New Transportation Page

Transportation, including transit (public transportation), nonmotorized alternatives (especially bicycles and walking), roads, and parking, is where the most changes, angst, and money spent are to be found in Ann Arbor, possibly even surpassing development.  The new Transportation Page will include links and articles to draw some of the threads of this huge topic together.

UPDATE: The Ann Arbor Chronicle has an article that not only explains some of the issues surrounding a move to a county-wide transportation system, but links to its earlier articles on the subject.  A good review and starting place to watch what is happening.

Google, Parking, and the Wealth of the City

In his recent talk at a recent UM sustainability conference, Michael Shuman made a point of saying that most local economic development programs focus on efforts to “attract and retain” non-local businesses—and that by doing so, they are striking a bad bargain.  Non-local businesses, he says, often move on, after accepting generous subsidies from localities.  Pfizer comes to mind as one example (they are even asking for more money back after getting plenty from both Ann Arbor and Michigan in tax abatements).  Now let’s look at another high-profile capture – Google.

In July 2006, Governor Granholm announced that the Michigan Economic Growth Authority (MEGA) was granting Google up to $38 million in tax benefits to bring 1000 jobs to Ann Arbor (that’s a cost of $38,000 per each job paying $47,000).  This set off a competition among area municipalities and real-estate venues.  But there was a strong wish to bring Google into Ann Arbor’s downtown, and they finally leased space in McKinley’s Towne Centre on Liberty.  The Google operation at this location is an office of their AdWords advertising sales.

In order to lure them downtown, the City Council promised Google free employee parking (up to 400 spaces)  for four years.  This was estimated by the city’s chief financial officer to cost about $2 million till December 2010.   (That’s $5,000 per space.)   The council also amended the agreement with McKinley so that some of the 252 parking spaces it has been allotted in the Liberty Square parking structure can be used by Google.

The decision put Google at the head of the line for parking permits. There is a waiting list for monthly permits, and a limited capacity in the system. Obviously, for every monthly parking permit the DDA sells, there will be one less space for short-term visitors (retail and restaurant customers).  So the city has both set aside a major part of its General Fund dollars (even more critical now that major service cuts are being made) and allocated a scarce resource (parking), one that many local businesses would have enjoyed.

(According to a policy adopted by the council in 2007 and based on the Nelson-Nygaard study, the objective is to have no more than a 30-day wait for parking permits.  But that will be expensive and difficult, especially since the council  is simultaneously asking the DDA to host all downtown parking within its system and to pay the city $2 million a year for the privilege of this service. As explained in a recent Ann Arbor Chronicle article, the DDA has two revenue funds, the TIF fund (property taxes) and the parking fund.  Up till now, the TIF fund has not been used to pay for constructing parking structures, but that might have to change if the city keeps on draining the parking fund for its own general fund.  As reported by the Chronicle elsewhere, the DDA is making the payments on the bonds for a $55 million parking structure under the “Library Lot” on Fifth Avenue – and also paying the city a service fee of $1.4 million.  Yet the council is asking the DDA for the $2 million a year as “rent” for the parking system. Meanwhile there is scarcity of parking and rates are going up, possibly affecting retail customers.)

But according to a March Business Review story, Google/Ann Arbor is believed to have about 250 employees currently and recent trends are not favorable to AdWords’ business; online advertising is said to be failing to support web-based businesses in this economy.   It appears unlikely that they will make their 5-year goal of 1000 employees, and they may be hard-pressed to make the 500 jobs needed for a partial MEGA grant.

So what is the value of having Google in our downtown?  One is, of course, the jobs.  It’s nice that some relatively low-paid jobs are there.  These are not high-tech or high-paying jobs though, and I doubt that the employees are serving as much of a customer base for downtown businesses. Presumably McKinley is receiving rental payments from the lease, all good.  But it seems that much of Google’s value is in the bragging rights. Certainly the visible glamour of  those cute little primary-color letters and the cachet of merely being able to claim its presence adds to the “sizzle”.  For example, the Wall Street Journal recently cited Google’s presence as evidence of Ann Arbor’s vibrancy, with a statement that Google “opened an Ann Arbor campus in 2006″.    But is the city’s investment really paying off in jobs, new investment, and growth?  In other words, does it add to the wealth of our civic enterprise?

A page on the city website exclaims, “Today, while the university remains a significant contributor to the city’s workforce and driver of economic success, many industries and businesses are located in Ann Arbor, one of Michigan’s largest cities. Fortune 500 companies Borders Books and Domino’s Pizza have headquarters in Ann Arbor, and Google is in the process of relocating to the city, bringing more than 1,000 jobs.”

Ah. Back to Shuman and his argument that local businesses have more “leakage” – that is, more of the wealth generated stays in the local community, and also that they tend to stay in the community.  Note that Borders and Domino’s  both originated here, though they have since become nationally distributed.  Even with all its troubles, Borders has been a downtown anchor and a continual source of jobs. Domino’s seems secure in its Ann Arbor township headquarters.       The Google jobs site does not even list Ann Arbor as a location.

We’ll be hearing more and more about the need for economic development in the Ann Arbor region.  It would be nice to see some strategic thinking about how best to use the increasingly limited dollars we have at both the City of Ann Arbor and Washtenaw County government, both of which are undergoing some extreme budget cuts. What local business startups might do with a little assist from the city, according to Shuman’s recommendations,  isn’t easy to predict – not every one will be the next Zingerman’s.  But we should also consider what is a good price to pay for glamour, especially since wealth is in such short supply these days.

UPDATE: Not all the 400 parking spaces promised Google by the city are actually being used.  The amendment of the McKinley agreement with the city for Liberty Square spots only includes 235 spaces total.  An inquiry to the DDA indicated that it is not known (by them) how many of those are actually being used by Google.

UPDATE 6/2/2009: The Ann Arbor Business Review reports that there has been a management change at the Ann Arbor office of Google.  The reporters were not able to learn anything more about the current state of the office.

UPDATE 8/2/09: AnnArbor.com reports that Google is still “only one-quarter of the way to its initial goal” of 1000 employees and refuses to discuss its hiring plans.

UPDATE 10/19/09:  A new report by AnnArbor.com indicates that Google may have as few as 204 employees, not counting contractors.

UPDATE 9/14/2011: AnnArbor.com reports that Google is now using a global outsourcing firm to hire new employees at much lower wages than the original employees.  The terms of their employment is not clear.

UPDATE 3/19/13:   A new report by AnnArbor.com states that Google failed to pay Michigan Business Tax owed in relation to its Ann Arbor office.  The state has placed a tax lien on the company in Lansing.

Budget Vote Tonight

Tonight (May 18) the City Council will approve Ann Arbor’s city budget. Amendments will be brought forward to “save” at least a few popular programs, though the scope of changes that the budget will bring will probably not be understood for months. Sadly, our city has been eliminating or degrading services for some time, while embarking on an expensive building program.

One of the programs on the chopping block is Project Grow. Actually, it will continue in some form even if the tiny $7,000 appropriation requested is cut. But this contribution by the city could make the difference between Project Grow’s ability to expand its operation and continue to enhance our community food security, at a time in our country and state when people are under great income pressure even as we recognize the fragility of our food supply. I hope that the Council will show good leadership in restoring this miniscule amount.

Here is the text of a message sent out to Project Grow supporters today.  It contains good information.

TONIGHT Monday, May 18 Sabra Briere is presenting to the Ann Arbor City Council a resolution for vote to reinstate Project Grow in the city budget for fiscal years 2010 and 2011.

Please give one more push on behalf of Ann Arbor’s community gardens by contacting your council member and making your voice heard. Council emails and phone numbers are on the city website.

Here are some highlights of the resolution language:

Project Grow has been serving Ann Arbor’s citizens for 35 years, giving us all the opportunity to grow our own vegetables while working collaboratively with our neighbors. Project Grow gardens are scattered across the City, and are used by people of all means and all abilities.

Project Grow routinely collaborates with the following organizations:

Avalon Housing
Ann Arbor Parks and Recreation Department
Food Gatherers
Washtenaw County Parks and Recreation
University of Michigan Matthaei Botanical Gardens
Catholic Social Services
Ann Arbor Public Schools
Leslie Science and Nature Center

The list above does not include the many organizations that either volunteer in the Project Grow gardening programs or have plots in the gardens:

Michigan Community Scholars
University of Michigan’s Industrial Designers Society
Ann Arbor YMCA
Youth Volunteer program of America
Washtenaw County Juvenile Court
University of Michigan Indian American Student
University of Michigan’s Medical Students Association
University of Michigan Project Serve
Washtenaw County Youth Mentorship Program
University of Michigan Cultivating Community
Washtenaw County MSU Master Gardener Program
University of Michigan School of Natural Resources
Washtenaw Community College/ Project Grow
Hands on the Planet
Organic Gardener Certification Program
United Asian American Medical Student Association
Boy Scouts and Eagle Scouts
Eastern Michigan University’s Sigma Theta Sorority
Rehabilitation Program United Way Day of Youth Caring
University of Michigan Circle K International
Washtenaw Counties P.O.R.T
Packard Clinic

Who uses Project Grow?

In addition to all of the organizations that use Project Grow, about 500 gardeners are annual members. Many more benefit from the produce, as well. The Project Grow gardeners I know give away tomatoes, squash, beans, basil, lettuce and other produce regularly. You may have benefitted from the bounty, as well.

Project Grow equals local produce

Ann Arbor’s citizens are embracing a new ideal and building a local food system where food can be produced with a smaller carbon footprint. More and more of our neighbors are becoming more aware that it is good for us all to have access to fresh food; it’s also good to get the exercise and psychological benefits of reconnecting to nature.

Project Grow equals families working together

Our young people have been described as having a ‘nature deficit,’ and what can be more magical than working with our children to plant seeds and plants, reap the harvest, and eat what we have sown?

Project Grow gardening equals opportunity and access

Project Grow’s sliding scale allows families of all means to work in the soil; both apartment dwellers and home owners use Project Grow gardens. Additionally, Project Grow’s innovative gardens for people with disabilities have opened new possibilities in lives that previously were limited.

UPDATE: Councilmember Briere’s amendment failed, with only 5 votes (Briere, Smith, Teall, Higgins, Taylor) in favor.  Rapundalo and Anglin were absent.

Small Is Beautiful and Local Is Even More So

We have a rare opportunity on Tuesday, May 12 to hear Michael Shuman speak.  The lecture is free and open to the public, 7:30 p.m. in the Rackham Building.  Shuman is to goods-and-services-oriented businesses what Michael Pollan is to agriculture.  In his book, The Small-Mart Revolution, he sets up a dichotomy between “local ownership and import substitution” (LOIS) businesses, and the globalized “there is no alternative” (TINA) businesses that have taken over so much of American life.  His thesis is that we can live better and happier by supporting community-based enterprises and that the TINA businesses are responsible for many of our modern (economic) ills.  He calls the economy based on TINA “Wreckonomics”. The book was published in 2006, but remarkably enough says this in its first chapter:

“One of the central paradoxes of contemporary American life is that despite so much wealth and progress, we have never been so insecure.  Millions of middle-class Americans have taken advantage of low interest rates and borrowed their way to short-term stability, but we know that sooner or later this will come crashing down…Many of us are no further than one layoff, one major illness, or one national calamity away from plunging into a personal economic tailspin.”

He has many examples and prescriptions, and has continued the fight in many forums, as documented in his blog.  I’m looking forward to hearing him in person.

Why The City Should Support Project Grow

Ah, at last we have leadership for what counts in the White House.  Our president and his First Lady are getting their own hands dirty in the White House vegetable garden.  They are typifying the zeitgeist of an era where Michael Pollan is the prophet of eating fresh vegetables raised by one’s own hand and Alice Waters is the exemplar of their preparation.  Everywhere people are digging up vacant city blocks to enjoy the psychological and physical benefits of raising one’s own food.  So what does our city administration do?  It tries once again to cut off our very own community garden program.

On May 18, 2009, the City Council will either adopt a two-year budget, or the budget proposed by City Administrator Roger Fraser will take effect.  This convenient arrangement is apparently in the City Charter.  Fortunately, most years the Council has chosen to negotiate some changes to the administrator’s proposed budget.  Here’s hoping that restoring funding to Project Grow will be one of them this year.

As described in the Ann Arbor News article and a summary slide from the Townhall presentation, the upcoming year is budgeted at about $85 million in revenues, with the following year at about $82 million.  This puts the city into a deficit (expenditures exceed revenues by several million dollars).  So the administration plans to cut out the $7,000 only just restored to Project Grow.  I believe that the motivation for this and other cuts is to restrict the range of services offered to citizens to the bare minimum required by law.  It was also embarrassing to the administration last year when evidence surfaced that Project Grow had indeed requested funding, after it had been stated during budget discussions that they had not.

In an email to a councilmember, Jayne Miller (the Community Services administrator) explained the administrative reasoning behind the cut:

First, and in our view, most important, is the financial status of Project Grow.  Their fund balance, at the close of 2008, is at $59,849 or 98.3% of their operating budget for 2008 ($60,871).  Their proposed budget for 2009 shows a $63,994 operating budget with a proposed ending fund balance of $60,914 (95.2% of operating budget).   For 2010 they show a projected operating budget of $66,072 with an ending fund balance of $61,996 (93.8% of operating budget).  Also, the history of that fund balance has been:  2005 – $54,943, 2006 -  $62,924, and 2007 – $62,948.

Second, there are other “garden” non-profits they could consider consolidating with which may assist in reducing overhead costs.  It is our understanding that Matthai Botanical Gardens approached Project Grow about consolidating their operations, but Project Grow decided not to merge with Matthai.  Growing Hope and Food Gatherers are other non-profits they could consider for a merger.

Third, we do not provide support to any other “garden” non-profit and do not do a competitive review of “garden” non-profits to determine who should be funded, if any.

This is the most classic “doesn’t get it” explanation that I have ever seen.  Note the meticulous detailing of the projected fund balance for each year, down to the dollar.  (That projected fund balance of $66,072 included the city grant of $7,000.)  Huge numbers there.  Then the suggestion that Project Grow should merge with another non-profit.  Growing Hope serves mostly Ypsilanti and Food Gatherers has a huge job doing what it does now to feed the hungry.  Adding on a responsibility like managing Ann Arbor community garden plots would stress those organizations, and they would need more money to do it.  It doesn’t make sense.  (I am not close to the Matthei Gardens question, but I gather that it was a mutual decision not to have Matthei attempt to absorb Project Grow.)

Finally,  the competitive review idea is pure bureaucratese.  Such competitive reviews do happen where there are established programs with dedicated revenue streams (i.e., outside funding or a designated allocation from the general fund), and agencies respond to an RFP.  Human services are often provided in this way.  But Project Grow is a unique program and is the service.

I don’t need this service for myself.  Happily, I have a large back yard and an ever-expanding vegetable garden in it.  But there are a lot of people living in Ann Arbor who don’t have a place to grow their own food.  This is what Project Grow offers.  It is not a “garden non-profit”.  It is our community garden program. (Nelson Meade’s early history of Project Grow tells of the long hard work community activists have put in to achieve this, starting in 1971.)

I was on the Project Grow board briefly in the 1980s.  At that time, the City of Ann Arbor and Washtenaw County pretty much supported the entire program.  (Even now, some of the gardens are located outside the City of Ann Arbor.)  Since then, the organization has engaged in fundraising by holding events and asking for contributions from the general public, though the economic reality is that this will not be likely to pay for expenses.  About half their income (around $25,000)  is from rental fees for the plots, though they have reduced fees for lower-income gardeners.

So what does that huge budget go for?  About two-thirds ($40,00) is for salary and payroll taxes – for two part-time people.  Their jobs are mostly about maintaining and assigning garden plots, working with volunteers, and putting together newsletters and events.  (There is not much “overhead” to cut – these are worker bees.)  The rest is for garden maintenance expenses.  (The city charges them for the water used, for example.)  Most of the gardens are on property owned by the school system.  At one time there were gardens on land owned by non-profits and churches, but most of those were lost to development.  Recently Project Grow has been trying to put some community gardens into city parks, but this has been slow.

City council has often been put into a reactive position on these budget questions – with the question of “so what would you cut” when there is an attempt to add programs back in.  But that is a false equivalence.  The budget is not that  precise, and the question is never asked when an administrative initiative is being funded.  For small amounts like the allocation to Project Grow, it really will come out in the wash.  (Or, to be more explicit, out of the fund balance.)

Council needs to take leadership on this issue, not just for what might be perceived as a narrow constituency, but because it is the right thing for our city.  We are supposedly a forward-looking, environmentally motivated city, poised to offer a quality of life that includes all the best current sensibilities for healthy young people.  Well, folks, this is one of them.  Here are some reasons community gardens deserve support from our leaders.

1. It’s part of building a local food system where food can be produced without a huge carbon footprint, because the broccoli doesn’t have to travel thousands of miles.  (Environment – green – got it?)

2. It’s good for adults who can have access to fresh food, plus the exercise and psychological benefits of growing it. (So is a legitimate addition to the range of recreational choices offered by our parks system.)

3. It’s good for the young.  The Agrarian Adventure is one example of a nationwide effort to make children understand where food comes from and how to eat a more healthful diet, by growing and cooking their own food.  But that needs to be available to all the city’s children. Project Grow has special programs devoted to teaching the young.

4. It’s important for self-sufficiency and social equity.  Our residents who are lower-income (and yes, folks, we still have them) should have a place they can grow their own food.  It can be an important part of the diet for someone on a limited income.

5. Project Grow has made an outreach to persons with disabilities so that they too can garden.

6. It is part of the authentic community spirit of Ann Arbor, as shown by its history (see the Meade account), and it is also a great community-building activity.

7. It is the latest greatest thing, and your President would approve.

8. It is so very little money.  Please.

The Local Food Scene (I)

Call it a movement, a subculture, a community, or just the latest big thing—among a growing number of us, it has become very important to be involved in some way with the effort to bring our food home.  I think I’ve always been there in some ways, but the emerging focus on the subject in Ann Arbor drew my attention a couple of years ago and inspired me to explore it enough to write an article about it.  Since then I’ve made a number of personal moves in the direction of sourcing as much of my food locally as I can (in addition to and aside from continually expanding my vegetable garden).  Today was a big one – I bought half a hog from a local farm (Ernst Farm in Freedom Township).  We saved a little money, but we also brought the frozen, packaged meat home from a 5-generation family farm where the dams and sire are outside sniffing at the fresh air, while the layer hens wander around the driveway.  We know where the meat came from and that it was raised without antibiotics, in a natural setting.  And its purchase means that the farm operation earns the money to keep going.

I’ve been impressed with the many separate and distinct efforts to address the issue of a local food system here in Washtenaw County.  They are being combined, if not coordinated, in local food “summits” and there is now a joint website and calendar for events.  Shannon Brines has been a strong influence and his website and blog is a good place to keep up with local and national trends in the sustainable food movement (with occasional diversions to discussion of carbon burdens).  Slow Food Huron Valley has also been active in coordination, together with one of its leaders, Kim Bayer, whose food blog often has excellent recipes paired with seriously researched and collated information about local food producers, environmental aspects of the sustainable food movement, and reasons to go to the Farmers’ Market.  Another source of energy is Emily Springfield, who has chronicled her own efforts to produce food as well as starting a group effort (Preserving Traditions) to learn traditional methods of preparing food.

I’ve only barely scratched the surface with this beginning of an introduction to the subject, and ignored a lot of important contributors and groups.  But you’ll be hearing more.  Meanwhile, if you haven’t already, you might pick up a copy of Michael Pollan’s Omnivore’s Dilemma.  That will give you a good idea of where we are “coming from”.

How Can Our Downtown Succeed?

A recent article in the Ann Arbor Business Review describes an increase in retail and commercial vacancies, with a drop in asking prices for rents.  This is good an indication as any that business is not doing very well downtown.  But what are the causes and cures?

There was some slight interest in the question of downtown’s retail success at the time that Ann Arbor was walking through the Calthorpe exercise (predecessor of the A2D2 process).  The organizers invited Robert Gibbs, a specialist in developing retail centers, to speak.  His talk was inspiring and enlightening – and as far as I can tell, his recommendations were ignored.  As I reported in an article at the time, Gibbs made the point that what really determines the success of retail businesses is—parking.  What do customers want?  They want to be able to park in front of the place they are going, or failing that, not too far away.  But parking is a contentious issue right now.  The DDA has been doing an outstanding job of building and maintaining parking structures, but this is expensive.  There is a strong push to discourage the use of the automobile to reach downtown.  This makes sense for commuters, who are coming to downtown presumably for the whole day, and the estimable GetDowntown program is there to encourage the use of bicycles and the AATA.  But it won’t help to bring shoppers.

Another factor that has been affecting our downtown retailers has been the surge in property prices and rents. We’ve seen a number of local stores that provided a good basic service leave or close partly because of rents.  With rents now falling, perhaps we will keep some of the remaining ones.  My belief is that the bubble in real estate speculation that characterized the whole country has affected our downtown by pushing up rents and the value of property that might yield a quick development buck.  Newcombe Clark is quoted in the Business Review article as saying, “One result of the falling rents is that downtown buildings will lose their value…Another is that new construction will become economically impossible because the rental rates won’t support the costs of building”.  Yes. Exactly.

The problem is that the business of downtown has become only the business of development.  The Ann Arbor Chamber of Commerce (who surely should be looking after the interests of  business) recently issued a policy statement that, if adopted, would expand the built environment of downtown by developing it intensively up and out.  They are still trying for taller buildings and they are frustrated with all those troublesome historic districts.  And while we are at it, let’s make the area where we can build these big buildings bigger (goodbye, Central Area Plan).  But will this really make our downtown healthier?  I say no.  The opportunity to make money from development downtown has blinded us as a community to what makes the downtown valuable to begin with.  That is its character.  Alter the character too much, and no one will want to visit it.

Look at the images shown on the Main Street Association site.  What makes it attractive?  The old (aka historic) buildings.  Its wide walkable sidewalks, somewhat impeded by outdoor seating (European!), and nice trees help.  But the human scale of the buildings and their charming facades are what really distinguish it.

Last summer, the economic development specialist Donovan Rypkema (who specializes in commercial district revitalization and the reuse of historic structures) gave a talk in which the take-home message was very simple: if you want to develop a successful upscale community, historic preservation is an important tool because the young professionals you are trying to attract want that authentic ambiance.  I think I’m not stretching his point too much to say that this authenticity will also bring in customers.

Of course, it is also key that downtown should offer services that we want.   One of my favorite places to visit is Downtown Home and Garden, where I can buy stuff I actually need for gardening and cooking.   Now look at this business.  It is in a historic building.  It’s fun to go in there (even if the cat is not on duty).  And you can drive your car right into the building (or park in the adjacent privately owned parking lot).  Put that together with a good business sense of providing things people want to buy, and you have a successful downtown business.