OK - It's clear as mud.
Can you say weeks of run around!
When you merge Business with Government to the point that you can't tell the difference between the two that is the definition of Fascism.
Guess what kinda government Tempe has?
The Tempe Police gave me a map that has the Centerpoint Development boundries. This is only useful as a property line guide. It shows that public property is from "building face to building face" on Mill Ave and that the developer claims private property rights to most of the land and buildings N. of University, S. of 5th st, W. of Mill & E. of Ash Ave.
6th st West of Mill is public for now.
Here is the confusion. I have had long talks with A man named Carlos (aid to the Tempe Mayor 480-350-8110), Sgt. Lind Public Relations for the City of Tempe Police Department 480-350-8374, Rod Keeling (head of the DTC - Downtown Tempe Community ? 480-921-2300).
I have yet to receive calls back from Kristian Hecht (480-350-5182) from the City of Tempe's Community Service Parks & Rec. that is in charge of event permiting and from what Mr. Keeling said, also the records that show the quick deed to Centerpoint of the land.
Mr. Keeling is the guy that will be our lead man to take on I feel. He is the point man for the guys behind the curtain and the City of Tempe. So far this is my understanding of the situation. The City of Tempe has its hands in almost every large development in the City of Tempe. The method that was used for the Centerpoint Development was that the city retained ownership of the land so that property taxes would not have to be paid (I say just do away with property taxes). After 8 years the land was quick deeded to the Centerpoint development and thus became private property (and they say NO guns allowed (become a trespassing thing then - fine). That grey area was made a little more clear (haven't found out about parking in the Centerpoint area and if they give municipal tickets or not...yet). The transition from a fascist enterprise to a private one is being taken one forced step at a time. That is what the DTC is about. It is an effort by this fascist group (oh, and they do not like the definition I gave of Fascism. It hits way too close to home) to do as they wish without those darn constitutions getting in the way of providing the right kind of "environment" for the "right" type of people on what would otherwise be public property.
Examples:
The Mill Avenue Merchant Association apply for and get permits for the Fall and Spring Festival of the Arts (about the first weekend in Dec. and the last of March or first of April). The Fiesta Bowl Committee does, guess what? And the Ceterpoint Partnership Limited is the group that runs the Centerpoint Property and are the landlords that say "no guns allowed" no matter what the retailers say.
I'm still trying to get more information, but the best i can figure out it is the Centerpoint DMB, Inc. that is the one that does the block parties. They get a permit that makes them the sponsors of the event in the street on Mill Ave. I could not get the date of the next event by them...yet.
So. This Saturday, the 8th of January 2000, there is no permitted event. And the sidewalk on both sides of Mill Ave. is available for public use and anyone can carry their firearm. If you go into the doorway of any of the stores then you are on private property and in violation of the owners restrictions.
(Now this brought up a point that I'm sure they will address in the future. Do the leases of the retailers in the Centerpoint Development have this restriction written into them. Are retailers allowed to defend themselves or not or does this restriction apply only to their customers. And should a customer be denied their ability to defend themselves and are molested in some way, then who is held responsible, the merchant or the developer? Well they didn't have any answers to these questions of course but I could hear his gears turning)
TEAM is a private security company that has contracts with Centerpoint and 20+ bars as bouncers and such. They also have a small contract with the City of Tempe to protect the Tempe Lake Dam.
So. After some research this is the best conclution I can come to. Mill ave. might as well be anywhere or any event. (the Forth of July at the State Capital comes to mind, or the 2000 Celebration put on in Phoenix) It is the effort of men and women in and out of government to eliminate constituional protection of individual rights so that social engineering can be accomplished for what is thought to be the maximum economic benefit of those that have the ability to project force without opposition from the very entity whose function is to protect those individual rights (Law Enforcement).
Is this a problem? Should we oppose it? And how best to do that?
Q: If we assume that the government has no interest in the event, then the question is, "Can a private group (without opposition from retailers or residents in the effected area) ask for and recieve a "permit" from government that would define an area to be considered private so that restrictions could be put on the event that government would otherwise NOT be able to do"?
A: IMHO. Usually. As long as things like access to roads and homes and such are taken into consideration (they talk about this being taken care of, a lot). And they can not claim any kind of municipal immunity from civil liability in case of any damage to person or property due to their taking responsibility for my safety. This is the question that has them questioning themselves. Are they fully responsible as a private entity. (more about this later)
Q: Should we oppose this?
A: We have to be careful what it is we are going to oppose. I want to focus on liability (their wallet - where the choices are more easily made). It is important that all event sponsors and private property owners understand the increased liability they take on when they disarm people. So my answer is yes, in a way that will have the clearest and longest effect. No matter if it's a large Mall, shopping center, Walmart or permited event.
Q: How?
A: At a time that the Mill Avenue pavement area has been permited for a block party we then need to document (video tape, press release etc.) the arrest or threat of arrest of individuals that were denied the ability to bring their firearms to the event. And we must make sure that we get statements that make it clear who and or what is claiming to have event control. It would normally take a long time (hours) to get sponsors and officers on tape if we didn't plan it right. Or we could just announce our intent and reasons. This would prompt them to be professional and supply the answers we need to the press by the correct people. In the end we would either have our weapons checked and they take full responsibility for our safety as a private organization (then insurance companies would, in time charge whatever they saw fit for coverage - think about a time when events would get discounts for allowing attendees to be armed - this may indeed happen when stats start showing a financial impact). Even though weapons checking is law (and the government has to do it) most libertarians can't support this violation of the 1st Amendment right to not associate with armed people. I'm looking to get the government out of private ventures and keeping these private event sponsors full responsible for their policies. What is the most likely out come will be a video that shows that we (or just I) was denied access with my firearm under the threat of arrest. Fine. This tape would then be made available to the attorney of every person that was the victim of a violent crime. A higher standard of liability would then be added to the event sponsor since the ability to defend themselves was denied. Add to this the stats that have come out of a lot of recent research on guns being good to have around and we'll see a change due to the financials. At least the point will have been made.
Tomorrow is not a good time for any real impact. And would draw little press in comparison with an effort at the next Block Party by DMB, Inc. (I found that the DMB, Inc. is part of DTC - tangled web). What would be accomplished would be the illegal activities of the Tempe Police in the manner they handle armed individuals on Mill Ave's public sidewalks. But that is an entirely different matter that can be addressed at the same time as the other issue in almost the same place (within a couple of feet :)
So, I will not be on Mill Ave. tomorrow with my firearm. I know what I need to do and tomorrow is not the right time.
Whoa!
Just got a call from the city's Kristian Hecht. After a long talk, she has decided to turn me over to the City Attorney... here's why.
The Fiesta Bowl had Frito Lay (Tostitos) as its "Event Sponsor". And whenever there is an event on Mill Ave. Kristian at the permit office gets a letter from a Cory at DMB, Inc. (the property management company of Centerpoint) that states that they are in the event perimeter and that it is OK (something like that). BUT BUT BUT, the City of Tempe is the Event "Owner". And the City of Tempe sets the rules of the event that the "sponsor" must follow. And in that contract is a requirement that the sponsor (Frito Lay as an example) is fully liable for the event and must get insurance for it.
So we have the City of Tempe as the owner of any event on Mill Ave. but is requiring that the private sponsor be responsible for the required rights violations done by the City of Tempe police and their rules. WOW!
After I repeated what she said to me in our language she started to understand the headline,... I'd turn me over to the City Attorney too.
My argument to her was, "When I go anywhere in this country, I am either on public or private land. ----- Just got another call from Sgt Lind (Tempe Police media relations guy) but first Kristian ----- When on private land the rights of the owner are to be respected and defended by government, when on public land the rights of the individual are to be respected and defended (simply put of course). So what happens when the Government claims "ownership" to defend the private property rights of a governmental entity (starting to see an obviously common trend here, like when the DPS attorney claimed that DPS owned the rest stops) and then contracts with a private entity to take full financial liability for any civil action taken against the event, wow what a deal".
Sgt. Lind will be the contact for the coming day when a Block Party will have us at the perimeter wanting to know who it is that is disarming us on video.
Another thing that got their panties in a wad was the fact that we would be bringing this issue up with any future sponsor and any insurance company that they contract with :)
However, I do plan to be at the State Capital Monday to help make fun of the NRA.
Ernie
P.S.
Look for a story on Arpaio and I going at it about his tank in the next few weeks. I already did an interview with the Republic, but they'll wait for a good time to zing him.
P.S.S.
Judge Myers, will rule in the next couple of weeks on who controls the internal workings of political parties in Arizona (the Government or the Party itself and who is the State recognized Libertarian Party).