Councilmanic

Normally on Wednesdays I’ll write a preview of the Council meeting that night. Since tonight is the night before Thanksgiving, instead I’ll preview/review highlights of last week’s combined regular-session and committee-of-the-whole meeting. Among other things…

1. We voted in favor of vacating several overlooked alleys on the grounds of Fairview School, to enable the construction of the new school. These alleys haven’t been used in decades, and vacating them was a formality.

Yet many of our laws are designed to be triggered by the most nominal of events. Under our sign ordinance, the smallest change could trigger a requirement to remove or drastically alter the sign.

For a brief time the City considered giving up land in Butler Park for the new school. If it had, the City might have restored the rights of way under consideration at Fairview. The connectivity and integrity of the Near West Side neighborhood would have been improved with the inevitable infill project that would have followed; having kept the alleys might then have seemed like a brilliant notion.

When we give up city land, it’s incumbent upon the council to have good reason. Were I aware that Fairview was building a monstrously ugly building and I had had some say in its design, I would have been remiss to not act.

So I asked for better illustrations of the renderings for the new Fairview School. I would have preferred a three-dimensional model, but this project did not trigger that requirement. The public should be able to see the building they’re getting, in context of the buildings around it.

2. We voted to expedite our historic preservation efforts through the Preserve America program, which should help us make preservation decisions more quickly (i.e., in weeks rather than months).

3. We voted to extend the work of the Peak Oil Task Force another six months.

4. And, in the Committee of the Whole immediately following, we considered an end-of-the-year Appropriations Ordinance, reassigning funds within departments for other uses. The only thing that jumped out at me was the unclear question about fuel costs. Were departments looking for more money for fuel because fuel was expensive this summer and we’re paying back bills, because fuel may become expensive again and we’re trying to anticipate it, or because we simply are going to be needing more fuel in the next month or so? I hope to have answers next week.

#

Have a happy Turkey Day!

Yes, it’s true: I entered the Council Chambers after last week’s meeting began, and took my seat as an elected member of that august body…clad head-to-toe in a chicken suit, which I wore the entire meeting.

The photo’s caption: “Chicken Little? In observance of the Bloomington City Council‚Äôs discussion on an urban chicken ordinance, council member Steve Volan came to Wednesday evening‚Äôs meeting dressed as a chicken. Volan waited until the meeting started to make his appearance. City council member David Sabbagh looks on. Chris Howell | Herald-Times”

Many people have been asking questions or making comments about the incident. Forthwith are some answers and responses.

1. Why’d you do it?
2. Was the chicken suit uncomfortable?
3. How do you stand on chickens in the city?
4. You made the front page! What did you think of the HT’s coverage?
5. But wasn’t wearing a chicken suit inappropriate?
6. I saw the story in Hartford! Did you know that you’re making national news?
7. Who challenged you to wear the chicken suit?
8. So are chickens legal now in the city of Bloomington?
9. Is there video?

1. Why’d you do it?

The October 25 meeting of the Bloomington Common Council was a committee-of-the-whole whose sole agenda item was to consider proposed ordinance 06-21: “To Permit Small Flocks of Chickens by Waiver.” So the suit could certainly be considered relevant.

In a letter to the editor of the local paper of record, the Bloomington Herald-Times, on Friday, October 27 I wrote:

Thank you for covering the urban chickens ordinance so prominently in Thursday’s paper. I’ve always wanted to be able to claim a “pullet surprise.”

Of course I wore the chicken getup to endorse the keeping of chickens within city limits. The HT story did not make clear, however, the other reasons why I dressed up for the meeting.

The previous week, while dining with company at the Uptown, a friend passed my table on his way out. A second later, he came back grinning and declared abruptly: “I’ll donate $500 to the charity of your choice if you go to next week’s council meeting in a chicken suit!” (For the record, I was at that moment dining on polenta.) Having experience as costumed poultry — to promote a Thanksgiving sale a few years ago, I donned a turkey suit — how could I turn down such a challenge?

Since land-use issues are the most significant that the City Council considers, I’ve asked that the Sycamore Land Trust be the beneficiary of the generosity of my friend (who has requested anonymity…and who can blame him?).

Thanks also to Blast Off Balloons for the chicken suit. Yes, their costumes fit even me.

2. Was the chicken suit uncomfortable?

I am very tall, it’s true. But as I said above, the outfit Blast Off Balloons rented me actually fit. It was a little tight, but fortunately I just had to sit there at the meeting. Had I needed to sing and dance, I might have generated another laugh with the sound of ripping cloth.

The red rubber gloves made it hard to type on my laptop, however. That’s the worst part of outfits like that: the gloves.

3. How do you stand on chickens in the city?

Standing on chickens is cruel, even in the county.

With respect to proposed ordinance 06-21, I wouldn’t have worn the outfit if I didn’t agree with the proposal. My mom, who lived through the Nazi occupation of Greece, said that her family was lucky to survive relatively healthy and well-nourished because their family in the modern-day town of Sparta kept a flock of chickens; the eggs were their main source of protein. That made a big impression on me. Seeing as the city has adopted a resolution and created a commission on sustainability, it’s a no-brainer to me that this is one step, however small and clawed, toward more sustainable living.

Furthermore, this ordinance is one of the most restrictive of any in the country regulating the keeping of urban chickens. It doesn’t allow roosters (like moi — you know how us men-hens like to crow), it limits a flock to 5 hens, it’s quite strict about how the hens are to be kept, and it only allows the keeping of hens if all immediately-adjoining neighbors agree to it.

Fears expressed during the meeting were supported by no evidence at the meeting: fear of health specters like avian flu, fear of noise, fear of the mess chickens might make. I said during the meeting that we’ve been living in fear here in America long enough; we should not turn down this proposal simply because of unfounded fears. (Even though roosters are not allowed, I wouldn’t object to them either. I’d just as soon hear a rooster crow every day at dawn instead of a noisy garbage truck rumbling over the sidewalk and BWEEP-BWEEP-BWEEPing right outside my window.)

4. You made the front page! What did you think of the HT’s coverage?

The story made the front page of the Thursday, Oct. 26 edition of the HT, my chartreuse-fur-clad head and shoulders clearly above the fold (“Fowl get fair hearing” [$ubsc req'd]). It was perfunctory, though it at least indulged itself like the Council did in making its share of chicken jokes — no one at the meeting thought to call me “Chicken Little,” for example.

The HT editorial board, on the other hand, was a bit too eager later to criticize the outfit. Its Friday mini-editorial on the subject ($500 is not chicken feed [$ubsc req'd]) showed a lack of self-awareness unbecoming of a paper of record:

The sight of city council member Steve Volan in a full-sized chicken suit Wednesday was something to behold. But what should we think? Even though the costumed appearance accompanied a discussion of allowing chickens to be kept by city residents, our first thought was that really devalues the serious process of serious government. Humor has a place, but this didn’t seem to be it.¬†

But we’ve revised our position based on the very impressive fact that Volan dressed that way because one of his friends said he’d donate $500 to the council member’s favorite charity if he did. Volan took the challenge; the Sycamore Land Trust has an extra 500 bucks; and government perked on. If $500 is the reward, we’d favor a chicken suit for every council member.

It so happens that I said very clearly during the meeting that I had dressed up as a chicken because of a charitable challenge. At least one other Council member acknowledged this in his public comments. While this was near the end of the meeting, the HT reporter was there the whole time. She neglected to mention this mitigating factor in the story.

Had I not sent the above letter to the editor the next day, reiterating my biggest reason for the stunt, the HT editorial would likely have only been negative — thanks to their own inadequacies at gathering news.

I have previously criticized the relationship between the HT’s newsroom and its editorial board (”Is the Council nit-picking, or is the HT cherry-picking?” 2006.01.21 [$ubsc req'd]). Yet I remain, their humble subject, willing as ever to help them sell papers.

Next time, though, I’m also calling the IDS.

5. But wasn’t wearing a chicken suit inappropriate?

Like I’ve said above, I support the ordinance, it was for charity, and there was no other item on the agenda (I would probably have changed to civvies had there been one). It was also the last Wednesday before Halloween, so it’s not like it’s not the time of year. And the Council has been making chicken jokes relentlessly, both in public and behind the scenes, whenever the spectre of an urban-chickens ordinance has come up.

If anything, the message of the chicken suit is: we have nothing to fear but fear itself. If a politician can wear a chicken suit in public without fear for his reputation, people can live with a responsibly-kept flock of chickens next door.

6. I saw the story in Hartford! Did you know that you’re making national news?

The Indianapolis Star picked up the story (“Bloomington official goes chicken over coop measure”), including a second shot taken by the fine photographer Chris Howell. Several papers around the country picked the story up off the wire, including the Arizona Republic (“Councilman dresses up as chicken for debate”), the Raleigh News and Observer (“Chicken in the chamber”), and the Canton Repository.

FOX News also had a chicken run (“This Just in From the Fun With Fowl Department”), and the guy who initially challenged me saw it on CNN while on a business trip in Alabama. This story had legs like drumsticks.

7. Who challenged you to wear the chicken suit?

At first he wanted to remain anonymous, but less than a day later, my friend who challenged me said it was okay to release his name. Many thanks to Geoff McKim of Bloomington, and a shout out to his wife Amy Cornell (who I hope isn’t mad at him for the impetuous, impromptu donation; maybe it’ll come out of his school-board campaign fund).

8. So are chickens legal now in the city of Bloomington?

The proposed ordinance will be reconsidered at its second (and final) reading in the Council’s regularly-scheduled meeting tomorrow, Nov. 1. The vote to recommend passage was 5-1 in favor with 3 passes, so I assume it will be law soon enough.

9. Is there video?

Yep, thanks to the good people at Bloomington Community Access Television Services (CATS).You can watch for yourself the October 25, 2006 meeting, which starts about two minutes into the recording. I arrive about three minutes after that.

My final comments run from about 1:26 to just after 1:34, during which, despite being in costume, I manage to make a coherent argument between chicken jokes. But you should check out every councilmember’s comments, which are mostly very thoughtful. (Start with the first comments, ventured by CM Chris Gaal, at 1:23; he cracks the rotten egg of chicken jokes around 1:25.)

# # #

The portion of 7th Street just north of the Indiana University Auditorium (just west of Jordan Avenue) has been closed to all traffic for a couple of years now. It is being used as a staging area for construction trailers for new IU buildings.

The closure prevents buses from making shorter trips around campus. It also removes an essential component of the city’s urban grid; there’s one fewer outlet for traffic that piles up around the academic core of the campus. Showalter Fountain is now the centerpiece of a cul-de-sac.

So why doesn’t the City of Bloomington reopen it? Because the state trumps the city: since that section of road is entirely on the IU campus, they were evidently at liberty to do with it what they wanted. I wonder where IU administrators learned to do urban planning? Oh, wait — to plan a city, first they’d have to acknowledge that they were in a city. Our friends on the other side of Indiana Avenue fancy themselves to be the spiritual inheritors of Robert Moses: builders of monumental park-like places, damn the messy consensus of the people around them. All they’re doing instead is building a huge dose of suburban sprawl, in the very center of the fledgling urban place that is Bloomington.

CM Sabbagh (R-District V) and I don’t agree on much, but we agree most vocally on this issue. We think that at the very least the street should be reopened to buses. Maybe it’s time for a council resolution on the matter.

Since the budget process went from five weeknights over two weeks to four straight weeknights over one week, the city budget hearings have coincided with the week of the Monroe County Fair. Monday and Tuesday nights were four hours each, and we thought ourselves lucky to get away after that brief a period. Wednesday night’s meeting was not even two and a half hours — remarkable.

The budget hearings are a chance for council to comment on issues that otherwise might not be discussed in public because there is no pending legislation related to those issues. Each department head has to present their department’s budget separately.

There has been very little controversy over this year’s budget, and there was not much controversy over last year’s budget. Bloomington has been run by a Democratic mayor and council majority since 1972, so that’s perhaps not a surprise.

Until early this morning, other states used to revolve around Indiana. The country changed its clocks twice a year; we didn’t because we were right on the time zone line geographically, and we’re a vertical state. After many years living without Daylight Saving Time, I grew fond of not having to change my clocks.

But no more.

The Bluebird Nightclub is in District VI. It’s perhaps Bloomington’s oldest operating nightclub, established in 1973. Just a couple of hours ago, a friend and I observed the ringing in of this new era in Hoosier history. We chatted in a booth near the front bar, amidst the oblivious revelry of college students out on a Saturday night as a band called “40% Steve” (no relation) played on the main stage in back.

Indiana law requires taverns to stop serving by 3 am. A brand new Indiana law taking effect in 2006 observes daylight saving time, compelling Hoosiers for the first time since the sixties to join most of the rest of the country in changing their clocks twice a year.

But the time change takes place nationwide at 2 am. And there are lots of people and media attention in state for the NCAA Men’s Basketball Final Four, who’ll want to party as late as possible. (Another friend of mine, heading to her grandfather’s funeral, couldn’t get a flight out of Indianapolis because of the Final Four this weekend. Go figure. That’s how busy the state’s capital is right now; certainly a lot of people wanting to party on “spring forward” day in “Naptown.”) The governor, correctly sensing a public-relations embarrassment, granted taverns a one-hour reprieve from enforcement of the law.

Ironic that Hoosier Daylight Time should begin in a year that the NCAA Men’s Final Four is in Indianapolis. Basketball almost made its way onto the back of the Indiana quarter. But that’s another tale.

On the wall over the front bar in the Bird is a large electric clock with a very old Pontiac silhouette logo on it. Patrick, the strapping thirty-something manager whom I’ve known for years, told us the clock has been hanging there since the day the Bird opened and has never been changed for daylight saving time. I asked if they were going to start changing it now. He thought about it and said: they hadn’t thought about it.

I think they should put a sign up by it saying, “This clock is on Eastern Standard Time.” Don’t change it, Pat. Put up another clock if you have to right next to it, as if it were a newsroom. Let the old one stay as it is, to remind us of, um, a better time.

It’s a little premature for me to post this, as I haven’t finished introducing the blog as a whole. But here’s my first article of any substance in the new year. It’s a guest column to Bloomington’s daily newspaper, the Herald-Times, about their tendency to editorialize and to trivialize local issues in their newshole.

It was published Saturday, and I’ve already received privately several compliments on it. Evidently I’ve struck a local nerve. (If you’d like some background, let me know.)

For the record, the little section headers I wrote were stripped from the published product. The text below is my original text. Links to the referenced articles follow the text. 

Is the Council nit-picking…or is the H-T cherry-picking?
Jan. 13, 2006 (published in the Herald-Times Jan. 21, 2006)
Stephen Volan is a member of the Bloomington City Council.
*

‚ÄúThe editorial page of the newspaper is for precisely the things my disgruntled correspondent says we should not be doing. Our primary role is to serve the public by providing information, but the editorial pages…allow all who write for it to push or lead if their opinions are strong enough to do so.‚Äù — Bob Zaltsberg, August 15, 2005

Let’s examine the Herald-Times’ commitment to not “pushing” or “leading” outside its editorial page by deconstructing a recent opinion (‚ÄúCity council nitpicks CVS project too much,‚Äù January 8, 2006).
In public comments Jan. 3, I praised the new CVS project, saying I was looking forward to walking there to shop. I indeed said I thought all developments should be required to provide 3-dimensional models, not merely well-executed drawings.

Then, agreeing with Councilmember Ruff, I said the building should conform to “building-forward” design. It should be up against a street to send the explicit message that this building is for pedestrians too, not just for cars. Difficulty with ADA compliance didn‚Äôt appear to be enough reason to set the building back from all sides. The building‚Äôs setback was my main objection.

* Sin of omission

Only my 3-dimensional-models comment made it into Kurt Van der Dussen’s Jan. 4 story on the meeting. Implicitly through omission, he misrepresented why my initial vote on this project was a ‚Äúno.‚Äù

Mr. Van der Dussen was evidently the editorialist days later, even if another did the rewording. The Jan. 8 opinion follows the story beat for beat, often word for word. Even the story’s headline says Council “picked apart” CVS, while the editorial’s says Council “nitpicked.” It’s as if they were written simultaneously, with the explicit editorializing added later.

During that meeting, he decided that various objections were simply Council‚Äôs “personal preferences and foibles,‚Äù that the objections were over the “smallest” architectural features, and that Council is trying to micromanage “every project within the city.‚Äù (Mightn‚Äôt CVS‚Äô building choices also be idiosyncratic? If the features are so small, why is CVS skimping?)

He then chose comments from various CMs with an eye to variety, to emphasize their apparent pettiness. It doesn’t occur to him that Council might deliberate with an eye to the city’s Growth Policies Plan and its recently adopted downtown sub-plan – both developed after months of consensus-building among hundreds of interested citizens.

* Ignoring pictures big and small

This long-time reporter also seems not to realize that despite CVS’ months of meeting with planning officials, this was the first time that elected and not appointed officials were considering the request. He insists Council should not “rubber stamp,” yet would rather Council’s opinions were not the “final arbiter” of the project. I wonder whose he thinks should be.

Another telling nit to pick: Mr. Van der Dussen reported that Council would take its final vote Jan. 11. Regular sessions are the first and third weeks of the month; the next is Jan. 18 — a fact published well in advance of the editorial and stated clearly Jan. 3. (This was the only story error corrected in the editorial — without fanfare, of course.)

A small mistake, but perfectly indicative of someone with…”tenure,‚Äù let us call it: a reporter so long ensconced that he now just assumes he‚Äôs always correct.

* The devil is in the details

So comes now the pot calling the kettle petty. The jobs of both councilmember and journalist involve examining the details.

Looking for subtle omissions is necessary to decipher the technique of a writer who supports his shallow political opinion by looking at a tree and calling it the forest. Nit-picking is necessary to tease out a cherry-picker whose “reporting” should be trusted no more than his editorializing, because he can’t separate the two.

But one writer’s foibles aside, it is impossible to rationalize this editorial with the mini-editorial of Nov. 11, 2005, “Kudos for Nashville’s new CVS”:

The new pharmacy looks like it’s been there for decades. It has no resemblance to the dreaded boxy concrete building adorned with neon and ‘Giant Sale’ signs that might come to mind with a chain store.

The CVS looks like a remodeled old cottage-like building. It even has a porch.

In a town like Nashville, <a href=”http://www.blogger.com/img/gl.link.gif”>keeping architecture in harmony with the rest of the community</i> is important. This is a great example.

Bloomington’s Council expects nothing less from CVS: architecture in harmony with the rest of the community. How are the H-T editorial board’s standards so profoundly lower for its own hometown?

# # #