Re School Board Election
Some Democrats uneasy with Democratic Club
The non-partisanship necessary in school-related elections is being violated by the Royal Oak Democratic Club, according to some Democrats engaged in a listserv exchange of comments. Apparently, that club and County Commissioner Dave Woodward, wearing his Oakland County Chairman's hat, are openly supporting one candidate for Trustee on the Royal Oak School Board. That candidate happens to be a political consultant said to be guiding the campaign of Democrat Brenda Lawrence to unseat Republican Oakland County Exec L. Brooks Patterson.

The listserv dialogue makes the point that the School Community needs bipartisan support when it seeks renewed or new funding. According to one self-described "yellow-dog Democrat," Woodward was a major factor in achieving the School Community's win during its third try for a millage several years ago. At the time, VersagiVoice is told, Dave wasn't so much being political as simply helpful in mounting an issue-oriented campaign. For that, today's dissenting Dems are grateful, even as they are "angry about the level of support" the Democratic Party is offering its preferred candidate. (This is being written just before the election. The local press will probably name some of the members of the cast. We'll have to wait to see how it all turns out.)

Local Government at its best
What do you get when you mix School Board trustees and School Administrators with City Commission members and City Administrators in the same room?

You get a sample of local government at its best.

That was my impression after sitting through a 90-minute meeting during which School Board President Gary Briggs guided the gathering through an agenda containing a dozen items. This was the 15 April 2008 meeting of the City/School Liaison Committee which meets quarterly.

Part of the discussion was simply information exchange, updates of previous discussion re Longfellow Property and of Bus Stop developments, as examples. More detailed dialogue took place about such matters as the Voluntary Random Drug Testing program the School District is implementing and about the Notification System which will make it possible to simultaneously alert hundreds of households or individuals of any emergency, such as a lockdown.

Discussion about practical matters as why the Schools must follow newer drainage criteria when repairing or improving a parking lot brought forth information about state and federal standards and about eliminating flooded basements. "Asphalt-on-asphalt" is only a short-term fix, apparently, but it avoids the expense of meeting the new standards which must be followed when all existing pavement is removed. There was an exchange of information about whether the city's normal schedule of maintaining and updating streets can be adjusted to accommodate more quickly the streets near schools.

Talk of removing some crosswalk signals included the need to stay aware of student-count and location as people move out of and into the neighborhood. Conversation about the financial arrangements needed to maintain the Police Liaison Officer for the schools led to a review of that officer's responsibilities during school closings and holidays. Commissioner Drinkwine* joked, "Maybe we can trade a street for a police officer!"

Then there were simple announcements, like exploring the possibility of tying House & Home tours to the annual Dream Home Expo.

A couple of ad hoc subcommittees were formed to follow up on this or that. Most decisions reached by this City/School Liaison Committee remain tentative until approved at regular meetings of CITCOM or of the School Board, but the quietly conducted dialogue, even if occasionally gingerly, made possible productive exchanges of information and opinions which serve both constituencies well.

* So friendly and relaxed was this meeting that I failed to record who was present. Sitting here trying to visualize the seating, I come up with:

• From the City: City Manager Tom Hoover, Commissioners Terry Drinkwine and Carlo Ginotti, Police Chief Ted Quisenberry, City Engineer Elden Danielson, and recently appointed City Comptroller Tony DeCamp.

• From the Schools: Superintendent Tom Moline, Administration Staff John Schwartz and Andy Linell, Board Members Gary Briggs, Christine Hartwig, Deb Anderson . . . plus several individuals I didn't recognize.

Deny a lot split, get sued
A while ago, CITCOM denied a lot split, even though the proposed split meets the city's requirements. The owner sued. A settlement was reached during CITCOM's 30 July 2007 Special Meeting. City Attorney Dave Gillam provides the following informative summary.

This lawsuit involved an appeal of the City Commission's October 9, 2006 denial of an application for a lot split at 208 Mt. Vernon.  The Consent Judgment that was approved at this Monday's City Commission meeting was a result of settlement negotiations between our office and the property owners' attorneys.  Our office had recommended that the City enter into a settlement approving the land division because the resulting lots meet or exceed all applicable Zoning Ordinance regulations regarding lot size (although one of the two lots will be the narrowest in the neighborhood).  In exchange for the approval, the property owners have agreed to comply with all Zoning Ordinance requirements when the property is developed (building height, setbacks, lot coverage, etc.) and not seek any variances of any kind from the Zoning Board of Appeals.  In addition, the settlement places limitations on the style of any home that is built on the property to ensure that the home will be architecturally compatible with the existing homes in the neighborhood. -- Aug 2007

Who are those people?
VersagiVoice readers have asked the identity of the young man, sometimes accompanied by a female companion, who regularly sits in on meetings of the city commission, the plan commission, the zoning board of appeals, the DDA, and the like. On Wednesday, 16 May, the two were the last in the public seating area as the Downtown Development Authority meeting ended. Puzzled, one or two of the directors asked, "Did you want something?" Later that day, the two showed up at and participated in the Neighborhood Leaders meeting where City Attorney Dave Gillam spoke.

The young man is Royal Oak resident Andrew Androff, who announces his intention to run for city commissioner on his website: www.AndrewAndroff.com. He is informing himself about Royal Oak issues and personalities and government operations by attending as many civic/political events and meetings as he can. Androff's "campaign manager/girlfriend" is Katie Mato, "who served on the finance team for Rudy Giuliani's Exploratory Committee," and who has returned to Michigan to help in Andrew's campaign. -- 23 May 07

Royal Oak 50 years from now
Architects see current '10-block urban fabric' expanded
Parks, not parking lots . . . Density, not sprawl . . . Walkability and convenient transportation ("street trains") . . . A new City Hall erected above underground parking . . . Attractive, clustered, 6-story multi-use buildings . . . An expanded Farmers Market . . .

Such was the upbeat vision projected with words and PowerPoint by local architect Frank Arvan, of FX Architecture LLC, to about 50 people, including Royal Oak Mayor Jim Ellison, who attended an event tied to the celebration of the 150th Anniversary of the American Institute of Architects (AIA). Laying the foundation for his futuristic presentation, Arvan pointed out that currently if one walks west from the Farmers Market for several blocks one will be "walking mostly through parking lots ."

Urban redevelopment proceeds through three stages, the architect explained: Step 1 is restaurants and entertainment. Step 2 is increased residential. Step 3 is combining steps 1 and 2 with expanded mixed use development. Royal Oak has accomplished Step 1 and is transitionally combining Steps 2 and 3, one infers from Arvan's presentation. It was appropriate that the event was held in one of the empty retail spaces on the south side of multi-use Main North Lofts.

Responding to Arvan's recalling that Royal Oak was an important urban hub in the 1920s, the curator of the Royal Oak Historical Society Museum, Muriel Versagi, described a couple of historical artifacts in the museum's collection: An 1872 map which shows Old Pontiac Trail (now Woodward) coming through Royal Oak, "with a hotel at Woodward and Ten Mile." And, a 1919 photograph showing a rally in front of the Inter-urban train, with a sign declaring Royal Oak the "Gateway to Detroit" and touting three miles of newly paved road. "Everything old is new again."

Arvan and several other architects who reside in Royal Oak assembled a professional-and-academic team to develop the case study of Royal Oak and its presentation, as their tie-in to the AIA's statewide 150th Anniversary celebration. Arvan is willing to offer the presentation to local civic and professional groups. He can be reached at 248.586.0336. In the accompanying picture, he is shown answering a question after the session ended -- probably about "going green."

The Farmers Market and The Library --
Should they be city-owned?
The ongoing fight about parking at the Farmers Market lot has caused some civic activists to suggest that -- for both similar and different reasons -- the question of city ownership of the market and the library should be reviewed. For the Library, the parking problem takes the form of whether and how it should validate/pay parking fees for its patrons. Beyond parking though:

§ Nationwide, reports are accumulating which show reduced attendance at public libraries, especially among children. Books by Hemingway go for two years without being borrowed.  "'Doctor Faustus' has survived for more than four centuries but hasn't been checked out in the past 24 months." Part of the problem is the availability of reference material via the Internet; another part is an apparent drop-off in book-reading. Libraries are counterattacking by changing the nature of their venue, critics charge. Children and adults no longer have to depend on a library to conduct research or simply to locate a single piece of information (some librarians complain that callers bother them for information "they could have found sooner on their own online") So libraries are becoming entertainment centers and offering videos and compact discs and services which are available in the private sector.

Libraries have become "welfare programs for middle-class readers who would rather borrow Nelson DeMille's newest potboiler than spend a few dollars for it at their local Wal-Mart." . . . Mitch Albom's "latest  tear jerker" outpulls Bronte, Faulkner, Hardy, Proust -- all of which have been removed from the shelves. That  being so, "Why must we have government-run libraries at all?"

At the very least, some suggest, public libraries should be removed from city budgets and made independent, a la school districts, to seek public and other financing and to be totally independent in their operations, including in hiring and firing.

§ About Royal Oak's Farmers Market, the buzz -- after Commissioner Drinkwine's suggestion that professional management be retained -- includes dialogue about privatizing the market. Like the Library, the Farmers Market is considered a city "jewel," a reputation enhanced by the fact that it operates at a profit, requiring no money from the city's General Fund.

Those who are less entranced with the Farmers Market maintain that with toy sales and other special events, the market is no longer a farmer's market. Further, they suggest it is not really operating profitably when such matters as the following are considered:

The city purchased the building, so the Market pays no mortgage or rent. . . . It is owned by the city, so no tax payments; therefore vendor-rental fees are below private sector prices. . . . Streetscaping is provided at no charge; private businesses would love that freebee! . . . Maintenance costs and upgrades are funded by the Downtown Development Authority (was that a $500,000 check?) . . . "Without all these perks, the Farmers Market could not stand on its own two feet."

All this comes at a time when private sector retailers are complaining about the lack of help or cooperation from City Hall.

About the Farmers Market, former city commissioner Tom Hallock writes:
Re: Farmers Market debate. A couple of factual corrections.

The DDA does not pay for Market maintenance costs, it is either paid for out of Market profits if it is a large item or the City takes care of it if minor as it is owned by the city.

Secondly, quite true the DDA donated $500K to the Market for renovations, grateful for that. However, the other $800K came from profits made by the Market. The next renovation of the Kitchen area comes solely from Market profit.

About the Library, Metta Lansdale has her say.
 

Asst City Attorney sues City --
Of course, it's a conflict-of-interest
At Issue:
According to news reports, Royal Oak Assistant City Attorney Brian James has filed three legal actions against the City, the latest being a lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in which he charges that the city retaliated for his joining a union and his pro-union advocacy on his radio and cable talk shows. Somewhere in there are charges of emotional stress, mental anguish, humiliation, and the like. [Disclosure: Sometime during 2006, VersagiVoice published an interview with James -- unfortunately not archived -- about his talk shows. In other writing, I have suggested, among other things, that the City Attorney's Office be privatized or at least downsized.]

Limited and cautious published statements from the City lead readers to believe the issue is much narrower than all that, that he was relieved of some of his duties after Police Chief Ted Quisenberry objected to a union steward, James, handling collective bargaining matters for management when management is dealing with other unions. "Conflict-of-interest" seems to be the City's foundation-position.

Some Impressions:
With decades of collective bargaining experience behind me, I find it impossible not to comment in brief bullet-points.

• Whether James's lack of work assignments is unfair "retaliation" will be decided by the National Labor Relations Board, if the NLRB decides the charge deserves pursuing. I haven't followed developments closely, but I assume James is speaking for the entire bargaining unit, not just for himself.

• Whether James has suffered compensable emotional stress and like is for the Federal Court to decide, if the complaint gets to hearing or trial.

• If the same rules apply to pubic sector collective bargaining as to the private sector, the Union -- in this case the Teamsters -- and the City each has a 30-day window during which to notify the other party of an intention to terminate the existing agreement. The 30-day window must be no less than 60 and no more than 90 days before the contract's expiration date. What happens between now and March, therefore, may affect either or both the pending NLRB and Federal Court action.

• Re: the basic question of whether it is a conflict of interest for James, who is a union steward, to negotiate for management (his employer) with other unions: of course that is a conflict of interest. A parallel: Would James be comfortable with his boss-management-the City Attorney, representing him in negotiations with his union?

  • On management's behalf over the years I have retained an attorney who sometimes represents management and sometimes unions, but the same attorney could not ethically represent both parties in the same collective bargaining episode.

Unfortunately, in the legal arena matters become excessively convoluted. I once testified before the NLRB for several hours on each of two days, even having the honor of being declared a hostile witness by the attorney who had asked for my testimony. As lawyers are wont to do, what we covered -- in excessive and meaningless detail -- over those two days could easily have been resolved in an hour or two outside the legal arena. What drives the layman crazy, of course, is that in these situations procedure tends to overwhelm substance. "Where was he sitting when he made that statement?" for example, when the issue is what the guy said, not where he was sitting.

Back to Brian James and Royal Oak: The context will be muddied by the fact that what might otherwise be a straightforward labor-management disagreement will be caught up in public conjecture about everything from the city's financial plight to personal likes and dislikes toward the individuals involved and toward the City Attorney's Office as an institution. -- FJV: Jan 2007

Not in Royal Oak --
Neighborhoods are 'second' 
Royal Oak is lucky.
Although there is some animosity directed toward "downtown" by occasional residents or resident groups, there is no discernible counterattack by "downtown" against neighborhoods. No Royal Oak civic leader or business owner or city official, for example, has said anything like, "Neighborhoods are important, but they're second," as a Michigan Economic Development Corporation spokesman announced during a discussion in Warren about that city's intention to develop a downtown and to remove blight.

Those concerned about downtown Royal Oak tend to fret about the mix of conventional retail and restaurants/bars and about liquor licenses. Except for the occasional charge that neighborhoods in the South End are neglected by city officials, one hears positive things about Royal Oak neighborhoods. And there is praise for those regular meetings with neighborhood leaders arranged by City Manager Tom Hoover. No one has said of Royal Oak what one Warren councilman is reported to have said about his city: "We have some institutions that were destroyed by the administration for the sake of downtown development." In Royal Oak even the size and shape of the attractive parking structure on Lafayette was affected by the preferences of nearby residents.

Let's go national.
Spokespeople for the National Trust Main Street Center -- while acknowledging the desire to preserve historic buildings -- say, "Clothing and hardware stores will never return to the town center. Restaurants, bars, offices, even private housing [condos?] need to be given a place on or near Main Street." To help such revitalization, a couple of states, Montana and Nebraska so far, are offering state aid to small entrepreneurs.

Royal Oak retailers understandably and properly reject that conclusion. For one thing, the growth-impact of restaurants and bars in Royal Oak has peaked. It is accurate enough to say, these days, "Restaurants come and go" as restaurateurs and developers continue to try to find the right mix of sports bars, family meals, ethnic cuisine, and upscale dining. Anytime now, absentee property owners will have to face that it is unwise to keep their property vacant while hoping for a new eatery to want the space. So rents should drop to the point that conventional retailers can justify returning to downtown Royal Oak.

That brings us back to neighborhoods. Too many of them seem to have given up on downtown, complaining that "those people" are not reflective of Royal Oak. True, the youngish crowd which frequents bars and restaurants may or may not be residents and are not good prospects for conventional retailers. But there are retailers downtown, and -- especially during the day -- there's enough parking to accommodate regular residents when they come into town. The hope is that when all the condos are built there will be enough prospective customers to justify a dry cleaner and drug store and other conventional retail -- and downtown will become just another neighborhood. -- Jan 2007

Charter Review Committee goes into action
Guided by Commissioner Carlo Ginotti, Royal Oak's Charter Review Committee held its first 2007 meeting on 09 January. The committee made its first pass at creating a list of items to address. CRC's charge: simplify and modernize Charter language; improve the Charter's ease of reading and render it more understandable; and update the Charter so that it is in concert with current practices and ordinances.

In addition to setting priorities for the topics suggested by CRC members or requested by the City Commission, the committee will again survey department heads for proposed amendments or language changes.

CRC members are Commissioner Carlo Ginotti; retired City Attorney Chuck Semchena; attorney David Poulton; and two non-attorneys: Frank Versagi, webmaster of this website;  and Ryan Shelby, creator of the online community forum www:royaloaksoundoff.com. Poulton was elected Chairman.

City Attorney Dave Gilliam attended the meeting as the required legal liaison, sitting in for Mark Liss, Assistant Deputy City Attorney, who was ill.

City Engineer ignored evidence supporting back-in angle parking?
Frank,
I disagree with your comment that Danielson's report provided all the information the Commission needed to make an easy yes or no decision on how to best implement angle parking. I also found his recommendation to be contradictory to the information provided.

Back-in Angle Parking
Danielson cited three safety advantages to back-in angle parking: 

1) Better visibility when leaving the parking stall. 
2) Access to vehicles and trunks from the sidewalk.
3) When doors are open they face the sidewalk.

The negatives he cited were:

1) Birmingham participants didn't like it. 
2) People might hit inanimate objects on the sidewalk.

Regarding the Birmingham participants who didn't like it, I say so what. Their opinions are based solely on ‘feelings’ and aren’t relevant to Royal Oak's situation. They had converted from pull-in to back-in angle parking. Change is hard. Royal Oak is converting from parallel. Parkers in Royal Oak are already used to back-in parking, because they do it everyday as part of their parallel parking maneuver on S. Washington. 

If Birmingham’s experience was worth citing, then the long-term experiences of other cities should have been included. Wilmington, DE; Seattle, Tacoma & Vancouver, WA; Indianapolis, IN; Washington, D.C.; Montreal, Canada; Portland & Salem, OR; Salt Lake City, UT; Tucson, AZ and Pottstown, PA all have back-in angle parking, some for close to 50 years. In summary they report:  

Regarding inanimate objects on the sidewalk, move them if they are in peril. Or install bollards or concrete bumpers to protect them.  What is the feedback from other cities about the validity of this concern?

Pull-in Angle Parking
Danielson cited no advantages or disadvantages specific to pull-in angle parking. I’m unaware of any advantages, but the following disadvantages should have been cited or clarified:

• General traffic engineering practices don’t recommend backing out of parking spaces into live traffic lanes.Pull-in angle parking creates fewer new parking spaces and ergo, less meter revenue than back-in. 

• The pull-in angle parking layout required a setback from the departure side of all intersections to mitigate the chance of backing vehicles from impacting pedestrians in crosswalks.

• What wasn't mentioned is that this requirement is unique to pull-in angle parking, because with back-in angle parking you don't back out of the parking spaces, so there is no greater risk to pedestrians than there is with parallel parking.

The pull-in angle parking plan reduced the parking stall angle to 40 degrees because angles greater than 40 degrees could cause drivers to cross the double yellow centerline into opposing traffic when performing the back out maneuver. Again this is unique to pull-in angle parking.    

I say do the math. 
If you were to base your decision solely on the information contained in Danielson’s report, the answer is clear. Back-in angle parking has three safety advantages over pull-in angle parking. But what doesn’t add up is why he recommended the option that had less safety advantages. In fact, it is contradictory to the information provided, and in my opinion, reason enough for Commissioners to question it. Further, any specific disadvantages attributed solely to back-in angle parking are irrelevant or easily resolved. -- Sandy Johnson, Former RO Parking Committee Member