Today we are talking about the next City Council meeting, coming up March 1st, including a little bit about development, a little bit about rules, and a lot about sidewalks.
Links from today’s episode:
– the meeting agenda
– materials from the Transportation Commission meeting on sidewalk snow removal
– the Pedestrian Safety and Access Task Force
– the latest SnowBuddy report
And, for good measure, the full text of the sidewalk snow removal resolution we fangirled so hard.
We’ve launched a ko-fi! If you’d like to support the podcast beyond listening, you can now send a few bucks our way. Listening will always be free! This just helps defray our hosting costs of hosting the podcast. Thanks to those of you who have already found and supported the ko-fi; you have almost covered our first year of fees!
Transcript
MH: hi welcome to this episode of Ann arbor a podcast for folks trying to figure out what’s going on in Ann arbor we discuss current events in local politics policy and governance and other civic good times i’m Michele he was my pronouns she her.
JL: And just leave talk and my pronouns are she her.
MK: And i’m molly climate and my pronouns are she her.
MH: Your co hosts to help you get informed and get involved it’s your city. Today we’re talking about the next City Council meeting, which is coming up on march 1 we’ll be touching on a few interesting agenda items, including a little bit about development, a little bit about rules shenanigans and a lot about sidewalks process note we’re recording this a few days before the Council meeting, which means there will be likely be some changes to the agenda between now and then let’s jump in.
JL: Yes, thank you i’m kicking us off today with a quick shout out to the consent agenda on the agenda at CAA for a resolution to operate a to excuse me to authorize the operation of sidewalk cafes and accept the responsibility of enforcing compliance with an m dot rights of way. I wanted to call this out just as an education opportunity that not all sidewalks are created equal that what we call the right of way, which is typically roads to the curb and then sidewalks, which is often considered from the curb to the building that can be complicated by parking lot layouts but roughly those right of ways are managed by different entities and along Jackson here on North main and wash and I in Ann arbor. Those right ways are managed by the Michigan Department of Transportation or m.so for businesses that want to operate sidewalk cafes there during the summer. For example, for pandemic and social distancing reasons we actually have to get permission from m dot. Instead of tip as we typically would from the city for those things, so no action I have no issue with the resolution, I just wanted to call out right away it’s actually right away right away, is and how they are differentially managed.
MK: Right so it’s right right of ways and not rights of a because it’s the ways that’s the.
JL: Florida exactly yeah and it’s a hyphenated phrase right dash of dash way, so you close the end of the phrase got it, and this is one of the linguistic on the podcast.
MH: We have to accept the responsibility of enforcing compliance.
JL: I know, and I there’s so much to say about enforcing compliance and if we wanted to get into things like Ada accessibility and deferring like equitable accessibility there’s actually a lot to say about the operation to use by private business of a public right a plane. Right in general I think we accepted as a good that small businesses, especially get the opportunity to operate safely and robustly, especially as the weather gets better, but that doesn’t mean that these aren’t conversations were having i’m actually not introducing any of that on this resolution, I just wanted to call out right of ways right.
MH: yeah okay yeah let’s not get into any of that stuff instead let’s talk about.
JL: More about side, why.
MH: So item see for on the agenda that so the one you were talking about with CAA for which is in the consent agenda and the one so it’s not expected to be controversial that’s why it’s in the consent agenda see for is an ordinance amendment So this will be if it’s, this is a fruit, this is what they call a first reading if it’s approved.On Monday, then there’ll be a public hearing. Later on, and the summons ordinances about building new sidewalks, and this is some work to clean up some stuff that’s, so this is yeah. What happened was it in in the recent past the City Council changed or they know okay let’s talk about in the in the more in the less recent past. In the less recent past, for most of an arborist existence sidewalks were paid for by. What they call a special assessment so if if they’re going to build a sidewalk the adjacent property owners pay for that sidewalk and they hate it and they oppose it every time.
MK: Just to be clear, though it’s only part of the cost of the sidewalk this event sure, even in the before times. Like not those before towns, but like before the millage times. When the city was putting in a new sidewalk and a place where there was already development had already happened. The city paid for a good chunk of it, and always always tried to have it, combined with other kinds of projects to reduce the total cost to minimize how much was assessed to property owners. Even with that it was sometimes a very substantial amount of money, I don’t want to minimize that but, as a result, there was often very local resistance to any new sidewalk because the property owner didn’t want to pay the assessment.
MH: yeah, and so they passed new ordinance or not they passed a faster resolution to put on the ballot a millage so that we can pay. We could pay that money that was formerly paid for by property owners in their special assessments, the city would be able to pay for that, with their village so individual property owners wouldn’t have wouldn’t be having to pay for sidewalks which makes sense because it’s a public good, it doesn’t really have a whole lot to do with improving your property, it has to do with making the entire city more accessible and building a network. And so the voters approve that in in November, and now we have a new millage money coming in to fund. What do they call the sidewalk gaps places where sidewalks should exists but don’t so this next thing just says so, the thing that’s that’s all done that’s all great, this is just a little cleanup thing to say BT dobbs. When like you know these the sidewalks are now considered a local public improvement which shall not be funded by by a special assessment of the property owner. But there are still some new sidewalk there are still some sidewalks it’ll be funded by the property owners, such as when new development is happening, and when the property is not subject to property tax, which mostly means you have them, maybe also washtenaw county. So um yeah that’s all it’s not a controversial thing it’s just. Some exciting stuff that’s happening.
MK: hope is that this will, this is the final step to make it easier to start approving more sidewalks to fill some gaps it’s been sidewalk Apps have been on the city’s agenda for a long time, but there have been all of these barriers to getting them installed and property owner objections were a big one, because they would lobby really hard to their Council members against the sidewalk and in recent years, we’ve had some pretty high profile votes against sidewalks where sidewalks did not get installed, including the safe routes to school sidewalk near the same school.
MH: Where we actually had down they turned down a ton of funding from the Federal Government yeah.
MK: get a bunch of federal money to put in sidewalks near school and the property owners objected Council voted it down which now means we can’t get more of that money for future projects there’s some.
MH: Is a fee no.
MK: there’s a pen -I believe there’s a penalty.
MH: there’s an actual penalty okay.
MK: We made we eventually will be able to try again as my understanding, I don’t know the details, but yeah That was a That was a real bummer, and so the goal The hope is that this assessment means we will stop having those kinds of property owner objections yeah and I know it’s not a guarantee.
JL: I have a process question for you guys and if you happen to know the answer so When we’re talking about sidewalk gaps and how they get filled is that something that city staff have a plan for and they’re like Okay, we have 121 through 20 gaps that we know we’re going to fill or are they filled in response to adjacent property owner requests, say, I have a gap I can’t get my my kids stroller over this can you come fill it like how.
MH: Do you know what the process that there is a process i’ve seen the list of how they prioritize these gaps and proper you know when people request them, that is a factor in the prioritization.
MK: right there it’s the prioritization process includes a bunch of different factors that have different point amounts and have it so individually requests from people nearby is one of those things, it also is things like proximity to schools how heavily used the route is how dangerous it is there’s there’s all of these different features, but the city does have they have a map of every single sidewalk APP in the city, they know where they are and they all have a color code in terms of how urgent it is to get them filled. Thanks.
MH: Alright, so that’s that see for it’ll be fun. next thing on the agenda is see a five and other another new ordinance and just would like to tell us about that.
JL: I do, and this is another one that I don’t expect to be controversial, but I just want to call it out as something that i’m really happy to see.So see five is an ordinance to add fair chance access to housing, to the code of the city of Ann arbor, and this is something that originated in the Human Rights Commission. And is specifically language around reducing the barriers of formerly incarcerated people to the to seeking housing specifically naming that landlords can’t use this as a screening filter for applicants. We have so much information about how formerly incarcerated people once being released face a lot of obstacles to housing to jobs to transportation. Everything like that, and one of the approaches to equity includes reducing or removing those barriers so as somebody who cares a lot about housing, I just wanted to say, thanks to the Human Rights Commission and staff for moving this forward i’m happy to see this come on our books.
MH: One thing I wonder about is how it’s going to be enforced and who is going to be enforcing it.
JL: that’s a good question, I believe that a company it’s typically enforced by complaint right, so if somebody notices this question in an inappropriate place which now includes housing applications. Then complained about that might go, for example, to the fair housing Center of southeastern mid Michigan they have a very cumbersome name but fair housing Center, which is a legal aid, essentially funded I believe by hud at the federal level and possibly in parts, by cycle of state and local funding as well, but anyway, that they address complaints pertaining to failure to access housing it’s not great it’s not proactive but that’s and also that’s My guess but. yeah that’s what I think.
MH: Excellent.
JL: up next is our shenanigans corresponding.
MH: I, yes, I like to report on some shenanigans going on here. So there has been a lot of shenanigans about the Council rules. They are taking up the city council’s taken up a lot of time to talk about these and it’s the rules that they make for themselves how they’re going to govern their own behavior during Council meetings and there are two competing interests going on and one is we want meetings to be efficient and we want to encourage Council members to do their homework and behave professionally during the meetings so that we’re there we’re not wasting a whole lot of time, the other interest is people wanting to make sure that issues are discussed thoroughly and publicly. So that they are adequately representing their constituents interests and adequately communicating with their constituents about you know why their votes are going the way they are so those were those were the kind of factors that went into the brew of the Council rules. What they came up with was mostly agreed upon universally by the by the Council but there’s this one small section that is apparently a gigantic battleground and it’s come, it was discussed a lot when the when when the resolution first was discussed before Council then it was called back to reconsideration at the at the last Council meeting, where amendments were proposed to this tiny section and rejected and now. There is now there’s a resolution to waive attorney client privilege, so that some of the city attorneys communications about the Council rules can be sent by the city council to the aclu for their consideration and the section in question is about the so historically what’s happened is Council members have call each other names lobbed conspiracy theories that each other spent a lot of time doing these things at meetings.
JL: and actually Michelle that’s a clarifying question I wanted to ask, are you talking about behavior at the table, or how they talk about them each other, like out in the world on social media.
MH: Right so okay so yeah not most of this is about how they behave at the table and in their committees and things like that gotta think this this tiny section mentions how they talk about each other out in public and what it what it says about how they talk about each other out in public is like it says hey if if you wanna if you want to call each other names out in public. Like don’t come and bring that to bread don’t come and bring that up at the Council meeting instead we want you to bring that up at the administration committee instead and we can discuss it there, instead of at Council meetings, because what’s happened before, is that you know Council member a calls Council member, be a poopy head on Facebook and then Council member be is like spends like 15 minutes bloviating about how they were called a poopy head when, in fact, is Council member who is poopy head and.
JL: We have to spend a lot of the record show that would be an improvement.
MH: And then they you know they spend a lot of time and it’s like the Council meetings drag out until 2am because of this stuff and so this was supposed to give them an alternative to drag the Council meetings out till 2am and it was supposed to say hey bring it to the administration committee and said, this is the, this is the appropriate place to talk about if you’ve been called a poopy head on Facebook.
MK: So it’s sort of like the airing of grievances supposed to happen at an admin committee and not in the Council meeting exactly so yes, festival, this is not for Council meetings.
MH: Right and you know it says like. The I mean, these are elected officials, they can’t like do anything to each other, like except for like start recall petitions, the same as any other like registered voter in Ann arbor. So, like it’s not like they can actually see you know, on see each other, because of these things, but what the Council administration committee could do is they might choose to write a letter that’s like hey guys cut it out or like we don’t think it’s appropriate that so and so that Council member a called Council member, be a poopy head, you know they might do that. Now there are Council members who feel that this is an, this is a grave insult to their freedom of speech and that they should be allowed to address the poopy head question at any time they want it, for as long as they want. And the city attorney has apparently advised them on this and, apparently, they don’t find that advice sufficient so now they want to now they want the city to formerly to formally seek the advice of the aclu in the hopes that they’ll say something different from what their own attorney who they hire has said which seems really strange to me because, and it seems like a really strange waste of the aclu is time because they’re supposed to be, you know, helping people who don’t have attorneys making six figure salaries at their beck and call like you go to the aclu when you know you you go to the aclu because you can’t do it yourself, you know, but if you have your own attorneys giving you your own advice like what do they want the aclu to do they’ll say you know, like best case scenario and their imagination is the aclu says. hey you you you can’t tell them, they have to talk about this administration committee and then the city attorney says, well, I think they can tell them to do it at the keynote. If they disagree with each other than like what like what are they supposed to do about that the aclu wasn’t gonna represent the city against its own attorney.
MK: yeah and that advice won’t be wouldn’t be binding in any way.
JL: Right exactly yes, I hear what you’re saying Michelle and I don’t have a problem at its base with you if you’re not sure that the advice your attorney is giving you with going outside of that and I think part of what i’m hearing and what you’re saying is that going through like the state AG, or something like that that that kind of process of appeal might be more appropriate than.
Getting outside of government entirely and going to the aclu I don’t have a problem with them questioning it and I guess i’m not as sensitive to the to asking the aclu, even if it ends up like not being a totally appropriate process, the thing that strikes me is that this is the same crowd that couldn’t bear Fuck in a public comment. And so like it seems like an inconsistent sensitivity about when we can and can’t talk about things we all have our inconsistency is but that that’s really what strikes me about this is that we should be allowed to say what we want to say in public meetings shouldn’t an extent to the commenters as well, so.
MH: yeah I don’t know I mean I guess like if they want to you know, like the city hires outside outside attorney advice, all the time, and you know I just hope that they’re not expecting the aclu to like stop defending people you know against the government in order to go and weigh in on which Council member is actually was is in fact a poopy head for free, you know if if they’re gonna they’re gonna hire that you sell you and pay them a bunch of money to determine which Council members, a poopy head like. Maybe the aclu will decide to do that and make a bunch of money, doing so, but like I don’t think that’s a good use of our money.
MK: Michelle This is also part of a sort of new trend that we’re seeing where certain Council members are trying to waive attorney client privilege.
MH: Right.
MK: On a variety of things right and that. This feels a little inside baseball but it’s this idea that the the legal advice that the city is getting from its own lawyers, they want to share it publicly for reasons that are opaque to me.
MH: They I mean I yeah I mean it’s it’s tough because we haven’t like actually seen one of those resolutions succeed yet and so we don’t know what they were trying to show us in waving that privilege. But like you know what the the arguments against that that we’ve heard are that, like. We want this, we want the Attorney to we want the city attorney to be able to give advice in an on you know, like unfiltered way they want to be able to say what they want, and like. You know if the city attorney knew that everything they said was going to be public, then they would you know be really they would they wouldn’t be able to have the like forthrightness that they would need. But even just knowing that. The city, the city council has a habit of trying to waive privilege might be enough to. make this make the city attorney hesitant to put certain things in the advice that supposed to be internal.
JL: And to clarify there’s very little that gets privileged right like almost everything that the city does is subject to public scrutiny, the three areas that i’m aware of our specific legal consultations with specific aspects of real estate transactions and specific aspects of hr. And Labor management for like those are the three areas and even within those areas it’s constrained about what is not subject to the public. So, seeking to waive the Attorney client privilege, again, I see it as part of a healthy process, possibly but it’s it’s not by itself alarming what you’re.
MH: What you guys are saying is.
JL: that this was part of the pattern that we’re seeing.
MH: Right.
JL: And without without being able to see you know what they’re seeking to wave it’s tough to understand whether we have a genuine process problem or whether they’re seeking to waive it for political reasons it’s just it’s tough to judge, but we’re definitely seeing a pattern here, because this is what the third one that we’ve seen in as many months or something like that yeah.
MH: And the other thing is every time it comes up somebody’s advice is that you know somebody somebody someone some City Council member has the idea that well instead of very waving attorney client privilege why don’t We ask the Attorney to write a new document you know with the public audience in mind and you know, so they could choose to do that, but I don’t know instead they’re doing. And like I don’t know it’s just these are just the rules about how the Council members are supposed to talk to each other, and we have to waste so much time talking about what that when there’s real problems in the city it’s talked about okay anyway enough about shenanigans they make me mad just why don’t you talk about something for real.
JL: I don’t know I think this is all real but color In particular, I will talk about DC to which is the resolution requesting the evaluation of feasibility of a revised development for Packard 2857 Packard you may hear referred to in the news or in I was gonna say cocktail party conversation but that’s not a thing right now so anyway just casually on social media, I guess, as the Web or property which has nothing to do as far as i’m aware with like weber’s the business but anyway, the Web or property.
MH: Its own named Weber.
JL: that’s right some duty Weber and it’s a private lot almost eight acres that’s zoned are one he and anything are one is single family residential, so this is eight acres inside the city of a an arbor that only has one home. Which is pretty unusual and makes the site pretty right for redevelopment, especially because this is on a transportation corridor like Packard. And, especially given the size of the property most likely what we’ll see is a developer purchasing the purchasing this seeking a rezoning to multifamily. And we’ll see apartments or condos developed on this property it’s my understanding, and my knowledge about the background of this property is a little bit fuzzy but it’s my understanding that this has been tied up in litigation for a little while and it’s coming out from under that set of constraints. And so, now that it’s coming out we’re seeing this property being subject to Community conversation, the one thing that’s complicating the conversation, is that the site is also home to the presence of landmark trees.
MK: Are they landmark trees, or are they just old trees.
JL: I thought they were landmark but it could.
MH: It says landmark in the resolution.
JL: Okay, it says landmark in the resolution and.
MH: we’re in the restaurant or something.
JL: Right worth double checking and it’s my understanding that landmark landmark designation for a tree as a little bit like a historic designation for a building it means that it gets it that it’s subject to specific treatment legally and financially. So um I think I want to stop there, and open it up to Michelle and molly because. So far, it’s pretty straightforward, but this like this point and understanding the property is where things start to get a little bit complicated so i’m curious like what you guys are understanding as. Like what’s the decision on the table, what are what what is it that people are talking about, because this is a subject.
MH: I’ve got more on the background at this.
JL: We can do a little bit I really want to talk about like from now going forward today that we can.
MK: So i’ll go because I probably the one of us who knows the least about this, but what i’m from what I understand there was already a development proposal on the table, there was a design like a site plan that was maybe even approved, I see just nodding which i’m radio means yes.
JL: that’s my understanding, I know at what point what process point the approval was that before or after but yes, there was a decision on the table.
MH: So what happened, what happened, as I recall, is there was a so it was it was going to get. There we’re going to build houses there, but some of the people you know didn’t like that it would have it would have torn down a whole bunch of trees and it would have turned down this farmhouse and so they worked with the city to make it a pod planned unit development that has special things that are different from the regular zoning. And they worked out a plan so that the houses would be spaced closer together so that more of the property could be. Not disturbed and they could save more of the trees and so the pod was then rejected by the city council. And banister went around to some to some or i’m sorry city former City Council member and banister then went around announcing that they had saved at the trees, we save the trees. When, in fact, what happened was that. They had rejected the compromise which, which would have saved some of the trees but so, then, the developer sued it said hey we put in all this work to come up with this compromise, and then you, and then you go ahead and figuring reject this like that’s that’s not fair. And so what we have coming back to us as consent judgment saying okay well you know we’re gonna we’re going to do a different it’s gonna we’re gonna say if these trees it’s going to have a different developer that’s what’s on the table as far as I know, they’ve got it.
JL: So the consent and judgment is actually where it gets a little bit fuzzy for me just because of my only mediocre knowledge of of legal goings on. The consent judgment was actually issued like in as far as I know, prior to this process, but hasn’t been enacted or something like like there’s some part of the legal process that hadn’t been finalized, which allowed for another development to get proposed by a person and a collaboration, who does not even own the site. So, to bring it back to the decision that’s on the table, right now, the resolution requesting evaluation of feasibility of a revised development for 2857 Packard there’s a developer called thrive, which has proposed a completely different development which is, I think something like 51 apartments I believe thrive, is also the developer, who is heading up viridian at county farm, which is that county owned site over off of I think it’s plat between here on and Packard.
So thrive has worked with an architecture firm system assistance designer and I think, maybe one or two other professionals or groups of professionals to propose a new development, but it would require a Public Private Partnership in terms of funding, and this is where my reservation comes in, so I just want to say for the record that the resolution that’s on the table. Council asking staff to evaluate the feasibility totally fine right, this is a normal part of governance Council is like we have some interesting ideas in front of us we’d like to understand a little bit more about what we can and can’t do what i’m expecting to see is that the Public Private Partnership that’s being proposed is likely in feasible. For a lot of different reasons, but no less because what’s being proposed isn’t that what thrive, is proposing isn’t really consistent. With the with masterplan ideas for this particular lot and on top of which you know we’ve talked about this a few episodes already we’re already looking at a little bit of an austerity budget for the city next year coming up with a new proposal, a new way to spend 123 million dollars or more for something that’s going to be of limited benefit to a limited number of people feels unlikely and that’s that’s really what I wanted to say about this is that this feels like good governance, but I just wanted to kind of throw my hat in the ring on this and say i’d love to see something that’s a little bit dense that well that’s a lot better than what we’ve got we could absolutely fit dozens of units on here. And something that’s consistent with our carbon neutrality plan, I would just prefer to see it really in the hands of a private developer, but make it proposing something that’s consistent with our current city goals. I think that’s everything that I wanted to say on this for now we’re going to see it come up a lot more and i’ll have more to say about that in the future, but is there anything else that you guys wanted to say on this project we’re pretty early on in its trajectory probably.
MH: got more to say about the past shenanigans, but I think i’ll leave that be.
JL: do have a shenanigans episode coming up in the next couple of months and.
MH: every sort of city council is a shenanigans.
JL: I don’t think we’ve talked about sidewalks enough so.
MK: yeah there’s always more to talk about with sidewalks so For those of you have been who’ve been following along the last few weeks, you know that city council has been talking a lot about municipal sidewalk snow removal and the started about a month ago with a resolution that was brought forward by councilmember Chris wall that was looking specifically at the snow that gets pushed back up from city plows and it was focused on curb ramps and bus stops and driveway.
MH: apron driveway we’re not going to get into driveway brands because we’ve we’ve moved past it now. At the last City Council meeting, there was a very similar resolution put forward by Council member Rom lolly That was the same sort of concern around curb ramps and bus stops, but only for the downtown area for the the downtown Development Authority.
MK: Space that neither of those past but there was City Council seems to accept that there’s real public appetite for a better way to do snow sidewalk snow removal in this northern city where it snows a lot. And so, now we have a new resolution, this is sort of from scratch. From councilmember briggs that looks much more comprehensively at the problem of sidewalk snow removal throughout the city of Ann arbor i’m really thrilled with this resolution it’s. I think it does a lot of what we want it to it’s just it’s so much better and the the whereas is jess and I were sort of geek out about the, whereas in the. Because they really lay out the problems so beautifully and there’s like a whole lot of whereas before we get to the resolutions, but one thing I thought we could do is just each of us pick and read our favorite whereas clauses which will help give you the listener, a sense of what we’re talking about without having to actually read the whole resolution. i’m Michelle do you want to go first.
MH: Sure i’ll talk about the one that says, whereas reversing the enact inequities and transportation investment and policies is an important component of a comprehensive Vision Zero strategy and an important objective in the Community of Ann arbor.
MH: I like that it didn’t it recognizes that we’ve been spending our transportation dollars in an equitable way by by focusing on cars and that and it highlights the the Vision Zero goal that we have. Zero pedestrian safe zero pedestrian fatalities and zero pedestrian serious injuries.
JL: yeah i’m going to call out to to wear as is, but for the same reason, whereas in June 2020 City Council unanimous unanimously adopted the two zero carbon neutrality plan which includes as a core strategy, reducing vehicle miles traveled by at least 50% by 2030 and whereas the comprehensive transportation plan Community engagement process established core Community values of creating a safe, equitable and accessible transportation system. What I love about these two and michelle’s is that we are using major strategy pieces that Council staff and the Community have already developed. Vision Zero the carbon neutrality plan and the transportation plan and we’re calling out those strategy pieces as a foundation for a new policy piece. That gets me really excited and very comfortable and confident that whatever comes from this policy is whatever actions come from this policy or a genuine expression of Community values as we’ve developed them together.
MH: yeah that’s what I didn’t like about the proposals that were made before it was that they were both shooting from the hip not engaging the work that’s been that’s been done previously.
JL: right they felt deeply and grounded.
MK: yeah and there are a few areas is in here also that call out the work of the pedestrian safety and access Task Force report which came out in 2015 So this was work that predates the existence of the transportation Commission that’s how long we’ve had. Community members working on this problem and articulating this specific need. And so my favorite whereas is the first one it’s also the shortest one, whereas sidewalks are vital transportation corridors. That has been missing from so much of our our city approach to all kinds of things snow removal who pays for new to fill sidewalk Apps all of these things. And so, this recognition that sidewalks are for transportation, most of the people who use sidewalks are using them to go places and using a sidewalk to get a place is as valid as using a car. We haven’t even gotten into what this actually is directing.
MH: Even often read, whereas class i’m just like okay okay what’s the point, what are we doing. What are we doing molly.
MK: What we’re gonna do is look into having the city take care of the snow that gets on the sidewalks, no matter how it gets there from the sky can get there from the clouds it can get there from a snowball face the city is going to look at being in charge of clearing at least some of the city sidewalks. And so the various resolutions that are a part of this, the the resolved clauses are about assessing the feasibility proposing cost estimates and strategies for a municipal sidewalk snow removal Program. Aligning policies procedures and budgets to ensure improved winter maintenance of the sidewalk network and then you know some more detailed stuff that all comes down to figure it out, this is a priority, this is a, this is an expression of our values and the status quo is unacceptable, and so, and this includes. And we’ll see what we actually got, especially with the budget limitations, but this does include pilots for next winter and that I want to point out that there was a real sense of urgency in the Community about sidewalk snow removal, we talked in a previous episode about the person who died last winter. And you know, this is what I think the people who are calling in to support those earlier resolutions, where we’re just so desperate for the city to do something more than what it’s been doing. And I wanted to talk a little bit about the the evolution of this new resolution, because I think it’s a really I think it demonstrates. What what a healthy process looks like so Council member breaks worked on a new draft of the resolution around side sidewalk snow removal, where she attempted to include some of the features of the previous two resolutions addressing the downtown area addressing curb ramps. But a little bit starting from scratch and she brought it to the transportation Commission meeting, which was last week. And the version that she brought last week was much more cautious in terms of timeline. And I understand that caution, because of the budget constraints and there’s like snow removal as we’ve talked about is a very logistically difficult, and I think there’s some concern among staff about how effectively or how quickly we would be able to pivot to that so she brought this previous version of the resolution to the transportation Commission and the transportation Commission had a lot of feedback and the the big piece of feedback that came from many Commissioners was this is not aggressive enough, this is not an aggressive enough timeline it sort of lays out the right values, but we don’t want to have to wait two years to get to actually doing something, because that original draft had all of next winter for like information gathering and data gathering and councilmember briggs like heard the Commission revised the resolution it’s got a more aggressive timeline now and that’s what’s coming to counsel so and.
MH: As a part owning including some actual pilot programs and.
MK: Please an actual pilot programs next winter and it’s already February so it’s it’s not that far away she’s not wrong like in the in the timeline of municipal operations 10 months is not a ton of lead time. But, but there was, but she there was sort of that acknowledgement that this was a real Community desire and that informed the policy that’s now coming to counsel. And so I I feel very happy about how this process, like the outcome and the sort of latter half of this process that it took a lot of Community input there’s there’s recognition of the sort of of the realities of municipal budgets and logistics, but at the same time there’s some ambition to it and a real recognition that that the status quo is not acceptable yeah, we have to do better.
JL: I appreciated my own response to this, you know, first of all, yes, we we were geek out girls about the whereas is. But I also found myself when I was looking at the resolution and, at the pilot that they’re directing staff to conduct next winter, my first gut response was off that feels fast, even though that’s what I had advocated for and this feels familiar to me like I find myself saying I want the fast thing and doing the incrementalist thing, and I feel myself constantly at war between I want something good, and I want something quick and in government that’s typically an either or situation. But it’s not even that black and white right like it’s a spectrum of quick and slow and it’s a spectrum of good and bad. And I think what we have we’re not asking for a city a fully funded city wide solution within 10 months we’re not we’re asking staff to help us understand. The priorities, help us understand the breakout of the budget, help us understand that intersection of equity and access and help us understand how good we can do a limited at implementation X winter, it still feels ambitious, but it feels good, especially because it’s so grounded.
MK: I mean it’s very closely aligned with the values we’ve set like the values that we’ve laid out for the city in terms of our climate goals and our safety goals people if people are going to give up their cars, they need to trust that the sidewalks are going to be usable all year round. Just as a baseline and we don’t have that right now.
JL: This is probably the most positive episode that we had three or four ordinances that we call it we’re like I just want to say this is good.
MH: This is a big one, this was this has been one of the things that i’ve cared about them almost you know.
JL: mm hmm yeah so good job Council. Good job Commission job staff good job in arbor. Yeah I think that’s everything that we wanted to cover from this week’s agenda right.
MK: I think that’s right yeah.
MH: I uh I did want to I, since we have a little extra time I wanted to talk about the whatever property, there was a there was a conversation I had with this with someone a long time ago when it was when the pod was on the agenda, people were wanted they wanted it to get rejected and so forth I talked to somebody who said, we want to live near trees not near condos and I said, well then, why don’t you buy a house in the country they’re cheap they’re near trees they’re not near condos like, why do you live in Ann arbor and that and their answer was that their answer was like friends loved ones job opportunities i’m like it sounds like you want to live near condos bra. I don’t know that’s.
JL: And along those lines, I want us to have some nuance and how we think about things right, like a lot of times we use trees as a shorthand for sustainability. And that’s not necessarily the case like three trees are not going to buy us nearly as much positive environmental benefit as getting 50 to 100 people or more out of their cars and into transit. And that’s what a development like this has the opportunity to do so, yes, we need to be mindful of trees, but within context. And arbor has if i’m remembering more parks and possibly more trees than any city city of a certain size in the country. we’re Okay, we should be mindful right like don’t don’t clear cut all of our trees that’s fine but losing five is not going to make an arbor any less sustainable and frankly any less lovely. And maybe being neighbor like you’re not a neighbor to condos your neighbor to people. Right right like so let’s talk about who were actually being neighbors to and they get to be a neighbor to you, and maybe that’s Okay, too. cool since we still have a little bit extra time, and so we had talked really briefly about whenever in this position you guys were all. Maybe we could do a quick follow up on the conor o’neill’s thing because it does actually show. Michelle do you want to take the lead on that or do you want me to.
MH: yeah well. yeah I mean we talked about so that’s at the last City Council meeting, there was something on the consent agenda and we didn’t actually note it as something to talk about on our podcast, but it was a. An outdoor dining event on St patrick’s day by conor o’neill’s.
JL: And closer.
MH: yeah there were many street yeah right and so the yeah so there’s competing interests there there’s the one concern, on the one hand we’ve got local businesses are feeling the squeeze from Colvin and this is a big moneymaker for conor o’neill’s we don’t want them to have to suffer, on the other hand, we have covert itself and that you know these dynamic these outdoor dining things they’ve always seemed a little dangerous to me. You got people hanging around next to each other with their masks off like.
MK: it’s I mean they’re in general being outdoors is way way way safer than being outdoors all think all all else being equal, and we had a really successful outdoor dining program all last summer and as I understand it, there’s no evidence that that had any negative impact on our coven numbers.
JL: So I think, and this specific event was vetted through the health department and they had said that they were Okay, with it, the Community had feelings.
MK: The feelings.
MH: Because there’s.
JL: No criticism of feelings.
MH: Because like, on the one hand, like you know people like me and people like the Council majority who voted to approve the conor o’neill’s street closers. We tend to trust the experts trust the professionals, if the health department says this is going to be safe it’s going to be safe, but when it comes to me. I have not liked the handling of coven. That has been going on, like it makes me so mad that there’s that we have limited indoor dining approved right now, like, I think we should have had early lockdowns and shut down coven you know, we should have we should have. And you know it’s like everyone has been living as though coven is just something we have to We just have to live with it we just have to get used to our friends and loved ones dying. This is just how things are now, but you know that’s no reason not to go to a restaurant.
I wish that higher levels of the government has taken this more seriously, I wish there was relief for these businesses so that like we didn’t have to put ourselves in our Community, in danger to support conor o’neill’s but I just did it so like you know so when you know normally I mean i’ve used to trusting professionals when they say it’s going to be safe, but the way coven has been handled makes me want to be a little bit more paranoid than the professional say I should be, and so, when I said this was going to be safe, I disagree.
JL: Well, and and so let’s for folks who don’t know let’s talk a little bit about the process, so the question came to counsel at the last meeting should. Can conor o’neill’s obtain a street closure for St patrick’s day event Council majority voted yes huge public hue and cry and later that week the mayor issued a veto negating that decision, so the answer now is no and that’s what shows up on today’s agenda is the Mayor leto of the previous decision right mm hmm.
MH: And he I saw some Council members talking about like you know yeah it was a tough call for me I voted yes, but I probably should have voted no so i’m glad that happened and somebody mentioned like that, like yeah. Maybe this particular event would have been typically safe but we didn’t want to like give the impression that everyone is clear and good to go partner I think there’s just a.
MK: Great there’s this whole like things that are specific to St patrick’s day. college town that it’s it was a lot of folks just did not believe that it wasn’t going to end up being a ranger because we’ve lived through however many St patrick’s day is already, and so I think that was part of it. But the other thing to keep in mind is that in another couple of weeks, another summer spring summer outdoor dining program is going to be coming to Council with a lots of street closures, so that lots of restaurants can be doing outdoor dining and. My hope is that that does not get the same kind of angry outcry we partly because we did it once before, and we know it worked very well and safely.And if people are going to go to restaurants i’d much rather they be eating outside than inside and it’s also it also did really great things to activate our streets for people.
MH: And do not forget I like the streets being closed. I didn’t like the people breathing all over me when I tried to walk by.
MK: yeah so there’s there’s some complexity here, what we see today is this veto and I think, as far as I know, the that’s the end like there’s no right is this part of the story is over but.
MH: No one is trying to override the veto.
MK: Right, but a few more weeks from now we’re going to see another on its face a kind of similar decision by Council only much bigger because it’s going to be for more streets and more businesses and more time and yeah and all summer or I guess it was just the weekends last year there was.
JL: The right thing, so like it’s like Friday this Friday afternoon to Sunday night, I think.
MK: Right I don’t know what the plan is for this year I haven’t seen a draft, yet I don’t know there might be one I just haven’t seen it.
JL: I haven’t but the the date that i’ve heard is to commence April 1 so i’m anticipating will see it at the next Council meeting that’s My guess. Alright, we didn’t you guys, we made it through, even to the end part where the veto lists.
MK: Yes, awesome so um that is that about wraps us up. Thanks for listening to Ann Arbor AF. We’re your cohosts Molly Kleinman, Michelle Hughes, and myself, Jess Letaw; and thanks to producer Jarod Malestein. For questions about this podcast or ideas about future episodes, you can email us at annarborafpod@gmail.com. Get informed, then get involved. It’s your city!
Captions auto-generated by Zoom; they aren’t perfect, but we hope they’re helpful!