The May 6, 2014 tax proposal received clear majority support overall (70.6%) in all jurisdictions: Ann Arbor (71.4%); the city of Ypsilanti (83.4%); and Ypsilanti Township (61.6%).

Overall, the proposal from the AAATA received 70.6% votes in favor. That percentage reflects 13,949 votes in favor and 5,783 against.

The new tax, which can be levied for five years before it again needs approval by voters, is supposed to fund a five-year service improvement plan.

The tax received clear majority support in all jurisdictions: Ann Arbor (71.4%); the city of Ypsilanti (83.4%); and Ypsilanti Township (61.6%).

Across all jurisdictions, the turnout was 12.7% of registered voters. Turnout was helped by sunny weather with high temperatures in the low 60s. By jurisdiction, turnout varied a bit: Ann Arbor (14%); Ypsilanti (12.6%); and Ypsilanti Township (9.5%).

Including all cash reported under late-filing rules, the Partners for Transit millage campaign raised $54,427 in cash. The anti-millage campaign committee, which called itself Better Transit Now, accumulated $17,817 in resources, when $15,037 of in-kind contributions – in ad purchases – by McCullagh Creative are included.

The May 6, 2014 tax proposal received clear majority support overall (70.6%) in all jurisdictions: Ann Arbor (71.4%); the city of Ypsilanti (83.4%); and Ypsilanti Township (61.6%).

The clear majority achieved by the millage contrasts with a great deal of uncertainty among Ann Arbor elected officials about its prospects. Some council sources indicated they expected it to fail or else to just squeak by.

Along nearly any cut of the poll results, the transit tax gained a clear majority among voters. In Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti, the proposal passed in all precincts. In Ypsilanti Township, 12 out of 14 precincts gave it majority support. In the two precincts where the proposal failed, it fell short by a total of just 14 votes with a combined tally of 173 in favor and 187 against.

Among absentee voters, the millage support was not as strong as among in-person voters, but it still achieved a clear majority. Ypsilanti did not tally absentee voters separately. But across Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti Township combined, the in-person majority was 72.2% compared to 60.1% for absentee voters. In Ann Arbor, the in-person majority was 73.2% compared to 62.25% for absentee voters. The millage failed to achieve a majority among absentee voters in just one precinct two precincts in Ann Arbor (Ward 2, Precinct 9 and Ward 1, Precinct 3) – where the tallies were 43 in favor to 45 against and 1 in favor and 3 against, respectively. In Ypsilanti Township, the in-person majority was 65.8% compared to 57.4% in absentee.

The first element of the five-year service plan will be implemented in August 2014: extension of the end time for weekday fixed-route service on most of AAATA’s routes. Most routes would be extended from 10:30 p.m. to 11:30 p.m. The second element of the plan is later evening service on weekends. Service currently ends between 6 p.m. and 7 p.m. on most routes on Saturday, so starting in August 2014, Saturday service would be extended about an hour on all routes in the first year. And then in August 2015, service would be extended essentially on all routes to between 10 p.m. and 11 p.m. on Saturdays.

Also included in the five-year service plan will be: greater frequency on some routes, additional routes, as well as new route configurations for some areas. Some of the improvements will need to wait 18 months, because the new buses they require will take up to 18 months to be delivered after they are ordered.

The board of the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority had voted at its Jan. 16, 2014 meeting to adopt the five-year service plan the millage. The following month, at its Feb. 20, 2014 meeting, the board voted to place the measure on the May 6 ballot.

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

It’s a Chronicle tradition to spend Election Day on two-wheeled transportation – a bicycle and a scooter – visiting as many precincts as possible and logging vignettes from the polls and points in between.

An Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority bus loading near Blake Transit Center.

But today’s vote – in Ann Arbor, Ypsilanti and Ypsilanti Township – includes way more geographic territory than we’re accustomed to covering.

Instead of trying to visit as many polling places as possible, we’re going to settle for visiting a couple in each jurisdiction. And to cover the distance, we’re going to tap the resources of the organization that’s putting the millage on the ballot – the AAATA fixed route bus system.

So updates today will be light on polling places and heavy on the points in between. We hope readers will help fill in the gaps by leaving comments on this article with their own vignettes from the polls.

Whatever your view on the millage, we hope you’ll mark a ballot today.

7:00 a.m. Ward 5, Precinct 2 (Bach Elementary School, 600 W. Jefferson St., Ann Arbor). We’re voters 1 and 2 here. When we point out the irony of showing a driver’s license to vote on a public transit proposal, poll workers seem to like the joke. Poll worker with American flag sweater worked this precinct at the Nov. 5, 2013 election as well.

7:15 a.m. Fleetwood Diner. Getting coffee for the road, we ask if any of the staff is planning to vote. The waitress indicates that she will, but it’s sure where her polling place is located. For anyone who needs to find out that information, it’s available on the Michigan Votes website.

7:25 a.m. Blake Transit Center. Lobby doesn’t open until 7:30 a.m. With the sun beaming down, the five-minute wait outside in 32 F degree temperature is not too bad. Across Fifth Avenue outside the Ann Arbor District Library polling location there is a Yes sign, a No sign and a sign for mayoral candidate Sally Petersen. You can’t vote for Petersen today, as the transit millage is the only question on the ballot. Wonder if any other candidates will have the same strategy for getting their names in front of voters for the August primary.

8:06 a.m. Blake Transit Center. Bus #427 departs with a total of 6 passengers. A sign gives instructions: No smoking, no eating, no drinking, no loud music. no profanity. We comply.

8:14 a.m. Packard & Stadium. An automated message, delivered by a female voice, tells us “Vote May 6. Important public transit decisions are being made. Vote May 6.”

8:20 a.m. Stone School & Packard. Former Georgetown Mall site is level dirt. Ward 4 councilmember Margie Teall asked at last night’s council meeting for a status report on the Packard Square development that’s supposed to go in there. Potholes are rattling the bus pretty good.

8:25 a.m. Ellsworth & Platt. Noticed a dead deer on the side of the road. City council action last night included a resolution directing the development of a collaborative effort to manage the deer herd.

8:30 a.m. Carpenter & Packard. Course correction. Boarded the wrong variant of Route #5 to get to Polo Fields, an Ypsi Township polling location. So we’re off the bus, and around the corner to the stop on Packard, and we’re picking up the Route #5A.

9:00 a.m. Ypsi Township Precincts 2 & 3 (Polo Fields, 2955 Packard). Poll worker small talk includes speculation that today’s high temperature will hit 62 F.

9:02 a.m. Ypsi Township Precincts 2 & 3 (Polo Fields, 2955 Packard). Poll worker tells voter: “You’re voter #30. That’s your lottery number for today!” Another man walks in the door. When directed toward the voting station, he clarifies: “Oh, I’m not here to vote – I’m looking for the restroom.”

9:20 a.m. Ypsi Township Precincts 2 & 3 (Polo Fields, 2955 Packard). Scott Martin, an Ypsilanti Township trustee, comes in to vote. He chats with poll workers and thanks them for their service. Though it’s by no means busy, a consistent flow of voters are passing through – 43 people so far.

9:50 a.m. Packard & Rice. Picking up the bus again, heading to Precinct 1. There’s no sidewalk on the south side of Packard along this stretch – but lots of dandelions.

10:05 a.m. Ypsi Township Precinct 1 (Free Methodist Church, 1800 Packard). Only 14 voters so far. The election chair thinks they’ll be lucky to get 10% turnout.

10:14 a.m. Ypsi Township Precinct 1 (Free Methodist Church, 1800 Packard). A voter arrives using AAATA’s A-Ride service. “It’s a party of one!” she jokes. She expresses surprise that there’s only one item on the ballot. The van driver isn’t voting here – he heads to the restroom.

10:26 a.m. Ypsi Township Precinct 1 (Free Methodist Church, 1800 Packard). A voter reminisces with poll workers about the November 2012 election, when lines were long. Poll workers recall they didn’t get out of here until 2 a.m. Apparently someone who’d been given a ballot got tired of waiting in line, and left – taking that ballot with him. It took a while to figure out what happened.

11:20 a.m. Ypsi City Ward 3, Precincts 1 & 3 (Emmanuel Lutheran Church, 201 N. River) Yes sign placed two inches in front of No sign, but not shoved as deep into the ground, leaving the stop sign graphic from the No sign visible as an odd lower panel for the Yes message.  ”Are the numbers still matching?” is the question from one precinct worker to another. “Yes,” comes the reply. So far there’ve been 88 voters. Voters are being asked for a photo ID, not a driver’s license, but driver’s license is what is produced. Basement of church has shuffleboard court marked on the tile.

Little tyke with dad is confused about what this outing is for – thinking they’re going “boating” today. “Where is the boat? Where is it? Where is it? Where is it? Where is it?”

12:19 p.m. Sidetrack Bar and Grill. Lunch is fish tacos. And it is delicious.

12:45 p.m. Ypsilanti Transit Center. Route #6 pulls out headed to Ann Arbor. Young man boards at State and Research Park Drive, asks us how to get to Arrowwood. Not sure but this bus goes to downtown Ann Arbor and from there it’s probably the #1 – if not, you can catch whatever bus it is from there. Briarwood stop fills with half dozen passengers who scramble off just before we pull out, once they realize this is headed to Ann Arbor not Ypsi.

2:10 p.m. Back in Ann Arbor. Naps could be indicated.

6:15 p.m. Ward 1, Precinct 4 (Ann Arbor Community Center, 625 N. Main St.) Poll workers report a higher-than-expected turnout – 185 voters, when they expected closer to 60. As we’re talking, a “surge” of about six voters come in. One woman is pushing a stroller, and reports that her child was excited by the Community Center’s purple bus that’s parked outside. It turns out she’s also excited by the “I Voted” sticker.

That wraps it up for us.

Election results from the Washtenaw County clerk’s office will be available on the clerk’s May 6, 2014 election results webpage.

If you’d like to collect early results from the voting machine tapes, visit your precinct just before 8 p.m. and wait respectfully out of the way of the poll workers – the same people who opened the polls 13 hours before. It would be welcome if you logged the yes/no total in a comment on this article. We’ll compile them in a shared spreadsheet that everyone can view: [shared Google Spreadsheet].

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

(AAATA is not the name of an actual prescription drug.)

The transit taxes currently collected in Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti are levied by the cities, and passed through to the AAATA.

This would be the first tax ever levied by the AAATA itself. The additional revenue is supposed to pay for a range of service improvements, including extended hours of operation on weekdays, additional service on weekends, and greater frequency of operation.

My guess is most people by now have made up their minds about the May 6 ballot referendum.

My purpose here is not to review the arguments pro and con and to weigh that balance in some sort of calculus that points to an unavoidable conclusion that the only possible rational vote is yes.

If you’re on the fence, though, this column is meant to give you a reason to vote yes. Any number of reasons might be given to vote yes, and surely there are also credible reasons for voting no.

But I am going to vote yes. And I’m going to tell you one of many reasons why.

If you don’t have the patience to wade through a bunch of words to find out that reason, here’s a one-sentence summary: I have noticed that my once-reliable body is getting old and creaky.

Background

For Ann Arbor taxpayers, the 0.7 mill tax will translate into a total transportation tax of about 2.7 mills – after the city’s own roughly 2 mill charter millage is added in. (Many people have forgotten that Ann Arbor’s charter transportation millage is actually 2.5 mills, but has been reduced over the years to just over 2 mills by the Headlee Amendment.)

My house has a taxable value of $97,010 – which means that I’m currently paying about $194 a year in transportation taxes. The 0.7 mill tax would mean an additional $68 for me, or a total transportation tax burden of $262. For the five-year period of the millage, I’ll pay something like $1,300.

The existing charter millage is perpetual, which means that it’s not subject to regular voter approval like this new five-year millage would be. If the millage is approved, the AAATA would need to ask voters for approval again after five years.

In five years, I’ll be 54 years old. That’s pretty damn old. But that’s still 11 years away from eligibility for the AAATA’s Good as Gold senior ride program, which allows seniors (age 65 and up) to ride the regular fixed-route buses without paying a fare to board. If I were an Ann Arbor senior making just two round trips a week by bus, that would work out to $0.26 $2.60 per round trip (my $262 tax burden divided by 100 trips).

That strikes me as a bargain. If I were 65, I would fill out the application form right now.

But critics of the AAATA’s route system will sometimes contend that the routes don’t go where they need to go, or that the trip into downtown to make a transfer makes the journey too long – so making that trip cost-free doesn’t help much. There’s some merit to that criticism. No doubt it is a challenge to get from Point A to Point B using fixed-route bus service for many As and Bs in Ann Arbor.

Shared-Ride Taxi Service: Compared to Standard Cab

But here’s an under-appreciated fact about the Good as Gold program: It allows seniors to call and order same-day shared-ride taxi service – for $4 one-way and $4 for the return trip.  Think about that for just a second: If you’re a senior in Ann Arbor, you can make a phone call and get door-to-door transportation service – to your destination and back – for just $8. If you can plan things out a day in advance, you can save $1 for each leg of the trip for a total cost of $6.

It’s fair to point out that the Good as Gold service is different from a standard cab for hire: Your ride will often be shared with others; the vehicle cannot wait for you while you make a stop; and the assistance that the driver can provide is limited.

How does Good as Gold compare to calling a standard cab? Let’s consider an actual trip. Let’s say I wanted to travel from my house on the Old West Side to the University of Michigan School of Public Policy to attend a mayoral candidate forum.

At the maximum rate set by the city of Ann Arbor, which many taxi companies charge, that would be $3 to get in and $2.50 a mile, or $3 + $3.25 (for 1.3 miles) = $6.25. If I don’t want to pay for the waiting time  – and I don’t, because it would be $24 per hour – that works out to $13 round trip. Compared to the $6 a senior could pay in the Good as Gold program (reserving one day in advance) that’s a $7 savings.

Shared-Ride Taxi Service: Compared to Car Ownership

But that’s a $7 savings compared to a cab ride, not compared to a personal car, the preferred mode of many seniors. So let’s assume a roughly $9,100 average cost to own and operate a car for 15,000 miles – a number that comes from the U.S. Dept. of Transportation for 2012.

How much would it cost annually to take one round trip a day under the Good as Gold program – assuming none of those trips were planned a day in advance? It works out to $2,920 ($8 times 365 ) + $262 (my tax burden) =  $3,182 a year. Otherwise put, the cost of taking those trips with the AAATA’s Good as Gold program is about one-third the cost of owning and operating an automobile.

Perhaps that’s an unfair comparison for senior couples, whose $9,100 annual cost of owning and operating a car covers both of their trips. But even if we double the cost under Good as Gold – to account for the trips of each member of the couple – that’s still just two-thirds the amount it takes to own and operate a car.

What More Could You Want?

The 0.7 mill tax is supposed to pay for a five-year transportation improvement plan. But the Good as Gold program exists now. Does the senior shared-ride taxi service get any better if the millage is approved?  Yes.

The hours of operation for the shared-ride taxi service run parallel to the hours of operation for fixed-route service. So in every instance where the five-year improvement plan indicates hours of service being extended later into the evenings or on weekends, the shared-taxi service runs later into the evenings or on weekends. Wherever there is additional geographic area added in the service improvement plan, the shared-taxi service will follow.

But I Am Not a Senior

Readers who know me, or perhaps just know of me, might wonder why I am championing the cause of senior public transportation riders – and not just because I am not a senior. Some readers might know that I routinely haul loads upwards of 100 pounds on my bicycle cargo tailer, so I do not seem to suffer from mobility issues.

But every once in a while, life gives you a sneak preview of what it might be like to be older and less dynamic. Over the weekend three weeks ago, my lower back seized up into an angry block of tissue. I could not sit, stand or even roll over in bed without hitting a 10 on the pain scale. After 12 hours of pain-med therapy at the University of Michigan hospital’s observation unit, I was able to stand up and walk. But I still had to plan out every movement, slow and steady.

On my calendar that week was the first mayoral candidate forum – held at the University of Michigan Ford School of Public Policy. I was feeling feeble and unsteady, so walking and bicycling weren’t an option. So I took the bus – the #12 down Liberty to Blake Transit Center downtown. It turned out that I had narrowly missed the #6 bus connection I needed to continue to the Ford School.

Waiting the half hour for the next #6 bus wasn’t the end of the world – because I’d allowed some time for unplanned mishap and mayhem. I waited sitting on a bench outside on Fourth Avenue, soaking up the warmth of a sunny spring day. Eventually the #6 rolled up, I boarded, and I arrived on time for the mayoral forum.

The AAATA got me where I needed to go that day – but so what? What difference would the proposed 0.7 mill tax have made for that trip? The answer: 15 minutes. The proposed service improvements for Route #6 – to be paid for with the additional tax – include service every 15 minutes, not just every half hour. So for that specific trip, I would have reduced my waiting time by 15 minutes. A 15-minute difference can be important, especially if you have to make that trip every day – because not every day is sunny and warm.

Conclusion

Sunny warm days in Ann Arbor turn to gray, icy wind soon enough. And even though I am young and strong now, I will be older and decrepit soon enough. So I’m voting yes, for older people now – and for my future, decrepit self.

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

Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority board member Eric Mahler was discussing the potential for disparate impacts on different populations as a result of service changes. (Photos by the writer.)

The issue of the May 6 millage vote came up during public commentary. In addition, CEO Michael Ford delivered some prepared remarks meant to dispel what he called myths about the AAATA that are being promoted by opponents of that millage. [.pdf of press release from opposition campaign]

One myth is that the AAATA is inefficient, Ford said, when in fact the AAATA has 17% lower cost per passenger and has 18% fewer employees per passenger than its peers. Another myth, Ford said, is that the AAATA has 52 managers. “It’s just simply not true,” he said. Ford explained that the AAATA has 52 employees who are non-union – 11 of whom are managers. That includes administrative assistants, IT staff, customer service, human resources, safety and security personnel, dispatchers and others, Ford said.

The assertion that the AAATA will use millage revenue to fund a train service is untrue as well, Ford continued. The AAATA had intentionally not put rail service in the ballot language. AAATA has been acknowledged in USA Today, by CNN, and by independent transportation associations as one of the nation’s best-in-class in terms of ridership, operational efficiency, fiscal stability, and technological innovation, Ford said. And that’s why he was hopeful that voters in Ann Arbor, Ypsilanti and Ypsilanti Township would say yes when they go to the polls on May 6.

The concrete work contract was awarded to Saladino Construction, for a one-year period and the possibility of four one-year renewals. Board members subjected the item to a relatively lengthy discussion as far as AAATA board discussions go – as they had questions about the amount of future work there would be, how workmanship is verified, and how pedestrian flow at bus stops is maintained during the work period.

Also given a fair amount of discussion was the policy on service equity required under Title VI. Board members had several questions, including one about the action that is required if a disparate impact on low-income riders is found as a result of a fare increase. AAATA staff stressed that there is not currently a fare increase on the table.

Small Concrete Work Contract

The board considered a one-year contract with Saladino Construction for small concrete jobs. The contract, which has the option to be extended for four additional one-year periods, will cover work for access walks, shelter and bench pads, sidewalk extensions, curb extensions and bus pullouts.

The one-year contract is expected to be worth about $54,000 a year, which is under the $100,000 threshold requiring board approval. But because the board was approving potentially a five-year period, with the value of the work expected to exceed $100,000, the contract required board approval.

Saladino was selected from four bidders for the work. Even though 445 vendors were sent notice of the RFP, only four bids were received: Audia Concrete Construction of Milford; Hartwell Cement of Oak Park; Luigi Ferdinandi and Son Cement of Roseville; and Saladino Construction of Ann Arbor Township. The AAATA staff analysis indicated that small concrete jobs at multiple locations are not attractive to many contractors.

Small Concrete Work Contract: Board Discussion

Reporting out from the performance monitoring and external relations committee, Roger Kerson said the committee had discussed one agenda item – the contract for small concrete jobs. Saladino had been chosen, he noted. It was not the low bid, but had the best combination of cost and performance. Saladino has done work for the Washtenaw County Road Commission, the city of Ann Arbor, the city of Ypsilanti, he said. Kerson called the company very well-qualified with good references.

Kerson characterized the small concrete jobs as basically fixing the bus stops – the sidewalk approaches and the ramps around the stops. The estimate is for $54,000 per year, with a potential renewal up to five years, Kerson said. The committee had given that contract a thumbs up, Kerson concluded.

When the board reached that item on the agenda, Larry Krieg had a question about what the cost figure had been given as an “estimate.” Is that the amount that is budgeted or is that a cap on expenditures? If it turns out that all of the bus stops need to be redone, and it costs twice as much, what would happen?

Chris White, AAATA manager of service development, noted that the request for proposals included unit costs – for linear feet of concrete and for square feet of concrete. In order to compare proposals, AAATA had included an estimated amount of work that would need to be done based on past history. The amounts are not budgeted as part of the operating budget. That’s because grant funding pays for this type of project – as part of the capital and categorical grant program, White explained. AAATA knows roughly how much work there will be in a given year, but it can vary little bit. If a curb needs to be extended to make the bus stop accessible, then that may cost a little bit more, he explained. The estimate is based on previous experience, he reiterated.

AAATA board member Gillian Ream Gainsley.

Gillian Ream Gainsley noted that there was more damage to the roads because of the severe winter. Was there a similar impact on bus stops? Would the AAATA have a greater need for concrete repair at bus stops this year? White described the work covered by this contract as not really repair work. He described it as mostly new work: new shelter pads, and new access sidewalks.

Board chair Charles Griffith indicated that he hoped this cost figure would need to be reevaluated, if the transit millage passes. That’s because the AAATA will have more stops that need to be serviced.

White noted that the AAATA already has agreements for two new shelters on the proposed new Route M – a route that would start operation in August 2014 if the millage is approved. So the AAATA is already doing that kind of preparatory work, he said. The performance monitoring and external relations committee would be receiving the bus stop work plan at its next meeting, White said.

Sue Gott wanted to know what the typical warranty is for work performed under the contracts. She wanted to know who inspects the workmanship when it’s done: Is inspection done by staff within the AAATA’s organization? She was also curious to know how pedestrian circulation is ensured through areas where work on a sidewalk is being done.

On the question of workmanship, White explained that city inspectors are used for jobs that are done inside the city of Ann Arbor or Ypsilanti. Washtenaw County Road Commission inspectors are used for jobs in the townships. That kind of expertise doesn’t exist on staff at the AAATA, he said.

About work zones, White said that one of the reasons Saladino was chosen is that the company has done this kind of work in all the jurisdictions – so they know what is required as far as work zone safety. That includes directing people at the beginning of the block where they need to cross the street and that type of thing, White said. The bus stop coordinator, Jeff Murphy, oversees that element of the work, he said. CEO Michael Ford indicated that information about warranty of the work could be provided as a follow-up.

Eli Cooper stated that he would be supporting the resolution. Although it’s a small amount and the word “small” is in the resolution, he noted, this is a really large improvement for customers. It’s “moving that bus stop out of the proverbial mud puddle,” he explained. It appears to be “small concrete,” but as you consider access to the system, it’s important for people who have mobility challenges, as well as for able-bodied people. Even on a sunny day, if there is difficult terrain to overcome, that’s challenging, he said. Cooper asked staff to continue to review the amount of work – not just based on prior experience, but based on what true needs are, so that the AAATA is doing an appropriate amount of large improvements that need little amounts of resources.

Griffith asked how someone goes about asking for a bench to be installed on a bus stop near one’s own property: “How much money would it cost me if I wanted to take up a collection for it?” White indicated that it would probably cost nothing, pointing out that what the AAATA needs assistance with is maintenance.

If the AAATA can get an agreement from a property owner to do snow removal and maybe empty trash, the AAATA would work on installing a bench. Typically the AAATA prioritizes benches and access improvements at higher-volume bus stops. But the AAATA would bend that policy if there are willing policy partners to help, he said. Jeff Murphy has been active in soliciting adopt-a-stop agreements from adjacent property owners, White said. Many of those property owners are commercial property owners, but some homeowners are also interested enough that they’ve agreed to clear the snow if an access walk is put in.

Cooper noted that the installation of that kind of feature in the public right-of-way should follow city rules. There’s a right-of-way encroachment permit and sidewalk occupancy permits. There are review processes and fees associated with that, Cooper said. If a private property owner wants to install a feature on public property, that would then potentially be reviewed by the city’s planning department.

Cooper appreciated – from the standpoint of transit operations – that it would count as a benefit, but he wanted to make sure that any amenity was put in an appropriate place, in an appropriate manner, and that it be properly reviewed prior to its installation. White noted that the concrete contractor is responsible for obtaining the relevant city permits.

Outcome: The board unanimously approved the contract for small concrete jobs with Saladino.

Title VI Policy

On the board’s agenda was a policy on service equity analysis, which is required as part of the authority’s Title VI compliance. Title VI is the civil rights legislation that, in the context of public transportation, requires proof that a service change has no adverse effect on disadvantaged populations. [.pdf of Title VI policy included in April 17, 2014 AAATA board packet]

The policy on equity analysis comes in the context of a 5-year service improvement plan the AAATA hopes to implement if voters approve a millage request on May 6, 2014. The AAATA is required to have such a policy as one element in a Title VI program submitted to the Federal Transit Administration by October 2014.

The policy includes a method of analyzing disparate impacts on different populations for various changes in service, including: fare increases, decreases in frequency of service, decreases in span of service, and reduction in days of service.

Title VI Policy: Public Commentary

During public commentary at the start of the meeting, Jim Mogensen addressed the board on the topic of the Title VI policy. Mogensen noted that he had just had orthopedic surgery, so he had not been able to comment on the draft policy as early as he wanted to. There were some technical issues, which he had already talked to Chris White about, that he felt should eventually be considered. The first related to some technical issues associated with census data.

Jim Mogensen.

The second point related to the analysis of differential fares. He noted that low-income people who have applied to the AAATA are offered reduced fares – half the cash fare for the general population. That could impact how the analysis is done, Mogensen said. He described a scenario where the basic fare went up to $2 [from its current rate of $1.50], so a half fare would be one dollar. But the effect might not show up if the fare that the University of Michigan pays on behalf of its affiliates – which is $1 – did not go up.

Later in the meeting, AAATA manager of service development Chris White acknowledged Mogensen’s point, saying that fares for UM affiliates are paid by the university – so if UM fares do not go up in connection with a general fare increase, that would certainly make a difference in the impact of a fare increase on low-income people.

Mogensen also ventured that there could be differential impacts on neighborhoods, depending on the service level – which makes a difference when you have what are called “minority routes.” When a route is very long, like Route #6, it might not qualify as a minority route because it is so long, but there is a minority neighborhood on that route that would be impacted. So that kind of situation should also be incorporated into the policy, Mogensen suggested. He described the policy that was on the board’s agenda as “almost there, but not quite.”

Thomas Partridge addressed the board during both opportunities for public commentary. Aside from the Title VI policy, Partridge said, the AAATA needs to analyze the impact of changes that have yet to be made and yet to be proposed – that would ameliorate, if not wipe out discrimination in ride services for the most disadvantaged members of our community. Discrimination still persists, Partridge contended, in terms of ride scheduling and the type of vehicles and drivers who come to pick up people for the senior ride and paratransit program – the A-Ride program.

Partridge was concerned that with all the discussion about the technical aspects of Title VI policy guidelines, it did not touch on the substantial needs of senior citizens and disabled persons. He called for policies that would preclude discrimination in transportation for seniors and disabled persons in the current senior ride program. Current forms of discrimination exist that are particularly odious and particularly harmful to senior citizens and disabled persons, Partridge said, because of lack of adequate funding for vehicles on the road to service A-Ride. There are vehicles that should never be on the road and drivers who are ill-trained to serve handicapped people and senior citizens, he said. Partridge called for a review of the vehicles offered by the AAATA and the SelectRide company for A-Ride service.

Title VI Policy: Board Discussion

Sue Gott reported out from the planning and development committee that the group had spent quite a bit of time on the Title VI policy. The committee had spent a lot of time going back and forth with staff on the policy, she said. She thanked AAATA staff, and Chris White specifically, for the time and effort he had spent listening to a number of concerns and questions. White had also gone back and coordinated with the regional civil rights officer to identify opportunities for some improvements and on clarity in the language. White had also consulted with the AAATA’s legal counsel.

AAATA board member Sue Gott.

When the board reached the item on its agenda, Gillian Ream Gainsley also noted that the planning and development committee spent a lot of time going back and forth with staff on the policy. She really appreciated the time and effort that Chris White had put into it. She felt that White had been put in a challenging position and had really stepped up to the plate – because the federal requirements in Title VI don’t give you a lot of guidance about how to approach enforcement of the rule, she said.

So she felt that the AAATA was pioneering something in terms of determining exactly how they want to define disparate impact. She did not feel that the policy was going to be set in stone, saying that she felt the policy would a living document. The AAATA would continue to improve on the policy over time, she felt. But she called it an incredibly good start and appreciated that the AAATA was willing to go above and beyond what was required of it. She would be supporting the policy, she said.

Eric Mahler echoed Ream Gainsley’s remarks and appreciated the amount of work that Chris White, as well as the rest of the staff, had done. Mahler had a couple of questions about the policy and the methodology for measuring disproportionate burden in connection with fare increases.

For minority populations, the policy’s definition of disproportionate burden is: If a minority population bears a 5% greater burden from a fare increase than a non-minority population. The policy’s definition of disproportionate burden for the low-income population is: If low-income riders will bear a 10% greater burden from a fare increase. Mahler noted that the fare for low-income persons is half the full cash fare for the general population. And that is a justification for finding a disproportionate burden only if the low-income population would bear 10% more of the burden – as opposed to the 5% threshold used for minority ridership.

Back and forth between Mahler and White ensued on the topic of the interplay between the impact of a fare increase on low-income riders and the fact that the fares for low-income riders are by policy already supposed to be half the full cash fare.

White noted in the course of that back-and-forth that the AAATA has had a half fare for low-income riders for a long time, venturing that the AAATA was fairly unique in having such a program. White added that there’s a choice to make when the fare is an odd number. When the fare was $0.75, the AAATA had a choice to make – between a half fare of $0.35 or $0.40. The board chose at that time to make it $0.35. If the board had chosen to make the low-income fare $0.40, that might have made a difference in the calculation of disproportionate burden.

White stressed at several points that the AAATA is not contemplating a fare increase at this time. The Title VI policy is being put in place to deal with any future situation. For a fare increase, the analysis of disproportionate burden is a little more straightforward than with a service increase, White said – because an actual calculation can be done. The intention is that a chart would be prepared that shows all the fare categories. Because the AAATA collects information on the fare for every rider who boards, the AAATA can compare any proposal for a fare increase and see what additional burden would be carried by low-income persons.

If a disproportionate burden were found, White said, the AAATA would have to go back and revise the fare increase to get rid of that disproportionate burden, or would have to demonstrate that the purposes that the AAATA was trying to achieve were legitimate, and this was the only way to do it. That would be a tough case to make, White felt.

Mahler asked what would happen if the disproportionate burden for low-income riders was only 9% more than for other riders. White replied: “It would be up to the board of directors.” Once the board has the information that shows the effect of the impact, the board would need to make a decision. Board chair Charles Griffith noted that ultimately the board has the final say: If there is some disproportionate impact – even if that disproportionate impact does not exceed the threshold defined in the policy – the board could still decide that it’s more disproportionate impact than the board was comfortable with.

Mahler came back to the policy language that specifies what is to be done if a disparate impact is found. The first step is to “review the objectives of the proposed change to determine if the evidence supports the legitimacy of the objectives.” Mahler was not sure what that meant. What evidence are you looking for? If there’s some evidence out there that could actually trump the disproportionate burden or the disparate impact, are we going to use that? Mahler asked. White replied: “That’s an interesting question to answer.”

The regional civil rights officer had reviewed the AAATA’s draft policy and came back with couple of comments, basically saying that the policy looked pretty good to her, White reported. But she made a very specific comment about wanting that specific language, which Mahler had asked about, inserted in the policy. White allowed that it was not entirely clear to him exactly what the language means. A lot of times a service change is meant to achieve multiple objectives, where some people are impacted negatively a small amount – but other people are impacted positively a large amount, and you have to weigh that without a numerical basis.

Mahler said that the only thing he could think of was if there were some segment of the population that was not being served at all, and that for some reason the AAATA decided there’s some compelling, overwhelming interest in serving the neglected population now and service needed to be extended to that geographic area – that might trump the disproportionate burden threshold.

White noted that they’re dealing with civil rights legislation, so it’s about equal treatment, not about a right to service. White ventured that the federal guidelines themselves were misguided in the following sense: The AAATA does analysis of proposed service changes and fare changes before they are ever made as a proposal. This kind of analysis is part of what the AAATA does initially. So if there is a disproportionate or disparate impact, the AAATA would revise its approach – before ever putting a proposal forward. If the AAATA were ever to propose service changes that had disparate impact, the AAATA would likely already have its arguments in place to defend those changes. In most cases, White felt, the analysis done after the proposal was made would show that the change did not have a disparate impact.

AATA board member Roger Kerson.

Roger Kerson noted that although the AAATA is not contemplating fare increases at this time, it certainly is proposing service changes and has made service changes recently. The major service increases that have been done recently involved Route #4 and Route #5, he said. He did not know if the disproportionate impact analysis had been done for those changes, but ventured that for those routes you’d find the opposite of a disparate impact – in terms of low-income and minority populations.

White told Kerson that the AAATA has the analysis for both of those route service changes and it was provided to the board ahead of time. The difference in the new regulations is that the AAATA had to define a threshold for disparate impact and disproportionate burden. The actual analysis has been done for many years, he said.

White explained that there is a definition of “minority route” and a “low-income route.” When you make a service change on the whole route, that’s the level of analysis you use. But if you’re doing a change on less than a whole route, the fact that it’s a minority route or a non-minority route doesn’t enter into the analysis, White said. The analysis is done on the area that is being affected and the population of that area – not the route as a whole, White explained.

Larry Krieg reiterated the board’s thanks to Chris White for undertaking the analysis. He called it an immensely complex and puzzling thing to work on.

Charles Griffith also appreciated the work that had been done and thanked the committee. He echoed the sentiments of Ream Gainsley, saying that the policy is a step forward: “Let’s think of it as a living document,” he said.

Outcome: The board unanimously to approve the new Title VI policy.

Title VI Policy: More Public Commentary

During public commentary at the conclusion of the meeting, Jim Mogensen said he would continue to work with Chris White on the Title VI policy. Some of the mysterious language is related to case law, he ventured. That’s why they are so specific about specific phrases. That’s sometimes the case with a 50-year-old law, he noted. Mogensen observed that there are people who think there should not be a Civil Rights Act and that people should be allowed to do what they want to do.

May 6 Millage Vote

The board had no formal business related to the upcoming May 6, 2014 vote on a proposed 0.7 mill tax – to be decided by voters in Ann Arbor, Ypsilanti and Ypsilanti Township. But the millage vote was touched on during the meeting. The board voted at its Feb. 20, 2014 meeting to place the millage on the ballot.

The proceeds of the millage are to pay for a set of service improvements over a period of five years. Those improvements include increased frequency during peak hours, extended service in the evenings, and additional service on weekends. Some looped routes are being replaced with out-and-back type route configurations. The plan does not include operation of rail-based services.

The AAATA has calculated that the improvements in service add up to 90,000 additional service hours per year, compared to the current service levels, which is a 44% increase.

May 6 Millage Vote: Michael Ford’s Remarks

CEO Michael Ford eschewed his typical wide-ranging report of activities for the previous month in favor of some remarks focused on the upcoming May 6 millage vote. Ford reviewed how the AAATA was asking Ann Arbor, Ypsilanti, and Ypsilanti Township voters to approve a millage of 0.7 mills for five years on Tuesday, May 6.

At the April 16, 2014 mayoral candidate forum, Ward 2 councilmember Sally Petersen said she was still on the fence about the May 6 millage. The other three candidates for Ann Arbor mayor – Sabra Briere, Christopher Taylor and Stephen Kunselman – have all endorsed it.

The AAATA’s five-year plan is based on overwhelming demand from local residents, businesses and elected officials, Ford said. The millage will help fund transit improvements that will better serve the community, provide 44% more service, and help spur economic activity in the greater Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti area.

For the average household, Ford continued, this millage amounts to less than the cost of a cup of coffee per week: “We think that’s a good value considering the additional 90,000 hours of service it will provide annually.” The response from the community to the AAATA’s proposal has been overwhelmingly been positive, Ford said.

Civic leaders and organizations that often disagree have united to endorse the goals of the AAATA five-year public transportation improvement plan, Ford said. He then ticked through several organizations and individuals who have endorsed the millage. [.pdf of extracted pages from board packet with a list of endorsers]

Ford noted that endorsers included three of the four candidates for Ann Arbor mayor.

By way of background, the candidate who has not yet endorsed the millage is Sally Petersen. At a candidate forum held on April 16, 2014, she stated:

I am leaning towards supporting it right now, but I am a little bit still on the fence. The reason why I would support the millage for the expansion of the five-year plan is because I do believe in the first place that urban core and making the connection between [Ann Arbor, Ypsilanti and Ypsilanti Township] easier and expanding those routes so we have fewer cars on the streets is better for the road, better for the environment and it leaves more parking spaces for Ann Arbor downtown. I also think we need a robust transportation system, for those who can’t drive, those who are elderly or have disabilities and I think we need to expand services for that. But I live in a ward where there is quite a bit of opposition to the transit millage and on April 29th, councilmember [Jane] Lumm and I are hosting a Ward 2 meeting … I want to hear from opposition and how TheRide leadership is going to answer some questions before I endorse.

Ford continued by saying there’s a recognition that Washtenaw County urban core communities will benefit from more routes and longer hours of service. Echoing the pro-millage campaign slogan, Ford said “more buses, more places, more often” will help retain talent, jobs and businesses, helping to ensure that the local economy remains vibrant.

But Ford allowed there has been some criticism of the millage proposal. He called it unfortunate that some people have chosen to misinterpret data about public transportation or mislead people into thinking that the public does not want to invest in public transportation. Nothing could be further from the truth, Ford contended.

Ford then addressed some of the specific claims that opponents of the millage have made: “I would like to address some of the myths.” One myth is that the AAATA is inefficient, Ford said, when in fact the AAATA has 17% lower cost per passenger and has 18% fewer employees per passenger than its peers. Another myth, Ford said, is that the AAATA has 52 managers. “It’s just simply not true,” he said. Ford explained that the AAATA has 52 employees who are non-union – 11 of whom are managers, he said. That includes administrative assistants, IT staff, customer service, human resources, safety and security personnel, dispatchers and others, Ford said.

The assertion that the AAATA will use millage revenue to fund a train service is untrue as well, Ford continued. The AAATA had intentionally not put rail service in the ballot language.

AAATA has been acknowledged in USA Today, by CNN, and by independent transportation associations as one of the nation’s best-in-class in terms of ridership, operational efficiency, fiscal stability, and technological innovation, Ford said. And that’s why he was hopeful that voters in Ann Arbor, Ypsilanti and Ypsilanti Township would say yes when they go to the polls on May 6.

May 6 Millage Vote: Public Commentary

During public commentary at the start of the meeting, Thomas Partridge introduced himself as a previous candidate for the Michigan state legislature. He called on everyone involved, including the public, to put forward all the positive reasons for voting on May 6 to support the transit millage. Passing the millage would be a positive step toward accomplishing what still needs to be done to develop true countywide transportation. That goal, Partridge said, requires the leadership of the city of Ann Arbor, the city of Ypsilanti, and Ypsilanti Township. Passing the millage and the expanded service will reduce the amount of traffic on our roads and the amount of rush hour traffic, he contended. It would spur economic development, he continued, and would have a positive impact on the need for affordable transportation for disabled people and senior citizens.

Partridge also addressed the board at the conclusion of the meeting during public commentary. He noted that Easter weekend was coming up and this time of year was of significance to most of the major religions of the world. Partridge said we should ask what Christ would advise on the vote to take steps to encompass the city of Ann Arbor, city of Ypsilanti, Ypsilanti Township into an area-wide transportation authority. Better transit would ameliorate the effects of climate change and air and water pollution, he said.

Lloyd Shelton spoke representing those with disabilities in Washtenaw County, saying that he’s also part of the Ann Arbor Center for Independent Living. The Ann Arbor CIL and people with disabilities across Washtenaw County stand firmly in support of this millage, he said. Shelton encouraged everyone to move forward on May 6 and to pass the millage.

Calisa Reid told the board that she’s a person with a disability, and she also lives in a rural area. As she was listening to the discussion of service changes, she hoped for service to the rural parts of Washtenaw County. She lives in Augusta Township and she ventured it would be hard to get a millage passed there. She suggested that maybe two times a month a shuttle could pick up people in rural areas of Washtenaw County so they can pay their bills or go grocery shopping. That might be a stopgap measure that could be implemented before more substantial changes come, she suggested.

Communications, Committees, CEO, Commentary

At its April 17 meeting, the AAATA board entertained various communications, including its usual reports from the performance monitoring and external relations committee, the planning and development committee, as well as from CEO Michael Ford. The board also heard commentary from the public. Here are some highlights.

Comm/Comm: Retreat, Work Plan

Reporting out from the planning and development committee, Sue Gott said the committee had spent a lot of time talking about the first draft of a work plan for 2015. She reminded board members that in order for the board to approve the budget for next year, the board first needs to review and approve a work plan – as a basis for putting the budget together.

In discussing the work plan, the committee had gone back and forth on a discussion about the retreat. Last year, she noted, the board had a quite extensive discussion about the work plan at its retreat. One of the questions on the table at the planning and development committee meeting was whether the board should spend as much time at this year’s retreat focusing on the work plan or perhaps keep the discussion of the work plan at a higher level – in order to allow other topics to receive greater time and priority at the retreat.

The outcome of that discussion was a bit of a hybrid, Gott said, in that the committee still wanted to have a review of the work plan at the committee and make it available at the retreat. But they wanted to use the time at the retreat to talk a little bit about the AAATA’s current and future roles and relationships, including what the AAATA’s place is within the region. To allow that topic to go wherever it needs to go during the retreat, the committee wanted flexibility in the retreat agenda, so that topic of future roles and relationships could be explored deeply.

Comm/Comm: Blake Transit Center

Reporting out from the performance monitoring and external relations committee, Roger Kerson noted that the committee had met in the meeting room at the newly constructed Blake Transit Center, which is now open. About the BTC, Kerson reported that people are liking it. The final outside work was described as needing another 6 to 8 weeks of work, after the frost laws are lifted.

Comm/Comm: Financial Update

Roger Kerson reported on a financial update that the performance monitoring and external relations committee had received. Revenue is 0.2% under budget, but expenses are 2% under budget. So the budget is in good shape, Kerson said. There’s a surplus of $258,000 so far this year. The fund reserve balance is still under the level it should be based on board policy [three month's worth of operating expenses], because of a van purchase that needed to be made, for which the AAATA could not use federal funds. AAATA controller Phil Webb is hoping that the reserve balance will get closer to the minimum level it’s supposed to be as the year goes forward. Part of that will depend on the outcome of the millage vote, Kerson said.

Kerson also noted that a correction in accounting needed to be made due to a software glitch. The software the AAATA was using did not understand how to depreciate land – which does not depreciate. Because the AAATA had bought a strip of land [from the city of Ann Arbor] in order to construct Blake Transit Center, that had “messed everything up,” Kerson said. The auditor had found that mistake – and that is why you do audits, Kerson said. It has now been corrected.

Comm/Comm: Ridership

Reporting out from the performance monitoring and external relations committee, Roger Kerson reviewed some ridership data. Fixed route ridership was higher in March 2014 compared to March 2013, but it is still down for the year – because January was so severely impacted by the weather, he said.

Comm/Comm: AAATA Website

Kerson reported that the AAATA website still needs some improvements, and ongoing discussions are taking place with the vendor about that. The plan at this stage is to hire a developer in-house, Kerson reported, so that the AAATA has its own capability and is not dependent on the vendor for the ongoing management of the website. Kerson felt that was a very good strategy. He described it as a very key hire, saying it was important to get the right person with the right set of abilities.

Comm/Comm: Onboard Survey

Continuing his report from the performance monitoring and external relations committee, Kerson said the onboard survey of riders has now been completed and the results of that would be released soon. The survey showed overall that customers have a very high satisfaction with the AAATA service, he said.

Comm/Comm: Local Advisory Council

Cheryl Webber gave the report from the AAATA’s local advisory council – a body that advises the AAATA on issues related to the disability community as well as seniors.

Cheryl Webber of the AAATA’s local advisory council.

She said there was a nice discussion at the LAC’s last meeting about the new Ride Guide and the changes that have been made to it. There was a good discussion also about how the paratransit A-Ride service works – and doesn’t work from time to time. Representatives of SelectRide, the vendor that provides the A-Ride service, were present and were able to respond to people’s concerns, Webber reported.

Two LAC members had expressed some interest in putting the LAC at the board’s disposal – saying that the person who represents the LAC at the board meetings is well-suited to bring back to the LAC any questions the board might have about anything pertaining to paratransit or the accessibility of buses. Members of the LAC have been consumers of the transportation service for a very long time. They’ve also provided input on how transportation service has been provided over a very long time. So LAC members have a unique perspective, Webber said.

Comm/Comm: Meeting Schedule Religious Holidays

During public commentary at the conclusion of the meeting, Jim Mogensen also told the board that he had left a church event in order to attend the board’s meeting that evening. He asked the board to think about dates of religious holidays when they set the board’s meeting calendar at the beginning of the year. [The meeting fell during Passover and on the Thursday before Easter.] The Interfaith Roundtable of Washtenaw County might serve as a resource for information on that, Mogensen said. Not all religious holidays are the same, he continued, pointing out that some of the holidays are more important than others.

Present: Charles Griffith, Eric Mahler, Eli Cooper, Sue Gott, Roger Kerson, Gillian Ream Gainsley, Larry Krieg.

Absent: Susan Baskett, Anya Dale, Jack Bernard.

Next regular meeting: Thursday, May 22, 2014 at 6:30 p.m. at the Ann Arbor District Library, 343 S. Fifth Ave., Ann Arbor. [Check Chronicle event listings to confirm date]

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

On May 6, voters in three jurisdictions – the city of Ann Arbor, the city of Ypsilanti and Ypsilanti Township – will be asked to approve a 0.7 mill tax to support improvements to transportation service. The board of the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority voted at its Feb. 20, 2014 meeting to place the question on the ballot.

In Ann Arbor, 1,529 absentee ballots were sent out in the first wave.

Of the 1,529 ballots, the initial distribution across Ann Arbor’s five wards appears to be skewed somewhat more heavily toward voters in Ward 2, with roughly 27% of the ballots requested from that ward. Based on requested ballots, the lightest participation so far is in Ward 1, with roughly 11% of the AV ballots requested from that ward. Precise figures are difficult to calculate, because some of the combined precincts for this election cross ward boundaries.

Registered voters can apply for an absentee ballot by mail until May 3. Registered voters can also apply for and vote an absentee ballot in-person at the city clerk’s office at city hall on the day before the election. The absentee ballot application form can be mailed or hand delivered to the city clerk at 301 E. Huron St., Ann Arbor, MI 48104. It can also be scanned and emailed to cityclerk@a2gov.org.

City council action authorizing the relocation of Precinct 1-7 for the August primaries came at its March 17, 2014 meeting. On Aug. 5, the two precincts will operate separately, even though they will be located in the same place.

For the May 6, 2014 transit millage election, the precincts will operate as a consolidated precinct at the Northwood Community Center. The city election commission – which consists of the city clerk, the city attorney, and the public safety administrator – has the authority to consolidate the operation of precincts. The rationale for the consolidation for the May 6 election is described in the staff memo accompanying the resolution as anticipated low turnout in largely student districts. The city election commission made the decision to consolidate the precincts at its Feb. 26, 2014 meeting.

Map of Precincts 1-7 and 2-1.

This brief was filed from the city council’s chambers on the second floor of city hall, located at 301 E. Huron.

The 0.7 mill tax was placed on a May 6 ballot by the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority board on Feb. 20, 2014. The tax would be levied by the AAATA only if it wins a majority of support among voters across its three member jurisdictions: the city of Ann Arbor, the city of Ypsilanti and Ypsilanti Township.

The DDA board resolution comes in part as a response to the fact that the DDA will be capturing a portion of the new millage under its tax increment finance (TIF) funding mechanism. The ballot language itself highlights DDA tax capture among other TIF authority capture:

PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT MILLAGE

To improve public bus, van, and paratransit services – including expanded service hours, routes, destinations, and services for seniors and people who have disabilities – shall the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority levy a new annual tax of 0.7 mills ($0.70 per $1000 of taxable value) on all taxable property within the City of Ann Arbor, the City of Ypsilanti, and the Charter Township of Ypsilanti for the years 2014-2018 inclusive? The estimate of revenue if this millage is approved is $4,368,847.00 for 2014. This revenue will be disbursed to the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority and, as required by law, a portion may be subject to capture by the downtown development authorities of the Cities of Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti, the Washtenaw County Brownfield Redevelopment Authority, and the local development finance authority of the Charter Township of Ypsilanti.

The city of Ann Arbor’s financial staff are currently projecting the DDA’s TIF revenue for fiscal year 2015 to be about $4.8 million. Given the roughly 28 mills of tax on which the DDA captures taxes, that works out to a 0.7 mill equivalent of $120,000 (4,800,000/28)*0.7=120,000]. That’s consistent with the AAATA’s estimates of about $119,000 that would be captured from the 0.7 mill transit tax by the Ann Arbor DDA.

The DDA board’s resolution approved on March 5, 2014 included a single resolved clause, which was amended at the meeting to add the phrase “maintain or”:

Resolved, If the voters support approval of a new five-year transit millage, the DDA, which has been a long-time supporter of transit as a key strategy to meet its mission, will work to maintain or increase its support for transportation-related programs and projects.

The TIF revenue estimate of $4.8 million was part of a draft FY 2015 budget reviewed by the DDA operations committee at its Feb. 26 meeting and approved for submission to the city of Ann Arbor by the full board at its March 5 meeting.

That budget includes enough to cover a transportation funding request for the AAATA’s getDowntown program, which the board will consider at its April meeting. The bulk of DDA’s getDowntown funding supports the go!pass, a program in which downtown employers can participate to allow employees to take unlimited bus rides at no cost to the employee. Employers pay $10 per employee per year for the passes. An “all-in” clause requires employers to purchase go!passes for all employees.

The fares for rides taken with a go!pass are covered in smaller part by the employer payment and in larger part by an annual grant from the DDA. The total grant request this year reflects an 11% increase from last year:

                         FY 2014    FY 2015
getDowntown             $ 40,488   $ 43,000
go!pass                 $479,000   $529,000
Transportation Options  $ 91,174   $105,264
TOTAL                   $610,662   $677,264

-

The board is expected to vote on the go!pass request at its April board meeting.

This brief was filed from the DDA boardroom at the DDA offices, located at 150 S. Fifth Ave., Suite 301. A more detailed report will follow: [link]

On Feb. 11, 2014, AAATA strategic planner Michael Benham presented the board’s planning and development committee with an analysis of the millage question. The committee recommended the full board take up the question at its Feb. 20 meeting, and that resulted in a unanimous vote to put a 0.7 mill tax on the May 6 ballot for voter approval. (Photo by the writer.)

The AAATA board voted unanimously at its Feb. 20, 2014 meeting to place the question on the ballot for voters to decide. The board’s vote had been anticipated for a few months.

It was preceded by public commentary from more than a dozen people in support of the decision, including state representative Jeff Irwin (D-53) and Ypsilanti mayor pro tem Lois Richardson. Representatives from Partners for Transit, which is a coalition coordinated by the Ecology Center, and the Washtenaw Regional Organizing Coalition (WeROC) spoke. Carolyn Grawi of the Ann Arbor Center for Independent Living led supporters in a chant of, “More buses, more places, more often!”

One speaker offered a counterpoint at the start of public commentary, asking the board to place the request on the November ballot instead of May. He stressed the fact that Ann Arbor voters have supported the AAATA up to this point, funding much of the capital investments.

If approved on May 6, the 0.7 mill tax would be levied for five years, from 2014 through 2018. Under Michigan’s Act 55 of 1963, that’s the longest period the AAATA could levy a millage, without asking voters again to renew it.

In his written report to the board in advance of the meeting, CEO Michael Ford called the vote to put the question before voters “one of the most important business decisions for the [AAATA] in decades.”

If approved, the millage would be the first ever levied by the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority. Existing dedicated transportation taxes, levied by the two cities and passed through to the AAATA, would remain in place. In Ypsilanti Township, the AAATA calculates the 0.7 mill levy to be commensurate with the level of service the township would receive as a result of transportation improvements. But the 0.7 mill levy would generate about twice as much as the amount paid by the township in its current purchase of service agreement (POSA). So Ypsilanti Township’s POSA amount would not be paid in addition to revenue from the 0.7 mill tax.

In separate action taken on Feb. 20, the AAATA board authorized a funding agreement with Ypsilanti Township governing that POSA. The agreement makes clear that if the 0.7 mill tax passes, then the township’s service, which would increase under the transportation improvement plan, would be paid by the 0.7 mill tax. [.pdf of AAATA agreement with Ypsilanti Township]

If approved by voters on May 6, the millage is supposed to pay for a set of service improvements over a period of five years. Those improvements include increased frequency during peak hours, extended service in the evenings, and additional service on weekends. Some looped routes are being replaced with out-and-back type route configurations. The plan does not include operation of rail-based services. The AAATA has calculated that the improvements in service add up to 90,000 additional service hours per year, compared to the current service levels, which is a 44% increase.

If a millage is approved on May 6, those improvements that involve extending the hours of service later in the evening and the weekend could begin to be implemented by late 2014. However, increases in frequency along routes, which would require acquisition of additional buses, would take longer.

For Ann Arbor, the rate for the existing tax is 2.056 mills, which is expected to generate a little over $10 million by 2019, the fifth year of the transportation improvement plan. For the city of Ypsilanti, the rate for the existing transit millage is 0.9789, which is expected to generate about $314,000 in 2019. For the owner of an Ann Arbor house with a market value of $200,000 and taxable value of $100,000, a 0.7 mill tax translates into $70 annually, which would be paid in addition to the existing transit millage. If the millage were to pass, the total Ann Arbor transit tax paid on a taxable value of $100,000 would be about $270 a year.

If it’s approved by voters, the total amount of revenue expected to be generated by the 0.7 mill tax in 2014 is $4,368,847.

The recommendation to place the ballot authorization question on the board’s Feb. 20 agenda came in action taken by the planning and development committee at its Feb. 11 meeting. Voting unanimously at that meeting to recommend the ballot question to the full board on Feb. 20 were: Sue Gott, Larry Krieg, Eli Cooper and Eric Mahler.

The planning and development committee made its recommendation after receiving a presentation of results from a survey of registered voters in late 2013. The survey results show that 63% of those surveyed would definitely or probably support a millage.

The board also received input from a financial task force, which found that the 0.7 mill tax was adequate to fund the improvements. [.pdf of Feb. 5, 2014 financial task force finding] Members of that task force included Bob Guenzel (former Washtenaw County administrator), Mary Jo Callan (director of the Washtenaw County office of community and economic development), Norman Herbert (former treasurer of the University of Michigan), Paul Krutko (CEO of Ann Arbor SPARK), and Mark Perry (director of real estate services, Masco Corp.). Guenzel was invited to address the board at the Feb. 20 meeting, and he summarized some of the background of the task force’s work.

That task force finding was that the ridership estimates were reasonable. The finding cautioned that some uncertainty existed about the future of the personal property tax. The task force finding also recommends against the capture of a portion of the new millage by TIF (tax increment financing) authorities, like the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority (DDA) and Ann Arbor’s local development finance authority (LDFA). It’s not clear whether it’s a legal option for the DDA not to capture a portion of that new tax. The AAATA estimates that annually about $119,000 of the new millage would be captured by the Ann Arbor DDA.

To be approved, a majority of voters in the city of Ann Arbor, the city of Ypsilanti and Ypsilanti Township would need to vote for the AAATA’s millage proposal. Those are the three jurisdictions that are members of the AAATA.

The city of Ann Arbor (pop. ~116,000), the city of Ypsilanti (pop. ~19,500) and Ypsilanti Township (pop. ~53,000) make up a bit more than half the population of Washtenaw County (pop. ~351,000).

In a separate resolution approved by the board at its Feb. 20 meeting, the board authorized CEO Michael Ford to spend up to $100,000 to cover the cost of holding the May election.

The ballot language the AAATA approved at its Feb. 20 meeting – which will be submitted to the Washtenaw County clerk’s office – differs from the language drafted and included in the board packet. The approved language explicitly highlights the capture of a portion of the millage by TIF authorities. The approved language also swaps in “seniors” for “the elderly”:

PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT MILLAGE

To improve public bus, van, and paratransit services – including expanded service hours, routes, destinations, and services for seniors and people who have disabilities – shall the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority levy a new annual tax of 0.7 mills ($0.70 per $1000 of taxable value) on all taxable property within the City of Ann Arbor, the City of Ypsilanti, and the Charter Township of Ypsilanti for the years 2014-2018 inclusive? The estimate of revenue if this millage is approved is $ 4,368,847.00 for 2014. This revenue will be disbursed to the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority and, as required by law, a portion may be subject to capture by the downtown development authorities of the Cities of Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti, the Washtenaw County Brownfield Redevelopment Authority, and the local development finance authority of the Charter Township of Ypsilanti.

The ballot language is subject to requirements in Michigan’s General Property Tax Act.

Here’s a detailed breakdown of how the roughly $4.3 million generated by the new AAATA millage would fit into the overall funding picture for AAATA services:

Revenue Source     Amount
State              $12,910,884
Federal            $4,507,490
Fares              $8,801,200
A2: 2.056          $10,980,259
A2: 0.70           $3,387,910
Ypsi C: 0.9789     $313,798
Ypsi C: 0.70       $202,730
Ypsi TWP: 0.70     $778,207
POSA               $1,087,344
Third Party        $1,204,196
Advertising        $375,000
TOTAL              $42,969,822

-

Here’s how that breakdown shapes up as a pie chart:

Pie chart of revenue sources for AAATA five-year transit improvements. (Data from AAATA, chart by The Chronicle. )

A significant portion of the added cost of providing service under the five-year improvement plan is planned to come from additional state operating assistance. While federal funding is expected to increase from about $4.1 million to about $4.5 million, state operating assistance is expected to increase from $8.5 million to $12.9 million.

Related to state operating assistance, an additional AAATA board action taken at its Feb. 20 meeting was approval of the annual resolution requesting state operating assistance. According to staff memos in the board’s information packet, the Michigan Dept. of Transportation instructed AAATA not to include assumptions of the five-year service improvement plan in this year’s application.

So this year’s application to the state for the AAATA’s portion of Act 51 money will include a budget as follows: estimated federal funds of $5,348,338, estimated state funds of $9,905,017, estimated local funds of $11,241,134, estimated fare box of $6,184,503, and estimated other funds of $647,288 – with total estimated expenses of $33,326,000. That application for state operating assistance could be amended, if the millage vote on May 6 succeeds.

The board of Michigan’s regional transit authority (RTA) voted on Feb. 17 not to ask voters for funding until 2016, which eliminates the possibility of two different transit millages on the ballot in the same year.

Information on the millage is available from the AAATA on a new website: therideyourway.org

This report was filed from the downtown location of the Ann Arbor District Library at 343 S. Fifth Ave., where the AAATA board holds its meetings. A more detailed report will follow: [link]