Private Parking in Webster Groves

TO: Webster Groves City Council
FR: Mad Bomber

I understand from recent news reports that the council is considering legislation which would dictate to property owners the number of maintained, functioning automobiles which may be legally parked on their property.

Just try it.

* * * * *

The above Memo was in response to a notice I saw in one of the small neighborhood newspapers this past fall; possibly this very one. The item stated that the Webster Groves City Council had "discussed a measure to limit the number of vehicles on residential property."

No - it can't be. Could they really be proposing to limit the number of vehicles I – we – you – can park on your own property?

No...not this administration. Not Mayor Terri Williams and this council who'd already danced with controversy. You'd think they know enough to keep a low profile for a while.

Though I'd just moved to Webster a few months ago, I'd heard of the alleged shenanigans of Williams and her bunch. I'd even written about it before, suggesting that in a democracy, people get the politicians they deserve; certainly, the ones they vote into office and, that said, the office-holder was entitled to the remainder of her elected term and that any move for a recount should be squelched.

Upon moving to Webster Groves, I was chided for such things as the need to "gift-wrap the trash." Indeed, after reading through some of the propaganda I'd picked up at city hall, I was surprised to learn, for example, that there is a limit to how high a backyard fence can be. (No more than four feet.) But as some clerical worker at Elm and Lockhart informed me, "in the end, it's for the overall good of the community."

For the overall good of the community, eh? Well, okay. I guess I can learn to appreciate such logic. After moving from an urban Chicago neighborhood, where my major concern was not fence height, but flying bullets, you'd think I'd be ready for a change. But news of the "car limit" ordinance was pushing things a bit far. That's when I issued the above Memo - the warning shot.

And then I sat back and waited.

* * * * *

In a city council meeting held on October 8th, an ordinance was passed that essentially limits how many vehicles one may own.

A few days later, I sent a note to City Hall requesting the minutes of each meeting in which this topic was discussed. I spoke to City Clerk Katie Nakazono who kindly explained that this mess started with "one resident complaint about cars parked in the street. So to correct this problem ... create a law which limits the number of cars which can be parked in a driveway.... it's really not something that's going to be enforced; only in response to calls."

Then, along with the information I requested, she answered my concern that the ordinance seemed to prohibit out-of-state licensed vehicles from parking on residential property, public or private, with a note which, with regards to out of town guests, the police "will investigate each situation cautiously, as there may be situations where out of state plates are acceptable in certain situations." That's your visiting relatives and mine, gang.

In reviewing the requested minutes Ms. Nakazono sent to me, I was astonished by what appeared to be a case of a lone squeaky wheel getting too much oil. Admittedly, I was also struck by the continuum of inane banter on the topic. Here are some pertinent highlights from the September 3, 1996, council meeting minutes:

- Police Chief (Gene) Young said there is no problem with unlicensed cars on the street. His officers can address that situation. If it is a licensed car, the driver can technically park anywhere in town.

- Councilmember (Richard) Gowan asked if there was a way to limit the number of unlicensed vehicles.

- (City Attorney) Mr. Starr said we don't want to get into court and have an ordinance that can't stand a chance.

- Councilmember (Steven) Beck said because of the discussion and the stipulations, the Bill was looking less and less appealing...

- Councilmember (Dotty) DeLassus said she would like to know if they have the right to limit the number of unlicensed vehicles on property.

Of course, in lieu of a new city law, the more simple solution would be to address each situation individually, as the Chief of Police claims will be done with out-of-state license plates that are going to be investigated.

* * * * *

While some folks collect stamps or antique furniture, some of us collect antique cars and they're just too big to store in the house and out of sight. (Besides, there's probably an ordinance prohibiting the operation of a carbon monoxide spewing device indoors.) If the city would let me build a fence high enough, (which they won't) nobody would be subjected to the sight of my own personal collection of Detroit iron in the event I opted to keep it at my home.

* * * * *

So what have we learned? That we have to sacrifice personal liberty for the sake of "the overall appearance of the community."

Indeed. But at what price do we enjoy the "appearance of the community?" Where is the line drawn? Should we continue to let the council draw the line for us? What's next? A "lights out" rule? A law prohibiting the running of a car motor only within certain hours of the day? Where will it end with this group? And when will this city council begin to focus on more important issues, beginning the sky-high taxes in Webster Groves.

Bob Dole: All or Nothing

Bruce Herschensohn, one of the last who opposed resignation, turned and said to no one in particular, "That's probably the real Nixon. It's a shame he couldn't have been like that more often."

That is from the eerie last pages of The Final Days, the controversial chronicle of Richard Nixon's demise. God knows if this actually happened considering that the book was written, for the most part, by that master dramatist, Bob Woodward, of Watergate/Washington Post/Deep Throat fame. Yet anyone who has seen video footage of Nixon's final farewell to his staff on the morning of his departure from the White House, can understand the sentiment reflected in this passage. For once in his life, the stiff, abrasive Nixon gave way to a gentler, kinder Nixon, to borrow a phrase. So it was deja vu when Bob Dole announced his resignation from the Senate - totally and completely - in order to spend his every waking hour pursuing the Holy Grail which has eluded him for so many years now....the Presidency - The White House - The Big Chair - The Whole Enchilada.

For once in his life, Bob Dole was human, too, and it couldn't have come at a better time.

He was emotional, yet never lost his composure as he did at Nixon's funeral. As Nixon himself said on the morning of August 9, 1974, in front of his staff, "it is a new beginning always." And this was one hell of a new beginning for Battling Bob; one of those high moments in the sport of politics that transcends party affiliation and leaves one relieved to be an American and have the opportunity to even witness such an event. These kinds of things don't happen too often in China, and they probably seldom happened in the days of Brezhnev. Dole was humbled (for a politician) and sounded, for a change, like he wanted to win for the sake of the American people, and not for himself.

It was also a brilliant strategic move; in considering what he must do to have a shot at winning this election, Dole broke free from the tainted chains of Newt Gingrich.

The tragedy here is that this brief seven minutes of some of the best political oration I've ever heard won't save Bob Dole was being beaten badly come November, as he is sent without grace and with no mercy into retirement. This country has already forgotten the Fighting Newt of a mere eighteen months ago; don't expect them to remember Battling Bob's Senate Resignation Speech, especially amid a fresh load of that infamous Dole rancor - which is sure to come - six months after the fact.

Jessica Dubroff Takes Flight

There are a whole lot of folks feeling sad about the fiery death of Jessica Dubroff, the 7-year-old "pilot" who was dealt a tragic blow by being genetically linked to a pair of history's biggest lamebrains - her parents. Much to the amazement of my more sensitive acquaintances, however, I'm not one of those who shed even crocodile tears when I'd heard that Jessica, her dimwit father, and her equally dimwitted flight instructor went down in flames this week when they attempted to put the girl in the record books as the youngest person to fly across the country.

No, I'm not sad. I'm enraged! Though not at the child. How could I be? She wasn't in on the decision! It's safe to say that, like most kids her age, she's not even capable of the reasoning required to make such a decision. I'm enraged at the selfishness that must exist in the evil souls of those who might make such a decision for her. It's safe to say that she had no idea of the danger her parents and her flying teacher were putting her in by making such a decision. However, there is a more important reason for being angry about this event.

* * * * *

Of course, the columnists are having a field day.

Some blamed the intense pressure put on kids by their peers ("society") as others - such as that bonehead from the University of Illinois at Chicago (Tolan, I think was the name) - questioned just how far parents should push their kids. Here's an answer: If we push them at all, limit this "encouragement" to the confines of keeping others safe. Right. How about blaming this tragedy on the intense neglect for mature decision making, vis-a-vis the general disregard for the physical society around us? (A disregard which more greatly permeates our society as never before.) What if she'd crashed in a residential area, taking out hundreds of other lives, as well?

I've been shocked that but one journalist - the Chicago Tribune's Clarence Page - mentioned this point, as they've all been occupied with the welfare of the little girl and her two stupid parents. To hell with the parents; I say it's too bad her mother wasn't up there with them!

* * * * *

I once heard a professional pilot state that he didn't worry much about amateur pilots - "they don't last too long."

Indeed, such commentary is only natural, considering how such an act by a mere child wrongly diminishes the accomplishments of professional pilots everywhere. Flying an airplane is not child’s play - it's serious business. I suppose this incident proves that not everyone can do it after all. And that Jessica Dubroff was not the "remarkable child" the world thought she was.