Wolf's Bane

Mon, Jan 2, 2012 : 6:11 p.m.

Joan Lowenstein is a polarizing force in a time when we need to come together to solve critical problems. If I never hear from her again that would be just great! And yes, I am a lifelong democrat.

Monica R-W

Mon, Dec 19, 2011 : 8:53 a.m.

Lots of internal issues in A2. Maybe its' time to have both sides of the on-going debate, on our growing political podcast ROJS Radio (thinking out loud on a internet newspaper form here)... <a href="http://www.blogtalkradio.com/rojsradio" rel='nofollow'>www.blogtalkradio.com/rojsradio</a> Nothing like a free format to hash out all of the issues, right?

Meral

Fri, Dec 16, 2011 : 10:13 p.m.

May I remind dear Joan before she stepped in to Ann Arbor especially 2. Ward voted mostly an Independent or Republican. She does sound like a sore looser. I am a registered Democrat and voted for Jane Lumm. If we had more people on the Councel likes of Jane Lumm we would be better off.

manbearpig

Fri, Dec 16, 2011 : 10 p.m.

Her employer should be ashamed

aawolve

Fri, Dec 16, 2011 : 9:37 p.m.

Well, delusion is obviously alive and well in our community.

Tony Dearing

Fri, Dec 16, 2011 : 8:54 p.m.

A comment was removed because it violated our conversation guidelines. Please do not post comments that include profanity or abbreviations that represent profanity.

sojourner truth

Fri, Dec 16, 2011 : 6:27 p.m.

I have never read a more emotional, irrational, and poorly thoughtout letter than Joan Lowenstein's in The Ann, and am at a loss to believe that the majority of citizens side with that diatribe. The mayor and the majority party have too long been able to push their agenda through too easily and when the populace respionds negatively, and they have to back off,it often costs the City and developers much time and often much money . Jane Lumm is slowing that process down and making the council more &quot;democratic&quot; by giving another voice to the discussion. As for the Fuller Street Station: there are still many questions to be answered before the City should commit to such a big project. What about the legality of using parkland, the cost, what benefit it has for Ann Arbor's citizens, how much will the University benefit unilaterly, will there ever be a high speed train or will this just become a parking lot for the U Hospital? The Council is already making moves to begin building ( go by Fuller Road and you will see what progress they are making) and there has never been a referendum from the citizens. I am not anti growth, but I do believe in intelligent and sensible growth. And how is being independent the party of 'anti&quot;? And why do we have partisan politics involved with City matters anyway?

davecj

Fri, Dec 16, 2011 : 5:03 p.m.

Sounds like a sore loser to me. Grow up Joan! You didn't get your way, so everyone else is 'anti' and old! I didn't see Mr Rapundalo garnish any 'young' supporters. I think a grand total of 3 students voted in the UM voting precinct, and most of his endorsers were inside the city hall types, not even Ward 2 constituents.

Stephen Landes

Fri, Dec 16, 2011 : 4:19 p.m.

Sometimes humorous response to the silliness of public officials is best. A friend happened to send this story to me today: An old prospector shuffled into the town leading a tired old mule. He walked up to the saloon and tied his old mule to the hitch rail. As he stood there, brushing some of the dust from his face and clothes, a young gunslinger stepped out of the saloon with a gun in one hand and a bottle of whiskey in the other. The young gunslinger looked at the old man and laughed, saying, &quot;Hey old man, can you dance?&quot; The old man looked up at the gunslinger and said, &quot;No son, I don't dance... never really wanted to.&quot; A crowd had gathered as the gunslinger grinned and said, &quot;Well, you old fool, you're gonna dance now!&quot; and started shooting at the old man's feet. The old prospector, not wanting to get a toe blown off, started hopping around like a flea on a hot skillet. Everybody standing around was laughing. When his last bullet had been fired, the young gunslinger, still laughing, holstered his gun and turned around to go back into the saloon. The old man turned to his pack mule, pulled out a double-barreled 12 gauge shotgun and cocked both hammers. The loud clicks carried clearly through the desert air. The young gunslinger heard the sounds and turned around very slowly. The silence was deafening. The crowd watched as the young gunman stared at the old timer and the large gaping holes of those twin 12 gauge barrels. The barrels of the shotgun never wavered in the old man's hands, as he quietly said; &quot;Son, have you ever kissed a mule's behind?&quot; The gunslinger swallowed hard and said, &quot;No sir... but...but I've always wanted to.&quot; There are a few lessons for all of us here: *Don't be arrogant. *Don't waste ammunition. *Whiskey makes you think you're smarter than you are. *Always make sure you know who is in control. *And finally, don't screw around with old folks; they didn't get old by being s

Jack Gladney

Fri, Dec 16, 2011 : 3:08 p.m.

I agree with Lowenstein. Ann Arbor needs one-party rule, now! This is &quot;our&quot; town and no one has a right to deter us in our efforts. By any means, even if we have to inter those with &quot;anti-party&quot; views. Being a registered republican or a tea party member would be a good place to start. Non-Specific Deity save the Mayor. Long live the Mayor!

Trepang674

Fri, Dec 16, 2011 : 2:53 p.m.

Lowenstien is complaining that Jane came back into the spot light under an independant lable...What do you think Rapundalo and Higgins did. This is nothing more than a public cat fight and Jane will stir the pot. The Democrat stew was getting burned. GO Jane!!

B2Pilot

Fri, Dec 16, 2011 : 2:51 p.m.

WOW bizarre angle on life and this is the poster child letter outlining the problem with politics today It's all about me. or my party Is she responable for the giant hole and 5th ave being a mess for 2 years. Is she is responsable for siphoning off DDA money to supplement the city budget- oh i guess i shouldn't complain or question her or anyone else about city services or how the city is spending money. WOW I have lived in the city since the 60's we have had plenty of mixed councils minorities and majorities what we have now is one sided; your either with us or your an anti; very un-Ann Arbor attitude in my opinion. I always thought what made Ann Arbor unique was the dialogue and exchange of ideas; it was friendly debates, and the city functioned and felt like a small town. now it is bitter my way or else, we pass meaningless legislation just because. And please do not cite crosswalks in California, Brighton, our neighbor to the north has a great down town and cross walk system and have had it for over 10 years! Question to Lowenstein and I am serious; Could young people be leaving the city because of the direction it has taken in the last 10 years with you and the leadership that has entrenched itself in city hall?? - seriously

Vivienne Armentrout

Fri, Dec 16, 2011 : 2:49 p.m.

It has been interesting reading all the comments and also watching the poll numbers. (I'll leave to others to debate the validity of such polls.) Today I read an academic paper about group consensus mechanisms that rang some bells. I'm not sure that the full article is available to nonsubcribers, so I apologize if not. <a href="http://www.sciencemag.org/content/334/6062/1578.full" rel='nofollow'>http://www.sciencemag.org/content/334/6062/1578.full</a> Also, a review and analysis is here <a href="http://www.sciencemag.org/content/334/6062/1503.full" rel='nofollow'>http://www.sciencemag.org/content/334/6062/1503.full</a> The article uses both experimental and theoretical work to examine what happens when a powerful minority takes charge of the group consensus. &quot;Conflicting interests among group members are common when making collective decisions, yet failure to achieve consensus can be costly. Under these circumstances individuals may be susceptible to manipulation by a strongly opinionated, or extremist, minority.&quot; But their conclusions are that presence of a large number of uninformed individuals damps out this manipulation and makes the group decision more democratic. As the review summarizes, &quot;Their presence allows the majority to wrest control back from a manipulative minority.&quot; My application of this to Ann Arbor is that while we have a small group of very influential decision-makers in power, once the general public (in contrast to insiders on both sides of an issue) is brought into the discussion, a leveling effect occurs that swings the discussion back to a common-sense direction that better represents the interests of the public at large. I am heartened by the sensible viewpoints expressed in many of these comments. Of course some people will say that the minority is our &quot; community&quot; viewpoint, rather than the Council Party. But discussion is good.

javajolt1

Fri, Dec 16, 2011 : 2:39 p.m.

Could annarbor.com please dispense with the hyperbolic editorialization on its surveys? It's spot on — go Joan! I'm offended — she should apologize ...seriously?? Can't we just indicate whether we agree or disagree without aa.com anticipating what we might be thinking beyond that? Ridiculous!

hut hut

Fri, Dec 16, 2011 : 2:35 p.m.

If I may misquote Lowenstein, &quot;We're smarter than you old people. You don't get it. We know what's best for everyone and you don't because you're senile. We need these kids to pay the bills&quot;. Not that they know what they're doing either, but we need the money.&quot;

Mike

Fri, Dec 16, 2011 : 2:34 p.m.

Dissent and differing opinion is now attacked by liberal idealogues like Lowenstein. It's not just her, you can see it everywhere. If people really think that group think and blindly focused, agenda driven government is the way to go then I don't know why everyone is complaining about the school board and all of the raises. You sent a message to the new superintendent that we are a wealthy district by giving her a $75,000 raise over the last superintendent and preach about fairness and equality and then when she hires a deputy superintendent for $140,000and gives the others a raise to that level to be &quot;fair&quot; everyone cries foul. What a messed up city...........

Jon Saalberg

Fri, Dec 16, 2011 : 2:06 p.m.

It all started with the parking deck to nowhere, and a DDA that thought we needed it, and a mayor and council that rubber-stamped it, against all reason… Oh, and the famous (or is it infamous?) Old West Side fence… And the West Park debacle… How about a haiku to the vagaries of Ann Arbor irrationality? Anyone?

just a voice

Fri, Dec 16, 2011 : 1:47 p.m.

the ann doesn't allow feedback, LAME!

Carole

Fri, Dec 16, 2011 : 1:17 p.m.

Born and raised in Ann Arbor, 70 plus years. It is one of the greatest towns in the country (have traveled a good deal) -- however, I believe that the current mayor and city council are out of touch with the reality of what the citizens of the city are requesting. In time of plenty, the extras such as art, new this and that may be fine, but when funds are tight, we need to resort back to the basics of life -- this is true for any of us. First and for most is the safety of the citizens, i.e. a fully staffed fire department and police department, streets should be kept in good repair, parks need to be tended to, water/sewer etc. That's the way of life. Not coming up with inane laws such as the &quot;pedestrian&quot; one which in effect caused more problems. When the well is full of funds again, maybe some of the extra projects could move forward, but please for once be realistic to what is &quot;really needed&quot;. Thank you.

Brad

Fri, Dec 16, 2011 : 12:38 p.m.

So typical of the small and annoyingly vocal &quot;Ann Arbor as a product&quot; crowd. They are the annointed ones that know what is best for our town so we elderly tea partiers (or whatever) should just pay our high taxes, shut up, and let them mold the city into one big theme park that demonstrates to the rest of the world just how darned wonderful and progressive we are here. I love it when people accidentally say what they really thing. Thanks, Joan. I'm sure there are others on DDA and council that share your misguided position.

Dark Dichotomy

Fri, Dec 16, 2011 : 11:40 a.m.

She's right about one thing. Ann Arbor is not a &quot;basic&quot; government town. The services we all thought were basic just a few years ago, like the Humane society, Lawnet, police officers, firefighters, social services and many other &quot;basic&quot; services, have already been cut from the budget. BTW, is there really a &quot;God given&quot; right to drive a car without restraint? I mean I don't really remember that one from church.

Dark Dichotomy

Fri, Dec 16, 2011 : 11:29 a.m.

Honestly I can't believe that this woman is so out of touch with out current city budget delemas. I was born and raised here, but times have changed. We don't need art, we need infrastructure. We cut police, firefighters, the Humane Society, LAWNET, teen programs, programs for the homeless, etc. and this woman wants public art? Tell you what, they spent $750,000 on a piece of metal in front of city hall, maybe if she goes and stares at that for awhile at least someone might get some value out of it. Even though my tax dollars have paid for it, it seems pretty worthless to me. Though that may be because I would rather have a dozen police officers looking out for me, rather than seeing a pretty hunk of metal when ever I go to fill out the police reports for the crimes that occur when no one is looking. How is it that the whole world is in an ecomonic crisis but this woman hasn't noticed?

mtlaurel

Fri, Dec 16, 2011 : 11:25 a.m.

people get what the council and DDA are for....people get that the character here is at risk. Is that anti? No-it means no carte blanche-the language of categorically saying people are &quot;anti &quot;is laziness. Our officials should be more diligent. Citizenry need to hold their feet to the fire...I think that will be happening.

hermhawk

Fri, Dec 16, 2011 : 6:23 a.m.

Lowenstein is right on cue with her comments. I for one has had enough of the tea party mentality and it is not confined to Ann Arbor. It is EVERYWHERE in the state of Michigan, from Lansing, where Governor Snyder and his pals run the show, to even Detroit, where the mayor seems to rub everyone there the wrong way from conflicts with the city unions to his and Snyder's rejection of the light rail startup. I won't even begin to mention all the backward laws Snyder and his fellow Republicans has passed since January. We are in as backwards and as selfish a state as we have been in for years and if this trend continues and infrastructure continues to crumble, we as a society will reap exactly what we sow.

Tony Keene

Fri, Dec 16, 2011 : 6:22 a.m.

Joan has served the Ann Arbor public for a long time, in several different roles and I believe she works for the good of the community and in the service of the Democratic party. She also controls a lot of political cash and goodwill. As a lifelong Democrat, typically I agree with most of her political agenda. However there is a pattern that is emerging in Ann Arbor politics, that is the result of a one party town and whatever political conceit and/ or misjudgment, that led her to write that column/opinion is indicative of a Fox News editorial, unfair and unbalanced. This opinion by Joan reeks of a magazine bought and paid for by political interests. I cant verify this but I would bet we could find Joan's Crony's fingerprints on the Ann's bottom line. I am ashamed to be a Democrat if this is what the leadership in the party has to offer. Is it time to reform the local democratic party so we can actually have a party that speaks Democracy instead of Oligarchy.

Stuart Brown

Fri, Dec 16, 2011 : 5:46 a.m.

What a sulker!

davecj

Fri, Dec 16, 2011 : 5:16 a.m.

I guess Ms Lowenstein forgeot that Jane got the Michigan Daily Endorsement. Guess all those students can now join the subset of the elderly.

PLGreen

Fri, Dec 16, 2011 : 4:27 a.m.

Remember to vote...

EyeHeartA2

Fri, Dec 16, 2011 : 4:05 a.m.

I wish Joan would run for council, so I could vote against her. This is typical of our council. Only the will of the people if it happens to agree with how the concilmember is told to vote.

Mick52

Fri, Dec 16, 2011 : 3:54 a.m.

Joan Lowenstein has always been off base, especially with legal issues. As an example of this, she compares Ann Arbor's failed pedestrian crossing ordinance with California's, which is commonly observed by drivers because it is a state law. She criticized two council members for supporting the need to make sure essential (not basic) services are appropriately funding before non-essential services are funded, such as an over the top police building and an over priced water fountain. She exhibits to a very ominous trend we are seeing grow nationwide, an attitude of &quot;our way or the highway&quot; where if you do not agree with our position, you are just wrong, there is no room for cooperation or compromise. It seems kind of childish to me that an elected official writes an article like hers because the voters chose a specific candidate. I prefer workers over whiners.

Tony Livingston

Fri, Dec 16, 2011 : 3:33 a.m.

I agree that her article was very strange. It was so anti senior citizen I could not believe what I was reading. Really patronizing.

1bit

Fri, Dec 16, 2011 : 3:27 a.m.

Hey ERMG, what's that thing you say about the DDA?

A A Resident

Fri, Dec 16, 2011 : 1:43 a.m.

Lowenstein's tirade? My first guess is that it's a result of being out of touch with real people, and the real world. Otherwise, I would think that she would know better than to risk exposing such conceit to public scrutiny.

alfonso

Fri, Dec 16, 2011 : 1:30 a.m.

I also am a lifelong liberal Democrat who voted for Jane Lumm. I know both Jane and Joan but voted for Jane because of the outrageous pedestrian crosswalk ordinance that was passed by a City Council that was oblivious to the flaws in the ordinance. How many accidents and injuries have already mounted up because of this asinine ordinance?

glacialerratic

Fri, Dec 16, 2011 : 12:27 a.m.

Apart from the flimsy effort to incite a political food fight, this is a miserable piece of barely disguised opinion-flogging--what is being reported here? Nothing.

Kai Petainen

Thu, Dec 15, 2011 : 11:23 p.m.

i don't see the problem with an aging community -- one would assume that's one great reason as to why the university hospital should expand (and just did). it's not just ann arbor that is aging... sad as though it may be, the baby-boomers will start dying in bundles within 10-20 years.

Cendra Lynn

Thu, Dec 15, 2011 : 10:57 p.m.

We are scared of people? That's a stretch. I didn't know we were scared. We just don't want Hizzoner and sycophants taking our park and recreation land and using it for this train station. When did A2 become a basic town? Sometime in the 1830s, I think. Kind of nasty to take away our basics, like fire and police protection, hide money in the budget, then spend and borrow for projects that will only line the pockets of developers or add to the resumes of folks who want to move on. Back to basics would be a good start. Making up statements about our motivations is juvenile.

javajolt1

Thu, Dec 15, 2011 : 10:51 p.m.

The question isn't whether services need to be cut. The question is why did we get to the point where we actually have to cut services in the first place. Two different questions all together. The answer: Neil Berlin, Roger Fraser, .et, .al and a host of others negotiated unsustainable wage and benefit packages that they either were not sophisticated enough to understand or worse, did understand and consented to them because they would collectively benefit. Now the &quot;super-majority&quot; City council of the past 10-15 years is another matter.....they just plain were not sophisticated enough to ask the tough questions required. They were too concerned with global social issues and making sure everyone &quot;had two chickens in their pot&quot; and this stuff went right through. So if you want to know why your pot holes are not being filled and the trash on State Street isn't being picked up....or what happened to community policing - i.e. cops on bikes downtown ......just go ask Joan Lowenstein.

Tru2Blu76

Thu, Dec 15, 2011 : 10:43 p.m.

Too much focus on the fixable problem: voters have the power to cause consequences for political office holders who do not perform well or who do unethical or criminal things. The real problem with this system is that it's now become a lose-lose situation: the so-called liberals are actually the &quot;best bet&quot; for citizens even though they sometimes go too far in providing government services. But the so-called &quot;conservatives&quot; are outright charlatans: they've insulated themselves from public reaction by taking their rewards from corporate paymasters AFTER they've been booted out of office. The &quot;conservatives&quot; have adopted the Can't Lose No Matter What system: there's never any consequences (only huge paychecks, bonuses, &quot;retirement plans&quot;) for any failures or even crimes committed. Perfect example: Rick Snyder. He'll have enough money tomorrow no matter what the voters do: he has several lifetimes worth of wealth socked away RIGHT NOW. If you survey the finances of the majority of conservative office holders: you'll find they have the same guarantees of permanent Fat Living Forever. SOME liberal legislators and governors have the same cushy guarantees (Nancy Pelosi being the most notorious). I doubt though that any city council members are multimillionaires - so, yes, they are more accountable. This isn't &quot;Mister Smith Goes to Washington&quot; folks: it's another version of The Emperor Has No Clothes&quot; - only substitute &quot;No Accountability&quot; for clothes.

mun

Thu, Dec 15, 2011 : 10:20 p.m.

&quot;The idea that we hear over and over from the 'anti' party — and that includes current Councilmembers Steve Kunselman and Mike Anglin — is that government should only provide 'basic' services,&quot; Lowenstein writes. &quot;When did Ann Arbor become a basic town?&quot; Well, how is cutting basic services good for Ann Arbor or any city for that matter?

Tru2Blu76

Thu, Dec 15, 2011 : 10:02 p.m.

Kudos to Ms. Lowenstein for touching on the right elements affecting our current city government and voter responses to it. She's right on when talking about those opposing the transit center: &quot;privacy&quot; and isolating oneself in a closed (by dint of wealth) community are trademarks of the sociopath and psychopath - as well as for corporate criminals like those responsible for THIS recession. People who fight unifying projects for communities are trying to build their own isolation from the judgement of mainstream society. Witness the gated community phenomenon and &quot;suburbanization&quot; - people moving &quot;to the country&quot; but living in high end developments which themselves destroy wildlife habitat and reinforce isolation from &quot;dangerous urban environments.&quot; Ms. Lowenstein inadvertently takes one side track in her opinion piece: she connects &quot;retirement age&quot; with conservatism. This is NOT a natural connection as anthropologists have proven. The elders in any society are entering the last phase of life, during which the impulse to &quot;do for the community&quot; springs forth. More involvement with one's community at around age 55 is an evolutionary development: older people are safer and more secure within the circle of the community - and they trade their learned wisdom and often actual work for this advantage. The misperception is understandable: it springs from the unnatural and warped psychological warfare perpetrated by right wing elitists.

justcurious

Thu, Dec 15, 2011 : 9:21 p.m.

<a href="http://www.a2politico.com/?p=11476" rel='nofollow'>http://www.a2politico.com/?p=11476</a>

Spanky

Thu, Dec 15, 2011 : 9:13 p.m.

Ms Lowenstein doesn't seem to understand who she works for, typical tree hugger. The only reason Democrats hold power in this city is because the liberal, not fully educated students are allowed to vote in this city. Otherwise the divide is about 50/50. Most elderly citzens in this community, long for the old days when republicans and business people were in control and things were much better than now. Truth!!!

Ron Eugene

Thu, Dec 15, 2011 : 8:59 p.m.

It was time for a change, this is further evidence that it is needed. There is the new city hall. There is the underground parking by the library that wasn't going to be anything but parking, now it will have something built on the foundation. There is the pedestrian fiasco on Plymouth Road, where someone will get seriously hurt and vehicles have already been rear-ended. Or how about those pensions where folks retire with more money then they were making before retirement. One could go on; however, there isn't any real need. If voting to end the nonsense &quot;heralds an un-Ann Arbor-like conservatism in the city's increasingly aging population&quot; then so be it. I am not a conservative but I am violently against what this council seems to cook-up. As a lifelong Democrat I resent her assertion that I have become more conservative.

Stephen Landes

Thu, Dec 15, 2011 : 8:57 p.m.

I voted &quot;don't really care&quot; because there is simply nothing that can be done with people like Lowenstein, so why agonize about it. Her comments are offensive, ridiculous, and, most importantly, wrong. Ms. Lowenstein can go sit in her corner and be &quot;sad&quot;. What I find troubling is that she is part of the DDA -- an organization that spends an awful lot of the people's money -- over which we have no direct vote. I hope voters remember Ms. Lowenstein's diatribe during the next election and vote out council members and the mayor who support keeping her on the DDA.

Nancy Shiffler

Thu, Dec 15, 2011 : 8:38 p.m.

One of her more interesting comments was to describe all of the Lumm supporters as not only old, but &quot;elderly.&quot; As to Fuller Road Station, she misses the two basic questions: Why are we using city parkland to build a parking structure for the University? and How will a 1000-car parking garage for University employees encourage them to take a train to work rather than driving their cars?

A2comments

Thu, Dec 15, 2011 : 8:18 p.m.

I had never heard of &quot;The Ann&quot;, and based upon this drivel I clearly won't be reading it ever...

demistify

Thu, Dec 15, 2011 : 8 p.m.

What many of the commenters here don't seem to get is that &quot;anti&quot; is the only thing that the participants in the Lumm campaign had in common. Jane Lumm is a Reagan Republican, so it is to be expected that she would rally Republican support. On the other hand, her candidacy was launched with the endorsement of 3 Councilmembers (Anglin, Briere, Kunselman) who oppose the mayor from the other end of the political spectrum. Most of the active campaigning came from the left wing (by Ann Arbor standards) of the local Democratic Party, with an agenda of wresting party control from the more moderate element that includes Hieftje and Loewenstein. It adds up to political infighting, not reform.

thefoodandwinehedonist

Thu, Dec 15, 2011 : 7:45 p.m.

Lumm's area is a little bit different than the rest of A2, so to cast her as an anti- or a neo-con may be short-sided. Admittedly, I don't know much about her, but it's probably an insult to compare her to Kunselman. He's unresponsive and, while ROme's burning his major effort was to make sure people can raise chickens in their yards. If only there was another choice in the past election besides the t-bagger that ran against him

jcj

Thu, Dec 15, 2011 : 7:43 p.m.

Well Ms Lowenstein you have done what I thought could not be done. You have single handily brought factions from all over the map together to denounce your position. I find myself agreeing with so many I had thought as off the wall as you!

daytona084

Thu, Dec 15, 2011 : 7:38 p.m.

So let me get this straight... It's bad to be &quot;anti-&quot;... ? (It's good to be &quot;pro-&quot;?) She certainly seems to be &quot;anti-&quot; a lot of things, doesn't she?

Patricia Lesko

Thu, Dec 15, 2011 : 7:32 p.m.

Ryan, Joan's piece is a letter to the editor. Evidently, because her piece had so many journalistic deficiencies that were not caught prior to publication, Kyle Poplin decided it could qualify as an edited column the factual accuracy of which The Ann was willing to stand behind. Vivienne's piece points out several of those factual inaccuracies, as does the piece on A2Politico—an analysis that is slightly spicier (<a href="http://www.a2politico.com/?p=11476)" rel='nofollow'>http://www.a2politico.com/?p=11476)</a> than Vivienne's dissection of Joan's error-filled missive. Joan's letter to the editor insults the city's Ward 2 voters because they're &quot;old,&quot; &quot;stingy,&quot; and &quot;conservative&quot; — I guess that's just the Democrats?

blahblahblah

Thu, Dec 15, 2011 : 7:30 p.m.

Here's how Ms. Lowenstein's article should have read: - Ann Arbor has an &quot;increasingly aging population&quot;. - Ann Arbor wishes to &quot;attract young, industrious, intelligent and civic-minded people.&quot; People are divided on how to deal with this situation. Some feel that the current tax levels are too high given the services received, which among other things makes Ann Arbor an unaffordable place to live for many workers, young families with children, etc. Others feel the city should continue to tax at the current level and perhaps increase taxes in order to support new &quot;non-basic&quot; projects like Fuller garage, county wide transit, public art, etc. It's a difference of opinion is all it is. No need for name calling

Michael Hartwell

Thu, Dec 15, 2011 : 7:21 p.m.

I am a Townie, I have been a proud townie since I moved to Ann Arbor in 1967. All the DDA wants to do is turn Ann Arbor into Southfield without the romance. All the DDA and the so-called conservatives want to do is turn Ann Arbor into a profit generator. A fine example is the Ann Arbor Skatepark. We (my son and I) worked with the fellow skaters and their parents to get an Ann Arbor Skatepark when my son was thirteen. He is now a twenty-five year old combat veteran. Ann Arbor still has no Skatepark because Skateboarders and their ilk do not fit the mold of rich &quot;conservatives&quot; trying to build high rise condominiums and make sure Ann Arbor is a clean vacuum for the football crowds.

djm12652

Thu, Dec 15, 2011 : 7:18 p.m.

Please explain how Ms Lowenstein can write blatant personal attacks and not be censored but bloggers can offer opinions and they are deleted? What a double standard! If I don't agree with something and decide a personal attack is appropriate, do I need to become a &quot;contributing&quot; journalist....what a line of horsel puckies!

grye

Thu, Dec 15, 2011 : 7:06 p.m.

One person voted in that is not a liberal Democrat and faithful follower of the high and mighty mayor, and suddenly she has a revelation that there is too much conservatism in Ann Arbor? There needs to be more conservatism to balance our political governing. When all we have is a bunch of rubberstamps, we have no checks and balances.

jcj

Thu, Dec 15, 2011 : 7:01 p.m.

As usual your &quot;poll&quot; question leaves much to be desired! What do you think of Joan Lowenstein's column in The Ann? You ask the question but don't give much of an option to really let you and her know what we think of her opinion!

jcj

Thu, Dec 15, 2011 : 7 p.m.

Better be careful MS Lowenstein you just insulted the &quot;elderly&quot; vote in Ann Arbor. Your college cronies can't get you everything you want!

jcj

Thu, Dec 15, 2011 : 6:56 p.m.

So anyone's point of view that does not line up with hers is &quot;anti&quot; ? Well using that &quot;logic&quot; she must be an &quot;anti&quot; because her view sure as well you know does not line up with mine!

a2grateful

Thu, Dec 15, 2011 : 6:44 p.m.

Joan Lowenstein? Yawn . . . She's just the poster child for the city's aging streets . . . Here's what she really said in that interview, between the lines, of course: &quot;I really love the DDA . . . We get to go shopping for really fun stuff . . . We have this giant credit card, and ZERO accountability . . . It's just the best! I get to be a Hieftjian chieftain with full immunity . . . Those stupid, clueless voters can't touch us . . . That's why the DDA theme song is by MC Hammer . . . I really like his pants . . . Nah nah nah nah, nah nah, nah nah: Can't touch this!&quot;

manbearpig

Thu, Dec 15, 2011 : 6:39 p.m.

To be honest, I saw her backing one area of new law, and a bunch of new spending projects. I agree that the government should do more then &quot;provide[] nothing but water, sewers, roads and police&quot; but I would like to have those priorities taken care of before we start talking about &quot;more public art, concert halls, theaters and libraries.&quot; ( I do like libraries most of theses, they seem to be the most accessible and useful to the john q. public) Additionally, we are &quot;one of the most educated populations in the country&quot; so why are the decisions the voting public made so bad? The phrase two minds are better then one comes seems to fit, and in this case the minds of the voters may well have been better then yours.

manbearpig

Thu, Dec 15, 2011 : 6:38 p.m.

Just read Jane's piece. I'm under 30, own a home in the city and do not agree with her. However, I am probably a subset of elderly, only because everyone is. Also loved the use of hyphens un-Ann Arbor- like Drivers in other states, such as Cali- fornia, and part- nering with the University of Michigan and the federal government to build a transportation center that includes commuter rail and bicycle and auto- mobile parking. Is this an independent point of view (Also as of now this plan only is a gigantic multi-level structure for the U, and as for the partnering, were the submissive partner per usual).

DonBee

Thu, Dec 15, 2011 : 6:34 p.m.

Ms. Lowenstein doesn't get it. You fund the basics first. Police, Fire, etc. As we were taught in high school and college people react to Maslow's hierarchy of needs. Basic needs first, then safety, then and only then Art and other &quot;self actualization&quot; projects. Ms. Lowenstein seems to want to turn the pyramid upside down. That is why Ms. Lumm won. Laying off police and fire, before cutting art programs is putting the world on its head. Right now Ann Arbor needs to get the basics right, then they need to clean up the processes around zoning, permitting and allocation of city funds. Then and only then can they take on some of the art and other projects they seem to kill city council meetings on. In short &quot;ground control to Major Tom&quot;

leezee

Thu, Dec 15, 2011 : 6:32 p.m.

Wow, wow and wow! This woman is WAY off base. How dare she presume how I feel and why I voted the way I did!! I am a female democrat in my 40's (don't know - is that considered part of the &quot;aging population&quot;?). I voted for Jane Lumm. I think this is just further proof that Mayor Hieftje has built a city government that can't see beyond their own thoughts and ideas. It is long past time for a change. I look forward to the mayor and many council members being replaced in the next election. Without question, the DDA needs to go. The Ann article is pure propaganda, so it makes me laugh to read that Joan Lowenstein claims propaganda was involved in Mr. Rapundalo's loss. He lost because he didn't share information with his constituents to see how they may have felt about decisions being made regarding our community. I know people who know Mr. Rapundalo and they all say the same thing - he is very bright and does have many good ideas, but he believes that he knows best and his constituents just don't understand what is best for them. I love Ann Arbor because people are passionate about their beliefs and what happens to the city. I'd rather see some opposition, open discussion, willingness to modify, willingness to listen in order to discover why people feel the way they feel. It sure sounds better than belittling people who don't agree with you.

manbearpig

Thu, Dec 15, 2011 : 6:22 p.m.

The &quot;so called&quot; council majority? Isn't a council majority when they all vote together on almost every issue?

Wolf's Bane

Thu, Dec 15, 2011 : 6:19 p.m.

I usually disagree with everything Lowenstein has to say, especially regarding her DDA activities. However, Lumm's election has ushered in a type neo-conservatism that is somewhat atypical for Ann Arbor. While I think it's a bit far to accuse Lumm of lying to get an elected I do share Lowenstein's frustrations. Things do need to change, here, in Ann Arbor, but I don't think the solution is along party lines any longer.

A2WS1

Thu, Dec 15, 2011 : 6:19 p.m.

A note on Jane Lumm - I would not put her in some sort of alliance with Anglin, Kunselman, and Briere. I think she is an island right now. She has the opportunity to decide how she uses her seat; remain an island, partner with the &quot;Anti&quot; crowd, or build a bridge to the majority - and perhaps pull them ever so slightly towards the middle of the spectrum.

Usual Suspect

Thu, Dec 15, 2011 : 6:10 p.m.

So being a non-robotic voter make me &quot;anti?&quot; OK then.

javajolt1

Thu, Dec 15, 2011 : 6:06 p.m.

&quot;...an un-Ann Arbor-like conservatism&quot; by whose measure? If Ann Arbor is so diverse it should be politically diverse, too. That's the problem with the so-called &quot;super democratic majority&quot; on council that has been running this city for the past decade. Some might say, running this city into the ground! So some are unhappy and showing this displeasure at the ballot box - isn't this the customary process in a Democracy? This is the kind of entitled arrogance that has led to the very dissent Joan Lowenstein apparently finds displeasing. Not too long ago, Ann Arbor was a right of center city that had equal numbers of Republicans and Democrats on council. Then the election dates were changed to allow more liberal students (non-residents) to vote. The result of this is if someone &quot;right of center&quot; has any hope of being elected, they have to run as a &quot;moderate democrat&quot; (see Higgins and others). The crazy conflicts of interest this council has 'rubber stamped' - like union members participating in the negotiation of union contracts that would ultimately benefit the negotiators - has turned a budget surplus into a budget deficit for as far as the eye can see. What is the response from those that presided over this dereliction of duty? Blame the voter!

63Townie

Thu, Dec 15, 2011 : 5:56 p.m.

The &quot;anti&quot; crowd, of which I consider myself a member, are independent thinkers. It's not that we only desire the &quot;basics&quot;, we want the basics covered before city council and hizzhonor start throwing millions at superfluous projects. I think she really fears the &quot;anti&quot; crowd because we won't swallow the propaganda hook, line and sinker. Independent thinkers are dangerous to the status quo of which she belongs.

so much nonsense

Thu, Dec 15, 2011 : 5:55 p.m.

@Vivienne Armentrout. Being called elderly is not an insult anymore than calling someone a woman or a man. It is a description of a voter. Joan's complete quote is this: &quot;Most are not only in the category of older but in the subset of elderly. There is no groundswell of young, independent voters.&quot; She is comparing elderly to young...not insulting them. The entire quote shows the true meaning. You might want to spin her words so that you can make others believe what is not there, for you own political manipulation, but the truth is still there. The gist of the article is that there is no uprising in Ann arbor of a well diverse group of people who are unhappy with the city. There is a politically motivated small group of older citizens who don't like change and who used a lot of money to turn an election in their favor. In elections where there is little turn out these things can happen. To sum up, Rapundalo losing does not mean the citizens of Ann Arbor are unhappy. I agree with Joan completely.

mr_annarbor

Thu, Dec 15, 2011 : 5:45 p.m.

Interesting column, but I agree with the commenters here that say that the opinions expressed are out of touch with the majority of the voters in Ann Arbor, if not the majority of all Ann Arborites. It's almost as if she doesn't realize this is democracy in action. I agree with Lowenstein in hoping that Ann Arbor is more than a &quot;basic&quot; city, but you can't have an exceptional city without basic services.

Vivienne Armentrout

Thu, Dec 15, 2011 : 5:40 p.m.

Thanks - to clarify, my statement about the column being politically incorrect was because of the strong display of ageism. Ms. Lowenstein attacked the &quot;antis&quot; or whatever because they/we are old, even elderly. Generally seasoned politicians know that you don't attack people on the basis of identity, whether age, race, or other such classifications. Here is the direct quote (from Lowenstein's column): &quot;Most are not only in the category of older but in the subset of elderly.&quot; You'll have to read the whole piece to get the full flavor.

PersonX

Thu, Dec 15, 2011 : 5:35 p.m.

Lowenstein's opinions seem shaped by the need to keep a certain kin of status quo: the rule of the Mayor's cabal that is much too close to real estate interests and would like to use Ann Arbor as a playground for a few developers, no matter the consequences. Ironically, she calls the public reaction to this monopoly of power as &quot;anti-&quot; and fossilized! her characterizations of council members who do not belong to this club are silly at best. We need progressive challengers to the other members of this cabal; Lumm may not have been ideal, but she was better than the incumbent and her election did signal that there is public opposition to the dominant group on council. The vote presented here could have been designed in a better manner. Why are the choices taken from the group-think PR cliche world? &quot;Go Joan&quot; is hardly something for adults, and the notion that anyone we disagree with has to &quot;apologize&quot; is another piece of media nonsense. She has the right to her opinion, however silly and politically motivated, and should not be asked for false contrition. A simple choice between &quot;agree&quot; and &quot;disagree&quot; would do, it seems to me. But then I also like to rant, not so much about elections as about the sad state of this blog ...

SMC

Thu, Dec 15, 2011 : 5:32 p.m.

Reading that column made me realize just how disconnected from reality some people are. Yes, every city should have public art... If the city can afford to do it without cutting basic services. Ann Arbor may not be a &quot;basic&quot; city, but all the concert halls, opera houses, and public art in the world will mean very little if the residents of the city don't feel safe to go out at night. Ann Arbor may not be Flint, and probably never will be, but just how much of our security (to say nothing of the public-safety jobs that have been cut) are we willing to sacrifice, so that we may have pretty things to look at. I also love how she compares the new police department to socialized medicine, then, a few paragraphs later, talks about the need for public funding for concert halls and theaters. That makes it clear that the author can't tell the difference between a basic necessity that the government should provide and a frivolity that can be built with private funding, if the people choose to have it. The sooner Mrs Lowenstein's cronies are removed from power, the better.

omniskeptic

Thu, Dec 15, 2011 : 5:29 p.m.

Lowenstein is perhaps coming to understand that she's become part of the problem, no longer part of any kind of solution. That's never a pleasant revelation, and it may account for the silliness of her piece.

bedrog

Thu, Dec 15, 2011 : 5:29 p.m.

Why should an a2.com poll even have &quot;offended /apologize &quot; as options?? This is a perfectly reasonable , albeit mildly partisan, opinion piece by a rather centrist local political figure, with whom i mildly disagee on some issues , others not. So what?? ( although i'm just counting the seconds for the true lowenstein hatas to chime in with their non-local agenda ... and about whom everyone bipartisanly concerned with civility should be offended.)

JSA

Thu, Dec 15, 2011 : 5:28 p.m.

Mrs. Lowenstein has clearly outlined the problem. She and her buddies on the Council are out of touch. They have and continue to ignore the reality of today preferring instead to waste tax dollars in search for their version of utopia. She should consider a move to Berkley. She would probably be happier there as more and more voters reject her views on how government should be run.

so much nonsense

Thu, Dec 15, 2011 : 5:17 p.m.

Bravo Joan!! I agree with every word. The strong backlash from Armentrout and others is because you make very valid points that the majority in this town agree with IMO. They (the &quot;anti-people&quot;) don't know how to discuss anything in a civil manner and always have to resort to character assassination when challenged. They get so offended when called &quot;anti&quot; and &quot;selfish&quot; but that is exactly what they are. My hope is that more people in this town will have the courage to stand up, speak the truth and support you.. Bravo Joan!

GoBlue1984

Thu, Dec 15, 2011 : 5:12 p.m.

I am a lifelong liberal democrat and *I* voted for Lumm... why? The pedestrian law that the previous city council put in place NEEDS TO GO!!! City Council, do not underestimate how angry this has made voters -- we are going to vote you out 1 by 1 if this ridiculous law isn't done away with. That's not a threat, it's a reality. Just ask Rapundalo.

Simon Green

Thu, Dec 15, 2011 : 5:10 p.m.

What happened to &quot;Dissent is the highest form of patriotism&quot;?