Before the start of the Jan. 19 board of regents meeting, UM president Mary Sue Coleman scanned an article from The Chronicle – but not this Chronicle. It's a report from The Chronicle of Higher Education. (Photos by the writer.)

Instead, regents dealt with less high-profile matters, approving a range of action items with little discussion. Those included funding for a major expansion of the UM Health System into Wayne County, along the I-275 corridor; renovations that will transform the entrance to Schembechler Hall and make a museum of football memorabilia more accessible to the public; and improvements to the university’s Northwood apartment complex on north campus.

But much of the meeting consisted of reports. Stephen Forrest, UM’s vice president for research, presented a sobering outlook for future research funding, calling the climate for federal funding “worrisome.” After his talk, regent Andrea Fischer Newman pointed out that tuition is helping to support the university’s $1.2 billion research program – about 25% of those research expenditures are covered internally.

Regents also heard from dean Alison Davis-Blake, who described how the business school is countering the caricature of managers that are only focused on short-term profits, and whose management skills consist of the ability to say, “You’re fired!” Graduates of Ross are taught to think more broadly, she said.

An item not on the agenda of the Jan. 19 meeting received considerable attention during public commentary. One student and three professors spoke against an effort to unionize graduate student research assistants (GSRAs).

Also during public commentary, the chair of the Sierra Club’s Huron Valley group raised concerns over the proposed Fuller Road Station, saying that the joint UM/city of Ann Arbor project runs counter to the university’s sustainability efforts. Fuller Road Station’s initial phase is a proposed parking structure, located near the UM medical campus, that could hold over 1,000 vehicles.

President’s Opening Remarks

The board typically meets in the regents boardroom of the Fleming Administration Building, but the January meeting was held in a sixth floor conference room of the Ross Business School. Another event was scheduled in the same room following the regents meeting, so UM president Mary Sue Coleman began her remarks by noting that they needed to move through their agenda “with alacrity.”

Coleman thanked the business school and dean Alison Davis-Blake for hosting the meeting. Construction of the new building had been made possible through philanthropy, she noted. [The school is named for businessman Stephen J. Ross, who donated $100 million – the largest donation ever to UM.]

Coleman said she wanted to revel in the Sugar Bowl one last time. Several regents and UM executive had traveled to New Orleans for the game, she said, and it had been terrific to see the resurgence of the historic American city in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. Alumni were enthusiastic, the marching band outdid themselves, and coach Brady Hoke and the football team made the fans proud, she said, though at times nervous. It was a magnificent display of spirit and intercollegiate athletics, Coleman said.

Turning to academic honors, Coleman reported that UM chemistry professor Brian Coppola had received Baylor University’s Robert Foster Cherry Award for Great Teaching. It’s the most financially lucrative teaching award in the country, she said – $250,000 to the winner, plus $25,000 for his home department, to further develop teaching skills there. Coppola is known for his innovative teaching, Coleman said – he won the U.S. Professor of the Year award in 2009, and UM’s Golden Apple teaching award in 1994. She said she’d watched one of his lectures that’s posted on the Baylor website, and she highly recommended that others watch the video too.

Calling it a landmark event, Coleman also highlighted the fact that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has decided to open a satellite location in Detroit – its first office outside of Washington D.C. This region was selected because of its high number of patent applications, from the auto industry as well as university research. Coleman reported that UM, Michigan State and Wayne State had worked hard to convince government officials to open the office here. She said she expects the university law schools will form alliances with the office, too.

Unionization of GSRAs

By way of background, at the board’s May 2011 meeting, regents had passed a resolution of support regarding the rights of graduate student research assistants (GSRAs) to decide whether to organize and be represented by a labor union. The resolution was passed over dissent from the board’s two Republican regents – Andrew Richner and Andrea Fischer Newman. Before the vote, UM president Mary Sue Coleman had spoken in opposition to the action.

On Jan. 19, Newman asked provost Phil Hanlon for an update on a UM graduate student who had spoken at a press conference the previous day. [The event had been organized by the Graduate Employees Organization (GEO), a group that hopes to represent GRSAs if they decide to unionize. The student, Jennifer Dibbern, was a GSRA who alleges that she was fired by professor Rachel Goldman over her support of efforts to unionize the GSRAs.]

Hanlon responded to Newman, saying that a lot of faculty members had inquired about the situation. He said he had personally reviewed the student’s academic record and is convinced that the decision was justified and appropriate, and that the decision was made based on academic grounds. He strongly supported the action.

Unionization of GSRAs: Public Commentary

During public commentary at the end of the meeting, four people spoke against the unionization effort.

Stephen Raiman, founder of Students Against GSRA Unionization, started off the public commentary by noting that he had spoken to regents on the same issue at their November 2011 meeting. Now, he wanted to talk about the negative effects on the faculty. He said he’s talked to many people across campus at various levels, and encountered people who are afraid to speak out. One faculty member said his department chair didn’t want anyone to address this issue for fear of retribution from the board of regents, Raiman said. This feeling is pervasive, he said, and stems from the disagreement between the majority of board members and the university administration. He contended that the overwhelming majority of faculty are against the unionization of GSRAs.

Raiman noted that in order for the unionization effort to move forward, signatures from more than 50% of GSRAs needed to be collected – and this was completed by the Graduate Employees Organization (GEO), he said. But many of the signatures were secured through misinformation or outright deception, he contended. He cited some specific examples of people he’d talked with, who told him that they hadn’t been informed about the $400 in dues they would owe to the GEO if the GSRAs are unionized. One person told him ”I signed their card to get rid of them,” Raiman said. These examples are anecdotal, he acknowledged, but he’s hearing more instances like this.

Victor DiRita, UM professor of microbiology and immunology, spoke during public commentary against the unionization of graduate student research assistants (GSRAs).

On Feb. 1, the Michigan Employment Relations Commission (MERC) will hold an administrative hearing on the legality of the election to unionize GSRAs, Raiman told regents. But his group is barred from attending – that means only one side of the issue will be represented, he said. He asked the board to ensure that the election is fair, if there’s an election. Raiman concluded by saying he was glad to see that there were faculty members brave enough to come and speak during public commentary.

The next three speakers were UM faculty: Victor DiRita, Finn Larsen, and Cagliyan Kurdak.

DiRita, a professor in the department of microbiology and immunology, is also associate dean for graduate and postdoctoral studies at the UM Medical School. He agreed with the sentiments expressed by Raiman. Saying he understood the impulse to offer choices to students, DiRita said that in this case, the choice is based on the flawed premise that students are employees. The faculty views that premise as a serious affront, he said. Faculty take mentoring and academic progress very seriously, and in fact it’s a red flag if someone treats a student like an employee, he said.

Larsen and Kurdak also raised concerns over possible GSRA unionization. Larsen, who’s chair of the physics department’s graduate program, said it’s meaningless to distinguish between thesis research and GSRA-supported research. Doing so will have a negative impact on the education and research missions of the university.

Kurdak, director of the applied physics program, also objected to characterizing GSRAs as employees. The relationship between faculty and students is very personal, he said. When problems arise between the faculty member and student, often times the problems are academic in nature – and union involvement would not be effective. In fact, it might result in escalating the situation so that there are no solutions that benefit the student, he said. Kurdak encouraged regents to recognize the academic nature of GSRA appointments.

Regent Andrea Fischer Newman thanked the faculty for coming to speak to the board on this issue.

Annual Research Report

Stephen Forrest, UM’s vice president for research, began his presentation by noting that this was the 90th annual research report to regents, but that it would be a more sober report than previous reports, because the university is entering sobering times. [.pdf of fiscal 2011 UM research report]

To put the research enterprise in context, Forrest noted its $1.2 billion in expenditures makes research the third-largest segment of the university, behind the health system ($2.4 billion) and education ($1.3 billion). He cautioned that these numbers can be misleading, because the three segments interlink in many ways.

Forrest then cited a 1962 quote from Harlan Hatcher, UM’s 8th president, on the occasion of the 40th annual research report: “The university fulfills three basic, interlocking functions: to educate youth in the widest possible variety of intellectual disciplines; to collect, increase, and disseminate knowledge that bears on these disciplines; and to perform those services for society, both individually and collectively, which, consistent with its education and research functions, it is peculiarly qualified to perform.”

Stephen Forrest, UM's vice president for research.

The statement was true then, Forrest said, “and it’s certainly true today.”

The challenge now, he said, is how to make the research enterprise thrive during a time of flat or declining federal support. Federal funding is the largest source of research dollars at UM, accounting for 66.7% – $824.75 million – of total research expenditures in fiscal 2011. For UM, federal funding has always increased year-to-year, Forrest noted, even when the overall amount of federal dollars available for research nationwide has declined. In fiscal 2011, federal funding for UM research increased 9.8% compared to the previous year.

In fiscal 2012, the university had expected federal funding to drop, but it didn’t, Forrest said. Regardless of the noise coming out of Washington, both political parties agree that innovation is a driver of American economy, he said.

In looking at funding received by UM from specific federal agencies, 46.2% of all UM research expenditures in fiscal 2011 were funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), an increase of 12.6% compared to the fiscal 2010. UM’s medical school is the sixth largest recipient of NIH funding in the country, Forrest noted, and they ?? need to be concerned a little – “or maybe a lot” – about diversification, he said.

The university’s second-largest federal funding source is from the National Science Foundation. NSF funding increased 10.3% to $74.25 million in fiscal 2011. Federal energy funding grew 30.4% to $35.40 million – the largest percentage increase.

Research funding to UM dropped from two federal sources – NASA and transportation funds.

Total non-federal funding also decreased by 1.1%, to $105.63 million. Industry support accounts for $40.84 million of that non-federal total, an increase of 4% for the year. (Other non-federal sources are foundations and state or local government.)

Overall, funding from industry sources makes up only a small percentage of total research expenditures, Forrest noted. But it’s important, he said, because it serves as a catalyst for other funding. In the 1980s, the federal government started emphasizing “use-inspired” basic research – work that can eventually lead to the creation of jobs or that supports an “innovation economy,” Forrest said. Very often, federal grants require some kind of industry partnership.

Looking ahead, Forrest said the growth forecast is worrisome. The global growth domestic product (GDP) is hovering just above recession levels. The GDP dip in 2008 was “terrible,” he said, and subsequent shocks, like the tsunami in Japan or the debt crisis in Europe, have had an impact.

In the future, Forrest expects to see significant budget cuts across all federal agencies, as the nation’s debt catches up with it. The university dodged a bullet in 2012, he said, but shouldn’t get complacent. These trends are likely to persist over the next 5-10 years.

So what should UM do? It’s important to focus on the university’s research strengths that are priorities for the federal government and industry, Forrest said. The university’s “sweet spot” is use-inspired basic research, he said, in areas including health, energy, intelligent vehicle systems, advanced manufacturing and sustainability.

Secondly, UM needs to build on its culture and research environment, Forrest said. The university already has a reputation for strengths across disciplines, and for interdisciplinary cooperation, ties to industry, and international relationships, he said. Forrest also described the North Campus Research Complex (NCRC) as the university’s “secret calling card,” with rapidly developing potential.

Finally, Forrest told regents that UM’s research operations need to streamline the administrative process. One example is the need to mentor young faculty, he said, so that they can more quickly start getting research grants. UM’s research administration needs to improve, he continued, by forging better relationships with the university’s office of technology transfer, business engagement center, and individual academic units.

The administration also needs to reduce barriers to working with industry, he said. Forrest concluded by telling regents that they can look forward to announcements about how the university will make it easier to craft intellectual property agreements, and in general improve its relationship with industry.

Annual Research Report: Regent Commentary

Andrea Fischer Newman said it seems that the university is losing money on its research – is that the case? Forrest replied that internal funding accounts for about 25% of UM’s total research program, paying for things like fellowships, infrastructure, and packages for startups that license university technology. Research returns a great value, he said, but it does cost a lot.

Newman said she wasn’t criticizing it. But she wanted to point out that tuition is used in part to subsidize the university’s research program.

Update from the Business School Dean

Alison Davis-Blake, dean of the UM Ross School of Business since July 2011, gave a brief overview of the school’s mission and approach to business education. Much has been written about the ill effects of business school graduates, she began – people who are narrow-minded, focused on short-term profits, and whose management skills consist of the ability to say, “You’re fired!”

Alison Davis-Blake, dean of the UM Ross School of Business.

That’s a caricature, she noted, yet there’s some truth to it. The future of business requires managers who think broadly and who have subtle management skills – and those are the kinds of managers that the Ross School is training, she said.

The school offers the traditional business disciplines, Davis-Blake said. But it also take an action-based learning approach, she added, focusing on organization sustainability – doing more with fewer financial, human, temporal and environmental resources, while creating positive outcomes for people and organizations. The approach is done in a multi-disciplinary way, she said, and involves not only faculty and students, but also alumni, businesses, nonprofits and government organizations.

Davis-Blake gave three examples to illustrate this approach. An “advanced model factory” at the Tauber Institute will be coming online in September, she said. Located at the North Campus Research Complex, it will be a small-scale replica of a real production environment. Because it will be easy to reconfigure, it will allow students to examine the effectiveness of various production methods. The focus will be on lean manufacturing and “green” techniques, she said, using principles of “factory physics.” In addition to teaching undergraduate and graduate students, workshops will be offered to Michigan businesses as well, she said.

Davis-Blake also cited work done by the school’s Center for Positive Organizational Scholarship. The emphasis is on cultivating positive emotions, positive connections and positive interpretations of events. A “job crafting” tool, for example, helps people change the way they work to make it more positive and productive.

In her final example, Davis-Blake described environmental sustainability work at the Erb Institute, a joint venture of the business school and the School of Natural Resources & Environment. Graduate students complete a thesis that involves a real client, and alumni teams choose projects that are suitable for publication. Three books – printed locally by Thomson-Shore – have been produced so far, she said, on the topics of climate strategies, hybrid organizations, and sustainable hotels.

Davis-Blake concluded by noting that her father had been a business school dean, and photos from his tenure showed an all-male faculty. Ross is not your father’s business school, she said.

Coleman thanked Davis-Blake, and commented that the energy from students in the building’s Winter Garden – the first floor lobby – was palpable.

Health System Expansion

A major expansion into western Wayne County by the University of Michigan Hospitals and Health Centers was on the Jan. 19 agenda for regents to authorize.

The $39 million project entails opening a new clinic along the I-275 corridor, at a site located at Seven Mile and Haggerty Roads in Northville Township – about a half mile away UM’s existing Livonia Center for Specialty Care. Attracting patients from outside the market of Livingston and Washtenaw counties is part of the UM Health System’s strategic plan.

The plan calls for signing a 25-year lease on 100,000 square feet, with base rent of $27.25 per rentable square foot per year, increasing 5% every five years. The base lease covers expenses related to the land, site work, design and management fees, and a part of the building construction. Operating costs would be an additional expense.

Ora Peskovitz, UM's executive vice president for medical affairs.

The location is expected to include primary and specialty care; a musculoskeletal program; eye care for adults and children; radiology services; infusion for cancer and non-cancer treatment; and a medical procedure unit.

The site is expected to be ready by the winter of 2014.

When he introduced the item, UM chief financial officer Tim Slottow noted that there were several reasons why this particular lease required board approval – the lease is longer than 10 years, more than 50,000 square feet, and over $1 million annually. He said the project is something that has been worked on for several years.

Ora Pescovitz, UM’s executive vice president for medical affairs, spoke briefly about the project, saying it was a very important facility and pivotal for the health system’s strategic plans. It’s responding to the burgeoning clinical needs in communities along this stretch of I-275.

Outcome: The board unanimously approved the lease for the Northville Township health system expansion.

Executive Officer Reports

During every meeting, UM’s executive officers have the opportunity to give verbal reports, supplementing any written communications they provide to the regents.

Executive Officer Reports: Health Care Costs

Tim Slottow, UM’s chief financial officer, said that in light of changes to health benefits made at the state level, he wanted to remind people of the successes that the university has seen in its health benefits strategies. Changes that UM has made since 2003 have resulted in about $94 million of savings annually, Slottow said, or about $400 million cumulatively. Of that, greater cost-sharing by employees accounts for about 65% of the savings. Employees pay for 30% of their health care premiums and co-pays.

Other savings were gained from use of generic drugs, instituting a one-year waiting period before new employees get university contributions toward their retirement savings accounts, and reducing administrative costs, he said.

UM president Mary Sue Coleman said the administration recognizes that faculty and staff have been partners in cutting costs. Everyone is aware of the need to do that, she said.

Executive Officer Reports: Development

Jerry May, UM’s vice president of development, reported that there was a strong uptick in donations in December, but fiscal year-to-date giving to the university is only up about 2% – $140.88 million for the first six months of fiscal 2012, compared to $138.05 million for the same period in fiscal 2011. [.pdf of development report]

May noted that in 2009, UM president Mary Sue Coleman had issued a challenge grant, with $5 million in matching funds to provide a $1 match for every $2 in endowment gifts of up to $500,000. That meant that the development office needed to raise $10 million in contributions to the university to fund undergraduate and graduate study abroad.

That goal has been met, May said, and there is now a permanent $15 million endowment that over the years will benefit thousands of students.

UM Athletics: Renovations, Finance

Two action items on the Jan. 19 agenda related to university athletics – for renovations of Schembechler Hall and Yost Ice Arena. In addition, regents were provided with supplemental information related to a financial audit of the athletics department.

UM Athletics: Renovations – Schembechler Hall

Regents were asked to authorize a $9 million renovation to the entrance of Schembechler Hall, which will integrate the Margaret Dow Towsley Sports Museum area. The building at 1200 S. State St. was constructed in 1990 for UM’s football program, and contains locker rooms, meeting rooms, medical treatment rooms, training areas, weight rooms, and administrative offices. The project will add about 7,000 square feet to the building, and renovate an additional 7,000 square feet. Funding will be provided from athletic department resources.

Tim Slottow, UM’s chief financial officer, said the renovations would completely change the look and feel of the entrance. Regent Andrea Fischer Newman asked whether the changes would make the museum more accessible. “Absolutely,” Slottow replied. The museum is significantly underutilized, he said, and this project is rethinking its whole use.

Newman said that if the university is going to spend $9 million on renovations, the public needs better access. Slottow said the changes will result in the museum being far better used.

The museum is a collection of UM football memorabilia, including some of the program’s championship trophies. In a statement released after the regents meeting, athletics director Dave Brandon indicated that more interactive displays will be added to the museum during the renovations. There’s no admission and it’s open to the public, but hours are limited. It’s open Monday-Thursday from 9 a.m.-noon and 1-4 p.m., and Friday from 9 a.m.-1 p.m.

Outcome: Regents unanimously approved the renovations to Schembechler Hall.

UM Athletics: Renovations – Yost Ice Arena

In a separate vote, regents were asked to authorize issuing bids and awarding construction contracts for a $14 million project at Yost Ice Arena. The overall project was initially approved by the board at its June 2011 meeting, with a schematic design subsequently approved in October.

The project includes replacing seating on the east, south and west sides of the rink, improving accessibility and emergency exits, converting the west side media balcony into a series of loge boxes, adding a new level five on the west side for media, and constructing new corner and stair platforms for additional seating. The project will be paid for out of athletic department revenues, and has been designed by Rossetti Architects Inc. of Southfield, Mich.

There’s the potential that a donor might provide additional funding for enhanced window treatments at Yost, Slottow said – UM athletics director Dave Brandon and Jerry May, the university’s vice president of development, are working on that. If the donation comes through, Slottow said he’ll be returning to the regents asking for an approval of an additional $1-2 million for the project.

Outcome: Without comment, regents unanimously approved issuing bids and awarding construction contracts for renovations at Yost.

UM Athletics: Finance – Supplement to Audit

As an item of information, Slottow pointed regents to a supplemental report for the athletics department financial audit covering the fiscal year that ended June 30, 2011. [.pdf of supplemental audit information] Slottow noted that the information is required by the NCAA. The report includes reviews of financial contributions from various booster organizations, financial aid for one student athletic in each of 10 sports, compensation for 12 coaches, and several other items. No exceptions were noted.

Renovation Projects: Kraus, Northwood

Regents were asked to approve renovation projects totaling nearly $10 million for academic and student housing purposes.

Renovation Projects: Kraus

A $1.7 million renovation to the auditorium of the Edward Henry Kraus building was on the Jan. 19 agenda for approval. The Kraus building is used by biology departments and was constructed in 1915. Its auditorium – one of the largest on central campus – was last updated in 1990.

The current project would renovate about 5,100 square feet and include accessibility improvements, new seating, power for laptops and other devices, and other upgrades. The renovation will be funded by the College of Literature, Science, and the Arts and the provost’s office. The work is expected to be complete by the summer of 2012.

Outcome: Regents unanimously approved the Kraus renovations.

Renovation Projects: Northwood

The board was asked to authorize a $7.5 million upgrade to the fire alarm and boiler systems at Northwood I, II and III – a 58-building apartment complex on north campus with 686 units of student housing.

The complex had been mentioned at the regents’ Nov. 17, 2011 meeting in the context of other housing changes on north campus and elsewhere throughout UM’s student housing system. At that meeting, regents approved renovations at two dorms – Baits II on north campus, and East Quad on central campus – and discussed the need for a broader strategic plan for student housing. Royster Harper, the university’s vice president for student affairs, had informed regents that the living/learning communities in the Northwood apartments I and II would be expanded to Northwood III.

The renovations to Northwood will be designed by UM’s department of architecture, engineering and construction, in collaboration with Riverside Integrated Systems Inc. and Structural Design Inc. The project is expected to be completed by the summer of 2013.

Outcome: Regents unanimously approved the Northwood renovation project, without comment.

Michigan Energy Institute

As an item of information, Stephen Forrest – UM’s vice president for research – noted that the Michigan Memorial Phoenix Institute is being renamed. As of Feb. 1, it will be called the University of Michigan Energy Institute.

When the institute launched six years ago, Forrest said, its name was chosen to reflect the legacy of the Michigan Memorial Phoenix Institute, which had been formed in 1948 to focus on peaceful uses for atomic energy. It was a way to honor the more than 500 students and alumni who sacrificed their lives during World War II.

A prominent display about the Phoenix project will be located in the lobby of the building, he said, and the building itself will be named the Michigan Memorial Phoenix Laboratory on North Campus. [The building is located at the North Campus Research Complex (NCRC) on Plymouth Road, site of the former Pfizer research operation.]

The institute’s new name will reflect a more interdisciplinary approach that draws on a range of disciplines, including science, technology, policy, business and other fields, Forrest said. It’s an academic research unit of the office of the vice president for research, with the mission of developing and promoting energy research and education.

Regents had no comments regarding the name change.

Conflict-of-Interest Disclosures

Regents were asked to authorize five items that required disclosure under the state’s Conflict of Interest statute. The law requires that regents vote on potential conflict-of-interest disclosures related to university staff, faculty or students.

The items often involve technology licensing agreements or leases. This month, companies involved are Edington Associates LLC, ArborMetrix, Valley View Farms, FlexDex LLC, and Diapin Therapeutics LLC.

Outcome: In one vote, regents authorized the five conflict-of-interest disclosures, without comment.

Public Commentary

In addition to the four people who spoke during public commentary against the effort to unionize graduate student research assistants, as reported above, a fifth speaker raised concerns over the proposed Fuller Road Station.

Public Commentary: Fuller Road Station

Nancy Shiffler, chair of the Sierra Club’s Huron Valley group, congratulated the university for its Planet Blue sustainability efforts, saying she was impressed by its goal and scope. However, she’s concerned about a project that runs counter to those goals.

Nancy Shiffler, chair of the Sierra Club's Huron Valley group.

The proposed Fuller Road Station would be a parking garage for potentially 1,600 vehicles, and would directly contradict the university’s sustainability goals, she said. The garage would primarily be used by UM employees commuting by car, although eventually it might include a commuter rail station.

Shiffler outlined several concerns. If a train station is eventually built, having a large parking garage there would discourage people from using commuter rail, she said. The structure would increase air pollution and traffic congestion, especially during hospital shift changes. Building on parkland, repurposing the land for non-park uses, violates city zoning. An extended lease or use agreement amounts to a de facto sale of parkland, which by city ordinance would require a vote by residents for approval.

In addition, Shiffler noted that the project’s first phase is expected to be funded by UM and an undetermined source of local funding. For phase 2, the city hopes to secure a federal grant, she said, which would require an environmental assessment and possibly an environmental impact statement. However, construction could begin on phase 1 and negate the results of those environmental reports. The Sierra Club has contacted the Federal Rail Administration about this issue, she said.

Shiffler concluded by saying that UM appears to tout its sustainability program, but ignores the program when it’s convenient to do so. She didn’t think this was the image that UM wanted, and she urged regents to look at the project from the point of view of sustainability.

Regents gave no response to Shiffler’s commentary. Other residents have raised this issue at previous board meetings. For example, in March 2010 Rita Mitchell also spoke to regents about Fuller Road Station, urging them not to proceed with the project. Mitchell attended the regents’ Jan. 19 meeting, but did not address the board during public commentary.

Present: Mary Sue Coleman (ex officio), Julia Darlow, Denise Ilitch, Olivia (Libby) Maynard, Andrea Fischer Newman, Andy Richner, Kathy White.

Absent: Larry Deitch, Martin Taylor.

Next board meeting: Thursday, Feb. 16, 2012 at 3 p.m. at the Fleming administration building on UM’s central campus. [confirm date]

The Chronicle could not survive without regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the University of Michigan board of regents. 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!

Local developer Peter Allen and Stephanie Simon, a student in Allen's urban development course at the University of Michigan Ross School of Business. Simon was part of a student team that had developed a project for the Library Lot – they presented their work to library board members on Dec. 17. (Photo by the writer.)

It was a telling moment. A group of graduate students from the University of Michigan had just finished making presentations to members of the Ann Arbor District Library board. They were part of a class on urban design taught by local developer Peter Allen.

Some of their class projects had focused on development of the Library Lot, and two teams were on hand to show their work to the board.

When they were done, Allen talked about why the student perspective was important – for the worldview they brought, and the insight they could give on how to make downtown Ann Arbor attractive for the 25 to 35-year-old professional.

The moment came when Prue Rosenthal, the board’s treasurer, asked this question: “How many of you plan to stay here?”

Silence – then some awkward laughter. None of the six students, it turns out, intend to stick around Ann Arbor after graduation.

That alone isn’t a big deal – it’s a small sample, after all. But it was striking when combined with the vision these students had for downtown development – a vision very different from what’s typically proposed for Ann Arbor, or from what actually gets built. But it’s a vision that, if realized, might compel these young professionals to make a life here.

I was able to watch the students’ presentations, both at the Dec. 17 meeting at the library as well as earlier that week, when six projects were showcased during a three-hour class meeting on Monday, Dec. 14. Their task had been to pick one of three sites in Ann Arbor, and develop a proposal that would help create a lively, liveable, transit-oriented town.

Some common themes emerged from their work, providing a lens through which to view the city’s current efforts to develop the Library Lot. More broadly, their projects raised questions about what might be possible in downtown Ann Arbor – and highlighted challenges that developers would certainly face to get there.

Student Visions for Ann Arbor

Since 1981 Peter Allen has been teaching this interdisciplinary course, or classes similar to it, as an adjunct faculty member at the UM Ross School of Business and Taubman College of Architecture and Urban Planning. One of the main components is an exercise in developing a specific site in Ann Arbor – Allen selects places that in theory could be developed, and asks students to do the research and come up with proposals that are as close as possible to what a real developer might make.

This term, three sites were selected: 1) the Library Lot, atop a city-owned underground parking structure being built next to the downtown library, between Fifth and Division; 2) a city-owned lot on Fuller Road, where a joint city/UM transit station and parking structure are being developed; and 3) riverfront property owned by DTE Energy – known as the MichCon site – and the adjacent Amtrak station, near the Broadway Bridge.

Emily Tsiang, an MBA student at the UM Ross School of Business, describes Broadway Mills, a project that her team developed for Peter Allen's course on urban design. She gave a presentation at the Dec. 14 meeting of Allen's class. (Photo by the writer.)

At the Dec. 14 class, six teams gave presentations – two for each site. Elements of each project varied, depending on the location. The MichCon site, for example, includes heavily contaminated areas that any developer would need to remediate. And the Fuller Road site had to be designed to include a multi-modal transit hub, on the assumption that a high-speed rail line would be part of that location.

That said, there were many common threads among the six projects. All put a premium on density, and on a mix of different uses – hotels, restaurants and cafés, retail shops, groceries, offices, apartments or condos.

Most mentioned that retail and restaurant tenants needed to encompass both national chains as well as locally-owned businesses. Some students even cited specific stores they thought would appeal to young professionals, like Express, Brooks Brothers and Zara. (I was a bit surprised to hear that Brooks Brothers appealed to young professionals, but I’m willing to believe.) “Basically, we want to steal business from Briarwood Mall,” said Peter Sotherland, a masters student in urban planning.

Other similarities: All of the proposals included tall buildings, some designed to the maximum height allowed by the A2D2 zoning changes – one as tall as 17 stories. Most proposed public space, either park-like settings or plazas, and some incorporated areas envisioned for outdoor performances or public art.

The developments were, without exception, designed to be accessible for pedestrians and cyclists, with the assumption that residents and visitors would have access to public transportation, or be within easy reach of whatever services they required, from grocery stores to health clubs.

Students also followed a similar process in developing their proposals, regardless of location. They were asked to identify stakeholders that would be affected by their projects, and their reports included an analysis of those different perspectives. For the Library Lot site, for example, teams met with Ann Arbor District Library director Josie Parker to find out what features of their developments would be seen as assets or detriments for the library.

That library-as-stakeholder approach taken by Allen’s students contrasts rather sharply with the approach now being taking by city officials – and theirs is not just an academic exercise. They’re currently evaluating actual proposals from actual developers for the Library Lot in response to an RFP (request for proposals) for that space. But the library is not represented on the RFP review committee, and the committee did not solicit the library’s feedback – though library leaders are providing feedback anyway. [Chronicle coverage: "Two Library Lot Proposals Eliminated" and "Library Lot: What Should Go on Top?"]

Library Lot: Thinking Big

The students’ Library Lot proposals reflected another approach differing from the one that the city is taking: The projects took into account a much wider scope than just the development on top of the underground parking structure.

The issue of master planning – or rather, the lack of it – came up during a Dec. 21 library board meeting, when board members discussed what they’d like to see in a development next door, and the implications a development would have on the library’s future. From a Chronicle report of that meeting:

Margaret Leary said she liked the idea of a hotel and conference center. She then spoke more generally about the kinds of things that would affect the downtown library. It’s crucial for the library to know what’s going on top of the underground parking site, she said, because it will affect how the library designs its own building, when that project is ready to move forward again.

And it’s not just the underground parking site, Leary added. The library will be affected by what happens to the surface parking lot at the northwest corner of Fifth and William – formerly the site of the YMCA – and by what happens at the AATA’s Blake Transit Center, adjacent to that parking lot. What’s needed is a master plan for the whole area, she said.

[For background on the AATA project, see Chronicle coverage: "AATA Board: Get Bids to Rebuild Blake"]

The student teams who developed proposals for the Library Lot connected that space with surrounding properties.

A proposal called “Library Gardens” extended its scope to Liberty Plaza, the multi-tiered city park at the southwest corner of Liberty and Division. The project called for making Liberty Plaza into one level and connecting it with an outdoor amphitheater/ice skating rink to the south, which in turn would lead into the proposed Library Lane, a small road running between Division and Fifth next to the library. Library Gardens also envisioned using the former YMCA site – now a city-owned surface parking lot at the northwest corner of Fifth and William – in part as a community garden.

Likewise, a proposal called “City Center” incorporated Liberty Plaza, the library, the UM Credit Union property just east of the library, and the former Y site. Presenting the team’s project to the library board on Dec. 17, MBA student Sara Jones said they took inspiration from Washington D.C., as well as cities in Europe, to make the area a focal point for downtown Ann Arbor. The plan called for building a new library on the former Y site, and using the property vacated by the current library as part of a complex of four buildings, including a hotel, offices and apartments. The project also envisioned creating new pedestrian-friendly streets within the block – a restaurant row, fashion avenue and a street modeled after a European market.

The student proposals are quite detailed in terms of their market and financial analysis, though obviously there are real-world considerations that in some cases they sidestep. For example, library director Josie Parker noted there are constraints on vacating or selling the downtown library property – linked to the library’s historical connection to the Ann Arbor Public Schools – which make it unlikely that they would pursue that option.

Still, the student projects contain an element that’s missing from most development proposals that come before the city. Perhaps it’s that the students are emboldened to take risks – there’s really nothing at stake for them, after all. Perhaps it’s that they’re not grounded in the city as it is, but rather as it could be – as they’ve experienced in cities elsewhere, places where they’ll move when they graduate.

After hearing their presentations, library board member Margaret Leary said she felt discouraged about the ability of Ann Arbor to ever realize the kind of vision that these students laid out. The two student projects she’d just seen were better than any of the six proposals that had been submitted to the city for the Library Lot site, she said. [Two of those six proposals were subsequently eliminated by a review committee. Copies of all six proposals are posted on the city's website.]

Leary described her experience as a former Ann Arbor planning commissioner, noting that the commission couldn’t even get approval to allow accessory dwelling units in the city – a zoning change that was originally seen as low-hanging fruit, she said, but that was “flattened” after two years of public debate.

How is it possible to focus on the greater community good, she asked, when some people will pick apart each project based on their own pet goals, from affordable housing to green space? Even when those goals are desirable for the community overall, if every project is forced to address them, then creative development is stymied.

Peter Allen told the board that getting political consensus was the biggest obstacle to any development project, “but I think you can build consensus around this site,” he said. He urged the board to take a leadership role – the library has built great public trust, and now needs to step up and help create a master plan for the area. “You need to be driving this process,” he said.

Some Final Thoughts

The demographic that these graduate students represent has been cited repeatedly as an important one for the city’s future – and for the state’s, for that matter. The Ann Arbor Region Success initiative has identified the development of a young professionals network among its priorities.

So following up on her own question – the one I cited at the start of this column – Prue Rosenthal asked what would compel the students to stay here.

One student talked about how she hadn’t needed a car, until she moved to Ann Arbor. The city either needs a better public transportation system, or more businesses within a walkable distance to housing – like pharmacies and groceries that aren’t overpriced, she said.

Active nightlife was another draw – things to do 24/7, whether it’s nightclubs or restaurants or just people out and about. In fact, the energy of people – the thrum of activity, of different kinds of people going about their business or play – was a strong allure. And that kind of energy, not coincidentally, was what their development projects sought to foster.

But if there are lessons to be drawn from these students, it’s not just in what they envision for Ann Arbor, but in how they would attempt to achieve their goals – like talking to stakeholders and taking seriously their input, and taking a far less piecemeal approach to projects that will transform the city, for better or worse.

Perhaps because I’m not from Ann Arbor – though I’ve lived here 13 years, and plan to stay – I’m most intrigued not by what the city was in the past, but by what it will become. And I hope Peter Allen’s students will return some day to see how things turn out.

Editor’s note: Added to this article on Dec. 31, 2009:

• BroadwayMills.pdf
• NoMo.pdf
• ArborDepotPark.pdf
• ArborGate.pdf
• LibraryGardens.pdf
• CityCenter.pdf

Elevator buttons in the new UM Ross School of Business building were among the areas treated during the disinfection protocol.

Overnight from Monday to Tuesday at the new UM Ross School of Business building, plant and custodial staff, along with employees of Aramark, which provides food services in the building, implemented a disinfection protocol for norovirus.

As of early Tuesday afternoon, there were no cases of norovirus yet confirmed among the 20-30 people who had become ill over the past week since the newly constructed building first opened on Jan. 5.  Further, according the Jennifer Nord, of UM Occupational Safety and Environmental Health (OSEH), the last date of onset for a new case of illness was on Jan. 10. People who have become sick have been requested to provide stool samples for analysis by the Michigan Department of Community Health in Lansing. As yet no samples have been provided for testing.

Nord and David Peters of OSEH, in a conference call (arranged by Pamela Koczman, manager in occupational safety and community health at UM), confirmed that the decision to act aggressively by starting the cleaning protocol last night was made based on: (i) the symptoms shown in cases reported, (ii) the quick spread, and (iii) the commonness of norovirus as the cause of such cases.

The norovirus is a term given to a group of viruses that cause gastroenteritis. Symptoms often include nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and stomach cramping, and sometimes include low-grade fever, chills, headache and muscle aches.

Graham Mercer, the business school’s assistant dean, sent an email to the entire school on Monday evening, alerting faculty, staff and students to the situation. He wrote: “After consultation with OSEH we are taking the conservative approach of treating this as a Norovirus outbreak … It’s impossible to determine where this external virus originated but aggressive action is being undertaken to eradicate it.”

A Michigan Department of Community Health publication provides instructions for cleaning an area believed to be infected with the norovirus. It recommends using mixtures of diluted chlorine bleach to disinfect doorknobs, faucets, sinks, toilets, phones, counters, chairs, tables, hand rails, elevator buttons, light switches and keyboards, among other high-touch items.

Chuck Amyx, who is director of operations for the business school campus, confirmed in a conversation on site at the new building this morning that the focus had been on treating surfaces with a high likelihood of being touched. Particular attention was paid to areas in the center of the building, like the Siegel Cafe and the fitness center, where people tend to cluster, increasing the risk of viral transmission via surfaces. However, Amyx said that UM custodial staff had also treated the areas outside of these nexus points, including surfaces like door handles, elevator buttons, drinking fountain activation buttons, counters – all surfaces The Chronicle touched.

The six-story, $145 million building was completed late last year and includes 270,000 square feet of offices, classrooms, an auditorium, gallery space, a “winter garden,” fitness center and cafe. (You can see a view of the building’s exterior from a live webcam here.)

The university has had other outbreaks of the virus, which often strikes in communal settings like schools, day care centers and nursing homes. In 2004, dozens of students living in campus dormitories became ill with the virus, according to an Ann Arbor News report. Nord and Peters said that the current situation at the business school is smaller and more contained than the 2004 situation.

Some of the 40 or so people who attended Friday morning's CEO Connect event at Zingerman's Roadhouse.

Kim Cameron projected an image on the screen and asked people what they saw. “Mars,” someone guessed.   Someone else thought it was an aerial satellite photo, presumably of planet Earth.

It was a cow, Cameron revealed, at which point the group murmured a collective “Aaah!”

The cow’s head was defined by the lighter shadings in the image. “When you look at the light,” Cameron said, “everything changes.” It’s not the image that changes, it’s your perspective on it.

The exercise was an effective illustration of Cameron’s message: Being positive can yield enormous results, both physiologically and in your business.

Kim Cameron, speaking at Friday's CEO Connect.

A co-founder of the Center for Positive Organizational Scholarship at the University of Michigan Ross School of Business, Cameron has researched this topic extensively. He stressed that his research is empirically based, unlike many leadership models that rely heavily on anecdotal case studies and inspirational stories of successful business leaders.

Cameron described how every living system is attracted to life-giving energy – we lean toward the light, metaphorically, just as plants lean toward the sun. It’s called the heliotropic effect, and can be a powerful force within organizations, he said.

His research looks at ways to use that effect to move organizations from a negative or normal state to being virtuous or extraordinary. Over the long term, these kinds of businesses are more productive, profitable, innovative and have higher customer retention, he said.

His most gripping example related to the cleanup of Rocky Flats, a former nuclear facility just outside of Denver. The situation was about as negative as you could get, Cameron said, in terms of toxic materials and the culture both within and outside of the 6,000-acre site. But because the company that was hired for the cleanup took such a positive approach, the job – originally estimated to take 70 years and cost $36 billion – got done in 10 years for around $7 billion. (A 2004 Fast Company article describes this transformation in detail.)

Many of the examples and research that Cameron presented are in his new book, “Positive Leadership: Strategies for Extraordinary Performance.” Several people at the event bought a copy to take with them – it’s sold locally at Nicola’s Books in the Westgate Shopping Center.

Cameron gave his talk Friday morning at a meeting of CEO Connect, organized by local business consultant Rob Pasick. As the event wound to a close, Pasick talked about the positive effect of supporting local businesses, and asked “What can we do locally to make a difference?” That might mean shopping at a locally owned store, eating at local restaurants, or using community banks that in turn invest in local ventures. All of these decisions will help the local economy, making it stronger regardless of external forces at play in the auto industry, Wall Street or elsewhere. He noted that his own new book, “Balanced Leadership in Unbalanced Times,” is being published by a local startup, David Crumm Media. “This is the spirit we want to encourage,” he said. “What little decisions do we make everyday?”

Rob Pasick, left, who organizes the CEO Connect events, with Dan Mulhern and Amy Milligan. Mulhern, who is married to Gov. Jennifer Granholm, is author of "Everyday Leadership" and hosts a weekly radio show by that same name on Michigan Talk Network. Milligan is development director at The Neutral Zone.

Allen Leibowitz and Steve Mangigian are managing partners of Zingerman's Coffee Company, which just released this year's Holiday Blend coffee. They passed out samples to people attending the CEO Connect meeting.