Hot News!
• Your humble Dean, published at The Enquirer!
Contact Us
v mail, fax: (214) 481-6464
e mail: click here
On today's date in The Beacon archives, we published:
•Some guys with a cornhole song (2007)•Still Chasing The Enquirer’s “Facts” (2007)
•Racial Descriptors at The Enquirer (2007)
•Building Power Statewide: How It Happens Now and How It Could Happen (2006)
Events
 Saturday, December 6 6th annual St. Nick Day Sale
IJPC is located in Peaslee Neighborhood Center at 215 E. 14th Street, Cincinnati OH 45202. We will be selling fair-trade items from all over the world. Your purchase helps benefit artisans from around the world as well as IJPC! |
Tuesday, December 16 CeaseFire Cincinnati, 3rd Tuesday, 5:30 pm Want to learn more about CeaseFire? Attend our monthly Community Coalition Meetings Held at the Avondale Pride Center, 3520 Burnet, CeaseFire Cincinnati: The Campaign to STOP the Shooting (513) 675 - 4102 http://www.ceasefirecincinnati.org |
Wednesday, December 17 Monthly meeting - IJPC General Peace Committee, 7 pm - 3rd Wednesday of every month - Peaslee Neighborhood Center, 513-579-8547, All are Welcome! |
Monday, June 23, 2008
“You Imbecile!” Chris Bortz Behaving Badly
Posted by The Dean of Cincinnati
Photo courtesy of here.
The Charter Party was founded to fight government corruption in Cincinnati, and they did so by supporting the council-manager form of government, and by supporting Proportional Representation (PR). Those are the cornerstones of the Charter Party. Without them, there is no need for there to be a Charter Party, as nothing else signifies a reason for the group’s existence. That’s why Chris Bortz’s total disprespect towards PR in a recent Enquirer article is so disturbing. Usually, when people support something, they don’t appear in media making disparaging comments about it. According to The Enquirer, “Councilman Chris Bortz, one of three Charterites on that reform commission, said PR could be ‘difficult to get people excited about it’ because it’s complicated.” But making disparaging comments comes naturally to a guy like Bortz, as evidenced by a recent email to The Cincinnati Beacon.
This morning, I received an unsolicited email from Councilmember Bortz. It stated, at the top of the letter, that the contents were “not for publication.” Naturally, there is no legal obligation for me to follow that suggestion (since I never agreed to such terms before continuing our correspondence), but because I am a man of honor I will allow the message to remain private. But I will share that it was not a very happy message.
So I wrote this:
You were quoted by the Enquirer insulting everyone’s intelligence.
But you raise a good point when you indicate that I should not take The Enquirer at face value.
I will gladly publish a formal apology if you would like to give me either some comments or an article showcasing your support of Proportional Representation—which would set the record straight from The Enquirer fallout.
Instead of setting the record straight, Bortz wrote back with another email that he hopes I will keep private. I will, simply because (as I said) I am an honorable person. Here is an excerpt of my next response:
You can, however, state unequivocally that you support PR and that you will vote against any move by Berding to implement a CEO-style mayor with districts for council elections.
But if you can’t make such statements in public, then for what exactly should I apologize? Calling you a “Republican”? That hardly seems like the worst thing a public figure could be called. A joke about “The Facist Five”? Give me a break. Those are just goofy word games.
The real meat of this issue is whether you will continue to support PR, or whether you intend to vote with Berding.
If I’ve got you pegged all wrong on this one, your next message can prove that unquestioningly. Then I’ll have no choice but to apologize in public and work to make atonement.
How did Bortz respond? With a simple two sentence message. Since it did not have a disclaimer, and since it was a partial answer to a direct question from someone the Charter Party considers a journalist, I take it as an on-the-record answer: “I do support PR, you imbecil. Don’t ever email me again.”
(Yes, he spelled “imbecile” incorrectly, and I left it that way in his quote. Naturally I’ve made spelling errors myself—they don’t really mean anything—but it is rather ironic given the nature of the word...)
I like the idea of PR. So, if I were to talk to media, I would never say it is “too complicated,” or anything remotely like that. I’d say, “It’s a really easy concept: you rank your favorite candidates and your top choices have more weight.”
See how easy that was? I don’t believe that people find the idea of “ranking” too difficult to comprehend.
And I don’t think the old-school base of the Charter Party are this dense, either. I can’t imagine that the hard-core Charterites are very happy with Bortz right now. (Maybe that’s why he got so angry with me—due to all the heat he’s been taking from people who usually give him big money contributions!)
If the Charter Party decides to leave its support of PR behind, and if it allows its endorsed candidates to disrespect the concept in media with no recompense, then the Charter Party has truly outlived its purpose. Why does Cincinnati need a third party that doesn’t represent anything whatsoever? That hardly makes any sense!
• 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.
23 Jun 2008 at 08:48 pm | #
Waiting....
23 Jun 2008 at 09:04 pm | #
His response proved nothing unquestioningly. I wrote:
He did no such thing. He did not come out in opposition to Berding’s idea.
So he can pay lip service to PR while hurling insults all he wants. But it means nothing if he decides to support Berding’s proposal. Right now, he can still do so. Why not support Berding’s idea? I mean, PR is “too complicated.”
Berding doesn’t want to have to get signatures, so he hopes he can just pass this through council. But that would be a slap in the face to the NAACP, since it looks like they’ll need to collect signatures to put PR on the ballot.
23 Jun 2008 at 10:34 pm | #
("Yes, he spelled ‘imbecile’ incorrectly, and I left it that way in his quote. Naturally I’ve made spelling errors myself—they don’t really mean anything—but it is rather ironic given the nature of the word...)”
I think you meant to write “… given the DEFINITION of the word” not NATURE.
You are an imbecile!
And, the Charter Committee did not allow you to join, not because you are a hack-journalist, but because you would add nothing to the party.
23 Jun 2008 at 11:42 pm | #
Man, they get so defensive when anyone questions them on anything..That’s ntural when one plays both sides of the fence.. Goes with the sport you play Mr Bortz. To most of us though, it isn’t a sport. It’s our lives.
23 Jun 2008 at 11:48 pm | #
JH:"Then I’ll have no choice but to apologize in public and work to make atonement.”
We have already seen how this never will happen, many times over. Totally empty promises.
24 Jun 2008 at 05:25 am | #
Not seeing why he needs to. They aren’t mutually exclusive. He can support the major elements of Berdings proposal (strong mayor/districts) while still supporting that the change to PR as to how they get elected.
He may even push to get Berding to include it as part of the overall proposal. At the end of the day if his intent is to change how city government operates for the better and doesn’t fall on his sword b/c PR isn’t a part of it, I don’t think I fault him.
Why are you against Berdings proposal?
Based on the commission’s report:
The one thing I think needs to happen is that the City Manager only reports to the Mayor. When council gets involved they seem to slow everything down in the city
24 Jun 2008 at 08:14 am | #
BTW, one of Bortz’s campaign promises (he made it in a speech in Northside) was to audit the city’s finances. Did that audit ever take place?
24 Jun 2008 at 09:10 am | #
It sure does seem odd that a council member would write an email and call someone names...that doesn’t seem very appropriate.
24 Jun 2008 at 11:11 am | #
You’re forbidden to ever email him again? What a cry baby!
24 Jun 2008 at 11:27 am | #
Bearman, if anyone should apologize, it’s the councilmember that inappropriately called someone an ”imbecile”. Bortz represents the city, gets paid by the taxpayers and should be a professional. Clearly he has some anger management issues he needs to work on.
This isn’t the first time Bortz has acted inappropriately when someone has criticized his policy positions. If he were smart he wouldn’t have written to a media activist calling them an “imbecile”, it makes one think he must be a, well…
This Republican hides behind the Charter Party which was founded to change the cities form of government from the strong mayor system to a city manager form of government. The Charter Party has always supported PR and If Bortz supportz PR why is he telling the media it’s “too complicated”?
Anonymous, you have no idea what you are talking about. I spoke directly to Michael Goldman and he said it was because of their new policy that journalist couldn’t join. I argued that he wasn’t a journalist and they insisted that he was. What makes you think the Charter Party would discriminate or think that he would add nothing? They don’t even know the Dean, yet.
Paul Green, to the best of my knowledge there has been no audit, but there should be. We should pursue this matter further.
24 Jun 2008 at 12:32 pm | #
I think the State Auditor regularly audits Cincinnati. I was looking at their site for Hamilton County audit results, which are missing since 2003, and they were there. I did not look at them, though.
By the way, I hope everyone saw the story about the missing Hamilton County audits.
24 Jun 2008 at 12:49 pm | #
Justin...what about my second comment? Why is Berding’s proposal the wrong way to go?
24 Jun 2008 at 12:50 pm | #
Bearman wrote:
The NAACP Executive Committee has endorsed PR. At the next membership meeting, it is likely the membership will vote to engage a petition drive to put PR on the ballot.
Jeff Berding, who does not want to collect thousands of signatures, wants to get his idea implemented through council and not the ballot.
How can Bortz back Berding, when the NAACP is actively seeking to implement a cornerstone belief of the Charter Party? Bortz should support the NAACP, leave it to voters, and vote “No” on Berding’s idea. It’s just that easy.
24 Jun 2008 at 01:04 pm | #
Bearman, I don’t know how Justin will answer, but look… Bortz is a Charterite. The whole reason for there being a Charter Party is to push for PR. If Bortz sides with Berding, the Charter Party is dead, and Chris Bortz killed it.
24 Jun 2008 at 02:18 pm | #
bortz voted no on berding’s ceo mayor plan today
24 Jun 2008 at 03:27 pm | #
Bearman, I think under a strong mayor system it might make sense to have the city manager only report to the mayor. Under the current weak mayor system it does make sense to have the city manager report to council.
Council gets things done rather quickly when they want to. You may remember the Fountain Square deal or all the deals that we’ve written about calling it council’s “hurry up offense” to push things through.
Wheter or not Berding’s plan is good or not is a whole other subject really. I don’t think moving to a strong mayor system should be the first electoral reform we start with, but it is worthy of discussion I suppose. We need our city government to be more responsive and accountable to the people. At this point we should throw everything on the table because we don’t have adequate representation or checks and balances.
First, I support PR and Instant Run Off Voting for the mayoral election (this would save the city over $200,000 and be less of a burden for voters, particualary the poor and handicapped). I support campaign finance reform and some free airtime for candidates that have attained ballot access. And I think we should have more referendums where the people get to weigh in on more major decisions.
I think some mix of district and at large government is also worthy of discussion, but I would start with the reforms I’ve listed above.
24 Jun 2008 at 04:06 pm | #
I’d e-mail him just to e-mail him. A council memeber should not behave that way. Plus, we dont know what’s in the “not so nice” e-mail The Dean respectfully didnt not publish. Maybe Bortz could learn a lesson in keeping his word… or maybe not.
24 Jun 2008 at 09:02 pm | #
Yeah, we’ve noticed your spelling errors & have equally noticed they don’t really mean anything...to you.
And I won’t hold my breath on a public apology & this nonsense of working for atonement. That’ll be a first for you.
24 Jun 2008 at 09:33 pm | #
Jones, don’t you think that the city councilman should be the one to apologize for calling a private citizen an “imbecile”?
After all, the Dean didn’t resort to petty name calling and Bortz is a paid public servant that should be able to take a little criticism and still act like he’s a professional. Was the blog post really that big of a deal?
The Dean simply pointed out that Bortz made a comment that made it sound like he supportz something other than PR-which is a cornerstone of the Charter Party. If you support something and you are smart, you don’t pretend that it’s “too complicated” when it is actually pretty easy to use, do you?
I think the real point is that Bortz tries to hide his true colors. He is obviously a right wing Republican, but instead of just being honest and straight forward about it he pretends that he’s just an independent. (Bortz has claimed he isn’t informed enough to even have an opinion about the war for instance. Judging from who he told people they should ask about it (Schmidt and Chabot) I’d have to agree with him on that point.)
As the Dean said, spelling errors don’t mean anything really, it’s just kind of funny when an arrogant public servant calls a private citizen an imbecile for no good reason and they spell it “imbecil”, don’t you think?
I mean it really makes Bortz look like a complete and total, well, silly goose…
25 Jun 2008 at 05:24 am | #
"Naturally I’ve made spelling errors myself—they don’t really mean anything—” I believe that’s being what Chris Rock calls a “Low Expectation Motherfucker.”
And you’re an English teacher? What’s the point?
The city has an Internal Auditor, and the City’s Annual Report is independently audited.
25 Jun 2008 at 06:06 am | #
I would like to know how Bortz was able to vote for all this downtown streetcar stuff when Towne Properties owns property all along the route. Why has no one called him out on this apparent conflict of interest?
25 Jun 2008 at 06:32 pm | #
Scott - In a way, alot of us has been. My angle is the same thing for 3cdc and who benefits from all that stuff. Go down the list of the board and such, and you have your answer. many of them benefit from the councils votes.
I think in this thread, The Dean pointed out that, lets use 3cdc as an example, is a good river of money to get elected . Contributions. MEP pointed out a way also.
I know that when I got my 2 minutes of nobody listening when I was trying to get answers for why there was construction at the same time and place of my FSQ event, I called everyone asking who was responsible for oversight of 3cdc. The answer came back that it was Bortz’s committee. When I called his office to ask, his staff didn’t know that they had the oversight. When I said in council “ Evidently Mr Bortz has oversight for 3cdc but his office didnt know that “ his head popped up and I got a look that I imagine was like the e-mail The Dean didn’t print. He would answer if he was or wasn’t, and I was told YOUR DONE by the chair.
Yes, you are right. Isn’t that his families buisness? I think today I saw a real estate broker sign on a bench downtown somebody Crowley , and it was in the 4th and plum area, so maybe not, but I assume it was Mr Crowely’s son. These people are so mixed up in all this financially, for me, it is just a given all the conflicts of interests. Alot of Fleecing going on in that room.
so your right. A 200 million street care that goes by their property. Other than that it is useless. It’s like a “ Rooftop pool that goes with it, funded by the taxpayers. It is not right.
25 Jun 2008 at 06:58 pm | #
Jeffre, I support many things & give plenty of hours volunteering toward those efforts. And yes, I am smart. Very smart. Extremely intelligent, actually.
However, I don’t have time to waste. So, I say exactly what I have to say & what is on my mind. It doesn’t always sit well with those who are so used to the sugar coated version & dealing with those who speak with gloves on.
You guys have been on Bortz since the get-go. Seems as if you’re a bunch of anti-Semites as well. Hammer away on the wealthy white Jewish man.
26 Jun 2008 at 11:16 am | #
Jones, your comment (or baseless smear) doesn’t make you look extremely smart.
27 Jun 2008 at 09:00 am | #
I’m very involved in the planning of the Cincinnati Streetcar and know the ownership of downtown properties pretty well. And I can think of only two relatively small buildings that the Bortz family company, Towne Properties, owns along the streetcar route. And one of those, they own with several other partners. If their financial interest in these two buildings comprises more than a tenth of one percent of their total property holdings spread over several states, I’d be truly surprised.
With respect to the speculation that Chris Bortz is self-interested in the route of the streetcar, precisely the opposite is true. Early-on, the streetcar was proposed to run on Elm and Race through downtown, where Towne Properties does have substantial, wholly-owned properties. And after studying it, Chris Bortz concluded that Elm/Race didn’t offer the best return to the city, that it needed to be nearer the center of downtown employment. And that’s why it’s now on Main and Walnut.
Best to know your facts before disparaging someone’s character.
27 Jun 2008 at 10:20 pm | #
John,
in many ways he has already shown his character . Maybe he has part of those LLC’s along the route?? Maybe he gets contributions?..... many ways to get a cat to purr
01 Jul 2008 at 10:30 pm | #
Jeffres should donate his RV to the streetcar route since he obviously isn’t using it anymore.
Remember that great use of campaign funds!
02 Jul 2008 at 11:58 am | #
Leroy, it’s not an RV and I fail to see how it would have anything to do with a streetcar. You do know what a streetcar is, don’t you? My MCU actually cost the campaign a very small amount of money and it got a good amount of media attention to say the least. More deep thoughts from the peanut gallery, I love it!