|
Alcohol
See:
Liquor Control Committee
Liquor Licenses
Liquor
Talk
Moratorium
Context:
For some residents, the consumption of alcohol in any form
is physically and morally unhealthful, even sinful.
September
§
Hi Frank,
Somehow I think if the 58,000 square foot entertainment complex
was being planned for the SW Corner of Lincoln and Woodward you
wouldn’t feel the City Commissioners were being “tortured” by
all the public comment coming from the impacted neighborhood.
For all intents and purposes, this is nothing more than a 58,000
square foot bar. -- Peggy Goodwin
§ We do not need
anymore bars or restaurants... how about more retail - specialty
clothing (and not just for the teens). Royal Oak is a Family
City - and Families like to go downtown also. -- Sandra
Oliver
In the 23 Sep 09 issue of the Royal Oak Review, Capello
suggests that what she terms a "partial moratorium" will "raise the
price of existing licenses."
With regard to the Semchena statement - I understand his position
with regard to the fear of "rubber stamping" more and more bars for
the downtown. However, I completely disagree with any legislation
that basically makes a current owner of a liquor license wealthier.
(Limit the transfers and current owners can ask for a king's ransom
for their license). If the community wants to restrict the number
of bars in the downtown district, than say that. This proposal does
not and will not accomplish that goal. -- Rick Karlowski
Four of the five candidates for elected office --
Capello, Ellison, Poulton, Rasor -- oppose the liquor license
moratorium. Androff favors it, and some of his literature drops
include Semchena's support. -- fjv
§
“It’s The Economy, Stupid”
In these tough economic
times, Royal Oak needs to welcome all ideas that have
the potential to enhance Royal Oak as an entertainment
venue as well as other types of business investment.
Investors should be encouraged to continue investment
into the development of Downtown Royal Oak and
all corners of Royal Oak.
What Chuck Semchena doesn’t
want you to know:
1) Crime is down in Royal
Oak based on the current FBI crime statistics just
published.
2) Property crime has
dropped 41% since 1999.
3) Royal Oak is
safer now
that it has ever been.
4) The police have and
continue to
protect us with the top and utmost
professionalism.
5) The DDA is paying for
three dedicated officers to help patrol our downtown.
In addition, the DDA supports the cost of the Court
House, and Parking in the downtown.
6) New businesses
mean no new
taxes for homeowners.
7) The only people that
support a “PARTIAL Moratorium” are a few that don’t
believe in competition.
The LCC and the City
Commission already have 36 criteria’s for “denying” any
liquor licenses transfer or current in-town license.
The city has already “denied” several licenses based on
policy staffing, size, location, parking (which I still
feel is not a problem), and yes “DANCING.”
Limiting new business
development that may need a liquor license such as a
hotel and not being able to grant that would be “BAD
Government” that is why I do not support this ballot
initiative. I want my elected officials to be able to
make that determination based on it being good business
for Royal Oak.
Join me in voting “NO” on
the moratorium on November 3rd.
Gary Lelito
Royal Oak City Commissioner
Regionalization
Context:
Regionalization, or at least consolidation, of some
services between municipalities sounds like a good idea.
Problems of local control and questionable financial
benefits have, so far, not been encouraging.
Ethics
(also see Ethics
Debate)
Context:
Recent amendment of the city's ethics ordinance has not
resolved residents' concerns over transparency in
government, whether speaking of elected or appointed
officials or panels staffed by residents.
Opinions vary about how to
attack this problem, which is believed to be tied closely to
the good or bad relationships among the individuals
involved.
24 Sep
from Daily Tribune & Oakland Press
As was inevitable, the new and improved Ethics Ordinance
doesn't satisfy everyone. Even Frank Houston, who threatened
to seek a referendum to adopt his 25-page proposed
ordinance, complains that the proposed penalty for
violations are not severe enough. Commissioner Carlo
Ginotti, whose shorter version was adopted, says he didn't
want to "go overboard" with penalties.
Reader Question
Every candidate agrees with the city's amended Ethics Ordinance, so you should
take it off your list of campaign issues.
If I heard Jim Rasor right during the Candidate
Forum, you are against an ethics ordinance. How can anybody be against ethics?
To help us focus, let's skim-review that
multi-purpose
controversy, the
ZBA/Bordine Affair.
Jim Rasor was charged with conflict of interest and other unethical
behavior. Attorneys and laymen quickly chose sides, with a very visible
bipartisan majority maintaining that his behavior was neither a conflict of interest
nor unetlhical. At a formal hearing, the legal charges against
Rasor were dismissed, and a follow-up attempt to at least censure him was
denied.
And then-Commissioner Stephen Miller was
suspected/accused of attempting to influence the vote during the same
ZBA/Bordine Affair. After a flurry of activity, the Sheriff's office decided
that, whatever had happened, Dave Poulton's complaint did not rise to the
level of criminal activity and shut down the investigation, which apparently had
never actually started anyway. Poulton was criticized for his behavior. At the
same time, Andrew Androff was criticized and accused of belonging to a
specific political circle because he was totally silent about the ZBA/Bordine
matter.
To summarize, there were allegations and there were hearings.
Although not everyone is satisfied with how it all ended, residents learned
about it all. How does a revised ethics ordinance improve on that?
About the ongoing debate over the
liquor license moratorium.
Apparently drawing on public records, those opposing the moratorium state that
$X dollars have been paid to two commissioners who have led the drive
for the moratorium. The implication is obvious: The vote of those commissioners
has been bought by an existing license holder who is attempting to avoid
more competition. If true, that is certainly unethical. If a quid pro quo can be
proved, the action can be considered criminal. If residents are convinced the
commissioners behaved unethically, they can move to recall the officials.
If someone is convinced that a bribe can be proved, legal action can be
initiated.
Once again. The public knows all that. How does a
revised ethics ordinance improve on that?
A few more paragraphs (or pages), some changes in language --
most of which can be and will be variously interpreted -- make no helpful
difference. A set of policies, specifying specific actions which are thought of
as unique to Royal Oak will take care of that uniqueness. And policies can be
readily updated by a CITCOM Resolution or by the Administration, with CITCOM
approval. Fattened ethic ordinances make many mountains out of few anthills.
With three of the four candidates directly or indirectly involved
or named
in ethics-focused matters, how can ethics not be a campaign issue?
To the degree that the candidates seem to agree that passing a
law or amending an ordinance should be the first approach to solving
problems, I'm disappointed in all four of them. Other Questions & Answers
|
Taxes
See:
Budget Talk
City Taxes
Context:
The positions are: "No new taxes" . . . "Dedicated millage
[usually for Police]" . . . "5 or 6 mill increase now" [to
return all quality-of-life services]
Watch for specific language. "No new taxes" has a very
different meaning than "No increase in property taxes." The
latter leaves open all sorts of "user fees," the most
frequently mentioned being a per drink surcharge on
alcoholic beverages.
School districts around the country are facing
further cuts in revenue. To reduce operating expenses, the education
community has turned to outsourcing, privatizing. The operations most at
risk? Food, custodial, and transportation -- all of which include
substantial physical labor.
For local governments, the equivalent "physical"
operations are Police, Fire, Public Works, and Parks and Recreation.
It also happens that those physical operations consume most of a
municipality's general fund revenue.
Cuts of administrative personnel and elimination of
bureaucratic departments strike some reformers as the way to go. Two
reasons that won't work: (1) Such cuts don't save enough money to make a
difference. (2) The mental, rather than physical, work of those
departments carries the institutional memory which makes for integration
and effective control of multiple departments. That institutional memory
is lost when those operations are outsourced.
All of which calls for choosing between the
physical demands of public safety and of quality of life. Causes one to
wonder why anyone would run for public office. -- fjv
Development
Context:
Whether Downtown or on the east side of Woodward, it is
difficult to find an example of residents actively
supporting development.
September
§ I take issue with the constant
diminishment of the legitimate concerns that the residents and
seniors have raised over this Emagine development. We are all
entitled to a difference of opinion, and our opinion right now is
that the process has been flawed, the City is being deliberate in
its efforts to keep decisions out of the public eye until the
decisions have already been made and wheels set in motion and that
there is a disregard for the residents' efforts to try to maintain
some "balance" in our community development. -- Kathleen A.
Klein
§ Monday night it was Carlo's comments that really
struck a chord with me. The fact that after listening to the
developer made him reconsidered his vote. I agree with Carlo
regarding the developer's insistence to have the commission
agree to his plan of operation.
What has happened to Freed? This is his project. I heard
many comments made by the developer that were reruns from other
developers Royal Oak has dealt with, including Burton Katzman,
Corvis, Schostak, Hanna, and several more. There must be a
developer workbook somewhere.
This developer is absolutely no different. He is wanting to
squeeze 10 lbs on a piece of property that is not large enough.
I agree with the movie venue. I am not sold on the alcohol
attachment, but it is not a deal breaker. I don't go to movies,
I rent. There is JUST not enough parking for a movie theatre, a
bowling alley, the residents, and a bar that seats 200. The
developer seems to want to use the Novi model and plop it down
in RO. It will also drive the Main theatre out!
Also, do you remember that it was Dennis Cowan that was
always pushing the communications between developers and
residents. As a matter of fact, he always insisted that
residents connect with other residents regarding home projects
too. -- Laura Harrison
28 Sep 09
Ongoing Emagine saga
VersagiVoice was told that when Emagine CEO, Paul A. Glantz, met
with Barton Tower Residents to address the concerns they had
already expressed twice -- at the Liquor Control Committee and
at CITCOM -- "The questions were the same. The answers were the
same." Essentially, observers reported, the proposed
theater/bowling alley development is still opposed by those
residents. I reached
out to Glantz for his reaction. He replied:
My desire to meet
with, and address the concerns of area residents, remains
steadfast and has not abated. I am very happy to meet with
anyone interested in discussing the project with me. You
are welcome to pass along on my contact information to those
interested in establishing a productive dialogue about the
proposed development.
As respects the meeting at Barton Towers last week, I think
it was productive overall. I certainly did my best to
address all those questions or concerns that would not be
characterized as "rhetorical in nature." While our
opponents were quite vocal among the attendees, I was
encouraged by those who quietly called me aside indicating
that they favor the project.
§
Reader Rick Karlowski tells VersagiVoice he sent this email
to CITCOM.
Seems Birmingham is getting proactive to recruit retail.
What are we doing to promote our downtown?
It's time to get on the stick. The number and type of potted
plants is secondary to full storefronts. If the DDA is
incapable of marketing the downtown, maybe its time to either
dissolve it or put some people on it who can. --28 Sep
§
And Tom December, chairman of the Skylofts Board, coped me on his
message to city officials:
As a downtown Royal
Oak resident, just wanted to express my appreciation for the
wonderful floral displays provided by the city. Just returned from a
weekend in New York and Downtown Royal Oak feels like a mini
Tribecca but with concerned charm. Keep up the beautification of the
Downtown area including all the great improvements to streets and
sidewalks. Click on the album link for some pics for your enjoyment.
Please pass on to Elden Danielson and others who deserve credit.
Tom
included a link to a slide show of pictures he has taken (I'm not sure
that I've copied the link correctly).
Royal Oak Fall Floral 9-27-09
-- 28 Sep
Budget
See:
Budget Talk
City Taxes
Context:
Any debate about taxes and quality-of-life comes down to
hard decisions about which city departments to downsize,
consolidate, or outsource.
|
