Ann Arbor Transportation Authority board member Charles Griffith flips through his copy of the draft transportation master plan. (Photos by the writer.)

The plan currently comprises two separate volumes – one outlining a vision and the other outlining how that vision would be implemented.

[.pdf of draft "Volume 1: A Transit Vision for Washtenaw County"] [.pdf of draft "Volume 2: Transit Master Plan Implementation Strategy"]

A third volume, on funding options, is forthcoming. It will not include a detailed discussion of governance. But the tax revenue portion of future funding will depend in part on the future governance structure of whatever agency is responsible for public transit in Ann Arbor and the rest of the county. Options for future governance include a countywide authority, which could eventually supplant the AATA as the agency responsible for public transit. On Thursday, the board received an update from CEO Michael Ford on conversations he’s been having, and will continue to have, with elected officials about the governance of a countywide authority.

In general concept, a countywide transit authority could first be formed and exist simultaneously with the AATA, but with no source of tax revenue. At some point, probably not this year, a millage proposal to support the countywide transit authority would be put in front of voters across the county. And if that millage were to succeed, the AATA’s assets would be folded into the new countywide transit authority.

In other work at Thursday’s meeting, the board held a public hearing on its planned federal program of projects.

The board also entertained the usual range of reports from its committees. Highlights included the fact that ridership has increased in the last month slightly compared to last year, and cost per service hour is better than what has been budgeted. The board also received an update on efforts to improve its real-time information to riders by working with its current software vendor, Trapeze.

Transportation Master Plan (TMP)

Before the board was a resolution calling for a draft of the transportation master plan (TMP) to be disseminated to the public. The AATA staff are directed “to schedule and publicize at least five public meetings during the review period at locations throughout the County, and to undertake additional discussions with citizens, officials and organizations as those opportunities arise and to take comments on the draft Plan documents.” Those meeting are all scheduled for 6-8 p.m as follows:

• May 9 at the Chelsea Library, 221 S. Main St., Chelsea.
• May 10 at SPARK East, 215 W. Michigan Ave., Ypsilanti.
• May 11 at the Ann Arbor District Library, 343 S. Fifth Ave., Ann Arbor.
• May 16 at the Dexter Library, 3255 Alpine, Dexter.
• May 27 17 at Saline City Hall, 100 N. Harris St., Saline.

After a 60-day review period, the document will come back before the AATA board, at its June meeting, for final approval. [Previous Chronicle coverage: "'Smart Growth' to Fuel Countywide Transit"]

The plan currently comprises two separate volumes – one outlining a vision and the other outlining how that vision would be implemented. [.pdf of draft "Volume 1: A Transit Vision for Washtenaw County"] [.pdf of draft "Volume 2: Transit Master Plan Implementation Strategy"]

A third forthcoming volume will address funding options.

TMP: Presentation to Board

Michael Benham, a special assistant for strategic planning at AATA who has directed the AATA’s transit master planning project, gave the board an overview of the plan’s two draft volumes.

TMP Presentation: Background Material

Benham noted that the development of the plan had been heavily weighted for public outreach and input, but also had a sound technical basis. He estimated that the AATA had spoken to several thousand people in the course of its meetings with the public.

Benham told the board that the report included a section outlining the solid performance of the AATA generally and its good financial health. A highlight from the report is the increase in annual ridership over the last 30 years, from 2.4 million in 1980 to 6 million in 2009. Findings from a recent audit included in the plan:

• AATA had experienced annual cost increases of 1.2% compared to peer average of 4.3%;
• Riders per-service-hour climbed from 22.8 in 2003 to 31.2 in 2008, surpassing the peer group average; and
• Cost-per-ride decreased from $4.23 in 2003 to $3.18 in 2008, for an average annual decrease of 5.5%.

[The cost-per-ride figure does not reflect fares, but rather the cost of providing the service. The current full-price regular bus fare is $1.50 per ride. The difference is subsidized through other revenue sources, like Ann Arbor's transit tax and purchase-of-service agreements with other municipalities.]

Benham told the board that the plan includes a discussion of AATA’s place in the transit picture in the rest of the county – it’s not the only transit provider, he pointed out. The University of Michigan, the  WAVE, People’s Express, Amtrak and others also operate transit services. Benham also described how existing service in the county is limited by time of day or geographic scope.

TMP Presentation: Concepts, Goals, Growth

Benham presented a slide showing key transit issues that had been identified: (1) insufficient access to essential services by transit-dependent people; (2) increasing road congestion; (3) negative impact on the economy due to lack of transit connectivity throughout county; (4) increasing mobility needs of an aging population; (5) limited appeal of transit currently to “choice” riders – people who don’t have to ride the bus out of necessity, but who choose to do so; and (6) a need to attract younger residents.

Countywide goals that transit can help achieve had also been developed in the course of the public engagement process, Benham said. Those goals include: (1) supporting economic growth in Washtenaw County; (2) promoting livability in Washtenaw County; (3) improving access for all; (4) facilitating a healthier community; (5) protecting the environment; (6) improving safety and security for all; and (7) promoting efficient land use and development patterns.

Projected development in Washtenaw County with transit-oriented development (left) compared to a projection that is more sprawl-like (right). (Image links to one-page .pdf file extracted from the master plan document.)

Benham went on to describe in more detail how transit can shape future growth in a region.

Of the three scenarios that the AATA and its consultant had developed, Benham said, it was the one labeled “Smart Growth” that had resulted as the preferred choice, based on public input and analytical study. Benham said that “smart growth” could benefit everyone who lives in the county. That scenario would result in the greatest return on the investment of transit operating dollars, he said.

The concept of the plan, said Benham, is to provide safe, affordable and attractive transit for everybody. The plan’s concept is as follows:

• Provide attractive, safe and affordable transit options for all residents of Washtenaw County to promote liveability;
• Help Washtenaw County retain and attract young people who desire an urban lifestyle without the expense of car ownership;
• Provide independence for the growing population of seniors and enable many to “age in place”;
• Stimulate job creation and economic growth across the county;
• Promote healthier lifestyles using transit, walking and biking;
• Provide much-needed service to areas that have little or no service at present;
• Focus development in areas that can best accommodate growth;
• Preserve green space;
• Reduce reliance on foreign oil.

TMP Presentation: Strategies

From the plan, Benham highlighted the strategy of “essential countywide services.” Those include (1) door-to-door services, and (2) Flex-Ride. The idea is to bring door-to-door service up to a common standard for seniors and disabled people with no gaps, and to provide hours of service beyond what’s available now, Benham said. The Flex-Ride service would provide dial-a-ride access to the regular bus network for everyone. Between the door-to-door service and the Flex-Ride, everyone in the county should have access to transit, he concluded.

Another strategy highlighted by Benham in his presentation was “countywide connections.” Specific initiatives that are a part of this strategy include expanded hours of service for the WAVE interurban bus service connecting Chelsea, Dexter and Ann Arbor, as well as expanded express services similar to those that already exist between Chelsea and Ann Arbor, and Canton and Ann Arbor. Local circulators would be added to Dexter, Chelsea and Saline as a part of this strategy.

A third strategy highlighted by Benham are urban bus network expansions. In the TMP report, these expansions of service are described as assuming a continued commitment to the hub-and-spoke concept of route design. Improvements to the existing bus network would include increased frequency of service, and possibly expansion of hours into the evenings and weekend, where there is already bus service in the Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti area.

That increase in frequency would be achieved in part through redesign of some routes. For example, some of the routes that are configured as loops on the west side of Ann Arbor could be re-configured as out-and-back type linear service routes. Also as part of the urban bus network expansion, a circulator service similar to The LINK – a downtown circulator bus service that was eliminated in 2009 – would be restored to Ann Arbor. Benham said that to improve the quality of existing service, the intent is to look for opportunities to give buses priority at intersections.

A fourth strategy touched on by Benham is high-capacity transit along key corridors like the Plymouth-State corridor and Washtenaw Avenue – either bus rapid transit (BRT) or light rail.

Regional connections would be a strategy embodied by east-west commuter rail from Detroit to Ann Arbor, and north-south from Howell to Ann Arbor, as well as an airport shuttle connection.

Vanpooling is also part of the regional connection strategy – a vehicle is typically stored by a participant in the program at the home of that person, who would then drive the van, with passengers arranged through the program. The University of Michigan has close to 90 such vanpools.

Although Benham did not dwell on vanpools during his presentation, later in the meeting, Mary Stasiak, AATA’s manager of community relations, gave an update on the status of AATA’s efforts to enter the vanpool market, which will begin this year in October. On Oct. 1, 2010 the state of Michigan announced that it’s discontinuing its funding for MichiVan, but is providing an additional buffer period through September 2011.

The state funding had depended on federal Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ) funds, which will no longer be available. At its retreat last August, the AATA board had discussed providing vanpool services. At Thursday’s meeting, Stasiak indicated that staff were now recommending that they initially adopt a “turnkey” operation for vanpool services, but the intent would be to look at “component contracting” for the future.

TMP Presentation: Benefits, Costs

Benham stressed that a basic theme of the TMP is integrating transit into the community. As far as expected impacts, the goal is to double ridership in the course of 30 years and to help shape the use of land over that period. Benham said that particularly for the commuter rail component of the plan, property values are expected to increase.

(Image links to 3-page .pdf extracted from the TMP draft report on costs.) The largest teal-colored block is for countywide door-to-door service operating costs. The bottom two block are the basic bus service (dark blue) currently operated by the AATA and the basic door-to-door service (red) that currently exists. The green block is enhanced urban bus service. The top two blocks (lilac and orange) designate regional connections and high-capacity transit.

Other community benefits included in the report: new, local jobs created; benefits to existing road users (from people switching to transit and biking); accessibility and livability benefits to existing and new riders, people with disabilities, rural communities, students and seniors; accident-saving benefits from reduction in car miles traveled; reduced-emissions benefit from reduction in car miles traveled; and health benefits from increased walking and biking (in part associated with transit use).

When all those benefits are added up, it comes to $275 million over the course of 30 years, Benham said. Board member Roger Kerson wanted to know if increased property values were calculated into the benefits – no, they weren’t, because they weren’t necessarily as certain as the other benefits, Benham explained.

The presentation on costs was divided into operating versus capital costs – the difference between running the system and building it. The report distinguishes the costs to be borne by Washtenaw County versus other counties, because for some of the components – like commuter rail – some of the costs would not be expected to be paid for inside Washtenaw.

By 2040, the annual operating cost after implementing all plan components would be $85.8 million per year. Just under $70 million of that would be attributed to existing service, plus enhancements to regular bus service and expansion of door-to-door service countywide.

The report now annualizes the cost of the capital investments that would be required to implement parts of the plan, which board members told Benham they were happy to see. The high-capacity system for the Washtenaw Avenue corridor, for example, has a total price tag of $168 million, but that drops to $5.60 million when expressed as a per-year figure.

Benham told the board that based on the cost-benefit analysis, every operating dollar spent would yield $3 in benefits.

The implementation strategy is included in the second volume of the plan, which breaks down the 30-year period into three parts: years 1-5; years 6-15; and years 16-30. In the first five-year period, the focus of implementation would be on enhanced regular bus service and expanded countywide door-to-door service. Commuter rail and high-capacity transit would come later.

Benham sought to allay concerns that if the plan is “done,” then there wouldn’t be a chance to influence it or to change it in the future. He stressed that the plan is always subject to revision and update in light of new conditions – that’s part of the AATA’s general approach to continual monitoring of all their services.

TMP: Board Deliberations

David Nacht led off deliberations by saying he’d been a keen observer of the entire process and a pesky critic – and he couldn’t be happier with the result. He said the AATA staff, with the community together with the consultant, had achieved more than a vision or a concept, but was a model for how the Ann Arbor economic area can maximize its value – how it can take care of the people who live here, take care of the environment and move people around to take advantage of our potential.

Nacht urged all of those who were naturally skeptical about government to really seriously read the proposal. If you look at it carefully, he said, you can see how your region benefits, and here are the specific things that will be done over the next five, 15 years and 30 years. You’ll see a plan for the outlay of cash in exchange for specific benefits, and a sensible and careful approach to the future.

He invited some “serious conservative types” to subject it to a financial analysis. But he said that he was very proud of the plan.

Roger Kerson said the plan puts the AATA at a transition point. The AATA can’t do it alone – the  plan has to be a partnership, he said. The plan really does lay a foundation to work as partners. As highlights of the plan, he pulled out the 5.4 million cars taken off the road and the reduction of 700 tons of greenhouse gas emissions – those things have an impact on everyone, even if they don’t ride the bus, he said. Kerson reiterated a point made by Larry Krieg during public commentary at the AATA’s March meeting about not lagging behind the community.

Anya Dale echoed the previous sentiments of her board colleagues. She noted that the county doesn’t really have a planning unit any more. The TMP is a good example of people coming together to create the plan. She said it showed how the AATA could be a regional planning leader.

Charles Griffith said he was very happy with the plan. He called the quantification of the benefits very conservative – an approach he agreed with. He said it was important that the capital costs were presented as annualized. He noted that the bulk of the operational spending would be mostly on basic transit service – not the “fancy” types of transit that some people might never use.

Sue McCormick said that everything other board members had mentioned is absolutely true. She noted that it’s important not to stop here – the resolution calls on staff to continue to reinforce the kind of community interaction that had led them to this point. She called the process as open and publicly engaged as they’d seen on this kind of issue. She complimented the staff’s work, as did all of the board members.

Outcome: The board voted unanimously to release the transit master plan draft proposal.

Transit Governance

The third volume of the transit master plan (TMP), on funding options, is forthcoming. It will not include a detailed discussion of governance. But the tax revenue portion of future funding will depend in part on the future governance structure of whatever agency is responsible for public transit in Ann Arbor and the rest of the county. Options for future governance include a countywide authority, which could eventually supplant the AATA as the agency responsible for public transit.

As part of the report from the planning and development committee, which Anya Dale delivered in Rich Robben’s absence, she mentioned that committee members had discussed the status of meetings with community members about future governance of a countywide authority. The committee recommended that additional community members be looped in, to make sure that all bases are covered, Dale reported.

During question time, board chair Jesse Bernstein inquired about the status of governance discussions. He noted that concerns had been raised by members of the county board of commissioners at a recent meeting. [Chronicle coverage: "Concerns Aired Over Transit Governance"]

CEO Michael Ford told Bernstein that there were 28 people he wanted to meet with, including all of the county commissioners one-on-one. He characterized the meetings as positive, and said that he’d met with some commissioners who were still interested in seeing the AATA move forward, but who did not want to be as involved as the AATA had originally thought. He mentioned that some of the townships were interested in forming Act 7 agreements and that all of the conversations had been positive. No one he’d met with had voiced strong objections, he said.

Bernstein confirmed with Ford that they had many options for governance and that the county board of commissioners did not necessarily have to be involved.

Technology: Collaboration, Real Time Information

Part of  the presentation on the transit master plan (TMP) included integrating transit into the community by improving service through integration of information systems, from ticketing to travel planning. In the course of the board meeting, Michael Ford gave a CEO report that highlighted some work on information technology improvements

Technology: Collaborative Technology Agreement

CEO Michael Ford asked Jan Hallberg to the podium to give an update on a collaborative agreement between the AATA, the city of Ann Arbor and Washtenaw County on the use of technology. Hallberg is AATA’s manager of information technology. She reported that for a few years, the city, county and AATA have been doing IT infrastructure projects together. She pointed to the combination of the city and county data centers as an example of that. The city and the AATA currently share the same VoIP (voice over Internet protocol) system. The agreement will formalize the arrangement, Hallberg said. The idea of the interagency agreement for collaborative technology and services is to save resources and taxpayer money, she said.

The agreement will come in front of the Ann Arbor city council on May 2 for its approval. Two days later, on May 4, it will go before the Washtenaw County board of commissioners.

Technology: Real-Time Bus Information

As part of his CEO report, Michael Ford said he’d met the previous day at a roundtable with other CEOs on the topic of getting real-time data to transit riders. He said the AATA is focused on getting the data through its current software package – Trapeze. He reported that the AATA was making some headway on the issue and expected to make additional progress at a meeting the following day.

During question time, board chair Jesse Bernstein asked for clarification – can Trapeze provide real-time information about where the buses are and how long it will take to get to the next stop? Ford explained that Trapeze can provide that information, but the AATA is trying to take it to the next level so that the information is available to riders as well. Ford reported that Trapeze is used for a lot of AATA operations and they’re trying to make sure that any agreement on real-time information services is one that works for the AATA.

Bernstein observed that AATA would not be going at the problem alone – other transit agencies also use Trapeze. Ford confirmed that is the case. Hallberg clarified that Trapeze works quite well for AATA’s own in-house purposes. What the AATA would like to do now is provide that real-time information to customers, either on smart phones or on the web. It’s something new for Trapeze, Hallberg said. So the AATA is now going back and forth with Trapeze to determine how the contract is going to work. She said AATA would be the first client to try out the system.

David Nacht noted that the board has received specific requests from members of the public for this kind of service. People want to be able to look at their phones and figure out if they’re running late for the bus or if they have a few extra minutes. Nacht said it was a tribute to the kind of people who live in Ann Arbor that they were pushing an industry-leading vendor in a direction to be more customer-service oriented.

Sue McCormick noted that any time you become a beta-testing site for software, there’s an exposure to new development costs as well as new maintenance costs. AATA may be bringing Trapeze into the development of a software module that becomes very valuable for Trapeze. She said it’s very smart to negotiate a contract as the AATA pays Trapeze to develop the software – to figure out what the “prenup” is. It could become a profit-center, she said.

Roger Kerson asked what the other options are besides Trapeze. Ford said they do have a backup plan – not all the eggs are in one basket. Hallberg said that over the years the AATA had made a large investment in Trapeze, and could not change to a different system overnight. Some other products are more open-source, she said. Trapeze is not used to sharing the structure of their software.

Kerson followed up by saying that it really should be a requirement that the software allow for third parties to develop their own applications, especially given the nature of the Ann Arbor community.

During her public commentary turn at the end of the meeting, Carolyn Grawi of the Center for Independent Living cautioned that introduction of real-time data for customers should be accessible to those with disabilities. She said that sometimes technology is developed in order to make it available quickly. Accessibility shouldn’t came second, she said, it should come at the same time the technology is first introduced.

Federal Program of Projects: Public Hearing

Chris White, AATA’s manager of service development, explained to board members that they had approved the AATA’s capital and categorical grant program for the next five years at the Jan. 20, 2011 meeting the board. [.pdf of capital and categorical grant program summary] To carry out that program, the AATA will be applying to a variety of federal programs for grant support.

For example, the Clean Fuels program will be used to pay the incremental cost for hybrid electric drive on 10 replacement buses. State of Good Repair funds are being used to pay a portion of the costs for the reconstruction of the Blake Transit Center, White said. Funds from the Urbanized Area Formula Program (Section 5307) will be used for a variety of purposes: remainder cost for replacement buses; associated capital maintenance costs for those buses (spare engines and transmissions, for example); computer hardware and software; non-revenue support vehicles; a park-and-ride lot; and preventive maintenance.

A new item this year, he reported, was Art in Public Places in connection with the Blake Transit Center reconstruction. He also reported that AATA would be applying for Job Access Reverse Commute funds and New Freedom funds, the latter of which would help the AATA go beyond the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act. A final source of federal funds mentioned by White was Congestion Mitigation Air Quality funds, which would include a portion of the cost of the getDowntown program.

White noted that the AATA had not received any written comments in response to its solicitation of feedback.

At the public hearing only one person spoke. Thomas Partridge told the board that applications for federal funds should be oriented more towards those who need assistance – seniors and disabled people. The AATA’s goals should include programs specifically designed to make important sites more accessible, including medical and educational facilities. He also called for making the AATA more user-friendly overall. He said that a schedule should be established for expanding AATA one step at a time.

Minutes Approval

Approval of minutes are typically a rote step in a meeting for any public body. However, at the board’s Thursday meeting, chair Jesse Bernstein reported that an amendment to the March 17 board minutes had been suggested, which he then read aloud. It turns out that the proposed amendment read aloud by Bernstein had actually been the original language. As properly amended, the minutes read as followed [Deletions in strike-through, additions in italics].

Larry Krieg appeared before the Board.  Mr. Krieg extended congratulations on the work completed on the Transit Master Plan.  Mr. Krieg echoed a sentiment expressed during a recent Planning and Development Committee meeting during which a Board member cautioned that AATA should not get ahead of fall behind county residents.  Mr. Krieg noted that the passage of the transit millage in Ypsilanti illustrates the willingness of citizens to support transit with their taxes. approval of the transit millage in Ypsilanti and the many benefits of public transportation.

Sue McCormick wanted to know whether the suggestion for the revision had come from Krieg himself – Bernstein confirmed it had.

Outcome: The board voted unanimously to approve the minutes as amended, with the change to the language to be made administratively, based on the language the board members intended to be approving.

Board: Communications, Committees, CEO, Commentary

At its January meeting, the board entertained various communications, including its usual reports from the performance monitoring and external relations committee, the planning and development committee, as well as from the CEO, Michael Ford. The board also heard commentary from the public. Here are some highlights not included elsewhere in the report.

Comm/Comm: Performance Data

The AATA has budgeted $107.50 per service hour this year. Costs this year (vertical bars) have been under budget – the heavy horizontal line – and better than last year – the dots connected by trend lines. (Image links to higher resolution .pdf file.)

In reporting out from the performance monitoring and external relations committee, Charles Griffith noted that the cost per service hour was under budget for the year. [.pdf of performance data for through March 2011]

[During his time on the board, former board member and treasurer Ted Annis had pointed to the cost per service hour as a metric for which the AATA should strive for major improvement.

The AATA has budgeted for $107.50 this year. Back in September 2009, Annis had argued for a series of cost-saving measures that would have put the AATA's cost per service hour at $96.]

Griffith also noted that ridership was up 3% compared to last year. He said it was interesting to speculate about whether the increase was due to the increase in gas prices or rather to other factors. The focus recommended by the committee was to try to figure out how to increase marketing to target sustaining those additional riders. [The trend so far this year has mostly been even with last year's pattern, after several months previously when numbers had been down, reflecting a nationwide transit trend.]

Vertical bars are ridership numbers for this year. The trend line shows last year's numbers.

Comm/Comm: Washtenaw Transfer Center

Charles Griffith, reporting out from the performance monitoring and external relations committee, alerted the board to a slight delay in the construction of a bus pullout in conjunction with a bus transfer center on Washtenaw Avenue. The delay is due to the need for DTE to relocate some streetlights. The board had approved a memorandum of understanding with the city of Ann Arbor on the construction of the bus pullout at a special meeting on April 1, 2011.

Comm/Comm: User Friendliness, Mean-Spiritedness

During public commentary at the start of the meeting, Thomas Partridge called on the AATA to make itself more user friendly. He suggested that bus drivers should undergo training. He also said that the AATA should contract with a company for paratransit services that is of unquestioned integrity. He questioned the award of that contract to SelectRide. He suggested that the master plan should include money for board members to ride the bus system anonymously and to prepare monthly reports on what they observed.

At the conclusion of the meeting, when there’s another slot for public commentary, Partridge criticized the mean-spiritedness of retail companies that refuse to allow AATA buses to pull onto their property to drop off and pick up passengers.

Present: Charles Griffith, David Nacht, Jesse Bernstein, Sue McCormick, Roger Kerson, Anya Dale

Absent: Rich Robben

Next regular meeting: Wednesday, May 19, 2011  at 6:30 p.m. at the fourth-floor conference room of the Ann Arbor District Library, 343 S. Fifth Ave., Ann Arbor [confirm date]

AATA board chair Jesse Bernstein's green button was not selected in honor of St. Patrick's Day. It reads: I <3 Transit, www.publictransportation.org (Photo by the writer.)

The final phase of that process included 20 public meetings in February, where three different scenarios were presented: Lifeline Plus, Accessible County, and Smart Growth. The three scenarios were nested subsets, starting with Lifeline Plus as a base, which would simply have expanded on existing services and focused on expanding services for seniors and disabled people throughout the county. Accessible County would have added fixed-route bus service to connect all the county’s urban centers. Smart Growth included all the features of Accessible County, as well as high-capacity transit along local corridors, plus regional commuter rail.

At Thursday’s meeting, board chair Jesse Bernstein characterized the TMP as a reflection of where the community wants to be 30 years from now. The entity that would be implementing the TMP, he stressed, would likely be organized under a different legal framework than the current AATA, which is an Act 55 transit authority, with a tax levied just in the city of Ann Arbor. The AATA board has actively discussed for at least the last two and a half years the idea of transforming the transit authority to a countywide funding source, possibly using Act 196.

The meeting included three other pieces of business: (1) approval of a contract for the AATA’s paratransit services; (2) acceptance of an auditor’s report on the AATA’s books from the previous fiscal year; and (3) approval of a contract for media services.

Also discussed, but not acted on, was a memorandum of understanding with the city of Ann Arbor for construction of a bus pull‐out on eastbound Washtenaw Avenue east of Pittsfield Boulevard. The bus pull-out is part of a larger project – a transfer center on the south side of Washtenaw Avenue at Pittsfield Boulevard, opposite Arborland mall – which will include a “super shelter.” The project is being funded with federal stimulus money granted to the AATA. The board was in favor of the agreement with the city, but was reluctant to vote on the memorandum absent a copy of the text of the memorandum itself.

Smart Growth TMP

Before the board was a resolution to adopt a “Smart Growth” scenario as the basis of continued development of its transit master plan (TMP).

Smart Growth: Background

The Smart Growth scenario is the most ambitious of three scenarios the AATA developed for presentation at a series of 20 public meetings in February. Those February meetings were the final phase of a planning  and public engagement process that began in the summer of 2010. [Previous Chronicle coverage includes: "AATA on County Transit: READY, Aim, Fire" and "AATA Moves Engagement Process into Gear"]

Transit options in the three scenarios – which the AATA has labeled Lifeline Plus, Accessible County, and Smart Growth – are nested subsets, starting with Lifeline Plus as a base, which expands on existing services and focuses on services for seniors and disabled people. Accessible County extends services by adding fixed-route bus service to connect all the county’s urban centers. The Smart Growth scenario includes north-south and east-west commuter rail regional components, as well as high-capacity local transit options for corridors like Washtenaw Avenue and State-Plymouth. [Previous Chronicle coverage includes: "AATA: Transit Study, Planning Updates" and "Transit Planning Forum: Saline Edition"]

Development of the TMP for countywide service has been identified by the AATA board as a necessary step to take before reorganizing the AATA as a transit authority for the entire county. In December 2009, the board held a special meeting to seek advice on various options for reorganization under Act 196 or Act 55. [Chronicle coverage of that special meeting: "AATA Gets Advice on Countywide Transit." The special meeting had been preceded by extensive discussions at board meetings: "AATA Plans for Countywide System" and "AATA Adopts Vision: Countywide Service"]

As a part of his regular CEO report to the board, which he made at Thursday’s meeting, Michael Ford said he’d met on Feb. 28 with a group of elected officials about board governance in connection with the new TMP and a possibly new legal framework. Board members Roger Kerson and Jesse Bernstein had attended the meeting, Ford reported. Rich Robben, in his report to the board from the planning and development committee, also mentioned the Act 196 discussions with elected official officials, and said those conversations would continue.

Ford said the funding analysis would continue for the TMP and that it would be addressed at the April board meeting. To explore additional funding options, Ford reported that he’d traveled to Washington D.C. and met with office staff for senators Carl Levin and Debbie Stabenow. He also reported that he’d met with U.S. representatives John Dingell, Candice Miller and Tim Walhberg, and he plans to meet with a representative of Gov. Rick Snyder’s office. They are all generally supportive of the transit master plan, he said.

In his report from the planning and development committee on the TMP, Robben said the Smart Growth plan was preferred by the majority of people polled – using feedback from public meetings, a poll on AnnArbor.com, as well as one on the AATA’s project website [www.movingyouforward.org]. The committee recommended that the board approve the resolution.

Smart Growth TMP: Public Comment

Larry Krieg led off the public commentary at the start of the meeting by congratulating the staff on all the hard work they’d done on the TMP. Krieg is a planner with Ypsilanti Township. He said that the TMP was put together well and that the public input had been meaningful. He called attention to the fact that the American Public Transit Association has calculated that a family using public transit would save $9,904 per year compared to owning a car.

Krieg continued by saying that there’d been some some wise comments made at the AATA’s planning and development committee meeting about the AATA not getting out too far ahead of the community. From the minutes:

David [Nacht] indicated that it will be important for that dialogue to continue and for the community to feel comfortable with the plan. He stated that AATA did not intend to “get ahead” of the community on this issue until support is there for moving forward.

Krieg cautioned that it’s also good not to lag behind the county residents, and to continue to push forward. He pointed to the city of Ypsilanti’s overwhelming approval of a transit millage in November 2010. [That millage will fund most of purchase of service (POS) agreement that Ypsilanti has with AATA.]

Carolyn Grawi, of the Ann Arbor Center for Independent Living, also thanked the board and the AATA staff for all the work they’d put into holding the various forums. She noted that people keep saying it’s a 30-year plan, but she said there’s a need to start right away to increase transit options in the community. The transit system is needed, and it’s being used, she said. She also told the board that many people she’s heard from about the TMP have indicated great excitement about the increased geographic area where paratransit service might be extended.

As the board contemplates a different legal framework for the AATA to allow countywide funding for transit, Grawi cautioned against dissolution of the existing Ann Arbor millage. She said that money needs to stay in place and needs to continue to be used to fund the transit options that we’ve become accustomed to using in Ann Arbor.

Smart Growth TMP: CEO Comment, Board Deliberations

In summarizing his written CEO report for the board, Michael Ford said that during the February meetings, when the three scenarios were introduced to the community, the overwhelming response was support of the Smart Growth option. He thanked Jesse Bernstein and Roger Kerson for their help in preparing for those meetings.

At several other points in the meeting, board members complimented the AATA staff for their hard work on the issue.

The TMP item was voted on by the board after minimal discussion on three other items. So Charles Griffith noted that “there seems like there should be a little discussion on this one.” He said he was very supportive of the effort. In the performance monitoring and external relations committee discussions, he said committee members had talked about how to acknowledge the fact that this is an important stage in the development of the plan. It would set the stage for a lot of additional work that would need to be done on the local, state and federal level, he said.

Griffith said it was important not to give the impression that a final decision had been made, but noted that the AATA had held “many, many meetings” with many different groups. So he said he felt like the AATA had the strength of the broad community behind the effort. In that sense, he said, he felt comfortable saying that the AATA board concurred with the community in supporting the most robust scenario of transit options.

For his part, board chair Jesse Bernstein said the TMP described where the community wants to be in 30 years. That, he said, is the easy part. Now we have to figure out how to get there. That would be achieved through 3-5 year strategic plans, he said, which the current board and likely a new board – established under Act 196 – would implement.

Roger Kerson echoed the appreciation of the staff’s hard work that had been expressed during the meeting. He also picked up on Larry Krieg’s comments about not wanting to get too far ahead of the community, but also not falling behind the community, either. He said that as stewards of public assets, the board had a responsibility to lead, and the TMP reflects real leadership, he said.

Kerson said he was concerned, based on his attendance of a meeting with leaders from other governmental units, about the word “plan.” He said that to an outside observer, the word “plan” sounds like it’s set in concrete. It’s not the same as  a “vision” or a “proposal” or a “scenario.” So endorsing Smart Growth is the way to go, he said, but he still wanted to be sensitive to language and the process as the AATA moves forward. As new partners are invited in, it’s responsible to invite them to work on the TMP to turn the vision into reality.

Anya Dale added her thanks to the community that had participated in the process of developing the plan. She said she was impressed not just that Smart Growth – which is the most daunting task of the three – had been the choice of the majority, but that it had been chosen “by a landslide.” The Smart Growth plan is something that we need to do for the community, she said, and we need to invest in transit, in large part, to help turn the economy around.

Sue McCormick complimented the AATA as a whole for really taking public engagement forward. Rather than just sharing information, the AATA had looked to the community for help in making what is likely the biggest decision an agency could make – namely, how to plan the future of the region for transit. A clear signal from the public makes it easy to lead, she concluded, saying that there is a good public consensus.

Outcome: The board voted unanimously to adopt the Smart Growth scenario as the basis for a countywide transit master plan.

Paratransit Contract

The board considered a resolution to award a contract for A-Ride and paratransit services to Select Ride Inc. Select Ride is the current provider of these services. The contract value is $2,793,481 for a one-year term from July 1, 2011 to June 30, 2012, with two one‐year additional renewal options.

A-Ride is a transportation service for people who are prevented from using AATA fixed-route bus service due to a disability. It’s provided with taxis, small buses or lift-vans. Performance data on A-Ride through February 2011 shows that AATA serves around 500 passengers daily.

The new contract differs from the old one by reducing the advance reservation booking window from two weeks to one week. The amount of time drivers are expected to wait (vehicle dwell time) was increased from two minutes to five minutes. Pricing of trips changed from an hourly rate to a flat per‐trip rate.

AATA has experienced reduced use of its A-Ride and paratransit services since implementing fare increases for that service in May 2009 (from $2 to $2.50) and May 2010 (from $2.50 to $3). AATA also attributes part of the decrease in use to the fact that the fare increases for A-Ride were coupled with elimination of fares to A‐Ride‐eligible passengers who chose to use the fixed‐route regular bus service.

Paratransit: Public Commentary

Addressing the board on the topic of paratransit services was Thomas Partridge, who introduced himself as a resident of Washtenaw County and the city of Ann Arbor, and a recent candidate in the Democratic primary for the District 18 state Senate seat. He noted that the AATA was showing a decrease in expenditures for its paratransit service, which is used by seniors and disabled people, exactly at a time when there’s increasing need for that service. He called on the board to reverse the contraction of services in that area. He also criticized the performance of Select Ride, with respect to the quality of their service and their ability to be non-discriminatory.

During her public comments, Carolyn Grawi, of the Ann Arbor Center for Independent Living, said she’d received feedback indicating an increase in the number of people using the regular bus service, instead of A-Ride, for their work transportation trips.

Paratransit: Board Deliberations

The board did not deliberate on the paratransit contract.

Outcome: The board unanimously approved the paratransit contract with Select Ride.

FY 2010 Audit

Before the board was a resolution to accept the auditor’s report for fiscal year 2010, which ended Sept. 30, 2010. The AATA’s auditor is Rehmann Robson.

FY 2010 Audit – Presentation

Dave Fisher delivered Rehmann Robson’s presentation to the board on the AATA audit. He noted that it had been presented in more detail to the performance monitoring and external relations committee a few weeks before, so he was highlighting just the main points.

Overall, he said he’d given a “clean opinion” on the AATA’s books, based on generally accepted accounting principles, including the guidelines of the Michigan Dept. of Transportation.

Economic factors discussed in the report included the fact that up until 2009, there had been relatively constant increases in property tax revenues. [Ann Arbor property owners pay a roughly 2 mill tax that helps fund the AATA, which appears as MASS TRANSIT on tax bills.] But the July 1, 2010 levy was down by 5% and next year was expected to be down a bit more, Fisher said.

In FY 2010, the $9,589,000 collected under the Ann Arbor tax levy represented 38% of total revenues, Fisher said. The rest of the revenues are state and federal operating or capital grants, plus fare box revenues.

Fisher summarized AATA’s assets this way: Total assets are $51,831,000, against which there are $11,212,000 in liabilities, leaving $40,619,000 in net assets.

Of those net assets, a substantial amount are capital assets, Fisher said, which is consistent with the typical case for a transit authority. Buildings, buses minus the depreciation totals $31,798,000 of capital assets for the AATA. Subtracting the capital assets from the total net assets gives $8,820,000 as the effective “working capital” of the AATA – money that is available to spend. That compares with $8,511,000 at the end of FY 2009.

Fisher also told the board that in addition to the basic financial audit, his firm was also responsible for auditing compliance with federal regulations – any time an organization receives more than $500,000 of federal grant money, such an audit is required because the Single Audit Act applies. The sum of federal assistance for the fiscal year was $8,729,000, Fisher reported, which is an increase compared to the last few years. That’s because of federal stimulus money, he said.

As an example of the federal compliance auditing, for the construction of the Plymouth Road park-and-ride lot, the AATA was required to comply with the Davis-Bacon Act, which requires that prevailing wages be paid for any public project. Fisher cautioned that the AATA needs to make sure that Davis-Bacon Act compliance on construction contracts is systematically verified by AATA, even when that responsibility is “farmed out” to a third party.

Among the other suggestions made that resulted from the audit were: (1) to have the board sign off on a list of vendors/contracts greater than $25,000 – indicating that the AATA’s conflict of interest policy has been met – before the contract is executed; (2) that only the accounts payable accountant, or the controller – but not the payroll accountant – be able to distribute management and hourly paychecks; and (3) when a journal entry is made, it should be documented and reviewed by someone other than the person who prepared the journal entry.

During the CEO’s question time, Charles Griffith asked CEO Michael Ford if he had anything to report on how the recommendations of the auditor would be implemented. Ford indicated that he’d have some remedies that would provide clear solutions, and would provide more details at the next performance monitoring committee meeting.

After entertaining questions from the board, Fisher expressed appreciation for AATA awarding a one-year audit contract to Rehmann. He noted that he’d heard rumblings that the AATA was contemplating changing audit firms. He reported that effective Jan. 1, 2011, Rehmnann had merged with a firm in Ann Arbor – Wright Griffin Davis and Co. If the AATA wanted to allow Rehmann to continue to bid on the auditing contract, they could continue to receive service with the same expertise, plus have a local presence. They could include a partner from Wright Griffin Davis for the AATA work, if what was desired is a another set of eyes, Fisher said.

By way of background, at its Sept. 16, 2010 meeting, the board awarded just a one-year contract to Rehmann Robson, amid a discussion about the possibility of changing its policy on awarding its auditing contract, so that a certain amount of rotation among firms would be enforced. From The Chronicle’s coverage of that meeting:

It gave her a reason to review the general policy on the awarding of auditing contracts, [Sue] McCormick said, which was to award them for no more than five years. Rehmann Robson has been under contract for auditing services for the AATA for the last 10 years. There’s no policy in place, she said, to ensure a variety of perspectives from different auditors – no term limit on auditors, she said. But because the current firm is very familiar with the AATA, they are able to offer their services more cost effectively, McCormick said – they’re familiar with the AATA chart of accounts, for example. She said that for the time being the recommendation is to move ahead with a one-year contract and use the time to review the auditing policy.

FY 2010 Audit – Board Questions, Deliberations

Board chair Jesse Bernstein wanted to know if the AATA had any “unfunded programs” – like pensions and health care for retirees. Fisher told Bernstein that the liability due to OPEB (Other Post-Employment Benefits) had been pre-funded with the “lion’s share” of its employees. It had been a one-time “pay-off,” Fisher said, and for those employees who did not take advantage of it, the liability is being recorded in the financial statements – it’s currently $179,685, he said, which is very small. For other organizations, that number would be in the millions of dollars, Fisher said.

Bernstein drew out the fact that when that obligation is eventually paid, it would need to be paid out of the working capital, just as if it were an account payable to a vendor. The defined contribution plan, Fisher said, is a percentage of the payroll, so there’s no hidden cost there. With a defined benefit plan, sometimes organizations will find that the trust fund will lag behind the required payment to meet the requirements of the benefit to be paid out. It’s not a problem for the AATA, Fisher said, because it has mostly switched over to a defined contribution plan.

David Nacht objected somewhat to the characterization Fisher had provided, saying that in connection with the last collective bargaining agreement, the AATA had maintained the defined benefit plan for its employees – but simply limited its obligations to that program to a defined contribution. That is, AATA agreed to make a certain contribution towards employee’s pensions every year and not to waver from it, or to borrow from it. Employees, for their part, agreed to increase their own contribution, if the AATA’s contribution were ever actuarially insufficient to achieve the benefit that is supposed to be achieved. It’s a way of sharing the risk with employees – it’s something the AATA is rather proud of, Nacht concluded.

Roger Kerson wanted to put the financial picture in the context of the countywide service expansion that the AATA is considering, which will require additional resources. As a summary, Kerson said, the AATA is managing around $28 million in expenses and had commensurate revenue to cover those expenses. He noted there are roughly $30 million in net assets. He asked for confirmation from Fisher that AATA is, on the whole, using financially sound practices compared to other agencies his firm has reviewed. Fisher confirmed for Kerson what he wanted to hear, citing specifically the working capital of around $9 million – that’s adequate, Fisher said. In contrast, he said, some other organizations have deficits in their working capital.

Kerson also asked for confirmation that all the local, state and federal taxes used by the AATA were being used for the purposes for which they were intended – Fisher gave that confirmation.

Sue McCormick wanted to know what the impact of GASB (Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statements) 54 is on the AATA – GASB 54 defines the standard practice for how fund balances are reported. Fisher answered by saying that GASB 54 would not apply to the AATA’s enterprise funds, because AATA uses a “full accrual” basis of accounting. That is, revenue is recognized on the ledger as soon as it is earned and expenses are recognized when the related benefit is received. [In contrast, a "cash basis" of accounting would recognize revenue only when it's actually received, and expenses only when they are actually paid.]

Fisher noted that the city of Ann Arbor, like many governmental entities, has a “modified accrual” basis of accounting. That is, revenue is recognized when it becomes both available and measurable, rather than when it is earned; expenditures are recognized when the related liability is incurred. GASB 54 applies to governmental funds that are on a modified accrual basis, explained Fisher, so it had an impact on the city’s books, but not the AATA’s.

When the board reached the point on their agenda when it actually voted on the resolution, Sue McCormick took the opportunity to compliment the AATA staff on their excellent work and said she looked forward to Ford’s planned remedies for the minor process issues that had been identified.

Outcome: The board voted unanimously to accept the auditor’s report.

Media Contract

The board considered a resolution to award a one-year contract for media placement services to be provided by Orange Egg, an Ann Arbor company. Orange Egg will identify the appropriate media for advertising, place the buys and handle the billing.

The contract provides for four additional one-year renewals. AATA expects to spend more than $100,000 under the contract, so it required board approval. In describing the contract during his report from the planning and development committee, Rich Robben noted that Orange Egg would essentially be acting as a pass-through agency, and the AATA costs would be billed against Orange Egg. So he wanted to make sure that it’s documented properly for auditors to review.

The board did not deliberate on the motion, having heard a description of the contract from Rich Robben during his report from the planning and development committee.

Outcome: The board unanimously approved the contract with Orange Egg for media services.

MOU: Washtenaw Avenue Bus Pull-Out

Not originally on the agenda was a resolution to authorize the CEO to sign a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the city of Ann Arbor regarding construction a bus pull‐out on eastbound Washtenaw Avenue, east of Pittsfield Boulevard. The bus pull-out is part of a larger project – a transfer center on the south side of Washtenaw Avenue at Pittsfield Boulevard, opposite Arborland mall – which will include a “super shelter.” The project is being paid for with federal stimulus money granted to the AATA.

During question time, Sue McCormick asked if a copy of the MOU was available – it was not. Chris White, manager of service development for the AATA, explained that the draft was being reviewed by the city attorney’s office and that the AATA had just received it the previous day – it hadn’t been reviewed by the AATA yet.

When the board came to the actual agenda item, board chair Jesse Bernstein asked if there was time pressure – could they wait until the board had the actual MOU before voting?

White indicated that there was, in fact, some time pressure. The city of Ann Arbor has already gone out to bid, had received bids and was ready to award a contract, he said. The city council would be acting at its first meeting in April to award the contract, he continued. He wasn’t sure if the city was requiring that an MOU be signed before awarding the contract. He turned to McCormick for insight – she’s the public services area administrator for the city of Ann Arbor.

McCormick said it depends on the terms of the MOU. White noted that the city is handling the contract, but AATA is paying the bills from a grant. McCormick said depending on the exact language in the MOU, it might be the case that the city would have to award the contract contingent on the AATA board’s action and an agreement to pay.

The board was in favor of the agreement with the city, but was reluctant to vote on the memorandum absent a copy of the text of the memorandum itself.

Board chair Jesse Bernstein suggested that a draft be circulated by board members and that board members “vote electronically.” There seemed to be a consensus that this would be the board’s intended course of action. There was no discussion about whether this strategy would comply with Michigan’s Open Meetings Act.

Outcome: The board did not act on the memorandum of understanding with the city of Ann Arbor.

Board: Communications, Committees, CEO, Commentary

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

Comm/Comm: Ridership Numbers

Reporting out for the performance monitoring and external relations committee, Charles Griffith said there were no big surprises in the monthly financials and performance statistics. [.pdf of tables and graphs for performance data extracted from the board packet] He noted that regular bus ridership was now just about even with last year’s ridership, after showing decreases for several months, and it was a good sign that the AATA was on its way back to its historic high ridership levels. [By way of comparison January ridership for 2011 showed an average of 22,834 weekday passengers compared to 22,618  in 2010. In February, there was a slight slip from 22,422 last year to 22,210 this year.]

Comm/Comm: Night Ride Expansion

Also during his report from the performance monitoring and external relations committee, Griffith said that the committee had been briefed on the expansion of the Night Ride shared taxi service to the area up to Golfside Road. It would be an experiment to see how much the service is used in the expanded area, he said. The AATA would be taking it slow to make sure that the level of service for existing users is not degraded.

Comm/Comm: Website Development

Part of Griffith’s performance monitoring and external relations committee report touched on the redevelopment of the AATA’s website. Griffith said the board would be getting a more complete update as that process unfolds.

Comm/Comm: Report from CEO Ford

In addition to the remarks that Michael Ford made about the work on the transit master plan (TMP) and future funding (see above), he also reported that he and deputy CEO Dawn Gabay had attended a Michigan Public Transit Association (MPTA) conference and met with Michigan state House representatives Jeff Irwin and Rick Olson.

Ford also made a point of thanking the staff for their hard work during the planning of the TMP, which was accomplished in the course of all the other regular day-to-day operations that had to be done to keep the buses running.

Comm/Comm: Annual Retreat Planning

Reporting out from the planning and development committee, Rich Robben said that committee members had discussed the planning of the board’s annual retreat, scheduled for Friday, June 3, 2011. Work was continuing on the agenda for that retreat, Robben said.

Comm/Comm: Local Advisory Council – Saying Thank You

Karen Wanza reported out from the AATA’s local advisory committee (LAC), the entity through which the AATA receives input and advice from people with disabilities and senior citizens interested in AATA services. She said that several people had attended their meetings who had expressed an interest in finding a way of showing appreciation to AATA employees who went above and beyond the call of duty. So LAC is looking for a some way of implementing such some kind of Driver of the Month program.

Comm/Comm: More Transparency

Addressing the board at the end of the meeting during the second slot that’s available for public commentary, Thomas Partridge called on the AATA to televise its committee meetings in addition to its board meeting. There needs to be more detailed discussion of issues at the board meetings, he said. He called for linking the transit system in Washtenaw County with other transit systems in southeast Michigan to form one united transportation system.

Present: Charles Griffith, David Nacht, Jesse Bernstein, Sue McCormick, Rich Robben, Roger Kerson, Anya Dale

Next regular meeting: Thursday, April 21, 2011 at 6:30 p.m. at the Ann Arbor District Library, 343 S. Fifth Ave., Ann Arbor [confirm date]

Transit options in the three scenarios – which the AATA has labeled Lifeline Plus, Accessible County, and Smart Growth – are nested subsets, starting with Lifeline Plus as a base, which expands on existing services and focuses on services for seniors and disabled people. Accessible County extends services by adding fixed-route bus service to connect all the county’s urban centers. The Smart Growth scenario includes north-south and east-west commuter rail regional components, as well as high-capacity local transit options for corridors like Washtenaw Avenue and State-Plymouth.

Development of the TMP for countywide service has been identified by the AATA board as a necessary step to take before reorganizing the AATA as a transit authority for the entire county. In December 2009, the board held a special meeting to seek advice on various options for reorganization under Act 196 or Act 55. [Chronicle coverage "AATA Gets Advice on Countywide Transit"]

This brief was filed from the Ann Arbor District Library boardroom, where the AATA board holds its regular monthly meetings. A more detailed report will follow: [link]