Right, his election was a "mandate" that citizens wanted to cancel the streetcar and the parking plan; Issue 22 failing was a "mandate" that we don't want any property tax increase for any reason; and keeping the property tax rate the same as last year is a "tax increase". That's the distorted mind of John Cranley.

Well this whole fixed amount of property tax issue is bizarre and any attempt to address it will no doubt be portrayed as an attempt to raise taxes. Kind of the way I thought about the parks levy was, that was Cranley's attempt to "claw back" more property tax revenue without addressing this issue directly.

And as somebody mentioned...if you really want your property taxes to go down, move to a little house in an unpopular part of town.  The annual tax on my house is about $2,250.  My cousin in Hyde Park pays $5,500 for a house of a similar size. 

 

That's great advice.  FYI, my property tax in Newport is about $1600 annually on a 1200 sq/ft house, not bad for being within walking distance of downtown.  Not that I'm encouraging anyone to leave Cincinnati; just supporting your assertion that a smaller house in a less trendy neighborhood translates into having more money on the back end.

 

Although the municipal income tax in NKY is slightly higher than Cincinnati.  It's mostly a wash with taxes in this region, even though there are three states.  But you can always choose to live in a smaller, less valuable house and almost certainly save a lot of money on taxes, utilities, etc. over the time you live there.  For *really* high income earners ($500k+), both working and living in an unincorporated area of this metro does save money by avoiding municipal earnings tax.  But most of those guys can't resist buying a large home and expensive cars, so they're not really getting ahead like they think they are. 

 

Lots of great tweets from WVXU's Jay Hanselman today:

 

Another interesting moment:  a city resident is having a conversation with the city's finance director about tax collections.

 

I as a reporter can't have that same conversation because of a city manager policy that prohibits dept heads from talking with press.

 

All requests for information must first be approved by manager's communication director.

 

 

And on the OTR parking permit idea (which was previously passed 5-4 by council and vetoed by the mayor):

 

Cranley says he would support parking permits for OTR residents who live in affordable housing.

 

Cranley says the parking permits would be free and adjacent to affordable housing units.

 

Council passes OTR residential parking permit program..5 yes, 4 no.  Mayor will likely veto again, and not enough  to override.

I agree with Cranley on something!

This was making the rounds on Facebook...

 

P. sure that Seelbach has the worst relationship with Cranley of anyone on Council.

He's childish in this exchange. Not focused on business, just blame. Eff politicians.

"Spent more money on spilt liquor..."

P. sure that Seelbach has the worst relationship with Cranley of anyone on Council.

 

 

Good. Cranley is an ass wipe. It's important to keep pressure on him to get him out of office.

Seelbach: Cranley treats people like 'shit' *

 

The discord between some Democratic members of Cincinnati City Council and the mayor has gotten so bad, Council members Chris Seelbach, Yvette Simpson and Wendell Young turned down the mayor's invitation to talk weekly, city e-mails shown to the Enquirer show.

 

Seelbach agreed to meet once to talk about their "professional relationship", but didn't mince words in his response to Mayor John Cranley about why he didn't want to meet weekly: "...Our professional relationship (or lack thereof) has absolutely nothing to do with the streetcar, me being more progressive or past campaigns. It has to do with you treating people like shit. You treating people with no respect."

 

Cranley asked Seelbach to reconsider. In an e-mail, he wrote: "I asked for a meeting so that we can improve our professional relationship and work together to move our city forward. I believe that the citizens want us to have a better relationship which can lead to better public policy."

 

Cont

 

 

*Note: Word is not currently censored on cincinnati.com

I was surprised they didn't censor it. I'm glad they didn't. It needs to be more widely known how disruptive to professional discussions he is.

The Enquirer has backed away from their original - and accurate - headline, to a much more milquetoast: "City Hall Democratic rift becomes chasm"

 

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/2016/01/20/seelbach-cranley-treats-people-like-shit/79059606/

COMMENTARY: Cranley tries to get the band back together for 2017

Jan 25, 2016, 2:10pm EST

Chris Wetterich

Staff reporter and columnist

Cincinnati Business Courier

 

In the wake of the staggering defeat of Mayor John Cranley's Issue 22 at the polls last year, the mayor promised more humility, listening and inclusiveness in the new year.

 

If anyone took that to mean that he would try to find common ground with his fellow majority Democrats on City Council, that notion was put to rest this month when Cranley picked a fight over a tiny amount of money he didn’t want included in the city’s 2017 property tax levy.

 

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/blog/2016/01/commentary-cranley-tries-to-get-the-band-back.html

Very accurate and harsh criticism of Cranley. Happy to see the Business Courier call him out.

A lot of great points in that article. Here's an important quote:

 

"Cranley's press office issued a news release that quoted him accusing council of raising property taxes, a dishonest accusation tailor-made for use in the 2017 campaign. Only in a tea party meeting or a remedial math class would someone argue that setting the property tax at 5.6 mills in 2016 and then setting it at the same 5.6 mills rate in 2017 constitutes a tax increase."

A lot of great points in that article. Here's an important quote:

 

"Cranley's press office issued a news release that quoted him accusing council of raising property taxes, a dishonest accusation tailor-made for use in the 2017 campaign. Only in a tea party meeting or a remedial math class would someone argue that setting the property tax at 5.6 mills in 2016 and then setting it at the same 5.6 mills rate in 2017 constitutes a tax increase."

 

I found this really put Cranley's view into perspective:

 

"Even Councilman Charlie Winburn, a Republican and staunch mayoral ally, called out Cranley in a letter. 'This 2017 collection estimate cannot be legitimately portrayed as a property tax increase,' Winburn wrote."

That article doesn't mention the other way the property tax is insane: fixed revenue with changing population. If the goal is to increase home ownership and city population, then it means the City has committed itself to funding more services for more people with a fixed property tax revenue source. On top of that, you have inflation. So the combined effects of inflation and population gains, even if modest year-over-year, gradually erode the tax revenue per resident. Absolutely insane!

Or alternatively, the policy gives the City a perverse incentive to want population declines and deflation... which is EVEN MORE INSANE!

There's always been this part of Cranley that seems frozen in 2001.  It's kind of understandable, given that was the time he first held office and he underwent a pretty traumatic experience within about three months.  But it's sort of weird how that period is kind of like the baseline of politics for him and so his refrains are always, "100 new cops, no new taxes," etc.  The City is a far different place now, particularly when it comes to voter turnout.

But that's the base that got him into office the first time. He appealed to conservative anti-tax suburbanites. Any those are the ones that generally show up to vote in off-years. As far as being stuck in 2001... yes, most of the people voting for Cranley probably haven't meaningfully spent any time in the city since 2001 (if ever), so they remain convinced that the city is a cesspool of violence and decay.

^He was appointed at first. The electorate shifts more than you think, and cares less about the issues Cranley promotes than he thinks.  But at least when he runs in the City, he does utilize that base.  He could still rely on it without making some of the choices he does cause its mostly signaling.

If PG runs, Cranley won't stand a chance in the next election.  Yvette Simpson also could pose a real threat to him, as she could presumably assemble the same coalition that led to two terms of Mallory: African Americans and urban progressives.  PG just seems to be generally likable, and his popularity crosses groups in a way that no other elected official can boast, as least that I can think of.

^There's no way PG runs for Mayor.

Yeah he wants federal office or state at the minimum.

Using under-the-radar PAC, Cranley quietly pushes political goals

 

The PAC also paid thousands of dollars to Cranley's chief of staff for consulting fees, reimbursed the mayor for travel expenses to a Hillary Clinton campaign event, and funneled campaign money to numerous state and local races. [...]

 

The PAC, formed a year ago this month, is fueled by thousands of dollars in donations from several big Democratic donors, including some out-of-town businessmen and well-heeled local philanthropists Otto Budig and Dick Rosenthal. Cranley-appointed "fun czar" Frank Wood Jr. and Shree Kulkarni, a controversial Cranley appointee to the city's Historic Conservation Board, contributed lesser amounts.

Business Courier's take:

 

Cranley PAC battles other Democrats with an eye toward 2017

The precinct candidate (Bobbi Dillon) on my [Democratic] primary ballot's running unopposed.  I guess I don't live in a very competitive precinct!

I'm beginning to suspect a reason why Mayor Cranley devised and fought for Issue 22, the property tax increase defeated last fall by voters which was ostensibly for the use on city parks, but which some suspected and characterized as a slush fund to be controlled by the mayor.  More and more is coming out about the park board's free-wheeling business practices and atrocious lack of accountability, profligate/questionable spending, avoidance of city and state regulations regarding the awarding of contracts, etc.  Here's the latest on the parks situation:

 

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2016/03/28/trips-meals-and-headphones-carden-klug-rack-up-parks-expenses/81324638/

 

It seems as though there's a concerted effort to cast blame entirely on the previous administration rather than casting any on the Cranley administration, and yet just in the case alone of the expedited work schedule associated with last summer's All Star Game, it obviously didn't occur during Mallory's terms in office.  Recall that Cranley initially wanted Carden to serve as City Manager.  For more background and context about this issue here's The Enquirer's recent article about the no-bid practice for awarding park work contracts:

 

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2016/03/22/how-did-smale-get-built-questions-arise-over-no-bid-contracts/81258696/

 

 

 

 

Yes, nobody seems to do the math and realize that Cranley has been in office for 27 months.  He's had 27 months to fix these problems with the park board.  Instead he sought to send them to dizzying new heights. 

I am as anti-Cranley as they come, but while a some of these problems were swept under the rug for the sake of the all-star game, there are some long standing problems that are left over from the previous administration that are often overlooked by UO because we liked Mallory's policies. 

Yes, Willie Carden seemed to have a long leash going back to the previous administration.  But I think some people are justifiably taking issue with, for instance, The Enquirer using a photo of Mallory on its front page article today.  Cranley's administration doesn't have the cleanest hands either, yet the mayor seems to be eluding blame in the coverage of this issue. 

 

My point is that it's dawning on me why Cranley may have wanted to have park funds as the source of funding when he came up with the Issue 22 idea that gave him and the City Manager so much power and discretion in deciding how Issue 22 funds would be spent.

In other words they would have had a bigger pot to pilfer from?

^I'm thinking more that the gross lack of oversight and accountability that the park board allows could've been attractive.  When opponents of Issue 22 raised concern about the power and discretion it would grant to the mayor didn't proponents, to allay those concerns, argue that the park board would still be involved in the process? 

 

Anyway, it's just a suspicion! 

 

 

My head is spinning a bit after reading this Biz Courier article:

 

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2016/03/29/some-council-members-defend-carden-park-board-in.html

 

Councilman Christopher Smitherman, an independent, said Carden and the park department have been caught in the crossfire between Cranley and those who wanted to defeat Issue 22. Like Flynn, he said he wanted to see the audit before making a public judgment.

“The parks board and the director have become casualties,” Smitherman said. “It diminished the great successes the parks have had for many decades.”

 

[Councilwoman Yvette] Simpson slammed the city administration for making public statements about the park department before the audit was complete. Carden, she said, has “a heart of gold,” and those who donated the money that built Smale Riverfront Park could have done anything with it, yet chose to give it to the city.

 

“That’s not leadership,” Simpson said. “The reality is that everything we say on record affects people. I want to say to Mr. Carden … you do a phenomenal job. I know that you have – and always have had – the option with your intelligence and your energy to do any job in the world. You could probably be leading a Fortune 500 company with your expertise, but you decided to serve the public.

My head is spinning a bit after reading this Biz Courier article:

 

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2016/03/29/some-council-members-defend-carden-park-board-in.html

 

Councilman Christopher Smitherman, an independent, said Carden and the park department have been caught in the crossfire between Cranley and those who wanted to defeat Issue 22. Like Flynn, he said he wanted to see the audit before making a public judgment.

“The parks board and the director have become casualties,” Smitherman said. “It diminished the great successes the parks have had for many decades.”

 

[Councilwoman Yvette] Simpson slammed the city administration for making public statements about the park department before the audit was complete. Carden, she said, has “a heart of gold,” and those who donated the money that built Smale Riverfront Park could have done anything with it, yet chose to give it to the city.

 

“That’s not leadership,” Simpson said. “The reality is that everything we say on record affects people. I want to say to Mr. Carden … you do a phenomenal job. I know that you have – and always have had – the option with your intelligence and your energy to do any job in the world. You could probably be leading a Fortune 500 company with your expertise, but you decided to serve the public.

 

I stopped reading after "Christopher Smitherman, Independent".

I chuckled and imagined the first draft of that article saying "Chris Smitherman, Republican Independent."

City may take 'bold' step of accepting photo IDs for immigrants, homeless

 

Cincinnati may be on the verge of photo ID cards for thousands of its most vulnerable residents – including undocumented immigrants.

 

After months of work by a religious coalition and the mayor's office, the City Council is scheduled to vote Wednesday on a resolution to begin accepting the cards in hopes of smoothing relations between police and groups that also include the homeless and people returning from prison.

 

Police hope possession of the card will reduce fears and reluctance in the immigrant community to report crimes.

 

"Our police know that when individual victims fail to report crime, it emboldens criminals to act again without consequence," Cincinnati Mayor John Cranley said.

 

"This will make our city safer," the mayor said.

 

Cincinnati would become the first municipality in Ohio to accept such an ID card.  The MARCC ID card is named for the faith-based organization that will issue it -- the Metropolitan Area Religious Coalition of Cincinnati.

 

In principle I am supportive of making IDs easier to get for those who are disadvantaged or living in the shadows. I'm skeptical of how much of an impact this will have, though. Especially considering you need a passport, birth certificate, or consular ID to get one of these. I think it kind of misses the point. But maybe I'm just not fully knowledgeable on the topic and they have a way to issue them if someone is missing these documents.

 

Any thoughts?

From the Business Courier:

 

[City Manager Harry] Black also proposed slashing human services funding by 5 percent, including cuts for United Way, Cranley’s Hand-Up Initiative and Strategies to End Homelessness. Black proposed zeroing out funding for Cradle Cincinnati, which had received $250,000 as a part of its mission to fight infant mortality.

 

But the Center for Closing the Health Gap, the nonprofit group led by Dwight Tillery, the city’s former mayor and a 2013 campaign chairman for Cranley, received a $250,000 increase and would receive $1 million next year under the proposed budget.

 

The Center for Closing the Health Gap also runs an annual health expo which was somehow declared a "heritage event" (on par with Oktoberfest and Taste of Cincinnati) at the mayor's urging. No surprise that Tillery and Cranley continue to scratch eachothers' backs.

^ For being a rather large city, I'm amazed at how well the good old boys network operates in Cincinnati. It's like something you'd see in a backwoods town of 20,000 people.

^ For being a rather large city, I'm amazed at how well the good old boys network operates in Cincinnati. It's like something you'd see in a backwoods town of 20,000 people.

 

It's because they have control of both parties at the local level, so it doesn't really matter who wins. They got Winburn in their pocket 20 years ago and none of his 300-odd marchers in the Northside parade seem to realize he's a Republican.  Smitherman's been on the payroll for 10 years now.  The told Smitherman and Cunningham that they were going to be buddies around 2009 after having been enemies when Smitherman wasn't under their control. 

^ For being a rather large city, I'm amazed at how well the good old boys network operates in Cincinnati. It's like something you'd see in a backwoods town of 20,000 people.

 

This stuff happens in every city in every country in the world.  It's not a function of size.

Columbus is actually just as bad but only 5% of the population knows it since there's so many new people here and the town is terrible at retaining natives.

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/2016/06/26/hillary-clinton-event-cranley-home-takes-450k/86420452/

 

Cranley is in full combat with future opponent Yvette Simpson here -- trotting out a new black buddy to rush and try to buy more black votes.  Cranley doesn't care about anybody or anything, black or white, except for his own ghastly white self. 

 

Also, this article was insufferable for me personally, as my great-great grandfather was screwed out of his ownership stake in the Rosenthal printing business 100 years ago, and here we are a century later with someone who inherited a piece of that fortune that I could have gotten a piece of co-hosting a boring fundraiser for the insufferable Hillary Clinton.   

MSD $55,000 payoff to Sam Malone looking more and more like it was ordered by Cranley:

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/2016/06/29/msd-official-confirms-contract-threat/86533658/

Sewer questions bring Cranley temper to light

Jason Williams, [email protected] 8:06 a.m. EDT July 8, 2016

(Photo: The Enquirer/Carrie Cochran)

Politics Extra is a weekly column looking inside local politics

 

Mayor John Cranley had a big opportunity to lead City Hall amid last week's revelation of the first major scandal during his administration.

 

He whiffed.

 

Cranley's testy and controlling behavior during and after the June 29 special meeting of City Council about the sewer district mess made the whole thing messier. That behavior has been the Democrat's biggest shortcoming during his 2½ years in office and has failed to fade away even as Cranley has found success fixing fiscal problems, adding thousands of new jobs and putting more cops and firefighters on the streets.

 

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/2016/07/08/sewer-questions-bring-cranley-temper-light/86830598/

"I don't accept the caricature that I'm abrasive and take shots at people," [Cranley] said.

 

Lol

^That got me too.  He's a mess.

It's one thing if someone is abrasive and they know it. But if he's so delusional that he honestly doesn't realize, that's just sad.

It's one thing if someone is abrasive and they know it. But if he's so delusional that he honestly doesn't realize, that's just sad.

 

He was a lying weasel back in high school.  During freshman orientation, we were told that John Cranley '92 was a model St. Xavier student.  He had all of those administrators fooled.  I'm sure that his letters of recommendation were spectacular.