The Blade's non-endorsement for Toledo mayor

Yesterday, the local daily paper, The Toledo Blade, decided to 'sit out' the race for Toledo mayor by not endorsing either candidate.

First, let me say that this is one of the single best things that could happen in Toledo politics. For too long, politicians have asked 'how high' when the paper has said 'jump' and not always has it been the in the best interests of Toledo. Just look at all the politicians who jumped on board the Blade's position regarding the United Way, or their advocacy of a socialist bill of rights. Even when it comes to taxes, or smoking bans or a myriad of other issues, once the editorial is published, many of our elected officials suddenly make up their minds. And all because they want to remain on the good side of the paper for endorsements.

I've been the recipient of Blade endorsements, so I know the expectations as well as the consequences when you fail to 'play along.'

So for the next mayor to not have the specter of the publisher and editorial board claiming credit for a win - and expecting subservience as a result - means that whomever wins this race won't have to worry as much about upsetting those people.

Granted, taking into consideration all aspects of a decision, including what the local media will say about it, is just good strategy, but only in planning potential responses to opposing positions - not as guidance for what needs to be done.

When I first entered politics I was told that a Blade endorsement could count for roughly 10,000 votes. But the joke was that you just never knew if the votes were FOR you because of the Blade endorsement or AGAINST you as people did opposite of what the paper recommended. However, the end result was somewhere around the 10,000 in agreement with the publisher's recommendation.

But that was in the early to mid 1990s. Today, a Blade endorsement might result in a couple thousand votes from some who are still undecided. And while every vote is valuable, the influence of an endorsement is not what it once was.

As for the actual endorsement, let's start with the final paragraph of the editorial:

"And so we reluctantly defer to the electorate, hoping that they will turn out in large numbers to make their wishes known on Tuesday."

First, don't they always hope for large turnout and for voters to make their wishes known? Isn't that the way it's supposed to be?

And they 'reluctantly defer to the electorate'???? Perhaps they don't realize it, but they always have to defer to the electorate because we're the only ones who get to vote. The Blade doesn't get a vote, though its employees do. And the publisher, John Robinson Block, lives in Pittsburgh and doesn't get a vote.

So why are they reluctant? Are they admitting their lack of influence? Are they under some strange perception that voters actually do what they tell them without thinking independently?

And no matter how many people turn out to actually vote, those who do will make their wishes known. Why is this a bad thing, as implied by this last sentence?

But there's more to this non-endorsement than meets the eye.

I have no idea whether or not Mike Bell or Keith Wilkowski sat down with Block to discuss their candidacy. I know that in the news pages, Wilkowski has certainly received more favorable treatment - from headlines to choice of words used to describe his ideas and positions. Wilkowski's ideas are closer to the positions of the publisher and those taken on the editorial pages, especially when it comes to the role of government, green jobs, etc...

But Block, it is rumored, is not particularly fond of Wilkowski and that may play a big role in the decision. If Wilkowski is as organized as some seem to think, based upon what he learned with President Barack Obama's campaign and get-out-the-vote (GOTV) effort on election day last year, he may not need the endorsement.

Rumor also has it that Mark Luetke, owner the firm Bell's campaign hired, has long been on the outs with the publisher. As a result, he may not have pushed Bell to solidify Block's support.

So with neither candidate actively - aggressively - seeking the endorsement, could the non-support be a direct reaction? Sort of a 'If you don't want my support, fine! You won't get it' type of position?

That's what some are speculating.

Another interesting aspect is that, as far as I can tell, The Blade did not commission any polls on the race. I don't remember the last time the paper failed to do a poll in a high profile election in Toledo. This is probably due to lack of funds for a comprehensive one, but it appears they didn't even do a flash poll, even for internal reference.

I spoke with someone familiar with the paper's endorsement process and the general opinion was that the non-endorsement is dramatic - and sad. The perspective (paraphrased):

This signals the end of the political influence of The Blade forever. With its circulation so low now, this really was the last chance for it to throw its weight around. Choosing not to do so is sort of like the punch-drunk fighter who is too weak to fight back but too proud to simply fall to the mat. They just stand there and take punch after punch until there is nothing left. Then they will land with a huge thud.

Does Block understand and/or share this perspective? Probably not, for if he believed his influence was waning, he'd probably push harder for what he wants.

Will this prove to be The Blade's last hurrah when it comes to their political influence? If so, will they regret 'taking a pass' on the mayoral endorsement?

Only time will tell. But there may come a day when we look back and say this non-endorsement was the beginning of the end.

Saturday roundup

* Whenever you hear a politician say "revenue enhancements," you need to translate this government speak. "Revenue enhancements" for government mean "income subtraction" for you.

So remember: revenue enhancements = income subtraction.

* Karen Shanahan has a second 'fact-checking' piece on Keith Wilkowski, this time having to do with his record on taxes. It must have attracted some attention because his prior history of voting in favor of tax increases was a key question at the Chamber of Commerce candidate forum.

According to The Blade, Wilkowski 'defended' his vote by saying "the circumstances are totally different."

Mr. Wilkowski was a Lucas County commissioner in 1989 and 1990 and joined a 3-0 vote on Dec. 7, 1989, to raise the county’s portion of the state sales tax from 1 percent to 1.5 percent, which brought the total sales tax to 6.5 percent.

The tax increase, enacted in two 0.25-percent increments — one continuing, one to expire after three years, was overwhelmingly repealed by voters in May, 1990.

Mr. Wilkowski resigned from the board of commissioners later that year to become the city of Toledo law director...

Mr. Wilkowski told the moderator, Blade ombudsman Jack Lessenberry, that “the circumstances are totally different” and that a tax increase now would hasten Toledo’s loss of population.

While it is true that Toledo's population has declined since the 1970s, I don't believe the situations are that different, as Wilkowski says. In both cases the governmental jurisdiction 'needs' the money to pay for the things the politicians believe the public wants.

I would have been more impressed - as would, I believe, many voters - if Wilkowski had said he'd learned the lesson about raising taxes because the tax he voted for was overwhelming rejected by voters.

But he didn't. He justifies an action contrary to his current words by saying 'it's different.'

Karen also has a post with Wilkowski's complete answer on the tax question as well as some questions of her own. I'm very glad that Karen has done these fact-checking posts because it's clear the local paper and televisions stations aren't going to bother.

* A failure to implement planned tax decreases is an increase. There is no way politicians can get around this fact. When the Ohio House voted to 'delay' the planned roll-back of taxes, they increased the tax burden for all of us. It's just like politicians (Republicans and Democrats) to decide that they need your money more than you do.

* This article about a park being considered for designation as one of the darkest places on earth caught my eye. In the late '80s, Sam and I did a trip to the Bahamas during his spring break. Along with several friends, we chartered a sailboat and ended up at the Northwestern tip of Great Guana Cay in a delightful bay just where the island is the most narrow.

This was the first time I'd been anywhere 'remote' and that first night anchored in paradise, I wanted the sun set and then went down below to help fix dinner. Shortly, though, it was pitch dark and Sam called me on deck to see the sky.

I'd never seen so many stars in my entire life and I was awestruck. I kept saying, "I know there are billions and billions (yes, in Carl Sagan imitation for he was big at that time) of stars out there, but I never realized just what that would look like." I could even see the Milky Way, though at first I thought it was just some high, thin clouds blocking the view.

So, I can only imagine what the sky looks like at night in Gallaway Forest Park. Interestingly, the only two places currently designated this dark are Natural Bridges, Utah, and Cherry Springs State Park, Pennsylvania.

Shanahan fact-checks Wilkowski's JEDZ claim

Local blogger Karen Shanahan has gotten into the 'fact-checking' field by actually researching a specific claim of Toledo mayoral candidate Keith Wilkowski regarding his involvement in a JEDZ between Toledo, Monclova and Maumee.

She finds the claim 'wanting' - or maybe 'exaggeration,' or even 'lie,' might be a better term.

Another example of bloggers doing what our main stream media don't.

Keep up the good work, Karen!

Toledo mayor primary prediction

As mayoral candidate D. Michael Collins was quick to add to his campaign website, pollster Fritz Wenzel (on Conklin and Company) predicted that Collins and Mike Bell would be the top two vote-getters in Tuesday's primary. Wenzel believes the two independents will benefit from voter dissatisfaction and anger.

I will agree with him on Bell, as I don't believe Mike Bell has done anything to discourage the general 'feel-good' opinion and respect most Toledoans have of him and his prior service as Fire Chief.

However, I don't believe Collins has the necessary momentum to finish in the top two, due to his late entry into the race. While he's very well known within his current council district (District 2), I don't believe he's had the time or the media coverage to garner the support of the rest of the city.

So my prediction is that Keith Wilkowski will be the other candidate we'll see on the November ballot.

I choose Wilkowski for two reasons:

1) He's the better known and more 'liked' candidate among the democrats running. He's spent roughly a full year preparing his campaign and his supporters for next Tuesday. He's also had more positive press than the other candidates - due to his length in the race and the kind headlines the local paper has given him.

2) He's organized and will, I believe, have a good 'on-the-ground' effort for Tuesday. I'm sure he learned valuable lessons from working on the Obama campaign on how to mobilize your identified voters, and that he will use those techniques to be sure his supporters get to the polls and vote.

All candidates know that the important part of an election is not just getting people to vote - but getting your supporters to show up and vote for you. I believe that will be the key to his finishing in the top two.

As for the other candidates, I don't believe that Jim Moody has generated the enthusiasm within the local Republican Party that he would need to ensure a top-two finish. While he has many good ideas, the internal issues with being Chairman Jon Stainbrook's candidate may be too much to overcome. In general, Toledo Republicans are not motivated toward the GOP candidates, though they may be motivated toward conservatives in general. This will hurt Moody and will, I predict, cost him on Sept. 15th.

Current County Commissioner Ben Konop has also benefited from positive press from The Blade, but not enough to overcome his other campaign problems, including his push for failed policies and, especially, his disrespect for the U.S. Flag. He is seem by too many as immature and 'not ready for prime time.' Additionally, being perceived as a favorite of The Blade may actually hurt Konop at the ballot box. I predict he will not finish in the top three.

Opal Covey, the final candidate, will probably finish last, even though there are some who've stated they'll vote for her just because they're so fed up with everyone else. Whether words are followed through with votes in the ballot box remains to be seen. While Opal has passion, it is not tempered with reason, and her references to being sent by God make her more of a fringe candidate than anything else. However, some people are talking that she may, considering the general mood of the voting public, be able to pull off a fourth-place finish ahead of Konop, which would be a remarkable thing if it happened.

Do you have a prediction? We'll await the results to see who is right.

On the campaign trail #1

* In response to comments made by mayoral candidate and Lucas County Commissioner Ben Konop, Mayor Carty Finkbeiner issued the following statement:

"Candidates for public office should never use human tragedy to further their political ambitions or agendas. Mr. Konop should be ashamed of himself."

Of course, never one to take his own advice, Finkbeiner did exactly that when he announced the suicide of a 'very good friend' in a Toledo park. He was trying to make a point about safety even during layoffs of police officers, saying that the mother of the man did not blame the suicide on a lack of police officers to patrol the park. Of course, the tragedy occurred in Maumee, not Toledo, but Carty should be 'ashamed of himself for using human tragedy to further his political ambition and agenda.'

* There's more evidence of bias from The Blade when it comes to headlines in the mayoral race. As I've previously documented, the lack of the candidate's name in the headline is a subtle bias designed to impact name ID and recognition. Here are the latest headlines and word counts for the most recent press conferences:

Konop sees savings in city-county office merger - 289 words (candidate Ben Konop, Democrat)

Bell says city needs business advocate
Mayoral candidate wants to cut red tape, rules - 294 words (candidate Mike Bell, Democrat running as an Independent)

Wilkowski criticizes city for $2.5M paid in severance - 523 words (candidate Keith Wilkowski, Democrat)

Toledo mayoral candidate focuses on livability - 270 words (candidate Jim Moody, Republican)

All stories included photos of the candidates, with photos of Moody, Bell and Konop being upper body shots of them talking and gesturing with their hands. Wilkowski's photo is a head shot with a dark background, so it looks portrait-like. And Wilkowski is smiling.

* I've not covered the city council races yet. It seems like every day there is a new candidate announcing their run for one of the seats. After the petitions are in and certified, I'll cover the candidates who will be on the ballot.

I'm encouraged at how many people are actually pulling petitions and think we may set a record for the number of contenders. I'm not surprised, though, by the number who want to run as an independent. I think the number of candidates indicates that people are not only tired of the current decisions being made by the people who hold those offices, but also tired of the same old party politics that have given us these incumbents.

Blade bias in mayoral race

Prediction: Mayoral candidate Jim Moody will NOT get the endorsement from The Blade.

No, not because he's a Republican, though many would think that would be reason enough.

I'm not able to look into the minds of the editorial writer or the publisher to know WHY they won't endorse him, but I can tell they won't because of their coverage of him and his campaign.

Yesterday, Moody outlined his plan for retooling Toledo. It's 2,172 words and it is a detailed listing of several ideas for changing how city government works.

The Blade did carry a story on the plan, "GOP mayoral hopeful offers plan." It's a 206-word article - six paragraphs - and doesn't even make the front of the second section where they usually put important local news articles.

Contrast that with Keith Wilkowski's press conference on creating a business council and offering companies a tax credit if they join the chamber of commerce. The headline of that story was "Wilkowski vows to aid small firms." It's a 260-word article and the headline includes the candidate's name and tells you something about the content of the idea. It doesn't leave you asking 'offers a plan - for what?'

When you do a search on The Blade's website for 'Moody' or 'Jim Moody' you'll find 20 or 16 responses, depending on which name you use. Interestingly, the articles about his entry into the race don't show up, perhaps because the search only goes back 30 days. Here are the headlines:

GOP mayoral hopeful offers plan
Toledo candidate seeks special plates for predators
Mayoral hopeful: Privatize airport
Natural gas pushed for trucks
Moody vows to take businesslike approach to city
Businessman opens office for mayoral campaign bid
Republican to open HQ for Toledo mayor's race

There are other stories in which Moody is mentioned, like when all the candidates signed the Clean Campaign Pledge or when a new candidate entered the race and comments were sought. But note that his name is in the headline only once - and in 'Natural gas pushed for trucks,' you cannot tell this is even an idea from a candidate. It could just as easily be an environmental group lobbying government.

This wouldn't be an issue if it were the same for the other candidates, but it's not. Some might say that Moody is a lesser known candidate, so his name doesn't qualify for headlines - but I'd turn around and ask if the failure to use his name in headlines directly impacts that 'known' aspect - and whether or not it is intentional to omit his name from the headlines in order to NOT increase his name ID.

So here are the mayoral campaign headlines regarding the other declared candidates (remember that Wilkowski has been a declared candidate longer than the others, so he has more):

Lucas County Commissioner Ben Konop:
Critics recall Konop pledge
Commissioner Konop to kick off mayoral bid
Konop tours local firms, talks potential mayoral bid
Konop pursues bid to seek mayor's job
Konop takes step toward bid for mayor

Mike Bell:
Ex-Fire Chief Bell spots crash, pulls woman from wreckage
Ex-chief told plan to governor prior to going public
Bell makes it official, draws flak
Former fire chief Bell to seek mayor's job
Bell resigns as fire marshal
Bell says he's eyeing a run for mayor office

Keith Wilkowski:
Wilkowski vows to aid small firms
Wilkowski suggests tax credit to get investors
Wilkowski loses Web address for mayoral campaign
Mayor questions fit of Wilkowski, PR firm
Wilkowski taps Hart to oversee campaign
Wilkowski leads in cash for mayoral primary race
City urged to rank projects
Wilkowski adds advisory panel
Welcome to the mayor's race
Wilkowski in mayoral race
Wilkowski inches closer to race for mayor
Wilkowski pitches city wind-testing program
Solar panel field sought
Wilkowski poll advances his plans to run for mayor

Note the not-so-subtle bias of including some candidate names in the headline versus others and note which candidates get their names listed first. Also, do you really think the selection of an advertising firm is a news story (as in Wilkowski's case)? The selection of any particular firm will have ramifications for the other candidates because a firm isn't going to have two mayoral candidates as clients. Do you know who the other candidates have selected? Not from The Blade.

Also, look at the nature of the headlines - whether it's positive or negative. On Wilkowski, you have 'pitches wind-testing program,' 'adds advisory panel,' 'leads in cash,' 'suggests tax credit,' and 'vows aid to small firms.' On Bell you have 'resign' and 'draws flak.' On Konop you have an appeal to sympathy as 'critics' attack him. On Moody you have 'seeks special plates' and 'privatize' along with 'businessman' and 'businesslike.'

The impression from the headlines is one of specific and positive ideas from Wilkowski, but not so much from the other candidates. While it's still early in the race and Wilkowski, as I noted above, has more time as a candidate, those factors do not account for today's Moody headline of 'GOP mayoral hopeful offers plan.' They could have used any number of headlines (like 'Moody offers turn-around plan for city,' 'Moody offers plan to retool city,' or even 'Moody offers 5-point plan for city') that included his name and some description of the plan. They even could have focused on just one aspect of the press announcement and used a paragraph to say that other ideas, including x, y, z, were also presented. But they didn't.

These are specific ways in which the coverage is slanted and biased. But there are other things to pay attention to as you watch the coverage of the mayor's race from The Blade:

* placement of story - is it a lead story or buried inside?
* length - how many paragraphs?
* photo - is one included and, if so, is it a complimentary photo or does it make the candidate look ridiculous?
* content - does the article focus on the candidate and whatever idea/program is being promoted, or does it devote most of the story space to the reaction of other candidates?
* opposing views - does the article just cover the candidate's idea/program or does it include comments from all the other candidates? If it includes opposing views, are all the candidates given space for a response (or does it indicate that all candidates were contacted to provide response)?

The Blade's coverage is often one-sided. Now you know what to look for to be able to see just how one-sided it can be.

(SIDE NOTE: I'm currently awaiting a return call from the Moody campaign. I want to know if, as has happened in the past, the coverage of the press conference is so minor because the paper did not have the details ahead of time.

The Blade is well-known for its desire to have candidates give them the contents of a press conference ahead of time so that they can print the details on the day of the event. The idea is that, by the time the TV and radio stations cover it on the day of the event, it's old news for the paper to print it the next morning. As a result, if candidates don't give the paper 'the scoop,' they often find their coverage - well - lacking.

UPDATE: I've just heard from Jim Moody and he said he was informed (I did not ask by whom) of the desire of The Blade to have the contents ahead of time, but that he is treating all media outlets the same and giving them the same information at the same time.

So now the questions are: are the other candidates getting better coverage because they play The Blade's game? Will Moody's lack of preference for the paper's publication times impact their opinion and coverage of him and his events? Does the paper have an obligation to its readers to include mayoral proposals even if they are the day after the event? With the paper's website, could they not provide the same timely coverage as radio and TV and then include a notation in the print version that more details are available on-line?

Watch and see...

As if we didn't already know, Konop will run for mayor

With so much ado about even considering a run for mayor, I don't think anyone is surprised by the announcement that Lucas County Commissioner Ben Konop will formally enter the race tomorrow.

As a Democrat, he has added another option for local Dems to choose among. So far, the Republicans have only one declared candidate, Jim Moody, though former Fire Chief Mike Bell (a Democrat who plans to run as an Independent) is likely to garner support across political lines.

From The Blade:

Mr. Konop plans to argue that he has executive experience, having served on the three-person commissioner board for more than two years.

"You're managing budgets and personnel - two big aspects of being mayor," he said.

Having been a county commissioner (as well as an elected clerk of court and a business manager), I can certainly attest to the difference between 'managing' a budget and 'preparing' one.

Yes, commissioners manage a budget, but they don't create it, they don't set priorities (those are set by the Ohio Revised Code) and they don't have many options in denying other elected officials the ability to spend. Some might say a mayor does the same thing - but we've seen the detrimental impact of electing mayors who've never prepared a budget...can you say 'deficit'?

As for 'managing' personnel, I will concede that a commissioner does this. But managing as one of three people responsible is vastly different from what the mayor must do.

A commissioner votes on hiring/firing staff and hears and decides grievances filed by unions/employees. A commissioner doesn't determine the job descriptions, conduct performance evaluations, participate in union negotiations, interview potential employees or even impart the bad news when a person is let go. Konop's only individual hiring experience is of his personal assistant - and I don't believe he's ever had to tell someone, 'you're fired.'

His public track record on filling positions isn't the best, either. He was placed in charge of the search for a new director of the Lucas County Improvement Corporation, after pushing for the resignation of the prior one, but did not complete the task.

A mayor must select people to fill key positions: directors and commissioners, chief of staff, etc. While I never negate someone's ability to gain such expertise, I'm very confident I don't want the learning to occur first in the mayor's office.

Even if you decide that the personnel and budget management as a commissioner is equivalent to what is needed by a mayor, Konop has only two years of doing this - and nothing in his previous positions to contribute to that. If the ability to manage budgets and personnel is high on your list of needed skills, Konop's experience will put him near or at the bottom of the list of the major candidates at this point.

So what does that leave him to offer the voters? Why 'change' of course. And grandstanding - though he calls it 'challenging the status quo.'

"There's no one running that represents the kind of change that this community needs," Mr. Konop said in an interview with The Blade on Friday.

"I have a track record that shows I'm willing to aggressively challenge the status quo. I'm the only candidate who can deliver that."

There's more to being mayor than 'challenging the status quo' with ideas and gimmicks that cost taxpayer dollars. (Remember art assist - Konop's brilliant idea to subsidize loans for purchasing art?)

And though current mayor Carty Finkbeiner has had many public gaffs, none have been anything as severe as standing with a group who called our local Sheriff Deputies 'nazis' but not uttering a word of protest or objection, which Konop did just last week at the Foreclosure Defense League press conference.

Konop's working relationship with his fellow commissioners is not a good one. I'm not sure what he expected when he was elected, but I'm certain he thought he would have more support from his two Democrat colleagues. His difficulty in garnering support for his positions will be magnified when he has to work with quadruple the number on city council - and his lack of a track record with fellow Democrats does not result in good expectations for dealing with the political implications of A-Team, B-Team and Republicans in council chambers.

The good news about his entry into the race is that it will split the Democrat vote. The primary for mayor is non-partisan. The top two mayoral vote-getters go on to the general election, so if Democrats have to choose between multiple candidates, it is possible for a Republican to make it to the general election. However, that requires outstanding campaigning by the Republican, and it is as likely that the top two vote-getters will be Democrats, as we've seen in the past.

Additionally, The Blade, by the subtle clues we've all learned to recognize, has shown a preference for candidate Keith Wilkowski. They've also been highly supportive of Konop. Which one they end up favoring may influence a portion of the primary vote and their coverage of the candidates will be interesting to watch.

Now the only unknown is Finkbeiner. I've previously thought that he would enter the race and seek re-election no matter what. Now I'm not so sure. If the recall effort gathers sufficient signatures to place the matter on the primary ballot (which seems likely at this point), Carty may decide not to run. However, the logic of such a choice must be balanced by his ego and his perception that being the best cheerleader for the city is the highest qualification for the office.

This is going to be an interesting political season.

Tim Higgins at Just Blowing Smoke has more to say about Comm. Konop's claim of 'challenging the status quo'.

Twisted logic from Toledo politicians

Democratic mayoral candidate Keith Wilkowski has announced that, if elected, he will build a solar field on the old Dura Landfill. Today we learn that Toledo City Council doesn't want to wait for the election before getting started.

Councilman Joe McNamara will present legislation at next Tuesday's council meeting to allocate $200,000 from the city's 2009 Capital Improvements Fund for design and engineering services to make the site 'shovel ready.'

I've already talked about this plan from a 'role of government' perspective, and my position hasn't changed in that regard.

But today's paper has this quote from McNamara that just defies logic:

"He said the city has done nothing to invest in its solar-panel manufacturing companies, yet Toledo claims to be the solar capital of the world."

On September 21, 2008, Wilkowski said:

"I've said for years that we have to stop being just a cheerleader for solar energy and we have to start doing things to actually move that market forward."

So - just to understand. Toledo and Northwest Ohio are already being recognized as a solar hub. We're developing a reputation as a leader in this industry because of the work that the private sector is doing. Our local companies like First Solar and Xunlight are growing - and the city hasn't done anything????

How can this be? How can an industry grow without government? How can we get this far without the city being involved?

It's simple - the companies in this industry are doing what they need to do in order to grow themselves and they haven't needed the city to step in. I'm certain that if they needed a road for better access or if they requested some tax incentives for equipment or new hires, we'd support them - just as we do any other company that makes a similar request.

It is illogical to think that since we've gotten this far without involvement by city government we must now inject city government into the process. In fact, the proper conclusion would be that if we've gotten this far with Toledo doing 'something,' nothing needs to be done by the city.

And the proof of this is in other solar arrays being built on landfills. Most of those projects are being done by private companies which have purchased/leased/been given the landfills, built the structures and paid for the arrays and connection to the power grid.

If it's being done by the private sector in places like North Carolina and Florida, why does the taxpayer have to foot the bill in Toledo? And who do you think would do a better job of evaluating the return on investment of such a project: the city or a private company? Furthermore, if a private company isn't interested in expending the funds to build a solar field on our landfill, why would Toledo do so?

Here's an alternative idea. If you insist on using the Dura Landfill for a solar field, offer it free (or at a low enough price to make it attractive) to a private solar developer and see how many companies would agree to build a field and keep the profits. That is the way to create jobs - with a private company - not by spending limited public capital improvement dollars to 'enhance our reputation' or to be able to say 'me too!'

Government 'and' or 'versus' economic development

In 2002, when I ran for County Commissioner, most people were talking about jobs. As I stated repeatedly throughout that campaign, government doesn't create jobs - that's what the private sector does. But government can provide an environment that is conducive and helpful for job growth in the private sector.

Obviously, that message resonated because, by the elections of 2004 and 2005, everyone was using the phrase 'government doesn't create jobs.' The problem was that repeating the phrase didn't ensure that the speakers understood it or even believed it. That didn't matter, however, if it got the person elected.

Entering 2009, we will have a mayoral election in Toledo. Not surprisingly, every politician is still talking about jobs - except in the last 20 years or so (perhaps longer, but that's the time I've been involved) the issue of jobs has been the number one mantra and Toledo is still in decline.

Mayoral candidate Keith Wilkowski, a shrewd politician, yesterday announced his economic advisory team, calling it an 'economic recovery council' (see? very shrewd, indeed). Lisa Renee at Glass City Jungle has the press release. He takes an appropriate swipe at current mayor Carty Finkbeiner who promised jobs but has yet to deliver and sets the stage for an interesting discussion over the next year for who is the best person to elect to 'turn this area around.'

But I believe the discussions are already off target.

We have the Toledo-Lucas County Port Authority, the privately run and funded Regional Growth Partnership, the Lucas County Improvement Corporation, and NORED - Northwest Ohio Regional Economic Development Association. The city, or the tax dollars of its citizens, support all but one (RGP) of these economic development groups.

So why does the city of Toledo need an economic development department or strategy? If government cannot create jobs but only provide an environment for job growth, the focus of any city's efforts in economic development should be reaction to the private sector needs.

Numerous studies, reports and research, coupled with plain old common sense, will tell you that in order for a business to be successful, it needs to make a profit. Businesses make profits when their costs are lower than their earnings. They need a stable regulatory environment that treats them and their competitors fairly. They need taxes and fees that reflect only the mandated functions of government in order to keep them minimal - and preferably lower than what their out of city competitors are paying. They need a pool of workers who will meet their needs in terms of skills and knowledge.

While many politicians talk about 'quality of life' as economic development, most businesses will tell you that such issues are so far down the list that they only consider those things when every other need is identical, which is rarely the case.

Our existing economic development groups can - and, in fact, already do - provide information to the various municipalities about what businesses need. They are well-equipped to inform elected officials and administrators about what things the government can and should do to help provide a pro-growth environment. Sadly, most of the time they are not heeded with decision-makers focusing on their own ideas instead of responding to the true needs of businesses.

Even Wilkowski has fallen into this trap, talking about 'jumpstarting the economy' through more government spending in order to 'put Toledoans back to work.' In his recent proposal for a solar field on top of our landfill, he proposes that city government must promote our local industries, especially solar panels.

However, in promoting any one particular industry, the city will, by default, not be promoting another one. This puts the city in the position of picking and choosing winners - and using public policy and funds to do so. That's not a stable regulatory environment that treats all our businesses fairly. And any money spent on 'new' ideas means that those limited funds are not spent on existing needs like roads, police and fire - the core functions of a government.

Think about it: will Toledo attract new and varied businesses because we spend millions of tax dollars to build a solar field on top of our landfill? Or will business owners be more likely to come or expand here because our tax structure (sales, income and property) is lower?

Most of the time, elected officials end up interfering or hampering real economic development because they're so busy promoting government, and especially government spending, as the solution, rather than truly responding to the non-headline grabbing needs that already exist. They end up working against what could happen if they'd just get out of the way.

So as we enter the 2009 campaign, we should not allow mayoral candidates to frame the discussion of economic development in terms of what government spending they will propose. We should insist that they detail how the tax and regulatory environment in the city will be improved to truly create an environment that will allow all businesses to grow, creating the jobs we so desperately need.