O.K. Question, hot shot. Did you see this comming?
Why the Blade sat on this story before the elections is an example of the corruption going on in the city between the democrats and that drawn up skinny freak.
Explain to me why the paper sat on a story that had to have taken a month to compose (a story 14 months late, I have to add) and publish said story fourteen days after the election.
I swear it feels like Chicago is taking over....
posted by BrianInFlorida at 04:34 P.M. EST on Mon Nov 21, 2005 #
I wonder what Union Boss we will get to replace Bob when he steps down?
posted by Toledolaw05 at 04:56 P.M. EST on Mon Nov 21, 2005 #
Here's the original Blade article from 2002:
Published on August 28, 2002 Blade, The (Toledo, OH)
CITY COUNCIL TURNS DOWN REZONING FOR LOF LAND
This correction was published Thursday, August 29, 2002. A story on Page B-1 yesterday about Toledo City Council incorrectly reported the status of an ordinance to spend $50,000 to buy property near the former Unitcast foundry in East Toledo. The measure received a first reading.
Four Toledo City Council members last night changed their stand on the former Libbey-Owens-Ford Co. Technical Center, defeating a rezoning request that would allow a charter school to operate there.
The Lake Erie Academy charter school had planned to open today in the former technical center at East Broadway and Oakdale Avenue.
Instead, the school will open Tuesday in a different location that school officials would not disclose last night.
The rezoning, from M-2 industrial to M-3 planned industry, was defeated 4-7, with one councilman absent.
"We're disappointed," said John Keil, director of property management and environmental affairs for Pilkington North America, a subsidiary of British-owned Pilkington PLC, which bought the former Libbey-Owens-Ford Co. "We believe the rezoning was going to result in an opportunity for an otherwise idle facility to be reused."
The building is on 13 of 140 acres on which Pilkington and LOF once manufactured auto glass. The entire site has been for sale for about two years, with a price tag of $6 million.
Barbara Baker, leader of the planned charter school, said the rezoning won't halt the school.
"We're going to have an excellent school year," she said. The school is seeking to enroll 300 children from kindergarten through third grade.
The rezoning was recommended 7-0 by council's planning and zoning committee July 17. Among the supporters then was District 3 Councilman Robert McCloskey.
But Mr. McCloskey changed his mind a few weeks later. He said he decided that the property should remain available for industrial use.
A retired LOF employee, Mr. McCloskey said he had no love for Pilkington.
He claimed the company reneged on a deal he had helped negotiate to pay for retirees' prescriptions above $2,000. He acknowledged that he changed his mind about the zoning matter after he'd approached Pilkington about making good on the prescription commitment with no success.
He said he is not personally affected because he receives health coverage through the city. "I have a little bit of revenge in my stomach," Mr. McCloskey said.
Mr. McCloskey said he decided to oppose the rezoning because of fresh progress in an effort to revitalize another former industrial property in that part of East Toledo. Last night, council voted to spend $50,000 to buy two parcels near the former Unitcast foundry site, 1414 East Broadway, for use as right-of-way for a future truck roadway.
Such a road could eventually become part of a truck route to serve the technical center as well. "I realized [rezoning] would end up hurting our ability to make this whole [L-O-F] property heavy industrial," Mr. McCloskey said.
He said he has tried many times to help Pilkington market the technical center.
He portrayed council's determination to preserve valuable industrial land as more principled than Pilkington's willingness to parcel off the technical center. "They're out of London, England. They don't care. Once the deal's done and they have their money, they're gone," Mr. McCloskey said.
Mr. Keil said the company refused to discuss the retirees' prescription coverage in connection with the rezoning vote. "Pilkington believes this rezoning should be dealt with separate from any unrelated matters," he said.
Pilkington implemented an annual maximum of $2,000 for drug payments for retirees, effective Jan. 1, 2001, as part of a 1998 labor contract with Local 9G of the United Steelworkers' Aluminum, Brick & Glass Workers unit. Previously, there was no limit.
Council President Peter Ujvagi and council members Wilma Brown, and Tina Skeldon also reversed their vote from the July 17 committee meeting.
All three said they changed their minds to preserve the property for industrial use. "The key issue here was really the continual shrinking of industrial land here in Toledo," Mr. Ujvagi said.
East Toledoan Barbara Matney said council made a mistake in rejecting the application.
The wife of LOF retiree Virgil Matney, Mrs. Matney said she doesn't like Pilkington anymore than Mr. McCloskey, but said her three grandchildren who enrolled in the school will suffer.
"I don't care if Pilkington sells that building. That's a good opportunity. There's a cafeteria in that building. It could help east side parents," Mrs. Matney said.
Also voting against the rezoning were Michael Ashford, Peter Gerken, and Wade Kapszukiewicz. Those voting in support of the rezoning were Betty Shultz, Gene Zmuda, George Sarantou, and Rob Ludeman. Councilman Louis Escobar was absent.
Mayor Jack Ford had informed council that he opposed the rezoning, as well.
posted by psyche777 at 07:56 P.M. EST on Mon Nov 21, 2005 #
Thanks for the posting, psyche777. So the Fab Four include:
Bob McCloskey - violator of council term limits.
Wilma Brown - currently on council.
Tina Skeldon - a county commish.
Peter Ujvagi - a state rep.
They spread like a disease. It's one thing to pollute Toledo, but man, how do voters let them infect other areas?
So does Bob and maybe the other three support a pay-to-play system in Toledo? See, that's what happens when you have the one-party rule sytem around here that Frant Szollosi supports. Franks says of the current Council:
"... it should be the seven Democrats who get together and make decisions."
posted by jr at 08:20 P.M. EST on Mon Nov 21, 2005 #
This story has been out there and reported outside of Toledo, I think it is a real travesty that the Toledo Blade waited till after the election to cover this. I also don't understand why the City of Toledo should have to pay for Bob's attorney fees. If he is truly a "representative" of Toledo then he should be represented by counsel from the Toledo Law Department. If he wants his own attorney he should have to pay for it himself. Given this is still at the early stages and $88,000 has been spent just on McCloskey's attorney alone? It's going to be alot more expensive before this is over.
I found the "I have a little bit of revenge in my stomach," comment to be interesting. I also don't feel the insurance issue should have been included in the rezoning. Then adding to that the land was not used for heavy industrial anyway so one wonders if the $50,000 the city spent was another waste of tax dollars.
I am a Frank supporter however I don't think that comment was a good one for him to make. Especially given the whole A and B team. I do not want McCloskey as Toledo Council President though, not that my feeling will prevent anything. Heck if I had my way he would have never been elected.
I also think the City of Toledo should list an archive for past City Journal entries, they only list from 2003 to the present. That type of public information should be available on line to all of us.
posted by psyche777 at 08:34 P.M. EST on Mon Nov 21, 2005 #
We knew about the rumor of this story in 2003 but couldn't get the media's attention; too bad.
posted by soboredbytoledo at 08:43 P.M. EST on Mon Nov 21, 2005 #
Any Chicago mayor would be proud to serve in Toledo; it would feel like home...
I too agree that the law dept. should be handling this and not Mcluck, cluck, cklucksky's personal lawyer; especially on the taxpayer's dime...
re: the blah,
Is it still news when it's that old???
posted by Hooda_Thunkit at 09:11 P.M. EST on Mon Nov 21, 2005 #
Actually, if McCloskey is sued, civilly, for actions taken while as councilman, he's entitled to representation from the law department - at taxpayer expense. If, however, there is any criminal charge, he has to have his own attorney - paid for by himself.
Elected officials get sued all the time and they're usually sued in their official capacity.
Wonder if they think this will turn into criminal charges which is why he's got a separate attorney?
oh - and is this the same Tina Skeldon who now uses her married name...Tina Skeldon Wozniak? Wasn't she using her married name in 2002?
posted by intrepid at 09:38 P.M. EST on Mon Nov 21, 2005 #
For my 2 cents worth - the key word in any of these stories is alleged. I'm going to reserve opinion until the jury comes in - if there ever is one.
posted by DoknowDocare at 09:42 P.M. EST on Mon Nov 21, 2005 #
But he's not getting representation from the law department, the city is paying for him to have a private attorney. I agree if he is acting in his official capacity as a councilperson he should be represented, just not the way they are doing it. Especially since the city is also being sued and the law department is representing the city's interest's already.
I don't know if this is even a jury trial, nor is it criminal from my understanding it's a civil trial for damages.
posted by psyche777 at 10:31 P.M. EST on Mon Nov 21, 2005 #
I can't beleive that this guy got the second most votes in the city!!!
posted by lloyd at 12:20 A.M. EST on Tue Nov 22, 2005 #
Also funny is how the word alleged gets tossed around referring to Bulldog, but not to Noe.
posted by lloyd at 12:21 A.M. EST on Tue Nov 22, 2005 #
I can't believe it either lloyd...even worse it's hard to believe he could actually end up Council President.
posted by psyche777 at 12:46 A.M. EST on Tue Nov 22, 2005 #
What I am curious about is why the Law Department hasn't been entered into this equasion. After all, it was the Law Department that is authorizing these expendatures, right?
The same Law Department that gave Bob the nod to ethically violate the City Charter and run for his at-large seat.
Gee, why am I being beat up with all these red flags?
I'm sensing another blockbuster scam being swept under the rug with distracting bells and flashing bright lights.
posted by BrianInFlorida at 05:17 A.M. EST on Tue Nov 22, 2005 #
The law department may have a conflict representing both McCloskey and the city...If it turns out that McCloskey did something "inappropriate" (deference to those who want to use the word alleged...), the law department's first priority is to protect the city. This is probably why they're getting an outside attorney for McCloskey - so they don't find themselves both blaming and defending his actions.
posted by intrepid at 09:54 A.M. EST on Tue Nov 22, 2005 #
okay - not sure if this comment should go here or on another thread...
As I was thinking about all this, I couldn't help but wonder if the McCloskey stuff was just a way for the Blade to say "see - we go after Democrats, too."
And then I thought - it isn't whether or not the statement/strategy is true...it's the fact that I thought about it that's more telling.
My reaction was not just that they were reporting information, but they decided to report on it now because they're being hammered for the constant front-page coverage against certain republicans and they needed to demonstrate that they're "fair" by going after a democrat.
I wonder how many others had this same thought and what it says about our local paper - as well as our perspective of them.
jr, if this should go elsewhere, please move it for me - thanks!
posted by intrepid at 10:07 A.M. EST on Tue Nov 22, 2005 #
Bob McCloskey’s corruption is not new news. It was in the Rag over a year ago. It is true that the Rag didn’t mention this close to the election, despite the fact that the Rag knew about it. The only conclusion that seems to make sense is that most of not all of Toledo’s local politicians are corrupt and the Rag is simply telling them “play ball with us or we will shove the bat up your ass”.
posted by mike2004 at 12:09 P.M. EST on Tue Nov 22, 2005 #
intrepid, I had the exact same thought Sunday when I read the story. It was a good story with detail, although it lacked the names of the other three Democrats that changed their votes, something the Blade doesn't normally do when writing about Republicans.
I'd like to know more about these other three politicians, and why they changed their minds, and how much did they know about McCloskey's deal? From the Sunday story, it seems like others may have been involved.
I'd like to know more about Council's decision to not rezone the land for a charter school because they supposedly wanted the land for industrial use, but they wind up rezoning it for a public school. What happened to using the land for industrial use? What caused the change?
I'm sure we'll see more of about this story on at least a weekly basis. And is this Pilkington-McCloskey incident the only time something like this has happened in Toledo? Have other businesses paid Council for a vote?
posted by jr at 12:41 P.M. EST on Tue Nov 22, 2005 #
This is such old news; I think the plan was to let him get re-elected, resign under disgrace and let the D's name his replacement. Better than rolling the dice and having an R win. What a vicious cycle.
posted by soboredbytoledo at 08:37 P.M. EST on Tue Nov 22, 2005 #
I have heard similar things from knowledgeable sources, soboredbytoledo.
I think there is going to be a lot more to the McCloskey story than this.
(historymike is being very careful not to compromise sources as well as to keep certain information from going public yet)
Let's start again...
All I can say right now is that something is happening, and that...man, it's hard to say something while saying nothing.
:-}
posted by historymike at 09:51 P.M. EST on Tue Nov 22, 2005 #
Yeah, but this part of last Sunday's story is new:
"And on Friday [Nov 18, 2005], the city's law director forwarded an ordinance to City Council asking for $50,000 more to pay for Mr. McCloskey's outside lawyer, Jay Feldstein."
Will City Council comply? Probably, since it appears that some on the 2002 City Council may have been involved with McCloskey in at least a small way by changing their vote.
And the Blade started attacking McCloskey before the Nov election for his end around of the term limits and the billboards.
Oct 3 Blade op-ed:
"Mr. McCloskey's little zig-zag around the city charter puts at risk the community's good will and ours; it's the sort of shady maneuver that angers the public and erodes trust in public servants. And it should be challenged by a lawsuit. Where are the Republican lawyers in town? Where is the distress over Mr. McCloskey's transparent ploy?"
I love that "and ours" phrasing, which makes it seem like the Blade is detached from the community. Maybe the Blade will have trouble influencing city government if McCloskey is around.
Going after McCloskey is fine, but what about those other three? Were they involved? Take them all down if they were. The fact that the Blade failed to mention their names in the Sunday article tells me that they have no interest in investigating what involvement, if any, the other three had in the 2002 rezoning issue.
posted by jr at 12:02 A.M. EST on Wed Nov 23, 2005 #
It's so nice to see Bob remove himself from the running to be council president.
Now if only he had the cajones to plead guilty, he'd save Toledo Taxpayers over $100,000 over this trial and would be considered a HERO!!
Ironic that you're screwing Toledo over for the same amount you tried to extort, huh?
Bob, I just want you to know how apprehensive I am, knowing that soon you'll be a large meanacing inmates cuddle toy because you chose to be a moron. Yep. YOU made the decision to shoot yourself in the foot. How stupid does an imbicile of your caliber have to be to leave a voice message with extortion connotations, huh?
Some politican you turned out to be, getting caught with your own voice on tape. Don't you watch "CSI"?
posted by BrianInFlorida at 04:04 A.M. EST on Wed Nov 23, 2005 #
I think the plan was to let him get re-elected, resign under disgrace and let the D's name his replacement. Better than rolling the dice and having an R win.
--------------------------------------------
That is EXACTLY what the plan was. Someone appointed that Block can control, preferably yet another young elitist punk fresh out of law school that can be molded . G&^-D%$M, I get so sick of Blocks chicanery.
posted by Foolkiller at 06:40 P.M. EST on Wed Nov 23, 2005 #
What kind of voter cast his/her ballot for this knucklehead in the first place? Both he and Betty Shultz need to resign before Toledo becomes the laughing stock of Ohio.
posted by limedrops911 at 08:31 P.M. EST on Mon Nov 28, 2005 #
before Toledo becomes the laughing stock of Ohio.
------------------------------------------
BECOMES?
posted by Foolkiller at 03:59 A.M. EST on Tue Nov 29, 2005 #
Syndicate ToledoTalk
