Saturday, April 29, 2006
Posted by The Dean of Cincinnati
Phil Heimlich, President
Hamilton County Commission
Commissioner Heimlich:
As you’re aware, I’ve written you a number of letters about how you’re conducting county business. (You haven’t responded to a single one, but I’m sure you have your reasons.) And I know you’ve had your hands full lately, what with being sued by two former mayors, but I’d like to invite you to write an article on The Beacon.
As anyone who follows local politics is keenly aware, since the beginning of your political career on City Council, you’ve gained a reputation as a watchdog over public tax dollars. That’s obvious from dozens of news articles and it’s clearly a point of pride for you, based on the list of accomplishments from your online CV.
I’m sure you’ll agree that the Banks project is the most expensive, long term project of which you’ve ever been in charge. Millions of public dollars are involved, not just to pay for the bricks and mortar, but to pay millions to county attorney Tom Gabelman and other expenses.
For a number of months and at every opportunity, you seem to have been blocking any oversight of the project. You don’t want the city involved and you don’t want a mediator. It took a bipartisan city ordinance and a lawsuit from former mayors David Mann and Bobbie Sterne to finally steer you towards the negotiating table. When asked to account for yourself, the only rationale I’ve heard from you (and from Commisioner Pat DeWine) is that you don’t want any further delays.
What puzzles me is this, Phil. With your history as a tax watchdog, why are you throwing caution to the wind with a project of this magnitude? So I’d like to provide you with a public forum to fully express your point of view. For your upcoming Beacon article, here are some suggested questions which you might be able to clarify.
1. Why do you want to push through a $600 million project without any oversight other than you, Pat DeWine, Tom Gabelman, and Ron Roberts? (I’m leaving out Commisioner Todd Portune because he’s made it clear that you and Commissioner DeWine have excluded him from discussions of the Banks deal. How come?)
2. Why did you recently return campaign contributions from four developers vying for the Banks project?
3. Why were you willing to select a developer on the basis of a Requests for Qualifications (RFQ) which is nothing more than a glorified resume without specific breakdowns of costs, subcontractors, and other essential details? All of this might lead to costly bailouts caused by poor upfront planning. (Wasn’t that the basis of your lawsuit against the Bengals, that a prior county government cut a bad deal which eventually caught up with the current commission?) By choosing a developer based on an RFQ, wouldn’t that neatly shift the burden for researching the project onto the public, who will have to vet these proposals using public money instead of getting fleshed out proposals from the developers and paid for by them?
Thanks for your consideration and I look forward to publishing your article!
Sincerely,
The Dean of Cincinnati
P.S. Reading your online CV, I happened to notice a five-year gap from 1979, when you graduated from law school, until 1984, when you became a Hamilton County assistant prosecutor. Can you please account for those years?
cc:
Tom Callinan, Cincinnati Enquirer
Robert White, Cincinnati Post
David Mann & Bobbie Stern (c/o Marc Mezibov)
• Share This Article!
Listen to this article
Help The Cincinnati Beacon Grow! Participate in Social Networking!
Members
Register
Tell us what you think!
Anonymous comments are allowed, but you can log in 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!
|