Final thoughts on fireworks: Score Slick Jeffie's veto as a slight boost for the GOP.

In New Albany, the Democratic Party's intellectually exhausted bait 'n' switch brand of politics is making some mighty strange bedfellows out in the hoods.

It reminds me of the old socialist-realist script in the Soviet Union's cinema and literature: Boy meets tractor; boy falls in love with tractor; boy and tractor live happily ever after.

Back here in anchor-laden New Gahania, non-ironic dishonesty on the part of the ruling elite has accomplished one noteworthy feat of erasure: tractors no longer are needed. Instead, we have mirrors -- cracked rear view mirrors, to be sure, but it doesn't stop the Dickeyites from admiring their twisted, impotent reflections in the debris.

---

The city council's recent vote on a Republican-sponsored fireworks ordinance, which might be described as a cautious attempt to lightly restrict the bedlam of explosive civil liberties celebrations, was bipartisan in both directions.

Two Republicans voted for, one against. Two Democrats for, and two against. And, one independent for, one against. That's about as even a split as can be imagined given the state of our legislative body's usual rigid partisan alignment, and as a result, the measure proved vulnerable to a veto.

Mayor Jeff Gahan's argument against the litmus test of an only slightly restrictive fireworks ordinance was conveyed to the body by police chief Todd Bailey, a reliably pliant spinner of Dear Leader's self-serving party line.

It was yet another matter of such supremely overriding community importance that Gahan couldn't be bothered to attend; in all probability, our Genius of the Flood Plain shuns the council chamber because it gives him flashbacks to those eight long years spent there as a woefully underpaid savior of humanity, before a visit with former (now deceased) East Chicago mayor Robert Pastrick resulted in Gahan learning the real tricks of the patronage trade.

Chief Bailey said fireworks complaints were down this year (if true, it's because most people have given up on any hope of relief) and that enforcement of the ordinance would be a terrible burden.

(As such, it should be noted that there are few if any known instances of the police enforcing existing fireworks regulations, this laxity owing to the ruling Democrats viewing fireworks as example of usefully distracting "circuses" -- "bread" is what Rally's does, after all -- allowing the lower orders to entertain themselves so they won't get involved with questioning the Democratic Party's patronage machine.)

The posturing mayor's hasty "trampling on our God-given right to make noise" laugher was attached cynically and belatedly, only when publicizing his veto, and it most certainly WAS a political expedient on the perennially unimaginative Gahan's part.

I'm guessing this won't help him in electoral terms.

Those New Albanians citing the civil liberties argument in favor of unrestrained fireworks make up two broad groupings: right-leaning libertarians in the suburbs near the fringe area, and apolitical inner-city residents, a majority of them young, and probably a fair number renters.

The suburban libertarians vote, but while they're possessed of a worldview that enables agreement in principle with Gahan's veto, this alone won't change their antipathy toward the mayor in countless other instances.

Meanwhile the majority of inner city neighborhood folks I see and hear detonating fireworks are either youthful and transient, or ignorant of municipal election cycles, although they might turn out for presidential elections. In short, they're unlikely to vote in terms of prevailing demographics.

The most probable POLITICAL outcome of the vetoed fireworks ordinance is a slight boost for Republican candidates on the part of (a) older neighborhood stakeholders, who (b) value order and stability and (c) actually do vote. Just my two cents.

Feel free to disagree.

Look, ma, CM Greg Phipps’ favorite mayor ever vetoed the fireworks ordinance.

As predicted, Mayor Deafley "Slick Jeffie" Gahan announced his veto (sorry, Susie, no capital 'V' on veto) of the city council's recent tepid fireworks ordinance in an insulting and poorly worded post at Payhan's propaganda site.

Weddings, birthdays and holidays ... and the time Gahan bulldozes a homeless encampment?

---

I hereby Veto recent action by the city council to ban legal fireworks in New Albany.

The proposed ban would limit the use of fireworks to only 4.5 days (107 hours) per year, without first obtaining a government permit.

The 5-4 split council vote to ban legal fireworks is an intrusion into the private lives of our citizens and could silence the joy of many important occasions, like weddings, birthdays, and holidays.

As written, the proposed ordinance is impossible to enforce and introduces confusion between New Albany police officers and the people of New Albany.

Indiana State Law has already addressed the use of fireworks in IC 22-11-14.

---

Previously:

Limiting fireworks is the easy part. Enforcement is New Albany's traditional Achilles heel.

Limiting fireworks is the easy part. Enforcement is New Albany's traditional Achilles heel.

Matt Nash, Greg Phipps, David Barksdale, Al Knable and Scott Blair voted in favor while McLaughlin, Dan Coffey, Bob Caesar and David Aebersold voted against.

A strange council configuration approved a symbolic ordinance that probably will be impossible to enforce; given forceful opposition by the police chief, Deaf Gahan might well veto it anyway.

Meanwhile, within eyesight of my front porch, there are a half-dozen visible and persistent ordinance violations missed weekly when the city works extra hard to enforce just that one ordinance pertaining to blocking the street sweeper.

Welcome to New Albany. It's not an intelligent place, presumably because most of you prefer it that way.

New Albany City Council passes ordinance limiting fireworks, by John Boyle (Bill Hanson's Evangelical Medicine Show)

Vote passed by a 5-4 margin

NEW ALBANY — Citizens of New Albany now have more restrictions regarding when they can shoot off fireworks.

At Thursday's sometimes tense New Albany City Council meeting, council members voted 5-4 in favor of passing an ordinance limiting when fireworks can be used.

The final version of the ordinance, which will be tied in with the current noise ordinance, was identical to that which passed on first and second readings at the Aug. 5 meeting, with an amendment adding two more days to the week after the Fourth of July.

Now, residents of the city can only use consumer fireworks from 5 p.m. to 11:30 p.m. June 29-30, July 1-3, and July 5-11. Fireworks are also allowed from 10 a.m. July 4 to 12:01 a.m. July 5. For New Year's celebrations, fireworks are legal from 10 a.m. Dec. 31 to 1 a.m. Jan 1.

Violations of the ordinance will result in a fine of $150 for the first offense, $300 for the second, and $500 for each thereafter. The ordinance also includes a clause that allows groups and organizations to acquire permits to shoot off fireworks outside of the set time frames.

Discussions of personal liberties took place in the lead up to the vote ...

I must have missed this meeting. Was it a unanimous vote?

The fine structure is a shade ambiguous ...

To “ride someone out of town on a rail” is a classic American locution dating back to the early 19th century. In its usual figurative use, “to ride someone out of town on a rail” means to severely punish them by means of ridicule or public condemnation and, optimally, to banish the person utterly from further serious consideration in whatever field they committed their offense ...

... “Running men out of town on a rail is at least as much an American tradition as declaring unalienable rights,” according to historian Gary Wills in “Inventing America” (1978), and the punishment does seem to have been a fairly common, and uniquely American, phenomenon until the early 20th century.

While the “rail” in the phrase might conjure up images of the disgraced malefactor being dispatched out of town via the nearest railroad track, the actual “rail” involved in literally “riding someone out of town” was usually the sort of rail used to construct fences, i.e., a long, often rough-hewn, bar of wood. The victim was usually seated astride the rail as one would ride a horse (a position which was, not surprisingly, very painful).

The rail and its rider were then borne by two men, usually part of a large mob, to the town limits, where the banishee was dumped in a ditch and warned not to return. The warning was often amplified by the application of hot tar and feathers to the rider, a punishment that was extremely painful, often permanently disfiguring, and occasionally fatal.

What does it mean to operate a taxicab in the city of New Albany?

William S. is the Road Hammer. We had a chat recently, and I learned a bit about the business of driving a taxicab, insofar as rules and regulations govern the undertaking.

If you want a experienced driver with a proper license and insurance, and is permitted to operate in Southern Indiana call me: Road Hammer. My background includes:

• Licensed by the city of New Albany to operate in Southern Indiana. 
• Class A CDL, and have traveled all 48 states. 
• Driving a cab off and on for years serving Southern Indiana. 
• Former safety supervisor with company no longer in the cab business. 
• Trained emergency vehicle operator. 
• Former trained bodyguard and emergency medical tech.

If you need an experienced and trained driver for your local and long distance transportation, I hope you give me a chance. 

Road Hammer

These strike me as excellent qualifications to drive a taxicab.

Until we talked, it hadn't occurred to me to consider the notion of New Albany taxicab legality versus illegality in the era of Uber and Lyft -- and yes, I'm fully aware of the sharing economy (we adore Airbnb) and those arguments on both "sides" of the issue.

A "common-sense solution to the Uber vs. taxi wars" can be viewed here, and yet it remains that in New Albany, we've been talking about ordinance enforcement for as long as mayors have refused to undertake it fairly and uniformly.

Below is New Albany's lengthy, exhaustive taxicab ordinance, verbatim. What do these rules mean in the context of the ride sharing economy?

Thanks to the Road Hammer for asking the question. The answer is anyone's guess, so perhaps it's time for a city council conversation?

CHAPTER 119:  TAXICABS

Section

General Provisions

   119.01   Definitions

   119.02   Compliance with taxicab operation license regulations required

   119.03   Taxicab operation license required; application

   119.04   Taxicab operation license fee

   119.05   Issuance of license

   119.06   Insurance required

   119.07   Reserved

   119.08   Taxicabs to have identifying signs

   119.09   Taxicab drivers

   119.10   Reserved

   119.11   Revocation of license; hearing

   119.12   Inspections

   119.13   Rates

Taxicab Drivers

   119.25   Taxicab driver’s license required

   119.26   Taxicab driver’s license application

   119.27   Refusal to issue; revocation

   119.28   Conditional license

   119.29   Employment of unlicensed taxicab drivers prohibited

   119.99   Penalty

GENERAL PROVISIONS

§ 119.01  DEFINITIONS.

   For the purpose of this chapter, the following definition shall apply unless the context clearly indicates or requires a different meaning.

   TAXICAB.  A motor vehicle that:

      (1)   Is designed and constructed to accommodate and transport not more than six passengers in addition to the driver;

      (2)   Does not operate over any definite and designated routes within the corporate boundaries of a city or town and the suburban territory of a city or town; and

      (3)   Transports passengers to the destination designated by the passengers at the time of their transportation.

(Ord. G-95-228, passed 8-17-1995; Ord. G-11-26, passed 8-18-2011)

§ 119.02  COMPLIANCE WITH TAXICAB OPERATION LICENSE REGULATIONS REQUIRED.

   No person or persons, firm or corporation shall drive, run or operate any taxicab upon or along any street or other highway within the city’s corporate limits, except in accordance with regulations, terms and conditions established by this chapter. Any person or persons, firm or corporation found to be in violation of the requirements of this chapter shall be subject to the penalties provided in § 119.99(A).

(Ord. G-95-228, passed 8-17-1995; Ord. G-11-26, passed 8-18-2011)  Penalty, see § 119.99

§ 119.03  TAXICAB OPERATION LICENSE REQUIRED; APPLICATION.

   (A)   Any person or persons, firm or corporation desiring to operate a taxicab or taxicab service upon or along the streets or other highways within the city, shall, before undertaking to do so, file a signed application form in writing for a taxicab operation license, duly sworn to by the applicant or applicants with the Board of Public Works, which application shall show the following:

      (1)   The name and address of the person, persons, partnership, firm or corporation desiring the business license; if a partnership or firm, the full name and address of each of the members thereof; if a corporation, the name and address of each of the officers thereof;

      (2)   A certified copy of the certificate of existence and which shows registered agent of the applicant provided by the Secretary of State of Indiana;

      (3)   The applicant is financially able to render taxicab services as applied for and has the financial backing, including liabilities, as required by any and all city, state, or federal regulation;

      (4)   The applicant owns and is the sole owner of the taxicabs described in division (A)(5) below in his or her service; and

      (5)   The make, model, factory number and state license number of each motor vehicle to be driven and operated as a taxicab under the business license.

   (B)   Any person or persons, firm or corporation found to be in violation of the requirements of this section shall be subject to the penalty provided in § 119.99(A).

(Ord. G-95-228, passed 8-17-1995; Ord. G-11-26, passed 8-18-2011)  Penalty, see § 119.99

§ 119.04  TAXICAB OPERATION LICENSE FEE.

   (A)   Upon the filing of an application, the Board of Public Works shall then pass upon the application, taking into consideration the applicant, his or her financial standing, and his or her equipment for rendering taxicab service in the city. If the Board of Public Works finds that it is for the best interests of the city and the citizens thereof that the applicant be issued a license to operate a taxicab service, then the Board of Public Works shall instruct the City Clerk to issue a business license upon the compliance of the applicant with all other provisions of this chapter.

   (B)   The City Clerk shall issue to the applicant, upon the approval of the Board of Public Works as above, a license upon the payment of a fee set forth in § 158.06(D) for each taxicab to be operated, for any calendar year or fraction thereof the cabs are operated. The taxicab operation license shall continue, subject to inspection, in effect from year to year until revoked by the Board of Public Works. The license must be visible and prominently placed in a window of the taxicab.

   (C)   The operation of an unlicensed taxicab will be subject to the penalties of § 119.99(A).

(Ord. G-95-228, passed 8-17-1995; Ord. G-96-133, passed 8-15-1996; Ord. G-11-26, passed 8-18-2011)

§ 119.05  ISSUANCE OF LICENSE.

   Upon filing the application, approval thereof by the Board of Public Works, and payment of the required fees as fixed in § 119.04, and provided the other stipulations and conditions hereof have been met, the City Clerk shall issue to the applicant a license permitting the operation of the motor vehicle or motor vehicles described in the application for one year, commencing January 1 and ending December 31 of each year, subject to revocation as hereinafter provided.

(Ord. G-95-228, passed 8-17-1995)

§ 119.06  INSURANCE REQUIRED.

   (A)   No license shall be issued and no taxicab shall be operated on any street or highway within the city until there is filed with the City Clerk a policy of insurance executed by a company authorized to execute such instruments under the laws of the state, running for the year of the license to be issued to the applicant as provided in § 119.05.

   (B)   The insurance policy shall provide for the payment of any final judgment that may be rendered against the insured for damages to property, bodily injuries or death of any passenger or passengers or any other person or persons resulting from collision or other accident for which the person, persons, firm or corporation may be found liable while operating the taxicab described in the application, in a sum not less than the state statutory minimums for property damage and for injury or death of any person or persons.

(Ord. G-95-228, passed 8-17-1995)  Penalty, see § 119.99

§ 119.07  RESERVED.

§ 119.08  TAXICABS TO HAVE IDENTIFYING SIGNS.

   It shall be unlawful for any person, firm or corporation to use any motor vehicle for taxicab services unless that vehicle is designated as a taxicab by two or more colored signs, which signs must be permanently painted of a fast color on the body of the vehicle. The signs must designate the person, persons, firm or corporation to which the vehicle belongs, and must be readable at 150 feet or more by a person of normal vision. Limousines shall be exempt from this requirement.

(Ord. G-95-228, passed 8-17-1995)  Penalty, see § 119.99

§ 119.09  TAXICAB DRIVERS.

   It shall be the obligation of the owner or operator of any taxicab company which has secured a license to operate in the city to ascertain that each driver employed by that operator has obtained a state-required license to operate for hire passenger-transporting conveyances. Each driver shall present his or her license to the City Police Chief, or his or her designee, prior to entering any employment as a driver for the inspection of the Police Department, and the driver shall be instructed by the Police Chief, or his or her designee, with respect to traffic ordinances of the city.

(Ord. G-95-228, passed 8-17-1995)  Penalty, see § 119.99

§ 119.10  RESERVED.

§ 119.11  REVOCATION OF LICENSE; HEARING.

   (A)   The Board of Public Works may suspend or revoke the license issued to and for any taxicab or taxicabs for the violation of this chapter, whether or not any criminal prosecution of the licensee is pending, upon proof and hearing thereof.

   (B)   Any license issued to any owner or owners, operator or operators under the terms and conditions of this chapter may be revoked or indefinitely suspended by the Board of Public Works, upon failure of the owner, owners, operator or operators to operate a taxicab or taxicabs in compliance with the terms of this chapter and the laws of the state. However, the owner or owners, operator or operators of each taxicab shall be given five days’ written notice of the violation, and upon hearing and proof thereof the license for the taxicab or taxicabs may be suspended for a definite period or revoked.

(Ord. G-95-228, passed 8-17-1995)  Penalty, see § 119.99

§ 119.12  INSPECTIONS.

   Any vehicle used as a taxicab shall submit, upon request, to a safety inspection by a member of the Police Department or the department’s designee and further shall submit, upon request, to inspection and verification of all meters or rate devices by the Department of Weights and Measures or the Department’s designee.

(Ord. G-95-228, passed 8-17-1995)  Penalty, see § 119.99

§ 119.13  RATES.

   (A)   The rates charged by a taxicab service shall not exceed the following:

      (1)   A startup fee of $4.10; for each additional mile $1.95;

      (2)   Thirty cents ($0.30) for each minute of waiting;

      (3)   An additional charge of $3.00 per passenger beginning with the fifth passenger may be added to the metered fare; and

      (4)   Maximum hourly rate of $20.75 per hour.

   (B)   No taxicab service may charge a rate less than 80% of the maximum charges outlined in divisions (A)(1) through (4) above. No additional charge may be made for the following: luggage, grocery bags, laundry, wheelchairs, or seeing-eye dogs or multiple passengers (except for more than four passengers).

   (C)   The Board of Public Works and Safety is hereby authorized to declare a fuel emergency and to authorize a fuel surcharge, which will be in addition to the surcharges in division (A) of this section, to be added to the taxicab rate when the cost of gasoline exceeds $3.50 per gallon, according to the American Automobile Association’s published gasoline costs for medium grade gasoline for a period of 15 days. The allowable surcharge of 5% rounded to the nearest five cents will be added to the rates of fare authorized in this section. Any taxicab operator or company implementing this surcharge shall reset its taximeters and flat rate schedules to include the 5% surcharge, and the Board of Public Works and Safety shall provide a form notice of the surcharge to each taxicab company, and said company shall cause a copy of the notice to be placed in each licensed taxicab. The Board of Public Works and Safety is further authorized to terminate the surcharge when the cost of gasoline falls below $3.50 per gallon according to the American Automobile Association’s published rates for medium grade gasoline for a period of 15 consecutive days, or to extend the surcharge in 30 day increments if the cost of gasoline remains above $3.50 per gallon based upon gasoline costs for medium grade gasoline as published by the American Automobile Association.

(Ord. G-95-228, passed 8-17-1995; Ord. G-11-26, passed 8-18-2011)  Penalty, see § 119.99

TAXICAB DRIVERS

§ 119.25  TAXICAB DRIVER’S LICENSE REQUIRED.

   It shall be unlawful for any person to operate a taxicab as a driver within the city without first having secured a taxicab driver’s license to do so from the city. Any person or persons, firm or corporation found to be in violation of the requirements of this section shall be subject to the penalty provided in § 119.99(B).

(Ord. G-95-228, passed 8-17-1995; Ord. G-11-26, passed 8-18-2011)  Penalty, see § 119.99

§ 119.26  LICENSE APPLICATION.

   Every person desiring to drive a taxicab in the city shall, before undertaking to do so, file an application in writing for a taxicab driver’s license, duly sworn by the applicant, with the City Clerk, which application shall show the following:

   (A)   The name and present address of the applicant;

   (B)   The address of each place of residence of the applicant during the last two years prior to the date of the application;

   (C)   The place of employment, the kind of employment and the name of each of the employers of the applicant for the last five years immediately preceding the date of the application;

   (D)   The applicant’s experience in automobile operation;

   (E)   Whether or not the applicant has ever or does use alcohol or drugs;

   (F)   Whether or not the applicant has ever been charged or convicted in any court for any crime or misdemeanor and, if so, the facts and details concerning each conviction;

   (G)   The applicant’s state driver’s license number;

   (H)   The applicant shall also at the time of filing an application for a taxicab driver’s license, pay to the City Clerk the sum of $15 as fee for an annual taxicab driver’s license. The license shall expire one year after issuance unless it is revoked pursuant to the provisions of this chapter;

   (I)   The applicant is fingerprinted;

   (J)   The applicant obtains a local background check and an interstate identification index background check; and

   (K)   Any additional documentation deemed necessary by the Board of Works or the City Clerk in verifying the responses given by an applicant.

(Ord. G-95-228, passed 8-17-1995; Ord. G-11-26, passed 8-18-2011)  Penalty, see § 119.99

§ 119.27  REFUSAL TO ISSUE; REVOCATION.

   No taxicab driver’s license shall be issued to any person who does not meet the requirements set forth in I.C. 9-24-1 et seq. In addition, all applicants for a taxicab driver’s license shall provide all information concerning any violations, past, present or future, of any local, state or federal laws, and shall submit certified results of initial drug testing, and random drug testing at least annually thereafter from a private drug-testing contractor approved by the Board of Public Works. Violation of any local, state or federal laws or failure of any drug test shall be adequate ends for non-issuance, revocation or non-renewal of a taxicab driver’s license.

(Ord. G-95-228, passed 8-17-1995; Ord. G-96-133, passed 8-15-1996)

§ 119.28  CONDITIONAL LICENSE.

   Notwithstanding any of the express provisions of this chapter, the Board of Public Works may, in its discretion, issue a conditional license which shall, along with the regular license, be subject to immediate revocation for any period the Board may determine, upon the licensee being convicted of driving while under the influence of intoxicating liquor or any charge involving moral turpitude.

(Ord. G-95-228, passed 8-17-1995)

§ 119.29  EMPLOYMENT OF UNLICENSED TAXICAB DRIVERS PROHIBITED.

   No person, firm or corporation licensed to operate taxicabs under this chapter shall employ any person as a taxicab driver in the city unless that taxicab driver has been duly licensed in accordance with the provisions of this chapter. Any person, firm, or corporation found to have knowingly violated this section shall be subject to the penalty provided in § 119.99(B).

(Ord. G-95-228, passed 8-17-1995; Ord. G-11-26, passed 8-18-2011)  Penalty, see § 119.99

§ 119.99  PENALTY.

   (A)   Any person or company found to be in violation of §§ 119.01 through 119.13 of this chapter shall be subject to impoundment of the offending vehicle(s), towing and impoundment costs, and a fine of $2,500 to be paid to the City Clerk before the vehicle will be released.

   (B)   Any person or company who violates §§ 119.25 through 119.29 shall be subject to a fine of $100 for the first offense, and a fine of $250 for each subsequent offense.

   (C)   In addition to the penalties above, the Board of Public Works may suspend or revoke the taxicab operation and/or driver’s license of any business or individual who violates the provisions of this chapter. Each day a violation continues shall be deemed a separate violation.

(Ord. G-95-228, passed 8-17-1995; Ord. G-11-26, passed 8-18-2011)

Harvest Homecoming guest column follow-up: Our peculiar institution has no basis in ordinance, only habit.

On Thursday, I handed over my weekly ON THE AVENUES column slot to downtown independent business owner Cisa Kubley.

ON THE AVENUES: A downtown business owner's open letter to Harvest Homecoming.

As of Saturday morning, it has become the single most read ON THE AVENUES of 2017, doubling the views usually garnered by one of my columns.

This is richly deserved. Cisa's essay is cogent and hard-hitting, and I'm delighted she submitted it to NA Confidential. It's an example of a point-of-view the newspaper cannot do in mandating 250-word letters to the editor -- and probably wouldn't even then, as I suspect there's gold in those Harvest Homecoming advertisements.

In the interest of fairness, I've spoken to David White, chairman of the board of Harvest Homecoming. He is writing a column in reply to Cisa's, and I hope his essay will be ready for posting on Thursday, November 9.

Regular readers already know that Cisa's argument mirrors that of this blog.

These aren’t new issues, these aren’t new complaints. At what point will the Harvest Homecoming committee and the city finally make adjustments for the betterment of the whole community, not just those who enjoy the festival?

With all due respect to the history of Harvest Homecoming and my assumption of good intentions on the part of the committee, I simply cannot support an event that shows such blatant disregard and disrespect for the year-round businesses that lose money year after year.

I'll add only that the very weakest arguments mustered in response to critiques of Harvest Homecoming are these: It's inevitable; it's always been done this way; if you don't like it, just leave.

Apart from the fact of the city's existence for 150 years prior to the advent of Harvest Homecoming, it should be pointed out that the festival's inevitability has no absolutely no basis in statute.

City of New Albany, Indiana: Code of Ordinances

Harvest Homecoming is mentioned exactly twice in the city's rule book for self-governance (excerpts below), first with regard to daily leased parking in the lot adjacent to the festival's headquarters, and then as the recipient of an annual exception to registration requirements for "peddlers and solicitors."

Every other facet of Harvest Homecoming's peak street grid usage during the parade and subsequent booth days -- except for Dan Coffey's commandeering of city-owned property to park cars for self-enrichment -- is vetted and approved yearly by the Board of Public Works and Safety, just like any other request to interrupt normal operational procedures for a special activity.

Harvest Homecoming cannot function as it does without the express consent of the city, as well as traditionally uncounted city expenditures for ancillaries and overtime.

Knowing this, think again about the points made by Cisa Kubley in her guest column. In essence, City Hall approves that her business and others like it be inconvenienced for the benefit of the festival.

Why is that?