AATA board members Ted Annis, left, and Charles Griffith. (Photo by the writer.)

Ann Arbor Transportation Authority board meeting (August 19, 2009): Looming on a six-week horizon for Ypsilanti is the renewal of its Purchase of Service Agreement with the AATA – at a price slated for 10% higher each year over the next three years to make the agreement match actual costs. That’s the context in which three out of seven Ypsilanti city councilmembers appeared at the AATA board meeting on Wednesday.

Their collective message: Recognize the fiscal constraints on Ypsilanti, focus on the 30 years of a positive AATA-Ypsilanti partnership, and find ways to cut costs of the service without cutting service levels. Their message resonated with AATA board members, who seemed more inclined to find creative ways to cut costs than to use federal stimulus dollars to simply make up the gap. Part of that creative approach could include closing the Ypsilanti Transit Station.

The longer-term solution of supporting the AATA bus service through a dedicated countywide funding source was a theme that ran through the comments made by Ypsilanti councilmembers, as well as others at the meeting.

In other business, the board approved the construction contract for the Plymouth Road and US-23 park-and-ride, and formally discontinued the LINK service – a decision that came as no surprise given that the other two funding partners – the University of Michigan and the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority – had discontinued their funding for the downtown circulator bus.

Countywide Funding

The theme of a countywide funding source for the AATA was woven into several conversational threads. During public speaking time, the idea of establishing a countywide funding source for bus service – likely through a dedicated millage – came up multiple times. Three Ypsilanti city councilmembers addressed the board, in part to argue for a countywide system as a longer-term way to think about service they currently get through a Purchase of Service Agreement (POSA). They thus echoed the sentiments of Ypsilanti mayor Paul Schreiber, who had appeared before the AATA board in May. Ypsilanti’s POSA comes up for renewal soon and AATA is asking Ypsilanti to increase the payment to match the actual cost of the service.

The theme of funding Ypsilanti bus service continued in the board’s consideration of a resolution that would use American Recovery & Reinvestment Act (federal stimulus) dollars to fund the gap in Ypsilanti’s POSA on a one-time basis.

Thomas Partridge: Board chair David Nacht read Partidge’s name off the sign-up sheet and looked up scanning the room, asking where Partridge was. Partridge then rose from the third row of seats and delivered a self-deprecating deadpan: “Perhaps you didn’t notice me because of my great height!” Moving quickly to the serious side, Partridge pointed out that in August 2008 the AATA board had been presented with three different avenues they could pursue that would transition the AATA to a countywide transportation authority for Washtenaw County. He also reminded Nacht that Nacht had appeared before the Washtenaw County board of commissioners and the Ann Arbor city council, and had presented the idea of a countywide authority to those bodies. Yet there had been no progress, Partridge said, towards getting a proposal put on the ballot that would establish a countywide funding source. Partridge also criticized the proposal in one of the agenda items that explored the possibility of using federal stimulus money for operating assistance for Ypsilanti. That proposal did not, he said, explore the possibility of expanding service westward.

Said Nacht in reply: “I happen to agree with Tom Partridge – it’s been a long time.”

Carolyn Grawi: Grawi reported that she’d just come back from Toronto, where the public transportation was, she said, “amazing.” There were trolleys, buses, ferries, para-transit – everywhere you looked there was public transportation. Addressing the elimination of the LINK service, she said that if the city keeps cutting service, she was concerned for the future development of the city, for the POSA agreements, and for the future of countywide service. She suggested looking at Genesee County and asking how they managed to fund countywide service.

S.A. Trudy Swanson: The Ypsilanti city councilmember said she was there to speak about the proposed 30% increase in the Purchase of Service Agreement (POSA) with the city of Ypsilanti that the AATA was seeking. She asked for a “decrease in the increase.” She stressed that Ypsilanti had riders who depended on the service.

In response, AATA board member Ted Annis said that the reason for the increase was to stop having Ann Arbor taxpayers subsidize Ypsilanti bus service. As an AATA board member, Annis said, he objected to Ann Arbor subsidizing its neighbors and said that Ann Arbor’s neighbors needed to pay the freight. He invited Swanson to the Aug. 31 meeting of the planning and development committee, where they’d be working on the size of the required increase to Ypsilanti’s POSA.

David Nacht, AATA board chair. (Photo by the writer.)

Michael Bodary: Bodary introduced himself as a Ward 2 Ypsilanti councilmember. He was there to speak to the issue of the increase in the POSA for Ypsilanti. The 10% increase per year, for a total of 30% over three years, had been explained by Dawn Gabay and Chris White of the AATA at an Ypsilanti city council meeting, he said, so he understood the issues behind the increase. For Ypsilanti, however, revenues were down due to decreases in taxable value as well as drops in state shared revenue. He pointed out that some of the costs incorporated into the POSA are infrastructure costs, for example for the Ypsilanti Transit Center, as opposed to operations. He reported that 1/4 of police calls in downtown Ypsilanti were to the YTC. The AATA itself, he said, paid for a security guard there. He reported that some Ypsilanti citizens had suggested closing the YTC – he was not necessarily advocating that himself. He emphasized that Ypsilanti and the AATA needed to work together on solving the problem, because the Number 4, 5 and 6 buses were lifelines between Ypsilanti and Ann Arbor. He pointed out that it’s only been the last three out of 30 years that Ypsilanti had been afforded a reduced rate for its POSA.

Nacht responded by saying, “We share almost all your views,” but noted that it was a matter of working out the details. Referring to the YTC security issues Bodary had raised, Nacht said the last thing the AATA wanted to do was cause a public safety problem.

Annis noted that the cost data on the YTC showed that $110,000 was spent on security, so he’d like to “explore” closing it down. Nacht interjected to say that the board was not at this meeting in any way taking a position on the issue of closing down the YTC. Michael Ford, CEO of the AATA, also said that whenever he heard talk of something “getting closed down,” it gave him pause.

Pete Murdock: Murdock is also a member of the Ypsilanti city council. He began by saying that they understood the AATA’s situation. The problem, he said, was that they had “flat out no ability to raise taxes.” He said that their view was that the survival of the transit system depends on a regional system with a dedicated source of revenue. Someone other than them, he reminded the board, needed to put a measure on the ballot.

Nacht responded by saying that it was good to hear there’d be support for such a measure. “We’re a regional economy,” Nacht said, “and we need a regional transit system.” Nacht confirmed that the board shared that view philosophically.

At several points Annis invited Ypsilanti councilmembers to come to the planning and development committee meeting on Aug. 31 at 5:30 p.m.

The board considered a resolution involving the use of American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds – otherwise known as federal stimulus money – to bridge the gap in funding for the Ypsilanti Purchase of Service Agreement.

Board members expressed hesitation about using stimulus money in this way, when there might be other longer-term solutions available. Annis said he’d like to consider the matter in the planning and development committee. Board member Charles Griffith indicated that he didn’t want to see stimulus funds used if it meant that it was a way of not implementing other, longer-lasting solutions.

So board member Jesse Bernstein moved to table the resolution so that it could be available as a back-up plan.

The board voted to table it, which flummoxed the staff. “Now we can’t talk about it!” said Chris White. The resulting discussion revealed that the wording of the resolution didn’t authorize spending the money, but rather authorized AATA staff to talk to Ypsilanti about using ARRA funds to bridge the gap:

Now, Therefore, be it resolved that the AATA CEO is hereby authorized to discuss using a portion of the ARRA funds allocated to the AATA to bridge the gap between the beginning of the fiscal year and the implementation of service reductions.

It puzzled board member Rich Robben that a resolution had been brought seeking nothing more than an authorization to talk: “Why did you bring this to us at all??” Dawn Gabay, deputy CEO, explained that staff didn’t want to get out ahead of the board on a policy issue. Board chair Nacht traced the inclination of staff to proceed cautiously to an episode with former AATA director Greg Cook, who had arranged a deal to raise fares to cover the POSA gap, but didn’t have board approval to do so. Nacht recalled that he’d led the charge against those fare increases. The message that had been sent to staff at the time, said Nacht, was that staff needed board approval before going to POSA partners to talk about policy matters.

Robben, who’d voted for tabling the resolution, brought it back for reconsideration. It was not crystal clear to The Chronicle what happened from a parliamentary point of view, but the board did not seem to revote the tabling motion, instead opting to vote on another motion that expressly gave staff permission to talk to Ypsilanti about possible use of ARRA funds.

Outcome: Unclear from a parliamentary point of view. The board did, however, express its will that staff could talk to Ypsilanti about use of ARRA funds to bridge the POSA gap, among other solutions that might be longer lasting.

Report from Planning and Development Committee

In his update on the planning and development committee’s work, Ted Annis said that there were two main items they’d be focusing on: (i) the Ypsilanti Purchase of Service Agreement, and (ii) hammering out an AATA budget that met their goal of $96 per service hour in cost.

The LINK: Discontinued

The AATA board considered a resolution to discontinue the LINK service. The LINK is a downtown circulator service that does not charge a fare to ride. The LINK buses are painted purple.

The issue of the LINK was addressed by Tim Hull during public time in the context of public input on service changes.

Tim Hull: Hull identified himself as an AATA bus rider for the last six years, and suggested that the board reflect on the various avenues available for public input. It seemed to him, Hull said, that the public was often involved only at the last step. The Local Advisory Council, he said, was more of an advocacy group for seniors and disabled people, and met at a time inconvenient for people who worked a regular daytime schedule. He suggested that the public be engaged on matters such as schedule and service changes before they are set in stone. The discontinuation of the LINK, he said, felt like it was already a done deal at the time of a public meeting held over the summer.

In response, Nacht said that the last time that schedule changes had been contemplated, it had been a multi-month process and that originally, the Number 13 route to Newport Road had been targeted: “We were going to kill it!” But people spoke out, Nacht said, and the route was retained. So, Nacht said, he took Hull’s concerns very seriously and suggested that particular concerns could be conveyed to the director of community relations for the AATA, Mary Stasiak.

In his communications at the beginning of the meeting, board chair Nacht had already alluded to the item on the agenda that would discontinue the LINK. He described it as a “painful, difficult” decision, but that the AATA could not take on the funding of the service without the help of the two partners who’d bowed out – the University of Michigan and the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority.

AATA CEO Michael Ford, who’s been on the job for a month, said that in the future, when the AATA embarked on a project involving partners, he hoped the authority could plan for a way to continue that project, even if the partners bowed out.

Board member Ted Annis quipped that his wife was going to be disappointed, because she takes the grandkids to ride the purple buses, which they enjoy.

Nacht said that philosophically he thought that a free downtown circulator was something that was important, and he was sorry the board was discontinuing the LINK.

Outcome: The board voted unanimously to discontinue the LINK service.

Goals and Objectives

A document called “Goals and Objectives” generated some animated discussion between Ted Annis and David Nacht. Nacht was concerned that the document would constrain the new CEO, Michael Ford, from putting his own stamp on the organization, if the goals and objectives were provided to him with no room for flexibility.

Annis wanted to make explicit how Ford would provide his input on the goals and objectives: “Let’s nail it down!” To which Nacht responded: “I think it’s too early to nail it down – the man has been on the job for a month.”

One concern cited by Nacht in the exchange was that among the goals and objectives there was nothing about expanding the AATA to include countywide service.

For his part, Annis was somewhat frustrated that Nacht was not attaching adequate significance to the document – which had come out of the planning and development committee, chaired by Annis: “What do you want to do with this – ignore it?”

In the end, a consensus seemed to be reached that would have Ford delivering his input on the goals and objectives, with the planning and development committee, as well as the performance monitoring and external relations committee, “getting a shot at dealing with the goals as proposed by Michael Ford,” Annis said.

Questions for Michael Ford, CEO

Board member Charles Griffith thanked Michael Ford for his weekly updates. Annis said that he’d been having fun with Ford, and that he’d been putting pressure on Ford to control costs. Nacht followed Annis’ comment with, “Michael is still here!”

Plymouth Road Park-and-Ride Lot

Before the AATA board was a resolution authorizing the CEO to execute a contract with D&R Earthmoving for $1.144 million to construct the park-and-ride lot at Plymouth Road and US-23. The Ann Arbor city council had approved the site plan for the 245-space park-and-ride lot at its July 20 meeting. Board chair Nacht wanted to know what exactly D&R’s work would entail, besides digging a hole in the ground. “What are they doing?”

In response, Chris White, manager of service development for the AATA, joked, “Stimulating the economy!” He went on to elaborate with Phil Webb, AATA controller, chiming in: earthmoving, paving, drainage construction, traffic signals, lighting, trees, signage. There will be a sign acknowledging the work was supported with federal stimulus funds.

White confirmed for Nacht that D&R was the low bidder, with the highest bidder coming in at around $300,000 more.

Annis confirmed with White that the “funny little” Green Road park-and-ride would remain open.

Outcome: The resolution authorizing the execution of the park-and-ride lot construction was unanimously approved.

Public Time: FITS and WALLY

LuAnne Bullington: Nacht greeted Bullington by congratulating her on the race she ran in the recent Ward 3 city council elections, though she did not prevail. Bullington stressed that if WALLY (the Washtenaw-Livingston Rail Line, a north-south commuter rail) was going to be built, it was important to identify sources of funding for operations, not just construction. She expressed concern that the Ann Arbor city council’s recent approval of design work on the Fuller Intermodal Transit Station (FITS) meant that city council was moving ahead as if the AATA board had made a decision to close the Blake Transit Center downtown.

Board member Jesse Bernstein responded to Bullington by clarifying that the approval for FITS was a study and siting phase on a parcel of land owned by the city and currently leased to UM. As far as Blake Transit Center was concerned, Bernstein said that there’d been no discussion of moving it, and that the board was instead discussing funding improvements and repairs to it. [Renovating BTC is a part of the goals and objectives document that provoked much discussion later in the meeting.] Regarding FITS and BTC, Bernstein said, “It’s not one or the other, it’s both.”

Communications: More on WALLY

Board chair David Nacht described a meeting he’d had with representatives of the University of Michigan along with Chris White, who’s manager of service development for the AATA, as a way to “open doors with that relationship.” Nacht also described “a lot of activity” to try to find capital funds for construction of the north-south commuter rail line known as WALLY. That included a multi-agency application for a TIGER (Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery) grant. Nacht said the AATA continues to remain open to the concept of WALLY, but expressed concern that there’d been a lack of interest thus far from Livingston County for the funding of operations. “We’d like to see more support,” he said. However, Nacht concluded, “We’re doing our best to push the project forward.”

Nominations

In his communications at the beginning of the meeting, board chair Nacht had said that he was impressed with the committee work that was getting done and how the board’s committees were able to process a tremendous amount of information.

Board member Jesse Bernstein was appointed the sole member and chair of the nominating committee for board officer elections, which will take place at the board’s September meeting.

Present: Charles Griffith, David Nacht, Rich Robben, Ted Annis, Jesse Bernstein.

Absent: Sue McCormick, Paul Ajegba

Next regular meeting: Wednesday, Sept. 23, 2009 at 1:00 p.m. [note the unusual time] at AATA headquarters, 2700 S. Industrial Ave. [confirm date]

Other positive news coming out of the meeting was scant, compared to three disappointments. First, Arborland management seems committed to not allowing AATA to use a bus stop located on its property inside the shopping plaza. Second, the LINK downtown circulator bus, which the Downtown Development Authority recently elected not to fund in the fall, won’t be supported by the University of Michigan, either. Finally, the north-south connector feasibility study, which appeared finally to  have all four partners on board with their funding, was postponed by the AATA board when questions were raised about the price tag on AATA’s share – $320,000.

Arborland

Dawn Gabay, interim director of the AATA, reported on the latest status of negotiations about the Arborland bus stop location. She said that discussions have taken place with the management company, on behalf of the property owner AmCap, Inc., which is headquartered in Stamford, Conn. Gabay said, “The management company says the owner is adamant that they will not change their decision.” Contacted by The Chronicle by phone on Friday, a representative from AmCap declined comment.

AmCap’s decision was for the AATA to cease using the Arborland parking lot as a bus stop location. Gabay noted that customers are beginning to respond. She said that Borders, a tenant in the Arborland plaza, had issued a statement of support for continuing the bus stop at the Arborland location. In part, that statement reads:

Borders supports the work of the AATA and is disappointed with Arborland’s decision to remove this park-and-ride stop. While the stop and resulting parking needs of riders did at times present challenges to patrons of our store looking for parking near our location, these challenges were not insurmountable … Unfortunately, we were informed that the decision to remove the stop was final, and that Borders had no opportunity to influence or change it, despite our attempts to work out viable alternatives.

The section of Washtenaw Avenue near the intersection of Washtenaw Avenue and Pittsfield Boulevard has been identified as the most likely place to put in new bus stops.

But complicating matters, said Gabay, is the fact that a construction project along Washtenaw Avenue is scheduled to start immediately following the art fairs, which end July 18. That construction project involves a water main replacement.

Board chair David Nacht suggested that the AATA entertain the idea that “we pay some money.” He noted that the owners of the property were in business and had some interest in making money. If the park-and-ride stop was perceived to have a negative economic impact on their business, he reasoned, they might reasonably be interested in adequate compensation for their losses at some price.

Gabay indicated that the owners had no interest in a financial arrangement of the kind that Nacht was describing. Nacht pointed out that eviction from Arborland represented a significant inconvenience to AATA bus riders as well as a considerable expense, anyway. Based on that consideration, he said, he was comfortable with payment of some kind of reasonable rent. He said he recognized that it’s private property and that the AATA was not in a position to demand access, but he hoped that, in the interest of public spiritedness, the owner might be receptive to some good-faith willingness on the part of the AATA to pay some rent.

Gabay replied that the landlord had said that money was not currently an issue and it had never been an issue.

Board member Rich Robben – noting that the arrangement to use the Arborland parking lot for a bus stop had been in place for 30 years – wondered if there was perhaps some principle of de facto possession. Board member Sue McCormick supplied the relevant legal term: adverse possession. But she indicated that the principle would not apply, because the ATAA had been operating under the terms of an agreement, not under a casual or implicit arrangement.

Nacht said that, based on what he knew from the first year of law school, an adverse possession case had to be based on a property use that was open, notorious, hostile, and continuous. None of those elements seem to apply here, he concluded.

“What’s the game plan if they stick to their guns?” Nacht wanted to know. Gabay indicated that detouring buses through neighborhoods (during the road construction period) would generate complaints from neighbors. Nacht asked if the anticipated challenges would require communications with the city of Ann Arbor at the level of the city council and the mayor. Board member Sue McCormick, who is director of public services for the city, indicated that staff-level communications would be adequate.

Noting that the AATA had recently been kicked out of another shopping center – Maple Village – Nacht wondered, “Is this a trend?” Gabay indicated that it was not a trend. Prior to the board meeting, Mary Stasiak, manager of community relations for AATA, told The Chronicle that the AATA enjoyed good working relationships with other shopping centers, highlighting the Briarwood Mall and the two Meijer locations. During the art fairs, Briarwood serves as a park-and-ride location for a special AATA shuttle to bring art fair visitors into downtown Ann Arbor.

North-South Connector Feasibility Study

The board considered a resolution to approve $320,000 of funding for the north-south connector study.

The north-south connector feasibility study will determine whether the Plymouth Road and State Street corridors could be enhanced as a “signature corridor” in terms of the Transportation Master Plan Update, using either existing buses, bus rapid transit, or streetcar systems. The study includes four partners: the AATA, the University of Michigan, the DDA, and the city of Ann Arbor.

The study has a history of nearly a year at this point. The current cost-sharing arrangement evolved from a $250,000 estimate for the project cost and the following cost-sharing arrangement:

• AATA – $100,000
• University Of Michigan – $50,000
• DDA – $50,000
• City of Ann Arbor – $50,000.

When the bids came back from contractors, it was apparent that the $250,000 estimate was too low, and the price tag grew to $640,00. The respective contributions from each of the four partners were then adjusted in a way that split the cost equally:

• AATA – $160,000
• University Of Michigan – $160,000
• DDA – $160,000
• City of Ann Arbor – $160,000.

The city of Ann Arbor and the DDA then raised concerns about the relative proportions of the price to be paid by city tax dollars compared to the University of Michigan, and their shares were reduced so that combined, the total city and DDA shares equaled the UM share:

• AATA – $320,000
• University Of Michigan – $160,000
• DDA – $80,000
• City of Ann Arbor – $80,000.

Under this latest arrangement, the Ann Arbor city council and the DDA had authorized their funding of $80,000 at their most recent board meetings. The University of Michigan had already authorized its share.

Deliberations began with board chair David Nacht asking some clarificational questions about who was involved with the project. From Chris White, who is AATA’s manager of service development, Nacht elicited several pieces of information. The consulting company that is to undertake a study is URS. The office they’d be operating out of was Minneapolis. URS is used frequently by the University Michigan and had personnel in town frequently for that work. However, AATA has never contracted with URS before. Asked specifically what “human being would be leading the study,” White indicated that Eli Cooper, who is the transportation program manager for the city of Ann Arbor, would be heading up the project locally. The project manager from URS for the study would be Rick Nau.

Nacht then moved to table the resolution, saying he was “completely uncomfortable” with the allocation of that amount of stimulus money to a nonlocal company – noting also the uneven burden assigned to the AATA – and stated that the board should have been alerted more clearly in a memo from staff about what was being requested.

Board member Charles Griffith said that he wanted to offer a slightly different view, saying it shouldn’t matter whether the split among partners was even. If the project itself was a problem, he said, that’s what they should focus on.

The use of stimulus money was a quick way to get the project done, Griffith said.

Nacht confirmed with board member Ted Annis that the planning and development committee had not voted on the matter. Nacht said that if the committee had voted on it he would be somewhat more comfortable. Annis, for his part, said “I’ve seen a lot of money fly out the door for studies.” He said that he wanted a clearer statement of what the study was for, what outcomes were expected, and what the AATA planned to do with the study “besides put it on the shelf.”

Griffith then produced a copy of a document from the performance monitoring and external relations committee showing the $320,000 allocation on a list of projects it had considered, but noted it had not been singled out for discussion. Here’s a link to a scan of the relevant page of that committee’s February notes: $320,000 for north-south connector.

On revelation of that document, Nacht noted that because the stimulus money is on the list, that made him feel a lot better. Still, Nacht said, “I’m offended that a public board that I chair would spend stimulus dollars on a bunch of Minneapolis consultants. I want every one of those dollars spent here in Michigan.”

Sue McCormick noted that it was not actually stimulus money that would be spent. Rather, by using the stimulus money for other projects, the AATA had freed up other money to use for the north-south connector study.

Griffith then suggested that the study itself might well have no direct economic impact, but that once they got a project built that it would mean a tremendous amount of investment in the area. To get the economic stimulus of building the project, he said, it was necessary to undertake a study of this quality.

The board then explored the consequences of postponing, given that the board does not have a regularly scheduled monthly meeting in July. Chris White said that he would need to inquire whether URS would honor the pricing in their initial proposal.

Outcome: The board tabled the resolution. If the board does not convene a special meeting, the next opportunity to approve the allocation would come on August 19, 2009.

The LINK

As we reported previously, the Ann Arbor DDA chose not to renew its part of the grant funding that supports the LINK, which is a downtown circulator bus.

The AATA board did not have a resolution before it on the LINK, but news that the DDA had chosen not to renew funding was a matter of concern.

At the AATA board meeting, Dawn Gabay indicated that the University Michigan, which had previously been a partner in supporting the LINK, would continue to operate the transportation service as a shuttle, using its own buses between Oxford Housing – which houses more than 300 UM students – and central campus. [It's worth noting that the UM buses are free for anyone to board and ride – whether an affiliate of the university or not. Their exact location at any time can be tracked online with the Magic Bus system.]

Nacht wanted to know why the DDA had “killed the LINK.” Nacht pointed to a June 14, 2009 Michigan Daily editorial on the subject, which he described as “unbelievably thoughtful and coherent.”

Chris White indicated that the DDA’s transportation committee, which had been formed at the beginning of the year, had been handling the DDA’s analysis on the question. White indicated that the DDA did not feel that the LINK was meeting the DDA’s goals for the service and was not serving the demographic that it wanted to target. Nacht said, “I don’t want to see this thing disappear. It’s a core function of what we provide.” He asked if it might not be possible to find the $80,000 it would take to make up for the DDA funding so that the AATA could do the thing it was supposed to as an agency, namely, actually run a bus.

Annis wondered if this was not perhaps a case of having too many cooks in the transportation kitchen. Nacht expressed his interest in seeing the LINK continued.

If the LINK were to be continued, then it would likely also be without funding that the University of Michigan has provided historically.

To get an idea of what that funding has been, here’s the cost of service funding for the LINK circulator from September 2008 to April 2009:

$145,385  University of Michigan
$131,267  State operating assistance
$ 10,000  AATA advertising revenues
$ 71,023  AATA operating subsidy
$ 71,023  Downtown Development Authority

-

On news of the DDA’s decision not to renew funding, the University of Michigan has already made plans to replace the service that the purple LINK buses provided as a way for students to get to class on Central Campus. Speaking with The Chronicle by phone, David Miller, who is executive director for parking and transportation services at the university, confirmed that plans had been put into place to use its own buses – modifying existing routes – to provide the same service previously provided by the LINK. Miller said that it was more cost effective to integrate that service into its already-existing routes than to pay the AATA to provide it with the LINK.

The fact that the LINK went into the downtown area as well didn’t contribute directly on the university’s educational mission, Miller said. Also a consideration, said Miller, was that The Courtyards – a new student housing development on Broadway near Plymouth – would be coming more fully online next year, and there would be increased demand for service to that location. And in a tough budget environment, Miller said, it meant that his department needed to be as efficient as possible in allocating transportation resources.

CEO Search: Michael Ford’s Contract Offer

Board chair David Nacht opened the meeting by entertaining a motion from board member Sue McCormick to alter the agenda so that the board could go into an executive session immediately following the period allotted for public comment.

The purpose of the closed executive session would be to discuss details of the contract with Michael Ford, with whom the board is currently in negotiations to hire as its CEO. Nacht noted that an exception to the Open Meetings Act in this case could be allowed only to review the contents of an employment application when the applicant explicitly requests that the meeting not be open. “He has done so?” asked Nacht. “He has,” replied McCormick.

So the board then went into closed session.

Emerging from closed session, the board passed a motion setting forth the terms of a contract for Michael Ford, supporting his appointment as the chief executive officer of the AATA, with the expectation that he would assume responsibilities on July 6, 2009 or soon thereafter. The motion passed unanimously. Nacht said that this was the final written offer to Michael Ford, concluding, “We hope he’ll accept.” Board member Paul Ajegba participated in the meeting via conference call, but recused himself from the vote on the resolution.

The Chronicle has observed that on occasion, Ajegba has recused himself from certain votes tied in some way to the Michigan Department of Transportation – he’s manager for the Oakland County Transportation Service Center for MDOT. It’s not obvious why the recusal took place in this case, so we’ll follow up with a clarification.

American Civil Liberties Union: Surveillance on Buses?

In his general communications at the start of the meeting, Nacht indicated that he had been contacted by the American Civil Liberties Union of Washington County with an inquiry about the nature of audio and video taping on AATA buses. Nacht said that later in the meeting he wanted there to be a discussion, held in public, about the topic.

When that point in the meeting came, Nacht wanted to know, “Are we spying on people?”

Dawn Gabay, interim director of AATA, clarified that the AATA was not, in fact, spying on people. She said that there was audio and video taping equipment aboard buses that was used exclusively for the review of incidents and accidents. The material that was recorded, she said, was not downloaded or archived or otherwise examined.

If there was no specific reason to view the material or listen to it due to an incident or an accident, she said, that material was taped over – typically every 35-40 days. It was clarified that no one is watching the material in real time, and that it was not used by law enforcement who simply wanted to listen to what people were saying to each other aboard the bus. Gabay stressed that there had to be a specific reason to retrieve the footage to watch it based on some incident or accident.

Jim Mogensen: Speaking during the public commentary time at the conclusion of the meeting, Mogensen noted that he was not associated with the request from the ACLU about surveillance on the AATA buses. But he drew a connection between the video surveillance that is done on AATA buses and a Department of Justice grant allocation made the previous Monday night (June 15) at the meeting of Ann Arbor’s city council. For that grant, digital recording equipment is being installed in patrol cars. Mogensen made the point that eventual strings could be attached by the federal government to a grant paid for the digital recording equipment that would require the city of Ann Arbor to provide the information recorded with it. So he suggested that the AATA contemplate the possibility that any municipality using federal funds could be required to turn over its security tapes. He concluded by simply saying it was be a good idea to think it through.

WALLY

Ted Annis reported out from the planning and development committee that they’re now at the point where they’re looking to spend around $500,000 on hiring a consultant for the WALLY project. (This is a proposed north-south commuter rail between Ann Arbor and points north – it’s a different project from the north-south connector inside Ann Arbor.) It was a bit disconcerting to him, Annis said, to hear some of the updates from project coordinator Tom Cornillie. The estimated 1,000 riders a day, he said, might be high, while the capital expenditure of $33 million might be low. Said Annis, “The numbers don’t make sense to me, yet.” David Nacht said that he continued to have an open mind and was glad that Annis was asking that kind of question.

Purchase of Service Agreements

Gabay reported that conversations had begun to discuss alternatives on reconfiguring routes in Ypsilanti in light of that city’s financial condition, which suggested that the new purchase of service agreements would represent a hardship.

Public Commentary

Jim Mogensen: Mogensen addressed the list of AATA goals and objectives that was available in printed form, but which was not included in the board’s electronic meeting packet. He noted that among the priorities listed were long-term downtown transit, park-and-ride lots, the situation at Arborland, and an intermodal facility on Fuller Road. Those priorities, he said, suggested a focus on commuters as users of the transportation system. He urged the board to try to reconcile the tension between serving urban area dwellers – who pay for transportation through their taxes – and commuters who drive into the area. He gave a specific example related to his own personal circumstance: Currently he can take the Number 2 bus into town, but he could imagine that a reconfiguration of routes designed specifically to make commuting more deficient could easily result in a new configuration – one  that would require him to take the Number 22 bus to the Green Road park-and-ride lot and from there take the Number 2 into town.

At the conclusion of the meeting, after the board had discussed the situation at Arborland, Mogensen suggested that the Arborland bus stop location served two purposes: (i) it was a park-and-ride, and (ii) it was a connecting location. So in coming up with alternative solutions, it’s important, he said, to consider the impact on people who use the location to make connections versus people who use the bus for commuting. The contrast is between people who use buses to get around versus people who use buses just to get to work.

Thomas Partridge: Partridge criticized the time limit of two minutes for public commentary at the start of the meeting as well as the requirement that comments be focused only on agenda items. [Public commentary at the end of board meetings is not restricted by topic.] Partridge criticized the goals and objectives document because it didn’t give enough priority to countywide bus transportation. He said that he found lacking in the set of goals and objectives any items meant to improve para-transit service.

Rebecca Burke: In her report from the Local Advisory Council, Burke said that the bus stop accessibility project was taking a case-by-case approach with reports from members about problems at particular bus stops. She also said that the LAC was continuing to work on its code of conduct. And finally, she said that a resolution from the LAC that had been proposed to the LAC executive committee to unify the two entities had been rejected.

She also said there was renewed concern that there is not a continuous LAC liaison in place, and she extended an invitation to board chair David Nacht to attend its August meeting.

Sandra Holley: Speaking at end of the meeting,  Holley addressed several of the issues that the board had considered that evening. On the subject of surveillance and buses, she said that a bus is a public space, and that you know surveillance is going to happen, just like it happens in any department store. The important thing to bear in mind, she said, was the importance of due process and handling of the tapes. With respect to the imminent hiring of Michael Ford, she expressed concern that the AATA had a lot of different projects currently going on, and he would have a lot on his plate from the very start. So she suggested that it was important that someone shadow him in order to bring him quickly up to speed. On the subject of the LINK, she said that while it might well serve the students from the University of Michigan, they are the main consumers in Ann Arbor and the service should be evaluated in that context.

Present: Charles Griffith, David Nacht, Rich Robben, Sue McCormick, Ted Annis, Paul Ajegba (by speaker phone).

Absent: Jesse Bernstein.

Next regular meeting: Wednesday, August 19, 2009 at 6:30 p.m. at AATA headquarters, 2700 S. Industrial Ave. [confirm date]

First, a significant chunk of time was invested in discussing the relative lack of success of the A2Chelsea Express, a commuter express bus service between Chelsea and Ann Arbor, plus the intent to begin offering a similar service for Canton. Nacht concluded the discussion on the Ann Arbor-to-Chelsea express bus by saying that he continued to be a “faith-based believer in commuter bus service, but I hope at some point to have some data to support my theology.”

Secondly, Nacht gave his assurance a couple of different times during the meeting that it was not the intent of the AATA board to discontinue service to Ypsilanti. And finally, Dawn Gabay, interim director of the AATA, indicated that efforts were being made “behind the scenes” in conversations with the management of Arborland to preserve the AATA bus stops on that shopping center’s property – Arborland management has indicated a preference to have the bus stops removed.

Gabay might not have to serve in the capacity of interim director much longer, as the board got an update that negotiations were proceeding apace with Michael Ford, the one final candidate for the CEO position.

Ann Arbor to Chelsea Commuter Express Bus

Board chair Nacht focused attention on the Ann Arbor-to-Chelsea express bus in an extended exchange with Chris White, who is AATA’s manager of service development. The  one-year milestone report on that operation was included in the board’s packet. The service has now been offered for a year on a “demonstration basis” funded by a Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) grant, according to the report. It provides two trips each morning and evening (four trips) targeting Ann Arbor workers who live in Chelsea. There’s also one trip in the morning from Ann Arbor to Chelsea and one in the evening returning from Chelsea to Ann Arbor. [A2Chelsea Express schedule as a .pdf]

White explained to Nacht that the report reflected monthly totals and not daily numbers. The peak ridership in any given month was 1,364 rides in October 2008. It was currently averaging a little less than 1,200 rides per month, White said. In doing the rough math on the fly, Nacht noted that this sounded like it was around 55-60 passengers a day. [Dividing that across the six possible trips per day puts the average number of passengers on a bus at around 10, or about 20% of the Indian Trails motor coach capacity.]

White characterized the ridership as “quite low.” White reported that they are selling more tickets than are actually used – something that had not been expected on the scale that they were seeing it. White said the major hurdle to the service was the limited number of commuters who fit the two trips per day made by the service – it was thus operating within a severely constrained market. The service to Canton that is currently being planned, White said, would involve a much bigger market.

White reported that there had been some “consumer pushback” about the price –  people who didn’t want to use the service for all the days that they were required to purchase tickets. [Pricing for the service is as follows: $125 for a calendar month; $62.50 for a half calendar month; $40 for a ten-ride ticket; $5 exact cash for a one-way ride without a ticket or subscription.]

Nacht asked White if he had ever ridden the express service. White’s answer: Yes. White said that he and AATA staffer Tom Cornillie had talked to the regular passengers. Nacht suggested that there were two categories of people they needed to talk to: (i) those who could be riding with the service but who won’t try it, and (ii) those who ride it but who don’t love it. White contended that the people who do ride the service are, in fact, very satisfied with it.

In terms of what current riders of the A2Chelsea express enjoy, White said they don’t put value on the WiFi service or other amenities associated with the motorcoach – overhead luggage bins, reading lights, full reclining seats. [The AATA website indicates that WiFi is not provided, but White told The Chronicle at the board meeting that this amenity was available.]

Nacht asked where the data came from on the idea that people wanted the fancier coaches. He said that he recalled that former director of the AATA, Greg Cook, had always talked about the fact that people wanted the fancier coaches. White said this preference simply wasn’t true of the people who were actually riding the express bus – seat comfort was important, he allowed, but not the other amenities.

And White said that this lack of value placed on extra amenities factored into the AATA’s thinking about how to provide the service more cheaply. He said that the AATA could do the service at two-thirds the cost in-house (instead of contracting with Indian Trails) by using cheaper buses that were outfitted with highway seats.

Nacht briefly contemplated the idea of coming up with a different category to put drivers in for the commuter service – perhaps using minivans. Nacht wondered if there could be cost savings not just for the vehicles, but also for the drivers, if commuter service drivers were not paid according to the regular driver contract. White cautioned that there would be certain economies of scale sacrificed if they went with smaller vehicles. He noted that van pools are the primary forms of competition to the service. Board member Charles Griffith confirmed with White that the expansion of service to Canton was going to be provided under the same Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) grant that was funding the Chelsea service. Canton had been identified as a good area to target, White said, because of its high density of University of Michigan employees.

Nacht asked if there was money for a survey of riders who live within the Chelsea “catchment area” who could ride it in order to check for awareness of the service. White said that announcements had been sent out to all Chelsea area residents with their water bills. Board member Jesse Bernstein wanted to know to what extent the service was subsidized. Charles Griffith explained it was a 1:3 ratio – one third of the cost is covered by riders.

Nacht asked if anyone had been hired to consult, someone who’s done successful commuter buses elsewhere. White replied that the people with such expertise have usually dealt with situations where it’s a 40-50 mile commute to major urban areas [Chelsea is about 16 miles to the west of Ann Arbor]. Nacht wanted to know if the AATA was really ready to offer service to Canton. “Have we learned enough?” he asked. White responded by saying that the grant was getting old [it's now starting the second of two years]. Board member Charles Griffith suggested that Canton represented an opportunity to try lower cost alternatives, allowing that it would not permit a direct comparison between the Chelsea situation.

Nacht expressed the sentiments behind his questioning: “I have concerns that we are experimenting without sufficient analysis or expertise, using too much guesswork … I’m a huge commuter service supporter, but I have no sense we have a direction about how to improve.” Nacht said that after three months and at the six-month mark he had heard, “It’s early,” but after a year, he felt like he was not comfortable that the AATA was ready to actually “go into this business.”

Bernstein, for his part, was somewhat more sanguine. “We’ve got data,” he said, “and the biggest problem is people’s schedules, which we can’t change.” Charles Griffith said that the AATA could not go into business with the service as it was offered to Chelsea, because it won’t pay for itself. On that basis, he argued for the idea that lower-cost options for providing the service need to be explored.

Nacht suggested that White and Cornillie conduct a very informal focus group study by heading out to Chelsea on a Saturday afternoon and talking to people. White said that they have data on 30-40 people who have considered the service and have tried it, but who don’t use the service. This data comes from the two-week free trial. The idea was discussed of adding one later trip in the evening to provide the psychological assurance that there would be a bus coming later in case someone needed to stay longer at work, so they wouldn’t feel stranded.

Speaking to the idea of an additional evening trip, board member Sue McCormick said that based on her own experience, leaving home for work is fairly predictable, but that leaving work is always unpredictable. There would be the same challenge, she said, when commuter rail was implemented with relatively few options.

Rich Robben said he felt that the price of gasoline had a lot to do with it. Although the price per gallon right now stands around $2.50 a gallon, it was projected to be around $3.50 this time next year, he said.

Nacht wanted to know what the marketing efforts had been like for the Chelsea service. White said that the most successful approaches had been employer contacts [University of Michigan] and word-of-mouth – referrals can earn riders a discount.

Why the long discussion on the topic of the Ann Arbor-to-Chelsea express bus service? Nacht said that commuter bus service was crucially important, because it had been pointed to as one of the key components of expanded countywide service for the AATA.

Arborland

The AATA operates buses on three routes (numbers 4, 7, 22) using stops inside Arborland shopping center. Over the course of at least the last year, conversations have taken place between the management of the shopping center and the AATA, concerning the use of property inside the shopping center for bus stops. Although the AATA’s website does not list Arborland among its “park and ride” locations, some riders apparently use the lot for that purpose. Previously, an officially designated Park and Ride lot at Maple Village on the west side of Ann Arbor was “evicted” when no agreement could be reached between that shopping center’s management and the AATA.

The recent trajectory of Arborland-AATA communications is reflected in minutes from the the AATA’s performance monitoring and external relations committee.

From the draft minutes of the Feb. 13, 2009 performance monitoring and external relations committee:

Develop plans for park and ride lot near Washtenaw and US-23 to replace Arborland. Timing/Target completion date: April 1, 2009.

From the draft minutes of the March 11, 2009 performance monitoring and external relations committee meeting:

Mr. White reported that AATA has reached an agreement with Arborland Management on parking at Arborland. In the past two weeks, AATA staff has been working with riders to make sure they park in the designated area. This effort is intended to permit continuing AATA operations in Arborland. For the long term, staff will be looking for an alternate site.

From the draft minutes of the May 13, 2009 performance monitoring and external relations committee meeting:

Mr. White said that the owner of Arborland informed AATA a year ago the owner wanted us to leave shopping center last year, with no reason given. AATA contacted the management company and worked with them to designate a parking area away from the stores. The management company acknowledged that our efforts were successful, but we recently received a notice to vacate Arborland by July 1. Discussion of the situation resulted in a plan under which Ms. McCormick would evaluate the city’s leverage with Arborland and notify Mr. Bernstein, Mr. White and Ms Stasiak. Mr. Bernstein would follow up with Border’s and Arborland management to see if something could be worked out. Mr. White noted that vacating the center in mid schedule would cause additional problems and AATA would like to stay at the least through August, when the new schedule would go into effect. He added that some reconstruction could be done in 2010 at the shopping strip across Washtenaw Avenue from Arborland to allow for buses to pull in and wait.

At the May 20, 2009 board meeting, board member Charles Griffith asked about the situation with Arborland. Dawn Gabay, interim director of the AATA, said there had been behind the scenes work with the city and board memberJesse Bernstein, who are trying to resolve the situation, but they could not yet make an announcement on that.

Ypsilanti Bus Service

Part of the news from last month’s April 2009 AATA board meeting was that the board voted to adopt fully-allocated costs for  its “purchase of service” agreements (POSAs) with municipalities outside of Ann Arbor. Ann Arbor funds its bus service through a dedicated millage. That means that the AATA would specify the full cost of providing the service – not some fraction of it – in its POSAs. The increase to full allocation is scheduled to be put into place incrementally, with the fully-allocated costs not achieved until 2012. The $223,316 cost of Ypsilanti’s contract for fixed route service in 2009 would be increased by around $22,000 in 2010 to $245,888 and would increase further to $291,034 by 2012.

That prompted questions during public commentary both at the start and the end of the meeting from people concerned that service to Ypsilanti would be cut off. That concern came in light of recent reports from Ypsilanti, according to AATA interim director Dawn Gabay, that Ypsilanti was looking at around a $100,000 shortfall against the POSA put forward by the AATA.

One resident asked about Ypsilanti this way, “Does service just stop in October?” That’s when the AATA’s next fiscal year (2010) starts. The AATA has a schedule for arriving at its FY 2010 budget – which runs from Oct. 1, 2009 to Sept. 30, 2010 – that calls for approval by the board at a mid-September 2009 board meeting.

On both occasions when the issue was brought up, board chair Nacht was emphatic that it was not the intent of the board to discontinue service to Ypsilanti. Terminating the bus service to Ypsilanti, Nacht said, was not a direction the AATA wanted to go.

Speaking to The Chronicle by phone a few days after the meeting as well as writing in an email, Ypsilanti Mayor Paul Schreiber clarified that it would not be a question of all service to Ypsilanti disappearing in October. The dialogue from now until October between Ypsilanti’s city manager, Edward Koryzno, Jr., and the AATA would center on how much service could be maintained for a given purchase of service contract, Schreiber said. Koryzno requested a budget of $158,967 in FY 2010 to fund AATA service and had gotten support from Ypsilanti city council for that amount. The  difference between that request and the AATA-proposed POSA for fixed route service of $245,888 is the financial gap, if service routes were to remain unchanged.

In his budget message to council, Koryzno said about the proposed level of funding: “Adopting the proposed budget at this amount, allows the City time to negotiate price and service levels with AATA  before the current contract expires in October 2009.”

Schreiber said he was disappointed that he was now in a 2-5 minority on Ypsilanti’s city council on the issue of funding bus service:

… funding the buses is a top priority. Ypsilanti residents depend on the buses to get to work and shop. Partially funding the POSA sends a message that Ypsilanti does not value bus service and mass transportation – regardless of a Depot Town rail stop. The city of Ypsilanti needs to prove to the rest of Washtenaw County that mass transportation is important by funding bus service.

Useful documents for understanding that presentation include an analysis of Ypsilanti route productivity and an analysis of fixed and demand route costs.

Other Public Commentary

Larry Krieg: Krieg spoke for the organization Wake up, Washtenaw. He said that it was distressing to hear that Arborland management continues to want the AATA to get out of the parking lot. In connection with the refurbishment of the Blake Transit Center, Krieg suggested the exploration of joint development strategies with businesses offering services within the center. Nacht responded by saying, “We’ve tried that before, you know.” [This was an allusion to the attempted development of the Fifth and William location by the AATA as a mixed-use facility before it was purchased by the city of Ann Arbor.] In connection with the Blake refurbishment, Krieg also suggested that consideration be given to a long-term strategy of unifying the transportation centers for the north/south rail, the east/west rail and the bus station. Krieg said that he was encouraged that board member Jesse Bernstein had contacted the board’s Toledo, Ohio counterparts in connection with the proposed north/south commuter rail.

Carolyn Grawi: Grawi gave an update from the Center for Independent Living perspective. She announced that there would be a picnic on June 6 at 3941 Research Park, to which everyone was invited. She also announced that the IRide would be taking place from Aug. 6-9, 2009 – it’s a bicycle tour from Holland, Mich. to Ann Arbor. Grawi said that she expected Nacht participate. [While her remark could fairly be described as lighthearted, it was prompted by the fact that Nacht had ridden his bike to the board meeting.]

Thomas Partridge: When Partridge began his public commentary at the conclusion of the board meeting, board chair Nacht took the opportunity to ask Partridge about the quality of the bus service he was getting. “How’s your bus service these days out in Scio?” Nacht asked, continuing with, “What’s it like? What do you have to do to get the service?” Partridge described how he made reservations using the paratransit ride service. As far as access to the regular service, he said there are problems on a daily basis. The People’s Express circulator, Partridge said, runs only in a limited area, and only from 7 a.m.to 6:30 p.m. He said he thought that the one-year grant being used to fund the service ended this summer. Asked what one thing the AATA could do to make his life better, Partridge spoke on a range of themes, including the need to subsidize transit outside the city of Ann Arbor. He also said that the AATA needs a legal appeal system, which he said was not clearly delineated anywhere. Nacht directed staff to mail Partridge a copy of the appeal system.

Rebecca Burke: In reporting from the local advisory council, which she chairs, Burke said that their agenda had consisted of numerous attempts to develop a code of conduct for LAC member behavior and how to address complaints.

Other Announcements: Bonds, CEO, Surveys

Nacht announced that he had had a conversation with a bond lawyer. The purpose of the conversation was to explore the question of whether it was possible for the AATA to raise money by issuing bonds. The answer, said Nacht, was “maybe.” A portion of the costs, he continued, would need to be backed by an income stream, possibly constituted by grants. Nacht stressed that it was the vaguest of conversations.

Board member Sue McCormick reported on the status of negotiations with Michael Ford regarding his hire as the CEO of the AATA. She said that two negotiation sessions had taken place but as yet no consensus agreement had been reached. There would be one more before an offer would be made. She said that Ford was out of the country this week and next so there would be no progress for the next 10 days. Nacht commented that it was good for Ford to get his foreign travel out of the way now. [This was an allusion to the friction that had developed between the board and the previous director of the AATA, Greg Cook, over travel expenses.]

Board member Rich Robben reported out on the planning and development committees activities, in the absence of Ted Annis, who usually delivers that report as the committee’s chair. Robben highlighted the 10%, 20%, and 40% revenue reduction scenarios that the organization was trying to plan for as contingencies. He said that they continued to explore how to reduce service hour costs. The committee was working on a timeline for budget preparations [see above]. They were looking at route structure analysis especially in the light of the north/south and east/west commuter rail plans.

Reporting from the performance monitoring and external relations committee, McCormick said that at their Wednesday, May 13 meeting there had been no major variances from expected performance. The committee had focused on market research for expanded services – it received 10 proposals, all of them very high quality. The timing of launching that research would depend on grant approval. She said that Jesse Bernstein was helping to assist in the design of that survey. She also reported that the onboard rider survey proposals they had received were under evaluation.

Present: Charles Griffith, Jesse Bernstein, David Nacht, Rich Robben, Sue McCormick.

Absent: Ted Annis, Paul Ajegba.

Next regular meeting: Wednesday, June 17, 2009 at 6:30 p.m. at AATA headquarters, 2700 S. Industrial Ave. [confirm date]