Thank you, Frank Szollosi

Last night, Toledo City Council was scheduled to vote - again - on an increase in the trash tax.

Rather than have a 6-6 tie with Mayor Carty Finkbeiner to break the vote (and he would have supported the tax increase as a way to help balance the budget), Councilman Frank Szollosi walked out. In doing so, he drew the ire of Council President Joe McNamara, who supports the tax. According to WTOL,

McNamara would not be moved, saying, "Members of council are elected to come to meetings and vote. And that's the basic bare requirement of our job and so it's disappointing that anyone would duck a vote."

I don't believe Szollosi was ducking a vote, but taking advantage of the only option left to him to prevent a tax increase.

According to 13ABC:

"If I can stop a tax increase from making life more difficult for thousands of Toledo families by stepping out, I'm going to do it," says Szollosi.

But if you'll remember, the last time this was voted upon, it was defeated 5-6 and Szollosi was going to vote no. The numbers don't add up. So what happened?

According to The Blade,

On Sept. 1, council voted down the trash fee increase, with five in favor and six against. Voting in favor of the trash fee increase and rewards program were Mr. McNamara, Wilma Brown, Phillip Copeland, George Sarantou, and Steven Steel.

Voting against were Mr. (D. Michael) Collins, Tom Waniewski, Lindsay Webb, Michael Ashford, Mike Craig, and Betty Shultz.

So if everyone had voted the same way, and Szollosi voted no, it would have be 5 in favor and 7 against.

The paper reports:

Mrs. Brown said last night she intended to change her vote to yes, which would have made the split six in favor of the increase and six opposed.

Mrs. Shultz said she did not think through the increase when it came up for a vote four weeks ago and also that she did not want to leave a legacy that included a "bankrupt city."

I believe the paper has mis-identified the person who was going to change their vote - reporting it was Wilman Brown when they meant Betty Shultz. (This was corrected after my blog post.)

And I find it inconceivable that Betty was going to change her vote, especially because the city would still be bankrupt in 2009, even if this tax increase had been approved.

As Frank explained: "There are so many people hurting in this city, the last thing they need is for the city and the mayor to reach into their pockets more when we have failed to live within our means."

The best part of the actions last night was reported by 13ABC:

13abc's Christine Long: "Any idea when it will come back?"

McNamara: "No. I think it's probably done this year, unless council members change their minds, I think the trash fee change is dead."

So thank you to the council members who remained steadfast in their opposition to tax increases: D Michael Collins, Tom Waniewski, Lindsay Webb, Michael Ashford, and Mike Craig.

And thank you to Frank Szollosi who used every means possible to prevent this unprecedented tax increase.

Are you really a Republican if you support tax funded universal health insurance?

Last night, this resolution was passed unanimously at the Toledo City Council meeting:

RES. 256-08

Recognizing Cover The Uninsured Week 2008.

WHEREAS, Cover The Uninsured Week 2008 will be April 27- May 3, 2008; and

WHEREAS, 1.3 million Ohioans, including 43,700 adults and 6,200 children in Lucas County do not have health care coverage; and

WHEREAS, eight of 10 people who are uninsured are in working families and Ohio no longer offers medical assistance to low-income non-elderly adults without children at home, unless they are totally and severely disabled; and

WHEREAS, viable solutions to these problems are within our reach; and

WHEREAS, the State Children’s Health Insurance Program and Medicaid are successful programs that provide cost-effective coverage that saves both lives and taxpayer dollars through preventative care and early treatment; and

WHEREAS, insured children are twice as likely as uninsured children to get the medical care they need, when they need it; and

WHEREAS, as costs continue to rise, Ohio’s individuals, working families, and small businesses need help paying for coverage; and

WHEREAS, Ohio is poised to make historic progress in children’s health coverage through expansions passed in the FY2008-2009 budget; and

WHEREAS, Ohio’s leaders are on the verge of taking meaningful action to find common ground between providers, consumers, businesses, and insurers to create a sustainable plan that will assure affordable, accessible, high quality coverage to hundreds of thousands of Ohioans; NOW, THEREFORE,

Be it resolved by the Council of the City of Toledo:

SECTION 1. That Toledo City Council urges Governor Strickland and Ohio’s legislative and administrative leadership to take all necessary steps to reach affordable, accessible, and adequate health coverage for all Ohioans, and hereby declare April 27-May 3, 2008 as COVER THE UNINSURED WEEK in TOLEDO, OHIO.

SECTION 2. That this Resolution shall take effect and be in force from and after the earliest period allowed by law.

Such a resolution isn't unusual in the liberal/Democrat-dominated Toledo City Council, but what is unusual is that this resolution passed with the support of the three Republicans.

I have no idea why Republicans would vote to urge state government to provide health insurance, considering that a core Republican principle is LESS government involvement in our daily lives, not to mention the idea of LESS taxation...

What's more puzzling is the lack of discussion about this 'whereas': "...the State Children’s Health Insurance Program and Medicaid are successful programs that provide cost-effective coverage that saves both lives and taxpayer dollars..."

Taxpayers would save MORE if these programs didn't exist, but I guess that's beside the point.

And how anyone can claim that these bloated bureaucracies, which are about to go bankrupt, are 'successful programs' is just beyond my (apparently) limited understanding.

Perhaps our GOP representatives will say that they voted to name the week - a meaningless action in which all governmental bodies partake (and I've done so myself when a County Commissioner). But if they were just voting to name it "covered the uninsured week," they could have asked for the policy issues to be excluded from the resolution. That's what I've done.

As it stands now, George Sarantou, Betty Shultz, and Tom Waniewski are on the record as supporting state-provided (read taxpayer funded) universal health insurance coverage. It's no wonder many Republicans believe they have no representation on Toledo City Council.

City of Toledo gets computer parts on eBay

Yes, they do ... really. But that's only because the system that serves the city is so old that most parts aren't even made anymore.

They did have money in the budget to replace it ... but they took that money out of the Capital Improvements Budget so they could balance the General Fund - and spend money on the Willis Boyer Freighter 'tourist attraction,' a shower for the mayor's office, flowers, and other frivolous items.

Councilwoman Betty Shultz has spent years arguing, pleading, begging, demanding that the city upgrade the financial computers so council members could have accurate and current information about the city's budget and spending. Finally, they've set aside another amount in the CIP for doing so.

But in making the decision, fellow council members were 'shocked' to learn that many parts necessary to keep the current system functioning are only available on eBay. You'd think they would have listened to Betty years ago...

Better late than never, though.

(And our elected leaders wonder why people leave this town!)

Cheers and boos to Toledo City Council - UPDATED

I discussed the City Council votes on numerous issues on Eye on Toledo last night (listen here), and today's Blade also has a recap. So here are the cheers and boos:

CHEERS to Michael Ashford for voting no on the $7.8 million Southwyck buyout plan.

"We are on the hook for $7.8 million, and he (Larry Dillin) wants the city to help him with a $17 million plan. We can't afford that," Mr. Ashford said. "He wants a commitment for 2008 and 2009 [capital improvements for the $4 million], which we don't even know yet."

He also questioned why the city of Toledo is the "middleman" buying private property, doing asbestos cleanup, and then selling it to a private developer.

That's a great question, Mike, and it's one I bet didn't get answered. But I - and I'm sure many others - appreciate your take on this one. NBC24 has a good explanation of the requirements the city agreed to - and a copy of the letter of agreement on the deal from Larry Dillin.

BOOS to the rest of council, especially the Republicans, who seem to think this is what constitutes economic development while they perpetuate other policies and taxation that make this city 'not business friendly.'

CHEERS again to Michael Ashford for voting against spending $35,000 to hire a company to survey 800 Toledoans about their budget priorities, especially considering the fact that both the University of Toledo and Bowling Green State University have the ability to do the same thing for considerably less.

BOOS to the 10 council members who voted in favor of the new convenience store licensing law (background here, here, here and here.) According to an email from one of my WSPD listeners, Councilman Joe McNamara called the proposed legislation 'Draconian' and was going to meet with Councilman Rob Ludeman (the sponsor of the legislation) Monday to see about making some changes. Changes were made - some good, some not - and McNamara urged passage of the law which reflected 'minor tweaking.'

Some of the 'tweaking' was not 'minor' and I'll be discussing this tonight on Eye on Toledo at 6 p.m.

CHEERS to Betty Shultz and Joe Birmingham for voting against this.

Maybe they're finally getting it!

During a committee hearing yesterday, Toledo City Council President Michael Ashford was not convinced that it was a good idea for the city to purchase a portion of the Southwyck Mall property. And kudos to him for what he said, as quoted in today's Blade!

"The City of Toledo in this deal has become the middleman of buying private property, doing the cleanup, and then turning around and selling it to a private developer," he said. "That's not our role and responsibility."

But that's not the only news that came out of the committee meeting - the actual costs are closer to $2.6 million ... not the $1,095,000 that was originally published. The extra $1.5 million is to pay for the removal of any asbestos in the building, though Councilman Betty Shultz thinks the costs could be higher.

And the city plans to give itself a no interest loan from its revolving loan fund in order to cover the outlay. While city officials say that the purchase price and 80% of the clean-up costs would be repaid by Larry Dillin when he purchases the property from the city, the remaining 20% wouldn't be repaid until Dillin has all his private financing in place and his tenants lined up...and who knows when that could be, considering his other major commitment to the Marina District.

And that $1.5 million loan the city is going to make to itself is money that won't be available for other purposes in the meantime.

The fact that Michael Ashford believes this is not a proper use of public funds is terrific. Hopefully, he'll be able to convince his fellow council members of this(including the Republicans who've lately been more interested in agreeing with Carty than in standing for Republican principles) and the city won't interject itself into what should be a private transaction between the owner(s) of the property and Larry Dillin. Let Dillin purchase the property, clean it up and then develop it as he wants...and let the city focus on its statutory responsibilities.

(If you'd like background on the Southwyck Mall issue, type 'Southwyck' in the Search This Blog box in the left-hand column and you'll find seven other posts on the topic, including what appears to be a now defunct plan to take the mall by eminent domain.)

'Not business friendly' - post #4

Well, despite the pleas from realtors who truly know our market the best, Toledo City Council passed a government-mandated inspection of homes prior to a land-contract sale. (Blade article on the vote here.) And kudos to the five council members who voted no: Joe Birmingham (R-Dist. 6), Rob Ludeman (R-at large), George Sarantou (R-at large), Betty Shultz (R-at large) and Mark Sobczak (D-at large).

This means that anyone wanted to sell their home under a land-contract agreement must first apply to the Commissioner of Building Inspection for the Certificate of Property Code Compliance (CPCC) and include a copy of the inspection of the house conducted by an inspector "registered with the Commissioner of Building Inspection."

"A Certificate of Property Code Compliance Inspection shall include an inspection of the electrical, heating, and plumbing systems and building structure (e.g., roof, gutters, siding, etc.) to ensure that the residential property is in a safe, sanitary and habitable condition and meets the Property Maintenance Code (PMC) of the State of Ohio. Any Certificate of Property Code Compliance Inspection Report shall be on the form provided by the City of Toledo. Minimally, the Certificate of Property Code Compliance Inspection Report shall list individual violations and a rough estimate of the cost to cure each violation or deficiency, signed by a Registered Inspector. The Commissioner of Neighborhood Revitalization or the Commissioner of Building Inspection may, at his or her discretion, accept alternative inspection report forms. The Certificate of Property Code Compliance Inspection Report shall be completed and filed with the Commissioner of Neighborhood Revitalization or the Commissioner of Building Inspection within thirty (30) days of the date of application."

You've got 90-days (renewable once) to fix any defects found in the inspection report. Oh - and of course it's going to cost you $100 to actually become a 'registered inspector.' And, if you fail to follow this law, you can be fined $250 for the first violation, $500 for the second one and $1,000 for the third and subsequent fines - enforceable in civil court.

Non-compliance with other portions of this new law can be charged under the criminal code "of a misdemeanor third degree on the first offense, a misdemeanor of the second degree for a second subsequent offense or a misdemeanor of the first degree for a third subsequent offense."

All this, according to Keith Foster, vice president of the Greater Toledo Housing Coalition which sought the change, is to "protect the consumer."

And, the coalition will certainly work with any landlord who thinks the law is detrimental ... how magnanimous.

As many landlords and realtors have said in the past, laws already exist to protect such consumers. But the problem many housing advocates have is that they provide relief AFTER the fact, rather than preventing the consumer from making a mistake in the first place. And now we have the force of government to ensure that no one purchases a home on land contract without being aware of any problems and having them fixed. Never mind that anyone purchasing a home has the ability to hire an inspector and then negotiate a price accordingly. The force of law is now going to be not on the buyer, but on the seller to not only perform the inspection but to make any necessary repairs.

I guess the days of 'caveat emptor' are over - and instead we have the increasing lack of personal responsibility due to the government ensuring you never have the opportunity to learn from a mistake.