The vote tally is in and its doesn't look good for the incumbents.
ANNA L. HALE.......... 2166 27.16% TODD HICKMAN.......... 1744 21.87% ROBERT E. ROUTSON..... 1655 20.75%
No doubt that Anna Hale would be re-elected. But for the remaining leadership on council, a message was sent.
Let's look at the facts: First of all the voters voted out the Vice Mayor. Secondly, the current mayor was the least vote getter.
The message to council is that the voters are not happy with the expenditure of hundreds of thousands of tax payer money. If SunCoke is unresolved by the next election, we will see further changes in city leadership.
Yes, there is indeed a message from the voters.
Council, the voters actually speak louder than the vocal minority. Are you listening?
MainStreetMonroe.com is news of, for and by the people of Monroe, Ohio.
You had better take out your calculator and take a good look at how much tax revenue for the city sits near that proposed Coke plant.
I don't think voices have anything to do with it and the loss of tax revenue has everything to do with it.
Glad you could extrapolate so much information from an odd numbered year election. It is my experience that odd numbered year elections aren't much of an indication of anything.
The council will not just pack up give up the fight right now. There in the middle of litigation that is still pending. Its that simple till the current litigation is ironed out the city will not even consider closing up shop. Lastly, Mr. Hickman if he opposes the city is only one vote of 7.....
quote:[i]Originally posted by John Beagle[/i] [br]cmsquare, you are a shining example of the vocal minority. And I support your right be be just that. Vocal and minority on opinions.
Even though this CMsquare is quite mean.... I will have to stick up for him and say he does have a valid point about lost tax money. That is fact. John you are making an inference..... The fact is city and school will lose alot more in tax money then what the city will spend on this plant. Its going to be a tough fight but we can win this.
I don't think one incumbent being voted off is necessarily a mandate for major change. It just means that maybe Mr Hickman did a good job of presenting himself as a viable candidate and he reached a few more voters than the others that were not elected. The council still stays pretty much the same (6 of the 7) and it will probably function as it has over the past two years.
I'm interested in who will be selected as Mayor..
Congratulations to Anna Hale, Todd Hickman and Bob Routson.
"There are 10 types of people in this world. Those who understand binary, and those that don't."
From the 2005 Election, percentages are close to the same. I don't see it as a message being sent. Mr. Tannreuther has other issues, I think they sent him a message. http://www.butlercountyelections.org/results/files/Nov05/Results.htm ANNA HALE 1834 26.73% ROBERT E. ROUTSON 1425 20.77%
Lets look over at Middletown,Ohio!!! The number one supporter for SunCoke on Middletown City Council was removed last night from city council. Mr. Laubach took out Tony Marconi from city council. The city Middletown also shouted CHANGE in a way big way. Could it be Mr.Marconi lost for outspoken support for SunCoke? UMMMM
Anna Hale was also the top vote getter and if SunCoke was such an issue then Mr.Hickman would of likely been the top vote getter.
quote:[i]Originally posted by John Beagle[/i] [br]cmsquare, you are a shining example of the vocal minority. And I support your right be be just that. Vocal and minority on opinions.
I might be vocal here...but I have essentially done nothing in the real world to stop that plant. I voted yesterday just like you did. Still as we sit and talk here right now there is nothing stopping AK from starting construction as I understand it...So why no construction?
But again...I ask you and your calculator...how much tax revenue can Monroe afford to lose in the that quadrant of the city. I know you are always concerned about taxes. You are always concerned about these taxes....you should be concerned about a good chunk of revenue about to go up in smoke...or should I say coke.
I didn't see this as a call for change either, but Mr. Beagle has an agenda when it comes to this issue. He got involved in a pissing match and now he's going to keep it up. This is not part of the no spin zone.
I'm not always in the minority by the way, I was on the majority side of a pretty big election a year ago, it was pretty much a land slide.
MUSA Blog Forum: Congratulations Joshua...... I Mean Mr. Laubach 4 posts - 3 authors - Last post: Oct 3 As a small business owner in Middletown I would be happy to do what I can. I am now going out to Bronze my front yard sign. ... www.middletownusa.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=2260... - Similar
MUSA Blog Forum: Josh Laubach.......Impressive! I'm very impressed with Josh Laubach, in my opinion he's the best man running, (out of all the candidates, not just 3rd ward). ... www.middletownusa.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID... - Cached - Similar
Mr. Marconi by no means was the sole supporter of SunCoke, heck the whole town supports the $340 Million investment.
MainStreetMonroe.com is news of, for and by the people of Monroe, Ohio.
quote:[i]Originally posted by John Beagle[/i] [br]We supported Mr. Lauback on www.MiddletownUSA.com. We welcomed him:
MUSA Blog Forum: Congratulations Joshua...... I Mean Mr. Laubach 4 posts - 3 authors - Last post: Oct 3 As a small business owner in Middletown I would be happy to do what I can. I am now going out to Bronze my front yard sign. ... www.middletownusa.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=2260... - Similar
MUSA Blog Forum: Josh Laubach.......Impressive! I'm very impressed with Josh Laubach, in my opinion he's the best man running, (out of all the candidates, not just 3rd ward). ... www.middletownusa.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID... - Cached - Similar
Mr. Marconi by no means was the sole supporter of SunCoke, heck the whole town supports the $340 Million investment.
What???? We had 3400 signatures that said people wanted a say in the rezoning of the Martin/Bake Farm. Many people in Middletown oppose this plant wants the city to invest in 21st century jobs! Do you want me to share those petitions with you? Many of the people we visited were opposed to the plant and wanted Middletown to go in a new direction. Sorry John but you are dead wrong on the whole town supporting it.
The message to council is that the voters are not happy with the expenditure of hundreds of thousands of tax payer money. If SunCoke is unresolved by the next election, we will see further changes in city leadership.
Yes, there is indeed a message from the voters.
John, are you delirious? How do you get the defeat of one Council incumbent that there is this huge message from the voters that we consider SunCoke a waste of money?
There are a myriad of reasons Mr Tannenreuther was voted out. Mr. Hickman never came out for or against the plant but he did put up a lot of signs and brochures. But even if Todd now votes against the fight, he is only 1 of 7 that believe this lawsuit has no merit. But I ask, if it's just a waste of money, why no construction? They should be online by now, making money and spewing crap towards Monroe. Instead they are busy scratching their heads and rewriting the plan. Kudos to Council, including our current Vice Mayor.
I think the removal of one Council member had more to do with that one councilman and not winds of change blowing thru Monroe.
quote:[i]Originally posted by John Beagle[/i] [br]The vote tally is in and its doesn't look good for the incumbents.
ANNA L. HALE.......... 2166 27.16% TODD HICKMAN.......... 1744 21.87% ROBERT E. ROUTSON..... 1655 20.75%
No doubt that Anna Hale would be re-elected. But for the remaining leadership on council, a message was sent.
Let's look at the facts: First of all the voters voted out the Vice Mayor. Secondly, the current mayor was the least vote getter.
The message to council is that the voters are not happy with the expenditure of hundreds of thousands of tax payer money. If SunCoke is unresolved by the next election, we will see further changes in city leadership.
Yes, there is indeed a message from the voters.
Council, the voters actually speak louder than the vocal minority. Are you listening?
The message to council is that the voters are not happy with the expenditure of hundreds of thousands of tax payer money. If SunCoke is unresolved by the next election, we will see further changes in city leadership.
Yes, there is indeed a message from the voters.
John, are you delirious? How do you get the defeat of one Council incumbent that there is this huge message from the voters that we consider SunCoke a waste of money?
There are a myriad of reasons Mr Tannenreuther was voted out. Mr. Hickman never came out for or against the plant but he did put up a lot of signs and brochures. But even if Todd now votes against the fight, he is only 1 of 7 that believe this lawsuit has no merit. But I ask, if it's just a waste of money, why no construction? They should be online by now, making money and spewing crap towards Monroe. Instead they are busy scratching their heads and rewriting the plan. Kudos to Council, including our current Vice Mayor.
I think the removal of one Council member had more to do with that one councilman and not winds of change blowing thru Monroe.
Beautifully stated....John my friend let me say this again.... If Monroe was wasting money... Wouldn't the plant be built by now or even operational?
Hickman beat Tannreuther because in part, of our little groups effort. You know the silent majority. By next election who knows. Almost none of us post here because we don't want to be lambasted by the 'vocal minority' as Mr. Beagle puts it.
SunCoke will be built, Monroe will lose it's lawsuit, $1Million of the taxpayer money will be gone and in 2 short years, most of council will be gone too. Funny, our money will be gone and the people who spent it will be gone too. Just like the last round with the previous good old boys club.
I for one will vote to keep "vocal & decisive" members like Kelley on Council. I've been to several meetings and never saw Mr. Hickman. Matter of fact Urso is pretty much the only one who cares to attend on a fairly regular basis.
quote:[i]Originally posted by MonroeWatch[/i] [br]Hickman beat Tannreuther because in part, of our little groups effort. You know the silent majority. By next election who knows. Almost none of us post here because we don't want to be lambasted by the 'vocal minority' as Mr. Beagle puts it.
SunCoke will be built, Monroe will lose it's lawsuit, $1Million of the taxpayer money will be gone and in 2 short years, most of council will be gone too. Funny, our money will be gone and the people who spent it will be gone too. Just like the last round with the previous good old boys club.
so you can you tell us all why they aren't building right now? Nothing is stopping them. Why not get building? Why no action? Clearly they fear something.
I'm not sue how solid your math skills are, but you don't have all that great of a shot at getting a majority on council who support you in just 2 years...the #'s just don't add up.
Mr Beagle must still be crunching the tax figures....I would imagine the lost revenue from that part of town is enough to make one throw up in their mouth. I know he loves paying taxes and there are more coming for all of you when this coke plant goes live!
I'm not sure what kind of message you can derive from the defeat of one incumbent but I will say this. A vocal minority will get their way many many more times than a silent majority. Therefore if there is such a thing as a "silent majority" in Monroe about this issue. If you don't speak up and become more vocal then you're just shooting yourself in the foot and hurting your own cause. My guess is that a lot of Monroe is actually much more ambivalent about this issue.
I can only give a personal experience but the Suncoke issue was never on my mind when deciding who to vote for (and I ended up voting for the people who won)
Todd ran a very active campaign, just as Tracy did two years ago. Both got a lot of votes. Some incumbents didn't run active campaigns this year. I just don't see deep meaning beyond that in how our races turned out.
Campaigning works. That includes signs, meetings in homes, knocking on doors, and a core support group that is involved. Having a solid message and truthful message certainly doesn't hurt. These combined to give Monroe Local Schools a 72% passage of a substitution levy, when most districts couldn't even pass an emergency renewal.
There are 3 or 4 sub divisions, most with relatively new homes south of yankee rd and in monroe. I'd love to know what that quadrant of the city currently accounts for in terms of tax dollars. It's not small i can promise you that.
When all those homes take big hit in value and they pay significantly less into the pot than they do today...then what do you think happens?
Where will the money come from then? Maybe you need to take a drive up there and see how many homes are up in that part of the city.
cmsquare, I would but I am still calculating the tax revenue and income for local subcontractors on that $640 Million investment.
I have to say I appreciate your tenacity cmsquare, and I respect what you have to say. To be honest, I am not sure how many homeowners will have their property significantly impacted. It is a nice neighborhood and will probably be just as nice 5 years from now.
I do not deny that some houses will be severely negatively impacted. I think those people ought to seek legal representation to get full market value out of their homes. It is horrible that anyone has to be impacted negatively but whenever you move near a steel mill, you run a larger risk of being polluted upon than if lived away from a steel mill.
The ugly truth is that we need those jobs, our country needs to make steel and our economy needs this investment. Allot of people on here have been hurt by this lawsuit. Many refuse to post on here because they don't want to be yelled at, or feel afraid that some pro-lawsuit people will do them bodily harm. The thought has me concerned.
Again, I respect your right to express your opinion. If you disagree with me, fine. Keep in mind, I have the same right to express my opinions as anyone else on this website.
MainStreetMonroe.com is news of, for and by the people of Monroe, Ohio.
I live in the home of my dreams on Carol Ann Lane. I have been here for 20+ years and plan on being here until I cant keep it up any more. We have a beautiful pool/ landscaping, nice acre lot, new kitchen, bathrooms, etc. Never did I expect that there could be an industrial complex like a Coke plant right next door to us. Chugging out black smoke. It is bad enough with all dirt we get from AK. This changes everything and will change the resale value of the property. As a community we should stand up for each other and rally around each other in support. It appears if you live on the other side of Monroe that you are saying hell with us = let it go- don't throw good money after bad. We have invested our own funds with our neighborhood group to fight Suncoke - I pay City payroll taxes, property taxes - I appreciate the former City COuncil supporting our fight, rallying with us and NOT saying too bad - so sad. I am very disappointed that Hickman NEVER attempted to share his thoughts on Suncoke - other than as instigator - and I asked in several different places what his opinion was (City of Monroe site, facebook site, Voice, etc). He concerns me if his actions are anything like they were when he was the Instigator.
quote:[i]Originally posted by John Beagle[/i] [br]I have to say I appreciate your tenacity cmsquare, and I respect what you have to say. To be honest, I am not sure how many homeowners will have their property significantly impacted. It is a nice neighborhood and will probably be just as nice 5 years from now.
Reduced home values from this project already are already a fact John. In fact, you say so just down the page in your next comment. They will remain negatively impacted, for as long as the plan is in play. Buyers are certainly aware of the risk now, and are making that clear in their decisions. The only reason it is not obvious to all is that the general market is not good, and obscures it. In my mind, the only significant reason to question the city action, is to question their chance of success. But we just don't have the information to judge that. But seven council members who do know it are 100% aligned to pursue the court action.
quote: I do not deny that some houses will be severely negatively impacted. I think those people ought to seek legal representation to get full market value out of their homes.
Again, you already did, up the page. The chances of such an individual legal action succeeding, just based upon property values, is about zero. But the odds of success of the city taking such action, based on compliance with existing environmental laws, AND property values, is much greater.
quote: A lot of people on here have been hurt by this lawsuit. Many refuse to post on here because they don't want to be yelled at, or feel afraid that some pro-lawsuit people will do them bodily harm. The thought has me concerned.
I have to laugh at the ongoing Monroe fear of speaking out. I certainly have taken positions contrary to very outspoken council members, and have never once seen a significant personal impact of doing so, beyond the responses in this forum. And of the people I have dealt with in the school district, who are so afraid of speaking out for fear of punitive actions, I just have not seen that occur either, and I have dug into this. If anything, speaking out results in an aversion by government bodies and officials to present even the appearance of such behavior, and thus it serves to help those who speak out, far more than hurting them.
Thank you for speaking to me from one Monroe taxpayer to the other.
I appreciate the respectful way you expressed your personal tragedy. It sounds like you have a lovely home and I am sorry it might not always be that way.
I think it is important for all of us to hear and see the impact on our lives. The more you explain your side in human terms, the better your message gets out.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts. Perhaps you might just sway a few more readers in your direction.
quote:[i]Originally posted by Prada[/i] [br]I live in the home of my dreams on Carol Ann Lane. I have been here for 20+ years and plan on being here until I cant keep it up any more. We have a beautiful pool/ landscaping, nice acre lot, new kitchen, bathrooms, etc. Never did I expect that there could be an industrial complex like a Coke plant right next door to us. Chugging out black smoke. It is bad enough with all dirt we get from AK. This changes everything and will change the resale value of the property. As a community we should stand up for each other and rally around each other in support. It appears if you live on the other side of Monroe that you are saying hell with us = let it go- don't throw good money after bad. We have invested our own funds with our neighborhood group to fight Suncoke - I pay City payroll taxes, property taxes - I appreciate the former City COuncil supporting our fight, rallying with us and NOT saying too bad - so sad. I am very disappointed that Hickman NEVER attempted to share his thoughts on Suncoke - other than as instigator - and I asked in several different places what his opinion was (City of Monroe site, facebook site, Voice, etc). He concerns me if his actions are anything like they were when he was the Instigator.
MainStreetMonroe.com is news of, for and by the people of Monroe, Ohio.
You are pro big business and not for the greater good your community, it really is a shame. Save the "i'm for creating jobs talk", this plant is going to ruin some people's lives and your telling them they should pursue individual action against AK? That's laughable...you are a businessman...you know the chances of that working are slim and none. An effort led by the city is the only way.
I've got news for you...this isn't the industrial revolution...those jobs are leaving this country...and they aren't coming back. Labor is cheaper and the cost of doing business is lower other places.
I've never said you shouldn't be able to post your opinions...I just wish you would disclose all the facts when go off on this rants. You really didn't say much about the coke issues until people questioned some of your advertising revenue...and if you remember correctly I always supported your right to sell adds to anyone who wanted to buy them. Since then..and only since then have you become outspoken on this issue...to me that makes me question your motivation. Do you really care about the plant and these construction jobs? Or would you just like to see the council fail because you don't like them?
You're dead wrong about property values as Tom pointed out already...they have already been impacted. Maybe you need to stop touting the party line on this one and take a good look at what is happening to the town which you live in and have a website devoted too.
Then again you'll probably still choose big business over the regular people...it's what your party does.
Where does the money come from that will no doubt disappear once a coke plant is backed up on our boarder? I would like to know.
"think those people ought to seek legal representation to get full market value out of their homes."
so and justice for all with the deepest pockets right? Just let AK buy justice and outcomes and screw the little guy.
You want single families to take on billion dollar corporations? I should hope you and your business never find yourself in such a situation..I wonder how long you could afford to stand up for yourself against a giant corporation like say AK Steel...or Monster.
I encourage you to watch this video John Beagle as a small business owner. The situation doesn't apply directly to what we talk about here but the basics can be applied.
Great video. I can't help thinking that Monroe City is in the roll of the small businessman in the video. He, the small businessman, makes a very good argument that supports my view that Monroe can not stand up to a multi-Billion dollar corporation.
This is what I have been saying all along. I don't understand why you think Monroe Taxpayers can win this. You certainly are not getting the national media exposure that this guy is getting. Why not spend money with a media expert and get CNN and other medias down here to interview those who are negatively impacted. That would be money well spent. Get the Huffington Post to do a story. Bring your issue to national attention.
Spending $1 million on lawyer fees is like spitting in the wind. Find other ways to fight this because the current method is wasting our tax dollars.
MainStreetMonroe.com is news of, for and by the people of Monroe, Ohio.
Except he did stand up to them John...and he WON. Media experts? You would prefer they spend money on a media expert as opposed to legal expertise? I can only imagine the outcry once tax dollars go toward funding media experts. This doens't have to be a national issue for us to win. Media Experts, the media and public opinion for that matter have nothing to do with the outcome of this, it's a matter of federal law that is already written.
How about standing up for what is right? I'm glad we live in a city who isn't afraid to stand up for it's citizens. You want them to roll over and let big business have their way, on their terms...just because it's the way it's always been done around here. Let AK do whatever they want on whatever terms they want. It really doesn't seem to me as I drive through Middletown that AK has been all that great for the city...maybe I am missing something though.
There is no other way to fight this...except head on. I still ask you...how much potential tax revenue is in this corner of the city? Your the one concerned with every last dime...lets take a look at how much of the cities nest egg sits within the fallout zone of this coke plant?
The industrial revolution isn't happening a second time in the US..maybe a new kind of revolution needs to take place? A green one!
quote:[i]Originally posted by John Beagle[/i] [br]I don't understand why you think Monroe Taxpayers can win this. You certainly are not getting the national media exposure that this guy is getting. Why not spend money with a media expert and get CNN and other medias down here to interview those who are negatively impacted. That would be money well spent. Get the Huffington Post to do a story. Bring your issue to national attention.
Spending $1 million on lawyer fees is like spitting in the wind. Find other ways to fight this because the current method is wasting our tax dollars.
John I agree that Monroe should solicit favorable coverage. But you seem to be missing the main legal issue. This suit is not going to be decided in the court of public or by media attention. Instead it will be decided in large part by a federal judge, based upon details of federal environmental law, and little else. It is thus a suit based on technical law, not one of popular opinion. Our history is full of actions by smaller entities that were successful in stopping environmental incursions.
In fact, my impression is that SunCoke and AK are encouraging these efforts to stop Monroe from continuing, BECAUSE Monroe has a sound legal strategy, and thus SunCoke faces a difficult court outcome. It encourages my view of things.
Monroe certainly is not getting the national media exposure that this guy got. If you get a million people behind you, perhaps you can win. But instead you all push away those who question.
Monroe should have never entered this fight without proper planning including a comprehensive PR strategy. Sorry, we are not taking a large enough view of the problem. Instead we are running around half-kocked, not really putting the kind of thought into a project that could cost millions of Monroe taxpayers dollars.
I want council to stand up for all of its citizens, and not just the one's they happen to agree with. Is that too much to ask?
And please stop asking, "Why aren't they building?" That is so old.
MainStreetMonroe.com is news of, for and by the people of Monroe, Ohio.
quote:[i]Originally posted by John Beagle[/i] [br]Tom, saying, "Monroe has a sound legal strategy" doesn't make it so. Where are you getting your facts?
To the best of my knowledge, nobody outside of the council executive sessions, has that factual basis. But I discuss city issues with three members of council. While NONE have improperly shared confidential information, ALL state that they have a very solid case and I believe them. This is reinforced by all seven members, along with the city manager whose budget this comes out of, fully agreeing on the legal course taken. Just how often do eight politicians fully agree when there are reasonable grounds not to? Three council members just faced election, and four will in just two years. If they didn't have the law on their side, you can bet at least one would be seeking political cover. Thus I trust them to represent us reasonably. Don't you?
You state they won't win? What is your basis for that?
quote: By the by, judges are greatly influenced by public opinion. Shall I start citing cases?
Please. Start citing cases, where federal judges ignored the law, and instead just went with public opinion. Those thankfully rare instances are easily and cheaply reversed on appeal. This will be a judges opinion, not a jury easily swayed by hype.
Were your view the case, nuclear power plants would have seen no limits at all through the mid-70's, then would have all been completely shut down after the Three Mile Island incident. The snail darter would have never shut down the Clinch River plant, and four forest firefighters would not have died because idiots would not allow rescuers get water to protect them from a lake, that possibly might have endangered fish in it. Huge regions would not be shut down due to their possibly having a snail, worm, or turtle in it. The law is generally followed, almost to the extreme.
You have asked people to stop saying it, but it remains a fact that if AK or SunCoke fully believed they would win, they would have continued construction of the plant. Not doing so costs them lots of money. Their greatest chance of winning probably lies in getting the population to believe Monroe shouldn't try to win this case.
John, I have been personally involved in four lawsuits that went to court, representing Monroe and Butler Tech schools. Just as important, I participated in deciding that we should not proceed with several others, where while the district was right in its actions, we chose not to proceed because might not win, or the legal costs of winning exceeded their value.
I trust our council representatives to do exactly that, based on a legal strategy that obviously can't be shared with the public, for doing so immediately gives it to AK and SunCoke.
quote:[i]Originally posted by Tom Birdwell[/i] Their greatest chance of winning probably lies in getting the population to believe Monroe shouldn't try to win this case.
quote:[i]Originally posted by Tom Birdwell[/i] Their greatest chance of winning probably lies in getting the population to believe Monroe shouldn't try to win this case.
quoted for truth
MainStreetMonroe.com is news of, for and by the people of Monroe, Ohio.
It wouldn't be prudent. Who is to say which way the judge will rule. American Legal System Fact: Whoever has the best lawyers and the most money will usually win.
That's unfortunate because even though we have a good case, it probably isn't good enough. SunCoke is waiting for the green light on all fronts before they start dumping $340 Million into our local economy.
quote:[i]Originally posted by cmsquare[/i] [br]I keep asking be why they haven't starting building because it's never been answered.
I know it's old, but still no answer.
MainStreetMonroe.com is news of, for and by the people of Monroe, Ohio.
Well we can begin with the Scopes Monkey Trial the judge ruled against Scopes for the heinous crime of teaching evolution rather than creationism. Think about interpretation of laws, judges interpret laws based on their bias. Where does a judges point of view on a ruling come from? The public of course. And like the monkey trial, opinions evolve.
Public opinion can indeed make a difference. Especially if it is important enough to reach a national audience. If a judge sees a case is getting national sympathy it could make the judge hold a company to the higher standard. Some judges might have reason to be pro-business or pro city at the expense of another city even if it is a bit of a stretch.
Can you really say the city has a rock solid case they can not lose? Each judge uses his point of view to interpret the law. You really are not sure which judge you will get. The reason for the judge is to 'interpret' the law. Otherwise we would just say no, you can't build that coke plant there and that would be that.
One thing for sure, you can not predict how a given judge will rule on a given case. Even if it makes perfect sense in your mind, the ruling could be bad. And then what?
MainStreetMonroe.com is news of, for and by the people of Monroe, Ohio.
quote:[i]Originally posted by John Beagle[/i] [br]Please. Start citing cases
Well we can begin with the Scopes Monkey Trial the judge ruled against Scopes for the heinous crime of teaching evolution rather than creationism.
And what federal law did the judge ignore or violate in that decision? There was none.
quote: Think about interpretation of laws, judges interpret laws based on their bias. Where does a judges point of view on a ruling come from? The public of course. And like the monkey trial, opinions evolve.
If judges went by public opinion, we would probably draw and quarter flag burners, not send them on their way with a pat on the back as happened in the Supreme Court case Texas vs Johnson (1990). And the public largely wanted to jail the judge in both in and Scopes. They certainly didn't yield to public pressure to reach those decisions. But I agree with you that if Monroe officials did a better, more active job at making their case to the public, there would be less pressure to stop this case.
I think it is obvious from the infamous OJ trial that judges can be badly influenced by national media pressure. But can you cite an environmental case like that? I can't think of one at all. In fact the opposite seems true, that they tend to find for the environment where interpretation is required.
And John, it is a huge stretch of reality to conclude that a federal jurist will be overly influenced by what is really a small and local issue to him. And I even if he does rule in a way contrary to law, well that is what appeals courts are for. I challenge you to find examples where federal judges yielded on a small local case to public pressure, especially where it was far from overwhelming as this is. I suspect that city attorneys can make as good a case that people support this as SunCoke can that they don't. But for an example...
In WINTER, SECRETARY OF THE NAVY, ET AL. v NATU-RAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL, INC., ET AL., the court overcame incredible public pressure, to find that the Navy's claim that submarine warfare training had never once been shown to actually hurt a marine mammal were credible, and that their use of it in the designated training area was correct.
quote:
Public opinion can indeed make a difference. Especially if it is important enough to reach a national audience. If a judge sees a case is getting national sympathy it could make the judge hold a company to the higher standard. Some judges might have reason to be pro-business or pro city at the expense of another city even if it is a bit of a stretch.
Can you really say the city has a rock solid case they can not lose? Each judge uses his point of view to interpret the law. You really are not sure which judge you will get. The reason for the judge is to 'interpret' the law. Otherwise we would just say no, you can't build that coke plant there and that would be that.
One thing for sure, you can not predict how a given judge will rule on a given case. Even if it makes perfect sense in your mind, the ruling could be bad. And then what?
But you did just that. You believe the case a waste of money because they will lose. I trust that the eight officials with the full knowledge of the case, the ones who face reelection battles, will rightly represent us. Especially when all eight are in agreement.
There will be no Nativity Scene in Washington this year! The Supreme Court has ruled that there cannot be a Nativity Scene in the United States Capital this Christmas season. This isn't for any religious or legal reason. They simply have not been able to find Three Wise Men in the Nation's Capitol. A search for a Virgin continues. There was no problem, however, finding enough asses to fill the stable....
This is clearly an issue for the courts, and I am glad that the city has forced it there.
Now getting back on topic...I still fail to see how voting out 1 member means the voters sent a message to council but if it helps you sleep better at night to think that then go right ahead.
They re-elected two members who fully support this action so if anything...I think the public sent council a message that they support the job being done. It's the vocal minority, people like you and others with personal ties to AK that speak out against this. Probably Bob Preston too...I bet he is on your side.
The voters spoke...and they put two people who support using tax dollars to fund this fight BACK into office. It's a message all right..I'm just not sure you hear it very clearly. Are you wearing rose colored ear plugs to go along with the glasses?
quote:[i]Originally posted by John Beagle[/i] [br]The Answer Again
It wouldn't be prudent. Who is to say which way the judge will rule. American Legal System Fact: Whoever has the best lawyers and the most money will usually win.
That's unfortunate because even though we have a good case, it probably isn't good enough. SunCoke is waiting for the green light on all fronts before they start dumping $340 Million into our local economy.
quote:[i]Originally posted by cmsquare[/i] [br]I keep asking be why they haven't starting building because it's never been answered.
I know it's old, but still no answer.
Well you seem to know which way the judge will rule already...how can a company like AK, with very expensive lawyers I am sure, no see this for the slam dunk it is when John Beagle and his environmental law expertise is so certain???
Maybe they should bring you on board?
They will build that plant and dump all that money into the economy when they build the plant on AK land like it should have been in the first place. I know it sucks having to fix the things you broke/destroyed before building a new toy, but it's the responsible thing to do as a member of a community.
Instead AK just thought they would buy up more land to destroy...and buy air credits from 30 miles away. They don't care about this area...they will suck ever last penny from it and then abandon it when it profits them, just like with the corporate offices. Then what will happen in Middletown?
I'm no legal expert...but if AK were as confident as you...they would be building. They are clearly scared of something.
1. Monroe Wins and gets $1 Million Back 2. Monroe Wins but loses $1 Million in Legals/Other fees, costs. 3. Monroe Wins, losess $1, and they build the plant anyway because they get another judge to overturn the ruling. 4. Monroe Ties, the court ruling is neutral, plant gets buils, Monroe loses $1 Million 5. Monroe Loses and loses $1 Million 6. Monroe Loses Case, $1 Million and has to pay SunCokes legal fees. (This is a worst case scenario.
Of course it could be more or less than $1 Million, but if you look at the odds, I don't like ours.
This doesn't require a court it requires full blown public support and outrage. You only have a small group of people. You are not fighting a single corporation, you are fighting everyone in the area, public and private.
I'm for having reasonable expectations and being responsible with our taxpayer dollars. Yes, you can win, but I don't like your odds.
MainStreetMonroe.com is news of, for and by the people of Monroe, Ohio.
quote:[i]Originally posted by John Beagle[/i] [br]The vote tally is in and its doesn't look good for the incumbents.
ANNA L. HALE.......... 2166 27.16% TODD HICKMAN.......... 1744 21.87% ROBERT E. ROUTSON..... 1655 20.75%
No doubt that Anna Hale would be re-elected. But for the remaining leadership on council, a message was sent.
Let's look at the facts: First of all the voters voted out the Vice Mayor. Secondly, the current mayor was the least vote getter.
The message to council is that the voters are not happy with the expenditure of hundreds of thousands of tax payer money. If SunCoke is unresolved by the next election, we will see further changes in city leadership.
Yes, there is indeed a message from the voters.
Council, the voters actually speak louder than the vocal minority. Are you listening?
I don't think the results of this vote, as well as the school board results, have anything to do with SunCoke. IMO it is a beginning of a change in Monroe politics. No longer will the fact that you were born and raised here; that your family has been a part of this city for a long, long time; or that your name is synonymous with Monroe politics be enough to get you elected. Mr Tannreuther and Mr Leeds are Monroe lifers, but that was not enough - and won't be going forward. Todd Hickman outworked ALL the other folks that were running for council and it resulted in him getting elected.
Mr MacDonald doesn't completely fit into old time Monroe names because of his successful local business and the fact that he is very involved in the schools.
I think the proper thing to say is that political science research shows that the Supreme Court is usually bounded by public opinion. Which is to say that they won't make any decision that the public disagrees with so much that they refuse to acknowledge the decision. If the public disagrees with it so much then the President and Congress have little incentives to follow it. This has happened before (westmiller v georgia I think is the famous Andrew Jackson case, but there are others). Many people cite FDR's court packing plan as why the Supreme Court ultimately relented in the New Deal package but that's only part of the reason. There some rising public sentiment against the Court at that time as well (and a key retirement of a justice).
Some interesting studies too show how important it is for the Supreme Court (of any country really) to maintain a good standing in public perception or the institutional credibility and respect diminishes making it harder for them to impact policy or for their decisions to be followed.
So basically the argument is that while individual decisions are rarely determined solely based on public opinion, the Court is at least mindful of it enough to be careful in how they construct their decision. If a large majority of the public is very unhappy with the decision, the executive and legislative branches either won't follow it or will follow it half-heartedly.
Of course these studies are all at the Supreme Court level.
quote:[i]Originally posted by Matt_Steele[/i] [br]So basically the argument is that while individual decisions are rarely determined solely based on public opinion, the Supreme Court is at least mindful of it enough to be careful in how they construct their decision. If a large majority of the public is very unhappy with the decision, the executive and legislative branches either won't follow it or will follow it half-heartedly.
Of course these studies are all at the Supreme Court level.
You omit perhaps the biggest factor. The Supreme Court, unlike all lower courts, has the freedom to choose its cases. I agree with your general assertion of it being a somewhat political body. That is perhaps best shown by their choice of which cases to hear, and perhaps more so by those they reject. But I think some others' assertions that they have a singular ear to the political wind are nuts. Miranda, Brown, Roe, all were decidedly unpopular with the masses and Congress when announced. Many of their major cases are. As Matt points out, it took decades for Brown to be fully followed.
Voters Send Message to Monroe Council
Posted - 11/04/2009 : 10:18:44 AM
