Carroll Commencement
Fairborn commencement
Badin graduation
Ellen Belcher is the Dayton Daily News opinion pages editor. She writes about state government, education, the environment, higher education and all things Dayton.
Martin Gottlieb is an editorial writer and columnist for the Dayton Daily News opinion pages. He focuses on the political process itself and does such national issues as war, the economy, taxes and Social Security, as well as a hodge-podge of local and state issues.Home > Blogs > A Matter of Opinion > Archives > 2009 > October > 18
Sunday, October 18, 2009
Editorial: McLin better for tough job
2009 ELECTIONS
As the City of Dayton has lost people and jobs, the role of mayor of the region’s center has gotten woefully smaller.
Once upon a time, the job came with a portfolio that, depending on the person in the position, could be leveraged. Partly because downtown was an important center of things — with most of the region’s big businesses there — the mayor had a bully pulpit and was a spokesperson for more than the city.
Not so much today.
Rhine McLin isn’t a natural spokesperson, and she does not have the reflexes of either former Mayor Paul Leonard or former Mayor Mike Turner that would allow her to parlay her office into something larger. Eight years into the job, she struggles to be a force in the room and in the wider community.
Absolutely, the mayor has fine relationships with many people and other elected officials. (It would be a problem if she didn’t, or if she tried to roll over others as was frequently Mr. Turner’s style.) But it must be said: she is not an initiator or a born leader.
What she does have are some good instincts.
She is intuitive about what won’t sit well with citizens and the unintended consequences of decisions that would disadvantage Dayton. Often when the cameras aren’t rolling, she can wittily and insightfully sum up bone-headed ideas. Despite her foibles, she is more astute than many give her credit for.
When prepped and convinced of the need for a hard decision — telling public employee unions “no,” laying off workers, supporting gay rights — she does the right thing.
In very many ways, Mayor McLin is more suited for service in the legislature, where she served before being mayor. When she was one of 33 members of the Ohio Senate, she wasn’t as high profile, except when she chose to be. She liked having a choice, and she was a force to be reckoned with because of the easy and sincere way she relates to people.
It goes without saying that being mayor is much harder — especially in a city that has been so battered.
The city fathers who decided after the flood that Dayton needed a professional city manager form of government couldn’t have foreseen the spot Dayton would be in today. But their decision is now serving the city well.
With so many people having left for the suburbs, the line of people stepping up to serve on the five-member city commission — as mayor or commissioner — is often short or mostly unimpressive.
Maybe if the city had a strong-mayor form of government, more people would be interested in this demanding and mostly thankless work. But that view is only a theory or a hope.
Notwithstanding its shrinking size and its financial and social challenges, Dayton has been lucky to consistently have competent professionals advising the politicians.
When it comes to respecting the professionals, Mayor McLin can’t be faulted. She has shown excellent judgment in helping to pick, and then deferring to, City Manager Jim Dinneen, and then Rashad Young. She and the other commissioners demonstrated especially good judgment in tapping Tim Riordan to step in for Mr. Young, who left in October.
There is every reason to believe that when Mr. Riordan presents her with the awful choices that the city’s projected $17-million deficit in 2010 will require, the mayor will, to the best of her ability, explain, defend and act.
Then she will accept the inevitable politically pounding.
Dayton is not as poised for the renaissance that Mayor McLin, in her exuberant moments, wants voters to believe. That said, it has pockets of hard-won redevelopment and strategic-minded reinvestment.
Downtown’s Tech Town, which is an emerging business park on the old Harrison Radiator site, falls into that category. CareSource’s commitment to downtown was a win.
The University of Dayton’s aggressive investments in its campus, and Dayton’s hospitals’ commitment to expanding their complexes and revitalizing nearby neighborhoods, have been critically important to the city’s well-being.
With old, hulking manufacturing plants a thing of the past, the mayor is right when she says that the city’s and region’s future is in nurturing Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, area universities and the myriad small businesses that hire people by the dozen, not the thousands.
Mayor McLin’s opponent in the November election is Gary Leitzell, chairman of the Southeast Priority Board and the Walnut Hills neighborhood association. Give him credit for making the race. It’s not easy for a newcomer; he’s giving voters a choice, and there’s always something to be said for making the incumbent sweat.
But Mr. Leitzell is not ready. For example, he says Dayton’s business regulation ordinances are outdated, while admitting that he doesn’t really know that for sure and without citing examples.
He thinks half of the city’s projected $17 million deficit can be made up with new revenue, which amounts to a denial of the foremost challenge facing the next mayor and City Hall.
He talks much of a “disconnect” between the city and its neighborhoods, people and businesses. But there is a disconnect between him and the real-world problems of a city hall.
He is a stay-at-home father who paints miniature figurines to add to the family income. Though his neighborhood activism is a start, nothing in his background suggests readiness to be mayor of a diverse, complex, troubled city.
The most important task Mayor McLin and the administration have is managing Dayton’s ongoing downsizing in a responsible, smart way. She and the commission must keep the city solvent and focused on public safety and essential public services that protect citizens’ investments in their homes and businesses.
Delivering those services in the most cost-effective way has never been more important.
Even if Dayton does all this well, the city’s ability — on its own — to seed new initiatives, to put up money for new amenities and to do favors for business prospects will be sharply limited.
Mayor McLin has the unlucky responsibility of being in a job that is as difficult as it has ever been in modern history. Her experience and her commitment to doing what must be done make her the better choice on Nov. 3.
Permalink | Comments (119) | Post your comment | Categories: 2009 endorsements, City of Dayton, Editorials, Ellen Belcher
Ellen Belcher: Casino backers way worse than your kids
2009 Elections
This is every mother’s confession:
Once you have kids, there’s a lot in life that you can’t help but see through the prism of that experience.
The temper-prone idiot at work looks a lot like your 2-year-old.
The rude clerk sounds just like your pre-teen.
The bullying boss could pass for the kid who keeps tripping your son at recess.
Your melodramatic best friend sounds a lot like your overwrought 16-year-old daughter.
It’s true; there’s a lot about children and their life cycle that prepares you for dealing with the adult world. (I digress, but I’m totally convinced that women are much more likely to notice this than men. Fellows, now you know our secret.)
All of this brings me — no kidding — to Issue 3, the proposed constitutional amendment that would allow a casino in Cleveland, Columbus, Cincinnati and Toledo.
For the fifth time in two decades, you’re being asked to allow casino gambling. Four times you have said no. But “the kid” — the gambling industry — will just not give it up.
“He” keeps asking, begging, bribing, whining until you swear you’re going to slap him to sleep.
“Everybody’s doing it,” goes the argument, “Please, please, please.”
Gag me. Been there, heard that stuff for longer than I want to remember.
So enough with the metaphors. Here are the reasons to hold your ground, to not give in, to not be worn down, to not say “yes” because you’re tired of fighting the fight.
Issue 3 was written by the very two outfits that would own the casinos. They decided their own tax rates. They decided who would benefit from the low taxes they’ll pay and in what amount.
They decided what their license fees would be. They decided there would be no competition in the state, even though they are poised to rake in money in perpetuity. For-ever.
Remember, we’re talking about changing the Constitution here. And also keep in mind that the typical slot machine takes in about $100,000 a year. The casinos could have thousands at each site.
I’ll admit it: No matter who wrote the rules, you probably could never get my vote to allow casinos. I’ve been in one exactly twice, two decades apart. Once was in Reno, in 1995. This year I went to one of Pennsylvania’s new “racinos” in Erie.
The picture was the same: Hundreds and hundreds of people, many of them obviously not well-off, sitting around drinking, smoking and losing money hand over fist.
Obviously, people are free to spend their money and time how they want, but there’s something wrong with government wanting people to entertain themselves with discounted drinks and machines that are quite literally “one-armed bandits.”
There’s also something wrong with businesses getting filthy rich off an enterprise because they’re so rich they can stack a public-policy debate in their favor. Issue 3 would require Ohio’s casinos to pay 33 percent of gross revenue in taxes. But Pennsylvania’s rate is 55 percent; Illinois’ is 50 percent; Indiana’s is 35 percent; Michigan’s is 34 percent.
Why should Ohio be demanding such a small cut? Because Ohio isn’t demanding anything. To repeat: the casino developers wrote the proposed amendment for themselves.
The last time you were asked to approve casinos, the pitch was that practically all of Ohio would get scholarships from the proceeds. This time, the argument is that Ohio will be swimming in jobs.
Are we really that gullible? More than half of the projected jobs are construction jobs that will disappear after the casinos are built, and a lot of the others are for blackjack dealers and cocktail waitresses. Now there’s a future for your children.
Casinos also are built to be self-contained. That is, they don’t want gamblers going out to nearby restaurants or visiting other tourist sites or seeing the town. That means casinos will put some other businesses out of business. But that loss of jobs isn’t talked about.
Next month, be the grown-up — again. Say no to Issue 3.
Permalink | Comments (18) | Post your comment | Categories: 2009 endorsements, Columns, Elections, Ellen Belcher, Ohio government, Ohio politics
