Today's Feature

Approved Library Budget Adjustment.

The Carthage City Council met in a regular session on Tuesday evening and approved a budget adjustment appropriating an additional $27,250 to the Carthage Public Library for increased operating expenses.

During the Fiscal year 2008 budget hearings the Library board requested $54,500 for operating expenses, an increased amount over the previous year’s request, which was due to the expansion at the library. The Budget committee approved half of the requested amount, $27,250, with the understanding that the expanded library should operate for 6 months, after which the board should return to request the other half if it was needed. The board did so, and presented figures that indicated the additional funding was required. The budget adjustment was approved unanimously.

The Nuisance Abatement Policy.

During staff reports period of Tuesday’s Council meeting members of the Council discussed the City’s nuisance abatement policies.

Last year the Council approved ordinances that shifted the job of nuisance abatement from the Police Department’s control to the Public Works Department’s control. In so doing, positions for two full-time Nuisance Abatement officers were also created.

Public Works Director Chad Wampler said that he had heard from several Council members who had received recent calls from citizens, primarily landlords, with questions and complaints about the City policy.

The policy states that in cases where rented property is in violation of nuisance abatement restrictions, that the property be posted with a yellow sign that explains the violation and what steps should be taken for correction. If no action is taken after five days, a letter is then sent by the Public Works Department to the property owner explaining the violation and the steps to be taken. Property owners then have two weeks to make contact with the Department or to correct the violation before any further steps are taken. If the violation is not rectified a summons is issued which can result in a fine to the property owner.

Wampler said that several landlords have complained about the policy, saying that they felt the tenants should be responsible.

The same argument was made at a recent Public Works committee meeting wherein property owner Greg Rogler asked for clarification on the policy from the committee. Rogler told the committee that he had received a letter from the Department citing a violation for furniture on the front porch of one of his rental properties. He asked who would be held responsible for the violation. The committee explained the protocol to Rogler, saying that the City codes list the property owner as the responsible party. Rogler said he felt the tenant should be responsible.

At the Council meeting, City Attorney Nate Dally reiterated the protocol, saying that the landlord should have more control over the tenant than the City. Dally said that he had also checked with the Police Department, who had previously enforced the policy in the same fashion.

Wampler said he felt that with the approval of the department shift and funding for the 2 officers the Council had approved a "mandate to clean up the City," and that the officers had been following the procedures for that purpose. Wampler advised Council members that they could contact the Public Works Department for further information if they received complaints.

Mayor Jim Woestman said that he had no problem with the policy and that it could be explained to those who call with inquiries.

"You won’t hear any complaints from me," said Woestman.

I’ve seen those contraptions that look like a big ice cream scoop that I’m sure the folks who move trees for a livin’ use. Fact I was startin’ to wonder just where to locate one after ‘bout an hour of shovelin’.

Fortunately, diggin’ a hole to put a tree in isn’t near as tedious. I recommend dedicatin’ a separate day for the plantin’ hole, preferably on a separate week end. Havin’ a week to consider the task ahead, and allowin’ the aches to subside, might make the price they’re askin’ at the tree shop look reasonable.

This is some fact, but mostly,

Just Jake Talkin’.

Click & Clack Talk Cars
By Tom & Ray Magliozzi

Dear Tom and Ray:

I am having a debate with my co-workers about whether filling your gas tank halfway is more or less efficient than filling your tank completely. What is the most efficient way to fill a tank? Does the weight of the full tank affect the mileage? Does gas evaporate more quickly when the tank is half-full? I need your help to decide this debate. Thank you! - Ian

RAY: I take it you’re worried about the weight of the gasoline, Ian. You think that a full tank of gas weighs more, and therefore reduces your mileage. And by filling up only halfway, you’ll have a lighter car and get more miles per gallon.

TOM: The answer is, that’s true. I mean, sure, theoretically, if your 3,000-pound car is 50 or 60 pounds lighter, you’ll get slightly better mileage. In fact, manufacturers spend all kinds of money taking ounces of weight out of various car parts.

RAY: Right. And there’s no fuel lost to evaporation, because the fuel system in a modern car is a closed system.

TOM: But if you fill your tank only halfway, there’s another major fuel loss. That’s the fuel you use driving around looking for a gas station twice as often. And that could easily wipe out any small savings you get from making your car lighter.

RAY: Plus, where do you stop? If you’re really determined to reduce the weight of your vehicle, shouldn’t you always relieve yourself before driving, because otherwise you’ll be carrying around THAT extra weight, too?

TOM: And shouldn’t you shave your head to remove the weight of your hair? And your chest and legs, too?

RAY: And don’t forget your back!

TOM: Then you’d also need to always drive nude. Especially in the winter, when those heavy woolen overcoats are murder on your mpg, Ian. Think about it.