Following an exposé chronicling Charlottesville City’s profligate misspending, Albemarle County is the target of the “red pen 2” report—suggestions that if followed would save County taxpayers more than $14M this year alone. While not exhaustive, these first-round recommendations ultimately could result in a real estate tax rate reduction of .09, dropping the proposed rate per $100 of assessed value from .762 to .672.

While Albemarle County has responded to “the new economic reality” with significantly more verity than has Charlottesville City, there is much work to be done on the county budget and the appurtenant—and largely staff-driven— budgeting process. Unfortunately, as is the case in Charlottesville, elected officials are reluctant to suggest or even support commonsense proposals to reign-in expenditures. The concept of limited government is lost amongst grandiose, big-government visions and the accompanying community accolades often received by elected benefactors of taxpayer funds. Palatial public buildings, overly compensated government employees (salary and benefits), and handouts to politically favored “charities” show great opportunity for spending reform in Albemarle County.

The savings set forth and the resulting rate-drop could net the average Albemarle County homeowner $251 per year in reduced real estate taxation and at the same time deposit an additional $14M into the local economy. In reality, such changes are practically inconceivable given the lack of courage, foresight, and leadership shown in previous spending decisions ordained by Albemarle County’s elected and appointed officials.

(H/T to Steven Latimer for providing the red pen, and to Carole Thorpe for covering Albemarle County’s $36 paper budget fee.)

Review the Righteous Red Pen 2 Budget Analysis and Proposed Savings for Albemarle County:

The latest pictures, taken in January and February by Schilling Show contributor Jorge Brooks, Jr., show cars lining yellow-curbed emergency-vehicle access areas, blocking clearly marked fire lanes, and parking adjacent to fire hydrants on AHS grounds during various sports-related events. One picture displays an official Albemarle County Fire Command vehicle parked amidst other transgressors in a signed NO PARKING zone.

Responding to our previous coverage of these ongoing offenses, Albemarle County Schools’ Communications Officer, Phil Giaramita, indicated that AHS principal Jay Thomas had been notified of the problem, as had the local fire marshal. Apparently, the designated recipients in school and county administration did not receive the message clearly as these alarming parking illegalities continue.

See the latest parking violations at Albemarle High School:

[Show as slideshow]

[View with PicLens]

Circumstance saw me without my vehicle for a few days. Deciding to explore the alternatives, I chose to utilize the local transit system, known as CAT, the Charlottesville Area Transit System. I was a far younger man when I last utilized a transit system, in a city of much greater population. The system runs well, was on time, and I found the various points of transfer with other busses, in order to get across town, to be relatively easy. However, what I discovered while on board these busses has forced me to ask a serious question. How can a city municipal government, in the 21^st century, which receives federal funding, be allowed to deny to its employees some of the most simple and basic rights guaranteed to workers by the EEOC and the Department of Labor?

As I was making my travels, I overheard conversations between veteran drivers and those who were apparently being trained. What I heard was incredibly unbelievable. It seems that those individuals behind the wheel, with whom we entrust our lives and safety each and every time we step aboard a CAT bus, are denied the simple ability of having a break in their shift, as well as being denied an allotted time to even eat lunch. All these years, as I have witnessed these busses carrying on around town, I like everyone else no doubt, took for granted that those drivers were extended the same basic privileges as every other worker in the 21^st century. But we would all be wrong. While I can appreciate, from a safety point of view, the disallowance of cell phone and personal audio equipment use, as well as not being allowed to eat or drink while driving, I cannot agree to the other policy. That is the one that does not build into the work schedule of the drivers, an established period of down time, such as a fifteen-minute break in the morning and afternoon, as well as an established period of time that allows the driver to eat a meal.

I made it a point to pay greater attention to the drivers, and indeed, the schedules are so constrictive, that many barely have time to step off the bus to take care of simple basic human bodily functions, much less the luxury of actually eating or drinking.

I can not help but be curious as to the level of Council involvement in CAT transit affairs. Does council reach down into the administrative infrastructure, or does it simply hire folks such as Judy Mueller and trust in their leadership? I do not know how involved City Council currently is involved, but if they are highly engaged I can not help but be curious as to why Council members would abuse CAT employees, forcing them to work under conditions that not even an inmate at the Charlottesville-Albemarle Regional Jail would be legally required work under.

According to one of the drivers, breaks and lunches used to be extended to operators. Indeed, this driver said that they learned all of the routes by having to drive almost every one, as they filled in for the driver at lunch and at breaks. So what happened? How did the policy get eradicated? How can the CAT system and the city, which receives federal funding and it is my understanding, some state funding, not obey the law regarding treatment of city employees? As a taxpaying citizen, I am extremely uncomfortable in having any employee treated in this fashion, in my name.

One driver stated that there is supposedly a provision in the law that does not extend the lunch/break provisions for transit workers. However, he has never seen it in writing, nor does he know the statute number. So, I have to wonder if it really exists.

From simply a safety point of view, it is unbelievable to me that we can force a person to stay in a seat for up to ten hours, maybe more, and not get a chance to partake of nutrition and hydration. Answers need to be provided to these actions, along with a legally sound defense of same.

I would like to see Judy Mueller and all of her administrative staff not eat or drink from the time the go to work, until they get off work, plus two to three hours—the shift time of some drivers. I’ll bet that they could not do it.

There are many facets of the recent debacle associated with the recent “Occupy Charlottesville” which will no doubt be a matter of prescient debate for many weeks and months to follow. As it should be. However, I feel that there is core principle which has been overlooked, yet it is the very essence of what America is all about. It is an intricate portion of the ideological rock upon which this nation was founded, and as such, without it, our constitution can not and will not survive.

America is not simply a geographical location. It is not a mere happenstance of mountains and rivers and other natural resources. Beyond all of that, America is as much a place in one’s heart and mind, as it is a land that exists between Canada and South America. Given the right education and understanding of the history and philosophy of our founding fathers, I dare say a group could fly to the moon or Mars, and rightfully establish America anywhere. What is the essence of this ideal called America? It is in its respect for the rule of law. Previously, the citizens of America could trust that, just as the statue indicates, justice is blind as she holds the scales in balance. However, when the rule of law is no longer upheld, then the trust of the public is destroyed. With the erosion of that trust, goes the bedrock in which the pillars of our republic have been inserted.

Our founding fathers recognized the importance of good laws, but even more so, they were cognizant that good laws were preferable, but good men were better. This is where the notion of the Oath of Office came into being. Not just federal office’s, but for all offices. From the president down to the local dogcatcher. Why? Because our founding fathers knew that for our republic to survive, its officers must, for the good of “WE THE PEOPLE” pledge their allegiance to the constitution, or rather “The Law of the Land.”

Therein lies what causes me concern in the “Occupy Charlottesville” incident. I am not going to attempt to dissect the reasoning of the OC members, or whether or not you are in agreement with their stance. What I do take issue with, is the manner in which they were allowed to, for a time, break the law. What causes alarm is the capricious manner in which political bodies selectively choose to enforce regulations already on the books. What is an oath? An oath is a statement of fact or a promise calling upon something or someone that the oath maker considers sacred, usually God, as a witness to the binding nature of the promise or the truth of the statement of fact. To swear is to take an oath, to make a solemn vow. The essence of a divine oath is an invocation of divine agency to be a guarantor of the oath taker’s own honesty and integrity in a matter. By implication, this invokes divine displeasure if the oath taker fails in their sworn duties. It therefore implies greater care than usual in the act of the performance of one’s duty.

These days, the importance of law enforcement can not be underestimated. Police officers take risks and suffer inconveniences to protect the lives, defend civil liberties, secure the safety of fellow citizens, and they endure such risks and tolerate such inconveniences on behalf of strangers. Consequently, police work is one of the more noble and selfless occupations in society. Making a difference in the quality of life is an opportunity that policing provides, and few other professions can offer. A public affirmation of adhering to an Oath of Honor is a powerful vehicle demonstrating ethical standards. The following is the   Law Enforcement Oath of Honor, and is generally utilized and accepted by police departments throughout the United States. It reads as follows:

On my honor,
I will never betray my badge,
my integrity, my character,
or the public trust.
I will always have
the courage to hold myself
and others accountable for our actions.
I will always uphold the constitution
my community and the agency I serve.

So what is my point? When city council refused to do their job, and ordered the police NOT to fulfill their duty, the police chief should have ignored this order, for it was not constitutional. It is the duty of the police to enforce and execute the law as it currently exists! Perhaps city council sympathized with the plight of the protestors. Perhaps some even firmly believed, erroneously, in the rightness of their cause. It matters not. City council is elected to uphold the laws of the community. Now, perhaps they want to change those laws. Fine. But do so by following the rules of proper legislation. And if city council can not or will not fulfill their constitutional duties, then the checks and balances system falls into place.

So, how should have this recent scenario played out, if we had individuals in authority who had the grit to fulfill their responsibilities? When Occupy Charlottesville initially commenced breaking the law, the Charlottesville Police Department should have executed the law as it was currently on the books, and expelled them from the park utilizing whatever means necessary. When the police department was instructed to violate their sworn duties to the community and to the rule of law by council, the police department should have ignored the order and performed their duties. If council wanted to allow the activities that ultimately ensued, then an emergency council session should have been held, and the current rules and regulations amended in the proper legislative order!! The OC individuals should have been disallowed presence in Lee Park, or any other park, until city council, having taken the proper steps and in the proper order, effects a publically approved change to policy regarding to the rules and regulations of public parks.

Rules and laws are given to us in order to prevent chaos and to allow domestic tranquility. They are meant not to hold us back, but to establish order to support our lives and make them better. I recall the example of a kite. A father and son went kite flying on a windy day. The wind was strong, and soon the kite soared higher and higher. Within just a short while, they had let out all their line, and the kite was just a small dot in the sky. The boy, caught up in the excitement of flying the kite, asked his dad, “Isn’t the string holding the kite down? If we let go of the string, will the kite not go even higher?” To this the dad replied. “No, it’s just the opposite. It is the string that holds the kite up. If we let go of the string, the kite would fall to the ground and be forever lost.”

Sometimes we see rules and laws in the same manner. Some think that they hold us back, when in truth, they are the very thing that holds our society up. We have a free society because of these rules and laws, and because people obey and respect these laws. These laws are in place and are enforced to protect the people. A great danger is to think that disobeying the laws will give us more freedom. Instead, it is through disobedience that innocent people are hurt and suffer. When our governing officials fail to properly represent and uphold the law, then the last line of defense against societal chaos rests in the police. When they choose to wrongly place their allegiance to an individual, or group of individuals who are governing in error, rather than following the rules set forth by our forefathers, they start to cut the cord of trust in the flight of this kite we know as our republic. How many more cuts of trust, such as the recent OC incident, can this delicate cord of order withstand, before we too see our republic fall and be lost forever? How long can we violate the constitution, before we successfully destroy it? I fear we will soon have the answer.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=OfziHvdRMag

Facing eviction from their trashed Lee Park encampment, the true character of Occupy Charlottesville (OC) was revealed during a November 30, late night police action to liberate the park.

City Manager (and Director of Public Safety), Maurice Jones, in conjunction with Charlottesville Mayor Dave Norris, ordered the group dislocated, after previously ordering police to disregard the law and allow OC to violate permit and curfew statutes.

In a November 2 press release, Occupiers promised the greater community that theirs was a peaceful movement—intent only on calling attention to the excesses of structured capitalism:

The purpose of this three-week protest is to prove to ourselves and to the world that peaceful, abundant community is possible without corporate sponsorship, huge budgets, or leaders.” [emphasis added]

OC’s aggressive actions and violent invective of November 30 belie several previous group statements regarding the nature of the local Occupy movement.

Unearthed in this shocking audio/video compilation are Occupy Charlottesville’s:

• Blatant sexism—the vicious verbal assault on a female police officer
• Anti-police obloquy—with obvious intent to provoke
• Disrespect for the rule of law—refusing to obey lawful orders to disperse
• Extremely vile language—used liberally throughout, even in the presence of young children
• Verbal violence directed toward government officials—“Dave F#&%ing Norris”

The unmerited leniency and institutional political favoritism shown toward Occupy Charlottesville by naïve, immature city officials has been met with dangerously vehement hostility. This Marxist movement—born of lawlessness—predictably has degenerated into base depravity and utter chaos.

As predicted by The Schilling Show yesterday, OC members planned to move their makeshift tent city to from Charlottesville’s Lee Park—where the protest has resided since October—to George Rogers Clark Park on the Corner, which apparently rests on University grounds.

An open letter to OC from UVa Chief Operating Officer, Michael Strine, makes it clear that the University will not tolerate violation of their property and threatens potential Occupiers with citation and prosecution. A University Police car stationed at the Clark site this afternoon shows that UVa means business.

Occupier Jon Grainger, in today’s Daily Progress said OC’s fallback location is the “free speech wall” on Charlottesville’s downtown mall, directly in front of City Hall—a site recommended by John Whitehead of the Rutherford Institute.

Downtown merchants, at the height of their Christmas selling season, certainly would take issue with such relocation. In this event, how will Charlottesville’s invertebrate, incompetent City Fathers respond, now having painted themselves into a very tight Corner?

Read Michael Strine’s open letter to Occupy Charlottesville:

November 30, 2011

 

Dear Members of Occupy Charlottesville:

We understand from news reports last night that members of your group may intend to establish an indefinite encampment at the University of Virginia.  By way of this open letter to your membership, we are providing notice to you as soon as reasonably practicable that such an encampment will not be permitted on the University’s Grounds.

While the University cherishes and protects robust exercise of the rights protected by the First Amendment, the University must continue to fulfill its core functions of education and patient care.  The erection of camping structures on the University’s Grounds would impair our mission by diverting necessary resources from our core functions.  Such an encampment also would create significant health, hygiene, and safety problems for the University community and the citizens we serve.  Quite simply, the University is not a campground and is not set up to support an indefinite encampment.

By providing this notice to you in advance, we are hopeful that you can plan accordingly.  The University will take enforcement action to prevent the attempted establishment of an encampment on University property including issuing Trespass Notices and the subsequent enforcement of such notices, if necessary.  We also remind any of your membership who previously may have been issued Trespass Notices for prior conduct on University Grounds that such notices continue to remain in full force and effect and will be enforced.

Thank you for your anticipated cooperation.

Sincerely,

 

Michael Strine

Executive Vice President and
Chief Operating Officer

Growing pressure from the North Downtown Residents Association and frustrated downtown businesses and merchants—all of whom are tired of the Occupation’s negative impact on their lives and livelihoods—finally has forced reluctant Charlottesville City Councilors to make a decision on the future of Lee Park. In a November 28 Daily Progress article, Mayor Dave Norris stated that permission for a 24/7 encampment will end soon.

Unwilling to take a public vote on the subject of the ongoing Occupation, City Council is desperately seeking a painless exit from their self-created political quagmire. McIntire Park has been suggested as a new, less offensive commorancy, but on their own web site, Occupiers have expressed concern that the location:

1. Does not offer free wi-fi
2. Is not pedestrian friendly
3. Is too far from soup kitchens
4. Does not fit the Constitutional definition of a public forum

With such backlash against McIntire, city administrators clandestinely have proposed relocating the Occupiers to the George Rogers Clark (GRC) statue site, adjacent to the University of Virginia and the Corner.

City Hall officials have contacted management at the Red Roof Inn—located in the immediate vicinity of the alternate destination—to alert them to the prospect of new “neighbors” in the ‘hood. Red Roof management has expressed concern over potential crime and sanitation issues, as well as negative business impacts, should the Occupation migrate to the Corner.

The entitled Occupiers have not wholly embraced the notion of transposition from Lee Park against their collective will, commenting on the proposition:

• We should make a statement that we will decide if/where to move in the future.
• Mayor says that we ARE leaving, that’s not a decision we’ve come to yet.
• The issue is not whether or not we can occupy parks. That has been agreed on at City Council. The issue is which park. Lee Park is the best and that’s why we chose it. Lets dig in our heels here!

Further complicating the issue is a November 28 press release from the Rutherford Institute in the form of an open letter to Charlottesville Mayor Dave Norris. Rutherford founder and president, John Whitehead, suggests that any location not within a “reasonable distance” from Charlottesville City Hall is unacceptable for the purpose of continued “free speech” as currently being exercised by Occupy Charlottesville. He proffers that Occupiers relocate to the First Amendment Plaza, which stands immediately in front of Charlottesville City Hall:

First, the city should encourage protesters to make full use of the space which is presently home to the First Amendment Plaza. In light of the fact that the First Amendment monument, which is situated in the area outside City Hall, includes a podium “intended to serve as a contemporary soapbox from which individuals may address both planned and impromptu public gatherings,” this would seem to be a natural place for individuals wanting to petition their government for a redress of grievances. If the city chooses to look elsewhere, it should keep in mind that any such forum must be within a reasonable distance of City Hall so as to ensure the visibility of any potential protestors. To place such a forum away from the seat of government would effectively nullify the space’s purpose. To this end, we have concerns about McIntire Park as a proposed venue.

So, what is a Marxist Mayor to do?

Let the Occupiers stay in Lee Park and risk further political alienation of the neighbors? Not a chance.

Accept Rutherford’s recommendation for a Downtown Mall “free speech” Occupation marathon? Over the merchants’ dead bodies, especially at Christmastime.

Relocate the Occupiers to another park site within city limits? Possibly; but no real purpose is served by moving elsewhere legal, social, and sanitation problems inherent in the Occupation—a temporary fix, at best.

Norris and his spineless Keystone Kouncilors have capitulated to Occupiers’ lawlessness by rewarding them with unprecedented political and financial favoritism and by mollycoddling them with undeserved gratuity. In remunerating lawbreakers with misplaced charity, councilors have created a dangerously false expectation of continued leniency—a mirage that sadly may vanish in a haze of pepper spray should push come to shove.

After attending a few sporting events at Albemarle High School (AHS) this fall and parking in the main lot in front of the building, I noted that during many events, driveways leading back to the athletic fields were filled up with illegally parked cars—many stationed directly within clearly marked handicapped parking spaces and designated emergency fire lanes.

Having heard about how AHS rigorously enforces certain rules—but not others—concerning guests’ use of school grounds, I became concerned as to what would happen if a fire broke out in the eastern end of the AHS main building during one of these sporting events. Wouldn’t fire trucks have difficulty timely accessing critical fire hydrant locations blocked by these illegally parked cars?  Wouldn’t rescue vehicles be delayed in providing life-saving services by having to navigate artificially narrowed drives and wheel stretchers in-between the tightly parked automobiles?

Further, I wondered, why does AHS allow non-handicapped people to illegally park in assigned handicapped zones?  What happens to students, their parents and guests who actually are handicapped? Where are they to park?

I was going to contact AHS directly to ask these questions, until, after taking these pictures, I saw both an Albemarle Police Department (APD) vehicle and an AHS Maintenance Department vehicle parked in the immediate vicinity during a time of multiple and obvious infractions. It is clear to me that both the APD and AHS know exactly what is going on, but for some reason choose to ignore these serious violations.

I think this situation is outrageous, especially given the fact that AHS vigorously enforces other, less important “rules” concerning guests utilizing school property.

Taxpayers, athletic participants, handicapped individuals, families, and fire/rescue personnel all are being cheated by Albemarle County’s lax parking enforcement policies. Who will pay the price in the event of a catastrophic fire or other emergency at Albemarle High School?

Administrators, Supervisors, School Board members, police, coaches and other authority figures: you are on notice! Do not wait for tragedy in order to act. Enforce your laws equally and fairly, and there will be no regrets.

[Show as slideshow]

[View with PicLens]

27% live in poverty
One-party tyranny
Low paying jobs
Occupy Cville mobs
Cost of living through the roof
Power elite, arrogant and aloof

World Class, my a$$

Wasteful art in place
Disrespect for the black race
Public housing disgrace

World Class, my a$$

Former mayor beats his wife
Lacrosse player takes a life
Feel good, checkbook philanthropy
Blood money from Albemarle County

World Class, my a$$

Sister cities number three
Self-satisfied as can be
Self-designated “World Class” city
City-County enmity
$7 million to re-brick the Mall
Christmas bonuses for all

World Class, my a$$

School system failing AYP stings
Tablets forced on parents with costly strings
Millions wasted to reconfigure schools
School board is ship of fools

World Class, my a$$

UVA, arrogance beyond compare
Pay up or sit elsewhere
Health System doesn’t care
Serpentine walls
Know-it-alls

World Class, my a$$

Landmark eyesore
Bureaucrats spending galore
City Manager over his head
Good thing Mr. Jefferson is dead

World Class, my a$$

• Mr. Jones gave a verbal directive to city police to refrain from enforcing the curfew law in Lee Park before OC had applied for its permit.
• Councilor Kristin Szakos queried at the October 17 City Council meeting; “Is there a port-a-potty at Lee Park? Is that something we would be willing to provide or find a source for?” Of course, the “we” footing the bill would be city taxpayers for a rental fee and/or staff salaried time to search for a source.
• The $25.00 application fee and subsequent re-application fees were waived.
• An unprecedented 30-day permit extension without the need to re-file was granted.
• OC has been allowed to serve meals to the public without the required Temporary Food Permit. There is no standard for food safety (adequate refrigeration, storage, sanitary conditions).
• The required $1 million liability insurance policy was not provided by OC and they have been inhabiting the park for over two weeks without coverage. Will city taxpayers be liable for damages if someone brings a successful lawsuit against the City?
• OC has had fires burning in Lee Park with no fire extinguisher or water hose available nearby in case of emergency, but only one or two gallon-sized plastic jugs of water. Curiously, the Albemarle County Historical Society’s request to have a fire as part of its annual Spirit Walk has been denied every year since 2006.
• There have been multiple disturbances and arrests — including an incident on November 1 involving three homeless men and two juvenile girls in their company that were heavily intoxicated (the minors were transported to UVA hospital for treatment and observation), and an incident on November 5 where another homeless man was arrested and charged with attempted arson after pouring lighter fluid on a tent following a fight.
• Police discovered a shanty structure built in violation of the terms of the permit.
• A “Camp Needs” sign posted in the encampment contained a requested donation of 100 ‘rape whistles’. As reported by Reuters, OC organizer Zac Fabian stated that some females expressed concern for their safety due to the camp’s open nature. Fabian said; “Safety is an issue at night when we have every drunk person in the area strolling by and threatening to start fights or burn down tents. We’re worried that it could turn into something more serious.”

And so is the Jefferson Area Tea Party.

And so should all citizens who know that once the Rule of Law is trampled, conditions quickly deteriorate and the safety of everyone is put in jeopardy. The police department has been put in an impossible situation wherein they have no reliable way of identifying Occupiers by sight from others who are not in the park as part of the protest. How are they supposed to do their job to keep everyone safe and be fair at the same time? And will Maurice Jones choose again at some point to issue another non-emergency directive to the police?

The JATP rebukes the politically single-minded City Council for creating an unsafe situation for the purpose of indulging its professed political agenda.

The activists of Occupy Charlottesville are entitled to their right of free speech – but that right does not include suspension of ordinances and public safety measures to enable their specific style of demonstration. In our opinion, City Council’s actions exemplify political favoritism and irresponsible governance.

In an October 24 Special Event Application, group representative, Bailee E. Hampton, stated in her own writing that “there is no official food distribution” at the demonstration.

Good thing, because if there was, the Application informs the applicant:

“A Temporary Food Permit will be required by the State Health Department (Thomas Jefferson Health District) located on Rose Hill Drive…”

In addition, a Special Events Certificate of Approval issued to OC by the City of Charlottesville includes the following language regarding food:

TEMPORARY FOOD PERMIT

No food or food items may be distributed or provided to participants without obtaining a Temporary Food Permit from the Thomas Jefferson Health District–Environmental Services Division. This is a State requirement. Food permits must be posted for public view unless otherwise requested by State Health Department.

Yet, a November 2 Occupy Charlottesville press release entitled “OCCUPY CHARLOTTESVILLE SEEKS HELP FROM COMMUNITY” directly contradicts the City’s conditional terms of Occupancy:

We would like to formally invite the public to attend our Occupation, and we challenge those who seek to divide the bottom 99% to come spend even one night in the cold with us. There is an especial need for social workers, teachers, security volunteers, counselors of all kinds, cooks, cleaners, campers and anyone seeking solidarity, community or camaraderie. We would like to welcome questions and comments in person at our camp, and are happy to engage in polite discussion at any hour. Please come in a spirit of nonviolence and respect, and bring your friends. There is free food and beverage available to anyone, as well as coats and blankets, books and tarps. All are welcome.  [Emphasis added]

A recent picture of the encampment’s open “kitchen” area (see below) shows what appear to be fresh bananas and bagels amidst prepackaged foods and other food supplies, openly displayed and seemingly placed for the taking. Local Health Department officials confirm that as of yesterday, no Temporary Food Permit had been issued to Occupy Charlottesville.

OC protest organizer, Evan Knappenberger, stated in a November 3 Daily Progress story that the group is a respecter of law:

“We believe in law and order,” Knappenberger said, explaining that both the city and the Occupy Charlottesville movement feel strongly about keeping Lee Park both safe and clean.

If so, where is the State-mandated Temporary Food Permit for Occupy Charlottesville’s self-described food preparation and distribution services?

If not, where is the Thomas Jefferson Health District and where is equal protection under the law?

Occupy Charlottesville’s illegal commandeering of Lee Park may have been given a pass by politically sympathetic City Hall Marxists, but State forgiveness of health-related transgressions is much less likely—especially considering the open and flagrant nature of continuing OC violations.

[Show as slideshow]

[View with PicLens]

An October 24 “Indemnity Release” and “Special Event Application” signed by Occupy Charlottesville representative, Bailee Elizabeth Hampton, definitively states that there will be no alcoholic beverages involved in this activity and that:

“We are not allowing alcohol or other substances”

In addition to ongoing “substance” abuse issues, personal safety of participants is of great concern. Today, Occupiers are asking, through a centrally posted “Camp Needs” bulletin board, for donation of 100 “rape whisles” [sic]. Connection between the arrests and the request is unclear, but the surprisingly frank appeal certainly signals a looming sense of danger in the Occupy encampment.

Prior to OC’s sanctioned occupation of Lee Park, Charlottesville City Council members lauded the organization as peaceful and well mannered. Public requests for “rape whisles,” however, seem incongruous with initial characterizations of Occupy Charlottesville, and perhaps belie the city’s stated trust in the Occupiers to “self-police.”

See Occupy Charlottesville’s “Rape Whistles” wanted posting: