At left: Lynn Bowen, an administrative assistant with the city who provides staff support for the park advisory commission, is retiring and was honored at PAC's November meeting. She has worked at the city for 26 years, including the last six years with parks and recreation. To the right are PAC chair Julie Grand and Colin Smith, the city's parks and recreation manager. (Photos by the writer.)

Commissioners were briefed by city staff about annual finances related to the land acquisition for parks and greenbelt programs, which are funded by a 30-year millage. They also got an update on the city’s marketing efforts for parks and recreation, and heard a report on the status of a sustainability project – several PAC commissioners had attended a September joint work session to help prioritize city goals related to environmental quality, economic vitality, and social equity.

Updates were also given about a sediment removal project in the Ruthven Nature Area, and about two parking-related projects at Riverside Park and Veterans Memorial Park.

In his manager’s report, Colin Smith noted that he’d taken a canoe run through the under-construction Argo Dam bypass pools – the new channel was a ”bit sportier” than he had expected, and is still being tweaked. He also told commissioners he’d received word that two state grant applications made by the city of Ann Arbor – $300,000 for the proposed Ann Arbor skatepark at Veterans Memorial Park, and $300,000 for improvements at the Gallup Park canoe livery – had ranked in the top 12 out of 100 applications statewide for funding from the Michigan Natural Resources Trust Fund. That bodes well for the possibility that the grants will be awarded – a decision from the state is expected in December.

During the meeting commissioners also honored two volunteers with the city’s natural area preservation program – Sarah Newman and Drew Lathin – and said farewell to Lynn Bowen, the administrative assistant who works with PAC. The meeting was her last before retiring from the city.

An item not on the agenda – the proposed Fuller Road Station – drew focus from public commentary as well as some questions from commissioners later in the meeting. 

Fuller Road Station

The issue of Fuller Road Station has raised concerns for several members of PAC dating back nearly two years. The large parking structure, bus depot and possible rail station is proposed near the intersection of Fuller Road and Maiden Lane, near the University of Michigan medical campus on city-owned land. The land has been used as a surface parking lot since 1993, leased to the university, but is on property designated as parkland. It’s a joint project of the city of Ann Arbor and UM, but a formal agreement regarding its construction and operation hasn’t yet been finalized.

In June 2010, the commission passed a resolution that asked the city council to make available a complete plan of Fuller Road Station – including any significant proposed agreements, such as what the university will pay the city for use of the structure – allowing sufficient time for a presentation at a televised PAC meeting before the council votes on the project. The resolution also asked that staff and the council ensure the project results in a net revenue gain for the parks system. PAC most recently got a detailed update on the project at its May 2011 meeting. The commission has not formally received word about whether the city council will agree to the requests made in the 2010 resolution.

There was no agenda item for the proposed Fuller Road Station, but the issue came up during public commentary as well as at the end of the meeting, with questions from commissioners.

Fuller Road Station: Public Commentary

Nancy Kaplan told commissioners that she was there to speak about transforming Fuller Park into a Fuller Road parking garage, saying it set many negative, troubling precedents. One precedent is that it’s OK to change a part-time surface parking lot into a parking garage. The fact that it’s a surface lot to accommodate parking for the University of Michigan is being used to justify building a parking garage with up to 1,600 spaces, with an expected structural life of 75 years, she said. This decreases the chances of reclaiming the Huron Valley as a beautiful amenity. Another negative precedent, Kaplan said, is circumventing the expectations of a 2008 ballot initiative passed by Ann Arbor voters, which requires a referendum in order to sell city parkland. This circumvention breaks with the trust of voters, who had a common understanding of what it meant to sell parkland, she said, and although this situation isn’t technically a sale, the result is the same.

A third negative precedent is accepting that the project will move forward without a due process hearing. Aside from the memorandum of understanding, no city council vote on the overall project has been taken. Yet at the Nov. 14 council work session, Kaplan noted, it was stated that a groundbreaking is expected this spring, and that public art is already being planned. Finally, she said the university has embarked on a sustainability initiative, but bringing up to 1,600 cars into the parking garage is counter to sustainability. She pointed out that Stanford University in California doesn’t subsidize employee parking, as UM does. Instead, as part of its reward system, Stanford pays employees not to park, and offers bus passes and free shuttles. The side benefit is that Stanford doesn’t have to build a lot of parking garages. Kaplan said that hopefully these negative precedents, plus the model of Stanford, are issues to be considered seriously.

Rita Mitchell continued the topic of Fuller Road Station. She began by noting that she’s a steward for the city’s natural area preservation (NAP) program, and takes great interest in parks. She said she appreciated PAC’s work. She asked that commissioners discuss and forward a series of questions to city council, to be reviewed in public, regarding plans to build a parking structure in Fuller Park. She gave a brief history of the property, noting that it was acquired by the city in the 1920s for use as parkland, and was the city’s first golf course. Starting in 1993, it was temporarily leased to UM for parking, and many problems have stemmed from that use. It’s already an area of great traffic congestion, and adding up to 1,600 more cars will create a range of problems, including air pollution, more polluted runoff, and conflicts with pedestrians, buses and bicyclists. Air pollution and health risks will increase in the summer for people, including children, who use Fuller Pool, located across the street, Mitchell said.

The city has spent significant money already, without discussing with the public whether parkland should be repurposed in this way, Mitchell said. She asked that PAC advise the city council to hold a public hearing on the issue, at a time that’s not influenced heavily by upcoming holiday schedules, so that the community can express their concerns. She noted that the council’s Nov. 14 work session had included discussion of art for the structure, and called it “outrageous” that this discussion would happen for a project that hasn’t yet been approved. The university is the primary beneficiary for this project, but the public doesn’t know who is negotiating with the university on this project. “Do you, as commissioners?” she asked. PAC should ask council to be provided with the names of those negotiating, and the specifications of the negotiations. Repurposing parkland subverts the letter and intent of the 2008 ballot initiative that requires a voter referendum on the sale of parkland, she said. The structure would have a 75-year lifespan, and 75 years for use of land is in effect a sale. But there’s been no discussion of a fair market value, or compensation to the citizens or parks system for the use of the land.

Mitchell also said she’s heard about the possible transfer of the Amtrak station to that site. While rail travel is a great idea, she said, there are also a range of concerns. Is it in the best interests of the city to build and run a train station? Should it be placed on parkland? If Ann Arbor is just one commuter stop, why do we need a 1,600-space parking structure? There hasn’t been adequate public discussion on this issue, Mitchell said. In addition, this summer a major water and sewer line were moved in Fuller Park – had that been discussed with PAC? Is the sign that’s now missing from the south end of Fuller Park a silent indication that the land is no longer part of the park system? Park commissioners are stewards of all city parks, Mitchell said. She urged them to start asking pointed questions and advocate for greater public participation in decisions that relate to parkland.

Fuller Road Station: Commissioner Questions

Later in the meeting, Gwen Nystuen asked city staff a series of questions about the Fuller Road Station project. She wondered about the legal status of the city’s parks, and how that relates to the project. She asked about the site plan for Fuller Road Station – if council approves the project, would it constitute a change of land use, and no longer be part of the parks system? These are issues that have never been discussed by city council, she noted. The land is part of the central Huron River valley, an area that has some of the least parkland per capita in the city, she said. This project would reduce it even more, she said, so it’s of concern to PAC. She also wondered about the status of the soccer field that had been in that area.

Colin Smith, the city’s parks and recreation manager, said these are legitimate questions. He asked Nystuen and other commissioners to send him whatever questions they had, and he would forward the questions to the city attorney or other relevant staff. He said the soccer field will be put in place again after utility work is finished on the south side of Fuller Road.

Tim Berla suggested asking representatives from the city attorney’s office, systems planning unit and Eli Cooper, the city’s transportation program manager, to attend a future PAC meeting to discuss the Fuller Road Station project. He noted that sometimes their answers are a bit opaque, and that it’s better to have the chance to ask follow-up questions in person, rather than to just get their answers in writing.

Open Space Millage Update

Ginny Trocchio of The Conservation Fund briefed commissioners on the annual financial report related to the land acquisition for parks and greenbelt programs. [A similar update was given to the greenbelt advisory commission by Kelli Martin, financial manager for the city’s community services unit, at GAC's Sept. 14 meeting.] [.pdf of land preservation annual report]

Under contract with the city, Trocchio is a Conservation Fund staff member who helps administer the city’s greenbelt program and land acquisition program for parks, which are both funded by the 30-year open space and parkland preservation millage. The 0.5 mill tax was approved by voters in 2003. Two-thirds of the millage proceeds are used for the greenbelt program, and one-third is allotted to parkland acquisition. PAC oversees the portion related to parkland acquisition.

Revenues from the millage were $2.164 million in fiscal 2011, down slightly from $2.262 million the previous year. In addition, the greenbelt program brought in nearly $2.8 million in federal grants during the year – the highest amount it has ever received. Those grants are from the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Farm and Ranchland Protection Program, or FRPP. Investment income was $233,614 for the year, down from $492,576 in FY 2010. In total, $5.185 million in revenues came in for the combined greenbelt and parks acquisitions programs in FY 2011.

On the expense side, items included $1.2 million in debt service on the $20 million bond that the city issued in FY 2006. The greenbelt program spent $8.3 million during the year, related to land preservation projects. Parks spent $985,900 during the year, including two major purchases: (1) $592,503 for property off of South Pond owned by Wes Vivian and Elizabeth Kauffman, and (2) $369,160 for property next to the Bluffs Nature Area, owned by the Elks.

In FY 2011, $120,338 was paid to The Conservation Fund, which manages the greenbelt and park acquisition programs. Total administrative costs – including items like information technology (IT) and bond insurance – were $161,195. Administrative expenses accounted for 1.5% of the $10.672 million in total expenditures.

The fund balance stands at $10.3 million, down from $15.79 million a year ago. Of that, the portion for land acquisition for parks is $4.24 million.

Commissioners had no questions for Trocchio about the report.

Promoting Parks and Recreation

Kimberly Mortson, communications liaison for the city of Ann Arbor, gave a presentation on communications, marketing and social media for the parks and recreation system. She said that although she also does some work for other parts of the city’s community services area, 95% of her efforts are for parks and recreation.

Mortson noted that she started using Facebook and Twitter to promote city programs and events about two years ago. One of the advantages is that she can post a message one time, but there are an infinite number of people who’ll see it – and it doesn’t impact her budget, because Facebook and Twitter are free services. There’s a general Facebook page for parks and recreation, and other pages for specific units of parks and recreation, like the Ann Arbor farmers market, Cobblestone Farm and canoe liveries, among others

Twitter page for Ann Arbor parks. (Links to Twitter)

On Twitter, the @a2parks account has over 1,800 followers, Mortson reported. Over the past year, staff has tweeted from events, like the re-opening of West Park after its renovations, or the Heisman Trophy appearance at Hanover Park. They also use the account to promote other activities and programs.

Parks and recreation has also started using FourSquare, a social networking website that allows users to “check in” from their smart phones or other mobile devices, when they arrive at their destination. Mortson said she’s uploaded all the city’s parks and recreation locations to FourSquare – it’s another free marketing tool, she said.

Turning to the city’s website, Mortson told commissioners that the parks and recreation page is one of the most visited pages on the a2gov.org site. There will be changes to the page in the coming weeks and months, she said, to help people use the site more easily. Staff is also working with the state of Michigan on a new mobile application – the MI Camping and Recreation Locator. Now, people can use the application to search for information about state parks, she said. Ann Arbor will be the first city in the state to have its information loaded on that application, so that people can search for Ann Arbor parks information, too.

Some marketing materials for parks and recreation include QR codes, Mortson said – a marking similar to a bar code, which can be read by smart phones. The code is used to direct people to different websites for parks and recreation.

In addition to cost savings, social media and other online marketing is green, Mortson said – it saves paper.

Mortson said the city also advertises parks and recreation events and programs in traditional media, and showed several examples of ads that have run in the Ann Arbor Observer, Ann Arbor Chronicle, AnnArbor.com and other publications. Other venues for promoting parks and recreation include ads on buses and posters within city facilities.

Following Mortson’s presentation, Gwen Nystuen praised her efforts, saying the information showed that her marketing work is succeeding. Colin Smith, the city’s parks and recreation manager, noted that the programs are being well-run, and are being promoted exceedingly well. He gave the example of this summer’s day camps. In an extremely competitive area, two of the city’s four day camps were filled. Smith credited Mortson’s marketing efforts for helping achieve that level of participation.

Sustainability Project

Jamie Kidwell is working for the city on a sustainability project funded by a $95,000 grant the city received from the Home Depot Foundation. At the Nov. 15 meeting, she briefed commissioners on a Sept. 27, 2011 joint working session that involved four city commissions: park, planning, energy and environmental. The session focused on prioritizing existing goals for the city that touch on sustainability issues.

A Sept. 27, 2011 sustainability work session at Cobblestone Farm involved four city commissions: park, planning, energy and environmental.

By way of background, the concept of sustainability focuses on what’s called the triple bottom line: environmental quality, economic vitality, and social equity. The goal of the sustainability project for Ann Arbor is to review the city’s existing plans and organize them into a framework of goals, objectives and indicators that can guide future planning and policy. Other project goals include improving access to the city’s plans and to the sustainability components of each plan, and to incorporate the concept of sustainability into city planning and future city plans.

There’s an 18-month timeline for the project, which started earlier this year. For the first phase, Kidwell reviewed existing city plans – such as the downtown plan, the non-motorized transportation plan, the natural features master plan and others – and interviewed key city staff to determine which plans they use to guide their decision-making. Included in this project are 26 plans, and the second phase has involved organizing the goals for each plan. [.pdf of the list of 26 plans]

Kidwell and other city staff started to develop a framework for these plans, and to identify gaps that exist – goals that the city might want to pursue, but that aren’t laid out in existing plans.

At November’s regular PAC meeting, Kidwell characterized PAC as well-represented among the 26 commissioners at the three-hour sustainability session on Sept. 27. [Among the PAC members attending were Julie Grand, Tim Berla, Tim Doyle, Gwen Nystuen, Sam Offen, and John Lawter.]

Kidwell explained that the staff had identified four planning areas – climate & energy, community, land use & access, and natural systems. During the work session, commissioners met in breakout groups and started to prioritize the 226 goals that staff had pulled out from the city’s 26 planning documents and sorted into the four planning areas.

Kidwell provided a handout that listed the top goals identified at the work session in each planning area:

Climate & Energy

(1) Reduce community-wide greenhouse gas emissions 8% from 2000 levels by 2015.

(2) Commit to energy conservation measures and methods.

(3) Reduce greenhouse gas emissions in municipal operations 50% from 200 levels by 2015.

(4) Use 5% renewable energy community-wide by 2015.

Community

(1) To encourage cooperation between the City educational institutions and between the City and Townships that surround Ann Arbor (Ann Arbor, Pittsfield and Scio) on development issues that affect each other.

(2) Provide job opportunities, raise the standard of living of county residents, promote a sense of place and realize a tax base sufficient to provide public services through a comprehensive set of public and private strategies to foster and attract emerging industries.

Land Use & Access

(1) Encourage dense land use and development patterns which draw people downtown and foster an active street life, contribute to its function as an urban residential neighborhood and support a sustainable transportation system

(2) Establish a network of greenways throughout the City that provide non-motorized connections between various land uses, such as neighborhoods, commercial and employment centers, downtown and the University of Michigan, and that help retain the shape and continuity of natural features, especially along stream corridors, between parks and through new neighborhoods. The network also should extend to greenways located on adjacent township and County properties.

Natural Systems

(1) To protect and restore woodlands, landmark trees, steep slopes, endangered species habitats, prairies and savannahs, the Huron River, creeks and native flora and fauna from the impacts of development.

(2) To improve air quality to protect the health and welfare of the public

(3) Develop, complete and regularly update watershed plans for the City’s tributary waterways to improve water quality and to restore and preserve, waterways, banks, wetlands, floodplains, wildlife habits, native species and natural areas. Plans should include techniques to dramatically reduce the volume and speed of storm water runoff, increase water directed to infiltrate soil, and reduce the volume of toxics and pollutants reaching waterways.

(4) To protect, preserve and restore the natural resources of Washtenaw County through a comprehensive approach to water management and preservation of our natural features.

The 226 goals had been an exhaustive list, Kidwell said, with overlapping goals on a range of topics. The priority goals identified at the working session are a starting point, she said, providing feedback as the staff continues to refine what goals will fit into a sustainability framework.

Among the next steps, Kidwell said, will be to form a joint committee with representatives from each of the four commissions, to continue work on this project. There will also be a lecture series starting in January featuring issues in the four planning areas. Those lectures will be free and open to the public. At the same time, work will continue on developing a sustainability action plan, tying goals to measurable targets, Kidwell said.

Julie Grand, PAC’s chair, reported that she and Karen Levin will serve on the joint committee, representing PAC.

Parking Lot Improvements

Park planner Amy Kuras and Liz Rolla, a city engineer who primarily works on road resurfacing and reconstruction projects, talked about two parking lot improvement projects – at Riverside Park and Veterans Memorial Park.

Kuras said the projects represent a collaboration between the parks and public services units. At Riverside, the current parking lot is frequently under water, so Kuras was planning to address that issue as well as make other changes at the park. [For details, see Chronicle coverage: "Work Planned at Ann Arbor's Riverside Park"]

Sketch of proposed changes to Riverside Park. (Links to larger image)

Canal Street, a city street runs next to the park, also needs repair, so Kuras approached the public services staff to coordinate their work. The parking lot will be moved to a different part of the park – out of the floodplain – and Canal Street will be repaved.

Tim Berla noted that the path at Riverside, running next to the Huron River, is also frequently under water. Will the project address that too? Short of creating an elevated boardwalk, Kuras said, there’s nothing they could do to prevent flooding, given the path’s proximity to the river.

The second project involves the repaving of Dexter Avenue, which runs past Veterans Memorial Park. The road repaving needs to address stormwater issues, while the parks staff is concerned about the park’s path and parking lot, which are falling apart, Kuras said.

Rolla said the road will be reconstructed from Maple to Jackson. Typically, the requirement to capture stormwater runoff is handled through underground oversized pipes and swirl concentrators. But since the road runs past the park, the staff is looking at handling runoff with a bioswale in the park, which would include native plantings. There are federal dollars to pay for stormwater improvements, which will cover about 80% of the project’s cost, Rolla said.

Kuras said benefits include rebuilding the path that runs along Dexter Avenue, and reducing the parking lot’s footprint, though the number of parking spaces will remain unchanged. It’s a better environmental solution, she said, because of the bioswale.

Colin Smith, the city’s parks and recreation manager, said it’s good timing, since the city plans to renovate the softball fields there in 2012. The field renovation will likely start in mid-August, after the softball leagues finish their season.

Gwen Nystuen asked whether the parking lot would be paved with a pervious surface. No, Rolla replied. It’s too wet in that area for pervious pavement. Instead, the lot will be graded so that runoff will drain into the bioswale.

Karen Levin asked whether the park would be closed during this project. The section off of Dexter Avenue will probably be closed for some period, Kuras said, but the ice rink and pool – with an entrance off of Jackson Road – won’t be affected. Rolla added that the Dexter Avenue project will likely run from April through November, but they’ll leave it up to the contractor to decide when to do the parking lot and bioswale part of the project.

Aerial view of the site for the proposed bioswale at Veterans Memorial Park. The road at the top is Dexter Avenue. (Image links to larger file.)

John Lawter asked whether the bioswale will have standing water. There might be some minimal amount of standing water as the plants take hold, Rolla said, but the bioswale will be designed so that water will infiltrate. It’s similar to the bioswale at Buhr Park, she said. There will also be outlets leading to the city’s conventional storm sewer system, she added, in the event of a major rain.

Tim Doyle asked how much maintenance will be required in the bioswale. Rolla replied that the city will have an agreement with the contractor, who will provide maintenance in the area for three years. After that, the plantings should be established and it will be treated as a wet meadow by the city’s natural area preservation program. Smith noted that currently, the area proposed for a bioswale is included in the park’s mowing cycles. That maintenance would eventually be eliminated.

Julie Grand wondered what will happen if balls get hit into the bioswale – how are they retrieved? Smith said it’s a rare day when any balls are hit into the area proposed for the bioswale. Nor is it an area that’s typically used for team warm-ups. “It is really pretty much a dead space,” he said.

Grand also noted that the new parking lot will be closer to the playing fields. Is there more potential for balls to hit the cars? Rolla said it’s proposed to be moved only slightly closer to the fields. Kuras added that the location was discussed at length, and indicated that there’s little concern about the change.

Ruthven Nature Area

Lara Treemore Spears of the city’s natural area preservation (NAP) program updated commissioners on a wetland mitigation sediment removal project at the Ruthven Nature Area. The project involves removing sediment from Millers Creek, which flows through Ruthven, and repairing stream bank erosion that occurred when the creek bypassed its channel because of a sediment dam.

Like many streams in urban areas, Spears said, Millers Creek is surrounded by impervious surfaces. That creates runoff and sediment flowing into the creek, and over the years, has caused the creek to completely change its course.

The city risks losing some of its infrastructure along Huron River Drive and Geddes Road, Spears said – specifically, there’s the risk of damage to an undersized 24‐inch culvert under Geddes, which was not designed to receive the full volume of Millers Creek and could result in road flooding. Removing the sediment would redirect stormwater flow to a former open channel running through the wetlands at Ruthven, and into a larger 60-inch culvert under Geddes. It’s not an area that’s designated as a county drain, she noted, so it doesn’t fall under the purview of the county water resources commissioner’s office.

It’s best to remove the sediment when the ground is frozen, Spears said, so the work will likely begin in January. It will require some clearing, she said, but not nearly as much as has been done along Washtenaw Avenue for the county’s Mallets Creek drain project. The stream bank will be shored up with rock and restored with topsoil, mulch blanket, and native plant seed.

The city has submitted an application for a permit from the Michigan Dept. of Environmental Quality to do the work, and is awaiting review.

The ultimate goal, Spears said, is to reduce erosion. The city’s capital improvements plan (CIP) includes a sediment study of Millers Creek, to see if better long-term solutions can be found for preventing erosion.

Gwen Nystuen noted that there are a lot of  invasive species in Ruthven. She also wondered if the city had any plans to put in more trails through the nature area. There’s a trail with an entrance off of Geddes Road. But Spears noted that for a path off of Huron Parkway, after the first 325 feet it gets quite wet. There is one high quality area – a glacial kame, a hill created by glacial deposits. But most of the runoff flows straight south through a buckthorn thicket, she said – buckthorn is considered an invasive.

Tim Berla asked for Spears to give her best guess as to how long it would be before they’d have to repeat this work. Spears acknowledged that the problem comes from upstream, in an area that the city doesn’t control, and that erosion is aggravated by the surrounding impervious surfaces of roads and other development. Berla asked if there are any additional measures that can be taken, like adding underground swirl concentrators – devices designed to remove suspended solids from stormwater prior to reintroducing it into the city’s stormwater system. Spears said a long-term sediment study of the creek would look at those kinds of potential solutions.

Manager’s Report

Colin Smith, the city’s parks and recreation manager, updated commissioners on a range of items, starting with plans to renovate the city’s softball fields at Veterans Memorial Park, West Park, Southeast Area Park and Allmendinger Park. It’s analogous to the work already done at the soccer fields, he said. The idea is to bring the fields up to an acceptable level of play. Staff will be presenting a budget for the project to PAC at its December meeting. Smith and other staff had held a public meeting on the project earlier this month, which was attended primarily by managers of various leagues that use the fields. Smith reported that they seemed happy to see the project get underway.

Manager’s Report: Argo Bypass

Smith also noted that earlier in the month he had gone canoeing to test the new Argo Dam bypass, even though it had been snowing at the time. The design team is still tweaking the series of pools that make up the channel, and Smith described the stretch as a “bit sportier” than he had expected. It’s exciting to see that project come together, he said. Smith reported that the city council would be voting on a proposed change of scope to the project, which PAC had recommended at its August meeting.

View facing west of the first two pools in the Argo Dam bypass. The concrete pass-through at the far end will be replaced by a new, larger entrance.

The change will add a new entrance to the waterway from Argo Pond to the Huron River. The modification to the project is linked to an offer from DTE to pay for a whitewater section that’s part of the overall project, which freed up city funds for a new entrance from Argo Pond into the bypass. DTE is being required by the state to complete environmental remediation on its nearby property, which prompted its request that the city hold off on the part of the project that runs along the river.

Smith said the city’s agreement with DTE stipulates that the energy firm will hire the same consultant who designed the bypass – Gary Lacy – to design the whitewater features. TSP Environmental, which is building the bypass, will build the new entrance. [The city council subsequently voted to approve the change of scope at its Nov. 21 meeting.]

Tim Doyle wondered whether the change of scope will delay other aspects of the project. Only the whitewater features, which will be located in the river, will be delayed, Smith said. The bypass and new entry will move forward. It will likely be at least another year before the whitewater features are added, he said.

Manager’s Report: Update on Skatepark, Gallup Livery Grants

Smith reported that two state grant applications made by the city of Ann Arbor – $300,000 for the proposed Ann Arbor skatepark at Veterans Memorial Park, and $300,000 for improvements at the Gallup Park canoe livery – ranked in the top 12 out of 100 applications statewide for funding from the Michigan Natural Resources Trust Fund. Smith told PAC members that he received the application scores in the mail earlier in the day.

The skatepark application ranked 12th out of the 100 applications, based on a scoring system used to evaluate the grants. The Gallup Park application ranked 2nd. Smith also reported that a $300,000 grant application for Rutherford Pool in Ypsilanti had ranked 11th in the scoring system. The scoring is an indication of the likelihood that these grants will be awarded, but that announcement won’t be made until Dec. 7, Smith said. It’s also unknown how much money will be awarded this year from the trust fund. He told commissioners that the top 12 grant applications total $2.7 million. There’s a cap of $300,000 per project.

At its March 15, 2011 meeting, PAC had voted to recommend supporting the grant applications. The city council made a similar vote of support on March 21. The council’s resolution of support prioritized the skatepark project over the Gallup renovations – based on the opportunity to leverage $400,000 of matching funds from the Washtenaw County parks and recreation commission.

NAP Volunteers Honored

Toward the beginning of the Nov. 15 meeting, Dave Borneman, manager of the city’s natural area preservation program, introduced two volunteers – Sarah Newman and Drew Lathin – who had been honored in October by the city council as NAP Volunteers of the Year. Newman was recognized for work in the Miller Nature Area and Furstenberg Nature Area. Lathin was honored for work in the Miller Nature Area, as well as for volunteering for NAP’s burn crew and its frog and toad surveys. Borneman read the proclamations that had been given to the two volunteers at the Oct. 26 council meeting, and PAC gave them a round of applause.

Newman thanked commissioners, as well as the staff of NAP, for all their work. She described Furstenberg and Miller as areas that are at the opposite ends of the spectrum. Furstenberg is a gem in the parks system, located along the Huron River and constantly maintained by NAP. Miller, on the other hand, is a large but relatively unknown neighborhood park on the west side that’s full of invasive species.

Her time most recently has been spent at Miller, and her role has been to encourage neighbors to get involved, she said, including work with kids in Peace Neighborhood Center‘s summer day camp, helping them to learn about what a nature area is and to help preserve the trails. “It’s a privilege and pleasure to work with the dedicated, intelligent and super hard-working group that Dave heads,” Newman said.

Dave Borneman, center, head of the city's natural area preservation program, introduced two NAP Volunteers of the year: Drew Lathin and Sarah Newman.

Lathin said it was an honor to be honored, but that he and Newman wouldn’t have gotten much done in Miller Nature Area without the hundreds of hours that other volunteers worked. They’ve had close to 1,000 volunteer hours there since they started working on about a one-acre section of the park.

He said his work at Miller started one winter day when he was walking through and saw all the invasive honeysuckle and buckthorn there. In a moment of insanity, he said, he decided to do something about it. Borneman directed him to Jason Frenzel, who was NAP’s volunteer coordinator at the time. Lathin said he’s happy he has mental health benefits as part of his insurance, because he thinks they’re called for. He praised NAP staff under Borneman’s leadership, saying they aren’t typical government employees – they’re very committed to what they’re doing, and they do great work. Lathin said he’s just the tip of the iceberg, in terms of the volunteers who work for NAP.

Present: Tim Berla, Doug Chapman, Tim Doyle, Julie Grand, Karen Levin, Gwen Nystuen, John Lawter, councilmember Mike Anglin (ex-officio). Also Colin Smith, city parks manager.

Absent: David Barrett, Sam Offen, councilmember Christopher Taylor (ex-officio).

Next meeting: PAC’s meeting on Tuesday, Dec. 20, 2011 begins at 4 p.m. in the city hall second-floor council chambers, 301 E. Huron St., Ann Arbor. [confirm date]

The Chronicle survives in part through regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the Ann Arbor park advisory commission. If you’re already supporting The Chronicle, please encourage your friends, neighbors and coworkers to do the same. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle.

Before the meeting, park advisory commissioner John Lawter receives the final draft of the PROS plan from park planner Amy Kuras. Looking on is commissioner Gwen Nystuen. (Photos by the writer.)

Before approving the plan, the commission heard public commentary on the issue, as well as an update from park planner Amy Kuras about how some concerns had been addressed in revisions to earlier drafts. Later in the evening, the city’s planning commission also signed off on the plan. The PROS plan is set to come before the city council on March 7.

Heard during public commentary was criticism of the PROS plan for language it contains describing public-private partnerships for park services. One example of a potential partnership arose later in the meeting, when parks and recreation deputy manager Jeff Straw outlined a request for proposals, currently in draft form, that would explore interest from vendors in providing food concessions at park facilities.

The commission also approved a recommendation to raise fees slightly at the city’s golf courses for some items. Consideration of the fee increase came prior to the year’s regular budget decisions, so that the city council can consider and give final approval to the fee increases before the city’s golf courses open for play in the spring.

Also at the meeting, parks and recreation manager Colin Smith reviewed the parks budget presentation that had been made at a Jan. 31, 2011 city council work session. Smith also gave commissioners an update on two items concerning Argo Dam. He described how intake lines for a well that’s used for measuring water levels in the pond – so that the dam gates can regulate that level – had become clogged, and had ultimately required hiring a diver to unclog one of them.

The second Argo-related item was an update on the planned bypass channel which was recommended by the city’s park advisory commission and approved by the city council last year. Insurance issues are still being worked out with the contractor, Smith said, and construction will not start as early has had been hoped. Construction is not expected to be complete before the end of the construction season – in November.

Commissioners also agreed that before the city council approves the operating agreement between the city and the University of Michigan for the planned Fuller Road Station, they would like an opportunity to review that agreement.

At the meeting, commissioners also heard about a setback in a construction project that’s already nearing completion – renovations to the drainage system in West Park. Eight swirl concentrators were installed as a part of the project – four near the north Seventh Street entrance and four near the south entrance on Seventh. Craig Hupy, head of systems planning for the city, reported that four out of the eight swirl concentrators were in some state of failure, and that one of the four had experienced a catastrophic failure. The other four are also suspected to have problems.

West Park Swirl Concentrators: Catastrophic Failure

During the 2010 construction season, the city undertook major renovations to the drain system in West Park. Craig Hupy, head of systems planning for the city, seemed glum as he gave an update to park commissioners about a setback in the work. Most of the work in the park is complete, he said. The work around the park amenities, like the play area and the bandshell, is complete. The plantings for the wetland basins are not yet done, because spring is a better time to set them out.

View looking northeast from Seventh Street at the edge of West Park: site of the failed swirl concentrator. The backhoe had departed by the time this photograph was taken.

He began the discouraging part of the report by describing how there is currently a big yellow backhoe at the northwest end of the park on Seventh Street. The presence of the backhoe, he said, was due to a “catastrophic failure” in the new stormwater infrastructure that had been installed. During the construction work in the park, Hupy said, changes were made to the drain system. Eight swirl concentrator units – which help remove solids in the stormwater stream – had been installed as part of the drain system improvements, he explained. Four units were installed near the north Seventh Street entrance of the park and four units were installed near the south entrance on Seventh.

He told commissioners that one of the units on the north end had failed catastrophically and that the three other units on the north end were in some state of failure. They also suspect that the four units on the south end may be suffering similar failures. It’s not clear what caused the failure, Hupy said – the city has used such units at various other locations around the city. There are lawyers and engineers involved, he said, so there’s not yet any public statement that’s available.

Hupy also described how during heavy rains last year, the side of Seventh Street opposite the park had experienced a backup of water. It’s not completely clear, he said, whether the water backup was due to the construction configuration, or if it was due to changes in the park drainage system. The intent of the project, Hupy said, was of course to improve the drainage, not make it worse.

The use of the park amenities like the bandshell or the play area, he said, should not be affected by the work that will be required to put the swirl concentrators back in working order. They’d need to be dug up and rehabbed or replaced. Hupy indicated that the city hoped to be able to use the same source of funds that had paid for the project – a combination of federal stimulus and revolving loan – to effect the repairs.

Commissioner Tim Berla asked what exactly “failure” meant. Hupy told him the unit simply collapsed – nobody was hurt, though. Sam Offen wanted to know how long the repair would take – weeks or months? Hupy estimated that it would take until the end of the construction season – November.

Commission chair Julie Grand wanted to know what the implications for flooding are, with the swirl concentrators out of commission. Hupy explained that the walls directing water into the concentrators have been removed. The stormwater flow into the grates in Seventh Street was converted to overland flow through the park as a part of the project, he continued, so that should give an improvement in the stormwater management.

PROS Plan

The Parks and Recreation Open Space (PROS) plan, which provides an inventory, needs assessment and action plan for the city’s parks system, is updated every five years. The updated document is required by the state in order for the city to be eligible to apply for certain grants. The process – led by park planner Amy Kuras – began in late 2009. The city’s park advisory commission was scheduled to vote on the plan at its Jan. 18, 2011 meeting, but that vote was postponed, because the time for public input had been set to last through Jan. 24.

PROS Plan: Public Comment

Dorothy Nordness led off public commentary by citing three areas of disappointment with the draft PROS plan. First, she cited a lack of commitment to a downtown greenway in the plan. It’s important to think well into the future, she said, not just about how to get through the next year or two. She said she grew up in Minneapolis, where planners had thought ahead and the city had developed a park system that led people to love it at first sight. She challenged Ann Arbor to do the same. Her second criticism was that Ann Arbor settles for parks without a special designation as “parkland” with accompanying protective language preventing sale or lease of the land. The general “public land” designation used by the city is not sufficient to prevent the altered use of parkland. She gave as an example the Fuller Road Station site, which she called “under siege.”

As her time elapsed, Nordness addressed the language in the plan dealing with public-private partnerships, saying that any such partnerships needed to have periodic evaluation. [.pdf of remarks by Nordness]

PROS Plan: Staff, Commissioner Comment – Public-Private

Park planner Amy Kuras summarized for commissioners a series of revisions she’d made to the plan since they’d seen it at their January meeting. Highlights included:

• Section I: open space inventory now includes non-city open space; language about the city’s transportation plans and its open space millage has been added.
• Section II: language has been added to include relationships between the parks system and independent nonprofits like Leslie Science and Nature Center.
• Section III: information about the FY 2011 budget has been moved to an appendix; information on budget trends has been added.
• Section IV: references to the “drain commissioner” have been updated to “water resources commissioner;” the font size for maps had been increased; the fact that Narrow Gauge is a nature area has been made clear; the relationship between Dicken Woods and the schools has been made clear.
• Section V: language has been added about how park acquisition standards are developed; the section on downtown parks has been expanded; information on the city’s parkland charter amendment has been added; a map showing just the greenbelt boundary area has been replaced with one showing the specific properties protected by investments from the greenbelt millage.
• Section VI: projects that are now known will be completed are described that way (like the Argo Dam bypass channel); a section on public-private partnerships has been added, which includes language about evaluating the risks of such partnerships.
• Section VIII: a section about the greenway has been added, but no map has been included, because it’s not yet a part of any of the city’s master plans.

When Kuras finished ticking through the revisions, commissioner Tim Doyle wanted to know what the next step is. Kuras explained that later that day the planning commission would vote on the plan. Then it would be forwarded to the city council for their consideration on March 7. In connection with grant applications, the state’s deadline for final approval of the PROS plan, Kuras said, is actually March 1. She’s received an extension from the state, and later that evening she’d be FedEx-ing the plan to the state office, with a note saying that it is stilling pending approval by the city council.

The city will still be inside a different deadline for expiration of the current plan, which is April 1, Kuras explained.

Commissioner Gwen Nystuen wanted to know if there were any grants the city wanted to apply for that could be affected by not having the PROS plan approved. Yes, said Kuras, giving the Gallup Park canoe livery and a skatepark proposal as examples.

Mike Anglin, one of two city council ex-officio members of PAC, expressed concern about the exploration of public-private partnerships mentioned in the plan. Any RFP that would include divestment by the city in its parks should include input from PAC, he said. Anglin alluded to the RFP for the privatization of Huron Hills golf operations as an example of inadequate input from the public and PAC.

Kuras clarified that the added language she’d mentioned about public-private partnerships simply reflected the feedback from the planning commission for the section of the PROS plan that summarizes their input as a focus group. That section reads:

4) Staff should explore all opportunities to generate revenue, including public/private partnerships. A balanced view must include all possible risks inherent with acceptance of private funding.

Colin Smith stressed that inclusion of the concept of public-private partnerships is not new to the revised version of the PROS plan that PAC was being asked to consider. It’s been included in previous versions, and it’s also been emphasized that the risks must be balanced with the benefits.

Mike Anglin, an Ann Arbor city councilmember representing Ward 5 who also serves as an ex-officio member of the park advisory commission.

Smith addressed Anglin’s specific complaint about the RFP for Huron Hills golf operations by pointing out that the proposal had been discussed by the city’s golf task force and also by PAC itself. It had been a very public process, Smith said, and feedback from the public had been incorporated into the RFP.

The idea, said Smith, is that the city needs to look at opportunities for public-private partnerships, which is not to say that the city must take every one of those opportunities.

Commission chair Julie Grand also took exception to Anglin’s description of the Huron Hills RFP process, saying that she’d been present on the golf task force representing PAC for the RFP discussions, and had represented PAC at the interview with Miles of Golf, a local business that had responded to the RFP. She concluded that the Huron Hills RFP illustrated well that the city had weighed the risks and the benefits – the city ultimately rejected the Miles of Golf proposal.

Smith then gave various examples of public-private partnerships in the park and recreation system. Bryant Community Center and Leslie Science and Nature Center are operated by independent nonprofits, he said. The city’s recent promotion with Stonyfield Farm yogurt is another example, he said, as well as Zingerman’s products sold at Gallup canoe livery.

Gwen Nystuen said she thought Anglin’s point was important. She’d heard comments that the inclusion of public-private partnerships in the PROS plan made it sound like there was pressure to make money from the parks. Proposals like parking cars at Allmendinger and Frisinger parks on football Saturdays and the Huron Hills RFP were different from smaller, less permanent issues like concessions in the parks. She was concerned that permanent changes be treated differently from more minor decisions. Nystuen felt that PAC should have been more involved in the Huron Hills RFP than they were.

Smith responded to Nystuen by saying that the reality of the city’s situation is that it’s in a hard spot. They need to ask the question about whether to have a public-private partnership – even though they might answer, “No.” They need to look under every rock, he concluded.

Commissioner Tim Berla gave the city’s farmers market as another example of a public-private partnership. He noted that there had been a lot of upheaval in the community about the Huron Hills proposal, but in the end, nothing happened. It’s always important to weigh whether a proposal is good for the community or rather is simply good for some business. That could be done, he felt, without trying to impose a lot of rules for how public-private partnerships had to operate. The important thing is to make sure everything in the decision-making process is transparent, he said. He said the Huron Hills proposal showed that they’re doing a good job of that.

The discussion on the PROS plan concluded with a clarification from Smith, in response to some questions from Nystuen, about some budget information included in the plan. Administrative costs are not included in the costs of operating individual facilities, he explained.

Outcome: The park advisory commission voted unanimously to recommend adoption of the PROS plan.

Golf Course Fees

Before the commission was a recommendation to raise certain fees at the city’s golf courses. Power golf cart rentals for 9 holes at Leslie Park and Huron Hills would increase from $7 to $8; for 18 holes, the rental fee would increase from $13 to $14. City staff estimate the increases would generate $25,000 in additional revenue per season.

Weekend fees for 9 and 18 holes at Leslie Park golf course would increase by $2 and $1, respectively, and the twilight fee would increase to $16, up from $15. These increases would generate an estimated additional $12,500 in revenue per season. In addition, the commission approved raising the senior citizen qualification age to 59 for the 2011 season. That’s part of a consultant’s proposal to incrementally increase the qualification age from 55 to 62 by adding one year to the minimum age annually.

By way of introducing the proposed fee increases, Colin Smith told commissioners that the idea was to make sure that fees are still in line with other courses in the area. The fee increase for 18 holes of golf on the weekend would put Leslie at $30, Smith said, which is what the Pierce Lake course charges. The proposed increases had received unanimous support from the city’s golf task force two months ago, but they had not come easily to that conclusion.

Smith explained that the fee increase was coming to PAC in advance of the regular budget, because they wanted to get the fee increase in front of city council for final approval before the courses open in the spring.

Commissioner David Barrett got clarification that the budget impact was expected to be an extra $25,000 annuallyl from cart rentals and an extra $12,500 annually from the increase in fees for play. Commissioner Karen Levin wanted to know how often the fees were set. Smith explained that they’re reviewed every year to make sure they are in line with the competition.

Commissioner Tim Doyle wanted to know if there was a difference in price between city residents and non-city residents. Smith told Doyle that there was no difference. A recommendation from Golf Convergence had been to eliminate the different fees. Especially for Leslie, Smith said, differentiating between residents and non-residents on price was perceived negatively. It didn’t seem to make sense to pay more because you drive farther to get there.

Doyle wondered if there might be an impact on season pass sales if the price per round went up. Smith allowed that the fee increases could be a very minor additional economic incentive to purchase a season pass, but he did not think it would amount to more than a couple of extra passes sold.

Commissioner Sam Offen asked if there was any kind of combined season pass for various area municipal golf courses. Smith said there was not a season pass available, but that there was discussion of trying to coordinate marketing efforts.

Smith also clarified that once fees are set, staff has the flexibility to be creative about creating “specials.” He gave as an example a special deal where golfers could play 18 holes of golf for $18 if they started before 8 a.m. The tee timesheet between 7-8 a.m. is now full, he reported.

Mike Anglin wanted to know what the expected number of rounds would be at Huron Hills for the upcoming season. Smith put the numbers in perspective: In 2007, Huron Hills had seen 13,000 rounds played. Last year that number had risen to 22,000 rounds. This coming year, he’s hoping for 25,000 rounds, he said.

Commission chair Julie Grand asked for some explanation for the use of full-time year-round staff for the golf courses. Smith explained that the analysis of the previous season and planning for the upcoming season is done during the time the courses are closed. Smith said it’s not just the golf task force that has been instrumental in improving the number of rounds played over the last three years at the city’s golf courses. He attributed a lot of the success to the efforts of the city’s full-time golf course staff.

Smith also pointed out that the golf courses are not unique in having year-round staff, despite being open only part of the year. Canoe liveries follow that staffing strategy as well, he said. It’s during the off-season that programs are upgraded, and trends are studied. During the season, there’s only time to implement what has been developed during the off-season.

Commissioner Gwen Nystuen was curious to know if the off-season planning by the golf staff included use of Huron Hills for winter activities like cross-country skiing. Smith said he’s asked staff to contact local businesses that sell cross-country skis and snowshoes to begin a conversation about some kind of partnership, but indicated that he was not optimistic that it would generate revenue.

Outcome: PAC voted unanimously to recommend raising some of the fees associated with the city’s golf courses.

Budget Review

On the commission’s agenda was an update from parks and recreation manager Colin Smith on the parks and recreation planned FY 2012 budget. He reported from the city council’s budget work session on Jan. 31, 2011, which focused on the community services area, of which parks and recreation is a part. [.pdf of parks and recreation budget impact sheet]

Budget Review: Public Comment – Golf Courses

A large part of the discussion at the city council’s budget work session focused on options for the Huron Hills golf course. [.pdf of staff memos on golf course options and a $287,000 general fund supplement to the parks] At the park advisory commission meeting on Tuesday, commissioners heard public comment from two speakers who addressed the topic of Huron Hills golf course.

Nancy Kaplan told the commissioners that she was pleased with the apparent consensus reached by the city council at their Jan. 31. 2011 budget work session that Huron Hills would continue to be used as a park and that it also seemed agreed that the best economic use of the land is its current use – as a golf course. She expressed some concern about the fact that the city employs full-time, year-round employees for Huron Hills when the golf course is only open for part of the year. She suggested exploring additional opportunities for recreation at Huron Hills during the winter – ice-skating, cross-country skiing and snowshoeing. She stressed that she was pleased that Huron Hills remains parkland.

Ann Schriber told the commissioners that she was pleased that the Miles of Golf proposal had been turned down. She described how there are more than 100 people involved in the effort to make sure that Huron Hills is kept as parkland, yet “nobody has ever asked us” for their input on ways to ensure its future as parkland. She said the city had spent $50,000 on a consultant and that her group, Ann Arbor for Parkland Preservation, had spent $10,000. With $60,000, she said, surely they could come up with something.

Budget Review: Staff, Commissioner Discussion

Smith laid out for the commission the main points of the city council work session presentation:

• Ways that parks and recreation would be meeting its roughly 2.5% reduction target. [Energy savings in FY 2012 and increased revenues due to the construction of the Argo Dam bypass channel, in FY 2013]
• A question about whether to continue a $287,000 supplement to the parks and recreation budget, which began in FY 2008 amid controversy over the interpretation of an October 2006 city council resolution about the administration of the parks capital improvements and maintenance millage.
• Options for the future of Huron Hills golf course.

[For detailed coverage of the work session itself, see Chronicle coverage: "Ann Arbor 2012 Budget: Parks, Plans, People"]

With respect to the $287,000 parks supplement, Tim Berla recalled how the city’s chief financial officer had addressed PAC in 2007 in preparation for the FY 2008 budget planning and had explained how the parks budget does not increase at as high a rate as, for example the police department, which has a greater percentage of its costs due to personnel. He also recalled how part of the explanation for the apparent disparity in parks funding that year, compared to other parts of the budget, was related to the idea that a department can’t count savings for activities that had been discontinued.

In broad strokes, the controversy that resulted in the $287,000 parks supplement involved the language of the October 2006 resolution, which indicated that parks would be treated the same as other parts of the budget with respect to any increases or decreases.

Before the meeting started, Colin Smith, manager of parks and recreation for the city Ann Arbor, distributes written material to commissioners.

Smith told Berla that an accounting of how the parks budget had been treated the same as other parts of the budget since 2007 was now prepared in draft form. Berla had requested a report on that at PAC’s Nov. 16, 2010 meeting.

Commissioner David Barrett recalled that he’d been there during the 2007 “kerfuffle” and that the concern had been that the newly-passed millage was being swallowed up by reductions of general fund support to the parks. He gave credit to then-councilmember Bob Johnson for working it out. There’d been a feeling that the public voted and was then being hornswoggled, Barrett said.

Smith said that the city’s accounting at the time had been correct, but that perceptions had been otherwise and so the $287,000 had been supplemented to make the parks whole.

Summarizing the apparent council consensus that Huron Hills would remain a golf course for the next two years at least, Smith said that the cost to the city to use the property as a golf course was in line with, if not less than, any non-golf uses.

Argo Dam Update: Bypass, Funding, Water Levels

Parks and recreation manager Colin Smith gave commissioners updates on two different Argo Dam-related issues. The first was news that the hoped-for construction start for the Argo Dam bypass channel would not be realized. The city was meeting with the contractor and is still working out insurance issues, he said. It will take until the end of the 2011 construction season to complete the work, he said.

In response to a question from John Lawter, Smith said that the issue of the parks responsibility for funding dam maintenance would be addressed during the budget process. [At issue is whether the funding for dam maintenance at Argo is appropriately taken from the city's drinking water utility fund, even though Argo is considered a recreational dam. The city council debated the issue most recently at its Nov. 15, 2010 meeting, when the council approved the construction of the bypass channel at Argo, which will eliminate the need for canoeists to portage around the dam.]

Smith also reported that near Argo, intake lines for a well that’s used for measuring water levels in the pond – so that the dam gates can regulate that level – had recently become clogged, and had ultimately required hiring a diver to unclog one of them. When the water level in the well is low, the dam gates close in order to raise the level. When the water level in the well is high, the dam gates open to lower the level. If the intake pipes – which are between 1.5-2.0 inches in diameter – become clogged, the water level of the pond cannot be properly regulated.

The city’s first attempt to clear the lines was to use compressed air to blow out the lines. Ultimately a diver had to be hired to dive into the water, Smith said, to clear one of the lines. Work on the other line, which is a backup, will wait until warmer weather. All the dams have such regulators, he said, and they do become clogged from time to time. Clearing out the lines is a routine event, though he allowed that hiring a diver in the middle of winter made it “non-routine routine.”

Park Concessions RFP

Jeff Straw, deputy manager of parks and recreation, briefed commissioners on a draft of a request for proposals (RFP) he’s working on for concessions in the city’s park’s facilities. In light of the concerns about public-private partnerships that had been expressed earlier in the meeting, Smith playfully asked commissioners to “be kind” to Straw.

By way of backround, Straw told the commission that a few years ago the city had discontinued most of the concessions in the parks. They’d instead provided vending machines. That had allowed staff to focus on programs and services. Concessions weren’t completely eliminated, he explained, giving the golf courses, canoe liveries and Veteran’s Memorial Park ice rink (but not the pool) as examples.

The staff has heard feedback from park users that it would be nice to have concessions available. So the RFP would be to provide concessions. Straw said that except for the Veterans Memorial Park pool, the locations where the city is soliciting concessions proposals have dedicated space and facilities for concessions – it would be a win-win, he said. There would be no expense to the city. He hopes to be able to issue the RFP in the spring, and if there are responses that are agreeable, the city might be able to implement concessions operated by a private vendor starting with the new fiscal year, which is July 1, 2011, if not sooner.

Straw emphasized that the idea is not to commercialize the parks – it’s to provide a service that park users want. For a swimmer who wants to spend the afternoon at the pool, to get food they’d have to leave and come back. The RFP would include Buhr Park ice rink and pool, Veterans Memorial Park ice rink and pool, Fuller Park pool and athletic fields, and the Southeast Area Park.

They would entertain proposals involving “mobile carts,” too, he said. [In subsequent commissioner deliberations, they clarified that this did not mean that a vendor would be wandering up to park users soliciting purchases, but rather it means something akin to a food cart on the street – it'd be hauled to a location, and then at the end of the day would be put away.]

The city is not looking to discontinue the vending machines, because concessions might not be staffed for the entire time a facility is open, Straw explained. The RFP will include an expectation that some kind of sponsorship donation be made for exclusive use of the facilities and that donation would be put towards the city parks scholarship program.

Sam Offen said he thought issuing the RFP for concessions is a great idea. In response to a question from Offen, Smith said that he thought the city stopped selling concessions at its parks sometime around 2003 or 2004. He said when it was done by the city, it simply wasn’t done very well.

Offen wanted to know if someone responding to the RFP had to bid on all the locations – yes, said Straw. But if they don’t have success with that approach, they might have to try something else. Offen was also curious to know what the financial arrangement with a vendor would be like. Straw said that under the RFP, the vendors would make some kind of proposal – a percentage of gross, percentage of net, flat rental or sponsorship.

In response to another question from Offen, Straw said that the RFP does not provide any preference for Ann Arbor businesses right now.

Gwen Nystuen called offering concessions a good idea – it’s a nice thing that people enjoy, she said. She wouldn’t want to limit it just to vendors who would handle all locations. She said she liked the idea of a local business handling it.

Christopher Taylor, one of two city council ex-officio representatives to PAC, kidded Straw about what he meant by “no expense to the city.” Straw allowed that there would be some cost of utilities like gas, electricity and water. But there would be no inventory, supplies or staff costs, he said. Taylor confirmed further with Straw that utilities could not be charged to vendors because they’re not separately metered. There would be some amount of oversight and compliance, but basically whatever revenue the city realized would be “all margin.”

Tim Doyle wanted to know if the impact of clean-up costs had been factored into projections. He figured there would be some additional cost to cleaning up after park users who used the concessions. He said his first thought was to require that soda only be sold in cans with a deposit to ensure that someone had an incentive to go around and pick them up – but it had quickly occurred to him that there were many other kinds of trash that the strategy would not cover. He suggested that the RFP include a provision that any contract awarded to a vendor have a clause requiring a “re-look” after a certain period of time.

John Lawter suggested that recycling be thought about in connection with the clean-up issue. Doug Chapman drew out from Straw the fact that vendors would need to pass a health code inspection.

Doyle suggested that vendors would need to be sensitive to price – people might be turned off if costs were prohibitive. They’d hear complaints if a vendor were charging $7.50 for a hot dog, he said. Straw assured Doyle that the city wanted to make sure there are affordable options. Straw also said that they wanted to make sure there are healthy options, as well.

Julie Grand expressed some concern about the idea of mobile concessions, saying that it’s a challenge as a parent when options are presented in a manner where they are “in your face.” Straw clarified that once the concession is set up on a given day, it would not move around.

Straw concluded by saying he thought the RFP would be issued sometime in the month of March.

Fuller Road Station

During the slot for commissioner-proposed business, Gwen Nystuen expressed concern about how Fuller Road Station would be moving ahead. She reviewed many of the issues associated with the project, chief among them, the fact that the location – which is currently a 250-space surface parking lot – is city parkland. The city-university project would include around 1,000 total parking spaces as well as bus bays in its first phase and is later expected to include a train station.

Despite what the name plate says, this is park advisory commissioner Gwen Nystuen.

A point of  agreement among commissioners was the importance of the resolution that they’d passed at their June 15, 2010 meeting about the Fuller Road Station project. [Chronicle coverage: "Park Commission Asks for Transparency"]

Colin Smith told commissioners that currently the city attorney’s office is still working on the Fuller Road Station operating agreement between the city and the University of Michigan. He said he did not think, as Mike Anglin suggested, that it was on the agenda for the city council’s second meeting in March.

Commissioners made clear they want to make sure they have a chance to review the operating agreement before the city council votes on it. David Barrett drew an analogy to pouring cement on a deal – it shouldn’t begin to harden before PAC can have an impact on it.

Nancy Kaplan returned to the podium at the conclusion of the meeting during the second opportunity for public comment, and said she’d attended all the public meetings on the Fuller Road Station, and that the public who’d attended had almost universally objected to the station. She told commissioners that a group of UM graduate students is also opposed to building the station.

Present: David Barrett, Doug Chapman, Tim Berla, Tim Doyle, Julie Grand, Karen Levin, Sam Offen, Gwen Nystuen, John Lawter, councilmember Mike Anglin (ex-officio) , councilmember Christopher Taylor (ex-officio). Also Colin Smith, city parks manager.

Next meeting: PAC’s meeting on Tuesday, March 15, 2011 begins at 4 p.m. in the Washtenaw County administration building boardroom, 220 N. Main St. [confirm date]

Ann Arbor city councilmembers are ceremonially sworn in to start their two-year terms. From left to right: Mayor John Hieftje, Sandi Smith (Ward 1), Margie Teall, Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5), Tony Derezinski (Ward 2) and Christopher Taylor (Ward 3). Administering the oath, with her back to the camera, is city clerk Jackie Beaudry. (Photos by the writer.)

The council approved a $1,168,170 bypass around the Argo dam that will take the place of the current headrace, which is separated from the Huron River by an earthen embankment. The bypass will eliminate the portage currently required by canoeists. It would also allow the city to comply with the consent order it has with the state of Michigan that requires the city to address the repair of toe drains in the embankment.

Another item – on the funding of dam maintenance – was in its original form related more closely to the Argo bypass than in its amended version. The council approved a resolution that directed the city administrator to end the payment for repairs, maintenance and insurance of Argo and Geddes dams from the city’s drinking water fund. The shift in dam activity funding will be effective with the start of fiscal year 2012, which is July 1, 2011. An amendment to the original resolution, however, had the impact of leaving intact a previously budgeted $300,000 from the drinking water fund for possible construction of the Argo bypass.

The third water-themed agenda item approved by the council was $553,320 for fabrication of a piece of exterior art – a fountain-like sculpture – that had been commissioned from German artist Herbert Dreiseitl for the new municipal center. Dissenting votes were cast by Sabra Briere (Ward 1), Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) and Marcia Higgins (Ward 4).

The council also approved the receipt of a $216,723 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) grant for the purchase and demolition the structures at 215 and 219 W. Kingsley Street, which are located in the Allen Creek floodway. The area is subject to flooding during heavy rainstorms. The site will be modified in a way to create a small stormwater retention area, with $72,241 in city funds for the project to be drawn from the stormwater capital budget.

The council approved a drainage easement related to the new underground parking structure being constructed on Fifth Avenue. A final item related to water – in its frozen form – was an authorization to treat the Big Chill hockey game on Dec. 11 the same way that football Saturdays are treated, with respect to vending and parking near Michigan Stadium.

Among the postponed items was a modification to the zoning code to regulate medical marijuana facilities. In conjunction with that postponement, the council also extended a moratorium on the use of facilities for dispensing or cultivating marijuana for 60 days – until Jan. 31, 2011. At the council’s Dec. 6 meeting, it will give initial consideration to a licensing requirement for medical marijuana facilities. Then at its Dec. 20 meeting, it will give final consideration to both the zoning regulations and the licensing proposal.

Also among the postponed items was the conversion of the city’s composting facility to a merchant operation, which would offer a contract to WeCare Organics, a New York-based firm. The proposal on the compost operation will come back to the council at its Dec. 6 meeting. The council also postponed for a third time revisions to the city’s area, height and placement zoning regulations. For another zoning-related item, the council extended a deadline from Dec. 6, 2010 to Feb. 22, 2011 for the design guidelines task force to complete its work.

In other action, the 15th District Court judges will now have a place to sit in the new municipal court facility. A previously twice-postponed item to authorize a budget revision of up to $160,000 to purchase furniture for the court was approved. The dollar amount was reduced to about half that figure, after the court was asked to produce an itemized list of the furniture it intended to buy.

The council also entertained a customary range of public commentary and communications from its own ranks.

Drinking Water Fund, Dam Maintenance

Before the council was a resolution sponsored by Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5) and Margie Teall (Ward 4) that would discontinue the funding of maintenance, repairs and insurance of Argo and Geddes dams from the city’s drinking water fund.

The original resolution placed on the agenda by Hohnke and Teall had a single resolved clause:

RESOLVED, That City Council direct the City Administrator to remove funding for any repairs, maintenance or insurance for Argo and Geddes dams from the City’s Drinking Water Enterprise Fund effective November 16th, 2010

A revision to the resolution made by Hohnke and Teall before the meeting reflected a revised date – to coincide with the FY 2012 budget year on July 1, 2011. They also added a resolved clause that tied the resolution explicitly to another item on the agenda, which authorized $1,168,170 for the construction of a series of descending pools to replace the headrace that’s currently held back by an earthen embankment. The embankment is the subject of a consent agreement the city has with the state of Michigan that requires the city to address issues with the toe drains in the embankment. For an historical overview of the issue, see Chronicle coverage: “Two Dam Options for Argo.”

The resolved clauses of the resolution in their original form before the council looked like this – the first one was later, during deliberations, amended out:

RESOLVED, That City Council direct the City Administrator to identify funding for the Argo Dam embankment and headrace reconstruction project that does not include funding from the Water Supply System Fund;

RESOLVED, That City Council direct the City Administrator to remove funding for repairs, maintenance and insurance for Argo and Geddes dams from the City’s Water Supply System Fund in the FY2012 budget and thereafter.

The amending out of the first resolved clause was done over dissent from Teall and Hohnke, joined by mayor John Hieftje.

At one point during the deliberations, Hohnke alluded to the fact that he’d brought the issue of dam funding before the council a year ago. A resolution brought at the council’s Dec. 7, 2009 meeting on the acceptance of the Huron River Impoundment Management Plan (HRIMP) included two resolved clauses that were amended out:

… RESOLVED, The Ann Arbor City Council recommends that operation and maintenance of the recreational dams (Argo and Geddes) not be funded from the Drinking Water Enterprise Fund; and

RESOLVED, The Ann Arbor City Council recommends that funds currently used for the operation and maintenance of the recreational dams from the Drinking Water Enterprise Fund be reallocated to implement the Source Water Protection Plan to protect Ann Arbor’s Drinking Water.

The version of the resolution that was approved by the council in December 2009 had several other resolved clauses amended out as well, leaving only:

RESOLVED, That the Ann Arbor City Council directs the Park Advisory Commission and Environmental Commission to evaluate the 30 consensus recommendations, and to present options for implementation to City Council for those that can be acted upon at little or no cost; and

RESOLVED, That the Park Advisory Commission and the Environmental Commission complete their recommendations and report back to Council within one year.

Drinking Water Fund: Public Commentary

Laura Rubin, executive director of the Huron River Watershed Council, spoke in favor of removing the support for the maintenance, repair and insurance of Argo and Geddes dams from the drinking water fund. She described how she’d served on a city advisory board starting in 2005, which had representatives from across the broader community, that had explored ways to make the Huron River cleaner and safer. The recommendation of that board, she said, was to create a source water protection plan (SWPP). The SWPP had never been funded, she said.

Rubin characterized it as an “accounting error” that maintenance and insurance for Argo and Geddes dams were paid for out of the drinking water fund, tracing the history of all four of the city’s dams back to the early 1960s when they were purchased from DTE. The dams are classified as recreational dams in the national register of dams, she said, and do not help control flooding, nor do they factor into the city’s emergency strategy for sourcing drinking water.

Drinking Water Fund: Council Deliberations

Margie Teall (Ward 4) led off the council’s deliberations by describing the importance of integrity and transparency of the budgeting process. It’s important to make sure that money is used for what it’s connected to, she said. She reminded her council colleagues that a year ago the environmental commission had recommended in a resolution that the Source Water Protection Plan be funded, and the resolution before them that night would provide an opportunity to do that, she said.

Margie Teall (Ward 4) weighed in for removing funding for dam maintenance from the city's drinking water fund.

Teall and Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5), the resolution’s two sponsors, serve as the city council’s representatives to the city’s environmental commission. And it was Hohnke who weighed in next, citing the pair’s service on the commission. The issue, he said, is about the appropriateness of using drinking water funds for the dam. There was no intent, he stressed, to strangle funding for the dam. There was also no intent to “move the needle” in the direction of eventual removal of the dam, he said. He stressed that they’d worked with the city staff to explore alternative funding scenarios to make sure that no user groups were unduly burdened.

Hohnke also noted that the previous May, the environmental commission had recommended removal of the dam maintenance costs from the drinking water fund and that they had brought the recommendation forward to the council last November. [The council postponed the decision to its first meeting in December 2009 – the outcome of that meeting is described in the introduction to this section.]

Hohnke noted that the resolved clause removing dam maintenance funding from the drinking water fund was amended out of the December 2009 resolution. Hohnke characterized several factors that all pointed to not funding the dam maintenance out of the drinking water fund: previous public discussion; the fact that the dams are classified as “recreational” facilities by the state’s regulatory agency; the original 1963 staff memo [written by Guy Larcom, the city administrator after whom the city hall building is named]; and the city’s drinking water contingency plans.

As a model, Hohnke cited the past work of Christopher Easthope in tightening up the expenditures made by the city out of the solid waste fund. [Easthope previously served in Hohnke's Ward 5 council seat, and now serves as a judge in the 15th District Court.]

In considering the bypass channel construction agenda item – which came towards the end of the agenda – Hohnke suggested that given the funding alternatives that were available, it was possible to support the resolution on the drinking water fund as well as the bypass channel construction.

Sabra Briere (Ward 1) asked what it would cost to implement the Source Water Protection Plan – which was to be funded by the money previously allocated to dam maintenance and repair. Molly Wade, the city’s water quality manager, indicated that the cost was not known – the city had never budgeted for it.

Mike Anglin (Ward 5) asked what the purpose of the plan was and who would administer it. Wade explained the plan would be administered by the city. It would involve looking at possible zoning changes, she said, as well as looking to upstream communities as partners. In response to further questions from Anglin, Wade said that the city had already begun a dialogue with the Dexter school system to develop a curriculum on stormwater.

Drinking Water Fund: Council Deliberations – $300,000 Amendment

Sandi Smith (Ward 1) asked that a resolved clause be stricken, in light of the agenda item on construction of the dam bypass, which included funding scenarios based on use of $300,000 previously budgeted for dam maintenance and repair out of the drinking water fund:

RESOLVED, That City Council direct the City Administrator to identify funding for the Argo Dam embankment and headrace reconstruction project that does not include funding from the Water Supply System Fund;

Striking this clause would eliminate the request to city staff to seek money not tied to the drinking water fund for the Argo embankment and headrace reconstruction project.

Hohnke responded to Smith’s suggested amendment by acknowledging that the city’s capital improvement plan (CIP) did include $300,000 allocated for the earthen embankment toe drain repair. However, he said, the CIP had been approved after the environmental commission’s recommendation and his and Teall’s efforts to bring forward the recognition that those funds were not appropriate to be used for recreational operations and maintenance. He continued by saying that simply budgeting funds for a particular use did not, in his view, amount to a justification for an appropriate use of those funds.

Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) supported Smith’s amendment on the grounds that the funding of the Argo bypass should be discussed separately – in connection to the related resolution on bypass channel construction.

Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2), in supporting the amendment, cited the wider implications among various cost centers and suggested that such a decision should be handled during the budget process.

The amendment could be understood to express the idea that it would be bad policy in the future to fund dam maintenance out of the drinking water fund – starting with FY 2012 – but that it’s good policy to use funds already allocated out of the drinking water fund for that purpose. So Teall said she would not support the amendment, saying “If it’s bad policy, then it’s bad policy.”

Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) also expressed his support of the amendment, saying that the council should have had the discussion last year when the budget was being discussed. He characterized a change to the status of the $300,000 now as “micromanaging” the budget.

Marcia Higgins (Ward 4) acknowledged that councilmembers had said the issue should be discussed during last year’s budget season, but that the council collectively had not brought the issue forward. She said the resolution appropriately directed city staff to address the issue in the context of formulating the budget.

Sabra Briere (Ward 1) also expressed support for the amendment, saying that she did not want to make decisions that would affect this year’s budget, given the constraints of the current budget year. She characterized it as a precipitous decision to move $300,000 from one place in the budget to another, in the middle of the year. The issue has been “sequestered,” she said, since 2005, and there’s been ample time to decide to bring it up for anyone who thought it was a serious issue. It could have been brought up during last year’s budget process, she said, but for those on the council who did not think it was a serious issue, they had no reason to bring it up.

Teall stressed that she and Hohnke had, in fact, brought up the issue previously.

Smith said she would eventually like to see the four city dams analyzed together, noting that Barton Dam generates electricity and that Barton Pond is also the source of most of the city’s drinking water. So there’s “cross-contamination” from a budgeting perspective, she said. She said her goal would be to eliminate the sense that taking money from one place for another purpose is okay “only sometimes” but that other times it’s not okay at a particular moment when the money is wanted for something else.

Questions from mayor John Hieftje and Teall elicited from city staff the fact that revenue from Barton and Superior hydroelectric dams is deposited into the city’s general fund and the maintenance for the dams is taken from the general fund. Typically, the dams cover their own costs.

Briere suggested opening the agenda to consider the bypass channel construction at that time. There was little traction for that.

But at Hieftje’s request, the various funding options for the bypass channel were explicated by Sumedh Bahl, the city’s community services area administrator, who formerly was in charge of the dams. [Items in italics indicate items that vary across the different options.]

Option (1)

• Parks Rehabilitation and Development Millage: $683,000. Originally, funds in the amount of $1,385,860 had been transferred from parks to assist in the removal of trees affected by emerald ash borer (EAB). In July 2010 the project was completed and $683,000 was returned to the Parks Rehabilitation and Development Millage Fund. Consequently, these funds are unallocated and their designation to this project does not result in the cancellation of any existing or scheduled parks project.
• Parks Rehabilitation and Development Millage: $195,000. This is from an existing budgeted river parks project that calls for the improvements of river parks.
• Water Fund: $300,000. Funds budgeted for the repair of the toe drains.
• Additional funding may become available from the Washtenaw County Parks and Recreation Commission to assist with the Border-to-Border trail portion of the project. This could amount to an additional $50,000.
• Excluding potential funding assistance from the county, $1,178,000 is available for the project (only $1,168,170 is required).

Option (2)

• Parks Rehabilitation and Development Millage fund balance: $683,000 (this is the same as in Funding Option 1).
• Parks Rehabilitation and Development Millage existing river parks project: $195,000 (this is the same as in Funding Option 1).
• Parks additional capital funds from savings on existing projects: $135,000.
• Parks forestry funding: $155,170.
• Total available funding, excluding potential funding assistance from the county: $1,168,170.

Option (3)

• Parks Rehabilitation and Development Millage fund balance: $683,000 (this is the same as in Funding Option 1).
• Parks Rehabilitation and Development Millage existing river parks project: $195,000 (this is the same as in Funding Option 1).
• Parks additional capital funds from savings on existing projects: $135,000 (this is the same as in Funding Option 2).
• Parks capital existing recreation facility updates: $155,170.
• Total available funding, excluding potential funding assistance from the county: $1,168,170.

Option (4)

• Parks Rehabilitation and Development Millage fund balance: $683,000 (this is the same as in Funding Option 1).
• Parks Rehabilitation and Development Millage existing river parks project: $195,000 (this is the same as in Funding Option 1).
• Parks additional capital funds from savings on existing projects: $135,000 (this is the same as in Funding Option 2).
• General fund reserves: $155,170.
• Total available funding, excluding potential funding assistance from the county: $1,168,170.

Hohnke inquired with Bahl whether Argo or Geddes dams have anything to do with the water supply – no, said Bahl. With respect to the Source Water Protection Plan, Hohnke noted that whether it’s funded or not is not relevant to the question of whether it’s appropriate to fund maintenance for dams out of the drinking water fund, if those dams have nothing to do with drinking water. Responding to Kunselman’s remarks about “micromanaging” staff, Hohnke said the council tries hard not to do that, but that he and Teall had attempted to give direction a number of times to the staff, who had asked the council for guidance in this specific area.

Hohnke concluded that the only reason the dam maintenance funding has continued to be paid for out of the drinking water fund for more than 50 years is because the council has not provided guidance. Hohnke contended that in the original 1963 memo from city staff, it was clearly recognized that the dams would not continue to be funded from drinking water funds, because that was not appropriate.

Responding to Briere’s concern that the resolution moved too fast, Hohnke noted that the council had the option of postponing consideration of the bypass channel construction. Hohnke reiterated that he and Teall had brought up the issue before. He said he’d heard the argument that the council should move forward with the funding because it’s already been budgeted, but he had not heard any argument about why it was appropriate to use the funds in that way.

Hohnke observed that it was a frequent conversation between the council and the public about why funds could not be taken from one place and spent in another, for example, from the greenbelt millage to fund public safety. He suggested that with respect to the drinking water fund and dam maintenance, the council need to “walk the walk.”

Briere responded to Hohnke’s contention about the contents of the 1963 memo by describing herself as a “stickler for reading stuff.” Before reading aloud from it, however, she stressed that when she said that the discussion should have happened earlier, she meant that it should have happened during the discussion of the budget. Her concern, she said, was for the budget. She expressed skepticism that no other programs would be affected, saying that when you put money into one place, you take it from another. Here’s the passage Briere cited from the 1963 memo [emphasis Briere's]:

Portions of the property will, in time, be designated as the responsibility of the Park Department and will be developed and maintained for park and recreation purposes under the City General Fund Budget. As these lands above water are so designated, they will no longer be the responsibi1ity of the Utilities Department.

Briere contrasted that description of the lands in the 1963 memo with the memo’s explicit treatment of the dams, which maintenance and operation costs were to be split between the water and sewer funds:

The annual payment of $80,000.00 will be split 50-50 between the Utilities Department and the Sewage Disposal System – $40,000.00 each per year. The operating costs, although the responsibility of the Water Department, will be split 50-50 each year between the Utilities and Sewage Treatment budgets.

That’s the way it was set up, Briere said, as a point of accuracy. This year’s budget should remain untouched, Briere said, but she was not arguing about next year’s budget.

Hieftje said that Hohnke had explained the situation very well, and that the city should have corrected it years ago, but that it never came up. He said the council would have addressed the issue during the last budget cycle, and that was the intention, but there were a number of other issues that had distracted focus from that. [For Chronicle coverage of discussion by staff and elected officials over much of 2009 and early 2010, relate to the intention to remove funding for Argo and Geddes, see: "PAC Recommends Argo Dam Bypass"] Hieftje concluded that he would not support the amendment.

Outcome: The council approved the amendment striking the first resolved clause that would have direction to city staff to find alternate funding for the bypass – funds that would not include funding from the water supply system fund. Dissenting were Hieftje, Hohnke, and Teall.

Speaking to the amended resolution, Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) said he supported it broadly speaking. He wondered what the view of staff was about alternatives to funding the dam maintenance next year. He’d heard assurances at the park advisory commission that the dams could be covered by the parks budget. He wanted to know how big a hit the parks budget would take. Bahl explained that for Argo Dam, some money would come from the parks millage and what could not be covered by that would come from the general fund. He was not certain of the breakdown, but estimated around $38,000 a year.

Taylor ventured that – based on increased revenue from increased canoe trips – it might cover the maintenance. Bahl confirmed he was confident the parks budget could be called on to cover the dam maintenance costs.

Higgins objected to one “Whereas” clause, but city administrator Roger Fraser characterized those clauses as statements of history, not direction, and Higgins’ concern was allayed.

Smith suggested that it’s difficult to separate the resolution on funding out of the drinking water fund and the resolution to construct a bypass channel. She suggested that it might be necessary to challenge city staff to think creatively about going to the public to lease parkland in a way the community has not previously thought about it. Some of the revenue opportunities, she said, could involve public-private partnerships involving kayak rentals or cafes. There are therefore opportunities to replace the revenue from the drinking water fund, she said.

Fraser responded to Smith by saying that part of what they would do is to continue to provide the city’s parks and recreation staff with the chance to be imaginative and creative. The bypass channel, Fraser said, would provide a chance to add a new dimension to the city’s recreational opportunities.

Kunselman indicated that he would not be supporting the resolution. He characterized it as micromanaging the city administrator. With respect to the source water protection plan, he said he looked to the Huron River Watershed Council for leadership in protecting the city’s interests – for which the city pays HRWC membership dues. He also said it’s hypocritical to have concerns about the use of the drinking water fund on dam maintenance, when $347,000 worth of drinking water money had been allocated to the public art fund – along with $838,000 from the sewer fund.

Outcome: The resolution to stop funding dam maintenance, repair, and insurance out of the drinking water fund was approved, with dissent from Kunselman.

Argo Dam Bypass Channel

Before the council was a $1,168,170 project to build a bypass channel around the Argo dam that will take the place of the current headrace, which is separated from the Huron River by an earthen embankment. The bypass will eliminate the portage currently required by canoeists and kayakers. It would also allow the city to comply with the consent order it has with the state of Michigan that requires the city to address the repair of toe drains in the embankment. [See Chronicle coverage: "PAC Recommends Argo Dam Bypass Channel"]

Argo Dam Bypass: Public Commentary

Julie Grand, chair of the city’s park advisory commission (PAC), told the council that after the commission’s Oct. 19 meeting, she’d been as excited as she’s been in a long time. She cited four main benefits to the proposed bypass: (1) it would remove the necessity of portaging an 85-pound canoe, thus making canoeing more accessible to families and seniors; (2) the Border-to-Border Trail would be improved as a part of the project; (3) the white water feature – which she said should be added now so that it won’t cost more to add it later – would result in higher revenue projections than just the increase in canoe trips due to eliminating the portage; and (4) it will make Argo a destination, and getting more people in and around the river is a good thing.

Christy Summers of Beckett & Raeder presents a rendering of the bypass channel at the council's Nov. 8 work session. The channel is the series of pools above the river.

Also speaking in favor of the proposed bypass was Michael Psarouthakis. He was speaking on behalf of his wife, who is the president of Pioneer High School’s rowing club. He stated that he supports the modification of the embankment, saying it could become a major attraction, because of the portage-free trips. It also will allow rowers to maintain their current venue on the pond. The proposal combines the slow and fast water sports, he said, providing the best of both worlds. He suggested that one thing everyone could agree on is that it’s been a very tough process.

During his communications to the council, Mike Anglin (Ward 5) noted that the athletes who train on Argo Pond go on to excel at higher levels, citing the case of Pioneer High School grad Grace Luczak, who won a bronze medal with the U.S. four-woman boat at the 2010 World Rowing Championships in New Zealand. Luczak does her collegiate rowing for Stanford University.

Argo Dam Bypass: Council Deliberations

Sandi Smith (Ward 1) led off deliberations by declaring that it is a really exciting proposal, echoing the sentiments of the chair of the park advisory commission during public commentary. She characterized it as like a “bubble in the air.” She stressed that the current conversation is not a dialogue about dam-in versus dam-out.

Sabra Briere (Ward 1) said it’s possible that the reason she and Smith find it exciting is because the dam is in Ward 1. Briere said she had not been canoeing since she her son was 11 years old, but she did remember that the portage was a “pain in the rear.” She said the idea of making Argo a destination is exciting.

She stated that the city should have fixed the toe drains earlier. The proposal, however, eliminates the need to fix the toe drains, and there’ll be fewer of them.

Mayor John Hieftje noted that the resolution requires the council to designate one of the funding options.

Christopher Taylor (Ward 3), who had moved the resolution, and Tony Derezinski (Ward 2), who had seconded the motion, specified funding option (3), which skirts the controversy of using drinking water fund money for the project:

Option (3)

• Parks Rehabilitation and Development Millage fund balance: $683,000 (this is the same as in Funding Option 1).
• Parks Rehabilitation and Development Millage existing river parks project: $195,000 (this is the same as in Funding Option 1).
• Parks additional capital funds from savings on existing projects: $135,000 (this is the same as in Funding Option 2).
• Parks capital existing recreation facility updates: $155,170.
• Total available funding, excluding potential funding assistance from the county: $1,168,170.

Taylor said he was delighted with the proposal, and felt the hit to be taken by the parks [a delay in upgrades to the canoe liveries at Gallop and locker rooms at Veterans Memorial Ice Arena] would be “de minimis.” The locker room upgrade he characterized as useful but not critical. It was an appropriate balance, he said, between the delay in certain capital improvements and the council’s conclusion earlier that evening that drinking water funds should be used only for that purpose.

Marcia Higgins (Ward 4) said she’d visited the locker rooms and that she was not willing to wait a year. She did not want to ask the parks and recreation staff to be creative at the last minute and said she didn’t have a problem with funding it using $300,000 from the drinking water fund. She asked to amend the resolution to specify funding option (1):

Option (1)

• Parks Rehabilitation and Development Millage: $683,000. Originally, funds in the amount of $1,385,860 had been transferred from parks to assist in the removal of trees affected by emerald ash borer (EAB). In July 2010 the project was completed and $683,000 was returned to the Parks Rehabilitation and Development Millage Fund. Consequently, these funds are unallocated and their designation to this project does not result in the cancellation of any existing or scheduled parks project.
• Parks Rehabilitation and Development Millage: $195,000. This is from an existing budgeted river parks project that calls for the improvements of river parks.
• Water Fund: $300,000. Funds budgeted for the repair of the toe drains.
• Additional funding may become available from the Washtenaw County Parks and Recreation Commission to assist with the Border-to-Border trail portion of the project. This could amount to an additional $50,000.
• Excluding potential funding assistance from the county, $1,178,000 is available for the project (only $1,168,170 is required).

In supporting the selection of option (1), Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2) cited his experience serving five years on the park advisory commission and the ongoing need for capital improvements. Staff was forced to “play a little game” of bumping projects around from year to year.

Smith noted that there is a potential funding partner in the county, plus the possibility of using DTE property as a staging area that could reduce costs. She asked that the $300,000 from the drinking water fund be designated as the portion to which savings or additional revenues would be applied. Higgins, who had proposed the amendment specifying option (1), nodded her assent to incorporate that stipulation as a friendly amendment.

Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5) questioned Abigail Elias of the city attorney's office about the appropriateness of using the drinking water fund to pay for recreational dam expenses.

Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5) began by saying that he would not rehash all the arguments, which earned him a thank-you from the mayor. Responding to Rapundalo’s reference to having to “play a game” to fund parks capital improvements, he said that he did not think that taking money from the drinking water fund was any better a practice.

He suggested to Higgins that her concern about public art being funded out of different areas of the budget – which he didn’t share – should apply here as well. He strongly encouraged his colleagues to consider whether the use of the drinking water fund was appropriate to this project. In return for moving back the locker room improvements for a year, the council would get fidelity to fiscal prudence, Hohnke said.

The previous resolution passed by the council, which directed the city administrator to remove funding for dam maintenance and repair out of the drinking water fund, then came back into play. It included a “Whereas” clause as follows:

Whereas, Argo Dam and Geddes Dam create impoundments that are recreational in nature;

Hohnke asked the city attorney about possible legal exposure due to the council’s adoption of that resolution with its accompanying resolved clause. The council, in adopting the resolution, he said, had recognized the dams as recreational. What the council was now considering was using drinking water money for this recreational asset.

City attorney Stephen Postema deferred the question to staff attorney Abigail Elias, but characterized all the funding options as “reasonable.” Elias said that part of the issue was the 1963 purchase of the dams and ponds, which Briere had cited in earlier deliberations. At that time the council had considered the dams as “water assets,” Elias contended, saying they’d been considered water assets since that time. If the council were to designate them and “move them,” then a different funding source might be appropriate. But they have a history of being considered water assets and will be maintained as water assets “until they are transformed.”

Hohnke indicated that he understood the history. However, he noted that yes, impoundments have water in them, but to describe them as water assets did not seem completely accurate – when talking about a drinking water fund. The dams have nothing to do with drinking water. Even understanding the history and the need to provide for maintenance of the assets, he said, independent of a prior council designation, the resolution that night with its accompanying “whereas” clause meant that “we have that on the record” as the council’s view that the dams are recreational assets. To him, he said, that seems to change the legal analysis.

Elias said she did not think the previous resolution was clear enough to transform the dams into no longer being water assets. She pointed out that drinking water funds are not used to fund Barton Dam’s maintenance, even though it is involved with drinking water – there’s been a mixture of funding used for the dams, she said.

Hohnke wondered what kind of action it would take in order to change the dams’ status. He noted some indications that the transformation has already taken place: (1) the city does not include Argo and Geddes dams and their ponds in the drinking water contingency plan; and (2) they are classified as recreational by the state’s regulatory agency. He told Elias he did not understand the argument she was making based on a notion of “water assets.” The city doesn’t have a category of “water assets,” Hohnke pointed out – there’s a water treatment facility, a drinking water supply facility, etc.

Elias came back to the fact that the four dams and ponds were purchased as part of the drinking water system in 1963. The city was undergoing an expansion and that included an expansion in its water supply system. She said she was not privy to the conversations among staff at the time. If you look at the history, at that time the designation of the dams as water assets was appropriate, and thus the maintenance of them as assets of the water system was also appropriate. She said she was not sure how the financial system handles transfer of assets among systems because she doesn’t deal with that.

At that, Hohnke gave a deep sigh. He said he was trying to ask a very clear question. He told Elias that he’d understood her to say that absent any declaration that Argo and Geddes were not “water assets,” there was no legal exposure. So what kind of action, he asked, would re-designate the dams and make clear that they have no role in the city’s drinking water system? Elias told Hohnke that what she’d said was the dams are and have been water system assets, and that if the council does not want to treat them as such and wants to transfer them, the council can make that decision. How would that look different from the previous resolution? asked Hohnke. Elias said she didn’t read the resolution as saying that “They are hereby transferred.” And with that, Hohnke ended his questioning of Elias.

Smith stressed that the resolution to which Hohnke was referring specified a future time when drinking water funding would not support Argo and Geddes dams, so she disagreed that anything had happened that evening. Hohnke clarified that he’d been referring to the “whereas” clause.

In support of option (1), which had been recommended by PAC, Higgins that she felt it was not appropriate to change the funding scenario from the one PAC had recommended, without consulting with PAC members. Taylor, who sits as a council representative to PAC, acknowledged Higgins’ concern but felt that option (3) reflected a good balancing.

Outcome on funding option: The council amended the resolution to specify option (1). Voting for option (1) were Smith, Briere, Rapundalo, Kunselman, Higgins and Anglin. For option (3) were Derezinski, Taylor, Teall, Hieftje, Hohnke.

In continuing deliberations on the main resolution, assuming option (1), Hohnke indicated that he had hoped to support the resolution and he’d tried to find a way to get there. He noted it was no secret that the city’s environmental commission had concluded that no environmental case could be made to keep the dam. However, the environmental case, he said, is not the only case – there’s also the financial case and the recreational case. He’d come to the conclusion that repairing the toe drains in the embankment would provide a way for the debate to cool off a bit. He said he supported the construction of the amenity, but could not support its partial funding with drinking water money.

Hieftje indicated his support for building the bypass, saying that it would turn the community’s face to the river.

Teall said it would be easier to vote for the proposal without the drinking water fund involvement, but she would vote for it. This decision should not be tied to the dam-in or dam-out question, she said.

Outcome: The council approved construction of the bypass channel and whitewater amenity, with dissent from Hohnke.

Dreiseitl Public Art

Before the council was the authorization of $553,320 for fabrication of a piece of exterior art – a fountain – that had been commissioned from Herbert Dreiseitl for the new municipal center, at the corner of Fifth and Huron. Quinn Evans Architects will act as the general contractor to complete the work’s fabrication. The authorization for the design, at a cost of $111,400, was given during council’s Dec. 21, 2009 meeting. At that meeting, Stephen Kunselman had questioned whether the city had met its obligation under the public art ordinance to provide an estimate of maintenance costs associated with a work of art before making a decision to acquire it. From Chronicle coverage:

Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) then spoke to what he characterized as an “urgency” to move the project forward, a feeling he said he understood but did not share. He was more concerned, he said, that the council followed its own ordinance that it had passed in November 2007.
Kunselman then ticked through requirements of the ordinance that he felt potentially had not been met. The text of the ordinance cited in relevant part by Kunselman:

1:836.  Ownership and maintenance of work.
(1) No work of art shall be considered for acquisition under this chapter without an estimate for future maintenance costs.
…

With respect to the required estimate of maintenance costs, it was Sue McCormick, public services area administrator, who addressed the question. Kunselman was correct that the estimate was required, she allowed, but she presented that night’s agenda item in the following context: It was the second of three action steps, only the third of which was “acquisition.”

The first action step, explained McCormick, had been the conceptual design, which had been approved in March of 2009. What they were doing that evening was the bid to design what would be installed, complete with plans and specs for concrete and plumbing – the second action step.  The authorization of the purchase would come sometime in April, and that was “acquisition,” said McCormick. At that time, an estimate for maintenance costs would be required.

No estimate of maintenance costs had been calculated at the council’s meeting on Monday.

The city’s public art commission had originally commissioned three pieces of art from Dreiseitl, but the two interior pieces were not approved by the commission. The project budget for the three pieces was $750,000. According to the city, the total cost for the single exterior water sculpture will come to $741,720. For The Chronicle’s most recent coverage: “Funding Set for More Art at Municipal Center.”

Dreiseitl: Council Deliberations

Sue McCormick, the city’s public services area administrator, led off the discussion by reminding the council of their December 2009 approval of the conceptual design funding. She described how Dreiseitl’s piece of art was meant to illustrate the cycle of stormwater as rain fell and flowed across the land. She described how the art drew its funding from public art funds that had been contributed under the city’s Percent for Art program from the water, wastewater, and stormwater funds.

The city’s public art program is based on expenditures for capital projects, setting aside 1% of all projects for art, with a limit of $250,000 per project. Here’s what the balances look like as of mid-November, which Marcia Higgins (Ward 4) elicited from McCormick during deliberations:

ART IN PUBLIC PLACES
Budget Summary as of 11-13-10

                       Revenues   Transfers/  Available
                                    Expend.   Balance
General Fund                  -         -          -
Street Millage          419,189     9,344    409,844
Parks Millage            28,137    10,657     17,479
West Park                10,000    15,279     (5,279)
Solid Waste              33,782       331     33,450
Water                   347,378   218,459    128,918
Sewer                   838,189   533,949    304,239
Stormwater               47,683    32,859     14,823
Airport                   6,520       103      6,416
Energy                    3,564         -      6,416
Court/PD Facility       250,000    47,569    202,430
Dreiseitl/Utility       750,000   185,487    564,512 

Total Avlble for Art  2,734,442 1,054,042  1,683,251
FY 2011 Admin. Allctn    35,408     4,237     31,170
Remaining Admin.        143,975    31,859    112,115

-

Mayor John Hieftje stressed that there was very little or no money put towards the public art program that came out of the general fund, but noted there are still people in the media who misrepresent that.

McCormick described the public art program as an obligation related to capital asset investment: When the city invests in a capital asset, she said, it must also think about the aesthetics. It’s not required that a piece of art be physically attached to the capital asset, just that it serve the purpose of the fund from which it came or a message around that fund. The monies from which public art funds are drawn do not fund personnel, health care, or pensions, she said.

Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) picked up on the maintenance theme he’d established a year earlier: He wanted to know out of what fund would maintenance for the Dreiseitl piece be funded. McCormick said that no maintenance budget had been established, but that those costs would be drawn proportionally from public art fund contributions in the project budget: $210,000 from the water supply fund; $510,000 from the sanitary sewer; $30,000 form the stormwater fund. Percentage-wise, that’s 28% from water; 68% from sanitary sewer, and 0.04% from stormwater. Kunselman indicated that he would leave that for his counsel colleagues to contemplate and for the city attorney to tell him whether it was legal or not. City attorney Stephen Postema did not respond.

[For background on the request that Kunselman made last year for a written legal opinion from the city attorney, which is required by the city charter to be filed with the city clerk's office, see "Getting Smarter About City Charter." Postema never filed an opinion with the city clerk's office.]

Later in deliberations, Kunselman said he would not vote for the project without a legal opinion from the city attorney justifying its legality. Attorney-client privileged communications, he said, could not be used to justify the legality of the ordinance. When he’d voted for the program, he said, he had not voted to use restricted funds like street millage and utility money. There are important legal precedents, he said, that suggested to him the spending was not appropriate.

Sabra Briere (Ward 1), with her hand raised to speak. To her left is Tony Derezinski (Ward 2).

Mayor John Hieftje started the rollcall vote, when Sabra Briere (Ward 1) interrupted him, observing that she’d had her hand raised to speak. However, she indicated that she was content to vote without speaking. After some back and forth with the mayor, during which he encouraged her to go ahead and speak, Briere held forth on the Dreiseitl project.

She noted that this was the first time she’d had a chance to speak on any of the Dreiseitl project votes. Previously, she had left town on the day of the council’s meeting, thinking the item would not be on the agenda, but it was added late. On another occasion she’d left the council chambers briefly to get a cup of coffee during the meeting and the vote had happened just that fast. She apologized to the public for that.

She said she had several reasons for voting against it and they were “mild reasons.” She reported that she’d expressed her concerns about the project in terms of its design, its value to the community and its cost. Those are the criteria she should use, she said, to determine whether to “throw money” at a project that is supposed to last 50 years. She said she didn’t think the council should have funded the design costs last year, and she would not vote to fund construction costs this year. She concluded by echoing Margie Teall’s statement in connection with funding dam maintenance out of the drinking water fund: “If it’s bad policy, then it’s bad policy. And I think it’s bad policy.”

Hieftje asked Briere if her objections were related to the public art program in general or if she objected to this particular project. Briere answered that she felt the program should have been decreased from a 1% level of funding to 0.5% level. [In December of 2009, the council contemplated such a reduction but did not have enough votes to pass it on the second reading. Voting for the reduction were Smith and Kunselman – Briere was absent from that meeting. At that same meeting the Dreiseitl design had been voted through: "Council: Art Key to Ann Arbor's Identity"]

In November 2007, said Briere, the council had no idea how much money would be reserved for art through the program. She said she believes she made a mistake in voting for the program then, and said she was sorry.

Picking up on the idea of the implementation of the program, Kunselman inquired how many other communities in Michigan had implemented similar public art programs using similar funding mechanisms. If it’s such a great approach to funding public art, he wondered, why weren’t other communities emulating Ann Arbor. He objected to the particular project by saying that it’s too extravagant and puts too much money in one project. Communities like Seattle, he said, spread the wealth. “We’re putting all our money in a fountain,” he said, “and a phallic fountain at that.”

Marcia Higgins (Ward 4) expressed concern about the high level of funding for public art.

Marcia Higgins (Ward 4) noted that the level of funding had been a concern for a while – 1% might be too high. But it’s a good program, she said. [Higgins was perhaps one of the first to float the question of whether the 1% allocation should be reduced somewhat, in February 2009: "Discontent Emerges at Council Caucus"]

After discussing with McCormick the amount of money available in the public art program, Higgins inquired if the monies for the public art fund derived from construction bonds. McCormick explained that the money came from millage revenues and fees. It’s money that could be used for other items in those funds.

The 1% figure, McCormick continued, is within the 10% contingency that is generally established for construction projects. She also explained that the large contribution to the public art program from the sanitary sewer fund is due to the fact that there has been a major reconstruction of the wastewater treatment facility.

Higgins said she’d be voting no, but that it was not a vote against public art. In this she echoed what Kunselman had said earlier. Higgins said she was concerned about the amount of money that is being put towards the program.

Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5) picked up on Kunselman’s point that no other communities in Michigan had followed Ann Arbor’s leadership on its public art program. He elicited from McCormick the fact that Ann Arbor was not the first community nationally to enact a similar program and that Ann Arbor had not been pioneering in that regard. McCormick went on to explain that the Dreiseitl project was the first project begun under the public art program. A second project, in West Park, was started subsequently and is now complete.

Teall noted that other communities have public art programs that range from 0.5% to 2%. She also noted that the task force for public art at the municipal center is looked at other opportunities to install art there. That includes possible re-installation of the large multi-panel mosaic by Gerome Kamrowski – which previously was located near at the entrance to city hall and is now in storage.

Ken Clein of Quinn Evans Architects explained that last December, Quinn Evans had been given the charge to advance the design. He described how the initial estimates had come back high, but that they’d worked with the bidders to reduce the costs. The lead fabricator, he said, is a blacksmith and an artisan. He explained that the sculpture contains not just a water feature, but also a lighting feature.

Higgins asked what would happen to the sculpture if there were 60 days with no rain. Clein explained that there is a 15,000-gallon cistern under the fountain. Higgins wanted to know if it would operate through the winter – no, Clein said, only the lights would operate then.

Kunselman said that it sounded like a complex system with filters, pumps and lights. He wanted to know what the replacement costs for one of the glass “pearl” lights would be – $50 each, said Clein. Clein told Kunselman, in response to a query, that the fountain would not have submetering that would allow precise measurement of how much it cost to operate the fountain. Kunselman wondered how algae would be controlled. Clein told him that UV treatment is part of the filtering system.

Mike Anglin (Ward 5) thanked Clein for doing the due diligence and bringing in Michigan contractors. He asked if there is a warranty of some kind and wondered about the life of the equipment. Clein told Anglin that typical for the various pieces of equipment would be that they’d have a one-year warranty.

Briere established with Clein that the fountain would not operate as a fountain for nearly half the year. Clein suggested that there might not be water, but that there was a possibility that the water would freeze on the fountain in a way that was aesthetically pleasing.

Outcome: Funding for the fabrication of the Dreiseitl project was authorized, with dissent from Briere, Kunselman and Higgins.

Drainage to Underground Parking Garage

Before the council was a proposal to grant an easement to the properties to the northwest of the underground parking structure being built between Fifth Avenue and Division Street. The easement would be used to drain stormwater into the garage’s detention system, which has excess capacity for detention in its 40,763-cubic-foot tanks. The underground garage itself only requires 19,491 cubic feet of stormwater detention. Water in the detention tanks is cleaned before being released into Allen Creek.

The properties in question are at 320 S. Division and 330 E. Liberty.

Susan Pollay, executive director of the Downtown Development Authority, which is constructing the parking garage, clarified that the properties in question are located upslope from the parking garage, and the arrangement takes advantage of the natural direction of surface flow. Asked by Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) why the property owners are not paying for the easement, Pollay cited the overall benefit to the community.

Outcome: The council unanimously approved the easements.

Demolition of Kingsley Houses

Before the council was the receipt of a $216,723 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) grant for the purchase and demolition of the structures at 215 and 219 W. Kingsley Street, which are located in the Allen Creek floodway. The area is subject to flooding during heavy rainstorms. The site will be modified in a way to create a small stormwater retention area, with $72,241 in city funds for the project to be drawn from the stormwater capital budget.

Council deliberations were fairly brief. Sandi Smith (Ward 1), whose Trillium Real Estate offices were previously located across the street from the property in question, characterized the property as a “black eye in the neighborhood,” and said that Allen Creek practically ran through the basement of the house. The intersection floods regularly in a way that makes it impassable, she said. Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5) thanked the city staff for their work in securing the grant from FEMA.

Outcome: The council unanimously voted to accept the FEMA funding.

Compost Operations: A Private Operator

Before the council was a proposal to approve a contract with WeCare Organics to operate the city’s composting facility, which is not to exceed $200,000 annually. On Nov. 8, the city council had received a presentation at a work session on the proposal.

Compost: Public Commentary

Nicholas Nightwine spoke, as he had at the council’s previous meeting in late October, on behalf of the AFSCME Local 369, which represents many city workers, specifically positions at the city’s composting facility. He noted that the council had received a presentation on the proposed merchant operation to be contracted to WeCare Organics at a work session the previous week. At that work session, the presentation highlighted losses projected for the city’s composting operation, which is one program in the city’s solid waste fund.

By way of background, the city’s projections for losses over the next five years under current operations, compared to losses under WeCare, look like this:

       CITY        WECARE
FY10  ($682,000)    n.a.
FY11  ($699,775)  ($634,513)
FY12  ($713,909)  ($337,629)
FY13  ($732,904)  ($345,157)
FY14  ($752,468)  ($354,261)
FY15  ($772,620)  ($365,382)

-

The overall solid waste fund itself, however, operates with a slight surplus, which is projected to continue for the next five years. The solid waste fund is supported by a millage – listed as CITY REFUSE on property tax bills – and is levied at a rate of 2.467 mill.

In his comments Monday evening, Nightwine noted that the composting operation is still projected to operate at a loss for the next five years, even with WeCare’s operation – it’s just that the loss is not projected to be as great. He suggested that part of the reason for the extent of the losses is that the city’s prices for finished compost are too low. The history of finished compost [CY=cubic yard]:

   CY   2008   2009    2010
   10   $ 15   $ 7     $ 9
10-24   $ 10   $ 5     $ 7
   25   $  8   $ 2.75  $ 5

-

Nightwine contended that comparing rates with other sources of compost showed facilities charging anywhere between $15 to $50 per cubic yard.

The city, Nightwine concluded, set itself up for a loss by not pricing the finished product at the market rate. He also noted that no city staff had made a site visit to any of WeCare’s facilities. What if the arrangement doesn’t work out, he wondered. He asked why the city was not investing in its own employees. He asked the council to postpone their consideration of the proposal until answers to the many outstanding questions could be found.

In the mid-1990s, the composting manager and assistant solid waste manager for the city of Ann Arbor was Ray Ayer. Ayer addressed the council on Monday night on many of the same themes he’d covered the previous evening at the council’s caucus, attended by Sabra Briere (Ward 1), Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) and Mike Anglin (Ward 5). At the Sunday caucus, he’d said that as a former city worker, “My heart beats for the city of Ann Arbor.” On Monday he described himself as a “compost advocate.” He described the proposal to contract the operation of the city’s operation to WeCare as giving away the city’s $5-million, award-winning composting site. “It stinks,” he said, and predicted that the site would also stink.

By way of background, control of odor was one focus of Ayer’s management of the city’s facilities in the past. From “Ann Arbor Composting Program,” a program description written by Ayer, and available in a Michigan State University online archive:

Leaves and brush are blended in with the grass to obtain an approximately 30 parts carbon to 1 part nitrogen mixture. This mixture with frequent turning of the windrows allows the site to be operated with no offensive off site odors. In 1992 the City ceased collecting yard waste in plastic bags as it found grass in plastic bags had already turned anaerobic by the time they collected it and it was very difficult to control the incoming odors.

Ayer’s paper on the program stressed the need to allocate adequate resources to the composting program – a point which mirrors Nightwine’s call for the city to invest in its own employees:

The above requires the application of the M & Ms principal. Money, manpower, & motivation, none of the above will happen if the program is squeezed in between other duties. A person must be put in charge with adequate time, management support and money.

On Monday evening, Ayer described part of the problem with the facility now as “missing management.” He described how the facility built by “scrappy, environmental Ann Arbor” was a model for other communities. He described how WeCare had burned up one of their tub grinders a year ago. The city’s AFSCME workers would never abuse the equipment that way, he said, because “it’s owned by us.” He noted that WeCare would not bear the cost of re-capitalizing the equipment.

Ayer also criticized the proposed program because it will charge the city for every ton it tips at its own facility. Ayer also pointed out that the composting facility is fully funded – due to the solid waste millage.

Also addressing the council on the proposed composting program was Thomas Mesko, who introduced himself as a 20-year resident of Ann Arbor. He echoed the sentiments of Ayer and Nightwine. He asked the council to delay their decision, just as Nightwine had asked them to. He agreed with Ayer that the composting facility is a great part of what the city is – he’s been using it for 15 years. He described it as a small operation, with just two employees, a manager and a mechanic. He said that employees’ voices weren’t being heard.

Compost: Council Deliberations

Sandi Smith (Ward 1) led off deliberations by expressing concern that a Michigan company had bid on the contract [Spurt Industries in Zeeland, Mich.], but had not been selected. Instead it was a company based in New York, WeCare Organics, that had been recommended. Smith allowed that Spurt Industries did not have a lot of experience, but she noted that their numbers were close to what WeCare had proposed. She was still not quite comfortable, she said. The composting facility is a point of pride for many people and it’s become an Ann Arbor institution, she said. She observed that the city has made a number of investments in land and equipment. The beneficiary of those investments, she feared, would be a private company. She said she could be convinced to postpone the measure, but could not support it as written.

Sabra Briere (Ward 1) indicated that she was prepared to move a postponement, because she’d submitted questions to which she’d not received answers. She asked for a postponement until the first meeting in January 2011. Mayor John Hieftje responded to the length of the postponement by observing: “That’s a long time.” Briere justified the time by saying that she had a feeling that December would be busy. A councilmember, who had been blessed with a sensitive microphone, seemed to concur with Briere’s assessment of a busy December by noting, “No shit!”

Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) demonstrates commitment to core principles in deliberations on composting.

As it turned out, shit – a.k.a. “biosolids” – was next up for discussion. Mike Anglin (Ward 5) wanted to know if any biosolids that might be brought in to the site could contain heavy metals that could eventually result in the city facing an environmental cleanup bill.

Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) indicated support for the postponement, also citing concern about the possibility that WeCare might pursue contracts with other municipalities for “sewage sludge.” He also wondered about the 25% charge to the composting facility for the scalehouse. He characterized the proposal not as a public-private partnership but as “privatization.”

Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5) observed, in the interest of moving the people’s business forward, that the city staff responsible for the proposal were in the audience and available to answer questions, thus making a gambit for Smith and Briere to withdraw the motion to postpone. Smith shook her head no. Hieftje suggested that he’d support only a much shorter postponement, and the proposed delay was shortened. The council’s first meeting in December, on Dec. 6, was a date to which Smith and Briere were willing to agree.

Outcome: The decision to contract with WeCare to operate the city’s composting facility was postponed to Dec. 6.

Medical Marijuana

Before the city council for its second reading was a set of zoning regulations restricting the locations of medical marijuana dispensing and cultivating facilities.

Among other restrictions, the proposed zoning regulations include a provision that medical marijuana dispensaries can only be located in zoning districts classified as D (downtown), C (business), or M (industrial), or in PUD districts where retail is permitted in the supplemental regulations. Also, medical marijuana cultivation facilities would only be located in C (business), M (industrial), RE (research), or ORL (office/research) districts.

The council had given initial approval to the zoning regulations at its Oct. 18 meeting. The city’s planning commission had put the proposed medical marijuana zoning through the process of its ordinance revision committee, and the planning commission had recommended approval of the changes at its Oct. 5 meeting. The planning commission’s exploration of the issue came at the direction of the city council given at its Aug. 5 meeting. That direction was part of a 120-day moratorium the council had imposed on the use of facilities inside the city for dispensing or cultivating marijuana. At that meeting, it was revealed that prior discussion of medical marijuana had taken place by the council at a July 19 closed session of the council, a meeting that is currently the subject of pending litigation against the city by The Chronicle.

Medical Marijuana: Public Hearing

Mayor John Hieftje indicated before the hearing began that there was a strong possibility that consideration of the zoning ordinance would be postponed.

Charmie Gholson told the council that she wanted to focus not on safe access or on the intent of Michigan’s medical marijuana law but rather on the perspective of an organization she’s worked with called Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP). The organization is working to stop the failed drug war, she said. She reviewed the history of the prohibition of alcohol, when women and mothers like her had advocated to make alcohol illegal. That had proven to be a mistake. She spoke of how the drug war had transformed our law enforcement system. She suggested that we don’t yet know what things would look like if certain drugs were actually legal. Making them illegal simply results in black market activity. Gholson characterized the city council’s approach to the regulation of medical marijuana as thoughtful and sane.

Thomas Partridge introduced himself as a disabled senior citizen, who had come of age in the 1960s when marijuana was popularized. He described himself as a lifetime non-marijuana user. He urged the council to amend the ordinance in a way that would require education about the possible risks versus the pain-relief benefits of smoking anything.

Medical Marijuana: Council Deliberations

An item added to the agenda that evening proposed to extend the moratorium another 60 days – from Dec. 3 to Jan. 31, 2011. If the city passes ordinances regulating medical marijuana before Jan. 31, then the moratorium would expire on their passage. The extension of the moratorium was contemplated because the council wanted to postpone until Dec. 20 the possible passage of the zoning regulations to which it had already given initial approval.

Sandi Smith (Ward 1), who had urged the shortening of the moratorium from 180 to 120 days when it was first contemplated, said she respected the complexity of the challenge and was convinced that the work was progressing smoothly.

Sabra Briere (Ward 1) asked if it would be possible to schedule a council work session on the idea of licensing, given that she was not familiar with the various issues surrounding licensing. City attorney Stephen Postema construed her remark to be about medical marijuana licensing in particular, and told her that the reason she was unfamiliar with it is because the idea is unprecedented. City administrator Roger Fraser told Briere that if questions emerged, a work session could be scheduled. The current intent is for the city attorney’s office to produce the draft text of a medical marijuana licensing ordinance for initial consideration at the council’s Dec. 6 meeting. Assuming it receives initial approval, the licensing could then be considered for second and final approval at the same time that the zoning regulations are considered on Dec. 20.

Outcome: The council unanimously approved the extension to the medical marijuana moratorium and the postponement of the zoning regulations.

Design Guidelines

When the A2D2 rezoning of downtown Ann Arbor was completed, the A2D2 oversight committee was disbanded in favor of a design guidelines committee, which was charged with completing the last remaining piece of the project. Marcia Higgins (Ward 4), who serves as the council’s representative on the committee, indicated that there would be a work session in February. The deadline for the committee to report back with a recommendation to the council had been Dec. 6, 2010. The work was proceeding smoothly, Higgins said, but the committee needed a bit more time.

Outcome: The council unanimously approved the extension of the deadline for the design guidelines committee’s work until Feb. 22, 2011.

Greenbelt Acquisitions

The council considered three appropriations from the city’s open space preservation millage to purchase development rights in an area around the city known as the greenbelt. Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5), the council’s representative to the greenbelt advisory commission (GAC), noted that all of the properties are contiguous to existing greenbelt properties and that they helped complete a 1000-acre block in Webster Township and a 400-acre block in Ann Arbor Township.

The properties recommended by GAC to have their development rights purchased: Norman Ledwidge Farm ($179,025); Bradley D. and Mary J. Clark Farm ($182,939); and Edward C. and Muriel Pardon Farm ($145,154).

For The Chronicle’s most recent GAC meeting coverage, see “Time to Expand Greenbelt Boundary?”

District Court Furniture

Before the council was a $36,000 revision to the current FY 2011 budget to allow for the purchase of furniture for the 15th District Court, which will be housed in the new municipal center that’s nearing completion next to the Larcom building, at Fifth and Huron. The initial request had been postponed at the council’s Oct. 18 meeting, when councilmembers had closely questioned the court administrator, Keith Zeisloft, over a request for up to $160,000 worth of furniture. The council again delayed action at its Nov. 4 meeting.

The memo provided by Zeisloft for Monday’s meeting, which resulted in the council’s approval of the expenditure, itemized $37,573 worth of refurbished furniture and $33,947 worth of new furniture. The authorization for the refurbished furniture will come to the council at a later date.

Outcome: The council unanimously approved the $36,000 for court furniture.

Area, Height and Placement

Before the council were changes in the city’s zoning code for areas outside the downtown, across most of the city’s zoning classifications. The changes affect area, height and placement (AHP). Not included in the changes to AHP is the R4C (multi-family dwelling) zoning classification. The changes are intended to allow more compact use of land, preserve natural systems, accommodate new growth along transit corridors, and locate buildings to promote non-motorized access. Previous Chronicle coverage of the city planning commission’s deliberations on AHP changes: “AHP Zoning Revisions Go to City Council.”

The measure had been postponed from the council’s Oct. 4 meeting, at the request of Marcia Higgins (Ward 4). At the council’s Oct. 18 meeting, Higgins brought forth amendments that confined a height cap on buildings to areas adjacent to residential areas. After some deliberation on the merits of the amendments, Higgins withdrew them and the council again elected to postpone the measure.

At the Monday, Nov. 15 meeting, the council again elected to put off a final vote on the proposal.

Outcome: The revision to the city’s AHP ordinance was postponed to Dec. 6.

Stormwater and Urban Forestry

An item on the consent agenda that piqued the curiosity of Marcia Higgins (Ward 4) involved a $56,260 contract with JJR to facilitate public engagement on the city’s urban forestry plan. The money will be appropriated from the city’s stormwater fund.

In the course of deliberations, city administrator Roger Fraser made an often-noted observation about the relationship between trees and their impact on stormwater and runoff. Higgins was assured that city staff would be present for the engagement process, but that it’s common for the city to use professional facilitators for these kinds of encounters.

Outcome: The JJR contract for public engagement was unanimously approved.

Internal Council Business

In addition to the ceremonial swearing in of councilmembers Sandi Smith (Ward 1), Tony Derezinski (Ward 2), Christopher Taylor (Ward 3), Margie Teall (Ward 4) Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5) and mayor John Hieftje, each of whom won re-election on Nov. 2, the council accomplished other housekeeping as well.

Internal Business: Council Calendar

Sandi Smith (Ward 1) made a bid to revise the council’s calendar for the coming year in July to accommodate the Ann Arbor Townie Party, which falls on July 18 in 2011, the date of a regular Monday council meeting. Given that the council’s meeting is shifted already from Monday to Tuesday to accommodate the July 4 holiday, Smith proposed shifting both July meetings by a week – to July 11 and 25. Marcia Higgins (Ward 4) noted that the city charter stipulates the first and third Mondays of the month for council’s regular meetings and suggested that the Townie Party was not a substantial enough reason to shift the schedule.

Outcome: The council’s calendar was not modified to accommodate the Townie Party. Voting for Smith’s calendar amendment were: Smith, Derezinski, Teall, Hohnke, and Anglin. Voting against: Briere, Rapundalo, Taylor, Kunselman, Higgins, Hieftje.

Briere noted that the calendar as proposed did not acknowledge the Aug. 2 primary election and moved to change the meeting date from Aug. 1 to the following Thursday, which is the council’s post-election custom.

Outcome: The council approved the change in the first August meeting date from Aug. 1 to Aug. 4.

Internal Business: Committee Appointments

The council approved its committee appointments with virtually no differences from last year except administrative changes. For example, the assignment of the council’s representative to the planning commission is the same: Tony Derezinski (Ward 2).

The budget committee remains constant: Mike Anglin, Sabra Briere, Marcia Higgins, Stephen Rapundalo, Christopher Taylor. The council administration and labor committee also remains the same: Tony Derezenski, John Hieftje, Marcia Higgins, Margie Teall, Stephen Rapundalo.

The council’s mutually beneficial committee, responsible for negotiating the new parking contract with the DDA, was left off the list last year in what Higgins characterized this past spring as an administrative oversight. It was included this year: Carsten Hohnke, Christopher Taylor, Margie Teall. One of the substantively new appointments was for Sandi Smith to represent the city council on the city’s human rights commission.

Outcome: The city council unanimously approved its committee assignments.

Internal Business: Mayor Pro Tem and Order of Succession

Without comment, the council considered a resolution naming Marcia Higgins mayor pro tem and the order of succession for acting mayor for the other nine councilmembers as follows: Margie Teall, Stephen Rapundalo, Mike Anglin, Sabra Briere, Tony Derezinski, Carsten Hohnke, Sandi Smith, Christopher Taylor, Stephen Kunselman. The order is based first on seniority on council, then alphabetically.

Outcome: The city council unanimously approved Marcia Higgins as mayor pro tem and the order of succession.

Re-Opening the Agenda

Midway through the agenda, after the council had voted on the drinking water fund issue, Sabra Briere (Ward 1) moved to re-open the agenda in order to move the construction of the bypass channel to an earlier slot. Voting for re-opening the agenda were: Briere, Derezinski, Taylor, Kunselman, Anglin, and Hieftje. Voting against re-opening the agenda were: Smith, Rapundalo, Teall, Higgins and Hohnke. On the 6-5 vote the agenda was re-opened.

Briere then amended the agenda so that the Argo Dam bypass channel item came in an earlier slot. The vote was 7-4, with Teall joining the side of those in favor. City clerk Jackie Beaudry indicated the motion had failed, because it had not achieved the 3/4 majority required by council rule. The 3/4 rule regarding agenda revision reads as follows:

Matters not on the published agenda may be added at the time of approval of the agenda with the consent of 3/4 of the members present. The Mayor or City Administrator may delete items from the published agenda at the request of the initiator of the proposed action prior to approval of the agenda.

Later in the meeting, when the council had nearly reached the bypass construction agenda item, city attorney Stephen Postema drew the council’s attention to the fact that with seven votes, the agenda change should have passed – it had been an amendment of an existing item, not an addition of a new item, to which the 3/4 requirement applies. By then, however, the point was moot.

Communications and Comment

There are multiple slots on every agenda for city councilmembers and the city administrator to give updates or make announcements about important issues that are coming before the city council. And every meeting typically includes public commentary on subjects not necessarily on the agenda.

Comm/Comm: Huron Hills Golf Course

Susan Morrison spoke on behalf of Ann Arbor for Parkland Preservation as the group’s legal counsel. The group is against the privatization of operations at Huron Hills golf course, one of two municipal golf courses operated by the city. The city issued an RFP (request for proposals) asking for proposals that would maintain the land for golf operations. In response, Miles of Golf (MOG) has submitted one of the two proposals. Morrison referred councilmembers to a letter she’d sent on behalf of the group with objections to the MOG proposal for Huron Hills. She reviewed several highlights of the letter. Morrison contended that:

1. Miles Of Golf’s proposal for its retail golf store on public parkland does not comply with the zoning ordinance or the RFP requirements.
2. Miles of Golf’s proposal to build its retail golf store on public parkland does not comply with the concession exemption under the lessee-user tax act as required by the RFP.
3. Miles of Golf’s proposal to build its retail golf store on public parkland does not comply with the city council resolution of Oct. 22, 2007 regarding municipal golf courses.
4. Miles of Golf’s proposal to build its retail golf store and a driving range on public parkland does not comply with the city’s parks and recreation open space (PROS) plan.

Libby Hunter rendered her commentary in the form of a song, as has become her custom. The tune was from “Bye Bye Birdie” and featured the lyric, “Bye Bye Parkland.”

Comm/Comm: Peace Talks

Henry Herskovitz addressed the council on the topic of conditions in Palestine. He described how the current mainstream media portrays the peace talks as stalled, which is really a euphemism for doing nothing, he said. They begin, they stall, then they’re terminated. Herskovitz allowed that the group that demonstrates on Washtenaw Avenue every Saturday outside the Beth Israel Temple, calling for a boycott of Israeli goods, might seem small. But he expressed confidence that just as a white-supremicist state had failed in South Africa, a Jewish-supremicist state would fail in Israel.

Comm/Comm: Christmas Trees

Sabra Briere (Ward 1) inquired with the city administrator Roger Fraser about what residents should do with their Christmas trees this year. The city is discontinuing their pickup. Fraser told Briere he’d have to get back with her on that. The regular compostables pickup is being extended to Dec. 10, Fraser reported.

Comm/Comm: Parks Proclamation

Chuck Warpehoski and Nancy Shore were honored by a mayoral proclamation for their work at Winewood Thaler Park. The council tries to recognize park volunteers at one of its two monthly meetings.

Comm/Comm: Keep Your Chin Up

Thomas Partridge introduced himself as a recent candidate for Michigan state senate and a Democratic Party leader. He called on everyone to take heart and be of good will – unity should be given priority, he said. We should not be forlorn. We should keep in mind the moral imperative to put the least among us first.

Present: Stephen Rapundalo, Mike Anglin, Margie Teall, Sabra Briere, Sandi Smith, Tony Derezinski, Stephen Kunselman, Marcia Higgins, John Hieftje, Christopher Taylor, Carsten Hohnke.

Next council meeting: Dec. 6, 2010 at 7 p.m. in council chambers, 2nd floor of the Guy C. Larcom, Jr. Municipal Building, 100 N. Fifth Ave. [confirm date]