Jackson's article does not set out why he would be a good mayor.  All it seems to do is state that he has his own personal rules that he'll stick to.  Don't you dare violate his code or else he'll get mad at you.  Its weird and paints him as out of touch.   

 

by the way, what happened to my avatar?

this doesn't look good.  hopefully jane can come through on the debates.

 

courtesy of our friends at www.wkyc.com:

 

results: http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=571bb693-e5e3-41b0-99e0-29718c6c9821&c=30

 

summary:

CLEVELAND -- If the election for Mayor of Cleveland were held today, it would be a landslide victory for Frank Jackson.

 

That is what our exclusive Channel 3/Survey USA poll is predicting.

 

In a poll of 587 likely voters, 54-percent would vote for Jackson, while 34-percent for Jane Campbell. Eleven percent of Cleveland voters are undecided.

Yikes.

In other bad news for Jane:

 

Four labor groups endorse Jackson

Wednesday, October 26, 2005

 

Four labor groups, with a large percentage of Cleveland members, endorsed Council President Frank Jackson for mayor Tuesday.

 

The groups include the United Food & Commercial Workers, which has about 3,000 members in the city and UNITE HERE, the hospitality and linen workers union, which has about 1,000 members in Cleveland.

 

Also endorsing Jackson are the Cleveland Association of Rescue Employees, with more than 300 members and the Vanguards of Cleveland, a black and Latino firefighters group, with about 180 members.

Since the newpapers are being distributed to our carriers as I write this, I think it's now safe to report that Sun Newspapers is endorsing Jane Campbell. It's not a loving endorsement, however.

 

For Jackson supporters, please read my message earlier in this string at:

 

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php?topic=4040.msg56402#msg56402

 

KJP

Has Peter Lawson Jones made an endorsement in the mayoral election?  I saw him and Campbell in the same room yesterday, and he gave her a nice nod, but she didn't really acknowledge him and the two never spoke to one another.  It made me wonder if he had come out for Jackson.

I got this in the daily CrainsCleveland.com email

 

Jane, again

 

Jane Campbell may lack the dynamic persona of the previous occupant of the mayor’s office in Cleveland. However, she has proven to be a more competent administrator than her predecessor, and we believe she has grown in the job during her initial four years in the post. We urge Cleveland voters to give her the opportunity to build on her experience by re-electing Mayor Campbell to a second term on Nov. 8.

 

Unlike former mayor Mike White, who gave off an aura of infallibility and would bristle at any suggestion that he might not have handled a particular issue or problem in the proper manner, Jane Campbell is honest enough to admit that she doesn’t know it all and has learned a lot in her first term in office. And, she acknowledged in a meeting last week with Crain’s editorial board, “I suspect in a second term I’ll learn even more.” It is only from a willingness to learn that growth can come, which is why we believe Jane Campbell is a better mayor now than four years ago.

 

For instance, early in her term the mayor seemed to operate by the philosophy that the best way for the city to promote economic development was to get out of the way of business and let it happen. However, in more recent times the mayor’s office has taken a more activist role in contacting hundreds of businesses and trying to see what the city can do to keep them and their valuable jobs in Cleveland.

 

Mayor Campbell also has created a more inviting atmosphere than her predecessor for companies and developers to do business in the city. A prime example is the experience of developer Scott Wolstein, who is pursuing plans for a $230 million residential and retail redevelopment project on the East Bank of the Flats. Mr. Wolstein has stated that he and his late father, Bart, met resistance from the previous administration when it came to plans they concocted for the Flats land. By contrast, Mr. Wolstein said he has been “blown away” by the cooperation he has received from all levels of city government for advancing his Flats East Bank plan.

 

This endorsement doesn’t mean we’re entirely pleased with the mayor’s performance over the last four years. We have been critical of her failure to be a vocal champion of a clearly defined economic development vision for Cleveland. We also don’t share her desire to bring casino gambling to the city.

 

Nonetheless, we believe the improvements her administration has made in the inner workings of city government and the job knowledge she has gained that can be used to the city’s advantage over the next four years give Jane Campbell the edge over her opponent, City Council President Frank Jackson.

 

We believe Mr. Jackson, like Mayor Campbell, is an earnest public servant who wants what’s best for the people of the city of Cleveland. However, we don’t find in Mr. Jackson’s economic development platform much that is substantially different or better than programs and initiatives that already are in place or in progress under the current administration.

 

Rather than switch captains of the ship simply for the sake of change, we would prefer to stay with a pilot who can build upon four years of experience at the helm. It is why we endorse Jane Campbell for mayor.

so, who watched the debate on TV tonight?  Oh, right, no one!  Since WKYC didn't broadcast it!  I was astonished to hear that it was available by webcast only, because let's face it, a VERY limited # of Clevelanders actually knows how to access that... or WOULD access it, for that matter.  So, it was pretty much relegated to a 30 second feature on the Channel 3 (WKYC) nightly news.  Ridiculous!

 

I'll hold judgements on who won, but will say this: it was a good debate with many good questions and several duds and both candidates got their fair share of jabs in at each other's expense.  It didn't get out of hand by any means, but the crowd was definitely on the edge of their seats, waiting for their candidate to deliver the knockout punch.  (It never came, in my opinion)  Basically, both of them called each other on "spin" and misinformation and all that, so who really knows who's lying? 

 

Other interesting questions: how many in the audience were actually there because they are still on the fence?  I assumed that a large % had already made up their minds.  Also, how many in attendance were actually Cleveland residents???

I'm in NY right now and watched the whole thing on the internet.  It seemed like there was a delay.

 

As MGD stated, the knock out never came.  Although I think Jane came closer to getting a "tko".

 

In todays PD (online) the has graphic of wards (http://www.cleveland.com/mayor/wide/index.ssf?/mayor/wide/battleground.html) and it looks as though voter turn out was so low that its not a real indication who is actually winning, as over half the city is up for grabs.

 

I find it interesting, even with low turnout, that Campbell didn't win the ward she lives in, shaker square - my neighborhood.  :?  :?

WKYC and the PD should be ashamed of themselves.  WKYC broadcast like two questions of the debate, and the PD buried the story on the bottom of the metro page.  I'm sorry, but with the future of the city hanging in the balance, that debate should have been broadcast in its entirety, and should have been front page news, with a big picture. 

 

Jackson is not a great speaker.  I hope, in the event that he wins, that he has other qualities that I'm unaware of.  I don't understand how he's winning. 

The breakdown by district as to who voted for who made me feel a lot better. Although Campbell did not receive the most votes in Ohio City, Tremont, Downtown, and Edgewater, I would have to think that those people who wanted someone else in office will cast their vote for Campbell in November.

Yeah, but that WKYC poll posted above has me worried.

I think what's going on is that people are scapegoating Jane for what would have been a rough 4 years under any mayor. It was the beginning of an economic tailspin, the city's finances were in disarray, very little development was underway. As a result, some people will vote for *anyone* else, even if it's someone as unexciting (IMO) as Jackson.

Also, I think race and class are playing a role -- as always. The city remains largely black and poor, and Jackson is making more overtures to that demographic than Campbell, with his stubbornness about enforcing Fannie Lewis etc.

I think you've pretty much nailed it with all your comments blinker12.

If Jackson does nothing as mayor, he will be a huge success.  All of the work Jane has done, and all of the projects she (well, Chris Roynanne) worked to get done will bear fruit when he is in office.  Then in about 6 years we will be in a quiet crisis again

From the 10/30/05 PD:

 

 

Ex-pals tell why Campbell lost favor

Mayor disputes claims of elitist approach, broken promises

Sunday, October 30, 2005

Susan Vinella

Plain Dealer Reporter

 

Nearly every time she steps to the podium, Mayor Jane Campbell greets her audience with a chummy "Well, my friends . . ."

 

But after four years, Campbell's greeting rings hol low to many one- time pals who no longer think enough of the mayor to back her for a second term.

 

The list of those who have abandoned Campbell is lengthy and includes Cuyahoga County officials, unions and prominent Cleveland businessmen. Many publicly support her opponent, City Council President Frank Jackson. Others, such as the AFL-CIO, have opted to remain neutral.

 

SOURCES: Campbell campaign, Plain Dealer research

 

http://www.cleveland.com/news/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/cuyahoga/1130669363141800.xml&coll=2

 

"Four years ago, Jane Campbell expressed sympathy for and an understanding of the workers in the grocery industry in Cleveland," Thomas Robertson, the local's president, said in an e-mail. "Once elected, however, she turned her back on them. Instead of helping to preserve their jobs -- good-paying jobs with living wages and generous benefits that benefit the city -- she worked tirelessly to bring a Wal- Mart Supercenter to Steelyard Commons."

 

No Einstein, she worked to keep the Steelyard Commons project from being abandoned altogether. City council couldn't get the legislation passed to prevent Wal-Mart from offering groceries - and even if they did, it probably wouldn't have stood in court. So instead of allowing council to keep the project stuck in red tape and eventually dying on the vine and preventing 40+ other stores from opening, she had the sense to realize that some Clevelanders and near suburbanites ALREADY shop at Wal-Mart outside of Cleveland. It's amazing the spin these yo-hos will put on anything.

 

On that same subject, Jackson had the opportunity to push the Council legislation through that would have kept Wal-Mart out, but he chose not to.  In my eyes, they both made the same decision on Steelyard Commons. 

Cimperman is for Jackson?

I am starting to think the one group who wants to keep Cleveland poor and uneducated is the one group who has the most to lose if Cleveland becomes successful, the local Democratic party.

From what I understand, Cimperman was under a lot of pressure about the Wal-Mart deal and in order to get anything done about it, he had to go through Jackson. When Campbell took control of the situation and out of the realm of council, it made Cimperman look like he wasn't doing his job effectively so no doubt there are some hard feelings there.

Looks like even my old fave, Robert Triozzi, is for Jackson! Well, at least if Jackson wins Triozzi will probably have a job in the administration. An excerpt from today's "Campaign Notebook" in the PD:

 

Campaign Notebook

Tuesday, November 01, 2005

 

Frank Jackson campaigned Sunday on the city's far West Side with the help of former Cleveland Municipal judge and mayoral candidate Robert Triozzi, who scored the bulk of his primary votes in the area.

 

The two attended a house party in a neighborhood with high voter turnout. The problem: Few people turned out to hear Jackson. He was still generous with his time, talking nonstop for nearly an hour and half. Among the promises he made: He will never make his police chief face the community after a police shooting.

I have to say I'm watching the 2nd debate and Mayor Campbell (and the questions from the audience) is putting the screws to Jackson's record.

^will anyone notice?

CoolCleveland.com endorsed Jackson

I unsubscribed

I listened to the second debate.  I think that Campbell won the debate, but I feel that her tone may have turned off more folks than she won over. 

^ The Plain Dealer agrees with you:

 

Fiery mayor attacks record of challenger

Plain Dealer Politics Writer Mark Naymik analyzes Tuesday's mayoral debate and gives this round to Cleveland Mayor Jane Campbell.

Wednesday, November 02, 2005

 

Cleveland Mayor Jane Campbell battered her rival Frank Jackson Tuesday at a mayoral debate sponsored by the City Club of Cleveland, displaying passion and aggressiveness absent in earlier speeches and debates.

 

Campbell, armed with a well-rehearsed opening and laundry list of attacks on Jackson's record, successfully portrayed the council president as one-dimensional on development issues and disconnected from his ward's problems, such as gang violence.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/news/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/cuyahoga/1130936154175740.xml&coll=2

 

 

From the 11/4/05 PD:

 

 

Candidates get personal in last debate

Friday, November 04, 2005

Mark Naymik

Plain Dealer Politics Writer

 

In their final face-to-face meeting before Tuesday's mayoral election, onetime allies Jane Campbell and Frank Jackson scrapped like old enemies in what was the most personal and heated exchange thus far in the largely lackluster campaign. In the 60-minute televised debate sponsored by The Plain Dealer, Jackson and Campbell repeatedly accused each other of committing a long list of political sins: lying, shifting blame, taking unjust credit for accomplishments and ignoring the concerns of the city's poorest people.

 

"All you have done, madam mayor, is to blame someone else for what you didn't accomplish," Jackson said at the onset, a dramatic departure from earlier and far less antagonistic opening statements. "So basically, the reason I'm running for mayor is because you are a failure."

 

http://www.cleveland.com/news/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/cuyahoga/1131100775149640.xml&coll=2

 

From the 11/5/05 PD:

 

 

Campbell brochures take credit for projects that aren't done yet

Saturday, November 05, 2005

 

Throughout her re-election campaign, Mayor Jane Campbell has taken credit for $3 billion in development projects throughout the city that she says will be completed within the next three years.

 

But some of the projects, highlighted in her campaign brochures, are a decade or two away from completion (Lakefront Plan; Inner Belt rebuilding). Others are not yet fully funded (Flats East Bank; The Avenue District downtown). Still others were already in the works when she took office (Arbor Park; Quay 55).

 

 

Plain Dealer reporters Michael O'Malley, Olivera Perkins and Susan Vinella contributed to this column.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/news/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/cuyahoga/1131186601295080.xml&coll=2

 

From the 11/6/05 PD:

 

 

Voters favor Jackson, poll says

52% prefer challenger; 37% support Campbell

Sunday, November 06, 2005

Mark Naymik

Plain Dealer Politics Writer

 

A majority of Cleveland voters want to dump incumbent Mayor Jane Campbell for her rival, Council President Frank Jackson, a Plain Dealer poll shows.

 

Heading into Tuesday's mayoral election, 52 percent of likely voters surveyed say they favor Jackson, with 37 percent supporting Campbell. The remaining 11 percent said they are undecided.

 

Plain Dealer reporter Michael O'Malley contributed to this story.

 

To reach this Plain Dealer reporter:

[email protected], 216-999-4868

 

http://www.cleveland.com/news/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/cuyahoga/1131273661101500.xml&coll=2

 

Now that Jackson has won, does anyone have a sense of what will become of Chris Ronayne?  From my somewhat distant perspective it seems he makes good things happen.  I would hate to see the City lose him.

There has been some rumors that he could be the next president of University Circle Incorporated.

^That's one of my biggest concerns. Campbell may not have been the greatest leader, but she certainly was able to appoint people who had a mix of passion for their job and they knew what they were doing, Ronayne being a perfect example. If Jackson ditches the staff simply because they worked for Campbell, expect to see a return to Mike White cronyism.

The paper says that Marty Sweeney will probably be the new Council President.  I find this very interesting considering that he was one of my brother's best friends in grade and high school.  He's a good guy from a very Irish family.  He played on CSU's sweet 16 team and went to the best high school in the city ;)

 

But, will he make a good council president?  I don't know much about his politics.

call him up!  see if you can have a sit down with him!  seriously, there are a lot of Cleveland politicos who are into meeting and chatting with constituents and others who care about the City's future.  And if you have an inroad, I say use it!

I heard the UCI rumor as well for Chris Roynanne.

 

Lets give Jackson the benefit of the doubt.  Jane has left him a city very much improved than the city she inherited.  I do think she upset the local political machine (Dimora) it benefited the city, but not her.

 

I hope Jackson tries to do the same.

Well, we can be pretty sure Ken Silliman will be on Jackson's staff, and he's a smart guy. Also, I saw Robert Triozzi standing right next to Jackson after his victory speech last night -- I'm hoping that means my favorite mayoral candidate gets a spot on Jackson's staff!

Who is Triozzi?

^That's one of my biggest concerns. Campbell may not have been the greatest leader, but she certainly was able to appoint people who had a mix of passion for their job and they knew what they were doing, Ronayne being a perfect example. If Jackson ditches the staff simply because they worked for Campbell, expect to see a return to Mike White cronyism.

 

you mean dennis the menace

Triozzi was a municipal judge who seemed to have a strong following with the young professional, new urbanist crowd.  Sadly, in Cleveland, that crowd's not yet  big enough to win in a city-wide primary. 

 

Blinker, what role do you envision for Silliman?

 

I'd like to see Jackson approach Deb Janik about a role in the administration.  But she's at GCP right now, and I doubt she'd leave them so soon after accepting that job.

 

Any other recommendations for Jackson's Cabinet?  How about recs, along with what position you'd like to see them in.  I'll start with a few:

 

Law Director: Triozzi

 

Chief of Staff: Silliman or Janik (I would say Ronayne, but I think that ship has sailed)

 

Development (including Planning, Community and Economic Development, this was Silliman's role in the White adminsitration): Silliman (if Janik is chief of staff) or Chris Warren (economic development director under White)

 

Technology Czar:  Thomas Mulready (there had to have been a reason he endorsed Jackson)

 

 

I've only three words, God help us.

It could be worse - Detroit voters re-elected Kwame Kilpatrick  :wtf:

Frank Jackson will apoint whoever Tubbs and Dimora tells him to appoint.  That will be noone from the current admin.

 

Now what projects are put into jepardy because there are more important thing to do,

Steelyard commons?

Flats?

Avenues district?

Digital cities initiative?

 

I am disapointed in the vote.  I hate Cleveland's political machine.

 

 

Why do young urbanists like this Triozzi Ewoops?  Looked like he helped give the election to Tubbs, er, Jackson

At least you don't have a tax-evading former crackhead on your city council!

just a flamboyant drunk driver

Kilpatrick was re-elected?  Wow. . .

Punch, I'm not sure what they saw in him.  I talked to a lot of people who fit into that category that were supporting him though.  I got into Cleveland a little late, and didn't see much of his campaign.  I think he was actually offering some big ideas, as opposed to other candidates.

MGD, what do you know about him?  You voted for him in the primary, correct?

nah, i wasn't eligible.  i considered him, but primarily (no pun intended) because some close friends were behind him.  He seems to be very liberal and had no real opponents.  An advocate for gay rights and a good record in the courts.  his public persona wasn't very bright, which he could develop in years to come, but in person (I was told) he really captured people.

 

I voted for him.  In addition to what MGD said, in the primary debate (with all 500 candidates) he really seemed to know what he was talking about and actually answered the questions that were asked.  I hold the latter quality in high regard when it comes to politicians. He isn't charismatic in the typical sense (he didn't make jokes or use large hand gestures), but he seemed very much in control and intelligent.  Plus, it was the primaries...if I'd done more research (which I would've done if it was the general election) I might have found things I didn't like, but I went with my instincts.

I'm curious about why he's with Jackson, though.  I mean, I can't imagine it would be for personal gain only.  Things like this are bigger than that.  Then again, I tend to underestimate self-promotion as a motivating factor...

 

Anyway, I'm hearing more negative stuff about Jackson after the election from people who weren't speaking out during the days leading up to it.  "If we'd really wanted Jane in, we had a whole pile of stuff we could have doled out about Frank."  Stuff like that.  Problem was, they weren't too hot about Jane either, so they just kept it to themselves.  I'm not going to reveal details or who I'm talking about, but it's nothing monumental...just code regulation, neighborhood loyalty sorts of stuff that show how he can slight certain parts of his constituency if he decides they're not important.

I am just going to remember Triozzi as the guy who got Jackson elected