Hello neighbors!
This week, Ann Arbor City Council considers a number of items that have all appeared on previous agendas. They will vote on second reading and final approval for the zoning of recently annexed township parcels (B-1 and B-2) and changes to the marijuana ordinance (B-3) and the vegetation ordinance (B-4). Council will host public hearings for those four items plus a plan to divert tax revenue to support a private development (DS-1).
Due to absences, two agenda items were removed from the agenda of the last meeting: a brownfield plan for a private development at Arbor South (DS-1) and a public-private partnership with the developers of Arbor South (DS-2). Both of these items effectively subsidize the private development with tax dollars. The brownfield plan will re-invest $300 million in tax revenue right back into the private development. The public-private partnership will commit the City to spending over $160 million on parking structures to serve the development. For more on this, see my “Additional Thoughts” section below, also linked here:
https://a2elnel.com/post/arbor-south-public-interest-vs-investor-interest/
A2Council Update Video
After every City Council meeting I send out an “A2Council Update” newsletter, which includes a summary video. Here is my A2Council Update video from the Council meeting of November 6, 2025:
Ann Arbor City Council Meeting Agenda
Below is my summary of issues on the City Council Agenda this week, with links to more information about each of them. If you have comments about any of these issues, you can email all of Council at CityCouncil@a2gov.org
Ann Arbor City Council Meeting
Monday, November 17 2025 7:00PM
Ann Arbor City Hall (2nd Floor)
301 E Huron St, Ann Arbor 48104
The full agenda (including a link to the latest published PDF agenda, and instructions for dialing into the meeting) is on the A2Gov Legistar website:
https://a2gov.legistar.com/MeetingDetail.aspx?ID=1251593&GUID=17FF9E65-44B6-4BD3-A548-22BBD73307C5
City Council meetings are broadcast live by CTN on Comcast (channel 16) and AT&T (channel 99) and online at a2gov.org/watchCTN
Meetings are also streamed live on the CTN YouTube channel:
https://www.youtube.com/user/ctnannarbor
How to reserve public comment
People that wish to comment at a City Council meeting must sign up with the City Clerk’s office in advance. Speakers are allotted 3 minutes, with the first 15 speakers allowed to speak in a 45 minute session near the beginning of the meeting. Remaining speakers will speak at the end of the Council meeting. Public comment can be made either in person or remotely via phone/Zoom audio.
To sign up for public comment, please go to or call the City Clerk’s Office at 734-794-6140 on the day of the meeting between 8:00 AM and 5:00 PM. At 4:00 PM, all speakers that have signed up are randomly ordered in “priority groups”. After 4:00 PM, speakers are added to the end of the applicable priority group in the order received. No new speakers will be added to the list after 5:00 PM. For more information, visit the City’s website:
https://www.a2gov.org/city-council/council-meetings-overview/
Questions to the Agenda
In preparation for a Council meeting, Council members can ask questions of staff about scheduled agenda items. Questions must be submitted by noon on the Wednesday before a Council Meeting, and answers are returned the next day (Thursday) by 5pm.
AC-1 (25-1964) Agenda Response Memo and eComments – November 17, 2025
This agenda item has a PDF attachment with all questions raised by Council Members, and the answers provided by staff.
For the third meeting in a row, no Council Members asked questions of the agenda
Communications from the Mayor
MC-1 (25-1892) Appointment to the Local Officers Compensation Commission
This appointment from the Mayor was presented at the previous meeting, and will therefore be voted on at this Council meeting.
- Bryan Weinart – Local Officers Compensation Commission
MC-2 (25-1903) Appointments – Confirmations
This appointment from the Mayor was presented at the previous meeting, and will therefore be voted on at this Council meeting.
- K.C. Walbridge – Employees’ Retirement System Board of Trustees
Consent Agenda
Below is the list of items included on the Consent Agenda. If no one on Council specifically requests that an item be pulled for discussion, the whole of this list will be approved in a single vote.
CA-1 (25-1793) Resolution to Approve a Construction Contract with Process Piping & Equipment, Inc. for the Screw Pump Replacement Project (RFP #25-38, $2,769,400.00)
CA-2 (25-1840) Resolution to Approve a Contract with the Michigan Department of Transportation for the 2025 Traffic Signal Upgrade Project ($1,337,900.00)
CA-3 (25-1817) Resolution to Approve a Grant Contract with the Michigan Department of Transportation for Engineering and Construction Services for the Pavement Maintenance on a Section of Pavement in the Northwest Hangar Area at the Ann Arbor Municipal Airport ($448,242.00)
CA-4 (25-1818) Resolution to Approve a Grant Contract with the Michigan Department of Transportation for Engineering Services for the Upgrade of Navigation Aids at the Ann Arbor Municipal Airport for Runway 6/24 ($74,724.00)
CA-5 (25-1816) Resolution to Approve Extension of Support Agreement for Pure Storage from CDW Government, LLC ($232,349.40)
CA-6 (25-1850) Resolution to Accept a Water Main Easement at 2500 Keystone Lane and 2500 Breckenridge Drive from Surrey Park Investors LLC (8 Votes Required)
CA-7 (25-1888) Resolution to Approve Amendment Number 1 to the Legal Services Agreement with Hallahan & Associates P.C. Relative to Michigan Tax Tribunal Appeal MTT 21-000829, Mall at Briarwood, LLC vs City of Ann Arbor ($140,000.00)
CA-8 (25-1825) Resolution to Exercise a Right of First Refusal to Purchase and Resell the Affordable Unit at 105 Ashley Mews and Appropriate Funds (8 Votes Required)
Public Hearings
Anyone wanting to comment on these issues may speak for 3 minutes, without having specifically reserved time. Issues subject to public hearing will also be up for a vote by Council later in the meeting.
PH-1/B-1 (25-1652) An Ordinance to Amend Chapter 55 (Unified Development Code), Rezoning of 1 Acre from TWP (Township) to R1A (Single-Family Dwelling), Tai Zoning, 1155 Arlington Boulevard (CPC Recommendation: Approval – 8 Yes, 0 No) (ORD-25-31)
A 1-acre parcel at 1155 Arlington will be rezoned from TWP (Township) to R1A (Single-Family Dwelling). This parcel was recently annexed into the City and the zoning designation was consistent with the adjacent zoning, surrounding land uses, and the Comprehensive Plan.
The annexation and rezoning of this parcel were approved by the Planning Commission in March 2025: https://a2council.com/ann-arbor-city-planning-commission-march-18-2025/
City Council approved the annexation of this parcel in May 2025: https://a2council.com/ann-arbor-city-council-may-19-2025/
PH-2/B-2 (25-1656) An Ordinance to Amend Chapter 55 (Zoning), Rezoning of 5.7 Acres from TWP (Township) to R4A (Multiple-Family Dwelling District), The Village of Ann Arbor III, 2600 Pontiac Trail (CPC Recommendation: Approval – 9 Yes and 0 No) (ORD-25-32)
A 5.7 acre parcel at 2600 Pontiac Trail will be rezoned from TWP (Township) to R4A (Multiple-Family Dwelling District). This parcel was annexed in 2022 and is anticipated as a component of “The Village of Ann Arbor” development.
You can learn more about the development here: https://a2council.com/village-of-ann-arbor-resident-participation-meeting-march-27-2023/
PH-3/B-3 (25-1746) An Ordinance to Amend Section 5.16.3.F of Chapter 55 Unified Development Code of Title V of the Code of the City of Ann Arbor (Marijuana Business School Buffer Removal) CPC Recommendation: Approval (7 Yes, 0 No) (ORD-25-33)
Amendments to the marijuana ordinance will remove location restrictions relative to schools. Any concern will be considered on a case-by-case basis via the Special Exception Use permitting process for marijuana businesses. Marijuana growers will no longer be required to annually report energy used, water used, and sanitary sewer discharge; that information will now only be provided to the City Clerk “upon request.”
Not included in these changes: the Planning Commission recommends that the cap on provisioning centers/retailers – 28 – be wholly removed. There are currently 21 marijuana provisioning centers/retailers in Ann Arbor. From the staff report: “Removing the cap may result in new businesses locating in the city, or others relocating, perhaps adding to the potential for a greater number of businesses to thrive.”
The Planning Commission approved these changes to the marijuana ordinance at their meeting on September 16, 2025.
https://a2council.com/ann-arbor-city-planning-commission-september-16-2025/
PH-4/B-4 (25-1696) An Ordinance to Amend Chapter 40 (Trees and Other Vegetation) of Title III (Parks and Public Grounds) of the Code of the City of Ann Arbor (ORD-25-34)
This item was postponed from the November 6th meeting to allow for more consultation with transportation staff. Ordinance amendments will address guidelines for how trees and vegetation can be cultivated on private property adjacent to streets and sidewalks. Trees, shrubs and vegetation must allow 8 feet of clearance over sidewalks and 14 feet of clearance over streets. Amendments specifically address corners, where growth in a “sight triangle” can obstruct the view of pedestrians, bicyclists and motorists.
PH-5/DS-1 (25-1847) Resolution to Approve a Brownfield Plan for the Arbor South Project – 2845 South State Street
This item was originally on the November 6th agenda, but was removed due to absences. A brownfield plan will divert tax incremental financing (TIF) of an estimated $345,054,904 or not in excess of $373,825,905 with administrative fees to support the development of “Arbor South” at State and Eisenhower. The TIF will be diverted for the maximum timeframe: 30 years, through 2057.
Of the total TIF, about $184,866,844 will fund parking structures and $160,188,060 will fund off-site sanitary sewer trunklines and interceptor, water, storm sewer, bus rapid transit stop, pedestrian improvements and other utilities. An estimated $2 million will be used to remediate a gas station on-site.
The developers of Arbor South have declared a private investment of $406,000,000.
A brownfield plan with such a high percentage of public investment is typically ineligible for TIF funding. A staff report explains that developer-reimbursable Brownfield TIF should not exceed 20% of overall project investment.
Eligibility for this brownfield plan seems to depend on approval of the Public-Private partnership (see DS-2).
Ordinances – Second Reading
In order to amend the city code, Council must vote to approve the change, via ordinance, at two Council meetings. The following proposed ordinances were approved at a previous Council meeting, and are also subject to a public hearing as listed above.
B-1 (25-1652) is the same as PH-1 above
B-2 (25-1656) is the same as PH-2 above
B-3 (25-1746) is the same as PH-3 above
B-4 (25-1696) is the same as PH-4 above
Ordinances – First Reading
In order to amend the city code, Council must vote to approve the change, via ordinance, at two Council meetings. The following proposed ordinances are being introduced for “first reading”. If approved, the ordinance will be voted on at a subsequent Council meeting (“second reading”), where it will also be subject to a public hearing.
There are no first readings on the agenda
Motions and Resolutions
DC-1 (25-1828) Resolution to Appoint Wayne Powell to the Airport Advisory Committee as a Non-registered Elector (7 Votes Required)
This appointment from the Mayor is being presented at this meeting, and will therefore be voted on at the next Council meeting. Seven votes are required because the “appointee is not a registered elector of the City of Ann Arbor”.
- Wayne Powell – Airport Advisory Committee
DS-1 (25-1847) is the same as PH-5 above
DS-2 (25-1846) Resolution to Approve a Public-Private Development Agreement for the Arbor South Project and Authorize the Purchase of up to Three Parking Structures Subject to Availability of Funding (8 Votes Required)
This item was originally on the November 6th agenda, but was removed due to absences. By resolution, City Council will approve the purchase of property from the developers of Arbor South for City-owned parking decks. The City Administrator will be authorized to negotiate and finalize terms of a public-private partnership with co-developers Oxford Companies and Crawford Hoying. Approval of this item requires eight votes and will permit the purchase of property at Arbor South (at an unnamed price) subject to “availability of funds.” A detailed purchase agreement will not be voted on by Council and budgeting for the purchase could happen with a simple majority vote.
As part of the public private partnership, City-issued bonds in the amount of not less than $166,390,000 will fund parking structures to meet the needs of residents and visitors to Arbor South. These structures will then be owned and maintained by the City.
From the staff memo:
“Transforming one of Ann Arbor’s most automobile-dependent districts into a walkable urban neighborhood requires major infrastructure investment that cannot be supported by the private sector alone. To achieve this, the City and the developer intend to enter into a public-private partnership in which the City will finance, own, and operate three parking structures”
From the agreement:
“the privately owned components of the Project are contemplated to be served by three public parking structures”
According to the agreement, the bonds will be paid back from two sources:
- Brownfield Plan TIF revenue
- “Net Parking Revenues” from the parking structures.
The agreement does not include any estimate of what the city might extract in fees from parking structures at State/Eisenhower (“Net Parking Revenues”). That revenue will be “computed and determined by the City.”
Also unknown: the “Parking Structure Purchase Price.” The purchase price of each of three structures will be negotiated in consideration of “the Parking Structure Budget, the mutually approved land value and such other direct third party costs.” Money for the purchase price will be “negotiated either through authorized Bonds, an approved City budget or other appropriate funding source.” The purchase of each deck will not come back to City Council for a vote, but will be “reasonably approved by the City.”
The issuance of City bonds will include approval of an “inducement resolution,” which is required when public bonds are used by private entities. Approval of that resolution allows the opportunity for resident petitions demanding a public vote (Special Election) on the issue. When the City issues bonds to fund public capital projects, Council approves a “notice of intent” resolution that functions similarly.
Council last approved a “notice of intent” in January 2025 to issue $12 million in bonds to fund a new fire station on Huron Parkway. (Legistar) The opportunity to petition is the same for both types of City-issued bonds:
“The Bonds will be issued without a vote of the electors unless a valid petition requesting such a vote signed by not less than 10% or 15,000 of the registered electors of the City is filed with the City Clerk within forty-five (45) days after publication of this notice. If a valid petition is filed, the Bonds may not be issued without an approving vote of the majority of the qualified electors of the City voting thereon.”
The Arbor South project will redevelop seventeen acres of parking lot into 1000 rental housing units, 30 owner-occupied units, a 150 room hotel, a public plaza, and 100,000 sq feet of retail/commercial. Approximately 200 – but not fewer than 150 – of the rental housing units will be affordable, in a separate building to be owned by Ann Arbor Housing Commission.The City will issue more bonds to fund these affordable units at Arbor South. A staff memo explains:
“City Council is expected to separately authorize the issuance of City bonds to finance an anticipated amount of $18 million for the affordable housing building, backed by affordable housing millage revenue and/or rents.”
Additional Thoughts…
I also published this on my website:
https://a2elnel.com/post/arbor-south-public-interest-vs-investor-interest/
Arbor South: Public Interest vs Investor Interest
On November 17th, the Council agenda includes (for the second time) two agenda items related to public support for a private development at State and Eisenhower. These items appeared previously on the November 6th Council agenda.
DS-1 (25-1847) Resolution to Approve a Brownfield Plan for the Arbor South Project – 2845 South State Street
DS-2 (25-1846) Resolution to Approve a Public-Private Development Agreement for the Arbor South Project and Authorize the Purchase of up to Three Parking Structures Subject to Availability of Funding (8 Votes Required)
In anticipation of an expected vote on November 6th, I wrote at length about the likelihood that it would be approved, based on the fact that since November 2022, our City Council has approved virtually everything put in front of it.
https://a2elnel.com/post/the-council-that-cant-say-no-300-million-for-arbor-south/
Ahead of that meeting, two members announced their planned absences. On the night of the meeting, two other members were absent, which meant that one item could not meet the 8 vote requirement for approval. I did not expect that the items would be delayed due to absences. I did not expect that Council would be revisiting the issue this week.
“WE HAVE A MAJORITY OF CITY COUNCIL PEOPLE”
This week, I shared a video about why the project at State and Eisenhower is requesting so much public support and why a public-private partnership has been requested by the developer. In my video, I used a recording that had been posted online and was accessible via simple Google search. That recording was a June 2025 presentation that Jeff Hauptman (a co-developer of Arbor South) made to a room full of his investors: people who own a stake in property portfolios in and around Ann Arbor.
Many people have now seen that video and are shocked by how casually Mr Hauptman refers to the favorable zoning he was able to get approved, noting “A majority of what the investors have in this room are in this new zoning.” In the recording, Hauptman boasts about getting five planning commissioners on board with his plans for Arbor South and tells his investors:
“We’ve been at this now for about seven years, just pouring in time and money, pouring in time and money. And uh we finally reached a point where we have a majority of City Council people, all the City administrators, a bunch of County Commissioners, all really excited to see this happen. And so they’re doing what they can to help push it through.”
Hauptman emphasizes the goal of “making the land worth more than the buildings” and how this maximizes the profits for his investors.
My YouTube video was published for about two days, before it was the subject of a DMCA takedown notice. Anyone visiting the link now sees the message:
This video is no longer available due to a copyright claim by Oxford Companies.
My use of excerpts from a recording that was publicly posted on the internet, on a topic of public importance, is clearly fair use. I am appealing that decision.
THIS WEEK’S DECISION
Two Council members – Dharma Akmon and Erica Briggs – have publicly expressed opposition to the plan for subsidy of Arbor South. Privately, a third Council member, Jenn Cornell, has emailed constituents stating that she will oppose it. The plan can be approved with the required 8 votes if every other Council Member – apart from Akmon, Briggs, and Cornell – attends tomorrow’s meeting and votes in favor of it.
It is worth noting: dissenting votes from Cornell, Briggs, and Akmon have never prevented plans for Arbor South from moving forward. City Council has approved spending a total of $350,000 to move the plan forward: $175,000 on private consultants and $175,000 on specialized legal services. This is in addition to whatever staff time was spent on it when Council authorized the City Administrator to negotiate the deal. On August 7th, Cornell was willing to switch her vote when it was needed to approve more legal services for the plan. It’s unclear whether Cornell’s stated opposition will ‘stick’ this week, when it’s most needed.
It’s also unclear how well these votes of dissent actually understand the deal. In broad strokes, the deal is bad, but in explaining her opposition, Briggs recently offered this bizarre and completely wrong detail:
“If approved, the City commits to purchasing, operating, and maintaining three public parking structures to service the Arbor South Development. The City would not own the land on which the structures are built.”
https://us3.campaign-archive.com/?u=a346f7bb4c7ddb07e6f535e4b&id=a4f1a3b7b6
The public-private partnership agreement includes very clear explanation that the City agrees to pay up to $12 million for three separate pieces of land, each described as an “unimproved Parking Structure Parcel.” Three times – for each of the three proposed City-owned parking decks – the agreement explains an arrangement for the purchase of land “plus an amount for completion and delivery of the Parking Structure.” The purchase of land and structures add up to a potential cost to the City of over $160 million.
https://a2gov.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=F&ID=14953195&GUID=BAD4AD3C-06E8-4A8E-9E69-B63337BC50E5
Charitably, Briggs is confused. However, this begs the question: do Council Members not read the documents they are voting on? If they aren’t reading the documents, where are they getting their information? Briggs’ misstatement— minimizing the terms of the deal – is certainly a way of providing cover for colleagues who might vote in support of it.
“MAXIMIZING INVESTOR RETURNS”
All of this is important context for current conversations around updates to the Comprehensive Land Use Plan.
Hauptman’s June presentation is remarkable in directly stating what many neighborhood activists have been pointing out for months: profit interests are the direct beneficiaries of zoning changes that increase the cost of land. Re-zoning that escalates the cost of land is a boon to investors, not the community. In more moderately priced areas of the city, residents report that investors are already knocking on doors. Current plans to aggressively up-zone large swaths of the city will inevitably increase the cost of homes as it increases the bottom line for investors. The goal is profit, not affordability.
In response to the obvious point that the free market does not lead to affordability and empowering profit interests is not “progressive,” elected leaders and others have a set of rehearsed talking points: chanting “housing crisis” over and over, while dismissing serious affordability concerns. Any challenge to the strategy of deregulation to empower investors is met with broad insults— if you do not share this City Council’s desire to promote investor interests, you are simply “anti housing,” and an example of evil, selfish “NIMBYism.”
The truth: elected leaders that posture the righteousness of their work in the interests of “affordability” are – whether they realize it or not – aggressively promoting policies to maximize investor returns.
“WISDOM FOR THE DISCUSSION”
The developer aiming to get $300 million in subsidy for the project at State and Eisenhower does not want the public to know why they need this help. Some of that was explained by Hauptman in his June presentation. Oxford Companies has already used the tactic of threatening legal action against residents who speak out. This week, my YouTube channel was targeted.
In August 2024, residents raised concerns about how many times a Mayoral-appointee on the City Planning Commission had to recuse himself from decisions that would benefit his then-employer, Oxford Companies. In response, Mayor Christopher Taylor was dismissive:
“This is how local government should work. The notion that you want to find people who have nothing to do with local land use questions. You know, I don’t truck with that. I think this is a good thing and shows a planning commission filled with professionals of engagement, experience and wisdom for the discussion.”
We have a very specific kind of “wisdom” contributing to our public discussions now: investors who have a lot to gain and Council Members who seem not to understand the issues put in front of them.
Thank you for taking the time to be informed about our local government!
Elizabeth Nelson