Hot News!
• Tea Party leader gets grilled by NAACP membership
On today's date in The Beacon archives, we published:
•Smitherman still saying the issue is about a “streetcar” (2009)•More on Amy Goodman’s Arrest and the Struggle for a Free Media (2008)
•Journalist Amy Goodman Unlawfully Arrested At RNC (2008)
•Seizing Illegal Guns—Thinking About 2% (2007)
•Information or Advertisements? (2007)
•Nick Lachey: “I have never supported George W. Bush.” (2007)
Contact Us
v mail: (513) 685-0678
e mail: click here
Wednesday, July 01, 2009
Is Smitherman a Vigilante Councilman?
Posted by The Dean of Cincinnati
Chris Bortz says local NAACP chair Christopher Smitherman is running the City, and no one is opposing him. While standing mayors and councilmembers act on the authority of thousands upon thousands who voted them into office, Smitherman is only the branch president by virtue of a hundred or so votes. What do vote counts tell us about public support?
Here are the results for when Smitherman lost his bid to earn a second term on council. Based on the mayoral counts, about 69,865 people voted in this City election. Smitherman got 24,048 votes. In other words 45,817 people did not vote for Christopher Smitherman.
Cecil Thomas, the ninth place winner, earned his seat with 26,507 votes—only a difference of 2,459 with regards to Smitherman. However, since Smitherman won the local branch presidency with only about 150 votes, that means he rose to this current level of power with a number of supporters equal to only 1/16th of the difference between his losing tallies and Thomas’ victory. The last place council candidate, Antonio Hodge, even earned 1,218 votes—nearly ten times as many.
Obviously, the entire City of Cincinnati cannot vote in NAACP elections—so there is a huge comparative difference here. But do numbers speak to anything regarding overall community support? If so, what does it mean that Smitherman has inserted himself as a sort of vigilante councilmember into the body politic, based on such a relatively small number of people who even elected him to that office in the first place?
• Share This Article! | Listen to this article |
|  |
Register
Anonymous comments are allowed, but you can create an account above to stamp your name and to avoid typing the anti-spam code.
If you are not familiar with our rules for leaving comments, click here! The Cincinnati Beacon is not responsible for the contents of any comments. Comments do not represent the views of the moderators of The Cincinnati Beacon.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.5 License.
01 Jul 2009 at 10:29 am | #
Now I know you all hate Chris Bortz.
But I think he’s right in a way and have been saying that for awhile.
Smitherman is using the NAACP and the Adrican American Community by whipping them up into a frenzy with his fear mongering, histronics and rage so he has more power power and also aligning himself with Finney and COAST for the same reason so he’ll have more clout. 53 percent of Cincinnati is African American after all and he knows if he gets everyone behind him he will have power since he can;t get it the correct way by being elected.
01 Jul 2009 at 11:50 am | #
While I may disagree with much of Smitherman’s antics, how can Bortz say that Smitherman is running the city?
Smitherman is merely putting forth ballot initiatives for the public citizens to vote on.
If his ideas suck, the ballot initiative fails. If his ideas are good, the citizens vote it in.
Personally, I would like to see more citizen initiated ballots to counter poor decisions made by city council.
01 Jul 2009 at 10:18 pm | #
Bortz is just mad that his family gave money to Smitherman and Smitherman turned out to be such a fucking tool.
02 Jul 2009 at 01:58 pm | #
A vigilante? What a silly post. Smitherman and the NAACP have every right to challenge Bortz and council’s decisions. For Bortz to pretend that Smitherman is somehow running the city is just ridiculous. And obviously there are citizens that are opposing him and the NAACP. Bortz is just mad that Smitherman pointed out his conflict of interests.
02 Jul 2009 at 02:12 pm | #
I don’t think it is fair to call it a conflict of interest. That is the same kind of stinkin thinkin that killed broadway commons because tarbell had property nearby.Sure Bortz would benefit from the streetcar just like the rest of the city. smitherman would have got a council seat if we had PR is that a conflict of interest too?
02 Jul 2009 at 07:08 pm | #
Nobody owns as much property around the streetcar as the Bortz family does. They have a new big development in Uptown that would certainly benefit.
What are you talking about? Smitherman wasn’t running in 2008 when the NAACP put it on the ballot and he’s not running this year. He barely lost last time he ran. Long time members of the NAACP like Art Slater and Marian Spencer have been advocating for PR for years. The membership voted for it after Josh Krekeler made a presentation to the membership on it.
02 Jul 2009 at 07:16 pm | #
Is that a fact? Do you mean sq ft, or property value? Either way, if you are saying he would benefit from the streetcar you are conceding the streetcar would bring development and raise property values.
I think the question is what are you talking about? All I’m saying is that if we had PR Smitherman would get elected to city council. Bortz wasn’t the first to talk about a streetcar, so whats your point about some naacp members advocating PR?
02 Jul 2009 at 07:27 pm | #
I never said that a streetcar wouldn’t raise some people’s property values. Then again I think a tire trolley route with a painted line would also and for a fraction of the cost.
You implied that supporting PR was a conflict of interest for him even though he isn’t running. My point was that the membership of the NAACP has to support every ballot issue.