[Peace-discuss] Urbana's WQ seeking ethnic cleansing and more power over property owners.

Wed Nov 12 17:03:14 CST 2008

Whoa, Guys, news flash: ALL economic classes and ALL ethnic groups appreciate living in quiet safe neighborhoods that are free from "nuisance activities, among them mob action, assault, battery, unlawful use of weapons, prostitution, sexual assault, public indecency, illegal gambling, arson and drug-related crimes."  I can't believe you think that ANYONE -- regardless of race or economic status -- wants to- or should be expected to put up w/ these things!! How can you possibly conclude that this is something wanted by/meant for "rich white folks," implying that "poor black folks" -- or ANY folks -- don't care one way or another about these things!?? Wow, this seems like a snobbish -- and racist -- reaction to me!! 
 --Jenifer    

--- On Wed, 11/12/08, LAURIE SOLOMON <LAURIE at ADVANCENET.NET> wrote:

From: LAURIE SOLOMON <LAURIE at ADVANCENET.NET>
Subject: RE: [Peace-discuss] Urbana's WQ seeking ethnic cleansing and more power over property owners.
To: "'E. Wayne Johnson'" <ewj at pigs.ag>, "'Peace-discuss'" <peace-discuss at anti-war.net>, ronpaul-305 at meetup.com
Date: Wednesday, November 12, 2008, 11:31 AM

Ø  Property "owners" should take note that all of their property is lent to them by the kind permission of the Queen

And the Queen is being lent to you by permission of the good voters of Urbana.  J

From: peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of E. Wayne Johnson
Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 9:20 AM
To: Peace-discuss; ronpaul-305 at meetup.com
Subject: [Peace-discuss] Urbana's WQ seeking ethnic cleansing and more power over property owners.

Consider the article below...

I suggest that Prussing just cut directly to the chase and say that she wants to create an queendom in Urbana that is exclusively
for wealthy white folks except that a few others needed for domestic servants are welcome provided
that they meet her standards.  All the riff-raff should be summarily kicked out onto the streets.  Property "owners"
should take note that all of their property is lent to them by the kind permission of the Queen, and serious
consequences shall befall all who respect her not.

Urbana considering ordinance for repeat nuisance offenders

By Mike Monson
Wednesday November 12, 2008
URBANA – The city administration wants broad power to crack down on problem properties where criminal activities occur twice or more within a six-month period.
City aldermen on Monday discussed a proposed "criminal nuisance property" ordinance, but, at the suggestion of City Attorney Ronald O'Neal, postponed a final vote until next month.
"I recommend you give this one a really close look," he said. "There will be some concern from property owners regarding its use."
Mayor Laurel Prussing said she asked O'Neal to draft the ordinance.
"We try to make sure we can combat problems in every way possible to reduce crime and make neighborhoods safer," she said.
The proposed ordinance defines 15 criminal activities as nuisance activities, among them mob action, assault, battery, unlawful use of weapons, prostitution, sexual assault, public indecency, illegal gambling, arson and drug-related crimes.
If "a preponderance of the evidence" indicates that there have been two or more instances of nuisance activity within six months, the city could under the ordinance seek a fine of between $300 and $750 per day, per incident against the property owner, occupant or person in charge.
In hearing such a case, a judge could consider how serious the problem has been, the cost to the city in investigating and attempting to resolve it and how cooperative the property owner or other person has been, according to wording in the proposed ordinance.
O'Neal described the ordinance as "a very rough draft." He said it would give police another option when certain properties are generating an inordinate number of police calls.
"This ordinance attempts to put some of the onus on property owners," he said.
The city attorney said he helped draft a similar ordinance for the city of Aurora, where he formerly worked. O'Neal told aldermen that Aurora used its ordinance selectively against three or four chronic violators.
"We made property owners aware of this ordinance and let them know there were some fairly stiff fines available," he said.
The proposed ordinance would also give Urbana the authority to suspend the city rental license for a property for a period of 30 to 180 days.
Asked by Alderman Charlie Smyth what properties in Urbana might be subject to such a penalty, O'Neal declined to name names, but said "they involve apartment complexes and one or two bars as well."
Alderwoman Heather Stevenson asked about a scenario where a landlord was compelled to rent to a felon because of the city's human rights ordinance, which prohibits discrimination against someone based on their criminal record, and a situation where the felon then begins committing crimes.
"You are not required to keep someone who is perpetrating ongoing criminal activity," O'Neal responded. "You have grounds to evict them."
Champaign passed an aggravated-public-nuisances ordinance about a decade ago that targets property owners who allow their tenants to commit criminal acts, said Champaign City Attorney Fred Stavins._______________________________________________
Peace-discuss mailing list
Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/archive/peace-discuss/attachments/20081112/0f92dc39/attachment-0001.html