Tuesday, December 04, 2007

Enquirer Outing people behind on real estate taxes, despite good faith efforts

Posted by The Dean of Cincinnati

Guest editorial by “funnelcake.”

So the Enquirer does a story on the County getting ready to sell of delinquent real estate taxes to collection agencies.  Good job.  The public gets a heads up on what may happen to them if they are behind on taxes. 

Article here.

Hamilton County, being as reasonable as they are, will not sell delinquent real estate tax debt to collection agencies if have made arrangements to pay.

The Enquirer also throws in this saucy bit “See who owes delinquent taxes”.  Hey, who can’t help but check on the neighbors right?  It leads to his page here.

But what is that foot note at the bottom?

The Enquirer wouldn’t be so cold as to out people who are behind on their real estate taxes, but are responsible & conscientious enough to have made payment plan arrangements with the county would they?

A little bit of search & ta-dah!

Photo courtesy of here.

Yes.  The Enquirer is publicly outing those who have made payment plans!

Now since Hamilton County is publishing a public notice list of those who’s debts will be sold at auction, it does make some sense to put them out there (heck, some people may not even know about it & would appreciate the alert).

But what service does the Enquirer provide by publicly humiliating those who are working on payment plans to settle their real estate debt?

Admittedly, for some internet aficionados, looking up such information is a novel task.  But it’s a little different with the major paper in town serves it up on a silver platter for all to gawk at.

How hard would it have been for the Enquirer to have removed those Payment Plan records from their database of shame?

Socializer!

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.

ohdave says:
04 Dec 2007  at  08:31 am | #

Yeah, I’ve seen this kind of thing before.  We had a school board candidate several years ago who was written about in one of the local papers for not paying his property taxes.  Turned out that when he refinanced his lender didn’t escrow his property taxes.  He knew nothing about it until it he heard about it from the paper, and they he promptly paid them.  But it made him look bad, unfairly.

What the Enquirer is doing is really scummy, as you guys have pointed out.  Good piece.

Freedom Fighters says:
04 Dec 2007  at  05:38 pm | #

.

We must conform, We must conform, We must conform !

Hey, they can’t give all that money to the corporations so they can build all those air conditioned suites in OTR, unless they collect all the funds, from the working man.

Can They ?

What corporate crony ‘collection agency’ will get that contract ?

Hello, how about a courtesy robo-call before we give up 50% of the revenue ?

Oh, what Dusty Roads we travel !

.

Freedom Fighters says:
04 Dec 2007  at  05:55 pm | #

.

See what happens when you don’t pass their tax proposals ?

Only those in financial difficulties take the OTR beating.

Next, they will be homeless as their property is sold for taxes because attorney and collection fees become the last straw.

Kick’um while their down !

The beacon-coast can’t, EVER, see the larger picture !

Perhaps, a brighter bulb ?

.

Glass House Howie says:
04 Dec 2007  at  08:42 pm | #

Quit Enquirer bashing.
This is a matter of public record.
If anyone is outing you it is your government.
It’s called democracy.
It’s called transparency.
The Beacon should google it.

JFD says:
05 Dec 2007  at  10:27 am | #

It’s downright hysterical that you of all people would complain about the use of public information to “out” someone; in an effort to publicly embarrass them.  F__king Hypocrite!

says:
05 Dec 2007  at  07:46 pm | #

JFD, you should pay more attention to what you read or you’ll end up looking foolish.

Go back to the top and you’ll see this.

Guest editorial by “funnelcake.”

JFD says:
06 Dec 2007  at  08:24 am | #

JJ#6:Guest editorial by “funnelcake.”

I immediately followed up with another post that said “ Oh, and by the way, I understand “funnelcake” wrote it, but you printed it, and that makes it your baby too.” Some how that didn’t get posted.  Interesting how in a post about ethics, the Beacon once again demonstrates to the world, that ethics are for the other guy. 

So say one of you, so say you all.

says:
06 Dec 2007  at  12:58 pm | #

JFD/Bill Landeck, this is where diverging views collide. We printed Steve Fritsch’s pro-war piece even though we disagree with it. During the jail debate we printed Pepper’s take though we disagreed.

We don’t own things we don’t write and they aren’t our “baby”. We print your comments when you bother to follow simple rules, but they certainly aren’t our “baby’s”. I didn’t see the comment to which you refer, but you are wrong.

Do you think that City Beat agrees with every letter to the editor they print?

So say one of you, so say you all

Bill, I don’t understand why you can’t comprehend that we are all different people that have different ideas and takes on different issues. We just happen to respect each other and can disagree without being rude to each other, unlike many of the anonymous trolls on this site.

JFD says:
06 Dec 2007  at  01:50 pm | #

JJ: “ I don’t understand why you can’t comprehend that we are all different people that have different ideas and takes on different issues.” “this is where diverging views collide. We printed Steve Fritsch’s pro-war piece even though we disagree with it.”

I also comprehend, you are not disagreeing with funnelcake.  Jason posted an article by a guest writer, that echos his sentiments about the ethics at the Enquirer. Jason has made the same sentiments known, on multiple occasions, here on the Beacon; it’s just as good as if Jason had written it.  Now that I mention it, he isn’t disagreeing with funnelcake either. So say one of you, so say you all.  Well I guess that makes me the one with the divergent opinion.

says:
06 Dec 2007  at  04:54 pm | #

Bill Landeck, do you comprehend that I haven’t commented one way or the other on the issue?

Therefore I haven’t agreed or disagreed. Do you know what they say about when you assume?

My only comment is that you should pay more attention to what you’re reading or you’ll look foolish again. Stop making stuff up about what you think I “say” and what my positions are Bill. So say one, so say one.

Well I guess that makes me the one with the divergent opinion.

See comment #4.

JFD says:
07 Dec 2007  at  07:39 am | #

JJ#10: “do you comprehend that I haven’t commented one way or the other on the issue?”

Then I guess that makes you off topic, and maybe you should take this opportunity to comment one way or the other on the issue; instead of trying to convince anyone that the Beacon doesn’t have an editorial slant against the Enquirer.  Oh, and by the way, when you responded, and used"JFD/Bill Landeck you proved my original point in it’s entirety.

says:
07 Dec 2007  at  01:33 pm | #

JFD/Bill Landeck, I was off topic because I was pointing out what should’ve been obvious to anyone, to you. You called the Dean a “fucking hypocrite” for writing an article he obviously didn’t write. Instead of apoligizing you keep rambling on, so I am responding to you. I guess I could send you to Landeckland, but I thought I would address your comments.

I also had to explain to you that just because we run something in the Beacon doesn’t mean that we agree with it. This is a simple concept that you don’t seem to grasp.

It’s no secret that I don’t like the Enquirer and I’ve never pretended I have a neutral position on the Enquirer. It doesn’t mean that I agree with every criticism made against them.

I think that the Enquirer fails to report on many different and important things and fills their paper with “news” that isn’t really news.

I’ve had the pleasure of meeting you Bill, so I see no reason to use your imaginary name. I wasn’t the one who outed you, but with all the nasty comments you leave on our blog calling us names, I think you should have the courage to put your name behind your daily attacks. Otherwise it seems kind of cowardly to me.

says:
08 Dec 2007  at  07:02 am | #

I fail to see why it is “newsworthy” that a private citizen has a payment plan for late taxes.

I am not disputing that the fact is an open record.  But again, why is this newsworthy?  That, I thought, was the driving point behind funnelcake’s piece, and that is why I asked him if I could post it.

JFD says:
08 Dec 2007  at  07:58 am | #

JH#13: “I am not disputing that the fact is an open record.  But again, why is this newsworthy?”

Maybe you could clarify this for everyone, including yourself; and explain why you chose to engage in identical behavior.

Also, since Justin doesn’t like the imaginary pen name thing; do you have the courage to stop using yours?

says:
08 Dec 2007  at  08:54 am | #

Identical behavior?  When have I used public records to out private citizens?  (Hint:  never).

JFD says:
08 Dec 2007  at  10:48 am | #

JH#15: “Identical behavior?”

“So, who is JFD?” Does that ring a bell for you?  It was the opening line from your post drawing an imaginary connection between 3cdc and me.  I never used anything but a pen name when signing my comments and you did a google search from my email address in order to “out” me.  As a personal matter you didn’t do me any damage, but when you castigate the Enquirer for the same behavior you engage in; that makes you a hypocrite.

says:
08 Dec 2007  at  12:10 pm | #

When you use your email address to engage in public criticism, you enter the world of being public, not private.

That’s like publishing my phone number, then complaining that people call.

says:
08 Dec 2007  at  02:30 pm | #

Everybody knows who the Dean is. He doesn’t call people a “F__king Hypocrite!” behind an anonymous name Bill. I don’t have a problem with pen names, it’s just when they are used by people to constantly make nasty personal attacks that it bothers me.

The Beacon is very different from the Enquirer in that it is interactive. Have you ever had an argument or even a discussion with Tom Callinan or Margaret Buchanan? Try it and let us know how it goes. Keep calling people names and your going back to Landeckland.

says:
09 Dec 2007  at  08:23 am | #

Identical behavior?  When have I used public records to out private citizens?  (Hint:  never).

How about the Three Centurions? You used SOS documents (public) to disclose “out” private citizens.

says:
09 Dec 2007  at  08:57 am | #

Phil Heimlich is hardly a private citizen.

JFD says:
09 Dec 2007  at  11:37 am | #

JJ#18: “Have you ever had an argument or even a discussion with Tom Callinan or Margaret Buchanan? Try it and let us know how it goes.”

I have interacted with the editorial personnel at the Enquirer, and even had a ‘Your Voice’ article on the the over concentration of poverty and social services in the urban core, published.  I thought the process went very well.

Oh Really? says:
09 Dec 2007  at  12:37 pm | #

Diane Finney, Rebecca Heimlich and Jill Eichhorn are. And for that matter, Chris Finney and Jeff Eichhorn are private citizens.

Want to try again?

says:
09 Dec 2007  at  01:07 pm | #

JFD, so the answer to my question was no. We also allow you to voice your opinion on the topics at hand.

This is an article written by funnelcake and the topic isn’t the Dean or the Beacon, it’s the Enquirer. The Enquirer is the paper of record/corporate propaganda. I will not allow you to constantly make every article about the Dean, the Beacon or myself.

In your daily quest to call us hypocrites you have once again taken the thread off topic. I’m tired of warning you Bill. If you don’t want to follow the rules you won’t be allowed to post here anymore. They are really pretty simple.

says:
09 Dec 2007  at  02:00 pm | #

Oh Really you are off topic too! Go read the rules and follow them or your comments will be deleted in the future.

Chris Finney is a well known political activist that had a business relationship with Phil Heimlich while being appointed to important boards that affected public policy by Phil Heimlich. The other people listed above were involved in this situation and it was a completely different topic. No more off topic comments from the peanut gallery will be posted here.

Thanks for your article funnelcake!

JFD says:
09 Dec 2007  at  02:31 pm | #

Jason, see if you can keep your finger off of the delete button, and print my comments this time.  It really is beneath a person of your immense intellect, to evade the truth about themselves.

Beacon guidelines: “Anonymous comments are allowed, but you can log in above to stamp your name and to avoid typing the anti-spam code.”

This is as it appears above and says anonymous comments are allowed.

JH#17: “When you use your email address to engage in public criticism, you enter the world of being public, not private.  That’s like publishing my phone number, then complaining that people call.”

An email address is for email, you used it to find other public information about me and then published it with an opening headline that states you were removing anonymity that is supposedly allowed here.

JH#15: “Identical behavior?  When have I used public records to out private citizens? (Hint:  never).”

Seems all too clear, that in my case you did.  So it seems that hypocrisy and disingenuous rhetoric are both in your tool box, as a media activist.

JFD says:
09 Dec 2007  at  03:19 pm | #

Justin if you are unable to comprehend, that when the Beacon calls into question the ethical practices of the Enquirer while engaging in the same practices here, it’s pertinent to the discussion to bring that hypocrisy to light; then maybe you should ban yourself from the blog world.

says:
09 Dec 2007  at  06:23 pm | #

JFD/Bill, if you can’t comprehend that the article was written by funnelcake and is about the Enquirer and not the Dean or the Beacon then I don’t know what to tell you. I’m tired of you taking all of the discussions about articles here off topic. You have done this consistently for many months. I’ve heard that you’re a real stickler for following rules, until they don’t suit you. You’ve been warned!

JFD says:
10 Dec 2007  at  08:44 am | #

Justin, are you familiar with the definition of redacted?  That’s where you take multiple sources and combine them together to make it appear they are a single work.  Above in the article that you contend is solely the work of funnelcake, are the words “REDACTED BY THE BEACON”.  That proves participation by the “Beacon” in the final composition of this article, posted by Jason.  So to recap, this article is a combined effort by funnelcake and the Beacon (Jason), and as such, my criticism is 100% accurate and on topic.  I do apologize for the bad language in my original comment.

says:
10 Dec 2007  at  12:55 pm | #

JFD, I do understand that word.

The Dean provided the visual from the Enquirer to accompany funnelcake’s article. He redacted the image so that people could see what funnelcake was referring to. He didn’t write or participate in the composition of funnelcake’s article. So to recap, the article is 100% funnelcake’s and the Dean posted a visual from the Enquirer which he redacted so that readers could see what funnelcake was referring to.

JFD says:
10 Dec 2007  at  03:53 pm | #

The composition of the article as it appears on the Beacon includes, text as provided by funnelcake, is published here at the request of Jason, along with the contribution of visual assistance by Jason; and your still trying to divorce the Beacon from the subject matter?  When you factor in the ongoing vendetta the Beacon has going with the Enquirer, I gotta tell you, I’m not the one looking foolish here.

says:
10 Dec 2007  at  06:37 pm | #

Bill, you called the Dean a “F__king Hypocrite!” because you assumed he wrote the piece even though it obviously said written by funnelcake at the top. I pointed that out to you and now you won’t stop your tirade on this.

As I said before we published articles that were for the war and for the jail though we obviously don’t support those positions. The Dean asked David Pepper and Steve Fristch to write them for the Beacon. I’m not divorcing the subject matter because yes, we published them. We try to spark debates here about important issues. Does that make us hypocrites? I don’t think so.

We appreciate when people submit articles when we agree and when we disagree. We even appreciate comments we disagree with when they aren’t nasty personal attacks. (Hint!)

Are we critical of the Enquirer? Damn right we are! I think there’s a lot to criticize. They act as the paper of record and have a special responsibility to our community. They have put the Post out of business and they are going after City Beat too.

We try to give people a forum to have a voice in our community that otherwise don’t have one. Would the Enquirer have run funnelcake’s article? Maybe, but I seriously doubt it.

This conversation is going in circles, getting old and I suppose that you will continue to falsely assume that “so say one, so say all.”

Mike Altman says:
21 Dec 2007  at  03:55 am | #

Identical behavior?  When have I used public records to out private citizens?  (Hint:  never).

You outed my DUI.

http://www.cincinnatibeacon.com/index.php/content/comments/michael_d_altman_v_steve_fritsch/

says:
21 Dec 2007  at  07:59 am | #

Uh… Follow the link, and copy the line which does anything even remotely similar to what you claim.

Mike Altman says:
21 Dec 2007  at  01:18 pm | #

You linked to the Clerk of Courts site. These are public records. A simple search then finds my DUI.

You outed me. Simple.