March Newsletter--BHA

BHA Meeting--CHIEF SMITH TO BE GUEST SPEAKER

Next meeting of the Bromley Homeowners Association is Thursday, March 18, 
1993 at 7:30 p.m.
in the Gymnasium of Thurston School.  The featured guest will be Chief 
Douglas Smith, Chief of
Police, City of Ann Arbor.  Chief Smith brought the idea of Community 
Oriented Policing to Ann
Arbor from his previous position in Minneapolis.  Come meet him and our 
Community Oriented
Police officer, Thomas Kolpacki (see letter from him below).   We have 
also taken this
opportunity to invite the other neighborhoods that Officer Kolpacki 
serves, in the interest of
promoting northeast area unity.  Thanks to Officer Tom Kolpacki for 
suggesting this idea!

SIDEWALK SNOW REMOVAL.

     Recently, there were notices issued to a number of Bromley homes 
asking that they clean the
snow from their sidewalks.  These notices were issued by the Sidewalk 
Office of the
Transportation Department and they were issued in response to complaints 
lodged by individual
citizens.  While it is certainly true that we should all make a sincere 
effort to keep our sidewalks
clean, the sort of enforcement (by the Sidewalk Office) witnessed by some 
caused great distress-
-homes with clean sidewalks were targeted with notices as well as homes 
with sidewalks that had
not been shoveled.  BHA worked constructively with the Mayor's Office 
through phone
conversations, written letters, and photographic displays, and with 
Officer Kolpacki, to alleviate
the distress brought to some; the methods for enforcement by the Sidewalk 
Office are now being
re-evaluated, as per the letter from the Mayor sent by courier, 
hand-delivered directly to Sandy.
The Mayor called Sandy to apologize on behalf of the City for distress 
caused to residents of
Bromley.  (The BHA letters are not published here (they are long) but are 
available to anyone
wishing to see them.)
     BHA hopes that individuals with complaints about sidewalks, or 
anything else, will try
approaching the individual who is offending them (in a constructive 
manner); most of us don't
wish to offend our neighbors--we just get busy, sick, or whatever.  If 
not the individual, try the
Homeowners Association; we can help in a number of ways, too.
     Source of the complaints:  some have worried that it was the 
postman--NO.  Some have
worried that it was the Community Oriented Police officer--NO!!  Others 
have worried that it was
BHA--NO!!  All of these people would work directly with the individuals 
involved; to do anything
else would be contrary to their basic method of operation, based on 
openness, directness, and
community spirit.  These were citizen-generated complaints.  Both the 
Mayor's Office and C.O.P.
Officer Tom Kolpacki have been extremely helpful to the distressed 
Bromley residents in this
matter.

Letter of apology from Mayor Brater, March 5, 1993, to Sandy:

     Thank you very much for contacting me regarding problems with 
enforcement of the snow
removal ordinance.
     I am very sorry that the Bromley neighborhood has experienced 
difficulty with city
enforcement of the snow removal ordinance.  It is certainly not the 
Council's intent to harass
homeowners who have made a good faith effort to clear their sidewalks, 
and I am very disturbed
to hear that this has happened.
     I have asked the City Administrator to rectify this situation by 
adopting a more reasonable
enforcement policy.
     I very much appreciate the time you have taken to inform me of this 
serious problem.
     Once again, please accept my apologies for the inconvenience and 
distress that the Bromley
neighborhood has experienced in this regard.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Letter of introduction from Officer Kolpacki

Dear Residents:

     Allow me to introduce myself, my name is Officer Tom Kolpacki and I 
am your Community
Police Officer.  I am very excited about my assignment and look forward 
to meeting and working
with all the Bromley Neighborhood residents.
     The Ann Arbor Police Department is continuing and expanding the 
community policing
program, a large part is due to the success of the first pilot program, 
which originated in
Sandalwood.  The success of this program shows the commitment the 
residents of the city have
to their community.
     I will be attending your association meetings, to find out what some 
of your concerns, fears,
and expectations are, and how I can be of assistance.  I will also 
discuss some plans and ideas
that have been successful in other neighborhood groups, and offer my 
assistance in
implementing them.
     Community Policing is a partnership between the community and the 
police department.  In
pursuing  this partnership, my goal is to assist residents in enhancing 
the quality of life for the
Bromley neighborhood!!
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposal for Hazardous Waste Incinerator

BHA has received a packet of materials concerning this project from 
groups opposed to it; these
materials are available to anyone wishing to borrow them.  Here are some 
excerpts from a flyer
from Michigan Citizens Against Toxic Substances:

     "Envotech, a subsidiary of Wayne Disposal and Michigan Disposal, 
plans to build the nation's
second largest hazardous waste landfill and incinerator complex.
....[in]...
Augusta township, which is adjacent to Milan....An estimated 15,000 
people live within 4 miles of
this proposed hazardous waste complex and over 90,000 people live 12 
miles north of the site."

BHA has received no materials on the other side of the issue.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bromley Subdivision Garage Sale Day--May 8.
by Mary Ann Gasiorek

The Bromley Subdivision Garage Sale Day will be Saturday, May 8, from 
9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.
You may have a full-scale garage sale or just put a few things out in 
your driveway.  You will run
your own garage sale and keep all profits.  Please call Mary Ann Gasiorek 
at 996-4633 if you
would like to join the fun and have your address listed on the map of 
participants.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dolfins Pool--remember to support your pool--with your fair tax share (of 
$30 per year), with
labor, and with memberships!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ADvertisement:

"Seeking friendly, responsible teenagers for occasional babysitting and 
'parents' helper' time.
Family on Renfrew St. with easy-going preschooler.  Please call Priscilla 
Spencer 663-1874."


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BROMLEY HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION

PRESENTS

CHIEF DOUGLAS SMITH

ANN ARBOR POLICE DEPARTMENT

THURSDAY, MARCH 18, 1993

THURSTON SCHOOL, GYMNASIUM

7:30 P.M.


The Bromley Homeowners Association is proud to present Chief Douglas 
Smith, Chief of Police
for the City of Ann Arbor.  We do so at the suggestion of our Community 
Oriented Police Officer
Tom Kolpacki, so that all of Officer Kolpacki's neighborhoods have a 
chance to interact with
each other and to meet Chief Smith, the man who brought Community 
Oriented Policing to Ann
Arbor.  We all hope that this event will help to kick off  neighborhood 
unity in northeast Ann
Arbor that will be carried forward by neighborhood organizations working 
in partnership with the
Community Oriented Policing project.


Expect a lively talk with question and answer period following the talk.  
Officer Tom Kolpacki will
introduce Chief Smith.


Light refreshment will be served.

Bromley Homeowners Association Board of Trustees:

Sandra Arlinghaus, President
Elfriede Hofacker, Vice-president
Lucinda Baker, Secretary
Vivane Shammas, Treasurer
James Henderson
Marie Kilbane
Michael McConnell
Kenneth Reader








March 2, 1993






Mayor Elizabeth Brater
City of Ann Arbor
100 N. Fifth Ave.
Ann Arbor, MI 48107

Dear  Mayor Brater,

     This letter is a "post-script" to my letter of March 1, 1993 
concerning snow removal from
sidewalks.  I just spoke with Beverly in the Transportation Office who 
called me to discuss our
contesting of the way in which snow removal correction sheets were issued 
recently in Bromley.
I really appreciate her call; she was able to explain how homes are 
targeted for evaluation;
perhaps the sidewalk office might consider putting a clearer explanation, 
of the sort she gave
me, on the front of the evaluation sheet.  While I do appreciate her 
call, and the added
information (including the fact that the sidewalk office has suspended 
activity pending
development of photos--I went out and protested loudly to the man doing 
the photographing), it is
unfortunately the case that people here continue to feel a strong sense 
of outrage over their
feelings of being wrongly accused.  As I understand it, there is a matter 
of trip hazard and
potential litigation coming from the possibility of someone falling on an 
icy sidewalk (as a general
principle).  This is clearly a problem that no one wants to deal 
with--neither homeowner nor city.
But there are other possible problems that could create a nasty situation 
downstream, arising
from part of the solution to snow removal recommended by the city.
     In particular, the "Notice" says that "Sand, salt, or other 
substance must be applied to ice
immediately after it accumulates to prevent it from being slippery."  
Now, as we wait for the City
photographs to be developed (we are preparing a photographic display of 
our own of City
sidewalks) I would like to point out that while an icy patch may show 
(photographed from the
corner), an effort to salt that patch may not show.  I watched an 
individual from the sidewalk
office photographing swatches of sidewalk from a distance (around 9:30 
a.m. this morning); with
the temperatures the way they are now, there is a significant freeze-thaw 
cycle from night to day
that deposits ice-puddles early in the morning.  All one can do is salt 
them and then they melt in
a couple of hours.  I question whether or not a photograph would show 
such salting--that is in
accordance with the City-recommended procedure.
     I have walked and driven the whole neighborhood several times; one 
thing I note is that
people are using far more salt than previously; of course, the City 
"Notice" encourages that.  So
the trip hazard from ice is one issue--what about the others:
     1.  There are many City trees in the tree lawns; the trees are 
around 30 years old.  Many of
them are ash trees (and others) that apparently have roots near enough 
the surface to be visible.
What kind of impact is this heavier salting going to have on these 
trees?  Will they need more
pruning?  Will they die more quickly?  Will there be tree failures with 
trees falling into the street
in wind storms, possibly onto people walking or driving?  Will there be 
damage on private
property, by City trees, caused by premature and unexpected tree 
failures?  What about salt-
impact on other plants?
     2.  What about the impact of added salt on the non-human Bromley 
residents?  People walk
their dogs on our sidewalks--the dog walks barefooted on a salty walk; 
might not the pads on the
paw become dried out and cracked, causing  pain and suffering for the 
innocent dog and added
dog-doctoring bills for the owner?  (Same for other domesticated animals, 
too.)  Then, what
about our wild animal population; raccoons live in the storm sewers; what 
will a sharp change in
the salinity of the water in the storm sewers do to this underground 
population and its interaction
with this neighborhood?
     3.  What about the environmental impact of added salt on the ground 
water supply and on the
run-off that goes into the storm sewers and eventually into the "fresh" 
water supply that serves
the population in the drainage basin of the Huron River downstream from 
Ann Arbor?
     4.  What about problems that come from salting newly-laid cement?  
Many property owners
have put in new concrete in response to the trip hazard issue from raised 
concrete.  The City has
done so, too.  People with new concrete tell me that they are instructed 
not to salt it for two
years--even if they do not do so themselves, they are subjected to 
run-off from others who do so.
What rights do they have in all this?  Is the City concerned that more 
frequent concrete
replacement  will add to its budget?  Are we not to use salt?  It seems 
more effective than sand
or kitty litter, so when threatened by the city, many will naturally turn 
to salt.
     5.  Why, as a matter of common sense, is the City not also 
responsible for clearing this
"public" sidewalk at their expense.  Homeowners can do some; but when 
there are heavy snows
and ice storms there is only so much a homeowner can reasonably do with 
home-type
equipment.  The City has snow emergency plans for the streets--why not 
for the sidewalks, too--a
cooperative venture?  If not,  maybe homeowners should be billing the 
city for their routine
service in shoveling the public sidewalks?  I think most of us feel that 
we pay plenty in tax to the
City.
     6.  This sort of clandestine attack, coming at law-abiding citizens 
from out of the blue with no
opportunity to defend themselves against their accuser, leads people to 
make wild speculations;
one difficulty that is a possible consequence is the undermining of the 
Community Oriented
Police program in this neighborhood; the coincidence in timing is enough 
to make some
suspicious when no logical explanation for the motivation of the Sidewalk 
Office is available.  I
am working constructively with the wonderful police officer, Tom 
Kolpacki, to educate individuals
who might have some sort of perception problem in this regard.  But what 
we need is action from
the sidewalk office motivated by rationality rather than by litigious 
concerns.

     Now what we are concerned with is some sort of sense of 
middle-of-the-road reasonableness;
I gather that often when there are possible/potential threats of 
litigation, that responses in the
extreme are often encountered.  That is why there is hostility; people 
believe they were behaving
in a reasonable manner and they want to look to their City government as 
a source of
reinforcement for reasonable behavior--the sort of reasonable behavior 
that any civilized person
can figure out--not some sort of extremist position.
There are natural hazards that are related to climatic variation; in a 
northern climate there will be
ice and snow on sidewalks; no one (not even the City Sidewalk Office) can 
fight Mother Nature--
sidewalks in climates like ours cannot be kept 100% clear for 100% of the 
time; there are natural
run off patterns and freeze-thaw cycles that no amount of intervention 
can bridge.  Homeowners
need to make a sincere effort at removal as do pedestrians at exercising 
caution.
     While this targeting of homes is apparently complaint-driven, it is 
also the case that those
who feel wrongfully accused will naturally look to see that the one who 
cast the first stone (the
City Sidewalk Office) is keeping its house in order.  Thus, we are 
preparing a photographic
display to illustrate that those who accuse us seem not to be doing as 
good a job of snow
removal as many of us.  The public sidewalks at Thurston School are not 
cleared from side to
side "for their entire constructed width."  We have a photo of that; are 
we to believe that a small
patch of ice on a residential sidewalk is a greater potential threat to 
the population at large than a
walk to a school that hundreds of children traverse each day?  Is it the 
case that the Sidewalk
Office cares more about the single individual (or small group) that calls 
to complain than it does
for the welfare of the entire school population of Thurston School?  The 
natural resolution of
sunlight is good enough for our children but adults deserve better?  The 
public sidewalk at  the
Thurston Nature Center has apparently not been cleared at all; this is a 
brand new sidewalk
installed by the City (for which we are all very happy).  There are those 
who wonder if this might
not be a bit hypocritical;  homeowners should salt their new sidewalks 
while the City does not?
We have several photos of this sidewalk (mostly of the snow and ice on 
it, along with the sign)
and of the sidewalk leading directly into it.   These are all instant 
photos taken the morning of
March 2, shortly after the man from the sidewalk office photographed some 
of Bromley (so ours
will have more effects of natural melting).  As I mentioned to you in 
yesterday's letter, I
understand that one homeowner has also photographed his sidewalk; we do 
not yet have our
photos on that.
     Now as we note all this, please bear in mind that our reason for 
noting it is to illustrate that
people do live together successfully with mutual tolerance and 
understanding.  Is it appropriate to
disrupt that because of a single (or small number) of complaints about a 
possible trip hazard that
the Sidewalk Office responds to in what appears to be an extremely 
peculiar fashion (serving
notice on people with clean walks)?  Carry this logic to its extreme and 
there are a number of
obvious extensions:  if one cannot distinguish a "reasonable" job of snow 
shoveling from an
"unreasonable" job of an  uncleared sidewalk, because of possible legal 
threats as to what
constitutes "reasonable effort," then why bother to shovel at all?  Is 
the City prepared to do all
the shoveling on a regular basis, for the whole city, bill people and 
have 50,000 angry
homeowners down at City Hall contesting that strategy every time it 
snows?  That seems absurd
(too).  Or are we to say that because the Sidewalk Office seems to 
respond more to legal threats
than to common sense that the logical solution is to rip up all the 
sidewalks, with no need for a
Sidewalk Office, and let the strips of land go wild so that the issue of 
how good an attempt has
been made at sidewalk maintenance is not in effect; this too seems 
ridiculous and defeats some
of the desirable characteristics of urban life.  But when people feel 
unreasonably targeted,
possibly as a result of some sort of extreme response, other extremes 
surface as possible
thoughts.

      Ann Arbor has been a nice place to live; one of the things that 
distinguishes it from other
places, in my mind, is that there is tolerance and an understanding of 
what is resonable.  People
stand up for what they believe in and speak out accordingly with the 
rights they believe they
have as residents of a democracy.  When government starts being driven by 
minutia and law
suit threats, as would appear to be the case with the sidewalk office's 
response to complaints, I
see the city I love becoming more like some of the other cities I have 
lived in that were once nice
places prior to the adoption of this sort of small-picture focus on urban 
issues driven by threats
and outrageous response, rather than by cooperative and constructive 
action for the big picture.

     Again, thank you.

Best wishes,




Sandra L. Arlinghaus
President, Bromley Homeowners Association
2790 Briarcliff
Ann Arbor, MI 48105

761-1231





March 1, 1993






Mayor Elizabeth Brater
City of Ann Arbor
100 N. Fifth Ave.
Ann Arbor, MI 48107

Dear Mayor Brater,

      I write this letter to you as a follow-up to two phone 
conversations with your office this
morning.  The reason I had called was to discuss a situation in Bromley 
involving the City's
"snow removal correction sheet."  As we understand it, someone complained 
about lack of snow
removal in a broad area of Bromley.  Now a good number of people who have 
called me
appreciate the need to keep walks clear and many admit that they have had 
a hard time
following this latest ice storm, even though they routinely do keep their 
walks reasonably clear on
a regular basis.  Some of these people worried that they had been singled 
out; they seemed to
find the back side of the form clear enough (actual statement of the 
laws) but found that the way
the front side of the form reads is confrontational and frustrating.  
This is the small issue.  These
same people, who freely admit to being in violation personally, have 
expressed outrage--not at
the law and not at their notice--but at the idea that their neighbors' 
homes, whose walks they
knew to have been clear at the time the "notices" were issued, were 
targets for this notice.  I
know of five separate instances of this difficulty.  People see as 
absolute outrage, for example,
targeting the clean sidewalk of a retired man, who not only shovels his 
own sidewalk clean and
dry, but routinely shovels those of two houses near him--just to be 
nice--no one asked him, no
one pays him, and the owners (who do not live in the neighborhood) may 
not even know that he
does it.  In another case, younger families work to clear the walks of 
some of their senior citizen
neighbors--again, just to be nice.  All their walks are clear.  At least 
one man photographed his
clear walk immediately upon receiving notice.  These are reasonable 
people who keep their
homes and walks in reasonable condition (or better) on a regular basis; 
as is often the case with
those who are reasonable, they have very definite opinions of what is 
unreasonable.  I think we
all find it unreasonable to serve "notice" on homes with clear walks; 
certainly I understand their
sense of total outrage.  There are deeper problems, as well (enumerated 
below).
    1.  Fear--people do not know how to please the City with their 
shoveling when walks that are
clear get served "notice."
     2.  Shame--law-abiding citizens who pride themselves on good 
citizenship do not wish to be
targeted with notices.
     3.  Loss of sleep--from the anger and outrage of being wrongfully 
accused.
     4.  Frustration with not knowing who turned them in, and who is out 
to get them.  Creates
suspicion and all sorts of negative interpersonal problems within the 
neighborhood when a
complainant uses City Law to knife his (used generically) neighbors in 
the back.
     5.  Suspicion--some individuals have expressed concern that is it 
the Community Oriented
Policing program that caused this; clearly that would be totally counter 
to the interests of that
program.  But, people don't necessarily see it that way--especially not 
when they are angry and
are looking to put the blame somewhere.
     6.  Disgust with the man, Brad K., from the sidewalk office, whom a 
number noticed sitting in
his car for hours at a time, writing out notices.  Then they noted him 
cross clean sidewalks to put
the notice on the door.  They did not see that he used any discrimination 
in evaluating the
situation.
    7.  Anger--some long-time residents comment that they have lived here 
for 25 years and have
never been subjected to the sort of horrible situation the sidewalk 
office confronted them with
last summer, let alone this added insult.  It appears to be the result of 
the activities of one or two
individuals and the complainant(s?), but it is not always easy to explain 
this to good citizens who
have been the backbone of this community for so many years.

     I hope the items above capture the spirit of neighborhood feeling.  
In addition there are a
number of concerns that the neighborhood association has.

     1.  This manner of complaining is counter-productive to having a 
neighborhood organization
that tries hard to work in a constructive manner with both the City and 
with the individual
homeowners.  We try very hard to be helpful and are saddened to see this 
type of situation that,
by its very nature, seeks to defeat open, constructive communication.
     2.  We also worry about the sidewalk office; if Brad can't tell a 
snow covered sidewalk from a
clean one, or if he is complacent about filling out forms, or petty about 
interpretation of what is
"clean," then we do have to wonder what sort of abuse might come to 
residents of our
neighborhood when he "evaluates" their repaired/replaced sidewalk squares 
later in the spring.
Indeed, both Brad and his colleague Adam, seem more responsive to 
complaints than to
constructive action.  They were kind enough to come to our September 
Homeowners Association
meeting.  They said they would get me a package of materials right after 
the meeting, including
an updated City list of the Bromley households covered by the homeowners 
extension and
information on City specs for doing concrete work (positions of 
barricades and various other
technical material for do-it-yourselfers).  A month later,  Brad called 
to say it would be brought
out, "no problem."  Nothing happened.  I called back and was told it 
would be mailed.  Two more
calls to the office (talking to whoever answered the phone) yielded no 
further results.  By
December, still no materials.  Come January, Adam called me concerning 
how we were going to
deal with the group rate issue--apparently in response to a complaint 
(!!) from someone in the
neighborhood.  I explained all that to him and again asked about the 
materials.  Again, I was told
that he would look into it and that I would get them soon--"no problem."  
Still, we have no
materials.  All of this does not inspire confidence, and it doesn't seem 
to fit with the way the rest
of City Hall does business--other offices have been so nice about 
replying to reasonable queries
and to following up on them in a timely fashion.  They see the benefit of 
responding to
constructive interaction, as I know you and your office do.
     3.  We worry about  fostering the good relations we already have 
with the Community
Oriented Police project; we're overjoyed to have it, and given this 
attack,  we need to work hard
to convince residents, some of them all over again, that Tom Kolpacki is 
a wonderful person with
the best interests of "his" neighborhood at heart.

     Again, I thank you for all of your efforts: I look forward to having 
some sort of favorable
resolution to this situation and to hearing from you.

Best wishes,




Sandra L. Arlinghaus
President, Bromley Homeowners Association
2790 Briarcliff
Ann Arbor, MI 48105

(313) 761-1231