Hot News!
• Freestore Foodbank Battle of the Blogs!
• Cincinnati NAACP President shares update on Cincinnati Retirement Plan
Contact Us
v mail, fax: (214) 481-6464
e mail: click here
On today's date in The Beacon archives, we published:
•Fans find reality not reported by Enquirer (2007)•Open Letter to John Pepper about Disney Characters (2006)
•More Lack of Coverage from The Cincinnati Enquirer (2006)
Events
 |
|
|
Sunday, April 08, 2007
The Culture of Lobbyists: Dick Weiland’s City Council Contributions
Posted by The Dean of Cincinnati
Photo courtesy of here.
Recently, a concerned reader sent me a list of data which apparently compiles all of Richard Weiland’s campaign contributions to Cincinnati politicians. What does it mean when an über-lobbyist like Weiland gives a contribution? What strings are attached? The table below summarizes contributions from either Richard Weiland or his family. A second table provides total contributions per candidate.
| Name | Contribution Type | Amount | Recipient | Year |
| Dick Weiland | Individual | $500.00 | Bortz, Christopher | 2005 |
| Richard Weiland | Individual | $100.00 | Smitherman, Christopher | 2005 |
| Richard Weiland | Individual | $250.00 | Smitherman, Christopher | 2005 |
| Richard Weiland | Individual | $1,000.00 | Berding, Gerald | 2005 |
| Richard Weiland | Individual | $250.00 | Cole, Laketa | 2003 |
| Marcia Weiland | Individual | $500.00 | Cole, Laketa | 2003 |
| Richard Weiland | Individual | $750.00 | Cole, Laketa | 2003 |
| Richard Weiland | Individual | $1,000.00 | Cole, Laketa | 2003 |
| Richard Weiland | Individual | $1,000.00 | Cole, Laketa | 2005 |
| Richard Weiland | Individual | $500.00 | Cranley, John | 2005 |
| Richard Weiland | Individual | $500.00 | Cranley, John | 2005 |
| Richard Weiland | Individual | $1,000.00 | Cranley, John | 2003 |
| Dick Weiland | Individual | $50.00 | Crowley, David | 2003 |
| Richard Weiland | Individual | $50.00 | Crowley, David | 2005 |
| Dick Weiland | Individual | $150.00 | Crowley, David | 2003 |
| Richard Weiland | Individual | $400.00 | Crowley, David | 2005 |
| Richard Weiland | Individual | $500.00 | Crowley, David | 2003 |
| Richard Weiland | Individual | $515.87 | Crowley, David | 2005 |
| Richard Weiland | Individual | $100.00 | Thomas, Cecil | 2005 |
| Richard Weiland | Individual | $100.00 | Ghiz, Leslie | 2005 |
| Richard Weiland | Individual | $150.00 | Ghiz, Leslie | 2005 |
| Richard Weiland | Individual | $150.00 | Ghiz, Leslie | 2003 |
| Richard Weiland | Individual | $150.00 | Ghiz, Leslie | 2003 |
| Richard Weiland | Individual | $250.00 | Ghiz, Leslie | 2005 |
| Richard Weiland | Individual | $250.00 | Monzel, Chris | 2003 |
| Richard Weiland | Individual | $500.00 | Monzel, Chris | 2005 |
| Candidate | Total from Richard Weiland |
| Chris Bortz | $500.00 |
| Christopher Smitherman | $350.00 |
| Jeff Berding | $1,000.00 |
| Laketa Cole | $3,500.00 |
| John Cranley | $2,000.00 |
| David Crowley | $1,715.87 |
| Cecil Thomas | $100.00 |
| Leslie Ghiz | $800.00 |
| Chris Monzel | $750.00 |
• 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.
08 Apr 2007 at 06:44 am | #
on its face it means nothing, except that he exceeded the legal contribution limit of $1,000 per candidate per election cycle for Laketa Cole in 2003. This is sanctionable by the Cincinnati Elections Commission, carries a potential penalty, and shows typical bad form on Laketa’s part for accepting more than the legal limit vs. returning or refunding those checks.
Limits follow:
Individual contributions: $1,000
PAC contributions: $2,500
Party contributions: $10,000
I’ve met Dick and could never figure out on whose behalf he lobbies or “what’s in it for him.” I know he’s recruited by candidates to fundraise for them, so if you’re interested it may be worth looking into how much his fundraising events have contributed.
Better yet: interview him.
08 Apr 2007 at 09:37 am | #
Although I have no proof, I’ve always been suspect that Weiland also operates as a middle man in the funnelling of money to politicians. After all, this guy doesn’t have any gainful employment other than schmoozing at charity events & acting as a lobbyist broker. Perhaps there’s plenty of money to line his pockets in this racket.
I’ve supposed that some contributors didn’t want their names entered into public record, if you will, but wanted to support a particular candidate. It would seem they could give Dickie a couple of bucks & ask him to contribute to Candidate A. It would go under Dickie’s name, but hopefully he’d let Candidate A know it was really from Mr. & Mrs. Gottbucks.
Weiland has been sliced & diced here before, but this guy is so slippery. I doubt if anyone will truly get to the root of this creepy guy.
08 Apr 2007 at 11:28 am | #
Weiland has been sliced & diced here before, but this guy is so slippery. I doubt if anyone will truly get to the root of this creepy guy.
He’s only 76, so there’s still time. This cat has already used up about eight of his nine lives.
Everybody probably knows all this, but a quick recap. After he got out of federal prison for defrauding HUD (and losing the right to practice law for life), he polished his reputation by becoming a valued fundraiser for local nonprofits. He was at the heart of the DeCourcy scandal in the HamCounty Auditors Office, but got away clean, thanks to friends in high places especially Stan Aranoff.
Looks like set up the whole Drake sell-off for his nursing home cronies. Heimlich carried that water, but the deal blew up. Now the Health Alliance bought that dirty diaper.
On the plus side of the ledger, thanks to the Beacon, at least he knows he’s been tagged which may make the secret deals a little bit tougher to carry off.
08 Apr 2007 at 07:44 pm | #
Dean—you’re getting warm.
“Weiland’s money” is FAR more than what he gives directly. He collects tons more from others and feeds it to the different candidates. Look for certain names in common, and you’ll start to get a sense of the bigger amounts at stake. (Nothing illegal about doing it that way, but his influence is far more than just his own checks).
10 Apr 2007 at 10:42 pm | #
OK Dean, we get that you’re obsessed with bashing Heimlich and Weiland. Weiland’s personal history and political influence is not news to many of your readers, and it’s not hard to find donor data online so you have not pulled off some journalistic coup. Note that Weiland has given a lot of $$ to progressive Crowley. And when your hero Portune was sworn in, back in ‘05, one of the people he acknowledged as a big help was Weiland, and of course Stan Chesley.Weiland’s assistant at the time, Lena S, coordinated fundraising events for Portune. Have you ever even met Weiland? Ask the nonprofits who’ve benefited from his efforts. Nancy Minson of the Mental Health Association spoke to a group at the Union Institute about lobbyists and politics. She noted that many nonprofits,including MHA, have benefited from Weiland’s help and he frequently does this for little or no money.Say what you will about him, but he has done a lot of good for candidates and causes that many of us care about, and the fact that he’s still so active in his work at his age is admirable. Have you even considered that he has done a lot of positive work which in many people’s eyes is some redemption for his past? Judge not,lest ye be judged…
11 Apr 2007 at 07:27 am | #
Great debate points from UW. You just rationalized why we watch “good Democrats” take money from a person who has spent the last 10-12 years making sure Chabot, Boehner, and Heimlich were well funded against the great Democratic tickets. Nice to be active as an older person, nice to do good for small 501(c)3s. But for portions of a party that now hurling stones at Gerald Jeffrey Berding for getting lion’s shares of dollars, this is very hypocritical. Shows local Dems will not stand on principle when they look at being TRUE DEMOCRATS.Democratic leadership capitulates with easy to charming words. Wool is being pulled when higher or moderate rollers are challenged on where their funds go or who they, as candidates, take funds from.
Weiland’s convening properties, admirable. When it steals the voice of the Hamilton County voter who at the polls made the public decision, it’s deplorable. Then it becomes profiteering. Someone else noted profiteers in another article. That made sense. Weiland’s associations and behind the scenes “lobbying” becomes profiteering along the lines of a charm offensive."How dare you challenge Dick who brings us money?” Easy to challenge on principle and process.
Weiland makes deals with the Cincinnati Empowerment Corporation (CEC) on half a million (these are HUD funds folks, same people he bamboozled earlier), sets up a meeting of local agencies to “speak to their legislators” with Bill Seitz (CEC appointed attorney) assistance that includes over half of the participants as DWs lobbied clients it’s nice and sweet and good, but it is directed at those agencies getting more money for their own best interests therefore DWs. How many nursing home collaborators were behind the scene on the Drake issue?
Rosedale? Glass-Schneider? How many of his entities have very large administrative overheads and much smaller output into community programs that have true oversight programs that can be understood for citizen benefit?
Rank and file Democrats on this matter are being made to look like headless, boneless chickens in the political barnyard. Every Dem who “owes” Dick is making sure they charmingly present him. I admire DW’s work on understanding the Holacaust and some civic mindedness. The cloaked deals and the shady angles which rob public coffers, along with the political shills, to serve his chosen few are the acts of civic atrocity. R&F Dems are looking like other Stepford Wife parties. Duplicity and cluelessness running together.
11 Apr 2007 at 12:21 pm | #
UW, Crowley votes for 3CDC and a meaningless resolution against an escalation. He couldn’t even make his meaningless resolution agaisnt the war, just the escalation. And his fellow faux progressive Portune is the new jail pusher.
If you’re dumb enough to think that Dick’s influence peddling is admirable then you have no understanding of how a real democracy is supposed to work.
12 Apr 2007 at 06:26 am | #
don’t forget DW tried to bail Dale out of the sticky wicket sphincter boy got himself into when he was impeached last year.
dean, why didn’t you ask stickboy urkle about his brother’s impeachment and the mallory graft machine, his ties with lawpooch BCF DW EZ CL and the other slime.
chauncey
gardener
“I like to watch them screw the pooch”