The Cincinnati Business Courier reported last week that 3CDC has sent a letter to the Board of the Drop Inn Center with an offer to move facility. Full details were not released, but the article reports that it includes 3CDC managing the the move process and helping to get funding for the relocation and ongoing operations.
If the Drop Inn Center does not take this deal, they are fools. When the SCPA opens, the pressure will mount beyond control. Legal action may follow soon after. The problem for the Drop Inn Center rests on two fronts. First they have to deal with sex offenders living at the DIC, which likely would violate the law when the SCPA opens less than a block away.
Second, the DIC would face far more pressure to deal with what happens outside its doors. That would be the congregation of people in the park and on 12th Street using/selling drugs during the day, some then going into the DIC for the night, the rest going else where because the DIC won't take them. This second part is the problem the DIC has refused to deal with since I can remember, they attract criminals. Sure they claim they are not the problem and they do their best to keep it outside the center. That is the problem, if it is outside the center, they do nothing to stop it. If they cops did a sweep of those loitering outside the DIC on 12th Street or in Washington Park, we would hear the DIC and other homeless activist howl in protest.
The DIC has a deal in hand. They can hem and haw and act like peacocks all they want to save face within activist community, but they really need to take the deal. Further more they can't waste much time about it. The school year starts in August.
Monday, May 17, 2010
Sunday, May 16, 2010
What Happened In Lockland?
It's hard to know what to make of the students involved in the "senior prank" at Lockland High School, since it's not entirely clear what they actually did that night.
Regular readers will recall that last January, I was critical of officials who decided to file criminal charges against students who unplugged engine block heaters for diesel school buses, causing the cancellation of school in Mason. The Lockland students are also being criminally charged (some as adults, as they are 18) and face suspension or expulsion.
Early reports indicated that the students were ransacking the school, throwing books into hallways. When I read that, my thought was, "That's not a prank. That's vandalism." But an article in yesterday's Enquirer suggests that the conduct was much tamer. I can't figure out what the kids intended to do with the rubber bands and cups of water, but the "prank" hardly seems destructive, if that story is accurate.
If this was a non-destructive prank, then we're once again witnessing the results of over-criminalization of bad conduct. A school suspension and school-related discipline is appropriate. It might even be appropriate to disallow the students from participating in graduation ceremonies (but not actually from receiving their diplomas). But a felony record? Really?
Some of the students are charged with resisting arrest and fleeing from police. That's a separate issue. (Separate, that is, if the charges are legitimate--which is not always the case with a resisting charge.) If students really ran from or physically struggled with police, their conduct might have been criminal. Once your prank is exposed and you're caught, you don't start a police pursuit. You have to accept the consequences, even if that means a night in jail before your mom can get you released.
Yesterday's article focuses on an 18 year-old college-bound senior, for whom a felony record would be crippling. If the grand jury indicts her and the other students, I hope the authorities offer them some sort of diversionary disposition--some sort of result that involves acceptance of responsibility and community service, but no criminal conviction. If they stand indicted and aren't offered a way out, we'll find out whether 12 people of Hamilton County are willing to brand an 18 year-old a felon for high school hijinks.
The case raises an interesting contrast to the treatment accorded MU's Pi Beta Phi sorority members who behaved badly in April. According to the Enquirer, police encountered them intoxicated and urinating on the side of the road. That's classic disorderly conduct. But no one was cited; instead, the buses were "escorted" to Lake Lyndsay. And none of the students was charged criminally for their destructive behavior, even though some it certainly constituted criminal damaging. Yes, I realize that different police departments from different counties were involved. But it's fascinating that some people get police escorts to parties after bad behavior, and others get police escorts to the Justice Center.
Regular readers will recall that last January, I was critical of officials who decided to file criminal charges against students who unplugged engine block heaters for diesel school buses, causing the cancellation of school in Mason. The Lockland students are also being criminally charged (some as adults, as they are 18) and face suspension or expulsion.
Early reports indicated that the students were ransacking the school, throwing books into hallways. When I read that, my thought was, "That's not a prank. That's vandalism." But an article in yesterday's Enquirer suggests that the conduct was much tamer. I can't figure out what the kids intended to do with the rubber bands and cups of water, but the "prank" hardly seems destructive, if that story is accurate.
If this was a non-destructive prank, then we're once again witnessing the results of over-criminalization of bad conduct. A school suspension and school-related discipline is appropriate. It might even be appropriate to disallow the students from participating in graduation ceremonies (but not actually from receiving their diplomas). But a felony record? Really?
Some of the students are charged with resisting arrest and fleeing from police. That's a separate issue. (Separate, that is, if the charges are legitimate--which is not always the case with a resisting charge.) If students really ran from or physically struggled with police, their conduct might have been criminal. Once your prank is exposed and you're caught, you don't start a police pursuit. You have to accept the consequences, even if that means a night in jail before your mom can get you released.
Yesterday's article focuses on an 18 year-old college-bound senior, for whom a felony record would be crippling. If the grand jury indicts her and the other students, I hope the authorities offer them some sort of diversionary disposition--some sort of result that involves acceptance of responsibility and community service, but no criminal conviction. If they stand indicted and aren't offered a way out, we'll find out whether 12 people of Hamilton County are willing to brand an 18 year-old a felon for high school hijinks.
The case raises an interesting contrast to the treatment accorded MU's Pi Beta Phi sorority members who behaved badly in April. According to the Enquirer, police encountered them intoxicated and urinating on the side of the road. That's classic disorderly conduct. But no one was cited; instead, the buses were "escorted" to Lake Lyndsay. And none of the students was charged criminally for their destructive behavior, even though some it certainly constituted criminal damaging. Yes, I realize that different police departments from different counties were involved. But it's fascinating that some people get police escorts to parties after bad behavior, and others get police escorts to the Justice Center.
First Place!!!
Anyone who now tells you that two months ago, they predicted the Reds would be in first place in mid-May--after a three game series with the Cardinals--is lying.
Go Reds!!!
Go Reds!!!
Saturday, May 15, 2010
Ruminating at Schwartz's Point
When I was a sophomore at the University of Chicago, the guy who lived in the dorm across the hall from me--a freshman--was an amazing blues guitarist. While a lot of people in the dorm knew how good he was (since he spent hours upon hours practicing), few knew how often he was playing off-campus. A friend and I were among the lucky ones who did know, and on several nights we'd follow him to a club, sneak in (since we were under 21), and sit down to enjoy a few beers and some great music.
Two of these clandestine journeys stand out for me. One was to Kingston Mines, where my neighbor was sitting in with Buddy Guy. (When I said he was amazing, I meant it!) I remember that night because it's one of the few times I've ever had my name "on the list" at the entrance to a club, entitling me to bypass the long line of people waiting for a bouncer to grant them entrance. The other was to a much different blues club. I don't remember the name, but it was much deeper into the South Side of Chicago than our safe little Hyde Park hamlet--somewhere around 70th and Ashland.
In the South Side club, we were treated to a great musical performance. Our friend the guitarist wasn't featured; instead, the group was fronted by a female singer who pretty much blew the roof off the joint. I don't think I've ever heard her sing again, but the memory of her voice stays with me nearly twenty years later.
Being young and relatively naive, there were a few things that I didn't think about back then. The singer who fronted that group probably didn't support herself financially with her music. It never occurred to me to wonder about her life outside of that blues club. What did she do for a living? Did she have a family to care for? Also, I thought our guitarist friend just didn't want the somewhat snobby U. Chicago student body to know he was making money by playing the blues (sometimes at clubs in neighborhoods most of our classmates wouldn't venture into on a dare), and that was why he didn't invite more people to hear him play. In hindsight, I realize now the opposite is true: he didn't want ten or twelve Chicago students to follow him to gigs. They'd blow his cover and reveal his "other" identity (a white kid from Connecticut with a much WASPier name than the one under which he performed). He'd have lost his credibility if his audiences (and maybe more importantly, his fellow band members) knew he was a freshman at the University of Chicago.
Last night, I found myself at a table at Schwartz's Point, listening to my friend and fellow attorney Aleshia Fessel (or as I like to call her, Fesselicious) belt out some great jazz standards, backed by legendary pianist Ed Moss. The majority of the people in the small club were Aleshia's friends and family, but there were several there who weren't. As I sat there, I realized that they didn't know any of the "back story": that during the day, Aleshia is a really skilled, passionate criminal defense attorney who devotes a huge portion of her practice to defending the indigent and who probably spends more hours volunteering her time than I manage to be awake during any given week. They didn't know that the table full of appreciative listeners in the corner included Aleshia's husband, mother, and parents-in-law. (I suppose they also didn't know Aleshia was previously the subject of a Cincinnati Blog post.)
What they did know was that for five bucks, they encountered a delightful evening of music. They probably didn't consider what kind of bravery it takes to perform in a venue like that. Aleshia's musical roots are in pop/rock, and performing jazz is a little new for her. (And sometimes, I think, the freedom of jazz's forms is troubling for her Type A personality.) Standing up and singing with nothing but a piano behind your voice (played by an extremely talented, experienced artist who thinks nothing of improvising as it suits him) in a very intimate setting is a feat few would try to tackle, much less pull off with as much verve as Aleshia did.
So last night, I found two things: a different side of my friend, and a great spot to hang out and listen to good music. I'll definitely be back the next time Aleshia takes the stage. And while I've got my own (non-musical) gig on Tuesday nights for the next few weeks, very soon I plan to stop in on a Tuesday: for a $10 cover charge, you get a buffet dinner (with what I hear is really good food) and a night of music by Ed Moss's Society Jazz Orchestra.
Schwartz's Point: it's another one of Cincinnati's under-appreciated treasures, and something of an historical throwback. Stop by soon.
(Yes, I realize the cool bloggers have already written about Schwartz's Point. Once again, I'm late. But better late than never...)
Two of these clandestine journeys stand out for me. One was to Kingston Mines, where my neighbor was sitting in with Buddy Guy. (When I said he was amazing, I meant it!) I remember that night because it's one of the few times I've ever had my name "on the list" at the entrance to a club, entitling me to bypass the long line of people waiting for a bouncer to grant them entrance. The other was to a much different blues club. I don't remember the name, but it was much deeper into the South Side of Chicago than our safe little Hyde Park hamlet--somewhere around 70th and Ashland.
In the South Side club, we were treated to a great musical performance. Our friend the guitarist wasn't featured; instead, the group was fronted by a female singer who pretty much blew the roof off the joint. I don't think I've ever heard her sing again, but the memory of her voice stays with me nearly twenty years later.
Being young and relatively naive, there were a few things that I didn't think about back then. The singer who fronted that group probably didn't support herself financially with her music. It never occurred to me to wonder about her life outside of that blues club. What did she do for a living? Did she have a family to care for? Also, I thought our guitarist friend just didn't want the somewhat snobby U. Chicago student body to know he was making money by playing the blues (sometimes at clubs in neighborhoods most of our classmates wouldn't venture into on a dare), and that was why he didn't invite more people to hear him play. In hindsight, I realize now the opposite is true: he didn't want ten or twelve Chicago students to follow him to gigs. They'd blow his cover and reveal his "other" identity (a white kid from Connecticut with a much WASPier name than the one under which he performed). He'd have lost his credibility if his audiences (and maybe more importantly, his fellow band members) knew he was a freshman at the University of Chicago.
Last night, I found myself at a table at Schwartz's Point, listening to my friend and fellow attorney Aleshia Fessel (or as I like to call her, Fesselicious) belt out some great jazz standards, backed by legendary pianist Ed Moss. The majority of the people in the small club were Aleshia's friends and family, but there were several there who weren't. As I sat there, I realized that they didn't know any of the "back story": that during the day, Aleshia is a really skilled, passionate criminal defense attorney who devotes a huge portion of her practice to defending the indigent and who probably spends more hours volunteering her time than I manage to be awake during any given week. They didn't know that the table full of appreciative listeners in the corner included Aleshia's husband, mother, and parents-in-law. (I suppose they also didn't know Aleshia was previously the subject of a Cincinnati Blog post.)
What they did know was that for five bucks, they encountered a delightful evening of music. They probably didn't consider what kind of bravery it takes to perform in a venue like that. Aleshia's musical roots are in pop/rock, and performing jazz is a little new for her. (And sometimes, I think, the freedom of jazz's forms is troubling for her Type A personality.) Standing up and singing with nothing but a piano behind your voice (played by an extremely talented, experienced artist who thinks nothing of improvising as it suits him) in a very intimate setting is a feat few would try to tackle, much less pull off with as much verve as Aleshia did.
So last night, I found two things: a different side of my friend, and a great spot to hang out and listen to good music. I'll definitely be back the next time Aleshia takes the stage. And while I've got my own (non-musical) gig on Tuesday nights for the next few weeks, very soon I plan to stop in on a Tuesday: for a $10 cover charge, you get a buffet dinner (with what I hear is really good food) and a night of music by Ed Moss's Society Jazz Orchestra.
Schwartz's Point: it's another one of Cincinnati's under-appreciated treasures, and something of an historical throwback. Stop by soon.
(Yes, I realize the cool bloggers have already written about Schwartz's Point. Once again, I'm late. But better late than never...)
Friday, May 14, 2010
Rally Against Domestic Violence
This Monday, May 17, 2010, at 5:00 pm, the Hirsch Recreation Center on Reading Road in Avondale will host a rally against domestic violence. Participants include the Cincinnati Police Department; the YWCA; and Women Helping Women. Also on hand to address those gathered will be Hamilton County Common Pleas Court Judge Nadine Allen.
The event includes refreshments and a raffle for prizes. This is another one of those great community events that probably doesn't happen in the absence of our recreation centers.
The event includes refreshments and a raffle for prizes. This is another one of those great community events that probably doesn't happen in the absence of our recreation centers.
Visual Fringe Line-Up Announced!
The Visual Arts portion of the Cincinnati Fringe Festival was announced earlier this week. The exhibit runs at the Childlaw Gallery at the Art Academy of Cincinnati 1212 Jackson Street and runs from June 1-12.
Join in the opening night reception on June 1st as part of the Fringe Kick-Off Party, 6PM to 9PM at the Childlaw Gallery. Afterwards head down a block to the Know Theatre for the Kick-Off of the Performance and Film portions of Fringe.
Join in the opening night reception on June 1st as part of the Fringe Kick-Off Party, 6PM to 9PM at the Childlaw Gallery. Afterwards head down a block to the Know Theatre for the Kick-Off of the Performance and Film portions of Fringe.
Thursday, May 13, 2010
2011 Council Race Starts Early!
It's a long way before 2011, but for Chris Seelbach his campaign for Cincinnati begins now. The former VP of CincyPAC announced his campaign today and released his website: www.seelbachforcouncil.com.
Chris is a supporter of OTR and the Streetcar and was a committed leader with the Human Rights Campaign in Cincinnati in its successful effort to repeal Article XII.
I look forward to seeing how his campaign unfolds. I hope he seeks out a Democratic endorsement, but if he can build a big network and ride it into the early summer of 2011, he may have a chance at winning in his first council election, even without the endorsement.
Chris is a supporter of OTR and the Streetcar and was a committed leader with the Human Rights Campaign in Cincinnati in its successful effort to repeal Article XII.
I look forward to seeing how his campaign unfolds. I hope he seeks out a Democratic endorsement, but if he can build a big network and ride it into the early summer of 2011, he may have a chance at winning in his first council election, even without the endorsement.
Calgon, Take Me Away!!!
Kevin Osborne reports that Chris Seelbach will seek a place on City Council in 2011. (Other links: campaign website; KRM; logo design contest.)
From everything I know about and have heard about Chris, I strongly suspect he'll be one of the candidates I support next year. That's not to say I agree with him about everything: while I think he has excellent ideas regarding zoning reform, I'm concerned that he undervalues the role of the police in public safety.
Having said that, though, my immediate reaction was not "What can I do to help Seelbach win in 2011?" Instead it is: Really? We now have an eighteen-month campaign cycle for City Council? I can't handle this!
We already bemoan the nearly perpetual campaign cycle for offices like the President of the United States. Do we really want that for local elections, too? Doesn't there have to be time to govern?
Of course, the thought also crosses my mind that Seelbach is trying to position himself for the seat Laketa Cole will soon vacate....
From everything I know about and have heard about Chris, I strongly suspect he'll be one of the candidates I support next year. That's not to say I agree with him about everything: while I think he has excellent ideas regarding zoning reform, I'm concerned that he undervalues the role of the police in public safety.
Having said that, though, my immediate reaction was not "What can I do to help Seelbach win in 2011?" Instead it is: Really? We now have an eighteen-month campaign cycle for City Council? I can't handle this!
We already bemoan the nearly perpetual campaign cycle for offices like the President of the United States. Do we really want that for local elections, too? Doesn't there have to be time to govern?
Of course, the thought also crosses my mind that Seelbach is trying to position himself for the seat Laketa Cole will soon vacate....
Unified Local Theater Awards?
Rick Pender, Theatre Editor/Critic at CityBeat, has written a blog post discussing the concept of a unified Theatre awards program. The two groups to be unified would be CityBeat's Theatre CEA's and the Enquirer supported Acclaim Awards.
Each of the two programs are very different and use very different philosophies. The CEA's are a more traditional awards program where the categories and rules are better defined and understood by all. The Acclaims are determined by a small group of "Acclaimers" who see the various shows during the season. The rules and categories seem to change with the tides.
I think the CEA's work great. They are fair, and except for the public voting popularity contest that plagues all of CityBeat's awards, it awards the most deserving shows and individuals.
The Acclaims don't work as fairly. It largely falls on the whims of a few people, often just one. The Acclaims add too much personal taste for a show and far too often overlooks great work because those seeing a show don't like the type of play they are seeing, ignoring or penalizing the actors or directors or stage crew for the choice of the producers to put on that particular play.
All of that being said, both are fun events. I myself like having two. I like the competition. I think the more awards the better. We have the Oscars (CEA's) and we have the Golden Globes (Acclaim), and I think that works. Both could use some refining, but I would want to keep both going.
Each of the two programs are very different and use very different philosophies. The CEA's are a more traditional awards program where the categories and rules are better defined and understood by all. The Acclaims are determined by a small group of "Acclaimers" who see the various shows during the season. The rules and categories seem to change with the tides.
I think the CEA's work great. They are fair, and except for the public voting popularity contest that plagues all of CityBeat's awards, it awards the most deserving shows and individuals.
The Acclaims don't work as fairly. It largely falls on the whims of a few people, often just one. The Acclaims add too much personal taste for a show and far too often overlooks great work because those seeing a show don't like the type of play they are seeing, ignoring or penalizing the actors or directors or stage crew for the choice of the producers to put on that particular play.
All of that being said, both are fun events. I myself like having two. I like the competition. I think the more awards the better. We have the Oscars (CEA's) and we have the Golden Globes (Acclaim), and I think that works. Both could use some refining, but I would want to keep both going.
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
Some Food News: Josh Campbell and Molly Wellmann, Together Again
For those of you who are, like me, fans of Josh Campbell (the chef/proprietor of Mayberry and the World Food Bar), there are a couple of exciting events coming up.
On June 11, 2010, Josh once again join forces with Molly Wellmann (my review of an earlier joint venture featuring those two is here) for a Caribbean-themed dinner at the Boost meeting space on Reading Road. (I'm not sure if this spot counts as downtown or Pendleton.) On the menu: "funky island fare" from Josh and "classic tiki bar drinks" from Molly. There will also be a DJ. Apparently, the Boost venue is fairly impressive. The roof will be open (weather permitting), and food will be served downstairs. Tickets are $50 each (I think beer may be included in that price, though Molly's drinks are extra--and well worth it!); for reservations, call Mayberry at 381-5999.
And this Monday, May 17, at 6:30, Josh will be serving up a "Taste of Mayberry" at the Party Source in Newport. This is a demonstration class, so you'll be able to see Josh in action. The food includes pepper bacon-wrapped figs (you had me at bacon), grilled hanger steak, and banana cream pie. The cost is $60 (which includes some wine, I think), but Party Source has a 2-for-1 special (so it's essentially dinner for two for sixty bucks).
Both events sound great; I'll be at one or both, and hope to run into some of you there.
On June 11, 2010, Josh once again join forces with Molly Wellmann (my review of an earlier joint venture featuring those two is here) for a Caribbean-themed dinner at the Boost meeting space on Reading Road. (I'm not sure if this spot counts as downtown or Pendleton.) On the menu: "funky island fare" from Josh and "classic tiki bar drinks" from Molly. There will also be a DJ. Apparently, the Boost venue is fairly impressive. The roof will be open (weather permitting), and food will be served downstairs. Tickets are $50 each (I think beer may be included in that price, though Molly's drinks are extra--and well worth it!); for reservations, call Mayberry at 381-5999.
And this Monday, May 17, at 6:30, Josh will be serving up a "Taste of Mayberry" at the Party Source in Newport. This is a demonstration class, so you'll be able to see Josh in action. The food includes pepper bacon-wrapped figs (you had me at bacon), grilled hanger steak, and banana cream pie. The cost is $60 (which includes some wine, I think), but Party Source has a 2-for-1 special (so it's essentially dinner for two for sixty bucks).
Both events sound great; I'll be at one or both, and hope to run into some of you there.
Miami University: Is Anyone Really Surprised?
This is the post that may finally get me kicked off the blog.
Today comes word that the Miami chapter of Alpha Xi Delta may be suspended for bad behavior at an off-campus party. Earlier this week, the university announced the suspension of Pi Beta Phi for similarly drunken and boorish behavior.
And all of this comes on the heels of revelations that MU's most famous alumnus, Ben Roethlisberger, behaves like an entitled, inebriated frat boy on such a regular basis that some have begun to suggest that brain damage is to blame.
In a letter regarding the most recent sorority incident, MU President David Hodge writes that "the actions of these students are contrary to the values of Miami University." My question: how many people agree with him?
Most people who didn't attend MU perceive it as a place for spoiled rich kids who, not having the grades or connections to get into a better school, have found a quiet corner of Ohio in which to drink away their parents' money. MU students have set fires to so many couches that Oxford has a law banning anyone from having upholstered furniture on a porch. MU students, so disappointed that the scheduling of spring break would deprive them of the communal drinking opportunity posed by St. Patrick's Day, created Green Beer Day, devoted to nothing but drunken revelry.
President Hodge seems to fear that the recent bad conduct of two MU sororities will give the university a bad reputation. He's wrong. Stories about drunken, misbehaved MU students don't alter people's feelings towards MU; they reinforce them. And that's the real problem that Hodge must face, if he's serious about protecting the "values of Miami University."
UPDATE: Deadspin has more details on the Pi Beta Phi misbehavior. (Hat tip: Scott Sloan.)
Today comes word that the Miami chapter of Alpha Xi Delta may be suspended for bad behavior at an off-campus party. Earlier this week, the university announced the suspension of Pi Beta Phi for similarly drunken and boorish behavior.
And all of this comes on the heels of revelations that MU's most famous alumnus, Ben Roethlisberger, behaves like an entitled, inebriated frat boy on such a regular basis that some have begun to suggest that brain damage is to blame.
In a letter regarding the most recent sorority incident, MU President David Hodge writes that "the actions of these students are contrary to the values of Miami University." My question: how many people agree with him?
Most people who didn't attend MU perceive it as a place for spoiled rich kids who, not having the grades or connections to get into a better school, have found a quiet corner of Ohio in which to drink away their parents' money. MU students have set fires to so many couches that Oxford has a law banning anyone from having upholstered furniture on a porch. MU students, so disappointed that the scheduling of spring break would deprive them of the communal drinking opportunity posed by St. Patrick's Day, created Green Beer Day, devoted to nothing but drunken revelry.
President Hodge seems to fear that the recent bad conduct of two MU sororities will give the university a bad reputation. He's wrong. Stories about drunken, misbehaved MU students don't alter people's feelings towards MU; they reinforce them. And that's the real problem that Hodge must face, if he's serious about protecting the "values of Miami University."
UPDATE: Deadspin has more details on the Pi Beta Phi misbehavior. (Hat tip: Scott Sloan.)
Good Compromise for Streetcar Bonds
I'm still lukewarm (at best) about the notion of a streetcar. Lots of smart people who I respect say it will spur investment and development. So maybe my doubts aren't reasonable. (But please, folks, quit telling me about Portland. I don't have any reason to believe that city is analogous to Cincinnati. I'm much more interested in the streetcar experiences of places like Kenosha.)
But if our policymakers are going to move forward with the streetcar, I think they've done so in a responsible, measured way. Today, Council approved the issuance of $64 million in bonds, but removed the "emergency" clause from the authorizing legislation. That means the ordinance isn't effective for 90 days, by which time the City will almost certainly know whether federal help is coming our way. If not, Council can rescind the ordinance before the bonds issue.
One other question: the price that's been quoted is a few years old now. Given increases in steel prices, is it still any good? Isn't this project's cost going up by the minute?
But if our policymakers are going to move forward with the streetcar, I think they've done so in a responsible, measured way. Today, Council approved the issuance of $64 million in bonds, but removed the "emergency" clause from the authorizing legislation. That means the ordinance isn't effective for 90 days, by which time the City will almost certainly know whether federal help is coming our way. If not, Council can rescind the ordinance before the bonds issue.
One other question: the price that's been quoted is a few years old now. Given increases in steel prices, is it still any good? Isn't this project's cost going up by the minute?
Arnold's Is Going Topless
A new local Brewery, Rivertown Brewery, is joining the celebration by making Arnold's the first Downtown bar to carry their beers. Blues artist John Redell will play from 8PM to 10PM, but the party goes on until closing with all Rivertown beers only $3.
Sorry if you wanted more, but it just ain't happening.
A Heartwarming and Stomach Filling Story
Sean Rhiney from Soapbox has a very touching story about a new OTR business, ForkHeartKnife Kitchen.
They are on Twitter now too! @forkheartknife
They are on Twitter now too! @forkheartknife
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
Why Is This a News Story?
Why is the Enquirer spend the time on this article about a shoplifting case, valued at $185, that happened way back on April 27th?
Am I missing the importance?
They even have a photo of the suspects.
Since the thieves allegedly stole FIVE containers of KY lubricant, I can only assume the couple has been too busy since April 27th to be caught.
UPDATE: I just say a TV commercial for that exact brand of KY. Why would they name the product in the first place? Is this really a paid advertisement disguised a news story?
Am I missing the importance?
They even have a photo of the suspects.
Since the thieves allegedly stole FIVE containers of KY lubricant, I can only assume the couple has been too busy since April 27th to be caught.
UPDATE: I just say a TV commercial for that exact brand of KY. Why would they name the product in the first place? Is this really a paid advertisement disguised a news story?
Is the Enquirer Biased or Looking for Controversy?
I know, most are going to answer the title's question "Is Enquirer Biased or Looking for Controversy?" with a "Both" answer. The Provost at of The Phony Coney questions the timing of the Enquirer's coverage of the Bortz-Streecar Voting "controversy" as being, shall we say, ill-timed.
Yes, it is rather obvious that someone has been pushing the story to the Enquirer and the rest of the media around town. I don't know if I believe there is a full borne effort to disrupt the Streetcar project in the newsroom of the Enquirer. There may be individuals who oppose it, but the reporters are getting marching orders.
I do believe without a doubt that there is a desire for scandal, something media outlets nearly universally are guilty of doing, and doing without care in appearances or importance. I believe that desire isn't just in the editors' minds, it in this case is in the reporter's mind.
The only scandal with Bortz is in appearance. He made a public relations error in how he responded to the ethics letter. He didn't tell everything. That's his sin. The local media feels like he lied to them. They are pissed. Furthermore, where there's a lie, there's a scandal, so no matter the circumstances. Bortz and the Streetcar in association are going to get punched by the Enquirer. They will punch with same sin Bortz committed, the sin of omission.
So, the Enquirer is trying to sell newspapers and isn't doing or at least isn't publishing that is has done it's homework. That is bad journalism. It is good business. It brings more eyes to paper.
More evidence that I think sums up the problem comes in their editorial:
When other issues are pushed by Enquirer, I rarely see opponents getting the same credibility as Luken and Smitherman are getting. Those other opponents never drive the story. Anti-war protesters didn't get the credibility. People commenting on the death of a Notre Dame football recruit are cut off, not allowed to do anything to drive the story. These groups have limited voice and limited chance to influence the story, but Luken and Smitherman get quoted at will and on topics they know nothing about.
We don't need a manufactured controversy. The Enquirer has been the primary maker of that controversy surrounding Bortz and it is a bias they have, a bias for profit.
Yes, it is rather obvious that someone has been pushing the story to the Enquirer and the rest of the media around town. I don't know if I believe there is a full borne effort to disrupt the Streetcar project in the newsroom of the Enquirer. There may be individuals who oppose it, but the reporters are getting marching orders.
I do believe without a doubt that there is a desire for scandal, something media outlets nearly universally are guilty of doing, and doing without care in appearances or importance. I believe that desire isn't just in the editors' minds, it in this case is in the reporter's mind.
The only scandal with Bortz is in appearance. He made a public relations error in how he responded to the ethics letter. He didn't tell everything. That's his sin. The local media feels like he lied to them. They are pissed. Furthermore, where there's a lie, there's a scandal, so no matter the circumstances. Bortz and the Streetcar in association are going to get punched by the Enquirer. They will punch with same sin Bortz committed, the sin of omission.
So, the Enquirer is trying to sell newspapers and isn't doing or at least isn't publishing that is has done it's homework. That is bad journalism. It is good business. It brings more eyes to paper.
More evidence that I think sums up the problem comes in their editorial:
The streetcar may be a real step forward for Cincinnati. We don't oppose it. But we object to the way it has - or hasn't - been planned, explained and justified. So far, city leaders have been asking Cincinnatians to support a pig in a poke.Saying you don't oppose something you do nothing to support is as much dancing on the head of a pin one editorial can offer. If the Enquirer supports the Streetcar, then why are they giving people like Tom Luken and Chris Smitherman credibility when they oppose it with no fact or substitute plan for the development it would spawn? Neither person has any credibility, yet they are driving the Story. They are the opposition to the project, so they get the same level, and often a much, much bigger level, of a voice in the debate than the supports of the Streetcar.
Again: Where's the plan?
When other issues are pushed by Enquirer, I rarely see opponents getting the same credibility as Luken and Smitherman are getting. Those other opponents never drive the story. Anti-war protesters didn't get the credibility. People commenting on the death of a Notre Dame football recruit are cut off, not allowed to do anything to drive the story. These groups have limited voice and limited chance to influence the story, but Luken and Smitherman get quoted at will and on topics they know nothing about.
We don't need a manufactured controversy. The Enquirer has been the primary maker of that controversy surrounding Bortz and it is a bias they have, a bias for profit.
Monday, May 10, 2010
Casablanca and a Burger
A late Spring Sunday evening is a great night to get out of the condo and join your community in watching one of the best movies ever made. The details:
WHO: Venue 222Sounds like the perfect date night too. Any ladies want to go?
WHAT: There’s nothing better than a neighborhood party at Venue 222, Cincinnati’s premier urban event space. Join us with a showing of ‘Casablanca’ one of the most popular romantic dramas of all time. Food for purchase available from Café de Wheels, Cincinnati’s first mobile food truck. BYOBB – Bring Your Own Blanket & Booze.
Casablanca was premiered in 1942, with such stars as Humphrey Bogart, Ingrid Bergman – the film has been lauded for its inclusion of all types of stereotypes in popular culture.
This event is free and open to the public.
WHEN: Sunday May 16, 2010 from 6:30 p.m. – 10 p.m..
WHERE: 222 E. 14th Street, Cincinnati OH 45202.
First They Came for the Mexicans . . .
It's time to get concerned about the very visible anti-Mexican (and probably anti-Hispanic) bigotry taking hold in certain parts of the country.
First, we have the "papers, please" law recently passed in Arizona. Defenders of the law tell us that the only burden will be on illegal immigrants. They ignore the new power police are given to ask anyone who "looks illegal" for proof of citizenship. Everything in the statute is based on the state criminalizing the status of an illegal immigrant. Under the Constitution (which applies both to citizens and non-citizens), a law enforcement officer has to have "reasonable suspicion that criminal activity is afoot" to detain someone and ask questions. (Google "Terry stop" for more on this.)
How can an officer tell the difference between a Mexican-American citizen and an undocumented Mexican national? He can't, of course. So in Arizona, just being Hispanic (or probably non-white) gives an officer reason to detain someone long enough to ask questions. Terrific.
Next, we have the California kids sent home for wearing American flags on Cinco de Mayo. Many are treating this as an incident that is only about the free speech rights of the white students involved. (And I agree, their rights were violated; they should not have been sent home.) But what's being glossed over is the intent behind their "patriotic" display that day. Those students weren't just being patriotic. They were telling their Mexican-American classmates that the celebration of their heritage wasn't acceptable. They were making the Mexican-Americans aware of their otherness, showing them that they weren't quite Americans in the same way the flag-wearers are.
How do I know what the students intended, you ask? Simple. Because I never hear of students wearing American flags or "patriotic" colors on St. Patrick's Day. It's acceptable for people to wear green, display shamrocks, and celebrate their Irish heritage on that day. (I've also never seen any negative reaction to all of the black, red, and gold downtown during Oktoberfest.) Irish-Americans are OK. Mexican-Americans? Not so much. Ironic, given the history of discrimination against Irish-Americans.
The Butler County sheriff wants to bring a "papers, please" law to Ohio. In my criminal defense practice over the past six to twelve months, I've seen a growing hostility towards Hispanics. I hope that Ohioans prove that they're better than this.
In times of economic crisis, people often turn to scapegoating. That seems to be happening now in the U.S. Let's recognize it for what it is and end it. Now.
First, we have the "papers, please" law recently passed in Arizona. Defenders of the law tell us that the only burden will be on illegal immigrants. They ignore the new power police are given to ask anyone who "looks illegal" for proof of citizenship. Everything in the statute is based on the state criminalizing the status of an illegal immigrant. Under the Constitution (which applies both to citizens and non-citizens), a law enforcement officer has to have "reasonable suspicion that criminal activity is afoot" to detain someone and ask questions. (Google "Terry stop" for more on this.)
How can an officer tell the difference between a Mexican-American citizen and an undocumented Mexican national? He can't, of course. So in Arizona, just being Hispanic (or probably non-white) gives an officer reason to detain someone long enough to ask questions. Terrific.
Next, we have the California kids sent home for wearing American flags on Cinco de Mayo. Many are treating this as an incident that is only about the free speech rights of the white students involved. (And I agree, their rights were violated; they should not have been sent home.) But what's being glossed over is the intent behind their "patriotic" display that day. Those students weren't just being patriotic. They were telling their Mexican-American classmates that the celebration of their heritage wasn't acceptable. They were making the Mexican-Americans aware of their otherness, showing them that they weren't quite Americans in the same way the flag-wearers are.
How do I know what the students intended, you ask? Simple. Because I never hear of students wearing American flags or "patriotic" colors on St. Patrick's Day. It's acceptable for people to wear green, display shamrocks, and celebrate their Irish heritage on that day. (I've also never seen any negative reaction to all of the black, red, and gold downtown during Oktoberfest.) Irish-Americans are OK. Mexican-Americans? Not so much. Ironic, given the history of discrimination against Irish-Americans.
The Butler County sheriff wants to bring a "papers, please" law to Ohio. In my criminal defense practice over the past six to twelve months, I've seen a growing hostility towards Hispanics. I hope that Ohioans prove that they're better than this.
In times of economic crisis, people often turn to scapegoating. That seems to be happening now in the U.S. Let's recognize it for what it is and end it. Now.
New Store Coming to the Gateway Quarter
A new clothing store is coming to the Gateway Quarter and if the father of one of the owners is correct, it could be open as soon as in a few weeks. The store would take over 16 East 12th Street, the location that up until last month housed Outside, the store run by Terry Lee.
It was very sad to see Terry's store close, but it is a great sign to see the location turning over so quickly. On Sunday a crew was painting the space which is in great shape. I hope they are able to hold at least a soft opening on May 22nd when a great crowd will attend the OTR/Gateway Summer Celebration.
I was not able to get the name of the store or find any marketing information, so if anyone has more information, chime in.
It was very sad to see Terry's store close, but it is a great sign to see the location turning over so quickly. On Sunday a crew was painting the space which is in great shape. I hope they are able to hold at least a soft opening on May 22nd when a great crowd will attend the OTR/Gateway Summer Celebration.
I was not able to get the name of the store or find any marketing information, so if anyone has more information, chime in.
Sunday, May 09, 2010
The Fireworks Are Quieter
First, let me express (cautious) excitement about the Reds. They're currently a game above .500, in second place, and just three games behind the Cardinals. Mike Leake is a lot of fun to watch, despite a tough seventh inning tonight.
Now, let me move on to something that's ridiculously trivial, but that has been bothering me anyhow. I've made no secret of where I live: in an apartment building on Fourth Street between Plum and Central. My apartment is in the back of the building, facing the Duke Energy Convention Center.
In past seasons, I could "follow" the Reds in my apartment even without having the game on the radio or the television. If I heard fireworks, I'd flip the TV channel to FSN to see who just hit a home run. If I heard fireworks late enough in the evening, I'd know the Reds had just won. The sound was quite audible, and echoed off the buildings behind my building.
But this year, things are different. I can no longer hear fireworks from GABP. I was wondering if perhaps the Reds were using quieter fireworks, but when I attended a game for the first time this season (the eleven-inning thriller this past Monday), I thought the fireworks were as loud as ever.
My new theory: the Great American Tower is absorbing or deflecting the fireworks noise so that it no longer reaches the western end of downtown.
Anyone have any thoughts on this?
And by the way, my previous concern that the Tower could impact games by causing right fielders to drop balls during day games has proven unfounded, as the building doesn't seem shiny enough to create a glare.
Now, let me move on to something that's ridiculously trivial, but that has been bothering me anyhow. I've made no secret of where I live: in an apartment building on Fourth Street between Plum and Central. My apartment is in the back of the building, facing the Duke Energy Convention Center.
In past seasons, I could "follow" the Reds in my apartment even without having the game on the radio or the television. If I heard fireworks, I'd flip the TV channel to FSN to see who just hit a home run. If I heard fireworks late enough in the evening, I'd know the Reds had just won. The sound was quite audible, and echoed off the buildings behind my building.
But this year, things are different. I can no longer hear fireworks from GABP. I was wondering if perhaps the Reds were using quieter fireworks, but when I attended a game for the first time this season (the eleven-inning thriller this past Monday), I thought the fireworks were as loud as ever.
My new theory: the Great American Tower is absorbing or deflecting the fireworks noise so that it no longer reaches the western end of downtown.
Anyone have any thoughts on this?
And by the way, my previous concern that the Tower could impact games by causing right fielders to drop balls during day games has proven unfounded, as the building doesn't seem shiny enough to create a glare.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)