...and that makes it the place where WE live. So why is it that WE are unable to work together to find solutions?
I truly don't think that it is a decision that we have made, most of us, that individual action is the only virtuous action. I do not believe that anything but a fractional minority of us have decided that the best course of action would be to abolish government, disband or prohibit all communitarian activities, fend for ourselves and "devil take the hindmost."
Any rational actor with eyes wide open will concede that "the hindmost" are part of the problem and that leaving them to the devil is a recipe for anarchy, depletion, and exponentially greater problems.
In "Our American King," a recent novel, David Lozell Martin posits a near future in which the superrich, anticipating the coming collapse, use the tools of government to secure themselves ALL the benefits, including the benefits of an armed military, to wait out the economic collapse. All the resources for survival as WE know it are at their disposal, but withheld from 99% of the populace, resulting in a breakdown of American civilization.
So very few would willingly sign on to such an outcome that it is difficult to think that any significant number of us would actively believe in a society of nobles and serfs. Because all of us would be the serfs.
So if it isn't a rational ideology, why do so many of us look at elections and government as a needless exercise that will not, indeed can not make any difference? Why do so many abdicate the responsibility of voting for those who espouse support for the policies that would truly make our collective lives richer, more fulfilling, and simply better?
But it is not just the hindmost. It is our families, our neighbors, our friends who suffer from a city that has grown dysfunctional, a leadership that has abandoned any sense of responsibility, and a citizenry that lives in fear and resignation. When a parent fears to let his child outside in the yard because their neighborhood streets have become speedways and pass-throughs for regional traffic, who is to blame?
Don't tell me that the parent should deal with it herself. That's the ultimate expression of the anti-government ideology. Without a regime of law enforcement, any parent who would be so bold as to try to enforce a speeding ordinance is more likely to be beaten or shot than to effectively protect the child.
That anti-government ideology is one expressed just this weekend by a candidate for county council. This candidate said "...Government action is sometimes a hinderance (sic) to change and social improvement..." I would submit that government inaction is both a hindrance and an invitation to destructive exploitation of us all. Without consistent government action, we are all at the mercy of the least responsible among us.
You can point to dozens of similar areas, from badly paved streets that add hundreds of dollars to every household's costs of living in this city to irresponsible slumlords who permit meth labs to operate within their rented premises. In fact, I invite you to list areas where good government hinders social improvement. Then list those where government action enhances our lives.
There is rightful disillusionment at large. When one looks at the choices available in the May primaries, it doesn't give one confidence that things are about to change.
Which brings me to my inspiration for today's somewhat out-of-character posting.
The New York Times Magazine ran with its Green issue today. Food writer Michael Pollan contributed an essay about individual action vis-a-vis global warming and its possible futility in the face of cataclysm. It's called "Why Bother?"
A single paragraph in that outstanding essay gave a reason for us to "bother." Here's the paragraph, and though it pulls politics into its "green" message, the underlying principle is purely political.
Going personally green is a bet, nothing more or less, though it’s one we probably all should make, even if the odds of it paying off aren’t great. Sometimes you have to act as if acting will make a difference, even when you can’t prove that it will. That, after all, was precisely what happened in Communist Czechoslovakia and Poland, when a handful of individuals like Vaclav Havel and Adam Michnik resolved that they would simply conduct their lives “as if” they lived in a free society. That improbable bet created a tiny space of liberty that, in time, expanded to take in, and then help take down, the whole of the Eastern bloc.
The New Albany blogosphere has, from time to time, resounded with similar sentiment.
Involvement and engagement, moreover, expectation is our bet. Sometimes you have to act as if acting will make a difference, even when you can't prove that it will.
Good night, and good luck.
Sunday, April 20, 2008
Thursday, April 17, 2008
When the Mayor's Away...
It didn't compare to the days of yesteryear, but the City Council put on one of its better shows to date on Thursday night.
In one instance, a divided council failed to settle a zoning matter of some importance, with the excuse given that the deadline for action remains more than 30 days off.
In another, the council declined to take up a $5,000 tax abatement for a regional company that is currently paying more than $10,000 in income taxes to Jeffersontown, Ky. and far more than $10,000 to Metro Louisville. This from a company with 100 employees (at least a fifth of whom are Floyd County residents) that promises to increase its payroll by another 20. Good jobs? It's reasonable to assume that these new employees alone would make at least $50,000 a year. Oh, and all they want is a $5,000 first-year abatement of taxes on an industrial park building that has been vacant for at least five years.
The most intriguing legislative action of the evening was the unanimous rubber-stamping of a Floyd County ordinance raising the annual restaurant permit fee. Even the smallest food service establishment (something like the breakfast bar at the Hampton Inn) would now be required to pay $125 each year to remain in business. Inspections that result in violations and that require repeat visits could cause those small establishments to be "fined" half of that again.
Consulting the 2002 economic census data, New Albany has about 140 establishments that you would ordinarily consider to be subject to health department food regulation. Restaurants, bars, convenience stores, groceries, bars, bakeries, confectionaries and ice cream shops that you and I would all want to be inspected. Then, of course, the Health Department has to guard us against food poisoning at fall's Harvest Homecoming! and similar temporary vending opportunities.
Like you, I suspect, I wondered why in the world the city council would even be addressing an ordinance regulating food services when it is a Floyd County Health Department function. A cursory investigation indicates that within the incorporated limits of New Albany, the city has exclusive and dominant jurisdiction unless it explicitly delegates it to the county. I can't verify that, but I have no reason to doubt that.
The city council rapidly ratified the county's new ordinance - unanimously and without debate. The Pride of the 3rd District indicated his wish that restaurant inspection fees be used to fund city mosquito abatement efforts. The health department majordomo replied that he wanted the city to pay for same. D4 added his two cents, making it clear that he wasn't going to be happy if the county health department didn't do something in his home district, and soon.
Shadow5's question is this: What in tarnation do restaurant permit fees have to do with skeeter abatement?
But more seriously, how does the health department justify imposing a minimum $125 annual fee for restaurant inspections. Fees should have a rational basis to the cost of the service rendered, a service rendered primarily to the public, but also to the dining establishments.
What I can't figure out is the rationality of this fee increase. Combined with a recent sales tax increase that is decimating our local economy, not to mention a property tax "relief" program that dumps the cost of government onto businesses at a ratio of three to one, it seems clear that Indiana, Floyd County, and New Albany are bound and determined to drive business away, making New Albany nothing more than a bedroom for a vital and growing Louisville.
If you guys want that, keep supporting current policies. Then see how easy it is to fight crime, pave the streets, and pick up the garbage on residential taxes alone. Spend your consumer taxes across the river, 'cuz the Mitch Daniels program is explicitly one that says to businesses, "Go away!"
Mr. Robert Caesar, tyro council member representing the 2nd District, had his finest moment in espousing his reasons for opposing the wrecking of the existing zoning along the light-industrial zone north of Mt. Tabor Road. His logical stance for maintaining the integrity of that zone, supported by the negative recommendation of the Plan Commission, carried the day, although a third reading on approval/denial of a PUD district remains on the docket.
THIS is what's so great about watching the sausage-making that is city government. Jack Messer (CM At-Large), a man for whom we have the greatest respect, has judged the current zoning to be unreasonable. Mr. Caesar, for whom we have held great hopes, believes otherwise. Dan Coffey, with whom we can reliably be counted on to disagree, actually deferred to the strong recommendation of city staff in voting to deny the rezoning. And D5, Diane McCartin-Benedetti, citing no rationale, said throw the zoning to the wind and let a struggling pawn shop set up on a backwater road a few hundred feet from appropriate commercially zoned land.
Mr. Price, the suspect D3, chairs the council committee on tax abatements (quelle surprise) and is blocking the tax abatement for "vacant" building purchases recently authorized by Indiana statute. Having learned that givebacks were legal, he instructed Deputy Mayor Carl Malysz to develop a full-blown program for "voluntary" contributions in exchange for abatements before the next council meeting (May 8? May 12?).
Mr. Malysz, as diplomatically as he could, said it was his greatest hope that such a feat were possible, and, dejectedly, sat down.
Will greed derail the recruitment of the employer of 100+ tradespeople?
In one instance, a divided council failed to settle a zoning matter of some importance, with the excuse given that the deadline for action remains more than 30 days off.
In another, the council declined to take up a $5,000 tax abatement for a regional company that is currently paying more than $10,000 in income taxes to Jeffersontown, Ky. and far more than $10,000 to Metro Louisville. This from a company with 100 employees (at least a fifth of whom are Floyd County residents) that promises to increase its payroll by another 20. Good jobs? It's reasonable to assume that these new employees alone would make at least $50,000 a year. Oh, and all they want is a $5,000 first-year abatement of taxes on an industrial park building that has been vacant for at least five years.
The most intriguing legislative action of the evening was the unanimous rubber-stamping of a Floyd County ordinance raising the annual restaurant permit fee. Even the smallest food service establishment (something like the breakfast bar at the Hampton Inn) would now be required to pay $125 each year to remain in business. Inspections that result in violations and that require repeat visits could cause those small establishments to be "fined" half of that again.
Consulting the 2002 economic census data, New Albany has about 140 establishments that you would ordinarily consider to be subject to health department food regulation. Restaurants, bars, convenience stores, groceries, bars, bakeries, confectionaries and ice cream shops that you and I would all want to be inspected. Then, of course, the Health Department has to guard us against food poisoning at fall's Harvest Homecoming! and similar temporary vending opportunities.
Like you, I suspect, I wondered why in the world the city council would even be addressing an ordinance regulating food services when it is a Floyd County Health Department function. A cursory investigation indicates that within the incorporated limits of New Albany, the city has exclusive and dominant jurisdiction unless it explicitly delegates it to the county. I can't verify that, but I have no reason to doubt that.
The city council rapidly ratified the county's new ordinance - unanimously and without debate. The Pride of the 3rd District indicated his wish that restaurant inspection fees be used to fund city mosquito abatement efforts. The health department majordomo replied that he wanted the city to pay for same. D4 added his two cents, making it clear that he wasn't going to be happy if the county health department didn't do something in his home district, and soon.
Shadow5's question is this: What in tarnation do restaurant permit fees have to do with skeeter abatement?
But more seriously, how does the health department justify imposing a minimum $125 annual fee for restaurant inspections. Fees should have a rational basis to the cost of the service rendered, a service rendered primarily to the public, but also to the dining establishments.
What I can't figure out is the rationality of this fee increase. Combined with a recent sales tax increase that is decimating our local economy, not to mention a property tax "relief" program that dumps the cost of government onto businesses at a ratio of three to one, it seems clear that Indiana, Floyd County, and New Albany are bound and determined to drive business away, making New Albany nothing more than a bedroom for a vital and growing Louisville.
If you guys want that, keep supporting current policies. Then see how easy it is to fight crime, pave the streets, and pick up the garbage on residential taxes alone. Spend your consumer taxes across the river, 'cuz the Mitch Daniels program is explicitly one that says to businesses, "Go away!"
Mr. Robert Caesar, tyro council member representing the 2nd District, had his finest moment in espousing his reasons for opposing the wrecking of the existing zoning along the light-industrial zone north of Mt. Tabor Road. His logical stance for maintaining the integrity of that zone, supported by the negative recommendation of the Plan Commission, carried the day, although a third reading on approval/denial of a PUD district remains on the docket.
THIS is what's so great about watching the sausage-making that is city government. Jack Messer (CM At-Large), a man for whom we have the greatest respect, has judged the current zoning to be unreasonable. Mr. Caesar, for whom we have held great hopes, believes otherwise. Dan Coffey, with whom we can reliably be counted on to disagree, actually deferred to the strong recommendation of city staff in voting to deny the rezoning. And D5, Diane McCartin-Benedetti, citing no rationale, said throw the zoning to the wind and let a struggling pawn shop set up on a backwater road a few hundred feet from appropriate commercially zoned land.
Mr. Price, the suspect D3, chairs the council committee on tax abatements (quelle surprise) and is blocking the tax abatement for "vacant" building purchases recently authorized by Indiana statute. Having learned that givebacks were legal, he instructed Deputy Mayor Carl Malysz to develop a full-blown program for "voluntary" contributions in exchange for abatements before the next council meeting (May 8? May 12?).
Mr. Malysz, as diplomatically as he could, said it was his greatest hope that such a feat were possible, and, dejectedly, sat down.
Will greed derail the recruitment of the employer of 100+ tradespeople?
Tuesday, April 8, 2008
'Tis Time
Ah, lads and lassies, 'tis been a long time since we've filled these pixels with a report from the City Council chambers.
The far more professional and admittedly better-paid Metro Council that serves our big brother across the waters may weigh in on many more progressive matters, given that their commitment to an ongoing program of street-paving, community cleanup, and economic development dictates a degree of seriousness. But historically, New Albany's council had been far more entertaining.
And as much as we miss the circus, it's kinda sad to think that a city's "leading" lights provide more delight than insight.
After a robotic first three months of marching in lockstep while taking instruction from the minions of the England Restoration, the first cracks began to show.
Personally, I blame the weather. It looked like "Casual Friday" last evening as the council, to most observers, returned to Cloud Cuckoo-Land. I know one in attendance whose day-long depression was lifted by the lamentable entertainment of the Once and Future Kings of Comedy.
Another blogger playfully poked at the "silly" ordinance on tap for the evening's festivities - a ban on "novelty" lighters. These attractive nuisances were recently declared verboten in neighboring Jeffersonville, and it is presumed that the local cops or the fire marshal sought additional enforcement powers against the purveyors of such "candy for arsonists." Alas, council member Benedetti begged off on moving this measure forward, one hopes because she realized that significantly more important issues face this city.
Council member John Gonder, D-At Large, brought forward his visionary enabling legislation to foster permanent and ad hoc citizen councils and commissions to bring committed residents into the game. Hey, such a thing might actually serve as training for future leaders.
So who comes flying in with the body block? Why, it's the tag team of Gahan and Coffey, flexing their rhetorical and parliamentary muscles to quash this progressive, democratic move. Gahan insisted the ordinance be put aside, maintaining that such authority already existed. To his credit, Mr. Gonder demanded that the council's attorney come forward within ten days with the necessary legal citation justifying the ruling of the chair.
Dan Coffey, on the other hand, saw this as an opportunity to warn against the slippery slope of allowing citizens with actual knowledge taking on otherwise neglected tasks. A certainly apocryphal Mrs. was his McGuffin on Monday night. It seems that a "certain" authorized commission of this city (whose members are mostly known to shadow5 and its readers) had caused the woman to expend "$78,000" before ultimately losing her home.
Had I any confidence that the lady's violations had resulted in such draconian repression and retribution from this dangerous body of ordinary citizens (meddlers where they had no business meddling, I'm sure Mr. Coffey would call them), I would have led the charge in seeking justice. But I, like most others in the room, are used to the McCarthyite tactics of the Wizard of Westside, so I, like all others in the room, yawned.
Still, Mr. Coffey's warning should be heeded. What, indeed, would happen if ackshual citizens took part in the decision-making for this city? Or, God forbid, if they offered studied opinions to their elected leaders?
Effectively admonished by the council president and the senior council member, Mr. Gonder instructed Mr. Ulrich to justify his opinion on or before the next meeting of the council. Apparently, demanding a second opinion is going to be this council's mantra. For tonight's most dramatic (but least debated) action was their attempt to piss off Judge Terry Cody.
After being clearly warned to drop their suit against the sewer board, then after being taken to the woodshed by the jurist, this council and its attorney voted to "bate the bear" and tell the judge that his legal ruling was both unacceptable and insufficient.
In my experience, Terry Cody is a most pleasant fellow. Also, in my experience, judges can be quite pleasant to deal with so long as their authority is respected. But when a judge, even one as pleasant as Cody, is told by a litigant that he has "screwed the pooch," as my hero Gus Grissom would put it, the jurist rarely remains pleasant.
Don't worry, says council attorney Ulrich. I'll insult the judge for you. I'm so embarrassed at my miscalculation that I'll tell the judge that his ruling was muddy AND erroneous. And I'll do it for FREE!
Suspicious, that. It makes shadow5 wonder who is actually behind this effort to void a professional services contract granted last summer under judicially (and legislatively)sanctioned authority. Who, in fact, would benefit from having this five-year contract tossed and put out for "competitive" bidding? This time, even the shadow doesn't know, but it does have its conjectures.
Council member Zurschmiede pointed out that the "free" non-appeal/judicial insult would be far from free. City taxpayers and ratepayers will be undoubtedly paying for the sewer and stormwater boards' attorneys fees, not to mention the attorneys' fees for the various individually named defendants.
The stated justification is transparent. It was repeated Monday night that the purpose of the suit was to obtain advisory guidance from the court in order to craft legislation.
It's our view that the purpose is to salve the wounded pride of a couple of pissed-off council members, aided and abetted by malleable newbies and the resident nincompoop. Oh, and that other council member.
Shadow5 hopes the 7 who voted yes can identify themselves.
By all the evidence, this council wouldn't know a court order if it flipped them a bird. Speaking of which, that temptation, too, arose on Monday night.
Who do you have to sue to get through to this council?
The far more professional and admittedly better-paid Metro Council that serves our big brother across the waters may weigh in on many more progressive matters, given that their commitment to an ongoing program of street-paving, community cleanup, and economic development dictates a degree of seriousness. But historically, New Albany's council had been far more entertaining.
And as much as we miss the circus, it's kinda sad to think that a city's "leading" lights provide more delight than insight.
After a robotic first three months of marching in lockstep while taking instruction from the minions of the England Restoration, the first cracks began to show.
Personally, I blame the weather. It looked like "Casual Friday" last evening as the council, to most observers, returned to Cloud Cuckoo-Land. I know one in attendance whose day-long depression was lifted by the lamentable entertainment of the Once and Future Kings of Comedy.
Another blogger playfully poked at the "silly" ordinance on tap for the evening's festivities - a ban on "novelty" lighters. These attractive nuisances were recently declared verboten in neighboring Jeffersonville, and it is presumed that the local cops or the fire marshal sought additional enforcement powers against the purveyors of such "candy for arsonists." Alas, council member Benedetti begged off on moving this measure forward, one hopes because she realized that significantly more important issues face this city.
Council member John Gonder, D-At Large, brought forward his visionary enabling legislation to foster permanent and ad hoc citizen councils and commissions to bring committed residents into the game. Hey, such a thing might actually serve as training for future leaders.
So who comes flying in with the body block? Why, it's the tag team of Gahan and Coffey, flexing their rhetorical and parliamentary muscles to quash this progressive, democratic move. Gahan insisted the ordinance be put aside, maintaining that such authority already existed. To his credit, Mr. Gonder demanded that the council's attorney come forward within ten days with the necessary legal citation justifying the ruling of the chair.
Dan Coffey, on the other hand, saw this as an opportunity to warn against the slippery slope of allowing citizens with actual knowledge taking on otherwise neglected tasks. A certainly apocryphal Mrs. was his McGuffin on Monday night. It seems that a "certain" authorized commission of this city (whose members are mostly known to shadow5 and its readers) had caused the woman to expend "$78,000" before ultimately losing her home.
Had I any confidence that the lady's violations had resulted in such draconian repression and retribution from this dangerous body of ordinary citizens (meddlers where they had no business meddling, I'm sure Mr. Coffey would call them), I would have led the charge in seeking justice. But I, like most others in the room, are used to the McCarthyite tactics of the Wizard of Westside, so I, like all others in the room, yawned.
Still, Mr. Coffey's warning should be heeded. What, indeed, would happen if ackshual citizens took part in the decision-making for this city? Or, God forbid, if they offered studied opinions to their elected leaders?
Effectively admonished by the council president and the senior council member, Mr. Gonder instructed Mr. Ulrich to justify his opinion on or before the next meeting of the council. Apparently, demanding a second opinion is going to be this council's mantra. For tonight's most dramatic (but least debated) action was their attempt to piss off Judge Terry Cody.
After being clearly warned to drop their suit against the sewer board, then after being taken to the woodshed by the jurist, this council and its attorney voted to "bate the bear" and tell the judge that his legal ruling was both unacceptable and insufficient.
In my experience, Terry Cody is a most pleasant fellow. Also, in my experience, judges can be quite pleasant to deal with so long as their authority is respected. But when a judge, even one as pleasant as Cody, is told by a litigant that he has "screwed the pooch," as my hero Gus Grissom would put it, the jurist rarely remains pleasant.
Don't worry, says council attorney Ulrich. I'll insult the judge for you. I'm so embarrassed at my miscalculation that I'll tell the judge that his ruling was muddy AND erroneous. And I'll do it for FREE!
Suspicious, that. It makes shadow5 wonder who is actually behind this effort to void a professional services contract granted last summer under judicially (and legislatively)sanctioned authority. Who, in fact, would benefit from having this five-year contract tossed and put out for "competitive" bidding? This time, even the shadow doesn't know, but it does have its conjectures.
Council member Zurschmiede pointed out that the "free" non-appeal/judicial insult would be far from free. City taxpayers and ratepayers will be undoubtedly paying for the sewer and stormwater boards' attorneys fees, not to mention the attorneys' fees for the various individually named defendants.
The stated justification is transparent. It was repeated Monday night that the purpose of the suit was to obtain advisory guidance from the court in order to craft legislation.
It's our view that the purpose is to salve the wounded pride of a couple of pissed-off council members, aided and abetted by malleable newbies and the resident nincompoop. Oh, and that other council member.
Shadow5 hopes the 7 who voted yes can identify themselves.
By all the evidence, this council wouldn't know a court order if it flipped them a bird. Speaking of which, that temptation, too, arose on Monday night.
Who do you have to sue to get through to this council?
Friday, April 4, 2008
Proud or Not?
Where Indiana Ranks on Various Measures of Child Well-Being
(Click on the Measure to See Where All States Rank)
Rank Measure % Higher v. Best State
Deaths of infants per 1,000 live births #37 8.0 (700 Total) 77.8%
Deaths per 100,000 Children Aged 1-14 #32 24 (293 Total) 118.2%
Deaths per 100,000 Teens Aged 15-19 #28 68 (303 Total) 70.0%
Births to Teen Mothers (15-19) per 1,000 Teen Girls #33 44 (9,478 Total) 144.4%
Births to Women Receiving Late or No Prenatal Care #28 4.00% 166.7%
Children Living in Poverty #30 18% (277,000) 80.0%
Uninsured Children #16 7.8% (123,000) 84.0%
Juvenile Incarceration Rate (per 100,000) #47 415.4 (3,045 Total) 473.7%
Child Abuse Fatalities per 100,000 Children #27 1.81 (29 Total) 402.8%
Per Capita Child Welfare Expenditures #49 $24.82 13.8%*
Child Vulnerability Index #35
* Represents the % of expenditures compared to the best state
(Click on the Measure to See Where All States Rank)
Rank Measure % Higher v. Best State
Deaths of infants per 1,000 live births #37 8.0 (700 Total) 77.8%
Deaths per 100,000 Children Aged 1-14 #32 24 (293 Total) 118.2%
Deaths per 100,000 Teens Aged 15-19 #28 68 (303 Total) 70.0%
Births to Teen Mothers (15-19) per 1,000 Teen Girls #33 44 (9,478 Total) 144.4%
Births to Women Receiving Late or No Prenatal Care #28 4.00% 166.7%
Children Living in Poverty #30 18% (277,000) 80.0%
Uninsured Children #16 7.8% (123,000) 84.0%
Juvenile Incarceration Rate (per 100,000) #47 415.4 (3,045 Total) 473.7%
Child Abuse Fatalities per 100,000 Children #27 1.81 (29 Total) 402.8%
Per Capita Child Welfare Expenditures #49 $24.82 13.8%*
Child Vulnerability Index #35
* Represents the % of expenditures compared to the best state
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)