"The HOTTEST Places in HELL are RESERVED for
Those who in times of Great Moral Crises
MAINTAIN Their NEUTRALITY...
Dante

"Be an opener of doors for such as come after thee, and do not try to make the universe a blind alley."
- Ralph Waldo Emerson

Socio-Economic Re-Develepment

We're either Open for Business as the Capitol of The South Bank or We're just a quaint RiverCity tourist attraction for visitors to Greater Cincinnati... DownTown is the CBD, CAT, WDG, CONV, ENA, MGNA, ROMA, HLRSCA... north of 12th Street. Then there's UpTown between 12th & Levassor Park ...and on out the Madison Ave Corridor to the suburbs of Latonia & So Covington, bounded by the Licking River Greenway & the South Bank Commons!

Darkness cannot drive out darkness, only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate, only love can do that. Hate multiplies hate, violence multiplies violence, and toughness multiplies toughness in a descending spiral of destruction... The Chain reaction of evil --hate begetting hate, wars producing more wars-- must be broken, or we shall be plunged into the dark abyss of annihilation.

Martin Luther King, Jr. - 1963

South Bank Steel Magnolia's CARE!

Riverfront Commons

By now, many of you have read about the exciting new $50 million Riverfront Commons trail project. But there is more to this effort than a four-mile walking and bike path connecting Covington to Bellevue. The impact also extends to arts, culture, tourism and health in addition to the obvious economic impact.

South Bank News Briefs

Study: Aging gay couples face fiscal burden

Andrew Noyes, Gay.com/PlanetOut.com Network

Same-sex couples face colossal fiscal burdens as they age -- including the potential loss of tens of thousands of dollars in taxes and an average of $5,000 in yearly Social Security survivor benefits -- due to the denial of their right to marry, according to new research by the Human Rights Campaign (HRC).

A report to be released on Monday by HRC and the Urban Institute reveals that "widows" and "widowers" are heavily taxed on any retirement plan like 401(k)s or IRAs inherited from their partners, while heterosexual spouses can inherit the plans tax-free. Homosexuals are also charged an estate tax on the inheritance of a residence even if it was jointly owned -- a burden inapplicable for straight couples.

Don Brescia and John Spinelli, both over age 65, realized the injustice early on and were able to plan for the future. "We took care of this a long time ago because we foresaw what was in the cards," Brescia said. "We each have our own health insurance [and] long-term care -- but we're paying double -- whereas a married couple would not."

Brescia and Spinelli, who have been together for 46 years, are angry with the way the laws stand. "We've always worked, and we've always been contributors to our community," Brescia maintains.

They both have Medicare and have secured their jointly owned property through living wills, titles and deeds, but acknowledge that many same-sex couples are not so lucky. Brescia estimates that 50 percent of gay couples they know did not have the prescience to plan ahead.

Military veterans Frank Benedetti and Gary Trowbridge, who have been a couple for over 40 years, echo Brescia's sentiment. "We've honored our country's commitments and we feel like we're being ignored," Benedetti said. "It makes me angry, and I feel betrayed because we're good citizens. We vote regularly, we give to charities, we're regular church goers -- we do everything right."

Benedetti and Trowbridge have joint rights of survivorship and have made all major purchases together. To play it safe, they always carry medical powers of attorney paperwork with them when they travel and routinely make doctor's appointments together. Both receive retirement pensions and neither would have access to the other's assets should one die.

Benedetti likened the inequality to the Jim Crow laws of the 1960s, which forbade blacks and whites to intermarry and required business owners to keep their black and white clientele separate.

"Most heterosexual people don't even think about this because they're used to it being there for them," Benedetti said. "This really isn't fair or just, and we discuss this subject with everybody we meet."

The report, based on Census 2000 data and federal laws affecting same-sex couples, also showed that more than 1 in 10 same-sex couples include someone over 65 years old, and nearly a fourth include a partner over 55 years old.

"Same-sex couples pay the same taxes as heterosexual couples throughout their working lives," HRC President Cheryl Jacques said in a press release. "Yet they are denied the same protections when they most need it -- in old age and when faced with the death of a family member. That's taxation without compensation."

The report concludes that equality in access to marriage would also bring equity to the taxation of and benefits for all seniors regardless of sexual orientation. Its authors suggest a series of independent steps needed to bring equity to gay, lesbian and bisexual seniors. Among them are rewriting Social Security, federal tax, Medicaid and property laws.

Additionally, the report reveals the five counties with the greatest number of same-sex couples that include at least one senior: Los Angeles County; Cook County, Ill., Kings County (Brooklyn), N.Y.; Broward County, Fla.; and Miami-Dade County, Fla.

Human Rights:

"Sexual Orientation" vs "Sexual Preference"

As those of us in attendance know, there were only two people who spoke in opposition to passing the revised "HUMAN RIGHTS" Ordinance at last nights public hearing. While it was indeed uplifting and hopeful to hear so many of our CommUNITY, friends and neighbors speak with great conviction, emotion and urgency that our Commissioners do the "right thing" and approve the ordinance, I think it important to address the concerns of those two opposing the measure.

To do that, however, one must consider the language or semantics that have been used to cloud the true issue. First and foremost, it is a HUMAN RIGHTS ordinance not a "Gay Rights" ordinance. Second, the contested change provides for protection against discrimination in the areas of Housing, Employment and Public Accommodations. Thirdly, the protection is afforded to a class of people based on Sexual Orientation, NOT Sexual Preference. What's the difference you may ask?

We speak of Human Rights as they relate to our humanity and certain inalienable rights that our Founding Fathers spoke of when they wrote those immortal words "ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL". Since that time, when the signers of that magnificent document were all Straight(?) White Anglo Saxon Protestants, our beloved country has grown into a very diverse place. It is only right and just that as we have evolved as a nation, we have taken steps to re-interpret that document and affirm that we believe now as they did then that indeed, ALL HUMANITY IS CREATED EQUAL. A Human Rights ordinance does not serve to extend any special rights to any class of people, but merely to AFFIRM that all classes of people are equally entitled to those rights in the face of those who would regard themselves as superior or more entitled because of their own prejudices.

In regard to Housing, Employment and Public Accommodations, it takes no rights away from providers of those things to discriminate fairly or to choose the best applicant. If a landlord is a bigot and doesn't want to rent to me, I would rather him say so. Since coming "OUT" and endeavoring to live as one speaker said - "A full and honest life", I've always been upfront with prospective landlords and employers. And if any other business or public accommodation doesn't want my money that's just as green as the next guy's, it's their loss not mine. Personally, I want to reserve my right to discriminate against their prejudices and not do business with or work for them anyway. In any case, especially Housing, there are so many other ways that people can discriminate legally if they so choose. My own personal experience in Covington's rental market as someone who is Gay, HIV+ and on disability, is that I experience more discrimination in Housing -legally- as a holder of a Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher than as a Gay or disabled person.

"Sexual Orientation" refers to the recognized scientific, civil and humane notion that who one is attracted to is as immutable as skin color. On the other hand, "Sexual Preference" refers to things like doing it in a public park. As far as I know, irregardless of Sexual Orientation, that is an illegal activity. The ordinance does not grant immunity or protection of ANY KIND against any act so deemed AGAINST THE LAW. The majority of us in the GLBT Community are just as offended as any other citizens by such actions. I firmly believe that if we make that clear, we will calm the fears of the Grandfather who likes to frequent Devou Park with his grandchildren.

Unfortunately, what the ordinance will do nothing about is the personal prejudices the other opposition speaker unabashedly admitted to: "Believe it or not, there are still some people out there, as archaic as it may sound, who still believe that a family consists of a daddy and a mommy and a couple of kids. And anything other than that, they find objectionable".

Michael W. Connett - Covington, Ky.

Outside show is a poor substitute

for inner worth." --Aesop