Not even 72 hours has passed and the Indianapolis Star publishes a "woo-is-me" from the CIB, saying that the ICVA and the Pacers need more money.
The ICVA is the not-for-profit corporation in charge of promoting the convention center. The head, Don Welsh, makes a ridiculous $350,000 a year, and their tax filings reveal they have tons of money in investments. What's more is that they get tons of tax payer money, so it's all going to their ridiculous overhead.
The Pacers just can't afford to stay in Indianapolis unless $15 million or more is picked up. Give me a fucking break. The Simons purchased the Pacers for a complete steal. ESPN.com lists them as very profitable.
The weird part is, Republicans will fight tooth and nail for this, even though the Simons are one of the biggest backers of Democrats.
And in the mean time, Ballard ordered an across the board cut of 5% for all non-police/fire departments in the city. Early in his administrtion, he contemplated selling a number of city parks. Then decided they didn't need to be maintained. And now we're thinking of selling the city-owned golf courses.
But sell off Conseco Fieldhouse, ditch the Pacers, and give Lucas Oil Stadium back to it's rightful owner, the state? Heaven forbid.
Friday, August 14, 2009
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
Quick thoughts on CCC meeting + CIB meeting
The CIB meeting was generally uninteresting and no one without a press badge (or being on the board itself) would have a point in actually going. Unfortunately, my observation of the news media only leeds me to conclude that most are out of touch with what being a journalist is about. One reporter (not a commentator or anything like that, an actual reporter), in a conversation with Abdul Hakim-Shabazz, triviliazed the situation with "What's the big deal?", not getting that the CIB's solution to debt is to borrow more money, and that they'll have even LESS revenue in the future than they do now. As mentioned in the meeting, they sold off the parking lot where Market Square Arena used to sit.
After Don Welsh left the room, one reporter threw him a softball to so he could trott out the talking point of the supposed horros that could befall this city if taxes aren't raised and more money isn't thrown at the proble...err, CIB. The question was "What kind of devastating effects could this have on the city if the council doesn't pass the tax increase?"
Another interesting note was that they had the numbers for the rejected tax increases on hand at the CIB meeting (alcohol tax, car rental tax, etc...). I'd bet a breakfast at The Donut Shop that those same taxes will be proposed again, and soon.
The same tired line of "no formal discussions" concerning the $15 million to the Pacers was again trotted out, despite the IBJ reporting that the $15 million was on the table, the CIB confirming it verbally at the Pike Township townhall meeting. It's not in the annual budget, which is factually true, but there is nothing stopping that proposal from moving forward. As it is now, the $15 million is in the same place it was in January: Talked about, not voted on, and nobody in authority (legislature, CCC) has done anything to ensure it won't be proposed. Of course, I don't see the current makeup of the CCC rejecting a gift to the Simons. I think they could easily get all Democrats plus a few Republicans to give it to them.
Abdul asked where the revolutionaries/activisits/coffeehouse crowd was, in reference to the 2pm CIB meeting. While I know there's no secret club (and I've never even met a number of them), I understand that they all probably have jobs that keep them busy 9-5. I have a job that's flexible enough with hours, and Abdul has a job that actually pays him to go to these things. He responded with "the revolution doesn't sleep" or something like that. Yes, I was the lone "activist" he referred to via Twitter.
One last thing, the CIB really made a case of "poor me". The lights were shut off in most places, and the air conditioning wasn't turned on in many of the rooms, including the last minute switch to the larger room. I overheard one board member before the meeting say "Fire half of those union employees and it'd save us tons of money." We all can go back and forth about the unions and their place in today's business world, but to suggest that those working at the facilities should be pink slipped while every CIB member got a fat raise (except Levengood, who got a 30+% raise last year) this year is ludicrous.
The CCC meeting was surprising on so many levels. The city's attorney, who doesn't look much older than me, clearly had no idea what he was talking about in regards to Constitutional law and First Amendment rights, in relation to the proposed panhandling ordinance.
Councilor Lutz introduced the CIB bailout. During it, he read the summary of the talking points he was presented with during the committee meeting. With snarky comments referring to the committee meeting running four hours long ("what seemed like forever"), it's almost like Lutz forgot that 3.5 of those 4 hours were from suits lobbying for the bailout that HE scheduled himself. He also made sure to list every single supporter of the CIB bail out, but didn't mention a single member of the public who voiced their opposition to the bailout.
Of course,who could blame him? He put the comments from the public dead last on the Rules and Public Policy Committee. I was barely listening, and I was at the microphone stand for 2 minutes. I'm sure Lutz wasn't listening at all.
Both Democrats and Republicans used the panhandling ordinance and the CIB bailout to take cheap political shots. I kind of got the feeling that MAYBE the votes against the panhandling ordinance were made, overall, for the right reason (questionalbe legality, though "is this really necessary?" would've been nice too). But it's clear that the Democrats weren't in opposition to the tax increase on principal, and the Republicans wouldn't have been either if the shoe was on the other foot. Both were doing it for politics and the downtown elite. It's just that those who voted for it, it'll come back to haunt them.
Larry was dressed in black face. And just as I suspected when I first met him July 28, he's an Alex Jones follower. Nevertheless, I understand that he's logged endless hours at council meetings, and for that he should be applauded. If only a fraction of our fellow citizens were as passionate and dedicated as Larry, our city would be better off.
I haven't had the time or the energy to look through Ballard's budget yet, but I question how balanced it really can be. Federal stimulus money ($11 million) is being used to hire new police officers. I don't have the exact # to be hired, but where is this money going to come from after the fiscal year? If my memory is correct, that 50 new officers will be hired, that's $220,000 per officer. The average IMPD salary certainly isn't $220,000, so where is the rest of that money going? Is training really that expensive (Assuming they aren't rookies)?
And just looking at all the media reports shows how confusing the CIB has made it to see how much in debt they are. The Star has $47 million, the same figure quoted during the beginning of the year that includes the $15 million to the Pacers. Last week the Indinapolis Business Journal said they'd be $5 million in debt, and that does not include the Pacers' gift. At no point has it been suggested to find out how we got into this debt in the first place (not counting the $20 million cost for Lucas Oil Stadium and the aforementioned Pacers gift).
After Don Welsh left the room, one reporter threw him a softball to so he could trott out the talking point of the supposed horros that could befall this city if taxes aren't raised and more money isn't thrown at the proble...err, CIB. The question was "What kind of devastating effects could this have on the city if the council doesn't pass the tax increase?"
Another interesting note was that they had the numbers for the rejected tax increases on hand at the CIB meeting (alcohol tax, car rental tax, etc...). I'd bet a breakfast at The Donut Shop that those same taxes will be proposed again, and soon.
The same tired line of "no formal discussions" concerning the $15 million to the Pacers was again trotted out, despite the IBJ reporting that the $15 million was on the table, the CIB confirming it verbally at the Pike Township townhall meeting. It's not in the annual budget, which is factually true, but there is nothing stopping that proposal from moving forward. As it is now, the $15 million is in the same place it was in January: Talked about, not voted on, and nobody in authority (legislature, CCC) has done anything to ensure it won't be proposed. Of course, I don't see the current makeup of the CCC rejecting a gift to the Simons. I think they could easily get all Democrats plus a few Republicans to give it to them.
Abdul asked where the revolutionaries/activisits/coffeehouse crowd was, in reference to the 2pm CIB meeting. While I know there's no secret club (and I've never even met a number of them), I understand that they all probably have jobs that keep them busy 9-5. I have a job that's flexible enough with hours, and Abdul has a job that actually pays him to go to these things. He responded with "the revolution doesn't sleep" or something like that. Yes, I was the lone "activist" he referred to via Twitter.
One last thing, the CIB really made a case of "poor me". The lights were shut off in most places, and the air conditioning wasn't turned on in many of the rooms, including the last minute switch to the larger room. I overheard one board member before the meeting say "Fire half of those union employees and it'd save us tons of money." We all can go back and forth about the unions and their place in today's business world, but to suggest that those working at the facilities should be pink slipped while every CIB member got a fat raise (except Levengood, who got a 30+% raise last year) this year is ludicrous.
The CCC meeting was surprising on so many levels. The city's attorney, who doesn't look much older than me, clearly had no idea what he was talking about in regards to Constitutional law and First Amendment rights, in relation to the proposed panhandling ordinance.
Councilor Lutz introduced the CIB bailout. During it, he read the summary of the talking points he was presented with during the committee meeting. With snarky comments referring to the committee meeting running four hours long ("what seemed like forever"), it's almost like Lutz forgot that 3.5 of those 4 hours were from suits lobbying for the bailout that HE scheduled himself. He also made sure to list every single supporter of the CIB bail out, but didn't mention a single member of the public who voiced their opposition to the bailout.
Of course,who could blame him? He put the comments from the public dead last on the Rules and Public Policy Committee. I was barely listening, and I was at the microphone stand for 2 minutes. I'm sure Lutz wasn't listening at all.
Both Democrats and Republicans used the panhandling ordinance and the CIB bailout to take cheap political shots. I kind of got the feeling that MAYBE the votes against the panhandling ordinance were made, overall, for the right reason (questionalbe legality, though "is this really necessary?" would've been nice too). But it's clear that the Democrats weren't in opposition to the tax increase on principal, and the Republicans wouldn't have been either if the shoe was on the other foot. Both were doing it for politics and the downtown elite. It's just that those who voted for it, it'll come back to haunt them.
Larry was dressed in black face. And just as I suspected when I first met him July 28, he's an Alex Jones follower. Nevertheless, I understand that he's logged endless hours at council meetings, and for that he should be applauded. If only a fraction of our fellow citizens were as passionate and dedicated as Larry, our city would be better off.
I haven't had the time or the energy to look through Ballard's budget yet, but I question how balanced it really can be. Federal stimulus money ($11 million) is being used to hire new police officers. I don't have the exact # to be hired, but where is this money going to come from after the fiscal year? If my memory is correct, that 50 new officers will be hired, that's $220,000 per officer. The average IMPD salary certainly isn't $220,000, so where is the rest of that money going? Is training really that expensive (Assuming they aren't rookies)?
And just looking at all the media reports shows how confusing the CIB has made it to see how much in debt they are. The Star has $47 million, the same figure quoted during the beginning of the year that includes the $15 million to the Pacers. Last week the Indinapolis Business Journal said they'd be $5 million in debt, and that does not include the Pacers' gift. At no point has it been suggested to find out how we got into this debt in the first place (not counting the $20 million cost for Lucas Oil Stadium and the aforementioned Pacers gift).
Monday, August 10, 2009
Disabled in Indiana: Part II
Before I move on to the full re-cap of today's CIB meet and the CCC full council meeting, I have a new entry (unfortunately) for my Disabled in Indiana series.
I've been to the city-county building dozens of times, a handful of which after I had my cardiac pacemaker implanted. As per doctor's orders, I can walk through the metal detectors at what are generally used at retail outlets, but places such as airports or government offices usually use metal detectors that can be harmful to the pacemaker. Every time I've gone to the city-county building, I inform whatever security (Sheriffs?) on staff at the moment, they direct me around the metal detector, I empty my pockets, wave me down. I usually don't even have to show my "I have a cardiac pacemaker" card, though I always offer to.
It's usually a relatively painless process and I've never had a problem at the city county building, and it isn't nearly as humiliating a procedure as the idiots at TAS over in the airport put me through. But today was a different story.
Upon my first entry to the city-county building at 4:50pm, it went as it always does. When I got there again shortly before 7pm, it was a different story.
I went to the side and verbally communicated to the sheriffs that I couldn't go through and would like to be waved down with a wand. Sheriff Harden said I had to go through. I replied I have a cardiac pacemaker. He said I'll be fine. I inform him that I'm not supposed to go through them per doctor's orders and again requested to be waved down with a wand, noting that I had done so before, even as early as a couple hours ago. He told me to come to him and "stop giving him lip." and started searching me with the wand, as if I should be gracious that he's letting me get away with it. He said I should be going through the metal detector no matter what happened before. He then waved his wand repeatedly over my pacemaker and said "Does this hurt you?"
I was absolutely appalled at that action, knowing it was completely unnecessary and did not help him conduct his search and secure the building in any way, shape, or form. I shouldn't be TOO surprised that this comes from the Sheriff's office, but that doesn't justify it.
I'm sure this will get nowhere when I talk to the Sheriff's office tomorrow, but I'll be ready to file this complaint to the Justice Department along with the event at Boogie Burger.
I've been to the city-county building dozens of times, a handful of which after I had my cardiac pacemaker implanted. As per doctor's orders, I can walk through the metal detectors at what are generally used at retail outlets, but places such as airports or government offices usually use metal detectors that can be harmful to the pacemaker. Every time I've gone to the city-county building, I inform whatever security (Sheriffs?) on staff at the moment, they direct me around the metal detector, I empty my pockets, wave me down. I usually don't even have to show my "I have a cardiac pacemaker" card, though I always offer to.
It's usually a relatively painless process and I've never had a problem at the city county building, and it isn't nearly as humiliating a procedure as the idiots at TAS over in the airport put me through. But today was a different story.
Upon my first entry to the city-county building at 4:50pm, it went as it always does. When I got there again shortly before 7pm, it was a different story.
I went to the side and verbally communicated to the sheriffs that I couldn't go through and would like to be waved down with a wand. Sheriff Harden said I had to go through. I replied I have a cardiac pacemaker. He said I'll be fine. I inform him that I'm not supposed to go through them per doctor's orders and again requested to be waved down with a wand, noting that I had done so before, even as early as a couple hours ago. He told me to come to him and "stop giving him lip." and started searching me with the wand, as if I should be gracious that he's letting me get away with it. He said I should be going through the metal detector no matter what happened before. He then waved his wand repeatedly over my pacemaker and said "Does this hurt you?"
I was absolutely appalled at that action, knowing it was completely unnecessary and did not help him conduct his search and secure the building in any way, shape, or form. I shouldn't be TOO surprised that this comes from the Sheriff's office, but that doesn't justify it.
I'm sure this will get nowhere when I talk to the Sheriff's office tomorrow, but I'll be ready to file this complaint to the Justice Department along with the event at Boogie Burger.
CIB Meeting: just a few quick notes
I attended the CIB meeting at the Convention Center and left a bit over an hour after the meeting started.
Let me just say that, when one attends a meeting where not a single person is elected, where little to no oversight is exerted, it's basically all show.
The budget numbers were the same manipulations we've heard at the CCC and the legislature for months. The CIB used the same vague language implying that the Pacers' $15 million gift wasn't on the table. Which directly contradicts what the IBJ reported and what the CIB said during the Pike township townhall.
The only worthwhile part of it was hearing what people say when they don't think others are listening. But that deserves a full non-blackberry entry
Let me just say that, when one attends a meeting where not a single person is elected, where little to no oversight is exerted, it's basically all show.
The budget numbers were the same manipulations we've heard at the CCC and the legislature for months. The CIB used the same vague language implying that the Pacers' $15 million gift wasn't on the table. Which directly contradicts what the IBJ reported and what the CIB said during the Pike township townhall.
The only worthwhile part of it was hearing what people say when they don't think others are listening. But that deserves a full non-blackberry entry
Saturday, August 8, 2009
Disabled in Indiana: Part I
To make this short and for a full understanding of what I'm about to post, I have a handicapped placard for my car due to a cardiac pacemaker I have implanted. I use it mainly on campus or wherever else I have to use a backpack, since I can't carry it around both shoulders. I also have a service dog from a regional agency. He has a vest clearly identifying him as a service animal, and identification (even though, from what I've heard, service animals in Indiana aren't required to wear a vest).
For the most part, I've had relatively good experiences bringing my service dog, Quest, out in public. He has treats in his vest so people can give him one before they pet him, he follows my commands, pays attention, and is fine with waiting while I eat or read. Most of the time, employees of businesses just ask "Is that a service dog?" and leave it at that, just to make sure. Many of the businesses I frequent (usually in Broad Ripple) know Quest by name. And the times I've had confrontations, it's from some idiot manager at a fast food restaurant or a rent-a-cop.
The restaurant I went to on Wednesday night (August 5), Boogie Burger, has by far the best burgers in town for a great price. Friendly staff, locally owned, and Quest and I have been there before. I've dragged friends and family there and they've all loved it.
But on Wednesday, I had a vastly different experience.
I walk in to Boogie Burger to order a milkshake. Immediately, I am told from someone working in the back that dogs aren't allowed in and I have to take him outside. I informed him, very clearly, it was a service dog. An employee up front also mentioned it was a service dog. But the man in the back kept saying I had to take the dog outside because it was a health hazard. I refused to do so, and I asked who he was. He responded that he was the owner, and came out of the kitchen and stood behind the counter while I was on the other side of it.
I kept informing him that I would not leave because, according to the Americans with Disabilities Act, my service dog has every right to be where I can be. After some more back and forth of this, he said "Sir, get the fucking dog out of the restaurant." I refused, again reiterating that it was a service dog. He then asked "What type of service dog is it?". Knowing full well that it is specifically prohibited to inquire what the service dog does or what one's disability is, I said "None of your fucking business."
After being yelled at, scolded, and trying to be outshouted, he said "Sir, I'm going to ask you to leave." He then points to the sign that says that they have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason. I once again refused. He talked about how no one should curse at him in his restaurant and goes on about how out of control I am. I told him that he first cursed at ME, and that I'm doing nothing other than fighting for my right as a consumer. He then said he'd call the cops if I didn't leave this instant. I said "Go ahead." He picked up the phone, dialed 911, then hung up a few seconds later.
At this point, pretty much all business has stopped due to this back and forth between me and the owner. Customers and employees are staring at us. After his almost-cop call, this woman leans him over and whispers into his ear. She says to me "Sir, I apologize for this, what can I do to make it up to you?" I asked who she was, and she said she was also the owner. I said I wanted an apology.
The male owner completely backtracks, lies, and manipulates what had just happened. He says "I'm sorry, but I couldn't see the dog's collar from the kitchen". I said to him that that is an excuse, not an apology. I continued on saying that while what he said might be true, an employee noted it was a service dog, and I continually mentioned it was a service dog, mentioned the ADA, and he himself inquired what type of service dog it is. I mentally noted that he was a fairly tall guy and would have no problem seeing over the counter to where my dog was. I demand an actual apology, but he feeds me the same bullshit line that I quoted. Again, this turns into another back and forth, and he tries to "call it even", saying that we both got out of control. I refused this, saying that his faults should not be shifted to me. Eventually, he goes to the back and he disappears for a while.
Somewhere in this whole mess, I decide to enjoy my milkshake in the store and unravel a bit. I'm not what I would call a very aggressive person, and after all this huffing and puffing, my voice was shaky, my legs were tired, and my throat was dry. I sat in the restaurant for about 20 minutes hardly touching my drink and wondering what my next course of action would be.
The male owner once again came out and was talking to the female clerk, apparently not realizing I was still there. He apologized to her, and was about to say something else (probably an explanation shifting the blame onto me rather than him) but then noticed I was still there. He repeated the line he had been giving me to a while now, and said "What do you want me to do?". I said "I want you to go to the back and leave me alone." He said "I can do that." and did so.
Since then, my mind was been dissecting this event. Why did the other employees stay silent, even though one of them clearly noted it was a service dog. Why did the female owner stand in silence during the entire back and forth? Did those regular employees think I was some asshole for putting up such a scene? What about the customers that were waiting behind me? Would the male owner, who happened to be black, do what I did if someone tried to kick him out due to his race even if it was thinly covered up by a "you're being unruly, get out" excuse?
Maybe the male owner is afraid of dogs, or has a personal backstory. But as someone who has been on the "other side" of the cash register, I know that when you go to work, you put your personal biases and phobias and whatever else away. You treat your customers, your clients, with the utmost respect. And when you realize you've crossed the line, you stop, you apologize (no excuses) and you do whatever you can to make up for it. And when you can't handle a situation in a calm manner, you let someone else take over. That didn't happen here.
And while I'm still personally struggling with the full impact of this situation, and am doubting that I'll ever go to one of my favorite restaurants ever again, I've been assured by multiple people that what I did was right. And I hope that when someone tries to violate your rights as a human being, that you fight like hell for them too. Remember, laws do not give you rights. State and national constitutions don't either. They are INHERENT rights that all humans are born with. They just so happened to be spelled out in respective constitutions.
I titled this Part I, because I might post about my past experiences, or there may be follow up. And I'm sure there will be more incidents in the future, either about me or others.
For the most part, I've had relatively good experiences bringing my service dog, Quest, out in public. He has treats in his vest so people can give him one before they pet him, he follows my commands, pays attention, and is fine with waiting while I eat or read. Most of the time, employees of businesses just ask "Is that a service dog?" and leave it at that, just to make sure. Many of the businesses I frequent (usually in Broad Ripple) know Quest by name. And the times I've had confrontations, it's from some idiot manager at a fast food restaurant or a rent-a-cop.
The restaurant I went to on Wednesday night (August 5), Boogie Burger, has by far the best burgers in town for a great price. Friendly staff, locally owned, and Quest and I have been there before. I've dragged friends and family there and they've all loved it.
But on Wednesday, I had a vastly different experience.
I walk in to Boogie Burger to order a milkshake. Immediately, I am told from someone working in the back that dogs aren't allowed in and I have to take him outside. I informed him, very clearly, it was a service dog. An employee up front also mentioned it was a service dog. But the man in the back kept saying I had to take the dog outside because it was a health hazard. I refused to do so, and I asked who he was. He responded that he was the owner, and came out of the kitchen and stood behind the counter while I was on the other side of it.
I kept informing him that I would not leave because, according to the Americans with Disabilities Act, my service dog has every right to be where I can be. After some more back and forth of this, he said "Sir, get the fucking dog out of the restaurant." I refused, again reiterating that it was a service dog. He then asked "What type of service dog is it?". Knowing full well that it is specifically prohibited to inquire what the service dog does or what one's disability is, I said "None of your fucking business."
After being yelled at, scolded, and trying to be outshouted, he said "Sir, I'm going to ask you to leave." He then points to the sign that says that they have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason. I once again refused. He talked about how no one should curse at him in his restaurant and goes on about how out of control I am. I told him that he first cursed at ME, and that I'm doing nothing other than fighting for my right as a consumer. He then said he'd call the cops if I didn't leave this instant. I said "Go ahead." He picked up the phone, dialed 911, then hung up a few seconds later.
At this point, pretty much all business has stopped due to this back and forth between me and the owner. Customers and employees are staring at us. After his almost-cop call, this woman leans him over and whispers into his ear. She says to me "Sir, I apologize for this, what can I do to make it up to you?" I asked who she was, and she said she was also the owner. I said I wanted an apology.
The male owner completely backtracks, lies, and manipulates what had just happened. He says "I'm sorry, but I couldn't see the dog's collar from the kitchen". I said to him that that is an excuse, not an apology. I continued on saying that while what he said might be true, an employee noted it was a service dog, and I continually mentioned it was a service dog, mentioned the ADA, and he himself inquired what type of service dog it is. I mentally noted that he was a fairly tall guy and would have no problem seeing over the counter to where my dog was. I demand an actual apology, but he feeds me the same bullshit line that I quoted. Again, this turns into another back and forth, and he tries to "call it even", saying that we both got out of control. I refused this, saying that his faults should not be shifted to me. Eventually, he goes to the back and he disappears for a while.
Somewhere in this whole mess, I decide to enjoy my milkshake in the store and unravel a bit. I'm not what I would call a very aggressive person, and after all this huffing and puffing, my voice was shaky, my legs were tired, and my throat was dry. I sat in the restaurant for about 20 minutes hardly touching my drink and wondering what my next course of action would be.
The male owner once again came out and was talking to the female clerk, apparently not realizing I was still there. He apologized to her, and was about to say something else (probably an explanation shifting the blame onto me rather than him) but then noticed I was still there. He repeated the line he had been giving me to a while now, and said "What do you want me to do?". I said "I want you to go to the back and leave me alone." He said "I can do that." and did so.
Since then, my mind was been dissecting this event. Why did the other employees stay silent, even though one of them clearly noted it was a service dog. Why did the female owner stand in silence during the entire back and forth? Did those regular employees think I was some asshole for putting up such a scene? What about the customers that were waiting behind me? Would the male owner, who happened to be black, do what I did if someone tried to kick him out due to his race even if it was thinly covered up by a "you're being unruly, get out" excuse?
Maybe the male owner is afraid of dogs, or has a personal backstory. But as someone who has been on the "other side" of the cash register, I know that when you go to work, you put your personal biases and phobias and whatever else away. You treat your customers, your clients, with the utmost respect. And when you realize you've crossed the line, you stop, you apologize (no excuses) and you do whatever you can to make up for it. And when you can't handle a situation in a calm manner, you let someone else take over. That didn't happen here.
And while I'm still personally struggling with the full impact of this situation, and am doubting that I'll ever go to one of my favorite restaurants ever again, I've been assured by multiple people that what I did was right. And I hope that when someone tries to violate your rights as a human being, that you fight like hell for them too. Remember, laws do not give you rights. State and national constitutions don't either. They are INHERENT rights that all humans are born with. They just so happened to be spelled out in respective constitutions.
I titled this Part I, because I might post about my past experiences, or there may be follow up. And I'm sure there will be more incidents in the future, either about me or others.
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
City County votes against citizens, Constitution; for millionaires and taxes
My grandfather, Gordon Gilmer, used to represent most of Pike Township on the Indianapolis City-County Council years ago. This was the first time in a long time I’ve been inside that room for a council meeting, and arguably the first one I attended where I had enough knowledge to recognize what was going on.
During this meeting, the city-county members and the selfish supporters of the resolution took up the vast majority of a four hour meeting. They presented their figures about how much the CIB, and moreso, the convention industry, does for the city. The hotel management even dragged their workers to this meeting, which took up the back half of the public meeting space. In uniform. Just as Mr. Ogden predicted on his blog.
Only two were not blatantly biased in favor of the bill. A professor put together a quickly done study, ordered by Robert Lutz, that showed only 7,300 jobs are produced as a result of the convention business and the money visitors spend during those conventions. This figure is drastically different than the 66,000 jobs that the proponents cited, but Don Welsh managed to spin the professor’s independent study so it’d go along with his presentation. As for the second, a representative of the Libertarian Party was called forward to give some testimony. But he got off topic during his time, and it’s clear none of the representatives bothered to listen.
After all of that, Lutz strictly limited public input to two minutes per person. Apparently, 3 and a half hours into it and having only heard one side, he had all he needed, and didn’t need to hear about stuff like what the public thinks, or what the Indiana Constitution says, or any of that pesky non-sense.
Over at Hoosiers for Fair Tax, they mention the part of the Consitution I read during the public's two minutes per person. Article 10, Section 6, which clearly prohibits the county from using tax payer money to support what the CIB does, which is prop up the Colts and Pacers. And don't be fooled, just because the $15 million wasn't in the specific budget NOW, doesn't mean that the money won't be used for it.
But that isn't the only part of the Constitution that this violtes. Article 10, Section 12 says "nor shall the credit of the State ever be given, or loaned, in aid of any person, association or corporation; nor shall the State become a stockholder in any corporation or association."
Clear as day.
But the committee voted 5-1 against the Constitution. Against the will of the peope. And probably against a good number of no new tax pledges too.
A new entry will link to all the blogs covering this event, as they'll surely be updated soon.
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
Traffic Court, my experience
About three weeks ago, I was driving home from IUPUI's campus, avoiding the highway and just going via Lafayette Road. To get there, you have to go across a bridge on Michigan and turn past some railroad tracks, a hotel, and a school. As I was between the hotel and school, two state troopers pulled me over on their motorcycles.
I had noticed them already and knew I wasn't speeding.
But after "license and registration" (at the time, I couldn't produce my registration), I ended up with a ticket for "Improper wearing of safety belt". They could see how I was wearing it through my car because, well, they were really close.
Only after some looking at the law did I learn that "Click It Or Tick It" is very misleading, because it doesn't inform you on how to wear a seat belt (it's according to some federal manual) or about one of the 13 exemptions to the law, which I was under.
I have a cardiac pacemaker and the regular use of a seatbelt could be harmful to it. I've been wearing it under my arm while still strapped around my waist. Sometimes it's re-done by a plastic sealt belt adjuster.
Either way is illegal without a written doctor's note confirming it.
After remembering Paul Ogden's various entries on the traffic court, I decided to just pay the $25.
As Ogden has reported the traffic court blatantly violates the US Constitution and Indiana Constitution. Open courts and, under Indiana's, the right to not have unreasonable fines associated with a court case, are broken regularly. Multiple signs posted say that nobody besides the defendent is allowed in the court room. Other signs say that, if you lose the court case, in addition to the ticket and court fees, up to $500 can be added.
The Traffic Court's website says $1,000.
Neither are constitutional, and probably violate other laws and regulations too. Not to mention just plain common sense. In a regular day's activity, it isn't uncommon for someone to accompany you. Might be for business, for social activity, or something completely beyond your control. There's no reason to exclude them from what should be a public courtroom.
But that's not what I wanted to concentrate on, but rather, the building itself.
Nevermind that it's in an area not easily accessible by highway.
The parking situation is horrible. In the main entrance, two handicapped spaces are available. A third appears to have originally been placed in the lot too, but has almost completely faded and is now reserved for police.
As you enter, it's not clear which of three lines you should actually get into. Unless you ask, the only signs posted to explain the process are, coincidentally, by the cashier window, which would be the last stop.
The hallway is fairly small and I'd hate to see it if someone with a service dog or a wheel chair had to get through there.
And to top it all off, the first line I had to stand in ended right by a metal detector. Fortunately, it didn't appear to be on, but that's a clear violation of ADA. A building must be readily accessible to patrons, regardless of disability. It was only by luck that I was able to walk by it without my pacemaker malfunctioning.
I had noticed them already and knew I wasn't speeding.
But after "license and registration" (at the time, I couldn't produce my registration), I ended up with a ticket for "Improper wearing of safety belt". They could see how I was wearing it through my car because, well, they were really close.
Only after some looking at the law did I learn that "Click It Or Tick It" is very misleading, because it doesn't inform you on how to wear a seat belt (it's according to some federal manual) or about one of the 13 exemptions to the law, which I was under.
I have a cardiac pacemaker and the regular use of a seatbelt could be harmful to it. I've been wearing it under my arm while still strapped around my waist. Sometimes it's re-done by a plastic sealt belt adjuster.
Either way is illegal without a written doctor's note confirming it.
After remembering Paul Ogden's various entries on the traffic court, I decided to just pay the $25.
As Ogden has reported the traffic court blatantly violates the US Constitution and Indiana Constitution. Open courts and, under Indiana's, the right to not have unreasonable fines associated with a court case, are broken regularly. Multiple signs posted say that nobody besides the defendent is allowed in the court room. Other signs say that, if you lose the court case, in addition to the ticket and court fees, up to $500 can be added.
The Traffic Court's website says $1,000.
Neither are constitutional, and probably violate other laws and regulations too. Not to mention just plain common sense. In a regular day's activity, it isn't uncommon for someone to accompany you. Might be for business, for social activity, or something completely beyond your control. There's no reason to exclude them from what should be a public courtroom.
But that's not what I wanted to concentrate on, but rather, the building itself.
Nevermind that it's in an area not easily accessible by highway.
The parking situation is horrible. In the main entrance, two handicapped spaces are available. A third appears to have originally been placed in the lot too, but has almost completely faded and is now reserved for police.
As you enter, it's not clear which of three lines you should actually get into. Unless you ask, the only signs posted to explain the process are, coincidentally, by the cashier window, which would be the last stop.
The hallway is fairly small and I'd hate to see it if someone with a service dog or a wheel chair had to get through there.
And to top it all off, the first line I had to stand in ended right by a metal detector. Fortunately, it didn't appear to be on, but that's a clear violation of ADA. A building must be readily accessible to patrons, regardless of disability. It was only by luck that I was able to walk by it without my pacemaker malfunctioning.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)