The AATA board takes a vote at its June 20, 2013 meeting. (Photos by the writer.)

In the last two weeks the city councils of Ypsilanti and Ann Arbor had voted unanimously to support the changes to the articles. The vote on the AATA aboard was also unanimous among the five members who were present. Sue Gott and board chair Charles Griffith were absent.

The change to the articles will also expand the board to nine members, with one of the two additional seats to be appointed by the city of Ypsilanti. The name of the authority will now reflect the fact that the geographic boundaries extend beyond Ann Arbor by changing the name to the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority (AAATA).

While the change in governance does not in itself have any financial implications, the goal of the governance change is to provide a way for the two cities to generate additional revenue supporting transportation – in addition to the local millages that the cities already levy, which are specifically dedicated to transportation and transmitted to the AATA. An additional millage could be levied by the AAATA – a statutory right also enjoyed by the AATA, but never exercised. The AAATA could put a millage proposal on the ballot, but it would require voter approval.

The board does not have a meeting scheduled for the month of July, but CEO Michael Ford indicated that one might be convened, to handle some routine items as well as next steps related to the addition of Ypsilanti to the AAATA. That would need to be noticed to the public as a special meeting under Michigan’s Open Meetings Act.

In other business, the AATA board agreed to raise fares for its commuter express service from Canton and Chelsea. The increase in fares, in combination with a one-time agreement with the University of Michigan to defray costs of the fare increase for its employees, allowed the Canton service to continue. Fares were also increased on a certain subset of rides taken on the AATA’s NightRide – a shared taxi service that operates after the AATA regular buses stop running. The fare for NightRide will remain $5 for all rides except those that have origins and destinations both in Ann Arbor, and for those that are made with an advance reservation. However, if a ride has either an origin or destination outside Ann Arbor and no reservation is made in advance, then the cost will be $7. The board also approved a number of other route scheduling changes.

In addition, the board approved the purchase of battery refresher kits for up to 20 of its hybrid electric buses. And the board authorized the sale of an older bus to the Ann Arbor Community Center for one dollar.

The board held a public hearing on its federal program of projects, and received updates on several items. Board members also heard an update on the delayed deployment of the AATA’s new website, an optimistic report on the possibility that around $800,000 of state funding would be restored, and a status report on the connector project. The connector project is still in the planning stages, and could result in high-capacity transit along the corridor that runs from US-23 and Plymouth Road through downtown southward to Briarwood Mall.

The board also took care of some internal housekeeping items at the meeting, electing Eli Cooper as treasurer, who replaces David Nacht. Nacht recently ended his 10 years of service on the board.

Admission of Ypsilanti to AATA

The board was asked to give the final approval necessary to add the city of Ypsilanti as a member municipality of the transportation authority. As part of the move, the name of the organization will be changed to the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority.

The geographic footprint of the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority is shown in green: the two cities of Ypsilanti and Ann Arbor. The city of Saline and the townships of Pittsfield and Ypsilanti have also been part of recent active discussions about committing to a more stable funding mechanism for existing service and expanded service.

The change to the articles of incorporation also gives Ypsilanti the right to appoint a member of the board – which will expand from seven to nine members. The city councils of the two cities had already approved the change. The Ann Arbor city council voted on June 3, 2013 to approve the change in governance, while the Ypsilanti city council took its vote on June 18. Both councils voted unanimously to support the move. [.pdf of new AAATA articles of incorporation] [.pdf of old AATA articles of incorporation]

While the change to the articles will affect the governance of the AAATA, the goal of the governance change is to provide a way to generate additional funding for transportation. The AAATA could, with voter approval, levy a uniform property tax on the entire geographic area of its membership – something the AATA does not currently do. The cities of Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti now levy their own millages, which are transmitted to the AATA. However, Ypsilanti is currently at its 20-mill state constitutional limit. A millage levied by the AAATA would not count against that 20-mill cap.

Based on information provided to Ann Arbor city council members for their June 3 meeting, the local share of Ypsilanti’s transportation services – the part for which Ypsilanti is responsible – would come to $325,983 for FY 2014. Ypsilanti’s dedicated millage, which is levied at a rate of 0.9789 mills, generated about $308,000 in FY 2012. So there’s some interest in establishing an additional funding source, just to maintain existing levels of service.

However, current discussions indicate that the intent is to increase levels of service – both frequency and the hours of operation – within the Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti city boundaries. The additional amount of local funding for the planned increases in service would be the equivalent of around 0.6-0.7 mills. One mill is $1 for every $1,000 of a property’s taxable value.

An AAATA millage proposal would require voter approval. There’s an outside chance for the AAATA to place a millage on the November 2013 ballot, but that decision would need to be made by late August. [Ballot language must be certified to the county clerk by Aug. 27, 2013.] The practicalities of mounting a successful millage campaign mean that a decision to make a millage request would likely need to come sooner than late August, however.

On a possible millage question, AATA staff and board members are currently having “feeler” discussions with some members of the community who have strong interests in transportation.

Regarding the name change, customary pronunciation of the current name is to sound out each letter: A-A-T-A. One possibility that’s been suggested for the new Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority is to pronounce the new letter sequence Triple-A-T-A. Another possibility is A-3-T-A.

The proposal to include Ypsilanti in the AAATA came in the context of a demised attempt in 2012 to expand the AATA to all of Washtenaw County. Since then, conversations have continued among a smaller cluster of communities geographically closer to Ann Arbor. The next such meeting is scheduled for June 27 at Pittsfield Township hall, starting at 4 p.m. [Previous Chronicle coverage: "Ypsi Waits at Bus Stop, Other Riders Unclear."]

Ypsilanti mayor Paul Schreiber, responding to an emailed inquiry from The Chronicle, indicated that he hoped the Ypsilanti appointment to the AAATA board could be confirmed by the council by late July or mid-August.

Admission of Ypsilanti to AATA: Board Deliberations

Reporting out from the planning and development committee, Eli Cooper noted that Jerry Lax – outside counsel for the AATA – had attended the committee’s meeting that month. Lax had answered questions from committee members about the legal ins and outs of the move. There’s some continued interest on financial issues, which he’d keep an eye on as treasurer, Cooper said. The committee, however, was clear about the fact that the change to the governance was separate from the financial issue. The sense of the committee, he concluded, was that adding Ypsilanti is a positive step forward.

AATA board member Eli Cooper.

Cooper characterized the addition of Ypsilanti to the AATA as a “wonderful opportunity.” He pointed out that the AATA is an Act 55 transit authority, serving Ann Arbor since the 1970s. It’s really been an authority that has served the Ann Arbor area, he noted. The step of moving Ypsilanti into the AATA is a recognition of the regional nature of AATA’s services, Cooper said. He allowed that this is less than the countywide area that the authority had been pursuing last year, but it’s a recognition of the growth of the AATA and the Ann Arbor metropolitan area.

It’s one small step forward in establishing a footprint to serve the transit needs of the community, said Cooper, who also is the city of Ann Arbor’s transportation program manager. He hoped it’s the first of many similar steps, taken incrementally as other communities become interested in having a more formal relationship with the AATA. “Make no mistake about it: The city of Ypsilanti, by moving forward with a transit millage a few years back, is really a partner with us.” So he’d be voting in support of bringing Ypsilanti in and moving forward with the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority.

Roger Kerson echoed what Cooper had said. He called it a really good step forward in terms of regional thinking. Travel needs don’t stop at municipal boundaries, he noted. Kerson was especially looking forward to having representation from Ypsilanti on the board. He appreciated the fact that Ypsilanti mayor Paul Schreiber, as well as Ypsilanti councilmember Pete Murdock, had attended recent meetings of the AATA board.

Kerson allowed that there’d been “fits and starts” in the effort to expand transit services. He was glad Ypsilanti had jump-started the process. Kerson was also glad the Ann Arbor city council supported the move. Kerson stressed that having Ypsilanti join the AATA doesn’t exclude anyone else, saying that other communities might also want to become full partners. He was very happy to support the resolution.

Eric Mahler echoed what Cooper and Kerson had said. He offered his compliments to the AATA staff and outside counsel Jerry Lax. It was nice to have a willing and full partner who wants to be a real partner. It’s one thing to have a relationship, but it’s another one to have a real partner, he said.

Before proceeding to a vote, Anya Dale indicated she agreed with Mahler, Kerson and Cooper.

Outcome: The board unanimously approved the resolution adopting the revised articles of incorporation, admitting the city of Ypsilanti as a member of the AATA.

Admission of Ypsilanti to AATA: Next Steps

During his report to the board, Michael Ford told them that details of their availability had been requested in anticipation of a possible special board meeting to be held in July, in connection with next steps related to adding Ypsilanti to the AATA. Other items that might need board approval at a potential special meeting in July include a print job contract, relocation of a fire hydrant, and purchase of vans for the VanRide program expansion.

Meetings among nearby jurisdictions – including the cities of Ypsilanti and Saline, and the townships of Ypsilanti and Pittsfield – have continued after the end of an effort in 2012 to expand the AATA’s service and governance area to the entire county. The smaller group of government units has been presented with a set of increased services and various funding and governance options. Among those options was the possibility of Ypsilanti and other nearby jurisdictions joining the AATA. Previous Chronicle coverage: “Ypsi Waits at Bus Stop, Other Riders Unclear.”

The next meeting of the urban core group is June 27 at the Pittsfield Township hall, 6201 W. Michigan Ave., starting at 4 p.m. At the AATA board’s June 20 meeting, Ford announced that the June 27 meeting would include an unveiling of the “build out” of a plan and analysis of the urban core. The information will be for informational purposes only, Ford said, to inform stakeholders. Any funding proposal would eventually come before the AATA board for deliberation, he noted.

Ford also reported that the AATA is considering fielding an opinion survey to follow up on one that was conducted in November 2011. The previous survey had focused on the idea of countywide service, but this new one would focus on the “urban core” communities, Ford said.

Fare Increases: NightRide, Express

The board was asked to approve fare increases for two of the AATA’s services – NightRide and ExpressRide.

The NightRide is a shared cab service with a basic fare of $5, which is available weekdays from 11 p.m. to 6 a.m. and weekends from 7 p.m. to 6:45 a.m.

The board was asked to approve a proposal that keeps costs at $5 per rider for any trips that have their origin and destination within the city of Ann Arbor. And the current $5 per rider will continue to apply to any rides taken with an advance reservation – a system the AATA will be implementing, using vans. However, a $2 premium – for a total of $7 – will apply to rides with a destination or origin that’s not within the city of Ann Arbor, if no advance reservation is made. The move was proposed as a result of increased ridership on the service, after the AATA expanded the service to include the city of Ypsilanti.

The geographic coverage area of AATA’s NightRide was expanded eastward to Golfside Road in March 2011 and further to downtown Ypsilanti in January 2012 – as part of a broader effort to improve work transportation between Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti. Many downtown Ann Arbor restaurant workers live in Ypsilanti. Ridership increased dramatically.

Chart showing NightRide ridership for fiscal years 2008 into 2012.

That increase in ridership resulted in higher costs – due to an adjustment in the contract between Blue Cab and AATA, which the board authorized on July 16, 2012.

At its June 20 meeting, the board was also asked to approve fare increases for express services – from Canton and Chelsea. The proposal was to raise fares from $99 to $125 for a monthly pass; from $40 to $62.50 for a 10-ride ticket, and from $5 to $6.25 for a single trip. According to documentation on that fare increase provided to AATA board members, the University of Michigan and the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority have agreed to split the cost of subsidizing the fare increase. UM already subsidizes fares for its workers to ride the service.

At its March 6, 2013 board meeting, however, the DDA declined to include the requested $18,000 subsidy that AATA had requested for Canton and Chelsea express service support. That request had come in the context of AATA requests for other support – for the go!pass program for downtown commuters. The DDA board did agree to $610,662 of support for that program.

The fare increases will be effective in August 2013.

Fare Increases: NightRide, Express – Meeting Deliberations

In introducing the NightRide item to the board, AATA manager of service development Chris White described the service as a “victim of its own success.” He stressed that there are no changes proposed within the city of Ann Arbor. The premium fare applies only to those rides that have either an origin or destination outside of Ann Arbor – and are not made with an advance reservation.

In reporting out from the performance monitoring and external relations committee, Roger Kerson made clear the Canton service had been “on the chopping block,” but UM had provided the resources necessary to continue the service. In his remarks, Kerson stressed that financing the express services for out-of-town commuters did not rely on any Ann Arbor taxpayer dollars. The funding from UM is for only a year, and the AATA is hoping that the new southeast Michigan regional transit Authority (RTA) – which includes Washtenaw County – would provide funding in future years.

During his report to the board, CEO Michael Ford made a special note of the fact that the university had agreed to cover the cost of the express ride service to Canton, which avoided eliminating the route. A formal request had been made to the regional transit authority (RTA) for support of the commuter express ride services. The RTA couldn’t meet that request, because the new authority doesn’t have funds for operating transit at this time. Ford said he was very appreciative of UM’s willingness to step up and offer its support for the Canton service.

Kerson said UM’s last-minute provision of the resources to keep that service going indicated the value that UM places on reducing congestion and parking needs. The riders are paying some of the extra cost, Kerson pointed out, through the fare increase. At the end of the day, the AATA still provides the service but no local taxpayer money is used to subsidize out-of-town commuters, Kerson stressed, saying he knew that had been a concern.

AATA board member Eric Mahler.

A question from Eric Mahler later in the meeting clarified that the commitment from UM was for one year only. Ford indicated that in future years, the AATA hoped to continue the discussion with the RTA. Ford characterized the situation as the UM contribution giving a little bit of a reprieve, but the AATA will continue to work diligently to identify funding sources.

Chris White noted that the proposed change had included the potential for eliminating the Canton service. But that turned out not to be necessary. The fare increase was the result of working on a financing plan, White said, which had included conversations with riders about their willingness to pay an additional fare. Riders are “anxious to maintain the service” and are willing to pay some of those costs, he said.

So the issue the AATA faced was increasing fares versus losing riders, White explained. The increase comes to about 25% increase. The great majority of riders – more than 90% – have half their fare paid by UM or by the DDA through the getDowntown program, White said. So instead of a $26 increase, it works out to a $13 increase per month for those riders, he concluded.

Eli Cooper moved for approval, saying that it’s important to note that both the Chelsea and Canton services were new – when introduced using federal demonstration funding. He’d recalled the debate and the compromise that had been reached on the appropriate fare. The services have been years in developing ridership, he said.

Cooper recalled that when he served his first term on the board in 2005, he used to say: “I can get anywhere in Ann Arbor, but I can’t get outta here. And if I’m not here, I can’t get in here unless I have a car.” The express services respond directly to that challenge, he said. Combined with AirRide, the express services give the AATA a metropolitan area reach. The fact that AATA staff, employers and riders have come together to find stable financial footing for at least the next year reflects a real value that the service represents to all stakeholders, he said.

Cooper was also pleased to hear the RTA accepted the AATA’s request, but just doesn’t have the funding available. The AATA needs to continue to work with the RTA to understand the positive working relationship that can be established to give benefit to Washtenaw County and Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority riders, he said. It’s the culmination of a lot of hard work over a number of years, Cooper noted. It’s not serving the largest number of riders, he allowed, but it’s a new service. He looked forward to continued marketing and expansion of the service as the community grows.

Outcome: The board voted unanimously to approve the fare increases and the service changes on three separate votes.

At its June 20 meeting, the AATA board also approved several non-fare-related service changes to different routes. All except one was considered minor. The major change was to Route 12 in Ann Arbor, which changed its departure times from Blake Transit Center in downtown Ann Arbor.

“Sale” of Bus to Community Center

The board was asked to approve the sale of an older bus to the Ann Arbor Community Center. Under Michigan Dept. of Transportation guidelines, a transportation authority can sell a bus to a nonprofit at a cost of $1. That’s what the AATA board was asked to do.

AATA board member Roger Kerson.

The vehicle was a 1999 Gillig low-floor bus originally purchased by the AATA in October 1999. That means the bus has served its minimum 12-year useful life. According to AATA manager of maintenance Terry Black, the bus had about a half-million miles on it. The AATA had previously sold a bus to the community center in 2008 – also for $1. However, replacement parts for that bus are difficult to find.

Roger Kerson noted that buses reach a point where they go out of service and can’t be used by the AATA. But the Ann Arbor Community Center won’t use it that much, compared to the number of miles the AATA would put on it.

No transit authority would be able to use it, given the number of miles on it. It’s a way to support an organization that’s provided support to the community for 90 years, Black said.

Eli Cooper got clarification that the bus would receive a paint job (purple), making it clear that the vehicle was not an AATA bus. Susan Baskett indicated her support for the move, and felt that the community center is grateful for the support.

Outcome: The board voted unanimously to approve the sale of the bus.

Hybrid Bus Battery Refreshers

The board was asked to approve the purchase of refresher battery kits for up to 20 hybrid electric buses at a total cost of $675,000. The board had discussed the item at a previous meeting, on April 18, 2013.

At the April 18 meeting, the board lamented the fact that no U.S. company, and more specifically no Michigan company, had bid on the AATA’s request for proposals to replace the battery kits for its hybrid electric buses. But board sentiment was that a larger purchasing consortium for such kits might eventually be achieved through the newly-created southeast Michigan regional transit authority (RTA) – which includes the transit agencies in Washtenaw, Wayne, Macomb and Oakland counties. And that larger consortium might make it worth the while of a Michigan company that’s part of the state’s nascent battery industry to invest in the capability to produce bus battery kits.

The board delayed voting on the item in April due to the non-U.S. source – because board members wanted to be certain that federal funds could be used. The only bid had been from W.W. Williams of Dearborn, Mich., which distributes a product sold by Allison Transmission. The kits are fully assembled in Japan by Panasonic, but are programmed by Allison for use in the energy storage system used in AATA buses. So Allison was pursuing a Buy America waiver from the Federal Transit Administration – as its existing waiver had expired.

The AATA also inquired directly with the FTA. From the AATA staff memo on the results of that inquiry:

AATA requested clarification from the FTA on April 16, 2013 and received approval on June 4, 2013 from the FTA to purchase the battery refresh kits using grant funds. Approval from FTA came as a result of a determination that while the energy storage system (ESS) is a component of the Allison propulsion system, it is comprised of many subcomponents e.g., battery sub packs, relays, fuses, pre-charge resistors, etc. In the FTA’s opinion, components (ESS) of the propulsion system must be manufactured in the United States without regard to the origin of its subcomponents. In the FTA’s determination subcomponents may be of domestic or foreign origin. The purchase of the battery refresh kit is not a purchase of the entire ESS component, but a purchase of a subcomponent that does not require a waiver to be eligible for purchase using grant funds.

In the fleet of 80 AATA buses, 52 use hybrid battery technology.

Reporting out from the performance monitoring and external relations committee, Roger Kerson commended AATA manager of maintenance Terry Black. Kerson noted that AATA was an early-adopter of the technology for its buses. It’s easy to say, “Go buy a hybrid,” but it’s not easy when you’ve never run that kind of bus, and nobody actually has done that before.

In introducing the item for a vote, Kerson reiterated that it’s necessary to maintain hybrid bus batteries to keep them on the road. It’s being done in advance of the failure of any battery packs, he noted, so the AATA is addressing this proactively.

Outcome: The board voted unanimously to approve the hybrid electric bus battery refresher kits.

Board Organization

The AATA has three officers – chair, treasurer and secretary. Absence of board chair Charles Griffith at the June 20 meeting, and the recent departure from the board of treasurer David Nacht, meant that some housekeeping activity was required at the start of the June 20 meeting.

Due to the chair’s absence, board secretary Anya Dale presided over the meeting. But that meant an acting secretary needed to be appointed. Eli Cooper served as secretary for the duration of the meeting.

The two standing board committees were also set. The planning and development committee (PDC) will consist of: Sue Gott (chair), Eli Cooper and Eric Mahler. The performance monitoring and external relations (PMER) committee will consist of: Roger Kerson (chair), Anya Dale and Susan Baskett.

Because Nacht had left the board after 10 years of service, his position as treasurer needed replacement. Dale, presiding over the meeting, called Nacht’s replacement “in position only.”

Kerson nominated Cooper for the job. Kerson noted that Cooper was now in his second term of service on the AATA board. Cooper has a great deal of professional experience in transit, Kerson continued. He said that based on conversations on the board and off the board, Cooper is a “dedicated and rigorous guardian of public funds.” The AATA board and the taxpayers would be well-served with Cooper as board treasurer, Kerson said. Baskett seconded the nomination.

Outcome: The board unanimously approved the appointment of Eli Cooper as treasurer of the AATA board.

Federal Program of Projects Application

The AATA held a formal public hearing on its annual federal program of projects.

Federal Program of Projects Application: Background

Chris White, AATA manager of service development, explained the background of the federal program of projects. A public hearing is a required component each year for the AATA’s application to the Federal Transit Administration for grants. But the public hearing is the last step of the public input process, White said. Earlier opportunities for public input are provided in the planning process that includes development of a long-range plan – working with the Washtenaw Area Transportation Study (WATS) and the Southeast Michigan Council of Governments (SEMCOG), White said.

The next step in the development of AATA’s transportation improvement program is a four-year program. In order to be included in the FTA grant application, White said, a project must also be included in the long-range plan and the four-year plan. The public has also had previous opportunity to weigh in on the capital and categorical grant program – which is adopted each January. The capital and categorical grant program is a five-year program – which forms the basis of the application for the FTA grant funds.

The AATA receives funds from different formula sources, White explained. The primary source of funds is from Section 5307 (Urbanized Area Formula Program), which totals a little over $6 million this year, White said. The AATA had also received about $700,000 in funds from a new program – Section 5339 (Bus and Bus Facilities Formula Grants), which is a capital-only program. On the list is also about $1.15 million for CMAQ (Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality) funds for the replacement of two buses. Other funds on the list include some from the Job Access Reverse Commute (JARC) program and the New Freedom Program – which helps fund transportation for people with disabilities.

After describing the sources of the funds, White then ticked through the items on the list. The items, sorted by the amount of federal funds requested, is as follows:

Federal Share  Project  
=================================================
$1,680,000     Preventive Maintenance 
$1,474,000     Operating Assistance    
$1,156,320     2 Large Buses (replacement)  
$1,046,400     Blake Transit Center (final funding)      
$1,040,000     2 Large Buses (service expansion) 
  $500,000     25 Vans (vanpool)  
  $400,000     Ypsilanti Transit Center   
  $320,000     Planning  
  $311,760     Job Access Transportation
  $256,000     Bus Components  
  $240,000     Subcontracted Service  
  $151,724     New Freedom Mobility Transportation   
  $120,000     Computer (hardware, software)   
   $72,000     4 support vehicles  
   $64,000     Bus Stops (shelters/benches)

-

The two buses for service expansion are to be used on Route 5, where service was expanded in January 2013. The Blake Transit Center fund is the “last shot of funding” for the BTC reconstruction. The funding for the Ypsilanti Transit Center is called “rehabilitation” by the feds, but White would call it “renovation.” Design will be done this year (2013) with construction planned for next year (2014). The YTC is about 23 years old, White said, and is in need of some renovation.

The bus stop improvements are mostly shelters. White highlighted the “operating assistance” item, and pointed out the AATA had not been eligible for federal operating assistance for about 15 years. But now that the urbanized area for the AATA has a population of over 200,000, in combination with the MAP 21 rules, that means AATA is now eligible for operating assistance. So the AATA is applying for $1.47 million of operating assistance.

Later in the meeting, Roger Kerson asked what the AATA was planning to spend the additional $1.47 million on. White explained that this money is for FY 2013, the current budget year, so it’s already been budgeted.

The JARC funding, White explained, will be used to continue the NightRide service, and the trip assistance program AATA operates, called MyRide. JARC and New Freedom are programs the feds are looking to help leverage private funds, White said. So the AATA is looking to form partnerships with other agencies to help leverage those transportation funds.

White noted that the comments from the public hearing will be included in the public record, and would be included as part of the grant application.

Federal Program of Projects Application: Public Hearing

Thomas Partridge said he was there to advocate for the members of the community who need and deserve vital transportation, who aren’t well served currently. He was concerned about the lack of funding to meet the needs of seniors and disabled people.

Partridge asked that the application “go back to the drawing board” before it’s submitted to the federal government.

Allison Stroud introduced herself as a public policy intern for the summer at the Ann Arbor Center for Independent Living. She appreciated that the AATA is trying to make the transit system accessible to everybody with disabilities. But there are many more improvements that can be made. So she asked the board to give consideration to additional improvements, in those areas where the distance to a bus stop is too far, as an example. She also suggested additional transit options, and keeping the bus fares as low as possible so that everyone can afford the services.

Connector Update

During his report to the board, CEO Michael Ford gave an update on the public engagement process for the connector study.

Rick Nau of URS, the consultant that’s conducting the connector study, presented information at a June 18 session held at the downtown location of the Ann Arbor District Library. (Image links to the poster Nau is holding)

By way of background, the AATA is currently conducting an alternatives analysis study for the corridor running from US-23 and Plymouth southward along Plymouth to State Street, then further south to I-94. The alternatives analysis phase will result in a preferred choice of transit mode (e.g., bus rapid transit, light rail, etc.) and identification of stations and stops.

A previous study established the feasibility of operating some kind of high-capacity transit in that corridor. A key finding of the feasibility study was that the demand for high-capacity transit is clear in the “core” of the corridor – primarily between the University of Michigan’s north campus, medical facilities and central campus. The demand was found to be less intense on the corridor’s “shoulders.” That basic finding is now evident in the color shading on the draft route alignment map for the current phase of the study, which indicates the density of trips.

At the June 20 AATA board meeting, Ford relayed a point of information that had also been conveyed at a public engagement session held on June 18 at the downtown Ann Arbor District Library: the alternative of an elevated guideway system is not longer among the mix of options that the consultant is considering.

A final report on a locally preferred alternative is expected for this phase of the study sometime in the winter of 2014.

Communications, Committees, CEO, Commentary

At its June 20 meeting, the board entertained various communications, including its usual reports from the performance monitoring and external relations committee, the planning and development committee, as well as from CEO Michael Ford. The board also heard commentary from the public. Here are some highlights.

Comm/Comm: State Operating Assistance

During his report to the board, CEO Michael Ford gave an update on supplemental state funding that is on its way to the governor’s desk for signing. By way of background, for the current budget year, the AATA’s anticipated local bus operating assistance from the state of Michigan was about $800,000 less than anticipated, due to the application of a formula governing the allocation of such funds.

AATA was not the only transit agency negatively impacted, and the state legislature took action to make an additional appropriation. Ford said that initial calculations indicate the AATA will receive about $887,000. That could be subject to change.

Reporting out from the performance monitoring and external relations committee, Roger Kerson said that if the funding comes through, it would put the AATA’s budget in better shape than it was a couple of months ago. The AATA had dipped into reserves to fund expanded service on Routes #4 and #5, he noted, without an identified funding stream. The restored funding is not finalized, and “Lansing is an exciting place,” he allowed. But if it does get done as expected, he said, it would put the AATA in much better shape.

Comm/Comm: Website Launch

CEO Michael Ford advised the board that the launch of the AATA’s new website has again been delayed. “Surprise, surprise!” he quipped. The project has been delayed for several months.

From left: Jan Hallberg, AATA information technology manager, and Chris White, AATA manager of service development.

The problem is in integrating real-time information with the rider tools. The AATA is working closely with the developer to resolve the remaining issues, he said. “We’re almost there,” and the website is really dynamic. In another month or so, it would be ready, he ventured. When it’s launched, Ford added, it will bring a lot of benefit to riders.

Later during the meeting, Eli Cooper asked for some further clarification on the delay of the website. Jan Hallberg, AATA’s manager of information technology, provided more detail. The AATA has routes that start in the morning and continue all day, she explained. So the route makes several “trips” in a day. At the end of a trip and the beginning of a trip, it’s difficult to see the change in status. For example, if Route #4 is arriving at Blake Transit Center, you can see that the direction of the bus is “to Ann Arbor.” But if its status stays “to Ann Arbor” until it leaves the BTC, at that point it’s too late to tell the rider that the bus is headed back to Ypsilanti. So what they’re currently working to fix, Hallberg explained, is to make sure the real-time information changes to “to Ypsilanti” while the bus is still waiting at BTC. The AATA’s previous developer was never able to fix this, and now Hallberg wants to make sure that the issue is addressed before the website is launched.

Comm/Comm: Ridership

CEO Michael Ford gave an update on AirRide service, between downtown Ann Arbor and Detroit Metro Airport.

Reporting out from the performance monitoring and external relations committee, Roger Kerson said that the AATA is again on pace to have a record number of riders this year. The projection right now is for a 2% increase over last year’s record year.

Comm/Comm: Regional Transit Authority

Regarding the southeast Michigan regional transit authority (RTA), CEO Michael Ford reported that the RTA had recently drafted a master agreement between the RTA and local service providers. Ford characterized the language of the draft agreement as similar to and in the same spirit as a proposed memorandum of understanding that the AATA had drafted earlier. Staff from all the transit providers had given feedback on that at an RTA committee meeting earlier in the week. The master agreement will officially make the RTA the designated recipient of funds per state statute, and outlines the working relationship between transit service providers and the RTA, and the maximum local bus operating assistance the RTA would receive from the state.

Comm/Comm: Blake Transit Center Construction

CEO Michael Ford gave an update on the new transit center construction in downtown Ann Arbor – north of William, between Fourth and Fifth avenues. Utility work continues, and steel is being erected. The beams are expected to be placed in July. The first floor concrete is expected to be poured in the next few days.

Comm/Comm: LAC Report

Rebecca Burke reported from the AATA’s local advisory council (LAC), a group that provides input and feedback to AATA on disability and senior issues. The group had reviewed the A-Ride application and the User’s Guide, and discussed those two documents at its meeting.

Comm/Comm: Ad Litigation

At its June 20 meeting, the board voted to go into closed session to discuss pending litigation connected to its advertising program. A status conference with the court was held on June 17, and another one is scheduled for June 27. Nothing has happened since the court’s latest ruling, in early June. Recent Chronicle coverage: “Judge: No Anti-Israel Ad on Bus for Now.”

Comm/Comm: Thomas Partridge

During public commentary at the start of the meeting, Thomas Partridge told the board he has been a long-time advocate for open and transparent AATA meetings – as far as holding the meetings at sites that can be recorded and broadcast. He asked that all the committees also meet at a similar location so that they can be broadcast. He followed up with a turn of public commentary at the end of the meeting, reminding the board that it’s the 50th anniversary of Martin Luther King’s visit to Detroit.

Present: Eric Mahler, Susan Baskett, Eli Cooper, Roger Kerson, Anya Dale.

Absent: Sue Gott, Charles Griffith.

Next regular meeting: While no regular monthly meeting is currently scheduled for July, CEO Michael Ford indicated at the June 20 meeting that a special meeting might be called sometime during the month. The next scheduled regular meeting is Thursday, Aug. 15, 2013 at 6:30 p.m. at the Ann Arbor District Library, 343 S. Fifth Ave., Ann Arbor. [Check Chronicle event listings to confirm date.]

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

The NightRide is a shared cab service with a basic fare of $5, which is available weekdays from 11 p.m. to 6 a.m. and weekends from 7 p.m. to 6:45 a.m.

The service will still provide rides at its current $5 per rider for any trips that have their origin and destination within the city of Ann Arbor. And the current $5 per rider will continue to apply to any rides taken with an advance reservation – a system the AATA will be implementing, using vans. However, a $2 premium – for a total of $7 – will apply to rides with a destination or origin that’s not within the city of Ann Arbor, if no advance reservation is made. The move comes as a result of increased ridership on the service, after the AATA expanded the service to include the city of Ypsilanti.

The geographic coverage area of AATA’s NightRide was expanded eastward to Golfside Road in March 2011 and further to downtown Ypsilanti in January 2012 – as part of a broader effort to improve work transportation between Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti. Many downtown Ann Arbor restaurant workers live in Ypsilanti. Ridership increased dramatically. [.jpg of NightRide chart through May 2012] And that resulted in higher costs – due to an adjustment in the contract between Blue Cab and AATA, which the board authorized on July 16, 2012.

Also as a result of board action on June 20, two express services – from Canton and Chelsea – will have their fares raised from $99 to $125 for a monthly pass; from $40 to $62.50 for a 10-ride ticket, and from $5 to $6.25 for a single trip. According to documentation on that fare increase provided to AATA board members, the University of Michigan and the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority have agreed to split the cost of subsidizing the fare increase. UM already subsidizes fares for its workers to ride the service.

At its March 6, 2013 board meeting, however, the DDA declined to include the requested $18,000 subsidy that AATA had requested for Canton and Chelsea express service support. That request had come in the context of AATA requests for other support – for the go!pass program for downtown commuters. The DDA board did agree to $610,662 of support for that program.

At the June 20 AATA board meeting, in reporting out from the performance monitoring and external relations committee, Roger Kerson made clear the Canton service had been “on the chopping block” but the UM had provided the resources necessary to continue the service. In his remarks, Kerson stressed that financing the express services for out-of-town commuters did not rely on any Ann Arbor taxpayer dollars. The funding from UM is for only a year, and the AATA is hoping that the new southeast Michigan regional transit Authority (RTA) – which includes Washtenaw County – would provide funding in future years.

The fare increases will be effective in August 2013.

At its June 20 meeting, the AATA board also approved several non-fare-related service changes to different routes. All except for one was considered minor. The major change was to Route 12 in Ann Arbor, which changed its departure times from Blake Transit Center in downtown Ann Arbor.

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

AATA board members met in a workroom at AATA headquarters for their July 16 special meeting. Clockwise around the table starting at the far left: Anya Dale, David Nacht (obscured behind Dale), Jesse Bernstein, CEO Michael Ford, Sue Gott and Eli Cooper. (Photos by the writer.)

However, the longest and most vigorous discussion took place on an item not actually on the published agenda: compliance by the AATA with Michigan’s Public Act 152, signed into law in September 2011, which limits employer health care contributions to a fixed dollar amount. At their July 16 meeting, board members took no further action on the issue, letting the vote taken at their previous meeting on June 21, 2012 stand – for now. An additional special meeting might be called sometime in the next week.

The board’s discussion of new information, obtained from the Michigan attorney general’s office, as well as additional analysis of Act 152, suggested a kind of vindication for the position of two dissenters – Charles Griffith and Roger Kerson – in the board’s June 21 action.

That action had been to limit the AATA’s contributions to no more than 80% of the non-union employee health care cost. Adopting the 80% limit is another way for a public entity to comply with Act 152. And the board had voted on June 21 to do that for its non-union employees – because open enrollment was fast approaching for those employees.

As part of that compliance decision, AATA put together a new health care option, which would allow its non-union employees to choose a health care option that would cost them the same as before – but increase their co-pays. And by the time of the July 16 meeting, employees were participating in the open enrollment process, using the boardroom for that activity.

So the board met in a smaller workroom to handle its business for the July 16 special meeting.

That business included a $60,000 increase in the contract with Steer Davies Gleave, the international consulting firm the AATA hired to assist with the development of its transit master plan. The work has included identifying new service options and financial analysis for AATA’s initiative to expand its governance and service area countywide. With this and other previous increases, the value of the contract now totals $780,622, from a deal first signed in April 2010 for just under $400,000. Some of the additional $60,000 will essentially be passed through to a local consulting firm, Carlisle Wortman Associates.

In other business, the board struck a task-order style deal for marketing and advertising with Quack! Media and Pace & Partners Inc. – a three-year arrangement that could be extended for another two years. The $500,000 total authorized by the board works out to $100,000 a year.

The board also authorized an increase in the contract it has with Blue Cab to provide its NightRide service, which operates after the hours when fixed-route service stops running. The increase is from $28 to $32 per service hour for a contract that extends through 2013. Of the $4 increase, $3 is attributed to the AATA’s relatively new living wage policy.

In a final piece of business, the board authorized a $104,000 contract with RBV Contracting to relocate a fire hydrant as part of AATA’s bus garage expansion project.

Compliance with Michigan’s Public Act 152

The board discussed at length an action it had taken at its previous meeting on June 21, 2012 in order to comply with Michigan’s Public Act 152, which was signed into law last year. The board did not take any action on the issue at its July 16 meeting, but left open the possibility of calling a special meeting before July 23, when the “drop dead” date falls for health care open enrollment for AATA’s non-union employees. The health care plan year begins Aug. 1.

Public Act 152: Background

Public Act 152 limits the amount that a public employer like the AATA can make to its employees’ medical benefits plans – $5,500 for single-person coverage, $11,000 for two-person coverage, and $15,000 for family coverage. However, the act provides another option, under which a public employer can choose through a vote of its governing body (in this case, the AATA board) to not apply the hard dollar cap. Instead, the employer can limit its contribution to 80% of the medical benefit, leaving the employee to cover the remaining 20%. It’s this 80/20 option that the AATA board had exercised in its June 21 vote.

The board’s special meeting on July 16 was held in AATA headquarters at 2700 S. Industrial Highway, instead of the usual location at the downtown Ann Arbor District Library. But it was not held in the dedicated boardroom – because that space was being used for open enrollment in the health care plan.

As part of its compliance with the 80/20 provision, AATA had put together health plan options for non-union employees that would essentially make their health care costs roughly the same as current costs – if they choose to opt for higher co-pays.

Two board members dissented on the June 21 vote: Charles Griffith and Roger Kerson. Neither was able to attend the July 16 meeting. David Nacht, who had not attended the June 21 meeting, was present on July 16.

That led to deliberations that covered much of the same ground as the June 21 discussion. However, a couple of new points are worth highlighting, which were made plainer to the AATA by a letter the Michigan attorney general’s office sent to the U.S. Dept. of Labor. The letter pointed to two specific ways that transit agencies could comply with Act 152, without limiting contributions to employee health care. [.pdf of May 29, 2012 letter] First, a transit agency could vote under Section 8 of Act 152 to exempt itself from compliance. Based on the AATA board member deliberations on June 21, their understanding was that they could not, as appointed officials, exercise that option.

The Michigan attorney general’s letter also points to Section 9 as a way to comply. Section 9 of Act 152 provides an explicit penalty for non-compliance, suggesting that the law in some sense does not apply to transit agencies – because the penalties involve taking back 10% of state funds that such agencies don’t receive anyway. Those funds include the state’s current version of state-shared revenue, as well as school aid funds – which the AATA does not receive. From Act 152:

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

Why was the Michigan attorney general’s office communicating with the U.S. Department of Labor? It’s because Title 49 of United States Code 4333 5333 on labor standards set out conditions for receipt of financial assistance from a range of federal programs – and among those conditions are protection of employment conditions that derive from collective bargaining rights. Based on the Michigan attorney general’s letter, the U.S. Dept. of Labor has found the use of Section 8 or Section 9 by Michigan transit agencies an acceptable way to continue to meet its USC 5333 obligations. From USC 5333(b):

(b) Employee Protective Arrangements.—
(1) As a condition of financial assistance under sections 5307–5312, 5316, 5318, 5323 (a)(1), 5323 (b), 5323 (d), 5328, 5337, and 5338 (b) of this title, the interests of employees affected by the assistance shall be protected under arrangements the Secretary of Labor concludes are fair and equitable. …
(2) Arrangements under this subsection shall include provisions that may be necessary for—
(A) the preservation of rights, privileges, and benefits (including continuation of pension rights and benefits) under existing collective bargaining agreements or otherwise;
(B) the continuation of collective bargaining rights;
(C) the protection of individual employees against a worsening of their positions related to employment;
(D) assurances of employment to employees of acquired public transportation systems;
(E) assurances of priority of reemployment of employees whose employment is ended or who are laid off; and
(F) paid training or retraining programs.

Public Act 152: Board Deliberations

Board chair Jesse Bernstein began by posing a question about the employee health insurance benefits, which David Nacht translated roughly as follows: If the board doesn’t rescind its June 21 motion today, and takes action later to rescind, would that “screw up” what’s happening right now in open enrollment? In response to Nacht, Ed Robertson, AATA’s human resources manager, told him: “I’m afraid I don’t know the answer to that question.”

Board member David Nacht deliberates at the July 16, 2012 meeting.

Robertson clarified that the new health plan, about which AATA’s non-union employees are currently making choices, starts Aug. 1. [AATA's union employees are not immediately affected, as their contract goes through the end of the year; however, they participate in the same health care plan as non-union employees.]

Robertson indicated that his uncertainty was based on the fact that he’s not sure what information has already been transmitted to the AATA’s health insurance carrier. He stressed he was not saying the plan couldn’t be revised. Bernstein confirmed with Robertson that employees are making their decisions on health care coverage, based on the motion the board passed on June 21. Bernstein ventured that the board needs to find a way to “back out of it.”

Nacht, who is an attorney but does not provide legal counsel to the AATA, responded by saying the first thing the AATA must do is make sure it follows the law. As he understood the draft resolution that the board had been presented that day, there’s at least an oral opinion from the U.S. Dept. of Labor that Michigan’s Act 152 violates federal law with regard to the AATA’s labor union. However, Nacht continued, the AATA might still have a legal obligation under the state law to follow it with respect to the AATA’s non-union employees. Nacht said he understood that there’s an attorney general opinion, which has some relevance – because Michigan attorney general opinions are treated as legally binding in the absence of a court opinion.

But the bottom line is, said Nacht, that “we need our lawyer to tell us what to do.” The board risks breaking a law, if the board says it doesn’t have to follow a state law. So he concluded that the board should get legal advice, before passing a resolution saying that the AATA isn’t going to follow a state law.

Michael Ford, the AATA’s chief executive officer, commented that other transit agencies in Michigan are doing this “right now as we speak.” Robertson confirmed Ford’s statement, saying that’s what the AATA had been told by the U.S. Dept. of Labor. Bernstein indicated that he felt the board needs to find out how to back out of the board’s previous vote for non-union administrative staff, so that on Aug. 1 they can continue with the health plan they have now, if they choose to do that.

Nacht responded to Bernstein by saying if the state passed a law saying the AATA should follow it, he was not sure why the AATA should back out of it. Bernstein indicated his understanding was that there were certain criteria – based on the receipt of certain kinds of money from the state. The AATA does not receive that kind of money from the state, he said. If the law doesn’t cover the AATA, he continued, he didn’t know why the AATA would put its non-union employees through this procedure.

Ford asked Chris White, AATA’s manager of service development, to explain further, building on Bernstein’s comments. White said that Act 152 contains an opt-out provision for cities [Section 8] – which allows a governing body to take a 2/3 vote to opt out of following the law. [It's not clear why AATA believes Section 8 could not also apply to a transit agency.] For non-cities, White continued, there is a separate clause [Section 9], which he summarized as saying that are no penalties for not following the law. The legislature had given “an out” for both cities and non-cities in Act 152, White concluded.

Nacht ventured that the board has both a legal issue and a policy issue. The policy issue, he said, is complicated. He said it’s not something that he’d be prepared to say how he feels, because he hasn’t seen a memo analyzing it. It’d be possible to say, for example, Nacht said, that we have to comply with this law, but we’re concerned about regressive impacts on employees, and want to have some budgetary compensation for employees – but at the same time we want our organization to do what most public entities are doing.

Otherwise put, the AATA’s position might be that it doesn’t want employees to take a hit, because the agency is concerned about its people, Nacht said. But in the spirit of the legislature’s action, as much as the AATA cares about its people, the board also has a fiduciary responsibility to taxpayer dollars. The board needs to discuss its obligations under both law and policy, before it does anything, Nacht said: “We need to have a conversation about that.”

Bernstein ventured that the board did have a conversation about that at its last meeting [which Nacht did not attend]. Bernstein told Nacht that the consensus was that the board did not want to negatively impact “any employee” based on Act 152. He felt the sentiment on the board was fairly clear.

Eli Cooper picked up on Bernstein’s phrase “any employee” and noted that he felt the consensus was more about “employees as a class,” and the board had looked to the staff to recommend something that was equitable to the employees as a group. He agreed with Nacht that it’s a legal and a policy issue. Cooper conveyed some dissatisfaction with the fact that the draft resolution had been presented “as we walk into a meeting without an opportunity to review any background.” The issue was not “ripe for decision making,” he ventured.

He did appreciate the urgency of the matter, Cooper said. If the board can collect more information in the next day or two, there are still more calendar days when an emergency meeting of the board could be called – if the legal opinions and the policy analysis is such that the board is compelled to take action.

Ford responded to Cooper’s comment about the late introduction of the issue, saying he took responsibility for it. The AATA had just received the information, and he felt it was important for the board to be aware of it. He noted that the board had given staff direction at its last meeting to follow up on the issue. Ford said there’d not yet been an opportunity to follow up with legal counsel.

Nacht then apologized for not attending the last meeting, but noted that he’d read the minutes. From the minutes, he didn’t get the sense of the kind of consensus on the board that Bernstein had articulated. What he’d see in the minutes, Nacht said, was a divided vote. And he guessed that the additional information has been resolved “in favor of the dissenters.” Bernstein stressed to Nacht that “none of us were thrilled with this from a legal or a policy position.” The board was looking for a way – if the AATA had to comply with the law – to be fair to employees. It’s coming up at a bad time, he said, because of the tight deadline.

Bernstein asked for clarification from Karen Wheeler, Ford’s executive assistant, about what the rules are on voting if people are not present. [Bernstein was anticipating the possibility of convening a special meeting, and having some people participate by telephone or by sending a proxy.] Wheeler’s answer: “You cannot do it.” Bernstein confirmed that a person had to be present to vote, and could not vote by phone or with a proxy.

Nacht asked why the board could not deal with it as a financial matter. For now, he suggested, the AATA complies with the law until its lawyer gives a different opinion. If the board’s lawyer writes a letter saying the AATA doesn’t have to follow the law, then the board is in a whole different position about voting. He felt differently about voting under that kind of situation. But Nacht stressed that the decision has a financial impact for employees and their families. So through the budget process, the AATA can compensate and adjust if there’s a board consensus that there should be neutral impact to employees financially.

Bernstein returned to Cooper’s comment on individual employees, stressing that the potential impact to an employee is difficult to predict, because it’s dependent on each employee’s medical experience during the year. Ed Robertson had left the room during the deliberations to get some additional information, but returned to tell the board that the “drop-dead date” on open enrollment was a week from that day [July 23] for management staff.

Bernstein ventured that they should give staff a chance to gather more data and to get a legal opinion. Sue Gott stressed that she wanted a legal opinion in writing – so she could read it ahead of time. Nacht also ventured that he’d like to have a legal opinion on supplemental employee compensation based on health care receipts. Bernstein indicated no enthusiasm for that approach, saying it would be a “total nightmare,” citing concerns about breaching confidentiality. Responding to Nacht’s suggestion that confidentiality concerns could be addressed by using third-party administrators, Bernstein feared that costs would keep getting added.

Ford tried to extract some specific direction from the board. He ventured that he was supposed to get a legal opinion and then convene a special meeting. He’d need board members’ schedules for that, he noted. Nacht clarified for Ford that he’d like a legal opinion on three subjects: (1) How does compliance with Act 152 affect the AATA as it relates to USC 5333(b) for union employees? (2) How does compliance with Act 152 affect the AATA as it relates to USC 5333(b) for non-union employees? and (3) To the extent the AATA is following the law, what are some legal options about the AATA’s ability to adjust employee compensation? The deliberations concluded with Bernstein querying Ford: “Michael, are you clear?” “Got it,” was Ford’s reply.

Outcome: The board took no action on the issue, but held out the possibility for a special meeting to be convened in order to vote on the question.

Transit Master Plan Consultant Contract

The board considered adding $60,000 to the contract with Steer Davies Gleave, a consulting firm originally hired on April 21, 2010 to help develop a transportation master plan (TMP). The TMP is the basis for the AATA’s initiative possibly to convert the AATA to an Act 196 transit authority, with the intent to expand geographically the agency’s governance and service coverage area countywide. The consulting firm is assisting the AATA in that effort.

The original contract with Steer Davies Gleave was for $399,805. Over the last two years, the contract amount has been increased by board authorization on three occasions (on Nov. 18, 2010, July 19, 2011 and Feb. 16, 2012), which brought the total contract to $720,622. The July 16, 2012 authorization brought that total to $780,622.

Among other things, this most recent contract increase was to cover the following items: documentation of financial analysis; methodology for an equity analysis of the new service program; design and monitoring of the long-term countywide district-based community input; and administration of a community input planning tool. Of the additional amount in the contract, a portion will essentially be passed through to a local consultant, Carlisle Wortman Associates of Ann Arbor.

The previous increases to the contract covered an expanded public process, support to a financial task force, and the generation of a draft five-year service program. [.pdf of detail on Steer Davies Gleave contract changes]

Board member David Nacht said his understanding was that to some extent the additional funds would go to a local company [Carlisle Wortman Associates], which CEO Michael Ford confirmed. Nacht ask: “Is this going to be it, ya think, with this contract?” Ford indicated that the AATA is trying to “internalize” all the work that SDG has been doing until now. It’s his hope that this would be the final revision to the contract, he indicated.

Anya Dale, who serves as chair of the planning and development committee that had recommended the additional funds, noted that the resolution states it’s the “final contract amendment.” Ford indicated that if there were some compelling reason, it could be brought back, but the AATA is trying to bring the work in-house and “own it.”

Board chair Jesse Bernstein ventured that if the AATA needed some help from an international consultant like SDG, they could be hired for new contract, but this would finalize the transit master plan process. Nacht asked his colleagues to imagine that there’s some kind of an election in the spring [for example, on the question of a countywide transit millage to support expanded service]. No matter the outcome of that election, Nacht supposed, there would still not be any continuation of the SDG contract.

AATA strategic planner Michael Benham confirmed Nacht’s understanding. The intent is to bring the work in-house so that any changes to the plan or the service that might result from a popular vote could be implemented by the AATA staff. He expected that any necessary changes that might come from the results of an election would be, for example, to add a service here or take away a service there.

Sue Gott asked Benham to elaborate generally on the value SDG is bringing in terms of additional expertise, and productivity for added deliverables. She wondered if the issue was a matter of additional expertise or time and availability of AATA staff.

Benham clarified that the need for outside help had been the combination of the sheer volume of the issues that had to be handled, and with the fact that the AATA didn’t have staff on board who could do some of the analysis necessary. Now that the basic plan has been created, he said, AATA staff is in a position to do adjustments and revisions. Creation of the plan by AATA staff would have been difficult, he said. Gott asked if it’s fair to say that the majority of what SDG is bringing is added expertise. Ford indicated that it’s the expertise that SDG brings, as well as their international experience.

Responding to the mention of SDG’s international experience as critical – as it relates to some of the work that the additional funding will pay for, David Nacht asked, “Really? I mean, to attend the DAC [countywide district advisory committee] meetings and organize the DAC meetings?” Benham indicated that a lot of what this final contract revision is covering could be thought of as “training.” SDG has a lot of expertise, he said, and the AATA is asking SDG to hand it over to the AATA now.

Nacht told Benham that what he really heard Benham saying, and what sells Nacht on it, is not that SDG has international expertise. Rather, it’s that AATA has invested a lot of money with SDG to figure out the complexity of the service that will generate the actual routes for the buses in a countywide system. So as the AATA works with communities in the county and tries to transfer that knowledge – so people really understand it – the AATA needs to understand all of that, too, Nacht said. So it’s really in-house training for the AATA, so that AATA can run a countywide system, Nacht concluded.

Outcome: The board voted unanimously to approve the $60,000 contract increase with Steer Davies Gleave.

NightRide Contract

The board considered an increase in its contract with Blue Cab, which is the vendor that operates the AATA’s NightRide service. The increase is from $28 to $32 per service hour for a contract that extends through 2013. The current three-year contract was set to expire in November 2012.

The NightRide is a shared cab service with a basic fare of $5, which is available weekdays from 11 p.m. to 6 a.m. and weekends from 7 p.m. to 7 a.m. Those are hours when the AATA’s regular fixed-route service does not operate.

Of the $4 per service hour cost increase in Blue Cab’s contract, $3 is analyzed by the AATA as based on compliance with the AATA’s relatively new living wage policy. The other $1 is analyzed as a general cost increase.

The geographic coverage area of AATA’s NightRide was expanded eastward to Golfside Road in March 2011 and further to downtown Ypsilanti in January 2012 – as part of a broader effort to improve work transportation between Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti. Ridership has increased about 40% from last year – with about 25 points of that increase due to broader geographic coverage and the other 15 points due to demand in Ann Arbor.

Ridership on the AATA’s NightRide service showed a clear increase starting in January 2012. 

During her report from the planning and development committee, Anya Dale characterized the increased net cost to the AATA of the hourly operating increase as coming to around $46,000.

During deliberations, board member David Nacht asked if there’d been any complaints about Blue Cab by patrons. Board chair Jesse Bernstein noted that he’d been thanked several times by restaurant employees for the geographic expansion of service.

Chris White, manager of AATA service development, indicated that the number of complaints about Blue Cab has been low historically. However, he allowed that in recent months, complaints had shown an increase. White attributed the increased complaints to the fact that a lot of new people are using the NightRide. White also said that Blue Cab has been good at addressing complaints when they’ve occurred.

Outcome: The board voted unanimously to approve the Blue Cab contract extension.

Marketing, Public Relations Contract

The board was asked to authorize purchasing up to $500,000 of marketing and public relations services from Quack! Media and Pace & Partners Inc. over the next five years.

The marketing and public relations work will cover “public relations, education, community outreach and other communication services in support of AATA’s initiatives and general operations.” The two firms were selected after the issuance of a request for proposals that generated 13 responses from the 35 firms to whom the request was sent. Quack! Media is an Ann Arbor firm, while Pace & Partners is based in Lansing.

Board member David Nacht led off deliberations by asking why the AATA had switched vendors. Mary Stasiak, AATA director of community relations, explained that it had been a competitive procurement process. The decision was based on relative experience and qualifications, she continued. There was some specific experience, approach and management style the AATA was looking for, she said, to help move the strategic marketing and information plan forward. It requires a more sophisticated effort and project management, she said. The two companies the AATA had settled on use the same project management software, and they also have transit-related experience, she said.

Nacht confirmed with Stasiak that the AATA had a consultant study the AATA’s marketing efforts and that the request for proposals (RFP) had been designed in part based on findings of that study. But the company that performed the study is one of the companies that is being awarded the contract, Nacht said. He wondered: “So they came up with a recommendation that we should change in a way where they had a competitive advantage?” No, Stasiak said, because all respondents to the RFP were provided with the same information – the same marketing and strategic plan.

Nacht wanted to know if the situation had been scrutinized to make sure that the deck wasn’t stacked – that the consultant didn’t say, “What AATA really needs is a company that provides X” when the company “knows fully well that they have X better than their competition.” That’s always a danger, Nacht said. Stasiak came back to her point that all the bidders had the same information.

AATA board member Eli Cooper deliberates at the July 16, 2012 special meeting. To his right is board member Sue Gott. To her right is CEO Michael Ford.

Board chair Jesse Bernstein noted that the RFP was generated by AATA staff. Eli Cooper noted that the proposals had been reviewed by AATA staff and had been winnowed down from 13 to 5 and ultimately decided based on AATA’s needs, not whether the firm could “do X better.”

Subsequent board discussion clarified that the total limit on the contract is $500,000 over possibly five years – three years plus two one-year extensions. Stasiak indicated that the previous contract with the previous vendor had resulted in expenditures of $427,000 over three years. Nacht got clarification that the contract is subject to 30-day termination. Bernstein and Sue Gott indicated that they were interested in monitoring the performance of the two firms. Bernstein said there should be substantial reporting back to the performance monitoring and external relations (PMER) committee. Cooper drew out the fact that the contract is an “on-call” or “task-order” type contract. Nacht ventured that the AATA has the option not to give the two companies any tasks.

Outcome: The board voted unanimously to approve the media and marketing contract with Quack! Media and Pace & Partners Inc. over the next five years.

Fire Hydrant Contractor

The board considered a $104,000 contract with RBV Contracting to relocate a fire hydrant as part of the AATA’s bus garage expansion project. The city of Ann Arbor is requiring the relocation of the hydrant – located on the south end of the AATA’s property at 2700 S. Industrial Highway.

In the new location, the hydrant will connect to the neighboring property, which is owned by the University of Michigan. The change will create a continuous loop connection of the fire hydrant system in the area.

Commenting on the resolution, Eli Cooper – who sits on the planning and development committee that had recommended the action – noted that moving the hydrant is a city requirement for occupying the new space. David Nacht wondered why the board even need to vote on the action. Board chair Jesse Bernstein told him it was because it’s a lot of money. [With the contingency, the project went over the $100,000 threshold that requires board approval.]

Outcome: The board voted unanimously to approve the contract to relocate the fire hydrant.

Communications, Committees, CEO, Commentary

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

Comm/Comm: Countywide Expansion

In his update to the board, CEO Michael Ford alerted the board to the fact that the Washtenaw County board of commissioners would be giving final consideration to the four-party agreement (between the city of Ann Arbor, the city of Ypsilanti, the AATA and Washtenaw County) and the articles of incorporation of a new transit authority at the county board’s Aug. 1 meeting. The county board gave initial approval to the two documents at its July 11, 2012 ways & means committee meeting, after lengthy deliberations.

Comm/Comm: New Blake Transit Center

Ford noted that the new downtown Blake Transit Center would be reviewed by the city planning commission at its meeting the following day, on July 17. [Outcome of that review was an affirmation by the planning commission that the project meets city requirements for private development, with two exceptions involving landscaping and driveway width. The key change in the site, compared to the current configuration, will be moving the transit center building from the Fourth Avenue side of the midblock driveway to the Fifth Avenue side. The buses will also enter the driveway from the Fourth Avenue side and exit onto Fifth Avenue – which is the reverse of the current traffic flow. ]

Ford told the board that he hopes to be able to bring the Blake Transit Center proposal to the  Aug. 20 Ann Arbor city council meeting.

Comm/Comm: Triennial Review

In his update to the board, Ford noted that the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) had come in to review the way that the AATA handles its federal grants, which the FTA does every three years. Ford told the board that the AATA had done a very good job. A typical transit agency will have about seven deficiencies, Ford said, but FTA had found only one at the AATA – and that one was corrected “on the spot.” The FTA had told the AATA was the review was “top notch,” so Ford  commended the AATA staff on that.

Comm/Comm: Revisions to Five-Year Service Plan

Jim Mogensen reminded board members that a while back he’d addressed them about the parallels between the current countywide plan and the plans from the mid-1970s. A barrier to implementing that vision at that time was the confluence of money and politics, he noted. Now that conversation has opened again with all its complexity.

He observed that there are 15 different amendments to the service plan that are being looked at – so Mogensen ventured that it might be good to have a central place with all of that documented so that people can track what’s going on. Board chair Jesse Bernstein responded to Mogensen by saying, “We’re with you and that’s [strategic planner] Michael Benham’s job.”

Comm/Comm: General Complaints

Thomas Partridge addressed the board as an advocate for those who need transportation services the most. He complained that Blue Cab had not undergone sufficient evaluation and scrutiny. He expressed continued concerns about problems with service on the A-Ride service, for which the AATA contracts with SelectRide. He claimed there are violations so serious that they’re violations of criminal and civil laws. He questioned the continued “proclivity” of the board to go to outside contractors and pay their expensive rates without the board first exploring AATA’s ability to provide services in-house.

When he reached the end of his two-minute time, Partridge told board chair Jesse Bernstein he would appreciate additional time – otherwise Bernstein would be giving the appearance that the board didn’t want to hear constructive criticism. Bernstein explained to Partridge that there’s a rule that everyone gets two minutes. Partridge replied that before 1920 there was a law that said women couldn’t vote.

Present: David Nacht, Jesse Bernstein, Eli Cooper, Sue Gott, Anya Dale.

Absent: Charles Griffith, Roger Kerson.

Next regular meeting: Thursday, Aug. 16, 2012 at 6:30 p.m. in the fourth floor conference room at the Ann Arbor District Library, 343 S. Fifth Ave., Ann Arbor. [Check Chronicle event listings to confirm date]

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

The NightRide is a shared cab service with a basic fare of $5, which is available weekdays from 11 p.m. to 6 a.m. and weekends from 7 p.m. to 7 a.m. Those are hours when the AATA’s regular fixed-route service does not operate.

Of the $4 per service hour cost increase in Blue Cab’s contract, $3 is analyzed by the AATA as based on compliance with the AATA’s relatively new living wage policy. The other $1 is analyzed as a general cost increase.

The geographic coverage area of AATA’s NightRide was expanded eastward to Golfside Road in March 2011 and further to downtown Ypsilanti in January 2012 – as part of a broader effort to improve work transportation between Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti. Ridership has increased about 40% from last year – with about 25 points of that increase due to broader geographic coverage and the other 15 points due to demand in Ann Arbor. [.jpg of NightRide chart]

This brief was filed from AATA headquarters at 2700 S. Industrial Highway, where the special board meeting was held. A more detailed report of the meeting will follow: [link]