Did you know that apples are NOT the same thing as oranges? It’s true, and hopefully this example of things being dissimilar will help you understand the difference between a tax levy, which taxpayers get a say about, and EMERGENCY mills, which taxpayers have to just take. From the link (emphasis mine):
Mayor Andrea Davis on Monday will ask the City Council to levy two emergency mills to help cover expenses related to shelter. But she said the crisis services levy and the two emergency mills aren’t an equal comparison.
Among other things, she said the crisis levy sought $5 million annually to fund a wider range of programs, including addiction and mental health services, pretrial services and authorized camp sites, and it would have been a permanent levy on both city and county taxpayers.
In contrast, Davis said the two emergency mills represent a one-time expense and, if authorized, will go only to shelter services. She said the two-mill levy will reimburse the city around $414,000 for shelter costs.
If this was JUST about squeezing more money from your cavernous pockets, that would be bad enough, but the money will go to transforming parks into open-air drug markets, which some residents are strangely opposed to. Why? Don’t they know how much FUN people have in open air drug markets?
This map is the one released by the city and it shows all kinds of fun locations where you can poop, drink water, and distribute drugs for the cartel. Whoops, did I accidentally say the C word? Sorry, it’s important to depict ALL homeless people as helpless victims and NOT agents of organized crime, so please disregard my slip up.
Another article that caught my attention this morning positions City Councilor, Bob Campbell, against the three-headed beast of Municipal Court, The Excusinator. What does The Excusinator do? It makes excuses for homeless people, like the guy who “lost access” to court when he chose to move into the Johnson Street Shelter.
One of the things Bob needs to understand is that he does NOT have local legacy media on his side, as the framing of this Missoulian article clearly indicates (emphasis mine):
A Missoula city councilor used the threat of budget cuts on Wednesday to rail against a municipal court that he says has “thrown out any sort of accountability” for property crimes.
Councilor Bob Campbell, a retired city police officer who was elected to the 11-member council last November, introduced an amendment to cut $255,000 from the municipal court’s annual budget. But his explanation of the proposal quickly turned into an extended critique of the court’s operations under a trio of former public defenders elected the bench in 2021.
“We’ve totally thrown out any sort of accountability for those that commit criminal acts within the City of Missoula,” he said, referring specifically to theft and shoplifting charges. “I feel like we’re taking into account the needs of the offender over the needs of the safety of the public, quite frankly.”
What Municipal Court needs is an effigy of a homeless person, or someone that can stand-in as an effigy, to ritualistically destroy. That way the public can see how punitive the court still is. I wonder, who would make for a good ritual sacrifice? It has to be someone broadly despised, someone who doesn’t shut-up about the bad things that happen in a liberal utopia like Missoula. Do you know anyone who fits this description, Missoula?
One of the judges, Jake Coolidge (who had the pleasurable distinction of being MY volunteer when I was the Homeless Outreach Coordinator) displayed how butthurt Bob made him by referencing the separation of powers concept. Interesting.
Judge Jacob Coolidge has previously pushed back on Campbell’s suggestion that the municipal judges are failing to hold repeat offenders accountable. During a presentation of the proposed municipal court budget in July, he noted the judges are not asking for an increase in their budget for the next fiscal year.
He told the council Wednesday he feels strongly that the proposal violates the separation of powers between the city’s legislative and judicial branches by attempting to influence judicial policy with the threat of budget cuts.
“Mr. Campbell made it very clear that the motivation for cutting our funding is that he disagrees with our judicial philosophy and our approach to how we run a court,” Coolidge said. “When we ran, we ran to be elected to run a court. We were vocal about how we were going to run a court, and the people voted in accordance with that.”
Well, I understand how Jake feels because, like Jake, I FEEL STRONGLY that his court is violating my first amendment right to be a citizen journalist. I’d like to say more, but that probably wouldn’t be advisable.
Instead, I’ll shift to my daily request for financial support through Travis’ Impact Fund (TIF). But since I go months without any donations, I’ll be moving toward a revamp of this website soon, and there WILL be ads.
Thanks for reading!
