- Video screens in the County courthouse (particularly the first and second floors). How many attorneys would pay big bucks for ad space there?
- County vehicles: ads could be sold until they looked like NASCAR cars.
- The Justice Center holding cells. Ads for bail bondsmen and--again--lawyers would sell quickly. And maybe the manufacturers of the products in the commissary would want to get in on the action.
- Corporate sponsorships for various departments. How about the MetLife Coroner's Office? Or the H&R Block Treasurer's Office?
- The Commissioners themselves. They could be like boxers, and get henna tattoos before each Commission meeting. (Of course, they'd then need to attend the meeting topless.)
Thursday, December 11, 2008
More County Revenue
With a majority of the HamCo County commissioners apparently ready to sell advertising space on HamCo websites, maybe we should consider other places where ads could be sold:
County Budget, Part Deux
Each of the three HamCo Commissioners has offered his own adjustments to Administrator Pat Thompson's budget proposal. View them online: Pat DeWine, David Pepper, and Todd Portune. Of course, we here at the Cincinnati Blog have read the revised budgets so you don't have to. Here's a summary.
As you'll recall, the most controversial feature of Thompson's proposal is a $12.4 million reduction to the Sheriff's budget, which could require closing Queensgate and ending county-subsidized patrols in Green, Anderson, and Colerain townships. Commissioners are looking for ways to restore that money. The chart below indicates how each commissioner either reduces expenditures (shown by a minus) in other departments or increases revenues (shown by a plus):
Table
The big difference on furloughs is because DeWine and Pepper propose furloughing only Commissioners' staff, while Portune wants to do it county-wide (the difference between DeWine and Pepper is that the former proposes a five-day furlough, the latter ten days). The two Dems think money can be raised by selling advertising space on County websites (see the Cook County Assessor's website for an example).
Apparently, the HamCo Treasurer has recently revised its revenue forecast for 2009 upwards by about a half-million dollars. The Dems want to use this estimate, while DeWine is apparently unconvinced.
DeWine offers a fairly commonsense approach to how the HCSO budget cuts should be admininstered: let Si Leis handle it. He is not just the "expert" in this field, he's an elected department chief. DeWine also proposes charging ALL of the townships for patrols, not just the three largest.
Portune proposes a bunch of revenue additions (not in the chart) that would require changes to state law. Frankly, they seem like more of a wish list than a budget proposal. I'm not sure what the "Medical Expense Reduction Plan" is, but it's probably Portunese for "screw county employees on health benefits for the third consecutive year." I'd love to see a more detailed explanation of how he gets to over a million and a half dollars in savings in utilities and supplies.
None of them get to 12 million dollars between additional cuts and new revenue. (All of the plans are probably more akin to rearranging the deck chairs than steering the Titanic to a new course.) But each would minimize the impact of cuts on public safety. DeWine's proposal would keep Queensgate open through March. Pepper and Portune want to make sure the regional HazMat unit gets $100,000 stripped away by Thompson, but both neither are able to save Queensgate. Portune "an acceptable level" of patrols in the townships.
I suspect some combination of Pepper's and DeWine's budget will be what we see enacted. Many of DeWine's cuts seem wise in the current atmosphere, but both DeWine and Pepper propose some fairly speculative revenue enhancers (for DeWine, it's the "pay-to-stay" inmate program; for Pepper, it's the advertising plan). DeWine is "lame duck" with little to lose (his upcoming term on the Common Pleas court is six years), so he may be able to lead the BOCC through some politically unpopular budget cuts that the Dems themselves could not initiate (sort of an "only Nixon could go to China" thing).
As you'll recall, the most controversial feature of Thompson's proposal is a $12.4 million reduction to the Sheriff's budget, which could require closing Queensgate and ending county-subsidized patrols in Green, Anderson, and Colerain townships. Commissioners are looking for ways to restore that money. The chart below indicates how each commissioner either reduces expenditures (shown by a minus) in other departments or increases revenues (shown by a plus):
Table
Publish at Scribd or explore others:
The big difference on furloughs is because DeWine and Pepper propose furloughing only Commissioners' staff, while Portune wants to do it county-wide (the difference between DeWine and Pepper is that the former proposes a five-day furlough, the latter ten days). The two Dems think money can be raised by selling advertising space on County websites (see the Cook County Assessor's website for an example).
Apparently, the HamCo Treasurer has recently revised its revenue forecast for 2009 upwards by about a half-million dollars. The Dems want to use this estimate, while DeWine is apparently unconvinced.
DeWine offers a fairly commonsense approach to how the HCSO budget cuts should be admininstered: let Si Leis handle it. He is not just the "expert" in this field, he's an elected department chief. DeWine also proposes charging ALL of the townships for patrols, not just the three largest.
Portune proposes a bunch of revenue additions (not in the chart) that would require changes to state law. Frankly, they seem like more of a wish list than a budget proposal. I'm not sure what the "Medical Expense Reduction Plan" is, but it's probably Portunese for "screw county employees on health benefits for the third consecutive year." I'd love to see a more detailed explanation of how he gets to over a million and a half dollars in savings in utilities and supplies.
None of them get to 12 million dollars between additional cuts and new revenue. (All of the plans are probably more akin to rearranging the deck chairs than steering the Titanic to a new course.) But each would minimize the impact of cuts on public safety. DeWine's proposal would keep Queensgate open through March. Pepper and Portune want to make sure the regional HazMat unit gets $100,000 stripped away by Thompson, but both neither are able to save Queensgate. Portune "an acceptable level" of patrols in the townships.
I suspect some combination of Pepper's and DeWine's budget will be what we see enacted. Many of DeWine's cuts seem wise in the current atmosphere, but both DeWine and Pepper propose some fairly speculative revenue enhancers (for DeWine, it's the "pay-to-stay" inmate program; for Pepper, it's the advertising plan). DeWine is "lame duck" with little to lose (his upcoming term on the Common Pleas court is six years), so he may be able to lead the BOCC through some politically unpopular budget cuts that the Dems themselves could not initiate (sort of an "only Nixon could go to China" thing).
No News is Bad News
CityBeat's Kevin Osborne touches on the overall problem with the staffing cuts at the Enquire. Like it or not, we have only one major news gathering company in this town, the Enquirer. Local TV News stations do not gather much news, other than headlines and video. You don't get much fact and there is a void of in-depth reporting in television. What makes a real news outlet is its ability to get first run original copy on a huge variety of subjects. How is that done? You must have feet on the streets going places and asking questions. More and more we only have people working in their offices getting emails and making phone calls. Photographers will be eye witness to events, but that is about it. Sending people out for interviews? How often does that happen with a print reporter anymore? They are not given the choice. Editors don't even have the choice to let go look for news. News gathering for the Enquirer has become a passive activity. That is not just because of finances, it by design.
Fewer people doing more work is not going to produce wider or better coverage. We are seeing this first hand with the death of the Enquirer's arts coverage. You can't decimate your staff and expect comprehensive coverage. CityBeat right now, for a weekly publication, has more theatre and visual arts coverage, than the Enquirer. The Enquirer only wins in classical music, which is not a big area for CityBeat. For CityBeat, this is great news, they become the better source. I have to say for the arts and the for reading public it is really bad news. It is so valuable to have two (or more) full opinions on current local productions. With the cuts in staff at the Enquirer and the limiting of space in the paper for arts overall, there is a huge drop that hurts our society. Local News is going the way of the Independent Hardware Store. The Media Wal-marts are destroying all that is local, all in the name of profit. The media believe, with much evidence, that their target audience, suburban and exurban parents, don't leave their homes, so the only arts they care (or need to know about) are national stores, which is Entertainment most of the time, not art. It is movie and DVD releases. It is Oprah's bookclub picks. It is reaction to NY fashion. It is Seven Mary Three coming to town masquerading as music coverage.
Blogging and social networking websites are taking up some of the slack. Blogs are a but a mere firewall. Blogs are not able to provide a large enough news gathering source to make up for the shortfall. There is a market for local news, but the profit margin isn't something that is going to find any investors. Social Networks are not organized and lack focus. They are become a great way to get the word out about an event. They are still limited, but for some organizations they can reach 90% of their known audience. They don't allow a good means of expansion, however.
How as a society are we going to weather this? How do we adapt? How do we get credible news out to the public, the type news they need, not just the puff crap they are being fed?
How do we keep real journalism alive? I honestly don't know. Trust is a key element of journalism. Blogs and social networks are not great ways to build trust. Institutions are how your build credible trust that last beyond one person running a blog. We can't rely on individuals to be there all the time. We need organizations that can have credibility beyond one person's reputation. I don't know where this trust will come from. As a blogger, I will keep on looking for ways for my blog to at least be more than just me. That is not easy, so lets all keep on looking for more ways to keep news alive.
Fewer people doing more work is not going to produce wider or better coverage. We are seeing this first hand with the death of the Enquirer's arts coverage. You can't decimate your staff and expect comprehensive coverage. CityBeat right now, for a weekly publication, has more theatre and visual arts coverage, than the Enquirer. The Enquirer only wins in classical music, which is not a big area for CityBeat. For CityBeat, this is great news, they become the better source. I have to say for the arts and the for reading public it is really bad news. It is so valuable to have two (or more) full opinions on current local productions. With the cuts in staff at the Enquirer and the limiting of space in the paper for arts overall, there is a huge drop that hurts our society. Local News is going the way of the Independent Hardware Store. The Media Wal-marts are destroying all that is local, all in the name of profit. The media believe, with much evidence, that their target audience, suburban and exurban parents, don't leave their homes, so the only arts they care (or need to know about) are national stores, which is Entertainment most of the time, not art. It is movie and DVD releases. It is Oprah's bookclub picks. It is reaction to NY fashion. It is Seven Mary Three coming to town masquerading as music coverage.
Blogging and social networking websites are taking up some of the slack. Blogs are a but a mere firewall. Blogs are not able to provide a large enough news gathering source to make up for the shortfall. There is a market for local news, but the profit margin isn't something that is going to find any investors. Social Networks are not organized and lack focus. They are become a great way to get the word out about an event. They are still limited, but for some organizations they can reach 90% of their known audience. They don't allow a good means of expansion, however.
How as a society are we going to weather this? How do we adapt? How do we get credible news out to the public, the type news they need, not just the puff crap they are being fed?
How do we keep real journalism alive? I honestly don't know. Trust is a key element of journalism. Blogs and social networks are not great ways to build trust. Institutions are how your build credible trust that last beyond one person running a blog. We can't rely on individuals to be there all the time. We need organizations that can have credibility beyond one person's reputation. I don't know where this trust will come from. As a blogger, I will keep on looking for ways for my blog to at least be more than just me. That is not easy, so lets all keep on looking for more ways to keep news alive.
Tuesday, December 09, 2008
Democratic Money Burning
I have to admit: I miss the old Alex Triantafilou--the thoughtful judge who really wanted to get things right. (You may recall that I lamented his decision to leave the bench.) Judge Triantafilou has been replaced by Chairman Alex, a party leader often offering nothing but soundbites, particularly since his side lost the presidential election. He's begun what he's promised will be "occasional" feature on his blog called "Democrat Money Burn." (Alex, of course, needs a grammar lesson. "Democrat" is a noun. "Democratic" is the adjectival form of that noun. The party of the president-elect is the Democratic Party. Alex cannot change the English language just because its suits him.)
To his credit, Alex is batting .500 on his first two "Money Burn" installments. In the first, he questions whether Mayor Mallory needs another staffmember. Griff (who just won't admit he's a Democrat at heart) has also raised that concern, and I joined him in the comments. In fact, I'd go a step farther: not only should Mallory not be given additional personnel funds, but the cost of his personal security (a CPD specialist on special detail) should be moved from the CPD budget to the Mayor's Office budget--and the Mayor's Office overall budget should not be increased. Alex will find widespread support for his relatively non-controversial observations with respect to Mayor Mallory's budget proprosal.
But he misses the mark in his second "Money Burn" post, in which he criticizes the HamCo Commissioners (really, though, just Administrator Patrick Thompson, since the only budget proposal thus far released is his) for failing to decrease the budget for "County personnel," a decision Thompson justifies by pointing to the need for increased "HR" (human resources) oversight during the massive layoffs to be undertaken in the coming months. Alex writes:
As Alex knows, police officers aren't the only ones losing their jobs. And the reality is, laying people off is difficult. Employers have responsibilities towards former employers (most notably under COBRA). Moreover, HR-savvy people should be involved with layoff decisions to ensure that they are undertaken in such a way as to minimize the potential for litigation. If the county is to go through the next few months without the service of people knowledgable in human resources (which over the past two decades has become a highly specialized field), the taxpayers may as well write a check for a half million dollars or more to the Cincinnati Employment Lawyers Association (the plaintiffs' employment bar). A Republican policy-maker's decision to expose the county to massive lawsuits is one of the things that brought us this budget nightmare.
So while we need to make sure we're pinching every penny (at both the City and County levels), we need to make sure that we don't make short-term cuts that will cost us dearly in the long-run.
To his credit, Alex is batting .500 on his first two "Money Burn" installments. In the first, he questions whether Mayor Mallory needs another staffmember. Griff (who just won't admit he's a Democrat at heart) has also raised that concern, and I joined him in the comments. In fact, I'd go a step farther: not only should Mallory not be given additional personnel funds, but the cost of his personal security (a CPD specialist on special detail) should be moved from the CPD budget to the Mayor's Office budget--and the Mayor's Office overall budget should not be increased. Alex will find widespread support for his relatively non-controversial observations with respect to Mayor Mallory's budget proprosal.
But he misses the mark in his second "Money Burn" post, in which he criticizes the HamCo Commissioners (really, though, just Administrator Patrick Thompson, since the only budget proposal thus far released is his) for failing to decrease the budget for "County personnel," a decision Thompson justifies by pointing to the need for increased "HR" (human resources) oversight during the massive layoffs to be undertaken in the coming months. Alex writes:
Really? We need to spend more on HR staff so that the county can more
effectively fire police officers? Are these our priorities?
As Alex knows, police officers aren't the only ones losing their jobs. And the reality is, laying people off is difficult. Employers have responsibilities towards former employers (most notably under COBRA). Moreover, HR-savvy people should be involved with layoff decisions to ensure that they are undertaken in such a way as to minimize the potential for litigation. If the county is to go through the next few months without the service of people knowledgable in human resources (which over the past two decades has become a highly specialized field), the taxpayers may as well write a check for a half million dollars or more to the Cincinnati Employment Lawyers Association (the plaintiffs' employment bar). A Republican policy-maker's decision to expose the county to massive lawsuits is one of the things that brought us this budget nightmare.
So while we need to make sure we're pinching every penny (at both the City and County levels), we need to make sure that we don't make short-term cuts that will cost us dearly in the long-run.
To Hire Or Not To Hire: Cincinnati And Laid-Off HCSO Deputies
City Council is currently considering hiring some of the Hamilton County Sheriff's Office deputies that are being laid off due to HamCo budget cuts. (The Enquirer notes this development towards the end of this article.) It's an excellent idea. Those deputies, in many instances, would be ready to hit the streets pretty rapidly. But Council should take heed of the following:
- Cincinnati PD currently has a "recruit class" nearly finished with its Academy training. (The bright, shiny almost-officers were touring the courthouse today.) HCSO deputies should not be hired in lieu of these people, for two reasons. First, the City has already spent considerable funds in training this recruit class; discarding them is throwing that money away. Second, when the City takes on a recruit class, it makes an implicit commitment that jobs await those who successfully complete their training. Yes, sudden budgetary concerns could justify failing to hire a recruit class, but it would be less-than-honorable for the City to abandon its own recruits in favor of HCSO deputies.
- Many of the laid-off deputies will be corrections officers, not patrol officers. The City needs to make sure that these officers receive whatever additional training is needed (likely something well short of Academy graduation) to make these officers street-ready. There's a big difference between guarding Queensgate and patrolling a neighborhood (and residents generally don't like being treated as inmates.)
- The City should make sure that hiring laid-off deputies is at least cost-neutral with regards to, if not less expensive than, bringing in a new recruit class (again, after the current class has been hired). The City should save money due to the decreased amount of training these new officers would need, compared with a fresh recruit. But (and I don't know the answer to this) because some of these soon-to-be-former deputies would come in with considerable experience, the CBA with the FOP might call for them to receive higher pay. If the City is to hire these deputies, individual exceptions to the CBA should be negotiated to make sure the City isn't breaking its own budget.
Monday, December 08, 2008
County Budget: More Revenue?
In doing some research on the appropriate geographical reach of jury pools in municipal court cases, I came across Ohio Revised Code 1901.25, which requires that when a misdemeanor case arises under a municipal ordinance and proceeds to jury trial, the juror fees are to be paid by the relevant municipality. (Most criminal cases--particularly those tried to a jury--allege a violation of Ohio Revised Code rather than municipal ordinance.)
The obvious example is jury trials involving Cincinnati's marijuana law. But any case transferred from a mayor's court to municipal court would fit this description (unless the municipal prosecutor amends the charge to allege violation of the Revised Code). I tried one such case (successfully!), involving an alleged assault that took place in Norwood, last year. The police charged the offense under Norwood's municipal code. We filed a jury demand, which has the effect of automatically transferring the case from Mayor's Court to Municipal Court. For those wondering, the HamCo Prosecutor does not proceed on these cases: instead, the local municipality will have a law director that comes to Muni Court and tries the case. (Cincinnati, of course, has several full-time prosecutors that prosecute all misdemeanor offenses that are alleged to have taken place within City limits, regardless of whether the complaint alleges a violation of municipal or state law. And in some instances, a HamCo Assistant Prosecutor is the elected Law Director of a particular municipality.)
Obviously, this doesn't involve a ton of money, but we're at the point where every little bit counts. Does anyone know whether our court is recovering these fees from municipalities (including the City of Cincinnati) in appropriate cases? I couldn't find the answer online anywhere.
The obvious example is jury trials involving Cincinnati's marijuana law. But any case transferred from a mayor's court to municipal court would fit this description (unless the municipal prosecutor amends the charge to allege violation of the Revised Code). I tried one such case (successfully!), involving an alleged assault that took place in Norwood, last year. The police charged the offense under Norwood's municipal code. We filed a jury demand, which has the effect of automatically transferring the case from Mayor's Court to Municipal Court. For those wondering, the HamCo Prosecutor does not proceed on these cases: instead, the local municipality will have a law director that comes to Muni Court and tries the case. (Cincinnati, of course, has several full-time prosecutors that prosecute all misdemeanor offenses that are alleged to have taken place within City limits, regardless of whether the complaint alleges a violation of municipal or state law. And in some instances, a HamCo Assistant Prosecutor is the elected Law Director of a particular municipality.)
Obviously, this doesn't involve a ton of money, but we're at the point where every little bit counts. Does anyone know whether our court is recovering these fees from municipalities (including the City of Cincinnati) in appropriate cases? I couldn't find the answer online anywhere.
More Staff for the Mayor?
Does Mayor Mallory need a bigger staff? He seems to think so, with his budget proposal including a $50,000 increase. City Council may not agree. Is there enough staff to support the Mayor or not?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)