"German Village Valuables" this Saturday from 8am - 3pm

From: http://www.germanvillagebusinesses.com/

Zillow report raises question: Have We Hit Bottom?

Looks like we might be almost there. Start looking now if you want to buy or trade up. Remember, all real estate is local so your preferred area or neighborhood could be VERY different.

clipped from columbus.bizjournals.com Housing values in Columbus and most U.S. metropolitan areas continued their decline into the first quarter, but a new report from researcher Zillow.com points to encouraging signs in some of the most battered markets. Zillow on Monday reported that its quarterly home value index fell 3.8 percent from a year earlier to a median $183,700. Of the 135 metro markets that the Seattle company tracks, 106 registered declines. Zillow’s index is a median estimate for a single-family residence, condominium or cooperative in an area on a given day in the quarter The Columbus area, according to Zillow data, saw a slightly steeper slide in valuation in the first three months of the year, its median home value tumbling 5.1 percent to $108,700.

Despite the continued decline nationally in home values, Zillow reported those drops might be nearing a bottom in several large California metros, including the Los Angeles, San Diego and San Francisco areas. But some worry the long-term improvement trends may be threatened by the federal home buyer tax credit program stealing demand from the traditional summer housing-buying market instead of creating new demand.

That shift is likely to help put the bottom of the housing value decline in the fourth quarter of this year, rather than the second quarter as originally projected, Zillow chief economist Stan Humphries said in a release. The tax credit program is scheduled to end in June.

“When we do get there, we expect the high rates of negative equity and foreclosures to keep national home value appreciation near zero for some time, possibly as long as five years,” Humphries said.

Short North Business Association Executive Director Resigns

clipped from www.columbusunderground.com Christina Menges, the new Executive Director for the Short North Business Association has stepped down just four months after being hired for the position. Christina followed long-time Director John Angelo who left in December after four and a half years of service. “As much as we all liked Christina, it wasn’t a great fit, said Juli Rogers, SNBA Board Member and Owner of R Design & Printing. “She needs to work in an environment with a larger staff and greater budget. That, unfortunately, does not describe the SNBA yet.” The SNBA Board is planning on regrouping to redefine the position before seeking new applications for the job. In the meantime, the SNBA office will continue to be staffed as usual. “We parted on good terms and I am sure Christina will go on to great things and remain a friend of the SNBA,” added Rogers.

HRC Praises Nomination of Elena Kagan

clipped from www.hrcbackstory.org Today President Obama nominated United States Solicitor General Elena Kagan as the nominee for the opening on the United States Supreme Court created by the retirement of Justice John Paul Stevens. Issues that are critical to the LGBT community may reach the Supreme Court in the next few years, including issues related to marriage equality, the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law, the Defense of Marriage Act, and the new federal hate crimes law.  When issues like these come to the Supreme Court, it is vital that we have fair-minded judges to rule on these cases. HRC President Joe Solmonese made this statement: “We applaud President Obama for choosing Elena Kagan to become our nation’s next U.S. Supreme Court Justice. The U.S. Supreme Court decides cases that intimately affect the lives of all Americans.  We are confident that Elena Kagan has a demonstrated understanding and commitment to protecting the liberty and equality of all Americans, including LGBT Americans.”

In addition, we commend President Obama for his commitment to diversity and expanding the number of women on the Court. Diversity on the Court brings a broader view of the way that the law affects real people, including LGBT people. Once confirmed, Elena Kagan would be the fourth woman to serve on our nation’s highest court and would be the third woman sitting on the current Supreme Court, marking the highest representation of women on the Court in its history.

Elena Kagan will bring extensive legal experience and a strong background as a previously Senate-confirmed government official to the nation’s highest court. As Solicitor General in the Obama Administration, as a former legal advisor on domestic policy in the Clinton Administration and as the former Dean of Harvard Law School, Elena Kagan has demonstrated a commitment to fairness and equality. Specifically, we applaud Elena Kagan’s vocal opposition to the Solomon Amendment and the discriminatory “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law.

HRC will continue examining the record of Elena Kagan on issues that affect the LGBT community. Moreover, we look forward to the Senate’s thorough examination of Elena Kagan’s judicial philosophy and record. To learn more about federal judicial nominations and to follow our work on these crucial issues visit HRC’s Equality in the Courts page.

HRC defines a fair-minded judge as a person who demonstrates:

* A commitment to full equality under law for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender Americans; individuals living with HIV and AIDS; women; people with disabilities and racial, ethnic, and religious minorities;

* A commitment to the constitutional right to privacy and individual liberty, including the right of two consenting adults to enter into consensual intimate relationships;

* A respect for the constitutional authority of Congress to promote equality and civil rights and provide statutory remedies for discrimination and violence;

* A sophisticated understanding of and commitment to the separation of church and state and the protection of those citizens with minority religious views; and

* A respect for state legislatures’ attempts to address discrimination and violence based on sexual orientation, disability, race, ethnicity and other factors through carefully crafted legislation that meets the requirements of the Constitution.

Betty White on Saturday Night Live

clipped from www.mediaite.com Betty White kicked off her long-anticipated Saturday Night Live hosting gig by addressing the Facebook movement that brought her to the show in the first place. While she knocked the service, she was very gracious and thankful to her fans. White first joked about the live nature of the show. “Back then we didn’t want to do it live, we just didn’t know how to tape things,” she said. “So I don’t know what this show’s excuse is.” Then she turned her attention to the new media movement. “I really have to thank Facebook,” she said, but admitted she wasn’t aware of its existence until the campaign began. And once she learned about what it was: “It sounds like a huge waste of time.” Comparing her youth to the youth of today (who spend hours on Facebook), she said, “Facebook just sounds like a drag. In my day seeing pictures of people’s vacation was considered a punishment.” Check it out:

NPR: Gay Couples Challenge Defense Of Marriage Act

You can listen to the story here.

clipped from www.npr.org Six years after Massachusetts became the first state in the nation to legalize gay marriage, a group of married same-sex couples will be in federal court in Boston on Thursday, arguing that their marriages should also be recognized by the federal government. Among those bringing the lawsuit, considered to be the first serious challenge of the Federal Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA, are Kathy Bush and Mary Ritchie. When they married in 2004, they thought they would finally get the benefits and protections other couples do, without having to hire lawyers to draw up special contracts to secure everything from their parental rights to health care proxies. Kathy Bush (left) and Mary Ritchie help their sons, William and Ryan, with homework. State By State: Gay Marriage In America Interactive Map: Gay Marriage Laws By State

"We said, 'Wow! We can actually exhale now,' " recalls Ritchie. "You know, if someone says the word 'married,' everybody knows what that means."

But it wasn't long before they discovered that "everybody" did not include the federal government, which is barred by DOMA from recognizing gay marriages. For all federal purposes, Ritchie and Bush are still single. So, for example, if Ritchie, a State Police lieutenant, were killed in the line of duty, Bush would not be eligible for federal benefits available to other widows of law enforcement officers.

Ritchie and Bush also have to check the "single" box on their federal tax returns, and they say that has cost them an extra $20,000 over the six years they have been married.

"That's huge money," Ritchie says, "and it's only going to continue to grow, and that money is ours."

"It's sort of like we're treated as second-class citizens," Bush adds.

Bush, Ritchie and 17 other plaintiffs argue that the federal government can't just ignore some marriage certificates and recognize others. Their lawyer, Gary Buseck with Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders, says DOMA violates the equal protection clause of the Constitution because it is discriminatory.

When Congress passed the law in 1996, Buseck says, members "simply had a knee-jerk reaction that we have to bar the doors of the federal government in every conceivable way from the invasion of married gay people. I mean, they let it all hang loose."

Indeed, in heated congressional debate over DOMA in 1996, supporters argued the stakes couldn't be higher. One of DOMA's authors, former Republican Rep. Bob Barr, proclaimed, "The flames of hedonism and the flames of self-centered morality are licking at the very foundations of our society."

Barr, now a libertarian, has since called for DOMA's repeal, saying it violates states rights. President Obama also supports repeal. But his administration is in the awkward position of having to defend the law in court. As a Department of Justice official put it, we "can't pick and choose which federal laws [to] defend based on any one administration's policy preferences."

So, while government lawyers go out of their way in their legal papers to call DOMA “discriminatory,” they’re also arguing Congress did have good reason to want to preserve the status quo.

Peter Sprigg, with the Family Research Counsel, says Congress had to hit the brakes on redefining marriage.

"A change in something so fundamental to society as the definition of marriage should not be forced upon the federal government by the decisions of a handful — a tiny minority — of the states," he says. "I think it's obvious that Congress has an interest in not allowing that to happen."

But legal experts say that argument will be a hard sell, since the federal government has always deferred to states on the issue of marriage eligibility.

States have long had conflicting laws, and the federal government has never before refused to yield to a state's definition of who is legally wed.

"The federal government has never taken this step against any other class of marriages in American history," says Andrew Koppelman, a professor at Northwestern University Law School.

"Not between uncles and nieces, not between blacks and whites, not between young teenagers," he says. "Never, ever before."

Koppelman says this lawsuit may well succeed, in part, because it's limited in scope.

The plaintiffs are suing only for recognition from the federal government, but not from other states. Their suit does not address the part of DOMA that protects states from having to recognize a gay marriage from another state.

But that's little comfort to opponents of gay marriage like Sprigg.

"Obviously it's not going to be just limited to this," he says. "The people who are pressing this are people who believe that same-sex marriage is a civil right and should be legal in all 50 states. That is their ultimate goal and they will not be satisfied until that goal is achieved."

Bush and Ritchie laugh at the suggestion. "Of course!" they say; they'd love to see gay marriage legal everywhere. But that is a different fight, they say. This battle is for couples like them who are already married.

"This is about my family and protecting my family," says Bush. "You know, [the fight for marriage] is over in Massachusetts. It's done. We just need to recognize that."

If they prevail in federal court, and through an appeal, it'll almost certainly be the U.S. Supreme Court that decides whether a same-sex marriage in Massachusetts ought to mean more than it already does.

Hundreds of Vets will take DADT Fight to Capitol Hill on May 11 “Veterans’ Lobby Day”

clipped from www.hrcbackstory.org By jarrod chlapowski May 5th, 2010 at 4:38 pm Three hundred vets, and growing. But it’s not enough. We are on the path of creating the biggest veteran-focused lobby day on DADT in history. Veterans from around the country – from Massachussetts to Florida, from California to Virginia, from Indiana to Ohio to West Virginia – are coming to represent not only their home state, but their individual capacity as veterans who have dedicated a portion of their lives to serving the United States. They are the constituents who understand “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” better than anyone else, understand the military better than anyone else, and therefore can speak to the issue from an informed and passionate perspective. Three hundred veterans. But we can do better. Jarrod Chlapowski

There are over one million gay and lesbian veterans. There are millions more straight supporters in the defense community. We need every able body to come to the lobby day and let their member of Congress know that they cannot be on the wrong side of history. The time is now, and we need you, and every veteran you know, to help us out.

We’re a week away from another historical day in the fight to repeal DADT. Let’s make it big, let’s make it powerful, and let’s change the course for the better.

Jarrod Chlapowski is an HRC Public Policy Advocate on DADT and a veteran of the U.S. Army.