If you read Jim Schifrin's Wistleblower newsletter then you were already aware that he is an ass. I say that without trepidation, seriously, the guy is an old fart who insults people every day and writes offensive stuff that is meant for 80 year old men at 150-year-old run down barbershops. He of course goes above an beyond his usual horrible actions with the publication of the home address of Rep. Steve Driehaus.
Schifrin's newsletter (does the guy not know what a blog is?) is the epitome of the junior high mindset that seems to be pervasive with a large portion of conservative men. If they knew who Bevis and Butthead were, they might get the simple fact that what they think is funny now stopped being funny when you reach age 17. It would behoove them to grow up.
Friday, March 26, 2010
Thursday, March 25, 2010
Back the Food Truck Up.... (Bumped and Updated)
Over at Wine Me, Dine Me, Julie posts a press release issued by the operators of the food trucks that have recently sprouted up in Cincinnati. Apparently, the trucker-chefs are concerned that City Council is going to act to regulate the trucks. In their defense, Tom Acito, who owns Cafe de Wheels, says, "Our goal of being a mobile restaurant isn’t to steal business from local restaurants in the Over-the-Rhine and downtown areas. Rather, we hope to situate ourselves in areas where we will not directly compete with independent restaurant owners."
As far as I can tell, the trucker-chefs' concerns are fueled by John Curp's comment to Polly Campbell that "it's safe to say that the city is looking into the issue to see if there's need for additional regulations."
I'm not certain that Acito is really serious about not competing with local restaurants. Cafe de Wheels' typical lunchtime spot is on Walnut just off of Court Street. Assuming the truck stays there, it will definitely compete with Avril-Bleh's sidewalk grill, which is set to re-open April 5.
But more importantly, the trucks' primary competitors are not restaurants. After all, if you own a restaurant and find yourself at a competitive disadvantage to a guy who cooks his food in a UPS truck, it may be time to find a new profession. Instead, the trucks are really competing with sidewalk vendors.
The vendors are, of course, regulated by the city. And the trucker-chefs don't want to be. My question: is that fair? Sidewalk vendors run a pretty low-margin business. They are licensed by the City, and their location is subject to City approval. (In fact, the City has recently adopted a lottery through which street vendors' locations will be determined. This was first mentioned last year in a Jane Prendergast blog post. The HamCo Common Pleas Court recently issued a temporary restraining order delaying implementation of the new system. If I can find the complaint, I'll write a post on this issue.)
I know that the food trucks are the current darlings of the "cool kids" in the blogosphere. I like them (the trucks), too. (You haven't really lived until you've had Cafe de Wheels' grilled cheese and pulled pork sandwich.) But I wonder: why is it fair that the food trucks operate outside the rules that everyone else has to play by? Will a licensing fee and some rules about their location really put them out of business? Or would those things just put them on a level playing field with their competitors?
Finally, can anyone speak with certainty as to what Council committee would tackle this issue? I assume it's the Livable Communities Committee, chaired by Roxanne Qualls, but I'm not sure under the 2010 committee structure.
UPDATE (3/25/2010): Polly Campbell has this blog post on the topic, in which she quotes Tom Acito as saying that he and fellow trucker-chefs aren't presently petitioning the city. I'm not sure why he sent Julie a press release heralding the formation of his not-yet-formed group, then.
As far as I can tell, the trucker-chefs' concerns are fueled by John Curp's comment to Polly Campbell that "it's safe to say that the city is looking into the issue to see if there's need for additional regulations."
I'm not certain that Acito is really serious about not competing with local restaurants. Cafe de Wheels' typical lunchtime spot is on Walnut just off of Court Street. Assuming the truck stays there, it will definitely compete with Avril-Bleh's sidewalk grill, which is set to re-open April 5.
But more importantly, the trucks' primary competitors are not restaurants. After all, if you own a restaurant and find yourself at a competitive disadvantage to a guy who cooks his food in a UPS truck, it may be time to find a new profession. Instead, the trucks are really competing with sidewalk vendors.
The vendors are, of course, regulated by the city. And the trucker-chefs don't want to be. My question: is that fair? Sidewalk vendors run a pretty low-margin business. They are licensed by the City, and their location is subject to City approval. (In fact, the City has recently adopted a lottery through which street vendors' locations will be determined. This was first mentioned last year in a Jane Prendergast blog post. The HamCo Common Pleas Court recently issued a temporary restraining order delaying implementation of the new system. If I can find the complaint, I'll write a post on this issue.)
I know that the food trucks are the current darlings of the "cool kids" in the blogosphere. I like them (the trucks), too. (You haven't really lived until you've had Cafe de Wheels' grilled cheese and pulled pork sandwich.) But I wonder: why is it fair that the food trucks operate outside the rules that everyone else has to play by? Will a licensing fee and some rules about their location really put them out of business? Or would those things just put them on a level playing field with their competitors?
Finally, can anyone speak with certainty as to what Council committee would tackle this issue? I assume it's the Livable Communities Committee, chaired by Roxanne Qualls, but I'm not sure under the 2010 committee structure.
UPDATE (3/25/2010): Polly Campbell has this blog post on the topic, in which she quotes Tom Acito as saying that he and fellow trucker-chefs aren't presently petitioning the city. I'm not sure why he sent Julie a press release heralding the formation of his not-yet-formed group, then.
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
CPS and Minority Contractors: Is This Really Such A Mystery?
The Enquirer now reports that Cincinnati Public Schools has "reached out" to minority contractors in an effort to increase minority involvement in CPS's ongoing construction projects. The Enquirer describes the new plan as "experimental." My question: this isn't really as difficult as CPS is making it out to be, is it?
CPS has insisted (sincerely, I believe) that it is committed to minority involvement in its construction contracts. It seems befuddled as to how to get there. But there exists, within Cincinnati, a working model as to how to use race-neutral means to achieve significant minority participation in construction: the National Underground Railroad Freedom Center. Some time ago, the inestimable Dan Hurley did an excellent segment on Newsmakers on how the Freedom Center was able to achieve contracting out 40% of the work to minority-owned firms. I'll not recount the process here in great detail, but perhaps CPS Board members should follow the link and watch the video.
It should be noted that involving minority-owned firms doesn't necessarily ensure the employment of minority workers. That's a whole other blog post, I think. But I can't figure out why CPS is having such a hard time doing something that was accomplished just a few years ago in Cincinnati.
Finally, this is probably the right time to note my disagreement with Griff's post on Christopher Smitherman's arrest last week. Mr. Smitherman and Rev. Foster were acting in the best tradition of the civil rights movement: engaging in civil disobedience to bring attention to an important social problem. They demonstrated peaceably and offered no resistance to the police when arrested. And prior to their protest, they had exhausted other means to bring about change, having petitioned CPS several times to redress their concerns. Their actions are akin to the Flannery Five's sit-in in Steve Chabot's office to protest the Iraq war back in 2006. You may disagree with their viewpoint, but their actions are consistent with a rich tradition of American activism.
CPS has insisted (sincerely, I believe) that it is committed to minority involvement in its construction contracts. It seems befuddled as to how to get there. But there exists, within Cincinnati, a working model as to how to use race-neutral means to achieve significant minority participation in construction: the National Underground Railroad Freedom Center. Some time ago, the inestimable Dan Hurley did an excellent segment on Newsmakers on how the Freedom Center was able to achieve contracting out 40% of the work to minority-owned firms. I'll not recount the process here in great detail, but perhaps CPS Board members should follow the link and watch the video.
It should be noted that involving minority-owned firms doesn't necessarily ensure the employment of minority workers. That's a whole other blog post, I think. But I can't figure out why CPS is having such a hard time doing something that was accomplished just a few years ago in Cincinnati.
Finally, this is probably the right time to note my disagreement with Griff's post on Christopher Smitherman's arrest last week. Mr. Smitherman and Rev. Foster were acting in the best tradition of the civil rights movement: engaging in civil disobedience to bring attention to an important social problem. They demonstrated peaceably and offered no resistance to the police when arrested. And prior to their protest, they had exhausted other means to bring about change, having petitioned CPS several times to redress their concerns. Their actions are akin to the Flannery Five's sit-in in Steve Chabot's office to protest the Iraq war back in 2006. You may disagree with their viewpoint, but their actions are consistent with a rich tradition of American activism.
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
WOXY.com Halting Broadcasts
WOXY.com announced via its website that effective today, March 23rd, it is shutting down broadcasting due to a lack of funds. I hope they can continue operating, but this type of step indicates thier financial backers are unable to carry on support of the station. They may need another white knight. Good luck to the whole WOXY staff. I hope they are back on the air soon.
UPDATE: CityBeat's Mike Breen has a blog post including reference to a Facebook post from a long time WOXY staff member. The future does not look promising.
UPDATE #2: WOXY staffer Joe Long shared his thoughts on WOXY going silent via his music blog: www.eachnotesecure.com.
UPDATE #3: Jason at the Cincinnati Man has more, including a response from WOXY owner Future Sounds.
UPDATE: CityBeat's Mike Breen has a blog post including reference to a Facebook post from a long time WOXY staff member. The future does not look promising.
UPDATE #2: WOXY staffer Joe Long shared his thoughts on WOXY going silent via his music blog: www.eachnotesecure.com.
UPDATE #3: Jason at the Cincinnati Man has more, including a response from WOXY owner Future Sounds.
Chase Dean Misunderstands Professionalism
Chase Law School (part of NKU) has made some national news this week, and not in a way that will make its administration happy.
Last week, Chase scheduled a mandatory lecture on "professionalism" for its first-year students. Such events are relatively commonplace. They're boring. They have little to do with what first year students are studying at the time, and first-year students aren't really able to put a lecture on professionalism into context, as most haven't so much as set foot in a law firm yet. But nonetheless, law schools love to schedule these kinds of events.
For some reason, Chase's administration thought the perfect time for the relatively useless exercise was Thursday night--right in the middle of the first round of the NCAA tournament. And during Kentucky's first round game. The results were predictable. Students showed up, and (as is common at law schools these days) had their laptops open to "take notes." Of course, CBS was live-streaming the tournament, so students with laptops turned the game on (without sound). Others used their phones to check scores or text friends.
So who cares? The panel of speakers, seated at the front of the room, couldn't have seen what was on the laptops. Apparently, one of Chase's deans was in the back of the room. He saw the laptops, and was not pleased. So he sent anastygram strongly-worded email to the entire 1L class, telling them how "rude" and "unprofessional" they were. And now, the email has made its way to Above the Law, a blog with a national following devoted largely to law school news.
As a UC Law alum, I'm always happy to make fun of Chase. My glee at pointing out that the law school began at the Cincinnati YMCA knows no bounds. ("Where'd you get your law license--the Y? Oh, yeah, never mind....) Here, any ridicule needs to be reserved for Chase's administration, not its students. They scheduled a lecture to be attended primarily by twenty-somethings fresh out of college in the middle of the first round of March Madness and expected that attendees' attention wouldn't be diverted? Seriously?
Law school administrators often fall into the pattern we see here: treat law students as if they were still in high school, with little control over their own schedules or (frankly) lives, and then chide them for not being "professional." They forget that professionals have at least some control over their own calendars. Walk into the courthouse on Opening Day. You won't see anyone. Why? Because no one wants to schedule anything then. If a lawyer is a basketball fan, do you think he scheduled client meetings or court appearances last Thursday or Friday? Do you really expect a bunch of kids from Kentucky to abstain from March Madness?
Lawyers have lives outside of their practices. Law students are usually told during law school orientation to try to maintain some sort of life outside of their studies. Then, for the next three years, administrators and professors pretend as if law school is life. Such mixed signals will inevitably yield unhappy results.
Last week, Chase scheduled a mandatory lecture on "professionalism" for its first-year students. Such events are relatively commonplace. They're boring. They have little to do with what first year students are studying at the time, and first-year students aren't really able to put a lecture on professionalism into context, as most haven't so much as set foot in a law firm yet. But nonetheless, law schools love to schedule these kinds of events.
For some reason, Chase's administration thought the perfect time for the relatively useless exercise was Thursday night--right in the middle of the first round of the NCAA tournament. And during Kentucky's first round game. The results were predictable. Students showed up, and (as is common at law schools these days) had their laptops open to "take notes." Of course, CBS was live-streaming the tournament, so students with laptops turned the game on (without sound). Others used their phones to check scores or text friends.
So who cares? The panel of speakers, seated at the front of the room, couldn't have seen what was on the laptops. Apparently, one of Chase's deans was in the back of the room. He saw the laptops, and was not pleased. So he sent a
As a UC Law alum, I'm always happy to make fun of Chase. My glee at pointing out that the law school began at the Cincinnati YMCA knows no bounds. ("Where'd you get your law license--the Y? Oh, yeah, never mind....) Here, any ridicule needs to be reserved for Chase's administration, not its students. They scheduled a lecture to be attended primarily by twenty-somethings fresh out of college in the middle of the first round of March Madness and expected that attendees' attention wouldn't be diverted? Seriously?
Law school administrators often fall into the pattern we see here: treat law students as if they were still in high school, with little control over their own schedules or (frankly) lives, and then chide them for not being "professional." They forget that professionals have at least some control over their own calendars. Walk into the courthouse on Opening Day. You won't see anyone. Why? Because no one wants to schedule anything then. If a lawyer is a basketball fan, do you think he scheduled client meetings or court appearances last Thursday or Friday? Do you really expect a bunch of kids from Kentucky to abstain from March Madness?
Lawyers have lives outside of their practices. Law students are usually told during law school orientation to try to maintain some sort of life outside of their studies. Then, for the next three years, administrators and professors pretend as if law school is life. Such mixed signals will inevitably yield unhappy results.
A Pledge For Local TPers, If They Are Serious
Loki at Cincyvoices has formalized a pledge that local TP members should consider if they are really serious when they spout off about being against all forms of socialism.
Monday, March 22, 2010
Conservative Politics: The Junior High Edition
We have rock throwing at the local Democratic Party HQ and people wonder who could have been egging on the stormtroopers?
Someone needs to remind the right wing crazies that the world isn't going to end because of health-care coverage. Seriously, it's not.
Also, I really wonder if Ohio TPer's know anything about Federal Preemption. I mean, sure, they could try to coin their own currency or try to ignore the 14th Amendment, but we had a war about a 150 years ago that decided all of that rather definitively.
Where did the Republican grown-ups go?
Someone needs to remind the right wing crazies that the world isn't going to end because of health-care coverage. Seriously, it's not.
Also, I really wonder if Ohio TPer's know anything about Federal Preemption. I mean, sure, they could try to coin their own currency or try to ignore the 14th Amendment, but we had a war about a 150 years ago that decided all of that rather definitively.
Where did the Republican grown-ups go?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)