Ann Arbor DDA agrees to provide $218,050 for improvements to Delonis Center
The Delonis Center homeless shelter in downtown Ann Arbor will see $218,050 in upgrades soon, thanks to a grant from the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority.
The DDA's governing board voted 10-0 today to approve the grant, giving a boost to the nonprofit Shelter Association of Washtenaw County's plans to make energy efficiency upgrades and improve service delivery to the local homeless population.
Joan Lowenstein
In a resolution of support, DDA officials called the Shelter Association an important downtown anchor and service provider. They said the temporary shelter and supportive services the organization provides through the Delonis Center help further the DDA's mission.
"I would point out also that it was within our policy of providing infrastructure improvements, and so that is what's being provided here," said DDA Chairwoman Joan Lowenstein.
The DDA's grant will fund five specific items:
- New washers and dryers, including maintenance — $30,000
- Lockers and chairs — $8,000
- Emergency generator — $60,000
- Water conservation/lighting/HVAC energy conservation measures — $84,050
- Medical equipment and software — $36,000
Mayor John Hieftje said the upgrades aren't going to end Ann Arbor's homeless problem, but they will make sure the shelter has the infrastructure and resources it needs. The money is coming out of the DDA's Housing Fund.
John Hieftje
"This is in keeping very much with the work that the DDA has done in the past in collaboration with the city and the county to support the downtown shelter," said Hieftje, who serves on the DDA's governing board. "These infrastructure improvements are what we tend to concentrate on at the DDA, and it was right up our alley."
DDA officials said many of the clients served by the Shelter Association are in the downtown and receive medical attention, access to showers and washers and dryers, employment assistance and other services to help them get out of homelessness.
The Shelter Association still is seeking funding for other items identified in its capital improvement plan, including $98,210 for solar panels as an energy saving measure and $15,000 for computers enabling medical case managers to work offsite engaging individuals.
Also at today's meeting, DDA officials received a report showing the number of hourly patrons parking downtown has grown significantly over the last five years.
"You're seeing a really steady growth in our parking patrons," Hieftje said. "We have a rising number of people parking in the downtown, but at the same time the use of the go!pass is really expanding very much, and we're also seeing what we believe is a good-sized surge in the number of people bicycling in the downtown area, so demand for downtown is up."
The board today also received results of a recent bike parking count and cyclist survey, as well as a report showing parking revenues from August 2010 compared to August 2009. The report showed monthly revenues were down $13,638 from the year before, largely due to the closure of the Library Lot because of ongoing construction.
DDA board members Sandi Smith and Newcombe Clark were absent.
Ryan J. Stanton covers government and politics for AnnArbor.com. Reach him at ryanstanton@annarbor.com or 734-623-2529.
Comments
Speechless
Fri, Oct 8, 2010 : 12:04 p.m.
lou glorie wrote: "... If I were asked how to spend this money, I would spend it on increasing the number people we can shelter. Would that qualify me as venomous"?..." No, it wouldn't. That represents an alternate plan well worth consideration. But you miss my earlier point in regard to use of the word "venemous." I was chastizing some initial comments written in a derogatory or bullying fashion in response to spending ANY public money whatsoever on the Delonis Center. By contrast, you argue instead that the $218,000 should be spent differently. That sounds fine to me — it's a debate worth having, and to a fair extent your point is well taken. There's always give-and-take going on when choosing between improvements and expansion. How about some of both? But do keep in mind that your willingness to spend even one dime of DDA or city money on the Delonis Center places you squarely in opposition to most of the writers on this page. And we all know that postings on annarbor.com typically run far to the political right of the local liberal-centrist mainstream. Your post also reminds me of how, in the recent city primary, Pat Lesko & friends carefully sought talking points that deftly tapped into local libertarian-Republican frustrations while also not openly alienating left-leaning voters. (Why else would some Lesko backers claim that the Snyder effect took away votes from her, rather than the mayor?) ------------ "... Please tell us when you, our local government, Saint Joan of the DDA, or the Delonis Center will get around to addressing this root cause...." This is a strange statement. Of course, the Delonis Center and nearly all other programs (including those at local churches) only treat the symptoms of homelessness, and not the root causes in our corporate-driven economy. How would you propose to resolve homelessness on a municipal budget? After all, this huge, growing social crisis extends nationally and beyond in its scope. How would $218,000 get everyone off Ann Arbor streets right away and into stable, permanent residences? Go for it, and good luck. Instead, it's going to take massive Keynesian spending on a national scale (with the individual states pitching in), combined with wholesale economic reform and a big ramping up of federal social spending and services. Eventually — someday — our country will finally adopt a Western European model and seek to improve upon it. Though we can get started by diverting 90% of our $660 billion annual military budget into useful social purposes. Neither Mayor John, Saint Joan, the DDA, Pat Lesko, you, me, nor any other local finds themselves in a position to accomplish this on a city-level budget.
tlb1201
Thu, Oct 7, 2010 : 5:31 p.m.
Well said, Lou Glorie and Ranzini! Besides questioning the need for a $60,000 generator that will probably rust out before any of its parts wear out, I also question how the energy-efficient items such as $98,210 in solar panels, and probably many of the "green" items lumped into the $84,050, will provide any benefit to the homeless. I also question whether any of these "energy-saving" expenditures will ever save enough energy to pay for themselves and free up any money to go directly to caring for the homeless. I would bet that most will be fully obsolete before they ever cover their cost. I fear that they are just "green" window-dressings to further someone's image as a supporter of pet causes. There are a lot of people in this city who truly care for others and for issues that really matter, but they need to look deeper at how they are willing to our spend money to help. Just paying your taxes or paying for parking isn't enough. More of us need to question things and challenge those who are spending OUR money. We can't let the "feel-good" items steal the funds away from the core things we wish to accomplish. If we are going to spend money in a down economy, let's make the money work effectively so that it can provide more benefit than just supporting an image or making the taxpayers feel good about throwing money at something that looks good only on the very shallow surface.
bunnyabbot
Thu, Oct 7, 2010 : 4:44 p.m.
the homeless shelter is a non for profit, non profits usually take donations or have fundraisers. The shelter should be able to pay for its own upgrades by these means without having to ask the dda/city for funds. Like someone else said the dda is being treated as a bottomless cookie jar.
Jay Thomas
Thu, Oct 7, 2010 : 2:51 p.m.
Ranzini is right; they should have hired two beat cops with this money instead of splurging on new doo-dads. The DDA just raised parking rates and extended enforcement earlier this year to come up with this money. Most of Ann Arbor's homeless really aren't from Ann Arbor anyway. The best thing the DDA/shelter could do would be to buy them a bus ticket back where they came from like NYC did.
Steve Hendel
Thu, Oct 7, 2010 : 1:39 p.m.
Again, the DDA is being treated as a bottomless cookie jar from which monies can be taken for expenditures which are, at best, peripheral to it's purposes. The proposed expenditures may well deserve funding, but the source of those funds ought to be the General tax revenues of the City; to call the purchase of items such as laundry machines for the shelter consonant with the mission of strengthening downtown's infrastructure is simply absurd. I would GUESS that, in their heart of hearts, many of the Board members and politicians advocating these expenditures know this; on the other hand, times are tough and the DDA certainly has more loose change in it's pocket than does the General Fund...
Stephen Lange Ranzini
Thu, Oct 7, 2010 : 11:45 a.m.
"Emergency generator $60,000" My bank also had to buy an emergency electricity generator recently. Why doesn't DTE provide reliable power anymore? Wouldn't it be cheaper to get DTE to ensure reliable power so everyone with a mission critical business doesn't have to buy an expensive backup power generator to allow them to ride out the many lengthy power failures we experience? Before we give any more money to the homeless shelter why weren't tough questions asked to find out exactly how many level 4 sex offenders are actually living there? Are there really 10 of these highest level registered sex offenders now living at the homeless shelter? That the shelter is one block from the downtown YMCA and there is no visible police presence (because we fired all the downtown beat cops) is troubling. Speaking as a downtown resident, the fact that you can't walk to get coffee and back in the morning or pump gas into your car without being accosted by a panhandler or bunko artist is troubling. The fact that you can't eat dinner at an outside cafe without being accosted by a panhandler or bunko artist is troubling. The fact that the police have been instructed by city management not to interfere with panhandlers or bunko artists unless they are violent is most troubling. The fact is that my wife is (correctly) afraid to leave our home by herself at night. Why not spend some of this $218k instead hiring some beat cops?
lou glorie
Thu, Oct 7, 2010 : 11:24 a.m.
$218,050 for improvements!? @ speechless: sycophantic, self righteous, holier than thou sentiments like those expressed above can only strengthen the corporate power you rightly accuse of responsibility for the immiseration of so many of our neighbors. Yet, I cant imagine you have ever seen an item of government spending that you questioned the utility of. Or considered, that deference towards established power is a tendency that perpetuates systemic corruption of democracy--even here in our little city of enlightened souls. Regarding this particular expenditure: We are now heading toward winter and the homeless population will be at least as numerous this year as the last. But homelessness is a broad category. Some of the homeless have a car to sleep in, or a couch at a sibling's house or a basement room in an apartment building. In other words, many homeless people are able to find some form shelter. But, that leaves hundreds out in the coldthose who have no shelter at all. These sans-abri make due with cardboard under wooden stairs, Tarps set up in wooded areas, underpasses. In planning for this winter, one could be justified in considering the expenditure of over $200K on "improvements" to Delonis as an extravagance. If I were asked how to spend this money, I would spend it on increasing the number people we can shelter. Would that qualify me as venomous? Speechless is either naive or cynical to write "venomous resentment over modest subsidies for the homeless or the poor...". Oh? Then these subsidies going to the homeless? The article mentions improvements to a building. No mention of increasing the number of people who can be sheltered. How will the improvements enable Delonis to expand the number of beds? Oh, but this subsidy will make Delonis greener. This might give satisfaction to Malthusian greens like the mayor, but from my point of view, it in no way addresses a problem of central importance. This subsidy is no less meretricious as the money spent on those downtown holiday lights.. The Delonis Center does what it can, but it is not nearly enough. It offers services to help its clients change their behaviors. But do the root causes of homelessness reside in the comportment of the poor? Or are they dwelling in the corporatized economy you mentioned? Please tell us when you, our local government, Saint Joan of the DDA, or the Delonis Center will get around to addressing this root cause. Meanwhile the city fiddles while the homeless shiver.
demistify
Thu, Oct 7, 2010 : 10:50 a.m.
I was under the impression that the DDA's function was to undertake projects that would promote the economic health of downtown. The Delonis Center does not serve that purpose; indeed, judging by the recent flurry of concern about panhandlers, it probably detracts from it. Supporting the Delonis Center is a legitimate activity for the city, but using the DDA as a piggy-bank for that is a stretch.
Speechless
Thu, Oct 7, 2010 : 8:52 a.m.
"... Hieftje said the upgrades aren't going to end Ann Arbor's homeless problem, but they will make sure the shelter has the infrastructure and resources it needs...." This is an excellent application of DDA funding, as the Delonis Center is part of the infrastructure for the downtown area. Due to the major flaws inherent in our corporate economy which lead to homelessness on a mass scale, the Center is, unfortunately, a crucial necessity and an essential social service. Unlike many of those who write on these threads, the large majority of Ann Arbor residents do not express a cold, venomous resentment over modest subidies for the homeless or the poor. In a city that sets up a couple hundred thousand holiday lights every fall on downtown streets, we most certainly have the means to address homelessness in constructive, helpful ways. I would suggest that some of the above writers redirect their taxpayer rage more usefully. They could, if desired, focus it instead on evasion of property taxes through non-reporting of LLC transfers, an unofficial taxpayer-funded subsidy for the well-off which appears now to bother most of them very little.
bob
Thu, Oct 7, 2010 : 8:13 a.m.
I don't see how this is in the DDA's mission statement to undertake public improvements to strengthen downtown. I also questions $30,000 for washer/dryers??? First this building is only 7 years old. Doesn't it already have washers & dryers? Washers & dryers last a heck of a lot longer than 7 years. And exactly how many are they getting? $30,000 buys a lot when you can get a high end, efficient set for $1100..before any type of competitive bid for a governmental agency.
johnp
Wed, Oct 6, 2010 : 11:17 p.m.
A generator? Do they have people on life support? I have aerial feed to my place, except for the big outage, service gets restored fairly quickly. Wonder what it's like for those downtown?
bunnyabbot
Wed, Oct 6, 2010 : 10:32 p.m.
if you build it they will come (or be dropped off by out of town cops)
sbbuilder
Wed, Oct 6, 2010 : 9:49 p.m.
Only in AA do we have a state of the art, eco friendly, energy efficient,....... homeless shelter. According to a structural engineer who did the foundation work for this building, over 1/3 of the cost of the entire project went into the pilings they had to put in because the soils were so unstable. But, no, can't move the shelter away from downtown. No, no, no. Got to build it right over an underground creek. This is their way of assuaging their consciences. They don't want to get down and dirty with the homeless. But it they throw them a bone every now and then, they'll feel so much better. The homeless don't give a rats ass about computer systems and solar panels. I truly don't think these folks get it.
Jay Thomas
Wed, Oct 6, 2010 : 8:47 p.m.
Solar panels on the shelter... new computers because used would be shabby. At least I know where the DDA money is going ---> Necessities. :\
Laura J
Wed, Oct 6, 2010 : 7:37 p.m.
Are you kidding me?? Why don't we put this money to better use.
Gorc
Wed, Oct 6, 2010 : 6:26 p.m.
Maybe the DDA can spend part of the $218,050 on opening a retail medical marijuana shop at the Delonis Center...then they would have a steady stream of income to help offset their annual expenses.
Lokalisierung
Wed, Oct 6, 2010 : 4:44 p.m.
"Why was this fairly new center built not to be energy efficient?" Where does it say it isn't energy effienciant in the article? 98K is for adding solar panels, so I don't know if I'd call that "not energy effiiciant."
cinnabar7071
Wed, Oct 6, 2010 : 4:35 p.m.
What about cell phones, no money for cell phone?
Silly Sally
Wed, Oct 6, 2010 : 4:30 p.m.
Why was this fairly new center built not to be energy efficient? Will the payback on this energy savings be less than 10 years? If not, it doesn't make economic sense. $30,000 for laundry machines? What about sending them with a voucher to a local coin laundry? A voucher is needed so the money is not spent on beer or wine. Why not buy used computers at the UM disposal center? It seems as if officials just like spending tax dollars
townie
Wed, Oct 6, 2010 : 4:02 p.m.
"The report showed monthly revenues were down $13,638 from the year before, largely due to the closure of the Library Lot because of ongoing construction." This isn't entirely logical unless the conclusion is that the closure of the "library lot" has caused thousands of downtown customers and workers to forgo their cars. The report shows almost 10,000 fewer hourly patrons in August 2010 compared to August 2009. Clearly parking demand is down across the board or the construction would merely push the same number of parking patrons into other lots or structures. Revenues are only as high as they are due to recent rate increases. The drop in hourly patrons has been consistent for several months now. Maybe it's the economy or maybe it's those rate increases that have deterred drivers from parking downtown. Bottom line is, when the new underground structure opens, it appears we'll have hundreds of new spaces but less demand for parking than before. We'll also have millions in construction bonds that need to be paid from parking revenue.
Lokalisierung
Wed, Oct 6, 2010 : 3:50 p.m.
"How about a new stadium blvd bridge?" They cost more than $218,000 "I live downtown and like a lot of people could be 1 paycheck away from being out in the streets...anybody wanna put a washer and dryer in my apartment?" No, but if you lose that 1 paycheck and hit the streets they'll be a nice place for you to get back on your feet. Would you still be complaining then?
djm12652
Wed, Oct 6, 2010 : 3:46 p.m.
I live downtown and like a lot of people could be 1 paycheck away from being out in the streets...anybody wanna put a washer and dryer in my apartment?
scooter dog
Wed, Oct 6, 2010 : 3:41 p.m.
How about a new stadium blvd bridge?