The proposal to replace Cuyahoga County's government with a county executive and council will go before voters in November.
The Go Cuyahoga group, which drafted and proposed a county charter, collected enough valid signatures to put it on the ballot, the group and the board of elections said this afternoon. Here is their draft charter.
As of late Saturday, the board of elections had verified 45,776 signatures and rejected 23,270, with about 10,000 still to review. Go Cuyahoga needed 45,458 valid signatures to get the charter on the ballot. (Elections director Jane Platten said the board finished its work today and that final numbers will come out soon.) The county commissioners will have to vote to certify the ballot proposal, but the law says they "shall" do it -- they don't have a choice.
Voters who want reform but don't want a county executive and council will have another option. In November, voters will also decide whether to elect a commission to draft another charter proposal. County commissioners Tim Hagan and Peter Lawson Jones voted to put that on the ballot on Thursday.
Showing posts with label go cuyahoga. Show all posts
Showing posts with label go cuyahoga. Show all posts
Monday, July 20, 2009
Lanigan & Malone on new reform plan: "Absolute insanity"
Lanigan and Malone, WMJI's morning show hosts, talked this morning about Tim Hagan and Peter Lawson Jones' new reform plan. They don't like it.
"Absolute insanity," Jimmy Malone said.
Malone was trying to get his head around Hagan and Jones' decision to ask voters to approve a charter review commission in November. It's meant to compete with the Go Cuyahoga plan, which would replace Hagan, Jones, and Jimmy Dimora with a county executive and council.
The radio guys focused on how the charter review commission would be chosen: people who want to be on it will have to collect 10,000 signatures by August 20. [Update, 8/5: The secretary of state now says they'll need 5,000.]
"How are we supposed to know anything about these people to vote on them?" Lanigan asked. "The idea sounds good until you find out they need 10,000 signatures."
The charter commissioners will all be politically connected, Malone said. No one else will be organized enough to circulate that many petitions. "It'll cost money," Lanigan added.
"They must be afraid of reform," said Chip Kullik.
Lanigan and Malone, one of Cleveland's top-rated morning shows, often invites local politicians on the air as guests. This morning, Malone sounded exasperated with frequent guest Tim Hagan -- "who I still consider a friend," he said. The hosts said they were surprised to see three other politicians they admire -- Frank Jackson, Dennis Kucinich, and Jim Rokakis -- on the list of supporters.
It sounded like they'd read the spitting-mad editorial in Sunday's Plain Dealer, which lists the supporters of a charter review commission, assumes the worst about their motives, and labels them all "co-conspirators in confusion."
Malone tried to explain what happens if both reform proposals pass: how we might vote next year on a county executive and council and vote on whether to wipe out their jobs before they start. (Here's my attempt to explain it last week.)
Malone added he isn't endorsing the Go Cuyahoga proposal. "I'm not saying Bill Mason's plan is the answer," he said. "I really don't know. But this is so confusing."
"Absolute insanity," Jimmy Malone said.
Malone was trying to get his head around Hagan and Jones' decision to ask voters to approve a charter review commission in November. It's meant to compete with the Go Cuyahoga plan, which would replace Hagan, Jones, and Jimmy Dimora with a county executive and council.
The radio guys focused on how the charter review commission would be chosen: people who want to be on it will have to collect 10,000 signatures by August 20. [Update, 8/5: The secretary of state now says they'll need 5,000.]
"How are we supposed to know anything about these people to vote on them?" Lanigan asked. "The idea sounds good until you find out they need 10,000 signatures."
The charter commissioners will all be politically connected, Malone said. No one else will be organized enough to circulate that many petitions. "It'll cost money," Lanigan added.
"They must be afraid of reform," said Chip Kullik.
Lanigan and Malone, one of Cleveland's top-rated morning shows, often invites local politicians on the air as guests. This morning, Malone sounded exasperated with frequent guest Tim Hagan -- "who I still consider a friend," he said. The hosts said they were surprised to see three other politicians they admire -- Frank Jackson, Dennis Kucinich, and Jim Rokakis -- on the list of supporters.
It sounded like they'd read the spitting-mad editorial in Sunday's Plain Dealer, which lists the supporters of a charter review commission, assumes the worst about their motives, and labels them all "co-conspirators in confusion."
Malone tried to explain what happens if both reform proposals pass: how we might vote next year on a county executive and council and vote on whether to wipe out their jobs before they start. (Here's my attempt to explain it last week.)
Malone added he isn't endorsing the Go Cuyahoga proposal. "I'm not saying Bill Mason's plan is the answer," he said. "I really don't know. But this is so confusing."
Thursday, July 16, 2009
Dueling reforms: Hagan, Jones place charter commission on ballot
County commissioners Tim Hagan and Peter Lawson Jones voted today to give the Go Cuyahoga reform proposal some competition.
Voters will decide in November whether to create a commission to write a charter for the county -- at the same time they may be asked to approve the proposed charter Go Cuyahoga has already written!
"I think it's necessary because a real reform process should be open and inclusive, not behind closed doors," Jones said at the commissioners' meeting today. Jones and Hagan repeatedly contrasted Go Cuyahoga's charter-writing effort, which involved a small group of local political and business leaders meeting privately, with the openness of a charter commission.
Jimmy Dimora returned to work today, taking part in most of the commissioners' meeting. However, he left before the charter commission vote. He told reporters later that he didn't want the effort to be hurt by any accusations it was his idea.
Here's what's going to happen now: People who want to be on the charter commission -- which would be Cuyahoga County's version of a constitutional convention -- have until August 20 to collect signatures to get on the ballot. In November, county voters will vote yes or no to the question, "Shall a county charter commission be established?" At the same time, they'll choose 15 people for the commission. The commission will meet in 2010 and write a new charter.
Meanwhile, the proposed charter written by the Go Cuyahoga group, which would create a county executive and county council, may well be on this November's ballot too. Jones and Hagan clearly want voters to say yes to a charter commission and no to the county executive idea.
But what if voters say yes to both? Lawyers may have to sort that out. (Here is the section of the Ohio constitution that deals with writing charters.) Jones said, "The product of the charter review commission must be placed on the ballot ... in 2010," which would be "at the same time as the changes proposed by the Zanotti-Mason-Republican plan go into effect."
So if I understood Jones right, if we approve a charter and a charter commission this November, we could end up in a weird form of limbo. We'd vote on candidates for county executive and council in a September 2010 primary, then vote on them again in the November 2010 general election -- at the same time we vote on whether to approve a newer charter that wipes out their jobs before they even start!
Here's a law that says some more about charter commissions. Up to 4 of the 15 charter commission members can be currently elected officials.
Harriet Applegate, local head of the AFL-CIO, spoke in favor of the charter commission at the commissioners' meeting today. Letters supporting it were signed by U.S. Rep. Dennis Kucinich, Cleveland Mayor Frank Jackson, county treasurer Jim Rokakis, and several other local elected officials.
Voters will decide in November whether to create a commission to write a charter for the county -- at the same time they may be asked to approve the proposed charter Go Cuyahoga has already written!
"I think it's necessary because a real reform process should be open and inclusive, not behind closed doors," Jones said at the commissioners' meeting today. Jones and Hagan repeatedly contrasted Go Cuyahoga's charter-writing effort, which involved a small group of local political and business leaders meeting privately, with the openness of a charter commission.
Jimmy Dimora returned to work today, taking part in most of the commissioners' meeting. However, he left before the charter commission vote. He told reporters later that he didn't want the effort to be hurt by any accusations it was his idea.
Here's what's going to happen now: People who want to be on the charter commission -- which would be Cuyahoga County's version of a constitutional convention -- have until August 20 to collect signatures to get on the ballot. In November, county voters will vote yes or no to the question, "Shall a county charter commission be established?" At the same time, they'll choose 15 people for the commission. The commission will meet in 2010 and write a new charter.
Meanwhile, the proposed charter written by the Go Cuyahoga group, which would create a county executive and county council, may well be on this November's ballot too. Jones and Hagan clearly want voters to say yes to a charter commission and no to the county executive idea.
But what if voters say yes to both? Lawyers may have to sort that out. (Here is the section of the Ohio constitution that deals with writing charters.) Jones said, "The product of the charter review commission must be placed on the ballot ... in 2010," which would be "at the same time as the changes proposed by the Zanotti-Mason-Republican plan go into effect."
So if I understood Jones right, if we approve a charter and a charter commission this November, we could end up in a weird form of limbo. We'd vote on candidates for county executive and council in a September 2010 primary, then vote on them again in the November 2010 general election -- at the same time we vote on whether to approve a newer charter that wipes out their jobs before they even start!
Here's a law that says some more about charter commissions. Up to 4 of the 15 charter commission members can be currently elected officials.
Harriet Applegate, local head of the AFL-CIO, spoke in favor of the charter commission at the commissioners' meeting today. Letters supporting it were signed by U.S. Rep. Dennis Kucinich, Cleveland Mayor Frank Jackson, county treasurer Jim Rokakis, and several other local elected officials.
Friday, July 10, 2009
Go Cuyahoga charter effort turns in 79,000 signatures, but may need more
Go Cuyahoga, the effort to enact a charter for a new Cuyahoga County government, turned in 79,255 signatures to the Board of Elections this afternoon. But their press release says they may need more, and they'll continue their petition drive.
Meanwhile, commissioners Tim Hagan and Peter Lawson Jones announced yesterday that they plan to offer a competing proposal for restructuring the county on the November ballot.
The Go Cuyahoga group wants to replace the county commissioners with an 11-member council and a county executive who would appoint several county officials who are now elected. It wants to put its proposed charter (click here to read it as a Word document) on the Nov. 3 ballot.
"Our work is the result of over 20 years of analysis," Parma Heights Mayor and Go Cuyahoga organizer Martin Zanotti told me this afternoon, referring to previous studies of possible county reforms. Zanotti said the proposed charter, developed this year by a group of local politicians and businessmen, would reorganize the county around the goals of "jobs, equity, and economic development."
The law says the group had to turn in at least 45,458 signatures by July 13. Now, the board of elections has until July 21 to examine Go Cuyahoga's petitions and decide whether 45,458 of its 79,255 signatures are valid. If they aren't, the group can embark on a second round of signature-gathering, with a Sept. 4 deadline.
“We expect that we will need more signatures," county prosecutor Bill Mason, a Go Cuyahoga member, said in the press release, "but today is a positive step toward putting this charter on the ballot."
That's a sign that the group knows many of its signatures may not be valid -- because of incomplete information, signers not being registered to vote at the address they give, all sorts of reasons. This is common in petition drives. A very similar effort in 2004 turned in 74,000 signatures -- yet so many were invalidated, it fell sort of making the ballot by 2,700 signatures in the first round and 153 signatures short after the second round.
The charter plan may face competition. Hagan and Jones said yesterday that they plan to put a competing proposal for restructuring the county on the November ballot. Their plan isn't written yet, though Hagan said he agreed that some elected county officials should be appointed instead.
Hagan and Jones argued against an executive-council form of government, with Jones saying a county council elected by districts would encourage parochialism instead of regionalism, while Hagan questioned the $175,000 salary proposed for a county executive.
"We will offer options in terms of county government restructuring," Jones said. "We could not in good conscience permit [the charter proposal to go on the ballot] unchecked and unopposed."
Meanwhile, commissioners Tim Hagan and Peter Lawson Jones announced yesterday that they plan to offer a competing proposal for restructuring the county on the November ballot.
The Go Cuyahoga group wants to replace the county commissioners with an 11-member council and a county executive who would appoint several county officials who are now elected. It wants to put its proposed charter (click here to read it as a Word document) on the Nov. 3 ballot.
"Our work is the result of over 20 years of analysis," Parma Heights Mayor and Go Cuyahoga organizer Martin Zanotti told me this afternoon, referring to previous studies of possible county reforms. Zanotti said the proposed charter, developed this year by a group of local politicians and businessmen, would reorganize the county around the goals of "jobs, equity, and economic development."
The law says the group had to turn in at least 45,458 signatures by July 13. Now, the board of elections has until July 21 to examine Go Cuyahoga's petitions and decide whether 45,458 of its 79,255 signatures are valid. If they aren't, the group can embark on a second round of signature-gathering, with a Sept. 4 deadline.
“We expect that we will need more signatures," county prosecutor Bill Mason, a Go Cuyahoga member, said in the press release, "but today is a positive step toward putting this charter on the ballot."
That's a sign that the group knows many of its signatures may not be valid -- because of incomplete information, signers not being registered to vote at the address they give, all sorts of reasons. This is common in petition drives. A very similar effort in 2004 turned in 74,000 signatures -- yet so many were invalidated, it fell sort of making the ballot by 2,700 signatures in the first round and 153 signatures short after the second round.
The charter plan may face competition. Hagan and Jones said yesterday that they plan to put a competing proposal for restructuring the county on the November ballot. Their plan isn't written yet, though Hagan said he agreed that some elected county officials should be appointed instead.
Hagan and Jones argued against an executive-council form of government, with Jones saying a county council elected by districts would encourage parochialism instead of regionalism, while Hagan questioned the $175,000 salary proposed for a county executive.
"We will offer options in terms of county government restructuring," Jones said. "We could not in good conscience permit [the charter proposal to go on the ballot] unchecked and unopposed."
Tuesday, July 7, 2009
Poll shows support* for reform
*Kind of.
Check out the Plain Dealer front page today and you'll see a sidebar with some eye-popping poll results. It says 75 percent of Cuyahoga County voters would definitely or probably vote to approve a new charter for county government.
That convinced the Greater Cleveland Partnership, which hired the pollster, to support the county charter petition drive with $100,000.
But I can see at least three reasons to attach big asterisks to the results.
The first reason is right in the 2nd paragraph of the story:
"Slightly more than half of the 400 people surveyed... said they favor the Go Cuyahoga reform plan. The approval rate jumped to 75 percent after respondents were asked seven questions that outlined the plan's goals."
The "slightly more than half" number is the one I'd trust. Polls commonly start with a neutral question, then ask leading, one-sided questions to see if they change people's minds. It's a way of testing possible campaign messages.
But during an election, the other side will counter with its own message. Fund-raising will determine which message voters hear more often.
So imagine how that "slightly more than half" figure would decline if another poll used just one of the common arguments against the reform plan: "Opponents say the new county charter would concentrate too much power in the hands of one person, who would appoint almost all other officials in the government. Now how would you vote?"
(The proposed charter would replace the current county government with a county executive and 11-person county council. Here is the proposal as a Word document.)
Another reason for skepticism: only 13 percent of those surveyed were black, even though Cuyahoga County is 29 percent black. Attracting black voters is one of the reformers' biggest challenges, since most black political leaders in town, including U.S. Rep. Marcia Fudge and Cleveland Mayor Frank Jackson, oppose a charter.
Brent Larkin, who's read the poll, reported in his Sunday column, "Among black voters, results differed only slightly from the total numbers." But the reformers will have to work hard to hold onto black voters' support if Jackson and Fudge hit the airwaves to urge a no vote.
Finally, getting on the ballot can be as hard as winning on Election Day. Go Cuyahoga has until Monday to get 45,458 signatures. (If some of those signatures are ruled invalid, they would have a chance to collect more.) Parma Heights Mayor and Go Cuyahoga leader Martin Zanotti says he's confident the petition drive will succeed. But a similar county charter effort in 2004 turned in 74,000 signatures -- yet so many were invalidated, it fell 153 signatures short of making the ballot.
Check out the Plain Dealer front page today and you'll see a sidebar with some eye-popping poll results. It says 75 percent of Cuyahoga County voters would definitely or probably vote to approve a new charter for county government.
That convinced the Greater Cleveland Partnership, which hired the pollster, to support the county charter petition drive with $100,000.
But I can see at least three reasons to attach big asterisks to the results.
The first reason is right in the 2nd paragraph of the story:
"Slightly more than half of the 400 people surveyed... said they favor the Go Cuyahoga reform plan. The approval rate jumped to 75 percent after respondents were asked seven questions that outlined the plan's goals."
The "slightly more than half" number is the one I'd trust. Polls commonly start with a neutral question, then ask leading, one-sided questions to see if they change people's minds. It's a way of testing possible campaign messages.
But during an election, the other side will counter with its own message. Fund-raising will determine which message voters hear more often.
So imagine how that "slightly more than half" figure would decline if another poll used just one of the common arguments against the reform plan: "Opponents say the new county charter would concentrate too much power in the hands of one person, who would appoint almost all other officials in the government. Now how would you vote?"
(The proposed charter would replace the current county government with a county executive and 11-person county council. Here is the proposal as a Word document.)
Another reason for skepticism: only 13 percent of those surveyed were black, even though Cuyahoga County is 29 percent black. Attracting black voters is one of the reformers' biggest challenges, since most black political leaders in town, including U.S. Rep. Marcia Fudge and Cleveland Mayor Frank Jackson, oppose a charter.
Brent Larkin, who's read the poll, reported in his Sunday column, "Among black voters, results differed only slightly from the total numbers." But the reformers will have to work hard to hold onto black voters' support if Jackson and Fudge hit the airwaves to urge a no vote.
Finally, getting on the ballot can be as hard as winning on Election Day. Go Cuyahoga has until Monday to get 45,458 signatures. (If some of those signatures are ruled invalid, they would have a chance to collect more.) Parma Heights Mayor and Go Cuyahoga leader Martin Zanotti says he's confident the petition drive will succeed. But a similar county charter effort in 2004 turned in 74,000 signatures -- yet so many were invalidated, it fell 153 signatures short of making the ballot.
Thursday, July 2, 2009
Zanotti predicts reformers will submit 70,000 signatures by deadline
Parma Heights Mayor Martin Zanotti predicts the county reform effort will gather more than enough signatures to get a proposed charter on the November ballot.
"We expect to submit 70,000 signatures by the deadline," Zanotti told me yesterday.
The county reform group, now called Go Cuyahoga, wants to replace the current county government with a county executive and an 11-member county council. If it turns in 45,458 valid signatures by Monday, July 13, then county residents will vote on the proposal on November 3. (If they turn in 45,458 but some get declared invalid, they'll have until Sept. 4 to gather more and make up the difference. Zanotti's goal of 70,000 suggests they want to build up a cushion and get certified in the first round.)
Here is the proposed charter as a Word document.
Zanotti says Go Cuyahoga has 35 to 50 volunteer petition gatherers and another 35 or so paid signature-gatherers on the streets. The group hired National Petition Management, a petition-signature-gathering company, about two weeks ago. It's using a $100,000 donation it received last week from the Greater Cleveland Partnership (the regional chamber of commerce) to help pay NPM. That was a big help to the reformers, who had raised only $20,000 as of June 9.
Zanotti wouldn't say how many signatures they've collected so far. But the petition drive seems to be gaining momentum. I saw a couple of signature gatherers at the Waterloo Arts Festival on Saturday. This morning, a bunch of NPM workers were gathering signatures outside the county administration building and Justice Center.
"We expect to submit 70,000 signatures by the deadline," Zanotti told me yesterday.
The county reform group, now called Go Cuyahoga, wants to replace the current county government with a county executive and an 11-member county council. If it turns in 45,458 valid signatures by Monday, July 13, then county residents will vote on the proposal on November 3. (If they turn in 45,458 but some get declared invalid, they'll have until Sept. 4 to gather more and make up the difference. Zanotti's goal of 70,000 suggests they want to build up a cushion and get certified in the first round.)
Here is the proposed charter as a Word document.
Zanotti says Go Cuyahoga has 35 to 50 volunteer petition gatherers and another 35 or so paid signature-gatherers on the streets. The group hired National Petition Management, a petition-signature-gathering company, about two weeks ago. It's using a $100,000 donation it received last week from the Greater Cleveland Partnership (the regional chamber of commerce) to help pay NPM. That was a big help to the reformers, who had raised only $20,000 as of June 9.
Zanotti wouldn't say how many signatures they've collected so far. But the petition drive seems to be gaining momentum. I saw a couple of signature gatherers at the Waterloo Arts Festival on Saturday. This morning, a bunch of NPM workers were gathering signatures outside the county administration building and Justice Center.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
