Category Archives: City Hall

City Council President Arrested In Animal Cruelty Case

Leave a reply

City Council President Arrested In Animal Cruelty Case

 

One week before the originally scheduled hearing on Birmingham City Council President Lee Loder’s animal cruelty charges, municipal Judge David Barnes dismissed the case in an “expedited” hearing called on October 17. Barnes questioned not only the arrest of Loder without a warrant, but also misinformation on the police report regarding where the dog was found and what the judge termed “inappropriate” procedure taken by the city’s law department. Due to the law department’s representation of Loder as president of the City Council, it recused itself from the case and appointed a special prosecutor. Barnes complained that the department had issued subpoenas for the hearing even though it had recused itself.

/editorial/2002-10-24/dog2.gif
The emaciated dog being bathed by the authorities after impoundment.

In a telephone interview the day after Barnes dismissed the case, City Attorney Tamara Johnson disagreed with the judge’s assessment, explaining that even though special prosecutors were hired, the city can still provide resources [including subpoenas] with which to try the case. The law department, however, can not tell a special prosecutor how to try cases, according to Johnson. The city attorney said she had contacted Barnes to tell him that a conflict of interest existed with the law department as well as with any municipal judge handling the case, since municipal judges are appointed by the City Council. (Loder’s Administration Committee recommended reappointment of Barnes this past August.) Johnson added that the law department was not informed of the expedited hearing until two days before it was scheduled. She said she had no idea Barnes was going to hear the case when she first contacted him. It had originally been scheduled to be heard by Judge Agnes Chappell on October 24.

According to a police report filed September 26, Lee Loder’s dog was reported by Paul Clark, a carpenter working in the neighborhood. Clark described the dog, a 60-pound mixed breed named Stokely, as “skin and bones. I saw the condition of the dog. You had a chain that was so knotted up it was like a rigid bar. It wouldn’t even sag. For me that’s inexcusable . . . He had severely limited movement. I’d be surprised if he had more than a three or four foot radius that he could maneuver in . . . The dog’s ribs were sticking out and its eyes were sunk in. The dog was right at the point of starvation.” The police report confirmed that the dog appeared to be starving and was so emaciated that “all bony prominences [were] evident from a distance.” The animal was chained up in a fenced-in area out of reach of shelter due to the chain being “wrapped and hooked on his neck,” according to the report, which added that the dog was soaked and shivering after two days of rain. Animal cruelty officer Dana Johnston, who investigated the case, called Birmingham-Jefferson County Animal Control, which impounded the dog until October 10, when it was released into the custody of Loder’s veterinarian, Dr. Jerome Williams (who will eventually return the dog to Loder).

/editorial/2002-10-24/dog1.gif
Photos taken September 26 of Lee Loder’s dog chained in the rear of Loder’s house.

The dog reportedly had heartworms, intestinal and external parasites, and fleas. Williams examined the dog within 24 hours after impoundment. “I found the heartworms. I was told by the vet [at animal control] that she found intestinal worms and fleas.” Williams wrote in a letter regarding his observations to Judge Barnes, “Based on my personal observations of Stokely’s demeanor, his age, his vital indicators, his laboratory tests, and his medical history, I am of the opinion that the animal’s condition at the time of his impoundment was within acceptable normal range.” In an interview the day after the case’s dismissal, Williams described the dog as underweight when taken to animal control, but added that “skin and bones” was not a description that he would use, as the police report had.

/editorial/2002-10-24/dog3.gif
The chain had become so knotted that the dog was unable to reach shelter.

Williams has been seeing Loder’s dog since 1996 and reports that worms have been a problem in the past. When asked if Loder had regularly addressed health problems concerning the dog, the vet described Loder as “not being an ‘ideal’ client,” but added that the majority of his clients “are not optimum.” He said that Loder had brought the dog in regularly for shots [according to the police report, Loder could not tell the arresting officer the last time the dog had received his rabies shot]. The dog was still in Williams’ custody at press time. The veterinarian reported that the dog was “responding well” to care.

Police spokesperson Lt. Henry Irby said animal cruelty officer Dana Johnston’s office received a call stating that there was a dog being abused. Irby said that officers did not know who the dog belonged to when they impounded it. Loder was contacted once he was discovered to be the owner. “We asked Mr. Loder to come in to talk,” said Irby. “At that time he was placed under arrest and then released on a $500 bond.”

Loder addressed the issue in an October 15 interview, two days before the case was suddenly dropped. “We do dispute the claims that there was criminal neglect,” said Loder, who would not comment on whether the dog was kept chained on a regular basis. “I don’t have any problem talking about this but because it’s a legal matter and the matter’s in court, I really don’t want to go into details.” Loder insisted that the dog was given “reasonable care,” adding, “I’ve had a dog all my life and taken care of dogs very well. I don’t think that’s a question. I love them, and that’s why I have them.” The Council President said that no complaints had been lodged against him in the past regarding the animal. Loder expressed concerns about the impoundment and arrest procedures, noting that provisions for a 10-day notice were not utilized, which Loder says is often the case. “I wasn’t given the opportunity that I think other people are generally given, which is if there was a concern that was raised, to address it . . . and I’m not agreeing that the concern was one that had to be addressed. . . . That was an option [giving notice] for somebody who believed I was a credible person. . . . One of the things that I cherish and try to make sacred is being honest, being responsible, and being credible. And you do that for days like this-I don’t want to be treated differently than anybody but I think I’m a credible person who is responsible and who ought to be believed when they make a statement about something.” Loder added, “After this is all over-and this is going to be resolved very soon-there will be no question regarding my care for this dog.”

Loder said he explained to animal control officers that it was “all a misunderstanding.” He said that he offered to take the dog to the vet before he signed the $500 bond but was “not given that opportunity.” Loder said, “I expect my name to be cleared through the courts. And after that, for those who still have suspicions, I’ll have the dog and he’ll be there [at Loder's home] and I’ll let folks see him since he’s become a public figure now.” &

Council Reaches for Piece of Lodging Tax

Leave a reply
Council Reaches for Piece of Lodging Tax

Is the Birmingham City Council gearing up for another showdown with Mayor Bernard Kincaid? The mayor has voiced support for appropriating the entire three percent of a council-endorsed hotel lodging tax toward expansion of the Birmingham-Jefferson Convention Complex (BJCC). Councilors, however, wanted to earmark a third of lodging tax revenues for the Greater Birmingham Convention and Visitors Bureau for marketing purposes.

At the suggestion of Council President Pro Tem Carole Smitherman, the council is now considering a third option: a three-way split that would direct $1 million of the expected $3 million lodging tax windfall to the council for city projects. The council could later redirect its one-third portion back to BJCC expansion once funding is fully secured.

Councilor Joel Montgomery remains the lone council member adamantly opposed to using tax dollars to expand the BJCC to a multi-purpose facility. Montgomery prefers that the city focus its spending on cleaning up the city, which he believes will attract business and boost the city’s population. “It’s where you want to put your priorities,” said the councilor at the July 30 council meeting. “Why can’t we do the same thing to clean up our neighborhoods and improve schools?” Montgomery asked. “It’s not rocket science.” Montgomery said that he had recently immersed himself in domed stadium feasibility studies, including a report from Harvard University, and had found no justification for any such construction. Montgomery says that he can’t believe that a Harvard professor would agree with “somebody as dumb as me.” He added that there are not enough conventions to go around to justify the $440 million expansion plan.

Insisting that the lodging tax will “rev up our economy,” Councilor Smitherman calls expansion of the BJCC “a revenue-raising venture which helps us fund education.” Smitherman said that the city’s location in a valley limits the type of business the city can bring in due to ozone problems. “The lodging tax gives us a new Birmingham,” she said. “So be it if the city of Birmingham is the entertainment district for the region. So be it if we are the banking facility for the state of Alabama and the Southwest [sic]. The more we promote where we live to other places, [the more] people want to come to our valley to see what we’re doing and how we live. We have a special place here and it’s up to us to promote it.” Smitherman added that a million dollars is not much to spend on promotion.

“We have to spend money to make money,” said Councilor Bert Miller “Sometimes we outsmart ourselves. Let’s start using common sense. It’s so simple for our city. Birmingham is just a great big city waiting to explode around the nation. Once we build this thing people are gonna come from everywhere.” Miller urged “city-bashers” to move elsewhere and even offered to pay for a “Ryder truck” to help local malcontents relocate. For the record, approximately 20,000 residents have left Birmingham since 1990. &

City Hall — A Political Education

Leave a reply
A Political Education

At the June 11 council meeting, as Mayor Kincaid ignored her and studied the material before him, Councilor Carol Reynolds offered apologies to District Two constituents and fellow councilors for the controversy surrounding her attempt to cut a deal with the Mayor. Weeks earlier, Reynolds had offered to swap her vote in exchange for an appointment to the Birmingham Airport Authority Board. The vote would have been to approve an ordinance that would raise the amount the Mayor could spend without approval from the Council to $50,000. At the June 4 council meeting, Reynolds made a motion to delay the ordinance because the council had not yet finalized the Fiscal Year 2002-2003 budget. After that meeting, Kincaid played a voice-mail recording that Reynolds had left for him weeks earlier in which she offered the trade. The rift made headlines the following day.

At the June 11 meeting, Reynolds expressed regret that the issue had become public and worried about the public misreading her “lobbying” efforts. “Lobby [sic] has been acceptable procedure. . . . I just failed the course, I guess,” said Reynolds. The councilor said that the representative of the council’s Transportation and Communication Committee has traditionally served on the board. She added that it is a nonpaying position for which she is qualified, due to her work to save homes in East Lake Park from airport expansion plans. Asking forgiveness from fellow councilors, Reynolds pledged, “I will serve this city. I will serve this mayor or any other mayor while I’m here.” Reynolds concluded, “I’m a rookie, I’m not a politician. I don’t understand that you don’t have friends anymore when you do this. And I don’t want to come out cynical at the end of my next three and a half years, and I’m going to work really hard not to become a cynical person. I love you Birmingham.”

Expressing surprise at the fall-out from the controversy, Councilor Roderick Royal said he voted for the delay because the proposed ordinance increased the Mayor’s spending limit from $10,000 to $50,000 without a cap (an unlimited number of contracts, in other words). Royal emphasized that he was not using Reynolds’ rationale for delaying the measure. “I make my own decisions,” said Royal. “Let’s move this city forward and drop the petty politics, no matter what.” The councilor added, “I’m sorry that Ms. Reynolds’ feels that her trust, somehow or another, was violated. . . . I think I would have felt the same way. But unlike Ms. Reynolds, I certainly would have dealt with it.”

Disturbed that decisions are being made at City Hall that are not beneficial to communities, Councilor Gwen Sykes balked at excusing controversial civic involvement as simply political. “It’s just not politics. We have a responsibility to treat one another right. And we can name it anything that we want to name it.” As usual, her line of reasoning is difficult to follow. Criticizing those who behave as if they have no life outside the political ring, Sykes said, “We act like we don’t have nothing else or nowhere to go once this life is over with. And doing the work and the business of this city should not be worth losing our lives!” She then profusely thanked the Birmingham Airport Authority for hosting valedictorians and salutatorians at a recent luncheon. In her next breath, though, she condemned the blight and devastation that has resulted from airport expansion. Sykes urged the airport to be more sensitive to the needs of its surrounding neighborhoods.

Councilor Elias Hendricks thanked Sykes for addressing the necessity for cooperation with the airport and offered Reynolds his support. “It would be a heck of a lot easier if we had a sitting council member on the board. It would really facilitate our work getting done, and we have a lot of work to do out there.” Hendrick’s wife presently serves on the Airport Authority Board.

After the July 11 council meeting, Mayor Kincaid at first refused comment on the matter, but did offer a final word: “The Council was led to believe that there were genuine concerns for the budgeting process as to why a request to put this off for six weeks was requested and passed. My intent solely was to show that there were ulterior motives to that, not the sanguine motives of checking with the budget.” Kincaid added that the council “backhandedly admitted that they had been misled as to the reasons for [the delay].”

As for Reynolds’ response to Kincaid’s assessment that councilors were misled, her reply was direct. “He can’t speak for the whole council,” said Reynolds, adding that Kincaid had been discussing the Airport Authority Board appointment with her since she took office in November 2001. &

City Hall — Bills Due

Leave a reply

Bills Due

It was bound to happen. Council President Lee Loder, whose patience with his Council colleagues has been tested in recent months, blew his top at Mayor Bernard Kincaid during the May 14 City Council meeting. At issue was the city’s failure to pay a $7,100 bill for the Council’s inauguration reception held at the Harbert Center in November 2001. The unpaid expense has accumulated late fees and includes a $672 charge for wine, which Loder and his fellow councilors claim to know nothing about. Loder angrily lashed out at Kincaid for keeping the Council in the dark regarding reasons for nonpayment. The Mayor snarled right back. And before everyone was through arguing about the correct procedure to finance parties, Operation New Birmingham (ONB) was characterized as a “money-laundering” system.

Kincaid said the city didn’t receive the bill until February, and has no idea when it initially appeared in the Finance Department. According to the Mayor-Council Act, the Finance Department must certify that the money is available to cover the expense. Authorization for the Harbert reception was made by recently departed Council Administrator Jarvis Patton when the former Council was in office. Ironically, only one of the incumbents was re-elected. [The reception was originally scheduled as a private event, but the newly elected Council made it a public affair after public outcry.] Patton was told a purchase order was needed, said Kincaid, but the Council administrator ignored correct procedure. Denying that his office had been sitting on the bill to avoid paying for the event, Kincaid angrily denounced the insinuation that the Mayor’s office was “derelict” in duty.Food cannot be paid for with city funds unless the function is deemed to be for a public purpose. The inauguration reception did not meet that criteria, according to the city’s Law Department. “Liquor cannot be paid for under any circumstance,” added Kincaid. “The liquor was problematic.”

Loder argued that the event was a public function and therefore eligible for city funds. “I don’t know what the problem is,” said Loder. “I haven’t received a response — a formal response — at all over the last three months as to what the problem is with this event. And that’s a problem.” When asked by Loder when he expected to inform the Council that the bill was not payable by the city, Kincaid said his office has been trying for the past four months to find a way to cover the outstanding debt. The Mayor said that the corporate community could cover the expense.

Addressing the issue, Council Attorney J. Richmond Pearson said, “It is the most foolish thing in the world for you to take money from a private company, or a public utility, that comes before you for decisions,” warned Pearson. “That’s just plain common sense. You don’t even have to have lunch at law school to know that.” Using an example, Pearson pointed out that Alabama Power Company is on the council agenda seeking an easement on city land, though it was not stated that Alabama Power would be one of the corporations asked to pay off the reception expense.

“Investitures and inaugural festivals that include citizens, as well as public officials, is [sic] an extension of public business,” Pearson said, adding that, however remote, those benefiting from city decisions are in potential conflict if they contribute money, which should be avoided lest any “appearance of evil” be construed. City funds should cover inaugural events, with direct payment to “those vendors who rendered service, and not through any conduit,” continued Pearson. “And I mean by that, don’t send it through Operation New Birmingham, send it directly where it is intended to go.” “That’s what some of your legislators have done,” said Pearson. “There’s always the avenue of campaign funds being utilized to pay expenses of the nature referred to here. . . . All this other esoteric nonsense I’ve heard doesn’t make sense.”

Councilor Joel Montgomery noted that the Council had previously followed the advice of Patton regarding the reception. Montgomery suggested that perhaps Patton, who was Council administrator for over 20 years — and signed the original contract for the event — should foot the party bill. Montgomery added that he has refused many times to approve payment through the city custodial fund at ONB. He agreed with Pearson that the city is using ONB as a conduit to pay for food and other activities.

“You’re taking your citizens as fools, the same thing racketeers do,” said Pearson, unafraid to speak his mind. “You’re laundering money. It’s tainted all the way! If you owe somebody, pay ‘em direct. Don’t send it through the Devil!”

Commending the Commenders

 

Never one to miss an opportunity to laud the city for anything, the Birmingham City Council saluted the Vonetta Flowers Planning Day Committee. That’s right, the Council passed a resolution at the May 7 council meeting recognizing those who organized the city’s salute to Flowers in honor of her Olympic Gold Medal as a member of the two-women bobsled team. Each member of the group received a certificate and told the Council how moved they were to be able to honor the Olympian. Council President Loder calls the group a “dream volunteer team.” As the resolution’s sponsor, Councilor Bert Miller posed for photographs with the Planning Committee members and led a round of applause for Flowers because she was named “one of the most fiftiest most beautiful people in the world [sic]” by People magazine.
Auto Auction Prompts Questions

“Remember the day, folks . . . because it’s all going to come out in the wash,” Councilor Montgomery warned. The “day” in reference is the City Council’s approval of a redevelopment agreement with Serra Automotive. Birmingham will spend nearly $3 million to purchase land and make infrastructure improvements that will keep all Serra dealerships in the city for the next decade. The city expects to reap $8 million in tax revenues.Montgomery voted with other councilors several weeks earlier to endorse the plan, but when the May 28 vote to finalize the deal came up, the councilor protested vehemently. Montgomery’s change of heart was prompted by radio ads announcing that Serra Toyota was holding a used vehicle auction in Trussville. “Why would you be selling those automobiles there the weekend before you were fixing to enter into an agreement with the city of Birmingham to do business exclusively in the city of Birmingham?” Montgomery said after the meeting. “That raises the question in my mind as to where they think the true market is for their being able to sell the vehicles.”

Serra attorney Tom Baddley told the Council that the automobile dealer was holding auctions outside Birmingham because there was no available space near the dealership. Serra needs an area large enough to park 150 to 200 vehicles, according to Baddley, who said that auctions were also conducted in Irondale. Sales tax revenue goes to the municipality where the vehicle is delivered, according to city officials.

“If you want to do business in the city of Birmingham, we’ve got lots of parking lots,” Montgomery said to the Serra attorney. “What good is that [$8 million in projected revenues] gonna do us five years from now if they’re gone and we’ve got blank land sitting out there? We need to start trying to have businesses come to the city of Birmingham because they wanna be in the city of Birmingham . . . not because we’re having to pay them to stay here.”

Councilor Roderick Royal shared Montgomery’s concerns. “We want 100 percent of the revenues generated,” said Royal, who would like to see Serra hold auctions at the Wal-Mart parking lot in Huffman after it closes [a new Wal-Mart SuperCenter is currently scheduled for East Lake]. Serra attorney Baddley said that it was his understanding that an effort was being made to develop potential auction space in eastern Birmingham. “If [available area] is there and closer, Toyota would love to have their auctions in the city of Birmingham,” said Baddley, who added that automobile manufacturers approve auction sites. The attorney noted that the annexation agreement had not been signed, and that Serra was not yet in the city.

Should Serra violate the contract in an attempt to relocate, the city would be forced to go to court to recoup the $2.5 million it is paying the auto dealer. City attorneys said that the dealer’s right to conduct auctions outside the city could depend on how often they took place. &


City Hall — Liability on parade

Leave a reply

City Hall

Liability on parade

With one week to go before the Birmingham School Board election, Councilor Gwen Sykes is eerily close to playing a vote-solicitation card prompted by the March 22 killing of 15-year-old April Lynn Jamerson at Bessie Estell Park. Lurking in the background is fear from the city’s Law Department regarding the ever-dreaded word liability.

Sykes proposed a resolution at the April 2 Birmingham City Council meeting to rename the Friday before spring break “April Lynn Jamerson Senior Future Day.” That day has traditionally been known as “skip day,” when high school students play hooky without fear of school administrators taking disciplinary action. Present at today’s name-change proposal is Jamerson’s mother, Shunda Milhouse, who noted that officials had “promised” recognition of a day remembering her daughter’s death. Noting that “there is no privacy when it comes to privacy,” Milhouse urged parents to inspect bedrooms and “observe what’s going on in your child’s room, because a lot of these males, they are carrying guns.” Milhouse called for adult supervision of future student gatherings, and Sykes’ resolution endorses police patrol for any events next spring honoring Jamerson. Some councilors are hesitant to recognize the skip day.

Acknowledging that he understood “where we want to go, at least, in trying to honor the young lady who was unfortunately killed by another one of our children,” Councilor Roderick Royal protested: “Skip day has never been sanctioned by the school system.” Royal argued that school officials’ authority is being usurped as to “what days will be school days, and which days will not.” Councilor Bert Miller agreed, and noted that police involvement might make the city responsible for any problems that arise. “If we sanction this day, we are giving the kids permission to skip school. And also, if the city is patrolling with police officers, the city would be held liable if something was to happen again.” The ears of Council President Loder, an attorney by trade, perk up at mention of the word liable. Loder told Shunda Milhouse that he was hesitant to “draw [her] into this,” and asked if she would approve the Council delaying the renaming until all questions could be addressed. The mother replied that was fine as long as her daughter’s death was not “swept up under the rug.”

Councilor Sykes immediately went on the defensive as she attempted to clear the air, explaining that the resolution was never intended to allow a skip day. Sykes protested, “Skip day has never been really authorized, but I’m in the system. And I know, for some reason or another, there hasn’t been what it takes in order to make sure that this didn’t happen!” The councilor’s voice began to rise in anger. “There are people who knew that this was going on, because it’s been going on for years. We’re not authorizing the children to skip on this day. We’re saying that they will no longer skip on this day! And we’re saying the Board of Education had to put some teeth into what they’re doing.” Sykes added that teachers need to contact parents when children are not attending school. “There are some things the Board of Education is going to have to do!” thundered Sykes, assistant principal at Green Acres Middle School and head of the Council’s Education Committee. Sykes led a teacher walk-out a year ago protesting a salary raise given by the Board to current superintendent Johnny Brown. Her clashes with the Board have been front-page news, and her council administrative assistant, Gwen Webb, is running for the Board in the April 9 election.

Councilor Royal was “more than greatly disturbed” to hear Sykes say that those in the school system “would know and tacitly approve of students being out of school.”

An audible sigh emerged from the direction of City Attorney Tamara Johnson as a look of horror crossed her face. “This is a very emotional situation,” said Johnson. “However, there may be legal ramifications in some of the things that people are saying. To know that something takes place does not translate into a ‘tacit approval’ of something taking place. Nor does it translate into an obligation to perform some kind of duty or to have some kind of responsibility.” Johnson warned against making a public record of comments “about an independent board such as the School Board and its operations” since the Council does not know the facts in the case.

Sykes immediately changed her tone after Johnson spoke. “By no mean [sic] did we mean to imply that [school officials had been responsible],” said Sykes. “Just based on what we’ve been hearing for a long time, that it’s been something that’s been going on traditionally.”

Montgomery fulfills pledge to slow airport expansion

While campaigning for election to the City Council, Councilor Joel Montgomery said he was “hounded” to stop airport expansion, and promised “to do everything in my power to stop the expansion of the Birmingham Airport.” After extensive research, Montgomery found documentation that East Lake Park was dedicated in 1931 and certified by City Clerk Paula Smith in 1999. If a park has been dedicated with proper notification, no use other than that relating to park activity can be made of the property in question without a vote of the public. An ordinance of permanent operation must be published in a paper of record before becoming law.

Montgomery is convinced that expansion of parallel runways through East Lake Park will not be allowed. “I don’t see a problem with the documents presented. I attached the legal description, and I also attached the [land] survey. That means the park’s dedicated.” Montgomery said he did not know if proper notification in a paper of record had been given. “If it was not put in the paper, people have been going to the park for how many years? They all know it’s a park,” surmised Montgomery. “As far as I’m concerned, it’s dedicated.” &

City Hall — Langford Defends Visionland

Leave a reply

City Hall

 

Langford Defends Visionland


On March 15, Mayor Kincaid’s office released a report from the city’s financial advisor, the Swarthmore Group, that indicated financial hemorrhaging at Visionland. The subjective tone and sarcastic phrasing of the report caused quite a stir at city headquarters. The report questions the hiring and firing of park managers, alleged payments to Fairfield Mayor Larry Langford and Fairfield City Clerk Melvin Turner, and debilitating financial losses incurred in 1999. One conclusion reads “There’s more blood here than at the local Red Cross unit” and the park’s dreadful 1999 season is summarized as one of “Rape, Pillage, and Plunder.”

Swarthmore’s Dan Maze, the author of the report, told the Birmingham News that the wording was intended for effect. “I wanted somebody to continue to read it,” Maze said. “Did I go over the line? I don’t know.” The 1999 season saw attendance fall by a devastating 100,000, resulting in a net loss of $9.2 million, even though the minutes from the July 8, 1999, West Jefferson Amusement Park Joint Board meeting claimed, “All’s well at Visionland.” Among the original 13 board members were Langford [chairman], former Governor Fob James, Elmer Harris [retired president and CEO of Alabama Power], County Commissioner Betty Fine Collins, and former State Legislator Jimmy Butts, who was recently convicted of accepting bribes relating to business with Visionland. No one was accused of offering the bribe. Visionland was a sponsor of a NASCAR race car driven by Butts’ son, reportedly a $50,000 investment.

According to the Swarthmore report, the Board of Directors of the West Jefferson Amusement and Public Park Authority [WJAPPA], which was created by 11 surrounding municipalities to deliver financial assistance to Visionland during the beginning years, met biannually until July 1999. Because the board did not meet again until November 2001, observers wondered who approved the hiring of the Ogden Park Management Services in June 2000 for $750,000 a year. The Swarthmore report urged the city to support the park for another year, then recommended that the facility be sold.

The City Council convened a committee-of-the-whole meeting on March 21, approving payment of the $1 million currently owed to the amusement facility. Councilor Carol Reynolds, the lone “no” vote against paying the $1 million, had invited Larry Langford to address the council that afternoon. Langford said he did not attend the meeting to defend himself. He addressed what he termed “bogus reports” that he was being paid by the park, explaining that he was only reimbursed for expenses. Langford urged the council to ask to see the checks allegedly paid to him. “If I did what they said, call the attorney general and put me in jail. It’s a real simple thing.” Langford said there has been interest expressed in purchasing the park. “It was never intended for us to try and stay there and operate the park until hell freezes over,” Langford said as he explained that the intent had always been to sell the amusement park in “five or six years.”

Langford blamed much of the disastrous 1999 season on bad luck. “The problem was, we had 52 days of rain, and by the time it stopped raining, the heat index went to 110 degrees and stayed there for the rest of the summer.” He added that an E. coli breakout at amusement parks around the country that summer frightened away patrons. Langford reminded the Council that a $6 million ride malfunctioned the first day of its operation. “The park overall has done what we had hoped the park would do,” said Langford. The property purchased for the park at the time sold for $3,000 an acre. Today, property in the area goes for $250,000 to $300,000 an acre, according to Langford. He noted that 27 million people pass along Interstate 20/59 between Birmingham and Tuscaloosa yearly. “What we were trying to do was find a way to get people to stay here in Alabama for a couple of days and quit treating this state like a service station — come to get your gas and drive on through.”

“Our problem has been, how do you penetrate Jefferson County?” Langford said. He noted that if one out of every three county residents visited the park one time a year, in 10 years Visionland would be as large as Six Flags. “We can sell the park quicker with the park being open than if we closed it,” Langford said. He concluded by pointing out that Visionland had at least initiated “the first sign of real regional cooperation.”

Noise Ordinance

Councilor Joel Montgomery has had his fill of loud music booming from automobiles cruising past his District One home. “It’s killing me,” said Montgomery. The noise also shakes “the front door of St. John’s United Methodist Church, where I worship on Sundays,” Montgomery adds with obvious disgust.

So the councilor decided it was time to tweak city codes addressing noise abatement. The present noise ordinance is considered unenforceable, according to Birmingham Police Chief Mike Coppage. Requirements that Birmingham police use decibel meters to gauge volume levels makes it difficult to catch a perpetrator in the act. By the time police arrive, the offending noise has been turned down. There are only about a dozen decibel meters at present for the entire force, adding to the difficulty of enforcing the law. Coppage explains that the only way to consistently deal with the problem is to have complainants sign arrest warrants against noise level violators, yet most are reluctant to do so because they fear retaliation or future harassment.

As Public Safety chairperson, Montgomery collected noise ordinances from various states and municipalities in search of a model for Birmingham’s code. He found his answer in Kansas, where a state noise code explicitly addresses vehicle stereos. “This is the first step to revising our noise ordinance as a whole,” promises Montgomery. Changes in city noise laws will only affect vehicles. Other sections of the overall noise ordinance will remain intact until they can be addressed at future Public Safety Committee meetings.

“This is going to free the police officer. If he hears somebody within a distance of 35 feet, in an automobile rumbling, this is going to be his discretion as to whether or not he can write that individual a fine,”

Montgomery explained. No decibel meter will be needed. “To me there’s no difference in this and if you were writing somebody a speeding ticket and you had no radar device in the car. You’re still taking the police officer’s word against the operator’s word.” The new law stipulates that discernable noise heard by other vehicle passengers within 10 feet of an automobile or 35 feet for those in buildings will be considered a violation.

Montgomery emphasizes that he has no problem with what anybody listens to “as long as I don’t have to hear it. And I certainly don’t want to hear it when I’m lying in my bed.”

Councilor Montgomery originally suggested a minimum hearing range of 50 feet from a building with regards to a passing vehicle stereo, but Chief Coppage asked for a compromise. “I think that the 50-foot limit is a little bit gracious,” said Coppage, who suggested a 25-foot minimum. Captain Roy Williams of the Birmingham Police Department estimates he could write up to 50 tickets a day just on the volume of music in cars in traffic. “Sometimes I can’t even hear my radio,” Williams says.

The ordinance must be reviewed by the city’s Law Department, then voted on by the Birmingham City Council. Penalties will not exceed $500 or more than six months imprisonment or both.

“This is really trite,” said Councilor Reynolds. “But what about the popsicle man? Will he be required to have a permit to play his music?” Chief Coppage said that he would have to consult the legal department about the popsicle man. Coppage stressed that the ordinance is aimed at “boom boxes” that shake cars and rattle houses when they drive past. “To me, that is minimal compared to the fighter jets going overhead,” Reynolds said, referring to noise pollution at her home near the Birmingham Airport where an Alabama Air Guard is housed. She explains that she is simply trying to find a realistic way of enforcement “without creating a police state.”

The ordinance will include exemptions for emergency and public safety vehicles, vehicles used by municipal utility companies, sanitation trucks, and vehicles used in authorized public activities such as parades, fireworks displays, sports events, and musical productions.

“Praise the Lord!” Montgomery noted with a smile when he read the sentence addressing limits on “bass reverberations,” surmising, “One day noise pollution will be as much of an issue as air pollution.”

The Cause That Refreshes

A few weeks after Council President Lee Loder chastised Councilor Gwen Sykes for allowing a Highland Avenue coffee shop [which supplied the Council with pastries] to plug itself during cable television broadcasts of meetings, Coca-Cola got in on the action. After presenting the city with $100,000 towards the restoration of Vulcan, Coca-Cola United President and CEO Claude Nielsen accepted accolades from the Council commemorating the soft drink’s 100th anniversary. Coca-Cola’s humble beginnings were nothing more than “one mule, one employee, and we delivered 18 cases of Coca-Cola,” said Nielsen. “Next year, in this community, we will sell over eight million cases of Coca-Cola.” The CEO expressed appreciation for the “opportunity to refresh each of you every day. You can count on us for at least another hundred years of refreshing this city.” In honor of the anniversary, six-pack cartons featuring the Birmingham skyline and a rendering of Vulcan were presented to each councilor. Loder held a carton so the TV cameras could get a close-up as Councilor Carole Smitherman laughed, “Everything goes better with Coke!” &

City Hall — Public access

Leave a reply

City Hall

Public access

Council committee-of-the-whole meetings are informal gatherings designed for councilors to hash out problems around the intimacy of a conference table. Though open to the public, they are held in a conference room where space is often limited, prompting occasional gripes from residents who can’t squeeze in. Occasionally, there are demands to move hot-button issues to the council chambers. At a recent Council meeting, Councilor Joel Montgomery mentioned that some of his constituents have recently complained about discussion concerning the Water Works assets battle being held at committee-of-the-whole meetings. Montgomery noted that Tuesday council meetings frequently include only a brief synopsis of what happened in committee-of-the-whole meetings. “I think the public deserves to see what goes on as far as the discussions in the committee-of-the-whole,” observed Montgomery. At that same Council meeting, Councilor Gwen Sykes suggested that committee-of-the-whole meetings be televised when addressing an issue with the magnitude of the Water Works debate. Council President Lee Loder explained that any item can be put on the council agenda if it is added by the Wednesday prior to the Tuesday council meeting. Defending the council’s open operating procedure, Loder said “I think this is one of the most open City Councils in the history of this city. We make every effort to do press releases and notify the public on everything.” Stressing that “‘convenience’ and ‘open’ are two entirely different things,” Loder added, “it probably costs more to be in here [council chambers] and have all the lights on. There are a lot of practical concerns why you wouldn’t want to use a big facility just because we have it.” Councilor Roderick Royal agreed that the “public should be completely aware of how the Council is deliberating.” Though noting that media are sometimes “slanted” because they “report whatever they like,” Royal said that at least three media representatives have been present at each committee-of-the-whole meeting he has attended. But he supports bringing such meetings into the council chamber should consensus dictate. “I’ll sit right here and say what I would have said [in conference rooms]!” Councilor Carole Smitherman echoed Loder’s comments that anything can be brought up on the council dais if it’s submitted in time. “I don’t meet in no smokey back rooms,” laughed Smitherman. “I don’t think it’s fair to say that we’re doing something in the back.”

Citizens Advisory Board supports night council meetings

At its February 18 meeting, the Citizens Advisory Board approved a resolution urging the City Council to conduct at least two meetings per month at night. Councilor Gwen Sykes first proposed evening meetings immediately after her election in November 2001, explaining that night gatherings would be “more representative of our community.” Council President Loder acknowledged that several councilors had expressed interest in holding a series of evening meetings as the previous council had done, which included one per month until each district had played host. Several surrounding municipalities, including Mt. Brook, Hoover, and Vestavia, meet at night.

Council reverses decision

At the February 26 City Council meeting, a trucking and excavating company located near the airport sought rezoning from “residential” to “light industrial.” There are only three homes in the neighborhood (“The trucks look better than most of the houses there,” bragged the trucking company boss.) Such rezoning would be an example of “spot zoning,” considered by many to be a political liability and a threat to residential stability. Councilor Carol Reynolds said the homes around the airport should be purchased due to airport expansion, and supports rezoning the area to commercial in this case. Sykes agreed with Reynolds that the airport neighborhood is different because it will always be threatened by blight due to airport expansion. Admitting that spot zoning is not encouraged, Councilor Carole Smitherman said that business is encouraged. Smitherman voted in support of the rezoning along with Councilors Reynolds, Miller, and Hendricks. Oddly, Sykes abstained. Councilor Montgomery refused to approve spot zoning in the airport neighborhood, fearing it would set a precedent allowing spot zoning in other neighborhoods.

During the following week, Council President Loder met with the city attorney, city clerk, and council administrator after investigating the accuracy of his previous decision, which stated that the four votes approving the rezoning did not constitute a majority of the nine voting members present [Three councilors voted "no" and two abstained]. Citing Roberts Rules of Order, the parliamentary guide for council conduct, Loder corrected his earlier stance that “abstention” votes are included in a total when seeking a majority. The denial of rezoning will be changed to approval of rezoning at the next council meeting after a vote to finalize the switch.

Loder elaborated that Council Administrator Jarvis Patton stated that there may be an “unwritten rule, at least by past practice, that the [previous] council has counted abstentions as actual votes,” said Loder. However, Loder said he would follow Roberts Rules of Order. Councilor Sykes asks the million dollar question: Could the previous council procedures regarding voting supersede present council procedure in a legal challenge?

Loder insisted he will follow Roberts Rules of Order unless he is shown otherwise. “Education is a wonderful thing,” said Councilor Smitherman. Lavishing praise on Loder for researching and correcting the procedural mistake, Smitherman asked everyone to give the Council President a round of applause. All complied with Smitherman’s request.

Police cars to be monitored

Computers similar to the “black boxes” used on aircraft will be placed in police patrol cars at a total cost of $199,000. According to Police Chief Mike Coppage, the boxes “chart the driving habits of the individual officer so that the supervisor can sit down with that officer and explain to him his good points and his bad points.” Over-revving, over-braking, speeding, and operation of sirens and blue lights will be monitored. Funding comes from a federal technology grant, according to Coppage.

Twenty patrol vehicles have recently been tested in the west precinct. The police chief noted that none of them were wrecked in the five months each carried the computer, a driving record that he called “absolutely fantastic.” Also onboard is an automatic vehicle-locator, capable of printing out a map of where the patrol car has been. “It’s also a management tool,” smiled Coppage. “If we happen to pull up that same map and find that we’ve got six police cars parked down at Krispy Kreme, then we want to know about that, too.” Public Safety Committee chairman Joel Montgomery marveled at the driving record that resulted from the computer enhanced patrol cars, asking, “Could I get one in my wife’s vehicle?” &

City Hall — Council overrides Kincaid’s judicial preference

Leave a reply

City Hall

Council overrides Kincaid’s judicial preference

After voting for Agnes Chappell to replace controversial Judge Carnella Greene Norman as Municipal Court judge, Councilor Valerie Abbott said her choice was “the most difficult decision I’ve had to make since I’ve been on this council because we had such highly qualified candidates.” In a 5-4 vote that surprised City Hall observers, Chappell beat Community Development head Etta Dunning, Mayor Bernard Kincaid’s choice to follow Norman. Chappell had 18 years experience as a Family Court senior referee, where she heard 250 cases a week in her role making recommendations to the presiding judge. “In the end it came down to the person who had experience as a judge already,” said Abbott, who called the decision “agonizing.”

Councilor Carol Reynolds, who supported Dunning, also struggled to make up her mind. “I listened to the people within our community as to their recommendations,” Reynolds said, noting that she kept a tally sheet by her home telephone to keep up with constituents’ suggestions. Councilor Roderick Royal, who voted for Chappell, was bothered that none of the seven finalists for the judicial post live in Birmingham. Councilors Lee Loder, Carole Smitherman, and Elias Hendricks also voted for Chappell.

After the vote, Kincaid said that the Council’s choice was their prerogative. “If they’ll stay out of my business, I’ll stay out of theirs,” the Mayor laughed at the narrow defeat. Kincaid preferred Dunning because she had been director of Community Development and is very aware of community issues. Kincaid added that Dunning’s community development experience would make her the “ideal person” for presiding over the Environmental Court. The Mayor admitted he would be curious to know how Family Court would function after replacing Chappell.

Council approves controversial $5 million to UAB

UAB’s proposed $90 million, 12-story biomedical research center has caused some councilors to question the city’s priorities. Citing UAB as the leading employer in the city, Mayor Kincaid has defended the research center due to expected gains in occupational tax coffers through the research facility’s creation of 1,400 jobs. The economic impact should flourish in other areas as well, according to Kincaid. “It replicates itself in terms of economic benefit,” the Mayor explained, pointing to an increase in license fees and job opportunities at restaurants and other businesses affected by the opening of the center.

On February 19, the Birmingham City Council voted to approve appropriating $5 million for the project, with the first of five $1 million installments due in September. Councilor Joel Montgomery had voiced support for a February 12 resolution of intent, [the resolution aids the university's solicitation of other funding sources] but requested from the Mayor’s office projections of revenue benefits to the city against the $5 million investment before making up his mind to approve the money. A week later Montgomery had decided to oppose the funding until neighborhoods and schools got their share of the financial pie. Montgomery called UAB a “vital partner,” but quickly added, “We also have another vital partner in this city, and it’s the people of the city of Birmingham.” The councilor is concerned about diminishing population numbers, stressing that the city must invest in its neighborhoods to halt the flight from the city. “You do not start building a house with the roof. You start with the foundation.”

Councilor Gwen Sykes requested an audience with UAB officials so that the Council could “become even more of a partner in this venture.” Sykes’ request for more discussion irritated Councilor Hendricks, who noted that UAB officials had met with councilors at both Finance Committee and Economic Development Committee meetings. Chastising fellow councilors, Hendricks railed about the unfairness of councilors’ suggestions to the public that no dialogue has taken place. Sykes angrily voiced displeasure regarding implications that there is “lying” on the Council. Declaring that it was impossible for her to attend the meetings Hendricks referenced, Sykes maintained that she is “not a liar” and remains “in touch” with the public regardless of her attendance record at committee meetings. Sykes stated that the Council needs to examine every way that UAB “spreads its money as it relates to contracts and services throughout the city of Birmingham.”

Insisting that he is neither “a financial wizard nor a genius,” Councilor Royal reiterated his support for the resolution of intent supporting UAB funding, but points out that on January 18, the city could not “ante up” a million dollars for Huffman High to complete its construction of a gymnasium. If the city could not find a million dollars a month ago, why could the city find a million for UAB now, Royal asked. He added that the funding of the biomedical research center is “a little dishonest” as it relates to the schools. The councilor preferred that the UAB funding be included in the July 2002-2003 budget. Royal defended certain councilors’ refusal to fund the research center with a philosophical one-liner: “If all of us are thinking alike, then no one is thinking.” Royal also expressed displeasure with Hendricks’ scolding. “I take special exception to chastising of the council people.”

Councilor Reynolds wanted to see a list of the subcontractors employed by the top 20 white-owned businesses dealing with UAB. “We need to know if they are getting work to minorities or if these dollars are leaving town,” Reynolds inquired before yielding the remainder of her time to Kamau Afrika, a critic of UAB’s minority contracts practices.

“We must not have a continuation of ‘Uncle Tom’ politics as we had with your predecessors,” objected Afrika to councilors. “That’s why we put you in office.” Afrika continued: “The Summit had $12 million in land preparation but no minority participation at all. You had Mexicans doing the work.” Afrika repeated that it is wrong for UAB to hire “illegal aliens from Mexico and Central America” instead of local black residents. &

 

Bonding At City Hall

Leave a reply

Bonding At City Hall

By Ed Reynolds

Mayor Bernard Kincaid threw a curve ball at the City Council January 29 when he notified councilors that a proposed April 9 bond referendum needed preclearance from the U.S. Justice Department. Because the Justice Department must receive the ordinance detailing categories and spending of the bond referendum no less than 60 days before the scheduled vote, the Council was forced to act on the ordinance by February 5. Councilors made little attempt to hide their irritation with the rush. Councilor Smitherman was “very disturbed” by the sudden haste to finalize bond categories and amounts to be spent in each. When pressed by Smitherman for an explanation of why he did not know about the deadline sooner, Kincaid said that previous bond referendums did not require Justice Department preclearance. The city knew that the school board election needed preclearance because it is a new issue, but was reportedly caught off-guard by the bond referendum notification. [Because the bond vote is being held as a special election, preclearance is needed.]

Both Councilors Smitherman and Abbott were concerned about the status of the remaining town hall meetings, which allow residents to provide input on bond money spending. Kincaid noted that each district will have had one town hall meeting before the council finalizes the bond’s spending categories. Abbott’s first meeting, though, was held the night before the Council had to confirm the ordinance, and she is concerned that her constituents might feel betrayed. “We’re always being rushed to do something without much time to consider what we’re doing.”

A rare Sunday meeting was called for the Council to determine where bond money should be allocated. The starting time of the meeting flip-flopped, with Council President Loder desiring a mid-afternoon meeting so he could catch up on his sleep, while Councilor Bert Miller wanted to begin early so he wouldn’t miss the Super Bowl. Miller won.

Though the potential of a Mayor-Council showdown seemed high, the Sunday session went smoothly. Mayor Kincaid agreed to include funding for education in the bond referendum, pleasing Councilor Roderick Royal, who wants money for schools until the $260 million from the Birmingham Water Works currently tied up in litigation becomes available. Royal and the majority of the Council also lobbied heavily for street and sewer improvement. Councilor Hendricks preferred that the focus be on long-term investment, stressing economic development and cultural needs. Councilor Smitherman disagreed, saying that sewer problems, which have led to flooding in her district, were her priority. The councilor suggested that improvements to streets and sewers are the type of projects that will encourage voters to get behind the referendum.

Streets, sewers, and schools were the big winners, receiving the largest boosts following the Sunday meeting. The entire $125 million bond fund is drawn incrementally to avoid paying interest. An amount that can be floated without raising taxes — $50 million — is borrowed first. The city can then borrow the balance in the future as the debt is reduced.