The legislation funds grants and loans for what the staff memo accompanying the resolutions describes as “asset management plan development, stormwater management plan development, sewage collection and treatment design plan development, and state-funded loans to construct projects identified in the asset management plans.” [.pdf of FAQ by the State of Michigan on the SAW program] [PA 511 of 2012] [PA 560 of 2012] [PA 561 of 2012] [PA 562 of 2012]

Although communities that are awarded grants can receive a maximum of $2 million in total grant funds through the SAW program, the city of Ann Arbor is applying for the following six grants, on the idea that it will maximize its chances if the state uses a lottery type system. The first $1 million has a 10% local match requirement, and the second $1 million of grant money has a 25% local match requirement.

The city is applying for funding for some projects that have already been started, because money awarded through the SAW program can be spent retroactively as early as Jan. 2, 2013. The council passed six resolutions corresponding to grant requests from the Michigan Dept. of Environmental Quality for the following projects.

• Asset Management Plan for the Sanitary System ($1.1 million): Local match requirement is 10% of first million ($100,000) plus 25% of second million ($25,000) for a total of $125,000.
• Asset Management Plan for the Stormwater System ($1.1 million): Local match requirement is 10% of first million ($100,000) plus 25% of second million ($25,000) for a total of $125,000.
• Sanitary Sewer Wet Weather Evaluation Project (retroactive) ($1.2 million): Local match requirement is 10% of first million ($100,000) plus 25% of second million ($50,000) for a total of $150,000.
• Stormwater Model Calibration Project (retroactive) ($750,000): Local match requirement is 10% of first million ($75,000) or 25% of second million ($187,500) for a maximum of $187,500.
• Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) Asset Management Program ($350,00): Local match requirement is 10% of first million ($35,000) or 25% of second million ($87,500) for a maximum of $87,500.
• Asset Management Plan for the Wastewater Treatment Plant and the Sanitary Sewer System ($1.5 million): Local match requirement is 10% of first million ($100,000) plus 25% of second million ($125,000) for a total of $225,000.

This brief was filed from the city council’s chambers on the second floor of city hall, located at 301 E. Huron. A more detailed report will follow.

The sign on the door to the Ann Arbor city council chamber, installed in the summer of 2013, includes Braille.

The Thursday meeting, shifted from its usual Monday slot due to the Tuesday elections, is the last one with the current composition of the 11-member council. The outcome of Tuesday’s elections left all incumbents in place except for Marcia Higgins (Ward 4), whose departure was decided in the August Democratic primary. Ward 4 primary winner Jack Eaton will be the single new face on the council at its Nov. 18 meeting. At the Nov. 7 meeting, Higgins will likely receive a customary parting gift from her colleagues, to acknowledge her 14 years of service on the council.

The agenda is relatively heavy, featuring at least 34 voting items. This preview includes a more detailed explanation of several of those items, but first provides a thematic overview.

The city’s downtown factors prominently on the agenda in at least three ways. The city council will be asked to consider passing a resolution to direct the city administrator to negotiate a sales agreement for the city-owned property along William Street between Fourth and Fifth avenues, known as the old Y lot. The council will also be considering a revision to the city ordinance regulating the tax increment finance (TIF) capture of the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority. That’s been on the agenda since February, but now a committee of councilmembers and DDA board members has put forth a competing recommendation, which will also be on the Nov. 7 agenda.

Also related to downtown, the council will be formally accepting a report completed by the city’s park advisory commission with recommendations related to downtown parks.

Non-motorized issues also factor prominently as a theme of the Nov. 7 agenda. In addition to an update of the city’s non-motorized transportation plan, the council will consider establishing a pedestrian safety task force. The council’s agenda also includes the first of a series of resolutions for two separate sidewalk projects – one on Stone School Road and another on Scio Church Road. The council’s resolutions for those projects, directing the design work and detailed cost estimates, are the first actions necessary for some of the funding of the sidewalks to be special assessed to the adjacent property owners.

An additional project related to non-motorized issues, but not obviously so, is a contract with the Michigan Dept. of Transportation to resurface a portion of Huron Street from Main Street westward as Huron becomes Jackson Avenue on to I-94, as well as a section of South Maple. The intent is to re-stripe the roadway, reducing the lanes from four to three and adding bicycle lanes.

The sidewalk and street projects are among several capital improvement-related items on the agenda, including one that would help stabilize the earthen berm adjacent to Barton Dam. The council will also be considering a half dozen resolutions that will authorize applying for state grants that could fund capital asset projects for the city.

In addition to the items related to the city’s physical infrastructure, the council has several items that could be described as relating to the city’s social infrastructure. Those items relate to grants from the state and federal government to the 15th District Court for several of its specialty courts that focus on drug offenses, domestic violence, and veterans issues. The council will also be asked to approve a modified continuation of its coordinated funding approach to human services.

The agenda includes some council initiatives announced at the council’s previous meeting on Oct. 21. One of those is a resolution requesting that the University of Michigan decommission a recently constructed digital billboard near the football stadium.

Another one is a resolution directing the education of city officials on professional conduct. Related tangentially to those ethical considerations are the approvals of new bylaws for two of the city’s boards and commissions – the planning commission and the design review board.

This article includes a more detailed preview of many of these agenda items. More details on other meeting agenda items are available on the city’s online Legistar system. Readers can also follow the live meeting proceedings Thursday evening on Channel 16, streamed online by Community Television Network.

The Chronicle will be filing live updates from city council chambers during the meeting, published in this article below the preview material. Click here to skip the preview section and go directly to the live updates. The meeting is scheduled to start at 7 p.m.

Downtown

The agenda includes several items related to the downtown area.

Downtown: DDA Ordinance

On the Nov. 7 agenda are now two possible revisions to the city’s ordinance regarding how the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority’s TIF capture is regulated (Chapter 7). The first version has been under consideration by the council since Feb. 19, 2013.

The second version is the result of recommendations by a committee of DDA board members and city councilmembers that has met four times since Aug. 26, most recently on Oct. 30. That committee was established at the council’s July 1, 2013 meeting – after the first version achieved initial approval at the council’s April 1, 2013 meeting. Representing the council on the joint committee are Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3), Christopher Taylor (Ward 3), Jane Lumm (Ward 2) and Sally Petersen (Ward 2). Representing the DDA are Sandi Smith, Roger Hewitt, Bob Guenzel and Joan Lowenstein.

A range of possible parliamentary mechanisms are available to the council for handling the two competing versions of the ordinance amendment. One approach would be to put off deciding between the two versions at the Nov. 7 meeting – by postponing the first version and giving the second version an initial approval. That could move the debate to the council’s Nov. 18 meeting – after the new composition of the city council is seated.

Another parliamentary approach on Nov. 7 could be to amend the first version through substitution of the second. Or the council could vote down the first version and consider the second version. The council could also vote to give the first version final approval and not consider the second version when it’s reached on the agenda. The first version appears first on the agenda – but that order could be re-arranged at the start of the meeting.

The first version, which is in front of the council for final approval, would clarify the existing language of the ordinance regulating the DDA’s TIF capture in a way that would disallow the DDA’s preferred interpretation of a restriction on TIF revenue. The restriction that’s already expressed in the ordinance language is defined by reference to the amount of growth in taxable value in the DDA district that’s anticipated in the DDA’s TIF plan – a foundational document of the DDA. When those restrictions are applied to the DDA’s TIF revenue, then the amount of TIF received by the DDA would be roughly $4 million in FY 2015. By way of comparison, in the current fiscal year (FY 2014), under its preferred interpretation, the DDA looks to capture approximately $4.5 million of the taxes levied by other jurisdictions.

Under the first version revision, that roughly $0.5 million difference would be proportionally divided among the taxing jurisdictions, which together levy roughly 27.5 mills of taxes in the DDA district. Proportionally, that translates to: city of Ann Arbor (60%), Washtenaw County (21%), Washtenaw Community College (13%), and Ann Arbor District Library (6%). So out of a $500,000 return to other taxing jurisdictions, the city of Ann Arbor would receive $300,000. However, that $300,000 would be distributed proportionally to the funds generating Ann Arbor’s levy. Part of Ann Arbor’s levy is a transportation tax that is passed through to the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority. So of the $300,000 that would be returned to the city, about $40,000 of it would be passed through to the AAATA.

However, the total amount that would be returned on the first version revision is projected to rise each year from that roughly $0.5 million, to somewhere in the neighborhood of $2 million in FY 2017 based on projects in the downtown under construction and in the approval process.

The second version, proposed by the committee, would set a cap on DDA TIF revenue that would not apply at all until FY 2017 and would result in roughly $6.1 million of TIF revenue to the DDA that year, with an estimated return of $300,000 total to the other taxing jurisdictions. The city’s portion of that would be roughly $180,000, distributed proportionally across all its funds that get income from a captured levy, including the general fund.

Another major difference between the first version and the committee-recommended version of the Chapter 7 ordinance change is that the first version includes revisions to governance of the DDA, which the committee-recommended version omits. Those governance revisions include (1) a two-term limit for service on the DDA board; (2) a prohibition against elected officials, other than the mayor, serving on the DDA board; and (3) service of the mayor on the board (a possibility explicitly provided in the DDA state enabling legislation) subject to annual approval by the city council. If the council did not approve the mayor’s service on the DDA board in a given year, then that spot would go to the city administrator.

Downtown: Y Lot Sale

A resolution added to the agenda on Friday, Nov. 1, 2013 would direct city administrator Steve Powers to negotiate a sales agreement with Dennis Dahlmann for the purchase of the city-owned property north of William Street between Fourth and Fifth avenues in downtown Ann Arbor. Dahlmann has offered $5.25 million for the property, known as the Y lot. It had been listed at $4.2 million. [.pdf of Dahlmann offer 10.17.13]

If those negotiations are not successful, then the resolution directs the city administrator to negotiate with CA Ventures (Clark Street Holdings). City sources report that city administrator Steve Powers won’t be altering his recommendation to negotiate first with Dahlmann, despite the CA Ventures increase of its offer to $5.35 million – because that increased amount was received after the deadline for offers, which was firm and clearly communicated to bidders. The city received five bids on the property by the Oct. 18 deadline. [.pdf of summary page by broker Jim Chaconas]

The memo accompanying the Nov. 7 resolution states:

The offers from Dennis Dahlmann and CA Ventures are the strongest (cash, no contingencies, sales agreement, close in 2013) of the five proposals. Differences between the two offers are slight, but may be significant to city council. Dahlmann is proposing a purchase price of $5,250,000. CA Ventures is proposing $5,150,000. Dahlmann is proposing to build to less than the maximum density allowed by D1 zoning. CA Ventures’ offer assumes the ability to build to the maximum density allowed by D1 zoning.

The Nov. 7 resolution directs the city administrator to provide a purchase agreement for the property for the council’s consideration at its Nov. 18 meeting. That purchase agreement is supposed to include protections against the property not being developed.

While the council’s Nov. 7 meeting follows the Nov. 5 city council elections, the Nov. 18 meeting is the first meeting of the newly constituted council. There will be only one new councilmember – Jack Eaton, who defeated incumbent Marcia Higgins in the August Ward 4 Democratic primary. The Nov. 7 resolution is sponsored by mayor John Hieftje and Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3).

The city had hired Colliers International and local broker Jim Chaconas to handle the possible sale, as the city faces a $3.5 million balloon payment this year from the purchase loan it holds on that property. The city has owned the land for a decade.

If the sale is not completed by the end of the year when the balloon payment is due, the Bank of Ann Arbor would, according to city sources, maintain the existing interest rate on the loan (3.89%) and extend it for up to a year to allow for the city to finalize a sale.

Downtown: Parks

A subcommittee of the park advisory commission (PAC) has been meeting since early 2013 to explore the possibilities for a new downtown park. The subcommittee delivered its recommendations at the Oct. 15, 2013 meeting of PAC. [.pdf of 21-page full subcommittee report] On Nov. 7, the city council will be asked to formally accept the subcommittee’s report.

Ingrid Ault chaired the subcommittee, which also included Julie Grand, Alan Jackson and Karen Levin. The subcommittee’s work is also meant to supplement the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority’s Connecting William Street project.

The subcommittee’s work was guided by this mission statement:

To determine whether and what additional parks are wanted and/or needed in downtown Ann Arbor, focusing on city-owned parcels in the DDA district while maintaining awareness of additional nearby properties, for example: Liberty Plaza, 721 N. Main and 415 W. Washington. The “deliverable” will be a set of recommendations for the City Council.

The eight recommendations are wide-ranging, but include a site-specific recommendation to develop a new park/open space area on the top of the Library Lot underground parking structure. Now a surface parking lot, the site is owned by the city and is situated just north of the Ann Arbor District Library’s downtown building. The recommendation calls for only a portion of the site to be used for a new park/open space, and stresses that AADL should be involved in the planning process. The AADL board and staff discussed this recommendation at their Oct. 21, 2013 meeting.

Downtown – and Citywide: Park Fee Waiver

The council will be giving initial consideration to a change to the city’s ordinances so that charitable distribution of goods for basic human needs could be conducted in city parks without incurring a fee for park use. The proposal is not restricted to downtown parks, but the idea originated from an issue that emerged in connection with Liberty Plaza, which is a downtown park.

The recommendation for the ordinance change came from the city’s park advisory commission at its Sept. 17, 2013 meeting. This broader policy change comes three months after the Ann Arbor city council waived all rental fees for the use of Liberty Plaza during a one-year trial period, based on a PAC recommendation. That city council action came at its July 15, 2013 meeting.

The Liberty Plaza fee waiver was approved in response to a situation that arose earlier in the spring, when the city staff considered applying fees to the hosting of Pizza in the Park at Liberty Plaza – a homelessness outreach ministry of a local church. The proposal recommended by PAC on Sept. 17, and on the council’s Nov. 7 agenda, would amend Chapter 39, Section 3:6 of the city code. [.pdf of revised ordinance language]

It would be a permanent fee waiver for this specific purpose – the charitable distribution of goods for basic human needs – but it would still require that organizations get a permit to use the park, and follow permitting procedures, including clean up obligations.

Non-Motorized Issues

Several items on the council’s Nov. 7 agenda relate to non-motorized issues.

Non-Motorized Issues: Non-Motorized Transportation Plan Update

The council is being asked to adopt an update to the city’s non-motorized transportation plan, which is part of the city’s master plan. The planning commission adopted the plan at its Sept. 10, 2013 meeting. [.pdf of draft 2013 non-motorized transportation plan update]

Map identifying geographic areas for improvements for pedestrians and bicyclists, as noted in the 2013 non-motorized transportation plan update.

The update will be an amendment to the main non-motorized transportation plan, which was adopted in 2007. The new document is organized into three sections: (1) planning and policy updates; (2) updates to near-term recommendations; and (3) long-term recommendations.

Examples of planning and policy issues include design guidelines, recommendations for approaches like bike boulevards and bike share programs, and planning practices that cover education campaigns, maintenance, crosswalks and other non-motorized elements for pedestrians and bicyclists.

For example, the update recommends that the city begin developing a planning process for bike boulevards, which are described as “a low-traffic, low-speed road where bicycle interests are prioritized.” Sections of West Washington (from Revena to First), Elmwood (from Platt to Canterbury) and Broadway (from its southern intersection with Plymouth to where it rejoins Plymouth about a mile to the northeast) are suggested for potential bike boulevards.

Near-term recommendations include lower-cost efforts like re-striping roads to install bike lanes and adding crossing islands. Longer-term projects that were included in the 2007 plan are re-emphasized: the Allen Creek Greenway, Border-to-Border Trail, Gallup Park & Fuller Road paths, and a Briarwood-Pittsfield pedestrian bridge.

Non-Motorized Issues: Pedestrian Safety

Chuck Warpehoski (Ward 5) and Sabra Briere (Ward 1) announced at the council’s Oct. 21 meeting that they’d be bringing forward a proposal to establish a pedestrian safety task force. At the Oct. 21 meeting, Warpehoski stated that the effort was not meant as an alternative to the efforts that other councilmembers are making to bring forward a repeal of the city’s pedestrian crosswalk ordinance.

The city’s ordinance differs from the Uniform Traffic Code (UTC) in two respects: (1) requiring motorists to stop for pedestrians, not just to slow as to yield; and (2) requiring motorists to take action to accommodate pedestrians standing at the curb at a crosswalk, not just those pedestrians who have already entered the crosswalk. The resolution establishing the task force acknowledges that many residents are concerned that current city policies create an unsafe environment for pedestrians, cyclists and drivers.

The pedestrian safety and access task force would consist of nine residents, including “representatives from organizations that address the needs of school-aged youth, senior citizens, pedestrian safety, and people with mobility impairments.” Applications from interested citizens should be turned in to the mayor’s office by Nov. 22, 2013. [.pdf of standard city board and commission task force application] The intent is to appoint the task force at the Dec. 2, 2013 city council meeting.

The task force would deliver a report by early September 2014. That report would include recommendations for “improvements in the development and application of the Complete Streets model, using best practices, sound data and objective analysis.”

Some of the recent community conversation has included the fact that traffic crashes involving a pedestrian have shown an increase in the last two years, the period during which Ann Arbor adopted its local ordinance that requires more of motorists than the UTC. The charts below are by The Chronicle using data from Michigan Traffic Crash Facts.

Pedestrian Traffic Crashes by Year: Ann Arbor

Pedestrian Traffic Crashes by Year: SEMCOG region.

Pedestrian Traffic Crashes by Year: SEMCOG Region by County

Pedestrian Crashes by Year: Washtenaw County Outside Ann Arbor

Capital Projects

The Nov. 7 city council agenda includes a number of resolutions involving capital projects and expenses, some of which relate to non-motorized issues.

Capital Projects: I-94 Business Loop ($301,600)

This project would resurface the section of Huron Street from Main Street westward as Huron becomes Jackson Avenue on to I-94. The project will include a re-striping to reduce the number of lanes from four to three and add bicycle lanes. An agreement with the Michigan Dept. of Transportation is required because the city must contribute 12.5% of the funding for the resurfacing. That accounts for $198,700. Additional funding is needed to pay for the resurfacing of the portion of South Maple Road, as part of the project. South Maple is a city-owned street. MDOT has agreed to include the South Maple resurfacing as part of the project, but it will be funded by the city of Ann Arbor for $102,900.

Capital Projects: Stone School Road Sidewalk

On the council’s agenda is the first of a series of resolutions that could lead to special assessment of property owners on Stone School Road for constructing sidewalks, curbs and gutters as part of a road reconstruction project. The resolution simply directs the city administrator to prepare plans and specifications for the sidewalk improvement project, determine an estimate of the cost, and make a recommendation on what portion of the cost should be special assessed.

Capital Projects: Scio Church Sidewalk

Also on the council’s agenda is the first in a series of resolutions that could lead to special assessment of property owners on Scio Church, west of Seventh Street, for constructing a sidewalk there to eliminate a gap. The resolution directs the city administrator to prepare plans and specifications for the sidewalk improvement project, determine an estimate of the cost, and make a recommendation on what portion of the cost should be special assessed. The Scio Church resolution appropriates $35,000 for the design work. [For Chronicle coverage of a neighborhood meeting on the Scio Church sidewalk, see "Sidewalks: Build, Repair, Shovel"]

Capital Projects: Barton Dam Repair

The council will be asked to approve a contract with Catskill Remedial Contracting Services Inc. to install a “drainage blanket” for the earthen berm adjoining Barton Dam ($123,685). A drainage blanket is a pervious but stable layer of material installed directly at the base of a structure to facilitate drainage. The installation is meant to repair a “boil” that has surfaced in the drainage ditch at the base of the right embankment at the dam. The boil has been identified as a potential cause of failure for the embankment by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) – which is responsible for regulating the dam, because the dam generates electric power.

The contract is recommended to be awarded to Catskill, even though Pranam GlobalTech provided the lowest bid. The staff memo cites “substandard performance” by Pranam GlobalTech on two other city projects, which led to the disqualification of their bid. The cost of the project will be split between the water fund (as the dam creates a pond from which the city draws the majority of its drinking water) and the general fund (for the hydroelectric operations).

The council had been alerted to the need for this project earlier this year, at a Feb. 11, 2013 work session on the FY 2014 budget. From The Chronicle’s report of that session:

In addition to the concrete and steel part of the dam, a roughly 3/8-mile long earthen embankment is part of the structure that forms Barton Pond, [public services area administrator Craig] Hupy explained. FERC (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission) has required the city to do some investigative work, and the city thinks there’ll be some follow-up work required when that investigative work is completed. [FERC is involved as a regulator because the Barton Dam generates electricity.]

Responding to a question from [Ward 3 councilmember Christopher] Taylor about the anticipated cost of the additional work, Hupy indicated that it would be “six figures.” The city is putting about $400,000 total in various parts of the budget for it. But until the study work is completed later this spring, the amount can’t be more precise, Hupy indicated. Because Barton is a federally controlled dam, whatever the work the city does will be what the regulator demands that the city does or doesn’t do. “Stay tuned,” Hupy told Taylor.

Capital Projects: Technical Engineering Services

The council will be asked to approve two different contracts that resulted from a bid it put out in June 2013 – for technical engineering services to support the water treatment services unit with capital, operation, and maintenance project support for the water system, dams, and hydroelectric generating stations. One of the contracts is with Stantec Consulting Michigan Inc. ($250,000). The other contract is with Tetra Tech of Michigan ($250,000).

Capital Projects: Ozone

The council will be asked to approve a purchase order with Ozonia for ozone generator dielectrics ($68,209). The city uses ozone in the disinfection process for its drinking water. The city is currently out of spare dielectric units, which are the components that convert oxygen gas to ozone gas. So this resolution would allow the city to have replacement parts on hand if the units fail.

Capital Projects: State Funding of Water Asset Projects

Six resolutions appear on the council’s agenda related to state legislation passed in 2012 that forms the statutory framework of the Stormwater, Asset Management and Wastewater (SAW) program – a grant program. The legislation funds grants and loans for what the staff memo accompanying the resolutions describes as “funding for grants and loans for asset management plan development, stormwater management plan development, sewage collection and treatment design plan development, and state-funded loans to construct projects identified in the asset management plans.” [.pdf of FAQ by the State of Michigan on the SAW program] [PA 511 of 2012] [PA 560 of 2012] [PA 561 of 2012] [PA 562 of 2012]

Although communities that are awarded grants can receive a maximum of $2 million in total grant funds through the SAW program, the city of Ann Arbor is applying for the following six grants, on the idea that it will maximize its chances if the state uses a lottery type system. The first $1 million has a 10% local match requirement, and the second $1 million of grant money has a 25% local match requirement.

The city is applying for funding for some projects that have already been started, because money awarded through the SAW program can be spent retroactively as early as Jan. 2, 2013. The council will be considering six resolutions corresponding to grant requests from the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality for the following projects.

• Asset Management Plan for the Sanitary System ($1.1 million): Local match requirement is 10% of first million ($100,000) plus 25% of second million ($25,000) for a total of $125,000.
• Asset Management Plan for the Stormwater System ($1.1 million): Local match requirement is 10% of first million ($100,000) plus 25% of second million ($25,000) for a total of $125,000.
• Sanitary Sewer Wet Weather Evaluation Project (retroactive) ($1.2 million): Local match requirement is 10% of first million ($100,000) plus 25% of second million ($50,000) for a total of $150,000.
• Stormwater Model Calibration Project (retroactive) ($750,000): Local match requirement is 10% of first million ($75,000) or 25% of second million ($187,500) for a maximum of $187,500.
• Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) Asset Management Program ($350,00): Local match requirement is 10% of first million ($35,000) or 25% of second million ($87,500) for a maximum of $87,500.
• Asset Management Plan for the Wastewater Treatment Plant and the Sanitary Sewer System ($1.5 million): Local match requirement is 10% of first million ($100,000) plus 25% of second million ($125,000) for a total of $225,000.

Social Infrastructure

In addition to physical infrastructure items, the council’s Nov. 7 agenda also includes several pieces of business that could be described as related to social infrastructure.

Social Infrastructure: 15th District Court

The council will be asked to consider authorizing five grant-related items involving the specialty court functions of the 15th District Court. [For background on the 15th District Court and some of its functions, see Chronicle coverage: "Round 1 FY 2014: 15th District Court"]

• Accept three-year $300,000 supplemental grant from the U.S. Department of Justice to enhance countywide efforts to prevent domestic violence, effective Sept. 12, 2013 through Sept. 30, 2016. Of the grant total, $181,000 will reimburse the city for the salaries for a full-time domestic violence probation officer, a half-time system coordinator, and a part-time data entry clerk. Another $5,000 will reimburse the city for training expenses required by the U.S. Dept. of Justice. The remaining $114,000 will reimburse the city for a contract with SafeHouse Center to provide domestic violence prevention services.
• Authorize contract with SafeHouse to provide domestic violence prevention services ($114,000). Under terms of the contract, SafeHouse Center will provide confidential support, information and referrals for victims of domestic violence cases in the 15th District Court, 14A District Court and 14B District Court; monitor court and probation activity as it relates to victim safety; work collaboratively to enhance victim safety; and offer advice and training to judges, magistrates, probation and compliance officers and community partners.
• Accept Michigan Supreme Court drug court grant ($144,000). The 15th District Court’s sobriety court is “hyper-intensive probation,” which follows sentencing. The court assigns a full-time probation officer to the sobriety court for a program that lasts 18-24 months and includes monitoring of participants’ attendance at treatment programs, their progress in treatment, how they’re spending their time at work and doing community service. Reporting requirements are extensive. Participants must take frequent portable breath tests (PBTs) and urine tests. The majority of sobriety court participants are second-offender DWI cases, but offenses need not be driving-related. Also eligible to participate in sobriety court are, for example, retail fraud (shoplifting) offenders and misdemeanor drug possession offenders. Some of that grant money will fund a contract with Dawn Farm.
• Authorize contract with Dawn Farm ($88,000). The contract is for out-patient drug abuse counseling as part of the 15th District Court’s sobriety court.
• Accept Michigan Supreme Court veterans treatment court program grant ($92,279).

Social Infrastructure: Coordinated Funding

The council will be asked to authorize the basic approach that it has taken to human services funding in the past, but with some modifications. The funds would continue to be managed through Washtenaw County’s office of community & economic development, using the coordinated funding approach.

The county is one of five partners in the coordinated funding approach. Other partners are city of Ann Arbor, United Way of Washtenaw County, Washtenaw Urban County, and the Ann Arbor Area Community Foundation. It began as a pilot program in 2010; this is the second time that the program has been extended.

The coordinated funding process has three parts: planning/coordination, program operations, and capacity-building. The approach targets six priority areas, and identifies lead agencies for each area: (1) housing and homelessness – Washtenaw Housing Alliance; (2) aging – Blueprint for Aging; (3) school-aged youth – Washtenaw Alliance for Children and Youth; (4) children birth to six – Success by Six; (5) health – Washtenaw Health Plan; and (6) hunger relief – Food Gatherers.

Last year, TCC Group – a consulting firm based in Philadelphia – was hired to evaluate the process. As a result of that review, several changes were recommended. One of those changes is that funding would not necessarily be allocated to the six priority areas based on the proportion of funding allocated in the past. Instead, allocations among the six priority areas would be based on identified community-level outcomes, the strategies that align with them, and how each are prioritized. An additional change would broaden the pre-screening process so that smaller nonprofits could be accommodated.

Recommendations for specific funding allocations will be made in spring 2014. In addition, the RNR Foundation – a family foundation that funded TCC Group’s evaluation of the coordinated funding approach – will now be an additional funder in this process. One of the goals of coordinated funding is to attract more partners, such as private foundations.

The Washtenaw County board of commissioners gave initial approval to the continued use of the coordinated funding approach at its Oct. 16, 2013 meeting.

Ethics

The council’s agenda includes a couple of items that relate to ethics.

Ethics: Professional Standards of Conduct

Sally Petersen (Ward 2) is bringing forward a resolution that does not include “ethics” in the title, but addresses the kind of issues that could be described under the general rubric of “ethics.” The resolution directs an educational effort on Public Act 317 of 1968, which is the state’s conflict-of-interest statute.

A final “resolved” clause directs the council’s rules committee to draft standards of conduct for local officials based on Public Act 196 of 1973, which applies to state employees of the executive branch and appointees of the governor. The final resolved clause – if it’s approved, and if the council adopts a standard that’s recommended by the council rules committee and it’s strictly followed – would end any unauthorized leaks of information from the city government.

Ethics: Consent Agenda – Planning Commission Bylaws

The Nov. 7 consent agenda includes approval of new bylaws for two entities – the city’s design review board and the city planning commission.

The planning commission had given approval to changes in its bylaws at its July 16, 2013 meeting. Those changes related to the order of agenda items, and the length of time required for special accommodations, such as sign language interpreters. [.pdf of planning commission bylaws on Nov. 7 city council agenda]. The design review board has not had bylaws up to now.

Not the subject of a revision, but still the source of some recent community interest, is the following clause from the planning commission bylaws, which imposes a limitation on the ability of a councilmember to address the city planning commission:

Section 9. A member of the City Council shall not be heard before the Commission as a petitioner, representative of a petitioner or as a party interested in a petition during the Council member’s term of office.

That part of the bylaws surfaced recently, when councilmembers Chuck Warpehoski (Ward 5) and Sumi Kailasapathy on separate occasions sought to address the planning commission – Warpehoski on July 16, 2013 and Kailasapathy on Aug. 13, 2013.

Based on an analysis in the Michigan Municipal League’s “Handbook for Municipal Officials,” it may be problematic for a city councilmember to address a body like the planning commission. That’s not based on having a property interest in a matter, but rather because the council is the appointing body for the commission. The handbook presents the following scenario as an ethical exercise – using the zoning board of appeals (ZBA). From the MML Handbook:

Situation #2 Before you were elected to the city council you served on your city’s zoning board of appeals (ZBA), so you know the ZBA procedures very well. A few months after your election to council, your neighbor and campaign manager files a petition with the ZBA seeking a variance. Since you know how the ZBA works, he asks you to accompany him to the ZBA and to speak on his behalf. Should you do it?

The analysis offered by the handbook is the following:

No. The Michigan Court of Appeals has labeled this situation as “patently improper” and an abuse of public trust for the reason that the person making the argument to the ZBA is also one of the people charged with appointing the ZBA. This creates duress on the ZBA, raising doubt about the impartiality of the ZBA’s decision. Any decision made by the ZBA under these circumstances is void. See Barkey v. Nick, 11 Mich App 361 (1968).

The implication of the Ann Arbor city planning commission bylaw is that it’s permissible for a city councilmember to address the commission exactly when the councilmember is not the petitioner or does not have an interest in the matter. That situation appears to be explicitly deemed unethical by the MML Handbook, if the handbook’s analysis is extended from the ZBA to the planning commission.

Ethics: Consent Agenda – Rental Housing Inspection

A consent agenda item increases the amount of a contract the city has with the accounting firm Plante Moran for a thorough review of the city’s permitting processes. That review comes in the context of the discovery that some rental housing permits had not been properly verified, according to city sources. Steps taken by the city staff to correct the problems included a review of all questionable permits. That included site visits to eight residential properties, six of them occupied, to ensure no one was living in unsafe conditions.

Re-inspection continues of residential and business properties to verify issued permits, to ensure the accuracy of the city’s records. Property owners are not being charged additional costs for re-inspection. The city anticipated that over 80 properties would be re-inspected as of Oct. 30. The permits for those 80 properties compare to a total number of 10,000 building and rental permits issued annually.

Miscellaneous

A number of other items appear on the agenda. Here are a few highlights.

Misc: Consent Agenda

Three other consent agenda items include a $60,000 contract with Utilities Instrumentation Service for electrical and instrumentation support services. According to a staff memo, the scope of UIS work will include “transformer testing, infrared testing of switchgear, testing of medium voltage breakers at City substations and generators, programming and calibration of instrumentation, Supervisory Control And Data Acquisition (SCADA) support and troubleshooting, Programmable Logic Controller (PLC) programming, and tuning and testing of dam and hydroelectric generator controls.”

A fourth item on the consent agenda sets a public hearing for establishing an industrial development district (for potential tax abatements) at 1901 E. Ellsworth. That hearing will be held on Dec. 2, 2013.

Misc: Church Site Plan

The council will be asked to approve a site plan for the expansion of the Ann Arbor Christian Reformed Church at 1717 Broadway St. The city planning commission recommended approval of the project at its Oct. 1, 2013 meeting.

Aerial view of site for the Ann Arbor Christian Reformed Church at 1717 Broadway.

The site plan proposal calls for tearing down five existing buildings and constructing a 12,850-square-foot, two-story addition to the rear of the church. The addition would be used for educational activities at the church, which is located on a 4.3-acre site in Ward 1, southwest of Broadway’s intersection with Plymouth Road.

According to a staff memo, only minor changes are proposed for the existing 142-space parking lot. Additional sidewalks will be added, including a roughly 20-foot extension of the public sidewalk along Broadway Street, which currently stops short of the south property line.

Because the church is located in an area zoned for single-family residential use (R1C zoning), a special exception use approval was needed from the planning commission. The city’s planning staff noted that the church has been located there for about 50 years. The church has a capacity of 126 seats, which will remain unchanged. At their Oct. 1 meeting, planning commissioners unanimously voted to grant approval for a special exception use.

The project is estimated to cost about $3 million. No approval is required from the city council for the special exception use, but the council must consider the site plan for approval.

6:50 p.m. Pre-meeting activity. The scheduled meeting start is 7 p.m. Most evenings the actual starting time is between 7:10 p.m. and 7:15 p.m. Several people are here in support of the ordinance revision to waive fees for park usage if the purpose is to distribute goods to address basic human needs.

6:55 p.m. Fox 2 News is here to cover homelessness issues.

6:58 p.m. Based on overheard conversation, Tom Wall is reportedly going to address the council in his cape and tights as Captain Driver Ed.

7:02 p.m. Councilmembers are signing cards for Marcia Higgins (Ward 4). Sabra Briere (Ward 1) is here. She’d called in sick to the planning commission meeting last night. Most councilmembers are now here, but we seem to be a few minutes away from starting the meeting.

7:04 p.m. Confirmed sighting of Tom Wall as Captain Driver Ed. He’ll be addressing the city council during public commentary reserved time about pedestrian safety. He has a guitar with him.

7:09 p.m. Marcia Higgins has just arrived. And we’re off.

7:10 p.m. Pledge of allegiance, moment of silence and the roll call of council. All councilmembers are present and correct.

7:12 p.m. Approval of agenda. Margie Teall (Ward 4) wants to move coordinated funding (DS-19) to after the consent agenda. That appears amenable to everyone. Chuck Warpehoski (Ward 5) wants to move B-1 (DDA ordinance) after C-2 (DDA ordinance – joint subcommittee version).

7:14 p.m. Communications from city administrator. City administrator Steve Powers thanks the Ann Arbor police department for their work in arresting three suspects in Paul DeWolf homicide. He also says that the Main Street lightpoles have been inspected and that he’ll bring a proposal to the council at their Nov. 18 meeting.

7:14 p.m. Public commentary. This portion of the meeting offers 10 three-minute slots that can be reserved in advance. Preference is given to speakers who want to address the council on an agenda item. [Public commentary general time, with no sign-up required in advance, is offered at the end of the meeting.]

Six people are signed up to talk about the ordinance change that would waive the park permitting fee for distribution of goods to address basic human needs: Timothy W. Green, Ray Gholston, Stephan Pate, Ryan Sample, Andrew Mutschler, and Raytheon Jones as well as an alternate speaker, Chris Mckeown.

Ingrid Ault is signed up to speak on the resolution accepting the park advisory commission’s downtown parks report. And two people are signed up to talk about the resolution establishing a pedestrian safety task force – Tom Wall and Kathy Griswold. Dina Kurz is signed up to talk about the Y lot sale. The second alternate speaker is Emily Tondreau, who’s signed up to talk about the evictions of homeless people from their camp sites and the capacity of the shelter.

7:16 p.m. Timothy W. Green introduces himself as a member of Camp Take Notice. He’s been a part of the demonstration in front of city hall on behalf of the homeless community. In response to the count of 165 homeless people, he contends there’s at least triple that number. If you find yourself in a camp, it’s not safe, because AAPD tells you they have to go, he says. If you’re being run off, he asks, where do you go? You pack up and walk around the streets all night, he says. He took the podium to applause and his remarks conclude with applause. He refers to the amount spent on the Dreiseitl fountain next to their protests.

7:18 p.m. Ingrid Ault is addressing the council on behalf of the park advisory commission. She’s chair of that group and was chair of the subcommittee on downtown parks. She describes how the committee met several times over several months. She describes the survey the committee conducted that received over 1,600 responses. She highlights the eight recommendations in the committee’s report.

7:23 p.m. Ray Gholston invites everyone to stand who supports more support for homeless people. Almost everyone in the middle section of the chambers is standing in support. The way Ann Arbor treats the homeless is a human rights violation, he says. He says that if there were a pack of dogs out on Huron Street, people would go make sure they had shelter, but Ann Arborites won’t do the same for the homeless. There’s not enough space in the shelter, he says.

7:25 p.m. Dina Kurz, a member of the city’s energy commission, is addressing the council on the topic of the sale of the old Y lot. She wants the city to negotiate additional features of development on the site that are in line with the climate action plan and sustainability framework. It could become a shining example of what can be done to have less impact on the environment and offer greater sustainability. LEED Gold and the AIA 2030 standards are some of the covenants that the city could instruct the city administrator to write into the legal agreement, she says. She wants the council to “seize this moment.”

7:27 p.m. Stephan Pate introduces himself as a member of the homeless community. AAPD are running people off of property without giving them enough time to gather up their belongings, he says. He asks for enough time to gather up their belongings and live in peace.

7:29 p.m. Kathy Griswold is telling the council about the Ann Arbor Public Schools’ transportation safety committee, which is described on the AAPS website as “Advisory Committee to the Board of Education, the Ann Arbor City Council and, in a less formal manner, other governmental units including the Pittsfield Township Trustees and the Washtenaw County Road Commission.” [Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) is listed on Legistar as the council's representative to the committee.]

Griswold is essentially arguing for the expansion of the existing committee, which includes representatives of the University of Michigan, the Center for Independent Living and the Washtenaw Biking and Walking Coalition. Griswold thanks Warpehoski and Briere for their work to bring forward the task force resolution. The TSC was established in 1969, she says. She was a consultant for the TSC back in 2001, she says. It’s time to reassess the situation. She describes legislation in Lansing in the works that would make the Uniform Traffic Code the state law.

7:31 p.m. Andrew Mutschler introduces himself as a member of the Camp Misfit homeless community who are protesting out in front of city hall. He describes how he’d come back to his encampment to find all his belongings gone. He emphasizes that everyone needs stability, a place to call home – even if it’s just a 6×6 roof over your head.

7:34 p.m. Tom Wall is addressing the council as Captain Driver Ed. His son wasn’t allowed to introduce him on account of the speaking rules. He offers to the city, once they’ve decided what to do, his driver ed school, saying it’s very good at education. He’s now singing “Captain Driver Ed, Captain Driver Ed …” People are sort of singing along. “Don’t get distracted, it’s not attractive.” He tells people to clap for him. They do.

7:37 p.m. Raytheon Jones is speaking on behalf of the homeless. It’s a serious problem, he says. “Many of us are troubled, with nowhere to go,” he says. He’s speaking for the disenfranchised, the poor, the homeless and the people who have no voice. He first arrived in Ann Arbor in July a few months ago. He was sitting in a park, not being boisterous, he said. But AAPD had called him over and asked him what he was doing. They’d told him there were people there with their families and he needed to find somewhere else to go. There was no room in the shelter, he said. The homeless need somewhere to go, he says.

7:37 p.m. Council communications. This is the first of three slots on the agenda for council communications. It’s a time when councilmembers can report out from boards, commissions and task forces on which they serve. They can also alert their colleagues to proposals they might be bringing forward in the near future.

7:40 p.m. Briere is talking about the parking situation at Argo Cascades. The result of the city’s work was to put parking at Longshore Park. The neighborhood was not impressed with that, she says, and it had stopped after one weekend. On Nov. 21, at 7 p.m. the city is holding a public meeting on the parking needs at the Ann Arbor District Library’s Traverwood branch.

7:42 p.m. Sally Petersen (Ward 2) responds to the public commentary. She asks if the city administrator can contact the churches that provide a rotating shelter to see if that can be started earlier this year. Mayor John Hieftje says that it’s handled through the Shelter Association center. The warming center will open on Nov. 18, Hieftje says. He’d been in communication with the Shelter Association.

7:44 p.m. Jane Lumm (Ward 2) acknowledges that four AAPD officers were honored as officers of the year by the Washtenaw 100 Club. Oct. 24 was the date of this year’s event, she says. She lists off the names of the four officers. They’d entered a burning building and saved woman’s life on Jan. 13, 2013, she reports.

7:48 p.m. Chuck Warpehoski (Ward 5) also responds to the public commentary. He points out that there are not only churches but also synagogues. What triggers an eviction? he asks. City administrator Steve Powers says that by ordinance, camping is not allowed in city parks. Warpehoski confirms that it’s complaint driven. Powers also indicates there’s a 48-hour orange notice that’s posted saying: Please move. Powers indicates that he’s discussing the issue with the members of Camp Misfit and with Chief Seto.

Warpehoski says we don’t solve the problem of homelessness just by moving people around. He calls for upholding our laws with maximum humanity. He’s concerned about people’s belongings being respected.

7:49 p.m. Mike Anglin (Ward 5) gives an update on the Safety on Seventh campaign. There’ll be a community meeting on possibly more traffic calming. He’s disappointed that two elementary schools have discontinued their walk-to-school programs. He wonders if Bach and Eberwhite ended their program because of the traffic on Seventh Street.

7:51 p.m. Margie Teall (Ward 4) says she wants to change the tone. She recognizes that it’s the last meeting for Marcia Higgins (Ward 4). Higgins is presented with a crown, which she puts on. She indicates she’ll be wearing it for the duration of the meeting.

7:53 p.m. Nominations. Nominations tonight include Peter Greenfield to the airport advisory council replacing Wilson Tanner, and Anthony Ramirez to be re-appointed to the cable communications commission. On the housing and human services board, Eleanor Pollack and Thaddeus Jabzanka are being nominated to fill the vacancies left by Ned Staebler and Anthony Ramirez, respectively. Mohammad Issa and Linda Winkler are being nominated for re-appointment to the city’s human rights commission.

On the Ann Arbor housing commission, Christopher Geer is being re-appointed to correct the end date of his term. On Jan. 7, 2013 the council confirmed his appointment for a term ending May 5, 2014. Tonight’s confirmation, which is taking place in one step and needs eight votes to be approved, corrects the end date of his term to May 1, 2017.

7:54 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted to approve Geer’s re-appointment to the Ann Arbor housing commission.

7:54 p.m. Appointments. The council is being asked tonight to confirm appointments for nominations that were made at the council’s previous meeting on Oct. 21. Nominated to fill the remaining vacancy on the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority board – due to the resignation of Nader Nassif – was Cyndi Clark, owner of Lily Grace. The business is described on its website as a luxury cosmetics boutique in downtown Ann Arbor.

To fill a vacancy left by Leigh Greden on the Ann Arbor housing commission board, Tim Colenback was nominated on Oct. 21. Greden’s nomination had been made, but was never put forward for a confirmation vote. Colenback also serves on the city’s housing and human services advisory board. Colenback has told mayor John Hieftje that he won’t be able to serve on both bodies.

A replacement for Julie Grand on the park advisory commission was nominated at the Oct. 21 meeting – David Santacroce. He’s a professor of law at the University of Michigan, and he chaired the North Main Huron River corridor task force, which worked for a year and delivered its report recently to the council on recommendations to the corridor. Grand attended her last meeting of PAC on Oct. 15, 2013, after completing the maximum two terms of service. Amy Shepherd was nominated to serve on the city’s commission on disability issues. Shepherd is president of the Michigan Parents of Children with Visual Impairments. On the energy commission, Shoshannah Lenski was nominated to replace Mike Delaney, and Mike Shriberg was nominated for reappointment.

7:56 p.m. Hieftje describes Colenback’s credentials as assistant dean at the UM school of social work. Hieftje describes Cyndi Clark as having expertise in retail, in the cosmetics industry, on an international level. Hieftje also praises Santacroce’s work leading the North Main Huron River corridor task force.

7:58 p.m. Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) highlights the energy commission appointment of Shoshannah Lenski, who works with DTE. Kunselman points out there are some issues with the timely repair of streetlights, citing some near Mary Beth Doyle Park that have been out for quite a while.

7:58 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted to approve all the appointments.

8:01 p.m. Hieftje is now talking about the various services that the city of Ann Arbor offers for the homeless community. He recalls running for city council at the time when the building of the Delonis Center was being debated. [The shelter is located at 312 W. Huron, near the downtown.] He reiterates that the warming center is opening on Nov. 18. Hieftje describes how sometimes the AAPD posts notices and after the 48-hour period they return and they find no on there but possessions left behind. It’s something the AAPD is working on, he says.

8:03 p.m. Briere says the opening of the warming center is happening on about the same schedule as in the past. It’s not unusually late, she says. She asks Hieftje if the council will be asked for financial support for the warming shelter. She ventures that because she and Lumm serve on HHSB, they’d have occasion to meet with city and county staff and other nonprofits so that if there’s a need for funding, it can be brought back on Nov. 18.

8:03 p.m. Public hearings. All the public hearings are grouped together during this section of the meeting. Action on the related items comes later in the meeting. Two public hearings are scheduled: (1) The council is being asked to adopt an update to the city’s non-motorized transportation plan, which is part of the city’s master plan. The planning commission adopted the plan at its Sept. 10, 2013 meeting. [.pdf of draft 2013 non-motorized transportation plan update]; (2) a site plan for the expansion of the Ann Arbor Christian Reformed Church at 1717 Broadway St. The city planning commission recommended approval of the project at its Oct. 1, 2013 meeting.

8:04 p.m. PH-1 Adopt 2013 update to non-motorized plan. Kathy Griswold says it’s an exciting night because there’s more than one item on the agenda involving pedestrian safety. She urges the council to not adopt the update to the plan. It fails to identify funding for all the improvements. The plan alludes to funding improvements with federal Safe Routes to Schools funding and she is “absolutely disgusted” by it because Ann Arbor can afford to fund that itself without tapping federal funds.

8:06 p.m. PH-2 Site Plan: Ann Arbor Christian Reformed Church at 1717 Broadway St. No one speaks at this public hearing.

8:06 p.m. Approval of minutes for previous meeting.

8:07 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted to approve the minutes from the previous meeting.

8:07 p.m. Consent agenda This is a group of items that are deemed to be routine and are voted on “all in one go.” Contracts for less than $100,000 can be placed on the consent agenda. Tonight’s consent agenda includes approval of new bylaws for two entities – the city’s design review board and the city planning commission. [For more background, see Ethics: Consent Agenda – Planning Commission By-laws above.]

Three other items include a $60,000 contract with Utilities Instrumentation Service for Electrical and Instrumentation Support Services. According to the staff memo, the scope of UIS work will include “transformer testing, infrared testing of switchgear, testing of medium voltage breakers at City substations and generators, programming and calibration of instrumentation, Supervisory Control And Data Acquisition (SCADA) support and troubleshooting, Programmable Logic Controller (PLC) programming, and tuning and testing of dam and hydroelectric generator controls.”

A fourth item on the consent agenda sets a public hearing for establishing an industrial development district (for potential tax abatements) at 1901 E. Ellsworth – for Dec. 2, 2013. And a final consent agenda item increases the amount of a contract the city has with the accounting firm Plante Moran for a thorough review of the city’s permitting processes. That review comes in the context of the discovery that some rental housing permits had not been properly verified, according to city sources. Steps taken by the city staff to correct the problems included a review of all questionable permits. [For more background, see Ethics: Consent Agenda – Rental Housing Inspection above.]

8:07 p.m. Councilmembers can opt to select out any items for separate consideration. Briere wants to pull out CA-2, the planning commission bylaws. Briere says that the planning commission is discussing an additional change to the bylaws, so she wants to postpone until Dec. 16.

8:09 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted to approve all the consent agenda items, except for the planning commission bylaws, which have been postponed until the second meeting in December.

8:13 p.m. DS-19 Adopt FY 2015-16 human services funding process. The council is being asked to authorize the basic approach that it has taken to human services funding in the past, but with some modifications. The funds would continue to be managed through Washtenaw County’s office of community & economic development (OCED), using the coordinated funding approach. The city is one of five partners in the coordinated funding approach. Other partners are Washtenaw County, United Way of Washtenaw County, Washtenaw Urban County, and the Ann Arbor Area Community Foundation. It began as a pilot program in 2010; this is the second time that the program has been extended. This resolution does not allocate any funds, but rather authorizes the process for allocation. [For more background, see Social Infrastructure: Coordinated Funding above.]

8:15 p.m. OCED director Mary Jo Callan is fielding questions from Teall and Lumm.

8:17 p.m. Callan stresses that there’s no “pooling of funds” and that each entity maintains control over the designation of its own funding.

8:18 p.m. Warpehoski asks how the model doesn’t just cherry-pick the easy-to-serve kids and leave out the hardest-to-serve. Callan notes that the targeted population are selected by “let’s start with the poorest folks first.” The funds are in fact for the hardest-to-serve kids, she says.

8:19 p.m. Callan is talking about the best evidence-based practices and that’s what will be funded.

8:20 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted to authorize the coordinated funding process.

8:20 p.m. B-1 DDA Ordinance. On the Nov. 7 agenda are two possible revisions to the city’s ordinance regulating the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority’s TIF (tax increment financing) capture (Chapter 7). This is the first version, which has been under consideration by the council since Feb. 19, 2013. In summary strokes, this version is different from the competing version on the agenda in the following two ways. This version more nearly enforces the existing language in the ordinance with respect to the amount of TIF revenue the DDA would receive. It also proposes governance changes for the DDA board, which include term limits. [For more background, see Downtown: DDA Ordinance above.]

8:21 p.m. Kunselman asks that it be tabled. That puts it off to a date uncertain. It could be brought back as an option.

8:21 p.m. Kunselman describes how he’s planning to go talk to the other taxing jurisdictions about the council’s efforts. So he moves to table.

8:24 p.m. Teall says “I don’t get it,” saying that it’s been postponed several times. If the alternative proposal from the committee were to pass (the next agenda items) she wants to know what would happen. Kunselman explains the difference between the versions. This current version says that any changes to the restriction would need the approval of the other taxing jurisdictions. So Kunselman wants to discuss the second version with the other governmental entities.

8:24 p.m. Teall wants to know what would cause Kunselman to bring back the first version off the table. “Hopefully nothing,” he says.

8:25 p.m. Kunselman says that he hopes there will be no complaints and no whining.

8:25 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted unanimously to table the DDA ordinance change.

8:25 p.m. C-1 Ordinance: Exemptions to park permit requirements. The council is giving initial consideration to a change to the city’s ordinances so that charitable distribution of goods for basic human needs could be conducted in city parks without incurring a fee for park use. The recommendation for the ordinance change came from the city’s park advisory commission at its Sept. 17, 2013 meeting. [For more background, see Downtown (but not only): Park Fee Waiver above.]

8:27 p.m. Taylor is introducing the resolution. He recalls the Pizza in the Park issue in Liberty Plaza downtown. This extends the scope to all parks, not just downtown. Taylor notes that the proposal has been vetted by the park advisory commission.

8:28 p.m. Teall thanks Taylor for meeting with her and the representatives of Camp Take Notice and “taking the ball and running with it.” She thanks the CTN people. She encourages everyone to vote for it.

8:28 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted unanimously to give initial approval to the ordinance change that would allow for distribution of humanitarian aid in city parks without incurring a fee.

8:28 p.m. C-2 Alternate DDA ordinance revision. This is the second of two versions of the DDA ordinance revision. It’s the result of a joint DDA board and city council committee. It does not include any governance changes. And it would not propose any restriction on DDA TIF revenues until FY 2017. [For more background, see Downtown: DDA Ordinance above.]

8:31 p.m. Kunselman describes the alternative as much “cleaner” and it addresses just the TIF capture. Key stat: The TIF cap would have a basis $224 million taxable value in tax year 2016 with an increase of 3.5%.

8:32 p.m. Kunselman describes the amount of the DDA’s TIF capture as capped at around $6 million for the 2016 tax year. He invites CFO Tom Crawford to the podium.

8:34 p.m. By 2033 there would be “millions and millions” of dollars going back to the taxing authorities, says Kunselman. Crawford says he’d project that within a few years after the cap, more than $1 million would be distributed to the other governmental units.

8:35 p.m. Crawford is now describing the bonding capacity that the cap would allow: $59 million for the next 10 years. If they chose not to bond, the capacity for projects would be smaller.

8:37 p.m. Kunselman says he’ll have a couple of amendments. The point is not to hamstring the ability of the DDA to undertake capital improvements, Kunselman says. Part of the point is to improve the ability of the DDA to budget.

8:40 p.m. Kailasapathy notes that there’s two variables in the TIF plan: escalator and the basis. Crawford has chosen 3.5% which is from the TIF plan to avoid changing the TIF plan. Crawford concedes that the basis for the taxable valuable in the committee’s proposal is not from the TIF plan. Kailasapathy concludes that this is a change to the TIF plan. Crawford says there’s room for differing views on this.

8:41 p.m. Lumm asks about the clause in the existing ordinance that says that the restrictions in the ordinance can’t be removed except by approval of the other governmental units.

8:42 p.m. Assistant city attorney Mary Fales says it’s not possible for the city to abdicate its fiduciary responsibility to another entity.

8:48 p.m. Kunselman forwards an amendment by email to his colleagues about affordable housing.

8:48 p.m. Kunselman notes that the council had revised the DDA’s budget earlier in the year to transfer $300,000 of TIF to the DDA’s housing fund. He moves that the DDA be required to budget $200,000 for the DDA housing fund, starting in 2014, adjusted at the same rate of increase as the TIF income – to be spent on projects that meet the income guidelines of the Ann Arbor housing commission.

Kailasapathy wants the amount to be $300,000. Kunselman agrees. Briere notes that generally there’s an implied expectation that the city would match whatever the DDA does. She wants that on the record. Taylor asks if the proposal is enforceable. Fales says the council has the ability to approve the budget.

8:49 p.m. Briere wants to know if 2014 is tax year, calendar year, or fiscal year. Kunselman says it should be 2016 anyway.

8:54 p.m. Hieftje says he doesn’t think the DDA objects to funding affordable housing. But the DDA’s suspension of transfers to its housing fund was a function of having the obligations of building the underground parking structure, he says.

8:57 p.m. Executive director of the DDA Susan Pollay is fielding questions from the council. Warpehoski says he likes the idea of making sure the DDA’s housing fund is actually an affordable housing fund. But he’s not sure that Kunselman’s approach is right. Kunselman suggests that the requirement for projects to meet the Ann Arbor housing commission’s standards could be tied only to the $300,000 in the ordinance. Warpehoski asks if the HHSAB can simply exercise oversight. Kunselman doesn’t think HHSAB has enough teeth as an advisory body.

9:00 p.m. Kunselman now is amending his own amendment to restrict just the funds mandated by the ordinance to be in support of housing projects that meet the Ann Arbor housing commission’s income standards. Hieftje thinks there needs to be more flexibility. Kunselman amends to cite 50% AMI (area median income) as the standard.

9:03 p.m. Higgins thanks Kunselman for his work. [2016 year refers to the tax year.]

9:03 p.m. Outcome: The council has unanimously approved Kunselman’s amendment.

9:09 p.m. Kunselman is putting forth another amendment involving the capital improvement plan (CIP). This is an amendment from the first version of the ordinance that had received initial approval. Responding to Warpehoski’s question, city administrator Steve Powers says that the amendment would not pose a problem. Briere reviews how the CIP is put together.

9:10 p.m. Outcome: The council has unanimously approved Kunselman’s amendment on the CIP.

9:10 p.m. Lumm is proposing an amendment to add term limits. This is language from the first version.

9:14 p.m. Petersen notes that the bylaws approved by the council that night for the design review board also include term limits. She counters the argument that you lose someone’s expertise if term limits are imposed by saying that you don’t lose their expertise because that can be tapped on an informal basis.

9:15 p.m. Kailasapathy likes the portion of the amendment that restricts elected officials from serving on the DDA board.

9:21 p.m. Briere says that she’s not impressed with the value of term limits for elected officials. She says she might be willing to consider a limit of three consecutive terms instead of two. She argues for that by saying that the planning cycle for DDA projects is 10 years. She doesn’t like the part that says that elected officials of other jurisdictions can’t serve on the DDA board. She opposes term limits on a philosophical basis.

Kunselman replies by saying, “Oh my, look what I’ve started!” He had wanted to leave the governance issues aside because they can be addressed at any time. As far as the mayor’s appointment to the board, Kunselman says that the council could simply choose to appoint the city administrator instead of the mayor, when the council makes its annual committee appointments.

9:22 p.m. Kunselman doesn’t have a problem with elected officials from other jurisdictions serving on the DDA board but wants them all represented – the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority, the Ann Arbor District Library, and Washtenaw County. He doesn’t have a problem with term limits.

9:26 p.m. Teall asks how the joint committee had felt about term limits. Lumm says she missed the last joint committee meeting but she’d said at an earlier meeting that she’d wanted the term limits included. Kunselman says his focus had been on the financial picture. He stresses that there be consensus with the body that is being regulated so that they don’t feel “beaten down.” He didn’t want the discussion to be bogged down about feelings. The discussion had been going on for quite some time. “I’m tired of it, and the community is tired of it,” Kunselman says.

9:28 p.m. Teall won’t support the governance amendments including term limits. She wants it to pass with a large majority. Hieftje says he won’t be mayor after 2014. He wants to wait and see if the state legislature takes action requiring the representation of the other governmental units on the DDA board. Term limits have been a disaster with the Michigan legislature, Hieftje says. There is adequate turnover as it is, he says. He won’t support term limits.

9:31 p.m. Kailasapathy offers an amendment that would require representation of all the jurisdictions on the DDA board. Petersen echoes Hieftje’s sentiments, saying that the state legislature may act. Hieftje says the state legislature might act in a way that would allow the addition of representatives from other jurisdictions more swiftly. Discussion of different amendments to amendments.

Hieftje calls for a recess to sort it all out.

9:34 p.m. Recess. We’re in recess.

9:48 p.m. And we’re back.

9:52 p.m. Lumm is amending her amendment. It would be effective for the first appointment to the board after the date of the ordinance’s enactment. It’s constrained to term limits.

Taylor says term limit are pernicious. It removes the discretion of the appointing body to appoint someone who is actively engaged and serving well. “We’re sapping our boards … of useful engaged knowledgeable” board members, he says. Petersen comes back to the point that the council has just approved bylaws for bodies that include term limits. Taylor says, “I have no drive for perfection.”

9:55 p.m. Kailasapathy says there’s a difference between the Michigan legislature and an appointed body. She says that for elected officials, she doesn’t see the need for term limits. But for appointed boards, the more you get people involved, the more vibrant it becomes and the more perspectives it brings in. Look at the DDA board, she says: Do you want to keep this or do you want more diversity, she asks.

Hieftje says that he can’t recall that a person of color has applied to the DDA. He points to the fact that there are four DDA board members who are in their first terms. He says he’s gone away from nominating developers and has selected representatives from small businesses to serve on the board. He says there is diversity of viewpoint on the DDA board.

9:57 p.m. Lumm says, “You can Google it” to find that term limits are a nonprofit board best practice. It’s a healthy thing. She argues there should be consistency on all the boards and commissions. She argues that opportunities should be opened up for others to serve.

10:00 p.m. Lumm says it’s not difficult to recruit people to serve on the DDA board. Warpehoski says on the broader issue of whether term limits are good or bad, he can find examples of each. Given the small size of the DDA staff, he’s concerned about the preservation of the DDA’s institutional memory. He’d voted to put Russ Collins on the DDA board for a third term, so by the argument of consistency he couldn’t support this amendment. But he rejects the idea of consistency as the main consideration.

10:03 p.m. Kunselman argues that turnover is good when money is at stake. He thinks that two four-year terms is more than most councilmembers serve. As far as his vote for Russ Collins for a third term, he says he likes Russ and used to work for him at the Michigan Theater. But he wouldn’t vote for him again. It’s a core group of people who seem to hang around, he says. He points out that the city charter imposes term limits on certain kinds of boards and commissions. If it’s that big of an issue, a future council can bring it back, Kunselman says.

10:05 p.m. Hieftje proposes a compromise of a limit to three terms, not two.

10:05 p.m. Lumm says “That’s not the kind of revitalization I was looking for.” She says she’ll continue to work on the issue for all boards and commissions, but for tonight she’ll go along with three terms as the limit.

10:07 p.m. Briere challenges Petersen’s assertion that the bylaws of the design review board and the planning commission contain term limits. Higgins says she’d have supported the two-term limit, but will support three. She laments the disparagement of members of a sitting board, some of whom are sitting in the audience. Talking about a changeover and alluding to a “core group” of people is hurtful, Higgins says. That discourages people from stepping forward to serve.

10:08 p.m. Petersen thanks Briere for the correction on the bylaws, and apologizes to Taylor. Hieftje wants to move it along to a vote.

10:08 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted to approve the three-term limit. Teall and Taylor dissent.

10:09 p.m. Warpehoski asks for clarification of the TIF cap. It grows by 3.5%, is the explanation.

10:13 p.m. Taylor says that even though the stated intention is not to harm the DDA, the buying power of the DDA would be reduced by half over the next 10 years. That’s an incredible harm to the downtown, Taylor says. Only half of the excess would come to the city of Ann Arbor, he says. Lumm replies that the amount of TIF the DDA would receive would grow “handsomely” over the next few years.

10:13 p.m. Lumm says that she appreciates the work that has been done on this. She laments the fact that the discussion had become a litmus test of whether someone supports the DDA.

10:13 p.m. Lumm says Higgins was wise to create the joint DDA council committee.

10:16 p.m. To be clear, the council is now discussing the main motion. Hieftje says he is glad that the previous version was not pursued. Hieftje says that if the city is going to survive under Michigan’s funding system, it needs growth. Ann Arbor is fortunate to have UM as a job magnate. The park system attracts people, he says. AAPS also has high quality schools. The vibrant downtown is also an attractant. The DDA is a prime factor for success, says Hieftje.

10:19 p.m. Kailasapathy asks Crawford about the Justice Center bond repayment schedule. She’s referring to the $8 million mentioned in the DDA’s 2008 resolution that goes to the bond repayment. Crawford gives an explanation in terms of the “present value of money.” She points out that the DDA ends in 2033, which goes five years past the end of the DDA’s TIF plan.

10:20 p.m. Kunselman thanks the DDA board members for going through this with him. He makes further conciliatory remarks.

10:21 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted to give initial approval to the DDA ordinance revision.

10:21 p.m. DC-1 Digital billboard on E. Stadium Blvd. At the council’s Oct. 21 meeting, Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) announced the intent to bring forward the resolution, which requests that the University of Michigan decommission the $2.8 million digital billboard that it’s constructed on E. Stadium Blvd. The city’s fallback position is a request that the university operate the billboard (marquee) only around the time of major events at the football stadium or the Crisler Center. The resolution cites the city’s own recently enacted sign ordinance, which constrains the deployment of digital technology for outdoor signs.

According to the resolution, the marquee inflicts the same harms on the community that the city’s newly amended ordinance sought to prevent. [Sally Petersen (Ward 2) and Marcia Higgins (Ward 4) – who co-sponsored the resolution with Taylor, Jane Lumm (Ward 2) and Margie Teall (Ward 4) – voted against that ordinance.] Those harms are described in the resolution as “distract[ing] motorists and substantially degrad[ing] the community viewshed…”

10:26 p.m. Hieftje asks that the council not spend a whole lot of time on this. [UM head of community relations Jim Kosteva is in the audience.] Taylor reads aloud some remarks. Teall thanks Taylor for putting it all together. She’d heard comments that the city shouldn’t be bothered because the sign is across from the golf course. She points out that it does face the drivers.

Warpehoski describes the negotiation theory of wish-want-walk. He thinks the absolute minimum the UM should adhere to is FHA (Federal Highway Administration) rules – no animation. He wonders if someone can ask if the brightness of the sign can be adjusted. Kosteva says that the sign complies with the brightness standards. Except for videos shown on game day, he says, the animation does comply with federal standards. Warpehoski says he doesn’t think it’s acceptable to say “We follow the law most of the time.”

10:32 p.m. Higgins says in the interest of sustainability, it doesn’t make sense to have the sign lit at midnight. Kunselman wonders if anyone asked a UM regent about the issue when the marquee was in the planning stages. Kunselman says that he doesn’t want to have the university and the city “lobbing” resolutions back and forth. He doesn’t want to get a resolution from the regents saying, Why don’t you pave the road in front of the stadium?

10:33 p.m. Teall blames the university for not reaching out to the city. Kunselman asks Kosteva why the city wasn’t informed. Kosteva responds by saying his intent was to be present, to be a listener and to take the council’s concerns back to the university.

10:36 p.m. Lumm thanks Kosteva for being there. She’s reading aloud a statement.

10:38 p.m. Anglin says it’s the same drivers who go past it, so he questions what effect it has.

10:41 p.m. Taylor counters Kunselman’s contention that the resolution is heavy-handed, saying that it was open and temperate communication. Petersen wonders if the UM would consider showing public service announcements from the city on the marquee.

10:41 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted unanimously to approve the resolution requesting the University of Michigan decommission its $2.8 million billboard.

10:41 p.m. DC-2 Accepting PAC downtown parks subcommittee report on downtown parks. This resolution would accept the report of a subcommittee of the city’s park advisory commission, which studied the question of the need and best location for additional downtown parks. The subcommittee delivered its recommendations at the Oct. 15, 2013 meeting of PAC and PAC voted to recommend them to the city council for adoption. [.pdf of 21-page full subcommittee report]

The eight recommendations are wide-ranging, but include a site-specific recommendation to develop a new park/open space area on the top of the Library Lot underground parking structure. Now a surface parking lot, the site is owned by the city and is situated just north of the Ann Arbor District Library’s downtown building. The recommendation calls for only a portion of the site to be used for a new park/open space, and stresses that AADL should be involved in the planning process. [For more background, see Downtown: Parks above.]

10:42 p.m. Taylor is introducing the resolution.

10:43 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted over dissent from Mike Anglin (Ward 5) to accept the report on downtown parks.

10:43 p.m. DC-3 Ethics resolution The resolution does not include “ethics” in the title, but addresses the kind of issues that could be described under the general rubric of “ethics.” The resolution directs an educational effort on Public Act 317 of 1968, which is the state’s conflict-of-interest statute. A final “resolved” clause direct the council’s rules committee to draft standards of conduct for local officials based on Public Act 196 of 1973, which applies to state employees of the executive branch and appointees of the governor. The final resolved clause – if it’s approved, and if the council adopts a standard that’s recommended by the council rules committee and it’s strictly followed – would end any unauthorized leaks of information from the city government.

10:43 p.m. Petersen, who is the sponsor of the resolution, asks for postponement.

10:44 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted to postpone direction for education on professional standards and tasking the rules committee with drafting standards of conduct.

10:44 p.m. DC-4 Pedestrian safety task force. The resolution establishing the task force acknowledges that many residents are concerned that current city policies create an unsafe environment for pedestrians, cyclists and drivers. The pedestrian safety and access task force would consist of nine residents. Applications from interested citizens should be turned in to the mayor’s office by Nov. 22, 2013. [.pdf of standard city board and commission task force application]

The intent is to appoint the task force at the Dec. 2, 2013 city council meeting. The task force would deliver a report by early September 2014. [For more background, see Non-Motorized Issues: Pedestrian Safety above.]

10:53 p.m. Briere is introducing the resolution. She responds to Griswold’s suggestion during public commentary that the AAPS transportation safety committee be adapted to this purpose. But Briere notes that the TSC is not a city committee. Briere gives the rationale for the creation of the committee.

Warpehoski explains that there’s been a lot of interest in participation but the size of the task force was intended to provide focus and to allow the group to operate efficiently. Powers says that the task force won’t staff itself and would depend on any budget the council might approve. A budget is not a part of tonight’s resolution. Briere says she’s received positive communication from the University of Michigan about participation, and thinks that some of the cost could be offset by the UM.

10:57 p.m. Kunselman wonders if the timeline isn’t too aggressive. He questions if it’s realistic. Kunselman ticks through some of the items in the cost analysis, and wonders if it really would be $100,000. Kunselman asks where the funding would come from.

Public services area administrator Craig Hupy confirms it would be on the order of $100,000. [.pdf of Nov. 7 memo on pedestrian safety] It would have to come from the general fund. Kunselman questions what the goal of the task force would actually be. Warpehoski says if people want to put it off and take more time, he’s willing to postpone. Kunselman comes back to the point of an aggressive timeline. Staff resources are limited, he says, and there are other issues that might need to be focused on.

11:06 p.m. Kunselman isn’t sure the resolution is really ready. He doesn’t think the work is going to be done by September 2014. It took 8 months just to get a DDA ordinance passed, he notes. Briere argues for the establishment of a task force. Hieftje wonders if Warpehoski and Briere would be amenable to postponement. Briere says she will support that, but wants her colleagues to focus on recruitment of volunteers for the task force. Petersen will support postponement, but wonders if this task force shouldn’t be a standing committee, instead.

11:07 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted unanimously to postpone the creation of the pedestrian safety task force.

11:07 p.m. DC-5 Y Lot sales agreement. The resolution would direct city administrator Steve Powers to negotiate a sales agreement with Dennis Dahlmann for the purchase of the city-owned property north of William Street between Fourth and Fifth avenues in downtown Ann Arbor. Dahlmann has offered $5.25 million for the property, known as the Y lot. It had been listed at $4.2 million. The city has a $3.5 million balloon payment on a loan it took out to purchase the property, which it has now owned for 10 years. [.pdf of Dahlmann offer 10.17.13]

If negotiations with Dahlmann are not successful, then the resolution directs the city administrator to negotiate with CA Ventures (Clark Street Holdings). The bids from Dahlmann and CA Ventures were judged to be the two best out of the five bids on the property the city received by the Oct. 18 deadline. [.pdf of summary page by Jim Chaconas] The resolution directs the city administrator to present to the council a sales agreement – with Dahlmann or CA Ventures – for consideration at the council’s Nov. 18, 2013 meeting. [For more background, see Downtown: Y Lot Sale above.]

11:08 p.m. From the audience, Donald Salberg asks if he could comment. No, says Hieftje.

11:11 p.m. Taylor says he has been concerned all along about the use of the property. He says that the city and the community should understand more clearly what the property would be used for. He says that he’s forwarded an amendment to his colleagues. The resolution would direct how the sales agreement would be structured – with an obligation that a structure be built, and that the building be energy efficient and that the AAATA be involved in the conversation.

11:16 p.m. Taylor is now reading aloud the amendment. There’s a minimum 400% FAR including mixed use on the bottom floor, office space on the mid-floors and residential on the top floors. The uses are essentially those that are described in Dahlmann’s letter. The deadline for building something is January 2018. There’s a prohibition against sale to another third party except that the city has a right of first refusal.

11:17 p.m. Taylor continues with reading aloud the amendments on requirement for energy efficiency and the required conversation with the AAATA.

11:19 p.m. Petersen checks the arithmetic on 400% FAR. She confirms that Taylor is rounding 350% FAR to 400%. Briere contends that D1 requires 400% at a minimum anyway.

11:21 p.m. Teall says she’s concerned about the future use. She thinks that a hotel would be suitable for that parcel. She feels that visitors to the downtown are an economic generator. She appreciates the amendments.

11:25 p.m. Hieftje invites broker Jim Chaconas to the podium. He compliments Chaconas on his good work. Hieftje wants to pay off the debt. He doesn’t want to roll the dice and refinance. He asks Chaconas if the additional requests might cause Dahlmann or CA Ventures to balk. Chaconas says some of the requests make sense. But he doesn’t want to put too many restrictions on it. Dahlmann is offering a lot of money for the property, he says. Hieftje ventures that there’s an opportunity for negotiation.

11:26 p.m. Lumm says that the resolution is not written like a negotiation. She wants to “pound through” the amendments with Chaconas.

11:28 p.m. On the 400% FAR minimum, Chaconas contends that it’s a part of D1 zoning.

11:31 p.m. Kailasapathy asks Chaconas about the energy efficiency clauses. Briere stresses that Dahlmann would need to seek premiums to build more densely than 400%. Chaconas says that the amendments are items that have mostly been discussed with councilmembers.

11:33 p.m. Warpehoski says that he’s breaking council rules to disseminate Taylor’s amendments to the press. Kunselman thanks Chaconas. Kunselman says use can’t be controlled. What the council wants is a really nice building. He doesn’t think the amendments overload the property with use requirements.

11:36 p.m. Petersen points out that there are other city-owned properties that could be developed – responding to the possibility that the council doesn’t get the use it wants for this parcel.

11:37 p.m. The vote on the amendments is unanimous. [.pdf of Taylor's amendments.]

11:37 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted to approve the resolution, as amended, directing the city administrator to negotiate a sales agreement with Dennis Dahlmann for the sale of the former Y lot in downtown Ann Arbor.

11:37 p.m. DC-6 “Eat the Street” temporary food sales. The council is being asked to grant approval, under Chapter 55 (Zoning), Section 5:10.15(h) of the city code, for temporary sales of food at the vacant property at 1215 South University. The request is being made of the council by the South University Area Association (SUAA), which is planning a special event from Nov. 8, 2013 through Jan. 8, 2014. SUAA wants its “Eat the Street” event to include outdoor food cart sales at the location.

11:38 p.m. Lumm is thanking the South University Area Association and everyone’s hard work.

11:38 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted to approve the temporary sales of food for “Eat the Street.”

11:38 p.m. DC-7 Amicus brief on abortion clinic protest buffer zones. This resolution was added to the council’s agenda at around 4 p.m. today. It would list Ann Arbor as a “supporting municipality” in an amicus brief to be filed with the United States Supreme Court in a case to be heard by the court in McCullen v. Attorney General for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The plaintiff in that case is challenging a law creating a 35-foot buffer zone around Massachusetts abortion clinics, where people cannot demonstrate.

The city of Ann Arbor would be weighing in to support the idea that laws can be enacted establishing buffers around abortion clinics where people cannot demonstrate. Tangentially related to buffer zones for protest, in 1990 Ann Arbor voters agreed to amend the city charter to establish the city as a “zone of reproductive freedom.” From Chapter 20 of the Ann Arbor city charter: “No person within the City of Ann Arbor shall violate any law, rule, or regulation of this state which restricts or prohibits the right of any woman to an abortion, or which restricts or prohibits the right of a person to perform an abortion, as such right existed on January 20, 1981.” The resolution is co-sponsored by Sabra Briere (Ward 1), Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) and Jane Lumm (Ward 2).

11:39 p.m. Taylor invites city attorney Stephen Postema to explain the background.

11:43 p.m. Postema argues for his position based on the need for local authorities to exercise appropriate authority to balance time, place and manner considerations with First Amendment rights. He assures Taylor that it would not be a burden of city attorney resources, saying he merely needs to inform the filers of the amicus brief of the council’s vote.

11:43 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted to approve placing the city of Ann Arbor as a supporting municipality signing on to the amicus brief.

11:43 p.m. DB-1 Non-motorized transportation plan. The council is being asked to adopt an update to the city’s non-motorized transportation plan, which is part of the city’s master plan. The planning commission adopted the plan at its Sept. 10, 2013 meeting. [.pdf of draft 2013 non-motorized transportation plan update] [For more background, see Non-Motorized Issues: Non-Motorized Plan Update above.]

11:44 p.m. Briere asks Hupy to the podium. He defers to transportation program manager Eli Cooper and city planning manager Wendy Rampson.

11:51 p.m. Lumm says that with so many items on the agenda, she hasn’t had time to read through the plan. She wonders if there’s support for postponement. Hieftje allows that Lumm is right about it being an important document. There’s been a tremendous amount of work on the plan, Hieftje says. It’s already been through an extensive process. Surrounding municipalities have reviewed it, and it has been adopted by the planning commission. Hieftje is not inclined to postpone.

Kunselman asks if the plan has implications for grant eligibility. Yes, says Cooper. He gives an example of a non-motorized bridge across US-23 that was funded because it was indicated in the city’s non-motorized plan. Anglin says the council has heard a request from Lumm for more time. Lumm now moves for postponement.

11:54 p.m. Hieftje indicates that he’s already expressed his opinion. Briere allows it’s possible to be overloaded during campaign season. But she’s followed the plan in its development and now she’s ready to vote on it. There were no surprises in the update, she says. She feels that there are times when the council postpones beyond what’s reasonable. The item was on the agenda on Thursday. Kunselman says that postponing won’t hurt anything. It won’t cause any problems, he says. Teall says she’s ready to vote.

11:55 p.m. Lumm alludes to the solid waste plan, which the council had decided it needed to amend.

11:57 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted to postpone the update to the non-motorized plan. Voting for postponement were Kailasapathy, Petersen, Lumm, Kunselman, Higgins and Anglin.

11:57 p.m. DB-2 Site plan: Ann Arbor Christian Reformed Church. The council is being asked to approve a site plan for the expansion of the Ann Arbor Christian Reformed Church at 1717 Broadway St. The city planning commission recommended approval of the project at its Oct. 1, 2013 meeting. The site plan proposal calls for tearing down five existing buildings and constructing a 12,850-square-foot, two-story addition to the rear of the church. The addition would be used for educational activities at the church, which is located on a 4.3-acre site in Ward 1, southwest of Broadway’s intersection with Plymouth Road.

11:58 p.m. A representative of the project is giving a description of the project at Briere’s request.

11:58 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted to approve the site plan for Ann Arbor Christian Reformed Church on Broadway.

11:58 p.m. DS-1 through DS-6 MDEQ for SAW. The next six resolutions are grant requests, related to state legislation passed in 2012 that forms the statutory framework of the Stormwater, Asset Management and Wastewater (SAW) program – a grant program. The legislation funds grants and loans for what the staff memo accompanying the resolutions describes as “funding for grants and loans for asset management plan development, stormwater management plan development, sewage collection and treatment design plan development, and state-funded loans to construct projects identified in the asset management plans.”

Although communities that are awarded grants can receive a maximum of $2 million in total grant funds through the SAW program, the city of Ann Arbor is applying for the following six grants, on the idea that it will maximize its chances if the state uses a lottery type system. [For more background, see Capital Projects: State Funding of Water Asset Projects above.]

11:59 p.m. Hieftje is putting the six resolutions before the council all in one go.

11:59 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted unanimously without discussion to approve all of the MDEQ grant requests through the SAW program.

12:00 a.m. DS-7 Barton Dam repair ($123,684). The council is being asked to approve a contract with Catskill Remedial Contracting Services Inc. to install a “drainage blanket” for the earthen berm adjoining Barton Dam ($123,685). A drainage blanket is a pervious but stable layer of material installed directly at the base of a structure to facilitate drainage. The installation is meant to repair a “boil” that has surfaced in the drainage ditch at the base on the right embankment at the dam. The boil has been identified as a potential cause of failure for the embankment by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) – which is responsible for regulating the dam, because the dam generates electric power. [For more background, see Capital Projects: Barton Dam Repair above.]

12:00 a.m. Outcome: The council has voted without discussion to approve the contract with Catskill to install the drainage blanket.

12:00 a.m. DS-8 I-94 Business Loop and South Maple Road resurfacing project ($301,600). This project resurfaces the section of Huron Street from Main Street westward as Huron becomes Jackson Avenue on to I-94. The project will include a re-striping to reduce the number of lanes from four to three and add bicycle lanes. On the agenda is approval of an agreement with MDOT, which is required because the city must contribute 12.5% of the funding to the resurfacing. That accounts for $198,700. The additional funding is needed to pay for the resurfacing of the portion of South Maple Road, as a part of the project. South Maple is a city-owned street. MDOT has agreed to include the South Maple resurfacing as part of the project, but it will be funded by the city of Ann Arbor $102,900. [For more background, see Capital Projects: I-94 Business Loop ($301,600) above.]

12:00 a.m. Outcome: The council has voted unanimously without discussion to approve the MDOT contract.

12:00 a.m. DS-9 Sidewalk special assessment resolution – Stone School Road. This is the first of a series of resolutions that could lead to special assessment of property owners on Stone School Road for construction of sidewalks, curb and gutter as a part of a road reconstruction project. The resolution simply directs the city administrator to prepare plans and specifications for the sidewalk improvement project, determine an estimate of the cost, and make a recommendation on what portion of the cost should be special assessed. [For more background, see Capital Projects: Stone School Road Sidewalk above.]

12:02 a.m. Kunselman reports that there was a good public meeting on the topic. An issue that had arisen was the desire for more streetlights. He says it’s significant that there’s an 80% federal grant supporting the assessed costs.

12:02 a.m. Outcome: The council has voted to direct the design and cost estimates for the Stone School Road sidewalk project.

12:02 a.m. DS-10 Sidewalk special assessment resolution – Scio Church. This is the first in a series of resolutions that could lead to special assessment of property owners on Scio Church, west of Seventh Street for construction of a sidewalk there to eliminate a gap. The resolution directs the city administrator to prepare plans and specifications for the sidewalk improvement project, determine an estimate of the cost, and make a recommendation on what portion of the cost should be special assessed. The Scio Church resolution appropriates $35,000 for the design work. [For more background, see Capital Projects: Scio Church Sidewalk above.]

12:03 a.m. Teall says it’s another very exciting project. She thanks neighborhood resident Peter Houk for his work.

12:04 a.m. Higgins has a question for Craig Hupy. Scio Church Road is coming up for reconstruction, she ventures. Hupy says it’s on the radar but was pretty far off.

12:04 a.m. Outcome: The council has voted to direct preparation of sidewalk design for Scio Church.

12:05 a.m. DS-11 Tech engineering services ($250,000). The council will be asked to approve two different contracts that resulted from a bid that the city put out in June 2013 – for technical engineering services to support the water treatment services unit with capital, operation, and maintenance project support for the water system, dams, and hydroelectric generating stations. One of the contracts is with Stantec Consulting Michigan Inc. ($250,000). The other contract is with Tetra Tech of Michigan ($250,000). First up is Stantec.

12:05 a.m. Outcome: The council has voted to approve the contract with Stantec.

12:05 a.m. DS-12 Tech engineering services ($250,000). This is the second of two contracts related to the same RFP put out by the city. This one goes to Tetra Tech of Michigan.

12:05 a.m. Outcome: The council has voted to approve the contract with Tetra Tech.

12:05 a.m. DS-13 Purchase ozone generator dielectrics ($68,209). The council is being asked to approve a purchase order with Ozonia for ozone generator dielectrics. The city uses ozone in its disinfection process for its drinking water.

12:06 a.m. Outcome: The council has voted to approve the purchase of ozone generator dielectrics.

12:06 a.m. DS-14 Domestic violence grant ($300,000). The resolution accepts a three-year $300,000 supplemental grant for the 15th District Court from the U.S. Department of Justice to enhance countywide efforts to prevent domestic violence, effective Sept. 12, 2013 through Sept. 30, 2016. [For more background on this and the next five resolutions, see Social Capital: 15th District Court above.]

12:06 a.m. Outcome: The council has voted to accept the domestic violence prevention grant.

12:06 a.m. DS-15 Drug court grant ($144,000). The resolution accepts a Michigan Supreme Court drug court grant for the 15th District Court. The 15th District Court’s sobriety court is “hyper-intensive probation,” which follows sentencing.

12:06 a.m. Outcome: The council has voted to accept the drug court grant.

12:06 a.m. DS-16 Dawn Farm contract ($88,000). The resolution authorizes a contract with Dawn Farm for out-patient drug abuse counseling as part of the 15th District Court’s sobriety court ($88,000).

12:07 a.m. Outcome: The council has voted to authorize the contract with Dawn Farm.

12:07 a.m. DS-17 Veterans court grant ($92,279). The resolution accepts the Michigan Supreme Court veterans treatment court program grant.

12:07 a.m. Outcome: The council has voted to accept the veterans court grant.

12:07 a.m. DS-18 SafeHouse Center contract ($114,000). This resolution authorizes a contract with SafeHouse to provide domestic violence preventions services ($114,000), using funds accepted under DS-14. Under terms of the contract, SafeHouse Center will provide confidential support, information and referrals for victims of domestic violence cases in the 15th Judicial District Court, 14A Judicial Court and 14B Judicial District Court; monitor court and probation activity as it relates to victim safety; work collaboratively to enhance victim safety; and offer advice and training to judges, magistrates, probation and compliance officers and community partners.

12:08 a.m. Outcome: The council has voted to authorize the contract with SafeHouse.

12:08 a.m. DS-20 Accept public utilities easement. The property is located at 490 Huron Parkway owned by Johnson Building Group LLC.

12:08 a.m. Outcome: The council has voted to accept the easement.

12:08 a.m. DS-21 Accept public utilities easement. The property is located at 1500 Pauline Ave., owned by Pauline Apartments Limited Dividend Housing Association Limited Partnership.

12:08 a.m. Outcome: The council has voted to accept the public utilities easement.

12:09 a.m. DS-22 Vacate a public utilities easement. The property is located at 3100 Washtenaw Ave. (Arbor Hills Crossing).

12:09 a.m. Outcome: The council has voted to vacate the easement.

12:12 a.m. Council communications. Warpehoski says that with the Y lot resolution, there was a step towards having more money in the city’s affordable housing trust fund. He’d had conversations with some Washtenaw County commissioners about a county site on Platt Road. One of the possible uses for that county-owned property is affordable housing. He says that the city might want to be a partner with the county on the issue of affordable housing.

12:13 a.m. Briere is talking about affordable housing.

12:14 a.m. Hieftje says that in his experience the only way you get anything done on the issue of affordable housing is when you have partners.

12:14 a.m. Public commentary. There’s no requirement to sign up in advance for this slot for public commentary.

12:21 a.m. Seth Best from Camp Take Notice thanks the council for their action on the park permitting ordinance. He shares his experience as a homeless person in Ann Arbor. While the warming shelter will be opening on Nov. 18, there’s not sufficient capacity, he says. Ed Vielmetti is now addressing the council. He’d followed the meeting for a while on CTN tonight, and had come down to address the council. He asks the council to be more clear about the outcome of votes. He notes that it’s difficult to watch the meetings at local establishments like bars and laundromats without closed captioning. He gives a plug for the civic technology meetup group that he’s started.

12:25 a.m. Caleb Poirer thanks Higgins for her service. He thanks Kunselman for his efforts on affordable housing. He thanks Briere for bringing up the possibility of the city matching the DDA’s contribution to affordable housing. He regretted some of the comments of public speakers at the start of the meeting that had characterized the leadership of Ann Arbor negatively. But he was going to join those who spoke in support of their advocacy.

12:28 a.m. Farewell to Higgins. Teall leads off by saying, “Marcia, Marcia, Marcia.” She calls Higgins a great friend and a mentor. Teall tells Higgins her institutional memory has been very valuable. Hieftje has left his seat. Higgins is invited to take the seat as mayor pro tem. Taylor is now praising Higgins for her hard work.

12:29 a.m. Taylor says Higgins is good at taking care of slow, important things.

12:29 a.m. The beauty of Higgins’ being permeates the room and makes him joyful, Kunselman says. He praises her for her firmness and her longevity.

12:34 a.m. Lumm says Higgins has so many magnificent qualities. Higgins is going to blaze new trails, Lumm says. She calls Higgins a “class act.” She thanks her for her many years of service. Petersen thanks Higgins for welcoming Petersen to the council. She says she’ll miss her phone conversations with Higgins. Briere says she figures Higgins must get tired of all the praise. She recalls the time that the council used the county board room when city hall was being renovated, and Higgins had suggested that councilmembers sit next to different people.

12:38 a.m. Briere thanks Higgins for her body language. Kailasapathy says that she’d received some stares so she jokes she must not have been behaving. Anglin tells Higgins that Ann Arbor is a better town for her service. Warpehoski says he appreciates Higgins’ experience. On a lighter note, Warpehoski says he now feels less pressure to change his name to something that begins with “M” – alluding to Margie Teall, Mike Anglin, and Marcia Higgins.

12:39 a.m. Hieftje is now delivering his remarks. He thanks Higgins for her service. He reminds everyone that she’s not leaving town and that you can still have a beer with her.

12:41 a.m. Higgins is reviewing all the councilmembers she’s served with. It’s been “an amazing journey,” she says. Each and every person who’d previously sat there had helped her, so it was gratifying to hear people say that she’d helped them. She calls the current administrator the best of those she’d served with. “Thank you all,” she concludes. She gets a round of applause.

12:44 a.m. Teall brings up a bag with a city of Ann Arbor jacket and presents it to Higgins. City administrator Steve Powers has lost his balance and has fallen out of his chair. [See clarifying comment below that "... Powers actually rolled the wheel of his chair off the elevated platform where the mayor and administrator sit."]

12:44 a.m. Powers is unscathed.

12:44 a.m. Adjournment. We are now adjourned. That’s all from the hard benches.

A sign on the door to the Ann Arbor city council chambers gives instructions for post-meeting clean-up.

The Chronicle survives in part through regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the Ann Arbor city council. 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.

Screenshot of Legistar – the city of Ann Arbor online agenda management system. Image links to the Nov. 7 meeting agenda.

The city’s downtown factors prominently on the agenda in at least three ways. The city council will be asked to consider passing a resolution to direct the city administrator to negotiate a sales agreement for the city-owned property on William Street between Fourth and Fifth avenues, known as the old Y lot. The council will also be considering a revision to the city ordinance regulating the tax increment finance (TIF) capture of the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority. That’s been under consideration by the council since February, but now a committee of councilmembers and DDA board members has put forward a competing recommendation, which will also be on the Nov. 7 agenda.

Also related to downtown, the council will be formally accepting a report completed by the city’s park advisory commission with recommendations on downtown parks.

Non-motorized issues also factor prominently as a theme of the Nov. 7 agenda. In addition to an update of the city’s non-motorized transportation plan, the council will consider establishing a pedestrian safety task force. The council’s agenda also includes the first of a series of resolutions for two separate sidewalk projects – one on Stone School Road and another on Scio Church Road. The council’s resolutions for those projects, directing the design work and detailed cost estimates, are the first actions necessary for some of the funding of the sidewalks to be special assessed to the adjacent property owners.

An additional project related to non-motorized issues, but not obviously so, is a contract with the Michigan Dept. of Transportation to resurface a portion of Huron Street from Main Street westward as Huron becomes Jackson Avenue on to I-94, as well as a section of South Maple. The intent is to re-stripe the roadway, reducing the lanes from four to three and adding bicycle lanes.

The sidewalk and street projects are among several capital improvement-related items on the agenda, including one that would help stabilize the earthen berm adjacent to Barton Dam. The council will also be considering a half dozen resolutions that will authorize applying for state grants that could fund capital asset projects for the city.

In addition to the items related to the city’s physical infrastructure, the council has several items that could be described as relating to the city’s social infrastructure. Those items relate to grants from the state and federal government to the 15th District Court for several of its specialty courts that focus on drug offenses, domestic violence, and veterans issues. The council will also be asked to approve a modified continuation of its coordinated funding approach to human services.

The agenda includes some council initiatives announced at the council’s previous meeting on Oct. 21. One of those is a resolution requesting that the University of Michigan decommission a recently constructed digital billboard near the football stadium.

Another one is a resolution directing the education of city officials on professional conduct. Related tangentially to those ethical considerations are the approvals of new bylaws for two of the city’s boards and commissions – the planning commission and the design review board.

This article includes a more detailed preview of many of these agenda items. More details on other meeting agenda items are available on the city’s online Legistar system. The meeting proceedings can be followed live Thursday evening on Channel 16, streamed online by Community Television Network.

Downtown

The agenda includes several items related to the downtown area.

Downtown: DDA Ordinance

On the Nov. 7 agenda are now two possible revisions to the city’s ordinance regarding how the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority’s TIF capture is regulated (Chapter 7). The first version has been under consideration by the council since Feb. 19, 2013.

The second version is the result of recommendations by a committee of DDA board members and city councilmembers that has met four times since Aug. 26, most recently on Oct. 30. That committee was established at the council’s July 1, 2013 meeting – after the first version achieved initial approval at the council’s April 1, 2013 meeting. Representing the council on the joint committee are Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3), Christopher Taylor (Ward 3), Jane Lumm (Ward 2) and Sally Petersen (Ward 2). Representing the DDA are Sandi Smith, Roger Hewitt, Bob Guenzel and Joan Lowenstein.

A range of possible parliamentary mechanisms are available to the council for handling the two competing versions of the ordinance amendment. One approach would be to put off deciding between the two versions at the Nov. 7 meeting – by postponing the first version and giving the second version an initial approval. That could move the debate to the council’s Nov. 18 meeting – after the new composition of the city council is seated.

Another parliamentary approach on Nov. 7 could be to amend the first version through substitution of the second. Or the council could vote down the first version and consider the second version. The council could also vote to give the first version final approval and not consider the second version when it’s reached on the agenda. The first version appears first on the agenda – but that order could be re-arranged at the start of the meeting.

The first version, which will be in front of the council for final approval, would clarify the existing language of the ordinance regulating the DDA’s TIF capture in a way that would disallow the DDA’s preferred interpretation of a restriction in the ordinance. The restriction on TIF revenue that’s already expressed in the ordinance is defined by reference to the amount of growth in taxable value in the DDA district that’s anticipated in the DDA’s TIF plan – a foundational document of the DDA. When those restrictions are applied to the DDA’s TIF revenue, then the amount of TIF received by the DDA would be roughly $4 million in FY 2015. By way of comparison, in the current fiscal year (FY 2014), under its preferred interpretation, the DDA looks to capture approximately $4.5 million of the taxes levied by other jurisdictions.

Under the first version revision, that roughly $0.5 million difference would be proportionally divided among the taxing jurisdictions, which together levy roughly 27.5 mills of taxes in the DDA district. Proportionally, that translates to: city of Ann Arbor (60%), Washtenaw County (21%), Washtenaw Community College (13%), and Ann Arbor District Library (6%). So out of a $500,000 return to other taxing jurisdictions, the city of Ann Arbor would receive $300,000. However, that $300,000 would be distributed proportionally to the funds generating Ann Arbor’s levy. Part of Ann Arbor’s levy is a transportation tax that is passed through to the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority. So of the $300,000 that would be returned to the city, about $40,000 of it would be passed through to the AAATA.

However, the total amount that would be returned on the first version revision is projected to rise each year from that roughly $0.5 million, to somewhere in the neighborhood of $2 million in FY 2017 based on projects in the downtown under construction and in the approval process.

The second version, proposed by the committee, would set a cap on DDA TIF revenue that would not apply at all until FY 2017 and would result in roughly $6.1 million of TIF revenue to the DDA that year, with an estimated return of $300,000 total to the other taxing jurisdictions. The city’s portion of that would be roughly $180,000, distributed proportionally across all its funds that get income from a captured levy, including the general fund.

Another major difference between the first version and the committee-recommended version of the Chapter 7 ordinance change is that the first version includes revisions to governance of the DDA, which the committee-recommended version omits. Those governance revisions include (1) a two-term limit for service on the DDA board; (2) a prohibition against elected officials, other than the mayor, serving on the DDA board; and (3) service of the mayor on the board (a possibility explicitly provided in the DDA state enabling legislation) subject to annual approval by the city council. If the council did not approve the mayor’s service on the DDA board in a given year, then that spot would go to the city administrator.

Downtown: Y Lot Sale

A resolution added to the agenda on Friday, Nov. 1, 2013 would direct city administrator Steve Powers to negotiate a sales agreement with Dennis Dahlmann for the purchase of the city-owned property north of William Street between Fourth and Fifth avenues in downtown Ann Arbor. Dahlmann has offered $5.25 million for the property, known as the Y lot. It had been listed at $4.2 million. [.pdf of Dahlmann offer 10.17.13]

If those negotiations are not successful, then the resolution directs the city administrator to negotiate with CA Ventures (Clark Street Holdings).

The memo accompanying the Nov. 7 resolution states:

The offers from Dennis Dahlmann and CA Ventures are the strongest (cash, no contingencies, sales agreement, close in 2013) of the five proposals. Differences between the two offers are slight, but may be significant to city council. Dahlmann is proposing a purchase price of $5,250,000. CA Ventures is proposing $5,150,000. Dahlmann is proposing to build to less than the maximum density allowed by D1 zoning. CA Ventures’ offer assumes the ability to build to the maximum density allowed by D1 zoning.

The Nov. 7 resolution directs the city administrator to provide a purchase agreement for the property for the council’s consideration at its Nov. 18 meeting. That purchase agreement is supposed to include protections against the property not being developed.

While the council’s Nov. 7 meeting follows the Nov. 5 city council elections, the Nov. 18 meeting is the first meeting of the newly constituted council. The Nov. 7 resolution is sponsored by mayor John Hieftje and Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3).

The city received five bids on the property by the Oct. 18 deadline. [.pdf of summary page by Jim Chaconas]

The city had hired Colliers International and local broker Jim Chaconas to handle the possible sale, as the city faces a $3.5 million balloon payment this year from the purchase loan it holds on that property. The city has owned the land for a decade.

Downtown: Parks

A subcommittee of the park advisory commission (PAC) has been meeting since early 2013 to explore the possibilities for a new downtown park. The subcommittee delivered its recommendations at the Oct. 15, 2013 meeting of PAC. [.pdf of 21-page full subcommittee report]

Ingrid Ault chaired the committee, which also included Julie Grand, Alan Jackson and Karen Levin. The committee’s work is also meant to supplement the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority’s Connecting William Street project.

The subcommittee’s work was guided by this mission statement:

To determine whether and what additional parks are wanted and/or needed in downtown Ann Arbor, focusing on city-owned parcels in the DDA district while maintaining awareness of additional nearby properties, for example: Liberty Plaza, 721 N. Main and 415 W. Washington. The “deliverable” will be a set of recommendations for the City Council.

The eight recommendations are wide-ranging, but include a site-specific recommendation to develop a new park/open space area on the top of the Library Lot underground parking structure. Now a surface parking lot, the site is owned by the city and is situated just north of the Ann Arbor District Library’s downtown building. The recommendation calls for only a portion of the site to be used for a new park/open space, and stresses that AADL should be involved in the planning process. The AADL board and staff discussed this recommendation at their Oct. 21, 2013 meeting.

Downtown – and Citywide: Park Fee Waiver

The council will be giving initial consideration to a change to the city’s ordinances so that charitable distribution of goods for basic human needs could be conducted in city parks without incurring a fee for park use. The proposal is not restricted to downtown parks, but the idea originated from an issue that emerged in connection with Liberty Plaza, which is a downtown park.

The recommendation for the ordinance change came from the city’s park advisory commission at its Sept. 17, 2013 meeting. This broader policy change comes three months after the Ann Arbor city council waived all rental fees for the use of Liberty Plaza during a one-year trial period, based on a PAC recommendation. That city council action came at its July 15, 2013 meeting.

The Liberty Plaza fee waiver was approved in response to a situation that arose earlier in the spring, when the city staff considered applying fees to the hosting of Pizza in the Park at Liberty Plaza – a homelessness outreach ministry of a local church. The proposal recommended by PAC on Sept. 17, and on the council’s Nov. 7 agenda, would amend Chapter 39, Section 3:6 of the city code. [.pdf of revised ordinance language]

It would be a permanent fee waiver for this specific purpose – the charitable distribution of goods for basic human needs – but it would still require that organizations get a permit to use the park, and follow permitting procedures, including clean up obligations.

Non-Motorized Issues

Several items on the council’s Nov. 7 agenda relate to non-motorized issues.

Non-Motorized Issues: Non-Motorized Transportation Plan Update

The council is being asked to adopt an update to the city’s non-motorized transportation plan, which is part of the city’s master plan. The planning commission adopted the plan at its Sept. 10, 2013 meeting. [.pdf of draft 2013 non-motorized transportation plan update]

Map identifying geographic areas for improvements for pedestrians and bicyclists, as noted in the 2013 non-motorized transportation plan update.

The update will be an amendment to the main non-motorized transportation plan, which was adopted in 2007. The new document is organized into three sections: (1) planning and policy updates; (2) updates to near-term recommendations; and (3) long-term recommendations.

Examples of planning and policy issues include design guidelines, recommendations for approaches like bike boulevards and bike share programs, and planning practices that cover education campaigns, maintenance, crosswalks and other non-motorized elements for pedestrians and bicyclists.

For example, the update recommends that the city begin developing a planning process for bike boulevards, which are described as “a low-traffic, low-speed road where bicycle interests are prioritized.” Sections of West Washington (from Revena to First), Elmwood (from Platt to Canterbury) and Broadway (from its southern intersection with Plymouth to where it rejoins Plymouth about a mile to the northeast) are suggested for potential bike boulevards.

Near-term recommendations include lower-cost efforts like re-striping roads to install bike lanes and adding crossing islands. Longer-term projects that were included in the 2007 plan are re-emphasized: the Allen Creek Greenway, Border-to-Border Trail, Gallup Park & Fuller Road paths, and a Briarwood-Pittsfield pedestrian bridge.

Non-Motorized Issues: Pedestrian Safety

Chuck Warpehoski (Ward 5) and Sabra Briere (Ward 1) announced at the council’s Oct. 21 meeting that they’d be bringing forward a proposal to establish a pedestrian safety task force. At the Oct. 21 meeting, Warpehoski stated that the effort was not meant as an alternative to the efforts that other councilmembers are making to bring forward a repeal of the city’s pedestrian crosswalk ordinance.

The city’s ordinance differs from the Uniform Traffic Code (UTC) in two respects: (1) requiring motorists to stop for pedestrians, not just to slow as to yield; and (2) requiring motorists to take action to accommodate pedestrians standing at the curb at a crosswalk, not just those pedestrians who have already entered the crosswalk. The resolution establishing the task force acknowledges that many residents are concerned that current city policies create an unsafe environment for pedestrians, cyclists and drivers.

The pedestrian safety and access task force would consist of nine residents, including “representatives from organizations that address the needs of school-aged youth, senior citizens, pedestrian safety, and people with mobility impairments.” Applications from interested citizens should be turned in to the mayor’s office by Nov. 22, 2013. [.pdf of standard city board and commission task force application] The intent is to appoint the task force at the Dec. 2, 2013 city council meeting.

The task force would deliver a report by early September 2014. That report would include recommendations for “improvements in the development and application of the Complete Streets model, using best practices, sound data and objective analysis.”

Some of the recent community conversation has included the fact that traffic crashes involving a pedestrian have shown an increase in the last two years, the period during which Ann Arbor adopted its local ordinance that requires more of motorists than the UTC. The charts below are by The Chronicle using data from Michigan Traffic Crash Facts.

Pedestrian Traffic Crashes by Year: Ann Arbor

Pedestrian Traffic Crashes by Year: SEMCOG region.

Pedestrian Traffic Crashes by Year: SEMCOG Region by County

Pedestrian Crashes by Year: Washtenaw County Outside Ann Arbor

Capital Projects

The Nov. 7 city council agenda includes a number of resolutions involving capital projects and expenses, some of which relate to non-motorized issues.

Capital Projects: I-94 Business Loop ($301,600)

This project would resurface the section of Huron Street from Main Street westward as Huron becomes Jackson Avenue on to I-94. The project will include a re-striping to reduce the number of lanes from four to three and add bicycle lanes. An agreement with the Michigan Dept. of Transportation is required because the city must contribute 12.5% of the funding for the resurfacing. That accounts for $198,700. Additional funding is needed to pay for the resurfacing of the portion of South Maple Road, as part of the project. South Maple is a city-owned street. MDOT has agreed to include the South Maple resurfacing as part of the project, but it will be funded by the city of Ann Arbor for $102,900.

Capital Projects: Stone School Road Sidewalk

On the council’s agenda is the first of a series of resolutions that could lead to special assessment of property owners on Stone School Road for constructing sidewalks, curbs and gutters as part of a road reconstruction project. The resolution simply directs the city administrator to prepare plans and specifications for the sidewalk improvement project, determine an estimate of the cost, and make a recommendation on what portion of the cost should be special assessed.

Capital Projects: Scio Church Sidewalk

Also on the council’s agenda is the first in a series of resolutions that could lead to special assessment of property owners on Scio Church, west of Seventh Street, for constructing a sidewalk there to eliminate a gap. The resolution directs the city administrator to prepare plans and specifications for the sidewalk improvement project, determine an estimate of the cost, and make a recommendation on what portion of the cost should be special assessed. The Scio Church resolution appropriates $35,000 for the design work. [For Chronicle coverage of a neighborhood meeting on the Scio Church sidewalk, see "Sidewalks: Build, Repair, Shovel"]

Capital Projects: Barton Dam Repair

The council will be asked to approve a contract with Catskill Remedial Contracting Services Inc. to install a “drainage blanket” for the earthen berm adjoining Barton Dam ($123,685). A drainage blanket is a pervious but stable layer of material installed directly at the base of a structure to facilitate drainage. The installation is meant to repair a “boil” that has surfaced in the drainage ditch at the base of the right embankment at the dam. The boil has been identified as a potential cause of failure for the embankment by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) – which is responsible for regulating the dam, because the dam generates electric power.

The contract is recommended to be awarded to Catskill, even though Pranam GlobalTech provided the lowest bid. The staff memo cites “substandard performance” by Pranam GlobalTech on two other city projects, which led to the disqualification of their bid. The cost of the project will be split between the water fund (as the dam creates a pond from which the city draws the majority of its drinking water) and the general fund (for the hydroelectric operations).

The council had been alerted to the need for this project earlier this year, at a Feb. 11, 2013 work session on the FY 2014 budget. From The Chronicle’s report of that session:

In addition to the concrete and steel part of the dam, a roughly 3/8-mile long earthen embankment is part of the structure that forms Barton Pond, [public services area administrator Craig] Hupy explained. FERC (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission) has required the city to do some investigative work, and the city thinks there’ll be some follow-up work required when that investigative work is completed. [FERC is involved as a regulator because the Barton Dam generates electricity.]

Responding to a question from [Ward 3 councilmember Christopher] Taylor about the anticipated cost of the additional work, Hupy indicated that it would be “six figures.” The city is putting about $400,000 total in various parts of the budget for it. But until the study work is completed later this spring, the amount can’t be more precise, Hupy indicated. Because Barton is a federally controlled dam, whatever the work the city does will be what the regulator demands that the city does or doesn’t do. “Stay tuned,” Hupy told Taylor.

Capital Projects: Technical Engineering Services

The council will be asked to approve two different contracts that resulted from a bid it put out in June 2013 – for technical engineering services to support the water treatment services unit with capital, operation, and maintenance project support for the water system, dams, and hydroelectric generating stations. One of the contracts is with Stantec Consulting Michigan Inc. ($250,000). The other contract is with Tetra Tech of Michigan ($250,000).

Capital Projects: Ozone

The council will be asked to approve a purchase order with Ozonia for ozone generator dielectrics ($68,209). The city uses ozone in the disinfection process for its drinking water. The city is currently out of spare dielectric units, which are the components that convert oxygen gas to ozone gas. So this resolution would allow the city to have replacement parts on hand if the units fail.

Capital Projects: State Funding of Water Asset Projects

Six resolutions appear on the council’s agenda related to state legislation passed in 2012 that forms the statutory framework of the Stormwater, Asset Management and Wastewater (SAW) program – a grant program. The legislation funds grants and loans for what the staff memo accompanying the resolutions describes as “funding for grants and loans for asset management plan development, stormwater management plan development, sewage collection and treatment design plan development, and state-funded loans to construct projects identified in the asset management plans.” [.pdf of FAQ by the State of Michigan on the SAW program] [PA 511 of 2012] [PA 560 of 2012] [PA 561 of 2012] [PA 562 of 2012]

Although communities that are awarded grants can receive a maximum of $2 million in total grant funds through the SAW program, the city of Ann Arbor is applying for the following six grants, on the idea that it will maximize its chances if the state uses a lottery type system. The first $1 million has a 10% local match requirement, and the second $1 million of grant money has a 25% local match requirement.

The city is applying for funding for some projects that have already been started, because money awarded through the SAW program can be spent retroactively as early as Jan. 2, 2013. The council will be considering six resolutions corresponding to grant requests from the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality for the following projects.

• Asset Management Plan for the Sanitary System ($1.1 million): Local match requirement is 10% of first million ($100,000) plus 25% of second million ($25,000) for a total of $125,000.
• Asset Management Plan for the Stormwater System ($1.1 million): Local match requirement is 10% of first million ($100,000) plus 25% of second million ($25,000) for a total of $125,000.
• Sanitary Sewer Wet Weather Evaluation Project (retroactive) ($1.2 million): Local match requirement is 10% of first million ($100,000) plus 25% of second million ($50,000) for a total of $150,000.
• Stormwater Model Calibration Project (retroactive) ($750,000): Local match requirement is 10% of first million ($75,000) or 25% of second million ($187,500) for a maximum of $187,500.
• Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) Asset Management Program ($350,00): Local match requirement is 10% of first million ($35,000) or 25% of second million ($87,500) for a maximum of $87,500.
• Asset Management Plan for the Wastewater Treatment Plant and the Sanitary Sewer System ($1.5 million): Local match requirement is 10% of first million ($100,000) plus 25% of second million ($125,000) for a total of $225,000.

Social Infrastructure

In addition to physical infrastructure items, the council’s Nov. 7 agenda also includes several pieces of business that could be described as related to social infrastructure.

Social Infrastructure: 15th District Court

The council will be asked to consider authorizing five grant-related items involving the specialty court functions of the 15th District Court. [For background on the 15th District Court and some of its functions, see Chronicle coverage: "Round 1 FY 2014: 15th District Court"]

• Accept three-year $300,000 supplemental grant from the U.S. Department of Justice to enhance countywide efforts to prevent domestic violence, effective Sept. 12, 2013 through Sept. 30, 2016. Of the grant total, $181,000 will reimburse the city for the salaries for a full-time domestic violence probation officer, a half-time system coordinator, and a part-time data entry clerk. Another $5,000 will reimburse the city for training expenses required by the U.S. Dept. of Justice. The remaining $114,000 will reimburse the city for a contract with SafeHouse Center to provide domestic violence prevention services.
• Authorize contract with SafeHouse to provide domestic violence prevention services ($114,000). Under terms of the contract, SafeHouse Center will provide confidential support, information and referrals for victims of domestic violence cases in the 15th District Court, 14A District Court and 14B District Court; monitor court and probation activity as it relates to victim safety; work collaboratively to enhance victim safety; and offer advice and training to judges, magistrates, probation and compliance officers and community partners.
• Accept Michigan Supreme Court drug court grant ($144,000). The 15th District Court’s sobriety court is “hyper-intensive probation,” which follows sentencing. The court assigns a full-time probation officer to the sobriety court for a program that lasts 18-24 months and includes monitoring of participants’ attendance at treatment programs, their progress in treatment, how they’re spending their time at work and doing community service. Reporting requirements are extensive. Participants must take frequent portable breath tests (PBTs) and urine tests. The majority of sobriety court participants are second-offender DWI cases, but offenses need not be driving-related. Also eligible to participate in sobriety court are, for example, retail fraud (shoplifting) offenders and misdemeanor drug possession offenders. Some of that grant money will fund a contract with Dawn Farm.
• Authorize contract with Dawn Farm ($88,000). The contract is for out-patient drug abuse counseling as part of the 15th District Court’s sobriety court.
• Accept Michigan Supreme Court veterans treatment court program grant ($92,279).

Social Infrastructure: Coordinated Funding

The council will be asked to authorize the basic approach that it has taken to human services funding in the past, but with some modifications. The funds would continue to be managed through Washtenaw County’s office of community & economic development, using the coordinated funding approach.

The county is one of five partners in the coordinated funding approach. Other partners are city of Ann Arbor, United Way of Washtenaw County, Washtenaw Urban County, and the Ann Arbor Area Community Foundation. It began as a pilot program in 2010; this is the second time that the program has been extended.

The coordinated funding process has three parts: planning/coordination, program operations, and capacity-building. The approach targets six priority areas, and identifies lead agencies for each area: (1) housing and homelessness – Washtenaw Housing Alliance; (2) aging – Blueprint for Aging; (3) school-aged youth – Washtenaw Alliance for Children and Youth; (4) children birth to six – Success by Six; (5) health – Washtenaw Health Plan; and (6) hunger relief – Food Gatherers.

Last year, TCC Group – a consulting firm based in Philadelphia – was hired to evaluate the process. As a result of that review, several changes were recommended. One of those changes is that funding would not necessarily be allocated to the six priority areas based on the proportion of funding allocated in the past. Instead, allocations among the six priority areas would be based on identified community-level outcomes, the strategies that align with them, and how each are prioritized. An additional change would broaden the pre-screening process so that smaller nonprofits could be accommodated.

Recommendations for specific funding allocations will be made in spring 2014. In addition, the RNR Foundation – a family foundation that funded TCC Group’s evaluation of the coordinated funding approach – will now be an additional funder in this process. One of the goals of coordinated funding is to attract more partners, such as private foundations.

The Washtenaw County board of commissioners gave initial approval to the continued use of the coordinated funding approach at its Oct. 16, 2013 meeting.

Ethics

The council’s agenda includes a couple of items that relate to ethics.

Ethics: Professional Standards of Conduct

Sally Petersen (Ward 2) is bringing forward a resolution that does not include “ethics” in the title, but addresses the kind of issues that could be described under the general rubric of “ethics.” The resolution directs an educational effort on Public Act 317 of 1968, which is the state’s conflict-of-interest statute.

A final “resolved” clauses direct the council’s rules committee to draft standards of conduct for local officials based on Public Act 196 of 1973, which applies to state employees of the executive branch and appointees of the governor. The final resolved clause – if it’s approved, and if the council adopts a standard that’s recommended by the council rules committee and it’s strictly followed – would end any unauthorized leaks of information from the city government.

Ethics: Consent Agenda – Planning Commission Bylaws

The Nov. 7 consent agenda includes approval of new bylaws for two entities – the city’s design review board and the city planning commission.

Not the subject of a revision, but still the source of some recent community interest, is the following clause from the planning commission bylaws, which imposes a limitation on the ability of a councilmember to address the city planning commission:

Section 9. A member of the City Council shall not be heard before the Commission as a petitioner, representative of a petitioner or as a party interested in a petition during the Council member’s term of office.

That part of the bylaws surfaced recently, when councilmembers Chuck Warpehoski (Ward 5) and Sumi Kailasapathy on separate occasions sought to address the planning commission – Warpehoski on July 16, 2013 and Kailasapathy on Aug. 13, 2013.

Based on an analysis in the Michigan Municipal League’s “Handbook for Municipal Officials,” it may be problematic for a city councilmember to address a body like the planning commission. That’s not based on having a property interest in a matter, but rather because the council is the appointing body for the commission. The handbook presents the following scenario as an ethical exercise – using the zoning board of appeals (ZBA). From the MML Handbook:

Situation #2 Before you were elected to the city council you served on your city’s zoning board of appeals (ZBA), so you know the ZBA procedures very well. A few months after your election to council, your neighbor and campaign manager files a petition with the ZBA seeking a variance. Since you know how the ZBA works, he asks you to accompany him to the ZBA and to speak on his behalf. Should you do it?

The analysis offered by the handbook is the following:

No. The Michigan Court of Appeals has labeled this situation as “patently improper” and an abuse of public trust for the reason that the person making the argument to the ZBA is also one of the people charged with appointing the ZBA. This creates duress on the ZBA, raising doubt about the impartiality of the ZBA’s decision. Any decision made by the ZBA under these circumstances is void. See Barkey v. Nick, 11 Mich App 361 (1968).

The implication of the Ann Arbor city planning commission bylaw is that it’s permissible for a city councilmember to address the commission exactly when the councilmember is not the petitioner or does not have an interest in the matter. That situation appears to be explicitly deemed unethical by the MML Handbook, if the handbook’s analysis is extended from the ZBA to the planning commission.

Ethics: Consent Agenda – Rental Housing Inspection

A consent agenda item increases the amount of a contract the city has with the accounting firm Plante Moran for a thorough review of the city’s permitting processes. That review comes in the context of the discovery that some rental housing permits had not been properly verified, according to city sources. Steps taken by the city staff to correct the problems included a review of all questionable permits. That included site visits to eight residential properties, six of them occupied, to ensure no one was living in unsafe conditions.

Re-inspection continues of residential and business properties to verify issued permits, to ensure the accuracy of the city’s records. Property owners are not being charged additional costs for re-inspection. The city anticipated that over 80 properties would be re-inspected as of Oct. 30. The permits for those 80 properties compare to a total number of 10,000 building and rental permits issued annually.

Miscellaneous

A number of other items appear on the agenda. Here are a few highlights.

Misc: Consent Agenda

Three other consent agenda items include a $60,000 contract with Utilities Instrumentation Service for electrical and instrumentation support services. According to a staff memo, the scope of UIS work will include “transformer testing, infrared testing of switchgear, testing of medium voltage breakers at City substations and generators, programming and calibration of instrumentation, Supervisory Control And Data Acquisition (SCADA) support and troubleshooting, Programmable Logic Controller (PLC) programming, and tuning and testing of dam and hydroelectric generator controls.”

A fourth item on the consent agenda sets a public hearing for establishing an industrial development district (for potential tax abatements) at 1901 E. Ellsworth. That hearing will be held on Dec. 2, 2013.

Misc: Church Site Plan

The council will be asked to approve a site plan for the expansion of the Ann Arbor Christian Reformed Church at 1717 Broadway St. The city planning commission recommended approval of the project at its Oct. 1, 2013 meeting.

Aerial view of site for the Ann Arbor Christian Reformed Church at 1717 Broadway.

The site plan proposal calls for tearing down five existing buildings and constructing a 12,850-square-foot, two-story addition to the rear of the church. The addition would be used for educational activities at the church, which is located on a 4.3-acre site in Ward 1, southwest of Broadway’s intersection with Plymouth Road.

According to a staff memo, only minor changes are proposed for the existing 142-space parking lot. Additional sidewalks will be added, including a roughly 20-foot extension of the public sidewalk along Broadway Street, which currently stops short of the south property line.

Because the church is located in an area zoned for single-family residential use (R1C zoning), a special exception use approval was needed from the planning commission. The city’s planning staff noted that the church has been located there for about 50 years. The church has a capacity of 126 seats, which will remain unchanged. At their Oct. 1 meeting, planning commissioners unanimously voted to grant approval for a special exception use.

The project is estimated to cost about $3 million. No approval is required from the city council for the special exception use, but the council must consider the site plan for approval.

The Chronicle could not survive without regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the Ann Arbor city council. We sit on the hard bench so that you don’t have to. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle. And if you’re already supporting us, please encourage your friends, neighbors and colleagues to help support The Chronicle, too!

Of the Ann Arbor city council’s roughly 3-hour meeting, about a quarter of the time was taken up by deliberations on changes to the council’s rules (dark blue wedge), some of which would have affected public speaking time. Total public speaking time at the meeting (red wedge) was about 21 minutes, or 11% of the meeting. (Chart by The Chronicle based on time stamps of live updates filed from the meeting.)

About a quarter of that time was spent in deliberations on changes to the council’s own rules. That included a proposal to reduce the length of public speaking turns from three minutes to two minutes. After voting 10-1 – over the lone dissent of Margie Teall (Ward 4) – to eliminate the shortening of public speaking turns, the council discussed a number of the other proposed changes that had been recommended by the council’s rules committee.

Those changes include a shortening of councilmember speaking turns, adding public commentary to the council’s work sessions, moving nominations and appointments to a spot earlier on the agenda, and prohibiting the use of mobile devices for texting or phoning at the council table.

As councilmembers recognized that they would not be able to find their way to a clear consensus on the rules changes until they had longer deliberations, the council decided to postpone the item until its first meeting in September – which this year falls on Sept. 3.

So the council delayed launching itself off the lip of the legislative half-pipe to change its own internal rules. However, councilmembers took the advice of Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) when they voted on the construction contract for a new skatepark: “Just go for it!” The unanimous vote on a $1,031,592 contract with Krull Construction came after some scrutiny led by Sally Petersen (Ward 2). Her questioning was based on the project’s additional cost, compared to its original budget.

The originally approved budget for the project was $800,000 – though the expectation was that it would cost about $1 million. The total budget now – including the construction contract, 10% contingency and $89,560 design contract – is $1,224,311, or $424,311 higher than the originally budgeted $800,000. Funds to pay for the skatepark include a $400,000 grant from the Washtenaw County parks & recreation commission, $300,000 from the Michigan Dept. of Natural Resources Trust Fund, and $100,00 raised by the Friends of the Ann Arbor Skatepark, which paid for the skatepark’s design. This particular effort by the Friends dates back to 2005.

An item added to the agenda the same day as the meeting led to considerable discussion about the relationship between the city and the University of Michigan. The council had failed on May 13 to approve a right-of-way occupancy for the university to install conduits under Tappan Street. An early departure from that meeting by Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) contributed in part to the council’s inability to achieve an eight-vote majority.

Whether an eight-vote majority is needed is the source of friction between the city and UM. Under the city charter, an eight-vote majority is required for the council to approve transactions involving an interest in land. The purpose of the conduits under Tappan Street is to connect a new emergency generator to the Lawyers Club buildings at 551 S. State St. The Lawyers Club and the generator are located on opposite sides of the street. The university’s view is that the agreement needs to convey an interest in land, something the city attorney’s office disagrees with. The council’s resolution approved on July 15 directs the city staff to renegotiate with UM.

The other item on the agenda receiving at least 15 minutes of discussion was one that granted a fee waiver for events held in Liberty Plaza. That action was prompted by public protests at previous council meetings about the possibility of charging a fee to the church that hosts Pizza in the Park – a homelessness outreach program that distributes food and other humanitarian aid.

The council handled a raft of other items, including three different contracts related to protecting the local environment. Two of the contracts include an educational component – one related to the city’s materials recovery facility (MRF), and the other to stormwater management. The third concerned monitoring the city’s now-closed landfill at Platt and Ellsworth.

The council also handled several other items related to stormwater management. Three of the items involved street reconstruction – on Stone School Road, Forest Avenue, and multiple streets in the Springwater subdivision. A fourth item approved by the council was a contract for tree planting, which will be paid for from the city’s stormwater fund.

Among other items, the council also approved the distribution of $1.2 million in human services funding to various nonprofits that do work under contract with the city.

In non-voting business, the council received an update from chief of police John Seto. He reported that through the first six months of the year, Part 1 crimes – the most serious types of offenses – are down 10% compared to last year in the city, while overall crime is down 7.5%. Seto also reported that the police department is analyzing the initial data collection from the electronic activity logs for officers.

During public commentary, the council heard from advocates for racial equity, who called for the council to take action in response to the not-guilty verdict in Florida’s Trayvon Martin shooting case.

Council Rules

The council considered adopting amendments to its own internal rules. The items had been postponed twice previously.

Highlights of the proposed rules changes include adding public commentary to council work sessions. The proposal before the council on July 15 also included a shortening of public speaking turns – from three minutes to two minutes across all types of public speaking. Those types include general commentary, public hearings, and reserved time.

The length of councilmember speaking turns was also proposed to be shortened. The proposal was to reduce total time from eight minutes to five minutes. In more detail, the two turns they get per item would be reduced from five to three minutes and from three to two minutes.

A “frequent flyer” rule would prevent people from signing up for reserved time at the start of a meeting two meetings in a row.

Other changes included one that would put nominations and appointments to boards and commissions at the start of the agenda, before the council’s voting business, instead of after all the items. The new rules would also explicitly prohibit the use of mobile devices for texting or phoning at the council table.

For previous Chronicle coverage on these proposed changes, see “Council Mulls Speaking Rule Changes.”

The council had postponed a vote from its previous meeting, on July 1, 2013, due to the absence of Sally Petersen (Ward 2) and Margie Teall (Ward 4) – who were described by council rules committee chair Marcia Higgins (Ward 4) as wanting to take part in the conversation. The council had also postponed the item at its June 17, 2013 meeting.

Council Rules: Public Comment

During public commentary reserved time at the start of the meeting, Jack Eaton encouraged the council to enact the rule change on its agenda that adds public commentary to work sessions, which would cause work sessions to come into compliance with Michigan’s Open Meetings Act. He called the change “long overdue.” The proposed reduction in speaking times, however, was something he didn’t support. He contended that the council too often acts against the interests of its constituents. He asked the council to vote in favor of public participation. He told the council that the proposed reduction in allowed speaking time was a reaction to a few speakers who abuse the opportunity for public commentary. He said that democracy requires that councilmembers listen to all the voices who want to speak. He called on the council to take an affirmative approach to listen to residents of Ann Arbor.

Council Rules: Council Deliberations

Marcia Higgins (Ward 4) – who chairs the council’s rules committee that put together the proposal for rules changes – remarked that the item seemed like it’s been on the agenda forever. She summarized the discussion of the council rules committee and characterized it as a “lively debate” by the committee. She invited discussion from councilmembers on the proposed changes. The changes could be approved as a whole or individually, she ventured. [Besides Higgins, other rules committee members are Sabra Briere (Ward 1), Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3), Christopher Taylor (Ward 3), and mayor John Hieftje.]

Marcia Higgins (Ward 4) and mayor John Hieftje. (Photos by the writer.)

Jane Lumm (Ward 2) proposed an amendment. She understood the need to streamline meetings, but contended that the recent long public hearings were not typical. She didn’t support a reduction of public speaking time. Sometimes two minutes might be sufficient, but other times it might not be enough, she contended. She’d prefer to err on the side of allowing additional speaking time – saying that streamlining should be done some other way. So she proposed that the shortening of public speaking turns from three minutes to two minutes be eliminated. Chuck Warpehoski (Ward 5) seconded Lumm’s proposal – which would keep public speaking turns limited to three minutes.

Mike Anglin (Ward 5) supported Lumm’s proposal. He wanted to continue with the three-minute limit. Everyone has their own story, he said. If the council is really looking at how to shorten council meetings, there are other ways to do that, he said.

Briere described how in a “prior life” she had addressed the council as a member of the public – and allowed that three minutes goes by very fast. The proposal was not about limiting access or limiting the duration of a meeting, she said. Briere referred to a city council work session that had been held on April 29 on the topic of meeting management – which she’d watched a recording of, because she hadn’t been able to attend. Representatives of the Michigan Municipal League had been on hand to offer their advice on issues like the allotted time for public speaking. The message Briere had taken away from that Michigan Municipal League work session was that between minute 2 and minute 3, people tend to repeat themselves. But the MML’s recommendation of a two-minute time limit could be disregarded, Briere said.

Sally Petersen (Ward 2) said she didn’t think that the time limit change was meant to be a “cure-all” for making meetings more efficient. It was one step that might contribute to that, she felt. Her first concern was that the amount of time being allocated to councilmembers and to members of the public was different. The point is to improve the quality of the speaking time, she said, and to make the time as efficient as possible. She supported Lumm’s amendment.

Margie Teall (Ward 4) indicated that she could support a three-minute time limit for the reserved speaking time, because those speakers have made the effort to sign up ahead of time. Further, the reserved speaking time is already limited to just 10 slots. So she supported changing Lumm’s proposal so that it would restore the three-minute time limit just to the reserved time but not to other types of public speaking – general commentary and public hearings.

Higgins ventured that the council should not try to amend amendments, as Teall was suggesting. Higgins wanted each proposed amendment to be considered in turn. She asked Lumm to take her amendment off the table so that the council could consider each of the kinds of public commentary separately – reserved time, general time, and public hearings. Lumm didn’t want to do that.

Hieftje, who presides over council meetings, forged ahead with Teall’s amendment to Lumm’s proposed amendment, but it died for lack of a second. Discussion continued on Lumm’s proposal that all public speaking time should be limited to three minutes as it currently is – not two minutes as proposed by the rules committee. Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) ventured that the council could spend another hour on the topic. He supported the current three-minute time period. Democracy is about giving people a chance to speak, he said, and it’s important to continue Ann Arbor’s tradition of that.

Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) said that the purpose of reducing the meeting time had been disclaimed, so he wanted to address that. He rejected the idea that reducing time for public speaking turns would limit access and participation. Instead, he argued that it could encourage broader participation. He also pointed out that there are many points of contact between the public and the council besides the public commentary portions of meetings. He described how he’s heard from people who have despaired of ever trying to address the council, because they have to wait through other speakers.

Outcome on Lumm’s amendment: The vote was 10-1, with dissent from Teall.

Sumi Kailasapathy (Ward 1) then raised some objections to the “frequent flyer” portion of the rules changes. At that point, Briere suggested that the council just go through each rule change and vote each one up or down. Briere described how people who are very savvy are on the phone early in the morning to sign up for the reserved time at the start of meetings. And that can have the result that others who want to address the council on an agenda item don’t have a chance, she said. But the council also needs to hear from people who want to speak on non-agenda items, she said. Briere called the proposed rule change – the “frequent flyer” provision – a compromise.

At that point, from the audience, Thomas Partridge said that only six people signed up for reserved time that evening. Hieftje ruled him out of order. Hieftje continued by saying that he wanted some mechanism to ensure that if someone wanted to address the council, they would not be prevented from speaking by those who speak frequently.

Warpehoski proposed to amend the frequent flyer rule so that reserved time is assigned on a preferential basis to those who did not address the council at the previous meeting – instead of making it a strict prohibition against someone reserving time two meetings in a row. Kunselman wondered how that would work logistically: How would the clerk’s office staff handle that?

Higgins then asked that specific changes just be rejected, instead of trying to amend them. Hieftje ventured that there’s no rush to enact the rules changes. He suggested postponing a vote after the council had a chance to discuss all the rules changes.

Warpehoski encouraged the rules committee to consider changing the admonishment in the rules that council debate not include “personality.” Instead, he suggested a statement that council debate shouldn’t include “personal attacks.” He suggested that emails sent to all councilmembers during a meeting (draft language for amendments, for example) be made available to the public. He also noted that sometimes when councilmembers question staff – which isn’t counted as speaking time – often it includes editorial comments. How is that handled?

Responding to Warpehoski, Higgins reported how the rules committee had discussed the issue of councilmember speaking time. Higgins talked about the possibility of rotating the job of timekeeper among councilmembers. She invited councilmembers to send suggestions to the rules committee, which could then be incorporated into a revised proposal. Lumm felt that some kind of time limit for councilmembers is appropriate. Five minutes seems too long for the first speaking turn, so the reduction from five minutes to three minutes seems reasonable, she said. But the second speaking turn should stay at three minutes, she felt.

Hieftje ventured that the length of the meetings changes as the issues change. Hieftje invited someone to move for a postponement.

Anglin felt that the meeting agendas need to be shortened. He also wanted the public to be notified if it’s known that an item will be postponed by the council. Briere countered that the council can’t act on the assumption that an item will be postponed. One should not presuppose an action by the council, she said.

The discussion then wandered to the idea of managing the number of proclamations included on a meeting agenda. Kailasapathy noted that many people, like her, have children and full-time jobs, so meetings that go to 1 a.m. are a hardship. It’s more humane to have two four-hour sessions, she ventured, than a single eight-hour session. Meeting length shouldn’t be a barrier to service on the council for people with young children and full-time jobs, she said.

Petersen thought that the agenda itself should be examined – noting that the July 15 agenda included 16 items introduced by staff members.

Higgins mentioned the new proposed rule about communications via mobile devices at the table. She said that if councilmembers need to communicate on their mobile device, then they can just step away from the table to do that.

Teall asked about the new rule limiting the clerk’s report on the agenda to only certain items. Briere explained there have been times when councilmembers have received correspondence and councilmembers have asked that the correspondence be added to the electronic agenda.

Higgins suggested that the item be postponed until the first meeting in September, which is Sept. 3. Hieftje suggested postponing the issue instead until the second meeting in September. But Briere wanted to have the rules in place for the work session in September – which falls between the two regular meetings. The new rules, if adopted, would allow for a public comment period for that work session. Having a public comment period for the work session would ensure that councilmembers could engage in deliberations without violating Michigan’s Open Meetings Act.

Outcome: The council voted unanimously to postpone the amendments to the council rules until Sept. 3, 2013.

Skatepark Construction Contract

The council was asked to give the final approval necessary for creating a skatepark in the northwest corner of Veterans Memorial Park, on the west side of the city. That approval took the form of a $1,031,592 contract with Krull Construction.

This conceptual design by Wally Hollyday for the Ann Arbor skatepark at the northwest corner of Veterans Memorial Park was approved by the city council on Jan. 7, 2013.

Construction could start in early August, with completion of the concrete portion of the skatepark by this November – weather permitting.

The park advisory commission had voted earlier, on June 8, 2013, to recommend award of the contract.

The originally approved budget for the project was $800,000 – though the expectation was that the project would cost about $1 million. The total budget now – including the construction contract, 10% contingency and $89,560 design contract – is $1,224,311, or $424,311 higher than the originally budgeted $800,000. Funds to pay for the skatepark include a $400,000 grant from the Washtenaw County parks & recreation commission, $300,000 from the Michigan Dept. of Natural Resources Trust Fund, and $100,00 raised by the Friends of the Ann Arbor Skatepark, which paid for the skatepark’s design.

The city identified funds from a variety of sources to make up the gap.

• $110,463 from uncommitted funds available in the parks maintenance and capital improvements millage fund balance. The amount reflects a $45,000 decrease in the amount the city will contribute, because the Friends of the Ann Arbor Skatepark recently learned that they will receive a $50,000 grant from the Knight Foundation. Of that, $5,000 will go into the maintenance endowment.
• $80,000 from the city’s stormwater capital budget for rain gardens, to be repaid as a loan to the state revolving fund (SRF). The city expects a 50% loan forgiveness on this amount.
• $32,356 from the FY 2014 parks memorial and contributions fund (the Feldman Trust) for landscaping plantings.
• $30,356 from the FY 2014 parks maintenance and capital improvements millage.
• $22,977 from the FY 2014 parks and recreation services general fund operating budget – from the “parks fairness” funds resulting from other budget amendments made by the council.

In addition, up to $103,159 in uncommitted funds are available in the parks maintenance and capital improvements millage fund balance to cover a 10% construction contingency. Any unspent portion of this amount will be returned to the fund balance.

Skatepark Construction Contract: Council Deliberations

Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) led off deliberations by saying it’s been a long time coming. He recalled helping the Friends of the Ann Arbor Skatepark back in 2007-08, giving them a voice at the council table. Everyone had come together to make it possible, he said. He compared the vote to standing at the rim of a pool looking down getting ready to skate: “Just go for it.”

Jane Lumm (Ward 2) and Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3).

Sally Petersen (Ward 2) praised the effort, but expressed concern about the amount of an additional appropriation being made from city funds. She allowed that the Friends of Ann Arbor Skatepark are going to continue to do fundraising. So she wondered if it’s possible to delay the vote for a couple of months while additional private funding is pursued.

City administrator Steve Powers asked community services area administrator Sumedh Bahl to comment on the issue. The project needed to be completed by August 2014 under terms of the MDNR trust fund grant, Bahl explained. Under the current schedule, a June 30 estimated completion date is foreseen. There’s some “float,” Bahl said, but essentially the project needs to go ahead on the current schedule.

Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) explained that staff had worked closely with the construction company, with the park advisory commission, and with the Friends of the Ann Arbor Skatepark. Staff were mindful that additional money was being requested. Nevertheless, they were excited about moving forward, even with that additional cost, Taylor said. The effort had been long and earnest, and had the support of many governmental partners, he noted. The bid came in higher than was anticipated, Taylor said, but it was determined that this was simply how much it would cost. He allowed that it was more money than had been anticipated. The skatepark would be a good thing for kids and adults who skate, Taylor concluded.

Bahl noted that Friends of the Ann Arbor Skatepark had recently received a $50,000 grant from the Knight Foundation.

Jane Lumm (Ward 2) allowed that the amount by which the budget was off “could have been worse.” She noted that the specs had been reduced and that Krull had agreed to reduce the price by $10,000. She observed that the fund balance for the parks maintenance and capital improvements is healthy. The parks system is one of the reasons the quality of life in Ann Arbor is so strong, she said. Adding the new facility, even at the city’s cost, is worth doing, and she’d support it, Lumm concluded.

Mike Anglin (Ward 5) recalled how the entire council chambers had been filled with supporters when the project had come forward in its earlier stages. He called Trevor Staples to the podium. Staples is chair of the Friends of the Ann Arbor Skatepark board. Mayor John Hieftje established that no one on the council objected to Staples coming forward to speak. [This was a reference to a council rule that allows for members of the public to address the council outside of public commentary times, if no more than three councilmembers object.] Staples quipped that he himself might object.

Staples noted that about $900,000 is being brought to the city’s park system by the project. So he encouraged councilmembers to think about what could be lost if it doesn’t pass.

Petersen asked about the operating agreement: How will security be provided at the skatepark? Hieftje ventured that no additional security is provided for basketball courts. Petersen said she didn’t see any “eyes on the park” – that has been a concern cited in regard to downtown parks that have been proposed. Hieftje contrasted urban area parks with the future location of the skatepark, which is on the west side of town.

Hieftje hoped the construction contract would be approved that night. He recalled the kind of fundraising efforts that the Friends of the Ann Arbor Skatepark had made. The enthusiasm they’ve generated has been inspirational, Hieftje said. The city’s contribution was not coming from human services money, Hieftje added.

Outcome: The council voted unanimously to award the construction contract for the skatepark. Stephen Kunselman briefly left the table to give Trevor Staples a hug.

City-UM Relations

City-university relations arose twice during the July 15 meeting. A voting item involved a public right-of-way occupancy. An item of communication highlighted the partial closures of Main Street that are planned this fall for UM football games.

City-UM Relations: Tappan Conduits

The council was asked to approve a resolution giving direction to staff to renegotiate a template for agreements related to the University of Michigan’s need to install infrastructure in the city’s right-of-way. The resolution stemmed from an item that appeared on the council’s May 13, 2013 meeting agenda.

That item involved a right-of-way occupancy for UM to install conduits under Tappan Street. The purpose of the conduits is to connect a new emergency generator to the Lawyers Club buildings at 551 S. State St. The Lawyers Club and the generator are located on opposite sides of the street. The university considers the transaction to be a conveyance of an interest in land. The city doesn’t see it that way.

But UM insisted that the council approve the resolution as if it were a conveyance of an interest in land, which requires an eight-vote majority. On May 13, 2013, the council only had seven votes in favor. Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) had left that meeting early.

On July 15, Jane Lumm (Ward 2) introduced the resolution. Marcia Higgins (Ward 4) said she wanted the process used by the city to approve this kind of thing to be one that in the future could be handled at the staff level – with a standard licensing agreement, as other entities do. Another possibility is to use easements, she said. She wanted UM to use the tools that are already in place.

Sally Petersen (Ward 2) asked what has happened since May 13, when the council’s vote did not achieve the eight-vote majority. Higgins reiterated that there’s a standard licensing tool for this purpose. Taylor stated that the smooth operation between the city and the university is important, and it’s important for the university to be able to operate smoothly itself. He encouraged staff to move swiftly and surely, without prejudicing the city.

Mike Anglin (Ward 5) thanked those who brought the resolution forward – and was glad that the city is not granting the transfer of any property. Mayor John Hieftje noted the university has work pending, and wondered if the council’s action or non-action would have an impact on that. Assistant city attorney Abigail Elias said that the resolution that night would not preclude the Tappan Street agreement from coming back to the council.

Petersen wanted to know how long the renegotiation would take – because she’d heard the original negotiation had taken three years. Elias expressed optimism, but allowed that it takes two parties to reach an agreement. Higgins said that as long as the agreement doesn’t include a conveyance of land, it doesn’t need to ever come to the council. Lumm agreed with Higgins – that it’s about streamlining the process.

City attorney Stephen Postema weighed in by saying that if the university comes back with an agreement that required eight votes, then it could be a longer negotiation than Elias had described. Taylor clarified that things that need to be done for the Tappan Street project can be done currently. Elias replied, saying there would need to be a license agreement, and it’s up to UM to ask for what it needs to move forward.

Petersen asked what UM’s objection is to a licensing agreement. Elias explained that UM felt it needed an interest in the land, but the city felt that the conduit serves a structure, not the land. She characterized the proposal the council had rejected as an agreement to disagree. Anglin asked why this issue has even arisen. He called the previous resolution that the council was asked to approve on May 13 “gibberish” that no one could understand.

By way of background, the language Anglin was describing as gibberish was this:

As drafted, it grants to the University an interest in land only to the extent it grants to the University, by its terms, an interest in land.

Nevertheless, in accordance with the University’s request, but without agreeing that the agreement grants an interest in land, the document was submitted to City Council for approval with a requirement of 8 votes as if it granted an interest in land.

Outcome: The council voted to direct renegotiation of the right-of-way agreement with UM.

City-UM Relations: Football Games

During council communications, Marcia Higgins (Ward 4) reported that chief of police John Seto and public services area administrator Craig Hupy had been meeting with the University of Michigan about the possibility of closing Main Street, between Stadium Boulevard and Pauline Boulevard, for football games.

Different scenarios for closure would depend on the start time for the game – noon, 3:30 p.m. or 8 p.m. Higgins reported that there will be a public meeting on July 24 at 6 p.m. at the downtown location of the Ann Arbor District Library – to explain how the logistics will work. The meeting would give the public a chance to weigh in, she said, before a contract with the University of Michigan is finalized.

Liberty Plaza Fees

The council was asked to approve a waiver of fees for the use of Liberty Plaza – a park located at the southwest corner of Liberty and Divisions streets in downtown Ann Arbor. The proposed fee waiver is on a trial basis, through July 1, 2014.

The park advisory commission had voted at its June 18, 2013 meeting to recommend a trial waiver of fees at Liberty Plaza. The fee waiver comes in response to a situation that arose earlier in the spring, when city staff applied fees to the hosting of Pizza in the Park in Liberty Plaza – a homelessness outreach ministry of a local church.

Members of Camp Take Notice, a self-governed homelessness community, have addressed the council at several of its recent meetings on this topic. They’re keen to see a written commitment that the city would allow humanitarian efforts to take place on public land generally. They’ve objected to the focus by the council and the park advisory commission on general activities – as opposed to the protection of humanitarian aid efforts.

For example, the staff memo accompanying the resolution approved by PAC stated: “The waived rental fee will be promoted with a goal of attracting additional musicians, performers, and other events at Liberty Plaza.” And a key “whereas” clause of the resolution reads: “… it is the goal of PAC to further activate Liberty Plaza by increasing social, cultural, and recreational activities that take place there; …”

Liberty Plaza Fees: Council Deliberations

Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) reviewed the history of the issue with the Pizza in the Park program in Liberty Plaza. The program was under a perceived cloud, he said. PAC felt that a waiver would be useful for the particular purpose of protecting Pizza in the Park, but also would address the general purpose of activating the park. [Taylor and Mike Anglin (Ward 5) are ex-officio members of PAC.]

If the one-year trial is successful, it could become permanent. Taylor noted that advocates for Pizza in the Park have solidified how they think humanitarian efforts should be treated – beyond Liberty Plaza. Margie Teall (Ward 4) described how she’s met with several people and they’re exploring the possibility of extending waivers to other parks as well.

Sabra Briere (Ward 1) asked community services area administrator Sumedh Bahl to explain how permit fees are normally waived. Bahl said it’s not the usual practice to waive fees – and indicated he couldn’t recall that being done in the past. He allowed that the council could direct the staff to waive fees. Briere ventured that during the art fairs, the council could pass a resolution to direct the waiver of the permit fee at other parks. Higgins noted that the art fairs are held this week, so she wondered where Pizza in the Park is happening this week. Bahl indicated that it’s being held at West Park, and that no fee is being applied.

Anglin asked how this proposal came about. Taylor noted that staff had heard the tenor of the council’s reaction to the Pizza in the Park advocates who’d addressed the council at previous meetings. He ventured that the proposal – which protects Pizza in the Park, while also helping to activate the park in general – “feeds two birds with one stone.”

Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) asked if there’s an events committee through which this request could be handled. Sumi Kailasapathy (Ward 1) agreed with a suggestion Kunselman made that nonprofits could be included in the fee structure as exempt, instead of waiving the fees by resolution. Briere cautioned that “nonprofit” and “humanitarian aid” are not precise terms and would need to be refined.

Lumm reported that she’d met with advocates of Pizza in the Park, and appreciated that they were trying to get direction from the council. She also worried about opening the door to all nonprofits and encouraged a narrowly-defined solution.

Outcome: The council voted to approve the fee waiver in Liberty Plaza on a trial basis through July 1, 2014.

Liberty Plaza Fee Waiver: Public Commentary

During the public commentary period at the end of the meeting, Seth Best – who’s addressed the council at previous meetings advocating for Pizza in the Park – thanked the council for the time and for the resolution the council had passed on a fee waiver at Liberty Plaza. On behalf of the homeless population, he invited councilmembers to Pizza in the Park this Friday, which will be held in West Park.

Environmental Protection Contracts

The council was asked to approve three different contracts related to protecting the local environment.

Two of the contracts include an educational component – one related to the city’s materials recovery facility (MRF), and the other to stormwater management. The third concerned monitoring of the city’s now-closed landfill at Platt and Ellsworth.

Environmental Protection Contracts: MRF Tours

On the council’s consent agenda was a $43,788 annual contract with the Ecology Center to give tours of the materials recovery facility (MRF). The facility sees 4,000 visitors a year. The cost of the contract is split 60%-40% between the solid waste fund and the drinking water fund. The drinking water funding is related to a Michigan Dept. of Natural Resources requirement that the city engage in source water protection educational efforts. The requested authorization is for the contract to be extended annually for five years with a 3% increase each year.

Outcome: The council approved the contract with the Ecology Center as part of the consent agenda.

Environmental Protection Contracts: HRWC Stormwater

Also related to environmental educational efforts, the council was asked to authorize a contract with the Huron River Watershed Council to comply with the requirements of an MS4 stormwater discharge permit that it has through the Michigan Dept. of Environmental Quality. An MS4 system (short for Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System) is “a system of drainage (including roads, storm drains, pipes, and ditches, etc.) that is not a combined sewer or part of a sewage treatment plant.”

Ann Arbor city water quality manager Jennifer Lawson was in attendance at the July 15 meeting but was not asked by the council to answer any questions.

The goal of the MS4 program is to reduce pollution of Michigan’s surface waters. HRWC’s activities are described in the staff memo accompanying the agenda item as: “public education efforts; water quality monitoring; reporting assistance; watershed group facilitation; and, technical assistance.” The HRWC contract is to be funded out of the stormwater operating and maintenance budget.

The contract with HRWC comes in the context of an incident on June 27, when heavy rains briefly overwhelmed the city’s sanitary sewage system and resulted in 10,000 gallons of untreated sewage flowing into the Huron River.

The city has separate sanitary and stormwater sewer systems, but the sanitary system receives stormwater flow from cracks in the system as well as footing drains that were connected to the sanitary system as part of standard construction techniques in the 1970s.

Incidents like the one on June 27 led to the creation of the city’s footing drain disconnection (FDD) program in the early 2000s. Parts of that FDD program are currently suspended as the city is conducting a study of wet weather flows in the sanitary system.

From the city’s press release on the incident three weeks ago:

On Thursday, June 27, 2013, the Ann Arbor area was deluged with intense rainfall that caused flooding conditions and significantly increased the flow of wastewater to the City of Ann Arbor Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) over a short period of time. Plant flows more than tripled within a half hour. As a result of this unprecedented increase in plant flow, approximately 10,000 gallons of untreated wastewater was discharged to the Huron River from 5:20 to 5:30 p.m. By comparison, the WWTP fully treated approximately 350,000 gallons of wastewater during the 10minute period over which this incident occurred.

Fortunately, due to a number of factors, the impact of this incident on human health and the environment is minimal. The flow within the Huron River for the 10 minutes over which the discharge occurred was approximately 11,000,000 gallons, consequently the estimated 10,000 gallons of untreated wastewater was diluted by a factor of 1,000.

Outcome: The council voted to approve the contract with the Huron River Watershed Council.

Environmental Protection Contracts: Landfill

The third environmental item the council was asked to approve was an amendment to the city’s contract with Tetra Tech Inc. (TTI) to provide additional monitoring services of the city’s now-closed landfill. The $178,596 amendment brings the total amount of the contract to $543,386. Many of the additional services the city is asking Tetra Tech to provide are associated with a plume of 1,4 dioxane and vinyl chloride contamination in Southeast Area Park, which is located northeast of the landfill at Platt and Ellsworth.

Outcome: The council voted without discussion to approve the landfill monitoring contract with Tetra Tech.

Stormwater Infrastructure

Several projects related to stormwater management were on the council’s agenda.

Three of the items involved street reconstruction – on Stone School Road, Forest Avenue, and multiple streets in the Springwater subdivision. A fourth stormwater-related agenda item was a contract for tree planting, which will be paid for from the city’s stormwater fund.

Stormwater Infrastructure: Stone School Road

The Stone School Road stormwater project is part of a larger $4 million road improvement project. The council’s action was to approve a petition to the Washtenaw County water resources commissioner‘s office to apply for a state revolving fund loan of $1.2 million. The stormwater improvements will include work “to clean out, relocate, widen, deepen, straighten, extend, tile, interconnect, or otherwise improve a portion of the county drain located north of Ellsworth Road between Varsity Drive and Stone School Road, known as the Malletts Creek Drain.” The loan will be repaid in annual installments of up to $76,307 from the city’s stormwater fund. Up to 50% of the loan could be forgiven as a “green” project.

Outcome: The council voted to approve the petition to the water resources commissioner’s office for the Stone School Road Mallets Creek project.

Stormwater Infrastructure: Forest Avenue

The Forest Avenue reconstruction project extends from South University Avenue to Hill Street. The project includes installation of a stone reservoir under the street to allow for infiltration of stormwater. In addition to reconstructing the street, the existing 6-inch water main between Willard Street and Hill Street will be replaced with a 12-inch pipe. The total estimated $1,257,000 cost is to be paid for as follows: water fund capital budget ($185,000), street millage fund ($543,937), developer contributions (Zaragon Place and 601 Forest Ave.) to the parks memorials and contribution fund ($78,063), and the stormwater fund ($450,000). The city has obtained a loan through the state revolving fund for the stormwater portion of the project. The council’s requested action on July 15 was to approve a construction contract with MacKenzie Co. for $965,990.

During the brief deliberations, Sabra Briere (Ward 1) indicated that there’d been some concern about the timing of the project, from August to October. However the project will accommodate student move-in, she reported. She ventured that the city is eventually going to “turn the corner on stormwater.” Jane Lumm (Ward 2) stated that it’s good that the work is being done, characterizing the stretch of road as a “moonscape.”

Outcome: The council voted to approve the contract with E. T. MacKenzie Co. for the Forest Avenue work.

Stormwater Infrastructure: Springwater Design

The council was also asked to approve the engineering consultant work for street improvements in the Springwater subdivision – located southeast of Buhr Park, south of Packard Road. The eventual project, to be completed in 2014-16, would include “a reconstructed roadway section, storm sewer upgrades, storm water quality improvements, water main replacement, replacement of curb and gutter, and the construction of new sidewalk and/or the filling in of sidewalk gaps within the project limits.”

The work is planned over the course of three years, and would include the north-south streets of Nordman Road and Springbrook Avenue and the east-west streets of Butternut and Redwood. The action requested of the council was to approve a $212,784 contract with CDM Smith Michigan Inc.

Outcome: The council voted without discussion to approve the contract with CDM Smith Michigan Inc. for the Springwater subdivision street improvements.

Stormwater Infrastructure: Tree Planting

Finally, the council was asked approved a two-year $509,125 contract with Margolis Companies Inc. to plant 750 trees in FY 2014 and 1,000 trees in FY 2015. The work would be paid for from the city’s stormwater fund and reimbursed with a state revolving fund (SRF) loan that has been obtained through the Washtenaw County water resources commissioner’s office.

Deliberations were scant. Chuck Warpehoski (Ward 5) reviewed the environmental benefits to tree planting.

Outcome: The council voted to approve the tree-planting contract with Margolis Companies Inc.

Human Services Distribution

The council was asked to authorize the distribution of over $1.2 million to specific nonprofits that provide human services under contract with the city.

The budget allocation for $1,244,629 had already been made at the council’s May 20, 2013 meeting. A total of 20 programs operated by 16 different organizations are receiving funding from the city of Ann Arbor this year. It’s the same amount that was allocated last year.

Half of those organization are receiving more than $90,000: Interfaith Hospitality Network of Washtenaw County ($91,645); Catholic Social Services of Washtenaw County ($94,490); Food Gatherers ($95,171); Community Action Network ($104,944); Perry Nursery School of Ann Arbor ($109,851); Avalon Housing Inc. ($142,851); Legal Services of South Central Michigan ($177,052); and the Shelter Association of Washtenaw County ($245,529).

In the coordinated funding approach to human services taken by the city, a total of $4,369,102 is being allocated by the city and other entities. In addition to the city’s share, other contributions include: United Way of Washtenaw County ($1,797,000); Washtenaw County general fund ($1,015,000); Washtenaw Urban County ($288,326); and the Ann Arbor Area Community Foundation ($24,147).

Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) led off deliberations by asking the council to vote to excuse him from voting on the item, because one of his clients is Planned Parenthood, which is among the groups being funded. The council voted to excuse Taylor from voting and he took a seat in the audience.

Sabra Briere (Ward 1) noted that this is a three-year agreement and the amount this year is the same as it was the previous two years. Mayor John Hieftje recited how much each of the other entities was contributing. Jane Lumm (Ward 2) thanked Mary Jo Callan and Andrea Plevek, the staff who are responsible for administering the coordinated funding. She recited the history of the program. The need for human services continues to exceed the available funding, she said.

Outcome: The council voted to approve the human services funding distributions for FY 2014.

Appointments and Nominations

Nominations and confirmations to boards and commissions are a standard slot on council agendas. Currently it comes after all the other voting business. If the council adopts a new set of rules, the nominations and appointments would come before other voting business.

Appointments and Nominations: DDA

Among other nominations to city boards and commissions that the council was asked to consider was the confirmation of Russ Collins for a third four-year term on the board of the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority. Collins, who is executive director of the Michigan Theater, began his service on the DDA board in 2005.

Appointments and Nominations: Dean Fund

The council was also asked to confirm Jane Immonen, John Bassett, and Patrick Ion to the Elizabeth Dean Trust Fund committee. Sue Perry was nominated by mayor John Hieftje at the July 15 meeting to serve on that committee, too. The vote on her confirmation will come at the council’s next meeting.

The responsibility of the Dean Fund committee is to make recommendations on the use of the Dean Trust Fund money for special projects involving trees. The committee was established in 1975 to oversee the use of the investment earnings from a nearly $2 million bequest made to the city by Elizabeth Dean. According to a Nov. 10, 1974 Ann Arbor News article, the bequest was made in the early 1960s to “repair, maintain and replace trees on city property.” The principal amount remains intact.

Appointments and Nominations: Housing, Zoning Appeals Boards

The council was also asked to confirm at its July 15 meeting Geoffrey Mayers and Kevin Busch to the housing board of appeals, and Heather Lewis to the zoning board of appeals.

Appointments and Nominations: Greenbelt

The council was asked to confirm the appointment of Jean Cares to the city’s greenbelt advisory commission (GAC). That group is responsible for making recommendations for land acquisition using proceeds of the city’s open space and parkland preservation millage. Seats on the commission have specific qualifications attached to them, including one for someone “who is an agricultural landowner or operates an agricultural business.” That’s the seat Cares will fill, as owner of the Dexter Mill. Tom Bloomer, a Webster Township farmer, previously held that position but was term-limited.

Also at the council’s July 15 meeting, John Ramsburgh’s name was brought forward to serve on the greenbelt advisory commission. The fact that he’d be nominated was announced by Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) at the last meeting of GAC on July 11, 2013. Taylor serves as the city council representative to GAC. Unlike most appointments, the nominations for GAC are made by the council, not the mayor. The nomination is typically handled by placing the appointment on the agenda for one meeting, postponing the vote (which serves to give notice of the nomination), and then voting on the appointment at the next meeting of the council. That’s how Ramsburgh’s nomination was handled on July 15.

Ramsburgh is a development officer with the University of Michigan’s College of Literature, Science & the Arts. He also is the son of Ellen Ramsburgh, a long-time member of the Ann Arbor historic district commission, and its former chair. He is filling a position previously held by Dan Ezekiel, who was also term limited.

Appointments and Nominations: LDFA

Also at the council’s July 15 meeting, Richard Beedon was nominated for re-appointment to the board of the local development finance authority (LDFA). Terms on the LDFA are four years, so Beedon’s term extends to within one year of the end of the LDFA’s planned 15-year life in FY 2018.

Outcome: On unanimous votes, the council confirmed all the nominations it was asked to approve at its July 15 meeting.

Platt & Washtenaw Easements

On the agenda were three separate land-related items in connection with the Arbor Hills Crossing project at Platt & Washtenaw.

Platt & Washtenaw intersection looking east down Washtenaw on July 14, 2013.

Two of the items were easements – for a sidewalk and for bus shelters and bus pullouts.

The other item was the dedication of additional public right-of-way, so that Platt Road can be widened at that intersection. New traffic signals have been installed at the intersection, but they are not yet operational.

Responding to an inquiry from The Chronicle, city traffic engineer Les Sipowski indicated that the signals would likely not be turned on for another two weeks, and when they are first turned on they’d operate in flashing mode for a week.

The council had approved the site plan for Arbor Hills Crossing at its Nov. 21, 2011 meeting.

The project includes four one- and two-story buildings throughout the 7.45-acre site – a total of 90,700-square-feet of space for retail stores and offices. Three of the buildings face Washtenaw Avenue, across the street from the retail complex where Whole Foods grocery is located. The site will include 310 parking spaces.

Outcome: The council voted unanimously without discussion to approve all the items associated with Arbor Hills Crossing.

During the time allotted for communications from the city attorney, Stephen Postema indicated that the three easements on the agenda that night associated with Arbor Hills Crossing took a lot of work.

South State Corridor Plan

The council considered adoption of the South State Street corridor plan as part of the city’s master plan.

The city planning commission had voted unanimously to adopt the plan at its May 21, 2013 meeting. More commonly when the planning commission votes on a matter, it’s to recommend action by the city council. For the city’s master plan, however, the planning commission is on equal footing with the council: both groups must adopt the same plan. The council’s action came at its July 15, 2013 meeting.

Planning commissioners and staff have been working on this project for more than two years. [For additional background, see Chronicle coverage: "State Street Corridor Study Planned," “Sustainability Goals Shape Corridor Study,” “Ideas Floated for South State Corridor.” and “South State Corridor Gets Closer Look.”]

Recommendations in the South State Street corridor plan are organized into categories of the city’s recently adopted sustainability framework: Land use and access, community, climate and energy, and resource management. Among the recommendations are: (1) Evaluate use of vacant parcels for alternative energy generation; (2) Evaluate integrating public art along the corridor; (3) Evaluate use of open land for community gardens; (4) Assess and improve high crash areas along the corridor; (5) create boulevard on State Street between Eisenhower and I‐94 to enable safer automobile, bicycle, and pedestrian movement; (6) Consider utilizing vacant parcels for athletic fields and recreation facilities; (7) Develop a pedestrian and bicycle path along the Ann Arbor railroad that will connect the planned Allen Creek bikeway to Pittsfield Township through the corridor; and (8) Resurface roads in the corridor.

Each recommendation includes several related action items. The report also provides a section that organizes the recommendations into each of three distinct sections of the corridor: (1) from Stimson on the north to Eisenhower Parkway; (2) from Eisenhower south to the I-94 interchange; and (3) from I-94 to Ellsworth. In addition, there are nine site-specific recommendations for areas including Briarwood Mall, the complex of hotels near Victors Way and Broadway, and the research park development near the corridor’s south end.

The council had postponed its vote on the corridor plan at its July 1 meeting, deferring to a request from Marcia Higgins (Ward 4), who said she had concerns about adding it to the master plan.

Deliberations on July 15 were scant. Higgins thanked her colleagues on the council for the postponement at the last meeting so that she could look at the item a bit more closely.

Outcome: The council voted to adopt the South State Street corridor plan into the city’s master plan.

Barton Sidewalk Design

The council was asked to approve a design budget of $15,000 for a 400-foot new concrete sidewalk on the south side of Barton Road, from a spot west of Chandler Road to Longshore Drive.

Location of proposed Barton Drive sidewalk.

The money will be spent from the city’s general fund.

The council had approved similar design budgets for a sidewalk on Newport Road at its Jan. 22, 2013 meeting and for a sidewalk on Scio Church Road at its Nov. 19, 2012 meeting.

The interest in having sidewalks was supported by petitions submitted by adjoining property owners.

Construction of new sidewalks – as contrasted with repair of existing sidewalks, which is funded through the city’s sidewalk repair millage – is typically funded at least partly through special assessment of adjoining properties.

The cost of the design work can be recovered by the city in the same proportion as the construction cost. So, if 30% of the construction cost for the sidewalk is paid through special assessment, then 30% of the design cost can be recovered through special assessment.

Part of the context for sidewalk gap elimination is a decision made by the council on May 20, 2013, when it adopted the city’s FY 2014 budget. The budget included a $75,000 allocation for a study of sidewalk gaps, so that they can be prioritized.

Ward 1 councilmembers Sumi Kailasapathy and Sabra Briere.

During the brief council deliberations, council representatives for Ward 1, where the possible sidewalk is to be located, weighed in.

Sabra Briere (Ward 1) noted that people who are attempting to push strollers to Bandemer Park have complained for years about the lack of a sidewalk. The design budget doesn’t guarantee construction will take place, she allowed, but it’s a good step. There had been a meeting between staff and neighbors and the response was overwhelmingly positive, she reported.

Sumi Kailasapathy (Ward 1) confirmed the nature of the neighborhood meeting, which she’d also attended. She was impressed by the attendance at the meeting. She highlighted the importance of non-motorized transportation.

Outcome: The council voted to approve the design budget for the proposed Barton Drive sidewalk.

Social Justice Issues

Issues of social justice were raised during public commentary in connection with the Trayvon Marin verdict and with same-sex domestic partnership benefits.

Social Justice Issues: Trayvon Martin Verdict – Public Comment

Several people attended the council’s meeting to address the not-guilty verdict that had been delivered by a Florida jury in the Trayvon Martin shooting case over the weekend.

Blaine Coleman told the council they should make as much noise about the Trayvon Martin verdict as they did about the killing of white children in Newton, Mass. He told councilmembers he expected strong statements from them about what happened to Martin, which he characterized as “legalized lynching.” He spoke against the “slavemaster mindset,” which says that black life is worth nothing. Councilmembers need to rid themselves of that mindset, Coleman said – it’s a mindset that says it’s okay to hunt and kill black people. He expected the council to say that black life is worth something, and to express its revulsion at the Trayvon Martin verdict.

Lefiest Galimore was joined by seven others at the podium. He weighed in against the so-called “stand your ground” law in Florida. He drew attention to Michigan’s version of the law, which was enacted in 2006. [.pdf of Self Defense Act 309 of 2006]

Such laws are subject to interpretation, he cautioned. He said that outside of the council chambers he might be seen as a threat, simply because he is an African American male. He asked the council to pass a resolution calling for the repeal of Michigan’s law. He recited the history of the Pioneer High School football brawl in October 2012, in which three African American youths were charged criminally. He asked why three young African American men were charged out of two football teams that had players from different races. He called for the revocation of Michigan’s version of the “stand your ground” law.

Rev. Jeff Harrold introduced himself as pastor at the New Beginnings Community Church and a member of the steering committee of the Interfaith Council on Peace and Justice. [Chuck Warpehoski (Ward 5) is director of ICPJ.] Race was the “800-pound gorilla in the room” in the Trayvon Martin case, he said. Harrold told the council it’s all too easy to see a young black man as threatening. He encouraged the council to go on record against the “stand your ground” law.

Harrold allowed that the Trayvon Martin case had taken place in Florida, but cautioned that something like that could happen in Michigan. He called on the council to support bringing federal civil rights charges against George Zimmerman – who shot Martin. People don’t like to talk about race anymore, he said, but he pointed out that the Ann Arbor/Ypsilanti Reads selection this year is “The New Jim Crow.” And that had led to a facilitated dialogue. Race played a large role in the Trayvon Martin killing, and he wanted the U.S. Attorney General to do what the Florida jury had not done – deal with the issue of race in connection with the Trayvon Martin killing.

Social Justice Issues: Same-Sex Partnerships – Public Comment

Lisa Dusseau introduced herself as a born-and-raised Ann Arborite, and current resident of Ward 1. Ann Arbor has always been a place of diversity, inclusion and equality, she said. She described Ann Arbor as a progressive city where she felt free to live her life free of harassment or discrimination. Ann Arbor was one of the first cities to recognize domestic partnerships and to include sexual orientation in its non-discrimination policy. Her life partner is Kathleen Summersgill, who’s worked for the Ann Arbor fire department for 21 years, Dusseau said. They’ve been together as a couple for 19 years. They share everything a married couple would – except for health insurance. Dusseau reported that her current employer doesn’t offer health care that meets her needs. So she had to find her own insurance and pay her premiums out of pocket. Her asthma medication isn’t covered under her own policy – and a 90-day supply costs over $1,000.

There was a 9-month period in 2009 when she was covered under Summersgill’s insurance – and she is grateful for that, she said. But that was before 2011 when the Michigan state legislature prevented public employers from offering benefits to employees’ domestic partners. Now that the U.S. Supreme Court has struck down the Defense of Marriage Act as discriminatory, and soon after that the Michigan Court of Appeals rescinded Michigan’s ban on domestic partner benefits. Employees of the state, the University of Michigan and the Ann Arbor Public Schools can now obtain health benefits for their same-sex domestic partners – but nothing has changed for Ann Arbor city employees. She didn’t think it was fair that this discriminatory situation continues. So she urged the Ann Arbor city council to follow suit with other Ann Arbor institutions, in the light of recent court decisions, to restore domestic partner benefits.

Social Justice Issues: Council Response

Sumi Kailasapathy (Ward 1) addressed the issue of racial discrimination that public speakers had raised. In Ann Arbor it’s easy to forget what things are like in other states, she said. She didn’t know what to tell her kids to explain to them why the Trayvon Martin verdict came out the way it did. They were born in Ann Arbor and attended Ann Arbor schools so they’d lived protected lives. She said she was willing to work with other councilmembers on the issue of Michigan’s “stand your ground” law. Given that Ann Arbor is a progressive city and plays the role of a “shining light” to others, she felt that the council needs to pass a resolution and work with other cities to ensure that a situation like Trayvon Martin’s doesn’t occur in Michigan.

Chuck Warpehoski (Ward 5).

Chuck Warpehoski (Ward 5) also addressed the issues of marriage equality, racial equality and preventing gun violence – calling them issues dear to his heart. It was bad news when the state legislature had taken away the city’s ability to provide benefits to same-sex partners and it was good news when the courts gave that ability back. He indicated that the city was currently working to restore the same-sex benefits.

Warpehoski indicated that past local efforts to regulate gun ownership had been superseded by the state legislature. He expressed a willingness to support efforts to address “stand your ground” laws in Michigan. He hoped for the ability to have local control over regulation of gun ownership. He indicated that the city’s human rights commission was working on the issue of race. Racism isn’t just a Southern thing, he said.

Later during council communications ,Mike Anglin (Ward 5) said he wanted to add his voice of support for those who wanted Warpehoski to work on human rights issues. The phrasing of Anglin’s remarks – which could have been understood as drafting Warpehoski to do the work – prompted some chuckles around the table. Anglin indicated that he himself was willing to lend his own efforts to the work.

Communications and Comment

Every city council agenda contains multiple slots for city councilmembers and the city administrator to give updates or make announcements about important issues that are coming before the city council. And every meeting typically includes public commentary on subjects not necessarily on the agenda. Here are some highlights.

Comm/Comm: Policing, Public Safety

City administrator Steve Powers asked police chief John Seto to give an update. The first six months of the year show that Part 1 crimes are down 10% compared to last year, Seto reported. [Part 1 crimes are considered the most serious, and include murder, rape, robbery, arson, and motor vehicle theft, among others.] Overall crime is down 7.5%.

The department is analyzing the initial data collection from the electronic activity logs for officers. The department expects to be staffed up to the full authorized level of 119 officers with the anticipated hire of four officers, Seto reported.

Comm/Comm: Humane Society

During council communications, Jane Lumm (Ward 2) reported that chief of police John Seto would be meeting with the Humane Society of Huron Valley. She noted that she’s a board member of the HSHV. She explained that the HSHV has a contract with Washtenaw County to provide services with respect to stray animals. She noted that the city itself no longer provides animal control services. The city’s ordinance says that if there’s a request for service, then the individual is supposed to contact the Ann Arbor police department, which would then forward the request to HSHV. The HSHV had decided to follow that ordinance, which meant that there are a lot of calls going into the AAPD about animal control, Lumm said. So the city will meet with HSHV to coordinate how stray animals will be handled.

Comm/Comm: Karl Pohrt

Sabra Briere (Ward 1) offered a remembrance of Karl Pohrt, who died the previous week. He was best known to many as the owner of the Shaman Drum Bookshop, she said. That bookstore on South State Street served the philosophers, and poets and social scientists. Others knew him through his volunteer work, which included service on city boards. Other knew him as a man with a “beautiful soul” that shines on in the many people he touched. Briere related how he let her bounce ideas off him. When she saw him last, he was living his life as fully as anyone can, she said. “I wish we all had more time,” Briere concluded.

Comm/Comm: Flooding

Mike Anglin (Ward 5) offered some anecdotal information on flooding from the point of view of a real taxpayer. Since 2000, a woman has replaced all her basement walls, which had cost from $25,000-$50,000, he said. She had one instance of damage of $5,000 and another one of $3,000. The city’s cost in connection with the flooding has been $8,000, he reported. Anglin wanted to put a human face on the tragedy. He said the city needs to do its best to do a better job controlling floods and “disasters of that nature.”

Comm/Comm: General Reforms

During public commentary reserved time at the start of the meeting, Thomas Partridge called for a new attitude and a new mayor of the city. He called for a council that would work to place items on every agenda that would expand human rights and expand public participation at meetings. He called for increased affordable housing and transportation. For too long, the mayor and council have neglected and abused Michigan’s most vulnerable citizens, he said. Money is allocated that highlights historic discrimination, he contended, and it’s time to end that.

During the public commentary at the end of the meeting, Partridge rose to speak for responsibility and integrity as an advocate for those residents of the city and state who are most vulnerable.

Present: Jane Lumm, Mike Anglin, Margie Teall, Sabra Briere, Sumi Kailasapathy, Sally Petersen, Stephen Kunselman, Marcia Higgins, John Hieftje, Christopher Taylor, Chuck Warpehoski.

Next council meeting: Thursday, Aug. 8, 2013 at 7 p.m. in the second-floor council chambers at city hall, 301 E. Huron. [confirm date]

The Chronicle could not survive without regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the Ann Arbor city council. We sit on the hard bench so that you don’t have to. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle. And if you’re already supporting us, please encourage your friends, neighbors and colleagues to help support The Chronicle, too!

Three of the items involved street reconstruction – on Stone School Road, Forest Avenue, and multiple streets in the Springwater subdivision. A fourth item approved by the council was a contract for tree planting, which will be paid for from the city’s stormwater fund. The council’s action on these items came at its July 15, 2013 meeting.

The Stone School Road stormwater project is part of a larger $4 million road improvement project. The council’s action was to approve a petition to the Washtenaw County water resources commissioner‘s office to apply for a state revolving fund loan of $1.2 million. The stormwater improvements will include work “to clean out, relocate, widen, deepen, straighten, extend, tile, interconnect, or otherwise improve a portion of the county drain located north of Ellsworth Road between Varsity Drive and Stone School Road, known as the Malletts Creek Drain.” The loan will be repaid in annual installments of up to $76,307 from the city’s stormwater fund. Up to 50% of the loan could be forgiven as a “green” project.

The Forest Avenue reconstruction project extends from South University Ave. to Hill Street. The project includes installation of a stone reservoir under the street to allow for infiltration of stormwater. In addition to reconstructing the street, the existing 6-inch water main between Willard Street and Hill Street will be replaced with a 12-inch pipe. The total estimated $1,257,000 cost is to be paid for as follows: water fund capital budget ($185,000), street millage fund ($543,937), developer contributions (Zaragon Place and 601 Forest Ave.) to the parks memorials and contribution fund ($78,063), and the stormwater fund ($450,000). The city has obtained a loan through the state revolving fund for the stormwater portion of the project. The council’s action on July 15 was to approve a construction contract with MacKenzie Co. for $965,990.

The council also approved the engineering consultant work for street improvements in the Springwater subdivision – located southeast of Buhr Park, south of Packard Road. The eventual project, to be completed in 2014-16, would include “a reconstructed roadway section, storm sewer upgrades, storm water quality improvements, water main replacement, replacement of curb and gutter, and the construction of new sidewalk and/or the filling in of sidewalk gaps within the project limits.” The work is planned over the course of three years, and would include the north-south streets of Nordman Road and Springbrook Avenue and the east-west streets of Butternut and Redwood. The council’s action was to approve a $212,784 contract with CDM Smith Michigan Inc.

Finally, the council approved a two-year $509,125 contract with Margolis Companies Inc. to plant 750 trees in FY 2014 and 1,000 trees in FY 2015. The work would be paid for from the city’s stormwater fund and reimbursed with a state revolving fund (SRF) loan that has been obtained through the county water resources commissioner’s office.

This brief was filed from the city council’s chambers on the second floor of city hall, located at 301 E. Huron. A more detailed report will follow: [link]

Door to the Ann Arbor city council chamber.

The longer-than-usual break stems from the regular meeting schedule, which actually calls for a meeting on the first and third Monday of the month, not every two weeks. The traditional shift from Monday to Thursday to accommodate the Tuesday, Aug. 6 Democratic primary will add three more days to the break.

Two councilmembers have primary challenges this year – incumbent Stephen Kunselman is competing with Julie Grand for the Democratic nomination in Ward 3; and incumbent Marcia Higgins is competing with Jack Eaton for the Ward 4 nomination.

At its last meeting before the Aug. 6 election, the council’s agenda is relatively full. Dominant themes cutting across several agenda items are concrete and water.

In the category of concrete, the council will be asked to approve $15,000 for the design of a section of sidewalk along Barton Drive. The council approved similar design budgets for a sidewalk on Newport Road at its Jan. 22, 2013 meeting and for a sidewalk on Scio Church Road on Nov. 19, 2012. The interest in having sidewalks was supported by petitions submitted by adjoining property owners.

The council will also be asked to accept some easements and the dedication of right-of-way near the intersection of Platt Road and Washtenaw Avenue – in connection with the Arbor Hills Crossing development, where construction is well underway. A sidewalk is to be built along Platt Road as part of the intersection work.

Sidewalks also appear in connection with an agenda item that would approve a $212,784 engineering services contract with CDM Smith Michigan. The contract covers design for a street reconstruction project in the Springwater subdivision, located southeast of Buhr Park, south of Packard Road. The work is scheduled for FY 2014-16, and includes the construction of new sidewalks.

The council will also be asked to approve a $965,990 contract with MacKenzie Co. for street reconstruction between South University Avenue and Hill Street on Forest Avenue. The scope of the project includes the reconstruction of sidewalk.

Adding to the concrete on the agenda is the $1,031,592 construction contract with Krull Construction to build a concrete skatepark at Veterans Memorial Park. Among the features of the skatepark will be pools and bowls.

Although they won’t be skate-able, bowls show up in another agenda item that asks the council to approve $216,000 for renovations of 13 restrooms in the old city hall building. The bathrooms are 50 years old.

In the category of water, the council will be asked to approve a $33,743 annual contract with the Huron River Watershed Council to assist in compliance with the city’s stormwater permit from the Michigan Dept. of Environmental Quality. HRWC’s work includes public education efforts, water quality monitoring and reporting assistance.

Stormwater is also on the agenda in the form of a Stone School Road reconstruction project. Of the $4 million project total, $1.2 million of it involves stormwater work on the county drain north of Ellsworth Road between Varsity Drive and Stone School Road. The council will be asked to approve a petition to the office of the county water resources commissioner for a loan under the state’s revolving fund (SRF) program. If approved by the state, the loan repayment would come from the city’s stormwater fund.

A loan that’s already been secured through the SRF will pay for another item on the agenda – a $509,125 contract with Margolis Companies Inc. for the purchase and planting of trees, as well as stump removal along city streets. The stormwater fund is used for this work because of the positive impact trees have on stormwater runoff.

Water also shows up in a consent agenda item that asks the council to approve a $43,788 annual contract with the Ecology Center to give tours of the city’s materials recovery facility (MRF). The cost of the contract is split 60%-40% between the solid waste fund and the drinking water fund. The drinking water funding is related to a Michigan Dept. of Natural Resources requirement that the city engage in source water protection educational efforts.

Leftover business from the council’s July 1, 2013 meeting includes changes to the council’s rules and the approval of the State Street corridor plan. Rules changes include reductions in speaking times for public commentary as well as for councilmembers.

Details of other meeting agenda items are available on the city’s Legistar system. Readers can also follow the live meeting proceedings on Channel 16, streamed online by Community Television Network.

The Chronicle will be filing live updates from city council chambers during the meeting, published in this article “below the fold.” The meeting is scheduled to start at 7 p.m.

6:52 p.m. Pre-meeting activity. The scheduled meeting start is 7 p.m. Most evenings the actual starting time is between 7:10 p.m. and 7:15 p.m. About eight people are in the audience chambers now. No one from the city council has arrived yet.

7:00 p.m. Councilmembers are starting to arrive. Christopher Taylor, Stephen Kunselman, Sabra Briere, Chuck Warpehoski and Sally Petersen are now here.

7:02 p.m. Mike Anglin, John Hieftje, Sumi Kailasapathy and Margie Teall also here.

7:09 p.m. All councilmembers are here. We’re almost ready to start.

7:12 p.m. Pledge of allegiance, moment of silence and the roll call of council. All councilmembers are present and correct.

7:12 p.m. Proclamations. No proclamations are on the agenda tonight.

7:12 p.m. Public commentary. This portion of the meeting offers 10 three-minute slots that can be reserved in advance. Preference is given to speakers who want to address the council on an agenda item. [Public commentary general time, with no sign-up required in advance, is offered at the end of the meeting.] A pending rule change to be considered at tonight’s meeting would limit speaking time to two minutes. Another pending rule change would address “frequent flyers,” by only allowing people to reserve time at the start of the meeting, if they did not speak during reserved time at the previous council meeting. Tonight’s lineup for reserved time speaking is: Blaine Coleman, Thomas Partridge, Lisa Dusseau, Jack Eaton, Lefiest Galimore, Rev. Jeff Harrold. Galimore, Harrold and Coleman will be addressing the council on the topic of the Trayvon Martin verdict. Ward 4 council candidate Jack Eaton is here to talk about the council rules changes.

7:16 p.m. Blaine Coleman tells the council they should make as much noise about the Trayvon Martin verdict as they did about the killing of white children in Newton, Mass. He tells councilmembers he expects strong statements from them about what happened to Martin, which he characterizes as “legalized lynching.” He is speaking to the “slavemaster mindset,” which says that black life is worth nothing. Councilmembers need to rid themselves of that mindset, he says. That’s a mindset that says it’s okay to hunt and kill black people. He expects the council to say that black life is worth something, and express its revulsion at the Trayvon Martin verdict.

7:19 p.m. Thomas Partridge calls for a new attitude and a new mayor of the city. He wants a council that will work to place items on every agenda that will expand human rights and expand public participation at meetings. He calls for increased affordable housing and transportation. For too long, the mayor and council have neglected and abused Michigan’s most vulnerable citizens, he says. Money is allocated that highlights historic discrimination, he contends, and it’s time to end that.

7:23 p.m. Lisa Dusseau speaks in support of domestic partnerships. She said her life partner is an Ann Arbor firefighter. They share everything a married couple would – except for health insurance. Her asthma medication isn’t covered under her own policy. She calls on the city of Ann Arbor to follow suit with other Ann Arbor institutions, in the light of recent court decisions, to restore domestic partner benefits.

7:25 p.m. Jack Eaton encourages the council to enact the rule change on its agenda that adds public commentary to work sessions. The proposed reduction in speaking times, however, is something he’s not supporting. He tells the council that the reduction in time was a reaction to a few speakers who abuse the opportunity for public commentary. He says democracy requires that they listen to all the voices who want to speak.

7:29 p.m. Lefiest Galimore is joined by seven others at the podium. He weighs in against the so-called “stand your ground” law in Florida. He recites the history of the Pioneer High School football brawl. He calls for the revocation of Michigan’s version of the “stand your ground” law. Rev. Jeff Harrold says it’s all too easy to see a young black man as threatening. He encourages the council to go on record against the “stand your ground” law. He calls on the council to support federal civil rights charges to be brought against Zimmerman. He cites the fact that the Ann Arbor Reads selection is The New Jim Crow.

7:29 p.m. Council communications. This is the first of three slots on the agenda for council communications. It’s a time when councilmembers can report out from boards, commissions and task forces on which they serve. They can also alert their colleagues to proposals they might be bringing forward in the near future.

7:31 p.m. Sabra Briere offers a remembrance of Karl Pohrt. She calls him a man with a “beautiful soul.”

7:37 p.m. Mike Anglin offers some anecdotal information on flooding. A taxpayer has replaced all her basement walls. The taxpayer’s damages have been several thousand dollars, and the city’s cost has been $8,000. He wants to put a human face on the tragedy. He says the city needs to do its best to do a better job controlling floods and “disasters of that nature.”

Sumi Kailasapathy addresses the issue of racial discrimination that public speakers raised. She didn’t know what to tell her kids to explain to them why the Trayvon Martin verdict came out the way it did. She says she’ll support a resolution or work with other cities to make sure a situation like Trayvon Martin’s doesn’t occur in Michigan. Chuck Warpehoski also addresses the issues of marriage equality, racial equality and calls them issues dear to his heart. He indicates a willingness to support efforts to address “stand your ground” laws in Michigan. Racism isn’t just a Southern thing, he says.

7:41 p.m. City administrator Steve Powers is calling attention to the street closings that are on the consent agenda. On a more significant issue, he asks police chief John Seto to give an update. The first six months of the year show Part 1 crimes down 10% compared to last year. And overall crime is down 7.5%, he reports. The department is analyzing the initial data collection from the electronic activity logs for officers. The department expects to be staffed up to the full authorized level with the anticipated hire of four officers.

7:41 p.m. Public hearings. For tonight’s meeting there are no public hearings – a relatively rare occurrence.

7:46 p.m. Council communications. More council communications include a report from Jane Lumm that the city administrator will be meeting with the humane society to coordinate how stray animals will be handled. She discloses that she’s a board member for the Humane Society of Huron Valley. Mike Anglin says he wants to add his voice of support for those who wanted to work on human rights issues.

Marcia Higgins reports on meetings between city of Ann Arbor staff and University of Michigan about the possibility of closing Main Street, between Stadium Blvd. and Pauline Blvd., for football games. There will be a public meeting on July 24 at 6 p.m. at the downtown public library. Sabra Briere updates the council on the D1 review and the R4C committee work. Four meetings of the R4C will take place in August and September, she reports.

7:46 p.m. Minutes and consent agenda. This is a group of items that are deemed to be routine and are voted on “all in one go.” Contracts for less than $100,000 can be placed on the consent agenda. Items on the consent agenda tonight include:

• Street closings for the Electric Bolt 8K Run/Walk on July 28, 2013. It’s a new course this year, looping around Argo Pond, hosted by the Bezonki-award-winning Ann Arbor Active Against ALS.
• Street closings for the 2013 UA Block Party to include the Plumbers and Pipefitters 5K on Monday, Aug. 12, 2013.
• $43,788 annual contract with the Ecology Center to give tours of the material recovery facility (MRF). The cost of the contract is split 60-40 between the solid waste fund and the drinking water fund. The drinking water funding is related to a Michigan Department of Natural Resources requirement that the city engage in source water protection educational efforts. The authorization is for the contract to be extended annually for five years with a 3% increase each year.
• Agreement with Complus Data Innovations Inc. for parking citation collection. The current contract with Complus, which goes through Nov. 14, 2013, gives Complus $2.28 per ticket issued. Under the new agreement the cost will be $1.92 per ticket issued, with no annual increases for the life of the contract including any extensions. The city thinks this will result in a combined savings to the city and the University of Michigan of around $46,800 annually. That works out to about 130,000 parking tickets issued per year. The “convenience fee” is also being changed – from $3.50 per citation to a 3% transaction fee (which could cover multiple citations), with a minimum of $2.95 per citation.
• Approval of $91,533 for an amended grant contract with the Michigan Dept. of Transportation (MDOT) for a snow removal equipment building at the Ann Arbor municipal airport. The project was completed in 2012. According to the staff memo accompanying the resolution, the project lasted several years and MDOT-Aero forgot to amend the agreement earlier.

7:49 p.m. Councilmembers can opt to select out any items for separate consideration. Warpehoski removes the Plumbers and Pipefitters 5K street closing for separate consideration. He’s concerned about the city’s notification plan for neighbors of the race. On Fifth and Division streets, there are parking lots that have no other access. Community services area administrator Sumedh Bahl gives Warpehoski an assurance.

Lumm has pulled out the MRF tour item to correct the amount of the contract, but she observes that the amount has already been corrected.

7:49 p.m. Outcome: The council voted to approve all the consent agenda items.

7:49 p.m. Pension ordinance for police service specialists and command officers association. The council is being asked to give initial approval to a change to the pension ordinance to incorporate changes negotiated with the police service specialists and command officers association bargaining units.

7:49 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted without discussion to give initial approval to the changes in the pension ordinance.

7:50 p.m. GAC appointment: Jean Cares. This item was postponed from the previous meeting, as is standard practice with a greenbelt advisory commission appointment, which is made by the council, not by the mayor (as most nominations to boards and commissions are). When it appears on the agenda the first time and is postponed, that’s treated as the nomination. The following meeting, the vote is taken as a confirmation – which is what’s happening tonight. Cares is nominated as the agriculture landowner representative on the greenbelt advisory commission. Cares owns the Dexter Mill.

7:51 p.m. Taylor reminds everyone about the designated slots for differently qualified people on GAC.

7:51 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted unanimously to confirm the appointment of Cares to GAC.

7:51 p.m. 2013 Council rules amendments. For Chronicle coverage on these changes, see “Council Mulls Speaking Rule Changes.” Highlights include adding public commentary to council work sessions, but reducing public speaking time to two-minute turns. A “frequent flyer” rule would prevent people from signing up for reserved time at the start of a meeting two meetings in a row. The total time that each councilmember could speak on an item of debate would be reduced from eight minutes to five minutes. The council postponed a vote from its previous meeting, on July 1, 2013, on these changes due to the absence of Sally Petersen (Ward 2) and Margie Teall (Ward 4) – who were described by council rules committee chair Marcia Higgins (Ward 4) as wanting to take part in the conversation. The council had also postponed the item at its June 17, 2013 meeting.

7:56 p.m. Higgins remarks that the item seems like it’s been on the agenda forever. She summarizes the discussion of the council rules committee and characterizes it as a “lively debate.” She invites discussion from councilmembers on the proposed changes. The changes can be approved as a whole or in pieces, she ventures.

Lumm proposes an amendment. She understands the need to streamline meetings, but says that the recent long public hearings were not typical. She doesn’t support a reduction of public speaking time. Sometimes two minutes might be sufficient, but other times it might not be enough. She’d prefer to err on the side of allowing additional speaking time. Streamlining should be done some other way. So she proposes that the reduction from three minutes to two minutes for public speaking time be eliminated. Warpehoski seconds Lumm’s proposal.

8:09 p.m. Anglin supports Lumm’s proposal. He wants to continue with the three-minute limit. Everyone has their own story, he says. If the council is really looking at how to shorten council meetings, there are other ways to do that, Anglin says. Briere says in a “prior life” she’s addressed the council as a member of the public, and says that three minutes goes by very fast. It’s not about limiting access or limiting the duration of a meeting, she says. The message she’d taken away from an Michigan Municipal League work session was that between minute 2 and minute 3, people tend to repeat themselves. The MML’s recommendation could be disregarded, she said.

Petersen said she didn’t think that the time limit change was meant to be a “cure-all” for making meetings more efficient. It’s one step that might contribute to that, she felt. Her first concern was that the amount of time being allocated to councilmembers and to members of the public was different. The point is to improve the quality of the speaking time, she says, and to make the time as efficient as possible. She supports Lumm’s amendment.

Teall says she could support going back to three minutes for the reserved time, because those speakers have made the effort to sign up ahead of time. And that is limited to just 10 slots. So she supports three minutes for public speaking reserved time.

Higgins ventures that the council should not try to amend amendments, as Teall is suggesting. Higgins wants each proposed amendment to be considered in turn. She asks Lumm to take her amendment off the table and to consider each of the kinds of public commentary separately – reserved time, general time, and public hearings. Lumm doesn’t want to do that.

Hieftje forges ahead with Teall’s amendment to the amendment, but it dies for lack of a second. We’re back to Lumm’s amendment – to keep all public speaking time at three minutes. Kunselman ventures that the council could spend another hour on the topic. He supports going back to the original three-minute time period. Democracy is about giving people a chance to speak, he says. It’s important to continue Ann Arbor’s tradition.

Taylor says that the purpose of reducing the meeting time has been disclaimed, so he’s speaking to that. He rejects the idea that reducing the speaking time limits access and participation, but rather encourages broader participation. He also points out that there are many points of contact between the public and the council besides the public commentary portions of meetings. He relates how he’s heard from people who have despaired of ever trying to address the council because they have to wait through other speakers.

Outcome on Lumm’s amendment: The vote is 10-1, with dissent from Teall.

8:21 p.m. Kailasapathy is now addressing the “frequent flyer” portion of the rule. Briere suggests that the council just go through each rule change and vote them up and down. Briere talks about people who are very savvy and who are on the phone early in the morning to sign up for reserved time. People who want to address the council on an agenda item don’t have a chance, she said. But the council also needs to hear from people who want to speak on non-agenda items. She calls the proposed rule change – the “frequent flyer” provision – a compromise.

From the audience, Thomas Partridge says that only six people signed up for reserved time tonight. Hieftje rules him out of order. Hieftje says that he wants some mechanism to ensure that if someone wants to address the council, they’re not prevented from speaking by those who speak frequently.

Warpehoski proposes to amend the rule so that reserved time is assigned on a preferential basis to those who did not address the council at the previous meeting – instead of making it a strict prohibition against someone reserving time two meetings in a row. Kunselman wonders how this would work logistically.

Higgins asks that the changes just be rejected, instead of trying to amend the rules. Hieftje ventures that there’s no rush to do this. He suggests postponing again after the council goes through all the rules changes.

8:30 p.m. Warpehoski encourages the rules committee to consider changing the admonishment that council debate not include “personality” to saying that it shouldn’t include “personal attacks.” He suggests that emails sent to all councilmembers (draft language for amendments, for example) be made available to the public. He also notes that sometimes when councilmembers question staff – which isn’t counted as speaking time – often it includes editorial comments. How is that handled?

Higgins reports how the rules committee had discussed the issue of councilmember speaking time. Higgins talks about the possibility of rotating the job of timekeeper among councilmembers. She invites councilmembers to send suggestions to the rules committee. Lumm says that time limits for councilmembers is appropriate. Five minutes seems too long for the first time, so the reduction from five minutes to three minutes seems reasonable. But the second speaking time should stay at three minutes, she says. Hieftje says that the length of the meetings changes as the issues change. Hieftje invites someone to move for postponement.

8:40 p.m. Anglin ventures that the agenda itself needs to be shortened. He also wants the public to be notified if it’s known that an item will be postponed by the council. Briere counters that the council can’t act on the assumption that an item will be postponed. One should not presuppose an action by the council, she says.

The discussion has wandered to the idea of managing the number of proclamations. Kailasapathy says that many people, like her, have children and full-time jobs, so meetings that go to 1 a.m. are a hardship. It’s more humane to have two four-hour sessions, she ventures. She says that meeting length shouldn’t be a barrier to service on the council for people with young children and full-time jobs.

Petersen ventures that the agenda itself should be examined – noting that tonight’s agenda includes 16 items introduced by staff members. Higgins mentions the rule about communications via mobile devices at the table. She says that if councilmembers need to communicate, then they can just step away from the table to do that.

Teall asks about the rule limiting the clerk’s report on the agenda to only certain items. Briere explains there have been times when councilmembers have received correspondence and councilmembers have asked that the correspondence be added to the electronic agenda item.

8:40 p.m. Some young men who were here for the skatepark item have given up and departed the meeting.

8:42 p.m. Higgins suggests that the item be postponed until the first meeting in September, which is Sept. 3. Hieftje suggests the second meeting in September. Briere wants to have the rules in place for the work session in September. So the proposal is to postpone until Sept. 3.

8:42 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted unanimously to postpone the amendments to the council rules until Sept. 3.

8:43 p.m. The council is now in recess.

9:00 p.m. The council has returned from recess.

9:00 p.m. Right of way agreement with University of Michigan. This resolution stems from an item that appeared on the council’s May 13, 2013 meeting agenda. It involves a right-of-way occupancy for the University of Michigan to install conduits in Tappan Street. The purpose of the conduits under Tappan Street is to connect a new emergency generator to the Lawyers Club buildings at 551 S. State Street. The Lawyers Club and the generator are located on opposite sides of the street. The university considers the transaction to be a conveyance of an interest in land. The city doesn’t see it that way. But UM insists that the council approve the resolution as if it were a conveyance of an interest in land, which requires an eight-vote majority. On May 13, the council only had seven votes in favor. Tonight’s resolution directs the staff to renegotiate the agreement.

9:15 p.m. Lumm introduces the resolution. Higgins wants the process to be one in the future that could be approved at the staff level with a standard licensing agreement, as other entities do. Another possibility is to use easements, she says. She wants UM to use the tools that are already in place.

Petersen asks what has happened since May 13? What’s the change? Higgins reiterates that there’s a standard licensing tool for this purpose. Taylor says that the smooth operation between the city and the university is important. He encourages staff to move swiftly and surely, without prejudicing the city.

Anglin thanks those who brought the resolution forward – and is glad that the city is not granting the transfer of any property. Hieftje says the university has work pending, and wonders if the council’s action or non-action would have an impact. Assistant city attorney Abigail Elias says that the resolution tonight would not preclude the Tappan Street agreement from coming back to the council.

Petersen wants to know how long the renegotiation will take. She’d heard the original negotiation had taken three years. Elias expresses optimism, but allows that it takes two parties to reach an agreement. Higgins says that as long as the agreement doesn’t include a conveyance of land, it doesn’t need to ever come to the council. Lumm agrees with Higgins – that it’s about streamlining the process.

City attorney Stephen Postema says that if the university comes back with an agreement that requires eight votes, then it could be a longer negotiation than Elias had described. Taylor clarifies that things that need to be done for the Tappan Street project can be done currently. Elias says that there’d need to be a license agreement. It’s up to UM to ask for what it needs to move forward.

Petersen asks what UM’s objection is to a licensing agreement. Elias says that UM felt it needed an interest in the land but the city felt that the conduit serves a structure, not the land. She characterized the proposal the council had rejected as an agreement to disagree. Anglin asks why this issue has even arisen. He calls the previous resolution “gibberish” that no one can understand.

9:15 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted to direct renegotiation of the right-of-way agreement with UM.

9:16 p.m. Nomination to greenbelt advisory commission: John Ramsburgh. John Ramsburgh’s name is being put forward to serve on the greenbelt advisory commission to replace Dan Ezekiel. This was announced by Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) at the last meeting of GAC on July 11, 2013. Taylor serves as the city council representative to GAC. Taylor explains how GAC’s term limits work and requests a postponement.

9:16 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted to postpone the vote on Ramsburgh’s nomination to GAC, as is customary. The item’s first appearance on the agenda serves as the “nomination” and the subsequent vote is the confirmation.

9:16 p.m. South State Street corridor plan. This resolution would adopt the South State Street corridor plan into the city’s master plan. The city planning commission voted unanimously to adopt it at its May 21, 2013 meeting. At the council’s previous meeting, on July 1, 2013, councilmembers had voted to postpone the question, in deference to Marcia Higgins (Ward 4), who wanted more time to evaluate it.

More commonly when the planning commission votes on a matter, it’s to recommend action by the city council. For master plans, however, the planning commission is on equal footing with the council: both groups must adopt the same plan. Among the recommendations are: (1) Evaluate use of vacant parcels for alternative energy generation; (2) Evaluate integrating public art along the corridor; (3) Evaluate use of open land for community gardens; (4) Assess and improve high crash areas along the corridor; (5) create boulevard on State Street between Eisenhower and I‐94 to enable safer automobile, bicycle, and pedestrian movement; (6) Consider utilizing vacant parcels for athletic fields and recreation facilities; (7) Develop a pedestrian and bicycle path along the Ann Arbor railroad that will connect the planned Allen Creek bikeway to Pittsfield Township through the corridor; and (8) Resurface roads in the corridor.

9:17 p.m. Higgins thanks her colleagues for the postponement at the last meeting so that she could look at the item a bit more closely.

9:17 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted to adopt the South State Street corridor plan into the city’s master plan.

9:17 p.m. Waive park space rental fee for Liberty Plaza. This item comes on recommendation from the park advisory commission, which voted at its June 18, 2013 meeting to recommend the waiver of fees in Liberty Plaza on a trial basis through next year. The fee waiver comes in response to a situation that arose earlier in the spring, when city staff applied fees to the hosting of Pizza in the Park in Liberty Plaza – a homelessness outreach ministry of a local church. Members of Camp Take Notice, a self-governed homelessness community, have addressed the council at several of its recent meetings on this topic. They’re keen to see a more general written commitment that the city would allow humanitarian efforts to take place on public land generally.

9:20 p.m. Taylor reviews the history of the issue with the Pizza in the Park program in Liberty Plaza. The program was under a perceived cloud, he said. PAC felt that a waiver would be useful for the particular purpose of protecting Pizza in the Park, but also address the general purpose of activating the park. If the one-year trial is successful, it could become permanent. Taylor noted that advocates for Pizza in the Park have solidified how they think humanitarian efforts should be treated – beyond Liberty Plaza. Teall describes how she’s met with several people and they’re exploring the possibility of extending waivers to other parks as well.

9:32 p.m. Briere asks community services area administrator Sumedh Bahl to explain how permit fees are normally waived. Bahl said it’s not the usual practice to waive fees – and says he can’t recall that being done in the past. He allows that the council could direct the staff to waive fees. Briere ventures that during the art fairs, the council could pass a resolution to direct the waiver of the permit fee at other parks. Higgins notes that the art fair are held this week, so she wonders where Pizza in the Park is happening this week. Bahl indicates that it’s being held at West Park, and that no fee is being applied.

Anglin asks how this proposal came about, and Taylor says that staff had heard the tenor of the council’s reaction to the Pizza in the Park advocates who’d addressed the council at previous meetings. He ventures that the proposal – which protects Pizza in the Park, while also helping to activate the park in general – “feeds two birds with one stone.”

Kunselman asks if there’s an events committee through which this request could be handled. Kailasapathy agrees with Kunselman’s suggestion that nonprofits could be included in the fee structure as exempt, instead of waiving the fees by resolution. Briere cautions that “nonprofit” and “humanitarian aid” are not precise terms and would need to be refined.

Lumm reported that she’d met with the advocates of Pizza in the Park, and appreciated that they were trying to get direction from the council. She also worried about opening the door to all nonprofits and encouraged a narrowly-defined solution.

9:32 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted to approve the fee waiver in Liberty Plaza on a trial basis through July 1, 2014.

9:32 p.m. FY 2014 allocations to nonprofit entities for human services ($1,244,629). This is the distribution of funds to specific nonprofits that provide human services under contract with the city. The budget allocation for $1,244,629 was already made, at the council’s May 20, 2013 meeting.

A total of 20 programs operated by 16 different organizations are receiving funding from the city of Ann Arbor this year. Half of those organization are receiving more than $90,000: Interfaith Hospitality Network of Washtenaw County ($91,645); Catholic Social Services of Washtenaw ($94,490); Food Gatherers ($95,171); Community Action Network ($104,944); Perry Nursery School of Ann Arbor ($109,851); Avalon Housing Inc. ($142,851); Legal Services of South Central Michigan ($177,052); and the Shelter Association of Washtenaw County ($245,529).

In the coordinated funding approach to human services, a total of $4,369,102 is being allocated by the city and other entities. In addition to the city’s share, here’s a breakdown of other contributions: United Way of Washtenaw County ($1,797,000); Washtenaw County general fund ($1,015,000); Washtenaw Urban County ($288,326); and the Ann Arbor Area Community Foundation ($24,147).

9:33 p.m. Taylor asks the council to vote to excuse him from voting on the item, because one of his clients is Planned Parenthood, which is among the groups being funded. They take the necessary vote.

9:36 p.m. Briere notes that this is a three-year agreement and the amount this year is the same as it was the previous two years. Hieftje recites how much each of the other entities are contributing. Lumm thanks Mary Jo Callan and Andrea Plevek, the staff who are responsible for this. She recites the history of the program. Human services continue to exceed the available funding, she says.

9:36 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted to approve the human services funding distributions for FY 2014.

9:36 p.m. Krull contract for skatepark at Veterans Memorial Park ($1,031,592). The park advisory commission voted at its June 8, 2013 meeting to recommend award of the contract. The originally approved budget for the project, to be located at the northwest corner of Veterans Memorial Park, was $800,000 – though the expectation was that the project would cost about $1 million.

This conceptual design by Wally Hollyday for the Ann Arbor skatepark at the northwest corner of Veterans Memorial Park was approved by the city council on Jan. 7, 2013.

The total budget now – including the construction contract, 10% contingency and $89,560 design contract – is $1,224,311, or $424,311 higher than the originally budgeted $800,000. Funds to pay for the skatepark include a $400,000 grant from the Washtenaw County parks & recreation commission, $300,000 from the Michigan Dept. of Natural Resources Trust Fund, and $100,00 raised by the Friends of the Ann Arbor Skatepark, which paid for the skatepark’s design. The city identified funds from a variety of sources to make up the gap.

9:41 p.m. Kunselman says it’s been a long time coming. He recalls helping the Friends of the Ann Arbor Skatepark back in 2007-08, giving them a voice at the council table. Everyone had come together to make it possible. He compares the vote to standing at the rim of a pool looking down getting ready to skate: “Just go for it.”

Petersen praises the effort but expresses concern about the amount of an additional appropriation being made from city funds. She allows that the Friends of Ann Arbor Skatepark are going to continue to do fundraising. She wonders if it’s possible to delay the vote for a couple of months while private funding is pursued.

City administrator Steve Powers asks Sumedh Bahl to comment on the issue. The project needs to be completed by August 2014 under terms of the MDNR trust fund grant. Under the current schedule, a June 30 estimated completion date is foreseen. There’s some “float,” Bahl says, but essentially it needs to go ahead on the current schedule.

9:50 p.m. Taylor explains that staff worked closely with the construction company, with PAC, and with the Friends of the Ann Arbor Skatepark. Staff were mindful that additional money was being requested. Nevertheless, they were excited about moving forward, even with that additional cost. The effort had been long and earnest and had the support of many governmental partners. The bid came in higher than was anticipated, Taylor says, but it was determined that this was simply how much it would cost. He allowed that it was more money than had been anticipated. It would be a good thing for kids and adults who skate, Taylor concludes.

Bahl notes that Friends of the Ann Arbor Skatepark have recently received a $50,000 grant from the Knight Foundation. Lumm allows that the amount that the budget was off “could have been worse.” She notes that the specs had been reduced and that Krull had agreed to reduce the prices by $10,000. She noted that the fund balance for the parks maintenance and capital improvements is healthy. She calls the parks system one of the reasons the quality of life in Ann Arbor is so strong. Adding the new facility, even at the city’s cost, is worth doing, and she’ll support it.

Anglin recalls how the entire council chambers had been filled with supporters. He calls Trevor Staples to the podium. Hieftje establishes that no one on the council objects to Staples coming forward to speak. Staples quips that he himself might object. He notes that about $900,000 is being brought to the city’s park system by the project. So he encouraged councilmembers to think about what could be lost if it doesn’t pass.

9:53 p.m. Petersen asks about the operating agreement: How will security be provided at the skatepark? Hieftje ventures that no additional security is provided for basketball courts. Petersen said that she didn’t see any “eyes on the park” – that has been a concern cited in regard to downtown parks that have been proposed. Hieftje contrasts urban area parks with the future location of the skatepark. Hieftje hopes it will pass tonight. He recalls the kind of fund raising efforts that the Friends of the Ann Arbor Skatepark have made. The enthusiasm they’ve generated has been inspiriational, he says. The city’s contribution is not coming from human services money, he adds.

9:54 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted unanimously to award the construction contract for the skatepark. Kunselman briefly leaves the table to give Staples a hug.

9:54 p.m. Larcom building (city hall) restrooms renovation ($216,000). The council is being asked to move $216,000 from the general fund to the fleet and facilities fund, to cover a $188,484 contract with Howell Construction Services, plus a $27,516 contingency. The work would renovate 13 restrooms in the old city hall building, which are 50 years old.

9:56 p.m. Lumm notes that the money had originally been in the facilities budget and had reverted to the general fund balance at the end of the fiscal year. So the council was simply restoring the money to the facilities fund.

9:56 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted to approve the contract with Howell Construction for the Larcom building restroom renovations.

9:56 p.m. Huron River Watershed Council contract ($33,743 annually for six years for a total of $202,463). The council is being asked to authorize a contract with HRWC to be funded out of the stormwater operating and maintenance budget – to comply with the requirements of an MS4 stormwater discharge permit that it has through the Michigan Dept. of Environmental Quality. An MS4 system (short for Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System) is “a system of drainage (including roads, storm drains, pipes, and ditches, etc.) that is not a combined sewer or part of a sewage treatment plant.” The goal of the MS4 program is to reduce pollution of Michigan’s surface waters. HRWC’s activities are described in the staff memo accompanying the agenda items as: “public education efforts; water quality monitoring; reporting assistance; watershed group facilitation; and, technical assistance.”

9:56 p.m. This item comes in the context of an incident on June 27, when heavy rains briefly overwhelmed the city’s sanitary sewage system and resulted in 10,000 gallons of untreated sewage flowing into the Huron River. The city has separate sanitary and stormwater sewer systems, but the sanitary system receives stormwater flow from cracks in the system as well as footing drains that were connected to the sanitary system as part of standard construction techniques in the 1970s. Incidents like the one on June 27 led to the creation of the city’s footing drain disconnection program in the early 2000s. From the city’s press release on the incident three weeks ago:

On Thursday, June 27, 2013, the Ann Arbor area was deluged with intense rainfall that caused flooding conditions and significantly increased the flow of wastewater to the City of Ann Arbor Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) over a short period of time. Plant flows more than tripled within a half hour. As a result of this unprecedented increase in plant flow, approximately 10,000 gallons of untreated wastewater was discharged to the Huron River from 5:20 to 5:30 p.m. By comparison, the WWTP fully treated approximately 350,000 gallons of wastewater during the 10minute period over which this incident occurred.

9:56 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted to approve the contract with the Huron River Watershed Council.

9:57 p.m. Stone School Road and Malletts Creek stormwater improvements ($1.2 million loan application). The council is being asked to approve a petition to the Washtenaw County water resources commissioner’s office to apply for a state revolving fund loan for $1.2 million worth of stormwater improvements as part of a $4 million road improvement project. The stormwater improvements will include work “to clean out, relocate, widen, deepen, straighten, extend, tile, interconnect, or otherwise improve a portion of the county drain located north of Ellsworth Road between Varsity Drive and Stone School Road, known as the Malletts Creek Drain.” The loan would be repaid in annual installments of up to $76,307 from the city’s stormwater fund. Up to 50% of the loan could be forgiven as a “green” project.

9:57 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted to approve the petition to the water resources commissioner’s office for the Stone School Road Mallets Creek project.

9:57 p.m. Purchase, planting of trees, and stump removal along city streets, contract with Margolis Companies Inc. ($509,125). The council is being asked to approve a two-year $509,125 contract with Margolis Companies Inc. to plant 750 trees in FY 2014 and 1,000 trees in FY 2015. The work would be paid for from the city’s stormwater fund and reimbursed with a state revolving fund (SRF) loan that has been obtained through the county water resources commissioner’s office.

9:57 p.m. Warpehoski reviews the environmental benefits to tree planting.

9:57 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted to approve the tree-planting contract with Margolis Companies Inc.

9:58 p.m. Barton Drive sidewalk design ($15,000). The council is being asked to appropriate $15,000 from the city’s general fund to pay for the design of a 400-foot new concrete sidewalk on the south side of Barton Road from a spot west of Chandler Road to Longshore Drive. The council approved similar design budgets for a sidewalk on Newport Road at its Jan. 22, 2013 meeting and for a sidewalk on Scio Church Road at its Nov. 19, 2012 meeting. The interest in having sidewalks was supported by petitions submitted by adjoining property owners.

Location of proposed Barton Drive sidewalk.

10:01 p.m. Briere notes that people who are attempting to push strollers to Bandemer Park have complained for years about the lack of a sidewalk. The design budget doesn’t guarantee construction will take place, she allows, but it’s a good step. There was a meeting between staff and neighbors and the response was overwhelmingly positive, she says. Kailasapathy confirms the nature of the neighborhood meeting. She highlights the importance of non-motorized transportation.

10:01 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted to approve the design budget for the proposed Barton Drive sidewalk.

10:02 p.m. Engineering services for Springwater subdivision with CDM Smith Michigan Inc. ($212,784). The council is being asked to approve the engineering consultant work for improvements in the Springwater subdivision – located southeast of Buhr Park, south of Packard Road. The work is planned over the course of three years, and would include the north-south streets of Nordman Road and Springbrook Avenue and the east-west streets of Butternut and Redwood. The eventual project, to be completed in 2014-16, would include “a reconstructed roadway section, storm sewer upgrades, storm water quality improvements, water main replacement, replacement of curb and gutter, and the construction of new sidewalk and/or the filling in of sidewalk gaps within the project limits.”

10:02 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted without discussion to approve the contract with CDM Smith Michigan Inc. for the Springwater subdivision street improvements.

10:02 p.m. Forest Ave. construction contract with MacKenzie Co. ($965,990). The council is being asked to approve the construction contract for work on Forest Avenue from South University Ave. to Hill Street. In addition to reconstructing the street, the existing 6-inch water main between Willard Street and Hill Street will be replaced with a 12-inch pipe. The project also includes installation of a stone reservoir under the street to allow for infiltration of stormwater. The total estimated $1,257,000 cost is to be paid for as follows: water fund capital budget ($185,000), street millage fund ($543,937), developer contributions (Zaragon Place and 601 Forest Ave.) to the parks memorials and contribution fund ($78,063), and the stormwater fund ($450,000). The city has obtained a loan through the state revolving fund for the stormwater portion of the project.

10:05 p.m. Briere says there’s some concern about the timing of the project, from August to October. It will accommodate student move-in, she says. She ventures that the city is eventually going to turn the corner on stormwater. Lumm says it’s good that the work is being done, characterizing the stretch as a “moonscape.”

10:05 p.m. Outcome: The council voted to approve the contract with E. T. MacKenzie Co. for the Forest Avenue work.

10:05 p.m. Traffic signal materials: Carrier & Gable Inc. ($475,000) The council is being asked to approve the purchase of materials for the following work: (1) Packard and Stone School pedestrian signal upgrade ($45,000); (2) Packard and Jewett/Eastover pedestrian signal upgrades ($50,000); (3) maintenance operations including wear-out and accident damage, and support of other city projects ($250,000); (4) traffic signal rebuild at Ashley and Liberty ($65,000); (5) traffic signal rebuild at Packard and Pine Valley ($65,000). The materials are being paid for from the street fund.

10:06 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted to approve the purchase of traffic signal materials.

10:06 p.m. On-call engineering services: Stantec Consulting Michigan Inc. and Hubbell, Roth & Clark (each not to exceed $100,000 per year). The council is being asked to approve on-call contracts with engineering services firms in the event that projects come up faster than city staff can design repair work for “small and medium size projects including, but not limited to, architectural design for building repair, structural engineering work for repair or construction of pedestrian bridges, retaining walls and structural building repairs, civil engineering designs for difficult or specialized utility repairs, and landscape architecture designs to augment storm water management.”

10:08 p.m. Lumm says it’s appropriate to have such arrangements in place. But she’s curious about whether it’s a new approach or if it’s something the city has always done. Public services area administrator Craig Hupy says that it’s been a common practice. The approach is to facilitate a quick turn-around time, he says.

10:08 p.m. Outcome: The council voted to approve the contracts for on-call engineering services work.

10:08 p.m. Landfill monitoring: Tetra Tech Inc. ($178,596). The council is being asked to approve an amendment to the contract with Tetra Tech Inc. (TTI) to provide additional monitoring services of the city’s now-closed landfill. The $178,596 amendment brings the total amount of the contract to $543,386. Many of the additional services the city is asking Tetra Tech to provide are associated with a plume of 1,4 dioxane and vinyl chloride contamination in Southeast Area Park, which is located northeast of the landfill at Platt and Ellsworth.

10:08 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted without discussion to approve the landfill monitoring contract with Tetra Tech.

10:09 p.m. Fire dispatching: Emergent Health Partners (fka Huron Valley Ambulance) ($215,750). The council is being asked to approve a contract for fire dispatching services – as calls for fire emergencies are not handled by the sheriff’s office like other emergency calls are. The amount of the contract is based on the number of calls in the previous year.

10:09 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted to approve the contract with Emergent Health Partners for fire dispatching.

10:09 p.m. Easements at Washtenaw & Platt (Arbor Hills Crossing). The council is being asked to approve three separate land-related items in connection with the Arbor Hills Crossing project at Platt & Washtenaw. Two of the items are easements – for a sidewalk and for bus shelters and bus pullouts. The other item is the dedication of additional public right-of-way, so that Platt Road can be widened at that intersection. Here’s how construction looked yesterday from the intersection of Platt & Washtenaw:

Platt & Washtenaw looking east down Washtenaw on July 14, 2013.

The council had approved the site plan for Arbor Hills Crossing at its Nov. 21, 2011 meeting.

Drawing showing the location of the planned sidewalk along Platt Road for which the city council is being asked to accept an easement.

10:11 p.m. Outcome: The council voted unanimously without discussion to approve all the items associated with Arbor Hills Crossing.

10:11 p.m. Appointments & nominations. The council is being asked to confirm the re-appointment of Russ Collins to the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority board. By custom, the addresses for appointees are included in the council’s information packet. Collins, who’s executive director of the Michigan Theater, lives on Hollywood Street.

Also up for confirmation of nominations made at the council’s July 1 meeting are Jane Immonen, John Bassett, and Patrick Ion to the Elizabeth Dean Trust Fund committee, Geoffrey Mayers and Kevin Busch to the housing board of appeals, and Heather Lewis to the zoning board of appeals.

10:11 p.m. Being nominated tonight are Sue Perry to the Elizabeth Dean Trust Fund committee and Evan Nichols to the zoning board of appeals. Richard Beedon is being nominated for re-appointment to the board of the local development finance authority (LDFA). Terms on the LDFA are four years, so Beedon’s term extends to within one year of the end of the LDFA’s planned 15-year life in FY 2018.

10:12 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted without discussion to confirm all the nominations.

10:13 p.m. Council communications. Warpehoski reports on a meeting about fracking and says that he’ll be bringing a proposal to the environmental commission, on which he serves. Hieftje suggests that Warpehoski work with Pittsfield Township.

10:14 p.m. Communications from the city attorney. City attorney Stephen Postema says that the three easements on the agenda tonight took a lot of work.

10:15 p.m. Public commentary. There’s no requirement to sign up in advance for this slot for public commentary.

10:19 p.m. Thomas Partridge rises to speak for responsibility and integrity as an advocate for those residents of the city and state who are most vulnerable. Seth Best, advocate for Pizza in the Park, thanks the council for the time and for the resolution the council had passed on a fee waiver at Liberty Plaza. On behalf of the homeless population, he invites councilmembers to Pizza in the Park this Friday, which will be held in West Park.

10:19 p.m. Adjournment. We are now adjourned. That’s all from the hard benches.

A sign on the door to the Ann Arbor city council chambers gives instructions for post-meeting clean-up.

The Chronicle survives in part through regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the Ann Arbor city council. 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.