget – should be televised and held in the board chambers, so that the public can know where commissioners stand in terms of priorities and funding. It’s especially crucial if the county moves toward a four-year budget planning cycle, he said, adding that he had concerns about that process, too. [The board holds its regular meetings in the boardroom of the county administration building at 220 N. Main in downtown Ann Arbor.]

Conan Smith responded to Peterson, saying that he struggles “in this room, to have the kind of conversation with all of you – with my peers – that lets me get to that prioritization process.” Smith said he’s been a big advocate for getting out of the boardroom to have that conversation, but he’s torn on this issue. He wants the board as a team to work in a productive space, while at the same time giving the public access to those conversations. It might be doable to televise the retreat at the LRC, he said, noting that late last year, the interview process for appointments to the southeast Michigan regional transit authority had been held at the LRC and were videotaped.

C. Smith felt that the retreat was an opportunity for the board leadership to hear the views of other commissioners, but that the formal budget conversation would happen during a regular meeting in the boardroom.

Board chair Yousef Rabhi said it wasn’t his intention to take the retreat off camera or off the record. He stressed that the board is “always on the record.” The meetings are open to the public, and minutes are taken. The May 16 retreat is at a location that’s on a bus route, he noted, so that it’s more easily accessible. The point of having it at a different location is to “create a different environment for dialogue.” He said they were going above and beyond the requirements of the Open Meetings Act, but he was willing to explore options for recording the retreat – perhaps with audio or video recordings.

Greg Dill, the county’s infrastructure management director, reminded commissioners that when the boardroom had been renovated several years ago, meetings were held in the LRC and had been televised. So that capability exists, he said.

Rolland Sizemore Jr. didn’t think the previous retreat format had worked well. “You guys probably have the votes to do the [four-year] budget and you guys have probably got the votes to go out and get the $350 million [bond] that you guys plan on doing, so I’m not inclined to go anywhere where we’re not on camera … I think the public deserves to know what goes on.”

From left: Commissioners Andy LaBarre (D-District 7) and Ronnie Peterson (D-District 6).

Sizemore also wondered why the retreat wasn’t being held at SPARK East in Ypsilanti. Rabhi replied that the LRC was chosen because it’s the largest county facility – other than the boardroom in the downtown administration building – that could handle a larger crowd. He said he wasn’t opposed to exploring other locations.

Peterson said it was important to outline what would happen at the May 16 retreat. “If it’s a hug fest, I don’t have to be there.” If the meeting is about setting county priorities, then he’d be interested in it. He also stated that if the meeting isn’t televised, he wouldn’t attend – he said he’s been very consistent about that. Meetings shouldn’t be held “in the shadows,” especially in discussing a budget that extends beyond the commissioners’ terms in office. [County commissioners are elected for two-year terms. The proposed budget planning cycle would extend for four years.]

Peterson also noted the magnitude of the possible $350 million bond proposal, saying the public should be fully informed about that.

Andy LaBarre pointed out that the board would be discussing the bond proposal at the May 2 working session, and he suggested that comments and questions about that would be best saved until then.

Replying to Peterson, Rabhi said he wanted to be “crystal clear – we do not do business in the shadows. We do business in the public eye.” Minutes are taken, the press and public are invited, and most meetings are on camera, he noted. Rabhi said he’s never served on any other board that has held its retreat in a boardroom. Retreats are typically held in other locations “to facilitate the retreat environment,” he said. The county board has also held previous retreats that weren’t televised, he noted. Even so, Rabhi said he’s willing to work with staff and commissioners to find a way to record the retreat proceedings above and beyond the requirements of the Open Meetings Act. The openness of meetings is a priority of his and of the board, Rabhi said.

Rabhi added that the retreat is not focused on the question of bonding. That discussion would happen at the May 2 working session, he said, as well as at upcoming board meetings. All of that will be televised, he said.

The retreat on May 16, Rabhi said, “will not be a love fest. It will not be a pat-on-the-back occasion.” It will be a chance for the board to delve into its general priorities for the budget. The last retreat generated a lot of ideas, he said. Now, the board needs to take those ideas and weight their priorities. “It’s going to be work,” Rabhi said. “There aren’t going to be any hugs, unless somebody wants to give me a hug.”

He said he appreciated Peterson’s request to hold the retreat on camera, and that they can explore the possibility. However, he added, “I think that it’s unfair to me for you to continue to harp on this, when I have already committed to you that we are going to be looking into this. I just feel that it’s inappropriate. You didn’t mention my name, but you are directing it at me, and I feel that it’s inappropriate. I need to say that on record.”

Rabhi said he hoped the retreat could help the board work with administration to set a budget that reflects the board’s priorities. It’s especially important since the administration will be developing a four-year budget, he said.

Yousef Rabhi (D-District 8) is chair of the county board.

Peterson replied that he tried not to direct his comments to anyone personally. But when someone directs a comment to him personally, they can “expect a personal comment back,” he said. He wondered whether there was a document that laid out the content of the May 16 retreat. Brabec responded, saying there wasn’t a written document yet for the retreat.

Peterson stated that when things are done outside of the boardroom, “it puts a shadow over it.” He said no one has been anointed to run things. “All of us are equal at this table as commissioners,” he added. Documents should be equally shared with all commissioners, he said.

Regarding the issue of appropriateness, Peterson said, “I will bring up any item I deem is appropriate, as a commissioner representing my respective district, no matter what anybody thinks.” He said he knows some people are trying to guide this process. “Forget about guiding,” he said. “Just do your job that you’re elected to do as commissioner. There’s no minority at this table.” Apparently directing his comments to Rabhi as board chair, Peterson said: “You’re only elected by your colleagues to serve in the capacity that you serve.”

Peterson also said that the bond proposal is part of the budget, so he would be talking about that throughout the budget process. “You’ll hear me talk about a lot of the issues that are important to me as a commissioner – no matter who likes it.”

County Budget: Setting the Retreat Date

Later in the evening, Rabhi put forward a resolution that canceled the May 16 working session and set the budget retreat for that date instead, to be held at the LRC. When Sizemore asked if the retreat would be televised, Rabhi replied that the intent is to make sure there would be some kind of recording. Sizemore repeated the question: “Is this going to be on video or not?”

At that point, Rabhi suggested taking a straw poll of commissioners on this issue. LaBarre said that if it’s possible to videotape the retreat, that would be great. But if it can’t be videotaped, he felt the board should still proceed with the retreat, making every effort to comply with the Open Meetings Act and the spirit of transparency.

Other commissioners indicated agreement to videotaping the retreat. Rabhi said they’d go ahead and videotape it.

Alicia Ping suggested adding the LRC’s address to the resolution setting the retreat. She noted that not everyone knows where the facility is located. Rabhi suggested putting the bus route on the public meeting notice as well. [AATA's Route #4 goes past the LRC at 4135 Washtenaw Ave.]

Peterson reiterated his position that all budget-related meetings should be held in the boardroom.

Outcome: The board voted to cancel the May 16 working session and set a budget retreat for that date instead at the Learning Resource Center, 4135 Washtenaw Ave., starting at 6 p.m. Voting against the resolution were Ronnie Peterson and Dan Smith. Rolland Sizemore Jr. was out of the room during the vote.

After the vote, Rabhi stated that he wants to make sure everyone feels this is a collaborative environment, where everyone can share their thoughts and feelings about the process and about the way business is being done. He apologized if commissioners felt that he had reacted inappropriately to comments that were made during the meeting. He welcomed people to share their thoughts and concerns, “whether we agree or not.” He thanked commissioners for their work, and for sharing their values and the values of the people they represented.

County Budget: Four-Year Cycle

On the May 1 agenda was a resolution authorizing the development of a four-year budget planning cycle, a change from the current two-year cycle that’s been in place since 1994. The board had taken an initial vote on the issue at its meeting on April 17, 2013, with Ronnie Peterson dissenting and Rolland Sizemore Jr. absent.

The board had been briefed on the issue at a Feb. 21, 2013 working session. County administrator Verna McDaniel has cited several benefits to a longer budget planning cycle, saying it would provide more stability and allow the county to intervene earlier in potential deficit situations. [.pdf of McDaniel's Feb. 21 presentation] State law requires that the board approve the county’s budget annually, but a quadrennial budget would allow the administration to work from a longer-term plan.

County administrator Verna McDaniel and commissioner Rolland Sizemore Jr. (D-District 5).

With a two-year approach, larger cuts must be made within a shorter timeframe to address anticipated deficits. McDaniel has argued that a four-year plan would allow the administration to identify potential deficits at an earlier date, and target savings that would compound over the longer period, making the overall budget more manageable. Currently, the budget is being developed for 2014-2017.

Commissioners have noted that this approval provides direction to develop a four-year budget plan, but at any time the board can decide to revert to the previous two-year cycle. One of the main concerns mentioned by commissioners, including Peterson, is the fact a four-year budget cycle doesn’t synch with the two-year election cycle for terms on the board.

During the May 1 meeting, Dan Smith said he wanted to be perfectly clear that the board is simply allowing the process to move forward. He was reserving judgment about whether the final budget that’s produced should be adopted. “I’m certainly not saying that by voting on this [resolution] that I’ll be voting for a four-year budget.” But it’s good to continue exploring the possibility, he said. There are some good things about it, though he continues to have some serious concerns.

Sizemore asked for clarification about the timeline. McDaniel said the ultimate deadline for approving the budget is Dec. 31, so it would need to happen by the board’s last meeting in December. She plans to bring the budget forward much sooner than that, however, saying “the earlier, the better.” The process starts by meeting with the different departments in the county, she said, and the board will be updated along the way. At the board’s May 15 meeting, McDaniel will be giving an update on the county’s current financial situation for the first quarter through March, to set the stage for crafting the budget.

Sizemore said he hoped the budget wouldn’t be rushed through initial and final approval during the same meeting. He felt that this was happening too often with other items that come before the board.

Yousef Rabhi emphasized that even though the budget would be prepared for a four-year period, the board is evaluating the county’s financial condition on a quarterly basis. “We’re taking a far look down the road, but we’re also making sure that we benchmark the progress that we’re making.” He said he’d gotten some feedback that indicates people aren’t sure what the four-year budget is intended to do. People have concerns about how the board can adjust for changes that happen over the four-year period, such as fluctuations in tax revenues, he said. Rabhi indicated that there are ways the board will be able to make adjustments.

McDaniel also noted that a budget reaffirmation is required every year, and the board would have the opportunity to make changes at that point.

Peterson highlighted the fact that the four-year budget wasn’t a projection or strategic plan – it would be a budget, and the only way to change it would be by a majority vote of the board. McDaniel replied that the board has authority to review or change the process at any time.

Peterson pointed out that this would be the first time in the county’s history that a four-year budget would be developed. He didn’t know of any other municipality or government that used this approach. The projections could be off, he noted, especially because of changes in state or federal funding. Anything could happen in the gubernatorial or presidential election, and priorities could change. New technology will also result in changes to the government, he said. “I’m going to vote against this, because I don’t see how you can project that far out.”

Peterson said his view isn’t a reflection of the administration or finance staff – they’re just carrying out the wishes of the board, he noted. The board has responsibility to set the county’s priorities, but with a four-year budget, most of that responsibility will be gone. “So we owe the taxpayers a rebate. I hope we cut our salaries in half … because there’s really a lot less work to do.” The budget is the county board’s main task, he said, other than accepting the annual equalization report and making appointments to various boards and commissions.

From left: Yousef Rabhi (D-District 8), Alicia Ping (R-District 3) and Andy LaBarre (D-District 7).

Peterson contended that it would be difficult to modify a four-year budget. As an example, he noted that the emergency allocation from the county in response to last year’s tornado touchdown in the Dexter area would be more difficult to do, if there were a four-year budget in place. “With a four-year budget, that flexibility is not there,” Peterson said. Other unforeseen needs might include overtime for police services, technology infrastructure, or court costs. He hoped that the board would discuss the impact of a four-year budget with department heads and other elected officials. [The county board sets the budget for all county departments, including those led by elected officials: The sheriff, prosecuting attorney, treasurer, clerk/register of deeds, and water resources commissioner.]

Peterson said he wasn’t trying to make this a hostile discussion about the budget, but he didn’t see how it would be possible to develop a four-year budget.

Sizemore said he echoed Peterson’s concerns. He noted that the circuit court is asking for $2 million for a software update. “That just comes out of the blue, and I don’t know how we’re going to handle things like that if we have a four-year budget,” he said. The district court is over budget, he added: How will things like that be predicted, and where will the money come from to address it?

Alicia Ping clarified that the resolution in front of commissioners that night was authorizing the administration to develop a four-year budget. The board wasn’t voting on the budget itself, she noted.

Sizemore responded, asking why the board would tell the administration to develop a four-year budget if there weren’t already the votes to support adopting a four-year budget? That would be a waste of staff time, he said. Sizemore added that he wouldn’t support it. The vote is premature and the issue needs to be explored more before moving ahead.

Outcome: Commissioners gave final approval to develop a four-year budget on a 7-2 vote. Dissenting were Ronnie Peterson and Rolland Sizemore Jr.

Urban County Strategic Plan

Washtenaw Urban County‘s five-year strategic plan through 2018 and its 2013-14 annual plan were on the May 1 agenda for initial approval. [.pdf of draft strategic and annual plans]

The Urban County is a consortium of Washtenaw County and 18 local municipalities that receive federal funding for low-income neighborhoods. Members include the cities of Ann Arbor, Ypsilanti and Saline, and 15 townships. “Urban County” is a designation of the U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), identifying a county with more than 200,000 people. With that designation, individual governments within the Urban County can become members, entitling them to an allotment of funding through a variety of HUD programs. The Urban County is supported by the staff of Washtenaw County’s office of community & economic development (OCED).

Two HUD programs – the Community Development Block Grant and HOME Investment Partnership – are the primary funding sources for Urban County projects.

The plans indicate that the Urban County area is expected to receive about $2.7 million annually in federal funding, which will be used for these broad goals:

1. Increasing quality, affordable homeownership opportunities

2. Increasing quality, affordable rental housing

3. Improving public facilities and infrastructure

4. Supporting homeless prevention and rapid re‐housing services

5. Promoting access to public services and resources

6. Enhancing economic development activities

A public hearing had been held at the board’s April 17, 2013 meeting.

Urban County Strategic Plan: Board Discussion

Conan Smith asked about whether there is any integration between the Urban County strategic plan, and the strategic planning of other county operations, such as the workforce development or community action boards.

Brett Lenart, housing and infrastructure manager for the county’s office of community & economic development.

Brett Lenart, housing and infrastructure manager for the county’s office of community & economic development (OCED), said the best example of that integration is related to human services. A lot of the funding that the county gets for human services is administered through this process, he said. The strategic plan itself is fairly formulaic and general, following HUD’s requirements. But it’s integrated in terms of the synergy of activities, he said.

Lenart added that the next phase of OCED’s development as a department is to look for more intersections between economic development and workforce development. Human services and affordable housing have always been strongly linked, he noted, and going forward the OCED will look for more strongly integrating the other areas, too.

C. Smith said it might be interesting to “tease out” of this plan the relevant sections related to other citizen boards – the workforce development board and community action board – and to have a short presentation to each of those boards about the Urban County initiatives. He noted that integrating these areas was one of the reasons why the county merged the office of community development with the economic development and energy department.

Ronnie Peterson asked whether the Urban County budget would be coming before the board later this year. County administrator Verna McDaniel replied that this Urban County budget is for the fiscal year starting July 1, 2013, “so I believe this is it.”

Peterson then expressed concern that the commissioners weren’t getting more time to review this budget. Lenart explained that it’s a five-year plan that identifies general categories of work, but OCED will bring forward specific projects within those categories each year. The five-year plan gives an estimate of the total anticipated federal allocation during that period. The more detailed budget is for only one year, starting July 1. He noted that this is the Urban County’s third five-year plan.

Peterson said he’d support the resolution on its initial vote that night, but he would have additional questions when it came for a final vote on May 15.

Felicia Brabec noted that HUD’s priorities are changing. Are those changes reflected in the Urban County’s plans? Generally speaking, Lenart replied, the OCED has set up a framework that will allow it to do the work it has traditionally done with this federal funding. If HUD’s priorities and funding levels change, then OCED would look at the scope of its programs and how those programs are prioritized in the face of decreasing revenues.

Alicia Ping said she supported the Urban County “110 percent.” Six of the 10 municipalities that she represents in District 3 are part of the Urban County, which makes those communities eligible for federal funding that they wouldn’t otherwise be able to receive. She was glad that OCED director Mary Jo Callan had recruited more municipalities to join the Urban County a few years ago.

Commissioners Alicia Ping (R-District 3) and Andy LaBarre (D-District 7).

Peterson spoke again, noting that federal funding is shrinking. At some point, the county will have to make up the difference if it wants these programs to continue – whether they are programs managed by OCED, or by other county departments. So the question then becomes “Where does the money come from?” he said. Peterson felt that this warranted a fuller discussion, because “eventually, the well will run dry.”

Conan Smith noted that the housing challenge is universal across the county – it’s a dispersed problem. In areas where problems are greater – on the far west side, or in the city of Ypsilanti and Superior Township – it’s important to start looking at systemic investment in housing and workforce development based on geography, he said. In reading the strategic plan, C. Smith said he was surprised at how dispersed the housing problem was. “I thought it would be more concentrated.”

Responding to some of Peterson’s comments, Brabec said she agreed that it was important to consider the county’s entire budget – including federal funding – and not just look at the general fund budget. The county needs to be concerned about declining federal and state funding too.

Outcome: Commissioners unanimously gave initial approval to the Urban County five-year strategic plan through 2018 and its 2013-14 annual plan. A final vote is set for May 15.

Weatherization Grant

Commissioners were asked to give final approval to accept $185,654 in funds for the county’s weatherization assistance program. The unanimous vote at the board’s May 1, 2013 meeting, followed initial approval on April 17, 2013.

The funding roughly equals the amount of federal weatherization dollars that the county received in 2012, which was a decrease of about 65% compared to 2011 federal funding levels. The current funding is allocated through the 2013 Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP). The county last received LIHEAP funding in 2010, but has received weatherization grants from other federal funding sources in the intervening years.

For the period from April 1, 2013 to June 30, 2014, the program is expected to weatherize 27 homes. According to a staff memo, the work includes an energy audit inspection and follow-up inspection of the completed weatherization work, which might include attic and wall insulation, caulking, window repairs, furnace tune-ups, furnace replacements, and refrigerator installations. To qualify for the program, residents must have an income at or below 150% of federal poverty, which is about $35,325 for a family of four.

Outcome: Without comment, commissioners gave final approval to accept the weatherization funds.

Communications & Commentary

During the evening there were multiple opportunities for communications from the administration and commissioners, as well as public commentary. In addition to issues reported earlier in this article, here are some other highlights.

Communications & Commentary: Police & Corrections Week

Board chair Yousef Rabhi read a resolution declaring May 12-18, 2013 as Police and Correction Officers Week, and May 15 as Peace Officers Memorial Day, in honor of the local police and corrections officer who have died in the line of duty. [.pdf of resolution for Police & Corrections Officer Week] The presentation was followed by a standing ovation from the board and staff.

From left: Greg Dill, Washtenaw County’s infrastructure management director; county administrator Verna McDaniel; and Dieter Heren, police services commander.

Dieter Heren, police services commander with the Washtenaw County sheriff’s office, was on hand to accept the resolution on behalf of sheriff Jerry Clayton and all law enforcement agencies in the county. He reminded the board that on May 15 at 10 a.m. there will be a memorial service in the Washtenaw 100 Park in Ypsilanti to “honor the law enforcement officers who have fallen here in Washtenaw County while serving the community,” he said. The park is located at the corner of Michigan Avenue and Ballard Street.

Communications & Commentary: Medicaid Expansion

Andy LaBarre informed his board colleagues that he intends to bring a resolution to the May 15 meeting regarding Medicaid expansion. He said he’d be talking with commissioners individually about his resolution before then. He noted that at a recent meeting of the Area Agency on Aging 1-B, that board approved a resolution in support of Medicaid expansion. [LaBarre serves as the county's liaison to the AAA 1-B board.]

Responding to a follow-up email query from The Chronicle, LaBarre indicated that the resolution he plans to bring forward will state the county’s support for Medicaid expansion, highlighting some of its benefits.

Present: Alicia Ping, Felicia Brabec, Andy LaBarre, Kent Martinez-Kratz, Ronnie Peterson, Yousef Rabhi, Rolland Sizemore Jr., Conan Smith, Dan Smith.

Next regular board meeting: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 at 6:30 p.m. at the county administration building, 220 N. Main St. in Ann Arbor. The ways & means committee meets first, followed immediately by the regular board meeting. [Check Chronicle event listings to confirm date.] (Though the agenda states that the regular board meeting begins at 6:45 p.m., it usually starts much later – times vary depending on what’s on the agenda.) Public commentary is held at the beginning of each meeting, and no advance sign-up is required.

The Chronicle could not survive without regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the Washtenaw County board of commissioners. 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!

From left: Washtenaw County commissioners Conan Smith (D-District 9, Ann Arbor) and Ronnie Peterson (D-District 6, Ypsilanti). (Photos by the writer.)

The retreat comes in the context of a projected $24.64 million general fund deficit over a four-year period from 2014 through 2017. A much smaller general fund deficit of $3.93 million is projected for 2014, but county administrator Verna McDaniel hopes to identify $6.88 million in structural changes for that year – a combination of new revenues and cuts in expenditures. If that happens, the larger projected deficit would be addressed, because those cuts and revenue increases would compound and carry over into future years.

The retreat didn’t aim to identify dollar amounts or even specific programs to be cut or supported. Rather, the conversation – which included small-group work – was designed to elicit broader priorities of the board. Commissioners did not explicitly reference priorities that had been developed for the previous 2012-2013 budget cycle, though some common themes emerged. [.pdf of 2012-2013 budget priorities]

Several commissioners stressed the importance of strategic investment to create an environment that supports the local economy. Transportation, education, and housing – particularly on the county’s east side, in the Ypsilanti area – were all cited as critical to economic development efforts. Funding strategies were floated, including the possibility of a human services millage, road tax, or “social impact” bond. Also discussed was the possibility of absorbing the road commission into county government operations.

The retreat follows a budget briefing that McDaniel and her financial staff had given to commissioners at their Jan. 16, 2013 meeting. The board has also discussed the budget process at two working sessions earlier in the year, and will follow up the retreat with a working session in April. McDaniel is expected to deliver a budget proposal to the board in September. The board must adopt the budget by the end of 2013.

Retreat Expectations, Framework

At the start of the evening, board chair Yousef Rabhi clarified that although it was a county board of commissioners retreat, he had invited other elected county officials because they work so closely together. [The county board is responsible for setting the budgets that are overseen by other elected officials.] Those “electeds” who attended the retreat included sheriff Jerry Clayton, prosecuting attorney Brian Mackie, treasurer Catherine McClary, clerk/register of deeds Larry Kestenbaum, and Evan Pratt, the county’s water resources commissioner.

Other administrators from the county who attended the retreat included Lloyd Powell, the county’s public defender; county administrator Verna McDaniel; Bob Tetens, director of the county parks & recreation commission; Mary Jo Callan, director of the office of community & economic development, and several other senior staff. Also participating in the retreat was Paul Krutko, CEO of Ann Arbor SPARK, this area’s economic development agency – funded in part by the county. Caryette Fenner – president of AFSCME Local 2733, the county government’s largest union – stayed for the entire retreat but did not participate in the discussions.

The session was facilitated by Mary O’Hare, who began by asking commissioners to state the outcomes they’d like to see from the evening. Several commissioners indicated that they wanted to emerge from the retreat with concrete action items.

Alicia Ping (R-District 3).

Rolland Sizemore Jr. noted that this would be his third budget retreat – joking that aside from Ronnie Peterson, he was now the “old guy” on the board. He hoped to get something done, since many times meetings like this just result in plans that are put on the shelf.

Alicia Ping agreed. She hoped the board would leave with something “actionable.” Sometimes the board develops a “40-word run-on sentence” about what it wants to do, she said, “and we never do any of it.” She’d rather see some quick wins, with actions that can have an immediate impact. She’d rather be able to emerge from the retreat with a few small items that can be tackled, rather than “overarching, grand ideas.”

Dan Smith joked that his goal was to be home and in bed by 10 p.m. He agreed with other commissioners about the need to focus on concrete actions that are within the board’s purview – items that could be brought to the board for a vote within the next year to 18 months. If commissioners simply sit around and talk about things, but never bring anything forward for a vote, then “it really hasn’t accomplished much,” he said.

Yousef Rabhi pointed out that input from this retreat will help guide the task force that’s developing the county’s 2014 and 2015 budget. So in that way, he said, the direction given by the board at this retreat will result in priorities reflected in the budget, which the board will approve later this year. The task force includes senior administrative and finance staff, as well as department heads and two commissioners – Rabhi, who serves as board chair, and Felicia Brabec, chair of the board’s ways & means committee.

Kelly Belknap, the county’s finance director, was asked to provide some context for the budget discussions. She noted that setting the budget is one of the board’s biggest responsibilities, and the staff looks to the board to help set the budget’s priorities. Many services are mandated by the state, but the board can prioritize the level of service that the county should provide above the minimum mandates. The board’s priorities will become part of a “toolkit” that each county department receives as it prepares its piece of the budget and business plan, Belknap explained.

For the next two hours, commissioners and other elected officials and staff broke up into small groups focused on six key areas: (1) labor force sustainability/internal equity; (2) environmental impact and mobility in Washtenaw County; (3) economic development; (4) human services/safety net; (5) mandated service provision/resources; and (6) long-term fiscal stability.

When the group reconvened, they discussed the outcomes of the small group work. This report summarizes that discussion.

Environmental Impact & Mobility

The category of environmental impact and mobility included: issues related to the condition of roads and infrastructure; the county road commission; transportation – both motorized and non-motorized; and parks and open spaces, including the parks & recreation commission.

Dan Smith (R-District 2).

Andy LaBarre reported out from the small group discussions in this category. The first theme was easy to identify, he said: better roads. He, Dan Smith and Evan Pratt had discussed possible funding strategies, such as taxes – “the T word,” LaBarre joked.

Another theme is to continue expanding non-motorized connections, LaBarre said, and to do both motorized and non-motorized projects in tandem.

Referring to the issue of taxes, Pratt added that “the other party of T is tangible.” The idea is to have a public process that clearly defines what taxpayers will receive if they are taxed at different levels. People agree that roads are in bad shape, but residents need to give input about “the level of pain tolerance,” Pratt said – that is, how much they’re willing to pay in taxes to improve the roads.

Conan Smith raised the issue of consolidating the road commission, saying he wasn’t sure if it was a budgetary issue for this year, but it’s certainly a potential budgetary issue for future years. [Smith was referencing amendments to Section 46.11 of Public Act 156 of 1851, which allows for county boards of commissioners to transfer the powers of the road commission to the county board.] There’s a sunset to that law, he noted. From Section 46.11:

(s) Before January 1, 2015, by majority vote of the members of the county board of commissioners elected and serving in a county with an appointed board of county road commissioners, pass a resolution that transfers the powers, duties, and functions that are otherwise provided by law for the appointed board of county road commissioners of that county to the county board of commissioners.

“If we’re going to have that conversation, we need to have it within the sunset,” Smith said. “If we make that decision, it has budgetary implications – that’s all I’m saying.”

Ronnie Peterson asked Smith if he wanted to add that item to the list of budget priorities, joking that, “We need to stir up something before we leave today. I’m sure I’ll get some phone calls tonight.”

Dan Smith agreed with Conan Smith. They need to start the discussion about whether it makes sense to take over the road commission, he said. “I’m certainly not interested in fixing a problem that doesn’t need it,” Dan Smith added. But they should have that discussion and make a decision, one way or another.

Toward the end of the retreat, Peterson returned to the issue of transportation by raising the topic of regional or countywide transit. He noted that the issue hadn’t been discussed during the evening. LaBarre pointed out that the general topic of transit had emerged, but nothing specifically about the regional transit authority or the countywide effort.

By way of background, the new southeast Michigan regional transit authority (RTA) was created by the state legislature at the end of 2012. Its geographic region includes the city of Detroit and counties of Wayne, Macomb, Oakland and Washtenaw, and is intended to coordinate regional public transportation initiatives. The separate effort to expand transit within Washtenaw County – which involved setting up a countywide Act 196 transit authority last year – was spearheaded by the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority but ultimately did not garner enough support from local municipalities to move forward.

Peterson wanted to put the issue of transit on the table. It’s a major topic of discussion among the county’s urban municipalities, he said. Whatever form it takes, enhanced transit needs to be discussed and the county must play a role in that, he said. “I think people are waiting for us to make a statement.”

Environmental Impact & Mobility: Parks & Rec

Related to the county’s parks & recreation, commissioners highlighted the renewal of a millage for capital improvements that’s expected to be on the ballot in 2014. The board should also think about how to “recharge” the parks & recreation commission for the next generation, LaBarre said. He noted that there are some “long-time champions” on the parks & rec commission who will likely be leaving, so the county board – which appoints the parks & rec commissioners – needs to be thinking about how to cultivate new members.

Conan Smith suggested that the parks & recreation commission needs to have that “longevity” conversation itself. [Smith is one of three county commissioners who also serve on the 10-member parks & recreation commission. Other county commissioners on WCPARC are Dan Smith and Rolland Sizemore Jr.] It’s an awkward conversation to have, Smith noted. A lot of great people have been there for more than 30 years, he said. “If they love the parks commission, they have to be concerned about its viability over the long-term just as much as we are.” He felt that if the parks commissioners address the issue, they might come up with helpful ideas.

Environmental Impact & Mobility: Other Appointed Commissions

Ronnie Peterson asked if the same type of conversation about succession planning should take place at the county road commission. [The commission is composed of three road commissioners, who are also appointed by the county board. One of them, Fred Veigel, has served since 1991, and also serves on the parks & recreation commission. Other road commissioners are Doug Fuller, appointed in 2008; and Ken Schwartz, appointed in 2011 after losing his 2010 re-election bid for the District 2 seat on the county board.]

Rolland Sizemore Jr. (D-District 5)

Peterson framed his comments in terms of the services the state has asked or mandated that local governments to deliver. Some of the appointed county commissions – like the road commission or parks & rec commission – directly oversee the delivery of services, he said, with fewer resources from the state and county. Ultimately, the elected board of commissioners has responsibility. Peterson noted that some appointed commissions haven’t reported back to the county board in more than a decade – if at all.

Some of these appointed commissions might not serve their purposes anymore, Peterson said. It’s important to ask “what should county government look like” in the coming years, he said, especially as employees have been asked to work for less compensation than in the past. The county needs to be more thoughtful about how it designs programs equal to its revenue, he said.

Conan Smith responded, saying that Peterson’s comments tie in to discussions that the board has had about the need to look at the number and structure of its appointed boards, commissions and committees, and about how to make those groups more effective.

Andy LaBarre, who chairs the board’s working sessions, committed to putting that issue on the agenda for a working session later this year.

Smith also raised the challenge of providing sufficient staff resources to support the work of appointed boards and commissions. He said he’s served on many boards and committees over the years, and “to be on a board that has no resources, that has no staff support, is a waste of my time.” So the county needs to think about how to effectively provide resources to its appointed boards and commissions, so that those groups can achieve the missions they’ve been charged with.

Yousef Rabhi said that’s why he appreciated the comments that Peterson had made during the March 6, 2013 county board meeting the previous night, regarding the county’s food policy council. [Rabhi, who serves on that council, had mentioned the possibility of asking the board for funds to hire staff support for the council's work. Peterson had raised concerns, indicating that he wanted to have a broader discussion – possibly at a working session – to develop a process for funding projects that other commissioners might want to bring forward.]

Many commissioners agree that it’s important to find a way to fund the work of these appointed entities, Rabhi said, but it’s important to do that fairly.

Smith suggested tackling it in a phased approach. The board doesn’t have to do it all at once, he said, but it’s important to have a strategy in place and a way to implement that strategy. “Phasing is fine with me,” he said. “The absence of a strategy and absence of resources is not fine.”

In the foreground is county board chair Yousef Rabhi (D-District 8), at the table with county clerk Larry Kestenbaum.

These issues also incorporate the idea of public engagement, Rabhi said, and how the county works with citizens to engage in policymaking that is ultimately the county board’s responsibility. The food policy council, for example, includes citizens from the community who’ve been appointed to develop policy recommendations for the board. That model can apply to all of the other service areas, he said. “It’s a way to engage citizens in the decision-making process, and there’s a lot of power to that.”

As part of that process, there needs to be a built-in way of reporting the work of these commissions and committees, Rabhi said. For example, these entities need to provide minutes of their meetings by posting them online and making them available to the public. All of these things need to be part of the discussion on building a more engaged public, he said.

Peterson cautioned against creating too many appointed entities, saying that he agreed with some conservatives who believe there’s “too much government within government.” In some cases, the work of these appointed entities might be more appropriately integrated into the work of county departments. “Sometimes you wonder ‘Why are they there?’” he said, referring to the appointed entities.

Economic Development

Yousef Rabhi reported on the small group work for the category of economic development, highlighting some commissioners’ interest in investing in the east side of the county. Issues included the role of government in job creation, as well as providing stable schools and adequate infrastructure. Also discussed was the idea of investing in people or in an environment that supports business, rather than investing in specific projects.

Alicia Ping elaborated, saying that the last item was a direct reaction to Ypsilanti’s Water Street project. [In the late 1990s, the city of Ypsilanti took on millions of dollars in debt to buy and prep about 38 acres of blighted property off of Michigan Avenue, next to the Huron River, for redevelopment that has not materialized. The county parks & recreation commission is working with the city possibly to build a new recreation center on part of that site.]

Instead of investing in projects like the Water Street development, Ping said, the idea is to invest more broadly to build an environment that creates jobs, as well as a workforce that can fill those jobs. “How can we be the catalyst for that – not the creator, but the catalyst?” she asked. That might mean investing in infrastructure, for example. As she has observed in the past, Ping noted that in some areas of western Washtenaw County, no high-speed wireless Internet service is available, and people can’t work from home. As another example, Ping pointed to the county’s Seeds for Change initiative, to provide job training in the food sector in partnership with Washtenaw Community College. How can the county do that same kind of thing for others, she asked – not just people who are dislocated from their job, but also for people who are trying to plan for their future? How can the county help facilitate that type of education to develop the local workforce?

Andy LaBarre (D-District 7).

Rabhi felt that this kind of workforce development connected to the conversation about mobility. Transportation is a barrier, too – because maybe the jobs aren’t located near where people are living, he said. Another issue raised during the small group work in the category of economic development was affordable workforce housing. “If the jobs aren’t where people are living, how do we create housing for people where the jobs are?” he said. So maybe part of the solution is transportation, and part of it is workforce housing, Rabhi said.

Another economic development issue raised was the Ypsilanti area school system. Conan Smith elaborated, saying the discussion had revolved around what the county can do to create an environment for investment in places where “it’s most systemically impactful for that investment to happen.” Regarding the Ypsialnti area schools, Smith described it as a big issue that needs a holistic discussion at the board level.

There are two systemic problems on the county’s east side, he said. The employment issue is a serious challenge. “You cannot have a prosperous, sustainable community with the levels of unemployment that you see over on the east side,” Smith said.

There’s also the question about the ability of government to provide basic services, if it’s not generating the revenue necessary to sustain those services. That all comes down to the market for property – especially residential property – in the Ypsilanti area. “Right now there’s no market, and property values continue to decline on the east side,” Smith said, so property tax revenue continues to fall. “If we want to change that dynamic, we have to change the competitiveness of the housing market,” he added, as well as the competitiveness of the commercial and industrial markets.

One strategy for improving the competitiveness of the housing market would be to improve the quality and competitiveness of the school system overall, he said, but also to present a compelling reason for someone to compete for housing in that area. By looking at the school system and the opportunity for children there, Smith said he thinks both issues could be addressed.

Smith suggested expanding the Perry Preschool in Ypsilanti, noting that it was recently touted on This American Life as the nation’s signature pre-K program. Access to that program could be expanded throughout the Ypsilanti school district, he said, which also serves a social service function. There are a lot of parents at or below the poverty level who struggle for childcare services, he said, which creates a barrier for them to go to work. Even when jobs are available, childcare can sometimes be an obstacle.

Smith suggested tying together that pre-K effort with a universal college education component, which could be accomplished through “Promise Zones” or other methods. It creates incentives for current parents in the school district who are sending their kids elsewhere – to charter schools or schools of choice, for example – to bring their kids back into the Ypsilanti area district. He said there are about 2,000 students who fit that category, or about $14 million in state funding that the district isn’t receiving. Creating an incentive for those students to return would help increase revenues to support the quality and sustainability of the school district, he said.

What if living on the east side gives you the opportunity to send your kids to a nationally-known preschool program – and is coupled with the chance to send them to a renowned post-high school institution? Smith ventured that “has to make you think twice when moving to Washtenaw County about choosing that as the place to live and invest – which transforms the market around housing. I think it’s one of the most systemic projects and strategies we could spend some time on.”

By way of background, Smith had made a formal presentation to the board on the issue of revitalizing the county’s east side at a Dec. 7, 2011 board meeting. Smith, who served as board chair at the time, suggested a range of strategies, including the possibility of putting a new countywide millage or Headlee override on the ballot in 2012 to raise revenues. The board did not pursue his proposal.

There is also a county connection to the new Ypsilanti Community School District – a consolidation of Ypsilanti and Willow Run districts. Tony VanDerworp, the county’s economic development officer, is a board member of the new consolidated district.

Human Services/Safety Net

In the category of human services, access to mental and public health services was identified as a priority. That access might be related to transportation, as well as program availability and capacity to serve all those in need.

Greg Dill, Washtenaw County’s infrastructure management director, talks with county treasurer Catherine McClary.

Ronnie Peterson noted that as the county shifts the location of some of its offices – in part to reduce costs by centralizing operations – in some instances it becomes more challenging to meet the needs of clients, he said.

Alicia Ping described a concept of taking county services “on the road.” Like a bookmobile, the county’s public health department could have one mobile point of service, which would make stops throughout the county – in Manchester, Chelsea, Whitmore Lake and other locations, staying at each spot for a few days. That way, she said, people who have transportation challenges could more easily get access to these services.

Conan Smith elaborated on the issue of program capacity:  Does the county have enough employees to provide the services that residents need?

The other thing that stood out in the notes from these small group discussions, Smith said, is the need for innovative or new financial tools to meet these challenges – a millage, bonding or tax increment financing. Catherine McClary added that the phrase “financial tools” might not be direct enough. The suggestion was for a human services millage, she noted. Smith agreed, adding that another tool could be a “social impact” bond.

Another theme from this category was to focus on the welfare and root causes of issues related to human services. The idea is to make a “more front-end investment,” Smith said.

A final concern that emerged from the small group work related to the impact of external factors on the county’s ability to provide services. For example, what happens if federal sequestration continues? What happens in a prison-privatization scenario, with possible increases in recidivism and its impact on the county?

Mandated Service Provision/Resources

The category of mandated services focused on serviceability levels and the board’s responsibility for providing mandated services. Felicia Brabec reported out from the small group work in this category, noting that the main theme centered on revenue, which relates to the levels of service that the county can afford.

Conan Smith argued that state-mandated service levels should be interpreted at the “absolute possible minimum.” Beyond that, every other dollar should be invested strategically, he said. That might mean investing in higher levels of service for those services that are mandated. But he indicated that levels of serviceability should be a county board decision, not one made by the state. “I don’t give a crap about what the state tells me to do anymore; they clearly don’t have the prosperity of my community in mind.” He joked that his wife “will probably beat me up when I get home” because of that statement. [Smith is married to state Sen. Rebekah Warren.]

Felicia Brabec (D-District 4)

Catherine McClary said there’s a need to have a public discussion about what loss of services the community is willing to tolerate. Yousef Rabhi reported a comment that sheriff Jerry Clayton had made during the small group discussion. Clayton had said that from a pragmatic standpoint, he would deal with whatever budget the county board gave the sheriff’s office. But a cut in the budget means a cut in services. So the board needs to weigh its priorities when making cuts, Rabhi said.

Dan Smith noted that budget cuts quickly become a “complex piece of machinery.” The board could define the bare minimum mandate for the register of deeds office, for example. Perhaps that means it’s open only four hours on Monday morning, he said. But the potential repercussions might be that it becomes very difficult to buy and sell property in Washtenaw County – so the backlog of paperwork grows and closing on a new house takes a lot longer. That would hurt economic development, he said. His point was to illustrate how complex and interrelated these services are.

Continuing the example of the register of deeds, Rabhi added that this kind of work needs to be done – and it would just take longer, if fewer resources exist to do the work. McClary elaborated, saying that if the county has a furlough day and its offices are closed, people could make payments to the county through their banks. But if those payments aren’t being processed by the county in a timely way, the money isn’t going into the county’s accounts. So there are external issues related to economic development, but also internal issues related to the county’s fiscal stability. The example that Clayton gave, McClary reported, is whether the county will tolerate a five-minute response time from the sheriff’s office, or is 10 minutes good enough, even if someone is injured?

Dan Smith noted that if you reduce those mandated levels of service in public safety and justice, then crime might increase. He said he understands Conan Smith’s point, “but when you start tweaking those dials, the unknown ramifications quickly start to come forward.”

Conan Smith said his point about mandates wasn’t to suggest that the current levels of service should be reduced. Rather, he said he doesn’t want the state’s mandate to drive the county’s decision-making process about appropriate investments. “Let’s sideline that as much as possible,” he said. Instead, the question should be asked from the county’s perspective: “What is our desired serviceability level, as opposed to what the mandate is?”

Dan Smith pointed out that it’s a very hard discussion to talk about what levels of serviceability should be above the bare minimum mandate. Conan Smith agreed, adding that “I think we should have those hard discussions.” Especially if the board decides to move to a four-year budget process, then commissioners need to have these hard discussions this year, he said.

Andy LaBarre summarized Conan Smith’s point this way: By minimizing the definition of what’s mandated, the county maximizes its flexibility.

Collaboration was another theme identified in this category, Brabec said. An example cited was a software system that’s being used by both the treasurer’s office and the clerk/register of deeds, which helps link departments and cut costs.

Labor Force Sustainability/Internal Equity

Alicia Ping described the small group discussions for the category of labor force sustainability and internal equity. She reported a suggestion to do a compensation study using an organization like the Michigan Municipal League, which is based in Ann Arbor. Another suggestion is to look at part-time contractual workers as an option, but not a long-term solution. Also, the idea was raised to focus on succession planning and training the workers of the future.

From left: Washtenaw County public defender Lloyd Powell and Brian Mackie, the county’s prosecuting attorney.

Yousef Rabhi described the succession planning as a contrast to the model used by Lloyd Powell, the county’s public defender. In the public defender’s office, Rabhi said, young people are coming there to get experience. The idea is that it’s fine to provide experience for entry-level workers, but that approach shouldn’t be used to replace full-time staff, he said.

Ping reported that other ideas from the small group work included the need to update the county’s nepotism policy, and to restore the county’s commitment to professional and educational development. Another suggestion was to maintain the size of the county’s staff.

Conan Smith elaborated on that last point, saying he believed the county had already cut its capacity so severely that maintaining current staff levels ought to be a priority. Further reductions would result in community impacts that aren’t acceptable, he said.

Dan Smith noted that it’s important to keep in mind the cost of an employee, but also the value that taxpayers get as the result of having that person employed. The board needs to craft policies and make budget decisions so that “we continue to get high value for our expenditure,” he said. For example, if the organization becomes a training ground for people, where workers stay for 3-5 years then move on to something else, it’s great for the employee but perhaps not so good for the county, he said. In that scenario, the county is spending taxpayer dollars constantly educating employees, compared to a situation where an employee stays for a career with the county. “Finding the right balance is difficult,” Smith said.

Rabhi pointed out that turnover is also a factor. The county needs to compensate its employees adequately to attract and retain people who are valuable and who can provide good services to residents. Dan Smith noted that the county has a lot of skilled employees with a lot of experience who deliver high value for what they’re being paid. “That’s a great taxpayer benefit,” he said.

Conan Smith said he was interested in expanding a compensation study to also encompass staff motivation. You don’t pursue a career in government with the intent of becoming a millionaire, he said. Your motivation is usually more social – the desire to have an impact on the community, to be a civil servant, he said. So how can the county create an environment where that motivation stays high, and people don’t want to leave? Some of that is the compensation structure, he said, but some of it is “How awesome is my job? Am I making a difference that matters to me?”

Dan Smith said it’s easy for boards – whether in government or private corporations – to think that money and compensation are the solution. It’s an easy solution to put in place, he noted, but it really papers over problems because the underlying problems don’t go away.

Rabhi added that it relates to equity, too. If you don’t feel you’re being treated fairly, then that makes your job more miserable. A compensation study would help flesh out some of these issues, he said.

Ronnie Peterson urged that rank-and-file employees should be involved in designing the study, and should be part of any discussion about what it would take to entice employees – both to join the organization, and to stay there. Right now, employees have sacrificed and have shown commitment by staying, despite the sacrifices, he said. Years ago, employees sought out the county because of its reputation, he said. How can the county recreate that environment, even as a smaller organization? Employees are public servants, not public slaves, Peterson said. Employees should be fairly compensated for their labor.

Long-Term Fiscal Stability

Reporting on the category of long-term fiscal stability, Alicia Ping identified the common theme from the small group discussions as information. Commissioners want more information, she said, including information related to the impact of federal sequestration cuts and general trend data.

From left: County administrator Verna McDaniel talks with Mary O’Hare, who facilitated the board retreat.

There was also some interest in developing different versions of the upcoming budget, based on different revenue assumptions.

When looking at the economy, Dan Smith noted that it’s been an interesting 5-6 years, or even decade, and most people agree that it’s been a once-in-a-lifetime experience. The question is: What’s the future going to look like? In developing a budget, does the county make projections more in line with the long-term historical past? Or do they project a future based on very conservative assumptions? Both approaches have implications for the budget, he said. Smith said he doesn’t know what the answer is, but those decisions will have a compounding effect on the budget.

Conan Smith felt that the county’s finance team has been keenly focused on the county’s long-term fiscal stability. What the board needs to do is to focus on community impacts that result in long-term sustainability and stability. They could take a conservative fiscal approach and focus on things that they can control, like the county’s budget, he said. They can control costs and not make structural investments that result in long-term, compounding costs. In contrast,  other actions could be more risky, he said, but might offer a different community and fiscal impact – like investing in improvement of the county’s property value base. Over the long-term, it could result in the restoration of prosperity and property values.

Smith said the county doesn’t control the market, but the board ought to have a discussion about what the county can work to influence. Right now, economic development is not a primary focus for the county programmatically, he said, but he felt it’s an area that should receive increased attention, in terms of the investments that the county is making. For some county employees who are leading current programs, it might mean a wholesale revamp of how they do business. It goes back to investing in root causes instead of immediate pain, Smith said. Instead of putting a band-aid on a wound, the goal is to make sure the wound never happens. Those are tough decisions to make, but the board is doing a disservice to the community if it’s not at least having a conversation about these issues.

Next Steps

Mary O’Hare wrapped up the retreat by telling commissioners that the discussion would be summarized and provided to them, to use as they continue setting priorities. Andy LaBarre, chair of the board’s working sessions, reported that a working session on April 4 is scheduled as follow-up to the retreat.

Ronnie Peterson wanted to know how this process falls in line with the board’s existing budget timelines. He noted that there’s some urgency with this, as the board works to develop the 2014-2015 budget.

County administrator Verna McDaniel reviewed the timeline and guidelines that the board had adopted at its Jan. 16, 2013 meeting. [.pdf of timeline and guidelines] That timeline includes:

• March-April: Budget preparation with county finance staff and organization.
• April: 2013 equalization report delivered to the board.
• May: Board leadership gets budget development update; full board gets revised financial State of the County presentation.
• May-June: Meetings with administration, finance and organization to review all options & define budget targets.
• June: Board leadership gets budget development update.
• July-August: Development of administrator’s recommended budget.
• August: Board leadership gets budget development update, and board holds preliminary budget review sessions.
• September: Presentation of administrator’s recommended budget.
• Sept.-Oct.: Deliberation on budget at Ways & Means Committee meetings.
• October: Public hearing on budget.
• November: Board adopts budget.

McDaniel noted that the board chair, Yousef Rabhi, as well as Felicia Brabec, chair of the board’s ways & means committee, are both members of a budget task force that includes key staff and administrators.

From left: Washtenaw County clerk Larry Kestenbaum and sheriff Jerry Clayton.

Conan Smith suggested holding a working session at some point about potential millages. He noted that the issue of revenue was mentioned during the retreat in connection to several areas. If the board is considering a millage in 2013, they need to have that discussion fairly quickly, because there’s a statutory timeframe for putting a millage on the ballot. More importantly, he added, is the need to build up public will for a millage. Maybe there’s not the will to have that conversation, Smith said, but he did want to raise the issue.

Peterson noted that some of these issues are political decisions, and should be separated out – like whether to seize control of the road commission, he said. Another example is whether to support expanded public transit, he said. These issues don’t need to be tied to the budget timeline. He felt that the board might need an extra meeting to deal with these broader questions.

The economy is rebounding, Peterson said. Ann Arbor and some other communities are doing extremely well, although the east side of the county is still hurting. He said the board needs to schedule at least one more session to talk about these issues.

Rabhi agreed, suggesting that they devote future budget sessions to specific topics, like transportation. He said he appreciated the dialogue that they’d had during the retreat. It’s important to take a step back and ask what they’d like the county to look like, he said. It’s not a question they can answer in one night, but it’s something they should keep in mind as they go through the budgeting process.

Present: Felicia Brabec, Andy LaBarre, Kent Martinez-Kratz, Ronnie Peterson, Alicia Ping, Yousef Rabhi, Rolland Sizemore Jr., Conan Smith, Dan Smith.

Next regular board meeting: Wednesday, March 20, 2013 at 6:30 p.m. at the county administration building, 220 N. Main St. in Ann Arbor. The ways & means committee meets first, followed immediately by the regular board meeting. [Check Chronicle event listings to confirm date.] (Though the agenda states that the regular board meeting begins at 6:45 p.m., it usually starts much later – times vary depending on what’s on the agenda.) Public commentary is held at the beginning of each meeting, and no advance sign-up is required.

The Chronicle could not survive without regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the Washtenaw County board of commissioners. 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!

The retreat was scheduled by board chair Conan Smith. It had not been announced at previous board meetings, nor was it formally announced during any of the opportunities for communications from commissioners at the board’s Jan. 18 meeting. However, commissioner Ronnie Peterson mentioned the retreat during the Jan. 18 meeting, noting that he would be unable to attend. He said he was concerned that there wouldn’t be adequate citizen input or participation, and he wanted to encourage the board to include that perspective.

In response to Peterson’s remarks, Yousef Rabhi – chair of the board’s working sessions – told commissioners that Smith will use part of the Jan. 19 working session to prep for the retreat. The two main agenda items for the Jan. 19 working session were both listed as topics of discussion to be led by Smith: (1) a “millage discussion,” and (2) a discussion of a statewide regional transit authority. Smith indicated that the second topic on regional transit would be removed from the agenda, because anticipated legislative action at the state level has not yet occurred.

The millage discussion is a reference to an idea that Smith has previously floated, and that he outlined in a presentation at the board’s Dec. 7, 2011 meeting. At that meeting, he discussed a plan for board priority-setting in 2012 and beyond that focused county efforts on shoring up the county’s east side. He laid out a variety of options that the county could pursue to fund those efforts, including a possible Headlee override or a new millage to pay for services.

Washtenaw County commissioners and staff gather around a conference table at the Feb. 23 administrative briefing.

Administrative briefings have been held for about a decade, taking place a week before the board’s regular meetings, which are scheduled for the first and third Wednesday of each month. They are public but informal, held in a small conference room at the county’s downtown Ann Arbor administration building – not in the boardroom. The meetings, which usually last no longer than an hour, are focused on reviewing the upcoming agenda for the back-to-back Ways & Means Committee meeting and regular board meeting the following week.

Several commissioners say they benefit from the discussions that emerge at these briefings. But Ronnie Peterson, who has never attended because of his objections to the format, has been a vocal critic, calling them “backroom” meetings where deliberations occur that he believes are too far out of the public eye – even though they conform to the Open Meetings Act.

He raised the issue again at the Feb. 16 board meeting, which resulted in a lengthy debate about whether administrative briefings and the board’s budget retreats are sufficiently accessible to the public. The outcome of that debate was a vote at the Feb. 16 meeting to hold future retreats after the board’s regular working sessions – both would be televised. However, an attempt to relocate and televise administrative briefings failed, with support only from Peterson, Kristin Judge and Wes Prater.

On Wednesday, Smith – who on Feb. 16 argued for keeping the administrative briefings unchanged – said that after discussions with county administrator Verna McDaniel, they had decided to eliminate the briefings in favor of a weekly agenda-setting meeting with staff and just three commissioners: Smith, as board chair; Rolland Sizemore Jr., chair of the Ways & Means Committee; and Yousef Rabhi, chair of the working sessions. Because the meeting will not involve a quorum of commissioners, it will not be required to be open to the public.

McDaniel told commissioners that the briefings had begun under the previous administration – led by Bob Guenzel, who retired in May of 2010 – as a way for the three chairs and three vice chairs of the board, Ways & Means Committee and working sessions to touch base prior to the official meetings. The briefings began when the board consisted of 15 commissioners, so the gathering of six board leaders did not constitute a quorum.

However, when redistricting occurred after the 2000 census and the number of districts decreased to 11, six commissioners then constituted a quorum, and the meetings were required to be open to the public. Other commissioners began attending as well. [The Chronicle has attended nearly all of the briefings since this publication launched in September 2008. The meetings are rarely attended by members of the public or other media.]

Smith pointed out that the briefings have been a point of contention in the past, when they were cited in one of the complaints in a 2006 lawsuit filed against the county by the townships of Ypsilanti, Salem and Augusta over the cost of police services. The lawsuit claimed that the notice of meetings weren’t properly posted under the state’s Open Meetings Act because the notices didn’t indicate that a quorum of commissioners might attend. [Notices now state: "A quorum of the Washtenaw County Board of Commissioners may be present at this meeting."]

Smith said that eliminating the briefings is a way to address concerns that had been raised by Peterson, Judge and Prater at the Feb. 16 board meeting. Among other things, the three had argued that since deliberations occurred during the briefings, those discussions should be more easily available to the public – for example, by being conducted in the county boardroom, where the meetings can be televised on Community Television Network, simulcast on the county’s website and posted for replay online. They were particularly concerned about this as the board pursues strategies to eliminate a projected $20.9 million budget deficit for 2012 and 2013, and as the administration enters into negotiations with the 17 union bargaining units representing county employees.

At the Feb. 16 meeting, Leah Gunn had proposed instituting new rules that would curtail deliberations at the briefings, as one way to deal with the concerns. During that Feb. 16 meeting, corporation counsel Curtis Hedger advised her to bring the proposal forward at the next Ways & Means Committee meeting, on March 2. [Resolutions are considered and voted on first at Ways & Means, a committee on which all commissioners serve and which meets immediately prior to the regular board meetings.]

Ultimately, Smith said he and McDaniel felt a better solution would be to eliminate the briefings. At the Feb. 23 briefing, Smith said they’d rely on Rabhi – as chair of the working sessions – to make sure those meetings filled the gap in dialogue, and he encouraged the rest of the board to speak up if they felt there was something that needed more discussion.

Smith also told his colleagues that he knew this wasn’t an ideal solution. “I love these meetings,” he said, referring to the briefings.

Rob Turner – one of the board’s four new commissioners, who took office in January – agreed, saying he enjoyed the briefings and was going to miss them. He’d made similar statements that the Feb. 16 board meeting, arguing to keep the informal nature of the discussions. Because commissioners could ask questions of staff at the briefings, it cut down on the amount of time questioning them at the more formal board meetings, which are conducted according to Robert’s Rules of Order.

Sizemore also said he found the briefings useful, and said he feared that eliminating them would make the board meetings much longer.

Rabhi suggested an alternative – changing the board rules to codify the briefings, making them one of the official meetings of the commissioners. The rules now include a list of official meetings of the board, but the briefings are not among those cited. [.pdf file of board rules] But Smith said the crucial issue would remain: How to accommodate all the many and competing interests that were raised regarding the briefings.

Smith said if the new approach doesn’t work out or if any of the commissioners feel they aren’t getting what they need, they could revisit the issue. “It’s our calendar to build or deconstruct as we like,” he said.

Joanna Bidlack, who as a staff member with the administrator’s office leads the briefings, pointed out that the board had previously approved the 2011 calendar of meetings, which included administrative briefings. Rather than post a cancellation of each meeting for the rest of the year, she proposed bringing forward a resolution at their next meeting to revise the calendar, without the briefings.

Smith told commissioners that in lieu of the briefings, the three chairs would meet with administrative staff, then Bidlack would send out a draft agenda with explanatory notes during the week prior to their board meeting.

The Feb. 23 Briefing: A Summary

In addition to the discussion about the briefing itself, the Feb. 23 meeting focused on – as it typically does – a review of the agendas for the upcoming meetings of the Ways & Means Committee, regular board and working session. The first two meetings will be held back-to-back on March 2; the working session is the following evening, March 3.

Bidlack led the group through the three agendas, providing background information on each item.

Three resolutions will be considered at the Ways & Means Committee meeting, all of them related to federal funding that requires board approval to accept on behalf of the county’s Employment Training & Community Services (ETCS) department:

• $141,409 in federal funding for the Food Assistance Employment and Training Program, which is expected to serve over 100 residents.
• $1.161 million in federal and state funds for the Jobs, Education and Training (JET) program, which last year provided over 1,400 residents with job placement and other services.
• $148,532 in federal funding from the Workforce Investment Act for job-training and job search services.

In addition, the Ways & Means agenda includes a presentation by Kirk Profit, director of Governmental Consultant Services Inc., a Lansing-based lobbying firm employed by the county and several other local governments. Profit originally had been scheduled to address the board at their last board meeting, during the same week that Gov. Rick Snyder released his proposed state budget. Commissioners requested that his presentation be rescheduled, to allow time for Profit and his staff to assess the budget and its possible impact on the county, including changes to state shared revenue.

At Wednesday’s briefing, McDaniel told commissioners that they should let Profit know if there are any key issues they want him to address during his presentation.

“Money,” quipped Sizemore.

In reviewing the agenda for the regular board meeting, only one item drew discussion: a resolution to recognize that the United Way of Washtenaw County is a local nonprofit, and authorizing the county clerk to complete a form from the state’s charitable gaming division.

Corporation counsel Curtis Hedger explained to the board that the resolution is required by the state’s Bingo Act in order for the United Way to hold a charitable fundraiser that includes gambling. It’s extremely rare that these kinds of requests come to the county board – typically, they are handled by the local municipalities where the events will be held. Dan Smith, who previously served on the Northfield Township board of trustees, and Alicia Ping, a former Saline city councilmember, both reported getting multiple requests of this kind each year. When Smith asked why the county board was being approached instead, McDaniel said it’s because she and Sandy Rupp, executive director of the local United Way, are “buddies.”

Some commissioners expressed mild concern about the aspect of gambling, and Hedger clarified that the county was not accepting any responsibility for the event itself. Rabhi recalled that he had been involved in a similar fundraiser for another nonprofit, and described it as “the sketchiest thing I’ve ever been a part of.”

Prater also weighed in, saying, “If I were that organization, I’d be a little concerned about the image it conveys.” Rabhi agreed, adding “but that’s their problem.”

Gunn noted that the event was to raise money for charity.

“I know it’s for charity,” Prater said, “but it’s still gambling.”

The last agenda reviewed at the Feb. 23 briefing was for the March 3 working session, which includes two main items: (1) a closed executive session to discuss labor strategy, and (2) a wrap-up of the board’s budget retreat discussions.

The board had been briefed at its Feb. 17 working session about upcoming labor negotiations. Diane Heidt, the county’s human resources and labor relations director who gave that presentation, had told commissioners that she’d be talking with them at the March 3 working session to get some parameters for her and other staff to use in negotiations, as well as to talk about their general labor relations strategy.

The retreat discussion previously had been scheduled to follow the administrative briefing. [The board has held two budget retreats earlier this year: for five hours on Saturday, Jan. 29, and for two hours following the Feb. 9 administrative briefing.] But the final retreat was rescheduled following a debate at the board’s Feb. 16 meeting, when Peterson argued that it should be held in the boardroom and televised.

The working session will also include a board discussion on how to engage staff and the community in developing the county’s 2012-2013 budget.

Bill Reynolds, Washtenaw County's deputy administrator, with a framed copy of the county's "guiding principles."

The discussion was another step toward developing a framework that county administrator Verna McDaniel and her staff can use in their budget planning for 2012 and 2013, when the county faces a projected $20.9 million deficit. The session followed a five-hour Jan. 29 retreat. The board also plans to continue their budget talks on Feb. 23, after their regular administrative briefing.

Conan Smith, chair of the board, told the group he hoped they could form an outline of their priorities – not in terms of programs, but at a policy level. He said that focusing on specific programs at this point would limit the administration’s flexibility for future restructuring.

During the two-hour session, commissioners talked about the importance of providing a safety net of services for residents who are most in need – perhaps through a combination of the county’s own services, and partnerships with outside agencies. Though some commissioners expressed concerns about privatizing, there seemed to be consensus about exploring ways to market the county’s infrastructure services – like payroll processing and human resources – to other local municipalities.

They discussed the need for more self-reliance on local resources, as opposed to state and federal funding – while acknowledging the dependence that many county programs have on state and federal grants. The board also talked about the importance of balancing short-term budget needs with long-term investments that could bring more significant structural savings in future years.

Also during Wednesday’s retreat, some commissioners noted the importance of keeping all budget discussions in public view. The retreats – unlike the board’s regular meetings and working sessions – are not televised, though they are open to the public. In addition to county commissioners, the retreats are attended by other elected officials and county staff.

The bulk of Wednesday’s session focused on trying to craft a framework to prioritize “county business.” Of the five topics sketched out as possible parts of that prioritization framework, the group tackled three on Wednesday night, which can be recast as grouped questions: (1) Is a service mandated by state law? (2) Is a service part of the basic reason county government exists? Does a service address longer-term root causes of problems? Does a service address crisis situations? and (3) Does the county itself currently operate a program? Does the county invest in some outside agency to provide a program?

Because of time constraints, commissioners decided to continue discussion on the remaining two topics at their next session. Those topics are: (1) Is it better to provide world-class services, but fewer of them? Is it better to provide a broader range of services, but at lower levels? and (2) Should commissioners prefer solutions that have a sustainable, long-term budget impact or those that address immediate needs?

Before tackling these questions, commissioner Ronnie Peterson asked whether they should revisit the county’s “guiding principles,” which were adopted several years ago. Will their decisions be consistent with those? They should either abide by the principles, he said, or change them. Bill Reynolds, deputy county administrator, fetched a framed copy of the guiding principles that was hanging in the boardroom. The principles are:

1. Ensure long term fiscal stability for the county.

2. Reduce the cost of conducting the county’s business.

3. Enhance customer service.

4. Provide the necessary knowledge, skills and resources to county employees to carry out these principles.

5. Ensure adequate provision of mandated services.

6. Focus on the root causes of problems that affect the quality of life of county citizens by aggressively pursuing prevention strategies

7. Provide leadership on intragovernmental, intergovernmental and intersectoral cooperation and collaboration aimed at improving services to county citizens.

Smith suggested that Peterson’s question should be the topic for a future Wednesday retreat discussion. Kristin Judge said she also wanted to make sure they sought constituent input as the budget process moves forward. It’s important to get feedback about what priorities residents have regarding county services, she said.

This report summarizes the key points of the board’s two-hour discussion.

Mandated vs. Non-Mandated Services

In introducing the topic of mandated vs. non-mandated services, Conan Smith (D-District 10) noted that the priorities in Lansing – where the state legislature sets mandates for services that local governments must provide – might not be the county’s priorities. How does the board answer the question of serviceability, or guide the administration to determine what levels of mandated services they should provide?

Leah Gunn (D-District 9) characterized this as a crucial issue. “World-class service may not be attainable,” she said. Many of the non-mandated services that the county provides affect people who are most in need, Gunn noted. When asked by Smith to identify some principles that the administration can use to determine levels of serviceability, Gunn suggested getting guidance from the county’s department heads and other elected officials who lead departments, like the treasurer and clerk. She said she knows that Brian Mackie, the county’s prosecuting attorney, disliked the exercise they did during the last budget cycle when departments were asked to identify impacts if their budgets were cut 5%, 10%, 15% or 20%. But that was helpful, she said, because department heads know their operations much better than commissioners do.

While department heads are the best to determine the impact on their operations, Gunn added, it’s up to the board to decide which of those impacts are acceptable. Barbara Bergman (D-District 8) noted that some savings might not be worth it, if the consequence of cuts is too great.

From left: Washtenaw County commissioners Ronnie Peterson and Yousef Rabhi.

Ronnie Peterson (D-District 6) said they need to keep in mind three different categories: (1) mandated services for departments led by elected officials; (2) mandated services for departments led by staff; and (3) non-mandated services.

Dan Smith (R-District 2) agreed, saying the state had determined that certain services are important enough to mandate, and that most of those mandated services are in departments led by elected officials. Those services are deemed to be core, he said, citing several examples: a place to put people who break the law; a place to file deeds; a way to ensure that flooding is under control. The board needs to keep that distinction in mind during these discussions, he said.

Wes Prater (D-District 4) said that in general, he wanted to see a focus on performance measures and outcomes, to help determine serviceability levels.

Dan Smith pointed out that they can’t ignore the impact of decisions in Lansing. It’s probably too late for this budget cycle, he noted, but they need to lobby for relief from some of the state’s unfunded mandates – they need to lobby for additional state funding for those services. For non-mandated services, he observed that sometimes the county gets a huge return on its investments, by leveraging county dollars to get state or federal funding for programs. When that’s the case, “we should keep doing it,” he said.

Gunn added that lobbying the federal government on these issues is also important.

Regardless of lobbying efforts, Prater said it’s clear the county will need to do more on its own in the future. If they depend on Lansing, “I think you’re only wishful thinking.” The same is true at the federal level, he said. Despite the success of Rep. John Dingell in getting earmarks for his district, which covers much of Washtenaw County, that funding will might evaporate soon, Prater said.

Yousef Rabhi (D-District 11) expanded on Prater’s point, saying the county should try to relocalize what it does, and become self-sufficient as much as possible. That’s what local government is all about, he said.

But Peterson cautioned against taking that approach to the extreme, saying that state and federal funding is a plus for the county. One of the reasons the county has world-class departments is that they’ve been aggressive – and successful – in getting state and federal dollars, he said. Do you walk away from those population groups that are served by these programs? Most of those programs support families and children, he noted. The programs get federal funds, but they aren’t mandated. He urged the board not to abandon these people on principle. “It’s about the babies,” he said.

Bergman said they should at least question how much real benefit they’re getting from programs supported by the county’s general fund, even if they leverage federal dollars.

Prater clarified that he wasn’t advocating to abandon what they already have. If the county can hang on to the funding it’s got, that would be a success, he said. But commissioners need to anticipate that state and federal funding might be eliminated – that’s likely the case with state revenue-sharing dollars, he noted – and they should figure out how to deal with a decrease in outside funding.

Rabhi, too, said he wasn’t advocating to let go of all state and federal funding. But it’s important to look for ways that county government can be more independent.

Washtenaw County commissioners Leah Gunn and Dan Smith.

Rob Turner (R-District 1) brought the conversation back to the underlying issue: The county is facing a $20.9 million deficit. The state and federal government has evolved to make local governments dependent on them, he said, by taking local taxpayer dollars, then returning only a portion to local entities by funding certain programs. Local municipalities rely on the state and federal government to “give us our money back,” he said, but it’s just not happening.

The only way to address the situation is to ask every department to look for excesses in their programs and services, whether they be mandated or non-mandated, Turner said. They’re going to have to survive on less, and it will be difficult. He said he understood that cuts have already been made, but they need to do more, to squeeze out as much efficiency as they can. It should be a bottom-up process, he added, not a top-down decision.

Turner noted that he’d been on a tour that afternoon of several county facilities, and had come away more depressed than happy. [The tour included all four newly elected commissioners – Turner, Alicia Ping, Yousef Rabhi and Dan Smith – as part of their orientation to the county's operations.] Turner observed that the county provides so many great, essential services – and they won’t be able to do it all in the future.

Ping (R-District 3) agreed with Turner, saying it’s clear they can’t be all things to all people. She said their tour of the county children’s services department especially touched her heart. There are employees whose job entails both cooking and janitorial work, she noted, and counselors on the third shift do laundry as well. In many places they’ve already cut to the bone, she said, but they’ll need to do even more.

Gunn thanked Turner for pointing to the bottom line, and reminded her colleagues that in county administrator Verna McDaniel’s state of the county presentation last month, McDaniel had targeted making $8.5 million in cuts to employee compensation and benefits, and another $8.5 million in organizational changes and baseline reductions in the 2012-2013 budget. Gunn indicated that those are daunting cuts.

Conan Smith wrapped up the discussion on the topic by noting that so far, they hadn’t yet identified which non-mandated services they consider sacrosanct – which ones they’ll choose to do, regardless of state or federal support. That’s something they’ll need to address, he said.

Core Business, Root Causes or Crisis Management?

In starting the conversation on this topic, Conan Smith noted that the county exists for some purpose that’s distinct from why a city, state or federal government exists. The county supports services like the county jail, among other things. Rob Turner had previously characterized these as core businesses. How should they prioritize those services, Smith asked, compared to services that address “root causes” – one of the county’s guiding principles. [The principle states: "Focus on the root causes of problems that affect the quality of life of county citizens by aggressively pursuing prevention strategies."]

Smith said they know that when they attack root causes, there’s a long-term gain – but that gain is sometimes hard to quantify. How should they prioritize core services that don’t address root causes? Does a core service automatically take priority? And finally, how should they prioritize services that fall into the category of crisis management?

Washtenaw County commissioner Kristin Judge.

Yousef Rabhi described the role of government as providing services for those who’ve walked the length of the road, and there’s no more road for them to walk. Government is the safety net, when there’s nowhere else to turn. Of course, he added, it’s prudent to provide services aimed at preventing people from reaching the end of the road. But the county’s focus should be to support people when they most need it.

The most critical services provide food and health care, Barbara Bergman said. Leah Gunn agreed that the county’s role should be to cover holes in the safety net. But how do they do that, given the resources they have?

Ronnie Peterson said he considers core services to be those that are overseen by elected officials like the sheriff, water resources commission and clerk. But he also considers public health and mental health services to be core as well. People move to Washtenaw County for a reason, he said. And people who move here to work for the county are proud to be associated with it. The county’s reputation carries a great deal of respect, he said.

Dan Smith agreed with Peterson about prioritizing those core services for which county elected officials are responsible. Regarding root causes, he said the four new commissioners had just spent the afternoon learning about county programs focused on addressing those areas, which try to “nip problems in the bud” before they become major expenses later. Every dollar they spend on a child saves hundreds of dollars later on, he said, by keeping people out of jail, or making them healthier.

Conan Smith said this is a question he’s struggled with: How do they balance an investment in root causes today, given their declining resources? Such an investment would be important to yield a longer-term payoff, but won’t have an effect on the current budget. How do they balance their short-term goal of balancing the budget, with long-term strategic goals?

That’s the crucial question, Turner said. This is not just a two-year problem – the economic recovery likely won’t occur until at least 2015, he said. So commissioners need to factor in those long-term gains. Decisions about things like employee health care and pensions might not have a significant impact for 10 years, but they need to make those decisions now “or we’ll be revisiting this year after year,” he said.

Turner also noted that the four new commissioners had visited the county’s veterans affairs office earlier in the day. The office leverages less than $200,000 to get millions of dollars in federal funding, he noted, while providing help for local veterans. That’s what it means to do business well, he said, and the county needs to find similar areas of its operation that provide those kinds of returns for a relatively small investment.

Alicia Ping said it might take 18 years to see a payoff from investing in kids. When you visit the juvenile detention center or family court, you wonder how kids ended up there, she said.

Conan Smith summarized the point, saying the county needs to prioritize both financial and social ROI (return on investment).

Looking back at the previous 2010-2011 budget cycle, Gunn said they didn’t tackle real structural reform at the time. It’s time to address structural change, including departmental restructuring and labor costs, she said.

Wes Prater asked whether they were being realistic, in terms of their ability to address root causes. Shouldn’t much of that, for children, be the responsibility of parents? He questioned how the county should deal with that.

Conan Smith, chair of the Washtenaw County board of commissioners.

Kristin Judge (D-District 7) observed that the county’s Head Start program serves about 580 families, and parents participate, too – she’s sure they’re making a long-term difference. One of the program’s new employees had been part of Head Start as a child, she said.

Some of it comes down to the question of whether it’s the county government’s job to provide these services, Dan Smith said. Is it something that taxpayer dollars should support? Some people in the county would say that the services are important, he said, but that it’s not the county’s role to provide them, even if it’s a worthy cause or a good investment. It would be easy to tell the county administration to just provide the basics, he said, but the board needs to find a balance.

Judge said she was an advocate of zero-based budgeting – looking at what it costs to provide the county’s core services, then seeing how much was left over before deciding where to spend it.

Turner cautioned that the departments led by other elected officials shouldn’t simply get carte blanche on their budgets, even if they are core.

Running a County “Business” vs. Investing Elsewhere

Conan Smith set up discussion of this topic by asking commissioners what areas the county should itself take responsibility for.  Are there areas where the county should be aggressive about partnering with other organizations? For example, the county made a decision to invest in literacy – it helped develop the blueprint to end illiteracy, and is part of the Literacy Coalition of Washtenaw County. But the effort is being handled by others, Smith noted – that is, the county is a partner, rather than a driver. So what are the areas in which the county needs to be the primary leader, Smith asked, versus taking a secondary or tertiary role.

Dan Smith started by saying that perhaps they should look at the “transparent” services the county provides, those that taxpayers don’t see but that support the county’s operations – things like human resources and payroll. Perhaps they should explore transferring those services to a third-party provider. How much of its infrastructure does the county need to run? he asked.

Barbara Bergman said a better characterization might be “invisible” – there are many services provided that the public doesn’t see.

Conan Smith flipped that question, asking whether the county could provide those kinds of services to other local governments. He cited the example of the county taking on human resources for the Washtenaw County Road Commission, which previously had its own HR staff.

Yousef Rabhi said he didn’t like the idea of outsourcing infrastructure services, but he did favor being a place where other governments could come to for those services. The question is: How does the county market those services?

Rabhi described the veterans affairs office as a place where veterans could come and get help. If the county doesn’t offer the specific services a veteran needs, the staff would direct them to the right source. Maybe the county should take that approach on a broader level, he suggested. Sometimes they should just serve as a help desk, pointing people toward other resources in the community. But when there’s nowhere else to go, that’s when the county should provide a service. He said the county’s mission should be to make sure residents are provided for – it doesn’t matter who’s providing the services.

Wes Prater pointed out that the Washtenaw United Way’s 211 system is the kind of help desk that Rabhi described. Conan Smith said the county’s role could be to ensure that people are aware of that service. A possible framework, he said, is for the county to identify the services that its residents need, and to ensure that those services are provided – either by the county government, or some other agency. In that case, Prater responded, they need to do an inventory of services.

Rolland Sizemore Jr. (D-District 5) expressed concern that there’s a disconnect between the county board and other local governments, and between the county board and state leaders. Commissioners need to do more networking, he said. Sizemore also cautioned that they shouldn’t overburden the staff to the point that work isn’t getting done that needs to get done, but he liked the idea of providing services to other local governments. They’ve done that to some extent with training programs, he noted, but the word’s not out in the community about it.

Conan Smith said it’s a theme that comes up repeatedly – the county needs to do a better job at communicating what it does. In a sense, he added, that might be one of the “businesses” they should be in.

Going back to the topic of outsourcing services, Bergman said that the idea of privatizing scared her. She urged her colleagues to think about the possible long-term implications. As a metaphor, she posed a theoretical situation: What if they provided garbage pickup but decided to privatize that service, selling off their garbage trucks. What would happen if they later decided they didn’t like the services that a private company was providing? What would it cost to buy back those garbage trucks? [The county does not provide garbage pickup services.]

On the other hand, Bergman said, if more people know about the “invisible” services of the county, they might be able to sell those services.

Janis Bobrin, Washtenaw County water resources commissioner.

Janis Bobrin – the county’s water resources commissioner, an elected position – said they should also think about the standards and expectations they’d have for an outside service provider. What standards would they want to set so that the services remain as efficient as the county’s currently are?

County treasurer Catherine McClary, also an elected official, agreed with Bergman on the importance of looking at long-term implications. Her department handles payroll for county employees – would an outside firm be able to provide the same level of service? Whatever they decided, it would have consequences, she said.

Dan Smith clarified that his earlier remarks were just meant to talk through some of these issues – clearly there are different ways of looking at it. He noted that in his district – District 2, covering much of the county’s northeast region – there are six township boards that each have to deal with pension issues, for example. They might be happy to use the county’s resources for that, he said. Obviously the townships retain control over that decision, he added, but the county might not be doing enough to reach out to other local governments.

Prater suggested that as Smith traveled through his district, he might ask those local officials what they thought of the idea. That way, he could get a feel for how receptive they’d be. Prater noted that his own district, District 4, covers four jurisdictions in southeast Washtenaw: the city of Milan and the townships of Ypsilanti, York and Augusta. One of them might be interested in sharing services, he said, but for the other three, “it’s a turf war.”

Ronnie Peterson weighed in, saying he hoped they’d give departments a chance to streamline their operations first, before they considered privatizing.

Rob Turner said he’s not a big fan of privatizing, but there are times when it wouldn’t hurt to compare the county’s services with outside vendors. Turner, a former trustee for the Chelsea School District board of education, said it was amazing how when the school board started talking about outside services, the district’s employees found ways to streamline and save money. When the district was exploring the possibility of consolidating its bus services with the Washtenaw Intermediate School District, he said, the transportation department came up with a lot of ways to cut costs.

Alicia Ping, a former Saline city councilmember, said the city’s union contracts stipulate that if the city issues a request for proposals (RFP), the unions are offered the chance to come in at a lower cost on the project. She also cautioned commissioners not to assume that private businesses would deliver lower levels of service. There are many companies out there that are willing to go the extra mile, she said.

Kristin Judge echoed that sentiment, saying that privatization isn’t necessarily a bad word. They need to look at ways to support local businesses as well.

Prater said they need to keep in mind that the private sector needs a profit margin – but government doesn’t.

Verna McDaniel explained that most of the union contracts prevent the county from displacing workers by contracting out for services. However, she noted that when the county stops offering a service – for example, as they did when they discontinued the Library for the Blind and Physically Disabled – then there’s some flexibility. In the case of the library, those services were taken over by the Ann Arbor District Library – an entity McDaniel noted could provide the service well.

Next Steps

Near the end of almost two hours of discussion, Conan Smith asked county administrator Verna McDaniel about the budget timeline – at what point did she and her staff need the board to provide some kind of definitive guidance? Having it by early April would be fine, she replied – giving the board several more weeks to continue their budget discussions.

Smith proposed holding the next retreat on Feb. 23, from 6-8 p.m., following the board’s administrative briefing. He said he hoped they could ultimately provide McDaniel with a statement that would indicate the board’s agreed-upon outcomes and principles for investment, which could guide the staff’s budget planning.

Janis Bobrin, the water resources commissioner, hoped that the details of the evening’s discussion wouldn’t be lost. Details are almost as important as a final official statement, she said.

When Smith said that Rolland Sizemore Jr., as chair of the board’s Ways & Means Committee, would meet with McDaniel to get budget planning updates and feedback, Ronnie Peterson objected.

All of their budget-related talks should be held in the public eye, he said, adding that he even had concerns about the retreats they were holding. [Unlike the board's regular meetings and working sessions, the retreats aren't recorded for Community Television Network.] He said he certainly didn’t want any backroom meetings out of public view.

Smith said that wasn’t his intent. So he asked McDaniel if instead of meeting with Sizemore, she could give reports to the board at their regular meetings. She agreed, saying that her plan is to be very public about this process.

Wes Prater noted that Peterson has raised these same concerns at previous meetings. Commissioners need to keep everything on the table, he said, adding “we don’t have as much time as we think we do.”

Kristin Judge pointed out that this same situation had arisen during the last budget cycle, when Smith had served as chair of Ways & Means. She recalled that she and Prater had asked whether the board rules designate that the Ways & Means chair serves as a budget liaison between the board and administration – they don’t, she said. She agreed with Peterson that the board hasn’t authorized anyone to work on their behalf. They are each one of 11 commissioners, she said, and if there are budget discussions, they should all be involved. During the last budget cycle there were some “trust issues” that shouldn’t be repeated, she said.

Smith reiterated that it was not his intent to keep discussions out of public view – he said he had just wanted to give McDaniel an avenue for giving feedback.

Present: Commissioners Barbara Levin Bergman, Leah Gunn, Kristin Judge, Ronnie Peterson, Alicia Ping, Wes Prater, Yousef Rabhi, Rolland Sizemore Jr., Conan Smith, Dan Smith, Rob Turner. Other elected officials who attended the meeting: treasurer Catherine McClary, water resources commissioner Janis Bobrin. Several county staff members were also present, including county administrator Verna McDaniel; deputy administrator Bill Reynolds; Bob Tetens, director of Washtenaw County Parks and Recreation; and finance director Kelly Belknap.

Next retreat: These budget-related discussions, which are open to the public, will continue on Wednesday, Feb. 23 at a special meeting following the board’s administrative briefing, which is held to preview the March 2 board meeting. The briefing begins at 5:30 p.m. at the county administration building, 220 N. Main St. The special meeting focused on the budget is scheduled from 6-9 p.m. [confirm date]

Washington & Fifth Avenue, looking northwest. The concrete mixer is parked directly in front of the DDA offices. The entry for the board's Sept. 1 meeting was through the alley and the garage, which makes up part of the ground floor of the Fifth Avenue Building. (Photos by the writer.)

The first issue, handled with relatively little comment, was the report out from the DDA’s “mutually beneficial” committee, given by Roger Hewitt. The committee has been meeting over the course of the summer with a corresponding committee from the Ann Arbor city council to renegotiate the parking agreement under which the DDA manages the city’s parking system.

While board members Newcombe Clark and Russ Collins commented in a general way on the status of the conversations, it did not lead to any specific directive to the DDA’s committee for its next meeting, which will take place on Sept. 13 at 8:30 a.m.

However, at the suggestion of DDA executive director Susan Pollay, the board will schedule a retreat between now and its monthly board meeting in October – but likely after Sept. 13 – to focus on the “mutually beneficial” issue. In the meantime, the DDA’s committee will request of its city council counterparts that they provide their own assessment of the status of the negotiations. The Sept. 13 meeting of the two committees will also be the occasion when Pollay provides a detailed version of the outline, which she’d provided at the last committee meeting on Aug. 23, for a possible role for the DDA in the development of city-owned surface lots.

The second issue dispatched by the board with little overt controversy was a resolution that Newcombe Clark had brought through the operations committee last Wednesday to allocate $50,000 for support of skatepark facilities. Clark himself suggested that the resolution be tabled, alluding to the “prism through which everything is looked at this time of year.” DDA board members went along with that suggestion.

The prism to which Clark alluded is a political one. Clark is running an independent campaign for the Ward 5 city council seat currently held by Democrat Carsten Hohnke. Hohnke has positioned himself as a champion of the skating community’s efforts to construct a skateboarding facility at Veterans Memorial Park, which is in Ward 5.

At Wednesday’s meeting, the newest member of the board, former Washtenaw County administrator Bob Guenzel, and the member he replaced, Jennifer S. Hall, were acknowledged by chair Joan Lowenstein – but neither was present. The board passed a resolution of appreciation for Hall’s service, and Lowenstein welcomed Guenzel “in absentia.”

Other business at Wednesday’s meeting included the usual updates from the board’s committees. Notable from the transportation committee was an effort to collaborate with the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority to enhance bus service between Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti. And from the partnerships committee came a summary of a presentation they’d received from the chief of police – there’s a difference between being statistically safe and the perception of safety.

Downtown Development of City-Owned Property

Roger Hewitt gave the update from the DDA’s “mutually beneficial” committee, which is renegotiating the agreement under which the DDA manages the city’s parking system. He noted that the committee had been meeting every other week – that’s more frequently than the originally planned once-a-month schedule. He said they’d come up with a matrix of parking issues and had identified various complications that would be involved in the DDA’s possible participation in the enforcement of parking regulations. One of those issues is getting access to records of prior infractions, Hewitt said. Hewitt was complimentary of the efforts of DDA executive director Susan Pollay.

Hewitt also noted that Pollay had created an outline for the DDA’s possible involvement in the development process for city-owned surface lots, which was circulated at the previous week’s committee meeting and was included in the board’s meeting packet for that day. The role of the DDA in downtown development is a key element of the term sheet guiding the committee discussions.

The issue had been discussed by the board’s executive committee, Hewitt said. By way of background, the executive committee of the DDA board is defined in the body’s bylaws as follows:

Article V – Executive Committee: The officers of the Board, including Chair, Vice Chair, Treasurer and Recording Secretary shall constitute the executive committee. The last former Chair shall be a non-voting member and the Executive Director shall be a non-voting ex officio member of this committee.

Based on the results of the July annual meeting elections, the current executive committee consists of chair Joan Lowenstein, vice chair Gary Boren, treasurer Roger Hewitt, secretary Russ Collins and former chair John Splitt, along with non-voting member Susan Pollay.

Hewitt reported a desire to have a board retreat to guide how the “mutually beneficial” committee should proceed. Lowenstein called the idea of a retreat a good one, because there might be some ideas that have shifted since those discussions started.

Newcombe Clark asked if it might be reasonable to have the members of the city council’s “mutually beneficial” committee give a status report on the discussions from their point of view. Clark noted that if the reporting on the meetings has been accurate, then there has not been a lot of feedback from councilmembers.

Russ Collins, who serves on the DDA’s “mutually beneficial” committee, said that asking for that kind of feedback was reasonable. He noted that the committee had learned a lot about the bureaucratic and legal issues involved that would make the DDA’s enforcement of parking regulations difficult.

Responding to Clark, Collins allowed that yes, the DDA did need to focus on what the DDA wanted, but that if it’s impossible to get it, then that needed to be recognized. Collins emphasized that the committee had learned a great deal, characterizing the discussions as “productive, but frustrating.”

Clark expressed some frustration by saying, “What we want is irrelevant, because they have what they want.” He was alluding to the fact that the DDA in May had already agreed to pay the city an extra $2 million in FY 2010-11, which was not required by the original parking agreement.

Hewitt indicated that the next meeting of the city and DDA committees would take place on Sept. 13 at 8:30 a.m. – he would not be able to attend. Other members of the DDA’s committee are Gary Boren, Russ Collins and Sandi Smith.

Expected at that meeting is the more fully articulated, detailed plan for the DDA’s role in the development of downtown city lots.

Library Lot RFP Review Committee

If the DDA takes on a more active role in the development of city-owned land downtown, and if a suggestion from Ward 5 councilmember Carsten Hohnke is acted on, the Library Lot could be a parcel on which the DDA eventually leads the development process. Hohnke’s suggestion, made at a Democratic primary election forum, was that consideration of the Library Lot be restarted as a blank slate, with no preconceptions. An underground parking garage is currently under construction on the parcel, and a city-led committee is handling the review of proposals that were submitted for the lot last year. [Chronicle coverage: "Hotel/Conference Center Proposals Go Forward"]

At Wednesday’s DDA board meeting, John Splitt reported out from the committee that’s reviewing proposals for development of the parcel above the underground parking garage – he represents the DDA on the committee, which includes city staff as well as councilmembers Margie Teall and Stephen Rapundalo. Rapundalo chairs that committee.

Splitt gave essentially the same kind of update on the committee that Rapundalo has given his city council colleagues at recent meetings. The committee has not met in about four months, Splitt said. A consultant [Roxbury Group] has been hired and is doing due diligence on the two proposals that are still under consideration. The consultant’s meetings with the proposers should be concluded in time for the committee to meet sometime towards the end of September, Splitt said.

Skatepark Support

As chair of the operations committee, Roger Hewitt described to the board a resolution that Newcombe Clark had brought to that committee the previous week that allocated $50,000 of funds “to be used as matching funds for new public or private dollars raised in support of skate facilities and resources to be located and invested in the DDA District or within radial proximity of the DDA District.”

Skatepark: Tabling the Resolution

Hewitt said he didn’t feel the operations committee was the proper committee to review the proposal and said there were a number of problems with it. He thus stated that he did not want to move the resolution, but invited Clark to do so if he wanted to do so.

The proposed skatepark location in Veterans Memorial Park (yellow push pin) is 1.3 miles from the DDA boundary (shown in red.) (Image links to higher resolution file.)

Clark moved the resolution, but in the same breath indicated he was open to the idea of tabling it – Gary Boren and others clarified that the first step was to actually move the resolution. After establishing that the resolution had actually been moved and seconded, Clark described how he was approached by the skatepark supporters – as other DDA board members had been – about possible support from the DDA for their efforts.

Those efforts include a location at Veterans Memorial Park, Clark said, and so he and others were “stretching” to find a way to directly support  their efforts. [The "stretching" to which Clark alluded is a function of the city park's location, which is at the corner of Maple and Dexter-Ann Arbor roads, across from the new Aldi's. That's roughly 1.3 miles away from the DDA tax district boundary.]

Clark noted that the skatepark had gained support from Washtenaw County, the city of Ann Arbor, all the merchant associations, the Neutral Zone teen center – “all of our regularly supported friends and neighbors here,” said Clark. They all recognized how giving skaters a proper facility would help make the downtown safe take some of the burden off of downtown infrastructure. So he said he’d come up with the resolution as a way to support the effort with a relatively small amount of money.

But Clark noted that subsequently, he’d understood that there is “a prism that everything is looked through this time of the year,” and that he understood reservations that people might have.

Outcome: The board voted to table the resolution – with two audible votes against tabling from Sandi Smith and John Splitt – and the suggestion to the partnerships committee to take up the issue.

Skatepark: Political Prism

The political prism to which Clark alluded includes the fact that Clark is running an independent campaign for the Ward 5 city council seat currently held by Democrat Carsten Hohnke. Hohnke has positioned himself as a champion of the Ann Arbor Skatepark’s efforts to construct a skateboarding facility at Veterans Memorial Park, partly through his drafting of a letter from city councilmembers encouraging the Washtenaw County Parks and Recreation Commission to support the skatepark with a $400,000 matching grant. And Hohnke is endorsed by Trevor Staples, who is chair of the board of directors of Friends of the Ann Arbor Skatepark. The race for the Ward 5 seat is a three-way contest between Hohnke, Clark and John Floyd, who is the Republican nominee.

In a post on the Friends of the Skatepark website, Staples wrote about Clark’s resolution:

I feel that it’s important we point out that the Friends of the Ann Arbor Skatepark was approached by Newcombe Clark with the resolution for DDA funding that he wanted to bring for a vote before the DDA. The Friends of the Ann Arbor Skatepark declined to support the resolution because we could not figure out how the dollars could be used for the skatepark, unless the skatepark was moved. This is not an option.

Skatepark: Location, Location, Location

The location issue cited by Staples in his post involves where the DDA can make its investments. When the Ann Arbor DDA was renewed in 2003, the plan included explicit provision for expenditure of funds outside the DDA tax district [emphasis added].

[page 9] In an effort to accomplish its mission, it is understood that the DDA may elect to participate in important projects outside the DDA District.

[page 24] The funds allocated by the DDA are intended to strengthen the downtown area and attract new private investments. This Plan recognizes that solutions to downtown problems (for example, traffic, access, and parking problems) may best be developed by spending funds outside the DDA district. Similarly, this Plan recognizes that a key to the future vitality of the downtown is stable and successful near downtown neighborhoods.

However, the Veterans Memorial Park location is 1.3 miles away from the DDA boundary. While the DDA board has no general policy on the distances beyond the DDA boundary, it does have a specific distance policy related to affordable housing. The DDA’s affordable housing policy is to support housing projects up to 1/4 mile away from the DDA boundary. This policy was affirmed at the board’s March 4, 2009 meeting. Those deliberations will likely be remembered as much for the 1/4 mile distance as for board members’ “channeling” former board member Dave DeVarti, who consistently championed the cause of affordable housing.

While the source of the skatepark support was proposed to be taken from a grant previously allocated to the Washtenaw-Livingston Rail (WALLY) project, those WALLY funds ultimately came from the DDA’s parking revenues. Those dollars enjoy somewhat more geographic flexibility, because they are not collected under the tax increment financing of the DDA district, but rather from parking fees. Although there’s somewhat more geographic flexibility, the DDA’s policy on investing parking revenues has been to look at the parking system as part of a “transportation system” and to fund transportation-related projects. For example, the DDA uses parking revenues to fund go!pass bus passes for downtown workers.

While skateboards do have wheels, it’s not straightforward to analyze a skatepark facility at Veterans Memorial Park as a transportation project.

During public commentary at the conclusion of the meeting, Ray Fullerton expressed some puzzlement at the skatepark resolution, asking for some clarification as to whether the support would be for the proposed Veterans Memorial Park facility or for some additional second location. Board members don’t typically engage in interactions with the public during their speaking turns, but Clark told Fullerton that “as written” the money could not be spent on the proposed Veterans Memorial Park facility.

After the meeting, Clark told The Chronicle it’s possible that the DDA’s partnerships committee might amend the resolution’s wording – which currently reads “skate facilities and resources” – so that it’s simply skate resources that are located in the district. In that case a resource like, for example, signage pointing people down Dexter-Ann Arbor Road to the skatepark could conceivably be located in the district, but still support the Veterans Memorial Park location.

Policing the Downtown

How the downtown gets policed was a topic that received discussion at a couple of different points during the meeting.

Policing: Funding Source

The source of the funds identified for Clark’s resolution in support of the skatepark is an as-yet unspent grant for the Washtenaw Livingston Rail (WALLY) project, which has an uncertain future. [At a recent Ann Arbor Transportation Authority retreat, the AATA board identified WALLY as a project they'd like to see start hitting some milestones for achievement.]

Clark has previously identified the unspent WALLY allocation as a funding source for a different initiative – restoration of downtown police patrols. At the May 5, 2010 DDA board meeting, the board remanded a resolution to its partnerships committee on the subject. From previous Chronicle reporting:

At the May 5 DDA board meeting, the board remanded a resolution to the partnerships committee on reserving of funds for a possible contract with the city to provide downtown beat cops. The resolution had been brought to the board by Newcombe Clark via its operations committee.

At the May 12 partnerships committee meeting, Clark said he was content not to press the resolution forward unless there was an attempt to grab the funds for some other purpose. The funds in Clark’s resolution on beat cops would be reallocated in monthly $60,000 increments from the WALLY north-south commuter train project, between Washtenaw and Livingston counties. There is a total of $335,000 reserved in the DDA budget for WALLY.

Policing: Downtown Area Citizens Advisory Council Report

Ray Detter, who chairs the Downtown Area Citizens Advisory Council, reported on that body’s regular meeting, which takes place on the Tuesday evening before the DDA’s first-Wednesday monthly board meeting. The existence of the CAC as a body is stipulated in the state enabling legislation for downtown development authorities.

Detter reported that the previous night’s meeting had included chief of police Barnett Jones, deputy chief John Seto and Ward 1 city councilmember Sabra Briere. He said they’d spent two hours discussing crime, panhandling and the challenges of police in the downtown area, as well as throughout the rest of the city. The discussion had been prompted, Detter said, by the expressed concern of downtown residents about petty street crime and aggressive panhandling being on the rise. Some people are attributing this increase, he said, to the reduction in sidewalk police presence.

One of the CAC members is president of the Sloan Plaza Condominium Association, Detter said, and he’d reported five separate security issues in a one-month period – twice a homeless person had stolen items out of the lobby, a smash-and-grab break-in, as well as homeless people sleeping behind the building.

Detter indicated chief Jones had observed that some of the homeless population are homeless “because they choose to be.” There’s an increase in people sleeping on the street, in parks, under bridges, Detter continued, and Liberty Plaza – an urban park at the corner of Liberty and Division – has become a problem once again.

Detter said that the CAC admired the ability of the police department to cope with the problems of crime in the city. He noted that while crime statistics are going down, arrests are going up. The police force has been reduced from 216 down to 124, he said, and they need help to solve this city-wide problem.

Detter said that Briere had indicated she’d be bringing a resolution to the city council at its Sept. 20 meeting to re-establish a panhandling task force. Detter alluded to the work done from 2001-03 by a previous task force, which had prompted a revision to the city’s panhandling ordinance. The ordinance revision had been due in part to the efforts of Joan Lowenstein, Detter said, who was then a member of the city council.

Detter stated that now we need action again.

The city’s “panhandling ordinance” is not known by that label in the city code. It’s a part of Chapter 108 on disorderly conduct and is covered in the section on solicitation:

9:70. Solicitation.
Except as otherwise provided in Chapters 79 and 81 of this Code, it shall be unlawful for any person to solicit the immediate payment of money or goods from another person, whether or not in exchange for goods, services, or other consideration, under any of the following circumstances:
1. On private property, except as otherwise permitted by Chapters 79 and 81, unless the solicitor has permission from the owner or occupant;
2. In any public transportation vehicle or public transportation facility;
3. In any public parking structure and within 12 feet of any entrance or exit to any public parking structure;
4. From a person who is in any vehicle on the street;
5. By obstructing the free passage of pedestrian or vehicle traffic;
6. Within 12 feet of a bank or automated teller machine;
7. By moving to within 2 feet of the person solicited, unless that person has indicated that he/she wishes to be solicited;
8. By following and continuing to solicit a person who walks away from the solicitor;
9. By knowingly making a false or misleading representation in the course of a solicitation;
10. In a manner that appears likely to cause a reasonable person of ordinary sensibilities to feel intimidated, threatened or harassed;
11. Within 12 feet of the entrance to or exit from the Nickels Arcade, located between State Street and Maynard Street; the Galleria, located between S. University and the Forest Street parking structure; and the Pratt Building, located between Main Street and the Ashley parking lot; or
12. From a person who is a patron at any outdoor cafe or restaurant.

Policing the Downtown: Partnerships Committee Report

Russ Collins reported that the partnerships committee had invited chief of police Barnett Jones and deputy chief John Seto to make a presentation to the committee on the status of policing in the city. Collins noted that there’s a difference between the perception and the statistics of safety. With respect to statistics, Collins said, Ann Arbor is very safe. And from the point of view of perception, he continued, Ann Arbor is also perceived as essentially safe. But he allowed that “young people can act enthusiastically.”

He also said that there was a lot of support for the idea of having downtown police patrols, because the perception of safety can be even more important than the statistics of safety. Collins said that the relative leniency of the panhandling laws in the absence of policing meant that people’s perceptions didn’t necessarily match the statistical reality of safety.

Newcombe Clark noted that when the crime statistics are low, it might take only one or two “bad apples” to skew the numbers higher. At that, Collins quipped, “You’re not talking about Ray [Detter] specifically, though, right?” After the laughter quieted down, Clark continued by saying that a large number of incidents could be the work of one or two individuals.

The other point that Clark highlighted from the police department’s visit to the partnership’s committee CAC was that the police force is good statistically at catching all the perpetrators of major crimes quickly and efficiently – but they feel the pressure to be proactive. Summarizing what the two officers had presented at the meeting, Clark said that an armed robbery might or might not happen, depending on whether they knew there’d be police officers nearby.

The “slippage” at Liberty Plaza, Clark said, could be attributed to the fact that the people who are new to town don’t know the panhandling rule, and those who know it, know that there aren’t beat cops walking around regularly enforcing it. He said it did not undercut the argument for downtown patrols to observe that statistically the Ann Arbor police do a really good job, especially considering that they have 100 fewer officers than they had a few years ago. Clark concluded by saying he didn’t want to let the issue go, simply by saying “the stats are good.”

Collins agreed with Clark’s basic sentiment – we’d all like bicycle patrols and beat cops restored because that provides a very effective message to the citizens and to the “nefarious people.” Safety is not only a statistic, he said, but also a feeling.

Some Chronicle readers may have noticed bicycle-mounted Ann Arbor police officers along Fourth or Fifth Avenue near the Blake Transit Center. The Ann Arbor Transportation Authority contracts for security at the bus station. It’s not part of a general downtown beat patrol.

DDA Finances: Bond Payments, Timelines, Parking Revenue

As part of the operations committee report, Roger Hewitt presented the final unaudited summaries and fund balance sheets for FY 2010, which ended June 30. A point raised by Newcombe Clark was an asterisk next to a line in the TIF Fund Income Statement for the line item indicating “bond payments” for $1,569,605. The footnote reads: “Includes $508,000 for the Police/Court Facility Grant.”

Clark asked that in the future, that amount be reflected instead in the line item for “Grants & Transfers.” The arrangement is that the DDA has committed to grant the city of Ann Arbor the funds to make part of the city’s bond payments for the new police/court facility [aka municipal center]. At the meeting, deputy DDA director Joe Morehouse indicated the duration of the grant to be 25 years.

Also as part of the operations committee report, Hewitt noted that the board packet included a detailed set of milestones, which Village Green – developer of the City Apartments project at First and Washington – needs to hit as part of the purchase option agreement. That agreement was extended by the city council at its Aug. 5 meeting. Clark picked up on the fact that the turnaround time for DDA activities and involvement were all relatively short – in many cases a day. He suggested that the DDA “politely ask” that it be kept in the loop on those matters.

The parking revenue report that is always a part of the operations committee report showed some decreases in monthly numbers, compared year over year. For example, the Maynard structure showed $10,361 less revenue in June 2010 compared to June 2009, with 4,398 fewer hourly patrons using the structure.

             JUNE 2010          JUNE 2009         2010 VS. 2009
          Hourly             Hourly               Hourly
        Revenues  Patrons  Revenues  Patrons    Revenues  Patrons
Maynard $151,538  43,826   $161,900  48,224    ($10,361)  (4,398)

-

A breakdown of art fair parking showed $218,230 in revenues compared to $244,180 for 2009 for a decrease of $25,950 – the weather had been terrible this year, with downpours and tornadoes in the area. Hewitt said that most of the monthly difference for July 2010 – which was $$33,975 or 2.55% less that July a year ago – could be accounted for by the decreased revenues during art fair. Hewitt suggested that the quarterly and annual reports gave a better feel for how things are going than the month-to-month reports.

Changing of the Guard

At the start of the meeting, the board’s new chair, Joan Lowenstein, who was elected at the annual meeting held just after the regular board meeting in July, welcomed the board’s newest member, Bob Guenzel. Guenzel retired as Washtenaw County administrator earlier this year. Lowenstein indicated that Guenzel’s absence was due to a previously planned vacation, but she still welcomed him “in absentia,” quipping, “He doesn’t know about the whole hazing thing, yet.”

Guenzel is replacing Jennifer S. Hall. The board unanimously passed a resolution acknowledging her service, which is the usual pattern and practice of the board. Hall’s period of service included a turn as board chair from 2008-09. The resolution highlighted her commitment to open government:

Whereas, Jennifer Hall encouraged important changes to the DDA’s processes, meetings, and website to foster a strong sense of public openness, accountability and transparency;

That commitment emerged perhaps most publicly when it became clear this past spring that members of the DDA board and the city council had done significant work on re-negotiating the city-DDA parking agreement – work that took place out of public view and outside of the committee structure that both bodies had established to undertake that work.

At the May 5, 2010 DDA board meeting, when the DDA board voted to grant $2 million to the city as a unilateral amendment to the parking agreement, Hall gave a blistering critique of the way the discussions had been conducted out of public view, against the DDA’s commitment to openness and against the specific mandate she’d given – as chair at the time the DDA’s mutually beneficial committee was formed – that the discussions be open and transparent. [For Chronicle coverage of that meeting, see "DDA OKs $2 Million Over Strong Dissent."]

The resolution thanking Hall also highlighted some of the specific projects she’d worked on during her period of service:

Whereas, Jennifer Hall also encouraged a number of signature DDA projects and programs, including approval of the Fifth & Division pedestrian and bicycle improvements project, installation of in-street seasonal bicycle racks and expansion of DDA funding for the getDowntown program and go!passes;

After Lowenstein read the resolution aloud, the board approved it without comment.

Public Comment: Electric Cable

Paul Ganz – DTE Energy regional manager for the counties of Ingham, Jackson, Livingston and most of Washtenaw – told the board he was appearing before the board on a bit of a “whimsy.” In connection with the underground parking garage project along Fifth Avenue, he said, DTE had been working with Susan Pollay, executive director of the DDA, and Adrian Iraola of Park Avenue Consulting, who works with the DDA to help manage projects. [Various utilities have required relocation in connection with the project.]

Paul Ganz of DTE Energy presented board members with their own slice of history – a piece of an underground high-voltage cable that had been replaced as part of the construction of the underground parking garage the DDA is currently building on Fifth Avenue. DDA board member Leah Gunn is in the background.

To provide the board with a historical perspective, he distributed roughly hockey-puck-sized cross-sections of electrical cable, which he said was typical underground high-voltage electric cable – it had been installed 34 years ago, in May 1976.

Ganz noted that the copper wires are wrapped in lead to help protect them. Ordinarily, the cable is recycled, because the metal is valuable, he said. But he felt like it was worth sacrificing a foot or two of the cable, sliced up into pieces, so that board members could keep a piece of it on their desks as a memento. He concluded by thanking the DDA for their cooperation.

Board member John Mouat commented that he liked the “peace sign” that was formed by the insulation around the three separate clusters of copper wire that make up the cable.

Leah Gunn thanked Ganz, saying she’d add the cable slice to her concrete chunks from Fourth & Washington, and pieces of re-bar from First & Washington – a kind of “parking structure memorial.” Russ Collins also thanked DTE for the work involved in relocating the utilities, which had to be coordinated and timed in a crucial way.

Cross section of high-voltage undeground cable presented by Paul Ganz of DTE to DDA board members.

Present: Gary Boren, Newcombe Clark, Roger Hewitt, John Splitt, Sandi Smith, Leah Gunn, Russ Collins, Keith Orr, Joan Lowenstein, John Mouat.

Absent: John Hieftje, Bob Guenzel.

Next board meeting: Noon on Wednesday, Oct. 6, 2010, at the DDA offices, 150 S. Fifth Ave., Suite 301. [confirm date]