The election for Mayor of Cleveland is less then a year away, the PD had an article Sunday stating Jackson wasn't expecting much opposition. What are your thoughts?

 

Sunday, December 21, 2008

Mark Naymik

Plain Dealer Columnist

 

When Cleveland Mayor Frank Jackson seeks re- election in 2009, he is likely to face just one serious opponent: himself.

 

Three years after he handily defeated Jane Campbell, there is no real movement to knock him out of office. Not among black voters on the city's East Side, nor white voters on the West Side. Not among business leaders. Not among clergy. Not among labor leaders.

 

More at cleveland.com http://www.cleveland.com

I hope Mayor Jackson has some competition in 2009. While I think he's a good man for the job at this time, it would be great for Cleveland to have a truly inspiring leader who can continue to take the city forward, and I'd like to see a crop of people who think they can do that. Competition is always healthy.

 

Also, I do think Jackson has to do more to inspire others to believe in the city. He can't just continue to hide in his office and do the work. He has to put a public face on, too. And if he does stick around for another term, that's what I'd like to see more of from him.

::) ::)

 

 

I like the mayor I voted for.

My first thought is that everyone can have a nice cup of STFU and keep the thread on topic.

I am indifferent towards Jackson.  I feel the city has shown improvement since 2005, but I haven't see Frank go out and tackle some things that I feel need an outspoken, inspiring leader to correct.  But unless I see someone who exudes that type of personality, I think Jackson is "capable".

Jackson seems like a decent man.  I think it shows the pathetic state of Cleveland's leadership when all it takes is a "decent" man to win.  He offers zero leadership and energy.  When he sat there passively when Eaton left and declared "Cleveland will survive," I thought it symbolized his overly hands-off approach to being mayor.

 

Also, I hate how articles dance around the obvious.  Why doesn't it just state that if you are a white male, you basically have a snowballs chance in hell of winning if running against a recognizable black leader.  Racial politics at its best.

 

"...but he still doesn't seek to inspire, at least not in the sense that Barack Obama does."

 

UNDERSTATEMENT OF THE YEAR

 

What about Fred Nance?  Has he ever considered?  This city needs a business savvy black leader, because it won't elect a white one.

 

Also, the city needs a creative leader who is going to take bold action in order to right the ship.  And I do not think Jackson is the man.

 

Hell, look how they handled the whole land bank thing.  They sent McCall down there on the last day to try and get it killed.  Freaking ridiculous.

 

(sorry I forgot to add this onto my previous post)  :oops:

Jackson seems like a decent man.  I think it shows the pathetic state of Cleveland's leadership when all it takes is a "decent" man to win.  He offers zero leadership and energy.  When he sat there passively when Eaton left and declared "Cleveland will survive," I thought it symbolized his overly hands-off approach to being mayor.

 

Also, I hate how articles dance around the obvious.  Why doesn't it just state that if you are a white male, you basically have a snowballs chance in hell of winning if running against a recognizable black leader.  Racial politics at its best.

 

"...but he still doesn't seek to inspire, at least not in the sense that Barack Obama does."

 

UNDERSTATEMENT OF THE YEAR

 

 

So while he was campaigning for regional growth and cooperation, what should he have done? 

 

If he came out and said I'm fighting to keep a company in downtown that doesn't want to be here, he would have been labeled a flip flopping hypocrite.  Other elected officials would have then been worried that he would take a company from their suburb. He would also been labeled a man who cannot stick to his word.  To me Eaton was burning the candale at both ends.

 

I think his "Cleveland will survive" statement was correct.  If a company doesn't want to be in Downtown Cleveland, why should we want them?? Cleveland will still get tax money from Eatons new location as they have not left the region.  so what Eaton left, lets attract other businesses and cultivate them.  Yes landing a fortune company would be great, but making the city a place the incubates the next generation of fortune company's is better.  It diversifies your economy.

 

In regards to race, Jackson is bi racial so the media has never really throw out the race card.  They majority of stories only indicate that he is Italian and Black and don't really scratch the surface.

 

(sorry I forgot to add this onto my previous post)  :-[

 

FYI you can hit the "modify" button to edit any post, you don't have to create a new post.

 

 

 

 

"It's hard to see any challenger on the horizon who can compete with those numbers in a city where 54 percent of the 438,000 residents are minorities."

 

I may be mistaken here, but isn't that from the 2000 Census and that right now it's 67% minority?

Jackson seems like a decent man.  I think it shows the pathetic state of Cleveland's leadership when all it takes is a "decent" man to win.  He offers zero leadership and energy.  When he sat there passively when Eaton left and declared "Cleveland will survive," I thought it symbolized his overly hands-off approach to being mayor.

 

Also, I hate how articles dance around the obvious.  Why doesn't it just state that if you are a white male, you basically have a snowballs chance in hell of winning if running against a recognizable black leader.  Racial politics at its best.

 

"...but he still doesn't seek to inspire, at least not in the sense that Barack Obama does."

 

UNDERSTATEMENT OF THE YEAR

 

 

So while he was campaigning for regional growth and cooperation, what should he have done? 

 

If he came out and said I'm fighting to keep a company in downtown that doesn't want to be here, he would have been labeled a flip flopping hypocrite.  Other elected officials would have then been worried that he would take a company from their suburb. He would also been labeled a man who cannot stick to his word.  To me Eaton was burning the candale at both ends.

 

I think his "Cleveland will survive" statement was correct.  If a company doesn't want to be in Downtown Cleveland, why should we want them?? Cleveland will still get tax money from Eatons new location as they have not left the region.  so what Eaton left, lets attract other businesses and cultivate them.  Yes landing a fortune company would be great, but making the city a place the incubates the next generation of fortune company's is better.  It diversifies your economy.

 

In regards to race, Jackson is bi racial so the media has never really throw out the race card.  They majority of stories only indicate that he is Italian and Black and don't really scratch the surface.

 

(sorry I forgot to add this onto my previous post)  :-[

 

FYI you can hit the "modify" button to edit any post, you don't have to create a new post.

 

 

 

I disagree with your post on a lot of fronts. 

 

Him trying to get Eaton to stay downtown is very different than him poaching a business from an outside community.  Eaton was already here.  According to your rationale, the very fact they offered 25 million in incentives to stay would have already created a perception of hypocrisy.  Just bc Eaton chose to leave does not change the fact Jackson tried to make them stay.

 

Regarding the notion that if a company does not want to be here, we should just let them leave, I wholly disagree.  We need to retain companies that are here and recruit ones to come.  Do you apply this same logic to the population of Cuyahoga County?  If people do not want to be here, we should just let them leave? 

 

Yes, Jackson is bi-racial.  He is Italian and black.  However, he grew up in the Central neighborhood and clearly identifies with his black heritage more strongly.  I am curiuos what percentage of the black vote he received against Campbell.

 

Jackson seems like a decent man.  I think it shows the pathetic state of Cleveland's leadership when all it takes is a "decent" man to win.  He offers zero leadership and energy.  When he sat there passively when Eaton left and declared "Cleveland will survive," I thought it symbolized his overly hands-off approach to being mayor.

 

Also, I hate how articles dance around the obvious.  Why doesn't it just state that if you are a white male, you basically have a snowballs chance in hell of winning if running against a recognizable black leader.  Racial politics at its best.

 

"...but he still doesn't seek to inspire, at least not in the sense that Barack Obama does."

 

UNDERSTATEMENT OF THE YEAR

 

 

So while he was campaigning for regional growth and cooperation, what should he have done? 

 

If he came out and said I'm fighting to keep a company in downtown that doesn't want to be here, he would have been labeled a flip flopping hypocrite.  Other elected officials would have then been worried that he would take a company from their suburb. He would also been labeled a man who cannot stick to his word.  To me Eaton was burning the candale at both ends.

 

I think his "Cleveland will survive" statement was correct.  If a company doesn't want to be in Downtown Cleveland, why should we want them?? Cleveland will still get tax money from Eatons new location as they have not left the region.  so what Eaton left, lets attract other businesses and cultivate them.  Yes landing a fortune company would be great, but making the city a place the incubates the next generation of fortune company's is better.  It diversifies your economy.

 

In regards to race, Jackson is bi racial so the media has never really throw out the race card.  They majority of stories only indicate that he is Italian and Black and don't really scratch the surface.

 

(sorry I forgot to add this onto my previous post)  :-[

 

FYI you can hit the "modify" button to edit any post, you don't have to create a new post.

 

 

 

I disagree with your post on a lot of fronts. 

 

Him trying to get Eaton to stay downtown is very different than him poaching a business from an outside community.  Eaton was already here.  According to your rationale, the very fact they offered 25 million in incentives to stay would have already created a perception of hypocrisy.  Just bc Eaton chose to leave does not change the fact Jackson tried to make them stay.

 

Regarding the notion that if a company does not want to be here, we should just let them leave, I wholly disagree.  We need to retain companies that are here and recruit ones to come.  Do you apply this same logic to the population of Cuyahoga County?  If people do not want to be here, we should just let them leave? 

 

Yes, Jackson is bi-racial.  He is Italian and black.  However, he grew up in the Central neighborhood and clearly identifies with his black heritage more strongly.  I am curiuos what percentage of the black vote he received against Campbell.

 

 

I'm not saying that the city did not negotiate.  I'm saying once Eaton said we don't want to be here AFTER negotiating with the city, there is nothing more you can do.  Understand now?

 

Eaton made it clear that didn't want to be in Downtown.  I don't understand why we should give them the city just to keep them.  Once you do that, other company's will have their hands out.  If they don't want to be here, after negotiating in good faith.. phuck you!

I see your point.  But I think the city needs to be doing whatever it can to retain business and bring in new ones.  If this city becomes flooded with business & jobs again, then we can begin having the "take it or leave it" approach. 

I see your point.  But I think the city needs to be doing whatever it can to retain business and bring in new ones.  If this city becomes flooded with business & jobs again, then we can begin having the "take it or leave it" approach. 

 

It sounds as though, you think the city is not doing anything.  There are plenty of jobs in Cleveland.  The problem is not with jobs, but with attracting INDIVIDUALS who are qualified to fill those jobs.

 

We've moved out from being a primarily blue collar city.  Those that have not bothered to reeducate themselves are the ones who are suffering the most.  We need to continue to bring new jobs here and qualified people to the city.  Today's small or medium sized company could be tomorrows fortune company.

 

In addition, we don't want to be a city full of one type of industry with several smaller company's industries tied to it.  (ie Detroit)  some people seem to think that we need to steal a fortune 500 from another city to be competitive.  in this day and age you've got to work outside the box and we need to make the city more appealing to entrepreneurs and small businesses.

 

There are lots of improvements I see in the city and I feel once the feds clean house here and Obama takes office we can get back to recreating the best city we can. 

I see your point. But I think the city needs to be doing whatever it can to retain business and bring in new ones. If this city becomes flooded with business & jobs again, then we can begin having the "take it or leave it" approach.

 

What, specifically, are you recommending that Frank should have done?

Let's see... "Cleveland Mayoral Race 2009"... can we keep it on topic? Or should I just go ahead and lock this thread permanently since everyone is talking about anything BUT the Cleveland Mayoral Race of 2009, even AFTER I tell you guys to get back on topic? :roll:

 

 

 

I do not think there is anything to talk about.  Ronayne is not running.  No one else is going to challenge F. Jackson.  Maybe UO can flex its muscles and go Blago.  The highest bidder will win UO's honorable endorsement.

 

I see your point.  But I think the city needs to be doing whatever it can to retain business and bring in new ones.  If this city becomes flooded with business & jobs again, then we can begin having the "take it or leave it" approach. 

 

What, specifically, are you recommending that Frank should have done?

 

I believe he should have come up with more creative schemes in attracting business.  While I know everyone hates it, I think he should have tried to slash business taxes.  It is basic economics that such a measure would attract more business.  Then, maybe 20 years from now when the new businesses have become cozy in Cleveland, we could institute a tax hike.

 

I also think he provided no leadership with the Medical Mart.  While I know it is a county issue, the fact is that it will be placed downtown.  I think he should have put more public pressure to get the thing moving. 

...

He can also brag about ... revising the Police Department's deadly-force policy and redeploying police across the city, contributing to a reduction in crime.

...

Darn impressive, considering that the previous government had cut police on account of budget problems.

I do not think there is anything to talk about. Ronayne is not running. No one else is going to challenge F. Jackson. Maybe UO can flex its muscles and go Blago. The highest bidder will win UO's honorable endorsement.

 

I see your point. But I think the city needs to be doing whatever it can to retain business and bring in new ones. If this city becomes flooded with business & jobs again, then we can begin having the "take it or leave it" approach.

 

What, specifically, are you recommending that Frank should have done?

 

I believe he should have come up with more creative schemes in attracting business. While I know everyone hates it, I think he should have tried to slash business taxes. It is basic economics that such a measure would attract more business. Then, maybe 20 years from now when the new businesses have become cozy in Cleveland, we could institute a tax hike.

 

I also think he provided no leadership with the Medical Mart. While I know it is a county issue, the fact is that it will be placed downtown. I think he should have put more public pressure to get the thing moving.

 

OK, "more creative schemes" isn't really specific.  Anyone can say "come up with more creative schemes".  In that vein, he also should have tried harder, and been more convincing, I guess.  Cutting taxes would be great, but we have to run a balanced budget, unlike the Federal gov't.  It's easy to say, "cut taxes", but not so easy to actually make the further cuts in expenditures above and beyond those that are being made already because of declining tax income.

http://www.cleveland.com/cityhall/index.ssf/2009/01/kimberly_brown_former_social_w.html

 

Kimberly Brown, former social worker and radio personality, is early entry in Cleveland's 2009 mayoral race

by Henry J. Gomez/Plain Dealer Reporter

Wednesday January 28, 2009, 3:47 PM

 

Funny. Just a few days ago we were wondering who might challenge Mayor Frank Jackson this fall. Now, an official candidate has emerged.

 

I think that it would be really difficult for someone to be an effective mayor if he or she hasn't had any experience with city politics.

I think that it would be really difficult for someone to be an effective mayor if he or she hasn't had any experience with city politics.

 

I was thinking the same thing.

I think that it would be really difficult for someone to be an effective mayor if he or she hasn't had any experience with city politics.

 

That sounds like how tough it would be to run Chicago with a name that isn't Daley, so why don't you just let them.  I'm willing to put up with some rookie mistakes if it means not having a permanent political class.  Experience in city politics isn't exactly doled out evenly. 

I think Matt Zone has done a good job with Ward 17.  Perhaps he would consider at some point?

looks like a few candidates lined up:

 

 

CLEVELAND -- Mayor Frank Jackson's re-election campaign impresses on voters that his steady leadership during difficult times deserves a second term.

 

Four challengers are running against him and some claim his lack of leadership is the real campaign issue.

 

 

More at

http://www.wkyc.com/news/local/news_article.aspx?storyid=119851&catid=3

 

^ landslide victory for Frank Jackson this year.  No one else has a chance.

A big HELL NO to Bill Patmon.  Patronage will reach a new high if he is elected.  I also have good reason to believe that he toes the line of being a racist.

 

Frankie J has actually grown on me.  A few years back I was very vocal against him.  But now, he seems to have his feet under him now and I like many of the moves he has made.

^you and I pretty much are exactly the same when it comes to mayor Frank.  I've actually already cast my vote for him via vote by mail.

well-written article from today's PD's on various issues and Jackon's handling of them: Building and housing, Crime, Customer service, Education, Economic development, Finance, and Regionalism:

 

Cleveland Mayor Frank Jackson believes residents feel the city is moving in the right direction

Posted by Henry J. Gomez, The Plain Dealer August 23, 2009 05:00AM

 

Cleveland Mayor Frank Jackson has big ideas for the city of Cleveland among them moving the city closer to being a beacon of green economics. Critics question Jackson's methods and overall effectivness in his first term.

 

On the campaign trail four years ago, Frank Jackson told Cleveland voters that he would consider himself a failure if he was unable to restore hope to the ailing city within 200 days of becoming mayor.

 

More at

http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2009/08/cleveland_mayor_frank_jackson_5.html

 

 

 

I see there's a lot of interest in this race!

Too bad Cleveland did not come up with a better candidate.

when is the cutoff to enter the primary? has it already passed?

Yes - the primary is Sept. 8, two weeks from yesterday. The filing deadline was June 25.

I bet someone at channel 19 is kicking themselves for not developing a reality segment where they find a homeless person to run for mayor.  It could have been exciting.

What's George Forbes up to these days?

What's George Forbes up to these days?

 

What is your point?  What does Forbes have to do with this years election?

 

Im a smartass and all, but what is purpose/point of your last few posts?

 

Get to the point man!

 

 

I'm a little indifferent about this election.  I'm sure Mayor Jackson will win and I haven't heard all that much from the other candidates.  To be honest, I'm not even sure what a mayor's responsibilities are besides establishing a budget and being more or less a spokesman/representative for the city. 

 

Cities need strong business leaders to survive - that's the key to a strong economic future.  Unless you're truly someone special like Giuliani or Hickenlooper, well, I don't know.

I'm a little indifferent about this election.  I'm sure Mayor Jackson will win and I haven't heard all that much from the other candidates.  To be honest, I'm not even sure what a mayor's responsibilities are besides establishing a budget and being more or less a spokesman/representative for the city. 

 

Cities need strong business leaders to survive - that's the key to a strong economic future.  Unless you're truly someone special like Giuliani or Hickenlooper, well, I don't know.

Although I'm not a NYC resident, people say Giuliani was great. He only cared about big business not the neighborhoods, if it was above 96 street or the outer boros, he could have cared less.

 

He only cared about the definite "haves" not the "up an comings" or "have nots".

He certainly cared about victims and potential victims of crime, which you can extend to the "up an comings" and "have nots"

He certainly cared about victims and potential victims of crime, which you can extend to the "up an comings" and "have nots"

Trust me he wasn't.  Anyway, he has nothing to do with the 2009 Cleveland Mayoral race.  So lets get back on topic.  ;)

To be honest, I'm not even sure what a mayor's responsibilities are besides establishing a budget and being more or less a spokesman/representative for the city.

 

The Mayor's powers and duties are defined first by the City's Charter and secondly by the applicable sections of Title VII in the Ohio Revised Code, Chapter 733.

 

The Charter section can be viewed here: http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/clevelandcodes/cco_charter_11.html

 

In a nutshell, the Mayor does the following:

 

1) Appoint/remove all department heads and other city "officers" not under direct control of a department head

2) Conserve the peace

3) Supervise administration of city affairs

4) Advise council of the City's current state, make recommendations and answer any questions council may pose to him/her

5) While he/she can't vote, he/she is allowed to introduce ordinances/resolutions and take part in Council discussions

I'm not very impressed by Jackson, but he'll probably get my vote by default.

 

Frank has fallen into the footsteps of Jane Campbell: reactive and non-agressive, esp toward development.  Frankly, bad as she was (in my opinion) on this score, Jane did create the current Lakefront plan (although no UOer may live long enough to see its fruition) and craftily got Wolstein to move on Flats East bank -- idled, of course, by the housing collapse.  And even though Frank talked a good game about regional cooperation, Beachwood welcomed both downtown refugees: the Jewish Federation HQ and (much worse) Eaton, which kicked Wolstein in the teeth when the bolted, at the 11th hour, from the FEB project.

 

Frank gets a partial bye b/c the housing bottom dropped from under the city w/ the foreclosure crisis which whacked Cleveland harder than all but a few cities... The schools are somewhat better, I guess, but...

 

The Jackson/Campbell model is exactly what Cleveland doesn't need.  We need an aggressive, knock-some-heads mayoral approach.  This city is in crisis and as much as My Two Sense doesn't want to hear it: places like Pittsburgh have moved ahead of us in terms of its downtown and core entertainment districts.  Sadly, though, the laid-back approach is what suits a lot of Clevelanders, which is why we continue to tailspin (no, don't let E. 4th St and a few other hot spots fool you).

 

And I guess I'm stuck w/ voting for Frank b/c Frank's Tom, Dick or Sherry opponents aren't bringing anything impressive to the party imho...

What is your point?  What does Forbes have to do with this years election?

Im a smartass and all, but what is purpose/point of your last few posts?

Get to the point man!

 

I was trying to stimulate conversation on the topic--that's all. Its an important topic and i'm interested in it, but personally do not have any insight into how Jackson is, or the other contestants fare. So i am grateful for the insight of clvlndr, above. For some reason George Forbes popped into my head....don't know why....

I'm not very impressed by Jackson, but he'll probably get my vote by default.

 

Frank has fallen into the footsteps of Jane Campbell: reactive and non-agressive, esp toward development.  Frankly, bad as she was (in my opinion) on this score, Jane did create the current Lakefront plan (although no UOer may live long enough to see its fruition) and craftily got Wolstein to move on Flats East bank -- idled, of course, by the housing collapse.  And even though Frank talked a good game about regional cooperation, Beachwood welcomed both downtown refugees: the Jewish Federation HQ and (much worse) Eaton, which kicked Wolstein in the teeth when the bolted, at the 11th hour, from the FEB project.

 

Frank gets a partial bye b/c the housing bottom dropped from under the city w/ the foreclosure crisis which whacked Cleveland harder than all but a few cities... The schools are somewhat better, I guess, but...

 

The Jackson/Campbell model is exactly what Cleveland doesn't need.  We need an aggressive, knock-some-heads mayoral approach.  This city is in crisis and as much as My Two Sense doesn't want to hear it: places like Pittsburgh have moved ahead of us in terms of its downtown and core entertainment districts.  Sadly, though, the laid-back approach is what suits a lot of Clevelanders, which is why we continue to tailspin (no, don't let E. 4th St and a few other hot spots fool you).

 

And I guess I'm stuck w/ voting for Frank b/c Frank's Tom, Dick or Sherry opponents aren't bringing anything impressive to the party imho...

 

So it's Franks fault that the Jewish Federation and Eaton wanted to move no matter what the city and county offered?  That makes no sense.  I'm trying to understand your thought processes on that.

 

If someone wants to do something and their mind is made up, you can't change it no matter what.  Eaton wasn't honest and burned the candle at both ends.  If I was mayor I would let them leave as well. 

I'm a little indifferent about this election.  I'm sure Mayor Jackson will win and I haven't heard all that much from the other candidates.  To be honest, I'm not even sure what a mayor's responsibilities are besides establishing a budget and being more or less a spokesman/representative for the city. 

 

Cities need strong business leaders to survive - that's the key to a strong economic future.  Unless you're truly someone special like Giuliani or Hickenlooper, well, I don't know.

Although I'm not a NYC resident, people say Giuliani was great. He only cared about big business not the neighborhoods, if it was above 96 street or the outer boros, he could have cared less.

 

He only cared about the definite "haves" not the "up an comings" or "have nots".

:weird:

5) While he/she can't vote, he/she is allowed to introduce ordinances/resolutions and take part in Council discussions

 

With this in mind, I would really love to see a list of ordinances and resolutions that Jackson has introduced during his tenure, as well as a list of Campbell's and White's. I definitely feel like that is something that does not get a lot of attention, and such legislation, even if it's not acted upon, definitely seems to be a way that the mayor can set the tone of city government (coupled with the obvious power of being able to select the department heads, who in turn can set the tone on how government functions and how well it interacts with the citizenry).

 

I frankly am continually disappointed with leadership in the city. By and large, I think our elected officials are adequate, but I believe very few rise above the level of adequacy, and I don't see many young leaders entertaining going into local public office in the future. I would love to see mayoral and council and commissioner candidates who promote progressive policies, are fiscally responsible, can streamline permit/application processes, generally increase citizens' positive interactions with government, increase citizens' level of awareness of Cleveland's many opportunities and amenities, and empower residents to play a more active role in improving their community. Most importantly, I want elected officials who can set a positive and hopeful tone for the city, both with residents and outside our community. I want a "Yes, We Can" attitude and a message that this city is changing and changing for the better and changing with every potential resident as an innovator in this process.

 

One of the things I would love to do would be to establish a PAC for local elected offices that would promote young progressive candidates and reward candidates that talk from an inspirational position. I would love to target students in high schools, local colleges and, of course, all of us urban nerds and from a variety of backgrounds ... something, anything that breaks the complacency of a one-party system that doesn't seem to reward, or at the very least doesn't promote, new voices and new ideas.

As for Jackson, I definitely give him props for the following:

 

- Balancing the budget without severe cuts ... that's frankly huge. Many U.S. cities are seeing budget gaps in the double digits. 

- Trying to develop meaningful partnerships with other local municipalities to increase regionalism, although sadly, either these efforts have had minimal outcomes to date or I'm just under-informed about what those outcomes have been.

- Focusing on developing meaningful international relationships, more than just the traditional "sister city"-type thing.

- Prioritizing positioning the city as a leader in sustainability practices.

- Deploying a data-driven community development strategy that targets money toward those areas of the city where it is most likely to catalyze private investment and/or to trigger revitalization.

- Creating a five-year capital budget that laid out budget priorities for city investments in a comprehensive and thoughtful way.

- Putting in a place a Planning Department that is slowly but surely increasing bike infrastructure throughout the city.

- Initiating "broken window" strategies, like his crackdown on prostitution ... although his other policy, to round up stray cats seemed an unusual idea, given the range of challenges he could be addressing.

- Being an advocate for the city's impoverished, while seemingly not alienating the city's business community. Few Cleveland mayors in recent history seem to have accomplished that.

 

What I perceive to be his primary shortcomings:

 

- Lack of community dialogue ... seemingly little emphasis on engaging citizens in government affairs or improving their experiences with government agencies or giving them opportunities to present new ideas or to air grievances (the obvious exceptions being the sustainability summit and the continuation of the Mayor's Action Hotline).

- Major shortcomings as a spokesperson. While Campbell was often criticized as all talk and no action, I feel like we now have a mayor that's all action and no talk. I think that it's great that he's done so much substantive work, but I want to see someone who's constantly in the community exciting and energizing residents and businesses and nonprofits and someone who's drawing a lot of positive attention to the city with the suburbs, nationally and internationally. I'm not talking about grandstanding or puffery or public relations campaigns or perpetual electioneering ... but I do want someone who is galvanizing people into action, making them excited about how great this city is and engaging them in addressing its many challenges. I just don't understand why we can't have a leader with the pragmatism to get things done (shortcoming of Campbell?), the ethics to do it without scandal or constant bickering or cronyism (White?) and the ability to be a strong, vocal and visible leader (Jackson?) ... it doesn't seem like these are mutually exclusive personality traits.

I agree with Clvlndr.  Frank certainly has some good qualities, but just not what Cleveland really needs right now.  They need a rainmaker. 

 

The "It is what it is" attitude will only allow for the whole world to pass you by.  Its amazing what an outspoken and persuasive person can accomplish (even in regard to Eton and J.F. (even though I don't directly blame Frank for these, being a better and persuasive speaker certainly couldn't have hurt any...))

 

What happened to 327, and why isn't he running? 

It's not that he doesn't know what the problems are. He's known them for years. It's not that he doesn't know what the solutions are. He's known those for years. The problem is he hasn't done anything about it.

 

8)

It's not that he doesn't know what the problems are. He's known them for years. It's not that he doesn't know what the solutions are. He's known those for years. The problem is he hasn't done anything about it.

 

8)

 

WHAT IS YOUR SOLUTION?

 

It's very easy for us to be arm chair quarterbacks.  Many people complain and they aren't even involved in their local block club or neighborhood CDC.

to learn more about proactive action being taken by the Mayor to rebuild neighborhoods of choice and other substantial new information about development on the river and lake, please attend Mayor Jackson's first in a series of "Back to the Future: envisioning a Sustainable Cleveland" events, on 9/9 at 5:30pm on the Goodtime III. You can learn more and register at:

 

http://sustaincleveland.eventbrite.com/