Born at the old Doctor’s North Hospital in the Short North, I was brought home to Whitehall for the first time on July 31, 1961 to 4390 Broadhurst Drive, just behind the future site of Whitehall City Hall. In Dec. of 1965, my family moved to the house at 3877 Doney Street where our family has lived and owned it for 52 years. While I went out into the world for a total of 17 years, I always made it back to Whitehall. Now I own the house I grew up in, having bought it 10 years ago. I am the 3rd longest owner and its 2nd longest tenant in its 92 year history. My formative years were all spent in Whitehall and I have lived in this very house in every decade of my life. Here is the photographic proof of that.

Easter, 1966 in the side yard by Turkey Run with the new Doney Street bridge behind me

L-R My brother Tim, me (all arms and awkwardness), Stepfather Jim Hansley and brother Mike in the side yard closest to Robinwood. 1975

Myself and my Mother, Judy by the front stoop 1989

Me in the backyard, 1995

Presenting my Uncle John’s posthumous WWII-era flag and medals to my nephew Kyle in the backyard with my Cousin Bob Arthur in attendance 2008

Me in the side yard with the big porch, the same spot as the photo above taken 42 years ago. (Less arms and more confident). 2017

Chris Rodriguez is the current councilperson for Ward 1 here in Whitehall. I, Gerald Dixon, am running against him for that council seat he occupies. In the interest of winning the seat, besides offering up why I’m running and what my intentions are for the position, I also offer up this ‘by the numbers’ glimpse of your sitting councilperson as a means of understanding who exactly you’ve elected time and again and why that is not necessarily the best choice.

I will present Councilman Rodriguez’ record in three categories: His time in holding office and what seats he’s held. His record as a legislator for the citizens he represents and in attendance of those meetings. I will also offer up my thoughts on all three of these categories and an overall analysis at the end, both as a candidate seeking the office he holds and as an observant citizen. As a note, the numbers offered are what was available to me as of June 2017 and reflect 15 1/2 years. Sometimes I speak of his time in office though given that by the time he finishes his current term it will have been a full 16 years.

The numbers you’ll see here were culled from the official records kept by the Council office of the City of Whitehall. I spent about 20 hours of beautiful Spring days in the office this past June combing through 16 years of paper records (legislation, minutes, attendance records) to compile the entire history of Mr. Rodriguez’ time on council. Mary Freimark and the custodial gentleman who brought up dollies of boxes for me were a great help and I thank them. 

A dissemination of the information you’ll see here:

There are four meetings a month with an occasional emergency meeting. Two are in the room behind council chambers where various standing committees meet to discuss various business of the city, i.e. ‘Community Standards and Enforcement’ and ‘Economic Development’, etc.. This is where any discussion of these issues as well as presentations and the introduction of legislation by council and others are done. There is no ability for the public to weigh in on these meetings although they’re welcome to attend them.             The other two are in the council chambers, where legislation is voted on, entities make public presentations, public hearings are held and the Mayor, Auditor and the like report to council with their ‘officials reports’. This is also where council gives anyone who wishes to speak before them two 3-minute opportunities called ‘poll public’.                         That which is brought before them for a vote are generally two things: ordinances and resolutions. While ordinances are generally local law enacted and enforced by the proper authorities, resolutions are less permanent than ordinances and generally cover acknowledgements of people or events and not really anything which affects the general public, certainly not an enforceable law per se. So, ordinances are obviously something which would have greater impact on the citizens, resolutions, not so much.                          When Mr. Rodriguez first entered into office the salary was $4000 per year, about $83 per meeting. Between 2014 and 2016 the salary was $4600 a year, about $96 a meeting. In 2017 the pay went up to $5200 per year or about $108 per meeting.

HOLDING OFFICE:

*Announced his first run for the Ward 1 council seat prior to the events of 9/11.

*Total years on council:   16 years.

*As at-Large councilman:   4 years

*As Ward 1 councilman:   12 years

*Elections ran in:   4 opposed, 1 unopposed

*Longest-serving elected officials currently at Whitehall City Hall with no breaks in service (by the end of 2017)+:  

#1 Councilman Chris Rodriguez– 16 years (Longer than Franklin Delano Roosevelt!)             #2 Auditor/Mayor Kim Maggard– 15 years                                                                                         #3 Councilman/President of Council Jim Graham– 14 years                                                            #4 Councilmen Bob Bailey and Wes Kantor– 10 years                                                                      #5 Councilman/Auditor Dan Miller– 8 years                                                                                       + This despite term limits being affirmed and mandated three times by the voters.

Mr. Rodriguez’ movements are as follows:

• First elected to Ward 1 in Nov. 2001                                                                                                  
• Re-elected to Ward 1 in 2005                                                                                                              
• Abandoned Ward 1 seat in 2007 in order to run for at-Large (as it’s staggered from Ward elections**.) Won at-Large, Bob Bailey appointed to Mr. Rodriguez’ empty seat.                       
• Decided not to run again for his at-Large seat and instead ran for Auditor in 2011 and lost. Bob Bailey had abandoned his Ward 1 seat to run for at-Large (which he won) and so his empty Ward 1 seat needed an appointee. Guess who was appointed? None other than Chris Rodriguez.                                                                                                                          
• Mr. Rodriguez ran for Ward 1 councilman (again) in 2013, unopposed by the way, where he of course won, and currently sits.

** I maintain that the spirit of staggered elections between Wards and at-Larges are to give a ‘breather’ to elected officials so that they take a break from service as they are supposed to do per the city charter, i.e.- finish no more than two terms and not run again for two to four years. This allows the offices to open wide to receive applicants instead of one person, by way of the power and dominance of incumbency, to keep a lock on a seat. It also keeps the power more distributed amongst the citizenry than all in the hands of just a few. People like Chris Rodriguez and Bob Bailey and Wes Kantor circumvent this rule by abandoning the position they just ran for two years prior (that the voters entrusted them to serve the entire term) in order to hop on a new position and therefore never lose a seat, never lose power and make it imbalanced and unfair for any other out there who wants a chance to serve their civic duty. As well it is a thumbing of their noses to citizens who have, three times, said they want term limits for elected officials. Apparently, these guys think the spirit of that voter mandate doesn’t apply to them.  

LEGISLATION:

Ordinances labeled as ‘requested by’ Chris Rodriguez in 16 years*:  6                               (Of these six, three of them had up to 5 other people request it, meaning Chris Rodriguez only requested three ordinances in his 16 years as the citizen’s legislator.                           One of his sole requests was for the ‘adopt a basket’ program for the flower baskets on Yearling and one other was to institute no parking on Beechwood Rd. between Etna and Virginia Circle.                                                                                                                                         Average time for Chris Rodriguez to solely introduce an ordinance on Council:  Once every five years.

Resolutions labeled as ‘requested by’ Chris Rodriguez in 16 years:  4                                  ( Of these, one was honoring ‘Beechwood Ambassadors’, another recognized heroes and neighbors, another recognized the Shell station at Broad and Hamilton. While nice things to recognize and honor, this is not anything that couldn’t be accomplished by anyone else occupying the seat)                                                                                                                                 Average time for Chris Rodriguez to introduce a Resolution on Council:  Once every four years.                                                                                                                                                *Any ordinance or resolution requested by the entirety of council I never counted. It is only Mr. Rodriguez’ record, solely motivated and pursued, that I’m interested in focusing on here.

‘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.)

This is important information because I maintain (after watching Mr. Rodriguez for 6 or more years) that he is more a seat-filler and ‘yes man’ with a pack mentality than anything else. Not every piece of legislation that has been passed has been worthy of a ‘yes’. 18 of over 1500 things is a very low number. It suggests that Mr. Rodriguez is not an individual but rather part of a collective and yet, he is an individual who represents a specific Ward and is their voice, first and foremost. One has to question whether this disparity is an indicator of someone that simply ‘goes along’ as opposed to someone who stands alone, if necessary, and does what he has to do to buck others in order to properly represent and fight for his constituents. I claim it shows him as the former and not the latter.

ATTENDANCE:

Being that there are only 48 official meetings for council members to attend to in a calendar year it can be easy to start racking up too many absences. In doing my research there were so many levels of absence; how many absences were too many and what was an acceptable number? People get sick, people have schedules and such, all of which are understandable. The average time off, per the record, is five times a year or less. I estimated then that a fair number to excuse representatives absences was six, outside of illness, before it became a rightful issue for those they’re representing, those of whom they should have to answer to. So then, here is the record:

Number of times Chris Rodriguez missed an entire meeting:   138                                      (remember, there are only 48 meetings a year)

Number of years Chris Rodriguez went beyond six absences in a year:   8

The number one title holder of worst attendance by a councilperson in the last 16 years (out of 21 councilpersons):   Chris Rodriguez

Number of spots Chris Rodriguez holds in the top ten worst attendance records in a single year by councilpersons:   6

#1    Chris Rodriguez                                             25 absences                                                         

#2    Chris Rodriguez and Mike Shannon          22 absences                                                       

#3    Zach Woodruff                                                 21 absences                                                       

#4    Chris Rodriguez and Mike Shannon          16 absences                                                       

#5    Mike Shannon                                                  15 absences                                                       

#6    Mike Shannon                                                  13 absences                                                       

#7    Chris Rodriguez and Bob Bailey                 12 absences                                                       

#8    Bob Bailey and Wes Kantor                           11 absences                                                       

#9    Chris Rodriguez and Mike Shannon          10 absences                                                       

#10  Chris Rodriguez, Jim Graham                       9 absences                                                        Best attendance*: Leo Knoblauch   Only 6 meetings missed in his entire time on Council

Amount his absences averaged over 15 years (over 6 times a year) have cost the taxpayers:   $4,296.00

Amount of meetings Chris Rodriguez has missed due to absences beyond a six-meeting norm:  46 meetings or nearly one full year.

Critical Summary:

Let me say first to those supporters of Mr. Rodriguez: I have always found Mr. Rodriguez polite and affable. By face value, he seems a nice enough man, but, this is not a ‘nice man’ contest. It is about claiming a seat as the citizen’s representative on council that will act as a watchdog and proponent of the people they serve. To independently serve the interests of the citizens he represents within the offices of Whitehall City Council, that  branch which is separate in our government from the other two, for a reason. As a human being and my Mother’s son, I take no enjoyment or satisfaction from having to write this post. It is one of those things which are part of the process in elections; I am running and need to make my case to you. Not only why I’m the better candidate but, alternately, why he is not. If his record had been better, he wouldn’t have provided me himself with the ammunition he has, but that’s not the case. That is on him. The question remains then: who can/will do a better job in that capacity? In that, and being that Mr. Rodriguez has a record to analyze, it is only fitting that it be scrutinized and, like Mr. Rodriguez back in 2001, I also come to you without a record, making my case as to how and why I would do a better job as your representative in your local government than he.

That being said then, it is my claim that Mr. Rodriguez, from the public record and from observing him for several years, has been a seat filler rather than a leader all these years (since the first year of the first term of the George W. Bush administration). It is evident in his disregard for the principle that you should show up and work for what you’re being paid for. That which he ignored for his own benefit and the rest of council who excused all his absences, ignored for various reasons. Never did it seem the time that he, or them, considered that Mr. Rodriguez should resign, with no judgements, if he’s unable (for whatever reason) to carry out the responsibilities, fully, that the citizens entrusted him to, nor consider the citizens at all in that regard. What was more important to him was his own standing; keeping his weak leadership on the handle of power and keeping that steady income flowing. That is wrong. Let me state that again…that is wrong. Morally and financially wrong to the taxpayers/citizens he represents, and yet, what else is one to think of the moral failings of a person who would ask you to continue supporting him in light of that behavior?

It is evident in his lackluster leadership. Where are the programs or ideas or innovation for the neighborhoods he’s represented? I’ve seen none. Where was his voice for the citizens he represents when I shouted out that the city was abusing their power in regard to citizens civil rights (specifically the 4th and 14th amendment)? The only voice I heard was mine, not his. I stood up (and showed up!) for the people and I wasn’t even being paid to do so. He who was, did not. He has had an inordinate amount of time to prove his leadership outside of occupying a chair and collecting a check and yet, per the record, his most spectacular achievement to date has been to show up the least of any councilperson in the last 16 years. This is followed by his unending agreement to everything everyone else comes up with and the sad showing of his time as the people’s legislator introducing little to nothing on his own. Period.

Finally, it is evident in his disregard for the public he represents by disrespecting their overwhelming support of term limits, three times. Because Mr. Rodriguez and his ilk’s obsession remains compelled to always have their hands on the throttle of power here in Whitehall, while disregarding (and thus disrespecting) voters wishes in favor of term limits, they’re able to injudiciously hop from office to office circumventing those citizen’s mandate. They don’t really care what you want, they’re not really in it for you and so, the evident ones, keep doing what they must in order to stay in power. (Including, quite frankly, those who ignore what’s right for the citizens in favor of continuously supporting such behavior and actions.) There is much to show in regard for Mr. Rodriguez’ contempt for the people he claims to ‘serve’ (and continue to) but this particular one is vital to see the unadorned truth of the matter. Here, again, is his remark to a reporter after term limits were (again) reinforced by the voters in 2013;

“This is the third time it’s gone down. The people want them kept in place, and we have to respect that,” said Councilman Chris Rodriguez, who was re-elected to his fourth term. “We had three races go unopposed, mine being one of them.”

A few additional arguments to make my case that he should not be re-elected to yet another term:

He claims in the paper that ‘now is not the time’ to change councilpersons. I would agree if his time on council had actually been spent pursuing and exhibiting strong, independent leadership with critical thinking skills and pro-actively pursuing projects with creativity and innovation to shape those neighborhoods he represented with something more tangible and effective to show for, instead of just merely nodding his head ‘yes’ all the time. But, per the record, he didn’t. He merely filled the seat, collected a paycheck he too often didn’t earn with his heavy absences and said ‘yes’ to most everything that was set in front of him (good and bad), no doubt due to a lack of imagination, interest, creativity and/or depth of deeper knowledge of things like sociology and city planning. Others, who perhaps understood these things better, presented their cases to him and the others and that was good enough for him. It really though, is not good enough for a council representative who should use critical thinking skills, in particular, for the best outcomes for his constituents.

As well, if Mr. Rodriguez is so invaluable to the workings of outcomes at City Hall as his comment implies, then he must lay claim to the worst this city has seen as well. If he is supposedly indispensable to the workings of council and city governance in Whitehall and therefore partly responsible for any current success its enjoying, then its wretched dive into trouble and despair must also be his to claim. He was on council seven years by the time the worst dip of the economic crisis hit in January of 2009 and so must also claim all the wretched, sagging blight and crime that had entrenched itself in Whitehall during his first two terms as Ward 1 councilman. He’s been in there long enough that if he can lay claim to successes then we must blame him too for its failings. However, this is all nonsense. Mr. Rodriguez has no more claim to Whitehall’s successes and failures than Donald Trump has to class or nuance. To claim so is to ignore the truth of his record; that successes and failures have little relationship to non-leaders like Chris Rodriguez and more to both socio-economic waves and people who are more present and engaged than Councilman Rodriguez was, is or ever will be. Plain and simply.

As well, I believe the reason he has been kept in so long was that he made no stinks or ripples. He is the classic job filler who merely keeps any opinion or dynamism under the radar so that he gives nothing for anyone in authority (the voters) to find fault with nor cause uproar over, done so to merely keep his job. While that satisfies his self interests and the citizens who don’t like anything to interrupt the stillness of the waters, it is not a proactive or dynamic leadership which they, and everyone else, deserve and which can lead to better things for the ultimate higher benefit of the community, that greater community which actual leadership should be bringing for everyone.

Finally, I also believe he has his supporters in his ‘style’ of representation but ultimately it is a fairly low number in comparison to the amount of voters that actually exist. Apparently Chris Rodriguez does well with the low percentage of voters who actually show up at the polls. That is not a mandate but a shrugging ‘why not’. I feel absolutely no passion from the population in regard to Chris Rodriguez as their representative. I’ve even found, in going door to door speaking to some citizens, that even some longtime citizens didn’t know who their representative was or even his name (after 16 years!). That is an indictment on Councilman Rodriguez for failing to even show up at doors and introduce himself and chat with residents through the course of three U.S. Presidents!

Its time to elect a leader who will actually be there for you, show up and show some spirit and care to do the job well.

DIXON FOR WARD 1

*  Just for fun, here are the councilpersons with the best attendance records, per year, in the last 16 years:                                                                                                                                                         #1  Leslie LaCorte, Jim Graham, Cindy Stewart, Wes Kantor, Leo Knoblauch and Dan Miller:  0 absences                                                                                                                                  #2  Leslie LaCorte, Leo Knoblauch, Karen Conison, Larry Morrison, Jim Graham and Dan Miller: 1 absence                                                                                                                                    #3  Leslie LaCorte, Wes Kantor, Leo Knoblauch, Karen Conison:   2 absences                          #4  Leslie LaCorte, Leo Knoblauch, Jim Graham, Larry Gilmore:   3 absences                          #5  Councilpersons Gilmore and Potter:   5 absences

I’m certain that many people must look at my stances and writings and think to themselves, ‘This guy seems obsessed with ethics. Why is that?’

Let me explain.

Ethics in any human being are all fine and good. We need the world to be on the up and up so we know how to navigate it with a certain measure of assuredness and success. If everything is in the shadows and nothing is as it seems, it makes that navigation more treacherous and risky. That undermines trust and so one goes through life guarded and less likely to risk, ultimately taking away from the natural free flow that truth and ethics provide. So…ethics; good, treachery; bad.

In ones personal life, amongst friends and families and such, ones lack of ethics more or less only effect those people the ethic-less person’s behavior touches, and, it is up to those people to decide whether they can deal with that effect on their lives or decide to eradicate it. That is their personal choice and only effects a small number of people. That is why you don’t see me focused on the personal lives of people, whether private citizens or public officials/figures. Public officials/figures public behavior… now that’s another matter.

In my post:

https://votedixon.com/2015/07/04/why-ethics-in-public-office-matter/

the ethics of public officials is examined pretty thoroughly; how ethics in office are actually pretty important to our democratic systems and how a public officials lack of them erode and corrode their stability and their strength. Again, I quote British Prime Minister David Cameron on this topic, from 2013:
“… the best way to ensure that an economy delivers long-term success, and that success is felt by all of its people, is to have it overseen by political institutions in which everyone can share. Where governments are the servants of the people, not the masters. Where close tabs are kept on the powerful and where the powerful are forced to act in the interests of the whole people, not a narrow clique.”

My ‘obsession’ with public official’s ethics are directly tied to my care for and maintenance of our very form of government. I am a guardian by nature and I love this country’s tenets, as such it is my obligation, my duty (as much so and as deeply so as a soldier’s) to keep those democratic processes free from harm. I see it as a duty which is as vital to our country’s well being as anything any other American citizen does to defend it from those who would harm it, intentionally or unintentionally, whether by ego or greed or both*.

THAT is the reason for my heavy focus on it. Plus, nothing is ever done about city hall’s lack of it in the people’s business despite the clarion call of my warnings over these several years. Their lacks ethics was not okay 8 years ago, there are still ethics issues and they’re still not okay today. Until or unless others pick up the fight and stand with me and actually do something abut it (like electing me to stand guard within the halls of power), you will continue to hear me call them out regarding this matter.

*Now knowing this underlying peek into my feelings on the matter, one can then better understand my grand upset at my Democratic Party itself in rejecting me, for it not only was a stab in the heart to all my bright-eyed hopefulness in fighting and vanquishing social injustices for the world’s betterment but, it also said to me that the party I so believed in all these decades was not only more concerned with power than principles but also that power (and the things it generated: wealth, standing) was more important to them than America and its democratic processes itself. SMH. That is more than I or anyone can or should accept. Simply, awful.
https://votedixon.com/2017/09/19/my-democratic-party-when-power-trumps-principle-a-criticism/

People sometimes berate me for never speaking out about what our mayor is doing right, and so, because its the right and fair thing to do, I’ve decided to create this post.

Regardless of whether or not I’m a fan, I am not blind to that which Mayor Maggard has accomplished and which can be checked off in the positive column. Here then is my list:

#1 Putting in Heartland Bank in the Whitehall Community Park and taking out the golf dome.

The physical layout of the park was simply too difficult to implement successfully. The upper part was too small and really not amenable to much activity past picnicking at the shelters provided. With the large parking area taking up so much space and a lot of it laying dormant (in front of and to the south of the parking lot) it didn’t attract park goers as it might. So too, its location was such that it was inconvenient for residents to get to, plus, there were so few users, that it made it uninviting. So too the bottom part: an isolated cul-de sac of sorts, there were homeless near the bridge and woods by the creek and because of a lack of users it was nearly empty and thus more scary for those trapped down there where they couldn’t escape. The current plan helps to alleviate most of these issues.

By placing Heartland Bank up top and the offices off Broad it provides the park with a steady stream of users (at lunchtime, etc.). People don’t want to go to an isolated, empty park where they feel vulnerable and scared for their safety. They want to see others and feel secure having other people around in case there is trouble. The more people around the less likely the chance for assaults and other crimes. Plus, opening up the bottom to Broad Street gives a second access. Always a good idea.

Outside of any other ideas proffered or not proffered, because of the difficult nature of the parks two-tiered set up, I think this is an excellent solution. Kudos.

#2 Bringing Whitehall into the 21st century with new traffic light poles.

#3 Planting new trees and making certain the investment that was already made in trees is not wasted by placing the watering bags around them.

#4 Beautifying the city’s entryways with the median planters and the facelift at N. Hamilton Rd.

While I am not a fan of changing the city’s motto ‘City of Pride’ at Whitehall’s entryways with what amounts to a business slogan: ‘Opportunity is here’, I do like and appreciate the stylized three-sailed ‘W’s that grace the medians and have been used to identify the city in numerous ways. Getting the railroad to refurbish the trestle over Hamilton road was also excellent (I’m so glad they kept the art moderne motif intact).

#5 Modernizing and making professional city hall’s employees.

Several years ago when you went to city hall, while it was regular folks doing the business of the city, sometimes it wasn’t the most professional, particularly if they had any issue with you personally or politically. It has changed and everyone is a professional firstly. That is what one should expect when going down to your government’s offices for whatever business one has to attend to, unless of course you live in folksy communities like Mayberry. What I don’t like is the destruction of the interior of the mid-century city hall with thick Plexiglas everywhere. They could have retained the historic ambiance of the original works and perhaps used more cameras where needed if they felt security was so important. With everything of historical significance gone and/or disrespected in Whitehall this was just another act of vandalism of our historic, shared built environment.

#6 Updating and streamlining the city’s IT department and website.

The website is chock full of information and even directs people to resources to help them in matters of food and housing, etc. Good job on that one.

#7 Maintaining the flower baskets along Yearling Road.

#8 Enticing business into Whitehall, ala Wasserstrom, Priority One Designs, etc.  *

My caveat to this is that, while several businesses have received tax abatements as a means to entice them to Whitehall, the taxes from those businesses themselves then don’t contribute to the betterment of the city and its infrastructure and services but the employees who work there do through their taxed income. I know that we want to get business in given our economic crises in the last couple years but, in an organic way, I believe we are in a good position to take advantage of socio-economic waves heading towards us and so feel that we are selling ourselves for a song.  This is a pretty good and fair look into and criticism of this practice:

http://www.umich.edu/~econdev/taxabatemts/

#9 The ‘My Home’ down payment assistance program

On one hand I think its good to help people become homebuyers. Its the cornerstone of American society. On the other, Whitehall is on the precipice of change powered by Columbus’ extraordinary growth and successes, where we will be in the driver’s seat and not have to go begging for people who will live and do business here. As such, the gold we’ll possess in that change will be worth a great deal more than we get currently by entreating people to come here. The city needs to recognize that certainty and, with a little more patience, allow it to happen and wait for its true worth to reveal itself.

#10 Whitehall Home Reinvestment Program 

I thought this was an excellent idea because for years Whitehall merely codified everything and made punitive all their efforts at getting the poorer of Whitehall’s citizens to clean up their act, in essence putting the cart before the horse. In this method they’ve actually given people better tools to help them do things they want them to do. Much better than merely pissing off all the citizens (and treating them like criminals).

#11 Redirecting the entrance/exit of DSCC from East Broad St. to Yearling and Poth.

I don’t know if this was her the mayor’s baby or DSCC’s or whoever’s but, excellent. It was really backing up and creating a traffic nightmare and this alleviated that bad situation.

In conclusion I’ll say this: If there are things I left out it was because I either didn’t have enough information on them to comment, have mixed feelings about them (too heavy of a concentration of Senior housing) or had lost track of certain things.

Mayor Maggard claimed to have ‘vision’ in her elections, that which imbues her with special insight and leadership skills beyond the scope of regular, non-visionary people, that which allows her to take what is there and reshape it and steer it towards heretofore unseen and unknown destinations and results. I have observed leaders over the years from afar whose ‘vision’ was undeniable and recognizable; the Kennedys, Michael Bloomberg, Mario Cuomo, Jane Jacobs, Dr. King, etc. and while Mayor Maggard has lead the city rather than simply managing it as it lurched along, what she has done is in the ‘everything old is new again’ playbook of leadership and city planning. (While I have touted various aspects of what makes communities work over the years, that which I arrived at by reading and observation and thought, I have never claimed to have ‘vision’ as everything I’ve spoken of has either been around far longer than me or is really, common sense). So, while there is no vision, per se, in what the mayor has done, there are definitely smarts about it, and leadership.

Whitehall was, in large part, a victim of organic socio-economic waves and a lack of proactivity by former leader’s lack of understanding and knowledge in tamping down or heading off the worst damage of those waves. It was in fact, a series of waves that crashed over Whitehall. Mayor Maggard, to her credit, fairly tackled that which littered our city when the waves receded. To the casual observer she seems a miracle worker but to those schooled in sociology, economics, psychology and leadership, what she’s really done is simply that which has been done many times before in other places. However (and this is important), to her credit, she did something…she lead rather than sitting on her duff and making half-hearted blunders and attempts. In that, and whether her actions ultimately result in a truly beneficial future for our community or despite any negative criticisms of her I feel justified in having, she is to be rightly lauded for these positive actions and deserves the title of ‘leader’. In the rich, full, in-depth understanding of the entire story which ties Kim Maggard and Whitehall together, that which acknowledges and looks at all her bumps and faults with a critical eye too, I firmly believe she has earned that title.

Huzzahs to Mayor Maggard!

*  While I can give credit to Mayor Maggard for several things and certainly because she is the one running the city of Whitehall, a large amount of credit must be given to Zack Woodruff, Director of Economic Development and Public Service, due to his hard work in this area. I believe he is a heavier producer of some of these successes than most people know. So, kudos to Mr. Woodruff.

As with anyone running for office, people ask me what I stand for and what it is I hope to accomplish by service in public office. The first part has been thoroughly laid out here on this blog, most all of which still stands. I feel no need to further expound on what these posts already elaborate:

https://votedixon.com/2015/09/03/an-open-letter-to-whitehall-citizens/

https://votedixon.com/2015/09/05/my-positions-1-legislatorcouncilperson/

https://votedixon.com/2015/09/10/my-positions-2-policecrimesafety/

https://votedixon.com/2015/09/28/whitehall-ohio-the-city-of-no/

https://votedixon.com/2017/05/18/giving-a-damn-about-the-poor/

What I can provide though is a list of things I wish to focus on and hopefully bring to fruition while on council. (While this list is numbered it by no means suggests a prioritization)

#1 Pursue stronger anti-littering initiatives.

A couple years back Mayor Maggard rightly brought forth an initiative to tackle the littering problem. I was on the committee to pick people to sit on the anti-littering group but wasn’t on the ultimate committee. While they had a few ideas, I’m not certain what actually materialized or the success rate it had. I still see the same trash up and down Doney Street, in the creek and other parts of Whitehall.

I want to focus on a couple areas: the fines that we have on the books but have never heard of anyone receiving, more informative signage regarding Whitehall’s attitude regarding littering, requesting people not litter and fines associated with littering. (If we can put up signs suggesting all panhandlers are alcoholics and drug abusers, surely we can put up a few cautioning people against littering) and the trash/plastic producers themselves. What responsibility do they have in the creation of trash to the swirling trash-vortex the size of Texas in the Pacific Ocean? There is a connection and if the rest of America and the world can take concrete steps to do something about this very real problem, I don’t think Whitehall should be at the back of the line of communities stepping up.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/sep/06/plastic-fibres-found-tap-water-around-world-study-reveals

#2 Pursue more citizen-friendly, citizen-centric code enforcement policies.

In the past several years, the overarching implementation of code enforcement in Whitehall has been as a means to whip citizens into the shape amenable for your elected officials tastes (Pat Legg Jr.) or, as a tool to either rid the city of people they didn’t like (Dave Deluca) or to punish those who didn’t tow the ‘company line’. They have abused the rights granted them by you, the citizens, to punish those who didn’t ‘comply’ or were hostile to Whitehall’s governance. This has usually been done to entice the money men, the profiteers who see unique, organic community character as distasteful and  ‘substandard’ and abhorrent to the dull, standardized vision of their corporatocracy; where individuality and freedom and character are sacrificed for increased tax revenue sought by ego-driven politicians making a name for themselves and ever-increasing profit margins by ever-monopolizing multinational corporations who don’t care one lick about our Whitehall. You see it increasingly throughout America where whatever town you find yourself in is exactly the same as your town with all the same chain stores blandly lining the streets.*

 http://www.dispatch.com/news/20170925/does-columbus-zoning-board-bulldoze-area-commission-decisions                                                                                                                           

Code enforcement is supposed to be there for the ultimate reward of the citizens themselves, not to be used as a political tool to harm citizens and enemies and further enrich millionaires and billionaires bank accounts, particularly at the sacrifice of the community’s character**. That’s the code enforcement I want to see implemented.

#3 Designate the neighborhood known as ‘The Woods’ either as historic or as Whitehall’s first neighborhood.

My family and I have lived in Ward 1 for over 50 years. The neighborhood bound by Main, Broad, Maplewood and Robinwood were, I believe, nicknamed ‘The Woods’ by the police and constitute Whitehall’s first real neighborhood. Carved out of farms (including Abram Doney’s) nearly 100 years ago, it foreshadowed the coming suburbia over 25 years later. Its older homes and big trees are certainly worthy of this distinction. It creates interest for people to live there and certainly increases the cache for the homes and Whitehall itself. I think, even unofficially, with signage to allow visitors and passerby to know what the neighborhood is, it would be a win-win for Whitehall and Ward 1.

#4 Quality of life issues.

Something which has become increasingly apparent as the years have worn on since my return to Whitehall 10 years ago has been the assault to the quality of life Whitehall, and certainly Ward 1, has suffered. Daily are the motorcycles revving their ear-splitting engines and tearing down the streets going forty and fifty miles an hour, as well the trucks and cars too. There are the huge trucks which have no business coming down small residential streets to cut across or save themselves time delivering or going to and from Walmart and Target on opposite ends of ‘The Woods’. City Hall remains apathetic to the problem as the mayor and most councilpersons live where this isn’t an issue (except for Ward 1 councilman Chris Rodriguez who used to live on Robinwood Avenue and who finally took a half-hearted stab at doing something about it only after I involved him in it, that which was fought by the mayor and asst. city attorney and thus, dropped). People feel emboldened to speed and roar across Whitehall and ruin the quality of life for citizens and homeowners because there aren’t enough speed traps and the current administration is too busy building up businesses, careless to and seemingly blind to the detriment of the actual day to day quality of life of its citizens who live here. Something has got to give and I intend to be proactive on restoring some semblance of sanity to our neighborhoods again. With like-minded councilmembers, I hope we’ll achieve that goal.

#5 Create distinctions among neighborhoods within Whitehall.

In years past, different neighborhoods grew and lived as their own unique enclaves. (Not dull and standardized) It lent a friendly spirit of competition amongst different neighborhoods within the same city. I say, that can, and should be, promoted again. Youth sports teams can be brought forth (imagine the Norton Field Tigers!) and create fun and friendly competition amongst various Whitehall neighborhoods. It also creates a lively spirit exemplified in what the different neighborhoods bring to various events (their talents, their cooking skills). Different neighborhoods can host their own festival or fair that promotes and highlights their people and their assets. Tee-shirts can be made and worn, neighborhoods get an added real estate boost by having the cache their particular neighborhood brings to the table. It may increase desire to have particular businesses or attractions which burnish neighborhood pride. Signs not only signifying lines of demarcation but also names of neighborhoods, slogans, etc. I believe its a unique way to make the city livelier and interesting (as long as profiteers with only dollar signs in their eyes are kept away and not allowed to destroy the individuality, ingenuity and spirit this sort of grass-roots, citizen-based neighborhood initiative can bring).

#6 Act as the watchdog I’m supposed to when representing the citizens as their elected leader.

Too often in the past several years, I have seen council avert their eyes when decisions affecting the citizens, in various fashions, are made. There was the near thievery of the Woodcliffe neighborhood (see: profiteers) by our city’s leaders who were given this pass to do so by disinterested, uninformed, careless (or duplicitous) council representatives who weren’t minding the people’s business. (Which includes your current Ward 1 Councilman, Chris Rodriguez)

There are issues with code enforcement robbing people of their civil rights and yet, no watchdogs on council, no one looking out for the law, for ‘right’ and making sure the citizens were being protected from nefarious dealings by underhanded city leaders. Its really quite shameful. As your elected representative in government, it is my responsibility and obligation to the citizens (and the Constitution) to be their watchdog in governmental affairs. Plain and simply.

#7 Also acting as (and continuing to be) a watchdog for our democratic processes and the sanctity of the moral principles that guide and secure them.

This blog is rife with examples of the corrupt moral failings of your elected leaders in Whitehall politics who endlessly choose either the most expedient course of action, regardless of inherent conflicts of interest or, the one which, while wrong, is best for them personally or politically. Whitehall City Hall is sick with it. The public needs to pay attention to what is going on and insist upon candidates who actually discuss and promote ethical cleanliness of public officials in their campaign. It is not enough to simply trust them. Simply trusting them is exactly what caused the sickness at city hall in the first place. The prescription to heal it is demanding an ethical stringency in your candidates. It is vital and why I wish to focus on it when in office. This blog post explains why it is so vital:

https://votedixon.com/2015/07/04/why-ethics-in-public-office-matter/

#8 Insist on increased awareness of diversity in the movements of city events and such.

While I grew up in the Whitehall of the 60’s and 70’s where it was 99.5 % white, I also lived in NYC and LA for 17 years where ‘white’ was just one of several racial distinctions. Growing up in a majority white community I found it refreshing and wonderful to be surrounded by so much rich racial, ethnic and cultural diversity: Dominicans and Africans and Spaniards and Columbians and Islanders, etc., that all brought their unique selves to the table of experience and life. New York City, who are used to a rich diversity of peoples, are very comfortable with all their citizens. Everybody is celebrated and appreciated each in their own way and as a whole too. Here in Whitehall I feel a lack of comfortability with diversity from our city, in various ways. From my experience in NYC and LA, it feels non-inclusive and off-putting. Whether it was the harsh blanket criticism of the Commons at Royal Landing neighborhood (where many people of color who didn’t cause problems also lived and who were forced out of their homes), or the distinct lack of diverse choices of music at the various free concert venues ( I believe this is a WCCA event) Currently, its primarily always country music or 70’s rock tribute bands. It seems like stuff that those in charge enjoy regardless of whether a broader scope of people would enjoy or attend it.  How about something for the Somalians or the Senegalese that they may like? What about the Latinos? How about a festival or band celebrating one of their cultures? It must feel terribly dismissive to some citizens to never have their particular niche of humanity celebrated and made to feel specifically welcome by their own town.

My point is, I feel a lack of thought in regard to diversity of city events separates the citizenry. Whitehall is what it is now, not what it once was. As such, we need to acknowledge more of the reality of the current us and display it more in the events and such that we put on and enjoy. Its my hope to keep an eye on and speak up about and defend this position when decisions are discussed and made.

In closing and in consideration of your vote, I ask you: when was the last time you saw an actual council candidate in Whitehall put this much effort and consideration into, not only into letting you know all about them but also proffering a list of actual ideas to better the city (innovative or otherwise)? If you can elect silent candidates who lack proactivity in their job and sneak in and slide by doing little to nothing, why not elect one who actually has passion, ideas and care to see betterment?

GERALD DIXON     WARD 1                                                                                                                 NOVEMBER 7TH

*  “Visitors come to a place because the locals have given it character. Without authentic character, there is no vitality, only predictability and a dehumanizing banality. Appeal for either the local citizen or visitor does not exist.”- Roberta Brandes Gratz,  Award-winning journalist and urban critic

** https://votedixon.com/2015/10/24/the-petty-tyranny-of-whitehall-code-enforcement-part-3/

Recently there had been a newspaper article on a burger chain “giant” placing self-serve kiosks in stores this year. I took issue with several things within the article and, as is my habit, sat down and wrote those feelings down. Looking it over, I was taken by the message and tone of what I’d written, those I wanted to share with all of you. It is spot on in its criticism of automation and the loss of jobs for humans and what I see as profits over people. For this reason I wanted to share it with you here.

‘In an article describing increasing automation in a fast-food burger chain, the terms ‘labor costs/savings’ was mentioned three times. As well, it referenced ‘young people’ several times and in it the company asserted this demographic preferred to use these kiosks. One wonders if these ‘young people’ correlate their use of self-serve kiosks with a loss of jobs for themselves?
As well, the C.O.O. also spoke of eliminating labor hours and bemoaning wage inflation to investors. Topping it all off, labor was indirectly insulted by suggesting that kiosks were “always courteous and showed up on time”. The greed and demeaning condescension toward their human labor was apparent in the article and only served to convince me that they, and no doubt others, look upon their employees as a necessary evil whose hours and wages need to be slashed in order to increase profits for themselves and their investors. I find this kind of business model and attitude towards labor reprehensible.
While it is fine and understandable that people go into business to make an income to support themselves and gain success, if that ‘success’ comes at the cost of caring and respect to their fellow man and puts profit at a higher premium than humans and their interactions with each other, then what kind of ‘success’ is that?
How much profit then, how much money will be their folly when everything is so automated that there are no jobs left for people (who continue to procreate) to afford the things which these companies produce? What is their or any business’ moral obligation to the planet and its societies from which they consume and produce waste into? Are the planet and its masses only here for a businesses never-ending quest, and unquenchable thirst, for money? What about the lives and welfare of their fellow man? Do they not also need and want a better life and security too? Does business not understand this or is greed the only thing anymore? What has happened to society where ‘profit over people’ is the mantra instead of caring and looking out for your brothers and sisters who share God’s green earth with you?
Sadly, this business model underscores the truth that, if we do not proactively shop from conscientious companies, those which put people as high up on their list of priorities as money, we will then be, ironically, the only ones to blame for the demise of that ‘better life’ for ourselves.’

Oftentimes politics is about what you don’t say to citizens over that which you do; the whole truth that, if also presented, might not deliver the results they want (nor the votes they need). It is no less the case here in Whitehall from our Mayor, Kim Maggard, than it is anywhere else. However, being that this is our home, and these are our elected leaders, it is here that my examples are mined.

Case in point: The Commons at Royal Landing ‘CaRL’/Norton Crossing

What was said/presented: The complex was presented as trouble due to, in part, a stove toppling on a child resulting in his death blamed on heating issues and, a shooting which resulted in a young man’s death.

http://www.dispatch.com/article/20140304/NEWS/303049923

http://stagenc.build.dispatch.com/news/20170724/jury-acquits-man-of-murder-in-death-of-friend-in-whitehall-shootout

The ultimate culpability for the child’s death, I couldn’t find on the internet. In the case of the shooting it seems no one was ever convicted of the death itself.

What wasn’t said/presented: Prior to the shooting, in the same year, there had been a triple homicide (three times the rate at CaRL!) at the Shaker Square apartments and yet, you never heard the complex characterized by city officials as a source of problems like they had the CaRL.

Reason: They had no designs on the Shaker Square apartments as a parcel to develop and so, it had no impact on the city like their plans for a development on a key corner of the city’s entryway.

What was said/presented:                                                                                                                         “The area has been a constant source of issues” -Mayor Maggard as quoted in The Whitehall News                                                                                                                                            With 360 calls in the last 6 months “That’s about two times a day. That’s ridiculous.”            – Former Whitehall Community Affairs Coordinator Gail Martineau as quoted in The Whitehall News                                                                                                                                           “Our police department calls it a “super user” and it has been identified and just not a safe environment.” – Former Whitehall Community Affairs Coordinator as quoted on 10tv.com

What wasn’t said/presented:

Reason: Money and plans. As you can see by this chart, according to city officials litmus test of how many police service calls indicate a “super use” that’s “ridiculous”, Walmart certainly bests the CaRL as a bigger user of our police force, as evidenced by the department’s own records, but yet, no city officials have degraded it in the press. I suspect this is because of the city’s tax income received (sales tax, income tax, etc.) from Walmart’s presence in Whitehall and because their parcel of land is not in any city crosshairs for development. (Lesson learned? As long as there are sufficient funds filling the city’s coffers, their stated moral outrage is apparently hypocritically quelled and set aside). If only the CaRL then had provided Whitehall with more tax income for the city (and hadn’t been on a piece of property the city considered a “critical city entry point” to development) then they might’ve gotten a pass from city officials criticism, like Walmart seemingly has.

What was said/presented:                                                                                                                     “It’s an eyesore.” – at-Large Councilman Wes Kantor, as quoted in the Whitehall News        “What is there today is not attractive.” -Whitehall’s Director of Economic Development and Public Service Zach Woodruff as quoted in the Whitehall News                                         Demolition of the “ugly buildings” will be her “biggest step” yet in her continuing effort to combat blight in the city… Mayor Maggard, as quoted in the Whitehall News

What wasn’t said/presented: All these characterizations by Whitehall public officials are merely opinion (for they are not learned critics of architectural aesthetics) but, because they said them, they carry a heavier weight of truism to the public, for maximum benefit to their ultimate goal. The complex was never officially characterized as ‘blighted’ by any competent entity and while there were problems due to varied sources and situations, most of them could’ve been properly dealt with and were by no means as they characterized them. Or, as one resident said it, as quoted on 10tv.com, “If anything, if they really wanted to make it better, maybe get some security out here or something. I don’t think they need to tear it down.” What Malik Carter didn’t realize was that, no, they didn’t need to tear it down, but they definitely wanted to. Greater things for that spot were in Whitehall’s hopper and certainly an old apartment complex or the poorer of Whitehall’s citizens weren’t going to stand in their way.

Reason: They wanted the CaRL to fail because it would be an opportunity for them to get some land and proceed with development plans. See: the very next quote…

What was said/presented:                                                                                                                          “It will provide the city with a great opportunity for other purposes.” -at-Large Councilman Wes Kantor as quoted in the Whitehall News                                                                “I’m excited. It should be a boon for the area and spur more development.” – Barbara Blake, Planning Commission member appointed by Mayor Maggard                                             The city considers the area a “critical city entry point.” – bizjournals.com 11/29/16               (As they have now for several years…)

https://votedixon.com/2015/10/30/woodcliff-v-whitehall-part-two-the-pirates-of-whitehall/

What wasn’t said/presented: The degradation of CaRL was Whitehall’s “boon”. They have unsuccessfully been trying to develop this entryway now for years, as you can see/read for yourself in the above blogpost. Unfortunately, most of it’s land space is owned by others, in particular land size large enough to accommodate a glorious development project. It is clear they have been wanting to shape this area now for years but, instead of abusing the city’s power by simply trying to take people’s property through abuse of processes available to them, this time, they simply exploited a sad and unfortunate organic situation for their own gain. As opposed to their behavior with regard to the Woodcliff condominiums, there is ultimately nothing more wrong here (surface-wise) than the manipulation of information to the public for their ultimate gain.

There is more to be said regarding their agendas and her ‘visions’. For now this suffices to extend truth to the citizens past what the city parses out for their benefit.

In last weeks Whitehall News there was an article acknowledging Chris Rodriguez and myself as the two who will move on to the general election for the Ward 1 council seat.

http://www.thisweeknews.com/news/20170508/stage-set-for-council-races-after-primary-rules-out-one

In the article Councilman Rodriguez was quoted as saying that, “I hope to run a positive campaign”. In the past, I have noticed this catch-all saying can actually act to stifle things an opponent says that isn’t, and only, 100% pure sunshine, even when what is being said is truth and part of the record. Things that can be categorized as ‘good’ or ‘bad’ dependent on how the person wielding the ‘positivity’ banner feels about the them and, more importantly, how damaging they are to them. This is an important understanding to have and so wanted to clarify this otherwise innocuous seeming declaration.

 While my opponent for the Ward 1 council seat; incumbent Chris Rodriguez, wants to “run a positive campaign”, I wanted to say this in response;

While that is always an admirable (and just) goal, I wanted to remind citizens/voters that such wording shouldn’t be construed to mean that anything which isn’t “positive” must necessarily then be ‘negative’. In a campaign to reach not only a seat to represent citizens but one that also wields power, words must not be given any more heft or meaning than they are due. In presenting facts, as culled from his own record sitting on Council, or my opinions on that record as a political opponent, is neither ‘positive’ or ‘negative’ but, rather simply, the truth. Rather, it is Mr. Rodriguez’ actions and the character he displayed in those actions within the realm of his job as the citizen’s representative which are entirely right and fair game, and, the proper means in which to present one’s case. His personal life is not. That is the true distinction in what defines (and should actually be considered) a proper or improper campaign. A note of distinction I thought important and worthy of the public’s understanding.