Library Vote

Mayor Christopher Taylor and AADL director Eli Neiburger at the long-contested “Library Lot.” After a hard-fought campaign, voters approved their audacious plans for a high-rise there with a new library at its base. | Mark Bialek

The August 5 special-election ballot consisted solely of two city charter amendments: Proposal A authorized the city to sell the air rights above the underground Library Lane parking structure to the Ann Arbor District Library for $1 for a “mixed-use development that includes additional library services, housing, retail and programmable open public space.” Proposal B repealed a 2018 amendment that had reserved the structure’s ground-level roof for “an urban park and civic-center commons.” Both got about 58 percent of the more than 23,000 votes cast.

The proposals were endorsed by mayor Christopher Taylor, all ten council members, the AADL board, and other local officials. They were opposed by backers of the 2018 amendment, who accused the mayor of stonewalling on the charter’s mandate to build the park, then using the library as a “political pawn” to reverse it.

On social media, the debate occasionally turned nasty. In July, Ward 4 councilmember Jen Eyer complained on Facebook that “between the anti-library campaign and the Pause the Plan movement (which share many of the same organizers), it is the summer of disinformation in Ann Arbor.” Pause the Plan is the slogan promulgated by opponents of a proposed comprehensive land-use plan that would encourage denser development.

In response, Judy Stone posted that she’s not “anti-library” just “against that particular vision and plan. That’s all.” But other users piled on, with one likening Stone to “a Trump supporter or genocide denier.”

The proponents got off to a faster start and raised far more money. In their pre-election filings, Supporters of the Downtown Library reported collecting more than $84,000, against just over $15,000 for Vote No on Proposals A & B.

Related: Election Update

The No campaign, however, also benefited from $59,000 spent by the Library Green Conservancy, which promoted the 2018 vote and pressed the city unsuccessfully to create the park. After LGC voluntarily disclosed that, U-M researcher Andrew Robbins complained to the state that the nonprofit should have registered as a ballot committee and reported its donations.

Attorney Tom Wieder, who represents the LGC, responds by email that the group “can discuss issues raised in the campaign, factual history, and even discuss pros and cons of certain outcomes” without registering. “The sole prohibition is that it may not issue ‘communications containing express words of advocacy of election or defeat …’ The LGC has been very careful to avoid violating that prohibition in its ads and mailed materials.”

Wieder counters that the Friends of the Ann Arbor District Library should have reported its own donations. The FAADL donated about $23,000 to the “Supporters” campaign, he writes, which “would almost certainly be considered explicit advocacy activity.”

The donations “were made in compliance with IRS regulations for section 501(c)(3) nonprofits under the 501(h) election,” respond presidents Marcia Major and Jacqueline Sasaki and treasurer Garrett Scott in a statement. “Because FAADL donated to the Supporters of the Downtown Library, a ballot question committee registered in Washtenaw County, the donations were made in compliance with the Michigan Campaign Finance Act.

“FAADL did not campaign directly for or against the ballot measures.”

Wieder also argues that the library itself may have violated a state law that prohibits public bodies from engaging in communications in the run-up to an election “if that communication references a local ballot question.”

“All of our actions were taken in consultation with legal counsel,” responds AADL communications and marketing manager Rich Retyi by email, “and we’re confident that the Library is in compliance with all applicable regulations.”

Attorney Noah Hurwitz filed a lawsuit alleging that the ballot language was misleading and inaccurate, but withdrew it after the vote. “I hope the City has not perpetrated a fraud on the electorate,” he texted on election night, “and that the Library does what it promised.”

“We are grateful to Ann Arbor voters for trusting the AADL and its board to deliver on a bold plan for the Library Lot and a new downtown library,” AADL board president Molly Kleinman emails.“I am thrilled that so many Ann Arborites are excited about our vision for a landmark building that will make room both for all the AADL’s excellent programs, services, and collections, and for more of the people who want to live in this city.”

“Ann Arbor has given itself a gift—the gift of an amazing new, state of the art library,” Taylor wrote on Facebook. “Whether you voted YES or NO, we will all be able to enjoy a new, attractive place to library, gather, learn, and live.”

The mayor took a sharper tone when asked about an LGC flier that came out just before the vote. It alleged that the library proposals were just “the first steps” in a plan to “sell our Neighborhood Parks & Park Land to develop Million Dollar Condos” in the upcoming Comprehensive Land Use Plan. City staff and elected officials have denied that’s either the intent or the effect of the plan.

“The No Campaign’s cynical effort to piggyback on the Pause the Plan ‘they’re gonna sell parks’ disinformation campaign was a low point in Ann Arbor politics,” Taylor emails.

“Proposal A was quite literally about selling parkland,” Wieder insists. Although the city never listed the property as a park, he points to the 2018 amendment’s reference to “an urban central park” on the site. “As for cynicism, Taylor and the Yes campaign are unmatched,” he writes. “They exploited affection for the Library to eliminate the park designation voters previously approved.”

For their part, the city and library are already looking ahead. “The next steps for the project are to finalize a transfer agreement, to be approved by City Council and the AADL Board of Trustees,” emails director Eli Neiburger. “Then we will issue a Request for Proposals for Development partners with the goal of the Board of Trustees selecting partners and finalizing agreements by the end of 2026. Then we move on to design team selection, design development and a lot of public input.

“We’ll also determine the location for a temporary downtown library to be used during construction, likely to last 2–3 years. If everything goes smoothly, we’d be hoping to open the new library in 6–7 years; it’s a big project!”