as safe storage of guns
and how to work with
families with high-risk
teenagers,
without
taking
away guns. In addition, given
that 2018 was the worst year
for gun violence in schools
on
record,
Cunningham
expressed the need for further
inquiry into whether existing
safety measures in schools are
effective.
For Cunningham, working
as a doctor in the emergency
department
only
further
highlights the need to focus on
firearm injury prevention.
“One of the things that’s
specific about taking care of
patients who have been injured
by a gun is the lethality of the
bullet is such that there’s not
as much you can do after the
event,” Cunningham said. “We
take care of people who have
had horrific injuries, but I want
to do work so we not have them
in the ER in the first place.”
To include non-academics
in the project, FACTS created
a
practitioner
advisory
board
composed
of
health
practitioners, gun owners and
stakeholders,
pastors,
and
others involved in the gun
violence prevention effort.
Tom O’Connor, who also
serves on the board of directors
for Gun Owners for Responsible
Ownership, is a member of the
advisory
board.
O’Connor
highlighted
the
importance
of the firearm injury field,
emphasizing that gun owners
should be engaged in the
conversation.
“With
rights
come
responsibilities… My personal
belief is that if gun owners
don’t step forward and support
solid research and common
sense solutions to reducing
gun violence, you get policy
responses
that
don’t
work
and might not make sense,”
O’Connor said.
FACTS also hopes to create
an active field that will outlast
the five year duration of the
project, prioritizing the need
to train future firearm injury
researchers. School of Public
Health PhD candidate Amanda
Mauri is involved in the FACTS
policy taskforce. She explained
being with the project has given
her a network of individuals and
experts with similar interests.
“What FACTS has really
provided me is this great space
to interact with the existing
renowned researchers within
the firearm space,” Mauri said.
“I can also connect with other
trainees who are interested
in firearm-related work both
within and outside of Michigan,
from the Masters through the
Post-Doctoral level.”
Mauri
also
noted
the
University is well-positioned to
lead this growing field due to its
existing infrastructure.
“We have some of the most
established firearm researchers
in the U.S. The Injury Center
is one of the most established
ones in the country,” Mauri
said. “This is a historic moment
for firearm research in that we
can finally start adding to the
evidence base.”
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
News
Wednesday, January 9, 2019 — 3A
that have been brought to our
attention regarding protesters
who have been interfering,”
Lumm
said.
“They
haven’t
been peacefully demonstrating,
they
have
actually
stopped
and prohibited our contractor
White Buffalo from performing
their culling contracted work
on properties that have been
identified for culling.”
The city hired Connecticut-
based White Buffalo Inc. to
execute its deer management
program in 2016. Since this
year’s cull began at the start
of the month, the company’s
sharpshooters
have
taken
up positions on public and
private land around Ann Arbor,
including land owned by the
University of Michigan, and will
remained stationed there until
Jan. 27.
Protesters from groups like
Friends of Ann Arbor Wildlife
in Nature and Ann Arbor Non-
Lethal Deer Management have
held
demonstrations
by
the
sharpshooters’ perches.
Lumm said the protesters
have worked to disrupt the cull
and make the city-hired hunters
less effective.
“The protesters are preventing
them again from conducting this
work effectively,” Lumm said.
“The taxpayers are on the hook
paying for this contract and the
result has been that they will not
perform the work that they have
been contracted to perform.”
Lisa Abrams of FAAWN said
the group’s protests were lawful,
and thanked the councilmembers
who
voted
against
Lumm’s
resolution.
“The fact is that our protests
have been peaceful,” Abrams
said. “We have been on the
sidewalk every single time, or
we have gotten the permission
of private residents to be on their
private property, so every single
time we have been peaceful
and we are expressing our First
Amendment right to free speech,
and thank you for protecting that
so we are not living in a gestapo
state.”
Mayor Christopher Taylor has
repeatedly opposed the deer cull
and was the lone vote against it
when the program was adopted
in 2015, but he said his opposition
was not the reason why he did
not support Lumm’s resolution.
“Civil disobedience involves
disobedience
and
occasional
violation of the law,” Taylor said.
“We have protests in the streets
without permits on occasion and
I don’t want to get into a situation
where nonviolent protest results
in legal action.”
In an email interview, Bernie
Banet of Washtenaw Citizens
for Ecological Balance, a group
that supports the city’s deer
management efforts, said the
protesters purposefully tried to
impede the success of the cull.
“The small band of ‘protesters’
seeking to protect deer have been
very
successfully
interfering
with this year’s culls, from
what I hear,” Banet wrote. “By
congregating at the cull sites
and,
they
claim,
exercising
their free speech rights they are
successfully scaring away the
deer. That is, in my opinion, their
transparent intention, not simply
to protest. This effect on the
planned culls can be construed
as illegal interference with a
lawful
animal
management
program.”
Banet criticized City Council
for failing to pass the resolution.
“This does not bode well for the
City going forward being able to
protect its residents and its parks
and neighborhoods from the
impact of deer overabundance:
collisions with deer on the roads,
tick-borne illnesses facilitated
by a dense deer population,
interference
with
forest
regeneration, and destruction of
plantings throughout the city,”
he wrote. “A better balance
between the right to protest and
a government’s right to protect
its citizens from an animal
menace must be found.”
Councilmember Jeff Hayner,
D-Ward 1, voted against the
measure. He said he did not want
to discuss his personal beliefs
regarding the cull but defended
the protesters.
“I really believe that the
opposition
to
this
cull
is
legitimate,” he said. “… They feel
that it’s not the right thing to
be doing to send guns into our
parks, that it’s not necessary,
that we should live and let
live. I think that these are very
valid arguments, and the idea
of banging pots and pans and
shining lights and yelling and
exhibiting other forms of civil
disobedience, well, it’s been
famously said that the riot is the
language of the unheard, and I
believe that these people do feel
unheard.”
Councilmember Ali Ramlawi,
D-Ward 5, said one of his primary
obligations as an elected official
was to make sure residents’ tax
dollars were not being wasted —
a responsibility that included the
money spent on the cull.
“I’m all for civil disobedience,
but I know it comes at a cost,”
Ramlawi said. “You break the
law, you break the law and you
suffer the consequences of doing
so.”
agreement in late December.
Will Hathaway, a member of
the Ann Arbor Central Park Ballot
Committee, commended the city
for moving to settle the citizens
group’s lawsuit.
“This
action
will
help
disentangle
(the
city)
from
the idea of selling Library Lot
development rights to a private
corporation,” Hathaway said. “It
is time to look forward to the idea
of an urban park and civic center
on the library block. Creating a
consensus vision will take some
work and time. All of us want a
resulting public space of which we
will be proud.”
City
Councilmember
Jane
Lumm, I-Ward 2, said she was
glad the resolution to wind down
the lawsuit was on the agenda.
“Whenever there is litigation
against the city, especially when
it strains from our citizens,
our hope is that the litigation is
ultimately settled in an amicable
agreement,”
Lumm
said.
“The passage of Proposal A in
November is a clear statement
from residents that the sale of the
Library Lot development rights
to Core Spaces is not what the
majority of residents wanted for
the property.”
City Administrator Howard
Lazarus informed the developers
that the city was abandoning the
deal in a letter on Dec. 31.
“The
charter
amendment
prevents or impairs the city
from carrying out the sale of the
development rights on the Library
Lot,” Lazarus wrote. “Because
this situation is obviously one that
cannot be cured, the agreement
with Core Spaces is terminated.
We will arrange for the return
of the deposit paid as part of
this transaction and await your
direction on where and how to
send it.”
The
letter
directed
Core
Spaces to send any further
correspondence to him and City
Attorney Stephen Postema. In a
statement issued Jan. 2, Andrew
Wiedner, chief acquisitions officer
of Core Spaces, criticized Ann
Arbor’s decision to dismantle the
agreement.
“We strongly disagree with
the city’s position as stated in
the letter,” Wiedner said. “We
are evaluating our options and
will be responding in more detail
shortly.”
At a City Council meeting
Dec. 17, Core Spaces attorney I.W.
Winston cautioned the city to
take steps to avoid provoking legal
action.
“I do think that there is an
opportunity to have discussions
and I would hope to have those
in a different form in the future
to see whether the issues that
separate us can be resolved
without high stakes and very
expensive litigation,” Winston
said.
Had the Core Spaces deal
gone through, $5 million of
the proceeds would have been
allocated to the city’s affordable
housing trust fund. Monday night
at City Hall, Ann Arbor resident
Robert Gordon pointed out that
the collapse of the sale meant the
city lost money that would have
benefitted people struggling to
afford the city’s high cost of living.
“We
have
a
significant
challenge ahead of us,” Gordon
said. “It’s one thing to have good
faith disagreements about the use
of property in downtown Ann
Arbor. It’s quite another to ignore
the needs of the lower income
people of Ann Arbor. Let’s look
out for them. That’s a big part of
your job.”
Aside from legal costs, the city
is still facing nearly $250,000
in fees for its failed deal with
Core Spaces. Tom Crawford, the
city’s chief financial officer, told
MLive Ann Arbor would have to
pay about $220,000 in fees to a
real estate broker that helped the
city solicit different development
proposals for the site in 2015.
The Library Lot has been
the subject of another legal
challenge prior to the Ann Arbor
Central Park Ballot Committee’s
complaint.
In
June,
former
Councilmember
Sumi
Kailasapathy, D-Ward 1, and
Councilmember Anne Bannister,
D-Ward 1, sued the city, Taylor
and
City
Clerk
Jacqueline
Beaudry for a breach of protocol
in the process of selling the
Library Lot. The lawsuit alleged
that when Taylor and Beaudry
signed the contract with Core
Spaces, the document finalizing
the sale was not presented to City
Council. That was supposedly in
violation of the city charter, which
requires that a minimum of eight
councilmembers approve sales
worth more than $25,000.
During a hearing in early
September, Judge David Swartz
of the Washtenaw County Circuit
Court heard arguments in the
case and said he would issue a
written opinion, but has not done
so yet.
Lumm said she hoped the city
would find a way to settle all the
legal issues pertaining to the
Library Lot quickly, noting that
the Ballot Committee’s lawsuit
was more or less a moot point
after Proposal A’s passage.
“The purpose of the litigation
obviously was to stop that sale,
and that now being done, an
agreement
and
court
order
confirming that the sale to
Core will not take place is the
simple, natural way to close the
book on the issue,” Lumm said.
“Hopefully we will also be able to
close the book on the other related
litigation soon.”
DEER CULL
From Page 1A
LIBRARY LOT
From Page 1A
of victims of sexual assault.”
Rick Fitzgerald, assistant vice
president for Public Affairs said
that the University decided to
implement the interim policy
and will be gathering feedback
on the effectiveness of the pol-
icy.
“We understand that this new
element in our policy can be up-
setting to those involved in the
process,” Fitzgerald said. “We
believe questioning by students
is less traumatic than question-
ing by attorneys and also re-
moves concerns that a student
may not be able to hire an attor-
ney. Also, our process remains
an administrative procedure,
not a court hearing.”
The ruling was made in re-
sponse to a lawsuit filed by a
former University student who
claimed the University does
not provide due process for
male students accused of sexual
misconduct, which the lawsuit
attributed to gender discrimi-
nation. The lawsuit alleges on
March 12, a female student
reported to the Office of Insti-
tutional Equity that she and a
male student had engaged in
non-consensual sex about four
months prior.
As the lawsuit reads, the male
student alleged he and the fe-
male student had continued to
talk with each other after the
incident via Snapchat and occa-
sionally ate together within the
campus’ dining halls. He also
claims the female student had
sent a text message suggesting
the two should have sexual in-
tercourse once more. The stu-
dent said he declined this offer,
telling her the nature of their
relationship was one of a casual
friendship.
The female student filed anoth-
er complaint pertaining to an
infraction regarding a no-con-
tact order established in April.
She claimed she saw him at a
University dining hall where he
remained after the alleged en-
counter. However, the male stu-
dent provided Mcard documen-
tation proving he was not at the
dining hall at the said time.
The lawsuit also cited that
because of these allegations,
the
University
forcibly
re-
voked the student’s access to
his transcripts, impeding his
enrollment in a graduate engi-
neering program. The lawsuit
challenged the University’s in-
vestigative procedure and the
initial withholding of the stu-
dent’s transcripts.
The University released the
male student’s transcripts in
mid-June, about a week after
the lawsuit was filed, yet the
battle regarding due process
remained until about a month
later.
The decision, mirroring a pre-
vious 2017 case at the Univer-
sity of Cincinnati in which the
court ruled an accused student
must receive some type of hear-
ing in cases formed by word
of mouth where credibility is
in question, evoked an appeal
from the University itself citing
similar grievances found in the
Roe petition. However, Sand-
berg claims the University has
taken the ruling a “step further”
even after their appeal.
“The Sixth Circuit ruled that
the University must require
cross-examination by the ac-
cused or his agent,” Sandberg
said. “So, the key is that they
said ‘or his agent’ which would
be a personal adviser or a law-
yer, which is how it is done
within criminal and civil cases.
Currently, at other schools it is
done by a lawyer. To have it be
done by the accused rapist is
unbelievable, I don’t know why
(the University) felt that it was
a better way to go about cross-
examination by the accused
rapist themself.”
As a student going through the
Title IX investigation process,
Sandberg said the act of simply
reporting is exhausting.
“I am currently in a Title IX
case in another school,” Sand-
berg said. “My case currently
doesn’t require cross-exami-
nation. But, it is already very
stressful — it is so much to deal
with. A lot of people don’t real-
ize how difficult these Title IX
cases are, they just think about
the accused. For the person
who is the complainant, it is an
exhausting process.”
LSA sophomore Rebecca Har-
ley, a volunteer at Women at
Risk International, a nonprofit
providing support for women
and children of abuse, believes
this ruling will create further,
unnecessary mental trauma in
already difficult and lengthy
situations as described by Sand-
berg.
“This new ruling could create
further trauma for survivors
of sexual assault,” Harley said.
“Being in the presence of your
attacker could resurface the
trauma of the incident. This is
an unnecessary risk that falls
solely on a person who has al-
ready undergone severe mental
and physical suffering.”
City
Council
moved
to
amend an ordinance limiting
the unauthorized use of Ann
Arbor’s official seal at a meeting
Monday after the American
Civil Liberties Union called
restrictions requiring mayoral
permission unconstitutional.
Mayor Christopher Taylor
said the city attorney’s office
worked to craft an ordinance
to respond adequately to the
ACLU’s concerns.
“This
is
an
ordinance
that
complies
with
those
objections,” Taylor said. “It’s
our goal, of course, to avoid
confusion in the suggestion
of affiliation or sponsorship,
but it is also our goal to make
sure we comply with the First
Amendment in all obligations,
so I’m glad that this is moving
forward and I think this is an
effective change.”
In
July,
City
Council
passed a resolution banning
unauthorized displays of the
seal, with violations incurring
possible fines of up to $10,000.
In November, Dan Korobkin,
deputy legal director for ACLU
of Michigan, and Gayle Rosen,
co-chair of the Washtenaw
County
ACLU
Lawyers
Committee, sent a letter to the
city criticizing the measure,
saying it violated constitutional
protections for freedom of
speech and calling for Ann
Arbor to repeal it immediately.
“The City Seal and Flag
Ordinance is unconstitutional
on
its
face,”
they
wrote.
“Unlike commercial products,
a city seal and flag do not
enjoy trademark protection.
As a content-based restriction
on free speech, the ordinance
is subject to strict scrutiny
and
cannot
survive
that
rigorous test. And requiring
the
mayor’s
permission
to
display the seal or flag is a
classic unconstitutional prior
restraint on speech.”
City Council enforced the
ordinance in the case of Ann
Arbor resident Ed Vielmetti,
who was notified to cease
and desist after using the city
seal on an Ann Arbor page
on
localwiki.org
about
the
seal itself. Vielmetti called
the letters he and the parent
organization
of
LocalWiki
received “threatening.”
Vielmetti
spoke
at
the
meeting Monday, saying he
appreciated
City
Council’s
effort
to
narrow
the
prohibitions on using the seal.
“The letters, although they
were not a ticket, were very
clear threats of a $10,000 fine,”
Vielmetti said. “So I thank
all of you who voted for this
amendment, and I will thank
those of you who will change
your vote next time.”
Councilmembers Jack Eaton,
D-Ward 4, Jeff Hayner, D-Ward
1, and Anne Bannister, D-Ward
1, voted against the amendment
to the ordinance.
The
changes
to
the
ordinance strike the permitting
provisions while specifically
allowing Ann Arbor to obtain
an injunction to stop “unlawful
use of the flag and/or seal.”
While debating the resolution,
Hayner
asked
Matthew
Rechtien, senior assistant city
attorney, about a theoretical
situation in which an elected
official used the city seal on
social media.
“If I was a councilperson,
which I am, and I had some
kind of social media account
and I presented myself in front
of the city seal and I said, ‘Vote
no on this, vote yes on this,
vote for this person, don’t vote
for that person,’ would you
consider that a violation of the
council rules?” Hayner said.
“Would you consider that using
the city property?”
Rechtien refused to answer
Hayner’s hypothetical, saying
he would need all the facts
before offering legal advice.
“I’m just not going to get into
judging a vague hypothetical
here on the record in a council
meeting,” Rechtien said.
Councilmember
Zach
Ackerman,
whose
Twitter
header was the city seal, said
he thought Hayner’s question
was in reference to him.
“I realized now my cover
photo on Twitter is the seal
of the City of Ann Arbor,
and I think Councilmember
Hayner may be alluding to
that and I would just say if you
take objection to that you’re
more than welcome to just
call me and I’ll change it if it
makes
you
uncomfortable,”
Ackerman said. “I haven’t once
thought about it until this very
moment.”
Councilmember
Kathy
Griswold, D-Ward 2, said she
regretted that City Council had
passed the original ordinance
at all.
“The fact that we wasted
staff resources to write this
ordinance in the first place
and
we
are
now
wasting
staff resources to talk about
whatever conversation we’re
having tonight troubles me and
I apologize,” Griswold said.
TITLE IX
From Page 1A
GUN SAFETY
From Page 1A
City Council moves to amend seal
ordinance after criticism from ACLU
LEAH GRAHAM
Daily News Editor
Read more online at
michigandaily.com