Tonight, Adam Wasserman, the relatively new President and CEO of the Cleveland-Cuyahoga County Port Authority (CCCPA), sat down with Meet the Bloggers at Gypsy Bean Cafe on Cleveland's West-side.
Overall, I was very impressed with Mr. Wasserman. He is a no-nonsense, unapologetic, straight-talking man with a rather dry sense of humor, who speaks authoritatively, but without being condescending, on economic development issues.
Specifically on Cleveland area issues, Mr. Wasserman seems to have a firm grasp on our region's assets and potential, with a keen eye to see that we, as a city, a county, and a region need to decide what we want to be when we grow up, and fast. On a scale of 1 to 10 of how well we’re doing in identifying and leveraging our existing assets, Mr. Wasserman graded us a 4. I would have to agree.
He comes to us from Great Britain and several areas in the U.S. where he held positions relating to economic development and with fresh eyes about what our region needs to do in both the short term and long term. I found his ideas to be balanced and grounded in common sense.
I got the impression that Mr. Wasserman is not the least bit intimidated by persons of political high office and that he speaks truth to power just as candidly as he spoke to Meet the Bloggers about the broad-based, big picture economic development strategy that needs to be undertaken here and the role that CCCPA can play in that strategy.
This trait will be very important for Mr. Wasserman, as he navigates his way through our region’s complex political landscape (he has nine bosses, the Board of CCCPA – 6 appointed by the Mayor of Cleveland, 3 appointed by the Cuyahoga County Commissioners). The only grumbling I could find when I Googled Mr. Wasserman, was about his pay. His current salary is approximately $283,000 per year. That may seem high, but given his experience and expertise I think he’s worth it (and the fact that he has to navigate the politics of his bosses mentioned above, he should probably get combat pay, too).
Of course, only time will tell whether Mr. Wasserman can execute on his broad goals for the CCCPA and whether he can use his position as CCCPA President and CEO to drag our current dis-jointed, hodge-podge economic development strategies into a coherent plan for the region.
I suspect one of two things will happen; the power to whom Mr. Wasserman speaks truth will either listen, or those with ruffled feathers will quietly run him out of town. I hope, for our sake, for the former.
Of course, no one person (even of Mr. Wasserman’s seeming passion and know-how) can be our sole savior from our economic plight. However, we should listen carefully to what Mr. Wasserman has to say. He may very well get us over the hump and help us gain the momentum we need to decide who we are as a city and region to the rest of the world. I, for one, will be watching Mr. Wasserman and will have my fingers crossed that his economic dreams for this region might just come true for all of us.
Look for the podcast of our talk with Mr. Wasserman at meetthebloggers.net, coming soon.
CEP
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
Thursday, March 20, 2008
CEP's Reply to JStrok's Comment on Obama
I don't typically re-post my reply comments to comments on CEP blog posts, but, I think, this warrants an exception. JStrok's comment in a sense is begging the question, but you should read it, because it illustrates precisely my concern about going down the road we're heading with regard to this Obama/Reverend issue.
JStrok commented recently on My Take on the Barack, Reverend Thing .
Here is my reply:
JStrok -- first of all, I respect your opinion to disagree. Your opinion, however, seems to rely on unsupported statements by you that treat assumptions as facts.
Is it a fact (or just a supposition on your part) that this Reverened, who Obama has denounced, would be a part of Obama's staff? Can you support this supposition with evidence?
Is it a fact (or just a supposition on your part) that Obama and this Reverened are associated beyond that Mr. Obama happenes to worship where he preaches? Can you support this supposition with evidence?
Obama has denied that this Reverened has made any of these racially charged speeches in the presence of Obama.
And if your suppositions are wrong, the danger of the standard you set out becomes obvious: because you're essentially saying that it is fair to judge people by who they happen to be in proximity with, not even necessarily associate with.
Well, if that's the standard, then Clinton and McCain are in deep doo doo too.
If I must, in your view, to be a good leader, cast away and distance myself from any person who has spoken a taboo or whose beliefs are on the fringes on mainstream thought, then you are begging for the same myopic, nearsighted, tunnel vision leadership that we've endured under G.W. Bush for the past 8 years.
You say, "the fact that [Obama] chose to stay [at his Church when there were others of the same faith he could attend] says something of his charater and values."
I couldn't agree more. We just disagree about what it says about his character and values. You say it says, we'll he must agree and support what the reverened says then. This is a logical fallacy in the first order. I say it says that he can be subjected to speech that he disagrees with, and is not beholden or influenced by it.
You're asking him to make a symbolic meaningless gesture by moving to another church and calling that good character and values. If you really think he agrees with the Reverened and wanted to keep it a secret, don't you think he's politically savvy enough to have figured out he should go to another church so he can keep his beliefs a sercret on his own?
You're missing the boat on this one, JStrok. He stayed in the church because he HAS the courage of his convictions and he knows that just because he attends a church with a Reverened who is on the fringes, doesn't mean that he has to believe those things. I think he stays because he has faith that the American people are wise and intelligent enough to see that just because someone is in the same room with someone else, doesn't mean they all believe the same things. Perhaps, based on your comment, and where this story has been centered in the mainstream press, his faith in us is, sadly, misplaced.
CEP
JStrok commented recently on My Take on the Barack, Reverend Thing .
Here is my reply:
JStrok -- first of all, I respect your opinion to disagree. Your opinion, however, seems to rely on unsupported statements by you that treat assumptions as facts.
Is it a fact (or just a supposition on your part) that this Reverened, who Obama has denounced, would be a part of Obama's staff? Can you support this supposition with evidence?
Is it a fact (or just a supposition on your part) that Obama and this Reverened are associated beyond that Mr. Obama happenes to worship where he preaches? Can you support this supposition with evidence?
Obama has denied that this Reverened has made any of these racially charged speeches in the presence of Obama.
And if your suppositions are wrong, the danger of the standard you set out becomes obvious: because you're essentially saying that it is fair to judge people by who they happen to be in proximity with, not even necessarily associate with.
Well, if that's the standard, then Clinton and McCain are in deep doo doo too.
If I must, in your view, to be a good leader, cast away and distance myself from any person who has spoken a taboo or whose beliefs are on the fringes on mainstream thought, then you are begging for the same myopic, nearsighted, tunnel vision leadership that we've endured under G.W. Bush for the past 8 years.
You say, "the fact that [Obama] chose to stay [at his Church when there were others of the same faith he could attend] says something of his charater and values."
I couldn't agree more. We just disagree about what it says about his character and values. You say it says, we'll he must agree and support what the reverened says then. This is a logical fallacy in the first order. I say it says that he can be subjected to speech that he disagrees with, and is not beholden or influenced by it.
You're asking him to make a symbolic meaningless gesture by moving to another church and calling that good character and values. If you really think he agrees with the Reverened and wanted to keep it a secret, don't you think he's politically savvy enough to have figured out he should go to another church so he can keep his beliefs a sercret on his own?
You're missing the boat on this one, JStrok. He stayed in the church because he HAS the courage of his convictions and he knows that just because he attends a church with a Reverened who is on the fringes, doesn't mean that he has to believe those things. I think he stays because he has faith that the American people are wise and intelligent enough to see that just because someone is in the same room with someone else, doesn't mean they all believe the same things. Perhaps, based on your comment, and where this story has been centered in the mainstream press, his faith in us is, sadly, misplaced.
CEP
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
Cleveland's City Charter Says Mayor Has to Give Reasons for Increases/Decreases
Section 38 of the Cleveland City Charter is reproduced below in its entirety. I have bolded sub-paragraph (c) which requires that the Mayor's Estimate shall set forth reasons for proposed increases and decreases in items of expenditure. While I think it would be unduly burdensome for the mayor to give specific reasons for each line item in the budget, I don't think it is too much to ask to give explanations for line items or major subsections of program areas that increase or decrease more than 10% from one year to the next. This would certainly answer all of the questions I have in my review of the 2008 Mayor's Estimate.
Bill Callahan of Callahan's Cleveland Diary chimed in on my budget analysis recently. I just remembered that he's on the current Charter Review Commission. Perhaps this is an area that should be addressed by the Commission; how many other provisions of the City Charter are being essentially ignored? Maybe the revised Charter should have some sort of a citizen enforcement mechanism for some of the ignored provisions, such as the one bolded below. What say you Mr. Callahan?
§ 38 Mayor's Estimate
The fiscal year of the City shall begin on the first day of January. On or before the fifteenth day of November in each year the Mayor shall prepare an estimate of the expense of conducting the affairs of the City for the following year and shall submit such estimate to Council no later than February 1 of said following year. This estimate shall be compiled from detailed information obtained from the various departments on uniform blanks prepared by the Director of Finance, and shall set forth:
(a) An itemized estimate of the expense of conducting each department.
(b) Comparisons of such estimates with the corresponding items of expenditure for the last two complete fiscal years and with the expenditures of the current fiscal year plus an estimate of expenditures necessary to complete the current fiscal year.
(c) Reasons for proposed increases or decreases in such items of expenditure compared with the current fiscal year.
(d) A separate schedule for each department showing the things necessary for the department to do during the year and which of any desirable things it ought to do if possible.
(e) Items of payroll increases as either additional pay to present employees, or pay for more employees.
(f) A statement from the Director of Finance of the total probable income of the City from taxes for the period covered by the Mayor's estimate.
(g) An itemization of all anticipated revenue from sources other than the tax levy.
(h) The amounts required for interest on the City's debt, for sinking funds and for maturing serial bonds.
(i) The total amount of outstanding City debt with a schedule of maturities of bond issues.
(j) Such other information as may be required by the Council.
The Mayor shall submit the estimate thus prepared to the Council and at least one thousand (1,000) copies thereof shall be printed for distribution to citizens who may call for them. Copies of the estimate shall also be furnished to the newspapers of the City, and to the public library and each of its branches. (Effective November 21, 1967)
Bill Callahan of Callahan's Cleveland Diary chimed in on my budget analysis recently. I just remembered that he's on the current Charter Review Commission. Perhaps this is an area that should be addressed by the Commission; how many other provisions of the City Charter are being essentially ignored? Maybe the revised Charter should have some sort of a citizen enforcement mechanism for some of the ignored provisions, such as the one bolded below. What say you Mr. Callahan?
§ 38 Mayor's Estimate
The fiscal year of the City shall begin on the first day of January. On or before the fifteenth day of November in each year the Mayor shall prepare an estimate of the expense of conducting the affairs of the City for the following year and shall submit such estimate to Council no later than February 1 of said following year. This estimate shall be compiled from detailed information obtained from the various departments on uniform blanks prepared by the Director of Finance, and shall set forth:
(a) An itemized estimate of the expense of conducting each department.
(b) Comparisons of such estimates with the corresponding items of expenditure for the last two complete fiscal years and with the expenditures of the current fiscal year plus an estimate of expenditures necessary to complete the current fiscal year.
(c) Reasons for proposed increases or decreases in such items of expenditure compared with the current fiscal year.
(d) A separate schedule for each department showing the things necessary for the department to do during the year and which of any desirable things it ought to do if possible.
(e) Items of payroll increases as either additional pay to present employees, or pay for more employees.
(f) A statement from the Director of Finance of the total probable income of the City from taxes for the period covered by the Mayor's estimate.
(g) An itemization of all anticipated revenue from sources other than the tax levy.
(h) The amounts required for interest on the City's debt, for sinking funds and for maturing serial bonds.
(i) The total amount of outstanding City debt with a schedule of maturities of bond issues.
(j) Such other information as may be required by the Council.
The Mayor shall submit the estimate thus prepared to the Council and at least one thousand (1,000) copies thereof shall be printed for distribution to citizens who may call for them. Copies of the estimate shall also be furnished to the newspapers of the City, and to the public library and each of its branches. (Effective November 21, 1967)
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
My Take on the Barack, Reverend Thing
Barack Obama made have made his first serious tactical mistake of his presidential campaign.
By accepting the premise that what his pastor believes is at all a relevant issue in this campaign.
How'd he do that? When he denounced what his pastor said, even though he hadn't heard it personally. By that simple act, out of panic, perhaps, or bad advice from advisers, of denouncing the preachings of his pastor, Obama tacitly conceded the premise that we should give two shakes about what his pastor has to say at all vis-a-vis the character and fitness of Obama.
A close analogy is this: Judging Obama by what his pastor preaches and believes is tantamount to judging every Roman Catholic a pedophile because of the predilections of a very few wayward Priests. If this is the direction we're heading in this Country, then, as a Roman Catholic, I am deeply concerned.
I didn't listen to Obama's speech today, so maybe he said what I think he should have said from the beginning, although it would carry more weight if he hadn't already accepted the premise of the issue.
Here's what I think Obama should have said from the start and maintained this position: Holding anyone to account for what they, as a listener, heard from a speaker, in a society that holds up freedom of speech as a beacon for the fundamental principles of freedom to the rest of the world is intolerable and cannot and should not be condoned by any true blooded American.
Holding anyone to account for what they hear in the course of the practice of their freedom of religion is an abomination to the freedom from interference in the practice of one's religion, and must not be tolerated by a freedom loving people.
That my opponents, whether of democratic, republican or independent ilk, would attack my pastor's freedom of speech and my freedom to practice my religion; in order to score points in a political campaign for the highest office in our nation, a nation who's founding and continued existence is dependent on those very freedoms; is despicable, and makes them unworthy to hold such an office in this great land.
He should have simply never conceded the premise that what his pastor says has anything to do with him.
I mean seriously, how far are we going to take this road? If I now attend a music concert by a musically horrible band, does that mean I have poor taste in music? Can I get tagged for what someone else says or does just because I happened to be in the audience? This, my friends, is a slippery slope that we do not want any part of. We need to change direction, and fast. Hell, I attended George W. Bush's second inauguration, does that mean I'm on the hook for everything he said in that forgettable speech? This is insane people.
Let me know what you think.
CEP
By accepting the premise that what his pastor believes is at all a relevant issue in this campaign.
How'd he do that? When he denounced what his pastor said, even though he hadn't heard it personally. By that simple act, out of panic, perhaps, or bad advice from advisers, of denouncing the preachings of his pastor, Obama tacitly conceded the premise that we should give two shakes about what his pastor has to say at all vis-a-vis the character and fitness of Obama.
A close analogy is this: Judging Obama by what his pastor preaches and believes is tantamount to judging every Roman Catholic a pedophile because of the predilections of a very few wayward Priests. If this is the direction we're heading in this Country, then, as a Roman Catholic, I am deeply concerned.
I didn't listen to Obama's speech today, so maybe he said what I think he should have said from the beginning, although it would carry more weight if he hadn't already accepted the premise of the issue.
Here's what I think Obama should have said from the start and maintained this position: Holding anyone to account for what they, as a listener, heard from a speaker, in a society that holds up freedom of speech as a beacon for the fundamental principles of freedom to the rest of the world is intolerable and cannot and should not be condoned by any true blooded American.
Holding anyone to account for what they hear in the course of the practice of their freedom of religion is an abomination to the freedom from interference in the practice of one's religion, and must not be tolerated by a freedom loving people.
That my opponents, whether of democratic, republican or independent ilk, would attack my pastor's freedom of speech and my freedom to practice my religion; in order to score points in a political campaign for the highest office in our nation, a nation who's founding and continued existence is dependent on those very freedoms; is despicable, and makes them unworthy to hold such an office in this great land.
He should have simply never conceded the premise that what his pastor says has anything to do with him.
I mean seriously, how far are we going to take this road? If I now attend a music concert by a musically horrible band, does that mean I have poor taste in music? Can I get tagged for what someone else says or does just because I happened to be in the audience? This, my friends, is a slippery slope that we do not want any part of. We need to change direction, and fast. Hell, I attended George W. Bush's second inauguration, does that mean I'm on the hook for everything he said in that forgettable speech? This is insane people.
Let me know what you think.
CEP
The Other Shoe Drops; and Fuzzy Math
Well low and behold: Forest City says it can connect Medical Mart with convention center through Tower City Cinemas
Aha! I see the Forest through the trees. Forest City wastes no time in staking its claim to a chunk of the $43 mil per year Cuyahoga County is raping from its citizenry. Kinda makes ya go hmm . . .
Fuzzy Math: Let's see, if the convention center/medical mart costs $40 million for site development (air rights), and double that for construction, so we're up to $80 million, oh hell, let's triple it and do it right --- $120 million for the whole shebang and, as we recently learned, MMPI is kicking in $20 million of its own; when we're lookin' at roughly $100 million for this project.
$43 million per year in increased sales taxes times 20 years that the tax is levied; hmm let's see, carry the one, equals 860,000,000! WHOA! Hell, we can afford TWO convention centers, one at the existing public hall site and one at Tower City, and have money left over. Problem solved.
Hold the phone -- even better; we could just BUY Tower City, demolish it and build a new county administration building with a medical mart and convention center attached. I like this idea the best; only then, perhaps, we can end the raping and pillaging of Cleveland by the likes of Forest City. Actually, at least this time all of Cuyahoga County is getting hosed, not just Cleveland, so I should just zip it.
CEP
Aha! I see the Forest through the trees. Forest City wastes no time in staking its claim to a chunk of the $43 mil per year Cuyahoga County is raping from its citizenry. Kinda makes ya go hmm . . .
Fuzzy Math: Let's see, if the convention center/medical mart costs $40 million for site development (air rights), and double that for construction, so we're up to $80 million, oh hell, let's triple it and do it right --- $120 million for the whole shebang and, as we recently learned, MMPI is kicking in $20 million of its own; when we're lookin' at roughly $100 million for this project.
$43 million per year in increased sales taxes times 20 years that the tax is levied; hmm let's see, carry the one, equals 860,000,000! WHOA! Hell, we can afford TWO convention centers, one at the existing public hall site and one at Tower City, and have money left over. Problem solved.
Hold the phone -- even better; we could just BUY Tower City, demolish it and build a new county administration building with a medical mart and convention center attached. I like this idea the best; only then, perhaps, we can end the raping and pillaging of Cleveland by the likes of Forest City. Actually, at least this time all of Cuyahoga County is getting hosed, not just Cleveland, so I should just zip it.
CEP
Friday, March 14, 2008
Budget Priorities Part Deux
From cleveland.com metro blog today:
Two men shot overnight in Cleveland
Posted by Donna J. Miller March 14, 2008 11:12AM
Categories: Crime
Two men in a car at East 105th Street and St.Clair Avenue flagged down a Cleveland patrolman about 1 a.m. today and said they were shot at East 79th Street and St. Clair.
One was shot in the buttocks, the other in the back, Lt. Thomas Stacho said. They were taken to a hospital.
Details aren't yet available. Detectives are investigating.
The men should call Cleveland's Consumer Affairs department. They're fully staffed.
See prior post here.
CEP
Two men shot overnight in Cleveland
Posted by Donna J. Miller March 14, 2008 11:12AM
Categories: Crime
Two men in a car at East 105th Street and St.Clair Avenue flagged down a Cleveland patrolman about 1 a.m. today and said they were shot at East 79th Street and St. Clair.
One was shot in the buttocks, the other in the back, Lt. Thomas Stacho said. They were taken to a hospital.
Details aren't yet available. Detectives are investigating.
The men should call Cleveland's Consumer Affairs department. They're fully staffed.
See prior post here.
CEP
2008 Cleveland Mayor's Estimate Budget, Many Questions, Few Answers
Once again, I have masochistically thrown myself at trying to analyze the City of Cleveland Budget for 2008. Specifically the Mayor's Estimate (proposed budget to Council) which is available in its entirety here, all 505 pages of it. Ugh.
Once again, I am bewildered by the fact that there are no percentage increase/decrease columns in any of the charts that show where the budget is increasing and decreasing in a (somewhat) apples to apples comparison.
Once again, I am befuddled by the fact that there are no explanations for increases or decreases among program areas and within program areas. It appears that there may be transfers of functions and personnel between program areas and within different divisions of program areas, but the Mayor's Estimate provides no explanations in this regard. In short, the Mayor's Estimate raises many more questions than it answers. City Council, who has to approve this budget and enact legislation to appropriate the funds for it, should be asking these questions and getting answers. Are they? I'm not sure, but I doubt it.
Alas, I have created an excel spreadsheet calculating those percentages, which is a much better tool to see what program areas are growing, staying the same and shrinking, and by how much relative to last year, 2006, and 2005.
And without further ado, the program areas increasing the most (double digit increases) from 2007's unaudited actual to 2008 proposed budget are: (drum roll please):
Consumer Affairs, up 43%
Finance Department, up 31%
Personnel, up 23%
Aging Department, up 23%
Office of Management & Budget, up 18%
Zoning Board, up 15%
Office of Mayor, up 12%
City Council/Clerk, up 10%
The funding for departments that provide basic city services to residents (e.g. police, fire, sanitation, etc.) remain stagnant:
Public Safety, up 2%
Public Service, up 3%
Parks/Rec/Properties, up 7%
Community Dev., up <1%
Building & Housing, up 4%
Public Health, up 1%
Isn't interesting that the program areas increasing the most are back-office, support functions, while the program areas growing the least (or, in some cases, decreasing) are mostly functions that provide direct services to and provide for the health, safety, and welfare of the residents. Why? I'm not sure, but you won't find the answer in the 2008 Mayor's Estimate.
The only "direct service" function increasing significantly is Consumer Affairs. With all the crime and public safety issues facing the city, I am so glad to see that Consumer Affairs is up 43%, because we residents are sure clamoring for more consumer protection.
Certain aspects of the 2008 Mayor's Estimate caught my attention and raised questions in my mind for which I found no answers in the document itself. They are:
Within the Public Safety function, the Director's Office budget is increasing 28% ($864,000). Most of the increase can be found in one line item: Computer Software Maintenance. That line item was zero in 2005 and 2006. Last year it was $40,337. 2008 budget is $656,971. Why? There is no explanation provided in the Mayor's Estimate.
Also, within the Public Safety function, the House of Corrections budget is increasing a whopping 91% ($6,497,000). Didn't I read recently that the Cuyahoga County Sheriff was going to take over operations of the City Jail and save Cleveland a lot of money? Why the increase then? It appears that Cleveland is planning on a huge expansion of the jail with a significant increase in the corrections population. Indeed, the number of corrections officers is increasing from 66 to 170. Along with other staffing increases, this translates into an increase in the Wages, Salaries and Benefits for Corrections of $5,411,250. In addition, Contractual Services increases by $688,856. Food and Pharmaceutical Supplies line items increase by a combined $334,927.
Meanwhile, the Division of Police and Division of Fire budgets actually decrease in 2008 from 2007. Police is down $208,000, Fire is down $1,120,000 for a total reduction in the Police and Fire budgets of $1,328,000.
I’m still slogging through the numbers. If I find other things that seemingly need further explanation, I’ll post them. Unfortunately, I will only be able to raise more questions; because there are no answers or explanations for these numbers in the 2008 Mayor's Estimate.
CEP
Once again, I am bewildered by the fact that there are no percentage increase/decrease columns in any of the charts that show where the budget is increasing and decreasing in a (somewhat) apples to apples comparison.
Once again, I am befuddled by the fact that there are no explanations for increases or decreases among program areas and within program areas. It appears that there may be transfers of functions and personnel between program areas and within different divisions of program areas, but the Mayor's Estimate provides no explanations in this regard. In short, the Mayor's Estimate raises many more questions than it answers. City Council, who has to approve this budget and enact legislation to appropriate the funds for it, should be asking these questions and getting answers. Are they? I'm not sure, but I doubt it.
Alas, I have created an excel spreadsheet calculating those percentages, which is a much better tool to see what program areas are growing, staying the same and shrinking, and by how much relative to last year, 2006, and 2005.
And without further ado, the program areas increasing the most (double digit increases) from 2007's unaudited actual to 2008 proposed budget are: (drum roll please):
Consumer Affairs, up 43%
Finance Department, up 31%
Personnel, up 23%
Aging Department, up 23%
Office of Management & Budget, up 18%
Zoning Board, up 15%
Office of Mayor, up 12%
City Council/Clerk, up 10%
The funding for departments that provide basic city services to residents (e.g. police, fire, sanitation, etc.) remain stagnant:
Public Safety, up 2%
Public Service, up 3%
Parks/Rec/Properties, up 7%
Community Dev., up <1%
Building & Housing, up 4%
Public Health, up 1%
Isn't interesting that the program areas increasing the most are back-office, support functions, while the program areas growing the least (or, in some cases, decreasing) are mostly functions that provide direct services to and provide for the health, safety, and welfare of the residents. Why? I'm not sure, but you won't find the answer in the 2008 Mayor's Estimate.
The only "direct service" function increasing significantly is Consumer Affairs. With all the crime and public safety issues facing the city, I am so glad to see that Consumer Affairs is up 43%, because we residents are sure clamoring for more consumer protection.
Certain aspects of the 2008 Mayor's Estimate caught my attention and raised questions in my mind for which I found no answers in the document itself. They are:
Within the Public Safety function, the Director's Office budget is increasing 28% ($864,000). Most of the increase can be found in one line item: Computer Software Maintenance. That line item was zero in 2005 and 2006. Last year it was $40,337. 2008 budget is $656,971. Why? There is no explanation provided in the Mayor's Estimate.
Also, within the Public Safety function, the House of Corrections budget is increasing a whopping 91% ($6,497,000). Didn't I read recently that the Cuyahoga County Sheriff was going to take over operations of the City Jail and save Cleveland a lot of money? Why the increase then? It appears that Cleveland is planning on a huge expansion of the jail with a significant increase in the corrections population. Indeed, the number of corrections officers is increasing from 66 to 170. Along with other staffing increases, this translates into an increase in the Wages, Salaries and Benefits for Corrections of $5,411,250. In addition, Contractual Services increases by $688,856. Food and Pharmaceutical Supplies line items increase by a combined $334,927.
Meanwhile, the Division of Police and Division of Fire budgets actually decrease in 2008 from 2007. Police is down $208,000, Fire is down $1,120,000 for a total reduction in the Police and Fire budgets of $1,328,000.
I’m still slogging through the numbers. If I find other things that seemingly need further explanation, I’ll post them. Unfortunately, I will only be able to raise more questions; because there are no answers or explanations for these numbers in the 2008 Mayor's Estimate.
CEP
Thursday, March 13, 2008
What Cuyahoga County Says to Bond Investors About the Sales Tax Increase For Medical Mart
Here is what Cuyahoga County has to say about the sales tax increase in its information statement to prospective and current holders of County issued bonds and notes (emphases are mine, not in original):
Under State law, the Board has authority to adopt resolutions increasing the County sales and use tax by an additional .5% (up to an aggregate maximum of 1.5%) to provide revenue for the County’s General Fund or for certain other purposes. Unless adopted as an emergency measure or with voter approval, any resolution increasing the rate would be subject to referendum by the electors. If adopted as an emergency measure, the resolution increasing the rate would be subject to repeal at a voter-initiated election. If repealed by the electors, the increased rate could not be reimposed pursuant to an emergency measure for one year from the date of the election.
On July 26, 2007 the Board of County Commissioners adopted, by a 2 to 1 vote, a resolution pursuant to Ohio statute to increase the County’s sales tax from the rate of 1% to 1 ¼%. The purpose of this sales tax increase is to provide additional revenues for the County’s General Fund. The tax rate increase is to be levied for a period of 20 years. The annual estimated additional monies to be derived from the tax is anticipated to be $43 million in 2008. Pursuant to the resolution, the tax will become effective October 1, 2007. An effort to obtain sufficient signatures to place a referendum on the ballot putting the question of the sales tax increase to the voters of Cuyahoga County was unsuccessful.
In connection with the sales tax increase, the County has been in discussions with individuals from Merchandise Mart Properties, Inc. (“Medical Mart”) to develop a County Exhibition Facility in conjunction with a privately operated Medical Mart. The increase in the sales tax is expected to provide sufficient additional monies to the General Fund to allow the County to utilize certain of its non-tax revenues in addition to other available revenues to finance a portion of the County Exhibition Facility. At this time no definitive agreements have been entered into with the Medical Mart or any other party for the location, design or construction of a County Exhibition Facility or Medical Mart. However, the County is continuing on-going planning with respect to the foregoing and if the referendum effort is unsuccessful, the County intends to pursue the planning for acquisition, design and construction of the County Exhibition Facility in connection with the Medical Mart. If such Project does not proceed, the members of the County Commissioners who voted for the increased sales tax have stated they would reconsider the implementation of the sales tax increase. For further discussion respecting the financing for this proposed Project see Future Financings.
From: COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA, OHIO 2007 ANNUAL INFORMATIONAL STATEMENT
IN CONNECTION WITH BONDS AND NOTES OF THE COUNTY. p. 44.
Link to Document: http://obm.cuyahogacounty.us/PDF/2007CC_AIS.pdf
Translation: Primary purpose of Sales Tax Increase was to increase General Fund Revenue. Increasing General Fund Revenue might allow County to use other, non-tax money to fund part of a Convention Facility. If no deal is struck on Medical Mart, then Commissioners who voted for will reconsider its implementation.
Interesting. Very Interesting.
CEP
Under State law, the Board has authority to adopt resolutions increasing the County sales and use tax by an additional .5% (up to an aggregate maximum of 1.5%) to provide revenue for the County’s General Fund or for certain other purposes. Unless adopted as an emergency measure or with voter approval, any resolution increasing the rate would be subject to referendum by the electors. If adopted as an emergency measure, the resolution increasing the rate would be subject to repeal at a voter-initiated election. If repealed by the electors, the increased rate could not be reimposed pursuant to an emergency measure for one year from the date of the election.
On July 26, 2007 the Board of County Commissioners adopted, by a 2 to 1 vote, a resolution pursuant to Ohio statute to increase the County’s sales tax from the rate of 1% to 1 ¼%. The purpose of this sales tax increase is to provide additional revenues for the County’s General Fund. The tax rate increase is to be levied for a period of 20 years. The annual estimated additional monies to be derived from the tax is anticipated to be $43 million in 2008. Pursuant to the resolution, the tax will become effective October 1, 2007. An effort to obtain sufficient signatures to place a referendum on the ballot putting the question of the sales tax increase to the voters of Cuyahoga County was unsuccessful.
In connection with the sales tax increase, the County has been in discussions with individuals from Merchandise Mart Properties, Inc. (“Medical Mart”) to develop a County Exhibition Facility in conjunction with a privately operated Medical Mart. The increase in the sales tax is expected to provide sufficient additional monies to the General Fund to allow the County to utilize certain of its non-tax revenues in addition to other available revenues to finance a portion of the County Exhibition Facility. At this time no definitive agreements have been entered into with the Medical Mart or any other party for the location, design or construction of a County Exhibition Facility or Medical Mart. However, the County is continuing on-going planning with respect to the foregoing and if the referendum effort is unsuccessful, the County intends to pursue the planning for acquisition, design and construction of the County Exhibition Facility in connection with the Medical Mart. If such Project does not proceed, the members of the County Commissioners who voted for the increased sales tax have stated they would reconsider the implementation of the sales tax increase. For further discussion respecting the financing for this proposed Project see Future Financings.
From: COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA, OHIO 2007 ANNUAL INFORMATIONAL STATEMENT
IN CONNECTION WITH BONDS AND NOTES OF THE COUNTY. p. 44.
Link to Document: http://obm.cuyahogacounty.us/PDF/2007CC_AIS.pdf
Translation: Primary purpose of Sales Tax Increase was to increase General Fund Revenue. Increasing General Fund Revenue might allow County to use other, non-tax money to fund part of a Convention Facility. If no deal is struck on Medical Mart, then Commissioners who voted for will reconsider its implementation.
Interesting. Very Interesting.
CEP
My Experience as a Pollworker Part II
Click here for Part I.
. . . so where was I, oh yes, election day. First, there are some clean up items from Monday night, election eve.
After I pulled double duty as a Polling Location Coordinator (PLC) first at my polling location and then at Pearlbrook, I finally made it home at about 9:45 p.m. I was trying to settle in to get some rest (difficult because I was pensive about what lay ahead on election day given the inauspicious beginning at the Monday organizational meeting) when my cell phone rang at about 9:50 pm. It was the Board of Elections (BOE) calling.
An nice young women (whose name I forget) was calling to thank me for stepping up to the plate (her words) to be the Polling Location Coordinator and to let me know that I was being "officially promoted" to that position. I accepted, with the caveat that I would not be able to be the PLC for two polling locations (though I like to think of myself as superhuman, sadly, I am not) as that would be humanly impossible. I offered to show up at the Pearlbrook location in the morning to do the final steps of setting up the electronic voting machine for the visually impaired, but that was it. She agreed and thanked me.
I awoke at 4:15 am on Tuesday, March 4, 2008 having had about 5 hours or so of fitful sleep. I showered, shaved and arrived at my regular assigned polling location at about 4:55 am. The church custodian arrived just about time at 5:05 am and opened the facility. I went quickly about my duties and then excused myself to perform the same function at the Pearlbrook location up the street.
Completing the duplicate task at Pearlbrook, I returned to my regular assigned location to get ready to open the polls at 6:30 am.
At 6:20 am, I noticed that we had folks in line to vote already. I'm not sure how long they'd been there, but I assume they didn't all arrive simultaneously and there were about six people in line by then. This was going to be a busy, busy day.
Under the then current regimen of voting in Cuyahoga county (see cleveland.com article that tells us we'll be changing things again for the November election here); each precinct in a polling location was to have four (4) judges. Judge #1 and #2 were supposed to each have one of the alphabetical poll books (one is A-M, the other N-Z) where people sign to vote. Of course, these folks have to check i.d. now, too. Judge #3 was supposed to hand the correct ballot (e.g. Democratic, Republican, or Issues Only) to the voter after they had passed the scrutiny of Judge 1 or 2. Judge #3 also was supposed to read to each voter from a script. The voter then proceeded to a "privacy booth" where they marked their ballots and then returned them to the precinct specific ballot box.
Judge #4 from each precinct was supposed to sit at the "voter assistance table" and handle "problem voters"; folks who needed to vote provisionally.
This system was a great plan, provided, however, that all assigned workers showed up, and stayed the whole day.
My precinct was already short-handed one judge, me, because I was now acting as the PLC. Our illustrious Presiding Judge decided at about 8:30 a.m., that she had a "family emergency" to attend to and left. (We later learned that her daughter had missed the bus back to the University of Toledo, and she had to driver her there.) This semi-literate individual called the BOE for permission to leave, stating to them that her precinct was fully staffed (which it wasn't) and that everything was under control. Of course, she never consulted with anyone else on her "team" about this, and she just left. She returned about 1:30 that afternoon. In the meantime, we noticed that she (acting as Judge #3) had started with the wrong package of Democrat ballots (she started with number 101 instead of 1, which would screw our count up at the end of the night).
In addition, at one point someone overheard her asking a voter to vote for the Cleveland Library levy, which another judge admonished her about. I eventually called the BOE and explained to them that this person was a Total Disaster and had her dispatched.
Now, we were really shorthanded and our polling location was really busy. Instead of having 4 people for my originally assigned precinct, we only had three. So, no Judge #4 for the voter assistance table. I did that job, plus the PLC job, which was to great every voter who entered the polling location and direct them to the correct precinct. Precinct R was short-handed because their student worker never showed, so they had no one at the voter assistance table. Precinct Q's presiding judge spent much time at the voter assistance table dealing with the numerous provisional voters; but she was also the most experienced person at the polling location, so she kept getting called away to trouble shoot other issues in her precinct as well as the others.
Among the problems we encountered that day:
People putting their ballots into the wrong ballot box. Ballots had to be returned to the correct precinct ballot box, but voters could vote in any privacy booth. At least two people (that I know of) put their ballot in the wrong box. We were able to correct this at the end of the night when we opened the boxes to count the ballots, we made sure they got to the correct box. This took A LOT of additional time, however.
People making mistakes on their ballots. Many, many, many people requested their second and sometimes third ballot because they made errors. This would not have been so bad, except that when a replacement ballot was requested the #3 Judge had to record information regarding each of those instances in three different places. As short-handed and busy as we were, it really was difficult and frustrating to deal with erred ballots.
Too many provisional voters. So many people voted in this election that haven't voted in so long, that there were A LOT of provisional voters. Completing the paperwork (correctly) for the provisional ballots is very time consuming and at least twice during the day we had 3 -4 people waiting for someone to help them with a provisional ballot.
Too many last minute changes to procedures. There were so many last minute changes and mid-day changes to procedures that only added to the chaos of an already busy election day. It was extremely frustrating.
In summation, the Secretary of State, Jennifer Brunner, really has to put herself in the place of front line poll workers when she is issuing these "directives" and changes. I would like to see a law enacted that voting procedures must be set in stone at least 90 days in advance of the election. Any changes passed later than that cannot take effect until the next election.
Many of the problems we had could have been (would have been) avoided by the electronic voting machines.
CEP
. . . so where was I, oh yes, election day. First, there are some clean up items from Monday night, election eve.
After I pulled double duty as a Polling Location Coordinator (PLC) first at my polling location and then at Pearlbrook, I finally made it home at about 9:45 p.m. I was trying to settle in to get some rest (difficult because I was pensive about what lay ahead on election day given the inauspicious beginning at the Monday organizational meeting) when my cell phone rang at about 9:50 pm. It was the Board of Elections (BOE) calling.
An nice young women (whose name I forget) was calling to thank me for stepping up to the plate (her words) to be the Polling Location Coordinator and to let me know that I was being "officially promoted" to that position. I accepted, with the caveat that I would not be able to be the PLC for two polling locations (though I like to think of myself as superhuman, sadly, I am not) as that would be humanly impossible. I offered to show up at the Pearlbrook location in the morning to do the final steps of setting up the electronic voting machine for the visually impaired, but that was it. She agreed and thanked me.
I awoke at 4:15 am on Tuesday, March 4, 2008 having had about 5 hours or so of fitful sleep. I showered, shaved and arrived at my regular assigned polling location at about 4:55 am. The church custodian arrived just about time at 5:05 am and opened the facility. I went quickly about my duties and then excused myself to perform the same function at the Pearlbrook location up the street.
Completing the duplicate task at Pearlbrook, I returned to my regular assigned location to get ready to open the polls at 6:30 am.
At 6:20 am, I noticed that we had folks in line to vote already. I'm not sure how long they'd been there, but I assume they didn't all arrive simultaneously and there were about six people in line by then. This was going to be a busy, busy day.
Under the then current regimen of voting in Cuyahoga county (see cleveland.com article that tells us we'll be changing things again for the November election here); each precinct in a polling location was to have four (4) judges. Judge #1 and #2 were supposed to each have one of the alphabetical poll books (one is A-M, the other N-Z) where people sign to vote. Of course, these folks have to check i.d. now, too. Judge #3 was supposed to hand the correct ballot (e.g. Democratic, Republican, or Issues Only) to the voter after they had passed the scrutiny of Judge 1 or 2. Judge #3 also was supposed to read to each voter from a script. The voter then proceeded to a "privacy booth" where they marked their ballots and then returned them to the precinct specific ballot box.
Judge #4 from each precinct was supposed to sit at the "voter assistance table" and handle "problem voters"; folks who needed to vote provisionally.
This system was a great plan, provided, however, that all assigned workers showed up, and stayed the whole day.
My precinct was already short-handed one judge, me, because I was now acting as the PLC. Our illustrious Presiding Judge decided at about 8:30 a.m., that she had a "family emergency" to attend to and left. (We later learned that her daughter had missed the bus back to the University of Toledo, and she had to driver her there.) This semi-literate individual called the BOE for permission to leave, stating to them that her precinct was fully staffed (which it wasn't) and that everything was under control. Of course, she never consulted with anyone else on her "team" about this, and she just left. She returned about 1:30 that afternoon. In the meantime, we noticed that she (acting as Judge #3) had started with the wrong package of Democrat ballots (she started with number 101 instead of 1, which would screw our count up at the end of the night).
In addition, at one point someone overheard her asking a voter to vote for the Cleveland Library levy, which another judge admonished her about. I eventually called the BOE and explained to them that this person was a Total Disaster and had her dispatched.
Now, we were really shorthanded and our polling location was really busy. Instead of having 4 people for my originally assigned precinct, we only had three. So, no Judge #4 for the voter assistance table. I did that job, plus the PLC job, which was to great every voter who entered the polling location and direct them to the correct precinct. Precinct R was short-handed because their student worker never showed, so they had no one at the voter assistance table. Precinct Q's presiding judge spent much time at the voter assistance table dealing with the numerous provisional voters; but she was also the most experienced person at the polling location, so she kept getting called away to trouble shoot other issues in her precinct as well as the others.
Among the problems we encountered that day:
People putting their ballots into the wrong ballot box. Ballots had to be returned to the correct precinct ballot box, but voters could vote in any privacy booth. At least two people (that I know of) put their ballot in the wrong box. We were able to correct this at the end of the night when we opened the boxes to count the ballots, we made sure they got to the correct box. This took A LOT of additional time, however.
People making mistakes on their ballots. Many, many, many people requested their second and sometimes third ballot because they made errors. This would not have been so bad, except that when a replacement ballot was requested the #3 Judge had to record information regarding each of those instances in three different places. As short-handed and busy as we were, it really was difficult and frustrating to deal with erred ballots.
Too many provisional voters. So many people voted in this election that haven't voted in so long, that there were A LOT of provisional voters. Completing the paperwork (correctly) for the provisional ballots is very time consuming and at least twice during the day we had 3 -4 people waiting for someone to help them with a provisional ballot.
Too many last minute changes to procedures. There were so many last minute changes and mid-day changes to procedures that only added to the chaos of an already busy election day. It was extremely frustrating.
In summation, the Secretary of State, Jennifer Brunner, really has to put herself in the place of front line poll workers when she is issuing these "directives" and changes. I would like to see a law enacted that voting procedures must be set in stone at least 90 days in advance of the election. Any changes passed later than that cannot take effect until the next election.
Many of the problems we had could have been (would have been) avoided by the electronic voting machines.
CEP
WLST Reporting Medical Mart Deal Reached
See Jill Miller Zimon's post here:
http://www.writeslikeshetalks.com/2008/03/13/medmart-deal-reach/
See also, http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2008/03/cuyahoga_county_reaches_deal_o.html
CEP
http://www.writeslikeshetalks.com/2008/03/13/medmart-deal-reach/
See also, http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2008/03/cuyahoga_county_reaches_deal_o.html
CEP
Chance Meeting with Sen. Metzenbaum in 1992
In 1992, I was an undergraduate at Michigan State University and a student house management employee at the performing arts center on campus, where the third and final presidential election debate was held among George H. W. Bush, William Clinton, and H. Ross Perot. What an experience.
I was detailed to the uniformed White House Secret Service and my job was to check the credentials of each and every audience member who entered the building, including, among many notables in the press and government, Sen. Howard Metzenbaum.
It was a brief and chance meeting with the well-known Senator (even being born and raised in Michigan, I was aware of the venerable Sen. Metzenbaum), and I remember him as being very down to earth and friendly, gracious, and gentlemanly; and not the least bit put-off that some college punk had to give him permission to enter the building. Same can't be said for some other attendees. I liked him instantly.
May he rest in peace.
CEP
I was detailed to the uniformed White House Secret Service and my job was to check the credentials of each and every audience member who entered the building, including, among many notables in the press and government, Sen. Howard Metzenbaum.
It was a brief and chance meeting with the well-known Senator (even being born and raised in Michigan, I was aware of the venerable Sen. Metzenbaum), and I remember him as being very down to earth and friendly, gracious, and gentlemanly; and not the least bit put-off that some college punk had to give him permission to enter the building. Same can't be said for some other attendees. I liked him instantly.
May he rest in peace.
CEP
The '+" in Cleveland + Gets a Wee Bit Bigger, Where's Cleveland?
Interesting article and comments on cleveland.com regarding Akron-Canton airport expansion.
Here: http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2008/03/akroncanton_airport_to_launch.html
I wonder what plans Cleveland has for its airport, I mean, other than losing lawsuits regarding the taxi-cab service and a private, contracted police force. Small potatoes vs. big potatoes. We need to think bigger, or the "+" in Cleveland + is going to subtract out the Cleveland.
CEP
Here: http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2008/03/akroncanton_airport_to_launch.html
I wonder what plans Cleveland has for its airport, I mean, other than losing lawsuits regarding the taxi-cab service and a private, contracted police force. Small potatoes vs. big potatoes. We need to think bigger, or the "+" in Cleveland + is going to subtract out the Cleveland.
CEP
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
Clear Snow from the Fire Hydrants Near Your Dwelling
Clearing the snow from the fire hydrant closest to your dwelling will save precious seconds or even minutes if there is a fire in your dwelling or your neighbors. The life you save could be your own.
The City of Lakewood has publicly asked its residents to help out and do this. See cleveland.com article linked below.
http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2008/03/lakewood_firefighters_ask_for.html
Clevelanders should do it too.
CEP
The City of Lakewood has publicly asked its residents to help out and do this. See cleveland.com article linked below.
http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2008/03/lakewood_firefighters_ask_for.html
Clevelanders should do it too.
CEP
Ahh, the legacy of what "is" is continues to haunt us
Democrats fight over defining ‘winner’ is one headline on MSNBC this morning. In typical fashion the Democrats are splitting hairs and eating their young. John McCain must be salivating with joy.
In another recent article on MSNBC,
Internal sniping tarnishes Clinton’s image
Feuding between aides shines spotlight on candidate's management style
Some anonymous sources and some not, like Howard Wolfson, close to the Hillary campaign described Hillary Clinton's campaign management style as: (I am paraphrasing of course): she is detached from all but a few very close aides, is extremely loyal and slow to see underperformance due to being clouded with loyalty; she likes it when underlings disagree and leaves the to their own devices to "creatively" work it out. Wolfson is quoted as saying this creates the best process. Really?
Doesn't this remind you of the management style of the current oval office occupant? Would Hillary give us four more years of Bush-like management style? A style that left competing factions of Neocons vs. Powell doctrine folks to duke it out with no guidance from the top, leading to a disjointed incoherent foreign policy; and let's not forget all the finger pointing between Defense and State over who was supposed to plan for post-invasion Iraq. Oh, and then there's the dismal response to Katrina.
If I were Obama, I would be talking about these revealed similarities of her management style to Bush's. This is consistent with his message of change and draws a sharp distinction between his real change and more of the same with Hillary. But what the heck do I know; I'm "just" a blogger.
CEP
In another recent article on MSNBC,
Internal sniping tarnishes Clinton’s image
Feuding between aides shines spotlight on candidate's management style
Some anonymous sources and some not, like Howard Wolfson, close to the Hillary campaign described Hillary Clinton's campaign management style as: (I am paraphrasing of course): she is detached from all but a few very close aides, is extremely loyal and slow to see underperformance due to being clouded with loyalty; she likes it when underlings disagree and leaves the to their own devices to "creatively" work it out. Wolfson is quoted as saying this creates the best process. Really?
Doesn't this remind you of the management style of the current oval office occupant? Would Hillary give us four more years of Bush-like management style? A style that left competing factions of Neocons vs. Powell doctrine folks to duke it out with no guidance from the top, leading to a disjointed incoherent foreign policy; and let's not forget all the finger pointing between Defense and State over who was supposed to plan for post-invasion Iraq. Oh, and then there's the dismal response to Katrina.
If I were Obama, I would be talking about these revealed similarities of her management style to Bush's. This is consistent with his message of change and draws a sharp distinction between his real change and more of the same with Hillary. But what the heck do I know; I'm "just" a blogger.
CEP
Carnival of Ohio Politics # 108 is up and ready
If you haven't checked out this weekly digest of Ohio political blog posts, then you're missing out. Following the ling below to get informed and sometimes even entertained.
Great job Jill Miller Zimon of Writes Like She Talks, et al. on putting this together each week.
http://ohiopoliticscarnival.blogspot.com/2008/03/carnival-of-ohio-politics-108.html
CEP
Great job Jill Miller Zimon of Writes Like She Talks, et al. on putting this together each week.
http://ohiopoliticscarnival.blogspot.com/2008/03/carnival-of-ohio-politics-108.html
CEP
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Where I Come From . . .
I'm from Michigan. Born and bread. It's okay though, 'cause I went to Michigan State, and we hate the Wolverines even more than the Buckeyes hate them. Anyway, I occasionally read my old hometown area newspaper, the Port Huron Times Herald, on-line to catch up with the goings on up thar in the thumb of Michigan -- well, mostly to see who died. Today, in-fact, I read an obituary of the father of one of my high school classmates. How sad. He was only 62.
There was a series of articles over the past few days that I felt captured the essence of where I come from, as Kenny says; here they are in all their glory in chronological order:
From March 7, 2008:
Man kills bison after herd strays
By NICHOLAS DESHAISTimes Herald
The Sanilac County Sheriff Department is looking for a bison bandit.
The sheriff department was called to M-19 near Fisher Road in Speaker Township about 2:30 p.m. Thursday after bison escaped from a nearby farm. As sheriff deputies attempted to corral the bison that were getting dangerously close to the road, an unidentified man shot one and loaded it into a livestock trailer attached to his truck, Undersheriff Garry Biniecki said.
Biniecki said the man was driving an older model, red Ford pickup. He wouldn't say who owned the animals because the owner had not been contacted Thursday evening. "Twelve got loose, and we got them rounded up," Biniecki said. "They were a bit close to M-19."
Citizens helped deputies corral the bison by racing snowmobiles around them.
When the herd wandered through private property, the unidentified man "shot one of them, loaded it up and took off," Biniecki said. After containing the animals, which took several hours, the deputies began the hunt for the man in the red truck.
As of Thursday evening, there were no leads in the case. Sheriff deputy Nathan Smith is investigating.
The bison, Biniecki said, were not stampeding.
Contact Nicholas Deshais at (810) 989-6275 or ndeshais@gannett.com.
March 8, 2007:
Bison killer may be charged
Animal shot, body stolen after herd escaped Thursday from Sanilac ranch
By NICHOLAS DESHAISTimes Herald
The bison bandit of Sanilac County identified himself Friday, and authorities there are calling for justice.
Police said the man called the owner of the bison he shot. The owner phoned police after the conversation.
"I have to laugh about this because a hundred years ago, it was a hanging offense for rustling cattle," Undersheriff Garry Biniecki said Friday. Biniecki would not talk on the record about what the man, whose name has not been released, said to the owner of the bison.
Biniecki said the man probably will face a charge of larceny of more than $1,000, which is a felony punishable by up to five years in prison. However, Biniecki believes the thief also could be tried as a cattle rustler.
"There is a specific statute for cattle rustling," he said. "It does specify cows, sheep, goats, pigs and horses. However, it does not say buffalo."
The undersheriff said it would take some research into the law, but he believes bison now are classified as a bovine animal due to the species having been "taken off the endangered species list and having them on a bunch of these game ranches."
The trouble started at about 1:30 p.m. Thursday, when the sheriff department responded to a complaint of shots being fired in Speaker Township. Originally, police reported they were called to the area to control the bison, not in response to the shots fired.
When authorities arrived, they were confronted by a herd of a dozen bison, slowly meandering down Fisher Road while local residents, some on snowmobiles, attempted to corral the wayward animals.
During the confusion, a man rolled up in his red Ford pickup truck, shot one of the animals and loaded it onto the trailer he was pulling. Then he left.
The sheriff department still was trying to interview the man on Friday evening, but when they do get ahold of him, Biniecki is sure of one thing: He'll pay.
"That meat is pretty valuable."
Contact Nicholas Deshais at (810) 989-6275 or ndeshais@gannett.com.
March 10, 2008:
Bison owner knew shooter
Man hired previously to kill bull
By NICHOLAS DESHAISTimes Herlad
The owner of a bison shot dead said the shooter did not have permission to kill the cow, though the two men had worked together in the past.
"I wish he had called me up," Richard Demaray, the bison's owner, said. "I'm not happy." Demaray identified the shooter as Pete Weirmier.
On Thursday, a dozen of Demaray's bison escaped his Yale property and made it east about 3 miles, heading mainly down Fisher Road toward M-19. A lone cow made it onto Ralph Darin's property on Fisher Road, a half-mile shy of the highway.
Behind Darin's shed, on a plowed field covered with ice and snow, the 600-pound cow was shot and loaded on to a trailer before being carted away.
Weirmier told a Times Herald reporter he was the one who shot the bison. Weirmier said he owns a wild game meat processing plant in Yale.
Darin, the property owner, wasn't happy about the shooting.
"I pulled in about a half-hour after all the excitement," Darin said. He followed the tracks of the bison and truck to a "blood splatter" and a large impression where the cow fell.
Darin said he wouldn't have allowed the shooting had he been there.
"It wasn't his buffalo. I certainly wouldn't have let him shoot it," he said.
A neighbor heard the shots and called 911, alerting the Sanilac County sheriff department.
When authorities arrived, Demaray was on the scene piloting a snowmobile, corralling the beasts away from the highway and back the few miles to his property. A few other neighbors were assisting him.
On Friday, Undersheriff Garry Biniecki said no charges had been filed, but the shooter could face a charge of larceny of more than $1,000, which is a felony punishable by up to five years in prison. Also, though the law doesn't specify bison, Biniecki believed he could face cattle rustling charges.
"I have to laugh about this because a hundred years ago, it was a hanging offense for rustling cattle," Biniecki said Friday.
Demaray suggested he wasn't going to press charges against Weirmier.
About two months ago, Demaray hired the shooter when one of his bulls escaped the enclosure. The large bison, weighing close to 2,000 pounds, had wrapped himself up in barbed wire and Demaray could not calm the animal down.
Worried the bull would escape and wreak havoc on M-19, Demaray hired the wild game butcher to take the animal down, which he did.
Demaray said his bison keep escaping because of coyotes in the area. He found "a deer carcass with fresh marks right outside my fence."
Contact Nicholas Deshais at (810) 989-6275 or ndeshais@gannett.com
- - - - - - - - - - -
Now if that doesn't put a smile on your face, nothing will.
Follow the links to see photos and comments posted to the news articles from the local folks, my brethren, for even more flavor. Honestly folks, you just can't make this stuff up.
CEP
There was a series of articles over the past few days that I felt captured the essence of where I come from, as Kenny says; here they are in all their glory in chronological order:
From March 7, 2008:
Man kills bison after herd strays
By NICHOLAS DESHAISTimes Herald
The Sanilac County Sheriff Department is looking for a bison bandit.
The sheriff department was called to M-19 near Fisher Road in Speaker Township about 2:30 p.m. Thursday after bison escaped from a nearby farm. As sheriff deputies attempted to corral the bison that were getting dangerously close to the road, an unidentified man shot one and loaded it into a livestock trailer attached to his truck, Undersheriff Garry Biniecki said.
Biniecki said the man was driving an older model, red Ford pickup. He wouldn't say who owned the animals because the owner had not been contacted Thursday evening. "Twelve got loose, and we got them rounded up," Biniecki said. "They were a bit close to M-19."
Citizens helped deputies corral the bison by racing snowmobiles around them.
When the herd wandered through private property, the unidentified man "shot one of them, loaded it up and took off," Biniecki said. After containing the animals, which took several hours, the deputies began the hunt for the man in the red truck.
As of Thursday evening, there were no leads in the case. Sheriff deputy Nathan Smith is investigating.
The bison, Biniecki said, were not stampeding.
Contact Nicholas Deshais at (810) 989-6275 or ndeshais@gannett.com.
March 8, 2007:
Bison killer may be charged
Animal shot, body stolen after herd escaped Thursday from Sanilac ranch
By NICHOLAS DESHAISTimes Herald
The bison bandit of Sanilac County identified himself Friday, and authorities there are calling for justice.
Police said the man called the owner of the bison he shot. The owner phoned police after the conversation.
"I have to laugh about this because a hundred years ago, it was a hanging offense for rustling cattle," Undersheriff Garry Biniecki said Friday. Biniecki would not talk on the record about what the man, whose name has not been released, said to the owner of the bison.
Biniecki said the man probably will face a charge of larceny of more than $1,000, which is a felony punishable by up to five years in prison. However, Biniecki believes the thief also could be tried as a cattle rustler.
"There is a specific statute for cattle rustling," he said. "It does specify cows, sheep, goats, pigs and horses. However, it does not say buffalo."
The undersheriff said it would take some research into the law, but he believes bison now are classified as a bovine animal due to the species having been "taken off the endangered species list and having them on a bunch of these game ranches."
The trouble started at about 1:30 p.m. Thursday, when the sheriff department responded to a complaint of shots being fired in Speaker Township. Originally, police reported they were called to the area to control the bison, not in response to the shots fired.
When authorities arrived, they were confronted by a herd of a dozen bison, slowly meandering down Fisher Road while local residents, some on snowmobiles, attempted to corral the wayward animals.
During the confusion, a man rolled up in his red Ford pickup truck, shot one of the animals and loaded it onto the trailer he was pulling. Then he left.
The sheriff department still was trying to interview the man on Friday evening, but when they do get ahold of him, Biniecki is sure of one thing: He'll pay.
"That meat is pretty valuable."
Contact Nicholas Deshais at (810) 989-6275 or ndeshais@gannett.com.
March 10, 2008:
Bison owner knew shooter
Man hired previously to kill bull
By NICHOLAS DESHAISTimes Herlad
The owner of a bison shot dead said the shooter did not have permission to kill the cow, though the two men had worked together in the past.
"I wish he had called me up," Richard Demaray, the bison's owner, said. "I'm not happy." Demaray identified the shooter as Pete Weirmier.
On Thursday, a dozen of Demaray's bison escaped his Yale property and made it east about 3 miles, heading mainly down Fisher Road toward M-19. A lone cow made it onto Ralph Darin's property on Fisher Road, a half-mile shy of the highway.
Behind Darin's shed, on a plowed field covered with ice and snow, the 600-pound cow was shot and loaded on to a trailer before being carted away.
Weirmier told a Times Herald reporter he was the one who shot the bison. Weirmier said he owns a wild game meat processing plant in Yale.
Darin, the property owner, wasn't happy about the shooting.
"I pulled in about a half-hour after all the excitement," Darin said. He followed the tracks of the bison and truck to a "blood splatter" and a large impression where the cow fell.
Darin said he wouldn't have allowed the shooting had he been there.
"It wasn't his buffalo. I certainly wouldn't have let him shoot it," he said.
A neighbor heard the shots and called 911, alerting the Sanilac County sheriff department.
When authorities arrived, Demaray was on the scene piloting a snowmobile, corralling the beasts away from the highway and back the few miles to his property. A few other neighbors were assisting him.
On Friday, Undersheriff Garry Biniecki said no charges had been filed, but the shooter could face a charge of larceny of more than $1,000, which is a felony punishable by up to five years in prison. Also, though the law doesn't specify bison, Biniecki believed he could face cattle rustling charges.
"I have to laugh about this because a hundred years ago, it was a hanging offense for rustling cattle," Biniecki said Friday.
Demaray suggested he wasn't going to press charges against Weirmier.
About two months ago, Demaray hired the shooter when one of his bulls escaped the enclosure. The large bison, weighing close to 2,000 pounds, had wrapped himself up in barbed wire and Demaray could not calm the animal down.
Worried the bull would escape and wreak havoc on M-19, Demaray hired the wild game butcher to take the animal down, which he did.
Demaray said his bison keep escaping because of coyotes in the area. He found "a deer carcass with fresh marks right outside my fence."
Contact Nicholas Deshais at (810) 989-6275 or ndeshais@gannett.com
- - - - - - - - - - -
Now if that doesn't put a smile on your face, nothing will.
Follow the links to see photos and comments posted to the news articles from the local folks, my brethren, for even more flavor. Honestly folks, you just can't make this stuff up.
CEP
We Deserve What We Get
With all the important issues facing us today; on our street, in our neighborhood, our city, our county, our state, our region, our country, our world -- what will be talked about most in our mainstream media, and even on many blogs for days and possibly weeks to come: Eliott Spitzer's sex life.
Humans are a strange lot, aren't we.
I love and respect you all; but what Eliott Spitzer did or did not do and with whom is so far down on the list of things I care about -- I just want to bury my head in the sand until this is over.
I had lunch at home today. We don't have cable. I flicked on the t.v. just out of curiosity. Here's a newsflash folks; you can get this crap 5 days a week on CBS, NBC, and ABC. Called Soap Operas. Same story lines. Better acting.
CEP
Humans are a strange lot, aren't we.
I love and respect you all; but what Eliott Spitzer did or did not do and with whom is so far down on the list of things I care about -- I just want to bury my head in the sand until this is over.
I had lunch at home today. We don't have cable. I flicked on the t.v. just out of curiosity. Here's a newsflash folks; you can get this crap 5 days a week on CBS, NBC, and ABC. Called Soap Operas. Same story lines. Better acting.
CEP
Election Debacle Humor
I'll post more later on the election debacle from my admittedly very limited perspective as a pollworker. For now, I wanted to share with you a humorous moment from last night's MTB session with the group of Foreign Service Nationals I posted about here.
At the conclusion of the session, I was speaking with a member of the group from Islamabad, Pakistan about blogging and creating blogging communities in his home country. Near the end of our chat, which in part covered the unique challenges of fostering a blogging community in Pakistan, I proposed the following deal to the gentleman: We'll help you set up a blogging community in Pakistan, if your country will teach us how to hold elections. The gentleman and others present had a good laugh at that one.
Sad thing is, I was only half-joking.
CEP
At the conclusion of the session, I was speaking with a member of the group from Islamabad, Pakistan about blogging and creating blogging communities in his home country. Near the end of our chat, which in part covered the unique challenges of fostering a blogging community in Pakistan, I proposed the following deal to the gentleman: We'll help you set up a blogging community in Pakistan, if your country will teach us how to hold elections. The gentleman and others present had a good laugh at that one.
Sad thing is, I was only half-joking.
CEP
My Experience as a Pollworker for the Ohio Primary PART I
As promised, here is a run-down of my experience as a pollworker for the Ohio Primary Election for the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections on March 4, 2008.
I was assigned as a poll judge (Democrat) at the Cleveland Korean Presbyterian Church. Voting for this location was for Cleveland Ward 16, precincts P, Q, and R. I was assigned as a judge in precinct P.
Monday Organizational Meeting
I arrived early (6:50 p) for the 7:00 p meeting and others were there already. Good sign, eager beaver group. At 7:00 p. my precinct, Precinct P, all workers were present except for the Presiding Judge. This is a problem, as the Presiding Judge is supposed to tell us what to do and organize everything. They get extra pay and have extra responsibilities for this. Given the fact that we all have to report to the polling location no later than 5:30 a the next morning, we, obviously, wanted to get this organizational meeting over with ASAP.
All the workers were present at all the other precincts, except Precinct R, which was missing a student worker.
We were also supposed to have a Polling Location Coordinator, who had separate training than we did, who earn more $$$ than pollworkers do, and who had a array of responsibilities specific to the polling location and not to any precinct. The Polling Location Coordinator never showed up the entire election.
The Presiding Judge for my precinct, Precinct P, arrived at about 7:30 p. 1/2 hour late. She claimed she had trouble locating the polling location. If it were me, and I was assigned to a polling location I had never been to before (in a part of town I was not familiar with) I would have located it a day or two before the first meeting to be sure I could find it. But that's just me. In any event, she did not get off to a good start with her "team." On election day, as I'll discuss later, it only went downhill from there.
One of the duties of the Polling Location Coordinator is to set up the one (1) electronic voting machine that is available for use by visually impaired voters. Since I was an EDT (Election Data Technician) in the November 8, 2007 election, I knew how to set the machine up and I was quickly drafted into handling all the duties of the Polling Location Coordinator.
At some point in the evening, the area "Rover" from the BOE showed up. I'm not sure what this persons responsibilities are, except to "rove" around different polling locations he's assigned to in proximity to troubleshoot issues. I explained to him that the Polling Location Coordinator (PLC) did not show, but that I knew how to set up the electronic voting machine, and I had assumed the duties of the PLC. The Rover then informed me that a polling location up the street (Pearlbrook Church) also had their PLC not show and asked me if I could run up there after I was done here to set their machine up. I agreed to do it.
After completing the PLC duties for my assigned location, I then conferred with the Presiding Judge and fellow pollworkers for my assigned Precinct P. There was obviously going to be issues. Our assigned Presiding Judge, who was 1/2 hour late, also, it was becoming apparent, had no clue what she was doing. Further, it appeared that she only had the ability to read at a fourth or fifth grade level and wasn't able to follow the checklist in our training manuals.
Seeing the hour getting late, I quickly led our precinct "team" through the checklist and made sure as best I could that all the tasks had been completed.
I then left the polling location with my other precinct team members. While they headed home to bed, I headed to Pearlbrook church to complete the duties of that locations missing PLC.
This, I began to realize, was not going to be a smooth election for me. And I was beginning to dread the following day.
Come back later to hear how election day went.
I was assigned as a poll judge (Democrat) at the Cleveland Korean Presbyterian Church. Voting for this location was for Cleveland Ward 16, precincts P, Q, and R. I was assigned as a judge in precinct P.
Monday Organizational Meeting
I arrived early (6:50 p) for the 7:00 p meeting and others were there already. Good sign, eager beaver group. At 7:00 p. my precinct, Precinct P, all workers were present except for the Presiding Judge. This is a problem, as the Presiding Judge is supposed to tell us what to do and organize everything. They get extra pay and have extra responsibilities for this. Given the fact that we all have to report to the polling location no later than 5:30 a the next morning, we, obviously, wanted to get this organizational meeting over with ASAP.
All the workers were present at all the other precincts, except Precinct R, which was missing a student worker.
We were also supposed to have a Polling Location Coordinator, who had separate training than we did, who earn more $$$ than pollworkers do, and who had a array of responsibilities specific to the polling location and not to any precinct. The Polling Location Coordinator never showed up the entire election.
The Presiding Judge for my precinct, Precinct P, arrived at about 7:30 p. 1/2 hour late. She claimed she had trouble locating the polling location. If it were me, and I was assigned to a polling location I had never been to before (in a part of town I was not familiar with) I would have located it a day or two before the first meeting to be sure I could find it. But that's just me. In any event, she did not get off to a good start with her "team." On election day, as I'll discuss later, it only went downhill from there.
One of the duties of the Polling Location Coordinator is to set up the one (1) electronic voting machine that is available for use by visually impaired voters. Since I was an EDT (Election Data Technician) in the November 8, 2007 election, I knew how to set the machine up and I was quickly drafted into handling all the duties of the Polling Location Coordinator.
At some point in the evening, the area "Rover" from the BOE showed up. I'm not sure what this persons responsibilities are, except to "rove" around different polling locations he's assigned to in proximity to troubleshoot issues. I explained to him that the Polling Location Coordinator (PLC) did not show, but that I knew how to set up the electronic voting machine, and I had assumed the duties of the PLC. The Rover then informed me that a polling location up the street (Pearlbrook Church) also had their PLC not show and asked me if I could run up there after I was done here to set their machine up. I agreed to do it.
After completing the PLC duties for my assigned location, I then conferred with the Presiding Judge and fellow pollworkers for my assigned Precinct P. There was obviously going to be issues. Our assigned Presiding Judge, who was 1/2 hour late, also, it was becoming apparent, had no clue what she was doing. Further, it appeared that she only had the ability to read at a fourth or fifth grade level and wasn't able to follow the checklist in our training manuals.
Seeing the hour getting late, I quickly led our precinct "team" through the checklist and made sure as best I could that all the tasks had been completed.
I then left the polling location with my other precinct team members. While they headed home to bed, I headed to Pearlbrook church to complete the duties of that locations missing PLC.
This, I began to realize, was not going to be a smooth election for me. And I was beginning to dread the following day.
Come back later to hear how election day went.
Meet The Bloggers Event Was VERY Cool.
I had the honor and pleasure of attending a very cool Meet The Bloggers (MTB) event yesterday afternoon/evening.
A group of 24 U.S. State Department employees from around the world who are in a training program that involved a brief stint in Cleveland (arranged by the Cleveland Council on World Affairs) (CCWA) did a session with MTB yesterday from 4 p.m. to 6 p.m. at the Residence Inn on Prospect in downtown Cleveland.
The description of the group and their reason for being here is reprinted below from the CCWA web-site:
Foreign Service Nationals March 12 - 14, 2008 The Cleveland Council on World Affairs will be working with the Foreign Service Institute, the training arm of the U.S. Department of State, to create a training program for professional staff at U.S. embassies overseas. Since these foreign nationals serve as a bridge between the embassy and foreign publics and must explain American policy to local audiences, the purpose of each course is to help them better understand our foreign policy, our government and American society at large. This group of guests will focus on the media and press topic.
What a superb group of people. There were folks from just about every continent on the planet. As I understand it, they are all people involved with media, public relations, etc. at various US Embassies around the world.
We met with them to discuss the phenomenon that is Meet the Bloggers, and the role of blogging in politics. Of course, the session was digitally recorded and will be available soon as a podcast on Meetthebloggers.net.
Most of the questions from the group and the ensuing discussion revolved around blogging's place in the world of media, citizen journalism, and information dissemination. It seems most of these folks primarily deal with mainstream media outlets and they were VERY interested in blogging in general, and in particular MTB.
For me, it was one of the most rewarding and fascinating MTB sessions I have ever been involved in. I frequently read about how the world is getting flatter. Seldom, however, does one get to participate in an event where some of the flattening occurs in one's presence. Indeed, one gentleman from Pakistan huddled with MTB's Tim Ferris immediately after the session and used Tim's laptop to create his very own blog. This was VERY cool.
Be sure to check Meetthebloggers.net for the podcast, which will be posted soon.
CEP
A group of 24 U.S. State Department employees from around the world who are in a training program that involved a brief stint in Cleveland (arranged by the Cleveland Council on World Affairs) (CCWA) did a session with MTB yesterday from 4 p.m. to 6 p.m. at the Residence Inn on Prospect in downtown Cleveland.
The description of the group and their reason for being here is reprinted below from the CCWA web-site:
Foreign Service Nationals March 12 - 14, 2008 The Cleveland Council on World Affairs will be working with the Foreign Service Institute, the training arm of the U.S. Department of State, to create a training program for professional staff at U.S. embassies overseas. Since these foreign nationals serve as a bridge between the embassy and foreign publics and must explain American policy to local audiences, the purpose of each course is to help them better understand our foreign policy, our government and American society at large. This group of guests will focus on the media and press topic.
What a superb group of people. There were folks from just about every continent on the planet. As I understand it, they are all people involved with media, public relations, etc. at various US Embassies around the world.
We met with them to discuss the phenomenon that is Meet the Bloggers, and the role of blogging in politics. Of course, the session was digitally recorded and will be available soon as a podcast on Meetthebloggers.net.
Most of the questions from the group and the ensuing discussion revolved around blogging's place in the world of media, citizen journalism, and information dissemination. It seems most of these folks primarily deal with mainstream media outlets and they were VERY interested in blogging in general, and in particular MTB.
For me, it was one of the most rewarding and fascinating MTB sessions I have ever been involved in. I frequently read about how the world is getting flatter. Seldom, however, does one get to participate in an event where some of the flattening occurs in one's presence. Indeed, one gentleman from Pakistan huddled with MTB's Tim Ferris immediately after the session and used Tim's laptop to create his very own blog. This was VERY cool.
Be sure to check Meetthebloggers.net for the podcast, which will be posted soon.
CEP
Sunday, March 09, 2008
Survived the Blizzard of '08
Well, sorry I haven't been blogging, but it seems all I have done is operate a snowblower for the past 36 hours or so. Finally made it out of my neighborhood this a.m. to survey the damage.
Attended 12 noon Mass at St. Charles Borromeo in Parma. It was packed. Father Carlin commented that the noon Mass was the most packed of the whole weekend. Seems folks were finally starting to extract themselves from their driveways. Plus with the time change (Spring ahead, how ironic) folks were probably a bit late getting started this a.m.
I don't know about where you're at, but, due to drifting, the snow is nearly waist deep closest to my house. The rest of the yard has between 1.5 and 2 feet.
I can't believe Spring is less than 2 weeks away. It looks like the middle of January outside.
Anyway, I still plan to post about my election day experiences. Hopefully, later today, when I catch my breath.
CEP
Attended 12 noon Mass at St. Charles Borromeo in Parma. It was packed. Father Carlin commented that the noon Mass was the most packed of the whole weekend. Seems folks were finally starting to extract themselves from their driveways. Plus with the time change (Spring ahead, how ironic) folks were probably a bit late getting started this a.m.
I don't know about where you're at, but, due to drifting, the snow is nearly waist deep closest to my house. The rest of the yard has between 1.5 and 2 feet.
I can't believe Spring is less than 2 weeks away. It looks like the middle of January outside.
Anyway, I still plan to post about my election day experiences. Hopefully, later today, when I catch my breath.
CEP
Wednesday, March 05, 2008
What Happened to Live Blog?
Well, as my freshman H.S. English Teacher, Mr. MacDonald, always said, "the road to hell is paved with good intentions." I was not able to participate fully in the post debate live blogging @ WKYC. Why? Ice happened. Among other issues at the polling location that delayed me getting the heck outta there that I'll post about later today.
Right now, I have to do my day job and head down to Cuyahoga Domestic Relations Court where I will be appearing in front of James P. Celebreeze, whose daughter won the Dem primary last night for his seat. I think I'll have to congratulate him.
CEP
Right now, I have to do my day job and head down to Cuyahoga Domestic Relations Court where I will be appearing in front of James P. Celebreeze, whose daughter won the Dem primary last night for his seat. I think I'll have to congratulate him.
CEP
Monday, March 03, 2008
Taking Notice of Insurance Industry Practices
Well, well, well -- just found this article from CNBC on the MSNBC web-site. Apparently folks are finally starting to catch-on about the devastating effects of the under-regulated and runaway profit-seeking insurance industry. Here are some excerpts:
CNBC Business Nation: Are you insured?
Homeowners battle insurance companies over loss claims.
By Dana Ervin Miller and Scott Cohn
CNBC
updated 7:54 a.m. ET, Mon., March. 3, 2008
Insurance companies are reeling in record profits — making more money than at any time in their history. Insurers say they’re just having a few good years, but critics say the companies are charging more for premiums and cutting back on coverage and that’s leaving some homeowners in the lurch.
Insurance companies want you to see them as friendly neighbors, there to protect you and to help you in your time of need. But more and more homeowners are finding themselves doing battle with their “friendly” insurance company to get the money they say they’re due.
“Things have changed in the past, I would say three to five years, a great deal in the insurance industry,” said Joanne Katzman, who has worked in the insurance industry for more than 20 years.
“In some cases, they’ll offer such a low-ball figure that you cannot repair the job adequately for what they’re offering you,” she said. “And that’s just wrong.”
CNBC: “Is there something inherently wrong here?”Praeger: “Well, I think what we see more and more of is companies trying to avoid risk and maximize profits. And they’re in the business to make a profit, so there’s nothing criminally wrong with that. But I wish we could get back to a philosophy of insurance being managing risk and not just trying to avoid risk.”
I was just talking about this issue the other day here in the context of universal health care insurance.
CEP
CNBC Business Nation: Are you insured?
Homeowners battle insurance companies over loss claims.
By Dana Ervin Miller and Scott Cohn
CNBC
updated 7:54 a.m. ET, Mon., March. 3, 2008
Insurance companies are reeling in record profits — making more money than at any time in their history. Insurers say they’re just having a few good years, but critics say the companies are charging more for premiums and cutting back on coverage and that’s leaving some homeowners in the lurch.
Insurance companies want you to see them as friendly neighbors, there to protect you and to help you in your time of need. But more and more homeowners are finding themselves doing battle with their “friendly” insurance company to get the money they say they’re due.
“Things have changed in the past, I would say three to five years, a great deal in the insurance industry,” said Joanne Katzman, who has worked in the insurance industry for more than 20 years.
“In some cases, they’ll offer such a low-ball figure that you cannot repair the job adequately for what they’re offering you,” she said. “And that’s just wrong.”
CNBC: “Is there something inherently wrong here?”Praeger: “Well, I think what we see more and more of is companies trying to avoid risk and maximize profits. And they’re in the business to make a profit, so there’s nothing criminally wrong with that. But I wish we could get back to a philosophy of insurance being managing risk and not just trying to avoid risk.”
I was just talking about this issue the other day here in the context of universal health care insurance.
CEP
Primary Election Coverage
I will be recording my thoughts and impressions of the election from a pollworker perspective throughout the day tomorrow. However, I will not be posting them until after I am "off the clock" as a pollworker out of fairness to my (temporary) employer, the BOE.
So, tune in beginning after 9 p.m., when I will be leaving my temp job as a pollworker and heading over to Channel 3 WKYC television studios for a post election blogging extravaganza.
CEP
So, tune in beginning after 9 p.m., when I will be leaving my temp job as a pollworker and heading over to Channel 3 WKYC television studios for a post election blogging extravaganza.
CEP
Be Extra Nice to Your Pollworkers Tomorrow
I'm a pollworker for tomorrow's Ohio primary election. I'll be working as a judge in Cleveland, Ward 16, Precinct P at the Cleveland Korean Presbyterian Church at 4839 Pearl Road.
As a pollworker, I must do all of the following: attend a four hour training (which I did on 2/22); attend an organizational meeting tonight at 7:00 p.m. which may last 2 hours or more; and arrive to work at the polls at 5:30 a.m. tomorrow morning and work as late as 9 or 10 p.m.
For this, I get paid by the Board of Elections (BOE) a whopping, $170. (I don't remember the exact amount, but that's close enough.)
Folks, people who "volunteer" to be pollworkers don't do it for the bucks. They do it because they're civic minded and they feel a sense of duty to facilitate the greatest aspect of our republican democracy, our right to vote. Please keep this in mind when you go to your polling location to vote tomorrow.
The changes that have been thrown at pollworkers for this election are overwhelming. The training we received from the BOE was adequate, but minimal. Indeed, as part of the training we received no less than 3 complicated and lengthy official directives from the Office of the Ohio Secretary of State, who apparently forgot that most pollworkers are not lawyers. (I am, and I had difficultly slogging through the legalese of these directives.)
All pollworkers have been taught that NO ONE should be turned away to vote. At a minimum, anyone who presents themselves at a polling location should be able to vote a provisional ballot. Here's the catch: IF YOU VOTE A PROVISIONAL BALLOT, YOU MUST DO SO IN THE CORRECT CURRENT PRECINCT WHERE YOU LIVE NOW. IF YOU DON'T DO THIS YOUR PROVISIONAL VOTE WILL NOT COUNT.
So, if a pollworker sends you to a different table or a different polling location altogether, please, please, please understand they are not doing this to be difficult; they are doing it to ensure that your vote is counted.
My overall point is this. Please treat the pollworkers at your polling location tomorrow with the dignity and respect they deserve. They have a VERY difficult job to do. Your patience and understanding (as well as trying to see things from their side of the table) will go a long way to making your voting experience more pleasant, and Ohio's primary vote a success that all Ohioans can be proud of.
The nation will be watching us tomorrow. Let's put our best foot forward, work together, have patience and understanding with one another, and show the nation and world just how great Ohioans are.
CEP
As a pollworker, I must do all of the following: attend a four hour training (which I did on 2/22); attend an organizational meeting tonight at 7:00 p.m. which may last 2 hours or more; and arrive to work at the polls at 5:30 a.m. tomorrow morning and work as late as 9 or 10 p.m.
For this, I get paid by the Board of Elections (BOE) a whopping, $170. (I don't remember the exact amount, but that's close enough.)
Folks, people who "volunteer" to be pollworkers don't do it for the bucks. They do it because they're civic minded and they feel a sense of duty to facilitate the greatest aspect of our republican democracy, our right to vote. Please keep this in mind when you go to your polling location to vote tomorrow.
The changes that have been thrown at pollworkers for this election are overwhelming. The training we received from the BOE was adequate, but minimal. Indeed, as part of the training we received no less than 3 complicated and lengthy official directives from the Office of the Ohio Secretary of State, who apparently forgot that most pollworkers are not lawyers. (I am, and I had difficultly slogging through the legalese of these directives.)
All pollworkers have been taught that NO ONE should be turned away to vote. At a minimum, anyone who presents themselves at a polling location should be able to vote a provisional ballot. Here's the catch: IF YOU VOTE A PROVISIONAL BALLOT, YOU MUST DO SO IN THE CORRECT CURRENT PRECINCT WHERE YOU LIVE NOW. IF YOU DON'T DO THIS YOUR PROVISIONAL VOTE WILL NOT COUNT.
So, if a pollworker sends you to a different table or a different polling location altogether, please, please, please understand they are not doing this to be difficult; they are doing it to ensure that your vote is counted.
My overall point is this. Please treat the pollworkers at your polling location tomorrow with the dignity and respect they deserve. They have a VERY difficult job to do. Your patience and understanding (as well as trying to see things from their side of the table) will go a long way to making your voting experience more pleasant, and Ohio's primary vote a success that all Ohioans can be proud of.
The nation will be watching us tomorrow. Let's put our best foot forward, work together, have patience and understanding with one another, and show the nation and world just how great Ohioans are.
CEP
Saturday, March 01, 2008
My Comment on Word of Mouth Post on Universal Healthcare
Here's a comment I posted to this post from Word of Mouth.
Interesting comments. But what always seems to be missing from the debate about universal healthcare is an apples to apples comparison of a universal system to our system. NO system could ever be perfect. Critics of universal care, however, often cite articles like this one without ever comparing similar issues in our system.
As for whether healthcare is a "right" or a "privilege" -- this is a nonsense question. If you're an economist, the proper question is whether or not universal healthcare should be a "public good" and provided either by the gov't directly or through a well-regulated monopoly/oligopoly. Or if you think it should be a private good provided through the unregulated markets.
The fact of the matter is that our current for-profit, free-market healthcare system is crippling our nation's competativeness and skyrocketing healthcare costs are the primary driver of jobs out of this country on the NAFTA expressway. When you factor in the healthcare costs to wages/benefits, we simply cannot compete.
If you compare the overhead costs of our free-market healthcare compared to the overhead costs of Medicare/Medicaid, the latter is a much more efficient deliverer of healthcare services.
Think about it -- healthcare should be provided on a lifelong, long-term planning and preventative basis; yet we have chosen the short-term, profit-maximization model of free enterprise to deliver healthcare. It's like guarding the henhouse with foxes. No one will steal your hens, cause the foxes will eat them.
Cleveland Equanimous Philosopher
Interesting comments. But what always seems to be missing from the debate about universal healthcare is an apples to apples comparison of a universal system to our system. NO system could ever be perfect. Critics of universal care, however, often cite articles like this one without ever comparing similar issues in our system.
As for whether healthcare is a "right" or a "privilege" -- this is a nonsense question. If you're an economist, the proper question is whether or not universal healthcare should be a "public good" and provided either by the gov't directly or through a well-regulated monopoly/oligopoly. Or if you think it should be a private good provided through the unregulated markets.
The fact of the matter is that our current for-profit, free-market healthcare system is crippling our nation's competativeness and skyrocketing healthcare costs are the primary driver of jobs out of this country on the NAFTA expressway. When you factor in the healthcare costs to wages/benefits, we simply cannot compete.
If you compare the overhead costs of our free-market healthcare compared to the overhead costs of Medicare/Medicaid, the latter is a much more efficient deliverer of healthcare services.
Think about it -- healthcare should be provided on a lifelong, long-term planning and preventative basis; yet we have chosen the short-term, profit-maximization model of free enterprise to deliver healthcare. It's like guarding the henhouse with foxes. No one will steal your hens, cause the foxes will eat them.
Cleveland Equanimous Philosopher
Couldn't Have Said It (Much) Better Myself
Here's a comment posted on cleveland.com to this article. I agree with about 98% of it and it more eloquently expresses my thoughts that I tried to convey in my previous post.
Posted by warrentowers on 03/01/08 at 3:41PM
First off, each one of us here believes in our heart that our candidate provides the best chance for the future of this country.
Most of us here are very aware of the critical challenges this country faces and understand how much THIS election matters.
I certainly admit that I have let my heart and my passion for the candidate I support cloud my judgment and cause me to say stupid things about the other great Americans running for president - who, along with supporters all over - are working their asses for for what they believe is in the best intersts of this country.
But even in my most sober moments, I still believe there are serious questions about Hillary Clinton's ability to get things done in the White House. Let me be clear - I like and respect Hillary Clinton and believe progress would be stifled not because of a lack of effort or ability on her part, but rather because of short-sided obstacles placed in her way by Rove's henchmen and the Americans that still believe in the Bush Doctrine.
I also think Hillary is polarizing. Clinton supporters ardently disagree and 50% of the country agrees - that sounds pretty divisive to me. You can blame it on the right-wing attack machine, or the media, or now even the Obama supporters. But it is REAL. Whether her high negatives are fairly earned or unfairly fabricated can be debated - but that debate does not change the fact that they exist.
There are also serious questions about Clinton's electability in THESE times and in THIS race. I base this on the points discussed above and what we have seen in this campaign. Obama has handled himself with grace and determination, won support all over the country and is building a new generation that actually cares about politics.
The Democratic base is already energized. I discount the notion that the fights between Clinton and Obama supporters will cause people to stay home. Those supporters are just becoming more and more invested in this process and they will unite to stand against the GOP. Clinton's ardent supporters will not simply walk away - they will bring the fight to the Republicans. A few other points:
Obama will attract antiwar Independents and Republicans, whose numbers are significant.
-Obama will be able to draw a sharp contrast with John McCain so that the Republican attack machine cannot blur the lines.
-Obama is the strongest to debate McCain on Iraq. Most observers agree that this has been Obama's greatest strength in the debates with Clinton.
Clinton supporters: Do you really want to go over to the other side and start paroting back the conventional wisdom that the youth vote can't make a difference? The youth does not make a difference when it is disaffected - it needs to be INSPIRED. And from what I've seen . . . their not the only ones. Obama is calling a whole NEW generation to arms. This will not only impact this election - it will CHANGE the future. Both in terms of votes and public service. I believe that the energy shown by the Clinton and Obama supporters alike (as well as those for all the candidates) - can be parlayed effectively after the general election. Not everyone of course - but even a percentage of that energy could do the world a lot of good.
How can Obama make a REAL CHANGE to the way politics is conducted in Washington - you ask?
Because the new American Majority that votes for him in this election - including Democrats, Independents and Republicans, along with the growing cadre of new-age leaders on both sides of the aisle that support him - will all make sure that politicians who get in the way of OUR mandate will be cast aside - no matter who they are.
And that mandate is quite simple:
-END the Bush Doctrine and EVOLVE American foreign policy
-Make HEALTH CARE more affordable and accessible IMMEDIATELY and get us on the road towards UNIVERSAL health care
-Stop the trickle down ECONMICS and open the floodgates through TAXES and EDUCATION
-Pass a comprehensive IMMIGRATION bill and ensure that our boarders are SAFE
-LEAD the world on fighting terrorism, speading human rights and protecting our environment
Vote Obama and the join the New American majority. And don't worry, the Clintons will join us and BOTH will play key roles in guiding this country's FUTURE.
Posted by warrentowers on 03/01/08 at 3:41PM
First off, each one of us here believes in our heart that our candidate provides the best chance for the future of this country.
Most of us here are very aware of the critical challenges this country faces and understand how much THIS election matters.
I certainly admit that I have let my heart and my passion for the candidate I support cloud my judgment and cause me to say stupid things about the other great Americans running for president - who, along with supporters all over - are working their asses for for what they believe is in the best intersts of this country.
But even in my most sober moments, I still believe there are serious questions about Hillary Clinton's ability to get things done in the White House. Let me be clear - I like and respect Hillary Clinton and believe progress would be stifled not because of a lack of effort or ability on her part, but rather because of short-sided obstacles placed in her way by Rove's henchmen and the Americans that still believe in the Bush Doctrine.
I also think Hillary is polarizing. Clinton supporters ardently disagree and 50% of the country agrees - that sounds pretty divisive to me. You can blame it on the right-wing attack machine, or the media, or now even the Obama supporters. But it is REAL. Whether her high negatives are fairly earned or unfairly fabricated can be debated - but that debate does not change the fact that they exist.
There are also serious questions about Clinton's electability in THESE times and in THIS race. I base this on the points discussed above and what we have seen in this campaign. Obama has handled himself with grace and determination, won support all over the country and is building a new generation that actually cares about politics.
The Democratic base is already energized. I discount the notion that the fights between Clinton and Obama supporters will cause people to stay home. Those supporters are just becoming more and more invested in this process and they will unite to stand against the GOP. Clinton's ardent supporters will not simply walk away - they will bring the fight to the Republicans. A few other points:
Obama will attract antiwar Independents and Republicans, whose numbers are significant.
-Obama will be able to draw a sharp contrast with John McCain so that the Republican attack machine cannot blur the lines.
-Obama is the strongest to debate McCain on Iraq. Most observers agree that this has been Obama's greatest strength in the debates with Clinton.
Clinton supporters: Do you really want to go over to the other side and start paroting back the conventional wisdom that the youth vote can't make a difference? The youth does not make a difference when it is disaffected - it needs to be INSPIRED. And from what I've seen . . . their not the only ones. Obama is calling a whole NEW generation to arms. This will not only impact this election - it will CHANGE the future. Both in terms of votes and public service. I believe that the energy shown by the Clinton and Obama supporters alike (as well as those for all the candidates) - can be parlayed effectively after the general election. Not everyone of course - but even a percentage of that energy could do the world a lot of good.
How can Obama make a REAL CHANGE to the way politics is conducted in Washington - you ask?
Because the new American Majority that votes for him in this election - including Democrats, Independents and Republicans, along with the growing cadre of new-age leaders on both sides of the aisle that support him - will all make sure that politicians who get in the way of OUR mandate will be cast aside - no matter who they are.
And that mandate is quite simple:
-END the Bush Doctrine and EVOLVE American foreign policy
-Make HEALTH CARE more affordable and accessible IMMEDIATELY and get us on the road towards UNIVERSAL health care
-Stop the trickle down ECONMICS and open the floodgates through TAXES and EDUCATION
-Pass a comprehensive IMMIGRATION bill and ensure that our boarders are SAFE
-LEAD the world on fighting terrorism, speading human rights and protecting our environment
Vote Obama and the join the New American majority. And don't worry, the Clintons will join us and BOTH will play key roles in guiding this country's FUTURE.
Derek Owens
My thoughts and prayers are with Derek Owens' family today. Derek Owens was a Cleveland Police Officer killed in the line of duty last night. What a senseless waste of life. My thoughts and prayers are also with all of our men and women in blue. They are the true unsung heroes of our time.
**sigh**
CEP
**sigh**
CEP
One Reason (Even if it's a bad one) DEMS Should Vote Obama
The official punditry have declared Obama a "movement" and Hillary merely a "campaign." Regardless of whether you think Obama is just full of empty rhetoric (and I, personally, do not), and that Hillary has vast amounts of experience (again, I do not) -- here is a fact: Obama has mobilized and inspired a "movement" of people to act, the likes of which has not been seen in my lifetime (b. 1971 -- missed the whole JFK thing). Hillary, meanwhile, has run a fairly nasty, divisive campaign (odd to me as I recall her railing against the politics of personal destruction when she was FL).
Obama has turned a large cadre of otherwise apathetic folks, well, at least apolitical, into activists. Given the campaign Hillary has run, do you really think these erstwhile in-activists will run to her if she wins the nomination? I think not. I think they will go back to their lives of political inactivity and that the Republican nominee will be president. Moreover, Hillary has bled the traditional DEM donor base to death during this primary campaign. How much will they be able to give (or want to give) in the General? Will the average joes fund her campaign as they have Obama's? Again, I think no.
If Obama gets the nod, his "movement" will be emboldened. Talk about a surge. I think, bearing no unforeseen major campaign boo-boos or scandals, he will ride this wave right into the White House.
CEP
Obama has turned a large cadre of otherwise apathetic folks, well, at least apolitical, into activists. Given the campaign Hillary has run, do you really think these erstwhile in-activists will run to her if she wins the nomination? I think not. I think they will go back to their lives of political inactivity and that the Republican nominee will be president. Moreover, Hillary has bled the traditional DEM donor base to death during this primary campaign. How much will they be able to give (or want to give) in the General? Will the average joes fund her campaign as they have Obama's? Again, I think no.
If Obama gets the nod, his "movement" will be emboldened. Talk about a surge. I think, bearing no unforeseen major campaign boo-boos or scandals, he will ride this wave right into the White House.
CEP
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)