Background on Statehouse Barefoot Rule

The proposed rule action can be found here. What it does is add a new rule that states:

Attire – Full attire, including shirts and footwear, are required within the capitol buildings.

The current state of the rule is "To Be Refiled." It had originally been filed (proposed) on February 11. However, they were not able to attend the official meeting on it (scheduled for March 29), so they have been forced to withdraw it and then refile it. Obviously, it has not yet been refiled, so that gives us a chance to try to get the Board to completely withdraw the proposed rule change.

Here is the history of their rulemaking: On June 17, 2009, I was stopped by a State Trooper who was really upset that I was barefoot, and who was sure there was a rule. He called his Sergeant, who also didn't like it that I was challenging their authority. Finally, they got in touch with CSRAB, which confirmed that there was no such rule. However, this is what prompted them to make the rule (you have the right to be free until you try to exercise that right—they they'll take it away from you). In their July meeting, CSRAB adopted their barefoot rule. However, to become effective, it had to go through the full approval process, which includes publishing it in the Register of Ohio, then having it scheduled for a hearing before the Joint Committee on Agency Rule Review.

The proposed barefoot rule was first filed on February 2. I happened to notice it February 11. I'm afraid that I kind of let any effort lag after that. However, the hearing before JCARR was scheduled for March 29. It turns out that the CSRAB folks could not make that committee meeting, so they had to withdraw the rule, and will have to refile it. The current status of the rule is "To Be Refiled", so they haven't even refiled it. That gives us a perfect opportunity to try to get to both the Executive Director of CSRAB and all the Board Members before it is refiled. Or if it does get refiled, there will still be plenty of time to get to them to try to get them to withdraw it permanently at their April 21 CSRAB Board meeting.

I talked to their Executive Director on March 22. He claimed then that the reason for the rule was that they had sharp bricks there that a barefoot person might cut their feet on. I sent a quick email to their Executive Director asking the following:

Dear Mr. Carleton,

When we talked on the phone yesterday, you mentioned that there were bricks with sharp edges in the Statehouse that would be a danger to bare feet. I've never seen such bricks in my visits. Could you please tell me where they are?

Many thanks,
Bob

In response, he sent me a fairly long defense of the rule:

Dear Mr. Neinast:

The "no bare feet" policy was put into place by the members of the Capitol Square Review and Advisory Board to help ensure the health and safety of the nearly 500,000 individuals that utilize the complex each year. Considering such a diverse range of individuals utilize the Ohio Statehouse, it is important to institute broad policies that protect everyone.

The Ohio Statehouse hosts nearly 800 events annually; many of the events include catered meals, glassware and open cooking stations. Because the Capitol Square complex provides a diverse array of services, the Board felt it was necessary to institute the broad "no bare feet" policy to protect everyone during any particular event or situation. This policy may seem broad and unfair, however, we need to take into affect that our rules are instituted to protect a broad range of visitors (i.e.: school aged children and senior citizens) for a broad range of events (i.e.: rallies, weddings and galas).

In regards to our phone discussion yesterday, a few of the 150 year old stone and marble floors within the Statehouse are cracked and can be hazardous. The vulnerable floors are located in the Rotunda, Crypt, North and South Hallways and outside Representatives' Hall and the Ohio Senate Chamber. Floor plans of the building can be seen at www.ohiostatehouse.org.

Best regards.

William E. Carleton
Executive Director
Capitol Square Review and Advisory Board

There was one more piece of information that I wanted to get. Under the CSRAB's own rules under the Ohio Administrative Code, a proposed rule needs

A statement of the reason or purpose for adopting, amending or rescinding the rule, . . .

and this statement should be available from them. So, on Thursday, March 25, I went to their office to try to get a copy of it, and they did not even know about their own Rule 128-2-01. But Mr. Carleton did say that their meeting notices are online. The meeting notice for the meeting in which they adopted their rule is here. No mention of the proposed rule change, or what purpose it serves. They are violating there very own rules!

Here is a write-up of my encounter with Mr. Carleton (it was sent to the BF-Access yahoogroup). From it, you can see just how prejudiced, ignorant, and podophobic he is.

I just got back from the Statehouse. I wanted to get a copy of the public meeting notice as specified in CSRAB's Rule 128-2-01:

     <http://66.161.141.164/oac/128-2>.

That's when it got interesting. The lady at the front desk didn't know anything about such a notice. She went in back to talk to Carleton. He came out. I introduced myself (adding we exchanged emails). He looked down at my feet.

It turns out that they don't have any copies. He thought there might be something on the web page, but that it didn't have all that much. He said he would send to me what he could find if I gave him my address.

I then started talking to him about the rule. That it wasn't dangerous; that I'd carefully checked out the floors and they were perfectly safe. He still claimed you could cut a foot on them. I asked him if he'd ever tried it. Horror! Too dangerous in his eyes. I told him he had no evidence that they were dangerous, and he claimed that it was his opinion, which was just as good as mine (!). I reminded him that I had years of experience going barefoot that he did not have, and he just didn't know what he was talking about.

He talked a lot about health and safety. However, I pointed out that the Health Department had no problem. At one point I tried my humorous "feet don't emit magic death rays," and he said, "yes, they do." (!!!!!!) I again had to remind him that if they did, the Health Department might have said something about it.

He then switched to the old, "But we serve food here." My answer, "So?" Again, he seemed to think that somehow food required shoes. Again, ignorant of the Health Codes. Real podophobe.

He also said that there was nothing I could say to change things.

About that time 3 state troopers showed up and surrounded me and stood there looking as intimidating as possible. I did lose my train of thought at that point. I was not being the least bit aggressive or anything. One guess is that the secretary fetched them when I started talking to Carleton. Or, it might have been a trooper that I asked to find the CSRAB.

Anyways, I ended up giving him my address and then left.

One other thing: I did find the press release of the meeting online. It's here:

     <http://tinyurl.com/yfahujv>.

Notice that it does not say that a rule change is being addressed (as required by their very own rules!!!). It also does not say the purpose of the rule (but I guess at this point it is safe to assume "health and safety"). I still don't get how an authorization to make rules to "operate the capitol square" include a dress code.

After I got home, I ended up sending Carleton two more emails (I am still going to send him an official letter). The first one was just to let him know that I had found the press release (though I did go on a bit more after that).

Dear Mr. Carleton,

I think I found the online version of the press release for the July meeting. Is this it?

<http://www.ohiochannel.org/your_state/ohio_statehouse/communications/press_releases/press_release.cfm?release_id=94636>

or

<http://tinyurl.com/yfahujv>.

Oddly enough, it fails to mention that Rule 128-4-02 was being considered, a clear violation of your own rule 128-2-01. Or maybe there is a more complete public notice that went out?

Anyways, if that is the public meeting notice you were talking about, there is no need to send it to me.

I understand your great resistance to the thought that bare feet might be healthier than wearing shoes, but I have the medical evidence to show it. Those bricks that you pointed out to me are not the least bit dangerous. However, it is also clear, since you will not try it yourself, you really have no idea about its safety. Really, what you ought to do is, if you have to stay late some evening, when there is nobody around, just try walking down there barefoot. I guarantee that you will not hurt yourself, and you might learn something.

It was also clear to me that you hold misconceptions about health and safety. As I mentioned, there is no Health Department rule requiring shoes at food establishments. If feet really did emit "magic death rays", then you'd have to ban flip-flops and sandals, but you don't. I'm afraid you've just bought into urban myth. And if you had barefoot rules at other buildings you managed, all that means is that you bought into urban myth back then, too.

By the way, glass really isn't very dangerous. I not only occasionally step on it (though there is much less around than you might think, and I look for it), but I will deliberately go over to some and step on it, just to prove that it is not particularly dangerous. However, high heels really are dangerous (and I have the evidence to prove it). In fact, some of those irregularities on your floors really are dangerous if a heel gets caught on one. Yet, I bet you never consider banning high heels as dangerous. It is only because bare feet are outside your experience that you would consider banning them.

By the way, I really am pretty mild-mannered. There was no reason to call the troopers on me.

I really wish you could let go of your prejudice and reconsider any need of a barefoot rule. I'm more than willing to provide you with any information that will help you come to that realization. Let me know if there is anything you need.

Sincerely,
Bob

The second letter was just a PS.

William Carleton wrote:
> Floor plans of the building can be seen at www.ohiostatehouse.org.

PS. I think some of those floor plans need to be updated. It shows the CSRAB offices still up on the 3rd floor (on the House side). I had to ask at the Desk in the Rotunda (by the way, can you imagine the religious feeling of stepping barefoot on those tiles there where such great historical events have taken place?). That may have been what sent those troopers chasing after me (by the way, they really need to be trained better not to intimidate and harass simple, well-behaved citizens).

Sincerely,
Bob