Briefly
In case you haven’t been following other local blogs, today is the day that City Council will read, but not debate, the porch couch resolution. So you might want to sit this one out. The public debate on it, provided it passes the first reading, will take place sometime in August - more information forthcoming.
Arbor Update has the exact language for the ban and an e-mail from MSA president Jason Mironov opposing it.
Also, is anyone aware of any organized opposition, or interested in organizing one?
I’m interested in keeping tabs on any organized opposition.
scott.trudeau AT gmail.com
posted by Scott T. on July 19th, 2004 at 3:43 pmThis is as good a place as any to organize opposition. We need to get MSA, the ICC, and the Greeks together, obviously, as well as us concerned community folk. Perhaps, once we know when the public forum will take place, we can do a couch-to-couch awareness campaign in student neighborhoods… some sort of flier that reads “this couch could be illegal!” or somesuch with relevant info… pass them out to couch-sitters or tape them to upholstered furniture? Just some thoughts.
posted by Brandon on July 19th, 2004 at 3:49 pmI wish I had time to organize some kind of opposition movement outside of blogging about it, but I don’t. I would be up for having some kind of face-to-face meeting soon, though, if people think it’s a good idea.
posted by ann arbor is overrated on July 19th, 2004 at 3:52 pmThat’s a really good idea with the fliers, Brandon.
posted by ann arbor is overrated on July 19th, 2004 at 3:53 pmI’m disappointed that furniture is the only thing that would get you excited enough to be active. Of all the things you hate about A2, couches are the one thing that will get you off your blog and doing something in the community? For shame.
posted by Elizabeth on July 19th, 2004 at 5:04 pmHey Liz, I hope you’re just talking to AAIO there (though the anonymity off the author does make it hard to speculate on their involvement in the community). Otherwise, it’s hard to ask people like Kesterbaum and Trudeau to get more involved in local politics.
posted by js on July 19th, 2004 at 5:13 pm‘Course, maybe that can just be put down to you missing the joke…
Hey, I got a Xerox machine here at work. Who wants some flyers to put up? I have some other commitments (though I’ll try to make it to some of the meeting). Anyone got any couch sitting to do?
posted by js on July 19th, 2004 at 5:14 pmYes, this is the issue that will get me involved in the community, for a few reasons. It’s something I know a lot about, it’s an issue where I’m sure of my position and it’s all happening at a time when I’m around but many aren’t.
posted by ann arbor is overrated on July 19th, 2004 at 8:48 pmjs how about an article in the current next month ?
posted by Bez on July 19th, 2004 at 11:20 pmI’m planning to speak at the city council meeting when this comes up. Not about couches as such, but about how pushing this during the summer represents bad faith toward the student community.
In the meantime, whenever I run into city council folks, I have been discussing it with them, suggesting that they either drop the idea or postpone consideration until everybody is in town.
posted by Larry Kestenbaum on July 20th, 2004 at 12:46 amlooks like they actually did…it’s on Arbor Update now.
posted by ann arbor is overrated on July 20th, 2004 at 12:47 amYep, I just read that seconds ago.
posted by Larry Kestenbaum on July 20th, 2004 at 12:52 amElizabeth:
Shame is the City Council trying to find a backalley behind democracy so they could steamroll this measure past students.
Shame is the bobo elitism that proposed this ban in the first place.
Shame is the jackass who lied to me and bullied me off of the tennis courts at Burns Park last night. (just thought I’d sneak this one in here cuz I’m still pissed off about it!)
But nore importantly, shame is you telling others how to express their conscience and choose their tactics.
posted by Alex on July 20th, 2004 at 7:35 amYes, JS, my comment was directed at AAIO specifically. And if opinions are verboten, then there’s not much point in allowing comments, is there, Alex?
posted by Elizabeth on July 20th, 2004 at 9:26 amAlex, how did you get bullied off the Burns Park tennis court last night? I’m curious.
posted by c-loh on July 20th, 2004 at 10:16 amOh I’m dying to tell this story!
I arrived at the tennis courts at 6 pm. One was open, but my tennis partner had not yet arrived. And I had no tennis balls because he was bringing them. So I stood on the court, started stretching, and assumed he’d be there any minute. Two women approached me within 90 seconds and asked if I was waiting for someone. I apologized and said yes, I was. About 4 minutes later, a pair of guys approached, asked if I was waiting for someone, I said yes, and they went to sit on the bench and wait. I looked at my watch and said “I’ll wait 5 more minutes and if he doesn’t show up, I’ll give up the court.” Within 2 minutes, another pair of men arrived at the court. They just walked right on and started unpacking their gear. I said “excuse me, but I’m waiting for someone.” The older of the two men said “You can’t hold the courts. Sorry. Those are the rules.” I said, “but my partner will literally be here any minute.” He again informed me those were the rules, and he’d pretty much already taken his position at the baseline.
So I walked off the court, and around to the other side of the fence to look at the rules. Nowhere on there does it say you can’t “hold” a court. It says after 5 pm adults have preferences, and that when others are waiting you must limit your play to 1 hour. So I walked back over to the man and asked him to show me where the “no holding” rule was posted. He said “well, we don’t normally play at this location, but at the other place we play that’s one of the rules.” I said “there’s no rule like that posted here. You know, if you had been polite to me, I would have told that you I was just waiting 5 more minutes for my partner and if he still hadn’t arrived I would have given you the court.” He said “don’t you think it makes sense that you can’t hold the courts? There are no reservations here.” I said “I wasn’t *reserving* the court. I was *standing* here, waiting for my partner. People run late, that’s what happens. I wouldn’t have held the court unreasonably long. And what’s more, you shouldn’t lie to people and make up rules that suit your own purposes.” And with that I walked off. The man was at least 15 years my senior, was very pushy and impolite with me, and basically lied to get his way. I’m not a demure person, but I did feel bullied, and I think it speaks volumes about some people in this town’s sense of entitlement. My tennis partner arrived at 6:15 pm. Which means that I would have voluntarily given up the court by then anyway.
And Elizabeth, I never said you shouldn’t express an opinion. I said that I thought it was shameful that you would castigate someone for choosing an issue that you found less than worthwhile. Who are you to set someone else’s agenda? Why are you the arbiter of what is and isn’t important?
posted by Alex on July 20th, 2004 at 11:15 amSorry for your nasty experience, Alex. I think, unfortunately, that you can find those kinds of people anywhere, not just here. Is it also possible that your odds of encountering such people are greater than average when attempting to use a tennis court? Not to be stereotypical or anything.
posted by c-loh on July 20th, 2004 at 11:35 amI would be surprised if most people didn’t agree that there are a lot more important issues that need activists, including but not limited to homeless people and housing issues, abandoned animals, adult and child literacy, anti-war activities (if one is so inclined), or a host of other morally significant causes. Getting all worked up about whether or not A2 students are allowed to have porch couches is so perfectly representative of the entitlement attitude of AAIO and the whiny student mentality, that I can hardly stand it.
I’m not a moral relativist, and I won’t pretend to be. There are a lot of things in our world that need changing, and a lot of people and creatures who could use the help of those who are literate and privileged and willing to make time and give of their energy. Porch couches rank about 10,000th on that list.
And before you ask, yes, I do volunteer and give money regularly to several charities. I’ve been on the Boards of two non-profits, one national and one local. And I’m 34, so I’m not claiming generational superiority like that dude a couple weeks ago.
posted by Elizabeth on July 20th, 2004 at 1:10 pmNo, there are no written rules governing that situation, and there are always gray areas that cause confusion. However, generally accepted etiquette is that one should not hold a court while waiting for a partner. It’s a bit like holding a table at a restaurant while waiting for your party, while others are waiting and ready to be seated. Although I’m not condoning the “bullying” attitude of the person who took the court, the court really should have been given to the first group ready to play.
posted by peter on July 20th, 2004 at 1:12 pmThe truth is that one must pick one’s battles, and AAIO picked one that he or she is (a) personally affected by, and (b) able to actually have an influence on.
I’m sure that the Ann Arbor City Council will love nothing more that to know than the UofM students are organizing to petition the city to pass an anti-PATRIOT act resolution and holding weekly anti-war vigils while the council simultaneously pursues policies that increase rents, make amenities less accessible to students and generally intrude on their lives.
Why isn’t Elizabeth upset about the whiney busy-bodies who take it upon themselves to whine to the city council about the scourge of porch couches with another made-up concern about how they’re endangering the city?
Organized political influence comes in spurts. It involves picking fights that you can win, it’s something that’s done on the grass roots, going door to door building up support, and it’s something that happens after you’ve proven your political worth to the city council and your supporters. Plus, community weblogs are well-designed to organize small groups that share similar political concerns. So why not start with porch couches? AAIO didn’t fire the first shot, the town busybodies did.
posted by Constantine on July 20th, 2004 at 1:33 pmElizabeth, the porch couch thing isn’t about porch couches. It’s about the failure of the student population and the permanent population to coexist more or less peacefully. There are a great many friction points in that relationship, and this is just the latest manifestation. Your condescending atitude doesn’t help improve that relationship, either.
posted by tom on July 20th, 2004 at 1:40 pmOf all the frivolous, silly complaints I’ve made about Ann Arbor (that don’t have to do with strollers or marshmallows) this seems to be the one that’s struck the biggest nerve. And I think it’s because it’s the only one where complaining might actually change something.
posted by ann arbor is overrated on July 20th, 2004 at 1:53 pmPeter,
Perhaps you are right about what proper etiquette on the court is. I’ll just make brief comments in reply:
1)This man and his companion would not have been the next people up for a court, so not only did he bully me, but he also jumped the line.
2)I have played on many many public courts, in many many different places–including some neighborhoods infinitely snootier than Burns Park. I have never in my whole life been told that you couldn’t hold a court for 5-10 minutes.
3)If it’s such generally accepted etiquette, then why did the first two pairs who approached me accept my answer immediately and walk away?
Anyway, if those are indeed the rules, I will happily abide by them. What I take real umbrage with was his manipulation and extremely rude behavior. Maybe from now on I’ll make sure to bring my own tennis balls so I can practice my serve or something–would that be an adequate stake claimed?
posted by Alex on July 20th, 2004 at 2:10 pmTo the person complaining about politics over porch couches:
Get off your fricking high horse. Some people have issues that are more important to them and impact them more directly than homeless people or wars. You should be commending a person that he wants to get in politics rather than chastising them for not taking on an important enough issue (at least in your eyes). The people have little control over where wars are going (or not going to be fougth), if you want to chastise anyone you should be chastising the Congressmen and Senators that gave Bush the green light instead of actually declaring (or not declaring) war. War is not an issue that a local city council should not be involved with.
To tennis court guy:
I can understand if you were waiting for an hour, but 5 minutes shouldn’t matter. But then again, I see people driving like maniacs to add 2 seconds of waiting at a light.
posted by Kozzie on July 20th, 2004 at 2:26 pmIt sounds like you wanted to handle it in a proper way. Next time bring some balls and practice your serve or something or act crazy and say that you are playing with Bill over there.
Alex:
I suggest practicing serves while waiting for your partner. People will be less likely to bother you while you wait.
posted by James on July 20th, 2004 at 3:04 pmAs if I weren’t already having an anti-Ann Arbor kind of day because of “the tennis court incident” I just got a notice from the city that my car, which has been parked on the street in front of my house for 1 day, has been called in as ABANDONED! This is because the crazy, territorial elderly lady that lives across the street from me doesn’t like it when people park in front of her house. WHAT THE FUCK! The notice actually said that if I didn’t move my car within 24 hours they’d tow. What if I’d been out of town? What if the car was broken down? I think it’s totally absurd that she can just call in and complain and they’ll threaten to tow my car!!! Isn’t parking on the street one of my rights as a resident of this neighborhood?!?!? God dammit, why are people here so crazy??
posted by Alex(andra) on July 20th, 2004 at 3:29 pmsorry for the cursing
posted by Alex(andra) on July 20th, 2004 at 3:31 pmOh, Liz, poor Liz, gone 34— double income no kids?
posted by js on July 20th, 2004 at 3:31 pm“You shouldn’t pick battles you can win, only ones that linger,” said dear Liz, pointing her finger.
“Why myself, I fight homelessness, poverty and war; illiteracy, pollution and more!
“A couch ban fight is so petty, and anyway, get off your high horse already.
“Can’t you see that being practical means not winning but commiting to the intractible?
“And oh, the entitlement! You folks demand a reason for upholstery proscribement!
Oh Liz, dear Liz, can’t you see there are battles enough for all? And that victories often start small?
(Apologies for that last rhyme scheme… I should be writing a column, instead I’m drinking red wine in the afternoon).
posted by js on July 20th, 2004 at 3:32 pmMaybe it would be worthwhile to go over to the crazy old lady’s house, introduce yourself, explain that you live across the street, and point out your car so she knows it’s yours. No, you definitely should not have to do that, but at least that way she knows you’re on to her. Old creep.
posted by c-loh on July 20th, 2004 at 3:55 pmMaybe sometime I’ll tell you my OFW parking story about the “secret” street maintenance.
JS, your poetry is way too sophisticated for me.
Actually, I don’t fight pollution.
posted by Elizabeth on July 20th, 2004 at 4:06 pmWhy isn’t Elizabeth upset about the whiney busy-bodies who take it upon themselves to whine to the city council about the scourge of porch couches with another made-up concern about how they’re endangering the city?
Because I already know that all politicians are sleazy, sneaky, self-interested, dishonest, and generally unpleasant people (woh may not have started out that way, but inevitably end up that way). That’s why we have to count on us non-politicians to make real change in this world.
posted by Elizabeth on July 20th, 2004 at 4:11 pmSorry for the typo.
posted by Elizabeth on July 20th, 2004 at 4:12 pmRegarding js’ insert bad poetry here:
My point isn’t that a couch ban is a good thing. I think that house rules should be up to landlords. Hell, I don’t even believe in zoning, let alone all the property regulation A2 delights in.
My point is that there are a million trespasses made every day by governments and the people and companies supported (directly or indirectly) by them. I don’t see how someone can get all worked up about porch couches and somehow think that every other problem in the world will work itself out while they congratulate themselves about how involved they are because they organized against a COUCH PORCH BAN. Puh-leese.
posted by Elizabeth on July 20th, 2004 at 4:21 pmLiz- You’re a well-meaning liberal, I’m sure. Now go back to your PTA or whatever-the-fuck and quit yer bitchin’. As far as I know, this blog awards no Airtight Anus prize. But if you quit whining, I’ll stop pointing out that you’ve missed the point again (in doggerel no less).
posted by js on July 20th, 2004 at 4:48 pmSeriously, between the broad ad hominem against politicians and a lack of understanding about why some zoning laws are certainly necessary, perhaps you should leave politics for the political and teach more gay whales to recycle.
js
There are some fights that are bigger than one community (i.e., the war in Iraq) and people don’t feel directly impacted by the war and thus aren’t as motivated to fight it. There are some fights that people can do (i.e., the couch ban) and people see the impact and are thus more motivated.
There are some people (gasp imagine that) that see the war in Iraq as a necessary evil and thus don’t want to fight it. However to chastise our blog author for that is misplaced, he is just as powerless as you are. The rancor should go towards the folks that shirked their constitutional duty and authorised the President to do whatever he wanted and then acted all shocked when he did just that.
posted by Kozzie on July 20th, 2004 at 4:58 pmThere are no reasons zoning laws are necessary.
posted by Elizabeth on July 20th, 2004 at 4:59 pmReally? Because I want to build a nuclear waste dump right next door to you.
posted by js on July 20th, 2004 at 5:02 pmHey, ever get tired of being wrong?
(Further reasons: Promote sustainable growth, ensure access to public services, manage traffic patterns, encourage tax base growth- both residential and commercial, allow local communities to have a say in the make-up of said communities… Not all zoning laws are good, but to make a blanket statement against them is not just wrong, it’s stupid.)
posted by js on July 20th, 2004 at 5:05 pmPerhaps those who unequivocably oppose zoning laws should join the Libertarian commune that’s trying to get started in Grafton, NH. They want to set up a land that’s free of laws restricting “incest, cannibalism, dueling, gambling, and drug handling”. More importantly, no zoning laws! No taxes! And you can sleep with your sister! And then kill her in a duel! And then eat her!
Possibly we should send some Arborites out there, to sort of jump-start things.
posted by art student on July 20th, 2004 at 7:40 pmI’d argue that zoning laws generally do far more harm than good. They’ve historically promoted less-sustainable auto-centric growth by separating uses, mandating minimum lot sizes, setbacks from streets, and the like. Many prominent thinkers in the planning field are indeed currently calling for the abolition of zoning, which dates back to times of overcrowded, disease-infested slums and much dirtier industries. Today it’s almost impossible to build sustainable cities due to the very zoning laws you guys are praising. Obviously, things like nuclear waste dump sites need to be regulated, but on the whole zoning is working against the aims of good urbanism.
posted by Brandon on July 20th, 2004 at 8:31 pmContinuing the Elizabeth/js/Brandon thread drift, I’ll say that the current norm in zoning laws is bad and counterproductive. I’d rather do away with ‘em. However, everything js said is also true: zoning is a tool that can be used for all sorts of good things: it just has to be applied in a good way. I’ll point to zoning that promotes mixed-use by saying “you may build up to 5 floors of building on this site, but no more than 3 floors of commercial or 3 floors of residential.” For maximum economic gain, the developer will be led to consider a mixed-use building. In some cases, zoning is used to require strong building-fronts, prohibiting parking between the building and the street, making the street (and business) more pedestrian-friendly.
But I digress.
Elizabeth, I think an important thing to see here is that AAiO–and others–are now involved in one MORE cause than they used to be involved in. And when they complete their activism here? Maybe they’ll be inspired to take on (shock) another cause! Maybe they’ll be more ambitious! Maybe one of their projects will, in some small way, address poverty or hunger! Just think! You could be inspiring people instead of mocking! “Way to go guys! Hey, here’s this thing that’s similar to your cause that I’m working on that you might be interested in!”
posted by Murph on July 20th, 2004 at 9:29 pmWhy inspire people though? It’s much easier to say, “I’m involved with ending homelessness” or something to that effect. It’s nice to have large causes but get used to disappointment because most citizens have little control over them.
posted by Kozzie on July 20th, 2004 at 9:39 pmAnother take on ban opposition:
Say you and your buddies like to assemble on your porch couch. Further, say someone you don’t even have any involvement with takes umbrage with your couch and wants to make having a couch on your porch a penalizable offense. Even though the issue is not as important as global warming, why should you acquiesce? It wouldn’t even be a victimless crime, it would be a crimeless crime.
posted by A Different Jon on July 21st, 2004 at 1:24 amhow about a threaded message forum someday aaio?
posted by Bez on July 21st, 2004 at 5:50 amBrandon- Zoning laws are like hammers. You can use them to brain your neighbors or build a neighborhood. While they have often done harm, that has not been because zoning laws per se are bad, just that bad zoning laws were passed.
posted by js on July 21st, 2004 at 8:30 amYou can even remove the word zoning from the conversation, and say that laws are necessary even though there are plenty of very bad laws.
js
Fair enough, JS, although it is rarely used for good. In theory, though, zoning could be our friend. Typically, however, it is used to separate uses into different “zones” and kill any hope for a real fine-grained urban fabric. On the other hand “zoning” laws could, as Murph pointed out, essentially mandate mixing uses, good architecture and design, etc. I just wish it was actually used as such in real life.
posted by Brandon on July 21st, 2004 at 8:13 pmElizabeth, put a sock in it!
posted by Anonymous on July 21st, 2004 at 8:32 pmUmm, what?
posted by Elizabeth on July 21st, 2004 at 9:46 pmWell then, Brandon, that leaves it up to us “kids” who would like to see zoning used for good, not evil, to get involved with politics, doesn’t it?
posted by js on July 22nd, 2004 at 2:18 pmI mean, it’s not like Liz is gonna get it.
js
Get what, exactly? And although by asking, I probably ensure that you’ll only be contrary, please don’t call me Liz. Let’s keep it courteous, ok?
posted by Elizabeth on July 22nd, 2004 at 3:28 pmElizabeth- Get what? Well, here, why don’t you scroll back up and re-read the comments. While I may have inadvertantly slipped into a bit of 1337 slang with Brandon (maybe “zoning” is “h4xX0rz”), I don’t believe that I have.
posted by js on July 22nd, 2004 at 4:41 pmBut I believe with a little bit of effort, even you can figure out what we were talking about!
(And Ee-liz-a-beth, I’ve taken to truncating your name because I have a personal predilection against typing out long names. You may have noticed that I go by my initials. It’s easy; I bet you can figure out what yours are in a snap! Or, alternately, you could go by Beth or Betty. But I don’t much feel like calling you by your whole name until there are sufficient others with similar names that I feel the need to distinguish. Perhaps it’s the churlishness of youth.
While my comments may show a general lack of respect for you, I am clarifying that my abbreviation of your name is not a signifier thereof.)
js
eh, should’ve just spiked the ball at the guy
posted by Alf on August 2nd, 2004 at 12:03 am