Columbus City Council Elections 2015
October 27, 2015 5:57 pm at 5:57 pm #1099264
Interesting thought. Why do you advocate that?
The outerlying edges of Columbus were annexed when land was cheap and plentiful, suburbanization was all the rage, and new greenfield development meant new investment and a retention of tax dollars with the city.
Now that 40-60 years have passed and that era is ending/slowing, many of those areas have lowered in value (not all of them) and all will continue to need major investment in infrastructure upgrades to sustain themselves or to improve. Additionally, if those areas continue to remain lower density in use, then the return on investment is not going to be great, if it’s even a net-positive at all.
If some of our landlocked suburbs are looking for land to grow into, then Columbus could “spread the love” and let those communities inherit some of the legacy costs moving forward. Columbus can focus on what it does well (being a city) while the suburbs can focus on what they do well (being a suburb).
Of course, I don’t think there’s any precedent for this happening in any city/municipality anywhere. Or if there is, I haven’t looked it up. Businesses on the other hand are constantly “trimming the fat” in order to maximize efficiencies. No reason the same concept couldn’t be applied to city management and the optimization of infrastructure investment.
Anyway… just a random thought… I’d hardly call myself an advocate of this concept. ;)October 27, 2015 6:49 pm at 6:49 pm #1099265
I am not sure of the details, but this seems to be a very risky thing to do a week before the election. I hope that they make clear that the map is not final and can be adjusted so that neighborhoods people identify closely with are not divided into two or more wards.
IDK, when I first saw Mr. Stanley’s proposal today, I thought it was a shrewd move. There seems to be growing sentiment that a ward system is the way to go. I thought Bill Todd did an excellent job of explaining why in his recent Dispatch editorial.October 27, 2015 8:24 pm at 8:24 pm #1099270
God forbid — an independent thought on city council … Stanley is just listening to what tens of thousands of people have signed petitions in support of over the past three years — perish the thought! I’m o.k. with the map, as i assume there would be provisions to redraw boundaries after every census, should something like this be enacted, and for those who worry about the spread out districts, there is another citizen proposal being circulated seeking 10 districts, rather than the 8 Stanley proposes. The only objection I would offer to the Stanley proposal is that having so many members at large continues the problem that at large council members can’t afford their own elections and th ecouncil president gains power by funding those campaigns — right now, I predict Zach Klein will be the next council president, as he is funding commercials for Page, Brown, and Hardin. Just as ginther did in 2011-2013, it sets one person up to be mayor-elect, and serves the money raising politician by reducing political competitnio, though such competition workds for the beneift of citizens. I crossed lines to vote for Dimitrious Stanley because he is willing to propose what ordinary people have called for: council districts.October 27, 2015 9:53 pm at 9:53 pm #1099275
NDaEast: I’m voting for Stanley too. I just don’t want to give the Gintherites something to use against the pro-wards candidates like a map that divides neighborhoods into two or more separate wards or a map that has wards with very different numbers of residents. I just hope Stanley, etc. can answer any criticisms that may come from the machine now in power. I’m sure they’re examining the map right now for flaws they can capitalize on.October 28, 2015 12:17 am at 12:17 am #1099298
I’m still researching those candidates and haven’t looked much beyond that. I do think I’ll vote for Scott for mayor because I haven’t found anything bad about him and have absolutely no respect for Ginther.October 28, 2015 3:42 pm at 3:42 pm #1099419
Press Release from Joe Motil:
Hardin’s Minimum Wage Position is Dishonest
Joe Motil, Independent Write-In Candidate for the Unexpired Term Race for Columbus City Council, claims that Columbus City Council candidate Shannon Hardin’s response to a question in the Columbus Dispatch’s Voters Guide regarding raising the minimum wage for Columbus residents is dishonest and evasive. The question states, “Explain why you do or do not support raising the minimum wage in Columbus”. Mr. Hardin writes, “I support raising the minimum wage in Ohio… As I understand the issue, however, the Ohio Constitution prohibits cities from unilaterally raising the minimum wage as has been seen in cities like Seattle, San Francisco and Chicago which is why I would support a statewide increase”. Motil says, “Mr. Hardin, Zach Klein, Jaiza Page and Elizabeth Brown have all used the same scripted argument at candidate forums, including that the Columbus City Attorney has made this claim himself”.
Mr. Motil attempted to persuade the City of Columbus Charter Review Commission in May of 2014 to amend the City Charter and place a minimum wage for Columbus residents of $10.00 an hour on the ballot. The Commission rejected this proposed amendment and City Council agreed with their recommendation in July of 2014 thus disallowing the voters of Columbus to decide on this matter. Motil states, “Shannon Hardin and the other lap dog democratic candidates who attempt to deceit the voters of Columbus with such lies are only trying to hide behind their lack of leadership and courage to help the working poor of this city. It’s obvious that corporate Columbus controls their decision making. If the City Attorney actually stated that Columbus does not have the authority of home rule to raise the minimum wage by charter amendment or otherwise based on the Ohio Constitution, I would love to see this in writing. A court of law would easily reject any such nonsense”.
Section 34a Article II of the Ohio Constitution in the next to last paragraph clearly reads in the minimum wage section, “This section shall be liberally construed in favor of its purposes”, and that the home rule power of Municipalities under Article XVII of the Constitution shall not be restricted”. This is the authority that allows cities to raise the minimum wage and specifically uses the word “increase”.
Motil concludes, “As a product of 100% political nepotism, how can Shannon Hardin be trusted? A $5,000.00 campaign contribution pay off for supporting a tax abatement of a millionaire developer, contributions and illegal gifts from a convicted lobbyist, resigning from an appointed job at the CMHA due to recent City Hall corruption, a gift from the Columbus Partnership, will it ever end?”October 28, 2015 6:22 pm at 6:22 pm #1099441
[Joe] Motil concludes, “As a product of 100% political nepotism, how can Shannon Hardin be trusted? A $5,000.00 campaign contribution pay off for supporting a tax abatement of a millionaire developer, contributions and illegal gifts from a convicted lobbyist, resigning from an appointed job at the CMHA due to recent City Hall corruption, a gift from the Columbus Partnership, will it ever end?”
It will end when the voters say so. If it is allowed to continue, we can look in the mirror for who’s to blame.October 30, 2015 5:42 pm at 5:42 pm #1099666
The idea of setting up a ward system is not new. I remember discussions of same back in the 1970s. The argument against them then — representatives of wards wouldn’t prioritize what’s best for the city as a whole — is as applicable today as it was then. That, at any rate, is my view.October 30, 2015 6:38 pm at 6:38 pm #1099670
The idea of setting up a ward system is not new. I remember discussions of same back in the 1970s. The argument against them then — representatives of wards wouldn’t prioritize what’s best for the city as a whole — is as applicable today as it was then. That, at any rate, is my view.
I think it is possible it could lead to a formalized balkanization of the city and actually lead to an increase in corruption as leaders established themselves in ‘fiefdoms’ that would make any current corruption look like child’s play.
There are good and bad scenarios possible on both sides of the issue. I guess I actually support a ward system, but with at least 50% or more(preferably more) of the council seats still at large-sort of a compromise I guess.October 30, 2015 8:00 pm at 8:00 pm #1099674
<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>lazyfish wrote:</div>
have you noticed how spread out our city is?
Yup. Time to carve off some of those outerlying edges and hand them over to the burbs.
already happened with the schools, called the win/win agreement, allowed columbus developers to sell houses in the city of Columbus but not in the City School district, ingenuous eh? kinda like many of the big shopping centers are in township land so they avoid Columbus taxes.October 31, 2015 8:48 am at 8:48 am #1099689
“How many jobs does Ginther have? So he is a VP at Columbus hunger alliance making 6 figure salary, what amount of time per week does he spend on city business vs charity business. Someone had posted about the cost of his house earlier…that made me wonder about how he financed it. So I’m not a title attorney but I can type so I went to the recorders web site and noticed he payed off his mortgage on the recently bought house in one year. Seems like he is flush with cash unlike his buddy John.”
Ginther, like Coleman, uses his campaign fund as a slush fund to pay for meals, travel, gifts, OSU football games in Indianapolis, etc. The laws in this area are so poor that they allow him to use the big bucks provided by rich people receiving contracts, tax breaks, etc. from the city for almost anything he wants. So, he is able to live very high on the hog and save great amounts of money for his post-politics life. This is his idea of public service. The really sad part is that WE PAY for the contracts that may not provide the best deal for our tax dollars and for the tax breaks to developers who would make millions on their projects even without them.
Big money gives to Ginther’s slush fund (in contributions John Raphael called “success fees”) and we pay them back with our tax dollars. Sound right to you?October 31, 2015 11:40 am at 11:40 am #1099693October 31, 2015 12:07 pm at 12:07 pm #1099695
I just got a robocall from John O’ Grady telling me that Demetrius Stanley makes disparaging remarks about President Obama. I’m not sure what that has to do with anything but I do know that trying to wake up with a blustering John O’ Grady yelling in your ear has diminished my Saturday morning quality of life.
I can tell that having a landline is really going to pay off in the next couple days.October 31, 2015 8:48 pm at 8:48 pm #1099731
The Dispatch web site is lighting up with comments about JT Barrett’s arrest. If only people cared as much about the wrongdoings of their elected officials.November 2, 2015 11:32 am at 11:32 am #1099928
Dispatch reporting that Council will vote this evening to award the contract to build Fire Station #2 to the third-lowest bidder.
Did they not undertake a request-for-qualifications process to ensure all bidders were qualified?
Did the successful bidder give money to Ginther and company either directly or with laundered funds?
The forum ‘Politics’ is closed to new topics and replies.