You are viewing this article in the archives. For the latest breaking news and updates in Ann Arbor and the surrounding area, see
Posted on Tue, Nov 15, 2011 : 9:30 a.m.

$35K boost in public art administrator's contract recommended to Ann Arbor City Council

By Ryan J. Stanton


Sue McCormick, the city's public services administrator, gives a report to the Ann Arbor City Council during a special work session on public art Monday night.

Ryan J. Stanton |

Ann Arbor officials are looking for ways to improve the city's public art program and one of the first recommendations is to boost the public art administrator's pay.

Sue McCormick, the city's public services administrator, recommended the $35,000 contract adjustment to council during a special work session Monday night.

She said there are concerns that volunteer members of the city's Public Art Commission are being asked to make unreasonable time commitments, essentially acting as staff and performing the role of project management on smaller public art projects.

"And that's a part of what is hamstringing the productivity of the commission," McCormick told council members.

"It's really inconsistent with the role of boards and commissions throughout the city and I think it has contributed to the long times to deliver public art."

McCormick recommended the city modify the contract with Aaron Seagraves, the city's part-time public art administrator, to make him more equivalent to a full-time employee.

She said the current contract is in the $25,000 to $30,000 range, and staff recommends an additional commitment of $35,000 annually.

"It provides us that ability to continue to assess the needs to support the Public Art Commission and the delivery of public art for the community," McCormick said.

Monday's meeting came in response to a recent request by Mayor John Hieftje that the city closely evaluate the public art program started four years ago in Ann Arbor.

The city pays for public art through its Percent For Art Program. Under an ordinance approved by the City Council in late 2007, 1 percent of the budget for all city capital projects — up to a limit of $250,000 per project — is set aside in a special public art fund.


Marsha Chamberlin, chairwoman of the Ann Arbor Public Art Commission, addresses the City Council Monday night.

Ryan J. Stanton |

Some have questioned the effectiveness of the program. In the last four years, more than $2.2 million in city funds have been channeled toward public art, but the Public Art Commission has delivered on just two projects: a sculpture in front of city hall and a sculpture in West Park.

Marsha Chamberlin, chairwoman of the Public Art Commission, told council members Monday night it took a while to get the program going back in 2008.

"There was no public art program to build upon," she said. "I think we were doing a little on-the-job training, as well as really helping the city define what a public art program was all about."

Chamberlin called the Public Art Commission a "highly effective group of volunteers." She said the commission has had city staff support for only a year and four months.

"The rest of the work was done by the volunteers," she said. "So we defined the policies and procedures to make acquisitions and in commissioning artwork."

Chamberlin also gave an overview of the public art projects that are in the pipeline now. (See related story: Ann Arbor public art projects at Allmendinger Park, Justice Center moving forward)

Chamberlin said the commission has done a lot of "soul searching" lately and has identified a number of areas where it could improve. In addition to commissioned public art installations, she said, there's interest in developing a new process to acquire non-commissioned art.

"An artist may be willing to donate a piece to the city," she said. "Sometimes people own work that they would like to donate. We are in the process of developing guidelines for that."

The commission also would like to streamline the process for site-specific commissioned artwork and develop programs that result in recurring types of public art production, Chamberlin said, pointing to murals, patterned bike lanes and street furniture as examples.

"In Philadelphia and Boston, one of the things they do is pattern their bike lanes and pattern their crosswalks," she said. "So instead of just having the horizontal stripes of white paint, that white paint turns into patterns that are designed by artists and they're applied with a stencil.

"They're very original — the artist gets credit," she said. "And we can say, 'Oh, there are 15 crosswalks in downtown that have a kind of personality and create a sense of place.'"

Chamberlin noted Montreal also has painted its bike lanes different colors, which she said adds to the character of the city.

Chamberlin acknowledged there hasn't been enough public input on art projects or the annual public art plan. One goal is to improve communication with the public, she said.


Council Member Tony Derezinski, D-2nd Ward and a member of the Public Art Commission, agreed there's a "tremendous burden" placed on commission members right now. He also said he envied Grand Rapids for its efforts to promote itself as a city that values public art.

Ryan J. Stanton |

McCormick said another recommendation is to start holding annual work sessions on public art with the City Council and Park Advisory Commission.

"In the several years that we've had the ordinance in place, I can't recall a time that council actually took the work plan up and had a robust discussion about it," she said.

McCormick said staff is recommending the city maintain its broad base of source funds for public art, which mostly include a handful of millages and utility funds.

No funds for public art in Ann Arbor have come from the city's general fund, which pays for basic services like police and fire protection. But McCormick said the council could take action to expressly prohibit any potential future transfers from the general fund.

McCormick said city staff agrees with Council Member Sabra Briere, D-1st Ward, there should be a "sunset provision" to allow for the return of public art funds to the sources from which they came if three years pass and the money hasn't been spent or committed to a project.

She said it's staff's opinion, though, that the City Council should have the ability to provide for up to a two-year extension of funds if requested by the Public Art Commission.

Despite the $35,000 recommended increase in the contract with the public art administrator, which is intended to pay for project management services, McCormick said it's recommended that other administrative support for public art remain capped at 8 percent of budget.

Monday's meeting was purely for informational purposes. No action was taken by council, but some expressed initial support for some of the recommendations being made.

Council Member Tony Derezinski, D-2nd Ward and a member of the Public Art Commission, agreed there's a "tremendous burden" placed on commission members right now. He also said he envied Grand Rapids for its efforts to promote itself as a city that values public art.

Ryan J. Stanton covers government and politics for Reach him at or 734-623-2529. You also can follow him on Twitter or subscribe to's e-mail newsletters.



Mon, Nov 21, 2011 : 1:40 p.m.

It appears as though Ann Arbor officials do not care what we think - they will spend money any way they choose regardless of public objections.


Wed, Nov 16, 2011 : 10:48 p.m.

City Council: amazingly tone deaf.

Elaine F. Owsley

Wed, Nov 16, 2011 : 7:54 p.m.

if the recently dedicated piece o public art, created by a foreign artist, is any indication of the results of this program and its director, please just get rid of the whole thing - use the money for the welfare of the city.


Wed, Nov 16, 2011 : 2:37 p.m.

This is clearly a case of expensively decorating the house while the foundation crumbles. All our city officials seem to be interested in is making Ann Arbor into a "big city", while ignoring the big-city problems they're creating. The words "hubris" and "ego" quickly come to mind. I am *very* interested in seeing whether Carsten Hohnke and Mike Anglin, my two Ward 5 reps, support this nonsense.

Vivienne Armentrout

Wed, Nov 16, 2011 : 2:36 p.m.

As another commenter noted, Jane Lumm's election should in part indicate what the electorate at large thinks of this program. Lumm ran on an open skepticism of the program, and emails were sent out from at least one member of AAPAC in an attempt to defeat her. Part of the Council Party's support of the program seems to be based, frankly, on an unsophisticated and unthinking understanding of art. As I discussed at length in my blog post <a href="," rel='nofollow'>,</a> they seem to be striving for some symbolic Art (as in bike racks?) rather than understanding the complexity of the concept. Mr. Derezinski needs to be reminded (again) that the Grand Rapids ArtPrize program is the result of a multimillion dollar gift from a very rich benefactor. It is not the result of spending public tax dollars on art chosen by a committee.


Wed, Nov 16, 2011 : 2:31 p.m.

With all of the negative feedback to the City of Ann Arbor regarding the art funds being ripped off from other very much needed projects, I could not believe my eyes when I saw this article. Indeed, close down the whole &quot;art project&quot;, replace those funds back into the categories they were &quot;stolen&quot; from, and move forward to fixing the city's streets, parks, and most importantly of all rehire more AAFD and AAPD folks to keep our city safe. In my opinion, this is a total slap in the face of the AA citizens. Sorry for such strong words, but.....


Wed, Nov 16, 2011 : 2:05 p.m.

Well, the poll is up to 77% of people that aren't happy with the changes. You would think the Ward 2 election was a sign of things to come for the (m)ayor and rest of city council. People are sick and tired of not being listened to. With all of the declining CORE services in this city, they all know that this is a very controversial topic. How do they address it? Offer the person a huge raise. That's your city leadership hard at work.


Wed, Nov 16, 2011 : 1:54 p.m.

I can't take much more of this. I can't stop laughing and it gets difficult to breathe. Stupdity thrives in Ann Arbor under the name of public art.

A A Resident

Wed, Nov 16, 2011 : 1:26 p.m.

In most private sector jobs, pay is indexed to job performance. If you haven't done so already, check out the metal tree sculptures at West Park, and then see if you think the public art administrator deserves a raise. Real trees would have been cheaper, prettier, and provided shade for audiences during performances at the band shell. I bet several of the art classes at the local high schools and U of M would do the job, including making the art, for free.

Elaine F. Owsley

Wed, Nov 16, 2011 : 7:58 p.m.

You can actually purchase something very similar from one of the catalogs that hit my mailbox recently. I believe the cost was $39.95 and you had your choice of colors.

Stephen Lange Ranzini

Wed, Nov 16, 2011 : 12:16 p.m.

Regarding the major *accomplishment* of this person who is to get the $35,000 a year raise, I want to remind everyone about our contest for us citizens who paid $750,000 for it, to name &quot;IT&quot; (the Dreiseitl water sculpture). From your many suggestions, we are now up to 29 different name to choose from! Weigh in with your opinion and vote now by going to: <a href="" rel='nofollow'></a> Please encourage all your friends to vote in the naming contest also! We will announce interim results when &quot;IT&quot; is finally working.

Charlie Brown's Ghost

Wed, Nov 16, 2011 : 3:27 a.m.

If it's PUBLIC art, paid for with PUBLIC money, when does the PUBLIC get to select the art?

Fat Bill

Wed, Nov 16, 2011 : 2:01 a.m.

Look, I'm a confessed liberal, but I'm not crazy. This is the sort of thing people with too much of their own money (like the DeVos') can play with, not with taxpayer money in a tight budget year (decade?).


Wed, Nov 16, 2011 : 1:16 a.m.

The public art commission will never recover from the 750K German commission debacle. Sorry folks, you blew it, don't try to cover it over with a pendulum swing to flimsy ideas like cartoon bike lanes. Really.


Tue, Nov 15, 2011 : 9:22 p.m.

It's time for the mayor to go. A much better use of city funds would be to organize a recall campaign and remove the mayor and several city council members. The fact that issues such as this are even brought up for discussion is beyond good judgment.


Tue, Nov 15, 2011 : 6:43 p.m.

I understand it comes from a different budget but I think it shows the lack of common sense to be worried about this person getting a raise when we have lost almost 100 police officers in ten years. No matter where the money is coming from it still belongs to the city.


Wed, Nov 16, 2011 : 2:37 a.m.

I don't care why it was formed. I believe it's the wrong time economically to be giving this person a raise, when the city says its so cash strapped.

hut hut

Tue, Nov 15, 2011 : 10 p.m.

It's the fault of the AAPAC and the Mayor that people do not know anything about the AAPAC, it's funding or why and how it was formed. Sadly, not knowing the facts never stopped anyone from having an opinion.


Tue, Nov 15, 2011 : 7:06 p.m.

I believe it's the tax payers money. We entrusted it to our elected officials to use it wisely.


Tue, Nov 15, 2011 : 6:33 p.m.

Apparently kicking one City Council member out wasn't enough ... next election coming up.


Tue, Nov 15, 2011 : 6:21 p.m.

How many permanent local jobs have been created due to the public art fund? How many people moved to, or purchased homes in Ann Arbor specifically due to the new public art over the past 4 years? Clearly the new water sculpture in front of city hall is going to draw thousands to Ann Arbor... Until they find out the city paid $750,000 for it and laid off firefighters and police officers in that same exact time frame...

Charlie Brown's Ghost

Tue, Nov 15, 2011 : 6:08 p.m.

No, no, no, no, and still no. Abso-freakin-lutely not. And can somebody please explain how, if there's a limit of $250,00 per project, they were able to spend (waste) $750,000 on one thing?

Charlie Brown's Ghost

Wed, Nov 16, 2011 : 3:25 a.m.

Ahh, I see. Well, I'd like to propose a 0% limit per project, then.

Ashok Gopalakrishnan

Tue, Nov 15, 2011 : 7:42 p.m.

The limit is on how much money you can pull out of any one particular capital improvement project - like repaving a street, or replacing water/sewer pipes, etc. But once the money has gone into the art fund, there really is not a limit on how much can be spent on the art project. The caveat is of course that the art must somehow tie in to the source of the funds. In the case of the Dreiseitl scuplture, the money came from the fees that we all (A2 residents) paid the city to provide water and sewer services. We also paid the fees so that the city could keep the services running, and the infrastructure well-maintained. The sculpture uses water, and according to an article, &quot;His proposal incorporates metal, water, concrete, and a series of LED lights, and is comparable to "waterscapes" he has created for other cities that respond to the surrounding environment - designed to celebrate the refreshing, renewing quality of rain and water, and incorporating a sustainable approach to using storm water.&quot; So, there you have it. That the city raised its water/sewer rates back in June - well, if you are an art lover, you are not supposed to question it.


Tue, Nov 15, 2011 : 5:46 p.m.

HAHAHAHAHaHaHaHahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha...hehhehheh...heeheehee... *Sigh* Wait... That was a joke, right?


Tue, Nov 15, 2011 : 5:24 p.m.

City Hall needs to see a doctor, as it appears that deafness and perhaps insanity is showing.

Linda Peck

Tue, Nov 15, 2011 : 4:58 p.m.

I just do not understand this at all. We just had a huge amount of money go to a German artist (living in Germany!) for public art for this community. Why are we now spending more money for public art for our community when we have not even supported local artists for the city hall project? I say disband the program if there is no coherent plan for supporting local artists. That should be part of the plan!


Tue, Nov 15, 2011 : 4:56 p.m.

Truly this Ann Arbor City Counsel scam is an art form on the first degree. Why not start an Administration position for &quot;interpreter of cloud shapes&quot;.


Tue, Nov 15, 2011 : 4:42 p.m.

I'd rather see the funds go to people who propose their own art improvements to the city. How about allowing citizens to present proposals for funding and completing of art projects and have a commission vote to approve or deny . This is no different to funding proposals that would go on in the private or public sector, but the benefit is the advocate is the artist and they get credit for the work. Depending on the funding it could be billed as community service if payment is only for supplies/services and not contracted work. Could citizens be allowed to paint the bike-lanes blue and maize? Could they be used to design a clock-tower for Liberty Park? I'm interested in feedback?


Tue, Nov 15, 2011 : 4:41 p.m.

Count the Council incumbents returned to office. Just one more self-inflicted wound. Welcome to Lemming City.

Mumbambu, Esq.

Tue, Nov 15, 2011 : 4:27 p.m.

Imagine how many bridges $35,000 could build! Since when has having a &quot;cultural&quot; side mattered to a city?


Tue, Nov 15, 2011 : 6:15 p.m.

I'm afraid it wouldn't even pay for a corner of the bridge..... alas

hut hut

Tue, Nov 15, 2011 : 4:16 p.m.

Ann Arbor has unique &quot;community generated&quot; art. It's called Festifools and related events where people are the art, not some piece of statically placed sculpture or something hung on a wall in a building locked up for half the day. Does Ann Arbor want unique public art or does just continue to duplicate what other places have done? These are the discussions that need to take place, in public with lots of public input. If Ann Arbor wants a unique look and feel to it's public art program, get rid of the people on the board who represent little more than the local arts scene status quo. If Ann Arbor wants a publicly enjoyed and appreciated art program, plant seeds and incubate a place where local artists can gather think and produce. 415 W Washington St.


Tue, Nov 15, 2011 : 4:15 p.m.

OMG, the stupidity. Is every one of these people high? Patterned bike lanes and crosswalks? Fewer cops and firefighters, fire engines offline daily, aggressive panhandling, a rapist on the loose, street lights aren't turned on, no leaf pickup, a bridge in disrepair and potholes everywhere and for the love of God there are people starving in the world and art is suppose to be more important? Patterned bike lanes and crosswalks? My brain hurts now.


Tue, Nov 15, 2011 : 5:28 p.m.

I don't get it either. I feel like I'm in the movie &quot;Invasion of the Body Snatchers&quot; and I'm one of the few remaining humans. They must keep the &quot;pods&quot; in the basement of the old city building.

Alan Goldsmith

Tue, Nov 15, 2011 : 4:06 p.m.

I hope at the next Council meeting at least four members will request a written legal opinion on the One Percent Art program from the Ann Arbor City Attorney as well as one on the legal issues on restricting bids for further projects to residents of the State of Michigan. The request for a written opinion can then be voted up or down and those opposing it can explain why they are opposed to transparency and openness, both of which have been missing from this process since day one. This issues has been incorrectly been made into a lovers of art vs. haters of art issue and it's time to stop playing games and follow the rule of law. Why is that too much to ask?


Tue, Nov 15, 2011 : 4 p.m.

I love public art as do many other residents of this community. During good economic times, I might support this proposal. However, I don't know what it will take to enlighten this Mayor and city staff that when neighbors are losing their jobs, their homes and we observe city services being cut left and right (resulting in city staff losing their jobs), this is NOT a priority. I don't feel it has to be cut, but I would at least maintain the status quo while we are so broke we are cutting vital services. I would think that the last headline this city wants residents to read right now is that they want to give a raise of $35,000.00 to the Art Administrator (which is more than a lot of people earn in a year). I want to see how this City is going to help the residents that need it, not increase the city dollars for an art administrator. By the way, I like the &quot;community generated art&quot; far more than the expensive sculptures. I love the murals and the idea of painted bike lanes. Just please, don't pay some elite artist hundreds of thousands of dollars to do it.


Tue, Nov 15, 2011 : 3:59 p.m.

Hey, City of Ann Arbor: The economy stinks. You've been cutting services. And consequently, even many of us who have historically been supporters of the arts are thinking that too much of our tax money is being spent on unnecessary art projects when it could be better used for things like keeping more police on the streets and more firehouses open. DO NOT increase the salary of the public art administrator. LAY OFF the public art administrator. DISBAND the Public Art Commission. Roll all money that's been set aside for public art back into the coffers for use on services that the taxpayers actually need. Look, in better times I'm perfectly willing to have a small portion of my tax dollars diverted for public art. I fully support that. I enjoy the fruits of such a program. BUT NOW IS NOT THE TIME. When (if?) the economy recovers and the city has some extra cash, only then should you think about reviving the commission and hiring a new public art administrator. Until then, we need all available tax revenue to go to essential services. Also: patterned bike lanes? Are you serious? You do know that paint on pavement gets really slippery when it's wet, right? Riding a bike in this town is dangerous enough already; please don't make it more so.

Haran Rashes

Tue, Nov 15, 2011 : 3:56 p.m.

For $35,000 perhaps we can hire 1/2 or 1/3 of an additional police officer or fire fighter. In their spare time, when not training, on patrol, fighting fires, doing paperwork, etc., they can administer the art budget.

hut hut

Tue, Nov 15, 2011 : 3:52 p.m.

Grand Rapids Art Prize has degenerated into a street party complete with drunks and more bad art than should be allowed by law. There is some good art, a few excellent pieces, but it's usually in the institutions or higher end businesses. The rest of it is junk on display for the purpose of revenue generation for smaller downtown Grand Rapids businesses. The event might help local businesses, but it's NOT about public art Mr Derezinski should come to the realization that Art Prize is NOT a good example of what public art is or how it should be exhibited in Ann Arbor. Creativity is not about being a follower or duplicating what other places have done. As far as the current AAPAC, get rid of it and start over with a new board with written policy and guidelines IN PLACE before spending any more tax dollars.


Tue, Nov 15, 2011 : 3:51 p.m.

Pick up my unbagged/carted leaves if your going to spend money

Guinea Pig in a Tophat

Tue, Nov 15, 2011 : 3:43 p.m.

Can the community choose the pattern for the patterned bike lanes? I vote for dollar signs.


Tue, Nov 15, 2011 : 9:11 p.m.

how about three primates? one covering its mouth, the other its ears and the last covering its eyes


Tue, Nov 15, 2011 : 4:17 p.m.

how about a donkey with dollar sign eyes and the runs out the back


Tue, Nov 15, 2011 : 3:49 p.m.

dollar signs with wings ( heading south or at least out of town).

Ron Granger

Tue, Nov 15, 2011 : 3:31 p.m.

Did the city ever release the art administrator's contract? The Ann Arbor News asked for it years ago, and the city was steadfastly dragging their feet on the disclosure. I believe that inappropriate obstinancy tainted the whole program in regard to transparency.

Ron Granger

Tue, Nov 15, 2011 : 3:29 p.m.

I support the Percent for Art program...... BUT I think it has been grossly mismanaged. 1. There is no public input. NONE. Not on placement of pieces, type of pieces, administrative issues, everything. Once upon a time they spoke of whether to hold the required once a year public meeting, and whether that meeting would just be a dog and pony show, or whether they would have to take actual input. That's just pathetic. They have millions of dollars of our money and no accountability. To date, they have spent very poorly and unwisely. 2. Lack of transparency. See #1. 3. To date the program has been a shill organization that only supports city hall. It is truly sad how much of the money and attention spent to date services the monument to ego that is our new city hall. You may know it as the building that voters rejected time and again, but which was ultimately built against their wishes. 4. Lack of progress. They have accomplished almost nothing in terms of enriching our community with art. 5. Benchmarking. They need to compare their progress with other cities. Not just any cities, but cities that have great public art. 6. Don't waste time re-inventing the wheel. Others cities have already done this. Adopt their best practices, rules and guidelines. And, again, don't forget the public input. 7. Portfolio. To underscore how ineffective they have been they should have a simple image portfolio online. That portfolio will make it very clear just how little they have accomplished. Please don't make it some expensive Flash app that you hire a developer for to program- just put some pics up in a gallery. 8. You have a limited time to make an impact in this community until we take our money back. City hall does NOT count. Elephant in the room: You don't see how little you have contributed to the community after three years. 9. You work for us. If you are a volunteer, great! You still work for this community, as you spend our money.


Tue, Nov 15, 2011 : 3:24 p.m.

Let me get this straight, we voted for street &amp; sidewalk repair millage and now the salary of the public art director goes up? I remember reading a previous article that the cost of the public art administrator was $50,000. Perhaps that includes all the benefits and support staff? And if this person is earning only $30,000 right now shouldn't we be able to see more than 2 art installations? Do something to deserve the raise and maybe we can consider it. I manage many more projects and make about that. Who is this guy that he gets more? Can we trade jobs?


Tue, Nov 15, 2011 : 3:45 p.m.

buildergirl the fact that your trying to make since disqualifies you from this postion in liberal A2.

Stephen Landes

Tue, Nov 15, 2011 : 3:21 p.m.

I see that City Council, by considering this insanity from the public art commission, is preparing more ammunition for the next election when those deaf to the voice of the public will finally lose their seats. It's too bad we have to wait for another election to let them know their priorities don't match those of the tax payers.


Tue, Nov 15, 2011 : 3:14 p.m.

I wonder, how many other cities the size of Ann Arbor has a public position of Public Art Administrator? Why can't this position be rolled into already existing positions from, oh lets say, the DDA? Or the Park Commission? This is the same city that can't seem to find the funds for essential public services in financial hard times for police officers and firefighters. Again, the operative word here is essential. Then the gall to have utility rates contribute to the arts program isn't what I expect when I turn on my tap each day. Or, when my home backs up with sewer water. And the reference to public art in Grand Rapids, how much of their funding is from private sources? Not a good comparison. How soon is it before McCormick jets to Detroit? Ha! Try this scenario of funding public art with utility rates in Detroit and she'll be back in Lansing with a cushy retirement.


Tue, Nov 15, 2011 : 3:02 p.m.

As an art dealer that has just returned to Ann Arbor, I certainly understand the need to pay an administrative-curator a full wage. That being said, I don't believe that painted bike lanes and crosswalks will lend any sort of &quot;identity&quot; to the city. In most communities, artists pave the way for organic growth (think mosaics on South Street in Philadelphia or even Chicago's graffiti scene in its heyday before spray paint was banned). It has to be a conversation within the realm of studio, paintbrush and hand - certainly not the confines of a committee's chatter. I've served on numerous boards and committees and that's hardly how extraordinary creative work happens. We can't be held accountable nor contrast ourselves to Grand Rapids' Artprize. It's a five year competition fully funded by the DeVos Family and its foundation where the artists are awarded by popular vote. I hardly see how we can or would want to compete with a venue which allows artists to campaign for votes. My recommendation is to publicize the Public Art Commission meetings so that artists will know when the meetings happen, have a vetted competition for public art works and spend the money on funding material stipends for the artists. Otherwise, the viability of this plan will be short-lived. Especially in an economical climate where people are struggling, we hardly need to see where we're supposed to ride our bikes in any color other than city-mandated white.


Tue, Nov 15, 2011 : 3:23 p.m.

The city can't hardly afford to provide city services equal to surrounding smaller communities yet the council and mayor continue to waste our precious tax dollars on non-essential whims. Enough!


Tue, Nov 15, 2011 : 3:02 p.m.

Oh Snap this is going to be good. You just cant buy this kind of entertainment. Thank you liberals for making me feel so smart.


Tue, Nov 15, 2011 : 2:50 p.m.

Patterned bike lanes! That is SO Ann Arbor.


Fri, Nov 18, 2011 : 5:45 p.m.

LOL. It would be funnier if it wasn't such a waste of money. I was in Montreal last month and walked for miles on end. I don't remember seeing any patterned bike lanes!


Tue, Nov 15, 2011 : 2:49 p.m.

All I can say is, &quot;REALLY&quot;


Tue, Nov 15, 2011 : 2:48 p.m.

&quot;Ann Arbor officials are looking for ways to improve the city's public art program and one of the first recommendations is to boost the public art administrator's pay.&quot; Of course it is. Who would have expected any less? It must be fun to play with other peoples money like that. I have a better idea: Stop this fiasco. Now.


Tue, Nov 15, 2011 : 2:42 p.m.

Oh this is going to have some lovely comments. I'm getting my popcorn ready!


Tue, Nov 15, 2011 : 2:41 p.m.

I have a great idea to ease the tremendous burden -- do away with the program entirely and disband the commission. The money could be put to *far* better uses in any number of ways. That seems to be what the vast majority of people who post here think.

Stephen Lange Ranzini

Wed, Nov 16, 2011 : 1:30 p.m.

Regarding the major *accomplishment* of this person who is to get the $35,000 a year raise, I want to remind everyone about our contest for us citizens who paid $750,000 for it, to name &quot;IT&quot; (the Dreiseitl water sculpture wasn't &quot;named&quot; by the sculptor&quot;). From your many suggestions, we are now up to 29 different name to choose from! Weigh in with your opinion and vote now by going to: <a href="" rel='nofollow'></a> Please encourage all your friends to vote in the naming contest also! We will announce interim results when &quot;IT&quot; is finally working.