Both the February and March 2010 sales tax receipts were up compared to those months in 2009. This appears to be the first time in a while. Since January 2008 the sales tax had been steadily dropping compared to the prior year (same month), so this is a welcome change from a budgetary point of view. Obviously it would be nice if this change in direction were to continue, even if only by a modest amount.
This change alone will not correct the budget issues we have been monitoring all year - still, every bit helps.
Monday, May 17, 2010
Sunday, May 16, 2010
what part of Illegal do people not get?
People are still talking about the Arizona law directing police to investigate persons that they believe might be in the country illegally. There are many articles discussing this, including one from Time on April 26, 2010. From what I can tell from reading peoples' comments and media polls, Americans are very supportive of the stance that Arizona is taking. I know I am.
The argument most used by opponents is that Arizona (and any other state) has no standing to enforce federal laws on immigration, based on the contents of the constitution of the united states, specifically Article 1 section 8, fourth clause "To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States;". Section 8 enumerates the powers of congress.
I would posit that the opponents of the Arizona legislation are wrong for the simple reason that the Arizona law does not seek to establish any rules setting who can and can't immigrate and become citizens. The Arizona law establishes a directive to Arizona law enforcement officers and other Arizona officials empowering them to investigate a suspect's legal right to be in the united states (and thus Arizona). Congress has established the rules of entry into the nation; those rules include the possession of a passport/visa or permanent resident card (green card). Only the federal government can issue or rescind visas or green cards. If you are in violation of the rules, you can't be here.
Since the Arizona law makes no attempt to authorize anyone in Arizona to issue or rescind visas or green cards, it is in not in any way in conflict with the national laws. What it does is, using the proper power of the states, authoriz law enforcement to detain people and render them to the federal authorities if they are in the state illegally.
Obviously, this is a contentious matter for many. I think people often fail to understand just what illegal means in any context, and specifically in the context of "illegal aliens". Illegal means to "not be in accord with the law". Congress determined what it takes to be in accord with the law. Arizona is just authorizing their sworn officers to execute the law. As far as I can tell, there is no prohibition to the states on enforcing laws.
In fact, when officials are sworn in to their office, even at the city level (here in Corinth), the official is required to take an oath to support and defend the constitution of the US as well as the state and (in our case) the city charter.
The argument most used by opponents is that Arizona (and any other state) has no standing to enforce federal laws on immigration, based on the contents of the constitution of the united states, specifically Article 1 section 8, fourth clause "To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States;". Section 8 enumerates the powers of congress.
I would posit that the opponents of the Arizona legislation are wrong for the simple reason that the Arizona law does not seek to establish any rules setting who can and can't immigrate and become citizens. The Arizona law establishes a directive to Arizona law enforcement officers and other Arizona officials empowering them to investigate a suspect's legal right to be in the united states (and thus Arizona). Congress has established the rules of entry into the nation; those rules include the possession of a passport/visa or permanent resident card (green card). Only the federal government can issue or rescind visas or green cards. If you are in violation of the rules, you can't be here.
Since the Arizona law makes no attempt to authorize anyone in Arizona to issue or rescind visas or green cards, it is in not in any way in conflict with the national laws. What it does is, using the proper power of the states, authoriz law enforcement to detain people and render them to the federal authorities if they are in the state illegally.
Obviously, this is a contentious matter for many. I think people often fail to understand just what illegal means in any context, and specifically in the context of "illegal aliens". Illegal means to "not be in accord with the law". Congress determined what it takes to be in accord with the law. Arizona is just authorizing their sworn officers to execute the law. As far as I can tell, there is no prohibition to the states on enforcing laws.
In fact, when officials are sworn in to their office, even at the city level (here in Corinth), the official is required to take an oath to support and defend the constitution of the US as well as the state and (in our case) the city charter.
California ban on violent video games unconstitutional
At the end of April of this year (2010), the Supreme Court of the US (SCOTUS) agreed to hear an appeal from the 9th Circuit court of appeals on the issue of California's ban on the sale of violent video games to anyone under the age of 18. See the AP article about the courts and violent video games
It never ceases to amaze me how governments at all levels continually attempt to impose their will on people's freedom of speech and expression and on their freedom of choice. The California law in question is yet another attempt to legislate "morality" and define what is okay for people to participate in. Luckily the 9th circuit court struck down the law. Now we get to hear SCOTUS weigh in on the issue.
To me this is very simple. The writers of the video games have freedom of expression, like anyone else. If people want to buy it, then they should be able to sell it. End of story. Just as important, if you want to buy a violent video game, that is your choice - and the government has no business telling you otherwise.
Now, as for people under 18 - it is the parents' responsibility to determine the suitability of any game, TV show, movie, or other activity their kids might participate in. And in fact, it is their freedom of choice to do so. If you don't want your kids to play violent video games, don't let them. Exercise a little parental control, rather than expecting the state to do it for you.
I will be interested in what SCOTUS has to say, probably sometime this fall or next year.
It never ceases to amaze me how governments at all levels continually attempt to impose their will on people's freedom of speech and expression and on their freedom of choice. The California law in question is yet another attempt to legislate "morality" and define what is okay for people to participate in. Luckily the 9th circuit court struck down the law. Now we get to hear SCOTUS weigh in on the issue.
To me this is very simple. The writers of the video games have freedom of expression, like anyone else. If people want to buy it, then they should be able to sell it. End of story. Just as important, if you want to buy a violent video game, that is your choice - and the government has no business telling you otherwise.
Now, as for people under 18 - it is the parents' responsibility to determine the suitability of any game, TV show, movie, or other activity their kids might participate in. And in fact, it is their freedom of choice to do so. If you don't want your kids to play violent video games, don't let them. Exercise a little parental control, rather than expecting the state to do it for you.
I will be interested in what SCOTUS has to say, probably sometime this fall or next year.
Consideration of a Moratorium on issuing Gas Well Permits in the City of Corinth
At the last council session (May 6, 2010), at the end I requested that discussion of an ordinance to enact a moratorium on Gas Well Permits being issued be added to the May 20, 2010 Council Session agenda. I went so far as to poll the council - if at least 2 other council members agreed it would have to be put on the agenda per City Code 30.085(B). However, I was unable to get even one other council member to throw in on it - so it was up to the mayor and/or city manager to decide if that would be on the agenda.
Apparently one (or both) did decide to place it on the agenda - which I believe is very important for us to at least discuss. After the last month of discussions on the XTO request for a gas well permit, I felt that we should review our well permitting ordinance. During that review, it would be in the city's (and the residents') best interests to not allow any new permit requests.
The moratorium would be temporary and would have an appeals process in place. During the moratorium, council and staff would be working on any revisions necessary to the Gas Well Ordinance. We obtained a tremendous amount of technical information related to Gas Wells during the recent application process. It is very possible that this new information could have an impact on what our ordinance needs to say.
This moratorium would only apply to new gas well permits - the permit that XTO requested (and was denied) would not be subject to the moratorium. You might remember that we denied without prejudice, such that they (XTO) could reapply in light of what they learned in the original permit process.
Apparently one (or both) did decide to place it on the agenda - which I believe is very important for us to at least discuss. After the last month of discussions on the XTO request for a gas well permit, I felt that we should review our well permitting ordinance. During that review, it would be in the city's (and the residents') best interests to not allow any new permit requests.
The moratorium would be temporary and would have an appeals process in place. During the moratorium, council and staff would be working on any revisions necessary to the Gas Well Ordinance. We obtained a tremendous amount of technical information related to Gas Wells during the recent application process. It is very possible that this new information could have an impact on what our ordinance needs to say.
This moratorium would only apply to new gas well permits - the permit that XTO requested (and was denied) would not be subject to the moratorium. You might remember that we denied without prejudice, such that they (XTO) could reapply in light of what they learned in the original permit process.
Disc Golf Proposal for Corinth
At the Corinth Parks and Recreation Commission regular session on May 18, 2010, Aaron Quisenberry will present a proposal for creating a disc golf course at community park. Since the commission session packet is not currently posted, we don't have any details on the proposal. However, at a meeting about 2 months ago I believe, the possibility of a disc golf course being installed west of the Community Park South parking lot near the maintenance building was introduced.
This session of the board will consider the plan as subsequently submitted by Quisenberry. If that plan is similar to the plan introduced a few months ago, I would expect it to meet with a favorable review. Both the council and the Parks Commission have stated in the past that Disc Golf would be a desirable amenity for the City. When the course in the North Community Park was rejected, that had more to do with the process (or actually lack of) in getting the plan going, than the plan itself.
This time around, the proper processes are being followed. And, frankly, I think the idea has great merit. It will certainly provide a recreation activity that anyone in the city can use. Today, the bulk of community park is dedicated to baseball, softball and football/soccer fields. You have to be a part of an organized league or other group to have access to these facilities. The addition of a facility that is available all the time to anyone in the city would be, in my opinion, welcome.
This session of the board will consider the plan as subsequently submitted by Quisenberry. If that plan is similar to the plan introduced a few months ago, I would expect it to meet with a favorable review. Both the council and the Parks Commission have stated in the past that Disc Golf would be a desirable amenity for the City. When the course in the North Community Park was rejected, that had more to do with the process (or actually lack of) in getting the plan going, than the plan itself.
This time around, the proper processes are being followed. And, frankly, I think the idea has great merit. It will certainly provide a recreation activity that anyone in the city can use. Today, the bulk of community park is dedicated to baseball, softball and football/soccer fields. You have to be a part of an organized league or other group to have access to these facilities. The addition of a facility that is available all the time to anyone in the city would be, in my opinion, welcome.
Saturday, May 1, 2010
for most, the story ends here
Now that the City of Corinth has denied XTO's gas well permit applications, most of the several hundred people who were attending meetings and speaking out will go back to their normal lives and probably pay little or no attention to what is happening.
Just couldn't happen at a worse time. As of now the Corinth Comprehensive plan is scheduled for public hearing and action by the Council on May 6, 2010. As important as it was for the public to come out and speak up at the XTO permit hearings, it is even more important to pay attention, get educated and speak up at the Comp Plan hearing.
The comprehensive plan if enacted will direct overhauls of many of our most important ordinances, including (but not limited to) zoning and subdivision, and will map the direction for our capital improvement projects for years to come. Some will remember the controversy around the Church Street reconstruction project - it was the comp plan from 2004-5 that set that in motion, and the contents of the infrastructure specifications in the comp plan that defined how the road would be built (how wide it would be).
The comp plan could be a significant instrument in defining how land gets used - and that can have a big impact on the Gas well situation. Or not, if no one speaks up about it.
So, where do you want the city to go? Stay involved, get involved with the comprehensive plan for the city of Corinth - read the plan, let us know what you think is important and come to the meetings/public hearings to have your voice heard.
Just couldn't happen at a worse time. As of now the Corinth Comprehensive plan is scheduled for public hearing and action by the Council on May 6, 2010. As important as it was for the public to come out and speak up at the XTO permit hearings, it is even more important to pay attention, get educated and speak up at the Comp Plan hearing.
The comprehensive plan if enacted will direct overhauls of many of our most important ordinances, including (but not limited to) zoning and subdivision, and will map the direction for our capital improvement projects for years to come. Some will remember the controversy around the Church Street reconstruction project - it was the comp plan from 2004-5 that set that in motion, and the contents of the infrastructure specifications in the comp plan that defined how the road would be built (how wide it would be).
The comp plan could be a significant instrument in defining how land gets used - and that can have a big impact on the Gas well situation. Or not, if no one speaks up about it.
So, where do you want the city to go? Stay involved, get involved with the comprehensive plan for the city of Corinth - read the plan, let us know what you think is important and come to the meetings/public hearings to have your voice heard.
XTO Gas Well Permits were denied
As many of you already know, the gas well permit applications from XTO energy were denied at the April 29 2010 Special Session of the Corinth City Council. One thing that everyone should understand is that the permits were denied without prejudice. XTO can reapply for the permit again. During the discussion on each variance and the permits, the Council's reasons for the rejection of the permit application were discussed and made clear.
So, for the time being, there is not going to be a gas well site on the Lake Sharon Christian Center. For now the gas well ordinance in Corinth stands... and it should for the rest of this year, and probably then next (2011). However, be aware that the state legislature is now getting pressure from the oil and gas industry. You can expect the states to preempt cities' authority to establish setbacks, air quality measures, road use, and anything else that gets in the way of the oil and gas companies. At the state level, tank setbacks something around 50 feet, and well set backs somewhere around 100-200 feet. So if we get preempted, our 600 foot setback will be gone.
I strongly suggest that all of you that were so vocal with the city now turn your attention to your state legislators. This is nowhere near done.
So, for the time being, there is not going to be a gas well site on the Lake Sharon Christian Center. For now the gas well ordinance in Corinth stands... and it should for the rest of this year, and probably then next (2011). However, be aware that the state legislature is now getting pressure from the oil and gas industry. You can expect the states to preempt cities' authority to establish setbacks, air quality measures, road use, and anything else that gets in the way of the oil and gas companies. At the state level, tank setbacks something around 50 feet, and well set backs somewhere around 100-200 feet. So if we get preempted, our 600 foot setback will be gone.
I strongly suggest that all of you that were so vocal with the city now turn your attention to your state legislators. This is nowhere near done.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)