------------------------------------------------------------
THE BIRMINGHAM BUZZ
-- "It's the 2016 Plan, stupid."
-------------------------------------------------------------

Buzz # 19 -- May 13, 2002

Promoting intelligence and reason in city government. Our mission: To inform and involve all Birmingham citizens.

VISIT OUR WEBSITE at http://www.bhambuzz.org for:
-- Up-to-date news items
-- Resources such as the 2016 Plan and the proposed Tree Preservation Ordinance
-- A calendar of important city events
-- A lively and intelligent discussion group

We want to hear from you! Please send questions, suggestions and feedback to info@bhambuzz.org
{{PERIOD}}

In this edition:

1) Appointee threatens to quit over ethics code
2) Editorial: Lanzetta is source of much incivility
3) Editorial: Virtual reality model is a fantasy, but high 'fees,' which may be illegal, are real
4) Businesses balk at 'virtual reality' fees
5) Laura Berman: Big Foot stubs big toe
6) Rountable on traffic issues to be televised
7) Taxes may dip if Commission OKs millage cut
8) Letter to Buzz: Manage change with balance
9) Hot dog! Mark calendar for DPS open house
10) Clean up, get to know Rouge River on June 1
11) To be removed, send a request to info@bhambuzz.org
{{PERIOD}}

1) Appointee threatens to quit over ethics code

May 13, 2002

A member of the Birmingham Historical Board and the Historic District Design and Review Commission says he will resign "the next day" if either of two versions of a proposed Code of Ethics is passed into law.

Tom McDaniel, in an April 8 letter to City Manager Tom Markus, said, "It is difficult for me to adequately express the depth of my contempt for this exercise. Not that some provisions of the draft are necessarily a bad thing -- it's just the motives of the individuals who are behind it."

McDaniel called the proposal "massive overkill -- far too long for anybody to wade through, much less understand."

"The most egregious part of the draft ordinance," said McDaniel, is the section titled Dedicated Service. "To me, this section reflects the true motives of the majority of the current commission and others who support them -- they want no disagreement with their own views, and they clearly are not interested in any professional opinion from city staff, or volunteer citizen board members, unless it is in full agreement with their own ideas."

McDaniel added that "administration and enforcement will create undue burden and expense for the city."

"In short," he concluded, "the city has worked just fine for many years, and does not need this ordinance. Nevertheless, if anyone believes such an ordinance is a good idea, then I strongly suggest starting over with the objective of developing a one-page 'Code of Conduct' that merely reinforces what should be obvious to everyone anyway."
McDaniel is a longtime resident of Birmingham. He has been a member of the HDDRC since 1995, and has sat on the Historical Board since 2000. He was a driving force behind the endowment of the Birmingham Historical Museum.

The Presidents Council of Homeowners' Associations, a tightly organized citizens group that claims to represent Birmingham residents but only recently began meeting in public, proposed an ordinance.

The council claimed that "in the last few years, there have been constant rumors circulating across our community regarding decisions and activities made by public officials -- both elected and appointed -- that appear to benefit special interest groups. As residents, we feel it is vitally important that such a code be adopted, not only to delineate inappropriate actions, but to eliminate these ongoing rumors that have resulted in mistrust of our officials."

The Presidents Council proposed one version of the ordinance; Markus, City Attorney Tim Currier and City Commissioner Donald Carney drafted the second. Citizens at large were not invited to participate in development of the ordinance, but were instead invited to comment on the proposals.

Visit http://www.bhambuzz.org/pdfs/ethics_city.pdf to read the proposed codes. Visit http://www.bhambuzz.org to send an email to city officials with comments on the proposed codes.


2) Editorial: Lanzetta is source of much incivility

May 12, 2002

Anyone who thought the ouster of Mike Wooley last year from the Birmingham City Commission would restore civility to the commission was unfortunately mistaken.
Wooley was famous for his frequent bickering with Commissioner Dante Lanzetta. Like watching children or unhappily married couples, it was sometimes hard to tell who instigated the verbal brawls.

Wooley was defeated in the last election, and at the first meeting of the Commission after his defeat, Mayor Dianne McKeon promised that civility would be restored to Commission meetings.

It wasn't, and now the source of the incivility is pretty clear. It was, and is, Lanzetta.

Lanzetta was in typical form Wednesday night at a joint meeting of the City Commission and Planning Board.

Here are a few words that capture the essence of Lanzetta's frequent performances: Obnoxious, rude, condescending, snickering, obfuscating, pedantic, sophomoric, arrogant, pompous, snide, sarcastic.

On Wednesday, one of the main points of the meeting was to allow the Planning Board to present to the Commission its list of priorities for the coming year. In essence, it is a glorified to-do list, and anyone with a modicum of intelligence could see that. It was roughly organized into four categories, with lists of items under each category. Take a look at it by clicking here.

Sure, Planning Board Chairman Gary Kulak could have done a better job of introducing and explaining the list. But the point of the presentation was pretty clear: Tell us what you think of our list, the Planning Board was asking the Commission. Do you have any items to add? Should we re-jigger anything? Delete anything?

Those questions were lost on Lanzetta, who launched into one of his much too frequent lectures, focusing more on semantics than on the important questions at hand. The whole semantic discussion ended up dominating the segment of the meeting. Anyone listening for intelligent discourse about how the city should be prioritizing these all-important items before the Planning Board was disappointed.

Lanzetta is self-absorbed and disrespects others. Those traits would be offensive in any elected official; they are even more so in this case when one considers that Lanzetta is the senior member of a commission that lacks any real leadership.

At one recent meeting, a petitioner reasonably noted that one of Lanzetta's questions seemed to be beside the point. "Humor me," Lanzetta barked at the man without the slightest trace of respect. Answer the question and we'll all go home a little sooner, he said.

On Wednesday night, talking about the proposed Tree Preservation Ordinance, Lanzetta said, "Here's an ordinance on which there are hardened and fast opinions, perhaps by people who haven't read the ordinance themselves, that's also a possibility, pretty much determining, before I've bothered wasting my time reading it, where the thing's going to go. ? I've gotten irate phone calls -- "you better kill this thing" -- and I haven't even seen the thing."

The next day, we sent Lanzetta a note, expressing surprise "to hear you say last night that you had not yet seen the proposed Tree Preservation Ordinance," and offering a couple of good sources for the material.

His response: "You might well have been surprised, because that isn't what I said."

What he said is what he said, ambiguous at best and, more important, characteristic of a man who enjoys the sound of his own voice, and rarely chooses his words wisely.

Lanzetta's performances can be seen in person at Commission meetings. Check out the Buzz calendar at http://www.supercalendar.com/view.php?a=1525 for times and places. Or catch the replays on Comcast's Channel 15. For the schedule, visit http://www.gorillainteractive.com/cableboard/channel15.cfm.

Watching him over the past six months or so, we can only conclude that Lanzetta has given up on politics, and has no intention of seeking another term in office. He seems to have placed a noose around his own neck. With every silly lecture, every snide comment, every snicker toward another commissioner or member of the public, he reduces himself in the public eye and yanks the noose a little tighter. It won't be long before he finally commits political suicide.

Should he choose to seek another term in 18 months, anyone interested in civility on the commission should think about meting out to Lanzetta the same fate that met his nemesis Wooley the last time around.


3) Editorial: Virtual reality model is a fantasy, but high 'fees,' which may be illegal, are real

May 13, 2002

By Diane Katz
Mackinac Center for Public Policy

The gallon of Pratt & Lambert paint that Dulce Fuller fancies for the wood trim of her Birmingham storefront retails for about $30. The permit required to apply a new coat of color would inflate the job cost by 2,400 percent -- damning evidence of City Hall's apparent indifference toward its beleaguered business district.

The permit "fees" are more than just a costly nuisance to downtown entrepreneurs. Based on a plain reading of the Michigan Constitution, the City Commission appears to have violated state law by enacting a tax without voter consent.

Article IX, Section 31 of the Constitution, known as the Headlee Amendment, requires the state and local governments to win the approval of voters before imposing a new tax or increasing an existing one. Townships, cities and counties have repeatedly attempted to circumvent the law by masquerading new and higher taxes as "user fees." In striking down the practice, the Michigan Supreme Court has delineated the differences between the two. And while the outcome of any potential litigation can't be predicted, the Birmingham fee ordinance appears to flunk this legal test.

From Mrs. Fuller and her downtown neighbors, the City Commission is demanding a minimum of $750 for permission to repaint a door or bit of window frame. The other permit regulations are equally onerous, including the required submission of material swatches, site photos, design plans drawn to scale (10 copies folded and stapled), colored renderings mounted on foam board, and a fully labeled brick-and-mortar site mock-up.

A multitude of dos and don'ts, ranging from the allowable letter size on signs to the style of garbage dumpster, have long forced business owners to jump seemingly unending bureaucratic hoops.

But what really rankles Birmingham's retailers these days is the so-called Virtual Reality "fee." Enacted by the City Commission, a minimum charge of $600 per façade per floor (or as much as $30,000 for a multi-story development) is levied against store owners when they undergo the "design review" required to paint a building exterior, add outdoor lighting, or hang an awning or a sign. This in addition to the $150 application fee.

This Virtual Reality fee is supposed to cover the cost of creating an electronic replica of downtown Birmingham for public access online. Contrary to the legal definition of a user fee, however, payment is mandatory whether or not a retailer wishes to participate.

Exacerbating matters, city officials acknowledge that the Virtual Reality project is more fantasy than reality. All that currently exists is an electronic file in a City Hall computer encoded with an incomplete inventory of downtown buildings. What will ultimately take shape is a "discussion that's still very fluid," city planner Jim Sabo conceded.

Moreover, the city is collecting the money in behalf of a private contractor that has never tested a similar project elsewhere. "We're just a pass-through," Sabo said, adding that Birmingham was picked for the experiment because "we're an affluent community."

Thus, there is no service being provided to those forced to pay the hefty "fee," nor is there any financial benchmark to determine whether the charge is proportionate to the supposed service rendered-as required of user fees under state law. That city officials evidently regard constituents' earnings as so easily expendable exposes a troubling disregard for property rights.

The vacancy rate in downtown Birmingham testifies to retailers' frustrations. "It's so hard to do business here," said Mrs. Fuller, whose curio shop Woodward and Maple will retain its pumpkin-hued trim so long as the city insists on levying the Virtual Reality tax. "City officials are absolutely anti-business, anti-development and anti-downtown. And by the day it's getting worse."

So widespread is opposition to the Virtual Reality "fee" that a good many other storeowners are likewise foregoing renovations. Interior Designer Joseph Keenan, for example, canceled plans to repaint his newly leased studio on Maple rather than submit to the $600 charge. The $7,000 he pays in city taxes is burden enough, he said.
"I hope the paint falls off my building," Mr. Keenan said. "Their $600 tax will do nothing to enrich my business."

Ironically, then, the City Commission's scheme to reinvigorate downtown is producing the opposite effect. But that's typically the result when government micromanages the private sector instead of leaving the business of business to the people who have actually invested their hearts, minds and money in it. Rather than taxing shop owners to create a virtual downtown, the City Commission would do far better to eliminate the very real financial and bureauc
atic obstacles that impede business growth.

(Diane Katz is director of science, environment and technology policy for the Mackinac Center for Public Policy (http://www.mackinac.org). She can be reached at (989)631-0900.)


4) Businesses balk at 'virtual reality' fees

May 12, 2002

From the Birmingham Eccentric

By Larry Ruehlen

City planning with virtual reality is too expensive, said Mel Kaftan, on the $8,600 fee he was forced to pay to add two floors of residential space to a commercial building at 369. E Maple.

"It's an awfully high price to pay," said Kaftan, at a joint meeting of the Birmingham City Commission and planning board Wednesday. "... Don't you people know what budgets are. Don't you know what dollars are. Sometimes people get out of whack. I think it's a deterrent to development... this is just unconscionable."

In April 2001, the city commission adopted an ordinance that required downtown property owners to pay new fees related to building construction or alterations. The fees are passed on to Vantage Point Technologies, a company that spent $600,000 developing a computerized virtual reality model of the entire downtown area.

The model -- the first in the country -- is supposed to be a state-of-the-art planning tool that allows city officials to see the impact of proposed construction before it happens. Every storefront, alley and parking meter is digitally reproduced within the computer program. And a skilled operator can add a five-story office building to the heart of downtown with the click of a mouse.

Clicking on the name of a building immediately transports the user to that place, and historical comparisons are possible because complete models of the city from different time periods are available. According to city documents, merchants supported the idea when it was proposed. But many are now calling for the city to abolish the fees.

The city collects the fees and gives the money to Vantage Point Technologies to update the virtual-reality model. Every time a merchant wants to do something minor such as paint the facade of a building the fee is $600. When new construction is proposed the fees start at $6,000 and go up 25 cents for every square foot of space.

For Kaftan, the fees added up to $8,600 but fees for large projects would be in the $50,000 range, though no developer has been charged that much because all the city's major projects began before the ordinance was adopted.

Keith Deyer, chairman of the Birmingham Historic District Design Review Commission, recently called for a suspension of the fees and a refund of thousand of dollars that merchants have already paid.

"At present time, the model is not of use to the HDDRC," said Deyer. "There is no means of incorporating architectural drawings of proposed new or modified buildings or renderings of new sign proposals."

Gary Kulak, chairman of the planning board, said the planning board hasn't used the virtual reality for planning at all in the past year. City Manager Tom Markus said virtual reality will be integral to site plan review at the planning board level board and Kaftan's site plan will be the first the board reviews in the coming months.

Gil Cox, spokesman for Vantage Point Technologies, appeared before the council and commission Wednesday and said the fees are necessary because it takes time to update the computer program. He also said the company has switched focus and will now work to train city employees to update the program to bring down costs for applicants.

"This is the future and the way planning commissions will be planning all across America," he said. "But if we don't keep it up to date, it becomes relatively useless."
When city commissioners Seth Chafetz and Rackeline Hoff said merchants were growing increasingly agitated over the fees, Cox said the company would be willing to "talk turkey" with the city and try to find a way to reduce costs.

Cox denied charging exorbitant fees to recoup the $600,000 it cost to develop the computer model for the city.

Markus said an argument could be made that the company had given the computer model to the city, but Cox didn't agree. He said Vantage Point Technologies has a signed contract that it fully intends to enforce.

Markus said he didn't want the program to cease.

"We are very much on the cutting edge nationwide," said Markus. "It's really out on the front, and I wouldn't like to see us retreat. We'll examine the costs, and if the city wants to move forward, perhaps the city could participate in the costs."


5) Laura Berman: Big Foot stubs big toe

May 7, 2002

From the Detroit News

The Birmingham Big Foot boom has gone bust.

Two years ago, builders were hiking door-to-door, ringing doorbells, begging to buy, willing to shell out $400,000 and up for small houses near the city's downtown they could tear down and max out.

"Max out the lot" was developer lingo for building as deep and wide into the lot as legally possible.

"We'd have to tell the nice old lady in the 1,100-square-foot house with one bathroom: 'We don't want your house. We want the lot.' She'd be sad -- but ultimately she would want the $400,000," says Doug Keating, a Birmingham real estate agent.

But more than a year after the city passed an ordinance to limit how big a house could be to 30 percent of the lot's square footage, the city is glutted with expensive real estate. This week, 69 houses and condominiums are listed at $1 million or more, in one small suburban town (pop. 19,291), most within a one-mile radius.

A few are selling. And others, like a four-condominium development with units priced at $2.5 million and up, are sitting vacant.

"The market is plugged up," says real estate agent Rebecca Meisner of Weir Manuel Ranke. "The young dot-commers, the people with extra money ... we're not seeing that customer at the moment. And we're not seeing people buying to tear down, either."

Says agent Ronni Keating: "A year ago, you could still get $500,000 for a house that was going to be torn down and used as a lot. That's not happening." She and others suggest that the new ordinance that limits the height of houses and restricts size has dampened enthusiasm for new construction -- and hurt the economics for builders.

They contend that the incentive is no longer there.

The Big Foot law has fueled hostilities between the forces of development and the forces of Mayberry, an archetypal battle chronicled on-line by the Birmingham Buzz (http://www.bhambuzz.org), a pro-development newsletter.

"If they wanted to control development, they (the city commissioners) went about it completely the wrong way," says Clinton Baller, the Birmingham Buzz editor.

Well, maybe.

But with so many expensive houses on the market, the theory that the ordinance damages housing prices is difficult -- make that impossible -- to prove.

But given a slumping stock market, concerns about area business and the sudden disappearance of people with, as Meisner put it, "extra money," all that anyone can agree upon is that the former frenzy of home demolition and new construction -- unusual elsewhere in the Metro Detroit area -- has slowed in Birmingham.

"I do think the economy is the problem, not the ordinance," says Victor Saroki, an award-winning architect. "I don't think the ordinance has kept us from building good quality homes."

"The builders and architects will still find a way to build," says Fred Kapaldi, who opposed the law but is still building. "For now we're just living with it."


6) Rountable on traffic issues to be televised

May 7, 2002

The city's recent Roundtable Committee meeting on traffic and traffic-calming will be televised on Comcast's Channel 15 on the following dates and times:

Tuesday, May 7, 10 a.m.
Wednesday, May 8, 4 p.m.
Monday, May 13, 4 p.m.
Tuesday, May 14, 10 a.m.
Thursday, May 16, 4 p.m.
Tuesday, May 21, 4 p.m.
Thursday, May 23, 10 a.m.
Friday, May 24, 3 p.m.
Tuesday, May 28, 6 p.m.
Wednesday, May 29, 10 p.m.


7) Taxes may dip if Commission OKs millage cut

May 5, 2002

From the Birmingham Eccentric

The average taxpayer in Birmingham will pay $85 less to the city in 2002-2003 if a proposed millage cut is approved by the Birmingham City Commission.
"We stood to collect more revenues than we expected or asked for," said Birmingham City Manager Tom Markus. "So we thought it was reasonable to give it (the added revenue) back."

The city commission approved the tax cut in principle Monday and is scheduled to vote on approval of the budget at its 8 p.m., Monday, May 13, meeting.

B. Sharon Ostin, Birmingham finance director, outlined the proposed tax cut Monday and said the taxable value of property in the city, which was estimated to be $1,400, 722,013, had actually risen to $1,492,257,488. The additional assessed value came from residential construction, house sales and commercial development. When a home is sold, the millage cap under Proposal A is lifted and the new homeowner pays taxes on the full taxable value.

Under the current operating millage rate of 12.02 mills, the increase in residential and commercial property values would raise an additional $1.1 million for the city. The proposed new rate is 11.49 mills. Levies for the library and debt service have also been slightly reduced but an increase in the trash pickup millage will offset both.

The bottom line for the taxpayers, said Ostin, is that the owner of a home with an assessed value of $135,910 will pay $2,020 in city property taxes compared with $2,105 last year.


8) Letter to Buzz: Manage change with balance

May 3, 2002

I join with others in thanking you for providing a vehicle and voice for the majority of Birmingham folks who are growing more and more disgusted with the tone and direction of city government. I, like many, see this city rapidly proceeding down a dangerous single-issue, anti-development road. I think that most people realize that we must, and can, have a balanced approach to how we manage change.

Change is inevitable. Whether it is good or bad is up to us. I can also be counted on to help unseat certain incumbents on the commission who have seriously damaged the relations with city staff and the community. The arrogance, sarcasm and intimidation used by one of our longtime commissioners is embarrassing to watch. From my
perspective, he has clearly changed the whole tone of governance and debate in our city. Our commission meetings should not be about scoring debate points, embarrassing people and micro-managing staff.

I applaud the attempts of commissioners Hoff and Dixon for clearly trying to move the debate and direction towards more balanced and reasonable solutions. I hope that the other commissioners (most of whom are well intentioned) would step back and take a look at the "atmosphere drift" that has and is occurring. I fear that winning the
anti-development agenda war is leaving a realistic long-term vision for Birmingham an orphan.

Tim Tindall
Birmingham


9) Hot dog! Mark calendar for DPS open house

Mark your calendar for the May 18 open house at the Department of Public Services, 851 S. Eton St. From 10 a.m. to 2 p.m., the department will be showing off all its cool equipment, and running short seminars on composting, lawn maintenance and tree-pruning.

The DPS is serving hot dogs and pop. The Open House is an opportunity to get to meet Bob Fox, the city's assistant director of public services; Charlie Moffatt, staff arborist (who might be point man on enforcement of the proposed tree ordinance) and others.


10) Clean up, get to know Rouge River on June 1

The annual Rouge River cleanup and appreciation day is June 1. Show up at Booth Park (at N. Old Woodward and Harmon) anytime after 8:30 a.m. Clean-up begins around 9 a.m.

The most common cleanup activity is removal of logjams and other debris from the stream. Other activities include stabilizing eroding stream banks, stream-side tree planting, and trail improvements. Dress accordingly.

Refreshments will be served in Booth Park after the event.

The city is considering improving the Rouge River trail, a project suggested in the 2016 Plan. The June 1 event is a good opportunity to familiarize yourself with the existing trail, and help with minor improvements.


11) To be removed, send a request to info@bhambuzz.org
{{PERIOD}}
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BE INFORMED...GET INVOLVED...SPREAD THE WORD

Forward this email to friends, neighbors and anyone you know who is interested in EXCELLENCE for Birmingham.

Subscribe at http://www.bhambuzz.org/subscribe.htm