A poster generated at the Jan. 30, 2014 Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority board retreat. (Photos by the writer.)

A communications and marketing strategy for the downtown was the focus of Rishi Narayan’s report from the board’s partnerships committee, which had invited representatives from the four downtown area merchant associations to it most recent meeting. The message from those groups, Narayan reported, was a desire to see more events take place downtown.

A desire to see more signature events take place, especially during the winter, had been one of several items identified by board members at a recent retreat, held on Jan. 30, 2014 in the jury assembly room of the Justice Center, from noon to about 3:30 p.m. At its Feb. 5 monthly meeting, the follow-up discussion about the retreat also focused heavily on the idea of events and the possible role the DDA might play in facilitating more frequent events downtown. An initial reaction that appeared to be shared by several board members was this: The DDA should not necessarily be in the event-hosting business, but rather provide assistance to those organizations that are already hosting various events.

Board chair Sandi Smith also floated the idea of hiring an additional staff member to focus on marketing. City administrator Steve Powers stressed the importance of having a clear idea of the financial basis for the DDA’s capacity to undertake various projects on the list of its five-year plan. That five-year project plan, which Smith characterized as always in draft form, will be a focus of discussion when the board continues its retreat on Feb. 19. In addition to the five-year project plan, the board will focus on its 10-year financial projections at the Feb. 19 session. [Updated: The board has decided to continue its retreat on Feb. 26 at 1 p.m. at the DDA offices.]

Transportation was a topic addressed by the sole speaker during public commentary at the Feb. 5 monthly meeting, as Martha Valadez, an organizer with Partners for Transit, asked the DDA board to support a millage proposal that’s expected to be placed on the ballot by the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority. Late last month, the board’s operations committee had been briefed by AAATA staff on the five-year transit improvement plan – the set of service increases that are driving the likely request that voters approve an additional 0.7 mill tax.

Also related to transportation was a report from the board’s operations committee that included an update on the go!pass program, which the DDA has funded historically. Last year, the DDA granted the AAATA about $560,000 to pay for rides taken by downtown employees through the go!pass program. A request will be coming up soon for this next year’s funding.

In another transportation-related topic, the board also received an update on a possible part-time conversion of downtown on-street loading zones into taxi stands. Somewhat related to on-street right-of-way, the board was briefed on city council action to impose a fee on developers who cause the removal of on-street parking meters – unless the development has a more general public benefit. It will be up to the DDA to define what constitutes a public benefit – a task the board will now take up.

Related specifically to the public parking system, which the DDA manages under a contract with the city, the board reviewed the parking revenues for the second quarter of the fiscal year, compared to last year. It was the first full quarter for which the year-over-year comparison was for periods that did not include any parking rate increases. Revenue was essentially flat, showing just a 0.7% increase.

It’s not clear how much longer the former Y lot – located on William between Fourth and Fifth avenues – will continue to be used as a surface parking lot. Not mentioned at the Feb. 5 board meeting, but discussed at the Jan. 29 operations committee meeting, was a proposal from Dennis Dahlmann about leasing the lot back to the DDA after he completes the purchase of the city-owned land. The idea would be for the DDA to lease the property and continue to operate a surface parking lot on the parcel until Dahlmann is able to move a site plan forward. At the operations committee meeting, the idea was not warmly embraced.

Other updates included the regular report from the downtown area citizens advisory council. Chair of the group, Ray Detter, reported that the CAC was generally supportive of an effort now being made by Will and Mary Hathaway to work with some city councilmembers on a resolution about the future of the surface level of the Library Lane underground parking structure. The resolution would establish a significant part of that level – but not all of it – as an urban public space.

DDA Board Retreat Review

Board members used their communications time toward the start of the Feb. 5 meeting to review their retreat, which was held from roughly noon to 3:30 p.m. in the jury assembly room of the Justice Center on Jan. 30, 2014.

In condensed and summarized form, the substantive part of the retreat was organized under three main headings.

• Trends: What local, regional, and national trends might influence downtown Ann Arbor? What have you observed about the evolving social, physical and economic fabric of downtown Ann Arbor?
• Looking forward: What are your hopes and dreams for downtown? What would you like to see more of or less of by 2024?
• DDA’s role: How can the DDA help downtown advance toward a preferred future?

At the board’s Feb. 5 meeting, board chair Sandi Smith indicated that she wanted to review the retreat’s discussion and to put a bit more flesh on the bones of the discussion so that the DDA staff would have a clearer direction. Smith indicated that board members had a draft version of its five-year project plan in front of them and stressed that “it is always in draft form.” She called the plan an “organic, living breathing document.” To frame the discussion, Smith asked: “How do we direct the staff to be able to begin [refining the document] and have that in line with our priorities here?”

John Mouat ventured that it would be useful to ask what ideas generated during the retreat were not on the five-year plan, that needed to be added to the plan. He asked if the five-year project plan and the 10-year financial projections would be a good basis for the conversation going forward. [.pdf of draft five-year plan from Sept. 4, 2013]

City administrator Steve Powers sat between John Splitt, far left, and Rishi Narayan at the Feb. 5 DDA board meeting.

City administrator Steve Powers, who sits on the DDA board, told Mouat that he did think it was very important for the DDA to have a five-year plan of projects. “Very selfishly from the city’s perspective,” Powers continued, “that then allows for better incorporation and coordination with the city’s planned projects, and we have a very robust capital improvements plan.” It’s important that the DDA have some indication of what it’s thinking about doing, Powers said.

Some of the items in the five-year plan are capital projects and some are not, Smith noted. For example, repairing the bricks on North Fifth Avenue is an expensive and capital-intensive project to be carried out. But hiring downtown ambassadors was not on the five-year project list and would take staff time to implement, Smith said.

Another question is marketing, Smith said: “Are we hiring somebody? Does that belong in this plan?” [Subsequently, Keith Orr drew out the fact that an updated five-year plan now included both ambassadors and a marketing position. It was reported later in the meeting that an RFQ (request for proposals) is being developed for the ambassador program.] Smith also said it was important to tell DDA staff how to move the projects forward. [.pdf of background on ambassadors]

Bob Guenzel asked DDA executive director Susan Pollay how the finances fit into the plan. Some of the projects could require a lot of money, while others would be more affordable. But he cautioned: “We haven’t been very successful in projecting our revenue.”

Pollay allowed that “we need to get real.” She reported that DDA staff is now working with city staff on next year’s budget. It’s not likely there will be a lot of money in the next couple of years for a lot of big projects, she said. But that should not prevent the board from continuing to work on the plan. She asked if the board would like the staff to tackle one or two larger projects or rather focus on several smaller projects that would not cost as much. “We can’t just write a big check for big projects,” Pollay said. An approach of taking smaller bite-sized chunks over a multi-year span would be needed.

Pollay pointed out that there are immediate, pressing needs. Ten years ago, she said, retail was a “different kind of animal” with the increased availability of online options like Amazon.com. “What role can we play?” Pollay asked, adding that’s why marketing is a question to explore.

A few years ago, downtown was also a bit more “free standing” Pollay said. Regionalism is now something that is much more front and center. So she asked what the role of the DDA is in a regionally centered downtown, which is a center of prosperity for a larger area. The DDA wants to encourage vitality and quality of life. A vision of that would be helpful, she said, before the DDA gets to the actual dollars and cents.

Bob Guenzel asked about housing. He asked if DDA staff could draft a proposal for how to work with the DDA’s partners, now that the economy is a little past the recession. There’s an idea the DDA could influence progress in development of more housing, he said. Pollay reported that the previous day she’d met with Mary Jo Callan, director of Washtenaw County’s office of community and economic development. Callan and her staff are creating an RFP for housing needs assessment. Post-recession, it’s important to have a clearer idea of what the needs for housing are. [Later in the meeting, the board was briefed on an upcoming request from the Ann Arbor housing commission for $600,000 of support for two of its largest properties: Baker Commons and Miller Manor. The item had been discussed at the AAHC board's Jan. 15, 2014 meeting.]

Mouat suggested that the consultant who’d been hired by the DDA to work on the streetscape framework plan might find it useful for the board to “pluck off” some of the relevant items from the board’s retreat work and provide that information to the consultant.

Smith said she wanted to make sure the final point on the retreat agenda was to transform what the board had done at the retreat into something concrete – because the retreat could be just a waste of time if the board doesn’t take its work and leverage it into some kind of action.

The DDA board will be holding a follow-up to the Jan. 30 retreat on Wednesday, Feb. 19.  [Updated: The board has decided to continue its retreat on Feb. 26 at 1 p.m. at the DDA offices.]

Pollay indicated that the five-year project plan and the 10-year financial plan would be documents provided at the continuation of the retreat. Powers weighed in, saying: “Personally, I think we’re at a point where some of that financial grounding is going to be very important. You can do visioning and trending and all that, but we need to bring in the financials here pretty soon.”

Mouat asked for an indication of when the revenue picture would be clearer. Pollay responded by saying that deputy DDA director Joe Morehouse was working on that at the moment. Pollay felt that by the time of the continuation of the retreat the necessary information would be in place.

Al McWilliams asked that for the purposes of the continued retreat, each item could be provided on notecards, categorized by cost: inexpensive, medium and huge. He felt it would be easier to prioritize the items in the plan. Mouat added that categorization of projects by construction versus planning would be useful.

Events

The idea of causing more downtown events to take place came up during the board’s review of the Jan. 30 retreat, as well as during a report from the partnerships committee.

Events: Retreat Review

During the discussion about the Jan. 30 retreat, Joan Lowenstein said she didn’t think the board had talked much about events. The DDA doesn’t sponsor events, she said, because the merchant associations handle events. The DDA board had, however, been batting around the idea of events after returning from the International Downtown Association conference in New York City last year. One specific idea she’d mentioned was a “Geeks Night Out” to encourage technology districts. She gave the East Liberty Street corridor of an example of where that’s happening in downtown Ann Arbor. Lowenstein called events relatively inexpensive compared to re-bricking a whole street.

Sandi Smith said the idea of a “Geeks Night Out” is not far from her thought of getting a regular group of residents together who live downtown, who are new to downtown, to find out what their needs are. In thinking about whether a downtown residential go!pass program would be useful, Smith cautioned that such a transportation program might be irrelevant. Downtown residents might already have one from their downtown employer or their affiliation with the University of Michigan. Without data, making a guess about what downtown residents might want seems foolish, Smith ventured.

Circling back to the topic of events, Smith said that perhaps smaller “seed events” could be hosted to touch base with people in different sectors. Responding to Smith’s mention of smaller events, Russ Collins quipped: “Or a big-ass film festival!” [Collins is executive director of the Michigan Theater on East Liberty.]

Events: Partnerships Committee Discussion

Rishi Narayan reported out from the previous month’s partnerships committee meeting. The four area merchant associations of downtown Ann Arbor had been invited to come and talk to the committee about what they do. Each association has different resources, staff and budgets, he said. By way of background those four groups are: Main Street Area Association, State Street Area Association, South University Area Association and Kerrytown District Association.

Rishi Narayan is one of the newer members of the DDA board – appointed in August 2013. At the Jan. 30, 2014 board retreat, a game of Two Truths and a Lie revealed that he has never worn a pair of jeans. (Photo by the writer from Jan. 30, 2014 DDA board retreat.)

The committee wanted input from those associations as the DDA tries to figure out what to do to market the downtown – and reaching out to them was a first step. Narayan stressed that the DDA did not want to duplicate the efforts that are already in place. The committee had approached the conversation by asking: What do you do and what do you need help with? Narayan characterized the conversation with the representatives from the merchant associations as “very enlightening.”

What the committee heard from the associations is that they want more events because that’s what brings people downtown and that’s what creates a culture for making things happen. The question is how the DDA might help facilitate additional or more diverse events taking place downtown

Narayan also reported that the merchant associations felt like they knew how to market to the local Ann Arbor community: “They felt like they have that down. That’s not something they felt was out of their wheelhouse.” Marketing to the nation and the farther reaches of the state was something the merchant associations felt the Pure Michigan campaign was doing pretty well.

Marketing to the nebulous “outside local” area – nearby locations like Plymouth and Novi – so that people can come as repeat customers is a gap, he reported. For businesses who need repeat customers, that’s important, he said. The other big partner for marketing is the Ann Arbor Area Convention & Visitors Bureau. So the committee is thinking about inviting the CVB to its next meeting.

Russ Collins encouraged the committee members to remember The Ark, the University Musical Society, the Kerrytown Concert House and a “plethora of student groups” that host events. Sometimes these events that are already happening are thought of as simply part of the “background.” Collins ventured that a little application of resources could result in an acceleration of events that are already happening. Collins gave as an example the idea of asking The Ark what it would take to expand the Folk Festival by a few extra nights.

Narayan agreed with the point that Collins was making, saying that the DDA does not want to go into the business of producing events. Narayan said the question is how to tie events into the downtown and unify them.

DDA board member Russ Collins is executive director of the Michigan Theater.

Prompted by Smith, Collins talked about the role of events in the State Street area. Collins explained that several years ago, the State Street Area Association realized that UMS and the Michigan Theater were driving traffic to the area, and they provided institutional support. The reasoning was that it was better to invest in the stability of those organizations, instead of investing in creating new events. State Street merchants look down at Main Street and see car festivals and food festivals. Collins talked about the idea of expanding existing events. Sometimes people look at going from zero to something big, when they could instead pour gasoline on a fire that’s already burning to add that extra “skosh” more.

Collins spoke of what he perceived as governmental reluctance to get involved in arts activities. He didn’t think that reluctance reflected community values. But some people feel there’s no appropriate role for funding of the arts in the Ann Arbor community. Collins felt that it’s a vocal minority.

Public art had come up at the start of the meeting, during the time the board allocates for a report from the downtown area citizens advisory council. Ray Detter reported that at the previous evening’s meeting of the CAC, members asked him to express the CAC’s continued support for public art in downtown Ann Arbor as well as throughout the city. Long before the city’s public art program existed, it was one of the CAC’s major goals to support art, he said.

The CAC had played a role in setting up a public art committee. [CAC's members include Marsha Chamberlin, a member of the Ann Arbor public art commission, and her husband John Chamberlin, as well as former AAPAC member Jim Kern.] Some of the decisions of the city council recently might stall some projects in the works, Detter said. The CAC appreciated the efforts of the public art commissioners over the years,  he said – they had made valuable contributions to the community. The CAC would continue to support efforts of the city and individuals, groups and organizations to make sure that a commitment to more public art remains an important community goal.

Transportation

Transportation was a major theme of the DDA board’s Feb. 5 regular meeting.

Transportation: Public Commentary

During public commentary at the start of the Feb. 5 DDA board meeting, Martha Valadez introduced herself as a transit organizer for the Ecology Center, working with Partners for Transit. She described Partners for Transit as a coalition of grassroots organizations advocating for expanded and improved bus services countywide, but focused on urban core communities – the cities of Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti, and Ypsilanti Township. She thanked DDA executive director Susan Pollay for inviting her to speak. She told the board she was hoping for support from the DDA. Her understanding was that the DDA is very supportive of transit. As an example, she cited the DDA’s funding of the go!pass.

Transit supports getting workers to the community – back and forth between their homes, she said. Her group’s focus last year had been about raising awareness and participating in community meetings, she said, pointing out that those meetings included the planning effort for the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority’s five-year improvement plan. She said her group saw that comments they’d made had affected how the final plan looked. She stressed that the five-year improvement plan would need additional funding. She encouraged people to attend the Feb. 20 meeting of the AAATA board, when it’s expected to take a vote on the question of putting a millage on the ballot. She said it was imperative that the millage question be placed on the ballot and be approved by voters in May.

Board chair Sandi Smith ventured that it was the operations committee of the DDA board that focused on transportation, and that Valadez should attend the next meeting of that committee.

Keith Orr summarized AAATA financial analyst and planner Bill De Groot’s presentation of the five-year plan to the operations committee at its monthly meeting. It’s an ambitious plan that resulted from a lot of community input, Orr said. It would expand service on weekends and during peak hours. It would expand the reach of public transit, because of the way the feeder routes are being redesigned. Orr, who manages the \aut\ BAR, said he hears from his employees that with the already implemented frequency of service on Routes #4 and #5, they have an easier time getting from city center to city center between Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti, but it’s not as easy to get around within each city. The improvement plan would need an additional millage, he noted. It’s expected that at its next meeting, the AAATA board will vote to place a question on the ballot – likely in May. [For recent Chronicle coverage, see: "Survey: Majority Favorable on Transit Tax."]

Bob Guenzel added to Orr’s remarks by noting he’d been part of a financial task force that had formed during an effort in 2012 to expand the AAATA to a countywide authority – and a subset of that task force has continued to meet. That subset has concluded that a 0.7 mill tax would be adequate to fund the planned additional services. That morning, Guenzel said, the group had forwarded its finding on the currently contemplated 0.7 millage to the AAATA. [.pdf of Feb. 5, 2014 financial task force memo]

Besides Guenzel, who is former Washtenaw County administrator, the current configuration of that group mentioned in the memo includes Mary Jo Callan (director of the Washtenaw County office of community and economic development), Norman Herbert (former treasurer of the University of Michigan), Paul Krutko (CEO of Ann Arbor SPARK), and Mark Perry (president of Perry & Co.).

Transportation: go!pass

Reporting out from the operations committee, Keith Orr noted that getDowntown director Nancy Shore had given the operations committee its annual update on the go!pass, which is administered by getDowntown.

By way of background, the two getDowntown program staff members are employees of the AAATA. Last year, the DDA granted the AAATA about $560,000 to pay for rides taken by downtown employees through the go!pass program. So a request will be coming up soon for this next year’s funding. The previous approval for funding came at the March 6, 2013 DDA board meeting.

The slight dip in ridership from two years ago to last year was analyzed by Orr as attributable to the increased cost to employers for participating in the go!pass program. [It had increased from $5 per employee to $10 employee.] Ridership had bounced back for the most recent year, Orr said.

Orr noted that one of the highlights of the report is that the profile of go!pass users had changed over time. In the last few years, it’s been mostly service and restaurant workers, but over the last year it has evened out more, he said. Part of the goal of the program is for it to be a community-wide program, not just for one job sector.

Fixed-route AAATA ridership by year for rides taken under the getDowntown go!pass program (red). (Data from AAATA, charted by The Chronicle.)

At its February meeting, the operations committee will be looking at next year’s go!pass costs and the funding ramifications, Orr said. Board chair Sandi Smith was particularly struck by the report that the people who would be driving alone to downtown if not for the go!pass: That’s more than 1,000 cars, she said. If you think about the number of parking spaces in the Library Lane parking structure that had been built at great expense – nearly $50 million – Smith indicated that the expense of the go!pass program didn’t come close to the cost of building the parking structure.

Orr agreed that funding the go!pass makes economic and ecological sense. The go!pass is also something that has been touted by downtown businesses as a program that makes it possible for them to locate downtown.

Al McWilliams added that 20% of decision makers said the go!pass was a significant factor in their decision to locate or stay downtown. Orr noted that stat was up from 14% last year.

Transportation: Taxi Stands

Reporting out from the operations committee, John Splitt told the board that a draft policy is being developed on the use of loading zones as taxi stands during certain times. [.pdf of draft policy on use of loading zones as taxi stands] The initial recommendation is that in some locations, loading zones could be used as taxi stands as follows:

• 6 a.m-6 p.m.: Commercial plates required, or passenger loading and unloading.
• 6 p.m.-3 a.m.: Taxis only.
• 3 a.m.-6 p.m.: No parking/Street maintenance.

[The idea stemmed from an inquiry made by city councilmember Stephen Kunselman at a fall 2013 work session. Kunselman is the city council appointee to the taxicab licensing board.] Splitt said DDA staff would be attending a future meeting of the taxicab board to discuss the proposal.

Transportation: Meter Removal

Reporting out from the operations committee, John Splitt told the board that the city council had approved a meter removal policy for on-street parking meters at its Jan. 6, 2014 meeting. [The fee amounts to $45,000 per space plus added payment to compensate for the projected revenue over the next 10 years, generated by the space to be eliminated. For an average space that would work out to around $20,000 in addition to the $45,000. The revenue portion of the payment to the city will be passed through to the DDA, but reduced by 17% – in conformance with the contract under which the DDA manages the public parking system for the city.]

Part of the policy is that the fees would be imposed unless a public benefit were determined. So it’s important that a clear public benefit be defined. That work will go forward now, Splitt said. [.pdf of draft public benefit policy for on-street meter removal]

Transportation: Bike Share

Keith Orr reported that the bike share program is planning a June rollout. By way of background, the bike share initiative is also supported by the University of Michigan and the Ann Arbor-based Clean Energy Coalition (CEC).

The program would include 12-14 bike share stations with an anticipated total of 120-140 bicycles. The contract to provide the service was won by B-Cycle.

In a bike share program, users get access to bicycles parked at a station by swiping their credit card or membership card. Users can then return the bicycle to another station location near their destination.

A recent press release from CEC announced that a name for the program has been chosen: ArborBike.

Parking

The Ann Arbor DDA manages the public parking system under a contract with the city of Ann Arbor. So parking is a point of discussion at most meetings.

Parking: Board Discussion

Reporting out from the operations committee on parking activity, John Splitt noted that for the second quarter of the fiscal year, hourly patrons were down slightly (by 1.12%) and revenues were up slightly (0.73%). The current fiscal year runs from July 1, 2013 through June 30, 2014, so the second-quarter figures were for October through December of 2013.

The first half of fiscal year – from July 1 through Dec. 31, 2013 – showed hourly patrons up by 1.38% and revenues up by 4.28%, Splitt said.

The number of monthly permits sold per structure will in the future be provided with standard parking reports, Splitt said.

Sandi Smith ventured that the quarterly numbers might be influenced by the additional precipitation from October to December in 2013 compared to 2012. Splitt indicated that based on a report from a recent meeting of the downtown marketing task force, crime was probably down for the same reason. Weather affects everything, including parking numbers, Splitt ventured.

Al McWilliams asked about the fact that the number of monthly permits sold at the First and Washington structure showed that the structure had filled up quickly. DDA deputy director Joe Morehouse told McWilliams that anyone who had a monthly permit in that location prior to the construction project was offered first opportunity to purchase a monthly permit – and most of them are taking advantage of that. [Below, the chart of monthly permits sold by structure shows declines in permits for other structures, as the First and Washington structure has come on line. Public parking is included as part of the City Apartments project.]

Splitt also noted that Republic Parking manager Art Low had given an update on parking activity for the NHL Winter Classic on Jan. 1, held at Michigan Stadium. At the most recent downtown marketing task force meeting, Ann Arbor Area CVB director Mary Kerr had said the NHL was complimentary of Republic Parking’s performance during the event, he said.

Parking: Charts

For several years, The Chronicle has been regularly charting activity and finances within the city’s public parking system, based on data from the DDA via Republic Parking, which manages the system for the DDA. These charts reflect the most recent data available.

Year over year for the last four and a half years, the number of hourly patrons – those paying by the hour, not with monthly permits – has been essentially flat. (Data from the DDA, chart by The Chronicle.)

The second quarter of the FY 2014 fiscal year, from October through December 2013, was a period when rates were identical to the corresponding period in the previous year. (Data from the DDA, chart by The Chronicle.)

The two large surface lots downtown show the highest revenue per space of any of the facilities. (Data from the DDA, chart by The Chronicle.)

The Library Lane parking structure revenue per space has started to settle in at a level that’s slightly above the average revenue per on-street metered space. (Data from the DDA, chart by The Chronicle.)

The number of monthly parking permits sold continues a generally upward trend. (Data from the DDA, chart by The Chronicle.)

Parking: Former Y Lot

At the Jan. 29, 2014 meeting of the DDA operations committee, a proposal from Dennis Dahlmann was discussed: Would the DDA lease the former Y lot for $150,000 a year? By way of background, the former Y lot – located on William between Fourth and Fifth avenues – is currently used as a 141-space surface parking lot in the public parking system. Right now 54 of those spaces are being used by the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority as construction staging for the Blake Transit Center.

The Ann Arbor city council approved a purchase agreement with Dahlmann for the city-owned land, for $5.25 million, at its Nov. 18, 2013 meeting. One of the terms of the agreement is that Dahlmann must complete construction and receive a certificate of occupancy for the project on the site by Jan. 1, 2018.

The proposal from Dahlmann is for the DDA to lease the property from him for $150,000 a year – so that the DDA could continue to provide public parking spaces there until construction of Dahlmann’s project could begin. The response from DDA operations committee members on Jan. 29 was unenthusiastic. They felt it would provide an incentive for Dahlmann to delay developing the land. They also felt that in the immediate vicinity of that lot, there was adequate parking – at the Fourth and William and the Library Lane structures. Finally, the DDA had calculated that with the $150,000 rent payment to Dahlmann, the net annual income to the parking system – assuming all 141 spaces in use – would be just $12,333 a year. [.pdf of DDA financial analysis of Dahlmann's proposal]

Housing

Joan Lowenstein reported out from the partnerships committee on a request that would be coming from the Ann Arbor housing commission. AAHC executive director Jennifer L. Hall had indicated that the AAHC would be making an additional request from the DDA for $600,000 for improvements to Baker Commons and Miller Manor – which are the two largest AAHC properties.

Hall will be returning to the February partnerships meeting to provide more information. A decision will be needed from the DDA by April so that a tax credit application by the AAHC can be made. Lowenstein said she felt the best use of the DDA’s housing fund money is to leverage it – by conditioning it on a match by the city of Ann Arbor. [For additional recent Chronicle coverage of the AAHC, see: "Public Housing Conversion Takes Next Step"]

Quarterly Financial Statements

In Roger Hewitt’s absence, John Splitt gave the summary of the second quarter’s financial statements. The TIF (tax increment financing) revenue is “right on track” in terms of revenue, he said. The parking fund is over on its expenses – and that was related to the timing of the First and Washington parking structure construction.

Parking maintenance is under on expenses, compared to the budgeted amount. DDA deputy director Joe Morehouse clarified that the bids for some work came in under budget by a total of $150,000. Elevator repair work had come in at $100,000 less, he said.

Library Lot

Reporting out from the downtown area citizens advisory council’s meeting, Ray Detter said the group had received a presentation from Will and Mary Hathaway. The Hathaways have been working with some councilmembers in support of a resolution to approve designating urban public space on the ground level of the Library Lane parking structure. Detter recounted how, over the last several years, a number of people and groups have lobbied CAC to establish the ground level of Library Lane as a public park. Detter told the DDA board that the CAC had refused to give support to that idea, but allowed that the CAC did support establishing a significantly-sized public plaza on the Fifth Avenue side of the site, that is as green as it can possibly be. Detter indicated that the green element might be potted rather than planted.

The CAC also supported using the pedestrian cut-through of the lot for scheduled community activities. Development of the site, Detter continued, should be sensitive to needs of the Ann Arbor District Library, the Blake Transit Center and nearby historic districts. Detter said the CAC also believed that planning for the Library Lane site should include the possibility of a major new, tax-producing private development on the major portion of the property. Any future private developer should be encouraged to work collaboratively to integrate with and complement the adjoining public plaza.

There are still some people in the community who would like to turn the entire Library Lot into a public park, but Detter stated, “We don’t.” So Detter indicated the CAC was pleased that the Hathaways don’t want to transform the entire surface into a public park. The resolution that the Hathaways are working on with members of the city council, Detter said, is moving in a direction that significantly agrees with that of the CAC and, he hoped, eventually with the DDA. The CAC had provided some input on the resolution, he said.

Contacted by The Chronicle via email, Will Hathaway confirmed that he was working with Jack Eaton and several other members of city council. A draft resolution has been circulated to relevant staff by city administrator Steve Powers, Hathaway wrote. Hathaway hopes that a new draft resolution would be ready for a city council meeting in March.

Present: Al McWilliams, Bob Guenzel, Steve Powers, John Splitt, Sandi Smith, Rishi Narayan, Russ Collins, Keith Orr, Joan Lowenstein, John Mouat.

Absent: Cyndi Clark, Roger Hewitt.

Next board meeting: The DDA’s next regular monthly meeting is at noon on Wednesday, March 5, 2014, at the DDA offices, 150 S. Fifth Ave., Suite 301. [Check Chronicle event listings to confirm date]

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

Rendering of “Bucket Cascade” proposal by Mags Harries and Lajos Heder. It’s one of two finalists for public art at the city’s Argo Cascades.

Commissioners were briefed about the city’s capital improvements plan (CIP), which will now be integral to the public art program. AAPAC and city staff will identify projects in the CIP that might be candidates for public art “enhancements” – if the council agrees and provides additional funding for that purpose. It’s a change from the previous Percent for Art program, which the city council eliminated earlier this year.

Deb Gosselin, who oversees the CIP process, attended AAPAC’s meeting and described a decision-making matrix that’s used to help city staff prioritize capital projects. AAPAC plans to use that matrix as a model for developing its own method of prioritizing potential public art projects.

Commissioners also briefly discussed four possible capital projects that might include public art enhancements, including an enclosure of the farmers market, and a retaining wall to be built as part of a Stadium Boulevard reconstruction.

Some of these issues will likely be picked up during a retreat that’s set for Nov. 20. The idea of a retreat was proposed by one of the newer commissioners, Ashlee Arder, as a way to get to know each other better, as well as to discuss the creation of AAPAC’s annual plan, which is due to the council in early 2014. Arder also hopes to assemble a “curated team” from different sectors of the community, to help AAPAC develop ideas for fostering public art as well as the broader creative sector.

Also at their most recent meeting, commissioners acted on a specific project that’s already underway. They authorized applying for a $40,000 grant from the Community Foundation of Southeast Michigan to fund a public art project in the Arbor Oaks/Bryant neighborhood on Ann Arbor’s southeast side. But they tabled another proposal – for artwork at the roundabout on South State and Ellsworth – until their February 2014 meeting, allowing time for commissioners to see how it might fit into an overall public art plan.

Updates were provided during the meeting on several other projects, including the Coleman Jewett memorial at the farmers market, finalists for artwork at Argo Cascades, and a plan to add an artistic element to the city’s new bike share program.

Capital Improvements Plan (CIP)

Deb Gosselin, who manages the city’s capital improvements plan (CIP), attended AAPAC’s meeting on Oct. 23 to review the CIP process. [.pdf of CIP for FY 2014-2019] She had previously briefed the commission at its Feb. 27, 2013 meeting, prior to changes in the way that the public art program is funded. Since then, the city council has eliminated the Percent for Art funding mechanism. That happened at the council’s June 3, 2013 meeting.

Deb Gosselin, who manages the city’s capital improvements plan, attended the Oct. 23 AAPAC meeting.

Now, city staff will work to determine whether a specific capital improvement should have enhanced design features “baked in” to the project – either enhanced architectural work or specific public art. The funding for any of the enhanced features would be included in the project’s budget and incorporated into the RFP (request for proposals) process for the capital project.

Required by state statute, the CIP must be developed and updated each year, looking ahead at a six-year period, to help with financial planning for major projects – permanent infrastructure like buildings, utilities, streets and parks. It’s intended to reflect the city’s priorities and needs, and serves as a guide to discern what projects are on the horizon. More than 300 projects are part of the CIP, including both projects that are funded as well as those for which funding hasn’t yet been identified.

The document must be approved by the city’s planning commission, not the city council. The planning commission approved the most recent CIP at its Dec. 18, 2012 meeting. The city council then uses the CIP in its budget planning process.

In her Oct. 23 briefing, Gosselin noted that the CIP schedule now affects when the city makes decisions about public art. She told commissioners that Aaron Seagraves, the city’s public art administrator, had looked through the CIP to find projects where it might be appropriate to incorporate public art.

Gosselin reviewed the CIP process, and described the decision-making matrix that’s used to help city staff prioritize capital projects. [.pdf of CIP prioritization matrix] She said the matrix is a tool that AAPAC might want to modify and use for its own decision-making on projects that might incorporate public art. Seagraves indicated he’d work with Gosselin to draft a similar matrix for AAPAC.

In theory, virtually any of the capital projects in the CIP could incorporate public art, Gosselin said. To do that, AAPAC would first need to identify a project in the CIP and request that it be enhanced, she explained. Although the planning commission is charged with approving the CIP, the city council is the entity that approves the budget for specific projects.

For capital projects that the city council has already funded for fiscal 2014 and 2015, it’s too late to build a public art enhancement into the budget. However, Gosselin noted that AAPAC could decide to use funds from the previous Percent for Art program that are unspent, and apply those funds toward capital projects that are already underway.

Beyond that, now is the time for AAPAC to look at items in the CIP starting in fiscal 2016, as projects that could potentially be enhanced with public art. In AAPAC’s annual report that’s due to the city council in early 2014, commissioners should flag projects that commissioners would like for the city to enhance, Gosselin said. AAPAC should also identify a specific budget amount that would need to be added to the project, in order to cover the public art enhancement and maintenance. That budget enhancement requires city council approval.

The lead time also helps managers of capital projects to work with designers and artists from the very early stages, she noted.

Summary chart of projects in the 2014-2019 Ann Arbor capital improvements plan (CIP).

Capital Improvements Plan (CIP): AAPAC Discussion

Connie Brown wondered about setting a public art enhancement budget at such an early stage, when it might be difficult to know how much is required. How much flexibility would there be to increase the amount at a later date? Deb Gosselin acknowledged that since this process of incorporating public art is new, it’s a bit hard to know how it will work. She thought there will likely be some flexibility, but the public art estimated budget needs to be as close as possible to the actual amount. “You’re in essence saying ‘Give me a budget and I’ll figure out what to do with it later,’” Gosselin said.

Connie Brown.

Craig Hupy, the city’s public services area administrator, noted that it’s not unusual for a capital project’s budget to change dramatically, from the time it’s first entered into the CIP to the time the budget is approved by the council. If the project is slated for Year 6 of the CIP – that is, six years in the future – it’s not as critical for the budget to be as precise.

For projects in which public art is part of the design process, Gosselin explained that the public art budget would be incorporated into a project’s construction contract, which would require city council approval. But if the artwork is conceived of as a standalone piece, it might have its own separate budget, with separate council approval.

Hupy described two approval thresholds: (1) when a capital project is approved, with an estimated budget; and (2) when a specific construction contract is approved for that project. “That is where the final release of money comes from,” he said.

John Kotarski wondered whether it would be appropriate to suggest a specific genre of public art when AAPAC recommends an enhancement – like a mural or street stamping. Hupy replied that it depends on the timeframe. A more general suggestion would work for projects that are in Year 6 of the CIP, he said. But for projects that are closer to being built – in Years 1 or 2 – then AAPAC should be more specific about what it would like to do and how much it would cost.

Seagraves then presented four projects from the CIP from fiscal 2016 and beyond that he had identified as having potential for public art enhancements. The budgets in the CIP do not yet include amounts for public art:

• Farmers Market enclosure ($90,000). Possible public art incorporated into design.
• Stadium Boulevard reconstruction from Hutchins to Kipke, including sidewalks ($3.84 million). Possible artwork on new retaining wall.
• Springwater subdivision street reconstruction ($2.18 million). Possible standalone artwork.
• Annual sidewalk repair program, citywide ($9 million): Possible sidewalk stamps.

Seagraves plans to meet with managers for these projects, to get more details about what the projects will entail.

Ashlee Arder clarified with Gosselin that any public art budget would be added to these existing budgets. Gosselin noted that some capital projects might have multiple funding sources, which means that public art enhancements might also draw from multiple funding sources. Hupy cautioned that some projects have a funding “twist” in that they might be funded in part with federal, state or county dollars. “And they will say no to art – that’s not their purpose,” he said.

Gosselin noted that capital projects for the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority and the Ann Arbor housing commission are now being listed in the city’s CIP. The AAHC has several large projects on the horizon, and Gosselin reported that AAHC director Jennifer Hall had made a point of saying she’d welcome public art added to those, if possible. This might be a case where AAPAC could solicit private funding for a project, Gosselin said. [For background on the AAHC effort, see Chronicle coverage: "Work Progresses on Public Housing Overhaul."]

South State Roundabout

On the agenda was an item to approve the budget for a public art project at the roundabout at South State Street and Ellsworth. The proposed budget was between $70,000 to $100,000 using funds that remain from the now-defunct Percent for Art program, tied to street projects. [.pdf of roundabout public art proposal]

Bob Miller, chair of the Ann Arbor public art commission.

This project had been previously approved but then suspended by AAPAC several months ago, because commissioners had wanted to coordinate it with the city’s South State Street corridor plan. [By way of background, both the planning commission and city council subsequently approved the South State Street corridor plan to be added to the city's master plan. The council took that action on June 15, 2013.]

Connie Brown said she didn’t feel like she could make a decision on this project right now. She wanted to evaluate it in concert with other projects that AAPAC is considering, rather than take a piecemeal approach. Because AAPAC would be looking at long-term projects in the CIP, Brown proposed holding off on a decision about the roundabout until the broader context was clearer.

John Kotarski said he tended to agree with Brown, but he thought that it might take a longer time to put together the broader context. He said he felt comfortable moving forward with this project, because the proposal contained the level of detail that he had asked for. He thought AAPAC should start moving forward with some of these projects.

Commissioners discussed whether they could reverse their decision, if they approved it now but later decided that there were other projects that should take priority.

Brown wondered what the impetus was for doing it now. Bob Miller replied that it was brought to AAPAC as a project and it was “smiled upon.” Craig Hupy, the city’s public services area administrator, pointed out that construction of the roundabout was finished, and it’s “not going to pick up and move anywhere in the next six months or six years.” He indicated that AAPAC could take some time to make a decision.

Marsha Chamberlin weighed in, saying that if AAPAC takes two or three months to develop its prioritization matrix, modeled after the CIP matrix, then they’ll have a more objective, defensible way of approaching the selection of projects.

After further discussion, Kotarski moved to table the roundabout item until AAPAC’s February 2014 meeting.

Outcome: Commissioners voted to table the item until their February 2014 meeting.

Grant for Arbor Oaks Public Art

Commissioners were asked to approve the application of a $40,000 grant from the Community Foundation of Southeast Michigan. It would fund a public art project in the Arbor Oaks/Bryant neighborhood on Ann Arbor’s southeast side. [.pdf of draft grant proposal]

Marsha Chamberlin.

By way of background, at AAPAC’s June 26, 2013 meeting, commissioners had approved setting up an exploratory task force for possible artwork in the Arbor Oaks Park, located in the Bryant neighborhood on the city’s southeast side. [.pdf of Arbor Oaks intake form] Task force members include public art commissioners Malverne Winborne and Nick Zagar; Derek Miller, deputy director of the nonprofit Community Action Network (CAN); and CAN board member David Jones, as well as local residents.

The task force has met twice. Aaron Seagraves, the city’s public art administrator, reported that the ideas being discussed all focus on having some kind of community project with a lot of involvement from residents, similar to the approach taken for the mural in Allmendinger Park.

The problem, he noted, is funding. There is currently no clear funding source from the city, but a grant is available from the community foundation. The deadline to apply is Nov. 15.

Marsha Chamberlin expressed some concern about the time it would take to write the grant application. She noted that Seagraves was being asked to do a lot, and his position is only part-time. Craig Hupy, the city’s public services area administrator, indicated that the Arbor Oaks project was a very valuable investment in a part of the community that some people view as underserved.

Chamberlin replied that she wasn’t against the project, but she wanted commissioners to be aware of how Seagraves is allocating his time. Hupy suggested that other city staff could help Seagraves complete the application.

Responding to a query from Connie Brown, Seagraves reported that no matching funds are required from AAPAC.

Outcome: Commissioners voted to approve application for the $40,000 grant from the Community Foundation of Southeast Michigan.

AAPAC Retreat

Ashlee Arder, who was appointed to AAPAC in March of 2013, put forward a proposal to schedule a retreat. The purpose would be to create a forum for commissioners to get to know each other better, as well as to discuss the creation of AAPAC’s annual plan.

John Kotarski and Ashlee Arder.

Commissioners were supportive of this proposal. The discussion focused on whether to have a facilitator and how formal it should be. Arder said she’d conceived it to be relatively informal, but she could see the advantage of having a facilitator. This idea is to share each commissioner’s skill sets and personal interests, and tie those into the goals of AAPAC. “Let’s get together and figure out what we’re doing and who we are,” she said.

There was also discussion about a venue, with Arder advocating to hold it at a location other than AAPAC’s usual meeting spot – which is a basement conference room at city hall. Craig Hupy, the city’s public services area administrator, reminded commissioners that the retreat would need to be posted and held in a place that’s accessible to the public, in order to comply with Michigan’s Open Meetings Act.

Outcome: Commissioners voted to set a retreat for Wednesday, Nov. 20 at 4:30 p.m. at a location to be determined.

Outreach Committee

Ashlee Arder also proposed creating a community engagement committee to develop strategies for program participation, resident input and public art education.

John Kotarski contended that AAPAC already has an outreach committee that was created at AAPAC’s June 26, 2013 meeting. Some commissioners, including Arder, Connie Brown and Marsha Chamberlin, said they didn’t realize such a committee existed. [According to both the minutes of that meeting and The Chronicle's report, commissioners on June 26 voted to appoint Kotarski to the role of community outreach and engagement, and Chamberlin to the role of media relations. From The Chronicle's report: "During the June 26 meeting, commissioners also voted on appointments related to outreach – making John Kotarski responsible for community outreach and engagement, and Marsha Chamberlin for media relations. Those roles were not defined, and do not appear to be connected to existing AAPAC committees."]

Kotarski urged Arder to join the outreach committee, and asked her to withdraw her resolution. She agreed, and talked about the kind of work she hoped to do, which in part involves bringing together a “curated team” from different sectors of the community to develop ideas for fostering public art as well as the broader creative sector. She intends to bring forward a formal proposal about this effort at a future meeting.

Outcome: Arder withdrew her resolution to create a community engagement committee.

Project Updates

Several other projects were discussed briefly during the Oct. 23 meeting, by way of updates. These projects were either already in progress when the city council temporarily halted spending on public art late last year, or don’t use Percent for Art funds. Here are some highlights.

Project Updates: Canoe Imagine Art

Marsha Chamberlin gave an update on a community project called Canoe Imagine Art. At a special meeting on March 7, 2013, AAPAC had voted to participate in the project, but did not commit to providing any funding at that time. On Sept. 25, commissioners voted to contribute $10,000 to the project. [.pdf of project intake form]

The project will use 30 old aluminum canoes from the city of Ann Arbor’s Argo canoe livery, which 10 artists and 20 community groups will turn into artwork that will be displayed throughout the downtown in 2014. Partners in the project include the Ann Arbor Area Convention & Visitors Bureau (CVB), the Main Street Area Association (MSAA), the Arts Alliance, and the Huron River Watershed Council.

On Oct. 23, Chamberlin reported that the city attorney’s office had requested that she stop promoting the project until a legal review is completed of the application process for artists. She expressed some frustration that the project’s momentum had come to a “screeching halt.”

As of Nov. 11, the project’s website includes this notice:

Submissions temporarily on hold
Do not use this site to submit a proposal for Canoe Imagine Art. Applications are on hold awaiting resolution by the City of Ann Arbor as to the best way to handle submissions to Canoe Imagine Art. If you plan to submit, enter your email below and we will notify you as to how to submit a proposal.

Project Updates: Argo Cascades

Two finalists for artwork at Argo Cascades are Jann Rosen-Queralt of Maryland and Mags Harries & Lajos Heder of Cambridge, Mass. came to town on Oct. 17 to present their conceptual designs to the selection task force and the public at city hall. The presentations were recorded by Community Television Network, and include feedback from the task force. [link to Rosen-Queralt CTN presentation] [link to Harries & Heder CTN presentation]

Rosen-Queralt is proposing artistic embellishments on the bridge railing, as well as a drinking fountain with similar embellishments. The proposal by Harries and Heder is called a “bucket cascade,” and would involve an interactive feature that allows people to operate pumps – using a pedal device on the bridge – that would draw up water from Argo Cascades and send it cascading back into the river.

Rendering of Bucket Cascades proposal by Mags Harries and Lajos Heder.

Rendering of proposal by Jann Rosen-Queralt for Argo Cascades bridge.

Task force members are John Kotarski, Malverne Winborne, Cheryl Saam, Margaret Parker, Cathy Fleisher, Bonnie Greenspoon, Julie Grand, and Colin Smith. The project has a budget of $150,000.

There is currently a survey posted on A2 Open City Hall to solicit additional input.

Seagraves reported that John Kotarski and Bob Miller will be attending the meetings of other city boards and commissions to make presentations about these two proposals and to get feedback. The task force will then make a recommendation to AAPAC, which will in turn make a recommendation to the city council.

Marsha Chamberlin wondered how much difference it makes to do the kind of outreach that Kotarski and Miller are undertaking. They made a similar effort before the task force made a recommendation for the artwork at the East Stadium bridges.

Connie Brown explained that there’s a broader purpose – to help people understand the process, and to create opportunities to engage others in the city’s public art program. Kotarski recalled that when he and Miller attended a Ward 2 meeting, it started out fairly confrontational. But by the end, residents seemed to better understand the process and support it. He said the outreach will help enhance and support the task force’s decision.

Project Updates: East Stadium Bridges

In early August, Catherine Widgery of Cambridge, Mass. was recommended as the artist for public art on the East Stadium bridges in Ann Arbor. She was picked by a selection panel from four finalists who had submitted proposals for the project, which has a $400,000 total budget. [.pdf of Widgery's proposal]

The selection panel provided feedback to Widgery, who subsequently revised her proposal. Members of the panel are Wiltrud Simbuerger, Bob Miller, Nancy Leff, David Huntoon and Joss Kiely. A conference call with the artist was held on Sept. 6 with panel members to discuss the proposal. [.pdf of panel feedback]

The new design incorporates glass paneled louvers with tree images in three locations on and under the bridge, to connect the locations thematically. Widgery is still revising her design, according to Seagraves. It would need to be reviewed by AAPAC and get final approval by the city council.

Project Updates: Bike Share Program

Ashlee Arder reported that she’ll be working with the Clean Energy Coalition, the University of Michigan and the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority to figure out how to incorporate an artistic element into the city’s new bike share stations. The CEC is managing the bike share program, with a targeted launch of April 2014.

Arder said she was hoping to learn more about the bike community, and to develop some partnerships for this project. In addition to bike stations on UM’s campus, potential stations in Ann Arbor could be located at: (1) Ashley & Liberty; (2) Fifth Avenue & Library Lane; (3) Liberty & Division; (4) Kerrytown, at Detroit & Fifth: and (5) South State & Hoover.

Project Updates: First & Kingsley Rain Garden

At their Aug. 28, 2013 meeting, commissioners had approved Joshua Wiener‘s schematic design for public art at a planned rain garden, to be located at the southeast corner of First & Kingsley. [.pdf of staff memo, including itemized budget] Wiener is continuing to finalize designs, for installation in the spring.

The Denver artist is working with landscapers to incorporate public art into a new rain garden at that location, which is in a floodplain. The project has a $27,000 budget, though the artist’s contract would be for $23,380.

His proposal is for sculptures showing the outlines of five fish. They’re small mouth bass, in different sizes, made of white epoxy-painted steel and pointed toward the Huron River. The largest sculpture will be just under 8 feet tall, 20 feet wide and about 5 feet deep. Two of the fish will be large enough to serve as benches.

Project Updates: Coleman Jewett Memorial

Marsha Chamberlin gave a brief update on the memorial for Coleman Jewett. [.pdf of Jewett memorial intake form]

At a special meeting on March 7, 2013, AAPAC had voted to accept developing the memorial for Coleman Jewett as an official AAPAC project. The original proposal was for a bronze Adirondack chair at the Ann Arbor farmers market. Jewett was a long-time local educator who died in January. After he retired, he made furniture that he sold at the Ann Arbor farmers market. A private foundation has committed $5,000 to create a memorial at the market, in the form of a bronze replica of one of Jewett’s Adirondack chairs.

A memorandum of understanding has been negotiated between the Jewett family, the city, and the Ann Arbor Area Community Foundation, which will act as a fiduciary for fundraising. The plan now calls for two full-sized replicas in bronze, at an estimated cost of $15,000 each.

The total budget is estimated to be $30,000 to $35,000. At AAPAC’s Sept. 25, 2013 meeting, commissioners voted to allocate $5,000 of AAPAC funds to help kick off the additional fundraising.

On Oct. 23, Chamberlin reported that she’d be going to the Ann Arbor farmers market on Saturday to meet with vendors and describe the project to them. Each stall would also be given a donation envelope, she said, in the hopes of raising funds from vendors for the project.

Commissioners present: Ashlee Arder, Connie Brown, Marsha Chamberlin, John Kotarski, Bob Miller, Nick Zagar. Also: Aaron Seagraves, the city’s public art administrator.

Absent: Devon Akmon, Malverne Winborne.

Next meeting: Instead of its regular monthly meeting, AAPAC has scheduled a retreat for Wednesday, Nov. 20, 2013 at 4:30 p.m. at a location to be determined. [Check Chronicle events listing to confirm date]

The Chronicle relies in part on regular voluntary subscriptions to support our artful coverage of public entities like the Ann Arbor public art commission. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle.

The point is to review the selection of projects for the commission’s annual plan, as well as to help build rapport among commissioners. Three new commissioners have joined AAPAC this year: Devon Akmon, Ashlee Arder, and Nick Zagar. The retreat will be held in place of the commission’s regular Nov. 27 meeting, which has been canceled. Update: The Nov. 20 retreat was subsequently canceled, as was AAPAC’s Nov. 27 regular meeting.

This brief was filed from the basement conference at city hall, 301 E. Huron, where the public art commission holds its meetings. A more detailed report will follow: [link]

In planning for the retreat, the board discussed its support for moving the district to a zero-based budgeting system, a goal of AAPS superintendent Patricia Green. Trustees also suggested discussing student performance measures, as related to both superintendent evaluation and the possible restructuring of teachers’ compensation to include merit pay.

The one item of regular business conducted at the July 18 meeting was to renew the district’s membership in the Michigan High School Athletic Association (MHSAA).

Board chair Deb Mexicotte also confirmed at the meeting that she’ll be seeking re-election in November. Dale Leslie, a former local businessman, has also filed for election to that seat – the only one open this cycle on the seven-member board.

Retreat Planning

Mexicotte opened a discussion on the board’s upcoming retreat, usually held in the summer. She noted that the board has typically met annually to evaluate its effectiveness, set goals for the year, and keep the board and superintendent’s work in alignment. The board goals then become regularly updated items on the board’s agenda over the year, she noted.

Retreat Planning: Agenda

At the July 18 meeting, Mexicotte led the board through a discussion to set the agenda for this year’s retreat. She suggested the board should conduct its annual self-evaluation using a survey tool that has already been distributed to board members. She told her board colleagues that the tool is the same one trustees used at the end of the superintendent search last year. “We should have the results of both surveys in front of us on August 1,” she said, “and we can talk about how this last year has gone.”

Out of the board’s 2011 retreat had come the idea of creating a “committee of the whole” to replace two previous committees consisting of three trustees each.  Those were the planning and performance committees. The board met for the first time as a single committee of the whole on Nov 2, 2011, and voted officially on Nov. 16, 2011 to continue the new committee structure by amending board policy.  The board has been operating with the single committee of the whole since that time.

Mexicotte said she would like the board to discuss the timing of the retreat, and whether an outside consultant should be hired to facilitate it which has been typical in the past. She invited board members to suggest additional topics for discussion at the retreat – beyond the board evaluation and goal-setting pieces already on the agenda.

Retreat Planning: More Topics

Trustees offered a range of additional topics they would like to have discussed at the August 1 retreat: the budget process and financial planning; superintendent evaluation and data management; incentive alignment around student performance [aka "merit pay"]; and their agenda-setting process.

Retreat Planning: Topics – Zero-Based Budgeting

Trustee Andy Thomas suggested that the board should use the retreat as an opportunity to figure out exactly which discussions need to begin in September to get “an earlier jump on the budget process.” He argued that the district gets “too hung up” on getting revenue numbers from the state before proceeding with budget planning. He said that the district knows it will be short at least $12.5 million next year already – $4.5 million of fund equity that was used for the 2012-13 budget, and a built-in structural deficit of at least $8 million.

Trustee Irene Patalan said she is optimistic that the district will weather the legislative challenges coming out of Lansing. But she ventured that it might be an interesting exercise to try to have a working budget for FY 2013-14 in place by the end of December 2012. Mexicotte noted that tension always exists in the timing for crafting the AAPS budget – between waiting for the information to come out of the state’s spring budget conferences versus the putting together the budget ahead of those conferences. She pointed to the risk of needing to retract proposed budget reductions if they end up not being necessary. She added that rebuilding the budget to use zero-based budgeting – one of Green’s goals when she was hired into the district last year – will “change the dynamic” even more.

By way of a simplified overview, zero-based budgeting contrasts with an incremental approach. Taking an incremental approach assumes the previous year’s budgeted expenditures for some activity as a base for evaluating how much to budget for the coming year – and requires evaluation of the change from that base, up or down, for the planned budget. A zero-based approach takes zero as the reference point, not what has been budgeted historically.

Green said she has known of “compliance budgets” in districts that are required to pass a budget by the end of the calendar year, but said that such budgets were “basically bogus … because they had to include everything but the kitchen sink.” Regarding zero-based budgeting, Green said it will take most of the year for AAPS to plan for it, and stated, “It’s not as easy as you think.”

Green contended that zero-based budgeting will give the district much better control of its resources. She estimated that AAPS could save $2 million this year just by implementing this method. Calling the process a “cultural shift,” Green said that zero-based budgeting must be strategic, and requires the use of technology. It also requires maintaining the same line-items year to year – not adding, deleting, or changing them – in order to better track actual spending. She added that zero-based budgeting allows the comparison of “actuals to actuals” not “budgeted to budgeted,” and significantly cuts down on transfers from accounts. Trustee Christine Stead added that the new process will also cause building administrators to shift from asking “What have I budgeted?” to “What do I need to run this building?”

There was some discussion of the appropriate timing of implementing zero-based budgeting. Trustees generally expressed their interest in Green taking her time to get it right. But they acknowledged that the savings Green predicts would be welcome as soon as possible. Thomas said, “This has been a pet peeve of mine for a long time – if you can come up with a column labeled “actual,” I would be so happy.”

Trustee Glenn Nelson pointed out that the board does review the actual spending via the annual audit, but Thomas countered that the audit comes out too late to be useful to budget planning and said the board should review actual spending at least quarterly. Green said that she gets a monthly report called the “recapitulation, or ‘recap’” that does just that. She noted that variances begin to become apparent around January.

Stead argued for increasing the scale of the financial planning the district does. She would like to see a three-year view – to be better positioned if the pattern of state cuts over the past five years continues. Nelson said if the district gets “ahead of data,” it will affect the quality of decisions. “It’s like deciding today whether or not you will take an umbrella with you next Tuesday,” he said. Stead responded by saying that Nelson’s illustration was not a good comparison. On an individual level, she said, the kind of planning for which she is advocating would not answer the question, “Will I need an umbrella on Tuesday?” but “How do I position myself to be able to buy a house?”

Nelson said that any long-term planning should include a review of the district goals in the strategic plan, the achievement gap elimination plan, and the discipline gap elimination plan. Trustee Simone Ligthfoot noted that the district transportation committee has begun meeting, and that it is using a three-year timeframe for planning, so that AAPS planning three years out would be helpful to the charge of that committee.

Stead said she is not interested in staff bringing the board a list of proposed FY 2013-14 cuts in December, but that she would like to see a working committee with board and staff take a long-term view to restructure the district so it continues to be financially sustainable within the macro trends that are anticipated.

Retreat Planning: Topics – Superintendent, Student Evaluation

Stead suggested that the board should use the retreat to nail down which student performance measures should be used to inform the superintendent’s evaluation. The state now requires student academic growth to be a factor in the evaluation of all education professionals, including administrators. Stead explained that the board needs to decide which student performance measures to “roll up” to the level of the superintendent for evaluation purposes – individual student test scores, scores by building, by teacher, or by other aggregate measures, for example.

Green added that the state has not come to consensus about which measures of student growth would prove most effective in evaluating superintendents. Stead agreed there is flexibility in the choice of scores. Stead suggested that the board identify four or five measures to “roll up” this year, and then have a touchpoint in the middle of the year to see which measures make the most sense. Mexicotte felt the student growth data should include Michigan Educational Assessment Program (MEAP) scores.

Nelson suggested that the issue of performance measures goes beyond those used in the superintendent evaluation. He reminded the board of the questions that surfaced when it was considering restructuring Roberto Clemente Student Development Center earlier this year. “This is a big, substantive piece,” Nelson said, “We need to have consensus on what we are measuring.” He added that student performance should inform the “personalized learning plans” (PLPs) touted in the district’s strategic plan. Thomas later asserted that the board should decide whether PLPs were something the district could realistically achieve.

Green explained that the MEAP does not measure student growth; however, the recently-implemented Northwest Evaluation Association’s (NWEA’s) Measures of Academic Progress (MAP) assessment does measure growth. Green called the NWEA assessment “extremely critical” and pointed out how the assessment can measure the change in cohorts of students over time. In contrast, Green said, the MEAP cut scores have shifted and changed. She also responded to board members’ concerns about the PLPs, saying that the PLPs will “kick in” as the district’s technology becomes fully developed.

The district has already committed to some data collection and management processes to meet requirements on inclusion of student growth data in performance evaluations. And several board members expressed concern about the district’s capacity to expand those processes even further. Thomas questioned what resources AAPS really needs to get what it wants from its data. Green noted that she would like a stronger linkage to exist between the student accounting and information technology departments – but said that “the manpower is just not there.”

Stead and Lightfoot suggested that AAPS director of student accounting Jane Landefeld and AAPS deputy superintendent of operations Robert Allen be present at the retreat. Green added that AAPS deputy superintendent of instruction Alesia Flye should also be included.

Retreat Planning: Topics – Merit Pay

Stead also suggested that the retreat include a board discussion on incentive alignment around student performance. She said AAPS should be able to reward teachers who are positively impacting student growth, and noted the parallels to private industry and recent tenure reform legislation. Stead argued that AAPS should encourage a culture in which high performers are rewarded, and in which “teachers want to be really effective, not just avoid being fired.”

Mexicotte said that the board has not developed any strategy regarding merit pay, and noted that in past discussions, board opinion on the issue has been mixed. She also referred to negative feedback the board has received for the amount paid to current administrators. Mexicotte also noted “it’s a political thing” to reward anyone in this difficult financial climate.

Stead clarified that the net amount of money paid to teachers does not have to change, but that it could be redistributed. “We have demonstrated as a board that it’s important to reward high performers and leaders,” she said.

Patalan said that she’s observed that if the culture focuses on excellence, it encourages everyone to “rise to the level of those who are doing top-notch work.”

Green suggested that rewards also do not have to be monetary, and that gifted educators want to do well.

Mexicotte said that incentives about student performance should focus on quality not quantity. Lightfoot added that the retreat is an opportunity for the board to re-affirm core commitments – on this and other value-laden items, such as recruiting historically-underutilized businesses to bid on capital improvement projects.

Retreat Planning: Topics – Agenda Setting Process

Nelson suggested that the board reconsider how agenda items are prioritized. Mexicotte said that the board could consider creating a rubric to determine a proposed agenda item’s placement. The rubric, she said, could include staff and board capacity, time for development, consistency with the strategic plan, etc. She quipped that she and Green, who are tasked with agenda setting as part of the new board committee structure, could also just “throw darts” to decide what gets on the agenda.

Nelson said he feels the board has lost a sense of high-priority things over the past 18-24 months, and that by March each of year, there  have still been 30 items to get through on that year’s agenda.

Mexicotte said that if the retreat works, the board should come out of it with a list of priority issues against which to judge new items.

Green argued that administration and board capacity must be linked. She cautioned against just being a “good” district by keeping staff and board member energy a mile wide and not very deep. Green said that she would like to see a cycle developed for bringing administrative reports to the board. The recommendations in those reports would be used as benchmarks against new priorities the following year. As examples, Green said there should be a regular review of curriculum, and an update for the board on all-day kindergarten.

Mexicotte said she heard Nelson’s comment as a request that that board try to discipline itself a little more. She added that the last two years have been a time of rebuilding and adjustment. Some of the board members who have been serving a long time have been frustrated by newer board members who have wanted their concerns addressed immediately, she said. Longer-serving board members, she continued, “have been wanting things for ten years.” Thomas noted that there is only one board seat up for election this November, which means that the board will remain relatively stable, and should be able to maintain such discipline. [The open seat is Mexicotte's and she's seeking re-election.]

Lightfoot said she likes the idea of a regular administrative reporting cycle, as long as room is left on the agenda for things that are not currently on the radar. “We don’t want to stifle [innovative] ideas coming out of the box,” she said.

Mexicotte said that being more structured about what is on the agenda will be helpful, and allow the board to actually be able to pay attention to unexpected items.

Retreat Planning: Logistics

Mexicotte asked board members about the work remaining on the summer agenda, and the board agreed to cancel its July 25 meeting. She then suggested that incentive alignment around student performance might be too big of an issue for the retreat, and that perhaps it should be the topic of the September committee-of-the-whole meeting.

She requested that board members weigh in about whether to have a facilitator at the retreat, and received comments pro and con, with several trustees saying they did not have a strong opinion.

Pros included: Mexicotte could participate in the retreat more easily if she were not facilitating the discussion; the retreats have usually had outside facilitation; and getting an outside perspective on board functioning can be helpful. Cons included: an outside facilitator costs money; the current board has been together long enough that it doesn’t need a facilitator; and there is no specific role the board needs a facilitator to play at this time.

Lightfoot asked how much a facilitator would cost. Mexicotte estimated it could be from $1,000 to $2,500, depending on who it is. Nelson suggested hiring a facilitator only for the board evaluation section of the retreat, but not for the goal-setting portion.

Trustees expressed general agreement on the idea of starting the retreat earlier in the day. After checking specific schedules for August 1, they agreed that they would begin meeting at 3 p.m., work through dinner around 5:30 p.m., and then continue meeting until roughly 9:00 p.m. Mexicotte also noted that some portion of that time would also be devoted to holding a short regular board meeting to handle some small items of business.

Mexicotte said she would work with board secretary Amy Osinksi to find a facilitator and to secure a location for the board to meet on August 1, beginning at 3:00 p.m.

Michigan High School Athletic Association (MHSAA) Renewal

The one item of regular meeting business conducted at the July 18 meeting was to renew the district’s membership in the Michigan High School Athletic Association (MHSAA). AAPS superintendent Patricia Green briefly introduced the item. She explained that MHSAA membership is necessary for AAPS high school athletes to compete in statewide tournaments, and noted that no cost is associated with it. She also noted that MHSAA membership requires adherence to a broad range of rules for all schools to follow, and that annual renewal is required.

Lightfoot asked if the MHSAA was the only organization of its type, and Green said it was. Stead added that every state has something like it.

Trustee Susan Baskett asked if this item could be placed on the board’s agenda earlier in the year – because it occurs annually. Osinski said it was her fault the item had not been placed on the agenda sooner, and that it will come sooner in the future.

Outcome: The renewal of the district’s membership in the MHSAA was approved unanimously.

Agenda Planning

The board generally sets its meeting dates and other calendar items at its annual organizational meeting, typically held in January of each year, which is also when any new board members elected the previous November would be sworn into office and begin to serve. But Mexicotte noted that Osinski had already put together a proposed board calendar for the 2012-13 school year. She ventured that the board could vote on it sooner – because the maximum change to the board’s make-up after the November 2012 election would be one person.

Mexicotte then announced that she has officially decided to run for re-election to the school board this fall, and that she has one challenger  at this point. [Dale Leslie is listed on the Washtenaw County clerk's webpage as a candidate, along with Mexicotte.]

Regarding the early passage of a calendar, Mexicotte noted that Green would like a calendar that covers the school year. Osinski distributed a draft calendar for the 2012-13 school year and pointed out that she had tried not to schedule any meetings on holidays. She noted that in the past some meetings have conflicted with Rosh Hashanah   and Yom Kippur.

Present: President Deb Mexicotte, vice-president Christine Stead, secretary Andy Thomas, treasurer Irene Patalan, and trustees Susan Baskett, Simone Lightfoot and Glenn Nelson.

Next regular meeting: Wednesday, August 15, 2012, at 7 p.m. in the fourth-floor conference room of the downtown Ann Arbor District Library, 343 S. Fifth Ave., Ann Arbor.

This is the final AAPS board meeting report to be filed by Jennifer Coffman. She has covered AAPS board meetings and AAPS-related topics since January 2010. In that time, she’s written 83 reports. This fall she’ll be returning to a full-time teaching position in a neighboring school district. Monet Tiedemann will continue The Chronicle’s coverage of AAPS starting in August. 

The Chronicle could not pay free-lance writers like Coffman and Tiedemann to cover public bodies like the Ann Arbor Public School Board without regular voluntary subscriptions. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle. And if you’re already supporting us, please encourage your friends, neighbors and colleagues to help support The Chronicle, too!

The intersection of South State and Stimson, looking north. A study of the South State corridor runs south from Stimson to Ellsworth. (Photos by the writer.)

A diverse range of land uses can be found between those two points, including small commercial enterprises, a large apartment complex, University of Michigan sports facilities, an auto dealership, high-rise office buildings, Briarwood Mall, the snarled I-94 exchange, sprawling research and industrial parks, and the soon-to-open Costco at the southern end, in Pittsfield Township.

The city held a forum recently to update the public about plans for improving South State and to seek input for possible changes. And the Ann Arbor planning commission’s retreat last week focused on the corridor, and included a van tour of the area.

This report covers both of those meetings.

Observations made by planning commissioners about the South State Street corridor at their retreat included: a lack of cohesion; a negative environment for pedestrians and bicyclists; and a sense that the corridor doesn’t reflect the character of Ann Arbor. Several commissioners noted that the stretch is just plain ugly – not an area that evokes the street as a major gateway into Ann Arbor. Suggestions ranged from improved landscaping and wayfinding signs to updating the city’s master plan, reflecting land use goals more in line with the city’s current priorities and sustainability efforts.

This isn’t the only corridor that’s getting attention – efforts to take a strategic look at North Main and Washtenaw Avenue are also underway.

For the South State study, the planning staff expects to develop draft recommendations by the end of this year, with additional public meetings, review by the planning commission, and consideration by the city council. If approved by the council, city staff would begin implementing recommendations.

Background: Corridor Studies

An interest in looking more closely at the South State corridor – from Stimson to the north, down to Ellsworth – has been on the city’s To Do list for several years. It was discussed by planning commissioners two years ago at their April 2010 retreat, in the context of setting priorities for projects that the commission hoped to tackle. It’s viewed as part of a broader effort to look at all of the city’s major gateway corridors, including Washtenaw Avenue to the east, Plymouth Road to the northeast, and North Main Street.

The Ann Arbor city council appointed members to a new North Main/Huron River corridor task force just this week, at its June 4 meeting. And the Washtenaw Avenue corridor project is well underway. Called Reimagine Washtenaw, the effort is more complex because the corridor crosses four jurisdictions: the city of Ann Arbor, Pittsfield Township, Ypsilanti Township, and the city of Ypsilanti.

A State Street corridor study has gotten off to a slower start. About a year ago – at an April 2011 work session – planning commissioners and staff talked about issuing a request for proposals (RFP) for a consultant to take on the work. The draft RFP reviewed by commissioners laid out specific tasks for the project [.pdf file of 2011 draft State Street corridor study RFP]:

1. Data Inventory and Analysis: A large amount of preliminary data on the corridor has been collected by staff, and includes information on related planning efforts, existing conditions for land use, transportation, natural features, and infrastructure, and issues and opportunities related to these conditions. A database of building parcel information, and a large number of GIS maps specific to existing conditions have also been collected. The consultant will utilize existing data and identify additional data requirements, and collect that data.

2. Market Analysis: A market analysis to identify market demand and redevelopment potential will be undertaken by the consultant. The analysis may include, but is not limited to, examination of existing conditions, identification of trends affecting demand for various land uses, identification of market and non-market based forces affecting the corridor, future market demand, and/or other relevant market information.

3. Identification of Goals, Issues, and Opportunities: Upon completion of market analyses and data collection, the selected consultant should analyze the data and work closely with the public, as well as business and institutional stakeholders, to complete a full SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats) analysis for the corridor. This analysis will be used to craft a preferred vision of future land use in the corridor.

4. Identification of Alternatives and Priorities: The consultant will work closely with staff and the Planning Commission, considering public input, to identify alternative scenarios that could be implemented over time as the corridor develops/redevelops.

5. Preparation of Plan Concepts and Selection of Preferred Scenario(s):Using the alternatives and priorities identified via the ongoing public process, corridor plan concepts will be developed that address the priorities and needs identified. The consultant will work with staff and the Planning Commission to recommend and select the preferred future land use scenario(s).

6. Identification of Action Strategies, Plans, Policies, and Best Practices: The consultant will work with staff and the Planning Commission to identify action steps and strategies needed for successful implementation of the preferred future land use scenario(s). This could include outlining methods to work with City leaders, local, regional, and state planning agencies, business groups, and members of the community at large to best implement the corridor plans, preserve the desired current aspects of the corridor, and to embrace future anticipated growth.

7. Development of Final Corridor Plan Report: Deliverables expected from the selected firm will include a final corridor plan report, in a format suitable for publication, including intermediate studies which were used in the planning process, such as future development scenarios, alternative scenarios, and market analyses.

About $150,000 had been set aside for that a consultant’s study. However, when the project moved to the city council for approval, a majority of councilmembers were reluctant to make the expenditure, and the funding was not approved.

City planning staff later took up the effort themselves, with Jill Thacher initially taking the lead. Planning commissioners were briefed again at an October 2011 work session, when they were told that Thacher and an intern would be interviewing stakeholders along the corridor, including business and property owners, residents of Hidden Valley Club Apartments and other residential properties, the Ann Arbor airport, Ann Arbor Public Schools (its administration building is located on South State), and the University of Michigan, which has a large athletic complex on South State. Pittsfield Township, the adjacent jurisdiction to the south, is another major stakeholder in that area.

Sign for Biercamp Artisan Sausage & Jerky on South State. A rezoning request for the property, adjacent to Produce Station, was denied by the city council earlier this year.

Thacher subsequently took family leave, so the point person’s role on the project has been taken up by Kristin Baja of the city’s systems planning staff.

Zoning is one of the drivers for studying the South State corridor. The need for a comprehensive study was raised in the context of two rezoning requests that were both denied within the past year: (1) a request to rezone property at 1712 S. State – now used by Treecity Health Collective, a medical marijuana dispensary – from O (office) to C1 (local business); and (2) a request to rezone the parcel where Biercamp Artisan Sausage & Jerky is located from TWP (township district) to C3 (fringe commercial district). That property is at 1643 and 1645 S. State St., south of Stimson and next to the Produce Station.

The State Street corridor project was part of the discussion during the Biercamp rezoning request, at the city council’s Feb. 21, 2012 meeting. From The Chronicle’s report of that discussion:

At mayor John Hieftje’s request, [planning manager Wendy] Rampson explained the next steps for the Biercamp owners if they wanted to expand. Rampson said that if the council did not approve the rezoning, she’d ask council to direct the planning staff to initiate the process of putting appropriate zoning in place. If two years pass after the annexation from the township and no zoning is applied by the city, the parcel becomes “unzoned” and anything could happen, Rampson said.

So the staff would want to put an M1 placeholder zoning on the parcel. In the meantime, the State Street corridor discussion would be going on, Rampson said, and clearly Biercamp is a stakeholder in the corridor now and would be able to advocate for itself in the context of that discussion. At the conclusion of the corridor study, the staff would likely come up with a “package” that Rampson felt would probably include a rezoning of that parcel, among other recommendations.

Sandi Smith (Ward 1) noted that immediately to the north is a property zoned C3, where the Produce Station is located. Rampson explained that the property was originally zoned M1 – it was a warehouse. The entire area was developed on an industrial-type footprint, she said. Smith ventured that context might eliminate the possibility that rezoning the Biercamp parcel would constitute a “spot zoning.”

Rampson indicated that the objection to the rezoning is not that it would amount to spot zoning. Instead, the objection is based on the fact that the city’s master plan talks about putting a boundary on the commercial district. The Produce Station is the edge, she said. Without having a further understanding of how retail would work beyond that boundary, the planning staff weren’t comfortable letting it go farther south.

The intent of the South State corridor study is to develop that further understanding, extending all along the stretch from Stimson to Ellsworth. Issues being explored include zoning alternatives, transportation options and infrastructure improvements, specifically as they relate to current and future land uses. Ultimately, a plan for the corridor would be used to guide future development. [.pdf of current zoning along South State]

South State Public Forum

On the evening of May 23, 2012, the city’s planning staff held a public forum to give an update on the corridor project and get input from residents, business owners and others with an interest in that area. The event, held at the Malletts Creek library branch, drew about two dozen people.

The people who attended had varying stakes in the corridor. One of the most unique perspectives came from Carol and Dave Diephuis, who own the residential property where Carol was raised. Located on about three acres north of the Wintermeyer office complex, it’s the family home she moved to in the early 1960s. It would be an understatement to say a lot has changed since then, she said.

Architect Brad Moore, left, and Tracy Wintermeyer, owner of the Wintermeyer office complex on South State, look at a large map of the South State corridor. They were among about two dozen people who attended a May 23 public forum on the city's corridor project, held at the Malletts Creek library branch.

The meeting began with project director Kristin Baja giving an overview of the work to date, noting that recommendations for the 2.5-mile corridor had most recently been incorporated into the city’s master plan in 1990. Land use patterns have changed over the past two decades, which has prompted the need to revisit this area.

Starting in the 1950s, the city has focused on developing office, research and light industrial businesses along State Street, Baja said. The University of Michigan also owns a considerable amount of land there: Its south athletic campus – on the west side of South State, south of the UM golf course – includes tennis, wrestling and soccer facilities. UM also owns property along the corridor that remains undeveloped.

The corridor has about 900,000 square feet of office space and 580,000 square feet of industrial and light manufacturing facilities – more than any other section of the city, Baja said.

She went on to describe how the study so far has divided the corridor into three distinct sections. Area 1 runs from Stimson at the north end of the corridor to Eisenhower, and contains a mix of commercial, office and industrial properties, including a large Edwards Brothers book manufacturing plant. The UM facilities are also in this area. Zoning is primarily for office and light industrial.

Area 2 starts at Eisenhower and runs south to I-94. It’s dominated by Briarwood Mall to the west, and hotels and offices to the east. Although there aren’t any industrial uses here, much of the area is zoned for light industrial use.

Area 3 is the stretch between the I-94 interchange and Ellsworth. Only the land on the east side of State is in the city, and it primarily includes the Ann Arbor Research Park and Ann Arbor Industrial Park. Zoning is primarily for research, office and light industrial uses. The west side of State, south of I-94, is under the jurisdiction of Pittsfield Township, and includes the Airport Plaza area where several Zingerman’s businesses – including the bakehouse, creamery and coffee company – are located.

Baja described how city staff had conducted interviews with people from nearly 30 organizations or stakeholder groups, including local residents, UM, businesses, other local governments, the Ann Arbor Public Schools and others. From those interviews, a set of priorities emerged, she said:

High priority: Improve aesthetics, pedestrian and bicycling access, signs and lighting; create an attractive entrance to the city; focus on sustainability and efficiency.

Medium priority: Install crosswalks and improve sidewalks; improve traffic flow from I-94 to Eisenhower; brand the corridor and give it an “Ann Arbor feel”; improve building facades and landscaping; add mixed-use residential to the corridor.

Lower priority: Improve stormwater management; increase sanitary capacity throughout the corridor; develop trails and natural areas; get more local amenities; improve access to and from Briarwood Mall.

The priorities reflect the comments and concerns of stakeholders who were interviewed, Baja said, but doesn’t yet mean that those will be the changes implemented by the city.

Baja also noted that the city’s sustainability goals – assuming those are approved by the city council, to be incorporated into the city’s master plan – could also inform any changes to the South State corridor. [.pdf of sustainability goals] [The planning commission subsequently recommended approval of those goals, at its June 5 meeting.]

South State Public Forum: Questions, Comments

A portion of the May 23 forum was spent discussing the South State corridor in small groups. Before that, Baja and other city staff fielded questions from people attending the event. Most of the questions related to transportation issues.

From left: Eli Cooper, the city of Ann Arbor's transportation program manager, talks with Larry Deck of the Washtenaw Bicycling and Walking Coalition.

Brad Moore, a local architect, asked whether there’s any intent to convert South State from four lanes of traffic to three – a “road diet” that’s already scheduled for the Jackson/Huron corridor on the city’s west side. Eli Cooper, the city’s transportation program manager, replied that such changes are considered based on traffic volumes or turning patterns. But the South State corridor is not a candidate for conversion to three lanes, he said.

Larry Deck, a board member of the Washtenaw Bicycling and Walking Coalition, noted that plans are in the works to expand South State to four lanes in Pittsfield Township, south of Ellsworth. Is that process being coordinated with the city? Baja reported that city planning staff have met with township representatives about the corridor project, and they’ll touch base again. Planning manager Wendy Rampson noted that the most recent city-township collaboration has related to construction of a roundabout at the State and Ellsworth intersection. That’s driven in part by a traffic impact statement done for the new Costco store being built in the township, north of Ellsworth and west of State.

Cooper added that the city coordinates with Pittsfield through WATS (the Washtenaw Area Transportation Study), as well as through the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority’s efforts to create a countywide transit system. There’s also been some interest in extending a public transit corridor into Pittsfield, he said – the current focus of that transit project has been on a stretch from the city’s north side, down Plymouth Road, through the downtown area to South State.

Moore also asked if there’s any potential for another east-west road to connect South State to South Main, north of Eisenhower. Planning manager Wendy Rampson noted that Oakbrook serves that purpose between South State and Boardwalk, on the east side of South State. The city’s master plan calls for extending Oakbrook from South State to South Main. But after that extension was put into the master plan, the University of Michigan bought the property that would be needed for the cut-through. UM has no interest in putting a road there, she said, ”but that is still on the books as a master planning item.”

Deck ventured that at least a bicycling and pedestrian cut-through could be built between South Main and South State. It’s possible, Rampson replied, but only if UM agrees.

Tony Derezinski, a Ward 2 city councilmember who also serves on the planning commission, asked if there are plans to resurface South State. Rampson indicated she wasn’t aware of any major capital improvements for the road, aside from interest by the Michigan Dept. of Transportation in improving the I-94 interchange.

Possible branding logos for the South State corridor. Participants at a May 23 public forum were asked to vote on their favorites.

Responding to a question about the corridor study’s timeframe, Baja said they hope to have draft recommendations by late fall. After draft recommendations are developed, the city’s planning commission will give feedback. A second community meeting also will be held, and a final draft of the corridor plan will be made. That plan will be reviewed again by the planning commission, which will hold a public hearing on it. The plan, along with the planning commission’s recommendation, will be forwarded to the city council for another public hearing and vote. If approved, city staff would work to implement the plan’s recommendations.

More materials related to the South State corridor study are also available on the city’s website.

Planning Commission Retreat

A few days after the public forum, the Ann Arbor planning commission and staff held a five-hour retreat that focused in part on the South State corridor. The May 29 session – which The Chronicle attended – convened at the Kensington Court hotel near Briarwood Mall, then launched into a van tour of the corridor, with several stops along the way. After the tour, the remainder of the retreat included a discussion of the State Street area, and a review of the planning staff’s work plan and activities.

Planning Commission Retreat: Tour

The intent of the tour was to get an up-close view of South State Street and provide a context for discussing the corridor study. Here are highlights of some stops along the way.

Stimson and State on the northern end of the corridor. The Produce Station and Salvation Army store are anchors for that end on the east side of State, leading south to the adjacent Biercamp Artisan Sausage & Jerky and other small businesses. A rezoning request from owners of the Biercamp property had been rejected by the city council earlier this year, on a recommendation by the planning commissioners, as had a rezoning request from a medical marijuana dispensary across the street. At the time, several commissioners had cited the need to hold off on rezoning until the city took a broader review of the corridor’s zoning. During the van tour, some commissioners joked that they weren’t sure how they’d be received if they dropped by the Biercamp store on their tour – it was a moot point, as the shop was closed that day.

University of Michigan south athletic campus. Though tucked mostly out of site from traffic on South State, this complex just north of the Edwards Brothers book manufacturing plant and south of the UM golf course includes large facilities for soccer, tennis and wrestling. The university also owns a considerable amount of undeveloped land in this area, which it intends for future expansion. Rampson said one of UM’s major concerns for the corridor is the need for more sanitary sewer capacity to accommodate its development. A private road runs from the complex behind Edwards Brothers, exiting into a large park-and-ride lot that’s south of the site, with an entrance/exit onto South State.

South State and Eisenhower intersection. This major intersection includes a complex of offices, shops and restaurants anchored by the Michigan Commerce Bank building on the northwest corner, across the street from the high-rise Eisenhower Plaza (known as the 777 Building) on the northeast corner. Another large office building, UM’s Wolverine Tower, is on the southeast corner. Briarwood Mall and surrounding restaurants and offices are southwest of that intersection.

Ann Arbor planning commissioners board a canoe livery van on their tour of the South State Street corridor. From left: Erica Briggs, Diane Giannola, Eleanore Adenekan, and Evan Pratt.

Airport Plaza development.  This complex of warehouses and industrial buildings in Pittsfield Township is home to an eclectic mix of businesses. Several of the Zingerman’s Community of Businesses are located there, including the bakehouse, creamery, candy “manufactory,” and coffee company. In addition to production facilities, these businesses also have small retail shops. Though outside of the city of Ann Arbor’s jurisdiction, planning manager Wendy Rampson included this complex in the tour in part because of its proximity to the new Costco store that’s expected to open later this summer, north of Ellsworth and west of State.

South State and Ellsworth. This is another major intersection on the corridor, and is expected to see an increase in traffic after Costco opens. Plans to build a roundabout here are underway, in coordination with the Washtenaw County road commission. The roundabout was discussed by planning commissioners at their March 6, 2012 meeting in conjunction with a Tim Horton’s site plan near the northeast corner of that intersection. A Jimmy John’s shop is expected to submit plans to build near the Tim Horton’s site.

Ann Arbor Research Park. The 33-acre Ann Arbor Research Park was originally conceived to be the city’s answer to Silicon Valley – a place for technology and research businesses – but it remains largely underdeveloped. A wide boulevard runs through the complex, though there’s little traffic. Several automotive research operations and a charter school are located in the complex. An adjacent industrial/office park to the east, with an entrance off of Ellsworth, includes the massive, vacant headquarters of the now-defunct Borders Group, near a large warehouse for the Zingerman’s mail order business.

Planning Commission Retreat: Discussion

After the van tour, planning commissioners and staff returned to a conference room in the Kensington Court hotel and began their discussion by giving impressions of the South State corridor, based on what they’d seen. The meeting later included a discussion of commission/staff work priorities for the coming year. This report focuses on the South State corridor portion of the retreat, and organizes the discussion thematically.

Planning Commission Retreat: Discussion – Traffic, Transportation

Traffic congestion was a major concern, both in volume and flow. Several people cited the danger of vehicles exiting eastbound I-94 onto South State, where drivers must merge with traffic heading northbound on State that’s not required to stop. You need to have eyes in the back of your head to negotiate that turn, Eric Mahler said. “That’s a problem.”

State Street runs north-south. Ellsworth, which runs east-west, is at the bottom of the frame. The large paved area northwest of the I-94/State Street interchange is Briarwood Mall. The area of study extends farther north to Stimson. (Image links to Bing Map.)

The traffic situation is expected to worsen when Costco opens later this summer. There are also spikes in traffic – on Saturdays for University of Michigan football games, for example, or on weekends at Briarwood Mall.

Bonnie Bona wondered whether there are opportunities for more park-and-ride lots south of the I-94 interchange. Planning manager Wendy Rampson reported that according to AATA staff, it’s counterintuitive for people to use park-and-ride lots that are located in the opposite direction of their destination. Diane Giannola also questioned whether there was adequate bus service south of I-94, to serve people going into town.

Several commissioners mentioned the unfriendly climate for pedestrians and bicyclists. There are few crosswalks across State, and making turns or navigating the stretch across I-94 on a bicycle is difficult, Erica Briggs said. On the upside, Mahler noted, there are tremendous opportunities for improvements in alternative transportation there.

Kirk Westphal recalled the walk that some of the commissioners had taken back to the hotel, walking south on State from the intersection of State and Eisenhower. Although there was a sidewalk, there was no buffer between the sidewalk and the street and its fast-moving, heavy traffic. Part of the sidewalk was overgrown with bushes and weeds. It’s worse than he had imagined, Westphal said, and not an environment meant for pedestrians.

Eleanore Adenekan contrasted that experience with the situation on Eisenhower, where she said it’s actually pleasant to walk between State and Main. The sidewalks are wide, there are trees and landscaping, and a buffer between the sidewalk and the street. She used to walk along that stretch during lunch hours with a few colleagues, “and some of us even lost weight!” she joked.

Planning Commission Retreat: Discussion – Aesthetics

While there are some areas that commissioners pointed to as examples of well-kept, aesthetically pleasing properties – the stretch of hotels along Boardwalk, for example, and for some the fountain at the northwest corner of State and Eisenhower – generally, the corridor’s aesthetics weren’t seen as a positive. Tony Derezinski described it as a “less-than-adequate welcome to the city.”

Evan Pratt said the corridor definitely needs a gateway. Bonnie Bona noted that the fountain and retaining wall at the northwest corner of State and Eisenhower – in front of the Michigan Commerce Bank building – was intended to serve that purpose, but “it’s just the completely wrong solution.” And the right-of-way does nothing to build cohesiveness along the corridor, she noted.

The corridor doesn’t really become welcoming until near Stimson, around the Produce Station, said Erica Briggs.

Commissioners pointed to overgrown or non-existent landscaping, barren stretches with concrete medians near I-94, and a general lack of cohesiveness along the entire corridor. Briggs said it seems like the vision for State Street “just didn’t work.” That prompted planning manager Wendy Rampson to quip, “You assume there is a vision!”

It’s time to try a different idea, Briggs said. It would be great to have an off-road connection from the State Street area to downtown Ann Arbor, she suggested – perhaps along the railroad track. It’s a long-term vision, she noted, but something to work toward.

Pratt observed that suggestions for a greenway in Ann Arbor typically end at Stadium Boulevard, but a greenway could really come much further south.

Things change very slowly, Bona said, whether it’s the Reimagine Washtenaw corridor project or efforts to bring more density to downtown. She hoped the city could figure out a way to make some incremental change that would have the biggest impact. One idea is to look at changing the right-of-way, she said. Someone once told her that you couldn’t tell why Ann Arbor is known as Tree City, Bona noted. To change that, she suggested, “let’s plant a million trees!” Rampson quipped that some business owners might just cut down any trees that blocked their signs – a reference to unapproved tree-cutting that occurred at the Red Robin restaurant site on South State.

Matt Kowalski, a city planner, observed that the South State corridor has a much more suburban feel than any of the other major entryways into the city. It’s truly generic, he said – there’s no real sense of the character of Ann Arbor until you get to the Produce Station near Stimson.

Pratt agreed, referring to it as “Anywhere USA.” Landscaping might help, he said. Even if it remains generic, it would at least look better.

Diane Giannola suggested starting with aesthetic improvements – lightpoles, banners, landscaping. Pratt noted that because the corridor is located within the city, it would be easier to create a corridor improvement authority (CIA) to help fund improvements. That’s in contrast with Washtenaw Avenue, which crosses four governmental jurisdictions. [For background on corridor improvement authorities, see Chronicle coverage: "What Does Washtenaw Corridor Need?"]

Kirk Westphal asked whether there seemed to be interest on the part of property owners for a CIA or perhaps a business improvement zone, like one created in downtown Ann Arbor. Kristin Baja reported that Ann Arbor SPARK and the Oxford Company, which manages several properties in that area, have expressed interest in somehow coordinating with the city for improvements like landscaping. She said a meeting is scheduled for later in June to talk about options.

Planning Commission Retreat: Discussion – Zoning

There was some discussion about the possibility of “upzoning” parts of the corridor, to allow for greater density or commercial use. Evan Pratt felt that zoning changes might motivate some property owners, like First Martin Corp., to redevelop sites along the corridor.

Tony Derezinski wondered how many requests have been made that reflect that the zoning is inadequate or out of date. Planning manager Wendy Rampson pointed to the C3 zoning at the corner of State and Ellsworth as an example. That zoning allowed for Tim Horton’s to be located there – the planning commission approved that fast food chain’s site plan in March of 2012. Is that what the city wants to see anchoring that location? she asked.

By way of background, rezoning requests discussed earlier in this article for 1712 S. State – now used by Treecity Health Collective, a medical marijuana dispensary – and for 1643 and 1645 S. State St., where Biercamp Artisan Sausage & Jerky is located, have been part of the commission’s ongoing conversation about the need to make a comprehensive review of zoning along the corridor. Several other areas along the corridor – such as the Ann Arbor Research Park – have been discussed as places where the city’s master plan might need to be updated, with respect to land use. [.pdf of current zoning along South State]

Planning Commission Retreat: Discussion – A Few Positives

During the retreat, commissioners pointed to a few positive attributes of the South State corridor. Some commissioners cited sections that were more aesthetically pleasing, like the stretch of Boardwalk where several hotels are located. Evan Pratt liked the fact that the hotels and some fast food restaurants were tucked back off of South State, but planning manager Wendy Rampson noted that the hotel representatives in particular aren’t thrilled about that. They’re concerned because it’s difficult for people to find  the hotels, she said. Several commissioners indicated that there’s a need for wayfinding signs all along the corridor.

Related to signs, city planner Alexis DiLeo noted that there aren’t many “horrendous” signs on the South State corridor, in contrast to Washtenaw Avenue or Jackson Road. It’s somewhat subdued, she said. There also aren’t as many overhead utility lines along the State corridor, which she said was a positive.

The Produce Station on the north end of the corridor, near Stimson, was seen as a vibrant location. Pratt wondered how the city could encourage more businesses like that.

Erica Briggs noted that she can bike from downtown to the area south of Eisenhower, and it’s fairly easy and comfortable.

Planning Commission Retreat: Discussion – What to Include?

Wendy Rampson told commissioners that the planning staff hasn’t included Briarwood Mall in its study at this point, and she asked for feedback about whether that was the right approach. She noted that the mall owners don’t own the outlying lots that encircle the shopping complex. Those are owned by other businesses and the university, which operates several medical offices on the north side of the road encircling the mall.

Planning commissioners and staff at the intersection of South State and Eisenhower. The woman on the bicycle was just passing through.

Tony Derezinski observed that it’s a huge development with a major impact on South State. Evan Pratt felt that it should be included, though he said he’d hate to end up in an adversarial position if the overall corridor plan conflicts with the mall’s interests.

Kristin Baja reported that representatives of Briarwood are hoping to close one of the exits onto South State, across from Victors Way. They’d also like to put up larger signs indicating the mall’s location, as well as better landscaping along State, she said. Rampson noted that one of the mall representatives hopes to see more development along the mall’s “ring road” – the idea is that if more businesses are located there, that will draw more customers to the mall area in general, she said. The Twelve Oaks mall in Novi is an example of that.

Rampson noted that it seemed like commissioners were interested in including Briarwood in the study. What about the industrial park that’s located east of the Ann Arbor Research Park, she asked – where the former Borders headquarters is located? Derezinski said it would be hard to ignore, in part because of how it affects traffic patterns leading into the Ellsworth/State corridor.

Industrial parks tend to provide more flexibility and cheaper space for businesses, Rampson said. She pointed to the diversity of businesses in the Airport Plaza complex in Pittsfield Township, where businesses range from Zingerman’s to Maker Works and other quirky enterprises.

Erica Briggs observed that there’s an opportunity to engage the arts community, which might be interested in the cheaper, more flexible space that these areas provide. Derezinski offered to raise the issue with the Ann Arbor public art commission. In addition to his positions on city council and the planning commission, Derezinski also serves on AAPAC.

Rampson said the staff could explore what types of zoning would allow for things like theaters or other arts ventures.

Next Steps

The city’s planning staff will continue to work on draft recommendations, which they hope to complete by the fall. After draft recommendations are developed, the city’s planning commission will give feedback, and a second community meeting will be held.

A final draft of the corridor plan will be made at that point, to be reviewed again by the planning commission, which will hold a public hearing on it. The plan, along with the planning commission’s recommendation, will be forwarded to the city council for another public hearing and vote. If approved, city staff would work to implement the plan’s recommendations.

Commissioners present: Eleanore Adenekan, Bonnie Bona, Erica Briggs, Tony Derezinski, Diane Giannola, Eric Mahler, Evan Pratt, Kirk Westphal, Wendy Woods. Also planning manager Wendy Rampson, Kristen Baja of the systems planning unit, and city planners Chris Cheng, Alexis DiLeo, Jeff Kahan, and Matt Kowalski.

The Chronicle relies in part on regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the city planning commission. If you’re already supporting The Chronicle, please encourage your friends, neighbors and coworkers to plan on doing the same. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle.

Ann Arbor's public art administrator, Aaron Seagraves (center) talks with public art commissioners Wiltrud Simbuerger and Bob Miller at the commission's Feb. 26, 2012 retreat. The four-hour session was held at the NEW Center on North Main. (Photos by the writer.)

The Percent for Art program, overseen by AAPAC, allocates 1% for public art from all of the city government’s capital projects. The program faced potential cuts by the city council last year, though a majority of councilmembers ultimately voted against decreased funding. There’s also been criticism that the commission, which was formed in 2008, has been too slow in funding works of art. The commission itself has seen recent turnover, with three new commissioners appointed since late 2011.

It’s in this context that AAPAC decided to work on a master plan – the retreat was a step toward that goal, though it’s expected to take several more months to complete. Meanwhile, the commission is also preparing an annual plan to approve at its next meeting, on March 28, with a list of specific projects it intends to pursue in the coming fiscal year. The public art ordinance requires that the annual plan be submitted to the city council by April 1.

Sunday’s retreat covered a broad range of topics. Commissioners discussed the need to address all aspects of their mission, as spelled out in the ordinance – including education, outreach and promotion of public art. John Kotarski, one of the newest commissioners, proposed a motto to reflect that goal: “The educated resident is the best consumer of public art.”

Questions were raised about whether Percent for Art funds could be used for outreach and promotion – in the past, AAPAC has been told by city staff that funding is restricted to permanent capital projects. Kotarski advocated for including temporary projects, such as an artist-in-residence program or events like FestiFools. If the ordinance doesn’t currently allow temporary work, he suggested amending it.

When Kotarski urged the commission to seek clarity from the city attorney’s office, Tony Derezinski – a commissioner who also serves on the city council – said the city attorney’s staff is already working on legal opinions related to questions from councilmembers. He indicated that the legal staff would be willing to attend a future AAPAC meeting to answer these questions.

Also during the meeting, Aaron Seagraves, the city’s public art administrator, presented preliminary results of an online survey of residents, which yielded 437 responses. [.pdf of preliminary survey report] In response to one of the questions – “Where are the public places in the city that would benefit from a public art project?” – the top three responses were parks (27 responses), “none” (25 responses) and Main Street (23 responses.)

Other items emerged at the retreat. Theresa Reid, the newest commissioner who was appointed earlier this year, reported that she and others are working to apply for a National Endowment for the Arts “Our Town” grant, to help pay for a countywide public arts planning process. Derezinski indicated that the Detroit Institute of Art’s Inside|Out project, which involves installing framed reproductions from the DIA’s collection at outdoor locations on building facades or in parks, likely won’t come to Ann Arbor until 2013. When originally proposed in October 2011, it was expected to take place this year.

Another possible project on the horizon is tied to the resurfacing of Main Street in 2013. AAPAC chair Marsha Chamberlin said the Main Street Area Association and Downtown Development Authority are interested in some kind of “street stamping” project. It’s a project that’s in the very early stages, she said, but might include ideas like creating patterns on the street at crosswalks, for example.

Though discrete projects were mentioned, the focus of the retreat remained on big-picture goals. Common themes included the importance of public art in creating a sense of identity for the community, and of its role in supporting the local economy.

Setting the Stage

Commissioners Connie Rizzolo Brown and John Kotarski were tasked with giving a broad overview of the purpose of public art and the history of the commission’s work in this community.

Brown noted that the recent publication by the Michigan Municipal League – “The Economics of Place: The Value of Building Communities Around People” – provides a blueprint for reinventing Michigan cities. The idea is to build healthy, sustainable communities to attract visitors, support the local economy, and create a sense of identity for residents and visitors, she said.

Those goals are part of Ann Arbor’s public art ordinance, too, Brown noted. She quoted from the ordinance:

City council has determined that the creation of public art will improve the aesthetic quality of public spaces and structures, provide cultural and recreational opportunities, contribute to the local heritage, stimulate economic activity and promote the general welfare of the community. [.pdf of public art ordinance]

The public art commission was formed to help guide that effort. Brown recapped the history of the commission, noting that it started informally as a group of volunteers who raised money for public art projects. The commission on art in public places (CAPP) was formed, which later transitioned to the Ann Arbor public art commission (AAPAC) when the city’s Percent for Art program was authorized by city council in 2007.

Because it’s an all-volunteer commission, it’s been difficult at times to handle the work, Brown said. That’s why it’s important to identify the roles of everyone involved, she said, including commissioners, city staff, and the public. That way, the work can be shared and it will be easier for everyone, she said.

The purpose, objectives and duties of AAPAC are defined in part by the public art ordinance, Brown noted. There are two main responsibilities: (1) recommending projects and allocating funds, and (2) providing education, promotion and outreach for public art.

In the first category, AAPAC’s duties include setting guidelines for selecting art and locations for art; presenting annual goals and an annual report; and determining whether projects in the city’s capital improvements plan (CIP) are eligible for public art funding. Brown noted that AAPAC doesn’t do this work alone – there are others involved, including city staff, task force members and the public. And AAPAC’s recommendations must be approved by the city council, she said.

Regarding education, promotion and outreach, the ordinance states that AAPAC can raise additional funds from other sources, foster public/private partnerships, promote awareness of public art, and advise donors of art regarding placement of artwork on non-city property. Yet AAPAC has lost some of its focus regarding these responsibilities, Brown said.

Promotion can mean a lot of things, Brown added. It can be as simple as AAPAC’s website, but can also mean embracing the concept of public art beyond just city-owned work to include private or University of Michigan art. So how does AAPAC promote a variety of arts in this region, to create a sustainable arts community here?

One example is a partnership with the Detroit Institute of Art’s Inside|Out project, which involves installing framed reproductions from the DIA’s collection at outdoor locations on building facades or in parks. [A DIA staff member talked to AAPAC about the idea in October of 2011, though it now looks like the installation won't occur until 2013.] A program like that creates awareness of public art in the community, Brown said. “It starts to define who we are.” If AAPAC can give more attention to these kinds of programs, they can increase the commission’s educational component, she said.

It’s important to define public art, Brown said, noting that the city’s public art ordinance defines it in this way:

Public art means works of art created, purchased, produced or otherwise acquired for display in public spaces or facilities. Public art may include artistic design features incorporated into the architecture, layout, design or structural elements of the space or facility. Public art may be any creation, production, conception or design with an aesthetic purpose, including freestanding objets d’art, sculptures, murals, mosaics, ornamentation, paint or decoration schemes, use of particular structural materials for aesthetic effect, or spatial arrangement of structures.

Brown wanted commissioners to think about how public art can draw people to the city. There are a lot of possibilities, she said.

Public Art Options

John Kotarski, who was appointed to the commission late last year, picked up the presentation by noting that he’d been impressed by the amount of work that’s already been done. Instead of creating a new vision, he said, commissioners should think about recovering that original vision.

Public Art Options: Seattle’s Example

When the city’s public art ordinance was being developed, people like Margaret Parker – AAPAC’s former chair, who resigned at the end of 2011 – had researched other public art programs nationwide. Seattle has one of the country’s oldest public art programs, and Parker had gone there to attend a seminar by Barbara Goldstein, editor of “Public Art by the Book.” The book is the gold standard for creating a public art program using best practices, Kotarski said, and was used in developing Ann Arbor’s ordinance.

John Kotarski, one of the newest public art commissioners, supports funding temporary art installations, in addition to permanent projects.

Kotarski said he traveled to Seattle in January and had talked to members of that city’s public arts commission. Ann Arbor can learn from that program – which was established in the early 1970s and is also supported with percent-for-art funding – and avoid its mistakes, he said.

Kotarski showed several slides of public art in Seattle, including the Hammering Man sculpture at the Seattle Art Museum entrance. People initially hated it, he said, but now it’s “beloved by the entire city.” The same was true, he said, for a work by Michael Heizer called “Adjacent, Against, Upon” – a series of large, square boulders lined up in a park next to Puget Sound.

“Public art won’t always be accepted at the start,” Kotarski said. In fact, artists want to challenge conventional boundaries – that’s part of what makes art enduring, he said.

Ann Arbor’s preamble to its public art ordinance mirrors the one for Seattle, Kotarski said. The Ann Arbor preamble reads: ”City council recognizes the responsibility of government to foster the development of culture and the arts.” To him, Kotarski said, this means that public art isn’t a luxury – it’s a responsibility of the government.

Like Brown, Kotarski encouraged a broader view of what constitutes public art. Beyond city-funded projects, he said, it includes University of Michigan artwork – like Maya Lin’s “Wave Field” on north campus – and even the fairy doors that are located throughout town on privately owned buildings. “This is public art too,” he said, and should be promoted by AAPAC.

Promoting awareness of public art, in part, means helping to educate the public, Kotarski said. He advocated for modifying the motto of the now-defunct clothing chain Syms – “An educated consumer is our best customer” – to reflect Ann Arbor’s public art outreach: “The educated resident is the best consumer of public art.”

Kotarski recommended ”The Art of Placemaking: Interpreting Community Through Public Art and Urban Design,” a book by Ronald Lee Fleming. This approach describes what Ann Arbor’s public art program is doing, he said. “We’re not decorating the city.” Rather, Ann Arbor is leading the reinvention of Michigan’s cities, he said, with public art as an economic driver.

Saying that the city has somehow become locked into thinking of public art as a permanent piece of construction, Kotarski said his reading of Ann Arbor’s ordinance allows for a broader definition, and he urged commissioners to expand their view of potential projects.

Seattle’s program has several options, he noted, including both permanent and temporary installations. He described these options as five quivers in their bow, and said that having a variety of approaches is a better way to achieve the city’s overall public art goal. Those approaches include:

• Site Integrated: Bringing an artist into a project at the early stages of design, so that the artwork is an integral part of the building or structure, rather than an add-on. Kotarski showed an example of artwork that’s integral to a skatepark in Seattle, and noted that Ann Arbor has a similar opportunity with the skatepark that’s being planned here.
• Site Specific: Locating artwork on a site – like putting a sculpture in a park or in front of a building.
• Portable Artwork: Artwork, typically paintings or sculptures, that are periodically moved to different locations. Kotarski noted that Seattle moves the artwork that’s located in municipal offices every three years. He said he supported a suggestion by Ann Arbor art commissioner Bob Miller, who had floated the idea of rotating outdoor sculptures throughout the city.
• Artist-in-Residence: Embedding an artist within a city department for a period of time. In Los Angeles, an artist-in-residence with the city’s parks department built a large roller imprinted with an aerial image of the city. City workers drag the roller down the beach several times each day, stamping the image onto the sand. Another example, Kotarski said, would be to embed an artist with the street department – perhaps the artist could create stamps that workers could then use to make patterns when streets or sidewalks are paved. Or an artist could be embedded with the city’s parks department, he said, and explore an art project using some of the aluminum canoes that are being replaced as part of the Argo Dam bypass project.
• Temporary Artwork: Temporary installations or performances can be economic engines for a community, Kotarski said. He cited the example of The Gates by Christo, a 14-day installation in New York City’s Central Park that drew millions of people to the area and generated millions of dollars for businesses there. In Ann Arbor, FestiFools – to be held this year on April 1 – is an example of that, he said. Its temporary nature is part of its value. Using an Americans for the Arts economic impact calculator, Kotarski said he estimated that FestiFools brought in more than $100,000 for local merchants. The annual ArtPrize in Grand Rapids is another good example of the economic value brought by temporary exhibits, he said.

Public Art Options: Art & the Economy

Theresa Reid, the newest commissioner who was attending her first meeting that day, said she felt like there were mixed messages regarding art and money. She’s from Chicago, and for her, public art is what makes people love that city. It’s about heart, not money, and she didn’t want to lose sight of that fact. Art has the power to transform, she said, both individually and as a community.

Ann Arbor public art commissioners Theresa Reid and Malverne Winborne. Reid was appointed to the commission this month, and is executive director of the ArtsEngine at the University of Michigan. Winborne is is director of Eastern Michigan University’s Charter Schools Office.

Kotarski agreed, but said commissioners also need to be able to make the economic case for public art. They need to be able to answer the question: Why spend money on public art? Is it just because they’re snobs? he asked – no, it’s more than that.

Tony Derezinski, an art commissioner who also represents Ward 2 on the city council, said he wanted to reinforce Kotarski’s point. Three times over the years there have been attempts to cut the Percent for Art program, he said. There have been questions about why the city should keep the funding level at 1%. The argument in support of the program is that it defines Ann Arbor as a community that appreciates art, Derezinski said. That’s even more important during tough economic times – that’s when you define your values, he said. But the longer view is that public art supports the economy, he said.

Kotarski returned to the topic later in the retreat, when he presented several possible answers to the question: Why support public art?

One reason is to expand the public’s experience of art. Kotarski returned to the motto: “The educated resident is the best consumer of public art.” Not everyone will like every piece of art, but at least they should be able to criticize it from an informed perspective, he said. Instead of just saying “Dreiseitl stinks!” the conversation could center around comparing the German artist’s Ann Arbor water sculpture – located in front of city hall – to work by other artists, or to other work by Dreiseitl, Kotarski said.

World-class performers want to come to Ann Arbor because this city has a world-class audience – people who appreciate the nuances of a performance. Kotarski cited Laurie Anderson as an example. In addition to venues at large cities, her tour last year included Ann Arbor because she knew the audience here would understand her work, he said. Artists like her aren’t just interested in selling tickets. The city can become a world-class audience for public art, too, he said.

Another reason to support public art is because it helps people to understand their community better as well as their individual lives, Kotarski said. One local example he cited is a mural of local war veterans, created by Mary Thiefels and located in an alley off of West Liberty near Main Street.

The final reason Kotarski offered was to create a 21st century economy. He said Gov. Rick Snyder is using “The Economics of Place” as a manifesto to guide the recovery of Michigan’s cities. Businesspeople want to create vibrant communities, he said – they don’t really care if it’s through making ashtrays or public art. “Knowledge workers” want to live in places like Ann Arbor, and the creativity reflected in the city’s public art can be a draw for them, he concluded.

Connie Brown noted that AAPAC’s work can be an essential part of placemaking for the city. That’s done by increasing each resident’s experience with visual art, she said, by building a sustainable local arts community, and by establishing Ann Arbor as a leader in public art. Through art installation, community engagement and education, the city can build a regional network that supports the arts and arts makers, she said. And by commissioning work by leading artists, Brown added, the bar is raised for local artists, and the city becomes more attractive for mid-career artists to live and work here.

She noted that public art projects support a variety of local workers and businesses, including designers, material suppliers, fabricators, installers and maintenance workers.

Brown concluded that part of the presentation by saying that the execution of this vision is difficult. Establishing a broad master plan can help guide the commission’s work, she said, including the annual plan that must be submitted to city council each year.

Different Roles in Shaping Public Art

The commission spent a portion of the retreat brainstorming about the roles of various people who are involved with public art in the city, including commissioners, the public art administrator – a job held by Aaron Seagraves – city staff, task forces, city council and the community.

Here’s the list of roles that commissioners generated for these groups during the session:

• Commissioners: (1) advise the city council and staff regarding public art projects, (2) set the public art program’s guidelines, vision and priorities, (3) submit an annual plan to city council, (4) communicate with the community and raise awareness about public art, (5) generate additional funding, (6) make recommendations on projects and funding allocations, (7) observe and review the fabrication of artwork, (8) set up partnerships, (9) appoint task forces and act on their recommendations, and (10) review job description for art administrator, and help with interview process and selection, when necessary.
• Public art administrator: (1) provide support to AAPAC, (2) act as conduit for ideas and information, (3) handle day-to-day administration of the public art program, (4) maintain AAPAC’s website, (5) promote public art, (6) serve as the chief contact person for the public and media, (7) provide overall leadership for AAPAC, (8) implement AAPAC’s vision, (9) provide project management, (10) report to the city’s public services area administrator, and (11) develop a portal for community engagement.
• Task Forces: (1) make recommendations about projects and programs to AAPAC, and (2) set the vision for certain projects.
• Community: (1) serve on task forces and subcommittees, (2) act as a sounding board, (3) be engaged in the process, (4) participate in project and site selection, (5) become ambassadors of public art, (6) provide ideas for new projects, and (7) be a source for collaborative projects, both through partnerships and fundraising.
• City staff: (1) manage projects that are tied to city capital improvements, (2) identify funding for art projects, (3) provide technical support, (4) act as liaisons between the artists and city departments, and (5) provide input and identify opportunities for new art projects.
• City council: (1) provide oversight, (2) act as final decision-makers, (3) provide adequate funding, (4) amend public art ordinance, as needed, and (5) appoint AAPAC commissioners.

Throughout the brainstorming session, discussions emerged related to some of these suggested roles. There was some uncertainty, for example, regarding the process by which task forces are appointed. Is that handled by the art administrator or the commissioner who’s leading the task force? It’s been done multiple ways, Brown noted.

Malverne Winborne raised the question of who’s responsible for deciding whether a project is “go or no-go.” To him, he said, there’s a lack of clarity between the commission’s role and the role of staff. When Bob Miller offered that AAPAC, as an advisory group, had 49% of the responsibility for making those kinds of decisions, Winborne replied, “Who’s the 51%?” That’s the city council, he was told.

Public art commissioners Cathy Gendron and Marsha Chamberlin.

As a new commissioner, Theresa Reid asked how decisions on AAPAC get made. Is there a formal vote? Not necessarily, Brown replied. Some issues are just discussed until a consensus is achieved. Winborne recommended identifying a hierarchy to clarify the relationship between AAPAC and city council, and AAPAC and its task forces.

It’s not just about making the final decision on a project, Marsha Chamberlin said. There’s also the question about who decides which projects get initiated. Cathy Gendron noted that in the past, a lot of projects were initiated by Sue McCormick, the city’s former public services administrator. The public art administrator reported to McCormick. [McCormick resigned late last year to take a job as head of Detroit's water and sewerage department. Craig Hupy is filling that job on an interim basis while the city conducts a search for a permanent replacement.]

What’s the art administrator’s role in this process? Kotarski asked. He noted that the job description for Seagraves includes “overall leadership” of AAPAC. Several commissioners expressed surprise at that – they indicated that they thought his role was staff support for AAPAC, not leadership. Seagraves noted that since the commission meets only once a month, part of his role is to move projects forward on a daily basis. That’s one way to interpret the leadership responsibility, he ventured.

Later, during a discussion about the city staff’s role, Kotarski drew on the experience of Seattle. The Seattle art commission had shifted its orientation, he said, and talked about funding in terms of the public art funds belonging to different departments. Commissioners would approach department liaisons and asked how the departments envisioned spending the money for public art. The attitude from commissioners became, “How can we help you create art for your department’s projects?” he said. There was much less pushback from city staff, because the staff took ownership of the art projects.

Cathy Gendron ended this portion of the retreat by offering some perspective. A lot of these ideas – collaborating with partners, embedding artists early in the process – have been discussed by AAPAC in the past, she noted. “Where we keep getting stalled is who does the work?” Commissioners have been told that the city funds can’t pay for things like promotion, she said. So at some point, she said, part of their discussion needs to focus on putting a structure in place so that AAPAC can do the things they envision.

Developing a Master Plan

Connie Brown began the next portion of the retreat by proposing a framework for thinking about the elements of a master plan. She noted that there is no perfect plan or process, but there are ways that they can approach their work. She cautioned that commissioners aren’t the artists – they shouldn’t be the people coming up with the ideas for specific projects.

Rather, she proposed that they develop a plan based on three basic categories: Location, typology and process.

• Location: This refers to zones or types of areas – recreation areas, neighborhoods, or business districts, for example – where public art could be located. Or commissioners might think about location in terms of geographic features, like the Huron River. This category helps AAPAC consider where the city might place public art, to ensure a diversity of location throughout the city.
• Typology: What type of public art does a project represent? It might be a gateway that marks an entry to a specific spot or corridor. It might serve a wayfinding function – artwork that guides people through an area with signs or pathways. This category helps identify the classification of a particular project.
• Process: There can be a variety of ways that public art projects get initiated. Some are brought forward by city staff or AAPAC – like the mural program – while others might be identified by the community. Partnerships like the one planned with the Detroit Institute of Arts are another way for public art to be created. AAPAC might also partner with other city entities – working with the energy commission, for example, on an art installation using solar-powered LED lights.

The purpose of the retreat and the master plan, Brown said, is to look at the big picture. They weren’t going to identify specific projects at specific location, but instead would start the process of prioritizing and setting general goals.

Public art commissioners John Kotarski and Connie Rizzolo Brown.

The approach might be to identify percentages of the Percent for Art budget that AAPAC would like to spend on certain types of projects – gateways, for example – and certain areas where the commission would like projects to be located. Brown also noted that they need to include all aspects of their mission – not just physical projects, but also education, outreach and promotion of public art.

The master plan that AAPAC ultimately develops can be used to guide the commission’s annual plan, which in turn will guide the work of the task forces that will be charged with implementing specific projects, she said. AAPAC needs to provide guidance but not be proscriptive, Brown cautioned – the task forces and artists need flexibility to be creative.

Brown also advocated for communicating with the city council at an earlier stage, and getting feedback from councilmembers. That way everyone can move ahead confidently, she said, without wondering if a project will get pushback from the council after being developed.

Tony Derezinski offered to use his communications time at council meetings to report on AAPAC’s work. Commissioners generally supported that. Bob Miller noted that it would help make the process more clear and transparent for everyone.

Developing a Master Plan: Survey Results

Aaron Seagraves, the city’s public art administrator, presented preliminary results from an online survey that AAPAC had distributed earlier this year. He plans to give a more formal report at the commission’s March 28 meeting. [.pdf of preliminary survey report]

There were 437 respondents, though not everyone answered all of the questions, he noted. For those that identified the neighborhood they lived in, the largest concentration was from the Old West Side (38 respondents), followed by Lower Burns Park (26) and Burns Park (20).

In response to the question “Where are the public places in the city that would benefit from a public art project?” the top three responses were parks (27 responses), “none” (25 responses) and Main Street (23 responses.)

“None” and parking structures/lots were the top answers (both with 26 responses) to the question “Which city infrastructure could be improved aesthetically with public art funding?” The other top response was the library (16 responses).

The survey also asked respondents to choose their top three programs that could result in artists designing multiple works using the same medium, item or theme. Percentage-wise by respondents, the top results were bus stops/shelters (59.5%), pedestrian crosswalk signs (54.4%), street furniture, like benches (54.4%), and community/participatory projects (40.9%).

That question also allowed for free responses. Here’s a sampling:

• A sculpture park in Bryant neighborhood. One of the pieces should allow for water sprinklers, so that it can enjoy a dual function.
• Campaign to stop graffiti
• Dual purpose installation. I’ve seen giant flower-shaped umbrellas with power outlets and lights along city streets; benches that enclose tree plantings
• Facade for abandoned buildings
• Garbage/recycling containers
• Flowers, plants by city entrances; a decent “Welcome to Ann Arbor” sign, “Home of the Wolverines,” something – please!
• More green spaces, places to sit down and enjoy the view
• Statues of historic figures, historic information displays
• Sculptures at interstate entrances to Ann Arbor
• Turn Main Street into a walking street, slowed to traffic to allow street performers, artists, musicians to perform and exhibit

John Kotarski asked Seagraves for his impressions of the survey results – what did it tell him? Seagraves indicated that there hadn’t been sufficient time to analyze the results, since the survey had just closed the previous week.

Kotarski wondered whether the number of “none” responses had surprised Seagraves. Not really, Seagraves replied. Malverne Winborne indicated that those results simply reflect that there are a number of people who don’t understand or support this work, but that the commission shouldn’t get too caught up in that.

Developing a Master Plan: Setting Goals

As the commission moved into its exercise of setting goals, there was some initial discussion over how detailed they needed to be, what the goals were intended to articulate, and whether the goals would be used for the master plan or the more immediate annual plan, which by ordinance must be delivered to city council by April 1.

Connie Pulcipher, a city staff member who was facilitating the discussion, noted that the intent was not to develop the master plan that day. Because this is the first time that AAPAC has formed a master plan, it’s a process that will likely take many more discussions over several months, she said.

The draft set of goals, which the commission intends to review and likely revise in the coming months, include:

• Establish relationships with city units and other city commissions.
• Develop a marketing/communications plan and budget.
• Develop a framework for decision-making.
• Use a simple narrative to ensure that the public, city council and city staff are better informed about the public art program.
• Identify a diversity of locations for public art.
• Promote temporary art.
• Develop a scoring list for project selection.

During the goal-setting discussion, several issues emerged that the commissioners discussed in more depth, including the possibility of funding temporary art, and the types of categories that might be used in selecting future public art projects.

Developing a Master Plan: Setting Goals – Temporary Art

John Kotarski noted that one of the obstacles that AAPAC faces is the interpretation of the public art ordinance. Does it include the ability to fund temporary art or an artist-in-residence? It seems important to clarify that with the city attorney’s office, he said, and to possibly work to amend the ordinance, if necessary.

In response to his question, AAPAC chair Marsha Chamberlin reviewed the work of the commission, noting that they’ve spent a lot of time developing policies and procedures, and that over the years a significant balance of Percent for Art funding has accumulated. [Seagraves later clarified that the Percent for Art balance of unallocated funds stands at around $1.1 million.] There is a push to get more projects competed, she said, and the ordinance doesn’t need to be changed in order to do that.

Chamberlin said that AAPAC has been told that the Percent for Art funds can’t be used for temporary art. By way of background, the meaning of “permanent” has been explained to AAPAC by city staff as relating to the ability of an item to be capitalized. At AAPAC’s July 2010 meeting, Sue McCormick – who at that time supervised the program as the city’s public services administrator – told commissioners that the city runs a depreciation schedule on each piece of art, and that artwork is considered a capital investment that needs to last a minimum of five years. At AAPAC’s December 2011 meeting, Chamberlin reported that the city’s finance staff had revised its definition of “permanent” to a minimum of two years, not five.

The challenge of permanent versus temporary artwork was also discussed at an AAPAC retreat in October of 2011. And at AAPAC’s September 2011 meeting, former commissioner Margaret Parker floated an idea to bypass the funding constraint on temporary installations by considering them as promoting public art, which is part of the commission’s charge.

At the Feb. 26 retreat, Kotarski asked whether AAPAC could spend $50,000 on building a gallery at city hall, or $20,000 on a promotional campaign, or $10,000 to create a coloring book connected to the upcoming DIA exhibit? If not, that eliminates an enormous amount of what AAPAC can do, he said. The issue needs clarity.

Tony Derezinski said these kinds of issues have been raised by city council members. He said he’s talked with the city attorney’s office, and that they are formulating opinions in response to these issues. Derezinski suggested that AAPAC schedule a session with someone from the city attorney’s office, to get some legal advice on these questions. The city attorney has indicated willingness to do that, he said.

Bob Miller suggested that the ordinance could be amended to accommodate temporary projects. Chamberlin said the issue had arisen when FestiFools, an annual street festival featuring oversized puppets, had approached AAPAC for funding. The commission had been ready to allocate funds for FestiFools, but was told that it wasn’t allowed because the event was considered temporary.

Developing a Master Plan: Setting Goals – Layers of Categories

Malverne Winborne suggested dividing the city into zones or quadrants, to help guide the selection of projects and ensure that all parts of the city are represented. [Later in the meeting, it was suggested that the quadrant boundaries (starting from downtown) could be roughly North Main to US-23 to the north, Jackson Road to the west, State Street to the south, and Washtenaw Avenue to the east.] Winborne was especially concerned about under-served areas, like the Bryant neighborhood. Located on the city’s southeast side – south of I-94 and east of Stone School Road – Bryant is one of the city’s lower-income neighborhoods.

Wiltrud Simbuerger said AAPAC should use different approaches to help determine where public art should be located, and what kind of public art is needed. In addition to geographic location, another approach might be to identify land use, such as recreational or parkland. Another way might look at  process – whether it’s participatory, or temporary.

Theresa Reid suggested setting up task forces for each quadrant of the city. Perhaps those groups could be tasked with identifying two projects for their quadrant per year, she said. It’s also possible to envision the task forces working together on a larger project that might span geographic areas.

Reid, who’s also a board member of the countywide Arts Alliance, reported that she and Derezinski, among others, are involved in an effort to apply for a National Endowment for the Arts “Our Town” grant, to help pay for a countywide public arts planning process. There could be opportunities for larger-scale projects as a result.

Later in the meeting, Cathy Gendron drew dots on a map to indicate where current public art projects are located. Winborne noted that most are concentrated downtown – there’s a need to get outside that area, he said. Bob Miller responded by saying that the downtown is the city’s economic center, so perhaps that’s appropriate.

Aaron Seagraves suggested that another selection category might be the size of a project, based on its budget or impact. The mural program, with a current budget of $10,000 per mural, is an example a smaller project that could be replicated throughout the city. Larger projects, like the Herbert Dreiseitl water sculpture in front of city hall – the largest public art project to date, costing more than $750,000 – would fall on the other end of the spectrum.

Public art commissioners Malverne Winborne and Tony Derezinski, who also serves on city council.

Winborne described these various selection categories as layers. Connie Brown summarized that in looking at selection this way, AAPAC could decide to base its decisions on land use (recreational, neighborhoods, etc.) and typology (gateways or wayfinding, for example). So they could decide to focus one year on putting public art into parks, as wayfinding projects, for example. The following year, they might focus on major corridors, and creating gateways to the city.

Gendron suggested that another layer – in the category of process – could be the outright purchase of public art. It’s something that AAPAC has previously discussed, she noted.

Gendron also advocated for density of population or activity as another layer. Derezinski agreed, saying that’s where you find the value of public art for economic development.

Winborne voiced a different perspective. He noted that if you talk to real estate agents, they’ll tell you that it’s easier to sell into communities that are perceived as cool. What if public art were put into areas that aren’t currently active, in order to draw people there? he said.

Gendron noted that if you divide the city into quadrants, then the North Main quadrant falls into an area that already has a lot of public art. Yet the North Main corridor itself, even though it’s a major entryway into the city, is essentially bereft of public art.

Reid agreed with the need to think about places of potential impact. She cited the High Line project, a public park built on an abandoned elevated rail line in Manhattan – its creator, Robert Hammond, was a recent speaker in the UM Penny Stamps series, she noted. It’s an example of taking an eyesore and creating a landmark, she said. They should think not only about where there’s density and impact now, but where there might be density and impact in the future, if spurred by public art.

Kotarski said he sees these layers as ways to help commissioners set priorities. Then, their message to the public can be simple – a direct message about where and how they plan to allocate public art dollars.

Derezinski advocated for being general about their priorities, and not attaching specific dollar amounts or even percentages to those priorities. He didn’t want to get “trapped” into criticism that they haven’t exactly followed their plan.

Next Steps

Aaron Seagraves suggested that further development of the master plan could be handled by a committee formed for that purpose. Marsha Chamberlin, AAPAC’s chair, indicated that a committee-of-the-whole would be preferable, in her view. “Today was very energizing,” she said.

John Kotarski agreed, saying that all commissioners should have a voice in developing the master plan.

Seagraves noted that though discussions could continue about the master plan, the annual plan needed to be done quickly. Given the April 1 deadline for turning the annual plan over to the city council, he said, AAPAC would need to finalize it at their next meeting, on March 28. He reminded commissioners that the annual plan is a list of general projects – it doesn’t need to include specific budgets.

The annual plan for the current fiscal year, for example, lists 10 projects for the period from July 1, 2011 through June 30, 2012: [.pdf of FY2012 annual plan]

1. Complete the Justice Center/City Hall exterior art installation.
2. Select and install one interior project at the Justice Center/City Hall.
3. Re-install the Kamrowski murals in the Justice Center/City Hall.
4. Continued development of the public art project at the Fuller Road Transit Station. Artist selection is anticipated to occur in FY 2012.
5. Complete the Mural Program pilot and evaluate program for continuation.
6. Evaluate opportunity for a public art project associated with a River Art Trail that includes the Gallup Canoe Livery, Argo Headrace. Coordinate with Park and Recreation.
7. Evaluate opportunity for a public art project associated with the Manchester Elevated Water Tank painting project scheduled to occur in FY 2013.
8. Evaluate opportunity for a public art project associated with the Stadium Bridges project.
9. Continue exploration of Sun Dragon repairs/replacement pending results of the feasibility study.
10. Evaluate opportunity for a pilot public art program at bus stops in collaboration with the AATA.

Commissioners listed off several projects that could be part of the next annual plan. Some are carry-overs from the current plan, including the East Stadium bridges project, the mural project, the river art trail, and the Sun Dragon repairs. Possible new projects include developing a master plan.

Next Steps: Possible New Projects

Cathy Gendron advocated the inclusion at least one project that was a priority for AAPAC, noting that many current projects were suggestions from city staff. Commissioners shouldn’t lose sight of the need to be proactive, rather than simply reactive, she said. When Bob Miller suggested that such a project could be guided by the recent survey results, Gendron cautioned that the survey wasn’t comprehensive. The results could be part of their decision-making, but shouldn’t be the only consideration, she said.

Cathy Gendron indicates where current public art projects are located throughout the city. Most are clustered in the downtown area. The commission discussed the need for geographic diversity.

Seagraves suggested that commissioners give that type of project some thought, and they could discuss it at the March 28 meeting.

Marsha Chamberlin reported that she’d been contacted by the Main Street Area Association and the Downtown Development Authority about possibly partnering on a Main Street project. The street is scheduled to be resurfaced in 2013, she said, and there’s interest in “street stamping” as part of that resurfacing project. That might include creating patterns at crosswalks, for example. She said it’s in the early stages, and is something for AAPAC to discuss.

John Kotarski noted that this type of project would be perfect for an artist-in-residence, but they need to clarify whether the Percent for Art funds can support something like that.

Gendron mentioned that she’d had a discussion with Bill Martin, a local developer whose company – First Martin Corp. – owns several prominent properties in town. He has pledged $10,000 for some kind of art project along the North Main corridor, she said. He likes the idea of putting banners along that stretch, Gendron said, adding that she thought he could be convinced to support other ideas instead.

By the end of the retreat, commissioners had also generated a “parking lot” list of issues – that can be “parked” for now, but need to be discussed in the future. Those issues are:

• Develop a marketing plan.
• Clarify the process of appointing task forces.
• Clarify roles and responsibilities for different groups (AAPAC, art administrator, etc.) and identify gaps.
• Work with the city council to see if amendments to the public art ordinance are needed.
• Review and possibly modify AAPAC’s committee structure.
• Discuss whether AAPAC should provide a framework for doing projects.
• Formalize a city staff liaison for the capital improvements plan, so that AAPAC can give early input into capital projects.
• Identify a structure or mechanisms for accomplishing AAPAC’s goals.

Commissioners present: Connie Rizzolo Brown, Marsha Chamberlin, Tony Derezinski, Cathy Gendron, John Kotarski, Bob Miller, Theresa Reid, Wiltrud Simbuerger, Malverne Winborne. Also Aaron Seagraves, the city’s public art administrator.

Next regular meeting: Wednesday, March 28, 2012 at 4:30 p.m. at city hall, 301 E. Huron St. [confirm date]

The Chronicle relies in part on regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of publicly-funded programs like the Percent for Art, which is overseen by the Ann Arbor public art commission. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle.

No agenda has yet been posted for the retreat, but it was discussed at AAPAC’s Jan. 25, 2012 meeting in the context of developing an annual art plan for fiscal 2013, which by ordinance must be delivered to the city council by April 1. In addition to shaping the annual plan, the aim of the retreat is to develop a master plan that would provide a broader conceptual framework to guide AAPAC’s decisions.

The retreat will be open to the public.

State Street runs north-south. Ellsworth, which runs east-west, is at the bottom of the frame. The large paved area northwest of the I-94/State Street interchange is Briarwood Mall. The proposed area of study extends farther north to Stimson. (Image links to Bing Map.)

The RFP, which will likely be issued next week, will solicit a consultant to develop a comprehensive plan for the 2.15-mile section between Stimson Street to the north – near a railroad crossing and the Produce Station – and Ellsworth to the south.

The corridor is the city’s main gateway from the south – the stretch includes an I-94 interchange, entrances to Briarwood Mall, and other retail, commercial and office complexes. Although there is one large apartment complex along that road, it is not a densely residential area.

Also at Tuesday’s working session, commissioners and staff discussed plans for an April 26 retreat that will focus on another major corridor: Washtenaw Avenue.

State Street Study RFP

A comprehensive study of the South State Street corridor had been scheduled for the current fiscal year – it was an item discussed at the planning commission’s annual retreat held in April 2010. But the city’s planning staff didn’t have the resources to do the work, according to Wendy Rampson, head of the planning unit.

So rather than having planning staff tackle the project, the city plans to hire a consultant for this project. About $150,000 is available for the project, though it’s unlikely that entire amount will be used. Those funds, which are in the budget for the current fiscal year, would require city council approval if they need to be carried over into FY2012, which begins July 1, 2011.

Jill Thacher, the city planner who’s leading this project, plans to issue the RFP next week, and on Tuesday evening asked planning commissioners for feedback on the draft she’d crafted. [.pdf file of draft State Street Corridor study RFP]

The RFP includes a proposed process for developing the corridor plan – a process that’s expected to take 12 months, beginning in July 2011:

1. Data Inventory and Analysis: A large amount of preliminary data on the corridor has been collected by staff, and includes information on related planning efforts, existing conditions for land use, transportation, natural features, and infrastructure, and issues and opportunities related to these conditions. A database of building parcel information, and a large number of GIS maps specific to existing conditions have also been collected. The consultant will utilize existing data and identify additional data requirements, and collect that data.

2. Market Analysis: A market analysis to identify market demand and redevelopment potential will be undertaken by the consultant. The analysis may include, but is not limited to, examination of existing conditions, identification of trends affecting demand for various land uses, identification of market and non-market based forces affecting the corridor, future market demand, and/or other relevant market information.

3. Identification of Goals, Issues, and Opportunities: Upon completion of market analyses and data collection, the selected consultant should analyze the data and work closely with the public, as well as business and institutional stakeholders, to complete a full SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats) analysis for the corridor. This analysis will be used to craft a preferred vision of future land use in the corridor.

4. Identification of Alternatives and Priorities: The consultant will work closely with staff and the Planning Commission, considering public input, to identify alternative scenarios that could be implemented over time as the corridor develops/redevelops.

5. Preparation of Plan Concepts and Selection of Preferred Scenario(s): Using the alternatives and priorities identified via the ongoing public process, corridor plan concepts will be developed that address the priorities and needs identified. The consultant will work with staff and the Planning Commission to recommend and select the preferred future land use scenario(s).

6. Identification of Action Strategies, Plans, Policies, and Best Practices: The consultant will work with staff and the Planning Commission to identify action steps and strategies needed for successful implementation of the preferred future land use scenario(s). This could include outlining methods to work with City leaders, local, regional, and state planning agencies, business groups, and members of the community at large to best implement the corridor plans, preserve the desired current aspects of the corridor, and to embrace future anticipated growth.

7. Development of Final Corridor Plan Report: Deliverables expected from the selected firm will include a final corridor plan report, in a format suitable for publication, including intermediate studies which were used in the planning process, such as future development scenarios, alternative scenarios, and market analyses.

Thacher told commissioners that the RFP will likely have a mid-May deadline for submitting proposals, with selection of a consultant taking place later that month. The planning commission’s master plan review committee – consisting of Wendy Woods, Diane Giannola, Evan Pratt and Erica Briggs – will help select the consultant. The goal is for work to begin in July 2011. Because the study is expected to cost more than $25,000, it would first require city council approval.

In a follow-up email to The Chronicle, Rampson said that the Ann Arbor city council had approved $70,000 to develop corridor design standards in FY2010 and $90,000 in FY2011 for consulting work on corridors. Of that, about $10,000 has been spent so far on inventory work, leaving $150,000 available. She said they do not intend to spend the entire $150,000 on this contract.

In addition, the council had allocated $85,000 for master plan revisions in FY2010 and $95,000 in FY2011. Following direction given by the planning commission, the city’s planning staff has not embarked on a full master plan revision effort, Rampson said, and they don’t intend to use the remainder of those funds.

[It was at its Oct. 18, 2010 meeting that the city council revised its FY 2011 budget by moving funds out of the general fund reserve and allocating them for corridor and master planning. The money had reverted to the general fund – after being previously allocated in the FY 2010 budget, but not spent. Because the unspent funds were not carried forward for FY 2011 when that year's budget was approved in May of 2010, the council needed to authorize the transfer back from the general fund reserve. That authorization came with dissent from Marcia Higgins, who represents Ward 4]

State Street Study RFP: Commissioner Feedback

Eric Mahler, the commission’s chair, began the working session discussion by looking at the eight deliverables listed in the RFP – items that the city will want the consultant to produce as part of the project. They include:

1. Data Inventory & Analysis: Interview and meeting summaries; analysis maps; narrative.

2. Market Analysis: Findings and summary report.

3. Issues/Opportunities/Goals: Overview of SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats) analysis; preliminary goals summary.

4. Choices/Trade-offs/Priorities: Summary of criteria and methodologies used; summary of choices

5. Recommended Plans/Policies/Practices: Draft plans and policies.

6. Action Strategies: Policy implementation and action strategies reports.

7. Draft/Final Corridor Plan: Draft and final plan text, illustrations, executive summary.

8. Two to four public meetings plus up to 25 targeted individual or small group interviews of key stakeholders.

Mahler said those are fine, but he noted that commissioners had also talked about incorporating sustainability goals into this project.

[By way of background, commissioners discussed sustainability and the State Street project at their April 2010 retreat, and more generally at a three-way joint working session of the environmental, energy and planning commissions that took place that same month. This year, the city was awarded a $95,000 grant from the Home Depot Foundation to: (1) create a sustainability framework; and (2) develop an action plan based on the sustainability framework. The funds are paying for a temporary employee, Jamie Kidwell, who's keeping a blog about the project on the Sustainable Cities Institute website. The goal is to develop a framework of goals, objectives and indicators, and a State of Our Sustainability Report.]

Mahler told other commissioners that this project is ideal for making the city’s sustainability goals concrete, though they need to settle on what specific goals they’d want to achieve. It might vary from one end of the corridor to the other, he said. There might not be a better opportunity to do this for a long time, Mahler added, saying that at the very least, the outcome would be something they could critique.

Rampson noted that Kidwell is just beginning her year-long project to build a sustainability framework, but she might be far enough along by the time the State Street consultant starts that they could work together.

Bonnie Bona added that it would help even if they simply developed questions to ask themselves relative to sustainability goals, and to identify where potential conflicts arise between the different goals of economic, environmental and social justice sustainability. The goals don’t always work together, she said.

Moving off the topic of sustainability, Evan Pratt suggested asking for the consultant to come up with alternative scenarios for the corridor. What would it look like in the future if the city did nothing? What might happen if there were different types of zoning changes?

Bona pointed to the city’s transportation plan – it would be nice to coordinate the State Street study with that plan, she said. Pratt added that an overview of traffic management issues should be part of the study.

Rampson later noted that the city will be able to provide the consultant with previously collected traffic data. City staff have also taken soil borings from the medians along State Street near Briarwood Mall, she said. The aesthetics of those medians has been an issue, and soil samples provide information about what can be done there – possibilities such as bioswales or native vegetation.

Kirk Westphal asked whether the consultant should explore funding possibilities, like a corridor improvement authority (CIA) that’s being considered for Washtenaw Avenue. Rampson felt it was more appropriate to ask the general question: What tools are available to implement the plan? She said they’ve already encountered the “realities” of possibly implementing tax increment financing (TIF) in the Washtenaw Avenue project, and she was reluctant to suggest that as a specific option for the consultant to explore.

Erica Briggs suggested that the study include information about where commuters who use the State Street corridor are coming from and going to. Westphal said the proposed Costco site on Ellsworth west of State – which will likely have a large surface parking lot – presents a huge park-and-ride opportunity.

Related to alternative transportation, Briggs noted that riding a bicycle along State Street is a problem.

Jean Carlberg described the diversity of development along the corridor, from “dilapidated” student housing on the north end, to the huge impact that Costco could have if it builds a store near State and Ellsworth, in Pittsfield Township. She also noted that the topography of the area isn’t mentioned in the RFP, but should be – stormwater issues are a concern.

Thacher reported that she had attended a meeting in Pittsfield Township where the draft of the township’s master plan was presented. For the area near South State and Ellsworth, Costco would serve as an anchor retail store, but the plan also calls for offices, live/work units that are characterized as artist lofts, and a centralized parking structure.

Rampson said that when Pittsfield officials complete the master planning process, they’ll send out copies to adjacent municipalities – including Ann Arbor – for review. That will likely occur soon, she said. [At its April 13 meeting, the Pittsfield Township board of trustees approved release of the master plan for a 63-day public review period, beginning April 18.]

Diane Giannola clarified that land south of I-94 and to the west of State Street is in Pittsfield Township, while land south of I-94 to the east of State is in Ann Arbor. Rampson added that the road itself is in Ann Arbor’s jurisdiction.

Thacher asked for feedback about the public participation component – her draft suggested two to four general public meetings, plus smaller focus groups with stakeholders, including local businesses, residents at the apartment complex, and the University of Michigan, which has offices in Wolverine Tower near State and Eisenhower.

Pratt said they’ll probably need to knock on doors – getting meaningful feedback in that area will be difficult, he said. Mahler suggested that two public meetings would be sufficient.

Briggs noted that city staff had successfully used an online survey to get public input for the recent update of the Park and Recreation Open Space (PROS) plan. The city could contact businesses along State Street, and have employers ask their workers to complete the survey, she said.

Westphal said he assumed that overlays would be a potential option for tweaking zoning in this corridor, as would a possible premium for building affordable housing. Rampson replied that it would depend on the commission’s goals. If they want more density, they could recommend changing the zoning to allow for that, she said. Westphal clarified that the corridor study would include a discussion of goals.

Briggs pointed out that the community hasn’t yet clearly articulated its overarching goals, whether those goals include density, affordable housing, transportation or other things. As the city’s resources become more limited, she said, it’s important to know the community’s goals and direct resources into those areas.

Maher suggested adding to the RFP an indication of what kind of modeling they’d like to see. Words on paper are dry, he said – the consultant should develop some sort of visual representation, either a computer model or physical 3-D rendering.

Thacher noted that the draft RFP asks for a market analysis. She asked for feedback – the analysis could be tailored, or quite broad. Mahler weighed in on the side of keeping it basic, saying he was reluctant to get into a protracted discussion about the underlying assumptions needed to do trending forecasts. “The simpler we keep it, the better.”

Pratt agreed, noting that if you ask for a 20-year forecast, you get what the Library Lot proposal entailed – a lot of caveats. Carlberg suggested looking at what a five-year build-out might mean, then identifying possible opportunities beyond that.

Rampson said these types of projects have rarely included market analyses in the past, but that in this case, because State Street is an employment corridor, it would be useful to see what’s on the horizon. They don’t need to do a fine-grain analysis, she said, but to get a sense of where the market is heading in this region, so that the corridor can identify a niche.

When Briggs said that one thing they can predict with certainty is rising gas prices, Mahler replied that there might be a viable alternative fuel that’s developed, to offset that factor.

Westphal observed that even if they aren’t hiring an economic development consultant, it would still be useful to ask for comparisons to corridors in other communities that were anchored by a large retailer and near an interstate. What other areas have made those assets into an opportunity? He also suggested looking at other corridors in Ann Arbor – making sure that their vision for State Street doesn’t detract from other areas, like Westgate, Arborland and the Plymouth/Green corridor.

They’d talked about the North Main corridor previously as well, Derezinski said. But there’s no question that in terms of priority, State Street was second in importance only after Washtenaw Avenue, he said. Pratt added that State Street stood out as an opportunity because changes there were likely to raise fewer objections from residents – there are few residential areas there now.

Derezinski noted that it was remarkable to see the businesses that have sprung up around the Birch Run outlet mall north of Flint, or around the Cabela’s store in Dundee, south of Ann Arbor. Briggs commented that she hoped that kind of development wasn’t in Ann Arbor’s future.

Some of that development could happen in Pittsfield Township, Rampson noted – and the city will need to work with the township about it, in a respectful way.

Planning Commission Annual Retreat

Part of Tuesday’s working session was spent talking about the group’s April 26 retreat, which will focus on the Washtenaw Avenue corridor.

Tony Derezinski, a planning commissioner who also serves on city council, along with commission chair Eric Mahler have been planning the retreat with Wendy Rampson and Jeff Kahan of the city’s planning staff. It’s set to begin at 3 p.m. at the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority headquarters, 2700 S. Industrial, where they’ll get an update on the county’s transit master plan from Michael Ford, AATA’s CEO.

At least two hours are devoted to a bus tour with stops along Washtenaw Avenue, between the split at East Stadium in Ann Arbor, and as far east as Hewitt Road in Ypsilanti. Stops are likely to include the crossing at Arbor Hills; the Arborland shopping mall; Glencoe Hills, an apartment complex owned by McKinley Inc.; and the Washtenaw intersections with Golfside and Hewitt.

The group will return to the AATA headquarters for dinner and a discussion of the Washtenaw Avenue corridor improvement authority (CIA), a project that involves the four jursidictions that Washtenaw Avenue crosses through: Ann Arbor, Pittsfield Township, Ypsilanti Township and Ypsilanti. [For background, see Chronicle coverage: "What Does Washtenaw Corridor Need?"]

In describing the agenda at Tuesday’s working session, Derezinski said they planned to invite other community members to participate. Albert Berriz, McKinley’s CEO, will be joining them for part of the retreat, he said, as will Anya Dale, a Washtenaw County planner and AATA board member. The broad theme of the retreat will be regional planning – looking at how communities can work together, Derezinski said, noting that it’s an effort the current administration in Lansing is stressing.

Erica Briggs said she hoped they’d have time to get off the bus and walk along some of the sections of Washtenaw, to experience it as a pedestrian. It’s difficult for pedestrians, especially along the US-23 interchange – and biking is even worse, she indicated.

Rampson said they purposefully picked rush hour to take the bus tour, so that they could see the corridor at its most congested.

Also during the retreat, the commission plans to discuss its work program priorities for the coming year. The retreat, which is open to the public, will run until 8:30 p.m. However, it’s not yet clear how the commission plans to make the bus tour portion of the retreat accessible to the public.

Planning commissioners present: Bonnie Bona, Erica Briggs, Jean Carlberg, Tony Derezinski, Diane Giannola, Eric Mahler, Evan Pratt, Kirk Westphal.

Absent: Wendy Woods.

At their Jan. 29 retreat, Washtenaw County commissioners, staff and other elected officials gathered to talk about the county's budget priorities. The retreat was led by commissioner Conan Smith, the board's chair, who's sitting in the center of the horseshoe table. Other participants are sitting around the room's perimeter, off camera. (Photos by the writer.)

While no decisions were made, the group took steps toward reaching consensus on budget priorities. They identified among their main concerns: public safety, service delivery and human services. At the end of the five-hour session, several commissioners cited the main benefit of the day as building closer relationships with each other, which they hope will help the board and other elected officials – including the sheriff, prosecuting attorney and treasurer – work together more effectively as they make difficult decisions about programs and services to cut.

The retreat was led by board chair Conan Smith, who structured the day with time for sharing individual priorities and concerns, combined with small group work to discuss specific outcomes the commissioners hope will result from those priorities. For example, if public safety is a priority, a possible outcome might be the goal of responding to a 911 call in 20 minutes or less. The county could then budget its resources to achieve that outcome.

Though these kinds of examples emerged during the retreat, the work of setting priorities will continue. Smith said the goal is to develop a formal board resolution outlining their priorities, to guide the budget-setting process. The board will hold its next retreat on Wednesday, Feb. 9 from 6-9 p.m., immediately following its 5:30 p.m. administrative briefing. Both meetings are public, and will be held at the county administration building, 220 N. Main St. in Ann Arbor.

The county’s fiscal year mirrors the calendar year, and budgets are developed on two-year cycles. The current budget runs through the end of 2011. While there will likely be some additional cuts this year, most discussions are focused on the 2012-2013 budget, which commissioners will be asked to approve by the end of this year. [For additional background, see Chronicle coverage: "'State of County' Tackles $20M Deficit"]

This report summarizes Saturday’s discussions of personal priorities, aspirations for Washtenaw County, budget priorities, and reflections on the process. For breakout sessions, we covered the group focused on public safety. By day’s end there were threads of optimism – Yousef Rabhi, one of four new commissioners, said he felt inspired that they were starting to work not just as a team, but “almost as a family.” But notes of caution were sounded as well, as veteran commissioner Wes Prater told the group that “the most difficult part is yet to come.”

Setting the Stage: Personal Priorities

After a discussion about what participants hoped to get out of the retreat, Conan Smith asked each person to tell the group why they got involved in county government. Here’s a summary of their remarks. [Unless otherwise indicated, the speakers are county commissioners.]

Kristin Judge (D-District 7): Issues of public safety, and her activism against Walmart – because of the safety issues the store in Pittsfield Township posed – caused her to run for office. Judge said she also got involved in county government to help create the kind of community where she wanted to raise her family, and to show her children that it’s important to be part of the process.

Catherine McClary (county treasurer): McClary said she was motivated to provide services to county residents in a non-bureaucratic way – so that people can access the county’s services without necessarily knowing the right number to call.

Alicia Ping (R-District 3): She noted that her sister Jessica Ping had been involved in county government, and that they talked about county issues a lot. [Jessica Ping, who previously held the District 3 seat, did not run for re-election in 2010. Prior to her election to the county board, Alicia Ping served on the Saline city council.] Services provided by the county are less “in your face,” Ping said, so it’s important to communicate to residents and let them know what they’re getting for their tax dollars.

Conan Smith (D-District 10): For residents of Ann Arbor, county government is largely invisible, Smith said. Six years ago, when he first came into office, he said he couldn’t have articulated all of its services – but he did know that the county did things that were visionary, and that was exciting. Smith cited the blueprint to end homelessness as an example. It was a critical issue then, and now it’s beyond critical – “but we have vision to deal with that,” he said. Similarly, the county has taken the lead in literacy and environmental issues. He didn’t see other governments approaching problem-solving in the same way, and he wanted to be part of that. It was inspirational, Smith said, and “I hope we keep doing that kind of stuff.”

Barbara Bergman (D-District 8): When Bergman worked as a social worker in the 1970s, she said she discovered that if you knew your county commissioner and the federal bureaucrat for your region, “you could get things for kids.” The county had the staff to work through the bureaucracy and get funds for child protection and youth services. That’s an important service, she said.

Yousef Rabhi (D-District 11): Rabhi recalled that when he was knocking on doors during his campaign for county commissioner last year, no one knew what the county did. “That’s a concern for me,” he said, because people need to know how their tax dollars are spent. His hope is to engage the residents in what the county does. The county cares about people – his top priority is providing people-oriented services, especially for people who are struggling. There’s a connection between services that the county provides, and economic growth, he noted. The environment and transportation issues are important, too, and the county plays a role in those as well. Within the county, there are 28 municipalities, Rabhi said. People should be willing to work together for better efficiencies in these areas – that’s the direction they should be going.

Leah Gunn (D-District 9): Gunn said she was first introduced to county government in the “ancient year” of 1972. Over the years she’s seen it become more visionary and proactive. She said she was proud that she worked on the homelessness task force, the blueprint to end homelessness, and the Delonis Center – the county’s homeless shelter. Less well-known is the fact that in 1988, voters in the county approved a millage to build SafeHouse, a shelter for victims of domestic violence. Voters are generous, she said – they created the county’s park system, and its natural area preservation program. But the biggest crisis the county has now is in providing services, Gunn said: “The safety net is full of holes, and we need to do something about that.”

Dan Smith (R-District 2): His concern is the responsible management of “precious dollars” that taxpayers give the county. They need to find a way not to kick the can down the road. It’s their job to provide basic services, the core infrastructure of a county treasurer, clerk, water resources commissioner, and public safety services like the sheriff, prosecutor, and courts. That needs to be the No. 1 priority, Smith said.

Wes Prater (D-District 4): Prater’s primary interest is public safety. To have a decent quality of life, it’s mandatory to have good public safety, he said. The county needs to do a better job of performance management and tracking results – though he added that the sheriff’s office is doing a much better job at that than he can ever remember. The courts are very important, too – most commissioners support the courts, he said, and expect them to do a good job. That’s true for the prosecuting attorney too, he said.

Prater talked about a series of public planning forums that had been organized a few years ago by Tony VanDerworp, director of the county’s energy and economic development department. Feedback from the public was that transportation overall was the No. 1 priority – and the biggest element of that was roads. It’s still a major issue, Prater said, and will become more of an issue as revenues from the state continue to fall. Without state funding, it falls to local government to keep roads from deteriorating further. He pointed out that several municipalities have millages for road repair, which gives them more control. That’s going to become a major issue in this county, he said. He told the group they should keep in mind that unlike Washtenaw County, a number of counties have road commissions that are elected [as opposed to appointed].

Bill Reynolds (deputy county administrator): Reynolds said he still believes in the nobility of public service. County government is about people, he said. As a child of the system, Reynolds said, he fully recognizes the value of having services to take care of people. Every person they lose could be the person who changes the future.

Bob Tetens (director, county parks & recreation): Tetens said he first joined the county in 1978, working in the planning department. He worked on an inventory of county services, and helped develop units of measurement for county services. Over six months of doing the inventory, he said he was amazed on a daily basis with all the things that the county was involved in. It’s rewarding to see the county’s impact on the community. He left county government for several years, but said he returned because he wanted to have an impact. His main concern now is for stability – how do they implement a managed transition?

County commissioners Rolland Sizemore Jr. and Kristin Judge at the Jan. 29 retreat.

Rolland Sizemore Jr. (D-District 5): Sizemore said he doesn’t remember a time when his family wasn’t in politics. Some people in the room have a more formal education, he noted, but he’s got street smarts from the streets of Ypsilanti. He said he likes to consider himself a fixer, and he likes to deal with “little guys and little programs.” He helped set up a place for kids to go after school, and vandalism dropped in that apartment complex. Some people just need a little bit of hope, he said, and that’s what he tries to give them.

Rob Turner (R-District 1): Turner’s main focus is on the local level – he served on the Chelsea school board for nine years, and said he loves serving the public. Former county commissioner Mark Ouimet approached him about running, Turner said, by saying it was an opportunity to serve more people. [Ouimet was elected to the state House in November, representing District 52.] On the school board, they learned how to streamline services with ever-shrinking resources, Turner said. The county government isn’t here to take your money, he said. It’s here to provide services, to help people get back on their feet and be productive citizens, so that they in turn can help others.

Dan Dwyer (Washtenaw County Trial Court administrator and mayor of Plymouth): Dwyer talked about his career – he had worked in probation for the state Dept. of Corrections in Wayne County. That system was geared toward volume, he said – getting people through the system as quickly as possible. In the 10 years he worked there, he said he didn’t get to know the judges or prosecutors. Then he came to Washtenaw County to run probation and got to know judges and others in the system. They were less focused on volume, and more on the quality of service. Next he ran the correctional facility in Ypsilanti, and he was at that job when he got a call from Judge Timothy Connors, for the job of trial court administrator. Dwyer said he’d finally found a place where justice is done the right way.

Brian Mackie (county prosecuting attorney): Mackie started by quipping that his personal priority is “about restoring balance in the universe.” He grew up poor in a rich community, and he hated the government. Every once in a while they’d see a sheriff’s deputy or the cops, usually coming to take a neighbor away. So Mackie said he became what he thought would be a lifelong defense attorney. He worked at the free legal aid office in Wayne County, and described two clients in particular who pushed him toward being a prosecutor.

One was a woman who killed one of her children, and abused her other child. He won her case. Another client murdered someone in a hotel, but pled the charge down to attempted manslaughter – he won that case, too. Mackie said he felt that a lot of people dropped the ball. Balance, he decided, would be restored by getting into prosecution. Mackie reminded the group that there was another motivation they all had: “There’s ego involved – we think we can do a better job.” If they’re going to have a decent community, it needs to be a safe community. He noted that most victims are poor, or just trying to make a living – like the small business owner that gets stuck with bad checks. They have a huge obligation to do the best job they possibly can in serving the county’s 346,00 people, he said.

Jerry Clayton (sheriff): Clayton said he thinks government can work better. He worked in the sheriff’s office for more than 20 years, but said that one of the best things that happened was when he left and saw how the office operated from the outside, and the impact it has on people. He said that part of his reluctance to run for sheriff stemmed from his family. He was born in Alabama, and his grandfather marched with Martin Luther King Jr. during the civil rights movement. When Clayton came to work at the sheriff’s office, his relationship with his grandfather changed. Law enforcement had been the enemy – his grandfather had seen police dogs and fire hoses used against the civil rights protesters.

Clayton said he grew up poor. Similar to Mackie’s experience, from Clayton’s perspective, law enforcement wasn’t engaged with the community, it was punitive. Clayton said his response is that sometimes you have to make change from the inside. It’s easy to sit on the outside and complain – it’s much harder to get involved. He said he doesn’t think public service is noble. “I just think it’s what you’re supposed to do.” If you don’t like what’s going on, be a part of changing it, he said, “or shut up.”

Aspirations for Washtenaw County

Conan Smith asked participants to talk about their aspirations for the county, broadly as well as for the current budget cycle.

Yousef Rabhi: Rabhi said he’d been on a tour of the county jail the previous day, and someone there had pointed out that it’s good to see what the budget numbers actually mean. Every number and percentage they see in the budget connects with something on the ground – “that’s something we can’t forget,” he said. It’s not just numbers, but people. It’s also important to market the county to other units of government – what services can the county provide to them? Rabhi said he as looking at millage rates here compared to other counties, and Washtenaw County’s isn’t that high. He said he’s not proposing anything, but in tough times, millages are something to look at, too. To a certain extent he agrees with people who say the county needs to focus on certain programs and services, but at the same time, he hopes they can continue to provide a breadth of services.

Leah Gunn: Long-term fiscal responsibility is important, and maintaining services. It’s clear they can’t maintain all services, she said, so they need to decide which services are a priority.

Dan Smith: It’s important to be decisive. While they shouldn’t make swift decisions, if there’s something that can be done in March, don’t wait until December to do it, he said. Uncertainty is often worse for people – don’t belabor things. It’s also important to make structural changes in the most humane way possible. That means telling people as early as possible what will happen later in the year, so that they can plan. They shouldn’t wait until the end of the year to make decisions, he said.

Wes Prater: This will be a very difficult process, Prater cautioned. One thing he hopes for is that it be as transparent as possible. He noted that they’ve listened to him talk about complying with the Uniform Budget and Accounting Act. The county always gets a good mark on the audit, but in his opinion, it hasn’t been what it needs to be, in terms of clarity and transparency. They need to get reports on the revenue and fund balances at the beginning and ending of each year. He said he’s still waiting for a printed copy of the 2011 budget.

Bill Reynolds (deputy county administrator): The administration and staff are there to fulfill the objectives of commissioners, he said. But they also have an obligation not to jerk around department heads and employees.

Bob Tetens (director, county parks & recreation): The investments they make as an organization should meet the community’s needs and expectations, though they can’t do everything, he noted. Internally, he hopes for a managed transition as they implement some structural changes. They’ve got to break the cycle of budget deficits.

Rolland Sizemore Jr.: They need to take a look at the county’s buildings and grounds, Sizemore said. Also, programs for kid are important. He said he’ll be jumping up and down screaming about funding for those. His hope is that they can try to combine programs and departments to save positions, rather than cutting.

From left: commissioners Conan Smith, Leah Gunn, Rob Turner and Barbara Bergman during a breakout session at the county board's Jan. 29 retreat.

Rob Turner: As they go through this process, they need to look at costs per service, Turner said. What county programs provide the most services for the least cost? He doesn’t want to cut 20% from all departments – they need to see what’s being done well, with best results and delivered in the most cost-effective way. In the areas where that’s not the case, those programs need to look for ways to restructure. This is a long-term situation – Turner said he recently heard the economist David Sowerby say the economy likely won’t see a turnaround until 2015. But if they prepare now, when money starts coming in again, the county will be able to provide services more effectively. “I don’t think that’s a bad thing,” he said.

Dan Dwyer (Washtenaw Trial Court administrator): Dwyer said they shouldn’t kick the can down the road – government has a habit of doing that, he said. Also, when everything’s a priority, he noted, nothing’s a priority. He said he’s not aware of any service in this county that’s not being done well, but something’s got to be a priority. Also, he hopes there’s an appreciation of both branches of government – the county and the courts. If they can go into budget discussions with mutual respect and appreciation of those roles, he said, they’ll be better for it.

Kristin Judge: Engaging the public and employees is important in these budget talks – Judge said she thinks they missed out on that last time. Forums in the previous budget cycle were more for informing people about decisions, not for getting ideas, she said. And for the past two years, they’ve been dancing around the task of identifying priorities. She hoped this is the start to actually tackling it, noting that they got away with small fixes last time.

Judge agreed that taking a little slice from everyone’s budget isn’t effective. She hoped they wouldn’t use the words “everything’s on table” – if you’re an employee, that just means that everyone’s job is on the line. She also hoped that the process is open and transparent. The board should have this kind of meeting once a quarter, she said. It’s valuable and inspiring to know they have same goals. She also asked that people not dig in their heels and protect their own priority programs. That’s what stymied the board during the last budget cycle – she said she had been doing it, too. If they start by keeping an open mind, they’ll get better results, she said.

Catherine McClary (county treasurer): McClary described how she grew up in Ypsilanti and Augusta Township. Both of her parents were public school teachers – they weren’t paid well, she noted, because teachers weren’t unionized at the time. Her dad moonlighted as a bus driver because those jobs were unionized and he could earn more. Her earliest memories were going door to door to solicit support for a school millage. Turning to the county’s issues, McClary said the new finance director [Kelly Belknap], new county administrator [Verna McDaniel] and deputy administrator [Bill Reynolds] have been great to work with. She gave an example of working through an issue related to bank fees, which have escalated for the county. There are choices to make, and they sat down and talked about their options – because of that, their efforts are better coordinated, she said.

McClary then cautioned commissioners about putting the budget cuts on the backs of the county’s unionized and non-unionized employees. Perhaps they should ask the administrator to look at ways to address poor performance, she said. As the county downsizes and selects programs or services to retain, and as there’s staff attrition, the staff that remains has to be as high-performing as possible. Finally, McClary noted that they hadn’t talked about two elephants in room: (1) state cuts and the reinvention of state government, and what that means; and (2) the denigration of a career in public service. When you adjust for education and experience, public employees do not make more than the private sector, she said. Aside from the question of whether public service is noble or just it’s their job help people, by and large they do it well in Washtenaw County, she said.

Alicia Ping: Saying she agreed with Prater’s comments, Ping added that she does plan to dig her heels in a little bit, when it comes to representing her district. However, she assured her colleagues of her commitment to the board: When they have achieved a consensus on their vision and direction, she’ll stand behind it.

Barbara Bergman: Bergman disagreed with Judge – everything is on the table. They need to do a cost/benefit analysis on county programs, she said. They need to look at the value of what they’re doing, she said, “and sometimes, there isn’t enough benefit.” Bergman said she’s not being glib when she says they can do less with less. But they can’t stress their staff to the point that they’ll implode. Most of the county’s staff is very high performing, she said. But there is a straw that breaks the camel’s back. The county wants their good people to stay.

Jerry Clayton (sheriff): In looking at their budget, they need to think about the state’s budget – the governor has intimated some things that will have impact on the county budget, he noted, like state revenue-sharing. The governor has talked about reducing the Dept. of Corrections – that means pushing people out of the state criminal justice system, Clayton said. But some people can’t be rehabilitated, he noted, and the county will be left having to handle the fallout, adding that there also have been cuts in state police.

Clayton also raised the issue of collaboration, saying that it’s a wonderful thing, and that the county has led the way in many cases. But they shouldn’t be doing it just for the sake of collaboration. They need to ask if they are gaining something by collaborating, if they are delivering services better. He said he’d also encourage commissioners to look outside of the county, if they’re hoping to collaborate – but again, they should be measuring outcomes. This isn’t the last budget conversation they’ll be having, he concluded, so it should set the stage for future budget cycles.

Some of the participants at the Jan. 29 board of commissioners retreat, from left: County treasurer Catherine McClary; county prosecuting attorney Brian Mackie; Tony VanDerworp, director of the county's energy and economic development department; Bob Tetens, director of Washtenaw County Parks and Recreation; and Dan Dwyer, Washtenaw County Trial Court administrator.

Brian Mackie (county prosecuting attorney): Mackie began by saying there isn’t a day that goes by when he’s not glad that Jerry Clayton is sheriff. Clayton’s election ended an “eight-year nightmare,” Mackie said, referring to the tenure of former sheriff Dan Minzey. He also thanked McClary for raising the issue of how public service has been denigrated. He said he works with people who left the private sector to pursue a career in public service, and now they hear people say that they’re the problem. “We need to think a little bigger than that,” he said. Mackie said the false dichotomies of the last budget discussions – setting up human services against law enforcement – left a bad taste. Law enforcement is and always will be one of the first lines of defense for people in crisis, whether it’s your child going wild or your spouse not taking their medication and getting violent. People in crisis don’t call him or a mental health professional, Mackie said. They call 911. Law enforcement helps the mentally ill – it’s not a separate system.

Mackie also urged commissioners to think about the impact of their decisions. He recalled that during the last budget cycle, one commissioner said that due to budget cuts, some people might have to wait a couple of hours to get birth certificate – as though that weren’t a significant thing. That offended him, Mackie said, because for some people, coming to the county clerk’s office is a long trip. They need a birth certificate for some other purpose, he said, and they might be making minimum wage. If it takes them a half day to get what they need, you’re taking money out of their mouths.

Budget Priorities: Community Impacts

Participants were given colored index cards – Conan Smith asked them to think about the 10-20 year impact that current budget reforms might make. What would that look like? They’re setting the stage for future budgets, he said. Think about what you might brag about in 20 years, looking back on the impact of decisions that are made now. Think about what a headline might be in a couple of decades, as the result of decisions made in 2011. How did the community change?

From left: county commissioners Barbara Bergman, Yousef Rabhi, Dan Smith and Wes Prater write down their long-term goals for the county.

These thoughts will help them articulate the outcomes they need from this current budget cycle, Smith said. They need to be able to tell the administration that they want to invest in certain areas, in order to get specific outcomes that will help them achieve long-term community impacts.

After working individually to write down their thoughts, retreat attendees broke up into small groups to try to categorize the ideas on those index cards. They then reconvened as a large group to share the results.

The outcome was a set of six categories: public safety, service delivery, human services/children’s services, fiscal management/responsibility, energy and economic development. Here’s a summary of the long-term community impacts that were grouped into each category. These impacts represent the ideas of individual participants, not a general consensus.

Public Safety:

• making the county a safe place to live and work
• providing rapid access to mental health services
• providing response to emergency calls within 15-20 minutes or less
• housing stability
• a community where kids don’t use drugs, and parents don’t condone substance abuse
• consolidation into only two law enforcement agencies in the county – the sheriff’s office, and the Ann Arbor police department

Service Delivery:

• a government that serves people efficiently and collaboratively
• a fully integrated partnership of human services and police services
• a county that’s a leader in preserving open space, recreation, public transportation, human services, and general quality of life
• reduced overlap in government services
• a government that’s respected and trusted by all residents
• when the public accesses county services, they are directed to the appropriate staff member, regardless of who they originally call or email
• a county government that collaborates and consolidates services with cities, townships and nonprofits to enhance services
• county investments have created communities that are more economically prosperous, more environmentally sustainable and more socially just
• the county’s “systemic” investments focus resources on outcomes across department/agencies

Human Services/Children’s Services:

• a safety net for those most in need
• all residents are aware of services that will/could impact their lives during good/bad times
• homelessness ends
• no food scarcity
• child abuse is all but gone
• early education is promoted and supported so parents have the tools they need to give their children the best possible start to their education
• every child in the county has enough to eat, a safe place to live, health care, educational opportunity, and a world-class quality of life

Fiscal Management/Responsibility:

• a top bond rating given to the county
• a small county budget surplus projected
• an increase in structural revenue collection (no “grant chasing”)
• never see a headline saying the county loses money in investment or embezzlement
• realistic benefit packages
• health care benefits not only save money, but also provide wellness and prevention services, resulting in a healthier workforce

Energy:

• reduce energy consumption in county buildings by 40%
• county government’s energy use is fossil fuel-free

Economic Development:

• high employment opportunities
• a place that people and businesses want to come to, not leave
• local economy grows, thanks to small business owners
• tourism becomes a major draw

Breakout Groups: Public Safety

The group then used “dotmocracy” to determine which of the six categories of general services they felt were priorities – that is, each person used colored paper dots to vote for the categories they prioritized. The top four vote-getters – public safety, service delivery, human services/children’s services, and fiscal management – were then chosen as topics for small group breakout discussions.

Each index card indicates a "community impact" goal that at least one person at the county board retreat felt was important. These cards all relate to public safety – the category that received the highest priority after a "dot voting" exercise.

Staff members facilitated these breakout sessions, and four small groups of elected officials rotated through each of the topics for about 15 minutes each. Public safety received the most votes, so The Chronicle observed the breakout sessions for that topic. It was facilitated by finance director Kelly Belknap, who has a personal connection to the issue: Her husband is a sergeant in the Pittsfield Township Dept. of Public Safety.

The question posed for each category was this: What are the direct outcomes you hope to see from the investment of the 2012-2013 budget, that help achieve the county’s desired community impacts?

The public safety community impacts that were mentioned by commissioners and other elected officials included (not in ranked order): (1) making the county a safe place to live and work; (2) providing rapid access to mental health services; (3) providing response to emergency calls within 15-20 minutes or less; (4) housing stability; (5) a community where kids don’t use drugs, and parents don’t condone substance abuse; and (6) consolidation to result in only two law enforcement agencies in the county – the sheriff’s office, and the Ann Arbor police department.

[It's important to note that there was no effort to reach a consensus on these community impacts – they were simply identified by individuals as the impacts they'd like to achieve.]

Public Safety Group 1: Mental Health, Consolidated Services

The first small group included commissioners Barbara Bergman and Kristin Judge, and sheriff Jerry Clayton. Bergman began by saying they needed to provide better services for the mentally ill and substance abusers, especially in the 48197 and 48198 areas – the zip codes for Ypsilanti. She suggested that they should collect better data on the need for such services throughout the county.

Clayton asked how she would propose aligning that with the budget. If it’s a goal of the county to target certain areas for the delivery of services, would the board tie funding to that priority?

Belknap noted that there are two county agencies – the Washtenaw Community Health Organization (WCHO) and Community Support & Treatment Services (CSTS) – that have primary responsibility for mental illness and substance abuse services. In total, they receive about $1.7 million in general fund dollars, with additional revenue from state and federal sources.

Judge raised another public safety issue that was mentioned as a community impact – having fewer police agencies in the county. At this, Clayton responded that the idea would scare the heck out of some people. Already there are those who won’t come to the table to talk about consolidating services, because they think that’s a precursor to getting rid of their own police departments.

Judge noted that they weren’t at the retreat to “hold hands” – there were difficult decisions to make. Clayton observed that the county can’t force Pittsfield or Saline or any other municipality to get rid of its police department – that goal is too presumptuous, he said. However, the county can be a leader in service consolidation, he added – services like dispatch, SWAT, canine units, or computer forensics.

Over time, as budgets shrink, consolidation might happen, he said. But the fear of it, at this point, is already driving some people to their corners. And if the sheriff’s office is out of the conversation, he noted, then they’ll never get anywhere.

Clayton then proposed another outcome: Better integration of human services and public safety. When Bergman observed that cops aren’t social workers, Clayton replied that most of what they do is social work. He noted that they’re now talking with the University of Michigan School of Social Work, to possibly bring in interns to work at the sheriff’s office. The hope is to keep the mentally ill out of the criminal justice system, he said, and get them the services they need.

Bergman said the county needs a drug court on the east side, as part of the 14-A District Court. Clayton asked whether that would be a priority of the board. Having one sure would help, Bergman replied.

Public Safety Group 2: Sheriff’s Road Patrol

The next small group consisted of commissioners Conan Smith, Dan Smith and Rob Turner. Conan Smith started the discussion by saying he wanted to develop a definition and rationale for the county’s support of sheriff deputy road patrols. [Each deputy is known as a police services unit (PSU) – the term refers to a sheriff's road patrol deputy who is under contract with a municipality, with the amount including indirect costs as well as salary and benefits.]

Dan Smith suggested collecting data – things like the number of 911 calls received in each municipality, how many miles of roads there are to cover, what the response times are – then developing metrics to evaluate what services are needed, where services are needed, and who should pay. The outcome is a framework for determining the price of a PSU. What they should try to achieve is an understanding of what drives the cost/price, he said.

Conan Smith noted that there was a process to determine the cost – it had been important to reach agreement on that, he said. [See Chronicle coverage: "Washtenaw Police Services: What's It Cost?"] Now, they need to do the same on price, he added.

Turner raised the issue of the level of service, and how to provide an acceptable level at the most economic price. He said his business is in Dexter Township, and if there’s a break-in, he can get there in 30 minutes, but would wait much longer for a response from law enforcement. Dan Smith said that’s why they need data – if response times are 90 minutes, for example, and they think that’s unacceptable, they could set a goal for better response times, and determine what resources they need to reach that goal. There needs to be a countywide discussion on these issues, he said.

That discussion needs to be about the values around public safety, Conan Smith said, and the metrics behind them. Setting goals will help that conversation, he added. If they can say to a contracting municipality that it will take X number of PSUs to reach the goal of a 45-minute or less response time, then they can shape the conversation around how the county and the municipality can share the cost of reaching that goal.

Public Safety Group 3: Consolidation, Public Education

The third small group included commissioners Leah Gunn and Alicia Ping, and county prosecuting attorney Brian Mackie. Looking at notes from the previous two groups, Gunn said that the discussion needs to include not just issues related to the sheriff, but also the courts, prosecutors and public defenders.

Mackie stated that they want the reality and perception of a safe county, but they might have hit a wall on addressing the public safety issue – police chiefs can only do so much, he observed. Mayors and township supervisors need to start talking about it, too. Gunn asked if Mackie sees turf wars among the police chiefs. Not among them, he replied, but among their bosses. Gunn said the Metro Alliance – a group that brings together leaders from the county’s major municipalities – would be a good place to have those discussions.

We’ve done the easy stuff, Mackie said – the hard decisions, yet to be made, will mean people’s jobs are at stake. Communities want control over how their police services are delivered. So how can you get them to the table to talk about consolidation? he asked. The message has to be that your citizens can get better service for less money.

Ping raised the issue of the cost of a police services unit (PSU). Most citizens don’t know what services they get when their municipality contracts with the county for PSUs, she said. Gunn pointed out that the county’s general fund subsidizes the cost of each PSU by about $25,000, as well as funding 12 “general fund” deputies that are deployed throughout the county, as needed.

Ping wondered how the county can incentivize collaboration related to public safety. Saline Township, for example, doesn’t contract with the county – nor does it have its own police department, as the city of Saline does. But when something happens in Saline Township, those law enforcement entities respond. She noted specifically a mobile home park on the edge of the township that’s a problem.

Overriding everything is public education, Mackie said. He cited the recently released community report by the sheriff’s office as an effort in that regard. [.pdf file of sheriff's office community report] Gunn called the report a “splendid propaganda piece,” adding that she was a Clayton supporter. “He’s very smart, that Jerry.”

Mackie talked about the general climate of public safety. He noted that Michigan has a lower number of police officers per capita than any other Great Lakes state. What goes into the mind of someone who’s thinking of investing here? he asked. They bounce down the roads that are in disrepair – that’s a negative, he said. They look at the schools, they read what’s happening in the news, and if they’re from out-of-state, they probably associate this area with Detroit. Other cities – like Saginaw, Pontiac and Flint – suffer from crime, which in turn has caused property values to plummet. Mackie noted that the FBI has ranked Saginaw the most violent city in America for its size.

In that light, Ping observed that public safety is an important issue for the health of the local economy, and for economic development.

Public Safety Group 4: Homelessness, Levels of Service

The fourth group included commissioners Wes Prater and Yousef Rabhi, and county treasurer Catherine McClary.

In reviewing notes from other groups, McClary agreed that more services were needed for the mentally ill – she suggested adding services for the homeless, too – but disagreed that those services were only needed in the Ypsilanti area. It’s important for the whole county, she said, and pervades everything, from public safety to economic development.

Yousef Rabhi hangs a sheet of paper on the wall that lists county goals for service delivery in Washtenaw County.

When they talk about the cost of police services units (PSUs), Rabhi felt they needed to draw out how much it would cost per deputy for a municipality to fund its own police department. The county’s cost for a PSU should be lower than that, he said.

Prater noted that the state constitution mandates that if a citizen calls with a public safety problem, the sheriff must respond. However, it doesn’t mandate how quick that response must be, he added – it could be minutes, or two hours, or eight hours. Regarding cost, Prater said a study commissioned by the county indicated the county should pay 34% of the cost of a road patrol deputy, with the contracting municipalities paying the rest. Over time, the percentage that the county pays has shifted downward, he noted.

[By way of background, Prater was referencing what's known as the Northwestern study, conducted by the Northwestern University Traffic Institute (.pdf of Northwestern study) (.pdf of Northwestern staffing analysis chart). For more details on the road patrol issue, see Chronicle coverage: "Washtenaw Police Services: What's It Cost?"]

Prater said the sheriff has done a good job at trying to get at the true cost of a deputy patrol. The price charged is about $150,000, while the cost has been identified as roughly $176,000. That means the county is paying about $26,000 per deputy – “which is nowhere near 34%,” Prater said.

McClary again raised the topic of homelessness, saying she felt it should be addressed as a public safety issue. Rabhi noted that homelessness is usually considered in the human services category, which received fewer “dot votes” among the group than did public safety. Perhaps it’s a matter of framing the issue, he suggested. For example, is the Delonis Center – the county’s homeless shelter, on West Huron Street – really a public safety asset? If funding to address homelessness is facing cuts because it’s considered part of human services, maybe they need to look at it as a public safety priority instead.

Breakout Groups: To Be Continued

At the end of the breakout session, the group reconvened as a whole. They were running short on time, so rather than debriefing as a group, Conan Smith asked that each facilitator write up their notes, which will be distributed to the entire group in the coming week. He noted that they’d been missing key voices in the discussion. For example, he said, environmental issues hadn’t been at the forefront, but one of its main advocates – Janis Bobrin, the county’s water resources commissioner – hadn’t been able to attend. They needed to capture the discussions from the retreat and disseminate that information, he said, but also get feedback from a diversity of voices.

Next Steps: Continuing the Retreat

When the scheduled end time of the retreat arrived, the group hadn’t addressed the final agenda item related to structural reform: (1) How should the county assess what their business should be; and (2) how does the board inform the county administration about where they need to make deeper, more structural reforms.

The group discussed the possibility of continuing the retreat – this final topic, as well as further priority-setting discussions – at an upcoming working session. [Working sessions are held twice a month, on Thursday evenings following the board's regular Wednesday meetings. Like its regular meetings, board working sessions are televised on Community Television Network (CTN).]

Rob Turner expressed preference for the more informal setting they’d used at the retreat, rather than sitting around the boardroom table. It allowed them to become closer and get to know each other as individuals, he said – and that makes them more effective working together. In response to a suggestion that they hold the discussion after the working session, but move to a different part of the room, Yousef Rabhi pointed out that it would be odd to start the meeting on-camera, then continue it off-camera.

Wes Prater suggested holding these discussions after their bi-weekly administrative briefings, which are held on the Wednesday a week ahead of the regular board meeting, to preview that meeting’s agenda. The briefings are public but are held in a conference room – they are much more informal, rarely attended by members of the general public and are not televised.

Prater noted that the meetings would need to be noticed to the public. Joanna Bidlack of the county administrative staff said she’d check with Curtis Hedger, the county’s corporation counsel, but she said they’d likely need to notice it as a special meeting.

[They later set the next retreat for Wednesday, Feb. 9 from 6-9 p.m., immediately following the board's 5 p.m. administrative briefing. Both meetings are public, and will be held at the county administration building, 220 N. Main St. in Ann Arbor.]

Wrapping Up

Before ending the retreat, Conan Smith asked everyone to make a brief statement about the work they’d done during the day.

Several people commented that they had begun the day very skeptical – even cynical – with low expectations regarding the outcome. For some, this was based in part of their negative experiences at the last retreat, held in April of 2009. [See Chronicle coverage: "County Commissioners Review Priorities"] Even those who hadn’t attended that retreat, like Alicia Ping, had heard negative reports on it. But Ping described Saturday’s work as “phenomenal,” saying she got a lot out of the day. Kristin Judge said it was the best day she’s had as a commissioner so far – she took office in January 2009.

Yousef Rabhi said the day had inspired him, making him believe they could work not just as a team, but “almost as a family.” In the toughest of economic times, there are challenges, but also opportunities, he said. “It’s a time for hope, and a time for rebuilding on a foundation that’s stronger than it was before.”

Nearly everyone weighed in that they felt the day was productive. Dan Smith said one reason why it was successful was that it was so well-organized. “We weren’t just standing around the pickle barrel chewing fat.” He was among several people who thanked Conan Smith for his leadership at the retreat – the board chair received a round of applause.

Conan Smith told the group that he was more touched than he could have imagined during the morning session – when people had discussed their personal priorities and aspirations – and he thanked everyone for sharing their passion for county service.

Several commissioners also noted that this is just the beginning. “I just want to caution you that the most difficult part is yet to come,” Wes Prater said. Rob Turner observed that while it looks like they have a lot of common ground, the challenge will be how to implement their priorities. There was a lot of value in the retreat’s conversation, he said, but the long-term value will be in implementation.

Sheriff Jerry Clayton agreed that there was a lot of heavy lifting to do. He said he walked in to the retreat feeling very cynical – he’d told his staff that he was not just nervous, but actually afraid of what the discussions could mean for the county’s employees. Now, he was less afraid – and he credited Conan Smith for keeping the group on task.

Brian Mackie, the county’s prosecuting attorney, said he was glad to hear the board’s support for staff, but that the next steps – putting dollar figures to their decisions – will be the painful ones, “so it’s important that we have our lovefest today.” He noted that in 2009, commissioners were looking for easy answers, and that’s not an option now.

Staff members who attended the retreat also weighed in. Bill Reynolds, the deputy county administrator, told commissioners that employees “need you to succeed.” Commissioners need to deliver their vision for the county. “We’ll get you there,” he said, but “until we have that, we’re just spinning our wheels and going in circles.” The last thing they want to do, he said, is to deliver a plan that isn’t what the board wants.

Reynolds also noted that the 2009 budget cycle took a toll on employees. It was a real negative impact, he said, adding that his goal is to make sure that doesn’t happen again.

Joanna Bidlack of the county administrative staff observed that there’d been a lot of dissension on the board recently, and that she’d thought it would be hard to actually get commissioners to talk to each other during the retreat. When there’s dissension on the board, she said, it’s extremely painful for staff – it keeps them awake at night. So it was exciting to see the outcome of the retreat, she added, saying it would benefit the organization.

Kelly Belknap, the county’s finance director, told commissioners that employees can have hope when they see the board working together. She urged them to remember this day when times get tough – “because it will get tough.”

Deputy county clerk Jason Brooks said he’ll be able to give a positive report back to his colleagues and county clerk Larry Kestenbaum – unlike the 2009 retreat, when commissioners just “talked a lot.” He also said he appreciated the lunch. [Conan Smith paid for catering from Zingerman's Deli – he said it was not expensed to the county.]

Smith closed the retreat with an exhortation, verging on a cheer: “Keep the positivity – live the mission!”

Present: Commissioners Barbara Levin Bergman, Leah Gunn, Kristin Judge, Alicia Ping, Wes Prater, Yousef Rabhi, Rolland Sizemore Jr., Conan Smith, Dan Smith, Rob Turner. Other elected officials who attended the meeting: Sheriff Jerry Clayton, county prosecuting attorney Brian Mackie and treasurer Catherine McClary. Several county staff members were also present, including deputy administrator Bill Reynolds; Bob Tetens, director of Washtenaw County Parks and Recreation; finance director Kelly Belknap; and Dan Dwyer, trial court administrator.

Absent: Ronnie Peterson

Next retreat: The discussions that began during the Jan. 29 retreat will continue on Wednesday, Feb. 9 at a special meeting following the board’s administrative briefing, which is held to preview the Feb. 16 board meeting. The briefing begins at 5:30 p.m. at the county administration building, 220 N. Main St. The special meeting focused on the budget is scheduled from 6-9 p.m. [confirm date]

As first reported by The Chronicle, the board of trustees two-day retreat at the Westin Book Cadillac hotel in Detroit cost a total of $9,910.70, including dinner at the hotel’s 24grille restaurant and $5,887.43 in hotel charges. WCC’s paper The Washtenaw Voice later reported that the dinner bill included $573 worth of wine.

Whitworth said the cost of the meal was higher than anticipated due to the fact that he missed a detail on the menu that 24grille faxed him before the retreat. Specifically, he didn’t read the fine print stating that the restaurant would charge $100 per person for the meal, not including tax and gratuity. Whitworth said he expected to pay about $2,000 and was shocked when he saw the bill.

Whitworth said he wanted to assert his culpability in response to a May 26 AnnArbor.com article, which was based on a press release issued by Lonnie Scott, a Democratic candidate for the 54th District state representative seat. Scott criticized fellow candidate and WCC board of trustees treasurer David Rutledge for attending the retreat dinner, calling the $4,023.87 bill excessive and a waste of taxpayer money.

The board has also received criticism for spending an extravagant amount on a dinner just before its members voted to increase WCC’s tuition by nearly 10% – or $7 per credit hour.

During Wednesday’s briefing, Whitworth stressed that Rutledge and the other board members are in no way responsible for the cost of the meal and were not aware of the expense at the time of the retreat. He called blaming the trustees “wholly and totally inappropriate.”

“I thought it was very, very unfortunate that Lonnie Scott would somehow think David Rutledge was responsible,” Whitworth said. “I want to take full responsibility.”

Whitworth also emphasized that the dinner was business-oriented. He said it’s important to isolate the trustees away from their other obligations once a year for the retreat so that they can concentrate on important matters pertaining to the college. He also defended the tuition increase, saying that it was necessary to maintain the quality of the college’s vocational and technical programs. He noted that the college will lose about $3.5 million in local tax revenue this year and therefore needs to raise tuition rates.

Whitworth said that in order to remedy his mistake, he has personally reimbursed the college for the dinner with a $4,024 check. He said he wasn’t pressured by the board of trustees in any way, and the reimbursement was entirely his idea.

“This is my error,” Whitworth said. “If you’re going to be responsible, there ought to be a consequence.”

The Chronicle initially reported the dinner and other expenses in the context of covering the March 5-6 retreat, where the trustees and staff discussed the possibility of opening a satellite campus in Ann Arbor – possibly in partnership with the Ann Arbor District Library. Other topics included financial updates, a discussion about tuition increases, a briefing on student demographic data, curriculum changes, and building projects.

Following the retreat, The Chronicle submitted a Freedom of Information Act request for expenses related to the two-day event. In addition to the $4,023 dinner tab, the college paid $5,887.43 in hotel charges that included individual guest charges, catering and Internet charges. [.pdf file of receipts from Westin Book Cadillac, in response to a FOIA request]

About the writer: Helen Nevius is a freelance writer for The Ann Arbor Chronicle.