Events Calendar
In This Section
Most Read Stories
Family found dead in Ohio home
Man gets 3 years in prison for having sex with horse
Brown still testing Cavs' lineup
Take comfort in knowing Browns could be bigger losers
Kosar would be wrong call as GM
Sex-toy study at Duke University raises some eyebrows
Akron man turns himself in after authorities turn up heat
Robbers order bar patrons to empty pockets
Blogs:
Pets:
Not 101 Dalmations…but close!
The Heldenfiles:
Friday Notebook
Patrick McManamon:
For your perusal
Akron Zips:
The morning after
Tribe Matters:
Tribe makes roster moves
Cleveland Browns:
Lewis doesn't like boycott
Kent State Sports:
Kent State falls to Akron, 20-28
Cleveland Cavaliers:
Gameblog: Cavs at Knicks
Buckeye Blogging:
Weekly ‘B’ Deck Report – New Mexico St.
Varsity Letters:
Wrestling, bowling teams prepare for season
All Da King's Men:
If It Looks Like Islamic Terrorism…
Blog of Mass Destruction:
Dems Message To Women: Don't Enjoy The Sex
Akron Law Café:
Health Care Financing Reform: (62) The Stupak Amendment
See Jane Style:
Muffle Your Muffler
Car Chase:
Perfect Weather for an Autumn Drive
Let's Talk Real Estate:
RUMORS: Downtown Restaurant Explosion
Ohio Travels with Betty:
Jack is looking for a trip to Southern Ohio the week of November 16.
Sound Check:
The Black Keys to perform benefit concert at Musica on November 27
HRLite House:
Personal Rant – Why People Do Not Live in Northeast Ohio
Akron Gamer:
New 'Call of Duty' could set entertainment record
Goal is to help Akron voters understand pros, cons of 'sewers for scholarships'
By Colette M. Jenkins
Beacon Journal staff writer
Published on Sunday, Oct 19, 2008
Proponents for Akron Issues 8 and 9 went head-to-head during a debate and town hall meeting Saturday to bring clarity to the ''sewers for scholarships'' issue.
Most of the 100 people at the educational forum, held at the Summit County Red Cross, appeared to have their minds made up about how to vote on the two issues regarding leasing the Akron sewer system to provide money for college scholarships.
Opposing views were held by two city employees — Cheri Cunningham, an assistant law director, and David Head, a sewer department employee.
''We hate 8 but 9 is fine,'' said Head, quoting the slogan for Issue 9. ''The employees in the sewer department don't want to lose their jobs and we don't want to pay higher rates anymore than anyone else. We want the voters to decide what they want done with their city utilities.''
Cunningham said that while she understands the fear
that some people have when it comes to leasing a public utility, there are guarantees for a rate cap and to protect the quality of service and the 100 jobs in the sewer department.
''It is important that we pass Issue 8 for our children. They represent the future and we need to help them reach their full potential,'' Cunningham said. ''The primary purpose of Issue 8 is to help children further their education after high school. I can't see anything but a positive coming out of this because we're helping our children with a nice economic development tool.''
Issue 8 is a charter amendment to lease the sewer system to a private corporation to generate at least $200 million to fund scholarships for Akron students to attend ''participating universities, colleges, technical and trade schools'' in the city.
The charter change proposed in Issue 9 would require that any action to sell, lease or transfer a public utility, including the sewer system, be approved by voters. Issue 9 is the result of a petition drive by a citizens group.
The goal of the forum, sponsored by the League of Women Voters of Akron, East Akron Community House and the Akron Bar Association, was to give participants a better understanding of the issues.
The forum included four panelists. Two — Richard Merolla, Akron director of public service, and William Considine, president and chief executive of Akron Children's Hospital — encouraged a vote for Issue 8. The other two — Jack Sombati, campaign chairman of Ohio Council 8 AFSCME Save our Sewer and Water Committee, and Wenonah Hauter, executive director of Food & Water Watch — had reservations.
In opposition to Issue 8
Hauter and Sombati said their opposition isn't to scholarships but to the funding source. They criticized the fact that the city does not have a lease in place, and cited problems in other cities where water and sewer systems were managed by private operations.
Those problems include sewage run-off, rate increases, job losses and poor service, they said. Sombati argued that the scholarship plan is actually a loan between the city and the students receiving money.
''If they don't live or work in the city of Akron for 30 years, they have to pay the money back,'' Sombati said. ''It's not a scholarship. It's a loan. And before you can apply for the money, you have to exhaust all other grants and financial aid.''
In favor of Issue 8
Merolla countered that the money would help 1,500 to 1,600 students a year. ''If you live or work in Akron, you do nothing. If you leave Akron, you continue to pay the income tax on the wages that you earn,'' Merolla said. ''You can choose to continue to pay the city income tax or pay the money back.''
Merolla and Considine said that although a lease is not in place, elements of the city charter guarantee a rate cap of 3.9 percent, which is less than the 4.1 percent increase that sewer customers have historically seen in the last 30 years and protects sewer department workers and customers.
Merolla said if the lessee should breach the contract, the city would take the utility back and keep the $200 million paid up front. He also said any rate increase would have to be approved by council.
''It's a matter of trust. You have to trust that the mayor and City Council, that has moved this city forward year after year, can manage this contract,'' Merolla said. ''We have not yet decided all of the details of the lease agreement, but nothing in the lease can be contrary to the charter provisions.''
Erica Greer, president of the local League of Women Voters, said the forum was not designed to convince those in attendance to vote one way or the other but to provide balanced information to help people make an informed decision before voting.
Questions and answers presented during the town hall portion of the forum will be posted on the League of Women Voters Web site, http://www.lwvaa.org.
Colette Jenkins can be reached at 330-996-3731 or cjenkins@thebeaconjournal.com.
Proponents for Akron Issues 8 and 9 went head-to-head during a debate and town hall meeting Saturday to bring clarity to the ''sewers for scholarships'' issue.
Get the full article here.
Comments
Click here to post your comments
Akron, OH
Posted 02:46 AM, 10/19/2008
Rick Merolla must have the finest organizational skills in the world.
How else could he give taxpayers their full money's worth for his over $115,000 per year salary as the City of Akron's "Director of Public Service" while being the treasurer multiple organizations that seems to have a finger in every single tax dollar spending project including "The Citizens To Keep Akron Strong" whose website "AkronScholarshipPlan.com" supports Issue 8); Citizens Committee Akron Public Schools which fielded "ForAkronSchools.com" which pushed Akron school tax levy Issue 6 down our throats and fielded "KeepAkronStrong.com" which did the same for Akron school tax levy Issue 10; membership on the Akron School's "Joint Board of Review" (decision makers on the multi-million dollar school renovation ...cough... Community Learning Center project); plus being on the Board of Trustees for Haven of Rest, being listed as the contact person for the tax exempt Donald L. Plusquellic Foundation (founded in October 1999), and possibly still on the board of SummaCare/Summa Insurance Company?
I'm sure none of these "outside" activities take away from Rick having his nose to the grindstone for the taxpayers every Monday-Friday from 8 AM to 5 PM.
Tallmadge, OH
Posted 07:59 AM, 10/19/2008
Akron needs to send Mayor Don a message with a No vote on 8 and a Yes vote on 9. They need top tell him they are mad and won't listen to him anymore.
akron, oh
Posted 08:58 AM, 10/19/2008
I hate to say it, but with Marco and the ghetto voters (most of akron)on board, i think this dumb idea will pass. They have and will continue to sell it as a freebie.
Akron, Oh
Posted 09:39 AM, 10/19/2008
Vote yes on issue 8. It is a scholarship and not a loan. If you move out of Akron prematurely, then you have renegged on the terms of your scholarship and you get to chose one of two consequences for violating your contract. Pay city tax for a limited amount of time or turn a prorated portion of your scholarship into a loan and pay it back.
If you don't like the terms of this scholarship, then you are welcome to not take advantage of it.
Posted 02:31 PM, 10/19/2008
We really need more forward thinking in this town or we will continue on a path of doom. Despite growth in certain areas, most of the young folk I know leave this place as soon as they can. Here is an opportunity to grow our city, attract businesses, schools and people. We would be putting out a more educated work force(attracting businesses and schools of higher learning) and how many cities can boast that all their public school graduates receive free scholarships?(attracts families)Investing in the children is never a bad thing. Sometimes you have to look in the future, have a vision. The charter guarantees the current workers will retain employment, that rates will be capped at lower than what we now pay, and we retain the right to take back the sewer if things are not working out in our best interest? Get out of the stone ages people!!! we gotta grow this city!!!
Posted 03:18 PM, 10/19/2008
No student intelligent enough to qualify for a scholarship is dumb enough to fall for this idea. This is NOT a scholarship. It has to be repaid, one way or another. Therefore, it is a loan.
And the repayment provisions are draconian: indentured servitude to the city for up to 30 years; or the paying for city income tax for up to 30 years; or the actual repayment of the loan money.
Akron voters beware: the only people willing to come out in numbers on behalf of this proposal are Plusquellic employees or the rich and powerful (or, in the case of Rich Merolla, they may fit into both categories).
Average citizens ARE NOT backing Issue 8. Only the mayor's cronies, who have their own self-interests at heart, are shilling for him.
Posted 03:22 PM, 10/19/2008
I can think of a lot worse cities to live in than Akron. Whether you care to admit it or not, its much better than cities of comparable size. This can only make it better, provide us with new entreprenurship opportunities as well.
Posted 03:24 PM, 10/19/2008
I am not a croonie of the mayor. I believe in providings students with opportunities they otherwise may not be able to afford. Stay in Akron, be a part of the growth or leave and pay the 2.25%city tax, or pay it off period. whats so bad about that?
Posted 03:52 PM, 10/19/2008
Because, Diana, scholarships DO NOT involve repayment. Again, this is a loan. The Plusquellic administration can't even be honest about that. What other aspects of this deal are they lying about? Think about it.
Posted 03:59 PM, 10/19/2008
The only 'winner' in this ridiculous concept is the U of A and the city. U of A will likely lower the standards for admission in order to get one or two semesters of 'scholarship' money out of the hopeful students before they flunk out or drop out. Then, if they move from the city, they will have to pay income tax to Akron to repay that 'scholarship'. Presumably, that income tax goes back into the fund....but I doubt it will. As for the 3.9% cap on rates. That is per year! Just think how lovely that bill will be in 5 years. And the company leasing the sewer will not tack on additional fees? Yeah, right. The first thing they will do is add a fee to prepare the bill each month, and you know that will have no cap!
With how city employees gripe about having to live in Akron, I can't believe any of them would be for this...forcing their children to live here for 30 years or pay back the 'scholarship'. The mayor wants this to be 'his legacy', but it is all Akron taxpayer dollars! Why, oh why, must Akron homeowners be forced to provide a college education for the APS students? I truly believe the 12 years provided is adequate. And, if U of A is going to so generously offer discounted tuition to the 'scholarship' recipients...why can't they offer a discount to residents of this city RIGHT NOW?
Akron, Oh
Posted 05:32 PM, 10/19/2008
Melissa, Look up indentured servitude. You are as dishonest and hystrionic as Ptty Longville. This is a scholarship and not a loan.
Akron, Oh
Posted 05:34 PM, 10/19/2008
Hey Bud, thanks for the narrow thinking. If UA wins, so do we all, but I can't expect a pee brain hillbilly disguised as a hippie like you to understand such a thing.
akron, oh
Posted 06:32 PM, 10/19/2008
Honestly, it is neither a scholarship nor a loan per se. A scholarship is money given to attend a school with no terms to pay it back. You go to the school and you get the money.
A loan is a loan.
This deal - for better or worse - is some form of hybrid.
Akron, OH
Posted 08:28 PM, 10/19/2008
I will not, and I can't understand how anyone else can support this proposal until the Mayor comes forward with the simple financial explanation related to the matter below.
The Charter Amendment tied to Issue 8 includes the following statement:
=====================
The City shall first repay any and all outstanding loans, bonds and obligations of the system from the lease proceeds.
The City shall transmit the remainder of the lease proceeds to the Akron Community Foundation to be managed and used to provide scholarships to Akron resident students.
========================
OK Mr. Mayor....EXACTLY how many dollars are involved with "any and all outstanding loans, bonds and obligations of the system"???
Until voters are provided with a dollar amount of how much of the lease proceeds will be used to cover all of the "outstanding loans, bonds and obligations of the system", there is no way to understand whether or not this entire proposal makes financial sense.
If the Sewers will bring in $200 million dollars in a lease but the "outstanding loans, bonds and obligations of the system" total $199 million dollars, the students who are alleged to benefit from this proposal will never see the kinds of money the proponents of this matter want to tout.
Mayor, your silence is deafening. Tell the voters and taxpayers exactly how much is owed on the "outstanding loans, bonds and obligations of the system".
Posted 07:43 AM, 10/20/2008
The city has 90 million in debt, leaving approx 200 million after its paid for the scholarship/loan, this per the mayor at a recent forum on the matter. No one is forced to stay here in Akron but its not a bad option,especially as the city continues to grow and offer even more diverse opportunities in business, entertainment and culture. It makes our city attractive. Again,, investing in our children is never a bad thing. Trade and tech schools are also an option,, not just UA. Like UA or not,, its still a great school that folks come to from all over the world. Us spoiled Akron folk take it for granted because its been right in our backyard for so long. Call it a scholarship, call it a loan,,, I call it a forward thinking initiative that is going to help our students=our future=our city to grow. Its still better than taking out thousands in loans, tha that have a higher interest rate than the city tax you would have to pay if you move. You can live outside of Akron but work here. You can live here 15 years then move and pay the balance(still less than student loans) Akron homeowners need to look at the big picture/vision. Providing education for our youth benefits us all, will attract new families, businesses, and increase our property values and start filling up some of these empty foreclosed homes. What about the benefits for the kids?? To me that outweighs all these other arguements.
Posted 10:24 AM, 10/20/2008
Dear Dave,
Histrionic? That comes from the word hysterical, and no one does that better than Donald L. Plusquellic himself. Witness his behavior with the parking lot attendant, replete with yelling, gross vulgarities, and threats.
Now that's histrionics at its finest. You should know that, Mr. Lieberth.
