Airport Improvement Commentary

Last Monday’s Public Works Committee meeting to discuss the Master Plan for New Philadelphia’s airport was interesting for a number of reasons, the foremost being the number of citizens who attended.

A dozen or more citizens went to the Committee meeting to voice their opinions about the possibility of losing their homes and property if the airport runway were lengthened to accommodate larger corporate jet aircraft. Unfortunately, they did not get the opportunity to speak before the committee because of time restraints. I had the opportunity, however, to chat with a number of them after the meeting, and one, who will remain anonymous, expressed his concern, saying, “We were going to remodel the house, but with the possibility of it being taken from us, even if it is ten years down the road, well, we’re reconsidering it. We thought we would live there until we died, but if the city has plans to take it, what’s the sense?”

Mr. Lautenschleger met informally with some of the homeowners and tried to calm their fears, but with little success. He did promise to have another meeting to hear their ideas, but most left with unanswered questions.

Mayor Taylor’s remarks about the Master Plan were straightforward and appeared to be candid. His comment that there was no FAA requirement that City Council approve the Master Plan was unexpected but welcome. His request, as I understood it, was to get a decision from City Council on how to proceed and get the job done. The job in this case is a decision to either extend the runway or make improvements to bring it into FAA standards and maintain it as “a Mom and Pop airport.” He also stated that it was up to Council to make that decision, and in that I totally disagree.

By City Ordinance it is the responsibility of the Airport Commission to provide City Council with a comprehensive plan for the airport, something which has yet to take place. It is significant that the Airport Commission was represented by Mr. Ted Gentsch, a member of the Commission. Mr. Gentsch, who works for Lauren Manufacturing, is well informed, articulate, and committed to improving the current airport or developing a new airport which will serve the needs of Tuscarawas County. He has appeared before Council on numerous occasions to sell the airport concept to Council, and has frequently indicated that Lauren has a major interest in extending the runway to handle larger jet aircraft. The problem is that Mr. Gentsch is the only member of the Airport Commission that appears before the City Council with any regularity. It is evident that the President of the Airport Commission, Mr. Tom Frabizo, does not have the same commitment to the airport as does Mr. Gentsch, otherwise it would be he selling the airport’s needs, requirements, and dreams to the City. His absence before City Council in regard to airport concerns is disturbing.

A single comprehensive plan which should be brought to City Council which contains justification for the expense the Airport Commission and the Mayor are requesting. It should spell out in detail improvements to be made, the cost of such improvements, their justification, and the effect on city residents those improvements would have. The generalizations presented in the Master Plan fall short in justifying the seizing of private property and the expense associated with any proposed upgrade.

It is also time for the Airport Commission to face the facts of life for the times in which we live. There is no free money. What the government is going to invest in any project at the airport, the 95% share they may pay for the project, is not free. It comes from taxes the government takes away from business profits and individual wages. Justification for spending the millions to upgrade the airport should be based, not on availability of tax money, but on sound business principles.

What will the people of New Philadelphia get in return for this investment? What businesses will be drawn to New Philadelphia, as we have been told will come if a larger airport is constructed? What are the businesses which will leave New Philadelphia, as we have been told may happen, if a larger airport is not constructed? How long will it be before New Philadelphia realizes a return in its investment, and what will that return be? How is it more inconvenient to drive 35 minutes from New Philadelphia to Akron-Canton than it is for residents of East Cleveland to drive to Hopkins, or residents of Joliet, Illinois, to drive to O’Hare, or residents of Beverly Hills to drive to LAX? How many more corporations, other than Lauren, will house their aircraft at the New Philadelphia airport? What will be the benefit of extending the airport runway to the citizen who lives on Front Street, 4th Street, NW, Kaderly Street, NW, or Sherman Avenue? How will the tax base be affected?

When it comes to expansion in New Philadelphia, look at recent history. What is the residency rate at the Tech Park? Where is New Philadelphia’s return on its investment there?

Airport Master Plan Committee Meeting

Monday night the Public Works Committee met in Council Chambers at City Hall. The meeting, called by Chairman Lautenschleger, was to discuss two issues, the New Philadelphia Airport Master Plan, and the purchase of property owned by Mary Egli located to the southeast of the existing airport runway. An audience of approximately 12 citizens and others was present.

Mr. Lautenschleger explained that the proposed Airport Master Plan to update the New Philadelphia Airport has been discussed for a number of years and was being brought to the City Council for adoption by the City to serve as a guideline for future improvement of the existing airport.

The FAA requires a master plan for airport improvements and upgrades. There are a number of options in the Master Plan for upgrading the airport for larger aircraft. Mayor Taylor said he wants City Council to be fully updated on the Master Plan to aid them in making long range decisions concerning the airport’s future. He explained major airport projects are, if approved, reimbursed by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) at 95% of the cost, the City paying the remaining five percent. City Council has not adopted a Master Plan in the past, and, said the Mayor, it is not required that it does. He desires a consensus of opinion from all concerned, the community, private individuals, businesses, on what Harry Clever Field should look like down the road. “Do we want to develop it or keep it a Mom and Pop field,” he asked. “At some time the FAA is going to require a decision as to what we are going to do with the airport and that will probably happen in the next five years when the runway needs resurfacing.”

Loretta Snyder, representative from Michael Baker, Jr. Associates, the consultants for the airport, stated that Clever Field is part of the national airport system which extends throughout the entire country. Businesses utilize smaller airports frequently and that is why almost every county has an airport.

Councilwoman Cox asked why the plan had to be approved when the Mayor previously stated that it did not have to be approved. She also questioned the number of options in the Plan and the effect of approving all of them rather than a single one.

Mr. Ted Gentsch, of Lauren Manufacturing, and a member of the Airport Commission, answered, stating, “The FAA requires you to look at every conceivable way of configuring the runway and expanding it, and the costs of expanding it and the impact on the community…and that you have done due diligence in expanding it at the current site. So, every alternative is outlined in there…The best alternative is Number 4, the next best alternative is a green field site.” He suggested, ‘If the number of alternatives is to great (seven), you can approve the Plan using only Option 4.

Cox asked why the Plan should be adopted when it contains two Alternatives which are “not recommended” and two that are “not practical,” to which Gentsch replied, “It’s a plan.”

Lautenschleger stated that the Master Plan is an overview of every possible scenario and doesn’t mean what’s going to be adopted or moved forward.

Cox replied that plans had been proposed in 2001 and 2004 which were not adopted because of removing of people’s homes and the cemetery. Lautenschleger said that the Plan was part of larger thinking and moving ahead in the future, and “If we don’t want to adopt any of this, then there are [other] scenarios. One, we could have public hearings and put this out here and have people review it and use their input. That’s not a bad thing as they can see everything that’s on there and then they can go back and maybe work on it some more. If you decide that you don’t want any growth at the airport,…then we should get that out on the table so the Airport Commission can understand and then they [may] decide to let the airport go. That’s an extreme scenario.”

A discussion between Lautenschleger and Cox ensued concerning removal of houses. Lautenschleger insisted that home removals was never discussed. He went on to say that such statements were scare tactics generated by unsigned letters being sent to residents in areas around the airport. (Ed: The letters in question are copies of the of the recent blog on this site, see New Philadelphia Airport Renovation, which were copied and sent without our knowledge.)

The Mayor stated that the Airport Commission has “no legal authority to move forward and pick an option, it has to be City Council.” He went on to say that he wants to get all the people concerned involved and make a decision about the airport which will decide its future. Cox stated her concern that there isn’t enough property at the present airport for expansion of needed hangers and other such improvements and suggested that the alternative of building another airport would be the most logical move.

Mr. Don Kennedy, a local realtor, asked if the FAA, in a past meeting, would not commit to a new airport as the cost would be in the range of 20-million dollars, but would commit to a new runway because they felt the option of a new airport was not feasible,. Mr Gentsh replied the FAA did not commit to anything. “If you read the Master Plan through to the end”, he said, “you’ll find that if you go through all the options, they say in there something to the effect…that you should consider a green field site. A green field site or a new airport would be the option for this community which would create the least amount of problems in terms of relocation, obstacles such as Schoenbrunn Park, that sort of thing. Getting everybody politically on the same page would be required, a champion, as the mayor mentioned, before that step could be made, and there are some sites which would be quite suitable in Tuscarawas County.” Gentsch went on to say that the FAA did not rule out a new airport but, when it was explored in the recent past, the political acceptance, county and municipalities, was not forthcoming.

Mr. Lautenschleger requested the Service Director, Mr. Zucal, to arrange a meeting with all interested parties in the near future to obtain concerns and comments concerning the Master Plan. The meeting closed with no action being taken and the matter of the property purchase from Mary Egli not discussed.

How Does New Philadelphia Make Its Laws?

There is a procedure, covered by New Philadelphia City Ordinance, on how legislation can be brought to the floor of City Council for consideration. The steps are simple, but not always fully understood.

Anybody may request New Philadelphia City Council to consider the creation, change, amendment, or revocation, of an ordinance by a request to a member of City Council. This right applies to any citizen of the city, and in some cases non-residents. The request may be made through any seated City Councilman, or through the President of City Council. This includes public officials such as the Mayor, Service Director, Police and Fire Chiefs, or any person who who works for the city.

Once the request is made to City Council, the request must be placed in a Council Committee for study. Standing Committees of the Council consist of three members plus an alternate, for a total of four. The alternate member fills in for an absent committeeman, should that be necessary, to assure three members are present at each meeting, assuring a quorum will be present. The Committee considers the question, or request, and by majority vote, two out of the three, decides whether or not to place the question before the full council. If the vote is to place the question before Council, the City Law Director is requested to prepare a numbered ordinance, all ordinances and resolutions are individually numbered for identification, to be presented by the recommendation of the Committee to the full Council at its next regular meeting. If the Committee desires, on the other hand, not to present the question to the full Council it may choose from a number of options. It may: vote to decline presenting the question to Council; it may table the question for further study at a later date; it may table the question indefinitely, which effectively blocks the question from ever being brought up again; or it may do nothing, neither send the question to the floor nor consider it further in Committee, which stops any further action on the question. In the latter cases, the Committee actions prevent any consideration by the full Council on the question.

How does legislation get to a Committee? If the request for action is received by the President of Council, who assigns the request to one of the Standing Committees. It, then has the responsibility of deciding what, if any, legislation is needed. If the request is presented to a sitting member of Council, that member has two choices. He may either refer the question to the President of Council, or he may take the question into his own committee for study and have his committee make the decision as to the advisability of bringing the question to the full Council.

A note of interest. Any Committee Chairman has the ability to bring before his Committee any legislation proposal he desires for his Committee to consider. Unfortunately, this is not frequently done. The Council President, on the other hand, has the ability to assign any legislative request to any of the Standing Committees, regardless of the Committee or the subject matter. For instance, a matter concerning City finances could be assigned to the Parks and Cemetery Committee instead of the Finance Committee should the Council President desire.

Once the legislation gets to the floor of City Council, it must, by law, be publicly read three times on the Council Floor, at three separate Council meetings. The exception to this are emergency measures which, by a minimal vote of six Council Members to wave the standing procedural rules of the Council, will allow Council to pass legislation with less than the three required readings.

Once passed, the question becomes law and is entered onto the permanent file of Codified Ordinances by the Clerk of Council.

Standing Committees, their Chairmen and members, may be found by checking http://www.newphilaoh.com/,the City of New Philadelphia Website at or by calling your City Councilman, The President of City Council, or the Mayor whose numbers are listed in the blog on this site titled "City Officials Phone Numbers."

New Philadelphia Airport Renovation

Welcome to the new year and along with it the first of a new spending spree. The Chairman of the Public Works Committee of the New Philadelphia City Council has called a committee meeting for Monday, January 25, at 6:30 p.m. This meeting, according to the announcement made to the media, will discuss two items, the proposed Master Plan for the New Philadelphia Municipal Airport, and the purchase of some acreage south-east of the existing runway, some ten acres currently owned by the Estate of Mary Egli. Neither of these items are new before City Council. They seem to come back with disturbing frequency.

New Philadelphia Municipal Airport, Harry Clever Field, is a general aviation airport designed to handle small private aircraft. Most of its traffic is the type of aircraft which are family owned and used for recreation such as Cessnas and Pipers. It also is a base for MedFlight helicopters, the folks who airlift critical patients to Akron and Cleveland hospitals. There are a couple of companies who use the airport for their corporate aircraft which include some jets and turboprops. It is well equipped for performing periodic maintenance checks and repairs on aircraft, sells fuel, and rents hanger space. Some people are concerned that larger corporate type aircraft, the larger jets which fly nationally and internationally, have difficulty using the airport due to the runway length, which is 3,950 feet. Users of corporate jets, such as Lauren Manufacturing, are interested in the city extending the runway to an excess of 5,000 feet to accommodate their jet aircraft, and possibly, a new, larger jet for international travel. In a perfect world, this would be a great idea. Unfortunately, this is not a perfect world.

The Master Plan for the Airport, first conceived by Zande Associates of Columbus, Ohio, and recently redone by R. J. Baker, Jr. of Cleveland, Ohio, lists seven alternative plans for improvement of the airport. They all contain similarities which will directly impact citizens of New Philadelphia.

Alternative One: Increase the existing approach areas to provide access by larger aircraft to the airport by taking homes and property by eminent domain including part of the East Avenue Cemetery and relocation of some roads.

Alternative Two: Extend the northeast end of the runway by taking eight houses by eminent domain and the purchase of approximately two acres of property, and acquire property from Schoenbrunn Village.

Alternative Three: The runway to be extended to the northwest but is not recommended as part of the cemetery and many houses are to be taken.

Alternative Four: Extend the runway to 4,500 feet and relocate the southwest end to a more westerly direction which would include taking houses and property by eminent domain as well as acquiring land from Schoenbrunn Village and changing the road into the Village.

Alternative Five: Extend the runway to 4,500 feet, reorient the runway through the center of East Avenue Cemetery, relocate the railroad tracks. This was not recommended as it would require taking several homes by eminent domain and the cost is considered excessive.

Alternative Six: Extend the runway 5,000 feet to the southeast, requiring more seizures by eminent domain, seizure of part of the East Avenue Cemetery, closure of Delaware Avenue and excessive costs due to needed land fill. This was not recommended because of the high cost.

Alternative Seven: Reduce the classification of the airport to bring it into compliance as a small general airport. This was not considered as practicable as it would preclude the use of the Lauren Learjet.

Alternative Eight: Develop a new airport. No recommendation made by the planners.

All the recommendations, including those not recommended by Baker, include a common thread. Take private property by eminent domain, close existing roads, destroy the East Avenue Cemetery, and spend untold dollars over the next 20 years.

Capital improvements at the current airport, which contains two phases, one for zero to ten years, the second 11 to 20 years, was originally calculated to be $8,485,000 in 2006. That figure because of inflation, jumped to $9,330,000 in 2009, an increase of better than six percent in two years. With the present economic crisis and the uncertainty of its future, it is impossible to predict what the cost of the project will be when, and if, completed.

A presentation was made to City Council by Mr. Ted Gentsch in the fall of 2009, in which he explained the Airport Master Plan. He mentioned often the problems that Lauren experienced with the current airport facility and how its limitations precluded the purchase of a larger company jet aircraft. He also stated that his preference would be a new airport located in Tuscarawas County which would accommodate larger aircraft.

On Monday the Airport Master Plan is going to be discussed in Mr. Lautensleger's Public Works Committee. The Committee will decide whether or not to recommend acceptance by City Council of the Master Plan. Administration officials, and some councilmen, have made the comment that passage of this Plan really doesn't lock the City into its implementation, that passage will merely agree on the principle of further exploration of the Plan's recommendations. Nothing could be further from the truth. Should this Plan be passed by City Council, it becomes the law of the city, one which must be implemented regardless of the impact on the city. Make no mistake about it, once passed a City Ordinance is the law.

Acceptance of the Airport Master Plan as it currently stands will take homes and property by force of law if necessary. The East Avenue Cemetery will be desecrated. Delaware Avenue will be closed. Runway extensions will involve agreements with Schoenbrunn Village, which is State of Ohio property, land which the City will never own. It is not generally known, but 500 feet of the existing runway are on state property, not owned by the City of New Philadelphia. The City will be committed to pay 20 percent of the cost of construction regardless of the alternative chosen. And once committed, the city will be required to pay the bill. And the rest of it? It isn't free money as is so often portrayed. It comes from taxes everybody pays. And it comes from a government which will expect something for its investment, and that something is, today, unknown.

The second item to be discussed by the Public Works Committee is the purchase of ten acres of property southeast of the airport runway. This property, owned by Mary Egli, has long been coveted by the mayors of New Philadelphia. In 2001 the acreage was appraised at $89,910. City Council turned the purchase down then, and on two occasions since, refused to bring it to the full Council. The Mayor requested Mr. Lautensleger's committee to consider purchasing it this year, but at a price of $190,000, an increase of 211 percent. All sorts of reasons are given for the city to purchase the property, the one most frequently passed around is to extend the runway at the airport. You have to be aware that should that property be purchased without it being included in the Airport Master Plan expenditures, the city will have to pay the full amount. The FAA won't put a penny into it otherwise, and once purchased it's the city's. The Mayor says if it doesn't work for the airport, the City can always turn it into a cemetery. So if we buy it now, and the deal with Schoenbrunn Village falls through, then we have ten acres of over-priced farmland.

This whole thing is fraught with disaster. Bets are being made in an economy which is in deep trouble. It comes back to the old question of how are we going to pay for all this? How long will it take for a new airport, or for 10 acres of property New Philadelphia really doesn't really need, to pay back the cost the City is being asked to put up to finance these unneeded purchases? How will these purchases effect the City's cash flow?

If you have questions about this, contact the Mayor, City Auditor, Council members, City Council Representatives to the Airport Commission are Ms. Colleen Espenschied, Mr. Jim Locker, and Mr. John Zucal , all of whose phone numbers are listed on this blog site under City Officials Phone Numbers. and in this case the Airport Commission President, Mr. Tom Farbizo, Office 330-364-0662 or Home 330-343-1260.

Remember, what the government gives away, it must first take away.

Gun Fight at the OK Corral

Back a few years ago, about 16, when I was writing for the Pharos-Tribune, I ran into a fellow named Ben Traywick in Tombstone, Arizona. I was looking for something to send in with some local color about the Southwest, and for that sort of information, what better place than the local newspaper, in this case, the Tombstone Epitath. The editor there told me to look up Ben and pointed to a building across the street. "That's where Ben lives," he said. "If he answers the door he probably won't talk to you, and if he talks to you, he probably won't let you in." He was wrong all the way around.

Ben was the official town historian then. He has written many books about Tombstone and talking to him was literally a step into the past. We became friends and talked frequently after that. The thing he always wanted to do was set the record straight about his town. So for Ben, here is the truth about the gunfight at the OK Corral.

TOMBSTONE, ARIZ - "I was in a Brisbane pub in '43 and the bartender asked me where I was from," said Ben Traywick. "I said Tennessee, and he asked if that was close to Tombstone."
Traywick, 65, Tombstone town historian, leaned back in his chair. "This is the most famous town in the world," he said, "and it's because of three things. The O-K Corral, the name Tombstone, and the Earps. Right down the street from the O-K Corral was the FW Smith Corral. The town's original name was Goose Flats. If I asked if you heard about the gun fight that took place between the Jones brothers and the cowboys at the FW Smith Corral in Goose Flats, you probably wouldn't care. But the Earps and the O-K Corral, that's something different."
For the last 25 years, Traywick has been researching the history of Tombstone and the gunfight. He has published 40 books and hundreds of articles about the town and gun fight.
"The fight only lasted 30 seconds," he said. "I don't think anybody wanted it. It was a confrontation that got out of control."
There had been problems between the Earps and the cowboys, including the Clantons, and Sheriff Johnny Behan, who was known to be involved with rustling and highway robbery. On the day of the fight, Ike Clanton was arrested by Marshal Virgil Earp, for carrying firearms in town. He resisted and Virgil subdued him with a pistol barrel slap to the head. He was fined and released. Shortly after, Tom McLaury threaten Wyatt Earp. Wyatt pistol-whipped McLaury and left him laying in the street.
Virgil and Wyatt decided to run the Clanton cowboys out of town. They planed to pistol whip them to embarrass them to the point that they would leave town and not return.
"In order to do that," said Traywick, "they had to get close, within six feet of them. With a seven-inch barrel pistol, it only took a step more to get near enough to crack 'em on the head. It was too damn close for a gunfight. So, along with Morgan Earp and Doc Holliday, who took a shotgun, they went looking for the Clantons. Holliday and Morgan were hot tempered, and had had enough. They wanted to settle it with the Clantons.

"The Earps and Holiday met the Clantons and Tom McLaury in an alley, only 15 feet wide, around the corner from the O-K Corral. There were nine men and two horses in that alley. When he got close, Holiday jabbed Tom McLaury with the shotgun and said we're going to kill you guys. They believed him and went for their guns, because they felt they had no other choice. It got out of hand.
"Wyatt and Virgil were shattered when this happened. Virgil shouted, 'You men are under arrest, throw up your hands,' and he said this with a cane in his hand. He had to throw the cane down and then reach for his gun. Wyatt had his gun in his coat, because Sheriff Behan said he had disarmed the cowboys, which he hadn't. The fight had already started before Wyatt could get his gun out. Ike Clanton didn't even have a gun."
When it was over, 28 shots had been fired. Two of the Clanton cowboys were dead. Virgil and Morgan seriously wounded, and Holliday had bullet burns on his buttocks.
"Nobody was ready for a fight," said Traywick. "It was just a confrontation that got out of hand."

City Officials Phone Numbers

New Philadelphians. Want to reach your city officials? Here are the phone numbers, just in case you want to call.

A question about City Council. How many people on City Council represent you? If you said four, you are correct. Your Ward Councilman and all three Councilmen At Large represent you on Council. If you have concerns, comments, you name it, call all four and make your feelings known. When it comes to a vote, four votes make a majority. Don't make the mistake of believing that you are only represented by your Ward Councilman. On issues with which you have concerns or comments, call all four.

City Council

Joel Day, Council President
Home: 330-343-8782 - Work: 330-364-8273

Sandy Cox, Councilwoman At Large
Home: 330-364-6469

Jim Locker, Councilman At Large
Home: 330-339-1750

Winnie Walker, Councilwoman At Large
Home: 330-339-6910

Colleen Espenschied, Ward I Councilwoman
Home: 330-364-5612 - Work: 330-454-9400

John Zucal, Ward II Councilman
Home: 330-364-5102 - Work: 330-964-0700

Darrin Lautenschleger, Ward III Councilman
Home: 330-364-2317 - Work: 330-343-6647

Rob Maurer, Ward IV Councilman
Home: 330-339-7028 - Work: 330-364-8874


City Administration

Michael Taylor, Mayor
Home: 330-343-3000 - Work: 330-364-4491, Ext 242

City Income Tax Administrator, Dixie Dyer
Work: 330-364-4491, Ext 230

Law Director, Michael Johnson
Work: 330-364-5593

Safety Director, Greg Popham
Work: 330-364-4491, Ext 244

Service Director, James Zucal
Work: 330-364-4491, Ext 240

Street Department, Fred Neff
Work: 330-339-2121, Ext 255

Water Department Supervisor, Kelly Ricklic
Work: 330-339-2332


Future articles on this blog will bring you information on how the City Council works, its rules, procedures, and perhaps, its biases. To find out what's going on, check the blog. If you have questions or comments about the city, let us know and we'll do our best to come up with an answer.

Real Chili For A Cold Night

A number of years ago we were in Casa Grande, Arizona, when the locals were having the annual chili cook-off. Learned a lot about chili that week. For one thing, there are as many different kinds of chili as there are cooks. But real down-home Texas chili "don't have no beans." That's chili con carne. By definition, chili is meat in a red sauce, and they mean it. The meat, by the way, is cubed not ground. Spices, vegetables, everything but the meat, is put in porous bags and suspended in the sauce to prevent anything from getting into the sauce. One parsley sprig in the finished meat sauce and you're disqualified. We tasted chili for a whole day and came away with a couple recipes, a favorite reprinted below. The porous bag is going a little too far for me. I'm not in a competitive mood, so I don't use it. And beans are definitely out. Oh, one other thing. When it comes to hot spices which really burn the mouth and tongue, like jalapenos and such, the best cure to stop the burn is milk. It quickly neutralizes the acids and lets you get back to the hot stuff again without waiting. Be aware that you drink it, you don't put it in the chili.

The traditional way is to eat chili is straight with tortillas, tacos, bread, or crackers. The wife likes to put it over macaroni. Some put it on spaghetti. I guess if you come from the Far East you could put it over rice but I've never seen that in a Chinese restaurant. I don't know what the Amish put it on. But no beans. The instructions say to make it ahead and store it in the refrigerator over night so the flavors will all blend in. It is good right away, so it's your choice. Left-overs are great for breakfast. Oh, one other thing, don't use expensive meat. Leaner is better. It's chili for Pete's sake.


CHILI NO BEANS

1 pound lean beef, cut into 1/4 inch cubes
1 chopped onion
2 chopped garlic cloves
8 ounces tomato sauce
16 ounces diced tomatoes, undrained
2 teaspoons salt
1/2 teaspoon ground pepper
1/2 teaspoon Tabasco sauce
1/4 teaspoon dried red pepper

Sauté beef in a skillet until just about brown. Pour off grease and reserve. Put meat into large sauce pan. Combine onions and garlic in the skillet and sauté until onions are clear. May add some of the reserved fat, if necessary. Add onion and garlic mixture to meat. Add all other ingredients to meat mixture and stir until well mixed. Cook, covered, on medium to low heat for 2 hours, stirring occasionally. When cool, refrigerate over night. Heat to serve.
Serves 4.

Let's Sue Somebody

If you haven't seen the front page article of the Times Reporter for January 6, 2010, you might want to take a look. It concerns a lady who was robbed at the Giant Eagle in Dover in 2008. According to the T-R she was approaching Giant Eagle's entrance when a man grabbed her purse and took off. The lady held onto the purse and was dragged by the thief along the sidewalk until the strap broke. She was also struck, according to the article. She yelled for help but there was nobody there to render assistance. The police caught the thief, who is currently doing a four year term for robbery. Case closed? Evidently not. According to the T-R, the lady is suing Giant Eagle, and the property owners, because there wasn't a security guard on duty outside the store, nor was there a window in the front of the building through which the folks at the customer service desk could have seen the attack.

I regret what happened to the lady. Things like this are never pleasant, and it is with regret that I admit that such attacks are all too frequent and on the increase. But I have a question as to responsibility. How does the blame fall on Giant Eagle and the property owner? The blame falls on the thief. If someone should be mugged in front of your house, should it be your responsibility because you didn't have a security guard on the porch?

What has me upset about this whole thing is that we seem to be living in a society in which individuals no longer accept any personal responsibility for themselves. Most folks seem to want somebody else pay for their misfortune, no matter what the cause. Granted this lady was a victim, but it wasn't Giant Eagle's fault. It was the fault of the thief. Sue him.

This case recalls other memorable law suits.

A patron stopped into a McDonald's, bought a cup of coffee, got into the car, put the coffee between his, or it could have been her, legs, started up, spilled the coffee, resulting in burns from the hot coffee on his legs. The end result was a lawsuit. which McDonald's lost and was ordered to pay a large amount for medical expenses, pain and suffering. The reason? The cup was not labeled wait a warning that the contents were hot. Come on. I thought it was stupid then, and I think it is stupid now. It's coffee. It's supposed to be hot. If you buy a cup of hot coffee and don't understand what hot is, it's you who has the problem, not McDonald's. Would the customer have complained and demanded money back or a replacement cup had it been cold? Probably.

A farmer went to work on his barn. It was a cold day, started out below freezing. He set a ladder up on the side of the barn and climbed onto the roof. Came time for lunch, he got on the ladder to go back to the house and disaster struck. He had placed the ladder atop a large frozen manure pile. As the morning wore on, the temperature rose, and combined with the natural activity of such a pile, the pile melted. Since the manure pile was no longer a stable base, it promptly tipped to the side, causing it, and the farmer, to fall to the ground. The farmer sued the ladder company for damages and, surprisingly, won a settlement. The reason? The warning label on the ladder did not mention the danger of using the ladder on a manure pile.

At Yellowstone National Park a number of years ago, a man and his wife were taking pictures of the buffalo. He decided that the picture would be better if the buffalo was facing another direction. He started pushing the buffalo on the rear end to get him turned around. The buffalo didn't like it and gave him a kick that would have made a NFL punter blush with shame. The end result was that the Park Service was sued for damages. Now there wasn't any way that the Park Service could have been responsible for that one. Whose responsibility was was it? The idiot who was molesting the buffalo. But he sued anyhow. I don't know how that one turned out.

Where does blaming others for our problems end? When I was a youngster and tripped over a crack in the sidewalk, my dad would tell me to pick up my feet. Today the first thought seems to be a lawsuit.

You have to wonder if the problem comes from the contingency fee system used by lawyers in the United States. The way it works, the client pays the lawyer nothing unless he wins a settlement. The lawyer then gets, as a minimum, twenty-five to thirty-three percent of that settlement. The client jumps on it because he has no expense. If he loses, it costs him nothing. If he wins, he gets paid off. The lawyer likes it because, while he doesn't win them all, the cases he does win are lucrative. Which, incidently, explains the flood of mail from law firms wanting to represent you if you were in an accident.

To me, the only consistent winners are the lawyers. Maybe it is time to go to legal system in which set fees are charged in all cases. What would the case load be in the courts if plaintiffs knew that win, lose, or draw, they would be paying the full bill?

More Wage Increases Coming

Happy New Year. A couple of days late, but the thought of a new start for the city, both on the governmental side and citizen's side, lends itself to visions of new approaches to old problems. In this case, my concern is for the unfinished business of last year, namely contracts for city employees.

We are all aware of the two contracts which were made late last year, the Police and Fire Departments, which will increase city salary expenses by 16 percent in the next three years, but there are two more yet to come.

Contract negotiations will soon be underway with the AFSCME, American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees. These are the folks who do the work in the city, and, incidentally, do it well. I'm talking about the street department, the clerical staffs, maintenance folks, tree trimmers, sanitation department, the ones who make the city work. There is one clinker here, there always is, in that the folks that work for the Water and Sewer Departments, are paid out of the income from your water and sewer monthly bills. And with that in mind, you know what's coming with water and sewer rates.

Maybe with the start of a new decade, the administration will take a second look at the way these contracts are negotiated. The Police and Fire contracts were negotiated through what is called Interest Based Bargaining. The idea is great. Both sides, the city and the union, get together and put their cards on the table. The union presents its position, including salary, benefits, staffing needs, that sort of thing. Then the city presents it side, financial considerations, plans for future improvements, the ability of budgets to finance the operations of the city, changes in staffing, in short an explanation of what the city can afford. In theory, it is a way that both sides can present their agendas in a way that a compromise can be made so that both sides, by understanding the others position, can work out a financial plan that will benefit all three parties. Whoa. All three parties? Absolutely. The third party is the taxpayer, you know, the one who has to pay the bill.

Well, they tried Interest Based Bargaining for the first time this year. The end result were wage expense increases for the Police and Fire Departments of 16 percent in the next three years. The problem boiled down to gross inexperience in negotiations on the part of the administration. The unions were evidently better prepared and advised than the administration as the end results proved. The negotiations were carried out in secret. City Council was not kept abreast of what was being discussed until the deal was struck. By the time council got involved, it was too late to amend the agreements, and wage cost increases of 16 percent over the next three years became a fact.

More contracts are in the offing for the AFSCME members. The question is are the same mistakes made last year going to be repeated? Is inexperience again going to be pitted against professional union lawyers, and make no mistake about it, union lawyers were intimately involved in advising the union negotiators, or will the city hire lawyers who have the expertise in dealing with union lawyers and contacts? It is important that the city hire the best lawyer negotiators to represent them or these next contract talks will end as disastrously as the previous two. The city desperately needs competent representation in the upcoming contract talks. We cannot again afford representation in any labor negotiation which does not understand the total implications of what is being discussed. A representative who is unaware of the financial status of the city, one which does not make persuasive arguments supporting the city's position, one who does not understand labor law, should have no part in negotiations which are binding on the city.

The representation the city had in the last two negotiation periods, this latest and the 2007 contracts, was far from adequate. The cost of employing knowledgeable people in dealing with the unions will be far outweighed by the savings the city could enjoy. New Philadelphia can no longer afford the inability of representatives who are ineffective in its representation of New Philadelphia. If the Administration does not change its attitude, how long will it be until the city goes into receivership?

As citizens we should be outraged. But, apparently we're not. And that's the sad part. Our city is on the verge of financial collapse and the public doesn't care enough to attend council meetings. When taxes are involved, few if any, attend the hearings. When water, sewer, and sanitation price increases come up, as they will in the coming months, public comment to council and the administration will probably be none. Why don't you care? It is your city. It is your money. If you aren't working, have had your wages cut, had expenses increase, the government at any level doesn't care. They still are going to raise taxes. Citizens, you must get involved.

Thanks for the patience

Dear Reader,

Sorry that the posts have been on the non-existent side for the past week or so. Unfortunately, on the way back from spending Christmas with our daughter in western Nebraska, we went into a spin just east of Ashland, Ohio, and ended up in an automobile crash. My wife got pretty well broken up, the car was totalled, and now ten days later, we're back in New Philadelphia, she at a rehab center, me at home. Thus the lack of posts. I hope you will bear with us for a couple of more days or so until things get settled down, then we'll be back to look into more amazing doings in New Philadelphia.

Thank you for your consideration.

Bob C

Merry Christmas

A quick post to wish you all, and I mean all regardless of political orientation, a merry Christmas. I can't speak for anyone but myself, but this time of year is very dear to me. I've been around for a long time and one thing I know for sure is that without Jesus Christ I would not have the peace, hope, and salvation I enjoy. They say there are no atheists in fox holes, and I have found that to be true. Without my faith in God I doubt that I could have enjoyed the peace of mind which has sustained me all these years. Christmas is the remembrance of Jesus's birth, and combined with the resurrection, gives me the courage to carry on and cope with the daily pitfalls of life. I know I am protected always, and when death finally comes, as it inevitably will, know that I will be accepted into the presence of God. It sure beats the other alternative. I'm proud to be a Christian, proud to be an American, and make no apologies for either.

So, Merry Christmas and God bless you all.

Bob Conner

Police and fire contracts. again

What is it that some folks just don't understand? If you don't plan for the future, there is no way you are going to be able to survive in it. The attitude that we have the money now is certainly no guarantee that we will have any in the future. The Times-Reporter editorial this Sunday is beyond comprehension. If you haven't had the opportunity to read it, log on to http://www.timesreporter.com/, check out opinions for the article, "Police, fire raises were justified." It is obvious this opinion is based on a lack of understanding of basic financial principles, lack of concern for the welfare of the city, and not even a rudimentary understanding of political reality.

A city, or state, or nation for that matter, is no different than a household. There is a certain amount of money that goes into the household, income, and a certain amount that goes out, expenses. There are certain things that must be paid out of the income every month, rent, food, heat. Keeping track of what goes in and what goes out is called cash flow. With a positive cash flow, money is left over at the end of the month or year, which ever applies. If more money goes out than comes in, that's negative cash flow, and you're on the slide to losing your home, your car, what ever you own. To prevent this, you put money aside to save for that rainy day. That's called planning ahead. The City does have some carryover money this year because of council's past planning for this year's decreasing revenues from the city income tax and other income sources.

It would be wonderful if your boss would give you more money every year because you were a good guy. I'm talking about businesses who have to make a profit to stay in business, where if you expect to get a pay raise, you have to produce more. If you don't produce more, from where is company income to come from to give the pay raise? There is one answer. Raise prices. The consumer then has the choice to to pay the higher price, go elsewhere, or just don't buy at the higher price. The manufacturer makes his choice based on what he thinks will help his cash flow and profits. If he guesses wrong, sales fall off, profits fall, cash flow goes negative, the business fails, jobs are lost.

But, that only applies in business. Government is just the opposite. Government produces nothing. As it produces nothing, its revenue comes from taxes, The sole source of government funds, all government funds, at all levels, come from taxes. What about government bonds, you might ask? How do they get paid off? From money brought in from taxes. There is no other source. And government, at whatever level, seldom, if ever, sustains a positive cash flow.


The wage increase received by the fire and police departments was not given for increased production nor for an increase in work load. Nothing changed. Matter of fact, when asked what the wage increase for the fire department was going to provide the city, the Fire Chief's answer was, "Continued fire protection." For a combined wage increase of 16% in those two departments alone, what changes? Nothing. More money, but no changes. No increase in protection from either department.


Understand one thing, and understand this well. I do not fault any city department for trying for more money under the current administration of New Philadelphia. In this bargaining period, it is fortunate that the taxpayers didn't take a bigger hosing than they got. We don't know what the other two city bargaining units are going to get, there has been no communication between the Mayor and City Council, but that bill will be coming. A look at the bargaining talents of both sides explains a lot. Both the fire and police departments were represented, and advised, by professional union lawyers and/or advisers, who have spent years doing only one thing, representing their members against inept advisers for the city. The administration representatives have very little, if any, experience in labor negotiations. An outside negotiator was hired by the city whose qualifications are as a human resources individual. What was needed was an attorney schooled in labor contract confrontations who understands labor law and we didn't get one. Is it any wonder that the negotiations ended up as they did?


The editorial blames the current situation on council. The fact of the matter is that City Council was not advised about the state of contract negotiations but was presented with a finished contract in both cases without sufficient time to study either. Communication between the Mayor and City Council was nonexistent during the negotiations, an inexcusable fault on the part of the Administration. When presented to Council at the eleventh hour, suggestions for changes were from Council were evidently ignored and not explored.


In the matter of the fire contract, inadequate representation by the Administration during fact finding resulted in pay increases for the fire department from the fact finder. In the case of the Council vote on the police contract, the absence of Councilman at Large Jim Locker and the single vote against refusal to accept the contract by Councilman Rob Maurer precluded even taking the contract before the fact finder.


The editorial comments in "Police, fire raises were justified" were off the mark due to its ignorance of the facts. But then, that's what editorials are for, whether they are based on facts or not.


For further information about the Police and Firemen contracts, see past articles on this blog.

Gun Restriction Makes No Sense

Last Monday, October 14, New Philadelphia City Council passed Ordinance No. 31-2009 which repealed Section 549.12 of the city's Codified Ordinances. That Section basically prohibited the carrying of guns in City owned buildings.

The repeal of that ordinance makes sense. The Ohio Revised Code lists places where weapons are not permitted. If you are interested you can look those up in Ohio Revised Code 2923.126. Secondly, the carrying of concealed weapons significantly lowers crime rates.

While repeal of 31-2009 was being considered, there were a number of comments made to the media about the terrible carnage which was surely to follow. A number of folks said they were not going to go to New Philadelphia's parks anymore as they fear for the safety of their families. It is difficult to understand their concern in light of the facts. The evidence is overwhelming that legally carrying a concealed weapon decreases crime.

The facts speak for themselves. Those cities with the most numerous, and strictest, gun controls are the ones with the highest crime rates, including murder. Two years ago, Chicago had a crime rate of 1,179 per hundred thousand population, which included 443 murders. At the same time, New York City had a crime rate of 614 cases per hundred thousand, about half that of Chicago, but still experienced 496 murders. Both these cities have extremely stringent and restrictive gun laws. Gun laws just don't work. Criminals don't obey the law, so where is the surprise that criminals carry, and use, weapons against unarmed citizens?

Economist John R. Lott, author of More Guns, Less Crime (Chicago University Press), said, “Letting law-abiding citizens carry guns reduces the rate at which criminals are carrying guns.” He went on to say that armed citizens increase the risk to armed criminals, who typically prefer to avoid life-threatening risk and so are less likely to use guns in the commission of a crime. Lott explained that where there is an increase in CCPs (Concealed Carry Permits), there is also a drop in violent crime relative to property crime -- fewer armed robberies and more larcenies. Also, criminals tend to move from areas in which more citizens are armed, resulting in an increase in crime in counties and states that restrict gun ownership and CCPs.

New Philadelphia Police Chief Jeff Urban, who originally requested the ordinance repeal, feels strongly about the issue of citizens and weapon possession. He is a strong advocate of the Second Amendment of the Constitution which guarantees the right for a citizen to possess, carry, and use a weapon for his protection. He points out that the Ohio Constitution guarantees that right as well. It is legal in Ohio to carry a firearm in the open, or concealed with the proper Concealed Carry Permit, anywhere in the state except where restricted by law, such as in court houses, police stations, prisons, and the like.

On this, Chief Urban and I agree. The right to carry a weapon, the ability to carry it concealed with a proper Concealed Carry Permit, and the right to defend one's self by its use, is a right which should be honored and protected.

I came across an excellent article about depressions, you may had heard the term recently, and thought it was worth while to mention it on the blog. I tried to get permission to reprint it but was unsuccessful in contacting the apparent copyright holder. Not wanting to create problems, I decided to do the next best thing and make the address for the article available. Well, here it is. I think you’ll find it interesting.

http://www.fff.org/freedom/fd0903e.asp

We Gotta Do Better Than This

Monday's New Philadelphia City Council meeting could be a classic case of "I don't know." Had you been there, you would have seen a display of irresponsibility which, quite possibly, will push the city budget into the red for years to come.

Two of the four contracts for city workers have been completed, the second, for the Firefighters Union, accepted by default last night. In a procedural maneuver, in which Councilman Rob Maurer blocked a possible reexamination of the fireman's contract, the city was committed to increases in wages and benefits that the city may find difficulty in paying.

With two contracts, fire and police, now in effect the first of the year, the financial question of how we are going to pay for them still hasn't been answered. In the Finance Committee meeting, which preceded the regular council meeting, the inability of the administration to answer basic financial questions by council members, showed a lack of preparation, planning, and understanding of city finances.

Money, as usual, was the focus of the questions. When the Mayor was asked what the cost of the new contract was going to be, he was unsure. When the City Auditor was asked the same question, she didn't know, replying that there were too many variables. When the Safety Director was asked what the projection was for over-time costs in the next year, he replied he didn't know because it "changed every day." When Mr. Seyer, the city's representative during the Fact Finding session, was asked about financial considerations, his answers were evasive. When all was said and done, the city, and its residents, were saddled with another contract which will increase city salaries above the ability of the city to pay.

For those members of the administration who couldn't find the budget figures, a question. How, without knowing the costs, could you enter into contracts which will increase the cost of city salaries in the immediate future? And how, Mr. Mayor, do you plan to pay for it. Ah, yes. I remember. During the Mayoral debate at Kent University two years ago, the then Candidate Taylor told us he would raise taxes to pay for such matters.

Well, just so you know what Mayor Taylor, Auditor Gundy, and the city's negotiator Mr. Sayer, couldn't find, didn't ask about, or knew and didn't make a case for with the Fact Finder, here are some of those figures.

Receipts into the City's General Fund, that's the fund with which we operate the city on a daily basis, have been decreasing over the last nine years. Comparing this November's income to 2008, there was a seven percent decrease in General Fund income, a loss of $362,270.

Income Tax receipts for November were down $89,000, which puts the income tax loss for the year at $451,000 when compared to 2008.

The Safety Forces Fund is down $133,831 comparing this November's figure to November 2008, and $219,221 below November of 2007.

Then there is the money from investments we have made as a city, mostly in bank deposits, and you know what the economy has done to interest rates. For the city it meant a $148,000 loss to the city's income in November alone when compared to a year ago.

We are in a deepening depression. City funds and income are decreasing. But according to the Fact Finder, New Philadelphia is in good financial condition and can afford pay raises to city employees. If you read his report, his findings are based on 2008 financial figures. Does this mean the Mayor and Mr. Seyer did not have the figures from 2009 available? Or if they had them available they didn't present them to the Fact Finder? Or does it mean that sending an inexperienced team to deal with the professional negotiator from the Firemen's Union was poor judgement for which we are going to pay dearly?

The negotiations of both the police and fire contracts were poorly handled. The contracts are unreasonable, both in salaries and benefits. It is time to get professional negotiators who have the legal expertise and experience in dealing with professional Union negotiators to represent the city in union negotiations. It is time the City Auditor provides accurate financial information to City Council instead of "I don't know" and "I didn't figure that." It is time that the Mayor honors his pre-election promise to better communicate with City Council. It is time that City Council fulfills its obligation to provide full representation of its citizens by looking into issues before voting on legislation. And it is time the citizens become involved in their city and watch, question, and confront both the Administration and City Council.

The Economy Is Really Getting Better?

Well, the White House, translated Obama, says we're getting out of the depression and back to work again. Sounds great. My concern is that according to Sunday's paper, the Tuscarawas County Common Pleas Court reports an almost double increase in credit card collection filings over last year. The Clerk of Courts, Rockne Clarke, is quoted as saying that in 2008 filings were only 301 for the entire year, but through last Friday they were up to 592. It really doesn't matter how you try to explain it away, the fact is that folks just can't pay their bills. To read the whole story check http://www.timesreporter.com/ for the article "Credit card cases soar."

Last Friday, Paul Volcker, the former Chairman of the Federal Reserve and advisor to Obama, didn't seem as optimistic as the President. Matter of fact, while in Berlin he commented that, “We have another economic problem which is mixed up in this of too much consumption, too much spending relative to our capacity to invest and to export. It’s involved with the financial crisis but in a way it’s more difficult than the financial crisis because it reflects the basic structure of the economy.”

Basically this translates to we are spending more money as a nation that we can afford. There are lots of figures churned out to deny that we're going broke as a nation, but the economic fact is that we are over our head in debt. If you are worried about owing your bookie twenty dollars because of this weekend's football game, consider this. The public debt, as of this writing, stands at $7,722,301,552,000 plus. That first figure behind the dollar sign is trillions of dollars. Seems like a lot, right? The public debt, by the way, is the money that has to be paid back to lenders, like taxpayers, the Chinese and other foreign investors, for money borrowed from the sale of federal bonds, loans, and other debts accrued by the government.

There are also what are called Intergovernmental Holdings, which is money borrowed from assets and funds owned by the government itself, stuff like the Social Security Trust Fund, Medicare Trust Fund, things which we have been required to pay for which are supposed to be tucked away for our future security, needs, and future. That debt comes to $4,370,371,347,000 plus, that's trillions again. Add them together and you get a gross national debt, that is, the total amount of money that the government owes, of $12,092,672,900,000 plus.

The next thing to consider is the Gross Domestic Product, or GDP. That's the amount of all goods and services produced by a nation. In the United States, it amounts to, give or take, $14,261,000,000,000 . Consider for a minute, that the amount of money that the federal government owes is only two trillion, one hundred sixty nine billion dollars less than the total amount of goods and services manufactured in the entire United States this year.

Look at it this way. If you had a job and were making $142 a week, I know its not much but we're just supposing, and before you could spend anything on electricity, gas, gasoline, food, house rental or mortgage, you had to pay your neighbor $121 a week for loans he made to you. It would be kind of hard to live wouldn't it? That would only leave you with $21 for the entire week's necessities. And suppose that the cost kept rising $41 every week because of the interest payments. That would pretty much finish off your financial stability. Oh, you ask. Where did the $41 come from? That represents the $40,759,555,481 interest payment this year on the gross federal government debt.

But, you see, the government is different than you and I. They don't care. Where we have to pay our debt off or go bust, congress just raises the debt limit, the president approves it, and they let somebody else worry about paying it off.

It is a vicious circle in which, as things get worse, the government spends more. As the government spends more, taxes go up. As taxes go up, businesses close. As businesses close, jobs are lost. As jobs are lost, tax revenue falls. As things get worse, the government spends more. As the government spends more, taxes go up. It just goes on and on and on.

And the White House says things are getting better? Go figure.

Old Timers Westerns Reminisence

It's all a case of perception. As the years have passed by the entertainment industry has changed and I'm not sure it has been for the good. In the old days, back when I was growing up, movie westerns were the standard fair both in the movies and on television. The youngsters won't remember the stars, movies, and television of those days, but we old folks will. Take a trip back to the days of yesteryear. Relive the memories. Turn on the sound and click on the link below. It looks best in full screen mode.


Those Old Westerns

And the Moral Is...

Young King Arthur was ambushed and imprisoned by the monarch of a neighboring kingdom. The monarch could have killed him but was moved by Arthur's youth and ideals. So, the monarch offered him his freedom, as long as he could answer a very difficult question.. Arthur would have a year to figure out the answer and, if after a year, he still had no answer, he would be put to death.
The question? What do women really want? Such a question would perplex even the most knowledgeable man, and to young Arthur, it seemed an impossible query. But, since it was better than death, he accepted the monarch's proposition to have an answer by year's end.
He returned to his kingdom and began to poll everyone: the princess, the priests, the wise men and even the court jester. He spoke with everyone, but no one could give him a satisfactory answer.
Many people advised him to consult the old witch, for only she would have the answer. But the price would be high; as the witch was famous throughout the kingdom for the exorbitant prices she charged.
The last day of the year arrived and Arthur had no choice but to talk to the witch. She agreed to answer the question, but he would have to agree to her price first. The old witch wanted to marry Sir Lancelot, the most noble of the Knights of the Round Table and Arthur's closest friend!
Young Arthur was horrified. She was hunchbacked and hideous, had only one tooth, smelled like sewage, made obscene noises, etc. He had never encountered such a repugnant creature in all his life.
He refused to force his friend to marry her and endure such a terrible burden; but Lancelot, learning of the proposal, spoke with Arthur. He said nothing was too big of a sacrifice compared to Arthur's life and the preservation of the Round Table.
Hence, a wedding was proclaimed and the witch answered Arthur's question thus: What a woman really wants, she answered is to be in charge of her own life. Everyone in the kingdom instantly knew that the witch had uttered a great truth and that Arthur's life would be spared. And so it was, the neighboring monarch granted Arthur his freedom and Lancelot and the witch had a wonderful wedding.
The honeymoon hour approached and Lancelot, steeling himself for a horrific experience, entered the bedroom. But, what a sight awaited him. The most beautiful woman he had ever seen lay before him on the bed. The astounded Lancelot asked what had happened.
The beauty replied that since he had been so kind to her when she appeared as a witch, she would henceforth, be her horrible deformed self only half the time and the beautiful maiden the other half.. Which, she asked, would he prefer? Beautiful during the day or night?
Lancelot pondered the predicament. During the day, a beautiful woman to show off to his friends, but at night, in the privacy of his castle, an old witch? Or, would he prefer having a hideous witch during the day, but by night, a beautiful woman for him to enjoy wondrous intimate moments?
Noble Lancelot said that he would allow her to make the choice herself.
Upon hearing this, she announced that she would be beautiful all the time because he had respected her enough to let her be in charge of her own life.
Now, what is the moral to this story? The moral is, if you don't let a woman have her own way, things are going to get ugly.

The Front Page

One of the things I enjoy, well, most of the time, is the morning paper after breakfast. I guess it comes from my grandfather who was a newspaper man. In his lifetime he published three newspapers, one in Fort Smith, Arkansas, another in Helena, Montana, and the last in Everett, Washington. The closest I ever got to the business was a number of years ago when I wrote a column for the Pharos-Tribune of Lafayette, Indiana. There is a big difference in writing a column and running a newspaper and I know nothing about the latter. That being said, I got a chuckle out of the front page of the Times-Reporter this morning.

The headline was a grabber. “School’s in for unemployed.” According to the article Governor Strickland has expanded unemployment benefits to out-of-work folks if they go back to school on a full time basis. The reasoning is that unemployed people will have less stress if they know that they won’t have to make a “sacrifice” to go to school. Hello. Does this really make any sense? How can having a degree which is subsidized by the state be good when there aren’t any jobs? How can spending more taxpayer money going to help Ohio when the state is more than a billion dollars in debt? Governor Strickland evidently doesn’t understand. The problem in Ohio is not too little education, but too few jobs. Wouldn’t it be better for the state to use that money to decrease business taxes which would make more money available for business expansion? I guess it’s me. I can’t figure out how a better educated out-of-work force is going to create jobs in the depression we are in.

We had another robbery in New Philadelphia. This time it was the First Federal Community Bank on West High. There is a picture on the front page, from one of the surveillance cameras in the bank, of a man with a mask, a pistol, and a bag in his hand. The caption is a classic. “A suspected robber, armed with a gun, leaves First Federal Community Bank in this image from surveillance cameras.” Hey, guys, he is the robber. No question about that. He has the gun, the teller saw him, and I’m sure she knew he robbed her. They may not know who he is but there is no doubt that guy in the picture did it. A thought to be considered. Had there been a couple of armed Concealed Carry License holders in the bank at the time, would the police be looking for this fellow today. One other thing. Paper said that he was talking on a cell phone during the robbery. Talk about being tied to the phone. This is ridiculous.

One other item on the front page. Headline says, “Authorities stepping up interstate traffic enforcement.” Good move. The article gives a warning that on this coming Friday from 7 p.m. to 3 a.m. Saturday, the State Highway Patrol will be patrolling I-77 and Route 8 from Tuscarawas county north to Cleveland looking, for drunk drivers, drug users, and speeders. But, wait. I don’t know what they are going to be using as guidelines for drunks and addicts, but speeding as defined in the article is “more than 20 miles over the speed limit.” We’re talking about flying past New Philadelphia and Dover at 85 miles an hour without being liable for a ticket. I’m not sure my car can go 85 miles an hour. A spokesman for the State Police was quoted as saying, “We want to send the message of slow down and be patient.” Slow down to 85 miles and hour? How fast are they going now?

I don’t read a lot of the paper. The biggest section is sports, and I don’t follow them that much. If I want to find out what’s going on in the world, the news for that is relegated to the back pages, which is one of the reasons that people aren’t aware that terrorism is picking up again in Iraq. National news is pretty much the same, Obama pictures and quotes saying that the economy is doing fine. Do like the comics, no matter what section they appear in. In honesty, I guess I’d miss not having a local paper.

Water Department Double Billing

If you received two New Philadelphia water bills this month, don't panic. There has been a glitch in the Water Office billing system which resulted in a double billing being mailed to many of the users of New Philadelphia water.

A couple of things you should be aware of. If you received a duplicate bill for your water, you are only responsible for one payment, you don't have to pay both. If you have more than one water meter, check the bills to be sure you received proper billing for each meter.

If you didn't get the duplicate billing you don't have to be concerned. If you did get a double billing you are not alone. When I talked to the Water Office today I was told that there is no pattern to the double billing error, it happened randomly across the city.

If you have any questions call the New Philadelphia Water Office at 330-364-4491, extension 502, or your city councilman. If you don't have your councilman's number call Mary Jo in the mayor's office at 330-364-4491, extension 242.