This blogpost is designed to inform the Whitehall citizens of what is going on at City Hall, with their government and the people elected as stewards of their government. Its main intent is to expose wrongdoing of those elected leaders at City Hall. If there is nothing to report, nothing will appear here. If wrong is being done in the citizen’s name, my intent is to alert you to it so the citizens have the information needed to put a stop to it. I am the messenger, if the citizens choose to do nothing then the continuation of the problem is in their hands. Citizens always have the right and ability to respond in several different ways; call the Mayor/Council members, write letters/emails protesting actions by them, organize to stop their behavior through campaigns of picketing, resistance, etc. The choice is really in the citizen’s hands. You are responsible for what ultimately is done in your name at Whitehall City Hall. Their actions, lack of them, etc., are a reflection on you. What you allow ultimately speaks of you, not them. People are only willing to get away with as much as what they’re allowed to, the same holds true here in Whitehall.
I’ve found that people who want to run for office fall into two categories: One are those we expect to, the person who wants to help out, actually serve their civic duty and do the right thing by their neighbors and citizens, the genuinely helpful person who wants to assist in the good health of their community, in all ways. Then there is the other type: They’re there for themselves, either through what the power the office brings them and their ego and/or their party too. The authoritarian and/or the fevered ego. These sorts love lording it over others, the ‘my way or the highway’ type. They want control and don’t mind inflicting it on the public. This sort falls into any party type. The fevered egos love the power and attention the role brings. The truly troublesome are the ones who refuse to let go of power, particularly in our democratic Republic. The authoritarians with fevered egos. There are several in City Hall. ‘No one can do it better than they, they are the end-all, be-all and its best they stay there forever and ever’. A job which was designed as part of the civic duty we’re all supposed to be serving, in one capacity or another. Sadly, when the citizenry don’t pay attention to whom is serving them, these unsavory characters are both allowed in and allowed to stay in. Again, that is on the citizens. Its imperative the citizens keep an eagle eye on who they’re electing. Truly decent people or just people pretending to be decent in order to win your vote, get in office and start their disrespectful service. Our city hall is rife with this second example. If you can’t tell when someone is bullshitting you, do us all a favor and don’t vote. Character is everything. They too often sell you a bill of goods through their skimpy literature that sells you on them as surely as diet soda manufacturers convince you of weight loss. Buyer beware. Now, when you go to nearly every meeting, like me, and watch them and their character like a hawk, you come to see the truth of them. That is me. That is what I do and what I’ve been doing since 2009.
***Why do I do this? I live here in Whitehall, born and raised. I could fight down at the Statehouse or visit D.C., but I believe that the tapestry of our nation is a huge piecework done in all corners, which includes Whitehall. I believe it is not the large things which cause the integrity of the tapestry of our government to weaken the whole but rather, the small holes allowed to appear and spread across its breadth and width. While a hole which Whitehall governance has made to appear may seem small in the larger scheme, it, along with many other small holes allowed to appear, have the ability to start the fraying, the tearing, the decline of the work as a whole and before you know it, the tapestry rips apart. That is where you and I come in, for it is we who have the responsibility to the tapestry of our Republic, we the people. To stop the hole from appearing and/or spreading. To understand what tears it, try to stop it from appearing initially and if it does, repair the damage done. Its really as simple as that and more important than you may realize.
So, when decisions are made that cause a rip in that tapestry, when fevered egos get in the way of our rule of law or authoritarian types decide that your rights are less important than their ego-driven schemes, it is an incremental assault on that which binds this country together. An assault on America itself. We are all defenders of this great country and while we’re looking outward for enemies of our Republic (and sending troops to go fight them), too often they come from within, more concerned with their need to rule over others and feed their egos than be genuine stewards of this great countries tenets. I for one refuse to allow it. That is why I do what I do here. When it comes to the uncorrupted integrity of the tapestry of our shared Republic, we must all be diligent needle workers, here, now.
Due to there being no venue for a candidate’s forum or debate and Ms. Haver’s seeming skittishness about answering questions in a public forum, the best that I am then able to do as a candidate with an opponent is to rebut, in a public sphere, the few things she’s posted. This is an election and the citizen’s have some right to know where their candidates stand through their views on matters. Since this is the only method that has apprised itself to myself and the voters, I will then take this opportunity, for you. The ‘exchange’ you’ll see will be her few statements on Facebook posts from the times she risked going out on a limb with her views. Her comments are in black, my comments (amidst hers) will be in red. The first is from a FB post where she apparently shared her ‘vision/belief’ for her time were she to be elected to council…
“SIMPLIFYING OUR CITY’S FUTURE: TRANSPARENT AND EFFECTIVE GOVERNANCE (The title is odd: is she saying that our city’s future success will be achieved through transparency and effective government or that our city’s future will be simplified through transparent government which is effective?)
As a resident of Whitehall’s Ward 1, I’ve seen firsthand the need for a fresh perspective on our City Council. (That ‘fresh perspective’ would be me…Gerald Dixon, unlike ANY councilor in recent memory. The rest are fairly carbon-copies of everyone that came before them. With that argument then, it seems she believes I should stay on council. So why then would she run against me?)That’s why I’m running as an independent candidate for Ward 1 City Council – to bring a voice that’s not beholden to special interests or party politics. (again…that’s ME! Note she didn’t use the word ‘mayor’ or ‘team’ politics. Party politics and ‘team’ politics aren’t the same)
My platform is built around simplifying our city’s approach to governance, making it more transparent, efficient, and responsive to the needs of all residents. (It is Ithat has pushed for greater transparency, hounding them for years to be more forthcoming with information. Its as transparent as it is now thanks to me. As far as ‘efficient’, I would ask exactly what she means by that and how she intends to implement it. Regarding ‘responsive’…I listened to the residents of Fairway Blvd. when their own Ward 4 councilor wouldn’t and bent over backward and worked hard to help them out in their plight. As well, I held a meeting with Ward 1 residents about flooding in 2022. THAT is responsive.)This means cutting through red tape (Not sure what she means by this; is red tape something I and the citizens are missing as a concern?), enhancing public engagement (You mean by fighting against one topic per poll council and allowing poll public letters to be read during council and fighting against the shrinking of communication by government to the people, like I did?), and ensuring that our city’s policies are guided by the principles of fairness, equity, and practicality (It is a brave stance indeed to fight against unfairness, inequity and impracticality)
As your representative, I’ll work tirelessly (that would be ME, tirelessly, for the past 16 years AND the last 4 on council) to ensure that our city government is working for everyone, not just the privileged few (I don’t know who these ‘privileged’ people are that are getting everything, unless you count developers, but ‘few’ is right on the money). I’ll be hosting community forums and listening sessions to understand the issues that matter most to you!
Join me on this journey towards a more inclusive and effective city government (a: who is not being included and b: an effective city government is precisely what I have been advocating for ‘lo these last 16 years! Its what I fight for and have withstood great resistance to make advances on). Let’s work together to make Whitehall a better place for all its residents. Share your thoughts and ideas with me on how we can simplify our city’s future.” (again, ‘simplify’. Is that REALLY the most vital aspect of anything that’s wrong with Whitehall government…its complexity? I’m confused by this focus)
That opening statement was followed by her reply to the President of the F.O.P, Brain Steel. See what you can make of this:
“I stand with our police officers 100%. I do not agree with the blocking of communication within the city departments. I am well aware as a community member, that there is a problem within our city when it comes to our police force. Being that I run a business there I make it a point to build relationships with as many officers as possible. I think that one thing that is easily forgotten is that our patrolling officers are human being not robots. They have emotions, and families just as we do. They are a part of our community just as I am! When I say that I am an advocate for my community, they are included! I am skeptical on the safety of our city. The numbers are scary to me. I have to be honest when I say my heart goes out to these guys. 60 available positions, 38 filled and only 14 patrolling…..and I just saw where we may have lost 2 more. Our officers are being forced In to working 5 12 hours days. How can we hold them accountable on work ethic if we are treating them as robots. Reports on incidents arent getting done in a timely manner, I speak on that from a personal stand point. An accident occured at night, the report is given to an officer that works night shift. There is no one to ask for help because of the lack of officers. Therefor a month later we still have no answers. Its causing our citizens to loose faith in them and its not because of their lack of responsibility, its because of lack of manpower. We all know when we go through things it affects us in many different ways. Do these guys (ladies) get the time to even process situations they are put into because they chose to serve and protect our city? I ask that because this is why Unions are important! Police unions are important because they provide collective bargaining for better wages, benefits, and working conditions, offer legal protection and representation for officers facing misconduct claims or legal risks, and ensure fair treatment during disciplinary actions. Additionally, unions serve as political advocates, lobbying for legislation and supporting candidates that champion officers’ rights and well-being. (EXACTLY why I was endorsed by the F.O.P.!) How can we as a community ask them to advocate for us if we aren’t fighting for them? I had a conversation with an officer the other day. We have had some amazing ones in the years. I have been here and had the opportunity to speak to them in a civilian engagement is it painful to me. These are great men that we are pushing away. Who is going to protect me when I need it? Who is going to protect them when they need it? Experience is detrimental when speaking on an issue such as this. Most of our officers at this point only have a couple years under their belts. Who can they turn to for support within if there is no one? Just as we want them to fight for us, who is going to fight for them! Nothing is always going to come out in your favor 100% but why take away the resources put there to accommodate and differentiate situations. I understand that many people are against you, personal opinions in this matter shouldn’t be shown. You are there to do a job. Again not everything is cut and dry, its just like running a business or even a city. You must do whatever necessary to make sure your job is fulfilled. If it isn’t done properly on an level then there is a process in order to investigate actions. If our police officers can’t reach out and entrust in our local elected officials, why are we here? Support is Key! Having a transparent relationship(s) with others in our community in every level is key! I stand by that!!!” (Honestly, from this, I don’t understand exactly what she stands by. Its kind of a run-on sentence with no discernible cohesive comprehension for the reader. Its clear that whatever wrote her opening comment, didn’t write this one. She appreciates the police but doesn’t like that they have no one to go to for protection? I read all the sentences and each one alone has meaning but when you put them together, its point is lost in the scattershot jumble of whatever she’s trying to say.)
Finally, there is this, a screed lambasting my supporters and her feeling attacked (“slandered”):
“Let’s talk about this …….
You guys are upset at me for running for an elected seat in my community. (I don’t think they’re upset you’re running for a seat but rather, because they have a councilor that is actually doing the job he’s supposed to: working for them and fighting wrong in their government, they’re upset that there would be anyone that would want to challenge that AND suggest that she’ll do the same good job…its nonsensical. As well, they know of your self-admitted dear friendship with Michael Bivens and so, given all the issues with him that they have and his fondness for yes-people (and despite your assurances to the contrary) they have a very tough time believing that once in there, you’ll have the courage (or will) to go up against his wishes (that’s surely one of the reasons he attended YOUR Meet & Greet and calls ME a hypocrite and a liar…) OK. Everyone gets a vote, an opportunity to use their voice! True. With or without that seat I will still be ME!!! As one should always be… But let’s talk about it….(It should be noted that after she posted this piece on FB, she shut off comments…)
I am being slandered because I run a business in my community and have for 6 years. (‘Slander’ is your word but, I don’t think its your running a business in and of itself that is their issue) I work in customer service as a bartender…..My opponent is also a bartender at a bar in a different community ! (Wrong. Firstly, I am a waiter, have been for 46 years. Served tens of thousands of people in my time. Secondly, why does my serving somewhere other than Whitehall deserve an exclamation point (!)) I am being slandered because I am married to a man of color, a well known educated blue collar working man (how are they ‘slandering’ you because of his color? Show us the proof)…….well my opponent likes men as well! (Ha-ha-ha! That was crass. What the hell does my sexuality have to do with your husband being a “man of color”? You think people hate that you and I both like men?! Where is the reason in this statement?) I don’t see any problem with either of these. (Neither do I.) The ONLY difference is I am open with my life. (Firstly, there are several ways in which we’re different but this sentence suggests that I’m not open with my life. I couldn’t possibly be MORE open with my life.) I love every part of my life. I have always stated I know people from the benches to the trenches. (I have known or waited on people who didn’t have two nickels to rub together and an actual Rockefeller.) I am not new to this, I AM TRUE TO THIS!!! My experiences can be used to help others in many ways. My door is always open (You keep saying this about your door but it always seems to be one on one and not public. Public service is not private, if people can’t know your views because you don’t want to share them or are afraid they’ll get criticized, then they should rightly reject you to serve them.)
I am getting an understanding on slander and “coming” for others during an election but as you can see we know where all the negativity is coming from. I am over here trying to help come up with solutions to bigger problems (Which are…?) and they are running a Smear Campaign (How is it a ‘smear campaign’ when people ask you legitimate questions, particularly about things like asking the overworked police dept. to walk through your Meet and Greet, and not once, but twice. You owe the citizens that pay their salary a reasonable explanation so they can trust that you’re on the up and up. When you hide, you lose trust…) and then have the nerve to get upset that WE/I don’t respond to every outburst on facebook. We have jobs and responsibilities. (I ALSO have jobs and responsibilities. If you’re too busy to campaign and be accountable to the people you claim to want to serve (and with transparency!) then why initiate such an endeavor in the first place?) Meet & greets have been held and I have said numerous times that I am available, I have run from no one. (Except those asking for public answers to public questions.) If anything I reached out to them asking to speak about issues. (privately) Those that want to know the truth, will make a way to find a way. One sided political social media pages aren’t it! (Regardless if you find these pages ‘one-sided’, you have the ability to persuade them to your side with argument. If they’re so wrong, prove them so. If you can’t argue your POV with people on FB, how are you going to accomplish it when needed to do so on Council?)
I am slandered because I enjoy my hobby, riding with a motorcycle organization that gives back to the community at any chance they can……well we don’t know his hobbies, maybe he has none or is shamed? (‘shamed’ or A-shamed? Not sure what you meant by this. I’ve had hobbies since I was a child…creating portraiture, collecting old bottles and cans, antiques and collectibles, stamps, gardening, movies (seen over 3000 at this point), reading, hiking, bicycling. None of which I’m ‘shamed’ of.)
I have lived in this community for over 16 years. I have raised all 3 of my children here as well as helping be a positive impact on many others ! I have spent countless hours in the schools and community giving back, being an advocate for not only children but many parents! I can sit here and name a million things I have been involved with within our community during my time here, many of you know, that’s how we met! (My attitude has always been: just do the work. I or you or anyone else that does good things owes nobody a list of them. For me, that’s not what interests me as your opponent, rather, it is your knowledge and understanding and acumen to serve as the people’s representative. Your courage and willfulness and independence and ethical morality with the people’s business. That is where your mettle will be tested and what information you owe the voters and not merely cozy buzzwords and phrases proffered to entreat their votes. What is the meat behind it? If you don’t have it, the citizens of Ward 1 shouldn’t be the victims of that kind of enchantment.)
Regardless of what happens ay the election I WILL STILL BE THE SAME ADVOCATE FOR ALL (Good for you. Now…why did YOU (per the police log) request officers to show up at yours and Micole Spicer’s Meet & Greet not once, but TWICE? Was it some kind of stunt to impress anyone that showed up? Were there threats (two times) that necessitated this call? Regardless of your cavalier attitude about transparency when it comes to yourself and sloughing off your deserved responsibility for this, the public is owed an explanation.)
Jerry’s kids are attacking myself as well as others on social media HARD! (Jerry’s kids…well, apparently my supporters don’t care for you and want me to win. That is quite natural and on them. The real question is, why can’t you take the heat? Why can’t you answer questions? You want to be a big adult and be up there with the big guys and gals but can’t handle some Facebook critics? We’ve seen what kind of difficulties which come from a thin skin already, its not a good trait when serving in government. Again…prove them wrong, convince them why they’re wrong and to come to your side of things. If they’re wrong, they’re wrong. If you can’t prove they’re wrong, deal with it and use it as a learning moment.) I ask why? I feel as though names should speak for themselves! You can’t be hidden from the community and then at election pop out and start to point fingers and make accusations that aren’t true! Newspaper articles, photos and best of all word of mouth from our village will tell who has been active and on what level! I know that I take responsibility for any and everything I have involved myself with. Am I perfect? Absolutely NOT but do we make mistakes, go through trials? Absolutely!!! And it makes us stronger. I can definitely tell you that this experience has given new light to those that hide behind keyboards. Makes you wonder what trials that they have encountered and you begin to ask yourself what can you do to help them…..
Having a chair on City Council means being an advocate for those without a voice! Having a way to bridge the gap between those who simply don’t know who or where to go to ask questions or simply doing the footwork for them. Having a “normal” person that is available and will help explain things that are happening around us. As I have done on many occasions. (While I have striven to rise above my station in life (as we all have the ability to do), that ‘station’ was right here in good ol’ Whitehall Ohio, in the 60’s and 70’s and 80’s and 90’s and 00’s and teens and 20’s. My mother kept and used Cool Whip containers as cereal bowls because we couldn’t afford to buy regular dishes and when she did, she bought ‘Corelle’ because they were pretty and, more importantly, unbreakable. We’d stuff a washcloth in a broken window because we couldn’t afford to buy a new pane. She shopped at Harts for our back to school clothing because it was affordable)… I am a NORMAL woman trying to continuesly help others in her community!
A HUGE Thank You for every organization and Individual that has supported me yesterday, today and tomorrow I appreciate You ALL Moving together, building relationships & making memories one day at a time!”
If Ms. Haver wishes to rebut what I’ve said then, this would be a good place to start:
Here then are some questions I’D like to ask my opponent…
*What is an ’emergency measure’, how is it used and what is your view on their use?
*What are your views on the Public Trust and conflicts of interest?
*We have seen what vested interests in the legislative branch has done to skew our separate branches of government; the executive branch being headed by Michael Bivens, whom you have claimed to be good friends with for a number of years. If elected, would you be able to keep that relationship separate from your duties in the legislative branch for the constituents you serve? If so, how would you do that?
*How do you feel we should balance the need for housing with saddling citizens, particularly Senior Citizens, with higher tax bills?
*Do you think TIFS and Tax Abatements are fair to the citizens?
*What about the mayor’s proposed ‘Department of Neighborhoods’ do you think is a good idea and what might be troubling?
*You say you want to build a more united Whitehall. What makes it divided and why and, in your opinion, what will you do to close that division?
I suppose it won’t come as any surprise to anyone here in Whitehall but, I just wanted to take a moment to let the community know, for the other three Council Ward races in Whitehall, I am proud to endorse Brian McCann for Ward 2, Mike Adkins for Ward 3 and Write-in candidate for Ward 4, Tracey Heise.
Brian McCann, I have only gotten to know this year but have found him to be a level-headed, good man. We have discussed a variety of topics and while we disagree from time to time, like me, he is also concerned with some of what he sees on the council dais. When called to take a stand to fight for an independent Legislative branch that represents the citizens and not the Executive branch, he answered that call. A longtime Whitehall resident and family man, he has committed to keeping an independent voice on council, beholding to no one other than the citizens and his own abilities to consider matters with no biases clouding his judgements. I believe Brian’s independent spirit on council will help bring Whitehall’s representative government back into the hands of the people, those whom we’re supposed to be serving.
Mike Adkins, I’ve known a few years. While not friends, we are acquaintances. We have spoken on a few occasions and respect each others separate roles we hold within the city. Mike may have served this community much longer than myself but in different capacities. He has served on Boards and Commissions and takes civic duty seriously. He is definitely of the ‘old school’ when civic-duty was simply a part of a citizen’s life living in a community. A Whitehall native, I know he grew up on Broadhurst Drive (where our parents may have overlapped slightly in the early 60’s as neighbors). I knew his father Ray who I spoke with numerous times as I campaigned in various years. He was a good man and harkened back to that group of old school civic-minded Dads we both grew up with. Mike is also alarmed at what he’s seeing in Whitehall and so too, wants to bring independence to the seat when elected.
Tracey Heise, I’ve met a couple times over the years, usually saw her at events or crises in the city working traffic or crowd control due to her longtime work with the Whitehall Citizens Police Academy Alumni Association, which, I believe, she is now the president of. Like Brian and Mike, she saw the issues going on in Whitehall government (and is one of the outspoken citizens who would be directly affected by the Fairway Cliffs project) and, after Councilor Lori Elmore and the City of Whitehall’s successful efforts to challenge Holly Stein’s candidacy against the mayorally-appointed Devin Brown, stepped forward to not only give the Ward 4 citizens a choice in their election (unlike ‘Team Forward Together’ who loves to just walk into a seat, either through manipulation or serendipitously grasping at office) but to also offer yet another civic and independent-minded critical thinker working in the people’s interest. For that, I endorse Tracey wholeheartedly.
WHY I’M ENDORSING THE THREE
I know the three of them are all level-headed and fair-minded people who will serve fairly and independently. Instead of relying on bias to the mayor (SO easy, SO wrong) they’ll use critical-thinking for decision-making and pledge to work for the people’s interests, whether that happens to align with the mayor’s plans and visions…or doesn’t. Without that political bias then, they are free to argue solely on legislation’s merits without those biases clouding that argument, considering legislation with the critical thinking and independence required to decide if something is good or bad, right or wrong for the city and the people they serve without adherence and fealty to a political benefactor. This is VITAL, VITAL, VITAL for a strong and healthfully productive government of, by and for the people.
Here is why this is vital: a) When you have a team, your dedication and allegiance is to ‘the team’ where there is a ‘team leader’, in this case, Micheal Bivens. When one is a part of a ‘team’ you don’t stray away or ‘against’ the team. Imagine an OSU Buckeye player NOT doing what Coach Daye wants? What player would ever ‘go rogue’ to do what HE wants? Its unheard of and could ruin the team’s chances of ‘winning’! Of course, team sports are not government and what may work or is important in sports, doesn’t belong in the people’s government. The people’s government is supposed to be an exercise in collaboration from many different people from all walks of life (called ‘Americans’) in separate but equal branches of government. As Americans or Whitehallians, we’re supposed to transcend our differences and work together for the good of the whole and NOT just one, where no ONE is the omnipotent ruler. So then, this is why things like fair-play and reason-ability and civil argument are important and come into play within our government, those attributes which sadly get scorched and kicked aside in favor of ‘the team’s’ success (bias to the leader). b) One can work together for the good of the people (like I believe myself, Brian, Mike and Tracey would) but not have allegiance to each other or any one person, aka, a leader. Therefore, while I endorse these three candidates for council, my demand of them (or anyone who serves on council) is to dedicate their allegiance to the citizens they represent and NOT a ‘leader’. (bias to the people) Those people who elected them and for whom they represent. c) I would never want to be a part of a ‘team’ when it comes to government. I expect and hope that, if elected, we will naturally disagree and even vote differently from time to time if that’s the way it works out but, at least we’ll know its because of the integrity of our independence that we’re doing the right thing for the right reason and not because we bent a knee.
“Somewhere along the way, someone is going
to tell you: ‘There is no “I” in team.’ ‘Maybe
not, but there is an “I” in independence,
individuality, and integrity.“-George Carlin
Finally then, among myself, Brian, Mike and Tracey, we all belong to various political parties. Unlike some in these races (I see you Micole Spicer!), I respect our non-partisan designation and so make a conscious effort not to reveal them during the campaign, particularly at such a divisive time in our country (…a nation divided cannot stand…) So, while being from different Parties we may fundamentally disagree and/or argue points, ALL of us are dedicated to keeping an independent mind and commitment working for the people. That then is at the base of my endorsement of these candidates.
I wanted to take a moment to address my concerns regarding a candidate for Ward 2 in the Primary coming up on May 6th. Micole Spicer is one of three candidates running to represent the citizens of Ward 2 and after lengthy consideration, I’ve come to the conclusion that Ms. Spicer is simply the wrong person to represent the citizens in a council seat. Making such an assertion then, I have a duty to explain then exactly how it is I came to that position and make my case as such.
Firstly, anyone that chooses to serve the citizens as their representative on Council, in my estimate, should be many things beyond the traditional litany of traits we have long expected of candidates (good with people, a positive booster, uncontroversial, etc.), among them, they should be: smart, intelligent, caring, fair-minded, civic-minded, courageous, determined, considerate, honest, forthright, secure, just, conscientious, analytical, critical, a champion of the people, thorough, fearless and…independent. (Not so independent-minded though that you can’t find commonality with others or dwell solely in stubbornness* but, an independence of spirit and mind for the seat, for the citizens who elected you and whom you represent and not for any entity or leader or ‘team’ politics).
This has been my own personal standard for some time now, borne from how I was raised and witnessing countless elected leaders, nationally, and some local, who have forged this viewpoint within me from the example they set for me in how not to be. It is a standard which I’ve been preaching here and holding government officials accountable for since I first became aware of issues in Whitehall government in 2009. I have spoken out against wrongs involving numerous (but not all) officials for years. It speaks truth to power and rightly holds elected official’s feet to the fire when appropriate to do so, using all the above-mentioned traits.
Me protesting on July 4th at John Bishop park around 2014. I did not come back to my hometown in 2008 to protest and rail against elected officials. It was THEIR behavior which compelled me to do so, not by my choice. However, whether citizen or citizen representative, it is my civic duty and obligation to do so if warranted, putting aside my own comfort and biases (being hated by the public/being a Democrat protesting against a Democrat)
So then, this preamble leads us back to candidate for Ward 2, Micole Spicer. Ms. Spicer was appointed to and currently serves on the Board of Zoning and Building Appeals, the ‘BZBA’. It is a political appointment made by the mayor at the time she was chosen (and a seeming pipeline for those aspiring to be on council). For some time I’ve witnessed Ms. Spicer coming to council meetings where she sits in the audience but has never been seen, by me (until just two weeks ago), coming forward to offer any critical analysis in thoughts or opinions she may have for council and/or her city’s government. As someone who, since first attending council meetings in 2009, paid deep attention at council meetings (and having an actual point of view about matters), spoke from time to time when I thought it appropriate to do so, as is my right and obligation as a citizen, as seen in this example from 2018.
Clearly, I wasn’t just sitting silently in the audience but actively, civicallyparticipating in the processes of my government. I left nothing at the door of my civic engagement to cause people to wonder who I was or where I stood on this or that issue, for good or ill. Therefore when I did run for office in 2015, 2017, 2019 and 2021, the citizens knew exactly who I was and what I stood for. The same opportunity Ms. Spicer has had in all her meeting attendances which she, alternately, has chosen not to take advantage of. This then is one of the things that concerns me about Ms. Spicer…Here then is the only time I’ve ever heard her speak during poll public in the couple years since she’s been attending:
I ask you then; what of someone that attends council meetings regularly but only speaks once, for all of 7 seconds, prior to a voting primary? Have all these attendances only been as a show of civic interest without the requisite participation? Has everything she’s witnessed during meetings only ever been sugar-coated delights? Certainly, there have been rancorous moments that may have stimulated whatever her point of view may be; police drones, gay pride crosswalks, tax incentives and their impact on our community, police investigations, the Fairway Cliffs project, housing, empty lots, welcoming migrants, water surcharges, elderly being taxed out of their homes, homes being turned into rental properties, etc., but yet, only once have I ever heard her step forward and utter a single word about anything and that one time was simply…praise. Its almost as if she either, a) doesn’t have any opinions on anything, b) is reticent to voice her opinions lest we see exactly who she is or isn’t and is afraid to make herself vulnerable in the public arena lest there be criticism or c) is simply an Administration ‘team player’ with nothing critical to say lest it reflect badly on ‘The Team’.**
While it could be bits and parts of all three, my core issue and concern with Ms. Spicer as a candidate to represent the people of Ward 2 is that she is largely, in my observation and opinion, simply another candidate to add to team ‘Forward Together’, there to merely rubber stamp anything and everything Administration wants so that those in the ‘Forward Together’ team can a) polish and add feathers to their political caps and b) exponentially increase their political power and hold on Whitehall governance, regardless of ‘anything and everything’ making any sense or having any effectiveness in the movement of our community. No independence, in mind or spirit, to pause, consider and counter anything which may deserve critical analysis coming out of Administration or, having a spirit of cooperation with others on council who aren’t part of ‘The Team’ or, taking into account the overwhelming consensus of the citizens themselves, as we saw during the year and a half of the Fairway Cliffs situation. Having a ‘Team’ then, while great for the ‘team leader’ gives no guarantee that what so many yes-es produce will actually be good for the citizens they’re supposed to be serving. What percentage then of what gets through ‘teams’ will be diamonds and what percentage will only be pea gravel? When its all yes-es with no independent, critically thought-out ‘no’s’, ‘pea gravel’ can be the result, as we have witnessed for ourselves; those boondoggles and failures that get through which the community itself will have to live with (and pay for) for years to come thanks to deference for ‘The Team’ taking priority over critical thinking for the people. That independence of thought which acts as a fail safe between the branches of government to prevent undue, possibly damaging power. This then is a problem I’ve been railing against consistently since 2009, when I used to call them ‘The Family’.
From 2015From 2023 Only those in a team ‘committed to moving Whitehall forward’ give a damn about Whitehall and will do things to make that a reality? Please.
Another ‘tell’ then, outside of Ms. Spicer’s lack of engagement in the public sphere, are the very few times she has engaged on Facebook, where people’s considerations are distilled into discernible points of view. All I ever saw though on council meeting Facebook commentary from her was constant praise, applause, adulation and cheer-leading for the Administration.
That’s it.
Yet, readers may be asking, ‘what’s wrong with being positive and uplifting’? To that I say, ‘nothing’. The issue here though is not her ‘positivity’** but rather, and in particular because she is running for office to serve the people, a clear indicator of a) where and with whom her priorities lie and b) when she had the opportunity to show us what kind of person she is that would properly serve the people’s interests, she instead just congratulated and gushed about Administration and The City, as an entity, instead of dedicating her time to championing the citizen’s and their issues. In these rare public statements she showed absolutely no indications of critical analysis on myriad issues before the city but instead used her time only to praise Administration. I’m sorry but when one is running with the slogan, ‘Community First’, her words don’t align with that sentiment. Therefore, I reject her feel-good tagline that has no discernible relation to anything I’ve publicly witnessed.
So then, what she’s already showing here is what a great team player she’ll be by promoting the Team Forward brand. The constant huzzahs and back-patting (as we also see among team ‘Forward Together’ at council meetings) signal to the public as to the WONDERFULLNESS of it all, thereby creating bafflers and walls between ‘The Team’ and the citizens right to truth (and representation) and any actual critical analysis which could be utilized for the benefit of the citizens themselves. It is not in service to the citizens, it is solely in service to team ‘Forward Together’, that same team-centric playbook that brought us to where we are today, as we have seen with Fairway Cliffs and rightful investigations into concerns of trouble in our police department. Its time to jettison this kind of ‘governing’ and choose independent representatives who work for you who put aside fealty to any entity and cooperate with each other to actually get things done for the citizens, for the city.
Finally, one last thing that bothers me, that which is used as a voter manipulation: ‘Parties’, i.e. Democrats, Republicans, etc., using their literature in this ‘non-partisan’ town to get you to vote for a particular candidate; not because they’re the best candidate but because of Party affiliation. I believe everyone in ‘Team Forward Together’ is a Democrat excepting Tom Potter. Ms. Spicer is a Democrat and without saying that in signage or literature, the Ohio Democratic Party comes along and, either through mailings (which they’ve done or at the polls) let you know who the Democrat is simply so you’ll vote for that person without ever thinking about the quality of the candidate or if they’re right for the position or what is in the best interest of the city, not the Party…for instance:
Take note of the upper right-hand corner.
It is nothing more than a backdoor manipulation to get you to vote for Party interests over independent community interests. In this non-partisan city, I find it treacherous and unhelpful. Here is why: Whitehall is a small town, the problems that exist here aren’t of a Democrat/Republican nature. They’re paving the roads, keeping the lights on, getting businesses to come here, Little League baseball, etc., etc. Just because she’s a Democrat and so are you doesn’t make her the best candidate. I’M a registered Democrat, have been since 1980, and I don’t feel she’s right for the position. As a result of this viewpoint, I have both Republican and Democrat Whitehallians who support me and I’m proud of that.
When I fight problems existing in our government, they haven’t been partisan, they’ve been a matter of right and wrong, period. Parties only care about themselves, that is why there is a ‘Country Over Party’ sign in my front yard. We need to deal with the real problems in our community, those which aren’t related to Party, but…the Party machine doesn’t like this. When I, a Democrat, sought out Party endorsements in (I believe) 2015 from the Franklin County Democrats and the Stonewall Democrats, they refused endorsement because I’d been ‘mean to Kim Maggard’ and ‘she’s been very good to us’. A clear sign that servility and power for ‘The Party’ is far more important than the principles you fight for. Its hypocritical to say the least. As a result, I never sought their endorsement again. As a 45-year registered Democrat, I urge Whitehall citizens to eschew this kind of Party manipulation. We have got to fight this wretched practice of ‘Team Politics’ here in Whitehall. Just because someone has told you wonderful things they want you to believe and get themselves in office doesn’t mean they have a right then to create a power stranglehold on the independence of the legislative branch, that branch where independence and critical analysis are vital to properly represent and serve the citizens.
So then, I urge you to eschew these ‘team’ politics, whether through Party or groupings that favor them over you and vote for the independent-minded Brian McCann or David Coleman in the Ward 2 Primary on May 6th.
Thank you
*Independent but fair-minded created this level of cooperation:
** Criticism is an important component of growth; outwardly and inwardly, personally and professionally and certainly, governmentally. I understand and appreciate positivity but there’s got to be some level of realism one abides by in this world given the real and troublesome issues that face Whitehall and particularly if one legitimately wants to tackle issues that need to be addressed that (ironically) produce that positive realm. One doesn’t fix problems by just invoking some insistence of positivity but rather, by looking at them with a clear eye and a courageous spirit and addressing them head on. Disney is nice escapism but its not reality nor does it address the pressing concerns that need to be changed.
In Whitehall’s Ward 2 there are three candidates running for the council seat which has forced a primary runoff on Tuesday May 6th. Those candidates are: David Coleman, Micole Spicer and Brian McCann. I have observed and spoken with all three candidates on different occasions and based on those conversations and observations, from my point of view as a fighter for Whitehall citizens these last 16 years, it is Brian McCann and David Coleman who I am compelled to back in the Primary here on May 6th. Here’s why:
While I’m not apprised of any of the three’s various positions outside of what they have or have not offered in public forums (although Brian McCann made an excellent small speech during poll public at a council meeting a couple weeks ago) I do know this: if you want someone to represent you, the citizens of Ward 2 as your voice on Council, I am confident it will be Brian and David who will best fill that role.
As I have stated before, the job of representing you the citizens on council requires first and foremost, an INDEPENDENCE of spirit, mind and benefaction, which is vital to using critical thinking skills for your benefit. It is my opinion that both Brian and David, whom I have full faith in regarding this independence, are the best candidates for that job.
VOTE TUESDAY MAY 6TH
(CHECK TO MAKE SURE WHERE YOUR VOTING LOCATION IS)
In normal campaigns (as if) opponents make their cases for their candidacy and that’s it. Here in Whitehall, because I’m Gerald Dixon and I have spent years recording issues with the current administration of Whitehall, the Mayor and others feel its their duty to keep me out of office. As well, she does her best to make sure what she wants gets voted for or in. If history repeats itself, this then is what the Dixon camp has in store and what you, as voters should look out for.
First, there is 20 year Councilman Chris Rodrigue’ ‘literature’ which usually arrives soon before the election. Small, inexpensive, almost as if he wasn’t trying very hard to win…or…because he had the juggernaut of the Mayor’s bully pulpit behind him, he didn’t have to put much effort into it. This was his card from two years ago.
Notice the status quo endorsements. This year there appeared none, as if he wanted to distance himself from ‘The Team’ in order to give the appearance that he’s an independent voice, there for the people!
All of these things stated on the literature are things ANYONE would want and fight for. That they are exclusive to him is ridiculous.
Then there is this ‘letter’, dropped off the last weekend before election:
This Mayoral letter is for all those who are unaware of her untrustworthy behavior; all the conflict of interests she’s ignored, her hijacking our government for her own political gain, abusing our government’s processes to grab property and thwarting the citizen’s rights when it doesn’t align with her own plans. This letter preys on their low-information for her maximum gain.
In it she makes Chris Rodriguez out to be Mother Teresa and Robert Moses rolled into one; a beatific saint, generous and warm to all who, sometimes, has to put up with ‘ill-tempered’ citizens demanding accountability. That its HE who is responsible for every great thing to roll into Whitehall and that without his essential help, Whitehall would be nothing more than a lawless hell-scape of murders, dirt lots and slatternly lean-tos. Its all quite laughable though because he is merely one vote. If he’d voted no on everything, it would all STILL have changed. He voted yes when things were good but (and here’s the problem) also voted yes when things were bad (as we’ve seen). He doesn’t discern what is actually good or bad, he just ‘yesses’ everything and in the doing, allows some things through which he should have said ‘no’ to. The truth is; she wants him kept in because his role as a yes-man in her administration holds aloft that illusion she created where ALL is well at City Hall and everything she produces is yet another golden egg. Without a full lineup of yes-people, cracks may begin to form in that carefully constructed illusion and the people may start to see that, after all, she wears no clothes. BTW, her alluding to the ‘ill-tempered’ treatment is no doubt her only barb towards his opponent (me) because I’d had the audacity to spend 20 hours of my own time pouring through Mr. Rodriguez’ official record as Councilor for 16 years and then post it on this blog for everyone to see. How ‘ill-tempered’ of me! Here is what his official record produced:
He’s right, character IS everything when electing people to your government. That is precisely why I feel he should go. His TRUE record shows the truth of his ‘character’ that they ignore. I love how he raises the threatening specter of an awful Gerald Dixon being mean and terrible to people in general I ‘disapprove’ of!
It was the Mayor’s actions in denying people their rights which veterans had fought to preserve for ALL of us that caused me to protest at DSCC’s gates that day. Her personal affiliation with people in the armed forces I was not privy to at that time. Regardless, my protest was with her as an elected leader causing those rights to be trampled which, ironically, were also harming and disrespecting the rights of those her husband wrote about who’d served. Of course, that ultimate irony was ignored so as to keep the Mayor’s yes-man in office and an actual fighter for the people and their rights…out. Mr. Maggard’s wretched letter reached voters about two days before the election. Imagine its impact on those who value the station of power his wife holds without my ability to rebut…and yet, I did as I was able, as you see by this post (the entirety of why I protested is in this post):
Summing up: Chris Rodriguez is one person. While he is ‘nice’ and affable enough, his job requires him to be many things, all of which don’t necessarily hinge on the level or quality of his niceness. Whether its his ignoring his constituents appeals regarding the rezoning for apartments at Maplewood and Main or his voting to undermine and quash the citizens hard-fought battle to take an issue to the ballot or his near-perfect score as an administration yes-man or being the Councilor with the worst attendance record in 20 years, none of those things are ‘nice’, neither to his obligations or the citizens he was elected to represent. The ‘nice’ character they keep representing him as (as does he) is merely a ploy to throw you off the scent of the truth of his record. That whole record which is most certainly worthy of your attention, whether the Mayor or any guardians of the status quo think it so with their election-time hyperbole.
The bottom line is this: If history has taught us anything here, its that the Mayor and/or other of her supporters will do their best to keep her yes-man and ‘Team member’ Chris Rodriguez in office. Not because, after 20 years, his presence is still so invaluable in bringing great things to Whitehall but, rather, because the Administration really needs him to keep up appearances for everyone that all is well at City Hall, that its already stocked full of only the brightest, hardest-working, most intrinsically valuable people it needs. Fortunately though, as we’ve seen with various of the administrations recent stinkers, we know that is just so much bull. Don’t fall for the deception. I’m nobody’s ‘yes-man’. I WILL fight for YOU and say yes when right and ‘no’ when right to do so. You can count on it!
Last night, with Councilor Chris Rodriguez leading the way, Council continued the assault on your rights as citizens of Whitehall. I can write my typical explanation of it all but Lana Pennington summed it up SO succinctly that I defer, for the first time in this blog’s 6 year history, to her summation of the issue. Lana is a Whitehall resident, administrator of the Facebook page ‘Whitehall Engaged: Citizen Action Network (We Can) and the name listed in the case of ‘Pennington v Bivens’* that went to the Ohio Supreme Court to compel our City Attorney Michael Bivens to ‘certify the sufficiency of petitioners’. Here is what she said about the actions at last night’s council meeting:
“Not only was Chris Rodriguez silent when the City Atty was stomping on your rights to vote and be heard, he is now leading the charge to take away your court ordered right to vote on the zoning change to allow the apartments on Maplewood. After presenting the original ordinances allowing the apartments and listening to the groundswell of our voices against the building of these apartments, current Ward 1 Council member Rodriguez not only dismissed us, but also voted “yes” to the passage of the ordinances. During the entire time the City Attorney was building roadblock after roadblock while the citizens tried to exercise their voice per City Charter and petition to put the zoning change to allow the apartments on the ballot, Rodriguez remained silent. Rodriguez remained silent while the people had to take the issue to the Ohio Supreme Court to be heard. Now the council has taken our court ordered right to vote on these ordinances away. Rodriguez, under the guise of “hearing our concerns” after the highest court in Ohio ordered them to do so, has introduced and helped pass an ordinance which rescinded the earlier zoning change. Great, right? No. They are going back to the developer and asking them to talk to us, to perhaps make changes, and to give us time. At least until the day after the election where we were supposed to vote. Then they will introduce and pass essentially the same zoning change, and do so again without giving us the right to vote. They will likely do so calling it an “emergency” which then takes our right to petition away per the City Charter. They did not want to put this on the ballot because they believed we would vote overwhelmingly against it – against their agenda – and suffer another embarrassing loss after the Supreme Court of Ohio determined their City Attorney abused his discretion in silencing our vote. This is the underhanded way they are circumventing the courts and continuing to do as they please without concern for the citizen. They ALSO did not include it on the posted agenda. The fewer citizens that were aware of and attended the meeting, the better. We must stop this machine which continues to believe they can operate with impunity. We must stop this machine which continues to neglect not only the voice of the people they promised to represent, but also their own Charter. Do not forget what they have been doing, and continue to do when you go to the ballot box.”
To add to Lana’s well-made points:
I feel assured that this legislation was given to Rodriguez to introduce in order to try and score him political points he actually doesn’t deserve. Particularly when he voted FOR the original legislation despite the loud chorus of his constituency’s disapproval at the time. Mr. Rodriguez’ callous disregard for his constituents (I’M talking now!) made him vulnerable to lose his 20 year council seat. Realizing that his usual behavior (yes, yes, yes**) was now being paid attention to by the people he’s supposed to be representing, he’s now backpedaled (with the help of his teammates at City Hall***) in order to save his own political neck. NOW he wants to listen to you? No. NOW he wants to save his seat of power where, as history has shown us, he will still NOT listen to you in the future for years 21 thru 24 in that seat. His and their disrespect for our Charter and your rights under it are beyond acceptable. It is outrageous. (This video shows Mr. Rodriguez, so eager to gain false redemption with voters, jumping the gun on introducing this bill which wasn’t even listed on the agenda, never seen by the public and passed without citizen review):
*https://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/0/2021/2021-Ohio-3134.pdf highlights: “Therefore, Bivens abused his discretion in rejecting a referendum petition on the ground that the petitioners failed to comply with R.C. 731.32’s requirement to submit a certified copy of the zoning ordinance to the city auditor before circulating their petition.” “Bivens therefore abused his discretion in determining that the petitioners’ referendum petition was insufficient because they had not complied with R.C. 731.32.”
**From my 2017 blogpost examining Chris Rodriguez’ official record:
‘Yes’ votes by Chris Rodriguez: 1,502
‘No’ votes by Chris Rodriguez: 18 (Mr. Rodriguez dissented only 1% of his entire time on Council, a mere fraction of the time. A third of that fraction was in agreement with everyone else (five times). He only stood away from the pack 0.50% or half of one percent of his entire time on council.)
***It is my opinion that this ‘gift’ to Chris Rodriguez’ political future was done so by abusing the processes of government. Using the very processes at their fingertips in order to politically bolster one of their own. That is a misuse and abuse of OUR government for their own political gain.
To: Councilpersons Robert Bailey, Wes Kantor, Karen Conison, Chris Rodríguez, JoAnna Heck, Larry Morrison, Lori Elmore
From: Gerald Dixon
re: Ord. 61-2021
Dear Councilors,
I am writing you today to implore your ‘no’ vote on Ordinance 61-2021, the utility surcharge legislation.
As for myself, I would be able to afford the $100 extra yearly expense were this legislation to pass but, my fight isn’t about me, it is about the other Whitehallians and your doing the right and responsible thing.
As you are aware, Whitehall is not the wealthiest suburb in Columbus. As such, attaching an additional $100 or so to everyone’s utility bill cannot be done without serious consideration for those constituents you represent who may not be able to handle this additional expenditure; the seniors on fixed incomes, the single Mother or family trying to make ends meet and put food on the table for their children. It is them, and others alike, who I fight for and whom you must give your most serious consideration. That is why careful consideration must be given where the money already is and how it is being spent. While the Administration will pull out all the stops with numerous power-point presentations and endless mind-numbing jargon related to sewer/water business, you must ask yourself if this is the only side to that story. Naturally, the Administration will sell you on everything related to their point of view but, as representatives of the people this $100 Damocles Sword hangs over, it is your obligation, to them, to look at all areas and viewpoints this situation contains. That’s where I’ve come in.
As you’re no doubt aware, I have taken my own personal time to look at those other points of view, as noted in this blogpost:
In them, I have shown how the Administration has, by and large, spent a great deal of money on various things that are more on ‘want‘ lists, as opposed to ‘need‘ lists, certainly that ‘need’ list where crumbling infrastructure certainly belongs. While the Administration defended their spending by saying the splash pad and YMCA and ‘community center’ were things that had been promised citizens during the hype to pass Issue 30, as the fiscal manager and titular head of our city, the Mayor had the fiscally responsible obligation to pass on the tough news to us regarding our crumbling infrastructure and the city’s responsibility to make that a higher priority. She can defend all she wants providing the citizens with what they wanted but, when you have critical needs right in front of you, it is wholly irresponsible to instead make pleasing everyone the higher priority. Now that that has been done, the critical need and its cost still exist and now the administration wants us to financially pick up where their irresponsibility left off, AND, make no concessions to cut back or be more responsible with the .5% income tax that still fills the city’s coffers.
That is why I say to you; table 61-2021. Insist, come budget time, that definitive cuts be made in as many areas as possible (our job as a city is not to employ a million people, our job is to make certain the people’s hard-earned money is spent with efficiency, responsibility, common sense and restraint). Then, when the Administration shows that its serious when it comes to fiscal responsibility towards the city’s health, then reintroduce the ordinance, with a lesser sum in the surcharge, for the benefit of the people’s wallets and pocketbooks, not, the city’s. Another’s fiscal irresponsibility with the citizen’s money should never be the citizen’s responsibility to pay for. If cuts are not made, then either kill it in future Committee or bring it forth and vote ‘no’ on it.
The second option is to simply vote ‘no’ on it at the 3rd reading this Tuesday. That will force the Administration to deal with ways in which to find the money for the water/sewer issue.
The 3rd option, were you afraid of political fallout over this ‘backdoor’ Council tax, is simply to make them put it to the voters. Even then, if the voters say yes to it, the administration has their funds. If they vote ‘no’, then she still has to come up with funds to pay for the infrastructure.
a) the water/sewer lines needed to be repaired and replaced and EPA mandates regarding water/sewer lines had to be fulfilled, that was the essential need to raise the income tax by a half percent in 2010.
b) They had two options to get the money: either raise income tax by .5% or attach a surcharge to utility bills to pay for it. They understood that the tax increase would be the least troublesome to the overall populace and their political stability so, they went with that option. After discussion on how to sell it to the public, they sent out postcards and fliers, like you see here:
The top things they mention are water/sewer EPA. Parks/Rec aren’t even mentioned until last.
In the article, then Auditor Kim Maggard said this, “This city was built in the 1950s, and our issue right now is aging infrastructure,” Auditor Kim Maggard said. “In 2011, we’re spending $1 million on infrastructure, and that doesn’t even touch what we need to do.” She never mentions parks and rec or services once.*
d)After the Issue passed, there was another article in the Whitehall News where, again, parks and rec weren’t even mentioned:
e) In the earlier Whitehall News article, it also stated the tax would be expecting to bring in an additional $4,000,000 a year. (Just for the purposes of this post, lets use that number to figure: the extra taxes started coming in for 2011, its now 2021 so…10 times 4 mil is $40,000,000 they would have had by now to have addressed the crumbling infrastructure. Okay.
f) The campaign for a new Mayor (as John Wolfe decided to no longer run) started in 2011. Kim Maggard ran unopposed (excepting a write in candidate). In an article from the time:
As mayor, she said, she would push for an overhaul of the city’s roads and sewers, drawing money for those projects from general-fund revenue. “We aren’t a new suburb,” she said. “When we find aging infrastructure, we’re going to have to say, ‘OK, how do we pay for this?’ We need to put the money aside in order to do that.”
g) So, money starts pouring in from the tax increase the very first year she is Mayor, 2012. She is the one (and the only one so far) who gets to play with it and put it where she wants (with Council’s approval, of course). ‘The City’ wasn’t used to this money so, while one could understand their excitement to distribute it, the citizens had every right to believe they would do so with moderation, sense and responsibility, particularly to important priorities. (If you suddenly won $150,000 in a lottery and you had house issues and back alimony and non-fun financial priorities, would you be responsible and get those issues settled or would your inner Diamond Jim Brady come out and start feeling generous, spending it on luxuries?) People are human no matter who they are. So then, that is the question here. Did the Mayor show restraint with this newfound bounty and do the most responsible thing or did she now have millions at her fingertips, tempting her inner Diamond Jim Brady to surface?
h) Let’s look at the numbers in the time of the last ten years or so since she took office:
Let’s add to that the I.T. department which jumped from $362,554 in 2012, almost tripling now to an appropriated amount of $924,679 per year.
We now have a Recreation Superintendent that has been appropriated $70,250 in 2021. The ‘recreation/park fund’ went from $98,992 in 2012 to being appropriated over $278,000 for this year. In 2018 it was $713,100! Parks and Rec went from a cost of $760,000 in 2012 to $1,131,192 in 2021
The cost of the Mayor’s office has went from $484,000 in 2012 to $1,193,309 in 2021. The cost of employee benefits went from $7,650,000 in 2012 to $8,046,450 in 2021.
A ‘public relations’ category was added in 2017. To date, including expected expense and appropriations, by the end of 2021, they’ll have spent $373,208!
Acting as if its still the 1950’s where the worker is king, benefits and raises were given out regardless of the economic storms that existed in the real world where benefits and raises are harder to come by. When its taxpayer cash flowing in though, there seems to be enough for everyone.
Franklin County Auditor Since 2013 they have spent…get this…$19,118,721 of taxpayer money. Nearly 20 million dollars!!
The evidence of their profligate spending is all through the public record. It just takes looking at to see.
i) As you can see by the city’s chart itself, the water/sewer issue has been evident even before Kim Maggard got into office. And, despite her speaking of making it a priority when she wanted your vote in 2011 (see ‘f’ above), she instead found a hundred other places to spend that newfound 1/2 percent income tax goldmine.
At the Water/Sewer Surcharge Town Hall Meeting where ‘The City’ came to the people to sell them on the need for the surcharge, we were told that if Council didn’t pass the surcharge, the administration would have to find the money somewhere and while people like their roads taken care of, that may not happen ‘anytime soon’, meaning: we’re gonna have to take the money from the road improvements fund to pay for the water/sewer issue despite sharing with us these figures of spending for the last 5 year:
You see? They spent almost as much on Parks as they did streets but if they’ve got to find money to pay for the crumbling infrastructure, they’re not gonna take it from their massive Parks expenditures, its gonna come from your repaved/repaired streets!
I’ve made my own version of this same chart instead of the circle to better show the dramatic differences in spending:
So, clearly, our Mayor has gussied up the city to divert attention away from the crumbling infrastructure she wasn’t properly attending to. Now, when she has no choice but to attend to that Stage 4 cancer under our feet, instead of cutting out all unnecessary spending to pay for that cancer treatment, she’s willing to renege against the city’s promise in 2010 of NOT having to attach a surcharge to our utility bills if we passed Issue 30, thereby giving her even MORE money for that which she didn’t do in the first place. She’s unwilling to give up her reckless and irresponsible spending, even as our city rots underneath, expecting US instead, to pay even more for it.
*At tonight’s Council meeting, after I urged Council to reject the surcharge legislation, she tried to degrade me to the public by inferring I was stupid at math**. She also reiterated that at Issue 30’s beginnings was talk of money being spent on Parks & Rec, and while it was part of the sell job, it certainly wasn’t the overarching theme. And even if it were as much a part of the spending as she claims, she had a fiscal responsibility to spend the tax monies wisely. She could have, at any time, said, ‘I know we talked about Parks and Recreation in Issue 30 but we’ve really got to put alot of that aside and focus on what’s really important at this time, the crumbling infrastructure’. But she didn’t. THAT is fiscally and managerially irresponsible. So too, when the public clamored for a community center or splash pad, it was her responsibility as the manager of the funds to let people know that there are more pressing problems and once we get those taken are of, we can revisit the splashpad. But she didn’t. Tonight I said she was fiscally irresponsible and in this blog I’ve made my argument as to how I arrived at that judgement. I’ve done MY job. Now council should do theirs and stop abetting her fiscal irresponsibility.
**I’ve never claimed to be a math whiz but my logic and powers of reason are well-honed.
This week (Thurs. July 29th, 6:30 p.m. City Hall) there will be a Town Hall meeting where Director of Public Service Zach Woodruff, Deputy Director of Public Affairs Megan Meyer and the City Engineer will provide the public information on the proposed water/sewer utility surcharge. I am told by Ms. Meyer that the information portion of the presentation will not be as long as other presentations they’ve made on the subject and that they’ll then open it to an informal Q&A with the public, both with those gathered and those online.
While this is all good and fine and right from the Town Hall playbook, and while I give them the due open-mindedness they and it deserve, I still reserve a measure of cynical reticence given ‘The City’ and ‘The Administration’s’ past behaviors and history of ignoring the public trust. They want us to put our full faith and allegiance in them while, when it was their obligation to honor the public trust for our sake, they instead honored their self-interests and not us. As such and given such extravagant spending on ‘The Administration’s’ part since the .5% tax increase (while our infrastructure crumbles beneath our feet), I’m concerned that this is merely a spin and sell job to get money to fix the water/sewer problem without having to cut anything from the largesse of ‘The Administration’s’ lineup of shiny crowd pleasers (which is GREAT for ‘The Administration’.)
So, keep your eyes and ears and, most importantly, your critical thinking skills open and we shall see what transpires.
In 2010, Mayor Wolfe and Council started discussing the need to increase the income tax rate in order to pay for infrastructure needs. Now that City Hall is making a case to reel in more of the citizen’s money through a surcharge in utility bills for this purpose, I think its important to counter their current arguments with the origins of the original tax. I was in attendance at those meetings and remember it being brought up, so…I asked for copies of the Committee meetings for all of 2010 to see exactly what was said. Let’s start with those…
“But somewhere along the way we are going to have major repairs or replacements on our storm and sewer lines”.“This is not money to be wasted; it will allow them, in the future, to meet the needs of the city without putting additional burdens on individual property owners.”
Here then is the literature they distributed to sell the voters on the increase:
During this, there was this article in the Whitehall News:
This blogpost is designed to inform the Whitehall citizens of what is going on at City Hall, with their government and the people elected as stewards of their government. Its main intent is to expose wrongdoing of those elected leaders at City Hall. If there is nothing to report, nothing will appear here. If wrong is being done in the citizen’s name, my intent is to alert you to it so the citizens have the information needed to put a stop to it. I am the messenger, if the citizens choose to do nothing then the continuation of the problem is in their hands. Citizens always have the right and ability to respond in several different ways; call the Mayor/Council members, write letters/emails protesting actions by them, organize to stop their behavior through campaigns of picketing, resistance, etc. The choice is really in the citizen’s hands. You are responsible for what ultimately is done in your name at Whitehall City Hall. Their actions, lack of them, etc., are a reflection on you. What you allow ultimately speaks of you, not them. People are only willing to get away with as much as what they’re allowed to, the same holds true here in Whitehall.
Whitehall Watchblog 
You must be logged in to post a comment.