Ann Arbor public art commissioners John Kotarski and Ashlee Arder at AAPAC’s June 26, 2013 meeting. Arder was shooting B-roll for a video she’s making about the commission. (Photos by the writer.)

As part of that, a proposal to overhaul the Golden Paintbrush awards – the city’s annual recognition of individuals and organizations who support public art in Ann Arbor – received the most attention. Commissioners John Kotarski and Connie Brown had recommended four categories of public recognition to replace the Golden Paintbrush, including a lifetime achievement award, a “Random Acts of Art” award, and public art awards to be presented at a formal social event that was described as an “Academy Awards-type” ceremony.

Although there was general consensus that the Golden Paintbrush needs to be improved, some commissioners felt that the proposed public recognition program was overreaching at this point. Malverne Winborne worried about “scope creep” – going too far afield of AAPAC’s role. Marsha Chamberlin thought that making some changes to the Golden Paintbrush, including a new name, could serve the same purpose. Ultimately, commissioners decided to give the proposal more thought before acting on it.

Also related to public engagement, Kotarski and AAPAC chair Bob Miller reported on efforts to get input on proposals by four finalists for artwork at the East Stadium bridges. The two men have been making presentations to a variety of groups, and are seeking feedback via two online surveys – one on Survey Monkey, another on A2 Open City Hall. Commissioners also talked about having a regular table at the Sunday artisan market and increasing their use of social media, including the commission’s Facebook page and Twitter account – @AAPublicArt. AAPAC also will have a table at the July 15 Townie Street Party.

In other action, commissioners voted to create exploratory task forces for possible projects at Arbor Oaks Park in southeast Ann Arbor, and at the wastewater treatment plant on Dixboro Road in Ann Arbor Township. Craig Hupy, the city’s public services area administrator, had approached AAPAC about the possibility of incorporating public art into the wastewater treatment project. He noted that of the remaining amount in the Percent for Art funds, much of it came from wastewater-related projects, and must be spent on public art with a “nexus” to wastewater.

Art Awards: Rethinking the Golden Paintbrush

The city’s annual Golden Paintbrush awards, given out for the past 14 years, are meant to recognize people and organizations who contribute to public art works that “add interest to our cityscape, beautify the community and create a sense of place.” This year’s awards were announced at the city council’s June 17 meeting, and given to: (1) John Carver, who commissioned “Spirit of Ann Arbor” by Detroit artist Charles McGee for the outside of the Carver-Gunn Building on Liberty Street; and (2) Vic Strecher and Jeri Rosenberg for their support of events like FestiFools and FoolMoon.

The public art commission is now responsible for selecting the winners, but some commissioners in the past have expressed frustration that the awards don’t adequately highlight accomplishments of local artists and patrons of the arts. Two commissioners, John Kotarski and Connie Brown, prepared some alternative ideas for a public recognition program that they presented at AAPAC’s June 26 meeting. [.pdf of public recognition memo]

They proposed four new award/recognition categories:

• Lifetime Achievement Award: Given to end-of-career artists/art administrators/art promoters at a public event hosted by AAPAC. The award would be given to someone whose work has impacted art in public places, and the awardee would need to be nominated by at least three community members.
• Ann Arbor Public Art Award: Given for more classically identified public art, such as monument art, streetscapes, or installation art. It would replace the current Golden Paintbrush award. Winners would be given a medallion or statuette, to be presented at an Academy Awards-type event – not simply presented in front of city council, as the current awards are.
• Random Acts of Art: Given “randomly and covertly” to more temporary work, such as snow sculptures, landscaping, or “guerrilla” art. Winners would be given a gift certificate and also recognized publicly.
• Resolution of Support: Given by AAPAC to publicly support projects that the city doesn’t fund. It would be given only in response to requests, and if the project fits into AAPAC’s vision for Ann Arbor’s public art program.

Kotarski introduced the proposal, saying that the issue of adequate public recognition had arisen as he’d tried to solicit nominations for this year’s Golden Paintbrush awards. Public recognition is a very effective tool, he noted – saying it’s cheap, and it matters to people.

Regarding the resolution of support, Brown told commissioners that the intent is to tell people that AAPAC appreciates artmaking efforts in the community. It’s a way to “give an ‘attaboy’ without taking the project under our wings,” she said. Brown acknowledged that AAPAC had struggled in the past with the idea of giving endorsements, but she said it was important to recognize non-AAPAC projects in some way.

Art Awards: Rethinking the Golden Paintbrush – Lifetime Achievement

Kotarski wanted commissioners to adopt the lifetime achievement award at their June 26 meeting, saying that some recommendations had already been made to him for potential awardees. The other items could be considered at a later date. He made a formal motion to adopt the lifetime achievement award.

Ann Arbor public art commissioner Connie Brown.

Malverne Winborne cautioned that these awards in general represented “scope creep.” The commission is still figuring out its role, he noted, yet now they’re considering additional work.

Marsha Chamberlin, AAPAC’s longest-serving member, pointed out that the Golden Paintbrush awards can be given in several categories, including one that recognizes substantial contributions to public art – similar to a lifetime achievement award, she said. Margaret Parker and Jan Onder have been recipients of that award.

In addition, AAPAC’s charge is focused on public art, Chamberlin noted. How many lifetime achievement awards can be given in that category, for a community this size? She questioned the assumption that AAPAC had the authority to give out awards for arts achievements generally, given its purview of public art, and said the broader awards might subject the commission to criticism.

Winborne supported possibly partnering with other groups, such as the Ann Arbor-based Arts Alliance – if the goal is to give general arts-related awards. Otherwise, it would move AAPAC too far away from its main mission of public art, he said.

The commission gets involved in so many things, Winborne said, then “gets in the weeds” and loses its momentum. The public recognition proposal includes some great ideas, he added, but AAPAC has limited resources. He liked the concept, but wanted to evaluate it more before voting – noting that he never buys a car the first time he walks into the dealership’s showroom.

Kotarski countered by saying that these awards directly address at least 30% of AAPAC’s task, as defined in the city’s public art ordinance – to promote public art. It doesn’t cost a dime, he said, and it would be in collaboration with others. He suggested that community members who nominate someone for a lifetime achievement award, for example, could take on the task for organizing the awards ceremony.

The current Golden Paintbrush awards lump everything together, Kotarski said. This new approach attempts to draw out and highlight different categories of achievement, he said, to get “more bang for our buck” in promoting public art. He noted that the lifetime achievement award wouldn’t need to be given annually – it would only be awarded if someone worthy is nominated for it.

Chamberlin gave a brief history of the Golden Paintbrush awards. The concept was modeled after the Ann Arbor park system’s Golden Trowel award, she noted, and was designed to pay tribute to individuals and organizations, as well as to publicize public art in general. Prior to the creation of AAPAC, the awards were originally given by the Washtenaw Council for the Arts – now called the Arts Alliance.

Chamberlin questioned AAPAC’s organizational capacity to pull off a major awards event, especially in the context of recent changes to the public art program. Renaming the Golden Paintbrush awards was fine, she added, but she didn’t feel the commission could take on a project like this now.

Winborne agreed with renaming the Golden Paintbrush – because to him, it seemed too specific to painters, not general public art.

Ashlee Arder, one of the newest public art commissioners, called the public recognition proposal a “noble concept,” but thought that AAPAC needed to figure out its capacity first. People in the arts community – including those at the University of Michigan, as well as arts patrons – would expect a certain caliber of event, she noted. If an awards ceremony fell short of that expectation, “it would do more harm than good,” she said.

If commissioners didn’t feel that the Golden Paintbrush awards were sufficient, then perhaps they needed to step back and think about ways to improve and promote those awards, Arder said. Chamberlin suggested holding a more formal reception after the awards are presented at the city council meeting. Winborne volunteered to wear his tuxedo.

Outcome: Kotarski withdrew the motion to create a lifetime achievement award, with the consensus that commissioners would consider the overall awards/recognition proposal and discuss it at a future meeting.

Outreach & Social Media

At several points throughout the June 26 meeting, commissioners discussed issues related to public outreach and engagement.

Ashlee Arder, one of the newest public art commissioners.

Ashlee Arder reported that she, Bob Miller and Aaron Seagraves had spent some time at a recent Sunday artisan market, talking with people about the city’s public art program and the East Stadium bridges proposals. They’d had some good conversations about visibility, she said. It’s importance for the community to know that the public art commissioners aren’t just figureheads making decisions – they’re people.

So to help make that point, Arder is making a video montage that includes images of commissioners. She shot some of those images during the June 26 meeting. [Arder is programs coordinator for ArtServe Michigan, a statewide nonprofit advocacy organization. She has an undergraduate degree from the University of Michigan and while there was heavily involved in other arts advocacy efforts. She recently participated in the UM Museum of Arts "Many Voices" project, in which participants created short videos inspired by artwork at UMMA. Her video is called "Boy" – and it explores the theme of young male energy in West African and Western cultures.]

Commissioners also talked about using social media to engage the public – specifically, the commission’s Facebook page and Twitter account, which is @AAPublicArt. Arder explained the different purposes served by these two social media platforms, and commissioners discussed whether they should all make posts or only have a couple of commissioners handle that task. Arder noted that social media is another way to humanize the commission. She reported that a woman showed up to the Sunday artisan market because she’d seen an @AAPublicArt tweet. “It works,” Arder said.

Related to other outreach tools, AAPAC is using two online surveys – one on Survey Monkey, another on A2 Open City Hall – to solicit feedback on four finalists for artwork at East Stadium bridges.

Commissioners also discussed whether to participate in the upcoming Ann Arbor art fairs, which run from July 17-20. A table costs $90, and would need to be staffed with commissioners and other volunteers for those four days. There was some uncertainty about whether funds would be available, given the change in funding for the city’s public art program.

Marsha Chamberlin reported that from her experience, a huge percentage of visitors to the art fairs are from out of town and “don’t give a damn” about local programs. [Chamberlin recently retired as the long-time president of the Ann Arbor Art Center.] She also noted that “it is the nastiest four days to spend on the street.” She said she’d rather see AAPAC’s resources at the artisan market or farmers market on a regular basis.

This poster, standing about five feet high, was painted last year by Hannah Nathans, a University of Michigan undergraduate who was an intern with the city. It’s based on a mural by Richard Wolk on East Liberty near State Street. The poster was part of the Ann Arbor public art commission’s booth at last year’s Townie Street Party, and AAPAC plans to use it again this year.

Malverne Winborne expressed support for doing something at the art fairs, but the general consensus was to organize a regular table at the Sunday artisan market, perhaps once a month.

However, AAPAC will have a table at the July 15 Townie Street Party, as it has in the past. Commissioners plan to re-use a large poster made last year by Hannah Nathans, who worked for the city as an intern. The poster was a popular interactive feature at last year’s Townie Street Party. People poked their faces through cut-out holes and got their pictures taken, which were then posted on AAPAC’s Facebook page. The poster is based on a mural by Richard Wolk on East Liberty near State Street, with stylized portraits of Woody Allen, Edgar Allan Poe, Herman Hesse, Franz Kafka, and Anaïs Nin.

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. Chamberlin asked for clarification of what media relations meant, saying “I’m old-school enough to think it meant working with the press.” Based on the ensuing conversation, it appears the focus will be more on social media like Facebook and Twitter, as well as an emailed newsletter.

Kotarski pointed out that many people don’t use social media, or even email. Those people are still remorseful over the loss of a real newspaper, he noted. Chamberlin replied that AAPAC has limited capacity, both as a commission and as individuals, so they need to prioritize. She thought that Facebook and the newsletter should be among the priorities.

Outcome: Commissioners voted unanimously to appoint John Kotarski to community outreach and engagement, and Marsha Chamberlin to media relations.

New Exploratory Task Forces

Two proposals were on the agenda to create exploratory task forces for possible projects at Arbor Oaks Park in southeast Ann Arbor, and at the wastewater treatment plant on Dixboro Road in Ann Arbor Township.

New Exploratory Task Forces: Arbor Oaks Park

Malverne Winborne reported that he and Seagraves had met in mid-June with David Jones, a board member of the Community Action Network (CAN). The nonprofit, under contract with the city, manages several community centers in Ann Arbor, including the Bryant Community Center in the Arbor Oaks neighborhood. There’s interest in putting some kind of public art in the Arbor Oaks Park, Winborne said, so the plan was to bring the idea to AAPAC, then form a task force to explore the possibility.

Task force members would include Winborne, Jones, AAPAC member Nick Zagar, and Derek Miller, CAN’s deputy director, as well as other members of the neighborhood and the arts community to be determined.

Connie Brown noted that there are several youth in that neighborhood who are interested in getting involved. She suggested that some of them could be part of the task force.

Outcome: AAPAC voted to create an exploratory task force for public art at Arbor Oaks Park.

New Exploratory Task Forces: Wastewater Treatment

The city is building a new wastewater treatment facility and renovating its existing facility in Ann Arbor Township, at 49 S. Dixboro Road. [.pdf of memo describing the wastewater treatment plant renovations] Craig Hupy, the city’s public services area administrator, had approached AAPAC about the possibility of incorporating public art into the project.

John Kotarski told commissioners that he’d be taking the lead on this. People from the community – including elementary school students – take tours of the facility, he said, so it’s an opportunity to make public art that’s engaging, educational and that gives “memorable impressions of that plant and the process contained within it.”

He described the renovations as a large project, with the opportunity for AAPAC to get involved at the beginning. Hupy, who attended the June 26 meeting, clarified that the project was already well underway.

Hupy also noted that of the remaining amount in the Percent for Art funds, much of it came from wastewater-related projects, and must be spent on public art with a “nexus” to wastewater.

By way of background, starting in 2007 and until this year, the city had funded public art through a Percent for Art mechanism, which set aside 1% of the budget for each of the city’s capital projects – up to a cap of $250,000 – for public art. However, at its June 3, 2013 meeting, the city council voted to eliminate the Percent for Art approach. At that time, amounts remaining in the respective funds totaled $845,029:

• 002-Energy $3,112
• 0042-Water Supply System $61,358
• 0043-Sewage Disposal System $451,956
• 0048-Airport $6,416
• 0069-Stormwater $20,844
• 0062-Street Millage $237,314
• 0071-Parks Millage $28,492
• 0072-Solid Waste $35,529

Of that total, the council voted to restore a portion to their funds of origin – which returned the additional amounts that had been set aside for the fiscal year 2014 budget:

• 0042-Water Supply System $113,500
• 0043-Sewage Disposal System $50,050
• 0069-Stormwater $33,500
• 0062-Street Millage $120,700
• 0071-Parks Millage $8,714

So about $402,000 is available for public art from the sewage disposal system (wastewater) fund.

Connie Brown had some concern about spending a large amount of money on a project like this, in what seemed to her like an ad hoc approach. Feedback she’s heard from the community indicates the desire for smaller work that’s integrated into neighborhoods, not large-scale projects. She wondered if it made more sense to have a committee look into the full range of possible projects for wastewater treatment funds, not just one at the main facility.

Kotarski noted that the task force is described as exploratory – it’s not a commitment to doing the project at the treatment plant. He invited Brown to join the task force, too.

Outcome: Commissioners voted to form an exploratory task force for possible artwork at the wastewater treatment plant.

Revisions to AAPAC Guidelines

On the agenda was an item to create a committee charged with revising AAPAC’s guidelines. [.pdf of existing guidelines] Bob Miller, AAPAC’s chair, introduced the item by saying “This is not a small one.”

Connie Brown expressed some skepticism, noting that in previous years the work on developing guidelines had not been “very fruitful.” [AAPAC had approved its guidelines at a March 9, 2010 meeting. Until that time, the guidelines had been under review – mostly by the city attorney’s office – for nearly two years.]

Marsha Chamberlin asked if anything had really changed, other than the public art program’s funding mechanism, that would impact the guidelines. Aaron Seagraves, the city’s public art administrator, noted that some practices and policies have been adopted by AAPAC but aren’t reflected in the guidelines. He gave as an example the artist selection process.

Rather than form a committee, Chamberlin suggested that Seagraves develop a draft set of revisions to bring back to AAPAC for review. At that point, if commissioners felt more work was needed, they could form a committee then, she said.

Outcome: The motion to create a committee to revise AAPAC’s guidelines was withdrawn.

Project Updates

Several projects were discussed briefly during the June 26 meeting, by way of updates. Additional information was also included in a written report by Aaron Seagraves, the city’s public art administrator. [.pdf of Seagraves' report] 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.

Project Updates: East Stadium Bridge

John Kotarski and Bob Miller have been making presentations to various groups about proposals from four finalists for artwork at the East Stadium bridge: Volkan Alkanoglu, based in Atlanta, Georgia; Sheila Klein of Bow, Washington; Rebar Group of San Francisco; and Catherine Widgery of Cambridge, Mass.

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

The presentation of their proposals is available online. The project has a budget of $400,000. Members of the task force are Miller, Wiltrud Simbuerger, Nancy Leff, David Huntoon and Joss Kiely.

Among the presentations included one at the June 18, 2013 meeting of the Ann Arbor park advisory commission, a table at the June 14 Green Fair on Main Street, and a meeting on June 25 at the Ann Arbor senior center, attended by Ward 2 city councilmembers Jane Lumm and Sally Petersen, and about a dozen residents.

Miller reported that Kotarski has been organizing these outreach efforts, as a way to promote community engagement with specific AAPAC projects.

Marsha Chamberlin praised the approach, but suggested that they might consolidate some of their efforts in order to reach more people. Kotarski responded, saying he purposefully didn’t plan the presentations that way because he wasn’t interested in efficiency so much as having multiple points of contact. It’s time intensive, he noted, but he wanted people to know that he and Miller are available and interested in getting input. There are a lot of misperceptions about the public art program and about how artists work, he said. This is a way to educate people as well, Kotarski said.

AAPAC is also using two online surveys – one on Survey Monkey, another on A2 Open City Hall – to solicit feedback on the East Stadium bridges proposals by the four finalists.

Project Updates: Kingsley & First Rain Garden

At AAPAC’s March 27, 2013 meeting, commissioners had selected Denver artist Josh Wiener to work with landscapers and incorporate public art into a new rain garden at the corner of Kingsley and First. The project has a $27,000 budget.

Wiener will be coming to Ann Arbor on July 15 to present his design to the public. He’ll also be attending the Townie Party to talk with community members about the project.

Project Updates: Coleman Jewett Memorial

At a special meeting on March 7, 2013, AAPAC had voted to accept a memorial for Coleman Jewett as an official AAPAC project and to approve Sarah Gay as a volunteer project manager. Her duties were to lead efforts for city council approval, donor relations and fundraising.

Marsha Chamberlin of the Ann Arbor public art commission.

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 donor 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.

Seagraves reported that a memorandum of understanding is being negotiated between the Jewett family, the city, and the Ann Arbor Area Community Foundation. Marsha Chamberlin said the plan now calls for two full-sized replicas in bronze. The cost is estimated at $15,000 each, and about $6,000 has been raised. Materials for fundraising are being developed.

Seagraves met with parks staff regarding a location for the chairs. At this point, the plan is to remove one of two existing benches on the market’s east side, and locate the bronze chairs there. The proposal would be put before the city’s public market advisory commission as well as AAPAC, before seeking city council approval.

Project Updates: Justice Center

Ed Carpenter’s “Radius” hanging sculpture was installed in the lobby of the Justice Center in late May. Seagraves reported that a formal dedication and ceremony is being planned for September, although a date hasn’t yet been set. Carpenter would return for that event.

Project Updates: Argo Cascades

A selection panel has picked three finalists for artwork along the Argo Cascades. Members of the selection panel include John Kotarski, Malverne Winborne, Cheryl Saam, Margaret Parker, Cathy Fleisher, Bonnie Greenspoon and Julie Grand. AAPAC approved a $150,000 budget for that project on April 25, 2012.

A survey to solicit feedback is being sent to stakeholders and also handed out at the Argo canoe livery, Seagraves reported. Connie Brown urged Seagraves to distribute the survey as widely as possible, including posting it on AAPAC’s website.

The finalists will be invited to a site walk-through in early August.

Update after publication: The three finalists are Jann Rosen-Queralt of Maryland; Mags Harries & Lajos Heder of Cambridge, Mass.; and Andy Dufford of Denver, Colo.

DIA’s Inside|Out

Free docent-led tours of Detroit Institute of Arts’ Inside|Out program artwork in Ann Arbor have ended, John Kotarski reported. But as a result of those tours, which he organized, he’s been asked to lead similar tours for visually impaired students. He described a recent group that spent most of the tour at the Herbert Dreiseitl water sculpture in front of city hall. The students as well as their sighted parents took their shoes off and got into the fountain, he said – it was designed that way, to be accessible and interactive, he noted.

Kotarski said he’d like to find a way to recognize the docents who’d volunteered to give tours in May and June, with perhaps a gift certificate.

Project Updates: Canoe Art

Marsha Chamberlin has been working on a canoe art project with other local organizations, called Canoe Imagine Art. The project will use old aluminum canoes from the city of Ann Arbor’s Argo canoe livery, which artists and 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 (HRWC). Task force members are Chamberlin; Cheryl Saam, the city’s canoe livery supervisor; Shoshana Hurand of the Arts Alliance; Mary Kerr of the CVB; Maura Thomson of the MSAA; and Laura Rubin of HRWC.

Seagraves reported that the task force is reviewing a draft fundraising proposal and call to artists. Chamberlin told commissioners that she planned to have a formal agenda item about the project for AAPAC’s July meeting. “I’m gonna creep the scope,” she joked.

Communications & Commentary

During the meeting there were several opportunities for communications from commissioners and staff, and two slots for public commentary. Here are some highlights.

Communications & Commentary: Fencing on Scio Church

Near the start of the June 26 meeting, Craig Hupy, the city’s public services area administrator, suggested a possible project for AAPAC. The city is putting in sidewalks along a stretch of Scio Church Road, he reported, and will also be installing a fence there. The city staff is planning to install the kind of chain link fence that they usually use, he said, but he thought there might be an opportunity for something more creative, if AAPAC wants to explore that possibility.

Marsha Chamberlin noted that the project could serve as a prototype for other fencing in the city. At the suggestion of AAPAC chair Bob Miller, Chamberlin volunteered to serve as the commission’s point person on this possible project.

Communications & Commentary: Public Commentary

Jeff Hayner attended the June 26 meeting and spoke at the final opportunity for public commentary. Bob Miller, AAPAC’s chair, reported that he had talked with Hayner at the recent Green Fair, and had encouraged Hayner to attend an AAPAC meeting.

Noting that there were two vacancies on AAPAC, Hayner encouraged commissioners to reach out and fill those positions. He noted that he serves on the board of the Ann Arbor PTO Thrift Shop, and they’re also working to fill some vacancies.

By way of background, Nick Zagar was appointed in March 2013 to replace Theresa Reid, for a term ending Dec. 31, 2015. Reid had resigned mid-term. Also in March, Ashlee Arder was appointed to replace Cathy Gendron for a term ending Jan. 20, 2016. Gendron had been reappointed at the city council’s Jan. 7, 2013 meeting, but resigned soon after that.

Wiltrud Simbuerger resigned in March, also before the end of her term. Bob Miller had previously reported that Maureen Devine’s name has been submitted to mayor John Hieftje, who is responsible for making nominations to most of the city’s advisory boards and commissions. Devine is art coordinator for the University of Michigan’s North Campus Research Complex (NCRC). However, Hieftje has not yet put forward her nomination.

Nor has anyone been nominated to replace a position previously held by Tony Derezinski. Along with Gendron and Connie Brown, Derezinski been nominated at the council’s Dec. 17, 2012 meeting for reappointment to serve terms ending Jan. 20, 2016. Both Gendron and Brown were reappointed at the council’s Jan. 7, 2013 meeting, but Derezinski’s name had been crossed out and the position he held remains vacant.

During his public commentary, Hayner also asked some clarificational questions about the city’s public art funding, and encouraged the commission to provide as much information as possible about its work. All taxpayers are stakeholders, he noted, adding that it had been very difficult for him to find out about AAPAC’s activities.

Commissioners present: Ashlee Arder, Connie Brown, Marsha Chamberlin, John Kotarski, Bob Miller, Malverne Winborne. Also: Aaron Seagraves, the city’s public art administrator, and Craig Hupy, the city’s public services area administrator.

Absent: Nick Zagar.

Next regular meeting: Wednesday, July 24, 2013 at 4:30 p.m. in the basement conference room at city hall, 301 E. Huron St. [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.

At left: Lynn Bowen, an administrative assistant with the city who provides staff support for the park advisory commission, is retiring and was honored at PAC's November meeting. She has worked at the city for 26 years, including the last six years with parks and recreation. To the right are PAC chair Julie Grand and Colin Smith, the city's parks and recreation manager. (Photos by the writer.)

Commissioners were briefed by city staff about annual finances related to the land acquisition for parks and greenbelt programs, which are funded by a 30-year millage. They also got an update on the city’s marketing efforts for parks and recreation, and heard a report on the status of a sustainability project – several PAC commissioners had attended a September joint work session to help prioritize city goals related to environmental quality, economic vitality, and social equity.

Updates were also given about a sediment removal project in the Ruthven Nature Area, and about two parking-related projects at Riverside Park and Veterans Memorial Park.

In his manager’s report, Colin Smith noted that he’d taken a canoe run through the under-construction Argo Dam bypass pools – the new channel was a ”bit sportier” than he had expected, and is still being tweaked. He also told commissioners he’d received word that two state grant applications made by the city of Ann Arbor – $300,000 for the proposed Ann Arbor skatepark at Veterans Memorial Park, and $300,000 for improvements at the Gallup Park canoe livery – had ranked in the top 12 out of 100 applications statewide for funding from the Michigan Natural Resources Trust Fund. That bodes well for the possibility that the grants will be awarded – a decision from the state is expected in December.

During the meeting commissioners also honored two volunteers with the city’s natural area preservation program – Sarah Newman and Drew Lathin – and said farewell to Lynn Bowen, the administrative assistant who works with PAC. The meeting was her last before retiring from the city.

An item not on the agenda – the proposed Fuller Road Station – drew focus from public commentary as well as some questions from commissioners later in the meeting. 

Fuller Road Station

The issue of Fuller Road Station has raised concerns for several members of PAC dating back nearly two years. The large parking structure, bus depot and possible rail station is proposed near the intersection of Fuller Road and Maiden Lane, near the University of Michigan medical campus on city-owned land. The land has been used as a surface parking lot since 1993, leased to the university, but is on property designated as parkland. It’s a joint project of the city of Ann Arbor and UM, but a formal agreement regarding its construction and operation hasn’t yet been finalized.

In June 2010, the commission passed a resolution that asked the city council to make available a complete plan of Fuller Road Station – including any significant proposed agreements, such as what the university will pay the city for use of the structure – allowing sufficient time for a presentation at a televised PAC meeting before the council votes on the project. The resolution also asked that staff and the council ensure the project results in a net revenue gain for the parks system. PAC most recently got a detailed update on the project at its May 2011 meeting. The commission has not formally received word about whether the city council will agree to the requests made in the 2010 resolution.

There was no agenda item for the proposed Fuller Road Station, but the issue came up during public commentary as well as at the end of the meeting, with questions from commissioners.

Fuller Road Station: Public Commentary

Nancy Kaplan told commissioners that she was there to speak about transforming Fuller Park into a Fuller Road parking garage, saying it set many negative, troubling precedents. One precedent is that it’s OK to change a part-time surface parking lot into a parking garage. The fact that it’s a surface lot to accommodate parking for the University of Michigan is being used to justify building a parking garage with up to 1,600 spaces, with an expected structural life of 75 years, she said. This decreases the chances of reclaiming the Huron Valley as a beautiful amenity. Another negative precedent, Kaplan said, is circumventing the expectations of a 2008 ballot initiative passed by Ann Arbor voters, which requires a referendum in order to sell city parkland. This circumvention breaks with the trust of voters, who had a common understanding of what it meant to sell parkland, she said, and although this situation isn’t technically a sale, the result is the same.

A third negative precedent is accepting that the project will move forward without a due process hearing. Aside from the memorandum of understanding, no city council vote on the overall project has been taken. Yet at the Nov. 14 council work session, Kaplan noted, it was stated that a groundbreaking is expected this spring, and that public art is already being planned. Finally, she said the university has embarked on a sustainability initiative, but bringing up to 1,600 cars into the parking garage is counter to sustainability. She pointed out that Stanford University in California doesn’t subsidize employee parking, as UM does. Instead, as part of its reward system, Stanford pays employees not to park, and offers bus passes and free shuttles. The side benefit is that Stanford doesn’t have to build a lot of parking garages. Kaplan said that hopefully these negative precedents, plus the model of Stanford, are issues to be considered seriously.

Rita Mitchell continued the topic of Fuller Road Station. She began by noting that she’s a steward for the city’s natural area preservation (NAP) program, and takes great interest in parks. She said she appreciated PAC’s work. She asked that commissioners discuss and forward a series of questions to city council, to be reviewed in public, regarding plans to build a parking structure in Fuller Park. She gave a brief history of the property, noting that it was acquired by the city in the 1920s for use as parkland, and was the city’s first golf course. Starting in 1993, it was temporarily leased to UM for parking, and many problems have stemmed from that use. It’s already an area of great traffic congestion, and adding up to 1,600 more cars will create a range of problems, including air pollution, more polluted runoff, and conflicts with pedestrians, buses and bicyclists. Air pollution and health risks will increase in the summer for people, including children, who use Fuller Pool, located across the street, Mitchell said.

The city has spent significant money already, without discussing with the public whether parkland should be repurposed in this way, Mitchell said. She asked that PAC advise the city council to hold a public hearing on the issue, at a time that’s not influenced heavily by upcoming holiday schedules, so that the community can express their concerns. She noted that the council’s Nov. 14 work session had included discussion of art for the structure, and called it “outrageous” that this discussion would happen for a project that hasn’t yet been approved. The university is the primary beneficiary for this project, but the public doesn’t know who is negotiating with the university on this project. “Do you, as commissioners?” she asked. PAC should ask council to be provided with the names of those negotiating, and the specifications of the negotiations. Repurposing parkland subverts the letter and intent of the 2008 ballot initiative that requires a voter referendum on the sale of parkland, she said. The structure would have a 75-year lifespan, and 75 years for use of land is in effect a sale. But there’s been no discussion of a fair market value, or compensation to the citizens or parks system for the use of the land.

Mitchell also said she’s heard about the possible transfer of the Amtrak station to that site. While rail travel is a great idea, she said, there are also a range of concerns. Is it in the best interests of the city to build and run a train station? Should it be placed on parkland? If Ann Arbor is just one commuter stop, why do we need a 1,600-space parking structure? There hasn’t been adequate public discussion on this issue, Mitchell said. In addition, this summer a major water and sewer line were moved in Fuller Park – had that been discussed with PAC? Is the sign that’s now missing from the south end of Fuller Park a silent indication that the land is no longer part of the park system? Park commissioners are stewards of all city parks, Mitchell said. She urged them to start asking pointed questions and advocate for greater public participation in decisions that relate to parkland.

Fuller Road Station: Commissioner Questions

Later in the meeting, Gwen Nystuen asked city staff a series of questions about the Fuller Road Station project. She wondered about the legal status of the city’s parks, and how that relates to the project. She asked about the site plan for Fuller Road Station – if council approves the project, would it constitute a change of land use, and no longer be part of the parks system? These are issues that have never been discussed by city council, she noted. The land is part of the central Huron River valley, an area that has some of the least parkland per capita in the city, she said. This project would reduce it even more, she said, so it’s of concern to PAC. She also wondered about the status of the soccer field that had been in that area.

Colin Smith, the city’s parks and recreation manager, said these are legitimate questions. He asked Nystuen and other commissioners to send him whatever questions they had, and he would forward the questions to the city attorney or other relevant staff. He said the soccer field will be put in place again after utility work is finished on the south side of Fuller Road.

Tim Berla suggested asking representatives from the city attorney’s office, systems planning unit and Eli Cooper, the city’s transportation program manager, to attend a future PAC meeting to discuss the Fuller Road Station project. He noted that sometimes their answers are a bit opaque, and that it’s better to have the chance to ask follow-up questions in person, rather than to just get their answers in writing.

Open Space Millage Update

Ginny Trocchio of The Conservation Fund briefed commissioners on the annual financial report related to the land acquisition for parks and greenbelt programs. [A similar update was given to the greenbelt advisory commission by Kelli Martin, financial manager for the city’s community services unit, at GAC's Sept. 14 meeting.] [.pdf of land preservation annual report]

Under contract with the city, Trocchio is a Conservation Fund staff member who helps administer the city’s greenbelt program and land acquisition program for parks, which are both funded by the 30-year open space and parkland preservation millage. The 0.5 mill tax was approved by voters in 2003. Two-thirds of the millage proceeds are used for the greenbelt program, and one-third is allotted to parkland acquisition. PAC oversees the portion related to parkland acquisition.

Revenues from the millage were $2.164 million in fiscal 2011, down slightly from $2.262 million the previous year. In addition, the greenbelt program brought in nearly $2.8 million in federal grants during the year – the highest amount it has ever received. Those grants are from the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Farm and Ranchland Protection Program, or FRPP. Investment income was $233,614 for the year, down from $492,576 in FY 2010. In total, $5.185 million in revenues came in for the combined greenbelt and parks acquisitions programs in FY 2011.

On the expense side, items included $1.2 million in debt service on the $20 million bond that the city issued in FY 2006. The greenbelt program spent $8.3 million during the year, related to land preservation projects. Parks spent $985,900 during the year, including two major purchases: (1) $592,503 for property off of South Pond owned by Wes Vivian and Elizabeth Kauffman, and (2) $369,160 for property next to the Bluffs Nature Area, owned by the Elks.

In FY 2011, $120,338 was paid to The Conservation Fund, which manages the greenbelt and park acquisition programs. Total administrative costs – including items like information technology (IT) and bond insurance – were $161,195. Administrative expenses accounted for 1.5% of the $10.672 million in total expenditures.

The fund balance stands at $10.3 million, down from $15.79 million a year ago. Of that, the portion for land acquisition for parks is $4.24 million.

Commissioners had no questions for Trocchio about the report.

Promoting Parks and Recreation

Kimberly Mortson, communications liaison for the city of Ann Arbor, gave a presentation on communications, marketing and social media for the parks and recreation system. She said that although she also does some work for other parts of the city’s community services area, 95% of her efforts are for parks and recreation.

Mortson noted that she started using Facebook and Twitter to promote city programs and events about two years ago. One of the advantages is that she can post a message one time, but there are an infinite number of people who’ll see it – and it doesn’t impact her budget, because Facebook and Twitter are free services. There’s a general Facebook page for parks and recreation, and other pages for specific units of parks and recreation, like the Ann Arbor farmers market, Cobblestone Farm and canoe liveries, among others

Twitter page for Ann Arbor parks. (Links to Twitter)

On Twitter, the @a2parks account has over 1,800 followers, Mortson reported. Over the past year, staff has tweeted from events, like the re-opening of West Park after its renovations, or the Heisman Trophy appearance at Hanover Park. They also use the account to promote other activities and programs.

Parks and recreation has also started using FourSquare, a social networking website that allows users to “check in” from their smart phones or other mobile devices, when they arrive at their destination. Mortson said she’s uploaded all the city’s parks and recreation locations to FourSquare – it’s another free marketing tool, she said.

Turning to the city’s website, Mortson told commissioners that the parks and recreation page is one of the most visited pages on the a2gov.org site. There will be changes to the page in the coming weeks and months, she said, to help people use the site more easily. Staff is also working with the state of Michigan on a new mobile application – the MI Camping and Recreation Locator. Now, people can use the application to search for information about state parks, she said. Ann Arbor will be the first city in the state to have its information loaded on that application, so that people can search for Ann Arbor parks information, too.

Some marketing materials for parks and recreation include QR codes, Mortson said – a marking similar to a bar code, which can be read by smart phones. The code is used to direct people to different websites for parks and recreation.

In addition to cost savings, social media and other online marketing is green, Mortson said – it saves paper.

Mortson said the city also advertises parks and recreation events and programs in traditional media, and showed several examples of ads that have run in the Ann Arbor Observer, Ann Arbor Chronicle, AnnArbor.com and other publications. Other venues for promoting parks and recreation include ads on buses and posters within city facilities.

Following Mortson’s presentation, Gwen Nystuen praised her efforts, saying the information showed that her marketing work is succeeding. Colin Smith, the city’s parks and recreation manager, noted that the programs are being well-run, and are being promoted exceedingly well. He gave the example of this summer’s day camps. In an extremely competitive area, two of the city’s four day camps were filled. Smith credited Mortson’s marketing efforts for helping achieve that level of participation.

Sustainability Project

Jamie Kidwell is working for the city on a sustainability project funded by a $95,000 grant the city received from the Home Depot Foundation. At the Nov. 15 meeting, she briefed commissioners on a Sept. 27, 2011 joint working session that involved four city commissions: park, planning, energy and environmental. The session focused on prioritizing existing goals for the city that touch on sustainability issues.

A Sept. 27, 2011 sustainability work session at Cobblestone Farm involved four city commissions: park, planning, energy and environmental.

By way of background, the concept of sustainability focuses on what’s called the triple bottom line: environmental quality, economic vitality, and social equity. The goal of the sustainability project for Ann Arbor is to review the city’s existing plans and organize them into a framework of goals, objectives and indicators that can guide future planning and policy. Other project goals include improving access to the city’s plans and to the sustainability components of each plan, and to incorporate the concept of sustainability into city planning and future city plans.

There’s an 18-month timeline for the project, which started earlier this year. For the first phase, Kidwell reviewed existing city plans – such as the downtown plan, the non-motorized transportation plan, the natural features master plan and others – and interviewed key city staff to determine which plans they use to guide their decision-making. Included in this project are 26 plans, and the second phase has involved organizing the goals for each plan. [.pdf of the list of 26 plans]

Kidwell and other city staff started to develop a framework for these plans, and to identify gaps that exist – goals that the city might want to pursue, but that aren’t laid out in existing plans.

At November’s regular PAC meeting, Kidwell characterized PAC as well-represented among the 26 commissioners at the three-hour sustainability session on Sept. 27. [Among the PAC members attending were Julie Grand, Tim Berla, Tim Doyle, Gwen Nystuen, Sam Offen, and John Lawter.]

Kidwell explained that the staff had identified four planning areas – climate & energy, community, land use & access, and natural systems. During the work session, commissioners met in breakout groups and started to prioritize the 226 goals that staff had pulled out from the city’s 26 planning documents and sorted into the four planning areas.

Kidwell provided a handout that listed the top goals identified at the work session in each planning area:

Climate & Energy

(1) Reduce community-wide greenhouse gas emissions 8% from 2000 levels by 2015.

(2) Commit to energy conservation measures and methods.

(3) Reduce greenhouse gas emissions in municipal operations 50% from 200 levels by 2015.

(4) Use 5% renewable energy community-wide by 2015.

Community

(1) To encourage cooperation between the City educational institutions and between the City and Townships that surround Ann Arbor (Ann Arbor, Pittsfield and Scio) on development issues that affect each other.

(2) Provide job opportunities, raise the standard of living of county residents, promote a sense of place and realize a tax base sufficient to provide public services through a comprehensive set of public and private strategies to foster and attract emerging industries.

Land Use & Access

(1) Encourage dense land use and development patterns which draw people downtown and foster an active street life, contribute to its function as an urban residential neighborhood and support a sustainable transportation system

(2) Establish a network of greenways throughout the City that provide non-motorized connections between various land uses, such as neighborhoods, commercial and employment centers, downtown and the University of Michigan, and that help retain the shape and continuity of natural features, especially along stream corridors, between parks and through new neighborhoods. The network also should extend to greenways located on adjacent township and County properties.

Natural Systems

(1) To protect and restore woodlands, landmark trees, steep slopes, endangered species habitats, prairies and savannahs, the Huron River, creeks and native flora and fauna from the impacts of development.

(2) To improve air quality to protect the health and welfare of the public

(3) Develop, complete and regularly update watershed plans for the City’s tributary waterways to improve water quality and to restore and preserve, waterways, banks, wetlands, floodplains, wildlife habits, native species and natural areas. Plans should include techniques to dramatically reduce the volume and speed of storm water runoff, increase water directed to infiltrate soil, and reduce the volume of toxics and pollutants reaching waterways.

(4) To protect, preserve and restore the natural resources of Washtenaw County through a comprehensive approach to water management and preservation of our natural features.

The 226 goals had been an exhaustive list, Kidwell said, with overlapping goals on a range of topics. The priority goals identified at the working session are a starting point, she said, providing feedback as the staff continues to refine what goals will fit into a sustainability framework.

Among the next steps, Kidwell said, will be to form a joint committee with representatives from each of the four commissions, to continue work on this project. There will also be a lecture series starting in January featuring issues in the four planning areas. Those lectures will be free and open to the public. At the same time, work will continue on developing a sustainability action plan, tying goals to measurable targets, Kidwell said.

Julie Grand, PAC’s chair, reported that she and Karen Levin will serve on the joint committee, representing PAC.

Parking Lot Improvements

Park planner Amy Kuras and Liz Rolla, a city engineer who primarily works on road resurfacing and reconstruction projects, talked about two parking lot improvement projects – at Riverside Park and Veterans Memorial Park.

Kuras said the projects represent a collaboration between the parks and public services units. At Riverside, the current parking lot is frequently under water, so Kuras was planning to address that issue as well as make other changes at the park. [For details, see Chronicle coverage: "Work Planned at Ann Arbor's Riverside Park"]

Sketch of proposed changes to Riverside Park. (Links to larger image)

Canal Street, a city street runs next to the park, also needs repair, so Kuras approached the public services staff to coordinate their work. The parking lot will be moved to a different part of the park – out of the floodplain – and Canal Street will be repaved.

Tim Berla noted that the path at Riverside, running next to the Huron River, is also frequently under water. Will the project address that too? Short of creating an elevated boardwalk, Kuras said, there’s nothing they could do to prevent flooding, given the path’s proximity to the river.

The second project involves the repaving of Dexter Avenue, which runs past Veterans Memorial Park. The road repaving needs to address stormwater issues, while the parks staff is concerned about the park’s path and parking lot, which are falling apart, Kuras said.

Rolla said the road will be reconstructed from Maple to Jackson. Typically, the requirement to capture stormwater runoff is handled through underground oversized pipes and swirl concentrators. But since the road runs past the park, the staff is looking at handling runoff with a bioswale in the park, which would include native plantings. There are federal dollars to pay for stormwater improvements, which will cover about 80% of the project’s cost, Rolla said.

Kuras said benefits include rebuilding the path that runs along Dexter Avenue, and reducing the parking lot’s footprint, though the number of parking spaces will remain unchanged. It’s a better environmental solution, she said, because of the bioswale.

Colin Smith, the city’s parks and recreation manager, said it’s good timing, since the city plans to renovate the softball fields there in 2012. The field renovation will likely start in mid-August, after the softball leagues finish their season.

Gwen Nystuen asked whether the parking lot would be paved with a pervious surface. No, Rolla replied. It’s too wet in that area for pervious pavement. Instead, the lot will be graded so that runoff will drain into the bioswale.

Karen Levin asked whether the park would be closed during this project. The section off of Dexter Avenue will probably be closed for some period, Kuras said, but the ice rink and pool – with an entrance off of Jackson Road – won’t be affected. Rolla added that the Dexter Avenue project will likely run from April through November, but they’ll leave it up to the contractor to decide when to do the parking lot and bioswale part of the project.

Aerial view of the site for the proposed bioswale at Veterans Memorial Park. The road at the top is Dexter Avenue. (Image links to larger file.)

John Lawter asked whether the bioswale will have standing water. There might be some minimal amount of standing water as the plants take hold, Rolla said, but the bioswale will be designed so that water will infiltrate. It’s similar to the bioswale at Buhr Park, she said. There will also be outlets leading to the city’s conventional storm sewer system, she added, in the event of a major rain.

Tim Doyle asked how much maintenance will be required in the bioswale. Rolla replied that the city will have an agreement with the contractor, who will provide maintenance in the area for three years. After that, the plantings should be established and it will be treated as a wet meadow by the city’s natural area preservation program. Smith noted that currently, the area proposed for a bioswale is included in the park’s mowing cycles. That maintenance would eventually be eliminated.

Julie Grand wondered what will happen if balls get hit into the bioswale – how are they retrieved? Smith said it’s a rare day when any balls are hit into the area proposed for the bioswale. Nor is it an area that’s typically used for team warm-ups. “It is really pretty much a dead space,” he said.

Grand also noted that the new parking lot will be closer to the playing fields. Is there more potential for balls to hit the cars? Rolla said it’s proposed to be moved only slightly closer to the fields. Kuras added that the location was discussed at length, and indicated that there’s little concern about the change.

Ruthven Nature Area

Lara Treemore Spears of the city’s natural area preservation (NAP) program updated commissioners on a wetland mitigation sediment removal project at the Ruthven Nature Area. The project involves removing sediment from Millers Creek, which flows through Ruthven, and repairing stream bank erosion that occurred when the creek bypassed its channel because of a sediment dam.

Like many streams in urban areas, Spears said, Millers Creek is surrounded by impervious surfaces. That creates runoff and sediment flowing into the creek, and over the years, has caused the creek to completely change its course.

The city risks losing some of its infrastructure along Huron River Drive and Geddes Road, Spears said – specifically, there’s the risk of damage to an undersized 24‐inch culvert under Geddes, which was not designed to receive the full volume of Millers Creek and could result in road flooding. Removing the sediment would redirect stormwater flow to a former open channel running through the wetlands at Ruthven, and into a larger 60-inch culvert under Geddes. It’s not an area that’s designated as a county drain, she noted, so it doesn’t fall under the purview of the county water resources commissioner’s office.

It’s best to remove the sediment when the ground is frozen, Spears said, so the work will likely begin in January. It will require some clearing, she said, but not nearly as much as has been done along Washtenaw Avenue for the county’s Mallets Creek drain project. The stream bank will be shored up with rock and restored with topsoil, mulch blanket, and native plant seed.

The city has submitted an application for a permit from the Michigan Dept. of Environmental Quality to do the work, and is awaiting review.

The ultimate goal, Spears said, is to reduce erosion. The city’s capital improvements plan (CIP) includes a sediment study of Millers Creek, to see if better long-term solutions can be found for preventing erosion.

Gwen Nystuen noted that there are a lot of  invasive species in Ruthven. She also wondered if the city had any plans to put in more trails through the nature area. There’s a trail with an entrance off of Geddes Road. But Spears noted that for a path off of Huron Parkway, after the first 325 feet it gets quite wet. There is one high quality area – a glacial kame, a hill created by glacial deposits. But most of the runoff flows straight south through a buckthorn thicket, she said – buckthorn is considered an invasive.

Tim Berla asked for Spears to give her best guess as to how long it would be before they’d have to repeat this work. Spears acknowledged that the problem comes from upstream, in an area that the city doesn’t control, and that erosion is aggravated by the surrounding impervious surfaces of roads and other development. Berla asked if there are any additional measures that can be taken, like adding underground swirl concentrators – devices designed to remove suspended solids from stormwater prior to reintroducing it into the city’s stormwater system. Spears said a long-term sediment study of the creek would look at those kinds of potential solutions.

Manager’s Report

Colin Smith, the city’s parks and recreation manager, updated commissioners on a range of items, starting with plans to renovate the city’s softball fields at Veterans Memorial Park, West Park, Southeast Area Park and Allmendinger Park. It’s analogous to the work already done at the soccer fields, he said. The idea is to bring the fields up to an acceptable level of play. Staff will be presenting a budget for the project to PAC at its December meeting. Smith and other staff had held a public meeting on the project earlier this month, which was attended primarily by managers of various leagues that use the fields. Smith reported that they seemed happy to see the project get underway.

Manager’s Report: Argo Bypass

Smith also noted that earlier in the month he had gone canoeing to test the new Argo Dam bypass, even though it had been snowing at the time. The design team is still tweaking the series of pools that make up the channel, and Smith described the stretch as a “bit sportier” than he had expected. It’s exciting to see that project come together, he said. Smith reported that the city council would be voting on a proposed change of scope to the project, which PAC had recommended at its August meeting.

View facing west of the first two pools in the Argo Dam bypass. The concrete pass-through at the far end will be replaced by a new, larger entrance.

The change will add a new entrance to the waterway from Argo Pond to the Huron River. The modification to the project is linked to an offer from DTE to pay for a whitewater section that’s part of the overall project, which freed up city funds for a new entrance from Argo Pond into the bypass. DTE is being required by the state to complete environmental remediation on its nearby property, which prompted its request that the city hold off on the part of the project that runs along the river.

Smith said the city’s agreement with DTE stipulates that the energy firm will hire the same consultant who designed the bypass – Gary Lacy – to design the whitewater features. TSP Environmental, which is building the bypass, will build the new entrance. [The city council subsequently voted to approve the change of scope at its Nov. 21 meeting.]

Tim Doyle wondered whether the change of scope will delay other aspects of the project. Only the whitewater features, which will be located in the river, will be delayed, Smith said. The bypass and new entry will move forward. It will likely be at least another year before the whitewater features are added, he said.

Manager’s Report: Update on Skatepark, Gallup Livery Grants

Smith reported that two state grant applications made by the city of Ann Arbor – $300,000 for the proposed Ann Arbor skatepark at Veterans Memorial Park, and $300,000 for improvements at the Gallup Park canoe livery – ranked in the top 12 out of 100 applications statewide for funding from the Michigan Natural Resources Trust Fund. Smith told PAC members that he received the application scores in the mail earlier in the day.

The skatepark application ranked 12th out of the 100 applications, based on a scoring system used to evaluate the grants. The Gallup Park application ranked 2nd. Smith also reported that a $300,000 grant application for Rutherford Pool in Ypsilanti had ranked 11th in the scoring system. The scoring is an indication of the likelihood that these grants will be awarded, but that announcement won’t be made until Dec. 7, Smith said. It’s also unknown how much money will be awarded this year from the trust fund. He told commissioners that the top 12 grant applications total $2.7 million. There’s a cap of $300,000 per project.

At its March 15, 2011 meeting, PAC had voted to recommend supporting the grant applications. The city council made a similar vote of support on March 21. The council’s resolution of support prioritized the skatepark project over the Gallup renovations – based on the opportunity to leverage $400,000 of matching funds from the Washtenaw County parks and recreation commission.

NAP Volunteers Honored

Toward the beginning of the Nov. 15 meeting, Dave Borneman, manager of the city’s natural area preservation program, introduced two volunteers – Sarah Newman and Drew Lathin – who had been honored in October by the city council as NAP Volunteers of the Year. Newman was recognized for work in the Miller Nature Area and Furstenberg Nature Area. Lathin was honored for work in the Miller Nature Area, as well as for volunteering for NAP’s burn crew and its frog and toad surveys. Borneman read the proclamations that had been given to the two volunteers at the Oct. 26 council meeting, and PAC gave them a round of applause.

Newman thanked commissioners, as well as the staff of NAP, for all their work. She described Furstenberg and Miller as areas that are at the opposite ends of the spectrum. Furstenberg is a gem in the parks system, located along the Huron River and constantly maintained by NAP. Miller, on the other hand, is a large but relatively unknown neighborhood park on the west side that’s full of invasive species.

Her time most recently has been spent at Miller, and her role has been to encourage neighbors to get involved, she said, including work with kids in Peace Neighborhood Center‘s summer day camp, helping them to learn about what a nature area is and to help preserve the trails. “It’s a privilege and pleasure to work with the dedicated, intelligent and super hard-working group that Dave heads,” Newman said.

Dave Borneman, center, head of the city's natural area preservation program, introduced two NAP Volunteers of the year: Drew Lathin and Sarah Newman.

Lathin said it was an honor to be honored, but that he and Newman wouldn’t have gotten much done in Miller Nature Area without the hundreds of hours that other volunteers worked. They’ve had close to 1,000 volunteer hours there since they started working on about a one-acre section of the park.

He said his work at Miller started one winter day when he was walking through and saw all the invasive honeysuckle and buckthorn there. In a moment of insanity, he said, he decided to do something about it. Borneman directed him to Jason Frenzel, who was NAP’s volunteer coordinator at the time. Lathin said he’s happy he has mental health benefits as part of his insurance, because he thinks they’re called for. He praised NAP staff under Borneman’s leadership, saying they aren’t typical government employees – they’re very committed to what they’re doing, and they do great work. Lathin said he’s just the tip of the iceberg, in terms of the volunteers who work for NAP.

Present: Tim Berla, Doug Chapman, Tim Doyle, Julie Grand, Karen Levin, Gwen Nystuen, John Lawter, councilmember Mike Anglin (ex-officio). Also Colin Smith, city parks manager.

Absent: David Barrett, Sam Offen, councilmember Christopher Taylor (ex-officio).

Next meeting: PAC’s meeting on Tuesday, Dec. 20, 2011 begins at 4 p.m. in the city hall second-floor council chambers, 301 E. Huron St., Ann Arbor. [confirm date]

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

The parking presentation was given by Matthew Horning, the city’s treasurer. It included comparative data from other cities, and an analysis of the impact on total revenues that would result from raising fines. His presentation also looked at the impact of providing incentives for early payment across the 34 different categories of violations. For the expired meter fine, which accounts for 65% of all tickets issues, Horning’s analysis assumed a recommended increase from $15 to $20. The schedule of fines presented by Horning is projected to increase annual revenues by $875,287.

The social media presentation was given by Kim Mortson, who works in public relations for community services at the city. She described how she’d used social media like Twitter and Facebook to complement more traditional approaches to promote parks and recreation programs.

In our report, we focus exclusively on the parking violation fines.

Parking Violation Fines

We begin with a bit of historical context, then describe Horning’s presentation, summarize the council’s commentary, and set a possible context for the future discussion – which includes the city’s relationship with the Downtown Development Authority.

When and Why Were Parking Fines Last Raised?

The parking violation fine structure was last changed in Ann Arbor about five years ago. At its June 21, 2004 meeting, the Ann Arbor city council approved that systematic increase. Six years before that, in 1998, fines had also been increased.

At the June 2004 meeting, the resolution to increase parking violation fines included “Whereas” clauses that provided the rationale for the increase [emphasis added]:

Whereas, Safety Services has reviewed the parking violation fines as part of the FY 2004-2005 budget submittal;

Whereas, The City last increased parking violation fines in April 1998;

Whereas, The current parking violation fines were found to be inadequate to cover the costs of service and promote long-term parking at meters rather at the designated long-term parking areas;

City’s Presentation on Parking Fines

City treasurer Matthew Horning’s presentation to the council described the current analysis as stemming from a periodic review of the fine structure, which began nearly a year ago, in December 2008. It was based on the benchmarking of fine structures in communities with similar population densities with universities: Milwaukee, New Haven, Seattle, Austin, Boulder, Madison, Lansing, East Lansing, and Grand Rapids.

To illustrate the benchmarking, here’s just one of the categories – Expired Meter – that Horning presented, showing the dollar amounts for fines in the benchmarked cities. [.PDF file: All Benchmarked Categories in Parking Fine Presentation]:

Exp  Meter     Mil  NH   Sea  Aus  Bou  Mad  Lan ELan  GR   A2   A2 Prop
Early Discntd                 15              5   10        10    10
Fine Amount    20   20   35   30   15   20   15   15   20   15    20
After 14 D          40   60        30   30   25   25   40   30    40
After 30 D          60                  40   35                   60
Default                                 50             60   40    70

-

The final two columns show Ann Arbor’s current fine structure and proposed fine structure. The first row displays the fine that is assessed if it’s paid by the next business day. Under the proposal that the city is recommending, then, an expired meter fine would remain the same $10 as it is now – if paid within one business day.

Currently, the parking fine structure provides a early-payment discount only for expired meters. The recommended fine structure change would include an early-payment discount across all violation categories. The discount would be uniform across all those categories: $10 would be subtracted from the fine amount.

Other features of the staff recommendation on parking violation fines include an increase in Minor and Near Hazard fines from $25 to $35, as well as standardization of all Hazard fines at $50.

The recommendation also extends the payment schedule across all categories, to include a 30-day point before default.

The projected revenue increase is based on the following distribution of how quickly patrons would pay fines, which is based on actual 2008 fine payment data:

Next Bus.    42%
1-14D        32%
14-30D        7%
30+D         10%
Default       9%
Total Rev.    $3,427,994
Rev. Increase $  875,287

-

So the projections see almost three-quarters of the newly-structured fines being paid at the standard fine or the discounted rate. And overall, there would be a 34% increase in revenues.

That 34% overall increase in revenues tracks with the 33% increase in fine for expired meters – from $15 to $20.

Expired Meters account for 65% of all parking tickets. If Over Legal Limit and No Parking Anytime tickets are added to Expired Meter tickets, 83% of all parking tickets are accounted for.

The recommended new rate structure for those three categories, plus a category that city councilmember Tony Derezinski (Ward 2) whimsically suggested at the work session could be eliminated entirely [Derezinski is a Harley enthusiast.]:

                 Disc  Stnd  14D   30D   Deflt
1  Expired Meter
 Current         10    15    30          40
 Proposed        10    20    40    60    70                                  

2  Over Legal
 Current               25    35          45
 Proposed        25    35    55    75    85                                  

4  No Park Any
 Current               25    35          45
 Proposed        25    35    55    75    85                                  

32 Motorcycles
 Current               25    35          45
 Proposed        25    35    55    75    85

-

Council Comments and Questions On Parking Fines

There was some concern expressed about the benchmarking communities.

Margie Teall (Ward 4) wanted to know how fresh the data from the other comparable cities was, and Horning confirmed that it was current. Sabra Briere (Ward 1) asked for further clarification on how the cities were selected for comparison. Horning said that it was population density, and the technology available in those cities. [Ann Arbor has recently rolled out a wireless E-Park kiosk payment system to replace parking meters.] In addition, the benchmarking communities were selected based on their inclusion of a university.

Mayor John Hieftje said it might be possible to make the comparison to Grand Rapids because Grand Rapids was one of the other areas of the state where, like Ann Arbor, the economy was not performing as poorly as the rest of the state. But he expressed concern at the way the fines accelerated after the 14-day window. Is there any way to seek relief, he wondered, where ticketed motorists who found themselves in a tight financial spot could say, “I want to pay, but I can’t do it”?  Horning allowed that it was a good question, something that could be checked out.

Sabra Briere (Ward 1) was interested in seeing comparisons to cities smaller than Milwaukee and Seattle.  Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2) asked for comparative data from Kalamazoo, but Horning said that he’d been unsuccessful in getting their data – he’d give it another try, though. Rapundalo also suggested getting data from one of the Detroit suburbs, like Royal Oak or Livonia.

Rapundalo  got clarification that there are currently 12 full-time employees whose responsibility is to issue parking ticktets – the same employees also enforce community standards ordinances.

Rapundalo indicated that in his trips up to East Lansing, enforcement was “quite vigorous,” and noted that the enforcement officers used electric vehicles. He said that Ann Arbor’s strategy of using officers on foot was healthy, but he wondered if the number of tickets issued might be increased. Hieftje reported having been given a parking ticket in Boulder within two minutes of his meter expiring, and Rapundalo one-upped that with a report that within one minute of meter expiration, he’d received a ticket in East Lansing. But, Rapundalo also indicated that they’d been quite generous when they overcharged him, providing a rebate good for … his next violation.

Rapundalo also drew out the relationship between the University of Michigan and the city of Ann Arbor with respect to parking enforcement. Horning explained that the city accepts the payment of fines from UM-issued tickets. As part of the arrangement, UM pays for one of the two full-time parking referees, who handle appeals, plus overhead to handle the collection and adjudication process.

Sandi Smith (Ward 1) expressed surprise that there were enough contested tickets to require two full-time employees. After the meeting, Horning emailed The Chronicle with complete 2008 data on contested cases: In 2008 there were 10,365 appeals heard for UM and city tickets combined; of those, 2,265 had the fine reduced and 4,657 were voided. That amounts to almost a 70% chance of some kind of success when a ticket is appealed to a parking referee.

Mike Anglin (Ward 5) got clarification that the revenues under discussion were different from revenues that stemmed from the residential permit parking program. He asked for a report on revenues from those programs in neighborhoods near the downtown. Smith said that she’d already asked for a report that might include what he wanted, and that it might be best to wait for that before working on a separate report.

Related to the issue of parking in neighborhoods near downtown is the planned installation of parking meters in some of these neighborhoods as a part of the adopted FY 2010 budget. At the work session, Tom Crawford, the city’s CFO, clarified for The Chronicle that the projected revenue increases for the parking fines assumed only the existing meters, without installation of those additional meters in neighborhoods.

The issue of installing those extra meters is one that Smith has adopted as somewhat of a project. She has persuaded her council colleagues to delay installation of them while ways to replace the revenue they would generate can be found. The FY 2010 budget assumed around $300,000 in revenue from additional parking meters to be installed in neighborhoods near downtown. [The section "Moratorium on Parking Meter Installation" in The Chronicle's coverage of council's Oct. 6 meeting contains additional background.]

Asked by email after the meeting if she saw the increased revenues from the parking fine increases as a possible way to eliminate the need for additional parking meters, Smith replied that she did, but that she had not yet floated the idea to her council colleagues.

Broader Context for Parking Fine Increases: DDA and the City

At Monday’s work session, Sandi Smith (Ward 1) raised the point that the majority of the tickets written were in downtown Ann Arbor –  in the Downtown  Development Authority district. Smith serves on both the city council and the DDA board.

She expressed concern that the fine structure be implemented in a way that did not result in downtown Ann Arbor being perceived as an unfriendly place. Mike Angin (Ward 5) at one point floated the idea of a “freebie” system where a ticket could be forgiven. City administrator Roger Fraser cautioned that it was important to have a system that the enforcement officers could easily enforce.

Smith also pointed out that the DDA was already deploying a strategy of “demand management,” which entails adjusting parking rates (not fines) to encourage people to park where they otherwise would not and to require a premium for parking that was the most desirable. The new E-Park kiosks that have already replaced many individual parking meters are intended to facilitate that strategy. She wanted to make sure that the DDA’s strategy of demand management be integrated into the new fine structure.

In responding to a question from Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5) about the reason behind the change in parking violation fine structures, city administrator Roger Fraser said it was a mix of: (i) demand management, (ii) revenue generation, (iii) deterrent and (iv) competitiveness.

Fraser stressed that “turnover” was something that the fine structure was meant to promote. That’s why there are 30-minute, 1-hour, and 2-hour limits, depending on the specific turnover goals in a given area, he said.

Chronicle Analysis: DDA and the Mutually Beneficial Agreement

Looking more broadly than the need to make the parking violation fine structure mesh with the DDA’s efforts at demand management, the context of the conversation includes the difficult negotiations that lie ahead between the DDA and the city on their agreement under which the DDA administers the city’s parking program – which is not the same as the city’s parking fine enforcement.

In very broad strokes, that city-DDA agreement, struck in 2005, provided that the DDA would pay the city $1 million a year for 10 years, through 2015. According to the terms of the agreement, however, the city could ask for $2 million in any given year, so long as the total amount did not exceed $10 million over the 10-year period. The city asked for $2 million in each of the first five years of the contract, which means that the FY 2010 budget year is the last year that the DDA is obligated under that contract to pay the city.

However, in the FY 2011 budget plan, which was introduced by the city administration in January 2009,  along with the FY 2010 budget recommendations, the city assumed an additional $2 million payment by the DDA. So the city council passed a resolution in early 2009 asking the DDA to renegotiate the city-DDA parking agreement.

The DDA responded by establishing a “mutually beneficial” committee to engage in that negotiation. The city took no action to form a committee of its own until Rene Greff’s term on the DDA board expired in July 2009. Jennifer S. Hall, then-chair of the DDA board, took herself off the DDA’s “mutually beneficial” committee around the same time. Mayor John Hieftje had revealed at a summer DDA retreat that the barrier to the city council appointing its own “mutually beneficial” committee was the membership of Hall and Greff on the DDA’s committee. [Chronicle coverage includes: "DDA: Who's on the Committee?"]

With Hall and Greff off the DDA committee, the city council appointed its own committee, which included Leigh Greden, who at the time represented Ward 3. With Greden’s defeat in the August 2009 Democratic primary, that spot now sits vacant on the city council’s committee.

The two committees have never met.

For the last few monthly DDA board meetings, Sandi Smith – who is a member of city council and the DDA board and a member of both the DDA’s “mutually beneficial” committees – has delivered a report of “nothing new to report.”

But at the DDA board’s April meeting, Greff had reported out the results of the first meeting (with itself) of the DDA’s “mutually beneficial” committee [emphasis added]:

Greff  then ticked through what the committee had done. They had: (i) reviewed history of DDA parking agreements with the city, (ii) reviewed TIF (tax increment financing) capture, and (iii) reached a majority view – with dissent from [Roger] Hewitt – that they should not re-open the discussion of the existing parking agreement. It was not the role of the DDA, Greff said, to cover gaps in the city budget. The committee had given some consideration to taking over city tax-funded activities (e.g., snow removal), and had contemplated purchasing the right to meter enforcement in downtown. [Here's the Chronicle's complete DDA board meeting report for April 2009.]

It’s thus possible that the DDA will begin to insert itself into the conversation on parking violation fines, especially as the approaching FY 2011 budget discussion increases the pressure for the city and the DDA to have their respective “mutually beneficial” committees meet and come to an agreement.

A recent Tweet by the Nonprofit Enterprise at Work (NEW), commenting on Wednesday's Cultural Alliance meeting.

The newly renovated and expanded University of Michigan Museum of Art is a social place: Tuesday night, several hundred people attended a kick-off fête for the Ann Arbor Summer Festival, while Wednesday brought members of the Cultural Alliance of Southeastern Michigan together for their annual meeting. The focus of Wednesday’s day-long event was also social, as in social networking – specifically, how nonprofits can use social media like blogs, Twitter and Facebook to fundraise, market and strengthen their organization.

Being social animals ourselves, The Chronicle dropped by both events, but was able to spend a bit more time at the Cultural Alliance forum, which was well represented by Ann Arbor groups, including the Ann Arbor Civic Theatre, University Musical Society and Arts Alliance, among others.

Linh Song of the NEW Center in Ann Arbor was one of the event’s organizers. She presented a session on fundraising with Twitter, Facebook, Tipjoy and other online tools. She started by defining social media – it’s about conversations, not monologues, with an ethos of honesty and transparency. Participants are people, not organizations –  institutional control is being ceded to consumer control.

Linh Song, an organizer and presenter at Wednesday's Cultural Alliance annual meeting. She is director of npServe, a program of the Ann Arbor-based Nonprofit Enterprise at Work.

Though it’s an effective, low-cost way to reach out, she said, most nonprofits aren’t taking advantage of social media. “We need to catch up.”

Song described Twitter as perfect for communicating with a nonprofit’s constituency and raising money. “It’s like a stream of consciousness coming from your organization.” NEW uses Twitter to promote workshops and other events, but also to pass along links that other nonprofits might find interesting, and to talk about what staff members are doing. (One recent Tweet: “Quality Coffee Friday at the NEW Center today. Tenants are loving @Sweetwaters House Blend and House Decaf!”)

Related to Twitter, TipJoy is an application that allows you to raise money via your Twitter network. It’s an alternative to the more well-known PayPal e-commerce system, Song said, and is preferable for nonprofits because it charges lower administrative fees for the transactions.  Song reported that a nonprofit called charity: water raised $250,000 in a week-long TipJoy campaign.

Facebook is another way to communicate with current or potential supporters of your nonprofit, Song said. She described an application called lil Green Patch, a game that’s free to play – Facebook users create and tend a virtual garden – but that’s also used to raise money for the Nature Conservancy. (The creator of lil Green Patch, David King, will be coming to the area in May for the Michigan Nonprofit Association SuperConference.)

The Meet the Bloggers panel at the Cultural Alliance annual meeting, from left: Mariah Cherem of Yelp, Jessica Rauch of The Generation Project, and Jim Griffioen of Sweet Juniper.

Following Song’s presentation, three panelists talked about how they use blogs and social media. Mariah Cherem, a graduate of Eastern Michigan University, works with Yelp, a site for reviews of restaurants, realtors and a range of other businesses and organizations. Cherem stressed that though Yelp has a nationwide reach, its power lies in allowing you to find reviews or make your own comments about businesses in your local community.

Jim Griffioen, a former attorney and stay-at-home dad, runs the blog Sweet Juniper, which he started after the birth of his daughter, Juniper. He now has about 50,000 visitors to his site each week, and has an agency selling ads for him: “I just get the checks – it’s incredible.” Engaging with readers is crucial, he said. When organizations do a blog, they often don’t do much with it. “If you do it half-ass, no one’s going to read it.” He suggested finding someone who’s passionate about the organization, and letting them blog without fencing them in.

The third panelist was Jessica Rauch, founder of The Generation Project. Her site allows donors to craft their own way of giving, then links them with low-income K-12 students who’ll benefit from their gift. The UM Law School’s Business Law Association, for example, recently held a fundraiser to provide interview clothes for Detroit students seeking after-school or summer jobs.

Now, back to the Ann Arbor Summer Festival kickoff party the previous day.  Who have they booked for this year? Their website is counting down the days to the official public announcement  – currently with three days left.  Based on the brochure they were handing around at the party, though, there’ll be something similar to but not exactly Beyonce, plenty for folks who mind their steps, a martini that you can’t drink, some people who are just making stuff up, plus eleven more acts to choose from.