Petition Opposing The "City Income Tax Increase" a.k.a. "The Great Bailout"

I have started a petition to send to the mayor's office, city council, city auditor, State Representative, Terry Johnson and the State Auditor's Office; showing that the citizens of Portsmouth, Ohio are not in support of the proposed tax increase that will be on the ballot in May 2011.

This will send a message to all of the above mentioned elected officials that the people of Portsmouth, Ohio have had enough of the incompetence that is rampid in our city government.

It is time, for the elected officials of our city government to understand that the people of Portsmouth, Ohio do not exist or serve them so, they may have titles and treasures; but they are to serve the people of Portsmouth, Ohio.  Although, many of the elected officials have not been elected into their positions in office.  It is time to remind them that ultimately the people; will and do have the final say!

This petition's details are listed in the petition itself.  I will try and seperate the registered and unregistered voters in my final reports.  But, please sign the petition even if you are an unregistered voter and are a citizen of Portsmouth, Ohio and over the ae of 18 years old.

If you are not a registered voter; please go to the county court house and register to vote!  It takes about 5 minutes and is painless!  At your local level is where any voter can make a direct impact on the lives of your family and community.  You can see and feel the results of your vote personally.  If you vote for only one thing in your life; please register to vote against this "Income Tax Levy" or "Safety Levy" they are disguising it as!

To Sign The Petition

Go To:

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/proposedcityincometaxincrease/

Vote "NO" or "AGAINST" The

• Proposed Income Tax Levy

OR

• The Safety Levy

Whatever They Are Trying To Call It Now!

Some Of Our Elected Officials Are:

State Bound And Going Down!

In the words of several local area sports teams!

STATE BOUND!

Poll Results On "City Income Tax" and "Trent Williams

The Bailout

On Feb. 3rd, I posted a poll on the "Proposed City Income Tax Bailout."  The results of that poll were,  74% Against and 25% Supported the Bailout!  The Portsmouth Daily Times ran a comparable poll of it's own on it's on-line website too!  They also, found very similar results.  Then the mayor-select, Malone announced a $22,000.00 media campaign to support the Proposed City Income Tax Increase," the so-called "Safety Levy!"

Then the firefighters decide to send their poster-child, Tony Hamilton; to the mayors offices and tell them that we will give back to the city of Portsmouth!  We will give back $200.00 a month per Fire Dept. employee!  Nice try!  Not enough though!  You greedy little men have demanded and twisted the arms of all the citizens of Portsmouth for far to long!  You have used scare tactics and even let a business burn to the ground in the 70's to get your point across and your way!  The city's government employees and incompetent elected officials have been a burden fiscally - not a service to this community for far to many years!  $200.00 a month is just the beginning of what you should really be paying for your benefits!  Get over yourselves; you will lose this vote on the "Bailout!"  And, some of you will lose your jobs!  The people of Portsmouth have had enough of your greedy manipulated personalities!

Trent Williams

On Feb. 17th, I also, posted a poll on whether you would support Trent Williams in the next City Auditors election.  63% No and 36% Yes.  Now, Trent has another deficit budget on his hands.  The state will be coming in!  But, only if you vote AGAINST the "City Proposed Income Tax Increase", backed by the unions and used to Bailout the poor performance of our elected officials.

So, I will post two other polls now.  Both questions are still the same!  But, now you have had much information and data provided to you to make a much more informed decision!  The polls are posted to the right of the page and will be posted till April 1, 2011.

Malone: Campaign for Income Tax Increase Not Taxpayer Funded

The Great Bailout

One thing is for certain.  When a city official makes a short statement about a topic; that is as critical and important to the citizens of Portsmouth - as the "Proposed Income Tax Increase."  Citizens best be cautious and gaurded about what is not being said.

With the exception of former Mayor Murray's administration; citizens of Portsmouth, Ohio have been treated much like the same process that one would use to grow mushrooms.  Kept in the dark, and feed shit!

Mayor Malone said; "the cost of the campaign to pass the city income tax increase is not being paid for by the taxpayers."  That is a good thing to hear.  This means, and is later confirmed in the article; that it is being funded by outside sources.


The Campaign

The campaign amount to promote this city income tax increase is $22,000.00.  More than what most folks make in a year in the city of Portsmouth.  What is really interesting about this announcement is; if taxpayer dollars are not being spent on this campaign, and outside sources are funding this effort.  Then, why is a city official making statements about the campaigns funding and about it's committee?  I mean, couldn't one of the committee members came forth and said the same statement?  Instead of the Mayor's office.  If Frank Lewis would have had a brief flash of investigative reporting come over him; he might have been able to ask a question directly to a committee member; about the funding or committee.

The Committee

The committee is working with outside sources to fund the campaign.  Does this committee have any city employees, labor union officials/members on the committee?  Are any of the local city employee unions donating funds towards this campaign?

If the answer to any of these questions are "Yes;" then this proposed income tax increase - is the direct result of unions and special interest groups!  City employee union contracts are about to expire, and they want more of your money!

The Reason Why

At least, we now know more than we did before.  Or, at least confirmed our suspicions!  This proposed income tax increase is nothing more than a wage and benefit increase for the unionized city workers!  But, there is one other really big reason that they want this to pass!  And, that's to keep the State Auditor's Office from coming in, and doing a full-scale audit on the city.

The "Big Audit"

This means that every fund, account, and transfer of funds; over the past several years - will be looked at with extreme circumspection!  This could also lead; to the state to take a hard look at some other things too.  Things like; Amerisco and the SOGP's involvement with the city of Portsmouth - there's just no-telling where this could take them.

It could lead to other state agencies coming in as well.  If warranted; to open their own formal investigations.  Sort of a "Political Colon Cleansing."  A "Local Government Enema."

It's a good thing that SOMC is putting in those grinders!  I got a feeling something is about to hit the fans!

Worried Looks & Sleepless Nights

Elected officials are starting to show signs of being worried too.  In fact.  They even have publicly commented on their concerns about the State Auditor coming in.

When they come in; they will require some "big time" answers for some "big time" problems!  Questions... that I'm sure most of them don't want to answer either.

In the next, few months to come.  Watch to see if anybody steps down or resigns.  I bet several late-night paper shredding parties will be of the norm.  Maybe that's, what is meant by "burning the midnight oil!"

How Can The Voter Help?

By voting NO on the proposed city income tax increase!  By voting no on this union sponsored city income tax increase; you will be helping our city get the expert help that is needed - to get us back on track to fiscal responsibility!  By providing the city auditor, council, mayor, and department heads; the tools needed to be proper and good stewards of the taxpayers dollars.  By voting NO or AGAINST the income tax increase you will be helping them and in return helping yourselves!

They will be shown how to make do with what they have and how to get things done properly.  And, also, this help will be continued for over a one to two year period.  They will come down every couple of months and do a check and balance type audit just to make sure the ship is still sailing and not sinking!

Where Do We Draw The Line?

When is it enough folks?  Look at what we as taxpayers have been asked to pay for; just over the last several years.

1. Martings Building Purchase (Money went to a local developer for strip malls.) ($2,000,000.00 of your tax dollars spent.)  (Got us a great deal there too, didn't they?)
2. Martings Building Renovations  (We had to vote it down "twice" to get them to understand.)  (Wanted the taxpayer to spend another $2 to $4 million dollars to fix it up!)
3. Adelphia Building (Full of black mold and very expensive to renovate and clean.)  (City forgave the owner of back taxes for the building.)
4. Amerisco Fiasco (Project not completed and has never been monitored to show any savings as promised.)  (They were real responsible with that $9,000,000.00 of your tax dollars, now wasn't they?)
5. Water & Sewage Increase (6 or 7 times in over the last 10 years!)

When is it enough people?  If you let this income tax increase pass; you will be getting alot of the same and it will keep getting worse and worse!  Stop the bleeding NOW!  Now, they want you to give them more of your money to mis-use and get their butts out of hot water with the State Auditor's Office.  And, to give to the city employees.

Here's the thing.  They can't explain or show you anything good about the 5 things listed above!  Not one!  Everything mentioned above cost the taxpayer money.  Not one thing have they done in 20 years to bring a good solid viable business into the city.  Not one!  Name a strong, viable, heavily employed business they have brought in themselves?  Kings Daughters came to the city and told them they were thinking of coming to town.

Dragging Up & Leaving This Town

When is the last time the city ever gave the citizens any good news on industry coming to town?  The fact is; none of them are doing one thing to try and bring any new industry to the city of Portsmouth.  Nothing!

And, we are in such a bad shape now; we have to give everything just get anyone to come!  And, then they still don't want anything to do with this place.

Some folks think that it might be because there are certain people and organizations within our city - that actually make more money and a healthy living; by keeping our area economically distressed.  They profit from your town being broke and having high unemployment rates!

In the last 20 years or so who has left and packed up their bags.

1. Mitchellace.  Used to employ several hundred people.  Left to Costa Rica to set up main production operations.  Why?  This will get you!  Because the unions were trying to take over!  This man still sits on many committees within the city!
2. Dayton Foundary
3. Lute Supply  (Tax abatements run out so, they set-up just outside of town.)
4. Lewis Furniture (Not really a big employer but, a staple of stability in our community.)
5. Martings Department Store  (Employed a good amount of people.) (but, they got their share of the pie and some.)
6. Maurices (In New Boston now.)
7. Patterson Box Company  (Not really a large employer but, a staple.)
8. Coke Plant  (Unions basically shut them down too.  They were striking right before they closed.)

Not to mention the Steel Mill in the 80s!  Now, what's coming in?  Nothing!

Conclusion

Mayor Malone and the entire city government from the bottom floor to the roof; are for the union workers too.  Just like Rep. Terry Johnson.  The deplorable oppressive thing about this whole proposed city income tax is; none of this money will go to benefit anything for the taxpayers!  It will all go for city employee's benefits and wages.

The City of Portsmouth's Proposed Income Tax Increase Is

The Great Bailout!

Vote "AGAINST" The Income Tax Increase

AND STOP THE

BLEEDING

City Charter - Section 47 Part II

In the article "City Charter - Section 47";  I had a comment from an anonymous reader, who was from what I could conclude, in support of the "Income Tax Increase."  His or her comments and/or reasoning for the support of the Income Tax Increase provoked my senses to do this article to try and illustrate that what was being said in those comments are not sufficient reasoning to vote yes for this income tax increase.

First, I don't want to critize or discourage the comments of the poster!  In fact, this is exactly the kind of participation that needs to happen so, we as human beings can depress the demise of Freedom of Thought!

Here are the comments that the poster left in response to the first article.

Anonymous stated;  "Deliberate this. Employees cost money. Inflation drives wages and benefits costs up. Revenues are flat. If revenues stay the same and expenditures for wages go up, the percentage of revenue to pay wages will increase. It's not rocket science. If taxes raised as employee costs went up, the percentage would stay the same. Tax rate has not changed since 1987. Do you think you could hire a good employee and keep them by paying them 1987 wages in 2011 and beyond?"

Inflation drives wages and benefits cost up?

The City of Portsmouth is experiencing what economist refer to as; Cost-Push Inflation!  Cost-Push Inflation is a decrease in aggregate supply, or a decrease in the product that is in demand.  In our case; that is money!

The two main sources for a decrease of aggregate supply is:

• An increase in wage rates.
• An increase in the prices of raw materials.

Portsmouth is suffering from both of these sources.  Union bargaining units driving the cost of wages and the raw materials up which is decreasing the aggregate supply.  The State of Ohio is currently considering legislation pertaining to the "bargaining unit" in regards to protect the tax-payer from this type of Cost-Push Inflation that is running rabid in local and state governments.  These sources of a decrease in aggregate supply operate by increasing costs, and the resulting inflation is called cost-push inflation.

Now, the City of Portsmouth is trying to do is Demand-Pull Inflation!  Demand-Pull Inflation is inflation resulting from an increase in aggregated demand, or an increase in the product that is in demand.  Again, in our case money!

The three main sources that generate ongoing increases in aggregate demand are:

• Increases in the money supply.
• Increases in government purchases.
• Increases in the price level in the rest of the world.

The City of Portsmouth is trying to increase their money supply because of the Cost-Push Inflation created by our elected officials and the bargaining units from our union employees.

By, City government covering the cost of employees's pension plans, not restructuring the health care packages, misuse of city vehicles, paying for Life Center memberships, not negotiating better contracts with unions for the sake of the taxpayer's costs etc.; they have decreased the aggregate supply of the city's treasury!

I seriously believe, that elected officials should not negotiate employees pension plans, health care packages, benefit packages or union contracts!  Not, with corruption being represented on both sides of the bargaining table!

By, getting involved with the Amerisco contract; certainly a bad judgement call on behalf of our elected officials.  No supervision to see that the job was carried out correctly or a system set in place to monitor the cost savings that was promised by such improvements.  All the meters were still not installed two years after the contract was signed.  Again, bad decision by our elected officials that have decreased the aggregate supply of the city's treasury!  Increasing government purchases!

If revenues stay the same and expenditures for wages go up, the percentage of revenue to pay wages will increase.

Unfortunately, this is a very real scenario in the City of Portsmouth.  But, why?  The City of Portsmouth has experienced a number of events that have contributed to this problem.

1. Decrease in the city's population.
2. Decrease in the number of business in the city limits.
3. Poor tax abatement deals for area business' {More tax load on the citizens.}
4. Decrease in employment opportunities, much less good employment opprtunities.  {By the way, with exception of the hospital and Shawnee State; working for the city is a great job to have.  Some could argue the best!}
5. Many city employee's live outside of the city limits; refering to property taxes of course.
6. Granting certain entities lucrative contracts that the City should be fulfilling.
7. Allowing certain entities to have control of grant writing for the city's development.

All of these factors will not allow the revenues to remain the same; but rather decrease and have a much more negative effect on our local economy!  Again, city elected officials responsible for most if not all of these reason either in a direct or in-directly manner!

It's not rocket science. If taxes raised as employee costs went up, the percentage would stay the same.

I find alot wrong with this comment!  Because, now we are getting to the real purpose of why this, Proposed Income Tax Increase is being at the citizens.  Keeping the text of the comment in mind; then everytime city employee's contracts are up and they request more, compensation, better health, pension and benefit packages; raise the taxes on the citizens.  If we continue to operate in this manner then when is enough, enough!

Then you will drive the population down even further because, people won't want to continue to live here and pay those rates.  Then you have created Nominal Cost vs. Real Value.  Is the cost of the services worth what you are paying for it?

You are right!  It's not rocket science!  But, if we would do as you have proposed; I would call it more like Mad Science!

Tax rate has not changed since 1987. Do you think you could hire a good employee and keep them by paying them 1987 wages in 2011 and beyond?

First, of all!  The wages for City employees are not at 1987 wage scales.  They are at the current 2011 wage scales.  You don't really believe that these union represenatives are going to let that slide by in the contract negotiations, do you?  So, in all fairness;  I think that takes care of your question portion of that comment.

Second, income and property tax rates do not have to raise to keep up with today's budget demands.  Elected officials being good stewards of the tax-payers money and making sound economical decisions involving the welfare and services provided to the citizens of the city does!  The tax rate could have been set in 1810 and not changed at all over the years and the percent of the tax could still meet the budgets demands.  If the 7 things mentioned above are eliminated a much brighter outlook would prevail.

Here is a solution; instead of income or property tax increases how about this.  Have a Pigovian Tax!

What is a Pigovian Tax?  One of the uses of taxes is to discourage activity that has negative externalities, or we believe is otherwise economically/socially harmful.

Definition: A pigovian tax is a tax placed on a negative externality to correct for a market failure.

Examples of a Pigovian Tax

• A cigarette tax.
• A alcohol tax.
• A energy tax.
• A impervious run off tax.  {Big business's like SOMC's water run off into storm sewers have a negative effect on others.}

The common term for this kind of tax is  Sin Taxes.

In conclusion, raising income or property taxes is not the solution to the City of Portsmouth's fiscal problems.

It's is simply this;  A lot of people are talking about losing services but, not improving security, electricity, water systems, but that's not necessarily what council and the mayor is intending to do. They'll be passing budgets, they'll be representing the material interests of their constituencies, and that takes a certain level of skill. 

 Having a government that is principle-centered - that means being good stewards.

And, just to show you that our elected officials are not even good at what they have choosen to do; and thats being politicians!  Consider this; Budgets are political documents, and this being a election year, you would thin they would have the goal of trying to show a declining deficit without endangering anyone's re-election prospects.  It's unfortunate that those that propose the "Income Tax" are using issues like crime, violence and loss of services as scare tactics.

City Charter - Section 47

What The "Income Tax Increase" Is Really For!

Section 47a and 47b

In Section 47a {Annual Tax Levy}, which assessed on the property values of your homes and Section 47b {Tax Levy For Bonds And Notes}, which is to pay interest, sinking fund, and retirement charges on all bonds and notes of the City of Portsmouth.  Both, of these sections in the Charter were created on 5-5-1953.

Section 47c {Income Tax Authorization}

In addition to Sections 47a and 47b, city council enacted an ordinance of levying an income tax to provide funds for the general municipal operations, city employee compensation, street lighting and capital improvements.

The net proceeds of the income tax will be set aside and used for the following:

• 30%                                     City Employee Compensation
• 30%                                      General Municipal Operation
• 30%                                      Capital Improvements
• 10%                                      Street Lighting

This section was adopted on 5-5-1970.

Section 47d {Supplemental Income Tax Authorization}

In addition to Sections 47a,b,c, city council enacted an ordinance levying an income tax to provide funds for the general municipal operations, city employee compensation, and capital improvements

The net proceeds of the income tax will be set aside and used for the following:

• 40%                                      City Employee Compensation
• 30%                                      General Municipal Operation
• 30%                                      Capital Improvements

This section was amended on 6-8-1976.

Section 47e {Supplemental Income Tax Authorization For Safety Forces}

In addition to Sections 47a,b,c,d, city council enacted an ordinance levying an income tax to provide funds for compensating employees of the police and fire forces of the City of Portsmouth and for no other purpose whatsoever.

The net proceeds from the income tax will be set aside and used for the following:

• 100%                                       Police and Fire Forces

This section was adopted on 11-3-1987

So, to some things up.  City employees receive 70% of the income generated from Sections 47c and 47d combined.  This includes the police and fire departments.  Thirty percent from 47c and forty percent from 47d.

Now, comes along Section 47e.  The police and fire forces, and I'm sure union reps too.  Have a Supplemental Income Tax placed on the books for just them, and them only.  Notice, in two sections of this ordinance; the wording!  "Providing funds for compensating employees of the police and fire forces." 

Not any of the funds are used to provide training, building, equipement or vehicle maintenance, electric, gas or water bills.  Just for compensating employees of the police and fire forces.

One other phrase, that I would like to draw to your attention!  "For no other purpose whatsoever."  Wow!  Talk about not playing well with others and being rapacious and predatory in their behavior!  Just a little greedy maybe?  That certainly smells of union representation!  These people are so vulgar in their methods... They lack compassion for any of the other departments; not to mention the citizens!

I want to now, draw your attention to the adoption date of Section 47e.  November 3, 1987!  That date is also, the date when Sections 87 and Section 89 were amended also!  Raising the police and fire departments staffing levels to 44 each.  So, they not only got money set aside for them and only them; they got to hire more employees for each of their departments!

Folks, I'm not against an income tax increase if it is merited and city government is responsible and good stewards of the money.  None, of these three things are even existent within our city government and some city employees!

The need for more money may be a correct conclusion.  But, the reason for the need of the money is for egotistical, self-seving and self-centered purposes and reasons!  Not for the betterment of the city or it's citizens!

Vote NO On The Proposed Income Tax Increase

As, you can see from above; the track record speaks for itself.  Where the money goes!  Make the City Employees pay their fair share of their own benefit packages.  Stop paying for firemen and their families to go to the Life Center.  All on the taxpayers dime!

One other thing, Trent Williams; do the inventory on the city's equipment and assets!  You have only been told by the State Auditor's office to do this for the last 4 or 5 years!

Vote For Anybody But TRENT WILLIAMS For Auditor

Citizens of Portsmouth; remember is big pay raise that he got after being elected last time!  Which was illegal!  And, now drives a nice big SUV with a full tank of gas!

Tell me what a City Auditor needs with a city vehicle much less a SUV?

Don't worry Mr. Trent Williams, I've got a few things to say about your time in office too!

The Vote Is In! Portsmouth's City Income Tax Increase FAILS!

Well, citiizens of Portsmouth, Ohio, the vote is in!  I placed a simple poll on this blog; just to see what kind of support the new proposed "City Income Tax Increase", would receive.

I am pleased to say; It failed!  It failed!  By the way, did I mention that it failed!  I ran the poll for 7 days and the final voting results are as follows.

A total of 58 citizens voted in the poll.

YES - 15 25%
NO  - 43 74%

The proposed City Income Tax Increase failed by a 3 to 1 vote!  That's by a landslide!

I will leave the poll up for a few more days and then once a month, I will re-post the poll and see if the numbers change; the closer we get to the actual election.

So, congratulations citizens of Portsmouth!  Saying NO, makes them have to do their work and stop the useless spending of your tax dollars.  Remember, they have already raised your water and sewage bills.  You didn't have a say in that; but you most certainly do with this!

Bonus!  By sayin NO to this Income Tax Increase; will most likely bring the State down on these city officials and then they will start asking some hard questions.

Watch them twitch & squirm then!

Meeting of the Minds - Portsmouth's elected officials form "Think Tank"

Elected officials of Portsmouth are set to meet on Thursday, Jan. 28th and again on Monday, Jan. 31st. to establish a "Think Tank" for the purpose of how to advertise and merchandise the income tax increase to the citizens of Portsmouth.

Council President Haas feels that the pressure to get this done before Feb. 2nd. deadline is necessary.  A deadline that would allow them to place the matter on the ballot for the May primary.

Third Ward Councilman Nick Basham says because of the city's Charter requirements; we have to have 44 employees in both the fire and police departments.

The sections in our Charter that does state those figures are Sections 87 Police Force and Section 89 Fire Force.  However, according to the city of Portsmouth's own website; the police department states their totals come out to 45.  On another page the claim to have 29 patrolman instead of 26 which would put their totals to 48 employees.  One to four employees could be cut from this department.

One other interesting thought came to mind when looking at these sections.  Why, do we have to have the same number of firemen as policemen?  How does the workloads compare?  How many calls does the fire department get compared to the police department?  My bet would be that the police department receives a hundred times more calls than the fire department, maybe even more!  Then, why the same amount of employees?  I would think that based on workload alone that the number of firemen could be reduced.  To what number would have to be determined by a further study of statistics and data.  That's something our "Think Tank" couldn't come up with is it?

Also, these Sections in the Charter were amended on November 3, 1987.  I wonder what those numbers were before that?  I'm sure the unions had something to do with the increase in numbers.  Why else would you amend the sections, but to raise the number of employees!

Councilman Basham goes on to say; "We’re down to basic service, and the public needs to know we can’t afford basic services, there has to be a change somehow.

We are down to basic services as far as the Charter states at the current time about these two departments.  With the exception of the possible additional employees in the police department.  We may very well have to many firemen for our city's needs as well.

Before, I go any further with this article.  I want to make one thing clear to the readers.  I do not dislike or hate any fireman or police officers.  I think that these men and women are a very important if not the most important organizations within any society, and are very much needed and often very much under appreciated.  It is just a matter of tough economical times and every city employee is a bargaining unit when it comes to possible cuts and/or layoffs.

I think that every city employee should be and have every right to be; extremely agitated and apprehensive over the fact that your jobs and livelyhoods could be in jeopardy!  But, that anger and concern should not be directed at the citizens and voters who will vote this tax increase down.  Instead, it should be channeled at the very people who are suppost to be the good stewards of your tax dollars as well.

Here is a prediction for the employees of the city of Portsmouth.  In the next several weeks and months.  Councilman, department heads, union leaders, the newspaper and even loud mouth Steve Hayes will tell you all if you don't vote for this you might loose your job!  Note:  If any elected offical or department head makes these comments to you; please let me know!  I will do everything in my power to help remove them from office because by law; they can't approach you or influence you about anything that is on aballot.  If any flyers are circulated; please make sure a copy finds me.

Ok, so back to the "Think Tank".

Why?  And, I mean a big why?  Should the citizens of the city of Portmouth for one minute believe or think that the 6 city councilmen can come up with a honorable and legitimate plan to fix our city's economical woes!  You have had this deficit problem for several years now and should have seen it coming several years before that.  But, with the exception of maybe Councilman Johnson and Noel; occupy the mental capacity or aptitude to shell peanuts or shuck corn!  You four councilman that I'm speaking of may as well mess in your pants and lick the windows.  Because, you definetly are not doing this city or it's citizens any good!

If city council won't make changes to the Charter to help the city and the citizens within, then the citizens will have to force your hands!  How?  By the very means that you govern by.  The Charter!

Because, we have a Charter form of government we the goverened have a more active say in what can and can't be done!  Remember, Governments deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.  We have to gaurd against the transgression of high powers, which we have delegated, we declare, that all powers not hereby delegated remain with the people.

I would like my readers to look at Section 14 of the city Charter.  It's entitled; "Power to initiate ordinances."

SECTION 14. POWER TO INITIATE ORDINANCES.

The electors shall have power to propose any ordinance, except an appropriation ordinance,

and to adopt or reject the same at the polls, such power being known as the initiative. Any

proposed ordinance may be submitted to the Council by petition which, to be sufficient, shall be

signed by electors of the City equal in number to at least ten percentum (10%) of those who voted

at the last regular municipal election. All petition papers circulated with respect to a proposed

ordinance shall be uniform in character and shall contain the proposed ordinance in full.

Drink it in folks!  It's the single most important portion of the Charter for the citizens!  This means we the people have the right to govern the elected officials.  You and I can insist that they govern the city the way that the majority of the citizens see fit.  Of course as long as it does not violate Federal and State laws!

So, if you think the number of fireman and/or police officers should be lowered or raised.  You have that power!  If you think the Martings building should be sold or any other useless property of the city should be sold!  You can make them!

Water, Sewer & Income Tax Increases! Why?

Our city officials; some elected and some selected!  Have decided to raise the water and sewer rates for all residental (citizens) of Portsmouth, Ohio.  But, the rates of the big players or businesses (not citizens) of Portsmouth, Ohio don't have to!  Water rates are expected to raise as high as 18% starting on Feb. 1st, 2011.

On another issue; they want to increase the Income Tax rate for citizens and non-citizens of Portsmouth who work within the city limits!

Question:  Why?  According to newly selected City Council President, John Haas; "to meet expenses."  Haas goes on to say; "one of the options is to put the issue on for two or three years versus a one time measure."  "We will let the voters see, if they think we've wasted a bunch of money and spent money on things that should not have been spent on then they don't have to renew it."

Here comes the scare tactic!  Haas said; "If they like what they see and like better roads and better services perhaps they would vote to keep it."

I want to just pause for a moment and reflect on what Mr. Haas just said and maybe just ask a few more detailed questions in regards to his comments.

"To meet expenses."  That is pretty much a unsure and unknown answer to a question.  I would say that he or the others don't even have the vaguest idea of what those expenses really are!

"One of the options is to put the issue on for two or three years versus a one time measure."  "We will let the voters see, if they think we've wasted a bunch of money and spent money on things that should not have been spent on then they don't have to renew it."  Well, thank you Council President, Haas for realizing that the citizens of Portsmouth, Ohio are skeptical and fearful of city officials wasting, spending a bunch of money on things they did or don't have to!  Of course, how can you not be reminded of that waste when it sits on Chillicothe St.

"If they like what they see and like better roads and better services perhaps they would vote to keep it."  Shouldn't we already have those better roads and services with the revenue that is already being generated?  Hey!  Here's an idea!  Stop giving these generous tax abatements to already established entities in our business districts.  Perfect example:  Lute Supply's abatement matured and what did they do?  Re-located outside of the city limits  Now, you can't even get the Income Tax from those jobs!

Council President, Haas goes on to say; "if the voters would not vote for an income tax increase, we can't continue with this deficit, we are either going to have to find another source of revenue, or we're going to have to start cutting employees and services."

Haas stated; "the revenue generated would not be used to construct or move city offices to a different location."  "what I would hope we would do with the money is maintain and possibly improve the services we have."

Thoughts on those comments.

"If the voters would not vote for an income tax increase, we can't continue with this deficit, we are either going to have to find another source of revenue, or we're going to have to start cutting employees and services."

I personally believe that this will fail at the polls by a landslide.  And, he is right we can't continue with this deficit.  Although, I agree with some of the remedies to cut the budget; the outcome wouldn't have to be pictured as so gray!

First, I was kind of floored but, amused by a statement that was made to me the other day about our newly selected mayor.  Understand, I have not yet confirmed this to be the truth but, will put this high on my priority list.  That David "The Messiah" Malone has employed a bodygaurd!  Wow!  A man who supposedly has God on his side.  Maybe he should take the wise words of Robert Fulghum; "If you break your neck, if you have nothing to eat, if your house is on fire, then you got a problem.  Everything else is inconvenience."  I also, heard that this bodygaurd is none other than his brother.  A created position on taxpayer dime!  This tells me that he does not have faith in our police department!  Or, he thinks he is a high ranking official now and deserves to be protected from what happened to Rep. Gifford in Arizona!  Also, is this man being allowed to carry a firearm?  Oh, well!  That's another story in of it's self!

Cutting employees... Now there is a idea!  I beleive the charter states that we are not to fall below 35 police officers.  We have more than that now.  I believe we have alot of city employees in the service department who are not putting in a full days work for a full days pay!  Believe me folks, it's not just me that see's you loafing and napping in trucks!  City employees driving vehicles home and using them after working hours for personal use.  Mr. Williams should be including that into those employees 1099's as taxable income.  Fire Department, awful lot of fireman sitting and eating at local restraunts on the clock with their vehicles sitting outside.  Now, I know they need to take them with them in case of an emergency!  By the way, who pays for the food that is kept at the fire station to feed the firemen?  I seen a high ranking fire official driving a city vehicle with his wife in the car in the middle of the day!  Why?  How often are the department heads audited on their credit card use?  How come the city's "Street Sweeping Program" doesn't do all of the streets?

Why do not all of the fire hydrants work throughtout our city?  If home owners insurance company's knew of this information rates might rise.  Why?  When leaving the city limits the roads are better and when entering the city limits they are the worst almost anywhere you have been?  How much does the city pay for city councilman to have insurance each year?  Don't these people have insurance from their current jobs and/or retirement plans?  By the way!  No more new hires; no more wage increases!  Period!

These are just some of the questions I would like for council and the mayor select to try and answer before you come to the citizens of Portsmouth and ask for more money for your "Slush Funds!"

By the way, how much is the deficit?  $2.2 million dollars.  What did the Martings Building intially cost us?  Seems like every couple of years they want us to come up with a couple more million dollars!  The buck has to stop here!  And now!

To The Readers:  Please feel free to leave your comments on this article good or bad!

Correction:

In the article above I stated that Charter said we were to only have 35 police officers.  That is incorrect.

According to the charter it reads as follows:

SECTION 87. POLICE FORCE.

The City shall maintain a police force consisting of an officer directly in charge thereof

and of not less than forty-three other officers, patrolmen and employees, as may otherwise be fixed

in accordance with the provisions of Section 38 of this Charter. In case of riot or like emergency

the Mayor may appoint additional patrolmen and officers for temporary service who need not be

in the classified service of the City. The officer directly in charge of the police force shall have

control of the stationing, and other disposition, of all members of the force under such rules and

regulations as he may establish with the approval of the Mayor.

(Amended 11-3-87.)

According to the official website of Portsmouth, Ohio.  The Police Department claims to have currently.

• Chief
• 2 Captains
• 4 Lietenants
• 8 Sergeants
• 26 Patrolman  (Another page states 29 patrolman)
• 1 Administrative Assistant
• 3 Administrative Clerks

Thats a total of 45 employees in the department.  48 employees if there are actually 29 patrolman.

SECTION 89. FIRE FORCE.

The City shall maintain a fire force consisting of an officer in charge thereof and of not

less than forty-three other officers, firemen and employees as may otherwise be fixed in

accordance with the provisions of Section 38 of this Charter. In case of riot, conflagration, or like

emergency, the Mayor may appoint additional officers and firemen for temporary service who

need not be in the classified service of the City. The officer directly in charge of the fire force

shall have control of the stationing, and other disposition, of the force under such rules and

regulations as he may establish with the approval of the Mayor.

(Amended 11-3-87.)

According to the official website of Portsmouth, Ohio.  The Fire Department claims to have currently.

• 38 sworn officers.
• 6 emergency dispatchers.

Thats a total of 44 employees.