dergon darkhelm

Oh yeah it is! Shakin' hard Here are a couple of better pictures now that the area is smoothed over completely:

Not my best pic, but it shows the filled sewer junction at 69th and Fr. Caruso (Picture facing East on Fr. Caruso at 69th)

I had the opportunity to take part in the interior demo of "Ink House" at 156th and Waterloo. I hadn't walked through the neighborhood in some time (Yeah, I've been to a show or three at the Beachland over the last couple of years but that's about it) I was surprised when Liz Maugans told me they were adding a Zygote Press annex there. When we came start the house renovation on a beautiful morning last weekend I finally understood. I see this neighborhood running in parallel just a few years back of Gordon Square. I was really pleasently surprised.

News around the DetShore ..... They are close to closing the Eastbound ramp into Edgewater Park in order to start work on the W 73rd tunnel. Supposedly they are ready now, but Matt Zone wants them to hold off until the unrelated construction over on the Herman/Tillman/49th Shoreway exit is completed, since all the park traffic will have to go East and then enter the park from that exit. They filled in the big sewer junction at W 69th and Fr. Caruso and have been smoothing and grading the land South of the RR tracks for what I presume is the upcoming shoe-fly (I finally retained that word ;) ).

http://www.cleveland.com/cuyahoga-county/index.ssf/2014/06/ed_fitzgerald_wants_to_tie_sin_tax_distribution_to_performance_of_browns_cavs_and_indians.html#incart_river_default

Agree. I had the chance to boat to the old bar for the hot minute it was open back in the day. Even in my drunken haze 20s I saw the potential. With land acess and other development nearby ... fogettaboudit!

A bit of cross-posting since the Coast Guard Station was in the "abandoned projects" forum. http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2014/05/cleveland_metroparks_considers.html Cleveland Metroparks considers fixing historic Coast Guard station

Maybe a chance to move this out of the "abandoned projects" forum :) http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2014/05/cleveland_metroparks_considers.html Cleveland Metroparks considers fixing historic Coast Guard station

There's some regrouping going on. People want to find something to a) continue to rally around and b) get a "win" to prevent getting demoralized. It turns out the Sin Tax was actually voted down ..... if you only count the City of Cleveland. (failed by 235 votes) There is the thought about going small with the facilities fees.... maybe target only the Browns separate from the Indians and Cavs and have the resolution be a city tax and not a county-wide measure. Haslam is the more easily villified of the owners, the Browns have the highest ticket prices and probably the most inelastic demand due to the few games. If we could get that one passed it would set a nice precedent for future funding issues. But all is in its infancy now. Mostly licking wounds and trying to keep people engaged for now.

You won't hear me say this often (or likely ever again) but I welcome the support of the Tea Party types on the sin tax opposition. Politics and strange bedfellows and all that. I am neither suburban, nor anti-tax, nor supportive of the cigarette and beverage industries. I have supported sin taxes in the past when I felt that the money spent was a wise use of public funds. I will support the sin tax again when the Cuyahoga arts and culture tax comes up for renewal. I view my No vote as a strike not against taxation but against corporate welfare and the too-cozy "go along get along" approach of our civic leaders.

The owners and the leagues have been trying to shorten the lifespan of stadiums dramatically over the last few years. Agree... there has to be some strong citizen push back. It's clear our politicians have already been rolled. So we have to vote down the corporate welfare ourselves.

Off to the polls I go. I have been politicking and arguing and cajoling online, in live meetings, and in one-on-one conversations. Regardless of results I wanted to say that of all the forums in which I have participated the quality of the debate was the highest here. On either side of the issue it is clear to me that the members of Urban Ohio are among the most informed of the electorate. If I have swayed any of you to my position then get out and Vote NO on Issue 7 today! And for those of you continue to support Issue 7 .... get out there and vote tomorrow! ;)

I find that response somewhat perplexing. It does not follow that if Issue 7fails there will be less money for other services. The reply wholly ignores the plan to find alternative funding sources. (Like the facilities fee). In fact, with the stadium use of the sin tax removed, we could be freed up to use a different sin tax some time in the future that might increase government services by funding public health, education, or infrastructure.

The facilities fee would be added to the price of each ticket. Although levied by the city, the owners rightly view that as putting downward pressure on their pricing power. I believe they would consider to have an alternative such as a multicounty tax, a smaller fee, or clarified leases and advertisement revenue sources all as better alternatives to that. The possibility that the full facilities fee goes on to the ballot November 2014 if something else is not successfully negotiated is what puts the leverage behind our civic leaders while at the negotiating table.

they negotiate because the potential of a deal that is very bad for them coming out of a citizen ballot initiative is quite high. If I am a team owner and I'm looking on Wednesday, May 7 at a failed issue seven and thinking that come November I am going to be having to have a facilities fee to make up the entirety of that revenue, I am going to start wanting a moderate solution. I would be thinking that getting to the table with the civic leaders, now forced to do their job more assertively by the citizenry, is a better option than simply letting a facilities fee go to the ballot without negotiation.

Realistically, no one knows what precisely will come out of the next negotiation. They will probably eventually get to a middle-of-the-road deal. What I am posting about is what I consider to be the ideal. perhaps the teams and the anti- sin tax groups could agree on a multicounty sales tax to defray some of the cost at a lower facilities fee. but the teams (and our leaders) know that they will have to come up with an alternative solution should issue seven fail .Kevin Kelly might like to say that the money will come out of the general fund. But it is not going to. He knows that that is not realistic. The owners know that that is not realistic. That is just their scare tactic. An alternative funding source will have to be secured.

Yes. BUt we only get to go back to the table on the leases if we put the smack down on Issue 7 next week. People seem to be taking a fatalistic "it is what it is" stance as if once done in the 90's the current leases and funding arrangements must be continued in perpetuity. That is not the case. These teams and our elected officials can be brought to the table. The sunlight of citizen awareness can disinfect the culture of abusing the peoples' purse and can force them to act in our best interest. But ONLY if Issue 7 fails on Tuesday.

I asked a similar question a while back, but I don't think I got a clear answer. Why would any citizen of Cleveland vote against the county tax measure if the burden would mostly fall on them to cover the cost if the tax measure fails? Because the plan after Issue 7 fails is not to let the burden fall on the citizens of Cleveland but instead to put in place a facilities fee, with the cost born by those attending games and the teams. ___ more national press: Ralph Nader says Vote NO on Issue 7 http://nader.org/2014/05/01/stopping-clevelands-corporate-freeloaders/ http://www.cleveland.com/tipoff/index.ssf/2014/05/ralph_nader_weighs_in_on_cuyah.html Well said, Ralph. Almost good enough for me to forgive you for sinking Gore in 2000.

http://www.clevelandleader.com/node/22510 Our Biggest Welfare Clients: The Beggar Billionaires Three by Roldo Bartimole Hear hear!

http://www.ideastream.org/soi/entry/61494 A discussion re: Issue 7 on WCPN Sound of Ideas this morning (Wednesday) at 9am. Glad to see Roldo on the panel. Go get 'em!

Here is the proposed ballot language: Initiative ____. Shall the ordinance requiring the City of Cleveland (1) to impose a Facilities Fee of $3.25 on each ticket sold to events held at each of the three publicly owned professional sports facilities located within the city of Cleveland commencing July 1, 2015; (2) to provide for penalties to any promoter or lessee operating any of the sports facilities for imposing any Facility Fee in addition to the proposed ordinance; (3) to repay a 15 year, $30 million obligation legislated from the General Fund of the City to pay for the maintenance and capital repairs of First Energy Stadium; and (4) to create a committee to oversee the ordinance's implementation and revenue distribution be adopted? Here is the full language of the FairShare proposal: Cleveland City Council Resolution Submitting to the Electors an Ordinance Ballot Petition Initiative. By the Committee of the Petitioners; representing the petitioners in all matters relating to the petition or its circulation; Alan B. Glazen, 10011 Cliff Dr., Cleveland, Ohio 44102 Claudia Young, 701 Lakeside Ave. W., Suite 1206 Cleveland, Ohio 44113 Ryan T. Eberly, 1734 W. 28th St. #205 Cleveland, 44113 Keith C. Humphrey, 15837 Norway Avenue, Cleveland, OH 44111 Larry Collins, 304 Overlook Park, Cleveland, Ohio 44110 Paulius Nasvytis, 701 Lakeside Ave. W., Suite 1206 Cleveland, Ohio 44113 Whereas, Chapter 7 of the Charter of the City of Cleveland, Ohio authorizes a Committee of Petitioners to circulate to the electors of the City of Cleveland, a petition to place an ordinance with full effect of law before the Clerk of the City Council containing no less than five thousand signatures of qualified electors. Whereas, The Clerk of the City Council of Cleveland must accept such duly and lawfully signed petitions, being represented by no less than five electors who have chosen to make up the Committee of the Petitioners. Whereas, The Clerk of the City Council of Cleveland must accept such signed petitions and the ordinance language submitted, examine them as allowed by Charter and endorse such petitions with a certificate result thereof. Whereas, The City of Cleveland, and in some circumstances, in partnership with the County of Cuyahoga, have committed to provide maintenance and capital improvement funding by way of leases to the three publicly owned sports facilities whose partial funding comes from taxes on the sales of tobacco and alcohol in the County of Cuyahoga and the City of Cleveland’s General Fund. Whereas, The Electors of the City of Cleveland desire to institute an ordinance for the funding for such leasehold maintenance and capital repairs and propose the following funding alternative by way of a citizen initiative petition; now therefore, The Committee of the Petitioners does hereby submit this lawfully presented ordinance to: 1. Assess a $3.25 “Facility Fee” on every ticket sold to any event at any of the three publicly owned sports facilities located within the City of Cleveland, to wit; Progressive Field, home of the Cleveland Indians; Quicken Loans Arena home of the Cleveland Cavaliers, and FirstEnergy Stadium home of the Cleveland Browns to commence July 1, 2015; 2. Codify by law, penalties for the collection of Facility Fees by any and all business that use the City of Cleveland (or combined City / Cuyahoga County) aforementioned publically owned professional sports facilities; 3. Create a committee to oversee the ordinance's implementation and disbursement of revenue to the City of Cleveland General Fund and to the Gateway Board Economic Development Corporation from the Facility Fees on behalf of the financial commitments agreed to be way of leases from the City of Cleveland; and 4. Notify the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections of the Ballot Initiative to prepare for a vote at the General Election to be held on Tuesday, November 4, 2014; and directing the Clerk of Cleveland City Council to fix the date for submission of arguments, public hearings and to provide for Notice and Publication in accordance with law; now therefor, Be it ordained by the Council of the City of Cleveland: Section 1: TITLE Cleveland Sports Facility Fee and Regulation Ordinance Section 2: FINDINGS The people of Cleveland, Ohio find as follows: WHEREAS it is the goal of the people of Cleveland to initiate a fair funding method for the maintenance, upkeep and capital repairs of the municipally owned facility now known as FirstEnergy Stadium and for its pro-rata portion of the maintenance, upkeep and capital repairs for the co-owned facilities in partnership with the County of Cuyahoga, Ohio and with respect to the contracts already authorized to the Gateway Economic Development Corporation to maintain and repair the facilities known as: Quicken Loans Arena and Progressive Field; and WHEREAS the current method of paying the City of Cleveland obligations to the lessees of these facilities places an undue and unfair burden upon City residents by imposing taxes on the consumption of alcohol and tobacco products; and WHEREAS it has been reported by the facility lessees that over 50% of all attendees at Cleveland’s sports facilities reside outside Cuyahoga County; and WHEREAS the poorest residents of the Northeast Ohio live within the boundaries of the City of Cleveland; and WHEREAS imposing and regulating a Facility Fee on each ticket sold at any event at these three sports facilities is the most equitable method available for funding the maintenance, upkeep and capital repairs of the publicly-owned venues; and WHEREAS in the face of the severe state fiscal cuts to the local government fund and the local budget crisis, the revenues from Facilities Fees would negate the need to cut City services which Cleveland City Council and the Mayor of Cleveland have publically stated will be required in order to maintain the lessor obligations previously negotiated; and WHEREAS the sin taxes that currently fund the maintenance and capital repairs of these sports facilities have no guarantee to provide for the projected useful life of the facilities; and WHEREAS it is the hope of the people of Cleveland that there be city law reform that will eliminate the problems and costs caused by a sin tax and cause legislation to be affected that charges the users and attendees of the sports facilities to pay for the use of the facilities; THEREFORE the people of the City of Cleveland do hereby enact the following ordinance establishing the Sports Facility Fee and Regulation policy of the city. Section 3: DEFINITION "Facility Fee" - Means a "surcharge” not a tax as currently defined in Ohio Revised Code Section 715.013. Section 4: PURPOSE The purpose of this ordinance is: a) To direct the City of Cleveland to impose a Facility Fee of $3.25 on the sale of each ticket for any professional sports event or other ticket-purchased event (excluding usage for non-profit corporations) and use to raise revenue on behalf of the City of Cleveland, Ohio to cover its obligations for the maintenance and capital repairs in excess of $500,000.00 per year or as otherwise negotiated in the current leases commencing July 1, 2015. b) To direct the Mayor’s office of the City of Cleveland to impose, collect and distribute the revenues from the Sports Facility Fee on a yearly basis to; i) replace from the General Fund the previously legislated fifteen year, $30 million authorization to fund the repairs and maintenance of the facility known as FirstEnergy Stadium with funding from the Sports Facility Fee, ii) use the yearly difference collected to pay its obligations to the Gateway Economic Development Corporation for the facilities known as Quicken Loan Arena and Progressive Field, iii) to pay any excess Facility Fees collected beyond Section 4(b)(i) and Section 4(b)(ii) to pay, on a yearly basis, directly to the debt bonds issued on behalf of the City of Cleveland and secured by the General Fund, effective immediately upon passage of this ordinance. Section 5: REGULATION The City of Cleveland shall establish a system to impose the Cleveland Sports Facility Fee and Regulation Ordinance as soon as possible under Ohio law. At that time, the Cleveland City Council shall promulgate regulations that include, but are not limited to, the following provisions consistent with Ohio law: a) The assessment of $3.25 per ticket sold at each of the three professional sports facilities located in Cleveland, Ohio as a Facility Fee; b) The city shall establish a system for collecting the Facility Fee from all lessees or promoters with regulations to assure good business practices, auditing and compliance; and c) Organizations who hold a qualified IRS 501©(3) designation and who contract to use the facilities shall be exempted from the Facility Fee; and d) Define and collect penalties assessed to any event promoter or lessee for imposing any type of Facility Fee beyond the Cleveland Sports Facility Fee and Regulation Ordinance referenced herein; and e) Distribute the Facility Fees and penalties, if imposed, to the appropriate sources as defined in Section 4. Section 6: OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE A Cleveland Sports Facility Fee and Regulation Ordinance Oversight Committee shall be appointed to oversee the implementation of the Cleveland Sports Facility Fee and Regulation Ordinance. The Committee will comprise 11 members by way of the following: 3 - Cleveland City Council members appointed by the President of Cleveland City Council; and 2 - Cuyahoga County Council members appointed by the President of Cuyahoga County Council; and 1 - Community member appointed by the Mayor of Cleveland; and 3 - Community members appointed by the Committee of the Petitioners; and 1 - Representative of the City of Cleveland Law Department; and 1 - Representative of the Cleveland Finance Department. Responsibilities of the Committee shall include: a) Oversee the implementation of the Cleveland Sports Facility Fee and Regulation Ordinance; b) Make recommendations to the Cleveland City Council regarding appropriate regulations, in accordance with Section 5 above; d) Oversee the disbursement of revenues generated through the enacted Facility Fee to ensure that funds go to i) the General Fund to replace any obligations previously legislated on behalf of the maintenance and capital repairs for FirstEnergy Stadium, ii) to Gateway Economic Development Corporation to fund the pro-rata commitments required by lease obligations from the City of Cleveland for the maintenance and repairs of Quicken Loans Arena and Progressive Field, iii) to pay off the obligations made by previous legislation to pay the debt/bondholders for the construction of the facilities; and e) Report annually to Cleveland City Council on the implementation of this ordinance. Section 7: SEVERABILITY If any provision of this ordinance or the application thereof to any person, entity or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the ordinance and the application of such provisions to other persons, entities or circumstances shall not be affected thereby, and be it,FURTHER RESOLVED: that the City Council of the City of Cleveland, Ohio does hereby request that the Board of Elections of Cuyahoga County order the consolidation of this Cleveland Municipal Ordinance number______, in the statewide general election of November 4, 2014 consistent with the provisions of state law; and, FURTHER RESOLVED: that in accordance with Article XVIII of the Ohio Constitution and Chapter 7 of the City of Cleveland Charter, the Council Clerk shall fix and determine a date for submission of hearings for or against said proposed initiative and said date shall be published in accordance with state laws; and be it FURTHER RESOLVED: that each ballot used at said Municipal Election shall have printed therein, in addition to any other matter required by law the following language: Initiative: Yes: No: Initiative ____. Shall the ordinance requiring the City of Cleveland (1) to impose a Facilities Fee of $3.25 on each ticket sold to events held at each of the three publicly owned professional sports facilities located within the city of Cleveland commencing July 1, 2015; (2) to provide for penalties to any promoter or lessee operating any of the sports facilities for imposing any Facility Fee in addition to the proposed ordinance; (3) to repay a 15 year, $30 million obligation legislated from the General Fund of the City to pay for the maintenance and capital repairs of First Energy Stadium; and (4) to create a committee to oversee the ordinance's implementation and revenue distribution be adopted? FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Clerk of Cleveland City Council, the Cleveland City Council and the Mayor of the City of Cleveland are hereby authorized and directed to take any and all actions necessary under law to prepare for and conduct the November 4, 2014, General Municipal Election and the City Council hereby authorizes and appropriates all money necessary for the Mayor and Council Clerk to prepare for and conduct the November 4, 2014 General Municipal Election consistent with law. IN COUNCIL, CLEVELAND, OHIO, PASSED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: AYES: - NOES: - ABSENT: - ABSTENTION: - DATE: ________________

The petition language allows the City of Cleveland to levy a fee on each ticket sold for sporting events at the venues. It does not mandate that the teams institute the fee.

Wait... what? People thought that the sin tax was going to expire as the law was written for it to expire. There weren't any alternatives planned because there wasn't any future tax planed. The maintenance costs weren't an expected expense? So by your rationale... even though the original sin tax was only scheduled for 20 years, opponents should have actually known that the tax was really meant to continue in perpetuity because of course the billionaire owners would continue to need more $$ and therefore should have proposed alternative funding measures expecting that the teams would want to renew the tax ad infinitum? That's some twisty logic there.

+1