Board of Education - Regular Meeting

Good evening everyone and welcome to the March 2nd meeting of the Ann Arbor City Council. If you're able, please rise and join us for a moment of silence followed by the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Would our clerk please call the role of councel? Council member Dish absent. Council Harrison absent. Council Watson here. Council Malik here. Council Readina here. Council Gazi Edwin here. [clears throat] Mayor Taylor here. Council here. Council Aman here. Council Briggs here. Council Cornell here. We have a quorum. We have a motion, please, to approve the agenda. Moved by council member Aman. Second by council. Discussion of the agenda. All in favor? All opposed. The agenda is approved. We have communications today from our city administrator. No.

We have a uh an update from the Independent Community Police Oversight Commission.

Mayor, we have Muhammad Oman on Zoom. Thank you very much. Uh, Vice Aman, you are you have the con. [snorts] Mr. Offman, you'll need to There you go. Good evening. Um, good evening, Mr. Mayor, city council members, city um, clerk and city administrator and community. Uh, I couldn't be at the council meeting uh, in person this evening because of the fasting months of Ramadan. Um, for our report, there were no Ebak reports to present in January uh, and February. We did not have meetings in those months. January meeting was cancelled because of the community visual uh hosting by Congresswoman Dingo which occurred on the same day and time as our regular uh meeting. We felt it was important to attend this event and hear the local officials addressing ICE practices. Uh many commissioners attended. In addition, our colleague, Commissioner Green, opened his New Hope Baptist Church for this gathering. Uh, the 2025 annual report update. The first draft of the report was sent to the commissioners for their feedback and comments. Uh we expect to have the final draft ready for our March meeting and probably ready for printing and

distribution in early April. Um for the 2025 complaints that we received, uh EKBA received 30 complaints that were filed directly with EKP and forwarded to APD for their investigation. 25 complaints were completed by the information in information managers. Um the other five complaints were closed were either rescended by complainant or did not involve AAPD. Uh on the other hand 15 complaints were filed directly with APD and were investigated. uh all complaints were piped and will be graphed and the graphs will be included in the annual report. Uh for the current year so far in this uh 2026 uh we received six six complaints uh so far and passed on those to APD for investigation. Uh two of those were closed by APD because they did not involve APD. Three complaints were investigated and completed and will [snorts] be assigned to information managers for their review. Uh the other item we are working on is the an update u of our [clears throat] um original interview questions for new candidates. Um this was done way back at the beginning of our um commission. uh and we feel that probably with time we need to update uh those uh questions not to deviate too far from the contents of those questions but to include some

other verbiage. um began um and those um um com those questions were sent to the commissioners for for their feedback and comments. I'm hoping to vote on the updated version at our March meeting. Uh we currently have two vacancies and would encourage the community members to apply online using the government the city government website to apply for these vacancies. Uh lastly, uh city council and leazison discussed the city council resolution regarding banning ICE agents from using um city government properties for their activities. Uh council member also sent us the resolution uh text to look at. We will be voting on a motion to support this resolution in our March meeting. And this is uh a brief report and if there are no questions [snorts] uh thank you so much.

Thank you so much. Thank you sir. Thank you. We now come to public comment reserve time. Public comment reserve time is an opportunity for members of the public to speak to council and the community about matters of municipal interest. To speak at public comment reserve time, one needs to have signed up in advance by contacting our city clerk. Speakers in all instances will have three minutes in which to speak. So, please pay close attention to the time. Our clerk [snorts] or the time clock will notify you when 30 seconds are remaining and when your time has expired. When your time is expired, please conclude your remarks and seed the floor. Our first speaker today is Tom Stolberg.

Mr. Stolberg is joining us online. Caller with the phone number running in 534 [snorts] and press star six to unmute your phone. Go ahead.

Thank you. Good evening. This is Tom Solver calling from 1202 Traver Street in the heart of Lowertown. Uh I'd like to talk about BA13. The uh this contract again shows the continuing failure to appropriately implement the best value policy. It's still skewed to support council members Iris and Medina's favorite union contractors via the seven-point advantage given to union contractors due to apprentice programs. Yet again, we're spending hundreds of thousands more than we have to with no real extra value. Bailey's original $6.9 million bid was a staggering $1.3 million higher than the Fonson bid. And Fonson's a very qualified contractor working regularly for this city. In fact, Bailey's bid was higher than the projected budget. Instead of going with Fontson, staff apparently negotiated the price down to 6.3 million by reducing the scope of the work. It's still over $600,000 more than Fonson. And Fonson would likely have reduced its bid a lot, too, for the reduced scope of work. But this is probably still a million dollar or more price difference. The scoring info shows the sevenpoint apprenticeship program advantage to Bailey and a three-point difference purportedly for Bailey's better references. The references from other places shouldn't really matter that much when the city has a huge amount of experience. Wisconsin, when there is this much money at stake, you should get into the weeds a bit before throwing our tax dollars away. We need a detailed review of how much extra we taxpayers have paid municipal contractors over the past few years. And speaking of paying extra, let's talk about the affordable housing millage

that we citizens voted to tax ourselves and how much affordable housing we are not getting simultaneously because of this administration's policies of favoring private development profits over affordable housing. [snorts] I want to lead with the Klein slot. That sale was for over $14 million and I haven't heard a word about the sale proceeds going to the affordable housing fund. We passed the millillage for the affordable housing thinking as we were told that

parking lots and other properties downtown would be developed for affordable housing or at least evaluated for that. So, I think a 100% of that 15 million should go to the affordable housing fund. Can we get a comment on that? Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker is Henry Herskovitz.

Good evening. It seems that if um body language is any indicator, I can conclude from the uh response of city council. And for those people who are just looking in on the TV, we have at least three people turning their backs. Four people, five, and one has left the room because they don't want to hear me when I speak about a matter of municipal interest called Holocaust Education in the Ann Arbor public schools. We are not teaching our students the truth. And that's why I approach council. But tonight, I bring some good news for the council people that don't want to hear what they what I have to say and they would want me to to not speak about this. Although I think they're they're wanting me to stop talking about this is a violation of my first amendment right and I want to get that straight. So, I have to read this part. I have the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances. That's in the first amendment. and I'll have to leave it up to um his call to advise council if they so desire to have advice. But the good news I bring is that I'm willing to let the the council people who don't want me to don't want to hear me speak have their way. Now for 20 years, two citizens of Ann Arbor, Blaine Coleman and Mjan Sababa Asvahani have begged council to pass a simple resolution. We are against military aid to Israel. Well, I am against military aid to Israel. And I think that anybody that has a heart and a soul is against military aid to Israel. My God, in the last two and a half years,

women and children have been slaughtered. Not Hamas fighters, women and children. the amount of which could fill Michigan's football stadium. 100,000 innocent women and children have died. So, I'll make a pledge to council that I will stop addressing council on matters of the Holocaust because that's what they don't want to hear if they pass a resolution that says we are against military aid to Israel. Coach Bob Knight of the Indiana Hooers in basketball beat the heck out of Michigan so many times that it embarrasses me to recall his name. But he did say something important. He said that those everybody wants to win. Few people want to work to win. If you want me to go away from city council, this is the work you have to do. Pass the resolution. We are against military aid to Israel. Our next speaker is Ryan Brace.

Hi, I'm Ryan Braves. I'm a licensed EMT in the state of Michigan and a city resident. I'm here today to speak in favor of the city's plan to establish a first ever contract for advanced life support ambulance service in the city of Ann Arbor and to suggest that we prioritize selecting a local nonprofit organization. The two unavoidable acronyms in my comment are BLS, basic life support, which is provided by EMTs, and ALS, advanced life support, which is provided by paramedics. The old joke is BLS slows down what is killing you and then ALS stops what is killing you. Either ALS or BLS can transport you to definitive care at our great hospitals where physicians and nurses figure out why it was trying to kill you and then fix that. Currently, the city has no ALS ambulance contract. We operate under the county's ambulance contract and we have since 1983. This is unusual for a city our size. Separate from this new ALS contract, the city already operates an excellent BLS ambulance response and transport operation as part of our high-erforming fire department. The city's request for proposal for ALS response has some great features in it, and I really applaud the way it was constructed. Specifically, the proposal binds the contracting agency to the city's living wage requirements. The RFP also binds the contracting agency to the city's non-discrimination policy, which strengthens our response, especially for marginalized communities. And additionally, the RFP also requires the contractor to provide the city with valuable data about 911 call frequency, ambulance availability, cost to residents, and ambulance response times. Not present in the RFP is a preference for an ALS provider that has local stations, local management, and nonprofit status. Emergency medical service is a rapidly changing landscape and in recent years consolidation has been accelerating and privy private equity firms are acquiring local

ambulance companies and building national conglomerates. I think Ann Arbor is better served by a local nonprofit and I urge the city to include that preference in the selection process. Currently four companies have bid for this contract and at least one is owned by a New York-based private equity firm. Most of the current biders are for-profit agencies. When the ALS contract selection comes before council for approval in the next few weeks, I urge council to look at the governance structure and ownership of the recommended bidder and make sure that aligns with the values of our city in addition to the needs of our residents. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker is Delani Dunoval.

Good evening, council. I might actually have some good news for you. Uh, Mayor Taylor, I'm actually here because of your public uh opposition to the administration and their fascist ways. Romulus has a proposed ICE uh facility that had a protest of 700 to a,000 people on Monday. In attendance was Representative Dingo, Representative Talib, Reg Regent Aker, Senate Senate Candidate McMurray, Senate Candidate Al. He wasn't there, but he has abolish ICE and AG Nassel just this week has instituted the paper trail you have to make in order to institute legal action. Rep. Representative Sander has had a press conference at the site on Sunday, so it's more or less public knowledge where they're trying to build it. Now, if you're so interested, I'm sure he had the address. Uh the Salt Lake City, Utah, Oklahoma City city in Oklahoma, Kansas City, Missouri by I'm going to mur murder this Baja Mississippi in Marshall County and Cicip Minnesota in Woodbury County have all stopped ice facilities dead in their tracks. They just are not going to happen. Now, this was done by public outcry, of course, which is uh a great way to start. But the three implementations that I believe can be of use in stopping these facilities, I know they're not in Ann Arbor as of right now, but you know, the three implementations that you can have to stop these facilities are the zonings and the neighbors rights to have a ice-free facility in their neighborhood, the occupancy permit, and the contractors that would have to update and remodel these facilities would be in breach of a law, more on that later, if they were to do work on this site and of course the state has oversightes over prisons and they're not building prisons they're building holes in the ground. Uh they have $170 billion somewhere between 35 and $170 billion depending on what they're allowed to spend it for and that

going to fund them for 5 to 7 years. So I don't believe that money is going away and of course until it does we need to stay vigilant. We need to stay perpetually aware of what quieter things they can do and uh I appreciate this council's good work. um in the preceding weeks about making this an issue. Just in the last 48 hours, if you want to look it up, GEO Group, which is the housing facility for ICE versus Minol. GEO Group Incorporated versus Minol, M O C A L, is a Supreme Court decision that was unanimous in saying that no, you are not qualified to be immune as a housing facility, as a detention facility. They really argued that because they were housing these persons, they had the same qualified immunity that ICE is currently defending and nine to zero against. So, here come the lawsuits. Here come a bunch of things. And thank God the Supreme Court got one right. And tomorrow at 9:00 a.m., Nome [snorts] is speaking to the House Judiciary Committee if you'd like to hear. And of course, DHS is still funded. Sorry to go over time. We still don't have the signs for local businesses, the anti local sign. Thanks for your time.

Thank you.

Our next speaker is Blaine Coleman. Dr. Moshkan Savius Fahani who ran for city council in Ann Arbor many times is right now in Iran with her elderly parents surrounded by aerial bombardment. Dr. Savi Fahani and I have done everything we can to bring this resolution in front of city council for over 20 years. This resolution on this sign, we are against military aid to Israel. Now, we're at the point where the great majority of your voter base is for this. They are against military aid to Israel. The great majority of your voter base is against the genocide that Israel is committing on Gaza. And as of this morning, uh the last 3 days, Israel and the United States have killed 555 Iranians in Iran. And I hope I hope Dr. Sabi Fahani does not become one of them. You were very excited to pass a resolution against ICE recently and it took you no time to do it and you were right to do it. ICE has recently killed two white people in Minneapolis. Israel has killed over 72,000

Palestinians in Gaza. And so far the last few days, 555 Iranians and many thousands of Lebanese. Is it really that much of a stretch for you to go along with your voter base and just approve a sevenword resolution? We are against military aid to Israel. Dr. of Abi Fahani is not going to be able to pull petitions to run this time in Ward 4 because she is under aerial bombardment in Iran. I hope that the two candidates, Aiden Silva and um David Zglin will publicly come out for this very simple resolution. Aiden has already signed a letter basically saying this. Uh, city council member Gazy Edwin has already signed a letter basically saying this. Uh, and so have numerous other local politicians. Thank you. Our next speaker is Jeremy Haley. [clears throat]

[clears throat]

Uh Jeremy Haley, FC Township. Good evening everyone. Uh, I just want to bring up I know the development on South State Street and U of M has a piece of property like right next to it pretty much and I was just putting this out there is to create some kind of Ann Arbor U of M welcome center cuz that would be a good location high frequency somewhere in that spot you know just putting it out there is to bring a a center right there. Bring more people where the U of M can use it and Arbor to expose a the history between U of M and Ann Arbor and how it's kind of they kind of both work together, but now it's not so much. But uh next thing I like to talk about is right now everybody is building for property taxes. Anything that gets built and anything I get here at any council meeting here or elsewhere it's well how much money or you going to bring in from tax property taxes. That system we have is not always going to be in place as it is. It's failing all across the country. there's going to be a major change at [clears throat] some point in time. I'm asking you all to start thinking for that time because that time may be in your lifetimes. And it's meaning we have to get away from the property tax system and go to some kind of uniform state sales tax. And if you're talking about affordability, property tax is a is a big thing in that affordability. you take property taxes out, people can afford more homes.

And the next thing I like to talk about is the Concordia property, the 187 acres, cuz the first thing I heard about that when people heard about the 17 187 acres was, oh, the tax revenue we can bring in from it. And I was like, is that all you people can think about is how much we can bring in from people in their homes? You're not looking at these people as people. You're looking as dollar signs when you do that. And what I'm asking is to develop the north side on Getty's Road. Leave the south side. Turn it into a big park as you want to increase density here. Create less density outside, more green space. Leave it as a carbon sink. Um, also if they were to vacate the property and leave the homes, you are looking for more places to put people. They do have places to put people that actually live there on campus. That's an asset that could also be looked at if you know for the future. Thank you.

Thank you. [snorts] Are there communications from council? Council member Watson. Um, Council Member Malik and I would like to uh invite residents to a W 2 listening session on Sunday, March 29th from 3:00 to 4:00 p.m. at the Traverwood Library Branch. Our guest will be Dr. Missy Stoultz, director of the Office of Sustainability Innovations. We hope you'll join us. Council member Gazi.

Thank you, Mayor. I would like to um just bring people's attention to AC2 under communications from the city administrator uh [snorts] a response to R24166 resolution to adopt an Americans with Disabilities Act transition plan for Ann Arbor Parks 2025 update. I just want to say I'm happy to see this and thankful to our city for being so dedicated to accessibility and inclusion in both her built environment and our social policies. Um the plan includes park by park planned updates including plans for adaptive sports. It's also important to note that in addition currently the city is working to construct a region's first universally designed splash pad and playground or bsentennium park um so that children and people of all abilities can enjoy our amenities. So thank you to staff, thank you to parks and our city for their ongoing dedication to disability justice. Thank you. Further communication from the council, council member Briggs.

Just wanted to wish my colleague in the fifth ward a happy birthday. She's amazing. Um, and I know that she filed petitions today to run again for city council and I'm excited for that because I see every day how hard you work for residents of Ann Arbor and um, I hope to be able to serve with you again. Further communication. Council Cornell,

I wasn't raising my hand to say thank you, but thank you. [laughter] Um, I have two um just pieces of information communitywide that I think are important. Um, some of you, many of you have seen that um the uh city of Van Arbor is considering decommissioning the outdoor warning siren system. And um that system I know affects a lot of people in different ways. Um, and in order to provide feedback, there is a survey at engage.2ggov.org. And so I'm I'm hopeful that people um will take the survey and provide input to us. I think that that will be a really important um piece of input that we consider as uh we make that decision going forward. And then the Ann Arbor Office of Sustainability and Innovations is hosting an e-waste collection event. There will be um drop off receptacles available throughout the city during the 2026 calendar year. And the first one is during the awesome March month of March. So, from March 9th through the 24th, there will be uh a receptacle located here at city hall, available to the public during regular business hours, 8:00 to 5:00 p.m. You can drop off household electronics, laptops, cell phones, tablets, keyboards, hard drives, hotspots, GSPA routers, GPS routers, modems, cords, cables. Looking at you, Dave Queen. CDs, DVDs, discs, tapes, alkaline batteries. no lithium batteries and consoles. And here's the key is that the opening is only 1 and 1/2 in tall. So, if you can't fit it through that slot, it's not going to be accepted. Once the bin is full, the collection is done. But please keep an eye on the city's website as there will be more options for this. As many of you know, uh recycling e-waste is difficult and this is a really valuable

service that the city provides.

Further communication from council Uh very briefly for my part uh as folks will recollect uh the city council passed a resolution a few uh a few meetings ago in connection with civil immigration enforcement. Uh in the course of that resolution [clears throat] we identified uh one of the um practices of current uh federal civil immigration enforcement designed to sow fear and chaos that being uh masking of agents and the absence of marking. uh the subject uh of some uh some law in California and some subsequent litigation. Uh we have uh that subsequent litigation has uh gotten to a a next stage and while not definitive, it does provide uh a point of entry and some possibility for uh for state and uh and or local action. In keeping with the ordinance, I'm just pardon me, in keeping with the resolution, uh we are in the process of drafting a ordinance which will address masking uh the obligation to uh remove masks um where uh inconsistent with proper law enforcement function and the obligation to mark uh so that folks in the public will know the persons with whom uh they're dealing, the agencies with whom they're dealing. Um, I'd of course uh and I think I I surely speak for us all like to express a great deal of gratitude uh to the city attorney's office for digging hard on this and to Chief Anderson who has reviewed uh the draft and is the process of reviewing the draft carefully to ensure that uh that we uh we put together an ordinance that meets public need and also provides for uh for law enforcement agent safe uh health and safety because in some instances masking is appropriate. Any event, uh, want to let you all know that that is, uh, in the works and I hope to see it at a meeting upcoming. We now have before us consent agenda. May I have a motion, please, to approve

the consent agenda. Moved by council member Redina, second by council Guzi, Edwin. Discussion of the consent agenda. Council member Watson. I'd like to pull CA7.

CA7. [clears throat] Further discussion on the consent agenda. Council member Medina. Uh thank you, mayor. I just very briefly wanted to address CA23 and 24. Uh they're both resolutions to resend previous recommendations for uh liquor licenses. Uh generally the liquor license review committee does not try to resend licenses and we work very hard with our local businesses actually to make sure that they're in compliance so that we can continue to support them. Um unfortunately these are two that uh for 3 years kind of this recommendation has been out there uh for us to to support a liquor license for for new businesses. Um unfortunately those businesses haven't started. Um that time has passed. This is a competitive uh field of licenses. There are only eight available. Uh so we are at this point recommending rescending our support to the Michigan Liquor uh control commission so that we could make sure that a new another new business could use these licenses um since they are not currently being used.

Further discussion council.

Thank you. Um I'd like to just make a comment on CA13. Um, you know, every once in a while a contract comes along that reminds us why voters passed best value procurement. Um, I want to remind folks that in in 2021 voters changed our charter by 78% because they wanted higher standards in how we spend public dollars. For years, we were required to award contracts to the lowest responsible bidder. But in legal terms, responsible means the bare minimum, the company that can perform the work. We could collect information about safety records, apprenticeship programs, health care, and retirement benefits, but we weren't allowed to do anything with that information. If the bidder met the minimum standard of being able to complete the work and had the lowest price, they won. The 2025 Miller Road project shows why procurement policy matters. Because it was funded with ARPA dollars, which are federal funds, we were required to follow lowest bid rules and could not apply our best value criteria. A worker was killed on that job. They did not make it home to their family that night. Myosa cited the contractor for deficiencies in its accidentrevention program. That tragedy underscores why voters wanted us to consider safety and training alongside price. In construction, materials cost what they cost. Concrete, pipe, aggregate, those prices don't vary dramatically. What varies is labor. Under lowest bid rules, union contractors often struggle to compete on sticker price because those investments are built into the bid. Owners of union firms don't squeeze out every dollar for themselves. They put money back into the people doing the work, into wages, healthcare, retirement, and training. More of the contract dollars go into workers' pockets, not bigger profits at the top. As the daughter of a union electrician,

I can tell you that makes a difference for families. Best value shifts the focus to standards. It allows us to award bids to contractors who invest in their workers, in safety, and in long-term quality. I want to note that I'm looking into how we can make our bidding process more transparent. Right now, our price sheets don't require biders to break out labor costs. So, those numbers are folded into other line items. If labor is the biggest variable in construction pricing, we should be able to see it clearly. Transparency helps us understand exactly where the dollars are going. But tonight, we are applying a policy that the voters approved. We are investing in safe job sites, skilled workers, and infrastructure that's built to last.

Further discussion? All in favor of the consent agenda with the exception of CA7? All opposed? The consent agenda with the exception of CA7 is approved with nine council members present. All voting the affirmative, thus satisfying the eight vote requirement with respect to CA8, CA 9, [clears throat] CA 11, CA1 12, CA13, CA2, CA2, CA26, CA27, CA7 Resolution to approve a professional services agreement with agency landscape and planning LLC for development of the 2028 through 2032 parks and recreation open space plan in the amount of $443,000 moved by council member Watson seconded by council member redee discussion please give CA7 council member Watson

uh I believe there's a staff intro staff is in the house Okay, everyone. [clears throat] Um, there was some slides that were supposed to be up. This panel is locked. Get you up um on here anymore. Uh here's your board. You just click here. Go back like that. Okay. Thank you again. Um well, thank you all for having me today um to talk about this kind of exciting project and introduce it. Um so what I want to talk about is our park and recreation open space plan um that we'll be doing for parks and it's one of our guiding documents. So what is the parks and recreation open space plan? So it's a comprehensive plan for the park system with goals for the next 5 years and beyond. It provides a forum for public input to ensure the plan reflects the values and desires of the community as well as current trends. It outlines needs and desires for existing and future facilities. It's required to be updated every 5 years to be eligible for grant funding from the uh Michigan Department of Natural Resources and provides justification for grant requests and other capital projects. The current pros plan is valid um from 2023 to 2027. What's in the park and recreation open space plan? Um, so it's a community description, our physical characteristics, our demographics, the administrative structure of parks, of the city as a whole. Uh, it goes into our budget and our funding um, sources.

There's an inventory of park and recreation and open space systems. Uh, there's a land use planning and acquisition section, planning process for the pros plan, how it was developed, how we engage with the community. There's a section for goals and objectives. um it identifies major park and recreation system infrastructure needs and then there's an action plan and this is what we've done for the last 20 plus years. Um it has been a template that has worked for us. Uh it takes considerable staff time to do the update to engage with the community um and ensure that we're meeting these requirements for the DNR so that we can get the grants. But now is different than five years ago. Um, we're in a new time period. Uh, in 2024, the park maintenance and capital improvements millage was passed. Um, we are finalizing an asset management plan that shows $115 million that needs to be invested in the park system over the next 20 plus years. Um, we have our ADA transition plan was adopted last year, um, which commits $19 million over the next 30 years. And then we have an everchanging community um with different needs and wants. So the question we face is how do we maintain our high level of service in a sustainable fashion while facing very limited budgets, an aging infrastructure, increased maintenance costs and staffing capacity. I want to step back for this slide um again while we look through it. Our last and our current pros plan is 142 pages long. Of that, 110 to 111 of them are reporting back. It's the community description through the planning process. Only 31 of those pages is looking forward at our goals and our

objectives, our major needs, and how we move forward. So as we look forward to this this new pros plan what we think is the best way to accomplish this is with outside help. So historically we have done this in-house. We went through a procurement process agency landscape and planning really showed a really good breadth of experience um and expertise that will help us make these decisions move forward with a new pros plan. It's a good um it's a new way of thinking how we make decisions as a community to meet the community needs with the resources we have. So that's why it's a little bit different than we've done in the past, but we think this is the right way to move forward um to provide this high level of service that Ann Arbor is expecting and um deserves. So I'm happy to answer any questions you might have, but I wanted to give that little introduction. Thank you.

Thank you, Council Watson. Oh, thank you. I really appreciate um your presentation, Mr. Fjo, and coming down here. Um you know, my time on the parks advisory commission with uh Council Member Readina. We we saw the first iteration of this back in 2023. We're excited for this uh forward-looking edition that's going to feature a lot of community community engagement and um I'm excited to uh support this tonight. Further discussion?

Uh for my part, I'm I'm excited as well. We all know that, you know, Ann Arbor loves its parks, but we also know that uh the parks are uh are a resource that requires uh maintenance and and improvement. Um and this uh this plan, as uh as I as I hear and I uh am confident, will provide the community with that long-term vision to make sure that the parks are are as beautiful now as they will be in the future and will continue to improve. Um, and so thank you for that work that staff is doing and I'm grateful for your your vision on this. Thank you. Further discussion. All in favor? All oppose. It's approved. Thank you. We now come to a public hearing. Public hearing number uh public hearings are opportunities for members of the public to speak to council in the community about the specific subject matter of the public hearing. To speak at a public hearing, you need not have signed up in advance, but your speech must relate to the subject matter of the public hearing. That is to say, the specific item on the agenda to which the public hearing relates. Speakers in all instances will have three minutes in which to speak. So, please pay close attention to the time. Our clerk or the time clock will notify you when 30 seconds are remaining and when your time is expired. When your time is expired, please conclude your remarks and seed the floor. Public hearing number one, an ordinance to amend the zoning map of chapter 55 unified development code reszoning of 95 acres from R4C multif family dwelling and M1 limited industrial to D1 downtown core Midtown character overlay secondary street frontage with conditions. the dean 558 South 5th Avenue. Is there anyone in house who would like to speak at this public hearing? There is no it it's just it's just come on up.

Hello. Let me see if I can get this a little closer. My name is Dennis Burke. Uh wanted to comment on 26-0061. What is the rush? Uh we have an outstanding uh long-term plan for the city. And here we are uh looking at an ordinance for you folks to approve that uh dramatically changes the zoning in a small halfb block area on the south side of downtown and it violates the traditional processes here in the city. There is a concept building. There has been no approved building plan. I have never seen the city council or any uh government agency here in this area adopt a zoning change without an approved building plan. Furthermore, this ordinance allows the developers to bypass the DDA building guidelines. If you're going to zone at D1, why aren't they allow why aren't they being held to the DDA uh building guidelines? So, I'm not quite understanding what the rush is. And we have a brand new plan and this is supposed to be a transition area. If you go to that area of town where this 14story concept building is being proposed, it is basically touching the flood plane. University of Michigan moved their dormatory complex back further south and moved their practice field north because it's the Allen Creek flood plane. And we're about ready to take the Allen Creek and open it back up. The reason why it was enclosed in the first place is because the city routinely flooded it in that area. So, I'm quite uh concerned that we're violating the process. Furthermore, the building department has recommended passing of the ordinance, but has anybody done any kind of background check on this developer? This developer is a private equity company that primarily specializes in building high-rise apartment complexes in university settings. Has anybody called the cities and asked them what is the

history of this development company? How do their buildings run? Are they maintained? Do they have tenant complaints? What do they do at move in moveout times? Have they had any kind of uh police involvement? Has there been any sexual assaults, drunken and disorderly conducts, wild parties, noise complaints? I think it's very important that as a tenant, you have to sign up to a background check. for has been the background check on these developers and all the developments they already have. So, you are being asked with extremely limited information to alter the zoning in this area when you're already looking at a long-term plan, a transition area, and there's no building that will be of this conceptual size anywhere within a two or three block radius. It's going to be a massive monument when everything else around it is typically five to seven stories. So I ask you at least two or three of you since it takes eight to pass to vote no. Take your time. Thank you.

Thank you. [applause] Uh good evening. Um my name is Dean Kalis and I own a house on South Fifth A. um one house away from this proposed project. Um the house that we own, it's been in the family for 60 years. Um I've got a few concerns about this project, which I I don't agree with, and I just don't feel it's the right fit based on its height at at its location. Uh just too massive in height. Um, approximately 2 years ago, there was a developer that came around, Subtex Living, I'm sure you're all aware of it, had a similar project uh on this block. Um, that drew comments from the city and board members that it was just just too tall. Uh, I believe this was also a 14story building if I remember right. And and here we are again. I just feel that a 14-story building in my view belongs in the heart of downtown and as these projects come to the table with the city. I just feel that as they move out towards the residential area, they need to taper down. Uh they need to transition down as they hit these outline residential areas. Um I just think it's a massive project. Um, I feel for the neighbors and I feel for the community, uh, that this couldn't be an eyes sore down at the end of this block. Basically, two full blocks of residential housing all the way, uh, up into uh to William Street. So, I just don't approve of it. I appreciate it.

Thank you.

Thank you. [applause] [clears throat] Hi, good evening. My name is Claud Zincense. I live at 545 South Fifth Avenue. This reszoning proposal that stretches between four fifth Avenue and Fourth Avenues is basically a souped up reincarnation of the development called the Moravian that was voted down by this body about 10 years ago. At that time, a strapping young council member, I think he's still around. Oh, right there in the middle. Uh, Mayor Taylor said, and I quote, "Now, zoning is like a contract that the city makes with its citizens." End of quote. And you voted down the Moravian casted the the deciding vote. Because zoning has not changed since andzoning rules and ordinances are still in effect. I should just stop here and urge you that the same development should not be voted down just as it is because the the previous incarnation was also voted down. However, I don't see a unanimous note from uh 11 people including our representatives Erica Bicks and Jennifer Cornell. So I continue my argument. I agree that some issues have become more pressing during the last dec decade, but this pot reszoning request is not going to amilarate any of them. To the contrary, for example, affordable housing. This development will destroy several dozen affordable housing apartments. No affordable housing apartments are included in this in the proposal. No contribution to the affordable housing fund will be made.

Climate change. The proposed structure is a cookie cutter skyscraper. It should have a platinum leed rating. Just a few uh decorative solar panels on the roof won't do it. They have a huge southacing facade that they should take advantage of with solar panels. Instead of cars, there should be batteries stuffed in those spaces. Demand what is possible. You have the leverage now but not tomorrow. Bike and pedestrian safety. Another issue. This is another big building. Without a driveway, invariably that leads to the bike lanes being taken over by delivery vans and the bikers are expelled to the main lane. and the main lane is already being overused by four bus lines that circle that block. These are all issues you have so virtually supported. Why this free giveaway? Why? This is your chance to talk not just talk virtuous but be virtuous. Thank you very much. Thank you. [applause] Is there anyone else in house who would like to speak at this public hearing? [clears throat]

Hello, I am um Richard Jacobson. I own the property at 538 South 5th Avenue. I've lived there since 1983. Uh I strongly oppose the Dean project which the council is considering tonight. The project will stifle further development on the block and degrade the property, my property's value, both as a rental property and for future sale, especially due to its small, awkward L-shaped footprint and extraordinary height. Last year, I was one of many residents on the block who had agreed to sell my property to Substax for a much larger project which would have filled the block, most of it between fourth and fifth avenues from Madison up to almost up to Packard. and they withdrew their proposal precisely because the city rescended a promise to record D1 zoning to the project without [clears throat] uh without that zoning. Subtext projected a much greater cost and possible losses from having to meet the requirements for a PUD. Its investors drew nervous and axed the project. Now, just months later, another sensible project, far less sensible project, the Dean is being proposed with D1 zoning. The dean's small footprint, coupled with its ridiculous proposed height, perched at one end of the block in the south, taking all the sun and the view, is unsightly. It will overshadowing shadow the surrounding 19th century homes, make rental units in those homes, including mine, less attractive to potential renters due to highly increased noise, traffic, and shading. The Gastly project is nothing more than a repeat of the Moravian, which was soundly defeated by this city council some years back. The mayor then said, "The city wants

development on this block, but this project is a wrong project for it." The dean just like the Moravian is the wrong project for this area. I was stunned and angry when the city killed the subject product project. Actually, I'm of a retirement age. The offer sale price would have allowed me to retire in comfort. I should not be subjected to a s series of inconsistent consistent capricious decisions by the city as to the developing zoning on this block such that I cannot reasonably weigh investing improvements on my property against the likelihood of a future sale to a developer. The dean diminishes my future likelihood of future sale of my property to another highdensity developer. How exactly is another highdensity develop project going to cope with that L-shaped configuration of the dean if it's built once it's in place? The dean will res result in chaotic patchwork development within the rest of the block with future developments um with future developers inserting skyscrapers on scattered small footprints. Thank you.

Printed it out. So, thank you. Good evening, Mr. Mayor and members of the city council. Uh, Mr. Mayor, I'm president of the Germantown Neighborhood Association. Do I have five minutes? Rules provide for three minutes. Okay. You changed the rules? I have not changed the rules. The rules used to be five minutes. Okay. Anyway, not since 2009. Can you reset the clock after that debate? It's not a debate if you asked questions.

Upzoning an R4C area all the way to D1 to benefit just one developer without regard to the collateral damage and other stakeholders is really preposterous. jumping ahead of the comprehensive land use plan for one party instead of waiting for citizen input and for the city reszoning process to play out is undemocratic. Our two-story craftsman houses represented by this will be dominated by a 14 or 16story tower. Here's the tower. This is the scale. This is the tower. These are our houses. That's the scale. However, the planning commission isn't satisfied with 161 ft. They want it to be 180 ft. Okay, you've got to add that much space on top of this against our 30 or 40 craftsman houses in the neighborhood. This neighborhood was developed in the 18th and 19th centuries. You know, we're real. We're people. we live there. The D1 zoning change will adversely impact the public welfare and property rights of re nearby residents and the city at large. 182 student apartments and 84 vehicle spaces create a level of density that this area cannot absorb. South Fifth and South Fourth Avenues will be clogged by delivery trucks. They'll be parked in the bike lanes. This is true already for the yard and many other structures. [snorts] However, the yard is only six stories. It's two blocks away. It's six stories. Everything else in the neighborhood is about three stories. You have to go very far to even find something that's seven

stories. Buses will be impeded and so will everyone else trying to get from A to B. Moreover, it's unfortunately a planning staff falsehood that the Allen Creek floodway stops at the curb. That's not how water behaves. Increased density in the floodway is against city policy. Period. Building at this location goes against sustainability. The huge rush for spot reszoning is highly suspicious. We citizens ask for three of you, at least three of you, to have the integrity, respect for citizens, and love of Ann Arbor to vote no. If we go home having to lick our our wounds, then trust me, you stepped in a hornets's nest. We have media abilities and we will pursue them. will get national attention to the flow of money into city council and how the campaigns get get funded.

Thank you.

When do I start?

Whenever you wish. Oh. Um, I I agree with the question of why doing this now when you're on the brink of finalizing a coordinated and presumably thoughtful plan for the entire area. And also, I think you would not be taking into account the most recent data on population expectations to see how much we really need to build. I I want to talk more generally about what the goals are relevant to this building. Um, if you want people to live and to visit our downtown instead of driving through it or away from it, we need pedestrian friendly designs like what I saw the city promoting roughly 10 years ago with retail at the street level, spaces for trees and benches along the sidewalks because no one enjoys walking alongside a big solid wall. I'm skeptical of what you all and the developers say. So, I'm looking at what gets done and I'm thinking of the standard which was completed recently on Main Street at Packard. If we placed an attractive red building that was set back about 10 ft for trees and shrubs, now we have the standard featuring a block long wall along Main Street. There are windows that are always covered because they are because the renters's beds and dining and whatever are right on Main Street. No setback. Um, the building itself has some finished corners with cheap looking brick after that that does not match it. An aluminum and what looks like white aluminum siding that would be great in a trailer park but has no place on Main Street downtown Ann Arbor. I think it is the ugliest building on Main Street and it is the most recently constructed as far as I know. That tells me where your standards are going and I'm concerned about the whole project here. Pedestrians also clearly want green spaces. I know because I cannot spend half an hour in my garden before someone

I've never seen before, all kinds of people, take the time to stop and tell me how much they enjoy walking past my garden and home. Please protect the trees and the green spaces. This is what makes Ann Arbor beautiful. Um, this the most frequent concern that I've heard at these meetings is about having housing that allows people who work in Ann Arbor to live here to achieve the diversity that many of us want and to promote healthy walking and low traffic and I will add to promote community so that by encountering the teachers, nurses, janitors, waiters not only at school or at work but also in the grocery store, the library, the cafe phase and on the streets. One does not need to own a car to live here comfortably. It is easier to afford the rent when one does not own a car. Apartment buildings with private gyms and parking, private parking are expensive. If you want to provide affordable housing, thank you. [applause] Uh, good evening, city council. Um, I live in Ward One and I see I'm once again wholly represented. You know, it concerns me when I see that because it makes me think that um, this body doesn't really listen to public hearings and I wish they would cuz these folks who are living right next to this monstrosity you're considering tonight have said almost everything that was on my page here. Um, but this I just want to add a couple things. Not only do I feel like public hearings aren't heard, I feel like you guys don't read what you're what's on the agenda that you're passing. I just want to point out real quickly that CA12 has a major typo in it if I'm not mistaken. CA12 where you uh are setting aside the the money for the

point of order. Sir, you have point of order.

Sir, can you confine your remarks to that? 12 is setting aside money for improvements to Packard, including a 12-in water man, which is necessary for the construction of D1 buildings outside of the downtown zone like this one. And there, if you care to read what is the business before you, you would see that it refers to the Nixon Road reconstruction project, not the Packard Road project. Okay? So, check out what you're approving. I think this is a horrible project of course and I agree with the neighbors and it's your obligation to deny the petition petition or this request if only because this same building this oversized building that doesn't belong there could be built using a planned unit development that would actually give us community benefits. It would give us 27 by my estimation units of affordable housing. the exact same building. So, I don't believe that you should pretend to care about affordable housing if you pass this without telling a developer to come back and give us some affordable housing on his project, a project that shouldn't even be zoned in this condition. I know some trolls are going to say all housing is good housing, but if you are representatives are unable to differentiate between housing that fulfills the community's stated goals and needs of affordability and sustainability and a project like this that only fulfills the developers profit motives, that's a problem. And so now I'm speaking to the residents out there. If this body is willing to put a 14story building 10 feet 10 feet from a residential zone when it should this is 10 ft from a residential zone which shouldn't even be there

with no CLUP to back it up. Imagine what they're going to do to your residential neighborhoods when there is a CLUP which they are going to claim gives them a mandate to do whatever they want. If you pass this now, you're showing the city exactly where you stand. You do not stand with fair housing. You do not stand with affordable housing, nor sustainable housing. Thank you. [applause] Is there anyone else in house who would like to speak at this public hearing? Is there anyone online who'd like to speak at this public hearing? Adam Duskevich, do you have a comment?

Hi, this is Adam Duskevich calling from the fourth ward. I support this reszoning. We've seen a number of proposals come and go for this site for various other assemblages of parcels on the same block over the years. The Madison, the Moravian, I forget the name of the most recent one, and now we have the dean. Each time the continued development in the surrounding area close to downtown um has made the case to reszone this site easier for home builders to make and harder to justify denial. The fact is that downtown has spread to surround this location. It's close to student oriented apartment homes on Main Street, close to a new University of Michigan dorms, and close to both the Blake Transit Center and the future University of Michigan Madison Transit Center. It's an entirely appropriate location for dense student oriented housing. This is a great location for a project like this. Please do not deny much needed housing while we are in the midst of a housing supply crisis. I want to thank the builders for bringing this forward and thank planning commission for recommending approval. Please vote yes on this tonight. Thank you.

Thank you. caller with the phone number ending in 534. Do you have a comment? Go ahead.

Thank you, Tom Stalberg. Again, uh this upzoning presupposes the outcome of the comprehensive land use plan designating this area as the hub land use category. Did council already deliberate on the comprehensive land use plan yet? No. Did council vote on the CLUP? Yes. No. Did council have the detailed neighborhood level examination and public input that they promised us? And they said, "Don't worry, that will take a long time." Did you do that yet? No. The new developments all around this area are D2, not D1. Even the new U ofM dorm, which doesn't have zoning, is D2 height, the yard, and the other one across uh on Main Street from that, they're D2. The standard is D1 in the north half, but D2 on the south half. This is south of there. This should not be upzoned more than D2. If the city wanted to upzone it more than that, it should be done as a plan unit development. As the prior speaker said, we would get almost 30 units of affordable housing that way or the cash equivalent, a few million dollars for affordable housing fund. That's what was recently done for the Verve and the Rambler over on Church and Forest, which extended density south of South University in a similar manner to what's being done here. If city council wants to approve this project, it should deny this application and tell the developer to bring it back as a plan unit development. This has been done before. Witness the garnet. Council members cannot possibly say that they are pro-affordable housing and approve the project in this manner, assuing almost 30 units of affordable housing. We can have density and

affordable housing. We just need a city council that'll stop giving away the affordable housing opportunities. Do new expensive buildings pay into the affordable housing millage like we all do? Yes, they do. But do the math. That's pennies on the dollar for what the city is giving away with these types of approvals. It will take many, many decades for the 1 mill tax on this profit property to provide as many affordable units as we could have right now. And please don't anybody try to claim that oh nothing will get built if we make developers provide affordable housing that are own zoning laws as they should. Many developers are doing it. I gave you a couple examples and recall morning sites in lower town came at double the rents they said they did they would after the city gave them an illegitimate waiver of 93 units of affordable housing. The justification employed to say that this needs the current comprehensive plan is beyond ludicrous. That logic would permit anything anywhere and makes the idea of a plan even arbitrary and meaningless.

Time. Further the condition. Thank you. Thank you,

mayor. I don't see any other callers online with their hands up. Good evening, council members. My name is Bren, Associates Architect. I'm one of the architects on the project. Um, I have with me today representatives of the developer, also our civil engineering consultant and our planning consultant, and we're here to answer any questions that you may have. Um, I'd like to uh remind you that the uh planning commission uh deliberated this project and they came to a unanimous recommendation of approval. um that the planning staff has an extensive report which indicates that this uh comports with the overarching goals of the 2009 comprehensive plan irrespective of what the 26 proposed plan may say that after this process if you vote to approve the resoning there will be a site plan filed and that that site plan will show that we will be meeting all the DDA standards for streetscape improvements um and it is not in a floodway and our civil engineering consultant is happy to address that. Thank you.

Thank you. I don't have any other callers online. See no on this public hearing is closed. We have before us the regular meeting minutes of February 1920 26. May I have a motion please moved by council member Watson. Second by council member Gazi Edwin. Discussion of the minutes. All in favor? All opposed. The minutes are approved. B1, an ordinance to amend the zoning map of chapter 55 unified development code reszoning of 0.95 acres from R4C multif family dwelling and M1 limited industrial to D1 downtown core Midtown character overlay secondary street frontage with conditions the dean 558 South 5th Avenue moved by council member Briggs second by council member Aman discussion please of B1 council member Briggs Thanks. And I'd like to thank everybody who came tonight and um called in to speak about this um proposed resoning. Obviously, what's in front of us this evening is a resoning, not the actual site plan. And so, it's important for us to consider whether or not that resoning is appropriate uh or not. Um not um looking at the site plan as um sort of as a reference point. Um but I know the planning commission and planning staff have dug into these issues. um they've wrestled with them. I've also wrestled and and um looked at sort of the the analysis in the site plan and um and have come to um also agree with their recommendations and um I do support the reasonzoning this evening. Um, you know,

we've we've heard a few things tonight um about about this project being sort of um rushing ahead of the um the comp plan process. Um but certainly planning staff and planning commission are providing guidance um that this is consistent with the recommendations of the 2009 comprehensive plan as well in terms of what those recommendations look like. um and understanding that there is a desire um and stated goal there to see um more housing in the downtown in the near downtown area. Um we have to acknowledge that the University of Michigan has grown 35% in terms of their enrollment over the last 20 years. We're seeing um a major demand um not just from from students but but from the student community. Um it's important to in the context of this project to discuss um and in context this is you know right across the street essentially from where the university is already growing. Um but we're also seeing that our comprehensive planning process which has been long and deliberative has also um is also recommend recommending that this area become a hub and that's certainly influential in in terms of understanding um what that planning process um looks like and what those recommendations are. And that's been a couple of year process. It's been passed by planning commission. It's coming to us um in the next meeting and I anticipate supporting that plan. Um I know issues of flooding have been raised here. Uh this is not in the flood way. Um it's important for us to understand that. I recognize and appreciate the comments that were made that were made in terms of um

water doesn't always you know uh it moves um in different ways. But the reality is we have to pay attention to what our our maps look like. And it is defined as it is not defined as a floodway. It's a flood flood fringe. Um and um any future projects will have to um abide by that um in terms of their um their design. Um finally, I guess I would just like to note that you know I heard an ins. Okay, I'll save that for later. Further discussion. [snorts] Councelor Rman.

Um, following on the flood plane issue because when people wrote in about this, um, I wanted to look at the details because I also know about the Elbell Field and how, um, they had to deal with water over there. So, I'm well aware. I actually work in the Perry building just up the hill from this development. So, I'm very familiar with the area. Um, I did notice in one of the reports attached to our agenda item that it says that this project actually will remove residential structures within the flood plane. Um and so my understanding is in a sense it actually uh creates a more robust situation with respect to flooding. And I was I didn't know if the uh if staff are on hand to talk a little bit about how this improves or addresses the fact uh that it's in this area. I think that would be helpful information to have.

We're working on it. We are working on it. Mayor Alexis Dio is on Zoom. Get it over with. You don't have any removing sir sir please it's not

please please ask a more specific question you get that Mr. Julio.

Yes, I understand that or I know that [clears throat] you commented that there are existing structures, residential structures in the flood plane on this site and they will be removed. That is true. Um how will that impact the hydraology? Um, I can't answer that scientifically, but I it seems to make some sense to me that um the any new structures um on this site will have to um I believe that residential structures must be elevated above the the base flood elevation that above even a little bit above that and that any um non-residential uses can be floodproofed. Um, this proposed building it will be designed as a to the residential the high-rise residential standards. It will be elevated above flood waters will be able designed to pass through the building. Now, there will be structure in the flood plane. Um, they're planning the garage to be there. In all honesty, I believe cars may be ruined by flood water if it comes to that. But in terms of um loss of protection of lives, new development um following current standards is um would be to a higher standard than the existing structures. And my instinct tells me that the way new buildings would be designed, any new building that allows flood waters to pass through and where the living space is elevated above would have a net benefit over the existing structures that were developed before there were um flood plane regulations.

Thank you, Council Member Rodina. Thank you, Mayor. while we still have staff. Um, we heard a a few people talk about the kind of PUD versus resoning um concept. I wonder if a PUD was considered here um or how we got to kind of resoning versus PUD if you could speak a little to that.

Um, I cannot uh I can speculate a little bit. I cannot um address exactly why this applicant chose uh conventional zoning over PED. I will say that um our PUD regulations treat plan unit developments as a custom zoning district intended for unique land uses or unique sites where our where our conventional districts don't fit or can't accommodate. Um and this is not a fair this is not a super unique land use. It's residential. Um it may have some challenges to develop. There is flood plane on the site. It's located on a on a fairly steep slope. So I suppose they could have considered a PUD, but I believe they felt that conventional zoning may be the best fit. The advantages of conventional zoning are it can evolve and grow. Uses can be added or subtracted. Um and it can grow with the city. Um, I'll give an example of of some of the limitations of PUDS. We have some older PUDs. Say anything from 20 years before. Um, you can't do a short-term rental there because it wasn't even invented at the time. So, obviously those supplemental regulations don't even allow it. Now, the And so, you might have recall you've seen a PUD or two come through wanting to change and evolve. And it's a it's a lot of effort. It's a heavy lift to address things that weren't even invented. They're not a thing 20 years before. So this is I think why a lot of developers do just go with conventional zoning. If they can build it conventionally, why not? That that's my understanding. Um and I'll just close by this part by

saying um we it's not required. It was not already zone PUD. When you reszone, you open up the book and you see what fits best. Further discussion, Council Briggs.

Yeah. And I I just wanted to pick up on that um point around the PUD. I think there's there's always a desire to um for us to want to customize everything, right? and but is important in terms of the PUD process. Um as um Mr. De Leo mentioned, first what happens is we have to see if a project fits within a certain zoning category. Um and in this case um both staff and planning commission believe that it does fit within the D1 assuming um with uh with the conditions that are put in place and with the Midtown character overlay district which creates a height limitation. Um I understand you know certainly when I've walked around this area um the fact that this is at the base of a hill is influential for me um in terms of what the impact is going to be. I recognize from those of you who are living in closer proximity to this that this is this is a big shift for the area and I understand um I understand your concerns around this. Um I think our job at the table is to um and it is to try to balance those uh a variety of different issues. um those being sort of the the neighborhood based um concerns as well as the larger issues that we we're facing as a community and the need to be able to um provide the type of housing that is needed to support um the needs of our community today. Um just as all of us are fortunate to live in this community, there are many others who are coming and and really need places to live here. So, um I do find it um somewhat insulting for um for one commenter to suggest that anything else would be influencing my my decision on this one. Um it is certainly trying to think in the best interest, long-term interest of of our community um and our neighborhoods as well. So, um I appreciate um everybody who spoken this

evening. Um and we'll be voting in favor as I mentioned.

Further discussion? Uh for my part, I will be uh voting in favor uh as well for the uh the reasons articulated by uh by my colleagues. Um and as uh we know that the um uh that this resoning does comply with the existing uh comprehensive land use plan and also conforms with uh the directionality and particulars of the draft plan. Uh the reasonzoning I think is going to be advantageous to the city as a whole. It's going to advance uh goals that we have had over the course of years. Those course of years meaning that we uh have had tens of thousands of people who work in Ann Arbor unable to live in Ann Arbor. We've had 10,000 plus new students come uh to the university and that has created a housing crisis in our city. That housing crisis cannot be met uh with uh we cannot ignore it because it is driving up prices uh throughout the community for everyone. Um, I appreciate that uh that approximate residents uh view this um with this favor that they recognize that this will change their neighborhood, but I will also say that their neighborhood is in the process of changing and changing irrevocably. Uh, the University of Michigan, as we all know, is creating dorms down the way with, you know, thousands and thousands of students. Um this is uh an area of town that is uh that is itself transitioning and changing and I believe that this zoning reflects the directionality of that change. Um we need to uh ensure that people who work in an arbor are able to live in Ann Arbor. We can only do that by allowing the building of housing. We have over the course of years artificially restricted housing supply throughout the community and that has had devastating effect on people's lives of uh on their ability to uh walk to work, bike to work, live in the community where they work. Uh it has

hurt uh everyone who needs to buy a home here, rent a home here. Um and so this I think as council member Briggs has indicated is part of a long process uh part of a process to provide for the structural needs of our community. I recognize and I do regret that the people who live next to this project um are not looking forward to it, are looking for it with apprehension, with concern and that um that is a loss and I am sorry for it. Um [snorts] I will say uh there has been some reference to his the history of the Moravian. the quote um attributed to me at the table, pardon me, attributed to me at the podium, contemporary reports identify that as being a quote from Walt Spiller uh rather than myself.

All I know is what I see before me in the chronicle and I am on record as having voted in favor of the Moravian back in 2010. Uh, and I'll also add, you know, following up on Council Member Briggs uh point, you know, we do hear uh our own motives uh called into question and insulted here at the table, and that is done without evidence uh because no evidence exists. You know, all the mo folks here uh at this table, this is a part-time job. We do this work because we love the community that we have and we're working hard to build it into community that you know that that is going to be here for everyone. That's what we're doing here. Uh to say otherwise is a falsehood. Further discussion. All in favor? All opposed. It is approved with nine council members present. Although in the affirmative, thus satisfying the 8 vote requirement. Do we have the pleasure of close session today?

No. Thank you, Mayor. Uh, we have before us the clerk's report of communications, petitions, and referrals. Can I have a motion, please, to approve the clerk's report? Moved by council member Briggs, second by council member Cornell. Discussion. All in favor? All opposed? It is approved. Do we have communications today from our city attorney? No. Thank you, Mayor. We may have a motion to adjurnn. Please move by council member Cornell, second by council. Discussion. All in favor? Opposed? We're adjourned.