Bad Boys of the Buzz
Sean Darks, a regular panelist on 1230 the Buzz's Week in Review program has hit FOX News. His company, along with partner Ben Moore, have started CityWatcher.com, a crime prevention service utilizing video camera surveillance.
Monday, July 14, 2003
More Convergys
John Schlagetter emails me with a response from Councilwoman Laketa Cole:
Council Candidate Nick Spenser's, via his blog, comes out against the Convergys deal, calling it "corporate welfare."
The City of Norwood officials are upset about this deal which stands to draw away jobs from Norwood.
Enquirer colmnist Denis Smith Amos believes the "City's Convergys deal gives too much, gets too little."
More coverage from the Enquirer, and Post.
John Schlagetter emails me with a response from Councilwoman Laketa Cole:
From: Cole, Laketa [mailto:Laketa.Cole@cincinnati-oh.gov]Cole has similar questions as Schlagetter.
Sent: Monday, July 14, 2003 12:48 PM
To: 'john@foregenitor.com'
Subject: RE: Convergys Deal Comments & Queries
Dear John:
As always thank you for your email. Your questions are right in line with
me thinking. I wanted to let you know that I have some reservation with
supporting Convergys.
Sincerely,
Councilmember Laketa Cole
Council Candidate Nick Spenser's, via his blog, comes out against the Convergys deal, calling it "corporate welfare."
The City of Norwood officials are upset about this deal which stands to draw away jobs from Norwood.
Enquirer colmnist Denis Smith Amos believes the "City's Convergys deal gives too much, gets too little."
More coverage from the Enquirer, and Post.
Sunday, July 13, 2003
A Shot Across the Bow
Council Candidate John Schlagetter has put the questions to City Council and the Mayor on the proposed Convergys Deal:
Council Candidate John Schlagetter has put the questions to City Council and the Mayor on the proposed Convergys Deal:
Subj: Convergys Deal Comments & QueriesThese are valid issues that should have been published on the city website. Open deal making is the only way to assure a democracy.
Date: 07/13/2003 1:13:23 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: john@foregenitor.com
To: Charlie.Luken@cincinnati-oh.gov, laketa.cole@cincinnati-oh.gov, minette.cooper@rcc.org, david.pepper@rcc.org, chris.monzel@rcc.org, alicia.reece@rcc.org
Mr. Mayor & Councilors:
Am I the only person finding it odd that a company based upon leveraging
distance relationships via technology wants $200 million in public money to
co-locate its own employees?
Several questions come to mind that are not addressed in the City Manager's
Memo published today by the Enquirer:
1. What is the Net Present Value of this "investment?"
2. What is the Discount Factor used to calculate this NPV?
3. What is the total sale price for the Third Street parking lot? (plus
column)
4. What is the loss in annual parking revenues resulting from the sale of
the parking lot? (minus column)
5. What is the Fair Market Value of the easement being given away between
Hammond Alley & Third Street? (minus column)
6. What is the FMV of the air rights above same being given away? (minus
column)
7. What is the FMV of the Pedestrian Access Right of Way being given away?
(minus column)
8. Convergys' current demand is for 300 people from Norwood Plus 97 per
year for 15 years. I am curious about the options considered and rejected
to locate them in the Convergys Center and its environs such as the
Provident Bank Building at Seventh & Vine, any space in the old Enquirer
Building, etc.
9. What percent of Convergys' current & proposed employees will live in
jurisdictions with their own local tax, further reducing the City's
collection?
Using the Posts' figures, the 15 year NET earnings tax collections per
employee will by less than $4,600 (not discounted for inflation). There
appears to be tremendous economic friction involved in this deal. This is
not an economic growth strategy; it is simply re-arranging deck chairs on
the Titanic.
Net: Convergys is willing to spend $100MM on a new building; the City & the
State are willing to spend $200MM to keep them here. Is there a third way
wherein the City & State fund the parking decks at The Banks which we need
anyway thus giving Convergys a platform upon which to erect its new
design-to-suit building? This presumes a CBD-Riverfront location is the
only option; consider also Broadway Commons, Queensgate (hideously
under-utilized land), West End (Western, EZ, Freeman exits), et.al.
Based upon the information provided in the City Manager's report (and the
appalling amount of information missing which is necessary to make an
informed investment decision), I find it hard to believe this deal as
structured is in the City's and the citizens' best interest.
Regards, J.
John Schlagetter
"Schlagetter for Cincinnati"
A Charter Committee Candidate
707 Race Street Suite 800
Cincinnati, Ohio 45202
513.652.3032 voice
513.929.0555 fax
www.john4council.com
Beating a Dead Horse
No, I am not talking about an equestrian snuff film. I am referring to my endless attack on the duplicitous Peter Bronson. His latest column starts off with an ironic twist I think was lost somewhere in Peter's gray hair. The irony begins squarely in the title: "Flynts' outrage just part of their fetish for ink." For those not familiar with newspaper terminology, should understand that "ink" is analogous to "coverage," more commonly used in the Broadcast media. Bronson's position is that the Flynts are just looking for more media attention, and Peter is providing that attention. If Pete wants the Flynts to just go away there is one simple solution, don't feed the beast!
In his column, Peter also displays elements of what can only be described logically as a physiological reaction to viewing the covers of porn videos/DVDs. I guess Peter has been taking Harry Potter to heart and has devolved the magical ability to know that a film is "explicit" and therefore violates the 1999 plea agreement without actually seeing the film. I guess not judging a book, or a video, by its cover is not an axiom popular in the Bronson household.
The most disingenuous comment from Bronson must be this:
Finally, Bronson is just being ignorant with this comment:
As a footnote, I have to wonder if it is an editorial policy of the Enquirer's old guard to mount a campaign disparaging the entire Flynt family. Bronson has now brought Jimmy Flynt's son Dustin into the fold by quoting him in his column. Dustin is involved in the operation of the Hustler store downtown and is fair game to be quoted, but why hasn't the Enquirer looked at the Flynt family from a different perspective, namely from the Flynt perspective? Dustin Flynt lives in town and is a member of the community with what I would surmise is a unique and an interesting perspective on the situation. If Bronson can do a quasi-edifying column on Nate Livingston, a known hate monger, why is there not a least a balanced report on someone from the Flynt camp? It would not be a conservative bias now would it? Maybe it is a little personal prejudice too.
No, I am not talking about an equestrian snuff film. I am referring to my endless attack on the duplicitous Peter Bronson. His latest column starts off with an ironic twist I think was lost somewhere in Peter's gray hair. The irony begins squarely in the title: "Flynts' outrage just part of their fetish for ink." For those not familiar with newspaper terminology, should understand that "ink" is analogous to "coverage," more commonly used in the Broadcast media. Bronson's position is that the Flynts are just looking for more media attention, and Peter is providing that attention. If Pete wants the Flynts to just go away there is one simple solution, don't feed the beast!
In his column, Peter also displays elements of what can only be described logically as a physiological reaction to viewing the covers of porn videos/DVDs. I guess Peter has been taking Harry Potter to heart and has devolved the magical ability to know that a film is "explicit" and therefore violates the 1999 plea agreement without actually seeing the film. I guess not judging a book, or a video, by its cover is not an axiom popular in the Bronson household.
The most disingenuous comment from Bronson must be this:
When the store was busted by the sheriff last month for selling X-rated videos, Jimmy Flynt said, "I think this is a personal vendetta."Who is Bronson trying to fool? It is plain and obvious that Hamilton County Sheriff Simon Leis is out to get the Flynts. There are thousands of other crimes with real victims in this city that go unsolved, yet Leis is out to get Flynt for selling a little porn. Peter seems to want to just gloss over the nearly 30-year crusade by the likes of Keating, Leis, and now Phil Burress to establish a theocracy here in Cincinnati.
It may indeed be a personal vendetta - by the Flynts.
Finally, Bronson is just being ignorant with this comment:
Here's the naked truth: The Flynts and their lawyers copped a plea bargain and paid $10,000 in fines in 1999 because they were about to get hammered for stinking up downtown like a sauerkraut factory in a hotel lobby.Peter's condiment fetish aside, the real reason the Flynts took the plea was financial. Larry Flynt stated on WLW's Mike McConnell show recently the reason for the plea deal. A California law prohibits ownership of a gaming license by anyone with a felony. Flynt was facing a felony. He plead down and made the deal to keep a cash cow business going. Larry Flynt also has a good defense now; he does not own the store where the allegedly "explicit" videos were sold. Larry has standing to claim that he did not violate the 1999 agreement and it should still be binding for him. Jimmy Flynt will be the person fighting the new charges. His defense will likely be that the agreement was unconstitutional, on equal enforcement of the law grounds. The same type or even the same videos are sold through other outlets in the county. The basis for limiting Jimmy Flynts ability to practice a business, while allowing others to practice the same type business is a very valid and worthwhile legal fight.
As a footnote, I have to wonder if it is an editorial policy of the Enquirer's old guard to mount a campaign disparaging the entire Flynt family. Bronson has now brought Jimmy Flynt's son Dustin into the fold by quoting him in his column. Dustin is involved in the operation of the Hustler store downtown and is fair game to be quoted, but why hasn't the Enquirer looked at the Flynt family from a different perspective, namely from the Flynt perspective? Dustin Flynt lives in town and is a member of the community with what I would surmise is a unique and an interesting perspective on the situation. If Bronson can do a quasi-edifying column on Nate Livingston, a known hate monger, why is there not a least a balanced report on someone from the Flynt camp? It would not be a conservative bias now would it? Maybe it is a little personal prejudice too.
MAUREEN DOWD: National House of Waffles
Ms. Dowd is getting to the meat of it. Sorry to disappoint the followers of the Church of Dubya, but George is no better than Bill Clinton. Semantics is not a defense. Intentionally manipulating the public into a war by misleading them as to the gravity of the threat is unconscionable. It is my opinion that deception can be the only conclusion. Trying to claim incompetence is just a head fake. The question is traction. Does this have the legs to carry the media forward? Sunday's talk shows should be an indicator. If no high-ranking Bush officials are on to defend their stance, then the blood is in the water. The question still remains, will the media smell it?
UPDATE: Josh Marshall also advises checking the Sunday talk shows.
UPDATE#2: The Washington Post reports that the CIA had the Uranium reference cut from Bush's October 7th, 2002 speech here in Cincinnati. I love it when Cincinnati can serve a positive purpose.
Ms. Dowd is getting to the meat of it. Sorry to disappoint the followers of the Church of Dubya, but George is no better than Bill Clinton. Semantics is not a defense. Intentionally manipulating the public into a war by misleading them as to the gravity of the threat is unconscionable. It is my opinion that deception can be the only conclusion. Trying to claim incompetence is just a head fake. The question is traction. Does this have the legs to carry the media forward? Sunday's talk shows should be an indicator. If no high-ranking Bush officials are on to defend their stance, then the blood is in the water. The question still remains, will the media smell it?
UPDATE: Josh Marshall also advises checking the Sunday talk shows.
UPDATE#2: The Washington Post reports that the CIA had the Uranium reference cut from Bush's October 7th, 2002 speech here in Cincinnati. I love it when Cincinnati can serve a positive purpose.
Saturday, July 12, 2003
David Crowley in the Springer Camp?
Gene Galvin's post at RunJerryRun.com makes that implication with a picture of Cincinnati City Councilman Crowley and Springer at events surrounding the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers conference. I am sure both know each other from Jerry's time in town, but I wonder if Crowley will endorse him in the Democratic primary for U. S. Senate. Can Springer count on his Cincinnati connections to pull in the local primary vote?
Gene Galvin's post at RunJerryRun.com makes that implication with a picture of Cincinnati City Councilman Crowley and Springer at events surrounding the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers conference. I am sure both know each other from Jerry's time in town, but I wonder if Crowley will endorse him in the Democratic primary for U. S. Senate. Can Springer count on his Cincinnati connections to pull in the local primary vote?
Friday, July 11, 2003
You can call him Mini-Dean?
Adam over at the Nick Spencer Campaign Blog posted this interesting list:
Now, I don't mean to disparage Nick with the Mini-me reference in my title, but I would bet Adam would be dying to use it, if they were not in the middle of a campaign. Local or Mini, they both work, right?
Adam over at the Nick Spencer Campaign Blog posted this interesting list:
5 Reasons Nick Spencer is the "Local Howard Dean."
1. Both campaigns are building a grassroots network of support that engages new voters and volunteers.
2. Both Spencer and Dean are strong supporters of GLBT rights. Spencer has taken a visible stand against Article 12, and will be an advocate for the GLBT community on Council.
3. Both are using the internet to mobilize support. The spencer2003.com site was modeled heavily after Deanforamerica.com, and we'll be adding even more content and features in the coming weeks.
4. Both support ending corporate welfare and focusing back on people.
5. Both Spencer and Dean are not afraid to criticize politically powerful special interests when they act against the best interests of the people.
Now, I don't mean to disparage Nick with the Mini-me reference in my title, but I would bet Adam would be dying to use it, if they were not in the middle of a campaign. Local or Mini, they both work, right?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)