*Wow. I must have been really tired yesterday. There were even more typos than usual! Please accept my apologies, and know that I've edited this story for grammar on Tuesday, April 22.

I spent most of today stuck in airports between Baltimore and Albany. So much for my quick trip down to D.C. for the holiday. As such, and combined with the effects of severe sleep deprivation, having gotten up at 3:30 this morning to catch a phantom plane, I'm pretty much out of the loop on all things city related.

I did, however, want to pass this one thing along. (And this will be reiterated in the paper later in the week). By now, we all know the story: Kathy Kahl sued the city for the right to sell hot dogs in Congress Park. The suit resulted in the ruling that no vendors are allowed to operate in Congress Park, except on special occasion, as per the city charter.

After a spat of calls to the "Sound Off" column, and, apparently, a few comments to Kathy, I just wanted to reiterate here that Kathy didn't sue the city for money, and she did not get any money as a result of the ruling. All she wanted to do was sell hot dogs, and she can't do that now, at least not in Congress Park

So, in the case of the great hot dog caper, it seems that almost everyone is a looser. People who like to eat hot dogs lose. And people who like to sell hot dogs lose.

The only people who win are the taxpayers, who are fortunate enough to have a government that enforces its own laws. So, at the end of the day, you'll have to walk about farther for your hot dog, but you'll purchase it from a vendor who complies with the city ordinances. Perhaps that will make that dog taste sweeter?

On the other hand, if the public out cry over hot dogs reaches a tumult, perhaps the city council will consider amending the ordinance currently prohibiting that dog of you dreams. See you tomorrow.