According to Huron River Watershed Council deputy director Elizabeth Riggs, that gauge is operated by the USGS in partnership with the city of Ann Arbor. It’s not clear if city staff were notified by USGS of the reduction in data reporting. Update: City of Ann Arbor water treatment plant unit manager Molly Robinson has indicated in an email to The Chronicle that service to that gauge is expected to be restored, based on a USGS update.

Ingrid Ault, who was elected chair of the Ann Arbor park advisory commission on Sept. 17, shakes hands with Alonzo Young of Camp Take Notice. (Photos by the writer.)

The waiver, which would require approval by the city council before taking effect, follows action by the council this summer to waive all park rental fees for the use of Liberty Plaza during a one-year trial period, also based on a PAC recommendation. The goal of that waiver is to spur more activity in that urban park, at the southwest corner of Liberty and Divisions streets.

The issue of fee waivers arose earlier this year when city staff considered charging a rental fee to the church that hosted Pizza in the Park, a weekly homelessness outreach ministry. Members of Camp Take Notice, a group that advocates for the homeless, has been urging the city to apply a broad fee waiver throughout the entire park system for entities that provide humanitarian aid. The recommendation approved on Sept. 17 is a compromise worked out with city staff and Camp Take Notice representatives.

Discussion among commissioners focused on how the waiver would be handled. Parks & recreation manager Colin Smith stressed that all park rules would still apply, and that applicants would need to go through the standard permitting process in order to receive a waiver.

During their Sept. 17 meeting, commissioners also discussed the issue of releasing raw data to the public, in the context of two recent surveys – on dog parks and downtown parks. Tim Berla and others advocated for making the survey results available in a form that could be used by the public for analysis. [The data from both of those surveys had been available in a .pdf format, and can now be downloaded from the city's website as Excel files.] Other commissioners pushed for the city to develop a policy regarding the release of data – a standardized approach that would be approved by the city council.

The Sept. 17 meeting also included PAC’s annual election of officers. Commissioners unanimously selected Ingrid Ault as chair and Graydon Krapohl as vice chair. Bob Galardi was re-elected chair of PAC’s budget and finance committee. There were no other nominations. Current PAC chair Julie Grand is term limited and will be cycling off the commission in October.

Park Fee Waiver for Charities

On PAC’s Sept. 17 agenda was a recommendation to waive fees for any charity that distributes “goods for basic human needs” in Ann Arbor parks. It was brought forward by Christopher Taylor, a city councilmember and ex-officio member of PAC.

Christopher Taylor, a Ward 3 Ann Arbor city councilmember who serves as an ex-officio member of the park advisory commission.

The recommendation comes two months after the Ann Arbor city council waived all rental fees for the use of Liberty Plaza during a one-year trial period, based on a PAC recommendation. That city council action came at its July 15, 2013 meeting. That fee waiver was approved in response to a situation that arose earlier in the spring, when city staff considered applying fees to the hosting of Pizza in the Park in Liberty Plaza – a homelessness outreach ministry of a local church. Liberty Plaza is an urban park located at the southwest corner of Liberty and Divisions streets in downtown Ann Arbor.

The Liberty Plaza fee waiver applies to all activities – social, cultural, and recreational – with the goal of increasing the use of that urban park.

However, members of Camp Take Notice, a self-governed homelessness community, have lobbied for a written commitment that the city would allow humanitarian efforts to take place on public land generally, not just at Liberty Plaza. They’ve objected to the focus by the council and the park advisory commission on general activities – as opposed to the protection of humanitarian aid efforts.

The proposal considered by PAC on Sept. 17 would amend Chapter 39, Section 3:6 of the city code. [.pdf of revised ordinance language] It would be a permanent fee waiver for this specific purpose – the charitable distribution of goods for basic human needs – but it would still require that organizations get a permit to use the park, and follow permitting procedures, including clean up obligations.

Several supporters of Camp Take Notice attended the Sept. 17 meeting, but did not address the commission before the vote.

In introducing the resolution, Taylor recalled the history of the Liberty Plaza fee waiver, and of the Camp Take Notice advocacy for a broader waiver. He noted that the waiver doesn’t alter the authorized uses of the parks, or alter the permitting process. The wording “charitable distribution of goods for basic human needs” was arrived at in consultation with city parks staff, the city attorney’s office, and Camp Take Notice representatives, he said.

Colin Smith, the city’s parks and recreation manager, noted that because it would amend an existing ordinance, the resolution would require initial approval at a first reading at city council, followed by a public hearing and final reading at a subsequent council meeting.

Taylor indicated that he would bring this resolution to the city council at its Oct. 21 meeting for a first reading, followed by a public hearing and final reading at a subsequent meeting.

Park Fee Waiver for Charities: Commission Discussion

Tim Berla noted that someone will have to decide whether a particular application for this waiver is acceptable or not. “It seems like a good definition,” he said, “but this is Ann Arbor, so it seems like also somebody will come up with something that is borderline.” There might be waivers requested for things that aren’t universally recognized as a community benefit, he said.

At the request of a resident, the city hired Matthew Butler to provide sign language interpretation during PAC’s Sept. 17 meeting.

Parks and recreation manager Colin Smith replied that he was comfortable with the proposed language. There’s room for interpretation on a lot of things handled by the parks staff, Smith noted. For example, activities are supposed to relate to the parks mission, which is open to interpretation. As with other things, the waiver will be looked at on a case-by-case basis, Smith said, adding that by going through the regular permitting process, there are opportunities for checks and balances.

Bob Galardi wondered if there is an appeals process, if the city rejects an application for a waiver. It varies, Smith replied. In this case, it would likely be appealed to the city administrator.

Alan Jackson described the phrase “basic human needs” as a “very fuzzy term.” Food and water comes to mind, he said, but does it extend to shelter or medical care? Is the park an appropriate place for that kind of thing? How broad does this waiver become, and what are the limitations? he asked.

Taylor replied that the word “goods” was specific, and therefore medical services wouldn’t apply. Jackson countered that pharmaceuticals are “goods.” Taylor felt that it would be outside the scope of the waiver.

Regarding shelter, Smith noted that all park rules outlined in Chapter 39 still apply, so no one would be allowed to stay in a park overnight. [.pdf of Chapter 39]

Julie Grand said she felt comfortable with the narrowing of the language, compared to the initial idea of allowing a waiver for humanitarian aid. She noted that the parks staff felt that this approach was “doable.”

Outcome: The fee waiver passed unanimously on a voice vote.

Park Fee Waiver for Charities: Public Commentary

At the end of the meeting during the agenda slot for public commentary, Alonzo Young told commissioners he was on the board of Camp Take Notice and he wanted to thank them for passing the resolution about the fee waiver.

PAC chair Julie Grand told him he’d given the most positive public commentary she’d ever heard, and she thanked him for his remarks.

Land Acquisition Annual Report

Ginny Trocchio is a staff member of The Conservation Fund who provides support to the greenbelt program under contract with the city. On Sept. 17 she briefed commissioners on the annual activity report for the city’s open space and parkland preservation program for the fiscal year 2013, which ended on June 30. [.pdf of draft fiscal 2013 activity report]

Ginny Trocchio, who provides staff support for PAC’s land acquisition activities as well as for the city’s greenbelt program, presented an annual report at the Sept. 17 meeting. In the background is sign language interpreter Matthew Butler.

The greenbelt program and park acquisitions are funded through a 30-year 0.5 mill tax that Ann Arbor voters passed in 2003. It’s called the open space and parkland preservation millage, and appears on the summer tax bill as the line item CITY PARK ACQ.

The city’s policy has been to allocate one-third of the millage for parks land acquisition and two-thirds for the greenbelt program. The greenbelt advisory commission (GAC) handles the portion for land preservation outside of the city limits, while the city’s park advisory commission (PAC) oversees the funds for parkland acquisition. PAC’s land acquisition committee, of which all PAC commissioners are members, makes recommendations for parkland purchases.

To get money upfront for land acquisition, the city took out a $20 million bond in fiscal year 2006. That bond is being paid back with revenue from the millage. Debt service on that bond in FY 2013 year totaled $1.227 million. [Two debt service payments are made during the fiscal year.]

Regarding parkland acquisitions, Trocchio reported that the city bought two properties in fiscal 2013, and accepted a donation from Ann Arbor Township – the Braun Nature Area, which is adjacent to the city’s Huron Parkway Nature Area. The purchases were:

• 0.91 acres along Hampstead Lane, adding to the Kuebler Langford Nature Area – at a total cost of $118,944.
• 0.35 acres along Orkney, to add to the Bluffs Nature Area – at a total cost of $120,774.

For the greenbelt program, five transactions were completed in the last fiscal year, covering 448 acres of farmland. [More details on those acquisitions, see Chronicle coverage: "Greenbelt Commission Gets Financial Update."]

Commissioners were also briefed on a financial report for fiscal 2013, related to the open space and parkland preservation millage. [.pdf of financial statements]

For the year ending June 30, 2013, Trocchio reported that net revenues from the millage were $2.626 million. Most of that – $2.141 million of it – came from millage proceeds. The other main revenue source was investment income of $111,137 in FY 2013. That  compared to $176,082 in investment income the previous year.

Karen Levin, an Ann Arbor park advisory commissioner.

Expenses for the year were $3.357 million. In addition to $1.227 for debt service, expenses included $1.757 million in greenbelt projects and $242,867 for parkland acquisition.

As of June 30, 2013, the fund balance stood at $8.856 million, with about equal amounts designated for the greenbelt ($4.413 million) and park acquisitions ($4.442 million). The greenbelt program also received $396,900 in reimbursements from the USDA Farm and Ranchland Protection Program (FRPP), and $5,330 in contributions – primarily a $5,000 gift from Cherry Republic.

Administrative costs of $129,966 in fiscal 2013 equate to 3.9% of total revenues. Administrative costs over the life of the millage are limited by ordinance to be no greater than 6% of revenues.

Trocchio also noted that she hopes to hold a joint session of the greenbelt and park advisory commissions sometime later this year.

There was minimal discussion among commissioners. Julie Grand noted that the city has accomplished a lot of its initial goals for land acquisition, but there are still funds available for that purpose. There’s nothing to prevent PAC from looking at its priorities and potentially approaching landowners who might be interested in selling, she said.

Outcome: This was not a voting item.

Survey Data

Tim Berla introduced a topic regarding the accessibility of raw data from surveys that the city conducts. Specifically, he noted that subcommittees for PAC had recently done two surveys – for dog parks, and downtown parks. In addition to producing .pdf files with the results, it would also be helpful to have the raw data available for anyone in the community who wants it, Berla said. For example, someone might want to compare the difference in attitudes toward dog parks by comparing responses of dog owners and non-dog owners.

He had advocated for releasing the data, and referenced some email exchanges with others who had raised objections that he said he didn’t completely understand. So his question was whether the city would release the survey data in raw data form.

From left: Park advisory commissioners Tim Berla and Alan Jackson.

Colin Smith, parks & recreation manager, replied that he had sent an email to all PAC members in response to Berla’s query. The city’s IT staff had indicated that it would be possible to release the data, likely in the form of an Excel spreadsheet. There’s no way to lock the file to prevent someone from modifying it, Smith noted, so that’s an issue that PAC should discuss.

There are several ways to handle the survey data, Smith said. Because the recent surveys used SurveyMonkey, it’s possible to run multiple reports and cross-tabulations, he said – for example, to look at responses for downtown residents between the ages of 25-44. Smith suggested that anyone who wanted a particular type of report could email a request to staff, who could then run the report and publish it on the PAC website.

Berla thought that for the sake of transparency, there should be a way to release the data. He didn’t dispute that people might use the data in a manipulative way. “There’s no way you can give somebody a spreadsheet and prevent them from doing something nefarious,” Berla said. “The good thing is that everybody would have the data,” he added, so anybody could verify the information.

The data is a public resource, Berla said. The point is to learn about how the community feels on these two issues. The advantage to releasing the data would be that it wouldn’t entail more work for staff, he noted. Berla said his main goal is for people to have access to the information.

Graydon Krapohl asked what the city’s policy is on releasing data. He noted that the data collected by PAC’s subcommittees belongs to the city. That’s the bigger issue, he said, and it would apply to all city surveys.

Smith said he didn’t have the answers to some of these questions. More tools have been available in recent years for getting feedback, including social media, and sometimes the policy doesn’t keep up, he noted. That’s something that city staff need to put more work into, he said. Smith pointed out that certain kinds of information – like emails and phone numbers from survey respondents – aren’t released.

Missy Stults observed that the .pdf file posted on PAC’s website includes all the information from the surveys – not just a summary. She also wondered whether the city parks staff had capacity to handle a lot of requests for survey reports.

Stults also suggested that PAC could encourage the city to come up with a policy on the issue of releasing survey data. A lot of people want the data and think that the city is holding it back, she noted, so it would be great if there were a standard policy to explain how the city operates in this regard.

Alan Jackson said he didn’t really understand the reluctance to release data. Without the raw data, it’s not possible to do relational searches. There might be things that could be learned – nuances about the data – that members of the public could discover, he said. Doing the surveys has been a learning experience for PAC, he added. One of the key lessons is to understand what will be released at the end. Jackson didn’t see any reason to hold back the data available from the surveys.

Mike Anglin, a Ward 5 city councilmember who serves as an ex-officio member of PAC, said that what the public pays for is public property. He suspected that the city would have a hard time telling people that they couldn’t have access to the data. Some local groups “are pretty sophisticated with data,” he said.

From left: Park advisory commissioners Graydon Krapohl and Bob Galardi.

Anglin noted that the city ran into a similar situation with a survey regarding a convention center, saying that the survey’s open-ended responses weren’t included in a final report. “If you’re going to ask the public, then you should report back to the public on what you found,” Anglin said.

Krapohl again urged the staff to develop a coherent city policy. It will only become more complicated as more people start using social media, he noted. If each commission decides how to handle it, then there will be a lot of inconsistencies, he said. The IT staff needs good guidance, and that has to come from a policy that should be reviewed by the city attorney and approved by the city council, he said.

Stults supported releasing data, but agreed with Krapohl that a clear, standard policy is needed. Another challenge is that some people want the surveys to be statistically significant, she noted. That’s something that the staff and PAC don’t have the resources to do, so they need to be very clear about that.

Julie Grand noted that because this is a very educated community, people should also understand the cost that would be involved in conducting a survey that’s statistically significant. The city tries to reach as many people as possible in its surveys, but it’s not possible to be representative of the entire city. The results are representative of the people who are willing to take the time to complete the survey, she said. It’s not realistic that the city would pay tens of thousands of dollars to do a survey that’s more sophisticated. The surveys that are done are one way to get feedback – but not the only way, Grand said.

Jackson agreed that a survey is only part of the process. “Ultimately, our role is to provide judgment to council, who will make decisions,” he said. Certainly it’s important to solicit public opinion, he added, and that’s why PAC did these surveys. “But we don’t have to be a slave to some bizarre criteria that people come up with,” he said.

Smith again stressed that all of the comments received from the dog park survey and the downtown park survey had been posted online [in .pdf form] – “hundreds and hundreds of pages of them.” He said he’d follow up with other city staff regarding the next steps to develop a policy on this issue.

The data for both surveys is now available in .pdf and .xls formats. [.pdf of 306-page dog park survey results] [.xls file of dog park survey results] [.pdf of 110-page downtown park survey results] [.xls file of downtown park survey results]

Officer Elections

The Sept. 17 agenda included PAC’s annual election of officers. The current chair, Julie Grand, is term limited. Her last meeting will be on Oct. 15. Ingrid Ault has served as vice chair for PAC since Oct. 16, 2012, and chairs the commission’s downtown park subcommittee.

Julie Grand, outgoing chair of the Ann Arbor park advisory commission, holds up a blank ballot prior to the Sept. 17 officer elections.

Ault was the only nominee for chair. PAC’s bylaws require that officer elections be conducted by secret ballot, even if there are no competing nominations. The ballots were passed to Colin Smith, the city’s manager of parks and recreation, for tabulation. Ault was unanimously elected, and will lead her first meeting as PAC chair on Oct. 15.

Graydon Krapohl, who joined PAC in January of 2013, was the only nominee for vice chair. He was also elected unanimously. In announcing the results, Smith joked that the spelling of Krapohl’s name showed some variations.

PAC’s chair is responsible for nominating the chair of the commission’s budget and finance committee. Grand nominated the current committee chair, Bob Galardi. This did not require a secret ballot, and his re-election took place with a unanimous voice vote.

Communications & Commentary

There were several opportunities for communications from staff or commissioners during the Aug. 20 meeting. Here are some highlights.

Communications & Commentary: Manager’s Report

Colin Smith, the city’s manager of parks and recreation, gave several brief updates. He noted that the skatepark construction is well underway at the northwest corner of Veterans Memorial Park. The concrete will be poured soon, he reported. Wally Hollyday, the skatepark designer, is basically living in town for the next few weeks to oversee the project, Smith said.

Roof construction at the Mack pool and Vets ice arena is wrapping up – a project that’s perhaps less exciting than the skatepark, he noted, but very necessary.

The Vets ice arena recently opened, and indoor ice skating has started. In other construction projects, the playground at Esch Park is completed, and phase two of the Gallup renovations has begun. The hope is that the Gallup work will be finished in November.

Smith also highlighted the city’s season-ending dog swim at Buhr Park pool. In 2012, 163 dogs “took their humans to that event,” he joked. This year, there were 419 dogs. He attributed the increase to outreach that staff had done to elevate the event’s profile.

Communications & Commentary: Recreation Advisory Commission

Tim Berla gave a report from the recreation advisory commission (RAC), on which he serves. The group advises Ann Arbor Rec & Ed, a unit of the Ann Arbor Public Schools. He said they’re working on a coach recognition program, to develop a Rec & Ed coaching hall of fame.

He also reported that AAPS trustee Glenn Nelson attended the RAC meeting to talk about the sinking fund millage renewal that’s on the Nov. 5, 2013 ballot. Berla described it as not a tax increase, but a continuation of funding to put money into the local schools, to pay for infrastructure needs. He hoped everyone would support it.

By way of additional background, the sinking fund millage was first passed in 2008, expiring in 2014. The ballot on Nov. 5 will include this statement:

Shall the Public Schools of the City of Ann Arbor, County of Washtenaw, Michigan, be authorized to levy 1.00 mill ($1.00 per $1,000 of taxable valuation) to create a sinking fund for the purpose of the construction or repair of school buildings and the improvement and development of sites and, to the extent permitted by law, for other purposes, including, but not limited to, the acquisition and installation of furnishings and equipment, by increasing the limitation on the amount of taxes which may be imposed on taxable property in the School District for a period of five (5) years, being the years 2015 to 2019, inclusive? It is estimated that 1.00 mill ($1.00 per $1,000 of taxable valuation) would raise approximately $7,450,000 in the first year that it is levied.

Communications & Commentary: Dog Park

Karen Levin gave a brief update on work of the dog park subcommittee. Survey results are posted online, with about 1,500 responses. [.pdf of 306-page survey results] [.xls file of survey results] Two public meetings are being held – on Sept. 11 and Sept. 24. The subcommittee is still gathering information, Levin said, both on possible locations for a more centralized dog park, as well as how to improve the city’s two existing dog parks.

Communications & Commentary: Downtown Park

Ingrid Ault, chair of the downtown park subcommittee, reviewed that group’s work. Like the dog park, there has been a survey that yielded nearly 1,600 responses. [.pdf of 110-page survey results] [.xls file of survey results] Two public forums – on Sept. 9 and Sept. 18 – were also held. Eight city parcels have been identified as having potential for additional public space, she said. Those parcels, which were part of the survey, are:

• the surface parking lot on South Ashley, north of William, known as the Kline lot
• the surface parking lot at the northeast corner of Main and William, next to Palio restaurant
• the ground floor of the Fourth & William parking structure
• the surface lot north of William, between Fourth and Fifth avenues – the former YMCA site
• the top of the Library Lane underground parking structure on South Fifth Avenue
• the surface parking lot at First & William
• 415 W. Washington, across from the current Y
• 721 N. Main, near Summit

The subcommittee is addressing three questions, Ault said: (1) Is there a need or desire for additional public space in the downtown or near downtown? (2) If yes, then what space would people like to see as an additional public space, and how would they like to use it? and (3) How does the city fund it?

Ault hopes to report back to PAC at its Oct. 15 meeting with recommendations. The goal is to forward recommendations to city council for its first meeting in November, she said.

In response to a query from Tim Berla, PAC chair Julie Grand said she expects the two committees will bring forward recommendations in the form of resolutions for commissioners to consider and vote on.

Present: Ingrid Ault, Tim Berla, Bob Galardi, Julie Grand, Alan Jackson, Graydon Krapohl, Karen Levin, Missy Stults, and councilmembers Mike Anglin and Christopher Taylor (ex-officio members). Also Colin Smith, city parks and recreation manager.

Next PAC meeting: Tuesday, Oct. 15, 2013 at 4 p.m. in the city hall second-floor council chambers, 301 E. Huron St., Ann Arbor. PAC’s land acquisition committee meets on Tuesday, Sept. 3 at 4 p.m. [Check Chronicle event listing to confirm date]

The Chronicle survives in part through regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the Ann Arbor park advisory commission. If you’re already helping The Chronicle with some financial green, please encourage your friends, neighbors and coworkers to do the same. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle.

For the Barton Pond gauge, the March 2 rain measured 0.45 inches. The Jackson Road and South Industrial Highway locations recorded 0.28 inches and 0.49 inches, respectively.

The city’s webpage also allows users to download data in files that contain comma-separated values. Based on data from the website, for the Barton Pond gauge, the most rainfall recorded on any one day since Nov. 24, 2009 was 2.65 inches on May 25, 2011.

Ann Arbor police service calls for Jan. 3, 2010. This map was built by The Chronicle in about 15 minutes using data from the city's online catalog. (Image links to fully interactive map hosted at http://www.batchgeocode.com)

At the same meeting, the budget committee also continued its discussion about the content of the monthly financial reports that the city charter requires the city administrator to provide to the council.

What ties these issues together is the idea that there’s information the city will be routinely pushing out, without anyone needing to make a special request for it.

In the case of the data catalog, it appears at first glance that the project is a kind of bonus for the citizens of Ann Arbor. That is, it could be thought of as something the city is not required by law to do, but which it’s doing anyway in the interest of transparent government.

That’s different from the monthly financial statement, which the charter explicitly requires. That issue came to the surface during the budget committee meeting, during a verbal exchange between Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) and the city’s chief financial officer, Tom Crawford. The exchange found Taylor appealing to an English word only rarely deployed as a verb: “I guess I’d stickle.”

On Stickling

CFO Tom Crawford is required by the city charter to provide to the council a monthly statement via the city administrator, Roger Fraser:

SECTION 5.6. The Controller shall be the chief accounting officer of the City. The Controller shall:

(6) Submit to the Council, through the City Administrator, by the tenth working day of each month, a statement showing the balances at the close of the preceding month, in all funds and budget items, the amount of the City’s known liabilities and budget items to which the same are to be charged, and all other information necessary to show the City’s financial condition;

After a period during which the city council apparently did not expect such a monthly report, the council’s budget committee has now begun to talk about what information should be contained in the monthly financial statement.

At the Feb. 16 budget committee meeting, Crawford said that he’d provided to councilmembers in that month’s statement the information that he interpreted the charter to require. It included encumbrances – funds that are committed for a specific use. But Crawford suggested not including encumbrances in future statements. In context it was clear that the concern was based on clean formatting and readability of the document, not a desire to shield that information from the public.

Christopher Taylor (Ward 3), however, wanted to know on what basis that information could be stricken from the monthly statement. Hadn’t Crawford just told the committee that he interpreted the charter to require its inclusion? Crawford suggested that the content of the report could reflect a consensus from council about what they wanted to see in the report: “It depends on how much of a stickler you’ll be.”

And at that, Taylor allowed: “I guess I’d stickle.” And Taylor is right to stickle. As I wrote in a previous  column on the city charter:

That is, the city council cannot waive a charter requirement. And any citizen has legal standing to file suit on a charter violation to demand relief.

The ensuing discussion among the budget committee touched on the idea that the monthly statements would be made available online. Perhaps formatting and readability issues could be addressed through linking to a separate document – as opposed to embedding the information on encumbrances directly in a document.

That seems like a practical approach to take: Focus on providing the information underpinning the statement, not so much on the formatting of the statement document. Can the statement “show” the encumbrances, if there is only a link from the statement to a separate document containing the encumbrances? Probably so – that’s the kind of issue the council can work out with city staff.

But it’s not up to city staff and the council to agree to strike the encumbrances from the set of information that’s required by the charter to be provided.

Data Catalog: Records and the City Charter

At the Feb. 16 meeting, the budget committee agreed that once they are satisfied with the format of the monthly statement, the statement will be conveyed directly to councilmembers, without intermediation by the committee. Conveying it to the council – and the public – by posting it online would be a good approach.

It’s a good approach because it would easily satisfy a charter requirement that all city records, like the monthly financial statement, be public:

City Records to be Public
SECTION 18.2. All records of the City shall be public, shall be kept in City offices except when required for official reasons or for purposes of safekeeping to be elsewhere, and shall be available for inspection at all reasonable times. No person shall dispose of, mutilate, or destroy any record of the City, except as provided by law, and any person who shall do so contrary to law shall be guilty of a violation of this charter.

Of course, the city could also be compelled to produce those monthly financial statements under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to anyone who asks.

By posting the monthly financial statements online, the city reduces the resources that would otherwise be required to respond to requests under the FOIA, or the city charter, that those records be produced.

The same principle applies to the information the city is providing as part of its new data catalog.

Last month, the city council’s budget committee had been told the data catalog would be coming online soon.  [Chronicle coverage: "Ann Arbor's Budget Data to Go Online"] So last week’s implementation of this first draft of the data catalog – which contains much more than just financial transactional data – was expected and welcome news. In addition to financial data, for example, the catalog also contains mapping data and public safety information.

Washtenaw County government is moving toward a similar goal. Commissioners discussed their “transparency of government initiative” at a Feb. 18 working session.

The city’s data catalog is a tremendous stride forward for transparency of our local government – but it should not be analyzed as an “extra” or a “bonus” for citizens. The FOIA requires that city documents – with few exceptions – be produced on request. And independently of the FOIA, the city charter requires that city records be available for inspection at all reasonable times.

By providing availability 24/7 on the Internet, the city would certainly cover “all reasonable times.”

The data catalog, then, should be seen as a way for the city to use technology efficiently to respond globally to potential requests for access to information under the FOIA or the city charter – which citizens could already legally demand on an individual basis.

As the city looks to add to the data catalog, then, one guiding question should be: Is this information record required to be public under the charter or the FOIA? If the answer is yes, then the information is a candidate for inclusion in the data catalog. Otherwise put, everything is fair game for inclusion in the data catalog.

Is there any reason why some city records shouldn’t be prioritized for inclusion in the data catalog? Absolutely. Those data sets that would require intensive ongoing staff resources for production of the data should be a lower priority.

As head of the city’s information technology, Dan Rainey, told the budget committee on Feb. 16, the data sets that are included in this initial phase are those that can be produced in automated fashion. They’ll be on a production schedule, with no human intervention required beyond the initial setup.

Data versus Records/Reports

What’s included in the data catalog are data sets, not reports/records. The idea is that by providing information in a relatively raw state, individuals – citizens or councilmembers – who are interested in building their own reports can do so fairly easily, without introducing an additional burden to city staff.

Kevin Eyer, senior applications specialists in the IT department with the city of Ann Arbor, gives the city council budget committee a quick tour through the data catalog. (Photo by the writer.)

For example, the city’s data catalog includes a comma-delimited file containing police service calls. There are data fields for date, location, type of call, and the street address.

Why don’t they provide that data presented as a map? It’s partly because you can make your own map out of the data, if you need a map. Besides, whatever kind of map the city might create, there will always be someone who’d prefer a different kind of map – maybe someone  wants to see the police calls for a specific day, like Jan. 3, 2010.

That’s what I wanted – for demonstration purposes – so I took the city’s data, and headed over to http://www.batchgeocode.com and within about 15 minutes generated the map shown at the top of this column. A few tips on preparing the police call data for mapping at batchgeocode.com:

• Add columns for city and state and fill each cell with “Ann Arbor” and “MI,” respectively
• In the street address field, replace the word “block” with a blank – the city provides the address information by block, not the specific address.
• In the street address field, insert spaces around the “&” for addresses specified by intersection.
• The batchgeocode.com process takes whatever column you name “group” and assigns the colors of the map push pins based on that. Clicking on the pushpins in the map legend causes just those color push pins to appear.
• Read through the documentation at batchgeocode.com
• If you’ve never done this before, it’ll take longer than 15 minutes.

It’s not that the city doesn’t like maps, though. Among the data sets in the catalog are various KML files that open in Google Earth. For example, there’s a perfectly drawn map of Ann Arbor’s city boundaries, which can be used as a layer in other maps that people might be interested in creating.

The demonstration of the data catalog at the budget committee meeting prompted an exclamation from Marcia Higgins (Ward 4): “It seems really user friendly!”

It is.

But the city will be looking for feedback on the data catalog – the email address DataCatalog@A2gov.org is one way to do that. And as Chronicle readers provide that feedback, I’d encourage you to bear in mind the difference between data and reports – as well as the idea that the data catalog provides information that could legally already be demanded from the city.

Dave Askins is editor of the Ann Arbor Chronicle.

Posting of the budget committee's Tuesday meeting.

At a meeting of the Ann Arbor city council’s budget committee, the city’s chief financial officer, Tom Crawford, sketched a plan to start making available a wide range of raw data from the city, starting with numbers from the finance department. Crawford said he hopes to have a pilot in place by the end of February.

Budget committee members also discussed what the contents of a monthly statement should be that will now be provided to the committee and to the council as a body – such a report is required by the city’s charter.

The other main point addressed by the budget committee was raised by city administrator Roger Fraser, who suggested to councilmembers that they owed it to the community to put the question of a city income tax before the voters. Fraser said they had a responsibility to float the question, regardless of what their personal feelings were on the issue.

The meeting was also attended by Mayor John Hieftje, who is a member of the city council, but no longer part of the 5-member budget committee – the council reorganized its committee structure at its Dec. 21, 2009 meeting. Hieftje participated in deliberations on the question of when a city income tax ballot question might feasibly go on the ballot.

Data Catalog

The city’s chief financial officer, Tom Crawford, put the posting of the city’s financial data online in the context of a broader initiative – modeled on Washington D.C.’s data catalog – to make available basic data on the city’s website. The idea is that other interested parties might use the data to create reports and analyses that the city staff might not think to create, or simply not have the time and resources to create.

Crawford reassured councilmembers that the data could not be altered and then re-posted to the city’s website by the public. Addressing the issue that someone could alter the data, then disseminate in by some other means, Crawford cited the experience of the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority in developing a disclaimer that is included with the provision of its realtime parking data. [That disclaimer reads: "The DDA is not responsible for third party use of this data." For some background on the realtime parking data kerfuffle leading to that disclaimer, see "Plus, Data Access Talk"]

The first kind of data that would be posted as a part of the city’s data catalog, Crawford said, would be data from his own department. As a pilot, the data would be provided as comma-separated value (CSV) files, together with documentation summarizing what was contained in the data set, a contact person within the city, a statement addressing accuracy, and a list of field names.

Also included for each group of data would be one of the standard kind of reports that can be run from the data, Crawford explained. These sample reports could range from hundreds to thousands of pages, he said. [They will not be printed out.] Examples of the kinds of data that would be available are journal entries, P-card transactions, the check register, the aging report (people who owe the city money), and the investment report.

The move towards providing the financial data as a part of the data catalog comes in advance of deployment of new financial software, which the city council authorized purchase of at its Dec. 7, 2009 meeting. The new software will cost around $900,000, with a payback through savings realized in a little under three years. One of the benefits touted for the new software is the ability to generate a variety of different reports by a broader range of users, and with less effort.

Even using the old software, however, Crawford said the idea was to post the data in a way that involved “minimal human effort.” This came in response to a concern expressed by Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) about the burden it would place on city staff.

The question of city staff burden arose at a couple of points during the meeting. City administrator Roger Fraser responded to councilmember concerns that they were placing an undue burden on staff. He said that, yes, there’d been an uptick in council requests for reports and data – but that was understandable given the current budget climate and that city staff accepted that as a part of their job.

Monthly Report

The budget committee also discussed what the contents of the monthly report should be, which will now be provided to the council. A monthly financial statement is required under the city’s charter:

SECTION 5.6. The Controller shall be the chief accounting officer of the City. The Controller shall:

(6) Submit to the Council, through the City Administrator, by the tenth working day of each month, a statement showing the balances at the close of the preceding month, in all funds and budget items, the amount of the City’s known liabilities and budget items to which the same are to be charged, and all other information necessary to show the City’s financial condition;

Tom Crawford, the city’s CFO, reported that he and his staff had looked at the charter and come up with a report that they thought met the definition as described in the city charter.

One of the elements of that report will be a report of the general fund’s revenues and expenditures. Crawford cautioned that the year-to-date percentages would not necessarily match the percentage of time that has passed to date in the fiscal year – it’s not linear. For example, now halfway through the fiscal year, most of the taxes were collected – but that’s a function of when taxes are collected, at the beginning of the year. Or halfway through the year, revenues from licensing and inspections in the building department are more than 50% of the year’s budgeted amount – but that actually translates into a projected shortfall.

Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) asked if the comparative year-to-date percentages could be included in the monthly report, just to orient councilmembers to the possible significance of the percentages. For example, 20% could either be awesome, Taylor said, or it could also mean that “the sky is falling.”

In discussing how the monthly report should be disseminated, Roger Fraser suggested that it be sent directly to all councilmembers. However, Marcia Higgins (Ward 4) weighed in in favor of first having the budget committee review it before disseminating it to other councilmembers. She reasoned that the rest of the council might not understand what they were looking at, and that budget committee members would then be in a position to help others on council.

Sabra Briere (Ward 1) said that she preferred to “err on the side of everybody-sees-it.” Crawford said that it could be posted on the website. Taylor suggested that if the report changed after review and questions by council, then it could be held until a final version was determined.

City Income Tax

City administrator Roger Fraser told the budget committee that revenue was not one of the items on the list of issues staff had been given to consider in preparation for the council’s Jan. 26 budget workshop [starting at 6 p.m. in city council chambers]. But on the question of a city income tax, Fraser said, “We owe it to the community to have that question out there.” He suggested that it be put before the voters either at the August 2010 primary election or the November 2010 general election.

Mayor John Hieftje would subsequently point out that choosing the primary versus the general election would not affect how soon the tax could be implemented.

When there seemed to be little enthusiasm in the room for the idea of floating a ballot question for voters on the implementation of a city income tax, Fraser pressed the point. He suggested that they spend a little bit of money to have a survey of voter attitudes done – similar to what the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority had undertaken recently to measure attitudes about a countywide transportation millage. He called undertaking such a survey “due diligence.”

Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2) wondered if there was a good enough set of information out in the public for a survey to be meaningful – we might want to try to educate first and then survey voters. One specific example cited by Rapundalo was that many people are under the erroneous impression that an income tax would be implemented on top of a property tax for general operating expenses. [The city charter forces a choice between a property tax or an income tax – it's not possible to have both for general operating expenses. That said, there would still be other property taxes collected – for transportation, solid waste, and schools, for example.]

There was some sentiment expressed in the room that people essentially calculated whether their individual taxes would go up or down and decided their vote based on that.

Fraser responded that a properly designed survey would actually find out what it is that voters understand about the issue. He allowed that when the results of the survey came back, the council might well decide that there was no point in putting it on the ballot.

Quorum and Open Meetings Issues

The five-member budget committee as determined by a city council resolution at its Dec. 21, 2009 meeting consists of  Mike Anglin (Ward 5), Marcia Higgins (Ward 4), Christopher Taylor (Ward 3), Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2) and Sabra Briere (Ward 1). Prior to that resolution, the council had combined its budget committee with its labor committee. Now, the labor committee is combined with the council administration committee.

At one of the spring 2009 Sunday night city council caucus meetings, Higgins had rejected the idea that other councilmembers should attend the budget committee’s meetings, citing the possibility that a quorum could be reached, with implications about whether any decisions made would become decisions of the council as a body as opposed to decisions of the budget committee.

The attendance on Tuesday of all five members of the budget committee, plus the mayor as an additional member of the council, constituted a quorum of councilmembers. The meeting was not social in nature and thus met the standard for definition of a meeting under Michigan Open Meetings Act.

Notice of Tuesday’s meeting of the budget committee was properly posted in the lobby of city hall; however, the notice did not include mention of the possibility that a quorum of councilmembers could be present.

The Open Meetings Act requires that minutes be recorded for the meeting – in the “action minutes” style used by the council, this would amount to a list of topics addressed as posted in the meeting notice, names of attendees, date and time of the meeting. Councilmembers present at the budget committee meeting did not vote on any resolutions.

On Monday evening, city staff met with 80-100 residents in the auditorium of Slauson Middle School. Kerry Gray, coordinator for urban forestry and natural resources planning, was on hand to clarify that an initiative to develop an urban forest management plan – Gray’s main goal in the coming year – had been accelerated. Instead of beginning the public process in the fall, Monday’s meeting was effectively the kickoff to a public engagement process on developing a tree management plan for the city.

Our goal with this brief article is not to explicate the back-and-forth among residents and staff at Monday’s meeting, but rather to share some data.

Back in the spring we’d noticed the city’s tree inventory in progress. On Monday evening at Slauson, some of the results of that inventory were presented in summary form (e.g., almost 40% of the city’s trees are some kind of maple).

But in light of some recent local discussion about access to raw data, we’d looked forward to the completion of the tree inventory by Davey Resource Group, anticipating a rich data set that could serve as inspiration for anyone with the technical know-how to make use of it. It includes the location of each tree, as well as type, condition and size.

We asked the city of Ann Arbor for all the electronic deliverables from Davey. And we provide the following data with a caveat: On Monday evening, city staff stressed that they were still doing some quality control work on the initial data set – so the data provided to The Chronicle is a snapshot of the city’s trees as assessed by the Davey Resource Group. The city’s inventory will presumably be maintained as a frequently updated data set that changes as trees are pruned, removed, or planted.

• Tree Inventory Analysis Report – includes executive summary.
• Tree Inventory CSV Data – the original data set was in MS EXCEL format. Saved to CSV saves a few MB, but even so, it’s a large (15MB) file.
• Report Spreadsheet – summary data associated with the analysis report.
• GeoDatabase Zipfile – the coordinates in the CSV file don’t look like GPS coordinates, but presumably the multiple files contained in the GeoDatabase provide some sort of relational structure?