The Act 196 authority, created in mid-2012 and spearheaded by the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority, was for all practical purposes ended late last year when the Ann Arbor city council voted to opt out of the transit authority at its Nov. 8, 2012 meeting. Of the 28 municipalities in Washtenaw County, the city of Ypsilanti is the only one that hasn’t opted out.

The county board’s April 17 resolution rescinds a board resolutions that created the transit authority, and requests that the state legislature also take action to dissolve the Washtenaw Ride, in accordance with Attorney General Opinion #7003. That AG opinion stated that “the dissolution of a transportation authority organized under the Public Transportation Authority Act requires an act of the Legislature and may not be accomplished by the unilateral action of the city in which it was established.” [.pdf of AG opinion 7003]

The county’s role in creating the transit entity had been laid out in a four-party agreement with Ann Arbor, Ypsilanti and the AATA, which commissioners approved on Aug. 1, 2012 in a 6-4 vote. Subsequent revisions involving the other entities resulted in the need for a re-vote by the county board, which occurred on Sept. 5, 2012.

There are two other transit efforts now under way. Washtenaw County is part of a southeast Michigan regional transit authority (RTA) created by the state legislature late last year. The RTA was formed to coordinate regional transit in the city of Detroit and counties of Wayne, Macomb, Oakland and Washtenaw. Conan Smith has been a strong advocate for the RTA, and made Washtenaw County’s two appointments to the RTA board before his term as county board chair ended on Dec. 31, 2012.

Separate from the RTA effort, the AATA has been meeting with representatives of the county’s “urban core” communities to discuss possible expanded public transit within a limited area around Ann Arbor. It would be a smaller effort than the previous attempt at countywide service. The AATA hosted a meeting on March 28 to go over details about where improvements or expansion might occur, and how much it might cost. [See Chronicle coverage: "Costs, Services Floated for Urban Core Transit."]

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

The Act 196 authority, created in mid-2012 and spearheaded by the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority, never gained traction and was for all practical purposes ended late last year when the Ann Arbor city council voted to opt out of the transit authority at its Nov. 8, 2012 meeting. Of the 28 municipalities in Washtenaw County, the city of Ypsilanti is the only one that hasn’t opted out.

The resolution given initial approval on April 3 was similar to one that county commissioner Dan Smith (R-District 2) had considered bringing forward in November of 2012, though he decided not to pursue dissolution at that time. [See Chronicle coverage: "End of Road for County Transit Effort?"] The April 3 resolution rescinds the board resolutions that created the transit authority, and requests that the state legislature also take action to dissolve the Washtenaw Ride, in accordance with Attorney General Opinion #7003. That AG opinion stated that “the dissolution of a transportation authority organized under the Public Transportation Authority Act requires an act of the Legislature and may not be accomplished by the unilateral action of the city in which it was established.” [.pdf of AG opinion 7003]

The county’s role in creating the transit entity had been laid out in a four-party agreement with Ann Arbor, Ypsilanti and the AATA, which commissioners approved on Aug. 1, 2012 in a 6-4 vote. Subsequent revisions involving the other entities resulted in the need for a re-vote by the county board, which occurred on Sept. 5, 2012.

There are two other transit efforts now under way. Washtenaw County is part of a southeast Michigan regional transit authority (RTA) created by the state legislature late last year. The RTA was formed to coordinate regional transit in the city of Detroit and counties of Wayne, Macomb, Oakland and Washtenaw.

Separate from the RTA effort, the AATA has been meeting with representatives of the county’s “urban core” communities to discuss possible expanded public transit within a limited area around Ann Arbor. It would be a smaller effort than the previous attempt at countywide service. The AATA hosted a meeting on March 28 to go over details about where improvements or expansion might occur, and how much it might cost. [See Chronicle coverage: "Costs, Services Floated for Urban Core Transit."]

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

From left: Washtenaw County treasurer Catherine McClary and Mary Jo Callan, director of the county/city of Ann Arbor office of community & economic development. Both women attended the Oct. 17 meeting of the county board of commissioners to address agenda items. (Photos by the writer.)

But they spent much of their discussion on a topic not on the agenda and not requiring a vote: public transit. It emerged that the county administrator now will be sending out additional notification letters to local jurisdictions about a new transit authority, called The Washtenaw Ride. The AATA had initially sent letters notifying jurisdictions of a 30-day window ending Nov. 2.

The new letters, which will likely be sent in early November and alert municipalities to a second 30-day window for opting out of the new authority, were originally expected to be sent by The Washtenaw Ride. But there’s been a delay in forming the new board, so the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority has asked that the county handle the notification process. The county had filed the articles of incorporation for the new entity in early October, at the AATA’s request.

Some commissioners were concerned about the cost –  because the agreement that lays out the process for forming the Washtenaw Ride indicated the county would not be financially responsible for any expenses. The following day, AATA CEO Michael Ford stated at the AATA board meeting that the county would be reimbursed for its expenses.

Part of the county board’s discussion on public transit also centered on proposed state legislation to set up a regional transit authority (RTA) for Detroit and the counties of Washtenaw, Wayne, Oakland and Macomb. Some commissioners wanted more information about Washtenaw County’s involvement, and asked for a working session on the topic.

Added to the agenda during the Oct. 17 meeting was a countywide civil infractions ordinance. It was given initial approval by commissioners – with a final vote and public hearing  scheduled for their Nov. 7 meeting. Currently, criminal misdemeanors are the only penalty that the county can apply for an ordinance violation – for infractions like not having a dog license. The intent of the proposed ordinance is to give the county more flexibility to designate violations of other county ordinances as a civil infraction, rather than a criminal misdemeanor. The proposed fines would be $50 for a first offense, $100 for a second offense, and $500 for a third or any subsequent offense.

The board also passed a policy to reduce barriers to breastfeeding in Washtenaw County facilities, and gave final approval to an ordinance change that shifts responsibility for the county’s accommodation tax from the county treasurer to the county finance director.  The accommodation tax is collected from hotels and motels.

Also approved was a one-year extension for the coordinated funding model that’s been piloted for two years as a way to more effectively fund local human services nonprofits. An evaluation of the program – a partnership between the county, city of Ann Arbor, United Way of Washtenaw County, Washtenaw Urban County, and the Ann Arbor Area Community Foundation – is expected early next year.

The board received a preliminary apportionment report for Washtenaw County, giving details of the 2012 taxable valuations for property in the county, by municipality. And commissioner Rob Turner reported that a new actuary has been selected to conduct reports on the status of the county’s employee pension and retirement health care funds. Turner is concerned that the fund balances are too low, leaving the county with unfunded liabilities that need to be addressed.

Speaking during public commentary, John Wagner – a volunteer for Camp Take Notice – urged commissioners to consider providing a county facility for the homeless, as winter approaches. The meeting also included recognitions of work done by SafeHouse Center, a domestic violence shelter, and local cooperatives like the Inter-Cooperative Council (ICC) of the University of Michigan. Gaia Kile, vice president of the board for the People’s Food Co-op, told commissioners that the hope is to turn these types of “highly democratic economic institutions” into the fastest-growing segment of the economy.

Civil Infractions Ordinance

A countywide civil infractions ordinance was placed on the agenda for initial approval at the Oct. 17 meeting. The board has previously discussed the idea of creating such an ordinance, but the item was not on the original published agenda. It was added as a supplemental agenda item during the meeting. [.pdf of proposed ordinance]

Currently, criminal misdemeanors are the only penalty that the county can impose for an ordinance violation. If the proposed ordinance is passed, it would  give the county more flexibility to designate ordinance violations as civil infractions, rather than criminal misdemeanors, which hold the threat of much higher fines and jail. The proposed civil infraction fines would be $50 for a first offense, $100 for a second offense, and $500 for a third or any subsequent offense.

Kirk Tabbey, chief judge of the 14-A District Court.

The issue of a civil infractions ordinance was raised most recently in the context of developing a policy for animal control services. Currently, not having a dog license is a criminal misdemeanor of 90 days in jail or a $500 fine. Because the penalty is relatively harsh, enforcement is low. County treasurer Catherine McClary had told the board at a February 2011 meeting that she was interested in developing a civil infractions ordinance for dog licensing, with the goal of increasing licensing compliance as a matter of public safety.

McClary and Kirk Tabbey, chief judge of the 14-A District Court, were on hand at the Oct. 17 meeting and answered questions from commissioners about the effort. The 14-A District Court has developed a collections system that the county hopes to use as a model. The ordinance was researched and written by Curtis Hedger, the county’s corporation counsel, with input from McClary, Tabbey and others.

Other departments – such as the building department, health department and office of the water resources commissioner – are also interested in applying civil infractions. So the ordinance is written in a general way, and not limited to a specific type of violation.

Civil Infractions Ordinance: Board Discussion

Conan Smith asked Kirk Tabbey to talk about the 14-A District Court’s “robust” system built around collections for civil infractions. Tabbey described the various steps that are taken if someone doesn’t pay the fine. The goal is to get the person into the collections cycle, and keep them out of court, if possible. About 1,000 people are currently on payment plans, he said. The easier it is for people to pay – by allowing them to make payments online, for example – the better it is for collecting the fine. He noted that the system more than pays for the staff needed to administer the collections.

Dan Smith asked about the judicial philosophy behind the system. Smith said he understood that the point was to not to tie up the courtroom, but the fact is that punishment as a misdemeanor is a strong deterrent. However, that’s only true if it’s enforced, he noted. Smith also expressed concern that some people might factor in a fine as a cost of doing business.

Tabbey agreed that these are real concerns. No matter how the system is structured, some people will find a way to abuse it, he said.  The intent is to get more compliance upfront, and avoid going to court. The approach meets multiple goals, and gives people a way to solve the problem without involving the court at the start, he said. The only reason for the court to get involved is if someone doesn’t pay.

Dan Smith pointed out that there’s still the threat of incarceration, if fines aren’t paid. But in the current system, the court would immediately be involved.

Outcome: Commissioners unanimously gave initial approval to the civil infraction ordinance. A final vote is expected at the board’s Nov. 7 meeting. The board also set a public hearing on the proposed ordinance for that same meeting.

Public Transit Update

It appears that Washtenaw County will now be the entity sending out an official letter to local municipalities in early November, informing them that the official 30-day “opt out” period for leaving the new Washtenaw Ride transit authority will start at that time. Curtis Hedger – the attorney for Washtenaw County – informed county commissioners of that news at their Oct. 17 meeting, in response to a query from commissioner Wes Prater.

Curt Hedger, right, is the county’s corporation counsel. He was talking with Pete Simms of the county clerk’s office prior to the start of the Oct. 17 meeting. Among other duties, Simms is responsible for taking minutes at the meeting.

Many commissioners expressed surprise at the county’s involvement in this way. Previously, the expectation was that the county would not be involved in the process after filing articles of incorporation – which occurred on Oct. 3 at the request of the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority. The Washtenaw Ride is an Act 196 authority, and is intended to create a much broader transit system than the current AATA. The process of creating a larger transit system has been in the works for more than two years.

There’s been some confusion and differing legal views regarding the process of forming the new transit authority. Letters of notification sent by the AATA in late September to all jurisdictions in the county referred to a statutory 30-day window starting with the filing of the articles of incorporation. But Act 196 also requires that the new transit authority itself notify jurisdictions, which also triggers a 30-day window for opting out. The statute makes clear that it’s the later of the two windows that is relevant. Because the new transit authority does not yet have a seated board, it has not yet acted to notify jurisdictions countywide. For a more detailed report on this issue, see Chronicle coverage: “Positions Open: New Transit Authority Board.”

At the county board’s Oct. 17 meeting, Hedger told commissioners that AATA had approached the county, as the incorporator of the new transit authority, and asked the county to send official letters instead of waiting for the new transit board to be formed. The county would do so as soon as the articles of incorporation become operational in early November, he said. That means letters would go out likely by Nov. 8, he said, which would create a 30-day “opt out” window that would close in early December. Jurisdictions are automatically a part of the new authority until their governing bodies take formal action. Since early October several township boards have already voted to opt out. From reports in assorted news outlets, those include the townships of Northfield, Salem, Manchester, Sharon, Superior, York, Dexter, Bridgewater and Augusta.

Hedger said he expects the letter, which hasn’t yet been drafted, will indicate that the new authority will honor the opt-out decisions that have already been made. But it also will inform municipalities that they could change their minds and rejoin the authority until the 30-day window closes in early December, he said.

Commissioners Dan Smith and Rob Turner, who have previously expressed reservations about the process, both noted that the county was not supposed to incur any costs in setting up the new authority – saying its only role was to officially file the articles of incorporation. They noted that this had been laid out in the four-party agreement between the county, AATA, and the cities of Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti. Now, it appears that staff time and postage costs will be paid by the county, they noted.

This is the relevant section in the four-party agreement:

6. Indemnification. AATA and its successor-in-interest The New TA shall indemnify and hold Washtenaw County, the Cities of Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti, their elected and appointed officials, employees, agents and volunteers harmless from and against all actions, liabilities, demands, costs and expenses, including court costs and attorney fees, which may arise due to their respective negligent, grossly negligent and/or intentional acts or omissions under this Agreement, and transfer or assumption required under this Agreement once the New TA is operational.

Hedger indicated that he doesn’t expect to spend a significant amount of time on drafting the letter, and will use the previous one sent out by AATA as a template. Commissioner Conan Smith noted that the county had pledged to ensure that municipalities would be notified, and if that simply means sending out 28 letters, then “I think we can foot the bill.”

There was some discussion about the need to notify each elected official individually, rather than just sending a notice to each of the township, village or city clerks in the 28 jurisdictions within Washtenaw County. That would significantly increase the number of letters that would be sent.

Hedger also noted that if the Washtenaw Ride board is appointed by early November, then that entity could take over the notification process. “But it doesn’t look like that will happen at this point,” he said.

Before any AATA assets would be transferred to The Washtenaw Ride, voters would need to approve a funding source – likely a millage that could come as early as May 2013. The requirement of voter approval is part of a four-party agreement – between Washtenaw County, the city of Ann Arbor, the city of Ypsilanti and the AATA – that governs the possible transition to The Washtenaw Ride.

Prater expressed frustration, questioning why the four-party agreement wasn’t being followed. ”Why don’t we just pitch it out? It’s absolutely ridiculous that we do these agreements, then they’re not followed.”

The day following the county board’s Oct. 17 meeting, the AATA board held its regular monthly meeting. Michael Ford, the AATA’s CEO, informed board members that the AATA would be reimbursing the county for any cost incurred from the mailing.

Public Transit Update: Regional Transit Authority (RTA)

Before the discussion about The Washtenaw Ride, Wes Prater had asked for an update about state legislation regarding a proposed regional transit authority (RTA) for southeast Michigan – the city of Detroit and the counties of Washtenaw, Wayne, Oakland and Macomb. Prater said he’d heard that board chair Conan Smith was involved, and he felt the board should get an update.

From left: Dick Fleece, the county’s public health director, and county commissioner Wes Prater.

Smith replied that he didn’t have detailed information at hand. The legislature has held several hearings, he said, and there’s strong support for an RTA across the region. But the legislation hasn’t gotten much traction, Smith added. [In late September, Smith had testified at a Michigan House Transportation Committee in support of the RTA. The legislation will likely be picked up again after the Nov. 6 election, in lame duck session.]

Prater felt like he hadn’t received sufficient information about the effort. Since Washtenaw County would be included in the RTA, if it’s formed, he thought the board should be more involved, rather than just one of its members.

Smith said he could send other commissioners information and analysis that he has received about the issue, noting that there have been multiple iterations of the RTA legislation over the past year. He also told Prater that Barbara Bergman and Yousef Rabhi had been appointed to an advocacy group about a year ago. When Prater asked when that had happened, Rabhi said that it had occurred at a board meeting.

By way of background, at its Sept. 21, 2011 meeting, the board unanimously passed a resolution of support for the RTA, but no appointments were made at that time. [.pdf of RTA resolution] From The Chronicle’s report of that meeting:

The context for the resolution is a Sept. 30 southeast Michigan regional summit that Washtenaw County has been invited to participate in for the first time. In past years, the summit included Detroit and the counties of Wayne, Oakland and Macomb. This year, Washtenaw and St. Clair counties will be included, and the topics will focus on regional cooperation and transportation. Smith and [former District 7 commissioner] Kristin Judge have been participating in the planning stages on Washtenaw County’s behalf.

The resolution cites the benefits and goals of regional transportation, including transit options along the Ann Arbor to Detroit corridor, and connections to Detroit Metro and Willow Run airports. It notes that state Sen. Rebekah Warren (D-Ann Arbor) – who is married to Conan Smith – has introduced legislation as part of a bipartisan package to create a regional transportation authority.

The main resolved clause of the Washtenaw County resolution states: “Be It Therefore Resolved that the Washtenaw County Board of Commissioners supports the creation of a new Regional Transportation Authority to enhance interconnectivity among the communities of the southeast Michigan region and urges the participants in the 2011 Southeast Michigan Regional Summit to aggressively pursue work that meets the above outlined goals.”

Responding to an email query from The Chronicle following the Oct. 17 meeting, Smith clarified that he was referring to an advocacy group called R-PATH (Regional Partners Advocating Transit Here). It’s unclear when Rabhi and Bergman were appointed, but they both filed R-PATH meetings – in January and February of 2012 – as part of their “flex account” statements. Each commissioner has $3,500 per year in their account to cover reimbursements for travel, per diem and other approved expenses. [Update: The resolution appointing Rabhi and Bergman was approved as part of the board's overall appointments process in January 2012.]

From left: Commissioners Rolland Sizemore Jr. and Yousef Rabhi.

At the end of the discussion at the Oct. 17 meeting, Rolland Sizemore Jr. said he’d like to have a working session on this issue. Smith suggested asking Kirk Profit, a lobbyist for the county, to attend the board’s Nov. 7 meeting and give an update.

Prater reiterated that the board should be informed, and that he didn’t want them to be taken by surprise. If the RTA is established, it’s important to know how it will be funded. The transit authority can’t be created without revenue, he said. “I think we all know that.” He wanted to know what it would cost.

Rabhi said he’d attended a meeting of the Washtenaw Area Transportation Study (WATS) earlier in the day. There, a liaison to SEMCOG – the Southeast Michigan Council of Governments – had given an update on the RTA status. A lot of people are unclear about what’s happening, he said, because it appears that much of the work is occurring behind the scenes. The initial plan put forward by Gov. Rick Snyder had called for vehicle registration fees to fund the RTA, he noted, but it’s not clear what the funding would be at this point.

Outcome: There was no vote – this was not an item on the agenda, and did not require action on the part of the board.

Accommodations Ordinance Change

Commissioners were asked to give final approval to an ordinance change that shifts responsibility for the county’s accommodation tax from the county treasurer to the county finance director. A public hearing was also held at the Oct. 17 meeting. Initial approval had been given on Oct. 3, 2012.

The ordinance amendment transfers a 0.7 full-time equivalent accounting job from the treasurer’s office to the county finance department, and amends the accommodation tax policy to clarify that the tax is only assessed against the actual price of a hotel, motel or other rental – not against other amenities that the business might charge its customers, such as Internet access or an extra cot in the room. [.pdf of ordinance amendment] [.pdf of amended accommodation ordinance] [.pdf of amended accommodation policy]

According to a staff memo, the changes are being recommended by the county’s accommodation ordinance commission (AOC), as well as the Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti convention and visitors bureaus, which receive funding from the 5% tax. In 2011, revenues from the tax reached nearly $4 million, and are allocated on a 75/25 percentage split to the Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti CVBs.

This is the second recent change to the accommodation tax ordinance. At its Aug. 1, 2012 meeting, the board amended the ordinance to exempt cottages and bed & breakfasts with fewer than 14 rooms, as well as individuals who occasionally lease out rooms. These types of establishments account for less than 1% of the total tax collected in Washtenaw County, according to a staff memo accompanying the resolution. Several owners of bed & breakfasts spoke to the board in favor of that amendment, citing concerns over the increased frequency of audits and general attitude of the treasurer’s staff, which they felt was unnecessarily contentious.

On Oct. 3, two people – both members of the local hotel association – spoke in support of the proposed change. No one spoke at the Oct. 17 public hearing.

Outcome: With no discussion, commissioners unanimously gave final approval to the accommodation ordinance change.

Coordinated Funding Program

A resolution to extend a two-year pilot program using a “coordinated funding” model to support local human services  for a third year was on the Oct. 17 agenda.

The county is one of five partners in the coordinated funding approach, which aims to leverage the money better that public and private entities allocate to local nonprofits. Other partners are the city of Ann Arbor, United Way of Washtenaw County, Washtenaw Urban County, and the Ann Arbor Area Community Foundation. The county board originally approved the two-year pilot at its November 2010 meeting – see Chronicle coverage: “Despite Concerns, Coordinated Funding OK’d.”

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

The total process puts $4.935 million into local human services nonprofits. The extension of the coordinated funding approach for a third year means that nonprofits receiving funding currently would not need to reapply for support. The extension by one year would allow for the evaluation process for the pilot period to finish, likely by early 2013. That evaluation is being funded with $70,000 from a private donor. The extension would also allow a better opportunity to provide the outcome data on the program so far, according to staff.

The Ann Arbor city council approved the one-year extension at its Oct. 15 meeting. A staff memo accompanying the county board’s resolution stated that the United Way of Washtenaw County and Ann Arbor Area Community Foundation have already approved the extension, and the Urban County executive committee is expected to vote on it at its Oct. 23 meeting.

Coordinated Funding Program: Public Commentary

Lily Au told commissioners that she hadn’t seen them in a long time, but she reminded them that she had previously attended their meetings and has been working on the issue of coordinated funding for years – she does not support it. She warned them to pay attention to the reallocation or redirection of funds. Usually, it’s related to someone’s personal benefit, she contended. From the beginning, she hasn’t agreed with the coordinated funding approach. She described it as immoral to take public funds and redirect them to private entities like the United Way. She pointed to what she sees as conflicts of interest – when former county commissioner Mark Ouimet served as president of the United Way board, and when the former president of AnnArbor.com did the same. It’s important to uphold integrity in the community, she concluded.

Coordinated Funding Program: Board Discussion

Dan Smith said he wasn’t thrilled with the one-year extension, but he would support it. He was really looking forward to the report that will be ready early next year.

From left: Commissioners Leah Gunn, Ronnie Peterson and Rob Turner.

Wes Prater and Ronnie Peterson asked several questions about the process. County administrator Verna McDaniel clarified that the extension runs through June 30 of 2014. The board has already approved funding for 2013 – that happened in late 2011, as part of a two-year budget planning cycle. At that time, the board approved a line item of $1.015 million annually for coordinated funding. However, commissioners must take another vote to affirm the 2013 budget, with any modifications they choose to make. That vote will likely occur at their Nov. 7 meeting.

McDaniel told commissioners that at some point in 2013, they’ll be asked to approve additional funding for the coordinated approach for the period of January through June of 2014. The county’s budget is tied to the calendar year, but the city of Ann Arbor’s budget year runs from June 30 through July 1.

Peterson wanted to know how much funding was being committed by other partners. He felt that information should be part of the board’s deliberations. He said that while the county’s funding was set firmly, he believed support from other partners tended to “move.” [Sitting in the audience, Mary Jo Callan – director of the office of community and economic development, which oversees this process – shook her head no, indicating that this wasn't the case.]

Peterson said he wanted to be clear about what the partnership truly  means. He was comfortable voting for the extension, but said that when the evaluation report is finished, he’ll bring forward some of his other concerns.

Outcome: The board unanimously gave initial approval to a one-year extension of the coordinated funding program for human services. A final vote is expected at the board’s Nov. 7 meeting.

Breastfeeding Policy

A policy to reduce barriers to breastfeeding in Washtenaw County facilities was on the agenda for approval at the Oct. 17 meeting. [.pdf of breastfeeding policy] The board had been briefed on the issue at a Sept. 20 working session.

The policy states: “In all County leased and owned buildings and property, and at all County-sponsored meetings, regardless of location, a mother may breastfeed her baby in any location, public or private, where the mother and her child are otherwise authorized to be.” There will be ”Breastfeeding Friendly” signs installed to promote the policy.

The goal is to promote “health, nutritional, immunologic, developmental, social and economic benefits for infants, mothers, families and communities” that are associated with breastfeeding, according to a staff memo.

Breastfeeding Policy: Public Commentary

Keleigh Lee of Superior Township introduced herself as a board-certified lactation consultant, and she thanked the board for supporting this breastfeeding policy. She has worked with hundreds of women, and many of them face an uphill battle – it’s hard to get started with breastfeeding, she said. So it’s sad to see many women quit doing it. The percentage of women breastfeeding drops from 80% to 15% within six months. She’s happy to see barriers removed, so that women can feel more comfortable breastfeeding.

Outcome: Without discussion, commissioners unanimously approved the county’s breastfeeding policy.

Apportionment Report

A preliminary apportionment report for Washtenaw County – giving details of the 2012 taxable valuations for property in the county, by municipality – was presented to county commissioners at their Oct. 17 meeting. The report also includes the amount of millages levied and the dollar amounts collected in taxes. December tax bills will be mailed out to property owners based on these calculations.

Raman Patel, Washtenaw County’s equalization director.

In April, the county’s equalization department produces an annual report describing Washtenaw County’s total equalized (assessed) value of property. The report is part of a state-mandated equalization process, and gives an indication of how much revenue the county will receive from property taxes in the coming year. [See Chronicle coverage: "Report: Better-Than-Expected '12 Tax Revenue"]

Later in the year – in October or November – the equalization and property description department presents an apportionment report. [.pdf file of 2012 preliminary apportionment report] Like the equalization report, the board is required by state law to vote on adoption of the apportionment report.

This year, all the taxing entities in Washtenaw County will be levying in total about $621.687 million in property taxes – a slight drop from $622 million in 2011 and $639 million in 2010. The county alone will levy about $80.578 million this year, compared to roughly $81 million in 2011 and $83 million in 2010.

The amount of money generated for the city of Ann Arbor through its millages will be increasing, due to the slightly increased valuation in Ann Arbor property values – from a total of 4,634,891,157 in 2011 to  $4,683,218,542 in 2012.

Typically, Raman Patel – the county’s long-time equalization director – makes a presentation to commissioners with highlights from the report. He attended the meeting, but was not asked to address the board.

Apportionment Report: Board Discussion

Dan Smith was the only commissioner to comment on the report. He highlighted the graphic on the report’s back cover – which was included in the paper version that was distributed to commissioners, but not in the electronic version. It showed that of the total amount of taxes levied in 2012 countywide, 52.05% was levied for public education. Smith said he just wanted to point out that fact.

Outcome: The board unanimously voted to approve the preliminary 2012 apportionment report.

Communications & Commentary

During the evening there were multiple opportunities for communications from the administration and commissioners, as well as public commentary. Here are some highlights.

Communications & Commentary: Camp Take Notice

John Wagner of Ann Arbor spoke during public commentary about Camp Take Notice, reporting that he’s been a volunteer for the homeless community for about two years. He reminded commissioners that the camp had been closed this summer. [The camp had been set up on property owned by the Michigan Dept. of Transportation, off of Wagner Road near M-14. This summer, MDOT told residents that they couldn't remain on the land, and the group disbanded from the location in June.]

Wagner said that when the group left the site, there were about 70 members. Of those, about 35 have found housing, and that’s great, he said. But homelessness remains a significant problem, both statewide and in this community. As individuals, people who are homeless feel isolated. There are also safety issues, he noted. The alienation that people feel contributes to chronic homelessness, and doesn’t help an individual get reintegrated into the community. Winter is approaching, Wagner noted, and times are tough. He hoped the county would consider helping find a site – perhaps a county-owned facility – that Camp Take Notice could use to help people through this troublesome time.

Commissioner Rob Turner responded to Wagner’s comments, referencing a recent meeting that he had attended with camp residents at the University of Michigan. [Turner had described this meeting in more detail at the board's Sept. 5, 2012 meeting.] He reported that some commissioners – including Leah Gunn, Yousef Rabhi and himself – had met with camp members and volunteers, county staff and nonprofits that are involved in addressing homelessness, including the Washtenaw Housing Alliance. There was not uniform agreement about an approach, he noted, because the camp’s philosophy differs in some ways from other groups. But there are some areas of agreement, he added, and they’ll be meeting again in November. He described the county board as strong advocates to help the homeless.

Communications & Commentary: Retirement Funds

Rob Turner reported news related to the county’s two retirement benefits boards – for the Washtenaw County Employees Retirement System (WCERS) and the Voluntary Employees Beneficiary Association (VEBA), which handles retiree health benefits. The WCERS and VEBA boards had a joint meeting recently to review responses to a request for proposals (RFP) for actuarial services. The two finalists were the current actuary – Gabriel Roeder Smith & Co. (GRS) – and Buck Consultants. Turner said that the Buck proposal was far superior, promising to be more pro-active and aggressive in reporting out the conditions of the funds. It was a unanimous decision, he said.

Commissioners Dan Smith and Alicia Ping.

Turner expressed concern about the fund balances, and looked forward to the county getting into a healthier position.

Wes Prater asked whether the county had received actuarial reports on WCERS and VEBA. County administrator Verna McDaniel reported that GRS had completed a report for WCERS, but the report for VEBA wasn’t yet finished – though it had been due “quite some time ago,” she said. [During a first-quarter budget update to the board in May 2012, Tina Gavalier – the county’s finance analyst – told commissioners that the reports would be completed by summer.] WCERS was 65% funded at the end of 2011.

Turner said the boards were concerned about the unfunded liabilities. He noted that if this were a plan in the private sector, they’d be required to address it. But because it’s a government plan, he said, the rules are different. It’s a big concern, he concluded, and the county needs to get its unfunded liabilities back in line.

Alicia Ping, who was chairing the Oct. 17 meeting, said that Yousef Rabhi would plan a working session on the topic in early 2013 – assuming that he would be re-elected as chair of the working session, she noted. The board elects its officers at its first meeting of 2013.

Communications & Commentary: Sylvan Recount

Rob Turner reported that he had attended the court-ordered recount of a ballot proposal vote for Sylvan Township earlier in the week. The vote ballot question – which was on the Aug. 7 primary ballot – was a proposal for a 20-year, 4.4 mill tax to repay debt on water and sewer bonds. [For more background, see Chronicle coverage: "County Board OKs Sylvan Twp. Contract."]

A recount had been requested following the narrow passage of the millage – 480 yes votes (50.37%) compared to 473 (49.63%) no votes. But during the recount on Sept. 4, the county board of canvassers determined that the ballot seal had not been appropriate and the recount didn’t proceed. That decision was appealed, and on Oct. 3 judge Archie Brown of the 22nd circuit court ruled that a recount could move forward within 21 days. The recount took place on the morning of Oct. 16.

Turner described it as a very interesting process, with no change in the outcome. He said he fully supported the recount, because the issue was festering. Several of his constituents have told him they feel relieved, Turner said, and it looks like the millage will be levied starting with the December 2012 tax bills.

Communications & Commentary:  WATS

Yousef Rabhi gave an update as the board’s liaison to the Washtenaw Area Transportation Study (WATS). The board had previously been briefed – at a Sept. 20, 2012 working session – about a WATS policy committee that was looking at the possibility of WATS becoming its own metropolitan planning organization (MPO). Currently, it is part of the Southeast Michigan Council of Governments (SEMCOG) MPO. The committee had decided not to move forward with separation from SEMCOG, he said, so that issue is off the table. He felt it had been productive to discuss, because it had led to progress in capturing SEMCOG’s attention regarding problems that need to be addressed. The county’s concerns will be better represented on a regional scale, he believed.

Communications & Commentary: Thomas Partridge

Thomas Partridge spoke during the evening’s two opportunities for public commentary. He introduced himself as a write-in candidate for state representative in District 53, which covers Ann Arbor. [Partridge had lost the Aug. 7 Democratic primary to incumbent Jeff Irwin, pulling in 11.53% of the vote.] Partridge advocated for support of affordable and accessible housing, transportation, health care and education, especially for the move vulnerable residents.

Recognitions

There were several formal recognitions made at the Oct. 17 meeting. Here are some highlights.

Barbara Niess May, executive director of the SafeHouse Center.

Recognitions: Domestic Violence Awareness

Felicia Brabec read a resolution that declared October as domestic violence awareness month and recognized SafeHouse Center for its work to help survivors of domestic violence. [.pdf of resolution] The nonprofit’s executive director, Barbara Niess May, was on hand and gave some brief remarks, thanking the board and others who have supported SafeHouse over the years. She told them that the work saves lives, but there are more people that they aren’t yet reaching. She reported that local law enforcement leaders would be convening to unveil a new effort that would improve the response to domestic violence countywide.

Recognitions: Cooperatives

Yousef Rabhi presented a resolution recognizing 2012 as the International Year of Cooperatives. The resolution noted that there are several cooperative businesses in the county, including the Inter-Cooperative Council (ICC) of the University of Michigan; Forest Hills Cooperative Housing; Arrowwood Hills Cooperative Housing; Colonial Square Cooperative; Pinelake Village Cooperative; Ann Arbor Cooperative Preschool; Stone School Cooperative Nursery; First United Methodist Cooperative Nursery; University of Michigan Credit Union; Ypsilanti Food Co-op; and the People’s Food Co-op in Ann Arbor.

Gaia Kile, vice president of the board for the People’s Food Co-op, spoke to the board briefly. Cooperatives have been recognized by the United Nations for playing an important role in economic development and in meeting human needs, he said. Because this type of business is values-based and focused on meeting the needs of its members, he said, they are “highly democratic economic institutions.” The hope is to turn cooperatives into the fastest-growing segment of the economy, Kile added, and he thanked the board for the recognition.

Rabhi noted that he used to live in cooperative housing. It changed his life, he said, and because it led him to run for office, he joked that it had changed the lives of other commissioners, too.

Present: Felicia Brabec, Leah Gunn, Ronnie Peterson, Alicia Ping, Wes Prater, Yousef Rabhi, Rolland Sizemore Jr., Conan Smith, Dan Smith, Rob Turner.

Absent: Barbara Bergman.

Next regular board meeting: Wednesday, Nov. 7, 2012 at 6:30 p.m. at the county administration building, 220 N. Main St. in Ann Arbor. The ways & means committee meets first, followed immediately by the regular board meeting. [Check Chronicle event listings to confirm date.] (Though the agenda states that the regular board meeting begins at 6:45 p.m., it usually starts much later – times vary depending on what’s on the agenda.) Public commentary is held at the beginning of each meeting, and no advance sign-up is required.

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

Optimism was based on ridership data for the fiscal year that ended on Sept. 30 – which includes a record-setting 6,325,785 rides on the regular bus service, up 6.6% over the previous year, and 3.4% more than the previous record year of 2009.

AATA board member David Nacht expressed concern about the idea of adding back in project elements to the new Blake Transit Center, grounding his concern in part in the fact that he was wearing his “treasurer’s hat.” (Photos by the writer.)

Damping enthusiasm were the year-end budget numbers, which showed the AATA posting a deficit around $260,000 greater than the one it had budgeted for, leaving an excess of expenditures over revenues of $1,255,312. [.pdf of unaudited FY 2012 financials] That comes in the context of an approved budget for the just-begun current fiscal year, which includes an anticipated deficit of about $300,000. The board’s Oct. 18 deliberations revealed the fact that only by recalculating the amount in the AATA’s cash reserves did the organization currently have the required three-month operating reserve on hand.

In that financial context, board members were not inclined to add back in some elements that had recently been cut out of the new Blake Transit Center project, which would have brought the project budget to nearly $8.5 million. The construction contracts approved by the board at its meeting totaled a bit over $8 million, which was still dramatically larger than the smaller $3.5 million project the AATA had started with over three years ago. Instead of taking the less ambitious strategy, the AATA opted to locate the new, larger center on the opposite side of the same parcel where it currently stands. Construction on the two-story Fifth Avenue-facing center is now expected to start in late November or early December.

The board’s deliberations on the new transit center focused on whether to add back into the project some items that had been removed to bring the cost down from $8.5 to $8 million. Of the three items on the table – automatic ticketing kiosks, real-time bus arrival information displays, and LEED certification of the building – only the LEED certification was added back in, at a cost of $80,000.

At the Oct. 18 meeting, the board also got an update on the situation surrounding the incorporation of the new Act 196 board for The Washtenaw Ride. Michael Ford, AATA’s CEO, indicated that the AATA would be reimbursing Washtenaw County for the cost of renotifying jurisdictions in the county regarding their option not to participate in the new authority. He confirmed that AATA board members would not serve simultaneously on the current board and the board of the new authority, as previously expected. Ford indicated that AATA legal counsel believes that what the AATA has done to date already complies with the law, but the AATA is exercising extreme caution.

Several members of the future Act 196 board attended the meeting and had a voice at the table, but not a vote.

The board’s meeting concluded with a closed session lasting nearly two hours on pending litigation.

Budget

The fiscal year that just ended on Sept. 30, 2012 was one item discussed, as was follow-up from approval at the board’s previous meeting of the budget for fiscal year 2013, which began on Oct. 1. The state of the budget was general background for the discussion of the Blake Transit Center item, which was the one voting item on the board’s meeting agenda.

Budget: FY 2012

The Ann Arbor Transportation Authority had budgeted for a nearly $1 million deficit this year, but wound up with an excess of expenditures over revenues that was actually $260,000 more than that. The unaudited figures reported to the AATA board at its Oct. 18 meeting showed a deficit for the year of $1,255,312. [.pdf of unaudited FY 2012 financials]

Several reasons were given for the additional shortfall, which resulted in only $27,617,099 in actual revenues compared with the $29,418,995 that was budgeted. Those reasons included: $120,842 less in passenger revenue; $269,095 less in local transit tax revenue; $529,214 less in purchase-of-service revenue; and $927,149 less in federal funding. That was balanced somewhat by reduced expenses in some categories, including: about $500,000 less in compensation; $600,000 less in purchased services (including consulting); and $550,000 in savings due to the delayed launch of the service between downtown Ann Arbor and Detroit Metro Airport.

Based on board discussion at the meeting, the AATA currently has just about exactly the three-month operating reserves on hand that it’s required to maintain by board policy.

Budget: Reserve Status

Reporting from the performance monitoring and external relations committee, Roger Kerson noted there’d been shortfalls in the FY 2012 year-end numbers for various reasons. For the time being, those numbers put the AATA under the three-month’s worth of cash reserve level. According to Kerson, controller Phil Webb had identified additional money. And there’s an interpretation of what the three-month reserve actually means, Kerson said. Some one-time expenses – for example, for the connector study – are one-time expenses, and it’s not necessary to maintain a reserve against those types of expenses, he said.

Budget: FY 2013

As a follow-up from the previous regular meeting, AATA CEO Michael Ford noted that a worksheet had been provided in the board information packet detailing the budget changes that had been made to the current year’s budget, which began on Oct. 1. [.pdf of detail on budget changes] Those changes had been made shortly before the board voted on the final budget, which was different from one reviewed in committee. The changes were necessary due to a reduction in state operating assistance of around $800,000. It had still resulted a $300,000 planned deficit for FY 2013 instead of the essentially break-even budget that had initially been reviewed in committee. Ford noted that the worksheet included those items that had been considered for elimination but were kept in the budget – at the request of board member Sue Gott.

New Blake Transit Center

The board considered a resolution to approve construction contracts totaling $8,049,988 for a new downtown Ann Arbor transit center. The initiative began over three years ago with a much smaller budget of around $3.5 million.

Blake Transit Center: Background

The original concept was to build the new center on the same footprint as the existing Blake Transit Center.

This AATA-owned parcel, where Blake Transit Center is located, sits in the middle of the block bounded by Fourth and Fifth avenues on the west and east, and by Liberty and William streets on the north and south. (Image links to higher resolution view. Parcel map and aerial photo from Washtenaw County’s website: gisweb.ewashtenaw.org/website/mapwashtenaw/)

But the concept changed to one that will construct a larger building at a different location – still on the same parcel where it currently stands, between Fourth and Fifth avenues, but on the opposite side of the block from its current site.

Bus traffic to the new Fifth Avenue-facing center will enter from Fourth Avenue and exit onto Fifth, which is opposite from the current traffic flow. In order to square off the parcel for the new construction, a six-foot wide strip of land on the southwestern edge of the parcel was purchased by the AATA from the city of Ann Arbor for $90,000.

Construction bids came in totaling $8.5 million. But as of the board’s Jan. 19, 2012 meeting, the AATA had only identified about $7 million in funding for the project. At that meeting, the board authorized a $7 million project budget –  in the context of approving its capital and categorical grant program for 2012–2016. That amount was an increase from a $5.5 million project budget that been approved at the board’s Aug. 24, 2011 meeting, when it had revised the capital grant program. The initial project budget had been $3.5 million.

The increase in cost is described in a staff memo accompanying the board’s Oct. 18 resolution as due to a variety of factors, including changes in design based on community input and environmental analysis. The original $3.5 million design was for a one-story building on the current building’s footprint. The approved design is for a three-level structure (two above ground) with foundations that could support another two stories – at an additional cost of $100,000. Subjecting the project to the city’s regular site plan approval process – which is not a legal requirement – cost several hundred thousand dollars, according to the staff memo. The city’s planning commission reviewed the project on July 17, 2012 and the city council received the review as part of its Aug. 20 meeting written communications.

Aerial view of the Blake Transit Center site plan. The building will come in at around 12,000 square feet.

According to a memo to the board from AATA CEO Michael Ford, money identified by the AATA beyond the $7 million budget included $700,000 from a 2002 federal grant that apparently had been earmarked for a new Blake Transit Center. The gap between the $7.7 million and the $8.5 million total construction bid could have been covered through an additional $750,000 in federal formula funds (Section 5307) that are available this year.

The board’s performance monitoring and external relations committee was divided at its Oct. 16 meeting on the question of increasing the budget to the $8.5 million mark. The committee recommended revisions to the project to cover the gap only to the point of $8,049,988. [.pdf of constructions contracts for BTC] The committee was interested in consulting the board as a whole to contemplate the issue of possibly increasing the budget further.

A memo from Ford to the full board asked for consideration of nearly the full construction bid amount, so that key elements could be restored to the project: LEED Gold certification ($80,000); real-time bus arrival kiosk signage ($180,000); and ticket vending machines ($125,000). Those three items would have brought the total project cost to $8,424,988.

Blake Transit Center: Board Discussion – Preliminaries

Roger Kerson reported from the performance monitoring and external relations committee meeting and described a “spirited discussion” about the Blake Transit Center project. He noted that the proposed budget has increased quite a bit since the start. He characterized the increased scope of the project and the budget as coming from a deliberate process of gathering community input and addressing needs of riders and planning for the future.

AATA board members Sue Gott and Roger Kerson.

The result is that the original $3.5 million project is now an $8.5 million project. But there was only a bit more than $7 million budgeted for the project, he said. He and David Nacht had been concerned about that, he said. It might be possible to shift money out of federal capital funds. What the committee had asked staff to do was to reduce the project budget – reasoning that the best course was to leave it to the board’s “collective wisdom” as to which option to choose. The option of the reduced project was being presented for the board’s consideration, he said. But the items that were removed are specified, so the resolution can be discussed in that context.

He felt that committee members are aware of the hard work that has gone into the planning process, as well as the timelines that the AATA is up against to start construction. But the board also needs to be the best possible stewards of public funds. They’re state and federal funds, but it’s still taxpayer money, he said.

Some questions and commentary from Bill Lavery, Anya Dale and Michael Ford centered around the impact of using federal formula funds (Section 5307) to cover the gap in funding between the budgeted amount and the $8.5 million cost that had resulted from construction bids.

The programming of the Section 5307 federal funds through 2015 shows a balance of $419,281. A memo included in the board’s information packet and written by Chris White, AATA’s manager of service development, notes that allocating an additional $600,000 of Section 5307 federal funds – as required to bring the new Blake Transit Center budget to $8.5 million – would have an impact on other planned uses of the funds. [.pdf of White's memo and allocation of federal funds by year]

Ford indicated that the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) had also contacted the AATA indicating that there was additional money specifically for the Blake Transit Center. “It was some money they had sitting somewhere, and I hate to say it that way, but it was available to us for that purpose,” Ford said. Kerson noted that even the additional FTA money – which meant that the dedicated funds for the project rose from around $7 million to $7.7 million – did not get the budget to $8.5 million.

Blake Transit Center: Board Discussion – Justifying Cost

When the board reached the Blake Transit Center project on the agenda, Jesse Bernstein led off the deliberations. He characterized the PMER committee discussion about the costs as “lively.” He said that he, too, was concerned about the costs. The committee looks at the details behind the rationale, he said. He reviewed the extended time that had been taken to involve other partners in the area and customers. He pointed to the $90,000 purchase of land from the city of Ann Arbor, which increased the cost. Another reason the cost had increased, he said, was due to a contingency of $300,000 that had been added. That contingency had not been included in the original projection, he said. The committee felt that is was prudent to add that, which is typical with most construction projects. Another element that had increased the costs was city fees, he said – fees for building permits and water connections were assumed to be at a particular cost and they turned out to be much higher, he said.

So the committee had pressed staff to see what could be cut out, Bernstein said. Some back-and-forth between Bernstein and other board members and staff established that the three items left out of the final budget were: LEED Gold Certification ($80,000); real-time bus arrival kiosk signage; and ticket vending machines ($125,000).

AATA maintenance manager Terry Black, who is managing the Blake Transit Center project.

A $243,000 cost for heated sidewalks and driveways – to eliminate the need for snow and ice removal in the winter – was included in the lower budget figure. Terry Black, maintenance manager, confirmed that the AATA has spent up to $75,000 in a year for winter maintenance of the existing facility. Bernstein characterized the cost of the heated sidewalks and driveways as realizing a return on their investment in about three years.

David Nacht noted that he’d sat on the planning and development committee (PDC) during the last couple of years as the project was being considered. That committee had been comfortable with the doubling in cost from $3.5 million to $7 million – taking into account significant environmental concerns and community concerns about aesthetics.

Accommodating that input was appropriate to the AATA’s role in the Ann Arbor community as good partners with the city, the neighborhood associations, and the business community, he said. He also said that another significant increased cost in the building is that it has the future potential to be built higher than the currently planned two stories above ground – for example, by a private-sector developer, Nacht said. That developer could pay AATA or The Washtenaw Ride in some kind of public-private partnership and establish a future revenue stream. That would mean investing in this part of downtown, and possibly recouping some of that investment in the form of future revenue, he said.

Blake Transit Center: Board Discussion – Treasurer’s Concern

But Nacht was concerned about increasing the cost from $8 million to $8.5 million. The last time PDC looked at the project, the budget was $7 million, he noted. There’d been no contingency in the budget at that time, he said, and he was fine with adding $300,000 as a contingency, noting that he hoped it didn’t get spent.

And he was fine with increasing the budget from $7.3 million to $8 million – because that’s federal money earmarked for this project, and could be described as “use it or lose it.” The budget is mostly federal money that is specifically earmarked for the Blake Transit Center project, he said, that cannot be used for other purposes. The building was in need of renovations costing at least $1 million in any case, he said. But through the help of Congressman John Dingell and Senator Carl Levin, most of the funding had been obtained.

Nacht noted that the discussion at the last board meeting had included a fiscal challenge – because the state is cutting back its funding of the AATA. Nacht viewed the situation from the perspective of the board treasurer. He noted that the board had just heard during the discussion of the year-end budget figures that AATA is just at the three-month cash reserve level. The AATA is also in an expansionary phase, Nacht said. So far it’s been successful – and the expanded service is resulting in additional riders. That means the AATA is offering services that people are using. If you dig into the detail of the past year’s service, he said, NightRide and ARide services are being well-used and that had contributed to the current fiscal situation, because they are expensive to operate.

AATA board member David Nacht checked the nameplate as he arrived to make sure he was sitting in the right spot.

The AATA can’t just keep saying yes to expanded services without some sort of change in the fiscal direction. That wouldn’t be sustainable, Nacht said. So he didn’t care what cuts were needed to go from $8.5 million to $8 million, but “I don’t want to spend that half a million bucks,” he concluded. It’s a building – where people get on the bus and get off the bus, he noted. At the end of the day, buses cost $600,000, and fiscal challenges happen, and “at some point, we have to stop buying things,” Nacht said, in order to be fiscally prudent. He had nothing bad to say about any of the specific project elements, and figured there were many more that could be added, but he didn’t want to spend “a nickel more than 8 million bucks on it.”

Blake Transit Center: Board Discussion – Big Enough?

Eli Cooper said he was reminded of a conversation of an even larger opportunity at that location, where the AATA was looking to expand to include the Fifth and William parcel – the site of the former YMCA building. [It's now owned by the city and used as a surface parking lot.] That project failed for a variety of reasons, Cooper said. The current proposal looks like it has a number of challenges, he said. The reinforcement of the foundations to allow for just two additional levels was a concern for Cooper. The matter-of-right development allowed by the D1 zoning for the area was not just the 400% floor-area-ratio (FAR) that the two additional stories would yield, but rather the higher-density 700%, Cooper observed.

A response from Nacht described the possibility of eventually combining the new BTC building with a future development on what is now a surface parking lot at Fifth and Division. [But Cooper's point – that the AATA was not thinking of the largest possible option allowed under city zoning – seemed to elude Nacht and other board members.] Cooper reiterated that he wanted to make sure that the AATA was maximizing the potential of the site.

Cooper also wanted to know how space in the new building was allocated: staff use compared to rider use.

Jesse Bernstein responded to Cooper by recalling how the public meetings had included questioning of the need for so many staff restrooms. The explanation is that drivers have little time to go to the bathroom between ending and starting their routes. Access to bathrooms can have an impact on on-time performance, he said. The second floor also includes a backup emergency dispatch center, and space for getDowntown program staff offices, Bernstein said.

Later in the meeting, when AATA manager of maintenance Terry Black was asked to the podium to explain the scope of the current building’s programming, he described how the getDowntown staff, who are employees of the AATA, were currently leasing space in downtown Ann Arbor. [That cost is borne by the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority.] The 12,000-square-foot new building would provide office space for getDowntown, Black said. The AATA headquarters facility at 2700 S. Industrial is maxed out in terms of office space, Black said. [On the most recent visit to that location by The Chronicle, a cubicle had been set up in a hallway area.]

Black also described the new building’s canopy, stormwater collection system from that canopy for use of graywater (toilet flushing) within the building, and the phased demolition of the existing building.

Blake Transit Center: Board Discussion – Needed Elements

Cooper ventured it’s not an issue of the operators’ needs. But in doubling the size of building, in the context of a tight budget time, he wondered about the inclusion of a secondary dispatch center contrasted with “significant elements for the benefit of our customers.” Real-time information is simply an expectation at a modern transit center, Cooper said. Now the board is being given a choice to leave it out. He wondered if the AATA was carpeting and outfitting a second level of the building at the expense of some elements that would make the AATA’s service more useful for its riders. He’d not been involved in the planning, he allowed, but when funds are low and there’s a need to make some tradeoffs, he was raising the question because he wanted to be comfortable as a board member that the board is making the right tradeoffs.

Nacht asked for Black’s assessment of the choices to be made. He agreed with Cooper about the inclusion of real-time information. But the decision of how to save the $0.5 million had been left up to the staff, he said.

Black essentially reviewed all the building elements. The building is entirely barrier-free and will meet ADA [Americans with Disabilities Act] code, he said. At the conclusion of the meeting during public commentary,  Carolyn Grawi – Center for Independent Living director of advocacy and education – indicated she was happy that Black and Bernstein had mentioned the barrier-free design.

Black noted that the Federal Transit Administration requires the AATA to spend 1% on art. And some of the cost associated with the building stems from the choice of materials, he said. The choice was for limestone, instead of cast stone. Limestone would give a more durable long-lasting building, he said, but cost more. Drywall could have been specified for the bathrooms, instead of tile, but tile is more durable. The heated sidewalks and driveway cost more now, but they’re an effort to reduce maintenance costs, while ensuring safety for riders.

Blake Transit Center: Board Discussion – Contingency

Sue Gott asked about the contingency amount. Why wasn’t there a contingency originally and why is it set at the proposed percentage? Terry Black indicated that a contingency wasn’t something that had been talked about initially. The $300,000 contingency is “very tight,” he allowed. But he felt comfortable that everything had been scoped out and the numbers were good. There are unknowns in any construction project, he said, but he allowed that the contingency is a concern.

In connection with the contingency, Michael Ford ventured that the ticketing kiosk and real-time information components might be held back until the project is halfway constructed, and if it’s recognized at that point that the additional contingency is not needed, those elements could be re-included.

Charles Griffith was concerned that the proposal before the board was not to take the extra step to obtain LEED certification at the Gold level, given that the building had been designed to meet that standard. [LEED stands for Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design, a rating system for energy-efficient building practices.] Black told Griffith that the LEED-designed building would be built. But without the additional $80,000 for the certification process, there would not be a certificate. The $80,000 could be used on some other area.

Griffith ventured that seemed like a significant lost opportunity to go to the effort to design for that LEED standard, and not be able to show that the building had actually reached that level. He would not personally support taking that component out. [Griffith is energy and climate programs director at the Ecology Center, an Ann Arbor nonprofit.]

Gott received confirmation that eliminating the LEED certification in the budget would not result in the elimination of any design elements – but that it would mean that costs associated with the submittals for certification wouldn’t be incurred.

Roger Kerson ventured that part of the problem is that “the cake is pretty well baked.” He’d hate to take out real-time bus information. If the process was in an earlier stage, it might be possible to try to live without the training room on the second floor, for example. But changes to the square footage at this point mean a change in design and that’s not free, he said. What Black and the staff were trying to identify were those “standalone” elements that could be removed.

Gott wanted clarification of the cost increase due just to the more substantial footings that are designed to bear the load of potentially a four-story building. Black told her it’s about $100,000.

From left: Ypsilanti mayor Paul Schreiber and AATA board chair Charles Griffith chat before the Oct. 18 AATA board meeting started.

Ypsilanti mayor Paul Schreiber – who serves on the future Washtenaw Ride’s board – ventured that he was certainly no expert in construction, but the Hamilton Crossing project under construction in Ypsilanti is an $18 million project and had a 10% contingency. The amount the AATA has included for the Blake Transit Center is low compared to that, he said. [$300,000 on a $7.7 million project for total of $8 million is about 3.5%.]

Blake Transit Center: Board Discussion – LEED Certification

Griffith came back to the LEED gold certification. He felt the board could agree that the design was meant to achieve the LEED certification standard. But the AATA wouldn’t be able to state that in a public way. You’d have to be very careful about how you discussed it, if you don’t have the LEED certification. It’s highly improper to say you’ve achieved LEED certification if you haven’t, he said. You’d have to say, “Well, we built to potentially meet LEED.”

He asked Sue Gott, who’s the chief planner for the University of Michigan, if UM would ever go to the trouble to design a LEED-certified building and then not actually certify it. Gott’s answer: “We did that with North Quad. We utilized the funds for elements of the building rather than the cost of the LEED certification.” [North Quad is a new student dorm at the corner of South State and Huron.] Later in the meeting, Gott expressed some uncertainly about the level of the North Quad LEED design. Responding to a follow-up emailed query from The Chronicle, she wrote that the North Quad building would have met the basic certified level, if UM had pursued that certification. The other levels in order are silver, gold, and platinum.

Bernstein said he agreed with the concerns that had been expressed. Having been involved with the planning, there’d been several unexpected turns, he said, including the fact that no one ever figured that an easement might be granted by the federal building folks to provide a walkway on the northern side of the parcel, which was a precursor to thinking about moving the site of the new building.

Blake Transit Center: Board Discussion – “Go for it”

Other than through the buses themselves, the most public statement the AATA makes is through the Blake Transit Center, Bernstein said.

From left: AATA CEO Michael Ford and board chair Charles Griffith.

Around 5,000 people a day people go through the BTC. He agreed with the concern about financing, however. Without wanting to seem “crass” about it, Bernstein said he thought the AATA ought to “go for it” and increase the budget to $8.5 million so that the three elements could be restored. To the public, the AATA could say that everything had been checked at every step of the way and it had been reviewed by committees and the public. Some people feel you shouldn’t spend anything on anything, Bernstein.

The AATA has to look at a commitment to improving the infrastructure for the future. It’s possible to stay in the current building and simply give all the money back to the feds, he said. He argued for not doing something partway, but rather getting as much out of the building as the AATA can. Constructing a building to last 10-15-20 years versus 20-30-40 makes a big difference, he said. He didn’t see a huge difference in $8.05 million and $8.5 million.

Anya Dale noted that her understanding was that a lot of the extra cost stemmed from incorporating public requests for what they wanted in a downtown transit center. Real-time information was an important request, she said. She agreed with Eli Cooper that providing real-time information was a key element for providing quality service.

Griffith returned to the LEED certification issue. He described it as a fairly intensive process of gathering data and doing analysis. It’s not just paperwork, he said.

Blake Transit Center: Board Discussion – Contingency Redux

David Nacht said he had no opinion about the particular point of the LEED certification. His concern was based on comments from Sue Gott and Paul Schreiber about the amount set aside in the project for contingency – that the amount might not be sufficient. He wanted to hear something about that. In a context where the organization is taking itself right up to the point of its required cash reserve level, the idea that the contingency for the project might not be sufficient would make him want to table the project.

Terry Black asked Matt Berg from Spence Brothers Construction to address the issue. Berg said he’d been working with Black for the last year. He was recommending a 5% contingency, based on the level of the design that’s been done. The drawings are done, and the project has been bid and scoped, he said. There’d been 80 bidders on 16 different construction packages. Contracts could be written now, he said. He felt that 5% should be sufficient.

Matt Berg, construction estimator with Spence Brothers Construction.

Schreiber’s higher number of 10% would be more typical if they were further behind in the design process and were still drawing. Nacht responded to Berg’s comments by saying, “Well, that was comforting!” Nacht continued by saying he had no particular opinion about the items identified for possible re-inclusion. However, he did have an opinion about dipping into funds beyond those that had been previously budgeted. As treasurer, he didn’t want to be in a position of having to come back and remind the board of this moment and saying, “Okay, we’re going to cut bus service now and fire staff now, because you wanted to build a building and make it a certain level building.”

Jesse Bernstein got confirmation from Black that the funding for the building won’t come out of operations funding. So the construction of the building wouldn’t result in reducing service or firing staff. Rather, it’s about buying buses or buying replacement parts possibly later than they otherwise would.

A somewhat inconclusive conversational thread ensued about the nature of the funds that were being tapped. Nacht noted that under federal transit law, preventive maintenance funds could be converted into operations funding to pay people and to buy fuel, he said. The AATA had recently received a budget shock and could receive additional shocks – for example, if the U.S. were to go to war with Iran next year, fuel prices could go through the roof, he said. Wearing his treasurer’s hat, it was his job to say these kinds of things.

Roger Kerson felt the Section 5307 funds were normally allocated for projects such as park-and-ride lots, not buses, which CEO Michael Ford seemed to confirm.

Eli Cooper was particularly sensitive to the process that has more than doubled in price – but that was the result of working with stakeholders. He’d been preparing to add an amendment to restore the three items to the budget, but had elected not to do that – out of respect for Nacht’s concern as the treasurer. It might be more appropriate to add those items back when the AATA had more confidence in its financial position, he said. There has to be a point in time where prudence takes over, he said. To hear that careful accounting has to be done in order to confirm that the cash reserve policy is being met, he said, means that it’s time to look at the project and ask the staff to perhaps find different additional sources of revenue to make sure that those features can be included that will ensure the new building is state-of-the-art.

Karen Lovejoy Roe expressed some support for the idea that Ford has suggested – that about halfway into the project the AATA would have a better idea of whether some of the additional items could be included under the contingency. She agreed with Schreiber that 5% seemed like a really low number. [Lovejoy Roe is Ypsilanti Township clerk and a member of the future Washtenaw Ride's board.]

Griffith indicated that he’d be open to an amendment along the lines of the items would be added in, if it appears there are sufficient resources as construction on the project progresses.

Bernstein didn’t feel such an amendment was necessary. If the staff comes back and says there’s extra money, the board can vote on that if it’s brought forward. If the motion is passed, the staff will still know that the board would like to see those items eventually included in the project. Black noted that the LEED certification has to begin with the start of the construction. The approach that Bernstein suggested might work for the real-time information display and the ticketing kiosk, however.

Blake Transit Center: Board Discussion – Adding LEED

Griffith said he wanted to prioritize that LEED item because it can’t be added after-the-fact. He just feels like it would be a real shame not to get the building certified for the high level it’s designed to achieve.

So that amendment was offered formally.

Cooper ventured that the $80,000 for LEED certification “buys us a certificate,” but wondered, “What else does it get us?”

Black indicated that the cost would include a year’s worth of testing and an outside contractor to verify all systems and to ensure that they’re working correctly. It includes monitoring during the construction process and after.

Nacht indicated that he just didn’t understand the significance of the certification, so he wanted Griffith to make a pitch, saying, “My off-the-cuff reaction is that 80 grand for piece of paper so that we can waive it around isn’t the best use of taxpayer dollars, when I’m not buying a ticket machine that a human being can use to get on a bus.”

Griffith indicated that obtaining LEED certification is part of the process of proving you’ve built the building to any standard at all. The AATA would be hard-pressed to say anything about the intent to met LEED standards. It’s meaningless to say anything about what your intention was without the certification, he said.

Nacht interjected with a question: If the whole point is to design an environmentally-sound building that’s good for the planet, and good for energy costs and good for the community, what is the added value of being able to say that we did it?

Griffith replied that the added value is that many people make environmental claims, but don’t back them up. And if you don’t go through the process, you can’t claim that it meets the standard. Drawing an analogy to other kinds of standards, AATA wouldn’t want to omit documentation for safety standards, he said.

Griffith quipped that it’s too bad the FTA does not have the same commitment to LEED certification as it does to public art.

Some conversation ensued about the graywater features and other environmental elements in the building that were a part of the LEED design.

Outcome on the amendment: The board approved the restoration of the LEED certification in the Blake Transit Center project budget, over dissent from Eli Cooper and David Nacht.

Outcome on the main motion: Without significant  further deliberation, the board unanimously approved the project budget for the new Blake Transit Center.

Incorporation of New Act 196 Authority

During his verbal report to the board, AATA CEO Michael Ford reviewed events of the last few weeks in connection with the AATA’s effort to expand the geographic area of its funding and governance. At a special meeting on Oct. 2, 2012, the board had authorized filing of the articles of incorporation for the new transit authority – under Act 196 of 1986. They were filed with the state through the Washtenaw County clerk on Oct. 3, Ford said. The AATA’s interpretation was that the 30-day opt-out period had started with the filing of the articles, and letters had been sent out to all jurisdictions in the county to that effect.

Several members of the future board of The Washtenaw Ride joined the AATA board at the table for the Oct. 18, 2012 AATA board meeting. They had a voice but not a vote. Starting at the near right and going clockwise around the table are: Charles Griffith (AATA), CEO Michael Ford, Jesse Bernstein (AATA), Eli Cooper (AATA), Karen Lovejoy Roe (TWR), Bill Mester (TWR), Paul Schreiber (TWR), David Philips (TWR), David Nacht (AATA), Sue Gott (AATA), Roger Kerson (AATA), Bill Lavery (TWR), and Anya Dale (AATA).

The city of Ann Arbor had recently “communicated a different interpretation of the 30-day opt-out period,” he said. The city suggested that the articles were not in effect until 30 days after the filing. So the opt-out period could not begin until around Nov. 3, Ford said. AATA legal counsel feels that AATA has complied with all laws related to the formation of a new transit authority, Ford continued, but out of an “abundance of caution,” additional time will be provided to make a decision to withdraw from the new transit authority. According to Ford, the city has given the go-ahead for a second notification to be sent out, this time by Washtenaw County, and the AATA will reimburse any costs associated with that. Ford said the AATA felt it was “on firm ground” with those issues. Clerks of all municipalities have been notified about the planned re-notification, and Ford said that the AATA “regret[s] any confusion the delay may have created.”

Besides the 30-day window for opting out, the AATA is also working with the city of Ann Arbor to establish representatives from Ann Arbor on the board of the new authority. “Contrary to our plans and understanding that the Act 55 board would automatically become a part of the Act 196 board, the city has chosen to proceed in this manner, citing possible violations of the incompatible offices statute,” Ford said.

So the city will appoint seven new board members, and Ford noted that process has begun with mayor John Hieftje’s nomination at the city council’s Oct. 15, 2012 meeting of two people to serve on the new board: Susan Baskett, who currently serves as a trustee on the Ann Arbor Public Schools board; and Tony Derezinski, who currently serves on the city council. [Derezinski will be leaving the council in mid-November, because he did not prevail in his August Democratic primary race. His last city council meeting will be Nov. 8. For more details and analysis, see previous Chronicle reporting: “Positions Open: New Transit Authority Board.”]

From left: Paul Schreiber, Michael Ford and David Philips.

Other nominations to the new board are expected to be forthcoming, Ford said. “While the new development has caused some delays, we are viewing this as an opportunity for a coordination process going forward so all parties can be comfortable in working together,” Ford concluded.

Later during the meeting, AATA board chair Charles Griffith said it was “a little bit of a surprise that our process for creating this  new authority got a little adjusted this past month. We started out with a bang with our action earlier this month to initiate the process for creating the new authority.” He said it was  not really a big concern if it takes a little longer, adding that he was not worried if some of the faces are new, when the new board is actually seated. He’s not worried that they won’t be friendly, he said. The AATA board would do everything it can to ensure a smooth transition.

Communications, Committees, CEO, Commentary

At its Oct. 18 meeting, the AATA board entertained various communications, including its usual reports from the performance monitoring and external relations committee, the planning and development committee, as well as from CEO Michael Ford. The board also heard commentary from the public. Here are some highlights.

Comm/Comm: Record Ridership

At the start of the meeting, saying he didn’t want it to be buried in a committee report, David Nacht stressed that the 2012 fiscal year had concluded with a record number of riders – well over 6 million, he said.

Ridership for FY 2012 (bars) compared against FY 2011 (trend line).

The AATA is continuing to attract new riders – and it was not the case that the increase could be attributed to uniformly high gas prices, he said. A lot of the increase is related to expansion of service on particular routes, he said. He summed up his comments by saying that the board had a lot to thank the staff for and a lot to be proud of.

During his oral report to the board, CEO Michael Ford also noted the 6.3 million rides on the fixed-route service, which was the largest number of rides since the inception of fixed-route service in 1979, he said. The number is almost 7% above last year. Routes that have increased more than 20% include Routes #4, #10, and #18. Doubling the frequency on Route #4 – between Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti – has been beneficial to the community, Ford said. Commuter express bus service has also increased about 29% for the Chelsea-Ann Arbor service and about 54% for the Canton-Ann Arbor service. Ford noted that a total of about 25,000 people had ridden the AirRide service – between downtown Ann Arbor and Detroit Metro Airport – since its inception in April 2012. [.pdf of year end performance data]

Comm/Comm: Committee Membership

Charles Griffith, who was elected chair of the board at the previous regular meeting on Sept 27, 2012, had said he wanted to hold off on setting committee membership until he’d had a chance to touch base with other board members.

Anya Dale.

At the Oct. 18 meeting, Griffith announced that Roger Kerson would take over Griffith’s chairmanship of the performance monitoring and external relations committee and outgoing board chair Jesse Bernstein would take a spot on that committee. The third member of that committee is David Nacht.

Anya Dale will continue to chair the planning and development committee. The other two members of that committee are Sue Gott and Eli Cooper.

Comm/Comm: City Council Action – Connector, Rail

Eli Cooper, who also serves as the city of Ann Arbor’s transportation program manager, reported that the city council had two transportation items on the agenda for its Oct. 15 meeting and both were approved. One was the environmental review and preliminary engineering study for an Ann Arbor rail station. The other was a study for a transportation connector between the northeast and southern part of the city. Cooper reported that the city is “all in” for those two projects as they’re currently understood.

Comm/Comm: Bus Shelter

Jim Mogensen addressed the issue of a bus shelter at Chidester Place in Ypsilanti, which he’d raised at the board’s previous board meeting. He said he’d received a useful response from AATA staff explaining why the change had been made from a 6×12 shelter to a 5×10 shelter.

By way of background, the response is described in the CEO’s written report to the board:

The old 6’x12’ shelter at Chidester had been in place for a long time. The building management installed a ramp several years ago to permit wheelchair users to get up onto the shelter pad. However, there was not enough room (only 3’) for a wheelchair user to get by the shelter to the bus stop. The Americans with Disabilities Act requires a 5’ clear path. The new shelter measures 5’x10’ and includes a location under the roof for a wheelchair user, which was not the case with the old shelter. While the daily boardings (21) are well below the threshold for placing a passenger shelter at the stop (50), we have maintained a shelter there because we recognize that Chidester Place is home to many seniors and people with disabilities.

In his Oct. 18 remarks, Mogensen noted there’d been an Option 1 considered, but no Option 2, for achieving the 5 -foot clear path. He suggested Option 2 could have been extending the concrete pad on the other side by two feet and keeping the larger shelter. Mogensen characterized it as a cultural point: by fixing the ADA issue, AATA fixed its [legal] problem, but that created a problem for the ridership.

During his oral report to the board, which came shortly after Mogensen’s comments at the meeting, Ford indicated that additional checking would be done based on Mogensen’s remarks.

Comm/Comm: New Website

Reporting from the performance monitoring and external relations committee, Roger Kerson said that the new website being developed for the AATA is “really cool.” He described it as very sophisticated. The real-time information, which allows people to locate a bus and see how far away it is, adds a lot of value, he said. The vendor is in the final stages of the work, Kerson reported. Before final launch, some additional testing will be done with focus groups, with some final adjustments to be made as a result of that. When it goes public, he said, the website will have some “test miles on it.”

Comm/Comm: Purchase of Transportation

Jim Mogensen reiterated a comment he made at a previous meeting – that municipalities that have purchase-of-service agreements (POSAs) with the AATA are not actually purchasing transportation. The AATA gets revenue from the federal government and the state government, and from fares. The difference between the cost of providing that service and the revenue is the local match – so what communities with POSAs are paying for is the local match, he said.

Comm/Comm: Partridge

Thomas Partridge weighed in during public commentary calling for a commitment to affordable public transportation.

Present: Charles Griffith, David Nacht, Jesse Bernstein, Eli Cooper, Sue Gott, Roger Kerson, Anya Dale.

Also attending as representatives of the future Act 196 board of The Washtenaw Ride were: Karen Lovejoy Roe, Bill Mester, Paul Schreiber, David Philips, and Bill Lavery.

Next regular meeting: Thursday, Nov. 15, 2012 at 6:30 p.m. at the Ann Arbor District Library, 343 S. Fifth Ave., Ann Arbor [Check Chronicle event listings to confirm date.]

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

Griffith is climate & energy program director for the Ecology Center. He has already served for six years on the board, and his current appointment lasts another four years. He was re-appointed to the board on May 2, 2011 to another five-year term after first being appointed on Sept. 19, 2006. Members of the current seven-member AATA board will likely become members of the new Washtenaw Ride countywide authority’s 15-member board – which is not yet incorporated.

But the AATA board has called a special meeting for Oct. 2, 2012 to make a formal request of Washtenaw County to file the articles of incorporation for the new authority – under Act 196 of 1986. The incorporation of the new authority has statutory as well as contractual implications.

On the statutory side – because the incorporation by Washtenaw County of a new transit authority will include by default all the jurisdictions in Washtenaw County – the filing of the articles opens a 30-day window for jurisdictions to opt out of the arrangement. That can be accomplished through a vote of a jurisdiction’s governing body.

The contractual side would already be reflected in the filing of the articles. That is, the request made by AATA to Washtenaw County to file the articles of incorporation would be handled under a four-party agreement – which was ratified earlier this year by the AATA, Washtenaw County, the city of Ann Arbor, and the city of Ypsilanti. That same contractual agreement would then govern the transition from the current AATA to The Washtenaw Ride. The transition would potentially not take place at all, unless a voter-approved funding source for the expanded services were identified by the end of 2014.

The AATA has indicated that a possible scenario is to ask voters in Washtenaw County to fund the new transit authority with a property tax of 0.584 mills – in an election that could come as early as May 2013. For a house worth $200,000, with a state-equalized value of $100,000, an 0.584 mill transit tax would cost that property owner about $58 per year. For an Ann Arbor resident with a $200,000 house, adding the 0.584 mill tax to the existing city transit tax of roughly 2 mills works out to a transportation tax burden of about $258 a year. Under the four-party agreement, the city of Ypsilanti’s transit tax would also be a part of The Washtenaw Ride’s funding.

The idea of putting a transit millage question before voters as early as May 2013 was not met with a universally positive reaction at a Sept. 25 meeting of Ann Arbor’s district advisory committee (DAC), which helps advise the as-yet-unincorporated authority. Tom Heywood, director of the State Street Area Association, feared that a millage would not pass if voted on that soon – because he thought there would not be adequate lead time to mount an effective millage campaign.

At the Sept. 25 meeting, DAC committee member Terri Blackmore, who’s executive director of the Washtenaw Area Transportation Study, was more sanguine than Heywood about the May 2013 timing. Also more positively inclined toward that timeframe was current AATA board chair Jesse Bernstein, whom Griffith is replacing as chair.

Bernstein has served the past two years as the board’s chair. His appointment to the board goes through May 1, 2013.

Other officers elected at the AATA board’s Sept. 27 meeting included David Nacht (treasurer) and Anya Dale (secretary). Determining membership on the planning and development committee and the performance monitoring and external relations committee was put off for the time being.

This brief was filed from the downtown location of the Ann Arbor District Library, where the AATA board holds its meetings. A more detailed report will follow: [link]

The proposal came in the context of an initial board vote to levy an annual tax of 0.05 mills, unchanged from the current rate. The Michigan statute authorizing this millage (Act 88 of 1913) predates the state’s Headlee Amendment, so no voter approval is required. The board can levy the tax directly.

Ken Schrader, a PC technician with Washtenaw County, explained to the county commissioners that recently installed new microphones are more sensitive than the older ones. He jokingly warned them that they should be careful what they say now, because “you can’t take anything back.” Later in the meeting, the county’s information technology department was presented with an award from the Center for Digital Government.

The current rate is expected to bring in about $683,095 in 2013, and is allocated to a variety of organizations, including the economic development agency Ann Arbor SPARK ($200,000) and its Ypsilanti office SPARK East ($50,000). Smith and county administrator Verna McDaniel serve on SPARK’s executive committee.

Smith, a Democrat from Ann Arbor, suggested that by raising the rate to 0.06 mills, property owners would see only a slight increase in their annual taxes. For the average taxpayer, he estimated it would increase from $4.25 to $5.10 per year, while the amount raised countywide would increase about 20% to $838,577. He also proposed that the office of community and economic development – a joint county/city of Ann Arbor department led by Mary Jo Callan – should be given the authority to allocate the funding, rather than having the county board earmark amounts for specific organizations.

No formal amendment was made, but Smith circulated a three-page memo the following night outlining his proposal. [.pdf of Smith's Act 88 memo] It’s likely the board will take up this proposal as an amendment before a final vote at its Sept. 19 meeting. Initial approval was given on Sept. 5 for the current rate of 0.05 mills on a 7-to-3 vote, with dissent from Alicia Ping, Wes Prater, and Dan Smith. Ronnie Peterson was absent.

Another pre-Headlee tax – for support of indigent veterans – also got initial approval from the board, at a slightly increased rate. The initial approval increases that tax from 0.025 mills to 0.0286 mills. Staff of the county’s department of veterans affairs say the increase is needed because of rising claims and services from veterans due to a struggling economy, an anticipated increase in the number of returning soldiers, and a drop in property values. The millage is expected to raise $390,340 in revenues during 2013.

In other action related to tax revenue, commissioners gave initial approval to an ordinance governing the county’s natural areas preservation program. The change would remove the current restriction that only 7% of millage funds can be used for management or stewardship. The intent is to provide more flexibility in managing the funds, allowing the county to build a reserve for long-term stewardship. It’s viewed as an important goal, in the event that the NAPP millage is eliminated in the future. Yousef Rabhi, a Democrat who represents District 11 in Ann Arbor, proposed an amendment that would set a minimum of 25% to be spent on stewardship. The amendment failed on a 1-9 vote.

In an item viewed largely as a formality, county commissioners “ratified” the articles of incorporation for a new countywide transit authority. The document had been slightly revised from what the board had previously approved on Aug. 1, 2012 – on a 6-4 vote. This time, the vote was 6-3, with dissent from Alicia Ping, Wes Prater and Dan Smith. Rolland Sizemore Jr. and Ronnie Peterson were absent. Rob Turner, who had previously voted against the articles of incorporation, supported the item on Sept. 5.

Also approved was a resolution to support a policy change in the city of Ann Arbor related to affordable housing. The item was added to the Sept. 5 agenda during the meeting by Democrat Leah Gunn of Ann Arbor, and was not discussed by commissioners at the meeting. The resolution “encourages the Ann Arbor City Council to direct proceeds from the sale of the city-owned surface parking lots in the downtown to the city’s Housing Trust Fund, to be used to support sustainable, affordable housing.” [Earlier in the day, the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority board had passed a similar resolution of support. Gunn is chair of the DDA.] Dan Smith abstained from the vote. The following night, at a board working session, Alicia Ping announced that she had intended to vote against it, but had cited the wrong agenda number in casting her no vote.

Other action at the Sept. 5 meeting included initial approval of the county’s public health budget, which projects a 3.5 net increase in jobs. Voting against the budget were Alicia Ping and Dan Smith, who cautioned against adding new jobs as the county faces a deficit in 2013. A final vote is expected at the board’s Sept. 19 meeting.

Seth Best, a former resident of Camp Take Notice, addressed the board during public commentary about the need to tackle the root causes of homelessness. The homeless encampment had been evicted this summer from its most recent site in Scio Township.

And highlighting a letter that the county had recently received, commissioner Felicia Brabec raised concerns about the intent of Paxton Resources LLC to drill an exploratory oil and gas well in Saline Township. The board will likely revisit the issue of hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking,” at a future working session. Yousef Rabhi, who chairs those meetings, suggested wrapping it into a session he plans regarding the Pall/Gelman Sciences 1,4 dioxane plume. He sees a tie-in to the issue of industrial environmental contamination.

Millages: Economic/Agricultural Development, Indigent Veterans

Two taxes – for economic/agricultural development and indigent veterans services– were on the agenda for initial approval. Because the Michigan statutes that authorize these millages predate the state’s Headlee Amendment, they can be approved by the board without a voter referendum. Commissioners also were asked to set public hearings on these millages for the board’s Sept. 19 meeting, when a final vote will be taken.

Millage: Economic/Agricultural Development – Board Discussion

The 0.05 mill tax for economic development and agriculture is authorized under the state’s Act 88 of 1913. It will cost homeowners $5 for each $100,000 of their home’s taxable value. The millage amount at this point would be unchanged from the current tax.

The anticipated $683,095 in millage proceeds would be allocated to the following local entities in 2013, and are generally the same amounts that the groups received this year: Ann Arbor SPARK ($200,000), SPARK East ($50,000), the county’s dept. of community & economic development ($140, 331), Eastern Leaders Group ($100,000), promotion of heritage tourism ($65,264), Food System Economic Partnership (FSEP – $15,000), Washtenaw 4-H ($82,500), Washtenaw County 4-H Youth Show ($15,000), and MSU Extension, to support economic development in the local food system ($15,000).

Board chair Conan Smith introduced this item by saying that the county is facing an interesting phenomenon. The average household income is increasing steadily, he contended, but taxable values of homes have been decreasing. That means that there’s less money for local governments, which receive revenues from property taxes. So funding for government services has decreased. It’s unusual to be in a county where families are experiencing greater prosperity, while local governments struggle, he said.

Conan Smith (D-District 10), chair of the Washtenaw County board of commissioners.

This was background for his proposal to look at increasing the Act 88 millage from 0.05 mills to 0.06 mills. Average taxpayers are paying about $4.25 annually, he said, and it would increase to $5.10. The increase would help to maintain the solvency of the fund and support for the agencies that are funded through it, and would allow the county to do even more economic development, he said.

Smith cited an ongoing concern about the recent consolidation that created the office of community and economic development (OCED). He felt that the move pulled together several economic development activities under one umbrella, but there’s only one staff person dedicated to coordinating those services. It’s a challenge, he said, especially when you think about the synergies between economic development, community development and workforce development – which are now all handled by OCED.

In addition to providing more revenues for economic development, Smith hoped the board could consider allocating all Act 88 revenues to OCED, and giving that department the authority to analyze and distribute the funds, rather than having the board allocate specific funding for each agency. Instead, OCED could make recommendations to the board each year, in the same way that OCED staff handles allocations to local nonprofits through the coordinated funding approach.

Smith said he wasn’t prepared to make any amendments to the Act 88 resolution that night, but he hoped the board could have this conversation in a couple of weeks at its Sept. 19 meeting.

Leah Gunn expressed her support for the idea. Rolland Sizemore Jr. told Smith he hoped to see a proposal before the Sept. 19 board meeting, to give everyone a chance to review it.

Turning to the resolution at hand, Wes Prater expressed frustration that he didn’t know how these organizations being funded by the Act 88 millage were performing. There needs to be a report of results from the previous year, he said. County administrator Verna McDaniel replied that the information is available. She noted that Skip Simms from Ann Arbor SPARK was at the meeting, and that she and Conan Smith served on SPARK’s executive committee.

Sizemore said he was tired of not getting this kind of information in advance of the board meeting. McDaniel apologized, saying that the information is online, but not provided in one centralized report.

Prater specifically asked about the accomplishments of the Eastern Leaders Group (ELG), which is getting $100,000. He also wondered why the county was paying $65,264 to promote heritage tourism – why weren’t the Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti convention and visitors bureaus doing that? [Mary Kerr, president of the Ann Arbor CVB, attended the Sept. 5 meeting but did not formally address the board.]

Tony VanDerworp, who serves as OCED’s business development specialist, highlighted a three-page report that had been included in the board’s meeting packet. Information about the ELG is given, he noted. In general, the report provides details about jobs created, funds that were leveraged, and new programs over the past year, he said. VanDerworp added that he’d be happy to provide additional information as well.

Prater replied that he’d seen the report, but that it didn’t talk about how the county’s funding had been used. He wanted to know specifically what was accomplished with the dollars that the county had levied and spent.

Sizemore thanked Bob Tetens, the county’s parks and recreation director, for taking leadership on the ELG – it’s moving forward faster than it had been, he said. Sizemore also praised Shamar Herron, the county’s workforce development manager. Sizemore is more concerned about people who are making $10-15 an hour, rather than the jobs that Ann Arbor SPARK focuses on, which are at a higher salary level.

As chair of the board’s working sessions, Yousef Rabhi reported that he planned to schedule a working session later this fall focused on the Food System Economic Partnership and MSU Extension program, to explain how their allocations will be spent. He suggested including representatives from other agencies funded by Act 88 as well.

Regarding Conan Smith’s proposal, Rabhi said he wasn’t sold on it yet but he’d be interested in hearing from OCED’s director, Mary Jo Callan.

Smith responded to Prater’s concerns about evaluating performance. Current analysis of the Act 88 grantees isn’t being done, he acknowledged. But OCED has developed a process to evaluate the grantees for human services, who receive money through the coordinated funding approach. That process should be easily replicable for economic development funding too, he said, and would allow for greater oversight of those funds.

Outcome: The initial vote on the Act 88 millage passed on a 7-3 vote, with dissent from Alicia Ping, Wes Prater and Dan Smith. Ronnie Peterson was absent. A public hearing is set for the board’s Sept. 19 meeting, where a final vote is expected, with the possible amendment mentioned by Conan Smith.

The following night, during the board’s working session, Conan Smith emailed commissioners a three-page memo outlining his proposal. [.pdf of Smith's memo] Smith projected that the proposed increase in the tax – to 0.06 mill, compared to the current 0.05 mill – would represent a 20% increase in revenues, raising an additional $139,762 for a total of $838,577 in 2013.

Millages: Support for Veterans – Board Discussion

Also on the Sept. 5 agenda was a tax to support services for indigent veterans. The proposal called for an increase to 0.0286 mills, to be levied in December 2012. That rate is expected to raise $390,340 in revenues for use during 2013. The current 0.025 mills brought in $344,486 in 2012.

According to a staff memo, the increase is needed because of rising claims and services from veterans due to a struggling economy, an anticipated increase in the number of returning soldiers, and a drop in property values. The county first began levying this millage in 2008. Services are administered through the county’s department of veterans affairs.

Washtenaw County administrator Verna McDaniel.

Rolland Sizemore Jr. asked why an increase is needed. Michael Smith, the department’s director, reviewed the reasons stated in the staff memo. He noted that when the millage revenues were first collected in 2009, the tax brought in about $393,000. Each year that amount has decreased, while costs have increased. The office helps indigent veterans pay for things like utility bills, gas and food. A $300 food voucher doesn’t buy as much as it did just a few years ago, he said, so the county’s veterans affairs committee – which the county board appoints – decided it was time to ask for an increase. They were very cautious and debated the decision at length, he said.

Smith described other services that his office provides. They help veterans pursue getting benefits from the U.S. Dept. of Veterans Affairs, for example, and pay $300 toward the burial costs for veterans or their spouses. In addition, veterans are entitled to a free memorial marker, but sometimes cemeteries require a base for those markers. And the cost for the base varies widely, he noted, from $35 in Manchester to more than $800 at United Memorial Gardens.

Smith also cited the uncertainty about how many veterans would be returning to Washtenaw County as the military demobilizes. About 300,000 soldiers are expected to be coming home nationwide, he said. Army reserve units will be returning as well.

Several commissioners expressed support for the work of Smith and his staff. Alicia Ping asked Smith to review the history of the millage. Smith explained that the state legislature had passed a law in 1899 to support indigent veterans, mandating that counties levy this tax. [Today, few counties actually levy the millage. Washtenaw County did not levy it until 2008, when former commissioner Ken Schwartz notified the board that the option existed. Previously, the county's department of veterans affairs was supported by the general fund.] Public Act 214 reads in part:

…each county shall annually levy, a tax not exceeding 1/10th of a mill on each dollar, to be levied and collected as provided by law… for the purpose of creating a fund for the relief of honorably discharged indigent members of the army, navy, air force, marine corps, coast guard, and women’s auxiliaries of all wars or military expeditions … and the indigent spouses, minor children and parents of each such indigent or deceased member.

If the county levied the maximum rate, the full 1/10th mill would raise more than $1 million in Washtenaw County, Smith said, which is more than is needed. In times of emergency, the county has the authority to levy as much as 2/10ths of a mill, he noted.

Sizemore also wondered why the department had decided to lock its doors – he was concerned about that. Smith explained that the department had been short-staffed, because two employees unexpectedly decided to retire at the end of last year. He didn’t have the staff to handle the office’s normal walk-in hours, he said, and he had to figure out how to manage their work flow.

In addition, the office – located at 2155 Hogback Road – is in a building that’s not very secure, and they work with a population that can be volatile, he said. The office is co-located with the county’s facilities warehouse. Deliveries are made there frequently and people are walking through the building unsupervised. The department has files with sensitive information, including Social Security numbers, Smith said, so he decided to lock the office doors. A sign is up indicating that people can knock for service, and most of the work is handled through appointments. They’ve never turned anyone away, he said. New employees are being trained, and he plans to return to full walk-in service in the future.

Sizemore responded, saying that if security is a problem, perhaps the county should find a more suitable location for the office. Wes Prater also expressed concern, saying that it had been a very hot summer and they don’t know what the winter will be like. He hoped that veterans wouldn’t have to wait outside in the cold. Smith agreed, saying he was working toward the goal of full walk-in service again.

Outcome: An initial vote to increase the millage for veterans relief passed unanimously. A final vote and public hearing is set for Sept. 19.

Natural Areas Preservation

An amendment to the ordinance governing the county’s natural areas preservation program was on the Sept. 5 agenda for initial approval.

The change would remove the current restriction that only 7% of millage funds can be used for management or stewardship. The Washtenaw County parks and recreation commission had been briefed on the proposal at its May 8, 2012 meeting. At that time, the proposal would have raised the limit from 7% to 25%. Now, however, the proposed ordinance amendment would eliminate all percentage restrictions on set-asides for management and stewardship.

The proposal would amend Section 8 of the NAPP ordinance (deleted text indicated in strike-through):

SECTION 8: Natural Areas Acquisition Fund

Available funding for the purchase of natural areas land shall be deposited in a special fund in the office of the Washtenaw County Treasurer (“Acquisition Fund”). Money in such Acquisition Fund may be temporarily deposited in such institutions or invested in such obligations as may be lawful for the investment of County money.

The revenues from the deposit and/or investment of the Acquisition Fund along with the revenues from the sale of any natural areas property purchased pursuant to this Ordinance shall be applied and used solely for the purchase, stewardship and administration of natural areas land (75%) and agricultural development rights (25%) under this Ordinance, however, that no more than 7% of increased millage funds used to purchase land under this Ordinance may be used annually to administer a land preservation program or maintain lands purchased under this Ordinance.

From left: Curt Hedger, Bob Tetens, and Tony VanDerworp. Hedger is the county’s corporation counsel. Tetens is parks and recreation director, and VanDerworp serves as business development specialist with the office of community and economic development.

According to a staff memo that was part of the county board’s Sept. 5 meeting information packet, the goal would be to use $600,000 per year for management and stewardship. Of that, roughly $240,000 would be used for ongoing stewardship activities, and $360,000 would remain to be invested in a dedicated reserve for long-term land stewardship. By 2020, when the current millage expires, that annual investment is expected to have built a dedicated reserve of $6 million.

Though no percentages are identified in the revised ordinance, $600,000 would work out to about 25% of annual millage revenues.

Voters first approved NAPP funding in 2000 and renewed it in 2010, each time for 10 years. The current millage – at 0.2409 mills – will expire in 2020. It generates about $3 million annually.

Natural Areas Preservation: Board Discussion

Conan Smith said he was very supportive of this change, because it provides greater flexibility. He also floated the idea of eliminating a separate ordinance requirement for allocating 75% to the acquisition and maintenance of natural areas and 25% for agricultural land. He hadn’t consulted with parks and recreation director Bob Tetens about this yet, Smith said, but if commissioners are interested, he’d bring forward a formal proposal at a future meeting.

Yousef Rabhi said he had some reservations about eliminating the 75/25 allocation, but was very supportive of the proposal that was on the table that night. Rabhi then asked Tetens to describe what kinds of maintenance activities are done in the county’s natural areas.

The work varies by preserve, Tetens explained, but includes trail maintenance, removal of invasive species, trash pickup and other activity. Rabhi hoped to see the balance of activities tip in favor of ecological restoration. He acknowledged that public accessibility was part of the program’s mission, but noted that increasing the health of the ecosystem is another important role. Tetens replied that the staff’s work is tilted toward that ecosystem aspect.

Rabhi then clarified with Tetens some information in the staff memo, which indicated that $240,000 annually would be used for stewardship. That’s an internal goal, Tetens replied. The current proposal grew out of discussions that occurred when the staff talked with commissioners and others prior to the NAPP millage renewal in 2010. Even with the 7% cap on spending for stewardship, he said, the program has set aside about $2 million for future stewardship activity.

The intent of the ordinance change is to to set aside even more dollars, so that by 2020 – when the county board has to decide whether to put a renewal on the ballot again – they’ll have some options. The assumption is that land acquired by the county through NAPP will be protected forever, Tetens said. They need to save more money so that they’ll be in a position to take care of the land in perpetuity, regardless of whether there’s a millage to support it.

Natural Areas Preservation: Board Discussion – Amendment

Rabhi said that as someone who works in the field, he understand the crucial role of stewardship. [Rabhi, a Democrat representing District 11 in Ann Arbor, works with the city's natural area preservation program.] He believed that instead of eliminating percentages completely, the ordinance should indicate a minimum of 25% for stewardship. He proposed that as an amendment to the resolution. It was seconded by Barbara Bergman.

Leah Gunn noted that she had been on the board when the original NAPP ordinance had been passed in 2000, and said she had worked hard campaigning for the millage to support the program. She said she couldn’t give enough praise to the parks and recreation commission and the staff, and she trusted them to do their jobs. Gunn told Tetens that the board should “let you do what you think is best, and if we find we’re dissatisfied with it, we’ll probably let you know,” she quipped.

Dan Smith weighed in, saying that the intent of changing the original ordinance was to simplify it. Ordinances should be crafted to last a long time, he said, and including percentages makes that more difficult. By adding back in a different percentage, Rabhi’s amendment adds complexity to the ordinance that’s unnecessary. [Smith is one of three county commissioners who serve on the parks and recreation commission. Others are Rolland Sizemore Jr. and Barbara Bergman.]

Commissioner Yousef Rabhi (D-District 11).

Smith read from the current ordinance, noting that the parks and recreation commission is an agency of the county. The ordinance gives the county board a lot of leeway to give direction to the parks and recreation commission, if it chooses. For those reasons, he did not support Rabhi’s amendment.

Wes Prater clarified with Tetens that none of the proposed changes would increase NAPP’s budget. Responding to another query from Prater, Tetens said that the issue is how to allocate the millage revenues. While the parks and recreation commission has a certain amount of discretion over NAPP’s budget, it doesn’t have authority to make ordinance revisions – only the county board of commissioners can do that.

Bergman praised the parks and recreation commission and staff, and said it’s important to maintain the county’s natural areas, especially regarding invasive species. To her, the amendment was meant to be advisory in nature, sending a message to future commissions.

Felicia Brabec asked Tetens what the impact would be on administering the program, if hard percentages are in the ordinance. When the ordinance was originally developed, the percentages were relatively arbitrary, Tetens replied. Regarding the proposed minimum 25% spent on stewardship, right now the program probably wouldn’t need to spend that much, he said. And depending on how much additional land is acquired in the future, they might need to spend more than that in the coming years. It’s important to keep manageable the amount of land that the county owns, he said, and to ensure that the county has sufficient funds to sustain maintenance indefinitely.

Conan Smith felt that Rabhi’s intention was “spot on,” and perhaps one way to address it would be to add language to the ordinance that expresses a commitment to maintenance. He did not make a formal motion to add such language, however.

At this point Alicia Ping called the question, a parliamentary move aimed at ending discussion and forcing a vote. The motion to call the question passed on a voice vote.

Outcome on amendment: The amendment failed on a 1-9 vote, with only support from Yousef Rabhi. Ronnie Peterson was absent.

Natural Areas Preservation: Board Discussion – Final Comments

Wes Prater asked about the current fund balance for NAPP. About $1.9 million is set aside for stewardship, Bob Tetens said. The total fund balance for NAPP is between $7-8 million, he added.

Leah Gunn said the purpose of the ordinance change is to set policy. It’s not to take control of the budget. She trusts the parks and recreation commission, which is appointed by the county board, to make decisions about NAPP’s budget. The program is also overseen by another group, the natural areas technical advisory committee (NATAC), she noted. The board needs to trust the people they’ve appointed to do the right thing, she concluded.

Outcome: The initial approval for changes to the NAPP ordinance passed unanimously. A final vote is expected at the board’s Sept. 19 meeting.

Later in the meeting, Rabhi stressed that he doesn’t distrust the parks staff or administration. He said he was simply trying to ensure that maintenance was financially supported at an adequate level. He understood that the staff is very well-qualified, as are members of the oversight bodies.

Countywide Transit Accord

In an item viewed largely as a formality, county commissioners were asked to “ratify” the articles of incorporation for a new countywide transit authority. The document was slightly revised from what the board had previously approved on Aug. 1, 2012 – on a 6-4 vote. The effort to more toward a broader public transit entity is being led by the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority (AATA).

From left: County commissioners Dan Smith (R-District 2), Wes Prater (D-District 4), and Felicia Brabec (D-District 7).

The ratification of the articles of incorporation does not incorporate a new transit authority. Rather, it establishes the document that will be used to incorporate a new authority. The articles of incorporation will be filed by Washtenaw County with the state, when the AATA requests that it do so. After incorporation, the new authority – to be called The Washtenaw Ride – would not receive a transfer of AATA assets until a voter-approved funding mechanism has been approved.

The Sept. 5 agenda item to re-approve the articles of incorporation was prompted indirectly by the board’s action on Aug. 1, when it voted to amend the document that had already been approved by three other parties in a four-party transit agreement. Those other parties include the cities of Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti, and the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority. Because of the amendment, the articles of incorporation had to be re-authorized by the other three parties.

The county board’s Aug. 1 amendment made a change to the size of the majority needed, in order for the new transit authority’s board to change the articles of incorporation – from 2/3 to 4/5 of the 15 board members. When the amended document was sent back to the Ann Arbor city council, the city’s legal staff made additional changes that were driven by a desire to harmonize the county board’s amendment with the rest of the document, as well as with Act 196 of 1986 – the act under which the new transit authority will be incorporated.

For example, the 4/5 majority requirement for changes to the articles of incorporation is at apparent odds with one kind of change to the articles specifically mentioned in Act 196 – a change in jurisdictions that are part of the authority. Act 196 explicitly indicates that a 2/3 vote is required. So an administrative change undertaken after the board’s Aug. 1 meeting was to add the clause: “… unless another vote of Board is required under the terms of these Articles or provided for in Act 196.”

Although it wasn’t clear whether the changes required a re-vote by the county board of commissioners, some commissioners were concerned that the changes might be construed as substantive and contrary to the intent of the county board, which could become an unnecessary point of contention down the road. For more details on this series of changes, see Chronicle coverage: “Washtenaw Board to Re-Vote on Transit Accord.”

Earlier in the day on Sept. 5, the AATA board released a final draft of a 5-year service plan as part of a possible transition to The Washtenaw Ride. An 0.584 mill tax to support expanded service could be placed on the ballot by May 2013. [See Chronicle coverage: "Revised 5-Year Transit Plan: More Service, Cost."]

Outcome: With no discussion, the board voted 6-3 to ratify the articles of incorporation, with dissent from Alicia Ping, Wes Prater and Dan Smith. Rolland Sizemore Jr. and Ronnie Peterson were absent. Rob Turner, who had previously voted against the articles of incorporation, supported the item.

Public Health Budget

A net increase of 3.5 full-time-equivalent positions was part of the 2012-2013 department of public health budget on the Sept. 5 agenda for initial approval.

Dick Fleece, the county’s public health director, and Jennifer Brassow, the public health department’s finance director.

Seven full-time-equivalent positions (a combination of part-time and full-time jobs) are being reclassified in the proposed budget. Last year, the department eliminated a net of nearly seven FTEs. The $10,998,870 budget includes a $3,553,575 allocation from the county’s general fund – unchanged from the previous year. Of that general fund allocation, $548,052 will be used to fund the county’s medical examiner program, according to a staff memo.

Unlike the county’s general fund budget, which is aligned to the calendar year, the public health budget runs from Oct. 1 through Sept. 30, in sync with the state’s fiscal year.

This coming year, the public health budget also includes two new vaccines that can be administered at the department’s clinics. Effective Jan. 1, 2013, meningococcal vaccines will be available at $120 per child and $125 per adult. HPV vaccines will be administered for $140 per child and $145 per adult. [.pdf of full fee schedule]

Public Health Budget: Board Discussion

Felicia Brabec asked Dick Fleece, the county’s public health director, about possible state cuts to the budget, and what the impact might be on clients served by the department. Fleece replied that there are concerns about across-the-board state budget cuts – that’s part of the uncertainty that the department faces. Some new grants the department is seeking are seen as promising, as well as current grants that are typically renewed. But none of those funding sources are finalized. As for the impact of possible funding cuts on clients, Fleece said it wasn’t possible to know until those cuts are determined – the department will have to make adjustments during the year, as necessary.

Fleece also noted that the department is projecting that it will end the year without needing to tap its fund balance.

Wes Prater pointed out that the positions reflect increased pay grades, which will cost the county in the long-term. He wondered why they couldn’t hold the line with pay grades. Fleece replied that for several of the positions, the increases will be covered by billing Medicaid. He noted that the department tried cutting some nursing positions during the previous budget cycle, but it had been hard to manage without them. That’s why this budget calls for two public health nurse positions. Currently, the department is turning away clients because there aren’t enough nurses to handle the demand for services.

Barbara Bergman described the funding from Medicaid as important – if the county didn’t take advantage of that, it would be like “leaving money on the table,” she said. She also defended the higher pay grades, saying that the county has been hemorrhaging staff and that at some point, people won’t be able to afford to work for the county.

Yousef Rabhi clarified with Fleece that no jobs were actually being eliminated – positions are simply being reclassified, or created.

Dan Smith said he’d be voting against this budget because it created a net of 3.5 new positions. The county is facing a budget deficit, and in that context, no new positions should be added.

Rolland Sizemore Jr. wondered if the budget cost the county more money. County administrator Verna McDaniel replied that there’s no increase in general fund support for the department. Fleece added that the general fund support is the minimum that’s necessary in order to receive state funding.

Outcome: Commissioners gave initial approval to the budget on a 8-2 vote. Voting against the budget were Alicia Ping and Dan Smith. Ronnie Peterson was absent. A final vote is expected at the board’s Sept. 19 meeting.

Food Policy Council Appointment

One appointment was made by commissioners at their Sept. 5 meeting. Sharon Sheldon of the Washtenaw County public health department was appointed to replace Jenna Bacolor on the Washtenaw County Food Policy Council. The slot is designated for someone in the public health sector. Sheldon also serves on the Food System Economic Partnership (FSEP) board and is a former board member of the nonprofit Growing Hope. She currently works as a program administrator in the county public health department’s health promotion/disease prevention division.

Outcome: Commissioners voted unanimously to appoint Sharon Sheldon to the food policy council.

Two appointments to fill vacancies on the Washtenaw County Historic District Commission had originally been on the Sept. 5 agenda but were pulled by board chair Conan Smith. Both slots had been for members of the general public. The board’s meeting packet had indicated that John McCurdy, an Ypsilanti Township resident and associate professor of history at Eastern Michigan University, was to be appointed to a term expiring on Dec. 31, 2012. Courtney Miller was to be appointed to a term ending on Dec. 31, 2013. She lives in Ypsilanti and previously served as a preservation planner with the city, serving as staff to the Ypsilanti Historic District Commission.

Smith stated that “technical” reasons resulted in the decision to remove the appointments from the agenda. Wes Prater asked Smith whether it was because the positions hadn’t been advertised, and Smith indicated that this was the case.

In an email to The Chronicle following the meeting, Smith clarified that although there is no requirement to “notice” these vacancies, he had “pledged to the commissioners that they would receive the appointments information further in advance and that I would personally vet them with staff. I hadn’t had a chance to do that when these two came to the board this evening.”

Ann Arbor Land Sale Policy

An item added to the Sept. 5 agenda during the meeting was a resolution to support a policy change in the city of Ann Arbor related to affordable housing.

From left: Commissioner Alicia Ping (R-District 3) and Elaine Holleran, administrative analyst.

The resolution “encourages the Ann Arbor City Council to direct proceeds from the sale of the city-owned surface parking lots in the downtown to the city’s Housing Trust Fund, to be used to support sustainable, affordable housing.”

Earlier in the day, the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority board had passed a similar resolution of support. County commissioner Leah Gunn (D-District 9) is chair of the DDA, and brought the resolution forward for the county board’s consideration.

At the city council’s Sept. 4 meeting, councilmember Sandi Smith –  who also serves on the DDA board – had announced her intent to bring a resolution to the council on Sept. 17 that would establish a policy of depositing proceeds from city-owned land sales into the city’s affordable housing trust fund. The policy Smith is calling for would represent a return to a previous policy that was rescinded in 2007. That policy dates back to 1996. [For detailed Chronicle coverage, see: "City Council to Focus on Land Sale Policy."]

Outcome: Without discussion, commissioners voted 8-1 to approve the land sale resolution. Dan Smith abstained. Ronnie Peterson and Rolland Sizemore Jr. were absent.

At the board’s Sept. 6 working session, Alicia Ping announced that she had intended to vote against the land sale resolution. But she had stated the incorrect agenda item number when she cast her dissenting vote, and had voted unintentionally against the board’s approval of claims. She hoped the record could be clarified.

Communications & Commentary

During the evening there are multiple opportunities for communications from the administration and commissioners, as well as public commentary. Here are some highlights.

Communications & Commentary: Camp Take Notice

During public commentary, Seth Best told the board that he now lives in Ann Arbor, but he’s a former resident of Camp Take Notice. He was identified as a female at birth, but he’s been male in his mind and heart, he said. In 2006, he made a life-affirming decision to transition to become male. It cost him his job, and by 2008 he was homeless. He was in the South at the time, where the faith community had a lock on providing services for the homeless, he said. But because he was transgender, he was not welcome.

He came back to Michigan because he’d heard that the Delonis Center would accept him. They did, but had a 90-day limit on his stay there. That passed quickly, and again he found himself at the mercy of the faith community, he said. After a few weeks he learned about Camp Take Notice, and asked if he could join. He found himself where his gender didn’t matter. He was among like-minded people in a safe, drug-free place. He felt empowered as the camp grew, and it helped him. He’s no longer on the streets.

Best told commissioners that homelessness can’t be ended with just a house or a job. The root causes need to be addressed, and that’s related to mental health issues, he said, including drugs and alcohol.

Communications & Commentary: Camp Take Notice – Board Response

Several commissioners responded to Best’s commentary. Yousef Rabhi thanked him for coming, and called his story inspiring. Barbara Bergman noted that she serves on the board of the Washtenaw Community Health Organization (WCHO), and she hoped their outreach efforts had been of some assistance.

From left: County commissioners Rob Turner (R-District 1) and Rolland Sizemore Jr. (D-District 5).

Rob Turner said he’d first met Best at a recent town hall meeting regarding Camp Take Notice. The meeting had been hosted by the University of Michigan School of Social Work, and led by emeritus professor Bill Birdsall. It had been held on a Sunday, Turner said, because every Sunday the camp members have dinner together, followed by a town hall meeting. [For some of the history of Camp Take Notice, including the tradition of those Sunday gatherings, see Chronicle coverage: "Laws of Physics: Homeless Camp Moves" and "Laws of Physics II: Homeless Encampment."]

Turner said he’d been struck by the sense of community among members of the camp, which had been dislocated this summer from its most recent site in Scio Township. [The camp had been set up on property owned by the Michigan Dept. of Transportation, off of Wagner Road near M-14.] Turner recalled that the county had helped fund assistance to provide housing, but several people were still without housing.

There are more than 4,000 homeless people in Washtenaw County, Turner said. The camp had been a place where people could feel safe, if they couldn’t stay at the Delonis Center. He said that several elected officials had been invited to the meeting at UM, including state Rep. Mark Ouimet, state Sen. Rebekah Warren, and sheriff Jerry Clayton. No county commissioners had been invited, Turner said, but he was the only elected official who came – he’d read about the meeting in the Chelsea Standard, and had brought his two daughters.

Recidivism into homelessness is high, Turner continued, because people often don’t have the ability to follow up with services that might help them stay in housing. Without community support, it’s hard. Turner said he’s impressed with the community that Camp Take Notice has built, but it’s not a perfect solution. He’d like to talk to their leadership, and try to tap into their volunteerism and community support to help some of the county’s programs. It could be a wonderful resource, he said.

Rabhi thanked Turner for attending the meeting at UM, and said he had also been involved – he’d gone out to the camp when the members were evicted, and had participated in a working group of people that included law enforcement, neighbors and others. Camp Take Notice worked hard to have a good relationship with the community, he said.

Bergman noted that the county has already provided considerable resources to Camp Take Notice. She felt that ending homelessness probably won’t happen, and curbing homelessness is a better goal.

Communications & Commentary: Fracking

Felicia Brabec highlighted a letter that was included in the board’s meeting packet from Paxton Resources LLC, indicating that the company has filed an application with the state to drill an exploratory oil and gas well in Saline Township. [.pdf of Paxton letter]

Brabec said she was very concerned. A Paxton representative had attended a working session earlier this year, and Brabec characterized his remarks about the board’s concerns regarding fracking as very dismissive and flippant. She wanted to revisit the issue.

Yousef Rabhi, who chairs the board’s working sessions, said he plans to schedule a session on the Pall/Gelman Sciences 1,4 dioxane contamination. That situation involves decades-long industrial contamination at the former Gelman Sciences manufacturing plant in Scio Township, now owned by Pall Corp., that spread to the aquifer. The company has implemented court-ordered remediation, overseen to some extent by the Michigan Dept. of Environmental Quality. Rabhi said he planned to invite members of the Coalition for Action on Remediation of Dioxane (CARD) to address the board.

He indicated that there might be a tie-in to the fracking issue, and that it could be handled in the same working session.

Communications & Commentary: IT Award

Kevin Moore was on hand to present the county with a 2012 Digital Counties award from the Center for Digital Government, Digital Communities program and the National Association of Counties (NACo). Washtenaw County ranked 9th in the the category of counties with a population between 250,000 to 499,000. Moore noted that Washtenaw County has ranked in the top 10 for 9 of the past 10 years.

Andy Brush, who leads the county’s IT staff, thanked Moore for coming into “hostile territory.” [Moore works for Quest Software, which is based in the Columbus, Ohio area. So it was an allusion to a college football rivalry between the university in that city and one located in Ann Arbor.] Brush also thanked the board for their support of technology, which he said helps make democracy accessible.

Leah Gunn thanked the IT staff for being gracious in helping “technological idiots like me.” Barbara Bergman also thanked the staff, noting that people in her generation are “digital immigrants,” unlike children who are “born with mice in their hands.” Conan Smith joked that he’d like to see the county advance above 8th place next year. [This is apparently a standard joke. When the county was awarded the 4th place ranking in 2011, Smith said he looked forward to the day that the county would be ranked No. 3.]

Communications & Commentary: Voting Rotation

During the meeting, Alicia Ping noted that in the past, votes had been taken by calling the commissioners’ names in rotation – that is, each roll call vote began with a different commissioner, so that the same person wouldn’t end up voting last each time. Now, the rotation doesn’t change, and Ping expressed a desire to return to the former practice. It makes a difference, especially on controversial votes, she said.

The task for administering the board’s roll call votes falls to Pete Simms of the Washtenaw County clerk’s office. Responding to an email from The Chronicle, Simms said the decision about rotating the vote is made by the county clerk [Larry Kestenbaum] clerk at the meeting. [Simms currently fills that role.] In the future, the voting order will be rotated, he said.

Communications & Commentary: November Election

Thomas Partridge spoke during the both opportunities for public commentary. He noted that it was an historic day – the eve of the Democratic National Convention’s nomination of the first African American U.S. president, Barack Obama, for a second term. It’s important to support Obama and all progressive Democratic candidates in the Nov. 6 election, he said. It’s important to put forward a plan that puts services for people first, and cast aside the Republicans and their presidential candidate, Mitt Romney, who put money before people, Partridge said. He also called for a commitment to end homelessness, and support for public transit. During his second turn at public commentary, Partridge said he planned to be a write-in candidate for either the District 53 state representative or Ann Arbor mayor. [Partridge had previously lost to incumbent state Rep. Jeff Irwin in the District 53 Democratic primary on Aug. 7.]

Present: Barbara Bergman, Felicia Brabec, Leah Gunn, Alicia Ping, Wes Prater, Yousef Rabhi, Rolland Sizemore Jr., Conan Smith, Dan Smith, Rob Turner.

Absent: Ronnie Peterson

Next regular board meeting: Wednesday, Sept. 19, 2012 at 6:30 p.m. at the county administration building, 220 N. Main St. in Ann Arbor. The ways & means committee meets first, followed immediately by the regular board meeting. [Check Chronicle event listings to confirm date] (Though the agenda states that the regular board meeting begins at 6:45 p.m., it usually starts much later – times vary depending on what’s on the agenda.) Public commentary is held at the beginning of each meeting, and no advance sign-up is required.

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

Once again on the agenda for the Washtenaw County board of commissioners meeting on Sept. 5 will be the articles of incorporation for a new transit authority. It’s expected to be a stamp of approval for some administrative changes, not a chance to change the document or rescind the board’s previous decision to approve the document.

Instead, the point of re-introducing the agenda item is to provide an opportunity for the board to affirm the administrative changes to the articles of incorporation that took place after the board’s Aug. 1 vote.

The administrative changes were already included in the documents by the other three parties to the four-party agreement when they subsequently ratified the document. Those parties are the cities of Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti, and the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority, which is leading this effort. The Ann Arbor city council voted (for a third time) to approve the articles of incorporation at its Aug. 9, 2012 meeting; the Ypsilanti city council voted at its Aug. 14 meeting (also for a third time); and the AATA board voted (for a second time) at its meeting on Aug. 16.

News of the agenda item came from an email sent by Washtenaw County board chair Conan Smith to other commissioners on the evening of Aug. 22. It’s not entirely clear whether the board will: (1) take a vote that affirms the administrative (non-substantive) nature of the changes that were made after the board approved the document on Aug. 1; or (2) take a vote that amends the document to match the version approved by the other three parties.

Previous re-votes have been driven by substantive amendments made by one of the parties to the agreement. For example, the Ypsilanti city council amended the four-party accord after the Ann Arbor city council first voted, on March 5, 2012. That amendment involved service charges applied to the respective cities’ existing millages. When the agreement went back to the Ann Arbor city council, that body amended the document further – which meant that it returned to the Ypsilanti city council for its approval again. The AATA board then ratified the agreement.

It was expected to be approved by the Washtenaw County board of commissioners without further substantive amendment. But on Aug. 1 the board made a change to the size of the majority needed, in order for the new transit authority’s board to change the articles of incorporation – from 2/3 to 4/5 of the 15 board members. That triggered the most recent round of approvals by the various bodies.

But those approvals incorporated some changes that were driven by a desire to harmonize the county board’s amendment with the rest of the document, as well as with Act 196 of 1986 – the act under which the new transit authority will be incorporated. For example, the 4/5 majority requirement for changes to the articles of incorporation is at apparent odds with one kind of change to the articles specifically mentioned in Act 196 – a change in jurisdictions that are part of the authority. Act 196 explicitly indicates that a 2/3 vote is required. So an administrative change undertaken after the board’s Aug. 1 meeting was to add the clause: “… unless another vote of Board is required under the terms of these Articles or provided for in Act 196.”

The view of legal counsel for the four parties was apparently that it’s not actually necessary for those changes to be explicitly re-voted and affirmed by the county board of commissioners. However, there is at least some sentiment on the county board that the changes might be construed as substantive and contrary to the intent of the county board, which could become an unnecessary point of contention down the road.

The AATA is current finalizing the details of a five-year service plan that will need to be published as one of several conditions that must be met before the AATA could transition into the newly incorporated authority, to be called The Washtenaw Ride. This week, the AATA board called a special meeting for Sept. 5 to unveil that service plan.

Earlier in the year, the AATA had hoped to be in a position to possibly place a transit millage proposal on the ballot this November. But at this point, that won’t be possible. Any transit millage proposal will come at a later election.

After the jump, this report describes the administrative changes in question and possible misinterpretations.

Text of the Changes

The Washtenaw County board of commissioners made the following change to the articles of incorporation on Aug. 1:

SECTION 10.01: AMENDMENTS
These Articles of Incorporation may be amended only upon a two-thirds (2/3) four-fifths (4/5) vote of the directors appointed and serving on the Authority. [Amendment by Washtenaw County board]

That drove additional changes made by city of Ann Arbor legal staff before the Ann Arbor city council voted on the amended document. The staff memo from the council’s Aug. 9, 2012 meeting characterized the nature of the additional changes as following logically from the amendment that the county board had made on Aug. 1: ” … however, the implementation of 4/5th requirement necessitated changes to Section 5.01 to recognize no change was being made to the 2/3 vote of the Board related to budgets and since amendments are referenced in Section 5.01 the inclusion of the change to 4/5 vote for amendments.”

Text of Changes: Ordinary Votes

The first administrative change involves the basic rule that decisions of the board of the new transit authority require a simple majority – with two exceptions: (1) votes on the budget, and (2) votes to change the articles of incorporation. Because the Washtenaw County board changed the threshold from 2/3 to 4/5 on amendments to the articles in a subsequent section, the following section was changed to be consistent with that intent. Added text is in bold italics. Deleted text is in strike-through.

SECTION 5.01: PUBLIC MEETINGS
… Each director shall have one vote. Decisions of the Board require a majority vote of the directors appointed and serving at a Board meeting having a quorum present, except approval of the budget which requires approval of 2/3rds of all directors and amendment of the articles each which requires approval of 2/3rds 4/5th of all directors. [Administrative change.]

Text of Changes: Conflicts with Act 196

The second administrative change is related to the clause in Act 196 that describes how a local governmental unit not originally a part of the authority can join it. Here’s the section from Act 196:

124.457 Membership after formation of public authority; resolution; approval, execution, filing, and publication of amendment to articles. Sec. 7.
A political subdivision or a portion of a city, village, or township bounded by lines described in section 4 may become a member of a public authority after the public authority’s formation under this act upon resolution adopted by a majority vote of the members elected to and serving on the legislative body of the political subdivision requesting membership for all or a portion of the political subdivision and upon resolution adopted by a 2/3 vote of the members serving on the board of the public authority approving an amendment to the articles of incorporation of the public authority adding all or a portion of the political subdivision. The amendment to the articles of incorporation shall be executed by the clerk of the political subdivision, all or a part of which is being added and shall be filed and published in the same manner as the original articles of incorporation.

So that section of Act 196 explicitly calls for a 2/3 vote for changes to the articles that involve the addition of another political subdivision. The amendment made by the Washtenaw County board of commissioners raises that threshold for all votes on the articles. The administrative change interprets the board’s intent as not to raise the threshold to 4/5 for that specific type of change to the articles of incorporation, by adding a kind of savings clause:

SECTION 10.01: AMENDMENTS
These Articles of Incorporation may be amended only upon a four-fifths (4/5) vote of the directors appointed and serving on the Authority unless another vote of Board is required under the terms of these Articles or provided for in Act 196.

Potential for Misunderstanding

The second administrative change depends on one interpretation of the county board’s intent – that it did not mean to lump the membership decisions into the kind of votes that would require a 4/5 majority. But the legislative record of that body might support the contention that the county board’s intent was, in fact, to apply the 4/5 majority requirement to all decisions involving the articles of incorporation – even those involving admission of an additional political subdivision into the transit authority.

That legislative record includes the following amendment, which was considered by the county board but rejected on July 11, 2012:

Unless otherwise specifically allowed by law, these Articles of Incorporation may be amended only upon a two-thirds (2/3) vote of the directors appointed and serving on the Authority. All amendments must comply with applicable state and federal laws. All amendments to the Articles of Incorporation become effective only after they are executed jointly by the Chairperson and by the Secretary of the Board of the Authority, ratified by each member political subdivision and the Washtenaw County Board of Commissioners, filed with the recording officer of the Washtenaw County Clerk, and filed and published in the same manner as the original Articles of Incorporation.

Based on that rejected amendment – which was supported by only 4 of the 11 county commissioners – it’s possible to imagine an argument that the board’s failure to include the savings clause in a later amendment, which it actually passed, was in fact a conscious and deliberate choice by the board.

Had the board made that conscious choice, and had the other three parties ratified the articles without that savings clause, it’s possible to imagine a dispute arising out of the following scenario:

Township A opts out of the new Act 196 transit authority when it’s initially formed. Later, the township board of Township A decides that it would like to be admitted into the new authority – and takes a unanimous vote. Then the board of the new transit authority votes 10-5 to admit Township A into the authority.

Does Township A get in?

The board of Township A might well argue that under 124.457 Sec. 7 of Act 196, the conditions have been met for admission into the transit authority, and that it’s therefore entitled to be admitted. But a resident of Township A, who is opposed to paying the associated property tax, might well argue that the requirement in the articles of incorporation that a 4/5 majority be achieved has not been met for changing the articles of incorporation – a change made necessary by the admission of Township A.

That kind of legal dispute would be settled through interpretation of Act 196. Does Act 196 set forth conditions under which a political subdivision is entitled to be admitted into the transit authority? Or does Act 196 set forth minimum conditions that must be met before a political subdivision can be admitted into the transit authority?

The administrative change made by city of Ann Arbor legal staff eliminates the possibility of that kind of dispute.

And by taking some kind of vote on Sept. 5, the Washtenaw County board of commissioners has an opportunity to make its intent absolutely clear.

Coda

The text of the document attached to the Ann Arbor city council’s agenda on Aug. 9, which the council voted to approve, was the following, including the trailing extra period:

These Articles of Incorporation may be amended only upon a four-fifths (4/5) vote of the directors appointed and serving on the Authority unless another vote of Board is required under the terms of these Articles or provided for in Act 196..

It’s not clear if on Sept. 5 the county board will undertake an administrative change to eliminate the extra punctuation, and if so, which one of the two periods will be struck from the text.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Four-Party Agreement, Countywide

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

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

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

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

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

Four-Party Agreement, Countywide: Comment from Lovejoy Roe

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Four-Party Agreement, Countywide: Public Comment

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Four-Party Agreement, Countywide: Board Deliberations

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

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

Four-Party Agreement, Countywide: Next Steps

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

North-South Rail (WALLY)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

North-South Rail (WALLY): Board Deliberations

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Health Care Contribution Policy

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

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

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

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

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

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

Health Care Contribution Policy: Board Deliberations

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Bus Advertising

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

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

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

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

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

Communications, Committees, CEO, Commentary

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

Comm/Comm: Blake Transit Center

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

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

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

Comm/Comm: New Website

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

Comm/Comm: Ridership

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

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

Comm/Comm: Financial Update

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

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

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

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

Absent: David Nacht, Sue Gott, Roger Kerson.

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

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

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

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

Even after the funding plan is published and the new authority is incorporated, the four-party agreement stipulates that any transfer of assets from the AATA to The Washtenaw Ride would take place only after a voter-approved funding mechanism is established. And only after a voter-approved funding mechanism is established would proceeds from the transportation millages currently levied by the cities of Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti be pledged to The Washtenaw Ride. A financial task force recruited by the AATA – to assess the amount of funding that would be necessary to offer the kind of service that AATA is proposing – concluded that it would require roughly the equivalent of 0.5 mills countywide. [.pdf of final version of transit documents]

This brief was filed from the downtown location of the Ann Arbor District Library at 343 S. Fifth, where the AATA board holds its meetings. A more detailed report will follow: [link]

From left: Mayor John Hieftje and city administrator Steve Powers before the start of the Aug. 9, 2012 council meeting.

But the council transacted several other pieces of business as well, some of which could be grouped into the general thematic pattern of land and property use. Most obviously connected to land use was the council’s initial approval of a rezoning request in connection with an expansion proposal from Knight’s Market, at the corner of Miller and Spring streets. The rezoning would allow a house to be converted into a bakery. It would also allow for eventual approval of a site plan to build a 1,200-square-foot addition to the existing grocery store and to expand, reconfigure, and improve the existing parking lot.

The council also passed a resolution to deal with an issue stemming, in part, from land use decisions made decades ago that resulted in residential development in the area of the Malletts Creek drainage district. Recently, residents in the area have been faced with severe localized flooding. The council’s resolution directed staff to start negotiations with the Washtenaw County water resources commissioner to identify “opportunities for stormwater conveyance and stormwater quality improvement in the area of the Malletts Creek drainage district.”

Related at least tangentially to land use at the level of a specific parcel was a resolution the council passed establishing the property at 317 Maynard in downtown Ann Arbor as an industrial development district. The move sets the stage for an expected application from the future tenant of the space, owned by First Martin Corp., for a tax abatement that would be worth around $85,000. The tenant is Barracuda Networks.

And the council took another step in implementing a strategy to eliminate blight. The city had previously set aside funds that could be used to demolish blighted buildings – if the city is unsuccessful in getting property owners to demolish them. The council’s action last Thursday authorized the city to sign contracts with four different companies to do such demolition work on an as-needed basis. It was announced at the meeting that the houses on North Main – at the site of the planned Near North affordable housing project – will likely be among the first to be demolished under the contracts authorized by the council.

To the extent that transportation systems have an impact on future land use, another item related to land use was a reapproval of the articles of incorporation for a possible new countywide transportation authority. The articles of incorporation are part of a four-party agreement to establish a framework for possibly expanding the governance and service area of the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority.

The four-party agreement is between the cities of Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti, Washtenaw County and the AATA. The Ann Arbor council changed the minimum threshold of votes required on the proposed new 15-member transit authority board, an action that brought the council in line with a version that the Washtenaw County board of commissioners had approved earlier this month. That threshold was increased from a 2/3 majority (10 votes) to a 4/5 majority (12 votes).

In other business, the council authorized the hiring of three additional firefighters for the next two years, using a federal grant. It also authorized the purchase of a new aerial fire truck.

Nominations to city boards and commissions made at the meeting included reappointment of Sandi Smith, Roger Hewitt and Keith Orr to the board of the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority. And Sally Petersen, who won the Ward 2 Democratic primary on Aug. 7, was nominated for the city’s commission on disability issues.

The council also heard public commentary on a range of topics, including smart meters and the idea of corporations as people. 

Knight’s Market Rezoning

The council was asked to consider a rezoning request that would allow for expansion of Knight’s Market.

Knight’s Market Rezoning: Background

The market is located at the northeast corner of Spring and Miller. The market’s owner, Ray Knight, also owns two separate, adjacent parcels. (Knight is perhaps best known for his family’s restaurant, Knight’s Steakhouse, located at 2324 Dexter Ave.) The grocery store is on land zoned C1 (local business) and M1 (light industrial). Another parcel at 306-308 Spring St. is zoned R2A (two-family dwelling) and M1, and contains two single-family homes and part of a parking lot. The third parcel at 310 Spring St. is zoned R2A and MI, and contains the other half of the store’s parking lot. All three parcels are currently non-conforming in some way, according to a staff report, and are located in the 100-year Allen Creek floodplain.

The proposal from Knight’s involves several steps. The request calls for 306, 308 and 310 Spring to be rezoned to C1. That rezoning would allow the building at 306 Spring to be converted into a bakery, although the intent is to leave the exterior of the house intact. The rezoning would also allow for approval of a site plan to build a 1,200-square-foot addition to the existing grocery store and to expand and reconfigure the existing parking lot. In addition, the plan requests that 418 Miller Ave. – the site of the existing grocery – also be rezoned to C1.

The proposed work to the parking lot includes providing three additional spaces (for a total of 17 parking spaces), a designated snow pile storage area, solid waste and recycling container storage enclosure, right-of-way screening, conflicting land use buffer, and rain gardens for storm water management. An unused curbcut on Miller Avenue would be removed and the curb and lawn extension would be restored there. A temporary storage building at 418 Miller would be removed. The house at 310 Spring would remain a single-family dwelling. The city planning commission recommended the rezoning on a 6-1 vote at its June 19, 2012 meeting.

Knight’s Market Rezoning: Council Deliberations

When the council came to the item, mayor John Hieftje looked first to Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5) to move the item, but Sabra Briere (Ward 1) interjected, noting that the market was on the Ward 1 side of the street. So Hieftje gave Briere and her wardmate Sandi Smith the privilege of moving and seconding the motion.

Briere noted that both Ward 1 and Ward 5 residents shop at the market and ventured that there are also people who drive to the market as well. She had attended one public meeting about the proposal. She noted that neighbors were very supportive of Knight’s Market, but had questions about the potential impact on the neighborhood. Generally, their concern is about what happens if the property is rezoned and then changes hands, so that Knight’s Market is no longer the owner.

Left to right: During a break, Sandi Smith (Ward 1) and Jane Lumm (Ward 2) joke about the smartphone app Smith uses to time speaking turns of other councilmembers. There have been occasions when Smith has not been joking when she has raised the point of order on Lumm’s speaking turns.

Smith said she’d had a number of conversations with people in the neighborhood – and they’re very supportive of having a local grocer right there and available. That fits well into the zoning, she said, and the idea of fringe commercial abutting the residential area. She heard strong support for it, she said.

Tony Derezinski (Ward 2), who is the city council’s representative to the planning commission, noted that the commission had had a thorough discussion of the issue. He called the characterizations by Briere and Smith as very accurate. It reminded him of the proposal that Zingerman’s Deli had made, when the neighbors had been carefully consulted. Neighbors had raised some issues – not in an attempt to stop the project – but there’d been an outpouring of approval, he said. Questions had been asked and answered, he said. He felt that “commercial crawl” could not occur because of the natural boundaries that would preclude it.

Mike Anglin (Ward 5) noted that the goal was to establish a bakery that would serve the restaurant and the retail store. He noted that it’s meant to strike a balance between land use goals. He said he lived in a neighborhood where he could, without a car, still walk to places and find places to buy enough to eat and drink. But there are neighborhoods where that’s not possible. He said that Knight’s Market is a place that makes that possible, and that Knight’s is a good neighbor.

Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) also indicated his support for the rezoning request. There used to be a store on Miner between Hiscock and Felch, he recalled, and he was not sure if the city’s zoning still allows for such mom-and-pop type stores. It’s important that the city have opportunities for a walkable, diverse and sustainable community. It’s not something the council would do frequently, he said, but in this case it’s important to do.

Hieftje noted that Knight’s Market has survived for a long time and is kind of a throwback to the past. If you look around Ann Arbor you can find buildings that were at one time a corner store in a neighborhood. As zoning changed, we’ve moved away from that concept, but in select areas, it might be possible to move back toward that approach, he said. Neighborhood stores like Washtenaw Dairy, Jefferson Market and Knight’s Market are a real asset, he said.

Jane Lumm (Ward 2) added she was the “daughter of a grocery man” and called the market a wonderful amenity that everyone in Ann Arbor values. When she goes there, it’s a reminder of what her father did. She appreciated the discussions that had occurred and the support that people were showing for it.

Outcome: The council voted unanimously to give initial approval to the Knight’s Market rezoning request. Because the request involves a rezoning – a change to the city’s set of ordinances – the council will need to give a second, final approval at a subsequent meeting, following a formal public hearing.

Development District 317 Maynard

On the Aug. 9 agenda was a resolution to establish a new industrial development district for the downtown Ann Arbor property at 317 Maynard St., which sets up the opportunity for Barracuda Networks to apply for a tax abatement as it moves from its current location on Depot Street to the downtown site.

Under Michigan’s Act 198 of 1974, the next step for that abatement, on application from Barracuda, will be for the city council to set a public hearing on the abatement. After the public hearing, the council could then grant the abatement, which is estimated to be valued at around $85,000.

At its July 2 meeting, the Ann Arbor city council had voted to set the Aug. 9 public hearing on the industrial development district. A letter dated June 1, 2012 from First Martin to the Ann Arbor city clerk requested the establishment of the district. First Martin is the owner of the property at 317 Maynard.

From Act 198, it’s the property owner – in this case, First Martin – that files for the establishment of the IDD.

207.554 Plant rehabilitation district or industrial development district; establishment; number of parcels; filing; notice; hearing; finding and determination; district established by township; industrial property as part of industrial development district or plant rehabilitation district also part of tax increment district; termination; notice.
Sec. 4. (1) A local governmental unit, by resolution of its legislative body, may establish plant rehabilitation districts and industrial development districts that consist of 1 or more parcels or tracts of land or a portion of a parcel or tract of land. (2) The legislative body of a local governmental unit may establish a plant rehabilitation district or an industrial development district on its own initiative or upon a written request filed by the owner or owners of 75% of the state equalized value of the industrial property located within a proposed plant rehabilitation district or industrial development district. This request shall be filed with the clerk of the local governmental unit.

And according to Act 198, the tenant – in this case, Barracuda Networks – can file an application for the tax abatement.

207.555 Application for industrial exemption certificate; filing; contents; notice to assessing and taxing units; hearing; application fee.
Sec. 5. (1) After the establishment of a district, the owner or lessee of a facility may file an application for an industrial facilities exemption certificate with the clerk of the local governmental unit that established the plant rehabilitation district or industrial development district.

Development District 317 Maynard: Public Hearing

Only one person spoke at the public hearing on the establishment of the IDD – Thomas Partridge. He lamented the loss of vitally-needed tax money through abatements, and contended that because of this, schools are becoming challenged to maintain standards of education and retain adequate numbers of teachers, especially special education teachers. Partridge asked recipients of tax abatements to voluntarily curtail the period of the tax rebates or forgo them. He allowed that the community needs jobs, but also needs to support our most vulnerable residents.

Development District 317 Maynard: Council Deliberations

Marcia Higgins (Ward 4), chair of the council’s budget committee, reported that the committee had met to consider the issue, but several committee members had not been able to attend. [Higgins participated in the committee meeting by speaker phone. Sabra Briere (Ward 1) attended in person, and was joined by city administrator Steve Powers, chief financial officer Tom Crawford, and Luke Bonner, an economic development specialist with Ann Arbor SPARK.]

317 Maynard is highlighted in yellow.

Aerial photo of 317 Maynard. The office space is located under the Maynard Street parking garage.

Higgins reviewed the distinction between the establishment of the district and the granting of the tax abatement: The parcel’s owner had applied for the establishment of the district, while the tenant, Barracuda, would be applying for the abatement.

The council was only authorizing the establishment of the district, she stressed. Only when the district is established, she said, would Barracuda be able to apply for the abatement. At that point, the city council’s budget committee would meet and review the application for an abatement.

Briere noted that some members of the community had been confused about who gets the benefit of the tax abatement, so she appreciated the explanation Higgins had offered. She noted that in the past, some districts had been established where no tenant had taken up the opportunity to apply for an abatement.

Mike Anglin (Ward 5) said he was sorry that he couldn’t attend the budget committee, but wondered if there were some preliminary figures. Higgins told him that some preliminary figures had been submitted, but she didn’t have them with her – but they looked promising, she said. Jane Lumm (Ward 2) expressed her support for the district, saying that the new jobs that Barracuda would be bringing is a positive development for the downtown.

Lumm agreed that the incentives being offered to Barracuda are warranted. Ann Arbor is an attractive location for businesses, she ventured, and it was not necessary to constantly offer tax incentives to attract businesses. Ann Arbor only does that on an infrequent and selective basis. She thinks this proposal is worthy of the support. She also pointed to a $1.2 million expansion grant from the Michigan Economic Development Corp. to Barracuda, and how the MEDC generally expected a local match.

Lumm had some remaining questions about the parking commitment. Higgins cautioned against diving into the details of the possible Barracuda proposal, until the application was final.

Mayor John Hieftje also said he didn’t think parking spaces would be presented to the council – because Barracuda would simply be taking advantage of a “special” being offered by the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority, which manages the city’s public parking system. [The DDA has offered incentives generally, not just to Barracuda, in the form of reduced rates on monthly passes for the new underground parking structure on South Fifth Avenue, which opened in July.]

Outcome: The council voted unanimously to establish the industrial development district at 317 Maynard.

Water Resources Commissioner: Flooding Solutions

The council considered a resolution directing city staff to start negotiations with the Washtenaw County water resources commissioner to identify “opportunities for stormwater conveyance and stormwater quality improvement in the area of the Malletts Creek drainage district bounded by Ann Arbor-Saline Road upstream to I-94 and Scio Church Road.”

Partial map of the area of study for the Malletts Creek drainage district.

The city council had heard complaints from residents in that area during public commentary earlier this spring about localized flooding.

The Aug. 7 primary election results from that precinct in Ward 4 were nearly decisive enough in favor of challenger Jack Eaton to win the Democratic nomination over incumbent Margie Teall – but his total fell short of Teall’s by 18 votes across the ward. [On Aug. 16, Eaton filed for a recount, which will likely occur later this month.]

The resolution considered by the council on Aug. 9 directs staff to bring an agreement to the city council with the water resources commissioner by Oct. 1, 2012.

Flooding Solutions: Council Deliberations

Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) said he was intrigued by the proposal and asked Cresson Slotten to answer some questions. Slotten is a senior project manager with the city. He told Kunselman that there’d been similar studies done in other areas of the city. The area described in the resolution, he said, is part of an existing drainage district, Malletts Creek, that’s within the county’s jurisdiction.

Kunselman ventured that outside the city limits, drain improvements get assessed to property owners, but inside the city, the cost is paid for out of the city’s stormwater utility fund. Slotten explained that one of the benefits of working with the water resources commissioner’s office is the ability to work within the state’s “drain code,” which is the statute that establishes the water resources commissioner’s office. [.pdf of Act 40 of 1956]

Malletts Creek is a Chapter 20 drain under that code, Slotten said. A key point is that costs are assessed to the governmental entity, the city of Ann Arbor, based on how much of the area is in the city. Some of it would be in an area owned by the Michigan Dept. of Transportation near I-94, he said, so MDOT would also contribute a small share. The city could choose to assess property owners as well, but typically has chosen to treat it as a “system cost,” especially if it’s a broad project area. And by working through the county, it’s also possible to arrange financing over time, so that there’s not a large up-front cost, Slotten said.

Kunselman noted that the city owns most of the stormwater conveyance – streets, gutters, storm sewers – and at some point there’s an outfall into Malletts Creek. So he wondered how much is really under the county’s jurisdiction. Slotten described the portion of Malletts Creek that’s under the county’s jurisdiction – the open creek visible down by Briarwood Mall and Ann Arbor-Saline Road, where there is “open creek.” In addition, if you continue past Ann Arbor-Saline Road, you see some ponds, and upstream of that is a large pipe that’s a part of the drain. That drain continues up to Scio Church Road and then even up to Maple Road.

That’s the reason the partnership between the county and the city that has evolved over the years – given the intermingling nature of the physical systems – is so beneficial, Slotten said.

Mike Anglin (Ward 5) wanted to know how many dollars in damage Ward 4 had experienced during the localized flooding. Slotten was not certain, but ventured that those claims would have been made through the city’s insurance board. Marcia Higgins (Ward 4) pointed out that the insurance board report had been included in the consent agenda.

Jane Lumm (Ward 2) reported that this project had been discussed as part of the Malletts Creek coordinating committee meeting the previous day. She clarified that the agreement would come back to the council on Oct. 1 for approval.

Outcome: The council unanimously approved the resolution giving direction to start negotiations with the county water resources commissioner.

Demolition Contracts

The council was asked to approve two-year contracts with four different companies, to perform demolition services on an as-needed basis. The four companies are Bierlein, DMC Consultants, Beal, and Van Assche.

At its Feb. 21, 2012 meeting, the Ann Arbor city council had approved a $250,000 allocation for demolishing buildings that the city deems dangerous under Chapter 101 of the city code. The city would like to target buildings that are diminishing the quality of neighborhoods, dragging down property values and attracting nuisances. The city expects to be able to reimburse the general fund for that allocation, from the proceeds of a lawsuit settlement related to the old Michigan Inn property on Jackson Avenue.

Sandi Smith (Ward 1) described the resolution as giving the city some flexibility by having predetermined contractors that the city can call on, to demolish some blighted properties and allow the city to move quicker when the city gets to that stage. As an example, she gave the house on First and Kingsley. It’s located on property that the city purchased earlier this year – the vacant house is expected to be demolished later this month.

Mayor John Hieftje then asked Sumedh Bahl, community services area administrator, to talks about Avalon Housing‘s Near North affordable housing project, located on North Main. Houses on the site of the expected development have long stood vacant.

Bahl explained that if Avalon doesn’t move to demolish the buildings, then the city will. He explained that the city might start the process soon. It might take up to two weeks to finalize the contracts with the demolition companies and to make sure all the right types of insurance are in place, he said. In the meantime, the city will look disconnecting at the water utilities. There has to be a 10-day notice of any demolition, he said. So even if the city starts the next day with the process, you won’t see a bulldozer then. But in 45-60 days, the city will have the buildings down, he said.

Sabra Briere (Ward 1) noted that in the last year or so, she’d heard concerns from several councilmembers about houses that aren’t being maintained in the community. Being able to move forward as quickly as possible is a catch-phrase they’ve talked about, but she noted that it’s hard actually to move quickly. The contract approvals, which are not tied to any particular building, mean the city won’t have to jump through that extra hoop. It’s a tool that won’t be used lightly, she said.

Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) said, “This is great.” He noted that the fund had been set up but he recalled that the amount of the fund was less than the $600,000 that you get when you multiple four contractors times $150,000 apiece. [The fund was set at $250,000.] So he wanted an explanation. Bahl explained that he would not be spending more than $250,000, but that the multiple contracts give him flexibility.

Bahl picked up on remarks by Smith and Briere that these demolitions would not be undertaken lightly. He described the due process that had to be used to demolish derelict houses.

Kunselman noted that the follow-up on the demolitions involves liens on the property and the proper paperwork so that the city can get reimbursed.

Kunselman also wanted to address the issue of the former St. Nicholas Church on North Main Street, which is currently under county tax foreclosure. Given that it’s in “the public hand,” Kunselman felt the city should be able to move quickly on that and take it down, because it’s no longer a private property. He noted that there’d been a house on Sharon Street when the county had cooperated with the city in that way.

City administrator Steve Powers observed that up to now, the city’s fund for demolition has been used as an incentive to property owners to do the work themselves – it’s a way to get a property owner’s attention. Regarding the St. Nicholas Church, Powers said that county treasurer Catherine McClary is well aware of the situation. She’d indicated that the county would be proceeding with demolition on the “county dime” but would be putting a lien on the property against that cost.

Smith asked Mike Appel, senior developer with the nonprofit Avalon Housing, to speak to the question of the Near North development. Appel told the council he appreciates the city’s patience and the whole community’s patience with the situation that he described as taking “too many months.” They’ve been working very hard to move the project forward, he said. They thought they could get the buildings taken down earlier, but now have been cooperating with city staff – by providing them with the asbestos surveys and the electric and gas utilities shutoffs. He said Avalon is doing everything in its power to get the houses down.

1992 FEMA floodway in light crosshatched blue, with the green lines indicating the boundaries of the floodplain. The intersection shown is Main and Summit. Red parcels are those that are now in the floodplain but previously were not. Green parcels were previously in the floodplain and now are not.

2012 FEMA floodway in dark blue, with the green lines indicating the boundaries of the floodplain. The intersection shown is Main and Summit. Red parcels are those that are now in the floodplain but previously were not. Green parcels were previously in the floodplain and now are not.

At this point, it appears that having the city do the demolition is quicker than doing it themselves, Appel said. The most recent event that’s slowed down the project is that in April of this year, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) had issued new floodway and floodplain maps. The floodway had expanded considerably, he reported. The proposed building is not in the floodway, but some of the activities associated with the building are – like parking. The state would allow the project to be built, but the federal funds they’d been planning to use won’t be available. So now Avalon is trying to find a way to substitute non-federal funds for federal funds.

Outcome: The council unanimously approved the contracts with demolition companies.

Transit Articles of Incorporation

In front of the council for the third time were the articles of incorporation for a possible new countywide transit authority. The council had approved them twice before.

The articles of incorporation are part of a four-party agreement to establish a framework for possibly expanding the governance and service area of the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority. The four-party agreement is between the city of Ann Arbor, the city of Ypsilanti, Washtenaw County and the AATA.

This most recent iteration on the Aug. 9 agenda came in response to an amendment made by the Washtenaw County board of commissioners at its Aug. 1, 2012 meeting.

The county board’s amendment changed the minimum threshold of votes required on the proposed new 15-member transit authority board to change the authority’s articles of incorporation. That threshold was increased from a 2/3 majority (10 votes) to a 4/5 majority (12 votes). With a 7-4 vote, the Ann Arbor city council adopted the county’s change. Dissenting were Jane Lumm (Ward 2), Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3), Mike Anglin (Ward 5), and Marcia Higgins (Ward 4).

The council had already reapproved the transit documents once before, at its June 4, 2012 meeting, in response to a change to the four-party agreement that had been made by the Ypsilanti city council. The Ann Arbor city council had initially given its approval to the four-party agreement on March 5, 2012.

Transit Articles of Incorporation: Council Deliberations

Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) reviewed the history of the document approvals and the nature of the change that was being requested.

Sabra Briere (Ward 1) offered a possible explanation for wanting one super majority (4/5) compared to another (2/3). A concern she’d heard was urban versus rural. The cities of Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti, along with Pittsfield Township, would together have 10 members of the board. They could “conspire” to reduce the impact of the other members by changing the articles of incorporation. By asking for 12 instead of 10, it’s necessary to have a mix of urban and rural in order to change the articles of incorporation. The proposal of a 4/5 majority is a compromise between requiring unanimous approval and the original 2/3 majority, she said.

Tony Derezinski (Ward 2) asked Michael Ford, the AATA’s CEO, if the 4/5 majority were acceptable to the AATA. Ford said it was.

Jane Lumm (Ward 2) indicated she had no issue with the specific change. Her concern remains with the agreement itself. She suspected no one had changed their fundamental position on that question. She then reviewed her standard objections to the proposal.

Left to right: Tony Derezinski (Ward 2) and Ann Arbor Transportation Authority CEO Michael Ford.

Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) felt that the “countywide” initiative would not be countywide at all and would end up being a regional Ypsilanti and Ann Arbor system. He felt there are better ways of accomplishing that. Kunselman then accused Ford of knowing the answers to some questions that Kunselman asked the last time Ford appeared in front of the city council. Kunselman said Ford had chosen not to share those answers. [Kunselman may have been alluding to the lack of specificity Ford provided when asked by Kunselman about the AATA's plans in case Ypsilanti was not able to meet the terms of its purchase-of-service agreement.]

Kunselman felt like the AATA has not been working in good faith and has been dropping the ball. He said it was not a countywide proposal, so he asked people to stop calling it that.

Mike Anglin (Ward 5) indicated that he’d vote against it because of the inclusion of Fuller Road Station as part of the plan. Having watched the county board of commissioners vote just 6-4 in favor of the agreement, he was not sure of the strength of the buy-in.

Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5) wanted to know what would happen if the council did not approve the change. Assistant city attorney Mary Fales explained that the document was binding only if all parties agreed to it. Hohnke indicated he was not interested in “belaboring the debate.”

Taylor indicated he’d support it for all the reasons previously discussed.

Outcome: The council voted to reapprove the articles of incorporation for the new countywide transit authority, with dissent from Jane Lumm (Ward 2), Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3), Marcia Higgins (Ward 4) and Mike Anglin (Ward 5).

Firefighters, Fire Truck

The council considered two agenda items directly related to fire protection: hiring three additional firefighters and authorizing the purchase of a new aerial truck.

Firefighters

The council was asked to authorize a revision to its FY 2013 budget that will allow for staffing of three additional firefighters for the next two years, bringing the budgeted staffing level for firefighters from 82 to 85. The positions will be funded with a $642,294 federal grant through the Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response (SAFER), which was announced earlier this year on May 30, 2012.

According to fire chief Chuck Hubbard, the city currently has three vacancies – which means 79 firefighters on staff.

The $321,000 from the SAFER grant for each of the next two years will be allocated for three firefighter positions, which the city estimates will cost $255,000 (at $85,000 per position). The remaining $66,000 per year will be spent on other unspecified fire services needs, according to the staff memo accompanying the resolution – including overtime and fleet expenses. Hiring a fourth firefighter would require using $19,000 of the city’s fund balance, according to the memo.

The budget amendment was anticipated based on the city council’s budget deliberations and final FY 2013 budget resolution earlier this year, on May 22, 2012, which directed the city administrator to submit a proposal to amend the budget and hire additional firefighters if the SAFER grant were to be awarded.

Jane Lumm (Ward 2) asks to be recognized to speak during the council’s Aug. 9 meeting. On the left is Tony Derezinski (Ward 2).

Jane Lumm (Ward 2) wanted to know what the $66,000 would be spent on. City administrator Steve Powers indicated that part of it would go toward overages already incurred. It would also be used to help pay for overtime, fleet expenses, and other fire service operations. The city is projecting a tight budget for FY 2013, Powers said.

Lumm wanted to know if the department was fully staffed at the budgeted level of 82. Hubbard indicated to Lumm that the approved budgeted level was 82. Powers clarified the question, which was essentially: Are we fully staffed? Hubbard indicated that right now the fire department has 79 firefighters – due to a retirements and recalled firefighters who did not return.

Sandi Smith (Ward 1) expressed concern about funding for firefighters in future years after the grant expires: What happens in two years? Hubbard indicated that in 2014 the city has the option to apply for another grant. Powers indicated that part of the rationale for hiring three firefighters instead of four is that the city’s projections are that it can sustain the staffing level of 85 when the two-year grant program is over. He allowed that one possibility is to reapply for the SAFER grant, but the city would prefer to fund the positions on its own.

Outcome: The council unanimously approved the budget change to allow the hiring of three additional firefighters.

Fire Truck

The council was also asked to authorize $1,043,685 from its fleet fund to purchase a new 2013 Sutphen model SPH100 mid-mount aerial platform – a “tower truck.” The department currently has two aerial trucks. The new purchase replaces a 1999 Emergency One brand 100-foot ladder truck – but it will be kept as a “reserve” aerial truck in the department. The department also has a 1996 Emergency One brand 100-foot aerial truck, which will be kept as a secondary aerial truck. Whichever Emergency One aerial truck first starts to have maintenance and repair costs that exceed its value will be retired from service – and the other truck will remain as a reserve.

The new truck is expected to arrive in 10-12 months.

Sabra Briere (Ward 1) noted that some constituents of hers who live in tall buildings were concerned about the city’s current tower truck functioning well. She wanted to know the difference between a ladder truck and a mid-mount truck.

Fire chief Chuck Hubbard explained that “mid-mount” is related to the way it’s built – on a mid-mount vehicle, the aerial component of the truck is mounted to the area just behind the cab. Responding to a question from Briere, Hubbard indicated that it’s not mid-mount versus rear-mount that determines how high the aerial platform can go, but rather the angle of inclination.

Briere said she’d heard that the city’s existing ladder truck had a weak piece that broke and couldn’t easily be fixed. Hubbard indicated that the new truck is very well built, made by a 100-year-old company. He felt that the issues with the existing truck had been well addressed in the purchase of the new truck – and indicated that replacement parts would be easy to acquire.

Mayor John Hieftje was keen to stress that the city’s ladder truck and tower truck were both currently back in service. And during the period when they were not in service, the “box-alarm” could have been used to get a tower truck from a neighboring jurisdiction. He ventured that long-term, it would make sense to think about a regional approach to those types of vehicles, saying that in many departments they are rarely used.

Responding to a question from Sandi Smith (Ward 1), Hubbard said there are more than 100 buildings in the city that are considered “high rises.” Smith asked if it wasn’t the case that they were likely fully-sprinkled – equipped with sprinkler systems under city code. Hubbard allowed that the codes are fairly strict. Hieftje asked city administrator Steve Powers to track down the percentage of high rise buildings that have sprinkler systems.

Responding to a question from Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3), Hubbard said that the preference for a platform instead of a ladder was based on ease of rescue. A ladder would require that a firefighter assist someone all the way down the ladder.

Kunselman got confirmation from Hubbard that the fire truck purchase is not connected at all to the possibility that the city will adopt a new station plan – operating out of three stations instead of the current five.

Mike Anglin (Ward 5) wondered if the number of firefighters required for operation of the truck was related to the “sway” of the truck. Hubbard said it has nothing to do with that, but rather with the number of tasks that have to be performed in connection with an aerial truck.

Outcome: The council unanimously approved the purchase of the aerial fire truck.

Nominations

The usual pattern for appointments to various boards and commissions is that their nominations are made at a council meeting and a vote is taken at a subsequent meeting.

Disabilities Commission: Petersen

Among the nominations for boards and commissions made by mayor John Hieftje at the city council’s Aug. 9 meeting was Sally Petersen to fill a vacancy on the commission on disability issues. Petersen will likely be joining the Ann Arbor city council itself in November, having received more votes than incumbent Tony Derezinski in the Aug. 7 Ward 2 Democratic primary. No other candidate will be on the ballot for Ward 2 on Nov. 6.

In announcing Petersen’s nomination, Hieftje said there was no reason to delay it. Petersen had also applied for appointment to the park advisory commission at the same time she’d applied for a spot on the commission on disability issues.

The commission on disability issues dates back to 1969, but has undergone several name changes since that time, including various forms of the word “handicap.” The commission was established to “promote and advocate for equal opportunities for all individuals with physical, mental and/or emotional disabilities.”

The city council will vote on confirmation of Petersen’s appointment at its Aug. 20 meeting.

DDA Nominations: Smith, Hewitt, Orr

Nominated for reappointment to the board of the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority are Sandi Smith, Roger Hewitt and Keith Orr. Those nominations were placed before the city council by mayor John Hieftje at the council’s Aug. 9 meeting.

This year’s DDA board officer elections, held  two months ago at the DDA’s July 2, 2012 annual meeting, again featured abstention on some votes by board member Newcombe Clark – because the future composition of the board was not yet clear. Hieftje’s custom for many reappointments to city boards and commissions has been to provide no public indication of his intentions on those nominations.

Communications and Comment

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

Comm/Comm: Community Center

Orian Zakai addressed the council as an organizer for the Imagine Community – a nonprofit that promotes solidarity between homed and homeless people, she said, through skill-sharing and creativity. In the last four months, she said, they’ve been cooperating with an educational program at the local homeless shelter, the Delonis Center. Their goal for this year is to open a community center in Ann Arbor, where homed and homeless people can create social lives, learn from each other and stay out of the cold together. They’re waiting for someone to address what they see in the streets – growing desperation, more people out on the streets, insufficient social services, public health care and metal health assistance. They’ve proposed to the city to lease the empty 721 N. Main city-owned building and to take over responsibility for the maintenance of the building in order to make it a hospitable space for a community. She claimed that the city is more interested in costly business plans that would serve business owners and corporate interests than about creating community.

Addressing the contracts with companies that would perform demolition, she wondered what would be built in place of the houses to be demolished – parking lots, high rises and business centers? She said that mayor John Hieftje had been quoted as saying that we’re going to hand the city off to the younger generation and that he thinks young people want to live in a city center with a lot of activity. Contrasting with that sentiment was one expressed by Rose, a Groundcover News vendor, who said that community and not consumption is the next big thing. Zakai said that as a young-ish person, she wanted to live in a community – where people care about each other and no one is left out in the cold to fend for themselves – not a city center. If she had wanted that, she would have chosen to live in Chicago, Tel Aviv, or New York.

Comm/Comm: Democratic Progressive Agenda

Thomas Partridge introduced himself as resident of Ann Arbor and the 53rd District of the Michigan house of representatives. He called on the council and the public to stand up for democratic progress, and build a new Michigan by building affordable housing and re-electing Barack Obama. We need to take courage and stand up and call on our leaders to adopt significant agendas that will benefit the majority of residents. He called on the council to turn away from special interests and the charter amendment protecting city parks, and to focus instead on providing adequate funding to end homelessness, access to affordable housing and to city, countywide and regionwide affordable transportation.

Comm/Comm: Sustainable Practices

Kermit Schlansker recalled his time as a soldier in Germany during 1945-47 after World War II. What he saw was extreme poverty and food shortages, he said. People would trade cameras, radios and jewelry and other items for food. The German farmer was king, he said. His German wife told of going to cut a designated tree for fire wood and having to transport it a long distance in a pull-wagon.

Schlansker indicated that could happen in this country as natural resources get scarcer, and poverty will grow. Before it becomes a national catastrophe, many people will be suffering. We need a place where desperate people can go and trade a little work for food and a place to sleep, he said. We need a place where parolees and drug addicts can go and survive without stealing, he said. Sooner or later, poverty will be ubiquitous. The best remedy is to establish work farms located near cities – for growing food and energy, designing new products and starting new businesses.

Comm/Comm: Smart Meters

Darren Schmidt again addressed the council on the topic of smart meters – which are being installed by DTE Energy to allow for remote measurement of electric usage and for measurements in finer increments. He brought a device that he told the council could measure the effects of such smart meters. The device indicates with colored lights the amount of electromagnetic radiation, he said. He contended that DTE is controlling the Michigan Public Service Commission. Even though there’s an opt-out program, he said, what’s at issue is public airspace. He offered to show people the measuring device and reported that Matt Naud, the city’s environmental coordinator, had taken him up on the offer.

Comm/Comm: Citizens United

Stuart Dowty told the council that he was there to recruit them as a group to do something about the U.S. Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision. Ultimately, it’s about money, he said. CU means that we’re dealing with a fundamental change in the nature of our democracy – and something should be done about it. The Ann Arbor council should join the effort toward education about CU, he said. Bob Davidow told the council he’s a member of the group – the Washtenaw Coalition For Democracy. It’s important to understand, he said, that CU didn’t create a problem, but rather exacerbated a pre-existing problem.

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

Next council meeting: Monday, Aug. 20, 2012 at 7 p.m. in the council chambers at 301 E. Huron. [Check Chronicle events listing to confirm date]

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