Other OH/Cincy Ballot Issues

[Duemellon]

Yah, did you know the ballots we receive in Cincinnati OH actually have other issues on them to? There's even another race going on at the same time for an entirely other position than pres/VP!??!? Oomazing!

So, the ones I can think of... I know, it's pretty hard to see around the eclipse of the pres race... are Issue #6, the Casino thing, Congress's seat race between Krikorian, Wulsin, & incumbent Schmidt. There's another out there... I forget what it is as well dangit!

[Duemellon]

I heard a bit of the 3-way debate between Wulsin, Schmidt & Krikorian.

I just simply don't agree with much Schmidt wants or says. I tried, but can't.

Wulsin was rigid in her material. She really did the thing where she'd warp the questions to be about the subject she wanted to talk about. Not only that, some of her views, I just couldn't get behind. She continued to say "her opponent", as in singular, even though there was clearly a 3rd person right there. When asked about partisan politics she said that you can't get anything done unless you're with a political party behind you. She continues to talk about picking the best "republican and democrat" ideas. That left a bad taste in my mouth like 2% milk & dill pickle juice.

Krikorian surprised me in that I found myself agreeing or understanding him more. Like, when they asked him about the Iraq war he actually said something to the effect that he actually is an outsider, doesn't have access to information Congress & others have, so he'd have to wait to make a definite answer but continued on to say, what he feels at this time according to what he knows. He also had to remind Wulsin that he did exist & there was the possibility of a non-partisan idea.

Oh, btw, none of them liked Issue 6 & are voting against it. Schmidt implied it was a moral choice & directed people who were out of work to seek help through existing government programs (re-education, training, job services). Wulsin said no & the warped it to talk about how she's going to create new jobs instead by focusing on alt. fuels. Krikorian just said he didn't want it either for pretty much the same reasons the others said.

So, based on that (but I don't have much else to go on) I'm leaning towards K. Any comments?

[Docta]

chabot v/ dreissen

ban of red light cameras

cap on payday lenders apr

funny, in this past sunday's enquirer there was a letter to the editor about how the paper does so many stories about the health crisis in the region and went on and endorsed all the local republican candidates. to make matters worse in the same edition of the paper they went on to endorse all the democratic issues on the ballot (red light cameras, pay day lenders, protecting the great lakes, etc.). it's really an acute find, the idea that the paper and many individuals support democratic causes while voting for republican representatives.

[Docta]

casinos are really not a partisan issue. righties like schmidt don't like it because of the morality of gambling, lefties like me don't like it because we see it as a tax on the middle/lower class.

[Duemellon]

Ok, then, my summation:

Congress seat: Krikorian & Deissen (Chabot's earned my anti-vote)
Issue #6: No. I'm against the casino.
Red Light cameras: No, I'm against having them
Payday lenders' APR: Unclear of info. Currently it's limited to 28% right?

Any other views/statements about this stuff?

[twentyshots]

the ban on red light cameras is issue 7. yes to ban.

somebody needs to post all the issues here.

p.s.- chabot vs DRIEHAUS

schmidt vs wulsin vs kirkorian

[dannyboy]

There is also issue 3 which would amend Ohio's constitution to extend property rights to the water that flows either through or underneath land that is privately owned.

[Duemellon]

The information for Cincy is here in PDF format (http://www.hamilton-co.org/boe/inputdata/candidateissues/gen08canisslist.pdf). It's not an official ballot, just a doc showing the stuff.

If you want a Wiki page for that stuff (non-OH as well) go to ballotpedia.org . They have stuff there for you too.

[ajax]

Issue 5 is the Ohio Payday loan regulation issue. I'm voting a big yes.

I work in the Wilmington area. The company I work for will greatly profit from the Casino in Wilmington. I'm fairly sure that DHL will pull out of Wilmington. I am not morally against casinos. And I believe the good outweighs the bad in this situation. Wilmington is a great small community. I do believe it will be forever changed either way. So it's yes on Issue 6 for me.

[Sushi]

Issue 5 is the Ohio Payday loan regulation issue. I'm voting a big yes.

I work in the Wilmington area. The company I work for will greatly profit from the Casino in Wilmington. I'm fairly sure that DHL will pull out of Wilmington. I am not morally against casinos. And I believe the good outweighs the bad in this situation. Wilmington is a great small community. I do believe it will be forever changed either way. So it's yes on Issue 6 for me.
I'm voting "no" on Issue 6 not because I have a problem with casinos (I don't) but because I think this particular deal is too heavily weighted in favor of the casino operators. I don't like the idea of any ballot issue being for one particular business. I would happily vote for legalization of gambling/casinos in Ohio with a fixed tax rate for all casinos, but I'm not going to vote for these guys to open one and have them potentially pay zero or very little tax. Adjustable rate mortgages suck, why should adjustable tax rates be any different?

[Docta]

the ban on red light cameras is issue 7. yes to ban.

somebody needs to post all the issues here.

p.s.- chabot vs DRIEHAUS

schmidt vs wulsin vs kirkorian

ha, ya dreisen was the first baseman from the reds. damn that early onset alzeimers.

on the payday lenders this initiative is to limit them to 28%. right now there is no limit and they regularly charge 391%!! $15 for every $100 per two weeks.

[Docta]

I'm voting "no" on Issue 6 not because I have a problem with casinos (I don't) but because I think this particular deal is too heavily weighted in favor of the casino operators. I don't like the idea of any ballot issue being for one particular business. I would happily vote for legalization of gambling/casinos in Ohio with a fixed tax rate for all casinos, but I'm not going to vote for these guys to open one and have them potentially pay zero or very little tax. Adjustable rate mortgages suck, why should adjustable tax rates be any different?

that's what i've heard. this casino initiative will actually change the ohio constitution pretty dramatically in favor of the industry, yikes.

[dannyboy]

I'm voting yes on 6. It definitely has drawbacks, but I really do think those are outweighed by the benefits. Every year that continues to pass by without Ohio legalizing casino gambling means that Ohioans will just continue to flock to other states and plunk their money down in casinos there. It also keeps out of state gamblers out of Ohio too. I really feel like gambling is sort of like a voluntary tax that gamblers choose to pay. I'm personally not a gambler, so any new revenues that come in through gambling that can potentially reduce my own tax burden, I'm all for.

[Duemellon]

Cincy's ballot issues

Issue 1 - Make state ballot voting deadline earlier by 125 pre-count.
I don't like it. It gets the "no" from me.

Issue 2 - $400mil continuation of OH clean air act
I like it, but don't like the idea it could go for private lands. Idunno. I guess I'll still vote for it.

Issue 3 - "Protect" private property rights on ground water
I think I might skip that. I don't really know why this is needed on the ballot if the rights already "exist" but just need more enforcement?

Issue 5 - Payday lenders change to $500 max & 28% APR max with 30-day repayment deadline
I don't really like it. I'd rather there wasn't a cap on the amount or the payment, but the APR alternative is way too ridic. I'm voting for it to make sure it gets to 28% APR max.

Issue 6 - Casino
This gets a "no" from me. On principle more than morality. I don't see the tax loophole mentioned, but still, it's not about that for me.

Issue 7 - Red light cameras
Wow, that is so bizarrely worded:Shall the Charter of the City of Cincinnati be amended to limit the use of photo-monitoring devices to detect
certain traffic law violations, by adopting new Article XIV?Huh? I don't know what the limit is right now. Thanks for citing a previous article instead of detailing it, you assholes.

Issue 8 - Council voting, changes to "weight/ranking" candidates on ballot.
Yah, I get it. I dunno what the point of it would be. I thought we already had the one where you had as many votes as there were candidates & you can use them anyway you like (9 for one candidate, etc.)

Issue 9 thru 12, 14, 15, 17 - Allow wine sales for specific businesses early on Sun
I almost voted for them, if it wasn't for 13

Issue 13 - Allow alcohol sales "in general" early on Sun
Yah. Sure. No prob.

What does the gas aggregation thing even mean? 16, 18 - 20?

I'm getting lost beyond those... wtf?

[Duemellon]

I'm voting yes on 6.Like Sushi was saying I just can't do this deal for just one entity. It's like the Sunday alcohol sales thing. Just seems like a "sweetheart" arrangement or something like that which is creating unfair competition.

Beyond that, the fact DHL is trying to flee doesn't mean we have to replace it with a desperate arrangement made hastily in this fashion.

[dannyboy]

Like Sushi was saying I just can't do this deal for just one entity. It's like the Sunday alcohol sales thing. Just seems like a "sweetheart" arrangement or something like that which is creating unfair competition.

Beyond that, the fact DHL is trying to flee doesn't mean we have to replace it with a desperate arrangement made hastily in this fashion.

Who says that the arrangement can't be changed at some point in the future?

[dannyboy]

What does the gas aggregation thing even mean? 16, 18 - 20?



Those municipalities are looking to bundle all of the retail users of natural gas (unless an individual user chooses to opt out) and shop the entire bundle to other natural gas supplies for a better rate.

[ajax]

Like Sushi was saying I just can't do this deal for just one entity. It's like the Sunday alcohol sales thing. Just seems like a "sweetheart" arrangement or something like that which is creating unfair competition.

Beyond that, the fact DHL is trying to flee doesn't mean we have to replace it with a desperate arrangement made hastily in this fashion.

I don't see any other way to replace 5000 jobs in a community of 12000 people unless some other company takes over the old Military airstrip that DHL now uses.

[ajax]

Gosh darn it. I need to make up my mind on issue 3 before I hit the lever. It's an important issue for me because I work for a water company that gets our water from below ground. (did notice an exemption for public welfare use) On the other hand this statement bothers me because I like to go fishing in rivers that border private land.

Make explicit that a private property owner who owns land on the border of a lake or other watercourse has a
right to make reasonable use of the water in such lake or watercourse located on or flowing through the owner’s
land, although this right is subordinate to the public welfare.

[Duemellon]

Who says that the arrangement can't be changed at some point in the future?Why not get it right the 1st time?If the casino shows no profits, they pay no taxes. Now you may say that's fine & dandy, but all other companies still have to pay the sales/service taxes. Why should they have an exception?

If the casino rebalanced their books in certain ways (or made certain timely/precise items) they also don't have to pay taxes because they aren't showing a profit.The arrangements offered this casino are too specific & to "helpful" for a business. It's more like a desperate plea to get gambling instead of a well thought-out thing. Kinda like the Convergys deal but for gambling. You remember? We gave Convergys tens of millions of dollars to help them build in an effort to get them to stay, they took the $ & then left Cincy with it. This sounds like that setup.I don't see any other way to replace 5000 jobs in a community of 12000 people unless some other company takes over the old Military airstrip that DHL now uses.There's an argument that a single casino can bring in that many jobs because of all the $ it brings. This won't be the single casino for long & the industry built up around it won't sustain them. It's not a good long term investment. It's not even a good startup. By the time the hotels & other infrastructure come up to support it, it'll be in competition with other places.

It's just so "desperate" in it's plea it bothers me.

Find those 5000 people sustainable jobs. C'mon.

[dannyboy]

Why not get it right the 1st time?If the casino shows no profits, they pay no taxes. Now you may say that's fine & dandy, but all other companies still have to pay the sales/service taxes. Why should they have an exception?

If the casino rebalanced their books in certain ways (or made certain timely/precise items) they also don't have to pay taxes because they aren't showing a profit.The arrangements offered this casino are too specific & to "helpful" for a business. It's more like a desperate plea to get gambling instead of a well thought-out thing. Kinda like the Convergys deal but for gambling. You remember? We gave Convergys tens of millions of dollars to help them build in an effort to get them to stay, they took the $ & then left Cincy with it. This sounds like that setup.There's an argument that a single casino can bring in that many jobs because of all the $ it brings. This won't be the single casino for long & the industry built up around it won't sustain them. It's not a good long term investment. It's not even a good startup. By the time the hotels & other infrastructure come up to support it, it'll be in competition with other places.

It's just so "desperate" in it's plea it bothers me.


It's a $600 million investment on the part of the casino company. If I were in their shoes, I would want some incentives put in place so that I could recoup the money fairly quickly too. I'm sure that if Ohio won't grant them the incentives to build a casino, other states and locales will be chomping at the bit to do so and Ohio, once again, falls further and further behind. Since Ohio won't give incentives to any one particular business, no business will invest. Yep, Ohio retains its integrity but its towns shrivel up and die.

[drougan]

On that note then, $600m is a fat load of money for an investment, moreso than a big box retail establishment which typically tries to work the deal where they pay no sales tax for X years in return for building the store. But this still flirts awfully close to the line of public sponsorship of private enterprise. Were I an Ohioan, I'd probably be willing to allow the casinos but would be unwilling to let sales taxes slide in order to do it. But then again, I'm not familiar with the particulars of the deal so I can't comment too much.

[Duemellon]

It's a $600 million investment on the part of the casino company. If I were in their shoes, I would want some incentives put in place so that I could recoup the money fairly quickly too.I wish they'd do the same for me. I've invested thousands of dollars into my business & only turned a profit one year. This year looks like another unprofitable one despite the t-shirt sales. : ( . I think I'll have to change my headquarters to overseas to take advantage of the tax breaksYep, Ohio retains its integrity but its towns shrivel up and die.It's not about retaining "integrity" for me. C'mon. We had a mayor busted for bad hooker checks, a city council held ransom by a tiger with no claws, & police with no oversight. What kinda integrity we got left?

But beyond those things...
They've made such wonderful offers to companies to stay but they didn't have proper securities in them to retain them. It's like they threw money at them, unconditionally, didn't maintain the relationship, or the companies were tempted by someone else.

Now I doubt the company will just pick up & leave after building the infrastructure, but the city is bearing all the risk burden. $600mil for the company is nothing if they don't have to pay taxes until they turn a profit. What's their risk? That they'll never recoup that much? It's a friggin casino! The house ALWAYS wins.

[Docta]

Issue 8 - Council voting, changes to "weight/ranking" candidates on ballot.
Yah, I get it. I dunno what the point of it would be. I thought we already had the one where you had as many votes as there were candidates & you can use them anyway you like (9 for one candidate, etc.)


right now you cannot vote more than once for any candidate and just say i vote for these 8 candidates. this issue would provide so you can rank them. the idea is that if there is a candidate that folks either love or hate they will not be elected because they only get half the votes while other candidates that everyone is luke-warm about will get in because he/she is 7th on a lot of people's lists.

[dannyboy]

Now I doubt the company will just pick up & leave after building the infrastructure, but the city is bearing all the risk burden. $600mil for the company is nothing if they don't have to pay taxes until they turn a profit. What's their risk? That they'll never recoup that much? It's a friggin casino! The house ALWAYS wins.

I'm just guessing here, but being that Ohio has never had casino gambling before, there is somewhat of a question mark when it comes to the market. Investors typically want very hard numbers when they invest. It may have been difficult to provide those hard numbers since the market is somewhat of an unknown. That's probably why they requested that no taxes be paid until a profit is turned.

[Nellie Bly]

Those municipalities are looking to bundle all of the retail users of natural gas (unless an individual user chooses to opt out) and shop the entire bundle to other natural gas supplies for a better rate.

Yep, here's a link (http://www.ci.pickerington.oh.us/sections/community/GasAggregation.pdf) to the City of Pickerington's page about gas aggregation (they're voting on it this November as well), it has a pretty good explanation.

[markalot]

Make explicit that a private property owner who owns land on the border of a lake or other watercourse has a
right to make reasonable use of the water in such lake or watercourse located on or flowing through the owner’s
land, although this right is subordinate to the public welfare.

http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Ohio_Issue_3_(2008)

What the fuck? Canada is involved somehow? Still reading.

I live in KY, we share no borders with the Canucs, so no worries for me.

Decent explanations of all issues:

http://www.sos.state.oh.us/SOS/(X(1)A(XTW1ja5ryQEkAAAAODJmZGI4MTUtZmRkNS00NTRlLWF lNzUtMDZkMTc4NTE5NDExeEwspgniuLykKhxe66jbECpqZRs1) S(2uam3g452fixhcaa2hrkapef))/Text.aspx?page=503&AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1

[Duemellon]

Now I doubt the company will just pick up & leave after building the infrastructure, but the city is bearing all the risk burden. $600mil for the company is nothing if they don't have to pay taxes until they turn a profit. What's their risk? That they'll never recoup that much? It's a friggin casino! The house ALWAYS wins.I read & reread it & that point doesn't seem to hold water.

They are paying taxes to begin with, but it may be awhile before they pay enough to start paying Ohio. They have some initial things they need to pay for before OH starts collecting the remainders at 10% for the city & 90% for the rest of OH.

[dannyboy]

I also found this provision in the issue 6 initiative:


(2) pay an initial license fee, upon approval of the initial casino license. The
General Assembly or the Gaming Regulatory Commission shall establish
the initial casino license fee based upon the estimated cost to the State of
establishing the Gaming Regulatory Commission and for operating it until
the State begins to collect the casino gross receipts tax, but in no event
shall the initial casino license fee exceed fifteen million dollars
($15,000,000). The initial casino license fee paid by the casino operator
shall be treated as an interest-free advance payment on and shall be
credited against the tax on Gross Casino Receipts described in division
(8) of this section, to be applied against the first payment of such tax and,
if the credit exceeds the first payment of such tax, against subsequent
payments until the credit is exhausted. No fee shall be charged for
applying for or for renewing a casino license.

So, it looks like the casino will be paying upfront for the cost of setting up the Gaming Regulatory Commission in the form of license fee. The fee will also be an advance payment on their taxes.

So, it seems to me that they aren't skirting out of paying taxes, so much as being given time to see what their revenues actually are before they are actually accessed a tax.

[frizgolf]

A good web site:
http://www.hamiltoncountyohio.gov/boe/

[Stoock]

Ohio Bishops Council weigh in...
http://www.ohiocathconf.org/L/FC2008/bishelection08/finalballot08.pdf

[ajax]

Ohio Bishops Council weigh in...
http://www.ohiocathconf.org/L/FC2008/bishelection08/finalballot08.pdf

Lolz I love their view on Issue six. Silly Catholics, gambling is great when it all goes to the church, not so great when it goes to everyone.

Who wants a a raffle ticket to win a Corvette. $10 gets you entered to win. Proceeds go to my Son's Catholic school.

[Dirk]

The casino would pay taxes on the gross profit, not net, so as long as they take in the money, they will be paying taxes on it. The payouts are taken out, but unless they are actually paying out more money than they are taking in (which means they are doing something REALLY wrong) they will be paying taxes.


The loophole is that while they will pay 30% now, if Ohio allows another casino, the tax rate will drop to 25% or the tax rate paid by the other casino, which ever is lower. The key here is that if the other casino was an indian casino, which would be exempt from taxes, the current casino's tax rate would drop to zero as well. To me this is the big issue with it. There is no reason to allow this huge loophole in.

[dannyboy]

The casino would pay taxes on the gross profit, not net, so as long as they take in the money, they will be paying taxes on it. The payouts are taken out, but unless they are actually paying out more money than they are taking in (which means they are doing something REALLY wrong) they will be paying taxes.


The loophole is that while they will pay 30% now, if Ohio allows another casino, the tax rate will drop to 25% or the tax rate paid by the other casino, which ever is lower. The key here is that if the other casino was an indian casino, which would be exempt from taxes, the current casino's tax rate would drop to zero as well. To me this is the big issue with it. There is no reason to allow this huge loophole in.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if an Indian casino opened up, they would first have to have the land declared a reservation. Wouldn't a reservation technically not be part of the state of Ohio?

[Stoock]

Lolz I love their view on Issue six. Silly Catholics, gambling is great when it all goes to the church, not so great when it goes to everyone.

Who wants a a raffle ticket to win a Corvette. $10 gets you entered to win. Proceeds go to my Son's Catholic school.

Wow, now I know how to give the Stoockette's tuition fund a boost!

[Dirk]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if an Indian casino opened up, they would first have to have the land declared a reservation. Wouldn't a reservation technically not be part of the state of Ohio?

I think part of the issue is that it really isn't clear. The reservation has it's own rules and doesn't have to follow state law, etc but I can't find a clear answer on whether they are just an piece of the state that is governed independently or if they are no longer even considered part of the state. My gut says it's the first, since they are still part of the US even if they are not subject to US laws and the same would go for the state, but I don't know. It's just a chance I'm not willing to take, especially when we are talking about adding it to the state constitution, so it will be next to impossible to change if it does turn out bad.

[tori]

dude. i thought issue 7 (red light cameras) didn't make it to the ballot. it wasn't on mine... and i really thought i was crazy, but i just looked up my precinct's ballot online and it's not on there.

but as far as those go, just be glad you're not in phoenix (http://www.azcentral.com/12news/news/articles/2008/10/14/20081014dpscameralist10142008-CR.html). earlier this year, a petitioner for the issue cruising the streets in mt. lookout asked me if i wanted to sign. i said, "eh, this stuff is old news to me, coming from a city that not only uses red light cameras and speed cameras, but has also caught me with them." then i think i politely declined to sign.

[ICONOCLAST420]

She continued to say "her opponent", as in singular, even though there was clearly a 3rd person right there.
That is what happened to me in the debates with Strickland and Azinger, it really made Azinger look stupid.
The key here is that if the other casino was an indian casino, which would be exempt from taxes, the current casino's tax rate would drop to zero as well.

And that is the loophole, legalizing crack houses and brothels would create jobs and generate tax revenues too, so why leave them out?

[Duemellon]

payday loans?
Locked at 28%

Casino Fail

RedLight - stopped (even with twisted wording)

[classicgrrl]

payday loans?
Locked at 28%

Casino Fail

RedLight - stopped (even with twisted wording)

good
good
and
good

I am happy with the outcomes of these issues

[Duemellon]

good
good
and
good

I am happy with the outcomes of these issuesMe too. That casino thing was just a "desparate" deal done by desperate people & was just too ackward for me to feel comfortable with.

If they gonna gamble, just open it up. Why make a sweetheart deal with just one person, turn an entire economically depressed area into beind dependent on 1 employment provider (that's their prob with DHL... duh... just repeat the same mistake? morons).

Glad it didn't make it.