2009 Commission Meetings July-December

06 July 09

There were two meetings-in-one: First, the commission moved rapidly through several routine agenda items. Then they addressed -- gingerly and emotionally -- what a couple of commissioners called "the 500-pound gorilla in this room."

Routine
In a burst of activity, CITCOM:

Approved an 18-item Consent Agenda without removing any for separate deliberation or comment.
Sent back to Staff the proposal to repeal a Private Lot Permit Ordinance which has never been enforced. Two or three commissioners suggested that, despite that lack of enforcement and no record of any problems, repealing the ordinance might result in a surge of non-downtown parking lots. The doubts were not overcome by the city attorney's assurance that other ordinances already in-place would cover those anticipated problems.
Appointed Mayor Ellison as Alternate on the Liquor Control Committee, to replace former commissioner Miller. Staff was directed to determine whether the presence of a city commissioner is mandated, or simply conventional, on three other panels where Miller served: Ice Arena Oversight Committee, Retirement Board, and Rehabilitation Board of Appeals.
Decided to leave Miller's commission seat vacant, rather than appoint a replacement. The thinking is that the process of filling the slot would take until mid-August, leaving only a few months of service. Consensus was reached that it is unlikely that 3-3 votes will occur during those months.
Approved the Tentative Agreement with the Royal Oak Command Officers' Association.
Approved Staff's recommendation to renew the MMRMA Insurance coverage, after Interim City Manager Johnson explained that the group is not an insurance company but an entity made up of municipal representatives who do the "shopping" which one commissioner preferred be done despite years of satisfactory performance.
Approved Staff's selection for Underground Storage Tank Liability Insurance.

The 500-pound Gorilla
The gorilla, of course, is the after-effect of the whole ZBA, Bordine, Rasor, Miller, Poulton mess.

Commissioner Semchena, firing what some observers had already labeled a pre-emptive strike against a rumored ethical investigation, convinced his colleagues to direct Staff to make recommendations about three gorilla-focused items:

Prohibit a member of a City Board/Committee, City Commission, or Authority, from acting as an advocate before a committee they serve on.
Prohibit Temporary Zoning Variances.
Define how City Commissioners interact with Appointees on City Boards, Commissions, or Authorities.

I had already drafted my anti-ethics code piece before this CITCOM meeting. -- FJV

Commissioner Lelito had six somewhat-related issues which were added to Semchena's list for the city attorney to review. Lelito's list included initiating an independent investigation of the alleged inappropriate behavior of several commissioners in the ZBA controversy. Such an investigation had been suggested, too, by Jim Rasor during Public Comment.

Dave Poulton, ZBA member and pending candidate for commissioner, also spoke briefly during Public Comment. Should CITCOM adopt an emergency resolution forbidding anyone who has pulled petitions from addressing the commission? They can have a family member or friend present any civic, non-political, thoughts they think need attention. -- FJV

Ellison did a masterful job of guiding the emotional dialogue as Semchena seemed to want to conduct another hearing on-the-spot; Andrzejak angrily reviewed his own participation, and not, in the Bordine matter, especially as it pertained to his contacts with Poulton; Drinkwine expressed disappointment at what he perceives as the over-reaction contained in Semchena's suggestions.

"It ain't over." . . . "Ripple Effect" . . . "Tipping Point"
are phrases used in previous VersagiVoice reports. Reviewing them will provide context for what is seemingly going to be a too-long preoccupation of city officials and the public. -- FJV

Interviews of the two remaining candidates for City Manager, including Don Johnson, are scheduled for 6:30 p.m., Wednesday 15 July.

15 Jul 09
City Manager Interviews

Final interviews for city manager applicants
If only they had televised CITCOM's interviews with the final two applicants for city manager.*

Then, more than the handful of citizens who sat in the audience would have seen five of their six elected officials (Ginotti was absent) working smoothly as a team. In order, out of order, but always orderly, they directed both soft and searching questions to the two finalists for city manager.

Both of the finalists came through as up to the job, differing mostly in demeanor and speaking style, indicating that the mayor and commissioners had done a thorough job of screening competence to reach the final two: Brighton City Manager Dana Foster and Royal Oak Interim City Manager and Director of Finance Don Johnson. In the room one at a time, Foster and Johnson gave similar answers to some questions.

It is the city manager's responsibility to implement policies and goals set by the commission. The manager will on occasion have suggestions about policies and goals, but they can only be acted upon after being approved by the commission.
The city manager should be accessible to the public but not to the extent that he is mistaken for the city's spokesman. That's the mayor's role. To the degree he can, the manager can be "visible" to the public by participating in service clubs, the chamber of commerce, volunteer fund-raising, and the like.
Whether to act on specific requests for information or research requested by an individual elected official is a matter of judgment. If the request goes beyond routine and cannot be addressed without extensive Staff time, it should be put in writing.

Foster handled well the question of how a city manager from a city of 7,000 can handle the responsibilities in a city of more than 50,000. He answered in two levels: (1) explaining that he had also served in Leavenworth, Kansas, as manager -- following some time as Finance Director -- and that even in Brighton much of his work is with regional entities whose joint population approaches 70,000. (2) stating that while there are some departments/activities required in Royal Oak but not in Brighton, "We have responsibilities in Brighton which don't exist in Royal Oak." He made it clear that he considers public administration a discipline and skill set which are not heavily affected by the size of the arena.

I found myself remembering that President Truman said something to the effect that, "If you can manage a haberdashery, you can manage the country."

Johnson had the advantage, and the disadvantage, of being one of our own. The advantage included being so well known to the elected officials that they had to reach to come up with questions to which they did not already know his answer. The disadvantage was that his answers to the tough questions carried the added burden of affecting his possible future relationships with those officials and with department heads.

The only time during his interview that he danced slightly, for example, was when asked, paraphrased: "Knowing what you do about our city finances, what services or departments would you suggest we cut immediately?" That same question had been asked repeatedly of former City Manager Tom Hoover. I considered it unfair then, and it was unfair during the interview. Whether or not he gets the job, he would have to face the personnel in the departments he named. Johnson properly included in his reply that it is CITCOM's responsibility to decide which city services to trim or terminate. It would be the manager's responsibility to implement (there's that word again) CITCOM's decisions.

When asked if there has/had been a "wrong" decision made by CITCOM relative to solving the city's budget problems, he quietly responded, in effect, "Not selling Normandy Oaks after you had appointed a committee to study the many bids, and the committee had selected one."

The elected officials must be asking themselves: What will be the impact if Johnson leaves if he is not chosen? If he is selected, will he try to save the city money by continuing to be both city manager and director of finance? Will he hire a paraprofessional to replace himself as finance director, banking on his own intimate knowledge of Royal Oak to give him more-than-adequate oversight?

I mentioned "demeanor and speaking style." Johnson stands or sits quietly and speaks in a soft voice, which -- especially when he's talking budget -- borders on being boring. Foster speaks vigorously and gesticulates -- almost to the point of distraction one experiences when trying to keep one's eyes off House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's flailing hands. That difference isn't likely to seriously affect a manager's effectiveness in operational circles, but personality could affect relationships with the public at-large.

But, since both Foster and Johnson consider the city manager's role as spokesman secondary to that of elected officials . . .

One of the handful of people attending the interviews -- which included Library Director Metta Lansdale and long-time city hall observer Brendan Wehrung -- was heard to say that in terms of competence "We could flip a coin."

It is possible that CITCOM will be ready to announce their decision at the 20 July 2009 meeting. (This is being written on 16 July, the day after the interviews.)

* The session was taped and will be available on WROK for several days. The session was not aired live, to avoid any possibility that one candidate might benefit from foreknowledge of the questions asked.

20 Jul 09

Despite a couple of vigorous but polite disagreements, and angry exchanges at the end of the meeting, CITCOM voted on principle most times during this long but productive meeting.

One measure of their focusing on issues was that Mayor Ellison and Commissioner Andrzejak agreed on one contentious issue and angrily disagreed on another. A bit worrisome is that several 3-3 votes were made by the same clusters: Ellison, Ginotti, and Lelito on one side, Andrzejak, Drinkwine, and Semchena on the other. But, first, let's summarize the productive decisions -- agree with them or not.

Unanimously approved all Dream Cruise Permits, including Ginotti's recommendation that IHOP be monitored re the appearance of its roof.
Denied (2-4) a profit-making organization's request for a "fun race" through part of downtown and some residential neighborhoods. No-votes were by Ellison, Andrzejak, Drinkwine, and Semchena. It was here that Ellison and Andrzejak both focused especially on (a) the run would tie up both vehicular and pedestrian traffic downtown, late afternoon and early evening on a Saturday, and (b) would deny residents the ability to park cars on their street and, possibly, conflict with residents' ability, say, to schedule a birthday party during those hours.
Unanimously approved the financial/bonding arrangement by which Beaumont Hospital uses the city's bonding mechanism to acquire a bond -- at no cost to or liability for the city.
Held over, pending more information, Staff's recommendation to accept advertising in Insight, the city's quarterly newsletter which is sent to all addresses. What CITCOM is seeking is a policy which describes what kind of advertising is acceptable and assurance that the advertising won't visually distract readers.
Unanimously directed the City Attorney prepare an amendment to the Private Parking Lot Permit Ordinance, rather than repeal the never-used ordinance.
With a 3-3 vote, failed to approve the Liquor Control Committee's denial of a request for a transfer of an out-of-Royal Oak license by 526 Main Street Pub. A tie-vote means the resolution fails. Neither is it approved. Essentially, the issue remains unresolved. Interpretations of parliamentary procedure differ over whether those who voted no are on the "winning" side, thus have the power to move to reconsider.
With a 3-3 vote, failed to approve the LCC's denial of Union Brewery's (Bastone's?) request for another sidewalk cafe.
Unanimously approved the LCC's resolution recommending Duggan's transfer of stock.
Unanimously approved Johnson's recommended change of City Hall Business Hours.
Agreed to a couple of appointments of commissioners to this or that committee.

Had the meeting ended there, I would have graded it "A".

But the poison still flowing from that damned ZBA/Bordine Affair spoiled the evening for observers -- and for the participants, I'm sure. I'll go into some detail next week, but for now here's a summary.

City Attorney Dave Gillam, making it clear he neither recommended nor rejected the idea of a CITCOM-directed "investigation" of charges against several commissioner, also made it clear that it would be a conflict of interest for him to be involved directly or indirectly in such an activity. Gillam went so far as to say it would be improper for him to help in the search for independent counsel, should the commission decide to conduct an investigation or a hearing.

Drinkwine, seconded by Semchena, moved to declare having any investigation a closed issue, since it would simply be a "witch-hunt." Ginotti and Ellison expressed uneasiness over just letting the matter drop, contending that complaints have been made and shouldn't just be left hanging there. Andrzejak insisted that the unwillingness to let the matter drop, indeed even raising the issue to begin with, is simply politics in an election year. It was during this discussion that voices were raised and anger exhibited -- from and to several directions. Drinkwine's motion was defeated with the final 3-3 vote of the meeting.

So intense were the emotions that Ginotti's motion to adjourn -- which cannot be debated or amended -- was ignored for two or three more minutes of undirected shouting. Unfortunately, most readers who reached me this morning expressed anger and sadness, completely forgetting that nine-tenths of the meeting had been productive, as described above.-- 21Jul 09

04 Aug 09

The best CITCOM meeting ever.
A couple more like this, and our elected officials will be well on their way to reducing residents' angst which has led to the need for the worrisome essay dealing with worried voters. [LINK HERE]

Jim Ellison was clearly in charge of the entire meeting. . . . Chuck Semchena made a masterful presentation about liquor licenses and praised Carlo Ginotti for his approach to addressing the ethics issue. . . . Ginotti used humor while helping Ellison guide a handful of rushed requests for Dream Cruise permits. . . . Gary Lelito spoke at length as he addressed his concerns re an ethics ordinance. . . . Mike Andrzejak quietly but firmly made his case about both the ethics and liquor license issues. . . . Terry Drinkwine several times offered pithy comments and at least twice nudged the deliberations toward a vote.

On the way to addressing (1) Ethics Ordinance Amendments and (2) A moratorium, of sorts, re the transfer of liquor licenses, CITCOM:

Rejected the First Reading of a modified Fence Ordinance -- tie vote.
Unanimously authorized City Manager Don Johnson to use his discretion re granting a Dream Cruise Permit to IHOP.
Unanimously approved selling advertising in Insight, the city's quarterly news magazine.
Approved providing temporary office space for Royal Oak Youth Assistance.

Then came agenda items 11 and 12, the ethics and liquor license items which regular city hall observers feared would lead to long and heated and out-of-control debate. Instead:

About ethics:
Obviously by thoughtful and wise pre-arrangement, Ellison simply announced that CITCOM talk of any investigation will "go no further." With no opposition to that statement, Ginotti suggested that the body discuss the general matter of the need or not for an ethics ordinance. There was consensus that CITCOM cannot be perceived as attempting to sweep concerns and allegations under the rug. Neither should there be an unseemly rush to do something quickly. Andrzejak seemed to wonder whether CITCOM should address the matter at all until the possibility of a voter-approved ordinance is resolved. An ordinance enacted by voter initiative would preempt any ordinance put in place by CITCOM.

During Public Comment, the resident who has announced his intention to put a proposed ordinance he has prepared on the ballot, implied that if he becomes convinced that the commission is seriously working an an ethics ordinance he will not continue his effort to place his on the November ballot. Whatever his decision, the city-wide dialogue which is already underway remains pertinent. A copy of Frank Houston's proposed ordinance will remain posted on VersagiVoice until the matter is formally concluded. Houston's proposed ethics ordinance

Semchena prefers expedited activity based on the exchanges of suggestions among themselves, and he moved that the city attorney work with a draft ordinance prepared by Ginotti based on those suggestions and state law. Lelito contended that the problem was not so much ethics and policies and procedures. He preferred that the commission discuss policies while the agenda item was on the table.

CITCOM's unanimous decision was to direct the city attorney to develop a proposed ethics ordinance, or a modified Chapter 45 (ethics ordinance related to contracts), based on Ginotti's draft. Pertinent documents are being placed on the City's Website or at Ginotti Ordinance.

About liquor licenses:
Actually, it is only about the transfer of Class C licenses from outside Royal Oak that Semchena made an excellently prepared 10-minute presentation. His intention, a 2-year halt to such transfers. Semchena's comments included a survey of licenses in escrow, licenses approved but not yet implemented, bistro licenses, downtown problems in the "wild west" days before the moratorium passed in the 90s. From his perspective, both public safety and economic growth are better served by halting transfers.

Ginotti and Lelito seemed to come down on the side that it is unwise for Royal Oak to develop a reputation for saying "no" and discouraging new business, liquor or not. Lelito saw/sees no need to "close our opportunities to look at options." Andrzejak maintained that Semchena's proposal is not a "no" document, because the city still has Class C licenses available and the, new. bistro licenses. Like Semchena, he sees a connection between too many liquor-serving establishments and problems which require police action. Police Chief Jahnke agreed with Semchena's proposal. Drinkwine took exception to the thought that allowing Class C transfers brings in new ideas. "It's just people making money at the expense of existing establishments," he said.

Ellison summarized the opposition by stressing that CITCOM already has the power to refuse any license transfers and that the public rightfully looks at elected officials to make the calls on a case-by-case basis.

Semchena's proposal went down with a 3-3 vote, but the pre-vote discussion revealed serious preparation for the debate by everyone at the table. And the tone of the meeting was more civil than it has been for months.

There were 20 speakers during Public Comment, and VersagiVoice will comment on them next week.

In the meantime, at first glance it seems that we may not need seven votes. 3-3 ties are proving an effective way to defeat a motion, while leaving the opportunity for the issue to be revisited. -- FJV: 04 Aug 09

The People Speak
Twenty residents and visitors addressed the city commission during Public Comment at the beginning of the commission's 04 August 2009 meeting. Here, paraphrased, is what was on their minds.

Mayor Ellison and Commissioner Ginotti expedited six of the speakers who were late coming to the party with their request for a Dream Cruise event permit.

There were 3 or 4 reports about the activities of volunteer-staffed city groups.

The resident who is proposing to put an ethics ordinance on the November ballot explained his rationale.

A homeowner living near downtown disagreed with CITCOM's decision the previous week to deny a liquor license transfer. "Don't punish newcomers because of this or that problem. If you choose to live close to downtown . . ."

"I don't think that liquor is the only answer to growing downtown. I'm not a Puritan, but there is no plan to recruit other businesses."

About the proposal for a moratorium on transferring Class C liquor licenses: "Let's not legislate away your power to make decisions. We elected you to make case-by-case decisions."

Re the need for a policy addressing non-motorized transportation: "Royal Oak continues to be Number One in the number of bicycle-auto collisions."

Speaking for a police union: "Further attritions will definitely adversely affect public safety. . . . We have already discontinued three services. . . . With further attrition, road patrols will have to be reduced."

Valet services for downtown parking must have insurance, get permits, pay fees.. Any proposed ordinance to permit a Private Parking Lot on a business's property must distinguish between "self parking," where the driver keeps the keys and walks away, and parking where the lot owner takes the keys. "That is valet parking."

The city must be more transparent with information about its collective bargaining, especially about the cost of each settlement or concession.

Yes, let's have a moratorium on liquor licenses. Citizens don't want or need more bars.

Royal Oak must not develop "a culture of 'no.' We can encourage new food-liquor establishments without hurting existing establishments -- so long as we don't restrict their ability to change or expand."

"We must do whatever necessary to keep Barnes & Noble here."

Thus sprach der volk..

17 Aug 09

Six heartfelt mini-speeches made it clear there was no need to revisit the controversial issue of a moratorium on liquor license transfers. Over-simplifying, one side -- Semchena, Andrzejak, Drinkwine -- repeatedly pointed to past and feared future public safety problems to demonstrate the need for the moratorium, and the other side -- Ellison, Ginotti, and Lelito -- countered that elected officials have in the past and can in the future take public safety into consideration as they make case-by-case decisions. CITCOM'S decision not to act means that Semchena's proposed amendment to the city's liquor control ordinance will be placed on the November ballot. [See]

Probably in reaction to two or three Public Comment speculations that those commissioners who support the moratorium have accepted campaign contributions from existing license holders, the proponents of the moratorium took a couple of shots at the citizens who spoke. And the two sides seemed to take opposing views about the wisdom of putting the matter on the November ballot. For the most part, though, the mini-speeches revealed the principled, if differing, mindsets about their role in dealing with liquor license request.

Twelve of the 14 persons who spoke during Public Comment addressed the moratorium. Of those 12, five support and seven oppose. It is clear that liquor control will become a significant issue in the 2009 campaign.

For the rest, the commission accomplished several procedural and housekeeping chores: The need to notify business owners early when DDA-planned streetscaping work will deny the use of their sidewalk cafe for several weeks . . . Several Traffic Committee resolutions, including painting the curb bump outs on Main Street yellow at the intersections from Catalpa to Eleven Mile . . . Took some action to approve an Industrial District Development . . . Approved several appointments of residents to committees . . . Moved along a revised Fence Ordinance, conditioned on reducing the proposed $100 permit fee to $65.

14 Sep 09

As predicted in the report out of September 9th's Liquor Control Committee meeting, many of the opponents of the proposed Emagine theater/bowling alley development repeated their opposition at this CITCOM meeting. They were slightly more impolite this time: (1) interrupting the developer when he was answering questions; (2) standing around and talking while the commission attempted to move through the rest of the agenda; (3) The activist who, during the LCC meeting, pledged to "rally the troops" stood and shouted, ignoring the mayor and a couple of commissioners who were forced to pound the gavel and to shout back to regain control of the meeting.

CITCOM approved LCC's recommendation for a liquor license, although Emagine CEO Paul Glantz pushed the majority of well-disposed commissioners close to denying the transfer when his persistent request for simultaneous approval of his plan of operation was perceived as a threat to withdraw the project if he didn't get everything he wanted that night. Commissioner Carlo Ginotti, declared he had been ready to vote to grant the license transfer "until three-and-a-half minutes ago," when the CEO had begun his combative comments.

Commissioner Terry Drinkwine, chair of the LCC, led much of the discussion/debate about the Emagine matter. Quietly and logically, he explained why the City could not force a developer to choose a specific site or to go through the entire Planning, Zoning, CITCOM-approval process before the developer was sure he had the license he needed to operate his development. The opponents weren't listening. Even Drinkwine bristled at Glantz's tone but kept his cool in making the point that the City was going as far as it can. At that point, the developer agreed to accept whatever resolution CITCOM passed. City Attorney Dave Gilliam's' explanation of some of the details and side agreements were hard to integrate understandably into the highly emotional proceedings. Even Commissioner Chuck Semchena shook his head in puzzlement during one portion of Gillam's presentation, and Chuck is the former city attorney.

CITCOM approved all three LCC recommendations: Emagine, 5-1 (Semchena); Ronin Sushi, 5-1 (Semchena); and Woody's, unanimously. Also adopted, three side agreements re the Emagine project, unanimously.

Glantz, in a coffee conversation, had told VersagiVoice that he was finished lobbying, but he has agreed to meet with Barton Tower residents in a facilitated meeting. It is almost impossible to expect the developer can convert them to supporters.

There was some discussion about televising LCC meetings. After Mayor Jim Ellison commented that only Public Hearings draw enough attention to justify the time and cost of televising less-than-exciting committee meetings, City Manager Don Johnson was directed to explore the feasibility of televising Public Hearings of any committee whose work calls for a hearing.

Other CITCOM decisions:

Adopted Proposed Amendment to the Fence Ordinance, 5-1 (Lelito).
Adopted Fence Permit Fees, 5-1 (Lelito).
Adopted the Ethics Ordinance, unanimously.
Granted Flex-N-Gate a 12-year (Industrial) tax abatement, 5-1 (Andrzejak)
Unanimously Approved $6,500 to install drainage and to waterproof the basement wall at the Crooks and Webster Fire Station, which is currently being converted to the permanent home for Royal Oak Historical Society Museum.

Thankfully, a handful of Public Comment speakers spoke about something other than liquor licenses. A couple of pleas for control of vicious dogs, breed-specific or not . . . A sort of city hall hell experienced, being bounced among several departments by correspondence or telephone . . . Generalized attack on the competence of this specific city commission, later labeled a "cheap shot" by one commissioner.

Once again, our elected officials have earned their excessive pay.

21 Sep 09

Dogs dominate 21 Sep 09 CITCOM meeting
Eight out of thirteen Public Comment speakers talked about dogs. Six of the eight were opposed to any "Single Breed Legislation" which would ban pit bulls, for example. They cited studies which suggest how difficult it is to categorize mixed breeds; they pointed out that all kinds of dogs bite people, including Labs and Chihuahuas; they blamed "people, not dogs" as the problem; they characterized their dogs as "part of the family."

Opposed were one or two who have experienced or witnessed pit bull attacks. When the city's Violent Dogs Ordinance came up on the agenda, City Manager Don Johnson cited local data which show that although pit bulls make up only 1.7% of licensed dogs, they account for "about 35% of reported dog bite incidents this year." Commissioner Terry Drinkwine recalled that during his years as a policeman, pit bulls were the only dogs who had to be shot. Most dogs can be called off, pit bulls can't, Drinkwine said. Most dogs simply bite, pit bulls tear, he added.

Drinkwine prefers banning pit bulls but he went along with the consensus to direct the Staff to survey other municipalities and to come back to CITCOM with a strengthened Vicious Dog Ordinance containing such requirements as muzzles when walking and higher fences. In addition, the commission seemed to agree with the suggestion that serious dog-related violations be made felonies, rather than misdemeanors.

Other Business

Free parking or not during the Christmas Parade
The institutional animosity between the city and the DDA bubbled up during debate about whether to offer free parking all over downtown from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. on the day of the Christmas Parade. Such a waiver will "cost" the city the normal income from the meters, and some of the resentment took the form of complaints that the DDA has a "positive cashflow" and shouldn't be asking the financially pressed city to give up revenue.

Last year, the decision was made to permit free parking throughout all downtown, instead of only on the Washington parade route. The thinking was that visitors would stay around and shop or dine. Commissioner Chuck Semchena's motion to deny downtown-wide free parking was defeated, with only him and Drinkwine voting yes. The motion to continue last year's practice passed, with Semchena and Drinkwine voting no.

Mayor Jim Ellison had to restore focus after the discussion drifted to the feasibility and justification of having the parade at all.

Televising Liquor Control Committee meetings
Johnson had prepared a letter opposing the suggestion, primarily from some residents, to televise LCC meetings. The very focused dialogue covered a lot of ground. How many attend? . . . The LCC is an advisory group; residents have access to LCC issues when those issues are brought before CITCOM. . . . Announce when -- as about the proposed theater/bowling alley project -- a controversial issue is coming up. . . . Televise only Public Hearings, not the LCC meeting itself. . . . Televise any Public Hearing held by any city panel. (Currently, all meetings -- and related hearings -- are televised for CITCOM, Planning Commission, Zoning Board of Appeals, and the DDA.)

The commission approved a policy to televise LCC meetings when there is to be a Public Hearing, with Drinkwine voting no. Drinkwine is current Chair of the LCC.

Also during Public Comment:

Dr. David Penney, author of several books about Royal Oak history, donated $501 to the Historical Society's Museum and handed society president Jay Dunstan a sealed envelope containing another donation. The envelope is to be opened during the society's annual dinner in October, when Penney will be in Israel.
Activist Brendan Wehrung repeated and reinforced residents' suggestion that LCC meetings be televised.
Permission was asked to sell pumpkins behind the sidewalk in front of the YMCA on Eleven Mile, from September 30 through October 31.
Laura Harrison suggested trading the DDA property at 696 for the land at Troy and Eleven Mile as the site for the Emagine theater/bowling alley.
"Don't belittle downtown." Downtown is not "sucking resources" from the rest of the city. Royal Oak's superior property values are in large part due to its successful downtown. (I didn't catch the speaker's name.--fjv)

05 Oct 09

An illuminated ball will drop in Royal Oak on New Year's Eve, with perhaps 5,000 people watching. And there will be bands and other entertainment in the streets, for what is billed as a family-oriented event called "Rockin' Royal Oak New Years Eve.' CITCOM approved a Special Event permit for Citadel Broadcasting, the firm which has successfully (an "uneventfully") conducted a ball drop in Grand Rapids. Former city commissioner Pat Capello and Pronto! co-owner Jim Domanski spoke in favor of the ball drop event during Public Comment.

A sound-level meter was placed on the commission table during the meeting, to provide some context for discussion of the city's Noise Ordinance. According to City Manager Don Johnson, who monitored the meter, "We were mostly in the 50's, often in the 60's, moved into the 70's on occasion and were over 80 a couple of times. When the mayor used his gavel to end the meeting, that recorded an 88."

(In a paper I wrote re Sound/Noise years ago, 50 decibels is described as "conversation" and 80s as "heavy street traffic." 10 to 20 db = "whispering" and 110 db = "thunder."

(Related to the residents' complaints re the noise out of Woody's and the question of where the sound level should be measured, I cited authorities who contend that decibels should be measured "at the point of complaint, as in a bedroom," not at some arbitrary point like the offender's property line.)

CITCOM directed the Administration to conduct some research, including holding Public Hearings, and come back with recommendations, after Commissioner Chuck Semchena explained that calling for "reasonable" sound levels is "too fuzzy" and that the issue is one to be addressed by Zoning and Planning, not by the Liquor Control Committee.

The Business Development Process Task Force gave an interim presentation re its progress in working to make permitting procedures faster and more efficient.

With unanimous votes (5-0: Andrzejak was ill and unable to attend), CITCOM:

Overruled a Traffic Committee recommendation and approved the installation of a Stop Sign at Potawatomi and Marywood. (The records show there has never been a Stop Sign at that interesection, nor are there records of accidents there. CITCOM voted to overrule Traffic after Mayor Jim Ellison and Commissioner Terry Drinkwine chose to ignore those findings and expressed personal, but unspecified, concerns about the issue.
Set 19 October as the date for a Public Hearing concerning establishing an Industrial District for Saab. (Establish such a district usually includes offering the petitioner a tax abatement for several years.)
Approved the First Reading of the Amended Parking Station Ordinance, after City Attorney Dave Gillam described the "fine-tuning" done at the request of the commission. (The ordinance has apparently never been enforced for decades, without harm to the public, and its first appearance on CITCOM's agenda had been with the intention to repealing it.)

19 Oct 09

It was impossible not to think of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde by the time this meeting ended. For much of the meeting commissioners good-naturedly made unanimous decisions, joshing each other along the way. For two intense debates, though, you had three lawyers (Gillam, Ginotti, and Semchena) and the mayor crossing swords or Mayor Ellison snipping at Commissioner Lelito. or other commissioners demanding to be heard. And there was the rare experience of the usually cool and clear city attorney appearing flush-faced angry and offering explanations which confused, rather than clarified the points he was making.

Often, when such irritation or ill-feeling bubbles up during a CITCOM meeting it is a result of an adversarial tone continuing from the Closed Session conducted just before the open meeting. It probably didn't improve the mood that 16 Public Comment speakers held forth for about 80 minutes, before CITCOM could get to work.

Dr. Jekyll
By unanimous votes, the commission: (1) Approved a $500 increase, to $2,500, to help fund the Memorial Day Parade. (2) Approved appointing City Manager Don Johnson as the city's Alternate representative for SEMCOG. (3) Approved the bid for updating the Farmers Market kitchen. (4) Approved continuing the license agreement which permits Holiday Market to locate a Storage Trailer on Parent Street for a specified time period. (5) Approved establishing an Industrial District for Saab. (6) Scheduled the Public Hearing (16 November) to consider Saab's request for tax abatement. (7) Approved a Lot Split on Rochester Road. (8) Approved a Bistro License for Cafe Muse. (9) Approved replacement of the Emergency E-911 Public Answering Point (PSAP), requested by the Police Department, which had separately found funding for the majority of the cost. (10) Approved the Parking Fee Schedule ($125) for private businesses which operate parking lots on their property.

Split votes: Approval of Mr. B's changed Plan of Operation to permit dancing. (4-2, Andrzejak & Semchena) . . . With abstentions by Commissioner Lelito, the commission approved (a) directing Staff to send a letter to Lansing opposing the proposal to extend bar hours to 4 a.m. from the current 2 a.m. and (b) a separate communication stressing the need to maintain local option, should the extended hours be passed.

Mr. Hyde
There were two lengthy and angry debates.

§ Snookers Pool & Pub wanted to change its Plan of Operation to permit gambling for charitable organizations several nights a week. A for-profit organization would manage the gambling and split proceeds 50-50 with the charitable group. Snookers would hope to benefit from food and beverage sales to the gamblers. The Liquor Control Committee recommended to deny (2-1, Lelito). The pub already has State permission to hold a handful of such events through mid-December.

The anger resulted from confusion over whether the LCC's denial required that CITCOM pass a separate resolution permitting those already scheduled, and legal, events to be conducted. The confusion was generated primarily by City Attorney Gillam's insistence that the Police Department would be left hanging (and the city liable to legal action?) unless that separate approval were granted. After many cross-table exchanges, not all of them friendly, Commissioner Drinkwine pointed out that local police departments don't require special resolutions to enforce State law, so there was no need for a resolution to protect the Police Department.

The vote was 5-1, Lelito, to deny Snookers a change in it Plan of Operation.

§ Transferring an escrowed license to 526 South Main.
This was procedural chaos. The LCC had voted to deny (2-1, Lelito). However, LCC chairman Drinkwine refused to introduce a motion at the CITCOM Table. Discussion seemed to conclude that inaction is equivalent to denial, but is less than a certain legal position for the city to take. Counsel for the petitioner, offered permission to break precedent, came before CITCOM a second time to point out that significant business decisions and a substantial amount of money would be left hanging if CITCOM did not make a definite Yes or No decision.

Commissioner Ginotti then moved to approve the transfer, predicting that the vote would be, as it proved to be, a 3-3 tie. (Semchena, Andrzejak, and Drinkwine voting No.) A tie is a No vote, so that settled the issue.

Except that word is already spreading that the city can expect to be sued.
(A couple of observers suspect that permitting the LCC not to introduce a resolution is itself legally questionable.)

A little joviality returned at meeting's end, discussing Commissioner Andrzejak's suggestion that Royal Oak put MDOT on notice about the deterioration, again, of the Sound Wall along the expressway.

09 Nov 09

After two hours of listening to 37 Public Comment speakers, 28 of them about dogs, CITCOM in 25 minutes:

Approved Beaumont Hospital's use of the City's excellent credit rating (with no risk or obligation to Royal Oak) to issue a $305 million bond. . . . Scheduled for 07 December a Public Hearing re transfer of a tax abatement from Form Tech to HHI. . . . Appointed Semchena to replace the outgoing Ginotti on the Audit Review Committee. Ellison was appointed to replace newly elected Capello as Alternate on the same committee. . . . Reversing itself, approved a Class C liquor license for 526 S Main (4-2), Semchena and Andrzejak voting No.

Guided and kept under control by Ellison, the dog-lovers:
Accused the Police Department of lying (distributing "disinformation;" . . . Questioned the character and competence of the Berkley/Royal Oak Animal Control Officer "should be called 'dog-catcher'"); . . . Insisted that the euthanized dog was "murdered;" . . . Demanded an independent investigation of the incident; . . . Challenged Royal Oak's (and apparently Berkley's) overall approach to animal control; . . . Threatened legal action, perhaps about its unfenced dog park; . . . Announced personal decisions not to buy a home in Royal Oak; . . . Threatened to boycott all Royal Oak businesses; . . . Threatened to continue harassing the city and its merchants with bullhorns, pickets, press releases, etc.

Except for a confrontation in the hall outside commission chambers, the group was well-behaved -- if one can ignore the hatred being expressed against the named Animal Control Officer; the vitriol apparently reflects the language being used on the Internet by the protesters and the non-profit group serving as the spokesman. Further, about a third of the protesters were not Royal Oak residents -- a matter of concern for those Royal Oakers who resent "outsiders" participating in local debates.

The issue is the debate over an incident involving two dogs who fought each other and during which one of the dogs (which one also at issue in some minds) bit a human trying to break up the dog fight. VersagiVoice has previously published the Police Department's press release about the matter.

Ellison had wisely arranged that the dog crowd would have the floor exclusively after those attendees with other issues on their mind had finished. The most exciting thing that happened while the nine non-dog speakers spoke was that Drinkwine left the chambers while resident Bill Shaw was refusing to give his home address when identifying himself. Ellison broke the tension by saying, "We know where you live" and permitting Shaw to continue.

16 Nov 09

Good meeting. Short, too.
Seven Public Comment speakers split 3-3 in their remarks about Emagine. Although procedurally, there could be no final vote, there was informal dialogue: Andrzejak, the lone No-vote at the Planning Commission, repeated his opposition, concentrating on his doubts about the validity of the Parking consultant's report. . . . Lelito expressed support for Emagine and said he was sorry he would be off the commission by December 21, the target date for the final vote. . . . Ginotti half-in-jest wondered whether he could demand that Staff and Emagine finish their work by December 7, so that could vote on it . . . . Drinkwine said that addressing the Emagine project is "something we have never done before" and recalled when there was a bus depot/garage at the site without complaint from the neighborhood. . . . Semchena said that it is erroneous to refer to the issue as "the Emagine project; We must consider the total PUD" (Planned Unit Development), especially when thinking about parking.

Procedurally, it is not necessary to schedule a Public Hearing about Emagine at the December 21 meeting, when the vote will be about amending the PUD to accommodate the proposed change from the tower originally planned. Ellison said that residents would still have opportunity to speak during Public Comment. Semchena moved to schedule a Public Hearing, but his motion failed for the lack of a Second.

The only No-vote of the evening came about offering Lockhart's BBQ (202 E. Third) five years to complete a required Streetscape improvement. After Planning Director Tim Thwing confirmed that such extensions had been previously granted (from memory, he recalled Holiday Market and Bastone), Drinkwine said he preferred to limit the extension to three years. He voted No when the motion on the table went forward.

There were two unanimous votes: (1) Denying the request for more staffing by the Rehabilitation Board of Appeals, and (2) Approving an Amendment to a Consent Judgment concerning 32832 & 38208 Woodward, with the stipulation that the business remain a dairy/ice cream store.

The meeting ended in laughter when the spokesman for Bar Louie asked the commission not to move forward on Drinkwine's proposed reversal of the Liquor Control Committee's original denial of a liquor license. The spokesman said he needs more time to amend contract timelines and needs to know the final disposition of the brouhaha over Emagine's parking issues.

Public Comment
Speaking of parking, one of the speakers during Public Comment, who used to own the Berkley theater, said the theater had 800 seats, and there were probably 500 parking spaces available, but there were no problems. Other Emagine supporters have challenged opponents to cite an example of a city which requires one parking space per seat -- whether the seat is in a bar or movie house.

There were only eight Public Comment speakers, six of whom split 3-3 re Emagine.

07 Dec 09

CITCOM was joking, right?
In what came through as a scripted farce, CITCOM approved a proposed contract with the promoter of Arts, Beats & Eats after the issue was, apparently, added to the agenda at the last minute. I'll wait until next week to comment on how it came to be that three newbies and two congenitally anti-alcohol veterans came to agree to having tens of thousands of people drinking in the streets of downtown Royal Oak for a 4-day festival.

And I'll be ready to admit my error if this afternoon's press conference doesn't confirm my suspicion that the promoter is using Royal Oak as a foil to help push Pontiac into continuing its 12-year subsidy of the event.

In the meantime, I hope to see the West of West residents' lobby reactivate -- FJV: 08 Dec 09

The meeting began wholesomely enough, with the invocation by Reverend John Miller, of First Congregational Church, and the National Anthem sung by the Royal Oak High School a cappella choir. After only two people spoke during Public Comment, Mayor Ellison answered a couple of questions from the high school's Ambassador Program.

Outgoing commissioners Carlo Ginotti and Gary Lelito made brief farewell comments; actually, Lelito's was a bit long, and Commissioner Drinkwine chided him on speaking longer than he ever had spoken in four years. Ellison presented each departing official with a plaque; each of the remaining commissioners praised them for their service; and the 44th Royal Oak City Commission was adjourned.

The 45th City Commission was called to order. Then 44th District Court Judge Terry Brennan swore in commissioners Pat Capello, Dave Poulton, and Jim Rasor, and Judge Dan Sawicki inducted re-elected Jim Ellison as mayor.

Organizational matters were completed, and routine business was conducted: Capello was appointed to the Appointments Committee; Capello and Poulton were appointed for one-time service on the Liquor Control Committee; Mike Andrzejak was named mayor pro- tem, for the third time; Ellison was authorized to accept suggestions from the commissioners and to create a matrix of appointments to appropriate committees. His recommendations will be presented to CITCOM at its 21 December meeting.

Two items were added to the agenda: Ratification of the collective bargaining agreement with the Firefighters and the contract with Arts, Beats & Eats. Both were approved unanimously. -- 14 Dec 09

21 Dec 09
5-hour CITCOM meeting covers a lot of ground

Emagine theater/bowling alley approved
About 11:30 on 21 December -- after about 90 minutes of listening to 24 Public Comment speakers and about two hours of debate about the final details of amendments needed to the PUD to make the Emagine project go forward, CITCOM voted 5-2 to approve the amendments and, in a separate vote, the plan of operations.
It took a lot of parliamentary dancing to get there.
Semchena introduced a motion which would have made a condition of approval the forced conversion of a proposed 7,000 sq ft restaurant to office/retail. . . . After some discussion, Drinkwine said that the suggested condition was in contradiction to the residents' sound defeat of the liquor license moratorium. . . . Semchena's motion was defeated. . . . Rasor moved the original motion, but added four or five conditions of his own. . . . One by one Mayor Ellison, working through Staff, was able to convince Rasor to withdraw all the conditions except one. . . . That one had to do with whether the city or the developer should add to the city-owned fence somewhere in the area. . . . The developer was willing to pay $5,000 for the city to do the work. . . . Thwing preferred that the developer do the work and pay for it. . . . Rasor wanted the developer to agree to pay whatever the work cost. . . . The developer begged off until Drinkwine held his thumb and finger less than an inch apart and said three times, "We're this close," "We're this close," "We're this close," after which the developer agreed to Rasor's request.
Then, 30-40 minutes were spent on parking, although to an attentive observer the discussion should have ended after the first seven minutes. . . . Semchena and Capello questioned the veteran author of the Parking studies. . . . Semchena and the expert went at it for perhaps 15 minutes. The commissioner seemed to use different words to repeatedly ask the same question. . . . The questions generated less-than-clarifying technical explanations. . . . Finally, apparently acknowledging that they were never going to understand each other, the two interlocutors gave up. . . . A hint of Capello's professional mindset came through when she began asking questions about such statistical specifics as the expert's use of "standard deviation." . . . That discussion went on long enough for me to wonder whether city officials need to be trained to understand "six sigma." . . . Ellison called a halt when Semchena began to ask questions about parking related to other downtown areas, reminding The Table that the discussion was restricted to the PUD.
Somewhere in there Rasor had raised concerns about traffic and pedestrian safety. . . Drinkwine reminded his fellow commissioners that "We have a standing Traffic Committee" which can address any problems which actually arise, as opposed to problems which are fearfully speculated about. . . . Thwing pointed out that Eleven Mile is a county road, so the city has limited authority to make any changes.
Eighteen of the 24 Public Comment speakers addressed the Emagine project. There were 21 in favor, one strongly opposed, and two yes-buts.
CITCOM took a short break at about 11:30 before proceeding with the rest of the agenda.
The meeting lasted till 12:30.
Counting the preceding 1-hour Closed Session, our elected officials earned $4-$5.00 per hour.
The limitations of representative democracy
This unusually long report reflects an unusually long CITCOM meeting and brings to mind the fact that at most a few hundred residents will have attended or seen the televised or podcasted session. And our local press can justify coverage of only a small part of what went on, of what goes on month after month.
So the vast majority of voters has no way of (1) appreciating the work their elected officials perform or (2) even being aware of important or minor issues, most of which don't immediately or directly affect them.
Therefore we have the two-sided effect of (a) residents coming late to the party many times and ignorantly complaining about something they know almost nothing about and (b) elected and appointed officials losing patience with uninformed residents.
Another result is that too often those of us news junkies who follow civic/political events and processes closely are talking to each other about issues which don't really matter to the public.
We can all wish it were otherwise, but 'tis a republic and that's the way it is.

The rest of the agenda.
Before and after the interesting, if too-long, work re Emagine, CITCOM unanimously:

Established budget ("Strategic Planning") meeting dates.
22 and 23 January 2010

Approved Traffic Committee recommendations.

Agreed to postpone a decision about holding a Special Event and Sidewalk sale during the same days as the Annual Antiques & Garage Sale.

Approved appointments made, separately, by the mayor, the commission, and the Appointments Committee.

Approved a Parking Agreement for Amber Management at 518 Oakland.
Asked, Thwing expressed no objection to the request. . . . Semchena asked a couple of operational questions. . . . Cowan described the concept. . . . Amber promised to preserve the green space as he erects a 42-unit building.

Approved an LCC-recommended bistro license for What Crepe.

Directed Staff to explore possible modifications to the Outdoor Burning Ordinance.
Rasor, who had added this item to the agenda, said existing law "makes lawbreakers" of a lot of residents. . . . Discussion among Fire Chief Wil White, Rasor, Drinkwine, Capello, Semchena, and Andrzejak covered everything from fire safety to the health problems of people with respiratory problems, from the definition of "outdoor burning" to the problems of enforcement.

There were split votes on several agenda items besides the two Emagine issues:

Approved Extension Request of Sixth and Main Development Proposal: (5-2) Andrzejak, Semchena
Andrzejak asked who had asked for the extension; questioned the wisdom of not seeking new RFPs; suggested we forego an uncertain deal which gives the city "a quarter on the dollar." Thwing replied that developer asked for the extension. . . . Drinkwine and Capello, emphasizing that we have no other offerings out there, said they were willing to give a 60-day extension but that they would reject any further extension if a solid proposal is not offered by then. . . . Rasor indicated he had chatted with the developer and agreed that he's willing to wait 60 days for a proposal "with some merit." . . . Ellison failed to use his gavel when Rasor and Andrzejak engaged in across0the-table debate without going through the chair. . . . Poulton and Semchena spoke briefly, David in favor of the extension, Chuck in opposition.

Approved Resolution to Lansing supporting reform of Act 312 which calls for compulsory arbitration in collective bargaining with Police and Fire: (6-1) Drinkwine
Andrzejak explained that no one is asking for repeal of the Act, just modification which would mandate that such factors as a city's financial situation be included in the deliberations. He recalled that Detroit Mayor Coleman Young expressed profound regret that he had been instrumental, when a state rep, in getting 312 enacted. . . . Johnson supported the resolution to send to Lansing, although he commented that the modifications would not be a cure-all at the administrative level. . . . Poulton bounced a legal question or two off of city attorney Gillam.

Approved having Cloverleaf's request for a bistro license go first to CITCOM, instead of to the Liquor Control Committee: (4-3) Drinkwine, Poulton, Semchena

Somewhere during all this, Capello informally suggested that CITCOM and the DDA would benefit from a Joint Committee to work together on their separate but interrelated budgetary issues. . . . Andrzejak mentioned that he had chatted with her and thinks it might be a good idea to broaden the joint committee's charge beyond just budget and to consider rotating its members to establish and maintain good relations among the individuals.

There were enough split votes in CITCOM's 21 December 2009 meeting to generate requests that I re-activate the tabulation of split votes for at least several months. [Go]