DDA News 2

Versagi Voice
	Contact us Home Page Ongoing Discussions	DDA News 2

DDA, CITCOM budget tiff eases
DDA and CITCOM budget discussions crossed paths this month and barely avoided crossing swords.

City Hall watchers will recall that CITCOM sent back the DDA's proposed budget. Addressing that rejection during its 20 May meeting, the DDA came close to resubmitting the same budget and stressing that the document reflected their best judgment after long deliberations. Had the DDA vote been taken early in this meeting, I was certain the unchanged budget would have been returned, accompanied by a request for a joint meeting to resolve differences.

The DDA mood changed when Pat Capello asked Interim City Manager Don Johnson what options CITCOM would have if the same budget was returned, other than to accept it or reject it again. Johnson said CITCOM could pass a resolution demanding that DDA would need to seek CITCOM approval on every expenditure, line item by line item. Visibly stunned, the board failed to ask Johnson under what authority such a resolution could be justified, but they listened more attentively to Planning Director Tim Thwing's suggestions about reaching a compromise. Consensus was reached that to throw the budget back would exacerbate the already contentious relationship between the two city bodies.

Without going into detail, the DDA and CITCOM differ about the importance of installing security cameras in the city's parking structures. More specifically, the debate is about how the cost of that proposed project impacts the existing financial relationships between them. DDA Chairman Kevin Kalczynski has provided a statement summarizing the DDA's action.

Coincidentally, CITCOM had its first working session on the budget in the same chamber seats just vacated by the DDA, and the agency was praised by Commissioner Andrzejak for cooperating with the city commission.

DDA Chairman Kevin Kalcynski's Statement

Background:
For several years, the DDA has paid the full debt service on the bonds that were issued to pay for the 5th and Lafayette Parking Structure totaling approximately $600,000 despite the fact that the DDA's contractual obligation is to pay approximately half of that amount. The DDA's voluntary assumption of that debt has provided substantial benefit to the City in that it allows the City to save funds that would otherwise have to come from the parking fund or other City sources.

Each year, the City Commission is required to approve the DDA's budget. This year, the DDA proposed a budget that provided for the DDA paying only the amount it was contractually obligated to pay on the debt service (approximately $300,000) and shifting the other $300,000 to a line item for installing security cameras in two of the parking decks. The City Commission considered the DDA's proposed budget and passed a resolution directing the DDA to reconsider its proposed budget.

Action at yesterday's meeting:
In line with the City Commission's resolution, the DDA reconsidered its proposed budget and, after vigorous debate, passed a resolution changing the originally-proposed budget by restoring the full funding for the debt service on the 5th and Lafayette Parking Deck by shifting the funding slated for the security cameras back to the debt service line item. The resolution includes a provision recommending to the City Commission that the Administration be directed to explore ways to fund the installation of the security cameras as well as a request for a joint meeting between the DDA and City Commission. In effect, this action fills in what would otherwise be a $300,000 hole in the City's budget and allows the DDA and City to jointly explore ways to fund the proposed security cameras for two of the City's parking decks. -- 21 May 2009

§ How DDAs fare in a recession
Downtown Development Authorities in Michigan, of which there are hundreds, have made a positive impact on their cities. One paragraph in a well-written Detroit Free Press review summarizes:

Royal Oak's authority built a courthouse and two parking decks. In Commerce Township and Warren, the authorities built new municipal centers. The Dearborn Heights authority built a police station and remodeled a firehouse. Southfield's authority operates the Millennium Center, the former Northland Theater.

Now, "Dozens of authorities across Michigan are facing tough times," and Oakland County Deputy Executive, Bob Daddow says some of them have bonds they will be paying off over 20 or 30 years. "But if [property] values fall far enough, they could risk default." Royal Oak's city commission recently rejected its DDA's proposed budget and sent it back for review and revision.

In Rochester
City Council, DDA work to reduce friction
DDA members took offense when newly elected council members "made inquiries concerning accounting matters, spending, and forecasting." Rochester's DDA "has the second largest budget in the city, following the police budget," reports The Oakland Press. Also a bone of contention is the "loss of $520,000 to the DDA in tax revenue in 2012 when millages expire." City Council and the DDA are holding joint sessions to address the confusion about money flow, to improve transparency, and to reduce the negativity in their relationship.

Why DDA terminated its participation in the Main Street Oakland program
Context:
The Main Street Oakland program is designed to assist and guide cities to preserve their historic character as they redevelop their downtown. Royal Oak was one of three Oakland County communities selected in 2000 to participate. To outsiders following developments it became obvious, after two or three years, that the four volunteer committees mandated by the program and established by the DDA were not performing effectively. Further, the Downtown Manager at the time essentially became the secretary for the four committees and had less time to attract and help downtown businesses.

Nine years later, at its September meeting, DDA decided to terminate its participation with Main Street Oakland County. In a memo summarizing why the decision was made, Executive Director Tim Thwing made it clear that there is no criticism of the program itself or of Main Street Oakland County. Instead, as I read it, this was a case where the "fit" did not prove mutually satisfactory. From Thwing's memo:

The Board members present during the August 20th discussion indicated they were satisfied with the DDA's organizational structure and, in general, the DDA's overall operation and direction.
It was also recognized that in terms of participation there was very little interest from Board Members/Volunteers to increase participation at various Main Street activities/workshops and/or training seminars. There has been sparse participation or interest in the Training Workshops/Annual Awards Meeting and/or Annual Joint Promotional Event, etc. There has been no interest in participating in the awards program or the National Main Street Conference.
The Board Members also discussed the basic differences between the DDA's and Main Street Oakland County's management philosophy and historic preservation focus, concluding the two organizations had different approaches to the revitalization of downtowns in these two areas.
Finally, there was a brief discussion about the demands on staff time. The County has gone from annual reporting to requiring "quarterly" submittals of downtown statistics. These statistical submittals require the information on the attached sheet. Staff has continuously attended various Oakland Count Main Street workshops and Manager's meetings.

The memo concluded with two resolutions which were approved in September: The first, to thank Oakland County, Main Street Oakland County. and the National Trust for Historic Preservation for their efforts and assistance; The second, to activate the required "Termination or Cancellation of Agreement."

17 Sep 08
In an uncharacteristic burst of activity, the Downtown Development Authority reversed its long-time practice of denying financial assistance to local events sponsored by non-profit civic groups or others.

It was enjoyable watching this group, which historically moves at a slow pace*, come to grips with the rush of decisions needed to take advantage of a Disney World-focused series of "Family Fun" promotional activities recommended by several downtown organizations, including the Chamber of Commerce. Spokesmen Bob Murray and Alan Kroll made the pitch for $12,000. During the hour-and-a-half discussion, DDA Chair Kevin Kalczynski announced his shift from opposition to support and Shirley Smith Schneider and Ilene Hill opposed -- both citing the short time for consideration among their concerns.

Although the first vote seemed to approve the funds, the lack of a quorum for such votes invalidated the approval. When DDA member Pete Webster arrived, there was renewed discussion; the $12,000 request was reduced to $9,000; the second resolution was approved with one no-vote (which I couldn't identify). Kalczynski directed Downtown Manager Stephanie McIntyre to draft a formal policy for dealing with such requests.

The panel then addressed several routine items: Forwarding a suggested design for Valet Signs to CITCOM . . . Brick replacement . . . Sidewalk signs . . . Parking for downtown employees . . . Shrub replacement . . . Whether this or that parking structure is underutilized.

McIntyre summarized the generally favorable results of a Downtown Business Survey, which asked respondents, among other things, to rate the importance to them of named services the DDA currently provides. On a scale which specifies 8 for most important and 1 for least important, a tabulation shows: Parking, 5.9; Maintenance, 5.8; Safety, 5.8; Streetscape Improvements, 5.0; Marketing, 4.5; Lighting, 4.4; Special Events, 4.0; Business Assistance Programs, 3.5.

Quietly, after years of growing dissatisfaction dealing with Main Street Oakland County, the DDA terminated its relationship with that body. An added factor in the decision was the excessive paperwork burden imposed on staff. VersagiVoice was among those, for example, who were dismayed when former Downtown Manager Jerry Dettloff was redirected from his, successful, promotion of downtown to essentially become the secretary for the four Main Street-mandated committees.

* Comment: I don't think it's cause-and-effect, but a few VersagiVoice readers have speculated that the slowness of DDA deliberations may be one result of institutional civility which has somehow developed. It is true that, even when strong differences are being addressed, voices are almost never raised in DDA meetings. -- FJV

§ Please either post this on your website or send directly to the misinformed, anonymous “city hall watcher” that I was not let go by the DDA. Instead, after six years of contributing upwards of $150,000 in cash sponsorship to pay for the physical holiday magic parade, and much more in in-kind sponsorship from media and elsewhere, as well as devoting many unpaid hours to creating and implementing the plan, programs and events, I did not renew my contract after it was offered to me in May 2008. It is not “sour grapes” when I try to clarify something as simplistic as how emcees were chosen for a local cable access telecast – that was blown way out of proportion, it is called communication. Happy Holidays and Merry Christmas!-- Peggy Goodwin

Dec 2008
DDA Director Bill Harrison cited the complaint by Court Administrator Kevin Sutherland, "in a local blog," as part of his reporting that the energy-saving dim blue lights on downtown trees have met with universal disapproval.

It develops that the testing, ordering, and installation didn't work out as planned. Harrison explored the situation with the supplier and learned several pertinent facts: (1) Our lights are on 12-inch centers. More brightness is achieved with 4-inch centers. (2) There are lights (bulbs) whose shell lets more light through and in a different, slightly larger shape. (3) Stringing the lights differently and mixing white or green lights with the blue provide more brightness.

Because these energy-saving lights use almost no electricity -- the city thought its wattmeter was broken -- the city and the supplier will make appropriate changes next year. The initial cost for upgrading will be a bit more, but the negligible operating cost will generate rapid payback.

During this last 2008 meeting, the Downtown Development Authority:

Held off on paying an invoice dealing with the uncompleted arch to be erected between the Dobie Building and The Fifth.
Discussed the need for more communication between committee and board concerning the Holiday Parade, especially re sponsors. Notice was given that the city commission seems set to "hammer" the parade.
Agreed that the drop in parade sponsorship was caused by the combination of new Downtown Manager and new promotional company and the overall economy.
Revealed a general dissatisfaction with the performance of the new promotion company, especially an apparent lack of attention displayed by not appearing at DDA meetings. The former Marketing Manager appeared every month.
Learned that the city's Traffic Committee has rejected all three proposals for modifying Second Street in front of the Post Office.
Approved some previously selected streetscaping and put off until January the examination of "accelerated" streetscaping.

As the meeting ended, Harrison asked City Manager Hoover why he proposed for director a former commissioner who had taken positions against the DDA and had recently suggested that all current directors be replaced. Hoover maintained he was confident in the qualifications of his nominee. Harrison praised outgoing (term-limited) Ilene Hill.

Harrison made the point that, with Hill's departure, the DDA Board includes two restaurateurs but no retailer, and he said that the remaining vacant directorship should be filled with a retailer. -- 24 Dec 08

21 Jan 2009
DDA Chairman Kevin Kalczynski deftly wended his way through a mix of touchy and boring dialogue, including just a touch of debate here and there, during the DDA's longer-than-usual 21 January 2009 meeting. Agenda items ranged from budget discussion, through addressing CITCOM concerns re promotional events, to a first pass at reviewing DDA's focus and obligations, its raison d'etre.

Two action items came off-the-floor during Public Comment: First, two young techies asked for support in mounting an interactive non-conventional business-related event at the Royal Oak Music Theatre. In addition to having high-tech presentations and discussions, there will be a concert. The goal is to alert Royal Oakers to the potential for job-growth and attracting entrepreneurs to a vibrant city. Kalczynski referred the matter to the DDA's Business Marketing Committee and named a contact the young men might find helpful.

Second, Carol Hennessey made announcements re two parades, St. Patrick's and Memorial Day, and she asked that the parking meters down Washington be covered for the former. That parade will stage at Royal Oak Middle School and proceed down Washington to Lincoln. The DDA Chair referred the matter to the Consumers Marketing Committee.

Drawing on her past service as city commissioner, newly appointed DDA director Pat Capello actively participated in deliberations, beginning with the first agenda item. During his opening comments, Kalczynski said that the DDA will benefit from having a former commissioner and, as it happened, Capello was able two or three times to provide context based on past CITCOM deliberations. Just before adjournment, she addressed some misunderstanding of a comment she had made a couple of weeks ago during CITCOM's Public Comment.

A plaque honoring 12 years of DDA service was presented to Ilene Hill, the term-limited director whom Capello replaced. Accepting the honor, Hill repeated her plea to place more young people on city panels like the DDA and for the DDA to continue to focus on "safety, cleanliness, and parking."

CITCOM's request that DDA take another look at the cost of mounting events, specifically the Christmas Parade, generated a lot of dialogue. Actually, the overall issue of what DDA should and should not do re promotional events arose several times. Up for discussion were such items as the performance of the new public relations firm, Quill; the duties of the relatively new downtown manager, Stephanie McIntyre; the choice between events which merely promote downtown and those which generate a profit; whether current economic times should cause DDA to "scale down" or eliminate some events; the information gained during meetings with downtown businesses; and the like.

Also:

Kalczynski was re-elected Chair and Bill Harrison Vice Chair.
Minutes for October, November, and December were approved after a minor correction.
DDA will offer in-kind support to the use of the Trolley now being financially supported by a couple of nearby cities. City Manager Tom Hoover expressed the hope that next year the DDA will consider offering financial support. The bus apparently runs from Pleasant Ridge to Ferndale and Royal Oak.
From among 300-plus DDA members, only four or five agreed to be sponsors for the Holiday Parade. (The topic of sponsors and who should get them and the impact of the current economic downturn was brought up several times in several ways.)
The Department of Public Services will handle snow removal downtown for the rest of this year. Although a few of those merchants who had already paid for snow removal grumbled, there is no plan to return their payment. The argument is that they will benefit from having snow removed from the front of nearby locations whose owners have not paid.
There is uncertainty about the wisdom of paying Channel 2 for "streaming" the Christmas Parade, since it is hard to measure any benefit from the supposed tens of thousands of "hits" online.
As happens at CITCOM meetings, eyes glazed and some confusion was voiced when budget matters were discussed. There was even some misunderstanding of the amount and use of the money generated by 2-mil levy on downtown merchants.

Where appropriate, Kalczynski stressed that some of DDA's decisions are advisory, are recommendations to CITCOM.

DDA meeting summary draws comment.
Probably because Downtown Development Authority matters were in the news recently -- from tree lights, to the Holiday Parade emcee hassle, to volunteer appointments -- more VersagiVoice readers than usual reacted to last week's report out of the 21 January DDA meeting.

1) Retailer reports positive reaction toward meeting to explore downtown promotional events.
Laura Harrison relays a couple of suggestions.

To: Royal Oak DDA members

Re: Event Planning 2009/2010

Thank you for the opportunity to participate in the meeting of January 20^th regarding the downtown events. I consider any meeting where views can be expressed openly is a positive. I only wish the meeting could have been taped so that it could be viewed by anyone who could not make it to the meeting. But I do think meetings like this should be done, at least quarterly.

After mulling over the meeting, and as a former event planner not only for the downtown, but also for several other organizations I am or was involved with, I would like to make the following recommendations. I am also basing my suggestions on the Guttman Report commissioned by the former DROA and financially supported by the DDA and the city EDC Committee.

The Guttman Report recommended that Royal Oak's downtown establish two major events, and several non-majors. The major events are sponsored and take probably 10 to 12 months pre-work. The smaller events could be put together in 8 to 10 weeks.

The first major event is the Art Fair. Historically, the Art Fair downtown has been in existence since the 80s and was partnered, in the beginning, with Oak Apple Run. But, because of the weather, runners like cool and damp and art fairs don't do well under those conditions, the DROA separated them into two functions. The Art Fair became the Clay and Glass about 16/18 years ago. I recommend the Art Fair be expanded by adding another art venue on Main Street and also increase the scope of the food/restaurant participation and add more music. The Ann Arbor art fair has three separate art fairs at the same time.

Our second major event is Holiday Magic. One of the DDA members suggested to me a while back that maybe we should change the time of the parade and have it at night with lights. WOW! Look at Disney World parade! That would be a great twist and would make Royal Oak different. Add to that the suggestion made Tuesday by Gary Baglio of Five15 about adding music and a more complete light show. My head is just loaded with ideas on how to get the retailers, the restaurants, and the customers involved.

Finally, Luigi's idea about having a vintage car show before Dream Cruise Saturday is another winner and should be jumped on immediately. It should be called Vintage Week and Anne Kuffler of Ariana Gallery has wanted to do this for several years. his is not a major event but would definitely bring foot traffic.

Again, thank you for last Tuesday's meeting.-- Laura Harrison, proprietor, Lady Bug Shoppe

2) As always, there are pluses and minuses.
The noticeable tension between City Hall and the DDA was reflected in readers' comments about the performance of DDA as a body and of individuals on the panel. Generally, most of the directors are more liked than disliked. Generally, the split decision about the overall panel shows up quickly as praise or criticism of the volunteer directors or of city staff.

One comment: "Gossip, rumors, ill informed decisions" portrays the oft-encountered perception of a lack of transparency about DDA affairs.

3) Questions about DDA agenda and minutes.
Several VersagiVoice readers asked why three months of minutes had "piled up" and why the agenda for the January meeting had not been posted on the city's website. Planning Director Tim Thwing, who serves as DDA's Executive Director, replies:

The DDA switched to a paperless packet for the January 21, 2009, meeting and will continue in that fashion for future meetings, we will not be printing hard/paper copies. Obviously if someone comes to the office (Planning Department) and requests a hard/paper copy we can make copies for a fee.

The agenda/attachments and now the video for the January 21 meeting can be accessed on the City’s website, as will future meetings. We will also be adding a link from/to the DDA’s website so the public can access/view both the DDA agenda and materials from either website. It is setup slightly different than the City Commission’s agenda/materials in that you have to scroll down to view attachment/materials.

In terms of DDA minutes (all minutes) and their preparation it is simply of question of manpower/workload & priorities. The written minutes have been shortened to include only required items in an effort to speed turn around. I would point out that individuals interested in knowing what happened at a meeting can come to the meeting, watch it on cable (live &/or repeats) as well as video on the website. The opportunities for involvement and being informed are numerous but may not meet everyone’s desires.

Let me know if you have any other questions or need further clarification.

18 Feb 09
Only five of the nine voting members attended this meeting. Apparently because DDA rules require five votes to approve certain actions, a 4-1 vote was not enough to approve a resolution dealing with parking structure Security Camera Specifications and cost. The split vote was caused in part by disagreement over which costs, if any, should be borne by the DDA and which by the City.

Quietly but assertively chaired by vice-chair Bill Harrison, the directors:

approved a $500 funding request for the St. Patrick's Day Parade;
left open the decision concerning how flexible/restrictive the DDA's Event Support Policy should be, with some thought that flexibility and case-by-case judgment might make a formal policy unnecessary;
approved, with suggestions, Quill's recommendations re Holiday Magic sponsorship and media;
chose not to deal with a suggestion that DDA should develop a standard real estate sign format.

Directors Jim Domanski, Shirley Smith, and Pat Capello conducted most of the dialogue. During discussion about negotiating the Holliday Magic contracts, Domanski, Capello and Harrison pointed to their personal experiences with negotiating, to back up their specific suggestions to Quill.

Fellow-TV-observers of the meeting differed about Capello's motives for commenting or asking questions about almost every item on the agenda, but she was certainly on-focus when -- during the discussion about whether the City or the DDA should pay the Security Camera costs -- she asked which body would have the ultimate legal responsibility in the event of a legal action.

The nature of DDA's work requires attention to minor details (micromanaging), but at one point, Executive Director (and Planning Director) Tim Thwing chided, "You really don't have to spend more time on color [of aging bricks]."

VersagiVoice has previously praised DDA for its institutional civility. That good nature showed even as the tension rose just a bit when Interim City Manager Don Johnson suggested that DDA should pay for the Security Camer package, and Domanski rebutted, "We've been generous to the City."

18 Mar 09
Not nearly as intense, and never ugly, the sour mood was evident at this DDA meeting, making the institutional DDA/City Hall tension a bit more tangible.

As visible irritation, the sour mood showed most during the discussion about mounting security cameras in the city's parking structures. Last month, Interim City Manager Don Johnson and DDA Chairman Kevin Kalczynski disagreed about whether the City or the DDA should pay for the installation. It was expected that the decision would be made this month. Instead, DDA members were surprised to learn that the Police Department now contends it cannot integrate a third system into its present setup for monitoring the Courthouse and Schools.

After much discussion about this "surprise" development, Kalczynski vehemently requested (two fellow observes say "demanded") that the Interim Police Chief, the involved Police Sergeant, and, I gather, a civilian adviser attend the next DDA meeting to straighten out this mess. Johnson said something to the effect that "the sergeant can't say anything the chief wouldn't say" and contended there is no justification for more than one representative from the police department need attend. Somewhere in there, Jim Domanski chided that if the DDA holds special meetings about handing flower pots, it can certainly hold one about security cameras, if needed.

Domanski was the first to question a subcommittee's recommendation to create and announce a formalized method for groups to approach the DDA for funding assistance to mount events. Jim contended that, now, people show up occasionally, not often, to make such requests but that a formalized and publicized procedure would draw excessive requests. There was debate, too, about the advisability of requiring a 30-day notice of such requests. The conclusion seemed to be to adopt the committee's recommendation, with the understanding that the DDA would be flexible in implementing the policy.

There was vigorous but good-natured debate about naming the DDA's Holiday Parade. In fact, there was discussion about the difference between "naming" and "sponsoring." With its own financial reserves on the low side, the DDA needs sponsors for the parade, on which it spends in excess of $30,000. A couple of the members wondered why it isn't called simply the "DDA Holiday Parade," to which the answer seemed to be that everyone knows it's a DDA event, but it would be a good idea to have it sponsored by one contributor, who can then be properly rewarded in all publicity and promotion. Left undecided was whether to establish a minimum fee for sole-sponsorship, so a company doesn't achieve that status cheaply.

Less good-natured was the questioning re line items in the DDA's Development Budget. Bill Harrison, primarily, joined by Pete Webster, repeatedly asked for clarification from Planning Director (and DDA Executive Director) Tim Thwing. Harrison tied the discussion to the City Hall/DDA relationship by mentioning (1) CITCOM's apparent preference that the DDA restrict itself more to "bricks and mortar" efforts and less to "soft" activities like the Holiday Parade and marketing activities in general, and (2) by recalling that there are people out there who think the Downtown Development Authority should be dissolved. Harrison elicited from Thwing an estimate that only about half of the DDA's TIFA income would go the city's general fund. When Harrison asked for monthly reports, Webster disagreed, reminding Harrison that practices which are common in the private sector cannot always be justified in the public sector.

Luigi Cutraro asked whether the hanging flower pots need to be watered every day. Told why that is necessary, he made unanimous the decision to increase the number of pots to 108. The highly praised hanging pots go up in mid-May and last through September.

City Hall/DDA tension arose again in the discussion about enforcing Valet Signs. There was confusion about everything from whether the police department or code enforcement should enforce the rules, and there was fuzziness about licensing procedure and the most frequent violaltions.

The group approved the color of brick pavers for future streetscaping, and they agreed to schedule several meetings a year for downtown businesses. Years ago, DDA mounted several month "Downtown Neighborhood" meetings at varying locations.

A longer than usual but productive DDA meeting.

DDA's April 2009 Meeting
Except when addressing money matters, the April meeting of the Downtown Development Authority was mostly devoted to housekeeping issues like approving committee reports and briefly considering whether to hold the annual Bloom (commercial flower display) on Washington. About money matters:

Bill Harrison is the DDA's Stephen Miller in asking more questions and challenging more details than anyone else. As when CITCOM talks money, observers' eyes glaze over after a while, because what may be meaningful to, some of, the members comes across as nit-picking to outsiders.
The unavoidable finance-focused tension between City Hall and the DDA showed two or three times, as about which body should pay for installing the security cameras proposed for the parking structures. And, when a comparison showed Royal Oak charges nonprofit groups more than nearby cities for services or for not requiring parking meters be fed during downtown events, Interim City Manager Don Johnson reminded everyone that all of the listed cities impose higher taxes than Royal Oak.
Peter Webster joined Bill Harrison is making the traditional DDA claim that the city would lose substantial income if the DDA were to be dissolved. [See Dissolve the DDA and DO NOT dissolve the DDA]
About such items as the Library Director Metta Lansdale's request for financial assistance in creating a Butterfly Garden, Chairman Kevin Kalczynski commented that "a simple question can generate complex analysis before the question can be answered." Lansdale's request was referred to a committee for review.
During DDA's March meeting, there was confusion and concern about the Police Department's stand re the security cameras. There were two aspects to that confusion: (1) Can the Police Department functionally accommodate adding a third system to its current monitoring of security cameras for the School District and the Court House and the department's internal needs (chiefly monitoring the prisoners in their cells)? (2) The question of who should pay for the installation of the parking structure cameras, as mentioned above. DDA Executive Director Tim Thwing said there is a possibility that anticipated federal stimulus funds might be applicable to paying some portion of the security camera project.
Answering questions, Interim Police Chief Chris Jahnke said of the proposed system, "We're all for it," after he had distinguished between the 24/7 monitoring of prisoners and other levels of monitoring.
During one of his comments of clarification, Johnson explained that the city's policy is to demand that "non-core" activities "pay their own way." He cited a couple of the city's "enterprise funds," like parking, as examples.

Listening to the DDA or CITCOM discuss budget issues reminds the observer that most of their members are volunteers (in CITCOM's case, poorly paid officials) who misuse terms like "deficit" and who confuse an operating statement with a balance sheet. That is said, not to criticize the members but to help explain the glazed eyes syndrome.

For a while, Mayor Jim Ellison was seen sitting in the audience, but he did not participate in any discussion or in Public Comment. Asked by VersagiVoice about his presence, Ellison replied, "Nothing sinister! I was there to see Chris Jahnke. I am doing the role of the Court Guard in Stagecrafters '12 Angry Men' and he was loaning me an auxiliary police badge for my costume. I stopped by to pick it up."

20 May 2009 Meeting
DDA and CITCOM budget discussions crossed paths this month and barely avoided crossing swords.

City Hall watchers will recall that CITCOM sent the DDA's proposed budget back, accompanied by a few rather snide remarks. Addressing that rejection during its 20 May meeting, the DDA came close to sending the same budget back, stressing that it reflected their best judgment after long deliberations. Indeed, had the DDA vote been taken early in this meeting, I was certain the unchanged budget would have been returned, accompanied by a request for a joint meeting to resolve differences.

The DDA mood changed when Pat Capello asked Interim City Manager Don Johnson what options CITCOM would have if the same budget was returned, other than to accept it or reject it again. Johnson said CITCOM could pass a resolution demanding that DDA would need to seek CITCOM approval on every expenditure, line item by line item. Visibly stunned, the board failed to ask Johnson under what authority such a resolution could be justified, but they listened more seriously to Planning Director Tim Thwing's suggestions about reaching a compromise. There was consensus that to throw the budget back would exacerbate the already contentious relationship between the two city bodies.

Without going into detail, the DDA and CITCOM differ about the importance of installing security cameras in the city's parking structures. Actually the debate is about how the cost of the project impacts the existing financial relationships between them. Chairman Kevin Kalczynski has provided a statement summarizing the DDA's action.

Coincidentally, CITCOM had its working session on the budget in the same chamber seats just vacated by the DDA, and the agency was praised by Commissioner Andrzejak for cooperating with the city commission.

DDA Chairman Kevin Kalcynski's Statement

DDA makes substantive decisions
Those of my readers who are quick to suspect skullduggery had a great time speculating about why the DDA's agenda was not posted on the city's website at the same time that a request concerning a liquor license expansion of Black Finn appeared on that agenda before being seen by the Plan Commission or the Zoning Board of Appeals or CITCOM. (Even without suspicion of skullduggery, there is chronic confusion about the path developers are supposed to follow.) The agenda was posted on DDA's website.

Actually, as Director Pat Capello pointed out, the request does not fall "under the purview" of the DDA, but the group spent more than a few minutes discussing it anyway, unable to resist noodling the pros and cons of the petitioner's offer to pay for another dedicated downtown cop. Finally, petitioner's counsel was advised to follow normal procedures.

DDA approved the resolution proposed by its Consumer Marketing Committee to reject a request to hold a series of concerts on the DDA's 696 property during the Woodward Dream Cruise. Although the concept found some support and the petitioning company is known to a couple of directors, the company's lack of follow-through after first making the request caused the panel to reject the proposal, leaving open the possibility for such events at another time. Discussion made it clear that the petitioner had failed to formally approach the Police Department, whose informal response had been negative anyway.

The promotional company retained by DDA a year or so ago came in for praise and criticism over the amount of sponsorship dollars it has so far raised toward the $40,000 budget for the Holiday Magic Parade. The $2,296.00 so far collected or pledged failed to impress a couple of directors but was "more than we had raised by July last year," according to others. Overall, the situation is that national firms are no longer participating, and the hope is that enough local businesses will donate smaller amounts to make up that loss.

Decision was reached over improving the Holiday Lights, with the discussion ranging from the time and cost of installing and taking down the lights getting more attention than the cost of the lights and their operation. Apparently, the non-incandescent lights use very little electricity, justifying buying more of them to overcome the objections about last year's anemic appearance.

The group listened to a review of the city's budget by Interim City Manager Don Johnson,, and Director Pete Webster did the lawyerly thing of repeatedly asking exactly the same question about the comparison between the city's and the DDA's fund balance over a series of years. To what end? A layman can only speculate that the purpose was a form of psychological payback for CITCOM's less than courteous rejection of DDA's first budget earlier this year.

In terms of human dynamics, parking is to Director Bill Harrison as alcohol is to Commissioner Mike Andrzejak. No matter what the topic, Bill finds some way to link parking to the discussion. When I teased him about it outside city hall, he politely but firmly said that parking must always be kept in mind when downtown matters are addressed. -- 16 July 09

DDA Meeting: 19 August
Streetscaping to close 10 sidewalk cafes
Ten sidewalk cafes will be forced to close for perhaps a month starting in September so that DDA-funded, but Engineering Department-scheduled streetscaping can be accomplished. Considerable time was spent discussing (1) the best time of year to do this work and (2) when, how, by whom restaurant owners need to be alerted to pending closures.

Timing: Would doing the work in Spring,, rather than in Fall be better for the restaurants, for the city? Notification: Should the city or the DDA formally notify the businesses?

The discussion made clear that DDA's long-term but phased streetscaping will occasionally cause temporary disruptions because of such practical considerations as weather, contractor's schedule, and the availability of equipment and materials needed for the work. The decision was made to keep this year's schedule, and for DDA immediately to send out a letter confirming that schedule, and for everybody to pay a bit more attention to the notification process in the future.

A request for DDA to fund the streetscaping mandated for 202 E. Third Street/303 Williams Street (for Lockhart's BBQ) was held over, pending the petitioner's providing the required detailed application. In the past, DDA funded 100% of streetscaping for the Skylofts (a project bringing in considerable TIFA money) and 50% of streetscaping for Bastone's.

The Kid's Cruise, which preceded the Woodward Dream Cruise was labeled a success and everyone involved was praised: Police, Fire, Volunteers, and Quill, the PR group who suggested the event.

Sponsorship for the Holiday Parade seems to be plodding along. In the absence of big-money sponsors, the Downtown Manager's report listed 25 contributions -- most of them of $50 or $100 and one of $2,500 by the Rasor Law Firm -- totaling $6,786.00. In-kind sponsorships (mostly ads and news announcements in media) are valued at $14,226.

There was informal talk about the wisdom of thinking about budgeting "a few years out": short-, mid-, and long-term.

08 Sep 09
DDA Chair responds re Downtown Manager

Frank,
I very much enjoy and look forward to your updates, so I read with interest your recent piece suggesting a downtown task team focused on attracting business to downtown and strengthening existing businesses. I wanted to let you know that many of the activities you suggest are already taking place on the DDA. I also wanted to respond to some of your other observations.

First, the DDA already includes a similar mix of interests that you suggest for a task force. For example, the DDA includes members of the Chamber of Commerce, City administration, the Restaurant association, as well as residents of downtown and retailers.

Second, the DDA has a business marketing committee (BMC), which is charged with attracting businesses to downtown, and which has recently conducted work sessions to formulate a marketing plan. This is a very high priority with us and will draw much of our attention in the upcoming months. As for the use of our downtown manager, I agree that initially Ms. McIntyre was more focused on downtown's events, but I would suggest that this focus was out of necessity as the DDA's past events coordinator did not renew her contract right around the same time Ms. McIntyre was hired. Ms. McIntyre stepped in and successfully executed a full calendar of events. As the DDA's new PR/Events firm has gotten up to speed, Ms. McIntyre's involvement in event coordination has significantly subsided. Currently, she serves as a liaison between the DDA, downtown businesses, the City administration (including Police and Fire), the Chamber, the Restaurant Association, and the nascent Retailer's Association. My own view is that communication between these constituents, which is a component of an attractive business environment, is better than ever. It is our plan that in the upcoming months, Ms. McIntyre will be more focused on supporting and executing the BMC's activities, especially the recruitment of new businesses.

Third, the DDA believes that its business attraction efforts should be primarily focused on improving the business environment in downtown and helping property owners and their professionals market their properties. This fiscal year, the DDA will invest (1) $1.2 million in downtown infrastructure improvements, (2) over $350,000 on safety by funding police officers in the DDA district, (3) over $300,000 in maintenance and beautification efforts, and (4) $200,000 for a coordinated marketing campaign. Last year, the DDA made similar investments, plus the DDA contributed an additional $2 million to help the City acquire the parking lot at 6th and Main, which has provided much-needed parking in the south end of downtown. All of these investments contribute to a more attractive business environment. Moreover, the BMC is currently arranging a meeting with downtown property owners and their brokers to discuss ways the DDA can assist in marketing their properties and lease space.

At the risk of stating the obvious, the downtown has been negatively impacted by the national, state and local economy. Nevertheless, the downtown continues to attract businesses and investment. Check out the DDA's website www.downtownroyaloak.org for a list of new businesses. Indeed, while the property values for the rest of Royal Oak and nearly all of Oakland County declined last year, the property values in the downtown increased. Without that increase, the City's financial condition would be even more acute.

Finally, I wanted to thank you again for your interesting updates. They are required reading for those who are interested in our local government. -- Kevin Kalczynski, Chairman

September 2009
DDA has short, unfocused meeting
Except for a bit of housekeeping, the Downtown Development Authority's September meeting was spent noodling over a couple of matters, both involving to some degree the DDA's relationship with city hall.

Streetscaping: Who -- the DDA, the city, the property owner -- pays for what? Does that change, depending on the property involved? On whether a change of occupant has occurred? On the type of change? What is the relative importance of concrete and trees?

A consensual decision was reached that a clearer written policy is needed, so the DDA isn't repeatedly making ad hoc decisions.

Joint DDA/City meeting: Are we going to have one? Who asked for it, the city or the DDA? What, besides the issue of security cameras in parking structures is to be addressed?

Consensus: "Let's talk about it in January."

The meeting lasted about an hour.

December 2009
DDA explores, debates, need for an Advisory Committee for Arts, Beats & Eats
An Advisory Committee which includes residents apparently makes some city officials and the owner of Arts, Beats & Eats uncomfortable.

That was the unavoidable conclusion after listening to the Downtown Development Corporation explore the possibility of such a committee. Under no conditions would any such committee have decision-making authority, insisted City Manager Don Johnson and Planning Director Tim Thwing. Both maintained that only representatives of the City/DDA and of the promoter, who will be investing money, have that authority. The promoter has made sounds like there will be some sort of coordinating committee, and a third city official has told VersagiVoice that the issue is being looked at, but no decision has been made.

DDA chairman Bill Harrison acknowledged that decision-making authority has to be restricted, but he fears that any perceived lack of transparency will cause bad feelings and generate opposition. Harrison cited the Farmers Market's concern about parking on Saturday during the festival. Thwing and Johnson countered by saying that such situations and the concerns of private interests and of neighborhoods are being addressed. Thwing alternated between saying "we" and "he" when discussing all this.

DDA member Luigi Cutraro stressed that the festival has a 12-year track record and insisted that no DDA staff time be devoted to promoting the event. And he doesn't want to see "even one hour" of billed time from the DDA's marketing and promotion contractor devoted to Arts, Beats & Eats. Thwing said that the Downtown Manager would serve as the communication bridge.

Royal Oak has until January 15 to guarantee that enough parking will be available. If not, what happens?

For the rest, the DDA's December meeting dealt with organizational matters such as what priority to assign security cameras in parking structures and valet parking policies.

A handful of VersagiVoice readers wonder whether that hurried December 7th meeting of the DDA was legal. Specifically, isn't there a mandated minimum time to notify members -- and the public -- that such a meeting is being called. I leave it to the truly suspicious to check it out.

January 2010
DDA absorbing new members, reviewing ongoing issues
The Downtown Development Authority, in the process of absorbing new appointees and reconstituting its committees, spent most of its January 2010 meeting noodling issues from the perspective of "where are we, where do we want to go?" The attitudes demonstrated during free-flowing conversation ranged from a reflection of the institutional animosity between the DDA and City hall to joshing City Engineer Elden Danielson who was sitting in for the city manager, but sometimes spoke wearing his city engineer hat.

Speaking of DDA-City relationships, the group will move quickly to address its next budget, in preparation for a proposed joint meeting. Both the commission and the authority strike me as dancing around having joint meetings, using the "We have to get together some time" approach and never actually setting a date. At any rate, the DDA:

Touched on such matters as the proper role of its Marketing/PR firm . . . The success or not of a couple of downtown events . . . Whether Tuesday or Thursday is the best night for such events . . . Retailers' reaction to this or that DDA effort.
Approved, 5-2, the concept of permitting a private business to rent public space for private use. Rock on Third is asking the city for permission to use two parking spaces on which to place its outdoor service. DDA Chair Jim Domanski tried unsuccessfully to get his colleagues to stick to the parking space issue, which is within the DDA's purview, rather than ramble about the design of the outdoor space, which isn't. (City Manager Don Johnson had approved the concept; City Engineer Danielson had voted against it. Hence, his being teased for speaking with two voices.)
Led by Bill Harrison, the group discussed parking concepts, before approving the purchase of a program which, Harrison maintains, will provide a dynamic analysis of ever-changing parking use and needs. The program costs less than $5,000. Planning Director Tim Thwing did not object to the recommendation although his comments suggested he sees no great advantages in the information it will provide.
There was discussion about the feasibility and cost of the city's participating in establishing an Incubator facility for small businesses in downtown Royal Oak. When discussion turned to the location of the Incubator, the city-owned building at Third and Troy was mentioned. The final decision was that the matter requires more study.
The hoped for development by Sonic at the former Wendy's location at Eleven Mile and Washington, has run into the stumbling block of who pays for the required Brownfield restoration, a factor which apparently has arisen recently. The DDA decision seemed to be to let the private sector (the seller and buyer) settle the issue.
Just before adjournment -- in the "what's on your mind? opportunity -- we heard Harrison talk more about his favorite topic: parking, parking parking. . . . And Domanski complained that "Royal Oak is becoming less pedestrian friendly," after mentioning that the snow/winter-caused removal of Crosswalk signs and the poor lighting make crossing streets hazardous. Jim cited reports of a couple of injuries. . . . And Luigi Cutraro asked about police reports such as those received by the Liquor Control Committee. -- 20 Jan 10

DDA has a long, tough meeting
and some people don't like what happened
If we were living in the Middle Ages, there would be duels fought between some members of the Downtown Development Authority and some commissioners. That is how tangible the institutional animosity between the DDA and CITCOM was during the Authority's March 2010 meeting.

Despite that, substantive decisions were made or postponed after lengthy discussion, resulting in two or three split votes. One split vote came when the majority (4-3?) approved granting the Emagine project $300,000 so it can quality for some State aid. That decision came after a 3-4 split vote on the motion to postpone making that decision.

Update: One citizen's reaction to the Emagine decision was to write CITCOM that "no due diligence" was performed and that "the DDA's actions reeked of incompetence and malfeasance." The resident requests that "the city disband the DDA" before the panel "does any more damage to the city financially and to its reputation."

The email cited several specific concerns, ranging from questions not asked to answers not given. The writer's impression is that "Tim Thwing framed the issue "as how much to give Emagine not whether to give."

Another resident suggests that the Emagine request was rushed onto the agenda with less than appropriate notification to interested parties, including CITCOM.

Institutional animosity was obvious when the discussion turned to CITCOM's refusal to approve a Change Order re one phase of long-planned streetscaping. The animosity had previously been on display at an earlier CITCOM meeting. At issue in both meetings was the confused irritation over control of money already approved, who's responsible for coordinating streetscaping with water/sewer work, what the contracts say, what city policy is. To an outsider this specific squabble appears to be simply a turf battle, vulgarly known as a pissing contest. Unfortunately, such a characterization unfairly suggests that the "combatants" have only personal motives for their position.

On the other hand, observers who can ignore the mutual animosity find it easy to focus on the merits of the differing arguments.

Similar was the quiet but ugly discussion over the renewal or extension of City-DDA agreements re Parking Debt Service, Downtown Police Service, and Court Debt Service. Those decisions were postponed, and a special meeting will be scheduled to address them at length. DDA is a tough venue for our City Manager and Planning Director, both of whom are mandated to sit on the panel.

Update: Special Meeting is scheduled 5 p.m. Monday, 29 March.

The major internal debate at the DDA meeting had to do with refocusing on the Authority's primary responsibility. The panel has long been criticized for ignoring bricks and mortar (development) and devoting money and effort instead to literature, banners, websites, parades, street-closing events (promotion). The directors spent time trying to clarify the difference between promoting downtown overall and focusing on the needs of different business sectors.

There was also discussion about the difference, if any, between marketing and public relations, between the benefits of promoting events (many of which are sponsored by other groups) versus the gains to be made just by bringing people downtown. Should the DDA or a sponsoring group, for example, take on the challenge of a night-time parade?

There are two or three new directors. For them this meeting was a great introduction into the scope of DDA's interests, its methods of operation, the relationships among the DDA veterans, and it provided the Newbies with their first glimpse of the panel's relationship with the city's elected and appointed officials.

Long-time VersagiVoice readers know I repeatedly suggest the DDA has been successful in bringing downtown Royal Oak back to life and should be dissolved. Inevitably there will be temporary financial and procedural disruption and inconvenience, so there is no "best" time to make the move.

Being anti-DDA does not mean disrespecting the hardworking volunteers who serve on the panel. The Newbies, depending on their own temperament, will find their niche among the three types of participants which exist on every committee, commission, board, or task team in either the public or private sector. Every such group contains some mix of (1) militants, (2) moderates, and (3) go-with-the-flow pacifists. Properly led, each mindset brings value to the deliberations.

DDA has a productive meeting
Only two days after being emasculated (my term) by CITCOM, the DDA held a great meeting, guided by a newly energized chair, Jim Domanski. Domanski struck the right note between justified anger and Pollyana-ish optimism about future relationships between DDA and CITCOM. Before expressing his feelings about that at the end of the session, Jim guided dialogue through committee reports and such routine work as the placement of trash containers and engaging a contractor to install and maintain holiday lights. Then they addressed:

§ The coming departure of Downtown Manager Stephanie McIntyre, who is leaving to raise a family.
The DDA will decide later whether to work quickly to replace Stephanie, or to use that position's salary for something as tangible as streetscaping or something in between. That led to a suggestion that DDA modify its budget format to show more line items, to reduce misunderstandings about what seems to some to be a huge, unspecified budget category.

§ The City/DDA issues labeled the "three horsemen" (1) Police Patrols, (2) Parking Deck debt service, and (3) 44th District Court debt service.

Here, City Manager Don Johnson and Planning Director Tim Thwing came across almost as a good cop/bad cop duo. Not really. But as happens in collective bargaining, Johnson made extreme demands, and Thwing provided most of the related history which has brought the city and the DDA to their present financial relationships.

§ Police Patrol
Johnson wanted the DDA to "promise to pay" for five years, "to reduce uncertainty." Bill Harrison prefers "2-plus 1" -- integrating the DDA's and City's budgeting for two years and extending one additional year each year to maintain synchronized budgets. Pete Webster prefers a fixed figure; others discussed whether costs/per patrolman are not as likely to decrease as increase.

Domanski stressed the need to keep reminding the world that police officers assigned to downtown are not being taken away from the neighborhoods. "We're paying for the service." My notes don't show the dollar amount approved, but Johnson got his five years.

§ Parking Deck Debt Service
Currently, the DDA is paying 100% of the parking deck debt service. Answering questions, Thwing briefly reviewed the several past arrangements with the city. Johnson's proposal was for the DDA to pay until the debt has been paid, in 2026. Domanski said he can live with 5 years. Harrison repeated his 2-plus-1 suggestion and added, "We have to protect CITCOM from itself."

The 2026 motion was defeated, 2-7. A 5-year proposal passed 7-2.

§ 44th District Court Debt Service
Acknowledging the lay of the land, Johnson modified his own motion, substituting 5-years for his original pay-until-paid-off in 2024. There was almost no dialogue about this one.

There was brief discussion of the problems Arts, Beats & Eats encountered during the CITCOM meeting two days earlier. The DDA took no action.

Domanski referred gingerly to "48 hours ago"; said "We have a lot on our plate"; and suggested that news reports make DDA/CITCOM relationships seem worse than they really are. He repeated quietly a claim that continues to be questioned by some: Jim maintains that the DDA need not seek CITCOM approval over individual decisions once CITCOM has approved the DDA budget. He went on to offer that "different doors open" after such controversy as the two city entities have gone through.

Johnson told the group that the commission is amenable to establishing a Joint DDA/CITCOM Committee. Domanski appointed himself and Vice Chair Harrison and new member Jason Krieger to meet with whomever CITCOM appoints.

Before the motion to adjourn was seconded, the group did what many boards and committees do when formal business has civilly been accomplished. They stayed around and chatted informally. Everything from small talk to calling in bond counsel to advise them about seeking a bond to cover all streetscaping. (Actually, that informal discussion led to a formal vote.)

With only three speakers during Public Comment, the meeting was over in about 90 minutes.

"This is just history now, but remember that if the DDA did not exist back in the 80s, who would have covered city hall and their over the hill project called "696"? Memories are so short. Because the DDA ponied up the money for 10 years or better, ALL of the streetscaping projects were put on hold. This is why so many of the sections of the downtown sidewalks never got done.

"And a thank you should be given to all the property owners who took a BIG chance and invested in the downtown area when downtown Royal Oak was nothing more than a ghost town. Outside of a few, who even knows these investors?" -- Laura Harrison