Thursday, August 6, 2009

Nothing Good Happens At Closing Time

It's almost as though I've had to break my own fingers to hold off posting some thoughts on Mayor Plusquellic's most interesting adventure on Akron's downtown streets nearly a week ago...but now that just about all the video and audio has been viewed and heard, the fingers are doing the talking again.

By now the facts are pretty clear:
  • Mayor Plusquellic had a busy Saturday night tending to official duties welcoming and introducing acts at the Ohio Ballet and Lock 3 before heading over to one of his favorite night spots to help celebrate a friend's birthday;
  • the night went long, a few drinks may have been had, but overall nothing spectacular and the type of night many of us have enjoyed at one time or another with friends;
  • as is sometimes the occasion at closing time, party turned to pounding. Outside a nearby club a nasty fight is underway; it does not involve the mayor's group but he is about to observe and witness;
  • Plusquellic walks into a bad situation on the way to his car. He does the right thing, calling 9-1-1 for help...just what any good citizen should do.
That's when it goes sour.

There's no dispute he was excited after seeing what he saw. Being a take-charge kind of guy, he wants to help (charitable view) or direct (critical view) what police do next. He doesn't dispute "adult language" may have been involved, admits he wasn't happy with the APD response he saw, and points out he is, after all, Akron's boss.

That's a big part of the issue. Now that this seems to be winding down, the issues of was or wasn't he (intoxicated) and did or didn't he (overstep his authority) seem to be working their way out. But the question most folks seem to have an opinion on seems to have less to do with policy and more to do with style. On that point, it would benefit both sides to remember a boss should be treated like a boss, and the employee should be treated with respect.

Apply The Other Shoe Test: if it had been Officer Plusquellic responding to the same situation and being cursed at, would Plusquellic have tolerated it? Eyewitness Wayne Jones, who says he was treated professionally by police, says the Mayor didn't cuss out the cop. I do know if we (John Q. Public) cussed out a cop, we'd be on the line for jail food the next morning. Then again, if my boss started telling me how to do my job I'd probably grumble about it but do what he said.

There's no easy answer, other than to hope the level of discourse between Chief Executive and people who work under the Chief of Police drops down a couple notches, and soon. Doubtful, given the response to city union leaders asking for more details about cuts they're supposed to swallow to help the City deal with the July budget surprise. Even from overseas, where he's talking peace in Japan on the anniversary of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the mayor's response was typical: fault and pointing blame rather than collaboration. It's just his style.

Another chapter in the ongoing Hatfield and McCoy saga of City politics. Wouldn't it be nice to get beyond the feuds and get right to solutions?

- - -

This week, Columbus voters went to the polls in numbers even worse than Akron's recall election (just 18% voted) and by a slim margin (just 51.7%) approved hiking the city income tax to help stuff a big deficit and stem layoffs to "critical" city workers. Mayor Coleman -- a close friend of Mayor Plusquellic -- thanked residents for putting their money where their critical services are, in marked contrast to Plusquellic, who quickly dismissed an Akron F.O.P suggestion of a public safety levy here despite threatened layoffs. Columbus notes there are "critical" city services, including police; Akron takes the stance uniformed services should get the same budget treatment as other departments.

Question to Mayor Plusquellic and City Council: if there's a rush to reform the recall charter language without a public hearing why not even hold a single meeting to openly discuss giving Akron voters the power to decide for themselves if police, fire and EMS are important enough to shell out more?

The last time a "police levy" was on the ballot it was part of (a much smaller part of) a bid to load up economic development programs. With the budget $12 million out of balance -- according to this month's figures -- would it really hurt giving city voters the option of making public safety critical enough to pay for?

No comments:

Post a Comment