“A Simple Path Forward”

The following February 2026 emails, released in a recent FOIA response by the City, show unelected individuals working closely with elected officials to shape the Comprehensive Plan and its implementation, with insiders enjoying privileged access to Council and Planning Commission members. The Plan approved by Council states that rewriting the zoning code will take one to three years. Instead, the emails indicate behind-the-scenes agreement that substantial rezoning should take place much more quickly. The exchange reveals the insider web of influence that has shaped the Plan, and also references potential major future projects not yet publicly disclosed.

Scroll down to read the emails, along with explanation of the highlighted text…

February 15, 2026 8:29am

From: Will Leaf <email redacted>
Sent: Sunday, February 15, 2026 8:29 AM
To: City Council <CityCouncil@a2gov.org>
Subject: A Simple Path Forward

Dear Members of City Council,

I'm excited that Council may give the Planning Commission guidance on how to begin implementing the comprehensive plan. Jonathan Levine and I wrote a sample resolution with the same purpose. That resolution lists a few general areas as possible places to target first, like downtown and commercial and industrial corridors.

If you or staff feel that these areas are too large, or there are other more important areas not listed, perhaps the solution would be a simplified resolution that asks the Planning Commission to identify and target key areas within Hub and Transition without Council prejudging what these areas are. The resolution might ask the Commission to:

"Establish one or more new mixed-use zoning districts in Hub and Transition areas identified by the Planning Commission as having the greatest potential for new housing and commercial space."

There are several advantages to this approach:
1. It gives clear direction without micromanaging.
2. It allows the Planning Commission and staff to plan in a systematic, logical way.
3. It avoids the controversy of Council immediately calling for rezonings at particular locations.
4. It would energize and inspire housing activists, who would see this resolution as a big victory.

In contrast, a resolution that calls out a few small specific areas has several disadvantages:
1. It would limit the scope and impact of the reforms at a time when bold action is needed to achieve the city's affordability, transportation, and climate goals.
2. It goes beyond giving guidance and cuts the Planning Commission out of the location selection process entirely.
3. It risks giving the appearance of favoritism, especially if the landowners in the selected areas are already perceived by some as having received special treatment in the past.
4. It would frustrate housing activists who want broader changes.
5. It might cause residents near the targeted areas to feel they are being singled out.
6. It could confuse the public. Some citizens might erroneously suspect favoritism or turn to conspiracy theories to understand why only a few specific areas are being selected.

I understand that if the Planning Commission is entrusted to select areas, there is a risk that the Commission may enlarge the scope of the reforms to an impractically large size and delay much-needed reforms, but I think the Commission is highly motivated to move quickly and avoid this result. More importantly, a systematic process is likely to yield better results, even if it does take slightly longer. As an activist who wants the city to move quickly, I think the right question is "How can we carry out comprehensive reform with all due speed," not "How can we get a few small changes done fast."

I encourage you to consider a simplified resolution that gives guidance to staff and the Commission but also empowers them to work out the details.

Thank you for your thoughtful leadership.

Will Leaf is a software engineer who ran unsuccessfully for City Council in 2015, is a long-time advocate for denser mixed-use development. He has a degree in urban planning from UM, and has written on zoning ordinances. Among many communications to the Planning Commission, on 1/21/26, Leaf and Levine sent the Commission a memo about quickly implementing new zoning in Hub and Transition areas, “Suggested First Package of Zoning Reforms” (https://a2gov.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=F&ID=15091242&GUID=489C11DA-315A-41F7-B5DE-0B175F2523A0). Planning Commissioner Dan Adams has stated strong support for their recommendations.

Jonathan Levine is a UM urban planning professor who had Will Leaf as one of his students, is a leading advocate for denser citywide development. He plays an informal but highly influential role as a conceptual architect of the Plan and adviser to the Planning Commission, particularly Ward 1 Council member Lisa Disch.

“simplified resolution that asks the Planning Commission to identify and target key areas within Hub and Transition without Council prejudging what these areas are” Even before the Plan is approved by Council, Leaf is asking Council to hand over to the Planning Commission the responsibility for setting rezoning priorities. The Commission is eager to make changes quickly despite last year’s assurances to the public from the mayor and Planning staff that this process would take a year or more.

“It would energize and inspire housing activists, who would see this resolution as a big victory.” Kirk Westphal organized the Neighborhood Institute in March 2023, weeks before Council hired CLUP consultants, to promote a growth-focused Plan and urbanization with up to 90,000 new residents. The NI mobilized several dozen housing activists to support a development-focused Plan. A former Council ally of the mayor (2014–2018) with a UM planning degree, Westphal studied with Jonathan Levine, who serves on the NI board, and also supports rapid rezoning of Hub and Transition areas.

“especially if the landowners in the selected areas are already perceived by some as having received special treatment in the past” This likely refers to Oxford Properties CEO Jeffrey Hauptmann, a major donor to Mayor Taylor and several Council members, who earlier this year received $300 million in city tax concessions for the Arbor South project.

February 15, 2026 3:52pm

On Sun, Feb 15, 2026 at 3:52 PM Disch, Lisa <LDisch@a2gov.org> wrote:

Will,

Thank you for continuing to offer your thoughts on these questions. As you know, there are many objectives in play at the moment. I am confident that CLUP implementation will proceed in a way that allows some initial, tangible progress in high-priority areas, while providing CPC to take some time to order and plan for the process in full.

Council may intervene by resolution wherever it seems necessary or beneficial for direction to take that form.

It is very good and helpful to have these conversations now so that the two bodies (and ORC) are positioned to move forward immediately after the Plan is approved by Council.

Best, Lisa

Lisa Disch | Ward One City Council Representative
City of Ann Arbor 301 E. Huron Street
Ann Arbor, MI 48107-8647
ldisch@a2gov.org | Watch City Council Live At: https://www.a2gov.org/departments/communications/ctn/Pages/watch.aspx

Lisa Disch Ward 1 Council Member Lisa Disch, Council’s representative on the Planning Commission, is a close mayoral ally and steadfast pro-development advocate who has supported numerous controversial projects, including Oxford’s Arbor South.

“two bodies (and ORC) are positioned to move forward immediately after the Plan is approved by Council.” Disch signals eagerness to rush new zoning ordinances despite earlier promises to the public. The Planning Commission’s Ordinance Revisions Committee (ORC), where such ordinances are first discussed, includes 2025 members: Elie Abrons (UM Architecture professor), Dan Adams (attorney and major donor to Mayor Taylor and Council), Richard Norton (UM Urban Planning faculty), Sarah Hammerschmidt (urban planner/developer), and Sarah Mills (UM Architecture associate professor of practice).

February 15, 2026 7:52pm

From: Will Leaf <email redacted>
Sent: Sunday, February 15, 2026 7:52 PM
To: Disch, Lisa <LDisch@a2gov.org>
Subject: Re: A Simple Path Forward

Thank you Lisa for reading and responding. I agree it is good to have these conversations and plan ahead. I want to be honest and frank--I do not think activists are going to support a Council directive limiting change to a few specified areas, and the response to such a resolution may be anger, vocal opposition, or disengagement from the process. People are giving up large portions of their lives to advocate for social change, and if Council asks the Planning Commission to spend 2026 rezoning whatever few areas staff suggests, I don't think Council is going to find much support or enthusiasm for that program from anyone. I have tried my best to suggest an alternative, and I'm sure there are other alternatives out there as well, but the decision is obviously out of my hands. I wish you the very best, and I'm always around to talk more if you want.

Will

“I do not think activists are going to support a Council directive limiting change to a few specified areas” Leaf suggests “housing activists” will oppose the Council if progress is slow.

February 16, 2026 6:49pm

On Mon, Feb 16, 2026 at 6:49 PM Disch, Lisa <LDisch@a2gov.org> wrote:

Will,

I'm sorry to hear this because I think that we are all looking for the same thing: a jump start to the Plan AND a thoughtful roll out of the CLUP.

There is very little that can be accomplished re: implementation in the few months that will remain of 2026 after the CLUP is approved. These three specific areas will be an excellent start on Transition. They will be written and mapped and approved by Council before the November election. This will allow Council to demonstrate that Transition will not allow 10-story buildings everywhere and that there will be community meetings (like the ones that happened for TC-1) for these zoning decisions.

While Planning Staff works on those, the Planning Commission and other Staff members will lay out the work plan for implementation in its entirety. If Planning Commission needs to lay out the work plan first, before any district writing and mapping occurs, even less will be accomplished toward CLUP implementation in 2026.

I do not regard these three areas proposed by staff as a "limit" on what can be accomplished. They are a green light to jump in. Once these districts are written and approved, they can be spread around the city by developer request. They will be useful because CPC currently doesn't have anything straightforward to offer when a devel comes in with a transition-like project.

We have plenty to offer, by contrast, for high rise development in the new Hub category: TC1, D1, D1, even Office can work in some instances. We seem to be approving things like that about once a month or every other month. So, our existing tools work for us as we wait for CLUP categories to come on line.

Staff's plan allows leapfrogging ahead with Transition before working out the sequencing of the more complex areas where Transition and Hub intersect.

Lisa

“we are all looking for the same thing: a jump start to the Plan AND a thoughtful roll out of the CLUP.” Disch again affirms a desire to implement new zoning quickly.

“These three specific areas will be an excellent start on Transition. They will be written and mapped and approved by Council before the November election.” Disch sees urgency in rezoning Transition areas before the November election while soft-pedaling potential disruptions to neighborhoods.

“I do not regard these three areas proposed by staff as a "limit" on what can be accomplished. They are a green light to jump in.” Disch says the Commission will approve developer-initiated requests for projects in other Transition areas before new zoning ordinances for these areas are enacted.

“We have plenty to offer, by contrast, for high rise development in the new Hub category: TC1, D1, D1, even Office can work in some instances.” Even without new zoning ordinances, the Commission is already approving high-rises, enabling “spot zoning” for projects unlike their surroundings, such as the Dean on Madison, the Five Corners project at State and Packard, and high-rises on Forest and Church.

February 16, 2026 7:51pm

From: Will Leaf <email redacted>
Sent: Monday, February 16, 2026 7:51 PM
To: Disch, Lisa <LDisch@a2gov.org>
Subject: Re: A Simple Path Forward

Hi Lisa. Thank you for responding and thinking these issues through. I am grateful that you are my city council representative.

I agree that council and activists are working towards the same goal, which is why I have been pushing so hard--I think there is a way to unite activists, City Council, and the Planning Commission, to get a great result and actually end the housing shortage, but the 3-area strategy is just not it.

City Council and the Planning Commission has a 7 month window to make big rezonings before there is a chance of a new council faction that denies the basic realities of the housing market, and all bets are off. Telling the Planning Commission that they have to use this window to rezone less than 1% of the city, on a site-specific basis that looks a lot like spot zoning, and includes a property that Oxford wants to do Arbor South 2.0 on, is just not good politics or policy. We can do so much better!

Creating a flexible mixed-use district for use in Transition is absolutely a top priority and I'm very glad that council wants to create one. However, the idea that all City Council needs to do is just create a floating district, not rezone anything, is not a sounds plan. That strategy relies on City Council continuing to approve controversial rezonings one at a time, indefinitely. If you talk to Richard Norton, or anybody with experience in planning outside of City Staff, they will tell you that relying on developer initiated rezonings is a bad idea. It's slow, uncertain, costly, inequitable, and requires staff, the Commission, and Council to reduplicate work over and over again.

More importantly, City Council might stop doing these rezonings in November, if a new Mayor decides he doesn't want to approve them. I would guess there is probably a 50% chance of this result happening. In this plausible future, all the rezonings for near-campus developments that have been keeping thousands of people from getting displaced from the city will stop. If 800 students come in every year, and there aren't new high-rises built for them, 800 people are going to get pushed out of the city, and they might include my friend Matt who works at Q bakery, and my friend Suri who is going to move 30 minutes off of campus and commute in every day. This terrible outcome can be easily avoided!

All we have to do is leave open the possibility that there might be more areas in the initial package of reforms than just these three areas. Isn't it possible that the Transition district might be a good fit for other important areas besides the three in question? If so, then shouldn't the council resolution keep open the possibility that more than three areas will get proactively rezoned? It's so easy to keep this option open, and it is a big political win at the same time. All you have to do is make the resolution say:

"Establish one or more new mixed-use zoning districts in Hub and Transition areas identified by the Planning Commission as having the greatest potential for new housing and commercial space."

Then the commission can make the districts and decide where to apply them. Staff can argue for those 3 areas, and the commission might agree or choose a larger area. Council would not be undermining staff in the slightest. Activists, Council, the Commission, and the large majority of Ann Arborites who agree that new housing is needed somewhere, would all be united together. We are so close!

In contrast, the 3 areas approach is going to immediately alienate homeowners in Wards 1 and 2, along with all the housing activists who are expecting larger reforms. It would be so frustrating if all the activists who are going to come to Council to support the plan have to also speak out against a resolution limiting the reforms to 3 areas. I very strongly don't want that outcome. I want to be turning people out to support Council, and I think there's an easy way to do that.

Noah Kazis and Adam Goodman (and me if I'm not at the hospital), are meeting with the Mayor on Wednesday. Would you please be willing to keep an open mind on means, since we agree on ends? Or talk on the phone?

Will

“but the 3-area strategy is just not it” The unexplained “3-area strategy” exemplifies city officials’ lack of transparency, shared with allies but withheld from the public.

“City Council and the Planning Commission has a 7 month window to make big rezonings before there is a chance of a new council faction that denies the basic realities of the housing market, and all bets are off.” Leaf warns speed is important because upcoming election could have consequences for implementing new zoning.

“Telling the Planning Commission that they have to use this window to rezone less than 1% of the city, on a site-specific basis that looks a lot like spot zoning” Leaf suggests that without quick “big rezonings,” the Commission will resort to spot zoning, which could raise legal issues.

“includes a property that Oxford wants to do Arbor South 2.0 on” Oxford Properties may be planning another major Arbor South-like project, suggesting Leaf has insider access to information not made public.

“Isn't it possible that the Transition district might be a good fit for other important areas besides the three in question? If so, then shouldn't the council resolution keep open the possibility that more than three areas will get proactively rezoned?” It is not clear what Leaf means here.

“Council would not be undermining staff in the slightest. Activists, Council, the Commission, and the large majority of Ann Arborites who agree that new housing is needed somewhere, would all be united together.” The goal of the CLUP is to build more market-rate housing. That a “large majority” of Ann Arborites support this kind of new housing of this kind is an unsubstantiated claim.

“going to immediately alienate homeowners in Wards 1 and 2” Whatever the “3-area strategy” is, it will likely impact Ward 1 and Ward 2 residents most.

“Noah Kazis and Adam Goodman (and me if I'm not at the hospital), are meeting with the Mayor on Wednesday” Noah Kazis, Jonathan Levine, and Will Leaf have collaborated on land-use policy recommendations for city leaders. Kazis joined the University of Michigan Law School in 2022 from New York and studies affordable housing and land-use law. Adam Goodman, a software engineer and early employee of Duo Security, has been a major contributor to Mayor Taylor and current Council members’ campaigns.

From: Disch, Lisa
To: Radina, Travis; Eyer, Jen; Taylor, Christopher (Mayor)
Subject: Fw: A Simple Path Forward
Date: Tuesday, February 17, 2026 7:33:17 PM

My whole thread with him.
Lisa

February 17, 2026 7:33pm

“To: Radina, Travis; Eyer, Jen; Taylor, Christopher (Mayor)” Why does Disch forward the email thread only to Mayor Taylor and CMs Travis Radina (mayor pro tem) and Jen Eyer?