4A - Thursday, February 13, 2014
The Michigan Daily - michigandaily.com
4A - Thursday, February 13, 2014 The Michigan Daily - michigandailycom
SMihinan:43aty
Edited and managed by students at
the University of Michigan since 1890.
420 Maynard St.
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
tothedaily@michigandaily.com
MEGAN MCDONALD
PETER SHAHIN and DANIEL WANG KATIE BURKE
EDITOR IN CHIEF EDITORIAL PAGE EDITORS MANAGING EDITOR
Unsigned editorials reflect the official position of the Daily's editorial board.
All other signed articles and illustrations represent solely the views of their authors.
A slippery situation
Ann Arbor should re-evaluate sidewalk clearance laws
Jn the midst of one of the heaviest winters in the past decade, Ann Arbor
community standards officers have issued 44 tickets and more than 400
warnings to property owners who didn't shovel and clean the sidewalks
in front of their houses within the proper time after a snowfall. The ticketing
has become controversial, as the strict guidelines seem impractical for
property owners to follow. While the snow and ice accumulation is dangerous
to pedestrians if left unattended, it's unfair to put the burden of clearing the
sidewalks solely on property owners. Furthermore, the punishments for not
doing so, or being unable to, do not fit the crime. Ann Arbor and its residents
must come to an reasonable agreement on the caretaking of the sidewalks in
order to ensure the safety of all citizens.
SOPHIA USOW
E-MAIL SOPsIsAus.a)uMIcH.EDu
To the (strong) men
For snow and ice that has accumulated prior
to 6 a.m., property owners are responsible
for clearing it by noon that day. They're also
required to treat the sidewalks with salt or
some other substance to make sure the ice is
not slippery. Within 24 hours after the end
of an accumulation of snow of 1 inch or more,
the snow and ice must be removed. Failure to
comply with the laws in a timely manner may
result in a civil infraction with fines ranging
from $100 to $1000.
While it's understandable that the snow
must be cleared within a decent time frame as
to avoid hazardousor dangerous conditions, it's
especially unfair to give such a short timeline
to clear the snow for people who are working
or out of town during this time. Furthermore,
Ann Arbor's removal regulations and fines are
unreasonable for property owners who may
have more important obligations, including
their employment, children or are traveling.
Other issues such as age or health problems
may also affect property owners' ability to
clear their sidewalks. There are no special
provisions for senior citizens in the Ann Arbor
Snow and Ice Removal Laws. Senior citizens
should be given more time or accommodation
for their snow to be shoveled.
Unshoveled snow is a safety hazard and
can result in serious injuries if not taken care
of. Though able-bodied people can try to get
around the snow without falling or being
injured, it's much more difficult for those who
are disabled. Carolyn Grawi, board member of
the Washtenaw Biking and Walking Coalition,
noted that unshoveled walkways are "a constant
concern for people using wheelchairs." Grawi,
who is legally blind, says she can't distinguish
the edges of the sidewalks when they are
covered with snow. If snow is not cleared away
from sidewalks and in front of properties, those
who are disabled can very easily get stuck.
Similarly, many automatic doors cannot open
because the snow has piled up in front of them
and business owners argue the lack of snow
removal will potentially hurt profits.
To encourage snow removal by property
owners, Ann Arbor should better advertise
that they provide residents with a 5-gallon
bucket's worth of sand and salt mixture
per visit to the maintenance yard to help
clear their snow. They should also increase
awareness of the community standards
helpline phone number that residents
can call after receiving a sidewalk snow
removal notice, or even before if necessary.
Furthermore, Ann Arbor needs to be more
transparent with these solutions, making
sure property owners are aware of the help
that the city provides.
his is for the strong men in
our lives.
The painthat overwhelms
your heart is not
just emotion.
It is a reaction
to words you N
never should
have heard. It
is the result of
an immense
pressure to deny
your humanity. MAJA
You may coolly TOSIC
fit into your
masculinity and
carefree swag,
but your eyes tell a different story. I
see the clouds of confusion and hurt
seeping over your strong composure.
As you leave innocent boyhood for
rough and rugged manhood, you feel
the need to adopt the one definition
of a man our society allows. To be
strong, independent, dominant.
aggressive and emotionally
constipated is synonymous with
being a man. Songs tell you of the
need to possess money and women in
order to be on top. Movies show you
of the need to solve problems with
active force. Your peers teach you of
the need to putthembefore hos. Your
father criticizes you for not being
man enough.
You are meant to walk with your
shoulders high on this campus. You
are supposed to party the hardest
and hold your alcohol down. You
are judged by how many women
you can get. You are pressured to
be the biggest, the baddest, the
coolest, the hottest.
The weight of these me
drowning you. And you ar
of your voice to say so - ts
would not be manly. Tht
possess privileges and]
will never experience, you
norms are just as suffocatin
Your tears shatter b
floors behind closed doors.
Your short stature calls f
appointments.
Your lack of muscular t
for brutal gym sessions.
Your need for love i
by an overbearing dem
independence.
You want to give, but o
you to take.
Your fragile and vulnera
is breaking, but
you must plant
your feet firmly W
in the ground.
Your self- t
worth is rooted
in your ability to ove
conform, so what
happens when
you don't?
You and I may
be regarded as
opposite poles of a restricti'
but I think our pain is bor
common story. We're both b
the same machine: manufa
become robotic products a
mimes of our culture.
You and I are not that
Our sadness is regarded asm
Our need for acceptance an
connection saturates our I
we are driven to distance o
We are turned blindly f
ssages is another so that we view each other
e robbed as opposites.
o admit it I am told to resent you for all you
sugh you have.
power I I am told to blame you for
ir gender the caution in my steps and the
Ig, oppression weighing me down.
bathroom I am told to fear you for the
privilege in your pockets.
or doctor But you are all my brothers.
Not my enemy. And the pain you
one calls silently suffer through adds to my
heartbroken pulse. I recognize the
s stifled need for our common liberation - a
sand for fight to be fought as allies connected
by love and interlaced hands.
thers tell But before I can reach for your
hand, I must see that boys will not
ble heart just be boys.
We all must
see that boys are
overshadowed
re all must see and overlooked.
.hat boys are Their pain will
t bbe locked in a
rshadowed and secret compart-
ment, because
overlooked, they'll have to
"toughen up"
and "act like a
man." Before
ve binary, anything, ask a boy how he is feel-
-n from a ing, so in that moment he can be
built from more than just a boy. Don't ask him
ctured to how he is doing, because "doing" is
nd silent an external act fit for his stereotype.
Chances are he'll laugh and shun the
different. topic. Ask him again how he is feel-
weakness. ing. And again and again, because
id human we must not give up on our boys.
ives. Yet,
surselves. - Maja Tosic can be reached
rom one at tosimaj@umich.edu.
EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS
Barry Belmont, Jacob Karafa, Nivedita Karki, Jordyn Kay,
Kellie Halushka, Aarica Marsh, Megan McDonald, Victoria
Noble, Michael Schramm, Matthew Seligman, Paul
Sherman, Allison Raeck, Daniel Wang, Derek Wolfe
CARLY MANES I
Empowerment, not politics
SONJA KARNOVSKY AND TREVOR DOLAN I
A Key(stone) issue
Environmental activists have been fighting
the proposed Keystone XLpipelinesince itwas
first introduced in 2008. This extension to the
current Keystone oil pipeline in Canada was
met with strong resistance from both activists
and legislators who argued that the impact
of the pipeline was not well understood.
At the time, the Environmental Protection
Agency specifically indicated that existing
data collected by the State Department was
too narrow and did not adequately consider
"oil spill response plans, safety issues and
greenhouse gas concerns." Three weeks ago,
the State Department issued a new report
summarizing its recent study of the potential
environmental impacts of the Keystone XL
pipeline. The report stated the pipeline would
not "significantly exacerbate" the problem of
greenhouse gas emissions. It went on to say
that oil sands extraction would continue at an
accelerating rate with or without Keystone,
pointing out that the crude oil could be moved
by rail failing the pipeline's construction.
This report may seem like a death knell for
the movement against Keystone, but it's not
quite the whole story. The majority of the
report lays out a scenario where oil prices
remain high and thus the tar sands in Alberta
would be developed for their oil regardless
of the creation of Keystone XL. However, if
oil prices - and by extension demand for oil
- are low, then the creation of Keystone XL
would artificially accelerate the destruction
of this land. Alternatively, transporting oil by
rail is more sensitive to market fluctuations
and would actually slow projected develop-
ment of this area. The report does not com-
ment on whether oil prices are likely to be
high or low, but the rigidity of oil production
necessary to sustain a pipeline should be suf-
ficient reason to argue against Keystone XL.
The report also states definitively that the
projected 3,900 jobs created by the construc-
tion of the pipeline would only be temporary.
Supporters of the Keystone XL pipeline often
cite job creation as one of the project's most
appealing features, but after two years only35
jobs would remain. The report from the State
Department has been described as a positive
recommendation for the Keystone XL proj-
ect, but in reality it lays out a more balanced
assessment of the future of the pipeline.
By itself, the State Department report holds
little weight; it's primarily an analysis of the
environmental and economic impacts that the
Keystone XL pipeline may have. This report
was delivered to Secretary of State John Kerry
three weeks ago, giving him 90 days to make a
recommendation on the future of Keystone XL
to President Barack Obama. The Secretary of
State has not made his opinion on the project
public in the past, but he has implied that he
is willing to balance environmental concerns
with corporate interests. However, he has also
previously made clear that he hopes to achieve
meaningful action on climate change during his
time in office. Obama has similarly indicated a
desire to build a strong climate legacy in his sec-
ond term but has taken a cautious approach to
the Keystone XL issue. Kerry's concern for the
environment should make his decision clear: a
definitive recommendation against the creation
of Keystone XL. This will both solidify his posi-
tion as an advocate for environmental issues
and bolster the environmental movement.
Both Kerry and Obama have crucial
decisions to make that will dictate the future
of both Keystone XL and the environmental
movement in the United States. In the fight
against climate change there are few tangible
battles. Far too often, environmental activists
must rally against large-scale crises that
cannot be resolved with one man's decision.
With the Keystone XL pipeline, we have the
chance to make a real difference and let our
voices be heard. We cannot keep coal-fueled
power plants from polluting, nor can we
reverse climate change. Frankly, the majority
of environmental issues are too big to tackle
head-on.We need to pick our battleswisely and
seize the opportunities we have. Preventing
the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline
is one such opportunity. Kerry must advise
Obama against the pipeline and the president
must prevent the pipeline's construction. This
is a battle we must win.
Students on campus will gather to hear state
Rep. Jeff Irwin (D-Ann Arbor) speak against
the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline
at 6 p.m. on Monday, Feb. 17, in the Central
Student Government Chambers in the Union.
In addition to learning more about this issue,
we will also be signing petitions to send to our
representatives. Come add your voice to this
important cause!
Sonja Karnovsky is an LSA senior and
Trevor Dolan is an LSA sophomore.
I was apprehensive about coming
to Michigan.
I had never seen a football game
before, didn't believe Wolverines
were real and had a disdain for the
color "maize." After two weeks at
Michigan I re-opened the Common
Application with the intention of
transferring by second semester. I
didn't feel like one of the "leaders and
best" - I just felt lost.
But then things changed.
That transformation happened
at my first football game. The
overwhelming sense of pride that
I felt that day was the catalyst for
the passion I have for this school,
its people and its supporters. In the
most clichd fashion, I felt at home.
Needless to say, I stayed at the
University, and it was undoubtedly
the best decision I've ever made.
However, through my experiences
here, it is undeniable that this place
doesn't always feel like home for all
Wolverines. Depending on what you
look like, act like, identify or don't
identify as, Michigan can feel more
like a personal vendetta than a place
of support and community.
Despite what the promotional
videos tell us, it can't be denied
that at the University, it isn't always
easy to be a Wolverine. Sometimes,
being a Wolverine requires one's
best to merely make it through the
day. From taking out $40,000 in
loans every year to feeling silenced
in our classrooms, there are times
when being a Wolverine can be
tough. Historically, bringing a voice
to these challenges on campus is
silenced more times than not, due
to our insistence that the problems
we face are unique and manageable.
These challenges feel like
individual experiences. In reality,
the problems we face as individuals
can be addressed, and are endowed
with a voice in our Central
Student Government.
However, many students believe
the individuals chosen to speak on
their behalf have fallen silent.
I can assure you, I have not been
silent. That is why I am running for
studentbody president.
For the past three years, I have.
met with students, administrators
and campus leaders to implement
student-driven initiatives, and
change the course ofthe conversation
and the action in CSG. From my
experience as a student activist, I
know that institutionalizing change
is an uphill battle.
But we can't wait anymore, and we
shouldn't have to.
I am running for student
body president because student
government has been unwilling
to take on the challenges that the
students on the front line face every
day for too long. Since my freshman
year, I have been privileged enough
to work with an incredible network of
student activists across identities and
issues. I have seen our work praised
by students, yet largely ignored by
the University's administration. I am
bringing my skills and passion for our
community to this position. But, at
the end of the day, progress requires
all of us working together towards
the betterment of our campus
community, committing to collective
action for campus-wide change.
With the entire campus community
at the base of a student government
fighting for the rights and needs of all
students, we can't lose. I ask you this:
Fortune favors the bold. Will you
join us?
Carly Manes is a junior in the
Ford School of Public Policy.
While the amount is large, in comparison to
the government's expenditures, it is not so
large:'
- Kwame Kilpatrick's defense attorney James Thomas in regards to the $1.1 million in taxpayer dollars
that went toward legal fees in the public corruption case.
t