The lease amendment would be for two years, for an amount not to exceed $50,340 over the length of the lease amendment term. Funding for FY 2014 would come from the parks and recreation services general fund and would be in the proposed budget for FY 2015, according to a staff memo. In FY 2013, the city generated about $225,000 in revenue from golf cart rentals.

The resolution passed by PAC on Feb. 25 also recommended the sale of 32 city-owned golf carts to Pifer for $50,340.

PAC had recommended the original lease a year ago, at its Feb. 26, 2013 meeting. The city council subsequently approved the agreement in March of 2013. The current amendment exercises the renewal option in that original deal, and establishes the qualities for new carts and trade-ins. The original terms remain in effect regarding sale price offered for acquiring the city’s old carts and the cost per new cart leased. [.pdf of staff memo and resolution]

The agreement will require approval from the city council.

This brief was filed from the second-floor council chambers at city hall, located at 301 E. Huron. A more detailed report will follow: [link]

The charter provision had been approved in November 2008 by a 81%-19% margin (42,969 to 9,944). The tweak would involve adding actions like “lease,” “license,” or “re-designate” to the set of actions on city parkland that would require a voter referendum.

The 2008 ballot question had asked voters if they wanted to add a clause to the city charter that would prevent the sale of city parkland without a voter referendum. Michigan’s Home Rule City Act already lists among a city’s prohibited powers: “… to sell a park, cemetery, or any part of a park or cemetery, except where the park is not required under an official master plan of the city …” But that year some residents were concerned that the city was looking to sell Huron Hills golf course – and they saw the exception in the state statute as a possible loophole. The council voted to place the question before voters that year over dissent from councilmember Marcia Higgins (Ward 4) and former councilmember Leigh Greden.

That year, the council had consciously settled on wording that included just selling, as opposed to leasing. In an Oct. 31, 2008 Ann Arbor News article, mayor John Hieftje was quoted as follows: “From time to time, we’ve thought about how nice it might be to have a restaurant near the river. I think it’s something people would really enjoy … That would be impossible if the ballot measure was expanded to include leasing.”

What prompts the current desire to contemplate adding “leasing” and other arrangements to the mix is concern that a portion of Fuller Park could eventually be used for a new rail station. Amtrak currently operates a station on Depot Street near the Broadway bridges. [See coverage of the council's June 4, 2012 meeting, when it accepted a $2.8 million federal grant to complete a planning study to confirm the Fuller Road site as the locally preferred alternative location for a new rail station.]

One draft of the ballot question that Lumm and Anglin are crafting reads: “Shall the voters of the City of Ann Arbor amend the city charter to require that the city shall not sell, lease, license, recategorize or repurpose, without the approval, by a majority vote of the electors of the city voting on the question at a regular or special election, any city park, or land in the city acquired for a park, cemetery, or any part thereof?” Lumm indicated that she’d bring the resolution to the council for a vote at its July 16 meeting.

While council support for placing a parkland lease question on the November 2012 ballot is uncertain, it’s likely that the council will follow the park advisory commission’s recommendation to place a renewal of the parks maintenance and capital improvements millage on the ballot. Christopher Taylor (Ward 3), who is one of two council ex officio members of PAC, indicated that consideration of that millage question would take place at the July 16 meeting.

Other possible ballot questions that have received some consideration by councilmembers include a charter amendment that would make city elections non-partisan.

And during deliberations on May 7, 2012 about a piece of public art to be commissioned for the city’s new justice center, Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) mentioned the possibility of establishing a millage just for public art. That would require placing a question on the ballot.

Locally, any city of Ann Arbor ballot questions might be joined by one that is likely to be put forward by the Ann Arbor District Library to support a downtown building project. A countywide transportation millage is less likely to be  placed on the November ballot, given the delays in approval of all the necessary documents.

This brief was filed from the Ann Arbor city council’s chambers on the second floor of city hall, located at 301 E. Huron. A more detailed report will follow: [link]

Power golf cart rentals for 9 holes at Leslie Park and Huron Hills will increase from $7 to $8; for 18 holes, the rental fee would increase from $13 to $14. City staff estimate the increases would generate $25,000 in additional revenue per season. Weekend fees for 9 and 18 holes at Leslie Park golf course will increase by $2 and $1, respectively, and the twilight fee would increase to $16, up from $15. These increases would generate an estimated additional $12,500 in revenue per season. In addition, the council approved raising the senior citizen qualification age to 59 for the 2011 season. That’s part of a consultant’s proposal to incrementally increase the qualification age from 55 to 62 by adding one year to the minimum age annually.

The actions came to the council in advance of the regular budget, so that the rates can be in place for the opening of the courses in the spring.

At the council’s meeting, the mandate of the city’s golf courses advisory task force, first appointed in 2008, was also renewed and its members were reappointed. Its members are: Stephen Rapundalo (city council); Julie Grand (park advisory commission); Bill Newcomb and Ed Walsh (citizens with demonstrated golf operations expertise); Thomas Allen (Ann Arbor citizen with group golf play experience); Barbara Jo Smith (Ann Arbor golf courses patron); John Stetz (citizen and member of a neighborhood association adjoining a golf course). The task force will be chaired by Rapundalo.

This brief was filed from the boardroom in the Washtenaw County administration building, where the council is meeting due to renovations in the city hall building. A more detailed report will follow: [link]

Leading up to the city administrator’s proposed budget in April, the city council is also holding a series of work sessions on the budget. Their typical scheduling pattern is for the weeks between council meetings. That was the case on Jan. 31, 2011 when the council held its budget work session on the community services area, which includes human services, parks and planning. Another session was held on Feb. 7, prior to the council’s regular meeting, regarding the 15th District Court. A report on the Feb. 14, 2011 session, which focused on police and fire, will follow.

At the podium is community services area administrator Sumedh Bahl. Partially obscured by the podium is councilmember Marcia Higgins (Ward 4). Leafing through the budget impact sheets that the council had been given just prior to the meeting is Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2). (Photo by the writer.)

The Ann Arbor city council’s budget work session on Jan. 31, 2011 covered a broad range of topics – from the city’s affordable housing stock, to planning and development, to parks and recreation (including golf courses), to human services funding. All these issues fall under the city’s community services area, which is led by Sumedh Bahl.

In a budget year where maintaining the same level of activity in every department is projected to result in a $2.4 million shortfall, city departments have been given reduction targets between 2.5% and 4%. Targets vary across departments depending on health care costs for employees in those departments.

So at their work session, councilmembers heard from heads of individual departments about the specific ways those targets might be met.

For example, Mary Jo Callan, who’s head of the city/county office of community development, told councilmembers that an unrealized $98,000 federal grant would pose an additional challenge. All other things being equal, Callan would meet the reduction target by reducing the city’s allocation to nonprofit human services agencies by $116,714 – from $1,275,744 to $1,159,030. The budget is planned in two-year cycles, even though it’s adopted just one year at a time, so Callan’s reduction strategy for next year’s FY 2013 budget would be to reduce the nonprofit allocation by an additional $48,700.

The planning department plans to meet its reduction target in part by charging the construction fund for 10% of the historic district coordinator’s time, factoring in projected revenue increases due to increased development activity, and leaving a rental housing inspector position vacant. The rental housing inspection activity would be maintained at appropriate levels by using construction inspectors for rental housing inspections as needed.

The city’s housing commission – which maintains more than 350 units of public housing throughout the city – is not proposing to meet reduction targets, but rather to hire what officials say are two crucially needed positions: a financial analyst and a facilities maintenance manager, which together are expected to cost an additional $154,000 per year.

Parks and recreation would meet their targets in part through savings derived from energy improvements that have been made to various recreational facilities over the past few years.

The council focused some of its session on the city’s golf courses, with a council consensus seeming to emerging that for the next two years, the council will be content to stick with the status quo – operating the Leslie Park and Huron Hills facilities as golf courses, and not changing them to other uses.

But the council was also asked to consider a question on which it could be harder to achieve consensus: Should the city continue to help fund park operations, as it has for the last four years, by tapping the city’s general fund reserve for $287,000 annually? The history of the issue dates back to the parks capital improvements and maintenance millage, which was approved in 2006, and which was followed by the council’s approval of its FY 2008 budget the next spring.

That history is rooted partly in a question that the city’s CFO, Tom Crawford, addressed in a straightforward fashion at the work session: What exactly does it mean for a department to have a budget reduction target of 2.5%? 

In this report, we take a look at: (1) how the city’s financial staff define budget reduction targets; (2) how and why those targets vary across departments; (3) how reduction targets relate to the parks budget controversy of FY 2008 and the current $287,000 question; and (4) the range of work session topics discussed by the council.

What Is a Budget Reduction Target?

The city is currently in the middle of its 2011 fiscal year – which ends on June 30, 2011 – and is developing its FY 2012 budget. If the city’s chief financial officer has established a 2.5% budget reduction target, how does he check to see that the target has been met?

Percents are all about comparing numbers, so a natural inclination would be to compare this year with next year – that is, the FY 2011 budget expenses with the FY 2012 projected revenue. In more detail, you might think to calculate 2.5% of the FY 2011 expenses, subtract that number from the FY 2011 expenses and ask: Is that number equal to my FY 2012 budgeted revenue? Arithmetically:

[FY 2011 expense] — [FY 2011 expense]*.025 ?=? [FY 2012]

If that checks out, then from this year to next year, we’ve cut the budget by 2.5%, right?

But that’s not what a 2.5% budget reduction target means for the city. When the city’s financial staff calculate a reduction target of 2.5%, they’re not comparing this year’s expenses with next year’s projected revenue. They’re comparing next year’s projected expenses, with next year’s projected revenue.

At the Jan. 31, 2011 city council work session, the city’s CFO, Tom Crawford, explained this concept to council members as a stepwise process:

1. Assume the same activities will be maintained next year at the same level they exist this year [staffing levels will remain the same; the same services will be provided; etc.].
2. Project to next year how much it will cost to maintain that same level of activity. [If the cost of electricity is expected to increase by 10%, that's calculated in; if union contracts stipulate that there's a 1.5% salary increase, that's calculated in.]
3. Compare next year’s projected cost with next year’s projected revenue. If cost exceeds revenue, that defines the percentage reduction the organization needs to achieve as a whole.

Arithmetically, the equation looks like this:

[FY 2012 expense] — [FY 2012 expense]*.025 ?=? [FY 2012 revenue]

By way of a made-up example, consider a perfectly balanced FY 2011 budget where expenses and revenues are $100,000. Let’s say that due to contractually obligated salary increases, overall inflation, and a rise in oil prices, it’s possible to project that the same activities/services the city obtained for $100,000 in FY 2011 will instead cost $101,000 in FY 2012. Let’s say that revenues are expected to drop in FY 2012 to $98,475. So the crucial question for the city is how to reduce $101,000 down to $98,475. On this scenario, measured in dollars, the city is looking for some way to trim $2,525. What’s that dollar target in terms of percent?

2,525/101,000 = .025

Let’s say on that scenario, the city does achieve its reduction target of 2.5%. That is, let’s say the city finds a way to cut expenses for FY 2012 down to $98,475. That would mean a reduction target of 2.5% has been met for FY 2012, even though comparing FY 2012 to FY 2011 would indicate only a 1.525% cut.

Different Reduction Targets for Different Departments

Part of the city’s specific labor strategy is to try to convince its unions to adopt a health care and pension plan that would cost the city less – by requiring greater contributions from employees. The public relations component of that strategy was reflected at the Feb. 7, 2011 city council meeting, when Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2), chair of the city council’s budget committee, addressed his colleagues. He contrasted the level of health care benefits received by city union workers with benefits received by city non-union workers and by employees at institutions like the University of Michigan.

In addition to the public relations piece, the city’s labor strategy has a budgetary component. As early as the first budget retreat in December 2010, city administrator Roger Fraser and CFO Tom Crawford explained to councilmembers that this year they will align the city’s labor and budget strategies. What that means in terms of budget reduction targets is that different departments will be given different reduction targets, depending on how many employees in the department have adopted the city’s new benefits plan.

All departments have a baseline 2.5% target, with additional reductions assigned to departments depending on the extent to which employees in each department are still on the city’s old benefits plan.

In a hypothetical department where all employees were on the new heath and pension plan, the reduction target would be 2.5%. In a department with a large number of union employees who have not yet adopted the new health plan, the reduction target this year can be as high as 4%. The numbers extracted from budget impact sheets submitted by each department for the Jan. 31 work session illustrate how the percentage reduction targets vary across departments. The targets all fall between 2.5% and 4.0%:

                   Community     Plan/Dev     Planning        Parks
Projected FY 012   2,008,008    1,497,874      829,796    3,612,367
Reduction Dollars     55,521       55,182       29,613       92,083
Reduction Percent       2.76         3.68         3.57         2.55

-

Reduction Targets and the 2006 Parks Millage: $287,000

The city’s method for computing reduction targets based on next year’s projected expenses and next year’s projected revenues is not new this year – this is simply the way it’s been done. But that method of computing budget targets is inconsistent with the last-year-vs.-this-year comparison that many people are drawn to when they think about percentages. That inconsistency led to considerable controversy in early 2007 when the city council adopted its FY 2008 budget.

The controversy involved the combined parks maintenance and capital improvements millage that was approved by voters in November 2006. Before passage of the combined millage, the city levied two separate millages at 0.5 mill each – one for parks maintenance and the other for capital improvements. Now, within the combined millage, taxes are collected at a rate of 1.0 mill, but money is allocated to maintenance or capital improvements on a more flexible basis than the previous legally enforced 50-50 split that was expressed by the specialized purpose of each millage.

However, there’s not complete flexibility to allocate money to maintenance or capital improvements within the unified millage. Percentage allocation is guided by a city council resolution passed in October 2006. The resolution specifies a range of 60% to 80% for maintenance, with the remainder going to capital improvements.

Another part of that resolution was intended to address a fear expressed by some in the community at the time: Even though more money for parks might be generated through the new millage, the amount of money actually spent on parks could be reduced – if the city reduced funding for parks from its general fund. So the intent of the resolution was to allay that fear. In relevant part, the October 2006 resolution reads:

4. If future reductions are necessary in the City’s general fund budget, during any of the six years of this millage, beginning with Fiscal Year 2007-2008, the general fund budget supporting the parks and recreation system for that year will be reduced by a percentage no greater than the average percentage reduction of the total City general fund budget;

5. If future increases occur in the City’s general fund budget during any of the six years of this millage, beginning with Fiscal Year 2007-2008, the general fund budget supporting the parks and recreation system for that year will be increased at the same rate as the average percentage increase of the total City general fund budget;

By spring the following year – as the council was prepared to adopt the FY 2008 budget – objections were raised when general fund support for parks in the proposed FY 2008 budget was less than in FY 2007. Those who objected, including prominent leaders of two environmental groups, pointed to the increase in the overall general fund budget from the previous year, and contended that parks should enjoy the same increase, not a decrease. From a May 19, 2007 Ann Arbor News account, written by Tom Gantert:

Mike Garfield, director of the Ecology Center, and Doug Cowherd, chairman of the Sierra Club-Huron Valley Group, said the city should do what it said it would do in an October 2006 resolution. That resolution stated that if the city’s general fund budget increased, the parks system budget will be increased at the same rate as the average percentage of the total general fund budget.

According to the city, the general fund budget rose from $78.5 million to $80.3 million, an increase of 2 percent. Yet, the parks system budget dropped from $6.7 million to $6.0 million, a decrease of about 11 percent. To get to that 2 percent increase as the resolution states, the city would have to add about $763,000.

On the night the council adopted the FY 2008 budget, an attempted budget amendment – proposed by then-councilmember Bob Johnson – would have added $638,900 to the parks budget from the general fund reserve. But the amendment failed, receiving support only from councilmembers Johnson, Ron Suarez and Stephen Kunselman.

For that vote, the majority of councilmembers seemed persuaded that the intent and purpose of the October 2006 resolution was served by treating the parks budget targets – as they’ve been laid out in the first section of this article – the same as all other departments. At the time, an Ann Arbor News account from May 16, 2007 had Crawford explaining the apparent discrepancy this way:

But now chief financial officer Tom Crawford says the [October 2006] resolution was too simplistic and just looked at overall budget figures and didn’t follow the city budget methodology in place for several years.

For example, because the parks system doesn’t have as many employees as other departments, its budget doesn’t increase as much for rising expenses such as employee health care.

Because of problems in the ordinance language like that, Crawford said the parks would be getting more money than other larger departments that are paying for such benefits.

Crawford said the parks department was treated the same as the other departments in the city.

But later, in October 2007, Johnson brought the issue back to the council with a smaller number to be added to the parks budget from the general fund reserve – $287,000. And that resolution was passed by the council.

Originally the general fund supplement to the parks budget was supposed to be a non-recurring item from the general fund reserve in FY 2008 and FY 2009. But it recurred in the FY 2010 and FY 2011 budgets, as well.

So at the Jan. 31, 2011 council work session, community services area administrator Sumedh Bahl asked the council for guidance: Should the city simply set the parks budget at $287,000 higher, continue to tap the general fund reserve, or discontinue the supplement? Mayor John Hieftje wanted to know if the city’s park advisory commission had become more versed in how the budget targets work. Crawford told the mayor he thinks PAC understands it.

Stephen Rapundalo said this is not the first time over the years when the council has talked about tapping the reserve fund balance for recurring operational needs – it needs to stop, he said, because the council was just “kicking the can down the road.”

But Crawford was keen to stress that in general the council has been disciplined about not tapping the general fund reserve for operational expenses. The parks supplement was an old decision, he said, and now it’s time to check and see where the council’s consensus is on the question.

Marcia Higgins (Ward 4) indicated that it is a decision the council would make during the budget process. Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) wondered how that would be achieved: Do they do that by resolution? The answer was unclear.

Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) noted that out of a $7.8 million community services budget, $287,000 is a relatively small order of magnitude. Rapundalo cautioned that the right number to compare the $287,000 against is just the parks portion – around $3.6 million.

Kunselman inquired when the parks maintenance and capital improvements millage is up for renewal, and Colin Smith, the city’s manager of parks and recreation, clarified that it would be on the November 2012 ballot.

Concerning the differing viewpoints on the intent of the October 2006 resolution, city administrator Roger Fraser seemed conciliatory. It was a matter of interpretation, he said, and both groups had made good arguments about whether the budget complied with the intent of voters.

Budget Impact Sheets

The Jan. 31, 2011 budget work session was oriented around budget impact sheets for each department. The city of Ann Arbor is maintaining a separate page in its online budget guide as a repository for the impact sheets. [.pdf of combined budget impact sheets from Jan. 31, 2011] The impact sheets include in detail all the items identified for savings or additional revenue, as well as any items that would increase costs.

Budget Impact Sheets: Planning and Development

Among the ways that the city’s planning and development services departments are meeting their reduction targets, Sumedh Bahl highlighted the following: making sure that staff time is being billed appropriately to other departments; and an additional $3,000 in revenue from already-implemented fee increases in the city’s historic preservation program.

Tony Derezinski (Ward 2) said he liked the additional $10,00o in revenue from increased development activity. He wanted to know if there were more development proposals in the pipeline? Yes, answered Bahl.

In the course of questioning, Bahl went on to explain that part of their plan to meet reduction targets is to leave an inspector position vacant and to use construction inspectors for rental housing inspections. Increased efficiency in rental housing inspections is expected to yield an additional $50,000 in revenue.

In response to councilmember questions, Bahl said that regionalization of inspections – using inspectors from surrounding municipalities – is a future possibility. The city is also looking into the establishment of an administrative hearing bureau (AHB), which would help expedite dealing with nuisance properties, Bahl said. That might take around a year to establish, he said.

[Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) has, over the last several months, pointed out specific properties in his ward that he says have become nuisances, and are contributing to blight. At the budget retreats, he has also urged that the council and staff  think about ways to address the problem – money for demolition can be clawed back through a lien, for example. Establishment of an AHB is one mechanism that the state's Home Rule Cities Act makes available for dealing with such properties. The city of Ypsilanti established an AHB last year.]

Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2) noted that he’d made a request at one of the budget retreats for a cost/benefit analysis of doing mandatory home inspections upon sale of a property. It’s something that would generate some amount of additional revenue. Is that on the list? he asked. Bahl confirmed that looking at the issue was at the top of his list.

Budget Impact Sheets: Housing Commission

The Ann Arbor Housing Commission oversees around 350 affordable housing units across the city. The housing commission’s impact sheet did not propose to meet the reduction target. Instead, it called for hiring two new positions: a facility maintenance manager and a financial analyst.

Bahl explained that the facility maintenance position  is vacant. The job includes overseeing the maintenance of buildings, plus the mechanicals like boilers and furnaces. Bahl stressed the need to maintain equipment as a way to extend its life, which delays capital expenses.

Bahl recalled his recent experience as head of the city’s drinking water facilities. [Bahl assumed the leadership of the community services area last year when Jayne Miller left the city for another position. Before that, Bahl was head of the drinking water facilities.] His focus was always on maintenance, he said. By way of example, he described for the council how they had gas engines from 1965 and pumps from 1949 that were still in service. That’s how you prolong the life of equipment – by having a good maintenance program.

[The request for two positions for the housing commission comes in the context of a wholesale replacement of the housing commission's board last year. Additional Chronicle coverage: "Housing Commission Reorganizes," and "Investments: Housing, Bridges, Transit." Last year, the council agreed to a $138,000 allocation to the housing commission to help transition it into an operation that is less dependent on the federal HUD program. The transition included making full-time positions of the executive director and deputy director of the housing commission.]

Mayor John Hieftje asked Tony Derezinski (Ward 2) – the city council’s liaison to the housing commission – if funding would be available to perform the maintenance, if the maintenance manager position were funded.

Derezinski explained that maintenance was part of needs assessment that had been done [by Schumaker & Company]. The commission is currently “backhoeing” a lot of the deferred maintenance, he said. It’s things like changing filters. [There is also currently an open request for proposals (RFP), with a Feb. 25 deadline, to bid on replacing furnaces at many of the housing commission properties.] They need the management position to organize the staff to do it the regular maintenance.

City administrator Roger Fraser said that $330,000 had been spent on furnaces and boilers in the last year. There are two resident managers who work with people in facilities to do some maintenance, he said, but they don’t have time to look at the capital side.

Fraser reminded the council that in last year’s budget, they’d approved additional money for the housing commission – over $130,000 – but this current request is “not a repeat of that money.” For some of the capital investments necessary, Fraser said, the commission had received grants. [To match those grants, the housing commission has recently asked the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority for support, but the DDA has not yet acted on the request.]

About the maintenance issues, Derezinski compared it to opening a drawer and finding more snakes. He said the maintenance issues in the housing units are reflected in the complaints you hear at the housing commission’s board meetings. Two years ago, he said, there were a dozen people at every meeting, but that’s decreasing. The staff is now “on top of it.”

Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2) inquired whether maintenance could be done by third party. If you have a schedule for changing filters, could they call up someone in the phone book and have them perform that task? he wondered. Bahl allowed that some tasks could be outsourced to a third party – they take a combined approach. Some maintenance is done by staff, and some is done by contracted sources – for example, for chillers that require a worker with specialized training. But Bahl said that someone has to monitor and manage everything.

Kunselman noted that as part of the reorganization last year, the commission had eliminated two union positions for maintenance. Kunselman wanted to know how that was consistent with needing a maintenance manager. The part of the maintenance that has been outsourced, instead of using union positions, Bahl said, is done when the units turn over to a new occupant. The commission still needs someone to make sure that all the regular maintenance work is getting done.

Earlier in the work session, Sandi Smith (Ward 1) drew out the fact that there is currently $118,000 in the Ann Arbor housing trust fund. Kunselman wanted to know if that included the Burton Commons project. Mary Jo Callan, head of the combined city/county office of community development, explained that four years ago the commission had committed funds the  Burton Commons housing project. Two years ago, she said, the city told “wanted-to-be developers” it could not continue the commitment. So, where’s the money? Kunselman wanted to know. Fraser explained that it was put in back in the trust fund, and it’s been used. Smith inquired about future payments that are due to the fund by developments – specifically, the one at Plymouth Green. Wendy Rampson, head of planning for the city, explained that based on the Plymouth Green development agreement, two payments of $15,000 had been made and there would be two more, at $15,000 each for next two years.

Smith noted that Avalon Housing is a nonprofit organization in town similar to the housing commission, and Avalon Housing has divested itself of smaller, single-unit housing. Did the needs assessment for the housing commission include consideration of the type of housing stock? She pointed out that it could be a question of replacing 100 furnaces versus one.

Derezinski said that the furnaces that had been replaced were in smaller units. He also said that the question of an appropriate mix of housing stock was receiving attention from the commission. They’d looked at the mix in the Grand Rapids housing commission’s collection of housing, for example.

Fraser wrapped up the discussion of the housing commission by noting that he’d been in public service long enough to see the federal government essentially get out of the business of domestic spending on housing. A lot of the housing we’re dealing with now, he said, dates to the late ’60s and ’70s. The units had 30-year mortgages to guarantee affordability. Fraser noted that the council had previously discussed multi-family units going to market rate. The pressure has rolled downhill to the smallest units of government closest to the people, he said, and the dilemma is only going to get worse.

Fraser pointed to President Obama’s remarks during his state of the union speech, and the new leadership in the U.S. Senate and House, as well as Michigan’s own legislature – all of them have been targeting domestic spending for cuts, he said, and we’ll have to live with it.

Budget Impact Sheets: Community Development

Mary Jo Callan, the director of the combined city/county office of community development, delivered a grim picture for human services allocations to nonprofits. She would meet the budget reduction target in FY 2012 by reducing allocation to nonprofits that provide human services by $116,714 – from $1,275,744 to $1,159,030. Callan’s strategy to meet the target for next year’s FY 2013 budget would be to reduce the nonprofit allocation by an additional $48,700.

Councilmembers appeared slow to grasp the full significance of the numbers on the budget impact sheets. Margie Teall (Ward 4) asked: How did you come up with that number? Where will it hit?

Callan explained that she did not yet know which specific nonprofits would be affected. She said that her department is in the process of gearing up for the new coordinated funding process, beginning July 1, 2011.

Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5) remarked that it was a significant percentage cut, with Teall chiming in that it was greater than 2.5%.

Callan explained that her department had anticipated receiving a $98,000 federal grant from HUD the previous year, to cover administrative costs incurred from city finance and administrative staff. The grant had not materialized – HUD requires documentation that is fairly specific, she said. In a followup email in response to a Chronicle query, Callan described the documentation issue in more detail:

The documentation requires not only the amount of time spent on a specific grant (e.g. CDBG, HOME, CDBG-R, NSP), but also the specific project worked on (e.g. single family demolition, 701 Miller rehab, human services). Community Development has our whole finance and time tracking system set-up to accommodate this documentation threshold, since the vast majority of our funding comes from these sources. City finance and administrative staff however, do not track their time in this detailed way, since the vast majority of their work relates to the general fund.

Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2) mistakenly concluded from Callan’s remarks that the $116,000 reduction did not mean reduction in nonprofit allocations after all – the reduction would be $116,000 minus the $98,000, he ventured. That would make it more palatable in terms of actual service agency cuts, he concluded.

But Callan clarified that they would not be subtracting $98,000 from anything. Rapundalo sought to clarify why support to nonprofits would be reduced if the $98,000 was originally intended to support administrative staff.

City administrator Roger Fraser sought to bring some clarity to the situation by saying that if administrative staff is reduced, the city loses capacity to administer the program. The office of community development had tried to keep the allocations to nonprofit agencies stable, he said. The city’s recommendation is consider the trade-off: What does it take to run the operation, and how much direct support to nonprofits can be provided? The city is trying to figure out how to pay for staff to run the program at the same level, while continuing to provide direct support to programs.

Rapundalo ventured that the budget impact sheet was not a specific proposal for allocating the cut between administrative staff and direct support to programs. Fraser replied that the city was suggesting a balancing act: “These are the adjustments we think are necessary.” Marcia Higgins (Ward 4) zeroed in on the significance of the numbers the council had been given: “So it really is a direct reduction?” Yes, said Callan. She continued by saying her department is a lean organization: “We don’t bring this to you lightly.”

Hohnke summarized the situation by saying that one way the city had been working to maintain funding was to identify federal funding opportunities – the proposed cut reflects the fact that federal funding didn’t materialize.

Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) characterized the situation as Callan believing the department is as lean as it can go and it has gotten what revenue is gettable – the only way to meet it is to reduce funding to human services agencies.

Fraser stressed that there was no effort yet to balance the choices in human services funding against other choices in the city’s organization. The office of community development was asked to meet the reduction targets just like every other department, and it was presented in “raw form.” In the proposed budget in April, he said, they might propose a different scenario, but the impact sheet simply recognizes that $98,000 is gone.

Budget Impact Sheets: Parks and Recreation – Basics

Among the dollars identified at the work session by Sumedh Bahl for savings in parks and recreation was $65,083 in energy savings due to improvements done at facilities. He also pointed to $10,000 saved in materials and supplies used for upkeep in facilities. Upgrades in facilities means that for a certain time, there’ll be a reduction in maintenance costs, he said. Additional budget savings would result from adjusting water charges to reflect what actual usage is. And they’re eliminating some software licenses. Some of the software, Bahl said, isn’t used by the staff that much, “so we’re taking it away from them.”

Bahl also pointed to an additional $52,000 in anticipated revenue, starting in FY 2013, from new kayaking and tubing, resulting from the planned construction of the Argo Dam bypass, which was recommended by the city’s park advisory commission and approved by the city council last year.

Mayor John Hieftje wondered about a proposed increase in fees at the city’s outdoor pools for FY 2013 – $4 to $5 for adults and $3.50 to $4 for youth and seniors – which the budget impact sheet showed would generate an additional $40,000 in revenue in FY 2013.  He noted that historically, fee increases had caused revenue to drop. Bahl said he felt the prices would still be pretty competitive.

Colin Smith, manager of the city’s parks and recreation program, allowed that fee increases leading to less patronage and lower revenues had happened – but that was a number of years ago, he said. At that time, he said, the increase had been for season passes and it was extraordinary. During the last fee adjustment cycle, the prices on season passes were raised by 10% and the city didn’t get any “hard feedback” on that, he said.

Marcia Higgins (Ward 4) wanted to know: What’s “hard feedback”? Smith explained that this meant negative public input about the increase.

But Higgins noted that this is the first year that the city would see the impact of the 10% fee increase – this spring. She clarified that these are additional fee increases planned for the following year. Smith confirmed that’s the case – he didn’t want to implement two kinds of fee increases at once.

Budget Impact Sheets: Parks and Recreation – Huron Hills

Included in the materials provided to city councilmembers was a memo that outlined various options for Huron Hills golf course. [The city also owns the Leslie Park golf course.]

[Last year the city issued an RFP to privatize of some the operations at the course, but ultimately decided not to accept either of the proposals that were made – one from Miles of Golf and the other from a citizen group that envisioned turning the course operations over to a nonprofit.]

Bahl summarized the result of the implementation of recommendations made by a consultant – Golf Convergence, hired by the city in 2007 – to improve patronage at the city’s two golf courses. All of the recommendations have now been implemented:

Rounds Played
Season  Huron    Leslie
2007    13,913   21,857
2008    15,558   27,078
2009    21,150   30,973
2010    22,500   32,000

-

Bahl noted that there’d been a dramatic improvement in the number of rounds played, but there are signs that it’s flattening out.

A memo provided to the council outlines the financial impact of various options for use of the Huron Hills land, including continuing to operate the golf course. In summary strokes, the options for Huron Hills and their costs over the next four years would be:

• Golf course: $162,000-187,000 annually
• Walking trails: $68,000-$309,000 annually
• Naturalization: at least $500,000 annually, falling to around $100,000 after seven years
• Soccer fields: no cost estimate
• Disc golf: no cost estimate
• Farming: no cost estimate

There’s a wide range of cost estimates for the walking trails option. By way of explanation, Bahl noted that for non-golf scenarios at Huron Hills, it’s necessary to include the “legacy costs” for two people currently employed at Huron Hills, both in union positions – one AFSCME and one Teamster. By union contract, he said, those employees cannot be laid off if the city has any temporary, seasonal, or contract worker employed at the city. And the city relies heavily on these types of workers, so laying off the two union workers at Huron Hills is not a realistic option. The net cost to the city of replacing seasonal workers with the Huron Hill’s workers would be around $175,000, Bahl said. Also in the mix is $42,000 in municipal service charges and $24,000 in IT charges that the golf enterprise fund accounting currently pays from the enterprise fund into the general fund.

The lower range of cost reflects a scenario in which the two Huron Hill’s union workers can be placed elsewhere in the city, while the higher cost in the range is a scenario where neither worker can be placed elsewhere.

Colin Smith, manager of the city’s parks and recreation program, stressed that under the walking trails option, the result would not be a natural area, but rather an “unkept golf course.” Converting it to a natural area would require considerably more investment – listed out as a separate option. Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) confirmed with Smith that under the walking trails option, there was money factored in for mowing of the 8th and 9th hole areas that are used for sledding in the winter. Sabra Briere (Ward 1) drew out the fact that there is not money in that option for mowing areas where people might cross-country ski.

Marcia Higgins (Ward 4) wondered why the parks capital improvements and maintenance millage could not be used for non-golf options. Smith’s answer was that because maintenance would be mowing, which must be paid out of the city’s general fund.

Commenting on the legacy costs, mayor John Hieftje noted that if positions elsewhere in the city opened up, they could be held open for the Huron Hills workers. City administrator Roger Fraser allowed that this would be the city’s strategy, but could not guarantee that positions would open up.

Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) noted that the walking trails options outlined a range of possibility, but he wanted to know what the range of likelihood is. Bahl told Taylor that chances of finding an opening for the AFSCME employee are better, because of the relatively large pool of such workers. On the Teamster side, the pool is smaller. Summarizing the city’s best realistic estimate for the legacy costs for non-golf options, Colin Smith said it’d be $150,000 and above in the first couple of years.

Higgins stated that the city had committed to five years before evaluating the success of the Golf Convergence recommendations – when does that end? she wondered. Colin Smith clarified that the five-year evaluation period ends in 2013 – there are two years left.

City administrator Roger Fraser weighed in, saying the staff was not suggesting the council had to implement changes before two more years is up. It’s a matter of considering what a sustainable approach to city services is. When the city talks about community engagement to solve problems for the city’s future, the different scenarios for Huron Hills should be a part of the discussion, he concluded.

There seemed to be little enthusiasm from councilmembers at the work session for contemplating anything but a golf course at Huron Hills for the next two years.

Park advisory commissioners Sam Offen, left, and Tim Doyle look at a schematic of the proposed Allen Creek Greenway during a presentation at PAC's Jan. 18 meeting. (Photos by the writer.)

A speaker during PAC’s public hearing on the plan had pointed out that the official public commentary period runs through Jan. 24. That prompted discussion among commissioners about whether to hold off until all possible commentary is heard – though some indicated there’d already been ample opportunity for feedback. Another public hearing on the PROS plan will be held at the planning commission’s Feb. 1 meeting, with a vote by that group set for Feb. 15. City council is expected to hold a public hearing and vote on the plan in early March.

Tuesday’s PAC meeting included two presentations. Mike Quinn, a board member of the Allen Creek Greenway Conservancy, described the group’s efforts and asked PAC to convey a sense of urgency about the project to city council. And Scott Rosencrans, a former PAC chair, gave an update on the Ann Arbor skatepark: “The big news is that this is the year we build the skatepark.”

Updates from city parks staff included a quarterly financial report, during which parks manager Colin Smith reported that parks & recreaction is looking at 2.5% cuts during the next budget cycle. Commissioners also got briefed on the outcome of the Miles of Golf proposal to take over operations of the Huron Hills golf course – a proposal rejected by the city late last year – and an update on planned improvements at the Gallup Park canoe livery. Staff will hold a public meeting with concept plans on Tuesday, Jan. 25 at the livery, starting at 7 p.m. If the plan is approved, the city is poised to apply for state grant funding for the project, estimated to cost about $450,000.

Action on PROS Plan Postponed

The Parks and Recreation Open Space (PROS) plan, which provides an inventory, needs assessment and action plan for the city’s parks system, is updated every five years. The updated document is required by the state in order for the city to be eligible to apply for certain grants. The process – led by parks planner Amy Kuras – began in late 2009 and is nearing completion, with final input being solicited on a draft. A resolution was on the agenda at PAC’s Jan. 18 meeting to recommend approval of the plan, and a public hearing was held to get additional feedback.

[For additional details on the plan itself, see Chronicle coverage: "Planning Commission Weighs In on Parks" Files in .pdf format of the draft PROS plan sections: Intro and Section I: Community Description, Section II: Administrative Structure, Section III: Budget & Funding, Section IV: Inventory, Section V: Land Use Planning & Acquisition, Section VI: Planning Process, Section VII: Goals & Objectives, Section VIII: Needs Assessment, Section IX: Action Plan]

PROS Plan: Public Hearing

Two people spoke during a public hearing on the PROS plan. Alice Ralph said she was speaking on behalf of Rita Mitchell, who wasn’t able to stay long enough to participate. Mitchell had prepared written remarks, which Ralph read, stating that it would be premature for PAC to vote on the PROS plan at this meeting. The city has indicated that public commentary will remain open through Jan. 24, and that public hearings at PAC, the planning commission and city council would be held in February and March.

[She was referring to the following paragraph, posted on the city's PROS plan website:]

Comments may be submitted until Jan. 24, 2011 to be considered for inclusion in the plan. In February and March, public hearings will be held at the Park Advisory Commission, Planning Commission and City Council. Dates will be posted as they are confirmed. To submit comments e-mail a2parks@a2gov.org.

Reading Mitchell’s remarks, Ralph stated that PAC hasn’t yet heard from the public, and that insufficient notice has been provided to the public about the opportunity for input. Will another public hearing be held at PAC? How will additional public input be incorporated into the plan, if PAC votes on it now? In addition, there were several specific comments directed at the plan itself. She opposed the concept of public/private partnerships, stating that it could lead to the piece-by-piece dismantling of the parks system. She cited Fuller Road Station and the Huron Hills golf course RFP process as examples. The current draft uses 2000 census data – 2010 data should be used instead. She also said there is a lack of clarity on the budget that’s included in the draft. She described here remarks as the start of her comments, and that she’ll be sending more. [.pdf file of full remarks]

George Gaston spoke briefly, saying he wanted to echo the comments that Ralph had made. He urged commissioners to postpone their voting on the PROS plan until all public input was received.

PROS Plan: Commissioner Comments, Questions

Tim Berla asked Amy Kuras to review the public process that had been done so far for the PROS plan. She said it started about a year ago, when a steering committee was formed to provide guidance on updating the plan. An online survey was open for three months, yielding about 820 responses from the public. They held three public forums, which she said weren’t particularly well-attended – about 30 people in total came to those. In addition, CDs of the draft are available at parks facilities, she said.

The public comment period to respond to the draft itself is dictated by the state, Kuras said. There’s a mandatory 42-day period from the time that the draft is released – that period ends on Jan. 24. She noted that in addition to the public hearing at PAC, there will be one at the planning commission on Feb. 1, and another at city council in March. She’s also solicited feedback directly from PAC and planning commissioners at work sessions. [See Chronicle coverage: "Planning Commission Weighs In on Parks"]

Gwen Nystuen said she supported waiting until the public commentary period has ended before voting on the draft. In response to a question from Nystuen about timing, Kuras said they needed to have final approval of the plan by all entities on April 1. If the city doesn’t meet that deadline, it won’t be eligible for certain state grants, she said. It’s not clear whether the city would remain ineligible for an entire year, or for a shorter period.

David Barrett said it was important to point out that more than 820 people had responded to the online survey. He elicited from Kuras that the previous report had used a phone survey, with about 600 responses.

Mike Anglin, a Ward 5 city councilmember who’s an ex-officio member of PAC, clarified that amendments could be made to the plan even after it is approved. He noted that over the past few years, the city has been involved in rezoning efforts, changing the zoning of city-owned property to “public land,” and adding transportation facilities as a possible use for parcels zoned as public land. That “might be a very radical change that’s taken place,” he said.

Perhaps a five-year plan is a model of the past, Anglin said. The council might want to review the document more frequently. He noted that he doesn’t use the parks much himself, but he’s proud that the city has these amenities – PAC serves as a custodian of that legacy. Anglin concluded by saying he was glad to know the plan could be amended.

Colin Smith, the city’s parks manager, said that one option for PAC would be to pass the resolution at that meeting, but make it contingent on possibly incorporating additional public commentary. He also pointed out that even if commentary is received, that doesn’t mean it will automatically be included in the plan. “It will be considered,” he said.

Julie Grand, PAC’s chair, voiced support for that approach. She observed that Kuras had met with PAC members last week at their land acquisition committee meeting, and they’d given feedback to her then. There have been multiple opportunities for input, she said, and this isn’t the last one.

Karen Levin proposed taking a vote at PAC’s next land acquisition committee meeting, on Feb. 1. [LAC is a committee that includes all PAC members. Its meetings are open to the public, but are held at Cobblestone Farm and are not televised.] Berla observed that it would be unusual not to take a vote on such a public topic at their main meeting.

Tim Doyle suggested adding the word “draft” into the resolution, making it clear that they were voting on a document that wasn’t yet completed. With that change, he said he’d support voting on it at the current meeting.

Sam Offen felt uncomfortable taking action before all the public commentary had been collected. It might be the last comment they receive from the public that prompts discussion and revisions, he said. For that reason, he supported postponing a vote.

Saying he didn’t want to prioritize the “food chain,” David Barrett clarified that the normal process would be for PAC to vote first, then the planning commission, and finally city council. If it could be worked out, he’d feel more comfortable waiting until after Jan. 24 to vote. He also praised Kuras for the tenor of the report, saying the document reflected the public commentary that had been made so far, but didn’t judge that commentary.

Because the planning commission has scheduled a public hearing on the plan for its Feb. 1 meeting, that group could vote on it at their Feb. 15 meeting, Smith said. He suggested that PAC also take a vote at their Feb. 15 meeting. [PAC meets prior to the planning commission – their meetings start at 4 p.m. and 7 p.m., respectively.] That way the vote is televised, and there’s adequate time to incorporate public commentary, he said. Kuras said her plan is to compile a summary of public commentary by the end of next week, which she’d provide to both PAC and the planning commission.

Grand concluded the discussion by observing that consensus seemed to be reached on taking a vote at their next Feb. 15 meeting. She thanked Kuras for her work, saying “it’s a beautiful document.”

Allen Creek Greenway

Mike Quinn, a board member of the Allen Creek Greenway Conservancy and a senior principal at Quinn Evans Architects, gave a presentation to commissioners and asked for their support of the walking/biking pathway. He described the greenway as ambitious, with the goal of transforming a stretch of land that’s now considered blighted – extending from East Stadium and South State, running north along the railroad right-of-way through town and ending at the Huron River. The transformation would have major economic benefits, he said, and the time is right to act – the economic downturn provides an opportunity, he said.

The conservancy – a 501(c)3 nonprofit – is trying to facilitate discussions between major property owners needed to make the greenway a reality: the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor Railroad and the city of Ann Arbor. Quinn reported that board members Joe O’Neal and Jonathan Bulkley were meeting with mayor John Hieftje that day. Members of the group also met recently with the owner of the Ann Arbor Railroad, and got a positive response, he said. And officials at the university have said they won’t impede the idea, Quinn reported – a response that greenway supporters consider positive.

Quinn noted that the PROS plan mentions the greenway briefly, but the conservancy hoped that PAC could give the project more energy.

Mike Quinn gave a presentation on the Allen Creek Greenway project at the Jan. 18 meeting of the Ann Arbor park advisory commission.

It’s critical to get a design in place so that people will have a proposal they can react to, Quinn said. There are three city properties that the conservancy hopes the city will commit to the project: 1) A surface parking lot at First & William, 2) the 415 W. Washington property, a former city maintenance facility, and 3) 721 N. Main, another city maintenance yard. He noted that all of the city land at First & William is located in the floodway, making it difficult to build there, but ideal for the greenway – the other two properties are partially located in the floodway.

In discussions last year, Quinn said city councilmembers had raised safety concerns, given that the proposed route would include crossing many streets. Conservancy members agree that it’s a problem, but it can be addressed, he said.

In response to a question from commissioner Tim Doyle, Quinn said the conservancy assumes the greenway would eventually become the responsibility of the city’s parks and recreation unit. He noted that it would connect with Washtenaw County’s border-to-border trail, and would promote efforts to create a more walkable, bikeable community.

After some wrangling with set-up, the presentation concluded with a five-minute video featuring community members – including Eppie Potts, Margaret Wong and Grace Shackman, among others – talking about why they support the project.

Quinn again asked PAC to convey to city council a sense of urgency about the greenway.

Ann Arbor Skatepark

Scott Rosencrans was in familiar territory at Tuesday’s PAC meeting. A former chair of the commission, he was on hand to make a presentation on behalf of the Ann Arbor skatepark project. He’s now a board member of the Friends of the Ann Arbor Skatepark, and told commissioners that he’s also the group’s project liaison. He thanked the public for voting in the December Pepsi Refresh competition, an online effort to win $250,000. Though they didn’t get the prize, they came in 20th out of 200 projects in their category, which was based on online votes throughout the month. He thanked the city for helping promote the competition, saying that even though they didn’t win, they raised awareness about the project.

Rosencrans reported that the Friends of the Ann Arbor Skatepark recently added two new board members – himself, and Sam Saalberg, a teen who’s representing users of the skatepark. He also noted that Trevor Staples, a long-time leader of the skatepark effort, decided not to run for president, though he’ll remain on the board. Instead, Joe Galante was elected to that position.

Skatepark organizers are running a major donor campaign, cultivating five- and six-figure contributions, Rosencrans said. At the same time, there’s an active grant-writing program too. They’ve received a great deal of financial and logistical support from local businesses and individuals, he said, and are raising funds through selling merchandise, including items sold at Acme Mercantile on West Liberty.

But the big news, Rosencrans said, “is that this is the year we build the skatepark.” There are deadlines they need to meet – Washtenaw County Parks & Recreation has committed $400,000 to the roughly $1 million project, but that offer expires on Jan. 1, 2012 if skatepark organizers can’t raise matching funds. An agreement with the city of Ann Arbor has set aside land at Veterans Memorial Park until 2014 to use for the project, but city officials can reconsider that date if sufficient funding hasn’t been raised by 2012, Rosencrans said. He’s optimistic they can do it, but said there’s a tremendous amount of work to do.

Next steps will include writing and issuing a request for proposals (RFP) for a firm to provide construction drawings and technical oversight to the project. They’ll need to form an RFP review committee, get their funding in place, go through the construction bid process, “and then we’ll build the darn thing,” he said. The skatepark will be a world-class facility, Rosencrans told commissioners, serving an estimated 5,000 to 7,000 skateboarders. “I think this will be a project all of us can be proud of.”

Several commissioners had comments or questions. David Barrett asked about parking – when baseball or softball games are played at Veterans Memorial Park, the parking gets tight. Are there plans to expand it? Rosencrans said it wasn’t part of their design and he didn’t know of any plans by the city to expand parking. He noted that there was also a large parking lot at the shopping center across the street. Colin Smith, parks manager, confirmed that the city didn’t intend to expand parking. He noted that even at peak usage, the lots were rarely if ever completely full. He also pointed out that the park is on a bus line, and it’s anticipated that many users of the skatepark will take the bus or come from surrounding neighborhoods.

Sam Offen asked whether they expected to raise the entire amount this year – if not, would they start construction, even if they still needed additional funding to complete the project? Rosencrans said the preferred scenario is to raise all the money and build it this year. It’s possible to build it in phases, but that’s not optimal and would likely increase costs overall, he said.

Tim Berla asked what the commission could do to help the project. He said it was interesting that the PROS plan listed several parks capital projects with funding identified, but that the line item for the skatepark was unfunded.

Rosencrans replied that personal contributions are welcome – he offered to facilitate donations. Spreading the word about the project is also important, he said. Smith pointed out that the memorandum of intent between the city and the skatepark organizers – which PAC approved – was the same language used in the PROS plan. Berla asked whether PAC could ask council to try to find skatepark funding, if the organizers came close to meeting their financial goal, but fell short. Smith indicated that if it gets to that point, there’s nothing prohibiting the city from revisiting the question of funding.

Julie Grand asked how much they’d raised so far. Rosencrans said they it takes time to cultivate donors, and that there were several five- and six-figure donations that hadn’t yet been finalized. They’ve raised about $80,000 so far, he said. An invitation-only fundraiser is being planned for potential supporters, he said – mayor John Hieftje and Zingerman’s co-founder Paul Saginaw have agreed to speak at the event.

Gallup Park Livery Improvements

Amy Kuras, the city’s parks planner, gave commissioners a briefing on planned improvements for the Gallup Park canoe livery. Renovations are needed because the use of the facility has outgrown its original design, she said, and it’s outdated in terms of energy efficiency and other features. They hope to expand the facility’s meeting room, improve the safety of the path approaching the livery, and give people barrier-free access to the facility and dock area.

City staff will hold a public meeting with concept plans on Tuesday, Jan. 25 at the livery, starting at 7 p.m. If the plan is approved, they hope to apply for state grant funding.

Colin Smith, the city’s parks & recreation manager, elaborated on the issue of grant applications. As their staff has decreased over the years, he said, they’ve had less capacity to seek grants. The application process isn’t very time-consuming, but administering the grants takes staff resources that they don’t have. However, the state last year awarded about $100 million for 80 parks-related projects statewide, out of about 120 applications, Smith said. Given those good odds, it makes sense for Ann Arbor to apply, he said. City staff believes the Gallup livery project would have a good chance, given the livery’s high usage and clear need for improvements.

The city has some consultants on retainer, Smith said, who might be used to administer the grant. But even if a consultant’s fees are paid out of the grant, it would still be worth it, he said. The project is estimated to cost between $450,000 to $500,000. Kuras estimated that the cost of a consultant to administer the grant would be around $5,000.

Offen asked whether the city plans to tear down the existing building, or renovate it. Kuras described the current structure as beautiful – it wouldn’t be torn down, but it would be reconfigured. For example, they might add doors to open onto a patio area, to create an indoor/outdoor space for events.

In response to another query from Offen, Kuras said she had talked to the city’s energy office, and that there might be opportunities for other grants for features like solar panels.

Smith concluded the presentation by urging the public to attend the Jan. 25 forum and give feedback on the project.

Quarterly Financial Report

Sam Offen, chair of PAC’s budget and finance committee, gave a brief report on the second quarter financial update for parks and recreation. [.pdf files of second-quarter update and FY2011 forecast]

There are no surprises, Offen said. For the overall parks & recreation operations, expenses are $47,500 lower than budgeted, and revenues are $35,000 higher than budgeted, for a net gain of $82,500 over the first six months of the fiscal year. Revenues were $50,000 higher than budgeted at the two golf courses – Huron Hills and Leslie Park – and expenses were $15,000 lower than budgeted. Revenues were higher than budgeted at several other facilities, but down at Mack Pool, Fuller Pool and the Argo canoe livery.

Offen commented that the parks staff is doing an excellent job at maximizing revenues while keeping expenses down.

Parks manager Colin Smith reported that as of the first six months of the year, parks & recreation operations were $17,500 “to the good” of their anticipated $1.2 million general fund subsidy for the fiscal year. It was a small percentage under budget, he noted, but they were pleased that they are so close to their target.

Smith also described the process for the upcoming two-year budget cycle of fiscal 2012 and 2013. The city council has already started budget discussions, he said, including budget retreats they held in December and January. Parks managers will be going over the budget in detail with PAC’s budget and finance committee, then bringing a recommendation to the full commission in April. That recommendation would be reviewed and voted on by PAC, then forwarded to city council.

This year, in addition to that process, each service area of the city will be preparing “impact sheets” with ideas about how to cut expenses and raise revenues. They’ll be giving presentations at city council work sessions on those impact sheets, he said. Parks is part of the community services unit, which will be making its presentation to council on Jan. 31. He expects to get feedback and guidance from council at that point, which will be incorporated into the budget.

Smith reported that parks & rec has been asked to cut its budget by 2.5% – or about $93,000. He described this as a manageable number, which can be made up through a combination of increased revenues and decreased expenses. In particular, Smith said they anticipate revenue opportunities at the Argo livery in the wake of improvements being done there this year. [The city council recently approved a $1.17 million project to build a bypass channel in the Argo Dam headrace and add whitewater features. See Chronicle coverage: "PAC Recommends Argo Dam Bypass"]

Related to the Argo Dam project, Smith reported that earlier this month, the Washtenaw County parks & recreation commission had agreed to fund the full cost of border-to-border trail improvements being done in conjunction with the bypass channel, for $112,500. The city had hoped for half that amount, Smith said, and appreciated the county’s enthusiasm for this project.

Huron Hills Golf Course Proposal

Tim Berla asked parks manager Colin Smith to brief PAC on the outcome of the Huron Hills Golf Course proposal from Miles of Golf, which had been rejected late last year.

Last year, the city had issued a request for proposals (RFP) to solicit ideas for improving operations at the city-owned course. Two groups submitted proposals, but only Miles of Golf – a Pittsfield Township business – was chosen by a selection committee to move forward in the selection process. The business owners made a presentation at a Dec. 3 public meeting, but were informed later in the month that the city would not be pursuing their proposal.

At Tuesday’s PAC meeting, Smith said that the selection committee’s charge was to make a recommendation to Sumedh Bahl, the city’s community services area administrator, who would then decide whether to forward that recommendation further. The committee felt that the proposal didn’t make sense for the city, Smith said. It asked for a $3 million capital contribution from the city, and the project’s risk outweighed its potential reward. The proposal also didn’t factor in operating costs that the city would still need to cover even if Miles of Golf took over operations of the course, he said.

In addition, there was a heavy emphasis on the firm’s retail business, which made members of the selection committee uncomfortable, Smith said. And though the revenue projections in the financial forecast were very aggressive, they still didn’t hit the amount needed for proposed financial incentives to the city to kick in. For all of these reasons, Smith said, the committee didn’t believe the proposal was one that the city should pursue.

Julie Grand, PAC’s chair who also served on the selection committee, added that the RFP had indicated the goal of proposals should be to improve the game of golf in this community. The Miles of Golf proposal, with its retail focus, wouldn’t do that, she said.

Smith noted that the process had been a contentious one for the community, and he gave Miles of Golf credit for trying to put together a proposal that would address the city’s needs as well as their own. “That should be commended, regardless of the outcome,” he said.

Public Commentary

John Satarino, a former PAC member, spoke against the proposed Fuller Road Station, a joint city of Ann Arbor/University of Michigan parking structure, bus depot and possible train station. He said a deed restriction placed on the property when it was bought by the city from a Detroit Edison subsidiary in 1931 requires that it remain for park purposes only. The city has spent more than $1 million on the project already, he said, partly with PAC’s blessing and partly because of the commission’s passivity.

He criticized the public forums held by the city about the project, describing them as heavily managed and reminiscent of the Third Reich. The station’s annual operations subsidy will cost millions, he said, but word about that hasn’t seemed to reach the Ann Arbor taxpayer yet. He concluded by saying that the city might have to sell off parkland to pay for it – and city officials are tooting their own horns “while Tree Town dies.”

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

Absent: John Lawter, councilmember Christopher Taylor (ex-officio)

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

Chris Mile, right, co-founder and president of Miles of Golf, discusses the firm's proposal for Huron Hills golf course with Doug Kelly, left, the city of Ann Arbor's director of golf, and Andrew Walton, the Huron Hills golf supervisor. (Photos by the writer.)

During the 90-minute meeting, president Chris Mile and other partners with the Pittsfield Township business gave a presentation and answered questions from a seven-member selection committee. Members of the public were allowed to submit questions, which city staff said will be answered and posted online within the next couple of weeks.

Much of the presentation covered the same material found in the Miles of Golf initial response to the city’s request for proposals (RFP), as well a separate financial report. [.pdf file of Miles of Golf RFP response] [.pdf file of Miles of Golf financial proposal] The business has proposed operating the 18-hole, 116-acre course essentially unchanged for three to five years. Then, it plans to build a new facility on what is now the front seven holes – land east of Huron Parkway – with a driving range, teaching center and golf shop. It would relocate its current operations, which are located off of Carpenter Road, south of Packard, and convert the remainder of Huron Hills into a 9-hole course. They’re also hoping to partner with Project Grow or Food Gatherers, to put in a community garden on land they don’t plan to use for golf.

To fund construction, the proposal calls for the city to issue a $3 million bond, which Miles of Golf would pay off over 20 years. The business proposes to pay additional funds to the city during that time, totaling about $1 million. Miles of Golf also estimates that the city would save about $5 million over the 20 years, since it would no longer be paying to operate the course – an estimated $250,000 per year.

During their presentation, Miles of Golf partners addressed concerns that have been raised in the community. They stressed that the project would not put up perimeter fencing or pole lights, and that the land would remain accessible for winter activities, like sledding. Nor do they plan to build a banquet center – though they do hope to eventually sell food and beverages on the site, including alcohol. Currently, Huron Hills does not have a liquor license, though the other city course, Leslie Park, does.

Miles of Golf submitted one of only two proposals that were made in response to the city’s RFP, which was issued in September. The selection committee rejected the second proposal, which had been submitted by a group called Ann Arbor Golf. It called for operating Huron Hills as a public, 18-hole golf course via a new nonprofit entity, the Herb Fowler Foundation of Huron Hills. [.pdf of nonprofit proposal]

In an email to The Chronicle, Paul Bancel – one of the leaders of Ann Arbor Golf – said they’d been told by city staff that their proposal was rejected because they hadn’t provided an adequate plan for staffing the golf course, hadn’t identified the roles of the key individuals in their organization and didn’t include any bank references. The group was disappointed the committee did not choose to interview their group, Bancel wrote – they were not asked any questions, nor were they asked to provide any clarifications about their proposal.

Not addressed during Friday’s meeting was a letter sent to the city last month by attorney Susan Morrison, on behalf of a group called Ann Arbor for Parkland Preservation. The letter urged the city to reject the Miles of Golf proposal, saying that it does not comply with city zoning ordinances and the RFP requirements, among other things. [.pdf of letter]

Miles of Golf Presentation

Chris Mile, co-founder and president of Miles of Golf, began by introducing others from the business: Co-founder Doug Davis, who is vice president of golf range operations; Brandon Anderson, golf shop manager; and Dave Kendall, founder of the Kendall Academy, which is part of the Miles of Golf operation.

Mile said they see three options for the city: 1) continue operating Huron Hills as an 18-hole course, subsidized by the city, 2) remake it into a different golf experience, as Miles of Golf is proposing, or 3) remake it into a non-golf use. He said that in speaking with city staff, it seemed clear that this last option would require capital investments that would make it unfeasible at this time. These three options were also outlined in an email that Miles of Golf sent to customers prior to Friday’s meeting, asking for support of their proposal. [.pdf file of email]

As a distance runner, Mile said he spends a lot of time in Ann Arbor’s parks. He notices two things about Huron Hills. One is that the area is stunningly beautiful. But the second thing is that “it’s sort of dead – it has a dead feeling to it.” Their proposal aims to keep the beauty, but bring vitality to Huron Hills, Mile said. He likened it to the transformation he’d observed at the Argo Pond livery. A few years ago, you had the feeling that nothing was happening there, he said. But after the city invested in a new building and landscaping, now it’s vibrant with lots of activity. “That’s what I’d like to see happen at Huron Hills,” he said.

Miles of Golf Presentation: Business Background, Overview

Miles of Golf is a local business, Mile noted, so members of the selection committee and others can talk to people in the community about how they operate. They started the business in 1995, taking over operations of Pat’s Par-3, which had been on that site at Carpenter south of Packard since the 1950s. Why consider moving now? Pittsfield Township – where the business is located – is redoing its master plan, he said, and considers that area important in rejuvenating the Carpenter/Packard corridor. Although there’s nothing imminent planned and they have a lease through 2033, Mile said they can see the writing on the wall.

Members of the public in Ann Arbor city council chambers, attending the Dec. 3 Miles of Golf interview for the Huron Hills golf course. In the front row, from the right, are Dave Kendall of the Kendall Academy and Chris Mile, president of Miles of Golf.

Mile described the business, saying it has three parts: 1) a facility for driving and short game practice, such as putting; 2) a teaching academy – the largest in the state, he said; and 3) a golf shop. Mile said they really like the idea of adding a golf course to the mix, and they believe their other operations will make the course more successful.

Mile told the committee that the 34 people in the business are all “golf nuts.” “We’re so into golf – if you’re not a golfer, you’d probably roll your eyes.” There are eight instructors, 14 employees in the golf shop, nine at the practice facility, and three in administration. He said they aren’t high-pressure sales people – their goal is to make people better golfers. If they do that, he said, business success will follow.

Their core values are to treat people fairly, honestly and respectfully, Mile said, and they expect to be treated in the same way. “We will do what we say we will do – you can count on us.” The owner of the property they lease would report that they always pay their rent on time, Mile said.

Mile addressed what he called a misconception – that the city would simply hand over the keys for Huron Hills to Miles of Golf, in exchange for payments. “We know that’s not what’s going to happen,” he said. They understand that the city will set standards and retain control over things such as financial reporting and operating hours.

There are also issues that can be stipulated in the partnership agreement, like prohibiting perimeter fencing. There’s no reason for perimeter fencing, he said, and they don’t want it. The same goes for pole lighting and domes, he said.

Even if the city wasn’t entering into a partnership agreement, there are ways to control what’s built on the site, Mile noted. Local governments have control over building in their jurisdictions, to ensure that the buidings are appropriate to the site, he said. That would be true for their project as well.

Mile also noted that this project wasn’t unusual – nationwide, about 100 other municiple golf courses are exploring public/private partnerships to manage the public courses.

Miles of Golf Presentation: Kendall Academy

Mile introduced Dave Kendall, noting that he grew up in Jackson and has been very involved in the Michigan PGA (Professional Golfers’ Association) – he just finished up a two-year term as president of that organization. Kendall has won both the Michigan Senior Open and the Michigan Senior PGA championship.

Kendall came to the podium, and described how he started the academy when he was the only instructor. He’s now been in business 14 years, and offers a wide range of programs, from beginners to advanced. The instructors don’t tell people what to do, he said – the approach is to help people understand their current golf game, figure out where they want to be, then look at what steps they need to take to achieve their goals. The idea is to give people a better understanding about golf, he said.

Kendall characterized golf as a family game. His father put a club in his hand when he was a boy – his father is now 87, and they still play together. That’s one of the great things about golf, Kendall said – you can play it forever.

The academy also offers women’s programs and fitness programs, Kendall said, and there are a lot of programs that would work well at Huron Hills, such as family golf, drop-off programs for kids, or a “first tee” program for youth to teach golf and life skills.

Because of the convenience of having a course as part of the same facility, they could better customize their instruction, Kendall said. The course isn’t lengthy or intimidating – it’s a great place to learn to love the game, or for senior citizens who get pushed out of the game because of the difficulty of some courses. The academy also has a synergy with other parts of Miles of Golf, Kendall said. That includes the golf shop, which he likened to a candy store for golfers.

Kendall closed by saying that they built the business on relationships, by becoming a resource and advocate for golfers – that’s what brings people back. He promised that they’d always do their best to be a source of pride for the community.

Miles of Golf Presentation: Golf Course and Facilities

Doug Davis spoke next. Mile had introduced him by noting that he attended Ypsilanti High School and had then gone to the University of Michigan, where he became captain of the UM golf team. Davis is enthusiastic about junior golf, Mile said – both of Davis’ daughters also played on the UM golf team.

Doug Davis, co-founder of Miles of Golf, talks with Julie Grand, chair of Ann Arbor's park advisory commission and a member of the selection committee for the Huron Hills golf course RFP.

Davis began his part of the presentation by saying that they had researched the original golf course designed in 1922 by Thomas Bendelow – they had wanted to respect that design, he said. They looked at historic photos, and discovered that the original course doesn’t exist today. None of the original 9 holes or the property is still in use, he said.

Davis then described the three phases of the Miles of Golf proposed transition. Phase I would be to operate the current 18-hole course, with no physical changes to the property. They understand the physical beauty of the land, he said, adding that the vistas are phenomenal. They would undertake some improvements – most significantly, they’d cut down the 25-foot wall of buckthorn and other scrub brush along the railroad tracks to the north of the property, which now blocks the view of the Huron River. They’d also try to mask the lime-green maintenance building using landscaping, and possibly transferring some trees that are now near the 7th hole.

In Phase II, which would be about three to five years out, Miles of Golf would move its operations to Huron Hills. They’d construct a tee line and building on the site, with the driving range facing east onto what’s now the front seven holes of the current course. There’s no need for pole lighting, Davis said – there’s ample natural light during the summer for the business. The site would also include an area for golfers to practice their short game – putting, chipping, sand trap playing, and pitching.

They wouldn’t need the current No. 6 green on the east end of the property, Davis said, and they’ve approached Project Grow and Food Gatherers to see if those local nonprofits are interested in using the land for community gardens.

A schematic of the Miles of Golf proposal for Huron Hills golf course, Phase II. The long orange bar represents the tee line for the proposed driving range, facing east. The road at the bottom of the image is Huron River Drive. (Links to larger image)

Another idea they’re considering for this phase is to build a three-hole practice site for the public. It would be especially good for families – Davis said that golf’s governing bodies haven’t done a great job at growing the sport.

The final phase would include tearing down the existing maintenance building and clubhouse. The proposal calls for adding a new maintenance building and clubhouse.

Regarding the city’s current staff at Huron Hills, Davis said they’d be glad to talk to employees to see if there’s interest in coming “under the Miles of Golf umbrella.” The city employs two full-time workers at the course.

Mile returned to the podium, saying that he was speaking on behalf of Casey Baker, vice president of golf shop operations. Baker is 33 years old, a graduate of Pioneer High School who was mentored by Herb Fowler, Mile said. Baker is one of the top five amateur golfers in Michigan, Mile noted. Though some of the other partners are older, Mile said the proposed 20-year agreement is well within the span of Baker’s career.

Mile started to describe the golf shop, which Baker runs, when loud construction noise from work adjacent to council chambers disrupted the presentation – city hall is being renovated, in conjunction with construction of the new municipal center. Mile attempted to continue, but an audience member asked that someone try to stop the noise, as the presentation was impossible to hear at that point. Abigail Elias of the city attorney’s office, who attended the meeting, left the room, and within five minutes the noise had stopped.

Mile continued by describing the 11,000-square-foot building they hope to construct – larger than their current facility, which is about 9,000 square feet. The building would house the golf shop as well as teaching studios that would open onto the driving range – there’s demand for that, Mile said. He characterized the size of the structure as “not a monstrosity,” noting that there are homes in the area that have a larger footprint.

They’d like to do something with food and beverage, Mile said, but it’s not yet clear what that might be. They left that open in the proposal, he said, but it’s something that could be developed in the future. Mile said they’d like to see community gardens on about seven acres of land that won’t be used for the driving range.

He also addressed concerns about whether Huron Hills would be open for winter activities, like sledding. There’s no reason why that can’t continue, Mile said, and it’s something that could be stated explicitly in a partnership agreement.

Miles of Golf Presentation: Financial

Mile then walked the committee through the proposed financials. [.pdf file of Miles of Golf financial proposal]

In the first phase, Miles of Golf would invest about $40,000 in landscaping and upgrading the golf cart paths. If annual golf revenues exceed $575,000, the city would get 10% of anything over that amount. [Revenue from Huron Hills during the last fiscal year was just over $300,000.]

During the second phase, starting in three to five years, Miles of Golf would build its driving range and golf shop at Huron Hills, and relocate its operations there. They estimate this would cost $3.25 million, Mile said. Miles of Golf would pay $250,000 of that amount, with the city covering the rest. Mile said they assumed the city would issue a bond for the project – Miles of Golf would make the bond payments in their entirety, he said, plus an additional percentage above that amount.

The proposal presents several scenarios, based on different interest rates. For example, at a 3% rate over 20 years, Miles of Golf would pay the city 5% in years 1-5, 6% in years 6-10, 7% in years 11-15 and 8% in years 16-20. The proposal indicates that if interest rates are above 7%, the financial viability of the project is questionable, and they would have be reconsider it.

To further illustrate the financial return to the city, Mile said that with a 4% interest rate on the bond, over the 20-year payoff period the city would receive about $1.2 million more from Miles of Golf than the original $3 million from the bond.

Mile also made a comparison to illustrate the difference between operating Huron Hills as an 18-hole course, and taking out the bond for the Miles of Golf project. Over a 20-year period, assuming that the city subsidizes golf operations at Huron Hills by $250,000 annually, the city would be paying $5 million to continue current operations, he said. They would save that amount through this partnership. In addition, the city could receive roughly $1 million in payments from Miles of Golf, above the amount to repay the bond. The net result is $6 million in savings and revenue for the city, he said – and the city owns the building.

From the city’s perspective, the $3 million bond is the big question, Mile said – the city will need to ask if it’s worth the risk. “There’s a $6 million reason why you’d want to take that risk,” he said.

In wrapping up, Mile said that when Dave Kendall teaches golf, he identifies the weakest part of your game, then works to make it the strongest. In life, it’s powerful to take the same approach, Mile said. Huron Hills is a gorgeous chunk of land that’s the weakest link in the parks system. If you take that weakest link and make it a gem, imagine what that would do. “I think our proposal can do that,” he said, and at the same time provide $6 million to invest in other city parks.

“If you decide you want to do this,” Mile concluded, “we’ll be a very good partner for the city.”

Selection Committee Questions

The Q&A portion of Friday’s meeting lasted about 30 minutes, and most questions focused on the financial aspect of the proposal. For this report, questions and answers are organized by topic.

The selection committee includes Colin Smith, the city’s parks and recreation manager; Julie Grand, chair of the park advisory commission; Doug Kelly, the city’s director of golf; Ward 2 city councilmember Stephen Rapundalo; former city councilmember Mike Reid; Ed Walsh, a real estate developer and member of the city’s golf advisory task force; and Sumedh Bahl, the city’s community services area administrator.

Selection Committee Questions: Revenues

Stephen Rapundalo began questioning by noting that Miles of Golf forecast an increase in revenues in the first few years of operation. He wondered how those revenue increases would be achieved – by increasing rates, increasing the number of rounds played, or in some other way?

Chris Mile explained that for the first two years – 2011 and 2012 – the forecast assumed they’d see the same revenue growth that Huron Hills has experienced over the past year: 15% each year, on the 18-hole course. [That projection would put revenues at $392,228 in 2011 and $454,354 in 2012.] In 2013 and 2014, they dropped that forecast growth to 4%. In 2015 – the first year with only a 9-hole course – projected revenues show a 33% drop to $345,722, but are projected to grow 4% in each of the subsequent years.

Golf lessons are the only revenue source that’s not projected to drop off when the course is converted from 18 to 9 holes. Revenue from lessons offered by the city brought in $21,942 in fiscal 2010, and are projected to grow to $32,913 in 2011 and $41,141 in 2012, with slower but steady growth forecast in each of the subsequent years.

Mile said they were most concerned about the period prior to moving their entire operations out to Huron Hills, but that they felt comfortable with their estimates. He noted that they also plan to cut employment costs and other expenses associated with the city operation. Mile said that when they convert from 18 to 9 holes, their profitability doesn’t get alarmingly worse, because expenses – such as maintenance – decrease as well.

Mike Reid, a member of the selection committee for the Huron Hills golf course proposal, is founder of Exchange Capital Management, an investment advisory firm.

Julie Grand noted that one of the city’s goals is to keep golf affordable. How much will it cost to golf on the 9-hole course, she asked, and will the cost of golf instruction align with what the city now charges?

The cost of playing on the course will be dictated by market conditions, Mile said, and Huron Hills is charging market rates. It won’t stay that price forever, he added, because market conditions will change. Regarding golf lessons, he said the private lessons offered through the Kendall Academy will be the same as what’s offered now. He noted that Dave Kendall provides a community-based instruction program for Pittsfield Township, though he wasn’t sure exactly what would be offered at Huron Hills. Whatever they offer, it would need to be responsive to community needs, he said, or it wouldn’t work.

Colin Smith clarified that the 10% revenue sharing would only come from revenues generated by the golf course, not from the other operations on site, like the driving range, lessons or concessions. He also observed that in their financial projections, Miles of Golf isn’t forecasting that they’ll reach the level of revenues that would activate the 10% revenue-sharing.

Selection Committee Questions: Bond

Ed Walsh, a Ward 2 resident, said that as someone who lives near the course, he has a high level of interest in maintaining it as a golf operation. One thing that jumped out at him, he said, was the high level of uncertainty in making financial projections three to five years out. If bond rates exceed a certain level – and that’s a possibility, he noted – would Miles of Golf be prepared to scrap the idea of moving over their entire operations, and be willing instead to simply operate the 18-hole golf course?

Mile said that if interest rates spike and make it unreasonable for the city to issue the bond for construction, they’d have to evaluate how the golf course is doing on its own. If it’s not doing well, “we’d have to sit down and talk,” he said. But if it’s performing well, they could continue operations and see how things go. Much of their financial forecast is based on their current operations at Miles of Golf, Mile said. The uncertainty is the golf course. They know what their costs are now, and what it will cost to move, and they feel they can afford it, Mile said. “But if interest rates go crazy, there’s going to be a problem.”

Mike Reid asked how the bond payments flowed into the financial projections. Mile responded that the payments are included in the G&A (general and administrative) line item – they aren’t broken out separately.

Reid then asked if G&A expenses specific to the Huron Hills course were separated from the overall G&A. Mile said they were co-mingled. He said he understood Reid’s conerns – Miles of Golf has been operating for 15 years, and they know how the driving range, pro shop and academy perform. What’s not predictable is the golf course, he added, but they can absorb some of those expenses if they know that they’ll have a home for their business for the next 20 years.

Selection Committee Questions: Alcohol

Reid asked Mile to expand on the need for food and beverage at the course, especially the addition of alcohol. Mile noted that the RFP speaks to that, but he clarified that his business partners don’t have any experience in food and beverage operations.

Doug Kelly, the city's director of golf operations.

Doug Kelly asked whether serving alcohol was essential. Mile responded, saying that everyone they’ve talked with in researching this project has considered the ability to serve alcohol as a key ingredient. That’s why it’s included in their proposal, he said.

Kelly also asked a question that he said was intended to dispel rumors: Was Miles of Golf planning to open a banquet center on the site? No, Mile said.

Rapundalo noted that Huron Hills is different from Leslie Park, the city’s other golf course – which has a liquor license. Huron Hills is more family- and community-oriented, and attracts more junior golfers. How does having a liquor license there align with the goal of keeping Huron Hills as this kind of community resource?

Mile said that Leslie Park also has children there, as do a lot of facilities that serve alcohol. The people managing it need to be responsible, he said. The RFP asked about food and beverage concessions, Mile said, so they included it. But details would have to be ironed out in a partnership agreement, he added.

[The RFP asked respondents to include responses to a series of topics. This section relates to food and beverage: "Financial Return to the City. The proposal must demonstrate a financial benefit to the City taking into consideration golf operations, pro-shop operations, food and drink concessions, sale of merchandise, instructional programs, and off-season recreational activities." .pdf file of full RFP]

Selection Committee Questions: Building

Walsh wondered whether an 11,000-square-feet building would be large enough to accommodate everything that Miles of Golf wants to offer. Doug Davis said they inherited their current building, and have tried to make it work. The new building would be designed for customer convenience.

Walsh also noted that in hearing from residents, there are two primary concerns: 1) the size of the building, and 2) the city’s financial commitment. Given that construction is likely three to five years in the future, how has the business addressed potential inflation of costs – what happens if the proposed $3 million construction budget is too low? Would Miles of Golf cover the overages, or would the city pick up that cost?

Davis said that they ran their projections by Bill Wheeler, Ann Arbor’s former director of public services who now works on a contract basis for the city, including as project manager for the new municipal building. Their projections included a 10% buffer for expenses, and Davis said Wheeler was ok with those calculations. Davis added that Miles of Golf has done its own construction in the past, so they are familiar with how these projects work. Still, he said he couldn’t say what would happen in three to five years. Mile added that it could end up costing more than projected.

Selection Committee Questions: Environmental Factors

Walsh pointed out that a creek runs through the middle of the golf course, in the section that would be converted into a driving range. How would the proposed changes affect that creek?

Davis said the creek is at about the 175-yard range, and it’s one of the most beautiful sections of the property. They have no plans to change it, though they might add some kind of barrier to help keep golf balls out of it. Golfers want to practice on land that emulates where they’ll actually be playing, Davis said, and the lay of the land in that part of the course is ideal – there’s no need to change the topography, or to change that tributary in any way.

Colin Smith brought up a related issue later, asking how much construction would be needed on the land to create the driving range. He noted that there were several older trees on the property, and that driving ranges are typically level. Davis said the only area they’d want to level is the tee, which runs north/south on the property. Their plan saves the trees, he noted – there’s one cluster of a half-dozen crabapple trees that they might want to move, but that’s not critical, he said. Trees add character to the range, and customers like that, Davis said.

Kelly asked about the $50,000 detention pond that’s mentioned in the proposal. Davis said the pond is required to handle runoff from the parking lot – it’s required by the city any time impervious surface is added to a site.

Rapundalo noted that they’d probably need to conduct an environmental study on the site, but he didn’t see anything in the budget for that expense. Would the city pay for it? Davis didn’t respond directly to that question, but said the business was very “green-friendly” and planned to stay that way. Doing an environmental study isn’t something they’d run from, he said.

Next Steps

Just after 11 a.m., Sumedh Bahl, who chaired the session, brought the meeting to a close. Colin Smith told the group that questions submitted by members of the public during the meeting would be posted online, along with answers, sometime in the next couple of weeks.

At the November meeting of the park advisory commission, PAC chair Julie Grand had outlined steps in the process. Now that the interview has taken place, the selection committee will make a recommendation to the city’s golf advisory task force, which in turn will make a recommendation to PAC. PAC could hold a public hearing, likely in December or January, and make its own recommendation to council. The city council would have the final decision about whether to accept the proposal. If council took that step, it would authorize city staff to negotiate a partnership agreement with Miles of Golf, formalizing the proposal.

The meeting – which will be recorded by Community Television Network (CTN) – will begin with a presentation by Miles of Golf, followed by questioning from the selection committee. The committee includes Colin Smith, the city’s parks and recreation manager; Julie Grand, chair of the park advisory commission; Doug Kelly, the city’s director of golf; Ward 2 city councilmember Stephen Rapundalo; former city councilmember Mike Reid; Ed Walsh, a member of the city’s golf advisory task force; and Sumedh Bahl, the city’s community services area administrator.

Miles of Golf proposes moving its business to the city-owned Huron Hills site. The current 11 holes on the south side of the Huron Hills property would continue to operate as a golf course. The first 7 holes on the north side would be converted to a golf center similar to the current Miles of Golf operation at Carpenter and Packard roads in Pittsfield Township, with a teaching center, a practice facility (driving range), and a retail shop. [.pdf file of Miles of Golf proposal]

A second proposal, not recommended by the committee, was submitted by a group called Ann Arbor Golf. It called for operating Huron Hills as a public, 18-hole golf course via a new nonprofit entity, the Herb Fowler Foundation of Huron Hills. [.pdf of nonprofit proposal]

Judy and Manfred Schmidt were honored at the Nov. 16 park advisory commission for their volunteer work with the city's natural area preservation program. (Photo by the writer.)

Parks manager Colin Smith reported that the first four months of this fiscal year – from July 1 through Oct. 31 – are off to a good start. Year-to-date revenues of $918,091 represent an increase over the same period last year, when revenues were $793,783. Expenses for that period are down from $1.23 million last year to $1.07 million this year.

Commissioner Tim Berla asked for clarification about how much support parks is getting from the city’s general fund, and Smith said he’d prepare a report on that issue for PAC’s December meeting. General fund support for parks is important to track, Berla indicated, because it reflects a promise that city council made prior to passage of a parks millage in 2006: That the total general fund subsidy for parks wouldn’t be diminished as a percentage of the overall general fund. The issue also ties into which part of the city budget will be used to pay for dam maintenance.

During an update on the $1.168 million Argo Dam bypass project – which PAC had recommended at its Oct. 19 meeting, and which the city council approved on Monday – Berla said he’d like to have a discussion about how to get city funding for a skatepark as well. As a result of that request, PAC will likely have a work session in December or January that focuses more broadly on prioritizing capital projects, including a skatepark. Other potential projects mentioned by commissioner Gwen Nystuen include the Allen Creek Greenway, another dog park, and increased connectivity for the park system’s trails and pathways.

Commissioners also got an update about the two proposals submitted for Huron Hills Golf Course, and heard from parks planner Amy Kuras on the status of capital improvement projects for the parks. Kuras reported that West Park is now open to the public following an extensive renovation, and that a draft of the Parks & Recreation Open Space (PROS) plan will be distributed soon for public feedback, pending a city council vote authorizing that action.

At the start of Tuesday’s meeting, two long-time volunteers – Judy and Manfred Schmidt – were honored as volunteers of the year for the city’s natural area preservation program. The Schmidts were specifically commended for their decades-long advocacy and stewardship of the Scarlett-Mitchell Nature Area, a 25-acre park adjacent to Scarlett and Mitchell schools and Mitchell-Scarlett Woods. During his comments, Manfred Schmidt proposed a whimsical solution to the city’s budget struggles, a plan that involves the amount of buckthorn he’s cut down over the years.

Huron Hills Golf Course RFP

This fall, the city issued a request for proposals (RFP), seeking ways to “maximize the recreational golf opportunities” at Huron Hills Golf Course. The 18-hole, 116-acre golf course is located on the city’s east side and is split by Huron Parkway, with seven holes on the north and 11 holes to the south. It dates back to 1922, when it was designed by the golf architect Thomas Bendelow. In 1949, the University of Michigan deeded the lower nine holes of Huron Hills Golf Club to the city – plus $10,000 – in exchange for Felch Park. The city bought an adjacent 57.5 acres in 1951.

Huron Hills: Public Commentary

Nancy Kaplan spoke on behalf of Ann Arbor for Parkland Preservation (A2P2), saying they were against loopholes in city ordinances that allowed the dismantling of parkland. Citizens don’t expect city ordinances to be looked at for their loopholes, she said, and it is disappointing that this approach is being taken. People expect that parkland will be protected, she said, and she hopes that PAC will help in that effort. She said she knew that finances are a major consideration, and on that she had two points.

Kaplan noted that a Ward 2 city councilmember had stated that on a cash basis, Huron Hills essentially breaks even. Secondly, since fiscal 2008, revenues municipal service charges for the golf enterprise fund have increased 58% . Finally, Kaplan pointed out that A2P2 and PAC shared the same goal: “We want to protect our parkland.” They don’t want to cut trees, or construct a building or huge parking lot, or destroy the vista. She said she hoped PAC would help them keep Huron Hills “public, open and free for all of us to enjoy.”

Huron Hills: Staff Report, Discussion

The topic of Huron Hills came up during the meeting in two contexts: During the quarterly financial report, and as part of the parks and rec manager’s update from Colin Smith.

During the quarterly financial update, Smith noted that revenues from Huron Hills had improved so far this year, compared to the previous fiscal year. Last year at this point, the course had about $145,000 in revenues – that compares to about $179,000 so far this year. They’re projecting revenues by the end of the fiscal year to exceed budget by as much as $35,000. Greens fees and cart rental revenues are up, and expenses are in line with last year, Smith said. “So Huron’s off to a good start.” [.pdf of Huron Hills financial statement]

During his manager’s report, Smith noted that the city had received two responses to its request for proposals (RFP): One from Miles of Golf, and one from Ann Arbor Golf. [See Chronicle coverage: "Two Huron Hills Golf Proposals Submitted"]

He alluded to emails that commissioners received over the weekend, and said that prior to the RFP being issued, it had been reviewed by the city attorney’s office. The proposals will be reviewed by the city attorney’s staff as well, he said.

Smith was referring to a five-page letter sent to the mayor and city council by attorney Susan Morrison, on behalf of Ann Arbor for Parkland Preservation. The letter urged the city to reject the Miles of Golf proposal, saying that it does not comply with city zoning ordinances and the RFP requirements, among other things. [.pdf of letter]

Smith said that a selection committee would be meeting later this week to review the proposals. If they decide to hold interviews for either of the proposals, those interviews are tentatively scheduled for Dec. 3.

Later in the meeting, PAC chair Julie Grand noted that she’ll be serving on the selection committee, and that they’re committed to a transparent, honest process. She said she understands that feelings of skepticism are out there – she pointed to the fact that the proposals were posted online soon after they were received, as an example of the city’s desire to make this process transparent.

The selection committee could choose to interview one, both or neither proposal, she said. They’ll make a recommendation to the city’s golf advisory task force, which in turn will make a recommendation to PAC. PAC could hold a public hearing, likely in December or January, and make its own recommendation to council. The city council would have the final decision.

The selection committee consists of the following: Grand; Smith; Doug Kelly, the city’s director of golf; Ward 2 city councilmember Stephen Rapundalo; former city councilmember Mike Reid; Ed Walsh, a member of the city’s golf advisory task force; and Sumedh Bahl, the city’s community services area administrator, whose responsibilities include overseeing the parks and rec operations.

Tim Doyle asked what the potential outcomes might be – he recalled there was the possibility of negotiations taking place at some point. He asked whether that would happen prior to being voted on by city council. Smith said it would depend on the proposal, but that if a proposal goes to the city council, the council vote would likely authorize the city staff to negotiate for a final contract.

Tim Berla asked what basic criteria would be used to evaluate the proposals. Was it based on finances, or making golfers happy, or something else? Smith said the scope of the RFP required continuing golf at Huron Hills – whether it would look the same as it does today would be up to the proposal, he said. The point is to enhance the golf experience, he said, but finances are also a piece of it, as is the proposer’s prior golf experience. Responses to the RFP include a separate sealed envelope that contains the financial proposal. That envelope won’t be opened until they move to the interview process, Smith said.

Argo Dam

Issues related to Argo came up at several different points in Tuesday’s meeting, beginning with public commentary.

Argo: Public Commentary

Vicki Dischler told commissioners that she lives near the canoe livery on Argo Pond, and that she was there to talk about the use of megaphones by rowing crew teams rowing on Argo. Many teams are now using a new technology that don’t use megaphones and are not as loud, but there are still times when some rowers use megaphones that over-amplify the directions that they shout, she said. She requested that megaphones be disallowed by the city, calling them a nuisance for residents and users of the park. The noise occurs six days a week during the fall and spring, she noted. Dischler said she’s written about the issue to city council, PAC and crew coaches, but her last email got no response. Speaking at public commentary was the only other way she knew to get the issue addressed, she said.

Argo: Staff Report

In his manager’s report, Colin Smith noted that the Ann Arbor city council had approved the $1.168 million Argo Dam bypass project that PAC had recommended at its October meeting. The project entails reconstructing the headrace into a series of connected pools that would flow from Argo Pond down to the river – eliminating the need to portage. The trail on the embankment would be widened and paved, making it more accessible for pedestrians and cyclists. In addition, a section of whitewater will be created on the Huron River, slightly upstream from the headrace channel’s exit into the river.

Smith said there was a great deal of discussion among councilmembers about how to fund the project. Originally, $300,000 from the city’s drinking water fund – money that had previously been earmarked for toe drain repair on the dam’s embankment – was included in the bypass project’s funding. Smith said a friendly amendment to the proposal stated that if staff is able to come up with other funding sources or cost savings, then that $300,000 won’t be used for the bypass. The main source of funding – as much as $683,000 – is from the city’s Parks Rehabilitation & Development millage. An additional $195,000 is available from the same millage, which has been earmarked for improvement of river parks.

Staff is very excited about the project, Smith said, and planned to have a meeting later in the week to talk about next steps.

Argo: Commissioner Discussion

Tim Berla asked for clarification about the source for part of the funding – was it the drinking water fund, or the stormwater fund? Christopher Taylor, an ex-officio PAC member who represents Ward 3 on city council, said the source was the treated water fund. [The treated water fund is commonly referred to as the drinking water fund.] Berla clarified that council is seeking legal guidance about the use of the water fund to pay for projects related to Argo Dam. Taylor reported that the city council, at its Monday meeting, had directed the city administrator to remove the dams from the treated water fund for the next fiscal year, which begins July 1, 2011.

Taylor later said the expectation is that more expenses related to dams will be picked up by the parks budget.

Gwen Nystuen said she’s been worried about the legal status of parks, and about how protected parkland actually is. She wondered whether some of the land around the city’s dams, as well as the land underneath the water, was considered parkland or public land. Are the dams themselves considered parkland? If not, should the parks system be paying for something that isn’t parkland?

Taylor said he didn’t know who owns the land under the river, nor does he know whether the water’s surface would be considered parkland. But for the purpose of a community conversation, he said, the river has been described as a bluefield – in recognition of its recreational use, similar to a greenfield.

Sam Offen asked Smith whether they could get a legal opinion on the issue from the city attorney. The question about land ownership and designation could apply to all of the waterways that run through the city, he said. Smith said he’d figure out the best way to pursue it. The discussion would be relevant in developing the budget, he added, as part of a broader discussion over how costs are allocated and what funds are appropriate to use for certain projects.

Berla weighed in, saying the only time he could imagine the distinction between parkland and public land being relevant is if the city wanted to sell a dam without getting voter approval. [A charter amendment requires the city to seek voter approval before selling parkland.] He said it’s unlikely the city would do that, so it seemed like an academic point to him. But it is relevant to identify where the funding will come from to maintain the dams, he said – the city could still decide to use parks funds for the maintenance of public lands. The point is that if a dam is used for recreational purposes, then it makes sense for funds to come out of the parks budget, he said.

Smith noted that the designation of the dams as parkland or public land might impact how you could use certain funds. For example, the parks millage is used for maintenance of recreational facilities. If you view the dam as a parks and rec facility or infrastructure that provides a recreational amenity, then would it have to also be a park in order to use the parks millage for it?

Mike Anglin said he didn’t thinks the parks system could afford to take care of everything associated with the river. “It’s just an awesome responsibility,” he said.

At the end of the discussion, Nystuen complimented PAC chair Julie Grand for representing PAC’s views to city council about the Argo bypass project. [Grand had spoken about the project at Monday's council meeting during public commentary time.] Nystuen praised Smith for his commentary at the council meeting, too. She said it was nice to have a project on which there was unanimity.

Grand said PAC’s unanimous vote reflected their enthusiasm, and the project’s obvious benefits, adding, “It’s nice to get a win, right?”

Argo: What about the Skatepark?

Under the agenda item for new business, Tim Berla said that following last month’s meeting and PAC’s approval of the Argo bypass project, he’d received a number of emails regarding the city’s role in a skatepark that’s being developed by a community group. At the October meeting, Berla had mentioned the skatepark himself. From The Chronicle’s report:

Berla then said he was concerned about the sustainability of financing for this [bypass] project. For years, they’ve been using the drinking water fund to pay for dam maintenance, he said, and he was personally uncomfortable with that, because Argo has nothing to do with drinking water. The project would require a lot of money to maintain over the next 20 years, and he doesn’t see where that money can come from except from the parks and recreation budget. He said that spending $683,000 from the millage fund was entirely legit – but it would be equally legit to spend it on other projects, like a skatepark.

On Tuesday, Berla said the emails he received caused him to wonder in what ways the city can move forward to find some capital funding for a skatepark. He noted that the county has already pledged some money. He said he understands that the city is contributing the site at Veterans Memorial Park, and that its memorandum of intent with skatepark organizers is important. But the skatepark seems like a really good amenity for the community, and he’d like to have a discussion about helping fund it.

Parks staff has a well-organized capital projects planning system, he noted, in which projects are listed and prioritized. But then there emerge other projects outside of that list, and funding is made available for them, he observed – like the $1.168 million for the Argo Dam bypass. Berla said he’d like to find a way to find funding for the skatepark in the capital improvements plan (CIP).

Gwen Nystuen suggested holding a work session on the topic. She noted that the PROS plan includes these kinds of priorities too. There are several potential projects like the skatepark, she said, including the Allen Creek Greenway, another dog park, and the city’s ball fields. Nystuen said she’d also like to see more work on connecting the city parks’ trails and pathways.

Smith noted that the draft of the PROS plan will be distributed in early December, and that it might be possible to hold a work session related to capital projects in that context. He said a robust discussion should include a look at all needs in the parks system, not just one project. From the staff’s perspective, he added, it’s important to renovate, reconstruct and improve the system’s existing infrastructure as well – that should be part of the discussion, too. He suggested the timing for a work session might be in December or January.

First-Quarter Budget Update

Sam Offen, chair of PAC’s finance committee, began the presentation by noting that the report covers the period from July 1 through Oct. 31, 2010 – much of the summer recreational activities are reflected in the report, he said, and the numbers look good. He also pointed out that due to a change in the accounting system, some large payments to parks and rec – including a fund transfer, and two parking payments from the University of Michigan – aren’t recorded yet. All in all, he said, he was pleased with the year so far.

Parks manager Colin Smith highlighted several items in the budget. He noted that the year has started off well, which will make next April, May and June – the start of the next recreational season, and the end of the fiscal year – less nerve-wracking. Revenues for facility rentals – including Cobblestone Farm and other venues – were well ahead of last year, at $157,095 so far this year, compared to $91,990 for the same period in FY 2010. Veterans Pool has seen revenues increase from $40,685 year-to-date last year, to $61,281 this year. Most of that increase is due to an increase in the number of swimmers using the pool, Smith said.

Canoe liveries are also doing well, he said, as is the senior center, which at one point the city had considered closing. Revenues to-date last year for the senior center were $18,299, compared to $31,713 this year. Expenses are about $10,o00 lower than the previous year, as more volunteers are being enlisted. “So they’re moving in the right direction,” he said.

Overall, Smith said he didn’t see anything in the budget that concerned him, and that he was pleased with where things stood after the first four months of the fiscal year.

First-Quarter Budget Update: Commissioner Comments, Questions

Commissioners’ questions covered a wide range of issues. David Barrett noted that the city had purchased a lot of equipment for the golf courses, and he wondered if that had been successful. Smith replied that the condition of the courses has improved, and the feedback from golfers has been positive – more people are coming to the courses, he said, and returning more than once. Barrett said that at one point there had been concerns about underground pipes and pumping – Smith reported that they had purchased a variable-speed pump, and everything is working well.

Tim Berla wanted to know how much the city’s general fund is subsidizing parks operations. Smith said the revenue budget for FY 2011 is $2.4 million, and expenditures are expected to be $3.6 million, for a net subsidy of $1.2 million – that’s the general fund amount for parks and rec services. That figure doesn’t include the field operations budget.

Berla observed that there used to be one number for the parks department. When the city reorganized, it split parks and rec into two areas – community services, and public services. Smith acknowledged that this was the case, noting that the public services unit, via the field operations staff, runs maintenance for all of the parks that aren’t “facilities within the fence.” Parks and rec covers the facilities and programs.

The $1.2 million net from the general fund is for the community services portion of parks and rec. Berla said he was interested in identifying the total amount the city’s general fund is contributing to parks. Smith said he thought the number for public services was about $2.9 million net. He said he’d provide a report on the issue next month. Gwen Nystuen said she’d also like to see the number for the city’s general fund contributions to parks going back several years.

Berla then clarified that the golf enterprise fund – consisting of operations at Huron Hills and Leslie Park golf courses – was receiving a $519,000 general fund subsidy for FY 2011. Berla asked why the figure is reported as a combined number for both courses, not separated out. Smith said it was likely because it’s a transfer from one fund to another – it’s not activity-specific. He said in the future they could report how much money from the general fund was going to each course.

Tim Doyle said it is his understanding that the two courses shared some expenses, but Smith said there’s little overlap. Each course has its own staff, equipment and materials.

Matt Warba, the city’s supervisor of field operations, reviewed the field operations portion of the budget for PAC, focusing on questions that he’d been asked by Offen and Nystuen at the finance committee meeting.

A line item for trunkline maintenance referred to state funding – $13,796 so far this year – that was provided to the city for maintenance of traffic islands and similar road-related property. He explained that the $41,114 in expenses for snow and ice control reflects equipment repairs. The line item for athletic fields and game courts showed a dramatic change – from $430,892 in FY 2009 to $14,927 in FY 2010. That reflects funding spent on major renovations at Fuller and Olson fields, Warba said.

The line item expense for debt service – nearly $296,000 each year – is for the field operations’ share of Wheeler Service Center, where that unit is housed. It’s a 25-year payout, Warba said, ending in 2031.

Nystuen asked about the line item expense for non-parks mowing, budgeted for $41,151 this year. Warba said they pay a contractor to mow traffic islands that aren’t covered by funds from the state. The islands are scattered all over the city, and it’s more efficient to pay a contractor to handle it, he said. It’s paid for out of the city’s general fund. Nystuen clarified that the street maintenance funds don’t pay for any of it.

Berla asked whether the general fund money for non-parks mowing would count as part of the general fund subsidy for parks. This kind of thing will become more of an issue as they talk about things like maintaining dams, and whether or not that expense comes out of the parks budget, he said.

Smith said that the field operations unit provides maintenance for all of the city’s infrastructure. He said it would be possible to prepare a report that broke out the general fund allocations to parks and non-parks operations, and that he’d bring it to next month’s meeting.

Berla then asked the two city councilmembers on PAC – Mike Anglin and Christopher Taylor – whether those figures were meaningful for council. That is, was there a time when the council said, “Oh, let’s give a little more money to parks” – and whether it would be meaningful that funding from the parks operations was not being used for non-parks work. Christopher Taylor replied, “I think we would tend not to get that granular.” Taylor added they would tend to look at funding for parks and field operations, but not at whether field operations staff were mowing in parks or some other public land.

Berla then clarified that it’s not really the case that the council discusses how much of a general fund subsidy the parks should receive – they’re not really paying attention to that number, he observed. He said the reason he raised the issue is that several years ago, there was a specific promise related to the parks millage, when council pledged that the total general fund subsidy wouldn’t be diminished as a percentage of the overall general fund, if the millage passed.

By way of background, in 2006 Ann Arbor voters were asked to approve a millage that 1) combined two previous millages for park maintenance and capital improvements, and 2) increased the revenue. In October of that year prior to the election, the city council passed a non-binding resolution stating that funding for parks would increase or decrease by the same proportion that the general fund grows or shrinks. Here’s the resolved clause from that resolution – items 4-6 pertain to this issue:

RESOLVED, That City Council amend the adopted policy guidance for the Park Maintenance and Capital Improvements Millage to read as follows:

1. Adoption of the Funding Distribution Guidelines as stipulated in Attachment A (on file in the City Clerk’s Office);

2. Annual allocation for maintenance is to be between 60% and 80% and capital improvements is to be between 20% and 40% with a total annual allocation being 100%;

3. The Natural Area Preservation Program budget be established at a minimum of $700,000.00 for first year of the millage budget and that it receive a minimum 3% annual increase for each of the subsequent five years of the millage to enhance the stewardship of increased acreage of natural park areas;

4. If future reductions are necessary in the City’s general fund budget, during any of the six years of this millage, beginning with Fiscal Year 2007-2008, the general fund budget supporting the parks and recreation system for that year will be reduced by a percentage no greater than the average percentage reduction of the total City general fund budget;

5. If future increases occur in the City’s general fund budget during any of the six years of this millage, beginning with Fiscal Year 2007-2008, the general fund budget supporting the parks and recreation system for that year will be increased at the same rate as the average percentage increase of the total City general fund budget;

6. City Council will verify these expenditures by examining the audit statement for each year.

7. The millage will not be subject to a municipal service charge;

8. The millage may be subject to appropriate information technology and fleet charges;

9. If the millage is not renewed after the six years, the Natural Area Preservation Program will receive the same percentage of any remaining fund balance from the Park Maintenance and Capital Improvements Millage as was in the approved budgeted in the sixth year of the millage; and

RESOLVED, That if the millage is adopted, the City Administrator be directed to develop an annual millage budget for review and recommendation by the Park Advisory Commission with final adoption by City Council consistent with this Resolution.

The resolution was meant to assure voters that general fund support for parks wouldn’t be diminished as a result of additional millage funding.

At Tuesday’s meeting, Taylor said that in that context, there could be direction from council to the city administrator to “observe that percentage.”

Capital Improvements Update

Parks planner Amy Kuras gave an update about capital improvement projects throughout the parks system. Here’s a summary:

• Buhr Park: Kuras reported that the steel structure of the ice rink will be cleaned and painted – the project has been delayed until the spring of 2011. Replacement of a walk from Easy Street to the entry road is completed. Neighborhood volunteers will be planting a new stormwater basin with native vegetation in the spring.
• Cobblestone Farm Barn: The asphalt walk leading from the parking lot to the barn was repaved.
• Farmers Market: Electrical upgrades – providing more outlets for vendors and replacing existing outlets with GFI outlets – are almost finished.
• Gallup Park: A conceptual design for renovating the approach to the livery is completed, as is an expanded patio and barrier-free docks.
• Veterans Memorial Park Ice Arena: Parking lot reconstruction is completed, as is reconstruction of the tennis courts – aside from color coating and striping, which will be done in the spring. A pedestrian walk at Dexter and Maple avenues has been replaced. Design is underway for a solar shade structure on the pool deck, funded by a grant from the city’s energy office.
• West Park: Kuras reported that the park’s major renovation is almost finished – the park is now open, and most of the construction fencing has been removed. Work included stormwater improvements, pathway construction, seat walls at the bandshell, basketball court replacement, parking lot renovations and landscaping. Additional landscaping will occur in the spring, she said. Public art sculptures have been installed on the seat wall near the bandshell. [See Chronicle coverage: "Mural Project OK'd, West Park Art Installed"] Stucco repair and painting of the band shell is finished, and the house on Chapin Street that was bought by the city earlier this year will be demolished soon. The tennis court will be rebuilt in the spring, she said, and work is underway to prepare construction drawings for that.

In addition, Kuras gave commissioners a report about the update of the city’s Parks & Recreation Open Space (PROS) plan. A draft master plan is available for PAC to review, she said. At its Nov. 3 meeting, the Ann Arbor planning commission approved distribution of the draft plan. The draft will be available for public review in December, following city council approval of the plan’s distribution. Both the planning commission and city council will need to approve the final draft – those votes will likely occur in March, Kuras said.

Several commissioners, as well as parks manager Colin Smith, praised Kuras for her efforts, citing specifically the major projects of the West Park renovation and PROS plan update. Julie Grand noted that in the past, the city had paid a consultant to work on the PROS plan update – Kuras saved the city money by taking on the project herself, she said.

Rec & Ed, Ball Field Update

During his report as liaison for the recreation advisory commission, Tim Berla said that the group had received an update on finances from Sara Aeschbach, director of the Ann Arbor Rec & Ed program, which is part of the Ann Arbor Public Schools. He reported that because of the economy, the program’s expenses exceeded revenues, and that if it continues, they’ll have to make cuts or raise fees. Last year, Rec & Ed gave out $400,000 worth of scholarships to families in need. He noted that years ago, the city previously contributed to those scholarships, though it doesn’t anymore. If Rec & Ed has to tighten their belts, the scholarships would likely be decreased, he said. Overall, the financial situation there is “not a crisis, it’s just a concern,” he said. Moving the program into its new offices at Pioneer High School is expected to help on the expense side, since they will no longer be paying rent, he said.

Berla also reported that he and Dave Barrett had met with several staff members from the Ann Arbor Public Schools, including Aeschbach and Randy Trent – the school district’s executive director of physical properties – to talk about the condition of ball fields at the schools. Barrett has taken the lead in assessing the conditions of the city’s ball fields – he presented a report at PAC’s Sept. 21, 2010 meeting. [.pdf file of Barrett's ballpark report]

From Barrett’s written report:

From the general to the specific, the larger canvas of their state is that many fields appear to be worn down and dog eared. Some simply need some work around the edges; others need fundamental renovation. Some fields need dirt and a refashioning of the drainage from the fields so that every rainstorm does not stop play for days; others need new backstops. Some need the outfields to be fertilized so the grass in the outfield grows evenly versus in clumps; others simply need more frequent mowing. Some need decent rubbers on the mound so the pitchers have something decent to push off of when they throw the ball; others have infields that are so hard that sliding would be inadvisable if not dangerous.

The interrelationship between the City, the Ann Arbor Public Schools, and Rec & Ed is a complex tapestry that was woven together organically over the years when monies were more plentiful – but as the budgetary stresses touched all of these organizations, there was a need to clarify the exact maintenance responsibilities of each. Recently, these responsibilities have been formalized in an agreement between all parties. Whether this has helped or hindered the maintenance of the existing fields remains to be seen. That said, this on-going dialogue should aid in figuring out how to best use limited resources.

At Tuesday’s PAC meeting, Berla explained what they’d learned from meeting with AAPS staff. The district’s basic model in approaching capital improvements at the schools is to get a list of prioritized projects from each building’s principal, he said. Not surprisingly, projects like improving the ball diamonds are at the bottom of those lists, he noted.

Barrett said they focused their discussion on middle school ball fields, which are generally in the worst shape. He said the AAPS staff had been very open to the conversation, but had started with an all-or-nothing attitude. That is, they felt they either needed enough funding to do all the desired rehab, or it wasn’t worth doing. Barrett said he tried to convince them that even a small investment could make a big difference – about $4,000 spent at Forsythe made a dramatic improvement. “Let’s not let perfection be the enemy of the good,” he said. Aeschbach had indicated there was the possibility of retooling the capital improvements process, Barrett said, adding that he left the meeting feeling encouraged.

NAP Volunteers of the Year

Jason Frenzel, volunteer and outreach coordinator for the city’s natural area preservation and Adopt-A-Park programs, was on hand to introduce this year’s NAP Volunteers of the Year – Judy and Manfred Schmidt.

Manfred Schmidt, left, talks with Jason Frenzel prior to the start of the Nov. 16 park advisory commission meeting. Frenzel is volunteer and outreach coordinator for the city's natural area preservation program. Manfred and Judy Schmidt were honored as NAP volunteers of the year.

Some years, the award goes to someone who has made an amazing contribution during the year, Frenzel said. Other times, it’s for lifetime achievement – and that’s the case for the Schmidts, he said, who’ve been working on natural area preservation “a few decades longer than our program has been around.”

Frenzel read a mayoral proclamation that had been given to the Schmidts at a recent volunteer award event. Their work has focused on the Scarlett-Mitchell Nature Area, a 25-acre park adjacent to Scarlett and Mitchell schools and Mitchell-Scarlett Woods. Judy Schmidt said they’ve been working in that area for about 40 years, and she joked that if they’d known it would be that long, she’s not sure they would have started.

Manfred Schmidt recalled how it took about 35-40 years and a lot of lobbying to get the city to buy the land that’s now the Scarlett-Mitchell Nature Area. He joked about his tenacity, saying that his attitude had been, “I will outlive you all!” He also said he had a solution for the city’s budget challenges: If he got a quarter for every buckthorn he cut, “I think there would be no problem with your budget.”

Commissioners gave the Schmidts a round of applause, and thanked them for their work over the years. Julie Grand said that since Manfred Schmidt was going to outlive them all, she hoped he would continue his work as well.

Present: David Barrett, Tim Doyle, Gwen Nystuen, Sam Offen, Julie Grand, Doug Chapman, Karen Levin, Tim Berla, Mike Anglin (ex-officio), Christopher Taylor (ex-officio)

Absent: John Lawter

Next meeting: Tuesday, Dec. 21 at 4 p.m. in the studios of Community Television Network (CTN), 2805 S. Industrial Hwy., Ann Arbor. [confirm date]

Doug Davis of Miles of Golf, left, and Doug Hellman of KemperSports were two of about a dozen people who attended Monday's pre-bid meeting for the Huron Hills Golf Course RFP. (Photo by the writer.)

Anyone who plans to submit a response to the RFP was required to attend the meeting, which lasted 30 minutes and was followed by a field trip to tour the course. Among those attending were Doug Davis and Chris Mile of Miles of Golf, Doug Hellman of KemperSports, Joe Spatafore of Royal Oak Golf Management, and William Arlinghaus of Greenscape.

Also attending were several citizens who have publicly opposed the RFP process, including Ted Annis, Nancy Kaplan, Myra Larson and Paul Bancel. Some are involved in the citizens group Ann Arbor for Parkland Preservation (A2P2).

The meeting, led by city parks manager Colin Smith, was a chance for potential bidders to ask questions or request additional information. The deadline to submit proposals is Oct. 29. [.pdf file of Huron Hills RFP]

Overview of RFP Process

Smith began by apologizing for a mix-up in the meeting time – two websites had posted two different start times, and some people had been waiting an hour. He also explained why the room might have felt stuffy – last Friday, HVAC for the entire city hall building had been turned off as part of an ongoing renovation of the structure, and there won’t be any air-conditioning or heating for at least three weeks.

Smith then reviewed some points in the process, and said that until Oct. 8 he’d accept questions or requests for information by email. His replies would be sent out to everyone who signed in at the pre-bid meeting, Smith said, so that everyone would receive the same information.

After the Oct. 29 deadline, responses will be reviewed by a selection committee, which Smith has previously said will consist of city staff, and representatives from the city’s golf task force, park advisory commission and city council. Interviews would begin in mid-November. If the selection committee makes a recommendation, it will then be reviewed by the golf task force and park advisory commission. Final approval would rest with city council.

Smith also reviewed some of the general information and scope of the RFP. [For an extensive report on the RFP, as well as public commentary about the project, see The Chronicle's report of the park advisory commission's Aug. 17, 2010 meeting: "Public Turns Out to Support Huron Hills Golf"]

The 18-hole, 116-acre golf course is located on the city’s east side and is split by Huron Parkway, with seven holes on the north and 11 holes to the south. Designed in 1922 by the golf architect Thomas Bendelow, Huron Hills is a 5,071-yard, par 67 course with a slope rating of 107, according to the RFP. The city’s ownership dates back to 1949, when the University of Michigan deeded the lower nine holes of Huron Hills Golf Club to the city – plus $10,000 – in exchange for Felch Park. The city bought an adjacent 57.5 acres in 1951.

The city is asking for proposals that “maximize the recreational golf opportunities” at Huron Hills. The RFP states that the city will retain ownership of the property and buildings, as well as any improvements that might be made. Beyond that, they are looking for proposals that follow four general principals:

• A commitment to growing the game of golf.
• Conduciveness to entry level golfers.
• Accessibility and affordability of recreational golf opportunities, especially for children and seniors.
• To better serve the Ann Arbor golf community.

Questions from Potential RFP Responders

This article reports the questions organized thematically.

Questions: Finance

Doug Hellman of KemperSports asked the most questions during the 30-minute meeting, and led off by requesting financial data about the golf course’s performance. Smith clarified that as an enterprise fund, the revenues and expenses are reported separately – that is, they aren’t wrapped into a larger departmental budget. [Enterprise funds are operations that are expected to be self-sustaining.] He agreed to provide financial data for the past five or six years, as well as information about the number of rounds played.

Some of that financial information is available in the RFP:

Huron Hills Golf Course

             FY2007     FY2008     FY2009

Starts       13,913     15,558     21,229
Net loss  ($145,845) ($195,514) ($276,164)

-

Smith had also given an update on the financial performance of Huron Hills at the Sept. 21, 2010 meeting of the park advisory commission, which resulted in some discussion among commissioners. From The Chronicle’s coverage of that meeting:

The golf enterprise fund includes operations at Huron Hills and Leslie Park golf courses. In total, the fund reported revenues of $1.122 million for the year, with $1.645 million in expenses – for a $523,529 total loss. Huron Hills revenue of $304,541 was 19% higher than expected, while expenses were lower than budgeted by nearly 8%.

At Leslie Park, revenue of $817,638 was 1.5% higher than budgeted. Expenses of $1.067 million were on par with budget.

Commissioner Tim Berla asked how many rounds of golf were played last year, and was told about 30,000 rounds at Leslie and 20,000 rounds at Huron Hills. Berla then calculated, based on the roughly $500,000 loss, that the city is paying about a $10 subsidy for each round of golf. He noted that this was his perspective and that others look at it differently, but he found it troubling. It seems out of balance to subsidize something that only a small percentage of residents use, he said. It might be the case that more people play soccer, Berla said, but the city pays perhaps 10 times as much for its golf courses than it does for its soccer fields. “I just wanted to note that, that’s all.”

Smith pointed out that the subsidy came from the general fund, not out of the parks and recreation budget – though he conceded that if the city council decided to change the accounting for golf, it would significantly impact the parks and recreation budget. But regardless on your perspective about a subsidy to golf, Smith said, both courses as budgeted were doing a fantastic job in an overall market that saw declining revenues and rounds played statewide.

Berla asked Smith to remind them of where the courses stood in terms of the long-range plan that had been laid out by a consultant hired to assess the city’s golf operations. FY 2010 was the second year in a six-year forecast, Smith said. For that year, the forecast had anticipated a $519,000 loss for the courses. So they’re on track with the forecast, he said, adding that the courses were never expected to eliminate their losses completely over that six-year period.

Gwen Nystuen recalled that PAC had recommended Huron Hills not be an enterprise fund. Smith confirmed that of the two courses, Leslie was more likely to be self-sustaining. Nystuen pointed out that the rest of the parks weren’t self-sustaining, and the city is willing to subsidize them. Do they calculate how much it costs someone to walk across a park? she asked. The city shouldn’t put something into an enterprise fund if the operation can’t support itself. Smith replied that the golf courses “will be part of very robust discussions come budget time.”

PAC chair Julie Grand, who serves on the city’s golf advisory task force, noted that the strategy right now for Huron Hills is to make rounds affordable so that they can draw in seniors and youth, by making play more accessible. And David Barrett pointed out that Leslie now has a liquor license – he asked if revenues from alcohol sales were “baked into” the total revenues for Leslie. Smith replied that total revenues did include alcohol sales, which were about $40,000 out of $79,000 in concession sales at Leslie during the year. Barrett asked if the liquor license had been a plus for Leslie, and Smith said that it was, especially for bringing in more leagues, outings and traveling golf groups.

At Monday’s pre-bid meeting, Paul Bancel asked for information on the municipal service charge that the golf course pays, including a breakdown of what the charge entails. Smith clarified for others that the municipal service charge is a charge that all non-general fund entities in the city pay – it covers the cost that the city incurs to provide services for the enterprise funds, he said, including administrative overhead. For Huron Hills, it’s about $87,000 annually.

Ted Annis said it was his understanding that Huron Hills would break even if the municipal service charge weren’t a factor. Smith said that wasn’t true – it would still lose money. Responding to another query, Smith said Leslie Park Golf Course – also owned by the city – wasn’t making money either. Why then was Huron Hills singled out for this RFP? That was based on direction given by the city council, Smith said.

Later in the meeting, Hellman requested financials for Leslie Park Golf Course as well.

Questions: Ownership

Bancel asked a series of questions related to ownership of facilities on the golf course. Smith clarified that the city would own the land and the facilities. [A list of assumptions provided in the RFP includes a statement that the city "remains the owner of the Huron Hills property, its buildings and appurtenances."]

As a hypothetical, Bancel described a scenario in which a contractor spends $2 million to build a facility on the property – how does the city contemplate assuming ownership? How would the city handle a transfer of ownership? Smith said it would depend on the proposal – that’s something that would have to be negotiated.

Hellman confirmed with Smith that the maximum term of the agreement is 20 years.

Questions: Labor

In response to a question about whether the city uses volunteers for the course, Smith said that there are some volunteers and neighborhood activists who do things like maintain flower beds, but the ranger service is done by a seasonal paid worker.

Later in the meeting he clarified that there are living wage requirements, which are outlined in the RFP. [For background on the city's living wage ordinance, see Chronicle coverage: "Living Wage: In-Sourcing City Temps"]

Bancel asked what the union situation was, and Smith said there are two workers at Huron Hills: The course supervisor, Andrew Walton, is a member of the Teamster’s union, while the course superintendent, Mark Wanshon, is a member of AFSCME. Asked whether the city anticipated that those workers would remain unionized, Smith said the RFP speaks to that. From the RFP:

4. Management and Oversight. The proposal must provide a detailed business plan that recognizes the City’s role in oversight of City land, and identifies how the existing two full-time employees may be incorporated.

Hellman asked that they be provided with a staffing chart showing the employees’ hourly rate, as well as resumes or background information for the current staff. [Walton attended Monday's meeting, but did not participate in the discussion.]

Questions: Relationship with Leslie Park Golf Course

Bill Newcomb, a member of the city’s golf task force, asked whether the city could reject a proposal that included Leslie Park Golf Course. Smith replied that as long as it met all the requirements of the RFP, it wouldn’t be rejected just because it incorporated both courses.

Hellman asked whether the two golf courses shared resources, such as equipment or personnel. No, Smith replied, the only thing that’s shared are the golf passes, which can be used at either course.

Questions: Liquor License

Smith clarified that Huron Hills doesn’t have a liquor license. When asked why Leslie Park Golf Course had one but Huron Hills does not, Smith said the consultant had recommended having one at Leslie. He said it would be possible to pursue obtaining a liquor license at Huron Hills as well. Someone asked if there was one available, and Smith said he wasn’t aware of one.

Hellman later asked about a reference to alcohol in the section outlining uses of the premises and property. From the RFP:

No alcohol will be served on the Premises at Contractor-sponsored events or private rental events, or otherwise consumed on the Premises, without the written approval of the Community Services Area Administrator. Section 3.2 of Chapter 39 of the City Code authorizes the City Administrator to issue permits to allow the consumption of wine and beer in areas which consumption would otherwise be prohibited. The City Administrator hereby delegates to the Community Services Area Administrator the authority to issue such permits for the moderate consumption of wine and/or beer on the Premises. When so approved in writing, moderate consumption of alcohol (wine and beer only) may be permitted. All other use of alcoholic beverages on the Premises is prohibited.

Who was the community services area administrator, he asked, and does this refer to a liquor license? Smith clarified that the community services area administrator is his boss, Sumedh Bahl. The section was referring to a permit that could be obtained for special events, not a regular liquor license. He again stated that it would be possible to pursue getting a liquor license for Huron Hills, if one were to become available.

Questions: Misc.

Hellman asked what prompted this RFP – what are the city’s goals? “That is a long answer, over many years, perhaps,” Smith replied. He summarized by saying that entities in an enterprise fund are supposed to be self-supporting, and that’s not been the case for a long time with the golf courses. The city brought in a consultant in 2007 – James Keegan, managing principal of Golf Convergence – to analyze the courses and make recommendations. [More detailed background is provided in The Chronicle's report of the Aug. 17, 2010 meeting of the park advisory commission. See also coverage of PAC's Nov. 19, 2009 meeting, which included an update on golf operations by Doug Kelly, the city's director of golf.]

Huron Hills has improved since then, Smith said, but it’s still operating at a loss. During the most recent budget cycle, everything was on the table, and the city council gave direction to the staff to issue a request for proposals (RFP) for a possible public/private partnership at Huron Hills. As for the city’s goals, Smith said they wanted it to remain a course that’s accessible to the public, while providing financial relief to the city.

Hellman asked whether the city was committed to moving forward with outsourcing or a public/private partnership. When Smith hesitated, Hellman quipped, “Well, it is the city council!” Smith said that the city was “certainly interested enough to issue the RFP.” Acceptance would depend on the nature of the proposal, and the outcome of review by the selection committee, golf task force, park advisory commission and city council, he said.

Ted Annis confirmed that the city attorney has signed off on the RFP. Annis also submitted a list of nine questions that he asked Smith to answer. Smith requested that the questions be emailed to him, so that he could send the questions and his responses to everyone who attended the pre-bid meeting. The questions are:

1. Tasks I and II call for a study and recommendations but the bids are being evaluated on a financial basis. [Task I requires a "thorough assessment of current operations" at the golf course. Task II is a proposal of services and financial plan.] How can the bids be evaluated before the completions of Tasks I and II?
2. City staff recommended to Council on 25 January 2010 that a driving range was the City’s best choice. Why isn’t a driving range mentioned in the RFP? If the Respondent proposes a driving range, is that the City’s preference and will it receive a higher score than say, miniature golf or a conference center?
3. The RFP says that the City will own the new facilities. How does this work with bank financing if the buildings are mortgaged to the Contractor?
4. Will the City indemnify and defend the Respondent (Contractor) in the event of a lawsuit alleging an illegal transaction between the City and the Respondent?
5. Will the City indemnify and defend the Respondent (Contractor) in the event of a lawsuit alleging damages in the form of decreased property values as a result of the transaction between the City and the Respondent?
6. There are government organizations (other than Ann Arbor’s PAC with its access to Greenbelt millage funds) that acquire natural lands for long-term preservation. An example is Natural Washtenaw and its Natural Area Preservation Program (NAPP). Is there a problem, legal or otherwise, if NAPP were to bid on these development rights for Huron Hills?
7. What is the zoning?
8. What are the development issues surrounding natural features protection, wetland preservation, and 100-year flood plain?
9. Prior to 25 January 2010, the City received proposals with plans and financial data from one and likely two private businesses regarding the privatization of the current City-operated golf operation on the Huron Hills parkland. Who at the City, City Council, and PAC have seen these plans and data? Who at the City, City Council, and PAC are in possession of these plans and data? What notes were taken from these plans and data?

The meeting concluded and Smith gave directions to the course, for a mandatory tour. He offered to schedule other tours until Oct. 8, for people who couldn’t go that day. As the meeting was breaking up, some people noted that anyone trying to enter into a partnership with the city would likely face opposition. If that hadn’t been apparent previously, it would have been clear on the trip to the golf course, where signs protesting the development of Huron Hills are in several front yards along East Huron River Drive, near the course.

These signs for the Ann Arbor for Parkland Preservation group are in front of several houses along Huron River Drive. (Photo by Judy McGovern.)

About 30 people attended the Aug. 17 Ann Arbor Park Advisory Commission meeting. Prior to the start, city councilmember Mike Anglin (far right) talks with Nancy Kaplan. Standing at the left is William Newcomb, a member of the city's golf task force, talking with PAC chair Julie Grand. In the foreground are Sandra Arlinghaus and William Arlinghaus. (Photos by the writer.)

The issue drew two city councilmembers to the meeting – Sabra Briere (Ward 1) and Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2) – as well as former and current council candidates Sumi Kailasapathy, Jack Eaton and John Floyd. Councilmember Mike Anglin, who serves as an ex-officio member of PAC, also attended. Former planning commissioner Sandra Arlinghaus and her son William Arlinghaus both spoke to PAC, urging them to widen the scope of the RFP so that it might include more creative possibilities, like a location for cremains.

A couple of people also spoke in opposition of the Fuller Road Station project, citing similarities with the Huron Hills situation. In both cases, they said, the city is attempting to use parkland for other purposes. The Fuller Road Station is a proposed parking structure and bus depot, which might someday include a train station.

During deliberations, most commissioners voiced support for the RFP, noting that the golf course – though doing better – is still losing money. [The accounting method used to determine how the golf course is performing financially was a point of contention by some speakers during public commentary.] Several commissioners pointed out that the city is under no obligation to accept any of the proposals that might be submitted. And Colin Smith, manager of parks and recreation, emphasized that the city would retain ownership of the land – there are no plans to sell Huron Hills, he said. He also noted that the RFP calls for proposals to be golf-related.

The plan is to issue the RFP on Sept. 3, with responses due at the end of October. A selection committee will review the proposals and make a recommendation to PAC, probably in December. City council would make the final decision on whether to proceed with any of the proposals.

Huron Hills Golf Course RFP

The city owns two golf courses, Huron Hills Golf Course and Leslie Park Golf Course, covering more than 275 acres. In 2007 the city hired James Keegan, managing principal of Golf Convergence, to evaluate the performance – financial and otherwise – of the courses, and make recommendations for change. This was done in the wake of declining revenues and play at the courses, and debate over whether the land should be put to different use. In his report, Keegan projected that the courses would continue to lose money for at least six years. In May of 2008, city council approved a plan to reinvest in the courses, using funds from the park maintenance and improvement tax.

During staff and city council budget discussions in late 2009 and early 2010, the possibility of pursuing a public/private partnership for Huron Hills was discussed. Though the council never explicitly made a decision on the issue, they made an implicit determination at a budget work session, indicating that staff should develop an RFP to solicit proposals. A draft of that RFP was the topic of discussion at Tuesday’s PAC meeting. [.pdf file of Huron Hills Golf Course draft RFP]

PAC last received a detailed update on the performance of the golf courses at their November 2009 meeting, given by Doug Kelly, the city’s director of golf. But the issue has emerged more recently during public commentary – at the city council’s June 7, 2010 meeting, as well as at PAC’s June 15, 2010 meeting. Several people at those meetings spoke against the plan to issue an RFP. One of those speakers also attended Tuesday’s meeting.

Huron Hills RFP: Public Commentary

Janet Cassebaum told commissioners that they had a big responsibility – they are stewards of Ann Arbor parkland. The city is issuing an RFP that will result in commercial development between Huron River Drive and the Huron River, she said. “We are not fooled by the language in the RFP – this is commercial development.” The golf course’s “front seven” is the gateway to the city – a city that prides itself on open space and parkland. Residents call Ann Arbor “Tree Town,” she noted. But instead of open space and beautiful trees, people will see an ugly fence, lots of netting, lights at night and a large parking lot. “Do what you are charged to do – reject the RFP,” she concluded, “and preserve the parkland.”

Ted Annis asked commissioners to declare the RFP “dead on arrival.” It was ill-conceived and should never have been drafted. It amounts to a constructive sale of city parkland, he said – and it doesn’t matter what other terms they use to describe it, like “lease” or “use agreement.” It’s a constructive sale for 20 years, worded in a way that’s intended to circumvent the city’s charter amendment, which prohibits the sale of parkland unless approved by voters.

Annis then pointed to the city’s greenbelt program. Voters approved a millage used to buy development rights for properties surrounding Ann Arbor. Yet inside Ann Arbor, the city is prepared to sell development rights to its parkland, Annis said. “This should offend you the way it offends me. It’s really very disturbing.” Finally, Annis – describing himself as a businessman who’s good at cost accounting – noted that the city makes an economic argument for its approach to Huron Hills. But the cost accounting used for the golf operation is inconsistent with the financial view that the city takes of all other parks, he said. If the golf operations were treated like other parks, you’d find that they actually make a modest net contribution to the city’s general fund, he said – the economic argument if false. He urged PAC to keep the integrity of the commission and stand up for greenspace.

Ann Schriber began by saying she didn’t understand why the city council wants so badly to dismantle Huron Hills – one of the most beautiful open spaces in the city. The city hired an expensive consultant to look at its golf courses and came up with a proposal to sell part of Huron Hills for development, she said. There was a great huge hue and cry over the possibility of selling Huron Hills, and the city backed off, she said, but not for long. Now, this RFP is looking for a public/private partnership to make the golf course pay for itself. If that means a driving range, then it will result in lights, fences, nets and buildings, she said – and there goes the beautiful open land, which can’t be taken back.

Schriber said she’s not a golfer and doesn’t live next to the course, but she drives by it nearly every day and takes great pride in it. She always points it out when she gives tours to potential newcomers to the city. When Ann Arbor was named by Money magazine as one of the top small cities in the country, they mentioned specifically the golf courses, she said.

Like Annis, Schriber mentioned the greenbelt millage that voters approved, providing millions of dollars to protect open space and greenspace. She held up a 2005 clipping of a front page article in the Ann Arbor News, which reported that the city had spent $5 million to protect four farms for the greenbelt. Now the city wants to sell what it already owns, and which benefits all the citizens of Ann Arbor. “This makes no sense to me,” she said. Schriber said that a current councilmember’s wife made a statement to former councilmember Mike Reid when this issue of selling part of Huron Hills came up before, calling it a “short-sighted, lame-brained plan.” The same woman wrote to mayor John Hieftje, Schriber said, asking him to save Huron Hills for everyone who enjoys it, from golfers to walkers to sledders to those who drive down Huron Parkway.

Nancy Kaplan read a letter written by Paul Bancel, who she said couldn’t attend the meeting. He’d sent a longer version to city councilmembers, she said. The statement was directed to councilmembers Mike Anglin and Christopher Taylor, who serve as ex-officio members of PAC. [Taylor was absent from Tuesday's meeting.] If the proposal goes forward to build a commercial driving range on some of the most prime open space in Ann Arbor, “a great tragedy will occur.” Taxpayers are paying a tax to support the greenbelt outside the city, yet city officials propose to eliminate some of the most beautiful and visible greenspace within the city limits. It goes against the PROS plan (the city’s Parks, Recreation and Open Space plan) and all the efforts to beautify entrances to Ann Arbor.

The main reason given for commercializing Huron Hills is an accounting entry in the general fund, Kaplan continued. Golf operations, cash-on-cash, will contribute to the city overhead in 2011 and this contribution will continue to grow. Huron Hills is the people’s golf course, and Leslie Park is the championship course – they complement each other and depend on each other. Administrative and overhead costs in 2011 will almost equal the general fund subsidy. These costs will continue, regardless of the fate of the golf course, she said. Why have expenses been allowed to double in less than five years? Bancel served for the past two years on the golf advisory task force, and at every meeting the emphasis was on revenue. Revenues and rounds have increased substantially, but it is now time for a discussion on costs. Building a driving range is not the way to cut costs. Closing beautiful, historic Huron Hills, which has been a golf course for over 90 years, is an irreversible act and it should not happen.

James D’Amour said he wasn’t a resident of the Ann Arbor Hills neighborhood, but he feels like one. Huron Hills is probably  the most beautiful golf course in Washtenaw County, he said – “and that’s saying a lot.” He said he was driving past Huron Hills recently and gnashed his teeth recalling something that PAC commissioner Tim Berla had said a couple months ago. Berla had “rather callously” said if you don’t like the charter amendment, change it, D’Amour said – in reference to Fuller Road Station, and the city charter requiring voter approval of the sale of parkland.

It’s pretty clear what the voters wanted, D’Amour said – any transfer of public parkland should come with a public vote. On this basis alone, PAC should reject any consideration of this RFP. It seems as though the city is at war with its parks system and its assets, D’Amour said. He added that he’s a strong supporter of the greenbelt but said it sends a puzzling message when the city is acquiring property in the greenbelt but selling property – “or whatever the heck we’re doing with our parklands” – in the city. It’s not right or necessary, and PAC should dismiss the RFP out of hand.

Noting that she isn’t a neighbor to the golf course either, Ethel Potts said the parks belong to all of us. She assumed that commissioners knew a lot about the RFP – that at the very least, they’d been asked to help write it. The public counts on PAC to protect the parks, she said. What benefits will this RFP bring to the public or the parks? If the city removed its administrative charges, the golf course would be even more successful. The RFP might be tempting because a proposal could bring in more money to the parks system through the lease or rental of Huron Hills– as is planned with Fuller Road Station, she said.

But Potts warned that the parks support from the city’s general fund would be reduced proportionally. She also cautioned PAC to look very carefully at the businesses that respond to the RFP – what’s their history, and how are they doing in the current economy? Potts concluded by saying that if PAC hadn’t been asked to help write the RFP, then it was a disgraceful disregard of an advisory commission.

Bill Cassebaum posed some questions about the RFP, which he said PAC could address during their discussion. On page 26 of the RFP, the business arrangement is defined as a contract to accomplish a specific purpose. Yet to him, it walks and quacks like a lease. Does this circumvent Section 14A of the city charter, which requires concurrence by at least eight members of city council? he asked. On page 12, it refers to income from driving range rentals. Does this mean that development of a commercial driving range will be acceptable?

On page 22, the RFP states that the city has the right to use the premises for conferences, meetings and so forth. Does this mean that development of a conference center is acceptable? On page 14, under assumptions, the RFP states that the contractor guarantees not to abandon or otherwise breach the contract. Cassebaum said he didn’t see any backup to the guarantee, like posting a bond. If it’s covered elsewhere in the RFP, he said he couldn’t find it. He also said he didn’t see any prohibition against assignment of the contract, or subcontracting, to third parties. On page 23, the contractor certifies that it has no personal or financial interest in the project, other than the fee it is to receive under the agreement. Will the city be financially obligated to the contractor?

William Arlinghaus said he owns a home in Ann Arbor and lives in Grand Rapids, and went to high school and college in Ann Arbor. He’s now president of Greenscape Michigan, a cemetery corporation. Cemeteries are one of the best ways to preserve greenspace in an urbanized environment, he said, and so are golf courses – the two uses can be blended fairly well. The purpose of the RFP is to generate more revenue for the city, he said, adding that he was capable of giving them a proposal that night that would preserve the golf course’s natural features, allow it to operate as an 18-hole golf course, and double its revenues without destroying any natural features.

If they must move forward with the RFP, he urged them narrow it and have it be considered only as an 18-hole course. At the same time, they should widen the scope of what’s permissible, he said, opening it up to those with experience managing large tracts of land – not just golf course or driving range managers. He said the city can solve its revenue problem with a better private/public partnership that doesn’t require an RFP, and that doesn’t give away, lease or sell the land. There are many other options available. They need to preserve the natural features that make Ann Arbor a great place. The RFP urged responders to think creatively, he noted, adding that there are lots of creative opportunities that can be explored.

Saying she supported what the previous speaker said, Sandra Arlinghaus told commissioners that she is president of Archive Memorials Online, a trust-funded nonprofit based in Ann Arbor. One possibility is the memorialization of cremains, which might be put on a golf course perimeter. Archive Memorials Online has been doing Internet memorialization since 2002 – at the time, they were the only trust-funded nonprofit doing that work in the world, she said.

As president, Arlinghaus said she was there to be helpful in any way that she could. She said she’s well known around town as being a highly creative person, and she’s willing to bring that creativity to bear on the Huron Hills issue. She ticked through a list of ways in which she’s been involved in community service, including previously serving on the city’s planning commission and environmental commission, among other groups. She’s currently chair of the technology committee for the American Contract Bridge League. The technology connection is important, she said, because that’s how memories survive. There are many creative ways to do that, she said.

Myra Larson noted that at city council’s June 7, 2010 meeting, she spoke during public commentary about the Huron Hills golf course, as did Jane Lumm and Leslie Morris. They asked council not to issue the RFP, she said – the council didn’t pay attention to them, so now she was at PAC’s meeting to address the same issue, hopefully with a more positive result. She referred to page 5, section 5 of the RFP:

Environmental and Ground Conditions. Any design or development should incorporate best practice in stormwater management, and if possible highlight other environmentally-friendly design elements. There are no other specific restrictions which impact potential design or site renovations although alternative usage should be aligned with strategies contained in the Parks and Recreation Open Space (PROS) plan. All Respondents should be prepared to address how both ground conditions and operations would be impacted during the implementation phase of their proposal.

The statement is an embarrassment, she said, in a community where education is the main industry, and where the Huron River is a main source of water. She said to keep in mind that the words used in the RFP are “should” and “if possible” – she indicated that this meant there’s nothing firmly required. And references to “land north of Huron Parkway” really refers to the Huron River, she said. Be forthright about what the impact will be on the river – it’s a very important part of this community. Any alteration of the golf course will have a negative impact on the river, she said, which needs all the tender loving care we can give it. Like several other speakers, Larson also mentioned the greenbelt millage. She asked how they could reconcile giving away parkland when the voters voted to tax themselves to acquire parkland.

Betty Richart said she was raised in South Jersey and her father always aspired to raising his family on a golf course, because he thought it would develop character and honesty. He built a course in 1929, and managed to hang on to it during the Great Depression. When she moved to Ann Arbor 45 years ago, Richart said all she wanted to do was to live near a golf course – and she found a home near Huron Hills.

Right away Richart got involved in junior golf there. Over the years she’s taught children golf and she’s taught in Sunday school, and they learn as much about life from the game of golf as they do in Sunday school, she said. Richart said she worked with the U.S. Golf Association for 30 years, and the group gave her $18,000 to bring kids from outside the city to learn to play golf. This is about more than just the little city of Ann Arbor, she said. The USGA is eager to keep parkland for golf because it’s a game that everyone can play, if they can walk.

Describing Huron Hills as a treasure, Arthur Holtz said that installing a driving range would be out of character for what the city is trying to do with its parks. It doesn’t matter if you play golf or just love the vista by the river. He appreciated that commissioners were courteous enough to listen to him and others, and he hoped they would take into consideration more than just dollars and cents. It’s the wrong place for a driving range, which would diminish the area. He hoped they would keep it as a golf course because he thinks Huron Hills can succeed as a golf course.

Wendy Carman raised her objection to issuing the RFP, saying that Huron Hills is in wonderful shape. Play is up, and the addition of golf carts is bringing in more revenues. The course serves the needs of many levels of players, she noted. To issue the RFP breaks faith with the public who voted in favor of the city charter amendment – they believed they had voted for something that would keep the parks public, she said. The golf course would probably be able to support itself financially, she said, if it weren’t saddled with administrative costs that aren’t directly tied to the course itself. Carman said she didn’t know what PAC’s abilities are with regard to stopping the RFP, but she hoped they’d consider turning it down.

Huron Hills RFP: Background

Colin Smith, the city’s manager of parks and recreation, began by saying it would be good to take a few steps back and talk about how this process started. At a December 2009 budget retreat, city council and senior staff talked about a range of “big ideas” to deal with the city’s financial situation. Many of those ideas dealt with parks, Smith said, and one related to a possible public/private partnership at Huron Hills.

From The Chronicle’s report of that retreat:

At Saturday’s retreat, [Jayne] Miller said that compared to a general fund allocated subsidy of $589,000, the golf courses had used $460,000 – so the trend was in the right direction, but the subsidy required was still substantial. Of the two courses, Leslie is showing more improvement, enhanced by receiving a liquor license from the city in 2008.

When the focus then came to rest on Huron Hills Golf Course as the less profitable of the two courses, [Ward 2 councilmember] Stephen Rapundalo lamented: “Here we go again!” It was possibly an allusion to the contentious general election Rapundalo only narrowly won against write-in challenger Ed Amonsen in 2007, when a central issue had been the question of whether the city intended to sell Huron Hills.

Miller said that closing Huron Hills for golf would not mean that it would stop losing money. Even keeping up the property at some basic level of maintenance (not as a golf course) would require a considerable ongoing expenditure, she said.

Hieftje summarized by saying, “I think we’ll have golf.”

At Tuesday’s PAC meeting, Smith said that after the budget retreat, city council next got a more detailed look at possible parks proposals at a Jan. 25, 2010 working session. At that time, he said, the council gave staff a directive to develop an RFP for Huron Hills. [Though the issue was discussed at that Jan. 25 meeting, there was no directive issued then. The topic came up again at a Feb. 8 council working session:

Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2) said he wanted to learn more about cost savings that could be achieved through private partnerships connected to public golf courses. He asked if the next step would be to issue an request for proposals (RFP) for Huron Hills Golf Course. Jayne Miller said she would recommend issuing an RFP – even though a private golf initiative would not be operational in time to have an impact on FY 2011, the council would get information needed to plan for FY 2012, she said. Margie Teall (Ward 4) stated that she wanted to see that happen.

Sabre Briere (Ward 1) wanted to know why Leslie Park Golf Course was not also being considered for a public-private partnership. Miller noted that Leslie represented a fairly decent chance of becoming self-sustaining and that allowing a private enterprise to take it over would essentially take money out of the city’s pocket.

Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) then introduced an analogy that flummoxed his colleagues sitting on the other side of the table: “We have the wolf by the ears with golf,” he said. Marcia Higgins (Ward 4) later asked him to clarify what he meant by that. Taylor then referenced the Jeffersonian analogy to slavery in America, which compared the U.S. relationship to slavery as having a wolf by the ears.

On the question of entering a private-public partnership on the Leslie Park Golf Course, Miller explained that a consultant [Golf Convergence] – who had been hired to look at the courses in conjunction with the creation of the city’s golf task force – found that there was little interest by anyone in either of the two golf courses. Now that the Leslie course has started to show some improvement in its finances [and now enjoys a liquor license], there had been some interest in it. Rapundalo, however, said that entering a public-private partnership on Leslie would be like “giving away our crown jewel.”

The result of the discussion – which Hieftje and Fraser took care to not label as a “decision,” but rather as giving direction to the city administrator – was that city staff will start preparing an RFP for a public-private partnership on the Huron Hills Golf Course.

Huron Hills RFP: Staff Report

Smith pointed out that the RFP hadn’t been issued yet – it was still a draft. Last week it was reviewed by the city’s golf task force, and some changes were made based on that feedback. In some ways, it’s similar to the Argo Dam RFP that was recently issued, Smith said. [See Chronicle coverage: "Two Dam Options for Argo"] It’s not typical that RFPs get public input, he said, but obviously in cases where there’s a lot of public interest, it’s important to do.

Smith reviewed a timeline for the RFP process:

• Sept. 3: RFP issued
• Oct. 29: RFP response deadline
• Nov. 1: Evaluation of responses begins
• Nov. 15: Interviews begin
• Dec. 8: Golf task force review
• Dec. 21: PAC recommendation
• TBD: Selection submitted for approval by city council
• TBD: Contract begins

A selection committee will do the initial evaluation of responses, Smith said. That committee will consist of city staff, and representatives from the golf task force, PAC and city council.

Smith then went over some highlights of the RFP. The purpose is to seek creative proposals, he said. Similar to the Argo Dam RFP, he said, it’s left wide open to see what, if any, proposals come back. It might be a proposal to run the entire 18 holes as it is, or someone might propose a modified land use. But they’d have to do that within the scope of remaining golf-related, incorporating these principals:

• A commitment to growing the game of golf.
• Conduciveness to entry level golfers.
• Accessibility and affordability of recreational golf opportunities, especially for children and seniors.
• To better serve the Ann Arbor golf community.

In the section on objectives, Smith noted that the RFP calls for the respondent to provide a strategic vision for the project, to show how they’d achieve a financial return for the city, and to demonstrate financial stability and experience in similar situations. If someone proposes changing the layout of Huron Hills, the city will want assurances of their financial stability, for example. The respondents also have to address management and oversight, environmental and ground conditions, and provide a development plan.

Smith noted that if a proposal called for changes on the grounds – building or removing things – it would be subject to review by the planning commission, and they’d have to follow city ordinances, like the natural features ordinance. Instead of delving into great detail, he said, the RFP mentions more generally the areas that the proposals need to deal with.

Each proposal will be evaluated with points assigned to different categories: professional qualifications (15 points); proposed work plan – benefits to users (30 points); proposed work plan – financial benefit to the city (40 points); and interview/presentation (15 points).

Smith said it was important to point out that the RFP explicitly states that the city will continue to own the Huron Hills property, and that it will continue to operate as part of the parks system as a fully public recreational facility. The respondent would be an independent contractor, operating under a negotiated agreement with the city. It speaks to the fact that in theory, the selected respondent could be a private operator of golf courses, or it could be a more creative proposal.

The RFP includes mention of a 20-year agreement, but it doesn’t have to be 20 years, Smith said. If American Golf, for example, said they’d like to manage the course, Smith said he doubted they’d want more than a three- or four-year agreement.

Smith also highlighted the section on the proposal’s scope of service, which outlines the tasks that a proposal would need to address. Tasks include an assessment of the current golf course, a proposal of services and a description of how those services would be provided, a staffing plan and a marketing plan. In evaluating proposals, Smith said, it will be important to know that if someone is providing a service for less cost, how do they plan to do that? At that lower cost, is the value good?

There are three pages of “assumptions” that respondents must consider in their proposal. Smith pointed out that the first assumption is that the city will remain owner of the property. Another important one to note, he said, is that if Huron Hills remains a golf course, the city can retain control over the cost of services. It’s still public property, and there for the benefit of the public.

Finally, Smith highlighted another one of the RFP’s assumptions:

The Contractor shall be required to relieve the City of all operating and capital expenses associated with HHGC unless specifically agreed to by the City. Respondents are advised that any request for City-funded capital improvement on-site will be considered only if the project constitutes a public purpose and meets all statutory financing and City debt service conditions.

If a proposal is accepted, it would allow the city administrator to negotiate a contract with the respondent, Smith said. The reality is that the RFP can’t include an example of a contract, he said, because the details will depend very much on the type of proposal that might be accepted.

Smith said that the staff developed this RFP under the council directive as part of a budget process. At this point, they’re looking for feedback prior to it being issued, he said.

Huron Hills: Commissioner Deliberations

Julie Grand, who chairs PAC, began by thanking Smith and his staff for their hard work in developing the RFP.

Gwen Nystuen wanted to know what the process would be to provide feedback. Would they need to make a resolution? Smith said they could give input at the meeting, or email suggestions to Grand by the end of the week, and she would forward those to him.

Nystuen wondered what kind of feedback the golf task force had given. Grand, who also serves on that task force, said they strengthened the language related to the environment, adding mention of the PROS plan. They added the key principle of “to better serve the Ann Arbor golf community,” and gave more weight to the presentation in the scoring criteria.

At this point, it was overall received positively, Grand said, because it’s so open-ended. It’s important to remember that they could reject all proposals, she said, “which is still a distinct possibility.”

Directing his question to councilmember Mike Anglin (Ward 5), one of two ex-officio councilmembers on PAC, Tim Berla asked what the purpose was of putting forward the RFP. Is it because the golf course manager doesn’t like the course any more, or that private industry could do a better job? Why are we doing this?

Anglin said there was never a vote taken on this by council – it was simply a discussion during a work session, and suddenly an RFP was produced. He said he was concerned – is it their task to raise $250,000? Is the city looking to privatize parts of running the park, because it’s getting too expensive? If that’s the purpose, then that should be clear, he said. He said he attended the meetings with the community two years ago, when these issues were first discussed. The golf courses are a standalone enterprise fund, he said, and like most recreational activities, it’s expensive to run. The city hired a consultant to look at the situation, and out of that came several recommendations.

As for Berla’s question – why are we doing this? – Anglin said that council never had an open discussion about that. That comment elicited rueful laughter from some members of the public in attendance. Anglin then noted that councilmember Stephen Rapundalo was there, and could speak to the question if he wanted. [Huron Hills is located in Ward 2, which Rapundalo represents.]

Rapundalo came to the podium, and said that the directive was give to develop an RFP – one of many directives that were given during budget deliberations. There’s no need for a direct vote to give the staff direction on something like that, he said, which was exploratory in nature. It was clear there was an interest to see if they could improve golf operations and the golf experience. From the outset, they’ve been concerned about the long-term sustainability of Huron Hills as a golf course. The staff was given a directive to explore that, and the best way to do that is to seek input through a formal RFP, he said.

Smith added that every recreation facility and operation in the city is being looked at to see if they can be operated more efficiently and effectively. They have to do that, he said. Asking the question of “Are there possibilities?” doesn’t mean it’s a done deal, he noted. But the staff would be remiss if they didn’t ask.

Berla recalled that when the report from the golf consultant was delivered in late 2007, Berla had suggested they talk about closing Huron Hills because it was losing so much money. His personal opinion is that the city should subsidize good activities – which golf certainly is. But they should subsidize those that aren’t provided by others, so that there’s a public interest in providing the service. Then they should think about how much it’s worth to do that. At the time, it seemed to him that the city was subsidizing golf at about $15 per round – “I found that really upsetting,” Berla said.

The purpose of the RFP process is pro-golf, he said – to avoid losing so much money, which is putting a strain on the city budget. He said he’d never want to sell Huron Hills, but he’d previously suggested putting soccer fields or other activities on parts of it. It would still be a beautiful park, but it wouldn’t cost so much to run as a golf course.

Berla then asked who’d make the final decision, assuming there were proposals submitted. Was it the city council? Yes, Smith said. Then what opportunities would there be for public input between now and then, Berla asked. Smith said that when the proposals are submitted and reviewed, they might decide to conduct the interviews on Community Television Network (CTN), much like the interviews for proposals on the development of the Library Lot were televised. Then it would go to the golf task force, he said, which is a public meeting, followed by PAC and city council. Meetings for both of those two entities have opportunity for public comment.

Berla wanted to know if there’s a limit on whether buildings could be constructed. Could someone build a restaurant or auditorium? Smith said those examples don’t tie in with the scope of the RFP, but potentially you could build something that’s related to golf, like a classroom. If so, the project would have to go through the planning commission.

Berla asked whether there was any way that the city could get stuck with the bill for a project at the golf course. Smith said there’s a section in the RFP that talks about how the contractor couldn’t walk away from the project. But if a contract were negotiated, that would likely be addressed in more detail.

Sam Offen said that if the city builds something on city-owned land, it must comply with building codes, but not zoning. What if a private entity built on city land? Smith said that in the case of the Huron Hills RFP, if a proposal called for building on the land, it would be no different than if parks and recreation decided to build something.

Offen asked what a CUB agreement was. [It's one of the forms to be completed in the RFP.] CUB stands for Construction Unity Board – the CUB agreement would require a respondent to use union labor, or to abide by the existing collective bargaining agreements of the appropriate labor unions.

Offen then asked how the city was defining golf. Was it just the traditional game, or could it be something like disc golf? Smith said that right now, the scope of the agreement was for recreational golf opportunities. He didn’t think that disc golf fell into that scope, but it’s something they could look at. There are all sorts of ideas that could come up, he said.

Offen also asked about the interviews. Sixty minutes per proposal seemed like a long time, he said. Smith responded that an hour goes by pretty quickly. He said he’d hope respondents would be able to speak for that long with enthusiasm, passion and strategic foresight.

One part of the RFP asks for respondents to do an assessment of Huron Hills. How thorough would that be, Offen asked – similar to what the golf consultant had done? No, Smith replied. There’s no need for respondents to reinvent the wheel, but they do need to demonstrate that they know about the current operations, as well as the golf course’s history. Last year, there were over 20,000 rounds there, which is a vast increase over two years ago, Smith said. It fills a need, and the proposal needs to reflect that understanding.

Offen noted that two people work at Huron Hills. What does the city anticipate in terms of staffing? Would they be hired – and if not, what happens to their employment with the city? Smith said that people who work at Huron Hills have specialized skills, and he’d want to see how that might be incorporated into a business plan.

Offen said he thought the RFP was a good step, though he knew it was controversial. It gives the city an idea of what kind of creative ideas are out there, with no obligation to do anything. It’s been a very time-consuming process for staff to develop the RFP, Offen said, and he trusts that council is well aware of that. Offen observed that if any ideas are valid, they can negotiate something to the benefit of the city. If not, they won’t. Smith said that even if they don’t end up choosing a proposal, it will allow the city to see how they’re performing, relative to others in the golf business.

Tim Doyle said in his career he’s been responding to government RFPs for 35 years. He described the RFP as very exploratory – you could end up with very diverse proposals, from a putt-putt golf course to a learning center. As a contractor, he said, the thing that’s disturbing about a general RFP is that you have to spend a lot of time writing the proposal, and being careful, because it’s a binding document. He suggested that instead of an RFP, the city could issue a request for information (RFI). The disadvantage is that it would likely yield more proposals, he said. But as it stands, the RFP doesn’t allow for things like a cemetery as adjunct to a golf course. The city might not get any proposals, he said, because no one will be willing to bind themselves to this.

Smith said that the thought behind going with an RFP rather than an RFI is that they did want to be specific that Huron Hills would remain a golf course, or an area for golf. They’re not interested in looking at the possibility of a cemetery. “That’s not the direction we’ve taken yet,” he said.

Doyle said what he heard about the cemetery was interesting to him. They weren’t talking about headstones, but rather about a designated spot for the remains of cremation. Other than having to walk around it, golfers wouldn’t be bothered at all. Doyle also said that the city could write an RFI that was restrictive, and say explicitly that you want certain uses. But for an RFP, you’re asking for a much greater level of detail, asking contractors to tell you exactly what they’re going to do, how much it’s going to cost, and to spend a fair amount of energy doing that. It might cause people not to respond, Doyle said, because they’ll think it’s money and time they’ll just be throwing away.

Smith said the city needs that amount of work to be done, so that they can see what sort of financial return a proposal might have for the city. It does require a level of commitment, he said, and they’ll just have to see what they get.

John Lawter said that there’s a perception, deserved or not, that the golf course is struggling because of the heavy administrative costs that the city charges. If Huron Hills is managed by a contractor, what happens to those overhead charges? Smith replied that until he had a proposal to review, it was too difficult to say.

Offen had another question: Are there other city facilities that are run by an outside contractor? The only one that came to mind was the community centers, he said. Smith clarified that the Bryant and Northside community centers are run by the nonprofit Community Action Network, under a contract with the city. They were hired because the city felt they were better equipped than city staff to provide the services, and it ended up costing the city less. A different example is the Leslie Science and Nature Center, which used to be part of the city’s parks system. It’s now a separate nonprofit, but the city still owns the land and buildings there, and assists with staff and capital improvements.

A public/private partnership isn’t inconsistent with other things the city has done, Smith said. Ann Arbor has an exclusive agreement with Pepsi, for example, as a vendor for the parks system. So it’s not unheard of, Smith said, and he expects to see more of those agreements in the future. And it’s not just about the money – the quality of service needs to be as good as what the city can provide, or better, he said.

Julie Grand asked about retirement costs – would that have to be negotiated? Smith said it was difficult to speak at that level of detail without seeing a specific proposal, but if the golf courses remained as an enterprise fund. And if a worker spent most of his career there, then the fund would bear most of the retirement costs.

Gwen Nystuen noted that Fuller Park and Huron Hills are prime parkland for the city – if the city didn’t own the property, they’d be trying to figure out how to buy the land. Yet they’re now converting them into a quasi-commercial situation. She wanted to know what legal protections are provided to land that’s designated as parkland, as opposed to just public land. What can the public expect? The public has bought these lands, she said, and they have voted to have a say if they’re ever to be sold or if the use changes. Nystuen wanted to know from the city’s legal staff: What is the status of dedicated parkland? (In the audience, Ted Annis raised his hands, giving Nystuen two thumbs up.) Smith said he’d pass along that request.

Doug Chapman said it was his understanding that the reason this RFP came about was because Huron Hills was losing money and it might have to close. This was something they were trying as an alternative – an alternative to closing the golf course. One concern he had was that the term “alternative golf use” was too vague. What does that mean? He suggested it be more clearly defined.

Berla said he wanted to respond to something that Nystuen had said. Everyone knows that parkland can’t be sold – that’s clear. He said he loves to see the public come to PAC meetings, especially since there were constructive comments. But what he counts as the “public will” are the things that the public voted on, like the sale of parkland. The main thing the public votes for are city council positions, and those councilmembers are taking positions on these and other issues. “I hope the public is holding them accountable,” he said. These are the people who are elected – this is democracy.

Berla said he finds it upsetting that they’re talking about what the proper uses of parkland are – it says in the RFP that the use is for golf. That’s exactly what’s in the PROS plan too. He said he finds it strange that they’re talking about this. Regarding commercial uses, what about the farmers market? he asked. It’s really important and a great part of the community, but it’s a public/private partnership. He supports that, saying it benefits the community. What he’d oppose is if he thought there was cronyism – deals that weren’t benefiting the public, but were only benefiting the private entity. In the case of the Huron Hills RFP, it seems like it’s benefiting the public, he said, and it’s a good thing.

Grand clarified that the golf courses are receiving money from the general fund for six years. There’s no guarantee that they’ll continue to receive general fund support beyond that. They can argue about accounting and the municipal service charges, she said, but the point is that based on the accounting that’s used now, Huron Hills is operating at a significant deficit that the parks system couldn’t cover without sacrificing other facilities. Maybe it’s not what people want to hear, she said, but that’s the financial reality. The result of the RFP might be that the city is doing the best it can, and that no one else wants to touch it. Then they’ll have to deal with how to overcome the deficit.

They are trying to keep the process as transparent as possible, Grand said, and she’s open to making arrangements for more public input, if it’s necessary.

Karen Levin said she wanted to acknowledge the work that’s gone into developing the RFP. The intent is to see if there’s a way to manage Huron Hills more efficiently, she said, and if there is, they want people’s ideas. She said she supports that.

Offen asked if PAC could see a revised version of the RFP, after their feedback had been included. Smith said he would send out a revised draft.

Huron Hills RFP: Public Commentary, Round 2

Several people took a second turn at public commentary at the end of the PAC meeting, responding to the commissioners’ discussion.

Nancy Kaplan said she went to the meeting of the golf advisory task force during which the RFP was discussed, and noted that as a member of the public, you can’t participate or ask questions – you’re just an observer. At that meeting it was stated that cash-on-cash, Huron Hills is ahead, she said, and that this fact is not well known. Looking at how the finances are kept is important. Golf is the only recreation facility that’s in an enterprise fund and that must make money, Kaplan stated.

She also pointed out that Huron Hills and Leslie Park are very different courses with very different audiences, and that needs to be kept in mind. It seems that piece by piece, we’re giving away our parkland, she said. It seems there is no protection. When voters supported the idea that there could be no sale of parkland without a public vote, they didn’t realize that everything except a sale would be ok, she said. It’s very disingenuous to say that there’s protection for the parks. Finally, she said, if you work from a flawed premise, no matter how deeply you dig, you won’t come up with a reasonable answer. It’s a flawed premise to say that the way to save Huron Hills is to put out an RFP, which will destroy the vista there. There has to be something that we can count on to protect parkland, she said. She concluded by thanking commissioners for all they were doing.

Betty Richart reminded commissioners that golf is an 18-hole game. Anything that whacks off parts of the course will prevent people from being able to play tournaments there.

Ted Annis responded to comments that Tim Berla made about the city subsidizing golfers. That’s not quite the case, he said. If you apply enterprise accounting to other facilities, like the senior center, they’d have to close. If you apply general fund accounting to the golf operations, then revenues cover their direct out-of-pocket expenses, he said. Add in the half-million-dollar administrative service charge, however, and it looks like they’re losing money. “You’re being misled, completely misled, by this notion that you’re subsidizing the rounds of golf played,” he said. “You’re not.”

Annis also said that they seemed intent on issuing something, though he wished they wouldn’t. If they’re going to, he said, then the request for information (RFI) makes some kind of sense. Finally, he noted that Colin Smith said council gave direction to issue an RFP. But then councilman Mike Anglin said that there was no direction, it was just a discussion. He asked for some clarification on that.

William Arlinghaus said that any proposal he’d make wouldn’t change the golf course in any way – it would probably remain managed by the city. He also asked a question about golf passes, which can now be purchased and used at both Huron Hills and Leslie Park. Would people still be able to do that, if Huron Hills becomes a public/private partnership?

Fuller Road Station

Fuller Road Station wasn’t on PAC’s agenda this month, but commissioner Gwen Nystuen asked for an update. Colin Smith, manager of parks and recreation, indicated that he’d provide an update during his manager’s report. However, he did not mention the project in his report.

At PAC’s meeting in July, commissioners were briefed on the project by Eli Cooper, the city’s transportation program manager. More recently, site plans were filed with the city’s planning department in early August. [See Chronicle coverage: "Site Plan Filed for Fuller Road Station"]

Fuller Road Station: Public Commentary

Two people spoke about Fuller Road Station during public commentary.

George Gaston said his issues were basically the same as the concerns over Huron Hills – it’s just a different park and a different project. He voiced opposition to Fuller Road Station, saying the same arguments against the RFP for Huron Hills can be applied to Fuller Road Station too. He mentioned that he’d given commissioners a copy of an email he’d sent to the mayor and city council. [.pdf of email] Gaston said he hoped PAC could take a stronger stand on these issues. These projects should go to a public vote, he said, and it seems odd that the city is buying development rights outside the city while granting development rights within the city. “Please pay attention,” he said.

Rita Mitchell said she was there to talk about Fuller Road Station, but her comments were applicable to Huron Hills as well. She thanked commissioners for their attention to Fuller Road Station, and said she knows they represent those who are interested in city parks. Residents have supported Fuller Park with their tax dollars since the early 1960s, she said. It’s a core part of Ann Arbor, near the Huron River. She said she appreciated their concerns about the parks budget and the openness of the public process that they address. However, the resolution that PAC sent to council lacks acknowledgment of the citizens’ interest in parks, indicated by the vote that changed the city charter to require voter input on the sale of parkland.

A memorandum of understanding for the use of parkland for 75 years or more is essentially a sale, Mitchell said. Building a parking structure that will last that long will set a precedent that will apply to all parks. The PAC resolution to council didn’t address the precedent issue, she said. Mitchell asked PAC to change their resolution, and make it a recommendation that actually protects parks. Don’t nibble away at the parks with temporary parking lots or leases. “Really think about what the long-term implications are,” she said.

During the second opportunity for public comment, Mitchell said she’d been looking forward to the update on Fuller Road Station – that’s why she’d stayed for the entire meeting – and she wondered what had happened to that.

West Park, PROS Plan Updates

Earlier in the meeting, parks planner Amy Kuras gave an update on West Park, which has been closed this spring and summer for massive renovations. “There are still big piles of dirt in the park,” she said, “but we’re moving them around.” [For background on the project, see Chronicle coverage: "West Park Renovations Get Fast-Tracked"]

The project is about two weeks behind schedule, Kuras said, but should be completed by the end of October. They discovered poor soils that needed to be removed, which set back their schedule a bit. In addition, recent heavy rains have washed out some of the work, she said.

Major changes to the stormwater system are underway, including installation of large swirl concentrators on the west side of the park. Stormwater that flows through these underground concrete devices is swirled in a cylindrical chamber, filtering out a large amount of sediment, oil, grease and other contaminants. The project also includes construction of bioswales – shallow excavated areas filled with native vegetation – that roughly follow the course of the Allen Creek tributary, which flows through the park in underground pipes.

Other changes include seating for the bandshell and a public art project there, the addition of a boardwalk, new stairs coming down the hill from Huron Street, moving the basketball court out of the floodway, and upgrading the condition of the baseball field.

Commissioner Sam Offen asked if the project was still on budget – roughly $3.5 million, funded in large part with federal stimulus dollars. Kuras reported that they’re within the budget’s 10% contingency at this point, and she doesn’t think they’ll exceed that amount. The city is asking the contractor to look at flood insurance coverage, to see if that might cover some of the costs related to recent heavy rains.

Colin Smith, the city’s parks and rec manager, noted that the changes aren’t intended to eliminate water from the park – it will just be managed better, he said.

Kuras also gave a brief update on revisions to the state-mandated Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) plan, which is done every five years. A draft is finished and being reviewed by city staff, and will then get feedback from the PROS steering committee. After that, the draft will be posted online for public input, Kuras said, probably in September or October. The plan will be presented to PAC and the planning commission later this year, before final approval is sought from city council. [For background on the PROS process, see Chronicle coverage: "Ann Arbor Planning with the PROS"]

Updates from the Parks & Rec Manager

Colin Smith gave updates on several projects, as part of his manager’s report.

The Argo Dam RFP was issued, and about 12 people attended a pre-bid meeting on Monday, Aug. 16. They toured the site and there were some interesting questions, he said. [For details on the Argo RFP, see Chronicle coverage: "Two Dam Options for Argo"] In the coming weeks, workers will be removing about 75-100 dead or dying trees on the dam’s embankment, as part of the vegetation management plan, Smith said. They might need to close the trail on certain days, depending on the work, he said.

He gave updates on efforts to raise revenues and cut costs at the Ann Arbor Senior Center and Mack Pool, which were both at risk of closing during the last budget cycle. [For details, see Chronicle coverage: "Shoring Up the Ann Arbor Senior Center"]

The final numbers for the FY2010 fiscal year, which ended June 30, will be presented at PAC’s September meeting, Smith said. Overall, parks did very well, he said. Several facilities – including Vets pool, the senior center, and the golf courses – exceeded the revenue that had been budgeted for the year.

Smith also described a new partnership the city has with Stonyfield Farm. The organic yogurt company will be in the city’s parks through Oct. 1, passing out free samples, and will donate $15,000 to either the senior center, Mack Pool or the parks and rec scholarship fund. Residents can “vote” for one of those options by depositing Stonyfield lids in containers at groceries throughout the area. More information about Stonyfield’s efforts in Ann Arbor is on the firm’s website. Smith described it as a nice partnership, giving exposure to some of the city’s parks and rec programs.

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

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

Next meeting: PAC’s meeting on Tuesday, Sept. 21 begins at 4 p.m. at the studios of Community Television Network, 2805 S. Industrial Highway. [confirm date]