Really, no election is totally predictable. There are plenty of things that happen at the last minute, lots of items people mull over and weigh one way or the other when they walk into the booth or fill out that early ballot. Nobody really knows the result until the numbers come in, but what is predictable: folks who don't listen to the message.
Tonight's reaction from the Issue 8 folks, I figure, was what one would expect if it had just ended at disappointment...but this one is different.
Mayor Plusquellic: "there's a special place in hell" for those who "misled" Akron voters on his sewer lease to fund scholarships program. Nice. I guess that means nearly seven out of every ten Akron voters ought to be prepping for a suntan.
Why is it candidates or advocates who lose the hard fight have such a hard time admitting it either just wasn't time for the idea -- or, worse yet, it just didn't make sense to all of their fellow citizens? Instead, blast away. Look for the sympathetic editorials decrying the lack of vision by the voters; "tsk tsk," they'll say, "how unfortunate the sheep won't follow the lead we set for them. How dare they!"
The impulse to blame the loss on "misunderstandings" or "misleading" opponents is universal to anyone on the short end of the stick, but most handle it professionally and understand the rest of the story comes after the loss. If it were that easy to just float an idea and have everyone embrace it we wouldn't be going through this process every four years...we'd just wake up and have a new leader whenever someone got the itch.
Here's a thought: people weren't misled because they really do see through the blather and ask their own questions. When they aren't comfortable with an idea that's so bold it has to be rushed to market without any real, open debate and discussion the best course of action is to vote no. If City Council can't take the time to bore in on a truly "big" idea, passing it wholesale with nary a dissenting question after getting the goods a few days before the first (and only) vote why should the public buy into it?
It's easy to slap the voters around for not having the vision because it saves one the trouble of actually looking inward and maybe admitting the proposal could have been better to begin with. Saying Akron just didn't understand is calling the 20-thousand more people who voted no-than-yes too dim or selfish to embrace the grand concept.
How condescending. You want respect from people when you ask them to support an idea? Start by giving respect to begin with. A nice step would be applying some salve to the bruised ego and recognizing the common ground shared with opponents instead of each working so hard to destroy the other.
One is reminded leaders in the past were skilled at making use of the bully pulpit by understanding "bully" didn't mean then what it apparently means now. Preaching from the pulpit with a club in one's hand has such a poor track record of capturing hearts and minds, and getting folks to willingly stay on your side rarely comes after beating them with verbal two-by-four again and again.
That might actually prove a valuable lesson to the next generation that still could use a scholarship program -- but one that makes sense, even to those rubes who wind up paying for these grand proposals.
Showing posts with label Issue 8. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Issue 8. Show all posts
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Sunday, November 2, 2008
Joe & Jill Catch Akron
The big push of presidential politics surrounds Akron today with Obama's in Cleveland and Palin in Canton; tomorrow McCain/Palin include Lakewood, Cleveland and Columbus while Joe and Jill Biden hit Copley High School for a Monday night quickie. More details to come on the Biden local visit, but doors to the school are expected to open around 5:30 p.m. based on the early word for one last chance for local Dems to kick it with the top of the ticket.
- - -
The beat goes on with about one full broadcast day left for those last minute radio and TV ads; expect to hear and see enough to make even the most experienced pol hurl. At least it's good for the media business. Looks like Ohio's margin and fluctuating polls will assure that the nation watches us Tuesday night like tea leaves predicting the future. Does B have the push to finally "close the deal", or does Mac comeback once again? Ohio's still too close to call when looking at the polling.
- - -
My pal Steve Hoffman offers his predictions from the Akron Beacon Journal perch. I agree with most of his observations, with the exception of Issue 8. That one, I think, really will depend on the whims of the turnout Tuesday. I do know down the stretch it's gotten pretty ugly, with trash talk from both sides dipping into the gutter. One side accuses the other of lying, the other trades the charge by denouncing "gestapo tactics." Friday was a banner day, one at least four different news organizations made conscious decisions to spare readers, listeners and viewers the most recent round of name-calling.
It's a shame the voices in power are so thin-skinned as to paint any questions or opposition to their viewpoints is madness or evil. It is worth noting not much of this garbage made it's way to public view because the folks doing the editing (myself included) asked what all of the name calling had to do with the issue of forking over management of the sewer system to support a scholarship program?
The questions Akron voters need to ask when heading to the polls on Issue 8:
- are they OK with a company running the sewer system? Despite the kvetching from opponents, it does work well in other cities -- just not all cities. There are just as many local governments who shouldn't be operating sewer plants as private companies, and when there's a big rainfall it doesn't matter who's clearing out the pipes, a heavy rain will do it regardless of management;
- does the scholarship program sound like a good deal for your kids or grandkids? Supporters tell you the 30-year requirement is fair, opponents note it's like chaining someone to the table. And there's that whole issue of limiting choices on where you can get a college education...no Kent State? During a recent visit with Leadership Akron I asked the class how many had hiring authority -- about half raised their hands. I then asked how many figured their new hires would be around in five years; no hands. It's a different reality and this generation understands mobility is a prime right often exercised. The Akron Plan may have been inspired by the Kalamazoo Promise but there are some big differences; if you're comfortable with limits, vote yes; if you think it's unrealistic and goofy, vote no;
- is Akron and Ohio so far behind the eight-ball that we've just GOT to do SOMETHING -- we're such basket cases that ANYTHING different becomes "visionary" and blindly saying yes to?Supporters almost have a sense of desperation, willing to take a plan that may be deficient just because it's going in any direction, while opponents often sound like they would say no to the Second Coming just because it's not the way things were done before. What's your take?
Hoffman's right on the money about one thing: this isn't do-or-die on Issue 8's objective, which ostensibly is to provide a helping hand for local kids to get a head-start on life with a college degree in their pocket. All sides agree that's a pretty good idea...so the details are what they're crabbing about. If the Save Our Sewers and Water people note it's a noble purpose, the table is already set for Round Two. That should be worth working on details that should be worth more than a month or two of private blue-ribbon committee meetings and last-minute ordinances passed without full debate. We took a year to decide what "Imagine Akron 2025" should look like, complete with public meetings and hearings; this should be worth the same effort.
The question is whether the brains needed to reach that goal gets swallowed up in bruised egos.
- - -
The beat goes on with about one full broadcast day left for those last minute radio and TV ads; expect to hear and see enough to make even the most experienced pol hurl. At least it's good for the media business. Looks like Ohio's margin and fluctuating polls will assure that the nation watches us Tuesday night like tea leaves predicting the future. Does B have the push to finally "close the deal", or does Mac comeback once again? Ohio's still too close to call when looking at the polling.
- - -
My pal Steve Hoffman offers his predictions from the Akron Beacon Journal perch. I agree with most of his observations, with the exception of Issue 8. That one, I think, really will depend on the whims of the turnout Tuesday. I do know down the stretch it's gotten pretty ugly, with trash talk from both sides dipping into the gutter. One side accuses the other of lying, the other trades the charge by denouncing "gestapo tactics." Friday was a banner day, one at least four different news organizations made conscious decisions to spare readers, listeners and viewers the most recent round of name-calling.
It's a shame the voices in power are so thin-skinned as to paint any questions or opposition to their viewpoints is madness or evil. It is worth noting not much of this garbage made it's way to public view because the folks doing the editing (myself included) asked what all of the name calling had to do with the issue of forking over management of the sewer system to support a scholarship program?
The questions Akron voters need to ask when heading to the polls on Issue 8:
- are they OK with a company running the sewer system? Despite the kvetching from opponents, it does work well in other cities -- just not all cities. There are just as many local governments who shouldn't be operating sewer plants as private companies, and when there's a big rainfall it doesn't matter who's clearing out the pipes, a heavy rain will do it regardless of management;
- does the scholarship program sound like a good deal for your kids or grandkids? Supporters tell you the 30-year requirement is fair, opponents note it's like chaining someone to the table. And there's that whole issue of limiting choices on where you can get a college education...no Kent State? During a recent visit with Leadership Akron I asked the class how many had hiring authority -- about half raised their hands. I then asked how many figured their new hires would be around in five years; no hands. It's a different reality and this generation understands mobility is a prime right often exercised. The Akron Plan may have been inspired by the Kalamazoo Promise but there are some big differences; if you're comfortable with limits, vote yes; if you think it's unrealistic and goofy, vote no;
- is Akron and Ohio so far behind the eight-ball that we've just GOT to do SOMETHING -- we're such basket cases that ANYTHING different becomes "visionary" and blindly saying yes to?Supporters almost have a sense of desperation, willing to take a plan that may be deficient just because it's going in any direction, while opponents often sound like they would say no to the Second Coming just because it's not the way things were done before. What's your take?
Hoffman's right on the money about one thing: this isn't do-or-die on Issue 8's objective, which ostensibly is to provide a helping hand for local kids to get a head-start on life with a college degree in their pocket. All sides agree that's a pretty good idea...so the details are what they're crabbing about. If the Save Our Sewers and Water people note it's a noble purpose, the table is already set for Round Two. That should be worth working on details that should be worth more than a month or two of private blue-ribbon committee meetings and last-minute ordinances passed without full debate. We took a year to decide what "Imagine Akron 2025" should look like, complete with public meetings and hearings; this should be worth the same effort.
The question is whether the brains needed to reach that goal gets swallowed up in bruised egos.
Friday, October 24, 2008
Issue 8: Akron's Not Kalamazoo
"Kazoo" refers to Kalamazoo, Michigan, the mother ship of offering college scholarships to local students. Mayor Plusquellic frequently refers to this western Michigan city's Kalamazoo Promise as his primary inspiration for his Akron Scholarship Plan.
It is important to note there's some pretty big outstanding differences; one big item is Kalamazoo's big-dog status as the biggest city in the southwest corner of Michigan. It's not even close to Akron, however: Kazoo less than half of our population. We have names like FirstEnergy, Goodyear and Firestone as giants of our economy while Kalamazoo has Pfizer, Eaton and Stryker. We have UA; they have WMU, Kalamazoo College, Davenport University and Kalamazoo Community.
Our friends up north in Wolverine country have much in common with Ohio; we have Cleveland and Youngstown, they have Detroit; we have the free republican of Athens, they have the free republic of Ann Arbor. We both have lakeshore. They have Grand Rapids and Kalamazoo with economic engines driven by more than automotive; we have Columbus and Cincinnati. They have a tax system business says is enough to drive them south; Ohio's been working on that. Both states have an aging population watching too many kids head for opportunity elsewhere, to return for holidays and deer season.
Kalamazoo funds their "Promise" program through private donations, sparked by what Plusquellic rightfully points out are the founding families of Kalamazoo who still have the resources to pony up for the greater good. We used to have those kinds of families here in Akron, too, and our landscape shows much of their impact: Goodyear Heights, Firestone Park, Seiberling Naturealm...the Seiberling, Goodrich, O'Neil and Firestone names still live on even though most of those families have already scattered to the winds and taking their money with them. Our sugar daddy days are done, left with Harvey's bronze reminder off South Main of glory days gone by.
The economic impact of the dollars today, however, is clear in Kazoo. The promise of jobs and development sparked more interest in living in Kalamazoo since this program started in 2006, just two years ago. I've included a report from Todd Kulman, our news director at our stations in Lansing, on the impact with this link. It's not even worth debating -- the plan works well for Kalamazoo.
But it's not the Akron Scholarship Plan.
Kalamazoo sends it's graduates to any state college or university, 52 at last count in Michigan; Akron's plan limits graduates to just eight institutions, including the University of Akron. The Kalamazoo Promise pays tuition; Akron's plan is a considered "last dollar", meaning recipients would exhaust other avenues and use Akron's scholarship as last resort. The Promise doesn't require recipients to return to Kalamazoo or pay it back; Akron calls for a 30-year term paying city income taxes either as a resident of the city, a worker in the city, or even making tax payments from wherever they land.
These are important distinctions and driving much of the discussion. Kalamazoo estimates $200 to $250 million generating enough money to fund scholarships for 500 students to start, anywhere from three to five million in tuition payments.
There are plenty of reasons to support the concept; 1200 graduates estimated to benefit from a step up, not a hand out. As the Administration and supporters rightfully point out, Akron made history with the first free public high school and this is a logical extension of that vision. But it is worth asking the question: if graduates of Akron's free high schools in the 19th and 20th centuries were free to move about the country without strings pulling their wallets back to Akron shouldn't the graduates of the 21st century version have the same ability to become ambassadors to the world?
It is important to note there's some pretty big outstanding differences; one big item is Kalamazoo's big-dog status as the biggest city in the southwest corner of Michigan. It's not even close to Akron, however: Kazoo less than half of our population. We have names like FirstEnergy, Goodyear and Firestone as giants of our economy while Kalamazoo has Pfizer, Eaton and Stryker. We have UA; they have WMU, Kalamazoo College, Davenport University and Kalamazoo Community.
Our friends up north in Wolverine country have much in common with Ohio; we have Cleveland and Youngstown, they have Detroit; we have the free republican of Athens, they have the free republic of Ann Arbor. We both have lakeshore. They have Grand Rapids and Kalamazoo with economic engines driven by more than automotive; we have Columbus and Cincinnati. They have a tax system business says is enough to drive them south; Ohio's been working on that. Both states have an aging population watching too many kids head for opportunity elsewhere, to return for holidays and deer season.
Kalamazoo funds their "Promise" program through private donations, sparked by what Plusquellic rightfully points out are the founding families of Kalamazoo who still have the resources to pony up for the greater good. We used to have those kinds of families here in Akron, too, and our landscape shows much of their impact: Goodyear Heights, Firestone Park, Seiberling Naturealm...the Seiberling, Goodrich, O'Neil and Firestone names still live on even though most of those families have already scattered to the winds and taking their money with them. Our sugar daddy days are done, left with Harvey's bronze reminder off South Main of glory days gone by.
The economic impact of the dollars today, however, is clear in Kazoo. The promise of jobs and development sparked more interest in living in Kalamazoo since this program started in 2006, just two years ago. I've included a report from Todd Kulman, our news director at our stations in Lansing, on the impact with this link. It's not even worth debating -- the plan works well for Kalamazoo.
But it's not the Akron Scholarship Plan.
Kalamazoo sends it's graduates to any state college or university, 52 at last count in Michigan; Akron's plan limits graduates to just eight institutions, including the University of Akron. The Kalamazoo Promise pays tuition; Akron's plan is a considered "last dollar", meaning recipients would exhaust other avenues and use Akron's scholarship as last resort. The Promise doesn't require recipients to return to Kalamazoo or pay it back; Akron calls for a 30-year term paying city income taxes either as a resident of the city, a worker in the city, or even making tax payments from wherever they land.
These are important distinctions and driving much of the discussion. Kalamazoo estimates $200 to $250 million generating enough money to fund scholarships for 500 students to start, anywhere from three to five million in tuition payments.
There are plenty of reasons to support the concept; 1200 graduates estimated to benefit from a step up, not a hand out. As the Administration and supporters rightfully point out, Akron made history with the first free public high school and this is a logical extension of that vision. But it is worth asking the question: if graduates of Akron's free high schools in the 19th and 20th centuries were free to move about the country without strings pulling their wallets back to Akron shouldn't the graduates of the 21st century version have the same ability to become ambassadors to the world?
Thursday, October 23, 2008
Issue 8: The Royal Flush
With dozens of candidates on the ballot -- ranging from national, state and local -- it may very well be the future of the flush that attracts most interest from Akron voters once they've made their choice for the White House.
Not to dismiss the importance of the other contests, mind you; after all, I'm sure Summit County awaits with baited breath the result of the Engineer's head-to-head. But much of the smoke from the political fires seems to burn around Issue 8, Akron's sewer lease-for-scholarships program.
On Wednesday we aired on WAKR a discussion program that provided callers the opportunity to pose questions directly to supporters and critics, and the late decision by two of the participants added some fireworks to the program. Mayor Plusquellic clearly has no time for Warner Mendenhall, the former councilman and now lawyer for the Save Our Sewers Committee which doesn't like the Administration's direction in leasing the sewer system to fund college with the Akron Scholarship Plan. Both were last-minute appearances to the panel and both took vocal and up-front positions in what turned into an excellent debate running over an hour.
The full program is available for listening using this link, but in the event you want to catch this on the air WAKR is airing an encore presentation following the noon news this Sunday, October 26th.
Overall, I think the debate showcased both sides favor some type of scholarship program; they disagree on how to pay for it. Mendenhall is fairly late to the party (less than two weeks from the election) with his idea of a city income tax to fund a scholarship program if Akron voters think it's that good of an idea. The Mayor jumped quick to tag Mendenhall as favoring increasing taxes, but the former councilman-turned-thorn-in-the-Don's-side didn't seem too bothered by the label. In fact, should Issue 8 fail it does offer supporters a comeback proposal to make.
A key issue here is whether Akron is willing to put either it's sewers or its money behind where their mouths are. It is easy to push for a more educated workforce and this is one way to get there, but it's another to take the money directly out of your pocket (as an income tax would do) or even push off a city asset to private management (as leasing the sewer system would do) to raise the cash.
There is a great deal of talk surrounding comments made by Public Service Director Merolla in The Bond Buyer, which bills itself as THE newspaper of public finance. On this topic I think the Administration has some work to do in more fully explaining what Merolla's comments mean, especially how any up-front payment for a lease would mean a net benefit to the scholarship plan. In the September article he notes the debt from the system would be paid first, and there seems to be some confusion on that point.
Another sticking point is the Administration's insistence that Akron get a payback from the scholarship in the form of income taxes, whether the recipient works and lives in the City or not for 30 years. The critics score points when they say it's a loan -- after all, it comes with strings. Plusquellic counters it is fashioned on the federal government's description of education assistance scholarships tied to working in rural areas, for example as doctors. Sure, Uncle Sam may call it a scholarship -- but most folks I talk to understand if getting money comes with strings we usually call that a loan.
It quacks like a loan, why not call it a loan? Because "scholarship" sounds like an easier sell, and at this point in the campaign it is doubtful supporters will back off such a key selling point. Issue 8 signs are growing, especially on every piece of public real estate around schools, and the cable TV ads are already on Time Warner Cable with radio expected to follow next week.
Not to dismiss the importance of the other contests, mind you; after all, I'm sure Summit County awaits with baited breath the result of the Engineer's head-to-head. But much of the smoke from the political fires seems to burn around Issue 8, Akron's sewer lease-for-scholarships program.
On Wednesday we aired on WAKR a discussion program that provided callers the opportunity to pose questions directly to supporters and critics, and the late decision by two of the participants added some fireworks to the program. Mayor Plusquellic clearly has no time for Warner Mendenhall, the former councilman and now lawyer for the Save Our Sewers Committee which doesn't like the Administration's direction in leasing the sewer system to fund college with the Akron Scholarship Plan. Both were last-minute appearances to the panel and both took vocal and up-front positions in what turned into an excellent debate running over an hour.
The full program is available for listening using this link, but in the event you want to catch this on the air WAKR is airing an encore presentation following the noon news this Sunday, October 26th.
Overall, I think the debate showcased both sides favor some type of scholarship program; they disagree on how to pay for it. Mendenhall is fairly late to the party (less than two weeks from the election) with his idea of a city income tax to fund a scholarship program if Akron voters think it's that good of an idea. The Mayor jumped quick to tag Mendenhall as favoring increasing taxes, but the former councilman-turned-thorn-in-the-Don's-side didn't seem too bothered by the label. In fact, should Issue 8 fail it does offer supporters a comeback proposal to make.
A key issue here is whether Akron is willing to put either it's sewers or its money behind where their mouths are. It is easy to push for a more educated workforce and this is one way to get there, but it's another to take the money directly out of your pocket (as an income tax would do) or even push off a city asset to private management (as leasing the sewer system would do) to raise the cash.
There is a great deal of talk surrounding comments made by Public Service Director Merolla in The Bond Buyer, which bills itself as THE newspaper of public finance. On this topic I think the Administration has some work to do in more fully explaining what Merolla's comments mean, especially how any up-front payment for a lease would mean a net benefit to the scholarship plan. In the September article he notes the debt from the system would be paid first, and there seems to be some confusion on that point.
Another sticking point is the Administration's insistence that Akron get a payback from the scholarship in the form of income taxes, whether the recipient works and lives in the City or not for 30 years. The critics score points when they say it's a loan -- after all, it comes with strings. Plusquellic counters it is fashioned on the federal government's description of education assistance scholarships tied to working in rural areas, for example as doctors. Sure, Uncle Sam may call it a scholarship -- but most folks I talk to understand if getting money comes with strings we usually call that a loan.
It quacks like a loan, why not call it a loan? Because "scholarship" sounds like an easier sell, and at this point in the campaign it is doubtful supporters will back off such a key selling point. Issue 8 signs are growing, especially on every piece of public real estate around schools, and the cable TV ads are already on Time Warner Cable with radio expected to follow next week.
Saturday, October 18, 2008
Talking Points: Issue 8
Both sides seem to have their talking points down pat in one of the few face-to-face forums on Issue 8 and 9...not that everyone at the Town Hall meeting sponsored by the League of Women Voters seemed to have an open mind in listening to the other side.
About a hundred people were in the FirstEnergy meeting room in the basement of the American Red Cross headquarters on West Market Street, a decent turnout for a Saturday morning. It was pretty clear the room was half-for, half-against judging by the number of city and community officials in tow to push for the Akron Scholarship Plan and the half-dozen or so wearing lime-green t-shirts reading "Hate 8, Vote No" above a "City of Akron For-Sale" sign.Following the opening statements moderator Susan Vogelsang noted the tenor of the meeting was non-partisan, and said they wouldn't proceed with the rest of the program unless the t-shirts were either reversed or turned inside out. There wasn't much grumbling -- in fact, even a few smiles -- as opponents of Issue 8 complied and then sat down to the ten work group tables set up to encourage more focused debate and working together to come up with ten questions for the panelists to respond to.
My favorite "strange bedfellows" pairing was the table where Deputy Mayor Dave Lieberth sat opposite frequent Administration critic Greg Coleridge of the Save our Sewers and Water Committee. Not exactly your normal buddy-buddy combination but both were far more civil than the normal chatter heard at Mayoral news conferences.
The questions:
1. Can the operator of the leased system commit the City to spending decisions?
No, says Akron Public Service Director Rick Merolla; rates can't go up more than 3.9% but he added EPA mandates have to be paid for regardless of who operates the system, and that falls to ratepayers. Save Our Sewers and Water Committee campaign chair Jack Sombati says the City can't make promises it isn't sure it can keep and it's tough to answer because no lease exists.
2. Why not look at another way to fund scholarships?
Sombati says they asked Mayor Plusquellic this when he first made the proposal and he wasn't interested; Children's Hospital CEO Bill Considine noted Akron is a generous community but raising $200 million privately won't happen. "We can't wait for someone to win the lottery," Considine said, adding "there's a sense of urgency here."
3. Explain Issue 9 pro and con.
This one was easy; both Merolla and Sombati agreed a "yes" vote was a good thing to make sure the public has the ultimate vote in the lease, transfer or sale of city-owned utilities.
4. How to you ensure compliance with EPA standards?
Wenonah Hauter, executive director of Washington-based Food and Water Watch, says we won't know until we see the actual lease agreement -- which doesn't exist. Merolla says nobody gets away with violating EPA options and there are a thousand municipal-run systems with problems just as there are with those run by private management. "I'm not going to sign a contract that puts Akron at risk," Merolla said.
5. What if the company breaks the lease or doesn't live up to its side?
Merolla: if there's a breach, the City takes back control with no payment to the lessee. Sombati says it would still be costly by the time lawyers got involved and used Akron Thermal (the bankrupt Akron municipal steam generator) as an example, noting the millions still owed the city in back taxes.
6. How do you link the scholarship plan with the business community?
Considine pointed to the BioInnovation agreement involving local universities and Akron's three major hospitals as programs bringing 2500 new jobs here in the next five years, and how they'd like to have those skilled jobs filled by Akron residents. Sombati charged the scholarship is really a loan program because of strings attached that tie graduates to paying Akron incomes taxes by staying here for 30 years, continuing Akron taxes if they leave or repaying the scholarship. He also noted Michigan's Kalamazoo Promise, offered up as a blueprint for Akron, provides a free ride without a 30 year commitment. Merolla shot back in a later segment the City was simply asking for a continued contribution to the community that made college possible, and wouldn't collect if graduates had no income (such as stay-at-home mothers or fathers.)
7. The City didn't enforce Time Warner's obligations for public access channels, why believe they will hold a lessee to an agreement?
I'll take this one...and note the cable TV issue has nothing to do with the City. The State of Ohio actually changed the law mandating cable companies hold responsibility for so-called local access channels, turning over the burden to local governments to manage. Not the same thing since it was the State, and not the City or a lessee, to actually change the rules.
8. We want more details on how the scholarship plan works.
Already covered above, but Merolla said 1500-1600 students would be eligible in the first class. The trigger on "repayment" comes with whether graduates pay Akron income tax by living or working in the City; Sombati says that's a loan, not a scholarship.
9. Who's responsible for storm sewer runoff?
More agreement; Sombati says the City is responsible and turned that into an attack on "just trust me" power voters would agree to without more lease details; Merolla countered the City is responsible and either way ratepayers would still pay the bill, lease or no lease.
10. What's the oversight, and how could we terminate the lease if needed?
Merolla: City still owns it, and there are plenty of examples of third-party managers doing city work -- such as highway construction and road resurfacing. Hauter says road maintenance isn't a good example since there's a big difference involving water and sewer quality.
11. Why does the Akron plan cover some communities but not others outside of Akron?
Suburbs are simply customers, says Merolla, and aren't owners so they don't have a voice in this decision. It's different for Akron residents who have children in non-Akron districts (such as Woodridge, Revere, Copley-Fairlawn, Coventry, and Springfield) because JEDDs have them in city limits but attending other schools. Sombati used this to say suburban customers will be just like Akron customers, at risk of big rate hikes because a lease operator will have to get their profits from somewhere.
It was interesting the Mayor wasn't in the house, but was keeping tabs on what was going on.
Proponents tell me this is by design because the Mayor doesn't want to have Issue 8 turned into a referendum on him, although that's probably a little late by now since he's already called those who disagree with him liars. It was a refreshing change to listen to competing sides made their points without calling each other names.
WAKR will air a live version of this town hall Wednesday night at 7:00 p.m. and while we'll get the same points it offers folks playing at home the ability to pick up the phone and get their questions right from the source.
About a hundred people were in the FirstEnergy meeting room in the basement of the American Red Cross headquarters on West Market Street, a decent turnout for a Saturday morning. It was pretty clear the room was half-for, half-against judging by the number of city and community officials in tow to push for the Akron Scholarship Plan and the half-dozen or so wearing lime-green t-shirts reading "Hate 8, Vote No" above a "City of Akron For-Sale" sign.Following the opening statements moderator Susan Vogelsang noted the tenor of the meeting was non-partisan, and said they wouldn't proceed with the rest of the program unless the t-shirts were either reversed or turned inside out. There wasn't much grumbling -- in fact, even a few smiles -- as opponents of Issue 8 complied and then sat down to the ten work group tables set up to encourage more focused debate and working together to come up with ten questions for the panelists to respond to.
My favorite "strange bedfellows" pairing was the table where Deputy Mayor Dave Lieberth sat opposite frequent Administration critic Greg Coleridge of the Save our Sewers and Water Committee. Not exactly your normal buddy-buddy combination but both were far more civil than the normal chatter heard at Mayoral news conferences.
The questions:
1. Can the operator of the leased system commit the City to spending decisions?
No, says Akron Public Service Director Rick Merolla; rates can't go up more than 3.9% but he added EPA mandates have to be paid for regardless of who operates the system, and that falls to ratepayers. Save Our Sewers and Water Committee campaign chair Jack Sombati says the City can't make promises it isn't sure it can keep and it's tough to answer because no lease exists.
2. Why not look at another way to fund scholarships?
Sombati says they asked Mayor Plusquellic this when he first made the proposal and he wasn't interested; Children's Hospital CEO Bill Considine noted Akron is a generous community but raising $200 million privately won't happen. "We can't wait for someone to win the lottery," Considine said, adding "there's a sense of urgency here."
3. Explain Issue 9 pro and con.
This one was easy; both Merolla and Sombati agreed a "yes" vote was a good thing to make sure the public has the ultimate vote in the lease, transfer or sale of city-owned utilities.
4. How to you ensure compliance with EPA standards?
Wenonah Hauter, executive director of Washington-based Food and Water Watch, says we won't know until we see the actual lease agreement -- which doesn't exist. Merolla says nobody gets away with violating EPA options and there are a thousand municipal-run systems with problems just as there are with those run by private management. "I'm not going to sign a contract that puts Akron at risk," Merolla said.
5. What if the company breaks the lease or doesn't live up to its side?
Merolla: if there's a breach, the City takes back control with no payment to the lessee. Sombati says it would still be costly by the time lawyers got involved and used Akron Thermal (the bankrupt Akron municipal steam generator) as an example, noting the millions still owed the city in back taxes.
6. How do you link the scholarship plan with the business community?
Considine pointed to the BioInnovation agreement involving local universities and Akron's three major hospitals as programs bringing 2500 new jobs here in the next five years, and how they'd like to have those skilled jobs filled by Akron residents. Sombati charged the scholarship is really a loan program because of strings attached that tie graduates to paying Akron incomes taxes by staying here for 30 years, continuing Akron taxes if they leave or repaying the scholarship. He also noted Michigan's Kalamazoo Promise, offered up as a blueprint for Akron, provides a free ride without a 30 year commitment. Merolla shot back in a later segment the City was simply asking for a continued contribution to the community that made college possible, and wouldn't collect if graduates had no income (such as stay-at-home mothers or fathers.)
7. The City didn't enforce Time Warner's obligations for public access channels, why believe they will hold a lessee to an agreement?
I'll take this one...and note the cable TV issue has nothing to do with the City. The State of Ohio actually changed the law mandating cable companies hold responsibility for so-called local access channels, turning over the burden to local governments to manage. Not the same thing since it was the State, and not the City or a lessee, to actually change the rules.
8. We want more details on how the scholarship plan works.
Already covered above, but Merolla said 1500-1600 students would be eligible in the first class. The trigger on "repayment" comes with whether graduates pay Akron income tax by living or working in the City; Sombati says that's a loan, not a scholarship.
9. Who's responsible for storm sewer runoff?
More agreement; Sombati says the City is responsible and turned that into an attack on "just trust me" power voters would agree to without more lease details; Merolla countered the City is responsible and either way ratepayers would still pay the bill, lease or no lease.
10. What's the oversight, and how could we terminate the lease if needed?
Merolla: City still owns it, and there are plenty of examples of third-party managers doing city work -- such as highway construction and road resurfacing. Hauter says road maintenance isn't a good example since there's a big difference involving water and sewer quality.
11. Why does the Akron plan cover some communities but not others outside of Akron?
Suburbs are simply customers, says Merolla, and aren't owners so they don't have a voice in this decision. It's different for Akron residents who have children in non-Akron districts (such as Woodridge, Revere, Copley-Fairlawn, Coventry, and Springfield) because JEDDs have them in city limits but attending other schools. Sombati used this to say suburban customers will be just like Akron customers, at risk of big rate hikes because a lease operator will have to get their profits from somewhere.
It was interesting the Mayor wasn't in the house, but was keeping tabs on what was going on.
Proponents tell me this is by design because the Mayor doesn't want to have Issue 8 turned into a referendum on him, although that's probably a little late by now since he's already called those who disagree with him liars. It was a refreshing change to listen to competing sides made their points without calling each other names.
WAKR will air a live version of this town hall Wednesday night at 7:00 p.m. and while we'll get the same points it offers folks playing at home the ability to pick up the phone and get their questions right from the source.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
