At last night's city council meeting, legislation to prohibit local businesses from distributing plastic bags was introduced. This was hardly a secret, and some hippie environmentalist types were on hand to support the bill. Conversely, the owner of Storm Bros. Ice Cream and City Wraps, Sveinn Storm, was on hand to argue against the bill. It is worth noting that Mr. Storm's investigative journalism regarding the malpractices of several sewage treatment plants has won a Peabody award, several local Emmy awards, and landed him in jail. Here is his testimony:
The plastic bags I use in my stores cost about a penny each. Replacing them with paper bags will result in a 500% increase in cost.
In the meantime, the paper bags you wish to force me to use will produce 70% more air pollutants and 50 times more water pollutants than my plastic bags. Before you question these facts, understand that they have been provided by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. You see four times as much energy is required to produce paper bags and 85 times as much energy is needed to recycle them. Paper takes up nine times as much space in landfills and doesn't break down there at a substantially faster rate than plastic does.
Have we forgotten where paper bags come from? They don't just grow on trees. Oops, wait a minute, that's exactly where they come from.
Now if the goal is to get away from using plastics altogether, let's also ban plastic spoons, forks, knives, cups and bottles. Perhaps I could persuade my customers to be responsible and bring their own silverware and drinking glasses.
Why not go one step further and ban the use of paper napkins? Maybe I could convince my customers to make use of their shirt sleeves?
I know these options sound rather absurd, but so is this plastic bag ban proposal. Let's face it. We live in a throwaway society and we need to deal with it in an intelligent manner.
In our home we find many uses for these bags. We use them as litter bags in our cars, we line our trash cans with them and we use them for poop and scoop bags for our dog. Perhaps you would prefer us to buy plastic bags for these purposes. I should also add that the ones we don't use, we take back to the store and recycle.
The real culprits are the slobs who litter or people who refuse to recycle, or communities like ours that don't provide and easy means for them to do so.
So what are some realistic answers? For starters, why don't we put out recycling receptacles clearly marked for plastic bottles and aluminum cans?
Why not enforce our existing laws? Both the police and parking enforcement personnel could very easily issue citations for these offenders. Have you bothered to research the number of times these laws are actually enforced? In over three decades down at the City Dock I have never seen anyone receive a ticket for this offense yet we have several public works employees who spend a significant amount of their day cleaning up after these scofflaws.
Enforcement and public education will help far more than an impractical, counterproductive ban on a product that is used properly and recycled every day by responsible people. It shouldn't take a millennium to alter wasteful behavior.
I am sickened at the prospect of being forced to contribute to the cutting down of more trees to make more paper bags available. I am distressed that you wish to legislate in a way that will contribute even more toward global warming.
If you are really concerned about our environment, you will not approve this bill. But if making a name for yourself is your goal, go right ahead.
SVEINN C. STORM
Tuesday, July 10, 2007
Monday, July 9, 2007
Capital Punisment: No More Plastic Bags, Sam?
This letter to the editor, which appeared on July 8, is from Ward 7 Alderman Sam Shropshire himself, concerning his proposed legislation to ban plastic bags from the city of Annapolis. Here we go:
Your editorial headlined "Paper-or-plastic issue not as simple as alderman thinks" cast doubt on my legislation to rid Annapolis neighborhoods and waterways, and the Chesapeake Bay, of plastic retail checkout bags.
That makes me wonder just how often Capital writers shop! I shop almost daily. I use reusable shopping bags. And a lot of U.S. supermarkets offer insulated, leak-proof recycled paper bags for transporting ice cream.
OK! Here is our first breach of logic. You claim to use a reusable bag, which is environmentally friendly. But, your legislation does not promote this, it merely bans plastic bags. This will only encourage paper bags. Maybe some people fear paper cuts and will switch to reusable, but you are not really promoting your own solution. Also, I have NEVER seen this insulated, reusable ice cream bag you speak of, and I was not born yesterday.
Plastic checkout bags litter Annapolis streets and waterways. They often fill with silt, acting like sandbags, clogging storm drains and creeks.
Your editorial headlined "Paper-or-plastic issue not as simple as alderman thinks" cast doubt on my legislation to rid Annapolis neighborhoods and waterways, and the Chesapeake Bay, of plastic retail checkout bags.
If true, The Capital can claim a rare success in actually encouraging open thought. To read more about how paper bags are at least the same or WORSE than plastic bags, click here, or here, or here, or here.
You said my "view that shoppers can do without plastic bags makes us wonder how much grocery shopping he has done recently. Has he tried transporting ice cream in a paper bag?"
To prevent this problem, try making your own ice cream.That makes me wonder just how often Capital writers shop! I shop almost daily. I use reusable shopping bags. And a lot of U.S. supermarkets offer insulated, leak-proof recycled paper bags for transporting ice cream.
OK! Here is our first breach of logic. You claim to use a reusable bag, which is environmentally friendly. But, your legislation does not promote this, it merely bans plastic bags. This will only encourage paper bags. Maybe some people fear paper cuts and will switch to reusable, but you are not really promoting your own solution. Also, I have NEVER seen this insulated, reusable ice cream bag you speak of, and I was not born yesterday.
Plastic checkout bags litter Annapolis streets and waterways. They often fill with silt, acting like sandbags, clogging storm drains and creeks.
Fair enough, but is this really a big problem? Maybe so. Anyway, before we go banning things or telling people how to live their lives, let's try and enforce the littering laws that already exist. Whadda ya think?
Thousands eventually make their way into the bay and out to sea, and some all the way across the Atlantic. En route they often look like jellyfish, and when they are ingested, birds, whales, seals, and turtles die.
I actually found some evidence that this is true, even all the way across the Atlantic. Careful though, this is a classic scare technique designed to make you ignore the facts and support a particular position based on your emotions alone, regardless of fact, logic, or reason. Besides, who really needs turtles, except Terrapins, because they are awesome.
And no matter how much money we spend trying to clean them up, we don't get them all. They just don't go away.
Partly true. We can't get them all, but they do go away eventually.
By most counts, only 1 percent of the 20 billion plastic checkout bags distributed annually in America are being recycled. That leaves 99 percent of these billions to contaminate our waterways or be trucked to dumps, where they will slowly exude toxins over several hundred years.
I don't like the smell of these numbers. I would bet you could argue these facts, if not disprove them. Nonetheless, how about an effort to increase recycling? Rather than banning? Whadda ya think?
My legislation would prohibit the distribution of plastic checkout bags by Annapolis retailers. While this may seem to some like firing a BB at the polluting giant of over consumption, for nervous international polyethylene profiteers it will certainly be a shot heard round the world.
SAM SHROPSHIRE, Alderman Ward 7, Annapolis
I'm surprised he waited this long. Here is my theory on how this legislation came to be: Alderman Sam is sitting at home one day and thinks to himself, "How can I use the phrase 'shot heard round the world' in a public forum?". He then concocts this elaborate scheme, which draws criticism, which requires a letter refuting the criticism, and here we are. I mean, this last paragraph is a fantastically absurd bit of rhetoric. You are not in a movie, Sam.
Also, I did some research. By 2010 the global demand for polyethylene will be 87 million tons. At the current price of about $.55 per pound, this means that by 2010 the international polyethylene market will gross $95,700,000,000--that's 95.7 billion dollars. I doubt that the international polyethylene profiteers are worried about the city of Annapolis banning plastic bags.
Have you ever heard the saying necessity breeds invention? Well, it does. I believe that the microchip was developed because NASA needed to make things smaller to fit on a rocket. This is what economists call a positive externality (and human beings call a good side-effect). If the world, somehow, banned plastic bags, all research concerning plastic bags, their production, distribution, etc. will stop. Any positive externalities that would have occurred along the way will no longer occur.
On the other hand, let's say you let businesses offer whatever the hell types of bags they want, but offer an incentive for recycling plastic bags. So businesses, in their desire to make money, figure out a good way to recycle plastic bags. Maybe their method of recycling also applies to paper bags, and recycling of paper bags increases too! This is called capitalism, and is why America is the richest country, because we are the most capitalist country.
(I would bet that if you calculated the correlation between capitalism and per capita gdp, you would find that the most capitalist countries are the richest. I now offer my apologies, because I do not have the research tools nor the expertise to produce a chart for you in a timely fashion.)
But the thing is, Sam, you don't have to offer businesses an incentive--THEY WILL DO IT THEMSELVES. Businesses have to pay, let's say $.01 each, for their plastic bags. If they figure out a way to recycle, they will have to buy fewer bags and will MAKE MORE MONEY. SO THE GOVERNMENT DOES NOT HAVE TO DO ANYTHING AND THE PROCESS WILL WORK.
Note to readers: the following is a bit geeky, but relevant. Normally the free market process works almost perfectly (at least in the long-run). But, in the case of environmental economics, pollution is an EXTERNALITY of production and not a COST of production. Businesses, therefore, do not consider pollution in their strategic decisions or consider it at a discounted rate. The government has a role here, as protection of the environment is a public good.
THE BOTTOM LINE IS THIS: BANNING PLASTIC BAGS IN ANNAPOLIS WILL NOT DECREASE THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT. IT DISCOURAGES ONE PARTICULAR PROBLEM AND DOES NOT ENCOURAGE ANY COMPREHENSIVE SOLUTION.
O'Malley Corruption: Land Deal
I am not going to cite an article here, but if you want to find more info about this, click on www.omalleywatch.com.
Basically, here's what happened. The state decided it wanted to buy a piece of land for preservation. The land was officially appraised twice, the appraisals for $3.6 million and $4.6 million respectively. According to the Baltimore Sun, the state along with Quenne Anne's County paid a total of $5 million for it.
Why $400,000 higher than THE HIGHEST appraisal? Because the owner of the land was a member of the O'Malley transition team! Smell a rat?
A 29-year state employee, Nelson Riechart, pointed out that in cases of differering appraisals, the state pays the average of the 2, or $4.1 million in this case. When he stated this FACT, he was fired THE NEXT DAY!. But the governor's office says the two events had nothing in common, simply that they wanted to take the Mr. Riechart's department in a different direction.
I mean, come on. If you didn't think things were out of control already, you do now.
Basically, here's what happened. The state decided it wanted to buy a piece of land for preservation. The land was officially appraised twice, the appraisals for $3.6 million and $4.6 million respectively. According to the Baltimore Sun, the state along with Quenne Anne's County paid a total of $5 million for it.
Why $400,000 higher than THE HIGHEST appraisal? Because the owner of the land was a member of the O'Malley transition team! Smell a rat?
A 29-year state employee, Nelson Riechart, pointed out that in cases of differering appraisals, the state pays the average of the 2, or $4.1 million in this case. When he stated this FACT, he was fired THE NEXT DAY!. But the governor's office says the two events had nothing in common, simply that they wanted to take the Mr. Riechart's department in a different direction.
I mean, come on. If you didn't think things were out of control already, you do now.
Friday, July 6, 2007
Do Your Math on the Sales Tax
Although the title of this blog, AP, refers to the politics of the city of Annapolis, from time to time state issues make their way onto these pages, as the state capital is indeed here as well.
So, the state budget issue goes something like this. Ehrlich came into office facing a budget deficit, then turned it around and left a $1 billion (fact check needed) or so surplus for O'Malley. O'Malley blew through that money in his first year, and now the state has no money, so they say. Politicians are now talking about what they call the 'doomsday budget', and telling us that if they don't raise taxes we will be cast back to the stone age because our schools, police, fire, and other services will just stop working. They are buttering us up for a HUGE tax increase next year, which is what happens when you have the executive branch and both houses of the legislature controlled by liberals. Note to readers: WE DO NOT HAVE A BUDGET PROBLEM, WE HAVE A SPENDING PROBLEM. REPEAT, A SPENDING PROBLEM!
Please read this article, in which Senate President Miller and House Speaker Busch talk about the budget and raising taxes. I am having you read this now, so next year, when all of this actually happens, I can make a cheeky 'I told you so' post on this site.
I am now going to quote selected excerpts from the article, and give you the no BS translation as to what this really means.
The sales tax is estimated to bring in $3.6 billion in fiscal 2008, according to the state. A 1 percent sales tax increase would raise an extra $750 million.
I hope you all like pop culture, because we are now going to play 'Are You Smarter Than A Fifth Grader?'!!! If the original value is 5, then it goes to 6, by what percent does it increase? Well, it's (6-5)/5 = 1/5 = .2 = 20%. THIS IS A TAX INCREASE OF 20%, NOT 1%. IT IS A 1% INCREASE OF THE VALUE OF THE GOOD, AND A 20% INCREASE IN WHAT YOU ARE PAYING. Let's use some numbers. Say you buy a car for $20,000. Now, you pay $1000 in sales tax. With a 6% sales tax, you would pay $1200. First, notice that this is a lot of money! Second, notice that you paid $1000, you now pay $200 more, and that is a 20% increase. This also means that the state will see A 20% INCREASE in sales tax receipts. Please write the papers when they call this a 1% increase.
But any sales tax hike would be part of a broader "menu" that would first look to cut state spending, reduce aid to local government, and then fill the remaining gap with new revenue, Mr. Busch said. Lawmakers have a duty to not unduly burden middle and lower class families with high taxes, he said.
Menu? A f_ _ _ ing tax MENU??!!! Let's get something straight, taxes are where the government (i.e. your neighbors who you elected) takes YOUR MONEY and gives it to SOMEONE ELSE for any reason they want. Democrats and liberals, you can now observe, see this as a natural part of life. They choose from a menu--a comprehensive list of dozens, perhaps hundreds, of ways to take your money. When one way produces less money, or invokes criticism, they just order something else from the menu. Also, remember Mr. Busch's promise not to burden middle and lower classes with higher taxes. First of all, rich families are apparently supposed to be unduly burdened with high taxes. And second of all, I promise you that he will raise taxes for EVERYBODY.
Last session, a bill sponsored by Del. Jim Gilchrest, D-Montgomery, would have taxed services ranging from auto repair shops and parking facilities to tanning salons and escort services.The legislation projected that state revenues could increase by more than $300 million in fiscal year 2008 and go up to more than $760 million by fiscal 2012.
I own a service based business in Prince George's County. What do you think will happen if I have to start paying sales tax (even though I am not selling anything). The cost pressures I face will cause me to either raise prices or decrease the quality of service, or put employees out of work. Somebody else, in another state right next to me, will come in and offer a better value and take business from me. Not only is this idea obviously bad for in-state businesses like mine, IT IS BAD FOR THE STATE ITSELF. This reasoning is a spin-off of the famous Laffer-Curve analysis of the optimal tax rate, which states that at some particular tax rate, an increase in that rate will actually cause a decrease in government tax revenue. Here's how: increases in tax rates increase the tax revenue per dollar of economic output (or GDP), but decrease the actual output itself. In my example, my income goes down because of the competing company who takes business from me. So, the state makes more money on each dollar of profit I make, but that profit is lower than before. At some point, the loss in profit outweighs the increased portion of tax I pay on the profit I still make, and the government therefore ACTUALLY LOSES MONEY BY RAISING THE TAXES. Not to mention, higher taxes may cause me to lay off employees because I can't afford to pay them, so the state loses this employee's income tax, and payroll taxes that I pay on the employee's salary.
I was recently denied admission to the University of Maryland PhD program in economics (who DO they let in? I graduated UMD cum laude in economics, started a freeking business at UMD, and was Young Entrepreneur of the Year. Geez.), but I have put a call in to my personal friend, the Dean of Behavioral and Social Sciences, to see if there is a data-based, calculated optimal tax level (an actual number, say 5.5% sales tax) that would maximize revenue. Conclusion: keep taxes as low as possible and let the private market do it's job.
Regardless of potential backlash, Mr. Miller said, lawmakers must have the political will to tell people what they need to hear, not what they want to hear.
Ha! Translation: lawmakers will tell us they are raising taxes no matter what and we can't do a damn thing about it even if we have a better solution or the majority of us don't want higher taxes.
If anybody wants to start a sister site, perhaps http://www.marylandpoliticsisfrustrating.blogspot.com/, (do not click here, it is not a real site), let me know and we can get together!
So, the state budget issue goes something like this. Ehrlich came into office facing a budget deficit, then turned it around and left a $1 billion (fact check needed) or so surplus for O'Malley. O'Malley blew through that money in his first year, and now the state has no money, so they say. Politicians are now talking about what they call the 'doomsday budget', and telling us that if they don't raise taxes we will be cast back to the stone age because our schools, police, fire, and other services will just stop working. They are buttering us up for a HUGE tax increase next year, which is what happens when you have the executive branch and both houses of the legislature controlled by liberals. Note to readers: WE DO NOT HAVE A BUDGET PROBLEM, WE HAVE A SPENDING PROBLEM. REPEAT, A SPENDING PROBLEM!
Please read this article, in which Senate President Miller and House Speaker Busch talk about the budget and raising taxes. I am having you read this now, so next year, when all of this actually happens, I can make a cheeky 'I told you so' post on this site.
I am now going to quote selected excerpts from the article, and give you the no BS translation as to what this really means.
The sales tax is estimated to bring in $3.6 billion in fiscal 2008, according to the state. A 1 percent sales tax increase would raise an extra $750 million.
I hope you all like pop culture, because we are now going to play 'Are You Smarter Than A Fifth Grader?'!!! If the original value is 5, then it goes to 6, by what percent does it increase? Well, it's (6-5)/5 = 1/5 = .2 = 20%. THIS IS A TAX INCREASE OF 20%, NOT 1%. IT IS A 1% INCREASE OF THE VALUE OF THE GOOD, AND A 20% INCREASE IN WHAT YOU ARE PAYING. Let's use some numbers. Say you buy a car for $20,000. Now, you pay $1000 in sales tax. With a 6% sales tax, you would pay $1200. First, notice that this is a lot of money! Second, notice that you paid $1000, you now pay $200 more, and that is a 20% increase. This also means that the state will see A 20% INCREASE in sales tax receipts. Please write the papers when they call this a 1% increase.
But any sales tax hike would be part of a broader "menu" that would first look to cut state spending, reduce aid to local government, and then fill the remaining gap with new revenue, Mr. Busch said. Lawmakers have a duty to not unduly burden middle and lower class families with high taxes, he said.
Menu? A f_ _ _ ing tax MENU??!!! Let's get something straight, taxes are where the government (i.e. your neighbors who you elected) takes YOUR MONEY and gives it to SOMEONE ELSE for any reason they want. Democrats and liberals, you can now observe, see this as a natural part of life. They choose from a menu--a comprehensive list of dozens, perhaps hundreds, of ways to take your money. When one way produces less money, or invokes criticism, they just order something else from the menu. Also, remember Mr. Busch's promise not to burden middle and lower classes with higher taxes. First of all, rich families are apparently supposed to be unduly burdened with high taxes. And second of all, I promise you that he will raise taxes for EVERYBODY.
Last session, a bill sponsored by Del. Jim Gilchrest, D-Montgomery, would have taxed services ranging from auto repair shops and parking facilities to tanning salons and escort services.The legislation projected that state revenues could increase by more than $300 million in fiscal year 2008 and go up to more than $760 million by fiscal 2012.
I own a service based business in Prince George's County. What do you think will happen if I have to start paying sales tax (even though I am not selling anything). The cost pressures I face will cause me to either raise prices or decrease the quality of service, or put employees out of work. Somebody else, in another state right next to me, will come in and offer a better value and take business from me. Not only is this idea obviously bad for in-state businesses like mine, IT IS BAD FOR THE STATE ITSELF. This reasoning is a spin-off of the famous Laffer-Curve analysis of the optimal tax rate, which states that at some particular tax rate, an increase in that rate will actually cause a decrease in government tax revenue. Here's how: increases in tax rates increase the tax revenue per dollar of economic output (or GDP), but decrease the actual output itself. In my example, my income goes down because of the competing company who takes business from me. So, the state makes more money on each dollar of profit I make, but that profit is lower than before. At some point, the loss in profit outweighs the increased portion of tax I pay on the profit I still make, and the government therefore ACTUALLY LOSES MONEY BY RAISING THE TAXES. Not to mention, higher taxes may cause me to lay off employees because I can't afford to pay them, so the state loses this employee's income tax, and payroll taxes that I pay on the employee's salary.
I was recently denied admission to the University of Maryland PhD program in economics (who DO they let in? I graduated UMD cum laude in economics, started a freeking business at UMD, and was Young Entrepreneur of the Year. Geez.), but I have put a call in to my personal friend, the Dean of Behavioral and Social Sciences, to see if there is a data-based, calculated optimal tax level (an actual number, say 5.5% sales tax) that would maximize revenue. Conclusion: keep taxes as low as possible and let the private market do it's job.
Regardless of potential backlash, Mr. Miller said, lawmakers must have the political will to tell people what they need to hear, not what they want to hear.
Ha! Translation: lawmakers will tell us they are raising taxes no matter what and we can't do a damn thing about it even if we have a better solution or the majority of us don't want higher taxes.
If anybody wants to start a sister site, perhaps http://www.marylandpoliticsisfrustrating.blogspot.com/, (do not click here, it is not a real site), let me know and we can get together!
Thursday, July 5, 2007
Capital Punishment: Ugh, Ward 1
I really hope that this 2 a.m. bill comes up for a vote soon, because it is getting burdensome to refute these Ward 1 letters. An esteemed colleague of mine, who happens to live in Acton's Landing along with this letter writer, acutely cautioned against making this into an elitist issue, but this is an elitist letter if I have ever seen one. It appeared on July 4.
Regarding a letter supporting the 2 a.m. curfew:
I doubt these recent residents of Annapolis have any understanding of the negative effects of the bars downtown. Residing in Acton's Landing, they may never understand the bars' effect on downtown and its residents.
Look at this. Already. In the first two sentences. We have not lived where you live for as long as you live so we can't possibly understand what you are talking about or have valid opinions of our own. This is classic arrogance.
Living In Acton's Landing, they will probably never:
-Wake up to find their flower pots thrown in the streets.
-Have their flags stolen or vandalized.
-Have their parked cars vandalized.
-Have to clean up vomit or used condoms in their yards.
-Deal with the broken beer bottles in the street and on the sidewalk.
I have news for you, my friend.....YES WE WILL!!!!!. This type of stuff happens everywhere, including my house here in Ward 5. Also, living in Acton's Landing, you are at the mercy of about 5 bars, maybe. I will give you the benefit of the doubt on this one, but I for one find it hard to believe that your house lies on a major walking route of drunk people. I mean, do the people who perpetrate the above behavior really leave O'Briens and walk past your house en route to their boat slip on the end of Franklin St.? BUT, MOST IMPORTANTLY, ENDING ALL LIQUOR SERVICE AT MIDNIGHT WILL NOT STOP THIS BEHAVIOR!!!! Now stopping drinking altogether might help a little bit.....for more info on prohibition click here. This is how to solve the problem you are referencing:
1. Raise the cost of a liquor license. For argument's sake, quadruple it.
2. Free up more money, perhaps by giving out fewer grants.
3. Use the extra money to offer police officers more than a 2% raise, thereby filling the 20 open vacancies on the police force.
4. USE THE EXTRA POLICE TO ENFORCE THE LAWS THAT ALREADY EXIST REGARDING PUBLIC INTOXICATION AND VANDALISM.
5. Increase fines for the above violations, thereby perpetuating the process.
6. Would anyone vote for me for mayor?
Let's continue....
Unless they walk downtown in the morning, they will probably never appreciate the volume and type of garbage that the city and residents have to clean up. They may never have to deal with the drunken driving and excessive street noise that excessive drinking brings.
Are you really saying that the only people who deal with drunk driving are downtown residents? Also, last time I checked all garbage was pretty much the same: gross. What is it about the particular type of garbage that you mention will we not appreciate? People have willingly paid taxes in exchange for services such as garbage removal for, like, ever.
Downtown is as nice as it is only because its residents are willing to fight to protect the quality of live that we have.
No, downtown is nice because it has attractive topography, historical context, charismatic residents and businesses, and the benefit of essential city services paid for by our tax dollars.
We protect it because we love downtown and understand what excessive drinking can do. More drinking equals more problems. Ask the police.
Ok, again, if you want to take to position that nobody should be drinking go right ahead. If not, the way to allow responsible drinking while reducing the problems is to punish the offenders via strictly enforced, meaningful punishments. That way, people will shift their behavior away from your definition of problem behavior in response to the incentive structure they are faced with.
The residents of downtown are asking how Alderwoman Classie Hoyle, D-Ward 3, benefits from suggesting extending the bar curfew.
Your sixth sense is correct here. It is AP's overwhelming suspicion that Alderwoman Hoyle is acting on behalf of one particular aggrieved bar owner and not on behalf of her constituents or the city citizens as a whole. Her motives may be improper, but the result of the bill would not be.
It is clear how many of the party establishments, many of which are owned and managed by out-of-towners, would benefit. I suppose most of those owners and managers don't really care what happens to downtown Annapolis. The downtown residents do.
MARY KOENIGSHOFF, Annapolis
I had really hoped that I could prove that most owners lived in the city limits, but that proved harder than I have time for. Readily available are the addresses of liquor license holders, but these names are often not the owners. Certainly some of these situations arise because the owners do not live in the city and the license holder must live within the limits, but I also noticed specific examples of listed owners who do live in the city but are not on the liquor license for whatever reason. Feeling defeated, I will not revert to a more obvious but equally valid argument. OF COURSE THEY CARE WHAT HAPPENS TO DOWNTOWN ANNAPOLIS. If downtown goes to hell nobody will come there and they will go out of business.
It's a good thing that I finished writing this post when I did, because I need a drink and at this time I can still get one wherever I want.
Regarding a letter supporting the 2 a.m. curfew:
I doubt these recent residents of Annapolis have any understanding of the negative effects of the bars downtown. Residing in Acton's Landing, they may never understand the bars' effect on downtown and its residents.
Look at this. Already. In the first two sentences. We have not lived where you live for as long as you live so we can't possibly understand what you are talking about or have valid opinions of our own. This is classic arrogance.
Living In Acton's Landing, they will probably never:
-Wake up to find their flower pots thrown in the streets.
-Have their flags stolen or vandalized.
-Have their parked cars vandalized.
-Have to clean up vomit or used condoms in their yards.
-Deal with the broken beer bottles in the street and on the sidewalk.
I have news for you, my friend.....YES WE WILL!!!!!. This type of stuff happens everywhere, including my house here in Ward 5. Also, living in Acton's Landing, you are at the mercy of about 5 bars, maybe. I will give you the benefit of the doubt on this one, but I for one find it hard to believe that your house lies on a major walking route of drunk people. I mean, do the people who perpetrate the above behavior really leave O'Briens and walk past your house en route to their boat slip on the end of Franklin St.? BUT, MOST IMPORTANTLY, ENDING ALL LIQUOR SERVICE AT MIDNIGHT WILL NOT STOP THIS BEHAVIOR!!!! Now stopping drinking altogether might help a little bit.....for more info on prohibition click here. This is how to solve the problem you are referencing:
1. Raise the cost of a liquor license. For argument's sake, quadruple it.
2. Free up more money, perhaps by giving out fewer grants.
3. Use the extra money to offer police officers more than a 2% raise, thereby filling the 20 open vacancies on the police force.
4. USE THE EXTRA POLICE TO ENFORCE THE LAWS THAT ALREADY EXIST REGARDING PUBLIC INTOXICATION AND VANDALISM.
5. Increase fines for the above violations, thereby perpetuating the process.
6. Would anyone vote for me for mayor?
Let's continue....
Unless they walk downtown in the morning, they will probably never appreciate the volume and type of garbage that the city and residents have to clean up. They may never have to deal with the drunken driving and excessive street noise that excessive drinking brings.
Are you really saying that the only people who deal with drunk driving are downtown residents? Also, last time I checked all garbage was pretty much the same: gross. What is it about the particular type of garbage that you mention will we not appreciate? People have willingly paid taxes in exchange for services such as garbage removal for, like, ever.
Downtown is as nice as it is only because its residents are willing to fight to protect the quality of live that we have.
No, downtown is nice because it has attractive topography, historical context, charismatic residents and businesses, and the benefit of essential city services paid for by our tax dollars.
We protect it because we love downtown and understand what excessive drinking can do. More drinking equals more problems. Ask the police.
Ok, again, if you want to take to position that nobody should be drinking go right ahead. If not, the way to allow responsible drinking while reducing the problems is to punish the offenders via strictly enforced, meaningful punishments. That way, people will shift their behavior away from your definition of problem behavior in response to the incentive structure they are faced with.
The residents of downtown are asking how Alderwoman Classie Hoyle, D-Ward 3, benefits from suggesting extending the bar curfew.
Your sixth sense is correct here. It is AP's overwhelming suspicion that Alderwoman Hoyle is acting on behalf of one particular aggrieved bar owner and not on behalf of her constituents or the city citizens as a whole. Her motives may be improper, but the result of the bill would not be.
It is clear how many of the party establishments, many of which are owned and managed by out-of-towners, would benefit. I suppose most of those owners and managers don't really care what happens to downtown Annapolis. The downtown residents do.
MARY KOENIGSHOFF, Annapolis
I had really hoped that I could prove that most owners lived in the city limits, but that proved harder than I have time for. Readily available are the addresses of liquor license holders, but these names are often not the owners. Certainly some of these situations arise because the owners do not live in the city and the license holder must live within the limits, but I also noticed specific examples of listed owners who do live in the city but are not on the liquor license for whatever reason. Feeling defeated, I will not revert to a more obvious but equally valid argument. OF COURSE THEY CARE WHAT HAPPENS TO DOWNTOWN ANNAPOLIS. If downtown goes to hell nobody will come there and they will go out of business.
It's a good thing that I finished writing this post when I did, because I need a drink and at this time I can still get one wherever I want.
Wednesday, July 4, 2007
Future Prediction: More Committees
Here is an example of the prevailing political culture in this city.
The article details a problem, in this case a specific pattern of crime, and a response by the city to create a committee to look at the problem.
This happens all the time. This administration does everything in its power to deflect blame. It would rather save face than admit to there being problems.
If you read The Capital with regularity, you have heard the common excuses:
"There is a problem nationwide--it affects us just the same as everybody else." or "We are experiencing the effects of a bigger problem." or "This started in a previous administration." or "The county need to do more to help.". Just watch, you'll see.
So, my prediction for the future: more committees, more blaming others.
The article details a problem, in this case a specific pattern of crime, and a response by the city to create a committee to look at the problem.
This happens all the time. This administration does everything in its power to deflect blame. It would rather save face than admit to there being problems.
If you read The Capital with regularity, you have heard the common excuses:
"There is a problem nationwide--it affects us just the same as everybody else." or "We are experiencing the effects of a bigger problem." or "This started in a previous administration." or "The county need to do more to help.". Just watch, you'll see.
So, my prediction for the future: more committees, more blaming others.
Capital Punishment
From time to time Capital Punishment is misleading, as a ray of shining brilliance pierces the clouds of the local media and shines on us. Such is the case here: this letter appeared on July 2.
I applaud the Ward 1 residents who wrote to The Capital in approval of 2 a.m. liquor licenses for all.
Me too! Go on.
They were a welcome breath of fresh sea air to dissipate a small and stagnant pool of antiquity.
I've got to get this fella to write a guest column. Most of my putdowns of Ward 1 stalwarts involve some type of yachting reference, but he has referred to them as a small and stagnant pool of antiquity! Nice. And remember folks, not all Ward 1 residents are part of this stagnant pool.
Annapolis is a home for the 21st century as well as a tourist destination. Unbelievably, a minority of Ward 1 residents are actually petitioning to make all businesses with liquor licences stop serving at midnight.
Right-O.
All other wards grant 2 a.m. licenses. How is it that West Street residents are old enough to know when it is time to go to bed, but not those in Ward 1?
Well, now we've got some zoning issues, some equity issues, and a bedtime issue. Let's just move on.
We are asked to believe that if two more downtown establishments are allowed to stay open until 2 a.m., it would make people sick on the streets and cover Ward 1 with prophylactics.
YES! EXCELLENT! Factual note: it would actually be 4 bars: Castlebay, Mangia, Gallway Bay, Sly Fox---all of which are no more than 50 feet away from a bar that has a 2 a.m license.
Castlebay Irish Pub and Restaurant has been in town for a dozen years. The proprietor is Vince Quinlan, who decided to make Annapolis his home after playing at two presidential inaugural balls.
Factual note: Of the other bars to be affected: the Fox brothers have lived in this area for some 30 years, and opened a historic property that had been vacant in one of the two oldest buildings in Annapolis. The Priola family (owner of Mangia and Marias), has been in the city for as long as I have been alive. Galway Bay, according to its Web Site, is owned by Irish Restaurant Company Inc., a conglomerate that also operates locations in Davidsonville and in the Market House.
Vince has supported countless charities, and made Castlebay a gathering place for music and friendship. There are strict limits, to avoid excessive consumption. Vince has helped make modern Annapolis the town that people want to live in and visit.
Ditto, most everyone else who lives or works here.
I support Vince's efforts to allow his business to stay open like the rest of the downtown establishments. It is time to support those who make Annapolis the great town it is and not allow mendacity to tell us what to do.
ARTHUR SCHWARTZ, Annapolis
Great closing. Top notch.
I applaud the Ward 1 residents who wrote to The Capital in approval of 2 a.m. liquor licenses for all.
Me too! Go on.
They were a welcome breath of fresh sea air to dissipate a small and stagnant pool of antiquity.
I've got to get this fella to write a guest column. Most of my putdowns of Ward 1 stalwarts involve some type of yachting reference, but he has referred to them as a small and stagnant pool of antiquity! Nice. And remember folks, not all Ward 1 residents are part of this stagnant pool.
Annapolis is a home for the 21st century as well as a tourist destination. Unbelievably, a minority of Ward 1 residents are actually petitioning to make all businesses with liquor licences stop serving at midnight.
Right-O.
All other wards grant 2 a.m. licenses. How is it that West Street residents are old enough to know when it is time to go to bed, but not those in Ward 1?
Well, now we've got some zoning issues, some equity issues, and a bedtime issue. Let's just move on.
We are asked to believe that if two more downtown establishments are allowed to stay open until 2 a.m., it would make people sick on the streets and cover Ward 1 with prophylactics.
YES! EXCELLENT! Factual note: it would actually be 4 bars: Castlebay, Mangia, Gallway Bay, Sly Fox---all of which are no more than 50 feet away from a bar that has a 2 a.m license.
Castlebay Irish Pub and Restaurant has been in town for a dozen years. The proprietor is Vince Quinlan, who decided to make Annapolis his home after playing at two presidential inaugural balls.
Factual note: Of the other bars to be affected: the Fox brothers have lived in this area for some 30 years, and opened a historic property that had been vacant in one of the two oldest buildings in Annapolis. The Priola family (owner of Mangia and Marias), has been in the city for as long as I have been alive. Galway Bay, according to its Web Site, is owned by Irish Restaurant Company Inc., a conglomerate that also operates locations in Davidsonville and in the Market House.
Vince has supported countless charities, and made Castlebay a gathering place for music and friendship. There are strict limits, to avoid excessive consumption. Vince has helped make modern Annapolis the town that people want to live in and visit.
Ditto, most everyone else who lives or works here.
I support Vince's efforts to allow his business to stay open like the rest of the downtown establishments. It is time to support those who make Annapolis the great town it is and not allow mendacity to tell us what to do.
ARTHUR SCHWARTZ, Annapolis
Great closing. Top notch.
Tuesday, July 3, 2007
No More Grauls?
So, we now know that the Graul's shopping center may be destroyed and replaced with an inn and conference center. Shockingly, AP will not take a position at this time regarding this issue. Instead, we will lay out for you the pros and cons.
Pro (Bring on the Bulldozer):
The shopping center is only marginally useful. Rite aid sells drugs and liquor, in the same place, and provides the strongest argument to stay. But let's take a look at the other places:
Laundromat-I actually didn't know this was there.
Bella Italia-good calamari, an italian restaurant not owned by the Priola family, but otherwise
average.
Naval Bagels-horrible. overrated. don't even get me started.
And Grauls. Graul's is never open. In fact, here are their hours (note: these are not their hours):
M-F: 8-6
Sa: 7 am-10am
Su: people work on Sundays?
Holidays: Ha!
The place is horribly inconvenient and we all know it. I know it is a family joint, but I'm sure there were plenty of family horse-shoe making businesses and you don't see anybody crying that cars came along. Get the point? Competition is good and this process must be allowed to go on.
Con (Leave the shopping center there):
West Annapolis needs their food! All of wards 1,2, and 3 MUST go to Grauls or else haul ass halfway across town and through every clogged road and construction site just to get a gallon of milk and some Helluva Good Dip. Here is the unabridged list of wards and where they get their food:
Ward 1: (Monday-Thursday) Graul's
Ward 1: (Friday-Sunday, on the way back from Yachting on the South River) Whole Foods
Ward 2: Grauls
Ward 3: Grauls
Ward 4: Safeway
Ward 5: Safeway, or if you are awesome, Giant
Ward 6: Giant
Ward 7: Giant
Ward 8: Not Applicable. Subsist on a diet of airborne particulates and home grown opium. You will, in fact, notice that there is not a single grocery store convenient to 'Liberal's Cove', otherwise known as the Maritime Republic of Eastport.
Plus the shopping center is city history, Graul's is family run, we don't need anymore development or traffic, yadda, yadda, etc.
So folks, make up your own mind. If Graul's can't compete, they have to go. But, if they go, Bestgate Rd. needs a grocery store, a liquor store, a pharmacy, and while we're at it, a gas station. Whatever happens, just don't do your shopping in Ward 8.
Pro (Bring on the Bulldozer):
The shopping center is only marginally useful. Rite aid sells drugs and liquor, in the same place, and provides the strongest argument to stay. But let's take a look at the other places:
Laundromat-I actually didn't know this was there.
Bella Italia-good calamari, an italian restaurant not owned by the Priola family, but otherwise
average.
Naval Bagels-horrible. overrated. don't even get me started.
And Grauls. Graul's is never open. In fact, here are their hours (note: these are not their hours):
M-F: 8-6
Sa: 7 am-10am
Su: people work on Sundays?
Holidays: Ha!
The place is horribly inconvenient and we all know it. I know it is a family joint, but I'm sure there were plenty of family horse-shoe making businesses and you don't see anybody crying that cars came along. Get the point? Competition is good and this process must be allowed to go on.
Con (Leave the shopping center there):
West Annapolis needs their food! All of wards 1,2, and 3 MUST go to Grauls or else haul ass halfway across town and through every clogged road and construction site just to get a gallon of milk and some Helluva Good Dip. Here is the unabridged list of wards and where they get their food:
Ward 1: (Monday-Thursday) Graul's
Ward 1: (Friday-Sunday, on the way back from Yachting on the South River) Whole Foods
Ward 2: Grauls
Ward 3: Grauls
Ward 4: Safeway
Ward 5: Safeway, or if you are awesome, Giant
Ward 6: Giant
Ward 7: Giant
Ward 8: Not Applicable. Subsist on a diet of airborne particulates and home grown opium. You will, in fact, notice that there is not a single grocery store convenient to 'Liberal's Cove', otherwise known as the Maritime Republic of Eastport.
Plus the shopping center is city history, Graul's is family run, we don't need anymore development or traffic, yadda, yadda, etc.
So folks, make up your own mind. If Graul's can't compete, they have to go. But, if they go, Bestgate Rd. needs a grocery store, a liquor store, a pharmacy, and while we're at it, a gas station. Whatever happens, just don't do your shopping in Ward 8.
Friday, June 29, 2007
Capital Punishment: Can We Focus on One Issue?
Capital Punishment is our on-going examination of the political and social views of our fellow citizens via their letters to the Editor of The Capital.
This one is from a woman in Tracy's Landing concerning the Four Seasons Development on Kent Island.
I was amazed by a recent letter to the Editor.
What were you so amazed about?
I rejoice that a large piece of Critical Area on the Eastern Shore was snatched from the jaws of the Four Seasons Resort.
Hey, wait, why were you amazed by the recent letter? You can't just leave us hanging like that. We demand that your thoughts make sense and proceed logically. Also, enough with the 'snatched from the jaws' type lingo. Leave the sensationalism to meaningless blogs like this one.
I live on the Western Shore, by the water, and I love the Chesapeake Bay. I am dismayed by dead zones, fish with cancerous sores and water that the health department says is not safe to swim in for 48 hours after a big rain.
We do not have to allow more construction in these critical areas, even though the developers were misled into believing they would be able to build there.
Ok, now we are getting somewhere. You are a citizen concerned about the environment, expressing your opposition to development on environmental grounds. Excellent. For a brief back story on this issue, click here. To see the Kent Island Defense League, which played a significant role in this process, click here.You also hit on another point. Developers must have the assurances that if they follow the law as it exists and file all of the proper applications, that upon approval of the applications they will be able to build. Apply this lesson to the APFO for Annapolis and you will gain some understanding on that issue as well.
I am also against nuclear energy.
What???
Remember Chernobyl?
Umm, is that near Wawa?
And I am most insistent that there be no drilling for oil in the arctic.
Where is all this coming from? This is not your bully pulpit to crusade against every environmental concern of yours. Stick to anti-development in Kent Island: you will make more friends.
The answer is to be found in new technology, not in destroying our public lands.
BARBARA MILLER, Tracy's Landing
The answer to what? I have so much to ask you! Oh well, I have a pot of Earl Gray on the stove.
This one is from a woman in Tracy's Landing concerning the Four Seasons Development on Kent Island.
I was amazed by a recent letter to the Editor.
What were you so amazed about?
I rejoice that a large piece of Critical Area on the Eastern Shore was snatched from the jaws of the Four Seasons Resort.
Hey, wait, why were you amazed by the recent letter? You can't just leave us hanging like that. We demand that your thoughts make sense and proceed logically. Also, enough with the 'snatched from the jaws' type lingo. Leave the sensationalism to meaningless blogs like this one.
I live on the Western Shore, by the water, and I love the Chesapeake Bay. I am dismayed by dead zones, fish with cancerous sores and water that the health department says is not safe to swim in for 48 hours after a big rain.
We do not have to allow more construction in these critical areas, even though the developers were misled into believing they would be able to build there.
Ok, now we are getting somewhere. You are a citizen concerned about the environment, expressing your opposition to development on environmental grounds. Excellent. For a brief back story on this issue, click here. To see the Kent Island Defense League, which played a significant role in this process, click here.You also hit on another point. Developers must have the assurances that if they follow the law as it exists and file all of the proper applications, that upon approval of the applications they will be able to build. Apply this lesson to the APFO for Annapolis and you will gain some understanding on that issue as well.
I am also against nuclear energy.
What???
Remember Chernobyl?
Umm, is that near Wawa?
And I am most insistent that there be no drilling for oil in the arctic.
Where is all this coming from? This is not your bully pulpit to crusade against every environmental concern of yours. Stick to anti-development in Kent Island: you will make more friends.
The answer is to be found in new technology, not in destroying our public lands.
BARBARA MILLER, Tracy's Landing
The answer to what? I have so much to ask you! Oh well, I have a pot of Earl Gray on the stove.
You mean....other people urinate outside too?
Let's examine some logic.
Problem: People are urinating on our property.
Solution: Make all bars close at midnight.
This, of course, does not make sense. But is precisely what Ward 1 residents are saying as part of their opposition to 2 am licenses. How, you are now asking yourself, does closing a bar at midnight reduce public urination? The answer is of course the "Cinderella Effect", whereby the bodies of local thrill-seekers and socialites turn into pumpkins if they are home by midnight. And pumpkins, of course, do not produce bodily fluids.
Unless--geez this is hard to even imagine--people urinate in public for reasons other than coming from a bar. For example: on a golf course, on the side of the road, or in your backyard on a particularly nice day if you have privacy landscaping. Or maybe, just maybe, when they leave after drinking at a private party. Does this really happen? Let's ask Eric Hartley from Thursday's Capital:
(In reference to some mansion in Gambrills):
Neighbors said there are parties perhaps once a month, with some going until 2 or 3 a.m. Pam Schneider, who lives next door, said partygoers sometimes park on neighbors' property, and a few even relieve themselves on surrounding lawns.
Thank you Pam, for enlightening us on this new issue. We now understand that Annapolis can take action to prevent this problem from happening to us. To protect us, the city council should:
1. Mandate that all private parties end by some arbitrary time, let's say 8 p.m.
2. Parties with service bars, along with wine parties, can continue until 8:20.
3. Parties wishing to have outside activities, including but not limited to music, must provide 500 day advance written notice and agree to sacrifice 3 goats if the decibel level surpasses that of the NBC nightly news.
4. There shall be no 'all-you-can-drink' parties, except in Ward 5 because we are awesome.
Then, perhaps, people will understand that you solve Problem A with Solution A, not Indirect, Unrelated Mandate Q. If you really want this (or any) behavior to stop, you give people on the individual level an incentive not to partake in that behavior. If you told me that I would be fined $10,000 every time I urinated in public, and I knew that fine would always be enforced, I would never do it again because the getting caught is too risky. See? Command and control is not the way to get things done. Provide incentives and let people figure it out for themselves.
Problem: People are urinating on our property.
Solution: Make all bars close at midnight.
This, of course, does not make sense. But is precisely what Ward 1 residents are saying as part of their opposition to 2 am licenses. How, you are now asking yourself, does closing a bar at midnight reduce public urination? The answer is of course the "Cinderella Effect", whereby the bodies of local thrill-seekers and socialites turn into pumpkins if they are home by midnight. And pumpkins, of course, do not produce bodily fluids.
Unless--geez this is hard to even imagine--people urinate in public for reasons other than coming from a bar. For example: on a golf course, on the side of the road, or in your backyard on a particularly nice day if you have privacy landscaping. Or maybe, just maybe, when they leave after drinking at a private party. Does this really happen? Let's ask Eric Hartley from Thursday's Capital:
(In reference to some mansion in Gambrills):
Neighbors said there are parties perhaps once a month, with some going until 2 or 3 a.m. Pam Schneider, who lives next door, said partygoers sometimes park on neighbors' property, and a few even relieve themselves on surrounding lawns.
Thank you Pam, for enlightening us on this new issue. We now understand that Annapolis can take action to prevent this problem from happening to us. To protect us, the city council should:
1. Mandate that all private parties end by some arbitrary time, let's say 8 p.m.
2. Parties with service bars, along with wine parties, can continue until 8:20.
3. Parties wishing to have outside activities, including but not limited to music, must provide 500 day advance written notice and agree to sacrifice 3 goats if the decibel level surpasses that of the NBC nightly news.
4. There shall be no 'all-you-can-drink' parties, except in Ward 5 because we are awesome.
Then, perhaps, people will understand that you solve Problem A with Solution A, not Indirect, Unrelated Mandate Q. If you really want this (or any) behavior to stop, you give people on the individual level an incentive not to partake in that behavior. If you told me that I would be fined $10,000 every time I urinated in public, and I knew that fine would always be enforced, I would never do it again because the getting caught is too risky. See? Command and control is not the way to get things done. Provide incentives and let people figure it out for themselves.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)