RULING ON CITYLINK IS ABSURDLY WRONG
A letter to the editor in Sunday's Enquirer:
RULING ON CITYLINK IS ABSURDLY WRONG
Hamilton County Judge Ralph E. Winkler's absurd interpretation of semantics overturned two lower court decisions in the CityLink case ("Judge OKs controversial social services mall," Nov. 23). He declared that CityLink, a faith-based, non-profit, social services mall, is not a community services facility but is a business/commercial enterprise.
I ask anyone reading this who knows anything about CityLink: Does CityLink propose to provide services to addicts, ex-cons and homeless people in the Cincinnati community by offering housing, food, clothing, grooming services and job training, or is it a business akin to Kroger, P&G or Gold's Gym? Where is John Stossel and his 20/20 news segment "Give me a break" when you need him?
Dr. Lorie Walter Over-the-Rhine
I would have to agree with Dr. Walter.
This comes from the original Enquirer Article on Winkler's decision:
Judge Ralph E. Winkler’s decision Wednesday said Citylink is not a “community service facility” that would be barred from a manufacturing district under the city’s zoning code.
Citylink is a consortium of churches and social service agencies that plans to create a one-stop center for job training, drug treatment, health care and other charities at a $1.4 million Bank Street site.
Because Citylink seeks to provide job training to people throughout the region – and not just residents of the West End – it is “best described as a business or commercial enterprise” rather than a social service center, Winkler’s decision said. “
Winkler's logic is indeed stunning. And his ruling (if let stand) could have some serious implications for the future of the City of Cincinnati's zoning code. If CityLink is best described as a business or commercial enterprise, facilities like this could potentially go anywhere other businesses and commercial enterprises exist. The City of Cincinnati needs to appeal this ruling to defend their right to enact and enforce future zoning law.
If CityLink isn't a community service facility (as prohibited in the zoning code) one has to wonder what constitutes such a facility.
The ruling also highlights CityLink's duplicitous nature in the whole affair. They consistently denied that the CityLink Center would be a magnet for drug addicts, pre and post release felons and the mentally ill. In court they argued that CityLink could not be defined as a community service facility because they weren't just serving the surrounding communities. CityLink claimed they would be drawing people from "throughout the region". Crossroads Community Church is planning a Wal-Mart sized Homeless Mall on a five acre site across the street from schools and playgrounds, and they admit in court that they plan to draw people from across the region to concentrate them there. That wasn't the message they were pimping to the community. At least they have been consistent in being consistently deceitful.
posted by Male Dallory at 9:08 AM
24 Comments:
"NOT NEAR OUR SCHOOLS" ???
Guess what?
The CityLink/Mallory/Burke cabal closed Bloom. They will close Heberle soon. Then ML King to follow.
Then all the schools around 800 Bank will be gone.
The power brokers want the cash flow of taxpayer loot that will go to support this program for the region's jailbirds.
They want the money folks.
Screw the schools. Screw the neighborhood.
They want a West End ghetto to consolidate all the region's problems and get their slice of the new money flows.
I am not sure that is accurate about the schools. I think the school board is forced to close some schools, and they are obviously going to start with the ones that they deem underperforming.
I am all for conspiracy theories, but I am not buying yours.
"I am all for conspiracy theories, but I am not buying yours. "
My story isn't a theory and it's not for sale.
You either know or you don't. I guess you don't know.
Check back in a year when all 3 schools are closed.
You think they would close if the Mallorys wanted them open?
Great point about how this ruling could affect the future of zoning. I don't think the City has any option other than to appeal.
" I don't think the City has any option other than to appeal. "
It's Dahoney's decision and he works for 3M. 3m's bought and paid for by the Kool-Aid club.
Look for another clowncil/3m fight.
It isn't in Dahoney's interest to give up the City's right to zone property or enforce zoning law. I can't see Dahoney willingly going along with this ruling. It is bad precedent and bad law.
I have to agree with anon 3:45 pm Your conspiracy cant be justified. If you really have heartburn that Bloom closed, Where were your headlines on your own blog here when it shut down ? where were the reporters ? I heard residents in the community were up in arms about it but it just wasnt big enough for our daily rag and reporters to cover. Now with Heberle next up on the chopping block what will YOU do?? I dont think CityLink has anything to do with these closings, you need to check with the school board on that decision. If your really concerned about them closing put some energy and motivation in stopping it. Go to the school board meetings and complain.
Again I can go for a good conspiracy but all I see is smoke on this issue.
9:35, Where is his own blog?
By the time I heard about it Bloom was already closed. Bloom wasn't a neighborhood school, it attracted kids Citywide. If I remember correctly it was a "back on track" program taught at an excellerated pace to get kids that they have failed back on track to graduation. Given that the school was populated by failing students, they generally didn't test well.
I have heard that Heberle is considering moving to Bloom. I have also heard that MLK may choose to move if CityLink goes forward. As a charter school CPS doesn't have the power to close MLK. Heberle's scores have been improving, I think that would save them from the chopping block.
I thought the following piece on charity might be good fodder for the CityLink debate:
"the undercover economist: The economic mysteries of daily life.
Charity Is Selfish
The economic case against philanthropy.
By Tim Harford
Updated Saturday, Oct. 14, 2006, at 7:11 AM ET
Listen to the MP3 audio version of this story here, or sign up for Slate's free daily podcast on iTunes.
Selfishness is one of those issues where economists seem to see the world differently. It's not that economists are incapable of imagining—or even modeling—altruism. They can, but they usually don't. And there's a good reason for that: People aren't selfless.
The Johns Hopkins Comparative Nonprofit Sector Project estimates that charitable giving in the United States was 1.85 percent of the size of the economy in recent years, 0.84 percent in the United Kingdom, and as little as 0.13 percent in Germany. By this reckoning, then, the Germans are 99.87 percent selfish, and even the Americans are more than 98 percent selfish. That's not 100 percent, but it's pretty close.
Admittedly, if you include the time spent volunteering, you can get selfishness rates as low as 95 percent: Step forward, the Dutch. That's still not impressive. It's also an underestimate of selfish motivations. If people really were altruistic, there would be much less volunteering.
This isn't some silly tautology. If these do-gooders really were motivated by the desire to do good, they would be doing something different. It would almost always be more effective to volunteer less, work overtime, and give more. A Dutch banker can pay for a lot of soup-kitchen chefs and servers with a couple of hours' worth of his salary, but that wouldn't provide the same feel-good buzz as ladling out stew himself, would it?
In fact, the closer you look at charitable giving, the less charitable it appears to be. A recent experiment by John List, an economist at the University of Chicago, and a team of colleagues, showed that donations are less than magnanimous after all. Using controlled trials to compare different methods of door-to-door fund-raising, professor List's team discovered that it was much more effective to raise funds by selling lottery tickets than it was to raise funds by asking for money. This hardly suggests a world populated by altruists seeking to do the maximum good with their charitable cash.
More effective still was simply to make sure that the fund-raisers were attractive white girls rather than a dowdier assortment of males and females representing all shapes, races, and sizes. This dramatically increased the average contribution, because many more men decided to give money. Altruism?
Few economists are surprised by these results. Robert Frank, from Cornell, wryly observes that those organizing fund-raising drives for the United Way tend to be disproportionately real estate agents, insurance brokers, car dealers, and other people with something to sell. Many people buy charity Christmas cards, effectively giving to charity and then posting the receipts to their friends and colleagues.
Even the way we choose to dole out cash betrays our true motives. Someone with $100 to give away and a world full of worthy causes should choose the worthiest and write the check. We don't. Instead, we give $5 for a LiveStrong bracelet, pledge $25 to Save the Children, another $25 to AIDS research, and so on. But $25 is not going to find a cure for AIDS. Either it's the best cause and deserves the entire $100, or it's not and some other cause does. The scattershot approach simply proves that we're more interested in feeling good than doing good.
Many people are unconvinced by this argument—which I owe to Steven Landsburg—because they are used to diversifying their financial investments (a bit of Google stock and a bit of Exxon, too) and varying their choices (vanilla ice cream AND bananas). But those instincts are selfish: They are not intended to benefit both Google and Exxon, nor both the ice-cream company and the banana growers. With charity, the logic is different, and a truly selfless donor would bite the bullet and put his entire donation behind one cause. That we find that so hard to imagine is just one more indication of how hard it is for us to think ourselves into a truly selfless view of the world.
None of this is to say that these contributions are worthless or economically insignificant. Just don't get too starry-eyed about the motives behind them.
There's one final twist in the tail. Professor Frank and co-authors decided to find out whether economists are stingier than noneconomists. Frank's team mailed questionnaires to university professors and discovered that the economists were more than twice as likely as the rest to say they give nothing at all to charity.
At least they are honest."
HEBERLE is gone!
As predicted here.......Heberle was doomed because the Mallory/Burke/CityLink cabal don't want schools near the 800 Bank criminal recycle project.
Tick tick tick.....ML King soon to follow.
I told you. Just because we are paranoid doesn't mean they are not out to get us.
CityLink is quickly taking away the "not near our school" arguement.
Burton in Avondale; Central Fairmount in South Fairmount; Gamble in Westwood; Heberle in the West End; Hyde Park; Jacobs, which was slated to be converted to an elementary school in College Hill; Parham or Hoffman in Evanston (community will help decide which one); Porter in the West End; Quebec Heights in East Price Hill; Washington Park in Over-the-Rhine; Whittier in East Price Hill; a second Montessori high school; a military high school.
I don't blame MLK for wanting to move away from Citylink. Businesses and families will want to move away from Citylink as well.
Q- Who has the juice to make a judge roll over and play the fool?
A- LINDNER
Q- Why is the ballpark on the river and not on the commons where it belongs?
A- LINDNER
The Mallory Mafia does exactly what Lindner wants. Nuf said.
Cincinnati Public is doing the sensible thing. You wouldn't want to operate schools next to Citylinks.
anon 3:45 have you been paying attention? The fix has been in for sometime. The truth squad has uncovered major conspiracies and will continue to do so. After the crap I have seen the past year I would believe anything. We are battling the rich and powerful. These folks all have Indian hill addresses. They have made up their minds and are determined to break our backs. in the world of the big players they avoid conflict and solve problems in not so obvious ways. Call it a conspiracy if you like I call it politics and influence.
"Nique said...
Cincinnati Public is doing the sensible thing. You wouldn't want to operate schools next to Citylinks.
5:42 PM "
CityLink ain't goin in.
It'll be appealed and CityLink will lose.
Winkler is a moron that sucked up to the Lindners.
he will look like a fool when his decision is reversed.
I find the closing of Bloom & perhaps the closing of Heberle rather suspicious, given the fact that CityLink looms so large. Granted, there's schools slated for closing every day & those get changed each week. But it raised my eyebrows just a bit, a little too pat, a bit too smooth to help pave the way. In a way, you've got to wonder what CPS was offered to be persuaded by Mallory, Lindner, Burke, & the rest of the boys at the table with brandy & cigars. With that said, there might be other avenues that need exploration & research.
Is St. Joseph School still open? Are there child day care facilities within close proximity? How about child care in private homes?
One thing is certain - the playground & sports fields are in very close proximity!
Where are the kids who live in City West going to school? Certainly, any more politicking will bus those kids out of the community for their education & the drop out rate will continue to soar.
See what child services/elderly services are within 1,000 feet, even 2,000 feet of this projected Hobo SuperCenter. Those utilizing the services offered within close proximity need to be informed on this CityLink garbage. And lobbied hard to stand up against it.
However, I see this Hobo Homeless Mall dying a painful death in the 1st Court. I really do.
After looking at the law I have no idea where Judge Winkler was coming from. It should be an easy case to overturn.
Guess who sits as a visiting judge on the Court of Appeals? Judge Ralph Winkler. Guess the make-up of the Court of Appeals? His friends.
can we get some action on this blog? I am hungry for some good dirt! Where the hell is Male Dallory?
Everyone interested in learning more about the absurd Winkler ruling on CityLink? Your chance is this Sunday Dec.3rd between 6-7:00 on CityTalk Live hosted by Michael Sweeney on 1360 AM.Tell your friends and neighbors or anyone interested in learning more about the continuing CityLink threat to our City. Feel free to call in and have your questions and concerns on the air.
CityTalk is a great show. I will be posting a link to the podcast.
Dear Male,
I tuned in.
Sweeney and his 3 anti-citylink guests were da bomb.
They all had well reasoned views on this emotional subject.
Not one pro-citylink caller. The callers that aired all had good points against citylink too.
I look forward to your posting of the podcast link so I can listen in again.
so where is the podcast link?
go to : mycityliving.com
at the bottom of the page go to: citytalk radio
then click on the Dec 3rd show
Post a Comment
<< Home