THE IMMOVABLE MOVER

A LOAD OF GARBAGE

"The Boston City Council welcomes public participation either through direct contact with the Council offices or through testimony at public hearings of the various City Council committees. We hope that the information below will provide you with information about how to have your voice heard on your issues of concern." - City of Boston, City Council Website

After 23 days, City Council President Maureen Feeney finally found time in her busy schedule to have some low-level, tax-funded assistant answer my questions.  Sort of.  Although I made a series of direct inquiries, none were actually addressed and I was referred to the officials at Code Enforcement for clarification on the issue (note numerous spelling errors):

I write on behalf of Council President Feeney who asked that I share with you her perspective on the proposal to collect outstanding fees for trash violations.  I apolagize for the delay in responding to your message. 

This issue is a critical one for many of our city’s neighborhoods.  Repeat offenders, many of whom are responsible for the bulk of these violations, have plagued some of our densest neighborhoods with overflowing trash.  This leads to serious concerns for public health, such as asthma, and invites the possibility of rodent infestation.  The Council President supports any effort, including the one she discussed with Emily Rooney, to exercise the cities responsibility to protect its residents from these quality of life hazards.  Using the web as a resource to encourage violators to abide by the law in the interest of the public good is a reasonable proposal.  I applaud my colleague, Councillor Mike Ross, for his leadership on this issue.

As to some of your specific questions, I would encourage you to contact officials from Code Enforcement who might be best suited to answer your questions. 

Thank you.

Justin Holmes

Chief of Policy and Communications

Huh?  If a local voter can't even get a response from one of the lowest elected officials on the political totem pole when he tries to have his voice heard (in a small city like Boston, none the less), what hope is there an a state or national scale?

I will respond by requesting a meeting with Herself.  I would like to get a clear understanding of exactly how this trash program will be enacted and at what cost to tax payers.  However, I am more concerned with the total lack of commitment and communication I am receiving.

Meanwhile, our city council is wasting time condemning the U.S. presence in the Middle East and the Iraq War.  Listen up Mr. Turner and Ms. Feeney: We pay QUALIFIED officials to do that!  Not lowly district councilors!

I'll post updates as I have them.

COMMONWEALTH TRASH

Seventeen days ago, I sent an email  to the newly elected Boston City Council President, Maureen Feeney, requesting clarification of her statements made during an interview on a local television show. (My original post is here). The interview focused solely on the City Council's recent initiative to use new methods to coerce "trash violators" into paying overdue fines and to clean up what they consider to be unsightly and unhealthy garbage.

Two of the new methods give the Council the authority to confiscate private property and shame overdue payees via a website listing naming the "trash offenders". My main concern with these new methods revolves around the expense and cost to all Boston residents as well as to the draconian method in which such fines a levied in this city.  I also called out a specific moment when Councilwoman Feeney and her interviewer, Emily Rooney, seemed to agree that the fines, which range from $25 to $100 for a first time offender, are modest, and both women suggested that anyone could afford to pay them.

I still have not received any word from the Councilwoman on this issue.  So, I have decided to put her hypotheses to the test, and see if I can shame Ms. Feeney into responding to one of the common electorate. I am still hoping for an answer to my request. I am sure the Council President is busy.  So am I.  However, in the private sector, where most of us must earn our money without looting it from taxpayers, I would lose business if I responded to my customers the way the current Council President seems to respond to the very people who finance her position.

Boston's Real Trash Problem: Local Dictators

Last week, Boston's newly elected City Council President Maureen Feeney appeared on WGBH's "Greater Boston with Emily Rooney" to talk about a new ordinance aimed at collection up to $3,000,000 in delinquent fines from those who do not pay ther tickets.  This new ordinance, proposed by the mayor and supported by Ms Feeney, would allow fine collectors to use more aggressive methods in collecting the overdue payements, including placing liens on properties where fines remain uncollected.  Repeat offenders would also be denied city building permits on future projects.  Following the recent trend to shame violators, the city will set up a website which will list the names of the offending parties, supposedly shaming them into paying.

While I submit to Boston's authority to enforce the existing laws, I can't understand how an expansion of the existing ordinance will do anything except harass law abiding citizens who occasionally make a mistake.  Most importantly, it makes no distinction between land owners and tenants, nor does it weed out scavengers and sloppy trash collectors.

Full disclosure: Last year I received a "green ticket" violation for "improper and unlawful dumping".  According to the citation, on the regular trash pick-up date, I walked my trash to a neighboring street that did not have a scheduled trash pick-up that day to dispose of my garbage.  The charge was ridiculous-- I have never placed my garbage anywhere but in its lawful place. Still I was fined $50 for the  violation.  The agent who ticketed me was never available to explain how he determined my guilt, so I took the matter to court where it was promptly dismissed.  I found the entire process to be unnecessarily burdensome and absurdly difficult.

On Tuesday night, as I watched Ms. Rooney and Ms. Feeney discuss the ordinance, I was shocked by the doublespeak and contradictions the Council President put forth.  Based on her comments, I sent her an e-mail asking her clarify a few points. I have note heard back from her, so I am putting her proposed method of shaming violators via the web to the test:

Ms. Feeney:

I recently saw your interview with Emily Rooney on Greater Boston regarding the new proposals to collect outstanding fees owed the city via trash violations.  Based on your comments and assertions, I have a few questions I wold like answered at your earliest convenience.

1. In the interview, you pointed out that the ticketing agents who must repeatedly issue violations to the same offenders are paid with taxpayer money.  What is the salary of these agents?  Are they only paid via tax payer money when they are issuing violations? Would the proposed website listing of repeat and delinquent violators be paid for by taxpayer dollars?  Would the personnel responsible for updating the list be paid for with tax payer dollars?

2. Do you believe that the proposed website listing of these violators (i.e. repeat offenders and those who do not pay) will help generate the lost revenue?  If so, would you propose expanding the program to include all other offenses? 

3. Do you think it is reasonable to confiscate the private property of a private citizen because he or she does not pay his or her violation for trash?  Is the lean/ confiscation process funded by tax payer money?

4. Can you issue violations to the trash thieves- i.e. the scavengers who rummage through every one's trash and spread debris everywhere?  How do you determine who is actually at fault for the violation in these situations?

5. Finally, when Ms. Rooney made the comment that the fees are "not very much" ("only $25 - $100") and said "why not just pay the fee?" you seemed to agree by nodding your head. Is it your opinion that $25 or $50 or $100 is a trivial amount to everyone, regardless of guilt or innocence? Or could that money be better spent on school clothes, or perhaps several meals?

I look forward to your response.

Thank you

James Bailey
Boston, MA

GOP Leaders in Massachusetts Come Out!

"As a Republican, I want the Government off our backs, and that means out of our pocketbook and our bedrooms" 

- MA Sen. Richard Tisei (R), Wakefield

A few weeks ago, feeling increasingly frustrated with the lack of GOP leadership in Massachusetts, I started to compose a post that questioned "where have the state Republicans gone?"  Since Kerry Healey's defeat to Deval Patrick for the Governorship, the Congressional leaders became noticeably silent.  I decided not to publish the post until enough time had passed, though I had little faith.

However, in the 2007 Republican Agenda for Massachusetts (PDF) published last month, the state GOP minority leaders have restored my faith and presented a platform that could very well appeal to a majority of Mass. voters if our newly elected Governor can't deliver on his excessively generous campaign pledges.

While the authors of the statement, including Senate Minority Leader Richard R. Tisei and House Minority Leader, Bradley H. Jones, seem sensitive to the overwhelming Democratic majority, they offer fiscally conservative and responsible solutions to problems that even Liberals should love:

• Create a First-Time Homebuyer’s Savings Account for aspiring homeowners to save for a home tax-free. (italics mine)
• Allow Massachusetts residents 65 and older to include home heating costs in the list of expenses used to qualify for the senior circuit breaker tax credit.
• Allow students to access seed money in the form of low-interest and zero interest government loans and grants.
• Require that 20 percent of all gas and diesel sold in Massachusetts must be alternative fuel, such as bio-diesel or ethanol, by the year 2020.
• Allow all ENERGY STAR products to be sold sales tax-free. (this position could be troublesome to Liberals.  It's always a problem when a corporation is getting the money, not the the state!).

In addition, there are many no-nonsense pro-business positions, private property protections as well as a commitment to keep elected officials accountable to the voters in the Commonwealth.

The agenda does not address and social issues such as abortion or "gay marriage" (aka. "marriage").  This is a hopeful sign that Sen. Tisei is willing to put his money where his mouth is when he proclaims that he wants the Government out of "our pocket book and our bedrooms".

Deval Patrick might want to take a peek at the proposal.  So might the GOP leaders in the US Congress.