August Election

Mayor Christopher Taylor and AADL director Eli Neiburger on the Library Lot atop the underground Library Lane parking structure. They’re envisoning a mixed-use high-rise there and on the existing downtown library site that would include a new library­—but it will happen only if voters approve two city charter amendments in an August 5 special election. | Photo by Mark Bialek

City council voted unanimously in March to hold a special election on August 5 to consider two city charter amendments. Together, they’d enable construction of a new downtown library in a high-rise spanning the existing library parcel and the “Library Lot” above the underground parking structure.

The project calls for the Ann Arbor District Library to buy the air rights over the structure for $1. According to one amendment, the project would include new outdoor public open space as well as a mixture of housing above the new library, consisting of artist spaces, condos, affordable units, market-rate units, and event spaces. Voters rejected a 2012 millage to replace the library on its existing site, but taxes shouldn’t be a factor this time—proponents say the plan would not require any new ones.

Related: Selling a Millage

City administrator Milton Dohoney Jr. explains that the “idea was swirling out there,” so he approached AADL director Eli Neiburger last September to see what might be possible. Neiburger says they “started talking specifics” once city council gave Dohoney the go-ahead in January.

The latest discussion follows years of debate over the optimum use for the site. The parking structure was built with a reinforced foundation capable of supporting a building above it, and in 2017, city council voted to sell its air rights for a multiuse development that would have included housing and a public plaza. The developer would have paid $10 million to the city; half of the proceeds would have been dedicated to affordable housing, with the other half going to the city’s general fund. But that project was killed in 2018, when voters approved a citizen-led ballot initiative that amended the city charter that requires the space be preserved as an “urban park and civic center commons.”

Related: Is Bigger Better?
To Sell or Not to Sell?

One of the new amendments would repeal that requirement; the other would outline the new plan and authorize the transfer of the air rights. Both need to be approved for the project to proceed.

Alan Haber, the longtime activist who helped write the 2018 amendment, denounced the proposals at an April city council meeting, calling the new plan a “betrayal” of the city’s obligation to develop the park. He said that Erica Briggs, council’s liaison to an advisory committee on implementing it, assured him that the city would contribute to hiring a consultant to review the amendment, suggest next steps, get outside input, and engage the public in the process. Haber says that commons supporters raised $70,000 for the consultant and the city set aside $40,000, but the request for proposals to hire one was allowed to languish.

“Their obligation is to continue the agreed RFP process for consultants to chart next steps,” he says.

Briggs acknowledges that she saw the merit of providing city funds if they could be matched against private dollars, and secured the $40,000 commitment four years ago. But, she says, “we were worried about moving forward with the project on public engagement when we didn’t necessarily have the capacity to move forward on that vision.” The next stage of the project, she says, would have required “an incredible amount of resources.”

Councilmember Jen Eyer says that parks are already underfunded and the city didn’t have the budget to create a new one, particularly at this location. “They couldn’t seem to make it go anywhere, so the committee was eventually disbanded,” she says.

“I don’t think this is a betrayal at all,” says Briggs, who argues that the library is a civic commons. “It’s one of these packages that seems to deliver on a lot of goals and visions that people have across a wide spectrum,” she says. “It’s a more practical path to realizing the community aspirations for this site.”

Mayor Christopher Taylor, who led the effort to sell the air rights and opposed the 2018 amendment, says that the site is ill-suited for a park. “You cannot grow mature trees on top of this parking structure,” he says. “The city has no money, certainly not the millions of dollars necessary to design, build, and maintain an urban park, even if it were adequately situated.

“The concept of a grand park on top of a parking structure has always been a fantasy.”

Haber also opposes holding a special election instead of waiting for the next general election in November 2026, when turnout would be greater. That would also allow more time for consultants to gather information and offer professional advice on implementing the 2018 amendment, he says.

“You have a willing partner right now,” Dohoney responds. “Their board seems poised to support this. You have a frustrated public with the status quo. What are we waiting for?”

Taylor, Eyer, and Neiburger all refer to the new proposal as a “win-win-win.”

“The question marks surrounding what would happen on that space have been a major impediment to the library’s planning for the future,” Neiburger says. “Being able to take control of that site and deliver some truly amazing public spaces, which the library has a proven track record of doing, is a wonderful opportunity for the community, for the library, for the city, for the patrons, for everybody.” Eyer says that the new space will be available for use by community organizations, providing the commons voters previously approved.

Haber disagrees that the new plan is consistent with his amendment. “I have never heard the word ‘park’ or significant common spaces for community use” in the discussion, he says. Dohoney acknowledges that the plan does not include a park but would provide for a public gathering space.

Taylor says the proposal satisfies key goals: creating a needed new downtown library, a substantial amount of additional housing, and public open space.

If both ballot initiatives pass, the library will put out a request for proposals to select development partners for the combined sites. If the vote is no, it will proceed with redeveloping the site that it already has.

Eyer says a “no” vote will send the Library Lot back to the drawing board again. But she’s optimistic it will pass. “When people hear about this, they’ll be really excited,” she says.

Calls & Letters June 2025

Crediting the Library Green

“I read the article on ‘August Election’ in the ‘Inside Ann Arbor’ section of the Ann Arbor Observer,” Rita Mitchell emailed. “There was no mention of the actions taken by the Library Green Conservancy to establish the Center of the City, in support of our current city charter.”

Our article credited a “citizen-led” ballot initiative for the 2018 city charter amendment calling for an “urban park and civic center commons” atop the Library Lane parking structure, and “commons supporters” with raising $70,000 to advance those plans. The Library Green Conservancy, which Mitchell heads, helped pass the amendment and raised the money to implement it.

Mitchell notes that the Conservancy also drafted a Memorandum of Understanding with the city in 2023, outlining the funding for a consultant and a request for proposals to hire one. Council never responded, and in February 2025, after the announcement of plan to amend the charter and develop the lot, the Conservancy withdrew its funding offer. Instead, Mitchell wrote at the time, they will “focus on a new opportunity” that they hope to announce this summer.