A smaller midwest city is contemplating streetcars. One notion in the article is "keep it simple."
Is that the battle line that is forming in the Cincinnati Street car fight? Do we have three camps now?
1. Those who want to start simple with a Riverfront to Findlay Market Line, then expand later to an Uptown line.
2. Those who want to start big, requiring a plan to include funding for a line to Uptown, other neighborhoods and a connection to the Metro bus system.
3. Those who want seek to make the Urban city into a suburban wasteland. The leader of that pack is John "When can I drink a beer at my favorite chain sports bar" Cranley.
Option 2 sounds like a good long run ideal, but the fight appears to be over what can get done and what can be paid for. I hope those in camps 1 and 2 don't let the passe thinkers in camp #3 win.
Saturday, February 23, 2008
Packin' Heat At City Hall
Shortly after Mayor Mark Mallory took office, he ordered the removal of the metal detectors guarding City Hall's front entrance, arguing for more public access to the building where the people's business is conducted. Now, Kevin Osborne reports that the metal detectors are coming back, and being joined by three armed security guards.
There seems to be a juxtaposition between what our city leaders say and what they do. We're constantly told how safe downtown is (and by and large, I think that message is correct). But Mayor Mallory is afraid to venture out into the city without a police escort (his bodyguard/security detail/whatever was even seen with Mallory at Senator Clinton's Skyline appearance--apparently, the mayor was worried that the presidential candidate's Secret Service contingent might not be up to handling an armed threat on its own). And now we learn that our elected leaders and City employees don't feel safe working in City Hall unless constituents coming to see them pass through a metal detector.
Is a weapon check at the entrance to every government building simply a cost of living in the twenty-first century that isn't even worthy of discussion or comment anymore? Or should we demand better than kneejerk responses from our leaders?
There seems to be a juxtaposition between what our city leaders say and what they do. We're constantly told how safe downtown is (and by and large, I think that message is correct). But Mayor Mallory is afraid to venture out into the city without a police escort (his bodyguard/security detail/whatever was even seen with Mallory at Senator Clinton's Skyline appearance--apparently, the mayor was worried that the presidential candidate's Secret Service contingent might not be up to handling an armed threat on its own). And now we learn that our elected leaders and City employees don't feel safe working in City Hall unless constituents coming to see them pass through a metal detector.
Is a weapon check at the entrance to every government building simply a cost of living in the twenty-first century that isn't even worthy of discussion or comment anymore? Or should we demand better than kneejerk responses from our leaders?
Open Thread For Hillary
Was anyone at today's town hall meeting? What's your reaction to Senator Clinton's performance?
And is anyone else surprised by how quickly Senator Clinton's lead (at least according to polling data) has shrunk? The Washington Post has Texas as a dead heat, and Ohio as a 50-43 Clinton edge (down from a 20-point lead a few weeks ago). Is seeing Senator Obama really that magical an experience, or is there something else at work here?
And is anyone else surprised by how quickly Senator Clinton's lead (at least according to polling data) has shrunk? The Washington Post has Texas as a dead heat, and Ohio as a 50-43 Clinton edge (down from a 20-point lead a few weeks ago). Is seeing Senator Obama really that magical an experience, or is there something else at work here?
Friday, February 22, 2008
Cincinnati's Top Ten Restaurants-- Cincinnati Magazine, March 2008.
1. Boca
2. Jean Robert at Pigall's
3. Orchids at Palm Court
4. Nicola's
5. Slims
6. Jean Ro Bistro
7. Cumin
8. Jo An
9. Nectar
10. Daveed's at 934
As usual, Boca and Pigall's flip flop for top restaurant. I'm surprised to see Slims and Cumin on this list (not because they're not good, they are, but because these lists skew towards the expensive and "special") and I thought Daveed's would place higher. What do you think? Which restaurants were snubbed, and which don't deserve to be on there?
2. Jean Robert at Pigall's
3. Orchids at Palm Court
4. Nicola's
5. Slims
6. Jean Ro Bistro
7. Cumin
8. Jo An
9. Nectar
10. Daveed's at 934
As usual, Boca and Pigall's flip flop for top restaurant. I'm surprised to see Slims and Cumin on this list (not because they're not good, they are, but because these lists skew towards the expensive and "special") and I thought Daveed's would place higher. What do you think? Which restaurants were snubbed, and which don't deserve to be on there?
Shameless Promotion Time
Time is running out on your chance to vote in City Beat's 2008 Best of Cincinnati (or Cincinnatuh as my Kentucky friends say) survey. Please go vote and be sure to vote for YOU KNOW WHAT as best blog --- Number 153 on the survey -- and vote for The Banks as Best Place To Take Visitors, Best Playground, Best Hot Spot, Best Romantic Hideaway, and Best Use of Public Funds. Voting ends March 1. Granted this may not be as important as the Ohio primary vote you cast on March 4, but please remember that Julie, Donald and I are on probation (or at least I am) and Griff is watching closely. I approved this ad because it is time Cincinnati had a blog as full of queenly vision as the Queen City herself.
Thursday, February 21, 2008
White Death 2008
OK...Here's an open thread for your commute stories. Have at it.
For me: at about 4:00, I left my downtown office to travel up 71 to Lebanon. You can imagine how well that went. The drive back down, which commenced around 8, was almost as much fun.
For me: at about 4:00, I left my downtown office to travel up 71 to Lebanon. You can imagine how well that went. The drive back down, which commenced around 8, was almost as much fun.
Roxanne Kills The Streetcars
According to the Enquirer, Roxanne Qualls will introduce a motion--which is already publicly backed by a majority of Council--to change the streetcar proposal so that rather than building the downtown-OTR loop, the streetcar would immediately include an uptown line. Under the current proposal (the one that Qualls is supplanting), the "loop" would be built first, with the uptown line added later.
Even the smaller, less ambitious looop initially proposed involves a huge outlay of public funds. But the Councilmembers supporting it had seemed to work through a way to finance it. I'm not sure there's any real hope that Council would pass a streetcar proposal that includes the increased pricetag that comes along with the Uptown link; it would be difficult to imagine finding the funding to do it immediately, rather than in the two phases initially proposed.
I'm not sure if Qualls is intentionally making sure streetcars don't come to Cincinnati, but that's almost certain to be the result of her actions.
Even the smaller, less ambitious looop initially proposed involves a huge outlay of public funds. But the Councilmembers supporting it had seemed to work through a way to finance it. I'm not sure there's any real hope that Council would pass a streetcar proposal that includes the increased pricetag that comes along with the Uptown link; it would be difficult to imagine finding the funding to do it immediately, rather than in the two phases initially proposed.
I'm not sure if Qualls is intentionally making sure streetcars don't come to Cincinnati, but that's almost certain to be the result of her actions.
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
On The Docket: Stopping The Insanity
Gerry Porter bought a home in Green Township in 1991. In 1995, he was convicted of a misdemeanor sex-related crime, and in 1999, he was convicted of sexual battery. The trial court labelled him a sexually-oriented offender.
In 2003, Ohio enacted what we all call the "1,000-foot rule," the law that forbids sex offenders from living within 1,000 feet of a school. A couple years later, the folks in Green Township realized (likely with the help of a GPS device) that Porter's house was 983 feet from St. Jude Elementary. Even though the school isn't visible from the house (or vice-versa) and walking or driving from the house to the school would require traversing a distrance of much more than 1,000 feet, Green Township filed an ejectment action against Pyle. Green Township won in the trial court and again in the court of appeals, even though Porter owned his home and had committed his offense prior to the enactment of the law.
Today, the Ohio Supreme Court, in a 6-1 decision, held that the law is not retroactive. In other words, people like Porter--whose offense was commited prior to the law and who owned a home within 1,000 feet of a school prior to the law--cannot be ejected. The decision does not stop the Ohio legislature from redrafting the law to make it retroactive; the court declined to reach the issue of whether such a law would be constitutional.
This is a terrific win for the Ohio Justice and Policy Center and its director, Cincinnati attorney David Singleton. It's an important first step in injecting some notion of fairness and sanity to Ohio's sex offender registration laws.
In 2003, Ohio enacted what we all call the "1,000-foot rule," the law that forbids sex offenders from living within 1,000 feet of a school. A couple years later, the folks in Green Township realized (likely with the help of a GPS device) that Porter's house was 983 feet from St. Jude Elementary. Even though the school isn't visible from the house (or vice-versa) and walking or driving from the house to the school would require traversing a distrance of much more than 1,000 feet, Green Township filed an ejectment action against Pyle. Green Township won in the trial court and again in the court of appeals, even though Porter owned his home and had committed his offense prior to the enactment of the law.
Today, the Ohio Supreme Court, in a 6-1 decision, held that the law is not retroactive. In other words, people like Porter--whose offense was commited prior to the law and who owned a home within 1,000 feet of a school prior to the law--cannot be ejected. The decision does not stop the Ohio legislature from redrafting the law to make it retroactive; the court declined to reach the issue of whether such a law would be constitutional.
This is a terrific win for the Ohio Justice and Policy Center and its director, Cincinnati attorney David Singleton. It's an important first step in injecting some notion of fairness and sanity to Ohio's sex offender registration laws.
Cinciditarod: Registration Closes 5PM Thursday
Get your team ready for the Cinciditarod: Cincinnati's Urban Iditarod. Registration for the March 1st event end this Thursday February 21st at 5PM.
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
Bockfest Hall at Former Red Cheetah
One of the big questions on this year's Bockfest has been where the main Bockfest Hall would be located. According to the map of the parade and shuttle it appears it will be at the former Red Cheetah club (aka Sycamore Gardens). If anyone can confirm the map, please chime in.
Regionalism: Explain This To Me Like I'm A Six Year-Old, Okay?
I'm constantly surprised by which of my posts will generate a lot of responses, and which will go unnoticed. My post on Moe's closing, for instance, drew far more comments than I had anticipated. (And I reiterate: the point of the post was not to express schadenfreude over the failure of a northern Kentucky business, but instead to make a broader point about the way some seem to view downtown Cincinnati.) Several of the comments focused on the theme of "regionalism" (and what a great idea it is).
I have to admit to having two questions:
If I'm a Cincinnatian desiring the best for Cincinnati, does that inevitably mean I want the best for surrounding communities, as well?
There are certain types of "regionalism" that would always seem to be beneficial. For instance, City Manager Milton Dohoney is working on a plan to turn Cincinnati Water Works into a regional water district. While of particular benefit to Cincinnati (with regards to increased revenue), as I understand the theory, the expansion would drive down water rates across the district. So that's a win-win.
But some of the commenters to the Moe's post seem to suggest that "regionalism" meets rooting for Newport (and Covington and West Chester and others) to have thriving business communities. But I question the wisdom of that, as I'm not sure that the figurative pie from which each sovereign's economy must draw money is unlimited. For instance, should Cincinnatians be pleased if the former Jillian's is converted into a casino? Certainly members of Council don't think so, as they seem poised to push a state-wide measure that would permit the building of casinos in any county neighboring a state with casinos. Does a Jillian's Casino increase tourist traffic to the entire "region," or does it instead suck money away from Cincinnati and surrounding communities? And don't "regionalism" efforts have particular problems here, where we're not just dealing with disparate local sovereigns, but municipal governments located in three different states (one of the issues I'm thinking of here, obviously, is tax revenue)? If a major retailer is considering locating in downtown or Sharonville, should Cincinnati compete for it, or be content that even in Sharonville, the new business would be in the "region"?
So tell me, regionalists: when do I have to play nice in the sandbox, and when am I allowed to root, root, root for the home team?
I have to admit to having two questions:
- What do people mean when they say (or write) "regionalism"?
- Is it really a desirable end in and of itself?
If I'm a Cincinnatian desiring the best for Cincinnati, does that inevitably mean I want the best for surrounding communities, as well?
There are certain types of "regionalism" that would always seem to be beneficial. For instance, City Manager Milton Dohoney is working on a plan to turn Cincinnati Water Works into a regional water district. While of particular benefit to Cincinnati (with regards to increased revenue), as I understand the theory, the expansion would drive down water rates across the district. So that's a win-win.
But some of the commenters to the Moe's post seem to suggest that "regionalism" meets rooting for Newport (and Covington and West Chester and others) to have thriving business communities. But I question the wisdom of that, as I'm not sure that the figurative pie from which each sovereign's economy must draw money is unlimited. For instance, should Cincinnatians be pleased if the former Jillian's is converted into a casino? Certainly members of Council don't think so, as they seem poised to push a state-wide measure that would permit the building of casinos in any county neighboring a state with casinos. Does a Jillian's Casino increase tourist traffic to the entire "region," or does it instead suck money away from Cincinnati and surrounding communities? And don't "regionalism" efforts have particular problems here, where we're not just dealing with disparate local sovereigns, but municipal governments located in three different states (one of the issues I'm thinking of here, obviously, is tax revenue)? If a major retailer is considering locating in downtown or Sharonville, should Cincinnati compete for it, or be content that even in Sharonville, the new business would be in the "region"?
So tell me, regionalists: when do I have to play nice in the sandbox, and when am I allowed to root, root, root for the home team?
College Hill Condos Coming
Al. Neyer is set to start selling condos for its $10 million condo development at the corner of Hamilton and North Bend Road, the Enquirer reports. Once the company sells nine, it will commence ground-breaking. This is a great news for the intersection, the development of which has long been a central focus for the College Hill community.
I'm fascinated by the people who buy condos site-unseen. It's a fairly common practice, as most of the new condo developments in the area are 80 to 100 percent sold out by the time they're completed. If you're one of these eager-beaver buyers, weren't you nervous about buying something you haven't seen yet? Do these people typically buy for an investment opportunity with an eye towards flipping the condo in a few years, or are the early buyers long-term residents?
I'd love to buy a condo at a new development in either downtown or OTR, but I can't get past my need to walk through a place before I plunk down a chunk of change.
I'm fascinated by the people who buy condos site-unseen. It's a fairly common practice, as most of the new condo developments in the area are 80 to 100 percent sold out by the time they're completed. If you're one of these eager-beaver buyers, weren't you nervous about buying something you haven't seen yet? Do these people typically buy for an investment opportunity with an eye towards flipping the condo in a few years, or are the early buyers long-term residents?
I'd love to buy a condo at a new development in either downtown or OTR, but I can't get past my need to walk through a place before I plunk down a chunk of change.
On The Docket: Smiling Bob Meets Uncle Sam
Back on January 8, a jury was selected to hear the case of United States v. Berkeley Premium Netraceuticals (and several of its corporate officers). Earlier today, closing arguments were completed and the jury was given final instructions. Deliberations are set to commence tomorrow morning. (The Enquirer's most recent article on closing arguments, which began last week, is here.) I've never been involved in a trial of this length, and have often wondered how one finds a jury of twelve (plus a couple alternates) who can give up their employment for a month or longer.
Berkeley is the company that manufactures and markets Enzyte, a product which Berekeley claimed (often through ads featuring "Smiling Bob") could enhance a certain part of the male anatomy.
In 2004, the Enquirer reported that Berekeley was a $250 million per year company, employing 1,000 people locally.
Berkeley is the company that manufactures and markets Enzyte, a product which Berekeley claimed (often through ads featuring "Smiling Bob") could enhance a certain part of the male anatomy.
In 2004, the Enquirer reported that Berekeley was a $250 million per year company, employing 1,000 people locally.
Monday, February 18, 2008
Another Restaurant Closes; Let's Panic
Yet another downtown restaurant has closed. It's a clear sign that downtown is in trouble, and isn't drawing enough people to support the dining and entertainment venues there. So don't buy or rent living space there, and certainly don't think about going there to spend your money. In all likelihood, the restaurant closed because people are so afraid they'll become crime victims when they come to the area.
Oh, wait!!! I misread the linked article! It's not a downtown restaurant at all--it's Moe's Southwest Grill in Newport on the Levee. So everytime you see the word "downtown" in the previous paragraph, replace it with "Newport."
Sorry. Of course the closing of Moe's doesn't mean that Newport--or even the Levee--is in trouble. But that's how certain people would be spinning the story if it were a downtown restaurant. So next time a downtown establishment closes up, can we refrain from taking the "the sky is falling approach" to reporting news? (For "certain people," you can fill in the name of your favorite Enquirer reporter or City Beat blogger.)
I'm sorry, by the way, to see Moe's go, as I am anytime a business closes and employees inevitably lose jobs and have their lives disrupted. I don't mean to make light of a bad situation for those adversely affected.
Oh, wait!!! I misread the linked article! It's not a downtown restaurant at all--it's Moe's Southwest Grill in Newport on the Levee. So everytime you see the word "downtown" in the previous paragraph, replace it with "Newport."
Sorry. Of course the closing of Moe's doesn't mean that Newport--or even the Levee--is in trouble. But that's how certain people would be spinning the story if it were a downtown restaurant. So next time a downtown establishment closes up, can we refrain from taking the "the sky is falling approach" to reporting news? (For "certain people," you can fill in the name of your favorite Enquirer reporter or City Beat blogger.)
I'm sorry, by the way, to see Moe's go, as I am anytime a business closes and employees inevitably lose jobs and have their lives disrupted. I don't mean to make light of a bad situation for those adversely affected.
But Where's The Big Hair?
Did anyone else feel like they were trapped in some strange time warp last night? NBC's primetime lineup consisted entirely of American Gladiators and Knight Rider. (Who agrees with me that if you put the women's winner, Monica, up on a joust platform with the men's winner, Evan, that Monica would win in about 6 seconds?)
Don't get me wrong--I watched every minute of both. (As a male of a certain age, watching a new installment of Knight Rider was some sort of preordained, primordial duty.) I'm just sayin'....
Don't get me wrong--I watched every minute of both. (As a male of a certain age, watching a new installment of Knight Rider was some sort of preordained, primordial duty.) I'm just sayin'....
Detour Ahead
I'm sure that it's absolutely necessary, but the closing of the Eighth Street viaduct isn't going to make getting to the West Side (or back Downtown from the West Side) much fun at all.
Sunday, February 17, 2008
Portman for McCain's VP?
On Meet the Press this morning, Rob Portman (former 2nd District Congressman from Ohio and Cincinnati Resident) was mentioned as a possible VP running mate for John McCain.
From a local angle, how much attention would that put on Cincinnati if a local person were on the national ticket? Would that be good for us, no matter what? We are looking to be a big stop on the campaign trail again, with the nation NAACP convention being a stop for the Presidential nominees. I don't look forward to those who seek to bash the city at all cost (say Chris Smitherman or Joe Deters for example) getting the opportunity to frame the discussion when ever Cincinnati is referenced.
Portman is not considered on the A list for the VP slot, but logically he has the economic background McCain lacks. From a GOP perspective, one
Would Portman, a fairly well liked former Ohio Congressman, give McCain Ohio?
From a local angle, how much attention would that put on Cincinnati if a local person were on the national ticket? Would that be good for us, no matter what? We are looking to be a big stop on the campaign trail again, with the nation NAACP convention being a stop for the Presidential nominees. I don't look forward to those who seek to bash the city at all cost (say Chris Smitherman or Joe Deters for example) getting the opportunity to frame the discussion when ever Cincinnati is referenced.
Portman is not considered on the A list for the VP slot, but logically he has the economic background McCain lacks. From a GOP perspective, one
Would Portman, a fairly well liked former Ohio Congressman, give McCain Ohio?
Saturday, February 16, 2008
Advantage Democrat?
I've been a little post-happy the last two days. I promise, this is the last one for the weekend (unless something really interesting comes up tomorrow).
The conventional wisdom is that the Democrats' prolonged primary season will benefit John McCain. Supposedly, McCain can now begin "uniting" the Republican Party behind him and begin a national general election campaign, while Barack and Hillary are left to squabble over who the nominee will be. I've begun to wonder if the opposite is true.
As you may recall, the Florida legislature moved the date of its primary to be ahead of Super Tuesday. The Democratic National Committee had told it not to do so, and threatened to refuse to seat Florida's delegates at the convention. Well, Florida stuck to its guns (and according to the current DNC rules, Florida will have no voice in choosing the Democratic nominee). The major Democratic candidates all agreed not to campaign in Florida before its primary.
The Republicans took a more laid-back approach, though, and just stripped Florida of half of its delegates to the Republican convention. The Florida Republican party was thrilled. It believes that as a result, the Republican candidate will have a head start in Florida for the general election, since he's already campaigned and built an organization there, whereas the Democrats didn't bother. (The DNC is still weighing whether to hold caucuses in Florida and Michigan, which also jumped the gun, and seat delegates based on those results.)
Does the same hold true for the Democrats? Three states that are sure to be pivotal in November--Wisconsin, Texas, and Ohio--are going to see a whole lot of love from Clinton and Obama. We already know about the intense organization-building taking place in Cincinnati, and I can only assume the same is happeneing in Madison, Milwaukee, Houston, Dallas, and so on. So this supposed disadvantage (that the Dems will actually elect a nominee rather than simply coronate one) might work out in the Democrats' favor. Well in advance of the conventions, the Democratic nominee will have GOTV organizations in place. The still-to-be-contested primary states will have a lot of opportunity to see the eventual nominee. And John McCain will have to start from scratch.
Any thoughts?
The conventional wisdom is that the Democrats' prolonged primary season will benefit John McCain. Supposedly, McCain can now begin "uniting" the Republican Party behind him and begin a national general election campaign, while Barack and Hillary are left to squabble over who the nominee will be. I've begun to wonder if the opposite is true.
As you may recall, the Florida legislature moved the date of its primary to be ahead of Super Tuesday. The Democratic National Committee had told it not to do so, and threatened to refuse to seat Florida's delegates at the convention. Well, Florida stuck to its guns (and according to the current DNC rules, Florida will have no voice in choosing the Democratic nominee). The major Democratic candidates all agreed not to campaign in Florida before its primary.
The Republicans took a more laid-back approach, though, and just stripped Florida of half of its delegates to the Republican convention. The Florida Republican party was thrilled. It believes that as a result, the Republican candidate will have a head start in Florida for the general election, since he's already campaigned and built an organization there, whereas the Democrats didn't bother. (The DNC is still weighing whether to hold caucuses in Florida and Michigan, which also jumped the gun, and seat delegates based on those results.)
Does the same hold true for the Democrats? Three states that are sure to be pivotal in November--Wisconsin, Texas, and Ohio--are going to see a whole lot of love from Clinton and Obama. We already know about the intense organization-building taking place in Cincinnati, and I can only assume the same is happeneing in Madison, Milwaukee, Houston, Dallas, and so on. So this supposed disadvantage (that the Dems will actually elect a nominee rather than simply coronate one) might work out in the Democrats' favor. Well in advance of the conventions, the Democratic nominee will have GOTV organizations in place. The still-to-be-contested primary states will have a lot of opportunity to see the eventual nominee. And John McCain will have to start from scratch.
Any thoughts?
Cincinnati: More Progressive Than You Think?
I'm a little reluctant to post this for fear of starting a religious flame war in the comment thread. But as a born-and-raised Presbyterian (the son, in fact, of a Presbyterian pastor), I can't pass up this story.
Tuesday night, the Presbytery of Cincinnati (roughly the equivalent of a diocese, but governed democratically rather than by a bishop) voted to send an overture to the General Assembly (the Presbyterian Church's national governing body, which meets once every two years) to permit the ordination of openly gay and lesbian pastors, elders, and deacons. The Enquirer's coverage is here.
It's certainly not surprising that a presbytery is sending such an overture to the General Assembly. This is a battle that the Presbyterian Church (USA) has been fighting for years. Many believe the issue will ultimately force some sort of formal schism in the church. Some, in fact, are openly working towards such a schism. (It's not easy for a congregation to separate itself from the Presbyterian Church, though; each individual church's property is held in trust by the presbytery in which it sits, so any congregation that "left" would also leave behind its building. If there's a schism, expect lots of nasty battles in secular courts on this issue--the Methodists are already fighting them.)
Is is surprising, however, that the overture is coming from the Presbytery of Cincinnati. This is a city that hasn't always been gay-friendly (think about the now-repealed Article XII). Just a few years ago, the Presbytery of Cincinnati defrocked Steven Van Kuiken for performing same-sex wedding ceremonies. (You can read City Beat's article on the resulting aftermath at Mt. Auburn Presbyterian Church, where Rev. Van Kuiken had been pastor, here.)
I really like it when Cincinnati surprises me like this.
Tuesday night, the Presbytery of Cincinnati (roughly the equivalent of a diocese, but governed democratically rather than by a bishop) voted to send an overture to the General Assembly (the Presbyterian Church's national governing body, which meets once every two years) to permit the ordination of openly gay and lesbian pastors, elders, and deacons. The Enquirer's coverage is here.
It's certainly not surprising that a presbytery is sending such an overture to the General Assembly. This is a battle that the Presbyterian Church (USA) has been fighting for years. Many believe the issue will ultimately force some sort of formal schism in the church. Some, in fact, are openly working towards such a schism. (It's not easy for a congregation to separate itself from the Presbyterian Church, though; each individual church's property is held in trust by the presbytery in which it sits, so any congregation that "left" would also leave behind its building. If there's a schism, expect lots of nasty battles in secular courts on this issue--the Methodists are already fighting them.)
Is is surprising, however, that the overture is coming from the Presbytery of Cincinnati. This is a city that hasn't always been gay-friendly (think about the now-repealed Article XII). Just a few years ago, the Presbytery of Cincinnati defrocked Steven Van Kuiken for performing same-sex wedding ceremonies. (You can read City Beat's article on the resulting aftermath at Mt. Auburn Presbyterian Church, where Rev. Van Kuiken had been pastor, here.)
I really like it when Cincinnati surprises me like this.
Big Question Left Unanswered
Howard Wilkinson summarizes the Clinton and Obama events in Cincinnati yesterday. But he leaves unanswered the single most important question on the minds of Cincinnati voters:
Does Hillary Clinton like Cincinnati chili?
(In Howard's defense, he does note that the campaign staff and Clinton's press flotilla took with them a rather large to-go order. But there's no word on Senator Clinton's own preference. How can we choose our nominee if we don't know where the candidates stand on Cincinnati chili? Hopefully, Howard will do better next time one of the candidates is in town.)
Does Hillary Clinton like Cincinnati chili?
(In Howard's defense, he does note that the campaign staff and Clinton's press flotilla took with them a rather large to-go order. But there's no word on Senator Clinton's own preference. How can we choose our nominee if we don't know where the candidates stand on Cincinnati chili? Hopefully, Howard will do better next time one of the candidates is in town.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)