A play in football where the quarterback throws a pass into a usually distant end zone without really aiming at any particular receiver. Usually the absolute last-ditch scoring option used at the end of a game, because everyone knows it's coming and the defense can simply bat the pass down. The name comes from the "canonical prayer" uttered by the quarterback before launching the football.
Source: Dallas Cowboy Quarterback Roger Staubach
The newspaper stated that Councilman Messer, Crump and Zurschmiede had signed a new Consent Decree Document along with Mayor James Garner.
Freedom of Speech would like to ask the following 5 questions:
1. Where did Councilman Messer obtain this new consent degree document?
2. Who prepared this new consent decree document?
3. Did City Council Attorney Jerry Ulrich prepare this new consent decree?
4. When and where did Councilman Messer meet with Crump, Zurschmiede and Mayor James Garner to REVIEW, DISCUSS and SIGN this new Consent Decree Document?
5. Have Councilman Messer, Crump, Zurshmiede and Mayor Garner read the court order/ agreement attached to R07-35A?
R07-35A states: IT IS SO ORDERED; Response: All discussions and deliberations on the issue of redistricting between members of the City Council shall take place only at regular or especially called meetings of the Council with notice to the public at least 48 hours in advance.
We offer you our readers the following documents. We think we have our answers ~ draw your own conclusions.
Document A - Taxpayer's Bill
ULRICH & VIDAR, LLC
Jerry L. Ulrich---Leslie E. Vidra
115 East Spring Street
Suite 100 Elsby Building
New Albany, Indiana 47150
Phone: (812) 945-2800
Fax: (812) 945-2818
Matter: Vogt v Common Council
Statement Date: 10/24/2007
Amount Due: $3,538.50
FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES RENDERED
Fee Date -7/27/2007
Description: Prepare for settlement conf.; attend settlement conf.
Hours - 2.50
Amount: $375.00
Fee Date - 8/21/2007
Description: Executive session re: response to proposed consent decree
Hours -1.00
Amount : $150.00
Fee Date - 8/23/2007
Description: Review annexation statutes
Hours - 0.40
Amount: $60.00
Fee Date - 8/24/2007
Description: Settlement conference
Hours - 3.50
Amount: $525.00
Fee Date - 8/27/2007
Description: Tele. conf. w/Mr. Kochert re: special mtg., etc.; parameters of districts; tele. conf. w/Mr. Gahan
Hours - 0.50
Amount: $75.00
Fee Date - 8/28/2007
Description: Tele. conf. w/Mr. Kochert re: special mtg.; review/revise memorandum
Hours: 0.60
Amount: $90.00
Fee Date - 9/10/2007
Description: Conf. w/Ms. Moeller re: dividing precincts
Hours: 1.20
Amount: $180.00
Fee Date - 9/13/2007
Description: Attend public hearing
Hours: 1.00
Amount: $150.00
Fee Date - 10/2/2007
Description: Conf. w/Mr. Coffee re: mtg. w/Plaintiffs; conf. w/Mr. Messer; conf. w/Mr. Zurschmiede and Mr. Kochert; tele. conf. w/Mr. Gahan
Hours: 2.00
Amount: $300.00
Fee Date - 10/4/2007
Description: Tele. conf. w/Mr. Messer re: resolution; tele. conf. w/Mr. Kochert re: Ordinance; draft Resolutions approving Consent Decree Ordinance
Hours: 1.00
Amount: $150.00
Fee Date - 10/5/2007
Description: Conf. w/Mr. Messer re: amended Consent Decree; draft Amended Decree; revise original Decree; prepare Resolution; prepare Ordinance, forward to Mayor
Hours: 3.00
Amount: $450.00
Fee Date - 10/8/2007
Description: Conf. w/Mr. Schmidt re: new redist. plan; review cases/plans for mtg; re-draft redist. order
Hours: 1.50
Amount: $225.00
Fee Date - 10/9/2007
Description: Re-draft Resolution/Consent Decree; Conf. w/Mr. Messer; meetings (2)
Hours: 3.80
Amount $570.00
Fee Date - 10/18/2007
Description: Tele. conf. w/Mr. Gahan re: Consent Decree; Special Meeting
Hours: 1.50
Amount: $225.00
SUBTOTAL: 23.50 Hours - Amount: $3,525.00
Expenses
Date: 8/29/2007
Description: Photocopies (54)
Amount: $13.50
SUBTOTAL: $13.50
Payments
Date - 9/25/2006
Description: Payment - Thank you!
Amount: $2,565.00
SUBTOTAL: $2,565.00
Bill Summary
Previous Balance: $2,565.00
Current Fees: $3,525.00
Current Expenses: $13.50
Current Other: $0.00
Current Payments: ($2,565.00)
Total Amount Due: $3,538.50
Source: Public document
* Which of the charges listed above by the City Council Attorney were for representing the City Council and which of these charges listed above were for the Plaintiffs?
Should the Plaintiffs pay their fair share of the work listed above?
Document B - Illegal Consent DecreeUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
NEW ALBANY DIVISION
CAUSE NUMBER 4: 06-CV-0076-JDT-WGH
PETER A. VOGT, et al
PLAINTIFFS
v.
THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF
NEW ALBANY, BILL SCHMIDT,
STEVE PRICE, LARRY KOCHERT,
DAN COFFEY, BEVERLY CRUMP,
JEFF GAHAN, DONNIE BLEVINS,
JACK MESSER AND KEVIN ZURSCHMIEDE
DEFENDANTS
CONSENT DECREE
WHEREAS, the statutory provisions of I.C. 36-4-6-3 (Statute) impose an affirmative duty on the Common Council for the City of New Albany, State of Indiana (Council) to draw the boundaries of the City's legislative districts in the second year after the decennial census; and
WHEREAS, the Statute requires the Council to draw six legislative districts that are contiguous and compact and that contain, as nearly as possible, equal population; and
WHEREAS, the Council has failed to comply with the provisions of the Statue since at least 1992, resulting in six existing legislative districts that are grossly unequal in population, as defined by the 2000 decennial census and which do not comply with the requirements of the Statute and which violate the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States and the equal protection clause of Section 23 of the Indiana Constitution; and
WHEREAS, the Common Council for the City of New Albany is a party to a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, New Albany Division, namely, Vogt, et al. v. City of New Albany, and desires to achieve a settlement with Plaintiffs of all issues prior to trial on that matter, and
WHEREAS, the parties desire that an ordinance of re-districting be adopted and carried into effect to the municipal elections of 2011; and
WHEREAS, the parties have conferred on these issues and have reached an agreement on same;IT IS THEREFORE, CONSIDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:
1. After January 1, 2008, the Council shall establish an Advisory Committee on Redistricting, to be composed of the three Council members elected at-large and three individuals from a list provided by the Plaintiffs to the lawsuit.2. The Council shall reimburse Counsel for the Plaintiffs all fees not to exceed $5,000.00 for services rendered in behalf of the Plaintiffs and for costs not to exceed $400.00 expended in the prosecution of this action, as determined by the Court of jurisdiction.
3. The Court shall retain jurisdiction to enforce this Order and for all other appropriate purposes.REVIEWED, SIGNED AND APPROVED BY:
Peter A. Vogt, Plaintiff, Jeff Gillenwater, Plaintiff, Roger Baylor, Plaintiff, Randy Smith, Plaintiff, Lloyd Wimp, Plaintiff, and Stephen J. Beardsley, Counsel for PlaintiffsCouncilman Jack Messer, At-Large, Councilman Kevin Zurschmiede At-Large, Councilwomen Beverly Crump, Fifth District and James E. Garner, Sr., Mayor ~ City of New Albany.
Source: Public document* If the majority of the Council did not sign this agreement, is it legal? When and where did Councilman Messer meet with Crump, Zurschmiede and Mayor James Garner to Review, Discuss and Sign this new Consent Decree Document?
Freedom of Speech would like to point out for the last several month's our City Council has been trying to resolve the redistricting problem. So we decided to uncover what has been going on regarding the "power play" with the redistricting lawsuit in New Albany. Of course certain people like Mayor Garner, Councilman Jack Messer, Councilwomen Beverly Crump, Councilman Kevin Zurschmiede, and some Plaintiffs do not want taxpayers to know about this bill and who drew up the consent decree agreement. This entire "power play" will cost New Albany taxpayers about $1,200.00.
Why didn't Counsel for the Plaintiff's Stephen J. Beardsley draw this agreement up?
We feel that when an elected official takes the oath of office they should be held liable and accountable for THEIR actions. This underhanded way of doing the PEOPLE'S business in New Albany is unacceptable.
For four years the citizens of New Albany have been "raped" by this administration and others. If it was either you or anyone of us violating the laws of Indiana, cutting deals, and unnecessarily costing taxpayers money for personal gain, or votes, they need to be exposed for what has been done and going on with the Redistricting Lawsuit of New Albany!
Freedom of Speech can only present to you our readers the FACTS of the redistricting matter.
Indiana laws have been broken, taxpayers are being billed for Plaintiff's Consent Decree, and illegal meetings and much more.
Citizens of New Albany, you should be outraged at our elected officials, Council members, attorneys and some of the Plaintiff's in order to get what they want at the expense of the taxpayers!
Our final thought...
Freedom of Speech predicts Council President Larry Kochert will step up and throw the famous "Hail Mary" pass for a win for the taxpayers over the Redistricting Lawsuit of New Albany.
Citizens need to step up and Support our Famous "GANG OF 4"...one last time!
Footnote: These documents are public record
