Accentuate the Positive by the Most Sensitive Man in Bexley, Simon Doer
The 1944 election year pitted Democrat Franklin D. Roosevelt against Republican Thomas Dewey in the campaign for President. While accusing Republicans of fraud in their attempts to claim credit for social gains of the New Deal, he also ridiculed Republican claims that his administration was corrupt and wasteful with tax money. He pointedly challenged a claim that he sent a US Navy ship to pick up his dog Fala, a terrier, in Alaska, noting that "Fala was furious" at the rumor. Meanwhile Dewey accused Roosevelt of being "indispensable" to corrupt big city Democratic organizations and American Communists. During that same year Johnny Mercer wrote the lyrics to Accentuate the Positive, a song with the refrain:
“You've got to accentuate the positive
Eliminate the negative
And latch on to the affirmative
Don't mess with Mister In-Between”
Those earlier lyrics may still hold guidance for election campaigns during 2010.
As you consider those lyrics from an earlier time, are you frustrated by what appears to be a current election campaign dominated by negative information about opponents rather than positive information promoting what each candidate would bring to the office they seek?
When I look for campaign literature or information accentuating candidates’ positive qualities, experience and strategies candidates propose to bring to the issues impacting the offices to which they seek to be elected this year, I find the mail, television, radio and internet bring a proliferation of negative information on the opposing candidates. Bad hair day or expression photos of the opposing candidates that even driver license or school photo providers would discard are usually the norm on these flyers and advertisements.
Many of the pieces opposing particular candidates hide behind broadly labeled groups or parties with no attribution to the candidates contesting the election.
Does what appears to be a trend to negatively focus on the opposing candidate run afoul of common sense and long standing marketing and public relations tactics? The show business cliché is that “It doesn't matter what they say as long as they spell your name right." Plus what happened to the political maxim “never give a political opponent free publicity?” That maxim has been used effectively by political frontrunners to ignore their opponents, never referring to them by name, but perhaps by political party alone, to avoid giving the opponent free exposure.
When so much negativism is awash in the political media do voters connect it to particular candidates? Ohio voters have a history of electing certain surnames, sometimes regardless of political party or political stances, based on the political familiarity of names (Brown, for example). Perhaps this is a jaundiced view, however, particularly when it comes to lesser known political races voters may make their entries on the ballot based on “I’ve heard that name,” likely not connecting a positive or negative association (and conversely “I haven’t heard anything about the other candidate or candidates.”)
There are many scholarly research articles on the effectiveness of negative political attacks on opposing candidates. Some of these studies, available through an internet search, make fascinating reading addressing the impact analysis of negative political advertisements. Sadly the results suggest that negative campaign approaches can be effective with certain targeted groups of voters.
Perhaps the question we should ask the issuers of negative campaign materials and the candidates that stand behind them who state, “I have approved this message,” is despite whether or not the materials are effective, are they ethical? Do they reflect an effort to bring to light a very real concern or are they simply presenting a litany of opponent’s quotes through cleverly crafted catchphrases to place their opponent in a bad light?
So, tell us as voters what you bring to the office, not what your opponent fails to offer.
That is one sensitive man’s opinion. What is yours?
HELP BEXLEY PUBLIC RADIO UPGRADE ITS ANTENNA AND PURCHASE NEW EAS EQUIPMENT SEND YOUR MONEY PROMPTLY. BE GENEROUS.
Bexley Public Radio Foundation broadcasting as
WCRX-LP, 102.1 FM, Local Power Radio
2700 E. Main St., Suite 208
Columbus, OH 43209
Voice (614) 235 2929
Fax (614) 235 3008
Email wcrxlp@yahoo.com
Blog http://agentofcurrency.blogspot.com
Bexley Public Radio Foundation is exempt from federal taxes under IRC Section 501(c)(3). Donations are deductible from federal income taxes for individuals who itemize. Checks may identify the payee as Bexley Public Radio Foundation or WCRX-LP, 102.1 FM.
Design is copyright 2010. All rights reserved. Bexley Public Radio Foundation. Text is copyright 2010. All rights reserved. MSMIB Most Sensitive Man in Bexley.
Showing posts with label MSMIB. Show all posts
Showing posts with label MSMIB. Show all posts
Friday, October 22, 2010
Thursday, October 8, 2009
MSMIB: Smoke Gets in Your Eyes…. And Your Nose and Mouth, Clothes and House
"Smoke gets in your eyes and your nose and mouth, clothes and house."
Commentary by the Most Sensitive Man in Bexley, Simon Doer
No, this is not a tobacco smoking commentary. It is also unlikely to add to my popularity, however, it must be written as a matter of sensitivity to the rights of the few.
Fire pits and wood burning fireplaces have increased in popularity. Relatives and friends have them. Fire pits are gathering places. Marsh-mellow smore-making opportunities. Enablers for spending cool evenings outdoors.
Yet there is only limited commentary on their use in communities in the United States.
As the South Park song opines “Blame Canada.” Canadians appear to be on the cutting edge of some issues, including fire pits.
There are several web-based articles on complaints and proposed regulations of fire pits relating to the reactions of Canadian residents, where supposedly the northern air is vibrant and clear. See for example:
http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Fire+complaints+cent/2010431/story.html
Apparently many of the complaints as well as proposals for regulation, fines and permits relate to the combustion of other than wood or materials such as painted wood. The Calgary Herald reported that complaints regarding fire pits increased from 217 in 2007 to 494 at August 2009 month-end.
The Calgary Director of bylaw services is quoted:
"It also might capture a growing impatience from some people about their health and the enjoyment of their home free from smoke intruding from the neighbours."
So, are fire pits and wood burning fireplaces an intrusion of the rights of your neighbors? Are they filling the air with smoke and impurities that may adversely affect your health as well as your neighbors?
Fire pits pose an interesting paradox as open burning of wood is typically not permitted within city limits, yet some of those same materials can be burned in an open fire pit.
While wood-burning fireplaces will continue to retain their allure as they have for generations, fire pits may or may not remain. Are they a fad similar to deep frying turkey in an oil filled cooker?
That is one sensitive man’s opinion. What is yours?
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
Simon Doer: The Most Sensitive Man in Bexley asks"Does the City Need an Audit Committee?"
Audit Function in Bexley City Government – Best Practices?
By the Most Sensitive Man in Bexley, Simon Doer
RECENT AUDIT LORE IN BEXLEY.
An August 28, 2009 news article by Dean Narciso for The Columbus Dispatch reported that “among the notable candidates to be bumped” in the removal by the Franklin County Board of Elections of “26 candidates from the Nov. 3 general election for failing to properly fill out paperwork or gather enough signatures” was “Bexley Auditor Larry A. Heiser, who didn't complete circulator statements as required by law. Heiser was running unopposed for his second term.”
While simply an introduction to the fact that Bexley has an auditor, that event (without in any way reflecting on the audit services provided by Mr. Heiser or his most recent predecessors, Gary Qualmann and Richard Al Levin) may also suggest an opportunity to examine best practices in city government related to proper auditing oversight.
THE RISE OF THE AUDIT COMMITTEE IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR.
In the private sector a crisis in corporate governance led to Sarbanes Oxley legislation and requirements that public companies focus on establishing Audit Committees on corporate boards of directors to ensure proper oversight.
In 2002 Congress enacted the Sarbanes-Oxley Act in response to allegations of corporate ethics issues, problems with financial statements and business failures. A focus of the Act known as Section 404 requires management to acknowledge, establish and maintain adequate internal controls. The auditor and senior management must separately and respectively attest or assert in writing that the controls are effective.
MUNICIPALITIES MIMIC BUSINESS AND ESTABLISH AUDIT COMMITTEES.
Similarly the governance of many cities has required Audit Committees for proper oversight. For example, the City of Cleveland in 2000 established an Audit Committee composed of seven (7) members as a requirement of Chapter 154 of its Administrative Code:
The City Audit Committee members consist of the following:
“the Mayor, or his designee; the President of Council, or the Chairman of the Finance Committee as his designee; the Director of Law; one member appointed by the Mayor; and two members appointed by the President of Council. The final member, who shall serve as Chair of the City Audit Committee, shall be chosen jointly by the Mayor and Council President, shall have at least ten years experience in auditing or financial accounting, including some experience in governmental finance or auditing, and shall have no financial or contractual interest with the City of Cleveland in accordance with the ethics provisions of the Ohio Revised Code. In addition, the Chair shall not have had any duties pertaining to the audit of the City of Cleveland for at least five years prior to his appointment.”
The stated purpose of the Audit Committee in Cleveland “is to serve as the focal point for communication between the legislative and executive branches of the City of Cleveland, the independent auditor retained by the City, the Department of Finance, and the Division of Internal Auditing as their duties relate to financial accounting, reporting, internal controls, and compliance with applicable laws and regulations. The City Audit Committee is to assist the staff and employees of the City in fulfilling its responsibilities as to accounting policies and reporting practices of the City of Cleveland and sufficiency of auditing relative thereto. The City Audit Committee shall be the principal agent in ensuring the independence of independent auditors, the integrity of management and the adequacy of disclosures to the public.”
STATE AUDITOR ENDORSES AUDIT COMMITTEE.
In the Winter of 2006 then Auditor of State, Betty Montgomery, in the Ohio State Auditor’s Best Practices publication endorsed audit committees by city councils:
“Audit Committees – Governments should establish audit committees to oversee internal and external audit functions.”
The article continued:
“The National Committee on Fraudulent Financial Reporting (i.e., The Treadway Commission) has stated that audit committees can serve as “informed, vigilant and effective overseers of the…reporting and internal controls process.” To be an effective independent overseer, the audit committee must be positioned between senior management and the external auditors. The audit committee should serve as a liaison between management and independent auditors. Although the committee could include officials from the entity, it is preferable that the committee include representation that is independent from elected officials and management. Thus, such committees provide an independent perspective on an organization’s control environment, which greatly bolsters an organization’s ability to mitigate fraud even at the highest organizational levels.”
(As further stated in the Ohio State Auditor’s Best Practices publication: “For an extensive discussion on audit committees, please see the Spring 2005 issue of Best Practices at www.auditor.state.oh.us/Publications/. Additionally, by visiting the AOS website, governments can access a toolkit developed by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AIC-PA) that is designed to help government audit committees operate as efficiently and effectively
as possible.”)
PRECEDENT BY BEXLEY’S SISTER CITY.
Even Bexley’s sister city, Bexley in England has an Internal Audit Committee. It has been active. A September 11, 2009 Bexley Times article reported that Audit Committee exonerated former Bexley Council leader, Ian Clement, on August 10 in connection with his use of a council credit card when he agreed to pay back charges he claimed on that card (however, continues to face other charges under the British Fraud Act related to credit card use).
SHOULD BEXLEY ESTABLISH AN AUDIT COMMITTEE?
Just as Sarbanes-Oxley was intended to increase investor confidence, hold corporate leaders accountable and focus on effective financial controls, it may suggest that public confidence in city government can be similarly addressed by the Bexley City Council seriously considering and establishing an Audit Committee to oversee internal and external audit functions. An advantage may also be the engagement of properly qualified residents to serve on the audit committee as active citizen participation in that aspect of oversight of city governance.
That is one sensitive man’s opinion. What is yours?
Bexley Public Radio Foundation broadcasting as
WCRX-LP, 102.1 FM, Local Power Radio
2700 E. Main St., Suite 208
Columbus, OH 43209
Voice (614) 235 2929
Fax (614) 235 3008
Email wcrxlp@yahoo.com
Blog http://agentofcurrency.blogspot.com
Bexley Public Radio Foundation is exempt from federal taxes under IRC Section 501(c)(3). Donations are deductible from federal income taxes for individuals who itemize. Checks may identify the payee as Bexley Public Radio Foundation or WCRX-LP, 102.1 FM.
Design is copyright 2009. All rights reserved. Bexley Public Radio Foundation. Text is copyright 2009. All rights reserved. The Most Sensitive Man in Bexley.
By the Most Sensitive Man in Bexley, Simon Doer
RECENT AUDIT LORE IN BEXLEY.
An August 28, 2009 news article by Dean Narciso for The Columbus Dispatch reported that “among the notable candidates to be bumped” in the removal by the Franklin County Board of Elections of “26 candidates from the Nov. 3 general election for failing to properly fill out paperwork or gather enough signatures” was “Bexley Auditor Larry A. Heiser, who didn't complete circulator statements as required by law. Heiser was running unopposed for his second term.”
While simply an introduction to the fact that Bexley has an auditor, that event (without in any way reflecting on the audit services provided by Mr. Heiser or his most recent predecessors, Gary Qualmann and Richard Al Levin) may also suggest an opportunity to examine best practices in city government related to proper auditing oversight.
THE RISE OF THE AUDIT COMMITTEE IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR.
In the private sector a crisis in corporate governance led to Sarbanes Oxley legislation and requirements that public companies focus on establishing Audit Committees on corporate boards of directors to ensure proper oversight.
In 2002 Congress enacted the Sarbanes-Oxley Act in response to allegations of corporate ethics issues, problems with financial statements and business failures. A focus of the Act known as Section 404 requires management to acknowledge, establish and maintain adequate internal controls. The auditor and senior management must separately and respectively attest or assert in writing that the controls are effective.
MUNICIPALITIES MIMIC BUSINESS AND ESTABLISH AUDIT COMMITTEES.
Similarly the governance of many cities has required Audit Committees for proper oversight. For example, the City of Cleveland in 2000 established an Audit Committee composed of seven (7) members as a requirement of Chapter 154 of its Administrative Code:
The City Audit Committee members consist of the following:
“the Mayor, or his designee; the President of Council, or the Chairman of the Finance Committee as his designee; the Director of Law; one member appointed by the Mayor; and two members appointed by the President of Council. The final member, who shall serve as Chair of the City Audit Committee, shall be chosen jointly by the Mayor and Council President, shall have at least ten years experience in auditing or financial accounting, including some experience in governmental finance or auditing, and shall have no financial or contractual interest with the City of Cleveland in accordance with the ethics provisions of the Ohio Revised Code. In addition, the Chair shall not have had any duties pertaining to the audit of the City of Cleveland for at least five years prior to his appointment.”
The stated purpose of the Audit Committee in Cleveland “is to serve as the focal point for communication between the legislative and executive branches of the City of Cleveland, the independent auditor retained by the City, the Department of Finance, and the Division of Internal Auditing as their duties relate to financial accounting, reporting, internal controls, and compliance with applicable laws and regulations. The City Audit Committee is to assist the staff and employees of the City in fulfilling its responsibilities as to accounting policies and reporting practices of the City of Cleveland and sufficiency of auditing relative thereto. The City Audit Committee shall be the principal agent in ensuring the independence of independent auditors, the integrity of management and the adequacy of disclosures to the public.”
STATE AUDITOR ENDORSES AUDIT COMMITTEE.
In the Winter of 2006 then Auditor of State, Betty Montgomery, in the Ohio State Auditor’s Best Practices publication endorsed audit committees by city councils:
“Audit Committees – Governments should establish audit committees to oversee internal and external audit functions.”
The article continued:
“The National Committee on Fraudulent Financial Reporting (i.e., The Treadway Commission) has stated that audit committees can serve as “informed, vigilant and effective overseers of the…reporting and internal controls process.” To be an effective independent overseer, the audit committee must be positioned between senior management and the external auditors. The audit committee should serve as a liaison between management and independent auditors. Although the committee could include officials from the entity, it is preferable that the committee include representation that is independent from elected officials and management. Thus, such committees provide an independent perspective on an organization’s control environment, which greatly bolsters an organization’s ability to mitigate fraud even at the highest organizational levels.”
(As further stated in the Ohio State Auditor’s Best Practices publication: “For an extensive discussion on audit committees, please see the Spring 2005 issue of Best Practices at www.auditor.state.oh.us/Publications/. Additionally, by visiting the AOS website, governments can access a toolkit developed by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AIC-PA) that is designed to help government audit committees operate as efficiently and effectively
as possible.”)
PRECEDENT BY BEXLEY’S SISTER CITY.
Even Bexley’s sister city, Bexley in England has an Internal Audit Committee. It has been active. A September 11, 2009 Bexley Times article reported that Audit Committee exonerated former Bexley Council leader, Ian Clement, on August 10 in connection with his use of a council credit card when he agreed to pay back charges he claimed on that card (however, continues to face other charges under the British Fraud Act related to credit card use).
SHOULD BEXLEY ESTABLISH AN AUDIT COMMITTEE?
Just as Sarbanes-Oxley was intended to increase investor confidence, hold corporate leaders accountable and focus on effective financial controls, it may suggest that public confidence in city government can be similarly addressed by the Bexley City Council seriously considering and establishing an Audit Committee to oversee internal and external audit functions. An advantage may also be the engagement of properly qualified residents to serve on the audit committee as active citizen participation in that aspect of oversight of city governance.
That is one sensitive man’s opinion. What is yours?
Bexley Public Radio Foundation broadcasting as
WCRX-LP, 102.1 FM, Local Power Radio
2700 E. Main St., Suite 208
Columbus, OH 43209
Voice (614) 235 2929
Fax (614) 235 3008
Email wcrxlp@yahoo.com
Blog http://agentofcurrency.blogspot.com
Bexley Public Radio Foundation is exempt from federal taxes under IRC Section 501(c)(3). Donations are deductible from federal income taxes for individuals who itemize. Checks may identify the payee as Bexley Public Radio Foundation or WCRX-LP, 102.1 FM.
Design is copyright 2009. All rights reserved. Bexley Public Radio Foundation. Text is copyright 2009. All rights reserved. The Most Sensitive Man in Bexley.
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
The Herons. By the most sensitive man in Bexley, Simon Doer.
The Herons. They reside in the Preston Road area of Columbus just to the west of Bexley. They are herons (yellow crowned night herons to be exact). Their nests, like tax havens, are located in that patch of real estate just outside Bexley in an awkward gerrymandered slice of Columbus. Like a peninsula, the Columbus area bounded by water at Alum Creek and Broad and Parkview Streets similar to an isthmus, juts out in historic tax defiance to its Bexley neighbors.
It is hard to deny that it is a perfect location, close to the water of Alum Creek and the trees of Wolfe Park. The herons wisely take advantage of that location to wing east to consume fish as their staple food from the ponds of Bexley residents as if those services are an entitlement offered to them due to their close Columbus residency. Similar to the herons consumption of fish in the ponds of adjoining residents, Columbus aggressively annexed land to grow while the slice of land to the east of Alum Creek remained as a dimple on the face of Columbus.
Like human carpetbaggers, during the past several years the herons have become outliers to Bexley, of sorts. The herons usual habitat has been the southern coastal region of the United States, a migration pattern many of their human neighbors also follow throughout the year. The residents appear to live parallel lives.
As they nest in the trees above the Columbus streets and the houses occupied by their human counterparts, the herons derive the protection of law enforcement as an endangered species. Bexley police even patrol those remote Columbus streets and Wolf Park in similar deference to what could be considered special citizens as they protect the human occupants of houses in close proximity to Bexley.
Taunt nets above the Bexley ponds may distract herons from their feasts of koi and goldfish, however, there currently appears no way to net the lost revenue from the closely knit Columbus community based near her Bexley neighbors. That slice of Columbus originally carved out of the near Bexley landscape to enable the election of Columbus City Council members from the area, became a permanent nest and haven, not only for the endangered herons, but for Columbus residents as well. Are there ways to share the cost of the current environment with Bexley’s near neighbors? Perhaps we need to be content that the herons’ human nightly counterparts occasionally pay to enjoy the food and merchant services of Bexley.
That is one sensitive man’s opinion. What is yours?
HELP BEXLEY PUBLIC RADIO UPGRADE ITS ANTENNA. SEND YOUR MONEY PROMPTLY. BE GENEROUS.
Bexley Public Radio Foundation broadcasting as
WCRX-LP, 102.1 FM, Local Power Radio
2700 E. Main St., Suite 208
Columbus, OH 43209
Voice (614) 235 2929
Fax (614) 235 3008
Email wcrxlp@yahoo.com
Blog http://agentofcurrency.blogspot.com
Bexley Public Radio Foundation is exempt from federal taxes under IRC Section 501(c)(3). Donations are deductible from federal income taxes for individuals who itemize. Checks may identify the payee as Bexley Public Radio Foundation or WCRX-LP, 102.1 FM.
Design is copyright 2009. All rights reserved. Bexley Public Radio Foundation. Text is copyright 2009. All rights reserved. MSMIB, Simon Doer and Bexley Public Radio Editorial Collective.
It is hard to deny that it is a perfect location, close to the water of Alum Creek and the trees of Wolfe Park. The herons wisely take advantage of that location to wing east to consume fish as their staple food from the ponds of Bexley residents as if those services are an entitlement offered to them due to their close Columbus residency. Similar to the herons consumption of fish in the ponds of adjoining residents, Columbus aggressively annexed land to grow while the slice of land to the east of Alum Creek remained as a dimple on the face of Columbus.
Like human carpetbaggers, during the past several years the herons have become outliers to Bexley, of sorts. The herons usual habitat has been the southern coastal region of the United States, a migration pattern many of their human neighbors also follow throughout the year. The residents appear to live parallel lives.
As they nest in the trees above the Columbus streets and the houses occupied by their human counterparts, the herons derive the protection of law enforcement as an endangered species. Bexley police even patrol those remote Columbus streets and Wolf Park in similar deference to what could be considered special citizens as they protect the human occupants of houses in close proximity to Bexley.
Taunt nets above the Bexley ponds may distract herons from their feasts of koi and goldfish, however, there currently appears no way to net the lost revenue from the closely knit Columbus community based near her Bexley neighbors. That slice of Columbus originally carved out of the near Bexley landscape to enable the election of Columbus City Council members from the area, became a permanent nest and haven, not only for the endangered herons, but for Columbus residents as well. Are there ways to share the cost of the current environment with Bexley’s near neighbors? Perhaps we need to be content that the herons’ human nightly counterparts occasionally pay to enjoy the food and merchant services of Bexley.
That is one sensitive man’s opinion. What is yours?
HELP BEXLEY PUBLIC RADIO UPGRADE ITS ANTENNA. SEND YOUR MONEY PROMPTLY. BE GENEROUS.
Bexley Public Radio Foundation broadcasting as
WCRX-LP, 102.1 FM, Local Power Radio
2700 E. Main St., Suite 208
Columbus, OH 43209
Voice (614) 235 2929
Fax (614) 235 3008
Email wcrxlp@yahoo.com
Blog http://agentofcurrency.blogspot.com
Bexley Public Radio Foundation is exempt from federal taxes under IRC Section 501(c)(3). Donations are deductible from federal income taxes for individuals who itemize. Checks may identify the payee as Bexley Public Radio Foundation or WCRX-LP, 102.1 FM.
Design is copyright 2009. All rights reserved. Bexley Public Radio Foundation. Text is copyright 2009. All rights reserved. MSMIB, Simon Doer and Bexley Public Radio Editorial Collective.
Saturday, March 7, 2009
MSMIB asks questions about county auditor and Bexley real estate taxes.
.
FALSE LOGIC: NO FRANKLIN COUNTY-BEXLEY TAX DOWNTURN IN HOUSING.
By the most sensitive man in Bexley, Simon Doer
So the housing market is slow or stalled, home prices are down.
Logic would assume that with home values down, based on our firm American foundation of the relationship between taxation and representation, responsive government officials would quickly respond to adjust comparable tax assessments.
Yet in a contrary fashion the Franklin County Auditor’s Office decided simply not to increase house values for 2009, but in a “catch 22” after the fact proposition, was poised to assess any homeowners who recently upgraded their homes, even if the upgrade was simply to maintain market value in the declining market.
If a Bexley resident remodeled a kitchen, bathroom, basement or improved outdoor landscaping and a permit for the work was filed with the City of Bexley, the tax man awaits a return from that expense and labor in 2009.
In an August 6, 2008 news release the Franklin County Auditor Joseph W. Testa advised residents that:
Question: Does remodeling always constitute “property improvement” that consistently results in an increased market value of a house from that previously recorded by the Franklin County Auditor?
This sensitive resident checked several neighborhoods and the assessment process. The Franklin County Auditor made a decision, which this resident contends appears to be based on false logic, that while it would not increase tax assessments for 2009 across the board for all residents, it would assess those residents who recently performed permit “improvement” work on their houses.
In one example a neighbor finished a basement and significantly upgraded a kitchen in 2006 without affecting their tax valuation, yet when a next door neighbor performed similar lesser value updates two years later the Franklin County Auditor’s Office revalued that neighbor’s home value using the current “property improvement” guidelines. So although the adjacent neighbor’s updates were simply keeping with adjoining homeowners’ properties the more recent updates resulted in a market value thousands of dollars above the higher end house next door.
Where is the equity and fairness by the Auditor’s Office selecting recent permit work while ignoring earlier updates?
The false logic is that remodeling always increases the value of the homes and that those residences should be singled out as being subject to an increase in the tax assessment. It does not account for remodeling that simply maintains the previously determined value of the house.
Residents intent on merely keeping their home value in line with competing houses in the neighborhood may have remodeled their kitchen, basement or a bathroom during 2007 or 2008. Unfortunately those residents now targeted by the Franklin County Auditor’s Office for an increased market value based on the permit value that was filed with the City of Bexley. So, if your neighbor remodeled their kitchen in 2006 and you simply remodeled to keep pace in 2007 or 2008, you, not your neighbor will experience an increase in Franklin County and resulting Bexley City and school property taxes.
The failed logic is that every remodeling activity results in an equal increase in market value. Houses that are not maintained and remodeled periodically should tend to decline in market value in comparison to neighboring properties. Even if we board up our homes and fail to upgrade them market value continues to keep pace according the Franklin County Auditors.
Is there any evidence that the Franklin County Auditor’s Office reduces the market value of houses that do not keep pace with the value of neighboring homes?
Assume side-by-side Bexley neighbors each with a house of equal market value. If the middle house never remodels during a twenty year period that house’s tax value will still keep pace with neighboring upgraded houses even without remodeling efforts as long as none of the homeowners make additions to their homes. Now adopting the false logic of the Franklin County Auditor’s Office, if the middle house remodeled a kitchen or bathroom during the past year or finished a basement or outdoor landscape two years after the neighbors made those decisions, the middle house will be tax assessed above the value of the neighbors’ houses.
Let’s test the logic theory…. If we boarded up our front windows (as one neighbor did while waiting for new replacement windows) the Most Sensitive Man In Bexley thinks that the value of the house is reduced, but the MSMIB also thinks that the Franklin County Auditor’s Office will not voluntarily reflect a decline in value in the tax assessment process.
That is one sensitive man’s opinion. What is yours?
Bexley Public Radio Foundation broadcasting as
WCRX-LP, 102.1 FM, Local Power Radio
2700 E. Main St., Suite 208
Columbus, OH 43209
Voice (614) 235 2929
Fax (614) 235 3008
Email wcrxlp@yahoo.com
Blog http://agentofcurrency.blogspot.com
Bexley Public Radio Foundation is exempt from federal taxes under IRC Section 501(c)(3). Donations are deductible from federal income taxes for individuals who itemize. Checks may identify the payee as Bexley Public Radio Foundation or WCRX-LP, 102.1 FM.
Design is copyright 2009. All rights reserved. Bexley Public Radio Foundation. Text is copyright 2009. All rights reserved. Bexley Public Radio Foundation. The styles MSMIB and Most Sensitive Man In Bexley are the property of Bexley Public Radio Foundation.
FALSE LOGIC: NO FRANKLIN COUNTY-BEXLEY TAX DOWNTURN IN HOUSING.
By the most sensitive man in Bexley, Simon Doer
So the housing market is slow or stalled, home prices are down.
Logic would assume that with home values down, based on our firm American foundation of the relationship between taxation and representation, responsive government officials would quickly respond to adjust comparable tax assessments.
Yet in a contrary fashion the Franklin County Auditor’s Office decided simply not to increase house values for 2009, but in a “catch 22” after the fact proposition, was poised to assess any homeowners who recently upgraded their homes, even if the upgrade was simply to maintain market value in the declining market.
If a Bexley resident remodeled a kitchen, bathroom, basement or improved outdoor landscaping and a permit for the work was filed with the City of Bexley, the tax man awaits a return from that expense and labor in 2009.
In an August 6, 2008 news release the Franklin County Auditor Joseph W. Testa advised residents that:
“Residential values will remain unchanged through the next three years.”
“In a first for Franklin County , Testa has ordered no increase in residential values for the 2008 appraisal update. Unless homeowners improve their property or voters pass new tax levies, there will not be an increase in residential real estate taxes payable in 2009, 2010 and 2011.”
Question: Does remodeling always constitute “property improvement” that consistently results in an increased market value of a house from that previously recorded by the Franklin County Auditor?
This sensitive resident checked several neighborhoods and the assessment process. The Franklin County Auditor made a decision, which this resident contends appears to be based on false logic, that while it would not increase tax assessments for 2009 across the board for all residents, it would assess those residents who recently performed permit “improvement” work on their houses.
In one example a neighbor finished a basement and significantly upgraded a kitchen in 2006 without affecting their tax valuation, yet when a next door neighbor performed similar lesser value updates two years later the Franklin County Auditor’s Office revalued that neighbor’s home value using the current “property improvement” guidelines. So although the adjacent neighbor’s updates were simply keeping with adjoining homeowners’ properties the more recent updates resulted in a market value thousands of dollars above the higher end house next door.
Where is the equity and fairness by the Auditor’s Office selecting recent permit work while ignoring earlier updates?
The false logic is that remodeling always increases the value of the homes and that those residences should be singled out as being subject to an increase in the tax assessment. It does not account for remodeling that simply maintains the previously determined value of the house.
Residents intent on merely keeping their home value in line with competing houses in the neighborhood may have remodeled their kitchen, basement or a bathroom during 2007 or 2008. Unfortunately those residents now targeted by the Franklin County Auditor’s Office for an increased market value based on the permit value that was filed with the City of Bexley. So, if your neighbor remodeled their kitchen in 2006 and you simply remodeled to keep pace in 2007 or 2008, you, not your neighbor will experience an increase in Franklin County and resulting Bexley City and school property taxes.
The failed logic is that every remodeling activity results in an equal increase in market value. Houses that are not maintained and remodeled periodically should tend to decline in market value in comparison to neighboring properties. Even if we board up our homes and fail to upgrade them market value continues to keep pace according the Franklin County Auditors.
Is there any evidence that the Franklin County Auditor’s Office reduces the market value of houses that do not keep pace with the value of neighboring homes?
Assume side-by-side Bexley neighbors each with a house of equal market value. If the middle house never remodels during a twenty year period that house’s tax value will still keep pace with neighboring upgraded houses even without remodeling efforts as long as none of the homeowners make additions to their homes. Now adopting the false logic of the Franklin County Auditor’s Office, if the middle house remodeled a kitchen or bathroom during the past year or finished a basement or outdoor landscape two years after the neighbors made those decisions, the middle house will be tax assessed above the value of the neighbors’ houses.
Let’s test the logic theory…. If we boarded up our front windows (as one neighbor did while waiting for new replacement windows) the Most Sensitive Man In Bexley thinks that the value of the house is reduced, but the MSMIB also thinks that the Franklin County Auditor’s Office will not voluntarily reflect a decline in value in the tax assessment process.
That is one sensitive man’s opinion. What is yours?
Bexley Public Radio Foundation broadcasting as
WCRX-LP, 102.1 FM, Local Power Radio
2700 E. Main St., Suite 208
Columbus, OH 43209
Voice (614) 235 2929
Fax (614) 235 3008
Email wcrxlp@yahoo.com
Blog http://agentofcurrency.blogspot.com
Bexley Public Radio Foundation is exempt from federal taxes under IRC Section 501(c)(3). Donations are deductible from federal income taxes for individuals who itemize. Checks may identify the payee as Bexley Public Radio Foundation or WCRX-LP, 102.1 FM.
Design is copyright 2009. All rights reserved. Bexley Public Radio Foundation. Text is copyright 2009. All rights reserved. Bexley Public Radio Foundation. The styles MSMIB and Most Sensitive Man In Bexley are the property of Bexley Public Radio Foundation.
Friday, November 7, 2008
MSMIB commentary. Signs, Signs, Everywhere Signs
This commentary is by the most sensitive man in Bexley, Simon Doer. The actual identity of the commentator is not disclosed.
Signs, Signs, Everywhere Signs.
Yes signs. Neither crop circles nor close encounters of the third kind. But political yard signs as well as many telephone calls, television, newspaper and internet ads, and ongoing political conversations. Rather political conversations going on and on.
It has been the political campaign season once again; this time the quadrennial Presidential election contributing its own set of audible and visual voter consequences.
Bexley, the city of trees, is awash in color, not only in the changing leaves of the fall season, but with the vast (or half vast) variety of national and local political yard signs, brown for Brown, for example, and patriotic red, white and blue for McCain-Palin and Obama-Biden.
This sensitive man ponders whether presidential yard signs really have the same impact that signs promoting local candidates have in helping voters to make their decision at the polls.
Well do they?? Are presidential yard signs really going to influence the vote? Do voters look at the neighbors and the volume of presidential yard signs as a criterion to make their presidential decision as opposed to decisions in judicial or other local races?
Presidential signs may simply be a "Statement!" The yard signs may also be an informal support group.
As we all likely noticed, yard signs and vehicle stickers (both bumper and window cling) have become the dramatic statement that political campaign buttons previously were to the wearer. While some of us collect the buttons few appear to wear them in the same constant display that yard signs and posted vehicle stickers enjoy. The signs and stickers have become a statement in what has increasingly become an anonymous world. We still see George W and Kerry (and even Gore and Edwards) vehicle stickers on prominent display. Neighbors who have no other contact with each other connect or disagree politically through their yard signs.
Interestingly as I travel the streets of Bexley it is surprising how many times neighbors tout the same candidate for president and how often whole blocks appear to agree or disagree on a presidential choice with a lone holdout occasionally in evidence. All without apparent violence (well perhaps a few stolen yard signs on politically hardened streets such as Parkview, but still rather tame).
This voting exercise in democracy inspired this sensitive man to vote early (but not often, which would be wrong) and he or she (gender being truly sensitive) was impressed with the diverse sea of voters, each with their individual commitment to vote, at the Franklin County Veterans Memorial as they stood in line for over an hour and a half (many more voters exercising their democratic right stood in line for four hours h or more) to cast their hand completed ballots for the 2000 election.
We often see voters in other lands (those with skies as blue or red as ours) standing in long lines and may marvel at their commitment, while we take our own for granted. We should rejoice that our field of candidates for 2008 has engendered citizens to respond by going to the polls.
It may well be an historic voter turnout as forecast by some or as an historic election as promoted by others.
On election day the atmosphere at voting precincts appears to vary by the personalities of the voting officials. While some are jovial and permissive in enforcing election rules such as electioneering voting distance from the polling place, others more strictly interpret the distance, insisting that electioneering be held on the other side of the street when the sidewalk on the polling place side of the street is a foot or two within the 100 feet rule.
This is a closely watched election and observers are out in full force. This sensitive man enlisted the observations of other voters on election day and they filed the following reports suggesting that these voters experienced an easy and efficient voting process with small lines and courteous and younger than usual poll workers.
Here are the observations of the first voter reporting to the MSMIB.
“Report on voting experience at Precinct 4A and 4E polling place at the Capital University student union.
Tuesday November 4, parking is abundantly available. There are Obama campaign workers at one parking lot entrance. No McCain workers.
My first impression based on the parking availability is that turnout is light.
I arrive at the student union at 9:10. A nice feature is that near the entrance to the student union, there is a cart selling coffee and juices to voters.
Quick count of eighteen voters and ten to fourteen poll workers. A few poll workers are mobile, going in and out of the room where the voting machines are.
Ten electronic voting machines. All are being used.
There are four lines where you identify yourself and get the little ticket for authority to vote. The longest line had five voters.
Three minutes in line, one minute to identify myself with a driver license and sign the register. I even develop a connection with a poll worker.
The poll workers are younger than usual. One third, about four, maybe five are less than twenty-five years old. One appears to be about eighteen. Poll workers, some seniors from prior years, are not present.
After receiving my authority to vote ticket and standing in two lines, my wait is still only four minutes.
The voting machines are the electronic machines from the primary. The ballot is long but I’m still behind the machine for only three minutes.
The machine is easy to use.
Easy to review your votes.
Easy to correct a mistake.
I confirm my votes on the ballot and then hit the vote button.
I leave with only eleven minutes elapsed time.
A poll worker gives me a “I voted today” sticker.
At the edge of campus near where I parked, there are two Issue 5 (payday lending) opponents encouraging people to vote.”
One voter sought a sticker explaining she teaches “new citizens” and it is important to show them that she had voted.
MSMIB comment:The “I Voted Today” stickers appear to be popular bling rewards for voting. Some have suggested they are like receiving a Cracker Jack prize. Do some citizens vote to receive the stickers?
In another report filed by a second voter for this commnetary, the voter made the effort to travel by bus from college, indicating that:
“There were only two other people voting at the time with half a dozen poll works and that the precinct was not busy at all.
The voter observed that the height and angle of voting machines were not comfortable for voters over six feet in height.
Identification process easy. Driver license.
Outside, no campaign workers in evidence. No one approached the voter.”
So, another election year shall pass and we will return to some balance of political order no matter the outcome. Yet although the yard signs and ads will quickly disappear the political conversations will surely continue the day after, with congratulations or complaints. Can you participate in those conversations.. …..Can’t you read the signs? Did you vote?
This is one sensitive man’s opinion. What’s yours?
Bexley Public Radio Foundation broadcasting as
WCRX-LP, 102.1 FM, Local Power Radio
2700 E. Main St., Suite 208
Columbus, OH 43209
Voice (614) 235 2929
Fax (614) 235 3008
Email wcrxlp@yahoo.com
Blog http://agentofcurrency.blogspot.com
Bexley Public Radio Foundation broadcasting as WCRX-LP, 102.1 FM is exempt from federal taxes under IRC Section 501(c)(3). Donations are deductible from federal income taxes for individuals who itemize. Checks may identify the payee as Bexley Public Radio Foundation WCRX-LP, 102.1 FM.
Design is copyright 2008. All rights reserved. Bexley Public Radio Foundation. Text is copyright 2008. All rights reserved. Bexley Public Radio Foundation. The styles "The Most Sensitive Man in Bexley" and "MSMIB" are the property of Bexley Public Radio Foundation.
Signs, Signs, Everywhere Signs.
Yes signs. Neither crop circles nor close encounters of the third kind. But political yard signs as well as many telephone calls, television, newspaper and internet ads, and ongoing political conversations. Rather political conversations going on and on.
It has been the political campaign season once again; this time the quadrennial Presidential election contributing its own set of audible and visual voter consequences.
Bexley, the city of trees, is awash in color, not only in the changing leaves of the fall season, but with the vast (or half vast) variety of national and local political yard signs, brown for Brown, for example, and patriotic red, white and blue for McCain-Palin and Obama-Biden.
This sensitive man ponders whether presidential yard signs really have the same impact that signs promoting local candidates have in helping voters to make their decision at the polls.
Well do they?? Are presidential yard signs really going to influence the vote? Do voters look at the neighbors and the volume of presidential yard signs as a criterion to make their presidential decision as opposed to decisions in judicial or other local races?
Presidential signs may simply be a "Statement!" The yard signs may also be an informal support group.
As we all likely noticed, yard signs and vehicle stickers (both bumper and window cling) have become the dramatic statement that political campaign buttons previously were to the wearer. While some of us collect the buttons few appear to wear them in the same constant display that yard signs and posted vehicle stickers enjoy. The signs and stickers have become a statement in what has increasingly become an anonymous world. We still see George W and Kerry (and even Gore and Edwards) vehicle stickers on prominent display. Neighbors who have no other contact with each other connect or disagree politically through their yard signs.
Interestingly as I travel the streets of Bexley it is surprising how many times neighbors tout the same candidate for president and how often whole blocks appear to agree or disagree on a presidential choice with a lone holdout occasionally in evidence. All without apparent violence (well perhaps a few stolen yard signs on politically hardened streets such as Parkview, but still rather tame).
This voting exercise in democracy inspired this sensitive man to vote early (but not often, which would be wrong) and he or she (gender being truly sensitive) was impressed with the diverse sea of voters, each with their individual commitment to vote, at the Franklin County Veterans Memorial as they stood in line for over an hour and a half (many more voters exercising their democratic right stood in line for four hours h or more) to cast their hand completed ballots for the 2000 election.
We often see voters in other lands (those with skies as blue or red as ours) standing in long lines and may marvel at their commitment, while we take our own for granted. We should rejoice that our field of candidates for 2008 has engendered citizens to respond by going to the polls.
It may well be an historic voter turnout as forecast by some or as an historic election as promoted by others.
On election day the atmosphere at voting precincts appears to vary by the personalities of the voting officials. While some are jovial and permissive in enforcing election rules such as electioneering voting distance from the polling place, others more strictly interpret the distance, insisting that electioneering be held on the other side of the street when the sidewalk on the polling place side of the street is a foot or two within the 100 feet rule.
This is a closely watched election and observers are out in full force. This sensitive man enlisted the observations of other voters on election day and they filed the following reports suggesting that these voters experienced an easy and efficient voting process with small lines and courteous and younger than usual poll workers.
Here are the observations of the first voter reporting to the MSMIB.
“Report on voting experience at Precinct 4A and 4E polling place at the Capital University student union.
Tuesday November 4, parking is abundantly available. There are Obama campaign workers at one parking lot entrance. No McCain workers.
My first impression based on the parking availability is that turnout is light.
I arrive at the student union at 9:10. A nice feature is that near the entrance to the student union, there is a cart selling coffee and juices to voters.
Quick count of eighteen voters and ten to fourteen poll workers. A few poll workers are mobile, going in and out of the room where the voting machines are.
Ten electronic voting machines. All are being used.
There are four lines where you identify yourself and get the little ticket for authority to vote. The longest line had five voters.
Three minutes in line, one minute to identify myself with a driver license and sign the register. I even develop a connection with a poll worker.
The poll workers are younger than usual. One third, about four, maybe five are less than twenty-five years old. One appears to be about eighteen. Poll workers, some seniors from prior years, are not present.
After receiving my authority to vote ticket and standing in two lines, my wait is still only four minutes.
The voting machines are the electronic machines from the primary. The ballot is long but I’m still behind the machine for only three minutes.
The machine is easy to use.
Easy to review your votes.
Easy to correct a mistake.
I confirm my votes on the ballot and then hit the vote button.
I leave with only eleven minutes elapsed time.
A poll worker gives me a “I voted today” sticker.
At the edge of campus near where I parked, there are two Issue 5 (payday lending) opponents encouraging people to vote.”
One voter sought a sticker explaining she teaches “new citizens” and it is important to show them that she had voted.
MSMIB comment:The “I Voted Today” stickers appear to be popular bling rewards for voting. Some have suggested they are like receiving a Cracker Jack prize. Do some citizens vote to receive the stickers?
In another report filed by a second voter for this commnetary, the voter made the effort to travel by bus from college, indicating that:
“There were only two other people voting at the time with half a dozen poll works and that the precinct was not busy at all.
The voter observed that the height and angle of voting machines were not comfortable for voters over six feet in height.
Identification process easy. Driver license.
Outside, no campaign workers in evidence. No one approached the voter.”
So, another election year shall pass and we will return to some balance of political order no matter the outcome. Yet although the yard signs and ads will quickly disappear the political conversations will surely continue the day after, with congratulations or complaints. Can you participate in those conversations.. …..Can’t you read the signs? Did you vote?
This is one sensitive man’s opinion. What’s yours?
Bexley Public Radio Foundation broadcasting as
WCRX-LP, 102.1 FM, Local Power Radio
2700 E. Main St., Suite 208
Columbus, OH 43209
Voice (614) 235 2929
Fax (614) 235 3008
Email wcrxlp@yahoo.com
Blog http://agentofcurrency.blogspot.com
Bexley Public Radio Foundation broadcasting as WCRX-LP, 102.1 FM is exempt from federal taxes under IRC Section 501(c)(3). Donations are deductible from federal income taxes for individuals who itemize. Checks may identify the payee as Bexley Public Radio Foundation WCRX-LP, 102.1 FM.
Design is copyright 2008. All rights reserved. Bexley Public Radio Foundation. Text is copyright 2008. All rights reserved. Bexley Public Radio Foundation. The styles "The Most Sensitive Man in Bexley" and "MSMIB" are the property of Bexley Public Radio Foundation.
Friday, October 10, 2008
MSMIB continues his reflections on public protests in Bexley.
"Protesters? …Not in Our Neighborhood" by the most sensitive man in Bexley, Simon Doer
What would the neighbors think? Protestors picketing on the public sidewalks of Bexley, Ohio on issues such as abortion or perhaps labor related issues by a union or employees of a corporate executive or students picketing a professor or teacher (probably not a good idea if they are still taking the class)?
It could and did happen when protestors decided to take their disagreement to the sidewalks adjacent to a Bexley resident who served as a physician for an abortion clinic. The result was a doctor, the point of that protest, (buoyed by residents concerned they may be future objects of protest) upset enough to seek an ordinance through city council prohibiting or limiting future protests in front of an individual’s residence.
While other laws address any resulting disturbances from pickets’ behaviors, such as threatening actions, harassment, stalking or acts of violence, at issue here is whether the assembly of protestors on the public sidewalks of the city adjacent to the home of a picketed individual can be prohibited.
We are not here discussing publicly owned mansions, such as the governor's on Parkview Avenue (typically hosting protesters opposed to executions) or that of the Ohio State University's president on North Drexel Avenue (not recently hosting protestors, but the potential is there if, for example, the football program was downsized in favor of increased spending on academic pursuits).
It is a delicate (and yes, sensitive) issue. The right to assemble to present grievances and to exercise free speech are guaranteed by the constitutions of the United States and Ohio. Protesters must, however, by law remain on public property, the sidewalk, and not block public entrance or exit. Leaving sticky notes on the sidewalk is not an option for protestors as littering laws are sacrosanct.
Restricting or otherwise limiting those rights cannot be taken lightly and must account, as in the above access rights, for any infringement on the rights of others. Without going into a legal discourse, suffice it to state that you cannot yell “FIRE” in the Drexel (or any other theatre [unless of course there is a fire]) or use imminent “fighting words” as you could harm and infringe on the rights of others, but you can peacefully assemble in public and use your free speech (unless it is after hours and then other nuisance and noise disturbance ordinances come into play).
So, can an ordinance be crafted and drafted to properly and constitutionally limit protesters’ assembly on the public sidewalks adjacent to a picketed Bexley residence? The residence of the pro-choice abortion physician was located on East Broad Street, should the reaction be different when the house is on a small side street like Bullet Park Place? Perhaps the answer is no to both questions.
In a July 26, 2008 article titled “Bexley considers limiting protesters,” reporter Alayna DeMartini of The Columbus Dispatch astutely observed “Bexley is not exactly the next Berkeley.“ She noted that “Upper Arlington had enforced a picketing law until 1995. An anti-abortion activist sued for the right to protest in front of an abortion doctor's home there and won. The U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals found the law to be unconstitutional, so the council repealed it, “ and that “Upper Arlington's former ban reads exactly like the one being proposed in Bexley: ‘It is unlawful for any person to engage in picketing before or about the private residence or dwelling of any individual.’"
Ms. DeMartini wrote that according to Lou Chodosh, Bexley’s city attorney, “the law would allow protesters to march past several houses, but not focus on any one home,” and that “Chodosh modeled Bexley's proposed law after one in Brookfield, Wis. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld it as constitutional in 1988.”
So, if protestors would annoy the neighbors as well as the targeted individual, perhaps the ordinance would meet constitutional muster?
A friend in another Ohio city placed the argument in perspective when he observed that it is more likely the neighbors of the picketed resident would be annoyed and inconvenienced than the targeted individual(s). His point was that the protesters’ target would likely avoid their home during the protest and picketing and stay elsewhere for the time. Meanwhile the neighbors would be subjected to the protestors’ chants and displays.
So from a practical perspective what are the neighbors to do if an ordinance is ineffective to restrict protestors in the neighborhood? Become creative, counter-protest. For example, neighbors could place signs on their lawns (assuming they can comply with the Bexley yard sign ordinance, which may be doubtful), so better yet stand in their own yards with signs stating, “Protestors Go Home,” “Not in Our Neighborhood,” “Protect Our Children,” “Silence is Golden,” “Heave Ho,” or any other number of counter arguments to the protestors’ displays. In this manner neighbors would not address the issue directly (with the potential for altercations), however, could show their peaceful request that the protestors move their assembly elsewhere.
On August 7, 2008, the editorial collective of this radio station reflected on the situation and proposed a compromise ordinance. The text of that comment is provided on the agenctofcurrency blog. The core idea of the editorial collective proposal, which has not yet been proposed in the form of an ordinance nor provided a reading by Council, is that when any Bexley resident attracts demonstrators and protestors, that resident would be “required to provide refreshments [such as water or more properly perhaps mineral water or champagne] and suitable facilities and accommodations for the public protestors.“ “Umbrellas should be available for inclement weather and lawn chairs provided so the protestors can rest.”
City ordinances are intended to be taken seriously and the time taken to consider them through three readings is important, ever ready for any challenge to the supreme courts. This sensitive man has not yet checked it out, but several websites refer to a September 9, 1919 Bexley, Ohio ordinance number 223 that prohibits the installation and usage of slot machines in outhouses. If the ordinance suggestion by the editorial collective of this radio station is to be considered by the Bexley City Council, we hope that ordinance number 223 will be considered as City Council sets the standards for refreshments, accommodations and suitable facilities for public protestors.
This is one sensitive man’s opinion. What’s yours?
What would the neighbors think? Protestors picketing on the public sidewalks of Bexley, Ohio on issues such as abortion or perhaps labor related issues by a union or employees of a corporate executive or students picketing a professor or teacher (probably not a good idea if they are still taking the class)?
It could and did happen when protestors decided to take their disagreement to the sidewalks adjacent to a Bexley resident who served as a physician for an abortion clinic. The result was a doctor, the point of that protest, (buoyed by residents concerned they may be future objects of protest) upset enough to seek an ordinance through city council prohibiting or limiting future protests in front of an individual’s residence.
While other laws address any resulting disturbances from pickets’ behaviors, such as threatening actions, harassment, stalking or acts of violence, at issue here is whether the assembly of protestors on the public sidewalks of the city adjacent to the home of a picketed individual can be prohibited.
We are not here discussing publicly owned mansions, such as the governor's on Parkview Avenue (typically hosting protesters opposed to executions) or that of the Ohio State University's president on North Drexel Avenue (not recently hosting protestors, but the potential is there if, for example, the football program was downsized in favor of increased spending on academic pursuits).It is a delicate (and yes, sensitive) issue. The right to assemble to present grievances and to exercise free speech are guaranteed by the constitutions of the United States and Ohio. Protesters must, however, by law remain on public property, the sidewalk, and not block public entrance or exit. Leaving sticky notes on the sidewalk is not an option for protestors as littering laws are sacrosanct.
Restricting or otherwise limiting those rights cannot be taken lightly and must account, as in the above access rights, for any infringement on the rights of others. Without going into a legal discourse, suffice it to state that you cannot yell “FIRE” in the Drexel (or any other theatre [unless of course there is a fire]) or use imminent “fighting words” as you could harm and infringe on the rights of others, but you can peacefully assemble in public and use your free speech (unless it is after hours and then other nuisance and noise disturbance ordinances come into play).
So, can an ordinance be crafted and drafted to properly and constitutionally limit protesters’ assembly on the public sidewalks adjacent to a picketed Bexley residence? The residence of the pro-choice abortion physician was located on East Broad Street, should the reaction be different when the house is on a small side street like Bullet Park Place? Perhaps the answer is no to both questions.
In a July 26, 2008 article titled “Bexley considers limiting protesters,” reporter Alayna DeMartini of The Columbus Dispatch astutely observed “Bexley is not exactly the next Berkeley.“ She noted that “Upper Arlington had enforced a picketing law until 1995. An anti-abortion activist sued for the right to protest in front of an abortion doctor's home there and won. The U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals found the law to be unconstitutional, so the council repealed it, “ and that “Upper Arlington's former ban reads exactly like the one being proposed in Bexley: ‘It is unlawful for any person to engage in picketing before or about the private residence or dwelling of any individual.’"
Ms. DeMartini wrote that according to Lou Chodosh, Bexley’s city attorney, “the law would allow protesters to march past several houses, but not focus on any one home,” and that “Chodosh modeled Bexley's proposed law after one in Brookfield, Wis. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld it as constitutional in 1988.”
So, if protestors would annoy the neighbors as well as the targeted individual, perhaps the ordinance would meet constitutional muster?
A friend in another Ohio city placed the argument in perspective when he observed that it is more likely the neighbors of the picketed resident would be annoyed and inconvenienced than the targeted individual(s). His point was that the protesters’ target would likely avoid their home during the protest and picketing and stay elsewhere for the time. Meanwhile the neighbors would be subjected to the protestors’ chants and displays.
So from a practical perspective what are the neighbors to do if an ordinance is ineffective to restrict protestors in the neighborhood? Become creative, counter-protest. For example, neighbors could place signs on their lawns (assuming they can comply with the Bexley yard sign ordinance, which may be doubtful), so better yet stand in their own yards with signs stating, “Protestors Go Home,” “Not in Our Neighborhood,” “Protect Our Children,” “Silence is Golden,” “Heave Ho,” or any other number of counter arguments to the protestors’ displays. In this manner neighbors would not address the issue directly (with the potential for altercations), however, could show their peaceful request that the protestors move their assembly elsewhere.
On August 7, 2008, the editorial collective of this radio station reflected on the situation and proposed a compromise ordinance. The text of that comment is provided on the agenctofcurrency blog. The core idea of the editorial collective proposal, which has not yet been proposed in the form of an ordinance nor provided a reading by Council, is that when any Bexley resident attracts demonstrators and protestors, that resident would be “required to provide refreshments [such as water or more properly perhaps mineral water or champagne] and suitable facilities and accommodations for the public protestors.“ “Umbrellas should be available for inclement weather and lawn chairs provided so the protestors can rest.”
City ordinances are intended to be taken seriously and the time taken to consider them through three readings is important, ever ready for any challenge to the supreme courts. This sensitive man has not yet checked it out, but several websites refer to a September 9, 1919 Bexley, Ohio ordinance number 223 that prohibits the installation and usage of slot machines in outhouses. If the ordinance suggestion by the editorial collective of this radio station is to be considered by the Bexley City Council, we hope that ordinance number 223 will be considered as City Council sets the standards for refreshments, accommodations and suitable facilities for public protestors.
This is one sensitive man’s opinion. What’s yours?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
