Members of one of the Pioneer High School marching band drum lines practiced on the evening before Election Day. Already in place was the yellow sign indicating that no campaigning is allowed beyond that point. Pioneer High serves at the polling location for Precincts 4 & 8 in Ward 4. (Photo illustration by The Chronicle.)

This year voters in the primary will be confronted with a single issue – a city council race. Ann Arbor city council seats have contested Democratic primaries in just two of the five wards. No Republican candidates are on the ballot.

Voters in Ward 3 will choose between incumbent Stephen Kunselman and Julie Grand. In Ward 4, the choice is between incumbent Marcia Higgins and Jack Eaton.

For all of you procrastinators who are still researching the candidates, here’s a link to Chronicle coverage of the Democratic primary races for Ann Arbor city council this year.

Not sure where to vote? To find your polling place and view a sample ballot for your precinct, visit the Secretary of State’s website.

Check back here throughout the day for briefs filed from the field, or add a comment with your own Election Day observations. 

7:15 a.m. Ward 3, Precinct 8 (Pittsfield School, 2543 Pittsfield Blvd.) As I roll up, poll worker Joseph Bones opens the door to the elementary school. In a loud, booming voice, he declares the polls open for all the world to hear. One person was there that early to vote. Two more arrive shortly after that. Among the reading material brought by poll workers: “Evil” by David Baldacci.

7:20 a.m. Ward 3, Precincts 1 & 2 (Michigan League, 911 N. University) Outside, there are 16 campaign signs for Julie Grand posted around the perimeter of the Michigan League – but so far, none for Stephen Kunselman. Poll workers expect an extremely slow day. They’re taking bets on the number of voters who might show up, with estimates ranging from 34 to 75.

This is a polling station for a combined precinct, and one of those precincts, 3-1, is primarily University of Michigan student housing, including the East Quad dorm. Poll workers recall that they were busy in November of 2012. “That was fun,” one of them says. One of the poll workers brought chocolate cookies to share. Another one brought carrot cake. They are well stocked for the long day.

7:49 a.m. Ward 4, Precinct 1 (Michigan Union, 530 S. State St.) The small polling room on the union’s first floor is stuffy – both the heat and the AC are on, poll workers report. One person has voted here so far. Because this is also a heavy student precinct – including the South Quad dorm – workers don’t expect more than a trickle of voters. They’ve brought reading material.

8:08 a.m. Ward 3, Precincts 6 & 9 (Scarlett Middle School, 3300 Lorraine St.) Approaching the Turnberry neighborhood through a cross-lot path, there’s a small sign in a front lawn: “US War Dead: 6,745.” The polls are set up in the gym. The two doors are propped open to the outside, but the air inside remains heavy with the smell of old gym wood floor varnish. A banner indicates that Scarlett athletes compete as the Roadrunners. Other middle schools: Cougars (Clague), Trojans (Tappan), Vikings (Forsythe), Golden Bears (Slauson), and Pandas (Ann Arbor Open). No Wile E. Coyotes in the mix. About a dozen people have voted so far. As she’s leaving, one tells the poll workers: “Thanks for doing this, you guys!”

8:27 a.m. Ward 4, Precinct 3 (UM Coliseum, Fifth Ave. & Hill St.) Voter No. 2 this morning just walks in – Graydon Krapohl, a member of the city’s park advisory commission. We chat after he finishes voting, and he reports that he’ll be putting out campaign signs here for incumbent Marcia Higgins. Signs for Jack Eaton are already posted in the appropriate spots. A few more voters show up, and most seem familiar to the poll workers. One worker is sewing red cloth baskets – she has three on the table. Others are doing more traditional time-killing activities: Reading and chatting. Voter No. 8 has now arrived.

And now voter No. 9 – Ned Staebler. He points out that voters no longer have to sign the statement saying they are a U.S. citizen. “I’m not a lawyer, but I play one on Facebook,” he jokes. Staebler also observes there are no longer any paper poll books – all precincts use electronic poll books now, and he clarifies that candidates can look at those. One of the poll workers asks: “Who are you?” He explains that he previously ran for office here, and has worked on other campaigns. Most recently, in 2010 he ran for state representative in District 53, but lost a very close race in the Democratic primary to Jeff Irwin.

8:35 a.m. Ward 3, Precinct 5 (University Townhouses Center, 3200 Braeburn Circle) The speedbumps leading to the polls are substantial. Poll workers are disappointed that I am not here to vote. Three people have cast their ballots in person so far. There’s not typically a morning rush, they explain, but around lunchtime and evening when people get off work, they expect to see a few more voters. Poll workers sort through the scheduling for their lunch breaks.

9:02 a.m. Ward 4, Precinct 2 (Mary St. Polling Place, 926 Mary St.) Here at the city’s historic polling station – the only building that’s still used for its original purpose – the smell of bleach doesn’t quite mask the underlying scent of bird excrement. Most of the year, this small one-room structure is used by the Bird Center of Washtenaw County. There have been three voters here by 9 a.m., including one of the poll workers. The precinct chair, Richard Holmes, points out the new window air-conditioner that’s been installed. But unlike most August primaries when the weather is hot and humid, the AC is hardly needed today. At nearly every polling station, workers remark on the pleasant weather this year – they caught a break.

9:13 a.m. Ward 3, Precincts 4 & 7 (Allen School, 2560 Towner Blvd.) The road to Allen Elementary is called Easy Street, which competes with Goat Fell for the best street name in the city. The pervious pavers on the east side of Easy Street have sunken a bit, making cycling a bit of a challenge. Poll workers exhibit a bit of precinct pride in reporting that 48 people have voted so far. At one point, four people were in line, and two of the voting booths were occupied at the same time. They’re happy the lighting in the school has been upgraded, making it easier to see than in past years. They offer me a spot to observe, situated between the flag of the state of Michigan and the American flag.

9:32 a.m. Ward 3, Precinct 3 (Tappan Middle School, 2251 E. Stadium Blvd.) When I arrive, 64 people have voted. During the next 15 minutes, another 10 people show up to vote, but never enough to create a wait. On her way out, one voter says, “Well, that was really easy!”

City attorney Stephen Postema walks in and introduces himself to poll workers as a member of the city’s election commission. He arrives at the same time as Ward 3 councilmember Christopher Taylor and two other voters. Outside, two volunteers for Julie Grand – wearing her purple campaign T-shirts – are handing out literature and talking to voters on their way in. These are the first campaign workers I’ve encountered so far at a polling station.

10:08 a.m. Ward 4, Precinct 6 (Cobblestone Farm, 2781 Packard St.) Large cutouts of fruits and vegetables along Packard indicate the farmers market, which runs from 4-7 p.m. at this location today. At the polls, a ballot jams in the machine. Could be the humidity. In any case, it results in a spoiled ballot. And the tabulator appears to be wrecked. Poll workers decide to have subsequent voters put their ballots in the auxiliary bin in the voting machine on the lower left side of the machine. The second voter who was asked to use this secondary procedure is Liz Margolis, Ann Arbor Public Schools communications director. Her comment to poll workers on placing it in the auxiliary bin: “As long as it counts.”

A few minutes later, the poll workers break out the manual for opening up the tabulator to clear obstructions. “You want to take one and try it again?” It appears that one of the wheels that pulls in the ballots is not grabbing properly. It’s pulling on one side but not the other. A technician is called. He’s now on site. Wire cutters are located. Current count is verified. Power is switched off. Tabulator is removed from top of machine. Replacement is installed. Poll workers engage in verification procedures. Ballots are fed successfully through the new tabulator. Technician leaves with defective tabulator.

City attorney Stephen Postema has arrived. He’s approaching each poll worker, introducing himself and thanking them for their service, working the room as a candidate running for office would. This is his custom, as a member of the city’s election commission, to visit the polls, introduce himself and shake hands with as many people as possible. So it’s not necessarily analyzable as a soft launch to his campaign for 22nd Circuit Court judge in 2014. Still, according to some members of the Washtenaw County legal community, he’s told them that he’s decided to run in 2014 for the judgeship that Donald Shelton will leave open when Shelton is “aged out.” Other possible candidates include Cedric Simpson and Erane Washington.

11:56 a.m. Ward 4, Precinct 5 (Clare Church/Temple Beth Emeth, 2309 Packard) So far 53 people have cast ballots here. The designated public area for this precinct includes a table and a chair, making it the very best precinct in the city from the perspective of a working journalist. Campaign sign count outside is Eaton, 5; Higgins, 3.

This polling location is on an AAATA bus route. Bus #479 [vehicle number] has just pulled into the stop heading southeast on Packard [Route #5]. A family arrives – parents, teenage daughter, and two younger kids. About the older daughter, mother announces: “This is her first time voting!” After voting, she declares: “That’s exciting.” “I voted” stickers are handed out all around.

2:12 p.m. Ward 4, Precincts 4 & 8 (Pioneer High School, 601 W. Stadium Blvd.) Voter No. 123 walks into the Pioneer gym, which is empty except for the four poll workers. “How will you handle this big crowd?” she jokes. One worker reports that turnout is better than expected, and has been steady.

Soon there’s a mini rush of sorts, with about five voters showing up. The gym is a little stuffy – one of the big stationary fans isn’t working, and the school electrician is enlisted to see if it can be fixed.

Also making an appearance is Howard Scheps from the city clerk’s office, with some paperwork for a poll worker to fill out. One of the workers calls out: “Get two pieces of ID from this guy!”

2:37 p.m. Ward 4, Precinct 9 (Lawton School, 2250 S. Seventh St.) To get to the polling room here, you have to navigate a twist of hallways, though there are plenty of “Vote Here” signs to guide the way. Even so, one voter that I encounter has gone into a darkened room by mistake, so I point her in the right direction. Turns out we interrupted someone’s nap.

There have been 150 voters so far, and poll workers cheer when they hear that their number is higher than the Pioneer High polling station. They talk about a relatively easy wrap-up after polls close at 8 p.m., given the relatively low number of voters and the simple ballot – especially compared to November 2012. One woman who took less than a minute to vote says “That’s my kind of ballot!”

3:19 p.m. Ward 4, Precinct 7 (Dicken School, 2135 Runnymede) The polls have been open 8 hours when voter No. 200 walks into the gym at Dicken. Poll workers have been here since 6 a.m., and have five more hours until the polls close – not that they’re counting.

The elderly couple who are voters No. 199 and 200 walk arm in arm. The woman tells poll workers that “I used to work here many years ago.” The man says he’s glad it’s a short ballot. He puts the “I Voted” sticker on his forehead, and paraphrases General MacArthur as he walks out: “I shall return – in November!”

And that wraps up the tour for this year.  The polls close at 8 p.m. The earliest results could be available within a half hour or so after the polls close. We’ll publish initial, unofficial results – based on voting machine tapes generated at the close of polls – in the Civic News Ticker. The Washtenaw County clerk’s website for election results will also have unofficial tallies.

The Chronicle could not survive without regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of civics and government affairs. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle. And if you’re already voting for us, please encourage your friends, neighbors and colleagues to help support The Chronicle, too!

2013 Ann Arbor Democratic primary city council campaign contributions: All candidates. (Map by The Chronicle based on data from the Washtenaw County clerk’s office.) Maps by candidate are included after the jump.

The deadline for filing pre-primary reports was July 26, for the period ending July 21.

Voters in the Democratic primary for Ward 3 will choose between incumbent Stephen Kunselman and Julie Grand as the Democratic candidate to appear on the November city council ballot. Grand raised the most cash of any candidate, getting donations from 68 contributors averaging about $160 apiece for a total of $10,825.

Kunselman raised $5,855 from 54 contributors. While that’s roughly half what Grand raised, it’s about twice what he received in the pre-primary period in 2011 ($2,750). That was a three-way race between himself, Ingrid Ault and Marwan Issa. The average contribution to Kunselman’s campaign this year was about $110.

In Ward 4, voters will choose between incumbent Marcia Higgins and Jack Eaton. Fourteen-year incumbent Higgins raised the least cash of any candidate, receiving $4,592 from 26 contributors for an average donation of $177.

Eaton raised $7,958 from 82 different contributors for an average donation of $97. That’s the greatest number of individual contributors of any candidate. Eaton’s total this time around is about twice as much as he raised for the same period in 2012 ($4,305), when he ran a close but ultimately unsuccessful race against incumbent Margie Teall.

Of the 228 total contributors for all four candidates (including those who contributed to more than one campaign), The Chronicle counted at least 57 contributions (25%) from people who are either current or past elected or appointed officials – including appointees to committees. Those contributions were evenly distributed across candidates: Eaton (16); Higgins (13); Grand (14); Kunselman (14).

Some current councilmembers have lent their financial support to candidates. Ward 4 challenger Jack Eaton is supported financially by Sumi Kailasapathy (Ward 1), Mike Anglin (Ward 5) and Jane Lumm (Ward 2). Incumbent Marcia Higgins has financial support from her wardmate Margie Teall as well as mayor John Hieftje.

Ward 3 incumbent Stephen Kunselman is also supported financial by Anglin and Lumm. Julie Grand has received contributions from Higgins and Teall.

Current and past campaign filing documents can be searched and retrieved from the Washtenaw County clerk’s web page. [.pdf of Grand's statements] [.pdf of Eaton's statements] [.pdf of Higgins' statements] [.pdf of Kunselman's statements]

Other coverage of the campaigns is categorized in The Chronicle as “2013 primary election.”

Presented below are charts of contribution counts, broken down by size of contribution, as well as maps showing the geographic distribution of contributions.

Contribution Counts by Size

In recent Democratic primaries, the shape of the distribution of contributions by size has been a possible indicator of success. Specifically, those candidates with a distribution skewed toward a greater number of smaller contributions have been successful.

Jack Eaton: Ann Arbor Ward 4 city council 2013 Democratic pre-primary campaign contributions. (Chart by The Chronicle based on data from the Washtenaw County clerk.)

Marcia Higgins: Ann Arbor Ward 4 city council 2013 Democratic pre-primary campaign contributions. (Chart by The Chronicle based on data from the Washtenaw County clerk.)

Julie Grand: Ann Arbor Ward 3 city council 2013 Democratic pre-primary campaign contributions. (Chart by The Chronicle based on data from the Washtenaw County clerk.)

Stephen Kunselman: Ann Arbor Ward 3 city council 2013 Democratic pre-primary campaign contributions. (Chart by The Chronicle based on data from the Washtenaw County clerk.)

Geographic Distribution

The maps below do not include contributions made from out of state. For example, members of Ward 3 candidate Julie Grand’s family, who live in Massachusetts, contributed to her campaign.

Contributions in Ward 4 (green) this year continue a trend seen in previous primaries – for many contributions to come from residents who live inside the city but outside the ward. Eaton’s geographic distribution can be identified by the tight cluster of donations in the northwest corner of the ward – where he lives. But his support is evenly distributed across the middle of the city, without regard to ward boundaries.

Based on the geographic distribution of contributions to Higgins’ campaign, it’s not evident which ward the race is in.

Jack Eaton 2013 Ward 4 (green) Ann Arbor city council campaign contributions: Democratic primary. (Map by The Chronicle based on data from the Washtenaw County clerk.)

Marcia Higgins 2013 Ward 4 (green) Ann Arbor city council campaign contributions: Democratic primary. (Map by The Chronicle based on data from the Washtenaw County clerk.)

In Ward 3 (yellow), both candidates enjoyed some support from outside the ward, but Grand’s support is more clearly centered in the neighborhood where she lives – in Burns Park. She received no contributions in Ward 3 south of Buhr Park. Kunselman’s neighborhood is discernible in the geographic plot, south of Packard and west of Platt.

Julie Grand 2013 Ward 3 (yellow) Ann Arbor city council campaign contributions: Democratic primary. (Map by The Chronicle based on data from the Washtenaw County clerk.)

Stephen Kunselman 2013 Ward 3 (yellow) Ann Arbor city council campaign contributions: Democratic primary. (Map by The Chronicle based on data from the Washtenaw County clerk.)

The Chronicle could not survive without regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the Ann Arbor city council. 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!

Jack Eaton and incumbent Marcia Higgins are competing for the Democratic nomination in the Ward 4 primary election on Aug. 6. (Photos by the writer.)

Each of the city’s five wards is represented with two seats on the 11-member council, which includes the mayor. The terms for council seats are two years, and one of the two seats is up for election every year.

Both candidates participated in a forum hosted by the League of Women Voters on July 10. The complete video recording of the forum, conducted at Community Television Network’s studios on South Industrial, is available online through CTN’s Video on Demand.

Questions fielded by Eaton and Higgins included topics like downtown Ann Arbor and future development, transportation, relations between the University of Michigan and the city, and interactions between councilmembers and residents.

They also responded to a debate prompt that for Ward 4 possibly could be of greater significance than those other issues – a question about flooding. In last year’s Ward 4 Democratic primary, which Eaton contested with incumbent Margie Teall, the election came about five months after heavy rains on March 15, 2012 caused overland flooding in the Lansdowne neighborhood of Ward 4. Although Eaton lost the election by a handful of votes, he was strongest in the precincts farther from downtown, where the flooding took place. Previously, Eaton had run for the Democratic nomination to represent Ward 4 in 2010, also against Teall. His showing in 2012 was a significant improvement over his 2010 result. This year marks his third campaign for Ann Arbor city council.

Higgins was first elected to the council in 1999 – as a Republican. However, she switched to the Democratic Party in 2005. She’s in her 14th year of service on the council.

This report presents responses by Higgins and Eaton to questions at the July 10 LWV forum, grouped more by theme than by chronology.

Opening Statement

Candidates were given a chance to make a one-minute opening statement.

Opening Statement: Eaton

Eaton began by thanking the League of Women Voters for holding the forum. Ward 4 residents were telling him that city hall needs to focus on sensible priorities, such as essential infrastructure and core services, he said. He’s running for office because he has been involved in local politics – as he’s been active in his neighborhood association and in helping other neighborhoods get organized.

What he’d found, Eaton said, is that the city council is unresponsive to the concerns of city residents. He’s running for council because he believes that Ward 4 residents deserve responsive leadership. He said he’d answer e-mails and return phone calls promptly. He’s running because he believes the council needs to represent the priorities of its residents. If elected, he would seek common sense solutions to neighborhood concerns.

He called himself a voice for sensible priorities – such as public safety, protecting the local transportation system, and maintaining essential infrastructure.

Opening Statement: Higgins

Higgins introduced herself as a current councilmember representing Ward 4. Since the time she was elected to the council, her priorities have always included a balanced budget, she said, which absolutely allows the city to provide core services.

Other priorities indicated by Higgins included maintaining infrastructure, maintaining strong reserves and an excellent bond rating, preserving parkland, and working with neighbors on various issues. She’d worked on stormwater issues, traffic calming, and had prevented football parking in Allmendinger Park, Higgins said. She’d worked on issues that arise between residents and students.

Higgins said she wants to continue to work to make Ann Arbor a vibrant and livable city. She wants to work with residents in collaboration going forward, looking at how Ann Arbor can be moved forward.

Downtown, Development

Several questions involved downtown development and a vision for the future of Ann Arbor.

Downtown, Development: City-Owned Land

Please tell the voters what land the city owns in the downtown area and how you would favor using it for the greatest good. What ideas are out there or are commitments already made? And specifically, what use would you support for the Library Lane lot?

The five city-owned sites that were the focus of the Connecting William Street project are indicated in blue.

By way of additional background, the DDA this year completed a city council-directed planning project, called Connecting William Street (CWS), which included the Library Lane lot as well as the former Y Lot. The CWS project was undertaken by the DDA based on a directive from the city council given at its April 4, 2011 meeting.

The intent was to make recommendations for possible future development, in a cohesive way, on five city-owned sites: (1) the Kline lot (on the east side of Ashley, north of William), (2) the lot next to Palio restaurant (northeast corner of Main & William), (3) the ground floor of the Fourth & William parking structure, (4) the former YMCA lot (on William between Fourth and Fifth), and (5) the top of the Library Lane underground parking garage on South Fifth, north of the downtown library.

In January 2013, the DDA gave a presentation to the council on its Connecting William Street recommendations. The council never took action on that proposal. However, at its March 5, 2013 meeting, the Ann Arbor planning commission voted to adopt the report as a resource document supporting the city’s master plan. Kirk Westphal, the commission’s chair, also served on an advisory board for the Connecting William Street effort. He is running unopposed in the Aug. 6 Democratic primary for Ward 2.

For a summary of Chronicle coverage of CWS and Y lot issues, see “Planning Group Strategizes on Downtown.”

Downtown, Development: City-Owned Land – Higgins

Higgins began by saying that the city council had worked with the DDA to look at what needs to be done in the downtown. The city owns several lots in the midtown area, she said. The Kline lot is also under consideration, she added. The city has just contracted with a real estate person to look at the Y lot and at what can be done with that, she said.

She felt there’s still a community conversation that is happening about what to do with those properties – and she didn’t think that decisions about that should be driven by the council. Higgins thought that decisions about those properties should be driven by the community. She was not aware of any decisions that have been made, she said. She’s not supporting any particular decision, she said, because it’s still an ongoing conversation.

For the top of the Library Lane lot, she’d heard all different types of suggestions that had been made, and all of them have merit, she contended. The community had not yet coalesced around one idea that is right for Ann Arbor, she concluded.

Downtown, Development: City-Owned Land – Eaton

The city owns a variety of properties downtown, Eaton began, saying that each one of them is unique. As a unique feature of the old Y lot, he pointed out that it’s a property that the city purchased and still owes money on. So he thought that property should be treated differently, saying that the city should try to sell that as soon as it can, so that the debt can be paid off. Eaton cautioned that it’s important to make sure that the zoning attached to the property is definite enough so that there is not a big drawn-out fight over how to use it, once somebody does buy it. But Eaton said he doesn’t think the city should micromanage what happens to it: The property should be put on the market and the market should decide what happens to that.

The other properties that the city doesn’t owe any money on are really public assets, Eaton said. And the city should be careful how those properties are used or disposed of. He believed a close look should be taken at developing downtown parks, and at creating downtown performance centers – things that actually serve the community, rather than simply selling those properties for a price.

Downtown, Development: DDA

Who or what is the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority and what is the financial interrelationship between the DDA and the city of Ann Arbor? Do you favor continuing it or changing it somehow? And if so, what would you like to do?

By way of additional background, the DDA does not levy taxes on its own authority, but rather captures taxes of other taxing entities – the city of Ann Arbor, Washtenaw County, Washtenaw Community College and the Ann Arbor District Library. The DDA does not capture the full amount of those entities’ taxes, but rather only on the initial increment between the baseline value of a property and the increase in value due to new construction and improvements. That is, the DDA does not capture taxes on an increase that’s due to inflation.

Chapter 7 of the city code already regulates the DDA’s tax increment finance (TIF). The DDA has chosen to interpret the Chapter 7 language in a way that does not recognize the cap on TIF revenues that is set forth in the code. That led to a proposal by some councilmembers earlier this year to revise the ordinance so that the DDA’s alternate interpretation is clearly ruled out. The council gave the ordinance change initial approval on April 1, 2013. But later, on May 6, 2013, the council chose to postpone the vote until Sept. 3, the council’s first meeting that month.

Downtown, Development: DDA – Eaton

The Downtown Development Authority was created under a state statute, Eaton said, that allows cities to “skim” tax funds off of a downtown area for improving the downtown.

Jack Eaton.

The statute was originally intended to help avoid decaying Midwestern downtowns. Ann Arbor’s DDA has been quite successful, he said, pointing out that Ann Arbor doesn’t have a decaying downtown.

Eaton allowed that the DDA does important work for the city.

When the city of Ann Arbor originally conceived of having a downtown development authority, Eaton pointed out, the city’s ordinance [Chapter 7] included limiting the rate of growth of the DDA TIF capture, but now “we’ve lost our way from that.”

Now that so much building is going on in the downtown area, the DDA is increasing its revenues at a rapid rate, Eaton. He thought it’s important to look at how quickly those revenues increase.

Downtown, Development: DDA – Higgins

The DDA is always changing, Higgins said.

Marcia Higgins eyed the hat from which she was asked to draw a slip of paper to determine the sequence of speaking turns.

The DDA was created in the 1980s, at a time when downtown Ann Arbor was decaying. A complete flight of things out of downtown and out to the suburbs had taken place, she said, noting that this was when Briarwood Mall was built.

And Ann Arbor’s downtown was looking pretty bad. The DDA took the initiative and has rebuilt the downtown, Higgins said.

Over the last 20 years, the downtown has changed significantly several different times. That is a part of change, Higgins said.

The DDA does a great job, she said. The issue that has come before the council now is a funding issue, she explained.

Higgins contended that the city had spent a lot of time in an economic downturn to lay a platform for the growth of the downtown area – and some of that is now happening. And it’s not just apartment buildings being built, Higgins said. Companies are coming back to downtown because that’s where they want to be.

So the city council right now is tackling the issue: What is the correct funding formula? A DDA-council committee had been appointed to review that question and come back with a solution, she concluded.

Downtown, Development: Vision of Ann Arbor

Many of today’s Ann Arbor citizens say they don’t recognize their city anymore, with the high-rises, zoning changes, and widely varying architecture. Are we trying for a complete makeover? So how would you or did you as a councilmember vote regarding building moratoriums, height restrictions, dedication of historical districts, and architectural oversight?

By way of additional background, on May 13, 2013, the city council approved a contentious development proposal at 413 E. Huron – a 14-story, 216-apartment building at the northeast corner of Huron and Division streets.

The council had contemplated imposing a moratorium on downtown site plans, but on March 18, 2013 opted not to do so. Instead, the council gave direction to the city planning commission to review the city’s D1 zoning. The specific scope of planning commission work was outlined in an April 1, 2013 council resolution. Before that, on March 4, 2013 the council also reconvened its design review task force to take another look at the design review process. Currently, design review is mandatory, but compliance by developers with review board recommendations is voluntary.

Downtown, Development: Vision of Ann Arbor – Higgins

Higgins described the A2D2 downtown rezoning overhaul as a large project to decide on a vision for Ann Arbor, which had lasted several years. It was a collaboration of residents from across the city over several years and resulted in a community decision to increase density in the downtown. And until the community tells her otherwise, Higgins said, she’d continue to support that.

Where problems had arisen, she said, is in those areas where downtown zoning butts up against near-downtown neighborhoods. That’s now being reviewed, Higgins pointed out, by the planning commission. A consultant has been hired to look at areas where residential areas butt up against tall buildings, Higgins said, calling it a legitimate concern. As far as the proposed moratorium, she said, a platform had been set for what the community wanted to do in the downtown – and she wanted to continue with that platform.

Five buildings went through with complete approval, she said, and for one where there were issues, citizens had told the council there were issues. Higgins pointed to her work on the downtown design guidelines, which are used to guide architectural aspects of development.

Downtown, Development: Vision of Ann Arbor – Eaton

Eaton began by saying he felt there are competing visions for the city. He felt some of the city’s leaders envision making “radical changes to our town,” changing the character of downtown dramatically and perhaps even making Ann Arbor a “mini-metropolis.” Eaton said he’s not sure that everyone supports that.

He allowed that Ann Arbor can sustain some core density. But when the city was considering the A2D2 downtown zoning, he and others had warned that the zoning needed to provide buffers between the core density and the nearby neighborhoods – but the council had failed to do so.

Eaton analyzed the fight over 413 E. Huron as the product of a failure to address what’s included in the city’s master plan – buffer zones between density and nearby neighborhoods. Density has also been extended out into the neighborhoods, Eaton said – so now a four-story massive apartment building and multi-use project will be located at the former Georgetown Mall site, in the middle of a residential block. Eaton wasn’t sure that project is an appropriate use of density. [The project Eaton was describing is Packard Square, which recently received approval of a revision to its brownfield plan.]

Downtown, Development: Who Are We Attracting?

The mayor and others want to work to make Ann Arbor a more attractive home for young professionals. Are we doing as much to promote a good, accessible life for retired professionals as well as for our disabled fellow citizens?

Downtown, Development: Who Are We Attracting? – Eaton

Eaton began by saying it was his understanding that when the zoning in downtown was revised, the idea was to try to attract not just young professionals but also empty-nesters, and he guessed that includes the disability community as well. Eaton felt that the revised zoning had failed on both counts.

The massive building that’s happened in the downtown area has been student housing, he said – not for young professionals, not for empty-nesters, not for any just “normal residents” of town. He believed that the downtown rezoning efforts have really seriously failed – and it’s important to go back and address what it would take to make the downtown area more inviting for non-student groups.

Downtown, Development: Who Are We Attracting? – Higgins

Responding to Eaton’s assertion that the revised A2D2 zoning had failed, Higgins said, “I don’t believe it’s failed.” Many retirees come to Ann Arbor, and empty-nesters want to live downtown. They have many places to choose from, she said – pointing out there are wonderful lofts above historic buildings, and that’s where they live. They also live in Sloan Plaza, she added. The new building that will be built at 413 E. Huron has a mix of 60% one- and two-bedroom apartments. That development could also be a place for retirees to live, Higgins ventured.

As more density is being built in the downtown, Higgins said, in the near-downtown neighborhoods homes are starting to be turned back to single-family occupancy. It’s not just about young professionals who want to live downtown and it’s not just about students, Higgins said. Instead, she said, it’s about being inclusive so that we have the right mix of housing for everyone who wants to be in Ann Arbor.

Downtown, Development: Realizing Vision

Looking ahead 10-20 years, explain one or more projects you would like to initiate or support now to make your Ann Arbor vision realizable.

Downtown, Development: Realizing Vision – Eaton

Eaton thought the city really needs to focus on the core functions of local government. Primarily, he thought it’s the city’s responsibility now to set the foundation with infrastructure – so that 10 or 20 years from now, residents won’t continue to have the kind of bad roads that the city has now, and won’t continue to have the kind of street flooding that allows people to kayak in the street. Future generations should be able to build on what is done today, Eaton said, concluding that there’s a fundamental duty to take responsibility for problems today.

Downtown, Development: Realizing Vision – Higgins

Higgins began by quipping that she hopes she’s around in 15 or 20 years to see what it looks like. She said the city is “tackling” several issues – like transportation, what the downtown looks like, and preserving neighborhoods. She described those issues as including initiatives that have been underway for the past decade – and “we’re now starting to see fruits of that,” she said.

Responding to Eaton’s remarks about infrastructure, she contended that the city is focusing on infrastructure, saying the city has rebuilt five bridges in the past 10 years, put in miles of roads, replaced sewer, water lines, water mains and sewer pipes. Sidewalks have been replaced. That had been done in the context of a terrible economic downturn, Higgins said, adding that it’s important to ensure that the city has a balanced budget. A balanced budget is the most important thing, Higgins said, because what the city wants to do is always going to be determined by how much money the city has.

Affordable Housing

In your opinion, what progress has been made by the city to assure the availability of affordable housing? Could there be an exchange or regulations requiring developers of high-priced private dorms to provide some low-cost housing in exchange for the ability to develop it? Or will we just wait until these pricey student residences become outdated or unnecessary so they can be repurposed?

Affordable Housing: Eaton

Eaton said he thought the city has really fallen short on the entire area of affordable housing. When the old YMCA building was torn down, and its single-resident occupancy units for low-income people were eliminated, nothing was done to replace it, Eaton said.

He expressed concern about whether the city was maintaining the amount of affordable housing it had in the past. As an example, he gave an Avalon Housing project on Pauline Boulevard that demolished affordable housing and replaced it with fewer units. More needs to be done for affordable housing, Eaton said.

He also said more precision is required in the definition of affordable housing. He posed a series of questions: Is affordable housing for the very, very poor? Is it for the working poor? Or is it for middle-class people who can’t afford to live in this town? Without more clearly defining what is meant by affordable housing, Eaton felt it would be difficult to address the housing problem.

Affordable Housing: Higgins

Higgins began by saying she supports affordable housing. She wished the city had more general fund dollars to commit to affordable housing. The city has moved away from planned unit developments (PUDs), which had an affordable housing component. That involved a developer paying money into the city’s affordable housing trust fund, or providing a certain amount of affordable units within the housing itself. Now, more “by-right” development is taking place, instead of through PUDs, so that funding source has disappeared, she said.

The council is working with the Ann Arbor housing commission on ways to increase housing, Higgins said, and the city is working with other not-for-profits that provide affordable housing. She gave as an example Avalon Housing’s Carrot Way project on the northeast side of town. Higgins described the affordable housing the city has as not necessarily in the best shape. She said that the city needs to focus on what it already has, saying it needs to be housing for people who are going to want to live there and are going to be safe there, constructed with quality materials.

Transportation

Candidates were asked two questions on transportation issues at opposite ends of the spectrum: (1) a possible high-capacity transit system that’s currently being studied; and (2) a relatively new crosswalk law regulating conditions under which motorists must stop for pedestrians.

Transportation: The Connector

Regarding the connector study, plans are underway to bring light rail transportation into the city of Ann Arbor. Please use your minute to tell voters, especially in your ward, how you feel about any of the options – station location, possible routing, service priorities, cost-sharing on the planning.

By way of additional background, the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority is currently conducting an alternatives analysis study for possible high-capacity transit in the corridor running from US-23 and Plymouth southward along Plymouth to State Street, then further south to I-94. The alternatives analysis phase will result in a preferred choice of transit mode (e.g., bus rapid transit, light rail, etc.) and identification of stations and stops.

Area of study for the connector. (Image links to study website.)

A previous study established the feasibility of operating some kind of high-capacity transit in that corridor. A key finding of the feasibility study was that the demand for high-capacity transit is clear in the “core” of the corridor – primarily between the University of Michigan’s north campus, medical facilities and central campus.

The demand was found to be less intense on the corridor’s “shoulders.” That basic finding is now evident in the color shading on the draft route alignment map for the current phase of the study, which indicates the density of trips.

At a public engagement session held on June 18 at the downtown Ann Arbor District Library, it was announced that the alternative of an elevated guideway system is no longer among the mix of options that the consultant is considering. A final report on a locally preferred alternative is expected for this phase of the study sometime in the winter of 2014.

The funding for the planning work associated with both phases of the study was subjected to wrangling among the funding partners – the city, the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority, the University of Michigan and the AAATA.

Transportation: The Connector – Higgins

Higgins began by saying that she was very excited to see that Florida didn’t want some federal funding that could now be brought into Michigan to consider funding “light rail.” [Higgins was alluding to federal funding for high-speed commuter rail for inter-city service. But the connector, as a new service that could be built within the city limits, is not that kind of project. The rest of the response from Higgins didn't address the connector project per se, but rather concerned commuter rail into and out of the city of Ann Arbor, with the associated controversies of building a new station – at the Fuller Park location – or expanding the existing Amtrak station to serve east-west commuter rail.]

Higgins said that “light rail” is not just about commuters, but rather is about people who want to go to a lot of places for entertainment, for example. It’s a way to connect, she said, and Michigan is behind the curve. As far as where the station could be or should be located, Higgins didn’t really have a preference about where it is. She just thought the best location needs to be decided and then the city should move forward with that. A new station could very well be an expansion of the existing station, she said. If a new station were to be located somewhere, there’d be a community dialogue on where it should be.

Transportation: The Connector – Eaton

Eaton began by first sketching out what the connector is. The connector study is actually a study about moving a large number of people within the city, he explained – from the northeast corner of town, down to the University of Michigan campus and perhaps even out South State Street. The connector project is separate and apart from the desire to have commuter rail between Ann Arbor and Livingston County or to Wayne County, Eaton said. The connector, Eaton said, would primarily benefit the University Michigan – in that it would be moving a lot of students between central and north campus.

Eaton pointed out that Ann Arbor has a transit authority in Ann Arbor with a dedicated millage. It should be the AAATA’s responsibility to work with the University of Michigan on the connector project, he said, and he was opposed to using Ann Arbor general fund money for that transportation study. There are a lot of other core, essential services that should be using its general fund, he concluded.

Transportation: Crosswalk Law

Please comment on the effectiveness and enforcement of the pedestrian crossing laws in Ann Arbor. Is there money available and is it being spent to ensure maintenance of the striping and the electric signaling? In your opinion, how are pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists responding? Is further education and communication needed?

Background on the legislative history of Ann Arbor’s crosswalk ordinance includes a tweak given final approval at the council’s Dec. 19, 2011 meeting.

Chronicle file photo of Seventh & Washington in Ann Arbor looking northwest. The crosswalk includes an island in the middle of the street as well as a “local law” sign, indicating motorists are to stop, not just yield.

The language given final approval by the council reads in relevant part: “… the driver of a vehicle shall stop before entering a crosswalk and yield the right-of-way to a pedestrian stopped at the curb, curb line or ramp leading to a crosswalk and to every pedestrian within a crosswalk, when the pedestrian is on the half of the roadway on which the vehicle is traveling or when the pedestrian is approaching so closely from the opposite half of the roadway as to be in danger.”

That revision came after a modification the council made 18 months earlier on July 19, 2010 – to include an expansion of the conditions under which motorists must take action to accommodate pedestrians. Specifically, the 2010 amendments required accommodation of pedestrians not just “within a crosswalk” but also “approaching or within a crosswalk.” The modification approved on Dec. 19 was intended to address a perceived ambiguity of the word “approaching.”

Besides the “approaching” phrase, the 2010 amendments also included two other key elements. The 2010 amendments included a requirement that motorists “stop” and not merely “slow as to yield.” The proposal to change the language to “stop” – for the sake of clarity – was made at the council table by Marcia Higgins.

Transportation: Crosswalk Law – Eaton

Eaton began by saying that recently the city passed a pedestrian ordinance that’s quite different from the local law in most communities in Michigan. Ann Arbor has a lot of people coming to live for shorter periods of time – to do business or attend school. He didn’t think that Ann Arbor’s law on pedestrian safety should be that much different from the rest of the state.

Eaton indicated that the state’s allocation of Act 51 money to the city might be available to use on sidewalks and pedestrian safety in greater proportions than it’s been used in the past. He would support more signals, and filling in more of the city’s sidewalk gaps to make pedestrians safer in town.

Transportation: Crosswalk Law – Higgins

Higgins thought the city’s current crosswalk ordinance language is a little confusing for a lot of people, saying that they don’t know exactly what they’re supposed to do. She described the council’s action as tackling an issue of safety very quickly, saying that not all the kinks have been worked out. Different alternatives had been considered to allow pedestrians to cross streets more safely, she said. As an example, she cited solar-powered flashing signals that work to ensure that people can get entirely across some of the major streets.

About “road diets,” she said that the city is still trying to figure out the best approach, noting that there is still some work to do on that. About sidewalks, she said the recent voter-approved sidewalk millage is being used to work on the sidewalk gaps in the city. [The sidewalk millage is actually only available for repair of existing sidewalks, not for construction of new sidewalks.]

University-City Relations

Many university cities have established anchor institution relationships, the hallmark of which is connecting the campus with city life and community-building. What are the some of the ways you believe that Ann Arbor and the University of Michigan can nurture and grow programs that use common anchor institution strategies – among them local purchasing, investment practices, neighborhood partnerships, and city revenue generation, such as payments in lieu of taxes, known as PILOTs.

By way of additional background, the city and the University of Michigan recently came up against a point of friction over a right-of-way occupancy agreement in connection with the university’s desire to run conduit under Tappan Street. The council took action at its July 15, 2013 meeting to direct renegotiation of the template used by the city and the university to handle that kind of agreement.

The friction stemmed from a vote taken at the council’s May 13, 2013 meeting, which failed to achieve an eight-vote majority. The purpose of the conduits is to connect a new emergency generator to the Lawyers Club buildings at 551 S. State St. The Lawyers Club and the generator are located on opposite sides of the street. The university considers the transaction to be a conveyance of an interest in land. The city doesn’t see it that way, but the council was asked to treat the agreement as if it were a conveyance of an interest in land – which triggered the requirement of an eight-vote majority.

Other recent council conversation about university-city relations includes coordinating with the university about a partial closure of Main Street on football Saturdays. A public meeting is scheduled for July 24 at 6 p.m. at the downtown location of the Ann Arbor District Library to explain how the logistics will work.

University-City Relations – Eaton

Eaton thought Ann Arbor needs to work significantly harder to cooperate with the University of Michigan, saying it’s the main institution and one of the largest employers in town. Eaton said the city does not have a good working relationship with the university. He thought that one of the ways the city could cooperate with the University of Michigan is by installing infrastructure and utilities on a schedule that is compatible with the building projects that the university has.

He also felt the city could cooperate with the University of Michigan in seeking alternative energy generation and use. He concluded that he believed there’s a lot of work that needs to be done to set up better cooperation between the city and the university, and he would support such efforts if he were elected to the council.

University-City Relations – Higgins

Higgins pointed out that the city already has a relationship with the university at the staff level. For the projects that the university is working on, city staff are providing support, she said, and vice versa. Monthly meetings are held where staff from the two institutions talk about what’s coming up, where the city and the university can collaborate on different issues – and she thought that approach is working well.

She described additional friction that can happen, when the university chooses to undertake major projects that affect the nearby neighborhoods. The city has been working for the past couple of years with the university so that when the university rolls out a project, the city can alert those neighborhoods so that a conversation can be started with the residents about how they will be impacted. Higgins said she thinks that is working very well, and it’s something the city will continue to work on.

Citizen Participation

The League of Women Voters exists to promote active citizen participation in government. Please direct your answer to an interested Ann Arbor resident. Tell her or him what steps to take to become actively involved in our city, through the neighborhoods, the council, the commissions, etc. What kind of advice would you give?

Citizen Participation – Higgins

Higgins said the city is always looking for volunteers. It’s one of the conversations the city council has had: How do we let people know where we need help? She pointed out that people can apply online to serve on boards and commissions. People active in their neighborhoods are very important, and the city looks to those neighborhoods to give direction on how neighborhoods can be helped, she said.

The city now has a citizen participation ordinance that requires a developer to have a meeting with citizens in the early stages of proposing a project, so citizens can have input on what they think about the project, she said. That all becomes part of the public record and it moves through to the planning commission, and it helps with decision-making, she said. Higgins concluded by saying that residents’ voices are very important.

Citizen Participation – Eaton

Eaton took the question as an opportunity to praise the League of Women Voters, by saying he’d suggest that a resident of Ann Arbor consider joining the League of Women Voters and becoming active through LWV, which he described as a superb organization. He also suggested as an alternative becoming active in a political party of a resident’s choosing.

Eaton stated that he’d personally been active in many neighborhood organizations and helped form coalitions of neighborhoods. That was an excellent way to become involved in local politics, he felt, because the interaction between neighborhoods and elected representatives is “really where a lot happens in this town.” He hoped to work to open up availability on boards and commissions, contending that it seems like the same people are repeatedly appointed to the same boards and commissions again and again, term after term. Eaton wanted to open up the boards to more residents and encourage more residents to participate.

Flooding

What plans does or should the city have to prevent or abate street flooding in the city? What do we need? Can we afford it? What interim measures can we work on first?

Malletts Creek “smart map” showing the study area.

Additional background includes a study currently being conducted by the Washtenaw County water resources commissioner focusing on the Upper Malletts Creek area – located in Ward 4. The study was authorized by the Ann Arbor city council at its Oct. 15, 2012 meeting. The $200,000 cost of the study is to be paid for with city funds already held by the county water resources commissioner’s office. [County web page on Upper Mallets Creek study]

The staff memo accompanying the council’s Oct. 15, 2012 resolution mentioned the heavy rains on March 15, 2012, which resulted in street flooding in that part of the city. The city council heard complaints from the public at its meetings after the flooding. A map of historical flooding in the city shows that respondents to a survey conducted in the mid-1990s reported they’d experienced street flooding in the same areas that the flooding occurred in the spring of 2012. That map was part of a 1997 study conducted by Black & Veatch under contract with the city.

The city is also conducting a city-wide study of stormwater issues. [City web page on stormwater model calibration]

A third related study involves monitoring of the sanitary sewer system during wet weather. [City web page on wet weather sanitary sewer flows] That study is meant to measure the effectiveness of the city’s footing drain disconnection (FDD) program, which was partially suspended in city council action taken on Sept. 17, 2012. The developer offset mitigation portion of the program continues – as recent projects like 413 E. Huron (now approved) and the Glendale condominium project (currently postponed by the city planning commission) include required footing drain disconnection credits from developers.

The city of Ann Arbor has separate sanitary and stormwater conveyance systems. However, during construction of new developments before 1980, footing drains – permeable pipes buried around the perimeter of a foundation, roughly at the depth of a basement floor – were frequently connected directly to the sanitary sewer pipes. Those connections were convenient to make, because the footing drains and the sanitary sewers are buried at roughly the same depth.

During very heavy rains, that configuration leads to a volume of stormwater flow into the sanitary sewer system that it’s not designed to handle. That can cause sewage backups as well as possible discharges of untreated sewage into the Huron River. It was such discharges that led to the creation of the city’s FDD program in the early 2000s. Another relatively small volume of such discharge was caused by heavy rains last month.

Flooding: Higgins

Higgins stated that Ann Arbor has experienced flooding for years. There are new tools that can be considered, and the city has several different projects underway right now. To move forward just for the sake of moving forward quickly could exacerbate the problem – if it’s not the right solution. So time was being taken to study the issue. Higgins noted that the city is working with the Washtenaw County water resources commissioner [Evan Pratt] and using his expertise to deal with overland water flow.

Higgins also mentioned the city’s footing drain disconnection program, which she characterized as “a big question.” That program is being reevaluated, she said, noting that there is a moratorium in Ward 4 dealing with that. For Ann Arbor streets that were designed a decade ago or more, a decision was made that as storm sewers reach capacity, that water would be held in the streets. Not everybody understands that, Higgins said, so when you see a street flooding, it is actually supposed to do that. But because of the increased frequency of heavy rains, she added, the flooding is going overland, and that is what the city is dealing with now.

Flooding: Eaton

Eaton began by stating that two of the city’s main watersheds – Malletts Creek and Allen Creek – are beyond capacity. There’s continual talk about planning for growth, Eaton said, but he contended that there’s not capacity to handle the stormwater that the city is already experiencing.

He called for approaching the problem in a variety of different ways. He called for using pervious paving materials that allow stormwater to soak into the ground at the site rather than just moving it downstream. The city needs to increase the capacity to move water through Malletts Creek and Allen Creek to the Huron River, Eaton said. And the city needs to set up retention and detention ponds in neighborhoods to delay flow into the downtown areas, he said.

In 1997, Eaton said, the city did a major stormwater study. But the city had simply failed to follow up on any of the recommendations, Eaton contended. Now, 15 years later, the city is repeating the process of studying the problem that had already been ignored. He called for moving in a more expedient way.

Closing

Each candidate was given two minutes for a closing statement.

Closing: Higgins

Higgins thanked the LWV and CTN for hosting the event. During her years serving on the council, her constant focus has been on building the city’s infrastructure, she said. She’d kept an eye toward the future while respecting the past, and she thought the city needs to continue to do that. The city has a great budget, she said, and it’s balanced every year – the city was not raising taxes, but was providing services. On the question of whether additional police officers and firefighters could be added, Higgins said, “We just did.” She said that three more police officers had been added, saying that “We have beat cops that we didn’t have before.” But she stressed that it’s a matter of how those positions are funded. It’s easy to say, “just give us more,” Higgins said, but there has to be a funding mechanism. [Three Four additional firefighters were authorized in the FY 2014 budget compared with the FY 2013 budget. However, the number of authorized sworn police officers has remained the same. The council has passed a resolution asking the DDA to consider allocating funding for three downtown beat cops, but the DDA has not yet acted on that request.]

The city’s parks and recreation facilities are a tremendous asset, she said. Every week the city wins awards for livability. The city’s budget is the envy of Michigan, Higgins said. She called it a great decision to partner with the county and the University of Michigan to found Ann Arbor SPARK – and that has helped the city provide an economic platform to bring companies to the city, which diversifies the city’s tax base. Everyone had learned a very hard lesson when the largest taxpayer and employer [Pfizer] had left the city, Higgins said. So she thought the city was doing very well.

She supports transportation, Higgins said, calling it a core service that has been offered in Ann Arbor. In founding the AATA, Ann Arbor had been way ahead of the game and it’s been a “treasure,” Higgins said. She felt that expansion of the AATA could take place, as long as it’s not at the city taxpayers’ cost.

Higgins concluded by drawing a contrast between herself and Eaton. She said that this election offers a choice, indicating that she was a candidate who would work to ensure and approach the future with efficient, open and transparent government, by listening to residents and colleagues, and making Ann Arbor the envy of every other city in the state. Change is coming, Higgins said, and she would continue to engage with all residents as the city strives to find the best solutions and thoughtfully prepare for this change. She indicated the choice was between her approach and “candidates who only say no and fear any change of any kind.”

Closing: Eaton

Eaton thanked the LWV for holding the event. He called Ann Arbor a special town.

Jack Eaton at the 4th of July parade this year.

There’s an opportunity to protect and preserve what is great about Ann Arbor while working to solve problems as they arise. This election provides a clear choice for voters, Eaton said. If elected to the council, he’d provide responsive representation. He’d answer constituent e-mails, and return phone calls, and meet with neighborhood groups. He would release regular e-mail updates. More importantly, Eaton said, he’d work with residents to help solve problems. He’d represent common sense priorities of the Ward 4 voters.

In speaking with Ward 4 voters, he’d heard that residents want the city council to focus on core services. He intended to work to rebuild the city’s safety services. The city’s police and fire departments should be staffed to meet nationally recognized standards, he said, contending that they don’t currently meet those staffing standards.

If elected, he’d work with other councilmembers to improve the city’s infrastructure. Long-term flooding problems need to be addressed, he said, saying that the city can’t afford further delay. Road repair funds need to be spent to maintain high-quality roads, Eaton said, not for ambitious planning and development.

Recent elections have added new responsive members to the council, he contended. He’d like to join those representatives and help bring common sense to city budget decisions. He asked people to take the time to vote on Tuesday, Aug. 6. He asked for support to represent voters’ interests and priorities.

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

The recount of the Ward 4 Ann Arbor city council race confirmed that incumbent Margie Teall had the most votes.

The initial count of ballots across the nine precincts of Ward 4 showed Teall with a total of 866 (50.5%) votes, compared to 848 (49.5%) votes for Jack Eaton. In the recounted totals, each candidate lost a vote in Precinct 4-9. In Precinct 4-6, Teall picked up one vote and Eaton lost one, leaving Eaton and Teall with 846 and 866 votes, respectively.

Teall does not face an on-the-ballot challenger in the Nov. 6 general election.

The city of Ypsilanti Ward 3 Democratic councilmember race was also recounted, with exactly the same results. In that race, Pete Murdock tallied 440 (60.03%) votes compared to 242 (33.02%) for Mike Eller and 47 (6.41%) for Ted Windish.

Three races in Augusta Township were recounted, all in the Democratic primary: clerk, treasurer and trustee. They all came out the same. In the clerk’s election, Iva Bielec tallied 304 votes (46.70%) compared to 343 (52.69%) for Kathy Giszczak. In the treasurer’s election, Susan Burek tallied 312 (49.60%) compared to 315 (50.08%) for Lynda Dew.

And in the trustee election, Cath Howard tallied 324 (16.78%) compared to 278 (14.40%) for H. Neil Johnson, 307 (15.90%) for Laverne Kailimai, 310 (16.05%) for Joseph Keefe, 375 (19.42%) for Judy Thornton, and 329 (17.04%) for Ira Todd. Voters could choose up to four, so it’s the three-vote spread between Kailimai and Keefe that was of most interest.

Seals on the ballot bags, deemed to be inappropriate by the board of canvassers, resulted in some precincts not being recounted – because one of the first steps to a recount is confirming that the ballots have been correctly sealed.

In the Ward 4 city council race, Precinct 4-2, which had 25 ballots in the Democratic primary, was not recounted – because the cable-tie device inserted through the twin zipper heads was itself not secure. The “snout” end of the tie had been inserted into its appropriate slot, but not far enough for the first nub to establish the “ratchet.” So when it was tested to confirm that it had been secure, it came undone.

Also due to be recounted was the Sylvan Township millage proposal. There is only one precinct in the township and it was not recounted, because of a ballot sealing issue. The problem was that the cable tie had been inserted through the holes in the zipper tabs, instead of the heads of the zippers. That left a gap equal to the length of the two zipper tabs. And based on that gap, the board of canvassers determined that the seal had not been appropriate.

For the Sylvan Township millage, the yes votes numbered 480 (50.37%), while 473 (49.63%) no votes were cast.

Races to be recounted include the race for city of Ann Arbor Ward 4 Democratic councilmember. The final results across the nine precincts of Ward 4 showed incumbent Margie Teall with a total of 848 (49.5%) votes, compared to 866 (50.5%) for Jack Eaton – an 18-vote difference.

The city of Ypsilanti Ward 3 Democratic councilmember race will also be recounted. In that race, Pete Murdock tallied 440 (60.03%) votes compared to 242 (33.02%) for Mike Eller and 47 (6.41%) for Ted Windish.

Three races in Augusta Township will be recounted, all in the Democratic primary: clerk, treasurer and trustee. In the clerk’s election, Iva Bielec tallied 304 votes (46.70%) compared to 343 (52.69%) for Kathy Giszczak. In the treasurer’s election, Susan Burek tallied 312 (49.60%) compared to 315 (50.08%) for Lynda Dew. And in the trustees election, Cath Howard tallied 324 (16.78%) compared to 278 (14.40%) for H. Neil Johnson, 307 (15.90%) for Laverne Kailimai, 310 (16.05%) for Joseph Keefe, 375 (19.42%) for Judy Thornton, and 329 (17.04%) for Ira Todd. Voters could choose up to four, so it’s the three-vote spread between Kailimai and Keefe that’s of most interest.

The Sylvan Township millage proposal will also be recounted. The yes votes numbered 480 (50.37%), while 473 (49.63%) no votes were cast.

Possibly added to the recounts to be done on Sept. 4 will be the Northfield Township Democratic trustee election. The board of canvassers will hold a meeting on Aug 29, 2012 at 10:30 a.m. to hear an objection to that recount. If the outcome of the hearing is to recount the ballots, then that recount will be held on Sept. 4 with the others. In that election, Douglas  Del Favero had 180 (18.26%) votes, with David E. Gibbons Jr. getting 189 (19.17%), Michael J. Magda getting 179 (18.15%), Tracy S. Thomas getting 236 (23.94%) and Athena Trentin getting 197 (19.98%). Voters could choose up to four candidates. So it’s the one-vote margin between Magda and Del Favero that’s at issue.

The recounts will be held at the county building at 200 N. Main Street in Ann Arbor in the lower level conference room.

According to Washtenaw County director of elections Ed Golembiewski, the recounting of the physical ballots will likely be scheduled for early in the week beginning Aug. 27, depending on the availability of members on the board of canvassers. That would accommodate the 7-day requirement to allow other candidates involved to file objections.

The other candidate involved was incumbent Margie Teall. The final results across the nine precincts of Ward 4 showed Eaton with a total of 848 (49.5%) votes, compared to 866 (50.5%) for Teall. That’s a difference of just 18 votes.

A recount costs the candidate requesting a recount $10 per precinct. So to recount all of Ward 4 would cost $90. If the recount changes the outcome of the election, that fee is returned to the candidate.

Recent recounts in area elections include: (1) the August 2008 Ward 5 city council Democratic primary contested between Vivienne Armentrout and Carsten Hohnke (58 votes); (2) the August 2009 Ward 3 city council Democratic primary contested among LuAnne Bullington, Leigh Greden and Stephen Kunselman (6 votes); and (3) the 2010 District 11 Washtenaw County board of commissioners Democratic primary between Yousef Rabhi and Michael Fried (1 vote).

In those recounts, the final vote total did not change by more than a couple of votes, and none of the outcomes changed.

Members of the board of canvassers who will oversee the recount are: Tony DeMott (Republican), Melodie Gable (Republican), Ulla Roth (Democrat) and Frances Brennan (Democrat). [.pdf of recount process]

The August 2010 primary was also contested by Teall and Eaton – and Teall won that race 1448 (69.08%) to 642 (30.63%)

This brief will be updated as additional precinct totals are known. Check the Washtenaw County clerk’s election results website for definitive, but still unofficial results.

Update at 11 p.m. Results now show Eaton with a total of 446 (43%) votes, compared to 587 (57%) for Teall – which reflects a total of 7 out of 9 precincts informally reported.

Update at 11:44 p.m. Complete unofficial results show Eaton with a total of 848 (49.5%) votes, compared to 866 (50.5%) for Teall – which reflects a total of 9 out of 9 precincts informally reported. That’s a difference of just 18 votes.

Ward 4 Ann Arbor city council candidates Jack Eaton and Margie Teall. (Photos by the writer.)

This year’s Ward 4 race reprises the 2010 contest that Teall won over Eaton with 69% of the vote. Teall has served on the council since 2002 and is seeking her sixth two-year term on the 11-member council – which includes the mayor and two representatives from each of the city’s five wards. Democratic primaries are contested this year in just four of the five wards, as Christopher Taylor is unchallenged in Ward 3. The winner of the Ward 4 Democratic primary will likely not face an on-the-ballot opponent in November – because no Republican has filed and the deadline for independent candidates to file is July 19.

In his remarks on local policy issues, Eaton stressed what he called sensible spending priorities – support for fire and police protection. He framed his thoughts on local issues by pointedly listing out those things he supports, not things he opposes.

Among those things he supports: city parkland – and specifically a possible charter amendment that would require a public referendum on the long-term leasing of parkland (not just sale, as the charter currently reads). He also supports the idea of a park on top of the new underground parking garage. He supports rebuilding the police and fire departments, and spending the city’s street reconstruction tax to repair roads in a timely fashion. If elected, he said he’d support neighborhoods by being a voice for their concerns.

Eaton also stressed some beliefs that could be characterized as classic Democratic Party values – support for labor. He cited his profession as a union-side labor lawyer and indicated that he’d fight against the tools that Republican “bullies” in the state legislature are giving local municipalities to reduce benefits to their union workers.

For her part, Teall cited her own labor credentials by saying she had support from several local unions. She gave an implicit response to Eaton’s focus on fire and police protection by saying that public safety had been a priority since 2002 when she first was elected to council. She indicated that residents could expect to see a greater police presence downtown, as the city has implemented a police recruit program. She identified flooding as currently a top issue for Ward 4, but pointed to the reconstruction of the East Stadium bridges and securing funding for future demolition of the Georgetown Mall as points of progress.

Teall said the city budget is in the best shape it’s been in the time she has served on the city council. The overall theme Teall stressed was a desire to keep Ann Arbor on the track that it started down 10 years ago.

Tracks were part of the one main policy question candidates were asked to comment on – the idea of a new rail station possibly to be constructed at the Fuller Road site. Briefly, Teall thinks it’s an ideal location for a rail station, proximate to the University of Michigan medical center, while Eaton feels it reflects inappropriate spending priorities.

Aside from opening and closing statements, not a lot of specific local policy ground was covered by questions put to the candidates – due in part to a time constraint of about an hour for eight candidates. But the candidates did talk a great deal about issues of transparency and group dynamics on the city council – in response to the leadoff question from forum moderator Mike Henry, co-chair (with Anne Bannister) of the Ann Arbor Democratic Party.

Broadcast live earlier in the week on the Community Television Network was a local League of Women Voters candidate forum that included Eaton and Teall, which is available online.

The deadline to register to vote in the Aug. 7 primary has passed. Oct. 9 is the last day to register to vote for the Tuesday, Nov. 6 general election. Information on voter registration can be found on the Washtenaw County clerk’s elections division website. To see a sample ballot for your precinct, visit the Secretary of State’s website. The League of Women Voters also has an online voter information site – Vote411.org – which includes biographical information on some candidates, stances on issues, and a “build my ballot” feature.

Opening Statements

Teall: As she had said at the League of Women Voters forum earlier in the week, she is running for reelection in order to keep Ann Arbor on the track that it started down 10 years ago. She does believe that Ann Arbor is doing remarkably well. The city budget is in the best shape it’s been in the time she has served on the council, she said. The city is hiring firefighters and police again, she pointed out. And she contended that residents would see a greater presence of police downtown – because the bicycle patrols are starting up again.

A police recruit program has also been implemented, so we will see more police downtown, she said. At the same time, crime is at its lowest rate in 30 years. Some people have asked if we need more police, she said. It is a matter of perception, and it is important that Ann Arbor is perceived as a safe city. Over the years she has worked hard on many committees, she noted, including the environmental commission and the housing and human services advisory board, and the urban county board.

She’s also worked to address the many issues that Ward 4 faces, Teall said. One of those was the crumbling East Stadium bridges. That project is ahead of schedule, she said, and she was glad to see that State Street has been reopened. It’s great to see it, and she described it as a beautiful bridge. She also worked with state and county officials to secure a $1 million dollar grant for the Georgetown Mall demolition.

Eaton: He began by thanking the Democratic Party for holding the forum. He also thanked everyone in attendance for coming. He introduced himself as a union-side labor lawyer, a lifelong Democrat and a neighborhood activist. He’s running for city council to restore sensible priorities for the city budget. He brings a neighborhood point of view, he said.

He received the endorsement of the Sierra Club Huron Valley Group and the Sierra Club Michigan Chapter – the only environment organizations to make endorsements in city council races, he pointed out. He felt that the endorsement was based on his support for public parks. He supports the proposed amendment to the city charter that will require approval from voters before parkland is repurposed. He supports placing a park on top of the new underground parking garage on South Fifth Avenue.

Ward 4 residents tell him, he said, that city hall needs to focus on sensible priorities – like safety services, infrastructure, and public services. He supports rebuilding the police and fire staff, and using the accumulated street millage funds for the prompt repair of the city’s roads. He said he is a voice for sensible priorities. He’ll represent the neighborhoods and he will provide responsive leadership, he concluded.

Working as a Group

Question: As a member of a legislative body, one of the things you’ll be judged by is what you can accomplish as a group. There’ll be group dynamics and differences of opinion. Mike Henry’s question invited candidates to talk about how they would approach finding solutions amid that difference of opinion.

Background: Henry’s question implicitly recalled the sentiments of Democratic county clerk Larry Kestenbaum, who wrote as a citizen to the entire city council in the fall of 2011, roundly castigating councilmembers for decisions that resulted in the demolition of seven houses on South Fifth Avenue, to be replaced by two large apartment buildings (City Place). Kestenbaum had stressed the importance of working as a group: “A city council is not judged by the good intentions of its members. It is judged by what it accomplishes, or fails to accomplish, as a body.”

Teall: She said she appreciated what Ward 5 candidate Chuck Warpehoski had just said about the importance of assuming good intent. [Coverage of other candidate responses is included in separate reports.] It’s something that they should work toward as an organization, she said. She thinks the current city council actually does move things forward – though it takes time and a lot of patience. It also takes listening, she said.

Councilmembers do not stop people from speaking to them, and anyone is welcome to get in touch with them, Teall pointed out. Councilmembers themselves often do have phone conversations about issues and express their intent on issues. On the whole, she felt the council works things through pretty well. She gave credit to mayor John Hieftje for facilitating issues on the council.

There is a perception of a lot of bickering, she allowed, but she felt that councilmembers don’t bicker as much as what might be portrayed in the media – which trades on bickering, she said.

Moderator Mike Henry followed up by asking Teall if she felt that the city council always comes up with the best solution as a group. Teall said that it’s not always been the perfect solution, but yes. The city council represents a very diverse community, she said, and by going through a lot of public process – public hearings and community meetings – the council tries to move forward in the best direction for the whole city.

Eaton: Earlier, candidate for Ward 5 Chuck Warpehoski had suggested that an essential premise for working effectively as a group is to assume good intent. So Eaton suggested that we should also start with the premise that mostly the city council does work together – as most votes are unanimous or nearly unanimous.

However, it’s important that the council have a robust discussion in front of the public about those things that are of great importance, Eaton said. Examples of things of great importance are spending priorities: Should we spend our money on police and fire protection or on something else? Those kinds of issues require good and robust public discussion, he said. He pointed out that in the past, there was some snarkiness behind-the-scenes in e-mails, and that had been destructive to the overall relationship on the council. But public disagreement among councilmembers shouldn’t be characterized as bickering, he suggested.

Eaton noted that he is a labor lawyer by trade, and works in adversarial contexts. His talent, he said, is to work with people who don’t agree, to try to find common ground and to mediate things, and to build a lasting relationship. It’s not whether you win this argument or lose that argument, he explained, but rather about building a relationship that will last over time. It’s not bickering, but rather a negotiation in a search for common ground.

Moderator Mike Henry ventured that Eaton agreed with Teall, that the council is moving forward in an orderly fashion. Eaton cheerfully objected to having words put in his mouth. Eaton clarified that he believes there is a majority on the council that comes to meetings with a predetermined outcome. And that meant that the discussion that happens is too late, and the public hearing that happens is too late – because the decision has already been made.

Eaton said that on those matters where there is not unanimous agreement on the council, councilmembers need to drag that discussion out into the public, and that discussion needs to take place after the public expresses its feelings at the podium. So he did not agree with Teall on that issue, he concluded.

Transparency

In their responses to the question about working as a group, moderator Mike Henry picked up on the mention of transparency by Ward 2 candidate Sally Petersen and Ward 1 candidate Sumi Kailasapathy. Henry asked those who are currently on the city council – Margie Teall (Ward 4) and Tony Derezinski (Ward 2) – how they felt about the current level of transparency. Ward 1 candidate Eric Sturgis made clear that he, and perhaps Vivienne Armentrout (Ward 5 candidate), also wanted to respond to that question. So some other candidates had a go at the question, too – but it didn’t come back around to Eaton.

Teall: She feels there is a great deal of transparency on the city council. We live in a society that includes not just men and women but also rules and regulations – and part of that in a representative democracy is that representatives are elected to the city council. [Teall used the phrase "men and women" because Ward 1 candidate Sumi Kailasapathy had suggested – in support of the idea of creating an ethics policy for the city council – that democracy is "not about men and women," but rather about rules and regulations.]

The RFP (request for proposals) review process for the Library Lot, Teall said, was very open and transparent: “I don’t know how many times I can say that, and people will still say that it wasn’t.” There were public meetings throughout, and there were no closed meetings – it was all open. She feels that the council does a pretty good job. It is much more transparent now, she allowed, than when she began her service on the city council. The neighborhood meetings that developers are now required to conduct is an example of that, and those meetings have been very successful. The public participation meeting is a required part of the development process now, she pointed out.

Teall felt that people often have issues with the fact that properties are owned by people, and we can’t tell the owners of the property what to do with their property. Moderator Mike Henry followed up by asking Teall why she thinks people say they still perceive that there’s a lack of transparency. Her answer: “I think it serves their interests.”

Top Issue (Fuller Road Station)

Question: Is there one overriding issue that you would like to work on? [Ward 5 candidate Vivienne Armentrout was the first respondent to the question, and she identified the proposed Fuller Road Station as one reason she'd been prompted to run for city council. So moderator Mike Henry asked the other candidates to try to share their thoughts on the Fuller Road Station as well.]

Background: At its June 4, 2012 meeting, the city council accepted the award of a roughly $2.8 million federal grant to help fund a site-alternatives analysis for possible construction of a new train station. The Amtrak station is currently located on Depot Street, near the Broadway bridges. The site-alternatives analysis is meant to result in the confirmation of a locally-preferred alternative to be reviewed by the Federal Rail Administration. The preliminary locally-preferred alternative is a site on Fuller Road near the University of Michigan medical complex. That site preference is based on previous planning work, as well as work for which the city has already expended roughly $700,000 (which satisfies the 20% local match requirement of the FRA grant).

Previously, the University of Michigan and the city had a memorandum of understanding that would have led to the construction of a 1,000-space parking structure at the Fuller Road site, in conjunction with the train station. However, on Feb. 10, 2012, UM withdrew, for now, from a partnership on the project. The Fuller Road Station project has been controversial in part because the site is on land that’s part of the city’s Fuller Park. The area proposed for the train station has been a surface parking lot for many years.

Teall: She said she could not identify only one issue citywide, but for Ward 4 it would be to try to solve the flooding problems. She said she did not realize until recently that the footing drain disconnect program actually goes back to the 1990s, when there were hundreds of houses and people who were affected. That’s been significantly reduced due to the footing drain disconnect program, she said. But there is still a lot of work to do. She has learned about the extraordinary expense to actually replace all the infrastructure.

[The footing drain disconnect program aims to ensure that stormwater flow does not enter the city's sanitary system unnecessarily. In the course of developing some areas of the city, the footing drains of buildings were connected to the city's sanitary sewer system. That led to backups of raw sewage into some people's basements. The disconnection program aims to sever the connection between footing drains and the sanitary sewer system, and to connect the drains instead to the city's stormwater system. Chronicle coverage of the footing drain disconnect program is included in a May 2011 report on downtown planning.

This spring, the Ann Arbor city council has heard public commentary during its meetings on overland stormwater flow problems in the Churchill Downs neighborhood, which is part of Ward 4 – the ward that Teall and Eaton are competing to represent.]

As far as the train station goes, Teall supports an effort to relocate and build a new transit station in Ann Arbor. She feels that the current Amtrak station is not adequate – because she doesn’t feel that parking is adequate there. She does not support putting a new train station on the MichCon site [near the current location of the Amtrak site on Depot Street near the Broadway bridges], because she wants to see a beautiful park there on the riverfront. She thinks that the Fuller Road site is a perfect spot for a rail station.

Teall stated that 24,000 people a day come into work at the University of Michigan hospitals, so to help accommodate that and to take cars off the highway would be a very good thing, she said. She thinks that the funding will eventually be there for the station construction. She felt that it would not cost the city much to have what she thinks will be a world-class train station.

Eaton: He began by saying that he did not feel that any of the candidates had run on a single issue. But if he had to pick his top issue, then it would be the city’s spending priorities. That’s a very broad-based issue, he noted. When you have a $79 million general fund budget, you have to allocate that money based on priorities.

Eaton’s priority is public safety. This year, the city has started to rebuild its police and fire departments – partly through a SAFER grant, which came, he believed, from the state. The SAFER grant will allow more firefighters to be hired, Eaton said, but the city had not received the COPS grant it had applied for.

[The Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response (SAFER) program is a federally funded program. The announcement of Ann Arbor's grant came on May 30, 2012. The Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) program is also a federal program. Both grant applications factored into deliberations by the city council on the FY 2013 budget.]

So we’re back to having to make hard decisions in the budget, Eaton concluded. He does not believe that closing fire stations will remedy the fire department’s response time issue.

[The city has six stations, one of which was closed several years ago – Station #2. The proposal to which Eaton was referring is a plan to re-open Station #2, but to close Stations #4 and #6, using just Stations #1, #2, and #5. For Chronicle coverage of the proposal, including maps of how the coverage is proposed to work, see "A Closer Look at Ann Arbor's Fire Station Plan." The city is currently accepting feedback on the proposal. Emailed comments can be sent to feedback@a2gov.org with the subject line "Fire Proposal."]

Budget priorities have to accommodate the fact that we have a very tight budget, Eaton said. We shouldn’t be spending millions of dollars on an Amtrak station when we believe we can’t afford to re-fund our police and fire departments, he concluded.

Closing Statements

Eaton: He began his closing statement by saying, “I’m a Democrat.” He feels that if someone runs or serves in local office as a Democrat, they should be active in the local Democratic Party [an implicit contrast between himself and Teall, who by many accounts is not active in the local organization.]. He said he had been active and would continue to be active in the Ann Arbor Democratic Party.

He’s a labor lawyer, and he believes that the labor movement is at the front line of the “war that the Republicans are waging on the middle class.” As a councilmember, Eaton would not accept the help that the bullies in the Republican legislature are giving local municipalities. We have to recognize the value of our employees, he said. [Among that "help" is legislation limiting the amount that public employers can contribute to their employees' health care. The sentiment expressed by Eaton was echoed at a recent board meeting of the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority, as some board members were reluctant to pass a resolution that reduced the AATA contributions to employee health care costs – arguing that just because the state had given them a hammer, that did not mean they had to use it against their employees.]

He’s a neighborhood activist, Eaton continued. Residents in Ward 4 neighborhoods want sensible priorities, he said – public safety, infrastructure and public services. Ann Arbor is a special town, he said. It’s the city council’s obligation to protect and preserve what’s great about the town while we address the fiscal problems that are upon us. It’s time to rebuild our city services – police and fire protection. He would fight to keep all the fire stations open, he said. We need to pay more prompt attention to repairing our roads. We need to develop a plan to address neighborhood flooding, he said. We’ve known since 1997 that the Lawton neighborhood needs relief from the flooding problem.

Teall: She thanked the Ann Arbor Democratic Party for hosting the event, and her supporters. She also appreciated the support of several local unions. She felt that the city needs to address both change and how to move forward. In supporting both businesses and neighborhoods, part of that is certainly economic development, she said. It’s important to have density downtown, to support businesses downtown. She said that all of the merchants are very appreciative of what the city is trying to do for business.

[Teall's remarks about the importance of economic development came after Ward 5 candidate Vivienne Armentrout had just previously criticized a proposal for a conference center on top of the Library Lot as responding to broader economic development objectives, instead of the needs of local Ann Arbor residents and local businesses. The council had voted on April 4, 2011 to end the RFP review process for the top of the new underground parking garage on South Fifth Avenue. That decision came after a committee had selected a proposal for a hotel/conference center by Valiant Partners as the preferred proposal among six that had been submitted. Teall voted against the termination of the review process.]

As far as the city’s budget priorities, safety services were prioritized starting in 2002 when Teall first was elected to the city council, she said. It’s always been a priority, but it hasn’t been easy – it hasn’t been easy in a time of recession to build safety services, she said. But the city has managed to do that, she contended. The fact that the city is hiring in both the police and fire departments is reflective of how strong the city’s budget actually is. She wants to keep the city moving forward in a collaborative manner with all city councilmembers.

The Chronicle could not survive without regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the Ann Arbor city council and other elections. 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!

Republican candidate for Ward 4 city council Eric Scheie, before the League of Women Voters forum on Oct. 5. On Scheie's website, he gives the pronunciation of his name, which is pronounced "Shay." During small talk among LWV members before the start of the meeting, they drew upon a character familiar from American history to help remind themselves of the pronunciation: "It's 'Shay' as in Shay's Rebellion." (Photo by the writer.)

This report focuses on the forum for candidates in Ward 4, where Republican Eric Scheie is challenging Democratic incumbent Marcia Higgins. A replay of the forum is available via Community Television Network’s video on demand service. [Ward 4 CTN coverage]

Higgins did not attend the forum, sending her regrets in a written statement, which was read aloud: “I’m confirming that I will not be in attendance tomorrow evening due to a family commitment on Oct. 5. I appreciate the league’s focus on debating the issues and time spent on bringing debate to the public. Thank you for the invitation to participate.” The LWV indicated that holding the forum without Higgins would be consistent with its “empty chair” policy.

Higgins began her city council career as a Republican, first winning election to the council in 1999. She changed parties to become a Democrat in 2005. Many observers believe it’s not possible to be elected to the council as a Republican in Ann Arbor’s current political climate.

At the LWV forum, Scheie explicitly addressed the issue of party membership, saying that he was running as a Republican precisely because of the lack of opposition politics in Ann Arbor – “Republican” has become a dirty word in Ann Arbor, he said.

The council is an 11-member body, with two representatives from each ward, plus the mayor. All members of the council, including the mayor, serve two-year terms. In a given year, one of the two council seats for each ward is up for election. In even-numbered years, the position of mayor is also up for election.

This year, the general election falls on Nov. 8. Readers who are unsure where to vote can type their address into the My Property page of the city of Ann Arbor’s website to get that information. A map of city ward boundaries is also online.

Scheie responded to LWV questions on the street/sidewalk repair millage, the proposed Fuller Road Station, high-rise buildings, human services and public art.

Opening statement

Scheie had a minute to give an opening statement.

Scheie said he’d lived in Ann Arbor for three years. The reason he’s running is that the biggest problem he thinks the city faces is a lack of opposition. Overwhelmingly, he said, city council measures are unanimously or nearly unanimously approved. He wants to see diversity in government, he said. He described himself as a reluctant candidate.

The reason he’s running as a Republican is that he’s discovered that in Ann Arbor, “Republican” is a dirty word. He said that going door-to-door, he’s had people practically chase him off their porch. One woman looked him in the eye and told him she didn’t think Republicans should be running for office in Ann Arbor. So that’s why he’s running, he said. He also noted that there are a number of issues in Ward 4 that are of particular concern – the East Stadium Boulevard bridges, potholes, sump pumps and Georgetown Mall.

Street Repair Millage

Question: Proposal 1 on the Nov. 8 ballot requests up to 2.0 mills for street and bridge reconstruction. Proposal 2 allows an additional 0.125 mills for sidewalk repair outside the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority TIF district. Please explain the mechanics of the two proposals’ interdependent passage. Tell voters in your ward how you plan to vote.

Street Repair Millage: Background

At its Aug. 4, 2011 meeting, the Ann Arbor city council approved language for the Nov. 8 ballot that would renew the street and bridge reconstruction millage, at a rate of 2.0 mills. It was last approved by voters in November 2006 for five years beginning in 2007 and ending in 2011. A tax rate of 1 mill is equivalent to $1 for every $1,000 of a property’s taxable value.

As a separate proposal on the ballot, voters will be asked if they support an additional 0.125 mill to pay for sidewalk repair. Up to now, sidewalk repair has been the responsibility of property owners.

The ballot language for the street repair millage will read:

Shall the Charter be amended to authorize a tax up to 2 mills for street and bridge reconstruction for 2012 through 2016 to replace the previously authorized tax up to 2 mills for street reconstruction for 2007 through 2011, which will raise in the first year of levy the estimated revenue of $9,091,000?

The ballot language for the sidewalk portion of the millage will read:

Shall the Charter be amended to authorize a tax increase of up to 0.125 mills for 2012 through 2016 in addition to the street and bridge resurfacing and reconstruction millage of 2 mills for 2012 through 2016, which 0.125 mills will raise in the first year of levy the estimated additional revenue of $563,000, to provide a total of up to 2.125 mills for sidewalk trip hazard repair in addition to street and bridge reconstruction and resurfacing? This Charter amendment shall not take effect unless the proposed Charter amendment to authorize the levy of a tax in 2012 through 2016 of up to 2 mills for the purpose of providing funds for the reconstruction and resurfacing of streets and bridges (Proposal 1) is approved.

The sidewalk repair portion of the millage would be levied only if the street repair millage were also approved by voters. But the levy of the street repair millage is not dependent on the authorization of the sidewalk repair millage.

If both millage proposals were to be approved by voters, the money would be collected under a single, combined millage – but accounting for reconstruction activity would be done separately for streets and sidewalks.

The separation of the question into two proposals can be explained in part by a summary of responses to the city’s online survey on the topic of slightly increasing the street repair millage to include sidewalk repairs. Sidewalk repairs have up to now been the responsibility of property owners. The survey reflects overwhelming sentiment from the 576 survey respondents (filtered for self-reported city residents) that it should be the city’s responsibility to repair the sidewalks.

The survey reflects some resistance to the idea that an increase in taxes is warranted, however. From the free-responses: “Stop wasting taxpayer money on parking structures, new city buildings, and public art. You are spending money like drunken sailors while we’re in the worst recession since the Great Depression.” Balanced against that are responses like this: “I strongly endorse the idea of the city taking responsibility for maintaining the sidewalks and am certainly willing to pay for it in the form of a millage in the amount cited in this survey.” [.pdf of survey response summary]

An amendment to the resolution approved by the council on Aug. 4 directs the city attorney to prepare a change to the city’s sidewalk ordinance relative to the obligation of property owners to maintain sidewalks adjacent to their property.

Street Repair Millage: Scheie

Scheie said he planned to vote no on both the street and sidewalk repair proposals. The city was not using the funds it had, he said. The city spends money on art – $750,000 for art in front of city hall, which was a project awarded to a German artist. He said he loved art and local artists, but the prioritization should be done differently.

As far as sidewalk repair, his understanding was that the city would do the repairs, and then the citizens paid the city for the repair. [Editor's note: That's one scenario that could unfold under the city's sidewalk repair program that it has run for the last five years. The city first inspects and marks problematic slabs, and notifies property owners. If property owners do not arrange to have the work done themselves, one option is to allow to the city to do the work – the owners would then be billed for it.] Scheie said people had complained to him that they had paid money and the repairs had not been done. He did not think at this point that the city could be trusted with the money it would collect under the millage.

Transportation

Question: The Fuller Road Station will require parkland for the purpose of providing a parking structure, which will be used primarily by the University of Michigan. For this the city will pay 22% of the initial cost. Down the road, how will the parking revenue be split? Who will pay the maintenance? Who will provide safety measures and protection? How do you personally feel about the project? What is the long-term vision for this station and the probable timeline?

Transportation: Fuller Road Background

The introduction of the Fuller Road Station concept to the public can be traced at least as far back as January 2009, when the city’s transportation program manager, Eli Cooper, presented a concept drawing at a meeting of neighbors at Northside Grill. At the time, the city was trying to encourage the University of Michigan to reconsider its plans to build parking structures on Wall Street.

The city’s strategy was to get the university to consider building its planned parking structures on the city-owned parking lot, just south of Fuller Road, near the intersection with East Medical Center Drive. It would allow the university to participate in the city’s hoped-for transit station at that location. The university has leased that parking lot from the city since 1993.

The transit station is envisioned as directly serving east-west commuter rail passengers. A day-trip demonstration service that was to launch in October 2010 never materialized. But an announcement earlier this year, that some federal support for high-speed rail track improvements would be forthcoming, has shored up hopes by many people in the community that the east-west rail connection could become a reality. That hope has been further strengthened by the recent acquisition of the track between Dearborn and Kalamazoo from Norfolk Southern by the Michigan Dept. of Transportation.

The council has already approved some expenditures directly related to the Fuller Road Station project. It voted unanimously on Aug. 17, 2009 to approve $213,984 of city funds for an environmental study and site assessment. Of that amount, $104,742 was appropriated from the economic development fund.

On Nov. 5, 2009, on separate votes, the council approved additional money for the environmental study and site assessment and to authorize a memorandum of understanding with the University of Michigan.

Controversy on the project includes the status of the land where the proposed Fuller Road Station would be located. It’s designated as parkland, but formally zoned as public land (PL). In the summer of 2010, the possible uses for land zoned as PL were altered by the council, on recommendation from the city planning commission, explicitly to include transportation facilities. Any long-term use agreement with the university is seen by many as tantamount to a sale of parkland. A sale should, per the city charter, be put to a voter referendum.

Recent developments have included an indication from mayor John Hieftje that a work session would be scheduled to update the council. When the city council subsequently added a July 11, 2011 work session to its calendar, it left the expectation that the topic of that session would be Fuller Road Station. However, that session did not include the proposed transit station on its agenda.

A letter from Hieftje sent to constituents in late July 2011 reviewed much of the information that was previously known, but appeared to introduce the possibility that the University of Michigan would provide construction costs for the city’s share of the parking structure up front, with the city’s portion of 22% to be repaid later.

Transportation: Scheie

Scheie said his understanding is that there’s a plan to put the Amtrak station on city parkland. He felt that should be put before voters. He noted that the city said it’s not bound by the city charter in this instance. For that kind of dramatic change in the use of parkland, he said, it should should be put before voters.

It’s also his understanding, said Scheie, that the rail traffic the station is supposed to serve is not yet there. It’s connected up to Detroit, he said, and what they’d be doing is putting in a station and hoping that trains eventually begin to run. That seemed foolish and short-sighted, he said. It’s also undemocratic, he added – people should have a right to vote on it.

High-Rise Buildings

Question: What is the current acceptable standard for building height in the central city? Do you know if the student enrollment has substantially increased or is there simply an appetite for luxury apartment living? Please speak to the occupancy rate in university dormitories, older housing and new units coming on the market. Do you think the numbers are working to fill the buildings?

High-Rise Buildings: Background

By way of background, the D-1 zoning for core downtown allows for buildings as tall as 180 feet. That was enacted as part of the city’s A2D2 (Ann Arbor Discovering Downtown) rezoning initiative. A2D2 was given final approval by the city council in November 2009. [See Chronicle coverage: "Downtown Planning Process Forges Ahead." For a timeline of the process, see also "Ann Arbor Hotel First to Get Design Review?"]

High-Rise Buildings: Scheie

Scheie said he did not think the numbers worked. He’d read there’s a substantial vacancy rate. And in spite of that, new high-rise buildings were being approved – for example, The Varsity Ann Arbor, which would stand 13 stories tall. He thought that was short-sighted. He described Ann Arbor as a small-scaled city of older homes.

Scheie did not think you could tear down older buildings and putting up a high-rise and expect that you can fill up the new building. He did not think that was going to happen – given the existing vacancy rate. Why would you want a high-rise? He wondered why developers would do that. What he’d read, he said, is that developers are in partnership with the city and there are tax advantages.

Human Services

Question: The proposed Washtenaw County budget includes major cuts in human services. The Delonis Center homeless shelter will suffer from this. Is the city prepared and able to make up the shortfall? If not, it would seem to exacerbate the problem of homelessness in the city, particularly downtown.

Human Services: Background

For background on the recently-proposed budget for Washtenaw County, see “Proposed County Budget Brings Cuts.”

The city’s support for human services is allocated in coordination with other entities: the United Way of Washtenaw County, Washtenaw County and the Washtenaw Urban County. For background on the coordinated funding approach, back when it was still in the planning stages: “Coordinated Funding for Nonprofits Planned.”

Human Services: Scheie

Scheie said nobody wants a problem with homelessness. Right where he lives, there are homeless people trying to squat, Scheie said. He’s called the police, but they say they’re understaffed. He said he’s very compassionate about that, but at the same time many of the homeless people in Ann Arbor are not from Ann Arbor. He said he would not want to see anyone denied services, particularly if it’s an Ann Arborite. Spending money on people who may come from other parts of the state needs to be looked at – with compassion, but also with an eye towards priorities, he concluded.

Public Art

Question: The city council is reconsidering the previously approved Percent for Art program, which sets aside 1% of each capital improvement project to be used for public art in the city. The process appears to be slow in producing art. Should it be reconsidered? Do you have suggestions for improvement?

Public Art: Background

At the city council’s Aug. 4, 2011 meeting, councilmembers voted to place ballot language before voters for a street repair and sidewalk repair millage. Before the meeting, some councilmembers had indicated they were prepared to modify the ballot language to make explicit that millage funds would not be subject to the public art ordinance. The ordinance, which establishes the Percent for Art program, stipulates that 1% of all capital improvement projects must be set aside to be spent on public art.

Mayor John Hieftje effectively preempted that conversation by nominating Tony Derezinski (Ward 2) as a replacement for Jeff Meyers on the public art commission and assuring the council that the question of public art could be taken up at the council’s Sept. 19, 2011 meeting.

However, at the Sept. 19 meeting a proposed revision to the public art ordinance, brought forward by Sabra Briere (Ward 1), was postponed until after a working session to be held on Nov. 14, after the election on Nov. 8.

The proposed revision would change the Percent for Art program by explicitly excluding sidewalk and street repair from projects that could be tapped to fund public art.

Some councilmembers had previously understood the public art ordinance already to exclude replacement of sidewalk slabs from its definition of capital improvement projects. But based on additional information from the city attorney’s office, the proposed ordinance revision was meant to spell that out explicitly.

On two previous occasions in the last two years (Dec. 21, 2009 and May 31, 2011), the council has considered but rejected a change to the public art ordinance that would have lowered the public art earmark from 1% to 0.5%. The city’s Percent for Art program was authorized by the council on Nov. 5, 2007. It is overseen by the city’s public art commission, with members nominated by the mayor and confirmed by the council.

The most recent regular Chronicle coverage of the city’s public art commission is “Art Commission Preps for Dreiseitl Dedication.”

Public Art: Scheie

Scheie said he loves art and he’s a patron of the arts. He’s learning how to weld, to create metal sculpture. He does like art, he said. However, he doesn’t particularly like the orange trees in West Park [which were the first project completed through the Percent for Art program].

Scheie’s problem with the public art ordinance is that it might possibly be illegal. It concerns public money, he said, that is supposed to go to other purposes like roads and bridges. People who are voting for millages for those purposes are not voting to pay for art. People should have the right to weigh in on that.

Basic services should come ahead of art, Scheie said. He is not against art, but the city’s approach is just not an appropriate way to fund it. Scheie rejected the defense of the public art program that the city is bound by the law to designate 1% of capital improvement projects to art – the city council passed that law and could rescind it, he said.

Closing statement

Scheie had two minutes to give a closing statement.

Scheie said he hadn’t had a chance to talk about the issues relevant to his ward. That included the East Stadium bridges project, which he described as dragging on forever. He said it’s more than a bridge project – the city is reconstructing a whole neighborhood. He described how some of the streets will be partly closed – people who live on Golden Avenue are very upset, he said, because of the closure of White Street. Scheie said that everybody is talking about potholes – it’s almost comical. Ann Arbor has the third worst roads in the state, he said.

There’s also a sump pump problem, Scheie said. He’d talked to several ward residents who said they’d never had a problem with basement flooding until the city forced them to get a sump pump. He described it as intrusive, busy-body government that people don’t like. [For background on the sanitary sewer disconnection program, see "DDA Preps Downtown Ann Arbor Process"]

People are also worried about the site that is the former location of the Georgetown Mall – he’s afraid it’s going to be another Broadway Village. Crime is increasing, Scheie contended, and police has been cut 35%. The city should focus on basic services, stop extravagant spending and end one-party rule.

We need opposition politics in this town, Scheie said. Republicans would never be the majority, he said, no matter what. Maybe the solution is not Republicans, maybe it’s independents like Jane Lumm, he said. But the city desperately needs some opposition.

The Chronicle could not survive without regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the Ann Arbor city council. 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!