Eliminating pork in Ohio prisons - a violation of 'separation of church and state'?

No, we're not talking about unnecessary spending to gain gain votes - this post is about pork - the other white meat, as their advertising calls it.

You see, in response to a lawsuit filed my a Muslim inmate, Ohio has decided to eliminate all pork products in their prisons. Interestingly, pork isn't even mentioned in the lawsuit which is insisting that all non-pork meats for Muslims come from animals slaughtered according to Islamic law. Ohio prisons already provide pre-packaged meals for Jewish inmates.

Death row inmate Abdul Awkal, the plaintiff in the suit, has said that non-pork and vegetarian options available in the prisons are not enough - that the meat that is served needs to be prepared in a manner proscribed by his religion (the throat of the animal needs to be slit and the blood drained).

Obviously, Ohio's pork producers are not happy. Pork was taken off the menus in 2009, but was added back last year. Pork rib patties are on the menu about once a week. Pork producers say that pork is a less expensive meat and thus saves the state money. The Ohio Pork Producers Council weighed in:

"We really think it's not in the best interest, frankly, of the whole prison system," said Dick Isler, executive director of the Ohio Pork Producers Council. "It seems like we're letting a small group make the rules when it really isn't in the best interest of the rest of prisoners."

This doesn't make sense to me. Why eliminate all pork from the menu if pre-packaged halal meals are available? If they can provide such meals for Jewish inmates, why not do the same for Muslim inmates?

The response of the state seems to be overkill and I don't know why this even ended up as a lawsuit in the first place. The state probably will lose the lawsuit considering the accommodations they've made for the eating requirements of those who follow the Jewish faith.

But are they risking a bigger problem by the elimination of pork altogether?

Is it not possible that pork-loving inmates could sue over the elimination of pork and claim that the state has violated the 'separation of church and state'? (the term is in quotes for a reason) If the display of the Ten Commandments is a violation of 'separation of church and state,' is not the insistence that all inmates not eat pork because of Muslim mandates not also a violation? Is the state not forcing non-Muslims to comply with the Muslim ban on pork? Are they 'inflicting' portions of the Muslim faith on non-Muslims?

After all, non-Muslims should not be infringed upon simply because of one inmate's religious beliefs. If even one non-Muslim inmate is offended... This just can't stand, right?

Of course I'm being sarcastic. But this is the same logic used so often to oppose anything that can even remotely be considered religious in public places - especially if the religious perspective is Christian. I just wonder how long it will be before we see consistency in the application of such logic.

If Jewish and halal pre-packaged meals are available, then offer them on the day that the pork rib patties are served. Problem solved - and Ohio saves the cost of a lawsuit.

Quote of the Day - limited government

A quote from Thomas Jefferson, writing about a national bank, while I do more research for today's fill-in on WSPD from 3-6 p.m.

"It would reduce the whole instrument to a single phrase, that of instituting a Congress with power to do whatever would be for the good of the United States; and as they would be the sole judges of the good or evil, it would be also a power to do whatever evil they please. Certainly no such universal power was meant to be given them. [The Constitution] was intended to lace them up straightly within the enumerated powers and those without which, as means, these powers could not be carried into effect." ~ Thomas Jefferson

Filling in on WSPD

I probably won't do much posting today or tomorrow as I research various topics for filling in for Brian Wilson on WSPD tomorrow from 3-6 p.m. I hope you'll tune in on AM 1370 or online and be part of the conversation.

In the meantime, here are a couple of items for your to read on your own:

Denmark's new fat tax

First Lady Michelle Obama's trip to Target was staged - perhaps because of the criticism she received for wearing $42,000 worth of diamonds on her wrist - and rather than be skeptical of the timing and the action, the liberal media swooned! No bias there.

And, in case you missed it, BET's Robert Johnson tells Pres. Obama to stop attacking the wealthy.

"Well, I think the president has to recalibrate his message. You don't get people to like you by attacking them or demeaning their success. You know, I grew up in a family of 10 kids, first one to go to college, and I've earned my success. I've earned my right to fly private if I choose to do so.

"And by attacking me it is not going to convince me that I should take a bigger hit because I happen to be wealthy. You know, it is the old -- I think Ted and Fred and I we both sort of take the old Ethel Merman approach to life. I've tried poor and I tried rich and I like rich better. It doesn't mean that I am a bad guy."

Quote of the Day - capitalism and compassion

“I believe in capitalism. The reason: capitalism confers its greatest benefits on those at the bottom of the income ladder. If I didn’t believe that, I wouldn’t be a capitalist. And Milton Friedman thinks the same way.” ~ Gary Becker, Nobel laureate and University of Chicago economist

Guest Post: Updating Ohio's Electoral System

Guest Column from Rep. Barbara Sears on Ohio H.B. 194, the election reform bill. The bill, which was signed into law by Gov. John Kasich, is opposed by various groups, including the Ohio Democratic Party, unions and the liberal organization Progress Ohio. On Thursday, these groups submitted 318,000 signatures to the Secretary of State seeking a referendum on the law. If they meet the minimum number of required valid signatures, the issue will go to voters in November 2012.

Updating Ohio’s Electoral System

The right to vote is an important hallmark of American democracy, yet it is the simplicity of our electoral process that sets us apart from much of the world. Exercising our right to vote in federal, state, and local government is a freedom that we sometimes take for granted, but it is a freedom we must protect nonetheless. Suffrage movements and other spirited struggles throughout our history have improved our democracy while still maintaining the simplistic integrity of our elections. However, there have been attempts in recent years to change our electoral process which threatens the simplicity that has secured our elections for centuries.

The current electoral process in Ohio is outdated and subject to inefficiencies and vulnerable to voter fraud. The Ohio House passed comprehensive election reform legislation, House Bill 194, to fix these problems. Through these necessary adjustments we can ensure the efficacy and integrity of Ohio’s election procedures.

House Bill 194 improves the transparency and simplicity of the way we cast our ballots. It’s designed to modernize the elections process, streamline operations and reduce costs for local boards of elections, verify the accuracy of voter rolls, improve the verification process for valid provisional and absentee ballots, and set statewide standards to absentee voting. Streamlining the voting process will make elections more straightforward and decrease voter confusion, as well as ensure that procedures are uniform from county to county. It is very important to me as your state representative that everyone has an equal opportunity to make their mark on our government.

The legislation also institutes several technological updates to Ohio’s electoral system. For example, it authorizes the development of a top-down voter registration database. This update will identify poll worker error; increase the accuracy of the rolls, and keep times and locations for voting more consistent from place to place. Furthermore, the bill allows voters to change their address online, thereby making it easier for voters to keep their personal information accurate for Election Day.

This package of reforms will restore accountability to Ohio’s voting process. Our right to vote is a liberty that Americans have fought long and hard for, and I want to guarantee that all Ohioans have access to an electoral process that is fair, honest and effective. House Bill 194 will make sure that your voice is clearly heard in our state and local governments.

More on the 'Durbin Fee'

Yesterday I wrote about the predictable consequences of trying to limit bank fees as news of the impact of Sen. Dick Durbin's amendment to the Frank-Dodd bill takes effect.

The amendment limited what banks could charge retailers when they accept a debit card. As a result, the banks are starting to charge a monthly fee to customers who have and use those cards. They're also starting to charge for other things to make up the loss of revenue.

Today, the Chicago Tribune editorializes about the Durbin Fee, which is, I believe, a much better name for the new rule.

The charge, which other banks are likely to adopt, is a direct result of his lawmaking. Call it the Durbin Fee.
...
Bankers told Durbin and his fellow lawmakers last year that the interchange fees subsidize free checking accounts and other services, including the convenient practice of making purchases with debit cards at no charge to the buyer. Slash fees to retailers, the banks said, and they would likely recoup the lost revenue by charging their customers for use of the cards. That's exactly what's happening now.

Durbin claimed that a cut in interchange fees would translate into lower prices and better service at Walmart and 7-Eleven. Funny, but no one's handed us a free Slurpee yet. In fact, the chief financial officer of Home Depot told Wall Street analysts in a conference call earlier this year that she expected Durbin's efforts to result in a $35 million annual "benefit" to the retailer.

Having picked sides in a high-stakes business deal—retailers over banks—Durbin denounced Bank of America for the widely telegraphed result. "Bank of America is trying to find new ways to pad its profits by sticking it to its customers," he said.

Shockingly, banks seek to be profitable. Durbin sought to transfer some profits from banks to retailers. The banks are trying to recoup the lost earnings.

Result of the government intervention: Retailers win, banks lose, and you get to pay the Durbin Fee.

Quote of the Day - sycophant

"But if you say, you can still pass the violations over, then I ask, hath your house been burnt? Hath your property been destroyed before your face? Are your wife and children destitute of a bed to lie on, or bread to live on? Have you lost a parent or a child by their hands, and yourself the ruined and wretched survivor? If you have not, then you are not a judge of those who have. But if you have, and can still shake hands with the murderers, then you are unworthy of the name of husband, father, friend, or lover, and whatever may be your rank or title in life, you have the heart of a coward and the spirit of a sycophant." ~ Thomas Paine

Predictable consequences of trying to limit bank fees

Congress, in its infinite wisdom (yes, that's sarcasm), decides that banks shouldn't charge for a particular service. In this case, it's a fee on the use of a debit card.

So they pass a law that prohibits banks from charging merchants a percentage on every use. It's part of the Frank-Dodd financial overhaul bill and this particular restriction is the Durbin amendment, courtesy of Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL).

But it costs money for banks to offer and process debit cards and their transactions - a factor members of Congress fail to understand. So what is a bank to do?

Well, they decide to charge the actual card holder a set monthly fee instead. Unintended consequences, which are entirely predictable, are certainly not part of the regular thinking of your 'average' congressional representative.

The fees range from $3-5 per month - if you're able to still have a debit card at all. Some banks, like JPMorganChase, have just eliminated the debit card completely.

So in their effort to 'help' consumers, Congress has ended up shifting the costs of the debit card service from the merchant to the card holder. Brilliant! What a bargain!

But that's not all. One aspect of the Frank-Dodd bill was limiting what banks could charge for overdraft fees. Now, in this day and age of instant information and various other provisions (like automatic transfers from savings to checking when the checking account gets to a certain level or overdraft protection programs), there really is no excuse for bouncing a check. People should know how much is in their account and whether or not there are funds to cover a check about to be written. When they write that check and it bounces, they should pay a fee to the bank.

It costs the bank money to return the check, notify you and deal with the subsequent actions that result. Why shouldn't they charge you a fee - large enough to make you not want to ever end up bouncing a check again in the future??? But people don't like being accountable - and politicians are too eager to help limit your liability for your own stupid actions.

And what, exactly, is the provider of a service supposed to do when they can no longer charge you their costs for that service, especially when they know they'll still need to provide the service even when they can't charge?

Well, they'll do what anyone else would - they'll charge for other things in order to cover the costs of the one they can't charge for.

So everyone who banks will pay more so that the small number who bounce checks don't have to pay for doing so. Again, brilliant!

Congress has decided it can determine how much a business should charge and how much profit it can make. They believe they know better than you and I the value of a service in the marketplace. But they're not actually limiting the profit, they're just playing around with various fees and imposing restrictions thinking (or, perhaps more accurately, hoping) that the banks will just take the restrictions and live with them.

But companies are in the business to make a profit. They don't exist to provide jobs (that's just a by-product of their effort to make money). They don't exist to do social programs (again, that's a by-product of their desire to have customers who thus help them to make a profit). They exist because they want to make money - for the owners and shareholders/investors - many of whom are the very people who are so adamant about restricting their profits in the first place.

In fact, it makes no sense to me that many unions argue against corporate profits when those very same profits are necessary to provide the jobs and benefits the unions so desire. And, most of the pension plans in America - whether individual IRAs, public pensions or private company pensions - are vested in the stocks of the very companies that are being demonized. Can you say 'stuck on stupid'???

So, when a company gets told by government that it can't make a profit with one item, it will begin charging for one that was previously free or add to the price of existing ones - or both.

This is completely and entirely predictable for anyone who understands anything whatsoever about business.

But Congress is, apparently, clueless and so, thanks to their 'help' for us poor consumers who cannot make good decisions on our own, we're now paying more.

Brilliant!

Serious about jobs? Rein in the regs!

Below is a guest post by Heather Harlow from the John Pfeiffer Company. She is a small business owner here in Ohio and is also a member of the Small Business For Sensible Regulations Coalition:

Serious About Jobs? Rein in the Regs!

Ohio, like much of the country, has struggled considerably during the past few years with serious economic challenges. According to the Department of Job and Family Services, the state's unemployment rate stands at 9.1%. Amazingly, Ohio has shed jobs for three straight months; more than half a million Ohioans are unemployed.

It was against this backdrop that President Obama arrived in Cincinnati, to tout his recently announced jobs plan. While there, he called on Congress to fund long overdue infrastructure projects like the Brent Spence Bridge renovation.

I applaud the President's intentions and I appreciate the attention he brought to the bridge, but nobody believes that renovation of the bridge will jump start the economy. Experts predict that even if the project received funding immediately, the first jobs wouldn't come online until 2013 at the earliest, and perhaps as late as 2015. Even the President admitted a few months ago that, "there's no such thing as a shovel ready project."

If the President wants to create jobs today, he should focus on jump starting private sector job creation rather than increasing the amount of money that comes to Washington. He could do that by working to remove obstacles to small business growth. Regulations have been proposed at break neck speed over the past three years and currently there are over 4,000 different proposed rules on the books. With so many regulations in the works, small businesses in Ohio and across the country have struggled to plan for the future. On the other hand, much of the money that is being sent to Washington is being used to implement more regulations. This past week, for example, the EPA announced it would need to hire up to 230,000 new government bureaucrats to enforce newly proposed regulations. Those jobs aren't self-sustaining; instead, they rely on taxpayer dollars.

If President Obama is serious about immediate job creation, he should help small business succeed rather than growing Washington.

Hurray for Texas - fighting for light bulb liberty!

From the National Center for Policy Analysis comes this summary of "Light Bulbs and Liberty," by Ryan Brannan at the Texas Public Policy Foundation:

In 2007, Congress passed the Energy and Security Act. The Act created energy efficiency standards for lighting, including household lighting, effectively ending the ability of American consumers to purchase the incandescent light bulbs that have been in use for the last 100 years. However, the law will not be implemented without overcoming obstacles and resistance. While U.S. Congressman Joe Barton's BULB Act, a move to repeal the 2007 Act, failed this past legislative session, another prong of attack has come out of the state of Texas, says Ryan Brannan, a policy analyst with the Texas Public Policy Foundation.

* Texas House Bill 2510 (HB 2510), which was recently signed by Governor Perry and will go into effect January 1, 2012 (the same day the Federal Energy and Security Act is slated to phase out the 100 watt light bulb), will effectively repeal the Energy and Security Act within the state of Texas.
* Asserting a constitutional argument, the bill's authors maintain that so long as the bulb itself is produced within the borders of Texas and remains within the state for use, it is not subject to the overarching authority of the interstate commerce clause.

In order for HB 2510 to stand, it will have to overcome judicial scrutiny assessing if the interstate commerce clause does in fact apply. There is precedent supporting both sides of the argument. Also, the state will have to attract a manufacturer of incandescent bulbs, which will undoubtedly be a challenge given that HB 2510 might be contested and overturned shortly after production begins, forcing them to close shop. In any case, it seems that a constitutional showdown regarding the consumer's right to make a market-based decision is inevitable.

Hopefully, Texas will be successful, though I believe the biggest obstacle will be to find a manufacturer. The last remaining U.S. light bulb manufacturer closed up shop earlier this month. So much for jobs....

Quotes of the Day - Constitution vs. the courts

"The public welfare demands that constitutional cases must be decided according to the terms of the Constitution itself, and not according to judges’ views of fairness, reasonableness, or justice. I have no fear of constitutional amendments properly adopted, but I do fear the rewriting of the Constitution by judges under the guise of interpretation." ~ Justice Hugo L. Black

"I hope your committee will not permit doubts as to constitutionality, however reasonable, to block the suggested legislation." ~ Franklin D. Roosevelt (in a 1935 letter to the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee concerning Roosevelt’s New Deal legislation)

"Under our Constitution, the federal government has delegated, enumerated and thus limited powers. Power is delegated by the founding generation or through subsequent amendment (that makes it legitimate); enumerated in the constitution (that makes it legal); and limited by that enumeration. As the 10th Amendment says, if a power hasn’t been delegated, the federal government doesn’t have it. For 150 years, that design held for the most part. When faced with a welfare bill in 1794, for example, James Madison, the principal author of the Constitution, rose in the House to say that he could find no constitutional authority for the bill. A century later, when Congress passed a similar measure, President Cleveland vetoed it as beyond Congress’ authority. That all changed during the New Deal as both congress and the president sought to expand federal power. When the Supreme court objected, rather than amend the Constitution, Franklin D. Roosevelt tried to pack the court with six additional members. The scheme failed, but the threat worked. Thereafter, the court started reading the Constitution’s General Welfare and Commerce Clauses so broadly that the doctrine of enumerated powers was essentially destroyed—and with it limited government." ~ Roger Pilon

Bill to penalize TARTA-like campaign actions passes from house committee

Press Release on the bill to impose a criminal penalty for what TARTA did when it 'loaned' public funds to their levy campaign:

Legislation to Penalize Campaign Finance Violators Passes from House Committee

COLUMBUS—The House Criminal Justice Committee yesterday approved legislation that, when enacted, will impose a criminal penalty on public officials who knowingly use public funds for political purposes.

House Bill 326—jointly sponsored by Representatives Jeff McClain (R-Upper Sandusky) and Brian Hill (R-Zanesville)—institutes a penalty of a first-degree misdemeanor, similar to the penalty for other campaign finance law violations. Currently, the Ohio Revised Code specifies that it is illegal to utilize tax dollars for political purposes but does not include a criminal penalty.

“This bill is very straightforward,” McClain said. “It simply protects taxpayer dollars and is deserving of the unanimous support it received.”

“Taxpayers are one step closer to holding their public officials accountable if they misuse public dollars and violate campaign finance laws,” Hill said. “Thank you to Chairman Slaby and the members of the Criminal Justice committee for their speedy consideration and unanimous support of this important legislation.”

The issue arose after a recent audit of the Toledo Area Regional Transit Authority (TARTA) revealed that in 2007 and 2008, TARTA illegally loaned nearly $67,000 to Citizens for TARTA, the political action committee that gathers resources to fund TARTA levy campaigns.

Having passed from the Criminal Justice Committee, House Bill 326 now awaits a vote by the full Ohio House of Representatives.

-30-

Toledo Chamber and TASBA urge YES on Issue 2

Press Release:

Toledo Job Creators Support YES Vote on Issue 2

(Columbus) - The Toledo Regional Chamber of Commerce and the Toledo Area Small Business Association announced today their support for the reasonable reforms of State Issue 2. The organization, ranked in the top 5 percent of chambers nationwide, represents more than 2,800 job creators throughout northwest Ohio.

"For Ohio and its communities to be strong again, government costs must be realigned with tax revenue," the chamber's board of directors said in a statement. "The passage of State Issue 2 would give local government elected officials and management the flexibility required to more effectively and efficiently manage their workplaces on behalf of Ohio’s taxpayers."

The Building a Better Ohio campaign welcomed the endorsement.

"We're proud to stand with Ohio's job creators in this effort to move our state in a new direction," said campaign spokesman Jason Mauk. "The people leading Ohio's economic recovery know exactly what needs to be done to create jobs. They know from experience that we can't make Ohio a more affordable place to live, work and do business until we get the cost of government under control. That starts with the reasonable reforms of State Issue 2."

The Toledo Chamber of Commerce joins a growing coalition of respected civic leaders across Ohio who have endorsed a YES vote on State Issue 2. Other recent endorsements include:

* Ohio Manufacturers' Association
* Ohio Farm Bureau Federation
* Ohio Society of CPAs
* Associated Builders and Contractors of Ohio
* National Federation of Independent Business - Ohio
* Ohio Chamber of Commerce
* Columbus Chamber of Commerce
* Greater Cleveland Partnership
* Cincinnati USA Regional Chamber of Commerce
* Youngstown Chamber of Commerce
* Dayton Area Chamber of Commerce

These organizations jointly represent hundreds of thousands of hard-working Ohioans across the state.

Quote of the Day - resistance

"The inherent right in the people to reform their government, I do not deny; and they have another right, and that is to resist unconstitutional laws without overturning the government." ~ Daniel Webster

Vol. 4: An honest look at Ohio Issue 2 - nurses

In their continuing effort to tell the truth about Ohio Issue 2, GOHP blog has released another video. This one examines the claims in the fourth ad from the campaign against Issue 2. In debunking the claims, the video points out that most of the current issues facing nurses stem from problems in the system - problems that Issue 2 would fix.

1Matters presents HarrySandler Exhibit and Gala

Press Release:

1Matters Announces Harry Sandler Exhibit and Gala to Benefit the Unhoused

Toledo, Ohio. Ken Leslie, founder of 1Matters, announces that Harry Sandler will kick off the exhibit of his unique photographic artwork to begin the fundraiser for this local non-profit organization. All proceeds from the Gala and sales of artwork benefit 1Matters, which provides assistance to the unhoused.

GALA: V.I.P. Premier Gala, with Harry Sandler in attendance hors d’oeuvres, desserts and wine bar music by Claude Black Trio
DATE: Friday, October 7
TIME: 6:00 – 10:00 p.m.
PLACE: 20 North Gallery
18 N. St. Clair Street, downtown Toledo
ADMISSION: $100 per person

OPENING RECEPTION: “Harry Sandler: Childhood and Other Neighborhoods”
DATE: Sunday, October 9
TIME: 2:00 – 6:00 p.m.
PLACE: 20 North Gallery
18 N. St. Clair Street, downtown Toledo
ADMISSION: no admission charge

EXHIBIT: “Harry Sandler: Childhood and Other Neighborhoods”
DATE: Wednesdays – Saturdays, October 12 - 30
TIME: noon – 4:00 p.m. (and by appointment)
PLACE: 20 North Gallery
18 N. St. Clair Street, downtown Toledo
ADMISSION: no admission charge

As part of the effort to increase awareness about the unhoused in our area and to raise funds to secure housing for them, 1Matters and 20 North Gallery are sponsoring a Harry Sandler exhibit. Spending more than 30 years traveling the world as a tour manager for Bruce Springsteen, Stevie Nicks, Van Halen, The Eagles, Jewel , Billy Joel and more, has given Harry Sandler rare opportunities to capture legends, landscapes and everyday life on film. Several items in this exhibit are signed by the performers pictured in them.

"John Mellencamp discovered this group’s work during a tour stop in Toledo. After getting to know Ken Leslie and the 1Matters mission as they worked with John on the road, John’s publicist, Bob Merlis, and I were impressed enough we both wanted to do something. Bob and I both joined the 1Matters Board of Directors and are working with John to build on something the music industry can support in a significant way," said Sandler.

Crystal Bowersox is one of many musicians who supports the efforts of 1Matters.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_pmIbFHQyNY&feature=youtu.be

The V.I.P. Premier Gala is co-chaired by Mayor Mike Bell, Commissioner Tina Skeldon Wozniak, State Representative Teresa Fedor, Councilman Steve Steel, Samantha Platzke, Eric Hillenbrand, and Ken and Norma Leslie. It features a silent auction and raffle items, including two tickets to a Roger Daltrey concert, airfare to and hotel in Las Vegas.

The exhibit’s opening reception coincides with the “1 Walks – 1 Rocks –1Matters” event that supports World Homeless Day. The exhibit concludes the last weekend of October, the same weekend that 1Matters sponsors its annual Tent City in downtown Toledo.

1Matters is an all-volunteer organization founded by formerly homeless man-turned-comedian, Ken Leslie. The group has become expert in bringing entire communities and competitors together in community collaborations to care about, and care for, the unhoused. Through these collaborations and the help of the music industry, help is provided to get more individuals and families with children off the streets and into domestic autonomy.

###
Tickets may be purchased online hereFor further information: www.1Matters.org www.HarrySandler.com
www.20NorthGallery.net

Vol. 3: An honest look at Issue 2

GOHP takes a look at the third ad from the campaign against Ohio Issue 2, pointing out the falsehoods in their latest television spot.

Be sure to share this information ...

Quotes of the Day - freedom vs. security

"One of the things that bothers me most is the growing belief in the country that security is more important than freedom. It ain't." ~ Lyn Nofziger


"Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the Government's purposes are beneficent. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding." ~ Justice Louis D. Brandeis

Toledo City Council Meeting September 20, 2011

My apologies...due to a problem with my email, I didn't get the Toledo City Council meeting notes from Sherry until today. Here they are with her comments about the proceedings in italics:

Toledo City Council Meeting

September 20, 2011

In attendance: Councilmen Martinez, McNamara, Craig, Steel, Waniewski, Sarantou, Copeland, Collins, Ludeman, Councilwomen Brown, Hicks-Hudson, Deputy Mayor Herwat. Councilwoman Webb had her baby.

I need to let you know the atmosphere. I arrived there at around 3:45. The place was packed. Every seat was taken, and at this point there is one row deep around the room. (They would not let anymore people in the room, it was two and three people deep around the room.) The Union was clapping, chanting, and waving flags. They were shouting, getting worked up, and there were things said, that I will not repeat. I ended up sitting in the back row. It was tough to hear, I did my best. The comments were flying as Council members entered. When Mr. Herwat and company entered the room, boos were heard everywhere. I kept hearing that the Mayor went to China on the taxpayer's dime. I tried to state that he didn't, but I was ignored. Union women (and I use the term lightly) stated that Webb should have been there with the baby. They would have done it. I looked at them and said that she had a C-Section with the first one, probably did with the second (I had two C-Sections). They excused that. Believe me, I'm no Webb fan, just stating facts. Ms. Brown opened the Meeting, letting everyone know that they will be escorted out if they cause a ruckus. The comments were flying, again.

Representative from the City (didn't catch the man's name) – the City will have a deficit of 5–8 mil – development 10 mil less – property taxes less – Income taxes down 20 mil – unemployment at 10.5% – benefits cannot be justified, 6.7 mil pension pick up, 2 mil insurance. We could end up laying off 130 people – we cannot afford to pay these things.

Vote for executive session – no – Steel, Collins, Copeland, Hicks-Hudson, Martinez - yes - McNamara, Waniewski, Craig, Ludeman, Brown, Sarantou. Motion failed.

Item 422 – Appropriation for 1st Phase of improve to Promenade Park, filling/grading & remove Water St, $750,000 CIP – refer back to Administration. *Prior to this reading, the agenda was turned over to Mr. Steel. He HAD to throw in his two cents. For what it is worth, here it is.* Steel - This is Democracy at work (I stated OUT LOUD that this was a Republic. We had just recited the pledge, “And to the Republic for which it stands”, I had multitudes of people around me. I was ignored.), and it is a good thing. Let me state that Collective Bargaining is a human right. (? SZ)

Item 423 – Amend TMC Ch. 2117, AFSCME Local 7, to implement terms and conditions of Fact Finding Report – Hicks-Hudson – Hold for 2 weeks – lets not make a decision tonight - it is premature to get rid of distrust. Copeland – Local 7 represents some 2,600 people - shame on the Mayor and the Administration – do the right thing – vote it down. (Hmmm, he must mean Issue 2?? Isn't this WRONG?! Isn't there a law? I just noticed this, as I typed. SZ) Collins – In 1979 Collective Bargaining in the State of OH, came under the Ferguson Act – Collective Bargaining doesn't need to be relinquished. In 2010 concessions were given – a true leader would do nothing that employees shouldn't do. Ludeman – this needs dialog – see what comes about – agree with the two week hold over. McNamara – agrees with the two week hold over. Sarantou – agrees with McNamara – negotiate/discussion agreement in two weeks. Martinez – it is not us vs. them. Vote to hold for 2 weeks – passed – all voting yes. Hold for 2 weeks. *Now 90% of the room leaves – noisily. I've moved up, so I can hear. There can't be anymore than 20 people left in the audience. Where are all these people when regular business is going on? These people were rude and crude. Good riddance.*

Item 425 – Resolution – Support integrated network of high-speed trains and expanded Amtrak service – adopted – all voting yes.

Item 426 – Authorize Administration to implement, enforce, and utilize HUD Section 108 Loan Program Policy – Martinez – this is an opportunity for economic Development – good team effort from the Port Authority. McNamara – states the same. Passed – all voting yes.

Item 427 – Resolution – Oppose proposed Congressional redistricting – Hicks-Hudson – Mayor is with Council on this issue. McNamara – letter to Toledo lobbyist – hearing today – we are not being silent about this. Adopted – all voting yes.

Item 428 - Purchase Laskey Road to Bancroft Street portion of abandoned CSX rail line for multi-use recreational trail - 1st Reading. Craig – UT to Dorr St. - you can get around Toledo on bicycles. (I did not understand why he said this, until Fred's Show the next day. Grrr! SZ)

Item 429 – Amend Ordinance 534-10 for proper accounting of ODNR GLRI grant for Environmental Services, $400,000 – passed – all voting yes.

Item 430 – Amend Enterprise Zone Policy with new section on job requirements – to Economic Development Committee.

Item 431 – Amend Toledo Expansion Incentive Program (TEI) Guidelines - to Economic Development Committee.

Item 432 – Grant 50% tax exemption for Chrysler Corp. $365M expansion and upgrade, retain 920, create 1105 - to Economic Development Committee.

Item 433 – Accept FirstEnergy grant for electrical upgrades at Standard Lofts, 34 Erie St, 75 Units, $40,000 – passed – all voting yes.

Item 434 – Grant 30' easement within Blair Park for United North Cranes Landing water source heat pump – passed – McNamara abstaining, rest voting yes.

Item 435 – Purchase foreclosed property at 4126 Ruskin Dr. for NSP model home, $41,000 NSP Funds – passed – all voting yes.

Item 436 – Accept ODOT grant for engineering/environmental study for Dorr St. (Upton-Byrne) Safety Project, $77,400 – passed – all voting yes.

Item 437 – Extend contracts 50/50 with N-Viro and S&L Fertilizer for biosolids at Water Reclamation, up to 90 days – passed – all voting yes.

Item 438 – Contract with S&L and Northwest BioEnergy for biosolids recycling/disposal program at Water Reclamation – to Utilities and Public Service Committee.

Item 439 – Expenditure to inspect and repair S&C switchgear at Water Reclamation, $25,000 Sewer Operating – passed – all voting yes.

Item 440 – Issue Water System Revenue Bonds, $40,000,000 - 1st Reading.

Last Call:

Hicks-Hudson – 1) Refuse and recycling pick up, September 24th, 420 E. Manhattan St, from 9 – 12. 2) Meeting about refuse and recycling, September 26th, Main Library, from 6 – 8. 3) Thanks to George Robinson for the tour of the Water Facility.

Ludeman – go Tigers!

Sarantou – Thank you for the success at the Greek-American Festival – Finance Committee meeting on Thursday.

Brown – going to Columbus to retire – keep it in Council .

Issue 2 and Issue 2 door hangers

If you support a 'yes' vote on Ohio Issues 2 and 3, you can go here to get your very own door hanger compliments of FreedomWorks.

Next month, FreedomWorks will host an official field hearing of the Tea Party Debt Commission in Cincinnatti where yard signs and door hangers will be available for pick up. For more information or to RSVP visit: http://connect.freedomworks.org/node/177745.