Ann Arbor public parking system: monthly permit use by length of stay. An example of the kind of data that’s possible to track for the public parking system. The DDA board has requested that Republic Parking start including additional data in its monthly parking report.

The DDA manages the city’s public parking system, and a report presented to the board for October 2012 – the most recent month for which data is available – showed $1.675 million in revenue, which amounts to an increase in revenue compared to October 2011 of about 15.5%. The increase is at least partly a function of rate increases, changes to the billing method, and an increase in the parking system inventory. The recently completed Library Lane underground parking garage offers more than 700 spaces, which were not available a year ago. The use of the parking system as measured by hourly patrons showed only a 1.8% increase.

At the meeting, DDA board member Roger Hewitt announced that future monthly reports would begin including more detailed information on the length of time patrons park in the system. Currently the board uses revenue levels as a kind of imperfect proxy for system usage.

Also related to the parking system, the stats for November will include the fact that the parking system maxed out – with all spaces in the entire system filled – on the night of the Midnight Madness holiday shopping promotion. That’s an event sponsored by the Main Street Area Association (MSAA), which took place on Nov. 30. Maura Thomson, executive director of the MSAA, relayed her appreciation to the board during public commentary for the DDA’s financial support of the holiday lights strung on trees downtown.

Again related to parking were brief remarks made to the board by local attorney Scott Munzel, who spoke on behalf of the developer of the proposed new residential project at 624 Church St. The DDA board had given its support for around 40 parking spaces to be provided for that 14-story, 81-unit apartment building through the city’s contribution-in-lieu program. Munzel alerted the board that the project was anticipated to be on the city planning commission’s Jan. 15, 2013 agenda. Munzel was hoping the location of the parking spaces in the public parking system could be determined by then.

Ray Detter, speaking for the downtown citizens advisory council, updated the board on another major development – 413 E. Huron. The northeast corner of Huron and Division is the location of a planned residential and retail development with 213 apartments – which does not need any variances in the D1 zoning district. Detter reported the developer’s intention to proceed with the development even through it was strongly criticized by the city’s design review board.

Addressing the board on a non-parking topic was Jim Balmer, president of Dawn Farm, a nonprofit offering both residential and out-patient services supporting recovery for alcoholics and drug addicts. Dawn Farm’s Chapin Street facility has been supported in the past by the DDA, and Balmer addressed the board to thank them for that support and to highlight a future funding request – $150,000 to pay down debt. The grant is intended to help Dawn Farm achieve a target of 200 beds for its residential facilities, up from the current 159 beds.

The board received news that the preliminary draft audit report indicates that the fiscal year 2012, which ended June 30, 2012, will be unqualified – that is, “clean.” The unrestricted net assets held by the DDA at the end of the fiscal year totaled about $8.65 million.

Parking

As usual, parking was a dominant theme of the DDA’s board meeting.

Parking: Profit-Loss

Roger Hewitt gave the parking report. It included a profit-and-loss statement on each facility for the year ending June 30, 2012. [.pdf of profit-loss statements] The second to the bottom line, he noted, reflects whether a particular structure “made money or not.” The key to that is three lines above that bottom line – bond payments.

Four structures still have bond payments being made, he pointed out. The Fourth & Washington and the Fourth & William structures still have the original construction bonds that need paying off, he noted. Two other structures have related bond payments: Maynard and Forest – which both underwent significant renovations. Hewitt pointed out that even after the bond payments are factored in for Maynard and Fourth & William, they’re still making money – unlike Fourth & Washington and Forest.

Hewitt said the more significant point is not to evaluate whether an individual structure is making money but rather whether the parking system as a whole is working. And the net annual income is nearly $800 per space, Hewitt said. So net revenue from the parking system is anticipated to be about $5.6 million for last fiscal year.

Responding to a question from Sandi Smith, Hewitt indicated that the $5.6 million figure was after making the payment due to the city of Ann Arbor, for 17% of gross parking system revenues. The total paid to the city was about $3 million or roughly $300,000 more than was budgeted, Hewitt said. It also includes the rent paid to privately-owned parking lots the DDA uses.

Parking: Midnight Madness

Hewitt also reported on a unique occurrence that, depending on your viewpoint, was either good or bad, he said. The previous Friday night, on Nov. 30, was Midnight Madness – and it maxed out the parking system. At some point during Friday night, every single spot at every structure and surface lot was filled, Hewitt said. That had happened only once before – on the Friday of the art fairs this year. That’s nearly 5,600 spaces, he said. The two structures at Maynard and at Fourth & Washington had parking activity that would be the equivalent of filling and emptying four times, Hewitt reported. If the new Library Lane structure had not been on line, it would have been necessary to shut down the system for 2 hours at the beginning of evening. There were almost 1,500 more parkers entering the system between 5-8 p.m. than last year on Midnight Madness.

John Mouat ventured that more important than the parking numbers were the people who were downtown. Hewitt said: “There were a lot of people downtown Friday night!” He saw that reflected in his restaurant. [Hewitt owns the Red Hawk.] Hewitt thanked the Republic Parking staff for their work in getting people in and out as quickly as possible.

Leah Gunn added that based on a conversation with Maura Thomson, executive director of the Main Street Area Association, “business was booming.” People were not just walking around, Gunn said, they were buying.

Maura Thomson, executive director of the Main Street Area Association.

Thomson also appeared before the board during public commentary time to thank the DDA publicly for the downtown holiday lights display. She felt it contributes to stimulating the downtown economy, and has an impact on the experience people have downtown that can’t be measured. It creates an environment that helps people feel connected to the downtown and makes people want to talk to other people about how great they think this downtown is, she said. As someone who works to promote downtown, she thanked the DDA for making her job easier.

Board member Nader Nassif responded to Thomson’s remarks by noting that he now lives on Fourth Avenue. He’d like to see the holiday lights expanded to other areas of downtown, not just Main Street. Sandi Smith echoed Nassif’s sentiments, calling it an easy piece of low-hanging fruit. Smith also suggested adding some wayfinding directions from the downtown to the Border-to-Border trail and the new Argo Cascades.

Parking: Monthly Report

The monthly parking report – comparing October 2012 against October 2011 – showed a 15.5% increase in revenue, with the number of hourly patrons up 1.8%. Hewitt pointed out that the new underground Library Lane structure showed about $77,500 in revenue, which he called “pretty good for a new structure.”

Hewitt indicated that the operations committee will be looking at the kind of statistics it requests from Republic Parking, the DDA’s subcontractor for parking operations. After adding the new Library Lane underground garage, the committee will be asking that Republic produce more detailed statistics on hourly users and how they affect the system. He said the format of the report would likely be modified to get a better idea of the impact of hourly users on the system.

Ann Arbor public parking system: Revenue. Compared to October 2011, revenue was up again (green trend line) – by 15% after showing about nearly the same revenue year-over-year in September. The revenue increase reflects increased rates, billing by the hour, and 865 additional spaces compared over the 6,955 in the system that were available in October 2011. It’s not clear how much additional usage of the system it reflects.

Ann Arbor public parking system: Patrons. Compared to October a year ago, the number of hourly patrons was up incrementally by 1.8%.

Ann Arbor public parking system: Focus on structures. The new Library Lane structure showed a clear upward trend in revenues per space (black trend line).

Ann Arbor public parking system: Focus on surface lots. The Fifth & William lot (purple trend line), near the newly opened Library Lane structure, may have lost some patrons to the new structure.

Ann Arbor public parking system: Focus on system. Revenue-per-space systemwide continues upward.

The different statistics that will be included in the standard monthly reports reflect an attempt to get a clearer picture of how different patrons are using the parking system. The DDA makes monthly permits available at prices that yield less revenue per space than the DDA would receive, if all spaces were paid at the standard hourly rate. For example, the standard hourly rate for a parking structure is $1.20 per hour. A standard monthly permit in some structures costs $145 per month. So a downtown worker who used a permit for eight hours daily would break just about even after three weeks, compared to paying hourly. [145/(1.2*8)]

The strategy the DDA is using to free up spaces for hourly patrons in structures near the University of Michigan campus has been to offer discounted permits in the new Library Lane structure – for new patrons or for people willing to shift their permits from Liberty Square or Maynard to the new Library Lane structure. That discounted rate is $95 per month. In the first week of December, 260 of the cheaper permits for Library Lane had been sold, with an additional 336 permits sold at the regular rate of $145 – for a total of 596 permits sold for the 738-space structure.

Revenue from permits alone for Library Lane would translate into about $73,000 per month. [336*145 + 260*95] Back in October, with fewer monthly permits sold, and about 8,000 hourly parking patrons using Library Lane, the structure generated $77,500 in revenue.

With additional statistics about how long hourly patrons are staying and how long monthly permit holders are parking, the DDA hopes to get a clearer understanding of the impact that pricing policies have on parking behavior.

Parking: Spaces for Bicycles

Two of the parking spaces in the Maynard structure will be given over to bicycle parking starting in March or April. John Mouat gave an update on the project, which getDowntown director Nancy Shore has suggested be called the “Bike House” – on analogy with the Big House, as University of Michigan’s football stadium is known.

Sketches and preliminary pricing has been done by designer Dan Mooney. At its Oct. 3, 2012 meeting, the DDA board authorized a $30,000 budget for the facility, which is expected to provide room for about 50 bikes.

Similar “cages” in other cities use a chain-link fencing material. However, the DDA hopes that a more aesthetically pleasing option can be identified. The preliminary drawings include a laminated glass half wall, instead of a chain-link design.

The facility is designed for commuters who would pay a rental amount for use of the “cage.” Bicyclists would still be responsible for securing their own bikes in racks inside the cage. [.jpg of rack configuration].

Development

A number of items on the Dec. 5 agenda related to the Ann Arbor DDA’s role as a development authority.

Development: Parking

Under city policy, the public parking system is used as a development tool – and that policy is implemented by the DDA. So local attorney Scott Munzel appeared before the board during public commentary time representing Opus Group of Minnetonka, Minn. – which is developing a residential project at 624 Church St. in downtown Ann Arbor. It will be a 13- or 14-story, 83-unit apartment building with approximately 181 beds. A request had already been made to the DDA by the developer to provide the required 40-42 parking spaces by contracting for them in the public parking system. That’s instead of building the spaces on site as part of the project.

The authorization to work out the parking agreement in the context of the city’s “contribution in lieu of parking” program came on a vote taken at the Oct. 3, 2012 meeting of the DDA board. The DDA manages the city’s public parking system under a contract with the city.

Ann Arbor’s “contribution in lieu of parking” program was authorized by the city council on April 2, 2012. That program allows essentially two options: (1) purchase monthly parking permits in the public parking system for an extra 20% more than the current rate for such permits, with a commitment of 15 years; or (2) make a lump sum payment of $55,000 per space. It’s option (1) that the 624 Church St. project will be pursuing.

At the DDA board’s Dec. 5 meeting, Munzel reported that the site plan for the project had been submitted and is expected to be on the Jan. 15 agenda of the Ann Arbor planning commission. Munzel ventured that the planning commission will want to know where the authorized spaces will be, and he told the board that the size of the building had settled in on a slightly smaller square footage, so that 40 spaces would be needed, not 42.

Munzel reiterated the developer’s request that those spaces be provided in the Forest parking structure, which is the closest one to the development. Munzel said that location would best meet the intent of the payment-in-lieu policy and would help stabilize revenue to the DDA. He offered to sit down and chat about that informally.

Development: Grant Request – Dawn Farm

Jim Balmer, president of Dawn Farm, told the board he guessed they all knew who he was, and that they’d seen the request that had been made for financial assistance to reduce the debt on two of the organization’s existing properties. By way of background, Dawn Farm is a nonprofit offering both residential and out-patient services supporting recovery for alcoholics and drug addicts. In 2001, the DDA had made a $135,000 grant to Dawn Farm to assist with the purchase of the property at 112 Chapin St.

The current request being made to the DDA is for $150,000 to help pay down the debt on two other Dawn Farm properties, at 343 Beakes and 324 Summit. The grant from the DDA would free up cash to expand the existing total 159 beds in Dawn Farm’s residential treatment facilities to 200 by early 2013, according to Dawn Farm.

Development: Update on 413 E. Huron

Reporting from the downtown citizens advisory council, Ray Detter told the board that in recent weeks, representatives of the eight downtown and near-downtown residential neighborhood associations had been negotiating directly with the developer of the project at 413 E. Huron St., which Detter described as a “massive 14-story … student housing building.” It’s located just east of Sloan Plaza and immediately adjacent to the Old Fourth Ward historic district.

Greenfield Partners is a financial backer of the project, Detter said. They have rejected all suggestions and requests from the city’s design review board to improve the design of the building, he reported. The design review board had recognized that context is important, and that the project is part of a specific character area, Detter said. [The city's development process of design review is mandatory, but compliance with the recommendations of the design review board is voluntary.] According to Detter, Greenfield Partners said that any further changes would affect the profitability of the project. The bottom line, Detter continued, is that the developer wants to make the maximum he can. “They call it ‘by right’ and they’re going to build it to make that money…”

Detter expressed some optimism based on the draft recommendations from the Connecting William Street project. A draft indicates that the planning commission would be required to report to the city council about how a project team responded to the recommendations of the design review board. The downtown citizens advisory council will join with other groups to work toward improving the design review process for all buildings, he said, not just those on public property.

Development: Board Retreat

Susan Pollay, executive director of the DDA, summarized the recent board retreat that was held on Nov. 17. The board had talked about the basics and what DDAs are created to do. They’d talked about what the board felt the Ann Arbor DDA did well and what outside stakeholders felt they did well, as well as what they did not do as well. A smaller group of the board had met after the retreat, she reported, and distilled the discussion from the retreat into key tactics:

1. Identity. There’s a lot of information that’s currently captured by the DDA about the downtown. More efforts could be made along these lines, Pollay said.
2. Infrastructure. It’s what the DDA is known for. The walkability and attractiveness of downtown is due in large part to DDA dollars, she said.
3. Transportation and parking. There’s more the DDA could do to merge the two areas. The DDA needs to look at the results of the Connector Study [on the corridor between US-23 and Plymouth, through University of Michigan campus and downtown to I-94 and State].
4. Business encouragement. The DDA should include a focus on “clean and safe” and should make conversations with the Main Street business improvement zone (BIZ) a part of that – which would help tap into the private sector.
5. Housing. It’s a key ingredient of the DDA’s success, Pollay said. The city and Washtenaw County, as well as the nonprofit community, have a role to play, she added. The DDA’s specialized role could be in supporting work-force housing. The DDA is trying to make it possible for people to live and work in the downtown.

Audit

Roger Hewitt reported that the operations committee had received a draft of the audit. The final version hasn’t been received yet, but he said it was completely clean as an accurate reflection of the DDA’s financial condition.

The statements include total net assets of $8,767,926 – nearly a $1 million increase over the previous year. That is primarily held in the balances of the DDA’s four different funds: TIF – tax increment finance ($4.7 million), parking ($2.1 million) and the two combined funds of housing and parking maintenance ($1.7 million). For the formal audit, the housing fund and the parking maintenance funds are lumped together as “non-major governmental funds.”

Bike Share

DDA board member John Mouat briefed his colleagues on a bike-share program that the DDA is being asked to support. A bike-share program would allow members to take a bicycle from a station and use it for a period of time. The concept is that several stations would be placed in a geographic area, so that a bicyclist could, as much as possible, ride from one station to another.

By way of background, a year ago – at the DDA’s Dec. 7, 2011 meeting – Mouat had briefed the board on a request from the Clean Energy Coalition for in-kind support for the bike-sharing program. The bike-sharing program would work on analogy to car-sharing programs like Zipcar. The initial request for only an in-kind contribution from the DDA was based on the hope that a grant award from the Federal Transit Administration’s Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) would cover both capital costs and operations. But it turns out that the FTA has limited the program to capital costs only.

At the partnerships committee meeting of June 27, 2012 the grant request by the CEC to the DDA was described as $5,000 in calendar year 2012 and $10,000 annually for the three years from 2013-2015. Other organizations that had been asked to contribute financially include: the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority ($18,000 this year and $40,000 annually for three years); the city of Ann Arbor ($15,000 this year and $40,000 annually for three years; and the University of Michigan ($66,000 this year and $200,000 annually for three years). The university was described as contributing the lion’s share because UM is interested in controlling the advertising component of the program.

At the board’s Dec. 5 meeting, Mouat described the project as having “run into a speed bump.” The CEC is looking to increase the amount of the requests. The question of how to ensure adequate operating expenses is crucial. Mouat indicated that his inclination was to put as much as possible of the responsibility on the University of Michigan. He described it as a complicated issue.

At the operations committee meeting of the DDA the previous week, Mouat had reported that the most recent meeting of the potential partners had become a bit contentious. At that operations committee meeting, DDA executive director Susan Pollay had supported the idea of having the University of Michigan take the lead with a launch that would be confined to the campus. When the program was established, it might be expanded – roughly on analogy with the way that the Zipcar program was rolled out in Ann Arbor.

The city of Ann Arbor is represented in the bike-share discussions by Eli Cooper, the city’s transportation program manager who also serves on the AATA board. In a telephone interview with The Chronicle, he indicated that he hoped the initial deployment would not be confined only to the University of Michigan campus. He pointed out that the concept of a bike-share is actually different from Zipcar.

When a patron of a Zipcar uses a vehicle, then the expectation is that the driver will use the vehicle for some period of time, perhaps driving somewhere and parking it for an hour or two, then returning it to the same Zipcar parking space. A bike-share program, in contrast, depends on the availability of a station near the intended destination, so that a user pays for the time of the travel, not for the entire “outing.” So Cooper hoped that the initial geographic deployment of stations would be as broad as possible. Cooper stressed that one of the challenges is that bike-share as a transportation strategy is relatively new.

Misc. Communications

The DDA board’s meeting included a range of other comments and communications.

Comm/Comm: Calendar

The board decided to move its January 2013 meeting to Jan. 9. Ordinarily it would have fallen on Jan. 2.

Comm/Comm: Thank You

Susan Pollay, executive director of the DDA, addressed the board at the end of the meeting during the public commentary time, saying she was wearing her citizen of Ann Arbor hat. She thanked DDA board member Sandi Smith for her tenure as a city councilmember. This year, Smith chose not to seek another two-year term after serving four years representing Ward 1 on the council.

Pollay also thanked DDA board member Leah Gunn, who was going to attend her final session of the Washtenaw County board of commissioners that night.

Comm/Comm: Adopting a Theme

Addressing the board at the conclusion of the meeting was Thomas Partridge. He encouraged the board to adopt a freedom theme for the 21st century. He called for the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority to provide transportation under the theme of Freedom Rides. Ann Arbor hasn’t adopted a theme and has been scooped by other cities like Atlanta, San Francisco, Chicago, New York, and Boston, he said. He criticized what he described as the Caucasian dominance of elected and appointed boards in Ann Arbor.

Present: Nader Nassif, Bob Guenzel, Roger Hewitt, John Hieftje, John Splitt, Sandi Smith, Leah Gunn, Russ Collins, Keith Orr, Joan Lowenstein, John Mouat.

Absent: Newcombe Clark.

Next board meeting: Noon on Wednesday, Jan. 9, 2013, at the DDA offices, 150 S. Fifth Ave., Suite 301. [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 Downtown Development Authority. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle. And if you’re already supporting us, please encourage your friends, neighbors and colleagues to help support The Chronicle, too!

Left to right: DDA board member Sandi Smith, Ann Arbor Housing Commission executive director Jennifer L. Hall, and DDA board chair Leah Gunn. (Photos by the writer.)

And board members voted unanimously to support the resolution, which DDA board member Sandi Smith had brought forward. Smith, who also represents Ward 1 on the Ann Arbor city council, is planning to bring the policy resolution to the council for consideration at its Sept. 17 meeting.

DDA board members were positively inclined toward their own resolution, but sought to clarify that the “proceeds” meant net proceeds – that is, whatever is left after any debt associated with city-owned land is paid off. The loan for the city’s acquisition of the former YMCA lot, for example, still has a principal of $3.5 million associated with it. Smith indicated at the meeting that the resolution she brings to the council might involve the DDA forgoing the repayment on investments it has made in city-owned property – like interest payments on the former YMCA lot or the demolition costs associated with that property.

The board also made an amendment to the resolution during the meeting, adding the phrase “a percentage of [proceeds].” The change gives the council flexibility to adopt a policy that doesn’t require the entire amount of the net proceeds to be directed to the affordable housing trust fund.

At the Sept. 5 meeting, the board also heard a request from the executive director of the Ann Arbor Housing Commission, Jennifer L. Hall, for a $260,000 allocation from the DDA’s own housing fund. The DDA has a housing fund that’s not necessarily dedicated to affordable housing. But the request Hall was making was for Baker Commons, a public housing project located within the DDA’s geographic district, at Packard and Main. The money would primarily go toward replacing the roof with one made of metal.

The board also got its regular update on the parking system. The basic message: revenue is up, and usage is up. The board also had a look at the unaudited financial figures for the end of fiscal year 2012, which concluded on June 30. Except for capital expenses, which were less than budgeted, most categories were on target. The DDA had budgeted all expenses for the new Library Lane parking structure for that fiscal year, but not all invoices have come in yet.

The board was also updated on a possible change to the way that transportation planning and funding takes place in Washtenaw County. Discussions by the policy board of the Washtenaw Area Transportation Study (WATS) suggest the  possibility that Washtenaw County could form its own metropolitan planning organization (MPO). Currently, the Southeast Michigan Council of Governments (SEMCOG), which includes a total of seven counties, serves as the MPO  for Washtenaw County. The change would affect how federal transportation funding is administered locally.

Affordable Housing Trust Fund Policy

The board was asked to consider a resolution encouraging the Ann Arbor city council to adopt a policy on proceeds from the sale of city-owned land – one that would allocate such proceeds into the city’s affordable housing trust fund. The city council’s resolution will be considered at that body’s Sept. 17 meeting. It’s being brought forward by Sandi Smith, who serves on both the city council and the DDA board.

The policy has a long history dating back to 1996. The policy of directing proceeds of city-owned land sales to the affordable housing trust fund was rescinded by the council in 2007. More detailed background is provided in previous Chronicle coverage: “City Council to Focus on Land Sale Policy.”

Affordable Housing Trust Fund: Commentary

Reporting from the downtown citizens advisory council, Ray Detter told the board that the CAC had also discussed the DDA’s resolution on using proceeds from city-owned land sales to support affordable housing. Members of the CAC have always supported affordable housing, he said.

But Detter cautioned the DDA and the city council that the CAC is committed to maintaining and improving the existing low-income housing in the downtown – whether it’s in the form of the Delonis Center homeless shelter, the housing commission’s Baker Commons, or the privately-owned Courthouse Square. The CAC supports rehabbing existing units rather than tearing down existing affordable housing to build new units, Detter said.

Affordable Housing Trust Fund: Board Discussion

Sandi Smith introduced her resolution by telling her DDA board colleagues that on Sept. 17 she would be bringing forward a resolution to city council that would direct the proceeds of the sale of city-owned property into the city’s affordable housing trust fund.

She observed that, “We have not had a tremendous amount of success in building affordable housing.” It’s something she has watched the community struggle with, she said, during her time serving on the DDA board and on the city council.

The funds need to come from somewhere, she stressed. She contended that insufficient affordable housing units are being provided in downtown and near downtown. The recent failure of the Near North project hammers the point home, she said. So she wanted to ask for the DDA board’s support in bringing the city council’s resolution forward. She allowed that the city council resolution was not yet in final draft form, so there is some ambiguity about it.

The details are not 100% clear, Smith allowed, but the request for the DDA’s part is to say that the DDA agrees with the overall concept – and that the DDA is willing to forgo some payback on some investments that the DDA has made in city-owned properties. As an example, Smith gave the portion of the ongoing interest payments the DDA has made on the loan used to purchase the old YMCA building. The DDA would be forgoing repayment of that interest. [Those payments total about $140,000 annually, half of which have been paid by the DDA and half by the city of Ann Arbor. The property was purchased in late 2003, and the building was subsequently demolished. It's now a surface parking lot.]

Roger Hewitt wanted clarification that the “proceeds” of any sale would be considered after the payment of any debt attached to the property. Smith pointed out it’s not a benefit to the city to leave a debt unpaid with nothing behind it – saying that would not make a lot of sense. Proceeds would be construed as “net” proceeds, she said. Hewitt indicated that he was comfortable with that. He also pointed out that the DDA’s resolution was an advisory resolution only – because it’s ultimately a city council decision.

John Mouat indicated his support for the notion, saying it was a terrific idea. But obviously, he said, the “devil is in the details.” From his perspective, he would prefer to see the proceeds from city-owned land sales not simply go into the general fund.

Mouat also wanted to see some consideration given to the fact that the DDA is still working on the Connecting William Street project – looking at five city-owned parcels and what uses would eventually be made of those parcels. [Recent Chronicle coverage of a DDA presentation to the planning commission: "Planning Group Briefed on William Street Project."]

Some of the things that people have said they want out of those parcels, Mouat continued, include performance space, parks, good architecture, sustainability. So the community vision for those parcels still needs to be determined, he said. [For response to Connecting William Street from the city's park advisory commission, see Chronicle coverage: "Park Commissioners: More Green, Please."]

Mouat also pointed out there might be some things the city needs to provide as incentives – to help realize the community’s vision for those parcels. So he liked the concept of reinvesting the proceeds of the sale in those parcels themselves or putting proceeds into the affordable housing trust fund.

Mayor John Hieftje pointed out that the city council resolution will only be as strong as the six councilmembers [a simple majority on the 11-member body] who sit around the table at the time. He also pointed out that there are other capital needs that might come along. In that context, he suggested an amendment to include the phrase “a percentage of [the proceeds].”

The amendment was approved unanimously.

Outcome: With no further discussion, the DDA board approved the resolution encouraging the city council to adopt a policy directing a percentage of the proceeds of city-owned land sales to the affordable housing trust fund.

Ann Arbor Housing Commission: New Roof

During public commentary at the start of the DDA board’s meeting, Jennifer L. Hall – executive director of the Ann Arbor Housing Commission – addressed the board. She discussed a request for $260,000 from the DDA’s housing fund, the bulk of which would be put toward the replacement of the roof of Baker Commons.

By way of background, the DDA’s housing fund is not the same fund as the city’s affordable housing trust fund. The DDA’s housing fund receives money through transfers from the DDA’s tax increment finance (TIF) fund. It currently has a balance of about $1 million – $400,000 of which is committed to Village Green’s City Apartments project, and another $500,000 of which had been committed to Avalon Housing’s Near North project. It was recently announced that Near North will not go forward.

Baker Commons roof. View is looking to the south, across the intersection of Packard and Main streets.

Hall noted that the Ann Arbor Housing Commission is the public housing authority for the city of Ann Arbor, which has jurisdiction for about 360 city-owned units. The housing commission also administers about 1,400 federal housing vouchers for the entire Washtenaw County.

Ninety percent or more of the population served by the Ann Arbor Housing Commission are extremely low-income residents, Hall said. Most of the people who live in housing commission units are disabled or elderly and many of them do not have jobs. So it’s really the lowest income folks in the community who are served by the Ann Arbor Housing Commission, Hall said.

The housing commission has only one property within the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority district, Hall explained – Baker Commons, on the corner of Packard and Main streets. So she wanted to make a request to fund a current urgent need: a roof for Baker Commons.

The roof has had ongoing leaking problems, and the housing commission has undertaken periodic patches. However, in the last year or so it is gotten much worse, Hall reported. There has been leakage into housing units and damage to the roof trusses, she explained. For all of the housing units, the commission is trying to move towards doing more long-term cost savings – so rather than replacing the Baker Commons roof with an asphalt roof, they explored using a product that would last longer and realize long-term savings.

So the housing commission went out and got a bid for a steel roof, which came back at $246,000. There are many advantages to a steel roof, Hall said. The only real disadvantage is the increased upfront cost, she explained – which is about three times more than an asphalt roof. On the other hand, she said such a roof can last forever – as long as you keep repainting it. The original guarantee is 20 years for the roof, and as long as you keep repainting it, you should never have to take it down to replace it.

From left: Jennifer Hall appears to be showing Leah Gunn how steep the Baker Commons roof is.

Hall noted that the roof of the building has an extremely steep pitch, so it is a very expensive project to replace the roof no matter what kind of roof is put on – because it’s a high-rise building with such a steep pitch. The commission would like to replace it once, and then have it last for a very, very long time, she said. Some of the benefits for the steel roof include: no off-gas; resistance to wind, fire, mildew, insects and rot; extended life for air-conditioning units; decrease in attic temperatures; and decreased energy use overall. It decreases the heat-island effect. Hall also pointed out that the product that the housing commission has chosen was made in Michigan.

A few additional items, for which Hall requested funding, fell into the category of energy-saving devices – programmable thermostats and occupancy sensors for interior lighting in common areas. The programmable thermostats are estimated to save $50 per year for each of the one-bedroom units in Baker Commons. The sensors would be estimated to save around $770 a year.

Ann Arbor Housing Commission: Board Response

Mayor John Hieftje made remarks generally supportive of Hall’s to request on behalf of the Ann Arbor Housing Commission. He said the 30-year funding trend across the nation for housing commissions was downward.

Board chair Leah Gunn suggested referring Hall’s proposal to the DDA’s partnerships committee.

Outcome: This was not an action item, and no vote was taken.

FY 2012 Financial Statements

Roger Hewitt gave an update on the financial reports for the end of the fiscal year, which concluded on June 30, 2012. The figures are as yet not audited, but the DDA is ready for the audit to take place, Hewitt said. There was not too much variation between the budget as amended in May 2012 and the final figures, Hewitt reported. The one area where a considerable difference appears is in capital expenses.

It’s a legal requirement that the DDA show positive budget numbers for the year, Hewitt explained. So for that reason, all conceivable capital expenses related to the new underground parking structure were included in the past fiscal year’s budget, even though the DDA did not expect that they would all need to be paid that year. That way, the DDA made sure that it remained within the letter of the law. [Last year, the DDA's auditor had noted an overage as a violation of Michigan's Uniform Budgeting and Accounting Act, which was due to a construction invoice submitted late in the year.]

So the major variations between the end-of-year figures in the budget were capital expenses that were budgeted but not actually expended. Those expenses will come due in the current fiscal year, Hewitt pointed out. [.pdf of end-of-year FY 2012 statements]

TIF (tax increment finance) fund income was very close to what had been budgeted, Hewitt said, as were TIF operating expenses. TIF capital expenses were about $2.4 million less than budgeted. But that money will be spent in the current fiscal year, he cautioned. The parking fund showed a similar situation, he continued. Parking revenue was very close to what had been budgeted. But about $800,000 was not spent, which had been in the parking fund budget – it will be spent in the current fiscal year. For the parking maintenance fund, about $1.4 million was not spent, but will be spent in the current fiscal year. For the housing fund, interest rates were a little bit higher than expected, so there was a bit more income than budgeted.

Hewitt then ticked through the fund balances for four funds in the DDA’s budget. The TIF fund has a little over $3.6 million. The housing fund has a little over $1 million. The parking fund balance is about $2.1 million. And the parking maintenance stands at about $1.6 million. Some additional money will be spent on the completion of the Library Lane underground parking structure, he allowed, but the total fund balance is such that it could comfortably take care of those additional expenses.

Parking Report

The DDA manages the city’s public parking system under a contract with the city of Ann Arbor. That contract pays the city 17% of gross revenues. The DDA in turn subcontracts out the day-to-day operations of the system to Republic Parking. So the monthly parking report is part of every DDA board meeting.

Parking Report: Monthly, Quarterly Numbers

The update on the parking system was delivered by board member Roger Hewitt. The trend that the DDA has seen for the last 12 months – and increasingly so in the last six months – Hewitt said, has been significantly higher revenues. That’s attributable to increased usage and also partly due to rate increases, he said. But the majority of the increase in revenue, he contended, was a function of greater usage of the parking system.

In June 2012, revenues were up 19% over June 2012 June 2011, while the number of hourly patrons for the same period was up 2.65%. Hewitt concluded that the hourly patrons are staying longer. Of the 19%, Hewitt estimated 6-8% is the amount of the rate increase. So he concluded there was a 10% increase in revenue attributable to increased usage. Hewitt concluded that it’s fortunate that the new Library Lane underground structure is open, because there is clearly demand for parking.

For the fourth quarter, Hewitt continued, revenue in the parking system was up 14% – with hourly patrons just about level. For the last 12 months revenues are up 12% – two-thirds of which was due to rate increases and the balance of which was increase in usage, Hewitt said. Hourly patron numbers for that period were up only about 2%, so the hourly patrons are staying longer, he concluded.

Hewitt concluded that demand and the financial condition of the parking system are very strong. The initial numbers for the first 10 days that the new structure had been open, Hewitt said, were 4,000 hourly patrons in the first week, which meant $45,000 of revenue.

By way of background on rate increases, the DDA board approved additional rate increases on Jan. 4, 2012. Some of those increases were just recently implemented, starting in September 2012. Rate increases implemented starting in September include those at parking structures and lots, where rates climbed from $1.10 per hour to $1.20 per hour.

But other changes were implemented starting Feb. 1, including a change in the billing method at parking structures and hourly lots – from half-hourly to hourly.

To compare the hour-increment billing method to the half-hour billing method, assume that parking times are evenly distributed among those people who parked between N and (N + 0.5) hours and those who parked between (N + 0.5) and (N + 1) hours, where N is some whole number.

On the hour-increment billing method – for the current hourly rate of $1.10 – the first group would pay for N + 1 hours, or roughly $0.55 more than under the half-hour-increment method, when they’d pay just for N + 0.5 hours. The second group would pay for N + 1 hours under either billing method. So by changing from half-hourly to hourly increments, half of the roughly 2 million annual hourly patrons would pay $0.55 more – generating roughly $550,000 more revenue annually.

Parking Report: Parking Management

Hewitt complimented Republic Parking manager Art Low on the management of the system during the art fairs in July. On the Friday of art fairs, for the first time in the history of the parking system, every single parking structure was full at one time – and that had never happened before, Hewitt said. Of course, Hewitt pointed out, it was during the art fairs. But that included three levels of the underground parking structure that were open to the public. [It has four levels, which are now all open.] So it was a very, very busy day, he concluded. Art fair revenues were up 30% over last year. Part of that is having extra capacity and part of that is having very good management of getting people into the structures, he said.

Hewitt also gave an update on the new automated payment equipment that’s being installed in the Liberty Square parking structure and the Fourth and Washington structure. The new equipment allows people to pay for their parking before getting into their cars to exit the structure, and then use their validated ticket to raise the gate arm so that they can leave – instead of paying an attendant sitting in a booth. [The new automated equipment is being paid for by Republic Parking under a $1.3 million lending arrangement with the DDA.]

Attendants will still be available in the structure, Hewitt explained, but they won’t be sitting in a booth working exclusively as cashiers. A lot of parking systems across the country are moving in that direction, he said. It makes for shorter lines when exiting and a more efficient operation, he said.

Hewitt emphasized that parking personnel are not being removed entirely from the structures. They are being used more efficiently and effectively, he said, because they are also providing light maintenance, and walking through the structures providing assistance as needed. [Republic parking manager Art Low previously had explained to the DDA's operations committee that the personnel change had required creating a new job classification for collective bargaining – one that is slightly higher-paid than booth cashiering. He allowed that the total number of staff will eventually decrease over time.]

The Fourth and Washington structure is in the process of having the equipment installed. And the equipment has already been installed at Liberty Square. Up to now, Liberty Square had been designated strictly for monthly parking permits during the day. Now, over 100 monthly permit holders had moved into the underground parking garage, so some hourly spaces are opening up at Liberty Square, Hewitt said – and the hourly patrons are using the automated payment system.

Parking Report: Charts and Graphs

Ann Arbor Public Parking System: Hourly Patrons. The yellow line shows patrons for the recently-concluded fiscal year 2012. The number of hourly patrons was in most months very slightly more than the same month the previous year. But in some months, the number was less. FY 2013 (green) is off to a slow start for hourly patrons compared to previous years.

Ann Arbor Public Parking System: Revenue. The yellow line shows revenue for the recently-concluded fiscal year 2012.  It reflects substantial increases in every month compared to the same month in the previous years. FY 2013 (green) continues that trend.

Ann Arbor Public Parking System Revenue Per Space – Surface Lots. The top two facilities in the system, measured by revenue per space, are the Huron/Ashley/First (bright red) lot and Kline’s lot on Ashley (bright blue). They generate significantly more revenue per space than a heavily-used structure like Maynard Street (light blue). The most erratic performance of any lot appears to be the Fifth & William lot. The dramatic increases starting in late 2009 reflect the closing of the neighboring lot where the new Library Lane parking structure was built.

Ann Arbor Public Parking System Revenue Per Space– Structures. The highest revenue-per-space structures (Fourth & Washington and Maynard Street) are still considerably lower than a surface lot like Huron/Ashley/First (light red). Considered as a facility unto itself, on-street meters generate less revenue per space than most other facilities in the public parking system. That’s due in part to the fact that enforcement of the meters does not extend past 6 p.m.

Ann Arbor Public Parking System: Number of Spaces by Fiscal Year. The number of spaces available shows some fluctuation month to month. But the increases in revenue clearly can’t be attributed to an increase in the parking space inventory.

Washtenaw: Separate from Seven-County Region?

During routine reports, John Mouat mentioned that he is the Ann Arbor DDA’s representative to the Washtenaw Transportation Study (WATS) – a group made up of county and township officials, a city council member and other “various folks” whose job it is to help guide the direction of transportation spending in the county. The world of transportation is a exoteric world of acronyms and other strange things, he said. The organizing body for determining federal funding is the Southeast Michigan Council of Governments (SEMCOG), which is a seven-county organization – dominated by Wayne, Oakland, and Macomb counties, Mouat said.

Mouat wanted people to be aware of a discussion going on right now – about whether Washtenaw County should form its own metropolitan planning organization (MPO). The logic for bringing it forward is the idea that currently it’s a long and complex process to get initiatives done that WATS would like to see implemented. [.pdf of chart showing average additional time of 77 days due to SEMCOG's involvement] [.pdf of comparison by WATS of current arrangement and separate MPO]

The other point is that for some people, Washtenaw County is seen as unique and different from other counties, he said. Washtenaw County’s interests might be different from the interests of other counties. Other counties might be more interested in roads and bridges and not as much in nonmotorized projects, transit projects and so forth. So it might be possible for Washtenaw County to represent itself better as a separate entity than through SEMCOG.

But it’s not a simple matter, Mouat cautioned. For one thing, SEMCOG is against it. Also the Michigan Dept. of Transportation (MDOT) has expressed considerable concern about it. [.pdf of MDOT letter] [.pdf of SEMCOG letter] He himself also has some concerns. He said it’s easy to be attracted to the idea of the county having control over our own destiny, but he feared the potential repercussions of breaking away from SEMCOG. He reported that there has been a bit of tension in trying to get meetings to happen with MDOT. He hoped that in the next couple of months some headway will be made on the topic.

Mouat thanked board chair Lee Gunn for attending the most recent WATS meeting in his absence. Gunn reported that not a lot happened at the meeting she had attended. But Mouat had been right about there being tension in the room, she said. Mouat call it a “very tough issue,” pointing out that the idea of Washtenaw County forming its own metropolitan planning organization is counter to the idea of regional planning. So it’s a balance between that and our own interests, he said.

Communications, Committee Reports

The board’s Sept 5. meeting included the usual range of reports from its standing committees and the downtown citizens advisory council.

Comm/Comm: DDA Board Retreat

Board chair Leah Gunn announced that there would be a DDA retreat on the afternoon of Nov. 16. More details will be forthcoming.

Comm/Comm: Construction Update

John Splitt gave an update on the completion of the Library Lane underground parking garage. He indicated that the punch lists are still being worked on. He hoped to have them finished very soon. But he confirmed that now all four levels of the parking structure are open.

Comm/Comm: Downtown Parks, Planning

Joan Lowenstein gave an update on the Connecting William Street project. The team is now presenting the draft scenarios to various groups. In the month of August, she reported, the project team had met with 11 different citizen groups, area associations and commissions. More such meetings will take place in September. She also described an upcoming webinar that same evening to introduce the Connecting William Street scenarios.

Another public meeting will take place on Sept. 10 at noon at the downtown branch of the Ann Arbor District Library, 343 S. Fifth. That would be a much more traditional meeting, compared to the webinar format. Lowenstein indicated the result the DDA wanted was a somewhat generalized idea of a consensus for massing and density on the sites. Really specific uses are not being proposed – although Lowenstein noted that generally described uses like residential, office, retail, hotel, lodging, and those kinds of things are a part of the different scenarios.

Mayor John Hieftje reported that he had addressed the Ann Arbor park advisory commission about the possibility of redesigning Liberty Plaza at the corner of Division and Liberty streets. The idea would be to make it into a better park than it is – although he contended it had come a long way since it was first built. He stressed the need to prioritize park initiatives, pointing to the greenway and the future of the 415 W. Washington and 721 N. Main Street properties. [For a detailed report of Hieftje's remarks to PAC and commissioners' response, see "Park Commission Focuses on Downtown, Dogs."]

During public commentary at the conclusion of the meeting, former planning commissioner Eric Lipson addressed the board.

Lipson introduced himself as the general manager of the Inter-Cooperative Council of the University Michigan, with headquarters 337 E. William St. He indicated the ICC was very interested in the Connecting William Street planning process. He thanked DDA planning specialist Amber Miller and DDA executive director Susan Pollay for coming to the ICC to present the Connecting William Street scenarios and to have ICC representatives take the survey.

Lipson said he was also there addressing the board as a member of the Library Green Conservancy to keep alive the concept of a plaza on top of the Library Lane underground parking structure. People who have passed by the location, since the completion of the underground parking structure, have probably seen what he has seen, Lipson ventured – namely, that the space between Fifth Avenue and the elevator structure is highly underutilized for parking. The Fifth and William street surface parking lot was full when he’d walked past it that day, but there were only three or four cars on top of the Library Lane structure, he said. That portion of the lot is so obviously a plaza, he said.

He pointed out that mayor John Hieftje had suggested that his group form a private conservancy, and he reported that the group had in fact formed a conservancy. He also noted that Roger Hewitt had told his group that ultimately this will be a city council decision. So he reported that the Library Green Conservancy is still pressing ahead, because his group did not want the topic to go “off the radar.”

Lipson also pointed out that the Calthorpe study, commissioned by the city in the mid-2000s, had mentioned in several places a public space and a public plaza. And the Calthorpe study had indicated that the spot where the top of the underground parking garage is located would be a perfect place for such a public plaza, he said. In that report, public plazas and a gathering space are mentioned dozens of times, but there had been no mention of a conference center or hotel space. Why did we have all those charrettes and all that public process associated with the Calthorpe study, Lipson wondered, if it wasn’t going to be used?

So Lipson told the board that the Library Green Conservancy was not going to go away, and would continue to advocate for a public plaza at that location – recognizing that there were many other people advocating for other things.

Comm/Comm: Bicycle Issues – Cages, Sidewalks

John Mouat reported from the operations committee on a concept for establishing a “bicycle cage” at the Maynard Street parking structure – a place where bicyclists could have their bicycles secured inside a fenced-off area accessible with a swipable pass. There would be some costs associated to the bicyclists to access the spaces. He said it might be used by people who have high-end bikes or who have concerns about the security of their bicycles. They would be under a cover. The next steps would be getting cost estimates. Mayor John Hieftje indicated his support for the idea.

If the program were successful at the Maynard Street location, Mouat said, it could be extended to other locations. But one of the questions is: How far will people walk? Where would you like to park your bike in relation to where you’re trying to get to? It would help reduce the number of bikes that are parked on the streets, he pointed out.

There has also been some ongoing discussion about what to do with abandoned bikes, Mouat said. He reminded the board that the DDA had previously had a role in helping to tag bikes that were abandoned, but that has been deemed “inappropriate.” Nader Nassif pointed out that each of these cages can hold about 50 bikes, so he felt it was a good use of the space.

Hieftje tacked onto the discussion of the bike cages an idea he’s floated before to the DDA board – that he believes bicycle riding on downtown sidewalks should be prohibited. He imagined that such a move would generate a lot of public discussion. The Washtenaw Bicycling and Walking Coalition has done some work on the issue, he said. As the number of pedestrians increases, Hieftje said, it’s something he thinks the DDA board should pursue to foster a good pedestrian environment.

He contended there is really no problem riding a bicycle on the streets in downtown Ann Arbor. He felt that anybody who can ride a bike can also master riding in downtown Ann Arbor. He noted that a concern that had been raised against such a prohibition in the past involves families who want to bring their kids downtown. But Hieftje felt there would be ways to make allowances for that type of activity within the ordinance – for example, by exempting people of a certain age, or exempting people who are riding with their children.

Comm/Comm: Student Housing

Jim Mogensen told the board he wanted to make some observations about student housing. He noted that a lot of student housing projects are being built. He observed that there is no zoning for student housing. He noted that the state legislature has discussed the idea of not allowing local governments to have non-discrimination ordinances, but he pointed out that Ann Arbor’s non-discrimination ordinance says that you cannot discriminate against people based on their student status. It doesn’t say that you can’t discriminate against students, just that you can’t discriminate against people based on their student status, he stressed.

He emphasized to the board that the large student housing developments downtown are not temporary. That contrasts with the relatively temporary student housing projects built in “residential for cash” zoning districts. ["Residential for cash" is Mogensen's standard word play for R4C multi-unit zoning.] But the current projects that are being built would be much harder to redevelop, he cautioned. So the projects are going to be there, and they would probably have to be reused. He pointed to Courthouse Square as an example. That matters to the DDA for a couple of reasons, he said. When the numbers stop working, or if there has been over-development, the DDA board might find that people come ask them for some of the TIF money.

The other thing is that some of the residential projects have been created with some assumptions about behavior – more walking and pedestrian use, for example. If these units are redeveloped for young professionals, no matter what we might hope will happen, Mogensen said, there will be a greater demand for cars, and that’ll be something that has to be incorporated into planning. He encouraged the board to incorporate that kind of thinking as a footnote to their planning.

Comm/Comm: Building Boom

Ray Detter reported from the downtown area citizens advisory council (CAC). The group had discussed a large packet of written material, part of which fell into the general category of “building boom and tight rental market.” Detter then listed out a number of projects: the Library Lane underground parking garage, Blake Transit Center, the Ann Arbor District Library, The Varsity, 618 South Main, The Landmark, Zaragon West, City Apartments, the former St. Nicholas Church property, Ed Shaffran’s plans to put condos on top of the Goodyear Building, Howard Frehsee’s building on South State Street and his plans perhaps to put a high-rise on the back of that building, plans for the former Borders building, the Zingerman’s Deli addition, and the closing of White Market.

Also included in the discussion were some unannounced developments that have not yet been reported in the news media, he said. Detter described a purchase by Ed Shaffran of the old Brauer building at Catherine Street and North Fifth Avenue, and a plan to put apartments in that location. [Responding to an emailed query from The Chronicle, Shaffran indicated that while a purchase agreement had been signed, there are a number of contingencies to work through before a sale would take place. One of the future uses being considered, wrote Shaffran, is residential. But that would require a rezoning of the property, which is currently a planned unit development (PUD), restricted to office-only use.]

Also discussed was an upcoming purchase of the Papa John’s Pizza property at Huron and Division – by the Connecticut firm Greenfield Partners. Detter noted that the firm had already purchased the neighboring property just west of Sloan Plaza. A project could now be extended all the way to Division Street, and Detter expressed his hope with the addition of the neighboring property, a better-designed building would result, and there would be better protection for the residents of Sloan Plaza.

The CAC was supportive of these developments, Detter said, in the same way that the group has been supportive of projects in the past – by making suggestions for improvements and monitoring the review of projects as they go through the process, including the city’s design review board.

Detter also described a range of different projects outside the downtown on which the CAC tended not to take positions. But because such projects would ultimately have an impact on the downtown, the CAC wanted to be involved in the ongoing discussion. Among the examples Detter gave were the location of a possible new rail station and the construction of a greenway.

Present: Nader Nassif, Roger Hewitt, John Hieftje, John Splitt, Sandi Smith, Leah Gunn, Keith Orr, Joan Lowenstein, John Mouat.

Absent: Newcombe Clark, Bob Guenzel, Russ Collins.

Next board meeting: Noon on Wednesday, Oct. 3, 2012, at the DDA offices, 150 S. Fifth Ave., Suite 301. [confirm date]

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

Left to right: Ann Arbor mayor John Hieftje and Ann Arbor downtown development authority board members Leah Gunn and Nader Nassif. (Photos by the writer.)

The difference will be covered from the existing fund balance. The use of fund balance, in the current year and in the coming year, was planned as part of the construction of a new underground parking structure on South Fifth Avenue, and a new contract with the city of Ann Arbor, ratified in May of 2011. The contract, under which the DDA manages the city’s public parking system, pays the city of Ann Arbor 17% of gross revenues from the parking system.

At the end of FY 2013, the DDA expects to have a total fund balance of $4.38 million, or an amount equal to about 18.2% of expenses.

In its other main business item, the board authorized a budget of $100,000 for its Connecting William Street project, which it’s undertaking at the direction of the Ann Arbor city council. The council passed a resolution on April 4, 2011 that gave the DDA direction to explore alternative uses of city-owned parcels – currently used for surface parking – in a limited area of downtown. The area is bounded by Ashley, Division, Liberty and William streets.

Parcels included in the area are: the Kline’s lot (on Ashley, north of William), Palio’s lot (at Main & William), the ground floor of the Fourth & William parking structure, the old Y lot (Fifth & William), and the top of the Fifth Avenue underground parking garage, which is nearing completion.

Of the budgeted amount, $65,000 will come from a community challenge grant awarded recently as part of a larger $3 million grant awarded to Washtenaw County by the U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development. The remaining $35,000 will be made up by DDA cash (no more than $20,000) and DDA in-kind contributions of staff time.

Toward the end of Wednesday’s meeting, the board also entertained some discussion about parking meter bags. The bags placed over on-street parking meters to designate the spots as unusable, so that streets are free of parked cars for construction projects or special events. The meter bag discussion came in the context of a request on behalf of FestiFools and conveyed by mayor John Hieftje, who sits on the DDA board. The request was to waive fees ordinarily associated with the meter bag placement for the April 1 FestiFools parade in downtown Ann Arbor.

One possible approach includes the creation of a parking meter puppet.

FY 2013 Budget

At its March 7 meeting, the board was asked to approve its fiscal year 2013 budget. Across all funds, the budget shows anticipated expenses revenues of $22,097,956 against $24,101,692 in expenditures – for an excess of expenditures over revenues of $2,003,736. The difference will be covered from the existing fund balance.

The shortfall was planned. It’s in the context of construction of a new underground parking structure on South Fifth Avenue, and a new contract with the city of Ann Arbor, ratified in May of 2011, under which the DDA manages the city’s public parking system. That contract pays the city of Ann Arbor 17% of gross revenues from the parking system, which are budgeted in FY 2103 at $18.1 million. The 17% translates to a ballpark figure of $3 million.

Factoring in coverage of this year’s (FY 2012) use of fund balance and FY 2013′s planned use of $2 million, the DDA will have a total fund balance of $4.38 million at the end of FY 2013, or an amount equal to about 18.2% of expenses. [.pdf of FY 2013 budget]

FY 2013 Budget: Deliberations

John Splitt reviewed the budget for the board, relying on the combined fund summary. [.pdf of FY 2013 DDA budget documents]

By way of background, the DDA’s accounting system includes four funds: the TIF (tax increment finance) fund, the housing fund, the parking fund and the parking maintenance fund. The TIF fund receives revenue from the taxes that are “captured” in the tax increment finance district defined in downtown Ann Arbor. The DDA receives taxes on the increment between the baseline value of property and the value of property after new construction. The DDA does not capture increases in value due to inflation. The housing fund receives revenue through transfers from the TIF fund.

The parking fund receives revenues from Ann Arbor’s public parking system, which the DDA manages under contract with the city. The contract, which was renewed in May 2011, calls for the city of Ann Arbor to receive 17% of gross parking revenues. The DDA contracts for day-to-day operations of the parking system with Republic Parking. The parking maintenance fund receives revenue through transfers from the parking fund.

Highlights of Splitt’s budget review included TIF income of $3,957,012. On the expense side, salaries and fringe benefits paid out of the TIF fund are basically split evenly, he explained, between the TIF and parking funds. That comes to roughly $152,000 for salaries and $95,000 for fringe benefits from each fund. [The DDA has four full-time employees– an executive director, a deputy director, a planning and research specialist, and a management assistant.]

Administrative expenses – $157,119 for the TIF fund and $90,292 for the parking fund – were described by Splitt as all the “office costs.” The professional services of $155,000 for the TIF fund and $85,500 for the parking fund will pay for architects, attorneys and consultants. Holiday lights and sidewalk repairs are budgeted for $130,000 of the TIF fund – it’s something the DDA does every year, Splitt noted. Another TIF fund line item is $508,000, which is an annual amount that the DDA pays toward the bond payments for the city of Ann Arbor’s new police/court building. The budget also includes $100,000 for the DDA’s energy grant program.

Another TIF fund line item for $200,000 – labeled “capital costs” – was described by Splitt as including sidewalk ramp installation for compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Of the $3,081,896 in bond payments to be made out of the TIF fund, $2.25 million is for the new underground parking garage on South Fifth Avenue, due for completion sometime this spring.

For the housing fund, Splitt highlighted the two $400,000 line items (for a total of $800,000) that would be spent on Avalon Housing’s Near North project on North Main Street, and Village Green’s City Apartments project at First and Washington. In addition to support for the affordable housing units that are part of the City Apartments project, the DDA is financing the construction of the first two floors of the development, which will contain a public parking deck. The deck will be owned by the city of Ann Arbor.

Splitt said he didn’t know how likely it would be that those grants would need to be paid during the FY 2013 year, but it’s not impossible, he said, so the items are being included in the budget. [Neither project has begun construction, but the City Apartments project is poised to begin, with construction equipment on site.]

For the parking fund, the revenue estimate for FY 2013 is $18,104,916. That’s based on essentially flat growth but some additional usage, Splitt said – perhaps 1/4 or 1/3 usage of the new underground parking garage, set to open this spring. There will also be a parking rate increase set to take effect in September, he said, so the budget factors in 10 months worth of that rate increase. He characterized it as a “reasonable and conservative” estimate.

Out of parking revenue, it’s anticipated that the contract with Republic Parking will cost $6,298,423. The 17% of gross to be paid to the city of Ann Arbor is estimated to be $3,139,795. Also paid out of the parking fund is a $500,000 transfer to the parking maintenance fund and $590,060 to support alternative transportation in the form of the go!pass program.

A capital cost for the parking fund of $1,588,235 was described as a downpayment for parking at the First and Washington development. Bond payments from the parking fund total $3,613,759 across all the various parking structures, Splitt said. Of that amount, $700,000 is for the First and Washington structure. It’s not clear whether that amount will need to be paid in this budget year, he said.

For the parking maintenance fund, Splitt pointed to the $1,696,350 estimated expense, an amount derived from an estimate of the DDA’s parking structure engineering consultant, Carl Walker. The structures are in such outstanding condition, Splitt said, that it’s not anticipated that all the money would be spent, but it would be budgeted nonetheless.

Summarizing across all funds, Splitt said, the DDA is spending roughly $2 million more than its anticipated revenues. Estimated balances for each of the funds at the end of the year are: TIF – $2.9 million; housing – $0.3 million; parking – $0.735 million; and parking maintenance – $0.465 million. That leaves a total fund balance of $4.387 million at the end of FY 2013, Splitt concluded.

Russ Collins commented that FY 2013 is the “nadir” of the projected financial picture. He was alluding to the fact that the DDA anticipated tight budgets for a certain period, in the wake of the new parking garage construction and the new parking contract with the city of Ann Arbor, but after that the DDA would be in less of a financial crunch.

Sandi Smith sought some clarification of the arithmetic for the fund balances – the numbers included in the budget sheet show existing fund balances from June 30, 2011, but did not show the use of fund balance for the current fiscal year, FY 2012.

Newcombe Clark noted that there are conservative “hedges” built into the budget – the need to pay out $800,000 from the housing fund and the estimate of usage for the new parking deck. He wanted to know if the operations committee had thoughts about how to proceed if the scenarios underlying those hedges did not materialize in a year or so. Would the advice be to pursue additional projects or to let that accumulate to the fund balance? Splitt indicated that he felt it would be better to hold on to the reserves at this point, until the DDA is very comfortable with its reserve level.

Mayor John Hieftje asked if the forecasted TIF revenues included new projects that were anticipated being built within the DDA district, which would increase the amount of tax captured by the DDA. Joe Morehouse, deputy director of the DDA, explained that the DDA uses a standard 2% increase per year projection for forecasting. Once taxes begin to be captured after a project is complete, they’re added in to the total.

Hieftje said he felt it’s important to say that the use of fund balance that the DDA is making this year has been planned for a long time. Splitt concurred, saying that the money the DDA is using from its reserves is what it expected to use.

Outcome: The DDA board voted unanimously to approve its FY 2013 budget.

Downtown Parcel Planning Budget

The board was asked to establish a budget of $100,000 for its Connecting William Street project, which it’s undertaking at the direction of the Ann Arbor city council.

Downtown Parcel Planning: Background

The council passed a resolution on April 4, 2011 that gave the DDA direction to explore alternative uses of city-owned parcels – currently used for surface parking – in a limited area of downtown. The area is bounded by Ashley, Division, Liberty and William streets.

Parcels included in the area are: the Kline’s lot (on Ashley, north of William), Palio’s lot (Main & William), the ground floor of the Fourth & William parking structure, the old Y lot (Fifth & William), and the top of the South Fifth Avenue underground parking garage, which is nearing completion.

Of the budgeted amount, $65,000 will come from a community challenge grant awarded recently as part of a larger $3 million grant awarded to Washtenaw County by the U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development. The remaining $35,000 will be made up by DDA cash (no more than $20,000) and DDA in-kind contributions of staff time.

The committee that has been shepherding the project along since the summer of 2011 recently released an online survey to solicit initial community feedback.

Downtown Parcel Planning: Deliberations

Joan Lowenstein reported on the Connecting William Street project, saying it’s pretty much on schedule. The survey has 1,500 responses so far. With the passage of the resolution, the project could move to its next phrase, to look at the land use and economics.

Newcombe Clark wanted to know if the $100,000 figure was matched to proposals from consultants. He was concerned that when the $100,000 figure is put out there, suddenly the cost of consulting becomes $100,000. Lowenstein indicated that the consultant had been selected already. [The consultant identified is SmithGroupJJR.] She noted that the DDA cash amount is “not to exceed” $20,000.

Amber Miller, planning and research specialist with the DDA, explained that the project budget was the same one used in the application that the DDA had made in coordination with Washtenaw County for a community challenge grant awarded by the U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development.

Clark noted that the resolution the board was being asked to consider authorized negotiation of the consultant contract at the committee chair level:

RESOLVED, The DDA Partnerships/Economic Development Committee Chairs are authorized to negotiate and approve contracts relating to this project including a grant contract with the County and the selection of consultants as needed.

Clark wanted to know if the consulting contract had been signed – no, he was told. Clark offered a “friendly set of eyes” to look at the contract before it’s signed, which seemed amenable to Lowenstein and other board members.

Earlier in the meeting, during his report from the Downtown Citizens Advisory Council, Ray Detter said that the CAC always respects and supports careful community planning. So at the CAC meeting the previous evening, he reported that members had participated in the Connecting William Street survey. The CAC had been joined by Skyline High School students who were satisfying a course requirement – in connection with the survey, they’d made a plea for more stuff for young people in the downtown.

Outcome: The board voted unanimously to approve the Connecting William Street project budget.

Parking

Parking is common topic for every DDA board meeting, even if there is no board business requiring a vote on it.

Parking: Monthly Numbers

In Roger Hewitt’s absence, John Splitt gave commentary on monthly parking numbers. Comparing January 2012 to January 2011, Splitt noted that revenue-wise it was a good month this year – up 17% [$1,358,935 in January 2012 compared to January 2011 at $1,161,632]. Splitt attributed the change to a rate increase and outstanding weather. He hoped for the same kind of results for February.

Not discussed by the board was the performance of the parking system measured by the number of hourly patrons – it was also up compared to a year ago. In January 2011 the parking system had 169,653 hourly patrons, compared to 179,037 this year, an increase of about 5.5%. Systemwide there were about the same number of spaces available, 6,918 in January 2011 compared to 6,895 in January 2012. [.pdf of January 2012 monthly parking report]

Ann Arbor public parking system hourly patrons. (Image links to larger file.)

Ann Arbor public parking system revenues. (Image links to larger file.)

Parking: Underground Garage Construction Update

Splitt said his report on the new underground parking garage would be much like it had been for the last two months, because it’s winter. Work is being done inside the deck on mechanical systems and lighting. Walls are being poured, he said, inside the structure. He expected that wall pours would be done at the end of March. They’re shooting to get South Fifth Avenue re-opened by the end of May, but hopefully it will be open before that, he said.

Newcombe Clark asked if there might be staging potential for the art fair (July 18-21) on top of the deck? Splitt said that if work stays on schedule, the surface work might be complete by the time of the art fairs. He also indicated that the garage might be opened in phases, with the first couple of levels opened before the lower levels.

During his report from the Downtown Citizens Advisory Council, Ray Detter said he’d visited the lower floors of the new underground parking garage under construction, and it could only be described as “awesome.”

Communications, Committee Reports

The board’s meeting included the usual range of reports from its standing committees and the Downtown Citizens Advisory Council.

Comm/Comm: FestiFools – Parking Meter Puppet?

At the end of the meeting, during the time for other DDA business, mayor John Hieftje told the board that FestiFools is facing a dilemma. [Festifools is an annual street festival in downtown Ann Arbor – this year held on Sunday, April 1 – involving very large puppets. The event has expanded to include FoolMoon, a procession of luminaries, which takes place this year on Friday, March 30. Workshops to create luminaries are being held every Sunday in March from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. at the Workantile (118 S. Main Street).]

Hieftje described the event as an innovative, quirky and fun project and they were hoping that the DDA could waive a $1,000 parking meter bag fee associated with closing streets.

Susan Pollay, executive director of the DDA, was asked for clarification of the meter bag fees. [The fee per meter was raised from $15 to $20 effective Feb. 1, 2012.] She explained that the parking rate increases authorized in January 2012 also made other changes to meter bag fees. Now, what’s required is a reimbursement of actual costs incurred (from Republic Parking) to place the meter bags on Sundays and holidays. After the meeting, Pollay told The Chronicle that Republic Parking’s labor contract with its workers requires a minimum call-out time of four hours.

From the set of parking policy changes authorized by the DDA board in January 2012, for February implementation:

Meter bag requests for Sundays and Holidays will incur a fee for meter bag installation fee of $160 for up to 100 bags and $320 for more than 100 bags.

What’s different this year compared to last year, Pollay told Hieftje, is the reimbursement of actual costs on Sundays and holidays – FestiFools falls on a Sunday. Hieftje asked that one of the DDA board committees talk about waiving the fee.

Keith Orr commented that often when the DDA does nice things, it doesn’t get recognition for that. He suggested that the Sunday actual cost fee be waived in exchange for FestiFools creating a parking meter puppet, or a meter-bag puppet.

DDA board member Keith Orr suggested that the DDA's fee waiver for FestiFools be tied to the creation of a parking meter puppet.

Sandi Smith weighed in on the importance of not doing something retroactively – it needs to be addressed now. She allowed that FestiFools is a great event. But she noted that there are more and more events downtown, and she noted that the DDA would get similar requests from other organizations. She pointed out that there’s a community events fund, which the city of Ann Arbor administers. It sounds simple and like a no-brainer to waive the fee for FestiFools, she said, but she had concerns about making a judgment for one event and not another.

Newcombe Clark followed up on Smith’s point by noting that the board heard a lot of “You’re not doing enough!” but this would create another opportunity for people to say, “Why not me?” He weighed in against waiving the fee in the absence of a policy.

Leah Gunn made a formal motion, which she would subsequently withdraw, that the DDA waive the $320 Sunday fee in exchange for a puppet in the parade. Hieftje said he supported that motion, but would like to go further than just the $320 and to waive all the meter bag fees, saying that the event is still really just getting started. He said the issue had come up quickly and caught FestiFools by surprise.

Clark suggested that it would be a better approach for now to have Pollay handle it within her discretion as executive director. John Mouat also indicated he was concerned about any approach that sets precedent for piecemeal solutions. Gunn was amenable to having Pollay handle the issue and withdrew her motion. Russ Collins weighed in supporting that approach, saying he would have suggested simply amending Gunn’s motion to provide direction to Pollay to handle the issue administratively.

Comm/Comm: LED Lights

Ted Williams and Jaspreet Sawhney of Falcon Innovations Inc. both attended the March 7 meeting, although it was Williams who gave a presentation to the board during public commentary.

Ted Williams of Falcon Innovations Inc. showed the DDA board an example of the kind of LED light bars his company manufactures.

The pair had previously paid the board a visit back on July 6, 2011 to introduce board members to their company’s LED lighting technology, which is sold under the brand name BLUECOLT. Williams showed them an LED light bar, which he described as revolutionizing lighting for many different applications. He showed the board slides of interior lighting applications, and illuminated exterior signs including some for Domino’s Pizza and the University of Michigan block M (at Glick Field House).

The main idea that Williams wanted to get across to the board regarded potential applications to lighting in parking structures. In most typical parking structure lighting applications, Williams explained, the light is up in the rafters and bounces around, which wastes energy – because the light is trapped there, and it’s not near the surface that needs to be lit.

Another issue specific to parking structures, Williams explained, is that typically large chunks of light are spaced out every 30 feet or so – that can cause alternating dark spots and glare for drivers. The concept that Williams showed the board would use light bars mounted under the beams of the parking structure, which would use “little bits of light spread out evenly.”

From a slide presented by Falcon Industries Inc. to the DDA board, illustrating an under-beam placement of LED light bars in a parking structure.

Williams told the board he’d be attending the third in the series of sustainability forums to be held at the downtown location of the Ann Arbor District Library, starting at 7 p.m. on March 8. The forum will cover Ann Arbor’s climate action plan, climate impacts, renewable and alternative energy, energy efficiency and conservation.

After Williams’ presentation, board member Newcombe Clark asked Williams if he’d been in touch with DDA executive director Susan Pollay. Williams indicated that he’d been in touch, partly as a result of the previous visit to the board.

Mayor John Hieftje wanted to know if the LED lights manufactured by Falcon could be dimmed – yes, he was told.

Comm/Comm: 1320 S. University

During his report from the Downtown Citizens Advisory Council, Ray Detter said he was pleased that the planning department and the planning commission had recommended denial [on Feb. 7, 2012] of the owner’s request to rezone the property at 1320 S. University from D2 to D1. However, he continued, he was disappointed that the owners of the property have nevertheless submitted a proposal to the city council that the property be rezoned. Detter described that upcoming vote [probably in April] as a test for the city council.

Comm/Comm: DishFish

Joel Verdun addressed the board during public commentary at the conclusion of the meeting, pitching DishFish, which he described as a fundraising coupon and community currency. The free coupons cost businesses no money, he said, and the coupons go back into circulation. He said he’d like to work with the DDA’s economic development and partnership committee to put the DDA logo on the coupons.

Present: Nader Nassif, Newcombe Clark, Bob Guenzel, John Hieftje, John Splitt, Sandi Smith, Leah Gunn, Russ Collins, Keith Orr, Joan Lowenstein, John Mouat.

Absent: Roger Hewitt.

Next board meeting: Noon on Wednesday, April 4, 2012, at the DDA offices, 150 S. Fifth Ave., Suite 301. [confirm date]

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

The shortfall was planned. It’s in the context of construction of a new underground parking structure on Fifth Avenue, and a new contract with the city of Ann Arbor, ratified in May of 2011, under which the DDA manages the city’s public parking system. That contract pays the city of Ann Arbor 17% of gross revenues from the parking system, which are budgeted in FY 2103 at $18.1 million. The 17% translates to a ballpark figure of $3 million.

Factoring in coverage of this year’s (FY 2012) $1.675 million use of fund balance and FY 2013′s planned use of $2 million, the DDA will have a total fund balance of $4.38 million at the end of FY 2013, or an amount equal to about 18.2% of expenses. [.pdf of FY 2013 budget]

This brief was filed from the DDA offices at 150 S. Fifth Ave., Suite 301 where the board holds its meetings. A more detailed report will follow: [link]

The speaker’s podium at Monday’s meeting was graced with a basket full of buttons stating: I WILL VOTE. The city’s primary election is Tuesday, Aug. 2. The buttons are part of a city clerk’s office effort to increase participation in the elections. (Photos by the writer.)

During the time reserved for council communications at the start of the meeting, councilmembers decided to reconsider a 5-4 vote they’d taken on July 5. That vote, which failed to achieve a six-vote majority, had the outcome of rejecting an increase to Recycle Ann Arbor‘s contract to provide curbside recycling service in the city. After agreeing to reconsider the vote, the issue was again fresh before the council.

Councilmembers then unanimously agreed to postpone action on the contract until the next meeting, which falls on Aug. 4 – after the Aug. 2 city council primary elections. Based on remarks from Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5), it appears likely that the council may discontinue a contract with RecycleBank (an incentive program provider) in order to free up funds to supplement Recycle Ann Arbor’s contract.

Next up was a resolution that had been moved forward on the council’s agenda to a spot before all the consent agenda items. After brief deliberations, the council agreed to offer its open city administrator position to Steve Powers. The decision for Powers over another finalist, Ellie Oppenheim, came after two rounds of interviews on July 12-13, including a televised session on the morning of July 13. [Previous Chronicle coverage: "Search Concluding for Ann Arbor City Admin"]

Although Monday’s meeting was brief, the council ticked through a raft of significant votes after those two main business items. The expected start of the East Stadium bridges reconstruction project was reflected in the approval of stormwater control projects near the construction site, and in the approval of a deal to use land as a construction staging area. For a property just down State Street from the bridge, but unrelated to the project, the council approved a sanitary sewer hookup at the location where Biercamp Artisan Sausage and Jerky has opened for business.

Related to the city’s emphasis on the natural environment, the council approved a contract that will allow the planting of 1,200 trees in city rights of way, and added 110 acres of land to the city’s greenbelt program.

The city renewed its membership in the Urban County, a consortium of local governmental entities that allows the city to receive federal funds through a variety of federal U.S. Housing and Urban Development (HUD) programs. The council also appointed Tony Derezinski (Ward 2) as a hearing officer for liquor license revocation recommendations. Initial approval was also given to two ordinance changes related to employee benefits – one of them for union employee retirement benefits, the other for non-union retiree health benefits.

Only three people addressed the council during public commentary at the start of the meeting. Two of them were the owners of businesses – Earthen Jar and Jerusalem Garden – adjacent to the construction site of the underground parking structure along Fifth Avenue. They reiterated the same theme they’d conveyed to the board of the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority (DDA) at that body’s July 6 meeting – their business is suffering due to the construction.

And related to the DDA, Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) continued a pattern of using his council communications slot to update his colleagues on his campaign to press the DDA to provide more information about its budget. It’s a highlight of his re-election campaign in Ward 3, where he’s contesting a three-way primary on Aug. 2.

New City Administrator

In front of the council for its consideration was a resolution to offer the job of city administrator to an unnamed candidate. The council moved the item towards the start of its agenda on Monday evening and deliberated briefly on the choice. Consideration of the resolution came after two rounds of interviews on July 12-13, with the two finalists – Steve Powers and Ellie Oppenheim – including a televised session on the morning of Wednesday, July 13. During the July 13 discussion among councilmembers who attended those interviews, a preference had been indicated for Powers. [Previous Chronicle coverage: "Search Concluding for Ann Arbor City Admin"]

Powers currently serves as county administrator of Marquette County, Mich. – a position he’s held since 1996. Oppenheim most recently served as CEO of the Reno-Sparks Convention and Visitors Authority.

The city’s chief financial officer, Tom Crawford, has been serving as interim city administrator since April 28 – he was appointed to that position at the city council’s April 19, 2011 meeting. Previous city administrator Roger Fraser announced his resignation at a Feb. 28 city council working session. Fraser took a job with the state of Michigan as a deputy treasurer.

New City Administrator: Council Deliberations

The first part of the council’s deliberations on Monday involved amending the resolution to add a candidate name.

Marcia Higgins (Ward 4), Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2) and Sabra Briere (Ward 1) before the July 18 council meeting started. Higgins is acting alone – it does not take three councilmembers to plug in a computer.

Marcia Higgins (Ward 4), who chaired the search committee, said a lot of the council’s sentiments on the two candidates had been expressed during the work session held on Wednesday, July 13. She said she felt Powers was a stronger candidate for what the city needs. She cited as a strength the fact that Powers is already familiar with Michigan. She pointed to the very dynamic things he’d accomplished with Marquette County. Higgins described his approach as thoughtful, and reiterated that she felt he was a stronger candidate.

Tony Derezinski (Ward 2) echoed Higgins’ sentiments. He pointed out that the process had narrowed down 60 applicants to three. The council was very thorough, he said, and had a lot of information. Based on the discussion at the work session, one candidate was favored, he noted. Because Powers had headed a municipal entity for 15 years, he knew how you handle conflicting things, Derezinski said. Like Higgins, he pointed to Powers’ background in Michigan as important. He noted that Powers was trained as a city administrator, but had found his future with a county. Now Powers was coming back to what he studied to be. Either candidate could have done the job, said Derezinski, but Powers was the better of the two.

Sandi Smith before the July 18 council meeting started. The poster in the background exhorting citizens to participate in the Aug. 2 elections has also appeared in the windows of downtown businesses. It’s part of an effort by the city clerk’s office to increase turnout in the off-year election.

Mayor John Hieftje said he’d heard several residents who appreciated the discussion that the council had had. It was a very good discussion about the candidates, he continued. The council had spent a lot of time with the decision, but it was clear to all of the councilmembers that Powers was a better fit. Powers’ desirability was also confirmed by another government, said Hieftje, who noted that Ann Arbor’s hire was close to being on schedule.

[Powers made a list of four finalists for the open county administrator job in Polk County, Iowa, where the city of Des Moines is located. The day after the Ann Arbor city council made its offer to Powers, Polk County added another finalist to their list of interviewees.]

Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5) allowed that he didn’t attend the round robin interviews on July 12 or the presentation and question/answer session on July 13. But he said he’d had lengthy conversation with both candidates at the July 12 public reception. He was able to review the video of the July 13 session and review the material that the city’s HR department had provided.

Hohnke said the city has a great opportunity to bring someone like Powers into the community. Both candidates had the skills and knowledge to fill the position more than adequately, he said. But for Hohnke, it came down to which candidate that had strengths that matched up with needs of Ann Arbor at this time. Powers’ familiarity with Michigan was appealing to him, as well as his ability to drill down to specific answers to questions. What stood out for Hohnke was Powers’ success at collaboration with his peers, his ability to take input in a sincere way, his ability to be fair and consistent, and his interest in how the city will measure the success of the city administration. Powers was able to dive down and be specific about tracking performance, Hohnke said.

Hohnke continued his comments by saying it’s a great opportunity and he thanked both candidates – it’s a lot of work to apply for a job, he said. He also thanked Tom Crawford, the city’s chief financial officer who has served as interim city administrator, noting Crawford still has some work to do. Hohnke also extended his thanks to the city council search committee.

Outcome on adding Powers’ name to the resolution: The council voted unanimously to amend the resolution by filling in the blank with Steve Powers’ name.

The deliberations on the main motion were brief. Sabra Briere (Ward 1) noted that it was the most important decision the council would make – unlike councilmembers, who might only serve a two-year term, city administrators stick around for more than two years, she said.

Outcome on city administrator selection: The council voted unanimously to extend an offer of the city administrator position to Steve Powers.

The resolution approved by the city council on Monday specifies that the appointment of Powers is contingent on signing a contract. The council’s city administrator search committee had recommended targeting recruitment of a city administrator with a base salary in the $145,000-$150,000 range. Negotiations on the council’s side will be handled by members of the search committee: Marcia Higgins (Ward 4), Sabra Briere (Ward 1), and Christopher Taylor (Ward 3).

Recycle Ann Arbor Deal

At the council’s July 5 meeting, a vote to change the contract under which Recycle Ann Arbor provides curbside recycling service failed to pass. On July 18, the council reconsidered that vote.

Recycle Ann Arbor Deal: Background

The proposal first considered at the council’s July 5 meet was a change to the city’s contract with Recycle Ann Arbor (RAA) for curbside collection of the city’s single-stream recycling carts – from $3.25 to $3.55 per month per cart, for a total of $107,042 annually. The vote was made without any deliberations and resulted in 5 votes for it and 4 against. Voting against it were Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3), Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5), Mike Anglin (Ward 5) and Sabra Briere (Ward 1). The 5-4 vote meant that the proposal did not achieve a required six-vote majority, and thus failed.

The city council had voted on March 15, 2010 to adopt the single-stream recycling program, which began exactly one year ago, on July 5, 2010.

At that time, the city approved a contract with RAA that called for a payment of $3.25 per month for each cart that is deployed in the the city (whether it is set out for collection or not), plus a per-ton payment of between $18.74 and $30.00. The amount of revenue RAA has received through these two kinds of payment was less than projected for the last fiscal year. Specifically, the tonnage payments received by RAA for fiscal year 2011 (which ended June 30) for recyclable material were projected to be $406,332 but in fact only generated $187,560 for RAA – only 46% of what was expected. The shortfall was $218,772.

Also, the city expected to distribute 32,779 carts, but it turned out that only 29,734 carts were deployed, or 9.3% fewer than planned. A staff memo accompanying the July 18 resolution explained the reduced number this way: “… many of the smaller multi-family residential units that were previously using the 11-gallon recycling ‘totes’ are able to share recycle carts, resulting in a smaller number of deployed carts.” In terms of revenue, the reduced number of carts meant that RAA received only $1,159,626 compared to the projected $1,278,381 – for a shortfall of $118,755.

Summing the shortfalls in the two kinds of revenue ($118,755 + $218,772), RAA received $337,527 less than it expected for FY 2011. The increase in the monthly per-cart service fee requested (but rejected by the council) – for all five years of the five-year contract – would have worked out to nearly cover the annual shortfall that was due only to the decreased number of carts: $107,042 versus $118,755.

The overly-optimistic projections were made by the city’s recycling consultant Resource Recycling Systems and RecycleBank, a company that administers a coupon-based incentive program to encourage residents to recycle. When the council approved the single-stream recycling contract with RAA last year, it also struck a 10-year deal with RecycleBank, at up to $200,000 per year, to administer a coupon-based incentive program to help boost recycling rates in conjunction with the single-stream rollout.

At the time, Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) questioned the length of the RecycleBank contract, and established in the course of deliberations that the city’s opt-out clause would be less costly than the cost of the contract. He was concerned that the city had options in the event that RecycleBank’s incentives did not boost recycling tonnage to the levels that were forecast. [Chronicle coverage: "Council Banks on Single-Stream Recycling"]

Graph 1. Tons of curbside recycling collected by week, from July 2009 through April 2011. The first vertical bar is the first week of July 2010, when single-stream recycling was implemented. The second vertical bar marks the first week in September, when RecycleBank’s contract started. (Data from the city of Ann Arbor. Graphing and any errors in presentation are The Chronicle’s responsibility.) The dip in March 2011 is not yet accounted for. (Image links to higher resolution .pdf file)

According to city of Ann Arbor staff, participation in the RecycleBank program stands at 10,000 of 23,600 Ann Arbor households. In the first five months of 2011, Ann Arbor residents ordered 7,153 rewards. The rewards range in value, generally around $5-20.

Tom McMurtrie, solid waste coordinator for the city of Ann Arbor, provided to The Chronicle truck-level data at the Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) for the period July 2009 to April 2011. Graph 1 is the result of filtering that data just for curbside recycling and grouping it by calendar week.

The plot suggests that the increase in curbside recycling tonnage collected – roughly 20% more – was realized with the rollout of the single-stream recycling program, and was not enhanced much by the RecycleBank coupon incentive program. That is counter to the expectation expressed at the council’s March 15, 2010 meeting, when the council approved the RecycleBank contract – at that time they were told that the RecycleBank program is what “gives it that shot in the arm.”

Recycle Ann Arbor Deal: Council Deliberations

Margie Teall (Ward 4) led off the first slot on the agenda for council communications by telling her council colleagues that she was sorry to have missed the last meeting, because there was an issue on solid waste that was voted on. As a member of the environmental commission involved in solid waste task forces over the last few years, she was disappointed not to be able to participate in that vote.

She said she would support bringing that vote back for reconsideration. [Because she did not attend the meeting, Teall could not make the motion for reconsideration herself. That motion must come from someone who voted, and specifically someone who voted with the prevailing side. In the case of that 5-4 vote, the four in the minority were actually the prevailing side, because the motion was defeated for lack of a six-vote majority. Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5) voted against the measure, so he was eligible to make the motion for reconsideration.]

Hohnke indicated he would be happy to move to reconsider that vote – it wouldn’t hurt to discuss the issue further. He said he was disappointed that the council didn’t have some of the data from the city staff he wanted to see, because it was not available. He suggested that the council could reconsider and postpone it. He said that if RecycleBank is not benefitting the city, then transferring the money from the RecycleBank contract to Recycle Ann Arbor might be a healthy solution.

Outcome: The motion to reconsider the Recycle Ann Arbor vote was unanimously approved.

With the resolution again before the council, Hohnke said he’d prefer to postpone action, given that there’s an analysis taking place that’s still not available. Tom McMurtrie, solid waste coordinator for the city, was not available at the meeting.

Mayor John Hieftje said he appreciated the reconsideration, because it would allow for some more investigation of the RecycleBank program. Hieftje said there may be some misperception that Recycle Ann Arbor had done something wrong – that was not the case, he said. Instead, Recycle Ann Arbor’s contract was based on incorrect estimates about the number of carts that would be deployed in the field.

Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) got clarification that the intended postponement was until the council’s next meeting on Aug. 4. Marcia Higgins (Ward 4) was interested in making sure that the council would see the requested data sooner than the council meeting.

Outcome: The council unanimously approved postponement of the Recycle Ann Arbor contract until Aug. 4.

Bridge Project Stormwater Controls

In front of the council for its consideration was authorization of petitions to the Washtenaw County water resources commissioner for the design and construction of stormwater controls as a part of the East Stadium bridges replacement project. The bridge project is expected to start construction in the fall of 2011.

The council authorized two petitions – one for the Allen Creek drainage district ($1,094,059 – with the city’s portion being $1,051,391) and the other for the Mallets Creek drainage district ($1,284,330 – with the city’s portion being $1,188,005).

The stormwater controls will provide for detention to slow the rate at which stormwater enters the two creeks. That will help reduce bank erosion and excessive runoff and washout. In addition, the stormwater controls will help remove E. coli, phosphorus, and other suspended solids that diminish the stream quality.

The city has been approved for a low-interest state revolving fund loan at an interest rate of 2.5%. The projects will be financed over the course of no more than 20 years. [Google Map showing watersheds and bridge construction location]

Outcome: The council voted unanimously, without discussion, to approve both stormwater controls projects.

Use of Parcel for Bridge Construction Staging

The council was asked to approve a $70,000 payment to the owner of the parcel at 1501 S. State St., for use as a construction staging area for the East Stadium bridges reconstruction project. The parcel is located immediately adjacent to the bridge over State Street, east of State Street and south of Stadium Boulevard. The money for the use agreement will come from the city’s street repair millage.

Construction on the bridge project is expected to start in the fall of 2011.

Outcome: The council unanimously approved the deal to use the parcel for a construction staging area – it was a part of the consent agenda.

Sanitary Sewer Connection

Councilmembers were asked to consider approval of a sanitary sewer connection to a property – at 1643 S. State St. – that lies in a township island (Ann Arbor Township) within the city. The property, which currently has a septic field, is the location of Biercamp Artisan Sausage and Jerky.

The property is already serviced by city water, which the city of Ann Arbor approved in 1937. The staff memo to the resolution, which appeared on the council’s consent agenda, indicates that all water improvement charges, sanitary sewer charges and sidewalk improvement charges have been paid in full. The owners of the property applied for annexation and rezoning of the property in May 2011.

In the brief deliberations, Sabra Briere (Ward 1) commended the staff for dealing with the parcel, which is currently a township island, in a creative way. Mayor John Hieftje said that the business couldn’t get county health department approval without a sanitary sewer connection.

Outcome: The council unanimously approved the sanitary sewer connection.

Tree Planting

In front of the council for its consideration was approval of a $301,475 contract with Marine City Nursery Co. to plant 1,200 trees in the right-of-ways of streets in the Malletts Creek, Allen Creek, Traver Creek and Swift Run drainage districts. [.pdf of map showing areas to be targeted for tree planting]

The money for the tree planting will come from the stormwater fund’s capital budget. The Washtenaw County water resources commissioner has obtained a low-interest loan on behalf of the city through the state’s revolving fund loan and will reimburse the stormwater fund for part of the project. The rationale for use of stormwater funds to plant trees is based on the idea that trees have a positive impact on the volume and quality of stormwater flow.

The city received only two bids for the tree-planting contract, and only the bid from Marine City Nursery Co. was determined to be a responsible bid.

Sabra Briere (Ward 1) prepares to take her seat at the council table. In the background is Sandi Smith (Ward 1).

During the brief deliberations, Sabra Briere (Ward 1) highlighted the fact that 1,200 trees would be planted in four different creeksheds. The effort would deal with the loss of many trees from the emerald ash borer. Mayor John Hieftje added that the city knew it was going to take a while to replace all those trees.

Mike Anglin (Ward 5) said he was happy the resolution is coming forward. He’s been hearing that sometimes when trees are planted in the right of way in front of someone’s property, people who live nearby don’t water them. He estimated it would cost only $300 for the water it would take to maintain a new tree. He asked that if residents are not planning to water the new trees, to let the city know.

Marcia Higgins (Ward 4) questioned whether the city asked residents to water trees planted in the right of ways. Hieftje indicated that he believed the city did ask residents to do that.

Outcome: The council voted unanimously to approve the tree planting contract.

Greenbelt Addition

On the July 18 agenda was a resolution to authorize of the purchase of development rights for a 110-acre property along Pleasant Lake Road in Lodi Township – the Lindemann-Weidmayer property. The city’s cost for the PDR will be $387,372. The total budget for the project is $699,992, including contributions from other funding sources.

On Feb. 7, 2011 the council had approved a grant application to the federal Farm and Ranch Land Protection Program for the purchase of development rights on the property. And on June 6, 2011 the council approved the acceptance of $312,620 from the U.S. Dept. of Agriculture for the purchase. The deal had been recommended by the city’s greenbelt advisory commission, after discussion in a closed session at its Feb. 9, 2011 meeting.

The brief council deliberations included a description by Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5) of the parcel’s location. Hohnke is the city council’s representative to the greenbelt advisory commission.

Outcome: The council voted unanimously to approve the purchase of development rights for the Lindemann-Weidmayer property.

Urban County Renewal

In front of the council for its consideration was a resolution to join the Washtenaw Urban County for a second three-year period, from July 2012 through June 2015.

“Urban County” is a designation of the U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), identifying a county with more than 200,000 people. With that designation, individual governments within the Urban County can become members, making them entitled to an allotment of funding through a variety of HUD programs, including the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnerships. Those two programs provide funding for projects to benefit low- and moderate-income residents, focused on housing, human services and other community development efforts.

Washtenaw County and the townships of Ann Arbor, Ypsilanti, Pittsfield, Superior, Northfield, Salem, and Bridgewater got the Urban County designation in 2002. Later, the city of Ypsilanti and Scio Township joined, and in 2009 the city of Ann Arbor – which previously received HUD funding directly – joined as well, roughly doubling the amount of money available in the Urban County’s funding pool. Earlier this summer, the Saline city council also voted to join the Urban County.

Renewal applications need to be submitted to the Detroit HUD Field Office by July 15, 2011 from all participating jurisdictions.

Margie Teall (Ward 4), who serves as the council’s representative to the Urban County, expressed her support for the city’s continued membership in that body. [The Urban County's executive committee meets on the fourth Tuesday of each month. However, its July 26 meeting has been cancelled.]

Outcome: The council voted unanimously to approve renewal of its membership in the Urban County.

Corrections Grant Application

Councilmembers were asked to approve a $421,801 grant application to the Michigan Dept. of Corrections for the Ann Arbor/Washtenaw community corrections advisory board. The state grant will be supplemented by $295,890 in fees, and a $292,369 general fund match from Washtenaw County, bringing the total program budget to $1,010,060.

The advisory board was established in August 1989 through resolutions approved by the Washtenaw County board of commissioners and the Ann Arbor city council. The purpose of the advisory board is to formulate a comprehensive plan for the development, implementation, and operation of the community correctional services in Washtenaw County and Ann Arbor, and to develop a plan for the administration, monitoring, and control of the community correctional services under the comprehensive plan.

Mike Anglin (Ward 5) is the city council’s representative to that board, which includes the county sheriff, Ann Arbor chief of police, a circuit court judge, a probate court judge, a district court judge, a county commissioner, a councilmember, a prosecuting attorney, a criminal defense attorney, and a circuit court probation agent or district court probation officer. The board also includes representatives from the fields of mental health, public health, substance abuse, employment and training or community alternative programs, the business community, communications media, and the general public.

The brief council deliberations consisted of Anglin’s summary of the advisory board’s program. He described the program’s goal as trying to keep people out of prisons. That’s consistent with the ethic in the community that attempts to make people as productive as they can be, he said.

Outcome: The council voted unanimously to approve the grant application.

Liquor License Hearing Officer

A resolution on the July 18 agenda called for the appointment of Tony Derezinski (Ward 2) as the hearing officer for all future liquor license revocation hearings – for any reason – conducted by the city on recommendation of the council’s liquor license review committee.

At the council’s March 7, 2011 meeting, councilmembers had already approved Derezinski’s appointment as hearing officer for all future appeals of non-renewal recommendations that arise from the liquor license review committee’s annual review.

The March appointment was somewhat controversial. The appointment of Derezinski as a single hearing officer, in place of the three-member liquor license review committee as a hearing board, came as a floor amendment (during the meeting) to the council’s resolution. Voting against the change to a single hearing officer that night were long-time chair of the liquor license control committee Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2), as well as Sabra Briere (Ward 1), Marcia Higgins (Ward 4) and Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3).

Liquor License Hearing Officer: Council Deliberations

Rapundalo noted that this past year was the first year that the establishments holding liquor licenses went through an annual review. A few establishments had required a hearing, and those were disposed of appropriately, Rapundalo said. He continued by explaining that the committee had discovered it didn’t have a process for handling situations between the times of the annual review. The liquor license review committee has adopted some regulations and parameters on which hearings will be conducted for situations not associated with the annual review. Those hearings will be handled to coincide with the appointment of Derezinski as hearing officer.

Rapundalo continued by saying that in the annual review process, $42,000 to $43,000 of back taxes had been recovered that had been in arrears.

Higgins then raised a “housekeeping” question – should Derezinski’s appointment be through Dec. 5 and then added to the council’s committee list, so that the council is reminded each year that the appointment needs to be made? Derezinski responded by saying he’d defer to the city attorney. City attorney Stephen Postema indicated there was not a problem handling the hearing officer appointment that way. Rapundalo felt it was an excellent idea. The resolution was amended to reflect Higgins’ housekeeping suggestion.

Mike Anglin (Ward 5), who serves on the liquor license review committee along with Rapundalo and Derezinski, alerted the public that the committee meetings are public. During the time he’s been on the committee, Anglin said, Rapundalo has done a good job of guiding the committee’s work. Anglin thanked Derezinski for stepping forward to do the work of the hearing officer.

Outcome: The council voted unanimously to appoint Tony Derezinski as the hearing officer for all appeals hearings on liquor license revocation.

Local Development Finance Authority

Added to the agenda the evening of the July 18 meeting was a resolution to reappoint Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2) to a four-year term to represent the city council on the Local Development Finance Authority board.

The LDFA is funded through tax-increment financing (TIF) in a manner similar to the way the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority is supported. A TIF district allows authorities like the LDFA and the DDA to “capture” some of the property taxes that are levied by other municipal entities in the district. The LDFA contracts with the economic development agency Ann Arbor SPARK for various business development services. [For more background on the LDFA, see Chronicle coverage: "Budget Round 5: Economic Development"]

The appointment to the LDFA board exceeds the length of a city council term, which is two years, because the terms for LDFA appointments are expressed in the LDFA bylaws as only for four years. Based on the brief council discussion between Rapundalo and Marcia Higgins (Ward 4), it appears that an LDFA board bylaws change to address that issue is on the horizon.

The council’s interest is in establishing the LDFA council appointment as a regular, routine part of the council’s committee appointment schedule, which it conducts with each new constitution of the council after November elections.

Outcome: The council voted unanimously to appoint Stephen Rapundalo to the LDFA board.

Police Service Specialist Pension

The council was asked to give initial approval to a change in the pension system for members of its police service specialist union. The council had approved the collectively bargained changes at its June 20, 2011 meeting.

Currently union members make a 5% post-tax contribution to their pension. That will change to a 6% pre-tax contribution made by members of the police service specialist union. The change will be effective starting Aug. 14, 2011.

Because the change to the police service specialist retirement package requires altering a city ordinance, it will require a public hearing and a second, final approval by the council at a subsequent meeting.

Outcome: The council voted unanimously, without discussion, to give initial approval to a change in the police service specialist union pension system.

Retiree Health Change

Councilmembers considered initial approval of a revision to the city’s ordinance that covers how a city retiree’s health care is paid for. The revision to the ordinance distinguishes between “subsidized retirees” and “non-subsidized retirees.” A non-subsidized retiree is someone who is hired or re-employed into a non-union position with the city on or after July 1, 2011. In their retirement, non-subsidized retirees will have access to health care they can pay for themselves, but it will not be subsidized by the city.

At its June 6, 2011 meeting, the city council had directed the staff to prepare an ordinance change along these lines. Because it is a change to a city ordinance, the initial approval given to the change in the city’s retiree health system will require a public hearing and a second, final approval at another meeting.

During the brief deliberations on the ordinance, Marcia Higgins (Ward 4) said she appreciated the city staff moving the ordinance forward based on the council’s resolution on June 6.

Outcome: The council voted unanimously to give the retiree health care change its initial approval.

Picometrix Tax Abatement Public Hearing

On the council’s July 18 agenda was a public hearing on a tax abatement for Picometrix LLC, located at 2925 Boardwalk in Ann Arbor. Picometrix is a supplier of high-speed optical receivers.

The 5-year abatement would apply to $2,434,882 of personal property that Picometrix is acquiring. From the application for abatement: “Due to the projected increase in production volume, the company will need to purchase assets to maximize production and support added staffing.”

The list of personal property included in the application ranges from garden-variety desks and cubicles to digital oscilloscopes and laser beam profilers. If the abatement were approved, it would reduce the company’s annual tax bill for the new equipment by about $16,500 annually. The new personal property would generate approximately $20,700 in property taxes for each year during the abatement period, according to a city staff memo accompanying the resolution.

The industrial development district in which the Picometrix tax abatement is sought was established in 2006.

Thomas Partridge was the only person to speak during the public hearing. He stressed that tax certificates should be considered as IOUs, not unlimited grants.

No council action on the Picometrix tax abatement was scheduled for the July 18 meeting.

Communications and Comment

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

Comm/Comm: Underground Parking Structure Impact

Owners of two local businesses addressed the council about their situation – being located next to the construction site of an underground parking structure on Fifth Avenue, between Liberty and William streets. The two had also addressed the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority board at its June 6, 2011 meeting.

[On the opposite side of the block, on Division Street, is another local business, the Mail Shoppe, which also has seen its business drop during the construction period. Mail Shoppe owner Carolyn Hough told The Chronicle her business has been down by 25%, and walk-in business specifically was down 50%.]

At the July 18 council meeting, Pushpinder Sethi introduced himself as the owner of Earthen Jar – he was there to ask for some kind of compensation due to the underground parking garage that’s being constructed next to his business. He described the turmoil surrounding the construction project and how business is going down. It was not expected that the construction project would last this long, he said. His sales are down 50% – he’s losing $6,000 every month. He said it’s hard to survive. He requested some compensation from the city in the form of a tax abatement.

Ali Ramlawi reminded the council that he had attended a city council meeting a couple of months ago, talking about the Downtown Development Authority. The Jerusalem Garden owner said he was not going to go out of business, but that’s because of the University of Michigan [which uses the restaurant's catering business] and the restaurant’s dedicated followers. He said he’d asked the DDA for help one year ago, but that request had been rejected by DDA executive director Susan Pollay, saying it was an ordinary civic construction project. But Ramlawi contended the project is not ordinary – Fifth Avenue has been closed for a year.

Ramlawi told the council he wanted to talk about the role of the DDA and the future of the city. Recently, the city council gave more power to the DDA with respect to parking fees and enforcement and more influence on future development of city-owned parking lots. He characterized it as a transfer of power to non-elected officials. That kind of power transfer needs to go before voters, he contended. There need to be some ballot initiatives to see if people are comfortable with that power transfer. People don’t know what the DDA is, he said. He called for more transparency. The general public doesn’t know how DDA board members are appointed or what they do.

Following their commentary, Mike Anglin (Ward 5) said it’s hard to find the businesses and wondered if some signage might be useful.

Comm/Comm: Kunselman and the DDA

During his communications slot at the end of the council meeting, Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) noted that the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority has submitted its missing TIF status reports from prior years. He summarized the excess of expenditures over revenues for FY 2008 ($138,000), FY 2009 ($1.9 million) and FY 2010 (3.8 million). He said that FY 2011 had just closed out, but on DDA estimates, the excess expenditures over revenues is $3.9 million. [.pdf of report compilation]

Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) settles in before the start of the July 18 council meeting.

Kunselman suggested that the only way to close that gap was to open up the spaces in the new parking garage and increase rates. He characterized the situation as “fiscally irresponsible.”

Kunselman has made the DDA’s financial accountability a campaign theme for his Ward 3 Democratic Party primary election race. He faces two challengers: Ingrid Ault and Marwan Issa.

In an uncharacteristic break from the form of the agenda’s communications slot, mayor John Hieftje responded to Kunselman’s remarks by telling Kunselman that if he felt that way, then he shouldn’t have voted to approve the DDA’s budget back in May. [Hieftje sits on the DDA board and appoints its members, with confirmation from the city council.]

Kunselman responded to Hieftje by noting that the budget books that are presented to the council do not include past years’ information, and it is not presented in a way that highlights excesses of expenses over revenues.

Comm/Comm: First and Washington, Village Green

Interim city administrator Tom Crawford gave the council an update on the Village Green City Apartments project located at the city-owned First and Washington lot. Village Green plans to build a 9-story, 99-foot-tall building on the lot, with 156 dwelling units.

He reminded the council that they’d last heard from him on the subject of a “bathtub” foundation design, which resulted in the council reducing the purchase price for the land by $100,000, from $3.3 to $3.2 million. Design work has been progressing, Crawford said, and a refinement of the interior is being undertaken to provide a best-as-possible parking experience for people. He said it would probably require another 60-day extension on the purchase option agreement. He wanted to give the council a heads up. Village Green is still hoping to start work on the project this construction season.

Comm/Comm: Progressive Agenda, Unity

Thomas Partridge addressed the council during public commentary at the beginning and the end of the meeting. He introduced himself as a Washtenaw County Democrat, a father and grandfather, and an advocate for all those who need government services – a majority of the residents of the state and city. He reminded everyone of the recall effort against Gov. Rick Snyder. The deadline is Aug. 5, he said.

Ann Arbor, Washtenaw County, and all local governments in the state are suffering from a reduction in state shared revenues, Partridge said. He called on the city council to act in a progressive, democratic manner with respect to all fees, including water and sewage fees. About all land use, planning, and zoning, and funds spent on capital improvements the council should think progressively, Partridge concluded.

Partridge also reminded the council of the recent death of President Gerald R. Ford’s wife, Betty Ford, of Grand Rapids, Mich. He called on all parties to come together with intelligent compromises and to be aware of the dire state that the residents of Michigan have been put in by the Michigan legislature and Gov. Snyder.

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

Next council meeting: Aug. 4, 2011 at 7 p.m. in the second floor council chambers of city hall, located at 301 E. Huron. [confirm date]