Monday, April 17th, 2006,
by Fred (,
eminent domain, Missouri, property, taxes
,
Meryl Yourish on the suicide bombing in Tel Aviv
Once more, for those who claim that the palestinian murderers use suicide bombing attacks because they don’t have tanks or other military weapons, I should like to point out that Tel Aviv has never been a part of the occupied territories.The bombing took place in Tel Aviv. Six people dead so far, 52 wounded, two critically. The wounded, of course, carry nails and shrapnel in their bodies, as well as rat poison in many cases. The murderers put it in to cause more bleeding, in the hopes of killing more people. These are the bombs used in “self-defense.â€
Islamic Jihad and Fatah — I’m sorry, Al-Aqsa — are claiming the bombing. Hamas says it was self-defense.
Sure. Self-defense. In Tel Aviv. At a bus station. At a falafel shop. Those are dangerous people, falafel-eaters.
No, they carry out these terrorist attacks because they are murderous thugs who like to kill Jews. They kill people like Philip Balahsan, who was at the site of the bombing with his two children. Hamas are terrorists, and any government led by Hamas is a terror government. This attack, coming a mere two weeks after Hamas took over the PA, should heighten the resolve of all western governments to eliminate funding to the Palestinians. They voted for terrorists, so now they must reap what they sowed.
Share This
Monday, April 17th, 2006,
by Fred (,
courts, crime, law, Missouri, sex offender registry
,
Missouri legislators are considering a bill designed to limit a form of corporate welfare, tax increment financing, which allows developers to use the future property taxes, sales taxes and other taxes that their projects will generate. But critics of the bill say it doesn’t go far enough.
Since the law was passed in 1982, cities across the state have set up hundreds of TIF districts that have diverted hundreds of millions of dollars to developers. County governments, school districts, library boards and ambulance districts are among the entities that forgo revenue.After hours of debate over several days, the Senate decided to leave intact the vague definition of “blight” that has allowed the program to spread. Areas can be declared blighted based on factors such as defective street layout and obsolete platting.
But under the bill, vacant fields or farmland in the St. Louis region would no longer qualify. The region is defined as the city of St. Louis and St. Louis, St. Charles, Jefferson and Franklin counties.
Statewide, undeveloped or vacant land would be ineligible if the project consisted solely of homes or apartments. The idea is, schools can’t afford to lose property taxes from new subdivisions full of children who need educating.
TIF and its necessary partner, eminent domain, have created huge problems in St. Louis County. Local municipalities have created hundreds of TIF districts, exempting the regions from taxation. Meanwhile, a fragmented sales tax system has left many municipalities dependent upon economic development projects to fund local government, so the municipalities heavily recruit developers, which requires even more TIF districts and eminent domain abuse. It’s a vicious cycle that will only be circumvented if the government limits (or, better yet, eliminates) TIF.
This bill certainly doesn’t go far enough. Developers, as always, have the upper hand, claiming that the projects will go to Illinois or Kansas instead. But does anyone really believe that Home Depot would shun Missouri if TIF was not available? Should taxpayers really be subsidizing this development? No and no.
Share This
Wednesday, April 12th, 2006,
by Fred (,
Kirkwood, Missouri, nanny state, politics, smoking
,
Kirkwood residents who think Citizens for a Smoke-Free Kirkwood’s proposed smoking ban will have no lasting economic effect better think again.
Restaurants in Ballwin, which in January banned smoking in public places, are suffering adverse economic effects, a survey by the chair of the Kirkwood Special Business District board has concluded.David McArthur, chairman of the Kirkwood Junction Special Business District Advisory Commission, said he visited seven restaurants along Manchester Road March 30 and conducted an impartial survey.
“Six of the seven reported losses in the bar of 35 to 50 percent,” McArthur told the Kirkwood City Council April 6. “The one exception, Mi Lupita, is a small restaurant with a six-seat bar area that likes the ban because it increased his non-smoking seating table capacity by five tables in the bar area. Restaurants like Longhorn Steakhouse reported bar losses of over 50 percent. No increase in restaurant sales and they now close an hour earlier every day. Also, one bar and two restaurants have closed since the ban.”
State and county-wide bans are bad enough, as they interfere with the right of a business owner to decide what legal activities are permissible on his property. Local bans like the one proposed for Kirkwood are just economic suicide, as smokers will just choose to go to a neighboring community that values freedom more highly. And it’s not like non-smokers are deprived of smoke-free environments - 16 of the 25 restaurants in the Kirkwood SBD are already smoke-free.
A city should like Kirkwood should be especially careful when considering business-killing ordinances. Kirkwood relies heavily on sales and gross receipts taxes; the General Fund receives no revenue from property taxes. In 2005, Kirkwood took in $4.1 million in sales tax revenue and $3.2 million in utility gross receipts tax revenue. General Fund expenditures were $15.9 million. Any business lost to the smoking ban would have a serious impact on sales and utility gross receipts tax revenue, and the Mayor is relying on an increase in the sales tax rate to fund some of his proposed $2 million in new spending.
Share This
Wednesday, April 12th, 2006,
by Fred (,
firearms, Missouri, psychiatry
,
Court overturns denial of gun permit to man once detained in mental ward
As a Missouri corrections officer for more than 10 years, David Nelson is authorized to carry a gun on the job. But a year ago, he was denied a state permit to buy one.The contradiction became a court dispute that reached all the way to the seven judges of the Missouri Supreme Court, who ruled unanimously Tuesday in Nelson’s favor.
The issue dates to Sept. 11, 2003, when a judge in Callaway County ordered that Nelson be detained, evaluated and treated at a mental institution for 96 hours, against his will, because a Fulton police officer alleged that Nelson had talked about suicide.
In that period, the Mid-Missouri Mental Health Center determined that Nelson did not suffer from mental illness and needed neither medication nor psychiatric care. He never got a court hearing to protest the police officer’s claim.
When Nelson applied for a permit to purchase a concealable weapon, the Callaway County Sheriff’s Department said no. Sheriff Dennis Crane, and later Prosecuting Attorney Robert Sterner, cited a state law that denies permits to felons or people having been committed to mental institutions. But Nelson’s “commitment”, which he did not have the opportunity to contest and which was based on the testimony of a police office whom Nelson did not have the opportunity to rebut, was for the minimum period under the law, and the doctors prescribed neither medication nor psychiatric treatment.
Nelson sued, and ended up before the same judge that issued the original detention order. Needless to say, he lost that round. It took a unanimous opinion from the Missouri Supreme Court, which drew a distinction between detention and commitment, to allow the corrections officer to obtain his permit.
This story points out the flaws in both the civil commitment law, which allows an individual to be held against their will for 96 hours without an opportunity to be heard or to challenge the detention, and Missouri’s gun laws, which deny permits to people too crazy to own a gun but not crazy enough to be committed.
Share This
Monday, April 10th, 2006,
by Fred (,
Missouri, politics, science, Stem Cell Research
,
Maryland Governor signs stem cell bill
Maryland Gov. Robert Ehrlich Jr., a Republican, signed on Thursday legislation intended to make his state a forerunner in stem cell research.Ehrlich had telegraphed his intentions on the stem cell bill, which will authorize $15 million for the research in the coming year. It had been opposed by a majority of Republican lawmakers….
The stem cell bill sets guidelines for awarding grants to conduct research using both embryonic and adult stem cells, research that supporters say holds great promise for treatment of a wide range of debilitating diseases.
States are stepping in to fill the void left by president Bush’s restriction on use of federal funds for this necessary research. Missourians will have the opportunity to do the same this November by supporting the Missouri Stem Cell Research and Cures Initiative.
Share This
Thursday, April 6th, 2006,
by Fred (,
economics, Kirkwood, Missouri, taxes
,
Kirkwood mayor proposes sales, property tax hikes
The mayor proposes that voters approve a sales tax of one-fourth of 1 percent for the fire department and a property-tax increase of 17 cents for each $100 of assessed value for the police department.Each would raise about $1 million, the mayor said on Monday. Each department would receive a minimum of $500,000 in additional money, he said. The remainder would replace general fund money spent on those departments and free the revenue for other municipal uses.
The two taxes would be separate proposals on the ballot. Swoboda said they could go before voters in the August primary election or in the election in April of next year.
The changes amount to a 3.5% increase in the sales tax and a 35.7% increase in the Kirkwood portion of the property tax. The property tax increase will be 2.6% of the total property tax bill (including the myriad county taxes). Kirkwood residents are loathe to approve new taxes, havign rejected a 34 cent increase in the property tax in 2004.
It appears that Kirkwood has taken some steps to reduce spending, and residents are likely to respond to requests for additional funds for public safety. But what purpose did the “community development director” and her secretary serve? What other unnecessary spending can be cut? This remains a city with a $15.9 million General Fund budget for 27,000 residents. Compare this with the nearby city of Webster Groves, which spends $12.2 million for its 23,000 residents (Kirkwood budget, Webster Groves budget). Were Kirkwood to spend at the rate Webster does, it could save well over $1 million each year.
Governments should tax as little and spend as little as possible, even at the local level.
Share This
Thursday, March 30th, 2006,
by Fred (,
censorship, government, Missouri, video games
,
Undeterred by the numerous court cases finding such bans unconstitutional, Missouri Democrats are pressing forward with a bill making it illegal to sell certain video games to minors
The gory excerpts, taken from the most violent of video games [Postal II], were offered as Exhibit A this week in favor of a bill banning the sale of such content to minors. The bill would make it a misdemeanor to sell games rated M for “mature,” or AO for “adults only” to anyone under age 17. It also would impose fines as high as $5,000 to retailers who fail to post information about game ratings.While shocked members of the committee echoed the need to protect children, critics warned of certain legal assault against such efforts. And they needed only to point to St. Louis County and Illinois, where similar bans have been toppled in court.
The last refuge of the censor is always “protect the children.” Parents, however, already have all the tools they need to protect their children. All video games are rated, indicating the appropriate ages for such games. Here are the ratings in question in Missouri:
MATURE
Titles rated M (Mature) have content that may be suitable for persons ages 17 and older. Titles in this category may contain intense violence, blood and gore, sexual content, and/or strong language.
ADULTS ONLY
Titles rated AO (Adults Only) have content that should only be played by persons 18 years and older. Titles in this category may include prolonged scenes of intense violence and/or graphic sexual content and nudity.
If you are a parent and don’t want your kids exposed to these games, don’t let them play games rated M or AO. Don’t know the rating of a game? Use the ESRB’s handy search feature, which will tell you that Postal 2 is rated M for “Blood and Gore, Intense Violence, Mature Humor, Mature Sexual Themes, Strong Language and Use of Drugs”. Or search by rating - there are nearly three times more games rated Teen (13+) than rated M or AO.
It’s just more Sesame Street Nation - lazy parents and the easily offended would rather have a society where nothing is inappropriate for a child than put the responsibility of raising children where it belongs, on the parents.
More discussion, including lots of parents asking the government to do their jobs for them, at the Post’s Talk of the Day.
Share This
Thursday, March 30th, 2006,
by Fred (,
abortion, Missouri, science, Stem Cell Research
,
The radical anti-abortion wing of the Missouri House is ready to forego $40 million in spending on science rather than see it spent on stem cell research.
Nearly $40 million once set aside by Missouri to support life science research and commercialization could soon become a casualty of the state’s battle over the legality of embryonic stem cell research.Over the objections of Gov. Matt Blunt, the Missouri House has opted to not include the money in its version of the budget passed earlier this month. Now, many question if the Senate will restore the funds, raised from the state’s tobacco settlement.
The 2003 law that created the Life Sciences Trust Fund provides that “[p]ublic funds shall not be expended, paid, or granted to or on behalf of an existing or proposed research project that involves abortion services, human cloning, or prohibited human research.” Some legislators are concerned that the stem cell research amendment on this November’s ballot, if approved by voters, would allow some of the funds to be used for stem cell research.
If this is the House’s concern, the members should be ashamed of themselves. If the law as written bars use of funds for stem cell research, it will only be because Missourians approve a constitutional amendment that expenditure on such research becomes legal. If a clear majority of Missourians want to spend public funds on stem-cell research, a handful of anti-abortion legislators whouldn’t stand in their way.
It’s not at all clear that the 2003 law even bars use of funds on stem cell research. The law bars use of the funds on abortion services, human cloning and prohibited human research. Abortion services is defined as “performing, inducing, or assisting with abortions or encouraging patients to have abortions, referring patients for abortions not necessary to save the life of the mother, or development of drugs, chemicals, or devices intended to be used to induce an abortion.” Stem cell research does not involve abortion services.
The law defines human cloning as “the creation of a human being by any means other than by the fertilization of an oocyte of a human female by a sperm of a human male.” The type of research at issue this November does not involve the “creation of a human being.” In fact, it strictly prohibits human cloning, as the Secretary of State acknowledges. Creation of stem cells in a lab does not amount to creation of a human being.
Finally, although the constitutional amendment at issue would guarantee that Missouri lawmakers cannot prohibit certain types of research, such research is legal now. It is not prohibited in a generic sense, and it is certainly not the “prohibited human research” at issue in the Life Sciences Trust Fund law, which limits prohibited research to
a research project in which there is the taking or utilization of the organs, tissues, or cellular material of (a) a deceased child, unless consent is given by the parents in a manner provided in sections 194.210 to 194.290, RSMo, relating to anatomical gifts, and neither parent caused the death of such child or consented to another person causing the death of such child or (b) a living child, when the intended or likely result of such taking or utilization is to kill or cause harm to the health, safety, or welfare of such child, or when the purpose is to target such child for possible destruction in the future.
The Missouri House must not allow a handful of anti-abortion legislators to use irrational fear of stem cell research to block scientific progress made possible through the Life Sciences Trust Fund (whether Missouri has any business operating such a fund is another matter for another day). Unfortunately, the Senate and Gov. Blunt seem unwilling to reverse this bad decision.
Share This
Wednesday, March 29th, 2006,
by Fred (,
eminent domain, Missouri, novus, property, Rock Hill, Sunset Hills
,
Missouri legislators are a step closer to enacting eminent domain reform
Pratt’s committee expected to wrap up public hearings Tuesday night. Before the panel is a bill that would bar government from taking private property solely to increase a community’s tax base and bring in new jobs.Blighted land could be taken for redevelopment, but dwellings would have to show physical signs of deterioration. Farmland and vacant land that has never been developed could not be deemed blighted.
Again, the bill is a good start. There is absolutely no reason local governments should be able to hand private property over to developers if the property is not blighted. The bill in committee still contains loopholes, and should be amended to ban all use of eminent domain for economic development purposes.
There’s a bigger systematic issue at play, however. Aggressive use of tax increment financing and a fragmented sales tax system among St. Louis County’s 91 municipalities have left communities heavily dependent upon economic redevelopment. For example, Rock Hill has bet its future upon Novus’ Market at McKnight project:
The city’s budget, scheduled for approval in April, has been trimmed by about 12 percent.
Rock Hill has no fire chief, no police chief and no city hall. It can’t afford to finish roadwork or start plans for a new city hall, or even to hire workers to fill empty positions.
“We’re just holding our breaths, waiting for this thing to start,” she said.
And when asked what the city would do if the development did not go forward, Morgan was almost speechless.
“Dramatic measures would have to be taken,” she said.
Novus is, of course, the developer whose financial problems led to the collapse of an eminent domain-based Sunset Manor in Sunset Hills, which proposed to tear down 254 mostly non-blighted homes and replace them with a shopping center. The collapse of the project left the property owners in the lurch, and local government officials on the hot seat.
Unless these issues are addressed, cash-starved municipalities will exploit any loopholes in the eminent domain bill, so the legislature must make sure any bill has as few loopholes as possible.
Share This
Thursday, March 23rd, 2006,
by Fred (,
Black Jack, law, Missouri
,
Turns out the Black Jack ordinance that forbids more than three people from living together unless they’re related by blood, marriage or adoption doesn’t have anything to do with overcrowding after all, as Black Jack had claimed during its attempts to kick Olivia Shelltrack and Fondray Loving out of town.
Mayor Norman McCourt has insisted the city ordinance is intended to prevent overcrowding.But in a November 1999 letter he wrote regarding a similar but unrelated case involving the unwed parents of triplets, McCourt makes specific comments about the city’s “morals and standards.”
Black Jack officials and residents “do not believe that an unmarried couple having children residing in our community is an appropriate standard that they wish to approve,” he wrote.
It’s presumptuous that the mayor of Black Jack would say that residents don’t want an unmarried couple with children living in their town. It’s offensive that the government would say what type of family arrangements are or are not acceptable. And it’s great that the mayor’s own words are now being used to show just how small-minded he and his cronies are.
Share This
