LET ME REPEAT MYSELF: From October 10...
No potential candidate for Mayor should get a free ride on this. Reporters and citizens need to make all the players come clean on their budget positions, long before this turns into a posture-fest at the Council committee table. If you think people need to be laid off, who goes first? If there's "fat" to be cut, where is it specifically? If you don't have some useful leadership to offer now, don't come to us talking about leadership in 2005. No Schwartzeneggers need apply.
Of course, this can't happen if all the numbers aren't public.
... The 2004 General Fund projections (and the 2003 numbers to date) -- all the projections -- should be posted prominently on the City's website right now, and updated as the Administration's information changes. This issue, far more than lakefront design or even the Convention Center, cries out for an open transparent public process: "We will have a lot less money than we need next year. What should we do about it?"
11.26.2003
MAYOR'S FULL BUDGET STATEMENT ON LINE: I'm happy to report that Mayor Campbell's full statement on budget cuts Monday, and the accompanying press release (with a significant amount of additional detail), are now both available at the City website.
This is a very good first step toward a full, public, transparent debate on the City's financial choices. A good next step would be posting Finance Director Baker's latest revenue results and projections, and the details of proposed cuts, department by department.
If you agree, here's the Mayor's e-mail form.
This is a very good first step toward a full, public, transparent debate on the City's financial choices. A good next step would be posting Finance Director Baker's latest revenue results and projections, and the details of proposed cuts, department by department.
If you agree, here's the Mayor's e-mail form.
THE FIRST CASUALTY: The sign is still out there at my neighborhood Convenient store, two days after everyone in the city -- including the guys next door at Fire Station 20 -- learned that Mayor Campbell plans to lay off 150 firefighters, not 235, and is proposing to close no stations.
The sign is a lie now, of course. But since nobody signed it, I guess nobody's responsible for correcting it or removing it. It can just sit out there, telling the neighbors something that isn't true but still serves the purpose of the folks who put it up... much like the "2,000 new city workers added in the 1990s" myth that the Mayor's Office apparently promoted to the Plain Dealer, which put it in an editorial and still hasn't corrected it.
Like the Mayor's chief of staff supposedly said to the Firefighters president, "This is war". And in war the first casualty is the truth.
The sign is a lie now, of course. But since nobody signed it, I guess nobody's responsible for correcting it or removing it. It can just sit out there, telling the neighbors something that isn't true but still serves the purpose of the folks who put it up... much like the "2,000 new city workers added in the 1990s" myth that the Mayor's Office apparently promoted to the Plain Dealer, which put it in an editorial and still hasn't corrected it.
Like the Mayor's chief of staff supposedly said to the Firefighters president, "This is war". And in war the first casualty is the truth.
11.24.2003
Campbell plans to cut 700 jobs
Cleveland Mayor Jane Campbell plans to cut more than 700 city jobs, delay the opening of outdoor swimming pools and scrap eight fire companies to help eliminate next year's $61 million budget deficit.... The Parks and Recreation Department and the Service Department, which handles road repair and trash pickup, will each lose 60 jobs... The city will eliminate 60 part-time jobs and not hire 310 seasonal employees for such tasks as snowplowing and trash pickup.
So tell me again, after all the agonizing and hand-wringing, why is a temporary income tax increase not on the table? A quarter-percent surcharge for the last three quarters of 2004 would raise nearly half of the shortfall -- if it was on the ballot March 4 instead of a Convention Center tax. I believe it could pass, given the alternatives.
The safety forces may be grandstanding and exaggerating the dangers, but I can tell you from bitter experience that closing eight fire stations will slow response times and risk lives. And if you think that safety, recreation, and street repair failures aren't serious "quality of life" issues that will drive middle class families out -- along with the laid off workers themselves -- you just haven't been paying attention.
Correction... The Mayor's proposal calls for eliminating eight fire companies, not stations. Apparently a company is the crew of a truck, more or less. There is no proposal on the table to close any stations. This is a obviously a big difference. The Mayor says trucks and response times can be protected through changes in work rules, i.e. one fewer firefighter per truck.
Cleveland Mayor Jane Campbell plans to cut more than 700 city jobs, delay the opening of outdoor swimming pools and scrap eight fire companies to help eliminate next year's $61 million budget deficit.... The Parks and Recreation Department and the Service Department, which handles road repair and trash pickup, will each lose 60 jobs... The city will eliminate 60 part-time jobs and not hire 310 seasonal employees for such tasks as snowplowing and trash pickup.
So tell me again, after all the agonizing and hand-wringing, why is a temporary income tax increase not on the table? A quarter-percent surcharge for the last three quarters of 2004 would raise nearly half of the shortfall -- if it was on the ballot March 4 instead of a Convention Center tax. I believe it could pass, given the alternatives.
The safety forces may be grandstanding and exaggerating the dangers, but I can tell you from bitter experience that closing eight fire stations will slow response times and risk lives. And if you think that safety, recreation, and street repair failures aren't serious "quality of life" issues that will drive middle class families out -- along with the laid off workers themselves -- you just haven't been paying attention.
Correction... The Mayor's proposal calls for eliminating eight fire companies, not stations. Apparently a company is the crew of a truck, more or less. There is no proposal on the table to close any stations. This is a obviously a big difference. The Mayor says trucks and response times can be protected through changes in work rules, i.e. one fewer firefighter per truck.
11.23.2003
MY REGIONAL GOVERNMENT PLAN (A THOUGHT EXERCISE): In this media market if not elsewhere, "regionalism" has become one of those words that obscures more than it communicates. Everyone from Thomas to Sam Fulwood, from Peter Lawson Jones (speaking at the last Connections Series event) to the fourteen biggest Cleveland law firms wants to talk "regional government". Elsewhere we're asked to think in terms of the bioregion, the northeast Ohio economic region (nineteen counties, according to REI's Ed Morrison), the "Great Lakes region" (Detroit to Buffalo with part of Ontario thrown in), etc., etc..
So what do they all mean by "region"? Certainly not the same thing. I'm pretty sure that Thomas and Lawson-Jones aren't proposing to create a municipal government that covers Lorain and Akron, while David Beach certainly doesn't think that the bioregion follows county lines. But by sharing the magic word "regional", all these disparate undertakings somehow hum at the same frequency in the public dialogue -- one big "progressive, visionary, 21st century" political harmonic. Sounds real pretty, doesn't it?
Now as my three regular readers know, I think there really is a distinct economic and political entity in Northeast Ohio -- more or less the same territory as REI's nineteen counties -- and I think we should have our own state, or something close to it. But there's a big difference between wanting to devolve centralized political authority to smaller, more locally-empowered entities (a value which is usually called subsidiarity), and wanting to merge smaller political authorities into a bigger one. You can call them both "regionalization", but they're two entirely different things.
"Centralization" is what we're discussing in Cleveland today... the merger of some or all municipal powers from a number of long-existing cities and villages into a single, bigger new municipality of some kind. What, why, who and how are still very vague. So to help clarify things, I want to offer -- purely as a thought exercise -- my very own municipal regionalization plan.
I call it the "BIGGER CLEVELAND PLAN" (and hereby claim copyright on the name, just in case some consultant tries to make a buck off it later).
Here's the way it would work: All of the cities currently sharing a border with the City of Cleveland would simultaneously offer to annex themselves to the City of Cleveland, along with their school districts. The City of Cleveland would accept their offer. Period. Full stop.
Of course nothing is that simple. The City of Cleveland's Home Rule Charter would have to be amended to redraw ward lines to include all those new citizens. And the process of incorporating the assets and employees of the various disappearing suburbs into Cleveland's would be complicated and stressful (no doubt providing all the legal work that those fourteen law firms are hoping for). But with strong, self-effacing leadership from all sides -- the kind of leadership everyone is demanding now from Jane Campbell and Frank Jackson -- I'm sure we could get through it.
In order of population, the annexed cities and villages would include Parma, Lakewood, Euclid, Cleveland Heights, Garfield Heights, Shaker Heights, East Cleveland, Maple Heights, South Euclid, Brook Park, Fairview Park, Warrensville Heights, Brooklyn, Newburgh Heights, Brooklyn Heights, Bratenahl, Cuyahoga Heights, and Linndale.
These eighteen municipalities -- the actual "first ring suburbs" -- have a total of about 450,000 residents, so their annexation would almost double Cleveland's population to over 925,000... back to Number 1 in Ohio and Number 11 in the U.S.
The combined Bigger Cleveland would have:
-- a poverty rate of 17%, compared to Smaller Cleveland's 26%
-- 19% of its adult residents with college degrees, compared to Smaller Cleveland's 11%
-- a public school system with a significant number of middle-income children and parents (at least at first) and a significant number of its teachers and administrators actually living in the district
-- lots of nice neighborhoods for its city employees to live in, even with the residency rule
-- some really nice new city parks and recreation centers open to all Cleveland residents (ever been to Brooklyn's Natatorium?)
-- a stronger property and income tax base, including some still-growing commercial centers and industrial parks
-- lots more political clout.
Of course, Smaller Cleveland residents would lose some political ground, too, since the former suburban voters would outnumber us in Bigger Cleveland (and they turn out better, too). African Americans in Smaller Cleveland would find themselves back in the minority, after decades of edging toward real political dominance in the city... a serious sacrifice for a community whose voting strength is currently its only way to get to the jobs-and-power table.
Nonetheless, I believe that, on balance, the Bigger Cleveland Plan as I have proposed it would be seen by most Smaller Cleveland residents as too good an offer to pass up, if only for the potential value to our schoolkids. And it has the advantage of being very straightforward: All we need is for those eighteen inner ring suburbs to get together and decide to be annexed to Cleveland, as provided under current state law.
Of course it would have to start with the eighteen suburbs themselves. I would think a good start would be for well-known regionalization fans Peter Lawson Jones and Jimmy Dimora to go around to all the city councils, school boards, and ward clubs in those municipalities to get the ball rolling. They could undoubtedly count on getting help from lots of local residents -- for example, attorneys from the fourteen biggest law firms -- who share the regional vision and are tired of being held back by the old-fashioned, parochial, inefficient communities where they live.
I would personally pay good money to hear those conversations -- especially Lawson-Jones making a pitch to the Shaker Heights school board.
Well, that's my Bigger Cleveland Plan. I wonder how long it will take for the petitions to start circulating in Shaker Heights, Cleveland Heights, Euclid, Parma and Lakewood? Or to put it another way... when does ice skating season start in Hell?
So what do they all mean by "region"? Certainly not the same thing. I'm pretty sure that Thomas and Lawson-Jones aren't proposing to create a municipal government that covers Lorain and Akron, while David Beach certainly doesn't think that the bioregion follows county lines. But by sharing the magic word "regional", all these disparate undertakings somehow hum at the same frequency in the public dialogue -- one big "progressive, visionary, 21st century" political harmonic. Sounds real pretty, doesn't it?
Now as my three regular readers know, I think there really is a distinct economic and political entity in Northeast Ohio -- more or less the same territory as REI's nineteen counties -- and I think we should have our own state, or something close to it. But there's a big difference between wanting to devolve centralized political authority to smaller, more locally-empowered entities (a value which is usually called subsidiarity), and wanting to merge smaller political authorities into a bigger one. You can call them both "regionalization", but they're two entirely different things.
"Centralization" is what we're discussing in Cleveland today... the merger of some or all municipal powers from a number of long-existing cities and villages into a single, bigger new municipality of some kind. What, why, who and how are still very vague. So to help clarify things, I want to offer -- purely as a thought exercise -- my very own municipal regionalization plan.
I call it the "BIGGER CLEVELAND PLAN" (and hereby claim copyright on the name, just in case some consultant tries to make a buck off it later).
Here's the way it would work: All of the cities currently sharing a border with the City of Cleveland would simultaneously offer to annex themselves to the City of Cleveland, along with their school districts. The City of Cleveland would accept their offer. Period. Full stop.
Of course nothing is that simple. The City of Cleveland's Home Rule Charter would have to be amended to redraw ward lines to include all those new citizens. And the process of incorporating the assets and employees of the various disappearing suburbs into Cleveland's would be complicated and stressful (no doubt providing all the legal work that those fourteen law firms are hoping for). But with strong, self-effacing leadership from all sides -- the kind of leadership everyone is demanding now from Jane Campbell and Frank Jackson -- I'm sure we could get through it.
In order of population, the annexed cities and villages would include Parma, Lakewood, Euclid, Cleveland Heights, Garfield Heights, Shaker Heights, East Cleveland, Maple Heights, South Euclid, Brook Park, Fairview Park, Warrensville Heights, Brooklyn, Newburgh Heights, Brooklyn Heights, Bratenahl, Cuyahoga Heights, and Linndale.
These eighteen municipalities -- the actual "first ring suburbs" -- have a total of about 450,000 residents, so their annexation would almost double Cleveland's population to over 925,000... back to Number 1 in Ohio and Number 11 in the U.S.
The combined Bigger Cleveland would have:
-- a poverty rate of 17%, compared to Smaller Cleveland's 26%
-- 19% of its adult residents with college degrees, compared to Smaller Cleveland's 11%
-- a public school system with a significant number of middle-income children and parents (at least at first) and a significant number of its teachers and administrators actually living in the district
-- lots of nice neighborhoods for its city employees to live in, even with the residency rule
-- some really nice new city parks and recreation centers open to all Cleveland residents (ever been to Brooklyn's Natatorium?)
-- a stronger property and income tax base, including some still-growing commercial centers and industrial parks
-- lots more political clout.
Of course, Smaller Cleveland residents would lose some political ground, too, since the former suburban voters would outnumber us in Bigger Cleveland (and they turn out better, too). African Americans in Smaller Cleveland would find themselves back in the minority, after decades of edging toward real political dominance in the city... a serious sacrifice for a community whose voting strength is currently its only way to get to the jobs-and-power table.
Nonetheless, I believe that, on balance, the Bigger Cleveland Plan as I have proposed it would be seen by most Smaller Cleveland residents as too good an offer to pass up, if only for the potential value to our schoolkids. And it has the advantage of being very straightforward: All we need is for those eighteen inner ring suburbs to get together and decide to be annexed to Cleveland, as provided under current state law.
Of course it would have to start with the eighteen suburbs themselves. I would think a good start would be for well-known regionalization fans Peter Lawson Jones and Jimmy Dimora to go around to all the city councils, school boards, and ward clubs in those municipalities to get the ball rolling. They could undoubtedly count on getting help from lots of local residents -- for example, attorneys from the fourteen biggest law firms -- who share the regional vision and are tired of being held back by the old-fashioned, parochial, inefficient communities where they live.
I would personally pay good money to hear those conversations -- especially Lawson-Jones making a pitch to the Shaker Heights school board.
Well, that's my Bigger Cleveland Plan. I wonder how long it will take for the petitions to start circulating in Shaker Heights, Cleveland Heights, Euclid, Parma and Lakewood? Or to put it another way... when does ice skating season start in Hell?
11.17.2003
11.08.2003
ISSUE 1: TECHS AND THE CITY
How State Issue 1 did in the City of Cleveland:
(Ward map here.)
Issue 1 got majority support in twenty out of 21 Cleveland wards (the exception was Ward 16, Old Brooklyn). It broke 60% in all eleven East Side wards as well as Ward 13 (Tremont-Downtown-Goodrich Park).
The overall City result of 61-39% was basically identical to the rest of Cuyahoga County at 63-37%. But Cleveland's voter turnout of about 38,000 -- 11% of eligible adults -- was far lower than the rest of the county, where almost a third of all adults voted. This is not surprising -- Cleveland had only three judgeships and Issue 1 on its ballot, whereas many suburbs were electing mayors and city councils and voting on high-profile issues -- but it was unfortunate for Issue 1 backers, who might well have netted 15,000 to 20,000 votes from a higher city turnout. (The issue failed by only 45,000 votes statewide.)
On its face, there was nothing exceptional about the city's support for the issue. It was strong in this county, in NEO generally, and in Democratic-voting areas; it was weakest downstate and in Republican-dominated areas. While Issue 1 was sponsored by a GOP governor with the support of a GOP legislature, its basic pitch -- big new government investment to create new high-paying tech jobs -- seemed far more resonant for labor and city Democrats than for most white-collar Republicans, let alone farmers. And that's pretty much how the votes fell.
But I think Cleveland's vote is worth some attention nonetheless. Remember, these are the same voters who, according to polls, would have buried a Convention Center tax if it had been on this ballot. These are the people who are dismissed by some as too short-sighted, parochial and manufacturing-obsessed to embrace a new golden age of entrepreneurial wealth creation and creative-class high life. Thus this is the city whose very political existence is seen in some quarters as an obstacle to regional progress and prosperity.
And now it turns out we liked the Third Frontier better than they did in the Columbus and Cincinnati suburbs. Why, Frank Jackson's Ward 5 went for it by more than 70%!
Maybe the champions of NEO's new economic paradigm(s) have been looking for love in the wrong places.
More on this next time.
(Ward map here.)
Issue 1 got majority support in twenty out of 21 Cleveland wards (the exception was Ward 16, Old Brooklyn). It broke 60% in all eleven East Side wards as well as Ward 13 (Tremont-Downtown-Goodrich Park).
The overall City result of 61-39% was basically identical to the rest of Cuyahoga County at 63-37%. But Cleveland's voter turnout of about 38,000 -- 11% of eligible adults -- was far lower than the rest of the county, where almost a third of all adults voted. This is not surprising -- Cleveland had only three judgeships and Issue 1 on its ballot, whereas many suburbs were electing mayors and city councils and voting on high-profile issues -- but it was unfortunate for Issue 1 backers, who might well have netted 15,000 to 20,000 votes from a higher city turnout. (The issue failed by only 45,000 votes statewide.)
On its face, there was nothing exceptional about the city's support for the issue. It was strong in this county, in NEO generally, and in Democratic-voting areas; it was weakest downstate and in Republican-dominated areas. While Issue 1 was sponsored by a GOP governor with the support of a GOP legislature, its basic pitch -- big new government investment to create new high-paying tech jobs -- seemed far more resonant for labor and city Democrats than for most white-collar Republicans, let alone farmers. And that's pretty much how the votes fell.
But I think Cleveland's vote is worth some attention nonetheless. Remember, these are the same voters who, according to polls, would have buried a Convention Center tax if it had been on this ballot. These are the people who are dismissed by some as too short-sighted, parochial and manufacturing-obsessed to embrace a new golden age of entrepreneurial wealth creation and creative-class high life. Thus this is the city whose very political existence is seen in some quarters as an obstacle to regional progress and prosperity.
And now it turns out we liked the Third Frontier better than they did in the Columbus and Cincinnati suburbs. Why, Frank Jackson's Ward 5 went for it by more than 70%!
Maybe the champions of NEO's new economic paradigm(s) have been looking for love in the wrong places.
More on this next time.
11.06.2003
FOR ALL YOU WIFI FREAKS: Via the Community Technology Centers Network mailing list, a new website on "muni wireless".
MORE WAL-MART: Yesterday's New York Times has a long article on the Wal-Mart cleaning contractor case, which led to recent arrests at the chain's North Olmsted store along with sixty others.
Various sources in the story say store managers must have known illegal workers were cleaning their stores. The workers interviewed came in on tourist visas, worked long hours for months at a time without days off, and earned less an $7 an hour with no overtime pay. But there's a heartwarming high-tech edge to the story: They were recruited on the Web!
Robert, a Czech who runs a Web site to attract Eastern Europeans to janitorial work, said using foreign cleaners was good for Wal-Mart and for American consumers.
"No American wants to do this job," he said. "If they hired Americans, it would take 10 of them to do the work done by five Czechs. This helps Wal-Mart keep its prices low."
Ah, good old forthright ethnic pride. I'm amazed he's not featured in a Wal-Mart TV ad.
Various sources in the story say store managers must have known illegal workers were cleaning their stores. The workers interviewed came in on tourist visas, worked long hours for months at a time without days off, and earned less an $7 an hour with no overtime pay. But there's a heartwarming high-tech edge to the story: They were recruited on the Web!
Robert, a Czech who runs a Web site to attract Eastern Europeans to janitorial work, said using foreign cleaners was good for Wal-Mart and for American consumers.
"No American wants to do this job," he said. "If they hired Americans, it would take 10 of them to do the work done by five Czechs. This helps Wal-Mart keep its prices low."
Ah, good old forthright ethnic pride. I'm amazed he's not featured in a Wal-Mart TV ad.
11.04.2003
ROLDO: George Nemeth reveals that Roldo Bartimole's next column on Cool Cleveland responds to some earlier entries here and here. (You have to scroll down Roldo's column to get to this... it's the last section headlined "Consequences". )
The first thing I want to say is that I'm so happy that Roldo has a home on line with Cool Cleveland. Can you imagine any other well-known writer in this town being as scrupulous and diligent as this? Thank you, Mr. Mulready and Co.!
Roldo's column speaks for itself (including taking exception to my lumping him in with Crain's as a layoff enthusiast). But what's really interesting is Finance Director Baker's acknowledgment that the last ten years' job growth in City departments was closer to 600 than it was to 2,000 -- the number cited by editorials in both Crain's and the Plain Dealer, as well as Roldo's original City News column.
Why is it so interesting? Because when I contacted Joe Frolik at the PD, who wrote the editorial in question, he told me his source for the bigger number was the Mayor's office. (Joe says he was cautioned that it referred to overall employment growth, not just General Fund departments -- but it turns out that the real numbers in both cases are almost identical.) So it seems that someone at City Hall -- someone who talks to PD reporters -- was eiher badly misinformed or fibbing.
Does it matter? Joe made the same point to me that Roldo makes in his column, i.e. whether it's 2,000 added workers or only 600, the bottom line is still a $50 million deficit that won't go away without some serious payroll cuts somewhere. I've pretty much said what I have to say about this already.
Whatever the City does about all this, however, it's guaranteed to create extreme civic nastiness if the debate is less than honest, factual and transparent. The Case of the Two Thousand New Employees is not a promising start.
The first thing I want to say is that I'm so happy that Roldo has a home on line with Cool Cleveland. Can you imagine any other well-known writer in this town being as scrupulous and diligent as this? Thank you, Mr. Mulready and Co.!
Roldo's column speaks for itself (including taking exception to my lumping him in with Crain's as a layoff enthusiast). But what's really interesting is Finance Director Baker's acknowledgment that the last ten years' job growth in City departments was closer to 600 than it was to 2,000 -- the number cited by editorials in both Crain's and the Plain Dealer, as well as Roldo's original City News column.
Why is it so interesting? Because when I contacted Joe Frolik at the PD, who wrote the editorial in question, he told me his source for the bigger number was the Mayor's office. (Joe says he was cautioned that it referred to overall employment growth, not just General Fund departments -- but it turns out that the real numbers in both cases are almost identical.) So it seems that someone at City Hall -- someone who talks to PD reporters -- was eiher badly misinformed or fibbing.
Does it matter? Joe made the same point to me that Roldo makes in his column, i.e. whether it's 2,000 added workers or only 600, the bottom line is still a $50 million deficit that won't go away without some serious payroll cuts somewhere. I've pretty much said what I have to say about this already.
Whatever the City does about all this, however, it's guaranteed to create extreme civic nastiness if the debate is less than honest, factual and transparent. The Case of the Two Thousand New Employees is not a promising start.
10.29.2003
DOWNTOWN POVERTY DEVELOPMENT: I'm going to propose a new term now. The term is poverty development. I define "poverty development" as the deliberate application of public resources and policies to create jobs at poverty wages.
Please note that poverty development is not what happens when people are thrown out of work, or out of their homes, as the result of public policy. These activities may create poverty -- lots of it -- but that's not usually their goal, it's a side effect of some other goal. In poverty development, on the other hand, the poverty-wage jobs are a stated goal, the poverty-level wages are built into participants' long-range business plans, and ensuring a labor supply at those wage levels is part of the public development activity.
An example of poverty development would be the investment of hundreds of millions of dollars in public funds into a public convention center, in order to create business for hotels and restaurants that pay most of their employees less than living wages.
In this connection, I've posted a page of excerpts from CSU Urban Studies Dean Mark Rosentraub's pro-convention center "study" on my Cleveland Wages Pages website. The most relevant passages are highlighted in red, but the rest of the excerpt is there for context. What it says, in short, is:
A big part of Cleveland's workforce is uneducated and therefore unemployable in the better jobs we hope to create in the technology and financial sectors, so we need to keep growing the "hospitality sector" to provide jobs for them.
I had a long talk a couple of years ago with a young woman who worked as a housekeeper at the Ritz-Carlton, cleaning up after guests who paid up to $300 a night. She described a very demanding job where pay started at about $7 an hour and rose to $9 only at the top of a competitive "incentive" scale. The workers were virtually all Black, Hispanic or recent immigrants; many did not speak English. She had family members and friends at the Marriott who were working in the same circumstances.
These two hotels were flagship projects of the '80s, built with heavy tax abatements to "revitalize the hospitality industry" and "create good jobs for residents". What they created was dead-end jobs at $14-15,000 a year -- less than the City's definition of a Living Wage that's acceptable for subsidized projects --with no prospect of improvement. (Of the 2,500 hotel rooms built downtown since 1980, a grand total of 140 are cleaned by workers with union representation.)
When we talk about preserving and creating "hospitality sector" jobs for uneducated Cleveland residents, these hotels -- and the restaurants around them -- are what we're talking about. That's downtown poverty development. We've had lots of it in the past twenty years, during which the City has become -- predictably -- poorer.
If we're going to spend a lot of public money to benefit uneducated Cleveland workers, as Dean Rosentraub argues, there is another possible strategy: We could spend it to help them get educated and qualified for all those better jobs in technology, finance and health care.
But for some reason, nobody is calling for "leadership" in that direction.
Please note that poverty development is not what happens when people are thrown out of work, or out of their homes, as the result of public policy. These activities may create poverty -- lots of it -- but that's not usually their goal, it's a side effect of some other goal. In poverty development, on the other hand, the poverty-wage jobs are a stated goal, the poverty-level wages are built into participants' long-range business plans, and ensuring a labor supply at those wage levels is part of the public development activity.
An example of poverty development would be the investment of hundreds of millions of dollars in public funds into a public convention center, in order to create business for hotels and restaurants that pay most of their employees less than living wages.
In this connection, I've posted a page of excerpts from CSU Urban Studies Dean Mark Rosentraub's pro-convention center "study" on my Cleveland Wages Pages website. The most relevant passages are highlighted in red, but the rest of the excerpt is there for context. What it says, in short, is:
A big part of Cleveland's workforce is uneducated and therefore unemployable in the better jobs we hope to create in the technology and financial sectors, so we need to keep growing the "hospitality sector" to provide jobs for them.
I had a long talk a couple of years ago with a young woman who worked as a housekeeper at the Ritz-Carlton, cleaning up after guests who paid up to $300 a night. She described a very demanding job where pay started at about $7 an hour and rose to $9 only at the top of a competitive "incentive" scale. The workers were virtually all Black, Hispanic or recent immigrants; many did not speak English. She had family members and friends at the Marriott who were working in the same circumstances.
These two hotels were flagship projects of the '80s, built with heavy tax abatements to "revitalize the hospitality industry" and "create good jobs for residents". What they created was dead-end jobs at $14-15,000 a year -- less than the City's definition of a Living Wage that's acceptable for subsidized projects --with no prospect of improvement. (Of the 2,500 hotel rooms built downtown since 1980, a grand total of 140 are cleaned by workers with union representation.)
When we talk about preserving and creating "hospitality sector" jobs for uneducated Cleveland residents, these hotels -- and the restaurants around them -- are what we're talking about. That's downtown poverty development. We've had lots of it in the past twenty years, during which the City has become -- predictably -- poorer.
If we're going to spend a lot of public money to benefit uneducated Cleveland workers, as Dean Rosentraub argues, there is another possible strategy: We could spend it to help them get educated and qualified for all those better jobs in technology, finance and health care.
But for some reason, nobody is calling for "leadership" in that direction.
10.28.2003
WEIRD SCIENCE (ECONOMICS DIVISION): As I read yesterday's PD article about organized labor pushing a new convention center initiative, the following sentence caught my eye:
In the 1990s, employment gains in Northeast Ohio's hospitality sector - which includes, retail, museums and hotels - almost equaled lost manufacturing jobs, according to CSU analysis.
Read that sentence again. See anything strange? Here's a hint: Do you think of shopping malls as part of the "hospitality sector"? Probably not... but it seems that's the way CSU's study was counting in order to make its highly political point.
The study, by Levin College of Urban Affairs Dean Mark Rosentraub, is available here in PDF format. Published last May, it was waved around a lot during the Summer by Convention Center Tax advocates, but I never looked at it until this morning. The sentence from the PD quoted above is based on a passage that starts on page 14 and continues on page 15, referring to "changes in job levels throughout Northeast Ohio during the 1990s":
There was a loss of more than 22,000 manufacturing jobs... The number of new jobs in the retail, amusement services, museum, and lodging sectors -- which when grouped constitute the hospitality sector -- was almost equal to the loss of manufacturing jobs.
A chart follows which shows the following sectoral job gains (among others) for 1989-2000: 17,314 jobs in retail trade, 191 jobs in hotels and lodging, 4,115 jobs in amusement and recreation, and 478 jobs in museums. The total of these lines -- 22,098 jobs -- is apparently the "hospitality sector" gain that is supposed to almost offset the manufacturing loss. "Retail trade" is three-quarters of that total.
Now I don't know how these things work in the economics biz. Maybe there's some good reason for Dean Rosentraub and his colleagues to have a construct called "the hospitality sector" that includes Wal-Mart, K-Mart, Topps, Builders Square, the corner gas station, the video store, the Dollar Store and some apple stand in Hinckley. But it's hard to see how the performance of such a "sector" tells us anything useful about the economic impact of Cleveland's downtown convention and tourist business.
But who cares?. It's a statistic. It comes from the Dean of a college at CSU. And it appears to document the vital economic potential of conventions and hotels for a desperate Cleveland economy... at least until you give it a second glance. So put it in the paper and let the yokels try to figure out if it actually means anything.
Well, fellow yokels, it doesn't. It's junk science... a pre-judged conclusion in search of some data to support it.
Of course there's always a lot of this stuff floating around Cleveland -- remember the 25,000 good jobs Gateway was going to produce? But it sure would be nice if PD reporters had better smell detectors... or if CSU, which reportedly wants to be regarded as a real research institution, would start asking its faculty (and even its Deans) to act more like scientists and less like shills.
In the 1990s, employment gains in Northeast Ohio's hospitality sector - which includes, retail, museums and hotels - almost equaled lost manufacturing jobs, according to CSU analysis.
Read that sentence again. See anything strange? Here's a hint: Do you think of shopping malls as part of the "hospitality sector"? Probably not... but it seems that's the way CSU's study was counting in order to make its highly political point.
The study, by Levin College of Urban Affairs Dean Mark Rosentraub, is available here in PDF format. Published last May, it was waved around a lot during the Summer by Convention Center Tax advocates, but I never looked at it until this morning. The sentence from the PD quoted above is based on a passage that starts on page 14 and continues on page 15, referring to "changes in job levels throughout Northeast Ohio during the 1990s":
There was a loss of more than 22,000 manufacturing jobs... The number of new jobs in the retail, amusement services, museum, and lodging sectors -- which when grouped constitute the hospitality sector -- was almost equal to the loss of manufacturing jobs.
A chart follows which shows the following sectoral job gains (among others) for 1989-2000: 17,314 jobs in retail trade, 191 jobs in hotels and lodging, 4,115 jobs in amusement and recreation, and 478 jobs in museums. The total of these lines -- 22,098 jobs -- is apparently the "hospitality sector" gain that is supposed to almost offset the manufacturing loss. "Retail trade" is three-quarters of that total.
Now I don't know how these things work in the economics biz. Maybe there's some good reason for Dean Rosentraub and his colleagues to have a construct called "the hospitality sector" that includes Wal-Mart, K-Mart, Topps, Builders Square, the corner gas station, the video store, the Dollar Store and some apple stand in Hinckley. But it's hard to see how the performance of such a "sector" tells us anything useful about the economic impact of Cleveland's downtown convention and tourist business.
But who cares?. It's a statistic. It comes from the Dean of a college at CSU. And it appears to document the vital economic potential of conventions and hotels for a desperate Cleveland economy... at least until you give it a second glance. So put it in the paper and let the yokels try to figure out if it actually means anything.
Well, fellow yokels, it doesn't. It's junk science... a pre-judged conclusion in search of some data to support it.
Of course there's always a lot of this stuff floating around Cleveland -- remember the 25,000 good jobs Gateway was going to produce? But it sure would be nice if PD reporters had better smell detectors... or if CSU, which reportedly wants to be regarded as a real research institution, would start asking its faculty (and even its Deans) to act more like scientists and less like shills.
10.27.2003
PLAIN DEALER REPEATS BOGUS CITY JOBS CLAIM: In an editorial today, the PD joins Crain's and Roldo in calling for layoffs of City workers -- as early as January -- to head off a projected $52 million deficit in 2004. And like Crain's and Roldo, the PD undergirds its hasty attack on City workers' livelihoods with a claim that thousands of jobs were added to City payrolls in the 1990s:
No one should be cheered by the prospect of public employees losing their jobs, and the administration must be careful to preserve essential services. But since the city added nearly 2,000 employees during the 1990s, careful reductions need not prove crippling.
As I pointed out here on October 7, this claim is wildly wrong. Here, again, are the facts:
I went to the library and got the actual employment figures for General Fund departments (not just General fund employees) for the last ten years, and here's what I found:
... The City added a total of about 600 full-time-equivalent positions from 1992 to 2002.
... About 150 of these FTE positions were in Muny Court.
... About 600 FTE positions were added in the Public Safety Department... including 200 police patrol officers, 60 firefighters, and 95 "institutional guards".
... All the other General Fund departments combined lost about 170 FTE positions from 1992 to 2002.
I'll be sending the full spreadsheet with these numbers to the PD tomorrow... after which I'll confidently await their correction. Anybody else want to see it?
No one should be cheered by the prospect of public employees losing their jobs, and the administration must be careful to preserve essential services. But since the city added nearly 2,000 employees during the 1990s, careful reductions need not prove crippling.
As I pointed out here on October 7, this claim is wildly wrong. Here, again, are the facts:
I went to the library and got the actual employment figures for General Fund departments (not just General fund employees) for the last ten years, and here's what I found:
... The City added a total of about 600 full-time-equivalent positions from 1992 to 2002.
... About 150 of these FTE positions were in Muny Court.
... About 600 FTE positions were added in the Public Safety Department... including 200 police patrol officers, 60 firefighters, and 95 "institutional guards".
... All the other General Fund departments combined lost about 170 FTE positions from 1992 to 2002.
I'll be sending the full spreadsheet with these numbers to the PD tomorrow... after which I'll confidently await their correction. Anybody else want to see it?
10.26.2003
CLEVELAND CONNECTION: Since I sort of gave Wal-Mart a free plug the other day, and since we all like "Cleveland connections" so much, I want to take note of the fact that North Olmsted was one of the 61 Wal-Marts where Federal authorities arrested contract cleaning workers as illegal immigrants on Thursday.
The PD had a good front-page article Friday, which unfortunately doesn't seem to be on line. (If you missed it, here's USA Today for the overall story.) It seems the feds believe that the workers were being paid as little as $2 a day, and that top Wal-Mart execs were well aware of the situation.
Naturally, it's the victimized workers who are in custody. At least so far.
The PD had a good front-page article Friday, which unfortunately doesn't seem to be on line. (If you missed it, here's USA Today for the overall story.) It seems the feds believe that the workers were being paid as little as $2 a day, and that top Wal-Mart execs were well aware of the situation.
Naturally, it's the victimized workers who are in custody. At least so far.
10.21.2003
MAYBE YOU ALL ALREADY KNEW THIS... but I just discovered that Walmart.com is selling new PCs for $200. Two new PCs, actually: the Microtel SYSMAR417 with a Lycoris (Linux) OS on it, and the Microtel SYSMAR550 with no OS loaded. They're both Duron 1.2s with modest hard drives (20 gig), no modem and no floppy... but shit, it's $200!
(Don't go to your WalMart store looking for these systems -- they're available on-line only.)
Microtel is a California company and seems to do actual assembly there, though I'm sure they buy their boards from Asia. Lycoris is a Linux distribution from a fairly new company in Redmond, WA of all places (maybe that's why its front page looks so much like Windows XP.) Both companies seem to be looking for other resellers.
Now I'm sure that there's a market to be made in NE Ohio -- heck, in my neighborhood! -- for a sub-$250 new PC with a user-friendly Linux system. Is some Cleveland entrepreneur already checking this out? Is anyone out there trying to figure out how Microtel does it? How about the guys from the Open Source Society?
Or is this one more piece of northeast Ohio's consumer market that WalMart wll get to keep all to itself?
(Don't go to your WalMart store looking for these systems -- they're available on-line only.)
Microtel is a California company and seems to do actual assembly there, though I'm sure they buy their boards from Asia. Lycoris is a Linux distribution from a fairly new company in Redmond, WA of all places (maybe that's why its front page looks so much like Windows XP.) Both companies seem to be looking for other resellers.
Now I'm sure that there's a market to be made in NE Ohio -- heck, in my neighborhood! -- for a sub-$250 new PC with a user-friendly Linux system. Is some Cleveland entrepreneur already checking this out? Is anyone out there trying to figure out how Microtel does it? How about the guys from the Open Source Society?
Or is this one more piece of northeast Ohio's consumer market that WalMart wll get to keep all to itself?
WIRELESS WAFFLES: Belgian waffles and wi-fi... all for $5 !
This Sunday from 9 to 2 at Tremont Scoops -- it's a benefit pancake breakfast for Tremont Wi-Fi. Your money will help buy access points and wireless cards for more community hotspots like the one at at Scoops.
See you there.
This Sunday from 9 to 2 at Tremont Scoops -- it's a benefit pancake breakfast for Tremont Wi-Fi. Your money will help buy access points and wireless cards for more community hotspots like the one at at Scoops.
See you there.
10.13.2003
THIRD FRONTIER... NEW STATE ROLE IN BUSINESS? I know there was a PD article about this, but if it didn't lead you to take a look at the new Policy Matters analysis of State Issue 1 and what it means, go do so now. Don't just look at the Executive Summary, download the whole thing -- it's worth the effort.
The press spokesman for the report (thus, I assume, a major contributor) is Zach Schiller, the former PD and Business Week reporter, now Policy Matters Research Director. (If I recall correctly, Zach's byline was on the PD's very first "Quiet Crisis" article).
The report is neutral on passing Issue 1 this November, but points out that this constitutional amendment involves a lot more than some bond money for high-tech research and development -- for example, it would allow the state (and maybe local governments as well) to own shares in private corporations for the first time in a century and a half.
The press spokesman for the report (thus, I assume, a major contributor) is Zach Schiller, the former PD and Business Week reporter, now Policy Matters Research Director. (If I recall correctly, Zach's byline was on the PD's very first "Quiet Crisis" article).
The report is neutral on passing Issue 1 this November, but points out that this constitutional amendment involves a lot more than some bond money for high-tech research and development -- for example, it would allow the state (and maybe local governments as well) to own shares in private corporations for the first time in a century and a half.
10.10.2003
EMERGENT BUDGET DEMOCRACY? BFD has a recent post on "emergent democracy" that might be worth considering in connection with the Cleveland Budget Perplex. The author BFD links to is talking about a new variety of self-organizing Web participation in the civic process, exemplified by the Howard Dean campaign. Since the majority of Cleveland residents are probably still without home computers, let alone good Internet skills, the relevance here may seem farfetched. But the fact is that an awful lot of Cleveland voters have crossed that divide in the past couple of years. Suppose the Campbell Administration actually put the numbers on the Net, where everyone can see them, and urged its constituents to start a serious conversation about them. Where might that lead?
Emergent democracy is about leadership through giving up control, activating the people to engage through deliberation and action, and allowing emergent order to grow from the grass roots.
Maybe we could use a helping of that in Cleveland.
Emergent democracy is about leadership through giving up control, activating the people to engage through deliberation and action, and allowing emergent order to grow from the grass roots.
Maybe we could use a helping of that in Cleveland.
CLEVELAND BUDGET PERPLEX 2: More thoughts:
1) There's a big hand-lettered sign on a fence on Scranton Road that says "Cut the fat, not the firefighters. Call Jane Campbell." One more sign of a long, hard budget season, that will only get longer and harder if the Mayor tries to finesse her problems with quiet deals and last-minute rabbits pulled out of Finance Director Baker's hat.
The Mayor says she has told all the department directors to show her how their budgets can be cut by 10%. Just remember -- this is a General Fund shortfall we're discussing. Three-fifths of the General Fund is spent by the Department of Public Safety. Therefore, three-fifths of a 10% across-the-board budget cut will be borne by that department. More than 90% of General Fund dollars in the Public Safety budget go directly to the Police and Fire divisions. So if there's going to be "fat" to cut, that's where the Mayor has to look.
Cut $20 to $25 million from Police and Fire, without cutting patrol officers and firefighters? Lotsa luck. But without some way to get revenue up, that's the quandary the City faces... which is why friends of the firefighters' union are already putting up signs.
2) My rumor mill tells me that at least two Members of Council are already raising money for mayoral runs. Whether this is true or not, it reflects the certainty that political and journalistic behavior on the 2004 budget issue will assume it's all about November 2005.
No potential candidate for Mayor should get a free ride on this. Reporters and citizens need to make all the players come clean on their budget positions, long before this turns into a posture-fest at the Council committee table. If you think people need to be laid off, who goes first? If there's "fat" to be cut, where is it specifically? If you don't have some useful leadership to offer now, don't come to us talking about leadership in 2005. No Schwartzeneggers need apply.
Of course, this can't happen if all the numbers aren't public.
3) I said this in passing a couple of posts back but I want to repeat it emphatically: The 2004 General Fund projections (and the 2003 numbers to date) -- all the projections -- should be posted prominently on the City's website right now, and updated as the Administration's information changes. This issue, far more than lakefront design or even the Convention Center, cries out for an open transparent public process: "We will have a lot less money than we need next year. What should we do about it?"
1) There's a big hand-lettered sign on a fence on Scranton Road that says "Cut the fat, not the firefighters. Call Jane Campbell." One more sign of a long, hard budget season, that will only get longer and harder if the Mayor tries to finesse her problems with quiet deals and last-minute rabbits pulled out of Finance Director Baker's hat.
The Mayor says she has told all the department directors to show her how their budgets can be cut by 10%. Just remember -- this is a General Fund shortfall we're discussing. Three-fifths of the General Fund is spent by the Department of Public Safety. Therefore, three-fifths of a 10% across-the-board budget cut will be borne by that department. More than 90% of General Fund dollars in the Public Safety budget go directly to the Police and Fire divisions. So if there's going to be "fat" to cut, that's where the Mayor has to look.
Cut $20 to $25 million from Police and Fire, without cutting patrol officers and firefighters? Lotsa luck. But without some way to get revenue up, that's the quandary the City faces... which is why friends of the firefighters' union are already putting up signs.
2) My rumor mill tells me that at least two Members of Council are already raising money for mayoral runs. Whether this is true or not, it reflects the certainty that political and journalistic behavior on the 2004 budget issue will assume it's all about November 2005.
No potential candidate for Mayor should get a free ride on this. Reporters and citizens need to make all the players come clean on their budget positions, long before this turns into a posture-fest at the Council committee table. If you think people need to be laid off, who goes first? If there's "fat" to be cut, where is it specifically? If you don't have some useful leadership to offer now, don't come to us talking about leadership in 2005. No Schwartzeneggers need apply.
Of course, this can't happen if all the numbers aren't public.
3) I said this in passing a couple of posts back but I want to repeat it emphatically: The 2004 General Fund projections (and the 2003 numbers to date) -- all the projections -- should be posted prominently on the City's website right now, and updated as the Administration's information changes. This issue, far more than lakefront design or even the Convention Center, cries out for an open transparent public process: "We will have a lot less money than we need next year. What should we do about it?"
10.07.2003
CLEVELAND BUDGET PERPLEX: In response to my last entry, Mark Schumann comments:
But then you've got the old raising-taxes-in-a-recession problem. That's not good either. You can't push the payroll tax any higher, can you?
I think the answer is "Maybe yes, a little bit, temporarily, as an absolute last resort, if the alternative is laying off cops and firefighters". Which, Mark will note, is a highly political frame for the issue... but one which I think reflects reality.
Let me try walking through this step by step:
1) The huge increases in City workforce cited by Crain's and Roldo are mostly fictitious. I went to the library and got the actual employment figures for General Fund departments (not just General fund employees) for the last ten years, and here's what I found:
... The City added a total of about 600 full-time-equivalent positions from 1992 to 2002.
... About 150 of these FTE positions were in Muny Court.
... About 600 FTE positions were added in the Public Safety Department... including 200 police patrol officers, 60 firefighters, and 95 "institutional guards".
... All the other General Fund departments combined lost about 170 FTE positions from 1992 to 2002.
I don't have a clue what the extra Muny Court workers are doing or for how much, but for the sake of argument let's just say they're expendable. At $50,000 per slot, firing them all would save the City $7.5 million. That still leaves more than $42 million in projected deficit to be dealt with (and 150 newly unemployed people on the street).
Now what?
2) The Mayor and her staffers all just took voluntary pay cuts. Let's assume they can get all the non-civil service managers to do this. And that they find unnoticed cash lying around in a few more corners. And that they manage to get the firefighters to back down on overtime. Let's be wildly optimistic and say this all adds up to $6 or $7 million.
Now we're only short $35 million. What's next?
3) What's next is... cutting uniformed safety personnel, and/or a whole lot of part-time recreation and service workers. Which means, in turn -- no swimming pools or rec leagues next summer. No vacant lots mowed. Slower police response. Maybe a fire station or two shut down.
And... hundreds more laid-off City workers on the street.
4) City residents will recognize the scenario outlined above as a sure-fire recipe for starting "the war of all against all"... angry unions, angry residents, furious Councilmen, municipal paralysis from now till November 2005. At which point we get a new Mayor -- probably just in time for recovering revenues to make him or her look like a genius.
As a City resident who prefers my local government to be functional, I'd rather avoid this municipal hellmouth, especially since nobody in Cleveland is really to blame for lower tax revenue. I don't care all that much if Campbell gets a second term, but I don't want the rest of her first term to be a total waste. That might be convenient for prospective opponents, but it would be very inconvenient for the rest of us.
5) So here's what I think Campbell should try:
First, go ahead and shake down every department for maximum non-personnel savings for next year. Be tough about it. Go after the fire overtime. Trim trim trim.
When that's done, and everyone has a good idea what the remaining deficit is gonna be, propose the following deal to the City unions, Council and the voters:
-- No layoffs, but...
-- All City employees, across the board, take a small pay reduction from April through December, enough to cover half the deficit. But this is conditional on...
-- Voter approval of a temporary income tax increase in March, lasting until the end of the year and sufficient to cover the other half. (A quarter-percent increase, for example, would raise $20-25 million over nine months.)
The deal would be a package. If any part of it failed, layoffs would ensue as needed, beginning April 1.
Also part of the deal would be measures to give back some of the tax hike through reductions in other City charges that don't affect the General Fund. First on my list would be an immediate 10% reduction in Cleveland Public Power rates. The City should also look for ways to reduce downtown workers' costs, e.g. cheaper parking options.
6) What would this accomplish? It would be a way to avoid wholesale layoffs, service cuts, and disfunctional government for what might well be the last year of really depressed tax collections. Everyone cooperates, nobody gets hurt too badly, city life doesn't collapse, and we're all still friends. If things are just as bad the following year (which is totally unpredictable) "we'll climb that hill... when we get up to it."
7) Would a tax increase of this kind hurt the local economy? No. It's temporary, it's small, it buys civic peace and cooperation, it's accompanied by some cost savings, it would be great for the city's reputation if Campbell could pull it off. The alternative is more disarray, more political warfare, and more unemployment.
8) Could she pull it off? That's a whole other question. It would be the performance of a lifetime, with a very high risk of failure -- lots of agendas to juggle, very complicated. Layoffs and service cuts would be simpler... but IMHO, a lot more destructive to both the Administration and the city.
9) One final non-pragmatic point: I think most Cleveland residents, being blue-collar, think private employers should make an effort to keep their employees working through temporary slumps, if at all possible. That's one mark of a "good place to work." We respect bosses who temper their desire to maximize profit and minimize loss with a sense of loyalty and fairness to their employees. We know this kind of boss is going to have a more loyal, more productive workforce in the long run.
Well, in this case, we're the boss. What kind of boss are we going to be?
But then you've got the old raising-taxes-in-a-recession problem. That's not good either. You can't push the payroll tax any higher, can you?
I think the answer is "Maybe yes, a little bit, temporarily, as an absolute last resort, if the alternative is laying off cops and firefighters". Which, Mark will note, is a highly political frame for the issue... but one which I think reflects reality.
Let me try walking through this step by step:
1) The huge increases in City workforce cited by Crain's and Roldo are mostly fictitious. I went to the library and got the actual employment figures for General Fund departments (not just General fund employees) for the last ten years, and here's what I found:
... The City added a total of about 600 full-time-equivalent positions from 1992 to 2002.
... About 150 of these FTE positions were in Muny Court.
... About 600 FTE positions were added in the Public Safety Department... including 200 police patrol officers, 60 firefighters, and 95 "institutional guards".
... All the other General Fund departments combined lost about 170 FTE positions from 1992 to 2002.
I don't have a clue what the extra Muny Court workers are doing or for how much, but for the sake of argument let's just say they're expendable. At $50,000 per slot, firing them all would save the City $7.5 million. That still leaves more than $42 million in projected deficit to be dealt with (and 150 newly unemployed people on the street).
Now what?
2) The Mayor and her staffers all just took voluntary pay cuts. Let's assume they can get all the non-civil service managers to do this. And that they find unnoticed cash lying around in a few more corners. And that they manage to get the firefighters to back down on overtime. Let's be wildly optimistic and say this all adds up to $6 or $7 million.
Now we're only short $35 million. What's next?
3) What's next is... cutting uniformed safety personnel, and/or a whole lot of part-time recreation and service workers. Which means, in turn -- no swimming pools or rec leagues next summer. No vacant lots mowed. Slower police response. Maybe a fire station or two shut down.
And... hundreds more laid-off City workers on the street.
4) City residents will recognize the scenario outlined above as a sure-fire recipe for starting "the war of all against all"... angry unions, angry residents, furious Councilmen, municipal paralysis from now till November 2005. At which point we get a new Mayor -- probably just in time for recovering revenues to make him or her look like a genius.
As a City resident who prefers my local government to be functional, I'd rather avoid this municipal hellmouth, especially since nobody in Cleveland is really to blame for lower tax revenue. I don't care all that much if Campbell gets a second term, but I don't want the rest of her first term to be a total waste. That might be convenient for prospective opponents, but it would be very inconvenient for the rest of us.
5) So here's what I think Campbell should try:
First, go ahead and shake down every department for maximum non-personnel savings for next year. Be tough about it. Go after the fire overtime. Trim trim trim.
When that's done, and everyone has a good idea what the remaining deficit is gonna be, propose the following deal to the City unions, Council and the voters:
-- No layoffs, but...
-- All City employees, across the board, take a small pay reduction from April through December, enough to cover half the deficit. But this is conditional on...
-- Voter approval of a temporary income tax increase in March, lasting until the end of the year and sufficient to cover the other half. (A quarter-percent increase, for example, would raise $20-25 million over nine months.)
The deal would be a package. If any part of it failed, layoffs would ensue as needed, beginning April 1.
Also part of the deal would be measures to give back some of the tax hike through reductions in other City charges that don't affect the General Fund. First on my list would be an immediate 10% reduction in Cleveland Public Power rates. The City should also look for ways to reduce downtown workers' costs, e.g. cheaper parking options.
6) What would this accomplish? It would be a way to avoid wholesale layoffs, service cuts, and disfunctional government for what might well be the last year of really depressed tax collections. Everyone cooperates, nobody gets hurt too badly, city life doesn't collapse, and we're all still friends. If things are just as bad the following year (which is totally unpredictable) "we'll climb that hill... when we get up to it."
7) Would a tax increase of this kind hurt the local economy? No. It's temporary, it's small, it buys civic peace and cooperation, it's accompanied by some cost savings, it would be great for the city's reputation if Campbell could pull it off. The alternative is more disarray, more political warfare, and more unemployment.
8) Could she pull it off? That's a whole other question. It would be the performance of a lifetime, with a very high risk of failure -- lots of agendas to juggle, very complicated. Layoffs and service cuts would be simpler... but IMHO, a lot more destructive to both the Administration and the city.
9) One final non-pragmatic point: I think most Cleveland residents, being blue-collar, think private employers should make an effort to keep their employees working through temporary slumps, if at all possible. That's one mark of a "good place to work." We respect bosses who temper their desire to maximize profit and minimize loss with a sense of loyalty and fairness to their employees. We know this kind of boss is going to have a more loyal, more productive workforce in the long run.
Well, in this case, we're the boss. What kind of boss are we going to be?
9.29.2003
WEIRD CONVERGENCE: Two weeks ago Crain's had an editorial blaming the projected Cleveland City deficit on continued increases in City Hall employment (sorry, can't link, it's subscription only). This week Roldo in the City News says virtually the same thing. That's right, Roldo and Brian Tucker... together for the first time anywhere!
I have two comments about this line of attack:
1) If the Campbell Administration really wants to promote e-government, now's the time to start posting all the current finance and job numbers on the City website -- the same numbers Finance Director Baker is giving to City Council. I don't know if Roldo's numbers, or Crains' for that matter, are right or wrong. I don't know, for example, how many of the jobs they say were added in recent years were uniformed safety forces. But as a citizen I'd like to be able to find out for myself, without taking time off work to go hang around City Hall. That's what the Web is good for, and since we're about to have a really nasty municipal melee over numbers, this would be a great time for our City to put the numbers where everyone can see them.
2) The logical inference from the Crain's/Bartimole analysis is that they want City workers laid off, quickly. Let's do the math.
Optimistically, the City might be able to average $50,000 in saved salary and fringes for each worker laid off. (That assumes a fair number of police and/or firefighters in the mix, since those are the only General Fund workforces that have hundreds of people making over $40,000 a year.) So to get rid of a $50 million shortfall we'd have to get rid of a thousand jobs... one-seventh to one-eighth of all General Fund employees.
Leave aside, for now, the question of what this would do to services. What would it do to Cleveland's staggering economy? These are all Cleveland residents we're talking about. Since layoffs would start with the last hired, they'd certainly include large numbers of Black, Hispanic and female workers. Lots of younger residents with families, lots of new homebuyers two payments away from foreclosure. And they'd be going into a job market with (as Roldo points out) 13%-plus unemployment and no end in sight.
What a great scenario. Does this make it a little easier to understand why Campbell and Jackson "gambled on the Cleveland economy climbing out of the recession when preparing the 2003 city budget" instead of cutting the workforce last year, as Crain's and Roldo says they should have?
So maybe the firefighters are exploiting overtime. Maybe the City should have foregone the last class of police recruits. And maybe there are one or two dozen unnecessary staffers on the second floor of City Hall. But none of this comes close to fifty million bucks. That's a revenue problem, caused mostly by national economic failure and state budget politics, and there's no "tough decision" Campbell and Jackson can make to fix it in the next two years.
Taxes or layoffs, that's the choice. Or not, I guess, since everyone seems to agree that a tax hike for municipal services (unlike, say, a convention center and "the arts") is unimaginable... and that struggling to keep Cleveland residents employed by the City in the midst of a horrible private job market is indefensible.
Roldo and Crain's, united at last. Weird.
I have two comments about this line of attack:
1) If the Campbell Administration really wants to promote e-government, now's the time to start posting all the current finance and job numbers on the City website -- the same numbers Finance Director Baker is giving to City Council. I don't know if Roldo's numbers, or Crains' for that matter, are right or wrong. I don't know, for example, how many of the jobs they say were added in recent years were uniformed safety forces. But as a citizen I'd like to be able to find out for myself, without taking time off work to go hang around City Hall. That's what the Web is good for, and since we're about to have a really nasty municipal melee over numbers, this would be a great time for our City to put the numbers where everyone can see them.
2) The logical inference from the Crain's/Bartimole analysis is that they want City workers laid off, quickly. Let's do the math.
Optimistically, the City might be able to average $50,000 in saved salary and fringes for each worker laid off. (That assumes a fair number of police and/or firefighters in the mix, since those are the only General Fund workforces that have hundreds of people making over $40,000 a year.) So to get rid of a $50 million shortfall we'd have to get rid of a thousand jobs... one-seventh to one-eighth of all General Fund employees.
Leave aside, for now, the question of what this would do to services. What would it do to Cleveland's staggering economy? These are all Cleveland residents we're talking about. Since layoffs would start with the last hired, they'd certainly include large numbers of Black, Hispanic and female workers. Lots of younger residents with families, lots of new homebuyers two payments away from foreclosure. And they'd be going into a job market with (as Roldo points out) 13%-plus unemployment and no end in sight.
What a great scenario. Does this make it a little easier to understand why Campbell and Jackson "gambled on the Cleveland economy climbing out of the recession when preparing the 2003 city budget" instead of cutting the workforce last year, as Crain's and Roldo says they should have?
So maybe the firefighters are exploiting overtime. Maybe the City should have foregone the last class of police recruits. And maybe there are one or two dozen unnecessary staffers on the second floor of City Hall. But none of this comes close to fifty million bucks. That's a revenue problem, caused mostly by national economic failure and state budget politics, and there's no "tough decision" Campbell and Jackson can make to fix it in the next two years.
Taxes or layoffs, that's the choice. Or not, I guess, since everyone seems to agree that a tax hike for municipal services (unlike, say, a convention center and "the arts") is unimaginable... and that struggling to keep Cleveland residents employed by the City in the midst of a horrible private job market is indefensible.
Roldo and Crain's, united at last. Weird.
MY CLEVELAND CULTURE FOR THE WEEKEND: Hearing Daniel Thompson read a poem he wrote in a Parchman, Mississippi jail in 1961 -- and then two more -- to a cheering, SRO crowd of immigrant workers and their supporters at Sagrada Familia church Sunday evening.
The event was the Cleveland stop of the national Immigrant Workers Freedom Ride. In the hall to greet the bus riders from Chicago and points west were over a hundred folks from the Dover, Ohio area -- Latin American workers in a poultry factory in Kidron who are campaigning for representation by the United Food and Commercial Workers Local 880. Not to mention lots of people from Sagrada Familia parish, the West Side Hispanic community and the labor movement.
And... Afi-Odelia Scruggs, my favorite former Plain Dealer columnist, who sat down at the keyboard to belt out "Woke Up This Morning With My Mind Set On Freedom", followed by "Jesus Is On the Mainline" in English and Spanish.
Whoo-eee!
Here's Thompson's Parchman jail poem, reprinted from Art Crimes #3 courtesy of Agent of Chaos:
Freedom Rider Graffiti
by Daniel Thompson
Poem scraped with contraband
Fifty-cent piece on the prison wall
In Parchman, Mississippi
Summer, 1961
Know now
No hero here
No how
If ever
Hung
On tree
The way
They done
JC
I'd be
Cross
I guess
Hell
Yes
The event was the Cleveland stop of the national Immigrant Workers Freedom Ride. In the hall to greet the bus riders from Chicago and points west were over a hundred folks from the Dover, Ohio area -- Latin American workers in a poultry factory in Kidron who are campaigning for representation by the United Food and Commercial Workers Local 880. Not to mention lots of people from Sagrada Familia parish, the West Side Hispanic community and the labor movement.
And... Afi-Odelia Scruggs, my favorite former Plain Dealer columnist, who sat down at the keyboard to belt out "Woke Up This Morning With My Mind Set On Freedom", followed by "Jesus Is On the Mainline" in English and Spanish.
Whoo-eee!
Here's Thompson's Parchman jail poem, reprinted from Art Crimes #3 courtesy of Agent of Chaos:
Freedom Rider Graffiti
by Daniel Thompson
Poem scraped with contraband
Fifty-cent piece on the prison wall
In Parchman, Mississippi
Summer, 1961
Know now
No hero here
No how
If ever
Hung
On tree
The way
They done
JC
I'd be
Cross
I guess
Hell
Yes
9.22.2003
DIGITAL VISION BLOG: I've been resisting the urge to write about "digital divide" issues here, because I work on those issues for Cleveland Digital Vision... so it's an area of professional responsibility rather than personal opinion. However, I will break my rule long enough to announce that there's now a Digital Vision weblog associated with the newly rewritten DV website.
I invite you to check it out.
I invite you to check it out.
9.15.2003
George Nemeth at Brewed Fresh Daily responds to the Mayoral Leadership Poll posted here yesterday. George says the Mayor needs a Klingon tactical officer.
9.14.2003
MORE ON CLEVELAND PUBLIC POWER RATES: Public Power Magazine publishes a big statistical directory every Winter with info on municipal electric systems across the U.S. It's not on line, but yesterday I was at the Library and decided to take a look at the 2003 issue. Turns out it lists the total retail kilowatt-hour sales and the total retail revenue from said sales, for each municipal electric utility in 2001. So I did the math...
The average kilowatt-hour sold by Cleveland Public Power in 2001 cost 9.4 cents. (Remember, this averages all sales to customers of all sizes).
There are eleven other municipal electric utilities in the counties surrounding Cleveland. The average price price per kilowatt-hour to customers of the Painesville and Orrville systems was 5.8 cents. Amherst and Wellington charged 6.5 cents; Lodi, 6.7 cents; Wadworth, 6.8 cents; Seville, 7.0 cents; Oberlin, 7.3 cents; Grafton, 7.9 cents; Cuyahoga Falls, 8.0 cents.
Only Hudson came within a penny of Cleveland's price, at 8.6 cents -- still 8% cheaper than CPP.
The City of Columbus, the only other big-city public power system in Ohio, sold its average retail kilowatt-hour in 2001 for 6.6 cents... 30% less than Cleveland Public Power.
Same product. Same kind of ownership (Ohio cities). Same legal requirements. Hell, they're all part of the same state association and go to conferences together! So why does Cleveland Public Power charge so much more than all these other "muny lights"?
The average kilowatt-hour sold by Cleveland Public Power in 2001 cost 9.4 cents. (Remember, this averages all sales to customers of all sizes).
There are eleven other municipal electric utilities in the counties surrounding Cleveland. The average price price per kilowatt-hour to customers of the Painesville and Orrville systems was 5.8 cents. Amherst and Wellington charged 6.5 cents; Lodi, 6.7 cents; Wadworth, 6.8 cents; Seville, 7.0 cents; Oberlin, 7.3 cents; Grafton, 7.9 cents; Cuyahoga Falls, 8.0 cents.
Only Hudson came within a penny of Cleveland's price, at 8.6 cents -- still 8% cheaper than CPP.
The City of Columbus, the only other big-city public power system in Ohio, sold its average retail kilowatt-hour in 2001 for 6.6 cents... 30% less than Cleveland Public Power.
Same product. Same kind of ownership (Ohio cities). Same legal requirements. Hell, they're all part of the same state association and go to conferences together! So why does Cleveland Public Power charge so much more than all these other "muny lights"?
KNIVES COMING OUT AT CITY HALL: So now Cleveland's looking at a $12 million General Fund shortfall this fiscal year, and another $50 million shortage for 2004-05. Funny that no one mentioned this in August when the sales tax hike was on the table. Gee, what do you think this news would have done to a Convention Center ballot issue?
In point of fact, there's nothing at all surprising about the awful state of City revenue. Income tax collections started losing ground in the national 2001 downturn, after almost a decade of steady growth. Two years later our employment base and our taxes are still slipping. George Zeller of the Council on Economic Opportunities points out that new unemployment claims in Cuyahoga County, which were slowing a little earlier this year, have started accelerating again, with over 13,000 new claims filed in July and August -- a 7% increase over the same months in 2002. (See George's data for all Ohio counties here.) The national "jobless recovery" looks a lot like a deepening recession here, which is the worst possible news for a City Hall that gets over half of its operating income from a tax that jobless people don't pay. Add millions in unfunded costs of "homeland security", along with less money in the Local Government Fund (courtesy of Statehouse tax-cut zealots), and Cleveland's budget is in deep doo-doo.
You can take that spotlight off downtown Wi-Fi and arts funding, kids -- the big news in Cleveland politics this Fall and Winter will be cuts in basic services. Already the police and fire unions are saying "Hey, leave us out of this!" -- not so easy when the Safety Department uses about 60 cents of every General Fund dollar (Safety costs 100% of the city income tax, and then some). Campbell and Jackson are both swearing no tax hikes, probably because Byrd-Bennett is next in line for a levy this Spring. Cutting "political fat"? The Mayor could sacrifice a couple of press aides, a planner or two, maybe even a Tech Czar or CTO if things get really desperate... but that would just leave her facing the same awful arithmetic with a crippled staff operation. Saving $62 million will involve much bigger, more damaging sacrifices -- serious layoffs, closed rec centers or fire stations, stuff that makes voters and Councilmen mad.
So if you've missed the knife-fighting at City Hall since Mike White left, cheer up. The knives will be out soon... and not just for cutting budgets. The 2005 election starts now.
WHADDAYA MEAN, LEADERSHIP? Speaking of the 2005 election, I keep reading that the Mayor has lost it already -- two whole years before most voters will pay any attention at all. This seems a little premature, to say the least. But even stranger is the reasoning of the "one-term Jane" predictions, which always seem to come down to her "failure to provide strong leadership"... to not being a "big city mayor", in the words of the Free Times (a big-city newspaper if ever there was one).
Where, exactly, do these guys want to be led to?
You can't accuse Campbell of lacking programs or goals for the City -- look at the humongous laundry list in her State of the City speech.
You can say she bobbled the Convention Center process. But should she have sold it to unwilling voters (the PD), killed it in the cradle (Free Times), or just done whatever the "arts community" wanted? The bottom line is, she personally killed an unpopular tax proposal. I can hardly wait to see an opponent turn that into an issue.
Maybe Whiskey Island is being mishandled, maybe not -- but really, do you think most voters give a fart who buys Whiskey Island and what they do with it? Whiskey Island? Sober up.
On the plus side, no one disputes that Campbell has wrestled the City's books into some kind of order, made it less frightening to work at City Hall (and less depressing to visit), and brought the City's technology vision from around 1984 up to at least 1999. Her press operation needs some work, but the web site is a whole lot better. This all seemed important a year ago. Now I hear you yawning.
In truth, this is all inside baseball. Campbell will have two automatic advantages in the next election -- incumbency and name recognition -- offset by three big vulnerabilities: She's trying to govern a very poor city in very bad times (see above); she's white in a majority-black community; and she has no flair for drama, either in program or personal style. To me, these add up to a difficult re-election no matter what else happens.
But that's a handicapping observation, not a criticism. Handicapping is not civic debate. Honest civic debate starts with the question "What is important and possible for government to accomplish?", and then judges officeholders by whether they do what they should and can.
As Cleveland approaches the midpoint of this Mayor's first term, I think we need this kind of discussion. In fact, I think we owe it to the city, to Campbell, and to ourselves. Citizens, let's put our cards on the table!
CALLAHAN'S MAYORAL LEADERSHIP POLL
Cleveland voters: What will Jane Campbell have to accomplish in the next two years to get your vote for a second term?
Non-Cleveland voters: What will Jane Campbell have to accomplish in the next two years to get a campaign contribution from you toward her re-election?
You can list as many required accomplishments as you like, but please be very specific. Responses like "show more leadership" or "build more collaborations" will be unceremoniously deleted. Also remember to specify whether you vote in the City of Cleveland.
Post your response as a comment here. Or post it someplace else (like your own blog), let me know and I'll link to it.
In point of fact, there's nothing at all surprising about the awful state of City revenue. Income tax collections started losing ground in the national 2001 downturn, after almost a decade of steady growth. Two years later our employment base and our taxes are still slipping. George Zeller of the Council on Economic Opportunities points out that new unemployment claims in Cuyahoga County, which were slowing a little earlier this year, have started accelerating again, with over 13,000 new claims filed in July and August -- a 7% increase over the same months in 2002. (See George's data for all Ohio counties here.) The national "jobless recovery" looks a lot like a deepening recession here, which is the worst possible news for a City Hall that gets over half of its operating income from a tax that jobless people don't pay. Add millions in unfunded costs of "homeland security", along with less money in the Local Government Fund (courtesy of Statehouse tax-cut zealots), and Cleveland's budget is in deep doo-doo.
You can take that spotlight off downtown Wi-Fi and arts funding, kids -- the big news in Cleveland politics this Fall and Winter will be cuts in basic services. Already the police and fire unions are saying "Hey, leave us out of this!" -- not so easy when the Safety Department uses about 60 cents of every General Fund dollar (Safety costs 100% of the city income tax, and then some). Campbell and Jackson are both swearing no tax hikes, probably because Byrd-Bennett is next in line for a levy this Spring. Cutting "political fat"? The Mayor could sacrifice a couple of press aides, a planner or two, maybe even a Tech Czar or CTO if things get really desperate... but that would just leave her facing the same awful arithmetic with a crippled staff operation. Saving $62 million will involve much bigger, more damaging sacrifices -- serious layoffs, closed rec centers or fire stations, stuff that makes voters and Councilmen mad.
So if you've missed the knife-fighting at City Hall since Mike White left, cheer up. The knives will be out soon... and not just for cutting budgets. The 2005 election starts now.
WHADDAYA MEAN, LEADERSHIP? Speaking of the 2005 election, I keep reading that the Mayor has lost it already -- two whole years before most voters will pay any attention at all. This seems a little premature, to say the least. But even stranger is the reasoning of the "one-term Jane" predictions, which always seem to come down to her "failure to provide strong leadership"... to not being a "big city mayor", in the words of the Free Times (a big-city newspaper if ever there was one).
Where, exactly, do these guys want to be led to?
You can't accuse Campbell of lacking programs or goals for the City -- look at the humongous laundry list in her State of the City speech.
You can say she bobbled the Convention Center process. But should she have sold it to unwilling voters (the PD), killed it in the cradle (Free Times), or just done whatever the "arts community" wanted? The bottom line is, she personally killed an unpopular tax proposal. I can hardly wait to see an opponent turn that into an issue.
Maybe Whiskey Island is being mishandled, maybe not -- but really, do you think most voters give a fart who buys Whiskey Island and what they do with it? Whiskey Island? Sober up.
On the plus side, no one disputes that Campbell has wrestled the City's books into some kind of order, made it less frightening to work at City Hall (and less depressing to visit), and brought the City's technology vision from around 1984 up to at least 1999. Her press operation needs some work, but the web site is a whole lot better. This all seemed important a year ago. Now I hear you yawning.
In truth, this is all inside baseball. Campbell will have two automatic advantages in the next election -- incumbency and name recognition -- offset by three big vulnerabilities: She's trying to govern a very poor city in very bad times (see above); she's white in a majority-black community; and she has no flair for drama, either in program or personal style. To me, these add up to a difficult re-election no matter what else happens.
But that's a handicapping observation, not a criticism. Handicapping is not civic debate. Honest civic debate starts with the question "What is important and possible for government to accomplish?", and then judges officeholders by whether they do what they should and can.
As Cleveland approaches the midpoint of this Mayor's first term, I think we need this kind of discussion. In fact, I think we owe it to the city, to Campbell, and to ourselves. Citizens, let's put our cards on the table!
CALLAHAN'S MAYORAL LEADERSHIP POLL
Cleveland voters: What will Jane Campbell have to accomplish in the next two years to get your vote for a second term?
Non-Cleveland voters: What will Jane Campbell have to accomplish in the next two years to get a campaign contribution from you toward her re-election?
You can list as many required accomplishments as you like, but please be very specific. Responses like "show more leadership" or "build more collaborations" will be unceremoniously deleted. Also remember to specify whether you vote in the City of Cleveland.
Post your response as a comment here. Or post it someplace else (like your own blog), let me know and I'll link to it.
9.04.2003
NORTH OHIO 2: George Nemeth excerpted my last entry on Brewed Fresh Daily and got a string of comments from readers. I can't figure out how to link to George's comment page, but here's what's there now:
The concept is great in that it emphasizes the potential and power of the region. However, it ignores the reality that NEO is connected to the rest of Ohio, the Great Lakes, and the Mid West. Statehood is another way of running away from the fact that we are still dependent in some way with the rest of the world. In fact, from my observation, the creation of a duplicate state government by OUR powers-that-be would probably MORE THAN DOUBLE the overhead and bureacracy that we suffer with in Columbus.
steveg
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That's more people than many countries!
Finland with their high tech mobile phone business is just 5 million.
But we really should not be investigating the erection of new boundaries...
Valdis
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
two words...west virginia
mike
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I understand the frustration. Having spent two years on a "task force" dedicated to statewide economic development, I've become suspicious of purported relationships between economy and 19th century political boundaries.
That said, the problem is fractal: the more tightly you frame the geography, the more clearly you see finer economic fault lines.
My home state - Montana - has somewhat fewer than 1 million people spread across an area just slightly smaller than California. There are at least three distinct economies here. I wonder how many economies NEO has?
Dave Bayless
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A problem with this idea is it has no limits. What's to prevent a group of wealthy suburbs to insist they are their own state, and need not contribute to poorer areas? Seperatism is also pretty bad for any economy, witness the carnage in the Quebec economy as they flirted with seperation for the past few decades. It's one reason I didn't move to Montreal.
Jerry
Hmmm... let me think this over and get back to you all.
The concept is great in that it emphasizes the potential and power of the region. However, it ignores the reality that NEO is connected to the rest of Ohio, the Great Lakes, and the Mid West. Statehood is another way of running away from the fact that we are still dependent in some way with the rest of the world. In fact, from my observation, the creation of a duplicate state government by OUR powers-that-be would probably MORE THAN DOUBLE the overhead and bureacracy that we suffer with in Columbus.
steveg
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That's more people than many countries!
Finland with their high tech mobile phone business is just 5 million.
But we really should not be investigating the erection of new boundaries...
Valdis
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
two words...west virginia
mike
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I understand the frustration. Having spent two years on a "task force" dedicated to statewide economic development, I've become suspicious of purported relationships between economy and 19th century political boundaries.
That said, the problem is fractal: the more tightly you frame the geography, the more clearly you see finer economic fault lines.
My home state - Montana - has somewhat fewer than 1 million people spread across an area just slightly smaller than California. There are at least three distinct economies here. I wonder how many economies NEO has?
Dave Bayless
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A problem with this idea is it has no limits. What's to prevent a group of wealthy suburbs to insist they are their own state, and need not contribute to poorer areas? Seperatism is also pretty bad for any economy, witness the carnage in the Quebec economy as they flirted with seperation for the past few decades. It's one reason I didn't move to Montreal.
Jerry
Hmmm... let me think this over and get back to you all.
BIG OLE CRAZY IDEA DEPT... THE STATE OF NORTH OHIO: Travel is broadening, and not just because of the McDonald's at every interchange. In July we spent a couple of weeks at Yellowstone, admiring the teeming herds of mosquitoes and contemplating the cauldron of magma bubbling a couple of miles under our feet. It was fun. And on the way there and back, I got to see Wyoming.
Here are some interesting facts about Wyoming:
It has a total population of 493,000 -- just about 15,000 more than the City of Cleveland.
These half-million people have two United States Senators of their own. They have a state government of their own, too, with all the powers reserved to states by the Constitution: They get to choose their own tax structure, run their own schools and highways, and pass their own laws about everything from zoning to the death penalty, from utility rates to the drinking age.
Wyoming made me think: Why don't northeast Ohioans have our own state? I mean... what does being part of Ohio get us?
The 2000 Census shows twelve states with fewer residents than Cuyahoga County's 1.4 million. If you define "northeast Ohio" as Cuyahoga, plus all the counties touching Cuyahoga, plus all the counties touching them -- fifteen counties in all -- you've got a region of 4.1 million residents, which is more than 27 of the 50 states have. These NEO counties include the nation's fifteenth biggest consumer market and pay about a third of all of the state's taxes.
So why are we continuing to drive 140 miles down I-71, the world's most boring highway, to beg the likes of House Speaker Larry Householder (R-Perry County) and Senate President Doug White (R-Adams County) for the things this region needs? (In case you think this is just a Democrat thing, I'd say the same thing if it was still Vern Riffe (D-Scioto County)... but boy, that seems like a long time ago!) Why don't we keep our own tax money and decide how to spend it ourselves? Who really wants a Bicentennial Barn, anyway?
You want a "regional perspective" and a "regional strategy" for the future? Here's a nice, clear, Big Idea for the New Century... the northeast Ohio statehood movement.
North Carolina. North Dakota. North Ohio. Sounds good to me.
And it certainly makes as much sense as Wyoming.
Here are some interesting facts about Wyoming:
It has a total population of 493,000 -- just about 15,000 more than the City of Cleveland.
These half-million people have two United States Senators of their own. They have a state government of their own, too, with all the powers reserved to states by the Constitution: They get to choose their own tax structure, run their own schools and highways, and pass their own laws about everything from zoning to the death penalty, from utility rates to the drinking age.
Wyoming made me think: Why don't northeast Ohioans have our own state? I mean... what does being part of Ohio get us?
The 2000 Census shows twelve states with fewer residents than Cuyahoga County's 1.4 million. If you define "northeast Ohio" as Cuyahoga, plus all the counties touching Cuyahoga, plus all the counties touching them -- fifteen counties in all -- you've got a region of 4.1 million residents, which is more than 27 of the 50 states have. These NEO counties include the nation's fifteenth biggest consumer market and pay about a third of all of the state's taxes.
So why are we continuing to drive 140 miles down I-71, the world's most boring highway, to beg the likes of House Speaker Larry Householder (R-Perry County) and Senate President Doug White (R-Adams County) for the things this region needs? (In case you think this is just a Democrat thing, I'd say the same thing if it was still Vern Riffe (D-Scioto County)... but boy, that seems like a long time ago!) Why don't we keep our own tax money and decide how to spend it ourselves? Who really wants a Bicentennial Barn, anyway?
You want a "regional perspective" and a "regional strategy" for the future? Here's a nice, clear, Big Idea for the New Century... the northeast Ohio statehood movement.
North Carolina. North Dakota. North Ohio. Sounds good to me.
And it certainly makes as much sense as Wyoming.
9.01.2003
LABOR DAY: I wrote what follows a year ago, for a blogging effort that didn't happen. It was all true then (except the people's names, which are aliases) and not much has changed since. So... here's my Labor Day story.
LABOR DAY 2002 -- When we moved into a house on West 54th Street in 1980, the guy across the street was a UAW member. Jim didn't work at one of the auto plants, though; he built towmotors at a small factory, just six blocks away on Denison Ave. But he was doing all right, until the towmotor plant closed in the manufacturing implosion of the mid-80s. He never found a real job after that, and finally Jim and his wife retired to Florida (I guess his pension was vested).
Jim's daughter Maryann now lives on West 56th. In the last five years she was among twenty thousand Cleveland women who went from welfare to work -- in her case willingly, via some computer training and an office job with a nonprofit that depends on county and private charity funding. (How'd she end up on welfare? The usual: got pregnant, got married, got pregnant again, husband went to prison, etc., etc.) Of course, after 9/11, the onset of Cleveland's recession, and a county budget crunch, the nonprofit had to lay her off. So now Maryann has gone from welfare to unemployment and has no idea what to do next.
Meanwhile Maryann's oldest child, Mark, graduated from a Cleveland public high school, which is a significant accomplishment in a system where only a third of the ninth graders will see a diploma. He's a big kid, a football player, very articulate and polite.. knows how to use a computer, how to talk on the phone, all those soft skills that job trainers get paid to teach the benighted job seekers. I saw him at the Pick-and-Pay two weeks ago and he told me the sad story: Got a minimum-wage counter job at a gas station. Left after a few weeks for a better-paying, long-term factory job; laid off two weeks later. Tried working as a salesman; didn t make the quota. I gave him the number of the hire locally program at a nonprofit organization of small West Side manufacturers where I used to be on the board. A few days later, I called his mom to let Mark know that the hospital where my wife works has a hiring notice out for porters. The July unemployment rate in Cleveland was 12%. Good luck, Mark.
The towmotor factory where Mark's grandfather had a UAW job just twenty years ago -- a modern, single-story factory building next to a major railroad, handy to highways, with lots of parking and a new electric substation installed by the city around 1990 -- is empty. It was sold to an automotive fastener company which fell on tough times and was bought out by Park-Ohio Industries, which specializes in buying, downsizing and saving small companies. Park-Ohio didn t want to use the building to make fasteners but apparently didn t want to sell it, either (maybe because they'd have to do some toxic cleanup first) so they've left it empty, except for occasional rental to a distribution or trucking business.
A few months ago Park-Ohio asked the City to subsidize a plan to move one of its other subsidiaries into the building -- an industrial bucket maker whose home plant in Cicero, Illinois burned down over a year ago, putting two hundred Spanish-speaking workers on the street. Park-Ohio offered to bring those $8-an-hour jobs (but not the Cicero workers) to its vacant plant in Cleveland, if the City would just kick in tax abatement and a big low-interest loan. But the City is bound by a new Living Wage law which requires companies that get public largesse to pay their workers $9 an hour and respect their union organizing rights. Park-Ohio boss Ed Crawford wasn't willing to make any such promises. So the City's economic developers had to take a reluctant pass on the subsidies, which probably killed the deal.
Too bad. If Park-Ohio had brought its bucket factory from Cicero to Denison Ave., then Maryann and Mark, who aren't looking at any other great prospects, might have applied for jobs there at $8 an hour, right in the same building where Jim was building towmotors for UAW wages when I moved into the neighborhood. And I would have had the perfect metaphor for twenty-two years of recovery in Cleveland.
Happy Labor Day, everybody.
LABOR DAY 2002 -- When we moved into a house on West 54th Street in 1980, the guy across the street was a UAW member. Jim didn't work at one of the auto plants, though; he built towmotors at a small factory, just six blocks away on Denison Ave. But he was doing all right, until the towmotor plant closed in the manufacturing implosion of the mid-80s. He never found a real job after that, and finally Jim and his wife retired to Florida (I guess his pension was vested).
Jim's daughter Maryann now lives on West 56th. In the last five years she was among twenty thousand Cleveland women who went from welfare to work -- in her case willingly, via some computer training and an office job with a nonprofit that depends on county and private charity funding. (How'd she end up on welfare? The usual: got pregnant, got married, got pregnant again, husband went to prison, etc., etc.) Of course, after 9/11, the onset of Cleveland's recession, and a county budget crunch, the nonprofit had to lay her off. So now Maryann has gone from welfare to unemployment and has no idea what to do next.
Meanwhile Maryann's oldest child, Mark, graduated from a Cleveland public high school, which is a significant accomplishment in a system where only a third of the ninth graders will see a diploma. He's a big kid, a football player, very articulate and polite.. knows how to use a computer, how to talk on the phone, all those soft skills that job trainers get paid to teach the benighted job seekers. I saw him at the Pick-and-Pay two weeks ago and he told me the sad story: Got a minimum-wage counter job at a gas station. Left after a few weeks for a better-paying, long-term factory job; laid off two weeks later. Tried working as a salesman; didn t make the quota. I gave him the number of the hire locally program at a nonprofit organization of small West Side manufacturers where I used to be on the board. A few days later, I called his mom to let Mark know that the hospital where my wife works has a hiring notice out for porters. The July unemployment rate in Cleveland was 12%. Good luck, Mark.
The towmotor factory where Mark's grandfather had a UAW job just twenty years ago -- a modern, single-story factory building next to a major railroad, handy to highways, with lots of parking and a new electric substation installed by the city around 1990 -- is empty. It was sold to an automotive fastener company which fell on tough times and was bought out by Park-Ohio Industries, which specializes in buying, downsizing and saving small companies. Park-Ohio didn t want to use the building to make fasteners but apparently didn t want to sell it, either (maybe because they'd have to do some toxic cleanup first) so they've left it empty, except for occasional rental to a distribution or trucking business.
A few months ago Park-Ohio asked the City to subsidize a plan to move one of its other subsidiaries into the building -- an industrial bucket maker whose home plant in Cicero, Illinois burned down over a year ago, putting two hundred Spanish-speaking workers on the street. Park-Ohio offered to bring those $8-an-hour jobs (but not the Cicero workers) to its vacant plant in Cleveland, if the City would just kick in tax abatement and a big low-interest loan. But the City is bound by a new Living Wage law which requires companies that get public largesse to pay their workers $9 an hour and respect their union organizing rights. Park-Ohio boss Ed Crawford wasn't willing to make any such promises. So the City's economic developers had to take a reluctant pass on the subsidies, which probably killed the deal.
Too bad. If Park-Ohio had brought its bucket factory from Cicero to Denison Ave., then Maryann and Mark, who aren't looking at any other great prospects, might have applied for jobs there at $8 an hour, right in the same building where Jim was building towmotors for UAW wages when I moved into the neighborhood. And I would have had the perfect metaphor for twenty-two years of recovery in Cleveland.
Happy Labor Day, everybody.
8.22.2003
PUBLIC POWER FAILURE: In the midst of the blackout frenzy, we got our August electric bill yesterday. It said we used 645 kilowatt-hours in the July billing period, for which we owe the utility $80 and change. That's 12.4 cents per kilowatt-hour.
If you read this blog on Monday you saw a link to the PUCO's Ohio Utility Rate Survey for July, wherein we learn that the average cost of a residential kwh in Dayton this Summer is about ten cents; in Columbus and Cincinnati, about nine cents; in Canton, about seven cents. Of course the private utility corporations serving those cities are selling the same product -- 110 volt AC power -- that we get here in Cleveland, and making a profit doing so. Somehow they manage to do it a lot cheaper.
But okay, you say, we already knew that First Energy bills are ridiculously high, especially CEI bills... what's your point?
Well, you see, my bill didn't come from CEI. My ridiculously high bill came from Cleveland Public Power. Good old "Muny Light".
That's right, children. Cleveland Public Power is now one of the highest-priced utilities in the state. In the summertime, Muny Light bills are right up there with Ohio Edison and Toledo Edison, though still a little cheaper than CEI. CPP's Winter rates are a penny lower than its Summer rates, but averaged over the whole year the cost per kwh still tops eleven cents.
That's for a utility that generates none of its own power -- so when First Energy's surrounding grid went down Thursday, CPP's voltage went to zero in an instant, and stayed at zero until First Energy came back on line. That's for a city utility that wasn't even able to provide emergency power to the city's water system.
Over twenty years ago, Dennis Kucinich destroyed his mayoralty to preserve Muny Light as a competitor to CEI. Conscious of the large voter majority that supported Muny then, and continued to punish its enemies in subsequent City Council races, all mayors since Dennis have been vocal public power supporters. They renamed the system Cleveland Public Power, pushed a bond issue to expand it to the Southeast Side and the airport, sold its discount service to big commercial users as well as residents, and bragged about how much they were saving us. They also beefed up CPP's interconnection with "the grid", successfully pursuing a Federal case to force CEI to provide transmission services for power bought elsewhere -- from Niagara, from Kentucky, from downstate utilities and then from CEI/First Energy itself. CPP -- once the third rail of Cleveland politics -- became a consensus issue, a sacred cow.
There were flurries of controversy in the '90s over blackouts in CPP's decrepit West Side system, and some Councilmen made a stink about one modest increase in base rates. But for the most part, CPP receded from Cleveland's political consciousness. Which probably suited CPP's managers just fine -- because nobody was watching as their bills started climbing, and climbing, and climbing.
I'm proud to have been part of the fight to save and expand Muny/CPP many years ago, and I'm as committed as anyone in this city to the idea of a competitive public power system. But I think the time has come -- is, in fact, way overdue -- for a serious airing of CPP's operations and strategy. Why are the bills so high? Why is the system still totally dependent on expensive purchased power, with no baseload generating capacity of its own? Does this system have a plan for the future, and what is it? And how is it going to benefit the city's consumers, for whom the whole point of municipal power is to keep electric service reliable and affordable -- as opposed to vulnerable and expensive?
If you read this blog on Monday you saw a link to the PUCO's Ohio Utility Rate Survey for July, wherein we learn that the average cost of a residential kwh in Dayton this Summer is about ten cents; in Columbus and Cincinnati, about nine cents; in Canton, about seven cents. Of course the private utility corporations serving those cities are selling the same product -- 110 volt AC power -- that we get here in Cleveland, and making a profit doing so. Somehow they manage to do it a lot cheaper.
But okay, you say, we already knew that First Energy bills are ridiculously high, especially CEI bills... what's your point?
Well, you see, my bill didn't come from CEI. My ridiculously high bill came from Cleveland Public Power. Good old "Muny Light".
That's right, children. Cleveland Public Power is now one of the highest-priced utilities in the state. In the summertime, Muny Light bills are right up there with Ohio Edison and Toledo Edison, though still a little cheaper than CEI. CPP's Winter rates are a penny lower than its Summer rates, but averaged over the whole year the cost per kwh still tops eleven cents.
That's for a utility that generates none of its own power -- so when First Energy's surrounding grid went down Thursday, CPP's voltage went to zero in an instant, and stayed at zero until First Energy came back on line. That's for a city utility that wasn't even able to provide emergency power to the city's water system.
Over twenty years ago, Dennis Kucinich destroyed his mayoralty to preserve Muny Light as a competitor to CEI. Conscious of the large voter majority that supported Muny then, and continued to punish its enemies in subsequent City Council races, all mayors since Dennis have been vocal public power supporters. They renamed the system Cleveland Public Power, pushed a bond issue to expand it to the Southeast Side and the airport, sold its discount service to big commercial users as well as residents, and bragged about how much they were saving us. They also beefed up CPP's interconnection with "the grid", successfully pursuing a Federal case to force CEI to provide transmission services for power bought elsewhere -- from Niagara, from Kentucky, from downstate utilities and then from CEI/First Energy itself. CPP -- once the third rail of Cleveland politics -- became a consensus issue, a sacred cow.
There were flurries of controversy in the '90s over blackouts in CPP's decrepit West Side system, and some Councilmen made a stink about one modest increase in base rates. But for the most part, CPP receded from Cleveland's political consciousness. Which probably suited CPP's managers just fine -- because nobody was watching as their bills started climbing, and climbing, and climbing.
I'm proud to have been part of the fight to save and expand Muny/CPP many years ago, and I'm as committed as anyone in this city to the idea of a competitive public power system. But I think the time has come -- is, in fact, way overdue -- for a serious airing of CPP's operations and strategy. Why are the bills so high? Why is the system still totally dependent on expensive purchased power, with no baseload generating capacity of its own? Does this system have a plan for the future, and what is it? And how is it going to benefit the city's consumers, for whom the whole point of municipal power is to keep electric service reliable and affordable -- as opposed to vulnerable and expensive?
8.20.2003
DEAD CENTER: Well, it wasn't exactly an act of political courage. But it was an act of definitive common sense. And it will cost her politically, though not as much as the thumping she would have taken on Election Day if she'd stuck with the plan. So... two cheers from the bleachers for Mayor Campbell for pulling the plug on a Convention Center sales tax.
The Plain Dealer, in its usual tin-eared fashion, editorializes that "Public support for a tax increase to build a new convention center evaporated, in part, because public officials made the fatal error of never trying to convince their constituents of the need for such a facility." Wrong, wrong, wrong! Public support never existed for a tax increase for this thing, and no amount of "arts and culture" window dressing was going to change that. Despite endless hours of friendly public forums, and acres of front-page newsprint, the real Convention Center enthusiasts -- the Growth Association, Cleveland Tomorrow and the PD editorial board --never made their case in a way that made a lick of sense to ordinary voters. Why did they expect City Hall to do it for them?
We expect a lot of things from elected officials, but telling us what to think is not usually on the list. Nor is walking the plank for something their constituents just don't want.
So the Mayor has spared us an expensive, annoying and pointless election fight. It's the right thing to do, no matter how awkward it looks and no matter how much abuse she's letting herself in for. And politicians who do the right thing deserve some applause.
So here's mine. Good for you, Mayor!
Now can we move on to some real issues? We've got this water plant that needs a backup power supply...
The Plain Dealer, in its usual tin-eared fashion, editorializes that "Public support for a tax increase to build a new convention center evaporated, in part, because public officials made the fatal error of never trying to convince their constituents of the need for such a facility." Wrong, wrong, wrong! Public support never existed for a tax increase for this thing, and no amount of "arts and culture" window dressing was going to change that. Despite endless hours of friendly public forums, and acres of front-page newsprint, the real Convention Center enthusiasts -- the Growth Association, Cleveland Tomorrow and the PD editorial board --never made their case in a way that made a lick of sense to ordinary voters. Why did they expect City Hall to do it for them?
We expect a lot of things from elected officials, but telling us what to think is not usually on the list. Nor is walking the plank for something their constituents just don't want.
So the Mayor has spared us an expensive, annoying and pointless election fight. It's the right thing to do, no matter how awkward it looks and no matter how much abuse she's letting herself in for. And politicians who do the right thing deserve some applause.
So here's mine. Good for you, Mayor!
Now can we move on to some real issues? We've got this water plant that needs a backup power supply...
8.19.2003
BLACKOUT FALLOUT 3: Two more interesting takes on the Great Blackout and First Energy's role in it:
Ohio Citizen Action asks the NAERC to protect First Energy employees from reprisals for cooperating with the blackout investigation. We've been through this before with the Davis-Besse mess, says CA's Shari Weir.
And Amory Lovins' Rocky Mountain Institute says "We told you so twenty years ago!" The right answer, says RMI's Kyle Datta in this essay (PDF format), isn't more power lines and centralized generating plants, but local distributed generation systems combined with efficiency. All you geeks should find this part interesting:
Datta likened our current grid to a centralized mainframe with limited access points. The worldwide web, on the other hand, distributes computing power, and by its dispersed nature means information is at much less risk, he said.
''The web is a very good model of what we should be doing with electricity. The grid should exist, but it should complement electricity storing and generating devices on our office buildings, our homes, roofs, in our basements, and ultimately in our fuel cell driven automobiles. Putting all our eggs in one basket is a predictable catastrophe waiting to happen.''
Ohio Citizen Action asks the NAERC to protect First Energy employees from reprisals for cooperating with the blackout investigation. We've been through this before with the Davis-Besse mess, says CA's Shari Weir.
And Amory Lovins' Rocky Mountain Institute says "We told you so twenty years ago!" The right answer, says RMI's Kyle Datta in this essay (PDF format), isn't more power lines and centralized generating plants, but local distributed generation systems combined with efficiency. All you geeks should find this part interesting:
Datta likened our current grid to a centralized mainframe with limited access points. The worldwide web, on the other hand, distributes computing power, and by its dispersed nature means information is at much less risk, he said.
''The web is a very good model of what we should be doing with electricity. The grid should exist, but it should complement electricity storing and generating devices on our office buildings, our homes, roofs, in our basements, and ultimately in our fuel cell driven automobiles. Putting all our eggs in one basket is a predictable catastrophe waiting to happen.''
8.18.2003
BLACKOUT FALLOUT 2: Whenever a politician (or CEO) says "It's not the time for finger-pointing", you know there's something they hope won't come to your attention. Thus we saw Congressman Steve LaTourette on Action News last night as the anti-Kucinich, asking us to refrain from blaming anyone for the Great Blackout, and regretting that the Creaky Old Grid Issue had been sidelined in Congress by less urgent energy controversies like wilderness drilling. For some reason the Action NewsDroids did not take the opportunity to ask LaTourette how he had voted on a 2001 proposal by California Congressman Sam Farr to create a Federal financing fund for power grid upgrades. Here's an excerpt from Buzzflash's (very partisan) take on the story:
In June of 2001, Bush opposed and the congressional GOP voted down legislation to provide $350 million worth of loans to modernize the nation's power grid because of known weaknesses in reliability and capacity. Supporters of the amendment pointed to studies by the Energy Department showing that the grid was in desperate need of upgrades as proof that their legislation sponsored by U.S. Rep. Sam Farr (D-CA) should pass.
Unfortunately, the Bush Administration lobbied against it and the Republicans voted it down three separate times: First, on a straight party line in the U.S. House Appropriations Committee, then on a straight party line the U.S. House Rules Committee, and finally on a party line on the floor of the full House [Roll Call Vote #169, 6/20/01].
I personally think finger-pointing is a vital political exercise, and it sure looks like some important people screwed up royally in this case -- starting, it now appears, with our old friends at First Energy Corporation, who failed to notice and/or notify their neighbors that something very bad was happening to their transmission lines.
First Energy's current position is that it might not have been them, after all. We'll see.
Meanwhile, here are two things you might bear in mind as the utilities and their political friends try to get those fingers pointing elsewhere -- e.g. at revenue constraints, regulators and environmentalists getting in the way:
1. First Energy's Ohio subsidiaries -- CEI, Ohio Edison and Toledo Edison -- are collecting lots more money for their product than other electric companies in the state... you know, the ones that didn't crash. See the Public Utilities Commission's latest Ohio Utility Rate Survey (July, 2003) for details.
2. First Energy has proposed exactly one new transmission project to the Ohio Power Siting Board since 1999 -- the thirteen-mile Hanna-Shalersville line in Portage County. The application to the OPSB was filed in March 2000. It was approved in ten months flat, and completed and energized by April 2002. The OPSB staff report shows no opposition from environmentalists or anyone else -- and if there was any, it sure didn't slow the process down. Neither First Energy nor its subsidiaries have any other transmission grid upgrade applications pending. You can look it all up at the Power Siting Board's website.
In June of 2001, Bush opposed and the congressional GOP voted down legislation to provide $350 million worth of loans to modernize the nation's power grid because of known weaknesses in reliability and capacity. Supporters of the amendment pointed to studies by the Energy Department showing that the grid was in desperate need of upgrades as proof that their legislation sponsored by U.S. Rep. Sam Farr (D-CA) should pass.
Unfortunately, the Bush Administration lobbied against it and the Republicans voted it down three separate times: First, on a straight party line in the U.S. House Appropriations Committee, then on a straight party line the U.S. House Rules Committee, and finally on a party line on the floor of the full House [Roll Call Vote #169, 6/20/01].
I personally think finger-pointing is a vital political exercise, and it sure looks like some important people screwed up royally in this case -- starting, it now appears, with our old friends at First Energy Corporation, who failed to notice and/or notify their neighbors that something very bad was happening to their transmission lines.
First Energy's current position is that it might not have been them, after all. We'll see.
Meanwhile, here are two things you might bear in mind as the utilities and their political friends try to get those fingers pointing elsewhere -- e.g. at revenue constraints, regulators and environmentalists getting in the way:
1. First Energy's Ohio subsidiaries -- CEI, Ohio Edison and Toledo Edison -- are collecting lots more money for their product than other electric companies in the state... you know, the ones that didn't crash. See the Public Utilities Commission's latest Ohio Utility Rate Survey (July, 2003) for details.
2. First Energy has proposed exactly one new transmission project to the Ohio Power Siting Board since 1999 -- the thirteen-mile Hanna-Shalersville line in Portage County. The application to the OPSB was filed in March 2000. It was approved in ten months flat, and completed and energized by April 2002. The OPSB staff report shows no opposition from environmentalists or anyone else -- and if there was any, it sure didn't slow the process down. Neither First Energy nor its subsidiaries have any other transmission grid upgrade applications pending. You can look it all up at the Power Siting Board's website.
8.15.2003
BLACKOUT FALLOUT: As I write this at 4 pm, the lights seem to be back on in most of greater Cleveland -- at least intermittently -- but people are still boiling water or picking it up from the National Guard. And it looks like nobody got killed driving home through blacked-out intersections. But among the questions emerging from this incident, here's one for the top of the local list: Why wasn't backup power available for the City's own water pumping stations and traffic lights?
Hospitals were able to use their emergency backup systems. So did Hopkins Airport, which reportedly had air traffic control back in operation by 8 pm. So did most radio stations... but not the City's Divisions of Water and Traffic Engineering.
This is especially puzzling because the City has its own electric utility, complete with engineers, expert system operators and line crews. Cleveland Public Power has spent more than $50 million on expansion since 1990. In recent years, CPP has also invested a fair amount to improve the reliability of its older transmission stations and distribution lines. But as many customers learned last night, none of that really matters if the power you're distributing suddenly cuts off, and you have no alternative source to turn to.
Why CPP hasn't done something in the last twenty years to rebuild its own generating capacity is a topic for another day. But at the very least, you would think the City utility could have taken steps to create backup power for the City's own vital facilities.
Wouldn't you?
Hospitals were able to use their emergency backup systems. So did Hopkins Airport, which reportedly had air traffic control back in operation by 8 pm. So did most radio stations... but not the City's Divisions of Water and Traffic Engineering.
This is especially puzzling because the City has its own electric utility, complete with engineers, expert system operators and line crews. Cleveland Public Power has spent more than $50 million on expansion since 1990. In recent years, CPP has also invested a fair amount to improve the reliability of its older transmission stations and distribution lines. But as many customers learned last night, none of that really matters if the power you're distributing suddenly cuts off, and you have no alternative source to turn to.
Why CPP hasn't done something in the last twenty years to rebuild its own generating capacity is a topic for another day. But at the very least, you would think the City utility could have taken steps to create backup power for the City's own vital facilities.
Wouldn't you?
8.13.2003
An alert reader might notice that the last entry in this "diary" is fifty-one days old. It's like this: First I went to a conference. Then a week later I went with family to Yellowstone, where we stayed for two weeks out of range of cell phones, let alone Blogger. When we got back it was already a month since I'd posted, a lot of work was backed up and I just kept letting it slide.
Until now. Hi there. Did you miss me?
Hmmm. Well, anyway...
THE FERRY AGAIN: My personal favorite downtown development project, the Cleveland-to-Port-Stanley ferry, was in the news yesterday with this PD article and a WCPN story. The good news is that the Port Authority is moving forward with its Federally funded feasibility study, and hyping the concept. The bad news, from the PD:
The port doesn't plan to subsidize the service, beyond lobbying for federal money to build a terminal, so it needs to find an operator willing to shoulder the risk.
Now this is bizarre. The Port, which has used its bonds to finance everything from the Rock Hall to the Applied Industrial Technologies headquarters in Midtown, doesn't want to invest a penny of its own resources to draw new international passenger and freight business to its own docks!
Stay tuned, more to come.
Until now. Hi there. Did you miss me?
Hmmm. Well, anyway...
THE FERRY AGAIN: My personal favorite downtown development project, the Cleveland-to-Port-Stanley ferry, was in the news yesterday with this PD article and a WCPN story. The good news is that the Port Authority is moving forward with its Federally funded feasibility study, and hyping the concept. The bad news, from the PD:
The port doesn't plan to subsidize the service, beyond lobbying for federal money to build a terminal, so it needs to find an operator willing to shoulder the risk.
Now this is bizarre. The Port, which has used its bonds to finance everything from the Rock Hall to the Applied Industrial Technologies headquarters in Midtown, doesn't want to invest a penny of its own resources to draw new international passenger and freight business to its own docks!
Stay tuned, more to come.
6.23.2003
GROWING CLEVELAND'S POPULATION -- UNA PROPOSICION MODESTA: Mayor Campbell promised in her State of the City Address to reverse Cleveland's population decline and get back to 500,000 residents by the 2010 Census. That means gaining 25,000 folks in the next seven years, after losing about 27,000 in the '90s. This promise is in the news again because the Cleveland Foundation just gave the City $300,000 to help.
I think a lot of the Mayor's themes and proposals make perfect sense on their own terms. But if population growth is the point, there was one very strange omission from her speech and charts -- the word "Hispanic".
From 1989 to 1999, while the city's overall population shrank by 5%, those who identified themselves as "Hispanic" increased their numbers by 55%, going from 4% to 7% of Cleveland residents. They climbed to 15% of the city's West Side, where most live. A couple of West Side neighborhoods -- Clark-Fulton and Stockyards -- actually showed population increases in the 2000 census, due entirely to new families from Puerto Rico and Latin America. West Boulevard, Old Brooklyn, Jefferson, Detroit-Shoreway, Cudell, and Brooklyn Centre also saw big numerical and percentage increases in their Hispanic neighbors. With Hispanics now the biggest and fastest-growing minority in the U.S. overall, there's no reason to think Cleveland's neighborhoods can't continue to benefit on both sides of the river.
So, on the principle that any plan for growth should build first on our strengths, a modest proposal: Cleveland should set out to double our Hispanic population by becoming the Midwest's most Spanish-friendly city.
Yup... I'm saying we should become bilingual. Public communications, signs, local websites, all that stuff. A modest, symbolic start would be a word or two of Spanish on the City's website. More substantively, the schools could push conversational and written Spanish as a standard part of the curriculum. Government and foundation funders could try funding translation services for community and social service groups, especially on the West Side. The business community could make a serious effort to get at least one full-time Spanish-language station on the radio dial.
In my West Side experience, most Hispanic residents work pretty hard at getting fluent in English if they aren't already. This is a good and admirable thing. But wouldn't the city stand to gain from a reputation as a place you can move to and get established, even if your English isn't quite ready for prime time... like the computer science graduate from San Juan I met a few years ago, who could teach Windows classes and design a database, but couldn't find a job because she's a slow language learner? Wouldn't all the rest of us -- especially our kids -- benefit from learning a little of the second most common Western language? And wouldn't Cleveland be better off as a more cosmopolitan, more "international" city and region?
Esto es solamente una idea...
(Hey, did Babel Fish get that right?)
I think a lot of the Mayor's themes and proposals make perfect sense on their own terms. But if population growth is the point, there was one very strange omission from her speech and charts -- the word "Hispanic".
From 1989 to 1999, while the city's overall population shrank by 5%, those who identified themselves as "Hispanic" increased their numbers by 55%, going from 4% to 7% of Cleveland residents. They climbed to 15% of the city's West Side, where most live. A couple of West Side neighborhoods -- Clark-Fulton and Stockyards -- actually showed population increases in the 2000 census, due entirely to new families from Puerto Rico and Latin America. West Boulevard, Old Brooklyn, Jefferson, Detroit-Shoreway, Cudell, and Brooklyn Centre also saw big numerical and percentage increases in their Hispanic neighbors. With Hispanics now the biggest and fastest-growing minority in the U.S. overall, there's no reason to think Cleveland's neighborhoods can't continue to benefit on both sides of the river.
So, on the principle that any plan for growth should build first on our strengths, a modest proposal: Cleveland should set out to double our Hispanic population by becoming the Midwest's most Spanish-friendly city.
Yup... I'm saying we should become bilingual. Public communications, signs, local websites, all that stuff. A modest, symbolic start would be a word or two of Spanish on the City's website. More substantively, the schools could push conversational and written Spanish as a standard part of the curriculum. Government and foundation funders could try funding translation services for community and social service groups, especially on the West Side. The business community could make a serious effort to get at least one full-time Spanish-language station on the radio dial.
In my West Side experience, most Hispanic residents work pretty hard at getting fluent in English if they aren't already. This is a good and admirable thing. But wouldn't the city stand to gain from a reputation as a place you can move to and get established, even if your English isn't quite ready for prime time... like the computer science graduate from San Juan I met a few years ago, who could teach Windows classes and design a database, but couldn't find a job because she's a slow language learner? Wouldn't all the rest of us -- especially our kids -- benefit from learning a little of the second most common Western language? And wouldn't Cleveland be better off as a more cosmopolitan, more "international" city and region?
Esto es solamente una idea...
(Hey, did Babel Fish get that right?)
6.22.2003
PRIORITIES: Here's something to ponder about Cleveland's economic development strategy:
In the last census, Cleveland had a strikingly low percentage of four-year college graduates among our working-age residents... only 11.4%, which essentially tied us with Detroit for last place among the 50 biggest U.S. cities. Among the same 50 cities, we ranked 45th in the percentage of our young adults (18-24) enrolled in college or graduate school. (I'll send you the spreadsheet if you're curious... write me here.)
The "business community recommendations" for a new Convention Center include a new quarter-percent increase in Cuyahoga County's sales and use tax to help pay the debt service on the proposed bond issue. That dedicated sales tax would raise about $40 million a year, based on the county's existing 1% tax which raised $157 million in 2002.
Tuition and book costs to get an associate degree at Tri-C, and then finish a bachelor's degree at CSU, add up to about $16,000. So the annual revenue from that proposed Convention Center sales tax hike could send 2,500 young Clevelanders to college -- full ride. In ten years, it could pay for enough full scholarships to double Cleveland's current supply of working-age college grads!
Whaddaya think? What's a better investment for the city's future... 25,000 college-educated workers, or a Convention Center?
In the last census, Cleveland had a strikingly low percentage of four-year college graduates among our working-age residents... only 11.4%, which essentially tied us with Detroit for last place among the 50 biggest U.S. cities. Among the same 50 cities, we ranked 45th in the percentage of our young adults (18-24) enrolled in college or graduate school. (I'll send you the spreadsheet if you're curious... write me here.)
The "business community recommendations" for a new Convention Center include a new quarter-percent increase in Cuyahoga County's sales and use tax to help pay the debt service on the proposed bond issue. That dedicated sales tax would raise about $40 million a year, based on the county's existing 1% tax which raised $157 million in 2002.
Tuition and book costs to get an associate degree at Tri-C, and then finish a bachelor's degree at CSU, add up to about $16,000. So the annual revenue from that proposed Convention Center sales tax hike could send 2,500 young Clevelanders to college -- full ride. In ten years, it could pay for enough full scholarships to double Cleveland's current supply of working-age college grads!
Whaddaya think? What's a better investment for the city's future... 25,000 college-educated workers, or a Convention Center?
6.20.2003
ON THE TRAIL OF THE BUFFALO: I don't have much to say about the big Convention Center issues yet, like who should get the bond fees or which tax-abated hotel it should be closest to. (Though it was kind of striking to have the business guys propose a new quarter-percent county sales tax hike on the same day the Ohio General Assembly raised the state sales tax 1%. And a 2% Convention Center tax on restaurant bills... did you see that coming?)
But here's something I feel I should pass along:
Maybe you heard Growth Assn President Dennis Eckart explaining to WCPN today that the City has to show its commitment to build a CC in order to compete with... Cincinnati and Buffalo. Yes, Buffalo. Now, as it happens, my weekly Net reading includes the Buffalo Report, a Roldo-esque site produced by University of Buffalo professor Bruce Jackson. And just the other day, Jackson posted a couple of articles (this and this) about a proposal to sell Buffalo's convention center to the Seneca Nation for a gambling casino.
Think there might be something they're not telling us?
But here's something I feel I should pass along:
Maybe you heard Growth Assn President Dennis Eckart explaining to WCPN today that the City has to show its commitment to build a CC in order to compete with... Cincinnati and Buffalo. Yes, Buffalo. Now, as it happens, my weekly Net reading includes the Buffalo Report, a Roldo-esque site produced by University of Buffalo professor Bruce Jackson. And just the other day, Jackson posted a couple of articles (this and this) about a proposal to sell Buffalo's convention center to the Seneca Nation for a gambling casino.
Think there might be something they're not telling us?
6.17.2003
THE FREE TIMES CRUSADE (continued from yesterday): Why do I have my briefs in a knot about this, you ask? Good question.
It's not that I have a problem with WiFi. On the contrary. I love my home 802.11b network, over which this comes to you. We've been building a little hotspot at the West Side Community Computer Center, where our DSL is now shared by a GED classroom down the hall and a few offices across the parking lot... and soon by some nearby homes. I've been happy to help the folks who are creating a community WiFi in Tremont. I've spent many happy hours studying homebrew antenna designs.
And I certainly have no problem with the City promoting digital infrastructure or even owning it. Hey, I'm a Muny Light booster from way back. If the FT was calling on the city to get out on the leading edge by creating the nation's first municipal wireless network -- all over Cleveland -- I'd be right there, a hunnerd percent. A little skeptical, maybe... but right there.
Furthermore, let me state for the record that I'm glad the Free Times is back. And glad Dave Eden is running it.
So my problem is not with WiFi, City infrastructure-building or the Free Times itself. My problem is with the aggressive New Elitism that pervades the FT's argument in this case. You know what I mean; you hear it all around you. The New Elite says: The city's greatest need is smart, entrepreneurial, educated young people ("like us" is always the unspoken subtext.) We are the "creative class" and we need to be attracted. Entertained. Catered to. So get with it, City Hall, and give us free, fast Internet access wherever we go, so we'll think Cleveland is cool. Well, anyway, the parts of Cleveland where people like us live... the rest is, you know, not our problem.
Jane Campbell and Tim Mueller work for a City whose people are over 50% African-American and nearly 10% Hispanic. Only 17% of our young adults (25 to 34) have finished college, and 22% of that same demographic haven't finished high school. Our average household income is about $26,000 a year, which makes us 49th among the fifty biggest U.S. cities. Our current jobless rate may be unknowable, if George Zeller is right, but there's no doubt that that we have at least 25,000 to 30,000 residents out of work, and many thousands more working part-time.
There are many reasonable arguments about what it will take to improve this situation, including Richard Florida's theory of a "creative class" spurring entrepreneurial growth. There's a case to be made for public investment in high tech infrastructure. There's a case to be made for continuing to pour money into downtown -- and then a sub-case for concentrated residential development there. I suppose there's even a case to be made for "coolness", whatever that might mean.
But Clevelanders who argue these fashionable theories need to recognize what they're proposing, which is trickle-down economic development. And the Free Times proposition -- let's make Cleveland cool by giving free digital infrastructure to the creative class in its downtown neighborhood -- is such a pure version of the New Elite Theory that it approaches satire.
Now, I don't think the FT editors actually believe what they appear to be arguing. In fact, I'm sure that many of those now burbling with New Elite enthusiasm -- very nice, compassionate, civic-minded people -- think of themselves as grassrootsy, populist, small-d democrats.
All I can say is... listen to yourselves.
Even better, listen to some other people. Spend some time in the parts of this city that aren't ever going to be cool, but where the large majority of your fellow citizens live. Talk with some Clevelanders who don't have college degrees and laptops. Ask what they would think about their Mayor and Council spending public money to provide free Internet service to downtown and maybe a couple of other selected islands of "the creative class", just because, well, they'd like to have it.
Where's Roldo when you really need him?
It's not that I have a problem with WiFi. On the contrary. I love my home 802.11b network, over which this comes to you. We've been building a little hotspot at the West Side Community Computer Center, where our DSL is now shared by a GED classroom down the hall and a few offices across the parking lot... and soon by some nearby homes. I've been happy to help the folks who are creating a community WiFi in Tremont. I've spent many happy hours studying homebrew antenna designs.
And I certainly have no problem with the City promoting digital infrastructure or even owning it. Hey, I'm a Muny Light booster from way back. If the FT was calling on the city to get out on the leading edge by creating the nation's first municipal wireless network -- all over Cleveland -- I'd be right there, a hunnerd percent. A little skeptical, maybe... but right there.
Furthermore, let me state for the record that I'm glad the Free Times is back. And glad Dave Eden is running it.
So my problem is not with WiFi, City infrastructure-building or the Free Times itself. My problem is with the aggressive New Elitism that pervades the FT's argument in this case. You know what I mean; you hear it all around you. The New Elite says: The city's greatest need is smart, entrepreneurial, educated young people ("like us" is always the unspoken subtext.) We are the "creative class" and we need to be attracted. Entertained. Catered to. So get with it, City Hall, and give us free, fast Internet access wherever we go, so we'll think Cleveland is cool. Well, anyway, the parts of Cleveland where people like us live... the rest is, you know, not our problem.
Jane Campbell and Tim Mueller work for a City whose people are over 50% African-American and nearly 10% Hispanic. Only 17% of our young adults (25 to 34) have finished college, and 22% of that same demographic haven't finished high school. Our average household income is about $26,000 a year, which makes us 49th among the fifty biggest U.S. cities. Our current jobless rate may be unknowable, if George Zeller is right, but there's no doubt that that we have at least 25,000 to 30,000 residents out of work, and many thousands more working part-time.
There are many reasonable arguments about what it will take to improve this situation, including Richard Florida's theory of a "creative class" spurring entrepreneurial growth. There's a case to be made for public investment in high tech infrastructure. There's a case to be made for continuing to pour money into downtown -- and then a sub-case for concentrated residential development there. I suppose there's even a case to be made for "coolness", whatever that might mean.
But Clevelanders who argue these fashionable theories need to recognize what they're proposing, which is trickle-down economic development. And the Free Times proposition -- let's make Cleveland cool by giving free digital infrastructure to the creative class in its downtown neighborhood -- is such a pure version of the New Elite Theory that it approaches satire.
Now, I don't think the FT editors actually believe what they appear to be arguing. In fact, I'm sure that many of those now burbling with New Elite enthusiasm -- very nice, compassionate, civic-minded people -- think of themselves as grassrootsy, populist, small-d democrats.
All I can say is... listen to yourselves.
Even better, listen to some other people. Spend some time in the parts of this city that aren't ever going to be cool, but where the large majority of your fellow citizens live. Talk with some Clevelanders who don't have college degrees and laptops. Ask what they would think about their Mayor and Council spending public money to provide free Internet service to downtown and maybe a couple of other selected islands of "the creative class", just because, well, they'd like to have it.
Where's Roldo when you really need him?
6.16.2003
FREE TIMES CRUSADE FOR FREE DOWNTOWN INTERNET, PART 2: Okay, the new Free Times is out and we have the second installment (in City Chatter, but not on the FT web site) of David Eden's demand for City Hall to provide free wireless Internet service all over downtown. It seems that Tim Mueller says there'll be Wi-Fi on Mall C in September, and there's talk of a Wi-Fi corridor all along the Euclid Corridor from Public Square to CWRU. But this is not enough to make the Free Times Wi-Fi Warriors happy. It's just not up to the standard set by "other cities [that] are using Wi-Fi... to attract the entrepreneurial and creative classes..."
What other cities? Well, last week's editorial cited New York and Pittsburgh ("even Pittsburgh") as cities that "are making free wireless Internet access available in downtown areas, and other 'hot spots,' as part of an effort to attract visitors and companies to business districts". Here's where the language gets a little loose. Neither the City of New York nor the City of Pittsburgh is doing what the FT wants the City of Cleveland to do, i.e. deploy a free Wi-Fi grid throughout downtown at public expense.
In New York, there's a grassroots organization called NYCwireless creating voluntary hot spots throughout the boroughs (here's their system map). And in Pittsburgh, another nonprofit called Three Rivers Connect -- with much heavier corporate leadership, but still private -- has one small wireless network around its office downtown, pilot wi-fi projects on the North and East Sides and an experimental commercial network in the Oakland (University of Pittsburgh) area. The Oakland net is actually run by a company called Grok and costs $19 a month.
There is no indication on either website that their purpose is to "attract visitors and companies to business districts", let alone the "entrepreneurial and creative classes..." (Maybe they never met Richard Florida.) Three Rivers Connect does all kinds of things to promote IT and broadband throughout the Pittsburgh area. NYCwireless is one of the "wireless community networks" -- second generation FreeNets -- that've popped up all over the world; its mission statement says: NYCwireless promotes open wireless hotspots in public spaces throughout the New York region... NYCwireless intends to work with public and other nonprofit organizations to bring broadband wireless Internet to under-served communities.
Get that part about "underserved communities"? Read through the NYCwireless site and you get a sense of creative New Yorkers cooperating, with their own resources, to create something for the benefit of the whole community. Read the Free Times (not to mention a few local blogs) and you get a picture of a "Cleveland creative class" that's -- well, just kind of whiny. And in the case of its journalistic spokesnerds, a little loose with its facts.
Incidentally, the one city mentioned by the FT where the city government itself is sponsoring downtown WiFi as an ED initiative is Long Beach, CA. The "HotZone" covers four blocks. They also plan to WiFi their airport and their convention center. Sounds a lot like Cleveland, doesn't it? Read about it here.
What other cities? Well, last week's editorial cited New York and Pittsburgh ("even Pittsburgh") as cities that "are making free wireless Internet access available in downtown areas, and other 'hot spots,' as part of an effort to attract visitors and companies to business districts". Here's where the language gets a little loose. Neither the City of New York nor the City of Pittsburgh is doing what the FT wants the City of Cleveland to do, i.e. deploy a free Wi-Fi grid throughout downtown at public expense.
In New York, there's a grassroots organization called NYCwireless creating voluntary hot spots throughout the boroughs (here's their system map). And in Pittsburgh, another nonprofit called Three Rivers Connect -- with much heavier corporate leadership, but still private -- has one small wireless network around its office downtown, pilot wi-fi projects on the North and East Sides and an experimental commercial network in the Oakland (University of Pittsburgh) area. The Oakland net is actually run by a company called Grok and costs $19 a month.
There is no indication on either website that their purpose is to "attract visitors and companies to business districts", let alone the "entrepreneurial and creative classes..." (Maybe they never met Richard Florida.) Three Rivers Connect does all kinds of things to promote IT and broadband throughout the Pittsburgh area. NYCwireless is one of the "wireless community networks" -- second generation FreeNets -- that've popped up all over the world; its mission statement says: NYCwireless promotes open wireless hotspots in public spaces throughout the New York region... NYCwireless intends to work with public and other nonprofit organizations to bring broadband wireless Internet to under-served communities.
Get that part about "underserved communities"? Read through the NYCwireless site and you get a sense of creative New Yorkers cooperating, with their own resources, to create something for the benefit of the whole community. Read the Free Times (not to mention a few local blogs) and you get a picture of a "Cleveland creative class" that's -- well, just kind of whiny. And in the case of its journalistic spokesnerds, a little loose with its facts.
Incidentally, the one city mentioned by the FT where the city government itself is sponsoring downtown WiFi as an ED initiative is Long Beach, CA. The "HotZone" covers four blocks. They also plan to WiFi their airport and their convention center. Sounds a lot like Cleveland, doesn't it? Read about it here.
6.14.2003
HURRAY FOR THE LIBRARY: The Cleveland Public Library, that is. The CPL gets my Hurray of the Week because I made my periodic weekend run to the Main Branch today and was reminded what a great operation they have. I picked up a book I knew I wanted and one I just ran across, re-renewed the book my wife's been reading for three months, and got it all done in fifteen minutes. Five staffers helped me in one way or another, and they were all cheerful and on the case. I passed by ten or so Internet terminals on three floors and they were all getting used... at 4:30 on Saturday, downtown!
It's no wonder Cleveland voters passed the Library levy by a 60-40 margin. How many services, public or private, run so well? (Of course, I realize that Mark Schumann's endorsement was the real turning point in that election.)
Now if the City would just stop eliminating parking spaces around East 6th and Superior...
It's no wonder Cleveland voters passed the Library levy by a 60-40 margin. How many services, public or private, run so well? (Of course, I realize that Mark Schumann's endorsement was the real turning point in that election.)
Now if the City would just stop eliminating parking spaces around East 6th and Superior...
6.13.2003
So I got real busy this week, and now I look around and it's Friday! Oh well, both of the people who read this were probably busy, too. Who knows, maybe they were also at...
THE WEEK'S COOLEST EVENT: Yep, there we were in City Hall Rotunda Thursday, two or three hundred of us and the Mayor, with giant mop-props, music, folks beating a rhythm on plastic buckets, cheering, dancing... all celebrating a big step forward for downtown and the people who work there. The people, that is, who work there after everybody else goes home. The cleaning staff. The janitors.
Over seven hundred employees of downtown office cleaning contractors, represented by Service Employees Local 47, have been negotiating a new contract for the past few months. These are mostly African-American, mostly female, mostly Cleveland residents. They work shifts that start at 5 or 6 p.m., hard physical work, for pay that starts around $7 an hour. Many are kept on part-time status, meaning no health insurance. The union, as part of its ongoing national campaign called Justice for Janitors (anybody catch the movie Bread and Roses?), was asking for a modest pay increase, health insurance eligibility for everyone, and more full-time work.
Thursday's event was supposed to be a big support rally. But at the last minute -- Wednesday, I think -- a proposed agreement was reached with the major contractors. The union won $1.30 an hour over three years, health insurance for part-timers and a track for part-time workers into full-time work... a big and significant victory. (Here's the PD story.) So the rally turned into a party at City Hall, where the Mayor and City Council both supported the union's efforts. And lemme tell you... these cleaning folks know how to party!
Absolutely the downtown event of the week.
THE WEEK'S COOLEST EVENT: Yep, there we were in City Hall Rotunda Thursday, two or three hundred of us and the Mayor, with giant mop-props, music, folks beating a rhythm on plastic buckets, cheering, dancing... all celebrating a big step forward for downtown and the people who work there. The people, that is, who work there after everybody else goes home. The cleaning staff. The janitors.
Over seven hundred employees of downtown office cleaning contractors, represented by Service Employees Local 47, have been negotiating a new contract for the past few months. These are mostly African-American, mostly female, mostly Cleveland residents. They work shifts that start at 5 or 6 p.m., hard physical work, for pay that starts around $7 an hour. Many are kept on part-time status, meaning no health insurance. The union, as part of its ongoing national campaign called Justice for Janitors (anybody catch the movie Bread and Roses?), was asking for a modest pay increase, health insurance eligibility for everyone, and more full-time work.
Thursday's event was supposed to be a big support rally. But at the last minute -- Wednesday, I think -- a proposed agreement was reached with the major contractors. The union won $1.30 an hour over three years, health insurance for part-timers and a track for part-time workers into full-time work... a big and significant victory. (Here's the PD story.) So the rally turned into a party at City Hall, where the Mayor and City Council both supported the union's efforts. And lemme tell you... these cleaning folks know how to party!
Absolutely the downtown event of the week.
6.08.2003
MORE ON LOCAL JOB LOSSES: The Cleveland-Lorain SMSA lost 55,000 jobs during 2001 and 2002, according to a new report issued Saturday by the U.S. Conference of Mayors. Over 32,000 of those jobs went away during the "jobless recovery" of 2002. Cleveland's two-year total was eighth highest among U.S. metropolitan areas.
The Plain Dealer did not have the story in this morning's edition, although many other big-city papers did. (Here are the stories from Detroit, Indianapolis, and Boston.) Maybe it was just a deadline problem... we'll see about Monday.
MORE ON CLEVELAND MEDIA OWNERSHIP: What the PD did have this morning was a long front-page report on local implications of this week's FCC media ownership decision, with accompanying info on the concentrated out-of-town ownership of Cleveland radio and TV stations (and the PD itself.) Strangely, none of this is posted on cleveland.com.
My big question on this topic is: With all of Cuyahoga County's local broadcast frequencies taken up by outside corporate owners, why is there so little interest in creating alternatives? Where are Cleveland's radio entrepreneurs?
Remember the FCC shutdown of five Cleveland "pirate radio stations" a few years ago? But when the FCC solicited applications for Low Power FM licenses, there was virtually no interest here. (FCC records show 110 applications filed from Ohio, but only one from Cuyahoga County.) And there's no apparent upsurge of Internet radio sites based here, either. What's the matter... no one in Cleveland wants to hear the sound of our own voices?
The Plain Dealer did not have the story in this morning's edition, although many other big-city papers did. (Here are the stories from Detroit, Indianapolis, and Boston.) Maybe it was just a deadline problem... we'll see about Monday.
MORE ON CLEVELAND MEDIA OWNERSHIP: What the PD did have this morning was a long front-page report on local implications of this week's FCC media ownership decision, with accompanying info on the concentrated out-of-town ownership of Cleveland radio and TV stations (and the PD itself.) Strangely, none of this is posted on cleveland.com.
My big question on this topic is: With all of Cuyahoga County's local broadcast frequencies taken up by outside corporate owners, why is there so little interest in creating alternatives? Where are Cleveland's radio entrepreneurs?
Remember the FCC shutdown of five Cleveland "pirate radio stations" a few years ago? But when the FCC solicited applications for Low Power FM licenses, there was virtually no interest here. (FCC records show 110 applications filed from Ohio, but only one from Cuyahoga County.) And there's no apparent upsurge of Internet radio sites based here, either. What's the matter... no one in Cleveland wants to hear the sound of our own voices?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)