(Editor's note: This editorial has been revised to correct a date error.)
Every time you pay to park in downtown Ann Arbor, you are contributing to more than the cost of operating the parking system. You are helping to keep the city budget afloat.
For the past six years, the city has balanced its general fund by dipping into the parking system - which is managed by the Downtown Development Authority - to the tune of $2 million a year.
Now, the city and DDA are negotiating an agreement that would extend this practice for another decade. As much as we question the city’s continued over-reliance on parking revenue to sustain other basic services, we are particularly opposed to a portion of the proposed agreement that would take City Council off the hook for decisions on raising parking rates.
As it is now, the DDA board sets parking rates, which go into effect unless City Council vetoes them. In an update to City Council last month, DDA officials reported that the new agreement could “shield’’ council from the political ramifications of raising parking rates by giving the DDA final say on that issue.
If the DDA were setting rates solely for the purpose of supporting the parking system, we could see the rationale for that.
But if City Council is going to create pressure to keep parking revenue high enough to support other city services, including police and fire, then final decision-making ought to remain with council, and not be conveniently passed off on the DDA board, an unelected body whose mission already is being muddied by this whole arrangement.
A bit of history is in order here. The DDA, which has been around since the early 1980s, exists to fund public investments that strengthen downtown and attract new private investment. In 1992, the DDA took over the city’s neglected parking structures, and we’d be the first to say that in the years since, the DDA has done a commendable job of managing the parking system.
In 2005, as it became clear that the city was facing growing budget challenges, the relationship between City Council and the DDA began to shift. The DDA agreed to pay $1 million a year in “rent” on the city-owned parking facilities it oversaw. In exchange, the city agreed to continue to provide downtown beat cops. This agreement was for 10 years, with the understanding that the city could request the rent money early if it wanted to.
Even that arrangement remained consistent with the DDA’s mission, since the beat cops provided a direct benefit to downtown. But after five years of deepening budget woes, the downtown beat cops had been eliminated and the city had burned through the entire $10 million, leading it to ask for another $2 million payment from the parking fund for this fiscal year, using the money to avoid deep layoffs of police and firefighters.
Clearly, the city has general fund expenses it can’t afford, and rather than address the underlying structural problems in its budget, particularly employee benefit costs, it has leaned heavily on the DDA and parking revenue.
That has put the DDA in the awkward position of being a revenue generator for the city, rather than an entity whose sole mission is the vitality of downtown. The city’s reliance on parking revenue also seems even less advisable at a time when the DDA itself is operating at a deficit, not just in its parking fund, but in all of its activities. Granted, that deficit is a temporary one caused by the DDA’s upfront costs for construction of the new underground parking structure on Fifth Avenue, and at least the DDA has a clearly defined, long-term plan for restoring itself to a healthy fiscal position.
Our concerns aren't lessened by the pattern of appointments that Mayor John Hieftje has made to the DDA board. Like some other observers, we see a DDA that has become less independent and more under the influence of City Council. That influence is further extended by the fact that the mayor and City Council Member Sandi Smith both also sit on the DDA board.
The reduced autonomy and the mission creep that the DDA is experiencing is disconcerting and ultimately, we fear, not in the best interest of downtown. City Council should have a collaborative relationship with the DDA, but not undue influence. It would be preferable for the city manager to serve on the DDA board, rather than the mayor, and for other City Council members not to serve on the DDA.
Meanwhile, if City Council is determined to use the parking fund as a tool for balancing its budget, then let’s at least keep the accountability for that in the hands of elected council members. We oppose any effort to shelter council from the ramifications of future parking rate increases when it is their fiscal strategies that are pressuring rates upward.
(Editor’s note: Bob Guenzel, who serves as a community representative on our Editorial Board, did not participate in the deliberations on this editorial because he sits on the DDA board.)
Comments
Killroy
Tue, Dec 14, 2010 : 8:10 a.m.
If you know where to look and you don't mind walking 2-3 blocks from your car to Main street, there is plenty of free parking available; even between 6-8 pm on a weekend! It is great to be a townie.
Mick52
Mon, Dec 6, 2010 : 11:36 p.m.
Good article. What is the most disgusting to me is the city's raiding of DDA money for purposes other than what they were created for. So businesses in downtown are being robbed of possible improvements. I love this: "The DDA agreed to pay $1 million a year in rent on the city-owned parking facilities it oversaw. In exchange, the city agreed to continue to provide downtown beat cops." So DDA has to pay extra for police services? Maybe the DDA money should be restricted like the art fund is. I would prefer the art fund or the greenbelt funds were stolen for city essentials and the million dollar fountain was not finished. If the city needs money they should sell development rights on out of city property. Parking fees, gas tax, tolls, etc are the "hidden taxes" that are often increased because people will not agree to property tax increases or other tax increases that require a vote. @johnnya2 you are right that some of the restaurants are unique but like DonBee, I rarely go downtown for anything but my haircut because they validate my parking. The restaurants just are not that much better to put up with the hassle, lack and high cost of parking downtown. My favorite restaurants all provide free parking. DDA officials should be elected and independent of City Council as should be its budget.
peg dash fab
Mon, Dec 6, 2010 : 1:34 p.m.
Parking is metered to assure the availability of parking. If the rate is too low (or if parking tickets aren't issued), there will be few parking spaces available. If too high, most spaces will be available. Look around Downtown; which is it? DonBee parks for free most places in the county because there is little competition for parking spaces there.
DonBee
Sun, Dec 5, 2010 : 9:47 p.m.
@A2johnny - I am pleased you have money to go to dinner out. That puts you way ahead of me. I agree several restaurants downtown are unique, as is the State Theater. I don't need restaurants, as the downturn has taught me. I what I need, clothes, food, things to maintain my home, etc. are all found in areas with plenty of free parking. Don't get me wrong, I don't hate downtown, but I also don't go out of my way anymore to get downtown. I can find what I need outside the Downtown parking area. Many others who are watching their pennies are probably doing the same thing. I want a vital Ann Arbor, we all need it. I am not bashing Ann Arbor, rather pointing out that people have choices if they want them.
AlphaAlpha
Sun, Dec 5, 2010 : 3:52 p.m.
bunnyabbot makes excellent sense. Our downtown's vitality is at risk with excessive parking fees. If anything, lower rates should be the goal. DonBee is correct: by far, most businesses in the county offer free parking. A small change in consumer attitudes could put our downtown on a path toward the same fate as so many other MI cities...
bruceae
Sun, Dec 5, 2010 : 1:14 p.m.
I agree that there are many unique places in Downtown Ann Arbor but nothing that is sold in any of these places is something that I have to have. We usually head downtown on Friday or Saturday evening to have dinner at Real Seafood, The Earle, BD's, etc. but if I can't find a free parking spot in a surface lot we go somewhere else that has parking. What I don't understand is that the DDA is supposed to represent the downtown business people and promote more spending in the town down area. They of all people should be against raising parking rates and driving people away. At what point did these people become "lap dogs" for the city council and change their mission to generating money for the city general fund? We all know that the council could give a crap less about businesses that are trying to expand or build in Ann Arbor but if I owned a business downtown I would be concerned that the group I was paying into to represent me seems to have lost it's way.
Stephen Landes
Sun, Dec 5, 2010 : 12:21 p.m.
I hope that when city council elections come around again the editors at A2.com will remember this opinion piece and the comments on many other articles are refuse to endorse incumbents for council seats. No incumbents...period. William F. Buckley Jr. once said that he would rather be governed by the first 100 names in the Boston phone directory than by the entire faculty of Harvard University. Well, I would rather be governed by the fifty first names in the Ann Arbor phone book than any city of Ann Arbor incumbent politician regardless of their office (I'm including the school board).
johnnya2
Sun, Dec 5, 2010 : 11:56 a.m.
@don bee You are completely wrong. The entire downtown is made up primarily of unique businesses. In fact, I bet if you walked on Main Street or State Street most businesses could not be found in the townships. In fact, the opposite is true. I can go to Lowes in Pittsfield or Scio. Target has two locations in Pittsfield as does Meijer. I bet you can not go to a comic book store in the townships. I can downtown. I bet you can not go to a great movie theater with concerts and events that plays indie and non-formulaic movies like you can at the Michigan Theater or State. You can not get Italian food that competes with Palio or Gratzi at the likes of Olive Garden or Macaroni Grill. Tell em where you go for seafood that compares with Real Seafood? Joe's Crab Shack? How about heading to a gay bar? Nope, not gonna happen in the township. I bet you can not find authentic Indian cuisine in the townships, but I pass them on Main Street. As I pass businesses downtown the thing that makes it worthwhile is they are unique. Quite honestly I bet there as many of us who avoid the cookie cutter so wwe can go to businesses that are different and offer unique products. If I want generic crap that could be suburban Atlanta or suburban Seattle, I can head to the townships.
Leah Gunn
Sun, Dec 5, 2010 : 11:46 a.m.
Get your facts straight. The DDA took over management of the parking system in 1992. The meters were added in 2002.
bunnyabbot
Sun, Dec 5, 2010 : 11:40 a.m.
parking should be non-profit, rates should cover the actual expenses of operating, upkeep and funding future parking needs and that only. It shouldn't be a bottomless bucket that the city dips into when they need to cover their butts or fund willy nilly non necessities.
say it plain
Sun, Dec 5, 2010 : 11:07 a.m.
ah, @aareader, maybe it is the anti-teaparty vibe inherent to Ann Arbor lol that allows these same folks who do not care what the citizens may want or need to get re-elected time after time! It helps that the 'mainstream' journalism in town rarely calls them on it. This editorial was a nice if small step in that direction.
aareader
Sun, Dec 5, 2010 : 10:04 a.m.
Good editorial. I have read about a phrase some were in history that may sum up what you have stated. I think it was "No taxation without representation"
DonBee
Sun, Dec 5, 2010 : 9:31 a.m.
Since we live in a township, we have to choose which city to visit for meals, and other activities. Frankly parking in Ann Arbor moves it down our list of locations to travel to. I can park for free in most of the rest of the county. As time has gone on, I travel less and less to downtown. I no longer venture downtown to window shop. I doubt I am alone. I hope Ann Arbor remembers there is competition for consumer spending in the county. The Ark and a few other businesses are unique, but most are not.
Huron74
Sun, Dec 5, 2010 : 7:51 a.m.
This "independent board" style of responsibility-dodging is reminiscent of the way the state legislature would appoint ex-lawmakers to a pay board who would then recommend pay raises which would go into effect automatically unless they voted not to take them. Which they never did. Bottom line: The legislators got the money and the pay board got all the heat. This putting the independent DDA in charge of parking rates is just a dodge by the city council to avoid taking responsibility for the proper budgeting and funding of city operations. Thanks for calling them on it.