Out of control city councils

Originally Posted by Dennis Hultman

Add CORALVILLE, Iowa for telling a little girl selling a few glasses of lemonade for .25 that she needs a $400 permit.

You suck!

Add Midway, Ga.

Bone cancer patient's yard sale shut down by Salem government.

Salem - An obscure city law that prohibits residents from having more than three yard sales per year brought a government crackdown on a Salem woman who suffers from bone marrow cancer.
Jan Cline, who was diagnosed with bone marrow cancer earlier this summer, told Portland news channel KATU that she could break a bone by merely walking. The cancer, she says, eats holes in her bones.
With such a debilitating terminal condition she has no income. She is unable to work and does not have health insurance.
In order to pay her bills, which she told KATU amount to "thousands and thousands" of dollars each month, Cline decided to start selling her possessions in her back yard. She began raking in several hundred dollars each weekend.
What could have been a success story for a terminal cancer patient soon turned into a bureaucratic nightmare.
After a few weekends a neighbor complained about the yard sales and the city threatened Cline with a $300 fine if she did not cease the yard sales, citing a law that limited a resident to three yard sales per year.
That's right, in Salem it is illegal to sell your own possessions on your own property more than three times per year.
“I just hope that nobody else has to go through this kind of thing," Cline told KATU. "I hope no one else has to give their lives away for nickels and dimes and then be told they can’t even do that. I hope nobody else has to do this ever.”
The city's Community Development Department told KATU the reason for the law is that people have set up permanent flea-market type yard sales on their property.
But Cline told KATU she did her best to keep the yard sale in the back yard "so it's not goobering up the neighborhood."
That's not enough for the city bureaucrats, however, who told Cline "the laws the law."

After hearing more about Cline’s situation, a supervisor said he is going to take another look to see if there’s anything she can do to operate within the law. But if she reopens now, it is a misdemeanor and about a $300 fine.

To the bureaucrats of Salem, Here is your sign.

Who the hell do you think you people are? It's her stuff, her property.

Louisiana passed a law that bans individuals and businesses from transacting in cash


Cash Transactions Banned by Louisiana: Government Takes Private Property Without Due Process

This summer, the State Legislature and Governor of Louisiana passed a law that bans individuals and businesses from transacting in cash if they are considered a "secondhand dealer". House Bill 195 of the 2011 Regular Session (Act 389) broadly defines a secondhand dealer to include "... Anyone, other than a non-profit entity, who buys, sells, trades in or otherwise acquires or disposes of junk or used or secondhand property more frequently than once per month from any other person, other than a non-profit entity, shall be deemed as being in the business of a secondhand dealer. " The law then states that "A secondhand dealer shall not enter into any cash transactions in payment for the purchase of junk or used or secondhand property. Payment shall be made in the form of check, electronic transfers, or money order issued to the seller of the junk or used or secondhand property..." The broad scope of this definition can essentially encompass everyone; from your local flea market vendors and buyers to a housewife purchasing goods on ebay or craigslist, to a group of guys trading baseball cards, they could all be considered secondhand dealers. Lawmakers in Louisiana have effectively banned its citizens from freely using United States legal tender.

The law goes further to require secondhand dealers to turn over a valuable business asset, namely, their business' proprietary client information. For every transaction a secondhand dealer must obtain the seller's personal information such as their name, address, driver's license number and the license plate number of the vehicle in which the goods were delivered. They must also make a detailed description of the item(s) purchased and submit this with the personal identification information of every transaction to the local policing authorities through electronic daily reports. If a seller cannot or refuses to produce to the secondhand dealer any of the required forms of identification, the secondhand dealer is prohibited from completing the transaction.

This legislation amounts to a public taking of private property without due process or compensation. Regardless of whether or not the transaction information is connected with, or law enforcement is investigating a crime, individuals and businesses are forced to report routine business activity to the police. Can law enforcement not accomplish its goal of identifying potential thieves and locating stolen items in a far less intrusive manner? And of course, there are already laws that prohibit stealing, buying or selling stolen goods, laws that require businesses to account for transactions and laws that penalize individuals and businesses that transact in stolen property. Why does the Louisiana State Legislature need to enact more laws infringing on personal privacy, liberties and freedom?

Motivating the introduction of this legislation was an increase in criminal activity, necessitating law enforcement to develop additional tools in tracking potential criminals. Thefts of copper and other precious metals have risen recently with higher commodity prices and mounting pressures from the economic downturn. The added restrictions under this recent legislation have come about under the pretense of cracking down on crime and helping the government take care of you, all at the cost of your individual privacy, economic, civil liberty and freedom.

Interestingly enough, although Pawnshops are still required to obtain clients personal information and transmit their client database information to law enforcement, they are exempt from the restriction of cash payments. A jeweler next door to a pawnshop cannot offer clients the same payment method offered by its competing pawnshop neighbor.

Act 389 passed by unanimous consent of the Louisiana House of Representatives and only mustered one nay vote (Senator Neil Riser) from the State Senate. The governor signed the legislation into law on July 1, 2011.

Thad D. Ackel, Jr. serves as lead counsel at Ackel & Associates L.L.C. and Broker of Tribute Real Estate. He may be reached by email @ thadackel@gmail.com

Yet another "good intentions" brick in the paved road to hell......

Jailed for Siding Code Violation

Burnsville Man Arrested, Jailed for Siding Code Violation
http://kstp.com/news/stories/s2542281.shtml

A Burnsville man on his way to work was arrested and thrown in jail without bond, and then subjected to electronic home monitoring.

But it wasn’t for drugs or a DWI or some other major crime.

Burnsville city leaders say Mitch Faber’s dealings with the law all stem from his failure to properly put up siding on his house.

Yep, siding.

Faber says he had every intention of completing the stucco and decorative rock project on his home but he ran into money troubles when the economy soured. Burnsville leaders say they had no choice to enforce the law.

Here’s how a simple code violation spiraled into a criminal case:

Mitch and his wife Jean say it all began back in 2007 when they received a letter from the city of Burnsville saying, in part, "you must complete the siding of your home."

“We were in the process of finishing,” Mitch insists. “This wasn't something that we were trying to avoid doing.”

But in 2009 there were two more warning letters, and in 2010 yet another--this time requiring Faber to appear in court. Burnsville leaders provided 5 Eyewitness News with these 2010 photos of the Fabers' home as proof there was a problem.

“I was expecting maybe a $700 fine,” Faber said. Instead he was given an ultimatum -- finish the siding or go to jail.

So Mitch returned to his house and he and Jean say they spent about $12,000 putting a stucco façade over the plywood exterior. They thought they were finally in compliance. They were wrong.

Faber was then taken into custody in November 2011 after Burnsville inspectors ruled the work was still not satisfactorily completed. A warrant for his arrest had been issued when, according to the city, Faber failed to turn himself in because the house was still not up to code. Faber is adamant it was. Regardless, what came next, he says, was absolutely uncalled for and humiliating.

“I'm walking around in a green and white jump suit, I had to shower in front of a sheriff, I was shackled, my wrists were handcuffed to my waist — for siding.”

“It was insane,” said Jean. “Absolutely insane.”

After two days locked up, a judge agreed Mitch should be released but required him to submit to electronic home monitoring. In Dakota County, that process requires participants — no matter what their crimes -- to blow into a drug and alcohol device every time an alarm goes off.

“They could call me at 2 in the morning and they did,” Faber said.

Burnsville city leaders would not grant 5 Eyewitness News an interview about the Faber case but in an email from Communications Coordinator Marty Doll, he wrote, “”The city feels it provided Mr. Faber ample opportunity (nearly four years) to remedy the situation before issuing a citation…the city’s practice is to only issue citations for property maintenance issues (such as this one) as a last resort. In this case, the city determined a citation was the next appropriate course of action. Once the citation was issued, the matter had essentially left the city’s hands and entered the hands of the court system.”

5 Eyewitness News also called Dakota County Corrections as well as Midwest Monitoring (the company in charge of the electronic home monitoring) but calls were not returned. In a letter dated February 21, 2012, Dakota County Attorney Jim Backstrom wrote the Fabers, “This was a prosecution initiated by the city of Burnsville through their privately-retained city prosecutor. The County Attorney has no oversight or supervision over city prosecutors…While it was a district court judge who heard this case and made decisions pertaining thereto, judges are employed by the state of Minnesota and not Dakota County.”

The Fabers point to what they call far more glaring code violations outside other houses in their neighborhood. They’d like to know why they were targeted and others weren’t.

“It’s selective enforcement,” said Jean.

Most importantly, though, the Fabers say Burnsville made a mockery of an otherwise law-abiding man.

Asked Mitch, “What did you accomplish other than wasting the city's money, the county's money, our money, and then all the mental and emotional anguish? What did you accomplish?”

Four Pinellas County Comissioners ineligible to serve - Eight is Enough




Pinellas Commission votes to use your tax dollars to fight term limit law you passed

Citizens demand term limited Pinellas commissioners resign

Land of the Free?