Thurber's Thoughts

Ohio Cannabis Rights Amendment certified to Ballot Board

noreply@blogger.com (Maggie Thurber) — Fri, 17 May 2013 20:53:00 +0000

Press release:

(COLUMBUS, Ohio)—Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine today certified the petition for the proposed constitutional amendment submitted by the Ohio Rights Group.

On May 7th, the Ohio Attorney General's Office received a written petition to amend the Ohio Constitution by adding the Ohio Cannabis Rights Amendment. The submission was certified today as containing both the necessary 1,000 signatures from registered Ohio voters and a "fair and truthful" summary.

"Without passing upon the advisability of the approval or rejection of the measure to be referred,…I hereby certify that the summary is a fair and truthful statement of the proposed constitutional amendment," DeWine stated in a letter to the Ohio Ballot Board.

Once the summary language and initial signatures are certified, the Ohio Ballot Board must determine if the amendment contains a single issue or multiple issues. The petitioners must then collect signatures for each issue from registered voters in each of 44 of Ohio's 88 counties, equal to 5 percent of the total vote cast in the county for the office of United States President at the last presidential election. Total signatures collected statewide must also equal 10 percent of the total vote cast for the office of president at the last presidential election.

The full text of today's letter and of the amendment petitions submitted can be found at www.OhioAttorneyGeneral.gov/BallotInitiatives.

IRS convered up 'tea party' policy in response to FOIA requests

noreply@blogger.com (Maggie Thurber) — Fri, 17 May 2013 14:34:00 +0000

Well, well, well...this gets more interesting day by day...

In 2011, The 1851 Center for Constitution Law made a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the IRS asking for any "tea party" related policies. They were told there there no such documents. But the Inspector General's report showed specific policies were in place in 2010.

So they kept the information from Congress and the public.

Oh - and they also closed their FOIA reading room and locked the door..and no one had a key. Apparently "there's nothing worth reading in the FOIA public reading room anyway."

UPDATE: A very nice IRS disclosure officer tells @fschouten and me there's nothing worth reading in the FOIA public reading room anyway.
— Gregory Korte (@gregorykorte) May 16, 2013

This article from Ben Domenech really goes to the heart of the matter:

The point is that these scandals cut at the core conceit of Obama’s ideology: the healthy and enduring confidence of big government to be good government. As technological capabilities advance and the scope of government expands, the types of domestic scandals we’re seeing here are only going to increase in frequency and invasiveness, with personal information shared more frequently, easier for even low level bureaucrats to acquire and manipulate. At the same time, Americans are becoming increasingly skeptical and cynical about their public institutions, with their trust in the federal government at historic lows. They distrust the agencies and bureaucrats even as the politicians of our age are investing more and more power in them.

Today, the media, the Obama administration, and David Axelrod are undertaking the task that conservatives could not: illustrating with each passing day that the progressive approach to modern governance and policy is inherently flawed and that vast governments are ripe for abuse. What we are seeing from the IRS and the DOJ is not something new, nor does it represent a perverse approach to benign bureaucracy: it is the inevitable consequence of an approach which puts mechanisms in place and then assumes they will not be used for ill. You should expect government to go as far as it can, whenever it can, in any ways that it can, toward the full exploitation of the power made available to it. Expecting government to behave otherwise is to expect the scorpion not to sting the frog.

The progressive answer to this is more rules and regulators, more agencies and safeguards and accountability projects. Republicans should recognize this intervention for the ridiculousness it is – creating more federal entities to watch over federal entities – and focus their arguments instead on the only solution which will actually work: removing power from the federal government and returning it to the states or the people. The only way to ensure that government doesn’t abuse a power is to make sure it doesn’t have this power in the first place.

Here is the press release sent out by the 1851 Center. It's written by Lynn Walsh.

IRS Covered Up "Tea Party" Policy in Response to FOIA Requests

In 2011 FOIA response, IRS denied existence of records that Inspector General found clearly existed at the time

Columbus, OH - The 1851 Center for Constitutional Law today released a 2011 Internal Revenue Service response to its Freedom of Information Act request denying the existence of any "tea party"-related policy - - a policy that the Inspector General for Tax Administration has found to have clearly existed at that time.

Suspicious that the IRS may have been employing an "anti-tea-party" policy, the 1851 Center, through investigative journalist Lynn K. Walsh, submitted a June 2010 Freedom of Information Act request to the IRS for all documents related to this policy. In its 2011 response, the IRS headquarters, through "Disclosure Manager" Marie Twarog states as follows:

You asked for documents relating to any training, memos, letters, policies, etc., that details how the Tax Exempt/Government Entities Division reviews applications for non-profits, 501(c)(3) and other not for profit organizations specifically mentioning "Tea Party", "the Tea Party", "tea party", and "tea parties".

I found no documents specifically responsive to your request.

However, in its May 14 Report, the Inspector General specifically finds that "[t]he first Sensitive Case Report [identifying tea party groups] was prepared by the Technical Unit" in April of 2010 (See Page 32). The Report's Appendix goes on to chronicle the existence of a series of 2010 policies and related documents targeting "tea party" and other conservative organizations.

"Either IRS Headquarters was entirely incompetent in maintaining awareness of prominent policies and documents within the IRS, or it deliberately covered up the existence of anti-conservative IRS policies. Either is terrifying," said Maurice Thompson, Executive Director of the 1851 Center. "Legal action is necessary to ensure that the IRS does not lie to taxpayers in this manner in the future."

The released documents constitutes the most prominent evidence of either a cover-up or lack of institutional control related to the tea-party policies, and are the only example of the IRS specifically denying the existence of such policies in response to a Freedom of Information Act request. Importantly, the IRS did not claim that the requested documents were exempt from FOIA; it instead claimed that the documents did not exist.

Yesterday, the 1851 Center released that in its May 20, 2010 response to the 1851 Center's application for tax-exempt status, the IRS demanded that, in order to receive approval of its application, the 1851 Center must: "Please explain in detail your organization's involvement with the Tea Party."

Read the IRS FOIA Response HERE.

Read the FOIA Request made to the IRS HERE.

IRS harassment not limited to 'tea party' groups

noreply@blogger.com (Maggie Thurber) — Thu, 16 May 2013 20:52:00 +0000

Looks like Tea Party and Patriot groups weren't the only conservative targets the IRS went after.

This via email:

IRS Targeting of 1851 Center in May of 2010 Demonstrates Broader Corruption

IRS harassment was not limited to "tea party" organizations, and began earlier than many believe

Columbus, OH - The 1851 Center for Constitutional Law today emphasized that Internal Revenue Service harassment of groups advocating for limited government extends as far back as early 2010, and includes organizations exclusively dedicated to protecting constitutional rights, including the 1851 Center.

In its May 20, 2010 response to the 1851 Center's application for tax-exempt status, the IRS demands that, in order to receive approval of its application, the 1851 Center must:
"Please explain in detail your organization's involvement with the Tea Party."

The 1851 Center explained that it provides legal representation to Ohioans whose constitutional rights have been aggrieved, including tea party organizations and members, and ultimately received tax exempt status. However, this instance is significant because it reveals infractions beyond what even the Inspector General for Tax Administration's May 14 Report reveals:

While the Report focuses on 501(c)(4) political and/or lobbying organizations, the 1851 Center applied for status as an educational and/or civil public charity under Section 501(c)(3) (the 1851 Center is a public interest law firm that litigates civil rights cases without engaging in politics).

While the Report indicates that "[t]he Determinations Unit developed and used inappropriate criteria to identify applications from organizations with the words Tea Party in their names," the 1851 Center made no reference to "tea party," nor "patriot" or "9-12," in is application, much less in its name.

IRS harassment of liberty-oriented groups, and intent to root out "tea party" activities, even through non-tea party sources such as 1851, has been in full force for a minimum of three years.

In its IRS filings, the 1851 Center indicated that its mission was "to defend constitutional rights and human rights through legal action." The Center supplied no information that would have indicated any particular relationship with any particular tea-party organization.

"As with demands made of other organizations, the IRS demand to the 1851 Center was at minimum, irrelevant, and appears to have been calculated to do political opposition research on organizations opposing the President's policies through, ironically, doing nothing more than enforcing the United States and Ohio constitutions." said Maurice Thompson, Executive Director of the 1851 Center. "Investigators must acknowledge that the breadth of this scandal extends to not just 'tea party' groups, but to conservative and libertarian think tanks and public interest law firms across the nation."

The 1851 Center has been a steadfast opponent of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act since March of 2010, having initiated the Ohio Health Care Freedom Amendment, service as amicus counsel on the lawsuits opposing the individual mandate, and counseling against a state-based Obamacare exchange and more recently against Medicaid expansion.

Read the IRS Demand Letter to the 1851 Center HERE.

###

Toledo City Council Meeting - May 14, 2013

noreply@blogger.com (Maggie Thurber) — Thu, 16 May 2013 11:52:00 +0000

Notes from Sherry:

Toledo City Council Meeting
May 14, 2013

In attendance: Councilwomen Webb, Hicks-Hudson, Councilmen Collins, Enright, Steel, Riley, Sarantou, Ludeman, Craig, Martinez, Waniewski, McNamara, Deputy Mayor Herwat, Mayor Bell.

Item 230 – Appointment – Board of Building Appeals – confirmed – all voting yes.

Item 231 – Appointments – DPU Performance Audit Advisory Committee – confirmed – all voting yes. Webb – they all met today – went good.

Item 232 – Appointments – Police Civilian Review Board – Held for 2 weeks.

* Webb – Busy with Mother's Day – didn't review the packet.
* Hicks-Hudson – hold till later meeting.
* Herwat – I'm not in a position to answer at this time.
* Riley – will have information on this by Thursday. Webb – Meetings were canceled, need proper notice.
* Webb – hold for 2 weeks.
* Collins – What is the role of the board?

Item 199 – Accept 39th Year CDBG Funds from HUD, $6,839,464

(There was an extended discussion/argument because the deadline for submitting the CDBG plan to the feds is Friday; council wanted to remove several portions of the plan from the document but were told the plan had to be submitted in its entirety. Several council members took exception to the process, complaining that they weren't involved, but Mayor Bell noted that all council members were given a memo detailing the dates and times of the meetings to discuss the plan. One council member noted that a 'memo' isn't an 'invitation' while others didn't like that the Administration had determined the plan and they were just being asked to approve it, rather than make changes/modifications to the recommendations. They complained that they needed more time to basically duplicate the process the administration went through and were angry they couldn't have that time due to the Friday deadline)

* Martinez – Every year, more need than funds – accept one year action plan – accept funds, don't give dollars to 3rd party partners – put in right bank account I spoke with Columbus CDBG – acceptance of home dollars, don't advance Item 201 – meeting Thursday on this, better defined – next meeting more clear on this amendment.
* Herwat – we do not submit our plans – it will be now.
* Collins – HUD says we will lose.
* Santiago – Hold authorization -not to accept this would jeopardize the funds.
* Collins – no funds?
* Santiago - submit plan in entirety.
* Collins – revisit 2012 funding – the entity that received the most money, doesn't need it. Less transportation than last time – I requested a record - the report was sent to the Director and I received a draft (verbal fight ensues between Council Members and the Director of Neighborhoods)
* Hicks-Hudson – make this meeting on Thursday a Committee of the Whole.
* Santiago – it was OK – come at 4 PM and say the opposite.
* Collins – Council understands the process.
* Martinez – Submit funding.
* Santiago – Submit by the 17th, deadline. Santiago – Council submit the dollars.
* Webb – Council knows its position!
* Martinez – Accept dollars, do not authorize the Department to spend – has to pass.
* Santiago – we have to judge what is needed for the Community.
* Craig – Point of Order! (upset, Santiago and Craig shouting to be heard)
* Hicks-Hudson - (bangs the gavel a few times) The only person we need to take advise from is the Law Director – we are here because of last year – what is proper and not – meets action plan.
* Craig – can't believe the argument from the Director of Neighborhoods – not enough time – four members on this Council to review – this is about citizens, not accepting benefits for the Director of Neighborhoods.
* Steel – What is our role? Not to lay down and take it – budget was already appropriated - $1,000 might not sound like a lot, but for some it would make or break a food budget – this is not the way we should communicate – we could go a certain way – doesn't understand either way – the Administration doesn't want to work without dollars.
* Mayor – if you payed attention, you chose to come to this meeting – if we aren't using the format HUD exposed here – no Council Member questioned cuts in in funding – makes everyone happy – move this forward to Thursday, deadline is Friday.
* Hicks-Hudson – don't have to be to be flippant...
* Mayor – I'm not being flippant.
* Hicks-Hudson – We are going to meet this Thursday, this was already established.
* Mayor – make this an all day meeting, why not?
* Martinez – Table till this Thursday 1 – 3 PM – decide then – we shouldn't lose 6 mil – don't let them suffer – why are we using the homeless? Book this room for a length of time – make a decision.
* Hicks-Hudson – We will make a decision.
* Craig – refer this back to Committee.
* Collins – move to 11 AM on Thursday - 24 hour notice.
* Hicks-Hudson – we will work on the time.
* Webb – Do the opposite of what the Mayor said – lead us to a place we won't agree – not so – this Administration is forcing the issue down our throats.
* Steel – Item 168 – budgeting of line items by Thursday.

Item 200 – Accept 22nd Year HOME Funds from HUD, $1,682,898 – Committee of the Whole.

Item 201 – Accept 27th Year ESG Funds from HUD, $610,343 – Committee of the Whole
.
Item 195 – Appropriation to demolish 17 brick columns at Roosevelt Pool, $63,950 Parkland Replacement Fund

* Steel – Asked for update from Riley on this (not pool).
* Craig – Not a good way to spend money – pool is 50 years old – you could fund 70 baseball teams – all of Toledo, all year – this expense does nothing for the pool – not going to vote for this.
* Riley – They were there for a roof – legitimate use for the funds – supports.
* Collins - $120,000 left in this fund – is this a want or a need? Deputy Mayor will not have this done – what is it, a want or a need? This is dysfunctional.
* Riley – The Administration dictates what we should or shouldn't do – this is legitimate, supported by the community.
* Steel – Brings up the distrust – Administration will veto – (goes off on a rant about Government – he thinks we are a Democracy).

No – McNamara, Sarantou, Waniewski, Craig. Yes – Martinez, Ludeman, Hicks-Hudson, Steel, Collins, Enright, Webb, Riley.
Motion passed.

Item 196 – Amend TMC Sec. 933.02(i) to create Utility Appeals Board – To Utilities, Public Service.

Item 197 - Amend TMC Sec. 933.07(c) to allow tenants to pay public utility arrearage of landlord property owner - To Utilities, Public Service.

Item 198 - Amend TMC Sec. 933.10 to establish a Public Utility Customer Bill of Rights - To Utilities, Public Service.
* Webb – Meeting for these is on the 28th at 2 PM.

Item 233 - Amend TMC Sec. 187.34, Local Preference – passed – all voting yes.

Item 234 - Amend TMC Sec. 1706, Dogs, to mirror Ohio Revised Code – passed – all voting yes.

Item 235 – Contracts for spent time removal at Water Treatment, 3 years, $1,000,000/year Water Operating Fund – passed – all voting yes.

Item 236 – Appropriation for Barnum Ditch Ph. 2 improvements for Monroe and Harvest area, $850,000 Storm Water – passed all voting yes.

Item 237 – Re-appropriation for Engineering Services, from Matches/Planning to General Resurfacing, $371,455 CIP – passed – all voting yes.

Item 238 – Expenditure to Ed Kelley & Sons for emergency sewer repair at 1946 Greenwood, $15,051 Sewer Op – passed - all voting yes.

Item 239 – Agreement with QBE Insurance Corp for stop loss insurance coverage, 1 year + 1 option, $404,008 allocated – passed – all voting yes. Sarantou – spoke to VP of QBE – they have covered people in cities of our size before. I am voting yes.

Item 240 – Authorize disposal of obsolete City property; ladder truck, traffic light covers, NSP staging, and misc. - 1st Reading.

Item 241 – Expenditure for expansion & infrastructure installation at Forest Cemetery, $250,000 CIP – passed – all voting yes.

Item 242 – Contract for 2013 professional maintenance of swimming pools, $35,000 General Fund – passed – Waniewski, no – rest yes.

Item 243 – Accept Lucas County EMA grant for additional surveillance camera trailer for Police, $68,994 grant & LETF – passed – all voting yes.

Item 244 – Expenditures to Lucas County for 2013 criminal justice services,$5,398,190 General Fund - 1st Reading.

Item 245 – Landbank Sale – 117 Machen St. to Jim Ross for additional parking and green space, $150 – passed – all voting yes.

Item 246 – Resolution – Vacate alley near Monroe & Rushland – adopted – all voting yes.

Item 247 – Resolution – Vacate Kury Dr. south of Dorr at Westwood - 1st Reading.

Item 248 – Vacate streets and alleys west of Upton and north of I-475 for ProMedica Parkway – passed – all voting yes.

Item 249 – Vacate streets and alleys east of ProMedica Parkway and south of I-475 for ProMedica Parkway – passed – all
voting yes.

Item 188 - Resolution – Support creation of Dedicated Domestic Violence Docket at Toledo Municipal Court – passed – all voting yes.

Last Call:

McNamara – There is a meeting on June 3rd at 4 PM for street repairs and tree removal. Thanks for the support from the Law Department on jobs.

Riley – Would like the name of the business on the corner of Horce/Detroit Streets. They seem to have taken over; do they have a permit to operate.

Waniewski – Question for the Administration on a tree in the 3600/3700 block of Wycliff. Is the area at 3501 Queensbourgh a landbank? And Point of Order is not freedom to talk.

Webb – I used the word wisely (Point of Order). Had a meeting on bridge lighting, Suder Ave. - side walk on one side, rocks on the other. Bridge could use finishing touches.

Collins – Last Saturday there was a funeral for Dr. King, emphasized health care. He continued to serve the City, provided guidance.

Ludeman – Still waiting for answer on Firetruck.

Martinez – Hope everyone had a Happy Mother's Day. CDBG not enough dollars – polarizing – get this done Thursday.

Hicks-Hudson – This issue (CDBG) is important to whom we were elected to represent. Please get information before then. Tomorrow in these chambers there will be Police Awards at 9 AM.

IRS - Tea Party scandal timeline or deleted scenes from Idiocracy?

noreply@blogger.com (Maggie Thurber) — Tue, 14 May 2013 13:38:00 +0000

ABC News has obtained a (leaked) copy of a timeline created for the Inspector General report on the IRS - Tea Party scandal. It's more than just a documentation of the actions taken to target tea party/patriot/conservative groups for screening before giving them tax-exempt status. It's a damning indictment of the bureaucracy of this massive government agency that has control over all Americans.

As the introduction to Appendix VII says:

"The following chart illustrates a timeline of events from Redacted through July 2012 involving the identification and processing of potential political cases. It shows that there was confusion about how to process the applications, delays in the processing of the applications, and a lack of management oversight and guidance."

The timeline references multiple acting managers, replacement of managers and supervisors, changes in personnel over a two-year period of time. What the timeline doesn't indicate is if these changes were normal movements of personnel or if they were a result of the lack of progress on reviewing the cases.

It gets a bit confusing with the titles and departments, but basically, a Determinations Unit, a Technical Unit, Rulings and Agreement, lawyers and directors were all involved. It appears the Determinations Unit asked numerous times for guidance and direction from the Technical Unit. As the issue began to get public attention, the internal actions escalated.

If you look at the September - October 2011 entries you'll see the Determinations Unit asked the Technical Unit to 'triage' the cases to see what actions the Determinations Unit should take. They did and sent back a spreadsheet. But the Determinations Unit, which was looking for a recommendation about whether to close or further develop the cases, had no idea what to do with the information on the spreadsheet because it didn't answer the question. So back to the Technical Unit they went.

By November, they all decided that "the guidance developed would not work in its present form – it was “too lawyerly” to be
useful and needed the Determinations Unit input."

Then there was this on Feb. 29, 2012 (emphasis mine):

The Director, EO, stopped any more additional information request letters from being issued on advocacy cases until new guidance was provided to the Determinations Unit. In addition, the Acting Director, Rulings and Agreements, discussed with the Determinations Unit Program Manager, about having specialists print out website information and asking the organizations to verify the information instead of asking for applicants to print out the website information.

Yes, you read that correctly. They had to tell the specialists to go to their computers, print out information from the groups' websites and then verify the information rather than mail a request asking the groups to print out their website information and mail it back to the IRS.

I had plenty to say about this in February 2012 when I first reported on the Ohio Liberty Coalition's own experience with the IRS. I especially took issue with the demand that this tea-party group predict the future.

Isn't that something you'd expect to see in the movie, Idiocracy?

In the end, it took almost the full two years to get instructions and directions clear so that the Determinations Unit, charged with actually deciding if the various applications met the proper criteria, could actually determine if the applications should be approved or denied.

Even without the "lack of oversight and guidance," how in the world did we let any agency get so big - or laws so complicated - that it takes two years just to decide something like this???

And remember - this is the taxation agency, something I'm certain our founders would never have envisioned when they used the rallying cry of 'no taxation without representation.'

And if that's not scary enough, this is the same agency that's going to oversee your compliance with Obamacare.

Quote of the Day - Freedom

noreply@blogger.com (Maggie Thurber) — Mon, 13 May 2013 13:06:00 +0000

It was a fun, but late night with fellow bloggers at BlogCon2013 and I've got a lot of great notes from yesterday's panels which I need to work on. But today is another jam-packed day with sessions beginning at 9 a.m., so here's a QOTD to start your week:

"Freedom had been hunted round the globe; reason was considered as rebellion; and the slavery of fear had made men afraid to think. But such is the irresistible nature of truth, that all it asks, and all it wants, is the liberty of appearing." ~ Thomas Paine

Deneen Borelli at BlogCon2013

noreply@blogger.com (Maggie Thurber) — Sun, 12 May 2013 14:18:00 +0000

I was at my first BlogCon in Denver in 2011 when I first heard Deneen Borelli speak - and I was inspired! I immediately ordered her book, "Blacklash: How Obama and the Left Are Driving Americans to the Government Plantation".

Sadly, being a Kindle version, when I saw her again at BlogCon2012, she couldn't sign it for me. But it is one of the few books I return to again and again for inspiration.

She spoke to BlogCon2013 yesterday and began, as she usually does, proclaiming "America is an exceptional country."

"I am living proof that America is an exceptional country where anyone can succeed," she said. And her story is definitely one of living the American Dream.

But it wasn't easy. She said she lived for a while on Ramen noodles because that's all she could afford. In the end, she got an education, wrote a book is a Fox News contributor and the Director of Outreach for FreedomWorks, sponsor of BlogCon.

"When can someone like that end up as a Fox News contributor, author … you can’t tell me that America is not an exceptional country because it is," she emphasized.

She promotes herself as a living example of how the principles of freedom and liberty can appeal to everyone, especially minorities. She grew up in a Democratic household, but found that the messages of that political party didn't reflect what she learned and came to believe.

"If I can adopt these principles, anybody can - and boy do we need more Americans to adopt the principles of freedom."

Building on the theme of her book, she said that our tax dollars are being used to create a dependent class who will always vote for their masters. She contrasts that with the conservative view:

"We’re not telling people what to do. We want them to be empowered and be the boss of themselves."

She explained that President Barack Obama believes in the power of the government - not in the power of the individual. She advised to use his own words against him and show how his policies are hitting minorities and the poor disproportionately - especially his energy policies which unnecessarily raise the costs of gasoline, heating and cooling and his opposition to school choice which traps primarily minority children in low-performing schools.

He - and others - promote victimhood, she said.

"Blacks are victims who need special help to get by…this message is coming from black media, preachers, liberals, ... and that (message is) Blacks are victims of the white guy with the only hope being government."

Borelli has a powerful message: " The liberty message is about empowering individuals – especially those in the Black community who are under the cloud of the Black liberal establishment," she said. "There are some you won’t be able to reach…but if I can do it and understand it and come to my own conclusion and not be told, anyone can."

"It’s liberty, not government, that allows us to pursue our dreams," she emphasized.

But in order to reach others and spread the message, it takes a relationship. We can't just reach out to people at election time and expect them to pay attention to us, much less hear and understand the message.

While she said the common message of liberty is appealing regardless of what color you are, there are challenges in outreach to minority communities. "In a perfect world, it shouldn’t matter who the messenger is – this isn’t a perfect world," she said.

She gave us some tools to help start the conversation, telling us we can ask questions like "Why does Obama oppose school choice, trapping your kids in failing schools while sending his own to an elite, private school?" and "Why is Al Sharpton rich and you're not?"

She also encouraged everyone to support conservatives who are also minorities in their efforts and to welcome into our groups and tea party organizations the Black conservatives who "come out of the closet." We need to engage them and incorporate them into our regular activities and work with them to spread the message that:

"America is an exceptional country – an exceptional country - and our country does not guarantee you success, but it is liberty that guarantees you the opportunity to succeed."

Deneen Borelli, and her husband Tom, will be in Toledo on May 21st for a dinner event sponsored by the Northwest Ohio Conservative Coalition. Information and tickets are available here.

BlogCon2013

noreply@blogger.com (Maggie Thurber) — Sat, 11 May 2013 10:00:00 +0000

I'm heading to BlogCon 2013 today. We'll have sessions this afternoon and all day Sunday and Monday.

Attendees will also be in the audience for a taping of Glenn Beck's show, but I'll be on my way home at that time. :(

There will be great panel discussions and many of them will be streamed live here.

BlogCon is sponsored by FreedomWorks which has provided scholarships for many of the bloggers who will attend. I received a partial scholarship that will cover the cost of my room while I'm there, and I'm very grateful for the assistance will which allow me to attend.

So look for blog posts and/or twitter comments from me over the next several days.

And happy 22nd anniversary to the man of my dreams!

Teen Job Fair in Toledo

noreply@blogger.com (Maggie Thurber) — Sat, 11 May 2013 00:08:00 +0000

Press Release:

Youth invited to teen job fair

Opportunity to meet local employers, apply for summer jobs at one stop shop

Toledo youth ages 16-21 are invited to attend the 2013 City of Toledo Teen Job Fair. The event offers local teens the opportunity to meet potential employers, learn about summer job opportunities, and apply for openings with local business owners at one centralized location.

Online pre-registration is strongly encouraged, though walk-ins are welcome. Registration can be found at http://toledo.oh.gov/Departments/Youth-Commision/Teen-Job-Fair. For more information call the City of Toledo Youth Commission at 419-936-2051.

What: 2013 City of Toledo Teen Job Fair
When: Saturday, May 11, 2013 10:00 a.m. – 2:00 p.m.
Where: SeaGate Convention Center (Hall C) 401 Jefferson Ave

Quote of the Day - self defense and self reliance

noreply@blogger.com (Maggie Thurber) — Wed, 08 May 2013 13:54:00 +0000

"[O]ne who values his life and takes seriously his responsibilities to his family and community will possess and cultivate the means of fighting back, and will retaliate when threatened with death or grievous bodily injury to himself or a loved one. He will never be content to rely solely on others for his safety...." ~ Jeffrey R. Snyder

Arguments in favor of Internet Sales Tax are all wrong

noreply@blogger.com (Maggie Thurber) — Tue, 07 May 2013 11:26:00 +0000

I've been listening to the arguments being made in favor of the Internet sales tax - a bill passed by the Senate and now headed to the House that would mandate the collection of sales tax for any on-line purchases from a company with more than $1 million in gross sales.

The claim by large, national corporations is that it will 'level the playing field' when it comes to collection of the tax because most of them already do this.

The problem is that the sales tax varies by jurisdiction with 9,646 different jurisdictions and a tax that is dependent upon where the purchaser lives.

Under current law, sales tax is collected by the merch ant based upon where the merchant is physically located and charged on on-line purchases only when a merchant has a physical location in a state.

It's a regulatory nightmare and companies with $1 million in GROSS sales might not have the NET profit to be able to afford the cost of the mandate. Then is also the possibility of purchasers giving a friend or relative's address in order to avoid paying a higher tax rate. What's to prevent someone from Toledo (with a 6.75% sales tax) from using an Erie, Michigan address (6%) in order to save the .75% difference?

The bigger question that bypasses all the arguments is this: why are merchants being used as a tax collector for the government?

The government is the person to whom the tax is owed. They are the ones who want the money and they are the ones who have the authority for penalizing the non-payment. Why is there even a middle-man in the first place?

Many entities use a company that specializes in collecting past-due bills. Those companies are paid for their services, either in a set fee or contract or by a percentage of what is collected.

But merchants don't get paid or compensated for collecting the government's bill of sales tax.

Ohio has a law that requires individuals to report on-line orders and then pay the appropriate sales tax on them. The state uses the yearly income tax form for doing this.

So why not just expand that procedure to all purchases?

Clearly, it's because government can't rely upon self-reporting of purchases and it may be unrealistic to expect individuals to keep track of the taxable vs. non-taxable purchases they make.

In fact, it's because the government doesn't trust individuals to self-report that they're not trying to expand their tax collection to entities that don't even live within the state.

Because certainly if individuals can avoid paying taxes, they do, regardless of how much they may support taxation in general or additional taxation on 'the rich.'

So we have a conversation about how merchants can be forced to be bill collectors for the state.

Anyone else see anything wrong with this?

Marcy Kaptur thinks Obama is "worst socialist ever"

noreply@blogger.com (Maggie Thurber) — Sun, 05 May 2013 11:39:00 +0000

This was a tweet from Rep. Marcy Kaptur, preserved by the Sunlight Foundation:

Marcy Kaptur (D) @RepMarcyKaptur

Barack Obama is the worst socialist ever. Dow Touches 15000 on Jobs Data http://t.co/sGa4Es4kAG via @WSJ

Deleted 1 day ago after 8 seconds, originally posted via Tweet Button

You'll note that it only stayed up for 8 seconds before it was deleted.

So what does she mean by this?

Well, the article, S&P Tops 1600 on Jobs Data, says this:

The Dow Jones Industrial Average rose 142.38 points, or 1%, to 14973.96, after touching an all-time intraday high of 15009.59. It closed at a record.

The Standard & Poor's 500-stock index, meanwhile, pushed through the 1600-point level, 13 years after it surpassed 1500. The index rose 16.83 points, or 1.1%, to 1614.42. The Nasdaq Composite Index climbed 38.01 points, or 1.1%, to 3378.63.

So clearly, socialists do not want individual investors to have wealth or get wealthier, right?

In order to be the 'worst' socialist when the stock market rises, what other conclusion could there be?

And who are those investors?

Well, they're not all 'evil rich white guys,' that's for sure.

They're you and me. They're union workers with pensions invested in mutual funds and various stocks.

They're public employees like teachers, and fire fighters and police who all rejoice when their funds gain money and provide a return on their investment for those funds will cover their costs after retirement.

They're the young entrepreneur with a start-up company who relied upon venture capital funds that came from investors who made money from this very stock market.

The question no one ever seems to ask Rep. Kaptur is why she so identifies with socialists?

But with this tweet, why is she so disappointed with the stock market doing well? Doesn't she like that her constituents and their retirement accounts are making money?

What kind of a representative wants her constituents to LOSE money?

And did she really just criticize the president for a good stock market? Is the president really responsible? Or is it that she believes his actions can NEGATIVELY impact the market and result in a loss for all her constituents?

Does she want President Barack Obama to be a 'good' socialist as opposed to the "worst" one? She must obviously believe he's a socialist if she's grading him as the "worst" ever.

Why does she think the president is a socialist?

And since she supported him and encouraged others to vote for him, why does she want a socialist as the president of the United States?

Was it meant as a joke as some are implying? Is she making the claim that he's not a socialist with the stock market doing so well?

You know they say some of the truest things are said in jest...

Regardless, there's a reason why the website detailing the the deleted tweet is called "politiwoops."

Opening Day for Blair Museum of Lithophanes

noreply@blogger.com (Maggie Thurber) — Sat, 04 May 2013 12:29:00 +0000

Today is the opening day for the Blair Museum of Lithophanes at the Toledo Botanical Gardens. Their season runs through Oct. 27th.

In case you have no idea what a lithophane is, their website explains:

Lithophanes are three-dimensional translucent porcelain plaques which when backlit reveal detailed magical images. First created in Europe in the 1820s, the largest collection of this 19th century art form in the world is now on view at the Blair Museum of Lithophanes.

Lithophane is a term derived from the Greek litho meaning stone and phainen meaning to cause to appear. This Greek derivation has proven confusing to people who might know some basic Greek, but do not know that lithophanes have nothing to do with stone or a stone product, but are made of porcelain.

This is one from their collection that made me smile:

The museum is open weekdays from 1-4 .m. and during special events at the TBG. Kelly Sheehan, the museum's director, is the individual to contact if you want to arrange special visits or tours. You can reach her at 419-245-1365.

The current exhibit is called "Captured in Porcelain."

AG sues Toledo firm Making Home Affordable USA

noreply@blogger.com (Maggie Thurber) — Fri, 03 May 2013 19:33:00 +0000

Press Release:

TOLEDO, Ohio) – Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine today announced a lawsuit against N.M.M.S.R. Incorporated, doing business as Making Home Affordable USA, and its owner Jason Keating of Maumee. The lawsuit charges Keating and his business with multiple violations of Ohio's consumer laws.

"Too many consumers have lost thousands of dollars, or even their homes, because of loan modification services that did nothing to help them," DeWine said. "We are continuing to target foreclosure relief businesses that mislead consumers, and we will continue to take action when we find them."

Making Home Affordable USA is located at 120 10th Street in Toledo. It offers loan modification and foreclosure assistance services through its "National Mortgage Modification Stimulus Home Saver Program." Although the business' name and website closely resemble that of the federal government's Making Home Affordable program, Making Home Affordable USA is not associated with the federal government.

According to the Attorney General, the business instructed consumers to stop making their mortgage payments (even if they were current on their payments) and stated that banks and lenders would not negotiate unless consumers were behind on their payments. Consumers paid 60 to 65 percent of their current mortgage payment to the business after the business assured them that the funds would be held in escrow and submitted to their lenders once a modification was reached. Consumers' lenders never received any of the funds placed into the accounts.

Approximately 30 consumers have filed complaints with the Attorney General's Office, the Better Business Bureau, or the Federal Trade Commission. Their losses total around $75,000. Many additional victims likely have been affected.

The lawsuit charges the business and its owner with violations of Ohio's Consumer Sales Practices Act and Telephone Solicitation Sales Act. Specific counts include failure to deliver, encouraging consumers to default on their mortgages, and failing to register as a telephone solicitor. The Attorney General seeks consumer restitution, permanent injunctive relief, and civil penalties.

"Don't trust a business that tells you to stop making your mortgage payment in order to get a modification," DeWine said. "Not only is it bad advice — in Ohio, it's also illegal."

Attorney General DeWine offers consumers the following advice:

* Do not pay up-front fees for help avoiding foreclosure or obtaining mortgage relief. By law, companies are prohibited from charging and accepting fees for mortgage assistance relief services until consumers receive and accept a loan modification offer from their lenders.
* Research a business before providing any money or personal information. Check to see if consumers have filed complaints with the Ohio Attorney General's Office and check a company's reputation with the Better Business Bureau. Don't use a loan modification business that charges upfront fees.
* Contact Save the Dream Ohio if you are having difficulty making your mortgage payments. Call 888-404-4674 or visit www.savethedream.ohio.gov for free foreclosure assistance.

Consumers who believe they have been treated unfairly in any transaction should contact the Ohio Attorney General's Office at www.OhioAttorneyGeneral.gov or 800-282-0515.

A copy of the lawsuit is available on the Ohio Attorney General's website.

Petition for school prayer amendment rejected for technical deficiences

noreply@blogger.com (Maggie Thurber) — Thu, 02 May 2013 23:33:00 +0000

This Press Release seems pretty ironic considering today was the National Day of Prayer:

Photo courtesy of the
Saturday Evening Post

(COLUMBUS, Ohio)—The Ohio Attorney General's Office today rejected the petition for the proposed "Amendment to Return Prayer to Our Public Schools" because the petitions contained technical flaws which prevented the submission from being approved.

On April 22nd, the Ohio Attorney General's Office received a written petition from a group called Coalition to Return Prayer to Our Public Schools seeking to amend the Ohio Constitution by adding "The Amendment to Return Prayer to Our Public Schools." The submission was rejected for two reasons: 1) the individual part-petitions signed by various individuals do not contain the language of the proposed constitutional amendment and its summary, and 2) the individual part-petitions do not contain the signature of a circulator, signed under penalty of election falsification attesting to witnessing the number of individuals the circulator saw sign the part-petitions.

Petition signatures were not reviewed because of the petition deficiencies requiring the Attorney General to reject the submission.

Initiative petitions are many times rejected for technical reasons related to the petitions or summary language. The Ohio Attorney General's Office sends petitioners a letter outlining how they can correct deficiencies and be compliant with Ohio law.

In order for a constitutional amendment to proceed, an initial petition containing summary language of the amendment and 1,000 signatures from Ohio registered voters must be submitted to the Ohio Attorney General. Once the summary language and initial signatures are certified, the Ohio Ballot Board would determine if the amendment contains a single issue or multiple issues. The petitioners must then collect signatures for each issue from registered voters in each of 44 of Ohio's 88 counties, equal to 5 percent of the total vote cast in the county for the office of president at the last presidential election. Total signatures collected statewide must also equal 10 percent of the total vote cast for the office of president at the last presidential election.

The full text of today's letter and of the initiative petitions submitted can be found at www.OhioAttorneyGeneral.gov/BallotInitiatives.

Kasich Announces $1 Billion In Workers’ Compensation Rebates

noreply@blogger.com (Maggie Thurber) — Thu, 02 May 2013 20:46:00 +0000

Gongwers is reporting:

Gov. John Kasich announced plans Thursday to give Ohio employers a $1 billion rebate from the Bureau of Workers’ Compensation and another $900 million credit as the agency revamps its payment system.

“I would call this one of the most important economic stimulus measures that you can see. We’re actually going to do cash rebates,” he said during a news conference at a small T-shirt shop in Columbus.

“Being able to give $1 billion in cash means there’s going to be a heck of a lot more money floating around inside the state of Ohio and it will be of significant benefit to the employers, particularly the small business people,” he said.

Gov. Kasich and BWC Administrator Steve Buehrer said they would submit the rebate proposal to the Board of Directors for approval at its next meeting in late May.

AG releases 1st quarter Concealed Carry stats

noreply@blogger.com (Maggie Thurber) — Thu, 02 May 2013 01:55:00 +0000

Press Release:

First Quarter Concealed Carry Statistics Released

(COLUMBUS, Ohio) — Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine today issued concealed carry license statistics for the first quarter of 2013 indicating that more than 37,000 concealed carry licenses were issued in Ohio, a dramatic increase over the same period in 2012.

According to statistics reported to the Attorney General's office, county sheriffs in Ohio issued 31,407 new licenses and 6,354 renewal licenses, or 37,761 total licenses, between January 1 and March 31. In the first quarter of 2012, 16823 new licenses were issued, and 64,650 new licenses were issued in all of 2012. The 37,761 new licenses issued in the first quarter were more than in all of 2005 (22,457), 2006 (15,751), or 2007(22,103).

"The increase in law-abiding Ohioans seeking concealed carry permits to exercise their Second Amendment privileges is a noteworthy trend" DeWine said. "I look forward to continuing to work with Ohio's county sheriffs to provide information to Ohioans on this law's usage."

The Attorney General's Office compiles an annual report as required by law about the number of licenses issued each year. Each sheriff must report concealed handgun license statistics quarterly to the Ohio Peace Officer Training Commission within the Ohio Attorney General's Office. Those quarterly statistics are published on the Ohio Attorney General's website once compiled and verified.

To learn more about Ohio's concealed carry laws, please visit www.OhioAttorneyGeneral.gov/ConcealedCarry.

Statistics for Lucas County:

614 issued
130 renewals
14 suspended
6 revoked
24 denied

How long will Republicans tolerate such incompetence?

noreply@blogger.com (Maggie Thurber) — Wed, 01 May 2013 17:50:00 +0000

I just want to know how long Republicans in Lucas County are going to tolerate such incompetence from Jon Stainbrook, the chairman of the Lucas County Republican Party?

We have a chairman whose only success is getting enough of his supporters elected to the Central Committee and then getting them to show up to vote for him as chairman. In all other aspects of the job, he has failed miserably.

The top three priorities of a party chairman are:

1) raise money for the party and its candidates
2) recruit and elect good candidates
3) be the voice of the principles of the party

Stainbrook has done none of these.

When, if ever, have you heard him quoted in the news expressing support for the core principles of the Republican Party - or opposing any action promoted by the left?

When he is in the news it's usually because he's suing fellow Republicans or bashing fellow Republicans. Or he's doing something ridiculous like ignoring the Secretary of State's recommendation to fire the Board of Elections director and assistant director and, instead, making a motion to keep them and fire everyone else in the office.

Or he's voting AGAINST a motion to prohibit secretly recording conversations in the BOE. Seriously? What kind of party chairman votes against something like that?!?

(obviously, one known for secretly recording conversations...)

When there was a vacant Toledo City Council position, he threw in the towel - before the fight for the seat even began:

"...there isn’t anything the Republican Party can do to derail the appointment."

Actually, there was. Stainbrook could have been all over the news demanding that a placeholder - someone who wasn't going to run for the seat - be appointed until the election this year. I laid out a comprehensive strategy that would have set the stage on an important issue for our candidates this November.

Sadly, Stainbrook missed a wonderful opportunity for Republicans and demonstrated, again, his utter lack of understanding of the role of the 'loyal opposition' in a Democrat-dominated Toledo.

As for recruiting and electing Republicans, well, the lack of success is pretty telling.

Yes, they have had candidates, but many of them complain that the party did nothing to help them.

It used to be that you could rely upon the party for some initial funds - perhaps enough to get a small postcard or flyer to hand out. The party would compile and events calendar so candidates wouldn't miss an important opportunity to meet-and-greet. They would hold weekly candidate meetings to plan the upcoming week and ensure that two candidates didn't hold press conferences on the same day. They provided advice strategic planning on everything from press releases to message development.

None of that happens under this chairman. Not all candidates complain about the lack of party support, but the new ones don't know what they don't know. They've not seen a fully-functioning GOP and don't know what they're missing in terms of potential support.

And where are our candidates for this year??? This is a local election year. City council, mayoral and school board seats are on the ballot for November. There is absolutely nothing on the party's web page about being a candidate, screening potential candidates or...well...anything whatsoever related to the upcoming election.

As for the county website...He can even keep the LCRP website current! Here's a link to a screen shot of www.lucascountygop.org. As you can see, it's been at least three months since it was update as the only item on the page is the advertisement for the Lincoln Day Dinner - which was on Feb. 21st.

I wonder how long the web page will remain like this? In 2011, the Lincoln Day Dinner was April 7th and on August 29th, they still had that notice up. That's five months without updating their web page!

He hasn't raised any money and what money he does raise from events like the annual Lincoln Day Dinner go toward paying for his own personal campaign for state central committee. Just how much party money did he spend on his own PERSONAL campaign for State Central Committee? His personal mini-billboards were also paid for by the LCRP. And why would you need mini-billboards for a state central committee position in the first place? Certainly other candidates on the ballot have not received such support for their races that Stainbrook provided for his own.

He's paid for a parliamentarian (usually a check for $1,000), security, lawyers, numerous reimbursements to himself, Meghan Gallaher and other known FoS (Friends of Stainbrook) - often without detailed accounting of what they are for. The amount of money spent on candidates is negligible compared to the amount spent on himself.

The Oct. 25, 2012 campaign finance report showed the party had just over $2,000 and, despite showing three different purchases of yard signs, showed only one of those purchases as an in-kind contribution to a commissioner candidate. But you should know, $614.46 doesn't go very far when you're purchasing yard signs for a county-wide race.

The Dec. 14, 2012 Post General Report showed about $7,000 on hand. Interestingly, the party raised just under $9,000 between the pre-general and post-general report, with over half the amount ($5,395) coming in on Nov. 7th, the day after the election.

How did the party spend that money? Most of it went to the costs of the headquarters, but they did purchase $744 worth of signs, though it doesn't say who the signs were for. Oh, and Stainbrook was reimbursed $1,208.04 - again, without online documentation for what was being paid.

The finance report also shows the party owes $6,000 for a loan from Jim Brennan, Jr. It was a $10,000 loan taken on Jan. 20, 2011 and they've owed $6,000 for quite a while now. So it's essentially broke.

There was the previously mentioned Lincoln Day Dinner with Gov. John Kasich and we won't know how much was raised or spent until after the semi-annual reports are filed in July. But my guess is that any money raised will not go primarily to candidates - or be saved for candidates for this year's election.

So on the the primary duties of a chairman, Stainbrook's performance is dismal at best.

But that's not all.

He's a hypocrite.

Without consulting with the party, he took it upon himself to demand the resignation of the state party chairman and signed a letter stating he was speaking for all Republicans in Lucas County.

He's had numerous issues with signatures that don't match on various legal filings, including campaign finance reports for the party and in one of the races for state central committee.

Then there is his dereliction of duty to the voters of Lucas County.

There is a vacant judge seat on Common Pleas Court. The other judges are handling increased case loads and the citizens of the county are being deprived of a judge all because Stainbrook has not scheduled a screening for the known applicants for the position. The local party needs to screen the applicants and then recommend at least one of them to the governor for him to appoint. These applicants were told in early February by Stainbrook that the screening would take place after the Lincoln Day Dinner, but so far - nothing.

This is just the tip of the iceberg. So how long are Lucas County Republicans going to tolerate such incompetence?

What The Blade didn't tell its readers about their 'gang map' public records lawsuit

noreply@blogger.com (Maggie Thurber) — Tue, 30 Apr 2013 12:32:00 +0000

Ohio's Sixth District Court of Appeals

Yesterday I wrote an explanation of why the Toledo Police Department's 'gang map' is NOT a public record, despite what the Toledo Blade wrote in their editorial signed by John Robinson Block.

One of the things the paper said was that they were engaged in a legal battle over the issue. Ohio allows individuals (and media) to file a request for mandamus with a court to force the release of public records.

Interestingly, the Blade didn't explain any details of the lawsuit, so I decided to look it up.

Case number CL-2012-01183 was filed with the Sixth District Court of Apeals on July 11, 2012.

Here's a summary of the mandamus request:

* Reporter Taylor Dungien was told on three occasions that TPD maintains a gang map or "gang territories map" on a wall and electronically in the computer.

* She asked to view the map.

* Sgt. Heffernan, the individual responsible for handling public records requests, told her no because it is an "intelligence piece and we're using it to do our enforcement; it's actively being used."

* She made another request and the city's law director told her it was exempt from Ohio's public records law because it was a confidential law enforcement investigatory record.

(this is exactly the point I made in my post yesterday)

* The Blade maintains that it is a public record because it's a "compilation based on ongoing monitoring of of gang activity in the city" (yes, a lot of typos in the filing...) Accordingly, they claim, it can't be a 'investigatory' record.

* They claim the release of the map will not endanger an officer, victim, witness or informant - nor will it disclose the identity of a suspect.

* They also claim it won't reveal any "specific confidential investigatory techniques or specific investigatory work product."

(Interestingly, this claim that it isn't a work product directly contradicts their story about how long it took them to create their own map and how hard it was to do so, considering the lack of openness the gangs displayed.)

* They also claim that if portions of the map are exempt, the map should be redacted to give them the portions that aren't.

* They finally make the normal arguments that it's in the public interest and request compensation under the public records law.

The Court ordered the city to either release the map or show cause why they didn't have to.

Not surprisingly, the City responded and denied the Blade's claims, stating their original position that the map is exempt. They did admit to not offering a redacted version because it was "not capable of being redacted without becoming completely meaningless."

They also state that, to the point there is a public interest in the map, the "interest favors the effective pursuit of criminal investigations without interference" from the Blade.

The case followed the normal rules of Civil Procedure so after the initial filings, the discovery process would begin. However, on Sept. 20, the paper and the city filed a joint request for a pre-hearing conference because they couldn't agree upon discovery issues.

The court agreed to have them submit the issue - and their respective positions on the issue - to the court. This is where it gets interesting....

The Blade proposed that their attorney be allowed to view the map in confidence, agreeing not to reveal anything of it to the paper, so he could understand the legal basis for the refusal to release it. The city said no. Depositions began.

The paper again requested that the attorney be allowed to view the map under a protective order. The city again said no.

But as the deposition proceeded, the Blade attorney again asked to see it and promised not to reveal any part of it to his client. The city again refused and they agreed to go to the court for resolution of this dispute.

To recap: Having failed to get the map released, the Blade's attorney asked to view it and promised not to tell the paper anything about it. The city, maintained it was not a public record but a confidential record and not subject to discovery. And who could blame them?

You can't insist that an item be revealed in discovery when the item is the very subject of the mandamus action. But the city agreed that the court (judge) could view the document under seal and that they would make it available to the court.

Three judges signed the decision that said the law provided for no "hybrid" form of disclosure that would allow "attorneys eyes only" for the viewing of the map. The judges ruled that either the map was a public record subject to release and viewable by all, or it wasn't. They agreed with the city's position that the court should view the document, consistent with case law. That was December of 2012.

Following extensions of time and depositions, the Blade asked for a summary judgment in their favor, the reasons they believed they proved the record was a public one and asked for the order to release the map.

The city filed their request for summary judgment in their favor, setting out further arguments that supported their position that the map was a confidential law enforcement investigatory record (CLEIR). They also provided a copy of the map to the court.

Following that, the city filed a response objecting to the paper's request for summary judgment. In that response, they reveal various items of information from the deposition: that the map has been actively used as part of criminal investigations and some court cases are pending; the map was compiled for a specific investigatory purpose, but has since been maintained as an investigatory tool and nothing in Ohio law says a CLEIR can only be used once; revealing the map would tip off gangs and reveal the scope of TPD's knowledge about them; and (I love this one) that what other cities do with their crime maps has no relevance whatsoever to what Toledo is doing with theirs.

In accordance with the rules of civil procedure, the paper filed their objection to the city's motion for summary judgment. They claim that the map doesn't show specific crimes, just geography; it doesn't reveal specific techniques, just boundaries; release of the map wouldn't disclose specific houses or locations of suspected gang activity; that the law favors disclosure and that the burden of proof limiting disclosure lies on the part of the city; it doesn't relate to a "specific" investigation and doesn't reveal any specific technique, both of which are required in order to maintain an exemption under the law.

Those objections to the summary judgment were filed on April 18th.

Now it is up to the court to read the positions and arguments and make their decision.

Author Deneen Borelli - Talking to Toledo on May 21

noreply@blogger.com (Maggie Thurber) — Mon, 29 Apr 2013 13:14:00 +0000

The Northwest Ohio Conservative Coalition will host a dinner May 21 featuring Deneen Borelli and her husband Dr. Tom Borelli as the guest speaker.

From the notice, here is her background:

Borelli is the author of “Blacklash: How Obama and the Left are Driving Americans to the Government Plantation.”

She is also the Director of Outreach with FreedomWorks, a grassroots organization that educates, trains and mobilizes volunteer activists to fight for limited government; a contributor with Fox News; and has appeared regularly on “Hannity,” “The O’Reilly Factor,” “Fox and Friends,” and “Your World with Neil Cavuto.”

Borelli is a columnist with The Blaze.com, The Daily Caller.com, Newsmax Insider, and Fox News Opinion and her commentaries on the importance of freedom and limited government have been published by newspapers such as the Los Angeles Times, Philadelphia Inquirer, Chicago Tribune, Sacramento Bee, Baltimore Sun, Washington Examiner and Washington Times.

Deneen is a frequent speaker at Tea Party rallies and political events, including the FreedomWorks 9.12.2009 March on D.C. that drew a crowd estimated at over 800,000 people.

You can follow her on Twitter and Facebook.

I've had the pleasure of hearing her speaker on several occasions and I've read her book. The American Spectator called her "America's new Rosa Parks."

She is an energetic and inspiring woman and I hope you'll join NWOCC for this event.

The event is at Holy Trinity Cathedral Banquet Hall (park on Summit St. side) which is at 802 N. Superior St. It begins at 6:30 with dinner at 7 and Borelli speaking at 8:15. Tickets are $35 each or $320 for a table of 10. You can register and purchase tickets here.

Why The Blade is wrong about Toledo's 'gang map'

noreply@blogger.com (Maggie Thurber) — Mon, 29 Apr 2013 12:35:00 +0000

The Toledo Blade is doing a series on gangs in the city, which is a good public-interest story and certainly relevant news. It's called "Battle lines; Gangs of Toledo."

But they're not happy with the Toledo Police Department or Mayor Mike Bell because they won't release the map they have showing the territories of the various gangs.

Publisher and Editor-in-Chief John Robinson Block took the unusual action of writing - and signing - an editorial titled "On gang map, Mayor Bell ignores the public's right to know."

He writes:

The people of Toledo have a right to know about gang activity in this city. They have a right to know where it is. They are entitled to see the “gang map” that tells where gang activity is most dangerous and intense.

Many months ago, The Blade asked for that map, which is a public document under Ohio law. The mayor refused to release it. He has persisted in this refusal, even in the abse
nce of legal authority. This refusal is illegal and unjustified.

Except, the refusal is legal.

Ohio Revised Code 149.43 details the state's law about open records, access and penalties for failure to comply. It's one of the best public records laws in the country, generously favoring the public's right to know.

But there are numerous exemptions - items specifically designated as NOT a public record. Section (1) defines what a public record is and also says "Public record" does not mean any of the following: The following list includes this exemption

(h) Confidential law enforcement investigatory records;

The only way the Blade can maintain that the release of the gang map is a public record is to claim that it is not a confidential law enforcement investigatory record. That's also the only way the Mayor can maintain its secrecy.

Block also writes:

One consolation is that The Blade’s map is almost certainly more accurate than the city’s because gang members were naturally more willing to talk with our reporters than police officers.

Well if their map is more accurate, why are they still quibbling with TPD over theirs?

Block then writes:

Our motive is not to defame anyone or to depress readers but to show what is — to tell the truth.

In the final analysis, the gang map is not a matter of the newspaper’s right to know, but the people’s right to know. The Blade is merely the surrogate and servant of the people of Toledo. For only an informed public can govern itself.

For those of you who have followed my writing over the years, you'll know that I gave up coming up with headlines on the Blade's bias and just started numbering them. The local daily has a reputation - deservedly so - for being more of the dictator than the servant and for telling people what they want the people to know - rather than the truth. To say that hysterical laughter followed when I read this sentence, first to myself and then to a group of others, would not do justice to the hysterical laughter that actually followed.

But I digress - so back to the map as a public record...

TPD probably does not have a single map, but a series of maps over time, likely showing the various gang territories and how they have changed over time. Such a map could very legitimately be a confidential investigatory record showing which gangs are expanding, which are declining, which are combining and which are new. How they interact within their territories and with/against each other based upon those territories is an investigatory tool that could help TPD monitor and predict their activities and likely conflicts.

If the maps show disputed territory, it could influence such things as where TPD is placing their (highly controversial) monitoring cameras as well as the routes of their road patrols.

Additionally, if the gangs know what it is that the police know about their territories, it could cause them to change certain behaviors, putting the public further at risk.

If I can come up with such reasons and explanations as for why the TPD gang map is not a public record, I'm certain the mayor, having all the information, can as well. In fact, that's exactly what happened and the Blade promptly sued the city over the issue.

Contrary to what the editor claims in his editorial, the issue is not clear-cut and the public's 'right to know' isn't always outweighed by the public's own safety, or the safety of our police officers, through the protection of confidential investigatory records.

For more information, check out: What The Blade didn't tell its readers about their 'gang map' public records lawsuit

Where's the beer?

noreply@blogger.com (Maggie Thurber) — Sun, 28 Apr 2013 15:22:00 +0000

Anheuser-Busch objected to new bill .

Should brewers be able to purchase wholesale distributors in Ohio?

Shouldn't a free market allow anyone to purchase a distributorship in order to further distribute their products, especially beer?

Well, Ohio says no, according to a new law passed in a matter of hours two weeks ago.

Senate Bill 48 was introduced Feb. 20th and passed by the Senate on March 20th. It was sent to the House on March 21st.

On April 17th, the bill received a single hearing, a substitute bill was introduced and approved by the committee, then approved unanimously by the House and the Senate concurred. It was sent to the Governor on April 23rd.

On first examination, it looks like a good bill in that it sets up a two-tiered liquor licensing system that allows smaller brewers (making less than 31 million gallons a year) to sell directly to retail markets and bypass the wholesale distributors in the state.

It does a number of others things, but one aspect generated some controversy: it prohibits large brewers from owning a distributor.

And that was a problem for many, but especially Anheuser-Busch InBev which has numerous options to purchase, or determine the purchaser, of distributorships throughout the state.

So they objected to the terms of the bill - and the rapid process with which it was passed.

According to Rep. Jim Buchy, R-Greenville, the bill’s floor manager, "We want to maintain a good system that has worked so well so we don’t get into a noncompetitive situation. That’s what could happen here," he told the Columbus Dispatch.

Anheuser-Busch said they were not given any chance to comment upon the implications of the provision.

Interestingly, the Ohio Wholesale Wine and Beer Association, which is the direct beneficiary of the provision, has donated over $600,000 to various legislative and state campaigns in the past several years.

Anheuser-Busch's North American president, Luiz Edmond, met with Gov. John Kasich to see if he would veto the bill.

“This thing passed the House and the Senate unanimously,” Kasich said. “I’m not going to just veto something that has, basically, unanimous support across the board. I don’t see why I would do that," he told the Dispatch.

Scott Corbitt, Region Director for State Affairs at Anheuser-Busch, issued the following statement:

We have shared our concerns with legislators and Governor Kasich regarding the lack of transparency in the legislative process and that the legislation’s restrictions on competition and constraints on the free market will ultimately harm consumer choice. Positive assurances were given to us by policymakers to address the issues that could significantly impact our investments in the state. We are working to identify a solution that maintains consumer choice and the free market principles that make Ohio a great state to do business.

The Governor has until May 4th to sign or veto the bill, after which it will go into effect with or without his action.

Borges is new Ohio GOP chair

noreply@blogger.com (Maggie Thurber) — Fri, 26 Apr 2013 17:31:00 +0000

Gongwer reports:

Borges Elected New GOP Chair Over Tea Party Activist

Matt Borges was overwhelmingly elected as the new chairman of the Ohio Republican Party on Friday, fending off a tea party activist who warned that the party was alienating its conservative base.

The ORP’s executive director was elected by the State Central Committee 48-7 over Tom Zawistowski, executive director of the Portage County Tea Party.

Congress exempt from Obamacare? There ought to be a law!

noreply@blogger.com (Maggie Thurber) — Thu, 25 Apr 2013 15:01:00 +0000

What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

You've heard the phrase and know what it means.

But Congress doesn't.

Politico is reporting:

Congressional leaders in both parties are engaged in high-level, confidential talks about exempting lawmakers and Capitol Hill aides from the insurance exchanges they are mandated to join as part of President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul, sources in both parties said.

The talks — which involve Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), the Obama administration and other top lawmakers — are extraordinarily sensitive, with both sides acutely aware of the potential for political fallout from giving carve-outs from the hugely controversial law to 535 lawmakers and thousands of their aides. Discussions have stretched out for months, sources said.

A source close to the talks says: “Everyone has to hold hands on this and jump, or nothing is going to get done.”
Yet if Capitol Hill leaders move forward with the plan, they risk being dubbed hypocrites by their political rivals and the American public. By removing themselves from a key Obamacare component, lawmakers and aides would be held to a different standard than the people who put them in office.

But what to do about this?

Erick Erickson at RedState.com says:

If this happens, the nation needs to collectively march on Washington, DC, burn it to the ground, and spread salt over the ground.

Normally, I'm not one for calling for a new law whenever a problem exists, but clearly this is an exception.

There's already a push for a 28th Amendment:

“Congress shall make no law that applies to the citizens of the United States that does not apply equally to the Senators and/or Representatives; and, Congress shall make no law that applies to the Senators and/or Representatives that does not apply equally to the citizens of the United States”.

But I'd go a step further: whenever Congress passes and the administration implements a new law, it must first be applied to members of Congress, the administration and the federal government for a period of three years before it is applied to the public at large.

Don't you think that if they had to live with the mess they create, they'd quickly repeal bad laws and provisions?

Maybe not, but it would definitely be a learning experience.

The only problem is that no such law or provision will ever be passed by people who are already discussing ways to exempt themselves from Obamacare.

Maybe Erickson is right...where's my salt?

Medicaid expansion out, ban on Internet cafes in, OH Senate President says

noreply@blogger.com (Maggie Thurber) — Wed, 24 Apr 2013 15:25:00 +0000

Gongwer is reporting:

Senate President Says Medicaid Expansion Off The Table For Budget, Promises Internet Cafe Ban

Senate President Keith Faber announced Wednesday that the Senate will not pursue an expansion of Medicaid as proposed by Gov. John Kasich for the biennial budget.

The Celina Republican also detailed his intentions for the Senate to quickly extend a moratorium on so-called Internet cafes in the state and to follow that legislation with a complete ban on the operations, which he said serve no public purpose.

His announcements came during a Statehouse news conference where Attorney General Mike DeWine and Franklin County Prosecutor Ron O’Brien expressed support for the cafe prohibition, and fellow lawmakers joined the Senate leader in discussing general plans for the budget.