dergon darkhelm

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. It was only when the civic leaders decided to push for a re-up on the Sin Tax --- and to do it on a short schedule -- that CAST had to step up quickly. The teams and civic leaders banded together with a plan to push this one through fast. If they wanted a debate on funding they would have invited public commentary to consider options and alternatives over the last couple of years. Or it could have on the general ballot for the November general election. The burden should be been on our civic leaders. They have failed us on this one.

This little map gives a good simple perspective.

This is the car tunnel. It will go beneath the RR tracks roughly at W73rd street and slope down to meet the Shoreway at Edgewater park. The two existing pedestrian tunnels at 76th and 65th are already completed and in regular use.

Got the chance to speak to some people close-in on the campaigns last night. The rumor floating on "good authority" was that KCS has internal polling showing that the Vote NO camp is currently ahead by a couple of percentage points. If that is true then expect this last week to be a full court press of KCS scare tactics, paid actors pretending to be "average joe", scare tactics, Team management pretending to be cops, scare tactics, stadium employees being forced to politic for their employer and... more scare tactics. But do not be afraid, Cleveland. Issue 7 will be defeated and it will work out much better than if it hadn't been.

Connecting 78th to 76th north of Detroit is a must for sure.

Burden of the Challenger? For challenging a tax that was supposed to be temporary but now seems to be put on the flight path towards perpetuity. No way. The burden is on KCS to prove that the sin tax is a) necessary, b) the best use ofpublic funds, and c) administrated in an open manner. KCS comes up "undeserving of my vote" on all 3. Vote NO on Issue 7!

No. There's already a primary for May 5, 2015. Could go there easily if it had to. (I don't want it to come to that. I prefer a facilities fee or a multi-county sales tax but ......but it could.) Don't but the faux-urgency! If Issue 7 fails on May 6 not a single cop will lose his job the next day. No fireman will fail to respond the day after that. No services will be cut the next week. Potholes will still be patched over the next Winter.

Worst case scenario if 7 is defeated and no satisfactory funding measure is found and no amount of bargaining with the teams and cajoling our leadership to do their jobs and no amount of daylight resolves to opacity that is the use of the funds ....... Worst case scenario we defeat 7 and get nowhere .... and it just gets put back on the ballot for 2015. But why not at least TRY for a year?!

It is scare tactic because there is more than a full year after the defeat of Issue 7 to secure alternative funding sources and to clarify to greater distinction what "necessary repair and maintenance" means. IMHO is does not mean new scoreboards. Take issue with the quoted numbers if you like but the bottom line is unchanged. Issue 7 asks the poorest citizens of Cleveland to pay for costs that should be born by the teams. If I could wave my magic wand and renegotiate the leases I would. But I can't. But what we can do is find a fairer way to fund the responsibilities, clarify in greater detail what those responsibilities are, and force our civic leadership to be accountable to the public. But we can only do those things after Issue 7 is defeated.

Where do you get the figure that the measure failing is going to cost Jimmy Haslam $300mill? Here -- I'll let the article from BeltMag be more articulate than me. http://beltmag.com/following-money/ As how the spending relates to Yes/No fight

http://www.cleveland.com/cuyahoga-county/index.ssf/2014/04/browns_cavs_indians_bankroll_pro-sin_tax_campaign_according_to_latest_campaign_finance_report.html Shocked, I am ! Shocked! I'd do the same thing if I were Jimmy Haslam. Spend $300 to make a $300 million... that a great ROI! (( ps -- that's coming out of our pockets!)) Vote NO on Issue 7! That's like Goliath asking David to show the receipt for where he bought his slingshot.

Now they're going with "Out of towners who are in the pockets of the tobacco industry" Nice try... this is true grass roots good governance campaign work here. The smear ain't gonna take.

It would be stratified across all three teams. And, just like any other tax, it has projections that may exceed or may fall short of what is planned. CAST has estimated a $3.25 facilities as a replacement for the estimates to be brought in by the sin tax. Both revenue sources rely on projections. Both may or may not have to be adjusted in the future. Both may or may not exceed the needed revenue to adequately fund stadium maintenance and repair.

For me the "cart before the horse" component of this is putting Issue 7 on the ballot more than a FULL YEAR before expiration. The intent was to stifle an open dialogue about alternatives by forcing a short window of debate. Don't buy the faux-urgency hype. Issue 7 can be defeated in May and there is still a full year + to go!

Not in the next election, no. But we have already seen a high rate of support for the Cuyahoga Arts &Culture tax. There could be easily be future support for a sintax for infrastructure, jobs, education, community health etc if Issue 7 is defeated. It will be much much easier to suggest sin tax revenue streams for projects of real benefit to the community in future years if the current oligarch support sin-tax is defeated now.

+1 There is an opportunity cost to re-upping the sin tax. That's money we can no longer appropriate to more worthy projects.

Updated photos. I can only figure that the new trench (South of the RR tracks but well North of the new sewer line between 70th and 73rd) is the beginning of the tunnel. And maybe that discussion about early repaving of Father Caruso from 70th to W. 65th might come to fruition. They has smoothers on it the other day making it look even and pretty. ( This pook looking East along Fr. Caruso from W70th)

I will be sure to let everyone know where they can have that opportunity...... but it only comes into play after Issue 7 is defeated.

Here is your better way -- it's official as of today! Kevin Kelly might like to say that he won't consider any alternative funding.... but he's going to have to.

The issue public financing of stadiums, and the bad deal it is for citizens getting national press! http://www.newsweek.com/2014/05/02/wealthy-sports-team-owners-want-taxbreaks-go-forever-248356.html Vote NO on Issue 7!

http://www.cleveland.com/cuyahoga-county/index.ssf/2014/01/scoreboard_upgrades_will_appear_on_sin_tax_wish_list_for_cavs_indians_according_to_landlord.html#pd_a_7715335 Scoreboard upgrades will appear on 'sin tax' wish list for Cavs, Indians, according to landlord Yep. There are your "necessary repairs and maintenance". #sarcasm Vote NO on Issue 7.

1.9 cents on a can of beer, 1.5 cents per ounce of liquor, and 4.5 cents on a pack of cigarettes The facilities fee of $3.25 per ticket would replace the same revenue without using public funds. The hundreds of millions of dollars saved could either be pocketed by the citizenry (no new tax) or used for some other purpose ( support infrastructure, economic development, public health, education, etc). Thank you. I don't smoke, but I do enjoy the drinking. If the sin tax is repealed, does anyone think a $6 pack of smokes will now be $5.95 Or a $3.50 bud at a bar will be $3.48. I understand a lot of the arguments against continuing the sin tax, and they have merit. The one argument I feel has no merit is "think of the poor" because I don't think this particular tax is passed on to the costumer all that often. (Not to mention it's a sin tax, not a food tax) You can support sin taxes generally ( as I do when the revenues are put to good public use) and still oppose this sin tax. It is simply a transfer of public funds into the hands of the wealthiest members of the community.

Attendence demand for professional sports tickets is actually relatively inelsatic. http://econ.unt.edu/~jhauge/Teaching/Sports/monopoly_Coates_Humphreys_2007.pdf It's not the price of the ticket that dumps demand.... it's the product on the field. But -- just to entertain a "fall -off in demand" scenario. Let's say attendance does drop slightly and the facility fee adopted in November 2014 begins to fall short on estimated revenue after a few years. There's no reason that in say 2017 or 2018 other funding options could be reconsidered. It is just critically important for the voters to realize that there is no urgency in passing Issue 7 in May 2014. There is plenty of time work through other better, fairer, and well though out options. There is no need for a knee-jerk Yes vote. Vote No now and there is plenty of time later.

1.9 cents on a can of beer, 1.5 cents per ounce of liquor, and 4.5 cents on a pack of cigarettes The facilities fee of $3.25 per ticket would replace the same revenue without using public funds. The hundreds of millions of dollars saved could either be pocketed by the citizenry (no new tax) or used for some other purpose ( support infrastructure, economic development, public health, education, etc). Being the devils (owners) advocate here--I would argue against this because it's impossible to predict revenue. At least with the sin tax they can be assured that their minimums would be covered. But what if the Indians attendance goes in the cellar again (not an unfathomable concept). Suddenly they lose that $3.25 per ticket. But no matter how tough times get in Cleveland, people will still be buying their cigarettes and beer. What needs to happen is extend the sin tax, but put someone in charge of the books, and someone in charge of negotiating with the teams. Make Dan Gilbert buy his own toilet paper and light bulbs. Being the devils advocate for the owners here and I can appreciate the position but.... it is pure naivete to think that somehow *after* approving the sin tax the team owners come to the table and open the books with full transparency. If you want that then defeat Issue 7 on May 6 and then force them to the table with those terms conditional as part of adopting whatever funding plan. There is plenty of time -- all the way into 2015 -- to get that done after Issue 7 is defeated. (( I still think the facilities fee is fairer and adequate but I am just responding to your argument ))

1.9 cents on a can of beer, 1.5 cents per ounce of liquor, and 4.5 cents on a pack of cigarettes The facilities fee of $3.25 per ticket would replace the same revenue without using public funds. The hundreds of millions of dollars saved could either be pocketed by the citizenry (no new tax) or used for some other purpose ( support infrastructure, economic development, public health, education, etc).