It's being said by Republicans, Democrats, Charterites, and every other logical thinking person, but Don Mooney Jr. lays out the reasons why the anti-rail ballot issue is shortsighted and something that will hurt the city now and later.
This once again exposes the ignorance of Chris Smitherman for not understanding what COAST is trying to do, stop any and all rail project. COAST pretends to only be about destroying government, but it is just a bunch of conservatives with an extremist and outdated political agenda.
Wednesday, July 01, 2009
CAC Cancels Fall Show
Yeah, um...could there be a slight problem with the leadership at the Contemporary Arts Center? When I say leadership, I'm talking the top of the ticket, accent and all.
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Don't Give Kids (Or Jounalists) Candy
Councilmember Chris Bortz needs to learn something about dealing with the media. If you wave a big piece of candy in front of them, they are going reach out and grab it like a seven year grabbing for a candy bar. In this case the mere mentioning of Chris Smitherman's name will generate a story, and more importantly, a headline.
Hard Ball
If the Cincinnati Police Department wants to play games in the media, then at least they could put their name behind their action like Greg Harris has done. The rumor leaked by "someone" in the police department that 200 layoffs await was anonymous political move that lacked class and honesty.
I don't believe this is a serious plan. This is just Greg talking to Leis about what it would entail or what would be possible. I take this as a "two can play at that game, Chief" towards CPD Police Chief Tom Streicher who has been in the media talking about being forced into police layoffs, an attempt by Streicher to put fear into the public in hopes of pressuring Council to not cut his budget.
I don't believe this is a serious plan. This is just Greg talking to Leis about what it would entail or what would be possible. I take this as a "two can play at that game, Chief" towards CPD Police Chief Tom Streicher who has been in the media talking about being forced into police layoffs, an attempt by Streicher to put fear into the public in hopes of pressuring Council to not cut his budget.
Monday, June 29, 2009
Cincinnati Chamber Cut Jobs
The Business Courier is reporting that 7 employees of the Cincinnati Chamber of Commerce are being laid off. No detail on what positions were affected.
Sunday, June 28, 2009
Council Must Make Tough Decisions On Police Spending
As Griff notes, the Cincinnati Police Division's administration is suggesting that it may be forced to lay off up to 200 officers over the next six months. With $40 million to cut from next year's budget, it's unrealistic to believe that CPD's budget will be untouched. But all of us (including City Council) need to keep in mind that Cincinnati is not Hamilton County.
Last year, Hamilton County went through the painful budget process that now faces Cincinnati. The commissioners were forced to cut the budget of the Hamilton County Sheriff's Office. But they were powerless to address line-by-line spending within the HCSO budget. That's because the sheriff is an elected official who, by law, controls his own budget. Some (including the FOP) questioned whether there weren't additional administrative savings to be made. I still don't know the answer to that. But the decision was left to Simon Leis alone; the Commission could tell Leis how much money he was getting, but not how to spend it.
This is not true of the City of Cincinnati. The police chief is not an elected official, and is subordinate to the City Manager. The chief has no statutory authority protecting his right to set his own budget. Council has the power to set spending priorities--and it must use it. Before a single patrol officer is laid off, Council must examine the CPD's administrative budget.
The assistant chiefs are a good example of possible administrative savings. Do we really need five assistant chiefs? Chief Streicher's redeployment of Lt. Col. Janke a couple months ago would suggest we don't. In fact, we've only had five assistant chiefs since 2004. Of course, reducing the assistant chief compliment by one is just a drop in our financial bucket, but it provides an example of how a bureaucracy can become top-heavy in good economic times.
Beat officers are the lean meat of CPD. They're what are required to keep us all safe. City Council needs to take ownership of the job of finding CPD's fat and gristle. These are policy decisions that need to be made by elected officials, not by the appointed City Manager or the (non-appointed) Chief.
And if you're trying to figure out how to decide who to vote for in this fall's Council race, this is as good an issue as any. Any candidate who cannot give you a clear idea of where they'll find $40 million in cuts--with specifics from each department they intend to cut--probably isn't worthy of your vote.
Last year, Hamilton County went through the painful budget process that now faces Cincinnati. The commissioners were forced to cut the budget of the Hamilton County Sheriff's Office. But they were powerless to address line-by-line spending within the HCSO budget. That's because the sheriff is an elected official who, by law, controls his own budget. Some (including the FOP) questioned whether there weren't additional administrative savings to be made. I still don't know the answer to that. But the decision was left to Simon Leis alone; the Commission could tell Leis how much money he was getting, but not how to spend it.
This is not true of the City of Cincinnati. The police chief is not an elected official, and is subordinate to the City Manager. The chief has no statutory authority protecting his right to set his own budget. Council has the power to set spending priorities--and it must use it. Before a single patrol officer is laid off, Council must examine the CPD's administrative budget.
The assistant chiefs are a good example of possible administrative savings. Do we really need five assistant chiefs? Chief Streicher's redeployment of Lt. Col. Janke a couple months ago would suggest we don't. In fact, we've only had five assistant chiefs since 2004. Of course, reducing the assistant chief compliment by one is just a drop in our financial bucket, but it provides an example of how a bureaucracy can become top-heavy in good economic times.
Beat officers are the lean meat of CPD. They're what are required to keep us all safe. City Council needs to take ownership of the job of finding CPD's fat and gristle. These are policy decisions that need to be made by elected officials, not by the appointed City Manager or the (non-appointed) Chief.
And if you're trying to figure out how to decide who to vote for in this fall's Council race, this is as good an issue as any. Any candidate who cannot give you a clear idea of where they'll find $40 million in cuts--with specifics from each department they intend to cut--probably isn't worthy of your vote.
Haap Agrees: It's A Vanity Campaign
This morning, Cincinnati Beacon blogger Jason Haap appeared on Newsmakers. At the end of the interview, the following exchange occurred:
In other words, Haap is running for mayor, but has absolutely no intention of becoming the mayor. Running for an office one has no plans to occupy would be like the Reds or the Cardinals announcing tomorrow that they understand that mid- and small-market teams can't do well in Major League Baseball, and that they're just playing the rest of the season to try to teach others how to play ball.
Haap's a valuable voice in the blogosphere (and I know many of you will disagree with me--but guess what? You only disagree because you read the Beacon!). But while "political performance art" (which is how he describes his nom de plum) is an excellent way to get page hits to your blog, it's not such a good thing to inject into a serious political race, at a time when serious challenges are being addressed.
With Haap's admission that mayor's race really is between two candidates, that's how I plan to discuss the race: as one between Mayor Mallory and Dr. Wenstrup.
If you want performance art, go rent Borat. We don't need it in the mayoral race.
Hurley: What are you in this for? Are you in this to win, are
you in this to educate, what are you in this for?
Haap: I think I'm probably in this to educate.
In other words, Haap is running for mayor, but has absolutely no intention of becoming the mayor. Running for an office one has no plans to occupy would be like the Reds or the Cardinals announcing tomorrow that they understand that mid- and small-market teams can't do well in Major League Baseball, and that they're just playing the rest of the season to try to teach others how to play ball.
Haap's a valuable voice in the blogosphere (and I know many of you will disagree with me--but guess what? You only disagree because you read the Beacon!). But while "political performance art" (which is how he describes his nom de plum) is an excellent way to get page hits to your blog, it's not such a good thing to inject into a serious political race, at a time when serious challenges are being addressed.
With Haap's admission that mayor's race really is between two candidates, that's how I plan to discuss the race: as one between Mayor Mallory and Dr. Wenstrup.
If you want performance art, go rent Borat. We don't need it in the mayoral race.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)