Some courts must have lower standards

I spent half of my Monday in Opelika – in federal court. What a waste of the government’s time that was.
I got one of those things everyone hopes to avoid in my mailbox about two weeks ago – it was a summons for jury duty. The government requested, I should say ordered, my presence at the federal courthouse. I wasn’t the only local person who had to attend. I would say there was an inordinate number of Phenix City and Russell County residents ordered to attend among the 90 potential jurors summonsed.
With 23 counties, and all the people within those counties, available for the federal court’s picking, there were at least 14 from this area – 15.5 percent of the 90 members of the jury pool available for random selection.
I did not hear one person when asked to give his or her name, spouses name, occupation and address say he or she was from Autauga, Butler, Chilton, Coffee, Covington, Crenshaw, Dale, Geneva, Houston, Lowndes, Montgomery, Pike or Randolph counties. That’s no one was from 13 of the 23 counties that make up the Middle District. Almost 57 percent of the available jury pool was not represented for Monday’s festivities. I sure hate that for them.
I guess none of the people in those 13 counties took the time to vote in the last presidential election. If I had known I would be “randomly” selected because I voted in the last presidential election , I would not have voted and would not been one of the people available to waste half a day in Opelika.
I did pay particular attention when one lady said her name was "Clark" and that she was "married to Mark Clark," but “not that Mark Clark” while pointing in my direction. The people in the room found some humor in her comments - the judge even laughed.
Along with my summons for jury duty was a questionnaire – six or seven pages of very intrusive questions – that had to be returned within five days or receipt of the summons. I answered the questions as truthfully as I could. Apparently, no one took the time to read the answers to my questionnaire. If anyone had, I am sure I would have received a letter from the court telling me to stay away, very far away.
I know if I were selecting a jury, I would not pick me.
After everyone told who they and their spouses were, the judge had the lawyers introduce themselves. And then the defendants were introduced. Then everyone heard about the three – yes, only three – cases that were to be tried. I can’t tell you anything about that because the judge, the Honorable Myron Thompson, said I could not discuss the cases.
Judge Thompson does not appear to be as old as you would think he would be. He was placed in the federal court system by former President Jimmy Carter, but I will not hold that against him – Judge Thompson that is. And my first impression of the judge was not what I expected. To tell the truth, I have never read a single newspaper article that showed him in a favorable light. I found Judge Thompson to be quite affable. Like I said, that was my first impression and that could change with time.
After a five-minute restroom break and another break that was supposed to be used to question “in private” about 15 jurors about their answers to questions regarding one of the cases, everyone re-entered the courtroom. Within two minutes, the first jury was selected. The court clerk called out the names of those selected and instructed them to take a seat in the jury box. Guess who was selected – me. How could they have made such an error in judgment?
I have been called to serve in the past, in local courts, and have always been dismissed from service. Most judges and lawyers do not want anyone connected with newspapers serving as jurors. I fully support their feelings. Apparently, federal courts do not set their standards as high.
I have always said it is important for people to serve when called to duty. I now have to back up my words with actions. I have to serve on the federal jury because I was selected, I guess, to serve. I have doubts about the process used in the selection process and the people who did the selecting. I also cannot forget the words of the comedian Norm Crosby who said, “When you go into court, you are putting your fate into the hands of 12 people who weren’t smart enough to get out of jury duty.”
Somehow, I feel that I resemble that remark.

Public hearing was a lonely experience

Ludlow Porch was right when he said, “We’re all in this alone.”

That’s exactly how I felt Monday evening when I attended the public hearing at the Central Activity Center concerning the possible compensation increase for the Phenix City Council – very alone. There were very few citizens in attendance – less than 30 - and several of those citizens did not live in Phenix City.

Where were you?

State Representative Lesley Vance and State Senator Ted Little gave their time to allow you to give your input on the matter. You didn’t. You weren’t there.

“You would think that with all the letters and telephone calls I received there would have been a better turnout,” observed Rep. Vance.

Yep, I agree.

All four of our city council members were there – Jimmy Wetzel, Max Wilkes, Michelle Walker and Arthur Sumbry. Mayor Sonny Coulter was not. Each of the city council members gave his or her opinion on the matter. The mayor did not, but then like I said, he was not there.

I would have to say the most vocal of the citizens in attendance were opposed to the proposed increase of the compensation for the city council and mayor. They said so several times. There was somewhat of a spirited debate over the issue.

I put in my two-cents worth – that would be about a quarter’s worth when adjusted for inflation. Some might say I gave more than that, but not really. I really didn’t. I simply spoke my piece.

Want to know what that was?

Well, I oppose an immediate increase of the compensation package to a level equal to that of the Russell County Commission as stated in the bill that will undoubtedly be introduced during the current session of the state legislature by Rep. Vance, at the city council’s and mayor’s request. I do not, however, oppose an increase to the compensation the local governing body receives. Heck, it has not changed since 2000 when the compensation was increased to $800 per month for council members and to $1,000 per month for the mayor. I support no change to the city charter without a vote of the people on the matter in question.

Increasing that amount to $1,833.33 per month for council members – based on an annual salary of $22,000 – and to $2,916.87 per month for the mayor – based on an annual salary of $35,000 – seems a little too much too quickly. I proposed an increase of 43.1 percent for each of the council members and for the mayor which is based on the increase of the Consumer Price Index since the last increase in compensation for the governing body members in 2000. And, I think that amount should be tied to the annual increase in the CPI until it reaches a predetermined cap – say, the salary received by the Russell County Commission.

Using the figures I suggested, the council members would receive $1,144.80 per month. The mayor would receive $1,431 per month. That’s higher than the salaries received by some full-time city workers. This suggested increase would take effect when the next council and mayor take office in 2012. I do not support granting a “patch” with an expense account until then, especially one that does not require the council members and mayor to account for the money they would receive from an expense account.

I am glad I received some support, though limited, for the idea. I did not expect any swell of support for my suggestion. There weren’t enough people in attendance to cause a swell.

Some said the increase in compensation was a matter of “fairness.” Only one council member admitted he wanted a raise. The others said they wanted to do what was “fair,” “right” and “in the interest” of future councils. State law requires any increase in compensation for the council and mayor must be approved by the municipal governing body at least six months prior to the date of the next election – for us, it is six months prior to September 2012. The action the current council is proposing meets that requirement with plenty of time to spare.

I think the council members attending the public hearing made their feelings clear. Each said an increase in compensation would be welcomed, but it is not the reason he or she chose to seek office. Each said he or she was aware of the compensation he or she would receive when he or she decided to seek office and that his or her desire to serve would not change whether an increase was forthcoming or not. For that, we can all be thankful.

If money is the reason to seek office, then it is best to find another source of revenue for your pockets and not masquerade as servants of the people. The people, even the ones that did not attend Monday’s hearing, do not like that very much.

 

SB 101: A law to stop exposure

I must take time today to give a big “thank you” to senators Rodger Smitherman and Linda Coleman of Jefferson County for making sure the Alabama legislature does not lose focus of what is really important as this year’s session begins. Thank you, thank you, thank you so very much.

The presentation and passage of Senate Bill 101 is without a doubt the most important piece of legislation considered to help with the education of our children in the past century. Yes, it is so important to see that this piece of legislation reaches the floor of the Senate for a vote and then passed along to the state’s House of Representatives for consideration as quickly as possible. 

Sen. Smitherman and Sen. Coleman have taken the initiative to take action and I, for one, am proud to lend my support for their bill.

Oh, you do not know what Senate Bill 101 is about? I’m sorry. I should have explained at the beginning. Sens. Smitherman and Coleman are proposing legislation to make it illegal for students in our public education system, elementary through high school, to expose under britches intended to cover private parts. See? I told you this is important stuff they are dealing with in Montgomery. 

We must provide our children a safe and healthy environment for learning. Having to sit and look at someone’s nasty skid-marked under drawers is unsafe for our eyesight and unhealthy I’m sure. It is just plain sickening. No one should be exposed to such.

According to Dr. Eugene White, the superintendent of the Indianapolis school system and a former Phenix City native, we have raised a whole generation of children who have no idea how to properly use a belt. I have to agree. 

The legislation proposed by the senators will alleviate this problem. It will “prohibit a student enrolled in a public elementary through high school from intentionally wearing in any manner a garment that would display or expose his or her underwear that is intended to cover the private parts of the person while the student is in attendance at the school; and to provide for penalties.” Wow, imagine that. Students will be required to dress properly while in school and not be a distraction to the other students who may wish to spend their time in school learning.

If students fail to follow the law, if passed, they will face penalties. For the first offense, students will be given a verbal warning by the school principal and the principal shall inform the parents of the student by telephone call or other method of warning. For the second offense, students shall be suspended from regular school and placed in an in-school alternative program for three days and the parents shall be informed by telephone and sent a written letter. A third offense will result in the student being suspended and placed in an in-school alternative program for 10 days and the principal shall meet with the parents of the student. When a student violates the law for a fourth time, the student shall be suspended from all classes of instruction on public school grounds and school-sponsored activities except as authorized by the principal for a period not to exceed 10 days and remanded to the custody of his or her parents with specific homework assignments to be completed. Wow, this is tough stuff.

Forget about our state’s failing economy that is sagging so low that we may not be able to fund the state’s public education programs in the future. Forget that we may not be able to pay teachers and build schools to educate our children. Forget that without principals, teachers and public schools we will have no place and no one to enforce this new law. That would mean parents, heaven forbid, would have to teach their own children how to dress properly.

In case that happens . . . the underwear goes underneath the clothes being worn and the belt goes through the loops around the waistband of the pants or skirt with the buckle ending up in the front when you finish. If that does not work, use suspenders or duct tape. It is so sad to think we might have to enact a law for something people should have been taught before they entered our public school system. But, thank goodness, our government has the time to waste handling this for us.