I’m a liberal. That means I have no problem with regulation as a policy tool (well, neither do conservatives, they just want to regulate culturally rather than for purposes of social functionality… but I digress). But regulation by definition is based on an artificial power differential created to serve the interests of public administration. And truthfully, power differentials in general make me queasy.

As such, I hold to a simple regulatory ethic when I evaluate policy proposals or administrative functions. Basically, you regulate logistical matters (the housing density to infrastructure capacity scheme, or somesuch) and “bad” behavior (which I’ll define as behavior which can harm others – that covers environmental regulations, public health regulations such as second hand smoke issues, stopping people from beating other people up, etc).

But regulating “good” behavior? Why the hell would we want to do that?

What’s got me riled up is the cover article of this week’s Seven Days which examines the regulation “regime” around street performers in Burlington’s Church Street marketplace. Again, I can see the need for logistical regulation – how many prformers at a time, and such – but it’s clear that Burlington’s marketplace masters have gone way, way beyond that, and it burns me up (more below the fold).

Quick back story – yesterday I was walking to grab some lunch in Montpelier’s downtown. On the way, I heard a saxophone echoing between the buildings on State Street. The music was very skillfully rendered and brought an immediate smile to my face. As I walked over the river, I saw the young woman who was playing get up from her seat on the sidewalk and pack up to leave. I was delighted to see that several people had dropped tips into her sax case (which gave my faith in human nature a little boost) and took a minute to appreciate springtime in a place that tends to attract – and generally embrace – street performers of many stripes (although, as a musician myself, I do admit to being partial to the musicians).

To my surprise today at lunch, I notice that same saxaphone player gracing the cover of the new Seven Days. I enthusiastically grab a copy and sit down to read the article… although the cover blerb is giving me a creeping feeling of what to expect inside.

The artist herself is identified as 18 year-old Zoe Christiansen (who can be heard playing the clarinet, her other instrument of choice, on the Seven days website here). She is precisely the type and caliber of Church Street street talent that so impressed my wife and me when we moved to Vermont so many years ago, and always played a big role in our enthusiasm for making the drive up to Burlington on sunny weekend days.

But in the true spirit of fixing something that wasn’t broke, Burlington has a different regulatory regime in place than they did 12 years ago. One that goes beyond regulating logistics and into regulating individual good behavior (which I certainly consider performing in the community – and in the process enhancing that community –  without an admission fee to be).

In other words, rather than being celebrated, Ms. Christiansen has been banned:

The Church Street Marketplace has a “three strikes and you’re out” policy regarding complaints for performers who have, or are working toward, an annual license. According to the official rules and regulations, annual licenses are granted provided that “at least five daily/weekend licenses have been previously obtained, and no documented complaints have been filed during the five separate performing dates.”

Christiansen’s initial infraction – for excessive volume – came while she was performing on her first day permit. She was given a second day permit but was told a complaint had been filed against her; she was not told by whom.

So by whose authority has Christiansen been “banned?”

“They” are the Church Street Marketplace District Commission, a department of the City of Burlington whose primary function is to ensure that the Marketplace is a clean, safe public center. From maintenance to granting permits, Redmond and his staff handle virtually every aspect of Marketplace operations. Collectively, they are the “man behind the curtain.”

It’s actually a glass door, and the CSM office behind it is where the permit gauntlet begins – with the audition.

You read that right – an audition. To perform, you must audition for a handful of bureaucrats and meet with their approval (and presumably, their personal tastes). A little departure from the romantic notion of the traveling troubadour spontaneously sitting down to make his or her bus fare to the next stop, eh?

It’s important to note that strret musicians were originally envisioned as an integral part of the Church Street Marketplace, but as reporter Dan Bolles informs us, they seem to be seen now as a nuisance at worst, and just a piece of the decor at best:

Buried in the official regulations regarding Church Street performers – just a few paragraphs after the line stating that a street performer’s license “is not an employment contract” – lies a telling contradiction: “The right to act as a street entertainer on the Marketplace is a privilege.” While the language of that sentence is confusing, the message is clear: The Church Street Marketplace views street performance not as a right of free expression but rather, as [CSM Executive Director] Redmond puts it, as an “amenity.”

It’s an irony not lost on Zoe Christiansen. “Park benches are amenities,” she counters.

And who’s complaining about her?

On Monday, May 7, she went to the CSM office to obtain her third day permit. She was told the staff were too busy, and that they might be able to accommodate her later in the afternoon. So Christiansen decided to play on Cherry Street, hoping to siphon some listeners from the Marketplace. While she was physically off Church Street, her sound traveled there, to the displeasure of cart vendor Paul Buschner.

The 46-year-old proprietor of Amazing Kettle Corn typically sets up shop on Church just south of Cherry. Buschner describes Christiansen as a “rule breaker,” who has “only her own interests in mind.” He cites several occasions when he’s witnessed her riding her bicycle on the Marketplace – another no-no. He further claims the clarinetist was “just sitting, playing scales.” Though Buschner normally prefers to speak with offending buskers personally, on this occasion he asked Burlington Police to investigate.

Two officers notified Christiansen that she needed a city permit to play outside the CSM District, defined by the edge of the brick walkway that lines the Marketplace. The incident was reported to the CSM office, which later that afternoon informed her she would not be granted another day permit or considered for an annual license.

“Scales?” Please. Go back and click the audio link again, and keep in mind that this woman performs for a living. Scales wont pay the rent.

So what’s his problem with the “rule breaker?” Apparently according to some, Church Street isn’t a public area, it’s not part of the Burlington community, it exists only for the storeowners and their personal comfort zone takes precedence over everything and anything else. Yet another symptom of our cultural insistence on putting the value of commerce, the market and the successful marketeers so high, it reflexively trumps all else.

Let’s be clear; if a performer is belligerant and is harassing or threatening people – especially if they’re doing it under the pretense of performing, I have no problem with regulations to prevent that. But this is clearly not the case here, and what gives them away is the arbitrary and capricious regulatory regime:

Accordionist David Symons, 29, disagrees. “I don’t have a problem with issuing permits, necessarily, but the standards [the CSM] sets are totally arbitrary. They have these regulations, but they’re enforced selectively.” Symons adds that the CSM “has this attitude that we’re somehow employees, which we’re not.”

Christiansen was also informed by several members of the CSM staff that her attire was “inappropriate,” and that she should reconsider her look.

CSM Executive Director Ron Redmond, 51, conceded there is no mention of apparel, appropriate or otherwise, in the street performer regulations, but he added that CSM staff often make suggestions to performers in an effort to abet their success.

Christiansen was disturbed by CSM’s mother-hen approach. “I was wearing shorts that were kind of . . . short, I guess. But I also was wearing a dress that covered the shorts, down to the middle of my thigh, and a vest over that,” she explains. “I didn’t feel I was scandalously dressed, but I guess [the CSM] disagreed.” Furthermore, Christiansen points out, “There is nothing in the rules about attire and, frankly, who the hell are they to tell me what I can wear?”

To the one or two whiners such as Buschner, I say suck it up. You’re doing business in the most lucrative piece of real estate in the state, and its precisely because of the culture and setting that these performers are an integral part of that it is so lucrative (and BTW – there is no way to play a saxophone quietly). If you don’t like it, open up shop somewhere else. I’m sure there are plenty of folks waiting in line to fill your vacancy.

To the appointed judge/jury/talent executioners (and their bosses/enablers in City Hall), find a new hobby. As far as I’m concerned, from what’s in this article, you should be ashamed of yourselves.

If you’d like to let the appropriate folks know that you’re ashamed of them as well, here’s some contact info:

Ron Redmond, CSM Executive Director
(802) 865-7254
rredmond@verizon.net

Bob Kiss, Mayor
(802) 865-7272
(I couldn’t find an email, but here’s a link to an online feedback form)

… and maybe if you’re on Church Street and you have an urge for Kettle Corn, you might want to consider an alternative.

crossposted at five before chaos.

… although I’d really like to, using a dull X-Acto knife. I’d probably find a tumor that looked like Joe Lieberman. Now, yes, Emanuel does deserve a bit of credit for helping to win back the House, but dammit, now he’s adding ammunition to that argument about there being no differences between the parties/business as usual. David Sirota is reporting about a secret trade deal with Peru and Panama that has been going on behind closed doors, a lobbyist-written one that’s plain awful, even moreso because one of the Dems’ pledges was the end of such trade deals. If I’m understanding this correctly, the labor and environmental protections are not in the main text, rather “side agreements” which are basically unenforceable. And that’s making the White House happy…

Meanwhile, White House and GOP participants in the deal are now signaling that the deal’s much-touted labor and environmental provisions are designed to be kept out of the core text of trade agreements and thus potentially rendered utterly unenforceable. To date, the specific legislative language of the secret deal has been kept concealed from the public.

[This] move may explain why the Bush-connected head of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce has told reporters he has received “assurances that the labor provisions [in the deal] cannot be read to require compliance.” It may also explain why the dealmakers have yet to release the legislative language of the trade deal texts in question. If they are planning to not actually change the texts of the deals and pass them as is, there may not actually be any new language, meaning there would likely not be any substantive change to U.S. trade policy, despite the flood of press releases.

So where does Rahm fit into this? Well, rank-and-file Dems caught wind of this and wanted to have an open debate on the matter at the Democratic Caucus Meeting (which I believe was yesterday). Emmanuel initially agreed, then removed the debate from the agenda at the last minute. It’s quite obvious whose interests he’s looking out for, and it’s certainly not labor and the environment. Seems like he’s perfectly happy with yet another trade agreement with no enforceable protections. Don’t forget, he was one of the principle architects of NAFTA, which kick-started the whole race to the bottom that American industry continues to suffer from today, and it’s not getting any better. This morning, House Dems who aren’t too happy about this are having a meeting with Pelosi about it, so hopefully something good will come of it. Who knows?

I’ve said it before:  these people need to be marginalized. Rahm’s work in winning back the House shouldn’t get him off of the hook on this. And he continues to add to the cynicism that people such as myself who are not in the party have about “them all being corrupt”. It needs to end. Now. Bush is only part of the problem (and a major one at that). The enablers need to be held accountable as well.

(If it’s patrioticresponse, then I want him front & center! – promoted by Brattlerouser)

Peter Welch spoke on the floor of the U.S. House today explaining to the Congress why Vermonters in ever greater numbers are calling for impeachment. While it is good for members of Congress and for those who watch C-Span to hear about our sentiments, a speech is a miserable substitute for action.

Congressman Welch wants to end this war yesterday he says, but he has thus far only voted to further fund it. Impeachment will divide the Congress and only prolong the war he says, but he cannot point to a single action of Congress that has taken one step to even slow the pace of the occupation.

Welch thanks impeachment activists and says that while he opposes impeachment, he supports the indictment that we make against the Bush administration. He can’t have it both ways. The prosecutor doesn’t thank the grand jury for their hard work, agree with their call for indictment, and then toss it in the trash on his way out of the courthouse. But that is exactly what Peter Welch is doing and some people will try to tell us that we should be grateful to him for doing it.

Impeachment is the only Constitutional tool that we have left in the toolbox that could actually block this administration from furthering their reckless military stance. Impeachment is the only workable remedy that could help to redeem us in the eyes of the rest of the world.

More great stuff below the fold- BR

This Democratic Congress has betrayed us. They pull at some dried skin of a reeking onion, but they refuse to investigate the rot that is spreading from its core. “Look, ” they say, “we snipped those brown edges of the skin, it’s a fine onion again. Aren’t we good cooks?” A mere 40 Senators could prevent any further funding of this war, providing only a way to pay for withdrawal, but there are not yet 40 Senators who are brave or principled enough to do so. While Welch waits for the Republicans to magically join the Democratic war (non) strategy and then convince this President to change his mind, a handful of his colleagues have already called for impeachment investigations against Dick Cheney. It is sad that our Congressman is content with so little. It is as whimsical for him to think that he’s taking steps to end this war as it is for the President to think that he’s winning it.

Our Congressman is not yet convinced that we represent the views of an overwhelming number of Vermonters. He will be disabused of this notion in the coming days and weeks. There will be petition and post card drives that will give notice of just how many we are.

We are fed up with vacuous leadership. We are fed up with excuses. We are above all fed up with mediocre rhetoric masquerading as substance. This is a call for civil obedience to the Constitution by those who have sworn to defend it. It may well be the last call before massive civil disobedience is seen as the only way left to get our government to become once again “for the people”.