Shut up and pay: Secret police facility costs taxpayers $2 million

It’s like George Orwell meets the Mad Hatter. A local government board in Arizona finds nothing wrong with charging taxpayers nearly $2 million for a new police facility – and then refusing to disclose the building’s location.

 

True story.

 

City council members in Scottsdale, Ariz., have voted unanimously, 7-0, to spend $1.87 million for a new 17,827 square-foot offices for the police department’s Investigative Service Bureau. At the same time, they won’t disclose the address of the building. That’s the Orwell; now here’s the Hatter. Given the building’s size and office zoning, most in the community already know where it’s located.

 

So why is the government going through this charade of withholding public records?

 

It’s a safety thang.

 

“A substantial number of police undercover personnel will work out of this building. Therefore, in the interest of the safety of our officers and the integrity of future undercover investigations, the city will not disclose its precise location,” Kelly Corsette, communications and public affairs director for the City of Scottsdale, explains in an email.

 

Sure. That makes sense. So long as logic doesn’t get in the way, that is. Else one might arrive at a conclusion similar to that of one attorney schooled in Freedom of Information Act and public records law: Even federal investigative agents have public work addresses.

 

“Everybody knows where the CIA building is,” says Dan Barr, an attorney with a Phoenix law firm who also works with the National Freedom of Information Coalition.

 

One could say the same about the building that serves the FBI. Or, Homeland Security. Or the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. But perhaps these federal entities don’t deal with as sensitive security issues as Scottsdale police?

 

Not to mock – but really. This is government-gone-wild at its worst.

 

It’s bad enough when Capitol Hill politicians raid the public coffers for pork barrel projects, or special interest expenditures, or for wealth distribution schemes. It’s hard enough to keep congressional lawmakers in line who work, in some cases, hundreds of miles from their constituents and who conduct business in the labyrinth of Washington, D.C. But we’re talking local government body here. Scottsdale council members vote on the issues that impact the neighbors they speak with, the restaurants they eat in, the streets they drive, the schools their children attend.

 

They’re accountable, up close and personal.

 

So when seven members of the local governing board, including the mayor – who could not be reached for comment – decide that it’s perfectly sensible to take $1.87 million of taxpayer dollars and spend it on a police facility, and refuse to disclose the address of this facility, that’s quite a face slap. That’s a ‘we know best’ and ‘trust me’ philosophy of governance that runs counter to Founding Father or constitutional ‘we the people’ and ‘of, by and for the people’ principles. And given the flimsy excuse for the secrecy, more – much more – than just Scottsdale should be outraged.

 

Or, read it here: http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/368773/20120731/scottsdale-arizona-secret-police-facility-taxpayers.htm

More taxes, more taxes, more taxes

And now, presenting, another terrific budget idea from the Democrats ... More Taxes. These ones, however, are for our own good. They will help save the children, save their futures. In so doing, that saves America. Read the excerpt, from a Heartland Institute article:

"Bottled water, iced tea, soda, and juice at Baltimore groceries and convenience stores began costing more on July 1.

City Council members increased the bottle tax from 2 cents to 5 cents a bottle, over the objections of store owners and business groups that say the tax places them at a competitive disadvantage.

The tax means a 12-pack of soda costs 60 cents more in Baltimore than in stores outside city boundaries. A case of bottled water increases by $1.20. Excluded are dairy items and beverages sold in bottles larger than two liters."

The reason for the new tax? Once again, it's for the children ... the bottle tax is expected to raise $10 million for school construction. Yet one-in-five Baltimore-ians live below poverty level, while the unemployment rate in the city surpasses 9 percent. Wouldn't it be better sense to find some budget cuts, than hit up the city's hardest hit for more?

 
Full story here: http://news.heartland.org/newspaper-article/2012/07/16/baltimore-more-doubles-citys-bottle-tax.

Even ACLU supports Chik-Fil-A over Chicago, Boston

You know you've gone too far as a liberal when even the American Civil Liberties Union tells you to stop.

That's the case with the Chik-Fil-A issue in Chicago and Boston. In brief, the mayors of these cities find it objectionable that the CEO of Chik-Fil-A take the biblical view of gay marriage -- and moreover, dares to states these views publicly. In response, they've mounted the politically correct podium and announced desire to block Chik-Fil-A from their cities. Ridiculous? Un-Constitutional? Even the liberal ACLU says so.

From a Newsmax article, dated July 26::

Chicago and Boston might want to keep Chick-fil-A out of their cities but that doesn’t mean they have the right to do so, according to the ACLU.

Chick-fil-A President Dan Cathy’s recent comments supporting the “biblical definition” of marriage as between a man and a woman has led to calls by gay rights advocates to boycott the chain. The mayors of Boston and Chicago have recently promised to stop further expansion of the restaurants in their cities. Emanuel weighed in after Chicago Alderman Proco Joe Moreno said he intends to block the chain from opening its second Chicago location because of Cathy’s remarks.

Legal experts said the cities’ push to stop Chick-fil-A doesn’t stand a chance because barring Chick-fil-A over the personal views of its owner is an “open and shut” discrimination case, Fox News reported.

“The government can regulate discrimination in employment or against customers, but what the government cannot do is to punish someone for their words,” Adam Schwartz, senior attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois, told Fox News. “When an alderman refuses to allow a business to open because its owner has expressed a viewpoint the government disagrees with, the government is practicing viewpoint discrimination.”

The ACLU “strongly supports” same-sex marriage, Schwartz told Fox, but said that if a government can exclude a business for being against same-sex marriage, it can also exclude a business for being in support of same-sex marriage.

That's a very logical assessment from the ACLU ... and one that Chicago and Boston would do well to abide.

Read the full article here: http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/chick-fil-a-gay-marriage-chicago/2012/07/26/id/446713

'Boehner Baby' doll makes its debut

Oh, John Boehner. If only it were untrue ...

Happy Friday all!

Yet another red tape horror story: Feds halt oyster farming

Maryland environmental officials are attempting to encourage oyster farming in Chesapeake Bay, but oyster farmers are being held back by formidable bureaucratic red tape from Washington, DC.

Oysters are highly efficient at improving water quality by filtering out algae, excessive nutrients, and pollutants. With Chesapeake Bay oyster populations down roughly 90 percent from historical norms, state officials say they would like to encourage oyster farming, and oyster farmers say they would like to cultivate oysters. The problem, aquaculturists report, is obtaining permits through the redundant federal and state environmental review boards.

Karen Oertel, whose family has farmed oysters since 1947, described the frustration she has personally experienced with government regulation.

“This is not new,” Oertel said, speaking of the state’s 200-year-old oyster farming industry. “But nobody can get the permits. It’s a nightmare for anyone trying to obtain permits. It’s the feds. It’s the Army Corp of Engineers.”

Oertel said the state has been trying to work with the Army Corps of Engineers to open the doors to more permitting and more oyster farming. But it’s been a 20-year battle with few signs of improvement.

“I don’t know why. It’s beyond comprehension,” she said.

Read my full story here: http://heartland.org/policy-documents/maryland-oyster-farming-stalled-federal-red-tape

A five-minute honor for our Founders

I didn't write it, but I still believe it ...

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. ...

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_transcript.html 

We should all take five minutes to read this today, Independence Day.