Municipal governance involves structured decision-making processes where elected officials address community concerns through formal procedures including public comment periods, council discussions, and voting on resolutions. Effective governance requires balancing diverse community interests, such as tenant rights protection, public safety improvements, and urban planning considerations, while maintaining transparency and accountability to residents.
Install our extension to search inside any video instantly.
Ann Arbor City Council Meeting 7/20/26
Added:There is a genocide going on.
>> Ma'am, >> there is a genocide going on.
>> Ma'am being killed.
>> Ma'am, the meeting is Ma'am, the meeting is in order. If you disrupt this meeting, you will be asked to leave.
Please do not disrupt this meeting.
Welcome to the July 20 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.
>> Hello.
>> Council member Harrison >> here.
>> Council member Watson >> here.
>> Council Malik >> here.
>> Council Medina >> here. Councilor Gazi Edwin >> here.
>> Mayor Taylor >> here.
>> Councilor Ayer >> here.
>> Council Aman absent >> here. Here. [laughter] >> Councilor Briggs absent. Council Cornell >> here.
>> We have a quorum.
>> We have a motion please to approve the agenda. Moved by Council Reena. Second by Council Member Malik. Discussion of the agenda. Council member Harrison.
>> Yes.
>> I would like to resolution.
>> I'm sorry. Let me turn this on. We'd like to move a resolution to honor and celebrate the life of Washington County Deputy Chief Public Defender Lauren Brown to the agenda.
>> Shall we put it directly after the approval of the agenda?
>> Yes, we should.
>> May I have a second? Seconded by Council Member Watson. Discussion of that amendment.
All in favor? All opposed? It is approved. Further discussion of the main motion, pardon me, main of the agenda as amended. All in favor? Opposed? The agenda is approved. Uh resolution to honor and celebrate life of county deputy chief public defender Lauren Brown. Moved by Council Member Harrison, seconded by Council Member Redina.
Discussion, please of this resolution.
Council member Harrison.
>> All right. Thank you, Mayor. Um I would like to read the resolution.
um resolution to honor and celebrate the life of Washington County Deputy Chief Public Defender Lauren Brown.
Whereas Lauren Brown was born on September 11th, 1961 in Flint, Michigan, and raised in Ann Arbor, Michigan, where his family and friends quickly recognized that he had a gift for arguing and would make an excellent attorney.
Whereas Lauren Brown graduated from Pioneer High School and meticulate m metriculated to the University of Michigan to pursue a degree in political science.
Whereas Lauren Brown briefly left the University of Michigan to bravely and honorably serve this country in the United States Army just as his mother and grandmother did before him.
Whereas Lauren Brown returned to the University of Michigan and earned his undergraduate degree in political science.
Whereas Lauren Brown was one of the distinguished men of Vi Beta Sigma's Delta Row chapter where he actively served and mentored alongside his brothers for over 45 years.
Whereas Lauren Brown was one of the rare University of Michigan undergraduate students to be accepted into Michigan law and where he earned his jurist doctor.
Whereas Lauren Brown interned with the county public Washington County Public Defenders Office during law school where he learned that he loved using the law to fight for others and was officially hired into that office by Lloyd E.
Howell one year after graduation, whereas Lauren Brown served in the Washington County Public Defenders Office for 34 years, rising through the ranks until he held the position of deputy chief public defender.
Whereas Lauren Brown believed that any person with a desire to learn the law and a willingness to use that knowledge to fight for their clients could be a good attorney.
Whereas Lauren Brown mentored and befriended an entire generation of new lawyers, giving generously of his time and talents to ensure that his vast knowledge was passed down and his good work would continue long after his time on earth was done.
Whereas countless people owe their freedom and dignity to the tremendous [clears throat] skill, dedication, and tenacity of Lauren Brown, who successfully defended them against criminal charges that could not in the face of his fierce advocacy be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
Whereas Lauren Brown shared his wife life with wife Carolyn Cole Brown and their two incredible daughters, Elise and Laura.
Whereas Lauren Brown was a diehard Wolverine who nonetheless proudly posed for pictures in front of Sparty when his youngest daughter graduated from Michigan State University because he loved the Wolverines, but he always loved his family more.
Whereas Lauren Brown passed away on July 16th, 2026, leaving Ann Arbor and its vibrant legal community shocked and saddened by his loss.
Whereas Lauren Brown will forever be remembered as a beacon of hope and justice in a world that desperately needs more champions of his extraordinary caliber.
resolved. The Ann Arbor City Council requests that a tree be planted in Lauren Brown's memory and one of Ann Arbor's many beautiful parks is a small way of honoring a legal giant who so many were honored to call a mentor and friend.
resolved. The Ann Arbor City Council shall observe a moment of silence to remember and flect reflect on the life of Lauren Brown and his good and faithful service to our community.
Thank you.
So, um I would like to lead a moment of silence, >> please.
>> Can we stand while we do that or Sure.
Do you mind? Of course. Okay.
[clears throat] Next, I now would like to um have Lauren's family who is here. Um they're present today. If they would please stand, you can come to the podium. Um, I just wanted to, you know, personally for me, um, I pledge to work with you, uh, to ensure that Lauren's legacy of justice is an enduring part of the Ann Arbor community and that his memory is always held in the highest honor.
Also, I must say that Lauren had a great love of comic books. So, it's no wonder that he became a real life uh, superhero to many. uh he spent a lot of his hours in defense of others and in pursuit of justice and that took him away from his home at times. So thank you family for sharing him with us. I'd like and thank you all.
[applause] >> [snorts] >> Is there further discussion?
For my part, I just want to express a great deal of gratitude to uh the family for being here, to council member Harrison for leading the way on this, and you know, express uh the council's uh you know, gratitude and condolence to to you all. Uh his his life and work uh truly an inspiration. So, >> thank you one and all. All in favor? All opposed? It is approved. And please let the record show that it was unanimous.
Are there communications today from our city administrator?
>> No, mayor.
>> We have a set of uh our annual historic district commission awards from 2026.
Come on up.
You don't have You're not handing out awards.
>> Oh, >> you get to sit down.
>> All right. Perfect.
>> They're out in the hallway.
>> It's a virtual awards today. All right.
Perfect.
>> Hello everybody. My name is Susan Weinberg. I'm the chair of the historic district commission awards committee and welcome to the commission's 39th annual historic preservation awards. Thank you mayor and city council all of you for helping us celebrate these residents and institutions that have shaped the city we live in today. I personally want to thank everybody winning an award for beautifying our city and keeping Ann Arbor well Ann Arbor.
Uh Winston Churchill once said, "We shape our buildings and then they shape us."
I also want to thank the historic district commission committee, Fran Wright, Grace Shackman, Ellen Ramsburg, Tom Stolberg, Betsy Williams, and HDC members Sarah Nisbet and Jenna Carta.
And thanks to the staff, Jill Thatcher and Mariana Melon Corkerin.
We first have preservation awards that are presented in recognition of superior maintenance. Oh, wait. Oh, sorry. I skipped a paragraph. That's because I don't have my glasses on. What's the matter with me? All right, we are going to show you the presentation about the winners. Please save your applause until the slideshow has ended. Awardees may then proceed toward the elevator lobby to pick up their award certificate and head to the reception.
Okay, now let's do it. Preservation awards are pre are presented in recognition of superior maintenance of a significant property to preserve its essential historical, cultural or architectural value for 10 years or more. The honores are the Kulie Memorial Fountain on the Les Mall between the Michigan League and Burton Tower.
Completed in 1940, the fountain features a bronze sculpture by renowned Swedish sculptor Carl Milis called the Sunday mornings in deep waters which depicts the sea god Triton with his sons and 13 smaller fish. The fountain was commissioned by university athletic director Charles Baird who wanted to honor his childhood friend Thomas Kulie who was dean of the law school. The award is presented to the University of Michigan and it was recently restored and given award by the Michigan Historic Preservation Network.
Next, we have the Palmer House or the Frankliddaid Wright House, 227 Orchard Hills Drive. This iconic house was designed inside and out by Franklidd Wright in 1952.
It remained in the Palmer family in 2009 when it was sold to the current owners.
At 74 years old, the house is remarkably unchanged, including the garden and the Chinese tea house in the backyard. The house is from Bright's Eonian period when he designed smaller houses for mass consumption. It was built in a pattern of equilateral triangles which are repeated within the house in the furniture, in the tables, chairs, dishes, cutlery, and concrete floors.
The owners had maintained this historic character of this house, one of the showplaces of Ann Arbor. The award is presented to Jeffrey and Katherine Shocks.
1701 Morton Avenue. This 1945 tutor is defined by its parabolic arch doorway outlined in stone and set on an angle to the house which give this corner a unique configuration. This is at Morton and Ferdon. Casement windows set into the brick also define the style along with the copper roofed bay window near the entrance. It has been owned by the current owner since 2005.
This award is presented to Michael Faulner and Lisa Cyre 1444 down road. This house was built in 1922 by Edward Heimerdinger. I love that name. in in an unusual mix of craftsman bungalow and prairie styles. It has a wraparound porch that is repetition that is reminiscent of bungalows with open porches. It also has a clip gable dormer facing fdon which is a vertical element in a largely horizontal building which is the prairie influence. It uses three colors of brick wide raking boards under the eaves which add to the craftsman effect. Since 1999, it has been owned by the current owners who have maintained the exterior and added compatible landscaping. This award is given to Robert Axelrod and Amy Salinger.
Okay.
715 Arlington Boulevard, built in 1925 when it was not yet part of Ann Arbor.
This is reputedly a rare Sears honor kit house which may have only had 20 houses built with cedar shakes, eyebrow dormers, and wood shutters. It has all the bells and whistles of Craftsman Home. It was purchased by the current owners in 2002. The award is presented to Andrew and Amy Shepard.
The next category are rehabilitation awards and they are presented to projects that have substantially returned a property to its historic condition. The honores are 520 South Ashley Street. This 1896 house was built by John Ziegler, a clerk at Dean & Company. It is a simple Queen Anne L-shaped house with a wraparound porch.
All the restoration carpentry was done by the owner himself. It is in the old westside historic district. The award is presented to Jay Simrod and Constance Crump 331 East and Street just across the street from this building. This house was probably built in the early 1830s as a wing of a house which was destroyed by fire around 1913. The Gamber roof facade was added in 1914.
The current owner restored the original front porch and constructed a compatible rear edition that was approved by the historic district commission in 2023. It is in the old fourth ward historic district and the award is presented to Ryan Pantoo.
Then we have special merit awards are given in recognition of exceptional projects, landscapes and other unique preservation projects. The honores are the Jones school marker.
This award is presented for the installation of a historic marker in May 2025 celebrating Jones School from 1922 to 1965 when it was the primary elementary school in the black community. The new marker can be seen along Detroit Street behind Community High parking lot. The award is presented to Jocelyn Hunter Young and all of the Jones School historical marker committee which was many people many people worked on this for a long time. It's a great effort.
Okay. Another great effort award presented to the University of Michigan for the relocation of the Ral Wallenburgg House from East Madison Street to 439 South Division Street adjacent to the Arthur Miller House.
This gesture saved both small houses within which two of the university's most illustrious alumni lived while they were students. The houses will continue to tell the stories of Arthur Miller, the noted playwright, and Ral Wallenburgg, a graduate of the architecture school of the architecture school. Wallenburgg was a Swedish diplomat who courageously saved thousands of Hung Hungarian Jews from the Holocaust and there are many other things to him around. Uh the next awardee is the county historical society. This award is pres presented for the replacement of the roof on the museum on Main Street located at 500 North Main with authentic cedar shingles. [snorts] The building, which dates to the 1830s, is one of the few houses still standing from when Michigan became a state in 1837.
The society accomplished this through a fundraiser called Raise the Roof, which raised $40,000 needed for the materials and skilled workers to put an authentic roof on their building. In 1990, when facing demolition, this building was moved from 1015 Wall Street to its present location. The university donated the house to the society and the city donated the land that the house sits on.
It opened to the public in 1999 presenting exhibits and stories about Washna County and is listed in the National Register of Historic Places.
And we have a few anniversary awards given in recognition of businesses and organizations that have existed in Ann Arbor for 100 years or more. The honores are Zion Lutheran Church at 1501 West Liberty, which celebrated its 150th anniversary last year. Its history begins in 1833 with the arrival of Reverend Frederick Schmidt from Switzerland who was the driving force in establishing German Lutheran churches throughout Washington County. This current congregation traces its roots to a split within the Ann Arbor German community in 1875 which resulted in the creation of Zion and Bethlehem Church. The move to the current building began in 1948 and was completed in 1958.
And we'd like to recognize the University of Michigan College of Pharmacy, which is celebrating its 150th anniversary this year. It is the first and oldest pharmacy school at a state university, and its faculty are internationally recognized. Albert Prescott, the first dean, emphasized education grounded in basic science and fact, which was then considered heretical at the time. 30 years later, almost all pharmacy schools were following the Michigan model. As of 2024, they had 644 patents of feed for a relatively small department.
Congratulations to U of M pharmacy school on this milestone anniversary.
And lastly, we have uh the Rackom Graduate School, which is is um celebrating the 150th year of the first PhD that was granted. The university is receiving this uh for the granting of the first PhD degrees in 1876.
The university was one of the first research university in the country to offer degrees in graduate studies. They offered a master's of arts beginning in 1849 and the first two PhDs were conferred in 1876. One of those was to Victor Vaughn, a familiar name. As more students pursued these degrees, it became obvious that a more structured approach was needed. And in 1912, a separate graduate department was created. In 1938, the Rackom building was dedicated and has been home to the Rackom Graduate School ever since. Uh I should add that of course Rackom uh donated the money to build the building. So it was named after him. Uh this event, this um celebration will they will hold a celebration at a symposium on October 30th.
And I guess we should ask all of the awardies to stand and we can applaud.
[applause] [applause] Thank you.
>> Thank you very much. It's um you know of course Ann Arbor's history both in it uh in its built environment and uh and otherwise are still being written but it is always proper and useful to you know reflect upon what has been and to uh to honor it because it enliven what we have here today and what we expect to have tomorrow. So thanks for bringing these awards to us and thanks for the good and great work that you all have been uh doing with respect to those properties.
Thank you.
We now come to public comment general uh reserved time. Public comment reserve time is an opportunity for members of the public to speak to council in 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 or the time clock will notify you when 30 seconds are remaining and when your time is expired. When your time has expired, please conclude your remarks and seed the floor. I'll observe today that we have 27 folks signed up for public comment. Uh the way that the public comment rules work here at the city is that we reserve the first 45 minutes of a meeting for public comment. And so we will work through as many public commenters as we can during those 45 minutes. Um 15 at a minimum, but if we get to 16, 17, potentially 18, then we will be delighted to have your public comment at this time. After 45 minutes has passed, we'll then conduct the balance of the business meeting and at the uh end of the meeting, we'll have public comment overflow. And so for folks who wish to continue their public comment at that time who are on their list, we'll go through the queue.
>> Can I ask for a point of clarification, >> please?
>> Is it the first 45 minutes of the meeting? Meeting at 7:45.
>> Good question. No, thank you for It means the 45 minutes of public comment.
Thank you.
a a very gentle way of saying I messed that up. So, thank you.
Just a point of clarification.
Uh, our first speaker today is Sundy Wils.
Whistllow, my apologies.
Sundy Whistllo on the phone.
>> Sundy Whistllow, if you're on Zoom, can you please raise your hand?
Press star six to raise your hand.
>> Mayor, I don't see this caller online.
Our next speaker is Janet Wang.
Janet Wang.
>> Janet Wang. Go ahead.
>> Good evening, council.
My name is Janet Wang. As a renter in Ann Arbor, I've experienced firsthand the difficulties of the renting experience in the city.
As an organizer with the Ann Arbor Tenants Union and HBDSA, I have further witnessed the numerous affordability and livability issues tenants face in the city. Through tireless efforts with other organizers and members of the community on top of our time spent working and studying and doing family duties as students and workers and family members, we as tenants have come together to collectively draft a bill of rights and a language for a right to organize ordinance hoping to improve renters's living conditions.
While I urge the council to approve the resolution tonight as tenant protections cannot wait, I also wish to express my frustration at the severe lapse in communication between the council and the renters's commission and au. Neither the renters commission nor the tenants union were informed of this development despite asking about the right to organize ordinance for months. All the while tenants problems have not ceased.
As recently as last month, Courthouse Square residents were faced with broken AC units during a massive heat wave, leaving older housebound residents of the complex in danger. How can you say you stand for tenants when the most vulnerable tenants of the town are left behind? I asked the city attorney to produce a draft of the right to organize ordinance by the time of the August 20th renters commission meeting for their feedback and review. And I asked the city to officially receive the feedback in the form of meeting minutes as an attachment for the record on the September 8th meeting. I ask the members of city council who proclaim to stand for the rights of renters to actively engage with the community of tenants who have been working to create this proposal. I yield my time. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Our next speaker is Major Stevens.
>> Hello council. I'm Major Stevens. I'm resident of Ward One and I want to talk to you similarly about the um tenant preparation, the attorney of proposals to prepare an ordinance for granting tenants the right to organize. I do want to clarify some things for people who are not in the organizing space for tenant organizers. Um back in the summer of 2025, uh Ann Arbor Tenants Union and Heron Valley Democratic Socials of America partnered to create this tenant bill of rights. One of our first focuses was the right to organize. Um because of landlords and landlords over the time over the past couple years have consistently file tens have consistently tried to even remove tenants from their ability to organize in their apartment complexes. Back in 2025, uh we started drafting the formal language. We talked with legal scholars in housing. So this is Jim Shasma. So this is Gail Rosen who run the renters commission. And then back in March of 2026, we presented this formal language to the um renters's commission and um you know, we sent it off and hope for comment.
We had, you know, they were promised within months and yet nothing showed up.
And now it's July and we've never seen the comments and we never received the comments back. Now we see this proposal right for the request that does not reference an tenants union does not reference the draft ordinance that we prepared [snorts] does not reference the various season that occurred and was not communicated to the renters commission and tenants union it lays out a timeline that is longer than we want and um I think renters and tenant organizers uh deserve. So the question becomes why? I I don't I personally don't know if it's a political stunt, if it's a lack of care for community engagement, or if it's a simple mistake, which from the emails it might be a simple mistake.
However, right, I appreciate the idea of the resolution, but I would encourage that immediately after this um and if it passes, which I hope it does, uh that tenant organizers and um the city council and city uh attorney will work swiftly to actually create this right to organize and actually formalize language that's not watered down um and is actually impactful. Thank you.
>> Thank you. [applause] >> Our next speaker speaker is Felicia Brebeck.
Good evening, Mayor Taylor, city council members. I'm really grateful to be here and to have the opportunity to speak before you. I'm here in my capacity as chair of County's community mental health board. I was here in March uh about this issue uh and I'm so happy to be back uh and want to offer my thanks and support for the resolution to approve the intergovernmental agreement with community mental health to support the co-response program with the Ann Arbor Police Department. CH looks forward to partnering with our chief uh and AAPD uh in the collective efforts to strengthen crisis response services here for our residents particularly uh when they are experiencing behavioral health emergencies. We appreciate the city's commitment to trauma-informed community centered collaborative crisis response and we look forward to working collaboratively to support our residents who are in crisis. Finally, I want to express my sincere gratitude to Council Member Harrison for her tireless advocacy and leadership on this endeavor. Uh, and I ask for your support of this resolution. Thank you all. Hope you have a good night.
>> Thank you.
>> Our next speaker is Nathan Kim.
This caller is on Zoom.
Nathan Kim. Press star six to unmute your phone. Go ahead.
>> Hi. Uh my name is Nathan Kim. Uh uh good to see you all all here today. Um I'm here just to talk about the the right to organize and the proposed uh resolution to create a section on the um the city code to move the to create the tenant bill of rights. Um and also about my experience as a tenant organizer and why why we need such a thing. Um and then I'll also say a little bit about the uh process I guess by which we arrived here.
So um I I think al always needs to be said I think the conditions for tenants are always a lot worse I think that than we uh than people usually give it credit for. Um I think my experience as organ ten organizer began at Ann Arbor Woods um which is a complex work by Trader Joe's around 220 units. Um there were there were many many many problems and this is um you know as as our friend Dave said last week this is a um this this was also one of the better complexes in in our group. Um but there were leases everywhere. There were lines on public lines. Um whenever tenants saw uh maintenance uh they would receive constant bereavement from the leasing office managers. Um there would be cockroaches everywhere for for for a few of the units were next to each other in one of the buildings. Um such that one of the couple had couples had to move out completely because at one point there were they would wake up and cockroaches would be climbing over their bodies. Um and it was frankly humil humiliating to watch people understand these conditions um as those tenants sit and as people still do now as sometimes we sort of hide uh when we talk while we talk about the real issues um which are still real issues like comprehensive land and so on. So um yeah tenants rights are important. Um I guess [clears throat] the big problem with all that is that all the problems that we faced were legal. Um and so to me we undoubtedly need better laws. Um that is why we we in the tenants union and the human valley democratic socialists of America wrote the tenant bill of rights.
Um uh which I I believe is proposed um as a um as part of the resolution for tailed although um it maybe that's a different title of rights I guess. Um anyhow, um we're currently in in a position where renters can ask benevolent homeowners that oversee our conditions, like the current city council to help us. Um and sometimes it happens. Um but to me, living in a democracy doesn't mean that we have a bone thrown to our renters every once in a while. That we have renters that can fight for ourselves. If we've been harassed, filmed, have the police called on us, had our signs torn down, been threatened with eviction, been accused of quote unquote destruction of property for taking an 8 and 1 half by 11 paper to a glass door.
Um it it feels to me that um immediately there should be laws passed to uh prevent landlords from uh retaliating against them for that beh organized and for it to be pushed through as soon as possible. Um and finally I'd like to clarify that um the the resolution asked the city attorney to provide the language um by um I think September 8th, but um the resolution was the language was already provided 5 months ago. I guess um so that's that's that's the main. Thank you.
Thank you. Our next speaker is Sierra Wolfkinson.
All right. Good evening, Mayor Taylor, council members. I'm here to comment on proposal DC2. My name is Sirwolf Cen. My husband, Desert, and I are lifelong residents of Ann Arbor. We live in Ward 5 and we own a in a commercial district a fully licensed short-term rental that's one of the most loved in the city.
The people who stay with us include parents that are touring the University of Michigan with their kids, grandparents that are here for family reunions. Many times also families who needed somewhere to stay while someone they love was in treatment at Michigan Medicine. Overall, we've hosted over 150 stays, 750 guests, more than a third of whom include children, none of our neighbors have ever complained.
Now, 5 years ago, the city's ordinance prohibited non-principal resident short-term rentals in residential areas, but permitted them only in commercial mixeduse districts. The premise was that if you follow the rules, exist where you're told, then you'll be allowed to run your business. And we've done all of that. We've registered. We've passed inspections. We'd pay non-homestead taxes. And relying on this framework, we've now invested in renovating two more historic commercial properties.
Now, proposal DC2 was created to address the problem of hundreds of unregistered operators in residential neighborhoods, and we agree that is the problem to address. But if the solution involves a blanket moratorium on all new licenses, it likely won't affect the vast majority of these unregistered rentals. Many are not in your licensing queue, nor are they interested in applying for a license. A blanket freeze would mainly harm the people trying to comply, people like us, and effectively wipe out all of the time and work that we've already put into the properties. You would be effectively punishing the small business owners instead of the people who actively ignore your rules.
Given the lack of clarity on who DC2 applies to, we object to this resolution. We ask that you vote it down tonight. If you do proceed, we ask that you state on the record that the moratorium will apply only to residential districts, that it will exempt pending applications, protect renewals, and let projects in progress still be licensed. So, in closing, please enforce against the people who openly violate your city's rules. do not harm those who actively follow them.
Thank you.
>> Thank you.
>> Our next speaker is Matt Rydenower.
>> Hi there, Matt Rydenower. Um, everything Sierra just said. Um, so my wife and I are in the same boat. Uh, we have an investment property we've been working to buy for almost a year now. Um, we've invested uh hundreds of hours and thousands of dollars to get this property off the ground only to find out this weekend that this moratorum is coming. Uh, and I guess I just I'd like to make a couple of points to you about Airbnbs and Sierra made some great points. That's they're they're really salient. Um, in addition to that, I'd like you to just think about, you know, the the numbers of this. Airbnb or short-term rentals are um they they serve such a purpose in a community. In in our in Ann Arbor, um there's about 35 really high impact days of the year where there's football games or a Morgan Wallen concert or something like that that's going to bring in a large number of people, right? The other 330 days of the year, it's just normal, you know, uh crowds. No uh hotel is going to build for that volume of people. They're going to build for a a standard average influx. So the the purpose of an Airbnb is to you know take over that massive influx when it's needed. So you know it's just such a such an important uh part of how we manage the people that come to our city, right? And I think you know how Sierra puts it. It's the same way all of us think. Uh Airbnb, it's it's a business and we try our best to um provide an amazing stay for people and and and if we don't, they don't come back and we get poor reviews and it's it just sinks our business. And so, uh it kind of feeds itself. And when those people come to us and they give us a five-star review, it's because they had an amazing stay. And when they have an amazing stay, they come downtown and they go to the restaurants and they and they buy things and they want to come here and live here. So, it's kind of a self-fulfilling prophecy. So, the the short-term rental industry, it's not a it's not a bad thing, and I I wish it wasn't looked at as one. I understand that there are issues, and I feel like you've done a a good job of regulating out in the residential areas. you've done uh the right thing in in limiting the non-residential um you know non-owner occupied. I get it. I totally get it. You know, we're trying hard to fit in the boxes of the uh commercial zoning and we're still, you know, feeling the the crunch there. So, um I I guess I would just like you to think really hard about what what you're trying to limit here. you're you're you're you know you're singing off an important aspect of the economic value that a short-term rental brings to the table. So, thank you very much for your time.
>> Our next speaker is Hannah Lines.
>> Good evening, council. My name is Hannah Larsenes and I am the vice chair of the Ann Arbor Renters Commission. I'm here today to speak in support of the resolution to prepare an ordinance for the right to organize a tenant union. I applied for the renters commission after I had personally experienced housing insecurity while renting here in Ann Arbor. My property manager failed to maintain my apartment and I was abruptly forced to move out due to very high levels of mold.
I later learned that my unit didn't even have a certificate of compliance.
I had the privilege and resources to advocate for myself when faced with housing instability, but many Ann Arbor renters do not. A right to organize will ensure that tenants can work together to collectively bargain for more dignified housing conditions. Tenant unions in the US have successfully negotiated repairs, secured rent deductions, and have prevented evictions.
Existing state law protects tenants from being evicted due to tenant union membership, but it fails to provide protection from other forms of retaliation and does not adequately protect activities required for organizing like distributing literature or meeting uncommon areas of an apartment building. In February 2026, the renters commission endorsed a right to organize ordinance as presented by the Ann Arbor Tenants Union in the Herin Valley DSA. Our resolution had requested that city staff work with the Ann Arbor Tenants Union to pass the ordinance.
Since February, the renters commission has asked for an update on the right to organize every month. Yet, we have not been presented with any feedback nor an amended draft of the ordinance.
While I'm happy to see a resolution pushing right to organize forward, I am disappointed that the renters's commission has been kept in the dark.
This goes against the stated purpose of the renters commission as an advisory board for city council.
This resolution today only came to our attention because renter commission chair Rosita Ratcliffe just happened to check the agenda for today's council meeting.
In the future, I ask that the renters commission be informed of all tenant related resolutions by council. I hope to receive an updated draft of the right to organized ordinance before the August 20th renters commission meeting so that we can make up for lost time and ensure an effective right to organize ordinance is papped promptly.
Enacting the tenants bill of rights will equalize the power imbalance between renters and landlords in [clears throat] Ann Arbor. The renters commission has already started reviewing a right to repair and deduct ordinance. These legal protections are urgently needed to ensure safe and affordable housing for all Ann Arbor renters. I look forward to working together to pass the rest of the tenants bill of rights to guarantee fair and affordable housing for all renters here in Ann Arbor. Thank you.
>> Thank you. [applause] Our next speaker is Rebecca.
>> Good evening, council. My name is Rebecca Erenss. I'm a Ward One resident, a licensed clinical social worker, and I work part-time in psychiatric emergency services, and I'm also a candidate for Ward One. I support expanding behavioral health crisis response, and I support accountability.
I support CA21 because it strengthens the existing community mental health co-response model. Christine and Emily are fantastic. Pairing a dedicated clinician with an Ann Arbor police officer strengthens countywide collaboration proves responses to high acuity behavioral health crisis and helps keep clinicians safe in the field.
My concerns are with CA20.
Over three years ago, the city's own planning process identified dispatch protocols, performance metrics, coordination with existing providers, and public reporting as essential components of a successful program.
Today, many of those same elements remain unfinished. Dispatch protocols are still being developed.
Operating hours will be determined later. Public assets access pathways remain under discussion. Those are not minor details.
They're in the operating model. As someone who works in psych emergency services, I know that dispatch criteria, inter agency coordination, clinical responsibility, and clear performance standards are the foundation of a safe and effective crisis response.
Earlier this year, the city administrator stated that both the fire department and the police department had made a strong business case for additional staffing before creating four new permanent positions under CA20.
Council should explain how that decision aligns with the city's broader public safety priorities. The public deserves a transparent accounting of current public safety resources, including firefighter and police overtime costs, minimum patrol staffing for each 12-hour shift, the actual number of officers available after accounting for leave, training, court appearances, hospital watches, transports, and extended calls. Good governance requires understanding the needs of resources we already have before permanently adding the resources we want. Vote yes on CA21 and please vote no on CA20. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Our next speaker is Sheila Rosuli.
>> Oh, I'm sorry, Miss Rosuli. I skipped Jack Bernard. My apologies. I can hardly wait, but Mr. Bernard, it's all you. My apologies.
>> No worries. Thank you very much. Good evening, Mayor Taylor, council members, city staff. My name is Jack Bernard. I'm a longtime watcher of city council meetings, but a first-time commenter.
Um, yeah, thank you. [clears throat] Uh, I'm a student at the University of Michigan, a renter of Ann Arbor in for three years, a member of the Ann Arbor tenants union, and a member of the Urbanism Club at the University of Michigan. Just to give some context, my current apartment situation, my AC has been broken for 3 weeks during the heat wave. My fridge is now broken. and I've lost all my food and so tenant, you know, protections are pretty important to me. So, I'm glad to see that council is finally considering the right to organize in Ann Arbor. Uh, but I'm been extremely dissatisfied with the process that it has taken thus far. Right to organize has been in discussion between external groups like AU and the HVDSA and the renters commission for at least the past 5 to 6 months with continual asks for endorsement, discussion, andor engagement on the legislation being presented to council. We have received nothing in return and renters commission was completely unaware of this resolution on the agenda despite their asking for discussion on the right to organize for the past 5 months. HVDSA and AATU have already produced a draft of such possible legislation that is rooted in real tenant experiences. It addresses real concerns and issues like mine being faced by tenants across the city. This is literally a gold mine for city staff to understand and be in touch with the reality of its own citizens. So why is council refusing to engage with groups working and advocating for this exact issue? Or the official city commission that is appointed by council to quote advise the city council and city administrator on matters affecting renters in the city of Ann Arbor. At best this is an inefficient use of city resources and at worst this is undemocratic and up unrepresentative of real tenant needs. Are any of you renters? That's why we have the renters commission. [laughter] And it begins to look like this effort is a little bit more of a political move than a good faith effort to engage with the needs of renters in Ann Arbor. If it is not a political play, Mayor Taylor, Travis Redina, and other council members, why have you not asked for a meeting with us, AETU, HBDSA, or engaged with the renters commission at all on this issue to hear requirements and concerns that may have been good to include in the resolution tonight? Why were none of these groups even notified that the resolution was being put forth? I ask that you approve this resolution as time is of the essence for renters protections in Ann Arbor. But I also ask that you ensure a draft of the proposed text is provided to renters commission by their August 20th meeting so that their feedback can be officially provided to council for reference on the September 8th meeting. If this is not met, why even have the renters's commission in the first place if you are not going to meaningfully engage with them on their main purpose for the city?
Thank you very much.
>> Thank you. [applause] >> Our next speaker is Shida Razuli.
>> I'm back. Thank you for having me.
[laughter] Um, I came here tonight as a low-income tenant, uh, as an organizer and as an anarchbrite who believes that we are stronger when we face our problems together in solidarity with one another. And yet, unlike our labor organizing comrades who I see here today, we have no basic protections. Our organizers and tenant membership have faced numerous threats leading organizing efforts to trickle at a time when we might have seen greater advocacy for code compliance and better health outcomes for tenants living in apartments with zero heat security concerns and rampant pest issues. While I am frustrated for the many reasons our organizers have brought up in comment, today's resolution is a minimum but a good step in the right direction.
introducing a timeline for the city's attorney's office is the right move. Um, and I recognize with the 30-day notice there are limitations on what we can ask, but within those limitations, I believe it is fully reasonable to expect response by the August 20th renters commission meeting as myself and other commissioners have asked for updates in four meetings and I personally submitted the original draft language for review on March 5th. encourage greater communication between council, the commission, and authors of the ordinance so that we can achieve our shared goals, which I know are expanding tenants rights. And finally, I would like to express my support for the short-term rental moratorum. Uh my family moved to Ann Arbor over 10 years ago. I watched my brother become an adult in this city, and I, like many others, call Ann Arbor home. And yet, despite having the most income I've ever had in my life as a lowincome tenant, the only apartments I can afford are in the city of Balani.
You [snorts] may not hear the voices of in our brides pushed out because of lack of housing tonight. They are no longer in this city. But we would tell you this, which is that we need more housing fast [snorts] and we do not need a game day getaway. Thank you.
>> Thank you. [applause] Our next speaker is Peter Exin.
Uh it's good that you are at last addressing the uh problem of short-term rentals which make so many housing units unavailable to present and future residents of the city. But some cynical voters are wondering why is this important issue only coming up at the very last council meeting before the critical August primary.
There are two quick changes that might counter some of that cynicism.
Instead of suggesting a moratorum of just six months, uh how about extending it to cover six years and expand also expand coverage from areas designated as residential to include all those parts of the city including those designated commercial, mixeduse, and transitional. whatever the hell that is.
Uh that could open up real housing opportunities. Uh people need housing in all those areas. The problem is not a family moving out of their house for a weekend in order to raise extra money to help pay the property taxes or even as we've heard uh these single B&Bs that uh people are are creating. The problem is the many hundreds of units kept permanently off the market for full h full-term housing, full-time housing, so their owners can make more money through Airbnbs.
The problem is that you have approved project after project while allowing many of the units to be offered as short-term rentals. Three years ago, you reszoned a large property near the stadium to permit the prospective developer, a large campaign donor to rent out 30% of her units on a short-term basis. The justification is always we have a housing crisis. We need housing, housing, housing. But for whom?
Surely those who call themselves neighbors for more neighbors are not craving more Wall Street lawyers and Silicon Valley tycoons to have pads near the stadium when they jet in and out for football weekends.
Six years ago, a council not controlled by the mayor voted to take action on this problem. And once the mayor regained a majority, his council diluted those restrictions for better or for worse. But since then, there have been well over a hundred council meetings with no real action to check the growth of Airbnbs.
Now, at this last meeting before the election, you have before you this symbolic measure. You might reduce public cynicism a bit by amending it into a proposal with some teeth. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Our next speaker is [applause] Aisia Merik.
>> Good evening. My name is Allesia and I'm a tenant and a member of the Ann Arbor Tenants Union. Like my fellow members and tenants before me, I would like to address agenda item DC1, the resolution for the city attorney to prepare an ordinance granting tenants the right to organize. Tenants all over Ann Arbor who have tried to organize their buildings and units have been targeted and threatened by their landlords or property managers, have been surveiled and followed by the police, and have been threatened with eviction numerous times. Without legal protections, renters in Ann Arbor are unable to organize themselves and their neighbors and exert meaningful pressure on their landlord. While we were forming the tenants association at Island Drive, where tenants continue to face numerous maintenance issues due to landlord neglect, I talked to several tenants who were scared to get involved and voice their concerns because they feared that management would take action against them. This is the reality for so many of our neighbors. This is why tenants in the Ann Arbor Tenants Union and HBDSA decided to draft a tenant bill of rights and wrote language that would protect renters from facing such retaliation.
The tenant bill of rights and the right to organize ordinance was written by tenants and for tenants and was informed by real experiences that our members um and renters in Ann Arbor face regularly.
Which is why seeing the resolution on the agenda today without any prior acknowledgement from you city council members was particularly jarring. Just a couple of weeks ago, each of you received an email from an A or HBDSA member asking you to support and endorse the tenant bill of rights and so far you have not done either. Not to mention the months of silence from you regarding the right to organize ordinance when we asked for feedback and comments. You have not asked to meet with any member of either organization to discuss this resolution. You did not consult with the renters's commission and you have not meaningfully engaged with the right to organize organized language that's already been drafted. My ask for you today is to do all three. And while I support and strongly urge you to pass this resolution, I demand that moving forward you prioritize the needs of tenants over your political agendas. I also ask that you provide a draft of the right to organize ordinance to the renters commission by August 20th and receive their feedback in the form of meeting minutes as an attachment for the record on the September 8th meeting. And while I have the time, um I also want to say that I support the resolution um to put a moratorium on short-term rentals.
Thank you.
>> Thank you. [applause] Our next speaker is Alexandria James.
Hi council. Hi mayor. My name is Alexandria. I've lived in Ann Arbor my entire life and I'm here to speak on DC2. I've grown up in Ann Arbor real estate and property management community. I began working in property management in 2018 and have been a property manager since 2021. Through both my personal and professional experiences, I've had the opportunity to watch Ann Arbor's housing market evolve over the years, and I have spent my career helping people find housing in this community. I want to be transparent that I'm not here as someone making significant profits through short-term rentals. I earn a salary. For the past four years, I have hosted a small number of properties through Airbnb because I genuinely love hospitality, caring for people, and creating welcoming spaces um for visitors. Hosting short-term rentals has taught me that hospitality isn't just about providing a place to stay. It's about providing a place where life's biggest moments can happen. I've welcomed families celebrating weddings, alumni returning home, parents visiting their college students, and people exploring Ann Arbor for the first time.
I hosted families whose childrens were receiving treatment at M's Children's Hospital. Loved ones supporting family members at the University of Michigan Hospital. In those moments, a short-term rental isn't simply a place to sleep. It becomes a place where families can gather, cook a meal together, have privacy, and find a sense of home during some of the most difficult and meaningful times of their lives. Those experiences have shown me that responsible short-term rentals serve a real purpose in our community.
Additionally, Ann Arbor's housing market is changing rapidly. Thousands of new beds are expected to come online over the next few years. As someone who works in leasing every day, I have already seen the market shift dramatically.
Renters now have more choices than ever before, and I believe that's a positive thing. However, that also means there are properties that are appropriately zoned for short-term rentals that may sit vacant for long periods of time without being rented. Short-term rentals give owners, property managers, and other another option while continuing to support local businesses, restaurants, and visitors who want to truly experience Ann Arbor. I understand and respect the city's goal of supporting neighborhoods and encouraging long-term residency. Those are important goals and I believe they can coexist with responsible short-term rentals. My hope is that the city recognizes there is room for thoughtful balance regulation without eliminating opportunity. Ann Arbor has always been a city known for welcoming people from around the world.
Every guest who visits Ann Arbor has the opportunity to experience our restaurants, our small businesses, our university, our parks, everything that makes this city what it is.
Many leave with wonderful memories and recommend Ann Arbor to friends and family. That kind of positive experience strengthens our community in ways that are difficult to measure but impossible to ignore. Thank you for your time, for your service to our community, and for taking the time to listen to my perspective this evening.
>> Thank you. Our next speaker is Kathy Griswalt.
>> Good evening. As governance chair with the Annabra public schools, I introduced a resolution that prohibited personal attacks by parents, by trustees, and by teachers. I would recommend that you consider such a resolution. Now, the good news, uh, there's been a lot of negativity about the EPA on social media. There's been a lot of negativity about everything, but regarding the EPA, there's so much good news. We actually had a celebration.
Uh I talked to Debbie Dingle over the weekend and she is going to have a town hall meeting. In addition, the University of Michigan is now a partner with the EPA and the EPA is having community meetings and is available for one- on-one sessions. uh if you schedule them and you can go to the EPA website or I'm sure the city has that information. So, um now I want to talk about the last council meeting. Uh I questioned city staff's data analysis and offered to improve uh and recommendations to improve our 10-year high in serious and fatal pedestrian crashes. Why while data analysis is usually dry, this discussion quickly became highly emotional. It made me stop and ask a fundamental question.
Why is this data so triggering? Upon reflection, the pattern is clear. First, there is the promise. City staff base their recommendations on the premise that pedestrian safety is improving.
Council then allocates millions of dollars based on the promise that these meth methods are working. But then there is reality. The raw data suggests a serious problem. Our serious and fatal pedestrian crash rates are not dis decreasing. In fact, from the city's own website, the number of serious and fatal crashes in the last 10 years has doubled from 6 to 12. Now, we can do all kinds of manipulations, but that's the city's website.
Um, so also thinking about this, I used a soccer analogy and what I feel like is we have a lot of forwards that are out there working on these projects like the treeine trail, but we don't have any defenders who are actually doing the actual maintenance. Thus, we have crosswalks without lighting, crosswalks with poor painting, uh crosswalks with overgrown vegetation, and a lot of issues with our infrastructure that's contributing to the crashes. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Our next speaker is Jim Coley.
>> Good evening, Mayor Taylor and City Council. My nickname, in case you've forgotten, is Jim Coley. I own North Side Grill and Coley Enterprises which owns the Hansen Brown building which is the oldest commercial building in the city of Ann Arbor built in 1832 before the city of Ann Arbor and as I just found out before there was the state of Michigan. It is good to see you honoring historic buildings whose owners have done amazing things to preserve them as part of Ann Arbor's history. So why are you making it so difficult, if not impossible, to do the same for the Anson Brown building? First, I feel I need to correct a few misstatements that have recently been made. This is a unique situation. The Anson Brown building has stood where it is for over 195 years.
Now, after all these years with the land on which the building sits is being treated as sits being treated as private property, the city is now claiming the land on which the walls and foundation of the four buildings stands that the city is claiming as city property. I contest this position. This means the city's position is that four privately owned buildings are on city property.
This is a unique situation. The city cannot point to how this happened, cannot show any action that was taken to make this change. They say it is just the way it is and the city can't possibly give away public property.
Sorry, but this does not make any sense.
It ignores a history of private ownership and maintenance that predates the city itself. This has been going on for over 2 years. I have with me a timeline that anyone from council or anyone in the audience can look at. I will leave it here on the counter and see where my frustration is. In those two years, both the city and the staff have done a lot of things. They passed many development agreements, hired lots of consultants for many issues, passed new zoning ordinances, but no simple resolution for me in the Ansen Brown building, a building that some of you have professed a love for or for the three buildings in the block. They're similarly situated. I was forced to litigate when city staff refused to propose any acceptable solutions. Let me be clear, a license was never an acceptable solutions. is irrevocable at a whim. If revoked, the buildings would have to go. Now, since I appeared in front of council 6 weeks ago, there seems to finally be a genuine interest from staff to deal with this. I hope this is truly an a a desire and not just because an election is coming up because I must emphasize to you, this is business. This is not politics. So, let's get this done. Have your people put the same effort into this as you have made other priorities. Give me a quick claim deed or an easement that's consistent with the status quo that has existed since 1830. This is a unique situation. You're not giving public land away. This is how it's been for 194 years. Make the anen brown block whole again and preserve Ann Arbor's history. Thank you.
>> Thank you >> for your leisure.
>> Our next speaker is Ralph McKe.
Good evening, Ralph McKe, fifth word.
I'm happy you're putting a moratorium on STRs. That should have been done years ago or when folks asked to put it in the club. Now in election eve, you're finally doing it. 6 years ago, prior council banned non-owner occupied STRs in residential. Then STR leader Heidi Pocher owned many, donated to campaigns, and threatened to sue. I don't believe the court precedent was looked at carefully and the new council gr grandfathered them. Council said STRs were small businesses regardless of potential negative impact and wanted to protect their investments. There has been little enforcement. There's hundreds of unregistered new ones, many in residential. You've done resonings allowing more. You've had six years to study and react but have done nothing.
Asleep at the switch. And this draft ordinance as said earlier doesn't differentiate between owner occupied non or residential and commercial. Does that any of that make sense? Compare the protection of at large STR owners with the treatment of North Side Grill owner Jim Kohley who you just heard from. I learned about that listening to him here. The background he's laid out.
Somehow some way back this the roadway was measured to go into that front 20 in. The city insists the le that the city owns the 20 ines and won't let go, dragging it out for years, forcing him to spend tens of thousands of dollars on legal fi legal fees. He can't refire or get title insurance. The statute the city's relying on dates from 1925.
In the last 100 years, there's been zero problems with that road. The city's papers in court say nothing about this h this encroachment has or might cause harm. That's unusual. I've done a lot of briefs. You see the harm that's front page all the time. That's because there isn't any problem. There isn't any possible harm here. It's ridiculous.
So despite the lip service that we hear here about helping small businesses, this is the reality. If you're not a big developer or campaign donor, to add insult to injury, when he comes here to make his case, he gets insulted. M. Dish or Dr. Dish said Cole was Coley was wrong. he could refi getting in his easement. The city offered he that implies he was lying about whether his bank would would agree to it. And and when he when they do draft an easement that's acceptable to that to the bank, which ne never negotiate, the city attorney responds with two pages of unacceptable clauses. Then we hear, "Oh, it's your public right away." The suggestion that residents would want 20 in of sidewalk and some empty buildings rather than the north side grill in the cycle shop is absurd. And all this is based on a disputed claim which might get reversed on appeal. The bottom line is the city has no legit reason to mess Coley over and is doing it anyway for no reason I can fathom. This should be a major campaign issue particularly in word one. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Our next speaker is Tom Weider.
>> [applause] >> He left.
>> He's gone.
>> Yeah.
>> Thank you.
>> Our next speaker is Chuck Ree.
>> Good evening. Thank you for letting me speak. And Arbor is a special place. We feel lucky to be here. My parents first brought me here to a football game when I was one. My dad loved this town and the University of Michigan and I could feel his reverence when he when he came here. I got degrees at the Big U and then moved to Scio Township where I served on the township board for 20 years.
Uh in 2008, I moved back to Ann Arbor and when Chris Taylor appeared on the ballot, I voted for him and most of us did. Now, however, it's time for a change at city hall. The over-the-top overthe-top craving of this city council to redo Ann Arbor has spun right out of control.
I'm for more housing. All the candidates on August 4th support greater housing density and flexibility in zoning, but many don't support making our neighborhoods unrecognizable within a few years. Like our downtown was giant sized. The comprehensive land use plan is okay. As long as this current city council does not get four years to implement it, you wouldn't want to see the result. Until recently, I was running for city council, trying to get additional protection for trees during the giant building boom. You wouldn't consider that. I was motivated to investigate trees in Ann Arbor after a perfect, beautiful, large sycamore tree was cut down right in front of my eyes on while I was on my morning walk. It was too It was one foot too close to a sidewalk. I was really mad. I'm telling voters voters out there that there's a new attitude about trees in Ann Arbor or about anything else that might get in the way of this frenzied rush to build.
I'm also telling voters that on August 4th, there are very smart and independent candidates, Democrats, running for mayor and in every ward in this city. And they are excellent. Vote for them. Dark money is flowing, flooding into Ann Arbor. Can you imagine the amount of money that they will pay to win this election? Developers would spend anything to win this election. I just happen to have the names of some fine people to vote for. Mayor Robbie number one's ward two Montigue ward three bar Bartholomew where I would a incredibly smart gentleman Zglan in four Greg Monroe in five. If you have any question about these individuals please just talk to them and you will find that they're very impressive like I did. Thank you. Thank you.
[applause] Having had public comment now for 47 minutes, the balance of folks signed up for public comment uh reserve time will be heard at the uh on the back end of our meeting. Are there communications today from council?
Council member Cordell.
>> Thank you. I'll be brief. Um I wanted to thank the city of Ann Arbor and the Ann Arbor Fire Department. Um as many of you know, the Ann Arbor art fair was this week and um coincided with um a few days of extremely poor air quality. the city and the fire department donated um um N95 masks to the art fair to distribute to all vendors and the organizers of that did go around and offer them to um all of the vendors who wanted to use those and that was just a really great recognition by the city in terms of the benefit of the art fair and uh the importance of safety. Um and the and the city also did support the art fair's decision and offered additional support and resources as necessary um the on the Thursday to um allow the art fair to successfully close early if vendors chose to leave which they did not. Um but it was something that I thought really showed the city's attention to um just how valuable this is to our local um art scene and to our local economy.
And the other thing um I wanted to mention very quickly is a reminder that this weekend there is um University of Michigan is hosting a massive concert at the big house both Friday and Saturday nights. Um please plan ahead. Downtown will be extremely busy. Traffic will be extremely busy. Um there will be um I don't want anyone to be alarmed when there are fireworks at the end of both of those performances. I assume that they will be loud. Um and those performances are expected to be done around midnight and so you may go to bed and be awakened by those sounds. Um so just so that folks are aware um the city's website does have information about that um and the concerts themselves but just be aware that downtown will be congested and that there will be um a lot of pyrochnics involved with this show and to have that in the back of your mind so you are not startled when they occur. further council communication.
Uh I just like to you know note the uh the completion of our art fair and the imminence of these two concerts and would like to express a great deal of gratitude uh with respect to the art fair at least to members uh of the community particularly the uh the art fairs uh and all the folks who who support them as they uh you know bring hundreds of thousands of people and artists uh to our community. Uh, I'd like to, of course, too, uh, crucially and and always thank city staff for the great and good work that they've done in making sure that our downtown is as beautiful as it can be, uh, that everyone is as safe as they can be, uh, and doing it um, all for the uh, the good of the community. Um, the, uh, this of course uh, will continue to be uh, an event uh, with the university upcoming with the two concerts. Uh, we are blessed to have the University of Michigan among us. Uh but we also observe that they do spin off a great deal of activity. Um and so the addition of these two concerts is um another uh another tentpole event in the course of our summer. Um and you know we at the as a municipal organization are working hard to uh make sure that it is uh safe for for everyone. uh that it is as uh stress-free as possible for approximate residents and that we um going forward will make sure that those who come to uh to the university's uh events who visit the city of Ann Arbor will have a great time.
We now come to the consent agenda. May I have a motion, please, to approve the consent agenda. Moved by Council Member Harrison, second by Council Member Dish.
Discussion of the consent agenda. Uh I understand there are a number of things to move. Uh well, let's see what we let's we spin off the consent agenda because there are a number of introductions. Uh council member uh Harrison and Dish.
>> I'd like to pull uh CA14, CA 20, and CA21.
>> Council member Dish, >> I don't want to pull, but I wanted to say some nice things about CA8.
>> I can. So, I will go ahead with that. I take that as a go-ahad. Okay. So, CA8 is approving a payment in lie of taxes agreement for 22 2285 West Liberty Street, which is an upcoming affordable housing project. This is a 100% affordable housing high-rise that will bring 343 residential units where to the TC1 transit corridor zone along the stadium and maple corridor.
>> [snorts] >> The building will be 9 to 12 stories tall and have some structured parking on the bottom. Uh it is the units are targeted towards families and will range from studios to four-bedroom units. But what I want you to hear is that this gives the city two exciting firsts. It is the first 100% affordable high-rise made possible by transit corridor resoning and it is the first high-rise to be proposed following the resoning along the stable and stadium and maple corridor. This was the vision of transit corridor zoning. Residents will live in close proximity to multiple grocery stores,armacies, a library, restaurants, other commercial uses, city parks, making it an ideal development location for new housing. But there's more. This project will be 100% income eligible affordable because our resoning of this high amenity area made this private developer competitive for Michigan State Housing Development Authority lowincome housing tax credits. This is great. It couldn't be better.
Further discussion the consent agenda.
Council member Cornell.
>> Thank you. I just wanted to um draw attention to um CA10 to W 5 residents.
Um improving um pedestrian safety along that Dexter Road corridor um with its proximity to Abbott Elementary School has been something that residents in W 5 have been asking for since the first time I knocked doors and have been very interested in as I've knocked doors this round. Um and it's really exciting to see this project come forward. Um the thing that I'm extremely not only are there um being sidewalks being added along a road where there is very um narrow place to walk. There is no place to walk other than the street. It is a corridor that takes kids to school. Um but there will be um RFB enhanced crosswalks at um five different intersections that will allow safe passage for folks um in and around those neighborhoods. It's a significant improvement for pedestrian safety in W 5 and it's I hope my colleagues will join me in approving it. It's pretty grievy.
>> Further discussion of the consent agenda. Council member Malik.
>> Thank you, mayor. I would just like to highlight uh CA5, CA 6, and CA7. Um all three of which are related to our green belt program. um as uh city council liaison to the green belt advisory committee. Just wanted to highlight that these are some exciting expansions of our green belt program. Um all three of which utilizing significant outside dollars to augment our city millillage.
Um CA5 for example to the tune of the city only contributing 20% of the total cost.
So some of these are really exciting. So if you get a chance take a deeper look.
Thank you. Further discussion of the consent agenda.
Council member Harrison.
>> Um CA14. We've got a staff.
>> Well, we've we've pulled pulled CA14.
We'll get to it in a moment.
>> All good. Further discussion of the consent agenda.
All in favor? All oppose? The consent agenda with the exception of CA14, CA 20, and CA 21 are approved with 10 council members present. all voting of the affirmative, thus satisfying the eight vote requirement with respect to CA5, CA 6, CA7, CA 10, CA14, resolution to approve a master services purchasing agreement with Axon Enterprise, Inc. for police technology consolidation, drones, hardware, and software services. Moved by Council Member Harrison, seconded by Council Member Dish. Discussion, please. If CA14 Chief Hello everyone. You know, first of all, I want to start by um thanking the mayor council for giving me this opportunity uh to speak on this very important topic. You know, I want to recognize members of council and specifically council member Harrison who asked several questions um related to these particular issues. As such, I will walk you through answering a number of these questions and I would defer to a team that will uh assist with some of the more technical and legal questions as we move along. You may remember the show um Who Wants to be a Millionaire?
And if you remember that show, uh the contestant also had a friend that they can reach out to to help them when perhaps they may need some assistance.
So I may need a friend or two. So bear with me. So I'd like to start by saying that, you know, when I was uh asked by our city administrator um Mr. Milton Dehoney Jr. to come lead the Ann Arbor Police Department. He [snorts] provided me with a clear mandate and that mandate was to work very closely with the community, the city council, to [snorts] work with city leadership and then to also embrace community policing, but to do so in a way that we will build a response that minimizes harm. A response that would prioritize deescalation.
a response that will ensure that we do everything we can to avoid lethal encounters.
You know, our Exxon technology consolidation agreement is a direct extension of that thought process.
I wanted to be very clear, technology is not a replacement for good policing. I will say that again. Technology is not a replacement for good policing. It is simply a tool that we will use to help preserve human life. The upgrades or rather advancements that we will look at will allow for us to enable a transition to Taser 10. This is a system that will also integrate what's called visual virtual reality training which allows for us to be better stewards of what we do. This technology is designed to allow for us to resolve high stress crisis safely. It'll do that while ensuring that we preserve the life of everyone involved.
And so, as your police chief, what I want to say is that it is vital that I provide you this perspective. I want to convey for sure what my overall intentions and goals are related to the department. I want to ensure that you understand our operational capabilities with our unwavering commitment to public safety. That being said, I am prepared to start answering the questions. Mayor, would they be in would they be read or should I read them first?
>> If you can read them.
>> Okay. Our first question.
This agreement updates our taser fleet from taser 7 to taser 10, which has a longer range and can fire multiple probes simultaneously.
Has the Ann Arbor Police Department conducted or committed an equity analysis of taser deployments? the data to ensure that this upgrades capability does not disproportionately affect any particular neighborhood or demographic group.
Will the deployment data be reported publicly on a regular basis?
So, I want to talk about that. You know, our Taser 10 will leverage technology advancements to deescalate situations to transition the Taser to the Taser 10 system. So, what does it do? The Taser 10 expands an officer's effective range from 25 ft as it was before to 45 ft.
Now, why is that important? Because what it does is it doubles the doubles the distance of a standoff. That gives a police officer more time to be able to more distance to be able to deescalate a situation when before the encounter can move so fast to the police officer that it would force them to do something we don't want them to do. Now doubling that standoff distance, this allows for us to be a lot safer.
The standoff distance allows for more space as indicated, but that standoff distance allows for us to have conversations that will keep us in a position to deescalate.
The new taser also taser 10 also uses what we call virtual reality. Now, virtual reality is training where we put our police officers in a situation where they're actually seeing what they can do and when they should deploy taser and when they should not deploy taser. And before we weren't able to do that. Now we can evaluate that training. We can evaluate that police officer and we can make assessments to how they respond to danger. Those are the things that we believe are important.
Now, additionally, when we look at deployment of equa equality and analysis annually, we conduct a use of force analysis and it includes our demographic locations. It includes patterns and we actively work we are actively working to build a public facing dashboard which we already have. But we're going to increase what we're doing with use of force to the general public. Now to ensure that that total accountability takes place our police department will ina will will connect the use of force an analytics we will connect that to the Ann Arbor data dashboard that we have.
It will show the disparities also the trends that take place. What the software does is it is a baseline for ensuring that we can have equal equity studies. It gives us that information so we can see exactly what we're doing. It can monitor our capabilities and when we deploy the taser across the city in location and to demographic groups.
Moving forward, we will continue to create a relationship with our IGOP in our use of force transparency meetings.
We have them now. We talk about use of force. use of force has changed the name to response to resistance. You will see that as a national trend. We will have those meetings where we talk about how and what we were doing with our taser 10 and that transparency will become about on the dashboard.
The second question was about driving the quality ordinance and it states that it was built on the principle of reducing unnecessary contact between law enforcement and civilians. It asked the question, does the does the fleet incar camera technology included in this consolidation expand Ann Arbor Police Department's automated plate scanning capacity in any way that could increase pretextual stops? and if so, what safeguards will be in place to ensure that the technology isn't used in a manner that undercuts the intent of our driving equality ordinance? A very good question. You know, the police department, as you know, we fully embrace and share our commitment to council member Harrison's introduction and the council's collective agreement to our driving equality ordinance, which was introduced on July 6, 2023.
Now, as a chief, we looked at this and what I did was I declined and turned down the ability to use license plate reader. We are not able, we are not using that.
Our principles are strictly committed to data transparently specifically to open information about traffic stops. We already have a dash dashboard that shows that it talks specifically about how we relate to all the stops, the demographics, the age, what we were doing with respect to our driving equality ordinance. The Axon in Axon fleet incar system uh incar camera system is also being uh acquired strictly strictly as a video recording platform. It is only there to document our officers in interactions with members of the community. It ensures that we have absolute transpar transparency and it creates mutual accountability.
But to ensure that we have explicit operational guidelines, explicit operational guard rails, we are prepared to formalize a restriction into writing on our technology to use the policy that expressly prohibits automatic plate scanning and that we will ensure would work with the spirit of our driver equality ordinance. So let me tell you the outcomes of what transpired with our drive in equality ordinance.
The official policy that was created by me in concert with what the ordinance stated began on May 2025.
Now upon implementing our policy, here's what happened. Our driving equality ordinance in May 2025 present to date had a total number of stops of only 10.
a total number of stops. When we compared that same data range to 2024, there were over 800.
That is a significant change.
Even of those 10, eight of them were within the first 60 days. That was the education phase. Two of them were for an officer that stopped the person with no lights at all. and the other one was for a a windshield that was completely shattered where you could not see it.
So, I believe we remain steadfast to where we've been going with driver quality and it's had a big impact on traffic fatalities overall.
The next question is, what is Ann Arbor Police Department's quality control process for verifying reduction accuracy before footage is released? And has there been an independent testing to confirm the tool doesn't overred redact or underred redact in any way that it could affect public accountability or a defendant's access to evidence?
Well, [snorts] our Axon uh AI is a redaction tool. The tool does not use facial recogni recognition technology. does not use it.
In fact, when we look at what Axon is doing, they're actually against using facial race racial I I'm sorry, facial uh technology in order to advance this product. Our criminals justice compliance systems that we use have a quality control process from Axon for their reduction tool. And in order for us to use it in concert with what they do, we actually have to have a human loop. Meaning the AI can be utilized and move faster, but you cannot complete it without a human loop. It has to be vetted by us. You know, when you're looking at redaction for for any items, it can take a person for a 1-hour redaction anywhere from 6 to 12 hours.
We have to have technology in order to redact information quickly, [clears throat and snorts] but we also have to have a human person to vet that information prior to it being done. The a redaction process will recognize a head. What it does is it can see your head, but it doesn't have facial recognition. So when redaction sees the head, it allows for us to redact that portion of the body.
That's how it operates. And then as I indicated, confirmed by human human workflow.
Now in speaking to Axon, they have indicated that they're open to our council's recommendation regarding an independent audit and they already have one in place. They have Axon AI ethics board and that ethic board ethics board consists of experts in the field of AI that work with computer scientists. It works with with privacy privacy uh experts. It works with law enforcement, civil li liberties as well as they have a public policy. So it appears as if they're moving in that direction and they're open for us to engage.
Question four.
Given the body warning camera and taser deployment data can directly affect charging decisions, use of force reviews and outcomes for justice involved residents. What commitment can make what what commitment can staff make to ensure this data remains fully available to public defenders at no additional costs consistent with disclosure methods outlined in this agreement. We started off this meeting today to talk about the public defender, Mr. Brown.
Unfortunately, I didn't have an opportunity to meet him, but I'm honored that we did represent him as he was a public defender. The police department recognized the significance of public defenders because they create the balance we need to keep government and policing on par and respecting the rights that we have with respect to how we address people in the community.
That's important to me as a public safety leader. But what you should know is that it's important that our public defenders are never charged as part of the Michigan state law as they receive all unredacted police reports, recorded statements, and the evidence. They receive information that allows for them to have the body warn camera footage and the taser downloads. So, the state law already allows for that to occur.
The next question was about the 269,765 10% contingency which is tied to anticipated new hires. Now the question is can staff confirm how many new positions this assumes and over what time frame and whether this spending will be reported back to council as those hires are made. and ask rather than drawing down administrative without further public visibility, will there be reporting? So I want to speak specifically about that. Our contingency that we have is not based on a specific number of anticipated employees that we have defined as hiring. We don't have a staffing matri at this point to look that far ahead. This contract is fi is a five-year contract. The request for contingency is intended to accommodate the possibility that we may add additional police employees over a 5-year period. That is the possibility that could happen. The 269,765 represents 10% of this total contract value which is s which is kind of typical for a contingency level agreement.
Any new position will remain subject to our city administrators annual budget review. This is a process that every one of us in the city provides to the city administrator and then as you all know it is recommended to you the body of the council for final approval which means that the police department cannot add these bodies. So to be clear on on the contingency itself this would we the police department would not would not be able to authorize the creation of new bodies.
The last one is on Done.
Done is is the one genuine new technology in this agreement.
Now, beyond detecting unauthorized drone flights, can staff confirm this system has no capability to track or geollocate individuals on the ground? and what policy governs how long detection data is retained and who can access it. So I want to explain what DRON is. Done is a system. It is a safety tool. What it does is it detects drones that fly into a share airspace. It will detect those drones. It is not capable of tracking the public. It is not designed to track individuals only to track active drones in airspace.
Think about that. We have a stadium. We have the artfare. We have a number of things in play here. We want to track people's drones that are coming in. And we want to find a way to send that drone back home. Meaning do something to make sure that it lands away from our airspace. That is why we have the drones. We want to make sure we're safe.
The state of Michigan also has a set of retention and disposal records for law enforcement. We comply with that. We will set a custom data retention links for the drones as a data retention information as we do with all retention which is required by law.
So in conclusion, I will say this. By actively working to eliminate the conditions that lead to the desperate impacts or tragic outcomes, we are completely aligning our operational capabilities with the mandates to minimize harm. That is important for you. That is important for our city administrator who has relayed that to me and that [clears throat] is important to me and the men and women of this police department.
Every piece of software selected in this consolidation agreement has been thoroughly vetted by our staff. It's been done to ensure that we reach our ultimate goal. That ultimate goal is to protect the interests of the community with the unwavering commitment to human life and safety. And that is my conclus conclusion.
>> Thank you, Chief.
>> You're welcome. Your your lifeline is preserved.
>> Thank you, >> Council Member Harrison. Yes.
>> Are we moving on to CA20? Oh, I'll I'm >> No. All right. Further.
>> Further discussion of CA14.
I'll just say thank you, Chief. One and all.
>> Thank you, Chief.
>> Uh, all in favor? All opposed? CA14 is approved. CA20 resolution to approve unarmed response program through supportive connections and approve the addition of four full-time equivalent positions. Moved by council member Harrison, seconded by council member Watson. Discussion, please. If CA20 council member Harrison and we do believe we have a introduction.
>> Yeah. So, should we do the introduction first?
Jonathan Lelay is joining us on Zoom.
Good evening, council members and mayor.
Sorry about it. I'm zooming in from from St. Louis this evening. Um so I apologize for my absence in the meeting.
Um tonight we are asking city council to approve um CA20 a resolution to approve the unknown response program through supportive connections. This will allow us to officially start building the support the supportive response and outreach team as it was presented to you in December.
Um as a part of this ask staff have been asked to address both what success will look like for the program as well as the proposed structure of the spout of the sprout pilot program. Um first to address the question of success. The success of Sprout pilot the pilot would uh not only should not only be measured solely by the number of calls responded to but by whether the program demonstrates a clinicianled unarmed response can safely and effectively meet community needs while improving outcomes for residents in crisis. We would expect to see individuals being connected to appropriate behavioral health, substance use, housing, and social service resources rather than unnecessarily entering the criminal justice or emergency medical systems.
Excuse me. We would also like for evidence of safe field operations, positive community and stakeholder feedback, successful collaboration with 911, community mental health, and other service providers, and reduce demand on fire and police officers for non criminal behavior health calls. Neither important is showing that the people served feel respected, heard, and connected to ongoing support following the crisis.
At the same time, the purpose of a pilot program is to learn. If the evolution shows or evaluation shows that Sprout is not consistently able to meet response demand, that partnerships are not functioning as intended, safety concerns emerge, or that the program is not producing better outcomes for its residents, those findings should prompt a thoughtful reassessment of the program's structure. That reassessment may include staffing levels, operating hours, dispatch protocols, eligibility criteria, or other operational components. The goal is not to preserve a particular model at all costs, but to build the most effective, accountable, and evidenceinformed crisis response system possible for the city of Ann Arbor's community.
As for the staffing of the model and how it compares to models across the country, the proposed staffing model and program structure reflects what we have learned from established unarmed response programs, particularly that of Durham, North Carolina, where we find a similar structure on a much larger scale. Durham deploys the same structure across four teams for response in addition to uh in addition to the ongoing follow-up support. While program structures vary across the country based on community size, call volume, operating hours, and program scope, one consistent finding from our site visits was that successful programs invest not only in field responders, but also in the programming necessary to support individuals after the immediate crisis.
Crisis response is only one part of the broader solution. Meaningful follow-up, resource navigation, and care coordination are what help prevent repeated crises. The proposed model will leverage the existing supportive connections program by making use of its current case management and administrative leadership along the four alongside the four dedicated field commissions for SPR. This allows Sprout responders to focus on immediate crisis intervention while supportive connections. Case workers provide ongoing support, service coordination, and followup after the initial encounter. Based on what we have seen in other communities, this staffing approach is consistent with sustainable unarmed response programs that recognize long-term success depends on both effective field response and strong postcrisis engagement. The most important consideration is whether the program has the clinical, operational, and follow-up capacity to safely respond, connect people to care, evaluate outcomes, and adapt as demand evolves. As with any pilot program, staffing levels will be evaluated throughout implementation, and the recommendations for future expanded expansion or modification will be driven by operational data, response demand, staff workload, and community outcomes.
Thank you for >> Thank you, Council Member Harrison.
>> Thank you. I just have a few things real quick to say. Um, thank you, Mayor. Um, I remember hearing from residents again and again about what it's like to call for help during a mental health crisis and watch uniform officers show up instead of a mental health professional.
Instead of someone trained to listen, deescalate, and connect them to care, they or their loved one were ticketed, arrested, or trespassed. No mediator, no clinician, no opportunity to intervene before the criminal legal system took over. This council responded by affirming that behavioral health is a part of public safety. We voted to reaffirm that someone experiencing a crisis deserves to be treated fairly, compassionately, and professionally.
Having a breakdown isn't a crime. Not every crisis calls for a law enforcement response. Gideer took years of work.
Staff visited programs in cities like Durham and Atlanta and Denver and others to learn from the people who built them.
It also took time to find a sustainable pilot fund a sustainable pilot.
[gasps] What I am most proud of with Sprout is what it is not. It is not armed. It is not AAPD. It is a fully civilian unarmed response staffed by licensed social workers trained in crisis intervention and trauma-informed care. Their job is connection, stabilization, and case management, not law enforcement.
Sprout is built for the calls that were never criminal to begin with. Someone experiencing a mental health crisis, someone who's unhoused, or someone struggling with substance use. These are public health crisises, not criminal ones. And they deserve a public health response.
For the people we're trying to reach, many of whom many of whom have learned to fear a uniform, that distinction matters. It is a completely separate mission from law enforcement. This is what I push for consistently before and during my time on council. Fewer moments where police are the first and only response to someone who hasn't committed a crime and more moments where a trained professional can step in, deescalate the situation, and connect that person to ongoing care. In addition to resolving a crisis in the moment, the goal is to prevent the next one. This program is not finished growing. There are still important questions ahead about retention, dispatch protocols, and long-term funding beyond the millillage.
I intend to keep asking them, but tonight is about approving the foundation sprout needs to launch, hire, train, and begin serving our community.
I would like to take to thank supportive connections uh city assistant attorney uh Janeski, city staff, um and every resident who showed up to those early conversation and insisted this was worth building.
Tonight, we're recognizing that compassion is a part of public safety and our response should reflect that and this Ward One resident will be voting yes tonight on CA20 to develop our UN uh unarmed crisis response. Thank you.
>> Further discussion of CA20, Council Member Malik.
>> Thank you, Mayor. Um I'm also really excited uh to see this item on our agenda tonight. Uh it's been a long time coming. Uh and I know a lot of effort and thought and background research has been done to get us to where we are tonight. Um our community and city council both have made clear that establishing a community-based crisis intervention model, specifically unarmed response, is a priority in Ann Arbor.
And I know momentous obstacles have had to become had have had to be overcome to get to this point. Um, of course there's more work to be done, data to be collected, protocols to be refined, uh, hence the pilot status. Uh, but I'm excited for the opportunity to launch this potentially life-changing program tonight. Um, along with the co-response proposal in CA21 tonight separately, uh, I did have one question for staff. Um and that is at at what point might we consider the pilot status complete in terms of time past or outcomes and what changes might we envision should we decide to move to permanent program status >> at what time? So it's going to take some time for us to get it off the ground first of all. Um, so that's going to be a running thing and the idea at this point is to run it as a pilot as long as we need to in order to refine the tool to make sure that we're hitting all the all the metrics and goals of the are being asked of us as as the community.
Uh, we want to make sure that we we get this right and get it anchored before we make it permanent and and really solidify the model so that we're not really just fighting for well this is how how we think we should run it. We want to make sure that we start it, move forward and refine it as we go. Um, so if that takes some time, it might take some time. Um, at that point, once we get to a point where we're comfortable with the model and we've got everything moving as we feel is going to be best serving the community and we've got all the all the moving parts in place, the hope at that point is to be able to take the program and expand it. Frankly, we're starting with two teams um which because of the the spin-off with CA21 tonight was actually made possible uh for us to expand that way um under the direction of Mr. Done.
Um so we're hoping to be able to go further and take it to additional teams once we're able to get that far. Once we get to that bridge though, it'll be up up to council in order to give us that authorization and approval uh after we able to show that the program itself is functioning as a pilot and able to go forward.
>> Great. Thank you so much.
>> Please.
>> Uh just to add to that, uh Council Member Malik, out of [snorts] all the places that we visited, uh there wasn't any cities that had the pilot for less than 12 months on the ground. So that's that's the minimum council.
>> Thank you. Um I too want to start by recognizing this is a long time coming and I think it's longer than um you know the community expected. It's certainly I think longer than we expected when we first expressed support for exploring an unarmed uh crisis response model back in 2021. Um, the idea seemed straightforward back then, but building a program that actually works in the real world has been much more complex than any of us anticipated.
I really want to thank our city administrator and staff, council member Harrison, the many comm community members who gave input over the years and subject matter experts who helped us study best practices from around the country and [snorts] develop a model that fits what we want here in Ann Arbor. What we're voting on tonight isn't simply adopting someone else's program. It's a pilot that's been thoughtfully designed around our community's desires and needs. It creates a civilian-led response for low-risk, non-emergency situations where trained clinicians, not police, are the right responders while also allowing us to collect data, learn, and refine the model over time. At the heart of this program are people. someone struggling with a mental health crisis, someone experiencing homelessness, someone who needs support, not enforcement. If this program helps even one person get connected to the care they need before the crisis becomes a lifealtering event, it will have made a real difference. My hope is that Sprout becomes another way we meet people in this community with compassion and dignity and the right kind of help when they need it most. I'm excited to see this finally become a reality and I'm excited to support it.
further discussion.
The uh the germ of the this uh this program that we're uh piloting tonight and with respect to CA20 and CA21 uh perhaps draw as council me indicated draws its uh its its its lineage back to uh April 2021. At that point the um public conversation made very clear uh which something which uh should have been clear much for much uh should have been clear much earlier and that is that um our police are asked to do too much and that not every call to 911 requires uh an an armed response.
There are many instances of crisis in our community where police though well trained uh and and good meaning are not equipped for that circumstance where uh subject matter experts are uh are necessary. Um further despite whatever uh we look to accomplish as a governmental organization we also have to meet people where they are. And there are many times when people want help, need help, but uh they don't want to have an officer show up. They want to have someone else to help them. Um and given the the state of our government, that response is often um is is often a police officer because those are the only tools that we we have had. Um, our police have all too often been the point of last government contact, the point the government engagement of last resort. It's my hope and expectation with the passage of 20 of CA20 and CA21 that that will change, that we will have um a service to offer Ann Arbor residents and folks who have the the good fortune to come within our boundaries. Um, that we'll have an opport a place to a service to provide to them. Uh, folks who are trained and experts uh in mental health, folks who are uh who are unarmed, who are not the police, who are made safe, but nevertheless are are there to provide service where service is needed, where service is wanted. Um I'm grateful every day, of course, for the uh the work that our officers do.
They put their bodies on the line to help keep people safe and our community safe, but it is also true that not every circumstance requires their engagement.
here. We're going to give people options. Uh, and I think we will help people help folks lives be so much better because of it. And so I'm excited about this project. So many thanks to the staff members who have envisioned it, who have uh the community members who have uh demanded it. Uh, and I thanks in advance to uh all the all of our professionals who are looking to implement it. Thank you. Further discussion.
All in favor? All opposed? It is approved. CA21 resolution to I'm sorry. Uh >> yeah. Uh with approved with 11 council me with 10 council members present, all voting in the affirmative, thus satisfying the 8 vote requirement. CA21 resolution to approve the intergovernmental agreement with county community mental health for licensed clinician to support the co-response program through Ann Arbor Police Department. Moved by council member Harrison. Second by council member Ier discussion please of c821 I believe chief >> mayor and council uh >> it's a great day to perfect uh and you know I am really pleased that uh we have moved forward with CA20 um this is something for the police department we think is critical. The police department and our professionals do not want to respond and encounter a person that has some type some type of minuity that doesn't require the police officers to be there. Often times we want the best and most trained people to address those concerns so that we have a safe outcome.
The reality is is that there are times when individuals are threatening to commit suicide or armed and other scenarios that do require a police officer to respond. And in those and in those instances, we want to make sure that we have the right people doing that. So, regarding the anticipated adoption of perhaps the co-response team, I want to provide you some information and background because our A2 reach program is an acronym. The REACH is for respond, engage, assess, co-responder helpers.
And as stated earlier, it is our commitment to provide the community uh with community policing and public safety that relies heavily on an effective partnership with clinicians.
Um it is driven by a clear defined roles that we believe allow for us to share our mission. That mission is to deescalate a crisis and to also ensure that we have a a tailored traumainformed care response.
Ultimately, our co-response is to create a collaboration that allows for us to be successful so that we can connect individuals we come in contact with resources.
So, Council Member Harrison and others provided questions and I will walk through the questions and answer them. The first question is, how does pairing the CIT training officer with a licensed clinician in the field change what happens on scene compared to an officer responding alone and requesting clinical support afterwards?
That is a good question.
We are long beyond the days where a police officer responds to a person in mental distress without having the resources and an expert partner in order to assist the police officer in need and the community member in need.
Unfortunately, we've seen the devastating results of that type of response nationally.
Police officers today are different. It calls for us to have a non-traditional approach. And I'll speak specifically for Ann Arbor and why it's different.
You know, in Ann Arbor, our police officers have to have college credits.
Our supervisors have to have a degree.
We just hired two new police officers with a degree at the University of Michigan. We're bringing in police officers that are trained differently from the way they were in the past. Not police officers that were armed with a nightstick and perhap that had a leather glove with lead. Those days are gone.
Now we have police officers that have equipment, but the equipment alone is not good enough for our response. When we have people calling us because they you utilize 911, none of us can stop people from calling 911. It is an accepted standard that people will call when they see an emergency. So now what you have is a police officer that has additional training outside the norm.
Training that allows for them to deal with a mental health crisis. training that allows for a person to have training in crisis inter intervention training and advanced crisis training.
Training that allows for that police officer to respond in concert with a clinician in order to make sure that first the situation is safe. But that police officer is trained in such a way that they don't overreact.
that police officer is trained to make sure that they are not creating unnecessary arrest because they see that this person is having a mental crisis.
That's the benefit of having these trained police officers have with them someone a clinician that will come and actually work in tandem to provide the individual the appropriate resources.
Sometimes a police officer is need to help escort that person which happens on a regular basis to get them a petition to get them help to talk to their family members. That culmination of support and collaboration is really good. And a byproduct of that that is not often stated, sometimes the clinicians help the police officers because you have a social worker in the car with the police officer all day and police officers need help too. And so those police those clinicians help to make the policing profession better as they respond.
My next question was, County Community Mental Health, otherwise known as CH, already operates a similar co-response model countywide through the crew. What specific adjustments, if any, were made to fit this unit to Ann Arbor Police Department's particular operations, call value, and geography rather than simply replicating the county model as is.
There is an author that I highly respect and he wrote a book and the book is called It Always Begins with Leadership.
Now with that book, this always begins with leadership. So let's talk about what makes us different. First of all, the leadership started with our leader having the employees take a look at co-response models throughout the country. Sent staff members to evaluate how we can be a great steward of the co-response model. And for me as a police chief here, I have worked and helped to stand up two different co-response models in two other agencies.
So with that experience coming, we have started to begin to learn where we can go. We've had an opportunity to listen to people in the community. We've had an opportunity to go to Dr. Garza Edwin's professor Edwards class and listen to young students present to us and explain what they want to see and what they don't want to see in a co-response model. We've met with many community members to understand and we've also evaluated what our community mental health what our crew unit co-response unit is doing here in county and we've taken a look at specifically how they're responding. So traveling across the country and taking a look at what we're doing here is a start for knowing that we're looking at things differently. So what'll happen as we set this path forward is not something I can tell you today what we're going to do but similar to many things that we've done here as it relates to a shared vision or all the other things that you've seen us prescribe to is we're taking and collecting the information. We're synthesizing that information and then we're going to use the community at large to help us develop a response. The community at large will help us develop uniforms.
Those that have been impacted by the law enforcement profession, they will come on board and they will help us design what it looks like in order for us to respond. We will listen to the community and we will develop a response that we believe is best suited with respect to how we're going to address this. That is what we will do here. Our next question is, will A2 reach be dispatched through a standard 911 and Arbor Police Department dispatch, a separate CH line, or something new? And how will residents and other first responders know which option to use when a situation could go either way? Well, just as we are working in concert with Sprout, that is something that we will develop. The good thing about that is we have already started having conversations with our sheriff who's also looking at a response in order to have co-responders work in tandem with their dispatch. our fire chief and I and the and the collective fire leaders and police officers are speaking to our dispatchers in order to have what we call a unified leadership team that will put in place processes, practices and protocol that establishes routine calls and audited ordinary calls that will determine the appropriate response.
In other words, we are working with our dispatchers to determine what that response will look like. It is not likely that that response from the dispatchers will go directly um or response from the community members will go directly to our police officers, but rather it be funneled through a dispatch so that we can collect data so that we know the information and we can use what we call automatic vehicle locator which is a map that shows exactly where police officers are at so that we can get our co-response faster based on geographic information to where we see the greatest concerns. We will use technology, but we do not have the exact way we're going to do it right now, but we are working in concert to make sure that we address these concerns. And those are my questions.
>> Thank you, Council Member Harrison.
>> Thank you, Chief.
>> You're welcome.
Thank you, mayor. All right. So, uh I want to talk to you about why I'm asking um you to approve CA21.
Um back in March, I sponsored the resolution directing our city administrator to sit down with County Community Mental Health and find out if this partnership made sense. That conversation is part of why we have a real agreement in front of us tonight.
>> Why? Because in 2021, prior to me being on council, um that body directed unarmed crisis response for noncriminal calls, not all calls, noncriminal ones. It's a important distinction so that people in the community understand the reason why we need another alternative. We need an alternate response, alternative response in addition to unarmed crisis response so that we're so that we're not leaving people behind. When I took my seat in 2022, I inherited the promise that promise and a hard truth underneath it.
A lot of what our community actually wants help with someone taking food because they're hungry, for example. However, trespassing, sleeping outside, and panhandling are under our own charter criminal, which means unarmed response exactly as council designed it legally cannot answer those calls alone. So, I asked CH for the numbers on our own residents.
Last year, they filled in nearly 4,800 crisis requests requests involving Ann Arbor residents. Over 2,000 separate responses. 555 came through the Annal Police Department alone.
1692 Ann Arbor residents are CH clients today. This is happening every week with or without us. And when CH engages, it works. 73% of their outreach encounters were resolved without hospitalization.
A 100% resulted in followup. Their teams average over 14 contacts per person compared to about two in pair counties.
That's not a crisis response, that's a relationship.
Co-response brings that same depth into moments when there's also a safety concern. a CIT trained officer and a licensed clinician writing together so the person in front of them gets both.
I also asked staff directly, how do we make sure this doesn't turn into into criminalizing someone's mental mental illness or their poverty?
Their answer was that restorative care that restorative care will be the standard operational norm. I intend to hold them to that. Washington's own co-response pilot backs this up. Across more than 1300 encounters, the arrest rate was about 5% and nearly all of those happened while backing up a violent call, not doing the behavioral health work itself.
Tonight, you have both halves of what this community asked for. Sprout for the calls that are truly noncriminal and A2 reach for the calls where risk and need show up together. That is not a smaller vision. It's one that reaches everyone.
This took time because it needed to be built on sustainable funding, not one-time money that would already be gone. That's for the unarm crisis response.
What you're voting on tonight is built to last and built not to criminalize people, the people it is meant to help.
I'm asking for you all to vote yes tonight. Thank you.
>> Further discussion, Council Member Watson.
Too too often, police interactions with community members, especially black men like me, escalate when mental health issues are involved. My dad, Dr. George Watson Jr., was part of a co-response program with Ann Arbor police when he was a psychologist in training back in the late '7s. So, the idea of mental health professionals accompanying police officers in this city isn't new, but the commitment and funding fell by the wayside over the years.
I'm glad that this response is being implemented by AAPD and is informed by current best practices. The bottom line is that this program will save lives.
I can't tell you when. I can't tell you how. But by deescalating situations or preventing an officer involved shooting or by diverting people into into treatment, I know that this will prevent um that this will prevent unnecessary deaths. I'm grateful to Chief Anderson and the mental health professionals that will implement the A2 Reach program, and I'm glad to be supporting it here today.
Further discussion.
All in favor? All opposed. It is approved.
We now come to a set of public hearings.
No, we don't. Oh, yes, we do.
>> Yes. Thank you. We now come to a set of public hearings. 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 specific 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 has expired. When your time has expired, please conclude your remarks and seed the floor. Public hearing number one, an ordinance to amend chapter 55 zoning resoning of.28 acres from R1D single family dwelling district to R2A two family dwelling district 225 and 235 South Wagner Road. Is there anyone in house who would like to speak at this public hearing?
Is there anyone online who would like to speak at this public hearing?
Mayor, I don't see any callers online for this hearing.
Seeing no one, this public hearing is closed. Public hearing number two, an ordinance to amend chapter 55, zoning reszoning of 1.2 2 acres from M1 Limited Industrial District to C2B business service district 3785 Varsity Road. Is there anyone in house who would like to speak at this public hearing?
I don't know if I can uh if it's possible to get the the presentation I had.
>> I'm afraid not, sir. No, I No, I didn't.
Well, well, it it is a transitional uh use. Um the uh it's got u the the there's businesses north of it that they could walk to. There's retail to the south. We're going to put in a pathway and we think it's a we think it's a fine addition to uh a smaller apartment building to to uh add to um Ann Arbor stock of affordable housing.
And uh you know any questions you have uh I'll I'll be willing to take them.
>> If there are questions when it comes up when when the the matter comes up that's the that's when that's when they would be asked.
>> Oh this is the public hearing.
>> That's Yep.
>> Then I'll go sit at home.
>> All good. Thank you. Is there is there anyone else in in in the house who would like to speak at this public hearing?
Is there anyone online who'd like to speak at this public hearing?
>> Mayor, I don't have any callers online for this hearing.
Seeing no one, this public hearing is closed. Public hearing number three, an ordinance to amend the zoning map of chapter 55, unified development code, reszoning 1.2 2 acres from R4C multif family dwelling district to R4E multif family dwelling with conditions near North 700 North Maple Street, pardon me, North Main Street. Is there anyone in house who would like to speak at this public hearing?
Is there anyone online who would like to speak at this public hearing?
Mayor, >> I don't have any callers online for this hearing.
Seeing no one, this public hearing is closed. Public hearing number four, an ordinance to amend section 5.18 and 5.37 of chapter 55, unified development code of title 5 of the code of the city of Ann Arbor. Is there anyone in house who would like to speak at this public hearing?
Thank you, Mayor Taylor. Sorry, just to be sure I'm at the right hearing. This is on the height exception. UDC 518.4.
>> It is. Thank you. I don't have an agenda. Okay.
>> Ken Garber, second W. Um, planning commission took this up almost a year ago because of a proportionality problem.
Five downtown projects have used the sustainability height exception to go 30% higher. Not a single for-profit developer has taken advantage of the affordable housing exception.
Um, it's obvious why. For a marginal upfront cost difference of a few hundred,000, a high-rise developer can go all electric, which they should be doing anyway. Um, and raise their building value by tens of millions of dollars because of the extra height.
Um, so this was intended to be an incentive, but it's become a loophole.
Um, we should be asking a lot more for that extra height. The ordinance in front of you tonight does not. Um, it does require electrification, not just electrification ready, but we were already getting that. Um, the solar part is tiny. Consider 625 church, 20 stories, five more than the limit. Has roof space for 170 kW of solar.
that solar meets only 5% of the electric demand of this 300,000 square foot building. Um whether on the roof or payment in lie uh the solar contribution doesn't amount to much. I calculate that this building produces almost 2400 metric tons of CO2 equivalent emissions a year mostly scope 2 emissions. Um that doesn't count embedded emissions which may even double that amount. Um so the required cylinder doesn't isn't making much of an impact um on the sustainability of this building. For that extra 30% height construction should be net zero energy in compliance with appendix CC of the state energy code um as the A20 plan stipulates. at the very least apply strict building com um standards on performance uh like cities of Austin like Austin, Texas do this already for the extra height.
Uh if a developer chooses not to comply, they can go with this is the affordable housing 15% of units to get the 30% extra height.
Uh but as it stands uh this ordinance actually sets back I think our com our sustainability goals. I know that OSI has promised a stronger ordinance uh sometime in the future. Um but we in the climate community uh like to say the time for action is not tomorrow, it's yesterday.
Um and uh I realize that um our voice isn't necessarily being heard as loud and clear as it should be these days uh both nationally and on every level, but please send these revisions back to staff and come up with a height exception um that actually furthers our sustainability and affordability goals.
Thank you.
>> Thank you. Is there anyone else in house who'd like to speak at this public hearing?
Hi. Uh, I wanted to echo what Ken was saying. This was a >> ma'am, please be quiet.
>> Uh, this was a topic that we discussed in the renters's commission, which is that the uh affordability section of this uh exception to height limit was something which wasn't being um utilized effectively because of the sustainability loophole. um we would like to see affordability take front and center with uh height exceptions. So um that is something that I would like to see discussed more in the next public hearing or in the next revision. Thank you.
>> Thank you.
>> Anybody else? Can I go?
>> Yeah.
>> Hello Ann Arbor.
I think by now if we have learned one thing about Ann Arbor City Council is that they are very good about appearances but you you scrape a little bit nothing.
Do you know how long they've been talking about sustainability uh carbon footprint cleanup? Oh, we want to have zero this and that. Nothing.
It's just talk. It's just talk. Ann Arbor. They don't care about the fact that you can't afford to live here because you can see for the past 20 years they've pushed everyone out and pulled their Epstein class billionaires in. You can see they don't give a because they haven't done a thing to get you your minimum wage a little bit up.
They've done none of it. They've done nothing to clean up the gin dioxin contamination. What do they do? Do >> cosmetics. Ma'am, can you please relate to the item on the agenda?
>> Kick them out and get people.
>> Please relate to the item on the agenda.
>> That was the item on the agenda. No housing for you guys, but they keep pumping money to Israel.
>> Is there anyone else in house who'd like to speak at this public hearing?
Is there anyone online who would like to speak at this public hearing?
Mayor, I don't have any callers online for this hearing.
Seeing no one, this public hearing is closed. Public hearing number five, an ordinance to amend chapter 40, trees and other vegetation of title 3, parks and public grounds of the Ann Arbor City Code. Is there anyone in house who would like to speak at this public hearing?
Is there anyone online who would like to speak at this public hearing?
>> Mayor, I don't have any callers online for this hearing.
[clears throat] Seeing no one, this public hearing is closed. Public hearing number six, resolution to approve the issuance of bonds by the Ann Arbor Housing Commission for Ann Arbor Housing Development Corporation, Dr. Willis C.
Patterson project. Is there anyone in house who would like to speak at this public hearing?
>> Jeremy Haley, Ipsy Township, seeing how there is going to be some bond history of bonds, is there going to be publicly made the amoriza amortization table that the payback of the bonds going to be made? Because bond is just another word for loan and the yield is just another word for interest rate.
So are the is the public going to be made aware of the amorization schedule of the bond and the payback of the bond?
That's it. Thank you.
Is there anyone else in house would like to speak at this public hearing?
Is there anyone online who would like to speak at this public hearing?
Mayor, I don't have any callers online for this hearing.
Seeing no one, this public hearing is closed. Let's take a short break.
Perhaps we reconvene at 9:40.
We are back after a short break.
A we have before us the regular meeting minutes of July 6, 2026. I have a motion please to approve these minutes. Moved by council member Watson, seconded by council member Harrison. Discussion of the minutes.
All in favor? All opposed? The minutes are approved. B1, an ordinance to amend chapter 55, zoning reszoning of 28 acres from R1D single family dwelling district to R2A two family dwelling district 225 and 235 South Wagner Road. Moved by council member Dish, seconded by council member Aman. Discussion, please of B1.
Council member Dish.
>> We've already spoken to this in a previous meeting, so I will just say Whoops. very quickly that this resoning supports a project by the Ann Arbor Community Land Trust and this project meets the community's strong desire for what is sometimes called gentle densification and that's creating new housing opportunity that fits the style of existing neighborhoods while allowing more homes per parcel.
So the reasoning is necessary because uh otherwise a duplex would not be able to be built on each parcel and that's what the goal of CLT is. It's appropriate because the comp plan foresees gentle density here and many residents regard gentle density as advantageous for the community as does this council.
Reszoning is also warranted here because the site is conveniently located near transit and commercial services as well as near the recreational amenity of Dolph nature area. So I plan to support it. I am excited to see this before us and I look forward to hearing how you all vote.
>> Further discussion.
>> All in favor? All opposed. It is approved.
B2. An ordinance to amend chapter 55 zoning reszoning of 1.2 acres from M1 Limited Industrial District to C2B business Service District 3785 Varsity Drive. Moved by Council Member Dish.
Second by Council Member Malik.
Discussion please of B2. Council member Dish.
I would like to move a substitute motion from that which council entertained on first reading. That substitute motion is already included in tonight's packet and it asks council to approve a petition to reszone this vacant uh 1.26 acre parcel from M1 Limited Industrial District to C2B business service district with conditions. The statement of conditions is that short-term rentals as defined in the UDC are prohibited.
This statement is incorporated into the zoning of the property, shall be binding on and beneficial to the developer in the city, runs with the property, which means that it binds any new property owner in case of a future change of ownership, and it is voluntary voluntarily offered by the developer.
>> Is there a second? Seconded by council member, is the substitute friendly to the body?
It's friendly. Further discussion of the main motion as amended.
All in favor? All oppose. It is approved. B3. Ordinance to amend the zoning map of chapter 55 unified development code resoning of 1.2 acres from R4C multif family dwelling district to R4E multif family dwelling with conditions near North 700 North Main Street. Moved by council member Dish.
Second by council member Redina.
discussion please of B3. Council member Dish.
>> As we spoke last time, uh this site 700 North Main has already been approved for a project to build 21 town homes at $1 million each. The developer petitions for a reasonzoning because they have decided instead to build 64 one-bedroom rental apartments to 800 square ft.
Uh resoning makes it possible to accomplish considerably more units in a building of about the same size as that previously approved site plan. That was for a fivestory residential building.
This will be a sixstory residential building with almost three times the units and the price of those units will be considerably more expens uh accessible, excuse me, accessible than the earlier site plan. Um, the reasonzoning is advantageous. Uh, it swaps high-end housing for accessible housing. It's in a walkable location in close proximity to parks, grocery stores, bus service, restaurants, and many other services. Uh, and we did, I want to note, receive a communication from the North Central Neighborhood Association, uh, which is in this area of the city, and they welcome the project, but they have expressed a concern that the resoning sets a precedent for other developers to receive permission for 75- ft tall buildings. And I want to repeat something that was stated at the planning commission meeting but worth restating and that is that precedent is not included in the various conditions that uh that the planning commission and council are legally required to consider when deciding on a reasoning which is to say that precedent doesn't weigh. So that just because we do this one we do not need to do more. And moreover, it is very rare that any zoning re reszoning request is so much like a preceding one that you would be forced to replicate the preceding decision. So we're good. Um so uh yeah, that's I think all I need to say.
>> Further discussion of the main motion as amended.
Uh I'm excited by the uh by this change.
Obviously, we are looking for more housing and at uh lower price points and this uh this resoning will help affect that. I'd also like to observe that I of course have too received the communication from the neighborhood organization with respect to the potential presidential value of this parcel. They observe that the uh that this particular uh building is going to be at a extremely different grade than the balance of the neighborhood and that as a count of that grade the 75 ft uh limit is uh contextually uh appropriate but what might not be otherwise uh and in their view would not be otherwise contextually appropriate for uh other parcels deep within the neighborhood. And I totally see that.
Further discussion.
All in favor? All opposed? It is approved. B3, an ordinance to amend sections 5.18 and 5.37 of chapter 55 unified development. This four.
>> You said B3.
>> I'm sorry. B4. Thank you. B4. An ordinance to amend section 5.18 and 5.37 of chapter 55 unified development code of title five of the code of the city of Ann Arbor. Uh moved by council member Cornell, seconded by council member eye.
Discussion please of B4 council Malik. Oh, sorry. Council member Dish.
We're both blondes. Um I was thinking that there might be some thought from the other end of the table, but um since not.
Uh all right, Mr. Garber has already explained this very well and that is that uh height exceptions were introduced in 2023 and they allow height limits in all districts to be increased so building heights to be increased by 30% when the building either has an affordable or a sustainable component and the affordable component is currently defined as 15% of the units or a payment in Lu that will remain the The sustainability component is currently defined as a building being electric ready plus having solar panels covering 60% of the building footprint area on a site.
Members of the community have expressed concern, and so have members of council, that the cost to developers of the affordability component, 15% uh affordable units, was disproportionately expensive by comparison to the sustainability component, electric ready, and 60% solar panel coverage on the top of a building. Um this disproportionality does seem to have borne out by the fact that um since these two options have existed, five developers have chosen sustainable um and only one affordable.
And as Mr. Garber noted um in fact those who chose sustainable actually were willing to do more than the height exception actually asked for. They were willing to go all electric, not just electric ready. Now these amendments to the sustainability component drop the electric ready language to require all electric development.
Uh they retain the idea that the develop the requirement that the development includes solar panels equal to at least 60% of the building's footprint area.
But it would permit a fee in loo for a portion of this solar collector service area. This is an improvement that is needed now because we are seeing taller, narrower buildings in downtown where there may not be enough roof space to accommodate 60% solar panel coverage in addition to the mechanicals that need to go up there. So this is not a complete fix for the disproportionality problem.
It is a fix for the feasibility of the sustainability option in downtown Infill. And we want downtown Infill. And we want it to be all uh we want it to be all electric. We want it to have solar panels and we want it to be able to pay if it can't afford the full complement of solar panels. Does this get us to net zero? No, it does not yet. But that does not mean that this is where we are stopping. So, I know that we need to do everything yesterday because I too had to spend three days inside last week, but we will >> council further discussion.
>> Uh, sorry, council member Malik.
>> That's okay. Uh, I'll be brief since uh, Council Member Dish said much of what I was probably planning to say, but um, I think this item tonight is a meaningful step in the right direction uh, on the long road towards achieving uh, our housing and sustainability goals. Uh, that being said, I agree with Council Member Dish. Um, I'm looking forward to exploring ways to strengthen it where possible in the future uh, to further incentivize desired outcomes related to our A20 plan. Thank you. Further discussion. Council member Aman.
>> This might be a question uh for staff, but I'm just trying to understand what problem this solves. And I appreciated the explanation from council member Dish, but I'm still it doesn't sound like this change is going to result in seeing anything different because it sounds like most of the developments that are coming forward under this, they're disproportionately taking the sustainability um option and they're going all electric already. So, could someone help me understand what issue this solves and I think it could either be council member dish or staff >> there's not currently a provision for a payment in lie so if we have a downtown infill development that can't fit 60% solar on its roof it cannot meet the terms of the sustainability option so it would not be able to have the 30% height exception which we might want in a building downtown. Also um and rather than give up the sustainability option and not get the 30% uh we want to give them a way to benefit the city by a payment in lu that can support the expansion of solar panel or geothermal projects in the city.
>> Great.
>> Thanks for asking.
Thank you.
>> Further discussion.
All in favor? All opposed? It is approved. B5, an ordinance to amend chapter 40, trees and other vegetation of title three, parks and public grounds of the Ann Arbor City Code. Moved by council member Watson, seconded by council member Malik. Discussion, please, at B5.
Council Watson.
So, um, yes, we had a staff introduction on this in first reading, but just so the public knows, uh, the proposed ordinance will prevent the occurrence and spread of oakwilt disease by prohibiting pruning and trimming oak trees, whether on private or public land, between March 1st and December 1st. The ordinance mandates the prompt treatment via a pruning sealant or latex paint of any wounds to oak trees caused by pruning, trimming, nonweatherreated accident or construction. It also requires prompt chipping of oak trees and branches and sealing, grinding, or removing oak trees stumps. Residents who suspect outofseason oak trimming can report violations via the A2 Fixit app or by calling community standards.
Complaints will then be assigned to the urban and community forester for species verification and coordination with a community standards officer for review and enforcement.
Um the idea for this ordinance came from a W 2 constituent and um the ordinance was prepared by public services staff, the city forester and the attorney's office. Other cities in Michigan have similar ordinances including Trevor City. And if enacted, this ordinance will be accompanied by a communications plan starting with the companies that do a majority of the trimming in the city, including DDE contractors. The ordinance was amended at first reading to clarify that residents will not be responsible for oaks damaged by weather, which was never staff's intent. Weather damage often affects branches higher off the ground and can be prohibitively expensive for homeowners to address. I'm grateful to public services manager, uh, Mr. Matthews and our forester, Mr. Jacob, for their help in crafting this ordinance and I hope you'll support it.
>> Further discussion.
All in favor? All opposed? It is approved.
DC1 resolution to direct the city attorney to prepare an ordinance granting right to tenants to establish or participate in a tenant organization.
Moved by council member Roina, second by council member Harrison. Discussion, please of DC1.
Council member Medina.
Uh, thank you, Mayor. Uh, I want to start tonight by personally apologizing to the advocates who expressed their frustration this evening with communication and process. Uh, as I did earlier today by email. Uh this resolution tonight is an effort to expedite and further prioritize this issue and it was intended to be responsive to the request that we received a few weeks ago calling for us to do just that. I take responsibility for not communicating this resolution directly to with the tenants advocates when it was introduced. It came together quickly last week when it became apparent that this ordinance was still not finalized. Uh since progress of this ordinance has in fact been raised at the renters's commission meetings over the last several months, it would have been raised with the renters commission during their scheduled meeting last Thursday, the same time that it was added to this agenda. But the renters commission did not meet in July.
Nevertheless, I should have communicated this development with you all directly, and I am sorry that I didn't. That said, as someone who has led on every piece, >> ma'am, >> as someone who has led on every piece of meaningful tenants rights legislation that has passed through this body for 6 years with strong support from Mayor Taylor and every single one of my colleagues sitting at this table. It is also a bit disappointing to hear many of the people I have worked alongside suddenly suggesting that these efforts are just politics as we approach an election. Especially when just a few months ago, one of the one of tonight's speakers shared that quote, "Over the past few years, we have been told that Ann Arbor stands out as a model for tenants in cities like Kalamazoo, Detroit, Lancing, and for what legislation can achieve. I remain committed to keeping that reputation.
This is why I'm proud to support this resolution tonight. The right to organize is fundamental to ensuring that tenants have a meaningful voice in the safety, quality, and condition of their homes throughout our community. Tenants often face a significant power imbalance when forced to engage individually with their landlords or property management companies, particularly in a housing market where housing scarcity and a relatable related affordability crisis limit alternative options.
[clears throat and cough] When tenants can communicate, organize, and advocate collectively, they are better positioned to identify shared concerns, propose solutions, and negotiate constructively with their housing provider. After months of meeting with tenants advocates, discussions at renters's commission, including their endorsement of this very concept, and many conversations between council members and staff, it was my hope that we may have an ordinance ready for introduction before now. Unfortunately, because of the many competing responsibilities of our hardworking city attorneys, including fielding similar requests to this one from all 11 of us to introduce other legislation, a draft has not been ready. As has been noted, our rules grant the city administrator up to 30 days to review the ordinance once that we have a final draft for introduction.
This period of time can be frustrating, not just from community community members, but for council members as well. But it's an important step to allow the administrator and staff charged with enforcing the ordinance to evaluate and weigh in on resource needs, implementation concerns, and to ask questions as they prepare for enforcement. That said, I would again request that staff consider ways to streamline this process, including through closer collaboration between the city attorney and city administrator's offices to prevent long delays in the future. The deadline in this resolution provides direction to have an ordinance ready by for introduction at the September 8th council meeting. This effectively communicates this this to the city attorney that this draft which is nearing completion needs to be in our hands and the hands of the administrator within days to start the clock with enough time to allow the 30-day review period to be completed before September 8th. Simultaneous to this review period, that means the sponsors will have the final legislation, the final version of the legislation to continue ongoing engagement with impacted community members and organizations. that doesn't start on October 8th or on September 8th. [snorts] Finally, I do want to take a moment to express my gratitude to the renters commission, to the Ann Arbor Tenants Union, to the Hiron Valley DSA, and to renters throughout the community for their work to develop and support this proposed ordinance and for their continued advocacy. Despite the frustrations expressed this evening, your partnership has been critically important in protecting our city's tenants throughout the years. I urge my colleagues to support this resolution.
>> Further discussion?
Uh, I'd like to thank council member Adena uh and and uh the other co-sponsors uh and the renters's commission and the advocates uh who have come to speak before us today and who have uh spoken to the renters commission and communicated to us uh individually and as a group throughout the course of this conversation. As this council has demonstrated time and time again, we do understand [sighs and gasps] that there is a power imbalance. there is an asymmetry between tenants uh and uh and landlords and that tenants require uh the protection of a city that cares for them as do we. Uh this will mean this resolution and and hopefully others that uh that follow it.
Ensuring that we do have the full set of tenants rights that we are able to accomplish at the municipal level will help balance the playing field, will help uh make uh our housing crisis a little less crisisful for those in Ann Arbor who uh uh who who rent. And so I'm excited about this moving forward. I'm excited about the passage of the ordinance ultimately and the good work that it will do for the residents of our community. So thanks up and down the line. Further discussion. Council member Brier.
>> I simply would like to be added as a co-sponsor.
Thank you.
>> Further discussion. All in favor? All opposed? It's approved. D2. Resolution to direct the Thank you. Good lord. DC2.
Resolution to direct the city attorney to prepare a moratorum on short-term rentals and direct staff to review the city's short-term rental regulations.
Moved by council member Cornell.
Seconded by council member Rodina discussion please of DC2 council member Cornell.
>> Um I obviously have comments on this but I'd like to um introduce a very minor um amendment to this. Um Miss Bodri has it. Um the the um change to this um currently the first resolve clause says resolved that the city council directs the city attorney to prepare and bring forth an ordinance imposing a six-month moratorum on the issuance of new short-term rental licenses.
Where that currently ends, um the modification would to change the semicolon to a comma and add while allowing renewal licenses for existing and compliant short-term rentals. to address some of the concerns we heard.
>> Is there a second? Seconded by Council Member Aman. That's friendly to the body. Friendly the body. Council member Cornell, you still have the floor. Um the main motion is amended.
>> Okay. Thank you very much.
Way too many windows open. Okay. Um, so a 2025 Michigan State University study recognizes that Ann Arbor has adopted one of the most comprehensive STR regulatory frameworks in the state requiring all operators to obtain a license and prohibiting non-owner occupied STRs in most residential zones.
These measures reflect growing concerns that unchecked SDR expansion reduces the availability of long-term rental housing and increases challenges to housing affordability.
The resolution tonight directs the city attorney's office to come back to council with recommendations on how to implement a moratorum to allow time for staff to address issues that have caused the number of unlicensed STRs to skyrocket. It does not impose a moratorum at this time. This resolution asks city staff to identify issues that would need to be addressed by staff during such a moratorum. Do we make owner occupied STRs exempt? Do we require all STRs to have the same uh inspections as all rentals? How do we handle repeat illegal STRs? Should they have increasing fines? Should they not be allowed to obtain a permit at all? Um should we set a number of um a set number, a limit on the number of STR licenses? Um this is something that um we should all have staff recommendations on as we consider what change if any to ordinances uh to this ordinance the STR ordinance that we want to make um without um while mitigating the risk of unintended consequences. In my opinion, this is why we need a moratorum to pump the brakes and implement modifications um that we've learned through experience that would be helpful. And to that end, I want to thank staff, especially Mr. Riser, who I first began speaking to about how we might improve our STR ordinance back in January, and Miss Licia Turner Tolbert in the building department, who's provided information over the past few months regarding the challenges and opportunities her department sees for informing this intermediate step and our next steps, too. This is a a way for us to improve on ex an existing ordinance and make meaningful change that is both datadriven and informed. and I hope my colleagues will join me in um accepting and supporting staff's recommendations here.
>> Further discussion, Council Member Adino.
>> Uh thank you, Mayor Taylor, and thank you, Council Member Cornell, for your leadership on this. I know through our conversations over the last several weeks, um that this is something you've been really digging into and working really hard on to make sure that we're providing the right direction to staff so we get the outcome that we're hoping back again. Um, you know, I will say I am fully hopeful that we're going to get back some strong recommendations on further regulation. I have very serious concerns about continuing proliferation of of short-term rentals throughout the community. Um, particularly since we know just from conversations with with our our staff doing enforcement, how many are currently in the process of being cited for for operating without any license whatsoever, without any permit whatsoever. Um, and so making sure that we continue to strengthen our enforcement mechanisms, making sure that our staff have the tools to to crack down. Um, but also to make sure that those that are operating our in our community um are following strict guidelines to make sure that the people who are using them are safe and they're staying in quality in quality places.
Um, you know, I in particular, you know, we talked about this at a previous vote where we rejected a PUD that came to us, uh, that would have had a number of short-term rentals in it. I think many of us have also expressed concerns about kind of these multi-unit STRs that are operating really as ghost hotels throughout communities, um, that are less well- reggulated and less safe. And so, um, so I think, uh, this is a great step in that direction. Um, finally, I just do want to address some comments we heard at the beginning of the meeting because every time we talk about short-term rentals from this body, I think there's a little bit of historical revisionism that takes place about about the the regulations we currently have in place. Um, council did previously um outlaw short-term rentals in in residential zones throughout the community. Um, they are non-owner occupied, I apologize, non-owner occupied short-term rentals throughout the community. um in residential zones.
Um the change that was made was a very minor change that impacted fewer than 200 units throughout the community. I think fewer than 150 units throughout the community um because they were already operating and being permitted by the city. That created kind of a legal loophole in our ability to shut them down. We had permitted them. We had allowed them despite the fact that we didn't have a short-term rental permit.
they had applied for and were granted rental permits and rental licenses here in the city. Um, shutting them down against the advice of our attorneys would have subjected the city to a lawsuit and would have amounted in a taking from those folks who were already operating a business that the city had deemed legal in some way. Um, so so this idea that we suddenly rolled back short-term rentals that short-term rental uh bans that were enacted simply isn't true. Um, we we made sure we were following the advice of our attorneys, making sure that we were shielding the city from a lawsuit we would have lost and made sure that we could protect the ordinance that actually banned these in residential zones so that the entire thing wouldn't be struck down by a court. So, I just want to clarify what is actually currently law here in the city.
>> Further discussion?
>> Uh, Council Malikish. [laughter] >> Thank you, Mayor. Uh, and thanks to my colleagues and staff who brought this resolution tonight. Um, and to members of the community who spoke out on the topic. Uh, I appreciate the conversation and hearing the wide array of perspectives. Uh, I believe the proposed pause on new permits uh, and proposed review of current rules is a reasonable compromise. future tweaks uh or updates to our current rules to continue allowing well-run short-term rentals while exploring ways to further prevent unregistered rentals and strengthen enforcement is important and something that benefits everybody. Uh this resolution directs and prioritizes just that and I look forward to supporting it tonight. Thank you, >> Council Member Dish.
>> Okay. Thank you. Um, I really do appreciate the work that's gone into developing this resolution, and I appreciate the intent behind it. Several years of experience with STRs has shown us that there are a variety of problems with the current STR ordinance, or at least with the way it's operating in our community.
But a moratorum is a strong and broad action, and I do not think the arguments and evidence in this resolution fully warrant the city administrator preparing and the city council considering a moratorum.
This resolution and our discussion both recognize that there are differences between the concerns that arise from principal residents STRs and those that arise from non-principal residents, sometimes called commercial STRs. The city now has enough experience with both types to see that they both generate problems, but I believe that the problems are distinct and call for different remedies.
There exist problems with principal residents STRs that this resolution does a great job of spelling out. They range from nuisances to significant health threats to rule bending that some people use to operate would amount to commercial STRs in residential neighborhoods. But I do not fully understand how a moratorum on issuing new STR licenses, not renewals but new for new STRs will provide a remedy for the most significant problems associated with principal residents STRs. That's one hesitation. I think my bigger hesitation is that the resolution directs the city administrator come back to council with proposed amendments to the city STR ordinance and to the UDC.
Uh I'm not sure when in this process that's supposed to happen. Is it supposed to be as at the same time as the city administrator explores the feasibility of a moratorum or would that would this study happen only after a moratorum went into in effect into effect? My concern is really that the comp plan implementation explicitly includes reconsidering the STR ordinance um and calls out the need to address conflicts between expanding the land area available to non-principal resident STRs and the city's affordability goals.
Um that work is beginning. Planning staff expects to issue a contract for the UDC right sometime this fall. I don't see how the city administrator could and the city attorney could implement this resolution without asking planning staff and planning commission to take on some of the work that is currently slated to be performed as part of the UDC rewrite. My top priority for planning staff and CPC right now on top of the numerous site plan reviews and project analyses that keep them very busy is issuing a contract for the UDC write rewrite so that the implementation process for the comp plan can get underway and the more we ask them to do the more we will delay that really really important step forward. So that is those are my two concerns. Council member Watson.
>> In my W 2 listening sessions, constituents have often come up to me with concerns about unregul regulated Airbnbs in Ann Arbor. In a March 2025 budget work session, I asked questions about whether the city could do proactive enforcement of the existing ban on non-owner occupied short-term rentals and residential zones. Uh, but I was told that staff would eventually like to move toward proactive enforcement, but that it is difficult due to existing resource constraints. I hope this resolution can lead to a better understanding of what it would take to enforce regulations on SN STRs.
Uh, I I'll support it tonight and I would like to add myself as a co-sponsor.
>> Further discussion.
Uh, I'm going to of course be supporting the the resolution, appreciating uh the workflow uh cautions from uh from council member Dish. Uh I also want to express appreciation for folks who have come to us and talked about you know their entrepreneurship in the city um uh and their good faith engagement with the uh you know the the lensure structures that we have in place right now. um you know that uh that work is uh that that that work has benefit um it has benefit for them of course as you know small business owners it also has work uh has benefit for folks that do come into the city because uh you know that is an interest group that exists um for my part um in the balance the interest group that that I will uh uh prioritize in this context is uh our long-term residents um STRs uh understand and they do have benefit for visitors and for uh entrepreneur local entrepreneurs who are engaging with them. Uh they do take up rental units, they do take up units that could and would and uh I uh expect should be used for long-term residents.
Um, and so while there is a uh there is a benefit and this is a a balancing um for my part, I'm putting my chips on long-term residents and uh look forward to the result of the uh the resolution's implementation. Further discussion.
Roll call vote, please. Starting with Council Member Harrison.
>> Council member Harrison.
Council member Harrison.
>> Yes.
>> Council member Watson.
>> Yes.
>> Council Malik.
>> Yes.
>> Council Redina.
>> Yes.
>> Council Gazi Edwin. Absent. Mayor Taylor.
>> Yes.
>> Council Ay, >> yes.
>> Council Aman, >> yes.
>> Council Briggs, absent. Council Cornell, >> yes.
>> Council Dish, >> no.
>> Motion carries. DS1 resolution to approve the 3785 Varsity Drive area plan. Moved by Council Member Rena, seconded by Council [clears throat] Member Aman. Discussion, please of DS1.
All in favor?
All opposed? It is approved. DS2 resolution to approve the Near North area plan 700 North Main Street. Moved by Council Member Dish, seconded by Council Member Adena. Discussion, please of DS2.
All in favor? All opposed? It's approved DS3 resolution approving the issuance of bonds by the Ann Arbor Housing Commission for Ann Arbor Housing Development Corporation, Dr. Willis C.
Patterson project. Moved by Council Member Cornell, second by Council Member. Discussion, please of DS3.
Council member Watson.
>> Uh to answer the uh commenter's question, yes, the amortization schedule will be made public as is required for a public offering. City Council's approval of this resolution is limited to the public approval required under federal tax law. It does not constitute approval of the bonds as city debt, does not pledge city funds or credit to repayment of the bonds, and does not make the city responsible for the project financing.
The bonds will not be general general obligations of the city, will not pledge the city's faith and credit for taxing power, and will not obligate the city to pay debt service. The bonds are to be paid back with rent generated by the pro by the property. Um and the bonds the bond proceeds are expected to be loaned to the Ann Arbor Housing Development Corporation and used to defay the cost of purchasing um 114 unit multif family residential rental housing property known as Avia Lofts.
And uh this is a good mechanism because the project is intended to preserve and provide long-term low and moderate income rental housing subject to applicable affordability restrictions.
So this keeps affordable housing um on the market, keep preserves existing um housing and and will uh likely lower the the rent and provide a new property for the Ann Arbor Housing Commission. So there's a lot to um look forward to with this uh offering offering.
Further discussion.
Uh I'm delighted that this is brought forward and that we are uh continuing to work uh in support of our affordable housing needs. I will observe that these revenue bonds are not being used for the purpose of construction. Uh revenue bonds particularly with respect to affordable housing sites come nowhere close to satisfying the cost of construction. This is not a new construction project. This is a purchase of an existing structure and the renovation of that structure. The purchase and rehab is much less expensive than initial full construction. Um and so uh this uh use of bonds as a a portion of the capital stack. um is is complete and uh is completely proper and appropriate and uh and wise because it enables the planning commission to buy that existing structure and to use it for um long-term permanent affordable housing and I'm excited to be part of it. So, thank you housing commission. Further discussion.
All in favor? All opposed? It is approved.
Do we have the pleasure of a close session today, Miss Raab?
>> Yes, we do. Uh, mayor, I request that council go into close session pursuant to section 8H of the open meetings act to discuss written attorney client privileged communication dated July 17th, 26. May I have a motion please to go into close session on that basis?
Moved by council member Malign by council member Dish.
Discussion. Roll call please. Starting with council member Harrison.
>> Yes.
>> Council member Harrison.
>> Yes. [laughter] >> Council Watson.
>> Yes.
>> Council Malik.
>> Yes.
>> Council Medina.
>> Yes.
>> Council Gazi Edwin. Absent. Mayor Taylor.
>> Yes.
>> Coun.
>> Yes.
>> Council Aman.
>> Yes.
>> Councilor Briggs absent. Council Cornell.
>> Yes.
>> Council Dish.
>> Yes.
>> Motion carries.
>> We're in close session.
Miss Ra, are you ready?
Are >> back in open session? We have before us the clerk's report of communications, petitions, and referrals. May I have a motion, please, to May I have a motion, please, to go back to open session. I can't just do it by fiat. [laughter] Moved by council member Cornell, second by councilor.
Discussion. All in favor opposed. We're back in open session now before I was so properly interrupted. Uh we have before us the clerk's report of communications petitions and referrals. May I have a motion please to approve the clerk's report? Moved by council dish. Second by council member Watson. Discussion.
All in favor? Opposed? Is approved. We have communications today from our city attorney.
>> We do. On behalf of our wonderful clerk, I wanted to remind everyone that 9 days of early voting begins this Saturday, July 25th. There are four early voting sites, including City Hall from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. and Westgate, Malletz Creek, and Traverwood libraries from 11:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. And early voting continues through Sunday, August 2nd.
More information can be found at a2gov.org/early voting.
>> Thank you.
We now come to public comment reserve time overflow. Uh to refresh your recollection, speakers have three minutes in which to speak. So please pay close attention to the time. Our clerk of the time clock will notify you when 30 seconds are remaining and when your time is expired. When your time has expired, please conclude your remarks and seed the floor. Our next speaker is Nicholas Nightwine.
>> [applause] >> Mr. Mayor, Mr. Administrator, council members, thank you very much for hearing us out, hearing me out tonight. Um, just quick brief on contract negotiations.
I'm been here for about 22 years, the city of Manber. Um, 23 years ago when I started here, I was very proud to work for the city of Ann Arbor. I have been since I've been here, but the I have to admit the last few years it's been pretty pretty hard to say I'm a proud city worker. I still come to work every day. I do my job to the best of my ability. I'm proud of the job I do. I'm from the water resource, sorry, the water resource recovery facility. Name's changed recently. Um, and we take our job very seriously out there. Uh the problems that we've had recently is when some research the city of Chelsea, they're starting pay at 28% higher than our businesses. Um an employee at the city of Chelsea after they worked 3 years there is making more than I have after 22 years here at the city of Ann Arbor. I don't understand why that is and I wish it would change.
U we're essential workers during the pandemic. We came to work every day. We did our job. We did it proudly. Uh the wildfires we've had recently, I know there were warnings for people not to be outside and be cautious outside. We can't do that. Our job is mostly outside. Um we do it. We do it proudly and we do it with minimal complaining.
Everybody's going to complain a little bit. Um a few years back I was the union president of the Chief Stewart Ferrari years ago. And a couple contracts ago we made a deal with the human resources department for premium pay for night shift. Uh Robin Wilkerson who was the HR director at the time. We had worked out a deal with her for $150 an hour which was comparable to Yucka who's the closest wastewater plant for us. When we were getting ready to sign, Robin had her issues and resigned from the city of Ann Arbor. And then for some reason human resources after that would not honor honor pay. This is a deal we made in negotiations. It was for anou so that the other unions basically couldn't say me too, we want two. it was just going to be anou for the two water plants.
That went away. It was an honor from the city of Ann Arbor. Um I've been bringing it up for numerous times since with other administrators and we can prove that we agreed to it in emails, but now we seem to be getting push back on it at all in the uh negotiations.
Um another thing that's really bothering us is the fact that seem to be going after our full-time union official. Uh, we have, I think, 250 or so members. And when that job is done right, it's it's not a 40-hour week job. It's not a 50-hour week job. You have members constantly calling you, constantly needing help. And we need a full-time union official. He's not a $100,000 employee. He's not an $80,000 employee.
He makes $73,000 a year. I'm sure his full compensation is probably about 130.
But we gave up a personal day back in the 80s for that position. when you do the math to get that personal bay back, which it's probably around $200,000.
>> Thank you.
>> Thank you.
>> Our next speaker is Vince Caruso.
>> Mr. Russo online.
>> Mr. Cruso is not online.
>> Our next speaker is Julie Lebaniano.
Julie Labiano.
Is Miss Labiano online?
>> She's also not online.
>> Our next speaker is Jeremy Haley.
Jeremy Haley, FC Township. Um, I moved from Walkabout Creek and Dexter and they had a program with Misha that started in 1996 that lasted for 30 years and last year of that program at Walkabout Creek is this year. I was told in 2020 by Walkabout Creek that they did not accept the extension of the Misha program for the 99-year program.
So that's why in 2024 I took the opportunity to get out and buy the house that I did.
Cuz what I'm telling you is that while I was there, I got to know Ben. He's a young man who has Down syndrome who lived there with his mother. He's going to have to move now or looking to move because of they're ending the program.
Next to me lived Annie and Jacob. And Jacob has autism.
And the other side of me was a male group home that had Michael, Nathan, and Byron in it. at the other end had a girls group home.
All these people have to move now because Walkabout Creek did not accept or say we want to extend the 99year program.
Why I'm telling you this all those people have to move now and they have to move somewhere. is obviously not [clears throat] going to be in Dexter and the 315. You said Misha's going to has a 25-year program. I'm telling you this, they're not going to extend it past the 25 year. They're going to abolish it and go for full market rate.
And there going to be people in those units that are going to be like Ben, Nathan, Michael, Byron, Annie, and Jacob that are going to have to find new places to move when that happens. And that is going to happen because they're not going to extend it because they're going to see that they can get full market rate at that point. And I wish you would consider that these programs sounds nice and these extensions for so long and options to go longer sounds awesome, but you have to look in the end in the reality of things. Are they actually really going to take it? And that's why I'm telling you this. The options of them taking it are really low when they have options to make more money in the end. And it puts people like the people I got to know in Walkabout Creek out of place to live. And I got to say in the end, Ben [snorts] was awesome. He loved Patrick sees and his favorite movie was Roadhouse. And he could tell you every movie Patrick sees was in. He was awesome. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Our next speaker is David Caster.
City Council, my name is David Casser.
I'm a water treatment plant operator and currently the president of Ask Me Local 369. I'm not here to pick a fight, to ask you to listen to a reality that is becoming impossible to ignore.
Yesterday, I received a message from an administrative staff member right here at city hall. She didn't write to ask for luxury. She wrote because she she wrote because she's drowning.
She's actively looking for a second job just to survive. And she's not alone.
Right now, we have dedicated city employees who are forced to work second and third jobs. We have members who have resorted to selling their own plasma just to make ends meet. Our members haven't seen a raise since 2024. And when we talk about a 2 or 3% raise, roughly 50 cents per hour, is that actually a lifeline for someone who is already underwater?
The administration claims their market research shows Annabber pays competitively, but with respect, that doesn't make any sense because Ipsellani, Westland, and Chelsea are offering starting pay 20 to 30% higher than ours. It's a tough pill to swallow that a third year higher in Chelsea currently makes more money than a dedicated 16-year veteran right here in Ann Arbor. Excuse me, 20-year veteran.
22, [clears throat] sorry, we're losing our best talent because they simply cannot afford to stay.
The administration often claims that holding the line on our pay is fiscally responsible. I respectfully challenge that. Allowing years of negative real wage growth isn't a fiscal responsibility. It's actually fis fiscally irresponsible.
When you allow wages to fall so far behind inflation and the market, it demands a correction. The hidden cost of high turnover, constant recruiting, endless retraining, and lost institutional knowledge ultimately cost taxpayers far more than paying a competitive wage in the first place.
When I bring these crises to you, my goal is collaboration. That is why it's so discouraging to see the budget and labor committee push to eliminate my position and cap our union officer hours.
Silencing our voice doesn't solve the financial crisis our members face. It just removes your ability to hear about it and weakens our collective ability to fix it. I'm asking you to please look closely at the data and listen to the people doing the work. We have brought forward solutions to the bargaining table, some with zero upfront costs, and I am simply asking you to actually judge them on their merits.
Please, let's recognize the true cost of turnover, make the necessary correction, and pay this workforce what they're actually worth. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Our next speaker is Mojan Savio.
Hello, Ann Arbor. Um, we heard from many, many people tonight, most of whom are telling us they have no confidence in this city council. We just heard from city workers whose contract has not been renewed for 6 months.
>> [snorts] >> There is no confidence in people of this city council. They do not work for people of Ann Arbor, workers, middle class. They work for those who pay for their reelection campaigns. This is now quite obvious to all of us. And they protect Israel. And they have for the past 20 years that I've been coming here, 24 years, [snorts] they have passed every opportunity to take one simple step to say no more American tax dollars for the Zionist Nazi genocidal state of Israel.
They have had multiple occasions to do it. They've never done it. What it tells all of us is that we have no confidence in Ann Arbor City Council, no confidence in our government, in the government of the United States. Because what they do is they use our tax dollars and send that money to a genocidal state like Israel that uses those billions of dollars to massacre people of Palestine, [snorts] people of Lebanon, people of Iran. These people come to the office promising no more wars and they expand genocide after genocide.
This is the people these guys represent.
War mongers, billionaires, [clears throat] epste people. This is who is their client. Not us, not the workers, not those who have to sell their plasma to pay the the price that that is to live in Ann Arbor. I want to ask an arborites to come out in August. Vote these guys out. You do have a structure to vote.
Come out. Vote them out. They don't speak for you and me. They are wararm mongers. They work to enable Israel to murder us. Israel has killed hundreds and thousands of children. They stand here and take a minute of silence for someone who lived their life and died.
But will they stand one second for a child that died in Palestine? Will they stand one second to acknowledge the genocide that they are supporting with their total silence? Will they stand up and admit that the United States bombed a kindergarten, a children's school, and killed 200 children? THIS IS AN EXPANDING GENOCIDE BEING PAID by American tax dollars where people do not want to pay it. I don't know one American who wants to pay for the murder of Iranian children.
>> I don't know what American who wants to [applause] pay for the murder of Palestinian children.
>> Thank you.
>> Vote them out.
>> Thank you. Our next speaker is Paul Safer.
So, uh, I have different prepared remarks. I I would like to speak on the union contract as well. I would really appreciate it if we could get a contract that is better than the one that came before it. I would really appreciate it if it didn't have a poison pill in it.
And I think you know what I'm talking about. Um, you know, I if if like me like showing how unreasonable and foolish I am would help us get that contract.
Like I could save you some work. Like I'm willing to do it and I'm very good at it.
Like whatever it takes. Like I don't know.
I know that I've not been effective coming up here to talk to you guys. Like I can I can understand that. Um but like I don't know what else to do. Like I'm trying to stay in my home community where my family is, where my kid grew up.
It's important to me like and I I mean it's it's wild to come here and have [laughter] like you unanimously vote without discussion to have a weaponized flying robot.
Like that is not the Ann Arbor that I remember. That is that is just wild.
Like please promise me that you are going to discuss it when you get the lethal version. Like somebody say something like I don't know that's it. And we've been here a long time. Have a good night.
>> Thank you. Our next speaker is Blaine Coleman.
Okay, you can start the clock.
[clears throat] I'm talking to you, the Ann Arbor City Council.
Israel is the genocide state.
Everybody knows it.
Israel killed 73,000 people and every single one of them has a story.
Israel killed 73,000 people with your US tax dollars and every minute of that killing. We were in front of the city council asking you for a resolution that says we are against military aid to Israel.
And every minute of that time, you were stonewalling the resolution, doing everything in your power to not vote on it. So, we've got 73,000 dead Palestinians. Plus, we have thousands of dead Lebanese, which your tax dollars helped Israel kill. Plus, we have thousands of dead Iranians, which your tax dollars helped Israel kill.
Your mayor, Christopher Taylor, publicly read a prayer for the state of Israel.
For the state of Israel.
Israel is a Nazi state through and through. Look what they do. You see it on your phones every day.
your fellow council member Jen er who's sitting here. She took campaign money from old friends of the Israel Defense Forces.
No wonder you've been stonewalling the resolution against military aid to Israel. No wonder all these years.
No wonder you're heartless enough to still refuse to pay your own city workers enough to live in Ann Arbor. in this city with you to let their kids sit next to your kids in school. That's how heartless you are. No wonder you deliver a $300 million tax break to a giant developer who bankrolls your campaigns and yet somehow you don't have money to pay your own city workers who are taking care of your water and your everything.
But things are changing. 103 US Congress members just voted in the last week against military aid to Israel.
How is it that you're so far behind them?
Want to stay in office, approve this resolution, and pay your city workers enough to actually live in this city.
Don't make them sell their plasma.
Don't make them moonlight for Door Dash delivering food to you.
That's it. Thank you. May I have a motion to adjurnn, please? Moved by Council Member Cornell, second by Council Member Harrison. Discussion. All in favor? Opposed? We're adjourned.
Related Videos
4:12
Political Science
COP27- Jagan Chapagain, Secretary General of the IFRC
AfDBGroup
104 views•2022-11-10
5:08
Political Science
The ABC spends a day on the campaign trail with WA Opposition leader Shane Love | ABC News
abcnewsaustralia
2K views•2025-02-24
10:10
Political Science
S. Jaishankar Says India Facing Challenges of Terrorism Amid Rising Security Concerns
newsxlive
678 views•2025-05-09
1:00:00
Political Science
Mayor addresses decrease in violent crime in 2024
WMAR2news
237 views•2025-01-07
1:45:09
Political Science
Strengthening Human Rights Through Youth Engagement
NationalEndowmentforDemocracy
306 views•2019-12-10
0:56
Political Science
Jeremy Corbyn speaking at event organised by the independent group of Bradford
Overseastimesnews
286 views•2026-04-22
23:06
Political Science
LIVE: Trump to Non-Citizens, "Register in 30 Days or Get Deported" | Firstpost America | N18G
Firstpost
3K views•2025-04-14
25:16
Political Science
Day 809 - Saudi prince tells ToI Israel needs to start being 'normal'
TimesofIsrael
4K views•2025-12-23
Trending
5:07
Philosophy
One Must Imagine Sisyphus Happy
vlogbrothers
61K views•2026-07-21
25:15
Business
Future of Taylor Farms
maighstirtarot5385
11K views•2026-07-21
12:30
Business
The Downfall of OnePlus!
techwiser
65K views•2026-07-21
23:12
Engineering
My Friend Locked Up The Engine On His K-Swapped Bug...
boostedboiz
128K views•2026-07-21