Warning to strict-interpreters of this blog's title: the following post has nothing to do with Annapolis or Politics.
I am fascinated by good advertising, but not the kind would be typically studied in business schools. Every once in a while, I find myself thinking "this is the most ridiculous product I have ever seen, and the person who invented it is an evil genius."
So, here is my list of the top 5 greatest marketing feats in the history of ever, listed in reverse order for added drama.
#5. Pet Rock
This, folks, is a classic. I am actually too young to know exactly how pet rocks came about, but if it involves anything resembling people paying for common roadside debris--and I'm pretty sure it does--than the marketing is genius. I do know that my grandfather had the coolest looking machine that I have ever seen for the precise purpose of polishing rocks, which suggests that pet rocks spun off even more incredible supporting industries. Where do we go from here: Pet leaves. Patent pending.
#4. Bottled Water
Before, you just drank water. If you thought it tasted a little funny, you boiled it, then waited a little bit, then drank it. I just looked at the freekin' Wikipedia page for bottled water, and look at all this crap:
Artesian Water - This type of water that originates from a confined aquifer that has been tapped. The distinguishing feature of water from an artesian aquifer is that it flows from the tap due to gravity; the subterranian water level is at a height greater than that of the location of the tap.
Fluoridated Water - This type of water contains fluoride added within the limitations established in the FDA Code of Federal Regulations. This category includes water classified as "For Infants" or "Nursery."
Ground Water - This type of water is from an underground source that is under a pressure equal to or greater than atmospheric pressure.
Mineral Water - This type of water contains at least 250 parts per million total dissolved solids (TDS). It comes from a source tapped at one or more bore holes or spring, and originates from a geologically and physically protected underground water source. No minerals may be added to this water.
Purified water - This type of water has been produced by distillation, deionization, reverse osmosis, or other suitable processes. Purified water may also be referred to as "demineralized water." It meets the definition of "purified water" in the United States Pharmacopoeia.
Sparkling Water - This type of water contains the same amount of carbon dioxide that it had at emergence from the source. The carbon dioxide may be removed and replenished after treatment.
Spring Water - This type of water comes from an underground formation from which water flows naturally to the Earth's surface.
Sterile Water - This type of water meets the requirements under "sterility tests" in the United States Pharmacopoeia.
Well Water - This type of water is taken from a well.
There are marketing geniuses out there who are paid to convince us that bottled water is more 'watery' than regular water. And we believe it--to the tune of $11 billion per year. Where do we go from here? Canned air. What? We already have that??!!!
#3. Diamonds
Diamonds--what a great story. The De Beers Company basically conglomerated 90% of all diamond mines in the world, the used their monopoly power to keep diamond prices ridiculously high by controlling the supply. And that's not even the best part! Some advertising phenom came up with the idea that a diamond is the only appropriate engagement ring, and that 2 months' salary was the appropriate amount to spend. Think about that! You can either put a down payment on a house, which allows you to create real wealth by owning a home, or you can make your future wife slightly happier than she otherwise would have been by giving her a luxury asset that creates no return on investment. Looks like we're renting for another year! Where do we go from here: Pet Rock engagement rings.
#2. Greeting Cards
Here is the business plan for greeting cards:
Step 1: Hype up every legitimate and less legitimate holiday, birthday, event, occasion, or other. Also, hype up every-day occurrences such as "just thinking about you" and "for being a great friend".
Step 2: Think of something that anybody else could think of and write it on a piece of paper.
Step 3: Make lazy, uncreative people come to your store and pay you for things they already know how to say.
Step 4: Smoke cigars poolside in the Caribbean while fanning yourself with $100 bills.
Where to we go from here: voting by greeting card. Fall of the human race.
#1. Cranberry Juice
Whoever was in charge of marketing cranberry juice should go in the Hall of Fame for Awesomeness. I challenge you to walk through the juice aisle in a grocery store and find a juice that has not been bullied and pushed around by cranberry juice. It's everywhere, and its influence is impressive. You've got cranberry, cranberry light, cran-apple, cran-mango, white cranberry, cran-grape--my head is spinning! Absolutely incredible. Cranberries don't even taste that good. Where we go from here: cran-tomato.
Where I go from here: to bed.
Monday, September 17, 2007
City Employee Crime
A letter writer to The Capital today suggested that the aloofness of the Moyer administration regarding crime(s) that a former city employee recently committed can be correlated with crime in our city.
So opines the writer:
According to the story, "Mayor Ellen O. Moyer declined to comment this morning through her spokesman Ray Weaver. She said she doesn't like it when anyone is robbed in the city, whether it be by a city employee or not."
Now there is a brilliant statement. Do you wonder why the city has a serious crime problem?
My initial reaction to this story was something like.........
"Why would the city notice a criminal from amongst thier midst?? After all, birds of a feather flock together."
And after realizing that such a comment was really for personal amusement more than anything else, I didn't have much to say.
What I want to say is: people are crazy. I own a company, and have witnessed the following employee problems:
-employee jailed for 24 hours for spreading the ashes of his cremated relative without a permit
-employee half-naked on-site with his girlfriend
-employee, while on the clock, wearing a shirt bearing the name of the company, ordering an alcoholic beverage from a bar that he knew was a business partner of our company, with the following instruction: "make it a double, and make it quick...i have to get back to work"
-employee missing work because his roommate left a newborn baby on his doorstep
And I only have 12 employees. The city has, like, way more than 12. There is only so much you can learn about a person in a job interview and/or background check. I think these are the only fair questions to ask here:
Did the city do a proper background check?
Is it policy to hire known violent criminals?
Do the city's hiring practices need to be changed?
Other than that, you can't babysit people. You can make the punishment for crimes bad enough to deter criminal behavior, and you can punish these people for a long time after the first offense so you know they won't do it again, but you can't control everything. It can probably be expected that there will be bad apples in the city government just like anywhere else, and every once in a while we have to hear a story like this.
So opines the writer:
According to the story, "Mayor Ellen O. Moyer declined to comment this morning through her spokesman Ray Weaver. She said she doesn't like it when anyone is robbed in the city, whether it be by a city employee or not."
Now there is a brilliant statement. Do you wonder why the city has a serious crime problem?
My initial reaction to this story was something like.........
"Why would the city notice a criminal from amongst thier midst?? After all, birds of a feather flock together."
And after realizing that such a comment was really for personal amusement more than anything else, I didn't have much to say.
What I want to say is: people are crazy. I own a company, and have witnessed the following employee problems:
-employee jailed for 24 hours for spreading the ashes of his cremated relative without a permit
-employee half-naked on-site with his girlfriend
-employee, while on the clock, wearing a shirt bearing the name of the company, ordering an alcoholic beverage from a bar that he knew was a business partner of our company, with the following instruction: "make it a double, and make it quick...i have to get back to work"
-employee missing work because his roommate left a newborn baby on his doorstep
And I only have 12 employees. The city has, like, way more than 12. There is only so much you can learn about a person in a job interview and/or background check. I think these are the only fair questions to ask here:
Did the city do a proper background check?
Is it policy to hire known violent criminals?
Do the city's hiring practices need to be changed?
Other than that, you can't babysit people. You can make the punishment for crimes bad enough to deter criminal behavior, and you can punish these people for a long time after the first offense so you know they won't do it again, but you can't control everything. It can probably be expected that there will be bad apples in the city government just like anywhere else, and every once in a while we have to hear a story like this.
Saturday, September 15, 2007
Perspective on AA GOP
Today's Capital featured a letter to the editor from Brian Griffiths, a Republican activist who, as far as I can see, was the person to break the story about the problems of the county Central Committee.
Mr. Griffiths is also the #1 most influential blogger in the state of Maryland, and presents his opinion on the path of the local Republican party:
In recent weeks, Anne Arundel County Republican voters have been subjected to a vicious and unfortunate set of circumstances. These included elected members of the Republican Central Committee attempting to remove the committee's chairman outside of the scope of public view, and outside the scrutiny of the press, the activists and the voters.
The sad stare of affairs came to a head at the recent republican Central Committee meeting. Certain members of the committee continued their efforts to remove Chairman Mike Collins without so much a a recitation of the charges against him.
The committee attempted this despite weeks of speculation, innuendo and rumor in the media and on the Internet about its intentions, motives and methods. Certain members went so far as to try to virtually exclude all public comments from being included in the meeting's agenda.
The committee went forward with its plans to remove the chairman despite the fact that all who addressed the committee opposed its actions. A majority of those activist and voters in attendance were outraged that certain members of the committee continued to attempt such an important action without input from those very voters by whom they were elected to serve.
Many longtime activists were revolted by the scene they witnessed that night.
A number of Central Committee members had their leadership abilities weighed and measured that night, and they were found sorely wanting.
The spectacle of this meeting showed that certain members of the committee do not hold the same values that I and many other local Republicans share, And I am not sure how our Republican Party can succeed under their stewardship.
BRIAN GRIFFITHS, Pasadena
For my take on the issue, click here.
I think the point is an important one that the Central Committee exists to further the party at the bequest of Republican voters. And although some have said that the Committee was gracious in allowing public comments at all (which they are not required to do), I wonder how the Committee could rectify a refusal to hear the public with their party-building obligations.
I fear a similar problem as with city aldermen. The reward to work ratio for central committee members is low, and it can be said that many members have aspirations to higher office. And problems occur when an office is a means to an end, and not an end in and of itself.
Mr. O'Malley, please re-read that last sentence.
As for the rest of you, have a nice afternoon!
Mr. Griffiths is also the #1 most influential blogger in the state of Maryland, and presents his opinion on the path of the local Republican party:
In recent weeks, Anne Arundel County Republican voters have been subjected to a vicious and unfortunate set of circumstances. These included elected members of the Republican Central Committee attempting to remove the committee's chairman outside of the scope of public view, and outside the scrutiny of the press, the activists and the voters.
The sad stare of affairs came to a head at the recent republican Central Committee meeting. Certain members of the committee continued their efforts to remove Chairman Mike Collins without so much a a recitation of the charges against him.
The committee attempted this despite weeks of speculation, innuendo and rumor in the media and on the Internet about its intentions, motives and methods. Certain members went so far as to try to virtually exclude all public comments from being included in the meeting's agenda.
The committee went forward with its plans to remove the chairman despite the fact that all who addressed the committee opposed its actions. A majority of those activist and voters in attendance were outraged that certain members of the committee continued to attempt such an important action without input from those very voters by whom they were elected to serve.
Many longtime activists were revolted by the scene they witnessed that night.
A number of Central Committee members had their leadership abilities weighed and measured that night, and they were found sorely wanting.
The spectacle of this meeting showed that certain members of the committee do not hold the same values that I and many other local Republicans share, And I am not sure how our Republican Party can succeed under their stewardship.
BRIAN GRIFFITHS, Pasadena
For my take on the issue, click here.
I think the point is an important one that the Central Committee exists to further the party at the bequest of Republican voters. And although some have said that the Committee was gracious in allowing public comments at all (which they are not required to do), I wonder how the Committee could rectify a refusal to hear the public with their party-building obligations.
I fear a similar problem as with city aldermen. The reward to work ratio for central committee members is low, and it can be said that many members have aspirations to higher office. And problems occur when an office is a means to an end, and not an end in and of itself.
Mr. O'Malley, please re-read that last sentence.
As for the rest of you, have a nice afternoon!
Plastic Bags: Those Pesky Things
Busy day.....wedding in Mrs. Politics' family (second wedding in 2 weeks)...must make a post....letter to the editor about plastic bags!
Regarding the proposal by Alderman Sam Shropshire, D-Ward 7, to ban plastic bag distribution in Annapolis:
Yes?
A Safeway lobbyist reportedly called Mr. Shropshire's bill un-American, saying it would take choices away from consumers.
Sounds about accurate.
I agree with Safeway.
Good.
Being an American is truly about our right of choice, and I would like the choice to live in Maryland without plastic bags whirling from car to car, collecting in the marshes or our shorelines, or coloring our ditches, where they are removed by highway cleanup crews we pay for with our tax dollars.
Tricky! I see...you took Safeway's own words, and turned them around a bit, using sarcasm. OK, I'm with you. This is more of a right than a choice, and if you want to address this problem, we should try and find a way to stop the PEOPLE who litter.
Also, we could be so lucky as to have our tax dollars pay for cleanup...here is some of what your tax dollars have bought in Annapolis:
-a proposal to ban plastic bags.
-a mayor that refused to fill 23 vacancies on the police department while homicides are on a record pace
-a bill in support of a midshipman—an issue that falls under U.S. Navy jurisdiction.
-increases in property tax receipts over past 4 years (2004-2007 proj.) of $4.89 million: average of 7.2% per year!
-Market House! Elimination of city history and character, 2 years of vacancy, loss of parking spaces, poor project supervision, inadequate HVAC design that is still not fixed
-$30,000 for flowers downtown
-apology for slavery
This choice is what is so great about America, and what is so poor about Safeway's perspective.
Giant got it Wrong too when spokesman Barry Sher said that the ban "sounds good until you consider the cost". Rather than ban plastic bags, he would have Annapolis enforce its existing litter laws.
Enforcing existing laws sounds like a fabulous solution, or at least a fabulous first step before we go banning things.
Giant is offering a solution for a symptom of the problem--littering--instead of the cause: distribution of plastic bags at the checkout counter.
I feel like this.
I have never seen such a precisely wrong statement in my life. LITTERING IS THE PROBLEM--IT IS NOT THE SYMPTOM. Plastic bags do not get up, stroll to the rivers, and jump in--they are put there by people!
To say that the problem is having plastic bags available at the checkout counter is a defiance of reason only equalled by your previous claim. You must also believe the following things to be true:
"Speeding is a symptom--the cause is allowing people to buy cars."
"Paedophilia is just a symptom--the cause is the internet that gives these people access to children."
"Assault is just a symptom--the cause is God because he gave us fists to hit people."
By your logic, we should ban cars and the Internet, and cut off everybody's right arm so if we wanted to assault somebody, at least it would be with our weak hand!
See the point? It is problems with people that cause violations of the law.
The total cost should be taken into account. This includes everything from extracting petroleum and natural gas, to making plastic, transporting the bags, and disposing of them.
Agreed--and the total cost of plastic bags is at least the same as paper bags, if not better.
One hundred billion plastic bags are made each year in the United States. In 2005, about 95 percent of them were not recycled, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Giant does not want us to know that the hidden cost to the environment is the reason the bags are so cheap.
What kind of economic reasoning is this? The following is NOT the way a production meeting at Giant would go:
"Bill, how much is it costing us to buy these plastic bags?"
"Well, Ray, the raw materials costs have gone up by 31%"
"Fine then. Jenkins, tell marketing to raise the prices for milk and ice cream by 31%."
(A faint, but stern, voice is heard in the background. It's Cynthia:)
"Wait! Our bags harm the environment. We can keep prices the same as long as we keep this cost a secret."
(All:) "Right-O. Let's play golf."
Pollution is an externality of production, not a cost of production.
Mr. Shropshire's bill offers voters a choice. What could be more American than that?
TERESA DARRAH, Annapolis
Did I miss something? Before, we could choose from bags A, B, and C. (Their real names have been withheld to protect the innocent.) Now we can choose from bags A, or B. Unless this is "opposite day", our choice has been limited.
(Note to readers: One time, in third grade, I was informed by one of my classmates that it indeed was 'opposite day'. The very next thing he told me was that it was not 'opposite day'. I have been quite confused ever since.)
For a more comprehensive analysis of the plastic bag bill, click here. The bottom line is this: we all like the environment, but there are much better places to start than a ban on plastic bags.
Regarding the proposal by Alderman Sam Shropshire, D-Ward 7, to ban plastic bag distribution in Annapolis:
Yes?
A Safeway lobbyist reportedly called Mr. Shropshire's bill un-American, saying it would take choices away from consumers.
Sounds about accurate.
I agree with Safeway.
Good.
Being an American is truly about our right of choice, and I would like the choice to live in Maryland without plastic bags whirling from car to car, collecting in the marshes or our shorelines, or coloring our ditches, where they are removed by highway cleanup crews we pay for with our tax dollars.
Tricky! I see...you took Safeway's own words, and turned them around a bit, using sarcasm. OK, I'm with you. This is more of a right than a choice, and if you want to address this problem, we should try and find a way to stop the PEOPLE who litter.
Also, we could be so lucky as to have our tax dollars pay for cleanup...here is some of what your tax dollars have bought in Annapolis:
-a proposal to ban plastic bags.
-a mayor that refused to fill 23 vacancies on the police department while homicides are on a record pace
-a bill in support of a midshipman—an issue that falls under U.S. Navy jurisdiction.
-increases in property tax receipts over past 4 years (2004-2007 proj.) of $4.89 million: average of 7.2% per year!
-Market House! Elimination of city history and character, 2 years of vacancy, loss of parking spaces, poor project supervision, inadequate HVAC design that is still not fixed
-$30,000 for flowers downtown
-apology for slavery
This choice is what is so great about America, and what is so poor about Safeway's perspective.
Giant got it Wrong too when spokesman Barry Sher said that the ban "sounds good until you consider the cost". Rather than ban plastic bags, he would have Annapolis enforce its existing litter laws.
Enforcing existing laws sounds like a fabulous solution, or at least a fabulous first step before we go banning things.
Giant is offering a solution for a symptom of the problem--littering--instead of the cause: distribution of plastic bags at the checkout counter.
I feel like this.
I have never seen such a precisely wrong statement in my life. LITTERING IS THE PROBLEM--IT IS NOT THE SYMPTOM. Plastic bags do not get up, stroll to the rivers, and jump in--they are put there by people!
To say that the problem is having plastic bags available at the checkout counter is a defiance of reason only equalled by your previous claim. You must also believe the following things to be true:
"Speeding is a symptom--the cause is allowing people to buy cars."
"Paedophilia is just a symptom--the cause is the internet that gives these people access to children."
"Assault is just a symptom--the cause is God because he gave us fists to hit people."
By your logic, we should ban cars and the Internet, and cut off everybody's right arm so if we wanted to assault somebody, at least it would be with our weak hand!
See the point? It is problems with people that cause violations of the law.
The total cost should be taken into account. This includes everything from extracting petroleum and natural gas, to making plastic, transporting the bags, and disposing of them.
Agreed--and the total cost of plastic bags is at least the same as paper bags, if not better.
One hundred billion plastic bags are made each year in the United States. In 2005, about 95 percent of them were not recycled, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Giant does not want us to know that the hidden cost to the environment is the reason the bags are so cheap.
What kind of economic reasoning is this? The following is NOT the way a production meeting at Giant would go:
"Bill, how much is it costing us to buy these plastic bags?"
"Well, Ray, the raw materials costs have gone up by 31%"
"Fine then. Jenkins, tell marketing to raise the prices for milk and ice cream by 31%."
(A faint, but stern, voice is heard in the background. It's Cynthia:)
"Wait! Our bags harm the environment. We can keep prices the same as long as we keep this cost a secret."
(All:) "Right-O. Let's play golf."
Pollution is an externality of production, not a cost of production.
Mr. Shropshire's bill offers voters a choice. What could be more American than that?
TERESA DARRAH, Annapolis
Did I miss something? Before, we could choose from bags A, B, and C. (Their real names have been withheld to protect the innocent.) Now we can choose from bags A, or B. Unless this is "opposite day", our choice has been limited.
(Note to readers: One time, in third grade, I was informed by one of my classmates that it indeed was 'opposite day'. The very next thing he told me was that it was not 'opposite day'. I have been quite confused ever since.)
For a more comprehensive analysis of the plastic bag bill, click here. The bottom line is this: we all like the environment, but there are much better places to start than a ban on plastic bags.
Friday, September 14, 2007
Rumors About Problems With Police, or Police Impersonators
This is by far the most hearsay-based post that I have ever made, but the implications are grave so I will oblige.
I have been reliably informed that persons flashing badges have been stirring up trouble at some of the local bars on more than one occasion in the recent weeks, including getting really drunk and trying to start fights. A friend of mine was forced to leave out the back door of a bar to avoid some people trying to start an altercation with him.
We would all like to believe that these people are not sworn officers, and right now there is no evidence that any officers were involved.
I think this is a good opportunity to point out the importance of our police officers. We hold them at a higher standard than we hold ourselves. We allow them to restrict our liberties if given probable cause, we rely on them for our safety, and if there is an emergency situation, we send them in to possibly die so that we can live. I for one appreciate the job they do.
I don't know if there are officers doing this, but if they are, I hope they are stopped (especially if they are drinking while they have their guns, which is not allowed). Conversely, impersonating an officer is a very serious crime, and if people are doing that, I hope they are caught, thrown in jail, and made to face a dangerous situation like a real officer.
I have been reliably informed that persons flashing badges have been stirring up trouble at some of the local bars on more than one occasion in the recent weeks, including getting really drunk and trying to start fights. A friend of mine was forced to leave out the back door of a bar to avoid some people trying to start an altercation with him.
We would all like to believe that these people are not sworn officers, and right now there is no evidence that any officers were involved.
I think this is a good opportunity to point out the importance of our police officers. We hold them at a higher standard than we hold ourselves. We allow them to restrict our liberties if given probable cause, we rely on them for our safety, and if there is an emergency situation, we send them in to possibly die so that we can live. I for one appreciate the job they do.
I don't know if there are officers doing this, but if they are, I hope they are stopped (especially if they are drinking while they have their guns, which is not allowed). Conversely, impersonating an officer is a very serious crime, and if people are doing that, I hope they are caught, thrown in jail, and made to face a dangerous situation like a real officer.
Perspecitve On Triathlon
The Capital ran an editorial today about the triathlon, announcing their support for making this an annual event on the condition that the planning is better.
I wanted to give some perspective, if possible, on the effect such an event has on the city. Below are percentages--ratios of event participants in relation to city populations:
Boston Marathon: event participants equate to 3.4% of population
Chicago Marathon: capped at 45,000 participants, or 1.6% of the population
New York City Marathon: less than .01% of the population
Annapolis Triathlon: 1,500 participants, 36,500 citizens, or about 4.5% of the population
I actually agree with The Capital, and certainly with the triathlon participants, that we should continue this event if better planning is possible. But can the event be run as smoothly as we (we meaning churches, businesses, travelers, residents) would want? For what it's worth, there are more event participants per capita than the other events mentioned above.
Also, a glaring difference between New York, Boston, and Chicago, as opposed to Annapolis, is that they have good public transportation that many (most?) of their citizens use, so closing the streets for an event has less of an effect. In Annapolis, everybody drives everywhere. As we have seen, closing roads in Annapolis at any time has a terrible effect on everything.
There is no amount of planning that could provide for an event in this town for 50,000 people. Can we accommodate 1,500? If the triathlon becomes an annual event, hopefully the answer is yes.
I wanted to give some perspective, if possible, on the effect such an event has on the city. Below are percentages--ratios of event participants in relation to city populations:
Boston Marathon: event participants equate to 3.4% of population
Chicago Marathon: capped at 45,000 participants, or 1.6% of the population
New York City Marathon: less than .01% of the population
Annapolis Triathlon: 1,500 participants, 36,500 citizens, or about 4.5% of the population
I actually agree with The Capital, and certainly with the triathlon participants, that we should continue this event if better planning is possible. But can the event be run as smoothly as we (we meaning churches, businesses, travelers, residents) would want? For what it's worth, there are more event participants per capita than the other events mentioned above.
Also, a glaring difference between New York, Boston, and Chicago, as opposed to Annapolis, is that they have good public transportation that many (most?) of their citizens use, so closing the streets for an event has less of an effect. In Annapolis, everybody drives everywhere. As we have seen, closing roads in Annapolis at any time has a terrible effect on everything.
There is no amount of planning that could provide for an event in this town for 50,000 people. Can we accommodate 1,500? If the triathlon becomes an annual event, hopefully the answer is yes.
Thursday, September 13, 2007
APFO: The Good, The Bad, and.......
At Monday’s city council meeting, the council passed the Adequacy of Public Facilities Ordinance (APFO) that has been in the works for well over a year. The APFO passed despite 44 (forty-four!) amendments offered by Alderwoman Stankivic no more than 6 hours before the vote! The bill was sponsored by Dave Cordle, R-Ward 5 and Ross Arnett, economist, and D-Ward 8. I think that it is fair to say that Alderman Cordle has staked much of his political reputation on the success of this bill.
The basic idea is that we need to make sure that our infrastructure can handle the development that we have. Sounds pretty simple, right? Well, as Lee Corso would say, not so fast! The bill is meant to provide a comprehensive answer to the question: is a certain project right for the city of Annapolis? Are our roads, our police and fire, our schools, our water and sewer sytems, equipped to handle growth?
Some of the questions we can act upon, but some we cannot. For example, schools are run by the county. If the APFO wanted to change the schools, it could not do so because the city does not have jurisdiction over the schools. Ditto: roads. While the city maintains most roads within its limits, some major roads (Forest Dr, I think) are notably excluded. Aldermen Shropshire and Stankivic voted against the APFO because it didn’t address traffic, but Aldermen Cordle and Arnett point to the jurisdictional issues, as well as another bill dealing with roads and traffic.
Basically, the process works like this:
-A builder or developer submits an adequacy of public facilities application at the same time as the application for design review.
-The application is passed to the following department heads for individual review, pursuant to each department’s purview: Director of Public Works, Director of Planning and Zoning, Director of Neighborhood and Environmental Programs, Police Chief, Fire Chief.
-Each department head ensures that the proposal meets the standards established by the APFO. (see below)
-If the proposal is satisfactory, department heads give their approval, and a certificate of adequate facilities is issues.
-Deficiencies in city properties must meet the adequacy standards of this bill within 6 years.
Standards.
Fire: Maintain response times of 4 or 8 minutes, depending on the situation. Maintain appropriate firefighter to population ratio.
Police: Maintain ratio of no fewer than 3.2 officers per 1000 citizens. Maintain average response time of 2 minutes, 30 seconds for type one emergencies.
Public Maintenance (roads, sewer, water, snow removal, trash pickup): Maintain adequacy as determined by the Director of Public Works.
Recreation Spaces:
*1000 feet of public recreational space per single family house.
*750 sq feet of public recreational space per single family attached unit.
*500 sq feet of public recreational space per multi-family dwelling unit.
Transportation: Provide reasonable access to non-vehicular travel where necessary.
Stormwater: Ensure developments meet existing stormwater runoff code.
Denial.
If a proposed development does not meet the above standards, 2 things can happen. Either the proposal is denied, or it is put on a wait list at the request of the applicant. For projects on the wait list, a certificate of adequate facilities can be issued once the problems are resolved.
If the city’s infrastructure will not support a particular project, the applicant has some options. They can pay the city for improvements in infrastructure, directly improve existing infrastructure or facilities, or donate facilities that are adequate.
Those are the facts, time for some analysis.
The Good.
Certainty.
I am not a developer, nor have I ever been a developer, nor do I want to be a developer when I grow up. But I imagine that for a business where such long-term planning and expense are necessary, you need to know what to plan for. Even if developers don’t agree with the code, at least they know what it is and can plan their costs accordingly.
Step in the Right Direction.
Let’s not kid ourselves—the clamor for this bill came about after the current system allowed Park Place and 1901 West to be built. Many, and probably most, citizens were somewhat surprised and opposed to such development, and now there is a more specific way to address smart growth.
Options.
Steps have been taken so the developers are not too terribly affected. If service to fire hydrants is not adequate, builders can add a sprinkler system. If a sewer system is old, builders can replace it.
Oversight.
Before, construction permits were all in the hands of the Planning and Zoning Director (I think). Now, there are no fewer than 5 department heads that can put the kibosh on development that they think is flawed. There is more openness, and a better chance for the public to articulate their concerns.
Discretion.
With the oversight comes more discretionary ability. The leaders of our city must know come together vis-Ã -vis the approval process before any major changes to our city are made.
The Bad.
Buy Your Way Out.
Oh, you don’t want to build a park? No problem, just buy your way out. Section 22.20.040:
The standards required to be promulgated pursuant to Section 22.08.10, shall include but not be limited to:
1. (recreation standards listed)
2. The fees in lieu of the provision of such public restoration space; or
3. A combination of the above.
If somebody decided that we need this recreation space, why are we letting people get out of it?
Discretion.
Yes, discretion is good and bad. Let’s say that the next election produces a crazy mayor, and that person appoints crazy department heads, and they think that a 200 story skyscraper is appropriate at the Market House….tough luck for us.
Very Wide Red Tape.
With this ordinance, government is growing. No two ways about it. Not only that—more levels of government are becoming involved, and this is a separate process. In other words, the APFO application is something builders have to do in addition to the permit processes they already have to go through. If you want economic development, you have to streamline the permitting process. Why not just make one application that covers everything? The APFO provides a process for spending more tax money to do all the things the bill requires.
The Other.
Do You Agree?
There is still time to offer your opinion. The two authors of the bill are fully aware that the bill will go through revisions. Surely some of Ms. Stankivic’s 44 ideas will make their way into the final version. But what do you think? Should there be more recreational space, or less? Should the city address the issues it only has partial control over? Tell your alderman.
Ratios.
The bill alluded to ratios for both police and fire. It is good that the bill did not cap the ratios of police and fire to population, but the reliance on ratios is misplaced. I fear that the way we measure the adequacy is the ratios, and not the important things like response times, reduction in crime, etc.
There Is Much Left To Do…Can We Cooperate?
Notably absent from the APFO are provisions on schools and roads, as well as a real plan to reduce the use of vehicular travel. The authors point out that these issues are being addressed elsewhere. The entirety of our lives is not encompassed by the APFO—other jurisdictions and other bills, along with the comprehensive plan, have much to do with what this bill tries to accomplish.
We have to continue to be vigilant—the process does not stop here. We have to be involved in the Comprehensive Plan, the Transportation Plan, and frankly, everything else.
We also have to accept that we must work with the county—the only ‘sister’ jurisdiction that matters. If city fire trucks can’t respond in 4 minutes because a county road is too narrow, what are we going to do? And how much better could our procedures be if we actually cooperated with the county on things like police, fire, and public works?
Much remains to be seen.
The basic idea is that we need to make sure that our infrastructure can handle the development that we have. Sounds pretty simple, right? Well, as Lee Corso would say, not so fast! The bill is meant to provide a comprehensive answer to the question: is a certain project right for the city of Annapolis? Are our roads, our police and fire, our schools, our water and sewer sytems, equipped to handle growth?
Some of the questions we can act upon, but some we cannot. For example, schools are run by the county. If the APFO wanted to change the schools, it could not do so because the city does not have jurisdiction over the schools. Ditto: roads. While the city maintains most roads within its limits, some major roads (Forest Dr, I think) are notably excluded. Aldermen Shropshire and Stankivic voted against the APFO because it didn’t address traffic, but Aldermen Cordle and Arnett point to the jurisdictional issues, as well as another bill dealing with roads and traffic.
Basically, the process works like this:
-A builder or developer submits an adequacy of public facilities application at the same time as the application for design review.
-The application is passed to the following department heads for individual review, pursuant to each department’s purview: Director of Public Works, Director of Planning and Zoning, Director of Neighborhood and Environmental Programs, Police Chief, Fire Chief.
-Each department head ensures that the proposal meets the standards established by the APFO. (see below)
-If the proposal is satisfactory, department heads give their approval, and a certificate of adequate facilities is issues.
-Deficiencies in city properties must meet the adequacy standards of this bill within 6 years.
Standards.
Fire: Maintain response times of 4 or 8 minutes, depending on the situation. Maintain appropriate firefighter to population ratio.
Police: Maintain ratio of no fewer than 3.2 officers per 1000 citizens. Maintain average response time of 2 minutes, 30 seconds for type one emergencies.
Public Maintenance (roads, sewer, water, snow removal, trash pickup): Maintain adequacy as determined by the Director of Public Works.
Recreation Spaces:
*1000 feet of public recreational space per single family house.
*750 sq feet of public recreational space per single family attached unit.
*500 sq feet of public recreational space per multi-family dwelling unit.
Transportation: Provide reasonable access to non-vehicular travel where necessary.
Stormwater: Ensure developments meet existing stormwater runoff code.
Denial.
If a proposed development does not meet the above standards, 2 things can happen. Either the proposal is denied, or it is put on a wait list at the request of the applicant. For projects on the wait list, a certificate of adequate facilities can be issued once the problems are resolved.
If the city’s infrastructure will not support a particular project, the applicant has some options. They can pay the city for improvements in infrastructure, directly improve existing infrastructure or facilities, or donate facilities that are adequate.
Those are the facts, time for some analysis.
The Good.
Certainty.
I am not a developer, nor have I ever been a developer, nor do I want to be a developer when I grow up. But I imagine that for a business where such long-term planning and expense are necessary, you need to know what to plan for. Even if developers don’t agree with the code, at least they know what it is and can plan their costs accordingly.
Step in the Right Direction.
Let’s not kid ourselves—the clamor for this bill came about after the current system allowed Park Place and 1901 West to be built. Many, and probably most, citizens were somewhat surprised and opposed to such development, and now there is a more specific way to address smart growth.
Options.
Steps have been taken so the developers are not too terribly affected. If service to fire hydrants is not adequate, builders can add a sprinkler system. If a sewer system is old, builders can replace it.
Oversight.
Before, construction permits were all in the hands of the Planning and Zoning Director (I think). Now, there are no fewer than 5 department heads that can put the kibosh on development that they think is flawed. There is more openness, and a better chance for the public to articulate their concerns.
Discretion.
With the oversight comes more discretionary ability. The leaders of our city must know come together vis-Ã -vis the approval process before any major changes to our city are made.
The Bad.
Buy Your Way Out.
Oh, you don’t want to build a park? No problem, just buy your way out. Section 22.20.040:
The standards required to be promulgated pursuant to Section 22.08.10, shall include but not be limited to:
1. (recreation standards listed)
2. The fees in lieu of the provision of such public restoration space; or
3. A combination of the above.
If somebody decided that we need this recreation space, why are we letting people get out of it?
Discretion.
Yes, discretion is good and bad. Let’s say that the next election produces a crazy mayor, and that person appoints crazy department heads, and they think that a 200 story skyscraper is appropriate at the Market House….tough luck for us.
Very Wide Red Tape.
With this ordinance, government is growing. No two ways about it. Not only that—more levels of government are becoming involved, and this is a separate process. In other words, the APFO application is something builders have to do in addition to the permit processes they already have to go through. If you want economic development, you have to streamline the permitting process. Why not just make one application that covers everything? The APFO provides a process for spending more tax money to do all the things the bill requires.
The Other.
Do You Agree?
There is still time to offer your opinion. The two authors of the bill are fully aware that the bill will go through revisions. Surely some of Ms. Stankivic’s 44 ideas will make their way into the final version. But what do you think? Should there be more recreational space, or less? Should the city address the issues it only has partial control over? Tell your alderman.
Ratios.
The bill alluded to ratios for both police and fire. It is good that the bill did not cap the ratios of police and fire to population, but the reliance on ratios is misplaced. I fear that the way we measure the adequacy is the ratios, and not the important things like response times, reduction in crime, etc.
There Is Much Left To Do…Can We Cooperate?
Notably absent from the APFO are provisions on schools and roads, as well as a real plan to reduce the use of vehicular travel. The authors point out that these issues are being addressed elsewhere. The entirety of our lives is not encompassed by the APFO—other jurisdictions and other bills, along with the comprehensive plan, have much to do with what this bill tries to accomplish.
We have to continue to be vigilant—the process does not stop here. We have to be involved in the Comprehensive Plan, the Transportation Plan, and frankly, everything else.
We also have to accept that we must work with the county—the only ‘sister’ jurisdiction that matters. If city fire trucks can’t respond in 4 minutes because a county road is too narrow, what are we going to do? And how much better could our procedures be if we actually cooperated with the county on things like police, fire, and public works?
Much remains to be seen.
Wednesday, September 12, 2007
Minimum Wage/Living Wage
The entire country has a minimum wage, and now many Maryland businesses will be subject to the 'living wage'. Let it be known that the difference between the 'minimum wage' and the 'living wage' is about the same as the difference between an 'illegal immigrant' and 'undocumented alien'. A living wage is just a higher minimum wage that doesn't apply to everyone.
Mandated minimum wages cause unemployment. They do not help: they hurt. On, the first day of the first economics class you ever take, you learn that if the price of something is higher, people want less of that thing. If labor costs are higher, employers will not be able to hire as many people.
Moreover, the higher a wage is, the higher quality of workers it attracts. Let's say that a person with an MBA can earn $100,000 per year doing the very stressful job of trading on the New York Stock Exchange. Let's also say that a cashier at a supermarket with only a high school diploma earns $20,000 per year.
Now let's say that congress sets the minimum wage at $100,000 for everyone. The MBA guy will apply for the cashier job because he can make the same money with a lot less stress. The supermarket now has a choice: hire an MBA for $100,000 or hire someone with a high school diploma for $100,000.
Their choice is obvious. So the result is unemployment for the very people that the minimum wage is trying to help!! Before, high school grad was making $20,000, now he is making $0. The economy suffers even more because the MBA guy who used to be a valuable asset for trading stocks stopped doing that.
The living wage doesn't apply to all businesses. Think about it--if it's so good, why doesn't it apply to everyone? Answer: it's not so good.
Tuesday, September 11, 2007
Mayor Moyer: Letter to the Editor
The mayor had a letter published in The Capital today:
Why did the city take so long to fill the potholes on Moreland Parkway?
Is this some sort of trick question?
The city is currently in court with the developers who own the road. Fixing the pothole required a letter from their attorney acknowledging that taking action on the road "would not prejudice the case".
The city attorney pursued this course of action and a letter was received late in the afternoon on Friday, Aug. 31. Then, and only then, could city workers fill the now-infamous pothole. the pothole was filled immediately after we received the letter.
In the past, before the current legal proceedings, we have fixed potholes on Moreland Parkway as soon as we become aware of them.
It is my understanding that The Capital was in possession of all of this information, yet chose not to include it in its coverage.
ELLEN MOYER, Mayor, Annapolis
I actually think that this letter was generally good and appropriate. I think that public officials should use the media to clarify information, and that's it. This letter, rather usefully as long as the information is accurate, provides more information than we previously knew. We got a better understanding of the legal concerns, and are able to see that it was not the heroic actions of Alderwoman Hoyle that got the job done.
I even think the bit about The Capital is ok, as it is not taken too far. The Mayor takes her trademark defensive posture, but that is her personality.
The bigger question is: why can't these people figure out who owns the road? There are two options:
1. city
2. developers
It's not Non-Euclidian Geometry, for goodness sake.
When the area was developed, nobody bothered to worry about who would fix the roads? Parking lots should be privately maintained, streets maintained by the city, or county.
On a side note, can we get some tort reform? Heck, even the city government can't act for fear of a lawsuit! What does that say for the rest of us?!! Our litigious society causes us to waste so many resources that we would otherwise be using to produce goods and services. And if we don't produce goods and services, how will we fund the war in Iraq?! (Just thought I'd throw that in there for fun.)
Why did the city take so long to fill the potholes on Moreland Parkway?
Is this some sort of trick question?
The city is currently in court with the developers who own the road. Fixing the pothole required a letter from their attorney acknowledging that taking action on the road "would not prejudice the case".
The city attorney pursued this course of action and a letter was received late in the afternoon on Friday, Aug. 31. Then, and only then, could city workers fill the now-infamous pothole. the pothole was filled immediately after we received the letter.
In the past, before the current legal proceedings, we have fixed potholes on Moreland Parkway as soon as we become aware of them.
It is my understanding that The Capital was in possession of all of this information, yet chose not to include it in its coverage.
ELLEN MOYER, Mayor, Annapolis
I actually think that this letter was generally good and appropriate. I think that public officials should use the media to clarify information, and that's it. This letter, rather usefully as long as the information is accurate, provides more information than we previously knew. We got a better understanding of the legal concerns, and are able to see that it was not the heroic actions of Alderwoman Hoyle that got the job done.
I even think the bit about The Capital is ok, as it is not taken too far. The Mayor takes her trademark defensive posture, but that is her personality.
The bigger question is: why can't these people figure out who owns the road? There are two options:
1. city
2. developers
It's not Non-Euclidian Geometry, for goodness sake.
When the area was developed, nobody bothered to worry about who would fix the roads? Parking lots should be privately maintained, streets maintained by the city, or county.
On a side note, can we get some tort reform? Heck, even the city government can't act for fear of a lawsuit! What does that say for the rest of us?!! Our litigious society causes us to waste so many resources that we would otherwise be using to produce goods and services. And if we don't produce goods and services, how will we fund the war in Iraq?! (Just thought I'd throw that in there for fun.)
City Council Meeting, 9/10
AP attended the city council meeting lats night, although admittedly only for the first hour , as I succombed to the allure of the Ravens game.
I was not too terribly excited about the meeting; here are the highlights (of the first hour):
-A guy who went to Annapolis Royal, Nova Scotia, Canada, a sister city of ours, and brought back some various propaganda and memorabilia.
-Passage of the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance (APFO). I will do a whole post about this later.
-A guy complaining about the traffic circle at Park Place/West St./Taylor Ave.
A letter writer recently complained about the same thing, because it's a bit tricky to navigate.
So, to all of you outsiders using this blog as your travel and informational guide, here are some tips:
1. From Spa Rd, stay in the outside lane to go towards downtown.
2. From Taylor Ave., outside lane must turn right at West St. and inside lane goes everywhere else.
3. Avoid this circle. That's what I would do, except I can't help it because Mrs. Politics lives off of Taylor Ave.
Stay tuned for the APFO post!
I was not too terribly excited about the meeting; here are the highlights (of the first hour):
-A guy who went to Annapolis Royal, Nova Scotia, Canada, a sister city of ours, and brought back some various propaganda and memorabilia.
-Passage of the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance (APFO). I will do a whole post about this later.
-A guy complaining about the traffic circle at Park Place/West St./Taylor Ave.
A letter writer recently complained about the same thing, because it's a bit tricky to navigate.
So, to all of you outsiders using this blog as your travel and informational guide, here are some tips:
1. From Spa Rd, stay in the outside lane to go towards downtown.
2. From Taylor Ave., outside lane must turn right at West St. and inside lane goes everywhere else.
3. Avoid this circle. That's what I would do, except I can't help it because Mrs. Politics lives off of Taylor Ave.
Stay tuned for the APFO post!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)